A pamphlet has just been issued in Germany by the Catholic authorities with the title of "The Culture and Education of the Clergy." Some suppose it to be from the hands of a bishop, and others from those of a director of a Catholic Theological Seminary. It undertakes to show with very painful care, by chapters and subchapters and divisions and subdivisions, statistically and historically, theoretically and practically, from the past and the present, that the only profitable development of the young Catholic theologians can come from their education according to Tridentine form in an institution supported by the Church and under the control of the bishop. The life of the German students in the state universities is painted in the darkest colors, while the lightest shades are thrown on that of the incipient priests within the walls of the clerical school. The author frankly confesses that a deeper scientific knowledge and a clearer insight in the inner connection of the sciences may be obtained for their learned theologians at the universities. But for the preparation for the cure of souls, learning is much less required than practical piety. The assertion is made that the study of theology rests mainly on authority, and that all necessary knowledge for the exercise of the priestly office may be obtained in the seminaries. The young clericals are there also imbued with patriotism and the love of the fatherland, as well as a high regard for its institutions. An antidote to this work is just announced that proposes to show the necessity of university training for the clergy, but it has not yet reached the public.

The thirteenth volume of the Encyclopedia for Protestant Theology, begun by Dr. Herzog and now continued by Dr. Hauck, has just appeared; and in it we are informed that the work cannot be finished in fifteen volumes, but will probably require seventeen, with the index included. No one will complain of this, as even that number will scarcely be enough to allow room for the large amount of new matter that will necessarily be crowded in the later volumes. The one just issued is a new proof of the scientific excellence of the entire undertaking. Extending from Bishop Ritschl to Scotus, it contains much that is new, especially concerning personalities just deceased, such as Rudelbach, Rückert, Schöberlein, Schubert, and Roth. The work of the ecclesiastical statistics is more than usually valuable, because the most of them are perfectly new; they are mainly from Russia, Saxony, Scotland, and Switzerland. The historical articles have a fullness in some instances not heretofore attained. The Protestant law of divorce is treated quite extensively in accordance with the changes recently made in this field. The author gives a concise and thorough compendium on this subject of forty-six pages. Taken all in all, the volume is worthy of its predecessors. The mechanical execution is also excellent, and the public will owe the publishers hearty thanks for finishing this valuable work in so creditable a way.

A unique addition to the Jewish polemics of the period is found in a modern Epistle to the Hebrews by "Saul." It is one of the most impor

tant productions which has appeared from the Jewish side of the Jewish question during the later period of the discussion. The author has chosen for himself the name of Saul, and his Semitic and human consciousness equally revolt against this modern Jewry, which is ruled, as he says, by "capitalism; " his Jewish, because among his people there is no unity born of a high idea, and his human consciousness, because their profit is quite sure to be gained by the injury of others. The Jews have received their severest wound in their so-called "emancipation,” because it has completely deprived them of their Christian character and has driven them into the worship of said "capitalism." Patriotic earnestness and patriotic hope have inspired the author with the essence of his epistle; and confessions of a similar kind that have lately been often repeated by the Jews belong to the most remarkable and satisfactory signs of the times. A quite important development of this kind is a recent expression of the Jews of southern Russia, bearing the title of "Sowing in Hope." In another work, in thirteen theses, the Jews of a certain district appeal to their fellows to listen to the words of their "Brother Jesus," and thus to seek peace with the nations. These developments are certainly very remarkable.

"Positive Christianity and Orthodox Pietism" is the title of a pamphlet recently issued concerning the unfortunate conflict between two wings of the German Protestant Church. The orthodox Germans claim that these so-called "positive Christians" have not a great deal of positive Christianity, and the object of this publication is an endeavor to make a reconciliation between the thoughtful men of the conservative side and all the earnest minds of the so-called liberal and enlightened side. But the trouble about the pamphlet is that the stand-point of the author lies, not between the parties, but rather in close juxtaposition to the Liberal party. So from the beginning these mediators in the conflict are not impartial. And the same may be said of their theological stand-point. They speak very lightly of the traditional doctrine" of the Trinity, and declare that the assertions regarding Jesus in the Gospel of John, and in Paul, from which their opponents are led to believe in pre-existence of Jesus, are enigmatical and ambiguous. The pamphlet was written by two hands, one belonging to an intelligent layman and the other to a theologian; but in their effort to make a basis of reconciliation between the right and the left, they use certain expressions indicating that certain gospels are falsely so-called, and take other positions in regard to orthodox theology that are quite incompatible with any idea of mediation. It is not at all probable that this extreme liberal wing of the Christian world of Germany will in this way withdraw any of the bolts that are now closed on them by the orthodox Churches.

Dr. Warneck is becoming the great authority in the German mission field, and at a late Continental Missionary Conference, held in Bremen, his essay on missionary control was, in his absence, read and received with much favor. He is making an effort to have the mission work in

heathen lands as far as possible sustained by the governmental influences of the countries whence the missionaries come. His position is that divisions among the missionaries in their fields of labor, and especially among those from the same land, are prejudicial to the success of the workers. In the course of the debate, induced by the reading of his paper, there was a very general expression of opinion that the tendency to develop missionary work in harmony with his views would be a wholesome one if well guarded; but one of the orators, referring to the early history of missions and the coolness shown toward them by most governments, warned them against being too ready to extend the finger, lest the entire hand be taken.

ART. XIII.-QUARTERLY BOOK TABLE.

