Correspondence.

Correspondents will be good enough to send their names and addresses, not necessarily for publication, but for the purpose of guaranteeing the bona fide character of the correspondence. The Editor reserves the right to give the substance of letters briefly.

DOES THE ESTABLISHED CHURCH EMBRACE THE MAJORITY OF THE PEOPLE OF SCOTLAND? THE PARISH MINISTER'S LETTER. SIR,-You were kind enough in your June number to insert a letter from me on the above question, raised, not by me, but by the answer of Lord Advocate Gordon to an inquiry on the point by a member of Parliament. In your last, your July number, "a Parish Minister," in the way professedly of only supplementing my information in one particular, insinuates a general inaccuracy. This is somewhat hasty, and far from fair. He has not ventured to contradict any of the various important facts which were given, especially he has not controverted my general principle, that the actual enumeration of the Government Census in 1851 is the only sure and fair test of numbers, and till this is done mere estimates are of little or no value. All that he has done is to supply me with additional information as to the progress of Sabbath-school teaching and scholars in the Establishment during the last seventeen years—that is, since the Census. I did not doubt that she had made progress-I acknowledged it-only I could not tell the amount. It seems that in the period referred to she has nearly doubled the number of her Sabbath scholars, and has made greater relative progress therefore than the Free and United Presbyterian Churches, though they have made decided progress too in the same department in the same time. The insinuation is that she has made greater progress in all respects. She may have done so. She may have had greater room for advancement, and yet, after all, be far from embracing, as the Lord Advocate seemed to suppose, a majority of the people of Scotland. Judged of even by the numbers attending Sabbath schools, the Establishment, on the showing of the "Parish Minister," is far behind the joined numbers of the Free and United Presbyterian Churches. He claims for the Establishment 142,000; but the united numbers of the others are 203,586. (I take the most recent enumeration of the Free Church from the Free Church Almanac-viz. 128,586.) This is without counting other denominations. Do such numbers look like an Establishment majority?

But what I complain of is the concluding remark: "I will not enter on other particulars of the comparison, but would only say, Ex uno disce omnes." Why not enter upon others? What is the meaning of the adage but that proved incorrect in one the writer is incorrect in all? Why not show this? Where is the inaccuracy? I have said there is nothing in the state of denominations now to disturb their relative position in 1851, and he shows that the Establishment has made more rapid progress in the number of Sabbath scholars since then than the Free Church or the United Presbyterian. But does this create any serious disturbance? Sabbath schools are only one test of numbers and progress. There are various others to which I referred; as church building, Christian liberality, &c. One Church may have greater facility for one kind of Christian work than another. The Establishment, perhaps from the number of her parochial and other schools, may have superior facilities for Sabbath-school teaching, and yet it may be quite true, and I have no doubt is so, that taken as a whole the Churches relatively occupy the same position which they did in 1851.

But as I have already said, 'the only fair test of numbers is actual enumeration at church. I believe, when the time comes the country will be satisfied with nothing else. Even according to the estimates made up by the Census Commissioners for the non-reporting in 1851, the Establishment as compared with all other denominations was in a very decided minority, with all the unfair help of the estimate; giving the non-reported the average of the reported, her numbers were but 351,454 against 592,497.-I am, &c.,

Reviews of Books.

L.

Biblical Commentary on the Old Testament. By Keil and Delitzsch. The Twelve Minor Prophets. By C. F. Keil. Translated from the German by the Rev. James Martin, B.A., Nottingham. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark.

NEXT to the Commentaries of Delitzsch on Job and Isaiah, this is the most important part yet issued of the series of Biblical Commentaries by Keil and Delitzsch. To be sure, anything done by Keil can never be so valuable as what is done by his coadjutor in this series. But this Commentary on the Minor Prophets is well executed for Keil. The characteristics of this author are accuracy of information, fairness, considerable clearness of statement, and more than average soundness of belief; but also a certain want of depth and failure to appreciate the higher, particularly the poetical, sides of a writer's mind. Hence, when he takes to do with a fine thought, it is like one handling a brilliant insect, the burnish and the light come off in the process, and we receive from his fingers a blurred and darkened thing. Rough sense, rather than delicate perception, marks his work. And thus, when he transfers the results of other thinkers to his Commentary, he leaves behind, in general, the fragrance and the colour of the original. His mind is one that moves among facts rather than truths-the things in hand rather than their universal or even their wider relations. What we mean will be best understood, if any one will compare his comments on Micah and Habakkuk with the monograms of Caspari and Delitzsch on the same prophets.

But, in spite of some drawbacks, his Commentary is not an unworthy contribution to the exposition of the Minor Prophets. To us in this country it must be very acceptable. We have, no doubt, worthy examples of exegesis in this department among ourselves. Even the Germans can find nothing finer or more learned than the Expositions of Pococke; and quite recently, Pusey has written beautifully, and with much unction, on these prophets. But Pococke lived two centuries ago, and thought, like nature, needs to renew her clothing; God's thoughts only being like Israel's garments in the wilderness, that waxed not old. And Pusey is too great a devotee to be a good critic. He has so much oil that it drowns the lamp. And the other side of a perfervid faith is not uncommonly a fanatical intolerance, and when Pusey meets an opponent, he oftener banns him from his presence than takes the pains to controvert his opinions. And consequently, however valuable homiletically, and for purposes of edification, his writings may be, they are critically almost worthless. But while no one would give the highest place as a critic to Keil, we may feel satisfied that neither his ecclesiastical position nor his type of mind will give any very decided bias to his critical conclusions; and his work is the first full and sustained interpretation of these prophets, if not written by an original critic, yet at least written under the full influence of the strongest critical currents which one has had an opportunity of reading in English.

