ART. I.-A few Words of Obvious Truth; or, the Authenticity of a Part of the Baptismal Commission, as reported in the existing Copies of St. Matthew's Gospel, disproved by the Testimony of the Author of the Acts of the Apostles, and by the References to the Rite and Practice of Baptism in St. Paul's Epistles. By a Unitarian Believer in the Divinity of the Son of God. London. Gossling and Egley. 1829.

THE object of this pamphlet, and the course of argument by which that object is pursued, are fully stated in the title. The alleged discrepancy between the practice of the apostles, who are uniformly recorded to have baptized in the name of Christ, and the language in Matt. xxviii. 19, is indeed a formidable one to all, whether Trinitarian or Unitarian, who hold that our Lord was, by that language, instituting a positive rite. We should certainly have expected in that case-nay, we should have deemed it obligatory, that the verba ipsissima of the Founder should have been employed whenever the rite was performed. Yet even then the supposition of forgery would be a desperate resource for the removal of the discrepancy. It is one which they have no occasion for who think that Christ was not then instituting a ceremony, but alluding to a practice.

Our author urges two objections to the Unitarian interpretation of this passage: 1st, that it is incredible "that our Saviour should have commissioned his disciples to baptize in the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost; and that they should have considered it as perfectly optional whe ther they would so baptize, or simply and solely in his name;" and, secondly, that "the apposition, on the same plane, and in hæc verba, of the Supreme Being, a mere' man, and an attribute," defies the gravity of his criticism. Now the first objection does not press on any Unitarian quasi Unitarian, but only as he, in common with Trinitarians, may happen to be one of those who regard the passage as a record of the institution of the ceremony of Baptism. And as to

FROM whatever cause it proceeds, the fact is certain that no mode of conveying instruction has been more generally unsuccessful than that in which the ca techetical form is adopted. The failure probably arises from the desire of the catechist to condense the information imparted within replies which shall not be burdensome to the memory of the pupil; whereas amplification rather than condensation is necessary to secure the interest of the young or uninformed mind. The Philosophical Catechism before us appears to have no better chance of benefiting grown men, than the generality of its predecessors of enlightening the rising generation: though we do not mean to imply that we should have liked its philosophy better under any other form. The work, as the author tells us, is written for mankind at large; but what will mankind at large think of questions and answers like these?

"Q. Under what forms does matter occur in the world?

"A. It exists in the solid, liquid, and gaseous states.

"Q. Are not researches upon matter in some of these conditions more especially difficult?

"A. Researches upon matter in the form of gas are particularly so; for matter in this state is intimately connected with the personified principles which act in the human body; and here, observation and induction, the sole guides to certainty, abandon the investigator."—

P. 4.

The Natural Laws of Man are divided into the classes of the Vegetative, the Intellectual, and the Moral; under the first of which are arranged Sobriety and Temperance, which have hitherto been supposed to bear some relation to the

moral constitution of man. Here, however, they are classed with circulation and secretion. The intellectual faculties are no less strangely defined.

"Q. What is Attention then? "A. Attention is the effect of the entity self aroused by the active state of the affective and intellectual faculties. Its strength is proportioned to the degree of energy of the acting powers, that is, of the powers which attend.-Attention is synonymous with activity, and certain success is impossible without activity of the respective faculties."-P. 58.

What becomes of the science of Political Economy if the following be correct?

"Q. Has the word Theft the same meaning in the civil as in the natural code?

"A. Natural Morality declares many actions to be Thefts which are permitted by civil laws. Every one, according to the first, deserves the name of Thief who does not love his neighbour as him. self; he, for instance, who amasses wealth by means of the industry of others. In the eye of civil laws, however, he only is a Thief who takes, by force or fraud, aught that, agreeably to the law, belongs to another."-P. 143.

Dr. Spurzheim declares that "Natural Laws are inherent in beings, often evident, always demonstrable, universal, invariable, and harmonious." We are obliged to confess, however, that some of his laws are far from being evident to us, and seem to require demonstration from himself; without which we can gain no insight into their existence.

Let us try another instance of the harmony of the Moral Laws.

"Q. What are the virtues and the vices of Self-esteem?

"A. True diguity and nobleness of character depend in part on Self-esteem, and the faculty is virtuously employed in the production of such an effect, &c., &c. "Q. What is the signification of the word Humility?

"A. It is synonymous with the inaction of Self-esteem. Humility, to be a virtue, must result from the struggle between Self-esteem and the moral sentiments, and the victory of the latter. Humility is also occasionally used to signify activity in the sentiment of Respectfulness."

-P. 145.

It follows, therefore, that Humility and true nobleness of character are incompatible! Again,

"Q. Is man's ignorance great? "A. It is exceedingly great. The most common and necessary things are

totally unknown to the bulk of mankind.

"Q. Why is man's ignorance so great?

"A. The cause lies in the generally small size of the organs of his intellec tual faculties. This is also the reason why study is so commonly irksome and distasteful. Moreover, the civil, and especially the religious, governors of nations, have frequently opposed every sort of obstacle to the cultivation of Intellect aud the diffusion of Knowledge.” -P. 157.

