THEOLOGY, PHILOSOPHY, AND PHILOLOGY.

_History of Protestant Theology, particularly in Germany, viewed

according to its fundamental Movement, and in connection with the

Religious, Moral, and Intellectual Life._ By Dr. J. A. DORNER,

Oberconsistorialrath and Professor of Theology at Berlin. Translated

by the Rev. George Robson, M.A., Inverness, and Sophia Taylor. 2 vols.

Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark. 1871.

Dr. Dorner is already well known in this country by the translation,

published by Messrs. Clark, in their Foreign Theological Library, of

his admirable and exhaustive work on the 'Person of Christ,' as a

theologian who unites profound and extensive learning with spiritual

insight, rare intellectual acumen, and earnest piety. The translation

of his 'History of Protestant Theology,' now published, will be hailed

as a welcome boon by all thoughtful students of Christian doctrine. It

cannot fail to increase and extend the high estimation in which the

author is held, and must lead to what is peculiarly needed at the

present time, the formation of deeper and sounder views of the great

principles involved in the religious and intellectual movement of the

Reformation. The original work came out about five years ago, as one

of a series of Histories of the Sciences, undertaken by the Historical

Commission of the Royal Academy of Science at Munich, under the

auspices of the King of Bavaria. It took at once a high position in

the recent theological literature of Germany. The companion work of

the series, 'a History of Catholic Theology,' by Dr. Werner, is

admitted, even by Roman Catholic reviewers, to be decidedly inferior

to it in scientific depth and thoroughness. Unquestionably a history

like this, so intimately pervaded by the true spirit of a living

Protestantism, which enables one clearly to understand the course of

evolution pursued by the doctrinal systems included under that name,

deserves to be regarded as 'a classic, both in respect of matter and

form.' We cannot, however, add _in respect of style_; for it must be

admitted that Dr. Dorner, like most of his countrymen, is very little

solicitous to recommend his thoughts by arranging them in an

attractive dress. His sentences are too often cumbrous and intricate,

sometimes even to obscurity, and require a degree of attention in the

reader that is rather fatiguing. Still there is a vigorous pulse in

them, and an exact propriety in the language, by which the mind is

stimulated and satisfied, so that when we have got to the end of a

chapter or division, and look back on the road we have travelled, we

feel as we might after a laborious climb which has rewarded us with a

noble prospect.

The distinctive excellencies of Dr. Dorner's history appear to us to

be the following:--First of all, as might be expected, it is marked by

depth and thoroughness of learning. The investigation is carried out

over the whole field, embracing all the sections and national branches

of Protestantism, with their subdivisions, from the time of Luther

onwards to our own day. So far from confining his review to the

Lutheran communities of Germany, ample space is assigned to the

leading representatives of opinion in the Reformed or Calvinistic

churches of France and Switzerland, Great Britain, and North America.

These are all taken up in due order, analyzed, and classified

according to their respective tendencies. The schools of Germany, no

doubt, receive the largest measure of attention, but there is a good

reason for this in the fact which the author says will be owned by

all, 'that the strength of scientific Protestantism, both in

exegetical, historical, and systematic theology, rests in Germany.' He

follows up this claim, however, with an ingenuous confession of the

weakness and shortcomings of the German Churches, in comparison with

those of other countries, in the practical and moral application of

Protestant principles. The accounts given of the different systems,

their origin, method of inquiry, and influence, are very complete and

faithful. They show a wonderful capacity to grasp the contents and

scope of widely different forms of thought and speculation, together

with admirable skill in the exposition of them, so as to make even

their abstruse portions intelligible. There is none of the dryness and

heaviness that is often complained of as attaching to the discussion

of the dogmas of a bygone age; but the vivid force of a subtle and

active mind runs through and enlivens the whole. Some writers on those

subjects remind one of a spiritless cicerone leading you through

avenues of ruins, pointing out each object with the wearisome and

formal minuteness of a catalogue; but our author is like one who

resuscitates the spirit of the past, and who can throw a human

interest around the fallen columns and deserted halls, awakening

sympathy with the men who reared them and made them their home. In

this respect he reminds us of the great Church historian, Neander. The

gift is certainly one of rarer occurrence among theological writers

than in the class of general historians.

This feeling of interest which is breathed into the discussions and

controversies of the past, is closely associated with what we conceive

to be the cardinal excellence of this history, stamping it with real

scientific worth. We refer to the instinctive skill and fidelity

displayed in tracing out the inner and formative principles of each

movement, defining the limits and relations of each, and with keen and

well-practised judgment determining the degrees of validity that

should be assigned to them. This process is carried out by the author,

not under the influence of some philosophic assumptions--which have

too frequently been set up as a regulation standard in this kind of

criticism--but in a spirit of Christian enlightenment and evangelical

experience. Everywhere we mark the union of reverence for divine

authority with the manly assertion of spiritual freedom in an honest

search after truth. Hence his mode of judging those theories of

religion which are most divergent from his own views, and antagonistic

(as we should say) to Scriptural orthodoxy, is free from all

narrowness, prejudice, and bitterness. He does not pronounce upon them

according to their deviation from certain human formularies, but seeks

to indicate the relation which they hold to ascertained laws of

intellectual and spiritual progress. He shows how, in several

instances, erroneous as they were, they formed a natural and partly

justifiable revolt from the injurious impositions and restrictions of

a barren orthodoxy, and led many to a healthier and more fruitful

cultivation of the intellect and of the spiritual faculty. We have

never read a delineation of the deep-seated causes which occasioned

the birth and growth of Rationalism, so instructive and admonitory--we

might add so impressive--from its candour and tenderness, as that

which is given in the second volume of this work. Hagenbach's valuable

history of the same phenomena is indeed composed with great fairness

and ability, and is presented in a more popular method and style; but

from that very cause it deals more with the superficial and obvious

aspects of the case, and lacks the spiritual depth and completeness of

Dorner's diagnosis. The study of both histories, however, should be

combined; for each supplies what is wanting in the other. We require

to conjoin with the scientific analysis of principles and tendencies

which we have here, the striking pictures of men, society, and events,

which enliven the pages of the more popular writer. In Dorner's view,

the aberrations of Rationalism formed a needful stage, though an

unhappy one, in the purification and elevation of Protestant theology,

which has come forth from it enlarged and liberalized in its scope,

better adapted to the wants of humanity, and more directly based on

just and firm foundations. Accordingly we find that, while he does not

look upon error with cool philosophic indifference, he can expose it

without severity, or any approach to denunciation. He detects the

elements of forgotten truths, which are often mixed up with it;

perceives the openings by which it liberated and brought into play

those faculties of our nature which had been unwisely fettered and

suppressed; and shows how, by the fermentation which it stirred in the

inert mass, it contributed to an ultimate reform both of theology and

religion. In short, in this history we are not only guided to the

sources of the stream in the healthy uplands of a new spiritual

life--that region of experience which was the birthplace of the

Reformation--but it is followed down in its various windings till it

becomes hemmed in and imprisoned by artificial reservoirs; we see it

gradually undermining, and at length bursting through the barriers,

carrying with it for a space wide-spread ruin, till the flood

subsides, and it begins once more to flow with deeper and ampler

current in its proper channel, fertilizing the surrounding fields. All

that now remains, perhaps, is to have patience till the waters become

clearer, more limpid, freer from sediment and wreck; and care must be

taken to keep up and strengthen the natural embankments, that the

river may nowhere diffuse itself into a sluggish, unwholesome

swamp--an expanse of shallow sentiment where boundaries are lost, and

the current of action is imperceptible.

The work is in two volumes, and is divided into three books, the first

of which occupies the whole of the former volume, embracing three

divisions. The first presents a most interesting account of the

preparatory forces, intellectual and spiritual, which were at work in

the Protestant Reformation period. This sketch is necessarily rapid,

yet it is remarkably complete and accurate. The Papal Church of the

Middle Ages departed from the true idea of Christianity 'in not

subordinating herself to the spiritual renovation of the nations, but

setting up the principle of [Church] authority, and lordship, of its

own end and highest good,' which led to all the spiritual blessings

and ordinances of the Church being 'transferred into instruments of

ecclesiastical power and hierarchical rule.' Thus, religion was

changed in its very essence. Its blessings ceased to consist in

personal fellowship with God, and assumed a materialistic and

impersonal character. Mysterious influences and powers belonging to

the Church and the clergy were made to constitute the riches of

Christianity; and so piety, robbed of its personal end, attached

itself to the visible altar, and to other sensible things. An ethical

personal holiness was exchanged for a material relation, dependent on

ceremonies. This is the radical error of all sacramentalism. The more

sincere, who were anxious about their personal salvation, could not

rest satisfied in such a system. Dr. Dorner--after discussing the

relations of the Mediæval Church to the questions of man's salvation,

to truth, and to the sphere of the civil power, which it strove to

subjugate; and having traced the influence of Anselm, Aquinas, and the

Schoolmen upon doctrine--treats briefly of the Latin and German

mystics, showing how they sought direct communion with God, by

contemplation and self abnegation. Their defects and excellencies are

ably analyzed. Among the pioneers of the Reformation a high place is

assigned to John Wessel, because of the prominence he gives to

evangelical faith in the Mediator. When the representatives of the

Biblical principle, in this preparatory stage, are introduced, it is

shown how Wycliffe advanced it in alliance with the scientific and

moral factors; but some injustice is done to him in respect of his

doctrinal views, which the translator, Mr. Robson, has carefully

corrected in one of the valuable notes with which he has enriched this

volume. The treatises of Wycliffe, edited by Dr. Vaughan, in 1845,

prove beyond question that the cardinal doctrines of grace were

clearly apprehended and taught by the English Reformer.

