father," Leo XIII, that the extreme criticism of the Bible may be met by a sober criticism. Dausch then takes under consideration the task, the method, the sources, and the literature. This is followed by a discussion of the relations of Clement of Alexandria to the individual documents of the New Testament-the gospels (canonical and uncanonical), the Acts of the Apostles, the Pauline letters and Hebrews, the letters of Peter, the letters of Jude and James, the letters of John, the Apocalypse of John and of Peter, together with the writings of the Shepherd of Hermas. In the second part Dausch takes up the view which Clement held of the character of the New Testament canon. He raises five questions: (1) Was Clement acquainted with a list of New Testament writings? (2) Was he acquainted with a collection of New Testament writings? (3) Did he know of any authority attributed to the New Testament writings (4) Did he know of any specific authority attributed to the New Testament writings? (5) Did he recognize the exclusive authority of the Scriptures? To all these questions Dausch gives a negative answer. He sums up his conclusions as follows: (1) Clement used and reverenced a large number of Christian and heathen writings to which he gave a certain authority and inspiration. (2) He distinguished between churchly and nonchurchly literature. (3) He knew no well-defined collection of Christian churchly literature, nor was the distinction sharp between Christian and other writings. (4) He knew no exclusive authority for the Scriptures. (5) He uses the epithets "Old" and "New Testament," but without clearly designating his meaning. (6) There was a collection of writings, but not a closed canon. (7) He held to no specific apostolic or prophetic principle of canonicity. (8) He spoke in essentially the same terms of the Old and New Testament. (9) Among recognized groups are the "gospels " and the "apostles." (10) By "apostolic" he generally meant "Pauline." (11) He knew of evangelical truth outside of the gospels. (12) He recognized a formal, but not an authoritative, difference between the Old and New Testament. (13) He knew fourteen Pauline letters, and ascribed the Hebrews to Paul. (14) He knew of the Acts by Luke, and the Apocalypse by John, but did not distinguish sharply between these documents and other old Christian literature. (15) Among the Catholic epistles he knew only 1 Peter, 1 and 2 John, and Jude. (16) In point of respect he held the letter of Barnabas, the first letter of Clement, and the teaching of the apostles almost as high as the canonical New Testament documents. In conclusion, Dausch claims that the strong individuality of Clement forbids that he should be taken as representative of his time, and that neither from the beginning, nor at the year 200 A. D., was there an apostolic collection of writings for the purpose of consolidating the then originating Catholic Church.

De joodsche achtergrond van den Brief aan de Romeinen (The Jewish Background of the Epistle to the Romans). By J. A. C. Van

Leeuwen. Utrecht, Breijer, 1894. Van Manen, the principal Dutch exponent of the idea that Romans in its present form is not the work of Paul, and could not possibly have been written by a Jew, but is a Gnostic revision and enlargement of a smaller work by Paul, furnishes the suggestion which has led to the writing of this work, which was originally a "doctor-dissertation." Contrary to the view of Van Manen, Van Leeuwen, another Dutchman, maintains the impossibility of the Greek origin of Romans in its present form. Taking up the direct utterances of Romans in reference to the Jewish origin of the author, he next considers the judgments of the epistle relative to the heathen and the Jews. In treating of the latter he discusses the significance of the law and the relation of Israel to Christ. Following the older theologians he points out the numerous analogies and parallels both in matter and form, between Romans and the older rabbinic literature. By this the author does not propose to demonstrate the dependence of Paul upon this literature in specific instances, but to show that the mind of the author of Romans proved itself in every part of the epistle saturated with Jewish ideas to such a degree as would be possible only to a born Jew. That he has succeeded no fair-minded reader can doubt. This does not, of course, prove directly that Paul is the author of the epistle in its present form, but it destroys the idea that it could not have been written by Paul. The argument for the Pauline authorship will be conceded by all who believe it to have been written by a Christian Jew. Yet such is the folly of some critics that it is difficult to say what position will be next taken. The Tübingen school did not question the Pauline authorship of Romans, 1 and 2 Corinthians, and Galatians. Since then every one of these has been challenged, and has had to fight for its life. There are critics who deny the genuineness of every book of the New Testament, and think that with every trustworthy record gone they are in a position to understand Christianity aright. Such criticism gives a bad reputation to criticism of every sort. And in fact the extreme views held in certain ages by critics, from nearly all of which the criticism of the present day has receded, raises in the minds of the thoughtful the question whether after a while the learned world will not swing back to a quiet acceptance of the Bible as our fathers knew it. Even those who find it necessary to deny the genuineness of some of the books of the New Testament would confess that it is far more sober to accept all than to reject the Pauline authorship of Romans and Galatians.

