kind of comic vein runs through the early adventures of the stouthearted warrior, in which love of women, of riddles, and of slaying Philistines out of pure wantonness, vie for the mastery.' P. 204.

Now, Mr. Editor, what is the character of the passages which I have quoted? Are they the dictates of a mind impressed with a conviction of the truth and the importance of Revelation? Is it possible that the person who wrote these passages can have ever applied the energies of his mind to the serious consideration of that awful question, on the issue of which all our future happiness depends? And what is likely to be the effect of such a work as this on an inexperienced and uninformed mind, not prepared by sound religious instruction to neutralize the moral poison which it contains? What father, who was anxious that his son should be a firm and consistent believer in that religion, on which he places all his hopes of future happiness, would venture to place "The History of the Jews" in his hands? I shall endeavour, at my leisure, to send a few more remarks on the same subject. A CHRISTIAN OF THE OLD SCHOOL.

Feb. 25, 1830.

I am, &c

SACRIFICE OF CHRIST.

Ezekiel xviii. 27, 28.-" When the wicked man turneth away from his wickedness that he hath committed, and doeth that which is lawful and right, he shall save his soul alive. Because he considereth, and turneth away from all his transgressions that he hath committed, he shall surely live, he shall not die." And, again, ver. 30, "Repent, and turn yourselves from all your transgressions; so iniquity shall not be your ruin."

Jeremiah iii. 12, 13.-" Go and proclaim these words towards the north, and say, Return, thou backsliding Israel, saith the Lord; and I will not cause mine anger to fall upon you: for I am merciful, saith the Lord, and I will not keep anger for ever. Only acknowledge thine iniquity, that thou hast transgressed against the Lord."

THESE expressions are sometimes thought to militate against the doctrine of the sacrifice of Christ as necessary to procure acceptance and pardon. But the expressions of the readiness of God to pardon his repentant people, did not do away with the necessity of the sacrifices required by the law, to make atonement for their offences against it-that was still to be done. Therefore these expressions, and many like them, promising the people of Israel pardon and favour on returning to God, are not in any way inconsistent with the doctrine of the sacrifice of Christ; for, notwithstanding these expressions by the prophets and Moses, the sacrifices under the law of Moses for the transgressions of the people were nevertheless to be made.

It is oftentimes objected that the death of an innocent person should be required, in order to the pardon of sin.

It is not uncommon for persons to offer to forego, and actually to forego, advantages and pleasures, that another may receive them. Self-denial, for others' benefit, is a thing of every day; neither are there wanting instances of persons sacrificing their lives for the good of others, of laying down their lives for their friends. Examples of this kind may be found in early history; and there are examples in

66

all periods, of individuals interposing their persons to save the lives of others. The Apostle, St. Paul, says, peradventure for a good man, some would even dare to die. But God commendeth his love towards us, that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us."

No one objects to individuals devoting their health and lives, and quitting every comfort of home to dwell among heathens, and to teach them religion, in order that they may be saved.

If we believe the Old and New Testaments, Prophets and Apostles, whom God knew would lose their lives in the service, have been sent by him to teach and to reform his people.

That men should be sent on services which peril their lives, or who will certainly be killed in them, can hardly be objected to, when so many voluntarily undertake the like services, without being expressly sent; and, withal, when the sent voluntarily accept the employment, and consider themselves highly honoured in it, which is the case with the prophets and apostles referred to.

That a person should die for the salvation of mankind, is not then an inconceivable thing; nor that he should consider himself as honoured in his office. Put the case of any individual among men, being capable, by his dying, of benefiting all his fellow-creatures, would there not be found many pressing forward to do it, and feeling highly honoured, if accepted? Without question there would be.

That Christ then should offer himself to die for the sins of mankind, if thereby their sins might be remitted, is perfectly agreeable to the natural sentiments of man. And that God should accept it, and send him into the world for that end, is but consonant with his known dealings, already referred to, of sending prophets and apostles, who willingly laid down their lives in the prosecution of their mission for the reformation of his people.

