disciple perhaps indulged his own personal love while he recalled so largely the discourses of his LORD:)--but, for all that, the long sequence of cause and effect existed; and the other end of that golden chain which terminated in the man, and the pen, and the ink, and the paper,--the other end of it, I say, was held fast within the Hand of GOD.--The method of Inspiration is but another of the many thousand marvels which on every side surround me; one of the many things I cannot fully understand, much less pretend to explain. But I may at least believe it in silence, and adore[410]. And,--(forgive me for keeping you so long; but I _cannot_ let you go until I have emptied my heart a little more on this great, and most concerning subject;)--mark you, Sirs, however reluctant some of you may be to admit that you agree with me, you _do_ agree with me,--almost to a man. For, what mean your reasonings on Holy Scripture,--your sermons, and your dissertations, and your catechizings,--your formulæ of belief, and your definitions of Faith,--except you believe in a vast deal more than _the substance_ of Holy Scripture? How can you pretend to expound a text, unless you hold _the words_ of that text to be inspired? What inferences can you venture to draw from words, the Divinity of which you dare not affirm? O, to what endless, hopeless scepticism are you pointing the way! What a variety of most unanswerable questionings will you provoke! How can you hope ever to convince or convict, if you begin by acquainting your adversary that it is only for the substantial verity of Scripture that you claim Inspiration; the verbal details being quite a different matter! See you not that you put into his hands a weapon with which he will infallibly slay _yourself?_ Did the Bishops and Doctors of the Church, when they met in solemn Council,--did _they_ hold such a theory concerning Holy Scripture, think you, as that the matter of it alone is Divine,--the language human? More briefly, that _the words_ of Scripture are _not inspired?_ What then mean their weighty definitions of Doctrine;--GOD the FATHER, "Maker of Heaven and Earth,"--GOD the SON, "by whom all things were made:"--the SON, "Θεὸς ἐκ Θεοῦ,"--"being of _one substance_ with the FATHER:"--"incarnate by the HOLY GHOST of the Virgin Mary:"--who "descended into Hell"--"whose kingdom shall have no end:"--the HOLY GHOST, "τὸ Κύριον καὶ τὸ ξωοποίον," "who proceeded from the FATHER and the SON?"--What means every article of that Creed to which you and I have given our unfeigned assent, and which Athanasius would have gladly subscribed to,--the most precious jewel in the Church's casket!--Nay, what means St. Paul's commentary on the history of Melchizedek, if the very words _omitted_ from Holy Scripture are not a _Divine_ omission?