eyes. I know of nothing to which the maxim applies more directly, with greater force, than to the claim of Christianity upon us.

And certainly for no others is such an inquiry more pertinent or important than for those who expect to teach this religion, that others may be led to accept and obey it. Clearness and thoroughness of conviction, on the subject of the Divine origin of Christianity, are to such men indispensable; unless they would build the whole structure of their work not so much on the sand as on the surface of shifting tides. They must have canvassed and felt the proofs that God has given superlative authority to the message which they carry, or their words will be as deficient in power to move mankind as is the mimic agony of the opera, as wanting in heat as is pictured flame.

This, therefore, is the subject which we confront, and concerning which I would bring such suggestions as I may in this series of Lectures. The line of argument which I hope to exhibit is not suddenly conceived, though it has, of necessity, to be rapidly and very imperfectly presented. I found in it long ago, and have found in it since, a delicate yet strong persuasion for myself of the truth of the claim which Christianity makes. I would fain hope that it may in a measure impart this to you. At least, I trust that He whom all but the atheists accept as in Himself the perfect Truth will keep me from saying anything untrue, oi anything misleading in its impression; and that He will so guide and control us in considering the theme that all our words, and all our thoughts, in their final effect, shall conspire to His glory!

Two embarrassments detain one at the start, in advancing to the subject. One arises from the fact, obvious to all, that opinions widely differing have prevailed, and still prevail, as to what Christianity actually is, in its substance and scope, in the intimate and organizing elements which compose it. They prevail not merely among those who stand altogether outside the range of its discipleship, but in the societies which accept it; among those who equally feel and affirm that they are adherents of the religion. So it may be naturally asked, "What is this Christianity, the claim of which to a Divine origin, and a related Divine authority, we are to investigate?"

Is it the doctrine that Jesus was a man, singularly gifted, nobly consecrated, of a really surpassing genius for religion, with ex traordinary power for morally impressing and inspiring others, who spoke words of such sovereign significance that the world has not been able to forget them, who gave a rule of action and of spirit exceptionally pure, while his life corresponded, in its harmonious beauty and majesty, with the precepts which he uttered; who has thus been able to affect generations subsequent to his time, in parts of the world which he had not traversed but who stood after all on a level of nature with ourselves, and only surpassed us in the fineness and reach of his moral intuitions, and in his power of imparting to others of the fullness of his rare and kingly spirit? Is this what you mean—the precepts, rules, and thoughts of truth, announced by this manwhen you speak of Christianity?

Or is it the doctrine, widely accepted, that He, being essentially Divine, but taking upon Him our nature in the wonder of the Incarnation, founded an organic visible Church, to abide on the earth, with ritual and hierarchy, into which one is brought by regenerating baptism, in which he is nourished in goodness and truth by effectual sacraments, and through whose authorized officiating priests he obtains absolution and remission of sins; a Church in which the Lord is evermore personally although mys tically present; which is, therefore, empowered to teach perpetually, without doubt or error, in His name; through whose sacraments, as orderly administered, His personal energy is continually exerted; and by which, in its continuance on earth, His Incarnation becomes perpetual, and is made universal throughout the Church? Is this the Christianity, whose claim to be considered Divine in origin and authority you would wish us to consider?

Or is it, again, that system of doctrine which sometimes is called "the evangelical," which is also accepted in large parts of the world where this religion, coming from Palestine, has got itself established: which teaches that man is by nature depraved, in the governing temper and tendency of his heart; that this depravity reveals itself with certainty in the natural and con tinuing action of his life; that Christ came to the world as a

;

Redeemer, uniting in Himself the human nature with the Divine; that He died on the cross to make atonement for humar transgression; that having then ascended into heaven He sent forth thence the Holy Spirit, to enlighten, convert, and purify men; that the Church on earth is simply the great invisible communion of those who believe, love, and obey, with reverent affection, this Son of God; and that beyond our present palpable sphere of being are realms of recompense, for evil and for good, into which each shall pass at death, and in which character, with the destiny involved, remains indelible? Is this, or any similar system not essentially divergent from this, the Christianity, concerning whose origin, and whose rightful authority, you would have us inquire?

