forth to push it into notice, and that no law was made commanding its reception, and prohibiting the public use of the Italic. Though men's opinions and attachments, even in matters which do not so deeply affect them as religion, cannot, at the command of a superior, be changed in a moment, the same effect will often, by proper means, be produced in a gentle and gradual manner.

"Immediately after the Reformation, the opportunity was very favour. able for procuring, among those who favoured the measures of the Reformers, a welcome reception to any version of the Bible into the vulgar tongue, which had the approbation of the heads of the party. If gratified in the thing chiefly wanted, they would not be critical as to the mode of introduction; and if, from the changes in their rulers, there had been some changes in relation to the Scriptures to be read in the congregation; what was es tablished, in some places, was of so short continuance, that the mind could hardly be said to be pre-occupied by it. But the case, at present, is widely different. Learning is in more hands. Critics are multiplied. The press is open; and every cavil, as well as every argument, is quickly circu lated. Besides, the prepossession in favour of the translation to which we have been so long habituated is, at this day, very strong. Add to all this, that the religious, as well as the civil rights of mankind were never better understood; the genuine principles of toleration had never greater influence. How then should we be affected, upon hearing that we are recommended, under pains and penalties by our superiors, to read, and cause to be read in our churches, such a particular translation of the Bible only, and never more to admit into the sacred service that version to which we have been hitherto all our lives accustomed, and for which we have contracted a great veneration. For my part, I will not dissemble the matter; I should think such a measure exceedingly incongruous to the spirit of that religion which the legislators, perhaps, intended to serve by it; and no less unseasonable, in respect of the age and country in which we live. I perfectly agree with Tertullian, that religion and coercion of any kind, are utterly incompatible. Humani juris et naturalis potestatis est, unicuique quod putaverit colere.' Again: Nec religionis est cogere religionem, qua sponte suscipi debeat, non vi.' I cordially subscribe to the sentiment of Lactantius, who deems it essential to the value of every thing in religious service, in respect both of the object and of the mode, that it be voluntary: Nihil est tam voluntarium quam religio, in qua si animus sacrificantis aversus est, jam sublata, jam milla est. Nor does it make any difference in the nature of the thing, whether the power that would compel us be called civil or ecclesiastical.

"But is there nothing then which can with propriety be attempted by the higher powers, spiritual or temporal, for promoting the success of an accurate translation of the Bible? The utmost which, in my judgment, can be done, if such a version should in any future period be offered to the public, is to remove the obstruction which those powers have heretofore raised to prevent its introduction, and to permit (not command) the use of it, wherever it shall be found agreeable to the people, and judged by the pastors to be edifying."

In the 19th Lecture, which treats of the Interpretation of Types, there is a " digression on the Sacrament of Baptism, as connected with Regeneration, occasioned by the present controversy on that subject." At some future

time we may take occasion to make remarks on that controversy, which we are prevented from doing at present from the want of room. That part, however, of the work which relates to the Interpretation of Prophecy is of a nature much too important to be passed over in silence. It contains an attack upon Bishop Warburton's celebrated system of primary and secondary senses, which we really do not see how the advocates of that system will be able to repel. It is painful to witness the overthrow of a beautiful and ingenious theory; and we would gladly stretch out a helping hand to save it- if we could. It cannot recover from the shock it now receives. It would be to do an injury to these overpowering arguments, to present them to the reader in any other dress than that in which they appear in the Lectures: we therefore extract the Professor's summary of the system proposed by the author of the Divine Legation, and of the arguments by which he has attempted its destruction. To prevent, however, any alarm, which might otherwise have been excited, lest Christianity itself should suffer by this attempt to destroy the credit of a work written in support and confirmation of its truths, the inquiry is preceded by a long series of examples of prophecies, which must be allowed to have related to the Messiah in their primary and literal sense, and to no one else. Having thus shown that we need not search in vain for passages which testify of Christ, "we may now," he observes," without anxiety, inquire into the foundation of that sense, which is sometimes called the remote sense, at other times the mystical sense, at other times the secondary sense, of prophecy. For, let the result of an inquiry into secondary senses be what it will, the prophecies, which testify of Christ according to their primary sense, are sufficiently numerous to supply us with arguments for the truth of our religion."-P. 61.

