phere grows darker, and there seems to be no consciousness of a bright and cheering outlook. We close the book with sadness, and feel as if we had been present at a tragedy—the tragedy of a noble, gifted, and fascinating spirit struggling bravely and resolutely, and though overweighted and overborne, still struggling to the end.

CONTEMPORARY LITERATURE.

The Supernatural in Nature: A Vindication by Free Use of Science. By JOSEPH W. REYNOLDS, M.A., &c. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, & Co., 1883.

The Mystery of Miracles: A Scientific and Philosophical Investigation. By JOSEPH W. REYNOLDS, M.A., &c. London: Kegan Paul, Trench, & Co., 1881.

We are glad to see that the first of these two books has reached a third edition. It deserves a still greater success. Of all the books which have recently appeared, it is, in its own line, much the most readable, and in every respect the most satisfactory we have met with. The learning and ability it displays are exceptional. The author seems to have read and mastered almost every thing of value relating to his subject, to have thought out his principles and ideas for himself, and to be quite at home both in the latest discoveries or hypotheses of science, and in the highest flights of speculative philosophy. The spirit in which he has written is deserving of the warmest commendation. He is neither fearful, declamatory, nor dogmatic; but full of a reverent confidence in the truth he handles, and of respect for those from whom he differs in opinion. If he hits hard, as he frequently does, he hits fairly, and writes with the frankness of a man who believes that his cause is so good that all it requires for its furtherance is that it should be known and understood. His aim is to show that religion has nothing to fear from science, that science need not be opposed to it, and that when rightly understood it is not. This he does by proving that the supernatural and the natural are in reality inseparable, that the one is implicated in the other, and that behind both there is the omniactive, wise, and omnipotent will of God. These ideas, Mr. Reynolds follows out at great length, making a free use of science with special reference to the earlier chapters of Genesis. To give anything like a fair idea of the contents of his volume is, in the space at our disposal, impossible; but when we say that he deals with such subjects as the Origin of Things, Evolution, Molecular Energy, Creation, the Sun, Light, the Origin of Language and Civilization, the Origin of Species, Human Progress, Parasites and their place in the Economy of the Physical World, the Connection between the Visible and the Invisible, Revelation, and the Kingdom of God, and that all these and many kindred subjects are treated from a scientific as well as from the theological standpoint, and in the moşt liberal and scientific spirit, we have said enough to indicate the rich and

varied character of its contents. A more profound, reasonable, or solid defence of Christian theism has not appeared. The only work we know with which to compare it is Ulrici's great work Gott und die Natur, and of the two we are disposed to prefer Mr. Reynolds'; for while not less profound and scientific, it has the great advantage of being written in our own tongue and in a much more popular and attractive style. The Mystery of Miracles is distinguished by the same rare and attractive merits as the Supernatural in Nature. Its scope and aim is of course more limited, yet it is none the less valuable as a contribution to the scientific theological literature of the day. Either volume goes far to redeem theology from the charge of being behind the age. They are admirably fitted to solve or illumine the doubts and perplexities of the many on whom the mystery of all this unintelligible world is now resting with heavy and weary weight. The City of God: a Series of Discussions in Religion. By A. M. FAIRBAIRN, D.D. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1883.

After reading Dr. Fairbairn's Studies in the Philosophy of Religion and History, his City of God is in many respects disappointing. There are signs of the same extensive reading, but some of its discussions are not at all up to the level of the Studies. Their thought is loose and inexact, and their style too rhetorical. The first is on 'Faith and Modern Thought,' and, to say the least, is tedious. The occasion on which it was delivered, offered the author a capital opportunity for instilling into his hearers a more charitable and tolerant spirit, and for leading them to look upon the new world of thought which is perpetually opening upon them with a less prejudiced mind; but for this or any similar purpose he does not seem to have used it. He begins by shaking his head in pious repu di ation of modern thought, and continues to shake it in the same spirit to the end. Notwithstanding his somewhat ostentatious definitions, so far as we can gather from the discussion itself, the 'Faith' championed by Dr. Fairbairn is his own opinions, and the 'Modern Thought' he denounces opinions which are not his own. 'The spirit of to-day,' we are told, ‘is a spirit of restless inquiry, of ceaseless search, and of a search that is not always the parent of faith.' It would be a pity if it were. It is to be hoped that it is quite as often the parent of knowledge. child of faith, Dr. Fairbairn does not seem to be aware. According to Dr. Fairbairn, the men who do our thinking, who lead the march of living mind, are essentially seekers, and they pursue their quest after truth often not very certain what it is or where it may be-only certain that it is somewhere, and can be found.' Precisely so if they were at all certain what it is or where it is, their character as 'seekers' would be gone. The above sentences are from the beginning of the 'discussion.' The reader will be at no loss to divine the character of the rest. In the pulpit-and with one exception the 'discussions' are sermons-the rule for controversialists, we

