Apostolic Fathers, the author interprets the Old Testament in the mystical manner which was then familiar to the Jews. He dignifies this mode of interpretation with the name of I'voort, knowledge. The Shepherd of Hermas is almost destitute of Scripture quotations, so that his principles of Biblical interpretation cannot be discovered. The first Epistle of Clement (the only one which has any claim to authenticity-i.e. true matter) contains various quotations from Scripture; but generally without much explanation. Nor do the epistles, ascribed to Ignatius and Polycarp, afford much matter for a history of Biblical interpretation.

4. Justin Martyr, born in Samaria at the beginning of the second century, was a Platonic philosopher before his conversion to christianity, and was, like other disciples of that school, attached to allegorical interpretation. He considered that the words of the Old Testament especially contained mystical meanings. This appears from various observations which he has made in his dialogue with Trypho, the Jew. An allegorical interpretation of facts defeats the object of the historian, who intended that what he wrote should be considered as truth. But typical interpretation, though it is regarded as a kind of allegorical interpretation, produces very different effects. The application of a type to its antitype leaves the truth of the history unimpaired. It is not the principle, therefore, of typical interpretation which is liable to objection, but the excess to which it has been carried. And from this excess Justin Martyr is certainly not free.

5. The next among the Greek fathers who is worthy of notice, is Irenæus, who wrote in the latter half of the second century. Though a native Greek, he was bishop of Lyons, in Gall. He objects to the allegorical interpretations of the Gnostics, though his own interpretations are sometimes as fanciful as those of his opponents. The principle of interpretation on which Irenæus chiefly insists is a kind of Traditio Hermeneutica, to which he appeals as authority for the interpretation of Scripture. Here the Recognitiones Clementis are introduced. "The Regula Veritatis, therefore, though previously called Veritas tradita, is here called Regula suscepta ex divinis Scripturis. Such also was the Regula Veritatis of Irenæus. It was not an authority distinct from Scripture, but Scripture itself interpreted by authority.

6. The order of time brings us to Clement of Alexandria, who wrote toward the end of the second century. According to Epiphanius he was a native of Athens, but he was educated at Alexandria, where he afterwards resided. His writings are replete with quotations from Greek philosophers and Greek poets; but he was chiefly attached to that species of the platonic philosophy which prevailed at Alexandria. Hence arose his predilection for allegorical interpretation. He explained even the ten commandments in an allegorical sense. He interpreted the fifth commandment as relating not to our earthly parents, but to our heavenly Father and to the divine Gnosis.

7. Tertullian, though contemporary with Clement of Alexandria, was not addicted to allegorical interpretation. Tertullian was a Latin father. He allows an allegorical interpretation in prophecy; but even there only in certain cases. The rule of Biblical interpretation, by which Tertullian was chiefly guided, he calls the "Regula Fidei." He represents the Regula Fidei, as a rule, quam Ecclesia ab Apostolis; Apostoli, a Christo, Christus a Deo tradidit, which the church delivered from the apostles, the apostles from Christ, Christ from God. This Regula Fidei of Tertullian has been compared to the tradition of the Church of Rome.

8. Origen, the most distinguished among the fathers in the Greek Church, and Cyprian, the most distinguished among the fathers in the Latin Church, flourished in the third century.

Origen compares the Scriptures with the owua (the body), the xn (the soul), and the veva (the spirit), which, according to Plato, are the component parts of man; whence arise three kinds of interpretation denoted by the epithets, owμaтikoσ (corporal) UXIKOO (animal), and TVEUμATIKOσ (spiritual). Upon the whole, then, we may conclude that Origen had only two modes of interpretation, the grammatical and the spiritual. Origen rejected the allegorical interpretation of the ten commandments which Clement had adopted. He had learned at Alexandria, and finding that the grammatical sense of Scripture was irrational or impossible, according to the spiritual sense given by philosophy, he departed from the literal sense.

Cyprian, as an interpreter of Scripture, does not occupy a large space in the history of Biblical interpretation. He professes to follow Tertullian, but he was much more inclined than his master to depart from the literal sense of Scripture.

9. The fourth century produced a greater number of distinguished writers, in the Greek Church, than any other [century produced]. In that century we find the names of, 1. Eusebius; 2. Athanasius; 3. Cyril of Jerusalem; 4. Epiphanius; 5. Apollinarius; 6. Basil of Cæsarea; 7. Gregory of Nazianzum; 8. Amphilochius; 9. Gregory of Nyssa; 10. Theodore of Mopsuestia; 11. Chrysostom; and 12. Cyril of Alexandria.

