in many other situations, and to hope and believe that they are rather diminishing than increasing. Of the latter, we wish that we could agree in opinion with the pious author. But with the lively recollection of our own experience upon the subject, we really cannot think with him, that the regular, performance of Divine service, in College Chapels, is to be numbered. among the chief means of promoting, in the academical student, the love of God. That it might be rendered such, nay, that in some favoured instances, it may be such, we will not doubt: but, generally speaking, we cannot but fear, that the carelessness and irreverence with which Divine worship is both conducted and attended in our Universities, must rather operate as a check than as an incentive to piety. A truly devout mind will, indeed, rise above all discouragements, and derive benefit from appointed means amidst the most untoward circumstances. But if the fire of devotion be unknown, if the internal spring of grace be wanting, the coldness and the formality of college services will rarely, we believe, do more than generate or promote a distaste for religious exercises altogether. The truth is; and in omitting this view of the subject, we think Mr. Marsh's sermon defective; no one, whatever be his condition or his age, will really love God until he possess a lively faith in the mercies and the promises of the Gospel. Faith, humble, thankful, unfeigned faith in Christ Jesus as a Saviour, will apprehend the unspeakable love of God in the redemption of a ruined world, and will assuredly work by love both to God and man. Other means and other considerations may and do tend to strengthen and animate that love, but can never implant it where it does not previously exist, where it has not originally flowed from the "sanctification of the Spirit and the belief of the truth." It is not, we know,

that Mr. Marsh is not aware of this genealogy of love, as we shall presently observe in another of his discourses; but we are so strongly persuaded of its importance, that: highly as we think of his general treatment of the subject, we cannot but regret that he did not deem it essential to its completeness to introduce and to enforce it here.

The fourth of Mr. Marsh's sermons embraces a topic of peculiar interest to the greater part of the audience before whom it was preached, and of great and general importance to the Church of England. This is no other than an inquiry into the nature and extent of the commission which Christ gave to his Apostles, when, after his resurrection, he breathed on them, and said, "Receive ye the Holy Ghost! Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them, and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained;" and into the grounds upon which the repetition of these words to every priest of the Church of England, on his ordination, is justified. The nature of the power originally conferred upon the Apostles, Mr. Marsh determines, we think, justly, to have been that of judicial authority to bind and loose, to forgive and to retain according to the circumstances of the sinner; not arbitrarily, however, or capriciously but in strict accordance with the revealed word of God; just as the sentence of a temporal judge is limited by the law of the land. This power he contends, both from the reason of the thing, and from the history of the fact, was not restricted to the Apostles, but transmitted by them to their successors, and is actually continued in our Church. And while it throws around its ministers, not an undefined or superstitious air of reverence, it clothes them with an authority which claims and deserves respect, and invests them with an awful responsibility which, if duly considered, would tend to repress the rash, the heedless, or

the profane, from intruding into the sacred office. There are some, perhaps, who may be inclined to think that the preacher asserts in the first part of his sermon too lofty a claim, and urges it in too decisive a tone; while others will be equally dissatisfied with the concessions which the well-known state of other reformed communities appears to demand from every wise and temperate advocate of our Church. We have no hesitation, however, in saying, that Mr. Marsh has in our opinion steered, not a doubtful or inconsistent, but a just and scriptural course; and we most earnestly pray, that the same union of enlightened and firm attachment to the Church of England, and of charity to those who separate from it, may more generally prevail. In the hope which he so eloquently expresses, that the unbroken succession of the priesthood, in this pure and apostolic church, may be divinely intended hereafter to form a rallying point to dispersed Christians of every denomination, we most cordially join. May the union of which it holds forth the encouraging prospect, distant as it may now seem, yet come, and come speedily! So shall the whole world "at length range itself into that universal church, against which Christ himself has promised, that the gates of hell shall not prevail."

The sermon which follows the preceding is "on Justification," and is certainly one of the ablest and most convincing upon that all important subject which we remember to have seen. Every point commected with it is embraced, and every one is treated with a masterly hand. We scarcely know where we could with greater satisfaction and confidence direct the attention of one who was anxious to obtain an enlarged and elaborate view of this grand and fundamental doctrine than to this discourse. The proof of the exclusion of the moral as well as the ceremonial law from the work of justification; the na

ture of the state expressed by that term, and of the faith which justifies the grounds upon which this method of salvation rests; the erroneous views which have too frequently been entertained of it; the reconciliation of St. Paul and St. James, and the defence of the doctrine of the former Apostle from the charge of making void the law, and encouraging licentiousness; are discussed with an ability which we have seldom observed in modern discourses, and with a strength and elevation of pious feeling which clearly proves the heartfelt interest of the author in the subject which he is enforcing. Where the merit of the whole is so great, and so nearly equal, it would be difficult to select an extract which will do justice to the argument.

We know not what might be the effect of this sermon on the learned body who originally heard it; but we are persuaded that it can scarcely be read, except by insuperable prejudice, without a strong impression of its truth and excellence.

