6

6

utterly and for ever lost all power to disquiet him. It could not even retain him in the grave where it had laid him. The debt being fully paid, the surety was set at liberty. He is henceforward a stranger to suffering in all its forms. He can no longer suffer, he can no longer die. He has entered into his rest; and that rest is glorious. He is sitting,' the posture of repose, at the right hand of the Majesty on high; angels, and principalities, and powers, being subject to him.' Instead of the incessant toils of his humbled life on earth as the victim of sin, there is the uninterrupted repose of eternity; to the powerlessness of death, to which sin reduced him, has succeeded all power over all flesh, all power in heaven and earth;' in the room of the days of a mortal man, few and full of trouble, has come length of days for ever and ever;' he who was the man of sorrows and acquainted with griefs, has become most blessed for ever;' and the soul which was exceeding sorrowful, even unto death, is made exceeding glad with Jehovah's countenance.'"-Vol. ii. pp. 435, 436.

III. "A royal priesthood."

"They are a kingdom, but they are a kingdom of priests." They belong to, complexly taken they form, the kingdom that is not of this world. They belong to a spiritual monarchy, at the head of which is Jehovah, in the person of the only begotten Son. They are his subjects; and, being his subjects, all their duties are religions duties, all exercises of the priestly function. 'Whatsoever they do,' in the way of duty, they are required to do it as to the Lord.' They serve the Lord Christ.' Whatsoever they do, whether in word or deed, they do all in the name of the Lord Jesus, giving thanks to God the Father by him.' And whether they eat, or drink, or whatsoever they do, they do all to his glory.'"-Vol. i. p. 265.

IV. "Having a conversation honest among the Gentiles."

"The heathens were poor judges of Christian doctrine: there was much, too, in the Christian character, the excellencies of which they could not at all appreciate. But when they saw Christians making it plain that no temptation could induce them to deviate from the straight path prescribed by the laws of temperance, and chastity, and justice, and love; rendering no man evil for evil; meekly suffering many injuries, but inflicting none; denying themselves the comforts of life, to supply those who were destitute of its necessaries; sacrificing and suffering every thing, rather than violate conscience: they could not help feeling how beautiful and how awful goodness is; and a testimony was silently lodged in their hearts, in behalf of the religion of Christ, which no reasoning could have placed there."-Vol. i. pp. 329, 330.

V. "As the servants of God."

“The only true liberty of which a dependent being like man is capable, is the free use of his faculties in the service of God. Independence, strictly speaking, belongs only to God. Man in seeking it, instead of obtaining, lost liberty. Seeking to be supreme lord of himself, refusing to be the servant of the best of beings, he necessarily became a slave of the worst. It is the very condition of our being, as creatures, that we serve; we have not the liberty to choose whether we shall serve or not, all the liberty we have is to choose our master.""—Vol. i. pp. 373, 374.

VI. "Love the brotherhood."

"It only remains, on this part of the subject, that I say a word or two as to the love which we should cherish towards that part of the great brotherhood who are not on earth, but in heaven, and the manner in which we should express it :"One family we dwell in him,

One church above, beneath,
Though now divided by the stream,
The narrow stream of death.'

"The stroke of mortality has broken many a strong and tender band; but it has not broken, it could not break, the band which binds Christian brother to Christian brother. We have no reason to think our brethren on high have forgotten us, or ceased to love us. We know we have not forgotten them, nor ceased to love them. They stand in no need of our offices of kindness; they are beyond the reach of imperfection, and want, and suffering; but they are the proper objects of a very tender and ardent affection-an affection which has more

of the purity of heaven, and the permanence of eternity, than any other affection which has a fellow-creature for its object. That affection is surely not one that must live in the heart without ever finding appropriate expression in this world. Our love to our brethren in heaven, is to be shown in our giving thanks to Him who loved them and us, for making more than conquerors;' in keeping steadily in our them mind's eye all that was excellent in their character and conduct, both for model and for motive; in giving all diligence, to the full assurance of hope; that we may not be slothful, but followers of them who through faith and patience are inheriting the promises;' in maintaining stedfastly that good cause which was dearer to them than life when here, and which we know is dearer to them now than ever; and in often practising the first notes of the ever new anthem, which, as sung by them, and to be sung by us, shall everlastingly echo in heaven;' Unto Him that loved us, and washed us from our sins in his blood. Salvation to our God and the Lamb for ever and ever."

