Though hazy mist and gloom the prospect shroud,
I see stupendous changes through the cloud,
Rais'd on the base of freedom, equal laws,
Zeal burning solely in the public cause,
And pure unsullied faith; but Heav'n denies
The glorious blazon to a mortal's eyes.

"So, prince! from our exalted station here
I now restore thee to thy native sphere."

Then, her white hand presented to the king,
Down the slope stairs, in many a spiral ring,
They sink with sliding motion. Soon the floor
Receives them, and they pass the turret's door.
As through the hall immeasurably wide
They softly as the mists of ev'ning glide,
Thron'd on his globe of glowing flame the God
Gave sign of favour with a gracious nod;
The temple shook, redoubling thunder roll'd,
And the vast gates spontaneously unfold.

Through these they bend their speedy march, nor stay
On the smooth steps, but wind their easy way
Prone through the liquid ether. Swift their flight,
Yet long; so boundless were the fields of light..
Suns, as they urge the rapid journey, turn
To glimm'ring stars, and stars enlarging burn
Broad as the lamps of day. At length a small,
Though shining circlet, this terrestrial ball,
On Alfred's eyes a few loose sparkles shed,
But soon the orb in larger compass spread
Gave land and ocean, hill and plain to view;
Near and more near the flying travelers drew.
Then gently as the wavering flakes of snows
Dropp'd on the spot from which at first they rose.'

P. 201.

The goddess here taking the wreath from her arms, crowns Alfred, and then ascends to heaven.

There are beautiful passages in this poem; but they are as clumsily connected as the scenes in a pantomime. Where Alfred is introduced, he should be the actor, not the spectator. The character is too great to be thus trifled with. While, however, we altogether condemn the plan of the poem, it is just to allow the author praise for the merit of the execution.

ART. V.-Discourses on the Scriptural Doctrines of Atonement and Sacrifice with additional Remarks on the principal Arguments advanced, and the Mode of reasoning employed, by the Opponents of those Doctrines, as held by the established Church: and an Appendix, containing some Strictures on Mr. Belsham's Review of Mr. Wilberforce's Treatise. By the Rev. William Magee, D. D. &c. 8vo. 9s. Boards. Cadell and Davies. 1801.

THE doctrine of the atonement has been made a stumblingblock to some sects of Christians, from the æra of the Reformation, by the retention of the language used in the church of Rome on the sacrifice, as it is called, of the mass; and to unbelievers it becomes a sufficient ground for the rejection of the whole of Christianity. On these accounts, a full explanation and vindication of the doctrine maintained by the church of England come with singular propriety from an academic who is highly distinguished in one of the sister universities of the united empire; yet we cannot but remark, with astonishment, that he seems to be but little acquainted with the state of Unitarianism in the southern part of this island, and particularly with the doctrines maintained by many of our academics in the university of Cambridge. His account of Unitarianism, or, as it is most presumptuously called, rational Christianity, he takes almost exclusively from Mr. Belsham, and regards this gentleman, and his friend Dr. Priestley, as the heads, if not the founders, of the sect. In this, however, there is much want of information; and it is an error into which numbers, owing to the celebrity of Dr. Priestley's name, and the circumstances of his life, are perpetually falling. Unitarians may properly, perhaps, be divided into two classes-those who were born and educated in the church, and those who have received their education among the dissenters. Of the latter, a very great portion, we believe, look principally to the writings of Dr. Priestley; but it is rather singular, that, among the former, these writings are very little studied, and seldom if ever appealed to as an authority. The remote heads of the former class are sir Isaac Newton and Mr. Locke; the latter of whom has had few followers in the university of which he was a member, and the college from which he was expelled. In Cambridge, the sect boasts of several disciples; but it has slowly excited notice; and towards the latter end of the last century alone can it appeal for any great degree of celebrity. Jackson, and Hartley, and Jortin, and Sykes, in various ways promoted the cause; but as the ancient philosophy was divided into classes diverging from the tenets of some principal teacher, so, in the university of Cambridge, a new school may be said to have been instituted under the auspices of Law, bishop of Carlisle. His disciples were Paley,

and Law, his son, joint tutors of Christ college; Jebb; Hughes of Queen's; Watson, now bishop of Llandaff; Tyrwhitt of Jesus; and others of about the same standing, who have been fol lowed by several in the ensuing academical generation, as it may be called; some of whom have quitted the church, or, remaining in it, refuse the preferment to which they would have succeeded if their scruples could have been removed. The doctrine of the atonement maintained in this school is very different from that asserted by Dr. Priestley and Mr. Belsham: and several of the Cambridge academics have seceded from the Unitarian Society established in London, on account of the manner in which this doctrine is there explained, and the ascription of simply a prophetic character to our Saviour. To the historian of these opinions we recommend a sedulous perusal of the writings of bishop Law, the father; and particularly a comparison of the different editions of his works; whence may be traced, in a very curious and remarkable manner, the changes in his opinion concerning the pre-existence of Christ: and, in perusing the writings of this school, it should be carefully noted whether the authors still remain in or have seceded from the church; while the judgement might be advantageously exercised on the declarations of the one class, and the silence of the other, as to several particular doctrines,

