the Board and the Presbyteries equally desirous of administering the fund in the spirit of faithfulness and love, there is likely to be less occasion of discontent in the operation of the one Board than in the operation of the many Presbyteries. II. Our preference is dictated by a desire to spare the Presbyteries what might mar their harmony and interrupt their peace. We rather wonder that Presbyteries should wish to have this matter committed to them. We feel almost ready to say, “Ye know not what ye ask." There are cases, even now, in which they are called to interfere with the pecuniary matters of the congregations under their inspection. We think they feel least at home in this department; and we rather think they are not supposed to be most successful in the management of it. Take the inquiries instituted when a moderation is applied for, as an example. How many cases might be referred to, in which the promised stipend is niggardly as unworthy of the people as it is insufficient for the minister? Yet the congregation carry their point: the Presbytery may give expression to their opinion, but they succumb. We do not inquire whether it be their love of peace, or their unwillingness to seem "greedy of filthy lucre" that influences them; but the fact is, in many cases they succumb. Now, suppose that the minister of one of these congregations needs the supplement, and that the Presbytery is the distributor of it; either they must now endeavour to bring up the people to their duty, and thus run the risks they formerly avoided, besides reflecting on their own former procedure; or they will forthwith proceed to supply what is lacking out of the common fund. In either case, the introduction of the subject will lead to discussion; and it will not be strange if the discussion should grow keen-if the contention should grow sharp. It is not to be overlooked, that there will be cases of delicacy and difficulty to be considered and decided; and it is desirable that those who sit in judgment, should be free from local influences and personal prepossessions-such influences and prepossessions even, as reflect no dishonour on those who are the subjects of them. Suppose that a case, involved in difficulty, comes before a Presbytery; the question arises, whether it is a case that calls for supplement,-or what the supplement ought to be. or There are certain queries which a brother would fain propose, but he is a neighbour, and may be reckoned inquisitorial; he may be disposed to object, but he fears it will be taken as a personal unkindness; or, he braves both of these-he proposes his questions, and states his objections. What follows? Offence is taken,-displeasure is expressed,-personal dislike is insinuated, contention is raised,: brethren are alienated,—the peace of the Presbytery is interrupted—the manse and the pulpit of the minister whose case was under consideration, are shut against the questioning and objecting brother, and all who spoke and voted with him, from that day forward; and the Presbytery learns by sad experience, that it were better by far that the Synod dispensed its beneficence by a committee of its own. III. Our preference is dictated by a desire to secure the confidence of the church. In the view of the people generally, the Presbytery is synonymous with a meeting of ministers. We do not need to be instructed that elders, in equal numbers with ministers, are members of presbytery. But whether from the fact that comparatively few elders are present, or that still fewer take any active part in the business, the proceedings of presbyteries are in popular account reckoned the proceedings of ministers and, if the working of the scheme be committed to them, K the idea will be fostered that it is a scheme of ministerial aggrandizement. As it is, there are parties ungenerous enough to talk of it in this way, and jealous of it on this account. As its success must be dependent altogether on the confidence of the people, that plan should be adopted which will give the amplest guarantee for the faithful distribution of the fund: we should seek to have the stewardship not only faithful, but unsuspected. And one way of securing this seems to be, to lodge it in the hands of a committee, composed to a great extent of parties who shall be free from those influences to which ministers and co-presbyters are supposed to be peculiarly subject. There may be some presbyteries where there is a large number of congregations in which the supplement is needed; not to suppose the extreme case of one in which they may be a majority of the presbytery. Would it be seemly to appoint such a presbytery to decide in this matter? With all respect for the brethren who compose it, we say, this is not the way to inspire your people with confidence in regard to the distribution of their bounty. We are persuaded that it is likely, if adopted, to prove the ruin of the scheme. We have already had intimation sufficiently distinct, that to commit it to presbyteries would be to diminish confidence and we fear that in many instances where this would not be avowed, it would be felt; and that we should find many, by keeping back the money, entering their silent, but significant protest against the change. Indeed we believe the very proposal of the change is operating injuriously on the interests of the scheme: and, if the discussion is prolonged, we