the dying martyr sought, but such a restoration as would include tie supreme happiness of existence; perfect holiness, deliverance from all evil, the fruition of God in everlasting blessedness. Now I would ask, Who was competent to confer such a gift as this? Who is able both to give existence, and to make that existence perfectly and immortally happy? Whom would a serious and rational person, in his last moments, choose to invoke and rely upon for this greatest of all blessings; for the highest enjoyment that divine be nevolence can, to all eternity, confer upon a dependent being? And can it be imagined, that this distinguished saint, a man divinely enlightened in the knowledge of Christian truth, who was so favoured with preternatural discoveries of heavenly realities, that he saw the glory of God,"-should, in his extremity, turn from the Living and Almighty God and repose his last act of faith and confidence upon a mere fellow creature? Upon the principles of those who hold the third sentiment, it will be readily granted that the object which the martyr desired was the eternal salvation of his soul, his immediate reception to the state of purity and happiness, "to be with Christ, where he is, and to behold his glory." He asked, therefore, of the Lord Jesus, the GREATEST GOOD that immortal existence can receive, or that even OMNIPOTENT LOVE can bestow !--And did he ask this of one who was only a fellow-man, however dignified?-Alas, if it were indeed so, language would fail to express his folly and impiety. For these reasons, I cannot but regard the notion, that it was allowable in Stephen to pray to Jesus, because "he actually saw him," as a childish and imbecile subterfuge, incapable of freeing the martyr, upon the Unitarian hypothesis itself, from the charge of absurdity, profaneness, and idolatry. For, let it be observed, that the point of the case is not a mere "address to Jesus," as it is artfully represented; but it lies in this, that the incontrovertible meaning and purport of the words used by Stephen, was a prayer for the GREATEST of possible blessings; a petition which would have been equally preposterous and irreligious, whether offered to a visible or an invisible being, unless that being were "over all, God blessed for ever." But the Calm Inquirer will not be moved by these reasonings. He does not hesitate at the broad insinuation that this dying act of faith and devotion was an act of disobedience to Christ. Was it, then, in scorn and irony that, in the same breath, he denominates Stephen "this good man, this holy proto-martyr?" Or are his notions of duty and of sin so lax, that, in his account, worship" unau. thorized" and "contrary to the precepts of Christ," was a trifling error, an inconsiderable weakness, such as we may very calmly attribute to one of the most eminent of the Saviour's disciples; and may even expect to find it recorded in the apostolic history, not only without censure but with every appearance of approbation? He says that this is a "solitary example." But it should be observed that it is the only circumstantial account of the death of a disciple of Christ, which it has pleased the wisdom of inspiration to preserve in the New Testament. It is, indeed, one; but it is all: and therefore we have a right to regard it as instar omnium; as equiva lent, for all the purposes of instruction and example, to the possession of a larger number of instances. It is, however, the fact that the New Testament furnishes us with references to the death of Christians, which are very remarkably impressed with the same character as this of Stephen, a peculiar and distinguished respect to the Lord Jesus Christ. Believers, at their mortal dissolution, are described as "fallen asleep in Christ, dead in Christ, fallen asleep through Jesus, blessed henceforth [as] dying in the Lord:" and when the apostles Peter and Paul write in anticipation of their own death, it is very observable that the thought in their minds was most intimately associated with the authority, power, and glory of our Lord Jesus Christ. The Inquirer also pronounces this example to be " unauthorized." Surely logical equity, leaving modesty out of the question, might have taught him to spare this assumption. If, by being authorized, he refers to the general warrant of Christianity, I appeal to the judgment of the serious and impartial reader, upon the evidence which has been and may be laid before him. If the expression be taken as respecting Stephen's personal knowledge of the principles of his religion, and his own obligations and duty; I humbly submit that it is, in a very high degree presumptuous and unreasonable for a writer of the nineteenth century, who professes himself to be an obedient believer in the religion of the New Testament, thus to question the authority, and to condemn the practice of an apostolic Christian, a man evidently held in the first rank of approbation by the inspired servants of Christ, and of whom we have no right to doubt that he was himself inspired: "a man full of faith and of the HOLY SPIRIT. Certainly, this writer