We reproduce, as pertinent to this line of thought, one or two paragraphs from the eloquent address of the deceased Mr. Thornton to the last General Conference:

The great matter is, we need the baptism of the Holy Ghost. How often have we said, in the language of the Nicene divines, "I believe in the Holy Ghost, the Lord and giver of life, who proceedeth from the Father and the Son." How often have we protested that our services without Him are clouds without water, clouds which (as Richard Watson said) may be gay with all the hues of light, but which mock the husbandman as they pass in brilliant career over his parched fields. The clouds we long to see are charged with the vapors of spring, tremble to the impulse of the breeze, and impatient to pour the vital shower on the dry and thirsty earth. We want the Holy Ghost.

We want the constant baptism, not merely a fruitful rain here, and sterility there and then; not excitement to-day and miserable coldness to-morrow; but zeal fed from the celestial altar, a fire that will not go out. We want a constant revival, one continual ingathering of souls. Then he that reapeth shall receive wages, and gather fruit to life everlasting. But while we desire a constant baptism of grace, we value the extraordinary effusions also, when God shall send them, and when the living waters cut their own channels. Then all hail to the life-giving floods! May they come on Europe and on America! "Awake, awake, O north wind, and blow! thou south wind, awake! Then shall the spices of the garden of the Lord flow out, and Zion will be the joy of the earth." Had I the voice of thunder, I would lift it up in affirming that what the Church wants more than everything else is the power from on high, the glory of the Holy Ghost, the pentecostal flame. Pentecost is not an obsolete word. It does not belong to old history only. The Spirit is coming.

What ought the Church to do as a thank-offering in the consecration of her substance to the Lord? Let it be first of all remembered that this offering is in addition to the regular collections, not substituted for either of them. They must be honestly and faithfully presented and the usual response given. Then, after they are provided for, is to come the thank-offering of the century.

How much shall it be? The General Conference said:

As the highest authority of the Methodist Episcopal Church, we commend this whole subject to the prayerful consideration of every minister, traveling and local, and every official and private member of the Church, calling for the most systematic and energetio efforts every where to carry out in their true spirit these noble plans; and after due consideration, we deem it right to ask for

and to expect not less than two millions of dollars for achievements which will be worthy of our great and honored Church, and which shall show to our descendants to the latest generations the gratitude we feel for the wonderful Providence which originated and has so largely blessed and prospered our beloved Church.

"Not less than two millions”—that sum is the minimum. Our personal views of the ability of the Church might be deemed extravagant. We give, instead, the sober estimate of Bishop Morris, the venerable senior of the Episcopal college. He has seen the Church growing. Fifty years has he spent in its ministry, and during that time he has traversed its length and breadth. In a recent communication to one of the Church papers he said:

The figures below have reference to the final aggregate of centenary contributions to both funds, connectional and local. Our communicants, omitting small fractions, are 929,000. These I divide into sections of 100,000 each, and note down what those of each section can probably give, on an average, per member, proceeding upon the Bible scale, "from the least to the greatest," or from the poorest to the most wealthy. The estimate is moderate. If there be any failure in filling the bill it will not be for want of will or ability on the part of our people, but because of neglect on the part of pastors to secure universal attention of all our friends in all the charges to this glorious enterprise.

So far as I can understand the matter, there is nothing impracticable or extravagant in this estimate of $5,000,000. If we realize that sum in 1866, and secure a net increase of seventy-one thousand members to make up an even million, I shall be content.

Who can pronounce his estimate extravagant? Is there one of his specifications which a thoroughly organized effort cannot accomplish? If not, and if there are those who purpose princely offerings, why may we not confidently expect the five millions which the practical bishop pronounces a moderate estimate? It is within the easy reach of the Church.

But the time for argument is passed by and the time for action comes. It is doubted if 1966 will bring so glorious an opportunity. Methodism comes now with a nation's blessing upon her head, amid the thanksgivings of peace, and the grateful shouts of four millions of liberated sons of bondage; comes after a century of unexampled progress and of unmeasured prosperity to answer the question of her own heart:

"What shall I render unto the LORD for all his benefits toward me?"

History shall record in what manner the question was answered.

ART. II. THE LATEST ATTEMPTS TO HARMONIZE THE MOSAIC HISTORY OF CREATION AND GEOLOGY.

GIOVANNI BATT. PIANCIANI, (S. J.) Cosmogonia naturale comparata col Genesi. Roma: 1865.

J. H. KURZ, Bibel und Astronomie nebst Zugaben verwandten Inhalts. Eine Darsteliung der Biblischen Kosmologie und ihrer Beziehungen zu den Naturwissenschaften. Fünfte Auflage.

Berlin 1864. ATHANASIUS BOSIZIO, (S. J.,) Hexaëmeron und die Geologie. Briefe über die Anwendung der geologischen Forschungen bei der Auslegung der heiligen Schöpfungsgeschichte. Mainz: 1865. F. W. SCHULTZ, Die Schöpfungsgeschichte nach Naturwissenschaft und Bibel. Beitrag zur Verständigung. Gotha: 1865.

