SCOTCH SERMONS.* IT may seem extravagant to say it, but

it is a simple fact that the representatives of the true and old tradition in the Scottish Church, are the men who are now so often condemned as innovators . and destroyers,—the liberalisers, who are often charged with "looking both ways," but hardly with kindly intent in " standing between the old and the new." The early fathers of the Scottish Church were in nothing more clear than on this, that no creed or confession could be final,—that it was but a compromise, a symbol or a flag raised as a rallying-point of union, and must inevitably be seen in some respects differently from different points of view, particularly when those serving under it were intently marching forward to action. The Bible was to be at all points the final test of authority, and the " symbols " merely aids iu this direction. These men were convinced that much "new truth was yet to break out of God's Holy Word ;" and if any brother had good grounds for believing that he had found new truth, he was charged to make known the same to his brethren, that the creeds might be modified in harmony with it ; and all the Courts of the Church, from lower to higher, were held to be instruments by which this process might be rendered easy. This most distinctly was the theory, however much, particularly in later times, such prosecutions as those of Edward Irving, Macleod Campbell, and, during the past two years, that of Professor Robertson Smith in the Free Church, have shown the wide ground possible for practical de- parture from it. Not less is evidence given by the bear-baiting which Dr. Norman Macleod underwent when lie endeavoured to show (surely with a clear purpose practically to exhibit new truth from the Bible) that the Sabbath was Christian, and no longer Jewish. For, strictly taken, all questions of heresy were to be determined, not by reference finally to the Confession, but to the Word of God, and the truth realised in respect of it,—two essentially different things. There was no idea of hard, stereo- typed, rigid literalism in this. The general principle in respect of subscription in early times was thus clear : each one might be held to yield something for the sake of unity ; the Confes- sion was only to be generally accepted. The formula of sub- scription which is now required from ministers of the Church of Scotland and the Free Church is out of harmony with this spirit, since verbally it tends to an absolute acceptance of the Westminster Confession in all its details ; and it is singular that the United Presbyterian Church (which is by many sup- posed to be the strictest body in Scotland) has had for years a modified formula, which binds the subscribers only to a general . acceptance of the Confession as fairly representing the truth of Scripture. This they owe mainly to the gradually-developed voluntaryism in conflict with clauses on the duty of the Civil Magistrate. It would be a great benefit to the Clergy of the Established and Free Churches in Scotland, were the formula thus relaxed and modified ; for a total sweep of the Confession would do away with a bold historic landmark,—a thing which men like Principal Tulloch, and Professor Mitchell, and Dr. Norman Macleod would, we suppose, alike regret, though from slightly different reasons. And certainly a return to the old Scottish Confession could not now be thought of.

The present volume, though it professedly disclaims any polemical purpose, in almost every page suggests these or similar points, with reference to the constitution of the Scottish 'Church. It is simply a volume of able discourses, written from a very independent stand-point. But there is not one discourse -which does not suggest how far the authors have travelled from the rigid acceptance of the Westminster Confession on most im- portant points, and how eager they are to bring the doctrine and teaching of the Church into direct relation with the tendency of the day, where science touches theology, and seems to disturb re- ligious conviction. One great obtaining principle may be noted as running through the volume like a silver thread, giving -unity ; it is the radical distinction (which has been luminously exhibited on several occasions by Principal Tulloch) between theological systems and religion, between any form of ecclesias- tical organisation and the religious life in itself. The presence a the religious instinct, and the power it ministers to human life, to regulate, to elevate, and to beautify it, is a fact as per- manent, persistent, and indisputable as that the sun shines, or that flowers grow and beautify the earth ; but science and philosophy must modify the constructions of theology, and in modifying them give guarantee of progress and develop-

• Scotch Savant. London: Macmillan and Co. 1880.

