doctrines of Scripture, on the Lord's Day. By withholding it from the pulpit, and advocating it on the platform alone, they either created or strengthened the impression already existing, that it was a matter of minor importance-a mere question of discipline, that was dividing the Church. If it was worth suffering for, surely it ought to have been preached, and we cannot help thinking that many are left in the Establishment to whom their former pastors owe a solemn duty, they will never have an opportunity of discharging. When retiring, and shaking the dust off their feet, they should have left behind them the testimony rung in every ear, that side by side with the truth that Christ is our only Redeemer, stands that other, that Christ is our only King. If this had been done in time, God's controversy with us for neglecting it might have stopped short of the sacrifice he has called us to make in its defence.

We are glad, therefore, to see a sermon on this subject, and we trust it will not be overlooked as it has been. Mr Gibson seems to have a full understanding of our principles. He has given us an excellent sermon, written in a vigorous style. Perhaps he has attempted to embrace too much in one discourse. One or two of the features of the disruption might have been left out, and, in their place, we would have desiderated a more prominent view of what we consider the chief value of our disruption; namely, the impression it is calculated to make on an unbelieving world, that there is truth in the religion of Jesus-that His servants are in earnest in declaring this, and that all do not desire the Priest's office for a bit of bread. By the way, we do not like the term "Secession," if by that is understood a secession from the Church. We do not wish to forget that the Church of Scotland has seceded from the State.

"From

We give a short extract as a specimen of Mr Gibson's style. neither of the great contending parties in the State did she receive support in her hour of need. And yet, even upon their own principles, what a strong claim did she put forth upon the sympathies and assistance of both! * What a noble opportunity did her case present to the one class of politicians to strike a blow for religious liberty! What an occasion did she furnish to the other to maintain in its integrity the most honoured of our national institutions! Her voice, however, was overborne; her testimony disregarded; her appeal, whether to the one party or the other, set at nought. It is a heavy calamity to any country, when its senators and statesmen have abandoned the solid ground of principle, and when they are adrift on the wide sea of expediency, having lost sight of the pole-star that should direct their course. How does their conduct in the case before us belie their oft-repeated protestations, and expose them to the charge of trifling with the most sacred interests of the commonwealth! They might have prevented that fearful crisis-they might have averted that heavy woe that so lately wrung the heart of Scotland. Miserable infatuation theirs, to withhold the redress of a nation's wrongs, and to imagine all the while, that the foul indignity that has been perpetrated will be forgotten by an injured and afflicted people." Pp. 31, 32.

The Ordinance of Covenanting. By JouN CUNNINGHAM, A.M. 12mo. pp. 395. 1843. Glasgow: Marshall.

From the importance of its subject, and the fullness with which it is treated, this Treatise deserves a more extended notice. The Theology of Covenanting is here unfolded with a richness of Scriptural research and a maturity of intellectual strength, which would have made the grey eye of Peden glisten with delight. Those who wish to know the principles on which the religious peculiarities of the Old Covenanters, and of their modern representatives are founded, should read a book like this; and, apart from the distinctive tenets of any

section of the Church of Christ, it is a production of great value; entering with much minuteness into those solemn ordinances in which man is called on to transact with God. Without avowing our acquiescence in every position laid down, or in every argument employed, we cannot withhold our tribute of regard for the spirit of calm and modest inquiry which pervades this work; its hallowed and reverential tone, and its truly practical tendency. Whether unconsciously possessed, or purposely restrained, there are frequent tokens of a mind of high attainments and rich resources; and, though we could gladly have allowed our author to luxuriate more largely in fields of thought where he is so much at home, we must not blame his rare forbearance. His Treatise is a valuable addition to that solid Theological Literature, of which the Reformed Presbyterian Church has produced repeated and enduring specimens, and stamps Mr Cunningham a distinguished disciple of the Thoughtful and Scriptural School of Mason and the Symingtons.

The Scottish Church Question: its Origin, History, and Results.

ANDERSON KIRKWOOD, Writer, Glasgow.

By

This pamphlet is strictly according to its title, the Origin, History, and Results of the Scottish Church Question. It is simply a statement of facts, and they are accurately and clearly written. It is just a synopsis of all that has transpired in connection with the struggle of our Church, from the commencement to the period of the disruption. The first half of the pamphlet contains a clear and distinct view of the contendings of our forefathers, from the reformation to the revolution, with many useful quotations from parliamentary statutes, shewing our legal right to all we claimed and were denied by the statesmen of the present day.

It was originally written for a London Theological Magazine, and bears marks of this which a Scotch reader will easily perceive. It is admirably suited for circulation in England, and indeed, anywhere among men who, wishing to understand our question, have little leisure, or little inclination to study it thoroughly.

46

"The End" the Time of Divine Interpretation, and the duty and peace of "waiting for it:" a Sermon preached on occasion of the lamented death of the Rev. John Morell Mackenzie, A.M., who perished in the wreck of the Pegasus, on the 20th July 1843. By RALPH WARDLAW, D.D.

