further, especially in the instance of the self-confident Peter, avail himself of that pride which goeth before destruction, and that haughty boastful spirit which precedes a fall. He could also put into the lips of his willing agents-for all who delight in seducing others from their obedience to Christ act as the agents of Satan-those taunts and threats which caused even this honest and affectionate disciple, in a moment of self-confident weakness, to exclaim with oaths and curses, "I know not the man." All this, so far as permitted by God, the tempter might do, and did ; and all this virtually does he continue to do to the present hour, by means of those innumerable seductions which beset our path and endanger our salvation. He addresses himself to every passion: he winds his way through every avenue of the heart. He is the god of falsehood, the god of covetousness, the god of envy, the god of unhallowed desires, the god of unlawful pleasures. He can even transform himself into an angel of light, deluding us by specious appearances of religion, and the flimsy garb of an external profession of Christianity. He made the love of knowledge, in itself a most lawful and laudable appetite, an instrument for the destruction of our first parents; and thus to the present hour does he attempt to pervert all our desires, tastes, and pursuits, and by every means to gain us over to his fatal dominion.

From this view of the subtle devices of our spiritual enemy, we proceed, secondly, to reflect upon the great danger to which St. Peter was exposed by means of their influence. This very chapter had recorded a fearful instance of the effects of listening to the suggestions of the tempter. Judas, who once, perhaps, had borne as firm a character for allegiance to Christ as St. Peter himself, had fallen, by the persuasions of the devil operating upon the avarice and treachery of his own corrupt heart. Satan, it is said,

entered into him, and he immediately went out and consulted how he might betray the Saviour. Peter was now to be exposed to the temptations of the same seducer: his vain glorious boast, "Though all men forsake thee, yet will not I," was to be put to an arduous test: he was to be sifted as wheat; his faith, his love, his Christian courage were to be severely proved; and who could say that he would not perish like dross in the fiery trial? Fall he did: his faith for a season was eclipsed; the expression of his love for his Divine Master was overpowered by the force of temptation, and he seemed to be fast following the steps of the apostate Judas. To increase his danger, he was not aware of it: he thought himself strong when he was weak: he boasted to the last of his power to withstand the shock of temptation: he professed himself ready to go with his Master to prison and to judgment; and instead of redoubling his vigilance, instead of seeking assistance from above, instead of uttering that prayer which had rescued him when sinking in the billows of the sea, "Lord save, or I perish," he vainly reposed on his own imagined firmness of character, and his past attachment to his Lord. This insensibility to his perilous condition, accompanied by that carelessness of spirit to which it gave rise, was the very circumstance that rendered him most vulnerable by the darts of his spiritual enemy. Temptation cannot be fatal so long as we are conscious of it, and endeavour resolutely to repel it, and, feeling the weakness of our own unassisted efforts, humbly look up for power from on high to make us conquerors over it. But the moment we relax in any of these points, our danger becomes extreme, and the tempter soon either finds or makes an easy entrance to our hearts.

Under these dangerous circumstances, happy was it for St. Peter, in the third place, that he experienced the merciful interposition of

his Divine Master. With earnest solicitude "the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat; but I have prayed for thee, that thy faith fail not.' This warning, if humbly listened to, and vigilantly made use of, might have turned aside the impending danger. For the warnings of God are mercifully intended to avert the calamities which they point out. Thus, Nineveh, though denounced against, was not destroyed, because, when admonished, it repented: thus Hezekiah, threatened with speedy death, avoided the approaching shaft, because he humbled himself before the Lord; and thus doubt less might St. Peter, by penitently retracting his vain boast, and casting himself at his Saviour's feet for pardon for the past and strength for the future, have been enabled to stand the trial, without the reproach of his awful, though, through the mercy of God, not final, apostacy.

Happy is it for every sincere disciple of Christ, that amidst his innumerable sins, temptations, and infirmities, he has a Shepherd, full of kindness and full of care, succoured by whose might he is enabled to triumph over all his spiritual adversaries. But for whom is this arm of the Lord revealed? Not for Judas, but for Peter; not for the wilful transgressor, the deliberate apostate, but for the sincere and affectionate, though erring, disciple. We are not to hope for the merciful interposition of the Redeemer, while habitually walking in the ways of

sin.

"I pray not," said our Lord, "for the world, but for them which thou, O Father, hast given me ;" and his prayer is, "not that thou shouldst take them out of the world, but that thou shouldst keep them from the evil." It was such a prayer that our Lord offered for St. Peter in the text: he prayed for one in whom the spirit was willing, though the flesh was weak ; and his prayer was, not that his faith should not be tried, but that it should not sink in

the trial; and this prayer was fully answered, so that St. Peter became, after his recovery from his temptation, one of the most faithful, zealous, and affectionate of all the apostles and martyrs of Christ.

