"servant," "master," "preach,' 99.66 happy," ," "world," "eternal," "soul,” and the like; but throughout the Commentary the only character employed is the Latin.

Respecting matters of doctrine, and the general authority of the Scriptures, the author's views have a decided leaning towards conservatism. But he is not haunted by a nervous solicitude either to explain every difficulty or else explain it away. More than once he frankly declares that the attempt to find spiritual food always and everywhere is unreasonable, and dishonoring to the Bible, which is "not a book of riddles, but must be interpreted on principles of common sense or it cannot be interpreted at all." While he does not blink the theological aspects of a text, he never by partisanship forfeits a reader's respect. Some of his discussions of much-debated passages chap. xvi. 18, may be taken as a speci

-

men are pre-eminently manly and scholarly.

Of course critical scrutiny will here and there detect statements which are dubious at the best; such as (page 104) that the symbolic use of fire, in chap. v. 22, was derived from the alleged fiery sacrifices to Moloch, over which even the preceding page confesses there hangs much obscurity; that the ancient Babylonians and Assyrians observed a weekly day of rest called by the name of the Sabbath (page 260); that our Christian Sabbath appears to have been "changed by the Apostles" from the seventh to the first day of the week. And some readers certainly will be disposed to modify the statement or the solution of such problems as our Lord's use of Psalm ex. in chap. xxii. 43 ff., and his reported utterances respecting the Parousia. In the latter case, indeed, our author at one moment, in his remarks on chap. x. 23, seems about to get a glimpse of the solution which the "historic principle affords. Yet in the palmary passage, chap. xvi. 27 f., which unquestionably combines the "coming" at the destruction of Jerusalem and the "coming" to judg ment, and so confronts an interpreter with the whole problem in a nutshell, our author contents himself with saying: "The sudden transition from the final coming for judgment to this nearer coming at the destruction of Jerusalem is repeatedly paralleled in chap. 24." And in commenting on chap. xxvi. 64, he intercalates (apparently unconsciously) after the phrase "sitting on the right hand of power," the words here italicized: "and finally they would behold his second coming on the clouds," etc.

It should have been explicitly stated earlier, perhaps, that the Commentary takes as its basis the English text, and gives the current version and the revised in parallel columns. It would have been more in harmony with the high scholarship which in general characterizes the work had Dr. Scrivener's Cambridge Paragraph Bible been taken as the representative of our common version, instead of the American Bible Society's edition. The history of the modifications which that version has undergone would not then have occasionally escaped notice; the marginal note, for example, now appearing at chap. vi. 1, was not added till the year 1762 (see Scrivener, page xxxii). And, alike in the case of the Authorized Version and of the Revision, the marginal renderings should have been recorded not "usually" merely, but without exception. Incidentally it may be added here, that those for whom the "Index of Authors" was made would find its helpfulness increased if the information given were supplemented by mentioning in every instance the date and place of publication of (the best edition of) the works named.

The brief discussions, in their appropriate places, of the divers archæological and geographical topics, such as the Jordan, Galilee and its Sea, Pharisees and Sadducees, Samaritans, phylacteries, demoniacal possession, etc., are not as in the average "popular commentaries" with which this work may be unjustly confounded, hasty and indiscriminate compilations from the most accessible books of reference, but evidently rest on a wide range of the best ancient and modern sources, and often happily condense much trustworthy information into narrow limits.

In fine, we have here a commentary marked by original study, ripe scholarship, conspicuous thoroughness, fairness, good sense. While the bulk of the work is addressed to English readers, there is much which will be serviceable to the most scholarly ministers. We may search long for a work in English on the First Gospel, which, taken for all in all, is equal to it; in vain, for its superior.

CAMBRIDGE.

J. H. Thayer.

INTRODUCTION TO THE CATHOLIC EPISTLES. By PATON J. Gloag, D. D., Minister of Galashiels; author of "An Introduction to the Pauline Epistles," "A Commentary on the Acts of the Apostles." etc. Pp. xvi, 416. Edinburgh: T. & T. Clark. New York: Scribner & Welford. 1887.

Our English literature of New Testament Introduction has not kept pace with the German. Our best books on this subject are translations of German works, and the recent treatises of Holtzmann and Weiss, both of which are crammed full of facts and acute criticism, are not yet accessible to English readers. There is room, and there ought to be a brisk demand, for first-class works in this line. This book of Dr. Gloag's covers only part of the ground, but what it does it does well. It is a more thorough piece of work than his "Introduction to the Pauline Epistles.' The author does not claim credit for original research, but he has studied the best books to good purpose, and gives a clear, candid, and impartial statement of divergent views and theories. On most points he agrees with the views most widely current among evangelical Christians, on some his judgment is in suspense, and sometimes he gives no intimation of his own opinion, but contents himself with a clear and fair statement of the arguments of opposing schools. In the preface a recent writer is criticised because he does not always estimate adequately the objections of his opponents. It can be said of Dr. Gloag, that he not only treats opponents with respect, but sincerely endeavors to give full value to their arguments.

