ground for ascertaining what portions of our New Testament were held to contain revelations concerning the person and position of Jesus of Nazareth. Mrs. Besant seems to have had doubts about the Fourth Gospel being Apostolic; but admitting the Synoptics and the four unchallenged Epistles, it certainly would be possible to construct an argument out of these which to an unprejudiced mind would be satisfactory. I say "unprejudiced" mind, because it is notorious that because of an unwillingness to admit the Divinity of Christ as an Apostolic doctrine, the rationalistic school endeavour to rule out of the argument the Fourth Gospel and the Epistles to the Ephesians, Philippians, and Colossians. The feeling of the Tübingen school is wellindicated by Dr. Carpenter's quotation from a paper read in America by a Unitarian, Dr. George Ellis, to the effect that from the side of Scriptural authority"the orthodox had the best of it; and that the way now to deal with the question at issue is to throw over this authority altogether." One would have had to ascertain from Mrs. Besant, at the time, whether she entertained this predisposition not to accept the doctrine if possible. In that case, the question would become one, not of argument, but of Christian therapeutics; and some spiritual influence gradually working into the heart and life would be the chief desideratum. That this kind of influence as a preparation was most necessary is manifest from the account given of her previous religious experience and her manner when visiting Dr. Pusey.

The key to the solution of her difficulties lay in a right apprehension of her religious history, and the bent of her mental tendencies. From the time that she began to doubt and question there were signs of sheer restlessness. The intellectual fever sometimes ran high. The attitude she assumed towards the order of Providence when she lost her child revealed a real passion against the Almighty, and although this passion subsided, the mental temper it revealed ran throughout her life. Her present heat and zeal in the speculations of Theosophy are the outcome of the same thing. She lacked, and lacks still, the calm, equable spirit which alone can ensure the clear apprehension of truth. Time may do much to tone down the fires of eager, restless speculation, and then when the nature regains its balance and the spiritual side attains its proper development, it may be that she will find, as many others equal to her in ability and in honesty have done, the truth that all along has been close at hand. Then she will be surprised that ever she made the reality of a great truth to depend on the ability of one man to lead a feverish intellect to it, and that immediate demonstration was sought for truths which require for their apprehension both a good intellect and a gentle, loving, child spirit that finds in God a real Father.

1 Nature and Man, p. 130.

A CORRESPONDENT has sent the following extract taken from The Biblical Illustrator, and asks if there is any foundation for the statement of Miss Weld. We forwarded the query to the Rev. H. G. Tomkins, the well-known Oriental scholar, who courteously sent it to Mrs. Finn, of whom he says "She knows if any one does."

"The ten pieces of silver. In the three parables recorded in this chapter (Luke xv.), there is so evidently a progress and ascent of thought; they mount so naturally to a climax in their revelation of the redeeming love of God, that if at any point we fail to make that progress out, if we encounter anything in them which wears the aspect of an anti-climax, we are checked, disappointed, perplexed. And yet, in the second of these parables, there is at one point an apparent retrocession, where all else implies a forward and upward movement of thought. Every one can see how immense an interval there is between the one sheep lost out of a hundred, and the one son out of two, and that the younger-and in the Bible commonly the dearer of the two. But where is the connecting link? How should the lost piece of money be dearer to the careful housewife than the lost sheep to the faithful shepherd, who knows and cares for every one of his flock, and calleth them each by his name? One out of ten marks a great advance upon one out of a hundred indeed, but would it not be less to lose even ten silver coins than a single sheep-less in value, less in love? The answer to that question, the solution of the difficulty, is to be found in an Eastern custom, the application of which to the parable before us all commentators on it have, so far as I know, overlooked. The women of Bethlehem, and of other parts of the Holy Land, still wear a row of coins sewn upon their head-dress, and pendant over their brows. And the number of the coins is very commonly ten, as I, in common with other travellers, have ascertained by counting. The custom reaches back far beyond the Christian era. In all probability, therefore, it was not simply a piece of silver which was lost out of her purse by the woman of our parable, but one of the ten precious coins which formed her most cherished ornament; and this would be a loss even more vividly felt than that of the shepherd when one out of his flock of a hundred went astray. So that immense as is the advance from both the care of the shepherd for his sheep, and of the pride of the woman in the burnished coins which gleamed upon her forehead, to the yearning and pitiful love of the father for his prodigal and self-banished son, we can nevertheless find a link between the first and last terms of the climax, and trace an advance even between the grief of the shepherd over his stray sheep, and that of the woman over her lost coin. A piece of money in her purse might easily be stolen or spent, but a coin from the head-dress could not be so much as touched by any

