the contrary, wheresoever the Real Presence of CHRIST is in its mediatorial energy, there is heaven. While we sing our Gloria in Excelsis to the Lamb of GOD which taketh away the sins of the world, we address Him as sitting at the right hand of the FATHER. The way into the holiest is made open by the Blood of CHRIST, and that omnipotent assession is wondrously brought near to us by this heavenly ministration, insomuch that S. Paul says of Christians, that we are made to sit together in heavenly places in [the Body of] CHRIST. For us there is no more an earthly temple, representing in a figure the absent celestial verity, but the Body of CHRIST is itself the heavenly temple, and it is truly presented to us in this Divine Mystery.

Secondly, Mr. Freeman distinguishes the reverence due to the sacred symbols as a separate act from the adoration due to CHRIST in heaven. But why are we to reverence the Body and Blood of CHRIST, or their symbols at all, if it is not because the glory of CHRIST'S Divine Person rests upon them? To reverence the symbols as separate from CHRIST, however much we may limit the idea of reverence, is idolatry. To adore them because they shine with the radiance of CHRIST'S Presence is a relative adoration which is no idolatry, because it reaches forth into that which is beyond the veil of CHRIST's flesh, even His Eternal Godhead. To adopt therefore some of Mr. Freeman's words, we would say, that "while our utmost reverence is directed towards the holy Body and Blood, witnessed to as present by the visible symbols, and discerned as such with the spiritual eye, and hand, and mouth of the soul," we must be careful not to think of them as earthly charms or idols, but as gifts of heaven, and looking through them to the spiritual world into which access is afforded us by their consecration, to direct all our thoughts and acts of worship through them to Him from union with Whom their only honour comes, and to strive by faith to see heaven opened therein and JESUS sitting at the right hand of GOD.

To this conclusion Mr. Freeman's premises necessarily lead us, unless for "CHRIST'S Body and Blood" we substitute an empty sign thereof, and for "utmost reverence" imaginary sentiment.

We quite agree with him that it is not a "principal purpose," much less "the supreme purpose of the entire rite to produce such a Presence as an object of adoration." And again, we do not sympathise with those who would encourage Christian men habitually "to resort to the sanctuary for the idle purpose of offering such worship without intending to take any further part in the rite of communicating." But neither was the Infant Body placed in the manger for the purpose of worship, yet those were truly wise men who acknowledged their belief in GoD's truth, by acting upon that corollary which affection necessarily deduced from it, and worshipping Him.

Bishop Forbes says well:

"Either CHRIST is present, or He is not. If He is, He ought to be adored; if He is not, cadit quæstio."

We shall conclude with an extract from Dr. Pusey:

"The pure worship, then, of the Infinite GOD, in and beyond all heavens, and the heaven of heavens, not contained by them, but containing them, was perfectly compatible with a worship of Him on earth whereon He made His Presence certainly known, whether under the form of man, or of an angel, or of created fire. Not the created fire, or any created form was worshipped, but the invisible GOD under them, and present with them.

Idolatry was for man, (1.) to worship any created thing or being, or any creature of his imagination, as GOD besides the one true GOD. This was forbidden by the first commandment, 'Thou shalt have no other gods beside Me.' Or, (2.) it was for man to invent forms for himself whereby to symbolize the invisible GOD, and to worship Him under any symbols which God had not ordained, and where consequently He is not present in any special way of His own appointment. This was forbidden in the second commandment, Thou shalt not make to thyself any graven image, nor the likeness of anything in heaven above, or in the earth beneath, or in the waters under the earth. Thou shalt not bow down to them, nor worship them.' But the presence of a material object, or of a creature, did not in itself interfere with the spiritual worship of GOD present there. Nay, they were precisely the most spiritual persons of the Old Testament, those to whom above others GOD foreshowed the Day of CHRIST-Abraham 'the friend of GOD,' and the patriarchs Isaac and Jacob; Moses, to whom He 'spake face to face;' and Joshua, and Ezekiel, and Daniel,—to these among the most eminent saints of the Old Testament did GOD reveal Himself, and receive worship under some created form.

"It is, then, in analogy with God's way under the older dispensation that the Church has ever worshipped our LORD truly and spiritually present in the Sacrament, notwithstanding that locally and after the natural manner of the existence of a body, His Human Nature is at the right hand of God in heaven."-Pp. 327, 328.