fear that we shall have to transfer our attention from such questions as, How, and by whom the fund shall be administered? to the question, Wherewithal shall we obtain a stipend-supplementing fund? In expressing our preference for "the Board," we have no reference to the personal qualifications of the parties who at present compose it. The question is not between men but systems. In regard to the existing Board, there has been no charge brought against it; it stands in need of no defence of ours: even if it did, it is not at all to our present purpose to offer it. If the parties at present composing the Board, do not possess the confidence of the Synod, let them be dismissed, and replaced by those who do. If the number be too large, let it be diminished; if it be too small, let it be enlarged. If the system, according to which its constitution is determined, is not satisfactory, let it be remodelled. And having secured a Board of such a character, and so constituted, as to possess the confidence of the Synod ;-entrust it with the working of the whole scheme; if you would give unity and efficiency to its operations; if you would consult the peace of your presbyteries; if you would retain the confidence of your people. But if you would have the operations of the scheme to be perfunctory and variegated; if you would have your presbyteries converted into scenes of strife and debate; if you would destroy the confidence of your people, give it into the hands of the Presbytery. We know of no objections to the system for which we plead, which may not be met by these two statements.-First, the Synod may appoint its own instruments for dispensing the bounty which the church places at its disposal; and, secondly, those who dispense the bounty, may make such inquiries as are necessary to satisfy themselves, and ought to make such inquiries as will enable them to satisfy the donors, that they are worthy for whom they do these things. B. HINTS ON THE INTERPRETATION OF PASSAGES OF SCRIPTURE WHICH ARE FREQUENTLY MISINTERPRETED. IN one of the speeches of Eliphaz, recorded in the book of Job, we find the following words," Behold, he put no trust in his servants; and his angels he charged with folly," (Job iv. 18). In quoting this text it is usual to express it in the present tense (charges for charged), and by this means a meaning is given to it which it will not receive, and a sentiment is expressed which is unsupported by Scripture. We are aware that there is not a perfect harmony among commentators, ancient and modern, regarding either the translation or interpretation of this verse, but we think the meaning expressed in the text of our common version is the correct one; and it is obvious that the common error arises from inadvertence, not from any supposed need of a change in the version. Eliphaz, then, refers to the fact, that God found a portion of his angels unfaithful, that he charged them with folly, and ejected them from the realms of bliss. He does not assert that God still charges the elect angels with folly, or that any additional number of them may yet sin, and be cast down to hell. Barnes, indeed, in the introduction to his notes on the book of Job, says, that this book "furnishes no information" as to whether the fallen angels "were originally evil, or whether they had apostatized from a former state of holiness and happiness." This is a mistake, however, and the same writer afterwards admits that it was the belief of Eliphaz, that "there had been some revolt or apostasy" among the holy angels. Matthew Henry guards his interpretation, which is the prevailing one, with the remark that "angels are intelligences, but finite ones; though not chargeable with iniquity, yet with imprudence." Let it be remembered, however, that the sacred writers usually employ the word folly as synonymous with sin, and such unquestionably is its meaning here. The holy angels are perfectly pure, and when we do the will of God as the angels do in heaven," we shall have reached perfection. But "God spared not the angels that sinned, but cast them down to hell," (2 Peter ii. 4). Let us learn from the doom of fallen angels to guard against the beginnings of sin, which is so hateful to God, and so ruinous to the sinner. "Though I walk through the valley of the shadow of death, I will fear no evil." This expression is usually quoted as if applicable exclusively to the last hour of life, when the soul is about to leave this earth for heaven. Thus the figurative expressions "valley of death," "shadow," and "Jordan of death," are used as synonymous. So uniform and general is this interpretation, that were we to apply the phrase to the dangers and trials of the Christian life, which is evidently the psalmist's meaning, we would be thought in error. The expression "shadow of death," is of frequent occurrence in Scripture. It is also found in the classical writers; but the Hebrew poets use it in a peculiar sense. In Scripture it denotes the thickest darkness. It is often used in the account of the calamities which befell the patriarch of Uz; for instance, Job iii. 5, x. 21, 22, xvi. 16, xxvi. 17, xxviii. 3, xxxiv. 22, xxxviii. 