Page images

most pleasant bank falls down into the stream. How very sorrowful! The Bose family of Svaropur is destroyed by indigo, the great destroyer of honour. How very terrible are the arms of indigo!

The cobra de capello, like the indigo planters, with mouths full of poison, threw all happiness into the flame of fire. The father through injustice, died in the prison; the elder brother in the indigo-field, and the mother, being insane through grief for her husband and son, murdered with her own hands the most honest woman. Getting her understanding again, and observing my sorrow, the ocean of grief again swelled in her. With that disease of sorrow, came the poison of want; and thus, without attending to consolation, she also departed this life. Incessantly do I call, where is my father? Where is my father? Embrace me once more with a smiling face. Crying out, oh mother! oh mother! I look on all sides; but that countenance of joy do I find nowhere. When I used to call mama, she immediately took me on her breast, and rubbed my mouth. Who knows the greatness of maternal affection? The cry of mama, mama, mama, mama, do I make in the battle-field and the wilderness whenever fear arises in the mind. Oh my mother, dear unto the heart, in the place of whom there is not one, as a friend in this world. Thy Bindu Madhab is come! open thine eyes once more and see. Ah! ah! it bursts my heart, not to know where my heart's Sarala is gone to. The most beautiful, wise, and entirely devoted to me; she walked as the swan,* and her eyes were handsome as those of the deer. With a smiling face and with the sweetest voice, thou did'st read to me the Batal. The mind was charmed by thy sweet reading, which was as the singing of the bird in the forest. Thou, Sarala, had'st the most beauteous face, and did'st brighten the lake of my heart. Who did take away my lotus with a cruel heart? The beautiful lake became dark. The world I look upon is as a desert full of corpses; while I have lost my father, my mother, my brother, and my wife.

Ah! ah! are they gone too in search of the dead body of my father? I am to prepare for going to the Ganges as soon as they come. Ah! how very terrible, the last scene of the drama of the lion-like Nobin Madhab is? (Sits down, taking hold of Sabitri's feet.) [The Curtain fulls down.

Heart Religion or Living Belief in the Truth. By the Rev. ALEXANDER LEITCH, author of "The Unity of the Faith," "Christian Errors Infidel Arguments," ," "The Gospel and the Great Apostacy." Edinburgh Andrew Elliot, 15 Princes Street.

ABOUT eighteen months ago we commended to our readers Mr Leitch's masterly disquisition on "The Unity of the Faith;" while we attested the great merits of his two earlier treatises, entitled respectively, "The

The gait of the swan is considered, in this country, the most beautiful model of the motion of the feet.

Gospel and the Great Apostacy" and "Christian Errors, Infidel Arguments." In these three volumes Mr Leitch has reviewed the controversies, relating to Romanism, Theism, and Church Organisation, with wonderful perspicacity, candour, and learning. His love of truth, his depth of intellect, his clearness of spiritual intuition, his maturity of Christian experience, are legible in every page. The essay which he has lately added to the foregoing series, is perhaps the noblest monument of its author's powers. In his "Heart Religion or Living Belief in the Truth" he rises to the height of a "greater argument" than of those in which he has been hitherto engaged. As a moral refutation of scepticism we regard the book as unequalled in the theological literature of this country. We believe that all intelligent and right-hearted men will concur with Mr Leitch in his admirably discriminating estimate of our "practical" divinity:


"1. There is scarcely a book on practical religion which does not assume that its readers believe in the truth of Christianity. There is commonly supposed to be a great gulf between the refutation of Infidelity, and a description of that process by which Christianity enters the heart of a man and begins to develope itself there. Such a supposition is only an enormous and pestilent mistake. Heart religion may, surely, be so set forth and delineated, as to prove the most powerful antidote to scepticism, and the ablest demonstration of the truth of the gospel. Such a natural history of heart religion is a serious desideratum.

"If it be indeed necessary, in order to appeal directly to any individual on the topic of his personal piety, either to prove the truth of the Bible by the usual array of evidences, or to assume that the man already believes in its truth, we are thereby reduced to a most fatal disadvantage. If there be no straight road to a man's heart,-to close dealing and earnest grappling with his conscience, but through the historical evidences and all their adjuncts, or on the blind admission that Christianity is from God, then his opportunities of retreating, and hiding, and defending his unbelief, are so numerous, that scarce a good chance remains of touching him to the quick. There is undoubtedly a way of immediate access to the human bosom, in which the open unbeliever and the mere formal believer in the gospel, may with equal power and equal success be assailed. This short cut to every consciencethis summary and practical appeal by which the hypocritical pretender to religion, as well as the bold infidel, may be struck down and confounded, is too generally forgotten and neglected. The blow that overturns the strong hold of the sceptic, will shiver into pieces the mask of the formalist. It is a plain mistake to suppose that two lines of argument and two kinds of appeal are needed, the one to confute and convict the atheist or deist, and the other to confound and convert the heartless professor. To shake the gospel torch and make it shine, is the best and only way to carry light and life into every dark and dismal cavern of sin-bound humanity, whether it be the rebel heart that dares to scoff, or the traitorous heart that dares to trifle with sacred and eternal things. In the real work of chasing the unbeliever from every cover, and depriving him of every shelter, it is of very little moment whether he wear the cloak of profession or not.