"According to this explanation, the existence of secondary senses in Hebrew prophecy is founded on the supposition of their logical propriety, and moral fitness. The secondary sense of a prophecy is there represented, as having the same relation to the primary sense which an antitype has to its type. But, if the primary and secondary senses of prophecy are subservient to the same end with types and antitypes, it is inferred, that they rest on the same foundation. As the Jews, for instance, when they sacrificed their paschal lamb, were not aware that this was a type prophetic of the sacrifice of Christ; so it is argued, that there might be verbal prophecies of the same event, though the literal meaning of those prophecies no more suggested that event to the Jews, than the type, by which it was prefigured. And the moral fitness, as well of primary and secondary senses,

The

on the one hand, as of types and antitypes on the other, is argued on the the following grounds: the law being only a preparation for the gospel, the Jews were kept in ignorance about the real tendency of types, till those types were superseded by the accomplishment of their antitypes; for, if they had previously understood the meaning of those types, they might have neglected the law, before the fulness of time was come. A foreknowledge of its intended abolition, a foreknowledge that it was only a shadow of better things to come, might have induced them to disregard the preparatory dispensation, even during the period while it was destined to last but the same reason, as is further argued, for which the Jews were kept in ignorance about the meaning of types relating to the Messiah, must have operated also in the case of verbal prophecy relating to the Messiah. same veil of obscurity, which was thrown over the former, is supposed, therefore, to have been necessarily thrown over the latter, in order to preserve consistency in the several parts of the Jewish Dispensation. And, to this purpose, nothing is supposed to have been better adapted, than the use of secondary senses; because these senses are so remote from the literal sense, that they occurred not to the prophets themselves. Lastly, to the objection, that secondary or mystical senses may be multiplied without end, while the literal or primary sense of a passage can be only one; it is answered, that when the system is so explained, the secondary sense has no less its limit than the primary sense, the one being determined by a reference to the Christian Dispensation; as the other is determined by a reference to the Jewish Dispensation."

The evidence against this theory is summed up as follows:

"After all, then, it appears that there is no system whatever by which we can either establish the existence of secondary senses, or by which, on the supposition of their existence, we can discover their real meaning. We must be contented, therefore, as at the beginning of the preceding Lecture, to resolve the question of secondary senses into a question of authority. In whatever case a passage of the Old Testament, which, according to its strict and literal sense, relates to some earlier event in the Jewish history, is yet applied, either by Christ, or by an Apostle of Christ, to what happened in their days; and, moreover, is so applied, as to indicate that the passage is prophetic; of such passage we must conclude on their authority, that beside its plain and primary sense, it has also a remote or secondary sense. The difficulties, which no human system can remove, are in such cases removed by Divine Power; the discoveries, which human reason attempts in vain, are there unfolded by divine intelligence; and the same divine authority, which communicated the prophecy, interposes to explain the prophecy. Though we ourselves are unable to discover any other meaning in a Hebrew prophecy, than that which the words themselves convey by their own proper import; yet, when we have such authority for the opinion, that beside the plain or primary sense which the words convey to us, they have also a remote or hidden sense, which the words do not convey to us, it would be presumptuous to question the existence of that sense, by opposing the result of our own researches to the decisions of unerring wisdom.

"Notwithstanding the difficulties, therefore, which attend the notion of secondary senses in general, we must allow that there are some passages of the Old Testament which really have a secondary sense. But since in every instance where a passage of the Old Testament has a

secondary sense, the existence of that secondary sense depends entirely on the divine authority, which has ascribed it to the passage, we must wholly confine the application of a secondary sense to those particular passages to which a secondary sense has been ascribed by divine autho rity. There is no supposed logical propriety; no supposed moral fitness, which can either establish the existence, or lead to the discovery of such senses. It is authority, and authority alone; though we may fairly presume from the very exercise of such authority, that in every instance where a secondary sense is applied by such authority, there is a moral fitness for the application. But then the application does not depend on such moral fitness: it depends on the authority itself. And since this authority is confined to individual cases, the doctrine of secondary senses is reducible to no system. As in the relation of types to antitypes we cannot go beyond those particular examples which are ratified by Divine authority, so in every instance the same divine authority must be produced, before we can recognise, in a prophecy of the Old Testament, both a primary and a secondary sense.

