sincere convictions of others; between conscientious adherence to our own persuasion and a bigoted enmity against the conscientious persuasion of others. We thus readily perceive the fallacy of the objection, and clearly see that we are thus adopting and cherishing no culpable indifference to all distinctions of religion; but, on the contrary, are establishing its surest safeguard in the inviolability of conscientious conviction. The very essence of true liberality consists not in discarding our own conviction, but in allowing others to enjoy theirs. If our sincere conviction were wanting, there would no longer be any room for exercising the virtue of liberality. It is easy enough not to interfere with the religion of others when we have no religion of our own, and such forbearance can claim no merit and evinces no virtue. The absence of all hostility may exist from the absence of all real religion; but such mere negative forbearance is very far from the character of true Christian liberality, which is founded upon the reality and comprehensiveness of Christian principle. Between two persons both devoid of all religion, or who consider all forms of religion matters of utter indifference, or who profess different tenets in mere hypocrisy, there can be no real exercise of Christian liberality. It is essential to the exercise of this virtue that each party be sincerely convinced of the doctrine he professes. Moderation consists not in indecision, uncertainty, and compromise, but, while we hold our opinion firmly and distinctly, in having a due consideration that the force of the evidence by which we are convinced may not be the same to others. Moderation is opposed not to entire or firm belief, but to obstinate, blind, one-sided belief: it affects not the earnestness of our convictions, but the temper in which we uphold them, and regard those of others when they differ from our own. By fair, candid, and courteous discussion, indeed, but no other means, each may naturally and reasonably endeavour to impart to others the light he himself enjoys, but without any wish arrogantly to force it on them, or any disposition to ascribe their inability to adopt the views disclosed to bad motives. Thus true liberality, so far from being at variance with real Christian sincerity, cannot subsist without it. Thus liberality is not indifference. The real spirit of charity in religious differences is not a spirit of latitudinarianism or scepticism. In proportion as the only solid basis of truth is recognized, will it be the more evident that those differences are unavoidable and irremediable; and hence the more pressing necessity for charity and liberality. Diversities of apprehension of the truth are inseparable from the imperfections of human nature, and necessarily incidental to the free pursuit of truth, and even to the state of trial in which we are here placed, and the very nature of walking by faith-not by sight. They are therefore not only to be tolerated, but defended; and the most sincere advocates of faith will be foremost to contend for the cause of liberalityconvinced that it is the cause of truth. As liberality in worldly affairs cannot be exercised without the right of private property, so liberality in religion cannot subsist without a distinct belief of our own. The one is no more consistent with the compromise of our own opinions than the other is compatible with a community of goods. In the precept (Eph. iv. 15), aλneúovтes Év åɣáпn—' seeking the truth in love'-St. Paul unites religious truth and charity: too many professing Christians separate them; some disregard charity under the plea of truth, and fall into religious bigotry. To maintain the truth in uncharitableness is not to maintain the whole truth, for charity is an essential part of it. Others disregard truth for charity: they are led into a false liberality, which discards the acknowledgment of truth; and is really no more than indifference to all the grounds of conscientious conviction. A spurious liberality represents all modes of faith as unimportant; it calls upon men to compromise all points of difference; it strikes at the foundation of real belief, and can imply little better than total apathy to all religion. It is even dangerous to the very principle of religious liberty; for if all forms are wholly indifferent, where is the hardship of conformity? True liberality, on the other hand, is based on the sacredness of conscientious conviction, and identified with the love of truth. It represents no difference as unimportant, but encourages each to hold fast his view of the truth; and, on the very same ground of right, to allow the same liberty to others. The language of false liberality is: Why these idle contentions?-Compound your differences and agree. The language of true liberality is: Differ-but agree to differ. Differences are unavoidable. Disagreements about them are unchristian. Is there then, it will be asked, no real standard of true doctrine? or are we to fall into what is in fact nothing but universal scepticism? We reply: the real standard to which the highest mental and moral illumination might attain, in its absolute perfection, is necessarily hidden from us; and the only approach to it must be made by the progressive advancement of each individual, according to the diligent use of the advantages vouchsafed to him. We cannot define it by dogmas, but each, according to his own attainment of clearer views of it, may, and ought to endeavour, to bring others to a participation in it. Truth, as it actually is, in its own divine brightness, is one thing; as imperfectly grasped by the human faculties—another. Thus the essential unity of truth is quite consistent with varieties of human apprehension of it. It must appear under different aspects, and be seen at different degrees of remoteness; and this without disparagement to the rectitude of vision of all those who are intent upon the contemplation of it; if they really strive to attain the clearest view their powers and position will enable them to attain. And this enlightenment, in a Christian sense, will be derived from the careful, candid, and rational study of the New Testament, in its uncorrupted simplicity; not by a hasty assumption of gratuitous theories and fanciful speculations, too often obtruded under the name of peculiarly rational' views, but in reality undistinguishable