of his soul. But if circumstances should throw him into a circle of persons differing materially from himself-such in the human mind is the power of sympathy, the propensity to imitation, and the desire to conciliate the good will of others, an object best effected by becoming like them--that he will probably soon begin to imbibe something of the taste and spirit of his new companions. It is vain for any one to hope that his good principles and dispositions, and his moral taste, will continue unsullied, if he associate much with persons of an opposite character. In hazarding the experiment he is trifling with one of the most powerful engines of good or of evil, according as it is used, which God has given to man; and he can no more control its operation, than he could change the course of summer and winter. Its force, though capable of being in a measure eluded and mitigated, cannot by any means be destroyed; and if applied in the wrong direction, it will not fail to impress on his soul baneful and, not improbably, fatal marks of its potency. We should at once allow this statement in political, and in merely moral points. What would be thought of any man, professedly loyal, who was much, and willingly, in the society of persons notoriously otherwise? What of a professedly sober or honest man who associated with the intemperate and dishonest? And what is there in religion to exempt the professedly religious man from suspicion as to his real principles, from the charge of inconsistency and folly, and from a progressive deterioration by means of his companions, if he mixes, more than the business of life and Christian kindness render necessary, with persons of an opposite character? On the contrary, he will even be more liable to suspicion, and he will also be in greater danger than the persons which have been mentioned, because, his conscience being more enlightened than theirs, CHRIST. OBSERV. No. 185, he acts in opposition to higher principles and more powerful checks. He professes to live in the love and fear of his God and Saviour, and to devote himself un-reservedly to their service. He is aware that he cannot do this without the aid of the Holy Spirit, to "work in him both to will and to do, according to God's good pleasure." And how then can he hope to be a temple of that Divine Agentto have that Spirit dwelling in his heart-if he does not act on the rules, and pursue the course best calculated to keep himself "únspotted from the world?" 2. He must abstain from intimacy with those whom he does not believe to be true Christians. Civility and kindness may be well preserved without intimacy. The latter, from taste as well as from prudence, should be carefully avoided, where we have not reason to think there is sound religious principle. From taste-because, if we value our high calling as we ought, we shall naturally feel a sort of repugnance to an intimacy with those who are" alienated in their minds" from that God and that Saviour whom we delight to serve: from prudence because intimacy removes many of the guards and reserves, which to a considerable degree, regulate conversation and conduct in general society, and thus prevent bad principles and dispositions from exhibiting themselves to the view of others. Besides, if intimacy is avoided, that familiarity of intercourse between the younger members of two families which would be dangerous may be prevented, without the necessity of embarrassing explanations. On the opposite supposition, the whole case will be reversed, and the most lamentable consequences may be expected to follow. 3. Let a participation with the world in its assemblages for purposes of pleasure be avoided. There are many pleasures which the Christian enjoys in common with men of 2 P a different character. There are others of which he cannot partake at all without a manifest dereliction of Christian duty. The latter, of course, must be altogether shunned: the former must be enjoyed in such a manner as not to render that which is safe and allowable in itself, unsafe and unfit from its attendant circumstances. Now, the spirit of the world never breaks forth with less restraint than in its professed amusements. Not only do these very much remove customary guards. and restrictions, but by being framed for the indulgence of worldly appetites, and dispositions merely natural, they draw these propensities forth into a more prominent display than usual. The lust of the flesh, the lust of the eye, and the pride of life, appear in decorous, perhaps, but in very intelligible shapes, and in connexion also with so much that is good humoured and amiable, as to assume the most seducing appearance, Happy they who, having once entered the magic circle, escape its fascinations! Happy, if they do not become, in a measure, reconciled to the low and unhallowed principles of the gay crowd with which they associate! Of those who think that they pass through this fire unhurt, certainly the greater part flatter and delude themselves. At all events, the Christian ought not to incur the danger. Nothing is more imperceptibly imbibed than a worldly spirit, and nothing is more fatal than such a spirit to the very life and existence of true religion. It requires all the efforts and all the watchfulness of the Christian, even under favourable circumstances, to escape its infection. What then must be bis danger, when he places himself in the very atmosphere where it abounds! Is he not then flagrantly violating the precept implied in the petition which he so often addresses to his God, "Lead us not into temptation?" Instead of fleeing "youthful lusts," is he not throw ing himself into the very region where they are prevalent? And if these questions cannot be satisfactorily answered, as they certainly cannot, let him solemnly ask himself still another, Whether he is not "giving place to the devil?" 