”He[Browning]was，wemaysuppose，offendedbyStrauss’sruthlessattackonmuchthatmankindhasheldsacredforages。HisreligioussensewasrevoltedbytheassumptionthattherewasnothinginChristianitywhichcouldsurvivethedestructionofthemiraculousandsupernaturalelementsinitshistory。
HedesiredtorepresentChristianityasanentirelyspiritualreligion，independentofexternal，materialagencies。Inordertomakehisargumentaspowerfulaspossible，hechoseforhismouth-pieceoneofthepersonalfollowersofChrist，onwhom，itmightbesupposed，theactualhumanlifeofhismasterhadmadeapermanentandlivelyimpression。WiththedetailsofBiblicalcriticismhehadnothingtodo；hisprincipleswereunaffectedbydiscussionsabouttheauthenticityofthevariouspartsofGospels；
so，indefianceofStrauss，thedisciplehechosewasthatveryJohn，whosepersonality，asrecognizedbylongtradition，hadbeensomuchdiscredited。Heshowedhoweveninoneofthedisciplestherecollectionofwondersandsignscouldbetranscended，andatlastobliterated，byaspiritualfaithwhichwassustainedbytheneedsandfacultiesofthesoul。Thepoemis，ineffect，aneloquentprotestindefenceof`thebreathandfinerspiritofallknowledge’。”
FromMrs。M。G。Glazebrook’spaperon`ADeathintheDesert’，readbeforetheLondonBrowningSociety。
ALISTOFCRITICISMSOFBROWNING’SWORKS。