separating the fall of Rome and the beginning of the church empire; that the latter, therefore, definitely began in the year 516 and ended with the year 1516; that its overthrow was, in fact, the immediate result of the Reformation in punishment for the sins of the church during the thousand years; that her position from the year 1517 to the present day is analogous to the captivity of Israel in Babylon during the seventy years; finally, that this captivity is not to be perpetual, but that a complete restoration of the church to her former supremacy is now to be expected; and that this is to be brought about in the midst, and by the agency, of judgments upon the temporal kingdoms of the modern world, analogous to those which overwhelmed the empire of Rome in the fifth century, and so opened the way for the church empire of the middle ages.'

The reader who has studied the history of the Middle Ages and of the Reformation would be amazed to find such an interpretation as this by a Master of Arts of Oxford, who has been a Fellow of one of her colleges, if the deeply papal spirit which has long prevailed in that university had not prepared us for anything in this direction. It is superfluous to say that we do not acquiesce in Mr. Scott's interpretation. We regard it as forced, unnatural, remarkably superficial, and based on principles which we believe to be entirely contrary to those which are plainly laid down in Scripture with relation to the Church.

Mr. Macleod's handsome volume on the Cherubim and the Apocalypse,' we have read with much interest. The cherubim are symbols, not of angels, but of the whole Church, chiefly the redeemed in heaven. He does not seem successful in harmonizing this explanation with all the references to the cherubim in Scripture. His interpretation of the Apocalypse differs from all those which are noticed in our foregoing observations. His manner is neither critical nor argumentative, but dogmatic. According to his interpretation, the white horse of the first seal is an emblem of Christ preaching the Gospel by his apostles. The black horse, whose rider has a yoke in his hand, denotes 'the corruption of Christianity and the papal yoke.' Death on the pale horse intimates the variety of the methods of torturing and slaying God's people. The fifth seal includes the pagan and papal persecutions. The opening of the sixth seal is the final retribution. There is a similar want of distinctness throughout the volume, and, as we judge, too narrow a conception of the scheme of the Apocalypse. We heartily concur in many of the author's practical suggestions, but we have not found him very helpful in the study of the Apocalypse, chiefly from his confounding of predictions relating to the empire with those which relate to the church within its boundaries.

Dr. Brown's volume of 'Expository Discourses on the Epistle to the Galatians' is worthy to accompany his admirable exposi

tions on 'Peter's First Epistle,' and on the Discourses and Sayings of our Saviour,' and similar productions of the same pen. We can scarcely commend it too strongly. We notice it here, not with the intention of reviewing it, but to express our decided preference for the method of pulpit teaching in which he so greatly excels. We do not say that the truth contained in short sentences of Scripture should never be made the basis of popula addresses; yet we are sure that the other is the legitimate, the ancient, the most instructive mode of pastoral teaching. It ought to strike every minister of religion that, as he is not to discover truth hitherto unknown, but to expound-bring out with living authority and power-the truth which has been revealed, he cannot give a better proof of his reverence for that truth than by drawing it directly from the sacred writers themselves, giving to his hearers all the benefit of his own previous studies to clear away misconceptions, to explain particular phrases, to exhibit the harmony of revealed instruction, and to give the Word of God its due place as the oracle of all Christian teaching. It would be a much more laborious thing to prepare such expositions for the pulpit than to lay down a plan for extemporaneous utterance, or to write what is called an eloquent discourse; and for such laborious preparations a preacher needs much antecedent training, which we hope our colleges will look after even more earnestly than after fitting their students for taking secular degrees. But he who makes up his mind to have the training, and to apply the results of it in the way exemplified by Dr. Brown, will certainly not lose his reward in the larger satisfaction of his own mind, and in the more thorough and lasting usefulness of his public ministry. The skilful expounding of Scripture is an art not to be acquired at once, but it brings with it such a peculiar, sacred, and growing power, that it is worth the most persevering efforts of any man to attain it. Just as the best scientific teachers are they who most fully expound Nature, so they who most fully expound Scripture are the best religious teachers. We do not think disparagingly of systematic theological teaching, in its place; but we say, let us have plenty of Scripture intelligibly and earnestly brought before us in its exact meaning. We consider Dr. Brown's Expositions as models; but we would have every man follow the bent of his own genius in his method and in the manner of his illustrations. Most of the works we have already characterized will be of service in providing or suggesting precious sources of exegetical learning, which, to a beginner especially, will probably be felt to be

necessary.

