"When was or awas, in the singular number, is used to signify that the whole of the thing implied by the substantive with which it is joined is intended, the substantive has the article; but when it is employed to denote that every individual of that species is spoken of, then the substantive is anarthrons.”—Middleton on the Greek Article, p. 137.

I am, &c.

OXONIENSIS.

SCRIPTURE CRITICISM.

To the Editor of the Remembrancer.

Sir.

BISHOP HORSLEY was of opinion that ro; is spoken of persons only. A correspondent in the Gentleman's Magazine, October, 1783, p. 842, brings two examples in refutation, viz. John vi. 50. 58. έτος εσιν ὁ ἄλλος, and Luke xx. 17. &res subaud. 19. But surely in both these instances the person of Christ is understood. "This man is the bread." "This person is the stone." If therefore the admirable Bishop's opinion can be attacked on no better grounds than these, it may pass into a rule. I am not satisfied with any of the commentators on Isa. lxvi. 24, quoted by our Lord, Mark ix: 44. 46. 48. They speak of Tophet and the Valley of Hinnom; but surely the allu sion is to the two methods of disposing of dead bodies in general use among mankind; inhumation and cremation. The fleshly worm dies, the funeral pyre is quenched; but in the second death these destructive agents shall never cease to act. Perhaps some illustration of this remark is derived from Thucydides, 1. . — at least that passage first suggested it to me.

JHUOA.

BIBLICAL ILLUSTRATIONS.

(Continued.)

come no yoke, and tie the kine to the cart, and take the ark of the Lord, and lay it upon the cart." 1 Sam. vi. 7.

"None ought to carry the ark of God, but the Levites; for them hath the Lord chosen to carry the ark of God, and to minister unto him for ever." 1 Chron. xv. 2 ̧

Mr. Craufurd, in describing the funeral of the Lama, says, "In the procession came the musicians, with their instruments, and a Burcham, (or idol) carried in a red box, fullowed." Sketches of the Hindoos, V. II. P. 222.

Bishop Cumberland makes the following remark upon a passage in Sanchoniatho, respecting the Agrotis, who, it is said, had a much worshipped statue, and a temple, car. ried about by one or more yoke of 66 Methinks I oxen, in Phenicia.

see something like this in the advice of the priests of the Philistines, successors to the old Phoenicians in their religion and abode, to send back the ark of God upon a new cart, drawn by two milch cows. This ark was the epitome of the tabernacle, or moveable temple of God; a like tabernacle was that of Moloch, and of his Star Chiun *, or Rephan, whereof St. Stephen says, Acts vii. 43, that the Israelites carried them in the wilderness to bow unto or worship." Cumberland's Sanchoniatho, 247.

With the Hebrews the ark of Berith, "the purifier," was a small wooden chest, of three feet nine inches in length, two feet three inches broad, and two feet three inches in height. It contains the golden pot that had manna in it, Aaron's rod, and the tables of the law. The Indian ark is of a very simple construction, and it is only the intention and application of it that makes it worthy of notice, for it is made of pieces of wood securely fastened in the form of a square: their ark has a cover, and the whole is made impenetrably close with hiccory splinters; it is about half the

* Amos v. 26.

dimensions of the divine Jewish ark, and may very properly be called the red Hebrew ark of the purifier imitated. The leader and a beloved waiter carry it by turns. It contains several consecrated vessels made by beloved superannuated women, and of such various antiquated forms as would have puzzled Adam to have given significant names to each. The leader and his attendant are purified longer than the rest of the company, that the first may be fit to act in the religious office of a priest of war, and the other to carry the awful sacred ark. The ark, the mercy seat, and cherubim, were the very essence of the Levitical law, and often called the "testimonies of Yohewah." The ark of the temple was termed his throne; David calls it his footstool. In speaking of the Indian places of refuge for the unfortunate, I observed, that if a captive taken by the reputed power of the beloved things of the ark, should be able to make his escape into one of these towns, or even into the winter house of the Archimagus, he is delivered from the fiery torture otherwise inevitable.

The Indian ark is deemed so sacred and dangerous to be touched, either by their own sanctified warriors, or the spoiling enemy, that they durst not touch it on any account. It is not to be meddled with by any except the war chieftain and his waiter, under the penalty of inrurring great evil, nor would the most inveterate enemy touch it in the woods for the same reason, which is agreeable to the religious opinions and customs of the Hebrews, respecting the sacredness of their ark, A gentleman who was at the Ohio in the year 1756, assured me he saw a stranger there very importunate to see the inside of the Cherrakee ark, which was covered with a drest deer skin, and placed on a couple of short blocks. An Indian centinel watched it, armed with a hiccory bow and brass pointed arrows, and he was faithful to

his trust; for finding the stranger obtruding to pollute the sacred vehicle, he drew his arrow to the head, and would have shot him through the body, had he not suddenly withdrawn. The leader vir. tually acts the part of a priest of war pro tempore. If they obtain a vic. tory, and get some of the enemies' scalps, they sanctify themselves when they make their triumphal entrance, in the manner they do when they set off to war; but if their expedition proves unfortunate, they only mourn over their loss, and ascribe it to the vicious conduct of some of the followers of the beloved ark.

