As Mohammedanism continues to decline, the power and influence of the Greek Church, or, as it calls itself, the Orthodox Eastern Church, are looming up. A few years ago this Church had among the independent governments of the earth only two representatives, Russia and Greece, leaving out Montenegro, which was a little principality of only 120,000 inhabitants, and the independence of which was not recognized by Turkey. Now there are four other States in which the Greek Church will predominate-Servia, Roumania, Bulgaria, and Eastern Roumelia. The latter is likely to be, ere long, united with Bulgaria. Every further loss of Turkey will add to the territory, population, and power of these States; and in the history of the Christian Church the Greek Church must, therefore, occupy henceforth a more prominent place than in the past. This growth will, however, greatly change the inner constitution of the Church. The Patriarch of Constantinople still is, and probably will remain for a long time to come, the most prominent bishop of the entire communion; but the Churches of Russia, Austria, Greece, Servia, Roumania, Montenegro, Bulgaria, and the Churches of the Bulgarian nationality in East Roumelia, have made themselves entirely independent of his jurisdiction. Therefore, although the honorary pre-eminence of the See of Constantinople continues, the direct jurisdiction of the Patriarch has become limited to the Christians of Greek nationality living under Turkish rule. The progressing consolidation of the Bulgarian nationality, and the prospective annexation of large districts of the European part of Turkey to Greece, are likely very soon to reduce this jurisdiction of the Patriarch of Constantinople to still narrower limits.

As the Greek Church of Bosnia and Herzegovina is of the same (Servian) nationality as a large portion of that Church in Austria-Hungary, the Austrian government is intent upon establishing the closest union between these two Churches. It is estimated that in Austria-Hungary there is a population of about 3,100,000 which belongs to the Servian nationality. If to this number the Servians of Bosnia and Herzegovina are added, the number of Servians who are under the rule of the Emperor of Austria rises to more than 4,300,000, a number exceeding that of all Servians outside of the Austrian dominions. The establishment of a strong, consolidated Servian Church within the boundaries of Austria appears, therefore, to many of the leading statesmen of Austria as a matter of grave political importance for the future of the Empire. The Churches of Bosnia and Herzegovina were, until the treaty of Berlin, under the Patriarch of Constantinople. Nearly all the bishops appointed by the Patriarch were Greeks, who did not understand the Servian language, and had no sympathy with the national aspirations of the Servians. The latter, therefore, were greatly dissatisfied with their Greek bishops. This feeling was fostered by Austria after it bad obtained possession of Bosnia and Herzegovina. The history of the past relations between the Patriarch of Constantinople and the Servian nationality was referred to, to prove that any jurisdiction of Constantinople over Servia was a usurpation. At the time when Servia was a

powerful kingdom it had a Patriarch of its own at Ipek, whose independence was recognized by the Patriarch of Constantinople. Subsequently a large number of Servians, including the Patriarch of Ipek, emigrated to and settled upon Austrian territory; and in the course of time the Austrian Government deemed it good policy to establish within its own borders a Servian patriarchate at Carlovitz, which claims to be the heir and legitimate successor of the patriarchate of Ipek. The proposition to place all the Churches of Bosnia and Herzegovina under the Patriarchate of Carlovitz appears, therefore, to be quite natural, and a measure of this kind would have the great political advantage of promoting the permanent political union of these provinces with Austria. At the end of November, 1879, the Patriarch of Carlovitz and the Bishops of Ofen and Neusalz were summoned to Vienna and Pesth to be consulted on this subject by the Governments of Austria proper and Hungary.

ART. X.-QUARTERLY BOOK-TABLE.

Religion, Theology, and Biblical Literature.

The Advent of Christ; An Elucidation of the great Prophecy of our Lord, with special Reference to the Question, Whether Christ will make his Appearing before or after his Millennial Kingdom, together with an Answer to the Question, Did the Apostles expect the Advent of Christ in their own Day? By FRANZ L. NAGLER. 24mo., pp. 222. Cincinnati: Hitchcock & Walden. 1879. We have given above a translation of the title of a small book written in the Germanic dialect of our great Teutonic speech. Mr. Nagler avows that he once believed, but has now renounced, the doctrine of a premillennial advent. And as he indorses largely, but in a perfectly independent spirit and with some acute criticisms, many of the views which we have put forth distinctively from all other commentators, giving us full and frank credit, our hope is that our commentary, when fully completed, will prove a future safeguard for our people against those periodical fits of expecting the immediate advent which have proved so great a detriment to religion.

Full of mischiefs especially have been the interpretations of the twenty-fourth chapter of Matthew, both by English commentators, as Whitby and Clarke, and German commentators, such as Stier and Lange. Both have violated the fundamental principles of exegesis in misconstruing that chapter, and have made it pregnant with infidelity and heresy. Modern Universalism was born of the allegorizing of that chapter.

The readers of our commentary on Matt. xxiv and xxv are aware that we hold the phrase "these things," in the disciples'

questions and the Lord's answer, as designating the temporal troubles of the downfall of Jerusalem and the Jews, and thereby marking a clear distinction throughout between that downfall and the second advent. Mr. Nagler endeavors, in divers sharp ways, to spoil this our nice fix. He quotes Mark, and he might have quoted Luke, as giving the question, not about the "coming," but about "these things" solely, asking what should be "the sign" of their completion. That is, as we interpret, they furnish the question only about the troubles, and not about the advent. Matthew, on the other hand, furnishes the question about "the sign" of the advent alone; yet he really gives "the sign (xxiv, 15) of the crisis when they shall take their flight from the city's destruction. Our conclusion, then, is, that each evangelist makes an omission. Matthew omits the word "sign" in reference to the destruction, Mark and Luke omit the inquiry as to the advent. "These things," therefore, is still without contradic

tion, limited to the temporal troubles.

