sealed with their authority, but which the facts themselves, critically weighed, appear to warrant.

"This is what the present writer undertook to do, for the satisfaction of his own mind, and because, after reading a good many books on Christ, he felt still constrained to confess that there was no historical character whose motives, and objects, and feelings remained so incomprehensible to him. The enquiry which proved serviceable to himself may chance to be useful to others.

"What is now published is a fragment. No theological questions whatever are here discussed. Christ as the creator of modern theology and religion, will make the subject of another volume, which, however, the author does not hope to publish for some time to come. In the mean while, he has endeavoured to furnish an answer to the question, What was Christ's object in founding the society which is called by his name, and how is it adapted to attain that object?"

This is the Preface without any abridgement. Short as it is, there is hardly a sentence or sentiment in it which is not open to the gravest objections. There is one way, only one, neither "perilous nor audacious," whereby such as are dissatisfied with the current conceptions of Christ must seek for establishment in the first principles of our holy religion. Let them diligently and earnestly search the Scriptures which testify of Christ, with humble and earnest prayer for the gracious teaching of the Holy Spirit, and they shall be led into all needful and saving truth. The vulgarity and the bad taste of the second sentence are only exceeded by its folly and presumption. Where does St. Luke speak of our Lord in such terms as are here used? He tells us, indeed, what seems essential to his proper humanity, that he "increased in wisdom and stature, and in favour with God and man." But is this at all like the coarse and secular terms employed by our author? What time can we picture to ourselves, even in imagination, when the Saviour of mankind did not bear the name of Christ? Did not the angels announce to the shepherds, immediately upon his birth, "Unto you is born this day in the city of David a Saviour, which is Christ the Lord?" (Luke ii. 11.) And upon the eighth day, when he was brought to Jerusalem, does not the same evangelist give this remarkable testimony concerning Simeon ? "It was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost, that he should not see death before he had seen the Lord's Christ." (Luke ii. 26.) Nay, in the most public manner that can be possibly conceived, had not Herod the King demanded of all the chief priests and scribes where Christ should be born? (Matt. ii. 4.) And had not those priests and scribes given to the King the right answer, referring him to the express words of the Prophet, which speak of the promised Messiah in terms which cannot be applied to one who was a man only? "Thou, Bethlehem Ephrata, though thou be little among the thousands of Judah,

yet out of thee shall he come forth unto me that is to be ruler in Israel; whose goings forth have been from of old, from everlasting." (Mic. v. 2.) And after the temptation, when He had entered upon His public ministry, does not St. Luke tell us, "Devils also came out of many, crying out, and saying, Thou art Christ the Son of God. And he rebuking them suffered them not to speak; for they knew that he was Christ." (Luke iv. 41.) Is this "tracing his biography from point to point," to ignore or conceal such marked and marvellous points as these? What an unmeaning flourish of accepting only such conclusions about him as "facts themselves, critically weighed, appear to warrant"; when only such facts as appear to favour the views of the author are selected, and other facts, more numerous and more decisive, are entirely omitted! And yet such conclusions as these, and thus obtained, we are to accept in preference to those "which church doctors, or even apostles, have sealed with their authority." Church doctors are all fallible men, and are only to be heard when they "speak as the oracles of God"; but no wisdom or power on earth can ever supersede what the holy" apostles have sealed with their authority." One of these apostles has told us, "If any man think himself to be a prophet, or spiritual, let him acknowledge that the things that I write unto you are the commandments of the Lord." (1 Cor. xiv. 37.) We are not surprised that, after the "many books on Christ" which our author read, "he was constrained to confess there was no character whose motives, and objects, and feelings remained so incomprehensible to him." It could not be otherwise. The Roman governor who delivered him up to be crucified, and the Roman annalist who describes his religion as an execrable superstition, might have said exactly the same. we bow with the simplicity of little children to the great mystery of godliness, and believe with all our heart what the Holy Scriptures so expressly declare, and what the holy church throughout all the world has so invariably held from the beginning, that "God was manifest in the flesh," we shall find nothing but apparent contradictions and inextricable difficulties from the beginning to the end both of the New and the Old Testament. The simple faith of a Christian man is the only key which unlocks every difficulty. Our author was seeking satisfaction to his own mind by his enquiries and investigations, and he professes to have found it, because he tells us, "the enquiry which proved serviceable to himself may chance to be useful to others." What may be the secret conviction of his heart with regard to the person of our blessed Lord, or what he may intend to bring forth in his next volume, we presume not to say. Only we are constrained to observe, that, in the book which he has now published, "a fragment" though he calls it,-when he tells us

Until

in the Preface, "No theological questions whatever are here discussed," he assumes a position not only strangely unnatural, but absolutely impossible. To send forth to the world the "life and work" of Him whom all Christians believe to be as surely God as He is truly man, without any theology or theological discussion, to say the least that can be said, looks ominous and suspicious in the extreme. Then, with regard to the design of our Lord in founding His Church, and its adaptation to the end for which it was founded. Surely the labour of this anonymous author is in vain and to no purpose. The design for which the Church of Christ was founded is written as with a sunbeam in the Scriptures of truth; and every real Christian has the witness within himself, that the glorious Gospel of the blessed God, applied to the heart by the effectual power of the Holy Ghost, is most wonderfully adapted to bring every thought into captivity to the obedience of Christ, and to prepare His ransomed Church for the heavenly inheritance.

The volume before us consists of two parts. The first part, which contains nine chapters, refers to what is introductory to the Christian dispensation; and the second part, which is entitled "The Legislation of Christ," has fifteen elaborate chapters, many of them upon the nature and extent, the excellence and the superiority, of Christian morality.

