'it was written in good faith," or whether it "be not rather a covert attack on all religion"! Is it possible, I am ready to ask, that the critic can have read one tenth of the book, to have really any doubts about the intentions of the author, whatever he may have about his ability to second those intentions? Did not the very journal in which the critic writes declare, only a year or so ago, that the work had its value, specially as a protest against some of Mr. Newman's one-sided views; that it was calculated to give "pause and check to many a flashy young man," and this was probably the "worthy and pious " purpose of the author? Were not special commendations, bestowed on the protest against Mr. Newman's views of Christ, which it is the very object of this critic to explode ? *

The suspicions of the critic offer a tempting theme for the exercise of those same powers of sarcasm for which he gives me credit, if I were disposed to use them; which I will use, however, but sparingly, for the reasons I shall presently assign. It seems almost incredible that he can really mean what he says, and unsay all that his own journal has said. I can make allowance for a little sensitiveness at the dilemmas in Harrington's sceptical discussion, demanding, as they do, an answer from one who, on such questions, practically espouses the Deist's cause; I can sympathize with the natural wish to pay a little compliment to his friend Mr. Newman, whom he is just under the cruel necessity of opposing; I can indulge even the little flourish of "self-deceiving partiality," which permits

* The obverse and reverse of this critical medal would furnish curious contrasts; but it is hardly worth while to cite passages. The articles will be found in the numbers for August, 1852, and November, 1853. The motto of the Review is, "Respice, Aspice, Prospice.". The editor seems for a moment to have forgotten the first word of the three.

THE ECLIPSE OF FAITH.

him to say, in one and the same breath, "How is it that these same powerful instruments" (which have so demolished "The Eclipse of Faith"), "when wielded in a different cause, and directed against ourselves, appear to us to beat the air, we really cannot tell." I can less understand how it is that, just as he is about to show, on one of the most testing questions which can exercise the intellect and the heart of man, that either himself or Mr. Newman must be a very baby in critical discernment, one believing in the absolute moral perfection of Christ, and the other, that he was not only "encompassed with our infirmities," but "far below vast numbers of his unhonored disciples," he should select just that moment to profess "a profound deference for Mr. Newman's moral and historical judgments"! Pity his friend, love him, wonder at him, expostulate with him, all that is intelligible; but only think, gentle reader, in such a case, of a "profound deference for historical and moral judgments"! Who would not think now that it was Socrates, rather than Protagoras, that was speaking here, and that the critic was ironical in spite of himself? It is as if two men were looking at the sun: "Glorious orb!" says one, "how every meaner light fades away before thy effulgence! Who can confound thee with any other of the lamps of light?" "Do you call that the sun?" cries the other; it is but a star of the tenth or twelfth magnitude. I see far brighter orbs than that." "My dear friend," exclaims the first, "I have the profoundest deference for your powers of vision, but really But I will not go on. I suppress the sarcasms which the suspicions of my "Atheism" and the compliments to Mr. Newman's "historical and moral judgments" would justify, for the sake of that effort which the critic has made, (though, as I think, on most pre

carious grounds, and from a most imperfect point of view,) to defend the moral excellence and perfection of Him who is worthy of all love and veneration. The critic's conclusion, indeed, may surprise us, but still he arrives at it. He abandons seemingly all that is preternatural in Christianity, he reduces most of its history, all its miraculous history, to a caput mortuum of myth and fable, he leaves us in utter doubt how many or how few of its facts we are to credit or reject,

he believes that the "Messiah" himself was mistaken in his own Messiahship, he fancies that he knows more of Christianity, while he denies the integrity of the only records which inform us about it, than the Apostles themselves; — in all this he fights his battle under grave disadvantages, and, in fact, reposes his belief in the "moral perfection of Christ" solely on an irresistible feeling. Apart from that feeling (for which I yet cannot but honor him), he seems to vault upon air, or upon a rope so thin, that he seems to a spectator to do so; and as he trips about in the spangled dress of his somewhat too glittering rhetoric, it is impossible to restrain the fear lest he and his thesis should together tumble to the ground. Still he has defended the thesis; he avows that he sees, as he looks on the face of Christ, the moral glory and grandeur which beam from thence, and has endeavored to shelter Him from the rude attack which the author of the "Phases" has ventured to make upon Him. For that I will so far honor him, as to give him free leave to vent what suspicions he will of my possible Atheism," or my "equivocal good faith." If He, whom he strives on this occasion to defend, said that He would remember the most trivial act of kindness to the "least of those" whom He deigns to call "His brethren," surely His disciples may well forgive even a greater wrong to one who is

"

endeavoring, though I sincerely believe most inadequately, to defend His cause. I trust that this may convince the author of the critique, that "The Eclipse of Faith" does not come from the "Atheist's workshop," or from one who writes with "bad faith." Or, if he still doubts it, and will attempt to justify his suspicion, I pledge myself to examine whether his view or mine most naturally leads to religious scepticism; also, whether it may not be possible to give his logic a little more exercise in showing how, with his premises, he knows anything certain about Christ at all, or why His perfection as well as His miracles may not be a mere myth, than Mr. Newman has done by so feebly assailing the moral delineation of Him. I promise, however, that I will not charge my critic, as he charges me, with "hastening with utmost glee to poison the fountains of natural piety, and relishing the sorrows of the believers whose dreams he strives to dissipate " ! Such imputations should be left to those who have reached a downright, coarse, unmitigated Deism, and have snapped the last link which binds them in reverence to the moral loveliness he celebrates. Nay, I may even say they should be left to those who wield a less graceful pen than his; for good taste condemns them not less than good feeling.

SECTION XVI.

CONCLUSION.

AT length, I have done with Mr. Newman; but I cannot resist the present opportunity of saying a few words to my young Christian contemporaries on what I deem the true position of the chief arguments on which they are generally invited to surrender their faith, as compared with those which support it; and on what, before surrendering it, they have a right to demand from those who seek to snatch that faith from them.

At last, after much discussion in this and preceding ages, the world, I think and hope, is beginning to comprehend that it is not sufficient to discredit Christianity, or indeed any other system, to propound plausible or even insoluble objections; since it is a sort of weapon by which Atheism, Pantheism, and the half-score systems of Deisin may be alike easily foiled. And if there is any theory of religion, which is not in the same predicament as Christianity, - nay, which is not exposed to yet greater objections, I shall be glad to be informed of it. I can only say, it is a perfect novelty to me. Certainly it is not any of the theories of Deism, the pleasant varieties of which have sprung out of the very eagerness with which the advocates of each have sought to evade the difficulties which press the abettors of every other.

Encompassed on all sides by impassable barriers, in whatever direction we speculate, and in none by