sence, he would have been led to the equally legitimate conclusion, that to assist at the sacrifice, even without partaking of it, especially when the Church has joined Absolution to the Eucharistic Office, is a true and proper use of the sacrifice to obtain pardon. This oversight is the more singular, since Mr. Freeman, in the passage above quoted, admits that, in the Jewish ritual, sacrifices for sin were never partaken of by any of the worshippers, only by the priest, yet the worshippers received pardon through the means of the sacrifice, at which they only assisted and did not partake; surely analogy points out the benefit of non-communicating attendance. The cause of GOD's withdrawing His indwelling, at least the original measure of it, is to be found, Mr. Freeman thinks, in the condition of death into which man had now fallen; that this dissolution of soul and body, thus marring, as it were, the great work of creation, was incompatible with the higher degrees of His indwelling and presence, that the whole sacrificial system of the Old Law, especially the ceremonies connected with the red heifer, declare this; that it was the contact with death as a loathsome and detestable thing, that was the chief ingredient in the agony of CHRIST; and that the removal of death by the gift of a spiritual life, and the introduction of the resurrection of the body, through CHRIST's death and resurrection, restores to man a capability for this Presence. Connected with this, we have the wonderful provision of certain inanimate creatures being made the media of communicating this Presence. There was first the fruit of the tree of life; then, under the old covenant, a sanctifying power was bestowed on such things as oil, water, &c.; especially the ashes of the heifer, which S. Paul tells us, "sanctified to the purifying of the flesh," all closely connected, perhaps inseparably, with that which alone could make atonement, the blood. All this prepares us for the sacramental system of the new covenant. Mr. Freeman enters very fully into the purposes of the Levitical system. He insists strongly on the idea that it was one which, as far as was then possible, restored a real and abiding Presence of GOD in a particular land, and among a peculiar people; that the whole ritual of sacrifice and purification was ordained for this purpose, that those sacrifices and purifications had a real sanctifying power; at the same time preparing the way for the complete restoration of the Presence by the Incarnation. His minute examination of the sacrifices as bearing upon this point is most valuable, but will not bear abridgment. We can only mention a few facts as they are connected with the Eucharist. All animal sacrifices were accompanied with offerings of cakes, or flour, and wine; both in the Gentile and Jewish rites. "The victim, though itself the efficacious element of the sacrifice, was offered by means of the bread and the wine, (sic). The bread was broken and sprinkled on the head of the animal while alive; and again wine, with frankincense, was poured between the horns. This done the sacrifice was conceived to have been duly offered, so far as concerned the gift and dedication on man's part, and the acceptance of it by the Deity. This is proved by the fact that the word immolare, to sprinkle with the broken mola, or cake, was used, as is well known, to express the entire action of sacrifice, the slaying and burning included. So again, mactare, 'to enrich, or crown with the addition of wine' (mauctus magis auctus1), was likewise used for the whole action. This is an absolute proof of the immense virtue and implicit power attributed to the bread and the wine in these sacrifices. They were held to carry within them, in a manner, the whole action. The presenting of them was the presenting of the slain sacrifice: the acceptance of them was its acceptance: and that moreover they were identified respectively, the broken bread with the body to be slain, the poured out wine with the blood to be shed, is both probable from the obvious parallel, and is countenanced by the other parts of the system. Thus the poor, who could not afford slain victims, were allowed to do their part by providing cakes of bread, and these were sometimes made in the shape of the ox to be sacrificed, and might be offered alone. And the drinking of blood was, though rarely, substituted for that of wine."