Threw his slant beams, that in the open door
Pencil'd with golden light her flowing hair,
And all her form: that she so meekly fair,

And still, and rapt as pictured saint might be,
Like saint-like seem'd as her she did adore."

From the same poem we transfer this life-like painting :—
"Unto the tomb wherein he deem'd she lay,

All unperceived of any eye he went,

And while they still misdeem'd him far away,
He stood before that ancient monument;
He knew not in himself with what intent.
Beneath the portal's crevice, from within,
Into the moonlight crept a golden ray

That made it seem more ghastly pale and thin;
He wrench'd the door ajar, and wonderingly stepp'd in.

And there within an open tomb was laid,
With lighted tapers at her head and feet,
That flicker'd in the blast, a lovely maid,
Whose youthful innocence and beauty sweet
Kept the flowers fresh upon her winding sheet,
And as the gusty wind did rise and fall,
From old armorial tombs with knights display'd,
Arm'd shadows seem'd to threat upon the wall,
As if to guard from harm her slumbers virginal.
He on his knees sank, awed and tremblingly,
Before that image of fair maidenhead,
While life and death changed looks dissemblingly;
For such a paleness in his features spread,
That she the live might seem, and he the dead;
And all around the shadows toward the maid

And flamy tapers blended semblably,

While he, with arms upon his sword-hilt stay'd,

And fix'd and marble look, bent forward half-affray'd."

We take leave of Mr. Lord with high hopes for him in the future, charging him at the same time to remember that

"Not on downy plumes, nor under shade

Of canopy reposing, fame is won."

And although we fancy that at five and forty he will have written less poetry than he would now fain call by that name, we yet augur for him an honorable rank among our native poets.

D.

ART. IV.-Christ the only Sacrifice: or, the Atonement in its Relations to God and Man. By NATHAN S. S. BEMAN, D. D. With an Introductory Chapter, by S. H. Cox, D. D. Second edition, revised, rewritten, enlarged, and improved. New-York: Mark H. Newman. 1844. And a review of the work in the Biblical Repertory and Princeton Review, vol. xvii, No. 1.

The

THE atonement is eminently the great central doctrine in that system of truth contained in divine revelation; the only system of religion ever presented to man which can be regarded as containing ample provision for the salvation of his ruined race. system is only healthful, vigorous, and efficient in proportion as this doctrine is clearly and scripturally apprehended and maintained in the pulpit and by the press. But enervation and inefficiency have ever marked the history of its action on community in just the same proportion as the atonement has been obscured, held in error, or wholly set aside by a misguided fancy, or a false philosophy. In just how far the teachers of religion depart from the long-established and well-defined Scriptural land-marks in regard to this vital doctrine, in just so far the gospel in their hands becomes another gospel; it is no longer "the glorious gospel of the blessed God," which is "the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth." As well may we look for that mechanical system, combining the nicest adjustment of part to part, constructed and arranged with a view to a given result, to reach such result when the mainspring is either wanting, or its force in some way destroyed. If the vital organ in the organized body become. diseased, or its action obstructed or suspended, paralysis will follow.

That the atonement is invested with mystery, is a complaint we sometimes hear even from cultivated, intelligent, and pious minds. That in connection with it there is a profoundness, vast and unfathomable, cannot be denied. But are not the same things predicable of every work and every attribute of the infinite and eternal Mind? In itself considered, we see no more reason for doubt or difficulty with regard to the atonement than there is with regard to the divine omniscience, or any other perfection of the divine nature revealed in the Scriptures, with equal clearness. The atonement is eminently a doctrine of divine revelation; and, apart from its benevolent design in making known its provisions, that man may enjoy its eternal benefits, the sufficient object of divine revelation would be left highly problematical. Viewed as expressly including this, revelation, with all it compre

hends, stands forth as the sublimest expression of divine wisdom and benevolence.

The atonement may be contemplated in two regards. One, a view purely experimental and practical; the other, a view which may be called critical, philosophical, or metaphysical. In the former regard, which is that of simple substitution, it meets us as the ground of our hope, challenging our faith, in almost every page of the sacred volume. And if the truly awakened, unsophisticated, honest-hearted penitent seize upon the glorious truth that Jesus Christ "tasted death for every man"-resting alone here for pardon, holiness, and heaven-we see no reason why this elementary view of the atonement will not be sufficient for his salvation. In the latter regard, a wide range is taken; inquiry is instituted into its necessity, nature, extent, and the benefits derived from it. Its relations to the system of God's moral government are subjected to the rigid scrutiny of reason: nor has the doctrine always escaped injury from such an attempted analysis. This will inevitably be the case whenever reason, and not the declarations of the Bible, are made the criterion of judgment. A man can reason only about what he knows; all his knowledge of the atonement is derived from revelation; to its umpirage, therefore, all questions must be referred. In every step, then, let the inquirer not only act under a conscious deference to what the Holy Ghost teacheth, but bow unqualified submission to those inspired teachings, not mistaking the feeble flickerings of his own dim reason for the clear, steady, brilliant splendors emanating from the page of divine inspiration.

