Only and the churches a necessary, conscientious, and commanding one. superficial and trivial tendencies in passing religious thought can prevent its making its due and powerful public impression. It becomes at once a part of the blended history of truth and error among us. It exemplifies 1 Cor. xi. 19 very strikingly. Cf. 1 John ii. 24. We cité one paragraph on the main thesis of these arguments as exemplifying their style and tone: "It has been said by the defenders of 'Progressive Orthodoxy' that it cannot be pantheistic because it admits of the divine transcendence; but the answer is that it does not admit of the divine transcendence in the sense that attaches to the transcendence in Christian theism. According to the latter the quality of the being of God is the same whether considered in respect to his omnipresence in the world, or to his transcendence beyond the world. But according to the Greek immanence, the identity of the human with the divine gives a quality to the being of God in the world different from the quality of the being of God in his transcendence beyond the world. In his transcendence the being of God is purely divine, but in his immanence the being of God is identified with the human, and so confounded with the world. Thus it appears that the transcendence which the Greek immanence can consistently admit must differ in kind from the transcendence of Christian theism, for in that the transcendence and immanence represent the being of God as the same in quality. The admission of a transcendence, therefore, does not, as some have supposed, go to prove that a theology is free from pantheism. Any representation of the transcendence as different in quality from the immanence,-such as that immanence represents the actual or real being of God, while transcendence represents the ideal being of God; or that immanence represents the known being of God while transcendence represents the unknown being of God,-is contrary to Christian theism and in the interest of pantheism” (p. 19). There is a striking statement of Dr. Wellman touching an Andover student of two years ago who "boldly represented that Christ in his earthly life was ignorant; that he did not always know the nature of the diseases he healed. For instance, he supposed that he cast devils out of the demoniacs at Gadara, when, without much doubt, he only cured them of epilepsy" (p. 136). Such an instance could not occur, under such teaching as is taken to pieces in this pamphlet, without others similar also occurring, such as are set forth in the letter of Rev. H. H. Leavitt. G. F. MAGOUN. By Robert F. Hor- VERBUM DEI: the Yale Lectures on Preaching, 1893. ton, M. A., (Some time Fellow of New College, "Revelation and the Bible," etc. New York: Macmillan and Co. 1893. (Pp. 300. 5%x3%.) In this brilliant course of lectures the preacher will find much to instruct and stimulate him. It would seem almost impossible to say anything new in a course of lectures upon preaching, after the ground has been gone over by such eminent authorities as Henry Ward Beecher, Phillips Brooks, and nu merous others of almost equal eminence. But the originality and freshness of these lectures will be the first elements to impress the reader. Mr. Horton's conception of the preacher's province is the true one, namely, that he is to deal in positive truths; that, like the prophet of old, his utterances are all to come with a " thus saith the Lord." This renders it necessary for him to avoid doubtful disputations. But there is a positive element of duty even in doubtful matters. The obligation to act is based upon a preponderance of evidence, and not upon absolute demonstration. It is not positively certain that the cholera will reach America this year, but it is the positive duty of every man to shape his actions with reference to the contingency. It is not certain that any within the sound of a preacher's voice on a given day will die before the to-morrow's sun, but it is certain that such a contingency is by no means improbable, and the fact that no man knows what a day may bring forth is a proper basis for a most positive and stirring exhortation. This same line of reasoning may properly determine one's attitude of mind towards the critical theories of the Bible. The more conservative theologians and preachers throw emphasis upon the fact that many of the new theories may prove to have no proper basis, and prefer to hold fast to that which has been regarded as true until there has been time to prove all things, while the radical critics seem too ready to cut loose from all their moorings before they have decided whether or not they have found anything solid to tie to. The present lectures err, if anywhere, in the latter direction. In emphasizing Paul's knowledge of the present revelation of God, the lecturer seems to destroy our confidence in the apostle's ability to interpret the former word of God, averring that Paul "is very apt to quote from the