We wish that we could bestow equal praise on the succeeding discourse upon "Sanctification and Redemption." But here we meet with some sentiments which we certainly cannot altogether approve. A single expression in the sermon on justification would have excited our attention, had not that which was there merely hinted been here followed out into a regular train of argument. The sentiment to which we refer is, notwithstanding all that had been so excellently said in the preceding sermon, an undue depreciation of the nature and effect of justifying faith, and an incorrect separation, as we certainly think it, between that blessing and the work of sanetification. It is surely to place justification too low in the scale of evangelical blessings to say, that "it is no more at last than an entrance within the threshold of Christianity." "We grant that it is an entrance, but such an one, that

it is not then that the whole business of salvation is to be begun from that point. It is already begun. Justification, to use the language of the venerable Hooker, is " a part of sanctification;" the faith which justifies being in its own nature holy, the fruit of the spirit of adoption, and the root from which good works will assuredly proceed. Again: "Justification," observes Mr. Marsh, "is properly retrospective." "But sanctification regards the actual state, and changes the present nature.” But is justification, we would ask, merely retrospective? Does it not also affect the present state, and is not even the nature of the justified sinner essentially, though not so extensively and perfectly, changed, as by the subsequent work of sanctification? "By justification," Mr. Marsh continues, "a sinner is accepted, but remains a sinner still. Through sanctification he ceases to be a sinner." Surely on justification, also, a sinner ceases to be one wilfully and presumptuously. For can any one be said to be justified who does not repent, and who, though emerging only from a state of sin, is not penetrated with the mercy of God in Christ Jesus, has not received him as his Saviour, and is not willing to be delivered no less from the power than from the punishment of sin? Mr. Marsh allows, that through justification the Spirit is admitted; and that the moment we have put on Jesus Christ, the moment we have by faith received him as our righteousness, he is willing to become our sanctification. We think that he is more that he is actually become our sanctification by virtue of that faith by which we have previously chosen and accepted him as our complete Saviour. We, of course, entirely agree with Mr. Marsh, that sanctification is a progressive work, and think that his representation of it is scriptural and edifying. We differ from him, and that with much regret, only in con

sidering justification and sanctif cation as inseparable, though distinct blessings; and though we are aware of the bearing of this sentiment upon another on which we have often said that we are far from being inclined to dogmatize, we cannot think otherwise, without departing from what we conceive to be the doctrine of St. Paul and of our church, on the subject of justification by faith.

We stated, in a note upon the sermon on Mysteries, that there was one expression in it which we should take occasion afterwards to notice, and this is we conceive the proper place for introducing it. Among other topics which Mr. Marsh enumerates as suited to public instruction, he mentions "sanctification, or the conversion of imputed into inherent holiness." We felt quite at a loss, on first reading this explanation of sanctification, to comprehend the meaning of the words; and though another phrase which occurs in the Fifth Sermon, of proceeding from justifying faith to sanctifying faith, may throw a little light upon it, we are still unable to affix any sound and scriptural interpretation to the for mer words. Certainly the imputed righteousness which is external, and becomes ours only by faith, can never be changed into that which is inherent, wrought in us by the Spirit of Christ: nor, on the other hand, is the faith which justifies different from that which sanctifies. Possibly Mr. Marsh may not have intended to express either the one or the other of these objectionable sentiments; but we could not, without a dereliction of duty, avoid stating our apprehension of both.

The following passage would sufficiently shew that Mr. Marsh is not a Calvinist, if indeed the whole strain of his preaching did not plainly prove it. Though some expressions occur in it which will be though to favour too strongly the notion of human ability in the great work of

salvation, we still think that they may be considered as describing what is the condition, in point of fact, and for practical purposes, of those to whom the Gospel is preached.

"The view which is here given by St. Paul, of our salvation, as flowing entirely and exclusively from the grace and goodness of another, is indeed suf. ficiently abasing to human pride; which has therefore been in all ages unwilling to receive it. At the same time the objections taken to it, even on this score, are often irrelevant and by no means fairly deducible from the statement above given, as it is hoped, from Scriptare. Have we then,' (it is sometimes

asked contemptuously) have we then no part to act in the great business of car salvation? Are we to be degraded into passive machines, on whom super natural influence is to produce a saving effect? By no means. No such inference fairly results from the doctrine in question. Jesus Christ is indeed made of God unto as both wisdom and righteousness and sanctification and redemption. But yet it is left to us to determine whether we will be wise and righteous and holy and redeemed. The grace of God, that bringeth salvation, hath appeared to all men, teaching us, that, denying ungodliness and worldly Justs, we should live soberly, righteously, and godly in this present world. But, though it bringeth salvation, it does not force it upon us; though it empowers, it does not compel, and, like the God who gives it, has no respect of persons. "What then is it that makes the difference between the saint and the sin Ter? Even this, that some of us refuse, while others receive the offered Saviour. It is for us to entertain or to reject the mercy which is proposed to us. He tands at the door and knocks. It is for us to open or shut. So far, and so far aly, we are workers together with God. He gives us grace. He urges to use it. He forgives, invites, exhorts, enables, inspires. But if we will Bot yield to this condescending influ ence, if we pat away the means of grace and resist the suggestions of holiness, we ourselves renew the separation between us and God; and though our salvation can only be purchased by the Saviour, it is ours to avail ourselves of this purchased salvation or proudly CHRIST, OBSERV. No. 157.

to turn away from it. Undoubtedly the wretched cripple in the Gospel could not have healed his withered arm. But it depended upon himself either to try yet, when commanded to stretch it forth, to stretch it out and be healed, or to

cavil at the order and retain his infirmity." pp. 170-172.