"These remarks have been entirely addressed to the brethren. They alone could relish them; they alone, indeed, could fully understand them. But is there any one here uninterested in them? Not one. Strangers, foreigners, aliens,

6

Oh,

from the commonwealth of Israel,' from the household of faith,' there may be here; but every one of these must become brethren,' else they are undone for ever, for there is no salvation but by union to the Saviour- the first-born among the many brethren.' We dare not say to such persons, Make a profession of brotherhood. No; in your present circumstances this were but to accumulate guilt, to increase danger, to aggravate damnation. But we do say, Become brothers. The brethren with one voice of invitation say, 'We were once like you, far off; but we have been brought nigh.' You, too, may be brought nigh by that all-attractive blood of Jesus cross. Are you very guilty, very depraved, very wretched? So were some of us; ay, so were all of us; but we have been washed, we have been_sanctified, we have been justified, in the name of our Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of our God." His blood is as efficacious, his Spirit as free as ever. come to him, and then come to us! Give yourselves to him, and then give yourselves to us by his will. Come to him; he will put you among the brethren; he will not be ashamed to call you brethren; he will give you the brother's inheritance, the goodly land. Come to us, we will do you good; we will love you as brethren, and you will love us as brethren; we will strengthen one another's hands, and comfort one another's hearts; and move onwards and upwards, till we, one by one, join the goodly fellowship above. And when God has filled up the number of his chosen ones, a number which no man can number, then will the completed holy brotherhood be presented by their elder Brother, a glorious church, without spot or wrinkle, or any such thing,' to his Father and their Father, his God and their God, with exceeding joy," to dwell for ever in his presence, where there is fulness of joy, and rivers of pleasure for evermore.' There will be no need, then, to press the exhortation, Love the brotherhood.' They will all of them be thoroughly taught of God to love one another.''Come with us, and we will do you good; for the Lord hath spoken good concerning Israel.'”—Vol. ii. pp. 37-40.

·

We conclude with an expression of our thanks to him for this valuable contribution to our stock of expository works, and of our esteem for him personally. We congratulate the congregation which still possesses him as its pastor, and the Church whose chair of divinity he yet fills; and our fervent desire is, that when called to "put off this his tabernacle," he may have an abundant entrance ministered unto him into the everlasting kingdom of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ.

On some public questions we do not see eye to eye, nor is it likely that we shall on earth; but we rejoice to believe, that "the brotherhood," of which he has discoursed so well in these volumes, is composed of such as are "one in Christ," and that among those who shall be seen casting their crowns before his throne, and raising the sweet symphonious shout, "Worthy is the Lamb that was slain," will be de

scried some who in this dark wilderness sometimes "fell out by the way."

The work is elegantly got up, and does great credit to the publisher.

THE SIXTH VIAL AND THE THREE FROGS. DURING the pouring out of the sixth vial upon the Euphrates, Europe will become the scene of busy intrigue. The skies of the western world are to clear up for a little space; the lightnings and hail of the seventh trumpet will be intermitted, and the quiet interval will be intensely occupied by the agents of the dragon, the beast, and the false prophet, who shall prosecute with incredible zeal and activity their unconscious mission of bringing on the grand catastrophe. "And I saw three unclean spirits, like frogs, come out of the mouth of the dragon, and out of the mouth of the beast, and out of the mouth of the false prophet. For they are the spirits of devils, working miracles, which go forth unto the kings of the earth and of the whole world, to gather them to the battle of that great day of God Almighty." We determine the character of these three frogs, or spirits, by tracing their origin. The first issues from the mouth of the dragon, which is the old serpent, the devil. This can be nothing else than infidelity, the religion of Rome in its dragon form, in conjunction with its usual concomitants, democracy, and rebellion against all authority, Divine and human. The next issues from the mouth of the beast; i. e., the seven-headed and ten-horned beast. The characteristic principle of this beast, as distinguished from that of the false prophet, is despotism. The third and last spirit comes from the mouth of the false prophet, and beyond question is Popery. We have no hesitation, then, in concluding, that the three principles that are to burst into wide-spread and vehement action, during the brief interval of quiet in Western Europe, are infidelity, despotism, and Popery. This marks conclusively, we think, our own times as the period to which the prophecy has reference. It is plain that the advocates of these principles were to propagate them, not by the sword, but by loquacious talk; for they are symbolized as frogs-stingless frogs; a figure which has been employed since the time of Cicero, who applies it to the prating demagogues of his day, to designate the noisy advocates of demoralizing principles. Who is so ignorant as need to be told how rampant these three principles are at this moment in every country in Europe? No sooner had peace returned to the West, than Popery, with prodigious effort, set about repairing the calamities of the vials. She advanced her former blasphemous pretensions; intrigued in every court of Europe; flattered sovereigns; pandered to the passions of the people; had her men of science for the learned; her miracle-workers for the ignorant; sent missionaries into every land; affected liberality in free states, and erected the Inquisition in certain despotic ones. Thus did she labour to recover her ancient dominion. The spirit of despotism, too, rallied from the terrible blows which the French Revolution had dealt it. The former dynasties were restored, and, untaught by the bitter experience of the past, began systematically to act on the principle of enlarging the kingly prerogative, and curtailing the popular privilege. France itself was no exception. There this line of policy was pursued, both by the elder Bourbons and the house of Orleans, who have borne sway since the Revolution.