has little considered, whether he was not assuming the character of certain disputants against Stephen, who could not resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he spake;" and therefore they accused him of "speaking blasphemous words." What man of scriptural wisdom and humble piety, will not say; Let me die as Stephen died! let his faith and devotion be mine! But let me not be numbered with those who think themselves qualified to judge and censure him.' pp. 476-81. The New Testament challenges the regard of believers to Christ, in a manner which evinces most strikingly and unequivocally the estimate of his person which was familiar to the Apostles, and from which Divine claims, as being the ground of the affections to be exercised towards him, cannot be separated. It is not on principles by which the intercourse of creatures with each other may be regulated, nor is it on account of benefactions conferred, such as the most exalted of human beings may bestow, or be the means of procuring, that the devout feelings of the Christian towards his Lord and Saviour are to be explained. Those feelings are not so qualified by the authority which demands them, as would be proper in the case of an inferior order of obligations, which lead the mind to a cause of blessings merely instrumental, but without allowing it to settle and terminate its devotions there. They are affections fully, perfectly claimable by, and due to a Being of Divine excellence, the immediate author of the highest gifts received by man. To Dr. Smith's representations in the following passage, too much attention cannot be given. The absence of strong encomiums, on even the most eminent human instruments of divine beneficence to the world, is a very remarkable characteristic of the inspired writings, and especially of the New Testament; and it is a circumstance strictly accordant with the great plan of divine wisdom, that "no flesh should glory in the presence of God, but that he who glorieth should glory in the Lord." But to all this a most striking contrast is presented, in the whole manner of mentioning and referring to the Lord Jesus Christ. There is no restraint to the fulness of expression, no caution against trenching upon the divine prerogatives, no appearance of apprehension lest the line should be stretched too far in celebrating the honours of the Blessed Redeemer, and in pouring out the fulness of affectionate encomium and admiration with respect to him. Christians are taught to glory in him, with the warmest affection and zeal. Faith, love, trust, devotedness to Christ, and expectation from him of the highest blessings in all spiritual and immortal good, are habitually represented as the genius and essence of true piety. Yet, on the supposition that Christ is of the same class of beings with Moses, John and Paul, it was the fact with regard to him, equally as to them, that all his excellency was given to him by grace from above; and that restrictive cautions must have been the more necessary, on account of the abundance and higher description of the revelations of which he was the vehicle.' pp. 591, 2. In the subsequent pages, the argument is further illustrated; and numerous instances are collected from the Epistolary parts of the New Testament, in its support and confirmation: at the close of the enumeration there occurs the following appeal. In the preceding passages, to which there are others similar, the attributions are made to the Redeemer alone: in the following he is united, in terms which clearly indicate a parity of power and influence, with the Almighty Father. "Grace and peace be unto you, from God our Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ! Grace, mercy, and peace from God the Father, and the Lord Jesus Christ our Saviour! Our Lord Jesus Christ himself, and our God and Father (who hath loved us and hath given everlasting consolation and good hope by grace,) comfort your hearts and establish you in every good word and work." To the serious and sincere inquirer, whose faith in the divine word, whose meditations and devotions, permit him not to be a stranger to the weaknesses and wants, the sins and dangers, of human nature, in its existing state of probation, anxiety, and guilt, and in its expectancy of eternal judgment, I make the request, that he would closely reflect on the NATURE of the blessings here declared to be the gift and work of Christ, on the PERFECTIONS from which alone they can emanate, and on the POWER Over the mind and moral condition of man which the bestowment of them implies. We here find attributed to Christ in the plainest and fullest language, a condescension from a previous state, in order to deliver men from the deepest misery; the all-comprehensive and infinite good, the SALVATION of sinners; the exercise of boundless kindness and forbearance;— the most glorious, stupendous, and triumphant mercy;-deliverance from the greatest evil, in the present and the future life;-the conferring of perfect holiness, the highest honour and the germ of supreme bliss-the gift of the best blessings that can be