the New Testament, except by what seems to be very like an irreverent tampering with the word of God.

There is one point, however, on which the writings of the Mauritian school please us more than Dr. Crawford's work,- -we mean the unlimited extent of the Redeemer's atonement. All these writers hold that the loving regards of the Son of God were as wide as the race; but the Professor of Divinity in the University of Edinburgh unhappily maintains that the substitution of Christ was undertaken on behalf of only a limited portion of the family of man. He rigidly holds by the theology of the Westminster Confession of Faith. He devotes a separate section to the overthrow of what he calls the Rectoral or Governmental theory of the Atonement, as held by New England divines across the Atlantic, and by Drs. Gilbert and Wardlaw in Great Britain-the very view of the atonement, we may add, which our esteemed brethren Dr. Morison and Mr. Guthrie advocated at the bar of the Secession Synod in 1841 and 1843. He even quotes with approbation two passages from Mr. Jowett and Mr. Martineau in which this view is held up to ridicule as no "real substitution, but a mere stage representation, and an ad captandum platform display." And yet, if it be true, as the New Testament declares throughout, that "Jesus gave himself a ransom for all," this must be the true scriptural doctrine. He was not such a ransom that men must all be pardoned: but he was such a ransom that they may all be pardoned, if they will comply with the Holy Spirit's call. The following is all that our author has got to say on the contradiction that obtains between a limited atonement, and the universal invitations of the Gospel:

"That there is great difficulty in the way of harmonizing the general invitations of the Gospel, on the one hand, with the special reference of the atonement to those who shall eventually be partakers of its benefits, on the other hand-it would be altogether fruitless to disguise. And if these two things were alike within the reach and comprehension of the human understanding, in that case our inability to reconcile them might warrant a strong suspicion that they cannot both be true. But inasmuch as one of these subjects at least far exceeds the power and compass of our faculties, we cannot without presumption hazard the assertion, that our inability to reconcile it with the other is proof of any real inconsistency between the two. For it may be that the missing link that is needful, and would be available for their thorough reconciliation, may be hidden from our view in that profound abyss of God's everlasting counsels which we cannot fathom."

Two and two cannot be made five to all eternity; and if Christ only be the substitute of some, he cannot be consistently offered as a substitute to all. It is this contradiction that has called forth the Evangelical Union in Scotland; and when we find that the Professor of Divinity in our Metropolitian University is content to leave the matter in so unsatisfactory a state as the quotation just given indicates, we feel as if our humble protest against the limitarian theology of the land were as much needed in 1871 as it was thirty years ago. Dr. Crawford says, that there is as great an apparent discrepancy between God's commandments and his purposes, as there is between his Gospel invitations and his Gospel provisions. But

why are the ten commandments not kept? Simply because men refuse to keep them. Yet there they are, addressed to all, meant for all, and condemning all that break them. If our author will admit that there is as much grace for man at Calvary, as there is law at Sinai, we will claim him for the Arminian side.

In conclusion, we repeat, that the work before us is an admirable repository of theological literature on the question of the Nature of the Atonement. Whoever reads it and masters its contents will find that his mind has been well stored with most important information on the subject of which the volume treats. We understand that Dr. Crawford was for many years the clergyman of a large city parish in Edinburgh; and that it was only towards the evening of his life that he was called to the chair of theology in the University of that city. It is certainly greatly to his credit that, in addition to the discharge of his academic duties, he is able to publish theological works so voluminous and so satisfactory. He must have been during his lifetime a diligent student, and he must also possess a clear and logical mind. His reading on the question of the Atonement has been extensive; and the quotations which he makes from an antagonist's works are fair and judicious. In his courteous, yet painstaking and thorough way of canvassing an adversary's position he reminds us not a little of Wardlaw, whom he frequently quotes. We only wish that he would review those few passages of Scripture in the 6th of John, the 9th of Romans, and the 1st of Ephesians, which he thinks teach restricted grace; for we are certain that his acute mind, if set free from the prejudice of system, might soon discover that they may easily be reconciled "with that gospel for every creature" which the word of God proclaims in almost its every page.

We may add that the large volume is quite creditable to the eminent firm who have published it. We do not recollect having seen the characters of the Greek language printed so distinctly and beautifully in any work which has hitherto passed under our review.

THE TWO IMAGES.

ALL know something of the frailty and uncertainty of human life. All feel within them something of the seeds of disease, decay, and death. Viewed in one light, it is wonderful that we live so long, and that the body drags on through so many years as it generally does. Its texture is of the most delicate description. Its various parts are easily broken or rent asunder. Each part has its own particular work to perform, and yet each part has a bearing upon the work of all the other parts. The whole is knit together in the most beautiful order; all the separate members and organs being most tenderly, yet strongly, strung

on to one another. Looking upon the whole, and remembering that the vital fluid keeps circulating night and day, through the most delicate pipes, ever becoming renewed and purified for the sustenance of life, we may well exclaim with the poet

66

Strange that a harp with thousand strings
Should keep in tune so long!"

But viewed in another light, it is a wonder that we die, and especially that we die so soon. Why should not our life go on and on for any indefinite period? Why should not the lamp burn while it is supplied with oil? Why should not the furnace blaze while it is supplied with fuel? Why should not the millwheel continue to go round while the water course is supplied with water? And why should not the human body continue to live on and remain fresh and vigorous so long as it is supplied with nourishing food, pure air, and healthful exercise? Especially may we ask this question, when we remember that the body carries within itself a sort of healing balm for those sores or diseases to which it is subject-that it is a sort of self-rectifying machine. Why, then, should there be decay? Where does the decay begin? What is the cause of the decay? These questions, we apprehend, must be answered, at least to some extent, by the assertion that we bear the image of the earthly -the image of the first Adam.

