"He took upon Him our nature in all its poverty. What then was the sacrifice of praise which He had to offer? There was no longer any one covenanted object of sacrifice which could be the pledge to man of his joyous dominion in common union with God, over the rest of nature. Jesus honoured His Father by the perpetual consecration of every act to His Father's glory. A body hast Thou prepared me. I come to do Thy will O God.'" p. 13.

Here a definite question is asked; might we not have expected an equally definite answer? Instead of this, we have a string of unconnected sentences, amid the richness and variety of which, the reader gets hopelessly puzzled, as neither, taken by itself, is the expected answer. We deeply regret this, as it will deter many from the study of a work which is really admirable, and deserving of being studied. It is only fair to Mr. Benson, to add, that this want of clearness of which we complain, is almost entirely confined to the dogmatic parts of the work. When he speaks to the hearts of his hearers, he becomes touching and eloquent-for instance :

"O look upon His breast where the heart is heaving with the anguish of sin, and think as you watch each spasm, it is for that sin of mine done yesterday, or done some years ago. I never knew its foulness until now; and now I see it in the measure of the suffering heart of God. My sins come back upon me as I gaze upon the Cross; for there, oh! there, is every one. Intolerable burden of my sins which makes the Lamb of God to quail upon the Cross as one forsaken of the Father! O my good God! where can I go to quit this sight? Wherever I turn, the vision of my sin springs up before me. I have seen it on the Cross, and never more can lose its haunting, terrible ghastliness. From the heart upon the Cross, it echoes to my own heart, though I never felt its dark accusation before. If I turn anywhere else, the spectre meets me, and I can only turn to despair. I must fling myself in humble confession at the foot of the Cross, for there is the love of God manifested in majesty equal to my misery. There is the Lamb of God, and He reveals to me my sin, that He may take it away. If I die unto the world with Jesus, by the power of the love of the Cross, I shall yet live with Him unto God by the power of the Eternal Spirit. It is enough then now! Let the power of Satan cease! God hath made Him to be sin for us, who knew no sin; that we might be made the righteousness of God in Him.' p. 149.

The subject which the two distinguished authors have chosen, is one of the deepest in the whole range of Christian Theology. It does not yield in this respect even to the great mystery of the Holy Trinity; while, at the same time, as

touching human consciouness in its inmost depth, it stirs the heart with a more lively interest. What is the nature of that mysterious act whereby Christ redeemed the world? What are its relations to Almighty God, to the invisible world, to ourselves, and the world of sense? Such is the high theme which is the subject of these sermons, and it is remarkable that this point should now be the one which is more especially the subject of study among us at the present moment; nor is it altogether without interest to observe the process by which it has come up. It has arisen in the regular course of the development of the Catholic movement. Up to this time our theologians have been satisfied with the traditional view in the English Church, largely tinged as it is with a Calvinistic element; and for this reason, that hitherto their attention has been occupied with themes of more pressing interest. In its first origin, the movement had to take up a decided stand against the predominant Calvinism. It had to bring out into prominence the ideas of a visible Church, justification, and good works. And the ground upon which these ideas rested, was the Catholic doctrine of Baptism. Hence, during all the time of Dr. Newman, and for several years after, Baptismal Regeneration was the key-note of the Oxford School. It is curious to observe in all the writings of the period, how this doctrine continually recurs, and other truths which we now think all-important, are kept in the background. But the idea of the Church was incomplete without the realization of the doctrine of the Holy Eucharist; and hence the transition from the one Sacrament to the other, formed as it were, the second step in the development of the movement. It was natural that the first aspect in which the Holy Eucharist should present itself, should be that of a Sacrament; and, accordingly, at this stage the Real Presence of our Lord in Holy Communion, was the great thought which was worked out. This led, as a matter of necessity, to the study of the doctrine of the Incarnation. A third epoch in the progress of the movement, was signalised by the publication of the Brechin charge, in which the Sacrificial aspect of the Holy Eucharist was first brought prominently before the Church. It follows, as a matter of necessity, from the due appreciation of this, that the great work of Christ, in the redemption of the world, should now attract notice. The study of this momentous subject is, in fact, the pressing necessity of the present time. And with the elaboration of this doctrine we look forward to a deeper grounding of many Catholic truths and practices, at present imperfectly appreciated.

