been considerably to the north of the customary road. And, second, the different points indicated by Eusebius and St. Jerome, as well as recent travellers, lie upon the low shore of the lake, and not upon the range of noble hills to the west, where we know the city "set upon a hill" must have been. It is possible, as in the case of Tyre and Jericho, that a second city may have inherited the name of the first, upon a changed position, and with less permanency and grandeur in its modernized buildings. And this would account for the confusion which is now irremediable. The more practised guides, accustomed to furnish the traveller every thing for which he asks, imagining they are doing a service by providing another altar for the offering of pious enthusiasm, will continue to find a local habitation for this wandering ghost of a town; but the natives know not the name, as we ascertained upon the spot; and the conclusion of Dr. Robinson is irresistible, that no one place can be found answering all the requisitions of the sacred history. A fountain, called Ain-el-Tin, is the least suspicious candidate, and there are certainly ruins of some important towns at this nameless and lovely point.

While we differ with M. De Sauley in many of his views, we would not withhold the credit of having completed three months of exposure, fatigue, hardship, and peril, with no injury to himself or his party, with a thorough study of the botany and entomology of the land of promise, and with an untiring effort to increase our imperfect knowledge of Bible lands. If he has not brought to light much that is valuable, it is because it did not lie within his reach along the path which he chose. There are points, requiring further elucidation, which fell not within his enthusiastic grasp. Something might be discovered by extensive excavations in and around Damascus, among those vast mounds which denote buried remains of antiquity. The valley south of the Dead Sea might be explored by a suitable party, without any serious peril of life or health, and it would be some satisfaction to know even that nothing is to be known there of an outlet of the Jordan, and of ancient towns and temples. But the subterranean vaults beneath the Mosque of Omar will by and by be thrown open to

Christian curiosity, and may reveal to us some further memorials of Jewish greatness or sanctity. It was a significant type of the times, that, through the influence of his friend, the Consul at Jerusalem, our French savant was admitted in European dress within the sacred inclosure, termed by the Turkish worshippers "Harum." One step more, and, even should Palestine still groan beneath Moslem oppression, a firman and a government officer will usher European inquirers through these deserted crypts, and either shed a flood of light upon ancient story, or prove that, as far as the Jew is concerned, its record is sealed and laid away until the secrets of all hearts shall be disclosed.

F. W. H.

ART. VI. PROFESSOR MAURICE AND HIS HERESY.*

THE exclusion of Mr. Maurice, the author of the books mentioned at the foot of this page, from his Professorship in King's College, London, for no other reason than that of maintaining what he believes to be important religious truth, will draw to his Essays and Letters an attention which they would not have gained by their intrinsic merits, as contributions to theology. The author is known as a prominent member of what is called the Tractarian party in the Church of England. The republication in this country of his works on "The Kingdom of Christ," "The Religions of the World," and "The Prophets and Kings of the Old Testament," relieves us of what would otherwise be a difficult task, that of giving a distinct idea of his peculiar character as a thinker and writer. Those who are acquainted with the books above mentioned

1. Theological Essays. By F. D. MAURICE, Chaplain of Lincoln's Inn, and Professor of Divinity in King's College, London. Cambridge (Eng.). 1853.

2. The Word Eternal and the Punishment of the Wicked: a Letter to the Rev. Dr. Jelf, Canon of Christ Church and Principal of King's College. By F. D. MAURICE, Chaplain of Lincoln's Inn. From the Second London Edition. New York: C. S. Francis & Co. Boston: Crosby, Nichols, & Co. 1854.

know that he is capable of pouring forth from a rich and full mind a stream of thought on moral and religious subjects in elegant and often eloquent language. He has an imagination and a ready sympathy, which enable him, as in the work on the Prophets and Kings, to excite a fresh interest in states of society and habits of thought and action long past.

We regret to say, that in his Theological Essays he appears to less advantage than in his other works. He has not the philosophical or critical mind which fits him to write on theology, properly so called. Whoever shall consult these Essays with the purpose of obtaining exact knowledge, or clearer views of any of the difficult subjects discussed in them, will be sure to be disappointed. The author seems to look at all subjects, as from a great distance, as if he were above the necessity of coming into close contact with them. Hence his views are so obscure and vague, and his statements so general and indefinite, that we are often left in doubt what his opinions really are, or whether we agree with him or differ from him. His mere assumptions, as the bases of argument, are so frequent, his reasoning so loose and incon clusive, and his notions in regard to the interpretation of language so lax and arbitrary, that he seldom leads one to any conclusion on which he can rest with satisfaction. What shall we think of a writer, who undertakes to make it appear, by a show of argument, that the Athanasian Creed is not deficient in charity, and condemns no man for his religious opinions?

