MORAL RESPONSIBILITY.

SIR,-May I be permitted to add a few observations to what was said in my last letter upon the above subject?

The way in which free-will is secured in the midst of a fated or predestined state is this: On our predestined course we are always accompanied by a greater degree of power to act obediently than we choose to employ. This grace travelling with us, and ever present as air is to the physical body, lies, all available and impressible as the finest clay, between us and the rocky cradle of destiny. Now, for the use we make of the former we are responsible, but not for what we do as the centre of a succession of impulses which take their origin from the surface of the latter. We are responsible for what takes place within the vessel, but not for the agitation which its rapid course occasions-not for what it does in blind obedience to the gale which sent Napoleon over the face of society to disturb, deface, and destroy, as it did Johnson to study, encourage, and confirm. (See British Magazine on the Character of Johnson.)

Everybody must be sensible of the truth of this remark; i.e., that we never avail ourselves of the whole of the power which is mercifully, yet (if I may be allowed the expression) sagaciously, placed at our command. Now for despising this- for doing infinitely less than we might easily do, we shall be punished, but not for running a predestined course of madness or extravagance.

It often happens, I think we may suppose, that a common seaman who sins in a variety of ways, and who finally, never formally, repents of his iniquities, dies, nevertheless, with less to answer for than many a less inconsistent Christian whose life has all along been free from visible sin. This is, of course, because the latter, in proportion to the command of means assigned to him, does less in obedience to God's commands, than the former. But if such a thing can happen, what is the inference? Is it not that the sailor's coarse and sensual career is, to a certain extent, the result of design, and therefore, to the same extent, a thing unconnected with his own account? And yet the sailor remains to a certain extent a responsible being-he has his quantity of grace to answer for as well as the man of sensibility and information; only the latter has a much greater quantity-so much, perhaps, that because he does not choose to become what is absurdly called an ascetic, or haply because he will not submit to martyrdom, he dies a more sinful being than the former.

Another way of expressing the same thing is as follows:-There is a boundary to our responsibility. I, as a Christian, am not bound, in order to make my election sure, to lead a life pure as that of our Saviour's, because God has said that I cannot. But once grant that there is such a boundary, and you grant that for certain of my misdeeds I am not responsible. Now what I venture to assert is this, that these misdeeds are not my deeds, (I speak as a churchman,) but the deeds of God, who, in order to perform them, uses me as a mere instrument; because he, through Christ, has taken these deeds to his

own account, or, which is the same thing, has set them down entirely to that of the devil. The Christian is, in other words, at once a fated and responsible being. I have the honour to be, Sir, your obedient servant,

VELES.

ON JUSTIN MARTYR'S DOCTRINE OF THE EUCHARIST.

SIR,-In a passage of the First Apology, Justin Martyr writes thus :"We do not receive the eucharist as common bread and common drink but in the same manner (ov Tρóτov) as Jesus Christ our Saviour, being made flesh through the word of God, had both flesh and blood for our salvation; so we are also taught that the food over which thanksgiving has been pronounced by the prayer of the word which came from him-by which food, undergoing the necessary change, our flesh and blood are nourished- we are taught, I say, that this food is the flesh and blood of the incarnate Jesus." Bishop Kaye, at page 87 of his work on Justin Martyr, says, "As it appears to me, Justin does not here intend to compare the manner in which Jesus Christ, being made flesh by the word of God, had flesh and blood for our sake, with that in which the bread and wine, over which the thanksgiving appointed by Christ has been pronounced, become the flesh and blood of Christ; but only to say that, as Christians were taught that Christ had flesh and blood, so were they also taught that the bread and wine in the eucharist are the body and blood of Christ; ov тρóτоv is merely equivalent to as."

Dr. Baur, in the Tübinger Zeitschifrt für Theologie (vol. for 1839, part 2, pp. 95, 96), takes a different view of the passage. The following, according to Dr. Baur, is Justin's doctrine of the eucharist :At every solemnization of the eucharist, in which bread and wine, through the prayer which is spoken over them, are consecrated as the body and blood of Christ, there is a repetition of the act of incarnation. And because nothing can become flesh and blood which does not pass, as nourishment, into the substance of our body, bread and wine are therefore fixed upon to become the flesh and blood of the incarnate Jesus; they become so, however, not by any transubstantiation, but simply because the Word unites itself with them. On the above-cited passage of the First Apology, Dr. B. writes thus: "The word of prayer, which is spoken at the celebration of the eucharist, is paralleled, or rather identified with the λóyoç Oɛou, each being a living Word. In one case, as in the other, the Word is the mediating agent, without which there would be no flesh and blood of Christ. But as Christ's 'being made flesh through the word of God' is properly the incarnation of the Word itself, so also in the eucharist the word is made flesh in the pronouncing of the prayer over the bread and wine. Irenæus expresses this view distinctly; Bread from the earth, when God is invoked upon it, is no more common bread, but an eucharist, consisting of two elements, an earthly and a heavenly. The cup and the bread receive upon them the word of God, and the eucharist becomes the body of Christ.' And again: Bread and wine, receiving

