alternative between the existence and non-existence of truth at all, between truth as objective and infinite reality and truth as variable, finite, and contingent upon the conclusions of individual minds. Assuming, however, the fact of such a revelation, the authentication of it centres in the life and teaching of Jesus Christ. The evidence may be external and historical, as e. g., the display of supernatural power in miracle and prophecy; or it may be internal, i. e., the correspondence to the needs of the moral and spiritual nature of man; or, as is the case with Christianity, it may be both. In our day Christian apologists have freed themselves from the bondage of the Calvinistic position that the moral nature of man is not competent to be brought in evidence as to the attributes of God and his declared will. And Dr. Stanton, in showing the danger of this theory as philosophically espoused by Dean Mansel, defends Bishop Butler against the charge of favoring it by the important distinction that "it is one thing to remember that we may have misunderstood the purport of a doctrine which repels us, or that if we could see the whole of a course of action of which we know but a part, that which seems harsh and meaningless in it would be found not to be so. It is quite another to suppose that righteousness and love differ in God and in man, and to be required to accept propositions as truths which assume such a difference" (p. 48). The authentication of the fact and content of revelation naturally leads to a consideration of the value and importance of the witness of the Christian consciousness, which corresponds to the argument e consensu gentium and involves a correction of J. S. Mill's misapprehension of it. The analogy of the progress of science and of ordinary education compels us to expect, in the transmission of Christian truth, the exercise of the teaching office by the Church, and the spiritual illumination of the Church may be regarded as focussed in the general or ecumenical councils. Such determinations of doctrinal questions may not indeed be taken as absolutely infallible—as God is infallible—but, as expressing the mind of Christendom, they rightly com

mand the assent of individual Christians who realize that training and discipline, are the necessary preparation for intellectual, as they are for moral and spiritual development. "There is an inheritance of authoritative belief which has been preserved to us and which is to this day rendered available for us, because the Christian society is a fact, because there has been and is in Christendom an organized life.” "There are doctrines which have been formulated to protect genuine Christian faith from the inroads of alien principles," and "it is no small gain if only the treasures and the fruit of the achievements of the past are placed in our hands and made a real possession for us" (pp. 159, 160).

...

The contention of the Protestant controversialists that the Bible alone is the sufficient appeal in determining the value and importance of Christian doctrine is quite as faulty as the Roman Catholic reliance upon the absolute, unlimited authority of the Church. As in the broader question of infallibility, the truth lies between the two extremes, for as a matter of fact the authority of the Bible cannot be established without the Church, nor that of the Church without the Bible. The interdependence of these two sources of doctrinal definition appears in the actual history of Christianity at the first, and is repeatedly illustrated in the experience of individual minds to-day. It is possible without any theory of the Church to attain to a belief in the substantial truth of the great outlines of Christian revelationand this is what is constantly happening-but this is quite consistent with the other fact that anything like a complete and adequate view of Scripture or of Christian doctrine is impossible without her guidance and instruction. As Dr. Stanton says, "When the Church in the second century was beginning to define her belief in regard to the New Testament writings and the most fundamental articles of her creed, she had as yet no clear view of her function as an authoritative teacher of truth. In the very process of dealing with the questions brought before her, she arrived at a consciousness of it, and improved the organ for its expression,

and thus became fitted for still more delicate tasks of the same kind" (p. 68).

It is but a corollary from this to say that the Church to-day claiming such authority, must be able to show that she has preserved her continuity of life with the past; that to exercise such authority effectually she should be blessed with a visible unity; and that to bring such exercise into harmony with modern progress she should preserve entire freedom without license within her borders.

Altogether Dr. Stanton has produced a helpful book on a difficult but important subject, and apart from the essential line of the argument, there are, from time to time, very useful digressions, as, for example, upon the nature and value of the Old Testament writing, which evince a careful scholarship and a practical wisdom, necessary for these days. We cannot help thinking, however, that the results would have been more satisfactory if he had given an account of the acts of the general councils and of that inheritance of fundamental truth which he claims has been handed down to us. And in this rather misty age of ours there are some subjects, and religion is one of them, where a man ought to dare to be definite and explicit. Dr. Stanton does not appear to think So. At any rate, there are points in his argument where an earnest reader must feel that a clear conclusion is just missed if not avoided. Perhaps his is the better way. The theme is too great, too complex to be reduced to the limits of a formula, and the author's sincerity and carefulness are admirable. Yet, in the face of so much literature that is hesitating and halting in its tone, one could wish that he had expressed directly and unreservedly what he evidently thinks about the Church's position, and paid less attention to that universal Christian consciousness, of which after all the Church is the only visible, appreciable exponent and witness. That we regard his book as a very valuable one is, however, apparent from the fact that we have chosen to review it a year after its publication. We hope it will not be so long before we are allowed to review another.

