offered to the consideration of the reader: 'From that time began Jesus to make proclamation, and to say, Change your dispositions, become of a different moral character, in order to share in the enjoyments of that heavenly kingdom, that reign of piety and benevolence, which I am come to reveal, establish, and defend, and which shall be perfected in a future state of unchangeable happiness and glory.' Unless I am greatly mistaken, this view of the subject throws light on many passages of Scripture. It is sometimes asked, for instance, Which is first, repentance or faith? And taking the common acceptation of repentance among religious people, viz. a godly sorrow for sin, it is difficult to tell which is first, faith or this repentance. But understanding the word translated repentance to mean a moral change of character, the difficulty is removed; for this change must precede both a godly sorrow for sin, and evangelical faith. The reader will excuse the length of these remarks, when he considers the vast importance of the subject. Dr. Campbell's translation of this chapter is in several instanses too much like a paraphrase.

Doctrines.

We are taught in this chapter, that our Savior was carried up into the wilderness by the Spirit to be exposed to the temptations of the devil; v. 1; that after having fasted forty days and forty nights He became hungry, and was accosted by the tempter with a request that he would work a miracle for his own sustenance, if He were, as He had been proVOL. V. New Serics.

claimed from heaven, the Son of God; v. 2, 3; that he repelled the temptation by an appropriate quotation from the Scriptures of the Old Testament; v. 4; that the devil next conducts our Savior to one of the highest parts of the temple, which stood in the midst of Jerusalem, and proposes that he should cast himself down, in order to experience the fulfilment of a divine promise made to all the children of God; v. 5, 6; that Christ repelled the temptation by another quotation from Scripture; v. 7; that the devil again conducts him to the top of a very high mountain, spreads before him the wealth, power, and grandeur, of the whole world, and offers to give them to Him, on the single condition that He will prostrate himself before the giver, and worship him; v. 8, 9; that our Savior repels this third temptation by a third quotation from Scripture, and banishes Satan from His presence with indignation, and a tone of infinite superiority to the tempter and all his machinations; v. 10; that the tempter, being foiled, leaves our Savior, and angels come and serve Him; v. 11; that Christ, hearing of the seizure of John, left Nazareth and dwelt in Capernaum, so that a prophecy of Isaiah was accomplished; 12-16; that mankind without the Gospel are in a state of utter moral darkness; v. 16; that when our Savior first came to reside at Capernaum he made proclamation of the necessity of a moral change in the character of men generally, so that they might profit by the Gospel dispensation which was about to be revealed; v. 17; that Christ chose his four first disciples, afterward

to become apostles, from among the fishermen of Galilee; v. 18--22; that Christ publicly taught throughout all Galilee, proclaiming the glad tidings of the kingdom, healing every species of sickness, and delivering from the power of evil spirits all who were possessed by them; that these wonderful events carried His fame through all Syria; and that multitudes followed him from the neighboring territories; ν. 23-25.

Among the implied doctrines contained in this chapter, we observe, that here is taught the existence of two intelligent agents; one, the Spirit, who afterwards is revealed as the third person in the ever blessed Trinity; the other, the devil, the false accuser, the tempter, the great enemy of God and man; v. 1; that Christ was truly man, being subject to human passions; v. 3; that the best way to resist temptation is to resort to Scripture; v.4, 7, 10; that Scripture may be quoted for any purpose, however diabolical,and by any party, however, unprincipled; v. 6; that the proper way to correct a misapplication of a particular passage of Scripture is by comparing it with other passages; v. 7; that, therefore, every person ought to be acquainted with Scripture, as every person is exposed to temptation; that there are good angels, who delighted to minister to the Savior while on earth; v. 11; that it is sometimes prudent to yield to injustice, and to avoid exposing one's self to wicked men; v. 12; that mankind are so depraved as to need a thorough change before they can enjoy the Gospel; v. 17; and that malignant spirits were permitted to

torment some individuals, at least, among the people of Syria; v. 24.

Miscellaneous Remarks.