the word of God, become an eucharist, which is the body and blood of Christ.' Among the succeeding fathers of the church, Gregory of Nyssa has developed this view most fully. He sets out from the assumption that bread and wine are in themselves the substance of the human body, inasmuch ast he body is supported by them. "The body of Christ, then," he proceeds," was in a certain sense identical with the bread which nourished it. And as, at the incarnation, the Word consecrated a body which in itself was bread, and made it to be his own body, so also, in the eucharist, the bread is consecrated by the word, and there is again an incarnation." It appears, then, that, according to the doctrine of Justin Martyr, Irenæus, and Gregory, that which converts the bread and wine into the body of Christ, is not any change of substance, but merely the peculiar connexion which is established, through the prayer of consecration, between the word and the bread and wine; this connexion they held to be not less real than that which was established, at the incarnation, between the Word and Christ's natural body. This doctrine is remarkable as having been the earliest anti-symbolical view of the eucharist.

M. J. M.

CHURCH REGISTERS.

SIR, Will you permit me to draw the attention of my clerical brethren to an error which, if trivial in itself, seems yet, on account of its frequent occurrence, deserving of notice. I rarely open a Register of Baptisms, Marriages, or Burials, without finding one or more entries subscribed thus, "A.B., officiating minister." The regular minister's absence has been supplied by a friend, and the stranger has described himself as officiating minister, thereby in a great degree frustrating the intention of the act of parliament which, in 1813, prescribed the form of registry. The last column in the Baptismal and Burial Registers is headed thus, "By whom the ceremony was performed;" and I imagine no doubt can be entertained that the design in providing that column was, that if there was discovered any irregularity either in performing the ceremony or making the entry; or if for any other reason an investigation should be requisite, the clergyman who officiated might be known and appealed to. But it is evident that the name alone is not a sufficient clue, unless the clergyman officiating is the parochial minister. In fact, this insufficiency is universally admitted by the invariable addition of some description; and what I wish noticed is, that that description is in many cases a mere nullity.

It is obvious that the words "officiating minister" tell us nothing which we should not have known from the insertion of the name in the proper column. This is wrong: any clergyman who is required by circumstances to subscribe the register of a parish not his own ought to add to his name, rector, vicar, or curate (as the case may be) of; or if he has no official connexion with any parish, he may state his college and university; or, if he pleases, his place of residence. I am, Sir, yours, &c., J. H. C. F

VOL. XXII.-July, 1842.

NOTICES AND REVIEWS.

The Bishoprick of Souls. By the Rev. R. W. Evans, Vicar of Tarvin, and Fellow of Trinity College, Cambridge. 12mo. pp. 316. Rivingtons. 1842. THE title of this work hardly gives us a sufficiently definite guide to what we may expect in its pages. It is a series of chapters (seventeen in number), each offering some weighty counsel to the parochial clergyman, either by direct rules for his guidance in the oversight of Christ's flock, or by setting before him a lively sketch of what may be done by him. Such a work from the author of the Rectory of Valehead must have its attractions, and happily must have its influence also. Mr. Evans states in his preface, that, having been frequently called upon, as chaplain to Dr. Butler, the late Bishop of Lichfield, to address the candidates at ordinations, he found the benefit of drawing upon his own experience for the subject matter of his discourses on those occasions, and that he afterwards continued to register the results of that experience, and to record his own impressions. Mr. Evans then adds:

"The profit is by no means little which is derived from perusing the reflections of moments in which we calmly surveyed, in its essence, a subject which is now encumbered with perplexing accidents; from recurring to the better and second thoughts which succeeded to the agitation of a ruffled spirit; from reviewing resolutions which were made by conscience before the obstructing temptations had interposed; from returning to the meditations which were made, out of sight of men, in the sight of God; from describing to ourselves our own plans, and marking out our own course; from bringing ourselves to the bar of our best frame of mind and most holy purposes; from noting beginnings which we have to carry on, and ends of which we have come short. My oversight of a flock which numbers three thousand, and is scattered over sixteen square miles, supplies a plentiful store of such experience."

