Poems, by ARCHER GURNEY, (Longman,) contains sketches of actual life, across which the author has softly and touchingly thrown the light and shade of deep human feeling; but through the whole is seen the higher and holier purpose, of leading the soul, through human sympathies and trials, to everlasting love. The ideas are poetical, and at the same time simple: the style is elegant and refined. We judge also, from most of the poems being in a second edition, that the author has a considerable following.

Mr. FLOWER's translation of The Three Books of Theophilus to Autolycus, (Masters,) is at length given to the world. The appearance of the book, from its size and type, is most inviting; in everyway presenting a contrast to the patristic translations put forth in France and Germany, or even by our own countrymen, such as Humphrey's, Hollier's, and others, during the last century. The great importance of S. Theophilus, (who, as a father of the second century, is a valuable witness to much of the doctrinal teaching of that early time,) demands for his work a more extended notice at our hands, which we trust next month to present to our readers. Meanwhile we would beg them for themselves to peruse this most excellent and readable translation by Mr. Flower.

There are few things more trying to the temper than to find a really good work of any kind marred by so obvious a fault that one cannot imagine how it can have been committed. We make no apology, therefore, for speaking with some vexation of the little volume entitled, Ruth Levison; or Working and Waiting, (Masters.) Up to a certain point it is really admirable, and speaks well and truly on the subtle dangers of self-seeking, and the heavenly sweetness of true self-denial; and then suddenly the whole aspect of the story is altered, and its lessons rendered abortive by the introduction of the unhappy incident which mars nine-tenths of our religious tales-the invariable marriage of the heroine to the curate under whom she has been working. The obvious objection to such a catastrophe has of course nothing to do with the question of the marriage of the clergy in the abstract, for surely it needs no words to describe the evil of thus depicting young ladies being led through a long course of training in good works and self-devotion (?) with this clerical "reward of merit" seen in perspective at the end.

This writer has the power of becoming a useful author, if such lapses as these are avoided. Is it too much to ask that our Church booksellers should combine to put a stop to this very serious drawback to the usefulness of otherwise good publications?

There is not so much to be said about Miss Grace and her Scholars; or, What can Children do for God? (Mozley, London). It is but a weak exposition of a vast subject, good enough, so far as it goes.

The question of the XXIXth Canon needed more satisfactory treatment than it had yet received. We are glad, therefore, that Mr. NEALE should have given us the benefit of his great historical knowledge in his letter on the subject to the Bishop of Oxford, (Masters.) Mr. Neale urges the repeal of the Canon as strongly as Dr. Wordsworth pleaded for its continuance. After reading both sides, we come to the conclusion that it is simply a question of expediency, on which Churchmen may allowably be divided.

S. JOHN THE THEOLOGIAN.-II.

THERE is nothing more interesting, in reading the personal history of great men, than to trace out the various circumstances and influences by which they have been educated for the work which they were appointed to do. The character of plants is varied according to the soil from which they derive their substance, and the climate under whose influence they gather the light, heat, air, and moisture, which are the necessaries of their existence; and in the unbiassed order of nature every plant is there placed where the adjuncts of its being are just those most calculated to develope its greatest perfection. The free and unhindered course of God's Providence is equally fitted to the development of those whom He has set in a far higher rank of creation, as it is to that of the vegetable world. Men whom He has destined for some singular and important work are set in such places as are best suited to their growth in mind and body for that object; and so far as His work is left unmarred, they are moulded into that capacity of mind and body which is most suitable to their work by all the outward relationships which they have with their fellow men, and by all the personal peculiarities of their position.

It occasionally happens that a very few details are enough to show us how this power of the Potter over the clay is exercised; but there are, perhaps, more in which the connection between cause and effect, preparation for the work and the work itself, are less evident. It is easy, for instance, to see how the last and greatest of the Prophets was prepared for his stern and uncompromising work, by entire disconnection from all human associations and influences; as also, in what manner his eyesight was cleared for the discernment of the Lamb of GOD by the severe asceticism which kept him engrossed with heavenly things. It is not by any means easy, on the other hand, to see how the life of a fisherman was a preparation for the Apostolic office, although the Apostles appear to have been taken chiefly from among men of that occupation. The most one can say is, that there is a certain faint analogy between the calling of fisherman and that of shepherd, by which several of the Old Testament leaders were trained to their higher duties; but the analogy is so slight, as not to constitute an explanation. And where there is so little told us respecting the early life of those to whom important tasks have been assigned in the Church of GOD,-little, in any case, beyond their parentage and occupation,-we are frequently quite unable to give any reason why they should have been specially chosen out of the crowd of their fellows for the purpose.

VOL. XXII.-NOVEMBER, 1860.

3 s

The early life of S. John the Divine is thus so scantily revealed to us in Holy Scripture, that it is impossible to trace out the way in which he was moulded from the first to the very special office indicated by that title. It might have been expected that the great theologian of the New Dispensation would be a man of surpassing acquirements, just as the builder of the Tabernacle was "learned in all the wisdom of the Egyptians," and the builder of the Temple endowed with the gift of "a wise and understanding heart," so that "all the earth sought to Solomon to hear his wisdom which God had put in his heart." It seems as if it would have been fitting that one who had to counteract the effects of so much misdirected heathen and Jewish learning by his writings, should have had a familiar acquaintance with learning from his earliest days. But nothing of the kind appears. He was the son of a fisherman; and (though this was indeed a by no means despised or ungainful business, and his father Zebedee was sufficiently wealthy to employ hired labourers1) there is no proof that his trade entitled men to a higher rank in society among the Jews of Galilee than it does with ourselves; while it is plain that S. John followed his calling as an actual labourer. He was indeed, at a later time, known to the High Priest;2 and the eis rà idia of S. John xix. 27 has been supposed to show that he possessed a house of his own, though it may perhaps better be interpreted that the Apostle took the Blessed Virgin thenceforth as his own mother, rather than to his own house 3 but after all, it is expressly said, in Acts iv. 13, that the Jews perceived Peter and John to be "unlearned and ignorant men," (aypáμμato,) and there is no insinuation that the Jews were otherwise than correct in their perception. We are therefore shut out from supposing that the education of S. John was at all of such a character as to fit him for his office of Theologos; and are constrained to ask of him, as the Jews did of his Master, "How knoweth this man letters, having never learned ?"4" Whence hath this man this wisdom ?"'5 Were it S. Paul of whom we were speaking, it might be said at once that his position, as a man of good rank and a Pharisee, almost necessarily obliged him to acquire that fulness of knowledge, in both secular and sacred learning, which every energetic and conscientious man in a good social position will be sure to gain; and that these were evidently a part of that training, which enabled

