holy ground." It is because of losing sight of the fact that the Bible is God's book that such men as Colenso, and the Essayists, and Dr R. Lee, subject its statements to a heartless criticism, which exhibits more of enmity than erudition-more of intellectual pride than desire to know the truth-more of the knowledge that puffeth up than of the charity which edifieth.

Considering the extent to which modern criticism has been carried, and the results already apparent from rationalistic expositions, it is refreshing to open the works of the "Puritan period," and to hold converse with divines who lived, and wrote, and preached, under an abiding sense that the Bible was the inspiration of the Holy Spiritthe revelation of God's will to man-the supreme standard of doctrine, and only rule of duty. We look upon it as one of the favourable signs of the times, that, through the enterprise of modern publication, such works as these "Standard Divines' are being placed in the hands of the rising ministry. It was a hopeful sign of the Puritan, period that such expositions of the truth of God drew around their authors the enlightened piety of the Puritan era; and it will be a good sign of our own day if this and other works of the Puritan divines shall meet with the patronage which they so justly merit.

It is difficult, within a limited compass, to indicate the leading characteristics of this commentary of Hosea. By some it will be deemed too prolix, by others too tame, by not a few too comprehensive; but to the humble Bible student, as a book of reference, indicating the mind of the Spirit in application to the circumstances and wants of our age, it will be invaluable. To understand its style and general characteristics, it must be remembered that its subject-matter was presented in the ordinary ministrations of the pulpit, in an age when the people desired a spiritual meal-a full exposition and application of the word of God to the times and to the consciences of men,—and not as now, when a little intellectual dessert is more relished than the bread of life. Besides the textual exposition, which is learned, lucid, and simple, you have a series of observations raised, rebukes administered, counsels tendered, and consolations administered. There is evidence that both the Hebrew and Greek originals have been closely studied as the basis of interpretation, while the learning of former ages is rendered available in the elucidation of references to the natural history of the East, as well as the manners and customs of the Orientals. There seems also to have been a clear conception of the nature of idolatry-a species of knowledge in which some modern commentators would need to take lessons.

The following is a specimen of the style of exposition on chap. xi. 8: "How shall I give thee up, Ephraim? how shall I deliver thee, Israel? how shall I make thee as Admah? how shall I set thee as Zeboim? mine heart is turned within me; my repentings are kindled together:”"Here, according to Luther, ends the xi. chapter, and the xii. begins at the next

verse.

"From the words themselves, we have not in all the book of God a more full expression of the pathetical affections of mercy and compassion in God. "How shall I give thee up, Ephraim?'

"I beseech you observe, God was in the midst of His threatenings of judgment, and of charging them with their sin: The sword shall abide on his cities, and shall consume his branches, and devour them, because of their own counsels. And my people are bent to backsliding from me: though they called them to the Most High, none at all would exalt Him.' How! not one would come in? what should follow? One would think, Now let wrath pursue them, let the curse of the Almighty overtake them one would wonder that it did not: but mark a greater wonder; after charging them with this wickedness, and in the midst of threatenings of the most dreadful judgments, God exclaims, 'How shall I give thee up, Ephraim ?' &c. "The Lord here takes upon him (as it were) the person of a loving Father towards a stubborn and rebellious child. The child has gone away from the father, and has continued in its stubbornness. It may be the father sends after it: it will not come: it will not return, but goes on perversely. The father has many workings in his heart to cast it off: he shall never be the better for me; let him beg his bread from door to door; he is unnatural. Yea, but in the midst of these resolutions, and these sad thoughts towards the child, there comes a turning of his heart on a sudden How shall I give it up? how shall I disinherit it? how shall I do it? It is my child, though stubborn; why may it not return? why may not God yet work good upon it? Thus the Lord breaks out here. Here we have in our books four heads: How shall I give thee up, Ephraim? how shall I deliver thee, Israel? how shall I make thee as Admah? how shall I set thee as Zeboim? I confess, in the Hebrew there are but two; yet they have the sense of four, and accordingly the interpreters insert them. How? how? how? how shall I do it? There are four interrogations here, and four answers. Four pathetical interrogations that God asks as it were himself.

"Secondly, 'My repentings are kindled together.'

"Thirdly, 'I will not execute the fierceness of mine anger.'

'Fourthly, 'I will not return to destroy Ephraim.'

"These are the four answers; and for the last of them two reasons are givenFirst, I am God and not man.'

"Secondly, "The Holy One in the midst of thee.""