Religion, Theology, and Biblical Literature.

The Resurrection of Our Bodies that Die. Pamphlet, 8vo, pp. 123. Eureka, Portland: B. Thurston & Co. 1881.

Outlines of the Doctrine of the Resurrection. Biblical, Historical, and Scientific. By Rev. R. J. COOKE, M.A. With an Introduction by D. D. WHEDON, LL.D

12mo. New York: Phillips & Hunt.

Beyond the Grave. Reviewed by L. B. CALDWELL, Professor of Physics in East Tennessee Wesleyan University, Athens, Tenn. 12mo, pp. 152. Philadelphia: A. T. Zeising & Co.

We group these three works together, for notice and brief review, because of their substantial unity of design, and the similarity of their principal arguments, though they differ in some incidental things. The first is without the author's proper name, or other data by which its authorship may be known, further than what is given on the title-page. It is well written, in good temper and taste, and-abating somewhat our praise in view of the writer's over-confident dogmatizing, and his readiness to denounce all who dissent from his views as heretics, and, if Methodists, false to their profession-we may call it an altogether commendable piece of work. The second has already been pretty fully represented to our readers, first in an editorial "notice" in these pages, and next by its reviews and commendations in the Church press. It is written in an earnest and florid style, somewhat indicative of the fact that it is its author's first work. The book is, in its literary aspects, a creditable one, and the reader will think well of the writer, though he may not approve his methods of argumentation nor concur in all his conclusions, The third is a review of Bishop Foster's "Beyond the Grave,"

earnestly dissenting from both its methods and conclusions, though praising its style and its dialectic skill at some points. But neither in respect to fairness nor good taste is it altogether satisfactory, and its attempts at ridicule and sarcasm are worthy of the subject and the occasion..

un

These writers are all in the same plane of thought, and their presuppositions and processes, and the conclusions to which they come, are substantially identical; and they are also in harmony with the commonly prevalent (especially among the unscholarly) notions upon the subject, to wit, that at some future time the material bodies of all who shall have lived and died of the children of Adam will be rehabilitated and restored to life, to become again the abodes of the souls which from the death of Abel to the great consummation shall have subsisted for longer or shorter terms without such bodies. The writers who defend this notion usually accept some theory by which to surmount its confessed difficulties. Some have supposed the existence of a joint or ganglion which is the center or germ of the bodily identity; and that around this is to be gathered so much of earthy matter as may be needful to constitute a resurrection body. Other theories equally fanciful are well known; but to the credit of the writers now under review, it must be said that they fight shy of such theorizings, and refer the whole matter to the power of God.

In support of their views these writers so accept and apply certain well-known words of Scripture that they necessarily sustain their positions. The word "resurrection," Eyepots and ȧváoτaois, is quietly assumed to signify only the resuscitation of dead bodies, which is simply begging the question at issue, since others give quite another sense to them. In like manner, it is assumed that the resurrection of Christ, of which so much use is made in the apostolic writings, can have no other meaning than the quickening of the body that was laid in Joseph's tomb, and also that the body in which Jesus appeared during the forty days next ensuing did certainly ascend into heaven, where now, "in our nature," (which they understand of his physical body,) he is seated at God's right hand, and thence he will come again in that same material body to judge the world. Of the correctness or otherwise of this exegesis we say nothing; but as it is precisely at this point that objections to the theory of "the resurrection of our bodies that die" comes in, it might be well to give some little attention to these objections. It is claimed by objectors

that the design of what is written in the fifteenth chapter of First Corinthians was intended to comfort believers with the assurance of the future life, and that by exchanging the word "resurrection" in that place for some word to express simply the future felicity of the saints, would not only meet all the requirements of the language used, but also better preserve the harmony of its ideas; and also obviate the seeming contradiction which is involved in making the declaration that "flesh and blood cannot inherit the kingdom of God" mean something wholly different from its natural import.

The resurrection of Christ is certainly among the great central truths of Christianity, whether that fact is accepted as simply implying the bringing to life the body that was crucified, or as something accomplished in the spirit world, where the disembodied Christ spoiled Death in his own dominion, and came forth from his prison a conqueror. This act, performed in hades, by our Lord acting in his Messianic character, was itself, say those who account it "THE Resurrection," a work of redemption, which was itself to "the spirits in prison" an assurance of their eyepois, "arising." It is not our purpose to either defend or assert the correctness of this exegesis, but only to suggest that till its incorrectness has been shown it will not do to ignore it in a polemical setting forth of an opposite theory.

It is conceded that the physical and literalistic theory of the resurrection and of the future life has all along borne rule in theological statements and in the popular beliefs. It has, accord. ingly, become embodied in the sermonology and the hymnology of the Church. It was an integral part of the Catholic orthodoxy of the Church of the Middle Ages, and it was accepted almost entirely unchanged by the Protestant Churches of the Reformation. It is quite certain, however, that these views are not so generally or tenaciously held as they were formerly; and not a few of our best scholars, and among them some whose general orthodoxy cannot be impugned, are bold to announce other views and opinions. One of the books under notice directly antagonizes what has been written and published by one of our Bishops, and as that Bishop has not been called to account for what he has written, it may be assumed that the disputed tenet is not considered an integral part of Methodist orthodoxy. It will be wise for disputants on this subject to bear this in mind, and temper accordingly their denunciations of what they are pleased to stigmatize as heresy.