Billeder på siden

cerned it is more than worthless. On the religious condition of the United States it gives twenty lines, one half of which consists of the ecclesiastical statistics of Cincinnati, and the other half stating the re-election of Lincoln, the "liberation of the fugitive slaves" by the House of Representatives, and the abolition of slavery in Maryland.

Professor Hundeshagen, of Heidelberg, has published the first volume of an important work on the History of the Constitution of the Protestant Churches, principally those of Germany and Switzerland. (Beiträge zur Kirchenverfassungsgeschichte und Kirchenpolitik, insbesondere des Protestantismus. Wiesbaden, vol. 1, 1865.) The first volume contains three essays, treating, 1. Of "the religious and the moral element of Christian piety," and their "influence upon the development of the doctrine and the Church constitution of the earlier Protestantism." 2. Of the Reformation of Zuinglius and the Theocracy at Zurich. 3. Of the distinctive religious peculiarities of Lutheran and Reformed Protestantism, and their influence on Church constitution. Together these three essays present a history of Church Constitution until the end of the sixteenth century.

Simultaneously with the celebrated Codex Sinaiticus, Professor Tischendorf discovered, on his last literary journey, a complete copy of the Epistle of Barnabas, of which hitherto a considerable portion was unknown. The publication of the entire epistle has called forth a valuable monograph by Professor Weizsäcker, of Tubingen, entitled, Zur kritik des Barnabasbriefes aur dem Codex Sinaiticus. (Tubingen, 1864.) The author tries to prove that the Epistle was written shortly after the destruction of Jerusalem and after the Epistle to the Hebrews, and not, as has been recently asserted, under the Emperor Hadrian, to a congregation leaning toward Judaism.

The apologetic literature has received valuable contributions by a work from Professor Luthardt, of Leipsic, entitled "Apologetic Lectures on the Fundamental Truths of Christianity." (Apologetische Vorträge über die Grundwahrheiten des Christenthums. Leipsic, 1864.) In ten popular lectures the author refutes the views of modern infidelity concerning the Personal God, the Creation, Man,

Religion, Revelation, the History of Revelation, Paganism and Judaism, the Person of Christ.

Of a more speculative character is a work from Professor Auberlen, of Basel, on Divine Revelation. (Die Göttliche Offenbarung, vol. 2, 1864.) The first volume of this work appeared in 1861; the second, published last year, treats of man as a religious being. The death of the author, which occurred at Basel on May 2, 1864, leaves this work incomplete. A biographical sketch of Auberlen, who was highly esteemed as a theological author, is added to the second volume of the above work.

A new work on the Constitution and Present Condition of all the Oriental Churches, has been published by Dr. Silbernagle, (Roman Catholic,) Professor of Ecclesiastical Law at the University in Munich. (Verfassung und gegenwärti ger Bestand Sämmtlicher Kirchen des Orients. Landshut, 1865.) The work seems to be more complete than any previous work, and at the same time commendable for accuracy.

Among the various editions of the celebrated Encyclical, of December 8, 1864, the one published at Cologne is especially valuable. (Die Encyclica Sr. Heiligkeit des Papstes Pius IX) contains the original text, printed after the official edition of Rome, a German translation, as well as the most important of the documents referred to in the


Encyclical, namely, the Encyclical of November 9, 1846, the Allocutions of December 9, 1854, and of June 9, 1862. An introduction, which is said to have been written by a prominent Catholic theologian, attempts to refute the attacks which have been made upon the Encyclical from the stand-point of political liberty and modern civilization.


The French Academie des Sciences Morales et Politiques proposed some time ago, as one of its periodical prize essays, "The Philosophy of St. Augustine, its Origin and Character, its Merits and Defects." The prize was won by Mr. Nourrisson, already well known to the literary world by monographs on Leibnitz, Bossuet, and Berulle. In his new work (La Philosophie de Saint Augustin, Paris, 1865, 2 vols.) Mr. Nourrison con

tends that St. Augustine's influence was due not so much to his ecclesiastical character as to his metaphysical acumen, and that by maintaining the rights of liberty against the Manicheans while he upheld the claims of divine grace in opposition to the Pelagians, he proved himself the champion of philosophy.

