' required,'—' and a government which shall diligently repress every tendency to carelessness and every attempt at innovation.' (pp. 7, 10, 11, 12, 14.)

Entertaining the high opinion which we do of the ingenuous and candid spirit of our Author, we cannot but be surprised that none of the obvious objections to this principle appear to have occurred to him. The question is natural and unavoidable, Who are the persons, since the age of the inspired writers, who can prove themselves qualified to govern, in the minds of their fellow-men, the right of private judgement,' by drawing authoritatively the line of distinction between its wild and licentious exercise,' and that which is lawful and becoming; -to check, restrain, control, and bind the understandings of any men, in the concerns of religion or any other subjects of intellectual consideration? We say, authoritatively; for to acts of authority alone does Mr. R. refer. Authority is a right, founded upon the will and constitution of God, to command and to prohibit; and, when applied to religious matters, it implies the existence of an infallible principle of knowledge as to what is right and what is wrong, what is true and what is erroneous. We acknowledge this right, as residing primarily and infinitely in the Adorable God, and as exercised through the instrumentality of the prophets and apostles, who spake and wrote as they were moved by the Holy Spirit. We view it as our happiness and glory to recognize the principle of religious authority, inspired, infallible, and binding, in the Holy Scriptures; and beyond this, we need not, we cannot go.

But Mr. Rose, and many who think with him, conceive that this is far from being sufficient for duly preserving the interests of religion. Men may and do differ in their understanding and interpreting of the Holy Scriptures; and therefore, say they, there is a necessity for the interposition of a third power, in order to prevent the most perfect liberty of 'believing and thinking'; a something which shall possess 'binding authority' in matters of faith; and which shall be able to coerce, check, and control the exercise of men's intellectual faculties in the investigation of religious truth. Very good only let us know where we may find this third power. The claims of Popery are out of the question. Mr. R. and a numerous party in this country who think with him, are Protestants. Yet, they seem to feel no difficulty in the case! The Articles and Liturgy of the Church of England are by them fearlessly assumed as being possessed of this right and power. But do those documents, in fact, answer this intention? Is it not notorious, that there are, and always have been, in the Protestant Episcopal Church of our country,

most wide, vital, and irreconcileable differences of opinion;" from high enthusiasm and Antinomianism, down to the grossest Pelagianism? Further; if the proposed end were really obtained, we should still have a right, and be in duty bound, to ask, whether the means to this end be legitimate. Were these Articles and this Liturgy given by divine inspiration? Did the framers of them ever advance such a claim? Mr. R. indeed seems to make a close approach to the putting forward of the claim; (page 22.) but has it been substantiated by its proper evidence, that of miracles? Is it not notorious, that the Articles and Prayer Book derive their legal authority solely from the votes of Parliament and the Royal Assent? Was not the first Act of Uniformity carried in opposition to the declared opinions and wishes of nearly all the bishops? With what colour, then, of reason or of historic faith, can the absence of such a binding power' as this, be represented as the sole cause of the German heterodoxies? We conceive that other reasons for the existence of the evil are easily to be discovered. Of these, some are too obvious to need being particularized, as they fall under the general head of human depravity, and the tendency to abuse and to corrupt the greatest of providential blessings. Of the more specific causes, we shall mention four, each of which includes a host of subordinate evil principles.

1. The unhappy idea, which had a wide and pestiferous influence at the time of the Reformation, of making men disciples of Christ by government edicts and ecclesiastical mandates. From this wretched principle arose the chief evils of the sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, which produced the oppression and banishment of individuals who would not renounce all at once the Roman Catholic religion, and this by magistrates who had but themselves just quitted that communion ;-the murder of Servetus and many other deeds of horrid persecution, by even good men ;-the division of the Protestant interest into the two parties of the Reformed or Calvinistic, and the Evangelical or Lutheran ;-the fierce enmities and intolerance on both sides;-the thirty years' war ;the inforcing of the use of appropriating formularies by the whole population of a country;-the bringing all young people to the sacramental communion; and, in a little time, the training up for the holy ministry those who had given no evidence of being holy persons. One who saw the beginnings of these things with his own eyes, and whose errors should never cover from our admiration his piety, his integrity, his candid and amiable temper, his labours, and his cruel sorrows,-Sebastian Castellio, thus wrote in 1555.

• We see those who are endeavouring to reform the Church, bestow their chief pains in producing the outward form of 'sanctimoniousness; that is, that the word of God may be 'preached, the sacraments administered, the Bible read, psalms sung, prayers made publicly, and in every house, morning and evening, before meals and after meals, and all this in the vernacular tongue; also, that the Lord's Supper ' and public religious assemblies be attended; in a word, that • God be worshipped in all visible and palpable ways. What, some one may say, do not you approve of these things? Certainly I do far from me be the reprehension of them!But, since wicked as well as good men may perform these ⚫ outward actions, I wish to see the great stress laid upon such things as bad men cannot do, such as are the distinctive and genuine evidences of a true Christian.-How many per'sons, with the outward form of religion, are only so much ⚫ the more crafty, and malicious, and deceptive! So that the ' proverb is exemplified, "The nearer the temple, the further 'from God." Labouring to purify the Church without, yet 'neglecting to purify the soul within, is putting a new roof upon a falling house, or covering a patient with poultices, while deadly sickness lies at the heart.-O my brethren, let I us think of our own affairs, let us examine our own hearts, 'let us drive out our own lusts, let us fear the Lord,-let us 'bear with one another, let us love each other, let us not shed blood,-let us not harden our hearts.-The Lord is beginning to follow us with his judgements. War, pestilence, famine; all things rage on every side. Yet, every man sets up 'his own god, every man his own opinion; all are wise; every 'man listens to himself, and refuses to hear his neighbour. And, for a remedy of these things, shall we vex and accuse, banish, betray, and kill each other? Is this to appease an angry God? Is it not adding oil to the flames?-Let us seek • Christ where he is to be found,-scourged and derided, spit ' upon and reviled, his visage marred, his beauty defiled, and by the whole world rejected. Such a Christ must we choose, ' and embrace; if we would rise and reign with him.'*