In the second division, the Reformation itself is handled, as it

appeared in Germany and in Switzerland, together with the various

phases and relations it assumed up to the time of the Wittenberg

Concord in 1536. A leading place is, of course, given to the character

and experience of Luther, and the strongest light is thrown upon the

fact that the movement in his case, and in Calvin's as well, had its

origin in a great spiritual conflict and personal change. It was in

seeking for and in obtaining the assurance of pardon, and in the

experience of a power renovating the heart and life, bringing the

whole man into communion with God through Christ, that Luther rose to

the conception of faith as a divine principle uniting the soul to the

Saviour, and freeing the believer, not only from the terrors of

conscience and the moral impotency of the will, but from all

subjection to human authority in divine things. This is justly exalted

by Dr. Dorner as the _material principle_, and the moving force of the

Reformation; this is at once its life and its law. It is by the

harmonious working of this element, in a normal conjunction with the

_formal principle_ which sprung out of it, and which derives from it a

solid application--viz.: The recognition of the divine authority and

inspiration of the Scriptures,--that the life of the Reformation is

fully and healthily developed. Both the evangelical systems of

doctrine, the Lutheran and the Calvinistic, owe their characteristic

excellencies to the interaction of these two principles which gave

them birth. Their improvement, and the prosecution of the truths they

contain, must spring from the same source. It is only by the renewed

mind and heart of the believer, enlightened and guided by the Spirit

speaking through the Word, that the doctrines of Christianity can be

apprehended and embraced. Christianity is the salvation of God, and

can be understood by none but those who personally appropriate its

blessings through the Spirit by a living faith in the Redeemer.

Throughout his history, Dr. Dorner never allows us to lose sight of

that fact. The controversies, the declensions, the errors, the

revivals, which he follows out in long array through the seventeenth,

eighteenth, and nineteenth centuries, are so many instructive,

admonitory, or cheering illustrations of this fundamental law of

Protestantism. There is no security for the material principle when

separated from the formal, while the formal is emptied of life and

fruitfulness if divorced from the material principle, _the new life of

faith in the soul_. A divine, child-like faith in the heart, owning

and yielding to divine authority in the Word, is the secret of safety

and progress. That will give us at once Scriptural orthodoxy, and true

freedom.

Space fails us, or we would fain have touched on the contents of the

second volume, which, in some respects, is the more interesting of the

two, from the account it gives of English Deism, and the rise and

progress of German Rationalism. The critical analysis of the views and

influence of Lessing, and the way in which Schleiermacher's system is

drawn out and displayed, appear to us especially worthy of admiration.

Towards the close of the work, the state of theology in England

receives some attention; but here we are disposed to note, not only

the meagreness of the information supplied, but in one case its

inexactness. We refer to the introduction of the late Dean Mansel's

argument in his 'Hampton Lectures,' given in p. 494, which the writer

(we humbly conceive) has quite misapprehended in some important

points. Further, it is most inaccurate to say that Mansel was

'triumphantly encountered by Maurice, and Professor M'Cosh, of

Belfast.' Anything more crushing and scathing than Hansel's

examination of Maurice's 'Strictures,' which are a mere farrago of

fantastic misrepresentations and hysterical outcries, we never read.

Between M'Cosh and Mansel there is no real opposition; it is in

language rather than in substance that they differ, and as M'Cosh'

himself says, he 'would rather agree with Sir W. Hamilton and Mr.

Mansel, than any metaphysicians of the past or present age.'[69] This

mistake, however, is but a slight speck on the lustre of so great a

production, and may readily be excused in a foreign writer, who can

hardly be expected--though he be better acquainted with our theology

than most foreigners--to look at a controversy of this kind from our

point of view.

Both translators deserve high commendation for the manner in which

they have executed their laborious task. Mr. Robson's part is marked

by great exactness, which at times becomes too closely literal; Miss

Taylor's performance is more smooth and flowing, but in some of the

metaphysical portions a doubt occurs as to whether the author's

thought has been precisely seized. Yet, in many a paragraph we have

admired the facility with which the lady has worked her way through

rather abstruse speculations and involved periods. We tender both our

most hearty thanks for the service they have rendered the theological

public, and would beg most strongly to commend the work to all

scientific students of our common Protestantism.

_The Witness of History to Christ._ Five Sermons preached before the

University of Cambridge; being the Hulsean Lecture for the year 1870.

By the Rev. F. W. FARRAR, M.A. Macmillan and Co.

Mr. Farrar's object in his Hulsean Lecture is to examine the moral and

intellectual causes of modern unbelief. This he does in five

lectures--the first demonstrating 'the Antecedent Credibility of the

Miraculous;' the second affirming 'the Adequacy (for reasonable

conviction) of the Gospel Records;' the third setting forth, from the

facts of its history, 'The Victories of Christianity;' the fourth and

fifth on 'Christianity and the Individual' and 'Christianity and the

Race,' demonstrating the transcendent and transforming moral power of

the religion of Jesus Christ, as a presumptive argument for its

truthfulness--the whole being a cumulative argument, demonstrating

that Christianity is the Divine and supernatural truth of God, which

it professes to be. Mr. Farrar is necessarily restricted in these

several lines of argument, by the limits of a spoken discourse devoted

to each, to a few salient points, and to an indicative mode of

argument; and we, of course, can follow even him but a very little

way. The first, and fundamental question in the controversy between

sceptical science and religious faith is the credibility of the

supernatural. We do not think that Mr. Farrar has carried the

intellectual argument further than it has hitherto been carried, or

than perhaps it can be carried. Whatever theologians may say, it

revolves in a circle. Science refuses to be represented by men like

Strauss, who begin all argument by the _petitio principii_ that the

supernatural is antecedently incredible and absolutely impossible--for

a more thoroughly unscientific position cannot be conceived. Nothing

is antecedently impossible to true science; by the very conditions of

it, it is restricted to the demonstration and interpretation of actual

facts. Concerning the possible discovery of unknown facts it can say

absolutely nothing. The question really is, Have the alleged

supernatural facts of Scripture been demonstrated? Nor is it enough

that science can urge nothing in disproof--the _onus probandi_ lies

with those who affirm. What then is the scientific value of the

testimony to the alleged miracles of Scripture? First, it has to be

admitted that the testimony is furnished solely by Scripture--that is,

by the book which the miraculous is adduced to authenticate. Next, it

can scarcely be denied that the chief strength of the Scriptural

evidence lies in the transcendent moral qualities of Scripture. It is

not the miraculous that authenticates the holy doctrine; it is the

holy doctrine that authenticates the miraculous. The miraculous is

affirmed by Prophets, Evangelists, and by Christ; and it is a moral

impossibility that these should affirm falsely. We, therefore, who did

not see the miracle, but only receive it on testimony, accept the

testimony because the witnesses are unimpeachable. The actual

beholders did not; to them the miracle was the credential of the

teacher; but to us the teacher is the credential of the miracle. From

which it follows that science will never accept the evidence of the

miracle until it has accepted the unimpeachableness of the

witnesses--that is, it must accept the truth and holiness of Jesus

Christ before it will believe His miraculous works. Mr. Farrar,

therefore, is perfectly justified in affirming that 'modern scepticism

has not advanced one step further than the blank assertion, as regards

the inadequacy of testimony to establish a miracle;' but, on the other

hand, he must admit that beyond the assertion of the book, theology

has not advanced a single step to demonstrate its occurrence. The mere

intellectual argument must be left there, and the decision must turn

upon the unanswerable moral demonstration--first, of the Scriptures

themselves, and, above all, of the perfect character of our Lord; and

next upon the history of Christianity in its progress through the

world, and its contact with the philosophy and the moral phenomena of

human life. Mr. Farrar does not deal with the moral evidence of

Scripture, but he deals very effectively with the moral evidence which

Christian history furnishes. The victories of Christianity are

illustrated by the conditions and issues of its conflicts with Judaism

and Paganism. Judaism without the Church, and Judaism within, and

Paganism in its eclectic revival, its brilliant literature, and its

ruthless persecution. What is more, it had to contend with the

pseudo-Christianity of Constantine. 'Little, indeed,' says Mr. Farrar,

'did Christianity owe to that trimming emperor and unbaptized

catechumen--that strange Christian, indeed, who placed his own bust on

the statue of Apollo, and thought the nails of the true cross a

fitting ornament for the bridle of his charger, and on whose

extraordinary figure the robes, so besmeared with gold and crusted

with jewels, could not conceal the Neronian stain of a son's and a

consort's blood!' Then followed its conflicts with the Northern

barbarian invasion, with Mahometanism, and with the internal

corruptions of the Papacy. Thus, in its material and moral victories,

Christianity witnesses to the truth and power of its Divine Founder's

words. In the chapters in which Mr. Farrar demonstrates its triumphs

over individual hearts and lives, and its total influences on the

social life of nations, his facts are well selected, and his reasoning

is unanswerable. Mr. Farrar's book evinces immense reading. His

quotations are almost in excess of his text, and are gathered from the

most diverse sources, from Ignatius to Lord Derby's speech at Glasgow.

