is an entity which produces results, what is the means by which it produces them? Are not all results produced by force, and is not our reasoning thus reduced to the proposition that the entity force employs force to produce results? This proposition is unintelligible, and shows that the conception of force as an entity is absurd. Force is an attribute.-Pp. 81, 82.

Dr. Chalmers opined that theism is proved, not so much by the existence of matter, as by its "collocations" into an intellective system; but Dr. Winchell finds the following proof of theism in material existence:

But, if force must be conceived as an attribute, what is the nature of its subject? What is it which exerts or manifests force? To say that the attribute force exerts itself is to make it both attribute and subject. Something which is not force, but which is capable of exerting force, is therefore necessarily implied in the conception of force. Is matter the subject? Then, first, it is a subject which thinks and purposes; for the results of force are thoughtful and purposive, and matter does thus possess a "power and potency" of psychic results. But, secondly, we are not certain that matter possesses a subjective nature. We only know matter phenomenally, and it may easily be that phenomena constitute all there is of matter in itself. Yet phenomena are manifestations of something possessing the power to produce them. The phenomena which we cognize as matter are manifestations of force. If there be no subject matter, there must be some other subject revealing itself in the phenomena which we group under the designation of matter. We are driven, then, to the recognition of an intelligent subject as the ground of the attribute of force manifesting its activities in the being of what we call matter, as well as in the changes which are impressed upon

matter.

The inquiry does not end even here; for it remains to ascertain what is the mode of origin of force from its subject. What is the method by which the subject reveals the attribute of force? Is forceful emanation from the subject an unconscious and continuous necessity of its being; or is it a conscious and voluntary activity? If necessary, then some higher power has imposed the necessity; if unconscious, then some higher intelligence directs according to the laws of conscious thought; for co-ordination of products implies at least two things consciously apprehended both in their separateness and in their relation; unconscious intelligence is a nugatory expression, for consciousness is the prime moment of intelligence. If forceful manifestations are effected through the method of volition, then the subject which constitutes the ground of all cosmical force is possessed of will as well as intellect and susceptibility to motive, and is consequently a personal entity-an entity thinking, feeling, and willing with reference to that which is not itself.-Pp. 82, 83.

QUARTERLY REVIEW OF THE METHODIST EPISCOPAL CHURCH, SOUTH, January, 1880. (Nashville, Tenn.)-1. Methodist Episcopacy. 2. Development of Monotheism among the Greeks. 3. Studies in Shakspeare. 4. The Conflict. 5. Bible Revision. 6. The Problem of Life-The Book of Ecclesiastes. 7. Spencer's First Principles. 8. Providential Uses of Pain. 9. Social Life of our Forefathers. The welcome return of Dr. T. O. Summers to the editorial chair of the Southern Quarterly suggests some old antebellum, we had almost said antediluvian, recollections. The bitter antislavery contest was then at its height, and the presages of war were growing more and more distinct. Now the question of slavery is settled, even if the question of serfdom is not. We cherish the hope of prospective peace, not without recognition of lowering omens in the coming presidential contest.

This Quarterly is externally done up in good taste, has nearly two hundred octavo pages, with articles of a high character, and an extended editorial department, such as Dr. S. can furnish, priced at three dollars, in advance. The only fault which we have to find with it is the oppressive omission of the names of the writers, sustained by unreasonable reasons. The practice of furnishing the names exists in all parts of Europe, excepting England, and with, we believe, every Quarterly and Monthly in America, except the Southern Methodist.

English Reviews.

BRITISH AND FOREIGN EVANGELICAL REVIEW, January, 1880. (London.)—1. Richard Baxter; by the Rev. Donald Fraser, D.D. 2. Evolution in Religion; by the Rev. Dunlop Moore, D.D. 3. Testimony of St. Paul to Jesus Christ; by the Rev. J. Oswald Dykes, D.D., 4. The Unity of the Human Race, Considered from an American Stand-point; by the Rev. Prof. John Campbell. 5. Poetry of Edmund Spenser; by M. H. Towry. 6. Righteousness of Life. 7. The Formal and the Vital in the Bible; by the Rev. I. E. Dwinell. 8. The Lord's Supper; by Prof. Peck, D.D.

