present age cannot make use of means which are fitted to act powerfully on the savage or half civilized mind, which in former times were used without scruple. The ostensible effects of the more recent missions cannot be compared with those of an earlier date, those, for instance, which were instituted between the fifth and fifteenth centuries; we say ostensible effects, because it took a thousand years thoroughly to Christianize Europe, and some pagan practices are not eradicated at this day. What is the reason of this difference? To answer the question we have only to inquire how it was that that barbarian continent, once the seat of so fierce and gloomy superstitions, was made to bend its neck to the faith. When it became the duty of Christianity to subjugate and tame the freeborn and ungovernable hordes, who became the masters of Europe after the overthrow of the empire, the Church was already an established and well organized institution, with sufficient moral and intellectual power, to inspire the rude men who seated themselves by its side with no slight degree of respect. In the new organization of society, to which in their altered circumstances they were obliged to submit, it became necessary that they should resort to the more intelligent among the clergy for assistance. Hence their subjection to the church followed almost immediately and as a matter of course, although it was still necessary to use all the art and authority the clergy were masters of, to tame the ferocity of the new converts, and render their conversion permanent. The missionary, who went forth into more distant parts, was likewise the representative of the most vigorous institution of the empire before its fall, and which still retained its youthful strength after that event, an institution of sufficient power to make itself felt over a large part of the continent. He went forth therefore with singular advantages. It would be idle to suppose that he obtained his remarkable victories by a simple exposition of the truth to rude men. Too often the chief or noble was first bent to his purposes, and then by building imposing churches, by promises, threats and punishment, compelled his subjects to adopt the new faith. It is perhaps not too much to say, that Christianity owes as many of its outward triumphs over paganism in modern Europe to this as to any other cause. Something also was accomplished by the sword, far more indeed than the Christian world has ever been willing to acknowledge. The missionary carried with him like

wise a faith already grown awful and mysterious, and an array of splendid ceremonies well fitted to dazzle and subdue the mind of a wondering barbarian. He went out with a perfect unhesitating trust in the dogmas of his faith; he spoke with all the authority that the most positive convictions could give him, or with a hardy and unflinching hypocrisy, which often answered nearly the same purpose. He was not always too scrupulous in demanding the surrender of practices which had grown out of the old superstition. Some he tolerated; others he pressed into his service. His own religion was in some degree paganized. Nor was it to be expected that he should adopt a different course, being himself the representative of a rude age and a rude Christianity.

With the missionary of our times the case is widely different. He is the representative of a vastly more intelligent and refined age. He cannot use the sword, nor, except in a very feeble and imperfect manner, the civil power. Interpreting Christianity in the light of a highly cultivated period, if he is faithful to his trust, he can tolerate none of the immoral practices of paganism, much less make use of any. He demands more of the pagan than the ancient missionary did, because he carries with him not only a severer code of morals, but one which extends to a greater variety of the social relations, while he is himself forbidden to live in that hard ascetic mode, by which his predecessor of the olden time frequently recommended himself as a being of more than mortal sanctity. He must enforce a rigid subjection of the passions and a strict adherence to the laws of active duty, which man always bears with less patience than he submits to bodily mortification and torture. He carries with him a faith which appeals less to the imagination than that of elder times, which is less mysterious and outwardly imposing. He can no longer address the uncultivated mind with that unquestionable authority, which springs from assured convictions. Bred up in the midst of the utmost freedom of inquiry, where every opinion is questioned, doubted, or denied, he cannot have that untroubled faith which belongs to an age of tradition; at least, if on great points he thinks himself secure, he will still be subject to lurking weakness and timidity. He is no longer the minister of an undivided church, the representative of all Christendom, which has been rent into a thousand parts, but the agent of a sect; nor can he conceal from the more intelligent of those whom he

addresses, the divisions and contentions on all points, which reign among those who profess to be the disciples of the same Christ.

While then the character of the pagan, in all its essential characteristics, remains the same as of yore, the task of the missionary has become more arduous. It is true that he has some indirect advantages which his early predecessor had not. Greater facilities for intercourse with distant nations and tribes have been opened to him; the character of the uncivilized man and the nature of his institutions are better understood; the press lends him its aid. But for obvious reasons, these circumstances are not sufficient to counterbalance the increased difficulties under which he labors. The press must be comparatively inefficient among a people, the great mass of whom have not only to be taught to read, but to reflect. "We have had no proof," says Mr. Williams, printer to the mission in China, "that the thousands of books thrown among this people have excited one mind to inquire concerning them; have induced one soul to try to find a teacher among the foreigners in China; or have been the means of converting an individual. I have seen books on board of the Junks, which were given in Bankok and Batavia; but have never had a question asked concerning their meaning; have never heard an objection started, nor a request to have a doubt solved, though the sight of the books I had brought was the occasion of their showing the books they had received." *

If then the work of the missionary has become so much more arduous, it is but reasonable that the means and instruments which he needs should be multiplied. But how can these be afforded, so long as the circle of operations is so extended that the resources of no single mission can ever be greater than are actually necessary to preserve it from death?