The plain truths which in a work of this kind are unavoidably stated, are, however, made as little intelligible as possible by a mode of expression which cannot be excused on the ground that the volume is a translation from the French. We should be inclined to pass upon it the judgment which Professor Blumenbach is reported to have expressed of the science of Phreuology"There is much in it that is new; and much that is true. But that which is new is not true, and that which is true is not new."

ART. III.-A Manual of the Physiology of the Mind, comprehending the First Principles of Physical Theology. By John Fearn, Esq. London. Longman and Co. 1829. 8vo. pp. 244.

THE title of this work appears to us to be unfortunately chosen. It is only reasonable to expect that a Manual should at least be intelligible and, further, it will scarcely answer the purpose designed if the doctrines it holds forth are not only novel, but startling or ridiculous; or if new principles are proposed to account for facts which may be clearly explained on principles already established. As it is injurious to pass censure without adducing proof, we extract a passage which, in the author's opinion, contains a fact equally new, important and iuteresting. The emphatic words are marked by himself.

"The primary Phenomena of Vision, that is to say, our SENSATIONS OF CO LOURS together with their INTERLIMITATIONS,-possess an office in the Human Mind far more comprehensive than that of their character in being the General Facts of our Immediate Visual Percep tion: for, in addition to this last-mentioned character, they are the General Facts that are FORMATIVE of the INDICES, or ENVELOPS, of all our Thoughts whatever, with some special and very limited

exceptions; or, in other words, with the limited exceptions just mentioned, it is a general fact of the Human Mind that we THINK IN COLOURS. The thing in question amounts in effect to this, that in a certain and a very important sense, the Whole Universe of Human Thoughts is comprehended under the Laws of our Primary Visual Modifications."

"The General Fact in question is only One Species of a fact still more general, -namely that we think of each and every one of those Concrete Masses of Attributes that are the assumed Prototypes of our Complex Ideas, UNDER SOME SORT OF ENVELOP, or Visor, 'of SENSATION; or else, under Some Envelop, or Visor, or Idea of Sensation,"-Pp. 76, 84.

Few readers, we imagine, will feel more apprehension than we do, after reading the above, that the censures which are liberally dealt out in the Preface of the work before us, against Professors Brown and Stewart, will exert any very disastrous influence on the reputation of those philosophers.

ART. IV.-My Religious Experience, at my Native Home. Boston, U.S. 1829. Pp. 36.

In this little tract is offered no exaggerated contrast between the effects of cheerfulness and gloom in early religious impressions. The misery which is caused in the young mind by premature and excessive excitement of the imagination on religious subjects, and the danger of a pernicious and often fatal reaction of feeling, are described with truth, though not, perhaps, with sufficient simplicity of language. The following brief remarks on the subject of Revivals in religion are valuable:

"Now the secret of the revival, I conceive to be this. These associations (of early gloom) or remembrances are powerfully excited, are brought before the mind's eye with a renewed and start ling vividness.

"A preacher addresses an audience on the subject of religion. He portrays their sinfulness in the darkest colours, and the consequent wrath of an offended God. The torments of hell are set forth, the danger of delay is urged, and all, in that peculiarly dolorous tone which has become an established characteristic of religious fanaticism and superstitious fear. No sooner are these topics thus touched upon, than a host of awful images start up in the minds of the hear

them himself. To their kindled imaginations, the last trump now sounds, the end of the world is come, the dead are raised and assembled before the terrible glory of the Infinitely Just. The guilty are condemned, and cast into the buruing lake." "Almost all the inhabitants of Christian lands have their minds filled with the images and the associations of which I have spoken. But very few of these reason much on religious opinions. The majority receive the figurative representations of Scripture as the literal truth. No wonder that revival preachers produce such tremendous results, with all the poetical machinery of the Scriptures, of religious hymns, of creeds and catechisms, of Milton's Paradise Lost, and of their own invention besides, to wield in their cause. The same preaching would be in vain among the Heathen.

"As a proof that revivals are produced in the way I have mentioned, I ask the reader to look at the Hindoos of the present time. How little effect has the preaching of missionaries on their minds! They have preached for years concerning this awful God, and his iufinite punishments of the unbelieving and the wicked, to very small purpose. The fact is, the Hindoos have no associations in their minds, connected with the figu rative imagery of Scripture. All is new to them, and foreign to their usual current of thought and feeling. There is no excitement, no sympathy. It is with them as it would be with us, should they send missionaries here, to convert us to their faith. Should any one attempt to excite among the Hindoos a more devout attention to their own religion, and should array before their imaginations all the terrors on the one hand, and the delights on the other, of their mythology, no doubt he would produce a Pagan revival, very like, in many of its features, the fauatical tumults which have, from time to time, risen and subsided in many parts of the Christion world. Now, if these last are produced by the special influence of the Holy Spirit, as is pretended, it would matter not whether the subjects of this influence were educated in a Pagan or a Christian faith. Did not the apostles make multitudes of converts, in many nations of various and deeprooted religions-even thousands in a day? They were truly assisted by the Spirit. But could modern Gentiles more resist this same Spirit, than the ancient? Methinks that it must be most evident to the candid, that the wonder-working power of the great conversions, or revi