Viewed, not as a system but as a life, Christian morality is the result of faith in Christ, and inseparable from it. Apart from such faith, men may indeed exhibit morality, but not Christian morality. In the matter of external morality it is, and must be sorrowfully confessed that some deists, infidels and sceptics put some professing Christians to the blush. What a mastery of vicious propensities do we behold in Socrates! What justness in Cato! What chastity in Lucretia! What sobriety and honesty among infidels! And yet when you come to enquire for the root, the motive of all this, you find it in some subtle form of self-hood. How different is such morality from theirs who are poor in spirit,'pure in heart,' 'peace-makers,' 'full of mercy and good fruits, without partiality and without hypocrisy.' We have it on the authority of Christ Himself that all moral fruitfulness on the part of men spring from their union with Him. Abide in Me, and I in you. As the branch cannot bear fruit of itself, except it abide in the vine, no more can ye, except ye abide in Me. I am the vine, ye are the branches: He that abideth in Me, and I in him, the same bringeth forth much fruit: for without Me ye can do nothing.'

This vital union with Christ, then, is absolutely necessary to the production of Christian morality. We go further and say that this production will invariably arise from that union. It is as impossible for the man who is one' with Christ to be immoral, as it is for him who is not in Christ to be holy. Either make the tree corrupt and its fruit corrupt, or the tree good and its fruit good.' Let there be no divorce between religion and morals. Such a separation has, unhappily, been but too frequently attempted. Taking advantage of Paul's and of Luther's anti-legal teaching, and construing it in a way which they never dreamt of, men have become antinomians. Not a few, like the Anabaptists in Germany, like some of the early Moravians in England and elsewhere, wallowed in filth while pretending to glory in the faith-clung to the Cross while never dreaming of being crucified with Christ upon it. The law they reject even as a rule of life, and, seeing no further use in it, fall to work to abuse it. Thus John Agricola: 'Art thou a knave, adulterer, or otherwise a sinner? believest, thou art in the way of salvation. All who deal with Moses must go to the devil. To the gibbet with Moses!' These energetic utterances of the redoubtable John may, perhaps, be attributed partly to the fact that he and his companions had but lately escaped, by Luther's means, from the burden of precepts and penances, laws and ordinances, imposed upon them by an interested and misguided priesthood; had beheld, at least, even if they had not tasted, the liberty wherewith Christ maketh his people free-would no more come under the yoke of

If thou

Rome-would rather die first. Still, when all allowance on this score that can be made is made, there still remains a balance of bitterness in the words of our author that can only be put down to some positive hatred of law as law. No more than John Agricola do we like to see Moses striding up and down that new and living way' which has been opened to the Father by one greater than Moses, frightening poor wayfarers with his curses and his claims. But neither would we have the 'way' obliterated and rendered indistinguishable from the boundless common lying on each side of it. No; as fence and boundary wall we would place the first table' of Moses on the right hand, and the second on the left of the way that leadeth to the Father; not as obstructives, but simply as preservatives against errors.

Professedly Christian men no longer glory in their shame. Anti nomianism, as such, is discredited; bearing that brand, it is driven from the public haunts and ways of men, and now lurks and glides about in the back unfrequented streets of large cities, like London, and in the villages of small counties, like Rutland. But if Antinomianism as a profession is eclipsed, and men have grown ashamed of the company of the Agricolas, the Crisps, and the Zinzendorfs of other days, is the thing extinct? We fear not. Water may exist as water, as ice, or as vapour; so lawlessness may arise under the successive forms of Gnosticism, Antinomianism, Agnosticism, and Sensationalism. As Gnosticism, thou, O reader, knowest how, at the close of the Apostolical age, it cast its dark and hateful shadow over the closing years of the beloved John, causing his gentle soul many a pang. These knowers' knew almost everything, and did almost nothing but what they ought to have been ashamed of doing. Bringing itself into disrepute under its Greek appellative, the old lawless spirit next took refuge in the plausible Latin cognomen, Antinomianism, under which denomination it made that ferocious motion towards the gibbet with Moses, John Agricola volunteering to act as public hangman,—of which mention has just been made. Detected and discredited under its new name, it has, in these late days, concealed itself under the strange and questionable terms, Agnosticism and Sensationalism. The Agnostics, choosing a name which places them at the very furthest remove from their ancestors, the Gnostics, are 'know-nothings;' they know not God, nor any spiritual or invisible thing; they believe that such knowledge is unattainable. Now consider, kind reader, whether such persons, being altogether oblivious of the fountain of righteousness and true holiness;' sceptical about the very existtence of such fountain; nay, ignorant of what Mr. Matthew Arnold dimly calls the power that makes for righteousness;' consider whether such persons are likely to care very much for righteousness in their hearts, or to exhibit it very conspicuously in their

