practiced on when that Church used to keep up catechetical instruction. In later times they have fallen, practically, at least, into the Puritan and Methodist theory of regeneration, which identifies it with conversion.

Do Presbyterians preach this doctrine? Do they say to their baptized members, "You are to presume that you are a regenerate person, and on the basis of this you are to receive the instructions of the Church and become prepared to assume your baptismal vows?" Has it not rather been the effort to bring them to repentance and faith, and on the basis of this to predicate their regeneration as a fact in their lives, which dates from such conscious experience? We are not saying here what should be the character of the address to the baptized, but what it should be on the basis of this Presbyterian theory. It is easy to see, that it is embarrassed by the doctrine of election; for the child must presume, that it is regenerated, provided it has been elected. But inasmuch as the decree of election is secret and unknown, they are to take for granted that they are also of the elect, and to be certain of it when they see the fruits of it in their experience and life. But even with this embarrassment it would be a great matter, if all Presbyterian Churches would make account, even as they used to do, of educational religion and catechetical instruction.

We take issue with this theory when it asserts, that men are to be baptized on the presumption that they have previously been regenerated. And we think the article we are criticizing furnishes sufficient evidence to overthrow this assertion. It is the most natural interpretation of the passages of Scripture quoted in the article to understand that the grace signified is actually conferred in baptism, as indeed the Westminster Confession asserts, "Except a man be born of the water and the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of God." This passage the writer quotes among those referring to baptism. "Repent and be baptized for the remission of sins, and ye shall receive the Holy Ghost." "Arise and be baptized and wash away thy sins." "For as many of you as have been baptized into Christ have put on Christ." These and other passages

seem to connect the reception of the grace with the administration of the sacrament. There is but one case in the baptisms recorded in the New Testament, in which the communication of the Spirit preceded baptism. "The communication of the Spirit, and consequently regeneration, in this case (of Cornelius), before baptism, is striking, and without parallel in the New Testament. In all other cases, as with the Samaritans, the gift of the Spirit accompanied or followed baptism and the laying on of hands." (Dr. Schaff's Hist. Apos. Church, p. 222.)

Why then should this writer reverse this order, and say that the grace which baptism symbolizes is universally conferred before baptism? There is no reason for this. It is unnatural. As well might you say, that it is to be presumed that every one who comes to the Lord's Supper has previously received the specific grace connected with the observance of this holy sacrament, and the eating of the bread and drinking of the wine is only a symbol of a transaction already taken place. But we do not do this. Presbyterians do not speak thus of this sacrament. Whatever grace is bestowed is received in connection with the eating and drinking.

This view, that baptism symbolizes a fact or event already consummated is the Baptist theory, which the writer opposes. It comes from an interpretation given to the words, "He that believeth and is baptized shall be saved." But if we are to frame a theory from the mere order of the words here, then we should do the same in the words, "Except a man be born of the water and the Spirit he cannot enter into the kingdom of heaven." We would suppose that the order of the words is as important in the one case as in the other.

Now when we consider, that the writer asserts that the baptism of infants has precisely the same significance as the baptism of adults (on the third page of his article), we ought to conclude that we should follow the order exhibited in the New Testament, and not vice versa, as the Baptist theory does. Moreover it is reasonable. If God can regenerate a child before it is baptized, some time between its birth and its baptism, why may He not regenerate it when it is baptized? This would

agree with the use of human initiatory rites. An organization that has such a rite makes the administration of the rite and entrance into the organization synchronous. The person may be elected before, and have all the necessary qualifications, but he is not a member until he is initiated.

Then we have the unanimous view of the early Church on this subject, and the idea of a sacrament as held in all ages to support our position. It is not necessary to enlarge on this point. The whole conception of the mysteries of Christianity requires us to hold, that its sacraments are not merely external rites, but signs and seals of grace. And the writer of this article comes to this also in a singular way. His third point in defining the sacrament is, "Baptism, as a sacrament, is an instrument and medium, through which the Holy Ghost conveys to those by whom it is worthily received spiritual grace."

This is a strong statement. It allows all that is claimed by the advocates of baptismal regeneration, so far as the question. as to the relation of the outward sign to the inward grace is concerned. The old objection, that the Holy Ghost does not join His activities with the administration of an outward rite, is set aside. A certain kind of grace is conferred in the administration of the sacrament. And the sacrament is "the instrument and medium through which" it is conveyed. We need not question how this can be any more than we need question how God could join the healing of Naaman with his washing seven times in the river Jordan.