The policy of reducing the number of missions, we are aware, may be thought to savor too much of worldly wisdom, and quite contemptible, when compared with the magnificent project of converting the world simultaneously, as in private life men will have splendid virtues or none. But why should it appear so. The complete conversion of a single nation, capable of exerting a central influence, would be worth all the

efforts of Christendom. It would be worth so much, even if its own advantage alone were concerned; but it would in its turn become the regenerator of the world.

J. Q. D.

to

ART. IV. -THE SAMARITAN PENTATEUCH.

ALL which has been said, in the former part of this Essay,* prove that the Pentateuch must have been in existence among the Ten Tribes, and their immediate successors and descendants, the Samaritans, goes as far to show that it must have been an independent copy of the Law, and of course sets aside any hypothesis, which would derive it from the Hebrew in later times. But to any such hypothesis there is another formidable objection, the inveterate enmity, that always subsisted between the Jews and the Samaritans, which would keep either of them from borrowing any sacred books of the other. It commenced between the Jews and the Israelites at the period of the Revolt. There was an entire separation, it is well known, between the rival kingdoms of Judah and Israel. So far from keeping up any friendly intercourse, they were frequently at war with each other. And afterwards, when the Samaritans took the place of the Israelites, the breach was only widened. For upon them the Jews looked with proud contempt, as the descendants of Assyrian idolaters. This ancient hostility has never been forgotten on either side. As we follow the history of the two nations down to our own times, we see it constantly breaking forth. At the present day, "the enmity against the Jews is so strong," says Dr. Bowring, "that no Hebrew is admitted into the Samaritan synagogue." For some time, it seems to have been more of a political, than of a religious cast, and always the most implacable on the part of the Jews. For, after the Babylonish captivity," the adversaries of Judah and Benjamin," as the Samaritans were then called, offered to unite with the Jews in rebuilding their temple; but their civil proposal was roughly rejected. The consequence

* Christian Examiner, pp. 147–165 of Volume X.

was, they were the more bitterly exasperated against the Jews; and, other causes of dissension arising, they at length built a temple on Mount Gerizim, in opposition to that at Jerusalem.

About two hundred years later, we meet again with traces of animosity on the part of the Jews; for thus writes the author of the book of Ecclesiasticus (L.25,26): "There be two manner of nations, which my heart abhorreth; and the third is no nation; they that sit upon the mountain of Samaria, and they that dwell amongst the Philistines, and that foolish people that dwell in Sichem." In our Saviour's time, the word Samaritan, with a Jew, was but another name for a madman. When the enemies of Jesus found occasion to cavil at his beneficent miracles, it was the first outburst of impotent rage, "Say we not well, that thou art a Samaritan, and hast a demon?" The woman of Samaria was struck with amazement, that our Lord, who was a Jew, should ask of her, who was a Samaritan, even a cup of cold water. And when his disciples found him in conversation with her, they "marvelled that he talked with the woman." How irreconcilable this national hatred was, may be inferred from the following testimony of one of the Jewish Rabbis, as quoted by Lightfoot; " Ezra, Zorobabel, and Jeshua gathered all the congregation into the temple; and they blew the trumpets; and the Levites sung, and cursed the Samaritans by the secret name of God, and by the glorious writing of the tables, and by the curse of the upper and the lower house of judgment; that no Israelite eat of anything that is a Samaritan's, nor that any Samaritan be proselyted to Israel, nor have any part in the resurrection. And they sent this curse to all Israel in Babel, and added thereto curse upon curse; and the king fixed a curse everlasting to them." Now, such being the state of feeling between the two nations, is it credible that the Samaritans would ever have placed confidence enough in the Jews to receive from them any of their sacred books, and, least of all, a copy of that Law, which was to lay the foundation of their own national worship?

Besides, if the Samaritans had borrowed of the Jews their copy of the Law, they would have been just as likely, it would seem, to borrow some other of the Jewish Scriptures. Yet this they have never done. They have, it is true, defective copies of Joshua and the Judges; but these they do not regard as sacred books; nor does it appear that these were received through the Jews. This fact, then, cannot fairly be considered