certainly maintain that this theory is not materialistic, and others of them will undertake to show that, since the theory of evolution is both true and materialistic, we must hold materialism to be true.

Between the chapters already referred to, and other chapters refuting sensualistic ethics and psychology, Dr. Dabney discusses the origin and validity of a priori notions. In this section particular and detailed consideration is given to the agnosticism of Sir Wm. Hamilton and of Dean Mansel, who, with Herbert Spencer, are thought to justify the proverb,-" extremes meet." Here we have a good deal of acute, and some profitable criticism. In general, the view taken of the genesis of so-called a priori knowledge is such as is held to prove the falseness of philosophic sensualism.

EDWARDS ON THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS.*We have already called attention in this Review to the series of homiletical helps entitled "The Expositor's Bible" to which this work belongs, and have expressed the belief that it will prove a valuable incentive and aid to expository preaching. The present volume fully sustains the character of the series. It consists of dissertations upon the teaching of the Epistle of which it treats, which are well fitted to exhibit and apply its doctrinal and practical contents and to serve as a model of scholarly and edifying exposition of Scripture. The style of the author is clear, vigorous and often eloquent; his temper cautious and reverent. No discussion of the authorship of the Epistle is found in the volume. The writer distinguishes him from St. Paul but continually speaks of him as "the apostle." One cannot but wonder what "apostle" he means.

The eterThat God

As an example of the vigorous style a few sentences may be quoted from the first chapter; "God hath spoken.' nal silence has been broken. We have a revelation. has spoken unto men is the ground of all religion, etc." The author of the volume is already known in theological circles by his Commentary on I Corinthians published a year or two ago. In the more popular work before us he has not diminished the im pression of his ability and skill as a Biblical interpreter.

G. B. STEVENS.

* The Epistle to the Hebrews. By T. C. EDWARDS, D.D. A. C. Armstrong & Son: New York.

BRUCE ON THE TRAINING OF THE TWELVE.*-Probably no Scotch theologian is better known in America than Dr. Bruce. His publication a few years ago of a series of articles on ecclesiastical subjects in an American journal, his delivery of a course of lectures on the Miraculous Element in the Gospels in one of our theological seminaries, and his published writings have made his name familiar to multitudes of scholars on this side of the Atlantic. His Cunningham Lectures on the Humiliation of Christ show him to be a trained dogmatic theologian as his admirable volume on the Parabolic Teaching of Christ prove him to be a skilled exegete. The book before us has the blended qualities of the exegetical and doctrinal modes of treatment. The work has long been before the religious public, having first appeared in 1871. It is now presented in a fourth edition, an evidence of its deserved and continued popularity.

It is a systematic exhibition of the teaching and influence of Jesus as related to the twelve apostles. It is written in a popular, vivacious style and its pages are not weighted down with scholastic matter, though the scholar will perceive that the discussions are based upon scholarly research and presuppose the processes and judgment of the critic. The book will continue to be, as it has already so abundantly proved, a means of edification and instruction in private reading. It would be highly useful if systematically read in connection with a course of study-whether critical or practical-in the gospels.

GEORGE B. STEVENS.

*The Training of the Twelve. By ALEXANDER B. BRUCE, D.D., Professor in the Free Church College, Glasgow. A. C. Armstrong & Son, New York. pp. 552.

ARTICLE I.-THE VALIDITY OF NON-EPISCOPAL ORDINATION.*

PAUL DUDLEY, the founder of the Dudleian Lectures, was a graduate of Harvard College in the class of 1690. He pursued his law studies in the Temple in London. He became the Chief Justice of the Province of Massachusetts. He was honored in his day as a learned, eloquent, and impartial magistrate, and as a religious man. The fourth in the series, or cycle, of Lectures which was established by his bounty is the one which I am called to deliver; and the character of it is set forth in the terms of the foundation as follows: "The fourth and last Lecture I would have for the maintaining, explaining, and proving the validity of the ordination of ministers or pastors

* The Dudleian Lecture, delivered in the Chapel of Harvard University, on October 28th, 1888. By GEORGE PARK FISHER, D.D., LL.D., Titus Street Professor of Ecclesiastical History in Yale University.

of the churches, and so their administration of the sacraments or ordinances of religion, as the same hath been practised in New England, from the first beginning of it, and so continued at this day. Not that I would any ways invalidate Episcopal ordination as it is commonly called and practised in the Church of England; but I do esteem the method of ordination as practised in Scotland, at Geneva, and among the dissenters in England, and in the churches in this country, to be very safe, scriptural, and valid: and that the great Head of the Church, by his blessed Spirit, hath owned, sanctified and blessed them accordingly, and will continue so to do to the end of the world. Amen."

The design of this Lecture, as that design was defined and explained by the founder, is therefore purely defensive. His purpose was not to provide the means for an attack upon the polity of the Anglican Communion. In such an attack I should have no disposition to take part. Of the merits, and the claims to respect, of the Protestant Episcopal Church, as it exists at present in Great Britain, in the United States, and in other English-speaking communities, I should esteem it a grateful task to speak. On the services rendered by that Church in times past, on the services, likewise, which it is rendering at present, to our common Christianity, it would be pleasant to expatiate. With the advantages and with the disadvantages— whatever they may be of Episcopacy, as a method of Church organization, we have, on this occasion, nothing to do. It is only with a certain theory, on the basis of which the Episcopal system, since the accession of the Stuarts to the English throne, and especially since the Restoration, has frequently been maintained, that we are now concerned. According to that particular theory, Episcopacy is not only a lawful method of ecclesiastical government; it is not only a method which is commended to favor by ancient usage, and is conducive, in various ways, to the welfare of Christian people, but it is the only lawful method of Church organization. Without a distinct order of bishops so it is contended-a Church ceases to be a Church. Ordination by these bishops, who are alleged to form an unbroken line, running back to the Apostles, is pronounced essential to the exercise of the functions of the Christian ministry.

They

Without it, we are told, there is no valid administration of the Sacrament. According to this view, Episcopacy, and Episcopacy founded, in the way just indicated, on Apostolic Succession, is necessary not merely to the well-being, but to the very being of a Church. The creed of a Church may be orthodox; it may, like the Church of Scotland, or the Church of the Huguenots, count on its roll a shining list of heroic martyrs; its ministry may be faithful shepherds of the flock, eloquent, fervent, full of the spirit of self-sacrifice; if they have not been inducted into office by bishops standing in the line of the succession, they are acting without authority, and in dispensing the sacrament of the Lord's Supper, as in every other function which is conceived to pertain to the ministry, their proceeding is without warrant, or promise of blessing. have assumed an office for which they hold no commission. The question might be raised whether any such official continuity, as the High Church theory involves, can be made out to have existed in any branch of the Church. May there not be, here and there, a break-here and there a missing link in the long chain that stretches back through all those misty and troubled ages? But I do not care to linger upon subordinate points of this nature. The main question is a broad, historical one. Did Christ and the Apostles, did the founders of the Church, really institute the Episcopate as a distinct, superior office; and, moreover, did they decree that the door into the ministry should be opened and shut exclusively by a clerical order thus created, and empowered to hand down their sacred prerogatives to successors to the end of time?

If we examine the literature of the New Testament and of the period immediately following, we find one fact, at least, that is too plain to be disputed: organization was a gradual thing. There was from the outset a profession of faith in Jesus as the Christ; there was baptism, initiating the convert into the company, scattered far and wide, of his followers. These followers were associated in fraternities, in the several towns where they lived. Certain offices, after models furnished by Jewish synagogues, and partly, it would seem, by Gentile societies, both municipal and private, grew up, one after another, as necessity called for them. There were