Then, gentle reader, come with me, let us catch up some of the opinions that have prevailed. We will together wander through the field of human inquiry, and glean some of the notions that have been uttered at different perio ls of the world. It is possible that some of these may do little more than amuse us; but let us not be too severe in our censures. for every one has not studied the Inductive Philosophy," and the discoveries of Newton were not known to the wise men of very early days.

66

66

What is a comet? This is no novel inquiry. It was discussed as eagerly thousands of years ago, as it is in more modern times. The earliest opinion recorded is this: "A comet is an assemblage of little stars, which accidently meet, and, throughthe force of attraction, cluster together. After a time they part, each pursuing its separate way, and the brilliant light disappears." The famous Stagyrite, two thousand years ago, was teaching his disciples that a comet is an exhalation that has arisen into the upper regions of the air, and having become ignited, is now blazing in the sky." Another said, "a comet is a human spirit, that has been released from its material tenement, and is, for some reason, hovering over the earth before it retires to its rest. The one which appeared in 44 of the Christian era was, without doubt, the spirit of the illustrious Cæsar." A recent writer thinks it possible that a comet may be a manifestation from the spiritual world. May it not," he enquires, "be a chariot of angels? I read of ministering spirits, and find that their appearance has often been associated with dazzling brightness. It is said of the angel that appeared at the sepulchre of Jesus, his face was like light. ning.' The entrance of an angel illuminated the dark prison in which Peter was confined. And when the multitude of the heavenly host appeared to the shepherds in the vale of Bethlehem, 'a great light shone round about them.' What is there then more likely than that this peculiar brightness arises from a company of these heavenly messengers." A correspondent of the Times, some months ago, wrote sentiments like these: "The comet is a burning world. This earth will one day be destroyed by fire. The Bible plainly teaches us that the element shall melt with fervent heat, and the earth, and all the works that are therein, shall be burnt up. If it be so with this world, why not with other worlds? What can be more probable than that the brilliant object we see, is a planet unknown to us, hurled from its orbit by the hand of its Creator, and now passing through the process of purification by fire?"

The popular opinion has been, that a comet is an omen of evil. The approach of the mysterious messenger has awakened the most terrible apprehensions. Just picture to yourself, gentle reader, a group of persons wiser than their neighbours, and gather the remarks that fall from them. "This comet bodes no good. It will destroy our crops. You may depend on it there will be a sickly time. If it come much nearer it will draw the waters from the ocean and deluge the world. Moore's Almanac says about this time there may be expected a bloody war. Is there no danger of the world being destroyed? And thus you perceive that the object which looks so beautiful on the sky, is regarded as the harbinger of all imaginable evils." While you listen to this conversation, several facts recur to your memory which awaken the fear that, after all, the comet may not be quite harmless. You now recollect reading, that "a comet appeared during the siege of Troy, and was regarded by the Trojans as a

certain omen of destruction;" that "there were strange sights in the heavens during the seige of Jerusalem, amongst others, a comet in the shape of a sword, which continued to blaze in the sky until the city was destroyed;" that "a comet appeared in the very year in which William the Norman invaded England and introduced his reign of oppression and cruelty;" that "a comet appeared in 1456, the very time when the Turks were rushing on with wild fanaticism in their terrible conquests ;" and that even Pope Calixtus the Third was so distressed by the appearance of a comet, that he caused all the church bells in Christendom to be rung every day to summon the people to supplicate divine mercy." You do not now feel alarmed, perhaps. In your calmer moments it occurred to you that there was no necessary connection between that light in the sky and the evils which happened at the same time. Still you cannot feel so much surprised that there are some less wise than you, and that some even amongst ourselves in this uttermost part of the earth, are afraid of such mysterious tokens.

66

Still, you say, I do not yet understand what a comet is. Let us go together, then, my inquiring friend, and consult a few of the modern stargazers. They live in an age of advanced science, and may be supposed free from the errors and superstitions of their ancestors. We will listen to their representations. One says, "a comet is a transparent globe, and the light from the sun shining through it, produces the appearance of a tail." Another says, a comet is nebulous matter, and that which appears like a tail, is a trail of light which it leaves behind as it flies onward in its course." A third says, "the comet is a body like our earth, only less dense. It shines with borrowed rays; and the tail is like the auroraborealis, that shines sometimes so brilliantly in our northern sky." Now, is not this diversity of opinion very perplexing? Let us ask these learned men to explain to us what they know of Donati's comet. Perhaps they will favour us with the result of their observations.

