Mr. Marriott brings forward the case of S. Peter, to whom our LORD says, "When thou art converted strengthen thy brethren, in support of his view of the meaning of the term Conversion, viz., that it is applicable to Christians. We will answer this in his own words, for at page 121 we read the following comment upon Romans vi. 3, "Note how in this, as in other Scriptures, the changed life of the regenerate is connected immediately with the resurrection life of our LORD." This therefore cannot be a case in point, for though S. Peter knew and acknowledged CHRIST, and had been brought to Him, and taught by Him and loved Him; yet CHRIST had not yet died and risen from the dead when these words were spoken to S. Peter. Man was yet in his sins-the Spirit had not yet conquered the flesh-the HOLY GHOST had not yet come down for the sanctification of the lost race-the Church in fact was not born, and the Apostles were lying with the whole world under condemnation; therefore S. Peter was undoubtedly at that time neither regenerated, converted, justified, nor sanctified, in the exact and proper sense of these terms. This was the work of the Church after the Ascension of CHRIST, and the subsequent descent of the HOLY GHOST; for, till all this was accomplished, the consequences of the Incarnation could not be felt, the children of the Second Adam were yet unborn. The separate results of CHRIST's work seem so often to be misapprehended that one does not wonder at any confusion of theological terms. Some persons speak as if the Birth of CHRIST in itself saved us, others dwell only on the death. And though this may mainly depend on the different constitution of people's minds, yet it is a great mistake to dwell on any single act of CHRIST in itself, as more important than another. By the whole work of the Incarnate GOD all mankind is put in a condition to be saved, i.e., human nature in CHRIST is accepted by GoD; but without individual application of the benefits men, as individuals, still remain in the flesh and unsaved. By taking flesh, the SoN of GoD joined Himself to the common nature of man and showed His FATHER's love and willingness to save. By His spotless life on earth He in man's nature fulfilled the perfect law. By His Death He obtained in His own person the gift of remission of sins. By His Resurrection He overcame death and hell for the justification of the elect; and by His Ascension into heaven He obtained final acceptance of the FATHER for man. Thus, of His own fulness He is able, as our great High Priest, by the agency of the HOLY SPIRIT, to give spiritual life, remission of sin, and righteousness to every man who is born unto Him; and by the same Spirit to sanctify and renew him daily through appointed sacraments and ordinances of His Church-the channels of His Presence.

The better rendering of our LORD's words to S. Peter would be, "When thou art come to thyself, strengthen thy brethren."

We conclude with an extract from Mr. Marriott, with which in the main we agree, because it expresses the responsibility of individual members of the Body of CHRIST, with the view to their final salvation.

"And in them that cleave unto CHRIST, in whom what God sowed in their heart abides, these powers are after New Birth maintained and increased by the HOLY SPIRIT Working in the heart a renewing change, whereby they are all their life through conformed ever more and more to that likeness of GOD in which once man was created. But between the period of our New Birth and that of our actually entering, hereafter, into the full possession of those blessings of which then we became heirs in hope, there intervenes a life of probation, during which it is for us, in the strength which God has given us, to work out to its designed result that present salvation to which we have been called, man having his allotted part to do in causing to abide to his lasting blessing those gifts of the HOLY SPIRIT of which he has been made partaker.' Pp. 153, 154.

In this allusion to the gradual development of the Christian life we find no mention of the Sacraments as means to this end. The absence of objective teaching must be pronounced to be the great defect of this book, for which it is not sufficient apology to say that the writer would not say anything that might cause offence. It is impossible to follow any correct line of argument on the doctrines of Christianity, if they are viewed only in their subjective light and individual character. This latter is subject to the shifting and uncertainty of personal feeling and capacity, while the Truth is unchangeable as GOD Himself.

