that there are some wise and good men who seem to lose their senses at the very sound or scent of Calvinism. For the author's sake we are unwilling to look further into this note; but we must do it, for the sake of those who have caught the infectious dread of that "monstrum horrendum," that they may see whether there be not something in the world worse than even Calvinism itself-we mean, the illogical kind of reasoning with which it is assailed. And this is the more seasonable, as the days really seem to be coming when we shall be told, from certain high quarters, that even the doctrine of justification by faith ONLY partakes of that frightful heresy !

The note in question is on the words τους σωζομενους, which our translators render, "such as should be saved;" but the Bishop, after Markland, "those who are in a state of salvation;" which we are not sure that we quite understand, as connected with "the Lord added to the church." But be that as it may : having adopted this rendering, the Bishop adds, "And it is remarkable, that this is the only sense which excludes the Calvinistic interpretation!" Now, what is this to the purpose? But, after complaining that " Calvinism has made great use of this text," he proceeds to one of those argumenta ad invidiam which have been so often abused on this sacred subject, but which are far more worthy of avowed scoffers, than of the cooljudging and amiable Bishop of Calcutta: "IF the salvation of men were either already effected, or could be spoken of as a thing which must inevitably happen, an exhortation to be saved, or to save ourselves, would, in the case of the elect be superfluous, and in that of the reprobate an unfeeling mockery! -Oh, “will you speak wickedly for God, and talk deceitfully for him?"-But, having carried so triumphantly one of the out-works of Calvinism, the good Bishop, losing sight of the Greek article the while, is tempted forward to attack what he calls " a principal fortress of the Calvinists," viz. Acts xiii. 48; where, by the help of Krebs and others, the poor Calvinists are soon put to the rout, and it is very summarily proved, to the satisfaction of all parties concerned, that those whom the HOLY GHOST speaks of as τεταγμενοι εἰς ζωὴν αἰώνιον, are those merely who "felt a longing after immortality." Now we learn from old Cato ap. Addison, that this longing is natural to all men; and

IF, after all,

* Why should not we answer this by another hypothesis? the Calvinistic doctrine be true, what horrid blasphemy is contained in such argumenta ad invidiam as that quoted above! This is, of course, only hypothetical —IF it be—the supposition of a bare possibility; but from the very barest possibility of such a contingency, what wise man would not shrink with dismay?

therefore the words seem to mean almost nothing; but better that, we suppose, than Calvinism! Oh, if we were such bigots for Calvinism as some men are against it, how would we now buckle on our armour, and go forth to the field, as champions of a man who has so long" stood pilloried on infamy's high stage," and, except now and then, when some master-spirit, like Horsley, has dared to speak on his behalf, has been more hunted down with senseless revilings, through successive generations, than almost any other man who ever toiled for the salvation of souls!

But we have to do with Bishop Middleton, a man of too high a reputation to be mixed with the common herd of Calvin's enemies, but of whom we must say that we mourn over the note now before us; and we leave it as a parting hint to other haters of the Calvinistic heresy, that it is not sound philosophy, any more than it is sound religion, to glory in a text or an interpretation because it excludes Calvinism, but rather to glory in a doctrine, be it what it may, because it is found in the text of GOD'S WORD.

But we willingly return from our “ strange work" of censure, and proceed to remark, that, in going through the different parts of the Greek Testament, the learned prelate has brought forward, with great fairness, all the texts which involved any difficulty with respect to the article. In some of these cases, where the received text presents such a difficulty, he has shewn that there is good MS. authority for such a reading as his principles require : in other instances he has demonstrated most satisfactorily, that the article has its proper force, where at first sight it might appear to be used indefinitely; and he has corrected accordingly, in many passages, our English version. We forbear to quote examples, for a reason already intimated; but we must remark in general, that we think it a very clear and satisfactory application of the principles laid down in the former part. The difficulties, for the most part, are successfully met; and even if they were more in number and weight, and if less had been done towards their removal, they would not constitute a sufficient objection to the soundness of the Bishop's hypothesis. We again say, we wish the work had been compressed: many notes might have been omitted, and many greatly shortened, and the whole volume might have been reduced, probably, within the compass of four hundred and fifty pages: but, notwithstanding all this, we are bound to recommend it to the theological student, as not only an important, but in a great measure a necessary, help to his studies on the Greek Testament.

We need not say much respecting the new edition and its Editor. We have remarked already, that Professor Scholefield has given the sanction of his name, if that were needed, to the general principle of the book. His additions to it are neither numerous nor copious: they consist of a few notes, scattered through the volume, sometimes illustrating and occasionally correcting his author, and sometimes giving his own view of passages which the author had passed over. His note on 2 Cor. v. 15, may, we think, be referred to as an important specimen of sound scriptural criticism. But, instead of stopping to particularize, we will make short work, by quoting one note, we believe the longest by far in the book, because it will at once give our readers a pretty good idea upon three points-the author, his editor, and his opponents. It occurs on Luke

xx. 38.