It is not difficult to perceive, that the inevitable consequences of this state of a religious profession would be, first, formalism and pharisaism, subtle self-righteousness under the names and forms of evangelical doctrine; then, hypocrisy, in all degrees and shapes; then, indifference to sentiment, a mutual

* Quinque Impedimentorum, &c. i. e. Brief Enumeration of Five Hindrances which draw away the Minds of Men from the Knowledge of Divine Truth: a posthumous treatise, printed at Gouda, 1613.

and tacit understanding to regard confessions and formularies as articles of peace, rather than of faith, the exclusive preaching of the external evidences of revelation and of a dead morality; and finally, the avowed repudiation of fundamental truths.

2. We find another melancholy source of the evil, in the spirit and operation of a State Religion. Hence it is that irreligious men are constituted rulers, directors, and agents in the worship, profession, and government of the Church. Such men are radically enemies to the holy truths as well as duties of God's word; and, in the long run, they are sure to manifest their departure from them. Mr. Rose introduces with marked disapprobation, what he calls the 'grand position' of the pious Philip James Spener, (a contemporary and friend of Augustus Herman Franck,) that only a converted or regene' rated theologian could attain any true knowledge of his sci'ence.' (p. 36.) We trust that Mr. R. misunderstands the terms in which he gives this position; for, if not, if he denies the necessity of moral qualifications, a right state of the heart or affections towards God, in order, not to a mere theoretical understanding of the Gospel, but to a sincere faith in it, he is indeed sanctioning one of the most dangerous of errors. But we cannot impute to him such a denial. The solemn and awakening terms in which he speaks of the character of a Christian minister, in the perorations of his Second and Third Discourses, are irreconcileable with a disbelief of that influence of the Holy Spirit, from which all holy desires, all good 'counsels, and all just works do proceed.' We are far from saying that a man, without that heavenly grace, lies under a mental inability, or any sort of natural incapacity, for attaining a true knowledge of theological science.' On the contrary, we are persuaded, that nothing is wanting but the moral fitness of the mind; that is, a right state of the will and affections, a proper exercise of the voluntary powers, the springs of character and action. These moral powers, in the man who is unregenerate, (we speak not of baptism, but of that divinely conferred and inwardly received blessing which the Liturgy calls spiritual regeneration and the everlasting benediction of God's heavenly washing,) are so hostile to all true goodness, that, although such a man may understand theological truth never so extensively, in a manner that is merely intellectual and theoretical, he has no perception of its divine excellency, its holy beauty, its intrinsic charms, which, if we may use the wellknown words, are only yavra σUVETOTO. His mind, because of φωνάντα συνετοῖσιν. its governing principles, is " enmity against God;"-" it apprehendeth not that which cometh from the Spirit of God,

for it is to him foolishness, and he cannot conceive of it [i. e. aright and as he ought to do], since it must be judged of according to the principles of divine influence." The members of the Church of England would do well to attend to the most distinguished men of their own communion. From their fathers and their best divines they might learn, that 'God-does ⚫ still direct the humble and single-hearted, while he suffers ⚫ the proud searcher to lose himself in this obscure field of ⚫ truth: wherefore disobedient learning and industry, both are ' turned off from obtaining any certain and satisfactory knowledge of this divine mystery, as well as worldliness and vo⚫ luptuousness. [In this] spiritual husbandry-nothing can be brought to any great beauty, order, fulness, and maturity, without our own industry; nor indeed with it, unless the dew ' of HIS grace descend upon it, without whose blessing this 'spiritual culture will thrive as little as the labour of the hus⚫ bandman without showers of rain.' (Henry More.) He is ' a true Christian indeed, not he that is only book-taught, but he that is God-taught he that hath the unction from the Holy One, he that hath the Spirit of Christ within him.' (Cudworth.)

3. We esteem as a great accessory cause of this moral pestilence, the separation of a devout and serious spirit from theological discussions and biblical interpretations. This monstrous impropriety did not shew itself all at once. It took root, we fear, in the dry gravity and coldness of some commentators of the Remonstrant and Arian schools, whose works were introduced and powerfully recommended in Germany, about eighty years ago. It gradually increased unto more ungodliness, especially in the University Lectures; and quirk, jibe, and innuendo were without scruple used, in close connexion with the most serious and awful subjects. The sacred names and attributes, the law and the gospel of heaven, every doctrine and precept, every promise and threatening of the divine word, were readily associated with any form of jest and silly witticism. We cannot acquit John David Michaelis from a heavy share in this guilt; yet, we must observe, that those of his works which have been translated into English, seem, in this respect, more faulty than his Scripture Commentaries. So far as our acquaintance with the latter has extended, we have been gratified with observing less intrusion of his constitutional levity, and more seriousness of sentiment and ex

We cite the text according to the paraphrastic, but, we con ceive, just translation of Michaelis,