or some other?

The king and poet, founder of the Jewish monarchy, and the unrivalled lyrist of the Church in any age, takes the next place. Solomon then comes to sustain our plea in behalf of secular service done to religion.

It would lead us too far, to settle the claims of those of the prophets whose tribe and function are only obscurely mentioned. But in the number, several were unquestionably laymen. Whether doubtful or certain, we shall mention Isaiah, Jonah, Amos, Joel, Hosea, Nahum, Micah, Zephaniah, Habakkuk, Obadiah, Haggai, Zechariah, DANIEL, and Nehemiah. Does not this list, numerous and rich as it is, almost support the belief, that when signal services are to be performed, the Divine appointment gives a preference to those who are unshackled by sacerdotal duties and motives?

Turning off from the ground of canonical Scripture, we meet instances in abundance pertinent to our argument. The Author of the Wisdom of Solomon, we must not decisively claim for our list; but may without scruple lay hands upon Joshua, son of Sirach,-no mean contributor to the stores of practical, axiomatic wisdom, and one too who, had he stood, either nearer to the fountain of true light, so as to have had discharged from his disk the few spots that sully his splendor, or much further from it, so as not to have suffered by a comparison which he did not invite, and so as not to have been gathered with pretenders,-must have commanded a high reputation in that class of writers to which he belongs. He is not a Plato, not a Socrates, not a Seneca, not an Epictetus; but a Jew, who may be read with pleasure and advantage after the flowers of those sages have been gathered.

We have hesitated a moment upon the question of taking or leaving the name of the author of the Targum of Onkelos; but resign our pretensions, attracted by a bright reputation which, as we just now catch a glimpse of it, illumines all the tranquil bosom of the Nile. We speak of Philo; and in speaking of him, revert to our rule (as we must do in another signal instance at hand) which allows us to claim, as a LAYMAN, any one, though of sacerdotal blood, who in fact did not discharge the functions of the priestly office; but addicted himself to literature and sacred philosophy from the impulse of independence, or taste. Quid loquar de Philone? asks Jerom, quem vel alterum, vel secundum Platonem, critici pronunciant! So great a celebrity, says Photius, did Philo win for himself among the Greeks, as a powerful writer, that it became a common adage, ή Πλάτων φιλωνίζει, ἤ Φίλων πλα Tavig. Either Plato philonizes, or Philo platonizes.' We are content with this authentic commendation, and pass on. Who will dispute our rightful possession of Flavius Josephus, or deny us leave to vaunt the possession of him? Although, beyond all contradiction, and in defiance of envy and detraction,' as him

self affirms, he was son of Matthias, son of Joseph, and so on, in direct ascent of the Aaronic stock; nevertheless, by his own shewing also, in early youth he launched upon the troubled waters of civil and military life; and it would be as strange and outrageous a thing to class him among persons of the sacred order, as it would be to do so with certain country gentlemen among ourselves, who, whatever may be the actual colour of their cloth, conduct themselves always as if they always wore the colour the convenience of which is, that it does not shew dirt. Yes, assuredly, Josephus was a layman, and at the same time an invaluable contributor to the stock of sacred literature. At what price would the Biblical critic, or the student of history, consent to the perishing of the Jewish antiquities," and the "Wars of the Jews"? Καθαρὸς τὴν φράσιν conveying with grace and purity the weighty matters which recommend his page.'

66

66

Our readers will think that we are intending nothing less than to carry off and make a boast of the chiefest worthies of the temple of ecclesiastical fame: for our next name is that of Justin the Martyr, a philosopher, and better than a philosopher-a Christian; and a Christian (rare praise) who could not merely write in defence of the Gospel, but die for it. We do but mention some other names, either of less note, or concerning which our claim is disputable; such as Athenagoras, Pantænus, Apollonius, Aristides. It would lead us too far out of our path, to inquire concerning Tertullian, whether, though denominated 'presbyter,' he ever actually performed Church duties. Without ambiguity, Marcus Minutius Felix comes over to our side; a lawyer and man of the world, but an elegant, a caustic, and, we should not doubt, an efficient apologist of the rising, but then calumniated and afflicted Church.- Quàm idoneus veritatis assertor potuisset, si se totum ad id studii contulisset!'-Yes, but it was as a man of other interests that he stood forward, with so special an advantage as the assailant of idolatry, and the advocate of the faith of Christ.