The Indians have an old tradition, that when they left their own native land, they brought with them a sanctified rod, by order of the oracle, which they fixed every night in the ground, and were to remove from place to place on the continent, towards the sun rising till it budded in one night's time; that they obeyed the sacred mandate, and that the miracle took place after they arrived on this side the Mississippi, on the present land they possess. This, they say, was the sole cause of their settling here; of fighting so firmly for their reputed holy land and holy things, and that they may be buried with their forefathers. I have seen other Indians, who pretend to the like miraculous direction, and I think it plainly refers to Aaron's rod, which was a branch of an almond tree, that budded and blossomed in one night. Adair, P, 161, &c.

"And Balaam said unto God, Balak the son of Zippor, king of Moab, hath sent unto me, saying, Behold there is a people come out of Egypt, which covereth the face of the carta: come now, curse me them; peradventure I shall be able to overcome them, and drive them out." Numb. xxii. 10, &c.

Mr. Forbes t, in his oriental me

Numbers xvii. 7, 8.

↑ Vol. III. 239,

moirs, mentions it as a common circumstance for seers and prophets to be consulted on similar occasions in Guzerat. Thus the Gracias, a wild and lawless race, who style them. selves the Aborigines of their country, upon hearing of an expedition preparing against them, sent immediately for the principal Brahminical astrologers and soothsayers, who, as usual, received the reward of divination, and flattered the vanity of the Chieftain, by assuring him that his fortress was impregnable. Their seers and divines in Hindostan, are, however, not confined to the Brahmin tribe, they are to be found of various descriptions and both sexes, from the prince, who, like Joseph, divineth by his cup, to the humble fortune teller, who, like the wandering gipsey, receives a small donation for his predictions. Plutarch mentions similar occurrences, and from other classical writers we find Greeks and Romans believed some men were endowed with power to devote not only individuals, but whole armies, to death. Homer frequently introduces the seers and augurs in the Grecian and Trojan armies.

To the Editor of the Remembrancer.

Sir,

IT has often been objected to the Established Church of this kingdom, and to all establishments, that they have a tendency to deprive religion of its vitality by substituting shadow for spirit, and law for grace; so that we have indeed a form of godliness but want its power. The charge is very serious, and worthy of our most attentive consideration; and it should be met, not by an angry denial, but by a sincere examination how far it may be founded in fact. The result of such an investigation will not, I apprehend, to any candid mind, prove unfavourable to our cause; for though there are, unquestionably, some disadvantages in

our system, they will appear to be of less weight and fewer in number than those which may justly be urged against any other system that ever has been, or that can be proposed to mankind. It is not therefore any reasonable argument against our National Church that there are objections and dangers to which its members are peculiarly exposed, because there are greater objections and more formidable dangers in every other communion, real or Utopian. The fault, too, of the objections and dangers we encounter is not in the Institution itself, but in the corruption of man's nature, which tends always to the opposite yet allied extremes of formality and fanaticism; which, to escape from the strait path of mortified passions and crucified lusts, is continually deviating on one hand into an empty reliance on the outward ordinances of religion, and on the other into the more fatal wanderings of enthusiasm. But whereever we lay the blame, the danger ought not to be denied nor neglected. There is a danger, certainly, that the habit of attaching essential importance to the visible establishment of the Church may insensibly lead the mind away from the recollection that God is a Spirit, and they that worship him must worship him in spirit and in truth. How then, Sir, is this danger to be averted? By becoming indifferent to that frame of ecclesiastical polity which has the sanction of Divine appointment, of Apostolical authority, of long and trying experience? By disregarding outward ordinances, and despising regular government? God forbid! As well might we hope to cure the diseases of the mind by the destruction of the body, as to revive the spirituality of religion by abrogating its holy forms, its venerable usages, its consecrated func tions. The remedy must be of another nature: not in our ordinances or institutions, but in the use we make of them; not in our profession

of religion, but in our practice of it; not in the words of our lips, but in spirit, in soul, in heart. We do not want a new religion, a new church, a new ministry; but we do want a new heart and a right spirit; we do want a more spiritual mind, a more discreet zeal, a better disposition to make a right and true use of the means afforded us.