The scheme of mercy is a remedial scheme. It is designed by God not only to bless the souls of men with freedom from condemnation and restoration to the moral image of God, but it is also fitted to give deliverance from bodily disease, decay, and death. Hence it is that the apostle says, "as we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall also bear the image of the heavenly." In the chapter (1 Cor. xv,) in which these words occur, the sacred writer is asserting and proving the resurrection of the body. Thus, when he speaks of the image of the earthy, he thinks of the body hastening on to death, and lying in the corruption of the grave. And when he speaks of the image of the heavenly, he thinks of that body raised again, and adorned with all the beauties of a glorious immortality. There is a beautiful contrast. There is an earthy and there is a heavenly. There is a bearing of the image of the one, and a bearing of the image of the other. Death may be viewed as a kind of finishing stroke to the evils caused by sin; the resurrection as a kind of finishing stroke to the blessings brought to us by the scheme of mercy. We are the bearers of the earthly image because of our connection with the earthy. We may become the bearers of the heavenly image because of our connection with the heavenly.

There is a connection also between the earthy and the heavenly whose images are mentioned. Both are termed "Adam"-the first Adam and the second Adam. The second Adam was needed because of the first,-indeed, the second came to undo the work of the first. We are all connected with the first, and, consequently, we die in him; we are all connected with the second, and, consequently, he died for us. By our connection with the first we bear his image, and sink into the grave; by our connection with the second we may become further united to him by a living faith, and so rise with him and bear his glorious image. We are already connected with the second Adam on his side-we require also to be connected with him on our side. Our consent was not asked in order to our bearing the image of the earthy; but our consent is asked in order to our bearing the image of the heavenly. By our own sinfulness we may add immensely to the degradation and suffering connected with the earthly image; by our own faith we secure the blessings of the heavenly, and may add immensely to their fulness by our own holiness.

It

First, Let us look to the earthy and his image. Where shall we look for him? Let us contemplate, as best we can, the glories of paradise. It was a garden of pleasures, fitted up by God as a home for his lovely and favoured creature, man. was stored and adorned with everything that could minister to his necessities, his delight, and his glory. Being furnished by the hand of God himself, there was nothing to mar its beauty, nothing to pollute it, or cause uneasiness of any kind. While there was no sin bliss of every possible kind must have reigned over all. Now, it is at the outside of this lovely abode that we must look for the earthy, whose image we bear. He has been cast out of it by his transgression. The door is barred against him; it is his home no more. We may fancy something of the desolate condition of this poor creature, sent forth a forlorn wanderer over the earth to toil and weep and die. We may think of him, sitting down, it may be, with his hands upon his face in the deepest dejection. What dreariness would be all

around! What sorrow and distress within!

But is there nothing but earthiness about man thus cast out of his home? Is there nothing of heavenliness at all? Yes, there is much of heaven still remaining. He has a heavenly nature within his earthly body. He still has a soul which was made in the very image of his great Creator. And though the moral image of that soul has been marred by sin, its nature remains the same,-like his God; and he is capable of restoration to the moral loveliness which God designed for him. While the heavenly soul remained true to its God it was capable of raising

its earthy body to heaven with it. Now that sin has marred it heaven has decreed that a separation must take place between it and its earthy body. Its earthy body must return to the dust whence it was taken; but though cast out of his home, anticipating death, man the immortal being may still, through the wonders of redeeming love, rise to a heaven of glory, and even get the dust-body delivered from the power of the grave. Thus there is much of heaven connected with the earthy, but with it all man is still the earthy.

We all bear the image of this earthy. That is, we are exactly similar to what this earthy was. We bear a complete resemblance to him. He was the entire pattern of what we are. An image of a thing, or of a man, is a correct likeness of that thing or of that man; so we have borne, we do bear, the exact likeness of what the earthy Adam was when he was driven forth from his paradisiacal home. What sort of an image is it? It is a very marred and broken image. Man's body is not now what it once was. It is still a very beautiful and very wonderful framework. Traces of its former grandeur are still seen upon it. The workmanship is the same, only it has become much marred and broken. And as the broken pillars of some great temple can tell something of the glory of that temple when it stood in its original splendour, so the body in its marred and broken condition tells us something of its former glory. Beautiful and useful though every part is, how changed from what it once was! It is a polluted image. Sin is often spoken of in the Bible as uncleanness, as needing to be washed away. It is a moral uncleanness. What outward pollution is to material things, sin is to the soul. Properly it is the soul that sins and contracts this moral pollution. But the soul and the body are so intimately connected that the one cannot sin without affecting the other. The moral pollution of the one clings, in some measure, to the other. The soul often sins through the body, and employs the various members of the body in sinning. The eyes, the ears, the hands, the feet, &c., are often made the instruments of sin, and thus the moral guilt and pollution contracted by the soul in sinning becomes, so far, the guilt and pollution of the body as well as of the soul. While man remained in innocence, soul and body must have shared the beauty and the blessedness of purity. Now that man has sinned, the soul and the body share the degradation and pollution of sin. Thus the image that we bear is not only a broken image, it has moral pollution clinging to it. It is a decaying image. When man committed sin at first, the body became marred; but it did not remain in that marred condition merely without any further deterioration.

The