stranger, nor even taken from its wearer by her husband unless she cut it off of her own accord and placed it in his hands. It was safe, sacred, dear. It was a strictly personal possession, and might very well be an heirloom— like the silvers' of the Swiss women-hallowed by many fond and gracious memories. (A. G. Weld.)"

THE TEN PIECES OF SILVER.- -It is true that the native peasant women do wear a string of coins around the forehead, and others depending therefrom, on to the breast. The number, however, varies according to circumstances, and they are of gold or silver, according to the wealth of the wearer. These and other ornaments are commonly the gifts of the husband before marriage as dowry. They are the absolute property of the wife, and cannot be meddled with by the husband. In case of need, one or more may be cut off and used or pledged, and replaced when possible. But there is no special significance or sacredness attached to these coins. It is as dowry that they are the personal property of the bride. No doubt, the loss of one would cause diligent search just on this account, but so would the loss of any coin or trinket. These coins are not a sacred or even special marriage token, as the ring is with us. Valued they are, of course, more than ordinary coins. The ten pieces of silver may have belonged to the dowry ornaments, but this does not seem to me certain.

*E. A. FINN.

*The signature above is that of Mrs. Finn, daughter of the late eminent Hebraist and friend of the Jews, the Rev. Dr. McCaul, Professor of Hebrew at King's College, London, and widow of a distinguished Consul at Jerusalem. Mrs. Finn has devoted the work of her lifetime to the good, spiritual and temporal, of the Jews, and is now giving her whole energies to the excellent "Syrian Colonization Fund," of which the late Earl of Shaftesbury was President, for the settlement and support of poor Jews in Palestine and Syria; now more needed than ever in consequence of the miseries resulting from the Russian persecution. Any help to this good work is well bestowed. Mrs. Finn's address is "The Elms, Brook Green, London,"

CHRIST'S PRE-EMINENCE IN ALL THINGS.

In what sense may our Lord be said to have the pre-eminence in all things (Col. i. 18)?—A. W.

PRE-EMINENCE IN ALL THINGS.-In ver. 15 Paul asserted that the Son of God was begotten before the earliest creature was made: "Firstborn before all creation." This assertion he supports by saying that "in Him were created all things," even the various ranks of angels; as though the universe sprang into being in the hands of the Son. For emphasis, the Apostle summarizes and supplements his words foregoing by adding, “all things, by His agency and for Him, have been created." He then repeats

in ver. 17 an idea already embodied in ver. 15, viz., the earlier existence of the Son: "and He is before all things." To this he adds the assertion, "in Him all things stand together"; as though the universe found in the

Son its bond of internal union. Thus He is the Agent, the Object, and the encompassing and uniting element, of whatever exists.

After defining the Eternal Son's relation to the created universe, St. Paul goes on, in ver. 18, to define His special relation to the Church. The Church is His Body; and He is the Head of that Body. These last words express an element of truth not found in the earlier epistles. And this new truth is a substantial addition to St. Paul's favourite

metaphor of the Body of Christ. He is not only the unseen Spirit pervading, and giving life to, and guiding every member, but is Himself a member of His own Church and Body. He occupies, in relation to His human servants, the relation of the head to the other parts of a human body; like them as consisting of bone, and flesh, and blood, yet occupying, like a human head, a place of unique superiority.

In stately language the Apostle goes on further to describe the relation of the Son to the Church. He is the Beginning of it, viz., its earliest member. So Reuben is described by Jacob in Gen. xlix. 3 (comp. Deut. xxi. 17) as "the beginning of my strength." And in Rev. iii. 14 Christ is called "the Beginning of the creation of God." In this case, as frequently, the beginning is the cause of all that follows. For the Son is the Agent and the Archetype of the whole creation.

