Luthtcr, in the 16th Century, stirred up Germany and Europe into open revolt against the so-called infallible teaching of the Christian Church. The Church—argued the German student—is not the true depository of Religious truth—it is not the true rule of faith and practice—it is not fee refuge from the storm and tempest of God's wrath against the sinful sons of men. But—object his enemies as well as his friends—" what have we got to rely on, if we cannot rely on the Church?" Oh! said Luther, the Bible is the only authority in matters of religion. The world, hitherto, has rested on the Church, but the Church itself rests on the Bible; therefore, to the law and to the testimony, and not to tradition, must we finally appeal. The Reformer put down under his foot one alleged infallible authority and set up, in its place, another standard of infallibility. The Reformer stood on his own manhood and protested against the errors, absurdities and superstitious of the Church, and betook himself to the study of the Bible. This, he argued, is the Word of God, and our duty is to examine it for ourselves. He claimed the right of private judgment; the privilege of a personal interpretation, according to the light of his understanding. To Luther and his Protestant followers, it never occurred that an infallible book, written in a foreign tongue, and in a remote age, required an infallible interpreter. They assumed that the Bible was the revelation of God's mind and will. They, then, set about the work of interpretation. Luther translated it into the German tongue. Other Protestants followed suit. King James authorised a page 4 new version in the English language. Swarms of Commentaries in various languages, successively emanated from the labouring presses of Europe. During the last three Centuries, the right of private judgment has made sad havoc in the Protestant camp. There are now upwards of three hundred sects, distinguished for nothing so much as their mutual hostilities and suspicion. We have a Christian Babel of confusion and endless contradictions and inconsistencies. Meanwhile, a new and revised edition is daily expected. Christendom is drifting away from its old mooring. We are on the eve of a new and greater reformation than that of the 16th Century. As Bishop Hinds says: "We are now entering on a further stage of religious progress. Numbers are so startled at the exposure of some palpable errors, and even questionable rules of morality, in the Bible, that they are beginning to protest against its infallibility, as did a past generation against that of the Church." The Pope—says the Protestant—speaking ex cathedra, is not infallible. The Church in Council does not necessarily convey to us the will of God. It is mere human agency. Precisely so. But what is the Bible? Is it an infallible teacher? Is the preacher or the Commentator, or the Sect, any more oracular than the Roman Pontiff and Church? Who wrote the Bible? Certainly not God for no man, as we have often asserted in our writings, ever saw, or conversed with, God. The Apostle Paul says that "No man can approach unto, no man hath seen nor can see," God. The Apostle John says "No man hath seen God at any time." Again, says the beloved Apostle, "Ye have never heard his voice at any time, nor seen his shape." Paul says that "God at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past unto the Fathers by the Prophets." Observe, we have only the testimony, at second-hand, of those prophets and fathers, who alleged that they had "received the law by the disposition of angels," or messengers. We have simply their assertion for the proof that they were inspired by God, and received communications from the spirit world, through the medium of Angelic revelators. Now, this is precisely what the Modern Spiritualists daily assert. But who can credit such witnesses, or believe their alleged revelations? The Deity never "spake page 5 to the Fathers, save through faculties of mind.." We are told that the Bible is inspired. In other words that the writers are said to have written or spoken as the Spirit moved them. But we have only human testimony for that. To us there is absolutely no eternal vox ex adylis. The oracle of Delphi, or of Jerusalem, was believed to emanate, through human agency, direct from Apollo or Jehovah. Beyond one's own bosom a divine afflatus is absolutely impossible, mid is always impreceplible. An appeal is now being made, faintly and slowly, but surely, from the Bible to the human reason. The dogmas of Protestant Churches are quite as offensive to the reason, as were those of Rome. Indeed, the Roman Church in many respects, is more consistent in its line of procedure, than any of her Protestant daughters. She demands unyielding snbmission. They pretend to grant a show of reason, but ostracise it when it puts ugly and awkward questions. In our last issue of the Saturday Review, we concisely summed up the cardinal elements of true religion, in one noetic verse. God, we wrote, hath shown clearly to us what is true religion. Here it is in nuce:

"They deeds let sacred justice rule;
Thy heart let mercy fill;
And walking humbly with thy God,
To him resign thy will"