i, 21. Wherefore ovveoic and ovverós by themselves pertain to things inferior and terrestrial, and are held as little worth in divine things: την συνεσὶν τῶν συνετῶν αθετησῶ. 1 Cor. i, 19. For the most part ovveros is used of those who seem to act prudently or sagaciously. (Matt. xi, 25; Luke x, 21.) The man also who obeys the laws of the vouç and πvevμa by degrees receives σÚVεσIV пVEνμATIKýv, a spiritual understanding, sagacity, or discernment, and so the word is to be understood when it refers to heavenly things. Eph. iii, 4; 2 Tim. ii, 7. The sacred writers attribute to the TVεvμa and yuxý, not only the power of understanding and perceiving, but free will, which, being exempt from bonds, gradually enlarges to the true freedom, which is able to choose and to accomplish the right and excellent. The will of the TVεvμa is called opevéç;* the choice of the x is attributed to the kapdía, which two volitional tendencies we commonly term desire and appetite. Ppévεc occurs once only in the New Testament, 1 Cor. Φρένες xiv, 20, from which passage the true meaning of the word is not very clear. In Rom. vii, 28, and viii, 6, we find in antithesis the combinations φρόνημα σαρκος and πνεύματος, just as we have already found the combination of νοῦς σαρκός. Then φρόνησις, (Eph. i, 8; Luke i, 17,) opóviμos, (Matt. vii, 24; x, 16; xxiv, 55; xxv, 2,) are almost always used for a laudable prudence of the пvεvμa. Evvεròs, we have already seen, is not so used; opoviμws (Luke xvi, 8) has about the same signification as vovvex@s. (Mark xii, 34.) From this signification of the word pooveiv, to be minded, (Philippians ii, 5,) we can best understand the difference between таTεVÓS and ταπεινόφρων, φιλῶν and φιλόφρων, and other similar words. He is called TаTεivos, humble, who is so simply; Taтeivappwv, humble-minded, who is humble by conscious purpose. According to this division of the faculties we may easily understand that σopìa is in the φρήν, that γνῶσις is in the νοῦς, and πίστις is in the καρδια. Yuxý, also, so far as it has volition, desire, appetency, is in the * Pythagoras (if we may credit Diogenes Laertius viii, 20) held that opźv was the highest faculty in man : τὴν δὲ ἀνθρώπου ψυχὴν διαιρεῖσθαι τριχῆ εἰς τε νοῦν καὶ φρενὰς καὶ θύμον. Νοῦν μὲν οὖν εἶναι καὶ θύμον καὶ ἐν τοῖς ἄλλοις ζώοις; φρε vàc dè μóvov év áрúñш. This, in a manner, agrees with a familiar use in the New Testament writers, for they use opórnua to mean the intending, the directing the will toward a known aim. But I am scarce able to persuade myself that Pythagoras attributed vous to animals. Stobæus (Eccl. Phys., p. 878) imputes to the Pythagoreans another partition into λογισμὸν θύμον καὶ επιθύμιαν; but these seem rather to have been the views of the Platonists, with which he seems to have confounded the Pythagorean doctrine. New Testament called kapdía in a stricter sense. It is most difficult of all accurately to define what difference exists in the New Testament between vxn and Kapdía.* Often, as we have seen. ψυχή καρδία.* above, they are interchanged; Kapdía is put for yox, since the (physical) heart is held as the seat and, as it were, the receptacle of the soul, just as the head of the intellect; neither, nevertheless, is either word used promiscuously; but vxn is spoken of in so far as it exists, but kapdía so far as it is excited, or the subject of emotion. In other passages a difference is broadly made between x and καρδία, as Acts iv. The multitude of believers was one καρδία and vxý.† And especially these parallel passages: Matt. xxii, 37 : καρδία, ψυχή, διάνοια. Mark xii, 30 : καρδία, διανοία, ἴσχυς. Luke x, 27 : καρδία, ψυχή, ἴσχυς, διάνοια. Deut. vi, 5, (Septuagint :) διάνοια, ψυχή, δύναμις. So far as we can see, to kapdia, in these passages, is attributed desire; so that the series of terms may be rendered (German, begehrkraft, lebenskraft, denkkraft, willenskraft) affection-power, lifepower, thought-faculty, volition-power. Nevertheless, the usages of the New Testament writers is not everywhere uniform. In Eph. vi, 6, Col. iii, 23, þvxý is found, where the context, according to our rule, requires kapdia, (as Luther also renders it, herz,) which is the word used in Rom. vi, 17, and 1 Tim. i, 15, in a similar round of expression. In Mark ovveots is to be taken for diavola, that is, for the σύνεσις πνευματική. Finally, concerning the notion of owμa, body, we subjoin a few remarks. Σῶμα, derived from σαός, σούς, σῶς, is used to designate the body as the instrument of the soul, (owua