The dread of legal preaching has led ministers to deal much in general principles, and abstruse points of doctrine, to the neglect of striking and graphic descriptions of character, and frequent exhortations to the performance of duties which are incumbent on all, and more or less discharged by all, but the marked and exemplary performance of which is the only token by which the Christian can be recognised in the crowded walks of life;-of course I refer to the every-day duties of life-duties to God and duties to man ;-some of them acts of the mind, others of the body, but all comprised in that wonderful summary of religion and morals, "Love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and thy neighbour as thyself."

Progressive holiness, the Divine life, growth in grace, Christian vigilance, and other general terms, are in frequent use; but there is

not that pointed exhibition of prevalent vices and errors which the state of the religious world must be held to require.

The Evangelical Clergy of the Established Church differ widely in their mode of preaching from their dissenting brethren. With an equally clear and full exposition of the great doctrine of heavenly mercy, they unite a far more frequent and particular specification of the points in which Christians ought to be "lights of the world." That they do this without being considered unduly or offensively personal, their generally crowded churches are abundant proof. I am confirmed in my view of the matter by the repeated remarks of excellent friends of mine, accustomed to attend on evangelical preaching in the Church. They have told me that they have always been struck with the generalizing style adopted in dissenting chapels in different places, and that it appeared to them far less striking, and likely to arrest attention, than the manner of the clergy.

The recorded discourses of our blessed Saviour abound much in pointed exhortations to the practical duties of life, and these duties were by him specified individually, and not left to be included or not in general descriptions of virtuous character, according to the prevailing taste, or the prevailing infirmities of his hearers. I am persuaded that a careful comparison of these holy memorials, with the discourses most in favour among us, will fully justify the hint I presume to give, and do more to illustrate the subject than any disquisition with which I might encumber your pages.

In thus freely expressing my

uninteresting; while in the really sincere, it is apt to engender a sickly and sentimental piety, very unlike the vigorous, and purifying, and self-denying principles which Christianity exhibits.

If you should consider these observations deserving of attention, perhaps you will give them a place in the Congregational Magazine. I make no apology for the freedom of my strictures on the practice of ministers, because I claim community of purpose with themselves; having no other object than to do good.

I am, Gentlemen,
Your obedient servant,
AUDITOR.

No. II.

Brief Historical Sketch of the

Hebrew Language.

1. The golden age of this language comprehends that period during which the older historical books (Pentateuch, Joshua, Judges, 1st and 2d Samuel and Kings); and the works of the principal poets and prophets (Isaiah, Joel, Amos, Habakkuk, most of the Psalms, Proverbs, and Job,) were written. Jeremiah, Ezekiel, and a few others, bring us to the verge of the silver age.

The language of the Poets, besides being marked by a rythm produced by measured, parallel lines, as also in regard to words, grammatical forms, and composition of words, several peculiarities, by which it is distinguished from the common dialect, and which ought not to be left unnoticed by grammarians and lexicographers. Of these peculiarities, however, the majority are idioma

*

tical in a cognate dialect, namely, the Syriac. The language and rythm of the older prophets, Isaiah, and Joel, are purely poetical; those of the later, e. g. Jeremiah, approach nearer to prose.

2. Subsequent to the captivity commences the silver age of this language and literature. The poetry is feebler, and approaches

* In the preface to his larger Lexicon, Gesenius gives several instances of words which, in Hebrew, are poetical, but in Syriac are the common forms: the following are a specimens

for God; for D MUN, 1l man,

אֱנוֹשׁ

אָדָם

certained fact any conclusion can be drawn &c. He adds, "Whether from this asin favour of closer connection between the Hebrew poesy and Syriac literature, I very much doubt; and one may more correctly explain the facts of the case, by supposing that these words, at first uncommon and poetical, became by degrees to be used in ordinary and historical diction. The same may be observed in the latter historians of Rome, though in them resulting from a somewhat different cause." Heb. Hand. W. Buch. 1rster Theil. W. L. A.

to prose, the taste is less pure and refined, and the authors are almost mere imitators of the older classics of their nation, [i. e. their subjects and style are somewhat similar.] The orthography and idioms evidently diverge from the ancient models, and tend towards the Aramaïc. There are, nevertheless, not a few portions, which, though in point of history they must be placed in this age, equal even the oldest specimens of the language, e.g. some of the later Psalms; while others, such as Ecclesiastes, though they have the peculiarities, which mark a later age, are still highly estimable from their sentiments, taste, and style. The composition of the latest Hebrew book, that of Daniel, cannot be placed earlier than the age of the Maccabees. Indeed, of this, as well as of the book of Ezra, several portions are pure Chaldee.*

These Aramaic peculiarities are most apparent in the Book of Chronicles, Esther, Ecclesiastes, Daniel, and Jonah: somewhat

*The facts respecting the language of the different books mentioned in the above paragraph must be separated from the opinions respecting the history of these books, with which Gesenius has mixed them up. The author speaks as one who has entirely relinquished the idea of inspiration; and he judges, accordingly, of the books as he would of the remains of any other ancient nation. His remarks, therefore, cannot be considered as in any degree invalidating the claims to inspiration of the books he has specified; but simply stating the result of his inquiries into their language and style. The Chaldaisms of Daniel are very numerous, and marked, but this may be accounted for, from his prophecy having been written in a country where Chaldee was the vernacular tongue, without resorting to the opinion expressed in the text-an opinion which is opposed by all the evidence, external and internal, which can be collected on the subject. The Chaldeeisms of Ecclesiastes (if it is to be considered as written by Solomon,) I confess I cannot account for. W. L.A.

purer is the language of Ezra, Nehemiah, Zachariah, and Malachi. To the orthographico-grammatical peculiarities belong to the general scriptio plena of the vowelletters, and , as for commutation of and at the end of a word; and the use of (shin præfixum) for ; &c.