These excellent remarks are quoted here partly from their intrinsic truth, but chiefly because they serve as a very instructive commentary on the book itself, explaining in some places the tone which appears sometimes more appropriate to addresses from the pulpit than to an essay or description, and in others explaining the high standard of attainment and zeal which is set before us as requisite. The standard which Mr. Evans places before his own mind in moments such as he speaks of, must be high indeed, and that of which he falls short must not appal more ordinary minds, if they see that it is beyond their reach.

The series of the chapters embraces the following subjects :-The Clergyman's Mission, The Round of Visitation, The Visitation of the Sick; and then come a number of chapters, the titles of which remind one of that most delightful of books, George Herbert's Country Parson, being named The Clergyman in Church, The Clergyman's Sermon, &c.

It is needless to say that all appeals to the clergyman in this volume are based on high and holy principles; and that while a pious zeal warms the style, Christian prudence characterizes the matter. Yet those who remember the Rectory of Valehead will expect to find, among the practical and really practicable hints with which this volume abounds, something of an ideal view of things-something of the visionary perfection, which a mind of refinement chisels forth from its own conceptions, but which does not meet with its counterpart in life; which cannot, in fact, be realized. And this expectation, in the judgment of most men, will appear well founded. Nor is this objectionable. We know that the higher the point at which we aim, the higher, probably, will be the point to which we shall really reach; and this volume is addressed to his fellow-ministers by one of the ministers of Him who undoubtedly set before his followers an example and a rule of life, which they

must aim at, though they certainly cannot approach it, when he said, "Be ye perfect, as your Father in heaven is perfect." Perhaps the portion of the book which strikes the writer of this notice as apparently bearing the most marks of being drawn from the author's conception of what may be effected, rather than from a practical experience of that which is attainable, is the chapter on the Visitation of the Sick. It requires not only the wisdom of the serpent and the gentleness of the dove, but so much knowledge of man, and so much adroitness in using that knowledge, and indeed so many other qualities, that we can scarcely read it without exclaiming, "Who is sufficient for these things?"-a thought which would be almost overwhelming, if we did not know whence our sufficiency must come, and know also that in no time of need is the abundance of that sufficiency refused to those who ask it. There is also one suggestion in this portion of the volume on which there will be a difference of opinion. Mr. Evans strongly recommends extemporary prayer with the sick man-a prayer, however, founded strictly on the passage of Scripture which has been read with him. Mr. Evans exhorts every clergyman to become a man of prayer; and as his own private prayers must, in Mr. Evans's view, be extemporary, if they are to be sincere, and to be applicable to his own condition, Mr. Evans conceives that he must in such a case be able to frame an extempore prayer appropriate to this occasion. There would be the less necessity to make any remark on this portion of the work, if Mr. Evans had spoken less peremptorily, and more in the way of persuasion, or if his words carried less weight. But when he tells those whom he is addressing that they are "utterly unqualified for their situation" if they are unable to do this, the language is so strong, that one is naturally inclined to canvass the subject a little more carefully. Mr. Evans is doubtless aware of the conscientious objections entertained by some persons to extempore prayer in such cases at all. The writer of this notice was strongly cautioned, if not reproved, by one to whom he looked up with unfeigned respect, as a highly gifted prelate in a sister church of our beloved church of England, for adopting a course almost similar to that which Mr. Evans has thus authoritatively enforced. The bishop, to whom this course was mentioned by him, immediately objected to the extempore portion of it, although he considered that if time were taken to write down the prayer which was drawn from the passage of Scripture, and to use it when thus written, there was no further objection to be made to it; but that which Mr. Evans lays down as a sine quâ non this prelate considered as wholly objectionable. On this point, therefore, the learned and admirable author of this little volume must not wonder if some difference of opinion exists. There will probably be such a difference, but it will only be about the form; there will be none about the excellence of the spirit in which the whole chapter is written, nor about the value of most of its noble recommendations. In the chapters on The Round of Visitation there are some hints which every one will be able to turn to account; but it is impossible, in the limits of a short notice, to bring forward the real beauties of this work, which arise from its high Christian tone of feeling, and from the devotedness and self-denial enforced upon us, and that too by one who evidently has felt the full force of what he writes and inculcates on others.

But there are a few suggestions in the book which may be very briefly specified, and they belong to subjects on which it will interest the readers of this Magazine to have the opinion of so competent a judge as the author of this book. The chapters entitled The Clergyman's Sermon, The Clergyman's Lecture, and the Clergyman in his Study, ought to be read indeed by all who are not too proud to learn. The objections to a lecture in any other place than the church, and unaccompanied by the use of the Liturgy, are first stated; it is scarcely necessary to say that they are stated with great force and beauty. But supposing a lecture to be given, (and what Mr. Evans applies to the lecture will apply to all extemporary discourses,) the previous study of the whole passage to be commented upon in the original (after com