"Indeed, if we once transgress the limit prescribed by this authority, it will be difficult to find any limit to the introduction of secondary senses. For since the secondary sense of a passage is a sense which the words do not convey of themselves, it is manifest that, as soon as we begin to trust in our own interpretation, we shall interpret without rule or guide. Though no passage can have more than one grammatical meaning, yet, as soon as we begin to indulge ourselves in the invention of mystical meanings, it is impossible to say where we shall stop. We shall come at length to that wantonness of interpretation which is displayed by most of the Jewish commentators, and by many among the Christian Fathers. We have already seen that there is no analogy between the interpretation of prophecy and the interpretation of allegory, unless indeed it should so happen that an allegory was meant to be prophetic, which, however, is not its usual character. But such was the fondness for allegorical interpretation, that instead of confining it to allegory itself, both Jewish and Christian commentators have extended it to history and prophecy, where it is wholly inapplicable. When allegorical interpretation is employed where it properly belongs, namely, in the interpretation of a real allegory, there is always a connexion between the literal and the allegorical sense. There is always a clue which leads us from one sense to the other. But if we endeavour to find an allegorical sense, either in history or in prophecy, we endeavour to find a sense with which the literal sense is wholly unconnected. The sense therefore will be supplied by mere imagination; and not only will different interpreters invent different senses, but even the same interpreter may invent as many as he pleases. Indeed there have been Jewish commentators, who have boasted that they could discover seventy midrashim, or mystical meanings in one sentence. Some limit, therefore, is absolutely necessary, and enough has been already said, to show, that the only limit in which we can confide, is the limit assigned by the authority of Christ and his Apostles."

"This appeal to authority, as the foundation of secondary senses, is consistent also with the plan which is adopted in these lectures; for it has been already shewn, that there are prophecies which foretel the coming of Christ, according to their literal and primary sense. By these prophecies, united with the argument from miracles, we establish the divine authority of Christ and his Apostles, independently of secondary senses. When we

appeal therefore to their authority in proof of secondary senses, we are not liable to the charge of arguing in a circle. Such a charge applies only to those, who, while they undertake to prove the truth of our religion from prophecy, yet argue only on the supposition of secondary senses; for, as the existence of secondary senses depends on the authority of Christ and his Apostles, we cannot argue from those senses to the truth of our religion, without taking for granted the thing to be proved; but, on the other hand, though we cannot apply them to that particular purpose, there are other purposes to which they may be applied; for, though they prove nothing by themselves, yet, when combined with those prophecies which relate to the Messiah, in their primary' sense, they serve at least to illustrate that unity of design which connects the Jewish with the Christian Dispensation."

We now close a work by which we have been highly gratified, in the hope that the author's recent exaltation to the bench will not be the means of preventing the completion of a work in which so much progress has been made, and that we shall soon be presented with another Part, not inferior in merit to any of the preceding. His lordship no longer retains the title and emoluments of Professor; but he still retains the privilege, and we hope an inclination also, to devote some portion of his time and talents to the improvement of those among whom that Church, for which he so strenuously contends, is destined to find its champions and supporters.

ART. VI.-Travels in Brazil. By HENRY KOSTER. 4to. Longman. 1816.

SOUTH AMERICA, so prominent on the globe of the earth, is likely to become equally conspicuous, even in our own times, in the scale of nations. Less familiar with its inha bitants than with those of the northern division of the new world where we have long had a home; less acquainted also with its greatly diversified surface, its lengthened, rivers, its deep vallies, and its mountains that look down upon the clouds; we are readily and much attracted by any work respecting it, that promises to supply information, or to gratify curiosity. Of the American Peninsula as a whole, we long ago had well composed histories, and recently we have had the writings of several judicious travellers. But of No. XX.-VOL. III.-Aug. Rev.

2 R