This gracious interposition of the Saviour was connected with the employment of the means and instruments of spiritual stability. "I have prayed," said he, "that thy faith fail not." Faith is the anchor of the soul: it lays hold on things invisible; and by its firm grasp of the solid realities of eternity, it enables the Christian steadily and securely to ride out all the storms of temptation, without making shipwreck of his immortal soul. Our Lord's prayer therefore was directed to the strengthening of his disciple's drooping faith. He did not rescue him by a direct miracle, but by nurturing in his heart that sacred principle which is "the substance of things hoped for, the evidence of things not seen." And when the Apostle's faith was most depressed, when for a moment it seemed extinct, it was revived by a glance from that Eye which beamed co passion with its reproof, and caused the self-reproaching disciple to go out and weep bitterly. These tears bespoke the fulfilment of the prediction in the text: the faith of the tempted Apostle, though for a time it had withered in the baneful soil of self-confidence, had not utterly failed. It now re-blossoms; it brings forth new and richer fruits: the momentary apostate is converted, and, being converted, devotes bis future life, according to his Saviour's command, to strengthen his brethren. How faithfully, how zealously, he addicted himself to this great work, let his discourses, his epistles, his journeyings, his imprisonments, his cruel martyrdom declare. We find him in Europe, in Asia, in Africa, preaching to the Jew, and to the Gentile, the unsearchable riches of Christ. No toil was too great, no sacrifice too costly, to shew his love for his Divine Master, and his desire

to feed the flock which he had purchased with his most precious blood. We discover in his Epistles how well he could warn his brethren against the snares which had proved so dangerous to himself, and how skilfully and affectionately he could apply his own dearly bought experience to the various circumstances of human condition and of the Christian life. And at length, after having faithfully fulfilled his risen Saviour's command, Feed my sheep; feed my lambs," we behold him, according to ecclesiastical history, joyfully submitting to wear the thorny crown of martyrdom, and bowing his head in triumphant agonies upon the

cross.

How strikingly does the history which we have been considering, appeal to every heart! It exhorts us to be ever aware of our liability to temptation, and ever on our guard against it. If St. Peter, in the immediate presence of his Saviour, was not secure from the devices of Satan, when are we exempt from them? when can we safely lay aside our vigilance in guarding against them? when can we without peril neglect that petition which the Saviour himself has taught us; "Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil." The history further shews us the danger of selfconfidence, and the necessity of continually imploring the intercession of our Great High Priest, that our faith may not fail when we are exposed to the seductions of our spiritual enemy. It also encourages us to resist. temptation by the merciful solicitude which it displays on the part of our Redeemer, to shield his faithful disciples in the hour of their extremity. And, lastly, it teaches us to put others on their guard against those dangers which had well nigh proved our own ruin, and to devote our future life with renewed fidelity, affection, and diligence, to the service of our gracious Deliverer.

Tothe Editorofthe Christian Observer. On the subject of the discrepant translations of Psalm cv. 28, in our Bibles and prayer-books, there is a curious passage in Hooker's Polity, which it may be worth while to transcribe for the edification of your readers.

"Touching translations of holy Scripture, albeit we may not disallow of their painful travaels who strictly have tied themselves to the very original letter; yet the judgment of the church, as we see by the practice of all nations, Greeks, Latins, Persians, Syrians, Ethiopians, Arabians, hath been ever that the fittest for public audience are such as, following a middle course between the rigour of literal translators and the liberty of paraphrasts, do with greatest shortness and plainness deliver the meaning of the Holy Ghost; which, being a labour of so great difficulty, the exact performance thereof we may rather wish than look for; so that, except between the words of the translation and the mind of the Scripture itself, there be contradiction, every little difference should not seem an intolerable blemish, necessarily to be be spunged out. Whereas, therefore, the Prophet David, in a certain Psalm, doth say, concerning Moses and Aaron, that they were obedient to the word of God, and in the self-same place our allowed translation saith, they were not obedient; we are for this cause challenged as manifest gainsayers of Scripture, even in that which we read for Scripture unto the people. But, forasmuch as words are resemblances of that which the mind of the speaker conceiveth, and conceits are images representing that which is spoken of; it followeth, that they that will judge of words should have recourse to the things themselves from whence they rise. In setting down that miracle, at the sight whereof Peter fell down astonished before the feet of Jesus, and cried, Depart, Lord;

I am a sinner;' the Evangelist St. Luke (v. 6, 7) saith, the store of the fish which they took was such, that the net they took it in brake, and the ships which they loaded therewith sunk. St. John (xxi. 11) recording the like miracle saith, that albeit the fishes in number were so many, yet the net, with so great a weight, was not broken. Suppose they had written both of one miracle; although there be in their words a manifest shew of jar, yet none, if we look upon the difference of matter, with regard whereunto they might have both spoken even of one miracle the very same which they spake of divers; the one intending thereby to signify that the greatness of the burden exceeded the natural ability of the instruments which they had to bear it; the other, that the weak ness thereof was supported by a supernatural and miraculous addition of strength. The nets, as touching themselves, brake, but, through the power of God, they held. Are not the words of the prophet Micah (v. 2) touching Bethlehem, Thou Bethlehem, the least?' and doth not the Evangelist (Matt. ii. 6) translate these words, Thou, Bethlehem, not the least?' The one regard ing the quantity of the place; the other, the dignity. Micah attributeth unto it smallness, in respect to circuit; Matthew greatness, in regard of honour and estimation, by being the native soil of our Lord and Saviour Christ. Sith, therefore, speeches which gainsay one another must, of necessity, be applied both unto one and the self-same subject; sith they must also the one affirm, the other deny, the self-same things; what necessity of contradiction can there be between the letter of the prophet, David, and our authorised translation thereof, if he, understanding Moses and Aaron, do say,

