world; and Origen gave the same reply that is given at the present day. Truly, 'There is no new thing under the sun.'

Many other passages equally appropriate and decisive I had noted for quotation, but I fear that my remarks have been already too far protracted. This pagan philosopher, who was the first that ever made a philosophical attack on Christianity, used for substance the same arguments that are now urged against the evangelical system. I repeat the assertion, that these are the first objections which we know to have been made against Christianity by the heathen philosophers. Such was the shape in which this religion presented itself to them, and such was the mode in which the early Fathers were obliged to meet their assaults. If there are any such objections on record as the assumption of Priestley supposes, of an earlier date, let the passages be quoted, that we may see and believe. Till such evidence is produced, which, so far as I know, never yet has been, (the assertion has been often made and repeated, but a single clear, decisive passage in proof of it, from the philosophers or Fathers, I have never seen ;) till such evidence is produced, we must be content to judge according to the evidence which we possess.

If the Fathers did invent the doctrine of the Deity of Christ, in order to secure respect for their religion from philosophic pagans, they surely were most unfortunate in their choice of means; for, from the very first, nothing so much excited the contempt of heathen philosophers as this same doctrine. But the primitive Fathers were not thus weak or wicked. They maintained the doctrine of Christ crucified, as it had been taught them by the Apostles; Christ crucified, to the Jews a stumbling block and to the Greeks foolishness; but to them that are saved, both Jews and Greeks, Christ the power of God and the wisdom of God.' In this would we most earnestly endeavor to imitate their example. Deo soli gloria, omnia hominum idola pereant.

ARE THE NATURAL AFFECTIONS HOLY?

THE opposers of Evangelical religion seem not to have determined this question so definitively as perhaps they imagine. When told of the entire depravity of the unrenewed heart, they always appeal to the natural affections, as proof that there is something morally good, something holy in man by nature. They tell us how tenderly parents love their children, and children their parents; how deeply some persons, who make no pretensions to Evangelical religion, appear to feel for objects in distress, and how

ready they are to afford relief. Feelings of this kind, they insist, are real goodness, holiness, and consequently, the natural heart is not entirely depraved, and needs rather to be mended than changed, reformed than renewed, in order to prepare its possessor for heaven.

But these same persons-when hearing of revivals of religion, when told of the ardent love, the deep repentance, the lively faith, the animating hopes, the zeal, the fervor, of new born souls -are wont to exclaim, Of what avail is all this! It is mere sympathy a mere gush of animal feeling-an excitement of the natural affections-a tumult of the passions! There is no religion, no goodness in it. It will soon subside, and leave the subjects of it no better than they were before.'-Now these gentlemen are welcome to take whichever side of the question before us they please. But they certainly ought to confine themselves to one side. They ought not to be shuffling here and there, to say one thing and the other, just as their inclinations or their exigences demand. We hope they will settle the question among themselves, and with as little delay as possible, whether the natural affections are holy or not, and adopt some theory on the subject by which they are willing to abide.

Evangelical Christians, in general, have no difficulty in regard to this point. They have ascertained to their satisfaction that the natural affections are not holy, and consequently, that the possession of such affections by unregenerate men, is no proof that their moral natures are not entirely depraved. And so far as Christian teachers have evidence that affections of this sort mingle with revivals of religion, (and without doubt they often do mingle with them in some degree) they attach no value to these affections, and warn others not to place the least dependence upon them. They make a wide distinction between the mere sympathies of nature and holy love, and insist perpetually, that "without holiness, no man can see the Lord "—" without faith, it is impossible to please God." CONSISTENCY.

REVIEW S.

Memoirs of the Life, Character, and Writings of the Rev. MATTHEW HENRY. By J. B. WILLIAMS, Esq. F. S. A. First American Edition. Boston: Peirce & Williams, Philadelphia Tower & Hogan. 1830. pp. 348.

THOSE familiar with the Commentary and other valuable writings of Matthew Henry will desire an acquaintance with his life

and character. The means of gratifying so natural a desire are furnished in the volume before us.

