the pivot, as it were, upon which the whole argument turns; since the revelation of that name to Moses is the very core and centre of the story of the Exodus; and, if it appears, as, I believe, it will, on sufficient grounds, that the Name was not freely used, as the Pentateuch implies, in so early an age, it would follow that one of the most vital portions of the narrative is shown to be unhistorical. This will explain why I have discussed so minutely and carefully all that appears to bear on this part of the subject, with an anxious desire to ascertain the real truth with reference to so important a fact.

Others, again, have said that such a work as mine was unnecessary, because in these days the notion of literal inspiration is generally abandoned. It is but fighting, therefore, with a shadow, to attack the doctrine of Scripture infallibility, which is a thing of the past, and has either already died away, or is fast dying away, under the influence of modern science, and amidst the growing intelligence of the age.' But is this statement true? I quoted, in the Introduction to Part I, words addressed to the junior members of the University of Oxford by one of their select preachers, the well-known author of a much-commended 'Plain Commentary on the Gospels.' Could any language have set forth more explicitly the duty of regarding the Bible, as being in its every sentence, word, syllable, letter-where shall we stop?'- infallible and Divine? But many of that writer's best friends, it is said, regret the delivery and publication of those sermons. 'It is not to be supposed that such views are at all widely entertained within the Church in the present day.' What, then, shall be said of the following extracts, taken from writings of very different schools, which have been lately published with express reference to my book?

The English Churchman, Dec. 4, 1862, speaks as follows:How, it may be asked, are we to deal with those clergymen, who have doubts, yet have not yet come to conclusions? Are they to leave the Church? We say emphatically they ought, if they entertain any doubt as to that fundamental requisite for all who present themselves for Ordination,—that is, the thorough persuasion that the Scriptures cannot in any particular be untrue.

So, again, the Rev. E. GARBETT, M.A., in a sermon preached before the University of Oxford, Nov. 16, 1862, writes:

But this notion of an infallible Bible, and of the historical truth of its contents, is no more, it is replied, than the mistake of a popular religion. It is the clear teaching of those doctrinal formularies, to which we of the Church of England have expressed our solemn assent, and no honest interpretation of her language can get rid of it. p.9.

In all consistent reason, we must accept the whole of the inspired autographs or reject the whole, as from end to end unauthoritative and worthless. p.10.

The Bishop of MANCHESTER, (Manchester Examiner and Times, March 18, 1863,) says:

The very foundations of our faith, the very basis of our hopes, the very nearest and dearest of our consolations, are taken from us, when one line of that Sacred Volume, on which we base everything, is declared to be unfaithful or untrustworthy.

It would be easy to multiply quotations of a similar kind from other living authors of eminence, or from journals which express different shades of Church feeling.. But one more set of extracts may suffice to show the extent, to which the doctrine of Scripture infallibility is at this very time actively propagated within the Church of England. It is well known that the Bishop of WINCHESTER has lately set forth a very ominous statement, showing the gradual diminution which is taking place in the number of University graduates,-(and these not men who have taken honours, but men who, for the most part, have merely passed for their degree,)- who offer themselves as candidates for Holy Orders, and the proportional increase in the number of non-University men, classed together under the head of 'Literates.' The table of candidates, throughout the several

dioceses of England, is given on Bishop SUMNER's authority for

It will be seen from the above that in 1861 considerably more than one-third of the whole body of candidates for Holy Orders were 'Literates.' What kind of training, then, have these received? Doubtless, it has varied under different circumstances. But the following will show what it has been in St. Aidan's College, Birkenhead, one of the most successful—and, for the zeal and energy of its Principal, Dr. BAYLEE, deservedly successful of all the institutions which at present exist, for raising an inferior class of Clergy to fill the vacant pulpits of the land. In fact, as the Bishop of WINCHESTER states, Charge, 1862, p. 23

The single college of St. Aidan now contributes the twentieth part of the candidates for the whole English Church Ministry.

The number of ordained students' in February, 1862, is given in an official document now before me, as 242, [in July, 1862, increased to 288, Charge, as before,] viz:

-

It will be observed that very few indeed of the above have gone out as Missionaries. Fifteen are mentioned as ministering in colonial dioceses, three in dioceses not known :' of the

remainder, five are labouring in Irish dioceses, and the remaining two hundred and nineteen have found employment in the Church in the dioceses of England and Wales.

The kind of teaching, with which the above Clergy were imbued while under training at St. Aidan's, may be gathered from the following passages, extracted from a Manual-'BAYLEE'S Verbal Inspiration'-which, says the Preface, is part of an intended course of lectures on Scripture, Philosophy, and Exegesis, chiefly for the use of the students of St. Aidan's College.'

The whole Bible, as a revelation, is a declaration of the Mind of God towards His creatures, on all the subjects of which the Bible treats. p.6.

What I believe to be the truth is this, The Bible is God's Word, in the same sense as if He had made use of no human agent, but had Himself spoken it, as we know He did the Decalogue. p.33.

Modern Science, with all its wonderful advances, has discovered not one single inaccurate allusion to physical truth, in all the countless illustrations employed in the Bible. p.42.

The Bible cannot be less than verbally inspired. Every word, every syllable, every letter, is just what it would be, had God spoken from heaven without any human intervention. p.48.

Every scientific statement is infallibly accurate, all its history and narrations of every kind are without any inaccuracy. The words and phrases have a grammatical and philological accuracy, such as is possessed by no human composition. p.62.

After considering the above facts, will anyone say that there is no cause for an united effort to be made by all lovers of truth to break off from the neck of the Church of England the chains of such slavish subjection to the mere letter of the Scripture as this?

It has been the practice with not a few of my Reviewers to quote some one or other of my arguments partially, so as to omit altogether to mention the real point of the reasoning, and then to demolish it in its mutilated state, and so lead the reader

to suppose that it has been set aside altogether. Thus it has been argued, again and again, "Why can we not suppose that when it is said, 'the Congregation was assembled at the door of the Tabernacle,' it is merely meant to say in common popular language that a great number was present?' Of course, this might be supposed under ordinary circumstances. The point of my argument, which my opponents do not notice, is this, that it is expressly stated in L.viii.1 that Jehovah Himself summoned the Congregation together, and we cannot believe that Almighty God did really issue a command, which was not meant to be strictly obeyed, by all, at least, who were able to attend the summons, whereas such obedience was here impossible.

Again, great stress has been laid by some upon a trivial point, of no real consequence at all to my argument, viz. that it is possible that in L.iv.11 the Priest may be supposed to carry out' the remains of the victim a young calf — by the help of others, instead of doing it personally. The fact is, as an able writer (though to me unknown) in the National Review' has shown, that the version of the English Bible, which I have adopted, is the most obvious and natural one, justified not only by a multitude of similar instances as Ez.xii.6, 'In their sight shalt thou bear it upon thy shoulders, and carry it forth'

but especially by the kindred passage, L.vi.11, where the direction is given to the Priest, And he shall put off his garments, and put on other garments, and carry forth the ashes without the camp, unto a clean place.' If the Priest was in person to carry out the ashes, there is nothing very strange in supposing that he was meant to carry out the offal also. But I am quite ready to admit that the Hebrew word here employed may be used in the sense of carrying out with the help of others —as in L.xiv.45, And he (the Priest) shall carry forth (the