also well argued, and seems suited to the purpose of precluding many of those false reasonings, by which numbers are prejudiced against the scriptures previously to examination; and excuse to their own minds the neglect with which they treat them. It is calculated to obviate infidelity, not by meeting its cavils in detail, but by possessing the mind with principles which would exclude them. It pleads the cause of Christian doctrines not by adducing scriptural proofs, for that would be foreign to the present purpose, -but by defending them against the charge of being so unreasonable as to be rejected without listening to their evidence. Besides meeting specific objections, the Answer to Paine treats more generally, in as many distinct chapters, of Revelation, Miracles, Prophecy, the Canon of Scripture, Mystery, Redemption, the Insufficiency of Deism, and the Nature and tendency of Christianity.

The "Impartial Statement of the Scripture Doctrine in respect of Civil Government, and the Duties of Subjects," must be allowed, I think, by all candid persons, to be very moderate, wise, and useful; and it is still seasonable. It is divided into three chapters: the first containing "Propositions concerning Civil Government as the ordinance of God:" the second pointing out "Things not the duties of Subjects to their Rulers:" and the third, "Duties incumbent on us to our Rulers, and in Respect of Civil Government." V. Other Controversial Works: namely, the Answer to Rabbi Crooll on the Jewish question, the Answer to Bishop Tomline's "Refutation of Calvinism," and, as arising out of it, the History of the Synod of Dort.

The first of these publications has been repeatedly adverted to in letters written while it was in preparation, and inserted in a former part of this work. It may here be remarked that, besides following the work which gave occasion to it, from page to page, and answering its objections, or meeting its arguments as they arise, (a mode of reply, which, it must be confessed, combines with some advantages an apparent want of arrangement,) it discusses, in a distinct manner, the following principal questions and subjects:

1. Was the Messiah, predicted in the Old Testament, to have an immediate human father?

2.

Was he to be a mere man or not?

3. At what period was his coming to take place? 'What are we to understand by "the times of the Gentiles?">

4.

5. What have been the effects of Christ's coming on the state of the world?'-answered in a very forcible and interesting manner.

6. The triumphs of Jesus compared with those of Mohammed;' particularly in three points, 1. "The state of the countries in which their first successes were respectively obtained: 2. The nature of the religion propagated by each: and, 3. The means by which the triumphs of each were gained?'-This was the author's favorite section, and it is certainly very striking. It treats the subject more in detail than is usually done.

7. Whether the Messiah was to be the Messiah of Israel only, or of the Gentiles also?

8. How far and in what cases miracles are a proof of a divine mission?

9.

Was the Messiah's kingdom to be spiritual or absolutely earthly?

10. The priesthood of the Messiah.

11.

The reception which he was to meet with from the nation of Israel.

12. The death which he was to suffer, and the end to be answered by it.'-Here striking remarks are made on Isaiah liii, Psalm xxii, and other scriptures?

13. His resurrection, subsequent glory, and kingdom." All these questions are, of course, discussed from the Old Testament alone. The subjects also of sacrifices, the oral law, or traditions, and several others come under consideration.

Of the work generally, the Christian Observer, for 1815, thus speaks: "Should it prove the cycnea vox, the dying note of this truly great man, (the author,) which we trust it may not, we shall say much for this publication if we pronounce it worthy to be so; and state it to be inferior neither in matter nor temper to any of the truly Christian productions of his powerful mind."

On the Answer to the "Refutation of Calvinism" I shall do little more than transcribe the opinion which Mr. Wilson has given, in notes annexed to his funeral sermons. "It appears to me," he says, "incomparable for the acute and masterly defence of truth." And again: "the effects of these great qualities"-decision, activity, and childlike submission, to divine revelation,-"are observable in every part of our departed friend's writings. They are full of thought; full of 'the seeds of things,' as was said of Lord Bacon's works.

The ore dug up from the mine is not unalloyed indeed, but it is rich and copious, and well worthy of the process necessary to bring it into use. Take as an instance, "The Remarks,' which, in the second edition, I venture to call one of the first theological treatises of the day; it is pregnant with valuable matter, not merely on the questions directly discussed, but on almost every topic of doctrinal and prac tical divinity."

It is needless to say, that they are not the mere peculiarities of Calvinism which are defended in this work: had such been the only points assailed, it would probably never have appeared: "But, in falling foul of Calvinism," the volume which gave occasion to it offended grievously against Bishop Horsley's caution, to beware of "attacking something more sacred, and of a higher origin"-even what "belongs to our common Christianity:" and hence the answer, of course, takes equally wide ground. To the Christian temper, and respectful style in which it is written, the learned prelate concerned, is said, I believe upon good authority, to have done justice.