When an author devotes an entire treatise to the consideration of one subject, and especially when it has occupied his thoughts for some twenty years, and the treatise then comes to you "revised, rewritten, enlarged, and improved," he gives you the assurance that purchase and perusal will be richly compensated. Under these circumstances, the work under consideration makes its appearance. And as if to secure it a more favorable reception, and a wider circulation, it makes its appearance under the auspices of an introductory chapter by Dr. Cox. Of this chapter we will only say in this place, that our expectations were not fully realized. Adding little to the argument of the author, it abounds with epithets; and the style is in the writer's peculiar manner, following no model with which we are acquainted. Toward that class of opponents to the doctrines advanced called "restrictionists," his bearing is not a little severe. The views advanced by Dr. Cox will be considered in another connection.

The treatise before us, by Dr. Beman, is a 12mo. volume of one hundred and seventy-one pages, embracing five chapters, besides the introduction by Dr. Cox, just alluded to. One chapter is on the "necessity," one on the "fact," two on the "nature," and one on the "extent," of the atonement. As the chapter which treats of the "fact," or certainty that an atonement has been made, is directed against those who deny the atonement to be a Scripture doctrine-a point which every substitutionist most cordially admits, and which the author labors to establish by arguments drawn from animal, Adamic, patriarchal, Mosaic, and heathen sacrifices, with the concurrent testimony of prophecy and other Scriptural declarations as to Christ's vicarious death-the necessity, nature, and extent of the atonement, are the only points which demand our notice.

Dr. Beman lays it down as a principle that the prevention of crime is the grand end to be answered by the execution of the penalty annexed to the divine law. Hear him in his own

words:

"He [the penitent sinner] might be comparatively secure against future acts of rebellion, or, so far as his moral feelings are concerned, it might be consistent for God to forgive and restore him. But where is the honor of the law? Where is the good of the universe? Where is that terror which God, in benevolence to his creatures, has hung, with his own mighty hand, around the penalty? What would there be in such a case to deter others from trampling on divine authority?” -P. 57.

Again, to the same purpose,

"The penalty of the moral law was intended to operate as a powerful motive to obedience; and the execution of this penalty, whenever it takes place in the universe, becomes an awful warning to deter others from transgression."

"The penalty could never be set aside without the adoption of those precautionary measures which would secure the order and prosperity of the universe, as effectually, to say the least, as the infliction of the penal curse itself could do."-Pp. 126, 128.

This, to say the least, is taking but a partial view of the subject. It is conceded that, in human governments, and also in the divine government, the prevention of crime is one of the objects of punishment. But to make this the grand, or the only object, would be quite another proposition. The error, however, is not one of defect merely; it gives a false view to the very nature of sin. On this principle the guilt of sin consists, not in an infraction of the various relations we sustain to God and of the

endowments of our gifted natures, but simply in the infraction of the law of benevolence. According to Dr. Beman, the happiness of some beings in the universe is interrupted or curtailed by sin. In this the guilt consists. Consequently, the infliction of the penalty thus incurred, measurably, at least, undoes the evil occasioned by sin, because "the execution of this penalty, whenever it takes place in the universe, becomes an awful warning to deter others from transgression."

But does this view of the nature of sin accord with the ordinary dictates of conscience? We say ordinary, because these are instinctively felt with little, if any, variation by all men in the same circumstances. Does the man, conscious of crime, dwell upon its demoralizing effects upon others, or his encroachment upon their happiness, as that in which his criminality consists? Does he not rather "loathe himself when God he sees ?" or exclaim with David, "Against thee, thee only, have I sinned, and done this evil in thy sight that thou mightest be justified when thou speakest, and clear when thou judgest?" Psa. li, 4. The prodigal confessed that he had "sinned against Heaven," in the sight or presence of his father. He had contemned divine authority, to which his father was a witness; or he had sinned against God in the person of his father. His awakened conscience referred at once to God. To him the sinner always instinctively refers under the terrifying apprehensions of an awakened conscience. He feels that every sin, howsoever and against whomsoever committed, is a sin against God. This view of the case has the suffrage, then, of both Scripture and experience.

"It is not pretended that this theory is taught in the Bible. It purports to be a philosophy. The Bible contradicts it on every page, because every page contains some expression of genuine human feelings, of the conviction of the real difference between right and wrong, of a true sense of sin, or of the great truth that our responsibility is to God, and not to the universe. The doctrine, therefore, that sin is punished merely to preserve the order and prosperity of the universe, is an utterly false and revolting theory; inconsistent with the intuitive moral judgments of men, subversive of all moral distinctions; irreconcilable with the experience of every man when really convinced of sin, and contradicted by everything the Bible teaches on the subject.”—Princeton Review, vol. xvii, p. 89.

Dr. Beman assumes, that "so far as the moral feelings of the penitent are concerned, it might be consistent for God to forgive and restore him," were there no atonement. This might be done, because one object of punishment, the prevention of a repetition