« PreviousContinue »
" desire." Souls have a hunger as well as bodies, and the hunger of the soul is a much more serious thing. You may see physical hunger depicted in the wretched looks of those who crowd the alleys of St. Giles, and you may see the hunger of souls depicted on the faces of those that roll in their chariots of opulence through Rotten-row, What is the ennui that makes miserable the rich but the unsatisfied hunger of the soul. First: The hunger of the soul as well as the hunger of the body implies the existence of food somewhere. Secondly: The unsatisfied hunger of the soul as well as the body is painful and ruinous.
II. SOUL CRAVING ALLAYED ONLY BY LABOUR. “The soul of the sluggard desireth, and hath nothing, but the soul of the diligent shall be made fat." Charity, or accident, or fortune may allay the physical hunger of man, may make fat even the sluggard's body ; but personal labour, diligent effort, is essential to allay the hunger of the soul. Men must labour before they can get the soul's true bread. There must be the sowing, the culturing, the reaping, and the threshing by the individual man in order to get hold of that bread which can make fat the soul. Spiritually, I cannot live on the produce of other men,
we have, Secondly: The selfruinous in speech. "The soul of the transgressors shall eat vio. lence." The corrupt speech of the ungodly is a violence to reason, conscience, social propriety. The sinful tongue of the transgressor, of all violent weapons, inflicts the most violent injuries on his own nature.
II. THE SELF-CONTROLLED AND THE SELF-RECKLESS SPEECH. First: Controlled speech may be ilseful. “He that keepeth his mouth, keepeth his life.” The tongue is a member that requires controlling. Passion and impulse are constantly stimulating it to action. Hence the importance of it being properly “bridled ;' held firmly by the reins of reason. Secondly : Reckless speech may be dangerous. “ He that openeth wide his lips shall have destruction." Who can tell the evils that a lawless tongue has done in the world ? One spark from it has often kindled conflagrations. (James iii. 8, 9.) “If any man among you seemeth to be religious and bridleth not his tongue, but deceiveth his own heart, this man's religion is vain.” Give not thy tongue,” says Quarles, " too great a liberty, lest it take thee prisoner. A word unspoken is, like the sword in the scabbard, thine; if vented, thy sword is in another's hand. If thou desire to be held wise, be so wise as to hold thy tongue." "Set a watch, O Lord, before my mouth; keep the door of my lips !
SOUL CRIVING. " The soul of the sluggard desireth, and bath nothing: b:lt the soul of the diligent shall bə made fat." - Pror. xiii. 4.
These words suggest.
I. THAT SOUL CRAVING IS COMMON TO ALL. Both the soul of the sluggard and the diligent
MORAL TRUTHFULNESS. “A righteous man hateth lyinz: but a wicked man is loathsome, and cometh to shame. Righteousness keepeth him that is upright in the way: but wickedness overthroweth the sinner."-Prov. xiii. 5, 6.
I. MORAL TRUTHFULNESS IS AN INSTINCT TO THE RIGHTEOUS. “A righteous man hateth lying.”. A soul that has been made right in relation to the laws of its own spiritual being to the universe and to God, has an instinctive
repugnance to falsehood. A right He "cometh to shame." A liar hearted man cannot be false in either in lip, or life, or both, must speech or life.
“ He hates lying.” come to shame. A rigorous des The prayer of his soul is, “Ře tiny will strip off his mask, and move me from the way of lying! leave him exposed, a hideous and grant me thy law graciously.” hypocrite, to the scorn of men (Psalm cxix. 29.)
and angels. Thirdly: Destruction. II. MORAL TRUTHFULNESS IS A “ Wickedness overthroweth the SAFEGUARD AGAINST EVIL.
The sinner.” Inevitable destruction evils specified in these two verses is the doom of the false. They in connection with the wicked have built their houses on the must be regarded as kept off from sand of fiction, and the storms of the righteous by his moral truthfulness. This, indeed, seems im From all these evils, moral plied. What are the evils here truthfulness guards the righteous. implied connected with falsehood ? His truthfulness guards him First: Loathsomeness. “A wicked against the loathsome, the disman is loathsome.” A liar is an graceful, and the ruinous :unlovely and an unloveable object;
“ An honest man's the noblest work of he is detestable ; he attracts none;
POPE. he repels all. Secondly: Shame.