The learned and candid head of Oriel College, Oxford, also, in quoting from this work a passage to which all who engage in religious controversy would do well to take heed, terms the author "one of the most pious and temperate writers" among modern Calvinists, and says of him, "whose truly Christian sentiments I always admire, although his opinions upon the main doctrine under consideration"-that of predestination--"appear to me mistaken and dangerous."* The little work on the Synod of Dort arose out of the preceding publication. The account of the Synod commonly received in this country, is that furnished by the prej-udiced Peter Heylin, who gives the abbreviation of the articles by Daniel Tilenus, instead of the articles themselves. His statements are taken upon trust, and repeated by one writer after another, in a manner little creditable either to their diligence or their candor. My father, finding these abbreviated articles in the Refutation of Calvinism, remarked upon them, in the first edition of his answer, as if they bad been authentic, and thus, as he says, "erroneously adopted and aided in circulating a gross misrepresentation of the Synod." The discovery of his mistake led him to a more full investigation of the subject, and thus to translate

Copleston on Necessity and Predestination, p.-90.

and give to the public, 1. "The History of preceding Events" which led to the convocation of the Synod: 2. "The Judgment of the Synod," concerning the five controverted heads of doctrine: 3. "The Articles" of the Synod: 4. "The Approbation of the States General:"-subjoining his own remarks on each part. The translation is made from the "Acts" of the Synod published by authority, in a Latin quarto volume: a work which, it is worthy of remark, is never alluded to by either Mosheim or his translator Maclaine, though they refer to various other writings, on both sides, apparently of a less authentic character. The following reasons are assigned for the publication before us: 1. "That a very interesting and important part of ecclesiastical history has been obscured and overwhelmed with unmerited disgrace, by the misrepresentations given of the Synod and its articles, especially in this nation:" 2. That the author wished "to prove, that the doctrines commonly termed Calvinistic, whether they be or be not the doctrines of scriptural Christianity, may yet be so stated and explained, without any skilful and labored efforts, as to coincide with the strictest practical views of our holy religion, and so as greatly to encourage and promote genuine holiness:" 3. That "in a day when these doctrines are not only proscribed in a most hostile manner on one side, but deplorably misunderstood and perverted by many on the other side, he desired to add one more testimony against these misapprehensions and perversions, by shewing in what a holy, guarded, and reverential manner the divines of this reprobated Synod stated and explained them, compared with the superficial, incautious, and often unholy and presumptuous manner of too many in the present day:" 4. That he also "desired to make it manifest, that the deviations from the creeds of the reformed churches, in those points which are more properly called Calvinistic, is seldom for any length. of time kept separate from deviations in those doctrines, which are more generally allowed to be essential to vital Christianity." 5. That he "purposed, by means of this publication, to leave behind him in print his deliberate judgment on several controverted points;. which (judgment) must otherwise have died with him, or have been published separately, for which he had no inclination." The con

troverted points referred to, are principally those relating to toleration, religious liberty, terms of communion, and other ecelesiastical questions. To his sentiments here de

livered on these subjects, we may apply what he himself has said of the kindred ones contained in another publication, to be noticed immediately; they are such as "will please the bigots of no party."

In this work (page 172,) he delivers a strong opinion on the subject of what is miscalled Catholic emancipation.

In the present class we may perhaps range the only separate publication which remains to be noticed: the Letters to the Rev. Peter Roe on Ecclesiastical Establishments, adherence to the Church of England, &c. with a Tractate annexed on the Religious Establishment of Israel. The last he esteemed to be novel: at least, he observed, it was quite new to himself. The principle which it chiefly goes to establish is, that the conduct of the pious kings and governors of Judah,-Jehoshaphat, Hezekiah, Josiah, Zerubbabel, Ezra, Nehemiah-in their exertions for promoting religion among those under their command, which are sanctioned by the unqualified approbation of scripture, "was not adopted in obedience to any part of the ritual or political law of Moses," but was nothing more than that improvement of their talents, which would be incumbent upon any persons now occupying similar stations, and "was intended as an example for kings and princes, professing Christianity, to imitate." That spirit of moderation, which, the writer anticipated, would render these letters distasteful to zealots on all sides, will make them the more acceptable to fair and reasonable men; and they will probably be deemed by such persons better suited to plead the cause of the established church, by their not taking it up upon too high grounds.

Besides these works, my father was the author of many detached papers in various periodical publications, some of which are to be found in the fourth volume of his collected works; and a specimen of them has been introduced in speaking of the general principle of interpretation adopted. in his Commentary..

Passing from this review of my father's works to some observations on the general character of his theology, I should say, that its great and distinguishing excellency appears to be-its comprehensiveness. It embraces, as far perhaps as the infirmity of human nature will permit, the whole compass of scripture. Like the father of the faithful, he walks through the land in the length thereof and in the breadth thereof." It would be difficult, I think, to name a