Religion and Theology, A Sermon for the Times
by John Tulloch
RELIGION AND THEOLOGY
A SERMON FOR THE TIMES
PREACHED IN THE
PARISH CHURCH OF CRATHIE, 5TH SEPTEMBER
AND IN THE
COLLEGE CHURCH, ST ANDREWS
JOHN TULLOCH, D.D.
PRINCIPAL AND PROFESSOR OF THEOLOGY, ST MARY'S COLLEGE, IN THE
UNIVERSITY OF ST ANDREWS, AND ONE OF HER MAJESTY'S CHAPLAINS IN
ORDINARY IN SCOTLAND
WILLIAM BLACKWOOD AND SONS EDINBURGH AND LONDON MDCCCLXXV
WORKS BY THE SAME AUTHOR.
HISTORY OF RATIONAL THEOLOGY
CHRISTIAN PHILOSOPHY IN ENGLAND
IN THE SEVENTEENTH CENTURY.
Second Edition, 2 vols. 8vo, £1, 8s.
The pleasure with which Principal Tulloch explores this
comparatively unknown field communicates itself to his readers,
and the academic groves of Oxford and Cambridge are invested
with the freshness of a new glory.
It is rich in pregnant and suggestive thought.
Here we must take our respectful leave of this large-minded,
lively, and thoughtful work, which deserves to the full the
acceptance it cannot fail to receive.
Every thoughtful and liberal Englishman who reads these volumes
will feel that Principal Tulloch has laid him under obligations
in writing them.
British Quarterly Review.
Ample scholarship, well-disciplined powers, catholic sympathies,
and a masculine eloquence, give it a high place among modern
contributions to theological science.
From his lively portraits they will learn to know some of the
finest spirits England has produced; while from his able and
comprehensive summaries of the works they left behind them, any
reader of quick intelligence may acquaint himself with their
THE WITNESS OF REASON AND NATURE TO AN ALL-WISE AND BENEFICENT
Octavo, 10s. 6d.
Dr Tulloch's Essay, in its masterly statement of the real nature
and difficulties of the subject, its logical exactness in
distinguishing the illustrative from the suggestive, its lucid
arrangement of the argument, its simplicity of expression, is
quite unequalled by any work we have seen on the subject.
WILLIAM BLACKWOOD &SONS, EDINBURGH AND LONDON.
RELIGION AND THEOLOGY.
2 Cor. xi. 3.The simplicity that is in Christ.
There is much talk in the present time of the difficulties of
religion. And no doubt there is a sense in which religion is always
difficult. It is hard to be truly religiousto be humble, good, pure,
and just; to be full of faith, hope, and charity, so that our conduct
may be seen to be like that of Christ, and our light to shine before
men. But when men speak so much nowadays of the difficulties of
religion, they chiefly mean intellectual and not practical
difficulties. Religion is identified with the tenets of a Church
system, or of a theological system; and it is felt that modern
criticism has assailed these tenets in many vulnerable points, and made
it no longer easy for the open and well-informed mind to believe things
that were formerly held, or professed to be held, without hesitation.
Discussions and doubts which were once confined to a limited circle
when they were heard of at all, have penetrated the modern mind through
many avenues, and affected the whole tone of social intelligence. This
is not to be denied. For good or for evil such a result has come about;
and we live in times of unquiet thought, which form a real and painful
trial to many minds. It is not my intention at present to deplore or to
criticise this modern tendency, but rather to point out how it may be
accepted, and yet religion in the highest sense saved to us, if not
without struggle (for that is always impossible in the nature of
religion), yet without that intellectual conflict for which many minds
are entirely unfitted, and which can never be said in itself to help
religion in any minds.
The words which I have taken as my text seem to me to suggest a
train of thought having an immediate bearing on this subject. St Paul
has been speaking of himself in the passage from which the text is
taken. He has been commending himselfa task which is never congenial
to him. But his opponents in the Corinthian Church had forced this upon
him; and now he asks that he may be borne with a little in his folly.
He is pleased to speak of his conduct in this way, with that touch of
humorous irony not unfamiliar to him when writing under some
excitement. He pleads with his old converts for so much indulgence,
because he is jealous over them with a godly jealousy. He had won
them to the Lord. I have espoused you, he says, to one husband, that
I may present you as a chaste virgin to Christ. This had been his
unselfish work. He had sought nothing for himself, but all for Christ.
