eminent victorians-第38部分

按键盘上方向键 ← 或 → 可快速上下翻页，按键盘上的 Enter 键可回到本书目录页，按键盘上方向键 ↑ 可回到本页顶部！
————未阅读完？加入书签已便下次继续阅读！



made　an　obligatory　subject　at　the　London　University。



There　was　one　point　in　his　theory　which　was　not　quite　plain　to

Dr。　Arnold。　If　Church　and　State　were　absolutely　identical；　it

became　important　to　decide　precisely　which　classes　of　persons

were　to　be　excluded；　owing　to　their　beliefs；　from　the　community。

Jews；　for　instance；　were　decidedly　outside　the　pale；　while

Dissentersso　Dr。　Arnold　arguedwere　as　decidedly　within　it。

But　what　was　the　position　of　the　Unitarians？　Were　they；　or　were

they　not；　members　of　the　Church　of　Christ？　This　was　one　of　those

puzzling　questions　which　deepened　the　frown　upon　the　Doctor's

forehead　and　intensified　the　pursing　of　his　lips。　He　thought　long

and　earnestly　upon　the　subject；　he　wrote　elaborate　letters　on　it

to　various　correspondents；　but　his　conclusions　remained

indefinite。　'My　great　objection　to　Unitarianism；'　he　wrote；　'in

its　present　form　in　England；　is　that　it　makes　Christ　virtually

dead。'　Yet　he　expressed　'a　fervent　hope　that　if　we　could　get　rid

of　the　Athanasian　Creed　many　good　Unitarians　would　join　their

fellow　Christians　in　bowing　the　knee　to　Him　who　is　Lord　both　of

the　dead　and　the　living'。　Amid　these　perplexities；　it　was

disquieting　to　learn　that　'Unitarianism　is　becoming　very

prevalent　in　Boston'。　He　inquired　anxiously　as　to　its

'complexion'　there；　but　received　no　very　illuminating　answer。　The

whole　matter　continued　to　be　wrapped　in　a　painful　obscurity；

There　were；　he　believed；　Unitarians　and　Unitarians；　and　he　could

say　no　more。



In　the　meantime；　pending　the　completion　of　his　great　work；　he

occupied　himself　with　putting　forward　various　suggestions　of　a

practical　kind。　He　advocated　the　restoration　of　the　Order　of

Deacons；　which；　he　observed；　had　long　been　'quoad　the　reality；

dead；　for　he　believed　that　'some　plan　of　this　sort　might　be　the

small　end　of　the　wedge；　by　which　Antichrist　might　hereafter　be

burst　asunder　like　the　Dragon　of　Bel's　temple'。　But　the　Order　of

Deacons　was　never　restored；　and　Dr。　Arnold　turned　his　attention

elsewhere；　urging　in　a　weighty　pamphlet　the　desirabitity　of

authorising　military　officers；　in　congregations　where　it　was

impossible　to　procure　the　presence　of　clergy；　to　administer　the

Eucharist；　as　well　as　Baptism。　It　was　with　the　object　of　laying

such　views　as　these　before　the　public'to　tell　them　plainly'；　as

he　said；　'the　evils　that　exist；　and　lead　them；　if　I　can；　to　their

causes　and　remedies'that　he　started；　in　1831；　a　weekly

newspaper；　〃The　Englishman's　Register〃。　The　paper　was　not　a

success；　in　spite　of　the　fact　that　it　set　out　to　improve　its

readers　morally　and；　that　it　preserved；　in　every　article；　an

avowedly　Christian　tone。　After　a　few　weeks；　and　after　he　had

spent　upon　it　more　than　￡200；　it　came　to　an　end。



Altogether；　the　prospect　was　decidedly　discouraging。　After　all

his　efforts；　the　absolute　identity　of　Church　and　State　remained

as　unrecognised　as　ever。　'So　deep'；　he　was　at　last　obliged　to　

confess；　'is　the　distinction　between　the　Church　and　the　State

seated　in　our　laws；　our　language；　and　our　very　notions；　that

nothing　less　than　a　miraculous　interposition　of　God's　Providence

seems　capable　of　eradicating　it。'　Dr。　Arnold　waited　in　vain。



But；　he　did　not　wait　in　idleness。　He　attacked　the　same　question