law and the prophets language which supports his teachings, without any inquiry whether he is expressing the thought of his authorities " (p. 91). To many it would seem questionable whether an apostle who is mistaken when he endeavors to interpret the written word may not also be mistaken when he interprets the signs of the times in which he lives. Dr. Horton's view of inspiration is throughout one that confuses that special gift vouchsafed to the sacred writers for the illumination of the ages, with the more personal gifts of the Spirit which are designed for private guidance and edification. President Finney, who is quoted as having received a special revelation (p. 71), would be the last one to place himself on a level with Moses, Samuel, and Elijah in the character of his inspiration. In this and some other respects, therefore, it seems to us that the volume is calculated not to shed light upon the difficult problems respecting revelation which are troubling the present generation, but, on the contrary, to make "worse confounded" the confusion which already prevails. FROM THE PULPIT TO THE PALM-BRANCH: A Memorial of C. H. Spurgeon; with Five Memorial Sermons by Rev. A. T. Pierson, D. D. New York: A. C. Armstrong & Son. (Pp. 281. 33% x 534.) $1.50. The recent volume entitled "From the Usher's Desk to the Tabernacle Pulpit" gave a very interesting sketch of the life and work of Spurgeon, hav ing been prepared, for the most part, during his lifetime by a friend. The present volume is intended as a sequel to that, and gives accounts of Spurgeon's illness, death and funeral, together with his last addresses and written articles, and the sermons of Dr. Pierson. Those who have the other volume will wish this, also. THE DISEASES OF INEBRIETY from Alcohol, Opium, and Other Narcotic Drugs; its Etiology, Pathology, Treatment, and Medico-Legal Relations. Arranged and Compiled by the American Association for the Study and Cure of Inebriety. New York: E. B. Treat. 1893. (Pp. 400. 33⁄44x6.) $2.75. The past few years have witnessed great progress toward an intelligent setting forth of the physiological side of intemperance. Many are ready to go much farther than this, and affirm that the physiological aspect has justified itself as the point of view from which the subject must be studied; and that all other investigation must be made with the postulate of the pathological character of inebriety. In 1870 there was organized in New York the American Association for the Study and Cure of Inebriety, composed largely of physicians connected with asylums for inebriates. Their published papers meeting an increased demand, the secretary, Dr. T. D. Crothers of Hartford, has prepared the present volume presenting in permanent form some of the more important conclusions of the Society. The results are announced with no little confidence, and in many cases with an array of proof that commands attention, and will be of value to any student of the liquor problem, and no less to the clergyman than to the physician. To our mind, this is all that can be affirmed of the book: its theory is not supported by sufficient evidence to entitle it to entire confidence. It has been said that in a controversy both sides are to be believed in their affirmations and discredited in their denials; the merit of this book is in its positive contention that inebriety is a disease; and its defect is its denial that inebriety is also a crime. "It is now coming to be recognized that inebriety is a disease, but its treatment has heretofore been too much relegated to the moralist instead of to the physician to whom it properly belongs. The moralist has given us theories as to its cause and cure, but the theories have brought us no advancement; the disease still remains to vex their patient souls. The medical profession, however, place this subject in its true light, and give a hope to the world that in a short time there will be a better way to handle this whole matter" (p. 232). So says the author: let us hope that it is true. The moralist awaits this setting forth of this subject in its true light, and stands ready to co-operate with the physician whenever he shall make it manifest. But neither diet nor seclusion nor massage nor "chloride of gold" offers a substitute for moral character; and the medical profession, if it make its discoveries of permanent value to society, can ill afford to dispense with the aid of the moralist. Let it be granted that the subject has received the too exclusive attention of the moralist: the fault is not the moralist's: nor if it now appear that the moralist has not made all the discoveries in a field pre-empted by another pro fession, but has left something for the physician to discover in his own department, the fact that he did not keep pace with the moralist in study of the question, and has made his research but tardily, comports ill with the suggestion, now and then appearing, that the moralist shall now