sition of a believer? Will his understanding descend from its pontifical chair, to abase itself before that word, which, were it not for it, would remain human, or at least doubtful? We do not study to the bottom the sense of a passage, when we have pronounced it legitimate, only in virtue of a sense already discovered. We but half submit to any authority which we can reject, and which we have placed in doubt. We adore but imperfectly that which we have degraded."

Besides, and it is what we should be fully aware of, "the entire divinity of such or such a word of the Scriptures being dependent, in your eyes, not from the fact that it is found in the oracles of God, but from its presenting to your wisdom and your spirituality, certain characters of spirituality and of wisdom, the opinion which you form cannot always be so exempt from hesitation that you should retain in relation to it none of the doubts with which you commenced. Your faith will therefore necessarily partake of your doubts, and it will be itself imperfect, undecided, and conditional. Like opinion, like faith; and like faith, like life! But faith is not there; the life of God's elect is not there!"

But that which will better demonstrate the importance of the present subject is the fact, that, if one of the systems to which it may give rise has all its roots steeped in doubt, it brings forth inevitably as fruit, a new incredulity. Why is it that we see so many men open the Bible without ever perceiving the doctrines which it teaches with the greatest clearness? Whence comes it that they can thus walk in error for so many years, with the sun as it were in their hands? It is because pre-occupied by false notions on the subject of inspiration, and "believing that there exists still in the Sacred Scriptures admixture of error, but desirous, however, to be able to find some sentences which are in their opinion reasonable, in order to be able to believe them divine, they study, even without being conscious of it, to give to them a meaning which agrees with their own wisdom. And thus it is, that they only put themselves in a state of incapacity for recognizing what is God's meaning, but what they represent to themselves as despicable. They strive, for example, when reading the epistles of St. Paul, to find in them the doctrine of man's justification by the law, his native innocency, his inclination to what is good, the moral omnipotence of his will, the merit of his works. But then what happens? Alas! after they have attributed, by violence, some such thoughts to the sacred writer, they find a language so badly conceived for the supposed end, terms so badly chosen for that which they wish to say, and reasonings so inconclusive, that they lose, in despite of themselves, whatever of respect they may still have preserved for the letter of the Sacred Scriptures, and bury themselves in Rationalism."

The importance of the subject of inspiration is so great, says the Professor, that between the two answers that may be made to it, "there is the same abyss which separated the two Israelites who had seen Jesus Christ in the flesh, and who had equally recognized him as a prophet. But whilst one of them, considering his carpenter's dress, his mean food, his hands rendered hard by labour, and his rustic suite, believed him to be still liable to error and to sin, as an ordinary prophet, the other recognized in him the Emmanuel, the Lamb of God, the Lord our Righteousness, the Holy One of Israel, the King of Kings, the Lord of Hosts." So much from the Preface.

The first chapter contains some account of the word Théopneustia, "the name of that mysterious power which the Holy Spirit exercised upon the writers of the Old and New Testaments to cause them to compose them such as the Church of God has received them from their hands." The term is also thus defined,—it is that inexplicable power which the Holy Spirit exercised in former times on the Authors of the Sacred Scriptures, to guide them, even in the employment of the words which they used, and to preserve them from all error, and also from all omission.

With regard to the distinctive character and the object of this mysterious power, we have the following suggestions:-" Théopneustia is not a system, it is a fact. Like all the other events in the history of Redemption, this fact, attested by the Holy Scriptures, is one of the dogmas of our faith. Nevertheless, it is necessary to say, and it is necessary to understand that the miraculous operation of the Holy Spirit had not the sacred writers for its object, who were but instruments, and who must soon pass away. But it had for its object the sacred books themselves, which were destined to reveal from age to age to the church the counsels of God, and which must endure for ever."

The power itself has not been defined to us, cannot be by us. The Scripture never presents to us, as an object of study, either its mode or its measure. But that which is proposed to our faith is solely the inspiration of the words, the divine nature of the books which the writers have written. In this respect the Scripture has established no difference between the writers. They were all and each inspired of God, according to the meaning of the Greek term which has furnished the title for the Professor's volume,-a term used by an apostle. Their books are of God, "whether they recite the mysteries of a past more ancient than the creation, or those of a future more distant than the return of the Son of Man, or the eternal councils of the Most High, or the secrets of the human heart, or the deep things of God; whether they recount their own emotions, or relate their recollections, or repeat contemporaneous narratives, or copy genealogies, or make extracts from uninspired

6

documents, their writings are inspired; their recitals are directed from on high; it is always God who speaks, who recites, who commands or reveals by their mouth, and who, to do this, employs in different measures their personality. For the Spirit of the Lord was upon them,' it is written, and this word was upon their tongue.' And if it is always the word of man, because it is always men who utter it, it is also the word of God, because it is God who watches over them, who employs them, who guides them." God himself is not only the guaranty of all the facts, the author of all the commandments, the revealer of all the truths, contained in the Bible; but "he has caused them to be given to his church in the order, and in the measure, and in the terms which he has judged to be most suitable to his heavenly design."

We neither know nor need to know how the work of inspiration was accomplished. And if asked what was it "that the men of God experienced in their organs, in their will, or in their intelligence, whilst they were tracing the pages of the sacred volume, we should answer that the power or influence of inspiration was not felt to the same degree by each of them, and that their experiences were not uniform." The Professor adds that the knowledge of such a fact hardly concerns the interests of our faith, that being about the book, and not about the author. "It is the book which is inspired, and which is wholly inspired. This assurance ought to satisfy us."