"The limits assigned to this historical view make it impossible to produce quotations from their works as was done from those of Clement and Origen." Bishop March contents himself by stating the influence which these two celebrated fathers had on their successors of the fourth century. The influence was such that allegorical interpretation was very generally adopted. Theodore of Mopsuestia was the only one by whom it was entirely rejected. By all the rest it was adopted, though in various degrees. The least so by Chrysostom, and the most so by Cyril of Alexandria.

10. In the Latin Church, in the fourth century, the principal writers were: 1. Arnobius; 2. Lactantius; 3. Ambrose of Milan; 4. Hilary; 5. Jerome; and 6. Augustine.

1. "Arnobius was a decided adversary of allegorical interpretation. But allegorical interpretation was not rejected by Lactantius, who found a proof of the millenium in the first chapter of Genesis. Ambrose, bishop of Milan, a man of great authority in the Latin Church, was a decided advocate of mystical meanings. Jerome was highly gifted as an interpreter of Scripture. He was perfectly acquainted with Hebrew as well as with Greek, and could read, therefore, the whole of the Scriptures in their original languages, which very few of the Greek Fathers, and none other of the Latin Fathers, could. He possessed, therefore, the advantages which were necessary for a grammatical interpretation of Scripture, of which he also professed himself an advocate. But he has not unfrequently fallen into the error which he condemned in Origen. In his commentary on Nahum, he admits that he is sometimes compelled to take a middle course between historical (that is, grammatical) and allegorical interpretation. But whoever departs at all from grammatical interpretation must approximate to some kind of allegorical interpretation. Augustine, whose opinions became authority in the Latin Church, has, in his treatise De Doctrinâ Christianâ, given rules for the interpretation of Scripture. That which relates to grammatical and allegorical (or, as he terms it, figurative) interpretation is given in the following words: Iste omnine modus est, ut quicquid in sermone divino neque ad morum honestatem, neque ad fidei veritatem proprie referri potest figuratum esse cognoscas. That is altogether the mode that whatever cannot properly be referred, in divine discourse, to honesty of manners, or to verity of faith, you may understand to be figurative."

"But Augustine, like to Tertullian, appeals also to a Regula Fidei. In the second chapter of the same book, he says that where any man doubts the sense of Scripture, consulat regulam fidei, quam de Scripturarum planioribus locis et ecclesiæ auctoritate suscepit. Let him consult the Rule of Faith, which he has taken upon him (suscepit) from plainer places of the Scriptures, and from the authority of the Church.' But though Augustine here adds, ecclesiæ auctoritas, we must not conclude that his Regula Fidei rested on any other foundation than that of Scripture. His third book opens with these words: Homo timens deum voluntatem ejus in Scripturis Sanctis diligenter inquirit. The will of God, therefore, according to Augustine, must be sought in Holy Scripture; and, in what he added about the authority of the Church, he meant only an authority to determine the sense of Scripture, which, in controversies of faith, is claimed by every Church. He affords no support to the Romish doctrine of tradition, as an authority independent of Scripture. And, even were it true that a doctrina tradita existed, the discrepancies which prevailed among the Fathers of the first four centuries would show the uncertainty of the vehicle by which it is supposed to have been conveyed."-End of Lecture xi. pt. 1.

Part 1 has twelve Lectures on Biblical Criticism, and

Part 2

twelve Lectures on Biblical Interpretation. has twelve Lectures on the New Testament.-Bishop Marsh.

2. I have quoted Bishop Marsh from Part 1, and from Part 2. These parts are mine own inventions. His first Lectures refer to the Old Testament-pp.532, with an index. His second Lectures refer to the New Testament-pp. 296, without an index. Both courses have apendices. O. T., A.D. 1842.