abandon the entire question to him. Far from having won the right to assume a supercilious tone in speaking of moralists and their theories, it may be seriously questioned, whether the medical profession has not just cause to maintain in the presence of the moralist a becoming humility. After all has been conceded that may be in favor of thousands of noble physicians who are laboring to overthrow the drink curse, it still remains true that a very large number even of reputable physicians, who best know the evils of intemperance and the perils of moderate drinking, are responsible for many cases that develop into intemperance by their unnecessary and indiscriminate use of liquor in their practice; and it is an open secret that, by their granting prescriptions to those who desire liquor solely as a beverage, they do more than any other class of men, the drunkards and liquor sellers alone excepted, to render inoperative prohibitory and restrictive legislation. There is no occasion to bring a railing accusation, nor does the reviewer desire to do so; but it well enough to meet at the outset every suggestion that the moralist must give way to the physician, with the plain statement that not only does it still appear that this question has its moral as well as its physiological side, but that, until the physician shall heal himself, there will be some occasion for the moralist to interest himself even in the physiological aspect of the case. The author sets forth plainly his positions and those of his school, which briefly are these: Inebriety is a disease, inherited or acquired, and curable like other diseases; alcohol as a medicine should be classed among poisons, and prescribed for internal use with great caution; the civil authorities should recognize inebriety as a disease, and substitute for fines and imprisonment scientific treatment in hospitals and asylums, whose officers should have full control over their patients, with power to retain them a sufficient time to insure their permanent cure. The author claims, in the name of what he calls science, that this disease called inebriety renders men irresponsible, not only when under the influence of liquor, but when under temptation to procure it. It will be interesting to examine his proof on this point. "The wonderful network of nerves known as the sympathetic system acts independently of the will. . . . By its side the will is powerless. If it presides over appetite, its behests are absolute. . . . The hungry man who is starving for bread cannot, at his will, bid his hunger depart. The true inebriate, when his restless nerves and sinking spirit and burning desire demand repose and satisfaction must obey the call. He obeys, though his will, his conscience, his judgment, his past experience, his moral sense, all join in protest" (pp. 274, 275). This is bad physiology and worse logic; ethically it is worst of all. True, the hungry man cannot bid his hunger depart: but there is a vast difference between the passive state of hunger and the voluntary action of breaking a window and thrusting If these quotations did not sufficiently refute each other, it might be well to refer to the experience of any man who has been engaged in the work of reforming drunkards, even to the extent to which an ordinary pastor comes to have knowledge of such cases. What pastor has not met men who say, "I cannot let it alone; I cannot control my appetite;" but who, when told, "You can do it; trust God and try again!" reply, "Yes, I can, and with God's help I will!" And some of the worst of them succeed. There can hardly be better proof of this than a case cited by Dr. Crothers himself: "At last I prevailed by sheer force of will. I had recovered enough faith in the soul to assert my freedom, and I now look back upon those years of conflict with a kind of self-pity to think that I could have been so weak" (p. 367). So says a victim of one of the worst forms of inebriety, as quoted in the volume before us with the apparent approval of the author. This agrees ill with the author's protest against "the supposed stigma of inebriety" (p. 24), and his assertion that the victim gives way "not from any fault of his own, but on account of his being the subject of a mental disease entirely beyond his control" (p. 31). Dr. Crothers has cited some very significant examples of a tendency toward inebriety induced by cerebral injuries or sunstroke or inheritance. Unquestionably we have much to learn in this department, and this book is a help toward that end. As affording material for induction, it is valuable: as to its deductions, it is unsatisfactory. We welcome it not as a finality, but as a contribution toward a better understanding of one side of this manysided problem. We are glad of all research into the physical side of intemperance, and of every fact which can lessen temptation, or tend to offset the effects of heredity and habit as predisposing causes of inebriety; but intem |