on an old garment. All things remain firmly established, and the churches only declare that in regard to some points requiring further elucidation, they have arrived at a certain new formula. But even such a measure the author would not venture for the present to recommend to the Dutch Churches. Even in regard to the relation between Church and State, this would be untimely, although we can fully understand, why the Calvinistic churches of America have eliminated the third article of the twenty-third chapter of the Westminster Confession. He that would pluck the fruit before it has ripened always draws upon himself the penalty of a regret coming too late. The time for a revision of our standards will not arrive until after our churches shall have succeeded in purifying their atmosphere of heterogeneous elements, in regaining the consciousness, both in a theoretical and in a historical sense, of the principle that shapes their life, and in developing from this principle once more understood, a Calvinistic theology, that will draw its vital sap from its own root, and will be able to accredit itself to the scientific consciousness of the children of our age.

Calvinism is a specific tendency, which has to keep in the church of Christ its own sacred trust, to reveal the lustre of a principle peculiar to itself, to fulfil a distinct mission for the glory of God. By allowing this specific character to be effaced it would commit a crime, and the church would be impoverished and mutilated in a spiritual aspect, in so far as a member would drop out of its organism. We would sink from a higher to a lower plane. And the coming generation would address to us, laid to rest in our graves, the reproachful question, whence we derived the right to surrender the trust committed to us by God, the sacred inheritance of the fathers.

These are the reasons why the author, hearing of the revision proposed in America, and realizing what its consequences might be for the Dutch churches, would feel in duty bound, in the sight of God, to dissuade from such revision in the most positive manner, if it were proposed in his own country. We do not presume to give an opinion on American questions. This would obviously be out of place, and the good reader will not ascribe to us such

presumption. Some personal intercourse with the American churches would be indispensable to qualify us for forming such an opinion. Notwithstanding his almost enthusiastic sympathies for the life that is flourishing in America, the writer has not, thus far, found time to make this acquaintance. That we have, nevertheless, rendered this account of our views, is exclusively owing to the consciousness that in this question, also, there are certain universal principles at stake-principles that should govern the conduct of the "issus de Calvin" in every age and clime, independently of all transient conditions and local circumstances.

Free University, Amsterdam, Holland.

A. KUYPER.

II. THE UNIVERSAL BOOK.

THE study of literature is beginning to take a much higher place in education, and deservedly so. Much of the so-called study of literature is limited to mere hand-books, setting forth the names and personal traits of authors, and the names and character of their several productions, with brief selections by way of sample and illustration. Such studies seem intended to improve the taste and style of the student, and the result expected is aptly expressed in the one word, culture. Such a study of literature is wholly inadequate, and even misleading. The literature itself is the proper object of study.

Books contain the best thinking of the men who wrote them, expressed in their best style, elaborated out of the real experiences of life, and arranged to accomplish noble ends. The man who masters the works of one great author, thereby approximates the greatness of his intellect, assimilates into himself his moral force, imbibes the very grandeur of his conceptions, and appropriates his knowledge in such a way that when he reproduces it in his own thinking, it comes with all the freshness and vigor of absolute originality. Such a student is thus so inspired with the aims and impulses of his author that he can start from his vantage ground and achieve yet greater things. The culture, which is in itself so desirable, is the natural and incidental product of such study, and not itself the prime object of pursuit; just as happiness is the result of the pursuit of virtue, and is not itself the chief good. The student of literature, therefore, has little use for books about literature, except as he needs a grammar or a glossary. Some men study literature, again, on the same principle as that on which they string beads. Memory is the string, and fine figures, racy anecdotes, striking allusions, and fine passages of rhetoric are strung thereon for ready use. To such a student of literature, a cyclopædia of quotations, or a concordance, is the perfection of tools.

517

If one could master the entire literature of a people, he would present in himself a marvel versatility of genius, profundity of thought, universality of knowledge, the climax of wisdom, and the perfection of beauty. At least, he would realize in himself all these things, in so far as they are found in the literature he masters; and just so far we might call him a universal man.

Now there is a literature the absolute mastery of which will make this universal man. Greek and Roman literatures fall far short of such perfection, though they ought to be studied, and will be studied, till the end of time-studied as the fathers of English literature studied them.

The literature of the English-speaking people falls short of a universal literature, except so far as it draws its inspiration from the universal fountain.

There is a literature, unique and complete, the product of a remarkable people, extending over a period of sixteen hundred years, the expression of a long-continued civilization—a varying and widely-varied civilization. Allow me to repudiate, once for all, the terms barbaric and semi-barbaric, as applied to a people whose law-giver was divine and whose civil king and supreme judge was the Eternal Son of God.

The literature of that people, comprised in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testaments, is from every point of view the most remarkable of all the literatures. Modern critics call it a literature to disparage it; we call it the literature-the Bible-to exalt it and to locate it among literatures. It is unlike all other literatures in that it is both human and divine. We approach it from the human side and find it as distinctly human as if it were all human; we approach it from the divine side and find it as distinctly divine as if it were all divine-the analogue of the real Word, the GodMan. Its facts are all attested, its conclusions are all incontrovertible, its principles are all impregnable. All the mere human productions of that people have been eliminated from the Compend, and have in the main perished.

You find therein all the valued elements and forms of literature: history and biography, poetry and proverb, philosophy and fiction, civil codes and social customs, morals and religion, and,

withal, a prophetic vision which sweeps the whole arc of time. from the creation to the final glory, and unfolds the mysteries of two eternities.

Such a literature, with such an origin, and such authorship, may well be set forth as a universal literature; and, bound in one volume, it may be called the Universal Book. It is a mistake to limit its value to matters spiritual, as is the fashion in some quarters, and that for the purpose of disparaging the remainder, and with the result of destroying, or, at least, damaging the whole. Without quoting its own claims, it is fair to presume that the whole is profitable, and that none of its parts are superfluous.

It is safe and proper, just here, to premise a few things.

(a). This literature grew in volume as the centuries passed, just as other literatures, but not on the same principle. Each ad dition to these last is, in part, the product of the time and condi tions which gave it birth, and, in part, the product of personal genius; while the additions to the Bible are but the working out of a plan and purpose by one author, who determined the whole. This opens up the question of the object and scope of a written revelation-a question too wide for this hour. Suffice it to affirm, that it is not an evolutionary product of an evolving civilization, but rather a reducing to permanent form of the doctrines of the ages, and a necessary consecutive refutation of newly-rising heresies. The growth of the volume of inspiration kept pace with advancing perversions, so as to save the truth against the time of universal apostasy.

(b). Each separate book of the Bible reflects the local color and conditions of its author and times, and is exactly adapted to the immediate end for which it was written. This does not, as some imagine, mar its general utility, but rather enhances the certitude of its lessons.

(c). This book, like all other books, is to be interpreted according to the laws of language, which are as imperious as the law of gravitation, and an honest and competent exegesis carries conviction against all comers.

Now, if the points made thus far be accepted, it will hardly be necessary to prove the Bible to be the universal book; it would