N.T., 1840.-I have these two courses handsomely bound. I regard the book as a rich treasure. I bought Bishop Marsh's Lectures and read them carefully long before my ordination. I have read "Essays and Reviews" seven times consecutively when they were published. The arguments in favour of infidelity which they set forth "passed by me as the idle winds which I regard not.' Bishop Butler and Bishop Marsh should be, with Archdeacon Paley, the foundation books, with Dr. Isaac Watts' Logic, of every school-boy, who is destined to receive a liberal education. It may be said, "school-boys cannot understand subjects so abstruse." The reply is, They can understand. Teach them. I attribute the errors of the Established Church of England, in its officials of Joseph's coat theology, to a deficient education in matters theological. I address myself to the young. 3. The twelfth Lecture of Bishop Marsh opens with a statement that he found it necessary to conduct his historical view of Biblical Interpretation on a narrower scale, and in a summary manner, compared with the scale and manner which he had adopted in his explanation of the history of Biblical Interpretation in the first four centuries. "Nor does the history of Biblical Interpretation require that minuteness of research in the subsequent ages of Christianity, which is necessary for a right understanding of the earlier fathers." I must conclude, from this statement of Bishop Marsh, that the great divines of the fourth century of the Christian era completed the work of "the Mystery of Iniquity," which St. Paul declared was at work in his time. These talented, learned, devoted fathers of the Eastern and Western Churches, laid the foundation of that compromise of heathenism with Christianity, or of Christianity with heathenism, which originated the one thousand years of religious darkness, called "the dark ages,' " and which has continued to the present day, a cloudy sky, endeavouring to obscure and obstruct in its course the light of the knowledge of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ."

4. The names of the most distinguished among the writers of the Greek Church in the fifth century were (1) Euthalius, (2) Theodoret, (3) Isodore of Pelusium. Some of the fathers mentioned by Bishop Marsh, in Lect. ii., as having lived in the fourth century, are referred also to the fifth century, because they continued to live in that age.

(a.) Euthalius so far contributed to the interpretation of the Acts, and of the Epistles of St. Paul, that he made the references to them more easy. As Eusebius had divided the Gospels into kepaλaia (chapters), Euthalius did the same with the Acts and the Epistles.

And the division into σríxo, as it marked the pauses, determined frequently the sense.

(b.) Theodoret wrote commentaries on both the Old Testament and the New. Like to Chrysostom and Theodore of Mopseustia, he took great pains in the investigation of the literal sense; but this did not prevent him from the adoption of the allegorical interpretation.

c.) The same observations apply to Isodore of Pelusium, a town of Egypt, situated at the entrance of one of the seven mouths of the Nile, called (that is, the mouth of the Nile on which the town was situated) from it Pelusian.

(d.) Andreas, Bishop of Cæsarea, in Cappadocia, wrote, at the beginning of the sixth century, a commentary on the Apocalypse, which abounds with mystical meanings. His commentary is accompanied with the text, and is, therefore, of some use in the criticism of the Bible. To the commentary of Andreas is commonly added that of Arĕthas, who was likewise Bishop of Cæsarea, in Cappadocia, though some authors refer him to a later age than the sixth century.

In this age original commentators began to decrease. The Greek Church originated a fashion to make collections from former commentaries, and to arrange them under the portions of Scripture to which they belonged. These collections acquired afterwards the name Zeipai, or catēnæ, or chains, in which the original writers were considered as so many links. Hence we have, 1. Catena Patrum in Genesin; 2. Catena Patrum in Exodium, &c.; a Catena Patrum in Matthæum, a Catena Patrum in Marcum, &c. "For a further account of these Catena Patrum, I must refer the reader to 'Fabricii Bibliotheca Græca.'"-Bp. Marsh.

(e.) From the end of the sixth to the middle of the eighth century the only Greek commentator of any note was Johannes Damascēnus. In the ninth century Photius, Patriarch of Constantinople, wrote on religious subjects (perhaps he wrote commentaries); "but his writings contain little of Biblical interpre

tation.

(f.) In the tenth century Ecumenius, Bishop of Tricca, in Thessaly, wrote a commentary on, 1, the Acts of the Apostles; 2, on the (fourteen) Epistles of St. Paul; and 3, on the Catholic Epistles. But the remarks are taken chiefly from Chrysostom, Cyril, and other preceding writers.

(g.) In the eleventh century Theophylact, Archbishop of Bulgaria, wrote commentaries on, 1, the Four Gospels; 2, the Acts of the Apostles; and 3, the Epistles of St. Paul. He wrote also commentaries on some of the minor prophets. The works of Theophylact were held in high estimation by the Greek Church. Chrysostom was his principal guide. The European Greeks ever entertained the most profound veneration for Chrysostom. Therefore they held Theophylact in high estimation.

