throughout evangelical, spiritual, and holy. His commentary. on the 14th of Hosea is particularly excellent. His works have been lately republished.

Archbishop Leighton died in 1684. He is one of the very first divines of the British Church, whose writings breathe throughout the spirit of devotion, a noble strain of deep piety, a most humble, heavenly, and loving spirit, an elegant mind, and a scriptural standard of evangelical doctrine.

*

Bishop Beveridge died in 1708. He himself published only his more learned works, his Catechism, and one or two small pieces but his executors published many volumes of Sermons, his Private Thoughts, &c. never intended for the press. The whole of his English works have been correctly edited by Mr. Hartwell Horne. His Private Thoughts have been of inestimable service to the Church, from the deep piety and devotion and evangelical sentiments of this excellent bishop. Archbishop Tillotson, in his private character, seems to have been remarkably sincere and upright, open and generous, bearing reproaches patiently, longing for the union of the churches of Christ, charitable, and above ambition and the love of money. Far would we be from throwing any doubt on his personal piety; his very excellencies are the reason why it is necessary to advert to his erroneous views. His. writings are singled out, with those of Chillingworth, by Mr. Locke, as eminent examples of perspicuity. He seems to have been early prejudiced against preaching the doctrines of Christianity. When he was at Kiddington, in Suffolk, the parish universally complained that Jesus Christ was not preached among them-he meets such an accusation in his sermon on Titus iii. 2. I foresee what will be said, because I have heard it so often said in the like case, that there is not one word of Jesus Christ in all this. No more there is in the text, and yet I hope that Jesus Christ is truly preached, whenever his will and laws and the duties enjoined by the Christian religion are inculcated upon us. Here was his grand mistake; and the connections of his text, both in the close of the former, and the following verses, might have shown him that his view was not correct. We do not preach Jesus Christ merely by preaching his laws. He is far more than a Lawgiver, and his laws derive immense energy and force from his atonement, and are eminently effective through his grace. His views on justification (see his Sermon on Justifying Faith) are far from the views of our Reformers. After reading it, we are less surprised at Milner's strong

*Two of his expressions are admirable: 'I cannot endure a trick any where, much less in religion. Let us never do any thing for religion that is contrary to it.'

3

expression, Grotius on the continent, and Tillotson in our own island, with their numerous followers, corrupted it (justification by faith) with all their might. He objected to the Athanasian Creed. His sermon on the eternity of hell torments is seriously objectionable, as trifling with the plain declarations of scripture. He seems to have been misled by Episcopius, whose writings Tillotson's biographer asserts contributed much to the forming of some of the greatest divines of our country, in the age of which we speak. Did they not rather contribute to injure and deteriorate the divinity of this age?

Dr. Barrow is a superior writer in the same school.

The powers of his mind were of the highest order; and in his sermons on the passion of Christ, and on his incarnation, we have very able statements of the fundamental truths of the gospel; and his treatise on the Pope's Supremacy, has been said to be the most valuable on that topic in the English language. In his sermons on Faith, there are some magnificent passages; but there are others in which we cannot concur, though he distinctly acknowledges it to be a fruit of the Spirit. In his sermon on Justifying Faith, he speaks of God's being, by Christ, become reconciled, 'so as generally to proffer mercy, upon certain reasonable and gentle terms, to all that shall sincerely embrace such overtures of mercy, and heartily resolve to comply with those terms required by him; -namely, the returning and adhering to him, forsaking all impiety and iniquity, and constantly persisting in faithful obedience to his holy commandments.' This is not the simplicity of the gospel of Christ. Who shall be saved on the terms of constantly persisting in faithful obedience to his holy commandments!

In the general strain of sentiment, there is, it appears to the Author, a material departure from the character of scriptural divinity. Compare an epistle of St. Paul's and a writer, of this class, and you appear to be in another atmosphere. A few remarks on Barrow's Sermons on Industry will illustrate this view. These are admirable sermons, as comprehending a very valuable mass of weighty and important motives for industry in general, and in our callings as Christians, scholars, and gentlemen. It is a book which may be read through more than once with much advantage; almost every topic relating to the subject seems discussed, and almost every text quoted, but we see not evangelical motives fully developed. The love of Christ, the grand impelling spring of ceaseless activity, and devotedness to Him, the grand rule of all industry, are by no means clearly stated, or powerfully pressed. The beauty, the advantages, and the excellence of industry

to the attainment of every thing valuable, it is true, are put in a thousand instructive forms, and here and there a gospel principle and scriptural examples, are briefly adverted to, but there is vastly more of the views of gospel truth in the texts of scripture that he quotes, than in many pages of his own matter. Classical authors are quoted by him almost in the same way that he would quote an inspired writer. What Augustine says of Cicero, one is ready to say of him, though certainly in a far more restricted degree; we cease to be captivated by him because the name of Christ does not occur in him. The name of Christ does occur in Dr. Barrow (though far more rarely in these sermons than the Christian would desire), and in such a sermon as his on the Passion, we are glad to sit at his feet and learn the very best lessons.

The learning and the judgment of STILLINGFLEET, who died in 1699, were very eminent. His works, in 6 vols. folio, better deserve reprinting than some that have been reprinted. His pieces against Popery are quite an arsenal, furnishing the Protestant with ample armour for repelling the attacks of the subtle and often learned Romanist. Stillingfleet sometimes breaks out in fine evangelical sentiments; but in general rather dwells on the outworks than displays the glory of the interior.