To most English readers these prophets are full of obscurity, and consequently almost devoid of interest. This is due in some measure to the defects of our version, but chiefly to the characteristics of the books themselves, which no translation, without being a paraphrase, could obviate. Even in the original these books are dark. They are in such a degree condensed, and the allusions in them are so passing, and often to things not recorded in history, that even the learned interpreter, with all the aids of scholarship, is not seldom baffled in his pursuit of an assured meaning. But both the truths revealed by these prophets, and the forms into which they are cast, are so beautiful, that

and reverent study than has yet anywhere been given to them.

It would not be discreet in the pages of such a journal as this to enter into the criticism of passages. We must content ourselves with general reflections, and in order if possible to incite to the more minute study of these prophets, we will mention a few of the most important advantages which the close study of them offers.

1. They afford the first firm basis for the historical criticism of the Old Testament. They are the oldest compositions whose date is not contested. On all sides they are admitted to be historical, and their era is pretty well ascertained. They form a line of unbroken records from the ninth down to the end of the fifth century before Christ. Some difference of opinion may exist as to the exact order in which they lie one upon another. Thus Keil is inclined to put Obadiah lowest, a position which we should certainly claim for Joel. Certainly the two must be laid side by side, for the one throws out so many lines into the other that no different medium can have come between them. But the twelve form a series of distinct strata, whose age is ascertained and whose order is pretty nearly agreed upon. And with the exception of Zechariah, and, in the opinion of a very few, Obadiah, the strata are homogeneous, and not unnaturally interrupted by materials of another age. Now, here commences a very interesting investigation, to detect and reason on the remains of former eras imbedded in these strata, and if possible restore them, so far at least as to be able to identify or compare them with things existing. This is one of the most important problems in Old Testament criticism-How far the prophets were acquainted with the Pentateuch as we now have it; and how far they presuppose the history of Israel, not merely as it occurred, but as it is written for us in the early books of the Old Testament. Critics differ as to the results to be obtained from this investigation, but an inquiry cannot be regarded as uninteresting or useless because critics disagree on its

results.

2. Another very interesting use which these prophets serve is the restoration, to some extent, of contemporary life and history. The prophets were always men of their time, looking forward, it may be, to better days, but very firmly comprehending the tendencies of their

own.

Most of them were great statesmen, all of them great moralists, very sensitive to the slightest moral influence that touched them from any quarter in the State. No event or form of popular life could be without meaning to them. Hence they always reflect their age. Its main events, at least in their moral signification, can be found in their writings. And sometimes events that suited less the purpose of an annalist stood out very largely to the prophetic teacher, and things passed over in the history are not seldom set prominently in the prophecy. Prophecy often supplements history, and often reads it under new lights. Thus two prophets, Amos and Zechariah, both mention an earthquake in the days of Uzziah, unrecorded in history, though it was fearful enough to furnish time with a landmark, and to stand as a type of the terrors of the day of the Lord. And the latter prophet, in those weird, unnatural later chapters of his, which touch us like plaintive music falling on our drowsing ear, speaks of a "mourning of Hadadrimmon in the valley of Megiddo "-words that dull our sense like the taking of an opiate-referring perhaps to the death of Josiah, but possibly to some other woful event in those most mournful days. And throughout these prophets we meet with little pictures of national life and private manners, which are not only instructive but charming. Here is a picture of a people gathered together to supplicate the Lord for rain-one of Joel's most exquisite sketches: "Gather the people, sanctify the congregation, assemble the elders, gather the children, and those that suck the breasts; let the bridegroom go forth of his chamber, and the bride out of her closet; let the priests, the ministers of the Lord, weep, and let them say, Spare thy people, O Lord!" The induction of particulars and the grouping is not a whit ideal, but shows us the scene as it was. In the background the dark, indiscriminate, thick-wedged mass of heads-" the people." Further forward, where faces can be read, the awed, religious," sanctified" expression of the multitude. Where the mass is near enough to break into distinct groups, old men side by side with children, and women with infants in their arms, mute

row; and in front of all, the priests, the spokesmen of the people, weeping with uplifted hands. Joel's little prophecy is a gallery of such things, so finished and filled with truth, that Isaiah and the author of the Apocalypse, and all between, are not ashamed to copy them. Here, from the hand of a sterner moralist, Hosea, is a picture, done off in a single stroke, of a royal birthday in a dissolute and godless court: "In the day of our king the princes have made him sick with bottles of wine; he stretched out his hand with scorners." And there is something nearly comical in the account given by Amos of the assault made on him by the priest Amaziah-" Prophesy not again any more at Bethel, for it is a king's chapel." An evangelical cowfeeder in the High Church chapel royal! It would not do. For all that appears, the king himself, if not amused, was at least indifferent. But these prophets are full of such scenes. And as one gazing on a defaced monument finds the broken half-obliterated characters come out into relief and take shape under his eye, so studying those prophecies which seem flat and colourless with age, there rise up strange pictures of national joy or deep grief, or revelry or worship, and the life of the people goes in long and manifold procession past-as vivid and as exquisite as the casting on a hero's shield or the sepulchral reliefs around a monument. This is a vein which is almost unworked. Ewald has done a little in his History. But it needs a soberer explorer to bring out gold which the general mind will put its stamp upon.

