rally wish to present their claims to patronage in their full strength, and accordingly dwell considerably on what they have accomplished, and what they are destined to accomplish. But after you have looked at these bright visions of the prosperity of the church, then go through the length and breadth of the land, and behold the vast numbers that seldom or never visit the sanctuary; that seldom or never read the bible; who seldom or never mention God but to profane his name; and who are able, very generally, to defeat any measure connected with the interests of religion, whether proposed in town meeting, in the state legislature, or in the great council of the nation. Go to the scattered hamlets, as well as to the market places, and learn in conversation, how many are indifferent to the truths and duties of religion; how many are rank opposers, though they may from prudential motives conceal their opposition. Go and see how the fashionable literatue of the age is exerting an influence unfavorable to purity of faith, upon all classes, even upon females, teaching them to be doubters, thus falsifying the declaration of Hume, recorded in the life of Beattie, that, "scepticism is too sturdy a virtue for woman."

When you have thus by actual inspection seen the extent of infidelity in our own country, as well as in the countries of Europe, you will be prepared to understand the value of such a work as the one before us. It resolves the different forms of infidelity into one radical principle. It shows how exactly adapted the gospel is to man, in all his associations, and desires, and exegencies; so that the inference is inevitable that the same great being who is the creator of the one, is the author of the other. The web of Dr.T's argument is not like that of the spider, which entangles the smaller flies, but lets the stronger ones escape, but it is espe cially designed for strong men, who are of full age; "even those who by reason of age have their senses exercised to discern between good and evil.”

Moreover, his argumentation is of such a character, and couched in such language, that any intelligent man can easily understand it. He neither introduces new terms, nor uses old ones in an uncommon sense. He has no mysticism, no wire drawn speculations, no hair splitting distinctions: every man who understands the English language can understand him. Some men seem to be fond of trying to make their argumentation resemble a chain, each premise and conclusion successively corresponding to the several links, from the first principle assumed to the final inference. But in the book before us, the author seems to place various truths before us in a manner resembling a dissected map. In the empire of knowledge, he shows us certain provinces of truth in their relative situations, and having brought them together, he shows that there is a wide space which must be vacant, unless occupied by the province of

scriptural truth. He then introduces this province into its proper place, and shows how exactly it fits the other truths by which it is surrounded, and to which it is related. Now this is to our taste, and is we believe more convincing in moral subjects, than argumentation arranged in a different form.

Whatever may have been true at the first promulgation of the gospel, when the works of Jesus and his apostles bare witness of them, we must at the present day, for the most part, rely on the internal evidences to prove the truth of revelation; and for the obvious reason, that they are as to the greater part of mankind, the only evidences that can be adequately presented. And even upon meh of cultivated minds, they are often more effectual than any other, as we have often had an opportunity of observing. An instance once fell under our notice, which very strikingly illustrated the power of the internal evidences. A gentleman in Virginia, of some talents and extensive reading, was led by the light of false philosophy, into the cold and dreary domain of infidelity. He exerted the full force of his powerful and discriminating mind, in the examination of the ablest works on both sides of the question, especially so far as the historical argument was concerned. And so fully was he convinced of the falsehood of christianity, that he said publicly at a dinner table, around which were assembled some of the most respectable gentlemen in the vicinity, "christianity is a fable, and I can prove it to be so from history." But in time affliction came. The death of a beloved wife extinguished the light of joy in his heart. He was sad and solitary, seeking rest and finding none. Among the objects which reminded him of the departed one, was a small bible, which now became interesting to him because it was once dear to her. He opened it at the place where she used to read, and he found that the truths which she loved, were just the truths which he needed as a sufferer and a sinner. He continued to read, until in the adaptation of the bible to the wants, the sins, and the afflictions of man, he saw convincing proof of its divine origin. He became a sincere and humble believer in

revelation.

Before closing this article, we ought perhaps, to give an analysis of the work and to make some extracts which may furnish an illustration of the remarks we have been led to make. We have thus far viewed the work as a whole, and have not fixed our attention on particular passages, as the texts upon which we have written, or as eminently striking.-The volume is a small one comprised in about two hundred pages, and will well repay the pe rusal. Prefixed to it is a sensible well written preliminary essay, prepared, we understand, by one of the publishers.

In the first sermon Dr. Thompson lays down this important principle, that the disbelief of christianity in particular, leads to VOL. V.

61

the disbelief of religion in general." This he illustrates, first, by an appeal to the past history of deistical writings, the tendency of which has been such, for more than two centuries, as to convince every impartial observer" that to atheism we must come at last, if we acquiesce in their positions, and follow out the course which they have pursued." Secondly, to the character of the prevailing infidelity of the day, whose distinguishing feature is powerfully shown to be a determined hostility, or a settled contempt, for what is sacred,-not merely for the gospel of Christ,-but for all that relates to the belief and the service of the living God."

In the second sermon, Dr. Thompson goes on to illustrate the principle above stated, by appealing, thirdly, to the objections which deists have urged against christianity. These, he shows, when properly estimated, and impartially applied, are found to bear as strongly against natural as against revealed religion. These objections are, that christianity contains much that we cannot comprehend, that it has not been extended to our whole race, that many of its principles are still in controversy among its adherents, --and that it implies what is miraculous. As to the last objection, Dr. T. enters into a very ingenious comparison of the grounds of assent to Christ's mission, as supported by miracles, and to the being and attributes of God, as deduced from the phenomena of nature. A miracle like those phenomena, is a mere fact, attested by evidence. The argument is in both cases inductive. "Certain ascertained facts are combined with certain acknowledged first principles; and these conduct the understanding to certain conclusions in which it rests as inevitable.” As a fourth illustration of his leading principle, Dr. Thompson shows, that the moral causes which lead to deism, will naturally, and almost necessarily, bear the mind forward to open atheism. These are inconsideration,intellectual pride,—and moral depravity.

