things, quoad hoc, are in disorder and confusion; and we look forward to another and a better state, when God will educe order out of confusion, and proportion the weal or wo of all to their deserts. All exhibitions that he has made of himself or his government; all his ordinances for the well-being of man, show, that just so far as he loves men, he hates sin as their direst enemy, and will crush it by punishing its authors. He has caused them, too, to feel, that they are indeed its authors, and are guilty for being so; and that any governor who does not make its perpetrators suffer, is not trustworthy. Thus we read, that sin is that abominable thing which his soul hateth. This is his inmost feeling. 'Indignation and wrath, tribulation and anguish, upon every soul of man that doeth evil; but glory, honor and peace, to every man that worketh good," is the ordinance of his government. Earthly governors are sent by him for the punishment of evil-doers, and for the praise of them that do well. To the parent he saith, "He that spareth the rod, hateth his son." How unequivocally, then, has God ordained the expulsion of sin by punishment, or by explicit rebukes, in all those spheres of guardianship which he has appointed for the redemption of a fallen world! Doubtless his servants should be forbearing in the use of punishment, (as what gift of God should they abuse?) remembering, that he pardons on penitence, and that they ought to follow his example to the best of their power. But what do pardon and the requisition of repentance indicate, but an utter abhorrence of sin, and its desert of punishment? It will require greater sagacity than phrenologists display, to annul this constitution of things, and dissever sin from punishment, by the invention of a better scheme.

The same reason which leads them to banish all idea of punishment from their moral code, also induces them to expunge from their thoughts and homilies on moral and religious discipline, all such terms as sin, remorse, wickedness, depravity and repentance, regeneration, sanctification, salvation by the blood of Christ, and the indwelling power of his Spirit. These ideas are too evanescent and mystical to be entertained by any but bigots and fanatics. Old-fashioned people, perhaps, may be excused for not having emancipated themselves from such loose and dreamy notions; but no rational and ingenuous mind, that has witnessed the late dissections of the brain, can be tolerated at all in adhering to them. Every thing must be dwarfed and flattened to the phrenogical standard, "On thy belly shalt thou go." Moral maladies arise from disproportioned bumps. These must be altered, if we would accomplish any thing; and we must proceed to shape and develop them, as we would any other animal functions. Do we wish to make a weak man stout and vigorous? Put him to efforts that task his strength to the utmost. Think not of lashing vigor

into him. Do we wish to make a bad man good? Environ him with whatever things are pure, lovely, and of good report, and the result will as infallibly be secured, as that a sheep will fatten in luxuriant pastures. Their reduction of our faculties to instincts, puts the moral nature under the law of physical cause and effect. They forget, that the acts of man's will are self-originated, and that, without its own permission, it is under no foreign power; that it depends on its predominant state, whether good influences work well or ill upon it; that in all men, this predominant state is wickedness, until they are regenerated by the Holy Ghost; that the only means which God has deemed adequate to awaken the will from its superior love of sin, to a search after holiness, is, the denunciation of wrath to come, that the sinner may be incited to flee therefrom.

Our phrenological illuminati, however, have no idea of all this. They regard it as an invention of priestcraft, and at war with reason. Let any one read Dr. Spurzheim on "the religious constitution of man," in his second volume, and he can be at no loss to discover his meaning. It is easy to see, that it must be a feast of fat things to our modern Unitarians. Thus, on the depravity of man he says:

I am, nevertheless, astonished to observe so much goodness in the world. Its abundance evidently proves, that man is naturally good.' vol. ii p. 152.

On the nature of revelation, he thus speaks:

The interpretations of christianity are numerous. Those which seemed adapted and necessary to former generations, will no longer attract enlightened minds.' p. 99.

Dr. Spurzheim's readers cannot fail to see who and what are meant in the passages below. In his jeers at the "priesthood," he makes no discrimination between the faithful ministers of God, and a corrupt hierarchy, aspiring to lord it over God's heritage. He has fallen into the vulgar strain of infidel rant. The recipe for this kind of foul calumny is simple. Drop an inuendo against priests or religion in general, then manage to associate it with the iniquities of some heathen superstition, or some notoriously apostate and disowned branch of the christian church. For example, charge upon them deceit, intrigue, or obstinate resistance to light and knowledge. Do it in such a way, that every one shall have in mind the Romish priesthood or the Hindoo Bramins; who have, a thousand times over, on the very point in question, had the distinct and explicit reprobation of the very ministers who are aimed at. The following extracts savor of this temper:

It

'It is to be regretted that religious people are averse to reason. may be so, since many points of their doctrine do not stand the scrutiny of reason. I think with an able writer, that "religion has been wronged by nothing more than by being separated from intellect, and by being removed from the province of reason." Spurzheim, p. 89.

'It seems hostile to priesthood to conceive the Supreme Being as reasonable.' p. 90.

'It is obvious, therefore, why pretended ministers of God have always been, and are still interested in presenting ignorance as a virtue, and in preventing thinking people from communicating their opinions freely. As their religious interpretations do not always agree with the innate laws of intellect, it is rather convenient to interdict the exercise of reason, and unfortunately, hypocrites succeed too easily.' p. 95.

The "bundle of instincts," of which the human mind is composed, it seems, destroys the certainty and uniformity of revelation.

Those who believe in natural religion, as well as those who rely on revelation, will modify their religious conceptions according to their innate dispositions or gifts, and he who possesses the human feelings and the reflective faculties in a high degree, will reject any revealed law or interpretation that contradicts human sentiments and reason.' Spurzheim, p. 91.