The impression is of a man who has collected his opinions rather than

evolved them by processes of independent reasoning--only there is the

impress of a strong hand upon the whole. Mr. Farrar is master of his

quotations. His lectures are rhetorically eloquent, sometimes too much

so for their character and purpose; but his arguments are well

arranged, and his book is really a valuable contribution to modern

Christian apologetics.

_Modern Scepticism._ A Course of Lectures delivered at the request of

the Christian Evidence Society. With an Explanatory Paper by the Right

Rev. J. ELLICOTT, D.D., Lord Bishop of Gloucester and Bristol. Hodder

and Stoughton. 1871.

The present volume is an interesting sign of the times. Those who love

our common Christianity more than they love the ecclesiastical systems

which have so often interfered with their co-operation in Christian

work, here stand side by side to advocate positions common to them

all. The general diffusion of an atmosphere of sceptical speculation

which has not only crept over the outworks but has invaded the very

citadel of the Christian faith, has received great augmentation from

the mutual antagonism of some Christians, and from the unhappy

concessions of others. If nothing more had been gained for the cause

of Christian truth than the juxtaposition of these essays in one

volume, with the assurance thus given to the world that the most

distinguished dignitaries of the Church of England hold common ground

with learned Congregationalists and Wesleyan divines on the

fundamental bases of religious faith, the Christian Evidence Society

might be fairly congratulated on the success of its enterprise. There

is an intrinsic value in the re-assertion of the deep convictions of

cultured men and genuine Christians, touching the very foundation of

religious thought. When a volume of 500 pages professes to cover the

controversies that have been stirred during the last half century on

the very nature of evidence, on the presence of design in nature, on

the pantheistic and positivistic interpretation of the facts of the

universe, on the relations of science and revelation, on the nature of

miracles, on the gradual development of revelation, on the historical

difficulties of the entire Bible, on the mythical theories of

Christianity, on the credential value of the Pauline Epistles, on the

character of the Lord Jesus, and on the totality and adequacy of

Christian evidences; it is obvious that these topics must many of them

be touched, rather than discussed; approached, rather than developed.

The reader of these discourses is not supposed to be a convert to the

doctrines of either Mr. Darwin or Auguste Comte, of Professor Tyndall

or M. Rénan. Those who have plunged into the rapid current of

materialistic philosophy, or have mastered the details of positivism,

or become thoroughly familiar with the 'higher criticism' of Germany,

will not be diverted from their opinions by these popular and

interesting addresses. But there is a large class of educated young

men and cultivated women who are at the present moment staggered by

second-hand _rechauffés_ of various scepticisms, who are fascinated by

the audacity of modern doubt, and relieved from ugly fears by the

confident assertions of triumphant students of history and science,

who relish the boisterous breeze of these cloudy uplands of

speculation, and take greedily any assurance which wars with old

prejudices and threatens to uproot old systems or institutions. There

are, moreover, multitudes of busy men who have no time to study these

various forms of scepticism, but who are made miserable whenever they

have time to think, by the thickly flying shafts of the enemies of

Christianity. To these classes we conceive the volume before us may be

of great service. Everywhere we discover honesty of purpose, sympathy

with the doubter, an endeavour on the part of thoughtful and learned

Christian teachers to put themselves into the position of the

inquirer. There is comparatively little dogmatism, there is very

considerable beauty of illustration, and there breathes throughout

the whole volume a healthy vigorous faith. Several of the

distinguished writers have discoursed on themes on which they were by

previous well-known labours, entitled to speak. Thus the Archbishop of

York has discussed the purely philosophical question of 'design in

nature;' Dr. Rigg has handled Pantheism; and Dr. Stoughton the nature

of miracle. Professor Rawlinson has reviewed the 'Historical

Difficulties of the Old and New Testaments,' and the author of the

'Jesus of the Evangelists,' the Rev. Charles Row, has given us the

pith of the argument of that deeply interesting volume. For our own

part, we think Mr. Row's essay is by far the most complete and

satisfactory attempt in the whole volume to grapple with a great

subject, and to add something to the considerable literature of the

mythical theory. The Bishop of Ely has also approached the fascinating

question of 'Christ's teaching and influence on the world' with

fulness and sweetness of exposition. We trust the volume, which is in

every way attractive, will lead to more thorough investigation of the

great steps of this high argument, and will result in deeper and more

hearty appreciation of the bases of religious faith.

_Freedom in the Church of England._ Six Sermons Suggested by the

Voysey Judgment, Preached in St. James's Chapel, York-street. By the

Rev. STOPFORD A. BROOK. London: Henry S. King.

This little volume contains many things--Doctrinal, Ecclesiastical,

and Social--put with much freshness and power, albeit with some

rashness, upon which much detailed criticism might be bestowed. The

doctrinal sermons on the Atonement and Original Sin would necessarily

demand for their adequate criticism a space equal to that which they

themselves occupy. They lay down positions that must be tested--first

by Scripture, next by general principles of moral philosophy, and

lastly, by the doctrinal standards of the Episcopal Church. We do not

of course attempt to test them. Gladly recognising in them much that

is eternally true, much that is profoundly philosophical, and much

that commands our admiration for its intellectual acuteness and

vigour, we make only one or two remarks concerning them. First,

scarcely any attempt is made to show the harmony of the views

propounded with the doctrinal statements of Scripture; they are

evolved out of the depths of the author's own moral consciousness,

which is perfectly legitimate; only his anxiety to justify them to the

standards of the Episcopal Church rather than to the statements of the

Christian apostles, is not so legitimate and satisfactory for a simple

inquirer after truth, however necessary for a Churchman. The two great

factors of all true doctrine are surely the Divine revelation and

man's moral consciousness. It is the misery of doctrinal Church

standards that they necessarily rule so much of a man's thinking. We,

outside the Episcopal Church care but very subordinately about the

harmony of a clergyman's views with his Church Articles; we care very

much about the harmony of his teachings concerning atonement and

original sin with Divine revelation and the eternal truth of things.

As the result of the whole argumentation, we can say, only, that if

Mr. Brook's conclusions respecting the congruity of his teaching with

the standards of his Church be satisfactory to himself, the acute and

fearless author of the arguments themselves is a mystery to us. To us

it is a painful illustration of the influence of an embarrassing

position upon freedom and coherence of thought. Mr. Brook seems to us

to contradict categorically the explicit teaching of his Church, both

about original sin and the Atonement. Concerning his views on original

sin we have to say (1) that with the ninth article before us, it is to

us utterly incredible that the men, most of whom, Mr. Brook admits,

held the same doctrine which he 'rejects with dismay and horror,'

purposely left their statement so undefined as to admit of views so

opposed to theirs as Mr. Brook's. If they did, all the worse for them

and their article. (2) Mr. Brook altogether fails, in our judgment, to

justify, by his attenuated exposition of the 'fault and corruption of

our nature,' the strong expression of the article 'it deserveth God's

wrath and damnation.' (3) Mr. Brook's answer to the question 'Why

should God have made us with this wrong twist?' is simply 'Because God

wanted humanity,' and not 'a new angelic nature in which there should

be no effort, no contest, no dramatic possibilities.' The only

conclusion that he leaves open to us is, that whatever original sin

is, it is a created part or condition of our nature--that is, God

creates us in a condition that 'deserveth God's wrath and damnation.'

Mr. Brook's view of original sin may be the true one, but this is the

result to which he brings us by applying to it the test of the ninth

article.

Concerning the Atonement, Mr. Brook's theory is, that Christ was the

ideal man, in whom union with God was gradually developed--being from

'the moment of his birth potentially His, as the whole growth of the

oak is in the acorn.' That the merit of His suffering consisted in His

perfectly identifying himself with the sorrow of mankind; 'losing the

consciousness of Himself and of His own pain, through the intensity of

His sympathy with us,' He threw himself 'into the whole sense of this

vast human suffering, and so realizing it as His own, offered it up to

the pity and love of God.' 'In this way He took unto himself our

suffering, and suffered for it; in this way He represented in that

hour unto the Father, by means of the perfect self-forgetfulness of

love, all the spiritual pain of the world's absence from God.' 'God

sees in Christ the ideal of humanity, the whole race as sinless, as

one with himself;' 'the innocent suffered, through love, the pain

which comes of sin.' 'He passed from feeling as a man, to feeling as a

representative man.' 'He lost all thought of self in awful realization

of the sin of the whole' world.' 'God saw, in the absolute

self-sacrifice which enabled Christ to lose himself in love of man,

and to bear the burden of the sin of man in passionate sympathy with

the awfulness of the burden, the highest reach of human virtue, the

highest ideal of human sacrifice realized;' and, 'as He took into

himself and into union with himself, the humanity of Christ, so He

took into himself and into union with himself the humanity which

Christ represented. This is the reconciliation of God to man, the

forgiveness of men's sin by God. This is the objective side of the

Atonement.' 'With existing humanity God, though pitying and loving it

as a Father, could not, because of its sin, unite himself fully. But

when humanity in Christ had fulfilled all righteousness, and displayed

itself as wholly at one with God's life of self-sacrifice, God was

then able to unite himself to it, to take it up into Himself.' 'To

believe in Christ is to look upon his life and death of

self-sacrifice, and to say with a true heart, "I know that this is

true life; I accept it as mine. I will fulfil it in thought and

action, God being my helper."' From this theory of atonement Mr. Brook

deduces universalism. 'The whole race being in Christ, is now by right

redeemed, righteous, at one with God. But it is not redeemed,

righteous, or at one with God, in fact. It is still struggling with

sin, still wandering away from its inheritance, still rejecting its

rights. But that which has been done in God is done for ever: and

man--every soul of man--_must_ become in fact what they are now by

right. And though no thought may count the years, yet all humanity

shall at last be made coincident with that ideal of it which exists in

God in Christ.'

