all fulness dwell;' that "having made peace by the blood of the cross, by Him he reconciles all things unto himself, whether they be things in earth or things in heaven;" and men all over the world still feel that in these and kindred revelations there is a height and depth, a breadth and length, of wisdom, of love, and of needed grace, such as are found in no other words; and infidels also feel and know, that these words have such living power, that they too must try to understand them, and they dare not discard them till they have found some better, truer, and deeper sayings. Even those immersed in sense, when sometimes there floats around them the melody that descends from these celestial heights, are stirred by the same emotion that led Clement of Alexandria to exclaim: "Here is music, not indeed according to the measure of Terpander, but according to the eternal measure of a new harmony, the harmony of the new name of God." This deep-seated Christian longing for Christ, and for a better knowledge of his wisdom, is widely and spontaneously expressed, and gives its peculiar tone and shape to the general Christian literature, as well as to the best Christian aspirations of the passing times. The life of Christ is written anew in every language; the documents that give to us the unmatched record of that life-the most artless, touching, and inspiring biographies ever penned are subjected to a searching criticism, are tried by all the principles of the most advanced science, are explored and tested as never did alche mist or miner search for gold or try it in the refiner's fire. The whole contest between supernaturalism now centres just here: the whole evidence for the divine origin and authority of Christianity is concentrated on just this inquiry. Other controversies are adjourned that this may be adjusted. The works whose titles we have given at the head of this article, are significant indications of the nature and absorbing interest, and suggest some of the bearings, of this tendency. We do not now refer to them for the sake of any detailed criticism upon them, but as ex

amples of a large and increasing class of writings, devoted to this one central theme. "Ecce Homo," and "Ecce Deus," approach the question from different points of view-points so remote and opposite as to indicate the wide sweep of the principles and questions involved in this debate. "Ecce Homo," now conceded to be by Professor Seeley, begins from the human side; "Ecce Deus," starts from the divine side. The former, much the abler and more eloquent work of the two, pursues a method which we hold to be perfectly legitimate in such an inquiry, namely, beginning with certain generally acknowledged facts, taking the Gospels as we find them, and then trying to see what conclusions we might thence derive as to the origin of Christ's kingdom, and as to his own nature and origin also. The Kingdom of Christ, he concludes, must be referred to a celestial origin; "it came down from heaven." The person of Christ, he also concludes, is unique; he stands to men as does no other; love to him, and faith in him, are vital and essential-he is the ever-living, personal head of a new economy. As to all that concerns what we may perhaps almost call, (in the author's view) the su perhuman humanity of Christ, the wonderful laws and principles of the church he founded, and the personal relations of believers to their Lord, the work is admirable and quickening. Whether, as to the nature of Christ, the author can, in his mode of investigation, make the transition from the finite to the infinite, from the man to God-is the unanswered Christological question of this attractive volume. But if he does take that step, it must be on some other grounds than those he has as yet indicated: he can, consistently with all that he has said, also say Godman; but he can also refrain from saying it; and, if he does say it, it must be, not in the way of an inference from Christ's unique humanity, (for such an inference can never be logical) but by giving due heed and credit, and a fair interpretation, to the New Testament testimony on this point. And if he says Godman, will he also say, atoning sacrifice for

sin? This is more doubtful from the general tenor of the book, and from his occasional interpretation of particular texts. And yet an Incarnate God, in a sinful world, whose incarnation has no vital and necessary relation to the guilt and pardon of the race, would be a supernatural manifestation without any adequate ground or object-an anomaly, a mystery without an open face. Incarnation and atonement, in any complete and rounded system, must go together; practically, too, they stand or fall together. The person of Christ and the work of Christ are inseparable; they explain each other.

