in the dark mazes of polemical subtelty and equivocation.* Instead of promoting that higher unity of spirit, which Christianity aims to produce, they sever even those lower ties of natural love by which society is bound together, and invade the peace of neighbourhoods and families. They bring the sacred mysteries of revelation into so familiar a discussion, that all reverence for them is destroyed, and they cease to afford spiritual nutriment to the soul. In this way they injure the cause they are professedly designed to promote, and more than all other things together, bring it to a stand. As the contest proceeds, and the disguises, at first prudently worn, are thrown off, and envy thrusts forth its serpentine head, and hatred its envenomed fang, a scene is often witnessed, at which the enemies of religion rejoice, and its friends hang their heads. In view of the altercations, revilings, and the hundred nameless inhumanities practised by such disputants, one sometimes feels compelled to interpose with the apostolic admonition, if ye bite and devour one another, take heed that ye be not consumed one of another. What wonder is it, if the Heavenly Dove be frighted away from scenes like these: for she hath no gall in her breast, no crooked talons or beak wherewith to strike and contend, and dwells only with the sons of peace.

But these evils would be prevented, if all who concern themselves for the truth should have first taken it to their own bosoms, and have themselves experienced its sanctifying work. Were the true form of doctrine, not merely perceived intellectually, but wrought into their souls, it would expel every unhallowed passion, and produce every Christian grace. They would then no longer be impetuous, boastful, or denunciatory; but in meekness instructing those that oppose themselves, if peradventure God would give them repentance to the acknowledgment of the truth. Like Baxter, they would be as ready to die for charity, as for any article of the creed.

Views like these of the important place which the doctrines of Christianity hold, and of the varied duty devolving

*It was said by one who wrote respecting the endless minutiae of the fathers in the Arian and Nestorian controversies, that illis temporibus res ingeniosa fuit esse Christianum,-in those days it was an ingenious and subtle thing to be a Christian. And truly it is no less so in our own day, if one must be able to follow some theological controversialists through all their intricacies and labyrinths, in order to his being a Christian.

upon Christians of the present day with respect to them, have led to the establishment of the LITERARY AND THEOLOGICAL REVIEW. It has appeared to many, that there is an urgent demand for a periodical journal devoted principally to the investigation, dissemination, and defence of the doctrines of the Christian religion.

We are aware that a periodical publication, even though it may be the more dignified Quarterly, is better adapted to subserve the cause of general literature, than to be the vehicle of the graver sort of philosophical or theological discussion. While such discussion must, from its very nature, be abstract and recondite, and requires that those who would understand it, should be versed in speculative reasoning, it is carried by the periodical before the great public. This public, engrossed in secular affairs, is thus erected into a tribunal, and its verdict is solicited on questions requiring the most patient, consecutive thought. The circumstance of being placed at the bar of the busy public must obviously tend to withdraw philosophical and theological writers from the radical investigations demanded by the subjects on which they treat, and to incline them to a more popular and superficial mode of reasoning. This evil cannot probably be wholly prevented. But it is our hope to have a portion of this Review devoted to discussions, as scientific and thorough, as may be consistent with its general circulation and usefulness. We would suggest to the contributors to this portion of our Review, that many of their readers will be educated and professional men, and that many of the great questions on which the public mind is divided, can be settled only by learned biblical and historical research, and the calm and thorough examination of the original principles of the existing divergencies of sentiment. We shall occasionally furnish translations of such parts of foreign, and especially German, theological literature, as shall seem fitted to advance the cause of truth and theological learning in this country. In connexion with this principal object, it is our design to devote a portion of our Review* to general literature. In short, we hope to furnish as much variety of general matter, as may be consistent with the great object we have in view.

*We have used the word Review in our title, in the wider sense in which it is sometimes taken,-not meaning to imply that our work is designed principally for reviews strictly so called.

Many of the evils which have been heretofore attendant upon our periodical literature, have resulted from the fact of its being anonymous. A full examination of this matter would prove, we think, that even in that portion of periodical literature, where anonymous writing has been most contended for, (that of criticism,) it has not enough advantages to counterbalance the evils which result from it. Without dwelling upon this point, we would only refer to the unjust and wanton verdicts, both of praise and blame, which are every day uttered by the invisible oracles of Review, but which no respectable critic would have ventured to pronounce in his own name.— In German periodicals, the names of the writers are generally published with their articles. In England, the custom of anonymous periodical writing has been severely animadverted upon, by a late popular writer.* Two journals of a most respectable character in our own country have already set the example of publishing the names of their contributors. This example we design to follow, hoping that it may have some effect to render our contributors more careful and elaborate in their style of writing, more just and impartial in criticism, and more urbane and dignified in manner, than they would otherwise be.