How does the comet appear as seen through your powerful telescopes? "The appearance varies. Even the nucleus does not always look the same. Sometimes it has an unusual brilliance. It shoots forth jets of light which blaze out to the distance of miles. There seem to rise out of it rockets, that ascend in a spiral line, and then suddenly vanish. It appears to us, in our nocturnal observations, a most dazzling spectacle." What is its distance from the earth? "It varies. Its nearest point of approach is 51,000,000 of miles. It does not turn round the sun in a circle. At times it seems to be drawing near, and then moves millions on millions of miles away. Nevertheless, it belongs to the solar system. It never wanders near the precincts of any one of the fixed stars; and though, like a knight errant, in his dazzling armour, it rushes so far away into the regions of space, it returns at due intervals to do homage to the sun as its supreme lord."

At what rate does it travel? "It is not always moving at the same speed. The rate varies according to its distance from the sun. As a stream now creeps along sluggishly, and then dashes forward down the mountain side with fearful rapidity, so it is with this eccentric body. When nearest the sun, it flies along at the rate of about two thousand miles a minute, and one hundred and twenty-seven thousand miles an hour. A railway train, travelling at the same velocity, would pass from Louth to London in half a second. A ship would sail from England to America in one

minute and-a-half; and a balloon would fly round the world, and return to the same spot, in one quarter of an hour."

When did this comet appear before?" It is not certain it has appeared at all before. It is not unlikely to be the one that appeared in 1264. Henry the Third sat on the English throne. There was then no electric telegraph. The first railroad was not laid down. The printing-press had not been invented. Christopher Columbus had not caught a glimpse of the dim coast-line of America. There was scarcely a Bible in the whole of our fatherland. Wickliffe had not commenced the translation of the Scriptures into the vulgar tongue. It was about the time of the fifth crusade, and thousands of our countrymen were going to fight for the holy sepulchre, and perish in a foreign land.

We will not now, patient reader, push our enquiries any further. We will not stay to ask what is the number of the comets, what purpose they serve-what changes they undergo—or what will be their duration and destiny. We have discovered enough now to teach us some useful lessons, and there are a thousand things about them which, after all, must remain shrouded in the darkest mystery. Let us, then, indulge together in reflection. How limited is the circle of human knowledge! The wisest can see but a little way. All that was ever attained by the reasonings of men is but as a point of light surrounded by an infinitude of darkness. Think of the comet. It is an object that we have seen. Thousands have endeavoured to solve its mysteries; and yet, that which is known respecting it, is next to nothing. What then could we have known of subjects that more deeply concern us, and yet are more profoundly mysterious, without a revelation from heaven? What could we have known, for instance, about the Maker of comets? the destiny of the human spirit? the means of quieting a guilty conscience? or the hope of an inheritance which is incorruptible, and undefiled, and that fadeth not away?

"With

How independent is the divine will! God does as he pleases. whom took he counsel?" He did not ask one of us whether he should send the comet to visit us. And so in all things, he doeth “ as it pleaseth Him." Men may cavil at His doings, and say, "Why has he done this? Why did he permit sin to enter the universe? Why has he not sent a better teacher than the Bible? Why did he require his Son to die in order to our salvation? Why does he send so many sorrows in this life, and doom the lost to everlasting misery? The simple reply is because He saw fit. He never will consult you. It is in vain for you to try to arraign Him at your bar. It makes not the slightest difference if you do, for He does as he pleases; still, your best course is to humble yourself before Him, and to surrender your heart and your life to Jesus. It is hard for thee to kick against the pricks. "Acquaint now thyself with Him and be at peace, thereby good shall come unto thee."

How vast is the divine power. What force the comet displays. Who can consider it, and again limit the Holy One? What is there he cannot do? Can he not change the heart? Can he not answer prayer, and sustain his servants under every trial? Can he not quicken the dead, and punish the guilty, and raise the redeemed to glory? Surely the comet is ever singing as it shines "All things are possible with God."

How strange is the mystery of divine love. The comet has its mysteries, but greater still is "the mystery of godliness." Pause in view of that brilliant visitor, and think of it. He who struck off that light as a spark

from His own glory cares for you, sympathises with you in your sorrowsbears with you when you insult him-watches over you with the tenderness of a father-beseeches you to be reconciled, and makes true penitents, sons and daughters of the Lord Almighty. Yea, He who enkindled that light veiled His own glory. See Him a babe in Bethlehem-a dusty and weary traveller-bound, insulted, spit upon, scourged, and led forth to Calvary. Trace Him as he walks on amid a cruel mob. Look at Him on the cross-his features distorted-the blood trickling from his wounds, and his heart bursting with infinite sorrow. Remember "all things were made by him," and you must feel that there is no mystery so great as the mystery of divine love. Louth.

W. O.

SALTED WITH FIRE.

AN EXPOSITION OF MARK Ix, 49, 50.

"For every one shall be salted with fire, and every sacrifice shall

be salted with salt."

