REV. MR WATSON'S LECTURES.

Press, Volume XLIX, Issue 8134, 30 March 1892, Page 6

REV. MR WATSON'S LECTURES.

TO THE EMTOB OP THE FBESS. Sic, —Would you kindly allow mc to express in the heartiest form I can my gratitude and thanks to Mr Watson for his very able lectures .delivered in the Tuam street Hall last week, and by taking this form of doing so I may be able toTbrine public opinion to bear on the question el urging Mr Watson to visit all the centres of population and deliver these lectures for the advantage of the colony. It ia a mistake for the Christian public of ihuscolooy to allow Mr Watson, a may say comparatively, to waste bis time, as I feel he has been doing, in the: small parish of St. John's. He could command thousands to listen to him on the moat important topics of the day. It might take him six or twelve months. Tho expenses could be easily arranged, and no doubt his good Bishop would arrange & supply for Ma pulpit.—Yours, &c. t J. L. Wasojr. TO THE EDITOR OS" _HB __,_S3»' Sib,—l had only the privilege of attending the last lecture of the series. I wish to call attention to one or two points therein, regarding which the arguments used by tho lecturer appear to be nusfou-ded or entirely fallacious. L Endeavouring to relieve Christ from the responsibility of stamping with bis approval all the Old Testament writings, Mr Watson shows a distinction between new quotations and special applications to himself of Old Testament passages by Christ. This is a reversal of the old argument. We used to be taught that because Christ quoted the Old Testament books they were true, and every endeavour waa made to show that he quoted all, or, anyway, most of the books. Dlustrating bis new position, Mr Watson quoted the use made by Christ of Psalm ex., and the words "The Lord said unto my Lord, ' Sit thou on my right hand,'" &c. Luke, ii., 42. Now, surely Mr Watson knows, what every scholar knows, that the psalm can only, by forced interpretation, fea made to apply to the Christ. The Scribes did so apply it, no doubt, but it is the very words \?hich Jesus quoted (verso 11 which show its true application to David himself. The sweeping denunciation of the Scribes which follows the quotation almost places Him in opposition to such forced interpretations. ..■.-... IL Mr Watson spent so much of hi_ time oa Thursday on theories of Bible, or rather Old Testament interpretation, and vilews of the antiquity of man that " The contents of Christianity..'* proper had to be disposed of in ;few words, which was, to say-tne least, unfortunate. Redemption was dismissed in a few sentences. Atonement dealt with, apart from its combated doctrines of justification by faith and predestination, and the doctrine of vicarious sacrifice entirely misrepresJnted. First, we were told that Nature has no pity or mercy. Then this same Nature was appealed to to furnish illustrations of

vicarious suffering, such as the grass furnishing food for the ox, the ox in turn becoming food for man, and a mother's care for her child. Now sir, this is a very curious jumble of ideas. The feeding of one creature on another .has no counection with vicarious sacrifice, which is the furnishing or killing of one creature for the guilt ox another. The mother does not suffer instead of her child, bat with it, in sympathy. % We often share in the results of the Bins of others. That ia hard enough, bat we can understand how it is, and why it is. We do no more than grumble, for do we not share also in the benefits derived from their virtues, but this is a very different thing from sharing taeir guilt or bearing 16 for tnem, on the one hand, or being partakers of their righteousiiess on the otner. That one even should su&r for the crime of another is an injustice bo patent that ao humau judge would allow it, were the victims ever so willing. That one man's righteousness should be credited to another is not one whit less unjust, but the absurdity is more apparent. It appears to mc that Mr Watson is suffering from modern thought. Who is not? Toe Bishop; of Christcuureh has a bad attackwU.au he declares, that he does uot believe in eternal torment; and theu goes Onto assert that it is not taught by the Bible or theCiturehU Modem thought is nothing more than progressive .revelation; and not more startling than that of Christ to the Jews. .Let us open our blind eyes and dull ears and try to assimilate it, believing' in a living present Uod, and His continuous inspiration. ■ .■•.'..-■ /.o ;■■:• •■■••■ ■ ■ The lecture on Thursday was but an illustration of the old saw. Mr YVatoon tried to take his "place between two stools and, by his own weight, he came to the ground. Apparently he mistakes the very notion of modern thought, and yet he cannot rest on the Christianity of the Churches. Professing to seek "a reasonable " religion he clings 'tor a creed,: mosf of the articles of which set reason at defiance.— Yours, &c., Ons who was Pbesent,