If systems of theology are assailed upon the ground that they have usurped the place and authority of the sacred canon, we leave our opponents to try the issue with those who are guilty of the offence. We are conscious of no such wish. The formularies of our Church have borne many violent assaults; and in their turn all doctrinal works which coincide with them have been denounced. We have no hesitation in "postponing the Confession of Faith to the Holy Scriptures."* If systems of divinity have

been raised to a co-ordinate rank with the Word of God, let those answer for it who are guilty of the impiety. The books themselves are chargeable with no part of it, since they unanimously declare that the Bible only is the standard of faith. Yet shall we deny to any the liberty of making any scheme of doctrine his own. confession of faith? No constraint has been used to bring any man to such a declaration; nor have we heard of any man who has been required to conform himself to such a system, unless he had previously, of his own free will, confessed it to be a statement of his faith. We may, therefore, dismiss the cavil, as scarcely pertaining to this inquiry.

In view of the absolute impracticability of the visionary scheme now controverted, and the absence of any attempted exemplification of it, we are constrained to look somewhat further for the secret cause of the clamour against systematic theology. And when we regard the quarter from which it issues, we are convinced that the real objection is, not that systems are exceptionable qua tales, but that doctrine is systematized on the wrong side. Systematized heterodoxy is attacked upon its own merits; systematized orthodoxy is opposed because of its form and arrangements. The great standard works in this department are the results of labour, the monuments of tried doctrine; while the ephemeral fabrics of innovators do not live long enough to assume a regular shape. Hinc ille lachryma! When the late Robert Hall was arraigned by a certain loyalist, as having written in favour of parliamentary reform, he replied, in terms not inapplicable to this subject: "The plain state of the case is, not that the writer is offended at my meddling with politics, but that I have meddled on the wrong side. Had the same mediocrity of talent been exerted in eulogizing the measures of ministry, his greetings would have been as loud as his invective is bitter." If the system is false, let this be made to appear, let its errors be exposed, but, until this is done, let no arrangement of divine truth be decried as injurious. In conclusion, we apprehend no evils to our rising theologians from scholastic systems, for the best of all reasons-they know nothing of them. The literature of the day has extended its influence to the domain of theology, and the weekly, monthly, and quarterly receptacles of religious discussion consume too much of our attention to leave opportunity for poring over the works of

our ancestors.

* See Rev. E. Irving's late Letter in Frazer's Magazine.

ESSAY IV.

ON THE ATONEMENT.*

We are pleased with this volume on the Atonement, because such a work on this cardinal subject was needed; and because we are of opinion that the author has exhibited the true Calvinistic view of the atonement, as to its necessity, nature, and extent. This work is more comprehensive than any work on this subject with which we are acquainted; it embraces every point which it is proper to have discussed in a popular treatise. We consider it also a high recommendation that it is not written in a controversial spirit. The author attacks no one, but goes straight forward to his object. The style is characterized by vivacity and perspicuity. It would be difficult to find an involved or obscure sentence in the whole book. On every point the discussion is as concise as most readers will desire, and in our opinion is conducted with admirable judgment and good temper. Where the reader may differ from the sentiments of the author, he will never have occasion to censure him as deficient in Christian candour.

Mr. Symington's plan is also very judicious. He begins by an explication of the principal terms which relate to this subject. He then undertakes to answer the most common and popular objections to the doctrine. This part of his work is executed with great clearness and force. Nothing seems to be omitted which is proper to be said, and yet these objections are answered within a very moderate space. The necessity of an atonement comes next in order; and this he argues logically and conclusively, from the PERFECTIONS OF GOD-FROM THE NATURE OF MORAL GOVERNMENTFROM THE INEFFICACY OF OTHER MEANS TO OBTAIN PARDON AND FROM THE EXPRESS TESTIMONY OF SCRIPTURE.

