non-theists, or, as more clearly indicating the practical bearing of their opinions, secularists. For several years, Mr Holyoake was under the ministry of Mr Angel James of Birmingham, and enjoyed excellent opportunities of becoming acquainted both with the letter and spirit of evangelical religion. Now, however, he is an infidel, and the champion of infidels. His infidelity is not of the indiscriminate kind that sneers at Christianity and the Bible in toto; he condescends to admit that there is much good in the Bible, and that apostles and prophets may have been honest in intention; but along with much good he declares there is much evil; and though in this discussion he avoids the gross and outrageous language in which infidels have so often indulged, it appears that in his newspaper and elsewhere he has again and again either written or edited the most horrible blasphemies against our blessed Lord and his religion. Those who know him give him credit for sincerity, and for an amiable and benevolent spirit. Both in "The Reasoner," and in public lectures and meetings, he seems to have made it his chief aim to indoctrinate the working classes with his infidel views. He has taken a pretty prominent part in various measures of social reform, and is evidently anxious to stand well with the working classes, as one who has their interests at heart. Of late, waxing bold in his defiance, he has been challenging the clergy to a discussion of his views. For our part, we should have been disposed to leave him in undisputed possession of the empty vaunt, that no clergyman dared to take up the gauntlet, for we cannot regard a public discussion as the best way of meeting and counteracting such views as his. We can, however, quite well sympathise with the feelings of the Rev. Brewin Grant, a Congregationalist minister of Birmingham, who could not bear to hear an uncircumcised Philistine thus defying the armies of the living God, and who resolved, like Luther in the case of Tetzel, to “knock a hole in this fellow's drum." Mr Grant accepted the challenge, and a discussion was held between him and Mr Holyoake, in the British Institution, Cowper Street, London, on six successive Thursday evenings, commencing Jan. 20, and ending Feb. 24, 1853. The question on which the discussion turned was,-"What advantages would accrue to mankind generally, and the working classes in particular, by the removal of Christianity, and the substitution of secularism in its place?" Mr Holyoake undertook to establish three secular propositions, and two secular objections:-" 1. The precedence of the duties of this life over those pertaining to another world. 2. Science the providence of life; spiritual dependence may lead to material destruction. 3. Morality is independent of scriptural religion, and has guarantees in reason and utility. 4. The atonement by the death of Christ unsatisfactory as a scheme, and immoral as an example. 5. The example of Christ unsuitable for imitation; the principles of the New Testament unsuitable for guidance-except on the principle of arbitrary selection." These points were to form the subjects of discussion during the first five evenings, while the sixth was to be devoted to a "review of the general principles connected with the discussion."

"1.

Under the first head, Mr Holyoake argues as if the duties pertaining to another life were such as altogether to draw away men's attention from those pertaining to the present; under the second, he proceeds on the assumption that the doctrine of providence and of prayer implies

NO. V.

