very advantageous to the sale of his books, which were disposed of all in a single day, while it would under ordinary circumstances have required weeks to have circulated the same number.

These attacks were but the prelude to a more decided persecu tion; excited by the calumnious reports that were scattered abroad about Francke, the Elector of Mayence issued an edict, in which, stigmatizing Francke as the ringleader of a new sect, he deprived him of his situation, and banished him from Erfurt. As soon as the innocent object of this decree understood its purport, he hastened to the council of magistrates, to justify himself before them; but they refused to hear him, and ordered him to leave the town within eight and forty hours. His parishioners interceded for him, that their beloved pastor might be left, but in vain; their request was rudely refused, some of them who persisted to urge it were even committed to prison, and Francke was forced to separate himself from them, after fifteen months residence in Erfurt. Melancholy as the necessity was to which he yielded, it was rendered less severe by many testimonies of esteem from other quarters: the dukes of Gotha, of Cobourgh, and of Weimar, offered him an asylum in their states; and the very day in which the decree of banishment was communicated to him, he received an invitation to accept of the professorship of oriental languages in the new university of Halle, recently founded by the Elector of Brandenbourgh. To this last situation he removed in the year 1691, influenced, it would seem, by the character of its professors.

In conjunction with his situation in the university, he became minister of the church of Glaucha, in the suburbs of Halle-a post that called for all his care and all his energy. Not only was real vital religion unknown in his parish, but the morals of the inhabitants were very relaxed. The mechanics and idlers of Halle were accustomed to frequent the coffee-houses and taverns of the suburbs of Glaucha, and carried thither all the vices that are generated by drunkenness and want of employment. Francke faithfully fulfilled the duties of this important and difficult situation until 1715, when the parish of St. Ulrica, in Halle, was confided to him. His sermons equally at Glaucha and Halle, though very different in their form, had the same object, the great truths of the gospel with which his own heart was penetrated; the corruption of human nature, the grace of God manifested in Christ Jesus, and the holiness of life which is the first evidence of faith, these were the topics incessantly repeated. Many of his sermons have been printed, and display the life and energy that should characterise the preaching of the Gospel. His own notions on the subject of preaching were, perhaps, a little peculiar: "Many preachers" he says "cultivate pulpit eloquence, as if there ought to be orators in the church of God. We should not aim at being orators but fathers. preacher should exhort his congregation, as a father exhorts his children, and his addresses ought to be disposed in the manner he judges best fitted for the attainment of the only end he should propose, the saving of that which is lost. A father in speaking to his

The

children, never thinks of acting the orator, or uttering splendid harrangues on education or morals; let the pastor abstain from it likewise. A preacher should resemble those trees whose stem is elevated, but whose branches extend wide, and bend towards the ground, so that they who are unable to climb to its top, can yet gather its fruit, and receive its nourishment. I cannot but think the principle very dangerous which would regulate sermons by the congregation, and preach learnedly before a learned audience. The Pharisees were doubtless learned, and yet when our Lord addresses them, he declares their deficiencies and errors with all imaginable simplicity and plainness. Let us follow this example; and let us never forget that whatever be the refinement or education of the persons we address, their conversion to God is the all important object at which we should aim.” The last sentiment in this extract must, perhaps, modify the preceding observations; for as the instrument must vary in its strength and coarseness according to the material on which we employ it, so it would seem that while the same great truths form the ground-work of every sermon, and every address, the mode of annunciating them should vary with the mental character of the persons addressed. The sermon that would interest and influence a congregation of professors, would be unintelligible to a group of peasants: and while neither professors nor peasants should be suffered to go away ignorant of the message from God, the one thing needful, the former will admit and require a degree of care in the composition, variety in the illustration, and accuracy in the reasoning that would be unnecessary, perhaps injurious to the other.