Our article has been confined to the single point of adoration. We must not close it, however, without offering our humble tribute gratitude to the Bishop of Brechin, for the admirable summary of the whole doctrine of the Eucharist, contained in his Charge, which, we trust, because it is a summary, may obtain a wide circulation. No single extract can convey a right notion of its character; but the passage which we subjoin will serve to show how much of deep catholic teaching is compressed into its necessarily limited periods.

"This our sacrifice of prayer and thanksgiving,' as the Prayer Book beautifully renders the 'Sacrificium Eucharisticum' of the ancient liturgies, is that which GOD by the mouth of His Prophet Malachi promised, when He said 'from the rising of the sun even unto the going down of the same, My name shall be great among the Gentiles; and in every place

incense shall be offered to My name and a pure offering.' This is fulfilled to-day. Not as under the law which made nothing perfect' (Heb. vii. 19) 'in the time then present in which were offered both gifts and sacrifices which could not make him that did the same perfect as touching the conscience' (ix. 9); but the same Lamb of GOD, whom the rapt Apostle in Patmos saw in Heaven as it had been slain,' is now mystically offered in the Church below. Now we have no longer a priest who first for his own sins and then for the people's needeth daily to offer up sacrifice (vii. 27), but ours is a High Priest, holy, harmless, undefiled, separate from sinners and made higher than the Heavens (v. 26). For 'CHRIST being come an high priest of good things to come, by a greater and more perfect tabernacle, not made with hands, that is to say, not of this building, neither by the blood of goats and calves, but by His own blood He entered at once into the Holy Place, having obtained eternal redemption for us.' Now no longer is the altar of GOD bedewed by the worthless blood of bulls and goats, whereby it is not possible to take away sins (x. 4); but the same Holy Stream which flowed upon the Cross, is for us and for the salvation of all, consecrated, and by virtue of the operation of the HOLY GHOST, our mystic sacrifice is now the Body and Blood of Him Who offereth it. Yet this august solemnity in which the Church of GOD glories is purely spiritual, and in every way worthy of the Gospel covenant. In a Sacrament is the LORD's death shown forth in representation. The very image' has taken place of the 'shadow.' Full and sufficient is the marvel; for though it be given only to the eye of faith therein to discern the LORD's Body, and to love it, yet is that Body nevertheless 'verily and indeed' taken, and everlastingly under this image shown forth unto the FATHER."-Pp. 41, 42.

REVIEWS AND NOTICES.

1. A Lecture on Harvest Thanksgivings and Festivities. By the Rev. E. JACSON. Masters.

2. Metropolitan Workhouses and their Inmates. Longman and Co. WE combine these two dissimilar tracts, as together bearing witness to the general progress of schemes for doing good to the bodies and souls of men throughout the country. Thus, to take the centre of England, Northamptonshire and Worcestershire carry on their architectural societies vigorously; Warwickshire has its joint school competitions; Oxfordshire and Leicestershire have their harvest meetings of schoolmasters; Staffordshire brings its choirs annually together in the cathedral city; Shropshire, we learn from Mr. Jacson, is now taking up a reform of the much-abused harvest home; and the City of London has made a move for Christianising our workhouses. In all these, and many other kindred efforts, the Church is taking her right place; and to all we bid GOD speed! We beg our readers earnestly to procure these pamphlets for themselves: the latter of the two is by a very accomplished lady, who, we are glad to find, among her artistic labours, can find time to devote to works of mercy.

Atheisms of Geology. Sir C. Lyall, Hugh Miller, &c., confronted with the rocks. By J. A. S. London: Piper, Stephenson and Spence. Edinburgh: Menzies.