from　another　side：　he　explored　the　writings　of　the　Christian

Fathers；　and　began　to　compose　a　commentary　on　the　New　Testament。

In　his　view；　the　Scriptures　were　as　fit　a　subject　as　any　other

book　for　free　inquiry　and　the　exercise　of　the　individual

judgment；　and　it　was　in　this　spirit　that　he　set　about　the

interpretation　of　them。　He　was　not　afraid　of　facing　apparent

difficulties；　of　admitting　inconsistencies；　or　even　errors；　in

the　sacred　text。　Thus　he　observed　that　'in　Chronicles　xi；　20　and

xiii；　2；　there　is　a　decided　difference　in　the　parentage　of

Abijah's　mother；'　'which'；　he　added；　'is　curious　on　any

supposition'。　And　at　one　time　he　had　serious　doubts　as　to　the

authorship　of　the　Epistle　to　the　Hebrews。　But　he　was　able；　on

various　problematical　points；　to　suggest　interesting　solutions。



At　first；　for　instance；　he　could　not　but　be　startled　by　the

cessation　of　miracles　in　the　early　Church；　but　upon

consideration；　he　came　to　the　conclusion　that　this　phenomenon

might　be　'truly　accounted　for　by　the　supposition　that　none　but

the　Apostles　ever　conferred　miraculous　powers；　and　that　therefore

they　ceased　of　course；　after　one　generation'。　Nor　did　he　fail　to

base　his　exegesis；　whenever　possible；　upon　an　appeal　to　general

principles。　One　of　his　admirers　points　out　how　Dr。　Arnold

'vindicated　God's　command　to　Abraham　to　sacrifice　his　son　and　to

the　Jews　to　exterminate　the　nations　of　Canaan'；　by　explaining　the

principles　on　which　these　commands　were　given；　and　their

reference　to　the　moral　state　of　those　to　whom　they　were

addressed　thereby　educing　light　out　of　darkness；　unravelling

the　thread　of　God's　religious　education　of　the　human　race；　and

holding　up　God's　marvellous　counsels　to　the　devout　wonder　and

meditation　of　the　thoughtful　believer'。



There　was　one　of　his　friends；　however；　who　did　not　share　this

admiration　for　the　Doctor's　methods　of　Scriptural　interpretation。

W。　G。　Ward；　while　still　a　young　man　at　Oxford；　had　come　under　his

influence；　and　had　been　for　some　time　one　of　his　most

enthusiastic　disciples。　But　the　star　of　Newman　was　rising　at　the

University；　Ward　soon　felt　the　attraction　of　that　magnetic　power；

and　his　belief　in　his　old　teacher　began　to　waver。　It　was；　in

particular；　Dr。　Arnold's　treatment　of　the　Scriptures　which　filled

Ward's　argumentative　mind；　at　first　with　distrust；　and　at　last

with　positive　antagonism。　To　subject　the　Bible　to　free　inquiry；

to　exercise　upon　it　the　criticism　of　the　individual　judgment

where　might　not　such　methods　lead？　Who　could　say　that　they　would

not　end　in　Socinianism？nay；　in　Atheism　itself？　If　the　text　of

Scripture　was　to　be　submitted　to　the　searchings　of　human　reason；

how　could　the　question　of　its　inspiration　escape　the　same

tribunal？　And　the　proofs　of　revelation；　and　even　of　the　existence

of　God？　What　human　faculty　was　capable　of　deciding　upon　such

enormous　questions？　And　would　not　the　logical　result　be　a

condition　of　universal　doubt？



'On　a　very　moderate　computation；　Ward　argued；　'five　times　the

amount　of　a　man's　natural　life　might　qualify　a　person　endowed

with　extraordinary　genius　to　have　some　faint　notion　（though　even

this　we　doubt）　on　which　side　truth　lies。'　It　was　not　that　he　had

the　slightest　doubt　of　Dr。　Arnold's　orthodoxy　Dr。　Arnold；　whose

piety　was　universally　recognisedDr。　Arnold；　who　had　held　up　to

