method by which he thinks a profeffor of divinity may afford to the ftudent the greatest afliftance.

"In fo ample a field as fyftematic theology, I fay, not the beft thing we can do, but the only thing we can do to any pur fofe, is to give fome directions, firit, as to the order in which the ftudent ought to procced in h ́s inquiries; and fecondly, as to the books and afliftances which he ought to use. If th fe directions are properly attended to and followed, it might be hoped, by the right improvement of his leifire bours (and without this improvement the lectures of divinity fchcois will be of no fignificance) that a competent knowledge might in a te time be attained; and that, both of all the effential articles of the Chriftian fyftem, and of all the principal controverfies that have arifen concerning them." P. 53.

With refpect to the study of facred history,

"I am not of opinion," fays he, "that attending what are commonly called historical lectures, that is an abridgment of tory diftributed into lectures, whether the fubject be facred or civil, is the best way of acquiring a fufficiency of knowledge in this branch. I fee many difadvantages it has, when compared with reading well-written hiftories, but know not one advantage.”

Sentiments fimilar to these we have repeatedly expressed*, and are pleafed to find a man of Dr. Campbell's intellectual powers concurring with us, when his judgment is unwarped by controverfy. We agree with him likewife in thinking that the chief aid which a profeffor or tutor can lend to his pupils in the profecution of fuch ftudies, is by pointing out to them the most important parts of facred hiftory, and the books which they ought chiefly to ftudy; but his own lectures on ecclefiaftical hiftory furnish a complete proof how little the most vigorous and upright mind can be trufted, when "tracing the latent fprings of the principal changes, with which ecclefiaftical hiftory in particular prefents us.'

"To lay down proper canons of faered criticifm, to arrange them according to their comparative merit, fo that we may readily apprehend the way in which they are to be applied, must be a very ufeful labour to all in general, but of particular confequence to the young ftudent. I intend therefore (fays the learned principal) to enter more particularly into this branch of the fubject; and the rather, as by means of this, properly understood and improved, the young ftudent may be enabled to enter into

See particularly our 2cth vol. p. 175, &c.

the

the fpirit and fentiments of the infpired writers, and may not be led to receive, by a kind of implicit faith, the whole fyftem of Christian inftitutes from the dogmas and decifions of some favourite chief or leader." P. 57.

We have reafon to believe that the fubftance of the author's lectures from the profefforial chair on this important fubject, has been given to the public in the differtations prefixed to his tranflation of the Gofpels; and the proprietors of that work could not render a more acceptable or more ufeful fervice to the theological ftudent, than by pubJifhing a feparate edition of thofe differtations at a moderate price.

Having, in his three firft difcourfes, ftated clearly what he propofed to teach, and his intended mode of teaching, the learned Principal inculcates, in the fourth difcourfe, the neceffity for diligent ftudy on the part of his pupils, in order that they might become accomplished, or even useful, divines.

"I would have you to remember, gentlemen, that it is little, extremely little, that I, or any profeilor of divinity, can con tribute to your inftruction, if you yourselves do not strenuously co-operate to promote this end. The most that we have to do is to ferve as monitors to you, to fuggeft thofe things which may be helpful for bringing and keeping you in the right track of ftudy; and thus far preventing you, as much as poffible, from bestowing your time and pains improperly. Your advancement will, under God, be chiefly imputable to your own diligence and application." P. 69.

Of the study of systematic theology, the learned principal treats in fix lectures. In the firft he points out the methods by which a young man, who has gone through a course of philofophy, may fooneft, and with moft fatisfaction, form his own judgment of the truth of natural and revealed religion; but confidering, and juftly confidering, natural religion as a branch of philofophy, which profeffes to be the interpreter of nature, he infifls very little on that fubject, employing by much the greater part of the lecture in fhowing how the evidences of the Chriftian religion ought to be fudied. The most important direction which he gives for the fuccefsful profecution of this ftudy, is firft to ascertain from the fcriptures themfelves what Chriftianity is, that time may not be wafted in fruitless enquiries into the truth of what makes no part of the doctrine of Chrift; and then to confider the force of the moft plaufible objections which have been urged against the truth as it really is in Jesus. Cc 2

This

This was the method of ftudy which he followed himself. After ftudying the fcriptures, and forming his own judgment of what they require men to believe and to do, that they may inherit eternal life,

"I began," fays he, "with the attacks made upon our religion, as I made it a rule to hear the plea of a party first in his own language, and not in the words of an angry, and perhaps uncandid, antagonist. After reading an attack, if there was any thing fpecious in it, I confidered with myfelf how I fhould anfwer the principal argument if urged upon me by an adverfary with a view to difcredit religion; or if they were propofed as difficulties by a friend, who intended only the removal of his doubts. If I found myfelf puzzled by the arguments, not being fatisfied with any anfwer which occurred to myfelf, I had recourfe, as foon as poffible, to the beft I could hear of from others. But it fometimes happened, on the contrary, that, on a little reHection, I thought myself able to refute the antagonist's argin ments, in which cafe I never inquired about any answers that might have been publifhed." P. 105.

This is unquestionably the beft method of ftudying the evidences of our holy religion, provided the ftudent be, like Dr. Campbell, prepared for it by a fufficient acquaintance with the original languages of fcripture, ancient history, and the laws of moral evidence; and for fuch as have not, with fome fuccefs, gone through thefe preparatory ftudies, he does not recommend it.