De libris prohibitis commentarii. By Augustinus Arndt, S. J. Regensburg, F. Pustet, 1895. A book by a Jesuit concerning books forbidden to be read by Romanists ought to be authoritative of Roman Catholic belief and practice. It will therefore be well to notice what is forbidden, by whom, and why. In the first part of this work the author undertakes to give every instance of forbidden books which occurred prior to the year 1000. He claims that even in the early Church the Roman see exercised the recognized right to forbid the reading of objection

able books, and that very early arose the practice of referring dogmatic works to the popes for approbation prior to publication. In the second part the author takes up the punishments inflicted by the Church upon those who violated the prohibition. The object of the prohibition is to prevent the faithful from reading dangerous books and to hold them to obedience, but especially to prevent heretics and other godless men from publishing works of a harmful kind. Hence the prohibition extends to those who would personally be in no danger. But when the prohibition is issued by the Index-Congregation, even at the command of the pope, it is not a papal act, and hence not infallible, although binding on the conscience. Of course all books of such heresiarchs as Luther, Zwingli, and Calvin are forbidden, together with all Protestant translations of the Bible, which are in every case dangerous. Even Roman Catholic Bible translations with notes may not be read by the Romanists without special permission from the bishop upon recommendation of the father confessor or pastor. The reading of books in the mother tongue treating of the distinctions between Romanists and Protestants may be granted with the permission of the pastor. Book dealers may not handle forbidden books. Newspapers which justify the things condemned in the Syllabus of Pius IX are classed as dangerous. The father confessor must determine whether a paper may be read or not. One may receive permission to read books, and yet not be allowed to read forbidden newspapers. Even an innkeeper may not offer forbidden papers to his guests, and may at most furnish them for the value of the advertisements. Perhaps those who have insisted on the freedom which Roman Catholics enjoy will not see how excessively paternal is that system which places even newspaper reading under control of the Church. If Rome had spent half the energy in suppressing the wickedness of her saloon keepers and drunkards which she has exerted in the vain effort to hinder freedom of thought and the spread of intelligence, she might have accomplished something valuable in the world.

RELIGIOUS AND EDUCATIONAL.

An Austrian Retrograde Political Movement. The liberal revolution in Hungary has produced a clerical reaction which threatens harm to the religious liberty of Austria. In Hungary there is perfect religious freedom, brought about by the separation of Church and State. Romanists and Protestants, Jews and Christians, are alike free before the law to worship God as they will. The recent victory of the anti-Semitic party in Vienna is likely to produce exactly the opposite condition in Austria. The mayor of Vienna is an anti-Semite, and so are more than two thirds of the members of the city council. The party propose to allow no Jew to hold public office; to prevent the making of any contract by the government with Jews, and if possible to annul all governmental contracts with Jews now in force. They also propose to exclude all Jewish children from the public schools. But the party is almost as anti-Protestant as anti-Semitic.

Its program is to exclude all Protestant teachers from the public schools, and to restore the schools to the Roman Catholic party. It is supposed that this part of the plans of the anti-Semitics is inspired from Rome.

A New Roman Catholic Propaganda in Germany. If the Roman Catholics do not recover their power in Germany it will not be for lack of effort. By some means they have gotten lists of names and addresses of students of the gymnasia and seminaries, and, after the manner of the publishers of impure literature, they are sending to their pupils, under sealed covers, copies of tracts against Protestantism, announcing at the same time that each booklet can be had for about two cents. Special attention is called in an accompanying list of these publications, ninetytwo in number, to such tracts as "Luther and Marriage," "The Blessings of the Reformation," and "Protestant Historical Lies." of warfare which can only degrade those who engage in it. that for years the Roman Catholic Church has been compelled to resort to this and similar methods shows the desperation into which they have fallen. Yet there are people so blind to the real situation as to suppose that Roman Catholicism is only one of several equally justifiable forms of Christianity.

