misconception of what constitutes the kingdom of Christ. Because the laws of Christ have not received universal obedience, nor his power subdued all his enemies, therefore, he is not yet a king-such is the reasoning of the Millenarians. But do we not often find that Christ is said to have done that actually which he has done only virtually, and, at present partially? Little or no account is taken of the time intervening between the accomplishment of those facts which contain the germ and the guarantee of the success of Christ's kingdom, and the remote and complete results of those facts. I saw Satan fall like lightning from heaven '-describes, in the past historical tense, an event which is to take place fully in the future. And the reason is obvious. The triumphs which the disciples accomplished through the power of Christ had really dealt a death-blow to the kingdom of Satan, and were prognostics and pledges of its ultimate and complete fall. The conflict between these great empires had commenced, and the first victory, though obtained in the person of Christ only, presented the miniature image of the final destruction of the rival kingdom. That must be but a dim insight into the facts of the Gospel history, which does not see that the title of Christ to be King was acquired when his earthly career had closed; for he who had redeemed men from the curse of the law by his sufferings had also the right to claim their obedience; and he who had broken the bonds of death, and obtained dominion over its territories, was surely able to assert his power against all the might of the devil. If, therefore, Christ has not seen fit yet to exert his power, we are not to deny that he has it; if he chooses that his authority shall prevail gradually, we in our impatience are not to conclude that his kingdom does not yet exist; if he has ordained that it shall silently grow, and not be established by a sudden and visible revolution, we are yet to honor him as a Prince, and to confide in the potency of those means which he has thought sufficient to effect an ultimate and universal conquest.

It may be taken as a sacred maxim, that any views of Scripture which tend to relax the energies and check the activity of the Church cannot be just. Any theory that casts contempt on all agencies for good, on all the glowing hopes of the Church, cannot have the authority of the Divine Spirit, in whatever plausibilities it may be dressed. Millenarians have awkwardly attempted to deny that their theory affords any discouragement to missionary effort. We will admit that personally they may be desirous to promote the salvation of man, and some of them may even be willing to penetrate the fastnesses of idolatry in order to proclaim the truth; just as many other men are blind to the

logical consequences of their systems, and are guided more by the impulses of the heart than the propositions of the brain. But there can be hardly more than one opinion as to the fact, that the legitimate consequence of Millenarian principles is to paralyze all strenuous efforts for the conversion of the world, and to reduce the Church to the attitude of mere passive, excited, expectation of the second advent. For if the promises relating to the universality of Christ's kingdom belong to a period after, and not before, his coming; if the Gospel in its present form has not sufficient power, is not furnished with the influences that can make the world tributary to its Lord; if we are not to expect any great enlargement of the Church till Christ shall come by miracles and judgments to overturn the kingdom of Satan-we may still preach the truth, because a command is on record binding us to the duty; but we shall preach it with blighted expectations; deprived of nearly every support that could make us labour with hope, faith, and love. If the great heart of the Church is to beat responsively to the calls of duty, she must feel that her's is a grand comprehensive mission, embracing for its object the recovery of the whole species to Christ; that she has no limits to the sphere of her conquests; that her present resources and agencies are allsufficient; that the spiritual reign of Christ in the hearts of men is the highest form of the kingdom of God; and that no miracles and millenniums can ever match the power that is wielded by the preaching of the Cross.

The author of the work at the head of this article has written a valuable book against the Millenarian theory. We are not able to indicate its contents in detail, and content ourselves therefore with saying, that it is divided into three parts; the first treating of the second advent, the second of the millenium, and the third of objections. This second edition is a considerable enlargement and improvement of the first, embracing replies to various objections which have been advanced against the former. The author possesses an acute and logical mind, is skilled in dialectics, and evinces very respectable scholarship. We are not disposed to dwell on minor points, but speak of the book as a whole. In conclusion we heartily thank Mr. Brown for the good service he has rendered to this question, by so calm, interesting, and conclusive a treatment, of a somewhat uninviting subject.

ART. IV.-The History of the Early Puritans, from the Reformation to the opening of the Civil War in 1642. By J. B. Marsden, M.A., Vicar of Great Missenden. 8vo. Pp. 426. London: Hamilton & Co. A HISTORY of the Puritans by a clergyman is a novelty. The announcement of such a work took us by surprise, and we opened its pages with no little curiosity. So far as our observation extends, clerical reading, on topics of this kind, embraces little more than the worst specimens of narrow-mindedness and bigotry which our language supplies; and we had not, therefore, much expectation of deriving either instruction or pleasure from Mr. Marsden's volume. In ignorance of his character and views, we identified him with a class of prejudiced, ill-informed, and intolerant men, and calculated on meeting in his book with a repetition of the slanders of Heylin, the exaggerated tales of Walker, and the ecclesiastical absurdities which from the time of Bancroft have distinguished the champions of High Church. Still, we were determined to read for ourselves. We were curious to know in what form exploded calumnies were to be revived, or how the modern advocate of Whitgift and Laud would attempt to reconcile the men of our day to the atrocities of those Primates. Living amongst a different class, we sought to supply our lack of information by listening-attentively at least to the narrative and reasonings of the member of a different clique.