4. The course of the Christian ought to be such as to show clearly to what class of persons he belongs. He owes this full disclosure to God and to man, and of men to none more than to himself. If his conduct is equivocal, he either does not display the standard of his holy warfare, or he displays it only to dishonour it. In the first case, how can he hope to be acknowledged by Christ as his soldier? In the second, how can he hope for the meed of a good and faithful soldier? His light either does not shine before men, or at best it does not shine with such clearness and purity as to lead them to glorify his heavenly Father. By holding a course which leaves it a matter of any doubt whether he follows Christ or the world, he violates his duty to man as well as to God; for he is required not only to work out his own salvation, but to promote by every means in his power the salvation of all around him. But how can he hope in any measure to succeed in the latter object unless his conduct bear the clear stamp of the elevated principles of the Gospel, and therefore the stamp of their contrariety to the principles of the world? And how can he exhibit that stamp, if he slide into a similarity to the conduct of the world, in points in which Christians in general think that a decided and manifest distinction is requisite? The effect of this dubious system of conduct upon men of the world is very obvious? They will imagine, either that the profession of strict Christian principle is unsound, having more of pretence than of reality in it, or that Christian principle is a far lower thing, and approaches. far nearer to the principles of the world at large, than is in fact the. inhabitants rather as in his own than as in a strange country ;-the other reversing this picture in all its parts, and, while he abounds in candour, and kindness, and beneficence towards all around him, conducting himself among the busy or the idle crowd as one who views their pursuits in a very different light from that in which they themselves view them; as one who has higher aims, whose ruling affections have different objects, who orders his life and conversation as even now called to sit down, "holy, and unblameable, and unreproveable, in heavenly places with Christ Jesus," and to partake hereafter of all the blessings of his eternal and glorious kingdom. Is it not plain what a wide difference must appear in these characters, especially to those who have an opportunity of viewing them closely? Can it be doubted which will best reflect the adorable image of his Saviour, which will most adorn his own high and holy profession, and which will impress mankind with the greatest respect and esteem both for his own character and his religious principles? case. On either supposition, their conversion to God will be not forwarded but impeded. How eager will the "God of this world" be to avail himself of such means of blinding men's eyes, and of keeping them from coming to the true light which alone can lead them to salvation ! But after all, he who adopts so dubious a course, and who seems SO backward to choose whom he will serve, most injures himself. His consistency will be denied; and it must follow that either his sincerity will be doubted, or his good sense questioned ;-he will be thought by some to have renounced and condemned vital and true religion, and by others to have disproved its efficacy or existence. Even if he ultimately escape the imminent danger to which he exposes himself of spiritual shipwreck, never can he hope to enjoy that elevation of soul, that solid peace and joy in believing, or that extensive influence as a servant of God, which are reserved for those who," through honour and dishonour, through evil report and good report," proceed straight for ward in their Christian course, and are studious only to discover how much they can do for their great Lord, and how they can best "walk worthy of their high calling." Contemplate for a moment the prodigious difference in the eyes of men between the two following characters: the one professing religion, but departing from the general strictness of its most esteemed professors; nominally classing himself with those who, as a chosen generation, a holy nation, a royal priesthood, a peculiar people," are daily labouring, by God's power working in them, to obtain a victory over the world; and yet in practice seeming not afraid or disinclined to associate pretty freely with that world, and to join in its plans of unhallowed pleasure,-calling himself stranger and pilgrim upon earth," yet appearing to live among its And now, my dear R. it is time that I should close this long letter. You know that it has been dictated by a sense of duty, and by love for you; and I hope it is not stained by any disposition to severe criticism, or by a wish to deprive youth of its innocent and Christian pleasures. If I have pointed out dangers to which you do not think yourself exposed, and said things which you imagine I need not to have said to you, forgive me a wrong which has arisen from a recollection of my own youth, and from the warmest parental sympathy and anxiety for your temporal and eternal welfare. If my years have led me to be too cautious and too open to alarm, remember that yours may tempt you to be too unguarded and sanguine. Above all, reflect that on a point of such infinite importance, it is incomparably safer to err on the side of caution and circumspection than on that of carelessness and temerity. I really believe that the love and fear of God are in your heart. May that blessed spirit who has implanted them there, cause them to increase and abound, and bring forth fruit to perfection! But when you read of the enemy secretly sowing tares among the wheat; and of a Demas who departed from the Apostle, because "he loved this present world;" you cannot be much surprised at the solicitude of your father, or think his admonition altogether out of place. Yours most affectionately, R. S. To the Editor of the Christian Observer. I HAVE perceived in your number for March, p. 139, the animadversions of "a Layman," on a passage in the Notes of the Family Bible just published under the sanction of the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge. As I cannot but think this Layman has acted disingenuously both with respect to the venerable Society, of which he professes himself a member, and also the deserved reputation of the work they have sanctioned, I request the insertion of a few remarks on the subject. The passage which has so greatly disturbed this Layman appears, as he says, in a note subjoined to Ephes. ii. 8. "For by grace are ye saved, through faith; and that not of yourselves, it is the gift of God." He imagines that the note in question contains a denial of faith being the gift of God, and so is subversive of the doctrine of the established Church. 