city. Theophilus arrived at Constantinople in the autumn. of 402, and, though cited alone, bringing with him a great number of bishops of his party. John had provided accommodation for Theophilus and his company within the city; but the soured prelate preferred an abode without the walls, and would neither see, nor in any way recognize, his brother. A new thought now flashed before Eudoxia, which she was not slow to act upon. Here was Theophilus, a willing and fit instrument, ready for use against the honest and hated preacher ! She changed sides, and induced the emperor to authorize Theophilus to assemble a synod against John. Besides the empress, there concerted with Theophilus thirty-six of his own bishops, the deposed bishops, the other clerical malcontents, several bribed grandees of the court, and three offended widows. The synod, fearing the people, sat without the city, The charges were chiefly frivolous. John would not appear, unless four bishops, notorious as his foes, were withdrawn. He was, therefore, condemned for contumacy by forty-five bishops, and sentenced to deposition, with a recommendation to the emperor to punish him for the high treason said to be involved in his preaching at the empress. Arcadius banished him. He resolved at first not to leave the flock which had been committed to him by a Greater than the emperor; and preached an exciting sermon; but then, fearing a tumult, permitted himself to be conveyed by an officer to Nicaea, in Bithynia. Groans and cries resound in the city when the people know that their Golden-mouth is really gone; the coincidence of an earthquake enhances the general confusion, and the alarmed and remorseful empress, procuring by woman's tears the concurrence of Arcadius, hastily sends off a letter beseeching the bishop to return. He is greeted back by the illuminated shores of the Bosporus and the general joy.

But the calm is short.

A silver statue of Eudoxia, resting on a column of porphyry, was, with noisy festivities, dedicated near the church of St. Sophia, and the worshippers were disturbed. The bishop gave an angry sermon, which reached the ears of the empress, and made her also angry. In no-wise daunted, John-if we may believe the report-now began a sermon with the words: Once more Herodias rages, once more she dances, and once more demands the head of John! This was not to be forgiven, A new synod was convoked, and

advised by Theophilus-whose fear held him at home-to stretch for the occasion certain questionable canons, condemned John for resuming his place before the sentence of the former synod had been reversed. The emperor commanded him to abandon his church. He replied, "I have received this church from God, for the salvation of the people, and I cannot abandon it; but the city is yours, and if you wish me to quit it, drive me away by force, that I may have a lawful cause. His life was several times attempted. Another imperial order was sent, more peremptory and precise than the former. On the 20th day of June, 404, he bade a sad farewell to a few bishops and deaconnesses, who had continued faithful, and for fear of disturbance he withdrew secretly from the city. The people made an insurrection, burning public buildings; there followed a fearful hail-storm and the death of Eudoxia, which they spoke of as Heaven's vengeance. The troublesome bishop was this time transported to Cucusus, a deserted town among the mountains of Taurus. Here, faithful to his character as servant of Jesus Christ, he planned and laboured with success for the conversion of the neighbouring pagans, and consoled and exhorted by letter his absent flock. As the place was much exposed to robbers, he removed further eastward to Arabissa, in Armenia. Here he fell ill from the extreme cold in the winter of 405-6. The Roman troops having meanwhile represt the robbers, he returned to Cucusus in the Spring. His enemies, jealous of the praise of his good deeds, and, perhaps, fearing his recall, determined to prevent it by transporting him beyond observation, to Pityus in Pontus, the last city of the empire on the eastern coast of the Euxine. Two officers were commissioned to conduct him thither, with the promise of reward should he die on the way. One was pitiful; but secretly, as the manifest aim of the other was to fulfil the wishes of their employers. The bishop was accordingly treated with brutality; his bald head exposed now to the hot sun, now to showers of rain. Every place which seemed to offer comfort on the journey was carefully avoided. Passing Comana, in Pontus, without stopping, they proceeded some miles further to a village in whose church rested the bones of a martyr. That night, it is said, the martyr appeared to the bishop, with the words, Take courage, my brother John, we shall be together to-morrow. The next day,

John, relying on the vision, vainly besought his guards not to depart before eleven in the morning. They set off as usual, and marched some few miles, when it became manifest that the dying bishop could go no further. They returned with him to the last night's resting-place. Arrived here, he robes himself in white, partakes of the Lord's Supper, prays with the company, repeats the words of Job, -which were often on his lips-"Blessed be God for all things," makes the sign of the cross, and with an Amen, renders his noble spirit. This was on the 14th of September, 407, when he was about sixty years old. He was buried near the martyr, with much solemnity, by Christians from Syria, Cilicia, Pontus, and Armenia.

His exile and death could not smother the idea of him. A new glory burst forth from his tomb; loved and admired before, he was now revered and extolled as a holy martyr. A schism arose at Constantinople, where the Johnnites would acknowledge no successor in the archiepiscopal seat, and separated themselves from the church. Nor would they return, until in 438, Theodosius II., confessing the sins of his parents, Arcadius and Eudoxia, brought back to Constantinople the remains of her bishop, and paid them the highest funeral honours.

