tional writings call forth his chief powers, and will ever make him acceptable to the pious mind. He fell into something of Pelagian errors, and, like Warburton, did not consider the immortality of the soul revealed to the Patriarchs. It is also to be regretted that prayers for the dead have received countenance from some passages in his writings.

Many excellent divines on the continent, such as Zanchius, Junius, Pareus, Piscator, Spanheim, Amesius, &c.; and others in our own country, Greenham, Bishops Babington, Cowper, Andrews, &c.; Hieron, Downame, Whateley, &c. lived in this period. We pretend not to know all their writings, nor to defend all we do know; but have seen enough to be satisfied that much instruction is to be derived from them.

The Non-conformists.

We would take this term in a large sense, as comprehending all in our own country who, from the Reformation, disliked and separated from the Liturgy and ceremonies of the Established Church, till we come to modern times. It will be obvious that this class includes authors of very different sentiments and character, but our object is only to give brief hints and sketches.

Among the Non-conformists there is a class of divines, whose writings remain imperishable monuments of sanctified talent, learning, and piety, and who have been followed by others down to our own days. No one can well read the practical writings of such Scotch Presbyterians as Guthrie and Dickson; or the English Puritans, Cartwright and Burroughs; or the Independents, Owen and Goodwin; or the Non-conformists, Baxter, Manton, Bates, Howe, Flavel, Charnock, and the once despised Bunyan; or more recent writers, as Henry, Grove, Earl, Grosvenor, and Bennet, without edification, and in their works are some of the finest specimens of the workings of pious and powerful minds on the subject of religion in our language. In general, in their writings, there is little interference with worldly politics, and but little, comparatively, with church government. Those living in the rebellion were too much carried away by it; but in many there was much separation from the world, great integrity, indefatigable industry, and a high toned spirit of piety and devotion. Some were men of great learning. They clearly state the doctrines of the gospel and guard them (some perhaps too much) on every side; they minutely discriminate between the sincere and the hypocrite; they were acquainted thoroughly with the workings of the human heart, and with the Holy Scriptures; their expositions of which are full of

valuable matter. When thrown out of the church and kept by an unhappy policy in silence, they turned their leisure to the best advantage in multiplying publications chiefly on practical devotion.

The character of the age was more scholastic than that of the Reformation, and in this view not so scriptural. The principles of the Reformers were tried out and proved at the very stake there was not equal distinctness, but there was more simplicity and unction.

A multiplication of distinctions and divisions in their discourses was a fault of the successors of the Reformers, and most of the earlier authors of whom we now speak fell into this fault, and multiplied divisions almost without end. Still their writings not only retarded the decline of religion, but maintained a spirit of deep piety, which they spread in America as well as in this country.

The Non-conformists, after the restoration, were much more generally loyal than the Puritans of the Commonwealth. Time had dissipated false theories, and shown Christians the danger of interfering with this world's politics.

Some of the leading characters demand particular notice. That of Dr. Owen stands eminent in various respects. His devotional, and practical, and expository works are an invaluable treasure of divinity. It does not appear to me that he took a wise or a Christian course, with regard to government; ministers should never direct the politics of this world. Let the potsherds strive with the potsherds of the earth: the minister's objects are higher. His character, and his decision to support the Protectorate must have had influence in maintaining that usurpation. The defence set up for him falls short of a justification of his conduct, and it is better at once to acknowledge what is deemed the error of an eminent servant of God, than justify him throughout. His sermon after the king's death would tend to strengthen Cromwell's hand, and he evidently had a close intimacy with that usurper. With this serious drawback on his character, we freely avow, that his writings are eminently spiritual, devotional, and edifying. He is full of Biblical learning, sound exposition of doctrine, acuteness, and information. His controversial writings against the Socinians and Papists, on the question of justification, on the Jewish Questions, Sabbath, &c. are valuable and important. There is hardly any modern controversy that he has not welldigested and furnished matter for the defence of the truth. He gives expanded and rich views of the fulness of the gospel. His book on the 130th Psalm, is one of the fullest displays of evangelical forgiveness that we have ever seen. The Christian familiar with the conflicting exercises of exper

imental religion will be sensible of its value. It was a real service to the Church to have his works collected as they are (including the Exposition of the Epistle to the Hebrews) in 28 vols. 8vo. and they will furnish the Student with ample defences of the gospel against its various enemies. He was too minute and systematic in his distinctions for the largeness of scriptural truth; but he enters into the deepest recesses of the heart, shows clearly the evangelical principles by which sin is to be subdued, and more minutely almost than any other writer displays the various details of holy and devotional feeling. He is here invaluable.