2 S. John xviii. 15.

1 S. Mark i. 20. 3 It seems exceedingly improbable that the Last Supper should have been eaten at the house of a stranger, if the beloved disciple had a house of his own wherein to entertain his Master. The old tradition, that the Evangelist had recently purchased this house on Mount Sion, and having become a neighbour of the High Priest, was thus "known" to him, seems equally unlikely, when we consider the wandering character of our LORD's life, and the shortness of the time which He ever spent in Jerusalem.

4 S. John vii. 15.

5 S. Matt. xv. 54.

him to do what he did in confuting Jews and heathen philosophers on their own ground. But in S. John the want of such advantages of human learning was as conspicuous as the presence of them was in the other Apostle; and when, therefore, we see a profundity of thought, a literary power, and a refinement which we should, but for evidence to the contrary, attribute to education, the best conclusion we can arrive at is, that such results were brought about in no small measure by that very unoccupation of his mind by human learning making the Evangelist especially open to impressions which were to be derived from close intercourse with his Master. Such impressions, once received into a simple, loving, and meditative mind, would abide there as its natural occupants, in that strength of simplicity which is, after all, the strongest moral power over others that exists.

The life of S. John has been drawn out from the page of Holy Scripture, and from tradition, by several original writers; of whom those most worth notice are Metaphrastes in the Oriental Church, Prochorus in the Roman, and Cave in the English Church. We feel, however, that, with a special object in view, it will not be thought superfluous to go over the same ground again in these pages; that object being to show that his later course did supply to the divine that kind of discipline and knowledge which was not provided for him (because not necessary) in his earlier days. We should hesitate, in his case, to call such discipline education, because his real education for that office was the discourse of his Master; but as we believe that there was a certain analogy between the associations of the desolate Patmos and the prophecy of the New Creation, and still more between those of the great city of Ephesus and the philosophy of the New Creation, which formed in each case a part of S. John's training for their enunciation, it is our wish to make the grounds of that belief clear to our readers.

The father of S. John is frequently referred to as such in the Gospels; but beyond the name of Zebedee, and the information that he followed the calling to which his sons were brought up, we have no clue to his history. Whether he influenced the Evangelist for good in his early life, and was in any way a minister of God's Providence in training the youth to the higher vocation of fisher of men, who can tell? Straws cast into the air show, however, the course of the unyielding, though invisible current; and it may be that, when reading of S. John and his brother S. James, that they were mending their nets," we find that "they were with Zebedee, their father,"-it may be the slightest possible indication (after the manner of Holy Writ) that the father shared in some measure in their preparation for the Apostolic office, a portion of the duties of which have been always considered to be symbolised by the action alluded to. The sons were to prepare the net of God's Church for the fishing of men; and possibly the father, consciously

66

or unconsciously, was to be a helper to them in the work of preparation. Of S. John's other parent we are able to glean some information by a comparison of S. Matt. xxvii. 56, S. Mark xv. 40, and xvi. 1, from which it appears that she was named Salome, and was one of the three holy women who, lovingly and reverently towards Him Who was stretched on the Cross, and lovingly too to her who must ever be next to Him in the reverence and love of thoughtful Christians, stood with the Blessed Virgin when the "sword pierced through her soul also." After the Sabbath had ended, too, this holy matron Salome, with the other matron, Mary the mother of James the Less and Jude, (wife of Cleophas, who was Joseph's brother,) shared with Mary Magdalene in the reverential pilgrimage to the Sepulchre at day dawn, when they would have lavished their treasures on the mangled Body of their LORD. If, then, one cannot speak very definitely respecting the history of the divine's parents, it is at least not hard to find, in such few circumstances as are recorded, indications of holy, thoughtful, and loving reverence, goodness, and care.

But there is some reason to suppose that there existed a near relationship between the family of S. John and that of the holy JESUS. In S. John xix. 25, the Evangelist says that "there stood by the Cross of JESUS His Mother, and His Mother's sister, Mary the wife of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene." Olshausen concludes that "His Mother's sister" was "Mary the wife of Cleophas," otherwise called Alphæus, and that Salome being the daughter of Joseph, there was thus a legal relationship between our LORD and the four Apostles, James the Great, James the Less, John, and Joses. But we are much more inclined to agree with Alford in supposing that the habit of suppressing his own name, which is characteristic of S. John, was also extended to the name of his mother; and that therefore the sister of the Blessed Virgin is really Salome, the mother of S. John,2 in which case S. James the

1 Pearson remarks, in a note on the third Article of the Creed, that there appears to have been an old tradition among the early Christians which is represented by the statement of Epiphanius, that Joseph had six children by a former wife, James, Joses, Simeon, Judas, and two daughters, Mary and Salome."

? Probably the following table of genealogy is correct, though it cannot be proved to be so :