6

Q

lives. Talk as they may about evolution of the universe,' 'progress of the species,' 'march of intellect,'' development of civilization,' and so forth, we see nothing in such high-sounding phrases, cut lose as they are from the very first principles of godliness, to prevent us from developing into as heartless monsters of iniquity as the world ever had in it, and from marching straight to the devil.

the

Agnostics are mostly men of cold, clear intellects; with brain abnormally large, but with heart shrunk, withered, and atrophied. Sensationalists, on the other hand, are usually moist in intellect, but ardent in affection, with plenty of heart-power, and capacity of sensuous enjoyment; but, withal, afflicted not seldom with a moral spinal disease, which prevents their walking erect in the strength and integrity of righteousness. All metaphor aside, there is, in these days, a great cry for religious feeling, and a great dislike of religious teaching, or 'instruction in righteousness.' Let us not be understood to decry religious fervour, nor to overlook the emotions in man, which emotions religion is so well calculated to stir to purpose. What we deprecate is a mere play upon nerves, which is often mistaken for true religious feeling. Such a pleasurable nervous sensation produced by the sermon, song, or prayer, or by all combined, evaporates with the cessation of the action that produced it, and leaves the subject of it neither a wiser nor a better man. In these days of commercial speculation and of competition in almost every department of human action and endeavour, necessitating such an unwonted strain upon the moral principle, the conscience should be made of something different from indiarubber. And yet how plastic and far-stretching many consciences, even of religious professors, are! How lightly do some men assume financial burdens, which they are by no means able to carry, in hope of presently growing rich! As one has tersely put it :- A person who can't pay gets another person who can't pay to guarantee that he can pay.' How little do such people think of the honour of that name by which they are called, and of that cause which they profess to have espoused! The religious sensationalist is exposed to danger, not alone from the desire for wealth and display, but also from temptation to other sins of the flesh, such as drunkenness and uncleanness; and when he falls into it, which is not seldom the case, wounds the body of Christ all the more deeply that he was understood to preach righteousness and to approve and applaud morality. Let such brethren beware lest they should be classed with those who hold the truth in unrighteousness.' And let preachers also beware lest their ministrations should only affect the material, and fail to reach the moral, in man; lest in their laudable desire to afford comfort to the weary and distressed, they fail to rouse and stimulate the conscience to

a holy and healthy activity. A great and popular preacher, one whose preaching was largely doctrinal-the Rev. Rowland Hillis reported to have said on his death-bed that, had he to begin his ministerial life again, he would preach from texts selected from the Book of Proverbs much more frequently than he had done. He had observed that Jeshuran, grown fat upon high-seasoned doctrine, 'kicked,' and was negligent of the common duties of life. I speak not now,' says Archbishop Whately, 'of the errors of those who reject either religious faith or moral duty; but of those who regard them too much as distinct. There have, indeed, been many in all ages, from the ancient Perapatetic down to the Modern Deist, who have evinced a virtue without religion; and there have been many more, from the Pagan, with his hecatombs and purifications, down to the Antinomians of the present day, who have aimed at religion without virtue. But there are also some, it is to be feared, who, though they acknowledge the necessity of both, are not sufficiently careful to keep in mind and to exhibit their close and intimate connection; but, (to use the illustration of the Apostle James), separate as it were from each other the soul and the body, and yet think to preserve both. Else, we should not find so strong a distinction frequently drawn between doctrinal and practical discourses, as if the subjects were neither of them, indeed, to be neglected, but kept apart and independent. Whereas, in truth, every doctrinal discourse should lead the Christian hearer to its proper moral results-every practical precept be referred in his mind to its true foundations in the Gospel doctrines. It is not enough that the inner works of a clock are well constructed, and also the dial-plate, and hands; the one must act on the other, the works must regulate the movements of the hands.' J. W.

