the climatal extremes to be more strongly marked than at the present time. The summer heat and the winter cold in Central Europe somewhat resembled that of Siberia, and to this may be attributed the strange association of northern and southern animals, such as the hippopotamus and the reindeer, in the area extending from the Alps and Pyrenees to the Baltic. To the north of this the temperature was probably arctic, and to the south it was probably warmer than it is now. In the middle area mers de glace occupied certain isolated districts, such as Ireland, the greater part of Scotland, Wales, Lancashire, and Yorkshire, Auvergne and the Pyrenees."

The writer identifies the palaeolithic races of Auvergne in France and some other localities with the Esquimaux.

German Reviews.

STUDIEN UND KRITIKEN. (Essays and Reviews. 1873. First Number.) Essays: 1. GOTTSCHICK, The Visible and the Indivisible Church-on what this Distinction is based, and what Holy Writ teaches concerning it. 2. RoOSCH, The Jesus-Myths of Judaism. Remarks: 1. MICHELSEN, On Five Important Passages of the New Testament, concerning the Relation of the Gentiles to the Kingdom of God and to the Gospel. 2. KOSTLIN, The Controversy on the Birth-year of Luther. 3. LINDNER, On Hutten's Book: De Schismate Extinguendo. Reviews: 1. KLEIRNERT, Deuteronomy, reviewed by RIEHM. 2. HOLLENBERG, Contributions to Christian Knowledge, reviewed by BESSER. 3. SIEFFERT, The Apologetic Foundations of the science of Christian Faith, reviewed by SCHMIDT.

The introduction to this first number of the new year informs us that in the place of Dr. Hundeshagen, deceased, Dr. Köstlin, of Halle, has become one of the editors-in-chief of this veteran theological quarterly. The theological standpoint of the Studien will remain unchanged; it will defend a theology which will steadfastly adhere to the faith of the Apostles and the Reformers, but at the same time endeavor to find for it a new scientific form, in accordance with the consciousness of the living age.

The article by Rösch discusses all the Jewish traditions on the life of Jesus, as they have been collected in the wellknown works of Wagenseil, Lightfoot, Eisenmenger, and Schöttgen. It traces the history of each of these traditions, and tries to explain how they may have originated.

As appears from the article of Dr. Köstlin, the controversy of the German theological periodicals on the birth-year of

Luther is not yet closed. clusion that we are as yet unable to decide either in favor of the year 1483, which was formerly generally regarded as the birth-year of the great reformer, or whether the year 1484 has more in its favor.

Dr. Köstlin comes to the con

ZEITSCHRIFT FUR HISTORISCHE THEOLOGIE, (Journal for Historical Theology.) 1873. First Number. 1. GORRES, Critical Researches on the Insurrection and the Martyrdom of the Visigothic Prince Hermenigild. 2. BRANDES, A Sect of Quakers in Westphalia.

The history of Arianism in the Spanish kingdoms established by the Visigoths and other German tribes has been elaborately treated in quite a number of recent German works. Among the older works Aschbach's History of the Visigoths, (Geschichte der Westgothen, 1827,) was especially valuable; among those of a more recent date the "History of Arianism" and the "Law of the Visigoths," by Helferich; the "Kings of the Germans," (Könige der Germanen,) by Felix Dahn, the "Manual of German Antiquities," (Hundbuch deutscher Alterthümer,) by George Pfahler, the history of "Gregory of Tours" by Giesebrecht, have awakened a new interest in the subject. The article by Dr. Franz Görres, in the above number of the Journal for Historical Theology, treats of the history of the last Arian king of the Visigoths, Leovigild, (from 569 to 586,) and in particular of the rebellion of the king's eldest son, Hermenigild, who had joined the Roman communion against his father, and of his final overthrow and execution. The history of this war is an interesting illustration of the want of patriotism which generally has been shown in history by the Catholic subjects of non-Catholic Governments. The rebellion of the Catholic prince was so utterly unjustifiable that even the Catholic writers of those times severely censure it; nevertheless, he was supported by most of the Catholics, Bishops and clergy, and a large portion of the Catholic population, for no other reason than because they hoped he would overthrow the power of an Arian ruler. The Pope subsequently canonized the rebel, notwithstanding the unfavorable opinion which even the contemporaneous writers of the Catholic Church had expressed with regard to him, and ultramontane Church historians, like Cardinal Baronius (Annal.