(h.) In the twelfth century a monk at Constantinople, Euthymius Zigabēnus, composed a work called Panoplia Dogmatica. He wrote also commentaries on the Psalms, the Gospels, and the Epistles. Mat

thai, who first published the Greek of Euthymius on the Four Gospels, very highly extols his author as an accurate and judicious interpreter. "And here," says Bishop Marsh, "we must close the catalogue of Greek writers who have contributed to the illustration of the Bible. To these names may be added the unknown authors of the Greek scholia." Bishop Marsh refers to Matthäi's Greek Testament. Also to the Greek Glossaries of Hesychius and Suidas.

66

conse

4. "The Latin Church is described by Bishop Marsh, in the progress which it made in the interpretation of Scripture after the fourth century. In the fifth century, we find, 1. Tychonius. 2. Vincentius Lirinensis. 3. Eucharius. 4. Genadius. And in the sixth century, 1. Cassiodorius. 2. Facundus. 3. Vigilius Tapsensis. 4. Fulgentius. 5. Primasius. 6. Junilius. 7. Isidore of Seville; and 8. Gregory the Great. "But it would be a waste of time to examine their writings, in the expectation of finding anything useful for the interpretation of the Bible. The original languages of Scripture were unknown to them; grammatical interpretation was quently disregarded; and mystical meanings were adopted without control." "Indeed, the west of Europe, from the end of the fifth century, was, partly from the devastation by the Goths, and by other northern tribes, and partly by other causes,_ immersed in barbarism of every description." "Pope Gregory the Great, who laid the foundation of that power which his successors exercised with unlimited sway, employed his authority, not for the promotion but for the suppression of learning." "He became, indeed, an interpreter of Scripture, taking Augustine for his principal guide; and he acquired all the celebrity which might be expected from the darkness of the age, and the situation which he held."

5. "The seventh century produced no Biblical commentator in the Latin Church; nor did Italy produce a Biblical commentator during many ages."

He

6. In the eighth century England produced those distinguished writers, Bede and Alcuin. Germany produced Rabanus Maurus. Bede's commentaries were commentaries on the Latin Vulgate, and were principally derived from the works of Ambrose, Jerome, Augustine, and Gregory the Great. adhered to literal interpretations, especially in the New Testament. He sometimes deviated into mystical meanings. He was a native of Yorkshire. Alcuin was a native of Yorkshire. His works contain various remarks on Scripture. But, like to those of Bede, they were chiefly taken from former writers. 1. Bede, 2. Alcuin, natives of Yorkshire, were engaged in keeping alive in England a knowledge of and a love for the interpretation of Holy Scripture.

a. In the same (the eighth) century, Rabanus Maurus, born at Mayntz, A.D. 776, was a disciple of Alcuin, and successively became Abbot of Fulda and Archbishop of Mayntz. His commentaries were commentaries on the Latin Bible. He is said to have been acquainted with Hebrew. Rufinus had translated the works of Origen into Latin. Therefore, the Latin writers could read the works of Origen. Many

Ra

adopted Origen's fourfold sense of Scripture. banus Maurus was in this way acquainted with the works of Origen, and adopted his mode of Biblical interpretation. The learning and high rank of Rabanus Maurus obtained particular notice for his sentiments on Biblical interpretation.

b. In the ninth century, Walafrid Strabo, a disciple of Rabanus Maurus, a monk in the abbey of Fulda, and afterwards Abbot of Reichenau, compiled a commentary on the Bible, which was subsequently called Glossa Ordinaria, on account of its general adoption. No other commentator of the ninth century is worthy of notice, except Druthmar, a monk of Corbie, who wrote a commentary on St. Matthew.

7. The tenth and eleventh centuries produced no commentator in the west of Europe who is worthy of

notice.

8. In the twelfth century the most distinguished writer was Petrus Lombardus, who, from the work which he composed, acquired the title of "Magister Sententiarum." He followed Jerome and Augustine.

9. In the thirteenth century flourished Thomas Aquinas, another eminent divine, who, from this eminence which he had acquired, was styled Doctor Angelicus. He followed Augustine. He contributed little to Biblical interpretation.

a. In the same century, Hugo de St. Caro adopted Origen's fourfold interpretation of Scripture. He composed a concordance. He divided the Vulgate into chapters, which are now in use. In this thirteenth century are found the names of Albertus Magnus and Bonaventura. The former was Bishop of Ratisbon, and attempted to unite the Aristotelian philosophy with an allegorical interpretation of the Bible. The latter, who acquired the title of Doctor Seraphicus, was a cardinal, and Bishop of Alba. He was both a mystic and a scholastic divine. He adopts four senses, and afterwards adds three senses, thus making Scripture have a sevenfold sense. He calls these three senses (1) the symbolical, (2) synechdochical, (3) the hyperbolical. He remarked in his annotations on the Apocalypse, that the book with the seven seals, in the fifth chapter, was emblematical of the Bible with seven senses.

