fection of resentment, or the abuse of any of the other powers enumerated by him, for such actions as those mentioned in the quotation from St Matthew, or as we see daily around us.

Secondly, Christ says in the Gospel of St Luke, that " every tree is known by its own fruit: for of thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble-bush gather they grapes. A good man, out of the good treasure of his heart, bringeth forth that which is good; and an evil man, out of the evil treasure of his heart, bringeth forth that which is evil for of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh;" (Luke vi. 44, 45.) And in Matthew's Gospel, he counsels his followers thus: Let your light so shine before men, that they may see your good works, and glorify your Father which is in heaven; and again," I am not come to call the righteous, but sinners to repentance;" (Matt. v. 16; ix. 18.) Of Nathanael he said, Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom is no guile" (John i. 47.) Explaining the parable of the sower, he uses the following words: "But that on the good ground are they which, in an honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep it, and bring forth fruit with patience" (Luke viii. 15.) And in the parable of the lost sheep: "I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which need no repentance; (Luke xv. 7.) Of Zacharias and his wife Elisabeth we are told, that," they were both righteous before God, walking in all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord, blameless;" (Luke i. 6.) And the Apostle says, Follow righteousness, faith, charity, peace, with them that call on the Lord out of a pure heart;" (2 Tim. ii. 22.) And again: "Unto the pure, all things are pure;" (Titus i. 15.) Thus also the Psalmist says: "For thou, Lord, wilt bless the righteous; with favour wilt thou compass bim as with a shield;" (v. 12.) "Oh let the wickedness of the wicked come to an end, but establish the just." (vii. 9.) "With the merciful thou wilt shew thyself merciful, with an upright man thou wilt shew thyself upright: With the pure thou wilt shew thyself pure, and with the froward thou wilt shew thyself froward;" (xviii. 25, 26.) Finally: "Mark the perfect man, and behold the upright; for the end of that man is peace;" (xxxvii. 37.)-See also Psalms i. 1, 2; xv.; xxxii. 11; xxxiii. 15; xxxvii. 16, 17; xevii. 10-12; exii; cxxviii.

Thus it is abundantly evident, that while the human mind is represented in Scripture as liable to commit every species of wickedness, it is at the same time spoken of as possessing moral qualities of a pure and exalted description; "A good man," we are expressly told, "out of the good treasure of his heart, bringeth forth that which is good." Now, Phrenology shews us

VOL. IX.NO. XLIV.

Y

that although the mind is endowed with strong animal propensities, which are, in the majority of individuals, prone to rush into abuse, yet it has received also various moral powers,Benevolence, Veneration, and Conscientiousness. This system of philosophy, therefore, in representing human nature as possessing excellent and amiable qualities, is also in harmony with Scripture.

In the third place, St Paul, in his Epistle to the Romans, argues, that " when the Gentiles, which have not the law, do by nature the things contained in the law, these, having not the law, are a law unto themselves; which shew the work of the law written in their hearts, their conscience also bearing witness, and their thoughts the meanwhile accusing or else excusing one another;" (Rom. ii. 14, 15.) It will be recollected that the two classes of faculties, the propensities and moral sentiments, do not appear to the understanding to possess the same excellence and authority, but that we are instinctively conscious that the latter class is of a higher order, and has been framed by nature to govern the former and that it is from the dictates of the moral sentiments that our natural notions of duty begin. Now this is precisely, out and out, the doctrine of St Paul. The Gentiles were endowed by nature with Benevolence, Conscientiousness, Veneration, and Intellect; their intellect, on comparing the irregular and excessive manifestations of the animal propensities with the dictates of the moral sentiments, perceived the opposition between them,-and instantly their minds stood convicted of offending against a law of morality written in their hearts.

In the fourth place, we are taught in the Bible that God has given different talents to different individuals; to one five talents, to another two, and to another one, and that each shall be accountable only for that which he hath. (See Matth. xxv. 14-30; also Rom. xii. 6, 7, 8; 1 Peter, iv. 10, 11; 1 Cor. iv. 7; vii. 7.) It is impossible to look at the cerebral development, either animal, moral, or intellectual, of any two individuals, and not be convinced that Scripture and Phrenology precisely coincide in this view of human nature; and here also, while Phrenology accords with the Bible, many of the other systems of mental philosophy stand in opposition to it: for not a few philosophers maintain that all men are created with equal talents; and even those who admit a difference, merely state the fact, and do not point out the nature, the causes, or the extent of the variety apparent in the capacities and dispositions of individuals-which Phrenology makes palpable even to the senses.

Finally, St Paul observes, "I know that in me (that is, in my flesh) dwelleth no good thing for to will is present with me; but how to perform that which is good I find not. For

