other writers have been pursuing. But we have no personal feeling against Mr. Hare or his friends'; nor have we charged him with personal infidelity or rationalism. We have even stated, that he is careful to avow his belief in some of the cardinal doctrines of Christianity. We have admitted, in a passage which seems unintentionally to have given him great offence, that he is not a Pantheist. Our censure has been chiefly directed against that systematic attempt to promote the circulation of writings tinged with heresy and infidelity, of which Mr. Hare has himself afforded so woeful an example in the publication of "Sterling's Remains;" and we have expressed, what we now reiterate, and for reasons which we have assigned, our distrust of his opinions, in reference to the inspiration of Scripture-the very foundation, we need not say, on which the Christian Religion

reposes.

We have been somewhat surprised to observe that Mr. Hare uses the Ninth commandment as the title of his pamphlet. Might we be excused for suggesting a little more attention to the Third commandment? It seems to us that the sacred name is somewhat unnecessarily introduced by writers of this school when they mean to be emphatic. For instance, Mr. Hare, in the pamphlet before us, begins by asserting, that all our "charges," as he calls them, "are utterly false and malignantly slanderous; and this I will prove them to be, so HELP ME GOD!" Now, surely, the resolution to prove our charges unfounded was scarcely an occasion to call for an oath; any more than M. Bunsen's disclaimer of any wish to introduce a real, not a mock episcopate into Prussia, when he also says, "if by merely favouring the introduction of such an episcopacy, I should successfully combat the unbelief, Pantheism, and Atheism of the day, I would not do it; so HELP ME GOD!" We do not think that the name of God ought thus to be introduced in vehemence, and without necessity. We observe another instance of the same uncalled-for use of the name of God in page 21.

Space forbids us to follow Mr. Hare through the whole of the production before us; but we must, however briefly, advert to one or two more points in his defence.

We felt it necessary to comment on the fact, which is apparent on the surface of "Sterling's Life," that Archdeacon Hare had

2 We perceive that Mr. Maurice, also, at the end of the pamphlet before us, endeavours to make the question a personal one. We have heard, from a source on which we can rely, a very different version of the story told by Mr. Maurice, which, if it be correct, goes to prove, that while Mr. Maurice possesses the very convenient faculty of forgetting all facts which make against himself, he is liable to great error in passing judgment on the motives of others from whom he differs. The latter portion of this remark applies equally to Mr. Hare.

recommended him to take holy orders at a time when he must have been aware that his views on religion were sceptical and unsound. Mr. Hare is anxious to clear himself from any such imputation; and accordingly (p. 9) he implies, that the history of Sterling's early education was not known to him till after his ordination; and he observes, that he "had expressly said in page viii., that the information concerning his early education was communicated to me in later years." (p. 9.) On reference to the passage in Sterling's Life, cited by Mr. Hare, we find him certainly saying,

"In later years, speaking of the crude opinions on morals and politics and taste, which he held when he first went to college, he told me, that while a boy, he had read through the whole Edinburgh Review from its beginning."

But, of course, this passage does not refer to Sterling's religious views. We have nowhere referred to it as such, that we are aware of; but we have referred to another passage which Mr. Hare himself quotes in a postscript to his pamphlet, published separately, and directed to his exculpation on this particular point. We must here cite Mr. Hare's words in this postscript, which may possibly not come into the reader's hands.

"Subsequently, in page cxxviii. where I have to introduce some remarks on the change in his religious views, I say, with reference to the foregoing statement, that the tendency of his early education had been negative, after that mode of negativeness which we may remember as characteristic of such as drew their opinions from the oracles of the Edinburgh Review thirty years ago.' I have said nothing about his early religious opinions, for the simple reason, that I knew nothing about them. I speak merely of his opinions on morals and politics and taste' in philosophy and taste,' with regard to which, when he came to college, he held Mr. James Mill and Lord Jeffrey to be the first, or at least among the first living authorities. In asserting that he commenced life as a follower of that negative system in reference to religion, which distinguisht the Edinburgh Reviewers thirty years ago,i. e., in fact, as a sceptic,' our assailant quietly slips in the words in reference to religion, out of his mischief-breeding brain, and then draws an inference, after his own fashion, that Sterling commenced life ‘as a sceptic,' without any ground for it."-pp. 73, 74.