It is difficult to say what are the real bearings of science and revelation upon each other, with reference to any point that can be named-for we cannot confront them immediately. All that we do is to confront our interpretative apprehension of the one with our experimental knowledge of the other. It is therefore important for us to remember that the two terms of the comparison may be perfectly harmonious, although our intervening media of comparisons are inconsistent. It is consequently with sorrow that we see harsh names used on either side. Those persons can have learnt little of God's power from the study of His works who feel it in any way a matter of pleasure to find out a fancied flaw in that inspired word which professes to emanate from the Author of Creation; and on the other hand, those persons can have learnt little of the faith which inspiration demands, who tremble lest the results of science should be found irreconcileable with Scriptural statements. Herein lies one great element of our mental probation, that upon many points we have discrepancies which we cannot solve. Truth is not likely to be benefited by charging geology or any other science with Atheism, as the author of the pamphlet before us presumes to do. When geologists speak of certainty in their conclusions, they of course mean nothing beyond inductive certainty. When they state that the present phænomena could not possibly have been brought about except in some particular way, they do not of course mean to deny that GOD could by an act of His Omnipotence have created the earth exactly as it is at the present moment. He could have buried in its rocks the bones of animals who had never walked on its surface. It would have been no greater stretch of His power to trace at once with His finger upon the coal-bed the marks of foliage, than first to erect the forest and then to change it into coal. When a thing is declared to be impossible, it is meant to be so exceedingly improbable that nothing short of an express revelation would make one give credence to it. Now the record of Creation in the Book of Genesis is not of this express character. We are told of the original Creation of matter, and then of a subsequent state of disorganization, and then of six operations succeeding. We are not told however what is the exact relation of these various points of revelation one to another. Early Fathers, upon grounds quite distinct from geological experiment, believed that the Hexameron of Creation meant something much vaster than the mere lapse of six times four-and-twenty hours.

We may still be unable accurately to ascertain their position in the geological epochs, but we shall damage ourselves as students of GOD'S power if we determine beforehand that the voice of nature shall teach us nothing but what we can at once arrange along with our knowledge of facts from revelation. The man of science must of course remember that the circumstances of the world may have changed to such an inconceivable extent as to make his calculations altogether wrong. It may be that these deceptive phænomena are allowed for the very trial of his faith and humility. But while science and religion alike teach

him not to be over confident in anything of his own propounding,theology and devotion must equally teach him in his study of Scripture not to be over hasty in coming to conclusions, but to seek on amidst the mysteries of God's Word and of His works, confident of this one thing that they do tell one tale, whether he can understand them or no, and that he must go on studying in faith, hoping for the time when all discrepancies shall be harmonised, and when he shall know God's mysteries even as he is known of GOD.

We do not think the pamphlet before us is likely to conduce to the advancement either of scientific truth or religious tempers.

1. A Few Plain Words about what every Christian ought to know, believe, and do, in order to be saved. Plymouth: Jenkin Thomas. 2. The First Catechism on Christian Doctrine. London: Painter and Sons.

THESE are two of the kind of manuals the want of which we have so often deplored both are thoroughly Catholic, and both bring out very strongly the Church's doctrine as to the guilt and remedy of sin. The most novel thing that we note is the treatment of the difficult question of Extreme Unction in the "Catechism."

"Q. What is Visitation of the Sick?

"A. Prayer for forgiveness of their sins, and restoration to health, sometimes accompanied by anointing the sick with holy oil, and then called Extreme Unction.

"Q. What authority is there in Scripture for anointing the sick with oil? "A. We read in the Gospels that it was the practice of the Apostles; and in the fifth chapter of the Epistle of S. James it is said, 'Is any sick among you? Let him call for the elders of the Church; and let them pray over him, anointing him with oil in the Name of the LORD; and the prayer of faith shall save the sick; and the LORD shall raise him up; and if he have committed sins they shall be forgiven him.'

This method of treating the subject may certainly merit the claim of ingenuity. We quite understand that the disuse of anointing, to the mere "Scriptural Christian," is a serious difficulty; and there certainly is no reason why, in any case in which it is desired, it may not be resorted to. At the same time we can scarcely think that the way in which the question is here left would be satisfactory to any one by whom the disuse of the practice was at all scrupled.

In any new edition of the "Plain Words," we would suggest that the objective view of the Holy Eucharist might be brought out more strongly.

We cannot accord to Mr. Masters' The Canticles with Chants the title that it claims of being "pointed correctly." No pointing can be correct which limits itself to the mediation and cadence. We had thought that Dr. Elvey's Psalter, borrowing the Plain-Song system of pointing the whole verse, (and Sir F. Ouseley, we understand, has a Psalter in preparation on the same principle, more fully developed,) was an acknowledgment that the Anglican method of chanting was not any longer to be defended. This edition of the Canticles, however, though