soever. All that remains, then, for us, is to see how far any of those under our charge are so decidedly below the baptismal mark in actual character, as to make it desirable to refrain from ourselves presenting them with mysteries, which they cannot wholesomely receive, but which, however, we are quite unable to prevent their learning from other sources. And I have already said, that reserve on the subject of the atonement, does not imply total silence regarding it; that we may speak of Christ's dying for our sins, without enlarging on all that Scripture has revealed concerning his death. So that the question really comes to this,-How are we best "rightly to divide the word of truth," and in the course of our ministrations to "make a difference" between the several classes we address?

And, first, in regard to our public preaching. It is plain that clergymen are situated exceedingly differently in respect of this. The pastor of a small country parish may have such knowledge of his flock, as gives him power to regulate his choice of subjects, and his mode of handling them, by a reference to their existing state and present spiritual wants. This is one of his peculiar privileges, that he may, in a manner, take aim from the pulpit,-that he may first calculate and afterwards trace the effects of his words. He therefore ought to know and consider whether it be, on the whole, most advisable to appeal to the conscience, to reason of "righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come," or to feed with the "strong meat" of the gospel. At the same time, there is a reason, to which I soon must advert, why, on the whole, he should incline to the latter course. But the preacher in a large town, who sees before him a congregation of twelve hundred, or two thousand, to not a tithe of which he has had personal access, nay, who ministers privately during the week, and publicly on the Sunday, to two totally different sets of people, has little or none of this advantage. What, then, is his course? Not, I think, to omit occasional warnings to the impenitent; not to forbear noticing the fearful indications of their spiritual state, given by large masses of the congregation, in their late irregular attendance, in their listless, irreverent demeanour, and their systematic withdrawal from the Holy Communion; but still, on the whole, to address the worthy, rather than the unworthy, auditor,-to feed the secret ones of Christ, of whom he cannot but believe there are several present, with the sincere milk of the word,-to address his sermon to those who have really joined in the prayers that went before it. And this is the reason why, as I said before, even the country clergyman must, for the most part, proceed to the high mysteries of the gospel; that, within the Church, our first services are due to her faithful members; that to edify them is our first duty; that the very position of the sermon in the appointments for Sunday, precludes the supposition of its being meant to take a missionary character,* there being a strange inconsistency between calling on our hearers to join us in the high-pitched prayers that go before, and then addressing them as if barely Christians. It seems to me one crying evil in the modern Church, that in so many things the lean cattle are allowed to swallow up the fat,-that we address ourselves

Of course a clergyman is to recognise it as one of his most important duties, to go after the sheep that are lost. But it does not follow that his preaching is the material given him for fulfilling this duty.

to those who are, for the most part, hardening their hearts against all we have to say, and depriving those of their due, who listen, " hungering and thirsting after righteousness." This evil extends far beyond our preaching, and pervades nearly the whole circle of our ministrations. But to discuss it would lead me far from the subject before me.

I am therefore inclined to think that the principle of reserve, in any general sense, is inadmissible in the modern pulpit;* inadmissible, wherever things are so far as they ought to be, as to furnish us with a class of devout and faithful auditors, capable and desirous of being edified in the faith; inadmissible, when we are preaching to those whose previous prayers may be supposed to have had any meaning. And though I know not that they have ever put the matter thus, I should think something like what I have laid down to be the principle of the Oxford Tract writers themselves; inasmuch as one of the most distinguished of them has given to us four volumes of parochial sermons, of which no attentive reader will say that they are silent either about the atonement, or any other high mystery of the gospel. On the contrary, they are remarkable among the religious writings of the day for their depth of doctrine, for the amount of" strong meat" which they minister. But in private ministrations, and in religious conversation, the case is totally different. Here we know to whom we are speaking, and here we are bound to conduct our operations with a view to the exigencies of each particular individual. Does, then, the ancient principle of reserve come into play here? Not, certainly, in the shape of a definite rule. For those to whom we address ourselves are neither heathens nor catechumens, however little they may be answering to the réλetot, the men in Christ Jesus. Their cases, too, vary to an incalculable extent. Moreover, if they have been taught the Christian mysteries, it is impossible quite to treat them as if they had not. So that in our dealings with them, we cannot lay down any precise rule, but must content ourselves with inquiring how far the ancient principle of reserve, as suggested in the New Testament, and as exemplified by the early Church, supplies us with hints for our guidance.