"2. In many treatises the principles on which the progress of religion in the soul is developed are not sufficiently broad and deep. As a flaw in the foundation weakens the whole building, so a defect in the elements of our religion will prove detrimental to our religious advancement. If the very commencement of our piety be a misty and loose assumption that Chris

tianity is true, it will be like a tree planted in a contracted spot of earth or in a parched soil, whose growth must for ever be stunted and immature. The language of the apostle might with propriety be addressed to those who are made Christians after this fashion:-"When for the time ye ought to be teachers, ye have need that one teach you again which be the first principles of the oracles of God; and are become such as have need of milk, and not of strong meat."—(Heb. v. 12.) Unless heart religion find its basement in the lowest recesses of the soul, the temple cannot be expected to rise in full proportion, or to attain its normal elevation. It seems to be self-evident, that whatever the reasons are which should induce a man to be a Christian at all, and at the first, these reasons are the very same substantially which should daily urge him to higher and higher degrees of holiness. He lives by faith. Whether we exercise faith for the first time or for the five hundredth time, it is the same exercise. There is no gap or chasm of principle between coming to Christ and walking in Christ. But the two are frequently severed, and both are thereby injured. So little is the apostolical injunction fully understood:-"Leaving the principles of the doctrine of Christ, let us go on unto perfection." (Heb. vi. 1.) This language seems to imply what is undeniably true, that genuine moral perfection will be the natural result of due attention to the first principles of Christianity. Not only is the actual progress of thousands slow, and irregular, and unsatisfactory, because their first confession of Christ was defective in intelligence and decision, but also the true nature of pract cal Christian progress and ultimate perfection is imperfectly understood and coldly enforced by some of our ablest writers, because the very initiatory steps of the Christian life are not traced by them orderly and accurately."

Mr Leitch's own work is divided into three sections; the first of which contains four separate chapters on the possibility of Self-knowledge, on Practice and Speculation, on the Nature of Guilt, and the Impossibility of Religious Neutrality. The second section on the subject of man seeking God, is occupied with three chapters devoted to the following topics. 1. Man's Dependence upon God. 2. Man's Distance from God. 3. Man's Duty to God. The third and concluding section, comprises a most able and comprehensive description of the divine Message, of its Reception by mankind, of the Results of this reception, and of the Presence and Power of the promised Paraclete. The following passage in the chapter on "Religious Neutrality" may be quoted as a specimen of Mr Leitch's vigorous accuracy of thought, and unaffected elegance of style;

“No action indifferent.-No human action can be severed entirely from religion; and if this be the case, every action must either be in harmony with, or in opposition to, true religious principles. Even admitting, for the sake of argument, that some actions are indifferent in themselves, the motives which lead to these actions cannot be allowed to be indifferent or non-ethical. It appears to us that no action can be correctly regarded as strictly indifferent. The common opinion on this point is, we are prepared to show, a prevalent fallacy. Everything a man does, however trivial some things may be, is in itself right or wrong, proper or improper, lawful or unlawful. But much more is this remark true of a man's motives. Every action has a motive; and every motive honours or dishonours God.

"While in speculative questions there is much room for doubt or unbelief, in practical questions there is no such thing as unbelief or doubt, as has been already illustrated. Now, religion is, in every respect, a practical

business. A man's eternal welfare, and his relation to the Most High, form his most immediate and most momentous personal concern. Το regard it and treat it solely as a recondite affair of speculation, is to neglect its urgent demands, and to trifle with its solemn consequences. To omit a duty is to commit an offence. To withhold due honour from a superior, is to offer him an insult. Negligence in business is both fraud and folly. Hence it is obvious that inattention, on the part of any man, to his everlasting destiny, is the grossest imprudence; that disrespect and disobedience toward God constitute undisguised rebellion; while the non-acceptance of a freely offered pardon by the condemned prisoner, is the climax of all ingratitude. In any religious question, then, whatever, a middle course is impossible.