3. Another advantage of these prophecies is that we have in small extent in them all that in more unwieldy form we find in the greater prophets and in the whole Old Testament. Each of them is complete. Not one of them is a fragment. Joel or Zephaniah or Habakkuk is a unity as rounded and full as the most perfect piece of the poet laureate. These prophecies were not spoken as we have them. The Book of Amos was written not less than two years after the time of his prophetic activity. And those periods of Joel, each of which sparkles like a gem, and whose whole style flows on like a stream-never sullen like Hosea's, but just deep enough to be broken on the surface into infinite angles of light-are certainly the work of a man versed in literature, and whose hand from much use has acquired that delicate movement to us so beautiful. These small prophecies are the resume of what was sometimes a long and most various life of prophetic work. It happened either that the prophet, reflecting in afterdays on his own activity, or having had its main meaning made clear to him during his time of public life, wrote down for the learning of the Church the prominent elements of the truth he uttered. And thus we have even in these prophecies, as in other Scriptures, what those had who heard them, a historical revelation, condensed of course, but in meaning and connection in no way different. The two things to be studied in prophecy are, the truths current among the prophets, and their method of using them. The truths and the method may both be set down in brief, in these words, in their order: sin, judgment, mercy. The two spheres where these forces work are the Jewish Church and the heathen world. And all prophecy is made up of various combinations of these three principles with these two spheres. Now, no simpler combination can be seen than that shown by Zephaniah. But there is hardly one of these minor prophets, where, starting with the circumstances of the prophet, the divine plan does not roll itself out to its consummation, even till "the kingdom is the Lord's." In these books, therefore, prophetic principles and prophetic method may be studied in fields containing all the elements, and not so vast as to bewilder or dishearten the inquirer.

4. Another use, and it shall be the last to be mentioned, which these prophets serve is to show such wonderful literary variety and furnish such exquisite exemplars of Hebrew style. In this view, and indeed in some others, the announcement of a "Commentary on the Minor Prophets" is almost amusing. These prophets run through a period of nearly five centuries. A commentary on the English poets, from Chaucer to Coleridge, would hardly have to embrace more inharmonious elements. These twelve writers have this only in common, that they are Hebrew prophets. Otherwise, they are so dissimilar that they cannot be slumped, or even classed. Each has a manner as distinct as a poet of our own. Each must be made a separate study. Each is a great master, though he has left behind him only a

single work, out of which his manner, and his aims, and himself, indeed, must be re-constructed. A slight familiarity with his work will not suffice for all this. We shall hardly look for it in anything entitled largely, "The Minor Prophets." Of course, Keil has not done very much to realize such a thing. But we are thankful for his work with its rougher, broader aim. Such hands as his will rough-hew the stone, and at last some more divinely sensitive fingers will shape it into that more delicate individual thing which we so much long

to see.

Though it is impossible to discuss here minute points of criticism, we should like to mention Keil's opinion on a few matters in these prophets which are subjects of dispute. He thinks the oldest of the twelve is Obadiah, whom he places in the reign of Joram, near the beginning of the ninth century, about twenty years before Joel,-agreeing in this with Hofmann and Delitzsch. He thinks that the marriages of Hosea with a "wife of whoredom," recorded in his first three chapters, were inward and not real transactions, though not mere parables invented by the prophet. His chief adversary here is Kurtz, who maintains the literality of the occurrences. He considers the "locusts" of Joel to be literal, and the four swarms to indicate mere generality or exhaustiveness, and that there is no reference, either in the plague or in the number, to the foes of Israel in the shape of a fourfold world-kingdom, Chaldæan, Persian, Greek, and Roman-a view, old and traditional, still upheld by Hengstenberg and the faithful Pusey, and said by Ewald to be, in the light of our present knowledge, every day more inexcusable. Further, he decides that the prophecy is broken into two by what he considers the historical passage, chap. ii. 18, “And the Lord was jealous for his land,” agreeing in this with Ewald again, and Meyer, and differing from many, and among them Bleek. Again, he maintains strongly the historical character of Jonah. Again, he regards the beautiful prophecy of the "Mountain of the Lord," common to Isaiah and Micah, to be original in Micah. And once more, he defends the unity of authorship of all the prophecies that pass under the name of Zechariah, differing in this from the vast majority of German critics, but having on his side De Wette in his latest editions, and the newest commentator on the "Post Exile Prophets," Dr. Koehler, who now sits in Bleek's chair in Bonn.

Analytical Commentary on the Epistle to the Romans, tracing the Train of Thought by the aid of Parallelism, with Notes and Dissertations on the Principal Difficulties connected with the Exposition of the Epistle. By John Forbes, LL.D., Edinburgh. Edinburgh, 1868. Pp. xvi., 479.