We have now done as we contemplated, and sit down to record, for the benefit of our readers, the conclusions at which we have arrived. We are glad to say that the task is far more pleasant than we anticipated. Cynical as our craft is regarded, and narrow-minded and prejudiced as Dissenters are deemed, we have no hesitation in saying, that the perusal of Mr. Marsden's History' has afforded us much pleasure, and that we shall be glad to find it has extensive circulation amongst our friends. It is far from being a party book. Neither Churchmen nor Dissenters will, in the mass, be pleased with it. The former will object to the censures passed on the ecclesiastical policy of Whitgift, Bancroft, and Laud, as well as the virtues conceded to the Puritans; while Dissenters will deem its judgment on their opponents too light, and the praise awarded to their fathers too measured and cold. We can readily imagine many clerical readers throwing down the volume in disgust, while we know some Dissenters who will dispute the charity and sound judgment it displays. This is to be expected; and we do not mention it

as matter of special reproach. The same thing is discernible in every department of human inquiry, and the evils springing from it are visible in literature and science, as well as in politics and religion. Still it is to be deplored, and our best efforts should be directed against it. The championship of a party is not necessarily that of truth, and indiscriminate praise or censure may well awaken distrust of the judgment or honesty of a writer. It has been, therefore, with no ordinary gratification that we have read Mr. Marsden's History.' It is free, to a great extent, from this almost universal failing, and displays, what is rarely seen in clerical works on such topics, much catholicity of temper, with soundness of judgment and mental independence. There are still many points of difference between ourselves and the author. We deem some of his judgments hasty, and his sketches imperfect. There is too much in the one case to relieve the darkness of his picture, and in the other the shade has been deepened beyond what we deem the truth of the case. The Churchman is visible throughout, not for the most part in an unseemly and repulsive form, but occasionally warping the judgment of the historian, and checking somewhat the charity of the Christian. Mr. Marsden has, in our opinion-he will pardon the apparent assumption-much yet to learn. Free from the bitterness of his class, his views must be simplified and his range of observation become more extensive, before he can do full justice to the principles which lay at the basis of the actions he records. Those principles were yet undisclosed; at least they were known only to a few, and those for the most part unlearned and obscure. But they were present and in operation, concealed, it is true, from the eye of the many, yet not the less potent in the influence they exercised. These principles must be clearly and firmly apprehended before the narrative even of the early Puritans can be fairly told; and if so with them, we need scarcely say that the necessity exists in a yet higher degree in the case of their successors. Mr. Marsden's own volume supplies evidence of this in the terms applied to those by whom the ecclesiastical controversy was carried on. But notwithstanding all this, we receive his labours with respect, and proceed to acquaint our readers with them. There is so much in which we are agreed, that we have no disposition to dwell on the points of difference, more especially as those points are advanced without bitterness or assumption. Next to an intelligent and hearty approval of our views, we admire a masculine and candid opposition,-a free utterance of the objections held by honorable and inquiring men.

In estimating the character of a work, it is of importance to note the object of the writer and the temper in which he pro

poses to seek it. It was, therefore, with much pleasure that we found our author early stating that his aim was to write a faithful record of the virtues of the Puritans and of their faults; to show how much we owe to the one, and how much we suffer from the other; to describe their wrongs with respect and sympathy, and yet to display in its turn their own intolerance.' While such is the temper in which the work has been executed, the following passage will show that Mr. Marsden's estimate of the Puritans is vastly different from that which generally prevails amongst the clergy. We commend it to the consideration of his brethren as evincing the gross folly of the sneers with which they are accustomed to refer to the class in question.

'Wherever the religion, the language, or the free spirit of our country has forced its way, the Puritans of old have some memorial. They have moulded the character and shaped the laws of other lands, and tinged with their devouter shades unnumbered congregations of Christian worshippers, even where no allegiance is professed or willing homage done to their peculiarities. It is a party that has numbered in its ranks many of the best, and not a few of the greatest, men that England has enrolled upon her history. Amongst the Puritans were found, together with a crowd of our greatest divines and a multitude of learned men, many of our most profound lawyers, some of our most able statesmen, of our most renowned soldiers, and (strangely out of place as they may seem) not a few of our greatest orators and poets. Smith and Owen, Baxter and Howe, were their ministers, and preached amongst them. Cecil revered and defended them while he lived; so did the illustrious Bacon; and the unfortunate Essex sought his consolations from them when he came to die. They were the men whom Cromwell dreaded and deceived, and amongst whom Hampden fought and perished. Milton owned allegiance to their principles, and lent them a pen still immortal though steeped in gall. Of wealth, and wit, and patriotism, they had at least their fair proportion. They boasted, not without reason, that the first college, in either university, founded by a Protestant, was the magnificent donation of their own Sir Walter Mildmay at Cambridge; dedicated, not to legendary saints or superstitious fears, but to the Divine IMMANUEL; and built, not for the promotion of a stupid superstition, but in the pious hope that the Gospel of the Son of God might never want an advocate while its foundation should endure.'-Pp. 4, 5.

Our author's review of the early controversy respecting the vestments of the clergy is written with temper and judgment, and presents a fair summary of the case. Both parties were equally wedded to an ecclesiastical establishment. Hooper, who refused to wear the clerical attire, had no more thought of impugning its authority than Ridley who enforced it. It was on other grounds than those of the modern Dissenter that the former demurred. The vestments were regarded as Popish relics; they