ting and impatient attitude of the mind. The first two sentences, which clearly announce the design of the author, were found to be the following :—

The liberality of our citizens, and especially of one distinguished individual, who bore a name which has long been honoured, and which I hope will long continue to be honoured among us, having afforded new facilities for theological instruction in this University, an additional professorship has in consequence been founded.About to enter on the duties of this new office, I have thought that it would not be uninteresting to speak of the extent and relations of the science of theology, or, in other words, of the intellectual acquisitions and endowments required to constitute a consummate theologian.

The conclusion of the discourse runs thus:

And what consciousness of desert can be more honourable or more animating than bis, who feels that he is directing all his efforts, that he is devoting the whole energy of his mind, that he is pouring himself out like water, to swell the tide, which is to bear his country on to happiness and glory!

If all that a "consummate theologian" intends to do, or if all the result of his "intellectual acquisitions and endowments" be what is included in "swelling the tide which is to bear his country on to happiness and glory ;" and if at the same time he has no higher "consciousness of desert" than what is derived from this source, it occurred to us, that a consummate theologian" might be but little better than a political intriguer, or at least that he might be identified with a worldly-minded statesman. Some impressions also, which time and fashion have obliterated from the minds of a part of the community professing religion, were awakened concerning that which such a theologian as Paul, or Edwards, would have felt authorized to make his governing object, or would have deserved as the result and the recompence also of his labours. From this specimen we concluded that there would be somewhat to censure in the discourse, whatever matter there might be in other re

spects for eulogy; and with regard to the latter, we confess we could not but feel conscious, after having read the discourse throughout, that there was in it a portion of good sense, of manly éloquence, and of correct and elegant composition highly honourable to the professor of sacred literature in Cambridge.

To promote

In whatever light the science of theology may be viewed, every reflecting mind will concede that it possesses transcendent importance; since it treats of the being and attributes of God, his relation to us as men and as sinners, the dispensations of his providence, his will with respect to our actions, and his purposes with respect to our end, it involves in its discussion the greatest interests in existence, viz. the divine glory and the salvation of the soul. The glory of God and the sinner's salvation are the paramount interests involved in theological inquiries. them, should certainly be the great object of a teacher of theology, through the instrumentality of his studies and exertions. Professor N. introduces indeed the name of the Supreme Agent in a general way, and speaks of man as an immortal being: but by not adverting to the peculiarity of human nature as depraved, and the consequent relation which the divine character bears towards it, he has, as we conceive, overlooked the real extent, and some of the most important bearings of this great science. He may therefore be consistent with himself, in speaking only of the intellectual qualifications of a theologian, understanding by that phrase merely the reasoning powers, the capacity of conceiving, remembering and combining ideas, or, more generally, literary and scientific accomplishments of every sort. These qualifications, with

out doubt, are sufficient to teach and defend a theology, whose principal object is the augmentation of national happiness and glory-a happiness and glory which consist, let it be remembered, more in the reception of a philosophical religion, than in sub

jection to the pure doctrines and precepts of the gospel.

But though the writer may be here consistent with himself, we cannot think that he is consistent with the truth. Something beyond great mental powers and literary accomplishments, are necessary to constitute a 'consummate theologian,' or one who can properly and ably teach the science of christian theology. For this, indeed all our natural and acquired talents are demanded, and the greater a person's talents, the more auspicious, other things being equal, may be expected to be the result of their application. But we ask, with a confidence not to be shaken, that the affirmative must be conceded to us, are not a love of the truth, purity of intention, spiritual discernment, and a heart renewed unto holiness, quite as indispensable? Intellectual and spiritual accomplishments united, make the real consummate theologian.' Some of the truths of the bible are so contrary to our natural views, or so humiliating to our natural feelings, that it is only through the medium of regeneration that they are conveyed to the heart, and seen in their real beauty and glory. Whatever the understanding may itself dictate on such subjects, however it may be capable of attaching a true meaning to the terms, which present a spiritual object to the mind; yet the heart so controls the understanding in these cases, that the latter remains, to a great extent, in darkness. They therefore who do not love the truth, and have not a disposition to bow to it, are essentially deficient in the necessary qualifications of an accurate theologian. They will with too much certainty misapprehend, pervert, or deny some material parts of the divine communication. Our author has not insisted on spiritual qualifications. He does not even speak of common virtue, or of honesty of heart; but seems to rest the proper and adequate representation of the will of God, whether as taught us in the volume of nature, or that of revelation, on

strength of mind and literary skill.— These alone are expected to furnish us with greater light than has hitherto been enjoyed by the church of Christ on earth!—

