culcate in her little children, could not be received until they determined to be baptized." P. 247.

In Letter XX. there is an interesting discussion concerning pleasure and happiness, in which, however, we tread on very tender ground. The argument amounts to this, that "if faith and grace do not so dwell and rule in our hearts that every thought and word and action be not designed to please God, they are sin." P. 257. The author allows that it may be probably thought that this argument is pushed to an extreme. Most decidedly we do think so: for granting the justness of his extreme view, every man who eats beyond what is absolutely necessary to the support of nature, or clothes himself in gar ments beyond what are requisite for mere comfort and decency, either to gratify his palate or please his taste, is committing sin; and according to the conclusion here drawn, "is not in a state of salvation." P. 257.

There is a remark at the commencement of the twenty-second Letter which may be a profitable subject for consideration with many religious characters.

"How truly lamentable is it to see men, to whom the Gospel has long been familiar, betrayed into passion and uncharitableness after they have succeeded in reducing the more sensual affections into obedience! they have learned that the work of the Spirit is to change the heart, and of that change they boast; they have read that the Spirit itself witnesseth with our spirit that they are the children of God,' and they arrogate to themselves that exalted degree of holiness ;-a sure sign of the hollowness of such pretensions." P. 279.

6

In the same chapter, we find the following beautiful and expressive passage:

Whatever state of feeling the mind may be in, the certain test of godliness is the correspondence of our life with that feeling. And we may here remark, that the best life is only a test of the most spiritual heart. How much then we degrade the soul, when we look at the works of the body as meriting eternal life. Rather should we exert our faculties, and look for higher analogies. The seasons are the productions of time; but, instead of being the purpose of his motion, they are only the incidental consequences of that motion, as time himself moves to his ultimate condition: so are the best works of men but mere casualties, which take their form and character from the circum ́stances and contingents through which the living soul' passes on its way through the valley of death to the great city of God. In pursuing this end, in striving after perfection, our whole time and powers should be employed. Eternity has been beautifully likened to the ocean, and life to a river pursuing its course to the great abyss. We may reduce the picture, and compare the life of a Christian to a rivulet

rising from some polluted source, and winding its constant and unobtrusive way over a bed of pebbles. Every impurity gently subsides, and leaves the stream, as it glides along, clear and purified, until the pellucid water flows on its way in the unmixed purity of its native element." P. 282.

The too much contended subject of faith and works is thus explained:

"The word faith is frequently used to express both the state of the heart, and the religious blessings which are promised to a stedfast belief, and which arise from such belief. Hence the word is liable to be abused. St. Paul therefore, and St. James, qualify the doctrine, and shew that faith itself is a fruit of the Spirit, and worketh by love; for as the body without the spirit is dead, so faith without works is dead also. When, therefore, the former apostle says, we are justified by faith; and the latter declares that we are justified by works, and not by faith only; a consideration of the primary and secondary effect of that deliverance from the charge and power of sin, will reconcile them both. God judges the heart; man judges the actions: with reference, therefore, to the judgment of the Deity, we are justified by faith; but with reference to our own judgment, we are justified by the works which that faith will produce; that only being a justifying faith, which is the belief of the heart unto righteousness." P. 285.

On reading the Scriptures, our author expresses himself in these terms.

"We should approach the Word of God with different feelings and views from that with which we open any other book. The Gospel being a spiritual truth, is in its nature essentially different from scientific truth; the latter being but the outward defect of the understanding, whilst the former has a positive influence upon the heart. And such an influence accords with those sublime notices of its origin and power, which lie scattered over its pages, like the stars in the firmament, and tell of the celestial source from whence the light of salvation flows." P. 287.

It is chiefly for the beautiful illustration at the close of this passage that we insert it; for we have great doubt (but the question would lead us to a length of discussion on which we are not now prepared to enter) as to the extent of the asserted difference between spiritual and scientific truth. A sceptic, unless we are much mistaken, would eagerly seize upon it as leading to conclusions, in which we should be most unwilling to agree.

It will be seen from the foregoing extracts and observations, that there is, in the volume before us, much to commend-something to admire; but perhaps more which awakens a suspicious feeling in the mind, that all is not sound beneath, which makes

great caution necessary in assenting to the arguments, and great discrimination requisite in detecting the just limits of the inferences which are to be drawn from them.

Our readers will perceive, from the note at the end of the Introductory Letter, which it is but bare justice to the author to insert, that the whole discussion is very liable to be misapprehended, from the terms having been employed in a different sense from that in which the writers, whose systems are opposed, have used them: and in which they are used in common. We consider, too, that the distinction made between moral and good works, altogether unfounded and dangerous. So long as that which is denominated the moral law, constitutes a part of the Christian code, there can be nothing improper in calling obedience to that law, morality. Works are not less moral because they are done on Christian motives: it is true, that a man may be moral without being religious; but he cannot be religious without being moral. The caveat above alluded to, is as follows:

"Lest the meaning of the author respecting morality, as expressed in the following pages, be either misapprehended or misrepresented, he thinks it advisable to say, that whilst arguing that moral works,— whereby he means works performed neither from a religious motive, nor for a religious end, have no religious merit, he has unequivocally insisted upon the performance of good works, i. e. such works as arise from a religious motive, and are performed for a religious end, as the fruit of faith, and the only test whereby men can be assured of their acceptance with God. As an authority for this distinction, the author names the twelfth and thirteenth Articles of Religion. It is hoped, therefore, that no one will be so weak, or so wicked, after this explanation, as to say, that because the author denies religious merit to moral works, he either, by argument or inference, advocates immorality." P. 12.

