us is nothing. And, as an historical fact, those who reject this method of forming an idea of God, who deny that we are to refer to him the perfections of our own nature, have become atheists. They take spirit, and strip from it consciousness, intelligence, will, and moral attributes; and the residue, which is blank nothing, they call God. Hamilton and Mansel take refuge from this dreadful conclusion in faith. They admit that reason leads to the denial of all these attributes to the Infinite and Absolute, but they say that faith protests against this conclusion. But this protest of faith is unavailing, unless it can be shown that it is well founded; that the conclusions against which she protests are fallacious. When Kant proved that there is no rational evidence of the existence of God, and fell back from the speculative to the practical reason, (i. e., from reason to blind faith,) his successors universally gave up faith in a personal God entirely. It is admitted that we can form no idea of God unless we think of him as possessing the attributes of our own nature, and therefore, if this procedure lead us to false apprehensions, and be repudiated as invalid, we are left in total darkness, without God and without hope. Mr. Mansel acknowledges that "anthropomorphism is the indispensable condition of all human theology." P. 241. He quotes Kant, (Kritik der praktischen Vernunft, p. 282,) as saying, "We may confidently challenge all natural theology to name a single distinctive attribute of the Deity, whether denoting intelligence or will, which, apart from anthropomorphism, is anything more than a mere word, to which the slightest notion can be attached, which serves to extend our theoretical knowledge." Unfortunately, however, these writers, while they admit that this is the only possible method in which we can know God, deny that we thereby attain any true knowledge. It does not teach us what he is, but simply what we are forced (against reason) to think He is.

5. A fifth argument on this subject is, that the works of God manifest the attributes of a nature like our own. It is a legitimate principle that we must refer to the cause whatever attributes are required to account for the effects which that cause produces. If the effects manifest intelligence, wisdom, power, and moral excellence, these qualities or properties

must belong to the cause. As, therefore, the works of God are a revelation of all these attributes on the most stupendous scale, we are under a rational necessity to ascribe them to the cause of the Universe. This is only saying that the revelation made of the nature of God in the external world, authenticates the revelation of himself which he has made in the constitution of our own being. In other words, it proves that the image of himself, which he has enstamped on our nature, is a true likeness.

6. The Scriptures declare God to be just what we are led to believe he is, when we refer to him in an infinite degree, the perfections of our own nature. We are self-conscious; so is God. We are spirit; so is God. We are voluntary agents; so is God. We have a moral nature, miserably defaced indeed; God has moral excellence in absolute perfection. We are persons; so is God. All this the Scriptures declare to be true. The great primal revelation of God is as the "I Am," the personal God. All the names and titles given to God in the Scriptures, all the attributes ascribed to him, and all the works attributed to him, are revelations of his nature. He is the Elohim; the Mighty One; the Holy One; the Omnipresent Spirit. He knows all things. He is the Maker; the Preserver; the Governor of all things. He is our Father; the Hearer of Prayer; the Giver of all good. He feeds the young ravens; He clothes the flowers of the field; He is love. He so loved. the world that he spared not his own Son, but freely gave him for us all. He is merciful, long-suffering, abundant in goodness and truth. He is a help in every time of need; a refuge; a high tower; and an exceeding great reward. The relations in which we are represented as standing to him are such as we can sustain only to a person. We are bound to fear, worship, love, trust, and obey him. He is our Ruler, our Father, with whom we can have communion. His favour is our life; his loving-kindness is better than life. This sublime exhibition of God in his own nature and in his relation to us, is not a delusion. It is not mere regulative truth, or it would be a mockery. It makes God known to us as he really is. We know God, although no creature can understand the Almighty unto perfection.

7. Finally, God has revealed himself to us in the person of his Son. No man knoweth the Father, but the Son, and he to whom the Son shall reveal him. Jesus Christ is the true God. The revelation which he made of himself while on earth, was the manifestation of God in the flesh. He and the Father are one. The words of Christ were the words of God. The works of Christ were the works of God. The love, mercy, tenderness, and forgiving grace, as well as the holiness, severity, and power manifested by Christ, were manifestations of the nature of God. We see, therefore, as with our eyes what God is. We know that, although infinite and absolute, he can think, act, and will; that He can love and hate; that He can hear prayer and forgive sin; that we can have fellowship with him as one person can commune with another. Philosophy must vail her face and seal her lips in the presence of God thus manifest in the flesh, and not pretend to declare that he is not, or is not known to be, what he has just revealed himself as being. As this doctrine concerning the nature of God, as the object of certain and true knowledge, lies at the foundation of all religion, it was necessary to devote the more time to its explanation and vindication.