The first volume of Mr. Nourrisson's work contains a memoir of the bishop and a detailed exposition of his views on certainty, God, the soul, the world, and liberty. In the second we have an account of the principal sources from which Augustine borrowed his ideas, then comes an estimate of the influence which the Augustinian theories exercised, especially during the seventeenth century, and the last chapter is devoted to a critical discussion of these theories themselves. Mr. Nourrisson concludes by saying that cotemporary philosophy may still derive much profit from the writings of Augustine; for while many of the views they embody have been rejected as obsolete or erroneous, the Christian spirit which it is desirable to infuse into the speculations of the present day has nowhere been better exemplified than in the voluminous writings of the Bishop of Hippo.

ing them from the point of view of the new school, of which Mr. Colani and Réville are the chiefs.

Another volume of the Bibliothèque Philosophique, entitled La Science de Invisible, by Charles Lévêque, contains six essays or lectures on various points of psychology and theology. The auof French philosophers, who defend thor belongs to the "spiritualist" group against the Hegelians, Pantheists, and Materialists the personality of God and the immortality of the soul.

It would seem that, in the eyes of all candid men, the famous Encyclical of December 8, 1864, had for ever settled the question whether the Church of Rome is reconcilable with modern civilization and with the principles of civil liberty. Still there are a few enthusiasts among the Roman Catholics who pretend to believe in both the Church and in liberty. Among these belongs Abbé Bautain, who has just republished, in a volume entitled La Religion et La Liberté, a series of lectures, which were originally published a few weeks before the Revolution of 1848. The author has added some remarks on the nature and distinction of the two powers, spiritual and temporal, and also a sketch of the ori

A prominent writer of the "Liberal " (Rationalistic) school of French Protest-gin of political sovereignty. This last

antism, Th. Bost, contributes a new volume (Le Protestantisme Liberal, Paris, 1865) to the Bibliothèque Philosophique, in which he repudiates as a calumny the epithet négateurs given to his friends and to himself by the orthodox party. Every false idea, he remarks, is a negation, and therefore those who advocate such ideas are the true "deniers," not those who combat them. Mr. Bost maintains that the orthodox clergy of the French Protestant Churches differ widely in their views from the Protestant Church of the sixteenth century, and that if the primitive Huguenots were to reappear they would certainly be excommunicated. The difference between the liberal and the conservative sections of the present Church he regards as only a difference of more or less. Mr. Bost begins by pointing out the errors of Romanism; he then argues that the attempt to fix for ever the dogmatic boundaries of the Church is, on the part of orthodox Protestants, illogical and impossible; and he concludes by examining the principal religious questions of the day, interpret

chapter is directed against the system of Rousseau.

A most important pamphlet on the Roman question has just been published by M. de Persigny, the intimate friend of the French emperor. The pamphlet is in the form of a letter to M. Troflong, President of the French Senate. M. de Persigny begins with stating that he has long had the presentiment that there was some grave secret at Rome, and that he resolved to go there and worm it out. He thinks he has wormed it out, and he gives the result to the world in the present pamphlet. He found, however, that the "great secret was no secret after all, for "it was open as day" at Rome, and appeared to all eyes as clear as the light of the sun. It was simply the existence at Rome, long organized, of the enemies of France, and even now holding sway over all-popes, cardinals, religious orders, and governments. This party hates the civil legislation of France, and would, out of hatred of what it calls the revolutionary tendencies of France, imperil the secur

ity of twenty popes. It has tried to bend to its yoke the clergy of France, and to overthrow the great work, nearly one hundred years old, of the French Revolution:

Fancy, my dear President, by the side of the cardinals, a whole world of deacons, sub-deacons, monsignori, priests, monks, princes, nobles, advocates, and so forth, spread among scores of religious orders those orders forming in some sort as many sections of a vast Council of State who study, judge, and decide in all the affairs of Catholicity-congregations of the holy office, the consistory, immunities, propaganda, the index, rites, etc. Fancy this administration of the spiritual government of the universe with a staff of three or four thousand employés, ecclesiastics or laymen, at Rome, and fifteen thousand agents or correspondents abroad; and if you bear in mind that all this hierarchy, all this vast organization, is moved by the same idea, you will not be astonished at the powerlessness of a pope, though he be the best and the most holy of men, to control such a mass. When a party which personifies the interests and the prejudices of another period fills every post and all the approaches of power, and holds dominion over all the public bodies, there is no sovereign in the world capable of turning back the tide of their passions. A prince may doubtless, like Pius IX., by his ineffable goodness, and the touching virtues with which he adorns the pontifical throne, lessen the friction of the violent machine which carries him on, but he cannot change its direction.