In the first chapter, which is entitled "The Baptist," we are told John "was attempting, in an imperfect manner, that which Christ afterwards fully accomplished." John the Baptist, himself the subject of prophecy, both by Isaiah (xl. 3) and Malachi (iii. 1), had no private ends in view; and, as he fulfilled his course, he finished completely the great work which he was sent to perform. Every reference to the work of the Baptist is wholly inadequate, if that be left out which we are expressly told by the Holy Ghost was his special office and peculiar honour,-"And thou, child, shalt be called the Prophet of the Highest; for thou shalt go before the face of the Lord to prepare His ways." (Luke i. 76.) On the same page we are told, in words which we rejoice to record, "No more precious treasure was ever bestowed upon a nation than these oracles of God which were committed to the Jews." But then there follows a sentence which seems greatly to neutralize what went before. It is added, "Prophecy was one of those gifts which, like poetry or high art, are particularly apt to die out under change of time." To our apprehension, such a view of prophecy is wholly inconsistent with its Divine origin and heavenly inspiration. (2 Pet. i. 21.) The reference made in this chapter to the memorable words of the Baptist, "Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world" (John i. 29), is most painfully defective. It is true that the writer in

forms us that its full explanation would anticipate much that will more conveniently come in a later treatise; but why does he attempt to confound "that immaculate Lamb who was slain to take away the sins of the world" with any other lamb whatever? What does he say?

"When we remember that the Baptist's mind was doubtless full of imagery drawn from the Old Testament, and that the conception of a lamb of God makes the subject of one of the most striking of the Psalms, we shall perceive what he meant to convey by the phrase.

The Baptist was no lamb of God. He was a wrestler with life -one to whom peace of mind does not come easily, but only after a long struggle. His restlessness had driven him into the desert, where he had contended for years with thoughts he could not master, and from whence he had uttered his startling alarum to the nation. He was among the dogs rather than the lambs of the Shepherd. He recognised the superiority of Him whose confidence had never been disturbed, whose steadfast peace no agitations of life had ever ruffled. He did obeisance to the royalty of inward happiness." (pp. 6, 7.)

How many groundless assumptions, and foolish surmises, and unwarrantable assertions, are here made with reference to him who was greater than the greatest of the ancient prophets, who was filled with the Holy Ghost even from his mother's womb, and who not only boldly rebuked vice, but patiently suffered for the truth's sake. Where did the writer get the information which he has given us respecting John the Baptist? In addition to this, the idea of drawing any comparison whatever between "the very paschal Lamb who was sacrificed for us," with any other "lamb of God," or any "one of Jehovah's flock," is revolting at once both to the mind and heart of the true Christian. It reminds us of the melancholy attempt in the "Essays and Reviews" to explain away what is said of the suffering Son of God (Isa. liii.), by applying it to the prophet Jeremiah. It is said of Him who "was wounded for our transgressions," and who "made His soul an offering for sin,"-"He was led as a lamb to the slaughter." But the prophet Jeremiah said of himself, in the midst of his persecutors, "I was like a lamb or an ox that is brought to the slaughter" (Jer. xi. 19); therefore the essayist would infer that Jeremiah was intended in the 53rd of Isaiah. The same attempt is made here. Now we, in our most solemn approaches to the throne of the Heavenly Grace, address our humble petitions to Him who sits upon it as the Lamb of God, who taketh away the sin of the world; and we earnestly beseech Him to grant us His peace, to receive our prayers, and to have mercy upon us. How, then, can we put upon the significant testimony of His illustrious forerunner the meaning which this author tells us "he meant to convey by this phrase"? The

conclusion also of this chapter on the Baptist we must quote, because of the importance which the author himself attaches to it :

"More than this was wanting. It was necessary that an enthusiasm should be kindled. The phrase 'baptize with fire' seems at first sight to contain a mixture of metaphors. Baptism means cleaning, and fire means warmth. How can warmth cleanse? The answer is, that moral warmth does cleanse. No heart is pure that is not passionate; no virtue is safe that is not enthusiastic. And such an enthusiastic virtue Christ was to introduce. The whole of the present volume will be a comment on this text." (p. 8.)

Our author manifests, from the beginning to the end of his work, a deep-rooted and inveterate hatred of what he terms "conventional phraseology." But, in his anxiety to be free from it, he does not hesitate to make use of philosophic language. And what does he gain by the change? We believe sincerely, without in a single instance explaining a difficulty, where it really exists, in a great variety of instances, by this substitution, he creates them where they have no existence. Take, for instance, the word enthusiasm, in which he so greatly delights, and which he so abundantly uses, from the beginning to the end of his book. Whether he means us to understand by it enthusiastic loyalty inspired within us by the Founder of our holy religion, or the enthusiasm of humanity, by which he would express "the love of the man in every man," surely his phraseology is far more calculated to mystify and mislead than to illustrate and direct. We have learnt from the Holy Scriptures, "Believe in the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved;" and we have been directed by the same infallible authority, after we have purified our souls by obeying the truth, "See that ye love one another with a pure heart fervently." (1 Pet. i. 22.) Which language is the simplest and the best? Which is most likely to be understood, not merely by philosophers and scholars, but the poor, the unlearned, "every creature"? We put our most solemn veto upon the assertion that is here so confidently made, and in direct contradiction to it we affirm, that moral warmth does not cleanse. The guilty conscience is cleansed, and the stain and the defilement of sin is washed out and taken away, not by moral warmth, "but with the precious blood of Christ, as of a lamb without blemish and without spot." (1 Pet. i. 19.)

A few extracts we will give from the chapter on "The Temptation." In these we have no doubt the reader will be forcibly struck with the unwarrantable liberties that are taken with certain parts of the sacred narrative, and the shade of doubt that is cast upon it all. What shall we say to such a description as this?