ing the difficulties which present themselves along the path of biblical inquiry, and that both in the lines we have quoted, and in others having reference to sovereignty, election, and foreknowledge, his intellect glows with a light that shines from heaven. It ought to be borne in mind that the Bible is not a book of reasoning, but of facts and doctrines; and that metaphysics is not a proper plummet with which to sound the depths of revelation. Misapprehension on this subject has occasioned a thousand disputes, which will in all probability never cease to be agitated till the simplicity of faith is substituted for the fierceness of controversy, and intellectual pride yields to the dictates of christian humility. If the fall had not occurred, it may be safely concluded that the genius of man would have been able to penetrate to incalculable distances into the principles of the divine government, and to have reached far beyond the confusions which now darken to our eye the ways of God; but with enfeebled powers and necessarily limited manifestations, with spirits though 'winged for infinite,' yet encompassed about with material obscurities and obstructions, it is certain that in the present condition of our being there is an ultima Thule in every great question beyond which we cannot pass. It is precisely here that metaphysical theologians carry on eternal warfare, while within these impassable boundaries are subjects of thought and objects of faith enough to employ the strongest and instruct the most sceptical mind. Let a distinction be made between free inquiry and licentious thinking -between the aim to ascertain the revelations of truth, and the pride that would subject them to the criticisms and dictates of unsanctified reason-between the solicitude that meets its reward— 'Search the Scriptures; for in them ye think (justly) ye have eternal life' and the folly that receives its condemnation, Who art thou that repliest against God? Shall the thing formed say to him that formed it, why hast thou made me thus? On all that relates to the greatness and glory of God, the majesty of his Son, and the peculiarity of his character as Mediator and Redeemer, the necessity and nature of true worship, the importance of obedience, and the worth of private virtue, the sentiments of Milton are sufficiently obvious; and though persons of a heterodox faith have sometimes attempted to claim him, the tendency of his entire composition, as well as the distinct phraseology of particular passages, nullifies their pretensions. Milton is scrupulous in his adherence to scriptural forms of expression in the speeches he ascribes to the Almighty; for which some critics seem to have condemned him, and have imputed to his careful and correct phraseology a lurking spirit of hostility to orthodox theology. This charge, however, is ill-sustained. 'It is very possible,' says Mr. Hawkins, to copy the letter of revelation whilst its spirit is miserably neglected; and this error may be traced in Milton's work, especially in his daring descriptions of the persons of the Trinity. Take, for example, the description of the exaltation of the Son in the fifth book. This is founded no doubt on Psalm ii. 7, and on this slender basis what a detached and degrading story is constructed of the eternal Son of God, invested on a certain day with a species of vicegerent authority, his sonship declared, and the angels henceforward required to obey him; whilst the Son himself, if Abdiel did not declare of him that he took part in the creation of angels would appear little more than a superior angel raised above his fellows, allowed to wield the thunder and reflect the glory of his Father. As a general picture this is at utter variance with the spirit of those notions which revelation gives us of the Son of God, however it may be supported here and there by isolated texts by the words of Scripture torn from their context and divested of their genuine spirit. And it is greatly to be feared that the theology of the Paradise Lost has tainted many of its readers, and others through him, with floating notions of the materiality of the persons of the Trinity, tending obviously towards Tritheism, and tempting other minds offended by errors of this nature into the opposite errors of the Sabellian or Socinian schemes.' It is granted that it is very possible to copy the letter of revelation whilst its spirit is neglected; but is there any thing in the descriptions of the fifth book to justify this allegation? Milton's 'degrading story,' as it is termed, of the investment and proclamation of the Son's authority either is or is not in Scripture. If it be there, the story when repeated cannot be degrading; if not, of course it must be estimated in its character of a fiction. Orthodoxy itself will not dispute the fact that as Mediator the Son is represented as inferior to the Father, as invested with an office, and as conducting the affairs of this lower world in relation both to the state of man and the agency of celestial and infernal spirits. The practice of detaching particular passages of scripture from their context, and for controversial or sectarian purposes perverting the obvious meaning of words or phrases, cannot be too severely reprehended: and it must be confessed has frequently been resorted to by theologians who have been more solicitous of upholding the system of a party than advancing the interests of truth. But that anything of this kind is fairly deducible from the fifth or any other book of the Paradise Lost is denied. The very contrarieties of opinion that have prevailed on its theology tend to disprove the existence of such intended perversions, no less than what is more absolute evidence still, as already hinted, the author's great care in adhering as much as possible to scriptural phraseology. It is clear that the critic has, in this instance, his Notes to an edition of Milton published at Oxford, 1824. own own system sufficiently marked, together with an apparent sensi- Thrones, Dominations, Princedoms, Virtues, Powers, My only Son, and on this holy hill Him have anointed, whom ye now behold At my right hand; your Head I him appoint; All knees in Heaven, and shall confess him Lord'— With these