10. Bishop Marsh then notices the general effects of the scholastic theology on the interpretation of the Bible. This species of theology embraced all the subtilties of Dialectics or Logic. It derived its name, Scholastic Theology, from its having served during the middle ages, A.D. 500 to A.D. 1500, as the groundwork of theological disputation in the public schools of the universities. The Bible was brought into disuse by a system of theology which was defended by Dialectics. The Church of Rome derived advantage from the adoption of Dialectics as a substitute for the Bible, in proportion as doctrines were introduced which had no support in the Bible. Berengarius and his followers denied the doctrine of transubstantiation. They were silenced by arguments from the scholastic theology. Petrus Lombardus, Duns Scotus, and Thomas Aquinas, displayed great mental power in their scholastic theology, and in their disputations.

Their theology, named scholastic, impeded both the use and the understanding of the Bible. Towards the close of the twelfth century an attempt was made to counteract these effects. The parties who made the attempt went into the opposite extreme, and rejected the literal sense of Scripture altogether. From the passage in the Vulgate litera occidit, spiritus vivi cat-the letter killeth, the spirit giveth life-they argued to the interpretation of the Bible. Hence they acquired the name of Mystics. They created by their perversions of Scripture evils equalled only by those evils which the neglect of Scripture had caused. At length Albert and Bonaventura, at the end of the thirteenth century, united the subtilties of the scholastic theology with the fancies of the mystical theology, and produced a compound which was in no respect advantageous to the interpretation of the Bible.

11. During this period of the perversion of the Scriptures by men who were acquainted only with the Latin translation of them, there existed in the south of Spain many learned Jews, who devoted their attention to the study of the Hebrew Bible.

The south of Spain was then occupied by the Moors, who spake a dialect of the Arabic, which was then used in the north of Africa, from the Red Sea to the Atlantic. Arabic was then the language of learning. The south of Spain became the seat of oriental literature in the twelfth century. It will be sufficient to mention the names of (1) Aben Ezra, (2) David Kimchi, and (3) Moses Maimonides, whose writings contributed to the diffusion of Hebrew learning in the rest of Europe.

12. In the fourteenth century Nicolaus Lyranus, a native of Normandy, but supposed to have been of Jewish origin, was, among all the Christian interpreters who either preceded him, or lived at the same time with him, the most distinguished for his knowledge of Hebrew. His principal work was entitled Postilla Perpetuæ seu Brevia Commentaria in Universa Biblia. He retained the fourfold sense of Scripture which was then in common use. The fourteenth century was likewise distinguished by the attempts made both in England and in Germany to make the Bible known to the people at large. In England the Anglo-Saxon version, and in Germany Ottfried's German translation had long ceased to be understood. In the latter half of the fourteenth century Wickliffe undertook to translate the Bible into English; and about the same period translations were made into the German language. These were translations from the Latin Vulgate. Yet they opened the Scriptures to the common people, who had long been kept in darkness. This was the age in which printing was invented on the continent. The anxiety of the people to gain access to the Bible was evinced by the fact that those German translations were among the earliest books which were printed by Faust and Schaeffer.

13. "The fifteenth century prepared the way for the study of the Bible in its original languages. At the beginning of that century Manual Chrysolosus taught

Greek in Italy; and the fall of the Greek Empire, about the middle of that century, brought Theodorus Gaza, Georgius Trapezuntius, Bessorion, Demetrius Chalcodulas, Constantinus Lascaris, and other distinguished Greek scholars, into the west of Europe. Before the close of that century the study of the Greek and Latin classics began to revive in Italy, and the taste which was thereby acquired contributed to dispel the barbarism of the middle ages. In the same century (15) the Hebrew language, which had taken deep root in Spain, began to spread itself into other parts of Europe. To these advantages was added in the same century the important invention of printing by moveable types. In 1488 the whole Hebrew Bible was printed at Soncino in Italy, and other editions soon followed. The learned Jews, who had been invited to superintend those editions, soon propagated a knowledge of Hebrew, not only throughout Italy, but into the adjacent countries of Germany and France." "Though numerous editions, containing either the whole or parts of the Hebrew Bible, were printed in the fifteenth century, no part of the Greek Testament was printed in that age." "But Laurentius Valla, a noble and learned Roman, who wrote about the middle of that (15) century, procured manuscripts of the Greek Testament. In his note on Matt. xxvii. 22, Pilate saith unto them, What shall I do then with Jesus, who is called Christ?' They all say unto him, Let him be crucified.' He says, 'Tres codices Latinos, et totidem græcos habeo, quum hæc compono, et nonnunquam alios codices consulto.' I have three Latin manuscripts (codices) and as many Greek (manuscripts). When I compare these, I also (et) at the same time and place (nonnunquam) consult other manuscripts." Many of these manuscripts were then brought into the west of Europe. He wrote annotations on many passages of the New Testament, which, as might be expected from his taste and judgment, were grammatical. They were afterwards printed by Erasmus, A.D. 1504.

