So he reiterates. In fact, Latimer's strong moral sense gave him little taste for speculation on 'the decrees.' Moreover, he had no faculty for systematic theology. What he rebelled against in the unreformed theology was chiefly two things. First were the practical abuses. He saw men all around him 'tithing mint and anise and cummin, and neglecting the weightier matters of the law'— that is, he saw them occupied with acquiring merits by what were called 'voluntary works,' works over and above the necessary duties of the Christian-the adorning of churches, the going on pilgrimages, the decoration of images, the 'setting up of candles,' and neglecting the plain duties of moral reformation and works of mercy

'The images are to be clad in silk garments, and those also laden with precious gems and jewels; as who should say that no cost can be too great; whereas, in the meantime, we see Christ's faithful and lively images, bought with no less price than His most precious blood (alas! alas !) to be a-hungered, a-thirst, a-cold, and to be in darkness, wrapped in all wretchedness, yea to lie there till death take away their miseries.'

He saw religion converted, as it were, into a vast system of insurance against purgatory. Christians were occupied in providing for their own and others' souls in purgatory, instead of becoming better men and women here and now. He saw a vast system of money-getting, a gigantic traffic connected with what he called the 'purgatory pick purse,' and multitudes of clergy ordained as 'massing priests,' who did not preach, or teach, or labour to make men better. He saw the bishops absent from their dioceses, giving themselves to affairs of State and to the luxuries of the world; 'unpreaching prelates,' whom he seeks to put to shame by his famous reminder that 'the devil is never out of his diocese'; he 'always applieth his business.'

The whole organization of the unreformed Church seemed to Latimer to be directed to a wrong end, to something quite different from Christ's kingdom. Thus he was forced into violent reaction against the whole system. He is no doubt indiscriminating and harsh in his language. He does not seek to discover the element of truth which lay behind the corruptions. But that which he was striving for was the kingdom of righteousness.

What he desired was that all men should see that the Christian religion was nothing else than the becoming like Christ.

The other conspicuous feature in his Protestantism was his desire to go back to a simple gospel of divine love: that God had sent His Son to be the Saviour of the world; that He had won for us and for all men the forgiveness of our sins; that if we would have faith in Him our sins were forgiven; we had neither need nor power to purchase salvation by accumulation of merits; it remained for us simply to accept the great salvation, to repent of our sins, to make restitution for wrong done, and then, rejoicing in the light of the face of Christ, who had reconciled us to God, to go on our way to make His kingdom of righteousness and brotherly love prevail. Behind an accumulated mass of traditions Latimer wanted to go back to the religion of the Bible, in which his soul recognized and welcomed a revelation of God to his moral nature-the revelation of a God of righteousness, of justice, and of love. And it must be said that with all his repudiation of human merits, and his insistence upon the freedom of divine grace and forgiveness, he is in no danger of condoning moral laxity. He is always insisting upon the requirement of the moral law, on the reality of God's moral judgment, on the restoration of ecclesiastical discipline and excommunication for moral offences, and to the necessity of repentance he never wearies of adding the necessity of restitution of goods unjustly gotten, and the righting of wrongs done, as far as human power goes. Without this, though he appears to feel that he preaches to deaf ears, he is for ever insisting there is no real repentance. Latimer is a Protestant, then, because the moral aim and character of the Christian message had been overlaid with corruptions and superstitions; and he does not spare his own side when he sees lawlessness, selfishness, and greed masquerading under the pretext of zeal for the gospel. A reformer of Latimer's moral earnestness could not but find his bitterest disappointment among 'false gospellers.' Such was his Protestantism.

He was distinguished as a preacher from the first; and a preacher before all things, a preacher of extraordinary power he remained: perhaps the greatest popular preacher England has ever had. Violent he was sometimes in matter and manner; but he illuminated all he said with a profound moral fervour, a profound knowledge of human nature, and an extraordinarily lively wit and fancy, which shrunk from no 'merry tale' which could

illustrate in the pulpit or out of it what he wished to enforce. A real preacher, like his beloved St. Augustine, in eager response to the feelings of his hearers, speaking the language they understood with point and force, and repeating himself again and again till he had fixed what he wanted to say in the minds of his hearers. There is nothing stronger in English literature by way of moral invective than his sermon before the Convocation, and nothing more Christian in English preaching than his sermons on the Lord's Prayer.