In commenting on these statements we must cite the latter passage referred to by Mr. Hare at full length, which will, we believe, settle this matter at once. In the Life of Sterling, then, Mr. Hare thus speaks of his friend :

"These remarks are called from me here, when I am about to speak of the latter years of my dear friend's life, and of the changes which took place in his opinions on subjects of the highest moment. We have

seen how he attached himself to critical theology, and with what continually increasing interest he studied that of Germany. The tendency of his early education had been negative, after that mode of negativeness which we may remember as characteristic of such as drew their opinions from the oracles of the Edinburgh Review thirty years ago. A variety of influences, among others, the fascination of Coleridge's genius, drew him away from this negative state, and wrought a temporary reconciliation with that which is best and soundest in the faith and institutions of his countrymen. Under these and other calming and sobering influences, he took orders. How he did so, how he devoted himself to the duties thus incurred, with his whole heart and soul, we have seen. Still there was always a broad divergence in his opinions from those which are held by the great body of the Church, the very same divergence of which Coleridge speaks in his 'Confessions of an Enquiring Spirit."" -Sterling's Life, pp. cxxviii. cxxix.

If Mr. Hare is not throughout the whole of this passage speaking of "religious" views, we really know not the meaning of words. Most assuredly, in the passage marked in italics, he meant us to understand, that the early education of Sterling had been negative in a "religious" point of view. His words cannot fairly be construed to have any kind of relation to matters of philosophy and taste," which he now contends was their only reference. We are concerned to think, that a writer, in many respects so respectable, and who is usually not deficient in candour, should permit himself to be hurried away in the eagerness of self-defence, into assertions so unfounded.

66

It appears then, conclusively, from this passage, that Mr. Hare was himself of opinion that Sterling's early tendencies had been sceptical; and that there was "always," even when he had adopted more or less of Christianity, a broad divergence in his views, from those of the great body of the Church. Mr. Hare now asserts, on Mr. Maurice's authority (p. 75), that this was not the case-that Sterling was a "strong believer" in Christianity while at the University. Yet this is, we think, quite compatible with Mr. Hare's own former statement in his Life. It is very probable that the "Edinburgh Reviewers" professed themselves "firm believers" in Christianity, just as the Rationalists of Germany do, and as Sterling himself did in after life, notwithstanding his denial of the inspiration of Scripture; which, as his biographer tells us, he considered, "as Coleridge did, to be thoroughly compatible with a deep and lively Christian faith, and with a full reception of all that is essential in the doctrines of our Church." (Life of Sterling, p. ccxxix.) And, as the biographer of Sterling does not express any dissent from this opinion, might we not very reasonably infer, that the knowledge of Sterling's views on such material points, which we cannot do Mr. Hare the VOL. XI. NO. XXI.-MARCH, 1849.

injustice of supposing him entirely ignorant of, when he invited Mr. Sterling to take orders and to be his Curate, would not have been regarded by him as offering any bar to the accomplishment of his wish? We have expressed a surprise which will be shared by others, at the very sympathizing and exculpatory tone in which the author of Sterling's Life has spoken of the infidelity of the subject of his memoir, and at the praises which are lavished on him throughout. We may perhaps be sadly bigoted, and unenlightened on such matters; but we confess that while we can very well understand that even tender affection may exist between a believer and one who has apostatized from the faith, we cannot understand that believer, when he holds up his friend to admiration as one whose opinions are leading to an improvement in our religious system. It is really curious to contrast the tender way in which Archdeacon Hare speaks of Sterling's infidelity, and refrains from condemning him in any way, with the vehemence of his denunciation of "orthodox" opinions. To disbelieve the inspiration of Scripture, and to side with Strauss and Carlyle in favouring the doctrines of Pantheism or Atheism, is excusable; but to be of opinion that Episcopacy is essential to the Church, is to hold "a hateful Anti-Christian doctrine." (p. 28.)