Again, Mr. Nagler quotes Luke xxi, 28, "When these things begin to come to pass, lift up your heads, for your redemption draweth nigh," and questions whether the city's destruction furnished any such ground of jubilation. We understand our Lord as bidding them not hang their heads in fear and despondency as Jews bound to destruction, but to lift up their brows at the moment of their deliverance from both the despotism and doom of Jerusalem and Judaism, and their escape to their refuge in Pella.

But Mr. Nagler thinks our limitation of "these things" to the troubles is contradicted by Luke xxi, 36, "Watch ye, therefore, and pray always, that ye may be accounted worthy to escape all these things that shall come to pass and to stand before the Son of Man." A proper paraphrase of Luke xxi, 36, we think, would be: Watch and pray, that you, my disciples, may escape all these tribulations through which you will be called to pass without apostasy, and may stand uncondemned before Christ's judgment bar. Compare Matt. xxiv, 13.

To those who doubt whether so relative a phrase as these things should have so substantive a meaning as our interpretation assumes, we suggest: 1. This phrase, as applied to predicted events, occurs in the three reports of these discourses no less than seventeen times, and must have been actually spoken eight times. The fact that all three evangelists report the phrase with such unanimity implies their strong impression of its prominence; and the fact of its repeated use by our Lord implies a definite and

substantial import. 2. In all these eight instances at least five clearly designate the troubles of the Jews, and not the second advent. First, in the question of the disciples, as given by Matthew, there is an obvious antithesis between these things and coming. That this antithesis is real is demonstrated by the repetition of the antithesis in the answer, "these things (so Luke) must be, but the end is not yet." Here even Mr. Nagler will admit that these things and end, the troubles and the advent, are opposites, and exclude each other. Second, (Matt. xxiv, 8,) “All these are the beginning of sorrows," where, clearly, the troubles are meant. Third, (Luke xxi, 12,) Before all these things; where these things refers to the earthquakes and commotions of the previous verse; and so must designate the troubles, and not the advent. Fourth, (Luke xxi, 36,) "Ye may escape all these things, and stand before the Son of man ;" where these things are first to be escaped before and antithetical to the advent. Fifth, (Matt. xxiii, 36,) "All these things," namely, the temporal punishments for their ancestral sins, "shall come upon this generation." Now these five cases inductively prove that the other three cases must have this meaning, if they will possibly bear it. And then the sixth, (Luke xxi, 28,) "When these things shall begin to come to pass," and, seventh, (verse 31,) applying the parable of the fig-tree, "When ye see these things come to pass," must not refer to the advent, because that event was not, like the blossom of the fig-tree, a gradually appearing process, but a sudden and unwarned event, "like a thief in the night." We think, then, we fairly prove that seven of the eight cases refer to the temporal troubles, and, therefore, so must the eighth; namely, Matt. xxiv, 34, "Verily I say unto you, this generation shall not pass away until all these things be fulfilled." This celebrated passage does not declare that the advent should take place in that generation, but that the troubles should. And if this argument is valid, our interpretation of that discourse must stand uninvalidated.

We still decline a solution of the difficulties of this discourse by a false definition of "generation." For, 1. The meaning race is without, or nearly without, precedent. Delitzsch is indeed quoted as having found a few instances in the Septuagint; but that, if true, does not justify our rejecting its sense in all other Greek literature and fixing it here. 2. Our admission, quoted by Mr. Nagler, that the word in Luke xii, 8 means "kind, class, species," means only "kind, class, species," viewed contemporaneously, not as in a line of descent through time. 3. Even were the meaning

"race" admissible the parallel passage, (xxiii, 36,) "Verily I say unto you, All these things shall come upon this generation," decides that a contemporaneous generation is meant. The antithesis is between the sins of previous generations and the concentrated penalty upon "this generation." 4. The meaning "race" gives an inane sense to the words. The meaning, then, is, The Jewish race shall not pass away until the destruction of Jerusalem and the judgment-day are completed! That perverts the passage from telling how soon "these things" shall take place, answering the question "when," to telling us how long the Jewish race shall endure. We may add that, according to Robinson's "New Testament Lexicon," a generation was, Hebraically, understood to include a hundred years, so that the destruction of the city would be included within the period.

We cordially commend the work of Mr. Nagler, especially to the attention of our German brethren, who bring from the dear old "Fatherland" some dreamy Chiliastic theories, which the free, fresh air of our America should blow away.

Faith and Character. By MARVIN R. VINCENT, D.D. New York: Charles Scribner's Sons. 1880.

It is long since we opened a volume of sermons so real and wholesome as these. Many pulpit utterances are pervaded by an air of unreality such that the hearers find nothing in them which touches upon their own duties or experience. The terms are conventional and meaningless, or the statements are strained' until they become false. In fact, we would not expose a thoughtful child to the utterances of many pulpits whereof we know, for any consideration, because of the artificial and unreal nature of the ministrations. The pulpit in general has not yet got fully clear of the notion that the aim of Christ is to get men into a physical paradise, instead of saving them from sin and sinning. The Universalist pulpit of the last generation was almost entirely possessed with the notion that hell is the only thing to be dreaded. Dr. Vincent has a more Christian conception. Holy character is made the great aim of life; and each sermon deals either with the relations and bearings of character, or with the principle of faith in the unseen as its only permanent basis. The right of God to our lives, and the power of Christ to save and sanctify all who will accept him, are dwelt upon and emphasized in the most earnest and tender manner. The piety of our time needs nothing more than to learn the Christian way FOURTH SERIES, VOL. XXXII.—25