He entered the monastery in 1505, after passing a cheerful evening with his friends."

Luther was not happy in the monastic state. His ardent spirit could ill brook the tedious confinement and dull plodding life of a common monk. He went through the formalities prescribed by his order: but he found no comfort in them: he panted for something more expansive and more spirit-stirring. He found it in study: to learning he accordingly devoted himself with all the energy of his powerful and impetuous mind: and with such success, that he was soon distinguished for superior attainments in the sciences of the age: and was recommended to the Elector of Saxony, as one whose genius and erudition fitted him for raising to eminence the lately founded University of Wittemberg. In this situation he was found when the sale of indulgences by Tetzel and others, acting under the authority of Pope Leo X. roused him from his retirement: and the opposition which he experienced in his efforts to suppress one gross and crying enormity, drove him at length to the fortunate rashness of denying the papal claims to implicit obedience: renouncing the infallibility of the Church of Rome: and rejecting many of the doctrines which she sanctions and propounds.-The after-life of this great Reformer is matter of public history: and will be found, for the most part, embodied in a pleasing form in the work before us.

There are several minute inaccuracies, which a very slight degree of care would have enabled the author to avoid. Some of them relate to the names of historical personages. Miltitz is here uniformly written Miltz: and for Carlostadt we have Carolstadt: the transactions between the different branches of the electoral house of Saxony are strangely misconceived. Erasmus is made to say, that he "published at Basil his translations of the New Testament: it was the first time it had been printed in Greek: and drew upon him many censures." From this and from what follows, it appears that the author supposes Erasmus to have translated the New Testament into Greek: an error which might have been detected by reading with care the title-page of a common English Testament. We are gravely told, that about the year 1517, "English literature had begun to find its way into Upper Saxony:" if so, it must have found its way into

Saxony before it had made its appearance at home. With the exception of the writings of Chaucer and Gower, there was scarcely an English literary work in existence: and neither of these had yet been printed. Such defects in information abound: but they are of small consequence. A serious deficiency is the want of any clear and comprehensive view of the religious system which Luther taught. There are scraps of information on this point scattered through the book; but many points are altogether omitted: and it is impossible from these pages to form any definite idea of Luther as a theologian. His violence and intemperance in controversy, accompanied with the frequent employment of foul language and abusive epithets to opponents, are not exhibited with sufficient truth, nor censured with adequate severity: and his indecent marriage with a professed nun, is even represented as a most sentimental and amiable transaction. The writer's admiration for the Reformer leads to forgetfulness of the imperfections of the man. There is no necessity for this reserve as to the defects of Luther: for the real greatness of his character is such that it can well afford to bear the contrast of his errors and failings, when most unsparingly exhibited: and had it not been for the temperament in which these defects had their origin, Luther would not have been fitted for the perilous but glorious mission which devolved upon him.

ON THE MERIT OF HUMAN ACTIONS.

UNITARIANS are commonly, but most unjustly accused of looking for salvation through their own merits: and regarding their good works as giving them a claim upon the justice of God. I have never heard any expression proceed from the lips of a Unitarian, nor discovered any passage in the writings of a Unitarian, which could be supposed to inculcate any such doctrine. For myself I disclaim and disavow it: and I believe, I only speak the sentiments of my fellow believers in denouncing the charge as an unfounded imputation on our common faith.

But what would have been said, if language like the following had been employed by a Unitarian clergyman in solemn prayer to God: and published to the world with the sanction of his brethren in the ministry, and of the whole denomination to which he belonged?

Reader! the following passage is an extract from a prayer, offered up by a clergyman of the Established Church, at the ceremony of laying the foundation of a house of worship in the Parish of Glynn, in the County of Antrim. Copies of the prayer, printed for the occasion were distributed among the persons present: and it is stated in a published account of the proceedings, that the prayer is one" appointed for such occasions."

It is proper to add that I do not find this prayer in the Book of Common Prayer: nevertheless, I am inclined to think, that it must be required by some ecclesiastical authority; for it is not such a prayer as would naturally have presented itself to the mind of any Protestant clergyman of the present times: except it were some follower of the semi-papistical doctors of Oxford.

The extract is as follows:-"Accept, O Lord, this service at our hands; and bless it with such success, that it may tend to the setting forth of thy glory, and to the furtherance of our happiness, both in this life, and in that which is to come. And for those who, by thy good Spirit, shall be disposed to assist in supplying the spiritual wants of thy people, vouchsafe, we beseech thee, thy grace and benediction: multiply thy blessings upon them for their pious regard to thy honour, and to the good of souls; remember them concerning this, and wipe not out the kindness showed by them for thy Church, and for the offices thereof.”

