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

"In fo ample a field as fyftematic theology, I fay, not the best thing we can do, but the only thing we can do to any pur pofe, is to give fome directions, firft, as to the order in which the ftudent ought to proceed in his inquiries; and fecondly, as to the books and affiftances which he ought to use. If these directions are properly attended to and followed, it might be hoped, by the right improvement of his leifure hours (and without this improvement the lectures of divinity schools will be of no fignificance) that a competent knowledge might in a little 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 ftudy of facred history,

"I am not of opinion," fays he, "that attending what are dommonly called historical lectures, that is an abridgment of hif 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 ad. vantage."

Sentiments fimilar to these we have repeatedly expreffed, and are pleased 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 history 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 history in particular prefents us.'

"To lay down proper canons of facred criticifin, to arrange them according to their comparative merit, fo that we may rea dily apprehend the way in which they are to be applied, must be a very useful 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

Sce particularly our 20th 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 Chriftian inftitutes from the dogmas and decifions of fome favourite chief or leader." P. 57.

We have reafon to believe that the fubftance of the anthor'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 useful fervice to the theological ftudent, than by pub. lishing a separate edition of those differtations at a moderate price.

Having, in his three firft difcourfes, flated clearly what he propofed to teach, and his intended mode of teaching, the learned Principal inculcates, in the fourth discourse, 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 profeffor of divinity, can contribute to your inftruction, if you yourselves do not strenuously co-operate to promote this end. The moft 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 study; and thus far preventing you, as much as poffible, from beftowing your time and pains improperly. Your advancement will, under God, be chiefly imputable to your own diligence and application." P. 69.

Of the ftudy of fyftematic theology, the learned principal treats in fix lectures. In the first 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 reli gion; 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 ftudied. The most important direction which he gives for the fuccessful profecution of this ftudy, is firft to afcertain from the fcriptures themselves 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 Jefus.

Cc 2

This

This was the method of ftudy which he followed himfelf. 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 un-. candid, antagonist. After reading an attack, if there was any thing fpecious in it, I confidered with myfelf how I should anfwer the principal arguments, 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 my felf puzzled by the arguments, not being fatisfied with any anfwer which occurred to myself, I had recourfe, as foon as poffible, to the best I could hear of from others. But it fometimes happened, on the contrary, that, on a little reflection, I thought my felf able to refute the antagonist's argu ments, in which cafe I never inquired about any answers that might have been publifhed." P. 105.

This is unquestionably the best method of studying the evidences of our holy religion, provided the student be, Nke 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 Chriftian fyftem, contending that as it must be taken wholly from the facred fcriptures, the student should forbear to read bodies and inftitutes of theology, till he has made himfelf thoroughly acquainted with the mind of the Spirit as it is there revealed. For this mode of ftudy he urges many unanfwerable arguments, and obviates the moft plauLible objections that are likely to occur against it. He is an enemy to the ufe even of commentators, till the student has acquired from the fcriptures fome notions of the great objećts of divine revelation, and of the purposes 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 (negleft) 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 ourselves in fome principles by which we may examine them. And let us not conne purselves to thofe of one fide only, but freely confult thofe

of

of every fide. This we muft 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 fate 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 comparison 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 facred 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 reafonings have often been employed for very bad purposes; but what species 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 occasionally 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 irrecons 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 cautions againft adopting what may be called the technical language of a party, before the ftudent has made himself ac, quainted with the mind of the Spirit, are admirable; and

Cc3

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 vaft advantage of this method of proceeding, as it furnishes the ftudent with a standard of his own, by which to judge of the various controverfies which have agitated the Chriftian world. Its importance in the deifical 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 discover where lie the truths which have been fo keenly contefled 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 ftudent to be gin with, holy writ and facred hiftory, will, beyond his conception, tend to forten 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 measure juft; but what is the course of ecclefiaftical or facred hiftory 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 feet (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 each written a history of the church, which is much ap、 plauded 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 whose 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 ftudent 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,

must