be actuated by sinister ambition, and a lust of meretricious glory, then the feeble part of the assembly, to whom at first • they conform, becomes in its turn the dupe and instrument of their designs." (Works, 8vo. Vol. v. p. 90.)

With a full recollection of the pledge given, in the preface to this volume, that facts should be strictly adhered to, I have now to demand of the reader his belief in the statement that Dr Wiseman has actually adopted that portion of the foregoing extract, which is given in Italics, as one of his grand principles of interpretation; and in his third lecture, has actually applied it, as the sure guide to our Lord's meaning, in the sixth chapter of St John. And thus are the purposes of the Saviour of the world, and the means employed by him for the accomplishment of his object, to be estimated by the means and purposes to which a political leader may have recourse, with the view of controlling and directing the excited passions of a popular assembly. In truth, it "maketh the heart sick," to think that any oneleast of all a minister of Christ's religion-should have so far forgotten his own character, as to have thus ventured to treat the proceedings of Him, “in whom were hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge" and in whom " dwelt all the fulness of the Godhead bodily." To myself, there is something melancholy in what appears to be too commonly the effect of a determined resolution to maintain a set of theological opinions-I mean, a

"

certain hardness of disposition, and an insensibility to the propriety or impropriety of the methods adopted for that end. At the time, indeed, that Dr Wiseman adduced the already-mentioned sentiment of Mr Burke-for the purpose of showing that the feelings, the habits, the very prejudices of the audience addressed" must have been originally consulted by our Lord, and so must now be taken into account he was aware that the principles he was laying down might assume an odious appearance, and be carried to a dangerous extent. "Of course," he observes, " you will not for a moment confound this supposition with the doctrine of the rationalists, that our Saviour framed his dogma so as to accord with the errors and prejudices of the Jews-an opinion as unhermeneutical and absurd, as it is blasphemous. I speak of the manner, and not the matter, of his instructions."* Now, notwithstanding this limitation, I cannot but think that, if the language of Mr Burke is to be applied to the case-if our Lord is to be considered as one who, because he would " lead, must also in a considerable degree, have followed,” as one who must have "conformed his propositions to the taste, talent and disposition of those whom he wished to conduct"-Dr Wiseman's opinion, both in the disrespect which it implies and the dangers with which it is fraught, makes a very close approximation to that which he has pro* Lectures, p. 28.

nounced to be "as unhermeneutical and absurd, as it is blasphemous."

But Dr Wiseman does not decide the meaning of our Lord's discourses, by referring solely to the arts of a political leader. He appeals also to the compliances of a successful preacher. "I quoted to you," he writes, the remark of Burke, that in addressing popular assemblies it is necessary, in some respect, to adapt ourselves to the weaknesses and prejudices of those who hear us. • The preacher,' says an able writer [the author of The Elements of Rhetoric] who is intent upon carrying his point, should use all such precautions as are not inconsistent with it, to avoid raising unfavourable impressions in his hearers.'"* This appeal, although perhaps not exciting equal indignation with the former, yet betokens the most lamentable indifference to the dignity of the subject under discussion. Strong language is quite foreign to my habits of writing; but I cannot help expressing my surprise, that Dr Wiseman, with all his confidence in "an able writer," was not ashamed to propose, as the criterion for judging of our Lord and his discourses, "the preacher who is intent upon carrying his point." A notion like this, if seriously advanced, manifests such a povertystricken conception of the objects of our Lord's ministration among men-such a degrading estimate of his conduct, as recorded by the Evangel*Lectures, pp. 85, 86.

ists-that the difficulty is, to reconcile its appearance, with those moral feelings and religious impressions which we are anxious to attribute to the reverend lecturer. But let us proceed to the application, as explained by himself, of his hermeneutical principles:

(1) "Our Saviour's object, in his discourses to the Jews, was to gain them over to the doctrines of Christianity; and he, therefore, must be supposed to propose those doctrines in the manner most likely to gain their attention and conciliate their esteem. (2) At least, it is repugnant to suppose him selecting the most revolting images, wherein to clothe his dogmas, disguising his most amiable institutions under the semblance of things the most wicked and abominable in the opinion of his hearers, and inculcating the most saving and most beautiful principles, by the most impious and horrible illustrations. (3) Yet, in such manner must we consider him to have acted, if we deny him to have been teaching the doctrine of the real presence, and suppose him to have been simply inculcating the doctrine of faith. (4) For, the ideas of drinking blood and eating human flesh, presented something so frightful to a Jew, that we cannot allow our Saviour, if a sincere teacher, to have used them as images for consoling and cheering doctrines; nor, in fact, to have used them at all, under any other circumstances than an absolute necessity of recurring to them, as the most literal method of representing his doctrines." (pp. 86, 87.)

The preceding extract contains four sentences; on each of which, in its order, I will make a few observations. 1. If we may judge from our Lord's own proceeding, he must have frequently had some other object, besides that mentioned by Dr Wiseman-namely, that of "gaining the attention of the Jews, and conciliating their esteem.” When,

for instance, he declared, in the presence of "an innumerable multitude of people,” (Luke xii. 1) as well as of his disciples, (Luke xii. 49) that he was "come to send fire on the earth"--when he went on to say, "Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth? I tell you, Nay; but rather division for from henceforth there shall be five in one house divided, three against two, and two against three. The father shall be divided against the son, and the son against the father; the mother against the daughter, and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against her mother in law:"-when (Luke xiv. 25) he turned to "great multitudes" who "went with him," and said unto them, "If any man come to me, and hate not his father, and mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and sisters, yea, and his own life also, he cannot be my disciple;" and advised them before they resolved to "bear his cross," to follow the example of the man who, before engaging in some great undertaking, "sitteth down, and counteth the cost:"-when such, I say, was, in various instances, the tenor of our Lord's addresses to the people, is it to be endured, that we are to consider him in the light of a leader of a party, "conforming his propositions to the taste, talent and disposition" of his audienceor even in the light of a popular preacher, "using precautions, to avoid raising unfavourable impres