That they should belong to Christas the bride to the bridegroomwas
his jealous anxiety. But others had come in betwixt them and himnay,
betwixt them and Christ, as he believedand sought to seduce and
corrupt their minds by divers doctrines. I fear, lest by any means, as
the serpent beguiled Eve through his subtilty, so your minds should be
corrupted from the simplicity that is in Christ.
What the special corruptions from Christian simplicity were with
which the minds of St Paul's Corinthian converts were assailed, it is
not necessary for us now to inquire. Their special dangers are not
likely to be ours. What concerns us is the fact, that both St Paul and
Christhis Master and oursthought of religion as something simple.
Attachment to Christ was a simple personal reality, illustrated by the
tie which binds the bride, as a chaste virgin, to the bridegroom. It
was not an ingenuity, nor a subtilty, nor a ceremony. It involved no
speculation or argument. Its essence was personal and emotional, and
not intellectual. The true analogy of religion, in short, is that of
simple affection and trust. Subtilty may, in itself, be good or evil.
It may be applied for a religious no less than for an irreligious
purpose, as implied in the text. But it is something entirely different
from the simplicity that is in Christ.
It is not to be supposed that religion is or can be ever rightly
dissociated from intelligence. An intelligent perception of our own
higher wants, and of a higher power of love that can alone supply these
wants, is of its very nature. There must be knowledge in all
religionknowledge of ourselves, and knowledge of the Divine. It was
the knowledge of God in Christ communicated by St Paul that had made
the Corinthians Christians. But the knowledge that is essential to
religion is a simple knowledge like that which the loved has of the
person who lovesthe bride of the bridegroom, the child of the parent.
It springs from the personal and spiritual, and not from the cognitive
or critical side of our being; from the heart, and not from the head.
Not merely so; but if the heart or spiritual sphere be really awakened
in usif there be a true stirring of life here, and a true seeking
towards the lightthe essence and strength of a true religion may be
ours, although we are unable to answer many questions that may be
asked, or to solve even the difficulties raised by our own intellect.
The text, in short, suggests that there is a religious sphere,
distinct and intelligible by itself, which is not to be confounded with
the sphere of theology or science. This is the sphere in which Christ
worked, and in which St Paul also, although not so exclusively, worked
after Him. This is the special sphere of Christianity, or at least of
the Christianity of Christ.
And it is this, as it appears to us, important distinction to which
we now propose to direct your attention. Let us try to explain in what
respects the religion of Christ is really apart from those intellectual
and dogmatic difficulties with which it has been so much mixed up.
I. It is so, first of all, in the comparatively simple order of
facts with which it deals. Nothing can be simpler or more comprehensive
than our Lord's teaching. He knew what was in man. He knew, moreover,
what was in God towards man as a living power of love, who had sent Him
forth to seek and save the lost; and beyond these great facts, of a
fallen life to be restored, and of a higher life of divine love and
sacrifice, willing and able to restore and purify this fallen life, our
Lord seldom traversed. Unceasingly He proclaimed the reality of a
spiritual life in man, however obscured by sin, and the reality of a
divine life above him, which had never forsaken him nor left him to
perish in his sin. He held forth the need of man, and the grace and
sacrifice of God on behalf of man. And within this double order of
spiritual facts His teaching may be said to circulate. He dealt, in
other words, with the great ideas of God and the soul, which can alone
live in Him, however it may have sunk away from Him. These were to Him
the realities of all life and all religion. There are those, I know, in
our day, to whom these ideas are mere assumptionsdogmas of a
tremendous kind, to assume which is to assume everything. But with
this order of thought we have in the meantime nothing to do. The
questions of materialism are outside of Christianity altogether. They
were nothing to Christ, whose whole thought moved in a higher sphere of
personal love, embracing this lower world. The spiritual life was to
Him the life of reality and fact; and so it is to all who live in Him
and know in Him. The soul and God are, if you will, dogmas to science.
They cannot well be anything else to a vision which is outside of them,
and cannot from their very nature ever reach them. But within the
religious sphere they are primary experiences, original and simple data
from which all others come. And our present argument is, that Christ
dealt almost exclusively with these broad and simple elements of
religion, and that He believed the life of religion to rest within
them. He spoke to men and women as having souls to be saved; and He
spoke of Himself and of God as able and willing to save them. This was
the simplicity that was in Him.
