ambassadors of Jesus Christ, that they uttered words of such blessed and comprehensive import. Every minister of Jesus Christ, however obscure his position or humble his sphere, is commissioned to preach the same gospel which the apostles preached, and to feed the church with the same hopes and promises. There is no official prerogative, apart from their extraordinary apostolic powers as inspired teachers of truth, which he does not possess.

But while the power to pronounce these salutations and benedictions in their full original sense, is to be conceded to every ordained minister of Jesus Christ, the people should be carefully instructed in regard to the nature of this service, and its position in the ordinances and worship of God's house. They should be cautioned against attaching to it any mysterious virtue or efficacy, as though the minister who pronounces it has power to forgive sin, or bestow blessings. It should be well understood that no new or special spiritual gift is communicated by this ministerial act, but that it is the reiterated declaration of a truth as old as the Christian religion itself; that the grace of Jesus Christ is with his people, in accordance with the express provisions of his everlasting love, ratified by his death on the cross, and that it will ever abide with them in this world and in that which is to come. The congregation should be explicitly taught that, although the language of these formulas embraces all who are within sound of the minister's voice, inasmuch as it is not his prerogative to withhold the riches of the gospel of grace from any who wait upon his ministration, yet the blessing contained therein belongs to and rests upon those only who are true believers, and even upon such has little vitality and force, unless they are in the lively exercise of faith to discern its full and gracious import.

It is to be feared that there is in all our congregations much misapprehension in regard to the nature and import of the benediction. The people stand in reverential attitude during the pronouncement of this simple and sublime formula. There is danger, however, of their coming to regard themselves as the passive recipients of a blessing, in

reference to which their only duty is to assume a befitting posture. This may not be true of all. Some, doubtless, have such enlightened views, as to attach to this part of divine service no vital saving power, only as it rests upon those who by faith in Jesus Christ appropriate it to themselves, as a pledge and earnest of God's unchanging love. But such is the natural tendency to rely upon forms and observances, and to substitute them for the living faith of the gospel, that no doubt with many the benediction is regarded as the actual conferral of a blessing, irrespective of that spirituality of mind in the recipient necessary to make it such.

It has always seemed to us eminently befitting the relation which subsists between the minister and people, the one as God's ambassador, the other as a congregation gathered together to listen to the divine message, that public worship should be commenced with a salutation, not necessarily in a form composed in Old Testament language, but sometimes in that employed by Paul, "grace be unto you and peace from God the Father and the Lord Jesus Christ." This solemn and affectionate announcement that the favor of God rests ever upon the congregation of his saints, would constitute a fitting introduction to the services of the sanctuary, and confirm the faith and animate the hopes of those who "wait upon the Lord," and seek in the ordinances of his house to renew their spiritual strength. A beautiful correspondence also would then be maintained between the commencement and close of public worship, and due prominence would be given to the great and comforting truth of the superabounding grace of God bestowed upon his people.

But whatever position may be assigned them in public worship, let not these salutations and benedictions be regarded, on the one hand, as possessing some mysterious, indefinable power, when pronounced by priestly lips, so that a blessing is communicated to the whole congregation irrespective of personal faith in Christ, nor, on the other hand, as merely expressive of a wish or prayerful desire for the bestowal of the divine favor upon those in whose hear

ing they are pronounced. Let them rather be regarded as declarative of the great and fundamental fact of the gospel, that the grace of Christ abides with all his saints according to his promise, when about to lay down his life to bring in eternal redemption from sin and death.

ARTICLE III.

WEDGWOOD ON ENGLISH ETYMOLOGY.1

BY EUGENE SCHUYLER, PH D., NEW HAVEN, CONN.

