For the Christian Observer. "I was glad when they said unto me, Let us go into the house of the Lord." -Ps. cxxii. 1.

THE current of time rolls rapidly along years and ages are alike impelled by its resistless torrent: one generation passes away-another appears for a little moment and is gone. Yet Jehovah is the same, yesterday, to-day, and for ever; and amidst the diversified manners and customs of ages and nations, the people of Jehovah are the same. Three thousand years are almost swept away, since David, the man after God's own heart, uttered, in the fulness of his joy, those beautiful and striking words which appear as a motto to this paper; and where has been the man of God, throughout succeeding ages, that has not often echoed back the language of David, and sometimes felt it to be his own?

It has long been the custom of Philander to include, in his Sabbathmorning's meditation, the one hundred and twenty-second Psalm; and he has found it highly beneficial to make it especially the subject of his thoughts, in walking to the house of God.

66

In the vigour of youth, and blessed with the enjoyment of health, the return of the Sabbath was to him the return of its public services as well as its private engagements; and he had not learned to sympathize with the soul that, from continued and painful ab. sence, longeth, yea, even fajnteth, for the courts of the Lord." But the season of sickness was at hand, and a Sabbath dawned in which Philander was to be absent from the great congregation. As he communed with his heart upon his bed, the words of David were present to his mind-"I was glad when they said unto me, Let us go into the

house of the Lord." It was a morning of anticipated spring :—the sun bad risen in cloudless splendour, and beamed through the windows of his chamber; the feathered songsters had commenced their hymns of praise; and, borne upon the gentle gale, the cheerful notes of invitation issued from the sanctuary, calling upon man to prepare a nobler and more acceptable song.

Philander recollected the feelings with which he had so often obeyed the call, and endeavoured to analyze the sources of his joy. It did not escape him that he had felt as a man: yes, for there is in man a social principle which binds him to his fellow mortals, and bids him seek their sympathy in good as well as evil. He had often rejoiced, that while avoiding the assemblies of the wicked, he could unite with congregations of the righteous. He bad felt as an actor in the great theatre of the world; and he had often hailed with delight the return of the Sabbath, as a day of rest from his labours-a season of retirement from the busy scenes of the week-of comparative abstraction from the perplexing cares and anxieties of life. His memory presented a variety of instances, in which the Sabbath had indeed proved to him a day of rest: but this train of thought was suddenly interrupted by the recollection, that it was a day of Divine appointment. For a moment Philander was lost : the pressure of ideas was more than he could sustain. The condescension of the great Creator; the dignity conferred upon the creature ; the various relations subsisting between God and man, together with the obligations they involved: these all rushed into his mind, and overwhelmed him with astonishment and gratitude. He felt that it was indeed the noblest source of honour

and of joy, to approach the King of heaven," to afford him praise, the easiest recompense, and pay him thanks-how due!" He understood the feeling of a grateful mind, which "owing owes not, but still pays, at once indebted and discharged." He felt it to be not so much the duty of man, as his glory and delight, to sanctify himself and keep the Sabbath of the Lord. But Philander could not forget, that his was the Christian Sabbath; as the thought entered his mind, his eyes became dim with tears-with tears of gratitude and joy. He was suddenly in the temple, prostrate at the altar, at the table of his dying Lord. He felt something of the value of redemption; he recol lected the seasons of holy communion with his Saviour; he remembered how his heart had burned within him by the way, and how Jesus had been made known to him in the breaking of bread,—and he burst forth into the song of David, "I was glad when they said unto me, Let us go into the house of the Lord." His mind dwelt with delight on the glorious plan of salvation he pursued it through the stages of its progress on earth, and arrived at its consummation in heaven; there he beheld the ransomed sinner standing before the throne of God and the Lamb, freed from sin, and care, and pain, joining the hallelujahs of angels and perfected spirits. He paused-for he felt familiar with the scene: he remembered, that the day of sacred rest had often been cherished, as a type and pledge of that nobler rest which remaineth above: he remembered that his Sabbath enjoyments were sometimes felt to be blissful anticipations of the joys of heaven; and full well he recollected, that in this view of the Sabbath, he had especially exclaimed with the holy Psalmist, "I was glad when they said unto me, Let us go into the house of the Lord."

E. P. S.

TRUTH, when misapplied, or mixed with error, is more dangerous than falsehood itself. The latter is commonly detected by men of plain understandings: the former may be clothed in so specious a dress, or may be so much in unison with existing prejudices, as to perplex and unsettle the mind of a sincere but timid inquirer.

This remark was suggested by the perusal of a pamphlet, entitled, "Thoughts on the Tendency of Bible Societies, as affecting the Established Church and Christianity itself, as a reasonable Service, by the Rev. A. O'Callaghan." This pamphlet, I shall not scruple to affirm, abounds in misrepresenta→ tion, in illogical and inconclusive reasoning, in unfounded and exaggerated statement. I am well aware that these are strong terms, and ought not to be used unadvisedly: they contain charges which are easily made, and which should therefore be made with the greater caution. How far they are warranted in fact, and justified by a minute and careful examination of the leading principles therein avowed, it will be incumbent upon me in the sequel to show.