M. de Persigny conversed at Rome with Cardinal Antonelli and other eminent men, and expressed his opinions to them very freely. His opinion undoubtedly expresses, to a large extent, the views of the French emperor, and it may therefore foreshadow an attempt of solving the Roman question in accordance with these views. The passage recounting these conversations is, therefore, worth extracting. Persigny said

to them:

| tered the head of man. If you are insane enough to make the pope leave Rome, do so. You will be highly culpable in obliging this venerable pontiff to go again, at his age, into exile; but as you would prove by doing so that you neither wish, nor can, nor know how to do anything by yourselves, we shall arrange without you at Rome the affairs of the Papacy, and perhaps that would be the best way to solve the problem. Once you are gone, this is, in my opinion, the way things would inevitably pass. Nothing will be easier than to organize Rome according to the order of ideas which is to reconcile the interests of the holy see with the Italian sentiments of the population. In union with the Catholic powers and Italy herself, we shall establish at Rome a provisional government to administer the States of the Church in the name of the pope, and to introduce during his absence the necessary reforms. Under that government, which will reunite all the sympathies of Rome and of Italy, public order will not for a moment be disturbed. As at Naples and Florence, the conservative spirit of the population will master with ease the elements of disorder. Whether our troops are, or are not at Rome, we shall take, if need be, the necessary precautions to maintain tranquillity, and the Eternal City will await peaceably the day when it may please the holy father to return and resume in the seat of the Papacy the throne of his predecessors, relieved from all the causes which endangered its security. As for France, she will look with the utmost tranquillity on the departure of the pope and its consequences. The efforts you may make to agitate the French clergy, and through the clergy the nation, will be as vain as those you tried at the last elections.

You had then, however, an excellent pretense of mistrust to offer the clergy. It was the presence in the Department of the Interior, to direct the elections, of the same man who had struck down the Association of St. Vincent de Paul. You indulged in the greatest illusions. In seconding from Rome the various elements of opposition supplied by the old parties you had no doubt of success. But if you had studied France better you would have known I fear much that you are cherishing that wherever the clergy, forgetful of strange delusions. You probably think their duties, meddle with political conthat by doing nothing, proposing noth- tests, an effect is produced on public ing, and consenting to nothing, you will opinion contrary to their intentions-greatly embarrass us; that, frightened at that whenever the priest deviates from the prospect of the pope's departure from his character of peace and charity he Rome, we shall end by renouncing the only irritates the minds of men against execution of the Convention. Perhaps him. You may recollect the result; it you imagine, as many of you do not fear was so contrary to your hopes, and the to say publicly, that the trouble caused weakness of that part of the clergy which by his departure may weaken public interfered in the elections was so comauthority in France. Undeceive your-plete, that the government thought it selves; never has a greater illusion en- prudent not to publish the particulars. FOURTH SERIES, VOL. XVII.-29

It would nevertheless have rendered you a great service to have enlightened you on the state of France and on the degree of influence possessed by the clergy in political matters, but it would not have been just to wound the dignity of so respectable a body by rendering them responsible for the faults you made them commit. Think seriously on it. By endeavoring to rule the French clergy, and to oppose their duties to the Church to their duties to the State, by exercising a pressure on the bishops in order that in their turn they should press on the parish priests, take care that you do not strain the cord too much and break it. The most eminent men among the French clergy have already given you serious warnings. But if you commit the fault of carrying matters to extremity, if in place of coming to an understanding with Italy you force the pope to a new exile, be assured that the French clergy will not follow you in that hazardous

course, and that the day you quit Rome will be the last of Ultramontanism in France.

M. de Persigny concludes thus:

Well, then, we are on the eve of the realization of the Emperor's words, that "he would not sacrifice Italy to the pope, nor the pope to Italy." Soon, by the side of United Italy-Italy free and independent-the Papacy, reconciled to the new kingdom, will exhibit the spectacle, so much desired, of the pope maintained in his independence, his dignity, and his sovereignty, and without the humiliation of being guarded by a foreign army, reigning over a contented and devoted people. Soon, in one word, one of the greatest problems of our epoch will be resolved, and then no praise and no homage will be enough for the great prince who, calm and unmoved amid so many passions, will have accomplished all these things for the glory of France.


American Quarterly Reviews.