This note looks like the effect of certain misgivings, for which, we confess, there seems to us some reason.

The Harmony of the Law and the Gospel with regard to the Doctrine of a Future State. By THOMAS WILLIAM LANCASTER, M.A., Vicar of Banbury, and formerly Fellow of Queen's College, Oxford, 8vo. 486 pp. 12s. London. Rivingtons: 1825.

THE storm of controversy which was raised by the bold hypothesis, and still more audacious method of supporting it, adopted by the author of the Divine Legation of Moses, has long ceas

ed to agitate the theological and literary world. No traces of it remain but in the polemical tomes of the eighteenth century, which, by the great mass of mankind, are left to lie in dust, beside the more ponderous folios of the preceding age. New subjects of interest have arisen to occupy the public mind; and the number of those who are disposed to labour through the learned medley which was brought together into that memorable dispute, the Warburtonian controversy, is small indeed. There is, however, such an impression on the mind of most persons in favour of the mighty dead, that perhaps no author can now take up the subject without labouring under the double disadvantage of engaging in that which has ceased to command attention, and which is also supposed to have been exhausted by those whose merits have been stamped with the impress of time, and whose defects have been softened by its influence.

Of his disadvantages the author of the volume before us must have been fully aware: we therefore presume that nothing but a strong religious principle would have prompted him to bestow so much labour on an investigation, in which few would be disposed to give him credit for being successful, even out of the small number of those who might feel at all concerned in the undertaking. However important in itself, and however well adapted to develope superior talents and acquirements in the writer, and to excite a sympathetic feeling in the mind of the real theologian, the subject is too little in accordance with the spirit of the times to attract many readers; and the nature of the investigation it requires is equally unfitted to arrest the attention of those who may be led to enter on it merely by the expectation of finding a popular treatise on the points discussed. It is most probable that Mr. Lancaster hopes for the meed of honest praise, not from those who have thought little, but from those who have reflected deeply on the question; yet even here, unless his expectations be very limited, we know not how he can escape disappointment. Very different, in general, is the impression produced by the first efforts of the mind acting upon knowledge, which has yet all the charm of freshness, with all its vividness-and force, from that which is subsequently induced by incessant examination and revision. Even the interest in his subject, which can alone support an author in the tedious process requisite in works of this kind, ere the result of his lucubrations can be committed to the press; i's generally exhausted. When the mind is not buoyed up by some strong affection for its own offspring, and the student, (as in the case before us,) prefers the wearisome operation of sifting truth from falsehood, and of distinguishing the merely probable

from the certain, to striking out some new and bold hypothesis, which shall at least dazzle, if it do not enlighten, and confound, if it do not convince,-when this is so, the feeling with which the work is ultimately presented to the public must be very different from that with which it was commenced. A degree of surprise will generally be felt that the effect should fall so far short of the author's former anticipations; a doubt will generally rest on the mind that the whole is not so clear, so convincing, so worthy of its theme as it ought to be; and the knowledge that few appreciate patient labour in comparison of that "noble daring" which many attach to the idea of genius, will not add to the author's confidence: if he hope to have fewer opponents than the brilliant visionary, he must also expect to have fewer partizans.

Such has been the wreck of one system after another, that in addition to the suspicion with which all pretences to supe rior discernment are usually regarded, most judicious readers require some guarantee that their time shall not be altogether thrown away. This assurance at least we can give, that whatever impression Mr. Lancaster's work may leave on the mind, as to the degree in which his main argument is established, no one will rise up from its perusal without the most sincere respect both for the principles and intentions of the author. Though in some particulars we cannot altogether agree with him, and in many think his argument better conceived than handled; we certainly account ourselves under obligations to him for presenting us with a very able and satisfactory hypothesis, illustrated with much care and research, and well adapted to the solution of a problem in itself important and difficult, but rendered much more obscure by the introduction of extraneous matter, and the mystifications of a protracted controversy. The merits of the work and the character of the author seem, therefore, to demand an analysis as full as our limits will admit: to this we shall proceed in preference to making our own opinions the subject of our Article.

Mr. Lancaster opens the inquiry by referring to the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, as containing a developement of the dispensations of God towards mankind; and by insisting upon the necessity which hence arises of viewing each part with reference to the whole;-a consideration of which we never lose sight, and which becomes of the greatest importance in the course of the investigation. That a system of religion proceeding from God cannot be at variance with his essential attributes is certain. It is upon this ground, therefore, that objections against revealed religion appear most formidable