cannot be absorbed, and without violating its own free principles. There seems to be a glorious future before the American Unitarian Church. I might tell you how large the percentage of growth has been within five years; how great the promise in the North-west; how rapid the increase in our sales of denominational books; how insatiable the demand for able and earnest ministers; how active our laity and our women; how successful our local conferences; and how promising our national conference. But all this you will learn better from the "Monthly Journal," which I rejoice to learn you receive regularly. I have already abused your patience with this long letter. Nothing but the desire to put you in complete sympathy with American Unitarianism could excuse it. Rejoicing in all you say of our prospects in Europe, I offer you the expression of my fraternal love, and am, in the bonds of the gospel,

"PREPARATIONS" and "abridgments" of foreign works by American editors and translators are always to be distrusted, even when the principles on which the omissions and changes are made are frankly stated in the preface. When a narrow sectarian translates the work of a broader thinker, the chances are that he "improves" the original work to suit his own dogmatic prejudices, and that he leaves out the most liberal parts. We do not know that Mr. Lacroix has done this in the case of the work of Pressensé on the Church in France during the Revolution.* If we may trust his word, he has faithfully given "the spirit, the doctrines, and the judgments". of Pressense's book, condensing only the portions "not so interesting to the non-French reader," and slightly enlarging other portions by the addition of historical and explanatory matter. An American Meth

Religion and the Reign of Terror, or the Church during the French Revolution. Prepared from the French of M. EDMOND DE PRESSENSÉ. By Rev. JOHN P. LACROIX, A.M. New York: Carlton & Lanahan, 1869. 12mo, pp. 416.

odist, perhaps, is not the best judge of what "non-French" readers of works of this kind prefer; and it would seem that the "elucidating" matter might have been more conveniently given in the form of notes, than by insertion in the text, spoiling the smoothness and clearness of the narrative. Possibly, these insertions have caused some violations of a good idiomatic style in the English work, which otherwise might be attributed to the diffuseness of the French author. Even with this allowance, there are several passages in which the exact sense of the original has not been given by the translation. In the very first sentence of the introduction, we read of France and Europe, "inspired with an inexperienced ardor for universal reform.” A too literal rendering frequently betrays the translator into ungrammatical English. Occasionally, we find blunders which can hardly have been in the original, as on page 371, where the husband of Miss Patterson, "the youngest of the Emperor's brothers," is called Joseph Bonaparte; and on page 386, where we read "that the dictator of Brumaire was logically bound to impose on religion the same claims which he was forging for the whole body of the nation." We have not seen the original, but should judge from the context that it said, "fasten upon religion the same chains." The translator, too, invariably calls the French Abbé, "Abbot," bringing in so, not the original idea of a priest, but the idea of superior in a monastery, which Sieyes and Grégoire certainly were not. It is fair to say, however, that in this false rendering Mr. Lacroix may have been misled by the French dictionaries in common use.

The book itself is very interesting. After a rapid survey of the relation between church and state in the centuries preceding the Revolution, of the influence of the tradition of Gallican liberties, and of the writings of the philosophers of the eighteenth century, it shows us the gradual and steady progress of the idea of true religious liberty, until it was crushed by the Cæsarism of the great Napoleon, and the Church, both Catholic and Protestant, was made only the vassal of the state. The sympathies of the author are, as we might expect, with the Abbé Grégoire, and the party, who, while defending the right of private judgment, and of free prophesying, make no concessions to the irreverent and infidel spirit of the age. He sees in this party the saviours of religion in all that stormy time of the Girondists, the Terrorists, and the Directory. They maintain the rights of faith against the excesses of atheists, and the follies of the philanthropists, and enable the Church, when the storm has passed, to recover

its lost ground, and to come back to its former possession. That Rome is in religious possession of France to-day, is due, not so much to the resistance and the martyrdom of recusant priests, who would not subscribe to the constitution of the nation, as to the more patriotic wisdom of those priests and scholars who consented to the will of the people, yet held firmly to their hereditary faith in the truths of the creed and the Bible.

If the closing chapter of the book has not been improved by the American translator, it is certainly very bold writing for a subject of the third Napoleon, and shows that the strict censorship of the press cannot shut the mouths of all critics of the imperial rule. What Pressensé says of the acts and spirit of the uncle is equally exact in showing the acts and spirit of the nephew. The attitude of the despot who could respect all religions as a matter of state-craft, with an equal contempt for their spiritual claim, is precisely the attitude of the present sovereign of France. The position of the churches in France is certainly a great deal better than it was two centuries ago, even with the protection of Protestants by the Edict of Nantes. Catholic, Protestant, and Jew can live side by side, and have their rights guaranteed by the civil code, and their hands held back from fratricidal warfare. Yet the servitude of the Church to the Empire is as galling to Catholic as it is to Protestant. It is humiliating to be confined to metes and bounds, and to take a charitable stipend from the hand of the master. The spirit of propagandism has no chance where religion is under the supervision and control of the state. In France, as in England, the only class that are content with the present religious position, are the Liberals, who are able, under the protection of the secular power, to have free utterance of their heresies and their speculations.