If any sacrifice were to be accepted for sin, it is evident that the sacrifice must be of an innocent person. The sufferings of one guilty before God, according to his desert, could not be more than enough for his own offences-any suffering beyond his deserts would be unjust.

In the acceptance of a voluntary sacrifice, there is no wrong done to the individual.

As to the necessity of a sacrifice at all, we are not competent to judge. It is manifestly just that offenders should be punished; if pardoned, on what terms it should be, is not for the offenders to propose or question. We have not the means of judging in what terms God should pardon sin; but that it should be on terms to manifest the authority of the lawgiver, and his displeasure against the breakers of his law, will seem to most men reasonable. That the sacrifice of Christ does mark the displeasure of God against sin, even whilst he pardons, is hardly questionable. And unless man could show how otherwise it could be done, just as effectually, it becomes him to be silent, independent of the impiety of questioning the proceedings of God. We see a wise end answered by the sacrifice of an innocent person, in the person of Christ, dying in order to forgiveness. But if we could perceive no wisdom or propriety, whatever, in it; to object to it would be unreasonable. To give or withhold assent to

any supposed dealing of God-not on the sufficient or insufficient evidence of its being a proceeding of God's, but according as it agrees or disagrees with our notions of propriety, is to reduce the wisdom of God to the measure of an individual's mind. And whether this be reasonable or not, might be left to the determination of almost any man.

But it follows, that if the person sacrificed were innocent, he could not be merely one of human race; for it will hardly be denied by any one, that if any man should say he was without sin, he would not speak the truth.

This consideration leads to the acknowledgment of a superior nature in Christ, if the truth of the doctrine of his sacrifice be admitted. And this, in itself, is a paramount objection with those who object to the doctrine. They object to the union of the supposed superior nature of Christ with the human nature of man.

Unless, however, a man be a perfect materialist, he cannot deny that what is distinct from the human body-what we call the spirit of a man-may be united to the person of a man.

Unless a man believes that the spirit of a man is annihilated when the body dies, he must admit that a spirit which is itself not mortal—I do not say in itself not mortal, but in point of faet not mortal with the body-may be united to what is subject to death.

These things admitted, I do not see why it may not be admitted as conceivable, that a superior spirit to the spirit of a man may be united with the person of a man; or why it should be considered inconceivable that an immortal spirit-a spirit immortal in itself-should be united with mortal man.

Angels are in the Old Testament often represented as assuming the form and person of man. This is nothing to unbelievers in revelation; but it is worthy of consideration with those who admit the authority of Revelation, and yet question the divinity of Christ, on the ground of it being inconceivable that the divine and human nature can subsist in union.

The

Angels are said to rejoice over every sinner that repenteth. Son of God cannot be supposed less interested for the human race; nor, without degrading him below the sentiments of man, can we suppose him unwilling to make any sacrifice for their salvation. And we have seen that the acceptance of such sacrifice is not opposed to the known dealings of God, for the salvation and recovery of his people. U. Y.

MR. TERROT'S PARAPHRASE, &c. OF THE EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.

MR. EDITOR,-U. Y. will be obliged by the insertion in the next month's Christian Remembrancer, of the following corrections of his paper, under the above title, in the Remembrancer for March.

Page 182, line 3 from the bottom, dele "temporal life," and read "to a resurrection," &c.

Page 183, line 25 from the top, instead of "death eternal" read "eternal misery."

U. Y. begs permission to add, that what he has argued against the reviewer is, not the obvious fact that "it is appointed unto all men once to die; " but the affirmation, that "as in Adam all die, even so in Christ shall all be made alive," must refer to spiritual death;' and the further affirmation that the sacrifice of Christ exerts all its efficacy upon spiritual life.'

6

U. Y. of course admits that the penalty of temporal death is not remitted. Still he thinks that from the death men die, Christ must be acknowledged to be their deliverer; inasmuch as to him they are indebted for the resurrection from the dead.

March, 1830.

PAROCHIAL CHARITIES.