And, as regards infidelity, there never was an age since the Flood in which so great a proportion of the human race were disbelievers. Were the great apostles of infidelity, Voltaire and Rousseau, to look up from the dead, how would they be astonished at the success of their labours! A whole continent converted! For we affirm, without fear of contradiction, that the vast proportion of the people of Europe at this moment are atheists. Their whole character, life, and creed, may be summed up in three words; they fear nothing, worship nothing, and believe in nothing. With what restless energy has this spirit been propagating itself these thirty years past! Agencies innumerable has it pressed into its service: the journals and novels of France, the poetry and philosophy of Germany, the university chairs on the Rhine, the academies and printing-presses of the

Helvetic towns-all have been the vehicles of con

veying infidelity, under its various forms of neology, socialism, communism, pantheism; and the result that has been wrought out, especially on such a groundwork as the Popish mummeries had been the means of creating, is not surprising. Thus have these symbolic frogs covered Europe, penetrating everywhere, loading the air with their croakings, and polluting the earth with their filth. But, though individually insignificant and base, collectively they have been the authors of a tremendous catastrophe.. In the execution of their commission, they have gathered the kings of the earth and of the whole world to the battle of that great day of God Almighty. This is the next terrible scene that open

before us.

On the very eve of battle a solemn warning is tendered. "Behold, I come as a thief;" for this event is to overtake the world with unprecedented and startling suddenness. "Blessed is he that watcheth and keepeth his garments, lest he walk naked, and they see his shame." This warning plainly imports, that immediately before that great day, individuals aud Churches should be exposed to peculiar temptation to forsake their principles, here symbolized by their garments. The temptation will not arise from the persecution of force, but from the seduction of these three spirits. Do recent events throw no light on this prediction? Has not Puseyism solicited some to part with the doctrine of Christ's atonement and intercession? Has not Erastianism solicited others to give up the headship of the Lord Jesus? And has not Neology tempted others to make shipwreck of the faith altogether? A peculiar blessedness will be his who watcheth and keepeth his garments." The Seventh Vial.

MOSES STUART AS A COMMENTATOR. SOMEWHAT more than twenty years ago, Moses Stuart of Andover began to be known in this country as a theological writer of vigorous intellect, and even then possessed of considerable learning. The work which introduced him to the favourable notice of biblical students in this country, was a series of letters to Dr Channing, written chiefly in vindication of the divinity of Christ, and which were reprinted in Ireland by some of the orthodox members of the Synod of Ulster, during the controversy which they were called to wage with their Arian and Socinian brethren. Since then, besides various translations from the German, original essays in periodicals, and several hermeneutical helps (among which a volume on the Canon of the Old Testament deserves to be especially noticed), he has sent forth expositions successively on the Epistle to the Hebrews, the Epistle to the Romans, and the Apocalypse-which, for an expositor, are unquestionably the three most important and difficult books of New Testament scripture. The preface to the last work, which is dated three years back, gives even then such indication of an impaired and sinking constitution, that we can hardly doubt, we have already received all the contributions of any moment which the field of scriptural interpretation is likely to derive from his pen. And as his works, those especially on Romans and Hebrews, have now acquired a recognised place in the theological literature of this country, it may be rendering a service to a considerable portion of our readers to lay before them what we shall endeavour to make a fair and impartial estimate of his character and labours as an expositor.

