The crowd, ere it acquired such regal port
And withering power; the soul pants to evade
Its basilisk glare, trembling, as though caught
In the vile clutch of fiend with horrid mischief fraught.

The beetling furrows channeling the brow,

Betray fierce passions inmates of the soul,
The breath of whose repose e'en seems the sough
Of gathering tempest;-how those billows roll-
How his limbs twitch convulsive, while the whole
Of his broad frame, backwards and forwards sways
As the pine tempest-toss'd! Ambition's tool,
Who grasping sway, and fixing awe-struck gaze,
Heeds little in what scale his ponderous weight he lays.
Ah! that with men met to defend such right,
The hallow'd right of conscience, should consort
Men of low motives and self-views-a blight
On all high effort, rich with blessings fraught.
Alas! short term expires, ere man is taught
Perfection's growth is not of earthly clime;
At least, no present prize, but must be sought
Amidst the future, rife with deeds sublime,
Or midst celestial realms beyond the waves of time.

Pass from that fearful man, to yon sweet groupe:-
A blind old sire, tended by his fond child;

As travel-worn his limbs exhausted droop,

His silver locks from bonnet loose, stream wild
Upon the breeze; oh, with what dovelike, mild,
Soul-thrilling looks of love, his angel guide
Smooths his bald brow and cheek!-fatigue beguiled,
The old man folds his guardian to his side-

Tears, selfish woe ne'er drew, now flow a grateful tide.

A View of the general Tenor of the New Testament, regarding the Nature and Dignity of Jesus Christ, &c. By Joanna Baillie.

JOANNA BAILLIE is a name with which very few general readers can be unacquainted. It is the name of one, whose mental possessions are ample, and whose willingness to communicate of her abundance, is equal to her means. Of the richness of her mind, and the benevolence of her heart, the work bearing the title placed above, furnishes another proof, in addition to the many she has already given. In this work, her aim is to lay before the

reader, all that the Gospels, the Acts, and the Epistles, say respecting the person, offices, works, and titles of Jesus Christ; and thus to enable him to judge for himself, from Scriptural evidence, “ regarding the nature and dignity" of the Saviour. A noble aim this. It is worthy of the generous feelings and elevated intellect by which it

is made.

Whether Jesus of Nazareth is the self-existent God, or a great pre-existent being, or a "man in all things like unto his brethren," are questions which many long ages of angry controversy, and vain philosophizing, and presumptuous dogmatizing, have done nothing whatever towards answering, to the satisfaction of any inquisitive mind. To such a mind, human theories are not divine proofs, the creeds of men are not the words of God, the dogmas of churches are not the commands of heaven. So thought Joanna Baillie, and she has appealed from human theories, and creeds of men, and the dogmas of churches, to the Bible. She has done well. "No Protestant Christian," she truly affirms, "regulates, or ought to regulate his faith by any thing but what appears to him to be really taught in Scripture.". "I presume, then, to lay before the reader all the texts as they follow one another, in the Gospels, the Acts of the Apostles, and in the Epistles, which appear to me to have any reference to the nature, dignity, and offices of Jesus Christ; leaving him to draw from them what conclusions his honest judgment shall dictate." (p. 2, 5.)

In accordance with this announcement, the work before us is occupied chiefly by passages of Scripture; for from p. 10 to p. 121, we have, with the exception of a few connecting words, nothing but quotations from the New Testament, and 146 pages are the whole number in the volume. Having performed the task so laudably undertaken, the writer proceeds to say: "the reader has now seen, as far as I am able to judge, all the passages to be found (excluding the Revelation), in the New Testament, which bear upon the nature, dignity, and offices of Jesus Christ; and may consider for himself, how far either of the three sects, mentioned in the beginning of these pages, is borne out in its peculiar doctrine."

The three sects alluded to, are, to use the definitions of Miss Baillie, those who hold "the high church doctrine of the Trinity, which makes Jesus Christ God equal in all

attributes with the supreme God, or God the Father. Those who hold the Arian doctrine, which supposes him to be a most highly exalted being, who was with God before the creation of the world, and by whose agency it probably was created, by power derived from Almighty God. And those who hold the Socinian doctrine, which regards him as the great missioned Prophet of God, sent into the world to reveal his will to men, to set them an example of perfect virtue, and to testify the truth of his mission, by the sacrifice of his life." To which of these sects the writer considers herself to belong, she tells us in the following unequivocal passage:-" of the second sect, whose opinions, as far as I am capable of judging, agree best with the whole tenor of Scripture, I will say nothing.".

