The Order of Nature-Professor Baden Powell. 353

ART. IV.-The Order of Nature considered in reference to the Claims of Revelation. By the Rev. BADEN POWELL, M.A., Savilian Professor of Geometry in the University of Oxford. Longman and Co. 1859.

THE Reverend author of these Essays is evidently moving at a rapid pace; but whether he is making any real progress onward, or only moving in a circle, like one plodding in a treadmill,and whether, even on the supposition of his making some steps in advance, he is moving in a right or safe direction, must be left to the judgment of our readers after we have offered some account of the conclusions at which he has arrived, and of the course of reasoning by which he has reached them. He seems to have a lurking suspicion that some of these conclusions may not appear, at first sight, to comport well with the title prefixed to his name; but he anticipates and seeks to dispel any prejudice which might arise on that score, by reminding us that he holds orders in the Church of England, and that, in the formularies of that Church, "many points of great importance are left without any determination or mention;" that "such questions are undeniably perfectly open questions to those who adopt these formularies," and that "of this class are the entire subjects of philosophical theism, or natural theology; the evidences of Christianity; the inspiration of the Bible; the immateriality of the soul; and the nature of miracles." What an indulgent mother the Church of England must be to give such unbounded liberty to her sons! Unlike the Church of Rome, which has defined so many articles of faith, and left only a few points undetermined, which may be discussed by the curious and treated as matters of opinion, she has left these "entire subjects" as perfectly open questions," although they are "of great importance," and even, in common estimation, fundamental. What a magnificent field is thus presented for philosophical speculation; and what a wide range for doctrinal development! Unfettered by a single restriction arising from her formularies, the ministers of Christ in the Church of England may honestly and consistently, so far as their vows and subscription are concerned, take either side on any one of these momentous questions, and still claim to be regarded, not as traitors to her cause, but as her loyal and dutiful sons! If Father Newman left the Church of England and took refuge in the Church of Rome, it could not be from any want of scope for the application of his principle of development, for he might have developed anything or everything, without let or hindrance, out of those "entire subjects" which are

66

left as "perfectly open questions;" he might have developed Pantheism or Polytheism, Naturalism or Supernaturalism, Scepticism or Superstition, and neither the articles nor the authorities of the Church of England could have laid an arrest on his progress. Why then did he leave? Could it be from a shrewd conviction that such a process of development might be unsafe if left in the hands of individual speculatists, and that it peculiarly demanded a developing authority and a watchful superinten dence, such as is neither claimed nor exercised by the Church of England? Not such is the opinion of Professor Powell: "That, in the moderate tone of the requisitions of the Church of England, free course is allowed," he says, "to more enlightened views, without impugning a system so highly and practically valuable is at once the security of the established institution in an age of progress, and supplies the sure means by which eventually the advance of truth, without external innovation, will carry out its noiseless triumph over all artificial obstructions." The order of the Church and her venerable form must be sacredly preserved, as Semler himself required-" Conservato tamen ordine, et honesta ecclesiae forma salva,"-there must be no "external innovation;" but within there may be a process of sapping and mining by which all "artificial obstructions" will be eventually overcome; old doctrines must be replaced by "more enlightened views," better adapted to "an age of progress;" and thus, in process of time, a change will be effected in the theology of England such as can only be fitly compared to the religious revolution which was inaugurated by the great Reformers of the sixteenth century! "Indeed," says Mr Powell, "in the existing state of opinions, from the extensive consequences entailed, affecting the entire popular conception of the design and application of Scripture, the diffusion of such views must eventually create an epoch in theology hardly less marked than that of the Reformation." It may well be asked, where is all this to end? We see one large and influential party developing in the direction of formalism and superstition, tending in fact towards Rome; another smaller but growing party developing towards the opposite extreme of rationalistic or sceptical speculation; while both claim the right to interpret the Articles of the Church in a non-natural sense, and both proclaim their wide departure from that orthodox meaning which was attached to them by the truly godly divines of the English Reformation. They are equally aiming at a great revolution in the established theology of England, and seem to think that it may be effected without peril to the outward framework of her Church; but is there no reason to fear that, if the "honesta fama" of Churchmen shall come to be generally doubted, the "honesta forma" of the Church cannot

The Object and Contents of the Work.

355

be long preserved; and that the manly enthusiasm of straightforward Englishmen, if once aroused, will sweep it away, as being not only "a moral nullity," but "a moral nuisance;" and replace it with another form of Christianity, whose teaching will be less equivocal, and better adapted to the most urgent wants of serious, earnest, inquiring souls?

The Savilian Professor at Oxford has boldly broken ground in this great enterprise, and already not a few fellow-labourers in the same cause are busily engaged in undermining the foundations of old English orthodoxy; while the people, who were recently scared by the apparition of a white surplice, give little heed to the ominous black flag which has been unfurled in the midst of them, and the bishops seem to be asleep at their posts. We cannot attempt, within our prescribed limits, to offer anything like a full discussion of the multifarious contents of this work. It has been a dreary task to read it; it would be a still drearier task to review it in detail. We can only select some of its more salient points or chief characteristic features, and, placing them in a clear light before our readers, leave them to form their own judgment as to its character and tendency. It consists of four essays. The first is an "Historical Sketch of the Progress of Physical Science as bearing on Religious Belief,"-an essay which exhibits proofs of extensive reading, but which is fitly enough described as a "Sketch," since it is a cursory and somewhat meagre outline of a subject which has been more fully illustrated in Dr Whewell's "History" and "Philosophy" of "the Inductive Sciences." The second is an essay on "Nature and Revelation," and is devoted to the discussion—first, “ Of the Order of Nature as bearing on Theology in general; secondly, of "The Natural and the Supernatural;" and thirdly, of "Revelation and Miracles." The third is also, like the first, an historical sketch of "the Rationalistic and other Theories of Miracles," in which the abortive and now antiquated speculations of Paulus, Eickhorn, Strauss, and other German luminaries, are reproduced for the instruction of England, when they have all but ceased to be studied in their native country; a sketch which contains some interesting information, and is interspersed with occasional reflections on the respective merits and defects of the various systems which pass under review, but which can scarcely be held to equal or supersede the "Histoire Critique du Rationalisme en Allemagne," by Amand Saintes. The fourth essay is entitled "Theological Views of Miracles," and consists of two parts-first, some account of ecclesiastical miracles in ancient and modern times; and secondly, a general dissertation directed to show that the old arguments from miracles, as evidences, are now discredited by orthodox divines, and that miracles

