The Atonement of our Lord Jesus Christ, an Ordination Sermon by the Rev. R. HUSSEY, Regius Professor of Ecclesiastical History. (J. H. Parker.) This is a very clear and logical statement of doctrine, and appears most opportunely. We know no treatise wherein the teaching of the Catholic Church is better vindicated from the unreal verbiage of Evangelicalism and the philosophy (falsely so called) of the Neologian; and where the distinction is more clearly drawn between the death of CHRIST as Man, and His re-creative work as GOD. These both of course are included in the theological term Atonement."

There is always credit due to the leaders of a "forlorn hope," and so we feel bound to chronicle the fact that Mr. T. TURNER has produced a second part of his newest Version of the Psalms, done into metre, (Rivingtons) and that Messrs. Parker of Oxford have done the same good office to the Cleveland Psalter, that the S.P.C.K. did formerly to the Old and New Version, by publishing Selections, which they have further attempted to adapt by an Index to the Christian Seasons. Under these circumstances, we must upon the whole, we suppose, be glad that from the Publishers last named has also proceeded A Hymnal for the Services of the Church. The versifying of the Psalter is so objectionable both in practice and principle, that any Orthodox Hymnal is preferable. It is surely presumptuous in the Compilers at "Tedstone Delamere" to say that they believe that "no Hymn of real excellence has been omitted," when not more than four or five are given from ancient sources.

We have elsewhere referred to the Bishop of Exeter's Letter to Dr. Lushington (Murray) which is long since in everybody's hand. We will only just therefore call our readers' attention to the fact that the Bishop has discovered other instances of Post-Reformation Crosses than those which had been collected by Mr. Liddell's Counsel at the Trial.

Why do not the Wesleyan Methodists join the Church of England, when she is willing to receive them? (Masters.) This is certainly an Important Question, as the Author terms it; and we can quite believe that in many parts of the country this Tract will be found useful for circulation.

We call attention to a proposal by Mr. WHITFORD-a scholar, we believe, quite competent to the task-for publishing the Hellenistic Version of the Old Testament, according to the Complutensian Text with a Synopsis in the foot-notes of the other Three Standard Texts. It is a work which the delegates of the Oxford University Press ought to undertake, instead of publishing such utterly worthless things as they have recently done; but in default of their cooperation, Mr. Whitford is entitled to all the support which individual members of the Church can give. Subscribers' names will be received by Mr. J. W. Parker. And we may add, that Mr. Whitford proposes to make this edition the basis of a Greek Concordance, which is much required.

THE DEFECTIBILITY OF THE CHURCH.

1. Sermons preached at S. Mary's, in Oxford. By the Rev. CHARLES PAGE EDEN, &c. London: Rivingtons.

2. The Present State of the Controversy with Rome. By the Rev. W. GRESLEY, M.A. Masters.

THE first and prevailing impulse of one who has cultivated the grace of Faith, valuing as he ought that high faculty by which the intellectuality of the Christian is differenced from that of the natural man, is to receive in toto and without any sort of evasion, all that is properly accredited to him as the Word of GOD. Nothing grates so harshly against his instinctive reverence, as a theory which lies under a necessity to attemper and tone down the plain sense of Holy Scripture, before it can reduce that sense to the length and breadth of its own narrow dimensions. When once satisfied as to the critical integrity of the text which is put into our hands by the Church as the Word of GOD, such a mind wishes to receive it as what it is; and, knowing from Whom it comes, to consider it as embodying abstract truth: which truth lies, for the most part, in the simplest meaning that the language used is capable of bearing. He will indeed feel-and the more he studies Holy Scripture, the more he will so feel-that in the New Testament, no less than in the Old, there is deep after deep of mystical interpretation, underlying the obvious and simple; but this will confirm, rather than disturb the first conviction, by showing him the capability of the Divine oracles to supply, out of their fulness, teaching both for the wise and penetrating understanding, and also for the simple and unlearned. And he will remark, by way of analogy, that as there are treasures hidden in the earth for those who will search there, yet on the surface is all that the generality of mankind require; so, amid all the interpretations that may be found in Holy Scrip ture, that one which comes readily to hand is not necessarily to be regarded as otherwise than absolutely true, or the least wholesome and nourishing for the Christian soul.

And of all parts of Holy Scripture, the actual words of our Blessed LORD, uttered during the time of His earthly obedience, are those which reverent minds will be most unwilling to tamper with by qualifying explanations. He did, indeed, condescend to limit the knowledge of His Manhood, but such limitation in no way affects the absolute verity of His words. What He said, that is infallibly true; and whatever it may be of which we can be assured that He uttered it, we must so interpret as that our interpretation can in no way make His speech to be otherwise.

VOL. XVIII.-MARCH, 1856.

Of the many applications to be made of this principle, we have been led, by the perusal of some of the sermons contained in the volume named at the head of these pages, to consider that which presents a great amount of difficulty to many ardent minds-its application to our Blessed LORD's promises respecting the Church. Assuming, as a first principle of interpretation, that His words mean at the least as much as they seem on the face of them to mean, we have presented to us certain promises from which the mind at once forms an exalted ideal of that to which they apply. There are, for example, several distinct promises of unity in the Church, of which the ideal formed from such a principle of interpretation, is that of perfect oneness. So also of endurance against all opposition from Satan and the world; of success in the conversion and sanctification of large masses of mankind. There are, again, those general promises, on which all other and particular ones depend, of our LORD's own continual Presence, and of illumination by the abiding of GOD the HOLY GHOST: and from these it seems very reasonable to infer the most exalted sanctity of CHRIST'S Mystical Body, to which they are vouchsafed, and the most unerring knowledge.

