ourselves, we are prepared to admit, that he has succeeded in showing that we may, in perfect consistency, question, not merely the genuineness and authenticity of the Pentateuch, but even the authority of the ritual law, which it contains, without ceasing to acknowledge the great Hebrew legislator as having been expressly commissioned to make known the most exalted and sublime truths respecting the being, the unity, the attributes, the providence and moral government of God, and to separate the Israelites as a peculiar people, among whom the profession of their great principles should be established. We cannot but think, that the soberminded defender of revelation must be desirous, at the bottom of his heart, to see such a line of argument successfully maintained, which might relieve him from the necessity of addressing himself to a task, which, we are persuaded, he has seldom undertaken without wishing himself well rid of it.

The preceding remarks have extended to such a length that our limits will not now admit of more than a very slight sketch of the account which our author gives in his third volume, of the opinions and character of the different parties of the Gnostics. They have been divided into two classes; the Marcionites, and what have been called the Theosophic Gnostics. These classes agreed in the opinions which have already been stated as the fundamental tenets of Gnosticism,-besides which the latter indulged in a variety of extravagant speculations on the successive development of a multitude of supposed derivative spirits or cons, as they called them, which they believed to be emanations from the Supreme. It would be difficult to give in a small compass any intelligible account of these reveries; they are in the highest degree wild and visionary, and possess little interest in themselves, except as they furnish a curious chapter in the history of the strange vagaries to which the human mind is liable, when philosophers allow themselves to be carried into the regions of airy speculation on the wings of unbridled fancy. The principal leader of this class of Gnostics, was Valentinus, who flourished in the reigns of Adrian and Antoninus Pius. He appears to have received all our four Gospels, while Marcion, who is referred to a date somewhat earlier, acknowledged only that of Luke. Both of them, however,

exercised the liberty of rejecting what did not please them, -not as thinking it spurious, but because it favoured what they called Judaizing opinions. The very fact, however, of their rejecting particular passages, with the reason for it, amounted to an admission of the genuineness of the whole. It may be further remarked, that their having recourse to the mutilation of Luke's Gospel shows that no other history of Christ's ministry existed more favourable to their doctrines;-that in the first half of the second century, when Marcion lived, there was no Gnostic Gospel in being, to which he could appeal.

This

The solution which the Gnostics proposed to themselves of the difficult problem of the origin of evil, was founded partly on the ascription of the creation to an inferior imperfect being, and partly on a belief in the eternity of matter, in which, according to them, evil was inherent. Imperfection and evil were thus the necessary results of the defects both of the workman and the material. subordinate Creator was supposed by both parties to have been the Jehovah or God of the Jews; and by the Valentinians he was supposed to have derived his existence only mediately from the Supreme God, of whom they pretended he was not even aware of the existence till the coming of Christ. This notion, however absurd and extravagant it may appear to us, was in accordance with the philosophy and with the popular religion of those times; which, when they recognized a Supreme Divinity at all, commonly represented him as far removed from all active concern in the creation or government of the world;while the beings to whom these offices were entrusted, and to whom homage and worship were immediately due, were supposed indeed to be invested with superior power, but in all other respects a compound of human weaknesses, passions, and vices. That evil is essentially inherent in matter, was also a prevalent doctrine long before the time of the Gnostics. It appears to have been the opinion of Plato, and was held by some Christians not heretics; especially among those who embraced an ascetic code of morality, and sought to purify the soul by mortifying and macerating the body. In opposition to these notions our author has the following just and philosophical remarks :— 'The conceptions which were thus generally entertained, have

an obvious foundation in the nature of man. The appetites, by indulging in which the soul'embodies and embrutes,' are to be referred to our material part. The diseases which the flesh is heir to, disorder the affections and temper, fill the mind with phantoms of misery, disturb the judgment, and sometimes lay waste the intellect; and in our best estate the corruptible body weighs down the soul, and the earthly tabernacle burdens the mind full of many thoughts.' Still the body is not the sepulchre, but the cradle of the soul. It is a necessary condition of the present life,—of this school of discipline and instruction, which Divine Wisdom has prepared for us at the commencement of our being, and in which our powers of action, our capacities of enjoyment, and the objects around us, are so adjusted to each other, as to promote the moral growth of the newly-formed inhabitant of the universe. In a philosophical view, the body is not a clog upon the mind; it may rather be compared to the weight which gives motion to a piece of machinery; for its wants and desires are what first rouse the mind to action, and gradually bring into exercise its highest powers and best affections. If we cannot call the appetites the germ of our virtues, yet they may almost be considered as the soil in which our virtues take root. From them spring industry and forethought, which, as regards the greater part of men, are exercised most strenuously in supplying their demands; and they call into exercise self-control, the first requisite in moral discipline. The relation between the sexes becomes the source of the most disinterested love, and of all the domestic charities. And it is in witnessing the bodily wants and sufferings of our fellow-creatures, that compassion and benevolence are first awakened."-Vol. iii. 54.