And one reason why that ancient principle has been lately brought so much into notice, is, that a theory now prevails which excludes it altogether. And the consideration of this will show us why the question has been made to turn so much on the doctrine of the atonement, although all the high mysteries of the faith are, in point of fact, involved in it. There is, then, a theory, more or less prevalent in certain circles, which, in its full extent, amounts to this-no consideration short of the atonement has force sufficient to bring back the soul from sin; while on the other hand, when the combined manifestation of holiness and love made in the atonement reaches the mind, it exercises a constraining force, withdrawing it from evil and bringing it to God.

I need scarcely observe that in the ancient Church, catechumens were allowed to be present at the sermon. Consequently, any reserve that had reference to them, forms no precedent for us. In spite of this, too, and of some formal allusions to the necessity of being silent on the subject of the eucharist, because of their presence, I do not think Chrysostom's preaching is characterised by an abstinence from the high doctrines of the Gospel. Still less is Augustine's, which, mainly addressed to the true Christian, feeds him with the word of life, administered in exuberant richness.

Consequently, whether we wish to produce penitence or obedience, our business is to exhibit the atonement, and trust to its power as a stimulant on the human mind. This necessitarian theory (for such it is, and its being such is, in my judgment, a sufficient refutation of it,) has been developed and argued, with great ingenuity, by several of our most popular writers. It will be found more or less in the works of Dr. Chalmers, Dr. Gordon of Edinburgh, the early treatises of Mr. T. Erskine, and in a book of remarkable ability, entitled, if my memory serves me right, "Letters, Practical and Consolatory," by Mr. Russell, of Dundee; besides many others of wide-spread influence. It will be observed that it makes knowledge precede love and obedience, and views it as the instrument of conversion. I am, of course, speaking of it in its full development, and as standing alone. In the writers to whom I have alluded, it is accompanied by much most precious truth,-nay, itself is partially true. To the penitent, to him who is willing to surrender to Almighty God, the knowledge of Christ's death and mediation is instruction how to return; it is the father seeing the prodigal while he is yet a great way off, and running to meet him; it acts in such cases as an instrument of reconciliation, not merely of God to man, but of man to God. But has it any good effect, any but a very hardening and evil one, on a mind still impenitent and rebellious? Surely to be in contact with holy things without suitable dispositions, is the most hardening and desolating of all states of being. And is not the mystery of the cross the holiest object of human contemplation? Is it, then, the part of true wisdom or friendship needlessly to run so great a risk? Is it not better, first, in some degree to probe the state of the heart and conscience, to try and bring the one to own somewhat of the sway of the other, and thus to awaken a man to some sense of his spiritual needs, and to kindle in him some desire after spiritual life; and then, should we find ourselves successful, to bring before him the great mystery of God in Christ, which otherwise must consume him if he gaze on it?

The young Christian, in the ardour of first love, is apt to fancy that, could he but make others see the truths which have livelily impressed himself, he would break down the strong-holds of iniquity around him. Accordingly, he thinks he cannot talk of them too often, or discuss them too eagerly. It will be well for him if he only discovers that thus he does no good to others. It will be well for him if he do not find that he has himself suffered deeply in the process, that his own feelings of reverence, and with them the sincerity of his own faith and love, have become seriously injured. By bitter experience, it may be his to learn that, in regard to things above, our words should" be wary and few." Should it be our painful lot to converse with an infidel, nothing, I think, should be more carefully avoided than getting on the high doctrines of Christianity. Granting that we have been successful in answering an objection,-granting that we have removed a misapprehension, still all this is but a poor apology for the profanation almost necessarily involved in such a discussion, unaccompanied, as it is nearly sure to be, by any really renewing influence. Should the case be so far different for the better, that our companion, though sceptical, is an inquirer, and is sincerely in search of truth, still while we cannot prevent his knowing

the higher doctrines, (as far as formal statements can enable him to know them,) we may do what we can to discourage him from the subject, to shew him that if the Gospel be true, (a conviction which he admits that he may arrive at,) he is, in his present state, disqualified from profitably entertaining it, to appeal to the truths he does recognise to address his conscience-to recommend him really to obey the light he already has in the first instance, and to betake himself to prayer.* When, again, we find ourselves with the debauched and impure, surely St. Paul before Felix has supplied us with the most suitable subjects on which to touch-" righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come." Such persons, among the higher classes, are indeed but too apt to retreat upon infidelity; but among the lower, one may find a wonderful relish for the high doctrines of grace, without, apparently, the most distant thought of putting them in practice; an enemy, this, of which a clergyman will have reason to stand in dread more than nearly all besides.

In regard to the education of children, as I said in my last letter, the principle is, to a great extent, adopted; and I think I may appeal to experience as to the evils that have resulted from its violation in their

case.

