regard to quality. According, then, to a true idea, what is spiritual is identical with a regard to what is right; what is right as to affection, and action thereon, being the interior; and what is right as to judgment and sentiment being the exterior. To be spiritually minded is, consequently, to have a predominant and interior regard to what is right, and not merely to assent to an intellectual idea of what is right. But those are generally accounted spiritually minded who merely remember eternity; but how many of these have only a sensual idea of heavenly joy, as a joy arising from without; and how few regard it as the joy of doing what is right from the love of what is right!

66

CCLX.

The kingdom of man which is founded on the sciences, says Lord Bacon, can scarcely be entered otherwise than the kingdom of God,— that is, in the condition of little children."

CCLXI.

The natural philosopher, while engaged in the investigation of the relations of natural things-of things in themselves of trifling value, is making useful discoveries. So the Christian, although his thoughts may consist of very ordinary elements, by his watchful, careful, and intelligent explorations of them, is making discoveries of moral affinities and contrarieties, of immense practical importance.

CCLXII.

Youth is the season for furnishing the memory; maturity, for the formation of the rational principle out of its stores; and old age, for communicating the lessons of wisdom. The latter fact accounts for the proverbial garrulity of old age,-an old age, that is, which has nothing to communicate but egotistic impressions, instead of the lessons of wisdom. But supposing these lessons to abound with aged persons, there is little danger now of the reproach of garrulity being incurred, owing to the deficiency of willing listeners. The wise aged are welcome to the company of the youth in a wise, but are neglected in a foolish generation.

CCLXIII.

What is the reason that so little good comes, in the generality of cases, from hearing sermons, however powerfully addressed to the understanding? It is because every one is capable of conviction from another's understanding, only in the same degree that he habitually governs himself by his own understanding, that is, by what he believes to be the truth. It is not the case generally that men do thus really govern

themselves by the truth. Most men act and judge from impulse, restrained only by policy or fear.

CCLXIV.

If you expect by strength of reasoning to work conviction with those who are not used to govern themselves by what they believe to be truth, you are expecting nothing less than to pass through a closed door, jealously barred and watched against all who are opposed to the diminion of blind, and therefore, of course, selfish feelings.

CCLXV.

New instruction is the correction of error and the implantation of truth. Reformation is the gradual putting away of evil, and appropriation of good. No one can instruct or reform another, even by the highest efforts of reason, except to the extent that he is previously in the effort to instruct and reform himself. Supposing an individual not to be in this effort, all that we can do for him is to hold out to him the strongest inducements to self-reformation.

CCLXVI.

"We deceive ourselves if we imagine ourselves candid, unless we are innocent. It is the innocent alone who can dispense with all affectation, pretence, and covering."

CCLXVII.

Plain general rules for securing domestic harmony.

Be sure you understand each other right.
Try to perceive if reasonable each request.

To bow to reason, ever yields delight.

To bend the will to truth, is always best.
The harsh and angry answer quick repress,
It brings no fruit but bitter, vain regret.
The conscious fault with grief sincere confess :
The fault confessed, true love can soon forget.
The anxious, eager, self-defence cut short,

Or right or wrong; it does more harm than good.
Gently explain the purpose of your thought,
Content if you be rightly understood.

If fault be found, let not the feelings rise
To interfere with reason's calm survey.
If you are wrong, concede; if right, be wise,
And see that meekness govern what you say.

Try to maintain an equal, tranquil mind,
The temper suited best for judgment sound.
Avoid excitement;-bane of feelings kind,—
A fiend that makes domestic jars abound.
(To be continued.)

A NEW MODE OF COMBATING THE TRIPERSONAL THEORY.

THE advocate of the sole and exclusive Divinity of the Lord Jesus Christ, when conversing with a Tripersonalist, often finds considerable difficulty from the circumstance, that the latter affirms that God is One in one sense, but that he is Three in another, and (as he says) a totally different sense. Thus, in the Bishops' Book called "The Catholic Doctrine of the Trinity," we are told that the "terms GoD or LORD are names of a NATURE; but the term Person can belong only to an INDIVIDUAL." On this ground, namely, that God is a nature, and not AN INDIVIDUAL, but THREE Individuals or Persons, it is denied to be a legitimate conclusion, that three Divine Persons mean the very same as three Gods: so long as it is affirmed that God is not a Divine Person, but a Divine Nature, no progress can be made in the argument. If it be allowable to compare argumentation on such a sacred subject with actual warfare, it might be remarked, that the Tripersonalist who deals in arguments of this description, may be compared to those combatants who are ever changing their position, by delivering their fire now from behind one erection or object, and now from behind another, because they dare not venture to meet the other side in the open plain; while that side, confident of victory when on equal ground, only desires to draw the antagonist party from their hiding places. So the New Churchman entertains a conviction, that if he could induce the Trinitarian to accept of any common term applicable equally and undeniably to both terms, God and Divine Person, he would deprive him of the power of continually shifting his position, and compel him to meet the question in a straightforward manner, on the merits of the ideas really involved in the use of the words.

