S. James having written his Epistle with no reference to some particular ethical system, in which virtues and duties were classified in a particular manner, or associated with each other by their occurrence in a particular line of teaching. Nothing else can account for the rapid transitions from the mention of one duty to another not visibly connected with it. A reference to the book of Ecclesiasticus solves the phenomenon-exhibits the self-same concatenation of virtues, and supplies the line of thought on which they are strung together. (Compare S. James i. 2-12 with Ecclus. i. ii. throughout; both, of course, in the original Greek.) Whether S. James was acquainted with such system through the medium of that book or not, is indifferent ; it is just as likely to have been the popular ethical system of the day: it is enough that it fits exactly into the intricacies we find in the arrangement of that Epistle, unlocks it, and exhibits its contents under a regular and systematic form. We have only to add on the subject of the LXX. Version, a few remarks on the best method of studying it with the particular end in view of which we have been speaking. It will at once be seen that nothing but a regular and patient use of such a help can answer the desired purpose. We do not grow all at once into a scholar-like insight into the excellences and beauties of the classical writers; such insight is the growth of years, or however, of long acquaintance. And even so must the LXX. Version have been for some time our companion, before the full extent of its bearing on our studies of the New Testament is felt. We would suggest the constant use of it in the private reading of the Old Testament; and that, to be effective, should be followed up by a careful noting of such forms of expression as seem capable of illustrating the text of the New Testament. And conversely, in reading the latter critically, no pains should be spared in thoroughly sifting the LXX. usages which appear in any case to be adopted. Now this was formerly a laborious task, the field of the Version being so wide, that it was difficult indeed to be certain that one had not overlooked any important illustration. The Concordances of Kircherus and Trommius, and the LXX. Lexicon of Schleusner, are indeed valuable helps : but even with their assistance, much pains and discrimination are needed, to turn the contents of the Septuagint to account. We rejoice therefore that we are able to direct the student to a modern work, by which the process of exhaustive inquiry is immensely simplified. We allude to one of the noblest theological labours of our age, the 'Editio Hellenistica' of the New Testament, by Mr. Grinfield: the title of which appears at the head of our article. For 'improbus tabor' it rivals the Kircheri and the Trommii of past generations, even as it at present stands: had the learned and indefatigable editor been able to complete it, by adding to it his projected threefold collation of the Hebrew, LXX., and New Testament,1 it would have been a monument worthy to be placed side by side with Brian Walton, and Origen. 'Per decem annos,' he informs us in his touching and most religious preface, 'Per decem annos in hac Editione conficienda operam studiumque impensé elocavi.' We should not omit to add, that this brief but pregnant account of his labours is followed by the expression of a most modest appreciation of them. The plan of the work is simple, but most admirable. The New Testament text is printed entire, and to each verse is appended all that is to be found, either in the LXX. or the Apocrypha, illustrative of it. The versions of Theodotion, Symmachus, and Aquila, and the writings of Philo and Josephus, are also laid under contribution occasionally. Here, then, are not only collected together, but digested into the most convenient order for use, all those excellent materials for sacred study, which the one great body of writings kindred to the New Testament so richly supplies. We trust that no words of ours will be needed to recommend the work to the student. We do not

promise him that it will do away with the necessity of labour on his own part, but it will diminish it by fully one-half, making the study which it designs to forward both easy and delightful.

5. We have found ourselves obliged to enter at such length into the subject of LXX. study, that we must be more brief than we had intended to be upon other departments. It is clear, however, that for the critical study of the Inspired Text, generically the same helps are requisite as for the text of a profane author. Now, the genera of these helps may be reduced to three:-works of vocabulary, of syntax, and works of general illustration. Vocabulary is the first want of the reader of a new language. We have already, by recommending the study of the LXX., indicated one very ample source of New Testament vocabulary. Much, however, will, of course, still remain to be done, for which a Lexicon will be needed. Many valuable criticisms are, no doubt, to be found scattered in the more ponderous general Lexicons of Scapula, Constantinus, &c.; but a Lexicon specifically designed to assist the student of the New Testament is almost a requisite. And the older vocabularies of this sort-the Hesychius, and Suidas, and Phavorinus, whose glosses, often so hopelessly obscure, taxed the

patience and ingenuity of our forefathers, have, we need not say, been fully ransacked to furnish forth the more convenient compendiums of our own day. These last, however, call for some caution and discrimination in the use of them; and, we confess, we could not with much satisfaction have handed the tyro over to the fanciful mysticism of Parkhurst, or the more reckless and dangerous 'science' of Schleusner, Bretschneider, and Wahl, unaccompanied by any stricture on the objectionable parts of their writings. Happily, the honoured name of Hugh James Rose has established this claim, in addition to many others, on our gratitude, that he has left us a Lexicon on the basis of Parkhurst's, but omitting his puerilities, and embodying also such parts of Schleusner as are sound and valuable; thus rescuing at once the otherwise creditable work of his own countryman from the contempt into which it had necessarily fallen, and drawing the Rationalistic fangs of the continental interpreters.

