sacrifices that have been made to scientific nomenclature, we have noticed, among the chemical terms only, a considerable number of positive errors; besides the introduction of several titles which rest on the authority of doubtful and unconfirmed experiments, and which, therefore, it will be necessary again to alter in a subsequent edition.

An Appendix, in two parts, is subjoined; the first containing a short and superficial view of the medical history of the gases, electricity, and galvanism. The second relates to medical prescriptions; and the chief value of it consists in tables of the old names of the pharmaceutical preparations, arranged in corresponding columns with those which were adopted in the last editions of the London and Edinburgh Pharmacopeias.

ART. XIV. Christian Theology; or an Inquiry into the Nature. and general Character of Revelation. By the Rev. Richard Lloyd, A.M, Minister of Midhurst, Sussex. 8vo. pp. 382. 8s. Boards. Hatchard. 1804.

INTENDING his treatise chiefly for the use of the younger

Clergy of the Church of England, and for those Students of both Universities who are designed for holy orders, Mr. Lloyd has formed it on the basis and in support of the tenets of the national faith; and those who espouse different sentiments are thus apprized of the nature and tendency of his view of Christian Theology. With learning and talents adequate to the undertaking, he combines a conduct both manly and explicit, and does not indulge in arrogance and spiritual dog. matism. In his preface, he openly disavows all intention of giving unnecessary offence by contending, in a pertinacious manner, for points of a circumstantial nature; while he delivers himself with that independence of mind which is becoming a Christian Minister, he disclaims the vanity of supposing that his own opinions, however strenuously he may contend for them, are unmixed with error; and he owns the possibility of being under the secret influence of prejudice in a degree unknown to himself. Such a writer, as Mr. Lloyd thus professes himself, must be in a state of mind propitious to free inquiry; and he must be disposed to prefer the exercise of honest criticism, which will lead him to review his arguments and positions, rather than servile acquiescence and general commendation.

This Inquiry, which is divided into five chapters, treats of the Nature, Design, and Importance of Revelation ;-of the Unity of divine truth, as displayed in the Jewish and Christian Dispensations;-of the sentiments and dispositions which the Christian Religion ought to produce, more especially in its

ministers;

ministers; and of the means most conducive to this important end;-of that Doctrine which has a commanding Influence on the Christian System; and of the best method of enforcing this and other articles of our Holy religion ;-of the Nature and Attributes of God; the Relation and Dependence of his Creatures, and of the duties resulting from this relation and dependence; of Adam's state before and after the Fall, and the provision made for his Restoration to the Image of his Maker; of the Nature of this Restoration, with some observations connected with it.

We apprehend that the arrangement of subjects would have been improved, had the order been inverted; and that the discussion on the Being and Attributes of God, instead of occurring in the last chapter, should have formed a part of, or rather have been an introduction to, the first: but Mr. Lloyd, under the impression of that alarm which has been excited against Philosophy, and adopting the maxims of some modern divines, is unwilling to allow any value to Natural Religion. He informs us, in the first note to the first chapter, that

The question is not an abstract question what men might and ought to know about God and his perfections, upon mere principles of Reason improved by consideration and experience, without the help of Revelation; but a question of fact-What discoveries of this sort did men actually make? The law of nature is not to be confounded with the imperfect light of nature, as now enjoyed. I firmly believe that fallen man, left to himself, would not be able to make any discoveries relative to the being of a God, the immortality of the soul, or any of those first principles of what is called Natural Religion. In the fullest sense of the word, he would have “lived without God in the world.” Whatever, therefore, is found among heathens of these principles, is to be attributed to early Revelations and traditional light.”

The most enlightened divines of the last age, with Dr. Clarke at their head, and the most judicious of the present, with Dr. Paley as their leader, contended for the reverse of what is Mr. Lloyd's firm belief, asserted the existence of Natural Theology or Natural Religion, independently of Revelation, and explained their connection; and we may observe that their view of the subject exactly comports with the testimony of revelation itself. The Apostle Paul represents the Being and Attributes of God to be so deducible from the things that are seen, or the visible Creation, that those who did not acknowlege the Deity were left without excuse. It will be easier for Mr.

Lloyd to reconcile his positions in the above note with some of the very strong assertions of Bishop Horsley, than with the doctrine of the author of the Epistle to the Romans (ch. i. 20.) Before our divines manifest so strange a reluctance to do justice to Natural Religion, we wish them to reflect that Reve,

lation in every part presupposes the existence of natural reason and conscience; and that, if the human mind had not the power of deducing the first principles of Natural Religion, the appeals of Revelation to Man could be of no avail. It was formerly a received maxim, Philosophia theologia ancillatur; and we should hope that we are now sufficiently recovered from our panic, to believe that by "looking through nature up to Nature's God," we are neither unfitted for adoring "the Father of Mercies," nor for contemplating with gratitude the discoveries of Revelation.