This is a kind

But the fact

A Missionary Countess. The Countess Schimmelmann carries on a peculiar mission work among the laborers and fishermen of the Danish coast. At one time she lived in all the splendor of court life, but she has said farewell to the world, because it could not afford her happiness, and has consecrated herself to this missionary work among the lowliest of her people. She has purchased a pleasure boat which once belonged to Prince Waldemar, and has transformed it to suit her purposes. There is a crew of seven men. The forepart of the ship is covered with a tent, in which the Countess assembles her hearers and speaks to them. She appears dressed in a plain black garb and stands behind a small table. She there relates the circumstances of her court life, shows its hollowness and inability to bring happiness, and then explains her purpose to labor for the elevation of her hearers, and shows them how impossible it is for external circumstances to satisfy. She closes the meeting with prayer for all the unfortunate of earth. The men hear her with great attention, bid her a grateful good-bye, and quietly depart. Others come, and the scene is repeated. As many as five such meetings are held daily in some places.

Baptists of Sweden and Finland. At the beginning of the year 1895 the number in Sweden was 37,601. Twelve years ago the start was made in Finland. Rev. C. Jameson fought hard for freedom of conscience and faith. Twenty-one times he was brought by the priests before the courts, although not convicted a single time. Now Finland has 28 churches and about 1,600 members, also a preachers' seminary, and a monthly paper called the Post. The Baptist Missionary Society of America supports the work.

SUMMARY OF THE REVIEWS AND MAGAZINES.

INSPIRING are the examples of many of the pioneer clergy of the United States. The names and the deeds of some of these venerable worthies are recalled by President Charles J. Little, LL.D., in the Chautauquan for March, as he writes of "The American Pulpit." The "lay elder Brewster" comes early in the list, "who marched to church between Governor Bradford and Miles Standish, followed by the Pilgrims three abreast, each with a musket on his shoulder." The chaplain of the company which founded Jamestown was Robert Hunt, "an honest, religious, courageous divine,' and the mainstay of the colony. He wore out a very noble life in words and deeds of helpfulness, leaving behind him an example not easily followed by the secondhand and damaged clergymen sent out quite frequently from England-'men that wore black coats and could babble in a pulpit or roar in a tavern.'" Other preachers of righteousness in the South were Garden, for thirty years rector at St. Philip's, Charleston; Clement Hall, of North Carolina, who "wrought wonders in his journey of fourteen thousand miles; " and the Wesleys and Whitefield. In New England are recalled Dr. Fuller, "the godly physician," who ministered to the Salem Colony in 1629; Hooker, Roger Williams, and John Harvard; John Eliot, who "established 'praying towns' for the Indians and translated the Bible into the Indian tongue;" the zealous and great Jonathan Edwards; and Eleazar Wheelock, who "opened his own home for an Indian school, which developed afterwards into Dartmouth College." The frontier preacher who followed emigration across the Alleghanies; the loyal clergy of the Revolution; and the preachers of different denominations who made up the list in "the golden age of the American pulpit,” between 1784 and 1868, next pass in quick review. From this enumeration of the sainted workmen of the Church the transition to the obligations of the present pulpit in America is natural. "The real business of the preacher is with the other world." Men must be made "keenly alive " to the invisible. "That which gave even Theodore Parker his tremendous influence as a prophet of righteousness was his living consciousness of God and immortality. Men nowadays do not care for creeds, but they do care for faith; they ask eagerly, as Dr. Holmes so touchingly describes, 'Have you any news?' The American pulpit stands for news-good news-news from the invisible world.”

THE Study is a quarterly published by the faculty of the Iliff School of Theology, University of Denver, and edited by Bishop Warren. The March number (Vol. i, No. 1) contains valuable matter under the following heads: "Spiritual Dynamics," "Notes," "Great Texts," etc.; "With Books," "The School of the Prophets," "Our Own School." The quarterly takes the place of Studies in the English Bible which was issued from the same