relation; while even Sabellianism itself was opposed chiefly as it attacked the Nature of GOD the SON: taking this into consideration, it will seem no great wonder if there are expressions in the writings of the Fathers sufficiently indefinite to bear such constructions as would make them accord with mere modern views. But their meaning is not to be judged of by isolated passages. On the subject before us, almost more than any other, we must fear to adopt any such sense for these passages, as will make them inconsistent with the general teaching of their authors.

Now, we have shown that what we have defined as modern teaching is certainly at variance with all sound theological views of the Incarnation; and it is sufficiently known to every one that such views are derived from the interpretations put upon Holy Scripture in the patristic writings. If, therefore, there are contained in their pages, expressions which seem to support the notion we are deprecating, every fair rule of interpretation will lead us to the conclusion that the seeming contradiction of themselves is but such an inaccuracy of expression as is almost always found on those subjects which have not been laid under the necessity of habitually strict definition by the opposition of heresy.

The same thing may be also said as to the writings of our own Divines subsequently to the Reformation of the English Church. During nearly the whole of the time that has elapsed since that memorable epoch, Satan and his agents have been carrying on a continual war against the doctrine of the Incarnation, and such truths and practices as are immediately derived from it. Opposition to the Cross is the special symbol of our English unbelievers, as the love of it in form and substance is the sign of a full reception of the truth of CHRIST's twofold Nature. Hence it is around the doctrine of the At-one-ment, in all its bearings upon our spiritual life, from the Font to the final Regeneration, that our great Divines have rallied. Nor was it until the study of Theology had greatly declined among the Clergy, that there arose those Puritan and Quaker developments of Sabellianism in the direction of GOD the HOLY GHOST, from which the teaching of the Methodists, and of those many Churchmen who follow Wesley in doctrine though not in name, is mainly derived. Thus it will happen, that expressions are to be found in the writings of English Divines also, which, if taken by themselves, appear to support the notion of a separate action of GOD the HOLY GHOST. But while many of these, when interpreted without the bias of mere modern theories, must be classed with such passages in the Fathers as that quoted a page or two back from S. Augustine; all of them ought to be considered, not as they stand alone, but as they are influenced and modified by the general tenour of the writings in which they occur. Thus the Homily on the Resurrection has the following:-"Call to thy mind that therefore hast thou received

into thine own possession to the everlasting Verity, our SAVIOUR JESUS CHRIST, to confirm to thy conscience the truth of all this matter. Thou hast received Him, if in true faith and repentance of heart thou hast received Him; if in purpose of amendment thou hast received Him for an everlasting gage, or pledge of thy salvation. Thou hast received His Body which was once broken, and His Blood which was shed for the remission of thy sin. Thou hast received His Body, to have within thee, the FATHER, the SON, and the HOLY GHOST, for to dwell with thee, to endow thee with grace, to strengthen thee against thine enemies, and comfort thee with their presence. Thou hast received His Body to endow thee with everlasting righteousness, to assure thee of everlasting bliss and life of thy soul. For with CHRIST by true faith art thou quickened again, saith S. Paul, from death of sin to life of grace; and in hope translated from corporal and everlasting death, to the everlasting life of glory in Heaven, where now thy conversation should be, and thy heart and desire set. Doubt not of the truth of this matter, how great and high soever these things be. It becometh GOD to do no small deeds, how impossible soever they seem to thee. Pray to GOD that thou mayest have faith to perceive this great mystery of CHRIST'S Resurrection; that by faith thou mayest certainly believe nothing to be impossible with GOD. Only bring thou faith to CHRIST's holy Word and SACRAMENT." "Apply yourselves, good friends, to live in CHRIST, that CHRIST may still live in you." And in the Homily, "Concerning the Sacrament," which comes next in order, we read this striking passage:- "Thus much we must be sure to hold, that in the Supper of the LORD there is no vain ceremony, no bare sign, no untrue figure of a thing absent; but, as the Scripture saith, The Table of the LORD, the Bread and Cup of the LORD, the Memory of CHRIST, the Annunciation of His Death, yea, the Communion of the Body and Blood of the LORD, in a marvellous incorporation, which by the operation of the HOLY GHOST (the very bond of our conjunction with CHRIST) is through faith wrought in the souls of the faithful; whereby not only their souls live to eternal life, but they surely trust to win to their bodies a resurrection to immortality." Nothing can be more clear than that these passages make the Indwelling of our LORD JESUS CHRIST, by the Holy Eucharist, the great necessity of the Christian life, and its great privilege. And when we come to read in another Homily, "O what comfort is this to the heart of a true Christian, to think that the HOLY GHOST dwelleth within him," the straightforward course of interpretation at once connects this with the previous statement, that GOD the HOLY GHOST dwells in us through the Indwelling of CHRIST'S Human Nature. And as this Indwelling is there connected with the Eucharistic Sacrifice and Sacrament, so in another paragraph of the Whitsunday Homily it is said, "The HOLY