Had these distinctions been known to the learned author of the Discourses before us, we cannot avoid thinking that he would have rendered them more instructive and important. The question, with respect to mere deists and others who disbelieve revelation altogether, is of little consequence; for if all their difficulties relative to the atonement were removed, they would not be a whit nearer the profession of Christianity. The question belongs purely to those who believe in the Scriptures of the Old and New Testament, while all that the mere light of nature suggests on such a subject may be omitted, in the in stance before us, as superfluous. The fall of man must be first allowed, after which the part Christ took in his recovery is to be discussed. That Jesus Christ was a prophet, that he rose from the dead, and that every man shall be raised from the dead hereafter, are doctrines admitted by all Christians, But while one sect of Christians is contented with these doctrines of universal accordance, others, with great reason, and with true emotions of gratitude, look up to our Saviour as not only a teacher of such doctrines, but a necessary instrument of our happiness in the future life. Here we applaud highly our preacher's remark on the objection to the doctrine of atonement, as founded on the divine implacability;' on which he very properly observes, that the sacrifice of Christ was never deemed by any, who did not wish to calumniate the doctrine of atonement, to have made God placable, but merely viewed as the

means appointed by divine wisdom by which to bestow forgiveness.' Here in effect the whole doctrine rests on this; and to us there seems nothing in it which may not be made level to the comprehension of every Christian. That Adam sinned, is a fact universally allowed: by the will of God the effects of that sin have fallen upon his issue. Christ obeyed even to the death of the cross by the will of God;-the effect of which obedience is blessing to all mankind.

But still it is urged, " in what way can the death of Christ, considered as a sacrifice of expiation, be conceived to operate to the remission of sins, unless by the appeasing a Being, who otherwise would not have forgiven us?"-to this the answer of the Christian is, "I know not, nor does it concern me to know, in what manner the sacrifice of Christ is connected with the forgiveness of sins-it is enough, that this is declared by God to be the medium, through which my salvation is effected-I pretend not to dive into the counsels of the Almighty-I submit to his wisdom-and I will not reject his grace, because his mode of vouchsafing it is not within my comprehension"- -but now let us try the doctrine of pure intercession by this same objection-ft has been asked, how can the sufferings of one Being be conceived to have any connexion with the forgiveness of another-let us likewise inquire how the meritorious obedience of one Being can be conceived to have any connexion with the pardon of the transgressions of another-or whether the prayer of a righteous Being, in behalf of a wicked person, can be imagined to have more weight in obtaining forgiveness for the transgressor, than the same supplication, seconded by the offering up of life itself, to procure that forgiveness?- -the fact is, the want of discoverable connexion has nothing to do with either-neither the sacrifice, nor the intercession, have [has], as far as we can comprehend, any efficacy whatever-all that we know, or can know of the one, or of the other, is, that it has been appointed as the means by which God has determined to act with respect to man-so that to object to one, because the mode of operation is unknown, is not only giving up the other, but the very notion of a mediator-and if followed on, cannot fail to lead to pure deism, and perhaps may not stop even there. P, 27.

On the declaration that our Saviour is the mean ordained by God for our future felicity, who hence becomes the head of the new creation, some difficulties occur in consequence of the use of the terms sacrifice, atonement, and propițiation-difficulties which arise perhaps from translating too literally every part of a figure. We say, in a figure common to every one, that a man sacrifices himself for his country; so did Christ for the good of mankind. The sacrifice is not supposed to require an altar or a priest; nor was there either in the death of Christ: yet, as similar effects flowed from the death of our Saviour as from the death of the lamb in the temple, he may, with propriety, be called the lamb, the sacrifice, the propitiation for our sins. That

these terms may be used, our author proves, with great force of reasoning, in his first discourse, which he concludes in the following manner.

If now upon the whole it has appeared that natural reason is unable to evince the efficacy of repentance-if it has appeared that, for the purpose of forgiveness, the idea of a mediatorial scheme is perfectly consistent with our ordinary notions-if it has appeared that revelation has most unequivocally pronounced, that through the mediation of Jesus Christ, the Son of God, our redemption has been effected-if it has appeared that Christ is declared to have effected that redemption by the sacrifice of himself for the sins of mankindif it has appeared that in the Scripture meaning of sacrifice for sin is included atonement for transgression-and if it has appeared that the expression has been applied to Christ, in the plain and literal sense of the word, as the propitiation of an offended God-I trust we are sufficiently fortified against the deist, who denies the divine mission; against the Socinian, who denies the redeeming mediation; and against the modern rationalizing Arian, who denies the expiatory sacrifice of Christ-in short, against all who would deprive us of any part of the precious benefits which on this day our Saviour died to procure for us-against all who would rob us of that humble feeling of our own insufficiency, which alone can give us an ardent and animating faith in the death and merits of our blessed Redeemer." P:43:

In the second discourse, the nature of the Jewish and other sacrifices is examined. Of these, that of Abel-and indeed the whole principle of sacrificing-is supposed to refer to the great sacrifice, that of Christ himself. The nicety of discrimination here adopted may seem unnecessary; and particularly so, since the instance of sacrifice selected by our author as peculiarly adapted to throw light upon that of our Saviour seems by no means adequate to the purpose.

Of the several sacrifices under the law, that one which seems most exactly to illustrate the sacrifice of Christ, and which is expressly compared with it by the writer to the Hebrews, is that which was offered for the whole assembly on the solemn anniversary of expiation-the circumstances of this ceremony, whereby atonement was to be made for the sins of the whole Jewish people, seem so strikingly significant that they deserve a particular detail. On the day appointed for this general expiation, the priest is commanded to offer a bullock and a goat as sin-offerings, the one for himself, and the other for the people-and having sprinkled the blood of these in due form before the mercy-seat, to lead forth a second goat, denominated the scape-goat; and after laying both his hands upon the head of the scape-goat, and confessing over him all the iniquities of the people, to put them upon the head of the goat, and to send the animal, thus bearing the sins of the people, away into the wilderness-thus expressing by an action, which cannot be misunderstood, that the atonement, which it is directly affirmed was to be effected