the general appearances which present themselves in our intercourse with men individually. It is evident that when society has adopted a general standard of morals and religion, conformity to it becomes the general passport to reputation and standing in society and in the church. In such circumstances there must, in the present state of humanity, be more of habit than of principle, more of appearance than of reality. I do not, however, wish to encourage a suspicious or censorious spirit regarding those who conform to the rules of moral and religious order; I wish to ground upon this fact an argument in favour of charity and forbearance towards those who fall short of that order, and this I do on the ground that there are many of the considerations which have been mentioned, and others to which we shall allude, that must be brought to bear on the subject before we can form an opinion even humanly just and true. Let us suppose a case as an example; let it be that of an individual who labours under great disadvantages, one who inherits strong unamiable natural dispositions, with few redeeming qualities, and who has not been so fortunate as to be instructed in moral and religious truth, and initiated into self-denial and practical virtue; it is evident that the outward character of such a person, if not guilty of simulation, will contrast unfavourably with many whose mental constitution is what is termed more equally balanced, although there may be no more deliberate purpose of evil in the one case than in the other. If such a one enters upon the path of religion, his religious life and character will no doubt, for a time, present more apparent inconsistencies than others whose propensities are less strong and undisciplined, although he may in reality have more real virtue, because he may have accomplished more in resisting evil, although he may as yet have more evils than some others to resist. We should not judge altogether of a man by what he is when compared with others, but by what he is when compared with himself. Compare him as he is with what he has been, and take into consideration all the circumstances which we know that are peculiar to him, and form a general conclusion from the whole. This should be our practice; but after the best effort from the purest motive, we are still liable to err; and when we err least, how imperfect must be our judgment compared with that of God, who looketh upon the heart, and beholds at once all its secret springs of action, which are deeply concealed from our superficial and narrow observation. Could we behold the hearts of many whom we censure, we should no doubt see the inward conviction and desire struggling with the strong outward passion and appetite; and in many instances, when others are loud in censuring, there may be a still deeper self-condemnation. We ought also to reflect that regeneration is a gradual work, and that it is therefore unreasonable to expect a great change to be suddenly effected. The intentions of the mind may indeed be changed more rapidly, as well as more unobservedly, than the habits of the life; for the inward man is first regenerated, and afterwards the outward-the inside is first to be cleansed, that the outside may be clean also. It is reasonable to conclude, therefore, that with those who are seriously following in the path of regeneration, the outward appearance, which men look upon, may give a less favourable view of the real state and character than the heart itself, as seen by the eye of omniscience, declares. Long after the purpose of the heart has been seriously altered, the life may be checkered by infirmities of temper and the force of other habits; but these will no longer form the rule, but the exception. This may seem to palliate too much the sinful imperfections of human nature. Our purpose is only to inspire charity in judging of others by inculcating the Christian duty of thinking well of all men as well as genuine charity will allow. It is possible, indeed, to think too well of others; and a too favourable view of others may arise either from their hypocrisy or from our partiality. Some suppose that they are to think well of all, and do good to all, whether they be good or evil. It is proper to think the best that a discriminating charity will allow; but to think well of what we know to be evil, is as unwise and injurious as to think ill of what we know to be good. men—as While we are tender in judging of others, we should be more severe in judging of ourselves. We are not so entirely ignorant of our own hearts as we are of the hearts of others; we are not so liable to deceive ourselves, by surveying our own outward appearances. We may rest too confidently on our compliance with the outward form of godliness; but if we have any sense of the importance of inward purity, we must have a knowledge of the necessity of a harmony between the heart and conduct, and have abundant opportunity of comparing them. We cannot, it is true, know our own hearts as they are known of God; but we can have such a knowledge of their state as is necessary for all practical purposes. It is because God knows our hearts better than we know them ourselves, that in the order of His providence their desires so often remain ungratified. Every such instance reads us a most important lesson. No prayer can be denied us which is consistent with