In the fecond and third lectures the author treats of the tudy of the Chriflian fyftem, contending that as it must be taken wholly from the facred fcriptures, the ftudent fhould forbear to read bodies and inftitutes of theology, till he has made himself thoroughly acquainted with the mind of the Spirit as it is there revealed. For this mode of fludy he urges many unanswerable arguments, and obviates the most plaufible objections that are likely to occur againft it. He is an enemy to the ufe even of coinmentators, till the student has acquired from the fcriptures fome notions of the great objects of divine revelation, and of the purpofes for which the Son of God came into the world, and died on the cross.

"But what would you have us to do? Muft we give up with (neglect) all fyftems, commentaries, paraphrafes, and the like? I fay not fo entirely, though I by no means think the regular ftudy of them ought to be begun with. When we have made fome progrefs in the fcriptural fcience, we may confult them occafionally; we have then provided ourfelves in fome principles by which we may examine them. And let us not confine ourselves to thofe of one fide only, but freely confult thofe

of

of every fide. This we must do if we would conftitute fcripture the umpire in the controverfy, and not bring it to be tried at the bar of fome fyftem-maker or.commentator."

P. 122.

The topics on which Dr. Campbell more particularly recommends to the young theologian to form his opinions from the fcriptures alone, previous to his confulting fyftems and commentaries, are the divine nature and perfections; the creation of the world, and the divine providence; the State of man immediately after the creation; the fall, and its confe quences; the pre-existence, divinity, incarnation, and fufferings. of the Son of God; the Holy Spirit, what he is, and what he does; the regeneration, or recovery of man; the intermediate ftate between death and the refurrection; the general refurrection; the future judgment; heaven and hell. In order to difcover the truth on thefe important points, he recommends a patient comparifon of fcripture with fcripture, both in the original languages and in different approved tranilations; and then, when the ftudent has formed a fyftem of his own, to compare it impartially with the fyftems and commentaries of others, adopting, without refpect of perfons or parties, whatever fhall appear to be the meaning of the sacred oracles.

In the fourth lecture the learned Principal gives to the ftudent fome very judicious directions, for forming to himfelf a fyftem of Chriftian morality. Were we to object to any part of this admirable lecture, it would be to what he fays of the difquifitions of cafuiftry. No doubt, cafuistical reasonings have often been employed for very bad purposes; but what fpecies of reafoning, or indeed of any thing elfe, have not men of corrupt minds employed to foothe them felves and others in their errors and fins? This author's contempt of cafuiftry (which, however, he admits may be occafionally useful) feems to fpring from that philofophy too generally adopted, we believe, by his countrymen, which refers the morality of all our actions to the inftantaneous feelings of a moral fenfe, the fupreme, if not the only, guide of human conduct. Of the reality of fuch a fenfe, connate with the mind of man, we have often had occafion to exprefs more than a doubt; and it feems altogether irrecon cileable with that view of human nature, and of the purpofes for which Chrift came into the world, which is exhibited to. our understandings in the facred volume. The author's cau. tions against adopting what may be called the technical language of a party, before the ftudent has made himself acquainted with the mind of the Spirit, are adinirable; and CC 3

the

the whole lecture will amply reward the most attentive perufal.

The fubject of ftudying the fcriptures without the aid of commentaries, and previous to the ftudy of human compilations of theology, is continued in the fifth lecture, in which is fhown the val advantage of this method of proceeding, as it furnishes the fludent with a standard of his own, by which to judge of the various controverfies which have agitated the Chriflian world. Its importance in the deiftical controverfy was briefly pointed out in one of the preliminary lectures, and is greatly enlarged on here; whilft it is fhewn that the fame courfe of ftudy, if ecclefiaftical hiftory be added to it, is of itself fufficient to enable every candid mind, to difcover where lie the truths which have been so keenly contefted by the various fects of Chriftians.

"So juft will this remark be found upon the trial, that those branches of knowledge which we have advised the student to begin with, holy writ and facred hiftory, will, beyond his conception, tend to borten the ftudy of all religious controverfies, both general and particular. The reafon is obvious. It will fupply him with a fund in himfelf, whereby he can difcover the folidity or futility of almoft every argument that can be advanced.”

P. 208.

This is in a great meafure juft; but what is the course of ecclefiaftical or facred hiflory which is fitted to produce fo falutary an effect? Not furely the reading of any hiftory of the church, written by a modern author; for all modern hiftorians are as much wedded each to his own fee (to use the favourite phrafe of the learned principal) as the commentators on fcripture, or the builders of theological fyftems. Dupin, Mofheim, Dr. Haweis, Dr. Gregory, &c. &c. have cach written a hiftory of the church, which is much applauded by fome party or other; not to mention the author's own Lectures, or the Lives of the Fathers, by Dr. Cave, who has exhibited certainly a fuller, if not a more impartial, view of the faith, worship, and government of the church during the four first centuries, than any other modern with whofe writings we are acquainted. As thefe authors differ exceedingly from each other in the accounts which they give, not of opinions only, but even of facts of confiderable importance, which of them fhall the young fludent take for his guide? Obviously none of them. Whoever would acquire fuch a knowledge of ecclefiaftical history as to render it fubfervient to the purpofes for which it is recommended by Dr. Campbell, and for which alone it is truly valuable,

muft