Everywhere in the Gospels this simplicity is obvious. Our Lord came
forth from no school. There is no traditional scheme of thought lying
behind his words which must be mastered before these words are
understood. But out of the fulness of His own spiritual nature He spoke
to the spiritual natures around Him, broken, helpless, and worsted in
the conflict with evil as He saw them. The Spirit of the Lord is upon
me, He said at the opening of His Galilean ministry, because He hath
anointed me to preach the Gospel to the poor, to heal the
broken-hearted, to preach deliverance to the captives, and recovering
of sight to the blind, to set at liberty them that are bruised.
These were the great realities that confronted Him in life; and His
mission was to restore the divine powers of humanity thus everywhere
impoverished, wounded, and enslaved. He healed the sick and cured the
maimed by His simple word. He forgave sins. He spoke of good news to
the miserable. All who had erred and gone out of the waywho had
fallen under the burthen, or been seduced by the temptations, of
lifeHe invited to a recovered home of righteousness and peace. He
welcomed the prodigal, rescued the Magdalene, took the thief with Him
to Paradise. And all this He did by His simple word of grace: Come
unto me, all ye that labour and are heavy laden, and I will give you
rest. If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto
your children, how much more shall your Father which is in heaven give
good things to them that ask Him!
This was the Christianity of Christ. This is the Gospel. It is the
essence of all religionthat we feel ourselves in special need or
distress, and that we own a Divine Power willing to give us what we
need, and to save us from our distress. Other questions outside of this
primary range of spiritual experience may be important. They are not
vital. What is the soul? What is the divine nature? What is the Church?
In what way and by what means does divine grace operate? What is the
true meaning of Scripture, and the character of its inspiration and
authority? Whence has man sprung, and what is the character of the
future before him? These are all questions of the greatest interest;
but they are questions of theology and not of religion. I do not say
that they have no bearing upon religion. On the contrary, they have a
significant bearing upon it. And your religion and my religion will be
modified and coloured by the answers we give or find to them. We cannot
separate the life and character of any man from his opinions. It is
nevertheless true that our religious life, or the force of divine
inspiration and peace within us, do not depend upon the answers we are
able to give to such questions.
It is the function of theology, as of other sciences, to ask
questions, whether it can answer them or not. The task of the
theologian is a most important onewhether or not it be, as has been
lately said, the noblest of all the tasks which it is given to the
human mind to pursue. None but a sciolist will depreciate such a task;
and none but a sceptic will doubt the value of the conclusions which
may be thus reached. But all this is quite consistent with our
position. The welfare of the soul is not involved in such matters as I
have mentioned. A man is not good or bad, spiritual or unspiritual,
according to the view he takes of them. Men may differ widely regarding
them, and not only be equally honest, but equally sharers of the mind
of Christ. And this is peculiarly the case with many questions of the
present day, such as the antiquity of man, the age and genesis of the
earth, the origin and authority of the several books of Scripture. Not
one of these questions, first of all, can be answered without an amount
of special knowledge which few possess; and secondly, the answer to all
of them must be sought in the line of pure scientific and literary
inquiry. Mere authority, if we could find any such authority, would be
of no avail to settle any of them. Modern theology must work them out
by the fair weapons of knowledge and research, with no eye but an eye
to the truth. Within this sphere there is no light but the dry light of
But are our spiritual wants to wait the solution of such questions?
Am I less a sinner, or less weary with the burden of my own weakness
and folly? Is Christ less a Saviour? Is there less strength and peace
in Him whatever be the answer given to such questions? Because I cannot
be sure whether the Pentateuch was written, as long supposed, by
Mosesor whether the fourth Gospel comes as it stands from the beloved
apostleam I less in need of the divine teaching which both these
Scriptures contain? Surely not. That I am a spiritual being, and have
spiritual needs craving to be satisfied, and that God is a spiritual
power above me, of whom Christ is the revelation, are facts which I may
know or may not know, quite irrespective of such matters. The one class
of facts are intellectual and literary. The other are spiritual if they
exist at all. If I ever know them, I can only know them through my own
spiritual experience; but if I know themif I realise myself as a
sinner and in darkness, and Christ as my Saviour and the light of my
lifeI have within me all the genuine forces of religious strength and
peace. I may not have all the faith of the Church. I may have many
doubts, and may come far short of the catholic dogma. But faith is a
progressive insight, and dogma is a variable factor. No sane man
nowadays has the faith of the medievalist. No modern Christian can
think in many respects as the Christians of the seventeenth century, or
of the twelfth century, or of the fourth century. No primitive
Christian would have fully understood Athanasius in his contest against
the world. It was very easy at one time to chant the Athanasian
hymnit is easy for some still; but very hard for others. Are the
latter worse or better Christians on this account? Think, brethren, of
St Peter and St Andrew taken from their boats; of St Matthew as he sat
at the receipt of custom; of the good Samaritan; the devout centurion;
of curious Zaccheus; of the repentant prodigal; of St James, as he
wrote that a man is justified by works, and not by faith only;" of
Apollos, mighty in the Scriptures, who was instructed in the way of
the Lord; and being fervent in the spirit, spake and taught diligently
the things of the Lord, and yet who only knew the baptism of
John;" of the disciples at Ephesus who had not so much as heard
whether there be any Holy Ghost;" think of all the poor and simple
ones who have gone to heaven with Christ in their hearts, the hope of
glory, and yet who have never known with accuracy any Christian dogma
whatever,and you can hardly doubt how distinct are the spheres of
religion and of theology, and how far better than all theological
definitions is the honest and good heart, which, having heard the
Word, keeps it, and brings forth fruit with patience.
