may be restored to the state from which he fell. The Christian theologians have taught that man fell through want of experience, that the first fruit of the tree of knowledge brought death into the world, but that the advent of our Saviour gave to man the means of regaining his position. The general knowledge of the way in which this is to be achieved, was expounded by our Saviour upon earth. Man has now to work out the principles which were thus imparted. That this restoration can ever be effected, our reviewer, in the name of his " religious readers” and “Christian theologians," expressly denies. He refuses to believe that with the death of Christ, and his immediate disciples, all miraculous agency in the affairs of man terminated, and that the human race, having been put in possession of the full means of regeneration, were then left to work it out. He regards the efforts which man may make as altogether ineffectual, unless the laws of nature shall again in each case be subverted to effect his salvation. Spiritual aid, or in other words, miraculous aid, (for our reviewer contends that the natural constitution of man is insufficient, and by the word "spirit," intimates an unusual and external influence, and not merely the soul, which every man possesses,) must always be afforded to him for this purpose—he must receive powers which are not peculiar to all men—not common to the race and must therefore become an angel or superior being, and cease to be a man. He denies, therefore, that by the simple atonement of our Saviour all mankind may be saved, but asserts that, instead of this, a portion of mankind may be converted, while on earth, into angels or superior beings, and then, as angels, may be saved; and that Mr. Combe's philosophy, which would lead us to believe that the race may now work out its regeneration by a proper application of the powers of its own inherent constitution, is altogether false.

We must here leave the reviewer—there is scarcely a line in his article which we have not marked for refutation and exposure, but we cannot afford the space, and it would be needless, if we could. Our object was not to defend the theological views of Mr. Combe, because we are ignorant of their nature ; Mr. Combe having, in his Constitution of Man, merely stated two theories which have long been agitated respecting the prospects of man in this world, and then endeavoured to trace how far these theories are respectively borne out by a careful observation of facts. He has himself remarked that theological views should never be brought forward in opposition to any points of philosophical inquiry, and it is only by rash and irreverent persons that such a course would be adopted. The folly (not to use a harsher term) of bringing religious doctrines to bear against the experiments or the theories of scientific students, has often been illustrated, and is almost universally acknowledged. To show that our reviewer has fallen into his share of the absurdities and self-contradictions to which such a course inevitably leads, has been our only intention.

We cannot part from him, however, without distinctly reprobating his pharisaical use of the term, “We Christians," which he applies throughout the whole of his paper to himself, and to those who entertain views similar to his own. Notwithstanding his new readings of revelation, there exist a vast number of persons-probably amounting, in England and the United States, to upwards of a million-whose views harmonise with the philosophy of Mr. Combe, and who still retain a faith (a faith so strong, that they do not fear to examine abstract truths) in the Christian religion. The writer of the review is evidently unacquainted with the fact, that some large editions of Mr. Combe's Constitution of Man have been sold in America, with a treatise appended to them on the “ Harmony between Phrenology and Religion," and that this treatise has also, in a pamphlet form, had an extraordigary sale, both in England and in the United States. The author is an appointed teacher of the Gospel, and as such, enjoys a high reputation and an extensive influence, and we have no doubt he will be surprised to find that a patent-right to the title of “Christians” has been claimed by his opponents, and that a decree of excommunication has been promulgated in a London magazine against all those who may listen to his views.

It may also be proper to remark, that in addition to many attempts to fix upon Mr. Combe, by dishonest implication, views which that gentleman never promulgated, there are two or three distinct untruths sprinkled through the review : viz. “Mr. Combe asks us, without inquiry, to resign the Holy Scriptures," &c. &c. &c.

In his short quotations, interwoven with his text, the reviewer omits words and adds words, all within inverted commas, at his ow discretion. Thus Mr. Combe is made to say, that those who entertain the second hypothesis, • believe the world to contain within itself no element of rectification;" here the words should be, “no element of its own rectification,” and if the passage had been thus quoted, the remarks which the reviewer makes upon it would have been not only unnecessary, but absolutely ridiculous. Again he says, “We think no one can doubt that Mr. Combe is arraying his own philosophy against that of revelation. He tells us that our • fundamental error' js, that we hold this world to have lost the purity and beauty in which it was first created.” Mr. Combe's words respecting the fundamental error in question, really are, " Their minds have been infected with the first great error that this world is irremediably defective in its constitution.” In this place, a more conscientious


quotation would not have answered the purpose of the reviewer. He soon exhibits his motive for perverting Mr. Combe's words, since he goes on to assert, upon the strength of his misrepresentation, that Mr. Combe“ tells us that a faith in the myterious and spiritual doctrines of the Holy Scriptures is a fundamental error." Furthermore, the reviewer, in his own rash and unscrupulous way, says,

* Mr. Combe," in his remarks on the second hypothesis, " is pleased in this passage to cite something less than half the spiritual hypothesis-thus completely disguising it to suit his own purpose. He mentions the part of our faith which asserts the corruption of human nature, and the curse on nature in general, but makes not the slightest allusion here to the eternal prospects of mankind. This is very uncandid. We can scarcely stretch our own candor so far as to deem it honest."