But when those same ardent minds come to look abroad and at home, and observe the actual state of Christendom, they discover a multitude of circumstances in the Church at large, and in every branch of it, which appear to be strongly discordant with the Scriptural idea of the Church thus developed from the words of her allknowing Head and while they are embarrassed by some of these apparent discrepancies between theory and fact, there are others which tend greatly to discourage them in their practical duties. They read, for example, that the gates of hell shall not prevail against the Church, and yet where is that ecclesiastical body which is not being dragged more and more into the power of those whose chief object is to withstand and thwart the decree that the kingdoms of this world shall become the kingdoms of the LORD, and of His CHRIST,-or of others who oppose Catholic doctrine, that they may the more effectually war against all holiness of living? So, also, while the Gospel is being preached-almost literally "among all nations," the object for which it is being preached seems to be attained in no reasonable proportion: in Christian lands, the great mass of the people live almost as if they were heathens; and in heathen colonies or dependencies-as is so glaringly the case with India-the supernatural kingdom of CHRIST extends itself more slowly than the mere political devices of men.

Again, separating the Church from its relation to the world, what is its condition; where its peace, its unity, its light? Is there any trace of unity between the East and the West; or, in the West, between England and Rome? and can there be said to be anything like peace for the whole Body of CHRIST, while its several members

(if they are such) remain so totally at variance externally, with each other? Again, what mistakes-to call them by the most lenient name-have been, and still are made by the collective bodies of Christendom, and persisted in for centuries. Look at the Eastern Church rejecting the Double Procession; the Western setting up a tyranny at Rome, which has, more than anything else, served to perpetuate the divisions of Christendom. Look again at the Roman Church withdrawing the Cup from the laity, and adding to the Catholic Creeds; some of the Continental Churches wilfully annihilating themselves by breaking the bonds of the Succession asunder; the English Church laying itself open to Erastianism by unwarrantable concession of her rights-often seeking strength at the hands of men, rather than GOD; and neglecting, when it was in her power, to evangelize the New World.

Is it possible to reconcile such things with the ideal of unity, peace, and light which belong to the Church of the Gospels? Can it be that the promises of our LORD are being literally fulfilled, and that He Who said He would be with His Church "alway, even to the end of the world," is really abiding with those who seem so utterly divided from each other? or that the Comforter, Who was to guide it into all truth, is really guiding those who differ so much from each other, and in some cases from the Catholic standard of verity ?

Such doubts as these are in no small degree, we conceive, the consequence of a tone of mind which has become traditional among us-that of considering God's gifts with reference chiefly to their application by men, and almost forgetting that they have also an abstract value, and a relation to the Giver, no less than to the receiver. As to all the gifts of GOD, it is certain that though those to whom they are given possess them in earthen vessels, they are no less a treasure worthy of His majesty and perfection Who bestows them. A master bestows upon his slaves the gift of manumission, and they may so misuse it, that a state of freedom seems no better for them than one of bondage: yet this does not prove that the former is not a good and precious gift, to be bestowed on those who do not naturally possess it. Its relation to the receivers may, indeed, be so far apparently changed, as that their abuse of it causes the gift to seem of infinitely less practical value than it is; or—what is still more to our purpose-they may set so little price upon freedom that they neglect to avail themselves of its benefits. Yet in neither case can it be said that the limitation of the gift arises from its nature, or from the intentions of the giver-that he has either restricted its fulness, or bestowed it in such a manner that its fulness cannot be entirely realised.

There is another analogy, more closely bearing upon the point before us-the presence of sin in the baptized. Those who reject high theories of spiritual influences, look upon sin as if it were an

accidental disarrangement of a sort of moral mechanism which is ours by a law of nature, and thus reduce to nothing the gift of regeneration. But a full belief in the Baptismal grace will entail the belief that sin is external to the recreated nature; as shown by the salvation, without repentance, of Christians who die without actual sin. The gift by which we are brought into a state of salvation is perfect and full yet it comes into antagonism with a power external to the person receiving it whereby sin is, as it were, thrust in, and Itself thrust out by the consent of those who have received the treasure so priceless. And thus, although the regenerate nature bestowed upon us by GoD is in itself perfect, and what imperfection afterwards arises in our nature is not because it is of a mixed character, but because the Tempter, through the co-operation of our own free-will, is able to deteriorate that nature, and more or less to thrust away from it the gift of GoD-thus, that which is ever perfect in its relation to the Giver, is, in its relation to the receiver, only partially realized, and therefore not fully effective. Now, if we carry on this principle from the individual to the corporate body, and from the gift by which men are at first brought into a state of salvation, to those other gifts the operation of which we are at present considering, it will be seen that the unity, light, and power of the Church may be bestowed by GoD in all fulness, and yet not realized in all fulness by that body on which they are bestowed. His promises are without limitation, and His gifts are in strict keeping with His promises: but, as individuals with respect to their own personal inheritance of blessing, are in a state of probation, so in the Church at large there is what may be called a corporate free-will, by which it is proved in its antagonism with Satan ; and by the wrong bias of which the fulness of the promise is prevented from being realized, though there is yet a perfect fulness in the gift of GOD.

This manner of stating the question seems to us to be less open to objection than that of Mr. Eden, who starting from the same ground says:

"I venture then to propose this principle of interpretation, that the promises in Holy Scriptures, even the largest promises made to GOD'S Church shall be considered always to be made good, only in such special form and manner at each period of the Church's history as answers to the then condition of the Church, and the place which she is then holding in the great moving scheme of the Divine Providence."— P. 284.

Perhaps the difference we imagine may not be real; but there is something in the theory of "conditional promises," which seems to bring this expression more within the compass of those qualifying interpretations we at first referred to, than is accordant with preceding statements of the writer. It fails also in distinct recog