The Discovery of America with some Account of Ancient America and the Spanish Conquest. By John Fiske. In Two Volumes. Boston and New York: Houghton, Mifflin and Company. The Riverside Press: Cambridge. 1892. Crown 8vo, pp. xxxvi., 516; xxiv., 631. With maps and illustrations.

It is rather late in the day to review a book which is already in its seventh thousand and which has been greeted with what may be termed without exaggeration a chorus of unbounded praise. It is also rather presumptuous to attempt to sum up the merits of such a book in the short space which is at our disposal at present. We cannot, however, resist the temptation to use this opportunity to express our gratitude to Mr. Fiske (and we may add his publishers who have done their part of the work in a manner that cannot be too highly commended) as well as to recommend our readers to lose no opportunity to make themselves acquainted with what must be pronounced to be the worthiest literary memorial of the great exploit of Columbus that any American has yet offered to the world. In a subsequent number we hope to be able to devote an article to a review of the recent Columbian literature, and we trust we shall then be able to criticise in detail Mr. Fiske's noble volumes.

Mr. Fiske divides his work into twelve long chapters, all of absorbing interest. In the first he clears the ground by disposing of the romantic ideas of aboriginal American history which Prescott did so much to plant; and he naturally relies upon the epoch-making work of the late Lewis Morgan which Mr. Bandelier is still continuing. Chapter II. discusses the pre-Columbian voyages of the Norsemen and the Zeno brothers, a subject which Mr. Fiske handles more entertainingly, perhaps, than his latest English rival in this field of investigation, Mr. Payne. Chapter III., "Europe and Cathay," appeared some time back in The Atlantic Monthly; it could not fail to be fascinating, for it is mainly concerned with Marco Polo. Chapters IV. and V. discuss the search for the Indies by the Portuguese and the Spanish routes respectively. In his discussion of the influence of ancient cosmography on the mediæval mind, it strikes us

that Mr. Fiske is inferior to Mr. Payne; but in all that relates to the career of Columbus he is fuller and, therefore, more satisfactory. Mr. Fiske is a stout champion of the great Genoese, and he has little sympathy with the recent critics who seek to detract from his glory. Perhaps Mr. Payne's soberer estimate is nearer the truth than Mr. Fiske's eulogy, but it is not such pleasant reading. Chapter VI., "The Finding of Strange Coasts," continues the career of Columbus until his death.

Chapter VII., which begins the second volume, is entitled "Mundus Novus," but it might as well be called "Americus Vespucius," for it is largely devoted to a defense of that much abused navigator. Mr. Fiske mainly follows Varnhagen, and he certainly succeeds in rendering it more difficult to deny the famous first voyage of 1497. Naturally this chapter will provoke more comment from the specialists than any in the book, and we must leave Mr. Fiske to his fate. Chapters VIII., IX. and X. are concerned with Mexico and Peru and their Spanish conquerors, and if Mr. Fiske is not as fascinating as Prescott, he has nevertheless an absorbing theme and a charming style to help him through. Chapter XI. is fitly called after that exquisite character, Las Casas, and Chapter XII., "The Work of Two Centuries," appropriately concludes the book save for four valuable appendices and an index.

We have said that it is not here our intention to criticise this great work in any elaborate way, but rather to express our admiration for it. We cannot forbear, however, to point out the fact that Mr. Fiske's erudition is sometimes put forward in unnecessary, if interesting, footnotes, and that he is at times too discursive even in the body of his work. We think, too, that he sometimes shows a lack of taste in the obtrusion of his own opinions and comments when they are obviously unnecessary, and we have a rooted aversion to that method of criticism which allows a scholar to assert that the utterances of other scholars are to be received with "a peal of Homeric laughter." We must be forgiven for being in