2 L

miraculous interference, and a subversion of the scientific laws by which all things are governed; under the third (where he affirms, by the way, that there are very many persons who scarcely ever sin!) he maintains that human nature, and reason, and interest, are the true bulwarks of morality; under the fourth, he argues against the atonement on the ground of its ascribing to God a character of relentless severity; and under the fifth, he tries to point out inconsistencies in the character of Christ, and in the principles laid down in the New Testament for the regulation of the lives of his followers. This brief outline may show that there is nothing either very new or very formidable in the leading views of Mr Holyoake; but it would be a great mistake to suppose that they are not capable of doing great mischief, especially among the working classes. His second "secular proposition," for example, if not met and combated, might work unmeasured mischief in these days when so many of the working classes are awakening to a knowledge of the wonderfully exact and regular laws, and combinations of laws, by which all the operations both of mind and matter are guided. But besides his leading propositions, Mr Holyoake aims numberless sidethrusts at Christianity, often with very great skill and power, which are fitted to do great execution in a miscellaneous assemblage of working men. He knows how to urge with effect a class of objections which a few lines are sufficient to state, but the complete answer to which would fill nearly as many pages. There are many plausible objections to doctrines of Christianity-for example, to the doctrine of salvation by faith, which can be forcibly put in a couple of lines, thoroughly understood, and easily remembered, but the reply to which demands an acquaintance with the whole scheme and bearings of revealed truth, and some experimental knowledge, moreover, of the sanctifying power of the doctrines of free grace. It is on this ground that we entertain strong doubts as to the expediency of public and popular discussions of such subjects. A miscellaneous assemblage is gathered together; many crude and inquiring young men are of the audience; a seemingly earnest and candid infidel speaker presents himself; in a few short and pithy words he ever and anon states a plausible objection, that if true is fatal to all that they have hitherto deemed sacred; disrespectful language is applied to the Divine Redeemer, and a rude shock given to all their long-cherished sentiments of reverence for sacred things. The reply is heard; it, too, has its effective and telling passages; it corrects many misrepresentations, and deals some deadly thrusts at the infidel; but some of his most pointed and pithy objections are left unanswered, or if answered, are answered at so great length, that while the objec tion is remembered the reply is forgotten. The shock given to reverential feelings is not easily healed, and even the tone of the pious mind may be seriously injured. We very much doubt whether the advantages arising from the discussion will compensate for these almost inevitable evils. We are inclined to think that it would be better to leave the champions of infidelity to boast that ministers of the gospel will not meet them on the platform, rather than let the claims and evidences of Christianity be understated, as of necessity they must be at a popular discussion. There is often need, in presenting the full weight of the Christian evidence, for carefully balanced statement, and a thoroughly arranged and digested order of topics. The Press seems the

natural and proper vehicle for such defences of Christianity, while for gaining the ear of the working classes, and recommending the truth to their acceptance, there exist abundant facilities, if the champions of truth would but take an enlarged view of their condition, and of the measures that might be employed to secure their confidence and promote their wellbeing.

Mr Grant exhibits in this discussion many admirable qualities of a public debater. He is smart and ready; has a great command of language; a thorough acquaintance with the writings of Holyoake and his fraternity; admirable skill in raking up passages from them that throw a lurid light upon their views and projects; considerable powers of satire and ridicule; and withal, a command of temper, which is of eminent service to the controversialist. His most telling and effective passages are usually those in which he deals with plain and indisputable facts; he can bring down torrents of these "sturdy chields" on the unhappy secularists, and never do they appear in so miserable a plight as after one of these disastrous inundations. The following extract from the report of the second night's discussion, on the alleged but hitherto fabulous "benefits of secularism," will illustrate this characteristic:—

"He should give some instances of the successful application of this new, undefined, and undescribed method to the enlargement of human knowledge, the increase of man's mastery over nature, and an addition to the commodities and enjoyments of human life. If we are told none of these things, our time is wasted with irrelevant observations on Christianity, instead of a simple development of the benefits of Secularism. I do not mean an enumeration of the large promises they make, but a statement of the work they have done, and how this work is related to any principles they have and which we have not. It is easy to tell you what they have not done. They did not invent railways by this method. Surely these are methods of progress. They did not invent writing nor printing; they did not introduce the post-office system; they did not discover the caloric method, now successfully applied to vessels, and promising to supersede steam before they will supersede Christianity. They did not invent the telegraph; they did not build and fill the Crystal Palace. At one of their soirées, it is recorded as a smart saying that it was said the want of the age is good potatoes. Their new way of science has not met and mastered the potato blight. Mr Holyoake says science would annihilate the cholera, while we pray against it: he has not yet told us how science may do it. We look to Secularism in vain for help in any thing. All it can perform is to assume to itself all the science others have created, praise material dependence as the safety afforded by nature, which we had already enjoyed as the providence of the Creator. They bring us nothing new, but praise what we had before, only under a new name, as something which they have discovered. They found the world, the Christian world pre-eminently, advancing at an unprecedented rate in all the arts and sciences, to which none have contributed so much as Christian authors and Christian clergymen, and which none possess so largely as Christian nations; and their grand addition is a subtraction-as they ask the devout to cease their prayers, and Christians to abandon that gospel which has lifted the world from the imbecility of its old superstition, and fastened especially upon the English race to cultivate them into the grand asylum of freedom, the citadel of true liberty, at which tyrants vainly rage, and from which, as out of Zion, the perfection of beauty, God will yet shine to emancipate the whole earth. Let them, therefore, cease their empty boasts, and change the desert of their barren propositions into a fruitful field, that will supersede God's providence, which before they were born caused grass to grow for cattle, and herb for the service of man, preserving and blessing both, and which has given to man the capability,