He is described as short of stature, with large bald head, capacious wrinkled forehead, spare beard, hollow cheeks, retiring eyes, movements full of brisk energy, appearance of carnal discomfort. He never went to feasts, however often invited, and drank wine only in very warm weather.

The nature of this man was marked by intensity. Whatever he had been he would have striven to be wholly; whatever he had done he would have done with all his might. Grace led him to the christian ministry, and he threw his soul into the office. He was intense in friendship, intense in his austerities, intense in alms-giving, intense to rashness in rebuke, intense in reform. He preached intensely, like Edward Irving, but was never maddened by popularity, nor fascinated by the great. As an interpreter of Scripture, he is distinguished by common sense and vital sagacity, steering between the extremes of literality and allegorizing. It is easy to see, that underneath all his sternness there lay a rich vein of kind humour. His writings manifest a deep knowledge of mankind. As from the Puritans we may learn much of old English life, in like manner the works of this

observer of men will be found a rich repertory of the manners of the age. As a christian he was eminent for faith; with an eye fixed steadily on the Unseen, neither respecting worldly greatness nor despising poverty, but regarding man, simply, in his spiritual relations, needs, capabilities, prospects. Prosperity could not seduce, nor misfortune daunt him from care for souls. He held constant converse with the writings of Paul, as a kindred and model spirit. On the whole no figure of those ecclesiastical centuries more excites our love and wonder, and attracts purer complacency, than majestic and gentle John Chrysostom, whose errors belonged to the times, whose virtues were his own.

a

We propose in our next number to give some account of the theological sentiments and of the writings of Chrysostom, with some specimen paragraphs from his treatises and homilies.

LITERARY

NOTICES.

W.C., M.A.

[WE hold it to be the duty of an Editor either to give an early notice of the books sent to him for remark, or to return them at once to the Publisher. It is unjust to praise worthless books; it is robbery to retain unnoticed ones.]

PSYCHOLOGY AND THEOLOGY; or Psycology applied to the Investigation of Questions relating to Religion, Natural Theology, and Revelation. By RICHARD ALLIOTT, L. L. D., Professor of Theology and Mental Philosophy, Western College, Plymouth.

We fear that this work is one of those of a generation of books, which have the rare distinction of being "born out of due time" -not in the post-date, but in the pro-date sense. The religious world is not intellectually ripe for such a book as this. The first page will frighten the majority, whilst many who will attempt to read it will be in the quiet bosom of Morpheus before they reach the end of the first lecture; a few only- but thank God! a gradually increasing and mentally regal few-will peruse it with the deepest interest from the first sentence to the last. We suspect the

unripeness of the church for such a work; partly because it is still fashionable with its popular teachers, to deal in the old and vulgar declamations against "philosophy;" and partly from the fact that so few of the metropolitan preachers felt sufficient interest in the subject of this work, to attend upon the lectures when in course of delivery at the "Congregational Library." Although the lecturer is a man of high position and acknowledged superiority, and the lecture was opened to ministers of all denominations, there were not more, we suppose, than a dozen who heard out the course. We state this, not because we consider it to reflect upon the abilities of our author; on the contrary, it is notorious that the best of his predecessors were treated so; but in order to intimate that anti-metaphysical preachers may surely cease to denounce "philosophy," since there is not much reason to dread the psychological tendencies of the pulpit.

However, whether the book is before or after its time, it is a truly valuable production. "The study of consciousness," says Sir William Hamilton, "is psychology. Man is the microcosm of existence; consciousness, within a narrow focus, concentrates a knowledge of the universe and of God; psychology is thus the abstract of all science, human and divine." Dr. Alliott's view of psychology agrees throughout with this wide and grand definition of the profoundly philosophic Baronet. Regarding it as the abstract of all science, the Doctor in his introductory discourse unfolds its relation to the science of religion, of God, and revelation.

In the second lecture, two questions are discussed: first, whether religion be owing to a distinct faculty, susceptibility, or principle, of the human mind; and secondly, whether the human will has a self-determining power. In the first, the arguments of Schleirmacher and Morell are exposed and refuted. In the third lecture, the question is raised as to the origin of the idea of God. The object of the fourth lecture is to prove that a being does exist who corresponds with this idea. In the fifth and two following lectures, those controverted questions relating to religion and God, are discussed with what aid psychology affords in reference to christianity as a supernatural communication from God, and to the scriptures as an inspired record of the communications.

The vast field of subjects which is thus opened up, involves questions the most profound in speculative enquiry, and vital in the duty and destiny of man. We cannot say that we agree with all the postulates of the author, nor does he at all times succeed in conducting us to his conclusions. Had we the space of a "Quarterly" at our command we should be tempted to enter somewhat at large on the points to which we take exception. But we do not regard the book as less valuable on account of our disagreement. It is in every sense a first