But it is time to refer to a few particulars of his illustration of the extent and relations of the science of theology, or the intellectual qualifications and endowments required to constitute a theologian.

On the connection of theology with metaphysics, which is the first connection considered, we present the following paragraph :

It is one part of the business of a theologian to make himself familiar with those reasonings, by which the mind, now that it bas been educated by christianity, is able, even when left to its own powers and resources, to establish or render probable the truths of religion. He must become dence of God, and qualify himself to perthe interpreter of the works and proviceive the barmony between the two revelations which God has given us;—that, which is taught us by the laws which govregular operation; and that whose divine ern the world, as they proceed in their origin was attested by the presence of a power, controlling and suspending those laws. He will find a perfect harmony beevidences of both, though derived from tween them; and will perceive that the sources the most remote from each other, flow together at last, and bear us on to one common object, the truth of the essential

principles of religion.

Yet notwithstanding the strength of argument by which these principles are supported, we cannot but remark that our conclusions are embarrassed by some difficulties; and we know that scepticism has laboured to overthrow all our reasonings. The theologian, in pursuing his inquiries respecting these difficulties and objections, uttermost, will be obliged to go on to the if he be determined to follow them to the very limits of human knowledge; to the barriers which the mind has not yet passed, and which perhaps are impassible. He must fix a steady attention upon ideas very abstract, shadowy and inadequate. Where the last rays begin to be lost in utter darkness, he must distinguish in the doubtful twilight between deceptive appearances, and the forms of things really existing. He must subject to a strict scrutiny, words and expressions which often deceive us, and often mock us with only a show of meaning. He must engage in complicated and difficult processes of reasoning, in which the terms of language, divested of all their usual associations, become little more

forded of the truth of our religion. If this be not his design here, we need not urge it against him, as his erroneous, or at least deficient views are elsewhere sufficiently visible.

The study of the bible, and particularly of the New Testsment, is another of the relations of theology which comes under the consideration of our author. Of this he remarks, that "it is perhaps more than any other the the peculiar province of the theologian." The above needed not to be hypothetically stated. The study of the bible is, without doubt, all in all to the theologian. The observations on this topic are mostly instructive, and perhaps do not vary greatly from the views lately exprespressed by Professor Stuart in his letters to Mr. Channing, on the laws of interpretation, by which the sense of the scriptures is to be determined. Concerning the principles of the art of interpreting language, however, our author thinks that they have never yet been fully explained. It is perhaps needless to observe that he insists upon a knowledge of the languages in which the bible was originally written. But more than this. He informs us that "a mere critical knowledge of these languages, is but the first step towards their explanation. In order to know" he says, "in any particular instance, what is the true meaning of words, it is often necessary to know, under what circumstances and relations, they were used in that particular instance. The theologian, therefore, will proceed to collect and arrange all the immense variety of facts and truths, in connection with which the language of the scriptures must be viewed, in order to perceive its bearings and relations; and some one or more of which is continually entering as a principal element, into all those reasonings by which its sense is determined."