scorn　and　execration　Strauss's　Leben　Jesu　without　reading　it。

What　Ward　complained　of　was　the　Doctor's　lack　of　logic；　not　his

lack　of　faith。　Could　he　not　see　that　if　he　really　carried　out　his

own　principles　to　a　logical　conclusion　he　would　eventually　find

himself；　precisely；　in　the　arms　of　Strauss？　The　young　man；　whose

personal　friendship　remained　unshaken；　determined　upon　an

interview；　and　went　down　to　Rugby　primed　with　first　principles；

syllogisms；　and　dilemmas。　Finding　that　the　headmaster　was　busy　in

school；　he　spent　the　afternoon　reading　novels　on　the　sofa　in　the

drawing…room。　When　at　last；　late　in　the　evening；　the　Doctor

returned；　tired　out　with　his　day's　work；　Ward　fell　upon　him　with

all　his　vigour。　The　contest　was　long　and　furious；　it　was　also

entirely　inconclusive。　When　it　was　over；　Ward；　with　none　of　his

brilliant　arguments　disposed　of；　and　none　of　his　probing

questions　satisfactorily　answered；　returned　to　the　University　to

plunge　headlong　into　the　vortex　of　the　Oxford　Movement；　and　Dr。

Arnold；　worried；　perplexed；　and　exhausted；　went　to　bed；　where　he

remained　for　the　next　thirty…six　hours。



The　Commentary　on　the　New　Testament　was　never　finished；　and　the

great　work　on　Church　and　State　itself　remained　a　fragment。　Dr。

Arnold's　active　mind　was　diverted　from　political　and　theological

speculations　to　the　study　of　philology；　and　to　historical

composition。　His　Roman　History；　which　he　regarded　as　'the　chief

monument　of　his　historical　fame'；　was　based　partly　upon　the

researches　of　Niebuhr；　and　partly　upon　an　aversion　to　Gibbon。　'My

highest　ambition；'　he　wrote；　'is　to　make　my　history　the　very

reverse　of　Gibbon　in　this　respect；　that　whereas　the　whole　spirit

of　his　work；　from　its　low　morality；　is　hostile　to　religion；

without　speaking　directly　against　it；　so　my　greatest　desire　would

be；　in　my　History；　by　its　high　morals　and　its　general　tone；　to　be

of　use　to　the　cause　without　actually　bringing　it　forward。'　These

efforts　were　rewarded；　in　1841；　by　the　Professorship　of　Modern

History　at　Oxford。　Meanwhile；　he　was　engaged　in　the　study　of　the

Sanskrit　and　Slavonic　languages；　bringing　out　an　elaborate

edition　of　Thucydides；　and　carrying　on　a　voluminous

correspondence　upon　a　multitude　of　topics　with　a　large　circle　of

men　of　learning。　At　his　death；　his　published　works；　composed

during　such　intervals　as　he　could　spare　from　the　management　of　a

great　public　school；　filled；　besides　a　large　number　of　pamphlets

and　articles；　no　less　than　seventeen　volumes。　It　was　no　wonder

that　Carlyle；　after　a　visit　to　Rugby；　should　have　characterised

Dr。　Arnold　as　a　man　of　'unhasting；　unresting　diligence'。



Mrs。　Arnold；　too；　no　doubt　agreed　with　Carlyle。　During　the　first

eight　years　of　their　married　life；　she　bore　him　six　children；　and

four　more　were　to　follow。　In　this　large　and　growing　domestic

circle　his　hours　of　relaxation　were　spent。　There　those　who　had

only　known　him　in　his　professional　capacity　were　surprised　to

find　him　displaying　the　tenderness　and　jocosity　of　a　parent。　The

dignified　and　stern　headmaster　was　actually　seen　to　dandle

infants　and　to　caracole　upon　the　hearthrug　on　all　fours。　Yet；　we

are　told；　'the　sense　of　his　authority　as　a　father　was　never　lost

in　his　playfulness　as　a　companion'。　On　more　serious　occasions；

the　voice　of　the　spiritual　teacher　sometimes　made