glosses until it is almost impossible to ascertain what they 
are. And so we are constantly obliged to recur to the 
fountain-head to ascertain the true meaning, in the mind of 
Christ and His Apostles, of words which have been bandied 
about in various schools of theology, till scarcely a vestige of 
that meaning remains. Therefore, Mr. Arnold has done the 
cause of religion some service by recalling to our minds 
the original signification of several of the words we 
are accustomed to employ. He reminds us how far our 
modern use of such common words as “ repentance,” “ self- 
denial ” (p. 202), and the like, have drifted from the sense in 
which they were used in the Bible. If he is not always right, 
his method in this respect is worthy of our imitation, and we 
may derive much useful information from him on many points 
relating to the exegesis of the Bible,* which means, let us not 
forget, the ascertaining the actual mind of the original 
preachers of Christianity on many most important points of 
theology and morals. 
5. There is another point on which I conceive Mr. Arnold, 
by insisting, has done good service. Though I am far from 
believing with him, that correct intellectual conceptions are 
unnecessary to the “ ordering our conversation right,” yet 
I agree with him, that the main object of Christianity, as 
well as Judaism, was not the acceptance by the mind of 
certain abstract propositions, but conduct. If he is correct 
in saying that “ morality, ethics, conduct,” are “ carefully 
contradistinguished from religion” by theologians,! he is 
right in blaming them for such separation. For we are told 
by the Apostles, that God is love ; that love is greater even 
than faith and hope ; that he that dwelleth in love dwelleth 
in God and God in him ; and that he that hateth his brother 
is a liar, in whose heart the love of God cannot dwell. We 
are told that if we wish to know the truth we must wish 
to do God’s will. Hence, then, the acceptance of theological 
propositions of whatsoever kind, or rather, as I should 
prefer to put it, the acknowledgment of certain facts which 
it is important for us to know, is but a means to an end. 
* Especially in Literature and Dogma, ch. vii. — As an instance of this, I 
would mention the passage in p. 196, on “ metanoia.” “ We translate it 
repentance, a mourning and lamenting of our sins, and we translate it wrong. 
The lamenting one’s sins was but a small part of ‘ metanoia,’ as Jesus used 
the word ; the main part was something far more active and fruitful, a change 
of the inner man." He is not so happy when he translates x"P‘r, ‘ grace,’ 
by happiness. 
t P. 19. 