A UNITARIAN.

INTELLIGENCE.

IRISH UNITARIAN CHRISTIAN SOCIETY.

THE tenth anniversary of the Irish Unitarian Christian Society was held in Dublin, on Sunday the 26th, and Monday the 27th of April. The anniversary sermons were preached before the Society on Sunday, by the Rev. J. G. ROBBERDS of Manchester. In his first discourse, preached in Eustace-street Meeting-house at two o'clock, Mr. Robberds ably pointed out the characteristics of true and vital Christianity—that its spirit was not a "spirit of fear; but of power, and of love, and of a sound mind,” (2 Tim. i. 7.) The mild and amiable preacher drew no striking contrasts, and indulged in no comparisons but, whilst enforcing the paramount importance, and displaying

the ennobling effects of these essential indications of the spirit of Christianity-the experience of the least observant auditor must have powerfully suggested to him the extent to which the spirit of fear, degrading fear, oppresses so many Christians of all sects and denominations; and the remarkable absence, or deficiency amongst them, of a spirit of power, a spirit of love, and of a sound mind. In the evening, at 7 o'clock, Mr. ROBBERDS preached at Strand-street to an increased auditory. He selected for his text Gal. v. 6, and the question discussed was, "Is there any practical value in the peculiarities of Trinitarianism?" He defined Trinitarianism, as used in this inquiry, to mean the system which insists on a distinction of the Godhead into three persons; and he ably contended, and, as we conceive, established, that such a distinction presents no object for the devout affections, no motive to holiness, no encouragement or consolation to the believer, which is not equally furnished by the Unitarian view of God as strictly one person, and of Jesus Christ as the Son of God, to whom the spirit was given without measure, and who was, in fact, as to his words of wisdom and works of power, a perfect representation of God. Before entering on the inquiry, as to the practical value of the proposition which asserts the union of the two natures of God and man in Christ, the eloquent preacher gave a brief but powerful summary of what the Unitarian believes without it. We envy not the Trinitarian, or the Unitarian, who could listen with inattention, or unexcited devotion, to this summary. Mr. Robberds's observations on this point were to the following effect. Without believing in the union of the two natures of God and man in Christ, we believe that there was a close and intimate union between God and Christ. Nay, we believe that it was this union which constituted Jesus the Christ, or anointed, of God. We believe that God was with Christ in all that he did, in all that he taught. We believe that it was divine wisdom which spoke in his instructions and promises, divine power which was exercised in his mighty and wonderful works, divine love which was manifested in the whole spirit and object of his mission and ministry. We look to Christ as one with God, when we would learn of him the character or will of God. Yet we look to him also as distinct from God, when we contemplate him as

our example of obedience and submission to God, -as one to whom the spirit was given without measure, as one who was in the bosom of the Father, fully acquainted with the divine dispositions and purposes, and fully authorised to declare them. We acknowledge in him the visible image and representative of the invisible God. Yet as a being "made in our likeness," "tempted like as we are, though without sin," " touched with a feeling of our infirmities," confessing his dependence for all that he did and all that he was on his heavenly Father, and expressly declaring that of himself he could do nothing-we behold in him a suitable example for man. We do not believe that the divine and the human natures were in him so united as to constitute one person. But we do believe that, while there remained the real distinction of two persons, two beings, God and man; there was revealed in him the tender love of God to man, and there was also exemplified in him the effect which may be produced on man by a thorough knowledge and constant love of God.

The general annual meeting of the Society was held on Monday evening, at Radley's public rooms, Dame-street. The president for the last year, the venerable Dr. STOKES, having taken the chair at half past seven o'clock, the proceedings were opened with prayer by the Rev. Joseph Hutton. The report of the Committee, of which we are promised a few copies for circulation, and may take notice in a future number, was read by ROBERT ANDREWS, Esq. the secretary of the Society.

The Rev. Dr. DRUMMOND then moved, supported by the Rev. JOSEPH HUTTON" That the report should be received, approved, and ordered to be printed." In mov

ing the resolution, Dr. DRUMMOND made a touching reference to the loss, genuine Christianity and this Society had sustained, in the lamented death of the Rev. Dr. ARMSTRONG. He afterwards glanced at some of the topics embraced by the report. And in reference to the steady and marked progress of Unitarianism and Bible Christianity, read a highly interesting extract from a letter he had received from a total stranger, a gentleman in India, but whose name he did not mention, who had been educated in one of the strictest sects of Calvinism and Athanasianism, and had been taught to abhor the very name of Unitarian; and to regard inquiry on the subject as a