He spent himself effectively in pastoral work when he held his country parish in Wiltshire, and when he became Bishop of Worcester (in succession to a series of non-resident Italian bishops) he threw himself eagerly into the work of the diocese. He took great trouble to get good men promoted, and to extirpate abuses according to his lights. But he was bishop less than four years; he was hampered during those years by money difficulties ('No man,' he said, 'having the name of so many things hath the use of so few '); and doubtless he was not an administrator by nature. tion towards the older style of doctrine and dis

In the reac

cipline which characterized the later years of Henry VIII., he resigned his bishopric and retired for a while into the background, till he came out again with renewed vigour as a preacher on the accession of Edward vi., and (refusing to resume his bishopric) remained a dominant influence as a preacher in the ranks of the extremer reformers till Mary's accession put the power again into the hands of his opponents, and he died a martyr to his convictions (just under the window of the room which I used to occupy in college at Oxford), with the great words to his companion in the flames 'Be of good courage, Master Ridley, and play the man: we shall this day light such a candle by God's grace in England as I trust shall never be put out.'

I have done my best in a short compass to give you some account of the man whose memory and teaching this church is to recall to you. But, fresh as I am from the volumes which contain his writings and the records of his sermons which remain, I must come back to the chief general impression which they make. It is that Latimer was, among English Christian teachers, the prince of Christian Socialists, the forerunner of the Maurices and Kingsleys and Westcotts of later days. Righteousness-righteousness as shown in personal life and

social dealing, the social reforms which are necessary to vindicate and establish this righteousness among us in England, the motives and threatenings and encouragements which the doctrine of Christ supplies for one who hungers and thirsts after this righteousness-these things are first in his mind; they are continually recurring in his every sermon. He feels, as deeply as any man ever felt it, not that men are equal-he is no leveller-but that in God's sight every man counts for one, and no man counts for more than one. The moral gain to common men and women— that is the standard by which he measures the value of religious activities

'The end of your Convocation,' he says to that assembly of the clergy, 'shall show what ye have done; the fruit that shall come of your consultation shall show of what generation ye be. For what have ye done hitherto, I pray? These seven years and more? What have ye engendered? What have ye brought forth? What fruit is come of your long and great assembly? What one thing that the people of England hath been the better of a hair? or you yourselves either more accepted before God, or better discharged towards the people committed to your care?'

he still challenges it by its moral fruits. The And later, when the Reformation had gone further, property of the monasteries ought to have gone to the furthering of education and the good of the people. But had it?

'Abbeys were ordained for the comfort of the poor, therefore, I said, it was not decent that the king's horses should be kept in them, as many were at that time; the living of poor men thereby minished and taken away.'

He saw Church property passing to the selfish use of the rich, and Church preferment made a matter of traffic, livings bought and sold as property

If the great

'Oh, Lord,' he cries, in what case are we? men in Turkey should use in their religion of Mahomet to sell, as our patrons commonly sell benefices here, the office of preaching, the office of salvation, it should be taken as an intolerable thing; the Turk would not suffer it in his commonwealth. Patrons be charged to see the office done, and not to seek a lucre or a gain by their patronship.'

Latimer was afraid of no powerful person or interest. He speaks his mind boldly to Henry in his full power, and gives the plainest advice to the young Edward, surrounded by his courtiers. Like John the Baptist, he gives the plainest message of righteousness to every class of society; to nobles and magistrates, that they be accessible to the cares and needs of the poor; to lawyers and

physicians, that they serve the poor man's needs as the rich; to bishops and priests he delivers a plain message indeed. Before merchants and shopkeepers he denounces in detail the dishonest tricks of the trade, describing them so minutely, vividly, and humorously that he begins to be afraid the innocent will learn craft from him. He speaks to parents and to children, to masters and to servants, of their mutual duties. He is impartial all round. 'The servant who has his whole wages and does but half his work, or is a sluggard, that same fellow, I say, is a thief before God.' The profession of reformed opinions is of no avail against Latimer's keen shafts. He was a gospeller, one of the new brethren, somewhat worse than a rank papist.' We get a terrible picture of a country full of sin in Latimer's sermons-covetousness, fraud, irreverence, lust, and lying. He has the spirit of the Old Testament prophets in him. But it is not only denunciation which comes from his lips. He presents to us a noble positive ideal of social righteousness, based on faith in God the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost. He is no hard Puritan. He is for the consecration of all life, with its occupations and amusements; with all the members of the body, high and low, rich and poor, one with another co-operating for the good of the whole. No communist: he maintains stoutly the legal basis of private property, while he lays on all property the properly moral claim that it shall be used for the good of the whole under the laws of God.

My brethren, I am thankful that the name of Hugh Latimer should be held in reverence amongst us through the building of this church. I fancy that there is a great weariness of doctrine that has

no manifest effect upon life. But I fancy that a Christian doctrine which is brought to bear powerfully and directly upon life, individual and social, a doctrine that makes directly and forcibly for righteousness, a doctrine of the kingdom of Christ, full of sympathy for common human needs, and full of indignation-full of the fire of the Lord— against injustices and social wrongs, a doctrine of human brotherhood under Christ for our Captain -and what is all this but another name for scriptural doctrine?-for this, I fancy, there are hearts awake in all classes. We need a clergy to teach, saturated in Scripture, bold as John the Baptist, fearless as he and unworldly as he, able to rebuke sin with power, and to show the way of righteousness, full of the spirit of brotherhood, knowing the human nature, the needs, the aspirations, the difficulties of common men, taking in the whole of life, to preach once again a gospel for the poor, so that the power of the Spirit may win them again for Christ and for His Church.