So, then, although Miss Baillie was educated a Trinitarian; had for her father, not only a Trinitarian, but a Professor of Theology in the University of Glasgow; and must have felt all her early religious associations and predilections pleading in favour of the Trinity; yet on looking over the evidence of Scripture to the nature and dignity of Jesus Christ, she was, as an impartial judge, compelled to decide, that there is nothing about a Trinity in Scripture. She finds, that God the Father is the supreme God; that Jesus Christ received all his power from God, and that however exalted by the Father, Jesus is still a dependent, though pre-existent being. She avows herself an Arian; that is, in other words, a Christian Unitarian; for a Christian Unitarian is one who believes, that "there is but one God even the Father, who is to be worshipped in spirit and truth," and "one Master, Lord and Saviour of all, even Jesus Christ." To the society of those who hold this scriptural faith, we tender her a most hearty welcome.

But while we thus express our approbation of her endeavours to attain to "the truth as it is in Jesus" herself, and to assist others in the acquisition of that truth, we feel ourselves called upon to add, that some things said in this work, might be made subjects of serious objection, and some things omitted, the ground of just regret.

Of the former might be mentioned, the defective manner in which those doctrines are stated, which it is the design of the work to bring to the test of Scripture; the mode in which the third system is disposed of; and the

N

plea set up, for those who countenance forms of worship which they believe to be antiscriptural. The expression "Jesus Christ equal, &c. with the supreme God," will not please Trinitarians, because, if the Father be really the supreme God, then Jesus cannot in every sense be possessed of all the attributes of the Father; and if Jesus be possessed of all the attributes of the Father, then the Father cannot be the supreme God. There cannot be two supremes. The word probably, used in the definition of the Arian scheme, is objectionable, because that scheme supposes that the world was certainly (not probably) created by Jesus Christ, though his power to execute that work was derived from God. The appellation Socinian, though qualified, is nevertheless a nickname, to which Unitarians justly object, and which had better not have been employed. But what is still worse, no one who knew nothing more of what is called the Socinian view of the nature and dignity of Christ, than is to be learned from the following sentences, would in fact know anything at all:—

“As to the third, which considers Jesus Christ as a mere man, sent into the world with God's high mission to his brethren,"—" and to testify the truth of his mission by the sacrifice of his life,"—" it seems at variance with so many plain passages of Scripture, that it cannot, I should think, by those who view the subject in the simple way here recommended, be considered as standing upon any solid foundation." And if Joanna Baillie knows no more of Unitarianism, than that its distinguishing characteristic is its considering Jesus Christ to be a mere man, who only testified the truth of his mission by the sacrifice of his life; if she is unacquainted with the Unitarian doctrines,-that Christ is the Son of God, declared to be such by the resurrection from the dead; and that the resurrection exemplified and assured by him, is the grand crowning peculiarity of Christianity,-then we must hold her blameless, for rejecting it, as standing upon no solid foundation.

But take away the word mere, and carry on the idea in the words of Christ himself, and of his Apostles; and then would it instantly appear how very improper it is to say, that the "third system which considers Jesus Christ as a "MAN who told the truth which he heard from God""that MAN whom God approved"—"who was in all things like unto his brethren". "the one mediator between God and men, the MAN Christ Jesus," "seems at variance with

so many passages of Scripture, that it cannot, I think, by those who view the subject in the simple way here recommended, be considered as standing upon any solid foundation!" That the Scriptures represent Christ as a man, even Trinitarians are obliged to confess. Therefore the believers in the simple humanity of Christ, must be right as far as they go. What they believe is the truth. The only question is, is it the whole truth? They, of course, think it is, so far as the person of Christ is the object of belief: but as to the dignity of the Messiah, their belief extends as far as Scripture leads. They apply to him all the titles which the Scriptures give him. They hail him not only as the Prophet of God, but as the Instructor, Saviour, and final Judge of men. They view him as "the way, the truth, the resurrection, and the life"-the "image," and "form of God;" and as God spake by him, dwelt in him, and wrought through him, they deem him to be the mouth-piece of God, and receive his words as the words of the Father who sent him; and, because the word of God came to him, they consider him entitled to the appellation-God; and because "it pleased the Father that in him all fulness should dwell," they acknowledge him to be, in all things relating to the doctrines he taught, the truths he revealed, and the promises he gave, equal in authority with God. Who can deny, that these views of the dignity of Christ, are Scriptural? We most cordially agree with our author, that each one must, after all, judge for himself; and we can with the greatest sincerity. aver, that every honest inquirer after Scriptural truth, is dear to our heart, though his inquiries may lead him to opinions different from our own. We claim liberty to think for ourselves. We most willingly acknowledge that the same liberty is the natural right of every human being. Joanna Baillie has nobly exercised this right. Let her continue to do so, and we think she will, ere long, separate herself from the Trinitarian, or, as she has herself shown it to be, the unscriptural church-join the Unitarian Christian community, and give the public another little volume, containing her reasons for the change.