Concerning this theory, we remark, that while very much that is said

by Mr. Brook about the sufferings of Christ is beautifully true, yet,

as a theory of the Atonement, it is (1) to our conception, utterly at

variance with the doctrine of the Prayer Book, and with the theories

of its compilers. It is for lawyers to say whether under such

standards such a divergent theory is legally tenable--we can only say

that we should not like to shelter a moral contradiction like this

under a legal possibility. (2) Whatever may be the merits of the

'forensic theory' which, says Mr. Brook, 'I utterly deny and

repudiate,' 'it outrages our idea of God; it makes him satisfied with

a fiction;' this martyr theory of an ideal humanity suffering in

Christ, infinitely surpasses it in unreality. If the forensic theory

involves a legal fiction, this involves a moral fiction--which is not

only unthinkable in the domain of moral realities, but which, so far

as we can think, contradicts our deepest moral instincts. If there is

to be a fiction at all, which we think there need not be, we

infinitely prefer the legal fiction of Aquinas. No! whatever the true

theory of Atonement, this is not it. We can understand a federal

headship of humanity, which obtains for it fresh probation and fresh

privileges, but we cannot understand a federal headship which gives a

_quasi_ spiritual character, and which induces in God an unreal moral

estimate.

In passing from this doctrinal part of the book, we may ask why Mr.

Brook represents David as being from early morning until noon in

ascending the Mount of Olives, the summit of which may be easily

reached from St. Stephen's Gate in half an hour?

The first sermon here printed, however, although the last preached,

naturally challenges our chief attention. It discusses the question of

'Freedom in the [Established] Church' _apropos_ of the bearing upon it

of the judgment in Mr. Voysey's case. We note one or two points in it

only. First Mr. Brook says 'that the restrictions upon liberty of

thought, which he deprecates, would soon make the Church into a narrow

and bigoted sect.' The phrase, omitting the adjectives, has become a

kind of formula with Churchmen of Mr. Brook's school. We have

frequently tried to apprehend this attempted distinction between a

Church and a sect, but we are unable to do so; and we should

unaffectedly feel that Mr. Brook had laid us under a great obligation

if he had given us a distinct and intelligible definition. What is a

Church, and what is a sect? and wherein lies the differentia of the

two? In what sense is the Episcopal communion a Church and not a sect,

that is not equally true of the Presbyterian and Congregational

communions? Will Mr. Brook accept the definition of a Church given in

the 19th Article? 'The visible Church of Christ is a congregation of

faithful men, in the which the pure Word of God is preached, and the

Sacraments be duly ministered,' &c.? If so, then he can deny the

designation 'Church' to every congregational ecclesia--only by

impugning its 'faithful' character, its preaching or its sacraments.

Is it the criterion of a Church to be without formulated dogmas--or to

have doctrinal standards from which her clergy have indefinite liberty

to dissent? In the former case the Episcopal communion is not a

Church--in the latter, Congregationalists or Presbyterians might

easily become a Church, by according liberty of dissent from their

standards. The only thing that hinders among them the laxity of

subscription and interpretation which Mr. Brook claims for his own

Church is that they really believe in their beliefs, and make fidelity

to them a matter of conscience. We should be glad to know the exact

variation of the theological compass that converts a sect into a

Church. Or does Mr. Brook regard a National Establishment as the

criterion of a Church? Then he unchurches the Church of Rome in

England, the Episcopal Church in Ireland and Scotland, and prepares

for the unchurching of Episcopacy in England ere long. If universality

be the criterion, then Episcopacy cannot claim it. If to be the

largest religious body in a country be the criterion, then what is

Episcopacy in Scotland, Ireland, or Wales? If the criterion be

catholicity of spirit towards those who differ from us, we fear that

neither historically nor actually could his own Church make out a very

unequivocal claim. We have really looked at this rhetorical

distinction on all sides, and are unable to apprehend it; and yet it

is perpetually flung at our poor Nonconformist heads as a missile that

is as potent as David's sling and stone.

Is it worthy of intelligent and candid men, such as Mr. Brook, to use

controversial terms, with a view, if possible, to affix a reproach, to

which no intelligible meaning can be attached? In our view of it every

Church is a sect, in the good sense,--in the sense of being but a

section of the universal Church; and any Church, however large or

however small, established or unestablished, with fixed dogmas, or

with flexible ones, may be sectarian, in the bad sense, of being

exclusive in its claims, intolerant in its recognitions, and exacting

in its conduct. It is for members of the Established Church of England

to ask themselves of which of the ecclesiastical communities of the

kingdom these are the most characteristic features. We can scarcely

believe our eyes, when we read, 'In the assent of all to these

doctrines, and in the common love of all to God in Christ, and in the

common love of the body to which they belong, co-existing with an

almost endless variety of individual views about these doctrines,

consists the unity of the Church of England.' Is it then, really so,

that all the Church feuds and litigation from Tract 90 to the Purchas

judgment--the Hampden and Gorham cases, the 'Essays and Reviews'

warfare, the Ritualistic riots, the Liddel case, the Colenso

controversy, the Machonochie, Voysey, and Purchas cases, with the

pamphlets and sermons, the schisms and hatreds of the three great

parties within the Establishment, which for the last forty years have

kept the religious world in a state of intense excitement, that all

these things are the phantasmagoria of a bad dream, or the amiable

reciprocations of brotherly respect and Christian affection? Is there

any Church in Christendom with such a polemical history or at the

present moment so hopelessly and bitterly schismatic? How, in the face

of the English people, such a sentence could be written by a man like

Mr. Brook, is simply inscrutable; 'They do,' he says, 'work together

remarkably well.' 'There is no body of men more united than the

English clergy;' but he makes this fatal admission, 'Destroy the

connection of the State with the Church, and all that vanishes at

once. All the several parties begin quarrelling, and split up into

sects.' Then where is the vaunted unity, and what is the moral worth

of the legal bond that unites such discordant elements?

Mr. Brook propounds once more the old crippled fallacy, 'By right

every Englishman is a member of the National Church. It is of his own

free choice that he rejects that right.' But what if he

conscientiously disbelieves in that Church--and holds that in

establishing it and requiring national assent to it, both Church and

State have gone beyond the domain of the things that are Cæsar's into

that of the things that are God's? This, the real gist of the whole

matter, is carefully avoided. The Jews used the same argument against

the Christians; the Inquisition of the Romish Church against

Protestants. The essential injustice lies in maintaining any

established Church in a divided nation; and in the attempt to control

a man's religious conscience by any civil law or institution

whatsoever. Is it not simply childish to affirm, with England as it

is, that the parochial clergy 'feel as representatives of a National

Church, that all within the range of their several districts--no

matter what and who those are--dissenters, non-church-goers, infidels,

are their responsibility, and are given into their spiritual care by

the nation.' No doubt they do; but does anybody else feel it? is not

this the impertinence which one half the nation so resents? Mr. Brook

is too candid not to see that all this is the theory of a by-gone

state of things, and that the very mention of it now excites ridicule.

Accordingly the word 'ought,' and its equivalents do yeoman's service

throughout this sermon. It is indeed a discourse upon what a National

Church _ought_ to be, rather than upon what the National Church

actually is. So far as we understand Mr. Brook, there _ought_ to be

almost every conceivable diversity of religious belief in the

community, and the National Church _ought_ to be so vague in its

dogmas, or so flexible in their interpretation, as that its clergy

_ought_ to represent them all. And to this the argument must come.

With very many of Mr. Brook's subordinate remarks we cordially agree.

He is thoughtful and catholic-hearted, and has a keen perception of

much that is beautiful in Christian doctrine and life. But the task

that he has set himself is simply an impossible one. He wishes

contradictories, perfect freedom, and distinctive dogmas; a definite

Church character, and an indiscriminate inclusiveness; the

prerogatives of a supreme Church, while only the fragment of a nation;

which itself again is only a small part of Christendom. There is in

Mr. Brook's direction no possible way out of the embarrassments,

unrealities, and self-contradictions of the English Episcopal Church.

* * * * *

_Human Power in the Divine Life; or the Active Powers of the Mind in

Relation to Religion._ By Rev. NICHOLAS BISHOP, M.A. Hodder and

Stoughton.

The author of this book has attempted a difficult task, viz., to

exhibit in philosophical language the synthesis of the divine and

human in the new life. With profound reverence for God's revelation

and with great insight into the life of God in the soul, he has

discussed the function of the human will in Repentance, Faith,

Conversion, Sanctification, Christian Perfection and its Limits, in

Preaching and Prayer, and in relation to Divine Providence. The range

of thought is very wide, the mode of treatment very stimulating and

fresh. It would be difficult in a brief notice to convey an adequate

idea of the book. Some of the most difficult problems are broached,

and much light is thrown upon them. There are gems of thought

scattered through the discussion which nevertheless form a distinct

and integral part of the argument. Thus 'God's plan of instructing man

seems to be from the lower to the higher forms of thought. The nearer

the instruction can accommodate itself to the sense or to the simpler

acts of the intelligence the more likely it is to succeed. It must

begin with the concrete and rise by slow degrees, to abstract truth.