We turn now to what is really a distinct, and certainly the best, part of Mr. Marriott's work, viz., the appendices and notes on the critical meaning of certain Greek words. The first of these are on the two terms ῥῆμα Θεοῦ and ὁ Λόγος τοῦ Θεοῦ. The object of the writer is to show that this term, "The Word of God," in Holy Scripture does not mean the written Word. This in itself of course is valuable, when one remembers the canting use which is so often made of this term; but the distinction between the two Greek terms is even still more important, and this does not seem fully to be apprehended by Mr. Marriott. The words undoubtedly were not kept distinct by the Apostles with exact philosophical accuracy, and their respective meanings sometimes merge into one another. But, generally, there is this distinction observable between the two, viz., that pñua is the word spoken; but that óyos, (unless accompanied by the word axon,) generally indicates the Personal CHRIST, or else the grace that flows from Him. Of the former of these two kindred uses the opening words of S. John's Gospel form the best illustration, "In the beginning was the Word;" with which may be compared the words of the same

Apostle in the Apocalypse, (xix. 13,) "His Name is called the Word of GOD," and Acts xx. 32, "to the Word of His grace, Who (and not what, as in the Authorized Version) is able to build you up." For the meaning of Aóyos a single example will suffice, viz., the Parable of the Sower, where the Seed or Word of God is something sown in the heart, and endowed with vital powers"the Word of God is quick."

Another question of great importance, which has often been referred to in these pages, is touched (but only touched) on at page 100 of this book- -we mean the difference between the perfect and the aorist of the Greek. It is in a note on the words ãs o yeyevvnuévos, (in 1 S. John iii.,) and is as follows:

"Observe here once for all the characteristic distinction of meaning between the participle of the præsens perfectum and the participle of the aorist. The former (as a rule) denotes a present result from a past act, thus combining the notions of past and present time. The aorist participle denotes an act regarded as single and complete in itself, and is therefore never used to express the ideas either of duration or of repetition expressed by other participles. Authority for the above statements may be found by any who need it in Donaldson's Gr. Gr. p. 419, 'the idea of completeness conveyed by the aorist must be distinguished from that of a state consequent on an act, which is the meaning of the perfect.' Winer (with less clearness of statement) Gr. Gr. sect. xlv. part iii. 1. d. p. 360. Hence, if we compare the o jejevvnuévos, so often used by S. John, with the ò yevvnoe's, which occurs once and once only (ὁ γ. ἐκ Θεοῦ τηρεῖ ἑαυτὸν καὶ ὁ πονηρὸς οὐχ ἅπτεται αὐτοῦ, 1 S. John v. 18,) we shall see that the former means 'he that is a son of God,' (his present sonship resulting from the new birth considered as a past fact,) but that in the latter the thought is carried back to the moment of new birth itself, and the habitual watchfulness of the regenerated man is described as commencing from that time, and as so maintained that the evil onetoucheth him not.'"-P. 100.

In the next page but one Mr. Marriott also justly notices the same sense as belonging to the perfect participle in 1 S. Pet. i. 23, "being born again.'

We commend this subject to Mr. Marriott's more full investigation. The course of his argument does not lead him to touch on the participle "being justified" in the Epistle to the Romans; but we wonder that he should not have pressed 1 Cor. vi. 11 ("Ye have been washed," &c., not "ye are washed," as in the Authorized Version) to his side.

46

REVIEWS AND NOTICES.

The Office and Work of a Priest in the Church of God.

A Sermon preached in the Parish Church of Fulham. By J. J. COXHEAD, M.A., Curate. London: Parker.

CHURCHMANSHIP, we can well believe, is at a very low ebb in the parish of Fulham. The fabric of the church as it recently was, and we believe still is, would lead us to expect as much. So it appears that the good people of Fulham, who have lived or slept for so many generations under the shadow of the Episcopal palace of London, were shocked by learning, on Trinity Sunday last, when the Ordination was held in their church, that the Apostolic power of Absolution is conveyed, according to the English ordinal, to every one who receives the Episcopal laying on of hands.