A princely liberality has given you this church, and Hugh Latimer's name is named upon it. I would say, Be true to his spirit. Let his moral gospel be heard and felt here.

This service of consecration will be consummated to-morrow morning in the celebration of the Communion of the Lord's Body and Blood. That is the sacrament of fellowship-the binding of us all together in the Brotherhood of Christ, as we feed all together on Him and are brought through Him into union with God our common Father in one spirit. To this Holy Feast I bid those of you who are prepared to come by repentance for your sins, and faith in Christ's love and power to make you His.

Contributions

'Let your Women keep silence in the Church.'

It is surely true that the question of the ministry of women, on which Margaret Gibson writes in your May number, should be considered in the light of principle rather than in that of an individual opinion, even an opinion as weighty as that of the great apostle.

No one can approach the subject on its merits,

and Comments.

and

or trace its historic development without being at once confronted by St. Paul's words. Whether the words 'speak' and 'teach' indicate, as some hold, 'to argue or discuss' with men in the assemblies of the Church, or whether they mean simply to preach and teach the gospel, there is to many minds 'no thoroughfare' henceforward,. which could admit women to influence an assembly by word of mouth.

But it was not, as Margaret Gibson indicates,

the only word of Paul's on the subject, for some other words imply that the practice was not uncommon; see I Co 114-5 and 1 Ti 28-12

In the latter passage the apostle suggests a seemly dress is desirable when, in like manner as the holy men,' whom he wills should pray in every place, they (the women) also 'lift up holy hands without wrath or doubting.' The connexion is somewhat similar to that in 1 Co 114. 5. 6. 13. 14. 15, where a woman's long hair is alluded to with respect to her ministry, it should be shrouded or veiled when she prays or prophesies. It is clear from these passages that it was the apostle's view that women called to be ministers should preach in unostentatious manner and in modest dress; and this opinion is probably shared by the advocates of a woman's right to preach the gospel in the present day!

It is quite clear that Paul, upon many of these points, spoke out his own opinion, often comparing it as of less importance with what he said 'of the Lord,' and without any realization of how the Church to come would make his letters a standard of orthodoxy and a law of commandments. His letters to the Corinthians were written to meet certain grievances in their church, where, if he had heard there were some women pushing their way into public notice, or arguing in an unseemly fashion, he could not but have given some such verdict as in 1 Co 1434.

The point which, if settled, would give a firm foundation to the practice, is surely, 'Is there any real spiritual difference between a man's and a woman's soul, between their apprehension of Christ as the Saviour, and their life under the power of the Holy Ghost?' The Apostle Paul's opinion is given in Gal 328, There is neither Jew nor Greek, there is neither bond nor free, there is neither male nor female, for ye are all one in Christ Jesus.' This is the true basis surely for any sanction of women's preaching. Jesus looked on children, women, and men, and saw a similar soul in all, and all endowed with the power of speech; and when the little party of apostles, disciples, and women, to the number of 120, gathered in the upper room to wait for enduement with power from on High, the Holy Ghost fell on all who were assembled, and 'they began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit gave them utterance (Ac 24). The Apostle Peter clearly sees the crisis which has come, to be one in which men and women,

young and old, were to share alike. 'This is that which was spoken by the prophet Joel. . . . I will pour out of my spirit upon all flesh, and your sons and your daughters shall prophesy.' There are facts following this outpouring, which, when gathered together, show that at least in the apostolic Church, women were not debarred from service. In Ac 219 we read that Philip the evangelist had four daughters who did prophesy. Ro 16 tells of several: Phoebe, our sister,' who is a diakonos (minister) of the Church at Cenchrea, and evidently travelling in the ministry (Ro 161. 2). There were Tryphena and Tryphosa and Persis, 'who laboured in the Lord' (Ro 1612). There was Priscilla, who laboured equally with Aquila to enlighten Apollos, and enlarged the scope of his ministry.

