buslang, and has left on record his deliberate, though guarded, testimony to the reality and power of these famed religious movements. Mr Maclaurin was also the friend and correspondent of Jonathan Edwards, and other eminent American divines, who looked very much to Scotland for sympathy and support during their numerous trials. He was worthy of the friendship of Edwards; and on one occasion collected contributions among his friends in Scotland, to assist that great man in a period of difficulty. His life of usefulness and honour was suddenly cut short, by a brief but severe illness, in 1754. He died in the 61st year of his age, in the fulness of his powers and fame, leaving behind him works which posterity will never cease to admire.

Dr Goold has performed his editorial task with his usual accuracy and judgment. He has prefixed to the first volume a short memoir of Maclaurin, written by his son-in-law, Dr John Gillies, the wellknown author of the "Historical Collections ;" and he has appended a variety of notes and letters illustrative of Maclaurin's life and times. But this supplementary matter has a somewhat confused appearance. Indeed, notwithstanding what Dr Goold says about the scantiness of the materials for a life of Maclaurin, we are inclined to think that he might have used for that purpose such materials as he has collected with considerable success. Maclaurin, and other men of his stamp, lived before the biographical mania, which rages at present, had made its appearance; but it is due to such men that their lives should be carefully and classically written from what materials the industry of the present age can collect. A good life or memoir of an eminent man need not be a long one. It need not be copious in its details, or swollen out with journals and correspondence; yet, however succinct it may be, philosophical, and, in a sense, complete. We are persuaded that the lives of a goodly number of our Scottish worthies have yet to be written. The materials for such biographies are not so scanty as many suppose. What is wanted is the skilful and philosophical use of the materials that exist, or may be collected.

We heartily commend this new and complete edition of Maclaurin's works, and hope it will find a place in every theological library. Its outward appearance, as well as its intrinsic worth, ought to gain for it universal favour.

THE

NORTH BRITISH REVIEW.

NOVEMBER, 1860.

ART. I.-1. Thoughts in aid of Faith, gathered chiefly from recent works in Theology and Philosophy. By SARA S. HENNELL. Manwaring, 1859.

2. PRIZE ESSAY.-Christianity and Infidelity: an Exposition of the Arguments on both sides. Arranged according to a plan proposed by George Baillie, Esq. By S. S. HENNELL. Hall and Virtue, 1857.

66

3. Essay on the Sceptical Tendency of " Butler's Analogy." By S. S. HENNELL. 1859.

MINDS of high order, as to originative force, throw off from themselves the reflex quality of any scheme of doctrine which has sprung from them. The author of a philosophy is not always -he is not often-its truest representative, either intellectually or morally; perhaps he is not even its best expounder; and instances might be named in which a coherent notion of a system is better taken from the disciple than from the master. It will be so especially, if the disciple, while he is zealously affected toward the master, be also well schooled in the system itself, and be of such intelligence as that he is able to exhibit what is peculiar to it in its relation to the teaching of others. Thus it is that the Recipient Mind is to be looked to rather than the Originative Mind, when it is our purpose to acquaint ourselves authentically, and in the shortest time, with the doctrine of a sect or school.

Certainly it is not with an intention to speak disparagingly of the accomplished author of the books named at the head of this article, that we thus introduce her to our readers. She herself would, we think, choose so to be spoken of. In truth, the intellectual modesty and the candour which shed a grace upon her pages, assure us that we shall not offend her in availing our

VOL. XXXIII. NO. LXVI.

T

selves of her last book-regarding it as the product rather of a Disciple-Mind than of a Master-Mind. And yet it is only justice to her to say, that she is far from occupying the position of an obsequious listener to any one of the leading spirits of the time; for she writes eclectically-freely taking from each what she approves, and leaving what she disallows, in the systems of these noted Guides of "MODERN THOUGHT." She writes in a tone of independence, as well as with intelligence and candour. There is one other point on which we would preclude misapprehension. The author is-an awkward phrase !-an authoress; but let it not be imagined that the courtesy to which she is so well entitled -her sex not considered-is now rendered to her because it is "a lady" we have to do with. A courtesy of this sort she would rightly regard as an insult; and we should further say, that a critic who, in this instance, might assume the knightly style, would do well first to make himself sure that he is himself this lady's superior, either in power of thought or in accomplishments. No arrogance of this species will, we think, show itself in these pages. Be it at the same time well understood, that while we should scorn to treat Miss Hennell in the style of a spurious politeness, and are not professing to be gentle because she is the "weaker vessel," we must use a liberty that is quite regardless of sex in speaking of her principles-her doctrine-her conclusions; for with these we must deal, according to law, rigorously, and in no other mood than that of inexorable reason. Inexorable reason! and let the import of this phrase be duly regarded by those, on both sides, who owe it to themselves well to consider it. What then does it mean in relation to the momentous controversy now in view? It does not mean interminable argumentation-the endless See-Saw of evenly balanced "Considerations," now up, now down: it does not mean the carrying on of a hopeless antagonism, marked on the one side by philosophic arrogance, on the other side by irritation and petulant anathemas. What we intend in this instance by invoking the aid of inexorable reason is this:-we ask for fixedness of purpose in holding fast to the matter in hand; and in doing so, a strict adherence to those logical canons which belong to the subject in its two main branches-namely, of Abstract Thought, or Metaphysical Speculation; and of Historical Criticism. Thus, for example, as to the first of these departments, the requirements of rigid argumentation should include a "reporting progress" on the part of those who so often affirm that great progress has actually been made under their guidance. There are those at this time who, if they do not call one another "the most Advanced Thinkers of the age," yet quietly accept the designation when it is bestowed upon them by their admiring disciples.