That it is the

should say, is to put on an opponent's words the best and most charitable interpretation possible. Dr. Fairbairn does not always observe this rule. He is much too fond of making points. The way in which he makes them we cannot always admire. Whether Dr. Tyndall has ever ventured the assertion that matter' and 'the promise and potency of life' are the same, we are not aware; but something more than the quotation of the well-known and well-worn sentence from the Belfast Address is requisite to prove that he regards them as identical. A man may say he discerns wheat in chaff, or his face in a glass, but no one is fool enough to suppose that he identifies the wheat with the chaff, or his face with the glass. A similar lack of precision and philosophic insight is manifest in the treatment of the opinions of Darwin and Herbert Spencer. We are disciples of neither, but our duty as critics compels us to state that the words of both are susceptible of very different interpretations from what they here receive. As for those of the latter, Dr. Fairbairn's acquaintance with them is of the most superficial, while his attempted refutation is weak. Some of Dr. Fairbairn's assertions almost take away one's breath; others are so mixed up and confused that one scarcely knows what to make of them. As a sample of his mode of reasoning we may take the following 'By what right do our sage ethnologers assume that in the living savages we find the best type of primitive man? The savage is not primitive; he is, as to time, as remote from the first men as we are, and more remote as to nature. Grant the doctrine of development true, and what then? The nature that does not develop is no real or right type of the primitive germ. A man of twenty years may have only the mind of an infant, but we do not name him an infant, we name him an idiot. The infant of sixty or a hundred years would be the worst of all types of a healthy human child, and the man who built a fine theory on the supposition that he was one could hardly be recognised as wise. And the living savage is but an eternal infant, made by the very fact of his infancy more distant from the primitive man than we are by the fact of our manhood. The faculties that slumber in him reveal less of the aboriginal state than the faculties that live active and creative lives in us,' (pp. 81-2.) And all this, with much more of the same kind was 'preached before the London Missionary Society!' Dr. Fairbairn is at his best when away from controversy. Scattered through the latter part of the book are some really fine passages; but its tone and spirit are too dogmatic and rhetorical to do much good to the cause which Dr. Fairbairn professes to advance.

The Treasury of David: an Original Exposition of the Book of Psalms; a Collection of Illustrative Extracts from the whole. range of Literature, &c. By C. H. SPURGEON. Vol. VI., Psalm cxix. to cxxiv. London: Passmore & Alabaster, 1882. We welcome this new volume of Mr. Spurgeon's Treasury of David as a monument of rare devotion, and as a sign that the author, notwithstanding

his numerous avocations and increasing years, is still able to carry on what is at least a painstaking and laborious undertaking. As a critical commentary on the Book of Psalms it is simply worthless, and none, we suppose will more readily admit this than Mr. Spurgeon himself. In fact we are not sure that he will not regard the statement as a compliment. With critics, at all events with the critical commentators of more recent schools, he has no patience. In his opinion they are blind leaders of the blind. The attitude he adopts towards them is characterized by a considerable amount of dogmatism which many will be disposed to condemn as closely akin to, if not identical with, spiritual pride. By those who have taken the trouble to look into the matter it is now generally, and, in fact, unanimously admitted, that the non-Davidic authorship of Psalm cxix. has been demonstrated, yet here is Mr. Spurgeon's note "The fashion among modern writers is, as far as possible, to take every Psalm from David. As the critics of this school are usually unsound in doctrine and unspiritual in tone, we gravitate in the opposite direction, from a natural suspicion of everything which comes from so unsatisfactory a quarter. We believe that David wrote this Psalm. It is Davidic in tone and expression, and it tallies with David's experience in many interesting points. In our youth our teacher called it "David's pocket-book,” and we incline to the opinion then expressed that here we have the royal diary written at various times through a long life. No, we cannot give up this Psalm to the enemy 'and so on. It is to be regretted, both for his own sake and for the sake of his readers, that Mr. Spurgeon has permitted himself to indulge in rhodomontade like this. Many of the enemy' we suspect are quite as earnest and as devoted in their love for the truth as he is, and much more trustworthy as authorities respecting the authorship of the Psalms than our teacher.' Still, the volume before us has a value of its own. Its ability in its own line is undeniable. Except when touching upon critical points Mr. Spurgeon's remarks are always sensible, and frequently racy. His strong sympathy with the inspired writers, and his clear spiritual insight, give his explanatory notes a freshness and power which, in other commentaries, are often wanting. The illustrative extracts are well chosen, and are gathered from a pretty wide field, though there is much to be gleaned both in the same and in still wider fields.

Old Testament Revision: A Handbook for English Readers. By A. ROBERTS, D.D., &c. London: Hodder & Stoughton, 1883.

Some time ago we had to direct attention to, and to speak in terms of commendation of, Dr. Roberts' useful little Companion to the Revised Version of the English New Testament. We have now to speak in the same terms of his handbook on Old Testament Revision. In this handy little volume Dr. Roberts has gathered together, and presented in an untechnical form, a large amount of interesting and curious information respecting the Old