Of the succeeding sermon, which may be properly considered as a sequel to the two which immediately precede it, we think it sufficient to say, that it contains a just condemnation of the too-prevalent propensity, even in professed Christians, to rest satisfied with the mere elements and first principles of religion, and an animated exhortation to "go on unto perfection." The extracts which follow will serve to explain the object of this discourse.

"From this general statement it is evident that faith in the Apostle's view of it constitutes, as it were, in some sense the beginning, middle, and end of Christianity. Yet it appears, too, that the faith of a Christian will alter its character, as it proceeds: for the faith of a dying martyr is as materially different from the faith of an approved catechuman as the body of a fall-grown man is from that of a tender infant. For faith of this latter description, sincerity is the only quality that is indispensable. But, as the Christian advances, his faith must become not only sincere, but fervent and active and constant, till it acquires firmness and strength, till it emanates in every virtue, and finally, by the grace of God, mortifies every sin. These, then, at length, my brethren, these graces of holiness and works of the Spirit, by which the faith of a Christian guides him by slow advances from weakness to strength, and from strength to perfection, these are the gradations, the steps, the links, of which we have been in search, which connect the foundation of a Christian's hope to the end of his career and summit of his ambition." pp. 188, 189.

"Perfection, however (after all, it must be confessed), is an awful word. Who may attain it with all his zeal? Who can hope for it with all his faith? In the next life, by the mercies of Christ, any man-in the present, none. What degree of shortness of that final

end, provided it be attended with sincerity, the Almighty will accept and pardon, I suppose no one will presume to determine. No one can set limits to that all-encircling goodness, which has no where limited itself. But neither does the determination of this point concern us. Though the purpose of Providence is inscrutable, our duty is clear; and, while we are certain, that the Almighty will not punish any man for missing of a perfection which was placed beyond his grasp, the anger of: God is revealed and determined against. those who shroud their indolence under the plea of infirmity, who will not do what they can, because they cannot do what they would, and, because they despair of reaching, refuse to go on unto perfection." pp. 191, 192.

The volume closes with a very able discussion of the much-controverted question concerning Baptism, from the words of St. Peter relative to that sacrament, in the third chapter of his First Epistle. Nothing can be clearer or more triumphant than the reasoning by which Mr. Marsh disproves the frequently alledged identity of Baptism and Regeneration; while the necessity and the value of that initiatory ordinance are, at the same time, constantly and powerfully enforced. How far some of his expressions in the truly scriptural account of spiritual regeneration may be quite consistent with some others in subsequent passages of this sermon, or with the general tenor of his doctrine, we must not stay to inquire; nor can we do more than recommend the perusal of his arguments to those who are either disposed to attribute too much or too little to the sacrament in question.

Our limits remind us that we must bring this article to a conclusion. We cannot, however, take our leave of Mr. Marsh's volume without offering him our cordial thanks for the pleasure, and, we trust, the improvement which it has afforded us; and without congratulating the University before which these discourses were preach

ed, on the sound and wholesome doctrine which thus appears to have been heard within its precincts. We trust that Mr. Marsh and many others of kindred sentiments will continue thus to diffuse "the words of truth and soberness." That such principles should be progressive, is the best hope which we can indulge, both for the Church and for our Country; and we rejoice that such evident symptoms of its accomplishment every where abound.-In closing our remarks, we would only add, that while the sermons which we have been reviewing afford very striking marks not only of a pious, but of a vigorous and well-stored mind, they occasionally betray a neglect of strictly theological research, or, at least, of systematic divinity, which may perhaps have led to the inaccuracies we have noticed, and to some others of minor importance, to which we have not thought it necessary to advert. Mr. Marsh is evidently an independent and original thinker; but highly as we are inclined to appreciate such a character, we who are old and steady, and are in the habit of looking much and widely around us, are disposed, though not to fetter our inquiries by systems, or to enrol ourselves as the implicit followers of any great and venerable names, yet to respect what is ancient in theology, and not to overlook, in adjusting our own conclusions, those of the wise, the learned, and the pious of former ages. We are far from intending to insinuate that Mr. Marsh is not well acquainted with the divinity of other days, or not well affected towards it. We would only beg leave to recommend the examination of a few of his tenets by the corresponding researches of the great writers of our Church. He may, perhaps, on such a comparison, find reason to modify some of his present views, or at least to exhibit them in a more softened and mature shape; or