To Dr. Forbes belongs the praise of diligent and sustained study of Scripture, with much learning and acuteness, and with deep reverence for the teaching of the Holy Spirit in the Word. On the whole, we consider his exposition healthy in its tone. And yet we must add that there is in it a formality or mannerism to which he attributes a greatly exaggerated value; and also that there seems to be a confusion of ideas in his mind which has led him to argue in favour of some theological opinions from which we strongly dissent. We admire his kindliness and frankness in dealing with those from whom he differs, and therefore we have no hesitation in making this statement equally frankly, and with the wish to be no less kindly.

ment, let them accept the present arrangement as a mere tabulated form, convenient for marking the stages in the apostle's reasoning, and assisting the student to perceive the mutual relations of the various parts of the argument." Certainly we see no reason for his depriving chapters xv. and xvi. of the advantages of the "parallelistic lines." Nor do we know of any reason why the most carefully prepared speeches of modern orators might not also be printed in well balanced parallels, with some advantage to the reader over the confused form in which they appear in our ordinary Parliamentary reports. Nay, to do Dr. Forbes justice, in the case of this closely reasoned Epistle to the Romans, there are benefits derived from reading it in a "tabulated form, convenient for marking the stages in the apostle's reasoning," analogous to the benefits derived from using a copy of Euclid in which a separate line is given up to each successive step in the deduction. But, after all, his notes from the very beginning show how differently these parallelisms will be taken up and set forth by different minds; and in some cases at least, as in chapter v., his arrangements will generally be pronounced arbitrary and artificial.

In his notes on that fifth chapter, the difficult subject of Christ and Adam is treated carefully and learnedly; but we are not at all satisfied with the theological results. He seems to have a horror of the doctrine of imputation as taught generally by Calvinistic divines, even by one whom he esteems so highly as Dr. Hodge. And therefore, starting from his own position as a strict adherent to the theology of the Westminster Standards, he sets himself to restate the argument deduced from the apostle's language in this passage. In this attempt we fear we must say that he is unsuccessful. There are insuperable difficulties in the way of fully understanding what Scripture teaches on these high topics; but the advantage of our common theology is, that it manfully acknowledges this fact, and in doing so it really reduces these difficulties to a minimum. Dr. Forbes wishes to be in agreement with our Westminster theology; yet we must at least pronounce his language at times unhappy, and we must express our fears that his improvements and adjustments will not be found really in harmony with the old doctrine.

We do not dwell on the point that he holds the "all and the " many" "interested in Christ's salvation to be the same in extent as the "all" and the "many" involved in Adam's fall; according to him, in both cases it is all men without exception, and not “all Adam's natural on the one side and all Christ's spiritual seed on the other," according to the common view (pp. 193, 238, 240). He admits that this is true as to the fact or practical result; but he maintains that what the apostle here speaks of is, not "of what actually is or will be the case, but of what is freely offered to all." It seems to us that this exposition evacuates the meaning of the passage. And while he, of course, explicitly rejects the notion of universal salvation, we shall be glad to know that it is a mere slip of the pen (p. 132) which seems to teach universal redemption, when he says of the righteousness of God, "It has been manifested objectively to all men; and it is said to be (Rom. iii. 22) designed for all, but it is available for justification only to those who subjectively appropriate it;" certainly his disclaimer of it (p. 446) is accompanied with statements to which we take objection. Nor do we dwell upon his earlier analysis of that expression, "the righteousness of God," in which he wishes to comprehend the three ideas, righteousness in God, righteousness as justifying, and righteousness of life or sanctification. We are content to leave the sum of the controversy with ordinary Calvinistic divines as he himself has given it in pp. 141144.

But we think he is influenced by some unfortunate twist or bias when he speaks of Hodge's mode of stating the teaching of this passage about imputation, as giving

It is the opinion of Dr. Forbes that a very inadequate amount of attention has been given to the parallelisms which are characteristic of Scriptural writing; and he has sought to unfold this in a work which may be known to many of our readers, on the symmetrical structure of Scripture. Following in the footsteps of Bishop Jebb, he thinks that this has been too much connected with Hebrew poetry by the school of Lowth, whereas he holds that it pervades all Hebrew composition. | to the whole subject "a merely external, superficial Carrying out this principle, he has arranged almost the whole Epistle to the Romans in clauses, each having a line to itself, which gives the printing an appearance much like that of blank verse. It would be ungenerous to press a man very hard after he has spoken so modestly as Dr. Forbes (pp. 88-9), "Whether every part of this epistle which I have arranged in parallelisms has been designedly so composed by St. Paul, may admit of very reasonable doubt. . . . . . But if any still demur to the reality of parallelism existing in the New Testa

character. God is represented as acting in an arbitrary manner; imputing sin where there is as yet no real sinfulness, imputing righteousness where yet perhaps no immediate moral change takes place" (pp. 217, 218). Whether his own scheme is happier than the one which he thus represents must be left to the reader of pp. 236–7. "Such are the inconsistencies to which the imputationist theory seems necessarily to lead, by disjoining those things which are indissolubly joined together. It makes sin be entailed on all, not by a necessity of nature

showing us how "he that believeth shall not make haste." And when we look at the pressing necessities involved in the case, in the light which he throws upon it, we do not shrink from using his language, which to some of his hearers seemed too strong. Unspeakable and everlasting though the gain be to those thus enabled to confess the Saviour, and great too the blessing | of turning even one to righteousness, still this-the baptism of individuals among the pupils-is not the main work that the institutions are fitted to accomplish. The great purpose which they are fitted to accomplish is, as has been once and again explained, to prepare the way of the Lord, and make his paths straight. . . . . The great work of the institutions may be most powerfully progressing when there are few or no open professions of Christianity." To the lectures themselves we must refer in proof that this is a work pre-eminently suitable for us in Scotland to take up and to carry on; as well as for hints as to the way in which the scheme must be carried on and supplemented, if injustice is not to be done to it. Mr. Miller's most eager desire, in some sense more than for our contributions or even our prayers, is to have our intelligent interest in his work. "Therefore strive to understand this work. It is worth it."