The "Ecce Deus" is a book of a different quality and calibre. Forcible and suggestive at many points, it contains much that is commonplace; and its general argument is not thoroughly elaborated. It talks about and around a good many questions. The framework of the argument, as given in the preface, is hardly carried out to complete proof and conviction in the body of the work; so that the reader is half tempted to think that the book was written before the plan was fully matured. Professedly it approaches the subject from the divine side; but there is no real or thorough discussion of the intricate relation of the divine to the human natures in the one person of Christ. Like "Ecce Homo," it is rather an indication of the current interest in Christological questions, than a solution or even a full statement of the radical questions. And while both works carefully avoid the traditional doctrines of the church, they do not propound any clear solution of the difficulties with which the doctrine of the church really grapples.

The facts of Christ's life demand, says "Ecce Deus," the recognition of his divinity and incarnation; but what that incarnation really was, and how the union of divinity to humanity in one person is to be conceived and stated-these and such like inquiries are not fully appreciated, still less answered.

The Boyle Lectures of Professor Plumptre are more systematic, and they are valuable. They treat of the sources

of Christ's life, of his training and names, of his miracles, teaching, and ministerial work, and of his resurrection. These topics are well and carefully handled, in a conservative and candid spirit. The title of the work (“Christ and Christendom ") perhaps promises too much; but the main topic, the life of Christ, is worked out in part and incidentally with relation to the growing spirit of union and unity among Christians. The author distinctly recognizes other reformed churches than the Anglican as true churches, with valid ministrations. This is thought by many Episcopalians to be quite a liberal concession, though made by Hooker and even by Archbishop Sancroft. As this revival of Christology goes on, the wonder may possibly come to be that such concessions should ever have been judged important; for so to consider them seems to imply that there might be some good and valid reason for not making them.

Mr. Liddon's Bampton Lectures on the Divinity of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, are altogether the most scholarly and best worked out, as well as the most orthodox, of any of these volumes. On the basis of the church doctrine, the argument is clear and cogent, and it is admirably arranged. The theological questions and difficulties are better stated and more definitely resolved. As a positive, didactic essay it will take a high place. It is also well written, and comparatively so free from mere technicalities that it will interest a large class of readers,

The contents of these lectures are: 1. The Question before Us, comparing the Humanitarian, the Arian, and the Catholic Doctrine; 2. Anticipations of Christ's Divinity in the Old Testament; 3. Our Lord's Work in the World a Witness to his Divinity; 4. Our Lord's Divinity as Witnessed by his Consciousness; 5. The Doctrine in the Writings of St. John; 6. In St. James, St. Peter, and St. Paul; 7. The Homoousion; 8. Consequences of the Doctrine of our Lord's Divinity; its " conservative force," its "illuminative force," and its "ethical fruitfulness."

But our present object, as we have said,

is not to criticise these particular works, but rather to make use of them as indicating some of the characteristics of that tendency to Christological inquiries which make the present epoch of the Christian church. The nature, relations, and bearings of this theological movement are worthy of the most attentive consideration.

The Roman Catholic theology, centering as it does in the doctrine of the visible church, has a tendency to hide Christ from the immediate vision and faith of believers-to put the church and its sacraments between the Christian and Christ. The Protestant Reformation opened the Bible, and interpreted the dogmas and decrees of the church in its light; and it also brought the believer, as it were, face to face with Christ, as is indicated by its insisting upon justification by faith alone as the great article, the "material principle," of "the standing or falling church." In many of the subsequent systems, both Lutheran and Reformed, which elaborated the doctrines of the Scripture in a more scholastic form for the wants of the Protestant churches, there was a tendency to give a predominant and overshadowing authority to certain abstract truths and principles, rather than to the living and central facts of the divine revelation. This inevitably led to divisions and subdivisions, so that the real unity of Protestantism has never been fully realized. Rome has a real, though partial, unity, and consequently great power in its doctrine respecting the church. Protestantism has also a common centre of unity in its conscious oneness with Christ; but this has as yet been but imperfectly realized. Abstract truths and formal systems have too often taken the place of the living person of our Lord. Each branch and division of Protestantism has represented some part of the whole truth more fully than another, and hence its historic validity and necessity; but each branch or denomination has also insisted on what is peculiar to itself as of supreme importance and necessity. Hence the tendencies of Protestantism have been centrifugal rather than centripetal. Some