ART. III.-THE WORK OF BENEFICENCE: ITS MYSTERIES, DIFFICULTIES, AND ENCOURAGEMENTS.

'Cast thy bread upon the waters: for thou shalt find it after many days. Give a portion to seven, and also to eight; for thou knowest not what evil shall be upon the earth. If the clouds be full of rain they empty themselves upon the earth; and if the tree fall toward the south, or toward the north, in the place where the tree falleth, there it shall be. He that observeth the wind shall not Sow; and he that regardeth the clouds shall not reap. As thou knowest not what is the way of the spirit, nor how the bones do grow in the womb of her that is with child: even so thou knowest not the works of God who maketh all. In the morning sow thy seed, and in the evening withhold not thine hand: for thou knowest not whether shall prosper, either this or that, or whether they both shall be alike good.'-Eccles. xi. 1-6.

DUTY

UTY must be done, difficulties and mysteries notwithstanding. Our course of action is not always free from discouragement, check, or hindrance. If it were there would be less credit due to

us for keeping within it and making progress. The smooth and level road is pleasant and inviting. There is nothing tasking or testing in passing over it. To get forward in it is more like pleasure than the discharge of duty. The praise of right action, if given at all, falls due when difficulties beset us and make rough the road we have to take. The path of duty often lies up-hill. There are frequently difficulties in our way; but the supply is most plentiful when inclination is slack, for then we breed them for the purpose of finding an excuse for our negligence. The wise man counsels us to diligence and generosity in the face of deterent influence or circumstance. However dark the prospect be, and however perplexed the process, if we persevere, he says, the result will be right-right for us even if there be for others a failure of the good we intended. His advice is that we cherish the spirit of faith and venture on deeds of benevolence, the returns of which we cannot foresee. What he insists on is charitable action, or deeds of kindness affecting the temporal comfort of our fellowmen. Some take a different view of the passage as indicating effort directed to the good of men's souls. We may allow it to span both, as we should never lose sight of the higher good. The whole scope of the paragraph shows its primary application to the generous relief of the indigent. This is a duty in relation to which forbidding considerations and influences thwart and hinder We may argue that our bounty, if we be lavish in it, will beggar us, or that it will do little good to the receivers of it, as it too frequently falls into the hands of the unworthy, who make bad use of it. We oppose maxims of prudence and thrift to the call of this duty. It is better to use prudence and judgment in the exercise of it. We think it is allowable to do so, and more, it is binding on us to distribute our bounty judiciously. Unguarded explanation of the first verse makes the inspired sage to say that we should exercise an indiscriminate blind charity to all that ask our help. In this we cannot concur. It is possible, nevertheless, that we might carry prudence to excess, and seal up the fountain of generosity from those to whom its streams are due. Let none forget their dependence on Him who maketh all,' and that his blessing rests on those who imitate his beneficence as they have the means.

us.

'Cast thy bread upon the waters.' 'Bread' means seed or grain, the material of which bread is made, thence by an easy rhetoric called bread. Life-sustaining grain is more valuable than silver or gold, and is well called 'precious seed.' The direction given is, to cast it upon the waters,' or as the margin is, 'upon the face of the waters,' which is a beautiful Hebraism. The soil, not the sea, is the proper bed to which to commit seed. Yet the seed must have some connection with the water, or it cannot prosper.

6