AMERICAN PRESBYTERIAN AND THEOLOGICAL REVIEW, April, 1865. (New York.) 1. The Westminster Assembly. 2. The Messiah's Second Advent. 3. Missionary Interference at the Hawaiian Islands. 4. The Government of the Primitive Church. 5. Queen Candace. 6. The Hymns of the Church. 7. Schelling on the Characteristics of the different Christian Churches. 8. Duns Scotus as a Theologian and Philosopher. 9. Exegesis of Rom. ii, 18, and Phil. ii, 10.

BIBLIOTHECA SACRA, April, 1865. (Andover, Mass.) 1. Works on the Life of Christ. 2. More Recent Works on the Life of Christ. 3. The Permanence of Christianity in the Intention of its Founder. 4. Historical Studies in College. 5. The Scriptural Philosophy of Congregationalism and of Councils. 6. George Calixtus.

BIBLICAL REPERTORY AND PRINCETON REVIEW, April, 1865. (Philadelphia.) 1. The Structure of the Old Testament. 2. An Account of Extreme Unction. 3. Census of 1860. 4. Herbert Spencer's Philosophy; Atheism, Pantheism, and Materialism. 5. Principles of Church Union, and the Reunion of Old and New School Presbyterians.

EVANGELICAL QUARTERLY REVIEW, April, 1865. (Gettysburg, Pa.)—1. Dr. Luthardt's Contrast of the Two Generic Aspects of the World. 2. Sartorius's Holy Love of God-Translated from the German. 3. EldersTranslated from Zeller's Biblisches Wörterbuch. 4. Lutheran Hymnology. 5. The Hand of God in the War. 6. Politics and the Pulpit. 7. The United States Christian Commission. 8. The Poetry of the Bible.

FREEWILL BAPTIST QUARTERLY, April, 1865. (Dover, N. H.)-1. The Republic as it will be. 2. The Poor an Essential Element in Civilized Society. 3. Eschatology. 4. Chattanooga, Improvements, Contrabands. 5. The Garden of Eden. 6. The Messiah's Last Forty Days on Earth. 7. The College and the University. 8. Remarks on Inspiration. 9. Herbert Spencer.

UNIVERSALIST QUARTERLY, April, 1865. (Boston.)-9. East and West. 10. The Appeal of Faith. 11. Christian Consolation. 12. Human Destiny. 13. Broken Lights. 14. Character and Overthrow of the Alexandrian Theology.

NEW ENGLANDER, April, 1865. (New Haven.)-1. The Conflict with Skepticism and Unbelief. Sixth Article: The Credibility of the Testimony of Jesus concerning Himself. 2. Did Christ Suffer as Divine ? 3. The Christian Doctrine of Labor. 4. The Foundation of Moral Obligation. 5. Freedom of Will: Edwards and Whedon. 6. The Advancement of Christ's Kingdom by War. 7. Old Connecticut vs. The Atlantic Monthly. 8. The Hawaiian Islands.

The fifth article is candid, courteous, and able; but, as its system requires, terribly contradictory. A fear of occupying too much of our successive Quarterlies with this single topic prevents our analyzing and furnishing our answers to a large part of his counter views. I. We will first state some of his opposing positions.

A. Alternative or pluripotent causes are self-evidently an absurdity. Thus he says:

It is much as if a man, when confronted with the proposition that "two straight lines cannot inclose a space," should say, "Ah, but there are two kinds of straight lines, uni-directed straight lines, and pluri-directed straight lines, and while the former cannot inclose a space, the latter can easily do so." This being settled, it would be easy to charge his opponents with assuming that there is but one kind of straight line, thus making themselves ridiculous with a "paralogism."-P. 293. B. The very "principle of causality" self-evidently excludes any other than a one solely possible effect:

that is, a

Who can wonder that Edwards did not attempt to prove that a cause, causal principle, is adequate to only one effect? No first principle is more truly self-evident than that. It makes no difference whether we are speaking of material substances or the powers of the soul; the idea of cause and effect is utterly subverted by supposing a cause without an effect truly and solely its own.Pp. 294-5.

C. Alternativity is "a nothing," and its supposition implies "lawlessness."

We may let go all this "alternativity" as a mere nothing. There is no such thing as "alternative will." . . . The Will, as Whedon explains it, is lawless, because when acting under the strictest possible conditions of action it acts variably; in other words, because the Will, at different times, acting under precisely the same conditions of action, is not restricted to the same issue. A more complete definition of a lawless power could not be given.—Pp. 295, 299, 300.

Now if these three points are true, it is clear that the most fatalistic views of Edwards are absolutely true. There is no power whatever, there self-evidently can be no power whatever, for any cause or causal

« ForrigeFortsæt »