As every writer will appear in his own name, he alone will be responsible for his particular opinions. The Editor and conductors of this work, are responsible only for its general character; and will cheerfully admit of articles dissenting from their own private views, if they appear conducive to the general object of the Review.

It may be expected that we should here, in some general manner, indicate our view of the divergencies of opinion of which we have spoken, and point out the position with reference to them, which it is the design of this work to assume. These divergencies are manifest on a great variety of subjects, such as the nature of holiness and sin,-moral agency,-natural and moral ability, the divine influences, the divine government and controul, and many other points; but they may all obviously be referred back to some fundamental differences in anthropology, or the doctrine respecting man. It is according to the views entertained on this doctrine, that the whole system of belief is determined, and in this do all the questions with which the religious public is *Bulwer, in his England and the English.

+ Robinson's Biblical Repository, and Edwards' Quarterly Observer.

agitated, at last centre and converge. If any one will consult the systems of our principal theological writers, he will find, that the doctrine respecting man lies at the very basis, occupies by far the largest place, and is exhibited with more clearness, than any other part of the system. And this is in accordance with a fact very noticeable in doctrinal history, viz. that wherever the more practical cast of mind has prevailed, theological enquiry has been principally directed towards those regions of truth lying within the sphere of Christian experience; and that, on the contrary, the more speculative turn of mind has inclined to the investigation of that part of truth lying above and beyond the boundaries of our consciousness. Thus in the more practical Occidental church, theological enquiry has been more frequently and with preference directed to the doctrine respecting man, in all its branches and relations; while in the more speculative Oriental church, investigation has turned principally upon the doctrine respecting God, the mode of his existence, the person of the Redeemer, and other associated doctrines.

But the consideration of man belongs to Christian Theology, only so far as his relation to the work of Redemption is concerned. This relation must be one of greater or less need of the remedial scheme of the Gospel. To deny this need wholly, is not merely heretical, but directly anti-Christian. But this need being generally admitted, there are two extreme diverging tendencies, which constitute the natural heresies to which speculation about man has been ever prone. The first is that, which represents the need of man to be so great, as to constitute a natural, as well as moral inability to good, supposes the human constitution to be essentially, as well as contingently evil,-sees nothing in man to which the scheme of Redemption can naturally appeal, or which renders him naturally susceptible of influences from it, and places him in the incapacity of a block or a stone to all religious duty and effort, until brought under moral obligation, and empow ered to duty, by an antecedent and unconditioned renovation. The other extreme of sentiment is that, which unduly exalts the ability of man, and overlooks the bondage of his will,which conceives human nature to possess within itself principles which are adequate, or nearly so, to its recovery, and so reduces to the minimum man's need of Redemption, that though his dependance on divine grace is not denied, it is rather held as a matter of revelation, than believed as

a necessary result of the views entertained respecting his natural condition.-Such seem to be the existing divergencies of opinion; and somewhere between these must the truth lie. To attain the golden mean, in which our need and dependance shall be so held as not to interfere with our moral obligation, and in which the powers which truly remain to us since the fall, shall be so regarded as not to interfere with our absolute dependance on divine aid,―in short, to attain to the just and scriptural view of man's relation to the scheme of Redemption, must be acknowledged to be of the highest importance to every intelligent Christian.

In our attempts to attain to the truth on this subject, as well as on every other, we would have infixed in our minds, that most important, but neglected principle, "that every speculative errour, which boasts a multitude of advocates, has its golden, as well as its dark side,-that there is always some truth connected with it, the exclusive attention to which has misled the understanding, some moral beauty which has given it charms for the heart." We cannot think so meanly of the human mind, as to suppose it capable, except in the state of the most extreme perversion, of receiving naked errour, unadorned by the attractions of some truth, which hides its deformities, and commends it to the mind and heart. Hence we may see, that those persons are not in a fair way of arriving at truth, who feel an unmingled detestation of any wrong tendency of opinion, or who pronounce upon it indiscriminate condemnation; on the contrary, they are almost sure to run into the opposite extreme of errour. This unlimited detestation of some former heresy, is represented by Lord Bacon, as the root from which most of the subsequent heresies of the church have sprung; and so he describes them as "posthumi hæresium filii,-heresies that arise out of the ashes of other heresies, that are extinct and amortised."* He establishes the truth of this representation by appealing to the history of the Arian and Sabellian heresies; and it might be still farther established by inquiring into the causes of the leading divisions in the church of our times. --Would we then escape that partiality of view to which controversialists are so liable, and which blinds them to half the truth on the controverted subjects; we must rise above sectarian prejudices, and seek first for the golden side of errour, -the truth which attracts so many, and such enthusiastic * Bacon's Works. Vol. vii. p. 43, Montagu's edit.