It is utterly inconceivable to me, that the Spirit should be introduced, as He is in the first verse, if an attribute of God, as Socinians assert, or a mere abstract quality, were intended.

The word translated Lord, v. 7 and 10, is Jehovah in the Hebrew of the Old Testament, from which these passages are quoted.

Our Savior suffered himself to be directed by Satan, so far as to go, at his instance, to a height of the temple, and to the top of a a mountain. These actions, it should be remembered, were strictly innocent and lawful. The moment the tempter proposed any thing wrong, that moment he was repelled. Perhaps our Savior's conduct, in this particular, is designed to teach us, that we should not be deterred from doing what is clearly innocent, though bad men or devils mean to take occasion of our actions to injure us: provided, however, we have some good object continually in view, and never expose ourselves ne edlessly to temptation.

Christ says, v. 19, I will make you fishers of men. Considering that the conversion and salvation of men are the peculiar work of God, does not Christ here assume the divine prerogative of saving men by his own inherent power? He certainly does not intimate the necessity of any power superior to his own. And in the performance of these first miracles described by the evangelist, it does not appear, that our Sav

ior declared himself to work miracles in consequence of derived power. On the contrary, the whole narration strongly implies, that He healed the sick, and cast out evil spirits, by his own independent control over all natural causes.

On our Savior's temptation it may be observed, that He shewed himself perfectly superior to the undue influence of the human passions to which he was subject. The passion of hunger, for instance, which he doubtless experienced to an excessive degree, is perhaps the most uncontrollable of all the passions. Yet he remained unmoved by its highest paroxysm, nor would seek its alleviation in any method suggested by the subtle tempPHILALETHES.

ter.

EDITORIAL REMARKS.

We are informed that several clerical gentlemen, who consider themselves as included in the liberal party, have manifested extreme displeasure at a passage in the second number of Plain Scripture Readings, which was published in the Panoplist for February last. The passage referred to contains the assertion, 'that the liberal party in England, and the liberal party in Boston and the Vicinity, have obtruded the Improved Version upon the world, and have exerted themselves much to obtain for it a circulation.' p. 397. This assertion was declared to be "a malignant slander" by a member of the Boston Association, at a regular meeting of that body; and other opprobrious epithets were called forth of a character

not less indicative of strong feeling. Now it is evident, that the assertion above quoted can be no slander if it is strictly true. We hold ourselves religiously bound not only not to assert ourselves, but also not to suffer any correspondent to assert, through the medium of our pages, any fact which we have not good reason to believe to be true; especially a fact, which may affect, in any manner, the reputation of an individual or a body of men: Should we, notwithstanding, be unintentionally drawn into error, and be so unhappy as to convey an injurious imputation on the character of any man, or any body of men, we should consider it our duty to make all the reparation in our power, however ungraciously the error might be pointed out, or whatever unmerited bitterness of reproach we might have experienced. Under the charge in question we feel at perfect ease, and are satisfied, as we have no doubt every impartial reader will be satisfied also, that the assertion complained of is strictly and literally true. But before we proceed to adduce any proof, it may be well to describe "the liberal party," as we understand that designation.

And, first, we do not mean to convey either praise or dispraise by the epithet liberal. We mean not to admit, by the use of this word, that the party are, what the word naturally imports, candid, ingenuous, free from bigotry and prejudice; nor do we mean to imply, by way of irony, that they are the reverse of all this, uncandid, disingenuous, slaves to bigotry and prejudice. We utterly abhor every attempt to settle a dispute by fixing an opprobrious epithet upon an adversary. While there is a difference of opinion among men, however, and while we are obliged to use human language, we must have some words to designate the different classes of men, who hold different opinions. The least exceptionable words for this purpose of which we can conceive, are appellatives derived from proper names, such as Calvinists, Arminians, &c. President Edwards has shewn,* with his usual candor, good sense, and clearness of reasoning, that no just objection can be made to the use of such appellatives. But new parties are perpetually forming, which cannot be designated in this manner: what is to be done in these cases? The best that can be done, in our opinion, is, to yield to these parties some epithet of which they seem fond, without admitting its justice or converting it into a sarcasm. Let the words, which are used to point out different classes of men, be used for the mere purpose of designating the persons who belong to a class, and not at all for the purpose of describing their character. Let the estimation, in which any class of persons ought to be heid, be formed, not from the meaning of the name which they have chosen, or which has been fixed upon them by their opponents, but from more infallible sources.

