ready in its thought and experience to adopt it heartily. Let us be sure that Athanasius did not much care that it was the royal influence and not hearty conviction that led the Church to adopt the Nicæan creed. He was assured that the truth had been uttered, and he knew that it would reign in the heart of the Church in God's good time, and he lived to see the Eastern and Western Church adopt freely the symbol which so many years before he had wrought for them out of his own heart. As in ancient warfare the soldier would cast his weapon far over into the ranks of the enemy, and then fight his way up to it, so Athanasius gave the world his ultimatum in the creed he put forward at Nicæa, and he never turned back till fifty years afterward through persecution, and abuse, and toil, he had made a way for the whole Church to the faith in the Triune God.

ARTICLE IX.-NOTICES OF NEW BOOKS.

THEOLOGICAL AND RELIGIOUS.

TRENCH'S STUDIES IN THE GOSPELS.*-This volume answers to its title. It is not a commentary unfolding either the whole or any definite portion of the Gospels, but is made up of a succession of "Studies," or of investigations into the meaning and reflections upon the teachings of difficult or important sections and passages selected from all parts of the Gospel history. The passages discussed are sixteen in number, commencing with the one which contains the story of the Temptation of Christ, and passing on in the order of time to the closing one, which has reference to the interview between our Lord and the two disciples on the way to Emmaus. Each of these passages is entered into fully and minutely, but, of course, in great measure without relation to the others which precede or follow, and the book becomes in this way a collection of fragments, which need to be gathered up into a larger plan, in order to have entire completeness, or to be in the highest degree valuable to the ordinary student. Indeed the author intimates that he entertained the purpose of preparing such a larger work at the beginning, but was compelled to abandon it and limit himself to the perfecting, as far as he might, of these smaller parts. The reputation of the author is so widely extended, and his former books on the Miracles and the Parables have been so long known, and so greatly prized by preachers and students in this country, that high expectations must naturally be raised at the announcement of any new volume from his pen. From our examination of the one before us, however, we cannot but fear that these expectations will be somewhat disappointed. Many of the characteristics of the author's style and thought will be found in its pages; but there seems to be a want of that thoroughness which exhausts the subjects, and of that richness and suggestiveness which make a work of this kind truly excellent. The reader will hardly find himself aided very greatly in his insight into the

* Studies in the Gospels. By RICHARD CHENEVIX TRENCH, D. D., Archbishop of Dublin. New York: Charles Scribner & Co. 1867. 8vo., pp. 326.

deeper meaning of the Scriptures, or largely increased in his knowledge as he follows the Archbishop-and yet he will discover, here and there, traces of the same things which have distinguished the earlier and more useful works to which we have referred, enough, perchance, to make him glad to renew his acquaintance with the author.

TRENCH'S HULSEAN LECTURES.*These lectures were delivered in 1845 and 1846 by the present Archbishop of Dublin when rector of Itchenstoke. They are now reprinted in a neat and portable form by Mr. Widdleton. The topics themselves are of special interest, and they are treated in a clear and solid way by the well known author, and not without a certain gentle earnestness which makes his works in general both instructive and interesting.

AMERICAN EDITION OF SMITH'S DICTIONARY OF THE BIBLE.t— Smith's Dictionary is the best work of the kind in the English language. It represents well the Biblical learning and scholarship of England. In scientific precision and compression, it is inferior to Winer's Real-Worterbuch; and many of its Articles are defective. But the American edition, which Messrs. Hurd & Houghton are issuing in numbers, is a great improvement upon its English predecessor. The American editors are eminently qualified for the task they have undertaken. We feel sure that the highest attainable accuracy will be secured for the work, under their vigilant supervision. The corrections which they introduce are very numerous and are often important. The additional Articles contributed by them or by their co-laborers bring the Dictionary up to the state of knowledge at the present moment; and much of the new matter is of special importance to the American student. Few persons are aware of the amount of toil required in the preparation of this edition of the Dictionary. In typography the work appears to be a fac simile of the English edition.

The Fitness of Holy Scripture for Unfolding the Spiritual Life of Men. Christ, the desire of all Nations, or, the Unconscious Prophecies of Heathendom. Being the Hulsean Lectures. By RICHARD CHENEVIX TRENCH. New York: W. J. Widdleton. 1866.