Matthew Henry was the second son of the excellent Philip Henry, and was born at Broad Oak, in Flintshire, Oct. 18, 1662. His father was one of the two thousand confessors, who were ejected from their livings, and forbidden "to exercise their high vocation," by the famous act of uniformity. Matthew was born only a few months after this sweeping act was enforced against them. "At a very early period, his mind displayed the vigor and acuteness for which, through life, it was remarkable; and it is credibly stated, that, at the age of three years, he could read in the Bible with distinctness and observation." His early education was systematically religious, and the means used with him were signally blessed. While yet a child, before he was eleven years old, he was brought to a saving knowledge of himself, and of the way of salvation by a Redeemer. The account which he has left of his religious exercises at that period, and of his careful and scriptural examination of his hope in Christ, is highly pleasing and satisfactory. Under date of Dec. 7, 1673, he says,

"I, having been engaged in serious examination-what hope I have, that when I die, and leave this earthly tabernacle, I shall be received into heavenhave found several marks that I am a child of God. His ministers say there is true conversion, where there have been covenant transactions between God and the soul. And 1 found that there have been such between God and my soul, and I hope in truth and righteousness. If I never did this before, I do it now; for I take God in Christ to be mine. I give up myself to be his in the bond of an everlasting covenant never to be forgotten. But hath it been in truth? As far as I know my own heart, I do it in truth and sincerity. I did it December 7, and September 5, and October 13, and many other times. I do it every day. Where there hath been true repentance for sin; and grief, and shame, and sorrow for it, as to what is past; with all the ingredients of it, as confession, aggravation, self-judging, self-condemning, &c. And I have found this in me, though not in that measure that I could desire. I have been heartily sorry for what is past. I judge myself before the Lord, blushing for shame that I should ever affront him as I have done.-But hath this sorrow been true? As far as I know my own heart, it hath been true. 'But I sin often.' I lament and bewail it before the Lord, and I endeavor, by the grace of God, to do so no more. Where there is true love of God. For to love the Lord our God with all our soul, and with all our strength, is better than whole burnt-offerings and sacrifices. Now, as far as I know my own heart, I love God in sincerity. But is that love indeed sincere? As far as I can judge, it is so: for,

"1. I love the people of God; all the Lord's people shall be my people. And,

"2. 1 love the word of God. I esteem it above all. I find my heart so inclined. I desire it as the food of my soul. I greatly delight in it, both in reading and hearing of it; and my soul can witness subjection to it in some meas

ure."

Our readers will bear in mind, that these are the words of a child only eleven years old; and that he here refers to what he had experienced some considerable time previous. Let none persuade themselves that they are too young to be converted, to examine their own hearts, and to indulge a well founded hope in the Saviour.

As young Henry had given his heart to God, it was one of the first purposes of his life to serve him in the Gospel of his Son. Being cut off, as a dissenter, from the honors and privileges of the University, his preparatory education was acquired under the direction of his honored father, and by such other private means as the age afforded. With the Latin, Greek, and Hebrew languages he was quite familiar, having been instructed in them from his childhood. He afterwards acquired a knowledge of the French and, as was not uncommon in those times, he added the study of law to that of divinity, before he entered on the work of preaching. He was ordained in London privately, (such were the difficulties of the times) in May, 1687, and in June of the same year, commenced his public ministry at Chester. This city, with the surrounding villages, constituted the scene of nearly all his labors. He continued here until 1712, a period of twenty-five At this time, by the pressing importunity of a destitute congregation, and the advice of many friends, he was induced to remove to Hackney, near London. But his course on earth was drawing to a close. Already worn out with long-continued, unremitted studies and labors, he survived his removal but about two years. He died of apoplexy, while on his return from Chester to London, June 22, 1714. His remains were removed to Chester, to rest with those of a deceased wife, and of his former beloved people.

years.

This brief sketch details some of the leading incidents in the life of Henry: The filling up will be found in the volume before us. A memoir of him was published soon after his decease by Mr. Tong, a cotemporary minister, and an intimate friend; but this, we are told, was not quite satisfactory, either to his family or the public. The memoir before us is very full and complete; and it is matter of surprise, that, after the lapse of more than a century, so abundant materials remained for its compilation.