17. The valley of the shadow of death is an expression peculiar to David, and occurs in the 23d Psalm, as above quoted. It was probably suggested by some deep valley, surrounded by thick forests, and overhung by high hills, in the mountainous districts around Bethlehem, where he tended his father's flock ere he was raised to the throne of Israel. Travellers tell us, that on the north-east side of the town is a deep valley, alleged to be that in which the angel appeared to the shepherds on the night of our Saviour's birth, announcing this joyous event (Luke ii. 8). In a land of hills and valleys, like Palestine, there would probably be many a deep and narrow passage between two adjacent hills, which from its frowning rocks, and the dark shade cast over the traveller by the luxuriant foliage of the trees that abounded in it, would be deemed entitled to the designation," valley of the shadow of death." "Such names," says Dr Kitto, in his admirable work on Palestine," are not uncommonly given to gloomy or dangerous vales." Mr Buckingham found a place called the valley of death, on the shore of the Mediterranean Sea, near Mount Carmel. The beautiful allusion, by the royal psalmist, to the "valley of the shadow of death," is to be understood with reference to the dangers of the Christian life rather than death. The phrase is applicable to both, but especially the former. The meaning is excellently expressed by Calvin, thus: "As a sheep, when it wanders through rugged deserts and dark valleys, is secured, by the mere presence of its shepherd, against In Psalm xxiii. 4, the royal bard says, the assaults of wild beasts and other dan "Pride, self-adoring pride! was primal cause gers; so does David here testify, that as often as he is in a situation of danger, he has a sufficient protection in the shepherdcare of God. But now that God, in the person of his only begotten Son, has manifested himself as a shepherd in a far clearer and nobler manner than he did formerly to the fathers under the law, we do not sufficiently honour his protection, unless, with eye directed towards it, we walk through all fears and all dangers." "To such a valley of death-darkness," says Hengstenberg, the corresponding idea in spiritual matters is that of seasons of great trouble, danger, and severe suffering." Amos, "the herdman of Tekoa," says, that "the Lord turneth the shadow of death into the morning" (ch. v. 8); a statement which implies that the shadow of death is descriptive of the darkness of midnight. David, then, compares himself to a sheep wandering in a valley enclosed by wood-clad hills, amid the darkness of midnight, when 66 the beasts of the forest go forth to their prey. In harmony with the explanation we have given of this passage, is the view of John Bunyan. That famous "dreamer" conducts his pilgrim through the valley of the shadow of death, and other subsequent scenes, ere he reaches the Jordan, where he ends his pilgrimage. Seasons of trial and suffering the people of God may expect in this world; but in the midst of these trials they have often great spiritual joy-their continuity is interrupted by seasons of repose; and it is consoling to reflect, that this variety of sunshine and shade will not always last, but will be succeeded by the cloudless sky of an endless day. The hour when the soul is about to leave its clay tabernacle is emphatically the shadow of death, but its gloom is dispelled by the light of the gospel; and the presence of the Good Shepherd is the believer's security and joy. M. THE CONSECRATION OF THE SACRAMENTAL ELEMENTS. TO THE EDITOR OF THE UNITED PRESBYTERIAN MAGAZINE. SIR,-Allow me to ask you, or any of your readers, to furnish a satisfactory answer to the following query-When, and by what authority from the word of God, was the practice of setting apart or consecrating the elements in the ordinances of Baptism and the Lord's Supper adopted in the Presbyterian Church? The practice I refer to is the following:-Some ministers, in what they call the consecration prayer, before dispensing the ordinance, say, after having first asked a blessing on the elements," We, in the name and by the authority of the Lord Jesus Christ, the alone head of the church, consecrate or set apart so much of the elements as may be used on this occasion from a common to a holy sacramental use. Now, in the simple institution of the ordinance of the Supper by the great Head of the Church, who was consecrated a priest for ever, there is nothing to warrant this, nor, as far as I can discover, in any part of holy writ, a delegated power given to ministers of the gospel to use such words. And Paul, in dispensing the ordinance to the Corinthians, simply refers to the words of institution, and proceeds by imploring a blessing on the elements, which we are warranted to infer from his quoting the words, "and when he had given thanks." Let it be understood that it is the use of the words, consecrate and set apart, that I condemn. I believe that the great Head of the Church, to whom all power in heaven and earth has been committed, alone possesses the power to consecrate or set apart from a common to a holy sacramental use, and that he has consecrated, when he instituted the ordinance of the Supper, and which also applies to that of baptism, so much of the elements as may be used in all time coming, and on every occasion; and the great end and object of believers in every age is, or ought to be, to obtain the blessing on the outward sign, that they may realize the thing signified, viz. the washing of regeneration and renewing of the Holy Spirit, which no