parties for whose especial illumination it was intended. There was one formidable individual who did for Sir William then, what our slender power has been quite sufficient to do for him now-he showed him up as a theological pretender.

Nor will the Apocalypse suffer from this or a hundred such attacks. Even though the testimonies adduced against it had been genuine, as we have found them apocryphal, they are, with two exceptions, any thing but formidable. We could have furnished Sir William with a more serious list. But over against these we could easily have placed an array of authorities which every competent judge would allow to be triumphantly superior, in point of weight, down to the most recent and distinguished critics in Germany. Much has the Apocalypse suffered, on the one hand, from the wild comments which have been dignified with the name of "Keys" and "Expositions," and on the other from the severity with which the most modest attempts to clear up its difficulties are by some denounced-not to speak of the advantage taken of both by the enemies of this book to hold it up to contempt. But in spite of all this, it will vindicate its own claims, and continue to shine in its own lustre; it will command increasing interest, and derive light from the march of events; its incomparable scenes, its celestial strains, its soul-stirring encouragements and appalling denunciations, even the unearthly grandeur of its language, will inspire its unsophisticated readers, though unable to thread its mysterious mazes, with courage to fight the good fight of faith, and lay hold of eternal life-will nerve the hosts of the Lord for the great conflict between light and darkness, which is to issue in the rout and ruin of the phalanx of evil-will tide the church over the last brief wave of trouble, and see it into unclouded light, unruffled repose, and everlasting glory.

CRITICAL NOTICES.

History of the Reformation of the Sixteenth Century. Vol. V.-The Reformation in England. By J. H. MERLE D'AUBIGNE, D.D.

THE new volume of Dr Merle D'Aubigné's great work needs no recommendation from any one. Its own high merit will secure its universal reception. Yet in discharge of our duty to our readers we feel that we cannot withhold the statement of those thoughts on some topics which the perusal of a work so important has suggested.

We cannot venture to predict for D'Aubigné's History of the Reformation in England an equal measure of success with that already obtained by his previous volumes. Not that we regard the present volume as less deserving of success than its predecessors, but because it cannot have to British readers an equal degree of freshness. British readers are already in some degree familiar with the History of the Reformation in their own country; and although they may be somewhat curious to know how an educated and intelligent foreigner views the subject, they will not expect any actually new information, and they will not be disposed to submit their previously settled opinions to his guidance. Be the reason what it may, it is at any rate the fact, that nothing which is not mainly of English growth will much or permanently affect the English mind. Before any thing can greatly affect England, it must be adopted and made English. For this, and various other kindred reasons, we do not expect that D'Aubigne's new volume will be as popular in Britain as its predecessors have been.

If, however, we had the power to guide the mind of England, we would most earnestly urge it to accept this work, to give it the utmost possible encouragement, to receive it into every household from palace to hut, and to welcome and adopt it as the first and only full and authentic history of the Reformation in England. There have long existed ample materials for such a history; but a rightly qualified historian was wanting. Nothing could surpass, in its own department, the work of Foxe, the martyrologist; and nowhere could better materials for history be found than in its pages, when these are in the hands of one who knows how to use them, as D'Aubigné has amply proved. Strype, as an annalist, is as accurate, comprehensive, minute in detail, and abundant in material, as could possibly be desired; but his writings are not history, till a true historian employs them. Bishop Burnet is candid, truthful, frank, well-informed generally, and sufficiently copious in some parts, though deficient in others. Little of importance has yet been added on any topic of which he has treated; and in many instances, what he has stated as conjectural has been confirmed by subsequent research; yet his whole mental tendencies led him rather to produce what may be called the gossip of history, than history itself.