II. But religion differs from theology, not only in the
comparatively simple and universal order of the facts with which it
deals, but also because the facts are so much more verifiable in the
one case than in the other. They can so much more easily be found out
to be true or not. It has been sought of late, in a well-known quarter,
to bring all religion to this testand the test is not an unfair one
if legitimately applied. But it is not legitimate to test spiritual
facts simply as we test natural facts; such facts, for example, as that
fire burns, or that a stone thrown from the hand falls to the ground.
The presumption of all supernatural religion is that there is a
spiritual or supernatural sphere, as real and true as the natural
sphere in which we continually live and move; and the facts which
belong to this sphere must be tested within it. Morality and moral
conditions may be so far verified from without. If we do wrong we shall
finally find ourselves in the wrong; and that there is a Power not
ourselves which makes for righteousness and which will not allow us to
rest in wrong. This constantly verified experience of a kingdom of
righteousness is a valuable basis of morality. But religion could not
live or nourish itself within such limits. It must rest, not merely on
certain facts of divine order, but on such personal relations as are
ever uppermost in the mind of St Paul, and are so clearly before him in
this very passage. Moreover, the higher experience which reveals to us
a Power of righteousness in the world, no less reveals to us the living
personal character of this Power. Shut out conscience as a true source
of knowledge, and the very idea of righteousness will disappear with
itthere will be nothing to fall back upon but the combinations of
intelligence, and such religion as may be got therefrom; admit
conscience, and its verifying force transcends a mere order or
impersonal power of righteousness. It places us in front of a living
Spirit who not only governs us righteously and makes us feel our
wrong-doing, but who is continually educating us and raising us to His
own likeness of love and blessedness. We realise not merely that there
is a law of good in the world, but a Holy Will that loves good and
hates evil, and against whom all our sins are offences in the sense of
the Psalmist: Against Thee, Thee only, have I sinned, and done this
evil in Thy sight.
So much as this, we say, may be realisedthis consciousness of sin
on the one hand, and of a living Righteousness and Love far more
powerful than our sins, and able to save us from them. These roots of
religion are deeply planted in human nature. They answer to its highest
experiences. The purest and noblest natures in whom all the impulses of
a comprehensive humanity have been strongest, have felt and owned them.
The missionary preacher, wherever he has goneto the rude tribes of
Africa, or the cultured representatives of an ancient civilisationhas
appealed to them, and found a verifying response to his preaching. St
Paul, whether he spoke to Jew, or Greek, or Roman, found the same
voices of religious experience echoing to his callthe same burden of
sin lying on human heartsthe same cry from their depths, What must I
do to be saved? It is not necessary to maintain that these elements of
the Christian religion are verifiable in every experience. It is enough
to say that there is that in the Gospel which addresses all hearts in
which spiritual thoughtfulness and life have not entirely died out. It
lays hold of the common heart. It melts with a strange power the
highest minds. Look over a vast audience; travel to distant lands;
communicate with your fellow-creatures anywhere,and you feel that you
can reach them, and for the most part touch them, by the story of the
Gospelby the fact of a Father in heaven, and a Saviour sent from
heaven, that whosoever believeth in Him should not perish, but have
eternal life. Beneath all differences of condition, of intellect,
of culture, there is a common soul which the Gospel reaches, and which
nothing else in the same manner reaches.