Thcological Notes and Queries. .
OPEN COUNCIL. [The utmost freedom of honest thought is permitted in this department. The reder must therefore use his own discriminating faculties, and the Editor must be allowed to claim freedom from responsibility.]
THE GREAT PROPITIATIOX.
Replicant.-In answer to Querist
the atonement of Christ by the
Calvinists are very partial to this theory. The difference, according to their theory, between saint and sinner, saved and lost, is that the account of the one is cancelled, settled, or paid by the surety, and the other's debt remains undischarged, and hence his punish
ment is sure. We may, therefore,
Debtor to God.
count of Adam's sin .. To personal shortcomings after
conversion, or negation of good in deed, word, and
thought . . To positive evil work, and
word, and thought, before conversion
P To all acts, &c., of evil since
For all positive evil, or breach jury done to his character and of Divine law, punishment must government by individual sinners, be inflicted. For all negation of but by sin absolutely, without good, or lack of positive righteous any reference to names or numness, some other righteousness bers. In consequence of this must be given. The pain (3p) compensation, though no and the righteousness (r) have pretends to say what it was, or been fully paid by Christ, man's
how it answered its purpose, surety. According_to the Cal the Divine Being is at liberty vinistic theory, our Lord paid all without making light of sin, to for the elect by name, as .John bestow any favour on sinners. Bunyan, and paid nothing for the He, therefore, bestows upon some non-elect; therefore are the elect of them spiritual influences to free from all obligation to God, make them believe, and gives and their salvation, as far as God them eternal life for doing what is concerned, is of mere justice, they could not refuse to do. That and in no sense of mercy, while is the Calvinistic view of it. the salvation of the non-elect The Noncalvinistic theory regards always has been, and ever must be the divine influence as sufficient impossible, they being unable to only to make it possible for man meet the liabilities of the bill, and to believe, in spite of his evil having no friend to pay the sum propensities, and not as sufficent required. According to the view to annihilate the free agency of of those who believe in a universal believers. atonement, the bill is cancelled This theory requires (1.) The for every man, and God, there separation of God and Christ, as it fore, cannot in any case, with would be absurd to talk of one justice, demand a second payment. person compensating himself. Let us now consider:
This theory (2.) Makes salvation
of right and not of grace, and II. The atonement of Christ as
renders the punishment of the explained by the theory of compensa wicked impossible, for if a man tion.
were robbed, and afterwards This theory is but a slight received
compensation and · modification of the theory of debt. acknowledged it satisfactory, he The only point of difference being would have no longer any moral that in the latter our Lord is right to proscecute the evil doer. supposed to give to God an exact (3.) If the compensation be a full equivalent for benefits conferred
equivalent, as in the case of the upon sinners, while in the former atonement it is supposed to be, a general compensation only is then is there no room for forgivegiven; and those theologians who adopt this theory find it The great fundamentalobjection very convenient to leave that
to this theory of explanation is compensation undefined.
Man, this, (4.) That if it was impossible they say, having sinned, has for God to bestow upon the sinner forfeited all good by disobedience, the smallest gift without compenand it would be impossible for sation, it was surely impossible for God to bestow any good upon him Him to bestow his greatest giftnow that he is a sinner, without his only Son-without compen, seeming to sanction sin, unless sation. It is, however, supposed he received an equivalent or was that God coull give, and actually in some way–nobody knows how did give his Son or self for man's -compensated, not for the in
good without any compensation
whatever. If this was possible, I ask the unsophisticated reader, why could He not give, on the same terms, freely and without compensation, any other smaller gift? Why not give full pardon or eternal life on condition of true repentance ?
As I gave in 1862 an elaborate mathematical analysis of this theory in HOMILIST, Vol. iv., Second series, p. 102, it is not necessary to discuss it any further here.