BRITISH QUARTERLY REVIEW, January, 1880. (London.)-1. The Lords of Ardres. 2. Glimpses of the New Gold and Silver Mines. 3. Modern Greece. 4. Practical Esthetics. 5. Why is Scotland Radical? 6. The Christian Idea of God. 7. Nonconformist Psalmody. 8. Mr. Gladstone and the Nation. EDINBURGH REVIEW, January, 1880. (New York.)-1. Agricultural Depression. 2. Hamerton's Life of Turner. 3. The Military Position of Russia and England in Central Asia. 4. Ireland: her Present and Future. 5. The Persian Miracle Play. 6. British Light-houses. 7. Russia Before and After the War. 8. Lord Minto in India. 9. Plain Whig Principles.

WESTMINSTER REVIEW, January, 1880. (New York.)-1. Colonial Aid in War Time. 2. Early Greek Thought. 3. The Grand Dukes of Tuscany. 4. The Organization and Registration of Teachers. 5. Imperium et Libertas. 6. The Relation of Silver to Gold as Coin. 7. Social Philosophy. 8. Russia and Russian Reformers.

LONDON QUARTERLY REVIEW, January, 1880. (New York.)-1. Lord Bolingbroke. 2. The Progress of Taste. 3. Bishop Wilberforce. 4. The Successors of Alexander and Greek Civilization in the East. 5. Prince Metternich. 6. The Romance of Modern Travel. 7. Mr. Bright and the Duke of Somerset on Monarchy and Democracy. 8. The Credentials of the Opposition.

LONDON QUARTERLY REVIEW, January, 1880. (London.)-1. Egyptian and Sacred Chronology. 2. Modern Realism. 3. A Victim of the Falk Laws. 4. The Transvaal and its People. 5. Charles Waterton. 6. Our Convict System. 7. St. John's Doctrine of Christian Sonship.

The following notice of a biography of St. Hugh of Avalon, by G. G. Perry, gives us an impressive idea of a model mediæval bishop:

Probably the ordinary conception of a monk is that of a man whose life, even when it happens to be free from vice, is passed away in indolent devotion; and probably few ordinary readers have fairly realized the immense obligations which literature owes to the monastic settlements of the dark ages. Not to mention the familiar fact that the literary treasures of all antiquity, both sacred and profane, have been preserved for us by the monks, it is right to remark that we owe our knowledge of Europe, from the days of Charlemagne to the revival of letters, mainly to the monasteries. Especially in our own country, from the times of Bede to those of the Edwards, we are indebted for almost all our information to a series of literary monks. The great works which were composed in the monasteries, above all at Peterborough and St. Albans, are an almost inexhaustible treasury of historical information. But for such writers as these, the days of William Rufus, Henry, and Stephen, would be almost as perfect a blank as the history of Peru a couple of centuries before the invasion of Pizarro. The great interest which is taken by this generation in historical inquiries has brought many of these works into circulation; and, among others, Professor Stubbs has earned the gratitude of students by the care and industry with which he has edited these relics of English antiquity. Some years ago Mr. Dimock published an edition of the Metrical Life and the Great Life of St. Hugh of Lincoln. He then began to prepare for publication the works of Geraldus Cambrensis, whom Mr. Green describes as the wittiest of court chaplains, the most troublesome of bishops, and the gayest and most amusing of all the authors of his day. On Mr. Dimock's death the work was delayed for some time, but afterward completed by Mr. Freeman. When the Great Life appeared, Mr. Perry, already favorably known by his life of Bishop Grossteste, wisely determined to give this interesting biography to the English reader; the work, however, was delayed in the expectation that Geraldus Cambrensis would supply additional information. As soon, then, as this author was published, Mr. Perry proceeded with his task, and the result is the present biography of St. Hugh of Avalon, the main builder of the Cathedral at Lincoln.

Mr. Perry has given us a picture which enables us to realize, with tolerable accuracy, the religious life of our ancestors in the days of Coeur-de-Lion and Lackland. Probably even in his own Cathedral of Lincoln there is no very absorbing interest taken in St. Hugh himself; but still the study of this book may be pressed upon all those who desire to learn how our religious ancestors actually lived and thought and felt. Protestant readers especially need this kind of literature; for they usually regard the ages before the Reformation as altogether dark and corrupt. We are in danger of forgetting the truth, so often proclaimed by Carlyle, that no system can long endure after it has become altogether corrupt.