subordinate truth has practically usurped the place which rightfully belongs only to the great central truths and facts of the Christian religion. Belief in a scheme, a theory, sometimes in a rite, has been made the cardinal point in a sect, and, theoretically, taken the place of belief in Christ. At the same time, however, in Christian life and experience, faith in Christ and personal union with him have maintained their ground, and been common elements in the midst of all the divisions. Especially in the recent revivals of religion has the quickening power of such faith in Christ been signally illustrated. Presbyterians, Baptists, Congregationalists, Methodists, Episcopalians, all utter their essential, vital faith, in the same forms, in the same experience, the same hymns, the same prayers-and Christ rules in all. When speaking the language of faith and devotion all have the same aspirationthat we may all come in the unity of the faith and of the knowledge of the Son of God, unto a perfect man, unto the measure of the stature of the fullness of Christ.

The divisive Protestant tendency has reached, to say the least, the limits of safety, for it has come in many instances to the borders of disintegration. The most important question for the Protestant churches, especially in this country, is whether these divided churches have sufficient vital force to come together again on common ground for their common work, and against their common foes. Strong and compact organizations are needed to do the work of the church against the strong and compact forces by which it is on all hands assailed. And it is a most hopeful sign, that the unifying. power of our common faith is now increasingly felt; it is showing itself all around us. The tendency to union and reunion is just now the dominant and popular tendency in our churches. How far it may extend, what combinations may result, we do not venture to predict. But, as it now stands, it is the characteristic and significant tendency of our times, so far as the internal movements of the Christian church are concerned.

And this tendency is also connected,

not superficially, but vitally, with the revival of the questions respecting the person and work of Christ. And these questions are everywhere started and debated, as hardly ever before, not alone because materialism and pantheism are making such desperate assaults on our faith, but also because the faith of the church in these divine facts has become more definite and inspiring. We may say it, with reverence and thankfulness, that the conscious presence and power of the Son of God was never more fully realized than it now is by the heart and mind of the whole Christian church. Account for it as we may, it is still a fact. It is like a new revelation; it is the spiritual presence, invisible but real, of the Incarnate God, taking the place in men's hearts and thoughts, which has too often been assigned to some abstract dogma, some partial theory, some external rite. Believers are coming nearer to their Lord; and as they draw closer to that common centre, they draw closer, by the same movement, to each other. When Christ is fully formed in each soul, what it spontaneously looks for in every other soul is the same image and this likeness to Christ becomes the living bond of the inmost fellowship of believers. And so the power of mere sectarian distinctions is gradually weakened by the presence and power of this common life in Christ. Union with and in him is the one essential condition of all other Christian union.

Another important bearing of this Christological Revival is in relation to theological or doctrinal controversies. Every one knows that there is now less interest in mere theological gladiatorship, and in technical points of controversy, than there was in the last generation. It would be almost impossible to get up a general zeal in questions which not long since absorbed the general mind. Disputation on these points seems to have spent its force partly because, as the controversies were conducted, there seemed no possibility of a final adjustment; and partly because each side sees more of the truth for which the other is contending, and that neither side can be main

tained to the entire exclusion of the other. What were esteemed final and absolute statements, have come to be viewed as relative; and the differences are found to be differences in degree, and not in kind. And so the Christian mind has been led to look for some reconciling, harmonizing, and central truths and facts, in whose light these perpetual and fruitless controversies might be adjusted. And it is find-` ing these in the Christology of the Christian system, rather than, for example, in sovereignty or free agency. In the central light of the person and work of Christ, these other doctrines are put into their right place, and seen in their true nature and relations.