An Address on Church Work in New Zealand. By the Rev. Peter Barclay, lately and for some years Minister of St. Paul's Church, Napier, New Zealand. Edinburgh: Thomas Nelson and Sons. 1868. Pp. 32.-A clear and satisfactory statement on the points which it touches. Mr. Barclay tells distinctly and pleasantly the things which he has himself observed, and which he wishes us to know. He loves and values his own Church most, but at the same time he appreciates the excellencies of others. This is pre-eminently an address for ministers, preachers, and students to read, before they make up their minds to go to New Zealand or to stay away from it. The Hymn Question. By a Layman. Edinburgh: 1868. Johnstone, Hunter, and Co. Pp. 32. This bears the subscription, " An Elder of the R. P. Church," and is obviously meant to follow up a discussion in last Reformed Presbyterian Synod. The writer states some of the common arguments in favour of a moderate use of hymns in the public worship of God; and he seems anxious for a calm and deliberate discussion of the question.

The Shepherd of Israel-The King's Daughter-The Cloud and the Sunshine, &c. By the Rev. Duncan Macgregor, M.A., St. Peter's, Dundee. Dundee: William Smith. The congregation to which M'Cheyne ministered are engaged in territorial missionary operations; and these tracts seem to be a series prepared by their present minister for purposes of district work. No doubt there are advantages in binding the congregation and the district together in this way; and the inherent worth of these little papers may recommend them more widely. The subjects chosen are important gospel truths, and the illustrations are at once simple and effective.

The College Calendar for the Free Church of Scotland, 1868-69. Edinburgh: William Paterson. Pp. 51.-At the end of a quarter of a century of reorganization and readjustment, rendered necessary by the Disruption, it was high time to gather up the results, and arrange them for the instruction, stimulus, and guidance of the members of the Free Church. Last month we noticed (somewhat late, we confess) the admirable Free Church Almanac; now we have to call attention to the College Calendar, which confines its information within á narrower range, but on that account it is the more thorough and complete in its own department. We see how several improvements may be suggested for another issue, in the way of transposition, condensation, expansion, and addition; but the College Committee have been marvellously successful in the first attempt, and we understand that very great care has been taken to prevent any positive errors. To professors, students, and ministers, it must be pre-eminently interesting. But we greatly mistake the interest taken throughout the Free Church in the training of candidates for the ministry, if it has not a much wider circulation.

the course of which he is represented as losing all his comforts one after another, and last of all his principles, we have failed (perhaps by our own fault) in extracting anything encouraging.

The Christian's Duty and Encouragement: a Farewell Sermon. By the late Rev. John M. Sloan, M.A., late Junior Pastor, Dalkeith. Edinburgh: John Maclaren, 1868.— An earnest evangelical sermon, in which the line of thought suitable for a Communion Sabbath evening is at the same time adjusted to the circumstances of a minister and his congregation who are on the point of separating with mutual affection unbroken.

A Voice to the Empire: Two Sermons preached on the occasions of the Arrival of the Duke of Edinburgh in Victoria, and his attempted Assassination at Sydney. By the Rev. D. Meiklejohn, Kilmore. Melbourne: R. Mackay. 1868.-These discourses are intended to present appropriate lessons before the Australian colonists, in connection with the events which led to their being preached.

Christianity and Modern Progress. By the Rev. Alexander Raleigh, D.D. London: Jackson, Walford, and Hodder. 1868. Pp. 47.—An able and beautiful address, delivered this year from the Chair of the English Congregational Union. Dr. Raleigh starts from a favourite position of Chalmers-that the Word of God and his works cannot be contradictory. He points out how their liarmony may at times be obscured, and he traces the analogies between revealed religion and natural knowledge, especially in the spheres of fact and law. He also claims an intimate and friendly alliance between religion and all the ethical principles and forces which are helping on human progress; and he concludes with their joint work in the field of social sympathy and practical benevolence. One passage, in p. 18, has given rise to discussion in the newspapers, on account of its seeming interference with belief in the plenary inspiration of Scripture. We would fain think that there is nothing more censurable in it than hasty writing, rather alluding to the subject than dealing with it, and perhaps seeming to state as an opinion what need only have been a hypothetical assumption. But the point is one on which it is no wonder that great jealousy is felt; and among other letters, we were glad to see an admirable one by Dr. Lindsay Alexander. The subsequent correspondence is noticed elsewhere.