66 Thus," he says, "heretical views are now sent into the world, under the sanction (doubtless unwittingly) of the Society" and this Layman, in his alarm for the preservation of true religion amongst us, concludes with expressing his hope that "at least this Bible shall not be circulated without the Book of Common Prayer." Doubtless this Layman's hope is, in this respect, in exact unison with those of the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge, and of all good churchmen. But now, it had surely been better for the cause of candour and truth, if this writer had read the whole of the note to which he refers, and not have drawn his conclusions from garbled quotations; for in this way, with a little ingenuity, any commentator may be made to say any thing. I beg leave then to supply what your cor respondent has thought proper to omit, and leave it to the good sense of your readers to judge how fat be is justified in his attempts to depreciate the value of one of the most interesting and valuable commentaries on the Scripture that has proceeded from the press. The note referred to is an extract from the writings of Dean Tucker, and stands in the Commentary as follows: "Our translation of this passage is a little ambiguous; and many people have unhappily concluded from it, that faith is the gift of God; a gift, I mean, in some peculiar sense, such a gift as is not vouchsafed to mankind in general, like the gift of reason, or any other common blessing, [thus far only the Layman] but is appro priated only to the select few who are thereby enabled to lay hold on Christ, while all the rest of their brethren are necessarily lost for want of it. Now, this is a very great mistake; for the Scriptures contain no such assertion; and the words of the text, in particular, say nothing about any kind of faith, as a gift of God, but refer wholly to another matter. The assertion of the Apostle is plainly this, that salvation by grace is the gift of God; that it is not of ourselves, or to be derived from any works of ours, lest any man should boast. This is the substance of the doctrine; and the original Greek can signify no- then find that, in their Commentary, the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge have, in the words of Dean Stanbope, acknowledged that "every thing that tends to make us good, or is itself so, every spiritual perfection, comes to us from Heaven. All endowments of nature and grace are given by Him......... who is always the same, and always at hand." OLD CHURCH. To the Editor of the Christian Observer. THE Notes on the Family Bible published under the sanction of the Society for promoting Christian Knowledge are, upon all points connected with doctrine and discipline, professedly compiled from the writings of the most eminent divines of the established Church. The remarks on Ephes. ii. 8. quoted in your Number for March, in which a view of faith, as a "gift of God in a peculiar sense," is represented as an unhappy conclu sion from the Apostle's words, are, I think it may be safely stated, at variance not only with the language of our Liturgy, but likewise with the opinions of a great number of our divines, justly celebrated for their learning, talents, and piety. The opposite sentiments of two prelates of our church occurred to my Such is the whole note referred to, in a partial manner, by the Layman; from which it appears plain that the writer of it is not here, by any means, denying faith to be the gift of God, but is (as he explains himself) combating the notion of its being a gift in that peculiar sense entertained by those who hold the doctrines of predestination and election. To enter into any discus sion of the propriety or impropriety of this notion would be foreign both to the subject of the Layman's paper and my present purpose. But with respect to the passage in question, it may be observed, that on a plain inspection of the Greek it certainly appears wonderful how any other view of it could ever be taken than that contained in the note from Dr. Tucker. The words stand thus: T rág xágili is σεσωσμένοι διὰ της πίσεως· και τέτο ovn i§ `vμãv. ' Oe8 to dãgov oún i ἔργων ἵνα μή τις καυχήσηται. Here there cannot be a doubt that ruro refers to the whole sentence going before, and, as Macknight suggests, may have to pay na agreeing with it. There are then two several contrasts made between the ua, and the 8 To dopov, and the recollection as soon as I had read ἔργων, and the μή τις χαυχήσή]αι. But if I may venture a conjecture, 1 would rather suggest that raro here agrees with ro depov, and would propose pointing the passage as follows: "nai rõto, ovn éž ́vμ, Θεα το δῶρον, οὐκ ἐξ έργων (est scil.) -iva μn Tis xauxhonlai." The μή τις καυχήσηται.” translation will then stand thus: And this gift of God (namely, salvation by grace, through faith) is not of yourselves, not of works, lest any one should boast. I just add, for the satisfaction of those who may have been alarmed by the representations of the Layman, that if they will turn to the Epistle of St. James, i. 17, they will the note. The writers referred to are, Bishop Pearson and Bishop Sherlock; and to their judgment, as eminent divines, I should have expected the compilers of the Notes attached to the Society's Bible would have paid some attention on the important text in question. I beg leave to introduce their statements respecting faith as a peculiar gift of God, to the notice of your readers. My communication may possibly serve as an auxiliary to that of your lay correspondent, and show the unison of our celebrated writers with the Liturgy of our Church, upon a doctrine which (to use the mildest term) has been ex |