|
[Letter of Francis William Newman to J. Chapman Esq.] Captain Sterlings', My dear Chapman, Mr Scott has given up his Sunday Evening Lectures for the summer. I have a strong anticipation that he will be elected as Professor of Mental Philosophy in Owens College Manchester, (to our great loss in Gower Street and in Bedford Square) in which case of course his Sunday Evening Lectures come to an end. On the whole, I shall not know whether to regret them. While Mr. Scott does not declare himself more fully, no one can cooperate with him. In fact I am sure he would decline cooperation. It is then a question whether he is or is not impeding some more efficient proceedings. I am as desirous, as the lady you mention, of a reformed worship: but, (in reply to your personal suggestion to me,) I do not feel that I can come publicly forward & offer to teach & pray for the edification of whoever will come. Opinions will be numerous, sentiments also diverging: and it needs either a more cautious commencement, or that it be begun by one who gives his life to the work. I never was a clergymen: there is to the public feeling more unseemliness in my stepping forward (which nothing but success would justify) than in such men as the Rev. Thomas Wilson, Mr. Foxton, Mr. Newenham Travers. It is only natural in them to do that tentatively, which would be unnatural & embarrassing to me. I hope that some of these may be induced to form a nucleus of something, in which case I will not be wanting to aid as I may be able: but we ought (I think) to begin by privately ascertaining one another's sentiments, & to be very slow to open the door to an indiscriminate public. I have finished reading Mr. Mackay, & never before knew how orthodox I am. His views of the Jewish nation & doctrine down to Hezekiah are indeed startling. I have in consequence read again parts of my Hebrew Monarchy, & have carefully referred to the passages on which he bases his malignant representations; but the effect is, to confirm me that he is quite wrong. His references generally prove nothing. I only found one (in Leviticus) really to the purpose. And his theory wholly throws darkness over the feud of Jezebel with the prophets, and indeed of Manasseh. I am very sorry for these chapters of the book: they have an eagerness of credulity & needless harshness of phrase (as when he makes the Jews down to Isaiah's time cannibals, & David's daughters human sacrifices,) which damage his fairness. The basis of the whole is so very narrow. Sincerely yours,
|