and imposed on him the duty, of self-cultivation for his own happiness and the welfare of his fellows, as the most emphatic way of glorifying his Maker."

On the other hand, there are topics where Mr Grant does not thoroughly cope with his opponent,-as, for example, Mr Holyoake's favourite objection to the doctrine of eternal torments and " coarse damnation;" and there are other topics, such as the connection of faith and works, and of justification through the one, and judgment according to the other or the harmony of prayer with the laws of nature--which we think Mr Grant has not treated with sufficient discrimination, and where he has laid himself somewhat open to the attacks of his opponent. We regret exceedingly to be compelled to bring a more serious charge against Mr Grant. Some of the concessions which he makes we would entirely recall. What could induce him, for example, in settling the basis of discussion, to say that "the doctrines of election and reprobation, together with the supposed condemnation of all men for Adam's fall, are founded on metaphysical views," and should not therefore be included among those which he undertook to defend? The looseness of such an expression as that which we have placed in italics is equalled only by the inaccuracy of the sentiment. Or what could lead him, when he was asked whether he did not think David was a Christian, to answer, "No, I do not; he was a Jew"? We strongly protest against thrusting the Old Testament so completely into the background as is done in this discussion, or treating it as if it were a mere historical introduction to Christianity-not an integral part of the revelation of his will which God has graciously given to the children of men. No doubt the Old Testament might furnish Mr Holyoake and his brethren with still better materials than the New for such popular and superficial objections as all infidels delight in ; but though this might be an argument against the expediency of such popular discussions, it is no justification of the exclusion of the Old Testament as one of the great standards of revealed truth.

In reading this discussion, one thing has struck us forcibly the resemblance between some of the views and arguments of the secularists and those of agitators for railway trains, open museums, lecture-rooms, and crystal-palaces on the Lord's-day. We have not space to furnish extracts; but the fact will be apparent to every reader, and it is not an uninstructive one.

Another conviction that has been deepened in our minds by reading this discussion is that of the immense importance of a comprehensive view being taken by ministers of religion of the condition of the working classes, and great pains being used to develop the ameliorating and elevating tendencies of Christianity. We are fully aware of the dangers of the theory that would represent the gospel of Christ as a mere engine of temporal philanthropy; but the danger of the opposite extreme is not less-dealing with it as a mere system of dogmatic theology. We believe that at the present moment the state of the working classes in this country has reached a most momentous crisis. On the policy of the evangelical churches towards them it will depend, whether the next quarter of a century shall find the working classes of Great Britain in a state of infidelity similar to that of France immediately before the outbreak of the great Revolution, or, through the blessing of

God on the due use of means, in a condition of enlightened adherence to the Christian faith, and blessed subjection to its precepts, such as has never been exhibited on so vast a scale at any other period of history, or by any other nation of the world. There are some cheering and encouraging symptoms that lead one to hope that the evangelical churches are opening their eyes to their responsibility and duty in this matter; but they are only symptoms, and mere symptoms cannot leave one without anxiety. Let Christian ministers everywhere, and especially in large towns, study the condition of the masses; let it be one of the prominent subjects of exposition and consideration at Alliances, Unions, Synods, and all sorts of ecclesiastical assemblies; then, through God's mercy, the champions of infidelity shall find their occupation gone, and at last the world may behold the aspect of a really great and Christian

nation.