own day, it may be worth while at this point to examine his reference to Grotius (in the passage which we have just quoted), in order that we may estimate the general value and accuracy of his statements. He says: "The question is one which since the days of Grotius has engaged the attention of not a few of the most eminent theologians and commentators."

This paragraph leads the reader to infer that the question was first raised in the days of Grotius (ob. 1645), and that in fact he was the author of the view which limited our LORD's Sacrifice and Priesthood to heaven. Both these inferences, however, are entirely contrary to the facts.

From some expressions in the writings of Grotius, Bossuet accused him of Socinianism, and the popularity of Bossuet's works led to the charge being largely disseminated. But Burigny, the French historian (ob. 1785), in his Vie de Grotius (published in 1750), entirely clears him from this accusation, which, he points out, Grotius himself denies. Besides this, Grotius' work, Defensio Fidei Catholica de Satisfactione Christi adversus Faustum Socinum Senensem (published in 1617), is an admirable refutation of the main features of the Socinian heresy, and especially of its theory of the heavenly Sacrifice.

Dr. Milligan probably knew that Grotius had been accused of Socinianism, had heard that the work, De Satisfactione Christi, contained a discussion of the theory of a heavenly Sacrifice based upon the opinion that our LORD'S Priesthood was limited to heaven, and therefore took it for granted that Grotius originated this theory.

He, however, had probably never verified his as sumption and did not know that this work of Grotius was a masterly refutation of this very theory, as set

forth by Faustus Socinus in his treatise against Covetus, De Jesu Servatore (published in 1594), in which he probably only states and interprets the views of his uncle Lælius Socinus (ob. 1562), the real founder of Socinianism.

In order that the reader may judge how far Grotius is to be associated with the Socinian doctrine (and also for its own intrinsic worth), we give a translation of the last page of the work, De Satisfactione Christi. Refuting the interpretation of Heb. ix. 12 and Heb. i. 3 given by Socinus, Grotius writes as follows: "In which passages the words in the past tense show that the redemption and expiation were made before CHRIST entered His heavenly kingdom; for although CHRIST is an High Priest of an order which does not remain on earth like the Levitical priests (Heb. viii. 4), but, entering heaven, must ascend higher than heaven itself (Heb. iv. 14 and Heb. vii. 26), since His Priesthood is to be eternal and perpetual (Heb. vii. 24), nevertheless He was a true Priest and true Victim at the time when on earth He delivered Himself up to death.

"" Therefore is He said to have come into the world (Heb. x. 5) to do the will of God (vv. 7, 9); that is, to offer to GOD (v. 10) for sins (vv. 8, 12) His Body which had been prepared by GOD, that is, sanctified (v. 5).

"In which passage we must at the same time notice that we are said to be sanctified by His Oblation once for all (épάnα). Since CHRIST intercedes for us as often as we are in need, in this place we are to understand not His Intercession, but His mactation. There is on this account a twofold Oblation (both of certain legal victims and of CHRIST), first the Oblation of mactation, then that of presentation.

"In the case of the legal victims the first took place in the temple, the second in the sanctuary itself. In CHRIST'S Oblation of Himself, the first was on earth, the second in heaven. Nevertheless that first Oblation was not the preparation of the Sacrifice (sacrificii præparatio), but the Sacrifice; the latter not so much a sacrifice, as the commemoration of a sacrifice which had been made. Wherefore since the appearance and intercession [in heaven] are not properly priestly acts, excepting in so far as they depend (nituntur) on the virtue of a finished (peracti) sacrifice, he who takes away that sacrifice does not even leave CHRIST a true Priesthood, contrary to the plain teaching of the Scripture, which assigns to CHRIST the high-priestly dignity as distinct from that of the prophetical and regal offices; a term used not figuratively, but in a most real sense, for His Priesthood is contrasted with the Levitical priesthood (which was a true priesthood) as in the same genus a more perfect species is contrasted with one which is less perfect.

"Nor can it be rightly inferred that CHRIST should have somewhat to offer (Heb. viii. 3) unless in the truth of that Priesthood in which He was established (Heb. i. 3). But indeed it is not to be wondered at that those should have taken away from CHRIST the natural glory of His true name, I mean His Deity, who also diminish His offices and refuse to acknowledge His special benefits (beneficia).

To Thee O LORD JESU as true GOD, as true Redeemer, as true Priest, as true Victim for sins, with the FATHER and SPIRIT, together with Thee one GOD, be honour and glory." *

It is much to be desired that the Modern school * Grotius, De Satisfactione Christi, Opera, tom. iv., p. 338.

Reasons why the views of

Cassander and Johnson should be rejected by members of the Anglican Church.

would read this treatise of Grotius, instead of quoting him as the author of the Socinian theory of our LORD's heavenly Priesthood and Sacrifice.

In closing this lengthy but important chapter, we remark, first, that the doctrine of Cassander, that the Eucharist is related in its sacrificial character “not so much to the Oblation once for all made upon the Cross as to the perpetual Priesthood and continual Sacrifice which the eternal Priest offers daily in the heavens," has no Catholic or Anglican authority, in that it is only followed by the Pseudo-Overall, and is carefully avoided by all other Anglican writers.

Second, that the teaching of Johnson that our LORD'S "Soul was separated from the Body before the Sacrifice was consummated," and "that the Ascension of CHRIST into heaven many days after was but the finishing of this one Oblation," † which was therefore not finished on the Cross, is found in no reputable Anglican divine, and should be most earnestly repudiated by all members of the Anglican Church for the following

reasons:

(1) It is perilously near to the doctrine of Socinus ; (2) It is inconsistent with the scriptural doctrine of the Atonement ;

(3) It is unknown to any Catholic writer; and (4) It is absolutely contrary to the express declaration of the Prayer Book that upon the Cross our LORD "made by His one Oblation of Himself once offered, a full, perfect, and sufficient Sacrifice, Oblation, and Satisfaction for the sins of the whole world." *Tract No. 81, p. 317. † Ibid., p. 334.

TH

CHAPTER XI.

THE TESTIMONY OF THE TRACTARIANS.

HERE still remains for our examination the Introductory: evidence of one school of writers, the Tractar- The Tractarians, the leaders of the Catholic Revival in the Church of England.

ians the leaders of the Catholic Revival.

The great debt the Church

owes to them.

No words can be too strong to express the debt of gratitude which the Church of England owes them; no language too glowing to tell of the wondering admiration with which their lives and works inspire every Their wonderthoughtful English Churchman.

When we take into consideration the opposition which they had to meet from those in authority in the Church itself; the prejudices they had to overcome, not only in their own early education, but in their whole environment; the difficulties which ensued from the entire absence, for a century past, of any English theological literature upon which they could draw ;it fills us with amazement that they were able to grasp and teach the Catholic Faith as they did. Their great learning, their patient industry, that indomitable courage born of absolute trust in GoD and faith in His Church, which enabled them to accomplish such wonderful results, must command at once our deepest respect and our most profound gratitude.

ful lives.

some difficulties of their

task,

Among the difficulties which somewhat hindered especially from