themselves are regarded as objects, not as evidences, of faith. With reference to the leading object of his work, which is to set aside the whole miraculous evidence of Christianity, the second and the fourth essays are the most important, as containing the exposition of his own views, and a statement of the grounds on which they are maintained; and we shall direct our attention mainly to these in the few remarks which follow.

He

We have said that the leading object of his work is to set aside the whole miraculous evidence of Christianity. The first point, therefore, which claims our notice, is his doctrine of miracles. That there may be no misapprehension about it, we commence our remarks by singling out, and placing clearly before our readers, in his own words, the startling fact that, according to his avowed doctrine, there never have been, and never can be, any physical interruptions of the "order of nature." denies not only the reality, but the very possibility, of any supernatural interposition affecting the ordinary course of the physical system. Not content with affirming merely the incredibility of miracles, on the ground that human testimony is inadequate to afford a sufficient proof of their actual occurrence, he tasks his energies, and applies all his strength, to show that they are incredible à priori, as being at variance with the fundamental principles and legitimate conclusions of the inductive philosophy of nature. He speaks of "the idea of universal and invariable physical causation" as involved in "the grand conception of cosmical order,"-of "the real immutability of natural laws,"-of "the grand principle of the uniformity of nature, and the indissoluble chain of physical causes,"--" a broader principle" "than the narrow and (as we may consider it in the present day) generally renounced notion of real violations of the order of nature." In addition to these and similar expressions, which are repeated over and over again in every variety of form, we have many express and articulate statements on the subject, such as leave no doubt in regard to his peculiar opinions.

"The firm conception of the immutability of order is the first rudiment in all scientific foundation for cosmo-theology" (246). “In all cases of apparent interruptions or anomalies, the inductive philosopher will fall back on the primary maxim, that it is always more probable that events of an unaccountable and marvellous character are parts of some great fixed order of causes unknown to us, than that any real interruption occurs" (272). "To a correct apprehension of the whole argument, the one essential requisite is, to have obtained a complete and satisfactory grasp of this one grand principle of law pervading nature, or rather constituting the very idea of nature, which forms the vital essence of the whole of inductive science, and the sole assurance of those higher inferences, from the inductive study

His Doctrine of Miracles.

357

of natural causes, which are the indications of a Supreme Intelligence and a Moral Cause. The whole of the ensuing discussion must stand or fall with the admission of this grand principle. Those who are not prepared to embrace it in its full extent may probably not accept the conclusions; but they must be sent back to the school of inductive science, where alone it must be independently imbibed and thoroughly assimilated with the mind of the student in the first instance" (230). "The real question does not relate to the evidence of the senses, but of reason-not to experience in the limited sense of the word, but to the general ground of our convictions, the whole basis of the inductive philosophy-and turns essentially on the views we have arrived at of the order of the natural world, and the chain of physical causation" (290). "The philosophic thinker. . . will perceive that the grand inductive principle of the immutable uniformity of natural causes the sole substantial ground for belief in a Supreme Moral Cause-must ever remain unassailed; and firmly grasping this broad principle on the one hand, and perceiving the essential spirituality of Christianity on the other, he will repose on these convictions, and admit that the miraculous narratives of the Gospel may be received for the divine instruction they were designed to convey, without prejudice to the invariable laws of physiology, of gravitation, or of the constitution of matter" (377). "It is but a significant instance of the hostility which must always result, while either established priesthoods, or the more independent prophets of fanaticism and expositors of popular prejudice, continue to ally themselves and their cause with darkness and ignorance rather than with light and knowledge, to associate religious truth with physical error, and thus expose the doctrines of Christianity to the reproach of being an appeal rather to the blindness and infirmity, than to the information and higher sense of mankind—tacitly confessing that it is unable to stand the test of advancing inquiry, rather than seeking to identify it with all that tends to enlighten, to elevate, and to benefit the human race" (49).

Our first remark on his "grand argument," or "fundamental principle," as thus stated, is that, whatever may be its merits in other respects, it is neither more nor less than the preposterous assumption of STRAUSS, that "whatever is miraculous must needs be un-historical." In Mr Powell's hands, it has not even the merit, such as that is, of originality. It is not his lawful issue-it is only his adopted child. The Oxford professor has nowhere acknowledged, indeed, his obligations to the German heresiarch; but he has quoted enough from the "Life of Jesus" to show that he was himself fully aware of the fact that Strauss had not only anticipated him in his grand discovery, but had maintained it on substantially the same ground of argument, as well as applied it to the mythical interpretation of the Gospel. He admits that "a peculiar view of the mythic nature of the entire New Testament narrative" was "professedly connected by Strauss with scientific views and philosophical advance," and