sin, there he imputes it; and where there is no punishment of a sin, there it is not imputed." "If God, therefore, allows the punishment which Adam incurred to come on all his descendants, he imputes his sin to them all. And in this sense Paul maintains that the sin of Adam is imputed to all, because the punishment of the one offence of Adam has come upon all." On page 386 he gives the sense of Rom. v. 18, thus, "The judicial sentence of God, condemning all men to death, has passed on all men, on account of the one offence of Adam." This is precisely our doctrine. It matters not, as far as the principle is concerned, how the avas in this passage is explained.

Whitby has the same view. He insists upon rendering iq` ¿, “in whom," because, he says, "It is not true that death came upon all men, for that, or because, all have sinned. For the apostle directly here asserts the contrary, viz. That the death and condemnation to it which befel all men, was for the sin of Adam only." "Therefore the apostle doth expressly teach us that this death, this condemnation to it, came not upon us for the sin of all, but only for the sin of one, i. e. of that one Adam, in whom all men die.-1 Cor.

XV. 22."

We refer to these authors merely to make it appear, that even in the opinion of the most liberalized writers, the plain sense of Scripture contradicts the principle of the Spectator, that one man can never be punished for the sin of another. This sense, we are persuaded, cannot be gotten rid of, without adopting a principle of interpretation which would enable us to explain away any doctrine of the word of God. The older Calvinists, as we have seen, considered the denial of imputation, or in other words, the assumption of the principle of the Spectator, as leading to the denial of original sin or native depravity. They were, therefore, alarmed when some of their French brethren rejected the former doctrine, though they at that time continued to hold the latter. Their apprehensions were not unfounded. Those who made this first departure from the faith of their fathers, very soon gave up the other doctrine, and before long relapsed into that state from which, after so long a declension, they are now struggling to rise. Without any intention of either casting unmerited odium on any of our brethren, or of exciting unnecessary apprehensions, we would seriously ask, if there is

no evidence of a similar tendency in the opinions of some brethren in this country. The doctrine of imputation has long been rejected by many, both within and without the bounds of our own ecclesiastical connexion, who still hold, with Dr Dwight, to native depravity, or that men are born "contaminated in their moral nature." How this can be just, or consistent with the divine perfections, if not a penal infliction, it is difficult to perceive. We are, therefore, not surprised to find that some of the most distinguished theologians of this school, now deny that there is any such contamination of nature; or that men are morally depraved before they are moral agents, and have knowingly and voluntarily violated the laws of God. These gentlemen, however, still maintain that it is certain that the first moral act in every case will be sinful. But this seems very hard : that men should be brought up to their probation, under " a divine constitution" which secures the certainty of their sinning. How this is to be reconciled with God's justice and goodness any better than the doctrine of Dr Dwight, we are unable to discover; and therefore apprehend that it will not long be retained. The further step must, we apprehend, be taken, of denying any such constitution, and any such dire certainty of sinning. And then the universality of sin will be left to be explained by imitation and circumstances. This, as it appears to us, is the natural tendency of these opinions; this has been their actual course in other countries, and to a certain extent, also, among ourselves. If our brethren will call this arguing ad invidiam, we are sorry for it. They do not hesitate, however, to say, that our opinions make God the author of sin, destroy the sinner's responsibility, weaken the influence of the gospel, and thus ruin the souls of men.

But if the Spectator's principle, that one man can never suffer the punishment of the sins of another is correct, what becomes of the doctrine of atonement? According to the scriptural view of this subject, Christ saves us by bearing the punishment of our sins. This, as we understand, is admitted.

That is, it is admitted that this is the scriptural mode of representing this subject. Our brethren do not deny that the phrase "to bear the iniquity of any one," means to bear the punishment of that iniquity, as in the passage in Ezekiel, "The son shall not bear the iniquity of the father," and in