Now, in contrast to all this, the contents of any special theology
commend themselves to a comparatively few minds. And such hold as they
have over these minds is for the most part traditionary and
authoritative, not rational or intelligent. There can be no vital
experience of theological definitions, and no verification of them,
except in the few minds who have really examined them, and brought them
into the light of their own intelligence. This must always be the work
of a fewof what are called schools of thought, here and there. It is
only the judgment of the learned or thoughtful theologian that is
really of any value on a theological question. Others may assent or
dissent. He alone knows the conditions of the question and its possible
solution. Of all the absurdities that have come from the confusion of
religion and theology, none is more absurd or more general than the
idea that one opinion on a theological questionany more than on a
question of natural scienceis as good as another. The opinion of the
ignorant, of the unthoughtful, of the undisciplined in Christian
learning, is simply of no value whatever where the question
involvesas it may be said every theological question
involvesknowledge, thought, and scholarship. The mere necessity of
such qualities for working the theological sphere, and turning it to
any account, places it quite apart from the religious sphere. The one
belongs to the common life of humanity, the other to the school of the
prophets. The one is for you and for me, and for all human beings; the
other is for the expertthe theologianwho has weighed difficulties
and who understands them, if he has not solved them.
III. But again, religion differs from theology in the comparative
uniformity of its results. The ideal of religion is almost everywhere
the same. To do justly, to love mercy, to walk humbly with God.
Pure religion (or pure religious service) and undefiled, before God
and the Father is this, to visit the fatherless and widows in their
affliction, and to keep himself unspotted from the world. Where is
it not always the true, even if not the prevalent type of religion, to
be good and pure, and to approve the things that are excellent?
Whatsoever things are true, whatsoever things are honest, whatsoever
things are just, whatsoever things are pure, whatsoever things are
lovely, whatsoever things are of good report; if there be any virtue,
and if there be any praise, think on these things and do them, says
the apostle, and the God of peace shall be with you. Christians
differ like others in intellect, disposition, and temperament. They
differ also so far, but never in the same degree, in spiritual
condition and character. To be a Christian is in all cases to be saved
from guilt, to be sustained by faith, to be cleansed by divine
inspiration, to depart from iniquity. There may be, and must be, very
varying degrees of faith, hope, and charity; but no Christian can be
hard in heart, or impure in mind, or selfish in character. With much to
make us humble in the history of the Christian Church, and many faults
to deplore in the most conspicuous Christian men, the same types of
divine excellences yet meet us everywhere as we look along the line of
the Christian centuriesthe heroism of a St Paul, an Ignatius, an
Origen, an Athanasius, a Bernard, a Luther, a Calvin, a Chalmers, a
Livingstone; the tender and devout affectionateness of a Mary, a
Perpetua, a Monica; the enduring patience and self-denial of an
Elizabeth of Hungary, a Mrs Hutcheson, a Mrs Fry; the beautiful
holiness of a St John, a St Francis, a Fenelon, a Herbert, a Leighton.
Under the most various influences, and the most diverse types of
doctrine, the same fruits of the Spirit constantly appearLove, joy,
peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness,
All this sameness in diversity disappears when we turn to theology.
The differences in this case are radical. They are not diversities of
gifts with the same spirit, but fundamental antagonisms of thought. As
some men are said to be born Platonists, and some Aristotelians, so
some are born Augustinians, and some Pelagians or Arminians. These
names have been strangely identified with true or false views of
Christianity. What they really denote is diverse modes of Christian
thinking, diverse tendencies of the Christian intellect, which repeat
themselves by a law of nature. It is no more possible to make men think
alike in theology than in anything else where the facts are complicated
and the conclusions necessarily fallible. The history of theology is a
history of variations; not indeed, as some have maintained, without
an inner principle of movement, but with a constant repetition of
oppositions underlying its necessary development. The same, contrasts
continually appear throughout its course, and seem never to wear
themselves out. From the beginning there has always been the broader
and the narrower type of thoughta St Paul and St John, as well as a
St Peter and St James; the doctrine which leans to the works, and the
doctrine which leans to grace; the milder and the severer
interpretations of human nature and of the divine dealings with ita
Clement of Alexandria, an Origen and a Chrysostom, as well as a
Tertullian, an Augustine, and a Cyril of Alexandria, an Erasmus no less
than a Luther, a Castalio as well as a Calvin, a Frederick Robertson as
well as a John Newman. Look at these men and many others equally
significant on the spiritual side as they look to God, or as they work
for men, how much do they resemble one another! The same divine life
stirs in them all. Who will undertake to settle which is the truer
Christian? But look at them on the intellectual side and they are
hopelessly disunited. They lead rival forces in the march of Christian
thoughtforces which may yet find a point of conciliation, and which
may not be so widely opposed as they seem, but whose present attitude
is one of obvious hostility. Men may meet in common worship and in
common work, and find themselves at one. The same faith may breathe in
their prayers, and the same love fire their hearts. But men who think
can never be at one in their thoughts on the great subjects of the
Christian revelation. They may own the same Lord, and recognise and
reverence the same types of Christian character, but they will differ
so soon as they begin to define their notions of the Divine, and draw
conclusions from the researches either of ancient or of modern
theology. Of all the false dreams that have ever haunted humanity, none
is more false than the dream of catholic unity in this sense. It
vanishes in the very effort to grasp it, and the old fissures appear
within the most carefully compacted structures of dogma.
