274 
lie lias nowhere retracted the assertions made in Literature 
and Dogma, though on some comparatively unimportant 
points lie has modified them — inasmuch as the difference 
between the two books, regarded from a Christian point of 
view, is one of tone rather than of actual principle, — I may 
fairly regard Mr. Arnold as still responsible for the opinions 
expressed in the former volume. Regarding most of those 
opinions, as I do, as dangerous and unsound, I have made an 
endeavour, in this paper, to call attention to them, and to the 
way in which they are established, or supposed to be 
established. 
7. Before entering into an analysis of Mr. Arnold’s volume 
I have a word to say on its manner. Nothing has more 
struck me of late than the marvellous disproportion in 
intellectual calibre of attacks upon Christianity, to the effect 
they produce upon society. The publication of <f Supernatural 
Religion ” was hailed as the birth of a prodigy. Its learning 
was immense, its arguments unassailable, its mental force 
extraordinary, and Christianity, exhausted by the wounds 
inflicted upon it by so doughty a champion, was destined to 
sink into an early grave. But another champion* appeared 
in the lists, and it soon was found that the combatant likely 
to perish was not Christianity, but <f Supernatural Religion,” 
and though the first two volumes were received with enthu- 
siasm, a significant silence has hailed the appearance of the 
last. So in like manner it appears to me that Mr. Arnold’s 
book, though it has attracted much attention, is hardly 
worthy of the high and deserved reputation of its author. 
Had a book, equal to it in ability, in logical force, in vigour 
of style, in clearness of arrangement, been written in defence 
of Christianity, few persons, I believe, would have been found 
to cut the leaves. For as regards logic, Mr. Arnold falls 
into precisely the same errors, as I shall endeavour to show, 
as those of which he complains. As regards style and plan, 
his diffuseness, and the continual repetitions to be found in 
his pages, are apt to become a trifle wearisome, while the 
personalities with which he sometimes tries to enliven them 
will not bear a moment’s comparison in brilliancy, in 
piquancy, in originality, with the satirical touches which 
have rendered him, when writing on other subjects, so de- 
servedly a favourite with the public. But this circumstance 
only serves to illustrate the fact, which I have often noticed, 
that the ability which will secure a man a front rank among 
* Canon Lightfoot in the Contemporary Review. 