a multitude of similar cases. Where, therefore, the Bible says, that "Christ bore our sins" it means, that he bore the punishment of our sins; or rather, as Grotius says, it cannot mean any thing else. "Peccata ferre patiendo, atque ita ut inde liberentur alii, aliud indicare non potest, quam poenae alienae susceptionem."-P. 300. And not only the scriptures but even the Greek and Latin authors who use this phrase, he says, "semper imputationem includunt." This, however, on the Spectator's principle, must be explained away; and the ground be assumed, that the scriptures mean to teach us only the fact that Christ's death saves us, but not that it does so by being a punishment of our sins. But if this ground be taken, what shall we have to say to the Socinians who admit the fact as fully as we do? They say, it is by the moral impression it produces on us; our brethren say, it is by the moral impression it produces on the intelligent universe. If we desert the Bible representation, have they not as much right to their theory as we have to ours? is a subject we cannot now enter upon. Our object is, to show that this is no dispute about words; that the denial of the doctrine of imputation not only renders that of original sin untenable; but involves, either the rejection or serious modification of those of atonement and justification.

This

Select List of Recent Publications.

BIBLICAL.

Course of Hebrew Study; consisting of Extracts in Prose, adapted to the use of Beginners. By Moses Stuart. Vol. II. Andover. Flagg and Gould. 8vo.

The New Testament in the Common Version, conformed to Griesbach's Standard Greek Text. Boston. Boston. Gray and Bowen. 12mo. Pp. 491.

An Attempt to Ascertain the Chronology of the Acts of the Apostles, and of St Paul's Epistles. By the Rev. Edward Burton, D.D., Regius Professor of Divinity, and Canon of Christ Church. Oxford, 1830.

A Popular Introduction to the Study of the Holy Scriptures, for the use of English readers. By William Carpenter. The second edition, illustrated with Maps and Plates. Svo. London, 1830.

Questions on Select Portions of the Four Evangelists. By Joseph Allen. Boston. Gray and Bowen, 1830. 18mo. Pp. 112.

Geography of the Bible; compiled for the American Sunday School Union. By J. W. and J. A. Alexander. Stereotype. Philadelphia. 12mo. Pp. 180.

THEOLOGY.

BUCK'S THEOLOGICAL DICTIONARY. New Edition. A Theological Dictionary, containing Definitions of all Religious Terms; a Comprehensive View of every article in the System of Divinity; an Impartial Account of all the Principal Denominations which have subsisted in the Reli

gious World from the Birth of Christ to the present day : together with an accurate statement of the most remarkable transactions and events recorded in Ecclesiastical History. By the Rev. Charles Buck. New American, from the latest London edition. Revised and improved by the addition of many new articles, and the whole adapted to the present state of Theological Science and of the Religious World. By the Rev. George Bush, A.M. With an Appendix, containing a late Account of the Methodist Episcopal Church in America, and of the Associated Methodists. Philadelphia: James Kay, Jun. & Co. Library Street. Pittsburg: John J. Kay & Co. No. 95 Market Street.

The true Plan of a Living Temple; or Man considered in his proper relation to the ordinary occupations and pursuits of Life. By the author of the Morning and Evening Sacrifice. 3 vols, 12mo. London.

Practical Theology, comprising Discourses on the Liturgy and Principles of the United Church of England and Ireland; Critical and other Tracts, and a Speech delivered in the House of Peers in 1824. By the Rev. John Jebb, D.D. F.R.S., Bishop of Limerick, Ardfert and Aghadoe. 2 vols, 8vo. London, 1830.

The Works of President Edwards; with a Memoir of his Life. In 10 vols, 8vo. New York. S. Converse.

Treatise on Justification and Regeneration. By John Witherspoon, D.D., with an Introductory Essay, by William Wilberforce, Esq. Amherst. J. S. and C. Adams & Co. 12mo. Pp. 264.

The Testimony of Scripture to the Obligations and Efficacy of Prayer; in three Discourses. By Gilbert Wardlaw, A.M. Boston. Pierce and Williams. 12mo. Pp. 142. A Brief Notice of Dr. Tyler's Vindication of his Strictures. First published in the Quarterly Christian Spectator, for June 1830. New Haven. Baldwin and Treadway.

An Evangelical View of the Nature and Means of Regeneration, comprising a Review of Dr Tyler's Strictures. By Evangelus Pacificus. Boston. Perkins and Marvin. 8vo. Pp. 40.

Lectures in Defence of Divine Revelation. By David Pickering. Providence. Samuel W. Wheeler. 12mo. Pp. 216.

The Theology of the Cambridge Divinity School. By F. W. J. Greenwood. Boston. Gray and Bowen. 12mo.