maic,' and he establishes this conclusion by an amount of evidence which can hardly leave a doubt in the minds of unprejudiced readers. If the early chapters of his work may seem to be of a special and merely professional interest, Mr Roberts has, in the second part, made the result of his previous researches the groundwork of farther investigations, which place the original composition of the gospels in an entirely new light, and will be welcome to every careful reader of the New Testament."

The following testimony (only one of many) to the importance of Mr Roberts's investigations comes from the same learned source:

"Christianity, from an historical point of view, is the reunion of the Jew and Gentile, and, from a still higher point of view, it clearly marks the confluence of the two great streams of human life and thought—the Semitic and the Aryan. How wonderful, then, that He who came to reveal to the whole of mankind their common brotherhood and their common Father in heaven, should have had his words and thoughts moulded in the two principal languages of the two principal families of human speech-the Greek and Hebrew! To discover in the history of the world the indications of a Divine plan is no less comforting than to recognise the working of God's grace even in the smallest events of our daily life; and if we consider how a language represents the intellectual heirloom of a whole nation, to see Christ as the heir, not only of the Semitic, but even in a much higher degree of the Greek and Aryan races, is a confirmation stronger than any, of His truly historical character-a commentary clearer than any on the true meaning of "the fulness of time."-Saturday Review.

The Codex Sinaiticus.

The precious MS. of the holy Scriptures discovered some time ago in such a strange and romantic manner by Tischendorf, has recently been published at St Petersburgh, under the title, "Bibliorum Codex Sinaiticus Petropolitanus." Our readers are aware of the absurd and groundless claim put forward by a Greek named Simonides, at present resident in this country, to the effect that he himself was the writer of the MS., which both its discoverer and the ablest palæographers living have agreed in judging of the highest antiquity! Nothing more will probably be heard of this wild and daring assertion. But the precise age of the Codex Sinaiticus is still sub judice. The following paragraph refers to this, and properly maintains that whatever be the ultimate decision of criticism with respect to the exact date of the MS., it must be acknowledged to hold a high place among the most ancient written monuments of our faith

"The 'Codex Sinaiticus' is a great fact. It has fairly emerged from its obscurity of ages, and the appearance of a new island would scarcely have been regarded with more interest than its advent before the eyes of the critical world. A new claimant to the presidency in the republic of Bibli cal MSS. was, of course, a very possible occurrence, but it was not generally expected. All at once, however, a celebrated letter from Tischendorf to the Minister von Falkenstein, announced the coming of a candidate for that presidency, and of one whose rights might, perhaps, easily be determined. Codex A., which tradition ascribed to the time of the Nicene Council, and which for a long time was allowed to stand first, had been condemned to retire before at least one of its rivals, and to strike off a century or more from its assumed age. The Codex C., or the Ephraem rescript, had won a

high position. Tischendorf, for example, puts it before the middle of the fifth century,- -as early, if not earlier than Codex A. The Cambridge MS., Codex D., or Bezæ, has raised a good deal of discussion, but never held its ground as a candidate for the seniority. Of the rest we need not speak, excepting to name the one which had won its way to the headship-Codex B., or the Vatican MS. This last seemed to be settling down into quiet possession of its honours; and such is the exclusive veneration in which it is held, that it has for a long period been almost as difficult of access as the Grand Lama of Thibet, or his holiness the Pope. It remains to be seen whether the rival dignity of the Sinaitic Codex, which courts publicity, will have any effect in relaxing or removing the restrictions of which we speak. This is not all; it remains to be seen whether, by coming into the broad daylight, the Vatican Codex may not even yet vindicate its superior claims. It remains to be seen whether the Sinaitic Codex, Aleph or , may not be compelled to retire into the same rank as its brother Alpha of Alexandria. But whatever may be the ultimate decision of those who are able to investigate and pronounce judgment in the matter, the 'Codex Sinaiticus' is, we repeat, a fact, and not a myth, and it will always occupy a high and powerful position among the uncial MSS. of the Greek Scriptures."-Journal of Sacred Literature.

The Antiquity of Man.

On the question of the "Antiquity of Man," at present exciting so much discussion, we give the following passage :—

"No reasonable geologist will expect the public to alter the current chronology until the grounds for such a change are perfectly clear and conclusive. Till then it is not only proper but imperative to suspend the judg ment. If, however, the reader should be of opinion that the advocates of antiquity have raised a fair presumption in favour of their views, it becomes necessary to inquire how far this doctrine bears upon the statements contained in the Bible. Should the theory be established by further researches, ought we to conclude that the story of Adam's creation, as chronicled by Moses, is false? Certainly not. The discovery of a whole cemetery of skulls, like those of Engis or Neanderthal, or of a collection of microscopes and other philosophical instruments, in some pre-glacial formation, would not shake our faith in the veracity of Scripture for a moment. It would, indeed, be necessary to revise our construction of the opening chapters of Genesis. But since it is nowhere expressly asserted that Adam was the first intelligent creature whom God produced on the earth, we should surely have no right to charge the book with untruthfulness because it contains no allusion to the owners of those 'ape-like' crania, or to the manufacturers of those miserable flints. Few can fail to have been struck by the fact that man is the sole acknowledged species in the genus Homo. Is it not permissible to suppose, if the case should ultimately require some revision of our views, that other species of this proud genus may have preceded us on the earth? and as we may safely assume that they would be inferior to ourselves in mental organisation, would there be any impropriety in fastening the low-class skulls to which we have so frequently referred upon their shoulders, and placing the clumsy flint implements about which so much has been said in their unskilful hands?"-British Quarterly Review.

