It is very possible that we might not be prepared to bind ourselves to the precise view of Bishop Forbes upon this point. But what is impossible is, that we should for a moment tolerate a theory so novel and unheard of among theologians, as that of Bishop Trower. He is particularly fond of the terms 'unAnglican' and 'practical good sense.' We hope, therefore, that we shall be understood, when we declare that no hypothesis ever looked to us more un-Anglican, more opposed to practical good sense. Some similar theory might be tenable in Sweden, where even the laity profess belief, not only in the Three Creeds, but likewise (as recent events have reminded us) in the Augsburg Confession, in Luther's Two Catechisms, and in the Formula Concordiæ. But we will not argue the point while the Bishop of Glasgow has only an ipse dixi to produce. Let him name any half-dozen respectable authorities on his side, and we may then reconsider the case. Meanwhile, let our readers study the life of Chillingworth, the life of Dr. Johnson, or Mr. C. P. Chretien's Lectures on the Study of Theology.' We name these last, not only because they touch so ably, though incidentally, on the value and authority of the Creeds as compared with that of the Articles; but because, if we mistake not, they were published with the full sanction of the Provost and other authorities of the famous College of which Bishop Trower was himself once a Fellow. The Provost of Oriel College, Oxford, is surely an unsuspicious patron.

If our criticism of this Pastoral seems of very negative character, we must, by way of apology, declare that we cannot -in all solemnity and seriousness we say it-form any clear conception of what its positive teaching is. We can see what Mr. Cheyne teaches, or Mr. Palmer, or Bishop Forbes, respecting our blessed Lord's presence in the Holy Eucharist. We can see what Dean Ramsay teaches, we can see what Mr. Freeman teaches. Nor are we blind, we trust, to the deep and earnest piety which is compatible with all these views; or again, in individual Christians, with an absence of explicitly definite views. All we here assert is, that wherever we are to turn for a view which shall be consistent and intelligible, it must not be to the Bishop of Glasgow's Pastoral. At page 47, he supports the view of Hooker, of a presence in the believer only, and yet he has signed a document, reprinted at page 445, which evidently implies (as Mr. Freeman showed) a presence in the consecrated elements. If unconscious inconsistency may be tolerated, why not also views which have been borne with for 300 years? It would,' says a living writer, no less distinguished for the elegance of his scholarship than for the earnestness and moderation of his piety, it would be nothing less than a monstrous injustice

to condemn a clergyman in ecclesiastical penalties, for holding or preaching views on the Lord's Supper, which, however exceptionable to some minds, have a kind of support in some physical and Scriptural analogies, and were certainly held and taught by divines of such note and authority as Ridley, Poynet, 1 Jackson, Thorndike, and Jeremy Taylor.'

Is there no warning for us in the spectacle of the Calvinistic, as compared with that of the Lutheran communions? Of the three great Calvinistic countries, Scotland, Holland, Switzerland, the first-named has lived-yes, positively lived, upon English theology, not having produced one single great theologian of her own; the second, Holland, is fearfully dead, and has been, of all European colonizing countries, perhaps the most shamelessly wicked and anti-Christian; the third, Switzerland, is miserably Arian, and can hardly be said of late, we think, to have reared one really great teacher, with the single exception of the late M. Vinet, of Lausanne. Lutheranism, on the contrary, with all its faults of rationalism, yet displays the most salient energy against unbelief; yet organizes a system of resistance against the world; yet rears such thoughtful and deeply pious theologians as Olshausen, Stier, Dorner, Hengstenberg, and many more. Now Calvinism professes a low, Lutheranism an exalted, view of the Holy Eucharist.

The lamented illness of the Primus of the Scottish Church may be permitted to cause some delay.2 Assuredly the Episcopal Synod could ill spare his experience and the weight of his reputation for moral courage and fairness. Can they confirm Bishop Suther's sentence on Mr. Cheyne without virtually affirming,—1. That the teaching for which a Bishop is only censured (it being doubted whether there is any case for presentment) involves suspension for life on the part of a Presbyter; and, 2. That the same measure ought to be dealt out in England to a body of clergy outnumbering the whole number of the Presbyters in Scotland, including many of the most learned, pious, and attached among her sons.

It would ill become us, writing under the veil of anonymousness, to speak of the danger of secondary motives; to hint how well-meant tenderness towards those who are aggrieved on one side, may lead to the saddest injustice to others who are, to say the least, as loyal, as self-denying, as earnest children of the Church. Neither ought we, being self-constituted advisers, to do more than allude to that more dread tribunal before which,

1 Preface to University Sermons, by Rev. James Fraser, M.A. (now Chancellor of the Diocese of Salisbury). We have to thank this Preface for reminding us of Bishop Burnet's statements and Hooker's debt to Arnoldus.

2 We hear that this is not to be the case; but that the Synod will sit.

in a few short years, accusers and accused, judges and critics, must all alike be summoned. But even on lower grounds, of the results to be made evident on earth, we do most earnestly deprecate the confimation of Bishop's Suther's sentence. It will silence indeed a single Presbyter, one of the most respected and beloved in Scotland; but it cannot possibly put down his teaching; it may, probably, from the very reaction, tend to enforce it; and will be looked back to, we believe, by the most honoured among the judges, as its consequences sooner or later unfold themselves, with bitter and prolonged, but, it may be, unavailing regret.'