THE apologetical exposition of the first chapter of Genesis, or, in other words, the establishment of a harmony between Bib

NOTE BY THE TRANSLATOR.-The article here presented in an English dress appears in the first number of a new German monthly entitled "Der Beweis des Glau bens." As its title indicates, the new periodical is devoted to the defense of Christianity, particularly against naturalistic science, pantheistic philosophy, and ultramontane proselytism. It enrolls very strong men in its list of editorial and other contributors, and, judging from the first two numbers, promises to become one of the most wide-awake and valuable of the periodicals of Germany. We take pleasure in recommending it—without solicitation—to all readers of German interested in the discussion of apologetical questions. It may be ordered through any German bookseller, the subscription price being for the present 11⁄2 thaler, Prussian currency, with a prospect of reduction as soon as the enterprise shall have become financially paying. Each number contains 48 pages.

lical Revelation and Geological Science in the realm of Cosmogony, is one of the most interesting and at the same time one of the most difficult problems in the entire domain of Christian Apology. The manifestly not inconsiderable difference which exists between the succession of creative acts in the Hexaëmeron and the succession of geological formations, together with their organic remains, has called forth in the progress of modern geological and palæontological research a whole series of attempts at reconciliation, the latest of which are especially marked by learned ingenuity, and by the greatest possible avoidance of that harshness and capriciousness of exegesis which not unfrequently characterized former works. There are particularly four ways in which the reconciliation of these differences has been attempted: 1. By running a strict parallel between the six days of creation and the main epochs of the geological development, (hypothesis of Literal Agreement.) 2. By making the geological epochs and catastrophes anterior to the six days of creation, (the Restitutionary Hypothesis.) 3. By referring the paleontological phenomena to geological revolutions and cataclysms posterior to the Hexaëmeron, particularly to the universal deluge described in Genesis vi-ix, (the Diluvian Hypothesis.) 4. By abandoning the effort to establish a strict agreement between Geology and Genesis, in consequence of apprehending the Mosaic account of creation as indeed truc, but not literally and scientifically accurate, (hypothesis of Ideal or Substantial Agreement.)*

In the following pages we will subject each of the abovementioned methods of reconciliation to a careful examination, glancing occasionally at that which has thus far been done toward their scientific elaboration and proof, but preserving a special reference to the four new works mentioned at the head of this article, each one of which advocates one of the above hypotheses with warmth and decision.

I. The most natural attempt to explain the origin of the geological formations, and of the petrifactions contained in them, was, for the simple Scripture faith of the elder theologians,

the

*The first of these hypotheses is styled by our author "Die Concordanz hypothese" the last "Die Ideal-concordistische Hypothese."-Tr.

supposition that these organic remains date from the Noachian deluge, or if not exclusively from this, at least from similar desolating catastrophes subsequent to the Hexaëmeron. Already the Church Father Tertullian attributed diluvian origin to the petrified shells and animals which are found in and on the mountains.* At the end of the seventeenth century Leibnitz pursued (in his "Protogea") essentially the same course for the genetic explanation of the new facts which geology already in his day was rapidly bringing to light. In his footsteps followed the Englishmen Thomas Burnet, (Telluris Theoria Sacra, 1698;) John Woodward, (an Essay toward a Natural History of the Earth, 1696, 1733;) and others, as also the celebrated Zurich naturalist and physician Scheuchzer, who believed to have found in the anthropomorphous skeleton of a gigantic salamander the bones of a human being who had perished in the deluge, and accordingly a strong proof for the truth of Bible History, (Homo diluvii testis; Herbarium diluvianum; Physica sacra, 1727, ss.) More recently the Russian geologist Stephan Kutorga, (“Einige Worte gegen die Theorie der stufenweise Entwickelung der organischen Wesen der Erde," 1839,) the Frenchman Sorignet, ("La Cosmogonie de la Bible devant les Sciences Perfectionnées," 1854;) the wellknown Lutheran theologian and Old Testament commentator, Keil, (in Dieckhoff and Kliefoth's "Zeitschrift," 1860, p. 479, ss.; as also in his "Commentary on Genesis," 1862 ;) and latest of all the distinguished Roman Catholic preacher and devotional author, E. Veith, (in his Apologetical Lectures on Genesis i-xi, delivered in Vienna, "Die Anfänge der Menschenwelt," 1865,) have attempted to defend, in substance, this diluvian hypothesis. Among the authors of the four works here to be reviewed, the Jesuit Bosizio also declares himself in favor of this method of reconciliation.

At the very beginning of his work, our author emphasizes the great uncertainty, vacillation, and disagreement of the current geological investigations and opinions, and argues therefrom, that it is the duty of the defender of Genesis to proceed with the greatest caution. He thence proceeds to subject the attempts thus far made to reconcile Genesis and Geology (that is, the main forms of the first two hypotheses * Tertullian, de Pallio, chap. ii. Compare also Hippolytus, Refutat. haeres, I, 14