Eccles., vii, p. 656, ed. Antwerp) and the Spaniard, Antonio de Yepes, expressed the monstrous opinion that Hermenigild was right in taking up arms against his heretical father, as "a Catholic must love his religion more than parents, honor, glory, and life." The author of the article, Dr. Görres, appears to have made the history of Spanish Arianism a special study. Besides his article on Hermenigild, he has published another article on the beginning of the reign of King Leovigild, in the historical periodical Forschungen zur deutschen Geschichte, 1872, and he announces a special monograph on the "Relation of the Visigothic king Leovigild to Catholicism and to the Arian State Church."

ZEITSCHRIFT FUR WISSENSCHAFTLICHE THEOLOGIE. (Journal for Scientific Theology.) 1873. First Number.-1. HILGENFELD, The Epistle of James. 2. GRIMM, On Philippians 6-11. 3. HINSCH, Researches on the Epistle to the Philippians. 4. HOLTZMANN, Lucas and Josephus. 5. HITZIG, Belthis. 6. O. L., Nathanael. 7. HILGENFELD, John in Asia Minor.

Probably the most novel among the many novel assertions which this organ of the Rationalistic theologians of Germany is wont to make is the contribution in the above number on Nathanael. The author of the article, who merely signs his name O. L., undertakes to prove that the Nathanael mentioned in the fourth Gospel (i, 40-52) is the Apostle Paul. The argumentation in support of this strange opinion is as weak as it is novel.

In the last article Professor Hilgenfeld defends the Johannean origin of the Revelation against a new work by Professor Scholten, of Leyden. (Der Apostle Johannes in Kleinasien. Berlin. 1872.)

ART. VII.-FOREIGN RELIGIOUS INTELLIGENCE.

THE ROMAN CATHOLIC CHURCH.

THE SECOND CONGRESS OF OLD CATHOLICS.-On September 20, 21, and 22, the Second Congress of the Old Catholics was held at Cologne. Whatever opinion different religious parties may hold of the doctrinal system and the future of this new religious organization of Germany, it is agreed on all sides that this Second Congress by far exceeded in importance the First, which was held one year ago at Munich, and that it must be regarded as one of the most memorable ecclesiastical assemblies of the

year 1872. Dean Stanley, of Westminster, who attended it, is quoted as having said that never in his life had he been present at a meeting when the great religious questions of the day had been discussed with greater ability. All the leaders of the movement were present, and the invitations which had been sent to representative men of other Churches had been accepted by many. Among those who, by letters addressed to the Congress, expressed their sympathies with its labors, were the Anglican Bishop of Lichfield, Professor Pusey and Canon Liddon, of Oxford, Beresford Hope, Professor Ossinin, of St. Petersburg, the Italian Senator Terenzio Mamiani, Dr. Prato, member of the Austrian Reichsrath, Dr. Völk and Baron Stauffenberg, members of the German Reichsrath, Priest Aguayo, of Madrid, and the Patriarch of the Catholic Armenians. Professor Schulte was elected President of the Second Congress, as he had been of the First. The proceedings consisted of meetings of delegates, and of public meetings, in which the most prominent members of the Congress made addresses on the questions which are chiefly agitated in the new religious movement. The meetings of delegates were attended by more than four hundred members. Among those who took part in these meetings were the Old Catholic (Jansenist) Archbishop Loos, of Utrecht; the Anglican Bishops Wordsworth, of Lincoln, Browne, of Ely, and Whittingham, of Maryland; Dean Stanley, of Westminster; Professors John Wordsworth and W. Talbot, of Oxford; Rev. Mr. May, of London, (the representative of the Bishop of London ;) Archpriest Yanyschev, Rector of the Ecclesiastical Academy of St. Petersburg; Alexander Kirejev, Adjutant of the Grand Duke Constantine, and Secretary of the Association of the Friends of Enlightenment in St. Petersburg; Rev. Chauncy Langdon, of Florence, (who for many years has been laboring in Italy for the establishment of friendly relations between the Church of England and the reform party in the Catholic Church of Italy;) Rev. R. S. Nevin, rector of the American chapel in Rome; Abbé Michaud and E. de Pressensé, of Paris; Professors Döllinger, Friedrick, Huber, and Cornelius, of Munich; Maassen, of Vienna; Reinkens, of Breslau; Knoodt, Reusch, and Langen, of Bonn; Herzog, of Lucerne; Lutterbeck, of Giessen; Michelis, of Braunsberg; Dr. Hasenclever, member of the German Reichsrath; and Professor Bluntschli, of Heidelberg, (one of the leaders of the Protestantenverein of Germany.) Most of the priests who have joined the Old Catholic movement were present, with a number of professors of gymnasia, of members of town councils and the high judiciary.