In a following chapter, we have a lengthened examination of the question, whether the Gnostics opposed to the four Gospels any other histories or history of Christ's ministry; which leads to a general review of the books which have been called apocryphal Gospels. Of some books of this description whose names have been mentioned, the very existence seems doubtful; and some others which have been called Gospels were not so much histories of Christ's ministry, as accounts of the writer's views concerning the doctrines of Christianity. Others, of which there is no mention by any writer before the fourth century, are obviously of much too late a date to have any connection with the present argument. We have no longer room for even an outline of this investigation, oh is pursued by our author with much accuracy and

minuteness of detail;-but the conclusion to which he arrives is, that "the Gnostics did not oppose to the Gospels any other history of Christ's ministry; or, to state the conclusion in more general terms, it is evident that during the first three centuries, no history of Christ's ministry at variance with the four Gospels was in existence. The history of his ministry, such as is contained in them, or in some one of them, served as a common basis for the opinions of all Christians, catholic or heretical."

We have to apologize for the dry and we fear wearisome abstract, which is all that we have here been able to present to our readers. In fact, we feel the difficulty of preparing a report of a work like this, which shall give in a small compass a fair view of the author's general argument, and at the same time enable the reader to appreciate the extent of his research, the variety and interest of his illustrations, and the energetic eloquence in which they are conveyed. It is scarcely necessary to add, that there are many interesting and curious discussions of an incidental nature which we have been obliged to pass over altogether, but on which we should have been glad to dwell, had it been practicable within any reasonable limits. Among these we may particularly specify the remarks on the character of the ancient philosophy in the third volume, and a very curious note in the appendix to the same volume, on the distinction made by the ancients between things Intelligible and things Sensible, and on the nature of Matter.

May we be allowed, in conclusion, to express our regret that a work of so much interest and value should have been got up in so expensive a style, and consequently sold at a price which renders it almost inaccessible to many who would be both most desirous and best qualified to derive from it the information and improvement it is so well fitted to afford.

ART. V.-RELIGION IN THE AGE OF GREAT CITIES.

1. Ninth Report of the London Domestic Mission Society. April, 1844.

2. Tenth Report of the Ministry to the Poor in Manchester. April, 1844.

3. Seventh Annual Report, addressed to the Liverpool Domestic Mission Society. March, 1844.

4. Fifth Report of the Lewin's Mead Meeting Domestic Mission Society. August, 1844.

5. Fourth Annual Report of the Birmingham Unitarian Domestic Mission Society. February, 1844. Chapman, Newgate-street, London.

FEW differences between the Church of Rome and the Church of England have had more effect on the religious condition of the countries, in which their power has respectively prevailed, than this,-that the one, while it has exacted uniformity of confession, has been tolerant of variety in action, whereas the other, while it has interdicted variety of action, has tolerated extensive diversity of opinion. Under an outward uniformity of faith, the Catholic Church has met the wants and wishes of its people by every variety in its modes of religious ministration. The hospitable embrace of its Calendar has, with the salutary restriction of time only, been open to saints of all ranks and of all countries, and its clerisy, regular and secular, endowed and mendicant, learned and popular, settled and missionary, has lithely adapted itself to the varying temperament of ages, classes and countries. Not so with its Protestant Daughter. The Church of England has comprehended in her bosom, within three centuries, Socinian, Arian, Sabellian, and Tritheistic schools of divinity, with every variety of oscillation from High Church to Low Church, and from Low Church to High Church; but with all this latitude in opinion, it has always laid a prompt arresting hand upon any latitude in action. Hoadly and Waterland, Swift

and Sacheverel,* might remain in the bosom of the Church

* Sacheverel's temporary suspension on political grounds was in fact a triumph.