the good that I would, I do not; but the evil which I would not, that I do. Now, if I do that I would not, it is no more I that do it, but sin that dwelleth in me. I find then a law that, when I would do goody evil is present with me. For I delight in the law of God after the inward man. But I see another law in my members warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin, which is in my members;" (Rom. vii. 18-23.) And again, in the Epistle to the Galatians (v. 17): "For the flesh lusteth against the spirit, and the spirit against the flesh; and these are contrary the one to the other; so that ye cannot do the things that ye would. But if ye be led by the spirit, ye are not under the law. Now, the works of the flesh are manifest; which are these: Adultery, fornication, uncleanness, lasciviousness, idolatry, witchcraft, hatred, variance, emulations, wrath, strife, seditions, heresies, envyings, murders, drunkenness, revellings, and such like; of the which I tell you before, as I have also told you in time past, that they which do such things shall not inherit the kingdom of God. But the fruit of the spirit is love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance: against such there is no law." St Paul is here speaking of his own experience as an individual; and his description of himself is exactly in accordance with that of one class of characters with which Phrenology make us acquainted-namely, those in whom large organs of the animal propensities are combined with large organs of the moral sentiments and an active temperament. The history of St Paul's life shews that he belonged to this class. His original conduct in relation to Christianity was "breathing out threatenings and slaughter against the disciples of the Lord:" he "made havoc of the church, entering into every house, and hauling men and women, committed them to prison;" (Acts, viii. 3; ix. 1.) At this period the propensities held the ascendency. After his conversion he continued to feel the solicitations of those feelings in the manner forcibly described in the passages just quoted from his Epistles; but he no longer yielded to their abuses. The moral sentiments, under the influence of altered views, had now assumed the supremacy. It will be remarked that he distinctly recognises the action of both sets of faculties within his own mind: "I delight," says he, "in the law of God, after the inward man; but I see another law in my members warring against the law of my mind, and bringing me into captivity to the law of sin, which is in my members." We are aware that some divines construe the "spirit" mentioned in the verses quoted from the Epistle to the Galatians, to mean the Spirit of God, as contradistinguished from human nature: but it appears to us that such an interpretation is not only unwarranted, but inconsistent with the words.

just cited in italics, where both "laws" are spoken of as equally inherent in Paul's nature; and that the Apostles, in speaking of" the spirit" in opposition to "the flesh," allude to the moral and religious sentiments of the human mind, as contradistinguished from the animal propensities. The works of the flesh above described by St Paul, are, without exception, abuses of one or several of the faculties. He describes also "the fruit of the spirit," which is " love, joy, peace, long-suffering, gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance;" and every one of these, it will be observed, is a legitimate action of the moral sentiments and intellect. He says, most truly, that "against such there is no law." Certainly none-because the moral sentiments are the ruling powers, and their dictates, when enlightened by intellect, are supreme.

Similar views are eloquently expounded by Mr Clarke in the Lectures of which the title is copied at the commencement of the present article. We are happy to see Phrenology finding its way into the pulpit, and cannot entertain a doubt that, were clergymen in general to call in the aid of physical science and philosophy to illustrate and support the truths of religion, they would soon perceive a decided augmentation of the interest excited and instruction communicated by their discourses.

Mr Clarke has prefixed to his Lectures a Table of the Phrenological Organs, divided into three columns; the first containing the names and uses of the organs-the second, their abuses -and the third, the effects of their deficiency. And he adds the remark, that if the first column be read from top to bottom through the whole Table, it will be seen that the uses of the organs are all good-highly important-absolutely neces sary but if the second column be read in the same manner, it will be perceived that the abuses of the organs produce all the crimes known among men; while reading the third column wholly by itself will show that deficient organs, even those that may be most awfully misapplied, are by no means to be desired. The deficiency would not be an improvement.......By looking at the uses and abuses of Veneration, Hope, and Wonder, it will be found that they may either exalt to high-toned religion, or debase to grovelling superstition-belief in prodigies, magic, ghosts, and all kinds of absurdities; and even Conscientiousness may, when joined with these in its abused state, aid the delusion and swell the evils. The abuses of the organs only are sins; and from these sins the majority of human miseries flow. To use the organs aright is of course to avoid transgression and to escape suffering; and this again is to be virtuous and happy."

In the first lecture, Mr Clarke shews that Christ and his Apostles teach that man has animal propensities, from which

chiefly sin has its origin; that these are alluded to as powers in themselves both necessary and good; that, according to the Christian Scriptures, they may be kept within the limits of virtue and religion; that man is to be rendered religious, not by their destruction, but by directing them aright; and that human nature is by no means the mass of unmingled degradation which it is so frequently represented to be.

6

"Both Christianity and Phrenology," says he, "forbid us to view man's nature as a mixture of brute and demon. They who are become half brute half demon are said to be without natural affection,' and to be given up to vile affections.' As they did not like to retain God in their knowledge, God gave them over to a reprobate mind, to do those things which are not convenient; being filled with all unrighteousness.' They are men of corrupt minds. They are in an unnatural state. They are degraded, debased, and gone out of the way.' But while we may point to them as melancholy proofs of what human beings may become, we must not point to them as evidences of what human nature in its essence and constitution is. We might as justly adduce Socrates, Newton, and Howard, as proofs that the nature of every man is wise, and good, and great, as hold up Nero, King Henry the Eighth, and Judge Jeffreys, as evidences that the nature of every man is base, cruel, and depraved. To place the crimes of men to the account of an uncontrollably sinful nature, is to exculpate them from blame. It is more: it is asserting that man is unimprovable. It is condemning all plans and attempts which aim at exalting the human mind. It is pronouncing all human means unavailing to elevate the human character. It is representing a human being as too worthless, despicable, and vile, to be the object of virtuous affection. Let man be the loathsome reptile that he is sometimes supposed, and he is unworthy of regard, undeserving of respect, and utterly destitute of any claims upon the laws of benevolence and truth. Then, duty to each other men cannot owe. Beings who were compounded of only brute propensities and demon hate, worked up to a nature radically and universally depraved, must invariably act as demon-brutes. But is this the case? Are our social, scientific, charitable, and religious institutions, proofs that we are demon-brutes? Whenever a man sincerely laments that the human race is nothing but beast and demon, his own lament demonstrates that his views are false. He is not himself a demon-beast; for, if he were, no such lamentation could escape him.

"Does the tiger lament his own fierceness, or the serpent mourn over his degradation and poison? And as impossible would it be for man-for any man-to sigh for human nature, if the nature of every human being were brutified and demon