in the northern hemisphere long after its companions have sought a more genial clime; or to the oak that stands solitary after the surrounding forest has fallen, stretching out its stiffened arms as if to implore mercy from the winds and the storm. But our venerable friend has gone; numbered at last with the friends of his youth; allowed to rejoin the company from which he had been so long separated. The last of our patriarchs has left us; and men whom he baptized in infancy, wept at his funeral, when they had well nigh reached their seventieth year. Nothing was more affecting, said one who witnessed his obsequies, than to see those old men weeping over the corpse of their father."

In remarking upon the volumes before us, we have not thought it necessary to go into a critical examination of particular discourses. This would be an almost endless, as it would be altogether a superfluous labor. These discourses, or the most of them, have been long before the public. They have been extensively and attentively read Hundreds and thousands have reviewed them, each one for himself, and formed a judgment, and reaped the benefit. Nor have we thought it necessary to remark upon every point, whether of metaphysics or theology, in which the sentiments or language of the author may be regarded as open to objection, or susceptible of improvement. To do this would lead to a length of discussion, altogether incompatible with our present limits and design. But we have endeavored faithfully to exhibit the man as he appears to us in his memoirs and his publications, and as he did uniformly appear to us during a long and intimate acquaint

ance.

We have endeavored that our readers should have the means of understanding his character; his intellectual, moral, and religious character; his character as a student, a pastor, an instructor in theology, and a minister of Christ. That his works have had many readers, the ready sale of the first edition in seven thick octavo volumes, declares; and that they will have many readers in this new and improved edition there can be no doubt.

The one class of persons to whom, above all others, we would recommend the works of Dr. Emmons, consists of our young ministers, and those who are studying with a

view to the ministry. The older evangelical clergy, more especially in the Northern and Middle States, are already familiar, to some extent, with his writings. They have read them, pondered them, and been profited by them. But to the younger portion of the clergy, to candidates, and theological students, these writings will be, in great mea sure, new. Nor should it be any objection to the reading of Emmons, that individuals do not adopt his sentiments. No matter (so far as the question of reading is concerned) whether you receive them or not. No matter whether on all points of disagreement, you shall be convinced or not. The interest, the pleasure, the profit of reading him will not depend materially on this circumstance. Even if you reject many of his conclusions, you will "admire his logic." You will find yourselves more than repaid for the perusal of his works, by the force and ingenuity of his reasoning, by the originality and comprehensiveness of his views, by the peculiarity and freshness of his thoughts, by the example of his flowing, pellucid style, and the clearness of his method. He will suggest ideas, considerations, arguments, which never occurred to you before. He will put you upon new topics of interesting study, and open before you fields of inquiry, which you may enter and explore for yourselves. Again, then, we say to the class of per sons here addressed, By all means, read Emmons. And be not satisfied with reading the volumes once, and then dismissing them, but have them on your study-table, or some where within reach of your hand. They require to be not among the few books,

only read, but studied. They are poured forth from the teeming modern press, which will bear study, and repay it.

ART. III.-THE WILL IN ITS NORMAL AND ABNORMAL STATES.

By Rev. J. R. HERRICK, Malone, N. Y.

Ir is hardly too much to affirm that our conception of the human will is fundamental in theology. For this conception is our guide in the application of religious truth, and our criterion in interpreting many of the great doctrines of the Christian system. As we apprehend redemption, so we regard the person and work of Christ, and the necessity of the Divine Spirit to renew and sanctify the individual soul, and to save the world; and our view of depravity, of man's original nature and of his need of redemption, depends upon our view of the nature of sin. But our estimate of sin is inseparably connected with our conception of the human will. What we want to know is the actual condition of the will as affected by sin; what it can and what it cannot do; whether it is still fitted, and if not, how it may become fitted, to meet all the obligations which rest upon us in our fallen condition.

The problem of human ability, on which we offer the following thoughts, stands inseparably connected with responsibility and a need of redemption. And as this subject has always been central, so at the present time it seems likely to assume for the theologian and reformer greater importance than ever. The actual and abnormal state of the will implies a normal or ideal state; and this, if possible, should be rightly apprehended, before we look at the condition of the will as affected by sin.