-P. 76. Another important institution in the economy of the old Law was the table of shewbread, the "bread of Presence," or "of the Face of GOD," standing in a transverse line with the altar of incense; it was nearer to the Presence of God than the altar of burntoffering. Accompanied by its salt and frankincense, and, tradition says, also with wine, it was prepared every Sabbath, and there remained till the next Sabbath, when the frankincense was burnt "for a memorial of the bread," whence it is called "an offering made by fire unto the LORD." It was then eaten by the priests in a holy place. These twelve cakes, representing the twelve tribes, and being the fruit of the land, brought, as it were, the people into closer communion with GOD, and preserved and maintained the Presence to the land; and after being offered to GoD for a whole week, were given back by Him to be eaten by His priests; thus realizing the idea of communion in the closest manner. This sacrifice remains in the Church; it is that spoken of by Malachi: "In every place," not in the temple only, "incense shall be offered unto My Name and a pure offering." Thus in the restored temple Ezekiel is shown "the altar of wood. . . . this is the table that is before the LORD;" and again (xliv. 16), “They shall enter into My sanctuary, and come near to My table to minister unto Me." Thus, while the bloody offerings were to passaway, being fulfilled and completed in one far better and higher, Servius on Virg. Æn. iv. 57; x. 541. ? So Persius, Sat. ii. Hæc cedo ut admoveam Templis, et farre litabo. the mincha, the pure offering, is to remain, offered in every place, "the shewbread and the wine, the supreme meat and drink-offering the immolatio and mactatio of Gentile sacrifice-were to pass on, not changed, but only glorified, into the Gospel economy." Bearing in mind, then, the divinely guaranteed parallel between the old and new systems, we see that it sets forth to us, 1, the Church in Christ, as a royal priesthood, giving herself acceptably to GOD in Bread and Wine; the identification of these with that Body and Blood being effected by the application to them (with due 'memorial' reference to CHRIST's sacrifice) of His Priestly Intercession, and of the sanctifying fire of the Spirit; and then, 2, inasmuch as the same things were, in the Mosaic rite, received back from GOD to purposes of sanctification and of all covenanted blessings, it sets forth to us the Church receiving the same gifts back again, as the Body and Blood of CHRIST, mysteriously identified therewith by the same media, namely, the touch of the incense and of fire, as before, and obtaining by participation in them full sanctification and communion through CHRIST with GOD."-Pp. 189, 190. Mr. Freeman then goes on to give the parallel to the above in the liturgies, showing how marvellously the latter carried out the idea of sacrifice, as shown in the ancient sacrificial rites; yet by a most singular oversight-shall we not rather sap, by a most singular power of prejudice ?-he overlooks the analogy in the Scottish and Oriental liturgies of the place of Invocation after the words of Institution, though he actually uses the phrase "the sanctifying fire of the Spirit;" surely to the most superficial eye the analogy is perfect. By another oversight or prejudice, he says nothing of the mixing of water with the wine, though we know how the Fathers spoke of this as joining the people with CHRIST in the offering. In closing this part of our notice of Mr. Freeman's work, we repeat our former remark on the extreme value of that part of the treatise, which draws the analogy of the sacrificial economy of the old Law with the new. Mr. Freeman however is very far from exhausting the subject; he has left almost untouched one of the most important parts of the Old Testament, we mean Ezekiel. A separate treatise on the "Temple of Ezekiel," drawn up with this view, is necessary to complete the analogy from the Old Testament; we have little hesitation in confessing our belief that this view alone contains the key to unlock that most mysterious book. 548 THE APOSTOLICAL CONSTITUTIONS.-II. Constitutiones Apostolorum. P. A. DE LAGARDE edidit. Sumtibus Editoris, Formis Teubnerianis. Lipsiæ: B. G. Teubner. Londini Williams and Norgate. 1862. 8vo., pp. 288. : WE have another and most important clue for determining the age of the great bulk of the Apostolical Constitutions. In all points of Church government, down even to the smallest matters, they agree most minutely with the writings of S. Cyprian. In the Constitutions, as in the Cyprianic Epistles, the Bishop is regarded as the fons et origo of ecclesiastical power, as holding with a tight and a very firm hand the reins of a government almost despotic. In both these writings the lapsed are to be received into communion upon very much the same terms, and the other articles of the penitential code exhibit a marvellous analogy. Even the very vices which the Constitutions condemn are just those, against which S. Cyprian writes in the strongest terms; the same