the fall, so that, through parents, children shall be restored for all practical purposes, to a state similar to that of Adam before the fall; — The nature of the absolute and unrevealed Divinity, and his mode of revealing himself by dramatizing himself as being what he is not; -The mode of extricating the mind, by these and similar dramatizings from that entanglement in sinful habits and courses, into which all minds from the laws of their nature, necessarily fall; - And, the mode of representing dramatically, an atonement which has no existence, in such a way that it may affect the mind like reality, and thus aid still farther in delivering it from its necessary involution in sin.

Now whether his views on all these points are true or false, they are abundantly dogmatic. Nor does he, nor do we, find that language is inadequate to state his dogmatism. A creed could be constructed out of materials furnished by Dr. B., as systematic as the creed of the Council of Trent, or that of the Synod of Dort. The effect, too, of his fundamental theory of the origin of evil, is to degrade our conceptions of the nature of finite minds, and of the system of moral government over such minds, and to lessen our abhorrence of sin as in its nature inexcusably malignant. God can do no better in this, or in any other world, or in any period of time, than to create beings, the necessities of whose education must lead them through the regions of moral pollution and folly, in order to learn the worth of purity and wisdom.

This sweeping away of the great doctrine of unfallen angels, and of the devil and his angels, as commonly held, has not indeed been performed at full length. Our author has simply set them aside among "theologic rubbish," to be disposed of at his future. leisure. The system carried out to its natural results would sweep away with these, the doctrine of future eternal punishment. On this point, certainly, language is capable of stating a definite doctrine; but, as Dr. Bushnell has not pronounced upon it, we wait for his next" utterances." It is no less evident that the theory of the Absolute Being, upon which his doctrine of the Trinity is based, tends to practical Atheism in the same mode that Pantheism does. For the revelations of God, of which our author says so much, all amount in reality to nothing. He says: "We can never come into the knowledge of God, save as God is brought within our finite molds of action." And yet, so far as he comes into these finite molds, the Absolute Deity, according to this writer, is not

truly represented, but misrepresented. P. 144. We are, therefore, no nearer to knowing him than before. Ritter, in his account of Xenophanes, the celebrated Eleatic philosopher, exhibits the natural result of such views: "Seeing that man is forced to represent to himself the individual, and also being ignorant how the cognition of individual phenomena could lead to a knowledge of the Deity, he found himself in a painful position; desiring, on the one hand, to arrive at a knowledge of God, who is the truth; and, on the other, forced to look to individuals, -in and by themselves truthless appearances." The fact is, that if the human mind is not so made in the image of God, that the ideas of knowledge, choice, ends, plans, purposes, love, wisdom, law, obligation, government, etc., derived from it, do truly reveal God, then God is, and ever must be, to us, an unknown God. If these do reveal him to us, then Dr. Bushnell's whole theory, as to the absolute divinity and the mode of his revelation, is false; and tends, in its results, to practical Atheism. The same tendency to undermine all religious belief, lurks in his theory of an atonement, which is a mere dramatizing of a non-entity. It tends to produce a feeling that all religion is a mere trick; or, as in the Romish Church, a mere matter of dramatic display.

It is also worthy of particular notice, that the foundation of this theory, is laid, not in Scripture, but in philosophical assumptions, of which no proof is given, but incessant assertion. For example, the passage on Pp. 137-139, setting forth God as the Absolute Being, to be revealed, which is the basis of his whole theory of the Trinity, has not in it the slightest Scriptural element. It is merely philosophical dogmatism of the boldest kind. And in general, though he weaves in, here and there, portions of the Word of God, as if to impart a Scriptural hue and authority to his philosophical theories, and thus gain them a more ready reception, yet beyond all doubt the main elements of his system are pure rationalism. No theory was ever started upon philosophic grounds, so wild but that some portions of the Word of God could be introduced into it, at least by forced interpretation, to give it plausibility. But such portions can be easily detached, and the system suffer no loss; but still stand on its peculiar basis, as a system of rationalizing dogmatism.

As we close this review, a feeling of sadness steals over us, at the occasion furnished for the remarks which we have been

compelled to make. We have set forth the proofs afforded by this volume, that the author, a professed minister of reconciliation between God and man, is Pantheistic in his notions of the divine existence; that he ridicules the doctrine of two natures in the person of Christ; that he denies the truth of a Trinity in the Godhead; that he discards the doctrine of vicarious atonement by the sufferings and death of Christ; and that he teaches other pernicious errors.