Every reader of the Constitution of Man will be aware that Mr. Combe, from first to last, deals with his subject only as a branch of scientific inquiry, considering man solely in his adaptation to the present life, and to the material world in which he dwells. Moreover, if the reviewer had not been so impatient as to skip over the third page from that in which Mr. Combe is represented to have omitted all allusion to the eternal prospects of mankind, his mind would have been relieved by the following passage :

" It is objected that, by omitting the sanction of future reward and punishment, this treatise leaves out the highest, best, and most efficacious class of motives to virtuous conduct. This objection is founded on a misapprehension of the object of the book. It is my purpose to show, that the rewards and punishments of human actions are infinitely more complete, certain, and efficacious in this life, than is generally believed; but by no means to interfere with the sanctions to virtue, afforded by the prospect of future retribution. It appears to me, that every action which is morally wrong in reference to a future life, is equally wrong and inexpedient with relation to this world.”

We are sorry to have dwelt at so much length in exposing an article thus loosely written; more especially, since it involved the necessity of entering into matters connected with the highest points of religious belief; but it became proper, from the presumptuous tone of the reviewer, that we should show to his readers, in the clearest light, that, in irreverently bringing such matters into a contest with the results of practical reason, and assuming to himself the idea that he perfectly understands the mysteries of revelation, and is able positively to say what will and what will not harmonise therewith, he has not only grossly perverted the simplest truths of the religion which he professes to defend, but that, in grappling with a subject to which he

[ocr errors]

has evidently only given the lowest degree of thought, he has absolutely attempted to prove that some of the most obvious doctrines both of the Bible and the New Testament are altogether false.

We hope that the example which he has set, will prevent other opponents of phrenology from the impiety of bringing religion into a discussion which can be settled by other means. In this case, the efforts of our reviewer will have caused much real good, and he will be able to congratulate himself that his own indiscretion has, at least, been the means of preventing others from rushing recklessly into a ground where angels would fear to tread!


Lectures on Phrenology by George Combe, Esq., including its

application to the present and prospective condition of the United States; with Notes, an Introductory Essay, and an Historical Sketch. By Andrew Boardman, N. D. Second edition, with corrections and additions. New York: J. P. Giffing. 12mo.

pp. 390.


The lectures of Mr. Combe on phrenology, as reported by Dr. Boardman, of New York, have met with a very favourable reception. They have been republished in Great Britain, where we learn they are now having an extensive circulation; and it speaks well for the merits of the work, as well as for the progress of the science, that a new edition should be so soon called for in our own country. In the preface to the second edition, Dr. Boardman remarks that, “ since the publication of the first edition, Mr. Combe has left our shores, but the fruits of his labours remain with us. His sootsteps can be traced in beneficent results. The phrenologists of America return to him their sincere and hearty thanks; and the first in science, philosophy, and philanthropy, remember him with unfeigned respect and admiration. His visit has been highly efficacious in correcting prevalent errors concerning the foundation, scope, and utility of phrenology, and in attracting more closely to it the attention of many of the best minds in the country. I have endeavoured, among other things, to render the following work a monument of his labours in the United States."

This is truly a noble monument of Mr. Combe's labours among us; more valuable than the treasured spoils of wealth, and far more durable than the most splendid achievements of art. It consists in a defence and exposition of principles which are destined to elevate and improve


the human mind, and when properly applied, their fruits will be seen in the advancement of the health, happiness, and prosperity of individuals as well as communities. Such an application of these principles we hope, and believe, will yet be made in our own country. We admit that it must be the work of time; but that their application will eventually take place, and produce the most happy and beneficial results, may be predicted with as much assurance and certainty, as the continued existence and unchangeableness of God himself. For these principles are an essential part of his moral government; they are no less than the laws which God has ordained for the government of the mind in this world, and which can never be extinguished or suspended, until the great object is accomplished for which man was created and placed in this probationary state of existence.

The work before us contains not only a full and accurate report of Mr. Combe's lectures, but also an account of his reception in Boston, New York, and Philadelphia, as well as of the various resolutions which were passed at the close of his lectures in those cities. The "Essay on the Phrenological Mode of Investigation," and the "Sketch of the Rise, Progress, and Present Condition of Phrenology,” by Dr. Boardman, are both well written articles, and constitute a very appropriate introduction to the work. We are much gratified to find a material alteration in the Appendix to the present edition, as in noticing the previous one, we felt it our duty to dissent from some remarks there made in reference to practical phrenology. “ To what extent mental character can be ascertained from external developement alone,” is an interesting and important inquiry, and one which Dr. Boardman has very clearly and ably discussed in the present Appendix. As it is our intention soon to present an article in the Journal on Practical Phrenology. we shall then have occasion to recur to this subject again.



In the last number (January, 1841) of the Edinburgh Phrenological Journal, we find the following interesting account. Two practical phrenologists, while delivering lectures on the science at Exeter, visited the Deaf and Dumb Asylum at that place, and examined some of the lads belonging to the institution, in presence of several ladies and gentlemen. It appears that a Journal, or Log-book, is regularly

« VorigeDoorgaan »