And of the numerous modern attempts to produce a history of the Reformation in England, nothing less can be said than that they have all been comparatively failures,-not one has succeeded in becoming a standard work. The truth is, that no man can write a successful history unless his own mental characteristics be those of a historian. The man of true historical genius may be said to live as really in the past as in the present. He cannot become cognisant of an important fact or event of ancient times without seeing in it a vital principle, and tracing it along the continuous life of the community, till he marks its reappearance in his own day. He cannot look on any thing that bears the aspect of antiquity without retracing it to that period and event from which it sprung. "As for me," says D'Aubigné, in one of his works, “I delight in going back into past ages, and, as I contemplate what I meet with in the places I visit, to seek out what happened there in times gone by. I inquire into the historical reminiscences. I cannot look upon a field of battle without marshalling armies upon it; on an ancient house, without bringing back its inhabitants; on a church, without placing in the pulpit the illustrious man who has preached there, and in the house the audience he was wont to animate with his words. I cannot pass through a cemetery without calling up its dead." Such a man was needed to write the History of the Reformation in England. Let us now briefly glance at the first volume of that history which such a man has written.

It did not surprise us in the least to find that D'Aubigné could not begin the History of the Reformation in England with the reign of Henry VIII. England had attained a character and history as a nation long before that period, both in a political and in a religious aspect; and any intelligent person who should undertake to give an account of England in either of these points of view during that reign, would find it absolutely necessary to begin with a considerably long introduction. This was intuitively evident to D'Aubigné's historical genius, and was confirmed to his judgment by his historical experience. "If we search," he says, "for the characteristics of the British Reformation, we shall find that, beyond any other, they were social, national, and truly human. There is no people among whom the Reformation has produced to the same degree that morality and order, that liberty, public spirit, and activity, which are the very essence of a nation's greatness. Just as the Papacy has degraded the Spanish peninsula, has the gospel exalted the British islands. Hence the study upon which we are entering possesses an interest peculiar to itself. In order that this study may be useful, it should have a character of universality. To confine the history of a people within the space of a few years, or even of a century, would deprive that history of both truth and life. History is a wonderful organization, no part of which can be restricted. To understand the present we must know the past." With this conception in his mind, it is not surprising to find him stating his design thus:- "We shall now proceed to trace the destinies of the church in England from the earliest times of Christianity. These long and distant preparations are one of the distinctive characteristics of its reformation. Before the sixteenth century this church had passed through two great phases. The first was that of its formation, the second that of its corruption. In its formation it was Oriento-aposto

lical. In its corruption it was successively national-papistical and royalpapistical. After these two degrees of decline came the last and great phasis of the Reformation." To what this general view leads, we shall have occasion afterwards to advert.

In order to prove that the church in its formation was Orientoapostolical, the historian has to attempt to pierce the obscurities of the second century, in which he has little more than conjecture to guide him. This forces him to direct attention to the period of the Culdees, on which, however, he has thrown no additional light-if we might not almost say, that his statements tend rather to darken than to illuminate that distant period. But when he comes to treat of Succat, afterwards known as St Patrick, of Columba, of Oswald, Oswy, and Wilfrid, his narrative recovers all its brilliancy and power. The attentive reader will perceive that the earliest form of Christianity in England was not papal-was not hierarchical-was not even episcopal, as that term is now understood; and that it was overthrown, and the papal system erected on its ruins by the intrigues, violence, and cruelty of Augustine the monk; but we are not sure that the full character of the Orientoapostolical period has been adequately displayed, and especially we feel that the secret life which continued to linger in the heart of the community, after the fraudful substitution of what is termed the nationalpapistical, is not sufficiently traced. The royal-papistical began, according to D'Aubigné, when William the Conqueror dared to confront and check the aggressions of Pope Gregory VII. (Hildebrand). The same system was followed by his son Rufus; and for a time the royal power kept the papal in check in England. King John, indeed, surrendered all to the Pope; but the bold and freedom-loving English barons defended the liberties of their country, and extorted Magna Charta from the king, for which they were excommunicated by the Pope. Edward III. enacted the important statutes of Provisors and Præmunire, interdicting papal appointments to ecclesiastical dignities in England by the former, and all appeals to Rome, or introduction of papal bulls, excommunications, &c. into England by the latter. Thus England maintained a considerable amount of religious liberty in the royal-papistical period, and remained so far open to future reformation. During the same period Anselm, Grostête, and Bradwardine, especially the latter, boldly proclaimed the doctrines of grace, in opposition to the growing corruption of Rome, to the great delight of a large proportion of the community.