MR. EDITOR,-It is very common for a sum of money to be bequeathed, so that the interest shall be annually distributed among poor persons of the parish. Now these terms involve questions, whether the gratuity should be confined to such poor as have a legal settlement, and reside in the parish; or whether other poor residents may share in it; and whether it may not even be extended to other legal parishioners who may reside in any neighbouring parish. I should feel exceedingly obliged for the opinion and the practice of any Clergyman, to whom these questions may have occurred; and if the Commissioners on Charities shall have given any opinion on the points, I would request to have the passage noticed.

I am, Sir, your obedient servant,

Rectory, Devonshire, Jan. 14, 1830.

G. B.

We have not as yet been able to meet with any case in the Reports, wherein any intimation appears of the opinion of the Commissioners on the subject referred to in the letter of our correspondent, though we have a strong impression on our minds of the existence of some such cases. It has been the practice of the Commissioners, we believe, generally to recommend, that the distribution of charitable bequests, of the description alluded to by our correspondent, should be confined, as much as possible, to such poor persons in the parish to whom the bequest relates, as are not constantly or habitually relieved out of the poor-rates; the presumption being, that it was not the intention of the donors of such charities, that they should be applied for the benefit of the parochial poor, whose relief the law has otherwise provided for. Whether the distribution should be confined to poor persons having their legal settlement and residing within the parish, or whether other poor residents may be allowed to share in it, and whether the distribution may not even be extended to other legal parishioners residing in the neighbouring parishes, are questions which must depend very much on the terms of the donation itself; we see no reason, however, where the terms used are general, for construing them on principles applicable to settlement law; and we incline to think a bequest to poor persons of, or in any particular parish, may be properly administered for the benefit of industrious poor persons residing within the parish, whether legally

settled there or not; and, unless the terms of the bequest denote a contrary intention, we think also the benefit of it may properly be confined to the poor residing in such parish; it appearing to us that to extend it beyond, and to bestow it on others not resident, on the mere ground of their having a settlement in the parish, savours more of the principle of the law of settlement than was intended by the donors of these charities to govern the application of them.

SOPHISTRY.

"Oh fortunatos nimiùm, sua si bona nôrint,
Agricolas !"

MR. EDITOR,-In the present unparalleled state of distress, under which the lower classes are suffering, there is one argument which it strikes me might serve to lessen the load and reconcile them to their calamity, though I have not yet seen it applied by any writer to temporal affairs. It has been judiciously observed by the Rev. Daniel Wilson, and the other advocates of the late inroad on the constitution, and betrayal of the Church, that one great blessing necessarily arising from the ascendancy of Popery is, that the Protestant clergy will be forced to become so far more active and energetic as not merely to obviate the probability of any numerous defections in their flocks, but, by this compulsatory increase of zeal, to work far beyond the threatened evil, and create a livelier spirit of true piety generally, and a more vital diffusion of Christianity; the few who may apostatize during the progress of these operations, while Papists and Protestants are commencing with equal industry, being, of course, considered of no account. Now, will not an analogical application of this grand discovery salve half the evils we endure? May we not confidently reconcile the peasant to his present wretchedness, since he may happily be assured that, after a year or two, his dedication of eighteen hours per diem, instead of ten, to agriculture, will place him (if he be not starved in the interim) in as good, perhaps a better, situation than before? I really do hope, Mr. Editor, as the learned writers above have not condescended to exhibit the universal excellence of their doctrines, speaking as they do in the words of comfort to the poor, as well as the pious man, that you will be good enough hereby to supply this deficiency for the consolation of hundreds, who could not conceive why the demands of Irish demagogues superseded in the last session every consideration of our own distresses, and who may now be rejoiced at learning that those distresses were purposely left unnoticed, as being in themselves sources of greater coming wealth and prosperity.

I am, Sir, your obedient humble servant, and constant subscriber,

E. B. P.S.-I confess there is one thing puzzles me, viz., may we not, on this principle, stop our neighbour in the road and demand his purse, if we do so from the laudable motive of inducing him to exert his energies" in repairing the loss? As, however, I am but a bad casuist, I refer the resolution of this doubt to Mr. Wilson himself.