opуavikóv, as it is Oúμos was used among the Greek philosophers, as passages already quoted plentifully demonstrate. In the New Testament vúuoç (Apocalypse xiv, 10; i, 7; xix, 15) always signifies anger, wrath. The words evvoμetodai, evúμnois are found (Matt. ix, 4; xii, 25; Heb. iv, 12) pertaining to the кapdía, a sense familiar to the same word with the philosophers. Here also belongs the word oμovvμadóv, (Acts i, 14; iv, 1, 46; iv, 24,) which in Acts iv, 32 is expressed by the phrase τὸ πλῆθος ἦν ἡ καρδία καὶ ἡ ψυχὴ μία. † 1 Cor. i, 10 : Ἐν τῷ αὐτῷ νοι καὶ ἐν τῇ αὐτῇ γνώμη. These words pertain rather to unity in views; the passage Acts iv, 32, to unity in love. So Gregory Nyssen, (De Anim. et Resurr. Opp., vol. i, p. 189,) vvxý ¿OTIV οὐσία ζῶσα σώματι ὀργανικῶ καὶ αἰσθητικῷ δύναμιν ζωτικὴν καὶ τῶν αἰσθητῶν αντιληπτικὴν δι ἑαυτῆς ἐνιουσα. And Athanasius, (Opp., vol. ii, p. 49,) ἡ ψυχὴ ἐκ τῆς οἰκείας ἐνεργείας ἔχει τὴν τῆς ψυχῆς προσηγορίαν. Ψύχειν γὰρ τὸ ζωοποιεῖν λέγεται, διὰ τοῦτο ἐκ τῆς ζωοποιοῦ ψυχὴ λέγεται διὰ τὸ σῶμα ζωοποιειν. . p, called by Gregory Nyssen,) and like the parallel Hebrew it is used for the most part concerning the living body, but sometimes also for the dead. Usually the word for the dead body is Twμа. Záps, flesh, is the material of the body while living; кρɛaç, meat, when dead. But our present business is not with body as the organ of soul; neither with flesh as its material; but with flesh as an affectional power in the kapdia.* For caps is the seat of the ἐπιθυμίαι, (commonly translated lusts, and παθημάτα, passions; and on account of this is often put for concupiscence, as in Rom. vii, 18, there dwelleth in me, that is, ev тy σapki pov, no good thing; which in verse 23 is expressed by έv toïs μéhɛoi μov. This passage is important for elucidating the difference which exists between oáps and owua, so far as each term designates the seat and origin of εmovμíai, lusts or propensities. For cáps, which nearly always is used concerning men liable to sin, signifies, upon the whole, the infirm part of human nature, of terrene origin, the seat of concupiscence, so that it is almost interchangeable with ȧuapria. The fact, however, is otherwise when the oaps of Christ is adumbrated, inasmuch as the Son of God shared his own nature with his his own flesh. As oua signifies a complex or system of individual members, so it comprehends, also, the operations, individual and collective, of the oáps and duaoría. On this account we have the combinations, owμа τnç σaρкòs, body of the flesh, (Col. ii, 11,) and owμa Tov davárov, body of death, Rom. vii, 24, which is the same as тà μéλŋ, the members, v. 23. Compare Rom. viii, 11, 13. As being the seat of concupiscence, owua, the body, is called ovnτóv, σάρξ * 1 Cor. vi, 16 : Ὁ κολλώμενος τῇ πόρνῃ ἕν σῶμα ἐστιν, ἔσονται γάρ φησίν οἱ δύο εἰς σάρκα μίαν. Ὁ δὲ κολλώμενος τῷ κυρίῳ ἔν πνεῦμα ἐστι. This passage does not prove the signification of σῶμα and σάρξ to be the same; σῶμα and πνεῦμα are here simply set in opposition, as in Cor. v, 3, and for this reason we have the phrase ἐν σῶμα. But, in 1 Cor. ix, 27, σῶμα seems to be put for σάρξ. The image which the apostle wished to carry out, (of an athlete,) induced the use of ouɑ instead of σάρξ. For these reasons philosophers, not descending to ultimate causes, call a third part of human nature επιθυμία οι επιθυμετικόν, (a fact intelligible from passages already quoted,) putting particular actions or operations for their cause. To concupiscence they allot a certain locality in the human frame. Philo, (De Spec. Legg., vol. ii, p. 350,) επιθυμία δὲ τὸν περὶ τὸν ἔμφαλον καὶ τὸ Kaλоúμεvov diáḍpayμа xôpov éxel. And also, (De Leg. Alleg., vol. i, p. 57,) roù dè ἐπιθυμετικοῦ συμβέβηκε τὸ χώριον εἶναι τὸ ἱτρον. [These passages we shall leave in their garb of "well-sounding Greek." Trans.] In the New Testament there once occurs, Rev. ii, 23, véppoɩ, reins, as the seat of lusts. So the Hebrew i in the Old Testament often. Eλáyxva, bowels, is always used in a good sense, namely, concerning love, and indeed concerning maternal love. Enλáyva, that is, , seems to be derived ab utero. mortal, Rom. vi, 12, and the yʊxn is held bound by the fetters of the sin of the body, and is δοῦλός ἐστι τοῦ νόμου τῆς ἁμαρτίας, (Rom. vii, 25.) When this is the case the owua is merely uxikóv. By the power of Christ the soul is emancipated from these bonds, the body itself is rendered Tvεvμaтikóv, (1 Cor. xv, 44;) and when our body is μετασχηματισθεῖς, transfigured, even the επιθυμίαι, lusts of our immaterial nature, depart. On this account, in a few passages, the word επιθυμίαι, used of the πνευματικοι, or spiritual, is used in a good sense. Jesus himself says, εяidvμía επiðúμησa; επιθυμίᾳ επιθύμησα; literally, with lust have I lusted to eat this passover. Luke xxii, 15. See also Phil. i, 27; 1 Thes. ii, 17, where it is used concerning Paul ART. VIII.