ness and knowledge. His learning is undoubted; and there is, occasionally, an unpretending originality in his criticisms and illustrations, which more popular commentators have failed in attaining. The reasoning contained in the passage which we have just cited from the fourth volume (quarto) of his great work on the Apostolical epistles, does not, by any means, satisfy us of the correctness of his opinion. It seems to be an inference rather peremptorily drawn from the sacred text, when it is assumed that Paul did not remain at Tarsus, "the time that was necessary for acquiring" a fair portion of Greek literature. The expressions used in the 26th chapter of the Acts, though rather vague in their import, certainly seem to imply that he came early to Jerusalem, and that his main application was to "the traditions of the fathers;" there is nothing, however, in these facts to invali date the probability that while at Tarsus, in early youth, he was instructed in the elements of classical literature, or to use Macknight's phrase; in the "Greek rhetorick and philosophy," nor is it likely that a man of so much mental activity as that uniformly exhibited by Saul of Tarsus, would neglect, when at Jerusalem, the prosecution of those studies which he had commenced in the schools of his native city. Let us not be misunderstood as affirming this; it might, or it might not, be as we have suggested; all that we are anxious to establish is that nothing in the history of the apostle's early life can be fairly alleged as disproving the hypothesis of his proficiency in general learning, and thus prejudging the appeal to his writings as containing the only satisfactory evidence for the decision of the question.

The Rev. Richard Cecil was a Christian of a much higher cast of character than Dr. Macknight,

There was a vigour and richnesss in his intellectual faculties, an evangelical soundness in his doctrinal views, and a clear strength in his modes of expression, which intitle him to a high rank among divines. In the golden volume which, under the title of his "Remains," was given to the world by the Rev. Josiah Pratt, Mr. C. grapples, in his own energetic way, with the main question, instead of amusing himself with the collateral points.

"In speaking of St. Paul, it has been usual to magnify his learning, among the many other great qualities which he possessed. That point seems never to have been satisfactorily made out.He was an educated Pharisee; but, farther than this, I think, we cannot go. His quotations from the Greek poets are not evidences of even a school-boy's learning in our day; for we forget, when we talk, of them, that he was a Roman quoting Greek. Nor do I see any thing more in his famous speech in the Areopagus, so often produced as evidence on this subject, than the line of argument to which a strong and energetic mind would lead him. If we talk of his talents, indeed, he rises almost beyond admiration: but they were talents of a certain order; and the very display which we have of them, seems a strong corroborative proof, that he is not to be considered as a profoundly learned man of his day. For instance, had he studied Aristotle, it would have been almost impossible but he must have caught some influence, which we should have seen in his writings. But there is nothing like the dry, logical, metaphysical character of that school; which yet had then given the law to the seats of science and philosophy. Instead of this, we see every where the copious, diffusive, declaiming, discursive; but sublime, and wise, and effective mind."-Cecil's Remains, 12mo.

his fathers, and the glosses of the Rabbins, and yet that, while all his compositions savour of the rich scriptural knowledge which he thus attained, he exhibits not the slightest symptom of that spirit of litigiousness and paltry cavilling which the approved Rabbinical commentators have invariably displayed, from the days in which our Lord reproved them for their disgraceful prevarications, down to the date of the latest publication of their laborious triflings.

Dr. Wardlaw's brief and incidental investigation of this question has all the well-known characteristics of his modes of thinking and writing. Calm, clear, and impartial in discussion, with a happy union of correctness and impressiveness in his style, he can never fail of affording gratification and instruction, even when he fails of securing entire conviction. In the present instance, we shall first give his sentiments at large, and then refer to a few considerations to which the advocates of the opinion now under consideration, do not appear to allow sufficient weight.

"The apostles were not only esteemed foolish by men; as far as regarded the learning, the philosophy, the wisdom of this world, they really were so. I need not stop to prove this, with respect to the fishermen of the lake of Gennesaret, or the rest of the twelve, chosen during our Lord's personal ministry.--The only one of the apostles who has been supposed an exception, is the writer of this epistle himself-Saul of Tarsus.

"On this subject, there is, perhaps, a tendency to extremes on both sides. That Paul was a proficient in Jewish learning, we are not left to doubt. He was brought up in Jerusalem, at the feet of Gamaliel, (and) taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the fathers--That he might enjoy, other wise, a good ordinary education, is very likely. But of the eminent learning, and high accomplishments, which some have fondly ascribed to him, the evidence has always appeared to me exceedingly scanty. I have little idea that he would at all have been admitted to rank as a learned man, by the philosophers and literati of Greece or of Rome: and CONG, MAG. SUPP. 1823.

