most perfect system of morality that ever was given to the world. The word sacrament' is not to be found in the Bible; are we to renounce the two ceremonies of Baptism and the Lord's Supper on that account? Names are given arbitrarily, but the name of a thing is not the thing, it is only the sign by which we express the thing signified." P. 28.

For the rest of the " innumerable texts" which have been collected and compared together by different writers specified by Mr. Powlett, we are referred to the pamphlet of his" meri-. torious friend Mr. Vaillant," which we doubt not is a work of very great merit, but with which we have not the pleasure of being acquainted.

Secondly, Denial of the Socinian assertion, that "the faith is not ancient." Some proof from the writings of the ancient fathers would have been desirable under this head. :

Thirdly, Proof of a plurality of persons in the Godhead from the frequent use of the plural noun to express the name of God. From this part of the proof our author goes off, in the middle of a paragraph, to consider "some of the prophecies concerning the coming of the Messiah, and the divine dignity ascribed to him when he should come." It will give some idea of this writer's method, if we just state, that the consideration of these prophecies, together with the substantiation of the two last preceding proofs, form one portentous paragraph of eighteen pages in length.

Alluding to the proofs of the divinity of our Saviour.contained in the Gospel of St. John, our author observes that he is there spoken of in a way in which it would be absurd and impossible to speak of a mere attribute of the Deity.

"St. John does not say that the Word was in God, but with God; he does not say that the Word was divine, or belonging to God, but absolutely God. In the 11th verse (cap. i.) St. John adds," He came unto his own, &c." which is intelligible if applied to a person, but is complete nonsense, if applied to an attribute. Can an attribute be said to be the only-begotten of God, as Christ is styled in the 14th verse?". P. 63.

We are again recommended, p. 64, to "Mr. Vaillant's collection of texts relative to the doctrine of the Trinity;" after which we have the following paragraph.

"I will conclude this letter with drawing an argumentative summary of the whole question. After the various texts throughout both the Old and New Testament, which have been brought in evidence of the divinity of Christ, and of the Holy Ghost, which I cannot see how they can be answered or controverted, I might here rest the cause; but in this summary of the arguments, I will briefly introduce a statement of

some of the circumstances of the life of the blessed Jesus, and of the "gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth. I may truly add to the declaration said to be made by Abraham to Dives, If they hear not Moses and the Prophets;' that if men will not attend to the positive declarations of Christ himself, neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the dead."" P. 67.

Fortunately for the fate of his chapter, our author's idea of a summary is very different from that of any body else; and he sets off again for another thirty pages to collect fresh proofs of the divinity of the second person in the Trinity. This is unquestionably the best part of the chapter. The supernatural birth of our Lord; the coming of John the Baptist as his harbinger; the nature of the precepts contained in his sermon on the Mount; his miracles--but especially those in which he exercised authority over devils; his transfiguration, and his permitting the adoration of his disciples, are all appealed to as proofs of his divine nature and character. The title" Son of God," is proved to have been, in the estimation of our Lord himself, an appellation of divine import; and the existence of Christ in heaven before the foundation of the world is sufficiently deduced from clear texts of Scripture.

As we cannot follow our author more minutely into the details of his discussion, we will state at once the glaring deficiency, which to one in real doubt would render the pains taken in this chapter entirely nugatory. It is simply this; that the personality of the Holy Ghost is hardly glanced at; and that his divinity, notwithstanding the allusion made to the subject in the quotation from p. 67 given above, is not attempted to be proved. Such an omission as this in a treatise upon the Trinity," must have proved fatal to its claims to notice, even had all the other parts of it been adequately supplied; in the present instance, however, it is the natural consequence of a want of method which pervades the whole work, and causes inadequacy and incorrectness in one part as well as in another.

The epistolary dress which is chosen for the ornament of the work, cannot be allowed as an excuse for the absence of design, or the deficiency of argument. As easily might it be conceded to the statuary, that his ignorance of the human figure is venial, because his productions are to come draped from under his hands; as to the writer that the points of his subject may be neglected, because they are to be clothed with a covering of fami→ liarity and wit. Neither, in truth, do we see any good reason why paragraphs of twelve, sixteen, and two and twenty pages, should be permitted in an epistle, any more than in a treatise. Sure we are, that whilst such is the case, the treatise will have the

advantage over the latter as greatly in convenience as in solidity; and that which is confessedly lost in closeness, will not be made up either in facility or amusement.

It is but fair to say that the chapter on " the Atonement" bears the marks of a greater degree of labour than that of which we have given the substance. It is however, at best, very desultory; not answering in itself to the dignity of the subject of which it treats, and still less able to compensate for the deficiencies which are but too palpable in other portions of the work.

A Letter to the Right Reverend John, Lord Bishop of Bristol, respecting an additional Examination or the total Abolition of Ten-year Men in the University of Cambridge. To which are added, Observations on Mr. Samuel Perry's Letter to the Public Orator, and a Refutation of the accusations contained therein against the Lord Bishop of London. By PHILO-THEOLOGUS. 8vo. pp. 66. 2s. Deighton. Cambridge. 1825.

