England who took a part in the controversy against the Bible Society, where the word "safeguard" is used in speaking of the Prayer-book, and used in the sense which Mr. Bickersteth's words convey.

May I take this opportunity of adding a few words on a subject connected with this controversy, already noticed by Mr. Barter and another correspondent, (December, p. 712,) and of some consequence in these days, when we seem to be threatened with the adoption of pure Antinomianism, and something more, as the language of orthodox Protestant thinking. I mean the use of the word "merit." Many of your readers will recollect the candid admission of old John Wesley on this point, at the famous conference of 1770:—

“As to merit, itself, of which we have been so dreadfully afraid, we are rewarded 'according to our works;' yea, because of our works.' How does this differ from, 'for the sake of our works?' and how differs this from, 'secundum merita operum,' as our works deserve? Can you split this hair? I doubt I cannot.'

In fact, the use of the words "merit" and "conditions" of salvation are common, not only to our own divines, but to most of the old puritans. There is a passage in Baxter's End of Controversies so much to this purpose, that I cannot help wishing it to be offered to Mr. Barter's notice. Not having this work of Baxter's now before me, I quote it as I find it in Fletcher of Madeley's Works (vol. ii. p. 327, ed. 1795):—

"We are agreed on the negative :—1. That no man or angel can merit of God in proper commutative justice, giving him somewhat for his benefits that shall profit him, or to which he had no absolute right. 2. That no man can merit anything of God, upon the terms of the law of innocency, but punishment. 3. Nor can he merit anything of God by the law of grace, unless it be supposed first a free gift and merited by Christ.

"And, affirmatively, we are, I think, agreed :—1. That God governs us by a law of grace, which hath a promise, and gives by way of reward. 2. That God calls it his justice, to reward men according to his law of grace. 3 That this supposes that such works as God rewards have a moral aptitude for that reward, which aptitude chiefly consists in these things,-that they spring from the Spirit of God, that their faultiness is pardoned through the blood and merits of Christ, that they are done in the love and to the glory of God, and that they are presented to God by Jesus Christ. 4. That this moral aptitude is called in scripture, äžia,—i. e., worthiness, or merit; so that, thus far, 'worthiness' or 'merit' is a scripture phrase. And 5. That this worthiness or merit is only in point of paternal governing justice according to the law of grace, ordering that which in itself is a free gift merited by Christ.

"All orthodox Christians hold the fore-described doctrine of merit,' in sense, though not in words; for they that deny merit confess the rewardableness of our obedience, and acknowledge that the scripture useth the term worthy, and that ažios and aia may be translated meriting and merit as well as worthy and worthiness. This is the same thing, in other words, which the ancient Christians meant by merit.' When godly persons extol holiness, saying, that the righteous is more excellent than his neighbour, and yet deny all merit, reviling all that assert it, they do but shew that they understand not the word, and think that others misunderstand it. And so we are reproaching one another where we are agreed and know it not, like the woman who turned away her servant upon the controversy whether the house should be swept with a besom or with a broom."

It is necessary to add one paragraph more, as it bears so directly on the opinion expressed by Mr. Barter (Feb. p. 176):

"I formerly thought," says Baxter, "that, though we agree in the thing, it was best to omit the name, because the papists have abused it; and I think so still, in such companies where the use of it is not understood, and will do more harm than good. But in other cases, I now think it better to keep the word, lest we seem to the ignorant to be of another religion than all the ancient churches were,-lest we harden the papists, Greeks, and others, by denying the sound doctrine in terms, which they will

think we deny in sense, and because our penury of words is such, that, for my part, I remember no other word fit to substitute for merit,' 'desert,' or 'worthiness.' The word 'rewardableness' is long and harsh, but it is nothing else that we mean. It is a great advantage to the papists that many protestants wholly disclaim the word 'merit,' and simply deny the merit of Gospel obedience. For hereupon the [papist] teachers shew their scholars that all the fathers speak of merit, and that the protestant doctrine is new and heretical, as being contrary to all the ancient doctors; and when their scholars see it with their eyes, no wonder if they believe it to our dishonour."

The same doctrine, but less explicit, may be found in other treatises of Baxter's, particularly in his "Method for a Settled Peace of Conscience." Better justice will one day be done to this subject, if one of the most respected among living Oxford theologians shall be prevailed upon to commit to the press a volume of his University Sermons, a suitable companion to those Bampton Lectures which have established their title to a place among the best modern contributions to a sound practical view of Christianity.