Finally, there is a reserve which each man may suitably practise in reference to himself. Remembering how awfully holy are the great truths of the Creed; how fearful, too, is the danger, not less than the guilt, of irreverently thinking of them; we may well, I think, adopt a principle of caution, as to when, where, and how we consciously consider them. Not, of course, that we are to neglect such consideration, -not that we are to desist from daily meditating upon them; but still, to do so with care and at leisure,-to gird ourselves up, as it were, for the task,—to dismiss every thing of an idle or frivolous spirit which may have had a temporary possession of our minds, and thus to approach the great vision of revealed truth" with reverence and godly fear."

I have already said that I have not written these remarks as the advocate of what has appeared on the same subject in the Oxford Tracts. Some things have been said there to which I am not prepared to assent. Neither do I at all know whether the writers would agree entirely with the principles I have laid down. If, however, I am right in thinking that what I have said comprises the substance of the opinion they advocate and inculcate; then surely I had grounds for the remark, that this is a subject on which the orthodox clergy are kept asunder, in great measure, by misunderstanding. At least, I think few would object to the amount of reserve I have recommended, except the abettors of the necessitarian scheme to which I have referred. F. G.

COMMENTARY OF THEODORET, BISHOP OF CYRUS, IN SYRIA ON ST. PAUL'S EPISTLE TO THE ROMANS.

(Continued from page 156.)

12. Now if the fall of them be the riches of the world, and the diminishing of them the riches of the Gentiles, how much more their fulness?

It is remarkable that the work, generally esteemed the most powerful against infidelity, viz." Butler's Analogy," should be so much characterised by its reserve.

For if, when the greater number disbelieved, those that were converted among them brought the riches of the divine knowledge to the Gentiles, most manifest is it, that if all believed, they would become the means of yet greater blessings to all mankind, for all would the more readily believe, when these no longer opposed, but joined with us instead in preaching, the truth. Thence he turns his exhortations to those among the Gentiles who had believed, and counsels them to entertain a chastened view of themselves; aiming at once at a double point, on the one hand to pull down all self-sufficiency on their part, and lead them to fear; and on the other, to bring the Jews to a participation of their ancestral inheritance; and thus he begins, 13. For I speak unto you, Gentiles; inasmuch indeed as I am the apostle of the Gentiles, I magnify mine office, 14. If by any means I may provoke to emulation them which are my flesh, and may save some of them. Since God sent me forth as the minister of the Gentiles, necessarily do I labour after the salvation of the Gentiles, and direct my discourses in their behalf, and point out the holy prophets of old predicting these things; and this, that so I may excite the Jews to rivalry, and induce some of them to share in that salvation; for by his flesh he means the Jews, as those that in spirit were distant, and related to him only by the affinity of kindred. 15. For if the casting away of them be the reconciling of the world, what shall the receiving of them be, but life from the dead? For if, says he, on their disbelief the Gentiles were received in, and freed from their former ignorance, manifest is it, that if all these were willing to believe, nothing else would then remain to be accomplished, but the resurrection of the dead ;* for so the Lord also said, "and this gospel of the kingdom shall be preached unto all nations for a witness unto them, and then shall the end come," (Matt. xxiv. 14). And all this we must recollect the holy apostle says, from a desire to suit his matter exactly to the subject in hand,† and teach humility to those among the Gentiles that had believed, hold out the offer yet to the disbelieving among the Jews, and point out the salvation that would arise from their change of mind; as what follows teaches yet more clearly, 16. For if the firstfruit be holy, the lump is also holy; and if the root be holy, so are the branches. 17. And if some of the branches be broken off, and thou being a wild olive tree, wert grafted in among them, and with them partakest of the root and fatness of the olive tree; 18. Boast not thyself against the branches. By the first-fruit he means the Lord Christ in his human nature; by the root, the patriarch Abraham; by the branches of the olive, the Jewish people as sprung from thence; and by the richness of the olive, the doctrines of religion. He admonishes those among the Gentiles who believed, not to be puffed up against the disbelieving Jews; for these are they whom he speaks of as branches broken off. Observe rather, says he, that you, born of another race, have been grafted into this, and have received of the richness of the holy root. But if thou boast, thou bearest not the root, but the root thee; and consider this also, that the root bears thee, not thou the root, and thou

So the prayer in the Burial Service, “Beseeching Thee... shortly to accomplish the number of Thine elect and to hasten Thy kingdom," &c. Eng. Rit.-E. B. † Οἰκονομικῶς κατασκευάζων τὸν λόγον,