an amended calendar a proper selection of suitable readings could not be made and licence be given to use them in the daily services of the Church with discretion. The calendar need not be the same everywhere, and considerable latitude should be allowed for local usage.

The difference between the average English and the Roman view of sanctity is fundamental.* In the Breviary, for example, sanctity, as is implied in the whole process of canonization, connotes something miraculous. The saint is not as other men are. He has power with God denied to ordinary mortals, and the possession of this is confirmed by miracle. To most of us, on the contrary, a saint is a good man judged from a moral rather than a supernatural standpoint. St. Jerome and St. Augustine to a good Catholic are equally saints, and St. Peter, Martyr, is comparable with St. Francis of Assisi. We should be rather inclined to judge by character. Jerome, for example, was a great scholar and a most devout monk; on the other hand, he seems to have been as a controversialist an evil-tempered man with a large fund of uncharitable abuse with which he was always prepared to overwhelm those who differed from him. On the other hand, Augustine, judged by his Confessions, was one of those who really sought the Kingdom of God, and even in his controversial writings he often reveals a spirit which is truly Christian. Yet neither of them are blameless nor infallible as guides; both made mistakes which have had seriously evil consequences. Judged, however, by a moral standard, we should be inclined to give the name of saint to Augustine and withhold it from Jerome, whilst refusing to worship either as even supernatural men. Yet why should we be encouraged to meditate on the conversion of St. Paul, of which we know so little, and completely to ignore that of St. Augustine, which is related in one of the most admirable self-revelations in all literature? Equally irrational is it that a sermon on Apollos as "mighty in the Scripture" would be more in keeping in a Protestant pulpit than one on Jerome, who devoted his wide erudition and his literary experience to translating and explaining the Word of God.

But why confine our Breviary to the fourth century? Or, for that matter, to the middle or any other age, or to the typical saint, who is as a rule ecclesiastically minded? The men we want to hold up as examples are the good men, especially of our own race, and those to whom we owe a debt of gratitude. Bishop John Wordsworth drew up a calendar for his diocese of Salisbury as a suggestion for a reformed calendar for the Anglican Church, and for November the following names are selected:

* See note on p. 226.

November 2, All Souls: Richard Hooker, 1600.

November 4: Perpetua, wife of St. Peter. St. Charles Borromeo, Archbishop of Milan, 1584.

November 7: Willibrord, missionary to Frisia, 739.

November 16: Elfric, Bishop of Ramsbury and Archbishop of Canterbury, 1006. Edmund Rich, Archbishop, 1240. November 17: Hilda, Abbess, 680. Hugh, Bishop of Lincoln, 1200.

November 21: Columban of Leinster, Abbot of Bobbio, 615. November 30: St. Andrew, Archbishop, martyred at Patras. Frumentius, Bishop, Apostle of Abyssinia (circa 353). Francis Xavier, missionary, 1552.

These additions to the Anglican calendar are interesting, and show the learning and large sympathy of the Bishop. But there is in the selection a certian medievalism which is to me, at least, somewhat unreal. The old custom should be followed of each province or diocese having liberty to make its own calendar (of course, within limits), but in our communion the laity ought to have a full share of every calendar, and not merely paragons of piety, but good men who have used their ability for the good of mankind. Among clergy like George Herbert and E. Law the Non-juror, Bishop Ken, Bishop Wilson of Sodor and Man, should be placed not merely laymen like Robert Boyle or the Earl of Shaftesbury, but Addison, Samuel Johnson, William Cowper, and others. It is, however, dangerous to suggest names, and it is better to pass on to discuss the form a Breviary such as is suggested should assume.

The part of the Breviary hitherto under discussion is the lectionary. The idea of the Anglican lectionary was that the Bible should be read through in the daily lessons once a year, and the most important parts on the Sundays. Practically this works out that every Sunday the worshipper listens to a long chapter of the Bible torn from its context, and, at any rate as regards the New Testament, the same thing happens on the Sunday following. This is not particularly edifying, and does not attract the attention of the average worshipper. But a lesson might be learned by the study of the lections in the Breviary.

Take, for example, those for September 2, the feast of St. Stephen of Hungary, King and Confessor. The lections are all of them short, and divided from one another by responds. They give a brief account of the king, his piety, his death, and the fragrance which marked his sanctity after death, and his canonization by Innocent XI. at the time of the capture of Buda from the Turks by the Emperor and King of Hungary, Leopold I. Then follow a few extracts from a sermon of St.

Ambrose on the Parable of the Talents. But upon the whole the Breviary is a little disappointing though suggestive, and an Anglican one could be made more real if those whom it commemorates were made more living.

Supposing, for example, a day was set apart to celebrate St. Anselm, the most original and most powerful mind who ever adorned the See of Canterbury. Let a short lection explain who he was and why he is to be honoured, and an extract from his writings be read. Or if a day were given to Cranmer, it would be well to inform people why he deserves, for all his shortcomings, so well of the Church of England, if only for his unrivalled skill as shown in the Prayer-Book. By this means many who are now mere names would be made known, and the devout worshipper could either read of them or hear of them in church. The prayers which each composed might be recited, their truest and best utterances might be repeated, to put people in mind of the undying piety of the Church of Christ.