One of the chief things required for a right study of this momentous doctrine, is that it should be withdrawn from the sphere of Logic, into which it has been dragged by the excesses of Calvinism, and thrown back into that of mystery. By the sphere of Logic, we mean the sphere of human conceptions; and to bring the mystery of Christ's death within this sphere, is to form in the mind a conception, scheme, or plan, which professes to give an exhaustive account of God's working and purposes in respect of Christ's death. Nothing, however, can be more illusive than this. "Schemes of salvation," from the very nature of the case, must be necessarily false. They set out with the absurd supposition that our finite minds can comprehend the immensity of God and His universal providence. But we know that this is not so. The finite cannot comprehend the infinite. We only see through a glass darkly. God's great purposes are hidden from us. Only a small part of His plan falls within the sphere of our understanding; the rest is hidden from our gaze. The study of the doctrine of the Incarnation has wonderfully opened our minds to this truth. Clear and precise as the doctrine is in so far as it is a matter of fact; yet in its relations to God's universal purposes, it is shrouded in mystery. We are permitted to draw near and worship the God-man; but to comprehend His outgoing or His return is not for us. In like manner, we must look at and study the great doctrine of Redemption. Let it stand clear and definite before our minds as a matter of fuct; but for the rest let us humbly acknowledge that it is an unpenetrable mystery. "Christ by His death hath destroyed death, and by His rising again hath restored to us everlasting life." So far we know for certain, but the how or the why we cannot tell. That is a secret which remains with God, and which we can only know in its fulness hereafter. True, we have, as it were, glimpses of this secret even here, and we are to make the most of them. When, for instance, the death of Christ is spoken of as a Sacrifice, or as a Redemption, or as a Reconciliation, or as a Destruction of death, or of the Devil, or of the bondage of sin, all these aspects so far as intelligible to us, and constitute in their degree, a rational apprehension of the mystery of Christ's death. But if we fancy that one or all of them exhaust the mystery; that they make it a thing perfectly intelligible to us, we fall into grevious error. On the contrary, their purpose is but as grooves or lines to direct the adoring love of mankind. They do not exhaust, but lead us up to that which is infinite, and beyond all possible present knowledge.

The error from which the Church is at present suffering, is a forgetfulness of this truth-an error, which in its origin may be traced as far back as the Schoolmen. No one will accuse us of want of respect for those great and holy men who did so much for Christian Theology; but we cannot help thinking, although we say it with diffidence, that in considering the redeeming work of Christ almost exclusively as a satisfaction, they fell into this error. We do not for a moment depreciate, or wish to keep in the background, the idea of satisfaction as one aspect of the mysterious work of Christ. But the scholastic theology almost seems to imply that it is the only one, and that it is exhaustive of the mystery. No one will deny the altered tone which Western theology assumed subsequently to the Schoolmen-a tone which strikes us as very different from that of the early Fathers. In the latter, the cross of Christ is surrounded with mystery. It is approached on many sides. As in the Collects, no one idea is allowed to dominate over and exclude another, but all equally lead up to the mysterious and unknown. In the later theology of the west, on the other hand, the idea of satisfaction acquires more and more prominence; it displaces other ideas; it divests the Cross more and more of mystery, making it a thing intelligible to us, till at length it breaks off in Calvinism, into definite heresy. The Calvinistic doctrine is a one-sided development of the theology of the Schools-a development which casts aside all the other doctrines which balance it. And, in this point of view, we may take warning from Calvinism of the danger of too great a tendency to logical apprehension of what is essentially mysterious.

The evil of what we may call the logical view of Redemption is this—that when the mystery of Christ's death is confined under conceptions which profess to exhaust it, then inferences from these conceptions are legitimate and unavoidable. Whereas, so long as the conceptions are not taken as exhaustive, but simply as lines leading up to the Infinite, all inferences beyond the sphere of the conception are excluded. How dangerous these inferences are, and what havoc they make of other doctrines of Revelation, may be seen from Calvinism. The idea that Christ's death was a perfect satisfaction, being taken as exhaustive of the mystery of the Cross, we have such consequences as these elicited; that nothing can be added to Christ's satisfaction; that to attempt to add is to detract from His honour; that good works and the devotion of Christian worship are of the nature of such additions; that they are therefore filthy rags and empty mummery,

to be cast away and avoided; that we ought to trust all to Christ.

Yet it is very difficult to persuade men of the truth of the view we are advocating. It is only after a painful experience that men attain to the conviction that in respect of some things, we must rest content with a partial knowledge. The unexperienced understanding craves after perfect knowledge; and it will have it, even though it feeds on error, rather than remain content in ignorance. It may therefore, not be inappropriate to offer a few observations tending to show why Christ's death must necessarily be a mystery.

A mystery, as the term is applied to a religious dogma, is a truth only partially known. It is a truth which, as essentially belonging to the invisible world, is beyond our ken; but which, as breaking through the vail, and exhibiting to us, as it were, one side, is thus partially known. Now the act of Christ's death is in such sense a mystery; for it is essentially a supernatural act. Though done in this world, it is professedly done not in view of this world, but of a higher world. It essentially belongs to that higher world. Christ's death has, in fact, four bearings. It is related to us and to the world of sense, and in these two relations it is intelligible to

us.

But it is also related to Almighty God, and to the Invisible world, and so far must be an impenetrable mystery. At the best, therefore, we can, while we continue in this world, only know, as it were, one side of the Cross. We can know it in reference to ourselves and the world of sense; but in its bearing on Almighty God and the invisible world, we must be content with ignorance, or rather, with such intimations of results as God has been pleased to reveal to us.

Thus, to consider the Cross in reference to Almighty God. It is revealed to us that by the Cross we attain reconciliation, that we are again brought nigh, and that He is propitiated. But we do not know how; we do not know why the death of Christ should have this effect. And for this reason-that we are ignorant of God and His being. Did we know God and His mode of subsistence, just as we know all about our fellowmen, then we should be able also to know why the Cross is a propitiation, and why as a sacrifice, it has these effects. But not knowing this, it must remain a mystery to us-a thing to be believed, not understood. True, the idea of satisfaction comes in here, and so far explains; but while we make the most of it, we must carefully guard against supposing it a perfect explanation. The ideas of justice and satisfaction are after all but human ideas; and although according to the