epoch, the idea of a profound and mysterious philosophy, concealed under the symbols of every form of worship and the formulas of every religious system common to Egypt and to Persia, to Hermes and to Zoroaster,-this idea arises anew in the 16th century, and fills many minds with eccentric notions.

Certain books, evidently apocryphal, or at least of very doubtful authenticity, such as the famous Pomander,* the Oracles of the Magi, the Manual of Zoroaster, are put into extensive circulation, eagerly read, commented on with ingenuity and prodigious enthusiasm, and under the cover of the general credulity, the pantheistic notions with which these books are imbued penetrate the minds of all, and destroy Christianity at its roots. At the same time the Cabbala flourishes again with Pico di Mirandola and Reuchlin, and, as in the days of Akiba, it mingles with the interpretation of the Bible certain mystical and pantheistical speculations, which unite in the work of overthrow and dissolution. So true is it that Pantheism pervades the genius of this epoch, that we find it proceeding from the very same school from which we might have anticipated an entirely different spirit, that of the Peripatetics. Of the two branches which separate at this point, the most productive and original is the Pantheistic. This it is which has produced Cisalpini.

Such were the springs whence Michael Servetus derived his stream. Thus was he deeply imbued, I might say infatuated, with Pantheism. Parmenides, Plotius, Proclus, were his favourite authors. The books of Hermes are quoted in his works side by side with the Holy Scriptures. He appeals to Zoroaster and Moses, Philo and St. Paul, Numenius and Origen, Porphyry and St. Clement. This mixture of sacred and profane authorities completely distinguishes him from the other Pantheists of the 16th century, such as Bruno and Cisalpini, and gives him his peculiar characteristic. He is at the same time a Pantheist and a sincere Christian. He makes use of the metaphysics of Neo-platonism, not in the least for the purpose of stealthily undermining or openly doing battle in the breach with the dogmas of revelation, but in order to transform while in the act of interpreting them. He is sincerely desirous of regenerating Christianity by means of Pantheism. This he calls its restoration.

Certainly this attempt, utterly impracticable as it may in reality appear, is not without a certain grandeur and originality. Nevertheless, if it assigns to Servetus a solitary post in the midst of his contemporaries, we shall entertain an erroneous conception of it, if we imagine that it was the original conception of a man of the 16th century. From the first ages of Christianity, it rose into distinction and excited potent heresies. Though struck down by the Church, it constantly gathered new strength and pursued its course entirely through the intellectual darkness of the middle ages. Sabellius, Praxius, Eutyches, in the ancient world,-Scotus, Erigèna, Amaury de Chartres, and David de Dinant, in modern times, gave to Servetus an unbroken series of forerunners. Individually, he is but a link in

Consult respecting the Pomander of Hermes Trismegistus, the Symbolique of Kreuzer, translated and remodeled by M. Guigniant in his work entitled "Religions de l'Antiquité," B. iii. notes 6 and 11.

the chain of Pantheistic interpreters of Christianity, which recommences with Spinoza and is prolonged to Schelling and Hegel, to Schleiermacher and Strauss. Let us give an account of this resolute effort to introduce Pantheism into the bosom of Christianity,-an attempt always frustrated, yet constantly renewed,-with which the name of Michael Servetus ought henceforward to be united.

(To be continued.) į

NOTES ON THE GOSPEL OF ST. MARK.*

LARDNER'S opinion may be assumed correct, that this evangelist is the same as John Mark, mentioned in the Acts, the nephew of Barnabas, at one time fellow-traveller with Paul, ultimately with Peter, with whom he was in Rome when he compiled his Gospel, A. D. 64. This Gospel contains strong internal proofs that it had been revised by the apostle Peter, of which there is an early tradition. Tertullian, about the year 200, says that this Gospel may be reckoned Peter's, whose interpreter Mark was.

Ch. i. 38: " - for therefore came I forth." Heylin takes this to refer to his having come out that morning, Jesus having gone early to dispose himself for preaching by prayer in a solitary place. This seems a good sense, but it is negatived by the parallel passage in Luke iv. 43, "I am sent." The reading of the Vatican and other ancient MSS. is confirmatory of the latter sense.