The Question of Reading Sermons in the Pulpit.

We extract the following from an excellent article on the "Manner of Preaching," in the Princeton Review, April 1863 :-

"We, of course, cannot complete this survey of this subject without some remarks upon written and unwritten sermons. In our view, if the requisites to efficient preaching already spoken of be realised, it is of less consequence how it is accomplished. Different men have their special modes of reaching the most free and buoyant intellectual activity, and of most facile and effective preparation for the pulpit. Some are hampered by any use of the pen. It is very rare, nevertheless, that any preachers, however gifted in extemporaneous oratory, may not strengthen their productions by some use of the pen in the study. Some prefer to preach from written skeletons, sometimes before them while preaching, and sometimes left behind them. Others prefer to write out more fully, but not completely. Others, and, in some sections of country, the great majority, write out their sermons in full to the last word. Of those who do this, some few memorise their sermons more or less perfectly, and leave their manuscripts behind, or pay little attention to them. The most of those who write sermons preach from their manuscripts, and are at a loss without them. There are few, however, who are so enslaved to manuscripts that they do not easily and effectively preach in the lectureroom, and on occasions less formal and exacting than the public services of the Sabbath, without written preparations. And no one can impose laws upon others in these matters, much less determine for them, that their gifts can be made more effective without than with the use of the pen, and its free and abundant use, too, to the extent of a complete manuscript sermon.

It is obvious that the absence of a manuscript is likely to have the advantage of leading the preacher to conform to the first great requisites of oratory, that he speak to his audience, and have the aspect and attitude of directly addressing them. And if he be quite self-possessed, it favours ease and freedom, and, so far forth, the force of the address. We have, however, known preachers who, after giving up the practice of writing sermons, lost the power of facing and eyeing the audience, because they became so absorbed in the process of invention, in thought and language, as to divert them effectually from looking at their hearers.

"On the other hand, it cannot be denied that written preparations have the advantage on the score of accuracy, clearness, condensation, method, fluency, self-possession, and insuring something like a due care of preparation. Still, there is a large class, and in some sections quite the largest, who have an invincible repugnance to what they call reading of sermons, which they put in contrast with preaching, or denounce as a corruption of the ordinance of preaching. Another class, who in other sections are quite as predominant, have a great aversion to unwritten discourses. They think of them as unprepared, superficial, rambling, repetitious, crude, and tedious. The true explanation of this we apprehend to be, that so small a proportion of those who write sermons prepare them on oratorical principles, in the form of a sufficiently direct address to the audience; and still fewer give them an oratorical delivery. They have not acquired the art of speaking, instead of merely reading, from a manuscript. They have probably never sought, with any due painstaking, to acquire it. They do not, at least many of them, even appreciate it. They do not so prepare their sermons, as to chirography and previous effort, to become familiar with them, as to be able to lift their eyes from their paper, to face the congregation, and emphasise and gesticulate, as propriety, and force, and impressiveness may require. This is the secret of the aversion and prejudice against written sermons. This is all the more so, as the few written sermons preached in regions where the people are unaccustomed to them, are usually poor specimens of their kind, at least as to delivery. Ministers who seldom use manuscripts are usually more fettered and awkward in handling them than those who are habituated to their use. They are apt to appear more like poor readers than good speakers in the delivery of written sermons. But the point on which we insist is, that the aversion to written sermons, where it prevails, is mainly owing to the want

of an oratorical delivery, sometimes aggravated, to be sure, by the want of oratorical structure and style in their composition; and that attention to each of these points, especially the former, is of the first importance in the case of all who preach written sermons. We agree with Sir H. Moncreiff in his remarks at a late meeting of the Free Church Presbytery of Edinburgh, on the motion of Dr Begg, to send an overture to the General Assembly, 'urging that body to adopt means in the theological colleges of the church for training students in the habit of delivering their sermons without reading.' On urging his motion, the rev. doctor introduced some amusing anecdotes illustrative of Scotch antipathy to the use of the manuscript.

"Sir H. Moncreiff, who considered that it was not so much the reading of sermons as their ineffective delivery to which exception was taken by the people, proposed that to the overture the words should be added, that means should be adopted for training students in the habit of delivering their discourses effectively, with the use of their manuscript on the desk.'

