desired and some to be modified. The discussion of these topics is more than once kindled up and illuminated by touches of genius; as where, before discussing the ninth chapter of Romans, he quietly observes that a single page of Scripture ought to be interpreted in the light of its general tenor, and not the whole Bible by one page.

The positive defects of the work result from certain exaggerations of good qualities. For instance, the author thinks that whatever is traditional, accepted on authority, and void of that personal faith which is derived from our own life and experience, is of no real worth before God. Apply this principle to the absolution of sins by priestly authority, as held and practiced by the great majority of Romanists, and Protestants in general would have no objection to present. Pressensé goes further, and applies it to the Sabbath. His view is that Christian holiness requires the believer to make every place a sanctuary by his prayers, and every day sacred by his worship; that, consequently, no place possesses more sanctity than another, no day is more sacred than the next. The entire life is to be the voluntary, sweet, and solemn commemoration of our redemption. Such, he thinks, are the principles of the New Testament in the matter. The arguments by which he supports this view are: (a) The Christians of Ephesus assembled every day to hear Paul; (b) The Sabbath was closely connected with the Old Covenant, and has vanished with it; (c) It has not the practice of the apostles in its favor; (d) The statement of the historian, Socrates, that the Lord and his apostles did not establish festivals by law; and of Justin Martyr, that Christians are not Sabbatarians. He admits the value and legitimacy of Sunday observance, but denies its divine institution. To support this position he says that to refer the origin of the Sabbath to the Garden of Eden is to forget the true conditions of innocence, which does not admit the distinction of days into sacred and profane, and that the appeal to the Decalogue is set aside by the fact that it contains the law of holiness only in an imperfect form, and is abolished with the rest of Judaism. He thinks Acts xx, 7, and 1 Cor. xvi, 2, too vague to furnish us any real light.

The fact that the Ephesian Christians assembled daily to listen to Paul proves nothing against their special observance

of Sunday as a day set apart for the worship of God. In seasons of religious interest among American Churches, daily worship is frequently held for months, without any derogation from the pre-eminent sacredness of the Lord's day. If the Sabbath was closely connected with the Old Covenant, it no more follows that it has ceased with that Covenant than that prayer and worship, also closely connected with the Old Covenant, have ceased with it. The practice of the apostles, so far as we have any light on it, is in its favor. When Paul was at Troas he appears to have waited a full week in order to meet the Church on Sunday, apparently its fixed day for assembling, when he kept them up till midnight with his preaching, and the next morning set sail without having slept. Paul recommends deeds of charity to be done "on the first day of the week, when ye are come together," a plain implication that they were wont to meet on that day especially for worship. Saint John speaks of being in the Spirit on the Lord's day, an appellation which implies that it was observed in memory of the Saviour. The statements of Socrates and Justin Martyr imply nothing more than that Christians, like their Master, kept holy-day not in the Jewish but in the Christian spirit-a change which Christ, as Lord of the Sabbath-day, authorized and encouraged his disciples to make. Even Pressensé is constrained to admit that the tendency of the Apostolic Church was to celebrate worship on Sunday with especial care. Whatever may have been abolished with Judaism, all that the Jews had in common with the Patriarchal Church, based on permanent human wants and social necessities, would be retained in the ultimate faith of the Prayer, praise, exposition of religious truth, union in such services, would therefore be retained. Strange if the fixed. period for such united worship should be left to human caprice! While innocence does not allow a distinction of days into sacred and profane, in the sense that we are to be holy on the former but may be wicked on the latter, it does allow the setting apart of special seasons for special religious acts. Even unfallen man might set apart periods in which to dress and keep the garden of Eden, while other hours were given to meditation and p Under moral trial, man would need to devote special seasons to reflection on his duties and prayer for assisting grace. Open the book of Genesis and read the first chapters. In those

race.

prayer.

pages we learn that God is one, spiritual and free; that creation is his voluntary act, and no necessary evolution of an eternal substance; that man is free and responsible; that the race is a unit, and that God established marriage. Among these truths, which underlie all human society as its granitic foundations, the institution and sanctification of the Sabbath are mentioned. Thus the Sabbath was ordained before the fall for man in his innocence, amid the bliss and peace of Eden. If he needed it then, how much more does he need it now in his sins, dangers, and anxious cares? On this point Pressensé has yielded to unwarrantable claims. Yet it is only simple justice to say that he believes in no vulgar degradation of Sunday to secular labors or to holiday sports.