The proof of the Under this head he particularly of those

reality of the atonement is next exhibited. avails himself of the ancient sacrifices, and which were appointed in the Levitical law. On this interesting subject he furnishes the reader with a condensed view of all that is most important in the popular works of Magee and John Pye

*Originally published in 1836, in review of the following work: "On the Atonement and Intercession of Jesus Christ." By the Rev. William Symington.

Smith. He then considers the atonement as exhibited in prophecy : especially in the remarkable predictions of Isaiah and Daniel, concerning the vicarious sufferings and death of the Messiah.

The author now comes to the consideration of the sufferings of Christ, as the facts are recorded by the Evangelists; and considers the several conceivable ends of these extraordinary sufferings, and shows that none of these could have been the principal end, but that of making an atonement. The principal passages of scripture which speak of atonement, reconciliation, redemption, &c., are taken up and considered.

The matter of the atonement is now more particularly brought into view, where the expiatory sufferings of Christ are described. The value of the atonement is evinced from a consideration of the DIGNITY OF CHRIST'S PERSON-FROM HIS RELATIONSHIP TO MAN

FROM HIS FREEDOM FROM ALL PERSONAL OBLIGATION TO THE LAW -FROM HIS RIGHT TO DISPOSE OF HIMSELF-FROM THE VOLUNTARINESS OF HIS OFFERING-AND FROM ITS BEING MADE ACCORDING

TO THE APPOINTMENT OF GOD. The vexed subject of the EXTENT of the atonement is not omitted by our author. On this point he takes middle ground between the schemes of those who represent the atonement as indefinite and universal, and those who make it so limited as to be sufficient only for the salvation of the elect. He admits and maintains that the atonement, as to its intrinsic merit, is infinite; while, in its application, it is limited to the elect. The true point of dispute is not the intrinsic value of the atonement, but the design with which it was offered: and where the parties agree in relation to the doctrine of election, we do not see much room for dissension in regard to the extent of the atonement. Both parties consider it as a sufficient ground of a universal offer of Christ to all who are willing to receive him. The author maintains the definite character of the atonement, and its limitation to the elect in its design, with great force of argument, from the DIVINE PURPOSE FROM THE RECTITUDE OF GOD-FROM THE NATURE OF THE COVENANT OF GRACE-FROM THE VERY NATURE OF THE ATONEMENT-FROM THE RESURRECTION AND INTERCESSION OF CHRIST -FROM THE WORK OF THE SPIRIT-FROM THE LIMITED APPLICATION AND REVELATION OF THE ATONEMENT-FROM THE ABSURD CONSEQUENCS OF THE CONTRARY SUPPOSITION-AND FROM EXPRESS

TESTIMONIES OF SCRIPTURE. He then considers and answers the objections to this opinion, derived from its being derogatory to the honour of the Saviour-from its supposing a redundancy of merit -from the universal offer of the gospel-from universal terms used in scripture--and from the possibility of some perishing for whom Christ died.

Whether on this much disputed point the arguments in favour of a definite or general atonement preponderate, will be differently decided by readers according to their respective prepossessions. But for ourselves, we are of opinion that the author has placed the subject on the old Calvinistic ground, as particular redemption is

known to have been one of the doctrines in which almost all old Calvinists were agreed, and was one of the five points disputed between the Calvinists and Arminians, and decided in the Synod of Dort. It may, however, be admitted, that where there is an agreement respecting the vicarious nature of the atonement, and in the belief of the doctrine of election, the controversy must be rather verbal than real; for both sides hold the intrinsic sufficiency of the atonement, and both maintain that it was the design of the Father in giving his Son, and the design of the Son in dying, to save only those chosen in him before the world was. Wherein then is the difference, except in the proper mode of expressing our views? But we can see no advantage from representing the atonement to be universal; and when it is said to have been made as much for one man as another, the language is certainly inconsistent with the other parts of the Calvinistic system, and furnishes strong ground on which both Arminians and Universalists can erect their batteries to subvert it.