American Edition of Dr. William Smith's Edition of the Bible. Revised and edited by Professor H. B. HACKETT, D. D., with the coöperation of Mr. Ezra ABBOT, A. M., Assistant Librarian of Harvard University. New York: Hurd & Houghton. 1867.

MCCLINTOCK AND STRONG'S CYCLOPEDIA OF BIBLICAL, THEOLOGICAL, AND ECCLESIASTICAL LITERATURE.*—The plan of this Dictionary, as the title indicates, is very comprehensive, covering the whole field of theological knowledge. It is impossible that a critical reader should fail to mark in such a work the omission of some topics which he would expect to find. Inaccuracies will unavoidably creep in, let the editorial labor be never so diligent. These, however, are not likely to be of serious consequence to the majority of persons who have occasion to consult such a work, although perfect correctness should, of course, be carefully sought. The eminent qualifications of Doctors McClintock and Strong for the preparation of a work of this kind are well known. They have made use of the best sources of knowledge in the various languages; and their original contributions, although not concealing their own theological predilections, will be characterized, it can scarcely be doubted, by a spirit of candor and fairness. Their Dictionary deserves liberal patronage from all denominations of Christians.

MANUAL OF BIBLICAL INTERPRETATION.t-In the present state of biblical science we need nothing more than a severe, relentless method in the treatment of all subjects connected with it; not only in order to attain sure results in the particular department in hand, but also to accustom students to such a mode of treatment. In reviewing the attempts that are made from time to time to contribute to this science, we are bound to inquire first of all how they satisfy this demand. We welcome any new effort to bring about more correct views of the Bible, of its relations to our faith, and of the proper method of studying it, but we doubt if the above mentioned work can be considered, in these important points, any great advance upon Ernesti. Certainly in orderly arrangement and conciseness it is inferior. This would, however, be unimportant if the author himself had arrived at a clear and consistent view of the subject, and placed it before the student in such a way as to impart the same to him. Such is not the case. He professes himself of the grammatico-historical school, but has

* Cyclopædia of Biblical, Theological, and Ecclesiastical Literature. Prepared by Rev. JOHN MCCLINTOCK, D. D., and JAMES STRONG, S. T. D. Vol. I.—A, B. New York: Harper & Brothers, Publishers. 1867. pp. 947.

+ Manual of Biblical Interpretation. By JOSEPH MUENSCHER, D. D. Gambier, Ohio. Printed for the Author. 1865. 37

VOL. XXVI.

not reached a clear mastery of the method of that school, and the results to which it leads. The consequence is a collection of canons, which are not classified or arranged at all, and which are in some respects contradictory. We notice a corresponding uncertainty in his own exegesis, both in the examples contained in the "Manual," and in his Commentary to the Book of Proverbs. (See the treatment of 1 Kings ii., on pp. iii. and iv. of the Introduction.) He quotes, in his chapter on "Rationalism," the canon "Interpret the Bible as you would any other book" (p. 50), to condemn it as a doctrine of that school. The chapter is very vague, and it is impossible to find out who are meant by Rationalists, as he does not approach to a definition. We doubt if there are not classes of persons, who, from their stand-point, would regard some portions of the work before us as rationalistic, and feel that the author had robbed them of much of the "richness" of the word of God. We shall do better therefore to dismiss these invidious party-names and judge principles and opinions on their merits. We turn now to page 85, and find that the author lays it down as a "general preliminary principle, that the Bible should be interpreted as other books are interpreted. The same laws which are considered legitimate and proper in regard to the explanation of other books are applicable to the Bible." He proceeds, however, to qualify this, to the effect, that the Bible is the inspired record of a supernatural revelation, and is therefore, in so far, not to be treated like other books. This qualification constitutes the difference between his canon and the one which he quotes from the Rationalists. We have then a distinction established between sacred and profane Hermeneutics. The Revelation of God is written with words, in a book, aceording to the rules of human language, yet its meaning is not to be elucidated by the same rules, by which we get at the meaning of other things of the same nature. The reason is because the Inspiration of the Bible is a "dogmatic law of interpretation,"—" an axiom in the science of Biblical Hermeneutics." Whence this axiom, however?-an axiom which our opponents deny, and which assumes the solution of the problem proposed? Do we get it from tradition? The author's views of tradition are too sound for us to expect an affirmative. From the authority of the Church? Neither will he probably affirm this. He would argue, we presume, with us, that it rests upon the claims and character of the book itself-and these we can only become acquainted with, through studying the book-i. e., bringing our