but merely to ascertain what positions may be deduced from them as certain, and how far they preclude us from the adoption of those conclusions to which some reasoners have been led by these deprecated studies.

The first verse states, that “in the beginning God created the heavens and the earth." A question here arises; What time is meant by the beginning? Is it the beginning of all things, or the beginning of the solar system, or the beginning of our world? Look to the context. "In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth; and the earth was without form, and void; and darkness was upon the face of the deep; and the Spirit of God moved upon the face of the waters; and God said, Let there be light, and there was light." The narrative is apparently continuous; and therefore at first sight we should conceive that the same period is alluded to throughout. But this is the only reason for such a conclusion; and it is invalidated by observing, that the style of Moses is uniformly continuous,even where the greatest gaps remain to be supplied in the history. Thus, in the first verse of the twentieth chapter of the Book of Numbers, any cursory reader would imagine that the event there related, took place immediately after the occurrence recorded in the preceding chapter; whereas it is plain, by a comparison of dates, that thirtyeight years had intervened between them. But the use of the same absolute phrase, "In the beginning," at the commencement of St. John's Gospel, to describe our Lord Christ's Eternal Deity, seems to determine its sense to be "at the beginning of all things, before the commencement of the present system :" and then the first verse would convey simply the great truth, which otherwise is no where so distinctly taught, that God is the Creator of the universe, that he produced its vast materials out of nothing, and that they have no other original but his

will. The second verse then assumes a date in the history of his Divine transactions; namely, that date which marks the commencement of the only state of things in which we have any direct concern. At that date, whatever might have been the case earlier, the earth was without form; and the Almighty took that course with it which is afterwards related at large.

Some persons, it is possible, may not acquiesce in this construction of the passage; but I think no one can demonstrate that any narrower interpretation than this is intended. It is, at all events, open to this construction: and consequently no one who thinks he has reason for believing that the earth we now inhabit existed in some other form before the date above alluded to, ought to be opposed by a statement, that Moses has asserted the creation of the earth on the first of the six days, of which he subsequently describes the proceedings.

I will next pass on to the history of the fourth day, concerning which, it cannot be denied, that any cursory reader would at first suppose that it relates the formation of the sun, moon, and stars on that day: and yet, I imagine, there is not a man of education, now living, who believes that all the stars, of which modern astronomy has taught us to acknowledge the immeasurable distances and magnitudes, were created on that day. They must all therefore conceive, either that some other interpretation of the words is the true one, or that Moses has not related things as they were. But let us read his words, and examine what they really express, that we may not charge the sacred text with more than it contains. First, God said, "Let there be lights in the firmament of the heaven!" This does not necessarily determine that the luminaries referred to had no previous existence, any more than the words, " God said, Let there be light," in the third verse, determine that the universe had, up to

that moment, been in darkness. It is enough to establish the truth of the last-cited text, if the earth alone was at that time in darkness; and it is enough for the verification of the first, if the luminaries, whether they existed or not, were not then in the firmament of the heavens; or, in other words, if they were not visible in that expanse of sky, which now seems to exhibit them, as in a map before us. The words may be literally translated either, "Let

luminaries be in the firmament of the heaven;" or, "Let the luminaries in the firmament of the heaven be"for the purposes there mentioned; namely, those of giving light on the earth, and marking its seasons: and no inference ought to be pressed against any one, as deducible from this text, which would be met by adopting either of these interpretations.

But it may be argued, that whatever may be our construction of the fourteenth verse, the sixteenth plainly declares that the sun and moon were made on the fourth day. I think otherwise: for in the first place, it declares as much concerning the stars as it does concerning the sun and moon; and any one who presses another with the formation of the sun and moon on that day, ought himself to hold that all the stars in the universe were formed on that day likewise. But secondly, it is well known that the Hebrews have but one past tense, and are consequently unable to distinguish the pluperfect from the perfect. Our translators, however, never scruple to distinguish these tenses, whenever sufficient reasons are ap. parent to guide them in the discrimination. For example, it might be inferred from the last verse of the eleventh chapter of Genesis, and the first of the twelfth, that the Lord did not call Abram when he was in Ur of the Chaldees, nor till after his father's death in Haran. This, however, would be contradictory to other texts of Scripture; and therefore our translators, to obviate

the apparent contradiction, introduce the auxiliary, had, thus throwing the second statement backward, to a date prior to the first. They have not done so here, because they saw no reason for doing so. But reasons may afterwards be discovered; and those who feel the force of them, are as much at liberty to translate the sixteenth verse of the first chapter in the pluperfect tense, as our venerable translators themselves were so to translate the first

verse of the twelfth. The statement would in that case be, that God had previously made the sun, moon, and stars; and that he then displayed them in the expanse of the sky, to give light upon the earth, and to mark its revolving seasons for the use of men. They are not always to be seen there, even when we are sensible of their light. A foggy atmosphere, or a thick curtain of clouds will hide them from our view, without casting us back into original darkness: and this might have been the case during the first three days, after light was admitted, and had penetrated to the surface of our globe.

I do not affirm, that this is the true construction of the text: I only say, that no person can be justly stigmatized as an unbeliever, for denying that the sun was formed on the fourth day, unless the incorrectness of this interpretation can first be demonstrated. And on the whole, I am persuaded that nothing is contained in the Mosaic narrative, or in the whole Bible, which affects any conclusion to which geologists have, or may, come, concerning preexistent forms of our globe.