The diversities of doctrine in religion also obviously owe their origin to ignorance of the primitive faculties and their relations. The faculties differ in relative strength in different individuals, and each person is most alive to objects and views connected with the powers predominant in himself. Hence, in reading the scriptures, one is convinced that they establish Calvinism; another, possessing a different combination of faculties, discovers in them Lutheranism; and a third is satisfied that Socinianism is the only true interpretation.' Combe, p. 282.

We ask, Is God's truth one and immutable? Are his creatures bound to obey it? If so, are they not, one and all, capable of learning what it is? If it passes into these chameleon-like hues before different minds, are their "innate dispositions and gifts," that is, their Maker, in fault; or are they themselves to blame for their having these dispositions?

The phrenologists carry this animalizing view so far, that no small proportion of their homilies on moral culture resemble prescriptions for raising sheep or horses. Whole chapters have been printed on the "laws of hereditary descent." They urge most strenuously the necessity of crossing breeds, and being well housed and fed. This is all well enough in its place. But when we, who are blessed with the gospel, are called on to adopt a scheme of "moral culture," in which much is said about such things, and VOL. VII.

38

little about the bible, we feel it to be but a step from the sublime to the ridiculous.

These gentlemen profess to have demonstrated, and make it a merit for having been the first to demonstrate, the fact, that the constitution of things favors virtue and works against vice. Thus says Mr. Simpson:

'The same gifted writer has shown, that while each natural law acts separately, there is a beautiful combination in their action, having for its object the cultivation of the moral and intellectual powers of man, and the establishment of their supremacy over the animal propensities: in other words, THAT THE WORLD IS ACTUALLY ARRANGED ON THE PRINCIPLE OF FAVORING VIRTUE AND PUNISHING VICE, AND THAT IT IS THROUGHOUT ITS CONSTITUTION, FRAMED IN ADMIRABLE ADAPTATION TO THE FACULTIES OF MAN AS A MORAL, INTELLIGENT, AND RELIGIOUS BEING. This sublime truth had not escaped previous observation. Bishop Butler felt it as an impression on his virtuous mind, but failed to establish its universality on demonstrable evidence.' pp. 82, S3.

We gather from all our reading of these authors, that the import of this language is somewhat thus: that they have proved, and have been the first to prove, that violations of the moral law bring injury, just as unwise investments in business would issue in loss, or the want of food beget starvation. We conclude, too, that they regard the sense of pain felt in view of this conduct, as not differing from that which springs from the violation of any other law, natural or organic. At any rate, remorse, self-reproach, and fear of deserved punishment for sin, these men know, have hitherto accompanied all violations of the moral law; and that it has been the steady and unwearied effort of faithful ministers of the gospel, to awaken such feelings into activity, and proclaim the only true remedy, on the well-known principle, that they that are whole need not a physician, but they that are sick. The phrenologists suppose, that their scientific disclosures of the effects of obedience or disobedience to the moral laws, will move men, in the only effectual way, to seek conformity thereto. These disclosures bear principally on the present life, and the perceived effects of morality on present happiness. We care not to question the merit of these men, in having done something in their department to render this matter more certain than it was before. (To say, that the general fact, however, has not been understood, involves gross ignorance or misrepresentation.) But, though this mode of stating the subject has its weight with men, and has been so regarded by divines, it has not sufficient weight, and cannot be our main reliance for restoring men to rectitude. They must be taught, that they are dead in trespasses and sins, and that there is no other

name given under heaven, whereby they can be saved, than Christ. Does any man doubt, that, if our divines should stop preaching to men as guilty and fallen beings, the need of Christ and him crucified, of faith, repentance and sanctification; and should give themselves up to lecturing on the "animal, organic, intellectual and moral laws;" on the various sciences, and their correspondence with the supremacy of the moral law; religion and morality would soon become extinct. If, instead of teaching parents to bring up their children in the nurture and admonition of the Lord, they should tell them to watch the bumps on their heads, to set aside punishment and all signs of displeasure, in case of misconduct, and to instruct them in the mysteries of phrenology; would they not grow up wild and unsubdued?

We have dwelt at some length on this subject, because of its importance. Much has been said and written in these times on moral education, as having been hitherto a void, and now about to be filled. If by this be meant, that the solemn sanctions of eternity, and the momentous truths of the gospel, which were once urged in the domestic circle, are no longer to trouble the domestic circle; and that they are to be supplanted by any such system as we have been reviewing; we deem the project weak and perilous in the extreme. It is a duty, no doubt, to bestow moral education. But no education deserves to be called moral, which does not steadily inculcate gospel truth, by precept and example. Whatever is not consecrated to Christ, is earthly, sensual, devilish.

The phrenologists, too, descant with great emphasis on the ignorance and brutality of the human race, as it now is in barbarous, and, for the most part, in civilized countries. The subject is an appalling one, and may well interest every generous mind. They suppose, that their science affords a key to the most feasible scheme of amelioration. We have already endeavored to canvass the comparative power of their improved systems of "moral culture," and the inculcation of the leading truths of the gospel, for bringing man into conformity to the great end and law of his existence. What we have said of their efficacy upon individuals, applies equally to the whole race of man. The phrenologists, however, are not without company. Their leading error, that we must begin the work of bettering men, by informing the intellect, instead of awakening and purifying the conscience, is as extensive as it is fatal. The Society for the Diffusion of Useful Knowledge, the many penny magazines and encyclopedias, the very common language of popular harangues, are all symptoms of the same disease. Now, to publish such truths as these works contain, without publishing the truths which concern man's permanent and eternal wellbeing; to do it, too, with the air of communicating the one thing needful,-is to promulgate error. "A little learning is a dangerous