example. The diligent collation of the text, too,
has removed many difficulties; the diligent study
of the original languages of ancient history, manners
and customs, has cleared up many more; and by supplying
proof of accuracy where error of falsehood had been
charged, has supplied important additions to the evidence
which substantiates the truth of Revelation.
Against the alleged absurdity of the laws of Moses,
again, such works as that of Micholis have disclosed
much of that relative wisdom which aims not at the
abstractedly best, but the best which a given condition
of humanity, a given period of the world’s history,
and a given purpose could dictate. In pondering
such difficulties as still remain in those laws, we
may remember the answer of Solon to the question,
whether he had given the Athenians the best laws;
viz. that he had given them the best of which
they were capable: or the judgment of the illustrious
Montesquieu, who remarks, ’When Divine Wisdom
said to the Jews, “I have given you precepts
which are not good,” this signifies that they
had only a relative goodness: and this is the
sponge which wipes out all the difficulties which are
to be found in the laws of Moses.’ This
is a truth which we are persuaded a profound philosophy
will understand the better the more deeply it is revolved;
and only those legislative pedants will refuse weight
to it, who would venturously propose to give New Zealanders
and Hottentots, in the starkness of their savage ignorance,
the complex forms of the British constitution.
In similar manner, many of the old objections of our
deistical writers have ceased to be heard of in our
day, unless it be from the lips of the veriest sciolism;
the objections, for instance, of that truly pedantic
philosophy which once argued that ethical and religious
truth are not given in the Scripture in a system such
as a schoolman might have digested it into; as if
the brief iteration and varied illustration of pregnant
truth, intermingled with narrative, parable, and example,
were not infinitely better adapted to the condition
of the human intellect in general! For similar
reasons, the old objection, that statements of Christian
morality are given without the requisite limitations,
and cannot be literally acted upon, has been long
since abandoned as an absurdity. It is granted
that a hundred folios could not contain the hundredth
part of all the limitations of human actions, and
all the possible cases of a contentious casuistry;
and it is also granted that human nature is not so
inept as to be incapable of interpreting and limiting
for itself such rules as ‘Whatsoever ye would
that men should do to you, do ye even so to them.’


