who has no fears, or suffers no fears of worldly prudence to cry, Halt! to him in his career of consequential logic, and who has been ‘innutritus et juratus’ in the Grotio-Paleyan scheme of Christian evidence, and who has been taught by the men and books, which he has been bred up to regard as authority, to consider all inward experiences as fanatical delusions;—­I say, I can scarcely conceive such a young man to make a serious study of the Fathers of the first four or five centuries without becoming either a Romanist or a Deist.  Let him only read Petavius and the different Patristic and Ecclesiastico -historical tracts of Semler, and have no better philosophy than that of Locke, no better theology than that of Arminius and Bishop Jeremy Taylor, and I should tremble for his belief.  Yet why tremble for a belief which is the very antipode of faith?  Better for such a man to precipitate himself on to the utmost goal:  for then perhaps he may in the repose of intellectual activity feel the nothingness of his prize, or the wretchedness of it; and then perhaps the inward yearning after a religion may make him ask;—­“Have I not mistaken the road at the outset?  Am I sure that the Reformers, Luther and the rest collectively, were fanatics?”

Ib. p. 351.

  ‘Take no care what ye shall eat’.  As though that commandment did not
  hinder the carping and caring for the daily bread.

For ‘caring,’ read, ‘anxiety!’ ’Sit tibi curae, non autem solicitudini, panis quotidianus’.

Ib. p. 351.

Even so it was with Ambrose:  he wrote indeed well and purely, was more serious in writing than Austin, who was amiable and mild. * * * Fulgentius is the best poet, and far above Horace both with sentences, fair speeches and good actions; he is well worthy to be ranked and numbered with and among the poets.

‘Der Teufel’!  Surely the epithets should be reversed.  Austin’s mildness—­the ‘durus pater infantum’!  And the ’super’-Horatian effulgence of Master Foolgentius!  O Swan! thy critical cygnets are but goslings.

N.B.  I have, however, since I wrote the above, heard Mr. J. Hookham Frere speak highly of Fulgentius.

Ib. p. 352.

  For the Fathers were but men, and to speak the truth, their reputes
  and authorities did undervalue and suppress the books and writings of
  the sacred Apostles of Christ.

We doubtless find in the writings of the Fathers of the second century, and still more strongly in those of the third, passages concerning the Scriptures that seem to say the same as we Protestants now do.  But then we find the very same phrases used of writings not Apostolic, or with no other difference than what the greater name of the authors would naturally produce; just as a Platonist would speak of Speusippus’s books, were they extant, compared with those of later teachers of Platonism;—­’He was Plato’s nephew-had seen Plato—­was his appointed