The customary topics are treated, viz., the authenticity, authorship, readers, etc., of the several Epistles; and there are dissertations upon certain special difficulties and disputed questions, which add much both to the bulk and the value of the book. The subjects of these dissertations are: The Pauline and Jacobean Views of Justification; Resemblances in the Epistle of James to the Sermon on the Mount, the Epistles of Paul, the Epistle to the Hebrews, the First Epistle of Peter, and the Apocrypha; The Anointing of the Sick; Peter's Residence in Rome; Petrine Theology; The Eschatology of Peter; Relation between 2 Peter and Jude; The Heavenly Witnesses; Gnosticism as referred to in John's Epistle; The Assumption of Moses; and The Book of Enoch.

In the discussion of the Petrine doctrine of sin, after saying that Peter regards sin chiefly from an ethical point of view as that which corrupts

and pollutes the soul, and that he dwells on sin as having its seat in the soul in the form of evil desires and lusts, Dr. Gloag states the apostle's teaching concerning the relation of the knowledge of the gospel to human sinfulness as follows: "Before the preaching of the gospel, these sinful lusts and actions arose from ignorance (ayvola); hence he warns his readers against the former lusts in their ignorance' (i. 14). But after the promulgation of the gospel, they become willful transgressions disobedience to the gospel. Hence sin not merely polluted the soul, but it exposed to punishment; there was not only defilement, but guilt; but still the chief element in sin, according to Peter, is its defiling nature."

66

The discussion of 1 Peter iii. 18-20 is cautious and sober, and free from offensive dogmatism. Especial attention is asked to his treatment of this subject on account of the fact that some of our religious journals have claimed Dr. Gloag as a supporter of their own view, and by judiciously selected quotations have seemed to make good their claim. This is the penalty the author has been made to pay for stating so impartially the view to which he does not himself incline. In a note on page 180 he gives this brief exegesis of the passage: The two datives, σαρκί and πνεύ Mari, can only be understood adverbially; that as regards his flesh, Christ was put to death, and as regards his spirit He was quickened. Hence the translation in the Authorized Version is wrong, and that of the Revised Version is correct. The verb worоinbeis does not mean preserved or remained alive, but made alive, the antithesis to avaτwbeis. ev is not, as in the Authorized Version, by which, but, as in the Revised Version, in which in which spirit, made alive, Christ went. Toрevleis certainly suggests a local transference. kpvcev is here equivalent to evŋyyeλíσato, went and preached, namely, the gospel, for so only can the word be understood with reference to Christ. τοῖς ἐν φυλακῇ πνεύμασιν are the disembodied spirits in Hades, who were shut up, as in a prison, waiting their final doom. These spirits are further described as άж‹‹ðýσaσív TOTE, 'sometime, or formerly, disobedient,' unbelieving. And the period of their disobedience is described as that when the long-suffering of God was waiting in the days of Noah,' namely, during the hundred and twenty years (Gen. vi. 3) while the ark was preparing." A very careful statement is made of the views of those who hold that this passage represents Christ as preaching in person in Hades, and also of those who think it teaches that He preached mediately by his spirit, and that not in Hades, but in this world. Immediately after these statements the strongest objections to the view under discussion are given, and also the replies made to these objections. The view that Christ preached the gospel to the disobedient spirits in Hades is characterized as "plausible," and as "giving a good interpretation to the passage "; but of the opposing view, that the preaching alluded to is that of the Spirit of Christ through Noah to the disobedient at the time of the deluge, he says, after weighing carefully the arguments in its favor and setting aside as groundless some of the objections that have been made to it: "On the whole, however, the feeling remains, that the above interpretation is somewhat far-fetched and somewhat forced." Yet he is so cautious as to conclude with the statement: "The meaning of the passage must be left in uncertainty. It is one of those obscure statements of Scripture on which it is impossible to dogmatize, and any inference derived from which must be extremely problematical." The concluding paragraph of this dissertation is worthy of careful consideration: "The doctrine of a future state, especially that

which relates to the intermediate state, is a profound mystery; eschatology relates to the darkest enigmas of revelation; an impenetrable veil hangs over our condition after death which it has not pleased God to remove. 'It doth not yet appear what we shall be.' We dare not affirm anything positive concerning such a mysterious subject. We have few data to proceed upon. We cannot speak with confidence concerning an eternal hope with regard to those who have died impenitent, however anxious we may be to believe it, in the face of our Lord's strong declarations concerning the undying worm, the unquenchable fire, the impassable gulf fixed between the righteous and the wicked, and especially as the same term (alovios) is employed to denote the duration of the happiness of the righteous and the misery of the wicked. On the other hand, everlasting punishment is a subject too awful to contemplate, a full realization of which would convert this world, to every benevolent mind, into a scene of unparalleled woe. Here dogmatism is entirely out of place. We must leave the fate of the departed with the Judge of all the earth, who must inevitably do right and whose name and nature is love; but whilst we fear his justice, we are still permitted to hope in his mercy." Seemingly significant of the trend of the author's thinking is his quotation of the opinion of Bishop Martensen, who conceives that both everlasting punishment and universal restoration are unequivocally taught in Scripture; that there is here "an apparent contradiction between two laws equally divine, and which consequently cannot find a perfectly conclusive and satisfactory solution in the present stage, the earthly limits of human knowledge."