the character in which we ought to approach God, or with our real interests; and every prayer that remains unanswered is itself a witness of our own inordinateness or unfitness. Our desires must be regulated by the laws of truth, our prayers must be directed by the light of faith, otherwise we shall desire and ask amiss, which is the cause that we ask and receive not. It is not surprising that we should be denied many temporal blessings that we desire; but it would seem inconsistent that our prayers for the best gifts should be fruitless. But here we are to compare the desires of our hearts with the petitions of our lips; and if we enter into serious and searching self-examination, we shall no doubt discern that we ask for that which we either do not seriously desire or are not prepared to receive. Men who look upon the outward appearance, may acknowledge our piety; but God, who looketh on the heart, may pronounce our devotion a vain oblation. We are all naturally in danger of assuming more in the outward appearance than we possess in the inward life, oft doing our deeds and our alms to be seen of men. Let us, however, reflect that God looks upon the heart, and is pleased with our homage and obedience only as they manifest its sincerity and renewal. Poetry. JACOB'S DREAM. (GEN. xxviii.; JOHN, i. 51.) Upon the far-spread Syrian plain While in the pale horizon, far Above them, gleamed one sweet, pure star. And now a weary traveller stood Amid that holy solitude. Though in the prime of manhood's years, Farther to go he almost fears; Since long and toilsome yet his way, And with to-morrow's sun he'll go Where rivers through green meadows flow.* * Mesopotamia, or Aram-Naharaim, i. e., Aram of the two rivers-the knowledges of goodness and truth. His head he pillowed on a stone, Ascend along that golden stair, While more descend: and-blessed sight!— Above them, in the Fount of light, Where angel bright hath never trod, Appears the Everlasting GOD! When Jacob woke, 'twas morn around;- And so "the Son of Man" hath made A glorious "path-way" through earth's shade,— And joining earth with Heaven above. † Oh, brother Pilgrim! toiling here, If on thy soul the night falls drear,— If thou from GOD's bright Fount hast stray'd, Oh, brother! still "be not afraid!” *"In the original the term ladder is derived from an expression which signifies a path or way, because a 'way' signifies truth." (A. C. 3699.) + Eph. i. 10.-"That in the dispensation of the fulness of times, He might gather together in one all things in Christ, both which are in heaven and which are on earth." The lamp of Truth take in thy hand, An embryo Heaven thou didst not know. * "The House of GOD! the Gate of Heaven!" W. MISCELLANEOUS. THE MONTH. On Friday, June 6th, the Judicial Committee of the Privy Council gave its judgment in the important case of Burder v. Heath. Mr. Heath was condemned, and loses his vicarage, valued at from £600. to £700. per annum. Lord Cranworth delivered the judgment. The judgment is of great importance, as it shews the determination of the Ecclesiastical Courts to abide by the strictest construction of the Articles; and as Dr. Lushington suspended his judgment in relation to Dr. Rowland Williams until the result of this appeal was known, it may be regarded as fettering the clergy to a strict bondage to the dogmas of three hundred years ago. Yet the Judges themselves make some very curious statements of what these Articles teach. When Lord Cranworth was stating the charges against Mr. Heath, he said-"Their Lordships understood him to deny altogether the doctrine of justification by faith in Christ, as insisted on in that Article." Their Lordships leave out the word "ALONE," which is really the objectionable part of the Article. So when they speak of the next charge in relation to Articles 2 and 31, their Lordships say--"They had no doubt that they clearly laid down the doctrine that Christ died to reconcile us to God, and that this redemption was complete. Mr. Heath's views were diametrically opposed to this teaching." Whether Mr. Heath's views are opposed to Article 2 or not, it is the very opposite of their Lordships' description. It states "Christ died to reconcile His Father to us." They say "to reconcile us to God." They intimate that they think Mr. Heath's views are not very clear on the points in question, but it seems harsh to deprive a man of his living for want of clearness, when their own perceptions are anything but bright. Mr. Heath's doctrine is, that justification is making just, and is twofold. Justification on God's part is doing all things justly, or, as he sometimes states it, putting every one in his right place; and justification in relation to man is his becoming just by the "breathing in," as Mr. Heath says, "of the most vital and essential spirit of justice by the great and personal Justifier, the Lord of Justice Jesus Christ."+ Because Mr. Heath speaks of justification on God's part, their Lordships seem to have gathered that he denies justification on man's part by faith, but he does nothing of the kind; he teaches BOTH. So in the rest of this curious decision Mr. Heath seems to have been much misunderstood, and their Lordships seem both to misunderstand and mis-state the doctrines of See Tract by Mr. Heath, "Why am I Prosecuted ?" *Behold, the kingdom of God is within you." (Luke xvii. 21.) |