maniac clothed and in his right mind, from his dwelling in the tombs; who had fed them by thousands in the lone wilderness, and preached to the poor the glad tidings of a Father's love. There was a long pause, and then there was another effort; he was about, he said, to tell a dream he had had, but his voice faltered, the effort was too much, the taper had thrown its last gleamy flicker, and darkness was about to obscure it for ever. Raising his feeble eye, he said, gently but distinctly, "I am dying." The young man left his bedside; it was but a moment, and a little group stood round it; each stooped to receive his parting salutation, and then there was a dead silence, the spirit had returned to God who gave it. And with so slight an effort did those tried associates, the soul and body, part for ever. Why, his limbs moved not, neither was there sigh or groan, and that frame which but a moment before was animated by a soul pure as the stream that flows by the throne of the Eternal, lofty as the highest heaven, was a lifeless mass, even now resolving itself into its original properties. Yet was the separation beautiful; it had borne him company in all his joys, had been the vehicle of his mental energy, the instrument of his overflowing love; through it he had sympathised with the unfortunate, and borne a noble part in the struggle against wrong. And when premature decay had crept over it, and it no longer obeyed the volitions of his active spirit, it had been the medium of his domestic affections, had aided him in drawing more closely and tenderly the bonds of family love, and pouring into the hearts of the dear ones he was leaving, lessons never to be forgotten.

But they that little circle, to whom he had so long been the father-brother-how did they bear the parting? That gentle sister, his companion in the sacred trust, did her spirit sink beneath the trial? No; with calm firmness she closed his eyes, and kneeling between her surviving brothers, offered up, in clear and unfaltering accents, an earnest prayer to their Almighty Parent for consolation and protection: and it was given; and with calm resignation they parted with this their longest loved, their dearest earthly affection.

And the vision departed; and I looked again on the fair face of nature, and I saw that it had no beauties like

those of the mind of man, when it shows its dominion over matter.

REVIEW.

Unitarianism Confuted: a Series of Lectures, by Thirteen Clergymen of the Church of England. Liverpool, Perris; Hamilton, Adams, & Co., London.

Unitarianism Defended: a Series of Lectures, by Three Protestant Dissenting Ministers of Liverpool. Liverpool, Willmer & Smith; John Green, London.

(Concluded from p. 182.)

THE Rev. Henry W. M'Grath's Lecture, "The Sacraments practically rejected by Unitarians," just proves, that the Church of England holds its own view of Baptism and the Lord's Supper, and that Unitarians do not hold that view. In this discourse, Roman Catholics and Unitarians are represented as in opposite extremes of error, while the Established Church holds the truth between the two. We think, however, and we regret that it should be so, that in the case in question the last party has retained too much of Catholic superstition. Perusal of Mr. McGrath's lecture does not dislodge this opinion. from our minds; and the readers of Mr. Martineau's discourse following, will find sufficient ground for entertaining this estimate of the Church of England's Sacraments. " Christianity without Priest and without Ritual," by that gentlemen, is a valuable sermon, containing great and noble views. It distinguishes strikingly the offices of the priest and the prophet. Men, originally desirous to propitiate God by presents, as they would propitiate one another, got into the use of ceremonial forms, simple and intelligible at first, but at length requiring a certain class of persons to understand and manage them, whose officiation alone was believed to be available. Hence arose the priesthood, having the tendency to press down the human spirit, by intervening between it and its Maker with certain forms, by certain persons alone conducted. The office of the prophet had the converse tendency to this. It elevated the human spirit, by bringing the mind of God, which the prophet revealed, into close contact with the mind of man, teaching the affinity of the human spirit with God, and awakening it to greater excellence. The

priest had his temple made with hands; but the prophet proclaimed humanity to be God's temple, and there sought to call forth sentiments worthy of the Divinity. The Jewish religion, though it contained a priesthood, placed the prophet's office above it, and to that, and not the former, was it indebted for its chief excellence. Moses the prophet made Aaron a priest. "And who," asks Mr. M., "cares now for the sacerdotal books of the Old Testament compared with the rest? Who, having the strains of David, would pore over Leviticus; or would weary himself with Chronicles, when he might catch the inspiration of Isaiah? It was no pontifical spirit that exclaimed, Bring no more vain oblations; incense is an abomination to me,' &c.; 'wash you, make you clean.' Whatever in these venerable Scriptures awes us by its grandeur, and pierces us by its truth, comes of the Prophets, and not the Priest."-p. 10. By the Prophets, Mr. M. does not understand mere seers of future events. "The Prophet is the representative of God before men, commissioned from the Divine nature to sanctify the human. He bears a message downwards, from heaven to earth; his inspirer being above, his influence below. * * * He is charged with the peace of God, and gives from it rest to the weariness, and solace to the griefs of men. * * He is one to whom the primitive and everlasting relations between God and man have revealed themselves, stripped of every disguise and bared of all that is conventional. * * *An earnest speech, a brave and holy life, truth of sympathy, severity of conscience, freshness and loftiness of faith-these natural sanctities are his implements of power."-pages 10, 11. Having explained, at large, the difference between the prophet with his faith, and the priest with his ritual, Mr. Martineau proceeds to prove, that in her sacraments, the Church of England partakes not a little of the priestly character, pretending to sacred charms, which must be managed by an Apostolical succession of priestly mediators, and which are necessary, along with faith, to acceptance with the Deity; and on the other hand, that Christianity is entirely free from the sacerdotal character, while it is a glorious exhibition of the prophet's mission. On both these heads, Mr. M.'s remarks are deeply interesting.