Sermons by the late Rev. Hugh M'Bryde Broun, Minister of the Free Church, Lochmaben, Edinburgh: Maclaren. 1868. Pp. 176.-Though these Sermons appear as a posthumous memorial of their lamented author, they are eminently worthy of publication apart from all special and incidental circumstances. They are characterized by a chaste beauty, a gracious unction, and a fragrant sweetness of thought and diction which has been to us exceedingly delightful, and which we trust will make them equally welcome to many a heart and home. Nothing is told us of the author, either by prefatory notice or memorial sketch, but we gather from one or two modest explanatory memoranda at the foot of the page, and from the scanty materials furnished by the " Almanac," that he was settled in 1836 in a retired parish in Dumfriesshire; that he passed through the trials and shared the great sacrifices of 1843; and that he continued, spite of accomplishments and gifts which might well have called him to a wider sphere, his quiet pastorate at Lochmaben during the rest of his life, and that he died in 1867. Among the other sermons, we would refer, as especially interesting, to the first, preached, as a brief foot-note informs us, on the Sabbath succeeding the Disruption, to a congregation of two thousand in the open air. It is a touching memorial of the greatest religious act of modern times-all the more impressive that the preacher, with a noble reserve, and occupied with his one great message, refers only in one or two earnest sentences to the event itself, and utters not a word as to the part which he himself, not surely without some sharp pangsing, also, that he is absolutely silent as to any scriptural of anguish, had borne in the sacrifice.

In Suggestions on Academical Organization, by Mark Pattison, B.D., Rector of Lincoln College, we have a new constitution for the University of Oxford, after the fashion of the Abbe Sieyès. His plan is to throw the whole existing institutions of the place-chancellor, vice-chancellor, heads, convocations, and congregation, colleges, halls, professors, tutors, and examining boards, into the furnace, to fuse them all together, and to bring out thence a bran new university after his own mind. The colleges as places of residence for undergraduate students are to cease, and the buildings turned into dwelling-houseswe fear very uncomfortable ones—for married professors and professor-fellows. Thus re-organized, they are to be appropriated each singly or in amalgamated groups, to some special department of science or learning, of which they are to be respectively the rallying-points and centres. We confess that we should have more sanguine hopes of salutary and permanent results from a reform which should build upon the old foundations, and draw forth the future from the past, than from such a scheme of root and branch revolution. Many, however, of our author's individual suggestions seem to us judicious and valuable, especially those which point to a greater breadth and variety of academic studies, and the substitution of public teachers of eminence and power for the whole university, for the present separate and necessarily often inferior tuition of the colleges.

A Letter on Lay Patronage in the Church of Scotland. By William Forsyth. Blackwood and Sons, Edinburgh and London. 1867. Pp. 25.-The Day of Open Questions. By William Forsyth, Aberdeen. Blackwood. 1868. Pp. 17.-These are two letters to the Lord Advocate, the second being a sequel to the first. They take notice of the strength of the non-established Presbyterian denominations in Scotland, and their tendencies towards union; they urge the consequent necessity for strengthening the Established Church; and rallying round it anew the religious life of the country. The one thing indispensable but sufficient to accomplish this is the abolition of lay patronage (for he does not seem to think there will be any difficulty in securing spiritual independence to the Church), and Mr. Forsyth gives calculations to show how easily this might be done by purchase. His pamphlets are a little severe upon the inevitable tendency in the religious bodies outside of the Establishment to become political. He might have been more guarded, or more comprehensive, in his strictures, considering that so much of his own argument is connected with the avowed aim of strengthening the Establishment as a political instrument; consider

principle being involved in the question of patronage. The Union Question. Speech of Sir Henry Wellwood Moncreiff, Bart., D.D., in the Free Presbytery of Edin| burgh, on the 26th of February, 1868.—Edinburgh: John Maclaren, 1868. Pp. 36.-Sir Henry Moncreiff gives good reasons for delaying to publish his speech, and for publishing it at last. The community are now in possession of a considerable body of literature arising out of a single Presbytery debate; and those who have read these speeches with care must be in favourable circumstances for coming to a judgment on the case. This Speech is valuable in itself: its value is enhanced by some discussions in the Appendix; probably the most interesting of these being that on the sense in which the United Presbyterians are ready to maintain that it is the duty of the civil Government to recognize, acknowledge, and protect the Church.

A Catechism on the Doctrines of the Plymouth Brethren. By the Rev. Thomas Croskery, Presbyterian Minister, Londonderry. London: James Nisbet and Co. 1868. Pp. 24.-It is unnecessary now to do more than congratulate the author of this excellent and well-known pamphlet on its having reached a sixth edition. In a prefatory note he observes that he has rewritten several sections of the work, and has added two new ones. Might we ask him to revise the citations from Scripture? We have noticed many of them printed incorrectly. Images in the Windows of Churches: Protest against them. By George Rochfort Clarke, M.A. London: Seeley, Jackson, and Halliday. 1868.-This is a collection of correspondence with three bishops and a vicar on the practice of painting figures to adorn the windows of churches. Besides objections which have been urged against the practice in itself, there are others in connection with the present multitude of Ritualistic and Romanizing practices in the Church of England, which account for the strenuous opposition offered to this style of ornamentation by Mr. Clarke.

Review of Intelligence.

THE UNIVERSITY ELECTIONS.