ment, instead of stagnation and mere formalities and ex- ternal appearances. Heine once said, not without a sugges- tion of a sneer, that the moment a religion needed to seek aid from a philosophy, its end was near at hand; but here it is to be feared that he did not clearly recognise the distinction between religion and theological system. The essential facts of religion remain untouched, and cannot be touched, by any discovery of science or of criticism ; but to find new points of contact and reconciliation between science

and theological system is, and must remain, the work of the liberal critical theologian. The writers of these sermons are liberal theologians in this sense. Though a certain chilliness,

as of a note caught somehow from the dim suggestion of frosty Hegelianism in the first two, steals over most of the others, yet they are varied in topic and in interest; and one or trio are are practical. The editor well says in his preface :—

" This volume may serve to indicate a growing tendency, and to show the direction in which thought is moving. It is the work of those whose hope for the future lies not in alterations of ecclesiastical organisation, but in a profounder apprehension of the essential ideas of Christianity, and especially in time growth within the Church of such a method of presenting them as shall show that they are equally adapted to the needs of humanity, and in harmony with the results of critical and scientific research."

Certainly such sermons as those of Principal Coital on " Cor- porate Immortality " (in which whatever is of value in the new idea of an " immortal Humanity " is shown to be fully compre- hensible only iu the light of the Christian doctrine of individual immortality), and on " Union with God," which in many ways form a fitting supplement to the other, Jo much to realise what is here claimed by the editor,—a liberal and earnest spirit, in contact with the distracting problems of the present, and enabled

to discern great and leading lines, along which tribute is drawn from both sides for universal benefit and enlightenment. We can afford space to give only one specimen from these two remarkable and very thoughtful discourses :— " Our high prerogative as moral and spiritual beings, is that wo have each of us a separate self, a consciousness and will which no other being can invade, and in virtue of which we are each of us respon- sible for his own acts, and architect of his own moral life and destiny. Amidst the myriads of beings who constitute the human race, is there not given to each a moral individuality, a life which belongs to him apart from all around him ; a career of duty which no other can fulfil for him, and which, in time and eternity, he—and ho alone— must accomplish ? Is not each human soul, as is often said, alone amidst the crowd ? However close time rehtions into which we enter with others, however intimate the ties of kindred and friendship, or of common inclinations and pursuits, can the closest of these for a moment break down the impassable barrier between each and all other souls ? In my sorrows you may pity me, but the tenderest affection cannot make my pain yours. In my guilt and sin you may grieve for me, but my sin can never become yours, the burden of may moral acts can never be rolled over to you; now and for ever, my goodness or my guilt is all my own. And is not this gift of spiritual individuality, which in some of its aspects is so awful, just that which raises man above all other finite beings—above the mere unconscious life of nature, above the life of animals, in whom the race is all, time individual nothing— and which makes it possible for him to attain a height of spiritual excellence, a perfection gained by free self-development, a wealth of character wrought out by individual effort, which no otherwise could be reached ? In tide precious gift, this possession of an inalienable self, this right of each man be to himself, and to make and develop° himself, have not men recognised time root of all liberty, of thought, of all social, political, and religious freedom ? Take this away, annul that in the individual in virtue of what he can say, in the face of every human power and authority, ' You may possess yourself of my property, fetter, imprison, and torture my body, but you cannot

master my thoughts, or invade the sanctuary of my soul,'—take away this, and would you not deprive man of his spiritual birth-right, of a treasure for which nothing else could compensate ? Nay, may we not say with reverence that it is the greatness and the blessed- ness of man, as a spiritual, responsible being, that herein he pos- sesses a prerogative which even Omnipotence cannot invade ? It is

because I can offer to God a free obedience and love, that He is glorified in my service and devotion. And if you could conceive even a

Divine Being suspending or taking away this individuality, and break- ing down the barrier which divides my will and consciousness from his, taking possession of my thoughts and volitions, so that they should no longer be my own, but his, making time movements of my mind as much the expression of his will as the motions of my limbs are of mine, you might call this the elevation by the human into

unity with the Divine ; but it would be no real elevation, it would be rather the degradation and destruction of that in virtue of which I am a being made in God's own image, and which distinguishes my nature from that of the beasts that perish."