א

the ; דָּוִד

3. During the latter period (from 500 till 150B.c.) the Hebrew tongue was the language chiefly of writings and inscriptions; as the popular dialect was almost the same as the Chaldean, which had been learned during the captivity, and which, in the time of the Maccabees, had nearly entirely superseded the old Hebrew. The relation of these two cognate languages may be illustrated by that of the High and Low Dutch. It is entirely a mistake to suppose that the old Hebrew became extinct along with the carrying into captivity.

4. Since then, however, the old Hebrew has become a dead language. During the middle ages the study of it was engaged in chiefly by the Rabbins; but the progress made by them has been greatly exceeded by that gained by many learned Christians who have studied it in order to throw light by it on the criticism of the Bible.

18;

5. Obs. 1. The name "Hebrew language," is not found in the Old Testament, but we have "the language of Canaan," Isa. xix. and "The Jews' language," Isa. xxxvi. 11. This, however, is without doubt merely accidental. More recently the name "Hebrew language,” γλῶσσα τῶν Εβραίων, Εβραϊστί, was used in a more extended sense of all the Aramaic dialects of Palestine, as distinguished from the Greek, vide John v. 2, xix. 13. The term langua sancta was applied to it by

the Jews, as it was the language of their sacred books, to distinguish it from the langua profana, or that spoken in the Aramaic tribes.

Obs. 2. Of the provincial peculiarities we find a few in the Hebrew, but these are of little importance. Thus, in Judges xii. 6, we are told of the Ephraimites being betrayed, by their pronunciation of the w; and in Nehem. xiii. 24, mention is made of the speech of Ashdod.

Obs. 3. From some language to which it is not allied, the Hebrew has borrowed some word, which became naturalized in it; viz. from the Egyptian, names of places in that country, as a flood, the Nile; a reed of the Nile; and from the Persian at the time of the Persian usurpation, as Some

a park; in a daric. resemblances also between Hebrew and some of the older tongues of farther Asia are discoverable, especially in the names of plants, or animals, conveyed from one country to the other; as (Malab. kapi, Sansc. kabi,) an ape; (Sansc. togii) a peacock; D(Sansc. aghil) an aloe.

Obs. 4. In respect of copiousness, the Hebrew must be ranked between the far wealthier Arabic and the still poorer Aramaïc. We cannot imagine that in the remains of the old Hebrew which have come down to us, we possess all the words of that language; but those which are lost are not to be regarded as of high value. Its richness and force are chiefly apparent in the expression of

* This statement of Gesenius, though not peculiar to him, is very questionable. Col. Vans Kennedy, in a recent work, goes so far as to affirm that he has not been able to discover a single Hebrew word which could be identified with any term in Sanscrit, Greek, Latin, Persian, German, or English. The force of the learned Colonel's remark, however, is considerably diminished by his admitted ignorance of the Hebrew, beyond its first elements; and though this will not apply to Gesenius, yet I confess I cannot admit the propriety of his remark, unaccompanied as it is by any attempt to explain

those coincidences between Hebrew and the western tongues which are found in words that have no connexion with na

tural history. This is not the place to

במה

adduce all the examples which might be brought forward; the following, however, may serve as a specimen: (bama) Syr. Dor. Bãua and altar, a tribunal;

(bomo) Gr. ẞñμa, ßwuòs, a height, an (keren) a horn,

Lat. cornu; (uva) to desire, covet, Lat. aves; (jadal) to howl, Lat. ululo; &c. Until these and many other coincidences, can be explained, I must con

tinue to believe that the Hebrew and western languages are not such entire strangers to each other as Gesenius and some other philologists would make them.

W. L. A.

ANOTHER day is set apart for special humiliation and prayer. Every one will say, this is very proper. But it is one thing to make this hasty acknowledgment, and it is another and a different thing to observe it properly. It may be well then to pause on the subject. If it is of any importance that such a day should be observed, in our Churches, it is of great importance. Let it be entered on and anticipated by serious and devout consideration.

The mind may perhaps be awakened in some degree by a recur rence to the past. We have already, on several occasions, given ourselves to these more special services. There can be no doubt that real good has arisen from them to many of our churches; but has not that good fallen short of even our limited expectations? When we consider that God in his holy habitation is “the hearer and the answerer of prayer;" that he waits to be gracious; and that he is more ready to give than we are to receive," must we not be driven to the painful, but salutary conclusion, that our prayers have not found a more decided answer, because we have more or less "asked amiss?"

The

some excitement to their passions. They have been pleased; they have concluded they were profited; but they were mistaken. pleasure they had in their social engagements was not transferred to the solitude of the closet. Where there was nothing but God to impress them, they remained unaffected. Yea, instead of being reduced to profound self-abasement under the predominant sense of sin, they have indulged a vain elation and self-satisfaction of mind, in having done more than is usual to themselves, and more than others can be persuaded to do. Is this to keep a fast unto the Lord ?

How many have been disposed to regard, not only the day as extraordinary, but the temper of mind we should bring it to as of the same character, These persons, therefore, have endeavoured to work themselves up to a state of penitence and prayer fitted for the occasion, and they have as readily discharged themselves from this state of feeling on the close of the services. It is evident, that they have fearfully mistaken the intention of them. It was not meant that they should, for the time, put on and put off this temper of mind like a garment, but that the tone of feeling should be permanently invigorated to influence our future conversation. To them the extraordinary exercise has brought exhaustion, not renovation. Instead of having more life infused into ordinary services, they have decidedly less. Their vows, made in the heat of feeling, are broken; their prayers are forgotten. The common and daily claims to worship and to obedience have less interest with them; and they are scarcely to be awakened to sincere penitence,

N