In his opening speech the President of the Congress, Professor Schulte, gave a comprehensive review of the history of the Old Catholic movement, and of its present situation. The Old Catholic movement had been begun by men who were Catholics, and wished to remain Catholics, and who on that account refused to recognize doctrines which until recently had been entirely unknown and foreign to the Catholic Church. As all, or nearly all, of the bishops had submitted to the innovation, they had no tribunal before which a suit could be instituted against the Bishop of Rome and the other episcopal innovators, and as the large majority of

the lower clergy had followed the bishops in their apostasy from the true Catholic faith, many of the faithful Catholics were unable to attend divine service and to discharge their religious duties. Thus the Old Catholics were compelled to provide for the establishment of divine worship in their congregations, and, as the Catholic system recognizes the episcopate, to provide for the election of bishops. All the Old Catholics desired far-going reforms in their Church, and to resume the labors which to that end had been made during the last five centuries. But the proper organs for carrying out these reforms were diocesan, provincial, and Ecumenical Synods. So long as these Synods of the Old Catholic Church were not organized, they must be content with abrogating some glaring abuses which individual congregations have a right to deal with. In the meanwhile they would stand on the ground of the positive Christian faith, as it was contained in the Scriptures, and as it was explained by the first seven Ecumenical Councils.

Addresses were then made by the Archbishop of Utrecht and the Bishop of Lincoln, after which the discussion on the plan of the organization of Old Catholic congregations, as proposed by a special committee, was begun. This plan, which, in fourteen paragraphs, carries out the principles indicated in the opening speech of the President, was adopted with only one verbal modification. One of these paragraphs declares that as long as the Old Catholics of Germany have no bishop belonging to the Old Catholic faith, the bishops of the Church of Utrecht (the Jansenists) and the Armenian Church will be asked for the performance of the episcopal functions-in particular of the administration of the sacraments of confirmation and ordination; that, however, the Old Catholics of Germany reserve to themselves the right of re-establishing a regular episcopal jurisdiction by the election of bishops, who are to be chosen by the Old Catholic priests and the representatives of the Old Catholic congregations, and who are at the beginning to labor like the missionary bishops of the ancient Church. The abolition of celibacy, which was demanded by one delegate, was declared not to fall within the competency of this Congress, but the legislation on it was reserved for the authoritative organs of the Church, that is to say, the future bishops and Synods. For the same reason a notion to recognize only the first seven Ecumenical Councils as true councils was almost unanimously voted down.

The Archpriest Tanyschev, of St. Petersburg, expressed his delight with the course of the Old Catholics, and in particular with the resolutions to adhere to the faith and constitution of the ancient Church, and to leave the carrying through of the needed reforms to the lawful authority of the Church. The main point of difference between the Greek and the Latin Churches he declared to be that the well-known addition of Filioque to the creed of the universal Church, as agreed upon by a council of the whole Church, had been onesidedly adopted by the Latin Church, without the consent of the Greek. He advocated the just rights of different nationalities within the Church, and, on the other hand, dwelt on the importance of the truly Ecumenical Councils of the entire Church,