6

The period we are passing over abounds with names that might properly swell our list;-philosophers, grammarians, orators, who, vanquished by the evidence that sustained the gospel-history, or smitten with the purity and beauty of its ethics, avowed themselves Christians, and threw in contributions of more or less value, to the literary funds of the Church. But we hasten on; and fix only upon the most signal instances. And how signal an instance is Origen! Yet, inasmuch as our reader's impressions, doubtless, are all of a kind to which we should do violence, were

*

Aquila shall neither stand in his place in our text; nor be quite omitted. Shall we add to this note the names of Theodotion and Symmachus?

we to challenge this "Father of the Church" as a laic, we refrain from making out the good case we easily might in favour of such a claim. Churchman or layman, (and we take him as the latter,) he was a divine and a scholar, by the side of whom, could they be brought into near comparison, some reputed such among ourselves, must hide their diminished heads. Let Arnobius just serve as a means of transition from one illustrious name to another; -a link in our chain, connecting Origen with Lactantius, the glory and the reproach of the Church of that age, the 'Cicero of Christianity;' a man erudite and accomplished, yet (as some say, perhaps on uncertain grounds,) left by those who should have cherished him, to endure the miseries of want!

6

Again we shall be called in question as audacious spoliators, or as sacrilegious invaders of the goods of the Church, when we lay hands upon so great a writer and venerable a father' as Jerom, and stripping him of his presbyter's tunic, challenge him as a layman. Yet our rule embraces even Jerom. Invested, as a merely honorary title, with the name of presbyter, he led a life (and did so by formal stipulation *) altogether unencumbered with ecclesiastical duties. In taste, habit, and actual occupation, he was precisely the man of letters, who chose Christianity as his party, and sacred learning as his subject. Hear his encomiast and contemporary. Totus semper in lectione, totus in libris est: non die, non nocte requiescit: aut legit aliquid semper, aut scribit! -Are we not borne out in our claim? Moreover, unlike a man who, in return for the deference paid him by his colleagues, cherishes and defends his order, Jerom was the incessant and merciless assailant, not of heretic only, but of monks, bishops! presbyters! 'Oderunt eum hæretici, quia eos impugnare non desinit: oderunt CLERICI, quia vitia eorum insectatur et crimina.-Immo verò, nihil penitùs omisit, quod non carperet, laceraret, exponeret: præcipue avaritiam, nec minus vanitatem insectatus est.' What is all this but the Layman, who, in his privacy, frets at the disorders of a body with which he does not feel himself to be connected, and which he scruples not to expose to general contempt.

Some dozen names here meet us as meriting a place in our catalogue. Victorinus, for example; Didymus of Alexandria; Ephrem the Syrian, we are half resolved to claim; certainly Prudentius is ours; and Nonnus (as we think), yet ask us not to read his verses; Mark the hermit; Rufinus, friend and foe of Jerom; and Victor of Marseilles. But we advance to swell our

We pay more regard to his own account of himself in this respect, than to the casual expression used by an ecclesiastic of the western Church, who says, Ecclesiam loci illius Hieronymus presbyter regit.'

pretensions in behalf of the laity, with the valuable names (at least one of them valuable) of the church historians, Socrates and Solomon; after whom might be mentioned, Nilus of Constantinople, and if the reader pleases, though we do not please, Simeon Stylites.

Doubtless we shall place on a conspicuous pedestal (not so dizzy a one perhaps, but of far better workmanship and material than the pillar of Simeon) the classical author of the Consolations of Philosophy.' Boetius, the Consul, might well be chosen to head a host of lay theologians, as he brings up the rear of elegant latinity. Let him occupy alone this paragraph, and thence look mournfully over the wide gulf of ignorance and folly which lies between him and a brighter time.