Modern Thought as Old as Buddhism.

291

Now, we may fairly require it to be shown, on the part of these "Advanced Thinkers," that, in fact, "Thought" has been advanced-has been set forward, at least a step or two, since it has been in their keeping. But if, on the contrary, it shall appearand appear on the evidence of so well-informed a disciple as is the author of the book before us, that Abstract Speculation has, at this moment, come to a dead stop at the very point where it stood in the young days of Oriental Buddhism, then this Inexorable Reason, the aid of which we invoke, will demand that a three thousand years or more of unproductive toil on this field should now be accepted as proof more than enough of the hopelessness of any such endeavours to create a Theology on that ground. Miss Hennell will enable us to show that the newest issues of Modern Thought are resolvable into a scheme which, if it be a Theology, is less coherent than was the ancient Buddhism; which, if it be regarded as a Philosophy, can boast of no particle of scientific evidence beyond that which sustained the more ancient system; which, if it were looked to as a scheme of morals, is equally ineffective for any good-is impracticable-is powerless-is inane; and which, if it does not dispel the instinctive fears, quashes the instinctive hopes of the human mind.

The other branch of this great controversy in respect of which we invoke the help of unsparing logic, is that of Historical Criticism; for, by the evidence of a series of able writers, on the side of disbelief, it may be shown, at this time-first, that a final solution of the problem of Historical Christianity is imperatively needed; and next, that a strict adherence to the reason of the question will not fail to bring us to that issue-namely, a final decision concerning the Mission of Christ, as either authoritative toward the human family, or not so. It has long been felt, and it is now frankly admitted, that so long as Christianity maintains its position as a Theology from Heaven, and is looked to as a determinative source of religious belief, it blocks the way of Modern Thought upon the otherwise open field of abstract speculation. Christianity-if it be from God in its own sense, and if it is to give law to our beliefs, then must it be allowed to preclude speculation upon those matters over which Abstract Philosophy claims a right of control. If Christianity be from Heaven, then it is clear that those vital questions concerning a Personal God, and concerning the reality of a moral system and a future retribution, and especially concerning the continuity of individual consciousness after death, are already determined for The Court of Heaven has long ago given judgment on these points; and, therefore, any further debate concerning them must be idle; not to say that it is a 66 contempt of Court." But as to any such restrictions as these, they are felt to be intolerable by the

us.

Masters of Modern Thought!-how shall those submit to be so restricted, who have relished the pleasures of unfettered speculation? Miss Hennell expresses herself with great vivacity on this point she thus speaks of—

"the impression of contraction that strikes every one who turns back to the manner of thought that belongs to the period of theological belief, after having once indulged in the expansiveness of philosophical principle. Who is there who has not resented to himself the difficulty of forcing the mind again to submit to the conventional rigour that of right befits the limits of theological treatment? Immediately comes the consciousness that we are upon ground where there is always something to be taken for granted, beyond which we must be contented not to inquire. And in this indignant surmise, when it is thoroughly investigated, proves at last to lie the very root of the matter."—P. 95.

By all means, therefore, this power of restraint must be driven off from the ground of "expansive philosophical thought." And so it is that this writer, following the example of every one of her noted predecessors on the same side, addresses herself at the outset to this task-namely, that of dismissing Christianity, and of showing that, whatever use we may continue to make of it, we may henceforth safely think and speak of it as itself "a fable." We shall presently see that although she acquits herself of this preliminary task much to her own satisfaction-just at the moment of winding up her argument, yet passages very frequently occur throughout the volume, some of which we shall cite, which give evidence of deep uneasiness still lurking in her mind, as if, after all her efforts, things were not right on this ground.

In long series, one after another, every writer of note on the same side has given proof of his feeling, that Christianity must in some manner be thrust aside, and be deprived of its assumed right of interference on the field of Philosophy. Each of these writers, therefore-German, French, and English-has propounded a scheme of historical criticism, by help of which the difficulty may be overcome. But now, as to these successive schemes or theories, whether they be four or five, or more, it should be understood that there are not, at this time, four or five independent solutions of the Problem, from among which we are at liberty to select the one which pleases us the best. This is not the fact; nor have we any such option; for the truth is, that the author of each of these schemes has rested its claim to be accepted on the plea that he has already demolished the hypothesis of his immediate precursor. On the showing, therefore, of these very writers, listening as we may to them in their turn, we may save ourselves the trouble of inquiring concerning the merits of any one except the latest: we may do so without fear,