66

Ch. ii. 28: Therefore the Son of Man is Lord also of the sabbath." This would seem to imply that he was the Lord of something else. But the order of the original may suggest a different rendering, "The Son of Man also is Lord of the sabbath;" the reasoning being, If for the benefit of man in general the sabbath was instituted, he who came to reveal man's duty might dispense with this positive institution, if it came in the way of the discharge of his commission. If, however, it be thought that in this case kaι would have come before κυριος (Lord), I would propose this rendering, "The Son of Man is Lord even of the sabbath," i. e. notwithstanding its great sanctity; but the former reasoning would seem to be the most cogent. This, however, is adopted by Newcome and the Improved Version, though not by Mr. Sharpe. I solicit the attention of your learned readers to this minute point. Ch. ii. 23: " the ears of corn." Mr. Field, in his Introduction to a Series of Questions on the Gospels, p. 27, presses it as a strong objection to Dr. Carpenter's chronological arrangement, that it requires the transposition of the account of the walk through the corn-fields, the time when it would have fallen according to his arrangement, viz. October, not being the time when the occurrence could have taken place. Though for many years adopting that arrangement in its great outlines, I was never satisfied with that transposition, and always felt it as a great difficulty. It was with satisfaction, therefore, that I met with the observations on this occurrence in the Introduction to Dr.

*See C. R., Vol. XII. p. 392.

Palfrey's Harmony, Boston, 1831; and see C. R., IV. 875. It may be made sufficiently to appear that such a change in the time of the above transaction is no necessary part even of Dr. Carpenter's arrangement, and certainly need not follow the adoption of its distinctive feature, that John vi. 4 is the crucifixion Passover. This I consider to be nearly demonstrative, and of essential importance to the right arrangement of the events of our Lord's ministry. Now, looking to the situation which the two events, walk through the corn-fields (ch. xii.) and the feeding of the five thousand (ch. xiv.), occupy in Matthew's Gospel, separated by the occurrences, probably, only of a few days, the inference is reasonable enough, that the walk through the corn-fields must have preceded by a few weeks the last Passover. That occurrence was placed before a Passover by two continental theologians in the 17th century. (See C. R., IV. 876.) The following thoughts may perhaps remove some of the difficulties of this supposition. Tovs sráxvas will not imply thoroughly ripe corn, i. e. barley, Mark iv. 28; and it is observable that this evangelist omits the rubbing of the grain in their hands, which is found in Luke, not an eyewitness. This circumstance might very naturally be added by one who had not the benefit of personal knowledge. Nay, the illustration which Christ gave might seem to justify that addition.-I have little doubt, therefore, that the transaction occurred according to the time assigned to it in the narrative of the evangelists, and agree with Mr. Field that no violent transposition should be made, while I still adhere to the leading features of Dr. C.'s arrangement.

66

Ch. x. 13, 14: " young children - little children," where the original is in both instances raidia. Mr. Sharpe has rendered both, "little children." I think our word" children," by itself, is sufficient. Luke, it is true, uses ra ẞpeon in the former instance; but he had not, like Matthew and Peter, the benefit of personal inspection. And Schleusner says (3), that Boɛpos sometimes denotes a young person somewhat grown up, like the Latin puer, and cites this instance, as well as the reference to Timothy's childhood, in which he had a knowledge of the Scriptures (2 Tim. iii. 15). The children are represented as coming to Christ, and I consider the criticism of Grotius (on ch. ix. 36), too often overlooked, to be important. Ver. 16, where the C. V. and nearly the same in Sharpe's translation, " and he took them up in his arms," Grotius renders, complexus est, embraced, and compares with the Heb. pan, which has that signification. Haudiov, though a diminutive, is used in this Gospel, v. 39, 42, for a girl of twelve years of age; and in Luke ii. 43, Jesus himself at the same age is so called. Mark xvi. 9-20. The last twelve verses of St. Mark's Gospel, though found in all existing MSS. and Versions, with one remarkable exception, are yet considered by Griesbach, in his 3rd ed. of 1805, as probably spurious. The passage is, however, ably defended by Kuinoel; and Griesbach himself, in his 2nd ed., 1796, has affixed no mark of suspicion. In his Commentarius Criticus, he has detailed the grounds of his later judgment. With high reverence for this great authority, I venture to think that he is in this instance mistaken, and am confirmed in this opinion by a recent critic (Fritzche, 1830), who has fairly detailed the arguments on both sides. The report of the omission of the passage in several carly authorities is not sufficient against the united

weight of all existing authorities save the Vatican, which exception I admit to be remarkable enough. But are we quite sure that that MS. is not mutilated in this part? And is it wholly of the most ancient origin? When the fac-simile is published, long promised to the learned world, we shall be far better able, I think, than we now are to estimate its general antiquity and value, and the weight of its single authority in this remarkable instance. It would disclose a serious view of the materials for the settlement of the N. T. text, if all the authorities are mistaken excepting this individual. On the whole, I am disposed to receive the judgment of the late Dr. Carpenter,* after having fully considered the whole subject, as near the truth:

"The external evidence against this passage is very slight. The supposed inconsistency between it and the two other Gospels is the chief ground of argument. There is less appearance of discrepancy than might reasonably have been expected."I add only, that Lachmann, 8vo, 1842, has discovered no disposition to give up the passage. M.

