from a point of view of its own, as our free-trading Liberal friends.  Hebraism, with that mechanical and misleading use of the letter of Scripture on which we have already commented, is governed by such texts as:  Be fruitful and multiply,+ the edict of [244] God’s law, as Mr. Chambers would say; or by the declaration of what he would call God’s words in the Psalms, that the man who has a great number of children is thereby made happy.  And in conjunction with such texts as these it is apt to place another text:  The poor shall never cease out of the land.+ Thus Hebraism is conducted to nearly the same notion as the popular mind and as Mr. Robert Buchanan, that children are sent, and that the divine nature takes a delight in swarming the East End of London with paupers.  Only, when they are perishing in their helplessness and wretchedness, it asserts the Christian duty of succouring them, instead of saying, like The Times:  “Now their brief spring is over; there is nobody to blame for this; it is the result of Nature’s simplest laws!” But, like The Times, Hebraism despairs of any help from knowledge and says that “what is wanted is not the light of speculation.”  I remember, only the other day, a good man, looking with me upon a multitude of children who were gathered before us in one of the most miserable regions of London,—­children eaten up with disease, half-sized, half-fed, half-clothed, neglected by their parents, without health, without [245] home, without hope,—­said to me:  “The one thing really needful is to teach these little ones to succour one another, if only with a cup of cold water; but now, from one end of the country to the other, one hears nothing but the cry for knowledge, knowledge, knowledge!” And yet surely, so long as these children are there in these festering masses, without health, without home, without hope, and so long as their multitude is perpetually swelling, charged with misery they must still be for themselves, charged with misery they must still be for us, whether they help one another with a cup of cold water or no; and the knowledge how to prevent their accumulating is necessary, even to give their moral life and growth a fair chance!

May we not, therefore, say, that neither the true Hebraism of this good man, willing to spend and be spent for these sunken multitudes, nor what I may call the spurious Hebraism of our free-trading Liberal friends,—­mechanically worshipping their fetish of the production of wealth and of the increase of manufactures and population, and looking neither to the right nor left so long as this increase goes on,—­avail us much here; and that here, again, what we [246] want is Hellenism, the letting our consciousness play freely and simply upon the facts before us, and listening to what it tells us of the intelligible law of things as concerns them?  And surely what it tells us is, that a man’s children are not really sent, any more than the pictures upon his wall, or the horses in his stable, are sent; and that to