THIS is one of the most difficult passages in Mark's Gospel, both the meaning of the terms and the connection with what goes before being doubtful and obscure. Among the various interpretations which have been proposed, one or two points seem to be agreed upon, which may, therefore, be first stated, as a basis for determining the other questions. It is commonly admitted that the last clause of this verse is an allusion to, if not a direct quotation from, the law of sacrifice in Lev. ii. 13, from the Septuagint version of which it differs only by the change of "gift" to "sacrifice,"—a term used in the older classics to denote the sacrificial act or service, but in later Greek extended to the sacrificial victims, or the animals admitted to the altar. It is also agreed, that there is allusion to the antiseptic and conservative effects of salt, and that these are figuratively transferred to fire. But what fire is meant, and in what sense it is conservative, and how the whole verse is related to what goes before and follows, these are questions as to which there is a great diversity of judgment. The different hypotheses entitled to attention may, however, be reduced to two, essentially distinguished by the fact, that one of them regards this as a promise, and the other as a threatening or a warning. According to the former view, our Lord, referring to the well-known requisition of the law already mentioned, that every sacrificial victim must be salted,—that is, rubbed or sprinkled with salt,—and also to the universal association between salt and soundness or purity of meats, avails himself of these associations to assure his hearers that every one whom God approves, or towards whom he has purposes of mercy, though he may pass through the fire of persecution and affliction, including the painful self-denial recommended in the previous context, will be purified and saved thereby, or as an offering to God, salted with such fire, just as the literal sacrifice was salted at the altar. This is certainly a good sense in itself, and favoured by the strong analogy of the fiery trial which Peter mentions in his First Epistle (iv. 12.) The objections to it are, that it gives to fire a sense entirely different from that in the preceding context, and that it does not explain the logical connection indicated by the "for." The other explanation supposes the connection to be this: Our Lord had six times spoken of eternal

torments as unquenchable fire, from which no man could escape without self-denial and the mortification of sin. The immediately preceding verse concludes with the solemn repetition of that fearful saying, "Where their worm dieth not, and the fire is not quenched;" i.e., their sufferings are endless and unceasing. But how can the subject of such sufferings. escape annihilation? By being kept in existence for the very purpose of enduring them. This awful fact he clothes in a figurative form, derived from the sacrificial ritual of Moses. Every victim must be rubbed with salt, the symbol of incorruption and preservation; so these victims shall be salted, not with salt, but fire. The divine wrath that consumes them will preserve them; i.e., from annihilation,-not from suffering, but for suffering. It is no objection to this view of the passage, that it takes salt in a sense not justified by usage, which requires it to mean preservation for a good end, or salvation. This is a mere assumption, just as easy to deny as to affirm. The essential idea of the figure is preservation from destruction, or continued existence, and may just as well be used both in a good and a bad sense, as leaven (which the law excluded from all offerings no less strictly than it required salt) is used in both; and just as we might say that the lost sinner will be saved from annihilation, although not from ruin. On the other hand, this interpretation has the advantage of continuing the train of thought unbroken, taking fire in the same sense as throughout the previous context, and concluding this terrific warning in a manner far more appropriate than a promise of salvation by the fire of suffering, however pleasing and delightful in itself.

"Salt [is] good: but if the salt have lost his saltness, wherewith will ye season it? Have salt in yourselves, and have peace one with another."-MARK ix. 50.

According to the first interpretation given of verse 49, this must be taken as a sudden change of figure, or in the meaning of the figure there used. Salt, which there denotes the conservative or purifying virtue of affliction, now means heavenly grace or wisdom, which the disciples are enjoined to cherish in their own hearts. This is certainly a violent transition, not to be assumed without necessity, and furnishing a strong ground of preference for any exegetical hypothesis by which it is dispensed with. This is effected by the other explanation, which supposes this to be an answer to the very difficulty raised before, as to the use of salt in an unusual and unfavourable sense. He had said that every victim to the wrath of God would be salted by the fire of that wrath; i.e., preserved in existence for the purpose of enduring it. But salt, they might have said, as some say now, can only signify a salutary preservation, as, in the sacrificial law referred to, it denotes something good, not evil. With his usual method of converting objections into arguments or motives, he concedes the truth of the premises involved in this one. "Salt is good," not only in itself, but as a figure for moral purity and conservation; that is, the true salt, which every one should have within him, namely, moral purity and right affections." But if the salt becomes unsalted"- -a most lively and intelligible figure for the loss of moral goodness, and descriptive of men's natural condition since the fallwherewith" (literally, “in what," i.e., in the use of what means) “ will you season it ?—a Greek word always implying management, contrivance, art, and, in the latter classics, used as a culinary term, exactly answering