304 
scription “Nomen Christi deleto and, indeed, the very name of Christianity 
did then appear to have been blotted out from the face of the earth : it had been 
doomed by Continental atheists and by English deists, but it had survived 
all — Christianity lives because its Head lives. With regard to religion being 
“ conduct ” ; whatever theologians might have said about “ morality, ethics 
conduct,” the Bible did not say that they were religion. The word of God 
as it had come down to them, was all that they had to contend for. Mr. 
Arnold’s book, he considered, had too much of hypothesis and assertion 
n it, and his attempt to prove certain passages in the Acts irrecon- 
cilable, failed altogether. As to the personality of God, if He was not a 
Person, what was He ? It was difficult to comprehend Him, no doubt ; but, 
as had been said by Richard Sibbes 250 years ago, “ If we cannot compre- 
hend Him we can apprehend Him.” We could lay hold of Him by a living 
faith as revealed in the Gospel. 
Rev. C. L. Exgstrom would offer a few remarks rather in corroboration 
of the paper than against it. He supposed that the central thought of 
Mr. Matthew Arnold’s theory was, that certain races of men were 
gifted with certain characteristic powers, such as the Greeks possessed in 
matters of art, and the Jews in the matter of spiritual insight ; but he drew 
from that the mistaken inference that we were not to receive the testimony 
of the latter. He (the speaker) should have thought that the highest in 
any sphere which expressed man’s aspirations were most likely to be correct. 
In music, for instance, Germany, which was the most forward nation 
in that respect, had laid down certain canons which were actually 
true, as the teachings of Science showed. Then, on a kindred question, how, 
he asked, were they to judge of all such matters of spiritual aspiration ? 
Were we, who were beneath them, to judge them ? We know that, when 
Shakspeare first wrote, his writings were condemned by many persons. The 
French nation for a long time condemned them, because they did not agree 
with the canons laid down by Aristotle. We found such authors as Racine 
holding Shakspeare in small esteem. But now the world had grown wiser, 
and, having had that colossal intellect before it for centuries, had learnt that 
the canons, which were in force when Shakspeare wrote, had to be revised 
when they came into conflict with him. In like manner the Bible was not 
to be judged by lower canons, but, when the latter conflicted with it, they 
ought to give way* With regard to the Personality of God the reverend 
gentleman pointed out that Christ had never given His disciples to believe 
that The Father was a “something outside ourselves which makes towards 
righteousness.” He also laid great stress on the early date of the Epistle 
to the Hebrews, which would have been meaningless, had it been written 
after the Romans began the siege of Jerusalem. 
Mr. D. Howard asked the meeting to bear in mind one point, namely, 
that the differences which distracted the foes of Christianity were infinitely 
greater than those which existed amongst Christians. He considered that 