These demolitions of the truths of God's Word are like the doings of some Israelite, who should intrude "into the things which he had not seen" in the tabernacle of the testimony; and "being puffed up in his fleshly mind," should tear open the vail, interline the tables of stone, try his knife on Aaron's rod, and throw a handful of the manna to the fowls. There is scarcely any thing sacred in divine truth and Christian experience, which this author has not treated with a familiarity that disturbs our feelings. True, it is done with an air of seriousness, and protestations of zeal for progress, and with much power of composition; which, with many, will atone for all that is exceptionable in the book. But the splendors of rhetoric, and the solemn chants of a mystical pietism, can make no compensation for such destructive errors, which leave theology in ruins. When the very "first principles of the doctrine of Christ" are abjured, we see not how a religious teacher can do otherwise than to impose on himself, and his hearers, the workings of imagination for the motions of divine grace, and the flashes of fancy for the visions of faith. The most venturous soarings of religious sentimentalism will fall very far short of the threshold of heaven; and well deserve the remark of that Puritan knight, Sir Benjamin Rudyard, on the mystical preaching of one of Cromwell's chaplains: "It is too high for this world, and too low for the other." Even Coleridge could, at one time, lament the disastrous effect upon his spiritual health, of "delving in the unwholesome quicksilver mines" of German mysticism; and, at another time, complain of being bewildered "in the holy jungle of transcendental metaphysics.' We know that it enfeebled his will, so that it could finish nothing that it began, and could conquer no temptation. Such mournful examples give great force to the inspired warning: "Beware lest any man spoil you through philosophy and vain deceit."

PREACHED BEFORE THE CONVENTION OF THE CONGREGATIONAL MINISTERS OF MASSACHUSETTS, IN BRATTLE STREET MEETINGHOUSE, MAY 31, 1849. BY NEHEMIAH ADAMS, PASTOR OF ESSEX STREET CHURCH, BOSTON.

II. TIM. 1. 12. —For I know whom I have believed, and am persuaded that he is able to keep that which I have committed unto him against that day.

ASSURANCE of faith is justly expected of one whose professional business is to persuade men to believe. An ambassador is expected to be fully assured with regard to the nature and terms of his negotiation. It is as much to be expected of a minister of Christ that he shall feel sure of the way of salvation which he proposes to men, as that a pilot should be able to say to a shipmaster in the offing, I am sure that I can take you to port. A guide who is uncertain as to the way, is no guide. A teacher who does not know assuredly that which he professes to teach, is so far an impostor.

A minister of Christ cannot be expected to speak with certainty of things in religion upon which revelation is silent. But he is justly expected to say what things are revealed to faith, and to inculcate them; there must be in his mind certain truths relating to God, and man, retribution, and the way to be saved; these truths must be as positively fixed in his mind as the rules of grammar and of numbers are in the belief of a school teacher. If there be any meaning in his name, ambassador for Christ, there must be some things about which he is fully assured that they are essential to his own salvation and that of his hearers.

In answer to this, some will say, Men, and even ministers, differ with regard even to the fundamental truths of the gospel. If they are all fully assured of the doctrines they teach, some must be assured of things which are erroneous; for of two contradictory propositions, both cannot be true. Is it right, then, for any man to feel sure in his belief? What is there which is not disputed by able and apparently sincere men? In such circumstances, how can a man be expected to have assurance of faith? Is he justified in feeling sure that he is right?

The great business of ministers of the gospel, all acknowledge, is, to shew unto men the way of salvation. Whatever doubts a minister may have with regard to other things, so long as he holds his office he will, if he be an honest man, be sure that he is prescribing to men the way of salvation which God has appointed. Through constitutional infirmity of mind and excessive selfdistrust, he may not, as a Christian, have assurance of faith, in the experimental sense of that expression, to as great a degree as others; but if he have a common degree of honesty, he will cease from being a Christian minister when he no longer feels assured that he understands the conditions of the gospel.

Assurance of faith, using the term faith in a doctrinal, rather than an experimental, sense, necessarily depends upon the clearness and certainty with which the way of salvation is revealed in Scripture. If the way of salvation be not fixed and clearly revealed, there can be no assurance of faith in preaching it; fundamental differences of opinion with regard to it are to be expected, and it is presumptuous for any man to feel assured that he is right.

My subject, then, is this: ASSURANCE OF FAITH IS WARRANTED

BY THE CERTAINTY OF THE WAY OF SALVATION.

Is the way of salvation fixed and certain? I shall maintain the affirmative of this question. I remark, then,

I. IF THE WAY TO BE SAVED BE NOT FIXED AND CERTAIN, THE APPOINTMENT AND CONTINUANCE OF THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY IS PREPOSTEROUS.

The ascending Redeemer commissions his disciples in these words: "Go ye into all the world, and preach the Gospel to every creature. He that believeth and is baptized, shall be saved, and he that believeth not shall be damned."

If these men had no definite conceptions as to the way to be