But the article leaves us in the dark as to what the specific grace is which is conferred in baptism. According to the writer the grace of regeneration is conferred previous to baptism. Some other grace then is conferred in baptism. What is its character? Is it a confirming and strengthening grace? How then is it distinguished from the grace conferred in partaking of the Lord's Supper? The writer is evidently involved in confusion here. Baptism in the New Testament is spoken of as the sacrament of regeneration. It is called the laver of regeneration. The article says that it symbolizes, and thus has implied reference to, that radical change in the soul that

we commonly call "regeneration." If this be so, why then does the writer make it an immediate and direct sign of some other grace, and refer it only remotely to the grace of regeneration? We can explain this only on the supposition, that he wishes to avoid a certain conclusion. He dreads the doctrine of baptismal regeneration, and still more the ex opere operato theory. This it is that leads him to avoid the very conclusions to which his premises point.

Our limits do not allow us to extend this criticism. We close with the following remarks.

1. We think the writer aims at the accomplishment of an important purpose, in seeking to point the Presbyterian Church to a better view of baptism, than that it is a mere empty sign. That is what is practically held by a great portion of his Church. The consequence is, that the administration of baptism to infants has come to be sadly neglected in that Church. The General Assembly has repeatedly noticed and lamented the fact. Years ago Dr. Nevin called attention to the fact, that the Presbyterian Church and Puritanism generally, had fallen away from the old Reformed doctrine of the Lord's Supper, and he maintained it in a masterly work on "The Mystical Presence," and in a subsequent discussion with Dr. Hodge, who was brought to review his book only by the pressure of a special necessity. Here is a confession that that Church has fallen away also from the old Reformed doctrine of baptism. We hope the article we have criticised, and the words of the Editors of the Review in which it appeared, may serve to call attention to the fact.

2. The Reformed doctrine of baptism which joins the grace of regeneration (in the old Church sense of regeneration,-not the modern which confounds it with conversion) with the application of water in the administration of the sacrament of baptism, is not, by any means, the Roman doctrine. The Roman doctrine of natural depravity, or the state of the child by birth, is very different from the Protestant doctrine. And the Roman theory, that baptism places the subject in a state of innocency, completes the work, so that he need only to watch and guard against a fall from that state of innocency, and if he fall to seek restoration again in the sacrament of Penance, is widely different from the Protestant conception, that baptism is only the foundation and beginning of a growth in which sanctification is realized. But we cannot dwell further upon this point now.

RECENT PUBLICATION.

LIBRARY OF CHOICE FICTION." May," by Mrs. Oliphant, Author of " At His Gates," "Chronicles of Carlingford," "Miss Majoribanks," &c., &c. Scribner, Armstrong & Co., 654 Broadway, New York.

PATER MUNDI; OR. DOCTRINE OF EVOLUTION. Being in substance Lectures delivered in various Colleges and Theological Seminaries. By Rev. E. F. Burr, D. D.. author of "Ecce Coelum" and "Ad Fidem," and lecturer on the scientific evidences of religion, in Amherst College. Boston: Noyes, Holmes and Company, No. 117 Washington Street. 1873.

THE HOLY BIBLE, ACCORDING TO THE AUTHORIZED VERSION (A. D. 1611,) WITH AN EXPLANATORY AND CRITICAL COMMENTARY AND A REVISION OF THE TRANSLATION. By Bishops and other Clergy of the Anglican Church. Edited by F. C. Cook, M. A., Canon of Exeter. Vol. II. Joshua.-1 Kings. New York: Scribner, Armstrong & Co., 654 Broadway. 1873.

This is what has been known as The Speaker's Commentary, because it was entered upon, if we mistake not, at the suggestion of the Speaker of the House of Commons. The volume before us is admirably brought out by Scribner, Armstrong & Co. The binding is rich, plain, and substantial. The paper and type are of a quality in keeping with the character of the work. Altogether it is a volume pleasant to the eye, and an ornament as well as an addition to the library.

A stupendous work is being done in our day in the way of bringing out the wealth of the Sacred Scriptures. The advanced views that have come to be entertained in regard to these Scriptures, according to which, while their inspiration is firmly maintained, the human factor in them is more fully recognized, have conduced to add new interest to their critical study. The attacks made upon them also by modern infidelity, has induced new investigation, so that altogether the conditions are at hand for such a study of the Bible as has never been devoted to it in any preceding age.

This Speaker's Commentary will circulate most largely in England. But the enterprising Publishing House that has undertaken to bring it out in this country has no doubt calculated_with good assurance on a wide circulation also in this country. It is not as voluminous as Lange's Commentary, but it contains just such helps and explanations as the reader needs, without being cumbered with