But some may urge, that no good can result from trying to compel persons to believe what they are unwilling to believe, and that it is better to try to lead them quietly by their affections, than to try to tread them down by the iron hoof of intellectual power. Now, I have nothing

to say against the legitimate influence of the affections or the use of gentleness, but it has appeared to me that there are many sensible persons amongst Trinitarian communities, who, in consequence of their very excellencies, are the most difficult to be influenced by gentle management,--a mode of proceeding which not unfrequently means, practically, pointless argument. The excellence of these persons consists in their conscientiousness, and their affectionate disposition. It was under the impulse of the former quality, that they carefully chose their church, and under the influence of the latter, that they have become strong adherents to it. Hence their "adhesiveness" is exceedingly unyielding to ordinary inducements offered for the purpose of diminishing or detaching it. It seems to require to be dealt with decisively, or that a strong reason should be presented why the cause so much beloved is not deserving of the attachment bestowed upon it. If the adherence be thus tenacious, the shock offered to it, it would seem, should be strong in a corresponding degree; but, at the same time, of course, it should prudently be directed, lest the principle of attachment being wounded and pained injudiciously, should recoil, and no effect follow but a blind and offended resistance. To afford aid in such a case, is the object of the following representation of a supposed Dialogue on the subject. As far as I know, the principal suggestion contained in it may be regarded as in some degree original. It may be remarked, that it is by no means uncommon for Trinitarians to speak of GOD as "the Divine Mind," (as in Dr. Wardlaw's Christian Ethics, p. 382,) and this is made the ground of the suggested proceeding.

Tripersonalist. I have often been struck with the circumstance as truly astonishing, that men of such strong minds, and extensive attainments, as were many amongst the ancients, should fall into the absurdities of the popular mythologies of their times. It appears so utterly extravagant to imagine the great and complicated universe as under the government of distinct Gods, of diverse minds and characters. Nothing appears plainer to the eye of common perception, than that the universe, as being one obviously harmonious work, originated from ONE Divine Mind, or GREAT FIRST CAUSE. And since all the operations of nature that fall under our view, tend to one common end, without anything like confusion, such as must arise were there a multiplicity of governors, different in their characters and purposes,-it seems impossible to avoid the conclusion, that the mighty whole originated with ONE Divine Mind, and that the same Mind unceasingly carries on the stupendous work of government and superintendence.

New Churchman. The truth of your conclusion is self-evident, and hence the particular force, so universally felt, of the expression THE Divine Mind, also the Divine Providence, as meaning the superintending activity of that ONE DIVINE MIND. But I know you will pardon my freedom in putting a question to you, with a view to clearness and consistency of idea. You are, avowedly, a conscientious Tripersonalist,-a believer in three Divine Persons as together forming the Christian's God, if I rightly express myself. Now, how can the belief of three Divine Persons be made to appear compatible with the use of the phrase " One Divine Mind?"

T. I perceive no incongruity in this case, for, as it is said in The Catholic Doctrine of the Trinity (circulated by the Bishops' Society for promoting Christian Knowledge), "These three Persons are three distinct agents, yet there is but one and the same divine agency.”

N. C. However desirous I may be to do so, I find it impossible to attach a meaning to this phraseology. Allow me to ask you whether these distinct Agents act from a separate individual mind, and a distinct personal consciousness? for you will remember, that the work you have quoted speaks of the term person as belonging to the individual, and an individual must possess, it would seem, an individual mind.

T. Yes, I know it does: and I admit that we are accustomed to speak of the Persons in the ever blessed Trinity as distinct individuals, and as conferring together, and as communicating to each other, in such personal conferences, their individual views; and a distinct view communicated, does certainly imply a distinct view previously entertained; and this as certainly implies a distinct mind. I feel it, therefore, difficult to deny that each Divine Person has, individually and consciously, a distinct, and indeed separate, Divine Mind;-but how then can it be denied that there are Three Divine Minds?

N. C. Ah! that is, indeed, the difficulty of your position, and I would seriously ask you,-How do you propose to obviate it? You have powerfully shown that there is but ONE Divine Mind, and that there cannot possibly be more than One: how, then, do you prove that the belief of three Divine Minds, under the name of Three Divine Persons, is compatible with the belief of ONE Divine Mind, or One First Cause? for you know that Three First Causes would be a contradiction in terms!

T. I certainly am not prepared to demonstrate this proposition!

N. C. And I certainly am not surprised that such is the case. Why, the bare idea of the question being put, "How many minds has God?" actually fills one with horror!-Permit me, then, to add, that supposing