Again we plead for toleration, and meanwhile-may it be in all humility and sincerity—we pray :

' O Lord Jesu Christ, the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever,

Preserve us from being carried about with divers and strange doctrines.

Almighty, everliving Father, Who hast promised unto Thy faithful people life, by Thine Incarnate Son, even as He liveth by Thee; grant unto us all, and especially to our Bishops and Pastors, and to those whom Thy Providence hath in any wise entrusted with the treasure of Thy holy doctrine among us, Thy good Spirit, always so to believe and understand, to feel and firmly to hold, to speak and think, concerning the mystery of the Communion of thy Son's Body and Blood, as shall be well pleasing to Thee, and profitable to our souls; through the same our Lord Jesus Christ, Who liveth and reigneth with Thee in the unity of the same Spirit, One God, world without end. Amen.'

469

ART. VIII-1. The Life and Martyrdom of Savonarola. By R. R. MADDEN, M. R. T. A. 2 vols. London: Newby. 1853. 2. Life and Times of Girolamo Savonarola, illustrating the Progress of the Reformation in Italy during the Fifteenth Century. London: Whittaker & Co. 1843.

3. La Vita del M. R. P. F. Girolamo Savonarola de Ferrara, dell' Ordine de S. Dominico. Scritta del F. PACIFICO BURLAMACCHI LUCCHESE. Mansi: Lucchensis. 1791.

4. Histoire des Révolutions d'Italie, ou Guelphs et Gibilins. Par J. FERRARI. Paris: Didier et Cie. 1858.

WE have a very vivid and distinct recollection of a certain task we, along with several other boys, were set in our school-boy days, which, from our signal failure, has somehow haunted us ever since. We were set to draw from memory a map of ancient Greece, marking out the various states that composed that singular congeries of republics. We succeeded pretty well with the outline, and without much difficulty indicated the whereabouts of Athens, Sparta, and Corinth; but in endeavouring to locate the various smaller states, we soon found our faculties involved in Boeotian mist; nor can we honestly say that we have ever since wholly emerged from it. How can any one possibly remember states which approximate in size to a parish in the West Riding of Yorkshire, or hold a position like the two diminutive counties of Clackmannan and Kinross, in Scotland? Much the same hopeless feeling comes over us in later life, when we try to master the history of the Italian Republics in the Middle Ages; perpetual rivalry, incessant warfare never ceased; even when the great overwhelming armies of Germany and France poured down from the Alps, like their native torrents, when the sun melts the snows, could not serve to cool the jealousy of rival states, so as to make them band together against a common enemy. The bitterness of wounded pride made some even ally themselves with the invader, in order to enjoy the sight of the humiliation of a neighbour, that they could not singly effect. Two indeed of these states have left an imperishable renown on the page of history, for their noble defence of Western Europe against the hitherto victorious Turk; no one can read the history of the fall of the Eastern Empire without paying his tribute to the valour and perseverance of the great Justiniani and his gallant band of Genoese, whose dead bodies blocked up the golden gate of Constantinople, when the wood

:

and iron gave way before the battery of Turkish cannon. All that fixes itself in the memory with any tenacity in Italian mediæval history, is the sudden and brilliant career of some one individual, an Epaminondas, who shed a temporary lustre on his hitherto obscure city, causing it to blaze with an ephemeral glory, and then, when the hero passed from off the scene, to sink down again into its former obscurity; of the petty warfare, rebellions, and invasions we carry no distinct impressions—they are lost in multitude and tenuity. There is, however, one great difference between the warfare of the Grecian states, and the Italian in the former there was real fighting,-in the latter valour was often tempered with discretion. Italy was rather a chess-board than a battle-field,-plenty of dukes and marquises, instead of kings and queens, real knights with real castles, actual bishops, and real men-at-arms for pawns, played these games with endings as bloodless. Two hostile armies came out of their respective states, ostensibly to fight; but victories were sometimes won without a blow being struck. The two armies confronted each other at a distance, perhaps nearly equal in numbers; the skilful eye of each leader saw an advantageous post, perhaps a rising ground, with a wood on one flank, and a marsh on the other; now followed a series of manoeuvres, each trying to get his forces into this position. Here was the trial of skill; a bold rush over the marsh, a hazardous flank movement by which the wood was passed, and then the position was won. This was checkmate; the out-manoeuvred army saw it was useless to attack, so it gave in, terms were agreed to, and peace made. Whatever opinion may be given as to the question of valour, none can withhold the tribute of discretion to these warriors; the only point on which we dispute their sense, is, that the knights came to these mock battles clad in the heaviest and strongest armour; so ponderous was this means of defence, that it sometimes disabled the wearer: in one of these bloodless encounters, we read that the only loss on either side was that of three knights, whose horses falling with them, they were unable to rise, and were smothered in their armour; a result that no one will wonder at, who has stood in the armoury at Malta on a hot day in July, and has viewed the ponderous iron shell which enclosed those warriors, a good protection against the sword of an adversary, but no defence against the heat and dust of an Italian plain.1

1 We really forget in what battle this catastrophe happened. We trust our readers will pardon us for not looking through the pages of history to tell them. The excuse we have to offer for our negligence they will find in the pages of Ferrari, who says that between the end of the tenth century and the middle of the sixteenth, there were more than seven thousand revolutions in Italy alone: -on an average thirteen every year.