"On a division, the original motion was carried by a majority of 10 to 9. "If he had moved that they be trained to deliver their discourses effectively, with or without manuscripts, as they might choose, we can hardly doubt that, even in Scotland, this majority of one would have been reduced to a minority. He was undeniably right. Good sermons, spoken forcibly from a manuscript to the people, instead of being read almost as if the preacher had no audience before him, seldom fail to interest and impress all classes of people, as decidedly as if the same things were delivered without a manuscript. "On the other hand, the prejudice in many sections of the country against preaching without a manuscript, arises largely from the fact, that the poorest specimens of preaching which they hear are generally extemporaneous, not only in form, but in fact. Ministers accustomed to preach written sermons at the principal Sabbath service, seldom appear on such occasions without a manuscript, unless, for some reason, they have been cut short of time for preparation. Hence they rarely feel at ease in this sort of preaching, not only because they are unaccustomed to it, but because conscious of being unprepared. Hence, the people take the absence of a manuscript as a token of the absence of preparation. They expect a crude, undigested, rambling address. This expectation, in such cases, perfectly well understood by the preacher, reacts upon him, and still further disheartens and disables him. The meagre performance resulting, still further confirms the people in their aversion to unwritten sermons. And so, by a ceaseless action and reaction, the difficulty aggravates itself. And yet, as we have often seen, no people are more delighted and edified than these very congregations, by vigorous, instructive, and earnest preaching, without the aid of a manuscript, when they are favoured with it, which, owing to the causes already specified, rarely occurs.

"It is unwarranted, and worse than useless, to prescribe any iron rule, or to put all sorts of preachers, with every variety of gifts and training, upon any Procrustean bed, in this matter. To do so, would be to rob the church of the services of some of her noblest sons. We once heard a young man declaiming against preaching from manuscript. When he attempted to answer this argument, by saying that those were not called to preach who had not the requisite gifts, he apparently became embarrassed at the rashness of his own assertions, and was obliged to bring forth his manuscript from his pocket, in order to escape a more mortifying failure. It was once taken for granted, in this country, from the peculiarities of their printed sermons, that Chalmers preached extemporaneously, while Robert Hall carefully wrote his discourses. The reverse turned out to be true. The free, diffuse, impassioned Chalmers carefully wrote his discourses. The severely correct, elegant, classical, yet eloquent discourses of Hall were unwritten. Edwards, reading from a manuscript most closely written, caused spasmodic uprisings and shrieks in congregations, as he depicted to them the case of 'sinners in the hands of an angry God.' Those sermons of Griffin, that now overawed and now transported vast audiences of

all descriptions of people, now causing the obdurate sinner to tremble on the brink of the bottomless pit, and anon lifting the humble and contrite spirit to the third heaven, 'were written with great care, the author often rewriting, and cutting out everything superfluous.' Davies, 'a model of the most striking pulpit oratory,' probably the prince of American preachers, who almost invariably produced a profound impression on the largest audiences, whose discourses, heard by Patrick Henry, kindled that great orator to his almost matchless efforts of patriotic eloquence, usually wrote his sermons with great care, and carried them into the pulpit; but, like Dr Griffin, 'delivered them with freedom, without being confined to his manuscript.'"

Millenary Commemoration.

We willingly afford space for the following intelligence communicated by a learned clergyman of the Church of England, who being himself of Bohemian extraction, interests himself specially in the well-being of that people :

Slavonic Protestants in the Austrian Empire.

"It is not generally known, that the present year is being celebrated as the thousandth anniversary of the conversion of the Slavonians to Christianity by Methodius and Cyrillus, the sainted brothers of Thessalonica, who entered upon their work in 863 at the request of Rastislaw, duke of Moravia. The works of the English Wickliffe were carried to Bohemia by the attendants of the Bohemian wife of Richard II. of England, the study and defence of which brought John Huss to the stake at Constance in 1415. After this the Bohemians repelled no less than five crusades, supported by the whole power of Rome and the German empire, conquered special privileges from the Council of Basil, and maintained their religious liberty till 1620, when the husband of Elizabeth, daughter of the English James I., was driven from the throne of Bohemia after a reign of only one winter. The country was then converted to Romanism by the simple reduction of the population from 4,000,000 to 800,000, no less than 36,000 noble families leaving the kingdom for their faith's sake. But the Patent of Toleration issued by the Emperor Joseph II. in 1781, brought to light many thousands of concealed Protestants, and on 5th April 1861, a further ordinance proclaimed not merely toleration, but religious equality in the Austrian empire. Thus it is easy to see that the present year of jubilee is a very important one in the great struggle against the darkness of Romanism. And the Bohemian and Moravian Protestants are so poor, that none can tell the importance of British sympathy at the present crisis."

XII.-FOREIGN THEOLOGICAL JOURNALS FOR 1863 Zeitschrift für die Historische Theologie. Jahrgang, 1863.

The three numbers of this valuable historical journal which have appeared for the present year, contain the five following articles :

1. David Joris of Delft, his Life, Doctrine, and Sect, by Friedrich Rippold of Emmerich.

2. The Weigelians and Rosicrucians of the Hessian Church in the 16th and 17th centuries, by Karl Hochhuth.

3. History of the Church of the United Brethren in Livland, by Dr Johann Laurent.