disorders, the same heresies had affected the Church in the East as well as in the West. It is just as possible to illustrate the allusions in S. Cyprian from passages taken out of the Constitutions, as it is to bring (as we propose to do) certain fragments from S. Cyprian to elucidate the meaning of the Constitutions. We cannot subscribe the theory that because S. Cyprian did not bring forward quotations from the Constitutions, therefore these books were not then written, or did not publicly appear until after his martyrdom. Common abuses affected at the same period both branches of the Catholic Church. Able men in both set themselves to refute and to restrain them: the one man wielding his authority from his own great personal influence: the others claiming a higher commission than their own, by which to inculcate their salutary discipline. That each of the works we have mentioned should have had the same aim is surely a proof of almost contemporaneous authorship, because a given tone of thought does but last out its appointed day, and a new phase as a passing shadow throws into the background that which previously had been the prominent object in the landscape. We must not forget either, that S. Cyprian was very chary of his quotations from any books which are not included in the sacred Canon. We cannot call to mind in the whole of his Epistles, eighty-one in number, any citations from SS. Clement, Ignatius, Justin, from any of the earlier Fathers, Martyrs, or from any of the Apocryphal books. So that S. Cyprian not quoting from the Constitutions is no proof at all that he had neither heard nor seen them; or that if he had neither heard nor seen them, that they were not then extant for all that. We now proceed to notice a few of the more important of the contents of these books. There are three remarks worthy of note in the first book of the Constitutions. The first is the prohibition to the reading of heathen books (lib. i. c. 6): "Abstain from the books of the heathen, for what have you to do with foreign works, and laws, and false prophets, which subvert the faith of the unstable....?" This remark is valuable as indicating either a very early, or what is more probable, a rather late compilation in this book of the Constitutions. The general tenor of S. Paul's exhortations would on the whole tend to the disparagement of the heathen literature. The same remark would apply with perhaps more force to the early Apologists, although their particular line of argument led them especially to place the various mythological and philosophical systems of the ancients in their most unfavourable light. All the sub-apostolic, as well as the Fathers of the two succeeding ages, took a different view of the matter. In proportion to their own knowledge and genius, they were ready to hail all the best parts of the heathen writings as so many schoolmasters to bring the initiated to CHRIST. Tertullian speaks manfully upon this subject: "Quomodo repudiamur secularia studia, sine quibus divina non possunt ?" (Idolol. c. x.): and further argues that the schoolmaster may teach the ancient literature without the danger of being charged with idolatry. The same line was taken by the great masters of the Alexandrian school: it was asserted unhesitatingly and unequivocally both by S. Clement and Origen. The Stromata sings the praise of the heathen philosophy when sanctified by the Gospel, from first to last. Scores of passages might be adduced to prove in what light S. Clement regarded heathen study; and even when he confesses that on account of its inherent weakness it could not fulfil that moral code which came in by our Blessed LORD's teaching, still he does not give it up; it prepares the way for a more royal teaching-ouν уe πроxατασκευάζει τὴν ὁδὸν τῇ βασιλικωτάτῃ διδασκαλία. Origen specifies the particular studies of geometry and astronomy as χρήσιμα ἐσόμενα εἰς τὴν τῶν ἱερῶν γραφῶν διήγησιν : he calls them προπαιδεύματα to Christian doctrine, and he beautifully instances how the profane things taken from the Egyptians by the Israelites at their flight were yet afterwards in the wilderness turned to the service of God. (Philoc. cxiii. p. 41. Spenc.) It was because of this that Origen became, as Eusebius tells us, a μέγαν φιλόσοφον even amongst the Greeks themselves. We regard this prohibition in the Constitutions to be a reaction against some later developments of the Alexandrian school, and as in itself indicating a time when such profane learning had been much abused, as we conjecture from the stronger expressions upon the same subject which occur in the second book (c. 61). "Why do you wish to share in the Greek oracles, being of dead men, of those which manifest by the inspiration of the γε |