The idea of priority in time, already asserted in vers. 15, 17, and in the word "beginning" in ver. 18, is again made prominent in the words. following, "Firstborn from the dead." Even in victory over death, a victory which all His servants will share, the Son is the earliest. He is, as stated in 1 Cor. xv. 20, the "firstfruit of the sleeping ones."

The Apostle adds that Christ has risen from the dead, the earliest of all, in order that in the priority of resurrection from the dead, as in everything else, the Eternal Son might have Himself the first place: avròs #pwтεúшν. This is manifestly the Father's own purpose about the Son.

The Apostle's thought is that God designed the Son's relation to the universe to be reproduced in His relation to the Church, even in every detail of that relation. Consequently it was fitting that He first should Himself burst open the bars of death. This sameness of relation is kept before us by the emphatic prominence of the words "in all things."

The word yévnra, "that He should become in all things pre-eminent," refers to the historical development of Christ in contrast to His abiding state before time began. What He is in eternity, God willed that He should become in time. And for this end Christ rose from the dead to final victory over death earlier than any of His disciples. We have here a broad principle of the kingdom of Christ. The historical development of the Incarnate Son in time corresponds with the unchanging reality of the Eternal Son.

The purpose embodied in the concluding words of ver. 18 has received a fulfilment far beyond the writer's thought. Christ said little or nothing about general culture, about art, or about political power. But a practical monopoly of these in their highest forms has fallen to the lot of His

followers. This remarkable result must, in default of any other explanation, be attributed to the superiority of that religion which is the only element common to the foremost nations. And, if so, it bears witness to the greatness of the Founder of Christianity. Even as a dispenser of material good, Christ occupies, before our eyes to-day, the first place. In all things He has the pre-eminence.

JOSEPH AGAR BEET, D.D.

THE BOOK CRITIC.

THE INCARNATION OF THE SON OF GOD: BEING THE BAMPTON LECTURES FOR THE YEAR 1891. By CHARLES GORE, M.A., Principal of Pusey House, Fellow of Trinity College, Oxford. London: Murray. 1891. THIS book is a restatement of the doctrine of the Incarnation, together with a vindication of the rationality of the doctrine, and an exposition of its meaning or content. It also aims at expressing and justifying the conviction that, "however slowly and painfully, the old faith in Christ is being brought out in harmony not only with our moral needs and social aspirations, but also with that knowledge of nature, and that historical criticism which are the special growth of our time" (p. 18). With the bulk of the book no Churchman, no orthodox Christian, can quarrel. The old doctrine is stated in the old words (p. 258), and vindicated mainly on the old grounds; nor will a reader of Pearson on the Creed, or of Bull's Defensio Fidei Nicænæ, find anything that is contradictory, or much that is additional, to those old and standard expositions of the Christian belief on the subject which have been, for above two centuries, the generally accepted and almost authorized expositions, at any rate to the Anglican Communion, of the doctrine in question. What is new in the work will be found, principally, not in the exposition, but, first, in the vindication of the rationality of the doctrine, particularly in Lecture II. (pp. 29-53); and secondly, in the endeavours made throughout the volume to bring out and exhibit the harmony, which the writer discerns, between the doctrine as held by the Church and "that knowledge of nature, and that historical criticism which are the special growth of our time." Here we think that the writer, while excellently intentioned, and right in the principles which he lays down, is wrong in his application of them, has made dangerous concessions to those who are adversaries to the faith, and is an unsafe guide for the Christian student.

Lecture I has for its object "What Christianity is.” The answer is that it is belief in Jesus Christ; not, however, merely belief in Him as an historical personage, but believe in Him as Incarnate God. This belief involves an unreserved committal of ourselves to Him as the object of our devotion and the Lord of our life (p. 6). Such self-committal will be incomplete where the relationship to Jesus is obscured, either by false ecclesiasticism (p. 2), or by exaggerated devotion to S. Mary (p. 3), or by Protestant subjectivism (p. 4), or by untheological philanthropy (pp. 4, 5), or by academic intellectualism (p. 6); but the personal relationship is the root and ground of the whole matter. Herein Christianity differs essentially from other religions, as, for instance, from Mohammedanism (p. 7), and from Buddhism (pp. 7-9). The unique position which Christ holds in His religion rests upon the fact of the claim which He made for Himself, as set forth in all the Gospels (pp. 9-15), and