14. The sixteenth century had, at the commencement, that highly gifted and distinguished scholar, Erasmus. He prepared the first edition of the Greek Testament, accompanied with a new Latin translation, and with valuable annotations, in which the grammatical sense was again the chief object of inquiry.

(a.) In the year following (A.D. 1517) Luther commenced the reformation in Germany, and in A.D. 1522 he published his German translation of the Greek Testament. Like to Erasmus, Luther was a decided advocate of grammatical interpretation, which was ably defended by Melancthon. [Calvin was not the originator of the grammatical interpretation in the time of the reformation]. The Greek of the New Testament was interpreted like to the Greek of a classic author, the tropological and analogical senses, which had been ascribed to the Latin Vulgate, disappeared, and the names themselves ceased to occupy a place in the nomenclature of a Biblical interpreter. It became a maxim among Protestants that "The words of Scripture had only one sense, and that they who ascribed to them various senses made the meaning of Scripture altogether uncertain."

The propensity to mystical meanings, to which fanatics of every description are invariably attached, has displayed itself at various times and in various places, even in Protestant countries. But such a manifold interpretation of Scripture was then the exception, and not the rule, as it had been in the middle ages. "The great majority of Protestant commentators, especially they whose commentaries have been employed on the original languages of Scripture, have made it their chief object to discover the grammatical or literal sense.” In the sixteenth century, besides Erasmus, Luther, and Melancthon, who have been already mentioned, we find (1) Camerarius, (2) Osiander, (3) Chemnitz, (4) Calixt, (5) Zwingli, (6) Bucer, (7) Calvin, (8) Beza, (9) Isaac Casaubon, (10) Drusius, (11) Scaliger, and other eminent writers, who were again advocates of a single sense, "to be determined by a grammatical investigation of each word."

15. The seventeenth century is described by Bishop Marsh as producing (1) I. and L. Capellus, (2) Frederic Spanheim, (3) Loius de Dieu Pricæus, (4) Lightfoot, (5) Arminius, (6) Grotius, (7) Episcopius, (8) Le Clerc, and other eminent writers, who were again advocates of a single sense, and of a literal interpretation. But, towards the close of that century, an effort was made by Cocceius, at Leyden, and by some German divines at Berlin and Halle, to restore the manifold interpretation of Scripture, which the reformation had banished. During a period of many years their efforts were attended with success; but good sense and good taste gradually restored the Scriptures to the same mode of interpretation which is applied to classic authors. And, with a few exceptions, which it is unnecessary to mention, the same kind of interpretation has continued to prevail.

"Here, then, I will conclude, without further remarks, the historical view of the modes which have been adopted in the interpretation of Scripture from the earliest ages of Christianity to the present day."

In a note at the end of Bishop Marsh's first course of Lectures (in which note he states "that an account of the commentaries on the Bible, given in a historical view, would require another volume, or, I suppose, another course of Lectures, at least twelve in number,") he proceeds, "Walch has described the commentaries, which have been written in various languages, either on the whole, or on various parts of the Bible, from the time of Luther to the year 1765, and that description fills more than four hundred and fifty pages of large octavo."-Biblica Theologica, Tom. iv. p. 451-854. Not less than one hundred pages would be sufficient for a continuation of the history of Biblical Interpretation to the time when Bishop Marsh delivered his Lectures, A.D. 1842. Bishop Cleaver's catalogue contains many works on the subject of Biblical Interpretation which were published between the time of the reformation and A.D. 1800. The most complete and best arranged catalogue of theological books to A.D. 1800, is that which was published by Dr. Noesselt, professor of divinity at Halle (a city of Prussia). Berlin, the capital of Prussia, has acquired a deserved reputation for the publication of the original manuscripts of the Old and