The Author has no desire to conceal or reserve his own convictions, but these are of consequence to but few beside. Whereas the true grounds and reasons and bearings of the great religious questions being once clearly grasped, the Student's own convictions will be maturely formed, and will usually be stedfast. In this case there is no more reason to fear what the general result will be, than there was in the days of our fathers.

It is hoped that the method here pursued will be distinguished from a mere catena of authorities on the one hand, and from a mere cram-book on the other. The object certainly has been to stimulate research and enquiry, instead of resting in the mere manual. But this must depend on the earnestness of the student.

The rarity of patristic quotations may strike some as a serious defect. Those who think so will find brief extracts of this kind in Welchman's little work, so long used at Oxford; and more copious citations in the wellknown Exposition of the present Bishop of Ely. But the Author must further add that he thinks rather lightly of the benefit of such quotations to the ordinary Student. Their use is rather for reference than for 'getting up.' Few indeed are those who can retain them in their memory, and even their time may be generally more usefully spent in other practical matters which are insufficiently mastered.

But besides this, the Author must confess that he agrees with the present Bishop of Ossory in the Preface to his Sermons upon the Nature and Effects of Faith' when he says, 'the early divines from whom I draw so

6

largely were certainly at home in the Fathers; and they were led to conduct the great contest, so as to furnish any one who desires to make an array of ancient authorities, with an ample store of citations, and with great facility for enlarging it. But Romish controversial writers produced counter-authorities from the same sources; and though I am far from believing that upon this, any more than upon the other points which divide the Churches, there is room for reasonable doubt about the opinions, or at least the principles, of the ancient Fathers, yet to fix with precision the meaning of writers who, confessedly (at least before the Pelagian controversy), wrote somewhat loosely upon this doctrine, would require much reading and thought.' This fully illustrates the Author's conviction as to the practical utility of partial patristic extracts to the tyro in theology. For example, in the course of this work the valuable chapter of Waterland 'On the Eucharist' is referred to, in which he treats of the Eucharist as a sacrifice. What would the unassisted Student make of the numerous passages in early writers in which the Eucharist is called a true sacrifice, if he were not led to understand the real meaning of their phraseology? There must be something fundamentally unsound in the system itself, apart from mental unfairness, which has led to such opposite results. Jewel, for instance, in his Apology, produces a selection of Protestant quotations on the Eucharist from Fathers of the first four centuries; some modern writers amongst ourselves exhibit extracts from the same Fathers which look, to say the least, very like transubstantiation.

It is impossible, without a thoughtful study of their theological phraseology and general system, to understand rightly the true position of those ancient writers. Even our own Hooker may be, and has often been, misunderstood on some important points from want of this. Much more must this be the case when mediæval or modern theological glossaries are used to interpret the meaning of the earliest Christian writers. The Author has no misgivings as to the general result of that meaning. Our great Reformation divines were not mere men of indices and cyclopædias. They wrought our their systems by painful and laborious study of the Scriptures and the early authors. The mind and intent of primitive writers were familiar to them, and their appeal to antiquity was unwavering and decisive. Modern criticism has produced very little change in the general position as they left it. An excrescence, an inaccuracy, a spurious document, may have been lopped off here or there; but, substantially, the patristic bearing of the main controversies remains where our Reformers believed it to lie.

On the grounds, then, of the limited nature of this work, as well as of doubt as to their practical utility at this stage of advance, and their somewhat dubious value in themselves, patristic authorities have been scarcely at all referred to.

Some may desiderate a more important matter, a more distinct and copious demonstration of each Article from Holy Scripture. The Author by no means undervalues judicious selections of this kind from Holy Writ. At the same time, if the divine is ultimately to be

"mighty in the Scriptures,' it is thought that the Student should be guided rather to the manner, than to the details, of thus applying the Bible. Such at least is the course followed in the College over which the Author presides. The Scriptural examination and instruction in the Articles is oral, and precedes their more theological interpretation.

More, perhaps, need not be added in explanation of the objects and principles of this work. To write at greater length would have been in some respects an easier task. To unite compression of style with sufficient fulness of matter and reference, in dealing with subjects which invite discussion and amplification at every turn, requires a self-restraint not always easy to practise. But that compression is absolutely necessary when the object is not to make a display of learning, but to provide the theological student with a safe guide through his early difficulties. That some such treatise is greatly needed is very generally confessed. Should this attempt in any measure supply that necessity, it is not doubted that the criticism it may meet with will make considerable improvements possible on a future occasion.