It is not true that there is in the Christian world an increased indifference to doctrine and truth-rather the contrary. But the interest has come to centre in those truths which are central and vital, rather than in those which are abstract and remote. Truth, in its living reality, was never more earnestly sought. Metaphysical theology is indeed less regarded; merely ethical and deistic theories have lost their controlling power; but the real, living, essential principles of the Christian faith, those which distinguish it alike from mere metaphysics and mere ethics, were never more thoroughly pondered or deeply loved. These centre in the Christology of the Christian system; and this Christological Revival is partly the cause and partly the effect of the lull in mere dogmatic controversy. How differently these contests appear when they are seen in the light that shines forth from the central orb of the Christian religion. The theme of one of Mr. Melville's most impressive and characteristic discourses is, that "old truth becomes new truth when it is seen to be the truth as it is in Jesus." Divine sovereignty, divine providence, predestination and election, even man's inability and man's ability, human nature, its needs and destiny, and man's relations to God and eternal life, assume another form and tone when they are inwrought into a system, of which the person and work of Christ are the centre, and which is shaped

by the power of these truths. If ever the jarring and contesting creeds of Protestant Christendom come together, and unite in one confession, it will not be so much by and through a logical adjustment of their conflicting and extreme dogmas, as by union in a creed of which Christ is the life and centre, as he is also the source of life to each believer, as he is also the centre of the scriptural revelation and of the history of the church. As the Christology is more studied and better understood, so will Christians, in their creed, come nearer together, be less strenuous for non-essentials, and more tolerant of minor differences. "In essentials, unity; in non-essentials, liberty; in all things, charity;" and the essentials are in Christ; the non-essentials are remote from him; the charity is love to others for His sake.

We have said that this awakened interest in Christology does not betoken any decrease of regard for the doctrinal contents of the Christian system as distinguished from its practical work. It rather tends to heighten the interest in the most profound truths of the Christian faith. This is apparent from the very nature of the investigations and discussions which are now most prominent. We are brought to the heart of the divine revelation: divinity and humanity, and their union, the relation of God to man, and man's redemption from sinthese and kindred points centre in the Christology. The natures and person of Christ, atonement and redemption, inevitably become the chief topics of thought and discussion. And, as a matter of fact, Christian literature is now occupied with these themes.

In the person of Christ, according to the immemorial faith of the Christian Church, there is a union of two natures, the divine and the human, in one Person. The personal element is derived from the divine nature, and it is as really one as the natures are two; neither is the person to be divided, nor are the natures to be confounded or commingled. The humanitarian view, which makes Christ to be essentially a man; the Arian hypoth

esis, which represents Christ as a kind of second God, the product of the Father's creative will; the Sabellian theory, which, while allowing Christ to be essentially divine, denies his eternal personal subsistence in the Godhead-these are the chief errors which the received doctrine of the church is intended to guard against; while, at the same time, it concedes that there is, in the nature of the case, an essential mystery in the Incarnation, which man cannot fully grasp. Into the depths of the self-consciousness of an Incarnate God, man cannot hope to penetrate. And as to the modifications of the generally received doctrine which have been proposed, it may be safely said that no one has secured any general acquiescence and that no one is so complete in its statements, and, on the whole, so free from difficulties, as the recognized doctrine of the Church of Christ.

And, in point of fact, those great systems of thought and theology that have ruled men's spirits, are and must be coherent, logical, organized, and definite. In this is one of the secrets of their power. No essential point can be omitted, or seriously altered, without a disorganizing effect. Thus is it, in an eminent degree, with the Christology of the Christian faith. Leave out the divinity, or the humanity, or the union of the two in one Person, and the coherence and unity of the system have departed. The great ontological problem of the union of the divine with the human has its real solution in the person of Christ, or it has not been solved. All other attempted solutions leave the fact of union unexplained; they state the union in words as necessary, but have nothing real which they can show as corresponding to the words. It is a nominal and not a real union. Whereas, in the doctrine of the person of Christ, we have the living bond and fact of that union, consummated and realized in a Person-and a person is the highest spiritual reality. All other schemes give us words and not things, names and not realities. In the Incarnation we have "the middle term," which else we vainly seek, between the Infinite