In our last issue we noticed the appointment of Dr. Calderwood, of the United Presbyterian Church, Glasgow, to the Chair of Moral Philosophy in the University of Edinburgh. This appointment has given rise to much discussion. Writers in certain of the daily papers have vehemently assailed the Curators for having made what they consider a very unsatisfactory choice. Dr. Calderwood, they say, is not at all known among philosophers, and is greatly inferior in all the requisite qualifications to the other candidates. This is, to say the least, mere petulant ignorance. Dr. Calderwood, in point of philosophic reputation, was fully on a level with every one of the candidates, and has done much more than any of them to prove in addition his possession of the general vigour and insight which secure practical

success.

Among the letters which have been made public, the most remarkable are two from Professor Flint, the defeated candidate. Among many other observations, he remarks that it is not a right-it is scarcely a decentthing, that men of the social status and degree of education of two, at least, of the representatives of the Town Council should have anything to do with the appointment of professors; and only when narrowness is the measure of breadth, will such men judge aright as to the fittest teacher of what is an essentially liberal and catholic thing-" divine philosophy." Professor Flint's friends, we are sure, will regret these letters; and he himself also, we cannot doubt, when time has taken the edge off his disappointment, and when he has again submitted himself to the sway of "divine philosophy," will come to wish that he had left such public displays of feeling to Town Councillors and other persons in an equally benighted and uncivilized condition.

The Curators, in filling up the vacancy in the Principalship caused by the death of Sir David Brewster, have had a much more difficult task to perform, and one the result of which has caused still more discussion. In this case, also, the question ultimately narrowed itself into a choice betwixt two candidates, Sir James Y. Simpson, of Edinburgh, and Sir Alexander Grant, who is Principal of the Government College at Bombay. Sir James is a home-bred Scotsman, and an alumnus of Edinburgh University. Sir Alexander Grant, on the contrary, was educated in an English University, and was not at all well known in Scotland previously to his being mentioned in connection with this appointment. A majority of the curators had been prepared to prefer Sir James Simpson. But a memorial against his election from twelve professors having been presented, one of the majority deferred to this new element in the case, and gave his support to Sir Alexander Grant, who was accordingly elected.

We do not feel called upon to enter into any discussion of the grounds on which this conclusion was arrived at. At the same time, we cannot help expressing our regret that some one could not have been found more directly connected with Scottish Universities, and more thoroughly in sympathy with them than Sir Alexander Grant can be supposed to be. He is no doubtwhat his friends tell us he is a thoroughly accomplished gentleman, and much interested in educational matters; but that was hardly sufficient to mark him out as qualified in any eminent degree for the Principalship of a Scottish University. Scotsmen might have been found with claims at least as strong as those of Sir Alexander Grant. Meantime, however much we may regret the rising tendency in the direction of Oxford among our Scottish educational institutions, we may perhaps at least take credit for their thoroughly popular and unsectarian character. There will still be some little delay before we see an English College, in choosing its Principal, willing to set aside other claims in favour of those of one, however distinguished, who chances to be an alumnus of a Scottish university, and a Presbyterian.

FREE CHURCH.

There is usually very little business before the Presbyteries at their first meeting after the General Assembly. This year has proved no exception. They have been occupied, for the most part, only with matters of detail. One matter, however, which has excited much

66

interest has been before the Metropolitan Presbytery: namely, the call from Regent Square, London, to Mr. Wilson of the Barclay Church. Both on the occasion when the call was first notified to the Presbytery, and afterwards when, on the 9th July, the case came up for hearing parties, Mr. Wilson expressed himself as quite decided against going to London. His mind was thoroughly made up not to leave his present sphere of labour. If ever, in the providence of God, there was to be a change in his position, his desire was that it might come in the form of a call to return to home mission work, rather than to take the pastoral charge of a congregation like that in Regent Square. He would fain end his ministerial life as he had begun it, a home missionary.

Notwithstanding this statement, the decision to which the Presbytery came after anxious discussion, and by a large majority, was to sustain the call. Against this decision the commissioners from the Barclay Church of course appealed to the Synod. Meantime the somewhat unusual course the case has taken has led to much discussion in the newspapers and elsewhere, some of it not in the best possible spirit. The action of the Presbytery has been severely commented on, as if they were tyrannically desirous of forcing Mr. Wilson to abandon his present charge in opposition to his own wish and sense of duty. But, in point of fact, in all the circumstances the finding amounts to no more than a strong recommendation to Mr. Wilson to reconsider his decision. If Mr. Wilson's views undergo no change, no one will think of insisting on his removal to London.

Besides Mr. Wilson, two other ministers of our Church have been under call to London. Mr. Donald Fraser, Inverness, to Marylebone, and Mr. Rait of Gartly to John Knox Presbyterian Church, Stepney. Mr. Rait's translation has been agreed to, and in the case of Mr. Fraser, parties have been summoned to appear on an early day.

In accordance with the decision of last Assembly, the Presbytery of Dunse and Chirnside have sustained the call to the Rev. John Millar from the Boston Church, Dunse. Also the Presbytery of Ellon have sustained the call to the same gentleman from Old Meldrum. Mr. Millar has accepted the call to Dunse.

ESTABLISHED CHURCH.