Dr. Story's two sermons on " Christ's Authority " and " Christian Righteousness," which close the volume, are properly in their place, since they start from the ground of principle with the rest, and lead to many points of practical application. They

are, to our mind, almost what such sermons should be,—full of

thought and independence, and pervaded by earnest purpose. We are especially pleased with the luminous way in which is set forth the principle that every system, every teacher, must be judged by what he or it produces ; and the contrast of Christ- ianity with other systems in this respect, both as respects the individual character and the social systems, is one of the most remarkable of evidences. This gives us the practical point of contact between such practical sermons, and much which might be classed as merely speculative, as, for instance, when we read as follows, from Mr. Ferguson's sermon on " Law and Miracle ":—

" In our day, the doctrine of miracle does not occupy the promin- ent position it formerly did. It has fallen into the background, and lost its apologetic value ; but, at the same time, its actual rela- tions to the circle of Christian truth have been made clear. In the course of last century, on the contrary, the sharpest attacks which Christianity had to sustain were directed against this side. The con- test raged round the credibility or incredibility of miracle, as if the whole of revelation depended upon the issue. In reality, however, no vital point of revelation was endangered. It was an affair of out- posts altogether, and the work so energetically assaulted and de- fended had little importance for the citadel in the rear. Neither the philosopher who argued against it, nor the divine who contended for miracle, was dealing with the essence of Christianity, and the com- plete triumph of either would have made little change. At the worst, a dogma of the Church would have been overthrown; but the dogmas of the Church and the religion of Christ are not synonymous terms. Now to make belief in Christ depend, in any degree, upon the fact that he wrought miracles, is to build upon the sand. It is to go back to the old Jewish belief, and to incur the implied rebuke in our Lord's answer to Nicodemus. For by no act of power, be it over so great, can we prove a spiritual truth. In the ordinary business of life, we should not point to a physical fact, or series of facts, as an evidence of the truth of consciousness ; but when we enter upon matters connected with re- ligion, it is more difficult to preserve the candour of mind which else- where stands us in good stead. A false reverence is only too apt to blind us, though the principle is as strong in the one case as in the other. Considered in themselves, miracles are signs of the possession of power ; but whether the power springs from a deeper insight than common into the constitution of Nature, or is strictly speaking super- natural, they do not tell us."

Dr. Cunningham's sermons on "Home-spun Religion," a plea for religion in common life, and Mr. Mackintosh's on the "Law of Moral Continuity," well deserved to be mentioned ; Professor Knight's also, on " Conservatism and Change " and "The Continuity and Development of Religion," though with reference to these we are compelled to add that, along with much refinement and careful thinking, there is more of vagueness and random suggestion merely than in some of the others,—faults which may arise from one of two causes, either that Mr. Knight aspires to touch too many points within the compass of a ser- mon, or is too impatient, and apt to be caught in the toils of a brilliant idea that does not strictly arise out of a well-defined course of thought.

We have no space in which to do justice to much clear thinking in Mr. McFarlan's sermon on "Authority," or on Mr. Menzies' on " The Christian Priesthood."

It may seem a small matter, after the earnest and practical pur pose we have found in the book, to notice that it is inexcusably full of misquoted passages. Scarcely one citation from secular authors, ancient or modern, is right ; and the Scriptures them- selves are here and there unconsciously mangled. Professor

Knight is not immaculate. Twice he misquotes the fine line,- " The old order changeth, yielding place to new," and turns it into bad prose, following Charles Kingsley and others, to deform. Now and then we have notorious Scotticisms, "will" for " shall" where it must sound very odd to English ears, and " that" for " which," in several instances throughout the book. Trifling as these things are, they may spoil the

effect of eloquent passages, as, in some instances, they most assuredly do in this volume. We have incidentally referred to Principal Tulloch, and are inclined to ask, Why is he not repre- sented, in a volume which treats many topics so much in the spirit he is inclined to treat them ? And what of Dr. John

Service, of Glasgow P Surely they were not deemed too broad and liberal, or too likely to throw too human an atmosphere into it, to be included in a volume which would claim to

be representative of the liberalising element in the Scottish Church !