GHOST.... which inwardly worketh the Regeneration and New Birth of mankind. . . . . The FATHER to create, the SON to redeem, the HOLY GHOST to sanctify and regenerate. Whereof the last, the more it is hid from our understanding, the more it ought to move all men to wonder at the secret and mighty working of GOD'S HOLY SPIRIT which is within us.... Who is the only Worker of our sanctification, and maketh us new men in CHRIST JESUS." Nothing can be clearer in these three Homilies, than that the numerous allusions to the relation between the HOLY SPIRIT and Christians, all refer to that relation of GOD through CHRIST, which is common to all Three Persons of the Blessed TRINITY.

Equally clear is the language of Hooker:-" They which belong to the Mystical Body of our SAVIOUR CHRIST, and be in number as the stars of heaven, divided successively by reason of their mortal condition, into many generations, are, notwithstanding, coupled every one to CHRIST their Head, and all unto every particular person amongst themselves, inasmuch as the same SPIRIT, Which anointed the Blessed Soul of our SAVIOUR CHRIST, doth so formalize, unite, and actuate His whole race, as if both He and they were so many limbs compacted into one body, by being quickened all with one and the same soul!" A few paragraphs before he has written of the work of the SPIRIT:-"It is of necessity that as well our present sanctification unto newness of life, as the future restoration of our bodies should presuppose a participation of the grace, efficacy, merit, or virtue of CHRIST'S Body and Blood, without which foundation first laid, there is no place for those other operations of the SPIRIT of CHRIST to ensue." It is not necessary to show that Hooker speaks here of Baptism, as that by which we participate in the grace of CHRIST's Body and Blood, as all readers of his fifth book must well know how clearly he lays down the axiom that sacramental union with CHRIST is the foundation and topstone of Christian life. The only remark that need be made on these passages is that they come in in the writings of one whose reserve in speaking of the HOLY SPIRIT strongly illustrates the tone of the Prayer Book ; while what little he does say is plainly to the effect that God the HOLY GHOST, dwelling in the Church, bestows on men the gift of CHRIST'S Human Nature, by uniting It with theirs in Baptism and the Eucharist; and that by so uniting men to CHRIST'S Human Nature, He unites them also through Him to Himself and the FATHER.

We might follow up these extracts by others from the Caroline Divines, and some even of a later date; but as the task we set ourselves at the first was one of suggestion only, it is unnecessary to extend this article to a greater length by doing so. Our object is attained if we establish in the mind of the reader a prima facie case for opening out the investigation on his own account.

1 Eccl. Pol. v. lvi. 11.

If we have, however, carried the reader's judgment with us, so far as to convince him that it is inconsistent with sound Theology to speak of the Operation of the HOLY GHOST as an Indwelling, except in so far as He is One of the Three Persons with Whom the Human Nature of CHRIST is inseparably united, he will readily with us in the further remarks that we have to make, with reference to certain modes of expression which seem to be at variance with this fundamental principle.