Baxter was another eminent divine of these times, of immense reading and writing also. Perhaps he ought not to be numbered among the Non-conformists. In some measure he was indeed led away by the politics of the times; yet, notwithstanding this and some of his controversial writings, and his Reformed Liturgy, this holy man, when silenced, continued to attend the established church. His practical writings are invaluable ; powerful, awakening, with deep views of eternity, and the most heavenly meditations on the future state. The defect of Baxter's practical, or rather experimental writings, was such as might be expected from his defects in doctrinal views. We do not now remember (even in his most glowing work, the Saint's Rest) any very glowing views of the amazing love of Christ to the most sinful, and the freeness of his salvation. His method of peace to troubled consciences is circuitous and perplexed, instead of the direct road of simple and immediate faith. His Christian Directory is one of his most valuable works. His main power was in addresses to the conscience, in which he was probably more free and unfettered than most writers. His controversial writings are of various character. His Catholic Theology has much valuable information, and his reasons for the Christian Religion contain an able statement of the Evidences. He had to contend at first with Antinomians, who abused the gospel: he was a great pacificator, and those things which, in one view, are the highest excellence of character, seem to have led him into most of his mistakes. From an anxious desire to unite all parties, and to guard most carefully against the abuse of the doctrines of grace, he departed from the simplicity of the gospel, and multiplied the very divisions, which we may well believe it was the desire of his heart to heal. 'Mr. Baxter considered Calvinists and Arminians as reconcileable, making the difference between them of but small account. The scheme of the Arminians appears to me to undermine the doctrines of salvation, by grace alone, and resolve the difference between one sinner and another into the will of man,

which is directly opposite to all my views and experience. Nor could I feel a union of heart with those.... who hold with the gospel being a new remedial law, and represent sinners as contributing to their own conversion.'

Mr. Cecil says, Baxter surpasses all others in the grand, impressive, and persuasive style; but he is not to be named with Owen, as to furnishing the Student's mind. He is, however, multifarious, complex, practical.**

It is painful to see two such eminently holy men, and useful writers, as Owen and Baxter, writing against each other as they do. With a conviction, agreeing with Mr. Cecil, (that Owen is much nearer the truth in doctrine,) it is yet painful to see Owen so severely handle such a man as Baxter, and to see Baxter's recriminations. One is only comforted in the thought of their perfect union above, in together magnifying the riches of that grace which has covered all their asperities. What a lesson may such differences teach us of ceasing from man! We learn similar lessons in the disputes of good men, on points of discipline as well as of doctrine.

But it is impossible to enlarge on each individual. Mr. Hervey sums up their respective characters with happy discrimination. Dr. Owen, with his correct judgment and immense fund of learning. Mr. Charnock, with his masculine style and inexhaustible vein of thought. Dr. Goodwin, with sentiments truly evangelical, and a most happy talent at opening, sifting, and displaying the hidden riches of scripture; these are, I think, the first three. Then come Mr. Howe, nervous and majestic, with all the powers of imagery at his command. Dr. Bates, fluent, polished, with never-ceasing flow of beautiful similitudes. Mr. Flavel, fervent and affectionate, with a masterly hand at probing the conscience and striking the passions; Mr. Caryl, Dr. Manton, Mr. Pool, with many others whose works will speak for them ten thousand times better than the tongue of panegyric, or the pen of biography.'

The Divines of the Restoration and Revolution.

We now proceed to the character of Writers of the Established Church at the Restoration, and Revolution, and succeeding period. The History of Divinity, in the century from the Restoration, to the middle of the 18th century, is by no means cheering to the Christian eye, though it furnishes many a safeguard, and much valuable instruction. Let us trace it in its progress.

* Mr. Cecil observes in his Remains, "There is something so remarkable in the genius and spirit of the gospel, that it is not to be understood by any force of speculation and investigation. Baxter attempted this method and found it vain.'

Bishop Burnet has many valuable, very valuable qualities as a Divine. His pastoral care is exceedingly useful, but his religion was injured, and his spiritual character greatly lowered, by engaging as he did in worldly politics: though the friend of Leighton, he falls vastly short of Leighton's unction and spirituality. His views of this school will tend to awaken the fears of an evangelical mind, alive to the danger of false philosophy: (Col. ii. 8.) they are the views of a partial and attached friend, one of the class which he describes: a class undoubtedly worthy of the Student's attention, and from which much, directly and indirectly, may be learned. The improvements, however, which these excellent men introduced, by no means compensated for their defects of evangelical statements, and their keeping in the back ground the peculiar doctrines of the gospel.

The danger of giving up scriptural expressions, and changing for those we think less offensive, is very great, and the presumption very daring. Witsius speaks justly against the over-refined delicacy of giving up phrases of scripture for our own fancied smoother and more judicious expressions.

Robert Hall observes, with his accustomed terseness, 'If it be replied, Why adhere to an offensive term when its meaning may be expressed in other words, or at least by a more circuitous mode of expression? The obvious answer is, that words and ideas are closely associated, and that though ideas give birth to terms, appropriate terms become in their turn the surest safeguard of ideas, insomuch that a truth which is never announced but in a circuitous and circumlocutory form, will either have no hold, or a very feeble one on the public mind. The anxiety with which the precise, the appropriate term is avoided, bespeaks a shrinking, a timidity, a distrust with relation to the idea conveyed by it, which will be interpreted as equivalent to its disavowal.' We would press this point because of our strong conviction of the many evils of giving up scripture phraseology. The thing escapes with the term, or is deepened or otherwise in the impression of its importance according to the strength or weakness of the term employed to designate it. What words did Paul use to preach the gospel? 1 Cor. ii. 1, 4, 13. The original cast of the truth of Revelation, naturally seems to require a corresponding originality in the mode of expression through which they are communicated, in order that the ideas intended to be conveyed by them, may as far as possible be precise and determinate.

Bishop Reynolds died in 1676. He is a writer of great value, and deep piety and experience. His sentences are astonishingly terse and full of matter, and his doctrine is