I have been led, Sir, into these reflections by observing the very irreverent and unedifying manner in which the royal proclamation in favour of religion and virtue is too commonly read by the Clergy and heard by the people: it appears to be regarded merely as a form that must be complied with, a matter of external decorum that must be observed; and this, not only by thoughtless and irreligious persons, but by many who, I am persuaded, may be easily led to acknowledge their error, to lament and correct it.

The king in this, and in every country where a true Church is established, is the temporal head of that Church, and as such he presides over the councils of our spiritual rulers and sanctions their acts. Whatever therefore comes from him, by their advice or with their consent, should be regarded as proceeding from the highest authority upon earth, from that authority which, as the Scriptures declare, is ordained of God for the edification of his Church+, and has a right to our respect and obedience in all things not contrary to his laws; and certainly to a double porportion of espect and of obedience when it is employed in enforcing his commands and promoting his glory. When therefore our king, the temporal head of our Church, surrounded by his bishops who are our spiritual rulers, solemnly calls upon his people to renew their covenant with

See a Sermon on the death of King George III. by the Rev. J. H. Brooke Mountain.

Rom. xiii, 1. 2 Cor. x. 8. xiii. 10.

God; when lie exhorts us to revive the spirit of religion, to put away every man his abominations, to suppress vice and turn our attention to works of piety and charity; when standing in his place he makes a

covenant before the Lord to walk after the Lord, and to keep his commandments and his testimonies and his statutes, with all their heart and with all their soul, to perform the words of this covenant that are written in this book *; when the King of England, after the laudable custom of his fathers, and the example of ancient godly monarchs †, opens his reign with this solemn appeal to his people in behalf of true religion and virtue; surely, Sir, it is, to say the least of it, a very unbecoming inattention in us, if we read, or hear it read, without that deference which is due to the authority from which it comes, and that serious thought which its great importance demands; it is surely our imperative duty to regard it as one of those means of grace for our use, or abuse of which we shall be called to account; which if received in a serious and pious frame of mind cannot fail to draw down on this church and nation the blessing of the Almighty; if slighted and contemned will infallibly expose us to his just and fearful indigna

in seeing that the subject has been brought under discussion in the pages of the Christian Remembrancer, and has already called forth the different opinions of different correspondents. Clericus Devoniensis appears to me the most ingenuous and the most sensible of these correspondents, although I dissent from his conclusions, I am desirous of drawing the attention of your readers to the points to which he distantly and indistinctly alludes. There is much important matter of reflexion contained in the insinuation, that we should "consider the case as it really is, not as we could wish it to be;" and in the concession, that the persons who frequent these Evening Lectures, "would be far more usefully and religiously employed in reading the Scriptures at home, and instructing their families." Upon the strength of this concession, I am led to doubt, whether we are justified, "nay, called upon to have recourse to" this method of instruction, whether it is indeed a "Christian method," and whether it is one which has "a tendency to prevent the growth of schism, and to keep our flocks within their lawful pale."

It is, I conceive, only as an expedient, which the circumstances of the times render necessary, that Clericus Devoniensis means to recommend the more general establishment of Sunday Evening Lectures; and I put the question to his good sense and candour, for nothing can be more amiable than the tone and temper of his letter, whether these temporising expedients may not be, and whether they have not already been carried beyond their proper measure, and degree; whether it is the duty of the Clergy to comply with these humours and fashions of the people, or firmly, but at the same time temperately, to resist them, and to labour to induce better and surer principles and practices, and such as may lead more directly to that edification, which is the end of all ministerial exertion. There is, however, a view of the subREMEMBRANCER, No. 17.

ject, different from that which has been taken by any of your correspondents, which I venture to submit to your consideration, and in the justice of which I almost anticipate, at least the secret concurrence of Clericus Devoniensis.

The first question which I ask myself is this: are Sunday Evening Lectures, by which I understand the delivery of a sermon, with the customary prayers in the evening, after a full service has been performed both in the morning and in the afternoon, agreeable to the ritual of our Church? There are but two services in ordinary use, the one for the morning and the other for the evening; and whenever a third service is introduced, one or other of these services must be repeated. I proceed still further. I find no mention of any sermon, except in the morning after the Nicene Creed: in respect of the evening service, I can only read in the rubric, after the catechism, that

"The Curate of every parish shall diligently upon Sundays and holy days, after the second lesson at evening prayer, openly in the church instruct and examine so many children of his parish sent unto him, as he shall think convenient in some part of this catechism.

"And all fathers, mothers, masters and dames, shall cause their children, servants and apprentices, which have not learned their catechism, to come to the church at the time appointed, and obediently to hear and be ordered by the Curate, until such time as they have learned all that is here appointed for them to learn."

It was by this means, I apprehend, that the Reformers of our Church designed, in conformity with the primitive practice, to inculcate religious principles in the minds of the young, and by making catechizing a part of the public service, to refresh them in those of maturer years. It was for the same godly purpose that it was judged.

Min