After discussing the extent of the atonement pretty fully, Mr. Symington devotes one section to the consideration of its results, which he makes to be the following: IT ILLUSTRATES THE CHARACTER OF GOD-VINDICATES HIS MORAL GOVERNMENT-DEMONSTRATES THE EVIL OF SIN-SECURES FOR ITS OBJECTS PERFECT AND ETERNAL SALVATION-OPENS A WAY FOR THE EXERCISE OF DIVINE

MERCY, AND ENCOURAGES SINNERS TO RELY ON THE MERCY OF God,

AND AWAKENS GRATEFUL EMOTIONS IN THE PIOUS AFFECTS THE DIVINE DISPENSATIONS TO OUR WORLD-and FURNISHES AN ETERNAL THEME OF CONTEMPLATION TO THE WHOLE UNIVERSE OF MORAL CREATURES.

This concludes what strictly belongs to the atonement, but the author has very judiciously annexed a Second Part, containing the fullest and ablest view of the Intercession of Christ which we have seen. Indeed the subject of Christ's intercession cannot be separated from his atonement; for while the latter may be represented by the slaying of the sacrifice and laying it on the altar, the former is strikingly typified by the presentation and sprinkling of the blood of the sin-offering in the most Holy Place, accompanied with clouds of precious incense. The offering of Christ's body on the cross would have accomplished nothing, unless he had entered with his precious merit into the highest heavens, there to plead the cause of his people. We would particularly recommend this part of the work to the attentive perusal of the pious; it cannot be read, we think, without pleasure and profit by any sincere Christian. The topics which are introduced under this head are such as these; the Intercession of Christ displays the love of God, and proves the Divinity of Christ-shows the efficacy of his deathaffords security to the people of God. The discourse is concluded by considering the sin of dishonouring Christ's intercession, and the duty of daily seeking an interest in it.

It is gratifying to learn that the first edition of this work was all

sold in a few days, and a second edition called for before the author had the opportunity of revising the work, or availing himself of the remarks of the reviewers. He promises, however, "if a third edition be required, to supply this deficiency." The Christian Instructor of Edinburgh, which has always been ably conducted, and uniformly appears on the side of orthodoxy and evangelical piety, speaks of this work in the following terms: " Mr. S. has accomplished his work in the happiest possible manner. We have not often read a work which does more credit to its author, or is better fitted to edify the Church of God. The divine and the private Christian will alike find their account in giving it a careful perusal, and we are mistaken if there be many of its readers who will be satisfied with perusing it only once." The work is also highly commended in the Presbyterian Review, published in Edinburgh.

To account for the avidity with which this volume was bought up in Scotland, it will be necessary to advert to the circumstance, that the Christian public there has been considerably agitated with the publication of new and dangerous doctrines on the subject of the atonement. It will be recollected that Thomas Erskine, Esq., who had acquired considerable reputation as a theological writer, by his work on the INTERNAL EVIDENCES OF CHRISTIANITY, published a little work on the ATONEMENT, in which he maintained not only the universality of the atonement, but its universal efficacy in bringing the whole human race into a justified state. In connexion with this he taught that the glad tidings of the gospel was the annunciation of this fact, and that saving faith consisted in a full persuasion that we are already in a justified state; and that the condemnation of any would be for refusing to believe this merciful testimony of God. This antinomian work of Erskine was mixed up with much that was good and pious; and the author and his followers insisted that nothing so much promoted personal holiness as the persuasion above mentioned; and this they declared to be the effect of the doctrine on their own minds. Several able answers were returned to this publication. Dr. Wardlaw, so favourably and extensively known as a theological writer, took up his pen to counteract the influence of this pernicious publication. His little work has been republished in this country. Dr. Dewar, principal of Mareschall college, Aberdeen, also published a work on the atonement about this time. This subject was also involved in the prosecution carried on in the ecclesiastical courts of the Church of Scotland against Irving, M'Clean, Campbell, &c., which resulted in their deposition from the sacred ministry. The attention of theologians in that country was therefore turned to the subject of atonement; and as these errorists made the universality of the atonement the foundation of their whole system, this will show why the point has received so large a share of attention in the treatise now under review.

In this country discussions on the atonement have taken a dif