We by no means intend to say, however, that the Essays are worthless. They contain a current of fresh, and, as it were, extemporaneous thought, having a nearer or remoter relation to the subjects under consideration, which, coming from a very earnest and religious mind, possess a considerable degree of interest, though they seldom conduct us to any definite conclusion.

The Essays, as it appears, were originally sermons, which the author preached to his own congregation in the interval between Quinquagesima Sunday and Trinity Sunday. "I did not," he says, "allude to Unitarians while I was preaching. I have said scarcely any thing to them in writing, which I do not think just as applicable to the great body of my contemporaries, of all VOL. LVI. 4TH S. VOL. XXI. NO. II.

23

classes and opinions." But a certain lady having in her will desired him to apply a small sum to purposes in which he knew she was interested, he understood her special meaning to be "that of laying him under obligation to write or procure to be written some book especially addressed to Unitarians."

Throwing his sermons, therefore, into the form of essays, and making some alterations and additions, he has published the present volume for the special benefit of Unitarians. Alas that in the discharge of his benevolent labor and sacred trust, designed to rescue others from heresy, he should himself have been dismissed as a heretic from his theological professorship by members of a Church which he loves with an almost blind attachment!

The work is evidently the production of a liberal mind and a kind heart. His sympathies are too wide and deep to exclude Unitarians from his respectful regards. Here we find no bigoted denunciation, no aristocratic contempt. If the author's statement of Unitarian views is not always accurate, it is never the result of wilful rversion.

The Essays are sixteen in number: - I. On Charity. II. On Sin. III. On the Evil Spirit. IV. On the Sense of Righteousness in Men, and their Discovery of a Redeemer. V. On the Son of God. VI. On the Incarnation. VII. On the Atonement. VIII. On the Resurrection of the Son of God from Death, the Grave, and Hell. IX. On Justification by Faith. X. On Regeneration. XI. On the Ascension of Christ. XII. On the Judgment Day. XIII. On Inspiration. XIV. On the Personality and Teaching of the Holy Spirit. XV. On the Unity of the Church. XVI. On the Trinity in Unity. And the Conclusion, On Eternal Life and Eternal Death.

The method pursued by Professor Maurice in the discussion of these important subjects is very different from that of most writers on Christian theology. He seldom refers to passages or texts of Scripture as direct proofs of a doctrine, and, in fact, makes little account of the common rules and principles of interpretation. Spiritual discernment is the great instrument, on which he relies for ascertaining the meaning of the Scriptures. We must interpret them, he says, by the aid of the same Spirit

by which they were dictated. Now we have as high an opinion as Professor Maurice of the importance of the spiritual mind, or a mind under the inspiration of the Divine Spirit, for the attainment of religious truth. But it is impossible that the Divine Spirit should contradict the plainest laws of language, founded as they are in the common sense of mankind, or authorize us to maintain that to be the meaning of a writer, which, according to the laws of language, is not his meaning. The Divine Spirit, exciting or enlightening our reason, may teach us to pronounce the meaning of any writer to be erroneous; but it is a prostitution of reason to falsify the plain meaning of a writer, and substitute our ideas for his, in accommodation to what we may regard as the truth taught by the Spirit, or to the demands of science. It is painful to observe, that some of our scientific men have stooped to such a miserable practice for the purpose of reconciling the established conclusions of astronomy or geology with the conceptions of the ancient Jewish historians.

The principal test of truth, to which Professor Maurice seems to resort in the volume under consideration, is the adaptation of a doctrine to satisfy the wants of the human soul. His aim is to show that the doctrines of the Anglican Church, as he understands them, supply spiritual wants, for which the doctrines of other Christians, particularly the Unitarians, are not sufficient. There can be no doubt, that this consideration, applied with philosophic discrimination, candor, and comprehensiveness, with a mind capable of distinguishing the wants of human nature from the yearnings of men in a particular state of culture and religious opinion, and the essential principles of religion from opinions and forms accidentally associated with them, will lead to important results. But it is to be remembered, that religious persons, having already false or defective notions of God, or losing sight of some of the attributes which are essential to his character, frequently want what they ought not to have. The Israelites, in the time of Moses, thought their relig ious wants would be best supplied with a golden calf; and Aaron, if he had written on the subject, would probably have maintained that calf-worship was better suited to the wants of human nature than the higher religion of