Graile or Gradual, viz., the Officium or Introit with its Psalm, the Graduale, Tract, Sequence, Offertorium and Communio, are written in smaller characters; a practice which may be seen with few variations in a large number of the editions of the Sarum Missal."-P. lxxi.

There is no musical notation whatever in the book.

We have endeavoured to give, as briefly as possible, some idea of this book to our readers, and we have done so, rather in the words of the editor than our own; it is only fair that one, who has taken so much pains, and has made himself so well acquainted with the subject, should be heard. We shall conclude with a short notice of the life of the saint whose name it bears, drawn from the same source.

"It often happens that in the case of the early Celtic saints of this country, very little remains to us, save a name embalmed by local traditions. The immense fertility of the Celtic Church, or the facility with which departed worthies were, in popular estimation, regarded as saints, is evident to any one who studies the map of Brittany, Cornwall, Ireland, or the Highlands of Scotland. In some places every parish church seems to have had its separate patron, and it is no common [uncommon?] occurrence to find a single parish preserving the remembrance of a saint, whose fame has never passed beyond its narrow limits, and of whom, save the name, all memorial has perished.

"This is nearly the case with regard to S. Ternan, although his local celebrity extended to a province. A vague tradition that he was Archbishop of the Picts, a local connection with Kincardineshire, and especially with the town of Upper Banchory; a confused and untrustworthy legend in the Aberdeen Breviary, and some allusions in the Irish Festologies, are all that time has left us of one, who, in his day and generation, must have exercised a mighty influence for good among the simple people to whom he was sent.

"The Breviary devotes three Lections to his history, while it confuses the chronology by making him live in the time of S. Gregory; its information may be regarded as probably authentic, so far as it relates that he was born of noble parentage, in the province of the Mearns, the modern county of Kincardine; that he was baptized and instructed in the Christian faith by S. Palladius, who (as Bede, almost in the words of S. Prosper, records,) was sent by Pope Celestine to the Christian Scoti in 431.

"S. Ternan died at Banchory, on the river Dee, within his native province. There, not far from a fresh-water lake containing one of those stockaded islands, known among the Irish by the name of 'Crannoges,' his relics were preserved until the Reformation, together with his bell, called the Ronnecht, (doubtless a square bell, such as those preserved at Birnie and Cawdor,) and his copy of the Gospel of S. Matthew, enclosed in a 'tystyr,' a case of metal wrought with gold and silver; for thus the saints of old testified their exceeding reverence for the word of God."-Pp. lxxii. lxxiii.

COOK'S SERMONS.

Sermons preached in Lincoln's Inn Chapel, and on Special Occasions. By F. C. Cook, M.A., Chaplain in Ordinary to the Queen, one of H. M. Inspectors of Schools; Preacher to the Honourable Society of Lincoln's Inn, &c. London: Murray.

We have read these Sermons with special attention, because Mr. Cook is at present a star in the ascendant; and as editor of the proposed commentary on the Bible, we have been anxious to ascertain what is his actual theological status.

Before entering upon the volume before us and its doctrinal tendency, we would take this opportunity of definitely expressing our views concerning the peculiar religious phases through which the Church is passing at the present time. To state the matter broadly, there are three parties in the Church: 1st. The Dogmatic; 2nd. The Latitudinarian; 3rd. The Puritan. It is scarcely needful to say that each of these religious schools may be conscientiously followed without any direct connexion with personal holiness. But there can be no doubt, we conceive, that a definite apprehension of abstract truth, and a due acceptance of the Catholic faith in all its fulness, is the most likely to lead to definite and consistent practical results. And why? For these obvious reasons. The so-called liberal spirit must be inconsistent, having no positive principles on which to build a consistent practice. Again, the sectarian spirit is of necessity narrow, and leads men to measure divine subjects by a human standard of goodness and perfection; in other words, it is private opinion. Both these systems (if they may be so called) lead only to natural religion.