I am, Sir, yours very truly, E. C.

THE CHURCH MISSIONARIES.

SIR,-I am delighted to see that the attention of the church has been invited to the inadequate supply of clergy in England, and that a society has been called into existence, the object of which is to furnish "clerical" assistants to such incumbents as require them, and have only been prevented from engaging them by the straitness of their circumstances. It is reasonable to expect that, in proportion as the church shall flourish in the mother country, those remote branches of the church which are extending themselves, in spite of obstacles and difficulties, in the colonies, will flourish also. Yet, in my anxiety for the welfare of the church in our colonial dependencies, I think I see some ground for a fear lest, now that so many gratifying fields of duty will be opened in England for those of our clergy who are without preferment, the claims of the colonial church will be overlooked by the youth in our universities, and that the number of candidates for the foreign missionary stations in the church, (always too small,) will be now very considerably diminished. Let me hope, however, that as the prospect of the colonial church being supplied with ministers from graduates of our universities and other candidates for holy orders from England shall be diminished, larger funds may be placed at the disposal of the Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts, that if it cannot now any longer send out missionaries from England, as it has done for nearly a century and a half, it may still employ as many missionaries as our North American bishops can find in their respective dioceses fit for ordination. Oh! let not the hands of Bishops Stewart and Inglis be tied, as they have unhappily been of late years, by that resolution of the society which has discouraged their opening any new missions in dioceses where it is impossible to witness the sad spiritual destitution of our hardworking settlers without the most painful emotions. Let the suffragan

bishop in Lower Canada, (the first, I trust, of many whom we may yet see, under that primitive name, extending the bounds of our colonial church,) let Dr. Mountain, at least, not be crippled in his energies by finding it difficult to procure a title, or the means of subsistence, for those whom he might encourage as fit candidates for orders, if only a decent maintenance could be secured to them upon their ordination. Let each of these North American bishops be authorized to draw upon our venerable Society for the Propagation of the Gospel in Foreign Parts for the support, entirely or in part, of as many properly qualified natives, and other fit candidates for holy orders, as they may think it expedient from time to time to ordain, beyond those whom the wealthier congregations in our communion may support in the more favoured portions of their dioceses. Can it be generally known in England, that students in the University of Windsor, Nova Scotia, who had declared a preference for the church as a profession, and a peculiar fitness, moreover, for missionary labour, have absolutely turned with reluctance to law, or to some other pursuit, because, in a population wherein very few congregations could contribute anything to the support of a pastor, they would experience difficulty at the end of their college course in procuring any such guarantee for their support as the bishop would be justified in accepting as a title for holy orders? Let the society be strengthened by the bounty of the members of the church, that, when our colonial bishops shall have found and educated young men who are properly qualified and zealously disposed, they may be able to lay hands upon them, and send them forth to do the work of evangelists. To say nothing of the privations of the poor settler, which make it a most disagreeable matter to collect any sum whatever from his too scanty store for the maintenance of a clergyman, how can it be expected that the ambassador for Christ should be so independent in the declaration of his message as he ought to be, when he may be starved out if his faithfulness give offence to those among whom he ministers? Those who are perishing at our very doors should not be neglected; but let us not forget the strong claims of the church in the colonies. PHILO-COLONUS.

INTERPRETATIONS OF SCRIPTURE.

DEAR SIR,-A correspondent in your Number for June, suggests that the expression, "the temple of his body," in our Lord's prophetic intimation in the second chapter of St. John, may admit of another application besides the one usually received, and refer to his spiritual body, the Christian church. The weight due to such an interpretation would of course depend on a reference to catholic antiquity. In the absence of this confirmation, may I suggest some scriptural analogies, which strengthen your correspondent's supposition.

It is familiar to us how frequently the same figurative expression which is applied to our blessed Lord personally, is also applied to him as the body containing all Christians, and also to individuals

separately, as members of that body. As if there was contained within it some great "mystery of godliness," with respect to the distinctness, and also the strict oneness, or union, of Christ with his church, and as also indicating the separate state and the united state of Christians. This is sometimes shewn by the slight transition from one figure to another,-as, in one place," the righteous shall shine as the stars”—i. e., separately; in another place, they "shall shine as the sun"—i. e., all in one. Our Saviour is, at one time, the bridegroom, and Christians the bride, taken out of him, but existing separately; at another, he is dwelling in them, as one with them. At one time, he is separate, as the head, and they the body; sometimes one with them, as the body containing all.