enjoyed in our present condition, the knowledge of divine truth, ability to teach it, the progress and success of the gospel, the greatest mental enjoyments, the exercise, improvement, and confirmation of all moral virtues and Christian dispositions ;-the gracious presence of Christ with "the spirit" of man ;-effectual preservation from sin, temptation, enemies, persecutions, sorrows, and death;-and the crown of heavenly and everlasting happiness. Who can make THUS blessed but HE who is the FOUNTAIN OF LIVING WATERS? To this argument, which I humbly think is highly important and convincing, very little attention is paid in the Calm Inquiry. Of all the passages in the first class of the enumeration above made, that work notices but one: and of that, the Inquirer touches upon only the final clause. His observation is at best, but a surmise: and it entirely overlooks the point of the case, the nature of the "glory" which is attributed to Christ, and the identity of this style of ascription with that which so frequently occurs as a definite act of homage and worship to the Deity. See the preceding Chapter, Section III. Article II. Upon the passages in the second class he offers some remarks, which have been already considered in the Chapter and Section just now referred to, Article I. But it is to the nature of the blessings themselves, what they presuppose, what they involve, and to what they have respect as their tendency or termination, that a judicious inquirer will look for satisfaction as to the character and powers of their Author.' pp. 610-613. Dr. Smith does not retrograde' on the authenticity of the disputed passage, 1 John v. 7.; he retains his opinion that it is spurious; and we partake of his surprise and concern, that a passage so thoroughly untenable, should have had its warm defenders; some of whom have, in their late attempts to maintain its authority, very clearly shewn that they were unacquainted with even the very rudiments of the controversy. The subjects of the several Appendices are, I. On the sup posed Unitarianism of the Majority of the Early Christians. II. On the Doctrine of the Holy Spirit. III. On the Doctrine of the Trinity. IV. Observations referring to Dr. Carpenter and the Rev. W. J. Fox. V. List of the most important Manuscripts, and of the Ancient Versions of the New Testament. The Indices to the work are very complete. In concluding our notice of a work which, by the importance of its subject, and the seasonableness of its appearance, will strongly recommend itself to the attention of our readers, it is quite unnecessary for us to enlarge our remarks. Our encomium on these volumes has already been pronounced in a manner which could leave us but little to say relative to either the talents or the temper of the Author. The reader of Dr. Smith's work will have it impressed upon his mind, as he proceeds in the perusal and study of its contents, that he has not entered upon the examination of a theological speculation, but is committed to all the interest of a question of practical and fundamental importance. There are, we believe, many persons to whom the inquiry suggested by the title of the book has presented itself, to whom such a work as the Scripture Testimony, will, from the fulness and plainness of its criticisms, be essentially serviceable. It is a valuable addition to the many able defences already before the public, of doctrines which, in our view, comprise the essential principles of the Christian Revelation. Art. IX. Les Ogres du seizieme Siècle. Century; an historical Fairy Tale. pp. 118, London, 1820. The Ogres of the Sixteenth TH HERE are few things so difficult to hit off, as a genuine fairy-tale; and, always excepted the illustrious author of the unrivalled marvels of Mother Bunch,-the White Cat, Puss in Boots, the Yellow Dwarf, and that tale of wo which cost our 'infant eyes' so many tears, the Royal Ram, we are not acquainted with any writer who has so completely seized the true spirit of this species of composition, as Count Anthony Hamilton. The Arabian Nights are gorgeous and massy structures of rich enchantment: wizards, genii, peris, sultanas, monarchs, warriors, with variegated groupes of scarcely definable shape and feature, pass before the eye rather than the mind, in splendid and unbroken procession. The Tales of the Genii contain much of poetic and picturesque beauty, and their invention and costume are happy imitations of Eastern mildness and magnificence. Still, these are not fairy-tales. They characteristically avail themselves, and not unfrequently with dexterity and good effect, of the agency of spirits and enchanters of all sizes and sexes; but none of these gifted beings make the slightest approach to the lightness, brilliancy, rapidity, and gracefulness, which invest the form and movements of that radiant and ethereal essence, the authentic fairy. The traditions of the East probably suggested the primary idea of this exquisite imagination. The Peris are, in the ancient Persian romauces, what in ours we term Fairies, and inhabit a country which the Easterns call |