On the other hand, while we acknowledge that the sound theologian may not be a saint, yet his views are at least in practice fixed upon certain principles above himself: the abstract doctrines, that is to say, which regulate the kingdom of GOD on earth, are received by him as unchangeable and distinct from all human laws. But so long as the standard of God's infinite perfections is lowered to man's limited range of thought and imagination, religion can only be natural. Whereas if truth be such as we have described it, it is really imperishable; for it springs from the storehouse of GOD's eternal wisdom, and must be all-sufficient.

Without definiteness there cannot be power. In scientific pursuits, whatever cannot be proved according to fixed laws, would be discarded as being at variance with the system to which the subject had been reduced. And but too faithfully is this carried out even to the irreverent condemnation of the written word of GOD Himself. So confident is man in the laws of human science,

that he dares even to pit them against the Scriptures, the work of Omnipotence; because, in certain points, they seem to him at variance with those known rules by which he regulates and establishes all his discoveries and conclusions. Men acknowledge human science, because they find it can be regulated upon established principles. What should we think of him who attempts to set aside all or some of the known axioms in medicine or astronomy, or to blend together (on the notion of being liberal) various opinions of unscientific men? What consistency could there possibly be in his own opinions? what satisfactory results could accrue from his practice? and, further, how could he impart to others any definite idea of his science, when he had no system on which to act or speak? Little need be said of the utter inconsistency of resting in these matters on private opinion only for authority, independently of outward observation and fixed natural laws.

This brings us to the point in question-viz., the absolute necessity of a dogmatic theology. If natural science is not accepted as such, unless it be built on certain laws which have been proved to follow each other in due course, can we suppose it to be consistent that the most important of all sciences should be without its fixed rules; that man should be left to his own devices in matters wherein the mind of GOD alone is sufficient? And, again, the same reference to natural science may be made to decide the scope and extent of man's intellectual powers. Man's ignorance of GOD's works leads him naturally to examine them, and he developes his science according to the laws which he finds existing. Further than this, he knows nothing either of GOD or of the way in which these things were produced originally. Far less can he dive into the mind of Almighty GoD, and discover His reasons for thus ordering His own works. Certain definite facts exist, and because they are definite they are accepted. Thus, in the very dogmatism of fixed theological laws, rests the catholicity, unity, and power of the Church; because it proves her divinity. Thus we maintain that a consistent practice can be developed only from a definite system of religious teaching. And although it does not, as a matter of course, follow that personal holiness should accompany a due acceptance by faith and the intellect of sound theological truths (any more than it follows that physicians would always live virtuous lives, because they know that if they infringe certain natural laws they destroy their bodily health), yet any practical results springing from definite doctrine must lead, as a rule, to greater consistency and personal holiness. For, as we have seen, it is this attribute of unchangeableness in GoD which commands submission from man; and his heart, conscience, and will can scarcely fail of being brought under the power of that which his faith entirely receives. The question naturally now arises, How are we to know of this doctrine? In other words, What is truth?

In natural science certain known results imply equally certain causes. So it is in theological science. But beyond that which absolutely concerns man's present and eternal welfare to know, is not revealed. Faith takes her stand, and apprehends in all mysteries the hidden wisdom of GoD, into which human reason was never intended to penetrate.

What then is truth? Our LORD answers, "I am the way, the truth, and the life." To be in CHRIST is therefore to be in the truth: the faith of the Church rests on Him, Who is "the same yesterday, to-day, and for ever." However man may turn or misinterpret the truth by his own imagination or speculations, he cannot destroy it-he cannot change it. It is independent of his will or intellect, because centred in GOD. CHRIST speaking of Himself as man, says, "My doctrine is not Mine, but His that sent Me." How then may we learn the truth of God with certainty? Again, our LORD answers, "If any man will do His (GOD's) will, he shall know of the doctrine." And further, in speaking of the unity between GOD and the Church in Himself, He says, in that all-comprehensive prayer of His before His crucifixion, “I in them, and Thou in Me, that they may be made perfect in one;" and thus securing to the Church His own ever abiding Presence, He leaves a sacred promise which cannot fail, "Lo, I am with you always, even to the end of the world."