This discourse was preached on an occasion of deep and solemn interest, and was certainly well calculated to answer the purpose for which it was intended. It consists of remarks on the words, "But go thou thy way till the end be: for thou shalt rest, and stand in thy lot in the end of the days."—(Dan. xii. 13.) And to these, there is subjoined a sketch of the life and character of Mr. Mackenzie. It is an able discourse, characterized by the correct thought, lucid arrangement, elegant diction, and above all, spiritual unction, for which the excellent author is so well known. We like especially, what he says regarding the "lot" of the inheritance above; showing, that although the blessedness of this inheritance is always conferred upon the saint as a thing of God's free grace, still each man shall receive it as his own reward, and according to his own labour; that the recompense shall be given and enjoyed there, in proportion to the amount of activity which the individual puts forth here, and to the purity of motive by which he has been influenced in the service of God. The sketch of Mr Mackenzie's life and character is very interesting. To some, his character may appear overdrawn. But, from what we know of

Dr Wardlaw's judiciousness and candour, and from the honourable testimony which is borne by others, to the high endowments, fervent piety, and extensive learning of the lamented deceased, we believe it to be a correct and judicious estimate of the excellencies of a faithful and able minister of Christ, who, though called suddenly to encounter death, showed in his last moments that calmness of mind, and nobleness of soul, which the knowledge of Christ alone can give.

Correspondence between the Duke of Sutherland and Dr M'Farlan, &c. Greenock. 1843.

We would humbly suggest, that in all matters so important and delicate as those to which this correspondence relates, no single member of the Church, however respectable, ought to accede to a negociation without previously ascertaining the mind of his brethren. At least, had Dr. M'Farlan acted in this manner, he would not, we are persuaded, have lent so credulous an ear to the noble persecutor who addressed him, as he appears to have done, nor would the exertions of the Church on behalf of their oppressed and enslaved brethren in Sutherland have been so suddenly paralysed as undoubtedly they are. It was also with sorrow that we found Dr. M Farlan penning such sentiments as these, at this time of the day: "We propose (?) to go annually to Parliament, with the Claim of Rights in our hand, and demand their restitution. And, if the day shall arrive when the State shall do justice to Scotland, by inquiring into our claims and granting us redress-I may not say positively that we shall rejoin the Establishment-but, certain I am, that none of the inhabitants of the realm will hail so blessed an event with greater joy than the ministers and people of the Free Church, or more cordially enter, if permitted, into communion with their brethren of the Establishment, and cooperation with them in every good work.” It is against the concluding sentiment that we desire to enter our protest, and that very decidedly. We could not enter into communiou and co-operation with those who now form the Establishment, let parliament enact what they please, just because we cannot esteem them "brethren."

Sutherland as it Was and Is; or, How a Country may be Ruined. Edinburgh: John Johnstone.

1843.

We dare say most of our readers know the pamphlet already, or, at least, have read the articles in the Witness of which it is the reprint. We need, therefore, do no more than recommend it to them in its new form. The "Sutherland persecution," which it so ably, so eloquently exposes, has done more to open men's minds, and call men's attention to our present conflict than any other of the many striking scenes which have recently occurred.

Animadversions upon Sir William Hamilton's pamphlet, entitled "Be not Shismatics, be not Martyrs, by Mistake," &c. By WILLIAM CUNNINGHAM, D.D., formerly Minister of Trinity College Parish, and now one of the Theological Professors of the Free Church of Scotland. Edinburgh: John Johnstone. 1843.

In all likelihood we shall return to this admirable pamphlet again. But we take the earliest opportunity of calling our readers' attention to it. It contaius some severe but just observations on Sir W. Hamilton's pamphlet,

and proves that the Professor has considerably fewer claims to the character of learned than the world has hitherto given him credit for. We content ourselves at present with the following extract from the preliminary observations:

"Sir William, feeling, apparently, that there was a considerable antecedent improbability, that such a body of men as recently left the Established Church of Scotland, should have become Schismatics and Martyrs by mistake,' thinks it needful to begin with proving by instances, that, on various occasions, whole bodies of eminent theologians have fallen into grievous error. All this was quite unnecessary. Nobody has alleged that the evangelical party are infallible, and nobody would have disputed Sir William's right to discuss their principles, or their obligations to consider his arguments; although most men will probably think, that, considering the character and standing of the men whom he addressed, and his own very imperfect knowledge, and very cursory examination, of the topics he discusses, he might have conducted his Demonstration' somewhat in a less presumptuous style. It would be easy to produce some striking instances of men possessed of high talents, and extensive erudition upon other subjects, who, when they entered upon the field of theology, which they had examined only perfunctorily, exposed themselves to ridicule and contempt. But this would be of no real use in discussing Sir William's Demonstration.' By the course he has taken in this matter, he has an opportunity at once of making a fuller display of his learning, such as it is, upon ecclesiastical subjects, and at the same time manifesting his dislike of some men who have been eminently useful in promoting the interests of religion. His first instance is taken from the conduct of Luther, and some of the other Reformers.

