atonement, are much more satisfactorily exhibited by Dr. Smith, in these Discourses, than in the more popular work of the Archbishop. In our own opinion, however, the old work of Dr. Outram, De Sacrificiis, is superior to both of them, in just and accurate views, on this important subject. This valuable treatise has been long known to the learned, and within a few years, has been rendered accessible to the English reader, by the translator of Calvin's Institutes.

Dr. Smith has adopted a practice in the citation of testimonies from the Scriptures, against which we feel constrained to enter our protest. Instead of quoting the words of the authorized version, he gives us his own private interpretation. In his preface, he has assigned his reasons for pursuing this course, but we are not satisfied with the apology. If one person may use this liberty, so may every one, and the consequence would be, interminable confusion. Every smatterer in Greek and Hebrew literature, and every wild errorist, would come forward with their improved versions, of such parts of Scripture as they wished to turn to the advantage of their own cause, and thus the word of God would be rendered contemptible, and the confidence of the people in it as a fixed and infallible standard would be greatly shaken by seeing the sense of the same passage so differently represented. We do sincerely hope, therefore, that this example will not be followed. We do not say, that our English version of the Bible is infallible, or that it has any authority, where it departs from the true meaning of the original; but the correct method of proceeding, in our opinion, is, to cite testimonies, in the words of the commonly received version; and then, if the writer is of opinion that the sense is not fairly or fully given, let him exercise his critical skill, as much as he pleases, in endeavouring to elicit and establish the true meaning.

The style of these Discourses is, for the most part, perspicuous, and sometimes forcible and animated; but in our

judgment, too much minute and dry criticism is introduced into them, which should have been referred to the Notes and Illustrations. As they are now constructed, they cannot possibly be of any use but to the learned reader ; whereas by throwing the greater part of the critical discussion into the Notes, the principal argument would be level to the capacity of any intelligent person.

We think it also a fault, that the learned author, by endeavouring to render his definitions very accurate, in the abstract, often introduces obscurity into a subject, otherwise plain. Of this we have a remarkable example, in the Third Discourse, (p. 183.) where he formally gives the definition of holiness and sin. "Holiness," says he, "is the respecting of the due relations, or the objects of intended reference, which ought to be, in the performance of actions." And, "Sin is the absence of respect to the due relations of actions." Now, we believe, that these definitions are accurate; but do they elucidate the subject? If the words defined were removed, would any mortal be able to divine, what the subject of the definitions was? It would answer just about as good a purpose, to exhibit holiness and sin in algebraic signs.

Indeed, the greatest defect which we have observed in this truly learned and respectable author, is, too great a fondness for abstract reasoning, in cases, where the simple declaration of God is of more weight than all the reasonings. in the world.

Our object, in the review of these Discourses, is merely to bring them to the notice of our readers, to furnish them with a general analysis of their contents, and to give some extracts of sufficient extent, to enable them to judge for themselves, not only of the author's style, but of his theological views.

The text on which these Discourses is founded, is, Heb. ix. 14,-The blood of Christ, who through the eternal Spirit, offered himself without spot to God.

In the first Discourse-which in this edition extends through 82 pages-the subject treated is, THE NATURE OF THE SACRIFICE OF CHRIST. In discussing this important point, the author considers the following particulars. 1. The general nature of sacrifices. 2. The symbolical character of the ancient sacrifices. 3. The reference of these to the sacrifice of Christ. 4. The proper value of the sacrifice of Christ. 5. The efficacy of the sacrifice of Christ.

The views of the learned author, relative to the nature and origin of the ancient sacrifices, will be best learned from the following extract:

"A sacrifice, properly so called, is the solemn infliction of death on a living creature, generally by effusion of its blood, in a way of religious worship; and the presenting of this act to the Deity, as a supplication for the pardon of sin, and a supposed mean of compensation for the insult and injury thereby offered to his majesty and government.

"The practice of offering sacrifices to the true God, or to fictitious divinities, is known to have been a custom, in the most complete sense, universal and ancient. The records of the early history of nations, and the narratives of modern discovery, equally show the prevalence of sacrificial rites, in all countries where they have not been superseded by Christianity. The manner in which men performed those rites showed their strong apprehension of importance and interest in them. The inferior and less serviceable animals were not generally devoted to this purpose; but the animals of most utility to man were the usual sacrifices, and these often in large and costly numbers. Such profusion proved the serious earnestness of those who used it: yet, in instances without number, more horrid proofs were given. On great occasions of terror, or of expectation, human beings were the victims of this dire immolation. Unhappy and bewildered mortals have sought relief from the pangs of guilty dread, and have hoped to atone for past crimes by committing others still more awful: they have given their first-born for their transgression, the fruit of their body for the sin of their soul.