The sermon before us was written to allay this alarm, and to explain that the words "Whosesoever sins ye remit," &c., mean-nothing. But surely the people of Fulham must have fallen lower in intelligence, not to speak of spiritual apprehension, if they can accept Mr. Coxhead's explanations. Admitting, as one may well do, that our LORD's words include within their scope remission of sins by Baptism, it is surely impossible to exclude such more directly personal agency of an Apostle, as when S. Paul says that he "forgave" the sin of the incestuous Corinthian (which, by the way, Mr. Coxhead of course would represent as though it were the act of the Church) "in the Person of CHRIST." And so, also, as regards the mind of the Church of England, she is her own best interpreter. In the Ordinal she instructs her Bishops to con

vey

the power of remission, and it is in Absolution she bids them exercise the gift; for in Absolution she bids them pronounce the same solemn words, "I absolve thee." We rejoice to see that the Times has allowed this discussion to be carried on in its columns; and while the man of the world will doubtless follow the Times' lead, the plain and weighty reasoning of Dr. Pusey will sink deep into the heart of religious England, and will speedily bear fruit.

The Sermons and Addresses delivered at a Conference of Clergy of the Diocese of Oxford, held at Queen's College, Oxford, on the 5th, 6th, and 7th of July, 1866; with a Preface by the Lord Bishop of Oxford. Oxford: Parker.

THIS little volume, we must begin with noting, fails to fulfil what the Agenda" which is prefixed to it would lead us to expect. The "Address" and also "Sermon" delivered by the Bishop are wanting. The papers delivered in the evening are also omitted, and there is no record at all of the "discussion" which followed the delivery of the several papers. In this way, along with some trifling matter, the best part of the conference is really lost to the public. At conferences or at congresses

there must unavoidably be a good deal of "packing," and it is in the freedom of discussion that most good is likely to be done.

Of the actual contents of the book, the poorest is the introductory sermon of Dr. Miller; the best are Dr. Wordsworth's paper on the Spiritual Interpretation of Holy Scripture, and the Bishop of Grahamstown's on the Church in the Colonies. There is also an able sermon by Dr. Kay, on Unity.

Upon the whole we have little doubt that the Conference was a success, and that such meetings cannot but do good.

We congratulate Dr. WORDSWORTH on the completion of what may be called the first division of his Commentary on the Old Testament. A new volume has just appeared, containing Kings and Chronicles, Ezra, Nehemiah, and Esther. (Rivingtons.) Thus, at the price of £4, a commentary on this important and difficult part of Holy Scripture may be had, such as certainly was never within the reach of the mere English reader before. An historical and critical exegesis is given, which is quite up to the requirements of the day; and the principle of spiritual interpretation is at the same time applied throughout. For this the Church of England should be deeply thankful to Dr. Wordsworth. We shall, of course, examine this volume at length hereafter.

We are indebted to Mr. CARTER, of Clewer, for a more copious collection of Litanies (Masters) than has yet been accessible. They appear to have been drawn up by some member of the community of which he is the director, and probably, therefore, have been tried in private use before publication. They are printed so as to match with the "Day-Hours." A few miscellaneous offices are added at the end.

Mr. Masters has published the Speeches delivered by Mr. Hubbard and Canon Trevor on the Conscience Clause, in one of the supplementary meetings of the York Congress. They deserve careful attention.

A translation of Sturm's Reflections for every Day in the Year has been commenced by Mr. Hayes, which is to appear in monthly parts. The editor and publisher do not seem to be aware that fifty years ago this book was in common use in England. Of course this is far from being a disparagement of it.

Mr. BURGON has begun another series of Short Sermons, (Parker,) to appear in monthly parts, which we can recommend-but not for "family reading." The sermons are full of useful matter, but they are also full of humour and controversy, and contain many passages which it would be impossible for any one but their author to read without a sinile. They follow, of course, the order of the Church's year.

We have seldom met with a more charming volume than Miss ROSSETTI'S Prince's Progress, and other Poems, (Macmillan,) which amply repays the promise of the author's former works, and displays an uncommon freshness and originality of thought, joined with the