But this is frequently shewn by the same expression admitting of a threefold application. Thus Christ is sometimes applied, as it were, personally; sometimes to the church, "as members of one body, being many, are one body, so also is Christ;" sometimes to the individual, as, "Yet not I, but Christ that liveth in me." Thus also the temple does distinctly-though perhaps not solely-apply to our Lord's person, in the passage referred to. Also, to the church collectively, "the whole building growing into a holy temple;" also to the particular members, whose bodies are the temples of the Holy Ghost. In like manner, our Lord himself is called "the stone which the builders refused;"' the whole church collectively is "the stone cut out of the mountains without hands ;" and the members of the church individually, "ye also as living stones." Thus with the figure of a tree, our Lord is "the Tree of Life." He shall" grow up as a tender plant." So is the church "the tree overshadowing the earth," "the vine out of Egypt," and it is often the individual, as in the parable of the unfruitful tree. In like manner, the branch is often applied to our Lord himself" the man whose name is, The Branch;" sometimes to his church," the branch which thou madest so strong for thyself,” and "in that day shall the Branch of the Lord be beautiful;" sometimes to individuals, as "ye are the branches"-he is "cast forth as a branch."

Now, in these instances, is it not the case that, although one meaning is the most prominent, distinct, and obvious, yet that they do admit of reciprocal and ulterior applications also, in the same manner as types and prophecies, and everything else which is in its nature divine and infinite, and which, therefore, cannot be limited, as in human things, to one distinct end? Indeed, there may be, as I think Bishop Butler remarks, some great impropriety in considering things as ends at all, in the ways of God. Thus, expressions applied to our Lord himself in the Psalms, also refer to his members in him,-which is very observable throughout the service for Charles, the blessed martyr-and also to his church, as bearing his cross after him, and in which he is still suffering. Thus, also, the parables respecting the kingdom of heaven apply at the same time to the church, and also to an individual Christian-as the mustard seed, expanding to a vast tree, is the church on earth, and also implies that faith in each individual, which is so little seen on earth as to be the least of all seeds, but un

folded in heaven. May not the whole subject contain something infinitely beyond our comprehension, as alluding to that close union which exists between Christ and his church, and between Christians, both with Christ and with each other? All of which may be indicated both by these separate and distinct meanings, and by these mutual and typical correspondences.

I have thought that any remark which may serve to call attention to the manifold wisdom of scripture might be useful, if it only conduces to remind us of our exceeding ignorance. And not the least advantage to be derived from the labours of those who would turn our attention to the ancients will, I trust, with God's blessing, be this, that people will be brought to see that notions which have prevailed, in almost every department of theology, have been not so much positively erroneous as perfectly inadequate, and falling short of the infinite depth and harmony of the Divine Word.

I am, Sir, yours, I. Z. =

THE GREEK ARTICLE.

SIR, I have not hitherto had time to examine, according to your request, the work of Stuart on the Syntax of the New Testament; but I have read, though rather hastily, the Appendix of Hints and Cautions. A passage, however, met my eye (p. 158), which seemed rather ominous as to anything sound with respect to the article. It is this: "That the Greeks themselves never thought of all the subtleties which recent grammarians have found, is my full persuasion." No doubt the Greeks never thought about them, in a general way, any more than we think what we are doing, when, in common conversation, we make a verb agree with its nominative case; but they undoubtedly felt them; and it should be our aim to feel them too; and, in studying the language of that wonderful people, to lay it down, as a general principle, that there is no distinction without a difference, never considering our labours complete till each is ascertained and explained.

Accordingly, I was not surprised to find that he endeavours to represent the usage of the Article as, for the most part, an ad libitum matter. If Mr. Stuart has no taste for the more refined niceties of the language, it is natural that he should represent the labours of more exact scholars on the Article as unnecessary hair-splittings and rule-makings, and, to use his own words," much ado about nothing." He frankly confesses that he does not understand Middleton; and I was sorry to observe some display of flippancy on the subject; as when he applies to him the epithet "claro-obscure;" by which, I suppose, we are to understand a kind of lux maligna, half light, half darkness. I must confess that I really felt refreshed in passing from Mr. S.'s pages to the clear masculine sense of Middleton.

Whatever opinions he may hold as to the laxity of the Greek,