Locke himself is far from being a scriptural writer, It is a strong statement which Mr. Scott makes; he says, In no book which the author has read, does the pride of human reason opposing the express testimonies of God, and striving to wrest them from their obvious meaning, appear so prominent as in most part of Mr. Locke's Exposition of St. Paul's Epistles.' He had a clear and strong mind, with great powers of reasoning. He concurred with the Arminians, and was intimate with their leaders in Holland. His works have been much canvassed, and Lee, Browne, Edwards, and Stillingfleet, and the Author of Mr. Locke's Religion' have sufficiently proved that he overvalued the powers of the human understanding, and disliked, and disbelieved some of the vital doctrines of Christianity. Whatever desire of peace and union among Christians may have actuated him, we cannot but consider that his influence has been decidedly prejudicial to the pure gospel of Christ. While we acquit him of open skepticism and infidelity, we cannot acquit him of a tendency to Socinian principles. His works must therefore be read with caution. Locke admits that Jesus Christ gives his Holy Spirit to help us but is it not the admission of a correct notion, without its becoming a practical principle?

Various controversies arose in this period, which indicate the character of its divinity. One of the most important, the

influence of which has reached the present day, was upon the all-important doctrine of justification. Mr. Nelson gives many particulars of this controversy in his life of Bishop Bull, taking the side of the Bishop.

Bishop Bull's book led to many discussions, and was in part or wholly answered or noticed, either expressly, or by meeting the objections substantially, by Gataker, Trueman, Tully, Baxter, Tombes, Owen, and others.

Dr. Sherlock in 1673 published a discourse on the knowledge of Jesus Christ, attacking Dr. Owen's work on communion with God, and maintaining a very lowered and unscriptural tone of religion. This led to Owen's Reply, Alsop's Antisozzo, and Polhill's Answer, with several others, containing, without defending every thing, valuable elucidations of the evangelical doctrines which Sherlock opposed.

From 1680 to 1690 controversies were maintained with * great spirit on the subject of popery which produced an extended defence of the Reformation, and tended to bring Protestants more to Reformation principles.

In 1715 Bishop Hoadley, then Bishop of Bangor, published a Preservative against the principles and practices of the nonjurors, and shortly after preached a sermon on the words, My kingdom is not of this world, which produced what was called the Bangorian Controversy. He was considered as the patron and champion of misnamed liberal principles. His object was to show that the clergy had no authority in the government of the church, and the controversy afterwards changed from the rights of the clergy to that of the princes. Law's Reply in his three letters to the Bishop is worth reading; but though it has been said that the controversy tended to confirm our civil and ecclesiastical liberties, it is one in the study of which precious time may be lost, and by which men's minds were diverted from vital principles. The violence of the disputes that arose on these occasions, led to the setting aside of the Convocation, which has not since acted. Was there not a want of evangelical principles both in high and low church; and was not Christ, the only point of union for all Christians, too much lost sight of? If so, no wonder that eager disputes and wide wasting divisions prevailed.

But more serious discussions affecting even the first truths of religion succeeded. The Socinian heresy now began to spread and increase. This is attributed by some to the Act of Toleration; was it not rather owing to the want of evangelical principles in the ministry of the word ?* The opposi

Mr. Bowman gives the following view of the case-At the beginning of the 18th century Arminianism was sensibly on the decline. It had intro

tion of Socinians was not met with the evangelical piety, and learning, and wisdom of former days.

The Arian controversy, in this country, arose from Mr. Whiston's publications, in 1710, and the following years; and from Dr. Clarke's scripture doctrine of the Trinity, in 1712. It led to some valuable vindications of the Trinity, by writers from Dr. Waterland down to Mr. Jones of Nayland, though it is to be regretted that it was defended critically rather than practically, as a theory of immense moment, indeed, but little traced out in the experimental and holy use of it in the Christian life.*

Some farther remarks on writers, who lived at the latter part of this period, will be added, before we give testimonies to the general effects of this decline. There were some lovely characters of primitive piety, such as Bishop WILSON, who died in 1755; men who adorned the gospel of Christ in their lives, though their writings fail of exhibiting fully the essential doctrines of the gospel. The divinity current in their days accounts for this deficiency; and there is enough to show that they still did hold these doctrines. Oh! that all

duced Socinianism soon after the Restoration, which within a few years prevailed over it; so that Socinians were more numerous than the Arminians. Socinianism ushered in Arianism. But the Socinians having received a check, being publicly stigmatized by the Toleration Act in 1689, were obliged to speak with some caution and reserve. This perhaps was serviceable to the Arian interest, for it soon became predominant, and was at the commencement of the present age the fashionable religion.'

Subscription to the Articles was an impediment in the way of the Arians, till one of them declared, the Articles may lawfully and conscientiously be subscribed in any sense in which they themselves by their own interpretation can reconcile them to Scripture, without regard to the meaning and interpretation either of the persons who first compiled them, or who now impose them.' [See Waterland's case of Arian Subscription, p. 8.]

Even the pacific Wake, in a letter to the superintendent of Zurich, in 1719, thus writes- They to whom the preservation of the church is committed, and whose duty it is to watch against her enemies, and to reprove, restrain, and punish them, according to their demerits, even these endeavor to overthrow the authority of that church. These men are highly displeased with all confessions of faith, and with all subscriptions to Articles, and would have a liberty or rather a license granted for all men,, not only to believe, but to speak, write, and preach, what they think fit, though the grace of the Holy Spirit, the divinity of Christ, and all other fundamental Articles of our religion should thereby be overturned.'

*Thus the sacred writers ever mention it; thus St. Paul states it: The grace of our Lord Jesus Christ, and the love of God, and the fellowship of the Holy Ghost be with you all. Thus Jude puts it: Building up yourselves on your most holy FAITH, praying in the HOLY GHOST, keep yourselves in the love of GOD, looking for the mercy of OUR LORD JESUS CHRIST unto eternal life. Thus St. Peter: Elect according to the foreknowledge of God the Father, through sanctification of the Spirit, unto obedience and sprinkling of the blood of Jesus Christ.