The author of the pamphlet (p. 15) refers to our question whether Sterling's negative views were shared by certain college friends, to whom he professed himself indebted for the formation of his opinions, and he convicts us very satisfactorily of injustice and absurdity, by quoting the end of a passage referred to by us, (E. R. xx. 401.) Our question was founded on the preceding part of the passage, which Mr. Hare has taken no notice of. In one passage, we are supposed to have made Mr. Hare responsible for the opinions of Paulus and Strauss, which was certainly contrary to our real meaning. Of course we are aware that they are not amongst his representatives of the "better school" of Theology in Germany. But we were there speaking not of Mr. Hare exclusively, but of Blanco White, Coleridge, and Sterling also. It was not our intention to assert, that each of the German writers mentioned was approved of by each of those English writers referred to. We regret that Mr. Hare has so misconceived our meaning, as to assert that our statement in this place is utterly false, and that the Reviewer himself well knew that it was so." (p. 33.)

66

We must now take our leave of this pamphlet, without any further attempt to defend ourselves against Mr. Hare's imputations of ignorance, blundering, false reasoning, and so forth; which arise in many cases from misconception of our meaning, and which we are very well content, to leave to the judgment of intelligent readers.

11.-The Name and Number of the Apocalyptic Beasts: with an Explanation and Application. In 2 Parts. Part I. By DAVID THOM, Ph.D., A. M., Heidelberg, Minister of Bold Street Chapel, Liverpool. London: H. R. Lewis.

THE object of this work is to supply the right interpretation of the number and name of the Apocalyptic Beasts. The author is a dissenting minister of some sect: we rather imagine he must be a universalist, judging from the list of his works appended to this volume. We have here only half the work contemplated by Mr. Thom; and in it he is almost wholly occupied in stating all the various interpretations of the names and number 666, while at the close he selects some words as particularly deserving of attention, such as LATEINOS, and some others bearing directly on the Church of Rome, and adds two of his own, which are apparently intended as a masked battery preparatory to an attack on all established churches and creeds, as antichristian. The author has evidently bestowed much pains in putting together his work; and though his details are much too lengthy for the general reader, his garrulity is amusing enough in places, as he takes every opportunity of letting the world know the names of his private friends and every possible particular about them. We extract the following note as an illustration of our meaning:

·

"Since writing the above, indeed just as I was on the eve of finishing my work, I have been honoured with the correspondence of the learned and talented author of the Dissertation.' He lives, I find, in retirement, or rather, in the undisturbed enjoyment of literary leisure, at Kennison Green, Maghull, in the vicinity of Liverpool. To his kindness and gentleman-like liberality of conduct, I confess myself much indebted. Several solutions he has supplied me with, which had previously escaped my notice. As the nephew of the celebrated Dr. Adam Clarke (referred to, by the bye, in the Autobiography' of that eminent person, vol. i. pp. 21, 22, and in vol. iii. p. 114 of the edition published by J. B. B. Clarke, London, 1833), he evidently possesses in no small degree his honoured relative's literary tastes, love of research, and general ability. Concerning the facts of this gentleman's existence, of his being my neighbour, and of his relationship to the most learned and able writer whom Wesleyan Methodism has produced, I was, until within the last fortnight (I write this, December 29th, 1847), entirely ignorant. Mr. Clarke has honoured me with the information, that the ἡ Λατίνη βασιλεία was computed by him on the morning of Thursday, June 1, 1809, although not published until 1814."—p. 356.

The details which the public prints have supplied about the Pope's body-linen are nothing to this.

Imagine publishing such details of a man of whose very existence