Francke did not neglect those means of private instruction he had before found so useful; in his select societies he explained consecutively entire books of the Bible, commenting on the truths they contain, in the same order in which they are presented by the sacred writers in addition he assembled every day, morning and evening, his parishioners in the church, and for half an hour joined them in devotion, consisting of psalmody, prayer, the reading of a chapter and its explanation. On Saturday he mentioned the text on which he purposed to preach the next day, and requested his flock to make it the subject of their meditation to be the better prepared for profiting by the sermon: and on Sunday evening his discourse consisted of a brief analysis of his morning sermon, and a practical application of its truths. Every Thursday he read a portion of Arndt's valuable work on true Christianity; and on Friday he made the same

* John Arndt was born in the year 1555, and at first pursued the study of medicine, but having received serious feelings during an illness, he devoted himself to theology. Along with Prætorious, and more than him, he sought to re-establish the principles of the Reformation in the Lutheran churches, and to show that true Christianity consists in the manifestation of living, active faith, genuine piety, and the fruits of righteousness. In his lifetime he was the object of dislike and persecution, though he entered not into the polemics of his day, and yielding to the storm, he left Brunswick, and found an asylum in the Duke of Luneborough's dominion. His work on "True Christianity," published in

portion the groundwork of a sermon he regularly preached on that day. Thus it is apparent that Francke was a faithful servant to his Lord, who felt that all his time belonged to the master by whom the vineyard had been entrusted to his culture; and did not think that a sermon on Sunday acquitted him of his duty to God or his church: no, every day, and many times in the day, he mounted the pulpit to seek to gain souls, or to edify those that he had already conducted to the knowledge of salvation.

In 1699, Francke exchanged the professorship of oriental languages for that of divinity; and if as a pastor we have had occasion to admire his zeal and activity in the service of God, the duties to which his new situation called him, the manner in which he discharged them, and above all, the scenes of active benevolence by which he rendered his name universally illustrious, will enable us to contemplate him in other and equally important points of view. Our limits force us to defer the remainder of this survey till our succeeding number.

RELIGIOUS COMMUNICATIONS.

ON THE MILLENNIUM.

TO THE EDITOR OF THE CHRISTIAN EXAMINER,

SIR-As you have been kind enough to insert my remarks upon the second advent of Christ, and his personal reign upon the earth, I shall proceed, according to my promise, to the doctrine of the Millennium; and I regret very much, that from the limited space that I can presume to occupy in your pages, it is not in my power to do more than merely glance at the arguments that could be brought forward in support of these important doctrines, and in a condensed form lay before the public those particular arguments and proofs which appear to me less controvertible than others that might be adduced, although, perhaps, some of them may be less striking at first view. I am persuaded, however, that the principal points advanced in support of the personal reign of Christ in the last Number, cannot be satisfactorily answered:* and with the

1605, was charged with heresy, mysticism, alchemy, and ignorance. The work, however, remains, and is in constant use in Germany, while the very names of Arndt's opponents are forgotten. The most valuable part of his ministry was, perhaps, the formation of Spener's mind.

* Allow me to add the following remarks to what has been said in the former article on the promise that Christ should sit upon the throne of his father David. It may be said that David reigned over the house of Israel, and Christ reigns over the spiritual Israel of God, and in this sense he sits upon the throne of his father David. But I would remark that there never was any period in the history of the Church, that Christ did not reign over his people, as well before as subsequent to

same confidence respecting the views which I shall advance in the present article, I proceed at once to the point to be considered. And I would remark of the millennium, as I have done of the second advent, that all parties hold the doctrine of a millennium in one sense or other; the great point of difference being, when it is to take place, whether at the advent or before it, and whether the events connected with it are to be understood in a literal or spiritual sense. I propose to show that the millennium commences at the advent, and not before it, and that the events referred to are to be understood in the plain literal meaning of the words in which they are revealed.

The word millennium signifies a thousand years, and derives its import from what is said in the first few verses of the 20th chapter of Revelations, where the expression occurs no less than six times in as many verses. Let us then examine the several particulars which are there referred to, and see what light they throw upon the subject.

1st, Satan is to be bound one thousand years, and cast into the bottomless pit, or as in the original, the abyss: see Luke viii. 31. 2d, We are to have "the first resurrection."