These passages are sufficient to show that the author is not a dogmatist who is absolutely certain that he possesses the truth, the whole truth, and nothing but the truth concerning the difficult problems of human destiny, but an earnest and sincere thinker, who keeps his mind open for the reception of new truth, and has some adequate sense of the limitations of human knowledge.

A few errors have been noted, most of which seem to be due to careless proof-reading; e. g. on page 5 catholic is said to be "synonymous with exegetical (?) or circular"; on page 15 the translation of a passage from the Muratorian canon gives three Epistles of John, where the number should be two (the Latin foot-note gives duas); on page 104 "venal sins" takes the place of the customary phraseology, and on page 162 it is said that the spirit of Christ was in the apostles testifying beforehand of the sufferings of Christ, where obviously prophets are meant. There are some mistakes of a more serious nature. On page 118 it is said that Huther "wavers in his opinion" as to the dependence of 1 Peter upon the Pauline Epistles. "In one place he observes: The similarity between particular passages of Peter's Epistle and Paul's other Epistles is not of such a nature as to warrant the conclusion that there is a dependence of the former upon the latter;' whilst elsewhere he appears to admit such a dependence." The author must have failed to notice the word other in his quotation, for the fact is that Huther admits the dependence of 1 Peter upon Romans and Ephesians, but not upon Paul's other Epistles.

In his references to the use of the Catholic Epistles by Clement of Alexandria, the author is hardly self-consistent. On page 323 he quotes the statement of Eusebius, "In the work called Hypotyposes he (Clement) has given us abridged accounts of all the canonical Scriptures, not

66

even omitting those that are disputed, namely, the book of Jude and the other Catholic Epistles," and draws the inference that "Clement was acquainted with the seven Catholic Epistles." On page 207 he says that Clement's acquaintance with 2 Peter has been inferred from this statement, but does not himself expressly accept the inference as sound; while on page 339, in the discussion of 3 John, he says: If what Eusebius says of Clemens Alexandrinus is to be taken in its full extent . . . then this Epistle was known to Clement." A comparison of the general statement of Eusebius with the more specific one of Cassiodorus in his "Introduction to the Reading of Holy Scripture," has led most scholars to the conclusion that Clement recognized as canonical all of the Catholic epistles except James, 2 Peter, and 3 John (see Westcott on the canon, page 357), and there is no room for an inference which covers the seven Catholic Epistles.

But the blemishes are only a drop in the bucket. For its mastery of the literature of the subject, its sound judgment, and its absence of dogmatism and partisan bias, this work is to be heartily commended.

F. E. Woodruff.

GERMAN THEOLOGICAL LITERATURE.

- The

Kirchliches Handlexicon. Ein Hilfsbuch zur Orientierung auf dem Gesamtgebiete der Theologie und Kirche. In Verbindung mit einer Anzahl evangelisch-lutherischer Theologen herausgegeben von Dr. Carl Mensel, unter Mitwirkung von C. Haack und B. Lehmann. Erster Band. A bis Columna. Leipzig: Naumann. 1887. 8vo, pp. 800. 10 mks. present work aims to fill a place which, in spite of the great number of German theological encyclopædias already in existence, has hitherto remained vacant. The intention of the editors is to produce a brief, but at the same time comprehensive, handbook which shall embrace the whole field of religion and theology, and yet fill but four moderate sized volumes. Such a work cannot, of course, aspire to take the place of a Herzog or of the great Biblical, geographical, and biographical dictionaries of Smith and of others, but it will render excellent service in giving in a condensed form the main facts upon the various subjects which are treated with such fullness in those larger works. If the character of the whole may be judged from the first volume, the work may be recommended as filling its purpose admirably. It is in the hands of conservative theologians, and is intended to represent evangelical Lutheranism of the present day. The names of the various contributors have not yet appeared, but will be published with the last volume. The work appears in installments of eighty pages each, at intervals of a few weeks; the tenth, which has just been issued, completing the first volume. The whole is to embrace four large octavo volumes, each of 800 double-columned pages.

- Kirchengeschichtliche Studien. Hermann Reuter zum 70. Geburtstag gewidmet von Theodor Brieger, Paul Tschackert, Theod. Kolde, Fried. Loofs, und Karl Mirbt. Mit einer Beigabe von August Reuter. Leipzig: Hinrichs. 1888. 8vo, pp. 351. 8 mks. These studies are dedicated to the celebrated Göttingen Church Historian by six of his former pupils. They are upon widely varied subjects, but each is worthy