To those who are in the least degree acquainted with Mr Stuart's writings, we need not say that his expositions belong to an entirely different class from those of his countryman, Albert Barnes, which we recently noticed. The Notes of Barnes are intended for intelligent readers of the Bible at large, and hence come into competition with our Henrys and Scotts, the authors of our general commentaries. The expositions of Moses Stuart are designed to meet the wants mainly of professional students, and necessarily sought to conduct the work of scriptural interpretation on what may be called its highest literary elevation so much so, indeed, that at the time when he commenced his labours, the men could scarcely be said to have a local habitation and a name" in this country, with whom he was called to appear as a rival, but were known elsewhere by such names as De Wette, Rosenmuller, Tholuck, Olshausen, &c. On this ground alone, we cannot avoid entertaining a sincere respect for Mr Stuart, as being the first person No. LVII.

of any note who, in a time of shameful poverty and barrenness as to the more learned kind of expositions in the English language, boldly stepped forward to take away its reproach. A new era had dawned for the scientific interpretation of Scripture on the continent of Europe; there were giants there, and men of renown, who had signalized themselves in the work after its most improved modes, not a few of whom, like their ancient prototypes, had wonderfully striven to confound heaven and earth; and with the somewhat cumbrous and rusty weapons left us by our forefathers, it seemed as if we were placed altogether hors de combat, as if our simple mother tongue were incapable of playing a part in such dexterous operations, or as if those, at least, who should have been using it were alive only to the maxim, " that discretion is the better part of valour." When learned men from abroad asked, where now were our Pocockes, our Lightfoots, and our Lardners, we had no answer to give. And we, therefore, hold Mr Stuart entitled to some honour for adventuring in such circumstances to take the high places of the field, and commencing an English literature in this department, that should seriously aim at meeting the new demands of the age.

The author of the Letters to Channing was evidently possessed of gifts and attainments, which gave fair promise of future distinction in exegetical theology. If there appeared nothing original or profound in his cast of mind, there was at least freshness and vigour of thought, acuteness of discernment, clearness of conception, a ready command of appropriate ideas, and the power of expressing them in an easy and agreeable style. Of a lively and active disposition, he was also thoroughly devoted to the study of sacred literature, and resolved not to be hindered in the pursuit by any narrow prejudice or antiquated notion, but to take full advantage of the new materials placed within his reach, and turn them to account in the elucidation and defence of what he considered to be divine truth. Nor was it an unfavourable omen of his future success, that, while in a position to avail himself of the best means which the literature of the age could afford, he seemed perfectly alive to the abuse to which the approved hermeneutics had been applied by the theological school of Germany, which was then in the noon-tide of its strength, and was also beginning to operate with disastrous influence on the theology of America. It was, therefore, with a mind fully alive, both to the evil and the good of the times, that Mr Stuart entered on the work of scriptural interpretation, and with everything around him fitted to give the highest stimulus and the most profitable direction to his labours.

The sacred books chosen by him for the exercise SEPTEMBER, 1848.

of his talent indicate a full consciousness of his powers, and a high sense of his calling as an expositor, not unmingled, perhaps, by some promptings of ambition. In some respects, however, it was unfor. tunate that the first display of his skill should have been made on the Epistle to the Hebrews, which imperatively demands for its successful elucidation a clear insight into the spirit of the old economy, and the intimate connection between that and the new. But there was no department of divine truth which the earlier theology had left in so imperfect a state as this, and none which the new helps of the age had as yet done so little to improve, or, we should rather say, had done so much to misinterpret and obscure. The light here was still to a large extent intermingled with darkness, and Mr Stuart was wanting in the penetration and depth of thought necessary to separate the one from the other. Accordingly, his work on Hebrews, while respectable in point of scholarship, and bearing evident marks of care and industry, made no real advance in the interpretation of the epistle; not a single new ray of light was thrown upon the great argument maintained in it, or upon the special difficulties arising at intervals along the line of discussion. Even the lengthened prolegomena-most unduly lengthened, indeed, by entering into details needlessly minute, and formally discussing topics and opinions that did not deserve a moment's consideration-form no material contribution to the literature of the subject, and leave the only question of moment, that regarding the authorship of the epistle, as problematical as ever. But what was still more unfortunate, the entire manner in which the discussion is conducted by the inspired writer, implies a depth of meaning in the old economy, and the writings belonging to it, and a closeness of connection between them and the new, which was beyond the reach of Mr Stuart and the authorities to which he was most inclined to bow. This partly discovered itself in his manifest perplexity and uneasiness regarding some of the references to Old Testament scripture, in which he could find no satisfactory ground to stand upon, and was driven for relief to the principle of accommodation-the very principle which he had so justly denounced in his Letters as one of the worst and most fruitful devices of German Rationalism. This came out most distinctly in his 10th Excursus, when casting about for an explanation of the reference to Messiah and his people of the words in Isaiah viii. 18, "Behold I and the children whom the Lord hath given me." Mr Stuart does not, indeed, admit for himself, that the use made of the passage was to be regarded simply as an instance of accommodation; he is inclined to think that probably (for he seems by no means absolutely certain) there was some sort of typical connection between the old and the new in the eye of the writer; but it is clear, that he felt himself substantially shut up to the principle of accommodation. And, as usually happens when a wrong principle is taken up, so here Mr Stuart was carried beyond the immediate occasion, and led to make concessions, which indicated an ominous leaning to the Rationalist school of interpretation. It would have been quite competent for the most thorough adepts of that school to have said to him: Well, you admit with us, that Christ and his apostles so far stooped to the mistaken notions and current prejudices of the Jews, that they sometimes treated as facts, and took for Messianic predictions, what