Christ, as revealed in His gospel, is the nearest possible approach to

this. He is to the weakest mind the simplest possible concrete truth,

and He is also to the strongest mind the greatest possible

abstraction.' Again, 'If man could repent without the Divine Spirit,

his repentance could not be divine; and if the Spirit could produce

repentance without man's co-operation, it could not be human; but upon

God's plan it is perfectly human and perfectly divine--so perfect that

it could not be more divine if man were completely passive in it, nor

more human if the Spirit exercised no power in it.' With the

fundamental principle that 'the divine life is a developed spiritual

consciousness,' the writer has said much that is most refreshing,

stimulating, and practical, and we strongly commend this volume to

those who are seeking a higher life, and would find help and

consolation by an approximate _rationale_ of that life.

_Ten Great Religions; an Essay in Comparative Theology._ By JAMES

FREEMAN CLARKE. Trübner and Co.

Mr. Clarke has made an interesting and earnest endeavour to establish

some of the principles of a science which is likely before long to

occupy a high place in human thought. He has, moreover, shown decided

skill and considerable learning in his view of the salient features of

Brahmanism and Buddhism, in his summary of Confucianism and Tæpingism,

in his sketch of Persic, Scandinavian, Egyptian, and Græco-Roman

religions, and in his estimate of Judaism and Mahometanism. The

materials were ready to his hand in rich abundance, and he has set

forth the leading ideas of each of these great forms of faith with

commendable modesty and fine critical tact. The strong point he makes,

and in which we entirely agree with him, is--that Christ and

Christianity recognise the age-long witness to certain great truths

embodied in these ethnic faiths, that Christ is the fulfilment of the

prophetic visions which the founders of these varied religions

beheld;--that Christianity is the answer to the problem of Brahmanism,

the _pleroma_ of the faith of Sakya-muni, and the complement to all

the speculations of Egypt, Athens, and Scandinavia;--that Christianity

contains all that is living, all that is true to God and nature and

man, in any or all of these religious systems, and a great deal

more;--that it has absorbed many of them, and will eventually solve

the continuity, and embrace the devotees of them all in its catholic

fulness. He claims to find the highest evidence for the truth of

Christianity in this,--that while all other forms of faith have been

more or less one-sided, ethnic in their range, and local in their

influence, Christianity meets the need of every kind of race and

generation of mankind. The 'symphony of religions' is to him the

pledge of the eternal excellency, the indisputable supremacy, and the

absolute truth of Christianity. He will not admit that other religions

are 'natural' and that this alone is 'supernatural;' that other

religions are excogitated by the human intelligence, this alone

'revealed' from heaven; others the work of lying impostors, this alone

preserved from human frailty; others 'human religions,' and this

alone a 'divine' religion. All truth is divine with him, and all such

truth as has been intuitively perceived by great ethnic religious

teachers has been 'revealed' to them by God, the one God. But he

maintains the great position that all other religions are limited in

their range of thought, and in their adaptability to man; while

Christianity includes within itself the sum of all religious truth,

the nexus of all justifiable religious tendencies, the correction of

all extravagances, the answer and solvent to all human inquiry. As we

have said, Mr. Clarke holds here positions with which we sympathize

and which we have often advocated. But while we admit with him, the

significance of the ethnic religions, the truth uttered by Sakya-muni

and found in the Vedas, there is to our ear an exceeding bitter cry

for help and teaching and deliverance, coming out of the very

constitution of the heathen culture, and revealing itself in the

religious rites and in the literature of the East, to which he seems

comparatively indifferent. He is afraid of compromising the dignity

and majesty of human nature, or of saying anything offensive to its

unaided and unregenerated powers. To our view, human nature is in a

much more diseased and miserable condition than he admits; and we hold

that there was a specialty in the vision and faculty given to Hebrew

prophets, and possessed by the Great Master, which make them differ in

kind from those of the sages of India, Persia, or Greece. Though he

furnishes the facts with great fairness and skill, he seems strangely

unwilling to admit the grand difference between Hebraism and

Ethnicism, viz.: that in the one case, God is represented as seeking

and finding his people, pleading with their unwillingness and

disloyalty, unveiling to them his own glorious name, and in the other

cases men are 'feeling after God if haply they might find him, though

he is not far from any one of them.' The argument of Mr. Clarke,

moreover, is in our opinion, truncated and paralyzed by the extremely

low view that he entertains of the person of our Lord, and of the

essence of that very monotheism which has won the victories to which

he points with Christian exultation. There is no disrespect cast upon

the faith of nineteen-twentieths of Christendom, it is simply ignored;

and his Christianity is, after all, little more than 'the morality

touched by emotion,' of which we have heard a good deal lately. We

believe that a sounder and larger view of Christianity itself would

supply wards to the key here used by Mr. Clarke, which would enable

him to unlock many more of the mysteries of human life. We thank him

for the work he has done, so far as it goes, and can agree with him

that the philosophy of missions will lie very much in the direction of

comparative theology.

_Sermons for my Curates._ By the late Rev. THOMAS T. LYNCH, Minister

of Mornington Church, London. Edited by Samuel Cox. Strahan and Co.

Twelve months ago, in calling the attention of our readers to one of

the latest volumes of Mr. Lynch's sermons, we ventured to predict

that when it was too late, the world would find out that a prophet

had lifted up his voice in the heart of modern London, comparatively

disregarded; and now a ministry exercising transcendent influence over

a few sympathetic minds, the spiritual work of a great poet and

philosopher, the subtle wit, and delicate humour, and piercing satire

of a gifted man are things of the past. We have lost him. We, and many

others beside ourselves, are by this volume made to feel how

incalculable that loss is. Hundreds of busy men, and hasty critics,

will, we are satisfied, feel a species of pang when they discover the

realities and the significance of this volume. Here was a man

suffering from the agonies of angina pectoris, precluded by dire

necessity from conducting two services on the Sunday, and out of the

sheer love which he bore to his little flock, in the course of three

months of bitter suffering, producing for their use and advantage a

series of services, each including two prayers and a discourse which,

to say the least, no one but Thomas Lynch could have originated. Mr.

Cox's preface is painfully affecting. We might have expected, if he

had not forewarned us to the contrary, that these pages would have

shivered in sympathy with the intense agony under which they were

penned. On the contrary, they sparkle with life and beauty, with

cheerfulness and Christian hope. There is less of their author's

well-known quaintness, less abundant illustration; he seems more

intent upon the pure thought, and the logical concatenation of idea

than had been customary with him. There is much sweet reasoning with

despondency; there is an absence of all controversial atmosphere;

there is not a trace of bitterness, nor a morbid thought about either

God or man, but there is great fulness of heart and gentleness of

soul; and these are the only signs the printed page reveals of the

almost unutterable physical distress in which they were produced.

Although neither these nor others of Mr. Lynch's published sermons can

be called doctrinal deliverances, and though they deal with the life

of faith, rather than with its essence or its object, yet they will be

singularly valuable, and even indispensable to one who wishes to

understand the doctrinal position of their author. Produced in the

manner to which we have referred, they are above and beyond criticism.

We accept them reverently; we commend them heartily and tenderly to

our readers.

_The Ecclesiastical Polity of the New Testament: A Study for the

Present Crisis in the Church of England._ By the Rev. G. A. JACOB,

D.D., late Head Master of Christ's Hospital. Strahan and Co.

_Churches and their Creeds._ By the Rev. Sir PHILIP PERRING, Bart.

Longmans, Green, and Co.

Few things in modern controversy are more astounding, and cause more

scandal to Nonconformists than the unwarrantable assumptions and

unscholarly arguments of their Anglican opponents. We scarcely

hesitate to say that such a work as Mr. Blunt's 'Ecclesiastical

Dictionary--while evincing most patient research and abundant

knowledge--contains more arbitrary assumptions and illogical

conclusions than all the works on ecclesiastical controversy which

Nonconformists have published during the present century. Had a

Nonconformist been guilty of a tithe of such, every ecclesiastical

newspaper in the land would have poured out upon him its jubilant

ridicule. In any other science than theology such a treatment of facts

would be simply impossible. We are sadly forced to the conclusion,

that in the judgment of certain Churchmen, Sacramentarianism, and even

an Episcopal Establishment, are religious truths so vital, that the

very investigation of evidence is presumption of a reprobate mind, and

no testimony of history or conclusion of reason is valid against them.

It seems, at any rate, as if it were the first of religious duties so

to manipulate facts and reconstruct history as to compel testimony in

their support. For ourselves, we sorrowfully affirm that, speaking

generally, we have lost all confidence in the conclusions of Anglican

scholarship, and feel it imperative to test every citation and every

assertion before we can attach the slightest argumentative value to

it.

It is refreshing, therefore, to meet with the work of an Episcopalian

clergyman equally conspicuous for its learning and for its fearless

honesty. Dr. Jacob's work is one of those productions, rare, alas!

which impress the reader from the beginning that he is in the hands of

a man whose supreme solicitude is to ascertain truth--who permits no

ecclesiastical prepossessions or interests to influence his

conclusions; who however much he may love Plato, loves truth more. Dr.