This is a specimen of scriptural interpretation-an expounding of the word as posited by the Spirit of God. Bringing thus together question and answer, there is a light shed upon the passage which renders farther exposition almost unnecessary. And yet this is but the preparatory analysis for a rich, full, and gracious exposition and application of the passage. We can only find space for the following, as taken from the paraphrase:—

"Mercy and justice are both introduced to plead the case, both against and for Ephraim. Justice comes in and pleads, Lord, their sins are great and many: their mercies have been great; the means which they have had have been many; thou hast been patient a long time towards them: and this thy longsuffering has been abused; their hearts are still hardened; thy name is blasphemed because of them. These arguments are advanced against them. But then mercy steps up and pleads, But, Lord, art not thou a God? Thou art a God: these actions indeed may overcome

men, but shall they overcome thee? Is not this Ephraim? are not they thy people? are they not in covenant relation with thee? Spare them, Lord, for their forefather's sake, for Abraham's sake, for Israel's sake, who was so mighty with thee. Remember, Lord, 'the kindness of their youth :' the wonders that thou hast done heretofore for them, when they were stubborn and rebellious. Lord, thou hast many of thine elect among them, and wilt thou then utterly consume them? When the Lord hears mercy thus pleading against justice, He exclaims, 'How shall I do it? I cannot do it.'"

God did deliver up

"Observation 9. How different were the dealings of the Father with His own Son. Do the bowels of God thus work towards poor sinners, pleading for them when wrath is ready to be executed? then we may here see the great difference between God's dealings with His saints and with His Son. When God comes to deliver up His people to punishment, for their sakes He saith, 'How shall I deliver thee?' We do not find that God said so concerning His Son. His Son to wrath without a 'How shall I do it?' Yea, the heart of God was in it; there is no such expression of reluctancy about this work; but the Scriptures saith, 'It pleased the Lord to bruise Him.' Indeed it was for glorious ends which God had in view. Why so? God might have ends enough to bring forth His glory in our bruising; but yet, notwithstanding anything that He might effect, He saith, 'How shall I do it? God doth not delight to grieve the children of men; but God did grieve His Son; He bruised Him, and it pleased Him to bruise Him. You find such an expression in Isaiah liii. 10, and in Psalm xl.-' In the volume of the book it is written of me, I delight to do thy will.' It was the will of God that. Christ should come and suffer what He did. . . Oh, certainly it was from this work of God, the delivering up of His Son, that the Lord has such working of bowels towards sinners when wrath comes to be executed. 'How shall I give thee up?'"

It is easy to see how profitable and how wide was the range of such expositions at the era when they were delivered; and it is as easy to see how such expositions of prophecy would be equally seasonable in our own day. It was thus that the author took occasion to reprove sin and rebuke idolatry; and thus both idolatry and immorality would require to be met in our own day.

But while he was faithful in reproving sin, he was not less so in expounding the promises. To him the pages of the prophet were glowing with light and life and love. Through the clouds of superstition, and beyond the period of tumult, he could see the world redeemed -the covenant of peace established-the creatures subservient to man, and all the elements of earth and air-nature, animate and inanimate, waiting to serve redeemed and covenanted Israel, while they were honouring and serving a redeeming God. We hope to enrich our pages with occasional extracts; but in the meantime commend the work to our readers. Though in some interpretations we might differ from our author, we feel assured that all his expositions will be read with profit.

The Circle of Christian Doctrine: A Handbook of Faith, framed out of a Lay. man's Experience. By Lord Kinloch, one of the Judges of the Supreme Court of Scotland. Second Edition. Edinburgh: Edmond & Douglas. 1861. THIS work, as might have been expected from the known character of the author, evinces throughout great ability and deep thinking. It

U

is delightful to find one in the circle in which Lord Kinloch moves manifesting so much heart and earnestness in the discussion of the leading points of doctrinal and practical theology. The whole argument is also so conducted as to make it apparent that the great object of the writer is to commend true religion, and to induce his readers to give its truths an intelligent and cordial reception. In the composition of this volume Lord Kinloch seems to have kept two objects steadily in view-the establishment of revealed truth, and the removal of the prejudices against it which are cherished by many. It is in the elucidation of whatever relates to Christian practice that our author particularly excels. In this department of theology Lord Kinloch is ever so much at home as to indicate that he has more than a theoretical acquaintance with the subject of which he treats. As samples of this feature of the work we can give only two extracts. The first is taken from a valuable chapter on Natural Religion, which is such as to merit the serious attention, not only of individuals, but also of churches, and of all who take an interest in the religious education of youth, whether for the ministry or for other professions. We have felt, ever since we were capable of thinking on this subject, that the way in which moral philosophy has been taught in the universities, both at home and abroad, is not such as is calculated to have the beneficial influence on the character of young men which it ought to be the great object of such a chair to promote. The sentiments of Lord Kinloch, in relation to this subject, will be seen in the following extract, which, though rather long, will be read with interest by all who consider how vitally important the subject is :

