170 RIGHT EEV. THE BISHOP OP DOWN^ D.D., ON 



method is the application of strictly scientific historical criticism 

 to the sacred documents. I do not mean that as carried out 

 this method has been always scientific. Far from it. It has 

 often been marked by the unbridled use of hypothesis. Yet it 

 is true that the intention of the higher critic is to be strictly 

 scientific in his treatment of the documents. That is what he 

 professes. 



Now, looking at the world in a large way and at men in the 

 mass, we must realize that the mere application of such a 

 method to Holy Scripture marks a very great change and must 

 produce a strong effect on the popular mind. In the days that 

 our religious traditions come from, Holy Scripture was regarded 

 as too sacred for criticism. It demanded interpretation, and 

 there indeed the scholarly mind might find ample scope for 

 study and investigation. But to question the sacred documents' 

 themselves ; to treat them as, in many instances, probably 

 composite ; to apply to them the tests which would be applied 

 to other documents, seemed altogether profane. 



This being so, it was inevitable that, when it became clear to 

 the public mind that scholarship was testing Holy Scripture in 

 the very same way in which it tests all other documents, that 

 very fact had an extraordinary influence. And when, further, 

 the views and theories of some of the more extreme critics 

 gained currency, it appeared to multitudes of people that the 

 very foundations of the Christian Faith were being shaken. 

 The impression was created, and still persists, that the unusual 

 events recorded in Holy Scripture are being shown to have no 

 better foundation than the prodigies recorded in ancient legends, 

 and that the documents which are thus fallible, have little 

 claim on the reverence of mankind. The popular mind is very 

 vague. It does not grasp the exact result of any new develop- 

 ment of scientific thought; it receives an impression, and from 

 that impression it derives its conviction, or want of conviction. 

 So it is, I fear, in this case. 



Novv the truth is that at present the tendency of criticism 

 is rather to restore than to destroy. Even as regards the Old 

 Testament, there are indications that the extraordinary way in 

 which the discoveries of the spade are driving back the dates 

 assigned to ancient civilization is raising a suspicion that the 

 current theories will very soon require revision. And, in 

 relation to the New Testament, we can now say that there has 

 taken place an amazing restitution. The wild theories which 

 endeavoured to bring down the dates of the New Testament 

 books into the second century have practically vanished. It is 