Dr. Horsley miantains, and Mr. Lloyd adopts the position that "Revealed Religion stands not on the ground of any antecedent discoveries of natural reason:-that we must resort to Revelation for our first principles; -and that to lay the foundation of Revelation on any previous discoveries of reason is, in fact, to make reason the superior teacher." Each of these positions, however, we shall presume to controvert. The Bishop will not venture to deny the doctrine of the Psalmist that the Heavens declare the glory of God; and if natural reason perceives the divine glory in the visible heavens, here is an antecedent discovery of natural reason, on which Revelation stands. Again, if we must resort to Revelation for every first principle, then the Being of God cannot be deduced from his works, which is contrary to the express declaration of the apostle. Besides, does not natural conscience, or a principle of moral discernment, exist in man independently of supernatural communication; and does not Revelation itself presuppose, in all her addresses, the existence of this moral principle? How fruitless must its exhortations prove, were the fact otherwise! If we had no ability to search the book of Nature, and no sense to discern between good and evil, it would be in vain to require us to Search the Scriptures, and to call us to Repentance.-In making these remarks, we have no intention of disparaging divine revelation, of the infinite value of which we hope that we are as truly sensible as Bishop Horsley himself: but we offer them for the purpose of calling back our modern clergy to the practice of their most learned ancestors, the practice of considering Natural and Revealed Religion as inseparably connected together, as flowing from the same God, and addressed to the same creature. Lastly, the precedence of the intimations, or (if the Bishop pleases,) the discoveries of reason, does not constitute reason the superior teacher; for if priority established superiority, the dispensation of Moses must be superior to that of Christ,-which neither the Bishop nor we shall admit.

In describing the value and genius of the Gospel, Mr. Lloyd shews that, though the last gift of God, it is far superior to all

former

former dispensations; and if some expressions, proceeding from that misconception which we have been controverting, were omitted, the general account would be satisfactory and

correct:

The Gospel in short is the sovereign good of fallen man, a remedy commensurate with all his disorders. Its grand end is, through repentance, and faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, to enthrone the Deity in our hearts, and to produce that supreme love of him which is the very essence of holiness, the perfection of our nature, and the hap piness and glory of Heaven.

It appears, therefore, that the Christian religion is not to be pa rallelled and compared with any other. It stands alone. It is exclusively true. It is the only faithful transcript of the divine will, -the MAGNA CHARTA of Heaven. When it is said to be only comparatively or transcendently excellent, by such language its divinity is insulted, its majesty degraded, and its weight and importance in a great measure destroyed. For if the religion of the Bible be not true, no religion is so, for no other can advance any pretensions that will stand a sober scrutiny: but this has such a body of evidence, both in kind and degree in proof of its truth such bright and heavenly signatures impressed upon it-as must ever satisfy every honest and impartial inquirer with its authenticity.

Hence the duty of propagating Christianity by right and pacific means through all the kingdoms of the world. It is a duty founded upon its divine authority,-on authority paramount to all human institutions. Its genius is not to disturb the order of civil society, for it inculcates submission to the "powers that be" for conscience sake. It mixes with every species of government, and by its salutary influence improves and exalts them all, giving the promise of the life that now is as well as that which is to come.

The paramount importance of Revelation is thus forcibly

stated:

If this be the character of Revelation; if it convey to us a message from God himself, on which the everlasting interests of the soul are dependent; if it be given us as the only standard of truth and error, the only rule by which we must regulate our faith and practice; what must be the guilt of those who either despise or neglect this sacred volume? Of what importance will it be to such that they could "speak with the tongues of men and of angels," and "understand all languages," when languages shall cease, and the nations themselves which spake them shall sink into silence and oblivion? Of what avail to have known this little globe, and the kingdoms described upon it; or to have traversed the blue expanse of Heaven, calculated the revolutions of the planets, and ascertained their respective distances, when the earth shall be burnt up, the heavens shall pass away, the elements shall melt, and the world itself be dissolved? Such knowledge has its value and its place, it is useful, it is ornamental; but it will not purify the heart, tranquillize the tumults of the mind, speak peace to the guilty conscience, or inspire a "hope full of immortality and glory." The Bible is

given for these important ends; and, under the influence of the spirit, its native tendency to produce them is realized in the heart and life of man. Whosoever, therefore, neglects the word of God, it wold have been better for him that he had lived all his days in the wilds of a forest, and heard only the howling winds, instead of the voice of mercy, and the gracious sounds of salvation. For mercy despised, light resisted, privileges abused, open the way, according to the strict rules of distributive justice, for the most severe and tremendous punishment. "This is the condemnation, that light is come into the world, but men have loved darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil."

In the Chapter on the Unity of Divine revealed truth, Mr. Lloyd exhorts the student to generalize his ideas; and to regard Revelation as a complete system, displaying throughout an unity of design, and evincing that mutual relation, dependence, and coherence of parts, by which the Bible becomes its own interpreter. If we do not agree with him in his subsequent explanations, we allow that his rules for studying revelation are judicious. It is not from detached passages, but from the general scope of the sacred writings, that we are to collect their meaning. Had he followed his own advice, would he have stated Adam to be the federal head' of the human race?

According to Mr. Lloyd, the nature of Christianity was not particularly and fully revealed, till after the death and resurrection of Christ; and he apprehends that our Lord's character is not degraded, nor that of his aposties exalted above him, when he affirms that his ministry was more a preparation for the Gospel, than an explicit declaration of it,' which we must seek in the Acts and Epistles, as being the most clear and decisive parts of the sacred writings on doctrinal subjects."

We have been taught to regard the dispensation of John the Baptist as preparative to that of the Son of God: but we are obliged to Mr. L. for the discovery that the public ministry and preaching of Christ himself was also a preparation for the Gospel. Hence, in the four evangelists, we have only the twilight of Christianity; and we are not to look for the rising sun and meridian beam, till we come to the Acts and Epistles: though, towards the conclusion of the Gospels, we are expressly informed that they were "written that we might believe in Christ, and that believing we might have hope through his name;" which could scarcely be said of a merely introductory document. In making scripture the interpreter of scripture, are we to explain the figures and allegories by the plain doctrine; or endeavour to swell and dress out the plain doctrine in all the fantastic decorations which a bold commentary on figurative and allegorical language might furnish? Surely the ob