From that dark quag, we might stay to rescue a few names, which, however, must be left to some season of more leisure. Yet the resplendent Photius, far greater before his desecration of the priestly office than afterwards, must surely be called from his monastery to grace our list; and does he not actually brighten all the page that bears his name? But we will not attempt to add a pun to the thousand with which the learned have already graced the memory of this illustrious man *. It may be retorted upon us, if Jerom is to be marshalled in this array of laymen, why not Bede, why not Alcuin, Scotus, and others hardly less deserving of the bold attempt? It might, we confess, be hard to defend any ground of distinction we could advance. Perhaps the only reason why the one was taken and the others are not, is that ourselves are now impatiently pressing on to a close. Yet the good king Alfred-king-philosopher-patriot-warrior-legislator-Christian, - Alfred-theologian and layman, we will loudly boast of.

Our rule would grant us Maimonides:-let learned casuists decide the perplexing question, whether his title of courtesy, Rabbi,' is to be held equivalent to orders', and then, whether this JEw should be numbered with doctors of divinity! Strange conjunction of names, to adduce that of Danté, next to the Rabbi Moses !-and some may deem it still more strange to enlist the poet among theologians. Nevertheless, we will do so at all hazards; and run an equal risk too, with the name of Abelard.

Sir Thomas More, we deem an honour to our list, notwithstanding his position on the wrong side of a great controversy;

*It so happened that the writings of PHOTIUS, after resting long in the dark, were brought to light, by Schottus-Exóτos, a Jesuit of Antwerp. Who, with a single sparkle of wit to spare, could resist the temptation to pun wholesale, on so rare an occasion?

and would rather be companions with him, in the wrong, than with that mighty theologian and staunch defender of the faith, his master, in the right. And now must we take the shame of numbering that other accomplished clerk and king, James, who would have been almost as much vexed to find himself omitted in a catalogue of the great divines of the day, as to have seen his royal titles dropped out of the roll of sovereigns.

Great men, great men truly, now thicken upon us, who, though not ecclesiastics, rendered, in different modes, signal services to the Christian faith. For the absolute purity of their several creeds we are not responsible; yet hesitate not to say of most, that their talents and learning, sincerely devoted to the cause of Christianity, entitle them to the grateful recollection of all Christians. Who will refuse this tribute to the The immortal Author of The memory of Hugo Grotius? 'Provincial Letters', too, might perhaps measure merits, on the ground of substantial service done to truth and piety, with any of the divines his contemporaries. Our right to Father Malebranche might be contested, nor are we much disposed to enter into strife for his sake.

To number Lord Bacon among theologians, would seem only like an eager endeavour to grasp at every good thing within our reach, seeing that so very small a part of his writings bears upon religion. Let it however be granted to us to retain him, as if by anticipation of that extensive influence which, we are fond to believe, the great principles of his philosophy are yet destined to exert over the ground of theological science. That he himself looked forward to some such distant influence, we could make appear as at least probable*. In the same bright series, the reader expects to see Newton, Boyle, Locke, and Milton. Think what we may of their particular opinions, we must not deny, that the mere fact, that these great men were CHRISTIANS, has, during past seasons of doubt, sustained the wavering faith of

* A copious theme we must not here enter upon. Let us just say, that as, in reference to his natural philosophy, Bacon's prediction, if we may so call it, has been verified-Certe objici mihi rectissime posse existimo, quod verba mea SECULUM desiderent. Seculum forte integrum, ad probandum, complura autem secula ad perficiendum;'-so may it be that the high principles of reason which he promulgated, after having been carried home through all departments of physical science, are to be brought in and fully applied to the interpretation of Scripture. Yes, and seeing that Nature and Scripture are the work of one and the same hand, can it be otherwise than fit, that the Minister et Interpres Scripturæ, should proceed on the very principles which have proved themselves to be the genuine rules of the Minister et Interpres Naturæ '?