consecration by man can impart. Mr Editor, you will greatly oblige me, and many others, by giving a place to the above. AN OFFICE-BEARER IN THE PRESBYTERIAN CHURCH. [As to the question when the language referred to was introduced, our correspondent will find that it is as old as our subordinate standards. See Confession, ch. xxix. § 3. To "set apart" is to apply to a particular purpose. The purpose to which sacramental elements are applied is, as symbols, to represent Christ and his benefits. This is 66 not the common use" of these elements; but, on the contrary, it is a "holy use," or an application for a religious purpose of water in baptism, and of bread and wine in the Lord's Supper. The "authority" by which these sensible signs are applied to this purpose is, that of the Head of the church, who said, "Do this in remembrance of me.' "" That the phraseology remarked upon is sometimes interpreted in a superstitious and hurtful sense, we fear, is too true. To understand it to mean, that an inherent quality of sacredness is imparted to the sensible signs, is an error half-way to the lying wonder of transubstantiation. Equally unfounded and unscriptural is the notion, that the validity of the sacraments depends in any degree on human authority and appointment. Accordingly, in guarding against these errors, we are taught, Cat. Larger, 161, Shorter, 91, that "the sacraments become effectual APOLOGY FOR TEARS. means of salvation, not from any virtue in them, or in him that doth administer them, but only by the blessing of Christ, and the working of his Spirit in those that by faith receive them." "Consecration," though in strictness of meaning it signifies no more than setting apart to a religious purpose, is yet, in its sacramental application, so inveterately associated in many minds with semi-Popish and Puseyite notions, that in this connexion it should not be heard in our churches.-ED.] The Gleaner. I THE work of grace, though it is above nature, is not against it. The man who tells me not to weep at the grave, insults me, mocks me, and wishes to degrade me. do weep; I must weep,-I cannot help it. God requires me to do so, and has opened a fountain of tears in my nature for that purpose; and it is the silent, pure, unsophisticated testimony of my heart to the excellence of the gift he gave in mercy, and in mercy, no doubt, as well as judgment, has recalled. Without sorrow, we should not improve by his correcting hand. Chastened grief is like the gentle shower, falling first upon the earth to prepare it for the seed, and then upon the seed to prepare it to germinate; though wild, clamorous, passionate sorrow is like the thunder-shower of inundation, that carries away soil and seed together.-J. A. James. CHRISTIAN JOY NECESSARY FOR CHRISTIAN ACTIVITY. A happy church will be a working church. Nothing great was ever yet achieved under the sun, but by a heart glad and free. It is the joyous mind that aims at great things, expects great things, and accomplishes great things. The apostles and first disciples, though persecuted men, were joyous men. They counted it joy even to fall into divers temptations.-J. A. James. WHEN RELATIVES BECOME OUR IDOLS. If we depend upon these dear relations for happiness more than upon God's favour; if, in calculating our possessions, and adding up the sum-total of our enjoyments, we naturally place them first; if, in felicitating ourselves upon what we have, we turn to these before God; if we dread most the loss of these; if we feel that nothing could make us happy if these were removed; if we go daily and hourly to these alone for gartification; if they are enjoyed solely by themselves, and for themselves, apart from God; if, instead of leading our hearts to God, they hold them from him; if we are more solicitous to avoid what would endanger their continuance than the continuance of God's favour; if the temporary interruption of their enjoyment affects us more than the loss of the enjoyment of religion and religious privileges; if, upon their removal, we feel forlorn and desolate, as if we had lost our all, or imagine that such would be our state in the event of such a calamity;-then is it but too plain that these are our idols, and that we are worshipping them.-J. A. James. HOW TO OVERCOME A LONG ACQUIRED HABIT. In his journal, 6th July 1746, John Wesley observes," After talking largely with both the men and women leaders, we agreed it would prevent great expense, as well of health as of time and of money, if the poorer people of our society could be persuaded to leave off drinking of tea. We resolved ourselves to begin, and set the example. I expected some difficulty in breaking off a custom of six-and-twenty years' standing; and, accordingly, the three first days, ached more or less all day long, and I was half asleep from morning to night. The third day, on Wednesday, in the afternoon, my memory failed almost entirely; in the evening I sought my remedy in prayer. On Tuesday morning my headache was gone, my memory was as strong as ever; and I found no inconvenience, but a sensible benefit, in several respects, from that very day to this." JUVENILE COMMUNICANTS. THE Jews, it would appear (Luke ii. 41, 42), took their children, at twelve years of age, to partake of the passover; and well would it be if Christian youth, at twelve or fourteen, under right impressions, and with in |