French Reviews.

REVUE CHRETIENNE, (Christian Review.) November, 1883.-1. FALLOA, Laical Religion. 2. SECRÉTAN, The Philosophy of George Sand. 3. BERSIER, The Religious Crisis of Coligny. 4. WAGNER. Luther. Monthly Review by PRESSENSE.

December, 1883.--ASTIÉ, The Fear of the Protestant Principle in the Ranks of French Protestantism. 2. SABATIER, Madame de Remusat and Her Son. 3. ***, The Conscience of the Heart. 4. Correspondence by BOUVIER. Literary Notices. Monthly Review.

January, 1884.-1. STAPIER, The Question of Biblical Versions. 2. DARTIGUE, Contemporary Catholic Preaching. 3. BRIDEL, Philosophical Chronicle. 5. The Old Messenger of the Vosges, by L. R. Bibliographical Notice by HOLLARD. Review of the Month by E. DE PRESSENSE.

Revue Chretienne opens its volume for 1884 under very encouraging prospects. It is understood to be the most popular and acceptable representative of French Protestantism, and is so because of the breadth of its views and the latitude of its aims. It is necessarily popular in its character, because it must respond to the needs of many who have scarcely any other literary resource under the lead of the Protestant Church, and it must necessarily be broad to enlist the sympathy of Churches that are quite different in their individual character, while supporting a common cause and having one Christian aim. We have simply to look over a table of contents of the last year to perceive in the work of its contributors acceptable articles in the various literary, philosophical, and religious domains, on subjects most worthy of occupying the attention of French Protestantism. For the coming year the editor promises new and more energetic efforts to reach the height of their mission, in both the Christian and liberal spirit to which they invariably remain true. The amount of matter offered to the editorial corps is so great that they much desire an increase in the capacity of the Revue. This shows an energy and activity in the ranks of the French Protestants that augurs well for the future.

The facilis princeps of the Revue will continue to be the energetic and aggressive Edmond de Pressensé, notwithstanding the fact that he has recently been elevated to the rank of senatorial dignity. In the bulletin for the coming year, he calms the fears of his friends by assuring them that his new duties will not prevent him from performing the same labor for this periodical in the future that he has devoted to it in the

past. This will be welcome information to some who are not aware that Pressensé has the working power and energy of two ordinary men.

In the closing number of the last volume of the Revue he expresses his gratitude for the marks of sympathy received from all shades of French Protestantism and of the Liberal party, on the occasion of his election to the Senate. He acknowledges this to be a powerful encouragement to the performance of his duty in the severe conflicts of the near future. And he foreshadows the energy and boldness of his purpose in his new capacity by giving his friends very clearly to understand that in his senatorial position he will meet and oppose the recent action of the Chamber of Deputies in its vote on the Budget for Public Worship. He unhesitatingly declares that the reduction of the appropriation for this purpose indicates the real character of the policy of the majority in the question of the relations between Church and State, already sufficiently indicated by the passage of a municipal law of the same character, by the City Council of Paris. He declares these to be like attempts to impoverish and enfeeble the Church, in order to reach a separation of the two powers, when this régime has become impossible to the cause of religion, and this in the name of free thought, flaunted as a political flag. political flag. He condemns these resolutions from every point of view, and promises to meet them in this spirit when they shall be brought before the Senate; and we have no doubt but that this promise will be kept, and that the great champion of French Protestantism will be a fearless combatant on the senatorial arena.

The leading article in the December number by Astié, on "The Fear of the Protestant Principle in the Ranks of French Protestantism," is extremely suggestive of the fears and doubts that trouble the heart of the Church. For many years before the great National Synod, held by the permission and under the régime of Thiers, the French Churches were so essentially divided and estranged from each other that it was no easy matter to decide on the essential principle of Protestantism. After they came together in apparent unity, they learned that there was a great divergence in their views in regard to the major principle that bound them together. For some years, therefore, the leading thinkers of the Church have been

discussing this question in books, reviews, and sermons. It finally reached the platforms of their pastoral conferences, and in this field our author appears, with the reply to a question, presented by the Central Committee of a Pastoral Association of Switzerland. This question was as follows: "What is the principle of Protestantism?" And Astié replies to it in substance as follows:

"The three questions which we must examine from an historical point of view, in order to remain faithful to the programme of your Central Committee, will be these: What have we been? What have we become? and, What is the future in reserve for us? And we thus reply: What is the primitive idea of Protestantism, that from which all others have sprung, and which brings them all back to unity by imprinting on them its seal?' We call attention to the fact that the question concerns the primitive idea of Protestantism, and not that of the Reformation, which began by a fact, and not by an idea. Neither is it a question of the principle of Protestant theology, which did not appear until a later period.