3d, Those whe are partakers of the first resurrection, live and reign with Christ a thousand years; they shall be priests of God and of Christ, and upon them the second death hath no power.

4th, "The rest of the dead" live not again until the expiration of the thousand years.

5th, When the thousand years are expired, Satan is again to be let loose, and shall go out to deceive the nations. Gog and Magog will make an ineffectual attempt upon the saints and the beloved city, and will there meet with his final doom.

6th, The dead, small and great will then stand before the judgment seat of God. Death and hades, and all whose names are not written in the book of life, are cast into the lake of fire; "This is the second death."

Such are the events, connected with the millennium, which are revealed to us in the 20th chapter of Revelations, and I shall now, with as much brevity as possible, enter upon an examination of the leading points among them, I shall begin with the first resurrection, feeling persuaded that if I can successfully maintain the literal interpretation of this doctrine, I shall have gained the principal point in the controversy.

In your review there is some degree of confusion upon this point,

the time of David; and the promise to Mary announces the event as at that time future in its accomplishment. Let any person candidly read over the prophecy in Isaiah, and the subsequent promise in Luke, where the Lord declares that he will give- not that he has given--unto his beloved Son the throne of David: and let such a one come to the conclusion, if he can, that all this does not mean a literal reign in Jerusalem, but a spiritual reigning in the hearts of his believing people; that, in fact, a promise which is spoken of by St. Luke and by Isaiah, as future, was not future in its accomplishment, but was at all times verified in the history of the Church, from the first appearance of the Israel of God, even as it is this day.

and if I understand you right, a new doctrine is broached, which is this, that the martyrs are at this time raised from the grave, and go to heaven where they remain during the millennium, and then form the ten thousand saints who accompany the Lord coming to judgment. The more commonly received opinion, however, is, that the spirit which animated the martyrs, again revives in the church, and reanimates its members, so that true religion and piety are spread over the entire surface of the globe. My opinion is, that the souls of the faithful witnesses are united to their glorified bodies, raised from the dead, and come with Christ to reign upon the earth during the millennium. In support of this view I would remark.

That it is called the first resurrection; from which I infer that it must be understood not in a spiritual or figurative, but in a literal sense; for if it mean a great revival of religion, I am at a loss to know why it should receive the appellation of the first resurrection. If it be the first in that sense, let me ask what is to be the second? Understanding it, however, literally, we have no difficulty in the matter; the first is the resurrection of believers from among the dead, the second is the general resurrection which takes place at the end of the millennium, when the judgment is set, the books are opened and the wicked are cast into hell-not into hades where they go at death, but into gehenna*-the lake of fire; and this is what is particularly pointed out in the 12th and following verses of the chapter.

That in the writings of the New Testament a pointed distinction is observed between the first and second resurrection, the one being styled a resurrection from out of, or from among, the dead, and the other the resurrection of the dead; this distinction is clearly observable in the original, and in many places the translators have preserved it in our authorized version, rendering the one from the dead, and the other of the dead. See a striking instance of this in Luke xx. 35, compared with Matthew xxii. 31, where the resurrection of believers is styled by St. Luke from the dead, and the general resurrection by Matthew of the dead. In this passage believers are particularly entitled the children of the resurrection, and why should this be the case if there be but one resurrection both for believers and unbelievers? There is also a striking proof of this distinction in Phil. iii. 11, where the apostle expresses an earnest desire that he might by any means attain unto the resurrection from the dead-not of the dead, as in the English Bibles, for the apostle could not entertain a doubt but that he should rise again either unto the resurrection of life, or to the resurrection of condemnation for he well knew the Saviour's testimony to that effect, "The hour

* I have carefully examined the original of every passage where the word 'hell' occurs in the New Testament, with the assistance of a Concordance, and find that where the future place of eternal torment is spoken of, the word 'gehenna' is used; but where the present abode of the departed spirit is alluded to (as in the parable of the rich man and Lazarus, where the former is said to have lifted up his eyes in hell-bades) the word invariably used is hades-the unseen abode of the dead, See Campbell's Dissertations on the Gospels, Dis. 6, part 2, vol, i. p. 170.