will exhibit their existence by the force of recoil which they produce. An elastic spring will yield to sudden pressure, but if it be not broken it starts back again: it contains a power of reaction. In the Peter of the Acts of the Apostles we find no disposition to be ashamed of his Master, no disinclination to brave suffering for His sake.

And what awoke Peter's slumbering conscience? The look of Jesus. Jesus turned and looked upon Peter. Who can venture to put into words all that that look conveyed to the mind of the Apostle? Your thoughts would outrun me if I attempted the description. Could we but see that look directed on ourselves, how would it shame our cowardice and rebuke the coldness of

our love! And why do we see it not? It is

because in the deadness of our faith we turn our

eyes away from Him. The Apostle directs us to run with patience the race that is set before us, looking unto Jesus. If we strove to keep ever before us the thoughts of what He has done for us, and of what He has asked us to do for Him, even to follow in His steps and to imitate His holy example,—there would be ever present in our hearts a force which, even though at times overmastered by sudden temptation, would be strong for reaction and restoration.

God grant, brethren, that the fatal words, "too late," be not stamped on your repentance. Sorrow for sin is sure to come: for sin must always be followed by sorrow. But may yours be that godly sorrow which leadeth to repentance. May yours be the sorrow of Peter whose bitter weeping was the beginning of a happier life-who sowed in tears what he should reap in joy-not the sorrow of Esau who, when he came too late to value what he had despised before, found no place of repentance though he sought it carefully with

tears.

ΧΙ

CHARITY AND LOVE1

"And now abideth faith, hope, charity, these three; but the greatest of these is charity."--I CORINTHIANS xiii. 13.

In the Revised Version it is: " But now abideth faith, hope, love, these three; and the greatest of these is love."

ONE of the features which distinguishes the new version from the old is that a different rule is followed with regard to the translation of the same Greek by the same English word. This is not a thing that is always possible to be done consistently with faithful translation; for it constantly happens that corresponding words in different languages do not so completely correspond, but that the meaning of one somewhat overlaps that of the other, so that often two words in one language must be used to express all that is meant by one word in the other.

But King James's translators of set purpose disregarded any attempt to preserve uniformity of rendering in this respect, and without any neces1 Preached on Quinquagesima, 1882.

sity, but from mere love of variety, translate the same Greek word differently even when it recurs within a verse or two. In their Preface they defend this method of theirs, and altogether repudiate the notion that they were to be tied up if they had translated a word "journeying" in one place not to render it "travelling" in another; if one where "think" never to translate "suppose "; if one where "pain" never ache"; if one where "joy" never "gladness." "Thus to mince the matter," they say, "we thought to savour more of curiosity than of wisdom, and that rather it would breed scorn in the atheist than bring profit to the godly reader. For is the kingdom of God become words or syllables? Why should we be in bondage to them if we may be free ?-use one precisely when we may use another no less fit as commodiously?" And they give other reasons which I need not delay to quote.

There is no doubt that King James's translators, than whom no men understood the genius of the English language better, made their version much more agreeable to the ear by the variety with which they enriched their language; for the simple taste of earlier times had taken no offence against the constant repetition of the same word in a narrative, which English writers have generally thought it an elegance to avoid.

But there is a

grave inconvenience from the course followed by King James's translators, namely, that it has made the English Bible inadequate for a very profitable way of studying the Bible. One of the best comScripture itself.

For

mentaries on Scripture is Το compare one passage with another is often the best way of throwing light on the meaning of both. Now the similarity of two passages is often disguised when the same Greek word is made to wear different English dresses in the two places; and on the other hand the English reader is sometimes put on a false scent when he thinks he has found the same word used in two different texts, when in truth the Greek words are different. these and other reasons, the late Committee of Revision decided that they would aim at rendering as far as they could the same Greek word by the same English. And this gave rise to one of the first complaints that was made against their work. When their version was compared with the old one, it was found that in many a familiar text a word had been changed for another of very nearly the same sense; whereupon an outcry was made against such needless tampering with the venerable translation to which we have been all accustomed. "We can understand that King James's translators should be corrected if they had made a mistake, but why alter their work gratuitously when