THE question of which this pamphlet treats, relates to individuals, who, by virtue of a statute passed in the twelfth year of the reign of Elizabeth, being 24 years of age at the time of their admission, at the expiration of ten years (during the two last of which they have passed the ordinary exercises required from a Master of Arts proceeding in theology) claim the degree of B.D. We notice this essay, as containing an enquiry fraught with importance to the Church,-as involving the question, whether the exercises of those who avail themselves of this statute, be adequate tests of their capability as Clergymen and expositors of the Sacred Text; whether, in fact, they have not a tendency to depreciate the value of the regular degree through Arts, and encourage men to seek Ordination, without the previous requisites, in the hope that this statute will, in a less space of time, invest them with a rank for which, in the other case, 14 years and severe examinations are demanded.

The object of the writer is to shew, "the absolute necessity of adopting one of the two propositions following: first, that the exercises be made much more severe; and secondly, that the order of ten-year men should be abolished altogether." Under the first head he argues, that the conditions of the statute are not

VOL. I. NO. III.

I

observed; "qui ad academiam viginti quatuor annos nati accedunt, et se studio theologiæ totos tradunt," &c. &c. from which words he infers, that those claiming this degree, "shall for ten years wholly devote themselves to the study of theology IN the university:" this last condition is totally disregarded, and three terms of five weeks each are allowed as substitutes for the full time. It may, however, be a matter of dispute, whether from "se studio theologiæ totos tradunt," we may argue that it is necessary that they should continue the ten years in the university, or whether it be simply implied, that they shall be bound for that space exclusively to the study of theology. But, in either case, the proposition that the exercises should be rendered much more severe, will remain the same; and the writer has demonstrated, that this statute was only intended for a temporary purpose, which has long since been fulfilled.

We admit, that the exercises are purely elementary, that à mere candidate for Holy Orders ought to be ashamed to fail in such, as are proposed to the candidate for this degree; and we also admit, that there have been repeated instances, in which the person under examination, who, nevertheless, has passed his ordeal, was evidently ignorant of many of the most common principles of the Latin grammar,-yet, we cannot coincide with the author's indiscriminate disparagement, being, on the other hand, aware that many, from peculiar circumstances, have taken advantage of this statute, who were perfectly qualified to abide the test of the examinations required from those who pass from Arts to Theology. He does not indeed "include every ten-year man" in his censure, but we think his limitation too restricted. When a superior degree can be so easily procured, it is natural to suppose, that the number of aspirants will increase: we are not, therefore, surprised at the progressive table, which he has exhibited.

From these and other arguments, the necessity of a previous examination is established, and this is requisite to the enquiry, whether they have, since their admission, wholly devoted themselves to theological studies: for it must be granted, that the examinations in the divinity-schools are inadequate to the meaning of this clause. We, moreover, readily allow that these examinations should not be under the controul of the Regius Professor of Divinity; for although we are well assured of the great capability, and willingness of the present Professor to ad vance so desirable an object, yet we have no security that his successors will possess an equal liberality and zeal and his appointment to the office would be like the appointment of the

same individual to the offices of judge and jury, or to the task of auditing his own accounts *.

We do not conceive that the statute will allow those who enter under it to be subjected to the Lent examination; and we imagine the books, which our author has suggested in the place of the two classic authors, too elementary, and far too insufficient. The statute clearly pre-supposes, that the ten-year men have, since their admission, paid as much attention to theology as the rest of the university to the ordinary studies of the place: consequently, the examinations of the former should be proportioned to those of the latter. Before their clerum, English sermon, opponencies, and act, they should, undoubtedly, be examined by men, properly deputed to that duty by the Senate, -which would render the practice unlikely to be abrogated. The Greek fathers, books on the evidences of the Christian religion, Jewell's Apology, &c. &c. should form parts of the test, to which the candidates for this degree should be subjected; and as so many other studies, pursued by other members of the body, are omitted by this statute, it might not be amiss to require a certain knowledge of the Hebrew Bible, and to appoint the Hebrew professor, and the Arabic professor, examiners ex officio. For if the statute be continued in force, it is imperiously due from the University to the Church and to the public, that the preparatory exercises be rendered respectable, and that the degree follow an ordeal nearly, if not quite, as severe as that of the ordinary B.D.

Many difficulties oppose the second proposition, which relates to its total abolition. For it is very improbable, that all the colleges would coincide in refusing the admission of ten-year men; and more than probable, that, if all the rest were unanimous, the college to which the Regius Professor,-who would, in all likelihood, be the Master of it,-might belong, would continue to admit them; the consequence of which would be, that the numbers would not be diminished, but simply that they would all be members of the same society. But were a severe examination enjoined by the Senate, their numbers would rapidly decrease, and those who remained would be known to be capable men, who could reflect no discredit on the University. Yet should such a measure be adopted, it would be just that due notice of it should be given, and that it should not be in operation until the expiration of one year, or two

Since it is to the Professor's interest, that the number of ten-year men should increase, instead of being diminished, it is evident, primâ facie, that he should bear no part in any examination appointed by the Senate.