In order to keep to the proper sphere of inquiry, it seems needful, first of all, to distinguish between nature and spirit. Among the many true things spoken by Coleridge, notwithstanding his want of system, is this, in his Aids to Reflection: "If there be aught spiritual in man, the will must be such;

if there be a will, there must be a spirituality in man." We seem almost as little disposed, in thinking, as in living, to step over into the spirit-world, so long as we can retain a foothold in the material (as Robert Hall charged upon Macknight); and when we make the attempt, we are liable to confound the sensible and the spiritual; and all the more so, because we are so much inclined to carry our sense-begotten conceptions along with the terms we must borrow from the world of sense to express spiritual truth. Though it may not be easy to make the distinction, we will attempt to indicate it.

It is very obvious that mind and matter are not the same. Though we cannot tell what is the essence of the former, any more than of the latter, still we see clearly that it has not in itself a power of action. On the contrary, it is the great opposer of all activity. And however there may be in nature a law coun terworking that of inertia, still the laws and vital forces manifested in the material world are not from nature, but derive their existence from a spiritual source. But we cannot conceive of spirit otherwise than as activity. It is thus we know the Infinite Spirit from his activity. Thus, too, we know ourselves as spiritual, by the quickening and internal motion of our own spirits. In this sense the cogito ergo sum has force. Let us say first, then, that spirit is activity.

But again, spiritual activity is life and not mechanism. In nature, and within the sphere of the material, we find action and reäction. There is pushing and pulling, i. e. mechanical action. But this takes its start from, and owes its impulse to, something without. On the other hand, spirit starts its own action, originates it from within. It may be suggested, perhaps, that the seed is said to "have life in itself." True, the life-germ of the plant is in the seed; but its law of life can hardly be said to be its own, as we shall soon see is true of rational, spiritual life, Still, while we speak of activity and life as characteristics of spirit, and hold that this gives to nature all the activity and life it manifests, we do not claim them as the distinguishing characteristics of spirit. These follow. Spirit, then, has further, self-consciousness, while nature is estitute of it. Though life appears in nature, yet with all

the irritability of plants, the sensitivity, locomotion and perception of animals, neither vegetable nor animal life is conscious, at least not self-conscious. It knows not its own acts and processes, much less these as distinct from every thing else and belonging to itself. But the rational spirit knows itself, and recognizes its perceptions, intellections, feelings, volitions, as its own, and distinct from those of every other being. And through these, moreover, it finds a permanent self. Self-consciousness is possible only with the possession of reason. belongs wholly to the domain of spirit. Let it be observed also that it is an essential condition of freedom: spirit must know itself that it may act for itself.

But spirit is not only self-conscious; its sphere is likewise that of freedom and not of necessity. This is its other distinguishing characteristic. Within the sphere of nature, if there is action, it is action according to some necessary law; if there is life, it is only a development from an original germ, from whose law it cannot deviate. Know the law, and you already know what will and must result therefrom. Not so with spirit. Very true, since rational, it cannot be lawless. Nor does the law of freedom imply that the Creator does not prescribe laws for the finite spirit. And yet it is not so bound by its constituent idea, or by any prescribed law, that it cannot deviate therefrom. Not only can it know itself and what is demanded of it; it can also embrace or reject the demand. Spirituality is determined, not from without, but from within. And the dif ference here between nature and spirit is not one in degree, but in kind. The line that divides them divides the universe.*

Our field of inquiry, then, is that of spirit rather than nature. Before we come directly to the distinctive nature and action of the will, or rather in order that we may come directly to the central idea, we should know how we are to proceed in our inquiry, understand how the criterion is to be applied, and fix the method of investigation. If we know where we are going, we must keep the way clear that leads to it.

In all our knowledge derived from sense and experience,

* See Shedd's Address on "Method of Theol. Studies." Also Jacobi, “Von den göttlichen Dingen.'