In the third sermon, deism is shown to be "hostile in every respect to the interests of morality;" and in the fourth, to be "destructive of the comfort and happiness of those who embrace it." These two sermons are characterized by great compass and power of inductive reasoning, and most eloquent appeals to the conscience and the heart.

In the fifth and sixth sermons, Dr. Thompson shows that the term "unbeliever" is not to be confined to the mere deist or atheist. It belongs, 1. To those "who reject one part of revela tion, while they admit the rest." 2. To those "whose lives are characterized by impiety and immorality." 3. To those "who exhibit in their practices the decencies, and honesties, and charities of a good life, but do so without any regard to the principles of godliness and the authority of the gospel." 4. To those "who are characterized by worldly-mindedness." 5. To those "who

live in the wilful and habitual neglect of religious ordinances." 6. To those "whose conduct manifests indifference to the preservation and success of christianity in the world." These two sermons abound in just and forcible appeals to that large class of practical unbelievers in christian lands, who are reposing in a calm reliance on their speculative belief of christianity.

The seventh sermon exhibits with great power, the sinful nature and awful consequences of unbelief, as to the person to whom it attaches. In the eighth and ninth, the whole subject is applied in distinct address to parents,-to young men,-to persons of the higher classes,-to those of the lower classes, and to ministers of the gospel. These abound in judicious and weighty considerations. The following extract may serve as a specimen of the style and manner of these sermons.

The very conduct of infidels in spreading their system with so much eagerness and industry, affords a striking proof that its influence is essentially hostile to human happiness. For what is their conduct? Why, they allow that religion contributes largely to the comfort of man, -that in this respect, as well as with respect to morality, it would be a great evil were it to lose its hold over their affections,-and that those are no friends to the world who would shake or destroy their belief in it. And yet, in the very face of this acknowledgment, they scruple not to publish their doubts and their unbelief concerning it among their fellow men, and with all the cool deliberation of philosophy, and sometimes with all the keenness and ardor of a zealot, to do the very thing which they profess to deprecate as pernicious to the well-being and comfort of the species. Whether they are sincere in this profession, or whether they are only trifling with the sense and feeling of mankind, still it demonstrates the hardening influence of their principles; and from principles, which make those who hold them, so reckless of the peace and order and happiness of their brethren, what can be reasonably expected, every thing which is most destructive of human comfort?

but

It is true the infidel may be very humane in the intercourse of life; but, after all, what dependence can be placed upon that humanity of his, which deals out bread to the hungry, and clothing to the naked, and yet would sacrifice to literary vanity, or to something worse, whatever can give support in trial, and consolation at death? He may sympathise with me in my distress, and speak to me of immortality, and at the very moment his constitutional kindness may be triumphing over his coldblooded and gloomy speculations. But his speculations have shed a misery over my heart, which no language of his can dissipate, and which makes his most affectionate words sound in my ear like the words of mockery and scorn. He has destroyed me, and he cannot save me, and he cannot comfort me. At his bidding I have renounced that Savior in whom I once trusted, and was happy, and have banished that Comforter, who once dwelt with me, and would have dwelt with me as a comforter forever. And he now pities me, as if his most pitying tones could charm away the anguish of my bosom, and make me forget that it

19

is nothing ureasonable in believing them." If doctrines or facts such as these, do really belong to the system of revealed truth, it must be hard indeed to reconcile it with common sense. They are manifestly self-contradictory. Mr. Hinton has fallen into the not very uncommon error of confounding truth, with the objects to which it relates. Most of those objects, are in certain respects beyond our comprehension. Many things belonging to them are not revealed, and could not be to beings of our limited understandings. These unexplained things, therefore, are no more within the province of religious truth, than they are within the province of human reason. Religous truth is only the declaration of such facts concerning them, as we are able to understand; its design is to instruct us; it is addressed to our reason for that purpose; and only so far as it is understood can it be believed; for "how shall men believe in that of which they have not heard ;" and for what end should they hear, but to understand. This distinction between truth and the objects to which it relates, ought to be observed more generally than it is. Not unfrequently are unintelligible and even absurd propositions brought forward as claiming our faith, on the general assumption, that the truths of religion must be supposed to involve mystery; whereas it is the very use and end of truth to explain the subjects of which it treats. So far as it does this, they are brought within the comprehension of our reason, and cease to be mysterious: beyond this revelation does not and cannot go, though many things remain in the objects themselves which the human mind cannot penetrate.

What the author does mean by the reasonableness of religious truth, is more directly stated in the following manner.

The question is one of truth and justice, of goodness and wisdom; and the position I take is, that what is divinely exhibited as wise and good, as just and true, however displeasing to our taste, accords with the sense of truth and justice, of wisdom and goodness, universally existing in

mankind.

It is assumed in this assertion, not merely that there are ideas of justice and truth, of goodness and wisdom, afloat in the world, but that mankind universally are endowed with a sensibility to such qualities, and judge of them by a common standard; and whatever apparent or partial exceptions to this assumption might be adduced, it will probably not be seriously controverted. Blinded as the mind may be by ignorance, misled by custom, warped by interest, crushed by authority, or perverted by passion, there are nevertheless certain fundamental and invariable notions of rectitude and goodness, which are of unlimited prevalence, which constitutes in these respects the voice of human reason, or the common sense of mankind. There are innumerable cases in which all men instantly form one and the same decision, and, if their understanding could be brought into unbiassed and considerate exercise, they would do so in many more; premises from which it is evident that there exist, throughout the whole of our species, a common sensibility and