was emphatically "to destroy the works of the devil," those works of darkness should again break out, close to the throne of God that the "Lamb's Wife" should prove unfaithful—is something so incongruous in itself, and so opposed to the whole tenor of Scripture, and theory of the gospel covenant, that it cannot be taken as a possible alternative, but must be propounded for the mere sake of eliciting more direct proofs to the contrary than are usually thought necessary to be adduced.

I know not whether this text comes up to our friend's standard of intelligent grounds of evidence, but it is abundantly satisfactory to my own mind. Rev. iii. 12. "Him that overcometh will I make a pillar in the temple of my God, and he shall go no more out; and I will write upon him the name of my God," &c. When we consider all that is comprehended in these promises, and who it is who promises it-in perpetuity-I confess that my faith asks for no higher assurance on the subject.

There seem, however, two misconceptions involved in the mode of putting this Query, which require a word or two. (1) The redeemed are identified, by the Querist, with angels. This is a great mistake. The "children of the resurrection" do indeed resemble angels in one negative feature of their physical constitution (Matt. xxii. 30), but in moral position they differ totally. The holy angels are not sinners saved by grace; they have been preserved, not redeemed; they are unfallen and innocent, not pardoned and regenerate. A " man-angel were as impossible a hybrid, as the centaur himself. But supposing that the saints in glory are on an exact

equality with angels, there is no evidence at all that the angels now in heaven are peccable. We have every reason to believe that angels generally have passed through a state of probation, and that their present condition is fixed. 2 Peter ii. 4. But unless the contrary could be proved, which is impossible, no argument can be drawn from them as to the saint's liability to sin.

(2) There seems an assumption on the part of the Querist, that absolute free agency includes a power to sin. Perhaps in one sense it may; but we must recollect that sin is a question of will rather than of ability. If a saint in heaven never wills to sin, to abstain from sinning is at once his highest felicity and truest liberty; at the same time we have the highest authority for applying to such a being a phrase expressive of inability, and for saying that "he CANNOT sin” 1 John iii. 9. But then this inability lies not in a limitation of action, but in a rectitude of choice. The free agency which the gospel promises is not an oscillation between good and evil, but an identification with good. (John viii. 36. Rom. vi. 18.) Can the Holy One of Israel sin ?-yet is He not infinitely free ?—E. J. J.

Queries to be answered in our next Number.

25. "A wise Father spareth not the rod." Is this proverb in harmony with Christianity, or does it contain one of those things which Christ came to put away? Our progress as a Christian people is greatly dependent upon the diffusion of sound scriptural views, and the strict literal interpretation of this saying of Solomon has rightly or wrongly produced no small amount of human

suffering. Our social evils are but the reflex of our social mistakes and misdoings.

26." He hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor." How is this scripture reconcileable with the facts which are seen around us? In England, for example, the gospel may be preached to those who will hear it, but is it not however an incontrovertible fact, that only those classes designated "middling" and "upper' are to be found in our churches and chapels. The bulk of the laboring, poor, and destitute classes will not enter our places of worship, and do not otherwise come directly under the influence of gospel preaching.

VIRGITATE ET ORATE.

27.-Is "The Revival movement," as carried on during the last two years in this country, and as advocated by certain religionists, worthy the support of those intelligent and spriritual Christians, who believe that true religion is not fear of hell, but love of God ?-JOHN.

28. Is it a right and proper thing to be constantly endeavoring to get from children, who have no conviction of the importance of the object, their pence for missionary and other religious enterprises?-F. L.

29. Would any of your readers favor us with an explanation, or a suggestive outline on Gal. ii. 20, especially the former part of the verse, and "Moses from Mount Pisgah viewing the promised land ?-R.

THE SUFFERINGS OF JESUS
CHRIST.

Some persons, while "looking to Jesus," see no farther than the physical sufferings produced by transfixion to the cross. They think of the bodily pain He_endured, and of nothing else. This is a very inadequate view of the dying agonies of Immanuel. If

pain in the flesh was all He felt, many a servant surpasses his master; many a disciple is above his Lord. In the records of martyrology, we read of martyrs who suffered pain more acute, and more protracted, than the torture that thrilled the body of the Son of God. Yet we know that there is no sorrow like the sorrow of Jesus Christ, and that on the

cross, as elsewhere, He was preeminently the "man of sorrows." Among other things, a circumstance at the crucifixion itself shows, that He was the subject of something more grievous to be borne than physical pain. He was comparatively young; He was healthful and without sin; consequently there must have been extraordinary tenacity of life in His constitution; yet He died beneath His sufferings, sooner than the crucified malefactors; for when the soldiers came to hasten the death of all, by breaking their bones; they broke the bones of the thieves, but they broke not the bones of Jesus Christ, seeing already dead.

that He was The principal

sufferings of Jesus Christ were mental sufferings-agonies that pierced His righteous soul. "It pleased the Father to bruise him, and put him to grief." Hence, the awful words: "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" This fact is well set forth in the painting of the crucifixion, by Tintoretto. On this painting a skilful critic remarks:

In the common and most catholic treatment of the crucifixion, the mind is either painfully directed to the bodily agony, coarsely expressed by outward anatomical signs, or it is permitted to rest on that countenance which is inconceivable by man at any time, but chiefly so in its consummated humiliation. In the first case, the representation is revolting; in the second case it is inefficient and false. The greatest religious painters have failed here. But Tintoretto, penetrating into the root and deep places of his subject, neglecting outward and bodily appearances of pain, and seeking for some means of expressing, not the rack of nerve and sinew, but the fainting of the deserted Son of God, has, on the one hand, filled his picture with such various and impetuous muscular exertion, that the body of the crucified is by comparison in perfect repose; and, on the other hand, the countenance is cast altogether into shade. But, the agony is told by this and by this only; that, though there yet remains a chasm of light on the horizon where the darkness closes on the day, the broad and sun-like glory about the head of the Redeemer has become wan and of the color of ashes!"

Thus Art combines with Theology to give us a deeper knowledge of the sufferings of Jesus Christ on the cross than a super

ficial glance thereat will supply. The anguish and horror that overwhelmed our Saviour when He felt conscious that the Father had forsaken Him, we cannot fully comprehend; but by looking beyond the corporeal pain to the mental agony He endured, we see sufficient to impress us with the infinite love of God, in sparing not His own Son, but delivering Him up for us all. No marvel that the life which would have long resisted bodily sufferings, quickly sank under the pressure of spiritual anguish; that the heart which quailed not before the wrath of man was broken by the bereavement Jesus suffered when forsaken by the Father causing Him to utter the mortal cry "It is finished," and give up the Ghost. Let us, then, meditate less on the external, and more on the internal, agony of the Son of God; so shall we see more clearly the exceeding sinfulness of sin, and know more deeply the greatness of the love of Christ, until we see Him, not as the man of sorrows, but as the king in His beauty on His glorious high throne.-J. P. WRIGHT,

THE INCARNATION ILLUSTRATED BY ANALOGY.

"But how was God in flesh? As fire is in iron, not by being changed into it, but communicated to it. For the fire does not run forth to the iron, but remaining in its place, communicates its peculiar virtue, and is not diminished by the communication, although it fills with itself the whole of the object which partakes of it. Thus, then, the Word neither underwent change of place, although he dwelt among us, nor a change of nature, though He became flesh. Neither was heaven left empty of Him who fills it, and yet earth received