How then can there be doubt concerning the truth? The Spirit of GOD dwelling in the Body of CHRIST, and inseparable from Him, cannot err; the laws for the government of every part of the body cannot change, unless it were severed from the Head, when it would be no longer of the Body. The mind, therefore, of GOD in CHRIST, must be made known to the whole Catholic Church by the Spirit of Truth; for that which conduces to the well-being of the Body, must be consistent with its union with the Head. And it is by virtue of this union, that the HOLY GHOST gives vitality and power to the acts of the Church, as the divinely appointed keeper and dispenser of truth. It is impossible, therefore, but that what has been testified to by the whole Body, from the Apostles' to the present day, must be the mind of GOD; and if so, it must be the truth, and that truth must be definite and unchangeable as God Himself. That the Apostles were most careful to preserve consistency in doctrine, we find clearly shown by the great importance they attached to soundness of opinion; the approval of those who, being baptized, remained "stedfast in the Apostles' doctrine;" and the great censure passed upon such as opposed the same. "Mark them," says S. Paul, "which cause divisions amongst you, and offences contrary to the doctrine which ye have learned, and avoid them." And again, to S. Timothy, he denounces such as "will not endure sound doctrine."

We find that amidst all the storms of persecution, heresy, and

irreligion, the truth has itself stood firm and unshaken, its foundation being on the Rock of Ages; through all the darkness and obscurity which has hung over the Church from time to time, we find the truth continuing to shine forth; the Star of Bethlehem has pointed to the Incarnate GOD, the true Sun Who was to draw all humanity unto Himself. Truth then is independent of man, springing not from his own mind, but from GOD. It is consistent and perfect, infused into the Church by the HOLY GHOST, severally binding her members into one body in CHRIST, Who is the Truth.

Thus far we have endeavoured to show the absolute necessity of definite catholic teaching. There is, however, we apprehend, in these days, a particular danger attending on dogmatic teaching. From the great laxity prevailing in late years, any one who is bold enough to seek to revive a sound theology is very likely to be condemned as the propounder of new doctrines by his opposers of certain parties. But this is a risk which every faithful preacher must be prepared to run. Otherwise he is guilty of fraudulently raising his own reputation at the expense of those of his brethren who are more honest and consistent, and, what is even worse, he does not teach the truth; for the truth is something whole and complete, while a half-truth is practically a lie. Now we entirely acquit Mr. Cook of all conscious insincerity. He has persuaded himself probably that it is wrong to give offence, and so he has very skilfully steered round many points of controversy. But what is of necessity the result? He has left his hearers and readers, in so far as they accept him for their teacher, ignorant of large portions of the great scheme of Redemption. Thus the sermon headed "S. Paul's Doctrine," is a clever dissertation on justification and acceptance in and through CHRIST, by His most precious blood-shedding, as the full, perfect, and sufficient atonement for sin, and the application of that sacrifice to the soul in Baptism is clearly set forth, a matter calling for great thankfulness. Yet it is strange that he who so thoroughly appreciates the majesty of that plan by which man becomes a new creature in CHRIST, and thus is placed in a state of salvation, should apparently imagine that the soul of the newly baptized is left to carry on, by subjective efforts of his own, the work commenced in him while he was unconscious of good or evil. This would be a most incomplete theory of redemption, that the Christian should be without laws to regulate his spiritual life, as definite as that by which he became a member of CHRIST. It implies that all objective doctrine is lost in the subjective, so soon as man has regained God's favour by union with His SoN.

The great Sacrament of the Altar is scarcely mentioned in the volume. Not that we can imagine for a moment that Mr. Cook has done this from irreverence or want of sincere religious feeling;