In connection with these observations, our author says that "many of those who have decided most confidently respecting the sense of the sacred writings, appear to have been

ignorant of the very existence of the art of interpreting language." But however this may be, we would remark, that our reason will teach us, that it is possible to be in some respects, a valuable theologian without all that philosophical learning and critical skill on which he insists. These are highly important in themselves, but not indispensable even to distinguished utility in the evangelical ministry. Since the bible is a revelation of God's will to men, it must with the common helps that are afforded us, be easy to ascertain the essential truths. These, by the blessing of God, may be efficiently taught by men, who to a share of good sense and native powers of mind, join a respectable acquaintance with human learning, and what our author has neither here nor elsewhere noticed, a holy disposition. The more difficult portions of scripture, it will be conceded by all, possess minor importance. To the illustration of these, the adept in philology and the languages will be called; and surely their services, in the departments in which they labour, need not be underrated. We would concede to them all deserved honor. But at the same time we are anxious to guard against the error which arises from the disproportionate and unqualified statements that have sometimes been made on this subject. The importance of the branch of knowledge just referred to, should not be so stated, as necessarily to excite the suspicion in uneducated people, that something may yet be elicited from the bible of a character essentially different from what has generally been known; and that the religious views which have supported the faith, enlivened the hopes, and purified the hearts of thousands living and dying, are after all nothing but a chimera or a dream.

It may be further stated on the subject, so far as the sacred volume is concerned, that not a little danger attends the pursuit of these pilological niceties.

We are not permitted to approach that book with our critical analysis, just as the anatomist approaches the subject of his intended operations to disjoint and dissect them as he pleases. The divine character of the work must, from its nature, impose a restraint on the feelings of men, and it certainly ought to repress the presumption, that would treat it as though it were merely a human production. The conduct of critics, it is to be feared, has often become an instance of impiety similar to that which a certain writer complains of in some of the chemists, who in their exultation on account of their discoveries, have seemed to themselves to hold the Deity in their crucibles. Peculiar grace is necessary for persons who carry these philological researches to the greatest extent, that they may not, as with many has been the case, be carried over to the side of extravagant opinion, and even of infidelity.Since our author has insisted so much on philological learning and intellectual accomplishments generally, it was the more necessary for him either under this head or elsewhere, to have, at least, recommended the piety of a christian, as entering essentially into the character of a true theologian.

Prof. N. under the head of the study of the bible, or as he means the mere language of the bible, proceeds to inform us, that as its expositor must be a philologist in the most extensive sense of the word; so in order to be a philologist, he must be a poet, or "he must have the feelings and imaginations of a poet." His reasoning in amount is the following. Without a poetic spirit, poetry cannot be understood. We cannot sympathize with him by whom it is composed. The bible, especially the Old Testament is full of poetry. Therefore to expound the bible, or a considerable part, it is necessary to be a poet. Q. E. D. We cannot dispute demonstration, and we are no enemies to poetry; but we cannot help observing that it is obvious what

use he would wish to make of the poetic license, to explain away some important truths of the bible, truths so esteemed by many serious christians; for even in the New Testament he finds what amounts to poetry.

"In the New Testament, the oriental

and popular style which prevails, often requires no less than poetry itself, an acquaintance with all the uses of language, and with all the forms in which feeling, passion and imagination, express themselves, in order to distinguish and disengage the mere literal meaning from all those images and ideas with which it is associated."-pp. 21, 22.

Ecclesiastical history is the next relation which our author considers. An acquaintance with this he justly deems an important qualification for a teacher of religion. He displays much good sense in this part of the discourse, with a peculiar delicacy of discrimination; but there is nothing so original in the ideas as to require particular notice. For a similar reason, we pass by also the subject of morals, which, if we make no mistake, is the next relation that comes under the consideration of Prof. Norton.

Succeeding this is the study of human nature, which he rightly considers as being in connection with the science of theology. His thoughts on this topic, are, for the most part, valuable, and shew how accurately he has made man, in certain views, the subject of his own reflection. In certain views, it is to be remarked, for we do not perceive, that man is here, or any where else in the discourse, considered as a depraved and ruined being. It is true, the professor remarks, that "it is the office of a theologian to administer the medicine of the mind,” and that "in order to do this, he should be acquainted with its general constitution and the diseases to which it is liable." But nothing is here said concerning an acquaintance with the great-the radical disease. The following remark is useful, if you extend it beyond the application probably intended by the writer.