Mr. Knight's 'Critical Commentary on Paul's Epistle to the Romans,' commenced while the author was incapacitated for

public duty in Canada, and since enriched by the study of ancient and modern annotators during a residence in England, will be found useful to the critical student.

Mr. Pridham has written three unpretending little books on the Epistles to the Hebrews, Romans, and Ephesians, which we cheerfully commend to the use of those who have not the ability or the leisure to study larger commentaries, only mentioning that he has views with which we do not agree, which will be understood as belonging to what is called the millenarian school, though they are expressed with much Christian modesty.

Dr. Cumming's 'Sabbath Readings' are excellent. Mr. Bouchier's Manna in the House' will be found useful in family reading, as well as in that of the closet. Mr. Taylor's Word-Pictures from the Bible' are designed to interest the young in the Bible, rather than to explain the contents. We regard it as a most useful class-book, and a suitable present for the young. Mr. Jukes's 'Characteristic Differences of the Four Gospels' is a pleasing illustration of an ancient idea, that each of the evangelists has one prominent idea in his Gospel-Matthew contemplating our Lord as the Son of Abraham,-Mark, as the Servant of God,Luke, as the Son of Adam-John, as the Son of God.

Mr. Moody's 'Helps and Hints for Bible Readers' contains brief comments on about fifty passages in the Gospels, Acts, and Epistles, some of which are generally regarded as difficult. The explanations are not profound, nor always satisfactory; but they are simple, pious, devout, and practical.

Some of the works we have examined, though not formal expositions, belong to the same department, inasmuch as they are intended to facilitate the study of the Scriptures. Mr. Higginson's 'Spirit of the Bible' is only the first volume of a work intended to include, in a second, the Apocrypha and the New Testament. It is not orthodox, but bears strong marks of belonging to the Unitarian school. He undervalues the apostolic ministry as the real exposition of the facts related in the Gospels. He says some smart things on some of the weaknesses of the orthodox, who, we hope, are at least good-tempered enough to profit by some of them. He remarks, very oddly, that when Paul says all Scripture is inspired of God,' he does not mean that the writing is inspired, though it is of writings only that Paul speaks. He quotes with approbation Mr. F. Newman's "History of the Hebrew Monarchy, and Professor Norton's notes to the second volume of his work on 'The Evidences of the Genuineness of the Gospels.' He takes the usual superficial view taken by Unitarians of the demons and possessions recorded in the New Testament. He makes a great fuss about the want of scientific geology in Moses, and refers to the special pleading

of Dr. Buckland in his Bridgewater Treatise, while he makes no reference to the able lectures of Dr. Pye Smith on that subject. We do not make these remarks to prejudice our readers against the book, but merely to point out what we deem objectionable. In many respects we like it very much; notwithstanding these objections, we are disposed to speak well of it. We are sometimes twitted by writers of Mr. Higginson's school for the narrowness of our views and the poverty of our learning; yet here is a writer who suggests that the requisite aid for the Pentateuch will be found in Geddes's Holy Bible and Wellbeloved's Holy Bible!

Dr. Stebbing's Helps to the Thoughtful Reading of the Four Gospels' makes no display of learning; but with all its simplicity, ease, and familiarity, it would not have been what it is if the author had not known much more than he has occasion to say. He gives the results of much critical reading in a popular form, which render his 'Helps' really what they profess to be in the service of the devout reader.