The grammar and syntax of the New Testament is a subject which has been hitherto, for the most part, infelicitously handled. Writers have chosen to arrange themselves into two factions, the one obstinately maintaining, the other denying, the purity of the style. Hence, instead of candid inquirers into the matter of fact, we have generally had grammarians θέσιν διαφυλάττοντες, too anxious about the theory they had espoused to be safe guides. The real question is, What are the usages we find in the text? if, in any instance, they are obviously irreconcilable with Attic correctness, it is in vain to seek to explain them away; nor is there any object in so doing. Each passage must be examined by itself, and by itself stand or fall. What approximation the language thus examined may be found to make, as a whole, to the Attic, or any other standard, is a matter of secondary importance. A grammar of the New Testament dialect proceeding on this principle, has, at length, appeared on English ground; and we heartily commend it to the notice and use of the student, as no less meritorious in execution, than correct in point of design and plan. We allude to Mr. Green's treatise, named at the head of this article. We do not hesitate to speak of it as a work of the highest merit, even considered as a treatise on grammar in general; and, as a key to the grammatical peсиliarities of the New Testament, it is without a rival. For clearness, both of thought and expression, for philosophical accuracy and terseness of definition, for compression and comprehension, this modest and unpretending volume is truly admirable. The subjects of the article,' and of particles of design,' those knotty questions of sacred criticism, are very successfully treated, and for the most part, as we conceive, set definitively at rest. Bishop Middleton's work on the article may still continue to be read with interest as a meritorious essay, and he will ever have the great credit of having been the first to reduce the subject to a system; but the sounder definitions and theory of Mr. Green must render his work the text-book, henceforth, of the philosophical and accurate scholar. The worthy bishop had one great literary defect; he did not know when he was beaten. Hence, whenever his theory is at fault, as oftentimes it is, he sets up the most absurd defences; and in no one instance, that we remember, does he fairly give in, and confess that his theorem fails. From this cause, his book, useful as it is in piloting the student where all is tolerably plain sailing, utterly fails to bring him through any formidable straits whatsoever. Again, the rationalizing conclusions which Rosenmüller and others have built upon the allegation, that particles of design, in such passages as ἵνα πληρωθῇ τὸ ῥηθὲν διὰ τοῦ προφητοῦ κ. τ. λ. are used ἐκβατικῶς merely, will find their best answer in the calm and temperate discussion here bestowed upon them. On some minor points, we should differ in view from the writer, but they are chiefly matters rather of detail than of principle.

It only remains to speak of works of general illustration; and the consideration of these will very suitably bring to a close an article which will appear, at first sight, to recommend a somewhat confined line of study, with a view to the Greek text of the New Testament. While, however, it has confessedly been our object to prevail upon the student to adopt a very direct, and even matter-of-fact method of critical study, we by no means wish to exclude from view altogether many sources of illustration besides those we have mentioned; and we will now explain what place we would give to them. What we aim at, then, in the revolution which we would ain bring about in New Testament study in the original, is not, by any means, to discourage breadth and variety of research, but to secure that depth and solidity on which alone these can safely be based. Illustrative reading presupposes something to be illustrated; collateral reading, some principal line for it to run parallel to; and that something must be a rightly-directed, methodical, and critical study of the Sacred Text in the original. Let this be forthcoming, and stand firmly up as the stamen, the 'warp' of the web of theological study, and there is no limit to the amount of subtemen, 'woof' of every texture and colour, which may with advantage be worked into it. All that is then needed, is discrimination in the choice of materials. Here, then, will come in with admirable effect, the results of all chance and occasional theological reading, such as every student must more or less be led into. The writings of Fathers, however unsystematically and pro re natá studied, will now render up ample and available illustration, for we shall know where to place it. And our perusal of later works will teem with precious fragments of criticism in like manner, not now floating vaguely and without purpose, but ever tending towards one central line, and forming and crystallizing about it. The habit of noting and recording such illustrative passages, cannot be too highly commended: an interleaved copy of the Greek text supplies the readiest means of carrying it into practice. By this means, the student will find, after a while, that, in George Herbert's words, ' he hath compiled a book, and body of divinity,' and will fully acknowledge the truth of what the same revered though quaint authority adds on the subject, viz., that though the world is full of such composures, yet every man's own is fittest, readiest, and most savoury to him.' We cannot pretend to sketch anything like an exact scheme of reading, with a view to such a 'composure,' and must content ourselves with the suggestion of some principles of selection, and the enumeration of a few works which may be recommended for their bearing on particular parts of the Sacred Text. As a general rule, then, we would repeat our caution against 'running commentaries;' a 'commentarius perpetuus' is very apt to be a 'perpetual' clog upon our apprehension of the text: set treatises are a far more valuable kind of criticism. And while recognising as splendid exceptions the Catena Aurea' of S. Thomas Aquinas, long since translated as a companion to the Library of the Fathers, the 'Catena Patrum Græcorum,' edited by Dr. Cramer, and Theodoret's Commentary on the Epistles,' we would deprecate any exclusive use of even these, -any leaning upon them as all-sufficient guides. Euthymius Zigabenus, a Constantinopolitan monk, has left us a useful compendium of the earlier catenæ. On particular parts of the New Testament we would mention-on the Gospels generally, Mr. Isaac Williams's now well-known volume, and, with some reservation, of course, the Commentaries of Olshausen; on the earlier history of our Lord's life and ministry, Williams's 'Nativity;' Dr. Mill on the two first chapters of S. Luke; on S. Mark, the Greek Catena, (ut supra, supposed to be by S. Cyril of Alexandria,) as of especial beauty; on S. John's Gospel, Euthymius (ut supra); on the Epistles generally, Theodoret (ut supra); on the Epistle to the Romans, Bull's Harmonia and Examen (i. e. 'on Justification'); we know no commentary on it of equal value, after S. Chrysostom, who, of course, should be studied, if leisure permit, both for S. Matthew and the Romans. On the other Epistles, we know of no one modern book that can be commended; it is a want which we have already incidentally noticed. Finally, on the Apocalypse, Dr. Todd's