I admit, of course, the propriety of the question, after one has come to a definite impression, or, better still, to a serious conclusion, that there is a system, whatever in the end that may show itself to be, which is presented in these ancient writings, and which has fair claim to be considered as having originated in a mind above man's, and in the will everlasting and Divine. But it is precisely that preceding question which I am to consider while, after an answer to that has been given, affirmative and decisive, it will be in order for each to consider, with the most sincere and intent application of his supreme faculty for the work, what is that system which composes "Christianity." The question before us does not forestall that. It simply leads toward it, and prepares the way for it. I may see that the earth has been builded by a Power invisible and supernal, though I do not yet know the interior secrets of its material or chemical constitution: what gulfs of fire are under its crust, or how it is balanced on other stars. One may lead another to the front of a palace, and make him aware that it was surely erected by a king, though he has not as yet seen the treasures within, of jewels, mosaics, pictures, marbles, and costly marquetry. So it is plainly and surely possible to have a conviction that that religion which lies in the writings that by common consent contain Christianity has come from God, and not from the genius or will of man, though we have not as yet developed for ourselves, and set in their relations, its constituting doctrines. It is

this primary inquiry, not any which comes later, in regard to which at present I would offer suggestions.

But here the second embarrassment confronts us, which involves plainly a graver difficulty than does the preceding. It arises from the fact that the religion itself makes a personal spiritual experience of its power the only final evidence for it. "Taste and see that the Lord is good"; "if any man be minded to do the will of my Father in heaven, he shall know of the teaching, whether it be of God, or whether I speak of myself": these are consenting representative declarations from the older writings and the later of what is called among us The Bible, which harmonize with many others in setting forth the fact that only by spiritual experiment of the Gospel can man be assured of its Divine origin, as ultimately proved by its Divine energy. All other impressions of this must be, in the nature of the case, preparatory, rudimental. Only by trying it do men find with what subtle and exquisite adaptation the air is fitted to the lungs, so that by inhaling it their life is reinforced. Only by joyful experience of it is such a certainty produced in the mind of the inestimable beauty of sunshine, as could have been formed, as can be shaken, by no argument conceivable. Imagine the attempt to make that beauty as certain as it is to us, to one who had passed his entire life in the unlighted cavern! So it is only by trying Christianity, in its fitness to our deepest personal needs, of alliance with God, of moral renovation, of tranquillity, and of hope, that men can become utterly certain that it is from above; not a fabric, any more than the earth is, of human fancy, or a construction of human logic, or even a brilliant and lofty surmise of human aspiration; but a Divine system, as is the atmosphere, as is radiant light, presented by God to the world of mankind. for their permanent sovereign life and peace.

Every religion must have it for its office to bring men to God. Mental philosophy, ethics, art, have other purposes. A religion, by its nature, must have this for its object, sublime and special If one has found this accomplished in himself by Christianity, it may reasonably be said, he will need no further argument to prove that that which thus lifts him into intimate and conscious alliance with his Maker has come from Him. No stilts, con

structed in human workshops, can enable man to walk on the level of stars. No legend or logic can lift one to new and essential fellowship with Him whose wisdom governs the universe which His holiness illumines. If one has not this experience of the system, in its efficacious and beautiful virtue, all external argument, in the absence of this, must be an ineffective marshalling of words: a breath of air, set in motion for a moment, and speedily absorbed in the great world-currents that play and pulsate around the globe.

I do not in the least overlook the importance of the difficulty thus stated. As against the final demonstrative value of any external argument for Christianity, it is insurmountable. It must be impossible, in the nature of the case, to give one a vivid and governing conviction of the Divine source and the heavenly mission of a religion, by intellectual suggestions. He can gain that, as I fully believe, only by experience: as one learns in practice the virtue of a medicine, the tonic value of a strengthening cordial, or the strange power to conquer pain which lurks in the odorous anesthetic. The kind of faith, if such it may be called, which is based simply upon extrinsic proofs, is never one to quicken joy, to inspire to service, or to win from others sympathetic response. It fails in the grand emergencies of life. It cannot have the settled security, the vital energy, it cannot inspire the overmastering enthusiasm, which belong to the faith that is born of experience. To take the just distinction of Maurice, a man may come to hold a religion, in consequence of its external proofs; but that religion will not hold him, in its constant, subtle, and stimulating grasp, except through his experience of it.

But again, my inquiry is so primary in its nature that this objection does not really challenge it. I go back to meet a prior stage of mental and spiritual search for the truth, and the question which waits for our answer is this: Is there, or is there not, such a fair, obvious, antecedent probability that Christianity is from God, that each conscientious and intelligent man should study it for himself, should master it in its statements, requirements, offers, should set himself in intimate personal harmony with its law and life -thus making a sufficient experiment of it