Mr. Smith's 'Dissertation on the Origin and Connexion of the Gospels' is worthy of the author to whom we are indebted for the solid and pre-eminently satisfactory illustration of The Voyage and Shipwreck of St. Paul.' It is a noble specimen of honest criticism by an independent layman. It contains the antidote to the hollow pretensions of some German writers, and puts to shame the timidity which, under the semblance of reverence for Scripture, refuses to look fairly at the actual condition of those writings. The work is deserving of a careful examination. We can only state, in the author's own words, the conclusions to which he has been led by the evidence furnished in the Gospels themselves, and by other ancient writers, respecting the origin and connexion of the Gospels

'1st. Several of the apostles, including Matthew, Peter, and John, committed to writing accounts of the transactions of our Lord and his disciples in the language spoken by them,-i. e., Syro-Chaldaic or Aramaic, known in the New Testament and the works of the Fathers as Hebrew.

2nd. When the apostles were driven by persecution from Judæa, a history of the life of our Lord was drawn up from the original Memoirs in Hebrew and in Greek, by the Apostle Matthew, for the use of the Jewish converts, the Greek being the same as the Gospel according to Matthew.

3rd. St. Luke drew up, for the use of Theophilus, a new life of our Lord, founded upon the authority of eye-witnesses and ministers of the Word, including the Hebrew Memoir of Peter and the Greek Gospel of Matthew.

'4th. After Peter's death or departure from Rome (ëžodov), St. Mark translated the Memoir written by Peter into Greek.

5th. John, at a still later period, composed his Gospel from his own original Memoirs, omitting much that was already narrated by the other Evangelists, for reasons assigned by himself. (xxi. 25.)

'By adopting this theory of the origin of the Gospels we can easily explain the phenomena in question. I do not, however, propound it as a probable conjecture, calculated to afford an explanation, but trust I shall be able to substantiate every part of it by adequate proof.' (p. xxv.)

The phenomena in question,' it is understood, consists in the nature of the agreements between the several independent writers of the Gospels. The 'adequate proof' which Mr. Smith promises is given in examples from modern contemporary historians and in a minute examination of the Gospels themselves, which do not admit of abridgment. The objections of Dr. Lardner, Mr. Horne, Bishop Marsh, Mr. Alford, Dr. Davidson, and Professor Thiersch to the notion that any of the Evangelists made use of the works of their predecessors are answered :-the reader must judge with what success after he has examined the synopsis of the parallel passages in the first three Gospels and that of the parallels between Matthew and Luke, together with the appended Critical Notes. We are strongly of opinion that this Dissertation will, sooner or later, have its place among standard works in Biblical literature.

Dr. Forbes's 'Symmetrical Structure of Scripture' is an expansion of Bishop Lowth's 'Doctrine of Hebrew Parallelism,' which Bishop Jebb applied to the New Testament, and which was extended by the Rev. T. Boys to whole paragraphs, as well as lines. By examples selected from the Psalms, Proverbs, the Decalogue, the Sermon on the Mount, and numerous other parts of Scripture, Dr. Forbes has illustrated this principle in a very interesting manner. We have cautiously tested these examples, and others, so repeatedly, that we can very cordially recommend this book to all who desire to be 'mighty in the Scriptures."

Mr. Maurice's Unity of the New Testament' appears to us to be a very sensible and useful book, which cannot be read as it deserves without some results which we consider to be highly desirable. Without being a Commentary, it exhibits the purpose of each particular Gospel or Epistle, and shows that they all have 'one common subject, that they refer to a living Person, that when considered in reference to Him they have a unity which we can discover by no collection or paragraphs.' We hope the writer will be spared to complete his design of another series on the 'Apostle John,' and on the History of the Christian Church and the Romish Apostasy.' Not a few of Mr. Maurice's peculiar opinions, from which we dissent, will, of course, be found here and there; but we do not make it a canon of criticism to condemn all the books we read, in which we find that there are