-MISSIONS IN AMERICA. [THIRD ARTICLE.] THE extent and character of the American missionary field have been briefly sketched in two preceding articles in this Review. A glance at the uncultivated wastes as therein presented, containing millions of Indians, millions of men of foreign birth and tongue, millions who speak our own language, and millions more crowding over our borders from the North, and the South, and the East, all dependent upon the American Churches for spiritual instruction and salvation, instrumentally, is surely sufficient to cause us to feel the unequaled importance of our home work. What a home God has bestowed upon us! From sea to sea, and from the North to the South Pole. Such a home as no other people have had or can have. The Almighty has made but one, and there is not room for another such on the broad bosom of mother earth. The political and religious importance of our American home is unreckoned. We would not have this considered an empty boast characteristic of national vanity. Older members of the family of nations should not be offended by it. We are now what they were once, a young and vigorous people. They grew to opulence, to influence and greatness, and wielded the destinies of the world. The path of progress is now opened before us, and we must advance in it; we must increase; comparatively they must decrease. As the world's destiny has been in their hands, so it must pass into ours. And as each successive nation has risen higher in moral power and position, we believe it is God's order that the last should rise highest. As the increasing force of favorable circumstances mounts each succeeding generation of men upon the shoulders of the preceding one, so are nations elevated by each other. Untrodden heights of power and influence are beckoning the American nation onward, and with long and rapid strides she is ascending them. And with the highest national position comes the weightiest national responsibilities. Hence the importance that the American nation should be Christian, thoroughly Christian. Her own dangerous destiny and controlling influence upon the world at large demand it. Her political importance is seen and acknowledged, not only by politicians in the New, but in the Old World. In this respect the children of the world seem wiser in their generation than the children of light. The language of one of our statesmen upon a recent occasion is full of significant truth. He says: "We, the people of the United States, have a predestined fate before us, plain to be seen, according to my thought, as if inscribed on the adamantine leaves of time with a pencil of fire. Nay; it is as a providential mission, assigned to us by the visible, outstretched finger of God. . . . It is the foundation in America of republican empires: to outcount in numbers, and outvie in strength, the parent states of Europe. I say that it is the work appointed of God for us to do, and with the blessing of God upon us, that work we will do." This is assigning to America a transcendent political importance. The eye of the statesman traces its outline and reads its history in the future. Where is the seer on the watch-hills of Christianity, and what is his report? Is there not a religious future as magnificent and important for America as her political? Is the finger of God's providence visible only to the statesman? Has he no providential designs to be wrought out on this great continent for the universal spread of Christianity? Surely he has. And the Church should apprehend them, and gird herself for their instrumental accomplishment. The American Churches have at the present hour work enough at home to employ all their energies, and the future opens before them upon a scale of grandeur and usefulness unlimited. Here is their work. The remark of the Rev. J. Angel James to an American divine, showed that he fully appreciated the circumstances of the American Churches. He said that "America ought to be exempt from missionary effort," meaning foreign missionary effort; and exempt in view of her duties at home. A man sitting at the base of one of the great Egyptian pyramids would not be able |