were not properly entitled to such a character; and if we find more instances of this description in the New Testament than you are prepared to do, still we are agreed in principle, and the only question betwixt us regards the extent to which it should be carried.

But the deficiency now referred to in our author appeared even more strikingly in the very meagre and defective views which were exhibited in his commentary on the great theme of the Epistle-the real character and design of the ancient economy, and its close and inward relation to the realities of the gospel. It has sometimes surprised us, how a person even of ordinary intelligence and reflection could possibly traverse so rich a field, with so little apparent consciousness of the treasures that were lying around, and touching so often on points of the deepest interest and importance to the learned theologian, as well as the humble believer, yet gliding over them, as if all were easy and common-place. This is, no doubt, partly to be ascribed to the ideal the false ideal, we take leave to call it-which Mr Stuart appears to have set up for himself, as the best for learned expositions of Scripture, according to which, if the meaning of the original were only explained and cleared from grammatical or other objections, the work was to be regarded as done. Latterly, he ventured upon taking a little further license in this respect; and in his preface to the commentary on Revelation, he even enters into a defence of the length to which he has there gone in handling the topics discoursed of by the evangelist. "Without pretending to decide the question, in regard to the ideal of a perfect commentary, and without any design to speak lightly of views that differ from my own, I think I may safely say, that the simple grammatico-historical exegesis of an author is the great and leading business of an interpreter..... But what hinders one, who desires to render his work more interesting and useful than the mere performance of such a work would do, from throwing into his composition remarks and considerations of an æsthetical or of a theological character? Is it not the proper business of a Christian interpreter to point out the true nature of Christian doctrine, as exhibited by his author, its harmony with other scriptural writings, and its importance?" Unquestionably it is; and Mr Stuart would not have needed to make, nor probably would ever have thought of making, the defence which he thus records in behalf of such a style of interpretation, but for the undue influence which some of the greater spirits of Rationalism had acquired over him. So far from really needing to defend himself from what he has done in this respect, it would have been more to the purpose to have apologized for what he has not done; and we venture to pronounce it one of the capital defects of his commentaries, of itself sufficient materially to damage their permanent worth and usefulness, that there is so little in them of a serious grappling with the matter of scriptural statement, and so much of the pains that should have been employed on the truth itself, squandered on trifling minutiae or palpable absurdities. The bald and sapless style of commentary after which his work on Hebrews was modelled, was the invention of a class of men who, the better to hide their own anti-Christianism, made every thing of the casket of the gospel which they could handle, to the neglect of the heavenly jewel that lay within. For such men the Bible had no attrac

tion as an exhibition of divine truth, or a revelation of Godhead; they knew and prized it merely as a field for the exercise of philological skill, or the display of historical research. In proportion as the light and superficial spirit of Rationalism has waned we find this style of commentary also falling into desuetude; it is already growing antiquated in its native region; and the men there, who combine with vigorous thought and profound learning a sense of religion-for example, Tholuck, Olshausen, Hengstenberg-have in nothing more shown their superiority over the preceding race of commentators, than by the amount they have thrown into their works of the materiel of Christianity. We do not regard even such works, however, excepting in some select portions, as exemplifying the proper ideal of a Christian commentary; the relation of subservience, which the strictly philological and explanatory part should bear to the exhibition of divine truth and principle, is still not sufficiently preserved. For a commentary should take its hue and shape from the character of the original which it seeks to illustrate and make known; and the Bible is throughout so intensely ethical in its tone, that the letter and the form have not there, as in classical productions, something of an independent existence, a value and a worth for their own sake, but exist merely as the necessary media for reaching the understanding and the heart. So that, whatever may require to be done in verbal criticisms and controversies, in noting peculiarities of construction and language, or in rehearsing the views and exposing the errors of former interpreters-whatever may require to be done in this respect for purposes of elucidation, if the whole is not made inferior and subservient to the development of the line of thought, and the establishment of a sound and vital Christianity, there is no well-adjusted and satisfactory exposition of the sacred Scripture.

