PRAYER.

O God, who hast made of one blood all nations of men for to dwell on the face of the earth, and didst send Thy blessed Son to preach peace to them that are afar off, and to them that are nigh: Grant that all the people of this land may feel after Thee and find Thee, and hasten, O heavenly Father, the fulfilment of Thy promise, to pour out Thy Spirit upon all flesh, through Jesus Christ our Saviour. Amen.

ESSAYS ON THE BIBLE.

I. THE DUTY OF RELIGIOUS INQUIRY.

THERE are many who fully admit the claims of religion and are most attentive to what they conceive to be its duties who nevertheless see no reason whatever for making it a subject of investigation. They think that the faith which has satisfied their fathers will suffice for them. If it were untrue would not its falsity have been discovered long ago by men wiser and better than themselves? The very act of questioning the grounds of their faith seems to them to savour of impiety. They confess that there are difficulties which they are altogether unable to explain; but then their own acquaintance with their sacred books is very meagre, and they have had no time to study what has been written in their explanation and defence. They do not doubt that all objections can be answered by their learned gurus who have consecrated their life to theological research. Is not every one in these days content to walk in the footsteps of his fathers? Christians themselves never think of forsaking their ancestral religion, and why should they press upon others what they are unwilling to do themselves?

No doubt large numbers of people are influenced by such considerations as these, and yet every sensible man must feel that but little weight should be attached to the sanction of custom. If there were but one great religion which had commanded universal acceptance in all ages and countries there would indeed be strong ground for believing it to be the true one, and men might be excused if they doubted the utility of

examining its foundations; but when we see several creeds, each of which can boast of millions of adherents and yet in fundamental opposition to one another, it seems impossible to question the necessity for inquiry. Why is it that the Hindu differs in religion from his Muhammadan neighbour? In most cases for no reason whatever but that the one was born of Hindu and the other of Muhammadan parents. And if the same question were to be asked concerning the ancestors of these neighbours for several centuries past probably the same answer would have to be given. Every one accepted his father's religion as a matter of course. If we could trace the family history far enough back we should at last come to the ancestor who did forsake the religion of his fathers or at any rate accepted it in an altered form. He may have made this great change which has had so far-reaching an effect on his descendants, not from conviction, but as the result of compulsion or merely to further his temporal interests. History tells us how many thousands have been driven to profess a new and distasteful religion by fierce persecution, and how many, with an utter want of principle, have made their religion a mere question of policy. Is it not absurd that action of this kind should influence posterity? Is it not a fact that a family may have professed a particular creed for centuries, and yet not a single member of that family have accepted it from intelligent conviction? In such a case what becomes of the argument from custom? But suppose that in the first instance the new faith has been adopted with all sincerity after the most careful investigation, must the choice of one be the choice of all? Had that particular ancestor any monopoly of spiritual light? Had he any right to bind the consciences of his descendants? Is not reason a personal endowment which every one must use for himself? Moreover is not light now coming to us from sources unknown to our forefathers, so that the path of truth, which to them appeared dim and uncertain, may now be more distinctly traced?

In pressing the natives of India to examine religious questions we are really urging them to imitate the noblest of their own countrymen. The India of today is so conservative that we are apt to forget it has not always been so, and that it has produced some of the greatest religious thinkers and reformers. There have been men who would not accept their creed on trust, and as a result their names and memories are the most honoured in the land. Such men we should follow, not in blindly accepting the truths they taught, for this is the very thing their example teaches us not to do; but in subjecting all systems of belief to the test of our own reason and conscience.

Where can we find a nobler seeker after truth than Sákya Muni, the founder of the Buddhist religion, who can perhaps claim a larger following than any other teacher? It would be almost impossible for any inquiry to be more sincere,'more intensely anxious, more painfully prolonged. The logical conclusions to which he came were indeed bad enough, and we may deeply regret the atheistical character of his system. But practically his teaching was far higher than that of his day, and probably India owes much to the pure moral tone, the wide charity, the tender human sympathy of his system. One thing is certain, that upon himself personally his life of earnest thought produced the most ennobling influence, and raised him immeasurably above the age in which he lived.

Muhammad belongs to another country, but as his adherents are so numerous in India we may appropriately refer to his example. Had he been content to accept the religion of his fathers his name would have been utterly unknown. But during his earlier years at Mecca, the portion of his life which to us seems by far the purest and best, he patiently and diligently sought to discover the truth, and as a result he felt compelled to forsake and denounce the idolatry of his countrymen. Muhammad dared to think for himself, fearless of the consequences, and in this respect is worthy of universal imitation.

Coming down to the great thinkers who flourished in South India about the twelfth century we may especially single out the great Vaishnava reformer, Rámánujácháriya. Dissatisfied with the pantheism of the Vedanta this celebrated teacher powerfully contended for the personality of God, and maintained his opinion in the face of persecution. He and his disciples also loosened the chains of caste, and to them the Sri Vaishnavas of to-day are deeply indebted for the greater freedom they enjoy as compared with other sects. If worthy of their founder they will follow him in his resolute independence.

In recent years one man stands out from the rest as perhaps the only Hindu possessing a world-wide reputation. Keshub Chunder Sen was not content with the very considerable progress which had been made in the school to which he belonged. He felt it was wrong to make any compromise with such an evil as caste, and he preferred to break with his old friends rather than act contrary to the dictates of his conscience. In his readiness to admit every fresh ray of truth and in the tender devoutness of his spirit Chunder Sen presents a noble example to the educated youth of this generation.

Men who follow ancestors such as these act wisely and well. Whom should we choose as our patterns? The few who were not content to abrogate their rights and responsibilities as human beings and who consequently have acquired lasting influence and renown, or the many who never thought and acted for themselves and lived no higher life than the beasts of the field? Let us follow our ancestors by all means, only let those ancestors be the noblest and the best.

We do not urge on others what we are unwilling to do ourselves. Christians are bound, like the believers in all other creeds, to examine the foundations of their faith. It is true there are many who neglect to do so, but they are Christians in name only, to whom all religion is a matter of indifference. The large number of books published every year to defend and explain