It would be most unlikely that he should publish to the world and to the Jews themselves, that this observance was a mere temporary accommodation to Jewish prejudices. It would defeat the very purpose of conciliating them. The clear, natural, and coherent import of Paul's declaration, then, seems to be this: Ye "show forth the Lord's death " SO long as you live, or, speaking to the whole church as a permanent body, "till the end of the world." It has been said, indeed, that Paul supposed the end of the world to be very near, and the inference would seem to be implied, that, as he was mistaken on that point, he could not be trusted on any. But if the Apostle's injunction, as from the Lord, is not to be taken, because his reasoning or his private opinion is alleged to be wrong, then Christianity cannot be retained, in any sense, as a special communication from heaven; and it is quite unnecessary to agitate the question, whether any Apostolic institution or instruction is binding or not. If Paul says, Ye show forth in this rite the Lord's death till the end of time, it can be of very little importance to the question of its perpetuity, whether, in his private opinion, he had a correct idea of the ending of time or not.

Neither, as a further direct argument for the institution, is the utility of impressive scenes and occasions to be forgotten. "That man," it has been well said, "is little to be envied, whose patriotism would not gain force upon the plain of Marathon? Whose love of the sublime and beautiful would not be quickened amidst the ruins of Athens or of Rome? To whom would not the Holy Bible be made more interesting and dear, as the bequest of a dying parent? Who could visit, or ever will, in the flight of future ages, visit the tomb of Washington, without being touched with a deeper reverence for the great and godlike man? And if,- to compare great things with small, and without irreverence to compare them, if the tomb of the world's Redeemer and Saviour were among us and near us, who would not resort there in many a solemn hour, to meditate and pray, to bear up his soul amidst the trials and sorrows of life, to fix it upon that heaven whither Jesus has gone? Behold, then, the only substitute which the world, in all its regions, can have, for the associations of such an affecting and impressive spot!

Behold the affecting rite, in which Jesus, for ever

says, "This is my body broken for you; this is my blood shed for you; this do in remembrance of me," the rite, in which all who observe it," do show forth the Lord's death till he come "!

The views which we have endeavoured to present of this ordinance, let us farther say, are of a simple character and of a purely moral bearing, and they therefore urge its claim by making it intelligible and spiritual. There are feelings of the human mind, it is true, to which mystery appeals, but this is a claim which we do not choose to urge. The idea of an atonement, not in the scriptural sense which we profess to hold, but in the sense which many theologians have affixed to the term; the idea of an atonement, effected by the instrumentality of mere pain physical or mental, effected by some mysterious influence of Christ's suffering on God's government, of which it is presuming much to say that we know any thing; the belief that the destinies of unnumbered millions were suspended on that hour and that agony, rather than upon the whole work of Christ of which that was the consummation; the conception of an incarnate Deity as imparting to the sufferings of Jesus a stupendous mystery and dignity; these are views which, be it our happiness or our misfortune, we cannot present as urging the eucharistic commemoration of our Saviour. We are anxious to speak with no vaunting confidence of the superior rectitude or power of the views which we do adopt. God only knows who among us is right, or who is wrong, in his creed. But this we trust we may say in all humility, we have felt something of the power with which Jesus has spoken to the world; we have felt that he spake as never man spake; above all, we have felt that he died as never man died, died to save us from worse death, — died to set forth a pledge of God's everlasting love, and an example of undying, immortal, all-conquering virtue; that he died, in one word, to procure for us, the dearest, the most precious, the most exalted good that can ever bless any creature. This great and wonderful Being, however much more others may esteem and love him; we cannot say how much or whether any more; we cannot contend with them in that unseemly strife, but this great and wonderful Being, in our humble measure, we venerate, we love. We may not ascribe to him precisely what some of our brethren do, but we feel