This controversy has been carried on with such unintermitted zeal, that all the topics in debate, it might fairly have been concluded, were exhausted long ago, and the minds of men made up on the subject: that it was, at any rate, useless to rekindle angry passions by recurrence to the past; since the evil, if it were an evil, was irremediable, or, if the designs of the Bible Society were executed wisely, then the fruits would be daily more and more apparent and convincing. But the opponents of this. Society are, it seems, still restless and uneasy: they run the same circle of argument and invective; they renew the attack "verbo mendaci, aut mordaci" and serve up again

and again the same dishes to our jáded palates, seasoned with the same accompaniments, so altered and disguised as to suit the prevailing taste of the day, or the pe

culiar humour of the writer.

It would greatly exceed the limits I now propose to myself, to follow Mr. O'Callaghan step by step through the whole of his digressive and very declamatory pamphlet. His imagination is so excursive, so lively, so fruitful in resources; he presses so much extraneous matter into his service, that one cannot but suspect him of some secret misgivings, lest, if he should leave his cause to be tried by the standard of unimpassioned reason, (of which he is, in other respects, so vehemently enamoured,) it would be weighed in the balance, and found wanting. However this may be, the chief thing which I at present undertake to deal with, is the principle upon which the whole force of his conclusions rests. And this course I am the rather inclined to pursue,

1. Because the same principle, for the most part, pervades the sentiments of all who think, with Mr. O'C., that the Bible Society is fraught with mischief to the Established Church.

2. Because, if the foundation of their objections be proved to be insecure, then "it will follow, as the night the day," that the whole superstructure, however attractive and imposing, must be insecure also.

But it is time to let Mr. O'C. speak for himself. "The writer of these sheets" (says he, p. 14.) "can affirm, that on putting the Bible to this test, (i. e. the test of experiment,) by a careful perusal, he found it, collectively taken, one of the most difficult books he ever read, and that this character was applicable, though in different degrees, to every part not purely his torical." Here, then, amn contented to take my stand. I join issue with Mr. O'C. on this, the

avowed principle, the groundwork of all his future reasonings, which elsewhere repeatedly occurs; viz. that the Bible is of all books perhaps the most difficult ;” (p. 6 ;) and that, be it remembered, “in every part not purely historical;" "the Bible, without note or comment, is unfit for the perusal of the rude and illiterate." (p. 11.) It is clear, from these passages, that Mr. O'C. does not mean to be understood to state that many parts of the Bible are full of difficulty-a position which no one would be disposed to controvert-but that the character of extreme difficulty pervades every part not purely historical;"-an affirmation from which, I apprehend, every one will instinctively revolt; or, if some few should be found to accede to it, they would surely accede with almost insurmountable repugnance.

66

If I were to assert, that, on putting the Bible to the test of experiment, by a careful perusal of many parts not purely historical, the result was totally different from what Mr. O'C. experienced, I could not hope that such assertion would have much weight, because it might with propriety be considered as the opinion of one obscure individual opposed to that of another. But, if I can show, (as I most assuredly can,) that the opinions of men who were the brightest ornaments of our church at different periods since the Reformationopinions gravely and deliberately published to the world-are directly at variance with those of Mr. O'C., I think I may safely leave it to the good sense of mankind to determine, whether they will adopt his crude and novel sentiments, or adhere to the matured and collective wisdom of ages.

Before I proceed to cite the authorities above alluded to, I cannot forbear making one or two observations, to which Mr. O'C.'s mode of expression renders him peculiarly obnoxious. In the first place, it may be remarked, that it is one

thing to read the Bible, and another to search the Scriptures daily. Is it not probable, that this writer's difficulty may, in part at least, originate here? Or has he sufficiently considered that certain dispositions, and a particular frame of mind, joined to earnest prayer for understanding, that we may understand the Scriptures, are required of those who fervently and devoutly desire to read them with advantage?

"Would we know the main cause of our fruitless hearing of the word, here it is: men bring not a meek and guileless spirit to it." "Utilis lectio, utilis eruditio, sed magis unctio necessaria, quippe quæ sola docet de omnibus." But, as it is rather dangerous for any one to tread upon this ground, who startles at the reproachful term "fanatic, or enthusiast," I beg leave to refer, for a farther elucidation and confirmation of this part of the subject, to a valuable tract, published by the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge, entitled, "The Necessity and Usefulness of Reading the Holy Scriptures, and the Dispositions with which they ought to be read."