666

Among other points of Papal discipline, the zeal of Luther was roused against ecclesiastical celibacy aud monastic vows; and whether did it carry him? Not content to reason against the institution within natural limits, and on legitimate grounds, his fervour led him to deny explicitly, and in every relation, the existence of chastity, as a physical impossibility,-led him publicly to preach (and who ever preached with the energy of Luther?) incontinence, adultery, incest even, as not only allowable, but, if practised under the prudential regulations which he himself lays down, unobjectionable, and even praiseworthy. The epidemic spread; a fearful dissolution of manners throughout the sphere of the Reformer's influence was for a season the natural result. The ardour of the boisterous Luther infected, among others, even the ascetic and timorous Melancthon. Polygamy awaited only the permission of the civil ruler, to be promulgated as an article of the Reformation; and had this permission not been significantly refused (whilst, at the same time, the epidemic in Wittemberg was homopathically alleviated, at least, by the similar but more violent access in Munster), it would not have been the fault of the fathers of the Reformation if Christian liberty had remained less ample than Mahommedan license. As it was, polygamy was never abandoned by either Luther or Melancthon as a religious speculation: both in more than a single instance, accorded the formal sanction of their authority to its practice, by those who were above the law; and had the civil prudence of the imprudent Henry VII. not restrained him, sensual despot as he was, from carrying their spontaneous counsel into effect, a plurality of wives might now have been a privilege as religiously contended for in England as in Turkey.'

"Now, this paragraph is just an exaggerated summary of the accusations which the champions of Popery have been accustomed to adduce against Luther upon these points. It is written evidently in the same spirit of malignity against Luther which the agents of the mystery of iniquity have usually exhibited, though it contains a larger amount of misrepresentation than the more prudent Papists have ventured to indulge in. It is well known that

Luther, in his zeal against some of the doctrines and practices of Popery, made rash and offensive statements about marriage and divorce, of which the Papists took advantage, and which his friends and followers could not fully defend. But that he ever preached, as Sir William has here alleged, in defence of incontinence, adultery, and incest, is a calumny, of which no proof has been adduced, and of which even some Papists would be ashamed. Besides charging Luther with preaching in defence of incontinence, adultery, and incest, Sir William's statement is plainly intended to convey the ideas, that Luther, Melancthon, and the Reformers generally, had a deliberate opinion in favour of the lawfulness and propriety of polygamy,-that they wished this opinion to be acted upon, and recommended to the civil authorities to establish it by law,-and that it was just because the civil authorities refused to adopt, their views upon this point, that polygamy was not established as the law of the reformed churches. Sir William has produced no evidence of these startling positions; and it is enough, therefore, at present, that we meet them with a flat contradiction, and denounce them as slanders.

"Sir William refers to the permission granted by Luther and Melancthon in two instances, to princes to marry a second wife while their first was alive and undivorced. The case of the Landgrave of Hesse is well known, and Luther's conduct in this matter is probably the darkest spot in his history. But Luther's conduct and statements on that occasion, so far from proving the truth of Sir William's allegations that he approved of polygamy, and wished it sanctioned by civil authority, prove that they are unfounded; and, accordingly, the more respectable Popish writers adduce this affair, not as proving what Sir William insinuates against him, but as showing that for political objects, and on grounds of expediency, he sanctioned, under the plea of necessity, what he knew to be wrong.

"The anecdote' of which Sir William speaks in his note is, it is presumed, the insinuation contained in the text, that Luther and Melancthon advised Henry VIII. to marry a second wife without divorcing his first; and his statement that this anecdote' is unknown to all English historians, nay, as far as I know, to all ecclesiastical writers,' is evidently intended as an insinuation of his own extraordinary learning, in knowing what all English historians and all ecclesiastical writers' were ignorant of. There is, however, no such mighty mystery, and no such ground for boasting, about the matter. That an allegation to this effect has been made, and that a considerable degree of probability attaches to it, is well known to all who have any acquaintance with the original sources of information about the case of the Landgrave of Hesse; for the truth is, that this anecdote, about which Sir William makes such a foolish mystery, and about which he evidently supposes that nobody knows any thing but himself, rests upon a statement to this effect, made by the Landgrave of Hesse in his memorial to Luther and Melancthon, and upon the fact that in their answer they did not deny it. The documents upon this subject are at least as well known to many ecclesiastical writers as to Sir William Hamilton.

"Sir William evidently supposes that the story of Bishop Burnet advising Charles II. to take a second wife is also a great mystery, known only to men of extraordinary learning like himself. But if he had happened to have read the 177th page of the latest and cheapest edition of Burnet's History of his Own Times, published at London in 1838, he would have been aware that a knowledge of this fact was quite accessible to the general public, and that it was, therefore, not a topic about which a man of his erudition should have condescended to boast." Pp. 11–13. 2 M

VOL. XVI. NO. IV.