A thorough and impartial work on the actual condition of religious faith in France, and the relations of religious parties, is greatly to be desired.

"SACRED Archæology," in the language of Mr. Walcott means all the appendages of the priesthood and the rituals, knobs and bosses, choral pauses in the psalms; pocularies, or "consecrated

Sacred Archæology: a popular Dictionary of Ecclesiastical Art and Institutions, from Primitive to Modern Times. By MACKENZIE E. C. WALCOTT, B.D. London: L. Reeve & Co., 1868. 8vo, pp. xvi., 640.

drinking-cups; "pargettings," "the ornamental plastering on walls;" grave-diggers in the catacombs; torch-bearers; - every thing, and every man, in fact, that has had any thing to do with matters ecclesiastical. Paradise is sacred; "Hawpulling Towels " are sacred; "Pultog Holes," apertures for scaffolding left in church-walls, are sacred we have the holy sponge, the holy brush, the holy spoon, the holy voice-tube, and the holy pouch. This archæological dictionary is one of the first literary fruits of ritualism, and is a sign of the time. It shows us to what this reaction is tending, and what kind of puerility and folly it would fasten upon the churches. A great deal of singular and quaint learning is compressed in this goodly octavo; but the strangest thing is, that a sensible Englishman should find pleasure in bringing such stuff together. We have more than two pages about the cope; three pages about the mitre; more than two pages about the pall; and the account of the Rood Loft, concisely written, fills three full pages. None of the articles in the volume are tedious, and there is no sentiment to dress out the facts. There are nearly two thousand titles of separate articles and notices; and the information is drawn from a great variety of sources, English and foreign. The spirit of the work is good, not harsh or controversial. Mr. Walcott deprecates the "desecration of sacred and solemn subjects by the unchastened language of human passion." He therefore has no severe rebuke for the iconoclasts, when he mentions the broken images, and no sad lament over the good time gone, when he tells how pious customs have died out, such as head and feet washing, before the "Competentes " received baptismal unction. The only practice which stirs his mild wrath, is the practice of restoring ancient churches, which in his view is more dangerous than the ravages of armies, mobs, or fanatics. He invites the suggestions of critics, whether hostile or friendly, and is prepared to welcome their word. The verdict of the critics will be, that the book is very good of its kind, but that the kind seems to have lost its value in an age of reason and light.

C. H. B.

"THE Tripartite Nature of Man" is a fascinating book. Its style is clear and flowing, its arrangement scientific, the learning is

* The Tripartite Nature of Man, — Spirit, Soul, and Body; applied to illustrate and explain the doctrines of Original Sin, the New Birth, the Disembodied State, and the Spiritual Body. By Rev. G. B. HEARD, M.A. Edinburgh: J. & T. Clark, 1868. 12mo, pp. xxiv., 363.

ample, the argument ingenious, and the enthusiasm of belief is delightful and almost contagious. The writer believes and therefore speaks. He writes from a conviction, deep and earnest and mastering, that he has found in this theory of the threefold nature of man the solution of all philosophical difficulties, and the real harmony between the science of the soul and the dogmas of the Bible. There can be no question that his exposition of Paul's psychology is more correct than the distortions of the commentaries. It is impossible to bring this apostle into the company of the dualists, who see in man only body and soul, flesh and spirit. It is not so easy to demonstrate this of the other New-Testament writers, or to show it as the view of Jesus. Indeed, Mr. Heard does not pretend that Jesus taught in so many words the later doctrine of Paul, but only that he gave a deeper meaning to the word "soul" than the old Hebrews gave, and so prepared the way for the apostolic doctrine. This " trichotomy" was one of those views which he merely hinted, but reserved for the spirit of truth to teach more fully. Yet as we read the conversation with Nicodemus in the light of our present knowledge, we seem to see that Jesus was speaking of the latent spirit, when the rabbi understood him as speaking only of the psychical soul.

In spite of its beautiful enthusiasm and its reverent use of the Scripture language, the book is unsatisfactory. It assumes that the Orthodox scheme of theology and salvation is true; that God is divine, that man is fallen and depraved, that physical death came through his sin, that the atonement of Christ is vicarious, that punishment is eternal. It will allow no analogy between the threefold nature of man and the threefold nature of God. The one is a philosophical theory, perfectly intelligible and reasonable: the other is an ineffable mystery, above all reason. Man is "three natures in one person," God is "three persons in one nature." The tripartite man in no way helps us to understand the mystery of the Godhead. As a criticism of the notion of a double nature in man, soul and body wholly distinct, the argument of the book is sound. But who will base now a scientific psychology or theology upon the literal legend of Genesis, which is so self-contradictory?

And as little satisfactory to physiologists will be the speculations of the book about the resurrection body, that it will have a nervous without a nutritive system, senses without circulation; that it will share all the functions of the first body, except those of propagation and nutrition. The view here given of the physical body, and the