ART. V.-A History of Christian Doctrine. By WILLIAM G. T. SHEDD, D. D. In two volumes. New York: Charles Scribner. 1863.

THE title of this work, coupled with the author's reputation, will awaken large expectations in all who take an interest in the scientific unfolding of Christian doctrine. These expectations will not be disappointed, in the case of those who love the distinctive truths of Christianity, and who study these volumes sufficiently to understand their significance and power. In our judgment, no production of greater moment has been given to the public for a long time. It will, beyond doubt, attract great attention, and exercise a commanding and permanent influence in shaping opinion, in regard to those highest Christian doc

trines which have ever staggered the reason, humbled the pride, and rebuked the corruption of fallen man-which constitute the offence of the cross, and leave not the flesh whereof to glory. And we are happy to say that, in support of nearly all those high Christian doctrines which have suffered most violent and persistent assaults from heretics, latitudinarians, rationalists, infidels, heathens, and atheists, but which still keep their grasp on the faith of the church, these volumes render efficient and signal service. We say this with none the less emphasis and cordiality, although we shall be constrained to differ with the accomplished and respected author, on an occasional point.

There is a great advantage in the study of doctrines and creeds by the light of history. The maxim of Bolingbroke, now become proverbial, that "history is philosophy teaching by example," has a pregnant import in regard to church history. For not only can the doctrines of Christianity be illustrated and interpreted by Christian history, but, so far as the scientific statement and exposition of them is concerned, they are evolved by history. That is, while, for substance and implicitly, they were held by the church from the first; yet it was only as they came in conflict with heretical and rationalistic opposers, that they were developed into those exact and self-consistent forms of statement, which parry the ingenious assaults of adversaries. The great Christian doctrines, and more especially the symbols which articulate them, will be best understood in the light of the heretical assaults by which they were impugned, and to guard against which, they were expressly shaped and phrased. It is notorious that the creed formulas in which the mind of the church finally settled, were reached in successive eras-in regard to different doctrines, as they were successively impugned, and by such antagonism developed into greater. clearness and fulness. Says Dr. Shedd, "The endeavour to defend Christianity very often elicits a more profoundly philosophic statement of it. The defence of the doctrine of the Trinity against Sabellian and Arian objections, resulted in a deeper view of the subject than had heretofore prevailed. The subtle objections, and dangerous half-truths of the Tridentine divines, were the occasion of a more accurate statement of the doctrine VOL. XXXVI.—NO. I.

20

of justification by faith without works, than is to be found in the ancient church. Indeed, a clear, coherent, and fundamental presentation is one of the strongest arguments. Power of statement is power of argument. It precludes misrepresentations. It corrects misstatements. Hence, we find that the Defences of Christianity embody a great amount of philosophical expansion of Scripture doctrine; so that the history of Apologies is oftentimes, to a great extent, the history of the influence of philosophy upon Christianity." Vol. i. p. 31.

The author gives a fine illustration of what we have been saying, while he sets forth his own method, which is mainly that of "Special Dogmatic History," or the history of individual doctrines. We should be glad to quote, but have room only to refer the reader to pages 33, 34, of vol. i.

In these volumes the author precedes his history of individual Christian doctrines, by the history of Apologetics, and of philosophy in its relation to and influence upon Christian doctrines. He follows it with a history of Symbols, which concludes his work; the body of which is occupied with the analysis of the historical development of particular doctrines.

As the several forumlas of doctrine are best understood in the light of their historical genesis in guarding the truth against opposing errors, so that historian is best qualified to understand and explain this historical evolution, who, ceteris paribus, has had most personal experience of the antagonistic relations between these truths and their correspondent errors. He will best appreciate the doctrine of atonement and justification as exhibited in the Symbols of the Reformation, who has lived amidst and been called to combat the contrary errors; and all the more so, if in his own personal experience and thinking, he has been led to work his way out of such errors into the clear light of the glorious gospel of the blessed God. Dr. Shedd, with eminent scholarship, with the studies demanded in the chair of ecclesiastical history, which he filled many years with such honour to himself and advantage to the church, with a mind apt by nature and early training for metaphysical and dogmatic insight and discrimination, with a keen relish for doctrinal discussion, and the most solemn earnestness in his convictions of the importance of doctrinal truth-with these