The persons composing the party, which we now have in view, are often described, in publications under their own patronage, as liberal men: it

*See the preface to his Treatise on the Will.

cannot surely give them just offence if we use the same epithet, after the explanation already offered. And, to exhibit our meaning more fully, we take the liberty of saying, that should we ever apply the word orthodox to the class of persons with whom we agree on theological subjects, it will be far from our intention to imply, from the meaning of the term, that these persons are of course right and all others wrong. This word, if used at all, will be used from necessity, and for the want of some other word which would be equally well understood to designate the persons intended.

But, secondly, we will endeavor to state, as briefly as possible, several particulars, which will show the acceptation in which we use the designation of "the liberal party."

It will easily be conceived to be a difficult matter to define any party, which embraces a considerable number of individuals, so as to include every individual of the party, and exclude all others. Yet it is by no means difficult to make a definition sufficiently accurate for ordinary purposes, and one which, with suitable qualifications, will do injustice to no one. For the sake of illustration, let us refer to the two great political parties in this country. Either of these parties can be so designated in a few words, as that every candid man will admit the general accuracy of the designation; and yet every individual member of each party might not come strictly within the designation of the party to which he in reality belongs, and to which he gives his influence. The same remark will apply to the different classes of men who hold different religious opinions; and we are confident in saying, that the liberal party in New England is as well defined, as political parties usually are, and that the members who compose it are recognized with little danger of mistake. Their manner of preaching, of praying, of conversing, of writing, is perfectly well known and understood. It may not be amiss, however, to particularize some of the characteristics by which the members of this party are, and have been, distinguished.

1. The clergy of this party, generally, either omit, or oppose, both in their prayers and preaching, all the principal religious doctrines which are commonly called the doctrines of the Reformation. These doctrines

are clearly defined in the Assembly's Catechism, and are, as we believe, among the fundamental truths of the Christian religion. It is hardly necessary to add, that the doctrine of the Trinity, the divinity of Christ, the personality of the Holy Spirit, the native and total depravity of man, regeneration by the su pernatural agency of the Spirit, justification by faith alone, election, the divine decrees, the atonement, the perseverance of the saints, the endless punishment of the impenitently wicked, and other doctrines closely connected with these, are thus omitted, or opposed.

2. All those who conducted, fostered, or encouraged the Anthology, after its character was developed, and especially those who approved of the theological part of that work, must be classed with the liberal party. We

do not mean to include every subscriber; for there are probably, at least a few subscribers to every periodical work, who disapprove of its character and tendency, but who take it from curiosity or some other motive. When the devotedness of the Anthology to party purposes is considered; when the unbounded and indiscreet profusion of praise, which it was accustomed to pour forth so lavishly upon a certain class of persons, and the snarling, contemptuous manner in which it generally spoke of others of an opposite stamp, are called to mind; no one but a partisau, it will be admitted, could approve ove of that publication: and certainly no party but the one in question could expect to be profited by it.

3.

The patrons and supporters of the General Repository belong to the liberal party, except a few subscribers on the principles above stated.

4. To the same party must be referred all who represent their opponents as denying the Scriptures to be the only independent rule of faith, when in fact no man can be found who makes this denial; all who raise a vehement clamor against creeds, confessions, and catechisms, and yet have no objection to deluging the country with catechisms of their own; all who are opposed to ecclesiastical discipline of every kind, in cases where doctrines only are concerned; all who admit members into their churches without requiring any evidence of personal religion, or even of seriousness, on the general confession that Jesus was the Messiah; and all who oppose examining candi