from the wildest mysticism-but by sound, well-informed, critical examination of the sacred records. Such an inquiry will not fail to produce an increasing conviction of the spiritual simplicity of the Gospel; a simplicity in virtue of which its very vitality, as it were, is capable of being preserved, under almost all varieties of outward form, condition, and profession. The bigot would fix orthodoxy in this or that creed, as a child does the rainbow in the opposite field. But, as the better informed knows that the arch centres in the individual eye, so the liberal, in the varieties of belief, sees but the shifting reflection of the same immutable truth. And, as the only true Catholicism is universal liberality, so the only real orthodoxy, founded on the New Testament, consists in the progressive enlightenment of every seeker after truth, even the humblest, according to his diligent improvement of the means vouchsafed to him by Divine grace. And it is to be promoted by no extravagant theories, but by the gradual diffusion of a better knowledge of Scripture, and endeavours to disabuse the public mind of its cherished errors. Enlightened by this principle, the liberal Christian when he looks on a brother believer sincerely upholding what he cannot but deem fundamental error, is yet perplexed with no painful struggle between the wish to regard his views with indulgence on the one hand, and fears for his own on the other. He feels no such difficult demand on his principles as that of saying, 'You may be right, and I may be wrong.' He is assured that both are liable to err, yet each must be right in honestly following the light vouchsafed to him; and that, different as their view of it may be, in degree and character, yet both are in pursuit of the same one and eternal truth. This is the true 'Catholicism;' and is not, like the pretended, to be kept up by a narrow exclusiveness, by aiming at exact uni formity formity of profession, nor by a conciliation of compromises or concessions but by each adhering to what he conscientiously believes to be the truth; and regarding, not with indulgence, but with mere justice, those who are doing the same. And as truth is only secured by freedom of conviction, so liberty, in all varieties of belief, is the only real bond of unity; the cause of liberality is at once the cause of truth and of peace; real faith conspires with charity; and the most zealous promotion of the glory of God is identified with the advancement of good will towards men. 6 a In a debate in the House of Lords (May 26, 1840), one right rev. prelate is reported to have said that the Church of England is founded on liberty of conscience and right of private judgment,' when another, with some warmth, replied, that 'he always understood that all the Catholic Church is founded on truth.' How simple a consideration would have shown that both these eminent prelates in fact agreed; and that truth and freedom of opinion are one, while without liberty of conscience, a Protestant Church could never have existed, however founded on truth! ON ON HEBREW POETRY." By Professor G. H. A. von EWALD, D.D. Translated, with the Author's latest Corrections and Additions, by GENERAL OBSERVATIONS ON HEBREW POETRY. I.--Notion of Hebrew Poetry. 1. The primal basis of every genuine poetry is the rise and urgency of a living fresh thought in the mind of the poet. Whether a In presenting the English reader with a translation of the third work which has formed an epoch in the modern appreciation of Hebrew poetry, it is necessary to apprise him that the original of this translation is the first volume of Die Poetischen Bücher des Alten Bundes erklärt von Heinrich Ewald, Göttingen, 1835-39, 8vo. The last three volumes contain translations of, and commentaries on, the Psalms, the book of Job, and the Proverbs and Kohélet, and were published first. The first volume contains a view of the history of Hebrew poetry, and of its kinds; the most elaborate exhibition of its structure; and a general account of the Psalter; and includes, as illustrations, translations of nearly all those poems which are found in the historical and prophetical books. The first portion only of this volume is here given; the remainder will follow in successive numbers, until the whole is completed. Extract from the Author's Preface.--This volume is the last in the order of publication, although it is the first as to its place in the series. If all the volumes were not to appear together (which would certainly have been more advisable, in many respects), this order of appearance was prescribed by a regard for the advantage of the work itself. For the general truths and deductions which the first volume contains, rest but upon a narrow foundation, if the particular inquiries and special facts on which they are based, are not first firmly established. In modern times there has been far too great a chace after certain general judgments and views, without having beforehand clearly understood particulars: this has produced a great portion of that uncertainty under which Biblical science still labours, and which every better instructed and conscientious author will, at least, take good care not to increase, lest, by obscuring the knowledge of particulars, the true general and important aspects of the Bible become obscured also. This is especially the case with the Old Testament, about which one now-a-days hardly hears a general judgment that is not at the same time an erroneous one. A similar motive-the desire to establish the nearer and more necessary truths on a surer basis-has induced me, if I would deliver any such work at all into the hands of the general reader, at least to begin with the poets of the Old Testament. For the poets, in perhaps every ancient nation, exhibit the first vigorous, but purely personal, movement of the spirit which reveals itself in words. It is only he who understands the poets of the Old Testament, and the way in which the spirit moves in them, that has laid a sure ground by which he may not only ascend and receive in its most genuine sense the very different utterance of the prophets, but also descend and accurately trace the records which the historical books preserve of the course and tendencies of the national mind. It certainly is a great gain towards a surer scientific knowledge of the Bible, if, on the first step of the ascent to |