lines compare the following passages of Holy Writ: Ps. ii. 6, 7, Yet have I set my king upon my holy hill of Zion. I will declare the decree: the Lord hath said unto me, Thou art my Son; this day have I begotten thee.' Be it observed that no context can affect the meaning of this announcement. A decree, from its very nature, stands alone in its own entireness, and is to be interpreted by its own expressions. Gen. xxii. 16, By myself have I sworn, saith the Lord.' Philip. ii. 9, 10, 11, God hath highly exalted him, and given him a name which is above every name: That at the name of Jesus every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth: And that every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is Lord, to the glory of God the Father.' The entire speech of Abdiel to which reference is made consists of a series of representations taken from Scripture itself. For example, on the particular point in question, in reply to Satan's intimation of the injustice of elevating an equal above his fellows, which he is supposed to charge upon the Almighty in the exaltation of his son, the angel says Thyself, though great and glorious, dost thou count, Equal to him begotten Son? by whom As by his word the Mighty Father made All things, even thee; and all the spirits of heaven Crowned them with glory' Compare Coloss. i. 15, 16, 17, Who is the image of the invisible God, the first-born of every creature; for by him were all things created that are in heaven, and that are in earth, visible and invisible, whether they be thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or or powers all things were created by him and for him and he is before all things, and by him all things consist.' In these and kindred passages of the poem surely there is no deviation from the letter or spirit of inspired representations. And if there be one thing above others that commends them to us, it is, that Milton has sacrificed much of the rhythm and beauty of poetry to the greater object of retaining the truth of Scripture by verbal exactitude. The moral effect of such a principle of composition in connection with this great subject is unquestionably great. Let it but be duly appreciated, and the piety as well as genius of Milton will stand pre-eminent. With the Scriptural sentiments of the fifth, and the grandeur of the sixth book, where he describes the majesty and terror of the Son of God in taking vengeance on his enemies, may be brought into view the beautiful pictures of his divine compassion and love, as represented in the third: and surely it cannot be questioned that the influence of the Paradise Lost has served to deepen the impressions of Scripture respecting the character of the Son of God. Beyond compare the Son of God was seen Most glorious; in him all his Father shone Love without end, and without measure grace.' The reader can scarcely fail of observing the inimitable skill with which the expressions in three passages are combined. Heb. i. 3: "The express image of his person.'-John i. 14: 'full of grace.' -John iii. 34: 'God giveth not the Spirit by measure unto him.' The line 'Love without end, and without measure grace' is not surpassed in melody, if, indeed, it be equalled by the most euphonistic passages of Homer and Virgil, notwithstanding the advantage of the Greek and Latin languages. It is as if a sound and sentiment, breathed from an angel's lyre, had dropped upon a mortal spirit. The subject of the line in question moreover imparts to it an unequalled beauty. It is only rivalled by himself in another description which occurs soon after: 'His words here ended, but his meek aspect Silent yet spake, and breathed immortal love To mortal men :' or those musical lines in the seventh book, which represent the return of the Almighty from his omnipotent creations. -Up he rode, Followed with acclamations and the sound Angelic Angelic harmonies: the earth, the air Resounded (thou rememb’rest, for thou heard'st) With regard to the Tritheistic tendencies of the Paradise Lost, there is a semblance of truth in the allegation; but only a semblance. The distinct and frequent mention of the persons of the Godhead, with particular descriptions of each separately, and the interchanges of conversation, implying supremacy and subjection respectively, may affect some minds detrimentally, and here, if anywhere, perhaps the genius of the great poet flags. The following mitigating considerations, however, ought not to be disregarded. Notwithstanding the solemn interdictions of idolatry in Scripture, there are passages both in the Prophets and the Revelation which contain more strictly personal references to Deity than occur in any of the literalities of the Paradise Lost; for besides general descriptions there are many distinct references to the hands, feet, and speech of the Almighty, as if he possessed a corporeal organisation. A just theology, it is true, knows how to estimate these modes of language, and to defend them as a kind of necessary modal fiction in order to communicate certain sentiments in the most forcible manner. Moreover, the very character of the work, as a poem and not a treatise on theology, may redeem it from the opprobrium of teaching, or tending to impart idolatrous notions. The most cursory reader is not likely to receive these descriptions as dogmatic truths. They are seen at once to be a kind of machinery or fictitious vehicle of sentiment, not intended for literal interpretation. It is not credible that any one was ever made a Tritheist by these poetic pictures; and if in some instances they somewhat offend against taste, they are not calculated to corrupt principles. It may be fairly inquired how far it is proper that the mind should be filled with a highly finished picture of what the Scriptures have scarcely supplied an outline, and have purposely left obscure. The mind, it may truly be said, is partial to complete views, to connected ideas, so that it may be questioned whether the great body of those who do not study the Bible, and who are ignorant how much or how little of Milton is unwarranted by Scripture, but have heard that he was a religious man, and therefore think they may safely take all that he teaches for truth,—may not be |