BOLINGBROKE.

He entered public life endowed with every gift of nature, of fortune and of education, except the most important of all-fixed principle. A handsome person, a strong constitution, a most engaging yet most dignified manner, were his external recommendations; and were supported by a rich fund of reading, deep powers of thought and boundless ambition. He looked through the characters of others with a keen and searching eye. His eloquence, both commanding and rewarding the attention of his hearers, was ready, full and gushing; according to his own beautiful illustration, it flowed like a stream that is fed by an abundant spring, and did not merely spout forth, like a frothy water, on some gaudy day.† His genius was vast and lofty, yet able to contract itself at will-scarcely any thing too great for its grasp, and scarcely any thing too minute for its care. With such splendid abilities, such active ambition, he might have been the greatest and most useful statesman of his or perhaps of any age. But he utterly wanted virtue. He was no believer in revealed religion, whose tenets he attempted to sap in his writings and disregarded in his life. He had early rushed into pleasure with an eagerness and excess that might have been forgiven his youth and his ardent passions, had he not afterwards continued them from a miserable personal vanity. He aimed at being the modern Alcibiades-a man of pleasure at the same time as a man of business; sitting up one night to reel at a drunken orgy,-sitting up the next to compose a dispatch on which the fate of Europe might hang; at one hour dealing forth his thunderbolts of eloquence at the awe-struck senate-at another, whispering soft words at the ear of yielding beauty. There ceased to be any consistency between his conduct and his language. "Upon the whole of his extraordinary character," says his intimate friend Lord Chesterfield, "what can we say but, Alas! poor human nature!"-Lord Mahon's History of England, I. 36.

Harmony, 2nd ed., p. 303, note.

† See the Letter on the Spirit of Patriotism.

JOHN STERLING.*

THE biographies which have appeared in our country, during the last few years, have been, many of them, of a very interesting and important character. And by the side of the Memoirs of Dr. Arnold, Blanco White, and John Foster, may be worthily placed the pleasing portrait which Archdeacon Hare has drawn of his gifted and deceased friend, Sterling. Of this excellent and estimable man, so early called from the scenes and labours of earth, the world would have known nothing, but for the affection which prompted the preparation of the faithful and beautiful memorial now before us. It appears that Sterling, some years before his death, and during one of those painful illnesses to which he was so often subject, began to write an account of his own life, as the only service that he could by anticipation render to his children.

"I hope," he observes, "by a clear display of the faults I have committed, and the better influences to which I have been subjected, to help them, when they are of years for reflection, in the task of relying upon something above themselves, and in following this, not only zealously, but without the spurious humility of contented ignorance and prejudice. It also lies very near my heart that they should one day know how favoured I have been in my friends, and to set before them, as far as words can do it, examples which they may very possibly not find around them in actual life. But I have much to speak of which will require great nicety in the handling; and though, on my own account, I could even dare to tell whatever is worst of myself, it would not be the way to benefit those for whom I wish to write."

We regret that he should have destroyed these memoirs, and that hardly any thing remains of them but a few anecdotes of his childhood. His letters, which so touchingly and candidly describe his mental conflicts and spiritual experience, shew what such a work from his pen would have been. But as we cannot have the record of his history as he himself traced it, we owe a debt of gratitude to Archdeacon Hare for what he has done to delineate the mind and character of one whose story is so full of deep interest, and so suggestive of most valuable and instructive lessons to every thoughtful reader.

John Sterling was born at Kames Castle, in the isle of Bute, on the 20th of July, 1806, from whence, while he was yet a child, his parents removed to Llanblithian, in Glamorganshire, a rich and finely-wooded country, whose green, silent valley, brooklet and sweet pastoral scenes, were vividly remembered and loved by him to the last hours of his mortal existence. The four years which he passed there, had to him an "indescribable charm and sacredness." It was the spot of earth which supplied the first pictures of nature and of human life that he could recall, where dawned his consciousness of the feelings and aspirations, the frailties and trials, which afterwards characterized him. And he was accustomed to say, that it had for him an importance far beyond that of London, where he gained most of his knowledge, and of Rome, which had best fulfilled the vision of his fancy.

From his birth he was a very delicate child, and it was only by his

Essays and Tales, by John Sterling; collected and edited, with a Memoir of his Life, by Julius Charles Hare, M.A., Rector of Herstmonceux. 2 vols. 8vo. John W. Parker, West Strand.

1848.