Religion, therefore, is not to be confounded with theology, with
schemes of Christian thoughtnor, for that part of the matter, with
schemes of Christian order. It is not to be found in any set of
opinions or in any special ritual of worship. The difficulties of
modern theology, the theories of modern science (when they are really
scientific and do not go beyond ascertained facts and their laws), have
little or nothing to do with religion. Let the age of the earth be what
it may (we shall be very grateful to the British Association, or any
other association, when it has settled for us how old the earth is, and
how long man has been upon the face of it); let man spring in his
physical system from some lower phase of life; let the Bible be
resolved into its constituent sources by the power of modern analysis,
and our views of it greatly change, as indeed they are rapidly
changing,all this does not change or destroy in one iota the
spiritual life that throbs at the heart of humanity, and that witnesses
to a Spiritual Life above. No science, truly so-called, can ever touch
this or destroy it, for the simple reason that its work is outside the
spiritual or religious sphere altogether. Scientific presumption may
suggest the delusiveness of this sphere, just as in former times
religious presumption sought to restrain the inquiries of science. It
may, when it becomes ribald with a fanaticism far worse than any
fanaticism of religion, assail and ridicule the hopes which, amidst
much weakness, have made men noble for more than eighteen Christian
centuries. But science has no voice beyond its own province. The
weakest and the simplest soul, strong in the consciousness of the
divine within and above it, may withstand its most powerful assaults.
The shadows of doubt may cover us, and we may see no light. The
difficulties of modern speculation may overwhelm us, and we may find no
issue from them. If we wait till we have solved these difficulties and
cleared away the darkness, we may wait for ever. If your religion is
made to depend upon such matters, then I do not know what to say to you
in a time like this. I cannot counsel you to shut your minds against
any knowledge. I have no ready answers to your questions, no short and
easy method with modern scepticism. Inquiry must have its course in
theology as in everything else. It is fatal to intelligence to talk of
an infallible Church, and of all free thought in reference to religion
as deadly rationalism to be shunned. Not to be rational in religion as
in everything else is simply to be foolish, and to throw yourself into
the arms of the first authority that is able to hold you. In this as in
other respects you must work out your own salvation with fear and
trembling, remembering that it is God which worketh in you. You must
examine your own hearts; you must try yourselves whether there be in
you the roots of the divine life. If you do not find sin in your hearts
and Christ also there as the Saviour from sin, then you will find Him
nowhere. But if you find Him there, Christ within you as He was within
St. Paul,your righteousness, your life, your strength in weakness,
your light in darkness, the hope of glory within you, as He was all
this to the thoughtful and much-tried apostle,then you will accept
difficulties and doubts, and even the despairing darkness of some
intellectual moments, when the very foundations seem to give wayas
you accept other trials; and looking humbly for higher light, you will
patiently wait for it, until the day dawn and the shadows flee away.
 Luke, iv. 18.
 Matthew, xi. 28.
 Matthew, vii. 11.
 Mr Gladstone, 'Contemporary Review,' July, p. 194.
 James, ii. 24.
 Acts, xviii. 24, 25.
 Acts, xix. 2.
 Luke, viii. 15.
 John, iii. 15.
 Micah, vi. 8.
 James, i. 27.
 Philippians, iv. 8, 9.
 Galatians, v. 22, 23.
PRINTED BY WILLIAM BLACKWOOD AND SONS.