6

In ver. 38 of this chapter we have our Saviour's argument in proof of a resurrection expressed with some difference, in respect of the article, from the corresponding terms in Matthew and Mark : Θεος δε ουκ εστι νεκρων, αλλα ζωντων. παντες γαρ αυτῳ ζωσιν. This passage furnishes us with a specimen of the scriptural criticism of some of the opponents of Bishop Middleton's hypothesis. "The article ought to be inserted before os," says the Monthly Reviewer (June 1810). Not necessarily; as the present reading may very well be rendered," But he is not the God of the dead, but of the living." But the Reviewer proceeds: “ The additional words in Luke, παντες γαρ αυτῳ ζωσι, which are rendered in our common version, all live unto him,' mean, we think, 'all who are his are rewarded with life and happiness; no good man loses his reward.'' This is sufficiently startling to one accustomed to the sober criticism of Bishop Middleton; but the surprise excited by it is increased by the examples brought to confirm the novel interpretation: "See the dative so used in Luke v. 33; John xvii. 6 and 9." And he further appeals to some Hebrew usages in the Old Testament. Passing by these latter as proving nothing, the Greek references deserve to be examined. The first is Luke v. 33, of de σoi εotivos xas TOU: where σ is evidently the nominative plural of the adjective ros: and if the writer had intended it for the dative of ou, he would have used the dative also in the beginning of the verse, Iwavvy instead of Iwavvou. The examples from John are of the same kind: σonov and σ though, if there could be a doubt of the construction, the tenth verse would remove it: Tα sμα avta σa EOT!, the same way the construction of Luke xx. 88 [38] should be compared with Romans xiv. 8, ty kupio Cape.—The reader will probably be disposed from this specimen to consider Bishop Middleton and our own Translators safer guides to follow. Note, p. 321.

In

There are still many passages remaining in the Greek Testament, unnoticed either by the Bishop or the Professor, to which the principles of criticism which they have both advocated may be applied with great advantage. Take, for example, Heb. xiii. 4, which is too frequently quoted by Protestants as furnishing a conclusive, and even prophetic, argument against the Popish doctrine of celibacy: it would be well for the Church of Rome if she could as easily remove every other difficulty

66

out of the way, as that which this passage supplies. Tuos Τιμιος ὁ γαμος ἐν πασι, και ἡ κοιτη αμιαντος. If the former 'clause be rendered, as in our version, "Marriage is honourable in all,” the latter must be, "And the bed is undefiled;" the absurdity of which is evident: "the bed undefiled," in the sense of the undefiled bed," would require, in the Greek, the article to aparros. A slight consideration makes it clear that it should be translated, "Let marriage be honoured in all, and let the bed be undefiled;" and then the construction is precisely the same as in the following verse, 'Apilapyvpoç ó rрorоs, Let it be-. If any think, that even with this rendering the passage opposes the Popish doctrine, we confess ourselves of a different opinion, because we consider ao as limited to those who are married: with this part of the question, however, we have nothing to do.

But, instead of stopping to multiply examples, we would rather recommend it to our readers to take up for themselves the same study, which, if soberly conducted (and sober it must be, if it adhere to the principles of the work before us), they will find both interesting and profitable. We cannot take leave of the Bishop and his Editor without one remark on the price of the publication. The first edition, we believe, was published at 14s., though within these few years it has been selling for two guineas, and upwards: the present edition, with the additions of the editor, is advanced to 16s.; which is not, perhaps, too high for the size of the book, though we must regret the necessity for such a price; and it is already advertised in the catalogue of a London bookseller, which we have seen, at 18s. The reason of this we pretend not to know; for it is impossible that a book published in the present year can be scarce already but anticipating, as we do, that the sale of the present edition is likely to be much more rapid than that of the former, we should rejoice if any arrangements could be made for reducing the price in another edition. Feeling an intense interest in every thing connected with theological studies, we greatly desire to see every really valuable work in that department placed within the reach of ordinary students.

Windsor; or an humble Appeal to his Gracious Majesty George IV., inviting Inquiry respecting an Order of his Royal Highness the Duke of Clarence, as Lord High Admiral, prohibiting the Circulation of Religious Tracts in the British Navy, without the Revision of the Rev. Mr. Cole, Chaplain of Greenwich

Hospital. By the Rev. G. C. SMITH, &c. London: Wakefield. 1828.

We are always sorry when a sense of duty compels us to notice with disapprobation and censure the conduct of personages of high rank and influence. Cordially attached to our Establishments in Church and State, and no less attached and devoted to the Royal House of Brunswick, it is with extreme reluctance that we direct the attention of the public to the conduct and proceedings of His Royal Highness the Duke of Clarence, late Lord High Admiral of these realms. We do this, at least we wish to do it, in a Christian spirit, without any measure of that wrath of man which worketh not the righteousness of God. At the same time, there is a bold and manly avowal of our sentiments, which must shew that, like David, we are ready, if occasion require, to speak of God's testimonies before kings, and not to be ashamed of any faithful servant of Christ who shall do this, in days which call for the exercise of all our powers in the service of our God.

In a former number of our work, we noticed Mr. Smith's little work on the State of the Metropolis. Some of our friends have blamed us for giving such prominence to a mere pamphlet, in a quarterly work like our own; and such persons will doubtless renew their censure, upon our repeating this alleged offence. Our reply is very plain and simple-As Christian Reviewers, we look not so much at the size, or the author, or the style of a book, as to its subject, and the manner in which that subject is handled. The matter on which Mr. Smith ventures to address our gracious and beloved King, is one of vast and paramount importance, though confessedly one of very great difficulty and delicacy. We should have been truly thankful if some Dignitary of our church, or some learned Professor in one of our universities, had taken it in hand, and treated it with more prudence and address than are to be found in the letter now on our table. We think there are some passages in it which had been much better omitted; and though we give Mr. S. full credit for every feeling of loyal attachment to the state, we cannot say that he has shewn any thing like a becoming knowledge of our ecclesiastical polity, and the rules by which an established church like our own must be conducted. We much regret it, if an unfit clerical officer be appointed as Chaplain to Greenwich Hospital; and we still more regret if any thing like a want of toleration, to say the least, has been discovered in the conduct of the Lord High Admiral towards pious persons connected with the Navy. At the same time, Mr. S. must forgive us if we say that we cannot