"The remote antiquity of these observances is attested by the most venerable remains of classical and oriental composition: and the most ancient and authentic of documents, the sacred history, carries them back to the first family of man.

"It is the opinion of some, that, in allusion and accomodation to these practices, and with a view to facilitate the reception of Christianity by gratifying the prejudices of the Jews, the New Testament represents Jesus Christ as having offered a sacrifice to God; though, in a real and proper sense, he did no such thing. These interpreters affirm that, as the Jews had a profound veneration for their temple, their priesthood, and their altar, the first Christian teachers endeavoured to ingratiate themselves and procure acceptance to their system, by finding in it likewise a priest, a sacrifice, and an altar. To this mode of representation we object, that, as an hypothesis, it is defective, and that it is contrary to the testimony of Scripture.

"It is defective, as an hypothesis, in that it leaves the previous fact unaccounted for; the existence of sacrifices, their origin, and their design. An attempt is made to remove the difficulty, by alleging that the worship by sacrifices was of the nature of a present, by way of homage to the Supreme Being."*--On this supposition, must we not deem the bloodless, innocent, and more natural offering of Cain, the fruits of the earth, more rational in itself, and more likely to be agreeable to the Deity, than that of Abel, which appears revolting to the feelings of humaity, a useless waste of animal life, and, as an act of worship, manifestly absurd? But, passing by the grossness of the invention, what conceptions must those form of the blessed God, who imagine that with such services HE could be gratified? "We also object that this notion is inconsistent with the plain language of the Scriptures, in regard both to the ancient sacrifices, and to the sacrifice of Jesus Christ. Evidence for both the parts of this remark we shall presently submit to the reader's judgment.

"A doctrine, the reverse of that to which we have referred, appears to us the dictate of the divine oracles and of impartial reason.

This

is, that the ancient sacrifices were themselves only allusions; and that they were intended as a REPRESENTATION of the sufferings and death of the Messiah, or as a DECLARATION of the doctrine included in that grand future fact, and taught by it.

"In the communication of knowledge from man to man, the living voice is a very imperfect instrument. The extent of its use is narThe advantages of rowly circumscribed by infirmity and death. man's primitive longevity were opposed by prevailing and increasing corruption and practical wickedness must in time have effaced right impressions of religious truth. The tongues of patriarchs and pro

* Dr. Priestly's Notes on Scripture, Vol, i. p. 13.

:

phets were soon silent in the grave: and the mere memory of their instructions, however for a time affectionately cherished, was a hazardous channel of communication for truths of infinite concern. Hence a language of mute signs must have appeared to possess inesti. mable advantages, as soon as the idea of such an instrument was entertained. Such a representative of language might be of two kinds, the symbolical and the arbitrary. The latter kind is alphabetical writing and an admirable contrivance, whether it was entirely the fruit of human ingenuity, or, as some have supposed, originating in divine communication. It is probable that the first extensive use of this invention nearly coincided with the considerable increase of population, and the reduction of the length of human life to its present standard. The brevity, ease, and universal application of this method, have given it an almost exclusive prevalence among the cultivated nations which have been founded to the west of the original seats of the human race.

"But we have reason to think, that a more remote antiquity may be claimed for the other kind of sign, the symbolical. This was a system of natural significancy, in which visible objects or their pictures, and actions performed with this express design, were used to represent and convey information. This plan was prevalent in the earliest periods, and among the most ancient nations. Even at this day, a written language, which is understood by about one third part of the human race, is of this description: the Chinese. It is founded upon the principle of employing characters, not as representatives of sounds, but as types or symbols of ideas; and it is familiarly understood by nations whose spoken dialects differ greatly.

"Of this kind we conceive the rite of sacrificing to have been: a symbolical action, adapted and intended to convey important instruction. We shall offer our reasons for regarding sacrifices as thus intentionally significant; and then shall inquire into the particular. ideas and moral sentiments which were so represented.

"Our arguments in favour of the notion that sacrifices were intended as a species of symbolical language, will be drawn from their very Nature and Form, from their Origin, and from the Sentiments of those who practised them.

1. "The nature, form, and circumstances of a sacrifice carried an obvious import upon their very first aspect. The selection, presentation, and immolating of the unoffending animal, the regard paid to its blood, its consumption by fire, the solemn ceremonies which accompanied, and the particular confessions and supplications of the