Our readers will remember that last General Assembly, as the result of their discussion on Patronage, appointed a Committee to inquire into the whole subject. This Committee has already issued two sets of questions, one to Presbyteries, and another to the elders of the Church, both designed to bring out full information as to the working of the late Lord Aberdeen's Act. We observe that in the schedule of queries to be answered by elders is the following:-"Are you cognizant of any evils, such as disputed settlements, protracted delay in supplying a vacancy, or otherwise, which have occurred in any congregation of the Free Church, or any other Dissenting Church in any locality with which you are connected, since the formation of the Free Church in 1843? If so, state the nature of such evils, the particular cases in which they have occurred, and the causes, so far as within your knowledge, from which they have arisen." We venture to anticipate that there will not be found the same divergence of sentiment in the answers to this question as in the answers to those in regard to corresponding events in the Establishment.

The vacancy in Old Greyfriars, Edinburgh, caused by the death of Dr. Robert Lee, has recently been filled up by the Town Council, who are patrons. The congregation petitioned in favour of Mr. Wallace of Trinity College Church, who is understood to sympathize with the peculiar views and practices of the congregation and their late pastor. The Town Council, however, after vainly endeavouring to induce the congregation to take advantage of the Act which empowers them to purchase the patronage for £600, refused to grant their petition in favour of Mr. Wallace, and appointed the Rev. Dr. Gloag of Blantyre. Of course this has raised a great outery; but it certainly seems to us that the reasons adduced by members of the Council, are amply sufficient to justify the course they have taken.

CHURCH OF ENGLAND AND IRELAND. July is usually a dull month both in Church and State. In the ecclesiastical world there is a reaction from the excitement connected with the May meetings. In the political world there is the languor which inevi

tably characterizes the close of a fatiguing session of Parliament. To which there falls to be added this year the continued prevalence of a degree of oppressive heat rarely experienced in our temperate and variable climate. In spite of all this, however, there has been quite an exceptional amount of activity both in political and ecclesiastical circles during the past month. The debate on the Suspensory Bill in the House of Lords was one very notable event. The presence on that occasion of princes, peeresses, and members of the Lower House, sufficiently indicated the interest which was felt in the discussion. And although it might well have been thought that by the time it reached the House of Lords the subject was tolerably threadbare, yet it must be admitted that their lordships spiritual and temporal did handle the matter with much ability and freshness. Apart from the eloquence expected, it may be presumed that the presence of archbishops and bishops in the Upper House was one thing which led so many to desire to witness the debate on that arena. Men were naturally curious to see how these representatives of the United Church of England and Ireland would look, and to hear what they would say, when the proposal for the disestablishment and disendowment of the Irish Church came before them. This curiosity was most fully gratified by the Bishop of Oxford, who so far forgot the dignity of the Episcopal bench as to quote two statements (inconsistent as he supposed them to be) from Mr. Spurgeon, with a mimicry of the manner of that great preacher, which afforded great amusement to his noble hearers. The alleged inconsistency was this: Mr. Spurgeon has often expressed his belief in the superiority of the Voluntary principle to that of State support in the matter of religion. He has, at the same time, often deplored the poverty of many of the ministers in the denomination to which he belongs. The bishop, with some adroitness, and in his own sneering way, set the one class of statements over against the other, as if they were manifestly contradictory. Mr. Spurgeon has subsequently replied in a letter to the newspapers, which, though rather lengthy and deficient in dignity, has vindicated his consistency and put the bishop clearly in the wrong. Of course, their lordships threw out the Bill by a large majority, as every one expected. A collision between the two houses on a great public question such as this would, if long continued, lead to very serious results. But if, after the coming election, it shall appear that the country is in earnest, we are persuaded that the lords temporal, at least, will have the good sense to give way, even though the lords spiritual should be inclined to fight it out.

In connection with this subject-the disendowment of the Irish Church-the "Guardian," the organ of the High Church party, contains the following remarkable letter from the Bishop of Ontario:

"SIR,-The general opinion held by calm lookers-on is that the Irish Church is doomed as an Establishment. The precedent will certainly be disastrous to all Establishments, but I see no reason to infer that the Church will either perish or become impaired in usefulness. As a bishop of a Church which has gone through the ordeal of disestablishment, I am inclined to believe that the Irish Church may flourish when separated from the State.

"The resolutions of Mr. Gladstone will leave the Church in possession of all property, I suppose, that has been acquired by private benefaction, and of the glebe-houses and church edifices, and also will leave the clergy in possession of their incomes for life. Now, a precedent has been established in the disendowment of the Canadian Church which may be usefully followed in Ireland. Instead of the clergy retaining their rent-charges, &c., for the term of their natural life, let the State at once take possession of these revenues, and pay to the Church a capital sum in commutation of the clergy life interest. "The income of bishops and clergy is, say £500,000, which may be commuted, perhaps, for thirteen years' purchase; or, at all events, for ten years' purchase. Thus the Church will at once acquire five million pounds sterling of endowment. The interest of this sum will not suffice to pay the present incumbents their full stipends; but now is the time to show a spirit of self-sacrifice, and if the Irish clergy will follow the example of the Canadian clergy, all of whom, except one man, commuted their life annuities, and threw their money into a common fund, they will earn the admiration of the world. Any deficiency in their stipends may surely be made up by the voluntary contributions of the land