Jacob is an Episcopalian by conviction and preference--he does not

utter a word that either questions the one or impugns the other; and

yet he has written a book which is a patient, scholarly, and

dispassionate investigation into the Ecclesiastical Polity of the New

Testament, from the conclusions of which only men who contend for the

divine right of Presbyterianism or Congregationalism, and possibly of

Episcopalianism, will dissent. Since Archbishop Whately's 'Kingdom of

Christ,' no such thorough treatment, and candid an examination of

Church questions has appeared. To the fearless candour and acuteness

of Whately, Dr. Jacob adds a habit of minute and patient scholarly

investigation, which supplies the evidence upon which his important

conclusions are reached. Had all ecclesiastical controversy been

conducted in his spirit there would still be--as there ever will

be--Episcopalians, Presbyterians, and Congregationalists; but these

would have regarded their Church differences as preferential modes

rather than as divine rights; and Christendom would have presented an

aspect of harmonious diversity instead of one of sectarian assumptions

and animosity. For ourselves, we most heartily thank him for his book,

which, if there were any hope at all from the fanatical sectarianism

of what is known as Anglicanism, would be the best eirenicon of these

latter days. We cannot do better than try briefly to indicate a few of

Dr. Jacob's conclusions, the more especially as our general accord

with them calls for little criticism. 'In the apostolic writings, the

word ἐκκλησία is never said of a _country_ or _nation_. It is always

the church in a city or town. Neither is it ever said to be the church

_of_ any given town, but always _in_ or _at_ the place.' 'Whenever the

Christians of a country or nation are spoken of collectively, the word

is always in the plural number, as "The churches of Galatia," &c. 'Hence

national churches, however justifiable and desirable in certain periods

of national life, are not divine nor apostolic institutions--their

propriety rests altogether on the ground of general expediency and

public advantage; and to attempt to furnish them with a higher

sanction by arguments drawn from the theocratic government of the

Jewish people seems to me to savour but little of sound reasoning, and

to confound together some of the distinctive characteristics of two

widely different dispensations.' 'Neither is the word ever applied to

a _building_ or a _place of worship_,' 'nor does it ever mean

Christian ministers as distinguished from the general body of

Christians.' The Catholic Church in its visible form includes any

number of Christian societies, which, as far as human authority is

concerned, are independent of each other.'

'The Episcopate, in the modern acceptation of the term, and as a distinct

clerical order, does not appear in the New Testament, but was gradually

introduced and extended throughout the Church at a later period.'

'Timothy at Ephesus, and Titus in Crete, are never called "bishops,"

or any other name which might indicate a special order or ecclesiastical

office; their commission was evidently an exceptional and temporary

charge, to meet some peculiar wants in those places during the

necessary absence of St. Paul.' 'There is evidence of the most

satisfactory kind, because unintentional, to the effect that Episcopacy

was established in different churches _after the decease_ of the

apostles who founded them, and at different times.' 'The custom of the

Church, rather than any ordinance of the Lord, made bishops greater

than the rest.' Dr. Jacob attributes the idea of a priesthood in the

Christian Church to the combined leaven of Jewish and of Pagan

influences; and in this he differs from Professor Lightfoot, who

attributes it exclusively to Pagan influence. 'Tertullian is the first

Christian author by whom the Church ministry is directly asserted to

be a priesthood.' Dr. Jacob undertakes to prove the proposition--'That,

according to Scripture truth, the _Christian ministry is not a

priesthood_, and Christian ministers are not _priests_, are not

invested with any sacerdotal powers, and have no sacerdotal functions

to perform.' The proof is wrought out in detail, with great amplitude

of evidence, acuteness of argument, and to an irresistible conclusion.

We should deal unfairly with it were we to attempt either citation or

summary. The points of the argument are: 1. That the Christian Church

was moulded upon the form of the synagogue, which had no altar; and

not upon that of the temple, which had no pulpit. 2. The equality of

privilege or standing-ground in Christ which Christians of all orders

or degrees possessed. 3. The position and argument of the Epistle to

the Hebrews. 4. The remarkable _omissions_ concerning a priesthood of

the New Testament, which Dr. Jacob contends is '_an insuperable bar_

to all sacerdotal assumptions, inasmuch as a positive and express

appointment of divine authority is imperative.' A further argument is

derived from the nature of New Testament ordination, which is fully

discussed, and shown to confer, not _power_, but authority _quoad

hoc_. 'Authority it gives according to the order and constitution of

each church, but no other power than was possessed before, or

afterwards, by whatever means obtained.' 'Those, therefore, amongst

ourselves who contend that spiritual power is given by the act of

ordaining, if they are not merely misunderstanding the word and using

it in a sense which does not belong to it, are brought to the

assumption, that it is not a power producing effects which are seen

and felt in the hearts and lives of men, but one much more secret and

unappreciable in its working;--the power, as it is alleged, of

conferring divine grace through the sacraments, thus making the effect

of the sacraments to depend upon something in the administrator,

instead of the ordinance of Christ.'

'The authority to appoint Church officers was inherent in every duly

constituted church, as the natural right of a lawful and well

organized society.' Hence presbyters were competent to ordain, which

Hooker also admits ('Eccl. Pol.,' vii. 14). 'The government and

ordinations of Presbyterian churches are just as valid, Scriptural,

and apostolic, as our own.' 'A priest, indeed, whose office is to

stand between God and man must be specially called by God; but a

pastor and teacher and administrator of sacred things in a

congregation of Christian men who have access to God through the

priesthood of Jesus Christ, whatever inward call he may require, needs

no other outward appointment to his office than the authority of the

church in which he ministers.' 'Neither apostle nor presbyter in the

primitive church, so far as we know, pronounced absolution upon those

who had confessed their sins for the purpose of conveying to them a

grace from God, which otherwise they would not have had; nor is there

anything in the New Testament to show that the declaration of God's

forgiveness has any greater efficacy from the mouth of an ordained

presbyter, than from that of any ordinary Christian.' 'The clergy, not

being a priestly caste, or a mediating, sacrificing, absolving order,

but Church officers appointed for the maintenance of due religious

solemnity, the devout exercise of Christian worship, the instruction

of the people in Divine truth, and their general edification in

righteous living, are the acting representatives of the church to

which they belong, and derive their ministerial authority from it.'

'The Christian ministry was requisite, not on account of any spiritual

functions which could not otherwise have been lawfully discharged; but

for the sake of the solemnity and regularity which are essential in a

religious and permanent society. There was no spiritual act which in

itself was of such a nature that it might not have been done by every

individual Christian.' Hence Dr. Jacob concludes that neither of the

sacraments demand imperatively the administration of a minister. 'As

at the Jewish Passover any person might preside, usually the master of

the house--this was probably the case in the earliest times in the

Christian Church.' At the celebration of the Eucharist, 'Church

members,' moreover, 'might depose their presbyters.' 'It is evident

from the New Testament that questions of dogmatic theology are to be

considered by lay members of the church, as well as by the clergy; and

that no Christian man is to resign his reason or apprehensions of

religious truth, any more than his conscience, to the judgment of his

pastor.' When ministers teach false doctrine 'it would necessarily be

the duty of every Christian to refuse their teaching.' 'In the

apostolic age, and during the time when Christian worshippers met in

private rooms, or in edifices of a simple style, there was no

distinction made between different portions of the building, men and

women were not separated in the congregation; neither was any form of

consecration then used, or any particular sanctity or reverence

attached to the place. The sanctity was in the worshippers who met

together in the Saviour's name, and the reverence was given to His

spiritual presence, which had been promised to those who should be

thus assembled.' 'The consecration of churches with formal

solemnities, which were supposed to impart a sacredness to the place

and building, does not appear until the fourth century.' 'As no forms

of prayer of apostolic authority are given in the sacred record, nor

any command from the apostles as to the use or non-use of such forms,

this is an open question to be decided by every church for itself;

each church having a full right to act according to its discretion and

deliberate judgment; but no right at all to condemn or disparage the

opposite practice which another Christian community may prefer.' 'I

think it is perfectly certain that in the earliest period of the

apostolic age a fixed and prescribed liturgy could not have been

used.' 'All the evidence directly deducible from the New Testament is

against the use of such formularies in the apostolic age.' 'This, very

briefly expressed, is the sum and substance of the contemporary

patristic testimony; and it points us conclusively to the third and

fourth centuries, and not to the apostolic age for the distinct

appearance and growth to maturity of formal liturgies in Christian

churches.' 'There is in the New Testament no trace whatever of any one

of the annual days of hallowed commemoration which are now celebrated

in Christian churches.' Equally decisive are Dr. Jacob's arguments and

conclusions against anything like sacramental grace in the ordinances

of Baptism and the Lord's Supper. 'There is not the slightest

intimation that the validity of the Sacrament (of the Lord's Supper)

depended upon any ministerial power or act, or that any Christian

minister had the power of conferring sacramental grace through his

administration of it.' 'There is not the slightest intimation that

any change whatever was effected in the bread and wine, or that any

power or virtue, natural or supernatural, was infused into them. They

are not even said to be "consecrated," but only to have a blessing or

thanksgiving offered over them. There is not the slightest intimation

that our Lord Jesus Christ is in any sense present _in_, or _in

conjunction with_ the consecrated elements; or that His presence in

the believer's heart at this service is different in kind from His

presence in him at prayer, or in any other spiritual communion.'