*

Referring our readers to this excellent discourse for the particulars, we would here, in order to prevent a seeming contradiction being supposed, by those who only read this review, between Mr. M.'s sentiment concerning Christianity, that it is without priest and ritual, and what he has stated concerning the priesthood of Jesus in a former lecture (see Pioneer, p. 79), we would here only remind our readers, that the priesthood of Christ was a Jewish idea, and illustrated in the Epistle to the Hebrews in deference to Jewish feelings. Priesthood is applied to Jesus, but not to his Evangelists and the overseers of his churches; and "it is declared to belong to him only after his ascension. It is said that, while on earth, he neither was, nor could be, a priest; and if it is admitted that he holds the office in heaven, this is only to satisfy the demand of the Hebrew Christians for some sacerdotal ideas in their religion, and to reconcile them to having no priest on earth. The writer acknowledges one great pontiff in the world above, that the whole race may be superseded in the world below; and banishes priesthood into invisibility, that men may never see its shadow more."-p. 29.

"The Nicene and Athanasian Creeds explained and defended," by the Rev. R. Davies, is a meagre and unsatisfactory apology, for not only error, but, in the case of the Athanasian Creed, for a mass of contradictions and absurdity. At the end of the lecture, Mr. Davies gives a table, containing in three columns, the Apostles', the Nicene, and the Athanasian Creeds, and Scriptural proofs in a fourth. A glance at this table convinces us, that the two last creeds are not Scripturally supported. Mr. D. endeavours to repel certain charges brought against the Athanasian symbol, of which its uncharitableness is one. For the sake of the church where such a creed is read, we regret that such an attempt at apology should be required; we regret, still more, that the charge of uncharitableness remains as strong as ever, notwithstanding the sophistry of its explainer and defender.

In the lecture of the respondent to Mr. Davies, there are weighty matters for the consideration of him and all who think with him. In "Creeds the Foes of Heavenly Faith, the Allies of Worldly Policy," by Mr. Giles, the tendency of these instruments to " disqualify the mind

for the pursuit of truth," by creating mental apathy and mental indifference, by "paralysing the faculties of weak or sensitive natures by which they deprive them of all power for calm and deliberate examination, by fear of being excluded from their church, discarded by their friends, cast into hell, losing the favour of God and the friendship of Jesus," if they should differ from them in the slightest point; by stunting the most energetic intellect, employing it in fruitless arguments in defence of the productions of ignorant ages; the tendency of creeds thus to disqualify the mind from the pursuit and reception of truth, is ably urged by Mr. G. in his first division. In this part also he replies to the argument, that creeds beget unity of faith, by showing that they have created more heresies than they have checked; and by proving that the Church of England herself, with all her creeds, is full of the most diverse opinions. In his second division, the corrupting tendency of creeds, their influence in destroying sincerity and simplicity, their subservience to the ends of covetousness, pride, and ambition, is painted in strong, but too true colours. While, in the third division, the good, and generous, and wise, and great, even in creed-supporting churches, is candidly admitted. The whole lecture is vigorously written, and is enriched with historical illustrations. Its only fault is, that into places where certain points are discussed, observations are intruded and mixed up, which should have been confined entirely to their respective sections.

"The Personality and Agency of Satan," by the Rev. Hugh Stowell, it would be vain to deny, has in its favour a considerable show of Scriptural evidence. But it is appearance only; nor a whit more reality, because Unitarians differ from one another in their explanations of the passages produced by the Orthodox. The revelation (as a part either of Judaism or Christianity) of the doctrine of Satan and satanic assistants, we, with Mr. Martineau, most decidedly deny; and this denial, we hold, we have reason to make, whether the explanation following be esteemed in whole the most correct or not. We do not by any means agree in all its statements, but still esteem it worthy of consideration. Mr. Martineau says, in reply to the Trinitarian statement concerning the personality