I cannot but think the attempt injudicious, to fix upon him a character, to which he is so far from laying any claim, that, in the words before us, he evi, dently includes himself amongst the foolish and the weak, as distinguished from the wise and the mighty. I have in proportion as we invest this apostle called the attempt injudicious; because, with the attributes of extensive human erudition and captivating eloquence, we necessarily deduct both from the truth and from the force and conclusiveness of of his representation in this passage, the argument in support of the Gospel, drawn from the inadequacy, in a worldly point of view, of the instruments of its first propagation.

"It is true, this apostle, two or three times, quotes from the Greek poets. But the inference from this as to his general learning, has been too strongly drawn. Suppose a person, born of English parents, in a country where French was the prevailing language, were able to write and speak French, and on two or three occasions, were known to have

quoted a line of French poetry,--should slender evidence, to pronounce him a we think ourselves warranted, on such man of erudition, an eminent literary character, an accomplished scholar?* No, surely even although to this he occasional allusion to some of their pubshould add, in writing to Frenchmen, an lic spectacles, and well-known customs, as Paul does in writing to Greeks. it is on grounds such as these, that the tent-maker has at times been so liberally

Yet

An esteemed literary friend, a minister of the English Church, who heard. this discourse delivered, and who perfectly concurred in the views here given of the apostle Paul's supposed learning, mentioned to me, in conversation, immediately after, two things which had occurred to him: one of them fitted to confirm, and the other somewhat to modify, the aptness of the comparison here used. The first was, that the Greek language occupied at that time, as the general vehicle of international communication--the common language of Europe -a place similar to that which the French holds now. The second, that the art of printing and the state of society, in our times, had rendered the treasures of literature, of every description, so much more easily accessible than formerly, that the cases were not precisely parallel, and the inference from the one to the other might be too strongly drawn. I acquiesce in the correctness of both these remarks. I have no wish, that any argument should have more weight given to it than the truth of the case admits.

4. X

the schools. Still less was it likely to submit to such feeble restraints when called upon to identify itself with the grand theme of the Gospel ministry, and to give forth the lessons of eternity under the immediate inspiration of the Divine Spirit.

Dr. Wardlaw speaks in a tone approaching to the sarcastic, of the occasional quotations from the Greek poets, which the apostle condescended to introduce into his composition. To our minds the mere fact that he thus quoted, whether three or three hundred times, does not weigh a single feather in the controversy is itself perfectly decisive of his familiar acquaintance with the authors whose words he cited. On any other supposition we reduce St. Paul to the level of a writer who, deficient in his own stores, and not fairly licensed to avail himself of those of others, is yet anxious to make a parade of his learning, and to exhibit himself to advantage in a borrowed light. Whenever an author quotes skilfully and with effect, we should certainly take it into the account in any general estimate which we might be making of his acquaintance with books. On the same principle, when we find, on different occasions, St. Paul quoting promptly and a propos from the national and local literature of the people whom he is addressing, we are warranted in inferring his various and extensive knowledge. He was no pedant, no accumulator of common-place fragments, but he used citation with the same dexterity and discretion as he did all the other means of awakening and keeping alive the attention of those whom he addressed.

But the most effective illustratration of the character of St. Paul, as a man of learning, is to be found in the readiness and success with which he encountered the most accomplished debaters of

heathenism, upon their own ground. He never attempted to prescribe the laws, to arrange the lists, to adjust the barriers of controversy, but presented himself frankly and fearlessly to the contest, both with Greek and Jew, philosopher and peasant. Undoubtedly his main reliance was, as suggested by Dr. Wardlaw, on the promise of his divine Master to give him "a mouth and wisdom," but to bring this forward for the purpose of diminishing or explaining away the brilliant display of talent and power in the compositions of this great apostle, is to escape from the difficulty, not to meet it, to cut the knot, not to untie it. The Holy Spirit vouchsafes to employ sanctified means in the work of grace, and when we hear from the pulpit, or, in our closets, read the works which contain, the glowing effusions of human talent, informed and directed by His blessed influences, our admiration of the medium is entirely distinct from and perfectly compatible with the higher feeling produced by the conviction that a celestial agency has kindled and commanded the energy of genius, and that the latter has derived from it, considered as a special work, not existence, but inspiration.