The author's view of baptism is vitiated by the same excessive notion of the importance of freedom in all that is done for God. Omitting other statements which we should have to discuss and reject, let us consider his conclusion that infant baptism has no sufficient sanction in the New Testament. It should be observed that Pressensé is not led to this position from what is expressly taught in the Bible, so much as from certain general principles which he thinks must govern and decide the question. He denies that baptism is an opus operatum, conveying of itself sacramental grace. The author speaks of it somewhat confusedly as the sign of admission into the Church and as the sign of conversion. In all who receive it baptism is said to be connected with personal faith, the most free and individual act of the human soul. Thus it becomes, in Saint Peter's phrase, the answer or pledge of a good conscience before God. Pressensé then adds that "baptism is no more than faith transmitted as an inheritance. This is the great reason which leads us to think that in the apostolic age it was not conferred on infants." In a note at the close of the volume, the author freely admits that the child enjoys the benefits of redemption. He strikingly says, "He is enveloped in salvation; salvation belongs to him." It is then added that "the question is whether baptism represents objective grace, or grace received and assimilated?" For the sake of brevity, only so much of Pressensé's view is stated as is vital to the point under debate; since it is obvious that, if his great argument breaks

down, the minor ones can oppose no effectual resistance to the truth of Pedobaptism.

We assent heartily to all that Pressensé asserts against the notion of an opus operatum in this sacrament, against any magical virtue of the waters of baptism to wash away sin. We freely confess that most of the baptisms mentioned in the New Testament are cases of adult baptism. But the Church was then in its infancy; all who entered it must enter by the door of baptism, since the rite was then first administered, and sufficient time had not yet elapsed for persons baptized in infancy to reach the years of understanding and ratify a covenant made in their name. In such circumstances most of the baptisms would be of adult persons, and of course would be connected with their profession of faith; so that these facts may be accounted for without any implication that infant baptism did not exist.

Why does Pressensé speak of baptism as the sign of admission into the Church, and also as the sign of conversion? Surely conversion and admission into the Church are not the same thing. There must then be something in both which is signified by baptism. What then is this element, common to both, the soul of both, which is figured in the sacrament? When conversion begins it finds man dead in trespasses and sins. When completed, it renders him dead indeed unto the world, but alive unto God through our Lord Jesus Christ. Paul does not hesitate to tell believers, "Christ is our life;" nor to say, "For me to live is Christ," and "Christ liveth in me." What baptism represents visibly, as really existing in conversion and in admission to the Church, is this vitality of the believing soul in and through the Saviour. This vital relation always exists between the renewed soul and the Redeemer. It is the essential ground of fellowship in the true Church of believing souls, the spiritual fold of Christ. It should exist, and indeed is always supposed to exist, in all who enter the communion of the visible Church. The real question, then, is, whether the infant child stands in this vital relation to the Saviour? Pressensé affirms that infants are "placed under the benefits of redemption." This phrase is comprehensive enough, surely; but how barren of meaning would it be should it be found that their life is not hid with Christ in God! Personal faith is indispensable to this spiritual life in adult and

responsible souls. For infants it cannot be, since then the kingdom of heaven could not be of such as they. To suppose that children do not sustain such relations to the Redeemer would compel us to assert that they are not meet for the kingdom of heaven. The truth is, that Pressensé has been misled here by his supposition that the free consent of the human soul must be secured before any real covenant can be established between it and its God. He forgot that into all the implied contracts of civil society thousands are yearly born, and on no other ground than this do they bear their obligations and enjoy their benefits; that in the preceding dispensation children were sharers in the covenant of promise. But he regains his usual good sense and candor when he affirms that there is nothing wrong in infant baptism, provided due care be taken to instruct baptized children in the faith, and to enforce upon them their duty in riper years to assume and fulfill the obligations of the baptismal covenant.

The reader will owe us hearty thanks if this article shall lead him to a better acquaintance with one of the ripest scholars, ablest thinkers, and best writers of the Protestant Church. When Father Hyacinthe had read Pressensé's Life of Christ he sought out the author, warmly pressed his hand, and thanked him for the valuable service he had rendered to the Church universal. Every Christian reader of his works will often long to emulate the generous example of the noble Carmelite. May this work come to due completion in these troubled days when, amid tumbling thrones and all the clangor of war, the kingdom of God moves on to its glorious triumph. Late, and burdened with many sheaves, may the author enter his rest!

. ART. II.-SPECTRUM ANALYSIS.

[SECOND PAPER.]

PHYSICAL CONSTITUTION OF THE SUN-SOLAR SPOTS AND PROTUBERANCES.

BEFORE passing from our consideration of the sun, let us notice some of the indications which have been obtained relative to its physical constitution. Scarcely a month passes that fails to shed some new light upon this important question. In