PHILOLOGY, Or the science of language, is almost wholly the growth of the last fifty years; and in that time it has made rapid progress. Nearly all the known languages have been to some extent explored, and their sources and mutual relations pointed out. But philosophical research into the English language, by English scholars, has not kept pace with the advance in other directions. There has been produced no good and reliable work on English etymology, — not from lack of a rich field to work in, but from the incompetency of the laborers. Skinner and Junius lived before language was scientifically studied, and their works have been long out of date. Richardson and Webster, though still in use, are too inaccurate and incomplete to be of much service. They not only lacked the results worked out by investigators in other languages to aid their own researches, but they were both deficient in the genius and the capacities suitable for such studies. While Germany has become a nation of scholars, the age of English scholarship, even in the classics, seems to be past. The student of English has therefore

1 A Dictionary of English Etymology. By Hensleigh Wedgwood, M. A., late Fellow of Chr. Coll. Cam. Vol. I. (A-D.) 8vo. pp. xiv. 507. London: Trübner & Co. 1859.

The same; with Notes and Additions by George P. Marsh. 4to. pp. 247. New York: Sheldon & Co.

1862.

66

been forced to have recourse to the labors of foreign scholars in foreign languages, and draw what assistance he could from those sources. With regard to the Latin side of the language, Diez has covered most of the ground in his " Etymological Dictionary of the Romanic Languages; "1 while Grimm 2 and Diefenbach are authorities for the Teutonic and Celtic elements.

When, therefore, a new attempt in this line was announced by Mr. Wedgwood, under the auspices of the Philological Society of London, it was thought that the great want was about to be supplied. But on a careful examination of the work, we are obliged to say that the want is as great as ever, and that we must still wait, until some English scholar arises fully competent to perform the work.

A good etymological dictionary should be complete, scientific, and accurate. It should be complete in two respects. Not only should it contain all the words in the language, but all that is known about each word should be set forth. When a derivation is not certainly known, there should be a digest of the leading opinions on the word. All the cognate words, too, should be given, so that we may have before us all the steps necessary in ascending to its source.

A scientific treatment demands method; and a method based on true critical principles. No play should be allowed to mere fancy; but there should be a strict adherence to a fixed system in every part. About the word in question all the related words should be grouped, and arranged historically; going "upward through the ages," that we may clearly see its development, and know just when and how it came into our language. Thus, in treating a word of Latin origin, the forms in all the Romanic languages should be given, showing through which it came to us that parent

1 Friedrich Diez, Etymologisches Wörterbuch der Romanischen Sprachen. Bonn. 1853. 2d ed. 1861-62.

2 Deutsches Wörterbuch von Jacob Grimm und Wilhelm Grimm. Leipzig. 1852, ff. Deutsche Grammatik von Jacob Grimm. Göttingen, 1822–40.

* Lorenz Diefenbach, Vergleichendes Wörterbuch der Gothischen Sprache. Frankfurt am Main. 1851.

Celtica. Stuttgart. 1839.

word should then be deduced from the Latin, and that compared with its cognates, perhaps in the Greek or Sanskrit, or its root compared with others in different classes of the same family. An unhistorical method is not really scientific; and, although it may sometimes be of advantage to compare resemblances of words in languages widely separated, yet, at the same time, the investigator is apt to be led away by mere similarities of external form, and to reach conclusions which the history of the word would at once overthrow. Every change which a word undergoes, in its growth from the root to the present form, may have an effect upon the meaning; and it is by presenting all these in their proper order that the exact signification is to be made out.

It is of course necessary to a scientific method that there be accuracy and exactness. Known facts and mere surmises must be kept distinct. The facts in the history and development of a word should be stated just as they are, and with no attempt either to draw inferences from them, or to make them square with any preconceived theory.

The science of language is now beyond the empirical stage to which ingenious hypotheses are appropriate. Facts are no longer to be explained by any arbitrary principle obtained independently of them. The object is now to obtain all the facts; when we have these, we may endeavor to see in what manner they can be explained. The theory must grow up from the facts. But it will not do to found a theory on insufficient data; for the temptation is great, of moulding, to suit our previous notions, what is subsequently discovered. Nor is a dictionary the place for theorizing. If a lexicon is of any use at all, it is solely for the facts which it contains, unburdened by extrinsic matter. Another work should contain the conclusions which might be drawn from the data there given. What would be said of the botanist who should interweave with the description of a genus, arguments about the "origin of species" or the beginning of vegetable life? Dr. Webster may be taken as a striking example of an author working in this way. Starting with the idea that all languages came ultimately