After an introductory chapter, in which he relates the previous history of Lincoln Cathedral, Mr. Perry opens the more immediate subject of his book by a capital account of the kings and clergy in the days of St. Hugh. His sketch of the three monarchs, Henry the Second, Richard, and John, agrees with the estimate formed by other modern historians; but his intimate acquaintance with the monastic annalists enables him to paint very vividly the manners and customs of the clergy. The wealth of the Church had already begun to accumulate in the hands of the monks, and consequently the parish priests were often in a state of wretched poverty. The inevitable result was that they eked out their meager incomes by various forms of simony. Thus it was a common practice to say the mass as far as the offertory; when that had been taken up, to begin afresh, and to repeat the process as long as the congregation put any thing into the boxes. Perhaps profanity never reached a higher point than when the Lord's Supper was used in magical rites. The mass was said over waxen images, devoting to death, with solemn imprecations, the persons represented. No wonder the monkish annalist remarks that the rural parish priests were worse than Judas; for he, believing Jesus to be a man, sold him for thirty pieces of silver; but they, believing him to be a God, sell him for a penny. Another feature of clerical life under the Plantagenet was the remarkable ignorance even of those priests who undertook to preach. "A certain priest preaching about Barnabas, said he was a good and holy man, but he was a robber,' confounding Barnabas with Barabbas. Another described the Canaanitish woman as partly woman, partly a dog, thinking her name to be derived from canis, a dog. The Latin equivalent for a 'broiled fish and a piece of a honey-comb' was transformed by another into an ass-fish and beans covered with honey!' The word used in the Vulgate for a 'fire of coals,' (pruna,) another explained as meaning plums. A somewhat more serious fault was his who argued from the words, 'Fornicators and adulterers God will judge,' that no other evil-doers were to be judged."Page 152. Yet more serious charges than those of simony and ignorance were constantly laid against the clergy. William of Newbury mentions more than three hundred homicides with

which the clergy of his own time were popularly credited; while even some of those officials who had been active in the introduction of celibacy admit that it had produced a frightful amount of immorality. "The superior clergy were generally," says Mr. Perry, "free from these stains, but ignorance, meanness, avarice and servility were common among them all. There was a paralysis of discipline in the Church." There is no need to study carefully the lives of the leading bishops in order to judge their spiritual influence: Every reader of English history knows the pomp and vanity, the secular ambition and religious pride, the violence and warlike habits, of many of these servants of Christ. Shakspeare's Cardinal Beaufort expresses the popular conception of a powerful bishop: that there is no man so wicked as a wicked priest. Thus the clergy were base, and apparently the people were miserable. A modern historian gives an extract from the English Chronicle, which reveals the terrible anguish of the English in the days of St. Hugh's happy youth in Burgundy. "They hanged men up by their feet, and smoked them with foul smoke. Some were hanged up by their thumbs, others by the head, and burning things were hung on to their feet. They put knotted strings about their head, and writhed them till they entered the brain. They put men into prisons where adders and snakes and toads were crawling, and so they tormented them. Many thousands they afflicted with hunger." Against this terrible oppression the Church alone had power to come in between the people and the barons; and when, therefore, the clergy were corrupt, we may conclude that it was never merry world in England. Such were some aspects of English society in the days of St. Hugh; and his biographer rightly remarks that there could have been no greater boon conferred on the country than the sincere, bold, and saintly example of the Burgundian monk.

Hugh was born at Avalon, close to the Savoy frontier, probably in 1135. He sprang from a line of noble ancestors, as renowned for piety as for gentle blood; and when, in his eighth or ninth year, his mother died, his father devoted himself to a "religious "life, and took Hugh with him into the monastery. A beautiful feature in the future bishop's character was his affection for birds, and even squirrels, which were tamed by him so perfectly that they would leave the woods, and, at the hour of supper, come to share his frugal meals. Finding the discipline of the monastery not sufficiently stern to satisfy his devotion, Hugh broke an oath of loyalty which he had taken, and fled to the Carthusian Convent, at Grenoble. Here Mr. Perry notices a singular fact which seems to us to prove that the life of man cannot possibly be ordered by regulations imposed by external authority. The Cistercians required that the whole time of the monks should be occupied in devotion and manual labor, while the Franciscan friars were not allowed to possess a book. Now such is the perversity of human nature that the laborious Cistercians became the most luxurious, and the ignorant Franciscans