They were not disobedient,' we, applying our speech to Pharoah and the Egyptians, do say of them, They were not obedient?' Or, (which the matter itself will easily enough likewise suffer), the Egyp

tians being meant by both, it be said, that they in regard of their offer to let go the people (Ex. x. 24), when they saw the fearful darkness, disobeyed not the word of the Lord; and yet that they did not obey his word, inasmuch as the sheep and cattle, at the self-same time, they withheld. Of both translations, the better I willingly acknowledge that which cometh nearer to the very letter of the original verity; yet so that the other may likewise safely enough be read, without any peril at all of gainsaying as much as the least jot or syllable of God's most sacred and precious truth." (Eccles. Pol. v. § 19.)

In quoting the above, the copyist is very far from thinking this hypothesis of Hooker's the best specimen of his judgment, containing as it does a principle which would tend to deprive language of its expository character. It is, however, sufficiently ingenious; and it is Hooker's, of whom it may be said, as of Pearson, that "the very dust of his writings is gold." Gold-dust, however, may be as mischievous to the sight as dust of cheaper mould; and I am not so far "juratus in verba magistri" as to be a blinded admirer of any mortal. Though the above therefore is not adduced to settle the point in question, it is curious as proving that "this manifest shew of jar" has been a long standing subject of controversy, a very "crux" of commentators long ago. Will Numbers xvi. 14 throw any light on the passage? Here the LXX have omitted to translate : it will be replied that they here express themselves pwvik@g; this is doubtless the case: did they intend their rendering of Ps. cv. 28 to be understood in the same way?

Your's, &c.

AMYNTOR.

Tothe Editorofthe Christian Observer. IT will interest your biblical readers to be informed, that the learned and pious Bishop of St. David's,

undaunted by the objections urged against his arguments in favour of the authenticity of 1 John v. 7, and unchecked by the want of courtesy with which some of those objections have been conveyed, has again publicly issued forth to the important contest. His lordship has just published a second edition of his "Vindication" of the disputed passage, against M. Griesbach; to which he has appended a refutation of the strange hypothesis of the work entitled "Palæoromaica," respecting the original language of the New Testament*, and has prefixed a copious article of sixty-eight pages, in reply to the objections of the Quarterly Review against his lordship's arguments in favour of 1 John v. 7. As your work contains in former volumes various papers on the controversy, and allusions to it, your readers may not be displeased at having before them, in a concise form, the present state of the argument in favour of the passage. This is the more desirable, as most of the publications which have entered upon the discussion have addressed themselves chiefly to the refutatory class of arguments. I shall extract therefore, from the learned prelate's work, a compendium of his arguments in corroboration of the passage. These are in substance as follow:

1. The connexion of the verse with the context, and with the general scope of the Epistle; which Bengelius says, omnem codicum penuriam compensat.

2. The evidence of the Latin version, Græcis omnibus codicibus antiquior. (Bengelius.)

3. The testimony of Tertullian and Cyprian, which Mill says is abundantly sufficient to authenticate the seventh verse, licet in nullis omnino ab illo tempore in hunc usque diem exemplaribus comparuerit.

4. The testimony of Fulgentius,

For the substance of his lordship's refutation of Palæoromaica, see Christ. Observ. for February, p. 74.

who places beyond all doubt Cyprian's direct citation of the seventh

verse.

5. The testimony of Eucherius and Cassiodorus, who quote both verses.

6. The testimony of the African Bishops, instar centenorum codicum, qui optimæ notæ sunt seculi V. (Dorhout.)

7. The quotations or allusions of the Greek Fathers, Clemens of Alexandria, Dionysius of Alexandria, Basil, Athanasius the younger, Diodorus, the preceptor of Chrysostom, Cyril of Alexandria, Maximus, and the Greek Scholia.

8. The testimony of the Prologue of the canonical Epistles to the Greek text of the 7th verse, extant. in the time of the writer.

To these positive reasons for the authenticity of the verse, we may add the following negative arguments:

If there are no Greek manuscripts but one, for the verse, after the end of the third century, there are no Greek manuscripts against the verse before that time.

If no Greek fathers quote the Greek text (which cannot be admitted), no Latin heretics object to the Latin text. The Greek Church objected to the insertion Filioque in the Latin creed, but never to the text of the seventh verse in the Latin version.

If no Greck father quoted I John v. 7, no Greek father quoted 1 John v. 20, during the first three centuries, or 1 Tim. iii. 16, during the first four. I am, &c.

CLERICUS.

Tothe Editorofthe Christian Observer. HAVING great doubt as to the propriety of a deacon officiating in the way in which it is customary for deacons to officiate in the church, I shall be much obliged to any of your correspondents for information on the following points:

By what authority do deacons omit the Absolution, and in its place read some penitentiary collect? If this be because the Absolution