What is more common, for example, than to read such language as this of Bishop Beveridge concerning the HOLY GHOST:-" In that it is a Spirit, it is an active principle always doing; and in that it is the SPIRIT of GOD it is a holy principle, and, therefore, must always be doing good." And again, Cranmer with the most orthodox meaning can use such words as these :-" As in Baptism, we must think, that as the Priest putteth his hand to the child outwardly and washeth him with water, so must we think that God putteth to His Hand, and washeth the infant with His HOLY SPIRIT; and, moreover, that CHRIST cometh down upon the child, and apparelleth him with His Ownself."2 So we have in Barrow's Thirty-fourth Sermon on the Creed :-" God hath appointed His HOLY SPIRIT." And in a respected writer of our own time, the SPIRIT imparted in Baptism is called the "Power imparted," as if it were a faculty of manhood, rather than GoD Himself. Now, to say nothing of such expressions, as "At an appointed hour the Celestial Messenger descends;" "The Guardian Spirit Whom God has given to be their Guide and Comforter;" and many such which might easily be found on searching for them, and which speak of the HOLY SPIRIT much in the same manner as we might speak of a created Angel: to say nothing of these lower expressions, can others of the class we have hinted at be strictly reconciled with the statement of equality contained in the Athanasian Creed; or do they fairly echo the tone of the Church, which is ever giving ascriptions of equal glory to the Third with the Other Persons of the Blessed TRINITY, and praying, "O GOD the HOLY GHOST, proceeding from the FATHER and the Son, have mercy upon us miserable sinners ?"

Nor does it seem to us either to be more reverent than it is exact to identify, as is so commonly done or to seem to identify-grace and the HOLY SPIRIT. Grace is defined by S. Thomas, as "qualitas quædam supernaturalis;" and in modern theological language we understand it to be God's gift to men of a xápsopa, not evident to their outward senses, by which they are sanctified. But this Xápioμa is always understood also, by the best theologians, to be a Substance, though invisible; and that Substance the perfected Humanity of CHRIST. And although this is imparted to us by God the HOLY GHOST, working such sanctification through

our co-operating use of means, yet to identify the Gift with the Giver is not correct; and the inaccuracy has the effect of shutting out from the sight of those who are not theologians, the Personal and Substantial Mediation by which only intercourse is established between GOD the SPIRIT and mankind. If we speak of ' grace' in the abstract as that which is communicated to us by GoD for our soul's health and salvation, we mean the Human Nature of the GOD-Man; and to identify the Life within us with the Life-Giver is no less inexact in reference to our supernatural than to our natural relations with things and Persons Invisible.

So also with the gift of Illumination. This is undoubtedly a gift coming primarily from GOD, and specially administered by the Third Person of the Godhead. But it is no less certainly administered to us, not by any immediated operation of the SPIRIT upon us, but by the communication of CHRIST Himself to us. The Day-Spring from on high, that visited the earth for threeand-thirty years with the Brightness of His rising, yet illuminates by His Presence those on whom He shines. That was the True Light, which, coming into the world, lighteth every man. He is the Light of the whole regenerated world; and it is by His In-dwelling, not by any mere intellectual operation of the mind, that the Christian reaches to high knowledge of things Divine. "The natural man receiveth not the things of the SPIRIT of GOD: for they are foolishness unto him; neither can he know them, because they are spiritually discerned. . . . But we have the mind of CHRIST." Such a participation in the mind of CHRIST have all who have been united to His undivided Manhood; and it is retained and developed according as that union is renewed, by which the children of GOD are made more and more one with the SON of GOD, "Him that is true," Who said of Himself, "I am the Truth." "Of His fulness have we all received;" and a portion of that fulness is the gift of illumination, whereby, in Himself He hath given us an understanding, that we may know Him," and "discern spiritual things." If this be so, then the same objection which we made just now, applies here also. In pointing to the Final Cause, we teach those not otherwise instructed in the doctrines of the Faith, to overlook the Mediating Cause; and they naturally go on to substitute a communication of pure Spirit with spirit-the SPIRIT of GOD with the spirit of man-for the mediated intercourse by which CHRIST dwelling within us is the Substance of Knowledge as well as of Holiness.

Enough has been said to illustrate our position with regard to modes of expression, which though they will bear a correct interpretation, are yet, to say the least of it injudicious, because they do not present the all-important relation between us and the Hu