Justin Martyr says: 'We may still see amongst us women and men possessing the gifts of the Spirit of God. The prophetical gifts remain with us even to the present time.'1

Perhaps the gradual cessation of the practice was due to the persecutions which fell on the Montanists, who were a sect holding, among other things, that gifts of prophecy continued to be held by women. The Bishop of Rome, though he acknowledged the gift to have been bestowed on two wealthy Montanist ladies, Priscilla and Maximille, afterwards excommunicated them and their party. Considering the poor opinion that the Jews had of women's ability, the wonder is that any women were responsive to the call; and indeed the women who are recorded as preaching in the New Testament have chiefly Greek names. But, besides the damping effect of the Bishop's mandate, as sufficient men were drawn into the work, it was natural that fewer women felt called to forsake their usual avocations for a post of danger, publicity, and hardship. Still, all through the centuries, there have been occasionally women who, forced by inner conviction, have come forward to testify publicly to the demands of the Spiritual Life upon the world; and every one through whom the results justified the act, has pushed the door a little wider for others, till now women's ministry is everywhere at work, and by some denominations is given the same place and privileges as that of men.

1 Dialogue with Trypho, quoted in Backhouse's Early Church History.

2 Backhouse, Early Church History.

It is interesting in your July number to see in the Rev. Prebendary Whitefoord's address on 'The Need of Prophets,' that he calls on men and women to throw off that hampering habit of reserve which clings about us in our religious lives,' and to be willing to share that illumination which they have received. R. J. Fox.

Falmouth.

Dr. Davidson's 'Old Testament Prophecy.'

IN Professor Paterson's contribution there is only one

point to which I need refer. It relates to a matter of fact. He says that among a number of audacities in my paper 'the most audacious thing' is that I have twice ascribed to him the intention of presenting Dr. Davidson's views of 'prophecy in general.' He dislikes the quotation marks. 'I fancy,' he says, 'your readers will scarcely credit the statement that I never once used this phrase. It is Mr. Strachan's own; and whether innocent or not, he should not father it on me. I ask any one who desires fully to understand the audacity of this style of criticism to read,' etc. But Professor Paterson forgets. In the Preface

to the Biblical and Literary Essays he expressly announced the forthcoming publication of works dealing with 'Old Testament Theology,' with 'prophecy in general,' and with 'the theology of Isaiah in particular,' and guarded himself against the premature use of the material which might be required for the works just mentioned.' Yet he says, 'I never once used this phrase'! I do not think it is so audacious to assume that a man carries out his intentions and does not disown his words. As a matter of fact the intention has, unconsciously we are now to believe, been carried out only too well, and this is at least one of the things which make the Old Testament Prophecy in contrast with the splendid Theology of the Old Testament-such a disappointment to all Dr. Davidson's students.

As to the minor audacities there is naturally less need to write. I see no reason to depart from my criticism as a whole, which was prompted, as Professor Paterson must know very well, not by the determination 'to score' (the quotation marks are, leider, again necessary) off anyone, but by

pure regard for the name and fame of a great scholar. JAMES STRACHAN. London.

'Arnoýs and 'AλnOwós in St. John.

I.

PROFESSOR FINDLAY, in his instructive article on "The Theology of St. John' (THE EXPOSITORY TIMES for August, p. 505), makes a slight slip, which he will be glad to have pointed out to him. As an illustration of the apostle's use of the word dλnons he quotes Jn 728, He that sent me is true.' Unfortunately, however, in this passage St. John wrote aλnovós, apparently using the word as he does in the Apocalypse (e.g. Rev 314, with which cf. Jn 1935) in the sense of anons. This is not the only place in the Gospel where St. John appears to use aλnós in this sense. In 487 he writes, 'Herein is the saying true' (dλn0wós). On the other hand, ἀληθής seems to be put for aλnown in 655, My flesh is meat indeed'; that is, if ἀληθής and not ἀληθῶς be here the true reading. As a rule, of course, the apostle carefully distinguishes between the two words. Thus compare Jn 38, God is true' (anos) with 1 Jn 520, This G. F. HAMILTON. is the true (anovós) God.' Moylough, Co. Galway.

II.

In reply to Mr. Hamilton's interesting note, I may observe that the sentence, 'He that sent me is true,' occurs twice in the English Gospel according to John; and I was quoting (THE EXPOSITORY TIMES, August 1904, p. 505b) the latter of the two passages, namely, 82 (anos), not 728, where ánovós is found as my critic intimates. It seems to me that the distinction is accurately observed in these instances, as everywhere else in the Gospel of St. John. In 728 'aλλ' čσtiv åλŋowòs ὁ πέμψας με is the complement to ἀπ ̓ ἐμαυτοῦ οὐκ λýλvba: Jesus is no self-sent messenger; He has a genuine commission-there really is behind. Him the Father whom He asserts to have sent Him. In 826 the point is quite different: Jesus is vindicating the truth of His words, not, as before, the genuineness of His mission—ὁ πέμψας με ἀληθής ἐστιν, κἀγὼ ἃ ἤκουσα παρ' αὐτοῦ ταῦτα λέγω εἰς τὸν κόσμον.

Westcott's comment on 47 justifies dλnovós in that passage: In this spiritual sowing and