When it is stated that the preaching of such doctrines by Bradwardine found great acceptance in the community, the question naturally arises, how it was that the people so readily apprehended and approved such doctrines? To such a question, we apprehend, D'Aubigné has furnished a sufficient answer, but has scarcely made it sufficiently apparent. The principles of the early Oriento-apostolical church, as the historian terms it, still survived in the heart and mind of the community, and gladly revived at the utterance of kindred truth. This was the real Christianity, the true apostolic church of England; the papal system was but the external form superinduced upon it by papal conquerors, and wearing different aspects as priestly power, or regal power, might chance to prevail, under such men as Thomas à Becket or Edward III.—while the primitive and true church lived on, unseen and

unknown, but ready to revive and reappear at the call of living truth.

Bradwardine is succeeded by Wicklyffe, and the historian displays, in the increasing vividness of his style, that he has now obtained for his hero a man on whose character he delights to dwell. The whole that relates to him who has been so aptly styled "the morning star of the Reformation," is extremely interesting and instructive. Other characters and events begin to appear, hastening on the critical moment when Rome and England must enter into a deadly conflict. These characters are sketched with great fidelity and much graphic power. Lord Cobham, Erasmus, Sir Thomas More, Dean Colet, Henry VIII. in his youth, are all brought vividly before us, till we seem to perceive their very lineaments, and to become personally acquainted with them. Next appear Cardinal Wolsey and Anne Boleyn; and their peculiarities of position and character are delineated with great skill and ability. From the time when these personages appear, we cannot but feel that the conflict which ended in the Reformation has begun; and we trace its progress with increasing interest. That interest, however, is somewhat divided, not through any defect of skill in the historian, but because the conflict itself was waged on two distinct fields of action. It had its comparatively private sphere, where the preaching of gospel truth and the translation and diffusion of the Scriptures were producing a true religious reformation among the people; and it had its more public sphere of action, arising out of the collision between the king and the pope, in the matter of Henry's proposed divorce, the intrigues of Wolsey, and the counter-intrigues of the pope and his legates and emissaries.* The declining influence of Wolsey is traced; the introduction of Cranmer to Henry, and the new aspect thereby given to the prosecution of the divorce, are clearly presented; and the volume closes with the fall and death of Cardinal Wolsey.

The manifest tendency of D'Aubigné's work is to present the History of the Reformation in England to the public under an aspect and from a point of view almost new to the general reader, and of great importance. Hitherto it has been very common to regard the English Reformation as in a great measure the consequence of the king's quarrel with the pope,-carried forward as far as the sovereign pleased, and arrested when the sovereign thought proper,-made for the people, not by them, not so much an ecclesiastical as a civil reformation, ending in the institution of a species of civil popedom. A different view has also been taken by those who hold very high notions of church power and apostolicity. They regard the Church of England as having owed nothing to Henry but its deliverance from absolute subjection to the Bishop of Rome, and the consequent liberty of resting upon its own apostolical succession, rather cognate and co-ordinate with the Church of Rome than derived from it, and entitled to maintain its own inherent rights independent of the civil government. It is evident that the historian does not entertain either of these theories; and as in one passage he has given a general outline of his views, we shall extract it for the benefit of our readers :

D'Aubigné has clearly proved that Cardinal Wolsey was the originator of Henry's desire to obtain a divorce from his Queen, in revenge against Charles V. for not assisting him in his ambitious attempts to obtain the Popedom.