Mr. Henry's published works are numerous. Those by which he is chiefly known in this country are, his Commentary, his Discourse on Meekness, and his Communicant's Companion. The Commentary was commenced in Nov. 1704; but the author lived to complete it only through the Acts. Dr. Watts, in his copy of this work, upon a blank leaf at the beginning of the last volume, wrote the following statement:

"The Reverend Mr. Matthew Henry before his death had made some small preparations for this last volume. The Epistle to the Romans, indeed, was explained so largely by his own hand, that it needed only the labor of epitomizing. Some parts of the other Epistles were done, but very imperfectly, by himself; and a few other hints had been taken in short-hand from his public and private Expositions on some of the Epistles.

"By these assistances the ministers, whose names are here written, have endeavored to complete this work in the style and method of the author: viz. "Romans, Mr. [afterwards] Dr. John Evans; 1 Corinthians, Mr. Simon Browne; 2 Corinthians, Mr. David Mayo; Galatians, Mr. Joshua Bayes;

Ephesians, Mr. Samuel Rosewell; Philippians and Colossians, Mr. [afterwards Dr.] William Harris; 1 Thessalonians and 2 Thessalonians, Mr. Daniel Mayo; 1 Timothy and 2 Timothy, Mr. Benjamin Andrews Atkinson; Titus and Philemon, Mr. Jeremiah Smith; Hebrews, Mr. William Tong; James, Mr. William Wright; 1 Peter, Mr. Zech. Merrill; 2 Peter, Mr. Joseph Hill; 1, 2, and 3 John, Mr. John Reynolds of Shrewsbury; Jude, Mr. John Billingsley; Revelation, Mr. William Tong."

Upon all that bears the name of Henry, "the image and superscription of originality is fixed, strongly and indelibly;" the last volume of the Commentary will be found very different from those which precede it, and in our estimation much inferior. The style of Henry is thus characterized by his biographer :

"There is, in all his works, an entire absence of garishness and puerility; they never pander to the odious impertinence of vain and mere curious speculators; neither are there any meretricious ornaments; instruction is never made contemptible by empty declamation. No inquisitive theologian, how rigid soever his fancy, need fear discovering in them the mawkish effusions of scholastic pedantry. He may be amused sometimes by colloquialisms approaching to undue familiarity; by associations bordering upon the ludicrous; by antitheses, too frequent and too jingling; and, occasionally perhaps, he may be surprised by typical and allegorical interpretations carried to excess. But he is in no danger of being provoked by silly airs, and self-complacent tones; and, least of all, being fatigued by monotonous stupidity. All is modest and serious'; intimately connected with the conscience; and, without the slightest parade, evidential of extensive knowledge, both of books and men; of accurate and learned research; and true genius. It is by no means necessary to maintain that he equals Dr. Owen in profound and continuous thinking; or Dr. Barrow, in accuracy and elaboration; or Dr. Bates, in affluent phraseology; or Jeremy Taylor, and John Howe, in noble daring and seraphic elevation. It is praise sufficient to claim for him the fancy of Quarles, the affection of Flavel, the gentleness of Herbert, the good sense of Tillotson, and the terse sententiousness and antithetical point of Bishop Hall."

The private character of Mr. Henry is represented as irreproachable. As a son, a brother, a husband, a father, a neighbor, a citizen, a friend, he was a shining example to all around him.

"He was, in every sense of the phrase, a domestic man. He rejoiced 'in the wife of his youth;' and studiously contributed to the happiness of his household. Instead, like many, of going abroad for enjoyment, he sought and found it in his own habitation. Recording a journey to a distance to preach, he says —' In the evening I came to Chester late, and through much rain; but it was home.'

"His whole conduct to his offspring was marked by kindness. The advice he gave to others, he acted upon himself. Do all you can to make your chil dren love home.' Continual chiding and finding fault,' he abhorred. 'Remember,' he would say, that children are but children. If parents would not correct them except in a praying frame, when they can lift their hands without wrath,' it would neither provoke God nor them.-He labored to counteract the first risings of evil tempers in his children. He often asked them, and he advised others to do the same- Whom is it that God resists ?* What is the first of the seven things which the Lord hates?'t

Mr. Henry was a model of diligence in the improvement of time.

"Value your souls," said he, you do, take heed of idleness.

and you will value your time. Whatever That is the devil's anvil, on which he hammers out many temptations.'-Of sleep, he remarked, that it is God's gift to