The Anglican Church has a truly immense storehouse to draw upon, and if she chooses to avail herself of the piety of all Englishspeaking Christians, the treasury would be wellnigh inexhaustible. The need of the present day is to vitalize worship, which has everywhere tended to become more and more formal or irreverent. One danger is to endeavour to rekindle the lamp of worship by the light of the past. This has been the attempt of the Oxford Movement and all that came from out of it. The other is to borrow light from the future, and to think that nothing worth happening has hitherto come to pass. But surely it is better to endeavour to understand the past and to realize the facts of the present, and so to provide fuel for the future light to kindle.

F. J. FOAKES JACKSON.

It

Note on p. 224.-We do not know what Dr. Foakes Jackson means by the " average English" view; but, even when quite uninstructed, we doubt whether it is so different as he thinks from the Roman view. is precisely in character that the supernatural most plainly declares itself. There is much in St. Jerome's character which is disagreeable: there is nothing which is not on a great scale; and his inclusion in the calendar may be taken as evidence that the Church interprets sanctity broadly, and recognizes greatness no less than charm.-ED.

MISCELLANEA

NOTES AND COMMENTS

MR. THOULESS's article resumes the two articles on "Religious Authority" which appeared in September and October of last year. Mr. Thouless is a Research Fellow of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge, and Lecturer in Psychology at Manchester University. Readers of THEOLOGY will remember his contributions to the study of Conversion published in December, 1920, and February, 1921.

The Rev. J. K. Floyer is Rector of Esher. He is a Vice-President of the Archæological Institute, and compiled the catalogue of MSS. when Librarian of Worcester Cathedral.

The Dean of Winchester needs no introduction. Nor does Dr. Foakes Jackson. His latest book-An Introduction to the History of Christianity, A.D. 590-1314 (Macmillan, 20s. net)—will be reviewed shortly in these columns.

Professor Alexander Souter, D.Litt., has been Regius Professor of Humanity in the University of Aberdeen since 1911. He is well known as the editor of a Greek New Testament published in 1910.

Mr. Will Spens, who reviews Dr. Gore's Belief in God, is Fellow and Tutor of Corpus Christi College, Cambridge. He published a series of apologetical lectures entitled Belief and Practice in 1915, which is now in its second edition, and was a member of the Subjects Committee of the Anglo-Catholic Congress two years ago.

SIR,

CORRESPONDENCE

To the Editor of THEOLOGY

THE VIRGIN BIRTH

I have seen it stated recently that we have no evidence that the early Christians were taught the doctrine of Our Lord's Virgin Birth. But is not this a mistake? For St. Luke says that he only wrote his Gospel so that Theophilus might know the certainty of the things about which he had already been instructed. Clearly, then, the course of instruction must have included what the Gospel included, and this was the whole of Christ's Life from His Virgin Birth to His Ascension. Theophilus had only been taught about Our Lord's public life, St. Luke would scarcely have written a Gospel to assure him of the truth of this, and then commence it with a long account of Our Lord's Virgin Birth and early years (occupying 132 verses) about which he had been taught nothing.

Yours, etc.,

W. H. TURTON,

If

Lieut.-Colonel.

PAPERS FOR THE PRIESTHOOD

IN THE STUDY

BY REV. W. K. LOWTHER CLARKE, B.D., EDIT. SEC. OF S.P.C.K.

ADVICE ON BOOKS

If readers who require advice on courses of theological study or the choice of books care to write to the Editorial Department of S.P.C.K., an attempt will be made to give them the required information. Sixpence in stamps should be sent to cover the cost of the necessary correspondence. It will frequently be necessary to refer the enquiry to an expert; a number of well-known scholars have consented to help in this way. Sometimes, especially in the summer months, there may be a little delay in answering. The Editor reserves the right to publish answers if they are of sufficient general interest. In such cases the initials of the correspondents will be given.

IX.-FOREIGN THEOLOGY

Ar the risk of arousing dormant prejudices I should like to recommend the study of foreign theology, at least to certain classes of students. If we wish to be confirmed in Anglican prejudices, by all means let us stick to Anglican books, or perhaps we had better say English books; for there is generally a family resemblance to be discerned in English writings, whether of Anglican or Protestant origin. But if our purpose in reading is to learn, then a liberal proportion of foreign books is desirable, for two

reasons.

1. Few can read a French, German, or Italian author as readily as an English one. If the argument is to be followed, careful and steady reading is necessary. Those who read much get into the habit of grasping the meaning of a page without troubling to read the actual words. With many books thus to tear out the heart is the best way. But such desultory methods must be carefully controlled, or they will invade every part of our reading, and make us incapable of sustained mental effort. No better remedy against their undue extension can be suggested than the study of books in a foreign language.

2. Anyone who confines himself to English books is liable to the danger of becoming provincial in his outlook, and especially so to-day, when few translations are put on the English market. After 1815 England relapsed into a contented insularity which we condemn from a safe distance, though, unless we take care, history will repeat itself. From every point of view we ought to keep in touch with Continental culture, which is older and in some ways saner than ours. English Churchmen are peculiarly liable to provincialism. The Roman Catholics belong to a mighty Church, the Nonconformists are in touch with world-Protestant movements. We belong to a small Church, tempted to think itself great because it has mapped out the world in dioceses.

Two things brought home to me the absurdity of some Anglican pretensions. Bishop Nicolai Velimirovic, at a small gathering in London about the time of the Armistice, urged close co-operation between the Serbian and English Churches, because both were "small Churches"