In the next place, there is surely a singular infelicity in adducing the different sects amongst the Jews, as one of the many instances of the difficulty of rightly interpreting Scripture; those Jews, some of whom were men of deep erudition and learning-men who enjoyed the advantage of reading the sacred volume in their own familiar tongue -to whom the laws, manners, customs, and institutions therein described were thoroughly known; the peculiar idioms (which are now said to create so much obscurity) natural and easy. Are these the circumstances from which we are desired to infer that the learned make a proficiency in the most essential points of Christian knowledge, which the rude and illiterate are unable to attain? Are we to look for the proof of this in the immediate followers of our blessed

Lord; in the persevering incredulity of the Scribes and Pharisees; in the unsubdued virulence and opposition of the chief priests and rulers? If "reason only is to be the interpreter of Scripture," how is it to be accounted for, that whilst numbers were added to the churches daily," in less civilized regions, scarcely a single convert was made by the Apostle amongst the learned, refined, and enlightened members of the Areopagus at Athens ?* Are these the examples by which we are to decide, that human learning is the only accessible medium by which an adequate knowledge of the truth can be acquired? Is it not manifest, on the contrary, that the Jews, to whom Mr. O'C. so unaccountably appeals in support of his opinions, are the most striking and durable monuments of the total insufficiency of all human learning to generate a ready assent to the truths of the Gospel? If the Jews, as a nation, grossly misconceived the character of the Messiah, will Mr. O'C. venture to insinuate, in contradiction to the whole tenor of the Gospel, that such misconception proceeded from a deficiency in learning, or a want of mental capacity? Is it not abundantly obvious, on the contrary, that it was pride and hardness of heart-wilful obstinacy-and a presumptuous dependence upon

improved reason alone"-that made them spurn that true and living interpretation, which the simple and humble-minded, whether learned or unlearned, rich or poor, embraced with alacrity and joy? "Them that are meek shall he guide in judgment, and such as are gentle, them shall be learn his way."

But here Mr. O'C. will be ready to exclaim, "All, therefore, that is wanting, (in the opinion of the sup

porters of the Bible Society,) for understanding the Scriptures, is a competent portion of self-abasement and ignorance on the part of man, with a Bible to read; God will do the rest." (p. 16.) Is this the remark of intemperate prejudice, or wilful misrepresentation? Instead of the word " ignorance," which is insidiously and disingenuously introduced, substitute "diligence in the use of the appointed means," and it will be easy to find authority amongst the ablest divines and supporters of the Established Church, for a doctrine which excites in the mind of Mr. O'C. so much pleasantry. (See Judgment of Archbishop Cranmer, concerning the People's Right to, and discreet Use of, Holy Scripture, p. 15.)

How far Mr. O'C. is justified in stating, that "the greatest luminaries of our church and nation have thought that reason, improved reason, is the only interpreter of the Sacred Writings," we shall presently see, when I have contrasted the opinions of Archbishop Cranmer, of Archbishop Leighton, of the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge, and of Bishop Horsley, with those of Mr. O'C. This I shall do by extracting passages from the writings of those distinguished divines, and by reference to the tract above cited, which must necessarily be supposed to speak the sentiments of the Society by which it is published and circulated. "Peradventure they will say unto me, How and if we understand not that we read that is contained in the books? What then? Suppose thou understand not the deep and profound mysteries of Scripture, yet can it not be but that much fruit and holiness must come and grow unto thee by the reading: for it cannot be that thou shouldest be ignorant in all things alike. For the Holy Ghost hath so ordered and attempered the Scriptures, that in them as well publicans, fishers, and shepherds may find their edifi

cation, as great doctors their erudition. For these books were not made to vain-glory, like as were the writings of the Gentile philosophers and rhetoricians; to the intent the makers should be had in admiration for their high styles, and obscure manner and writing, whereof nothing can be understood without a master or expositor: but the Apostles and Prophets wrote their books so that their special intent and purpose might be understood and perceived of every reader, which was nothing but the edification and amendment of the life of them that read or hear it. Who is it, that reading, or hearing read in the Gospel, Blessed be they that be meek, blessed are they that be merciful, blessed are they that are clean of heart,' and such other like places, can perceive nothing, except he have a master to teach him what it meaneth." (See Judgment of Archbishop Cranmer, &c. p. 14.) Again: "Here all manner of persons ...... learned, unlearned; rich,

poor

tenants and mean men, artificers, husbandmen, &c. of what state and condition soever they may be, may in this book learn all things, what they ought to believe, what they ought to do," &c. &c. Therefore, I will take it for a conclusion sufficiently determined and appointed, that it is convenient and good the Scriptures be read of all sorts and kinds of people," &c. (Ibid, p. 18.)

"It (i. e. the Bible) is so contempered, that there may be many things, yea, all the main things in it, profitable for all, fitted to the use of the lowest estate and lowest capacities of men."—Archbishop Leighton's Works, vol. 1. p. 338.

My experience, I confess, leads me most fully and deliberately to assent to the truth of these declarations. But does it from thence "inevitably follow (as Mr. O'C, would have us believe, p. 15.) that the clergy are not therefore an essential part of a religious community?" Does it indeed follow,