"Is God's existence a matter of indifference?-In illustration of this position, let us refer to the most primary and fundamental question in religion; Does God exist? It is to be noticed that the ultimate position of atheistic profanity, the place of its last resort, the furthest move it ever has made, or ever can make, is not an assertion of the Divine non-existence, but only a denial of the sufficiency of the evidence that is alleged to prove His existence. It is a fact fraught with much instruction, that while the world has seen many professed atheists, it has never seen an avowed anti-theist. While many have doubted, or seemed to doubt, the fact of God's existence, none has ever ventured boldly to deny it, that is, to affirm that he could prove that there is no God. That such is the case is the verdict of universal history. Nor is there any difficulty in accounting for this phenomenon. To know that there is no God is a stretch of intelligence too great for man, and for angels also. To substantiate this negation, its advocate must travel through all the fields of unlimited space, and watch during all the ages of unbeginning and unending duration. He must himself possess the ubiquity and omniscience which he denies to any one else. He who would prove that God is not, claims thereby to be God himself. Every attempt to show the erroneousness of the assertion that God exists, can proceed only on the assumption that it is true.

[ocr errors]

'Assuming, then, that there is a report current in human society as to the existence of Deity-an unauthenticated rumour, and nothing more, floating on the surface of man's busy life; and assuming, what is manifestly undeniable, that this rumour respects a matter which bears with a direct, weighty, and ceaseless influence on the highest and best interests of every individual, it will follow, that doubt upon this question will give rise, or should give rise, to intensest anxiety, and every one will be conscious of an obligation to act as if the report were true. Every one will at the same time acknowledge, that whoever does not act as if the report were true, is acting as if it were false. No man has the choice left him of taking refuge on such a question in unfeeling, inactive unbelief.

"No man can escape from the necessity of adopting one or other of these two courses. The immediate urgency of this necessity must be irresistibly felt by every one, who does not deny the barest possibility of Divine existence, or the slightest connection of his own personal welfare with the favour or frown of the Most High. To deny the first, that is, even the possibility of God's existence, is equivalent to asserting that it can be demonstrated that God is not that He cannot be. In making such an attempt, the individual falls from the heights of presumption into the abyss of absurdity. To deny the second, that is, all connection between ourselves and the Supreme, is to refuse to acknowledge that our happiness and honour are at all bound up with the attributes and purposes of the Author of our being, and can only be inadequately compared to the conduct of the man who could affirm, that he shining of the sun, with all its unnumbered blessings, is nothing to him."



It has been remarked that every Royal Scottish Academy Exhibition is, in the estimation of the season-ticket loungers, a better one than that which preceded it. And so it is, almost everybody is fain to believe that the Exhibition of the current year is better than that which went before. But Art here does not make noticeable progression from season to seaAnd our matured opinion of the present Exhibition is that it is a very so so one. We have at least one landscape by a long established artist, exceedingly good. And we have contributions by another which are transcendently great. The other works, by resident artists, are nothing remarkable. In fact this is a good collection of works of Art, but not beyond mediocrity. We rather fancy that the sculptors have the best of it. Mr Brodie's full length statue of Lord Cockburn is infinitely the finest work in marble that ever we saw exhibited here. It has a Roubilliac-like dexterity which marks Brodie as the Sculptor of Scotland. There is some room for saying that the character of Lord Cockburn as the pawky advocate is not quite brought out. This statue of him is more the great orator, defiant and resolute. But still, take it altogether, nothing finer-as a memorial of the most winsome advocate we ever had among us, and the admirable judge can well be conceived. Of Brodie's other works, his bust of Mr M'Laren, late of the Scotsman, in handling, and for giving intellectual truth, is as near as may be perfect. And next to it we like his bust of Sheriff Monteith, which is forcible, and a capital likeness. The best bust is that of Biggs Andrews, Esq., Q.C., by Mr Hutchison. It is wonderfully delicate in handling, and must be a likeness. John Mossman's bust of Dr Norman Macleod reminds us of Patric Park, and to say that is to give high praise. Mr Ewing is extremely clever in his bust of Mr Macnee. He has made our good, most genial, friend a little old perhaps, but the likeness is true. Mr Steell is not very successful in his bust of the Lord Justice-General, a very great deal too much being made of the whiskers and hair of the head. Ruskin calls this chiselmanship. The busts by the Rev. James Gall are as bad as may be. His subjects are not very happy. If he had known how to treat them artistically he might have made more of them. He should be either good sculptor or good preacher. We doubt if he has established a reputation in either line, but anyhow rather a weak sermon than a very bad bust. Miss Paton's Sir Galahad is a most pleasing and beautiful performance. The objection is that the Good Knight is not sufficiently masculine in feature. There is something, however, exceedingly beautiful in the face, which reminds us of one of Raphael's "Angels of the Planets." We have omitted mention of Mr Hutchison's bust of Mr George Harvey, which in point of likeness is better than the painted portrait, and in manipulation is extremely able. Also we have forgotten to say the same artist's "Don Quixote" is the very finest ideal of the rueful knight we ever saw.

« PreviousContinue »