The conclusions which Dr. Jacob has reached are those which every

severe and impartial historical student must come to--which any legal

testing of evidence must necessarily compel. They have our hearty

concurrence. Dr. Jacob, as we have said, is, by conviction and

preference, an Episcopalian; our convictions and preferences induce us

to reject Episcopacy as having been almost uniformily and inevitably

inimical to the freedom and spirituality of the Church. On some minor

points, moreover, which are not important enough for remark here, we

differ from his conclusions; but as a _vade mecum_ of the

Ecclesiastical Polity of the New Testament we are well contented to

accept his book--we know of none, indeed, comparable with it; and we

cordially commend it, not only to the Anglicans, Evangelicals, and

Broad Churchmen of his own ecclesiastical body, with a strong desire

to know what replies they will give to it, but we recommend it to all

Congregational and Presbyterian ministers, as equally full of learned

fidelity to truth, of just recognitions of the liberty wherewith

Christ has made us free, and of broad, loving charities, which alone

can secure, and which are sufficient to secure, the unity of the

Church of God.

Sir Philip Perring's book is of a very different character--loose,

garrulous, and impetuous; but yet it contains many good things. It is

the production of one of those men of restless ingenuity--not

unfrequently found in all Churches--whose impulses are good, whose

intentions are true, whose utterance is fearless, but who yet want the

closeness, self-control, and exact logic which give opinions their

just influence. The book is a hotchpotch, made up of papers on

miscellaneous subjects--an 'Address to Conformists and to

Nonconformists,' on their respective faults and differences; 'A Hint

to Bishops,' urging them to call a council, and agree with their

Nonconformist brethren; 'Regulations of Public Worship,' advocating

liberty for Congregational gifts; 'Expenses of Public Worship,'

condemning pew rents and the offertory alike, and advocating

occasional collections; 'Episcopal Ordination;' 'Non-Episcopal

Ordination,' condemning the dogma of apostolical succession; 'The

Baptismal Service,' 'Everlasting Damnation,' 'Biblical Revision,'

'Passages in the Gospels revised,' 'Gospel accounts of the

Resurrection harmonized,' 'Silver Filings,'--a Collection of Aphorisms

and Sentences. Nonconformists have but little reason to complain of

Sir Philip's volume; his chief adjurations are directed against his

own Church, and he denounces in it assumptions, errors, and abuses

which have been the _raison d'être_ of Nonconformity. We are not let

off without rebuke; but our sins are light in comparison. On some

points we plead guilty. Nonconformity is, no doubt, amenable to the

reproach of undue sectarianism and unnecessary division. We are too

prone to party shibboleths; it is the characteristic sin which our

necessary nonconformity has generated. The evils which Sir P. Perring

rebukes, however, some of which he exaggerates, are evils of human

nature, not of Nonconformity as such. By God's grace we trust to amend

them. He is in error, however, when he says 'we wage a continual

warfare for participation in endowments,' to a fair share of which he

is just enough to say we are entitled. We may forgive a State

Churchman for failing to understand that we really have a strong

objection to endowments, and should deem them a spiritual injury to

our Churches; and yet, if he would look at Nonconformist history,

especially at the history of Regium Donum, he might be assured of the

fact. Our contention is not for a share of endowments; but that

endowments of one particular Church or of any number of Churches, out

of the property of the entire nation should, as an essential injustice

and as practically a prolific source of mischief, altogether cease. We

object to national endowments for religion _per se_, whoever may

participate in them, as being necessarily inequitable and inexpedient;

neither can we see the religious right or wisdom of acquiescing in the

wrong which the Established Church is doing. We are under religious

obligations to put an end to all wrong done to ourselves and others.

We do not interfere with the Episcopal Church as such--we concede to

it all the liberty we claim ourselves; we object to the National

Establishment as a wrong to all Nonconformists--that is, to one half

of the nation; and as citizens, we feel that we have the civil right,

and are under religious obligations to seek at the hands of the

Legislature the redress of this wrong. Can Sir P. Perring understand

the difference between finding fault with others, and seeking to

emancipate ourselves? Righteousness must come before peace is

possible, and it is consistent with the highest religiousness and the

most perfect charity to seek it.

_Ante-Nicene Christian Library_:--

_Translations of the Writings of the Fathers down to_ A.D. 325. Edited

by Rev. ALEXANDER ROBERTS, D.D., and JAMES DONALDSON, D.D.

_Vol. XIX. The Seven Books of Arnobius adversus Gentes._ Translated

by A. H. BRYCE, LL.D., D.C.L., and HUGH CAMPBELL, M.A.

_Vol. XX. The Works of Gregory Thaumaturgus, Dionysius of

Alexandria, and Archelaus._ Translated by Rev. S. D. F. SALMOND, M.A.

And _Syriac Documents, attributed to the First Three Centuries_.

Translated by Rev. B. P. PRATTEN, B.A. Edinburgh: T. and T. Clark.

The editors of this valuable series of translations are resolved to

furnish the English reader with nearly all the Christian literature

of the first three centuries. The volumes before us are singularly

important. The celebrated books of Arnobius _adversus Gentes_ reflect

the intense antagonism which the _monstra horrendaque_ of heathenism

had excited in pure-minded and thoughtful men. There is exceedingly

little of the peculiar form of Ante-Nicene Christianity to be gleaned

from this _apologia_; there is hardly a reference either to the Old

Testament or the New, or to any distinctively Christian doctrine, but

there is the most elaborate impeachment of the popular faith. The

incredible obscenity of the mythology of Greece and Rome is drawn out

in revolting detail, and is the sufficient reply to the maddened

hostility of heathen persecutors of Christians. Arnobius repudiated

the allegorical interpretation which had been put by philosophers upon

popular legend as a flimsy expedient to condone intolerable impurity,

and he drags out the sensuous earthworm, slime and all, into the

light. The same spirit of uncompromising detestation of the impurities

of heathenism that is conspicuous in the 'Apology' of Tertullian and

the 'Octavius' of Minucius Felix pervades this treatise, which yet, by

its philosophical arrangement and fulness of detail, has gained for

Arnobius the reputation of being the Christian Varro.

The translations of the genuine and spurious works of Gregory

Thaumaturgus are executed with great care, and contain the panegyric

on Origen, as well as the _metaphrase of Ecclesiastes_. One of the

most interesting things in the volume is the 'Disputation between

Bishop Archelaus and Manes,' which, for its picturesque surroundings,

and for the insight it gives into the activity and intensity of the

Manichæan faith, and the mode in which this great heresiarch was met

by the early Christians, is of immense value. The translations of the

Syriac documents, though acknowledged to have been done with Dr.

Cureton's translations open before the editor, are claimed by him as

an independent translation. The extent of these obligations are

differently estimated by Mr. Pratten and some of his critics; at all

events, they are a valuable addition to the series of the 'Ante-Nicene

Library.'

_The Story of Hare Court._ Being the History of an Independent Church.

By JOHN B. MARSH; with an introduction by the Rev. A. RALEIGH, D.D.

Strahan and Co.

This is an admirable specimen of a class of books that we should like

to see greatly multiplied. The history of many a Nonconforming Church

would be the best defence of its existence, and the best evidence of

its vitality. The Hare Court Church dates from the Commonwealth, some

of the illustrious names of which were connected with it, and with its

first pastor, George Cokayne, notably Sir Bulstrode Whitelocke, Lord

Mayor Tichborne, ancestor of the family just now attracting so much

notoriety--who also signed the death-warrant of Charles I., and Lord

Mayor Ireton, brother of Cromwell's famous Colonel. The Communion

plate now in use by the Church at Canonbury was presented by Sir

Bulstrode Whitelocke and Sir Robert Tichborne. Cokayne was also a

friend of Milton and of Bunyan, who died in the house of Mr. John

Strudwicke, one of Mr. Cokayne's deacons. The church has a great

history, and both in the distinction of its present honoured pastor

and in the noble achievements of the church itself it will perpetuate

its honourable traditions.

_The Moabite Stone; a fac-simile of the Original Inscription, with an

English Translation, and an Historical and Critical Commentary._

Second Edition, Revised and Enlarged, with a Map of the Land of Moab.

By CHRISTIAN D. GINSBURG, LL.D. Reeves and Turner.

The discovery and interpretation of the Moabite stone equal, and in

some respects surpass in importance and interest, those of the

celebrated Rosetta stone; these thirty-four lines, which have been

exposed to the chances of Bedouin ignorance and way-side accident for

nearly as many centuries, throw unexpected light upon both the history

and language of the Old Testament. The relations of Moab and Israel

were very intimate, and the Biblical records of these are very

perplexing. Thus we find David, who was of Moabite descent, and whose

parents had been sheltered by the king of Moab, for some inscrutable

reason, waging a bloody war against this hospitable monarch, and

slaughtering two-thirds of his subjects. It has been assumed that for

nearly a century the Moabites were tributory to the Israelites, but

the Moabite inscription implies that they had during this period

thrown off the yoke, and were conquered again by Omri. Dr. Ginsburg

thinks that Solomon granted their liberty, as there are several

indications of his friendly feeling. The inscription is a record of

the successful attempt of Mesha, king of Moab, circa B.C. 936, to

reconquer the territory and rebuild the cities anciently subjugated by

the Israelites, 2 Kings iii.; these they retained for upwards of a

century and a half, until in the time of Ahaz the 'burden of Moab' was

pronounced by Isaiah. (Isaiah xv., xvi.) Mesha, this triumphal tablet

tells us, made Dijon his fortified capital, and erected this memorial

in it. He took from Nebo 'the vessels of Jehovah' and dedicated them

to Chemosh, giving the important and entirely novel information that

the Jews had a house for the worship of Jehovah in Nebo, beyond

Jordan. The mention of the name of Jehovah on this tablet is

remarkable, implying that at that time it was commonly pronounced by

the Israelites--that is, the sacred Tetragrammaton had not then ceased

to be used. This superstition, Dr. Ginsburg thinks, was introduced by

the Alexandrine Jews.