Having seen what an importance Professor Gaussen sets upon a right faith with regard to inspiration, and also the high ground which he takes with regard to its fulness, its plenitude in the Scriptures, extending to the very words, to the peculiar style, as well as to the facts and the doctrines, whoever may be the writer, the reader is prepared to go forward with him in his book. Our business, therefore, now is to give a summary view of the arguments, and of the manner in which he disposes of objections, in order to make good the ground which he has assumed.

His object is, to prove the existence, the universality, and the plenitude of divine inspiration, in opposition to three classes of persons, who, without disavowing, or pretending to decline, the divine authority of the Scriptures, yet do not accede to the plenary doctrine which he maintains.

The first of these classes contains many German theologians, some of whom he names. They "reject all miraculous inspiration, and are willing to attribute to the sacred writers only what Cicero allowed to the poets-afflatum spiritus divini-a divine action of nature, an interior power similar to the other vital forces of nature." The second," whilst they admit the existence of a divine inspiration, are willing to acknowledge it only in a portion of the sacred books;-in the first and the fourth of the four Gospels, for example,

in a portion of the Epistles, in a portion of the writings of Moses, in a part of Isaiah, a part of Daniel. These portions of the Scriptures are from God; the others are from man."

The third class contains "several theologians in England." These "extend, it is true, to all parts of the Bible, the notion of a divine inspiration, but not equally to all. Inspiration, according to them, may be universal, but unequal, often imperfect, accompanied with innocent errors, and carried, according to the nature of the passages, to very different measures, of which they constitute themselves more or less the judges." A German author who belongs to this class, has thus expressed himself:-" Inspiration extends, without contradiction, even to the words, but only when their choice or their employment is connected with the interior religious life; for it is necessary to make a distinction between the Old and the New Testaments, between the law and the gospel, between the history and the prophecy, between the narratives and the doctrines, between the apostles and the helpers of the apostles."

As we have seen, Professor Gaussen goes beyond this last class, and undertakes to establish his plenary doctrine from the Scriptures themselves. He maintains that they contain the exact word of God. He is of opinion that he can and does prove that this word is God speaking in man, God speaking by man, God speaking as man, God speaking for man!

The objections to this large and impressive doctrine occupy our author in his second chapter. One of these is that the Individuality of the sacred writers is deeply imprinted on their books. But says the Professor, if this objection proves anything, it proves too much, as we think any person may at once perceive. The following observations, however, are such as every one is not competent to make: "That which strikes us in this objection, and in the system of intermittent inspiration, with which it is associated, is its triple character of complication, of temerity, and of puerility. Of complication; for it supposes that the Divine action, in dictating the Scriptures, becomes interrupted or enfeebled, as often as the degree of difficulty of the passage, or the degree of its importance diminishes; and it is thus that God is made successively to advance or retire, in the mind of the sacred writer, in the course of even one chapter, or of even one passage! Of temerity: for, mistaking the majesty of the Scriptures, men dare to suppose that they have an importance, and demand a wisdom more than human, only in certain parts! Of puerility for they fear, they tell us, to attribute to God useless miracles; as if the Holy Spirit, after having, as they avow, dictated word for word one part of the Scriptures, must have found less trouble in illuming the sacred writer, leaving him to write alone, or ccasing to have a superintendence over him."

Several of the objections encountered by the Professor must be

passed over by us, almost without an allusion to them; while with regard even to the most formidable, or where he returns the most masterly answer, we can only select a few sentences here and there.

A frivolous objection against the plenary inspiration of the original Scriptures has been made, viz. that the translations of them. into other languages are not inspired. Another, and in some degree akin to this is that which has been vaunted from the manner practised by the writers of the New Testament of sometimes quoting from the Septuagint. A portion of the answer to this is in these words: "If some modern prophet were sent from God to the churches which speak our language, how do you think that such a man would quote the Scriptures? In French, without doubt; but according to what version? Those of Ostervald and Martin being the most extensively used, it is probable that he would make his citations in the terms of one or the other, as often as their translations might seem to him to be sufficiently exact. But also, notwithstanding our practice and his, he would take care to leave both of these versions, and translate after his own way, as often as it might appear to him that the meaning of the original was not sufficiently well rendered in them. Sometimes, even, he would do more. To make us better comprehend in what sense he might have the intention to apply such or such a scripture, he would paraphrase the alleged passage, and then he would follow, in citing it, neither the letter of the original text, nor that of the translations. It is precisely thus that the writers of the New Testament have done in relation to the Septuagint."

Again, it has been said that there is bad reasoning, inapplicable quotations, popular superstitions, and other evidences of human weakness to be found in the Scriptures, all which must be incompatible with inspiration. These objections, however, are of such a general nature that they only obtain, as they only require, a general

answer.

It has been said, and has even been admitted by divines, who are regarded as orthodox on most important points of Christian faith, that there are Errors in the Scriptural narratives, and Contradictions in the facts. But the Professor maintains that no such things occur, when the passages are rightly translated; going into a minute examination of the most important of those which have been adduced; such as regard, for example, the genealogies of Jesus Christ, and other supposed discrepancies.

But then it is asserted that there are Errors in the Scriptures which contradict the Laws of Nature. This objection the Professor meets with surpassing ability and assurance. One of his fearless positions is that there is not one physical error in the Word of God. We must cull a few sentences from this masterly and eloquent sec