"It may not be forbidden, as a philosophical speculation, to endeavour to discover how much man may know of God by the mere light of reason, and for this end to abstract the truths of natural religion as the subject of separate contemplation. But the experiment is not free from risk; for it tends to present truth in a partial, and, therefore, an unreal aspect. The exercise is at best a piece of intellectual gymnastics; it is not practical progress: on the contrary, it tends to obstruct practical progress, by wasting the energies on a speculation inapplicable to the reality of the case. Life is too short, eternity too near, to make it safe to spend our moments on the theories of natural religion, when the truth which is to save from perdition lies in the volume which we leave unopened by our side.

"A bad example has been set in this matter by our writers on Theology and Ethics-even the very best of them. In the works of some, there is no reference whatever to God's word; and we find presented to us the most varied and contradictory theories as to the standard of morals, whilst the law of God, which, with all who believe in a God, is the true rule of conduct, is never so much as mentioned. This is as anomalous as if, in a country possessing a written code, a lecturer on municipal law occupied his whole course with the doctrines of natural equity, and never once mentioned the code. With a better class of authors, a common course is to treat the subject in the first instance according to natural reason, and afterwards to show, though sometimes by a scanty supplement, how the doctrines taught agree with those of revelation. I do not say that incidental advantages are not attached to this mode of proceeding. There are some minds which may by this way be brought unresistingly to the truth, from which they might have been deterred by an earlier exhibition of Scripture authority. But the danger is, that men generally may be carried on a wrong track, and led to rely primarily on reason, with revela

tion as a confirmation. This is to reverse the right order of things. Revelation is, to all who receive it, the proper basis of belief. Revelation ought, therefore, to be always set forth as the origin and foundation of truth. With the doctrines of revelation all instruction should commence. Reason may thereafter rightly be appealed to, in order by her teaching to illustrate the doctrines and confirm the fitness of the adaptations; to add clearness to the views, and force to the sanctions; and, by fair and judicious analogy, to supply the intentional blanks which man has had left him to fill up."

Is there not some reason to think that the way of teaching moral philosophy, which has been so long pursued, and which our author impugns, has been one leading spring in which the errors have had their rise which already extend far and wide over the Protestant churches of the Continent, and which are in the course of being disseminated in the churches of North and South Britain, but especially in the latter? Some of the most virulent of these heresies have a close affinity with such a source.

The second extract with which we furnish our readers is from a beautiful chapter on Christian Morals.

"The true difference between the Christian and others, in respect of common duties, is not in the outward character of the duties, but in the principle which actuates their performance. Here there is a vital distinction. The motives by which the man of the world is incited to duty are not necessarily mean or grovelling; they are often lofty and high-minded; but they comprehend no conscious reference to God, or God's purposes; to what God has done for him, or what God expects him to do. If religious sentiments to any extent influence his conduct, they are the vague reflections of early education, or of the general enlightenment of Christianity, without any distinct perception of the divine source of light. His system of morals is a collection of abstract rules, deriving their authority from a sort of traditionary law, not from the command of a sensibly existing and sensibly present Lawgiver. His incentives to action are all influences from the world around. He acts as if he were all his own, and this world were his all. Scripture, with one emphatic touch, depicts the entire character: 'God is not in all his thoughts.' By the Christian the same duties may be performed, and with precisely the same outward aspect; but the impulse is wholly different. There is connected with the outward conduct a succession of inward feelings all directly pointing to God and the destiny which God has assigned to him. The thought of God is, with the Christian, diffused through the whole of duty: he seeks to perform it all, as with God sensibly present, to direct, restrain, and encourage; and marks his advance in virtue by the growing clearness with which his view of God, as the object of all duty, is maintained, and the growing comprehensiveness with which a reference to God intermingles with his daily conduct."

There is an able chapter on Prayer, in which the consistency of this with the doctrine of predestination is shown in such a way as is powerfully calculated to produce conviction. The chapter on Christian Experience furnishes an illustration of the author's eminent qualifications for the treatment of all subjects relating to Christian practice. His remarks regarding the use of a diary are very judicious.

While Lord Kinloch holds the doctrines of the Westminister Standards as to predestination, and what have been called the "doctrines of grace," occasionally, in the parts of the work in which