We, therefore, regard Mr Stuart as erring at the out set of his career most materially in his ideal; and to that is, doubtless, to be attributed the scanty, cursory, almost incidental character of his remarks on the great theme of the Epistle to the Hebrews-sometimes even the total absence of any remark, where it might be most looked for, as in the case of the tabernacle and its furniture, described in chap. ix. 1-5, which, though declared to be a shadow of heavenly things, is passed by without the slightest effort to exhibit the symbolical or typical import of the different parts. But the remarks themselves also frequently indicate a want of insight into the higher relations and bearings of the subject discussed. Thus, he plainly confounds (at chap. viii.) the Old Testament dispensation with the covenant of law, which formed only a part of it-a confusion which renders absolutely impossible any clear or satisfactory explanation of the position of ancient believers, or the essential identity between their condition and that of believers under the gospel. Then, in regard to the question-one of the most important that force themselves on the mind of one who really investigates the Epistle Wherein precisely stood the difference between the legal offerings and the sacrifice of Christ—their difference in nature and in effect?-we have nothing more than what is contained in the following passage, taken from the general view of the contents of chap. vi.-x. 18," The blood of bulls and of goats, presented by the Jewish high-priest, effected nothing more than ceremonial, external purification, while the blood of Christ purifies the conscience and renders the worshipper truly acceptable to God." The only varia

tion or enlargement of this meagre statement, which is afterwards given, is simply, that by "the rites of the law, the offerer obtained external purification," or that he obtained" the civil and ecclesiastical pardon of his offences," while Christ's blood "sanctifies the soul of the believer," or saves him from "the consequences of sin in another world." Was the worshipper, then, under the law left to the awful infliction of these? or how did he find an escape from them? What was the actual worth and value of that external purification, or civil and ecclesiastical pardon, which was all, it seems, that he could obtain through his sacrifices? or how, in many cases, could such a result meet the palpable wants of his condition? The man, for example, who had committed a fraud or a perjury (Lev. v. and vi.), and sought atonement through the appointed offerings, what could a merely external purification do for him? He plainly laboured under the stain of a moral, not, in the ordinary sense, of a corporeal or ceremonial impurity; and if he felt his guilt, as he should have done, the grand concern with him must have been, how to obtain peace with God, life instead of death. Did the sacrifices provide a way for his actually obtaining this? or could he only find it if he descried with the eye of faith the coming sacrifice of Christ? Not a hint is dropt with reference to such inquiries; and it is perhaps as well. For certainly, on the supposition that all was merely external under the Old Testament rites of sacrifice, no satisfactory explanations could have been given.

On the whole, we are obliged to confess that Professor Stuart's work on Hebrews has no great claims to distinction as a contribution to our stores of exegetical theology. It is entitled to some consideration as a sort of first effort in the English language, after a period of collapse, and under a kind of new régime; but otherwise, it is not deserving of a prominent place. It was soon succeeded by the somewhat similar work of Tholuck, and, in its peculiar department, clearly surpassed; for, as an explanation of words and sentences, a recension of opinions, a display of philological skill and biblical learning, the production of the professor of Halle has the undoubted advantage of that of the professor of Andover; while it also stands far superior in depth of thought and insight into the meaning of the Epistle. If Tholuck has sometimes spoken too slightingly of the work of Stuart, we cannot wonder that he has so seldom referred to it.

It was about five years after the publication of the Commentary on Hebrews that Mr Stuart gave forth the next specimen of his exegetical labours-his work on Romans. Here he had Tholuck for a precursor; and if on the former field he was virtually supplanted by that dangerous rival, he has in this not altogether escaped from his trammels, as a very large portion of his materials are derived from Tholuck, and there is a want of something in the American work to give it a marked and distinctive difference from the German. Viewed in reference to the mere literature of the subject, we have not been able to note anything in our author which could properly be regarded as indicating a step in advance; and being, as it is to a considerable extent, of a dependent character, its place, on the whole, cannot be fixed very high, though somewhat higher, we think, than the Commentary on Hebrews.

But viewed simply per se, without reference either to the works that preceded it or the materials from