The linguistical interest of the stone consists in the fact that it is

the only pre-Maccabean original written in a language almost identical

with the Biblical Hebrew. It is older than two-thirds of the Old

Testament. Its bearings on the Masoretic text, therefore, are

profoundly important and interesting; these Dr. Ginsburg discusses.

The important fact emerges that the Hebrew words were divided by

points, and the verses by vertical strokes. A system of original

punctuation is thus virtually demonstrated, confirming the Masoretic

division. The palæographical importance of the Moabite stone is

equally great. It is, by a century and a half, the oldest alphabet of

its character that we possess; it is three centuries older than our

most ancient inscription, the sarcophagus of Eshmunazar. The

characters are the so-called Phoenician, from which the Greek,

Roman, and other European alphabets are derived. We have thus 'the

veritable prototype of modern writings,' for all the twenty-two

letters are here. All these points Dr. Ginsburg evolves and elucidates

with great scholarship and ingenuity. He narrates fully the history of

the discovery of this remarkable monument by the Rev. F. Klein; of the

foolish and fussy, and, as it proved, disastrous jealousy and

selfishness of the French Consul, M. Clermont-Gonneau, and of its

destruction by the Bedouins. The volume is one of almost romantic

interest. Dr. Ginsburg has wisely written for the comprehension of

even unlearned readers. His volume supplies not only a fac-simile of

the stone, the various translations of it already made, but a full

exposition of its manifold significance. It is a wonderful

corroboration of Old Testament authority.

_Palestine: its Holy Sites and Sacred Story._ By JOHN TILLOTSON. Ward,

Lock, and Tyler. 1871.

The history of the Jews, in the form in which we have it in the Old

St. Clair Testament, is a medley. The absence of chronological

arrangement in the books, the positive inversion of the order of

events within the limits of the same book--sometimes the brief account

of some reigns, the interruption of the story by long episodes, the

want of any means of correlating the prophets with the monarchs in

whose reigns they prophesy, combine to confuse the reader; and in

addition to this, the history is absent altogether for the 400 years

immediately before Christ. As a consequence, the Bible history is but

little studied by young people, and for a hundred lads who can readily

run through the list of sovereigns from Egbert to Victoria, or Clovis

to Napoleon, there is hardly one who can distinctly enumerate the

succession of the kings of Israel and Judah. The Bible history seems

far off and shadowy, and needs to be made near and real; it is passed

over for lighter literature, and needs to be invested with the charms

of a story; Palestine geography is neglected, while its relations with

the sacred story are close and living, and a graphic description of

the physical features of the country should always accompany an

account of the events which occurred in it. In those parts where the

Biblical narrative is detailed and connected through a few

chapters--as in the history of the patriarchs, or that of David and

Solomon, of Elijah and Elisha--it _is_ read with interest by the

young; so that if we give continuity to the entire account, we may

expect to create interest in the entire book. We are therefore

indebted to those who reduce the elements to order, and present us

with a connected history of Palestine, like the history of any other

country, as Dean Stanley has done in his 'Lectures on the Jewish

Church,' and Milman in his 'History of the Jews.' Those works,

however, are learned and expensive, and Stanley's book still wants the

concluding volume; so that a cheap popular history for young people

was a desideratum. The author of the present volume has long held a

position in general literature, and in this history of Palestine, as

well as in the Bible Dictionary which preceded it, he shows so much

knowledge of Biblical matters, and so much talent in dealing with

them, that his death, which took place before a copy of this book

could be placed in his hands, will be much regretted by many. In the

preparation of his book he has no doubt availed himself of the labours

of his predecessors; though at the same time he has put himself into

his work, and his fine, healthy, genial, and sympathising spirit is

exhibited in every chapter. In critical and scientific matters many

will disagree from some of his conclusions, as, for instance, when he

accepts Ussher's chronology, places Job earlier than Abraham, makes

the bed of the Dead Sea the site of Sodom, attributes Ecclesiastes to

Solomon, and ignores a deutero-Isaiah. It is better, perhaps, that

these questions should not all be discussed--nor without discussion be

decided adversely to common belief--in a book intended for young

people: else the author here and there shows his capacity to weigh the

evidence on both sides of a disputed matter. For the same reason, it

is well, perhaps, that while the natural and human sides of marvellous

events are made prominent, the question of the supernatural is not

formally discussed, but the very language of the Old Testament is

often quoted and left to make its own impression. In addition to the

Old Testament, the writer makes considerable use of Josephus, and

sometimes borrows from tradition, though more sparingly than does

Stanley. His style is more simple than Stanley's, his language more

homely; he writes in the present tense, and so gives the events a

dramatic interest; he makes old acts and practices understood by

running references to that which is analogous in modern society, and

finishes a portrait or a description with an apt quotation or proverb.

In historical parallels and allusions, the book abounds. For instance,

with reference to Abram's position in idolatrous Chaldæa, when John

Knox, bound as a galley slave, was wearily tugging at the oar in

French waters, he is said to have seized on a wooden image of the

Virgin. 'This a mother of God!' quoth he, 'she is fitter for swimming

than for being worshipped;' and so he flung her into the river. Abram

was more discreet. One day, when his father was away from the

_atelier_, he took a strong hammer and knocked half the idols to

pieces. When Terah returned and inquired the cause, Abram told him the

gods had fallen to fighting as to which was the greatest, and in the

battle had reduced themselves to the sight he saw; Terah, who would

not give up his faith in their vitality, was forced to silence (p.

14). With regard to Israel's passage of the Red Sea, at low tide the

sea may be forded at Suez, as Napoleon and his officers forded it on

horseback; yet the tide comes in with a mighty flood, such as

well-nigh overwhelmed Napoleon and his officers when re-crossing to

Suez (p. 52). When Saul took a yoke of oxen and hewed them in pieces

and sent them throughout all the coasts of Israel by the hands of

messengers, saying, 'Whosoever cometh not forth after Saul and after

Samuel, so shall it be done unto his oxen!' the challenge spread, with

extraordinary rapidity from family to family, from tribe to tribe.

Like the fiery cross of the old Highlanders, the signs were borne

along, and the people responded with one consent:--

'Fast as the fatal symbol flies,

In arms the huts and hamlets rise;

From winding glen, from upland brown,

Then poured each hardy tenant down:

Nor slacked the messenger his pace--

He showed the sign, he named the place;

And pressing forward like the wind,

Left clamour and surprise behind.' (P. 110.)

We trust that the author will succeed in his object of awakening a

deeper interest in the holy sites and sacred story of Palestine, and

in quickening a desire to know more about both.

_On a fresh Revision of the English New Testament._ By J. D.

LIGHTFOOT, D.D., Canon of St. Paul's, and Hulsean Professor of

Divinity, Cambridge. Macmillan and Co. 1871.

The substance of this work was read by Dr. Lightfoot to a clerical

meeting before the Revision Committee had held its first session. The

publication of the volume will do good service. The author introduces

his discussion by a clear _résumé_ of the circumstances which led to

Jerome's revision of the Latin Bible, and he then recounts the

difficulties and suspicions that were engendered by the proposals

which issued in the production of the authorized English version. It

is curious to find that the criticisms and fears which disturb good

people in the end of the nineteenth century are almost identical with

those which greeted the translators of the seventeenth century. Dr.

Lightfoot vindicates 'the necessity for a fresh revision of the

authorized version.' Though he here traverses ground which has often

been canvassed, the argument has never been more strongly or more

adequately presented. It consists of a careful and condensed

exposition, first of the textual defects and 'false readings' of the

English version; it goes on to enumerate the 'artificial distinctions

created' by an arbitrary variety of translation of the same Greek

words, and the 'real distinctions obliterated' by the reverse process

of using the same English word as the representative of several

different Greek words. Our author accumulates further proof of the

fact that many of the niceties of Greek grammar were not known to our

translators, that they were foggy in the extreme as to the use of the

definite article and the aorist tense, as well as to the fundamental

modifications effected in the meaning of verbs by the 'voice' in which

they are used. He is particularly happy in showing the inconsistency,

confusion, and utter lack of definite principle on which 'proper

names' are introduced into the English New Testament, and in this and

other ways shows that the time is come for a thorough revision of

blunders which often conceal truth and beauty, and interfere with the

vivid impression which the words of Jesus and his apostles ought to

produce upon the English reader. The chief and only criticism we feel

disposed to express is, that in many scores of places Dr. Lightfoot

indicates the obvious blunder of the English version, but does not

show us how he would find a remedy. Dr. Lightfoot argues that there

need be no violation whatever of this 'well of English undefiled;'

that in the matter of Greek scholarship we are never likely to have a

larger body of men competent to execute the work, and to criticise it

when done; and that a revised translation will not now be exposed to

the affectations and Latinisms that might possibly have disturbed such

a work as this at the commencement of the present century. Our author

speaks, moreover, with grateful satisfaction of the fine spirit which

has been expressed and consecrated by the actual co-operation of the

revisers.