There is indeed one speculation of geologists, which does appear to me to militate against the text of Scripture. It is that which has been, and may still be, held by many of them, concerning the long periods of time which they would substitute for days. It strikes me, that the consecration of the seventh day, as related in the second verse of the second chapter, determines

the limit of the word day, to one revolution of the earth on its axis; and every attempt to reconcile any other interpretation with the sacred text, is in my eyes an evasion. This, however, it is to be observed, is not a speculation produced by simply following geological discoveries, wherever they may lead us, but by forced attempts to reconcile them with Scripture.

Some good men are also staggered by the language of geologists, concerning the successive and sweeping destruction of plants and animals, before the time of Adam, as though it were at variance with Divine truth: and yet I can find nothing in all the Bible which contradicts it. The most forcible text which can he produced (Rom. v. 12)," By one man, sin entered into the world, and death by sin, and so death passed upon all men, for that all have sinned," is studiously limited to mankind by the words, "all men;" or, if the phrase "death entered into the world," be more comprehensive than that which im. mediately follows it, "death passed upon all men;" it would be unwarrantable to extend the meaning of that word beyond the present system of things, so as to include other worlds, if any such there were, as geologists teach us, having been previously formed out of the same materials, differently combined, which were subsequently prepared in six days for the residence of man. Death may exist in other worlds it may have existed in worlds which themselves have perished, or have been renewed, or even in the globe from which our present earth was produced, without contravening a text which clearly relates, in its obvious meaning and doctrine, to the existence of death in mankind; a race created and designed for immortality.

These remarks are submitted to the consideration of your readers, with a view to invite their inquiry into what I regard as a grave question, not to be mixed up with cri

minating insinuations and charges, but to be deliberately and calmly weighed; namely, whether there be, or be not, any declaration in Scripture, which ought to preclude us from adopting any of the conclusions which geological investigations, so far as they have been hitherto prosecuted, may lead us; and if there be, what they are, and what is the precise amount of them; because, as on the one hand I should esteem any clear and positive declaration of God's word, a plain proof of some fallacy in the reasoning which would contradict it, so on the other hand the cause of truth must suffer from attempts to fasten upon scientific inquirers, accusations of opposing revelation, which cannot be substantiated.

A CLERICAL HINT.

D. D.

Tothe Editorofthe Christian Observer.

I REQUEST permission respectfully to submit to the clerical readers of your miscellany, whether a letter of admonition, addressed by each of them to his successor, and to be presented to him when the writer shall have quitted this mortal life, night not be greatly instrumental to the glory of God, and the salvation of their respective charges. Let such a communication be drawn up wisely, meekly, faithfully, and in the spirit of Christian affection; let it consist of such local information as may be important to the overseer of the flock; of suitable remarks on the character of his parishioners; of earnest appeals to the conscience of the successor; of attractive views of the grace and glory of the Saviour; of strong representations of the happiness of a good shepherd, and of the unspeakable danger of the mere hireling; of cautions against worldly communications, and the dissipation of time; and finally, let this posthumous epistle remind him, how

near is death, how solemn is judgment, and, to those who are unprepared for it, how awful is eternity. Let this be said as from a dying man to his dying successor, and be accompanied with earnest prayer for the influences of the Holy Spirit, to render the admonition truly availing; and who can estimate the benefit that might result from such an undertaking ;-an undertaking, which if determined upon, should not be delayed, for who is permitted to foresee either how soon or suddenly he may be called to give an account of his stewardship?

Suppose that such a letter as I have suggested should be put into the hands of a successor truly devoted to the service of God, but inexperienced in the duties of the Christian ministry, would he not be glad to receive such friendly infor. mation and admonition? and might he not in consequence become, by the grace of God, a more zealous, faithful, and efficient minister of Christ? Or if he should be young and thoughtless, a lover of pleasure, or even greedy of filthy lucre, might not the voice of his prede. cessor, who, though dead, would thus yet speak, arouse him to consideration, to prayer, and to the study of those Holy Scriptures which are able to make us wise unto salvation, through faith which is in Christ Jesus? Might not such an appeal lead the mere theologian to reflect, that something more than intellectual attainments in divinity will be required of him by the Judge of all, at the great day of his appearing? Might not even the coldest formalist, or the most determined lover of the world, be led to ask himself in the depth of silent contemplation, "What are my duties now? What will be my account hereafter? Am I, in the sight of a heart-searching God, a faithful or a faithless steward? Do I preach Christ, or myself? Do I follow the Saviour, or the world?" In any case, the supposed commu

nication could do no harm; since the author would be beyond the reach of human animadversion,and the receiver could scarcely be offended at a voice thus speaking to him privately from the tomb. Πισις.

ON THE ORIGIN OF WRITTEN SERMONS.

Tothe EditoroftheChristian Observer.

THE author of the communication on the subject of Extempore Preaching in your Number for last October, states that the practice of reading sermons is peculiar to the Church of England, and peculiar to it only in latter times; being in every respect an innovation, though counted now by many as a valuable relic of antiquity. It commenced, he adds, in the time of king Charles II.; alleging in proof a mandate sent by that king to the university of Cambridge, enjoining extempore or memoriter preaching.

I cannot immediately refer to this mandate, and therefore cannot say how far its authority bears upon the question of the antiquity of the practice alluded to; but there is a passage in Burnet's History of the Reformation, which carries it back to a much earlier period, even to the reign of Henry VIII. In his remarks upon certain injunctions issued by Bonner to his clergy, A.D. 1542, he informs us, that, " now that the Reformation made a greater progress," eminent preachers were sent over the nation with the king's licence, and that no one was allowed to preach without a licence either from the king or his diocesan. "But," he proceeds, "in order to qualify this, a Book of Homilies was printed, in which the Gospels and Epistles of all the Sundays and holy-days of the year were set down; with a homily to every one of these, which is a plain and practical paraphrase of those portions of Scripture. these were added many serious ex

Το