The sermon itself, of which a portion has enticed us into this protracted discussion, is a very able composition, fraught with striking views and impressive statements of divine truth. From 1 Cor. i. 26-29. Dr. Wardlaw takes occasion to consider, The facts stated-The design of God in them-and the argument arising from them for the truth of the Gospel. Under his last head, he dwells with great force on the argument for the truth of Christianity, arising from the utter impossibility that the apostles should have been its inventors.

"Without dwelling at all on the pure, sublime, and throughout consistent views

of the Divine Being, allow me to call your attention, for a few moments, to one topic, which belongs exclusively to the New Testament writers--which is strictly their own:-I mean the conception and the practical development of the character of Jesus Christ.

"This is a character that stands quite alone. It is altogether unique ;such as " eye had not seen, nor ear heard, nor had it entered into the heart of man to conceive :'--a character, which had no preceding picture from which it could be taken; and for the invention of which therefore, supposing it had no real prototype, these writers have the full merit of originality. It is a character, moreover, than which, were it once invented, it is impossible to imagine one more difficult to support, with any thing approaching to consistency:--a character, uniting in it all that is truly and properly divine with all that is truly and properly human.--The difficulty of framing, and far more of consistently supporting, any feigned character, has, you are well aware, been powerfully felt by all the writers of romantic and of dramatic fiction. A human character absolutely perfect, it were a task of no trifling difficulty to maintain in full and unimpeachable consistency, so that nothing which any one could charge as a violation of propriety, should be thought, or said, or done, amidst all the varying circumstances, prosperous and adverse, of private and of public life, amongst friends, and amongst enemies; friends and enemies, too, distinguished by every diversity of temper and behaviour.-But how transcendently superior the difficulty, of maintaining a feigned character, which combines all the might and purity and majesty of the Godhead, with all the corporeal infirmities, and all the mental affections, personal and social, of the human nature, untainted by the slightest admixture of human corruption!-to blend all these in perfect and unbroken harmony; so as that nothing, in word or in act, shall ever present itself, unsuitable to either part of the complex constitution of this singular person;--nothing that shall excite even a momentary feeling towards him, in the slightest degree out of congruity with either view of his character;--nothing beneath the God,-nothing above the man;--nothing that interrupts a tender fellow-feeling with him as a partaker of our own nature, and yet nothing that lowers our veneration of his deity; nothing extravagant, nothing mean!" pp. 22-24.

Dr. Wardlaw then gives an eloquent and comprehensive sketch of the history of the Bible as a

part of the same argument, and concludes the section in the following pointed language.

"Let me put it to the common sense of every one present, if the fishermen of Galilee are for a moment to be supposed the unassisted authors of such a book. Let me put it to the conscience of every infidel and sceptic, whether there would not be here an intellectual and moral miracle, not inferior to any of the marvels recorded in the book itself; and whether he who can bring himself to believe it, be not more credulous than those weak and well-meaning enthusiasts whose credulity he affects to despise.

"Were it not, indeed, for the seriousness of the subject, it might not be unamusing, to remark the trouble which these poor unlettered men of Galilee have given to our sceptical and infidel philosophers;-how these wise men of the world' have expended, and continue to expend, their wits, in treatises and in volumes, directly and indirectly against them; how our Voltaires, and Bolingbrokes, and Humes, and Gibbons, and other chiefs of literature and science, have exhausted themselves, in labouring to show, how these poor men might have done what they did, without aid ;— that is, how they might, without aid, have produced something superior to all preceding efforts of human wisdom!

to show, in a word, that they were the most astonishing men the world ever saw;- -whilst yet they strangely persist in holding them in contempt.”—pp.26, 27.

Sermons. By the late Rev. Noah Hill. Longman and Co. 8vo. 9s.

AN apology is due to the esteemed editor of these sermons, and author of the funeral sermon, for the seeming neglect with which we have treated them.

We can conscientiously assure him, however, that it has arisen from no indifference to Mr. Hill's character, and from no deficiency of respect for himself, but from circumstances not entirely in our own controul. We feel great pleasure, in now introducing to our readers this volume of able and judicious discourses, on miscellaneous, theological, and practical subjects.

We shall, first of all, allow Mr. Hooper to exhibit the character,