GALILEO. (To be continued.)
[We hold it to be the duty of an Editor either to give an early notice of the books sent to him for remark, or to return them at once to the Publisher. It is unjust to praise worthless books; it is robbery to retain unnoticed ones.]
THE REVIEWER'S CANON.
THE LIFE AND LIGHT OF Man. An Essay. By John Young, LL.D.
Alexander Strahan, London and New York. We should like amazingly to see an intelligent, searching, vigorous, and thoroughly independent book on modern theological heretics— that is, heretics in relation to the standards which the popular teachers of religion have set up. Such a book would contain not only names that have been sadly slandered by contemporary bigots, but names representing the greatest scholars, the profoundest thinkers, and the most Christ-loving men. We should have such names as Dr. Pye Smith, Dr. Arnold, Arch bishop Whately, Dr. Bushnell, Robertson, of Brighton, John Foster, Thomas Binney, F. Maurice, and many others, including the distinguished author of the work before us.
And in what does the heresy of such men consist ? Simply in thisin making the Scriptures of God rather than the systems of men, the standard of their faith. “My heterodoxy,” says Archbishop Whately, “consists chiefly in waiving a good many subtle questions, agitated by various "anes' and 'ites' and 'ists,' and in keeping clear of sundry metaphysical distinctions relative to the mode of existence of the Divine and the human mind, which are beyond my comprehension, and which I am disposed to think would have been brought down to the level of it by Scripture, had they been necessary points of a saving faith.” The work before, us touches the most vital questions in Christian theology, and contains views in direct antagonism to many of those set forth by the preachers and the authors who arrogate to
themselves the title of “Evangelical.” As Evangelical opinions are not evangelical truths, Dr. Young's conclusions are not necessarily erroneous on this account. By the Scripture he must be tried, and by its decisions he is manifestly prepared to abide. Though we cannot, say we agree with all his propositions, we greatly admire the honesty, ability, and reverence with which they are presented. We heartily commend the work to the candid investigation of all who aspire to the work of expounding the Holy Book of God.
Tue CHURCII AS ESTABLISHED IN ITS RELATIONS WIT! Dissert. By
Rev. J. CLARK, M.A. London: Rivingtons, Waterloo-place. THE HOMILIst knows nothing of Church or Dissent, and takes no interest whatever in the squabbles of ecclesiastical parties. Nonconformity may, in the eye of a mere Churchman, be a very contemptible thing, but to him who studies the revelation of Christ in the light of reason and conscience, in its relations to universal man, and to that eternity which engulphs in a few short years a whole generation, with its kings, princes, generals, judges, bishops, clergymen and dissenting ministers, the “ Church of England,” as it is called, is rather an insignia ficant thing-a thing not worth battling for. We feel, therefore, but little interest in such works as the one before us. Dr. Clark is obvi. ously an able man, a vigorous writer, and his work will not fail to awaken an interest in ecclesiastical partisans.
A SUGGESTIVE COMMENTARY ON THE New TESTAMENT, ON AN ORIGINAL
Plan. St. Luke. Vol. I. By Rev. U. H. VAN DOREN. London:
R. D. Dickinson, 92, Farringdon-street. This is a work very much after our own heart. It answers well to its name. Though its Greek is not always accurate, and its theological leanings are rather too strong in some cases, it is pre-eminently suggestive, and this to us is the most priceless element in any such work. Its brief critical notes, gathered from our best exegetes, are numerous, lucid, and apt. They strike their light directly on the text. The author's annotations are in the main admirable. They are all pith and point; there is not a waste word; and many of his homiletic points, expressed in a sentence or two, are suggestive of enough to bring up sermons to fertile souls. We heartily commend the book.
MEMORIALS OF CHARLES MARCH, COMMANDER, R.N. By his Nephew,
SEPTIMUS MARCH, B.A. London: James Nisbet, 21, Berners
street. We once had the pleasure of an interview with Captain March some ten years ago, in the city of Gloucester. His modest bearing, frank expression, social glow, and regal head, so won our sympathies, that