"This elimination conducts us to the Diet of Spires in 1529, when our fathers accidentally received a name which has been accepted with more or less good grace by all the Churches that have sprung from the movement of the sixteenth century. Frightened by the incessant progress of the reformatory work, said Diet decided that they would accept the accomplished facts, but that in the future it would no longer be permitted to attempt new conquests. It was against this assumption of settling the religious question by a majority of votes that our fathers protested. 'We cannot,' they said, 'act otherwise than according to the demands of our own conscience.' But what is it that gives to conscience the courage and the strength to protest? It is because it has imbibed the conviction of its rights, or rather of its duties. The minority declared that, in all matters that concerned the salvation of our soul and eternal happiness, each one is responsible before God alone, and that it is to him only that we must render an account for our convictions.

"In this way the subjective character of Protestantism above all else is established in an historical manner. But what is the nature of this subjectivism? The object of the protest clearly

indicates the reply. Our fathers protested when the Diet wished to rob them of the right of pursuing the conquests of the Reformation of which they were already the children, and of which, in case of need, they were ready to be the martyrs. Now, why and how was the Reformation effected? The most bitter enemies which it provoked could tell us in case of need. They wished above all things to bring back their protesting colleagues to the confessional, and to the tribunal of penitence. It is on the indispensable intermediary of the sacrament, of which the hierarchy possesses the exclusive administration, that it bases its power to hold the conscience captive. What rendered the Reformation possible, and that which served it as a lever, was the intense conviction in both Luther and Zwingle of the absolute importance of Jesus; in clinging directly to him as the only source of salvation they emancipated the human conscience from the yoke of the Church, and in spite of themselves.

"I have said in spite of themselves, and this reservation is decisive. In the beginning our fathers intended, as faithful sons, to be the reformers of the existing Church; nothing was farther from their intentions than the project of founding new Churches. All the ideas which they advanced they presented as having the right of citizenship in the dominant Church, of which they themselves formed a part, and which had taught them these same ideas. The subjectivism of the reformers was, therefore, not exclusive-it was eminently social, both as to its bases and as to its aspirations. And this brings us to that which constitutes both the strong and the weak point of the work of the sixteenth century. It was in yielding to this social element that our fathers were reformers and not simply the representatives of a contemplative and quietistic tendency, seeing that God himself, and the circumstances of the period, were assuming the task of reforming the Church. But our fathers clung too much to the idea of remaining ecclesiastical reformers, and this was their weak point.

"It is true that religious and moral interest rules every thing; when it was a question of sacrificing the rights of conscience to enter into direct communion with Jesus Christ, they prefer to break with the Church, but they do it in spite of themselves, in self-defense, and as little as possible. It is for this reason

that their work remained incomplete, and that in many regards it failed. We are therefore in harmony with those who find their origin in the one single principle of Protestantism. The ancient distinction between the formal principle and the real principle appears to us singularly apocryphal. At a later period, undoubtedly, our fathers were greatly desirous of being in accord with the Scriptures; but in the beginning they first appealed to ecclesiastical law, to tradition, and to the general council as the only legitimate and definitive authority. They began to insist on the authority of the Scriptures only in the course of the conflict, and not until they saw themselves obliged to renounce the hope of reforming the Church; for then they needed to invoke an authority in order to justify their doctrines and the claims of God, in opposition to a majority which repudiated them, and with whom they had differed for other reasons. Having been forced into a minority by the majority of the ruling Church, they were compelled to prove that they possessed an authority superior to that which condemned them."

This significant discussion we consider a very healthy one for the period, and believe that the French Church need not fear to raise such a standard as their principle of Protestantism, namely, direct appeal to scriptural authority.

ART. X.-FOREIGN RELIGIOUS INTELLIGENCE.

THE FREE CHURCH OF FRANCE.

THE Free Church of France seems to be holding its position very fairly against many counteracting influences. At its late synod there were reported thirty-four congregations with 4,500 members, and besides this about twenty mission stations, of which some are on the point of rising into the dignity of independent congregations. This comparatively weak body has in about two years collected 335,000 francs for its ecclesiastical wants, while giving considerable to works of private benevolence. At its recent synod some very vigorous thoughts were expressed by distinguished speakers, indicating an ardent desire for a sound, manly, and popular religion. This key-note of the assembly has since been brought out in bold relief by the Journal du Protestantisme Français, which says: "We have never ceased to defend these views, since we claim for our Protestantism the right to develop itself in harmony with the highest endeavors of the spirit of our age." Pressensé, as usual, was the controlling figure of the occasion, in a splendid address