that if our hearts were to break with gratitude, they could not express all that we owe to him. For it is to him preëminently, under God, that we refer every thing most dear in existence, and most glorious in the hope of heaven, - pardon and purification, progress in virtue and communion with God, and the consciousness of a commencing immortality. Therefore would we ever, so long as our lives last, celebrate, with prec ous and joyful memorials, this chief Friend of our lives, this unerring Guide to heaven, the Son of God, the Saviour of the world; and surely we cannot fear that we shall offend God in so doing. Whatever any one may feel, with regard to the Scriptural obligation to this observance, he cannot suppose that God will be dipleased with the sincere and humble offering of his gratitude for redeeming mercy. And who can doubt, if a whole congregation felt these sentiments which we have expressed, if all hearts had been engaged in deep meditation, and had been moved and melted with the holy themes of religion, and had felt the strong desire awakened within them, to lead holy lives, who can doubt that a solemn acknowledgment of Jesus as their Guide and Saviour, on the part of the whole people, that a solemn avowal of their sense of the importance of religion, and of a purpose and pledge to be faithful and devoted Christians, would strengthen their common purposes, confirm their joint resolutions, give them all firmness, consistency, and peace of mind, and be more likely to send them forth from the house of prayer clothed with the whole armour of God, "to fight the good fight" with evil passions and temptations, and to overcome the hostile powers of an ensnaring and corrupting world? When the fathers of our country, in its great and perilous hour, pledged their lives to its service, was not that a suitable and useful action? Did it not tend to produce mutual confidence, to strengthen each one and all of them, to bind together that patriotic band in a more absolute devotion to the great cause they had undertaken to sustain? And is not the whole life of every people a great and perilous conflict with sin? And if the world is full of pledges to fidelity in every other cause, political, commercial, or social; shall not the great cause of religion, of all individual, and social, and eternal well-being have any pledge of fidelity to it?

ART. I. Institutes of Ecclesiastical History, Ancient and Modern, in Four Books, much Corrected, Enlarged and Improved, from the Primary Authorities; by JOHN LAWRENCE VON MOSHEIM, D. D., Chancellor of the University of Gottingen. A New and Literal Translation, from the Original Latin, with copious Additional Notes, Original and Selected; by JAMES MURDOCK, D. D. New Haven. A. H. Maltby. 1832. 3 vols. 8vo.

WE were prepared to think well of this work from the specimen we have before had of the translator's skill and candor. Nor have our expectations been disappointed; for the few slight errors, which such an examination of Dr. Murdock's present performance as we have given, has enabled us to detect, are not of a nature to impeach his character for impartiality and diligence. On the whole, the work does him great honor, and is creditable to the theological literature of our country.

The History of Mosheim, or Von Mosheim, for so we find we must now call him, has been long and extensively read. Its accuracy, in general, has stood the test of examination; and the work, though not of a remarkably philosophical character, and greatly injured, as we think, by the old and absurd division by centuries, has been deservedly in high esteem, and, with all its defects, has really great merit. The principal objections to it, in the form in which it has been known to the English reader, according to Dr. Murdock, are a faulty translation, and want of references to more copi

VOL. XIII. -N. S. VOL. VIII. NO. III.

35

ous sources of information. The translation does not profess to be a literal one. Dr. Maclaine very frankly tells us, that it was his aim to adhere rather to the spirit of his author, than to his mode of expression, which wants, he says, the ease and flow so agreeable to the ear; and that he took the liberty occasionally to add a few sentences, for the sake of illustration, point, or finish. The result, says Dr. Murdock, has been, that he has not only "essentially changed the style," but "greatly colored, and altered in many places, the sentiments of the historian." "In short," says he "he has paraphrased rather than translated a large part of the work. The book is thus rendered heavy and tedious to the reader, by its superfluity of words; and likewise obscure and indefinite, and sometimes self-contradictory, by the looseness of its unguarded statements." One consequence has been, that Mosheim has been repeatedly and severely censured for what is, in fact, a fault of his translator.

The above mentioned and other deficiencies and faults, Dr. Murdock has attempted to remedy, first, by giving an entirely new version, "close, literal, containing neither more nor less than the original, and presenting the exact thoughts of the author in the same direct, artless, and lucid manner, with as much similarity in the phraseology and modes of expression, as the idiom of the two languages would admit."

His greatest task, however, as he assures us, has not been that of translation. He has throughout, he says, compared the statements of Dr. Mosheim with the various original and secondary sources of information; he has examined his facts and weighed his reasonings, and where he has detected, or supposed he has detected, errors or deficiencies, he has offered, in the form of notes, "such statements or criticisms as he deemed necessary." When Dr. Mosheim differs from other historians of note, the difference is pointed out, the opinions of other writers are given, and the reader is left to draw his own inferences. Much also has been added in the department of biography. All the ancient Fathers, and eminent individuals named by Mosheim down to the period of the Reformation, have each a separate note appropriated to them,"containing brief notices of the most material things known concerning them." Much critical attention has also been bestowed on doctrinal controversies, on heresies and sects, on "the origin and history of the Reformation," and "the his