has, by his grace, enabled them to walk in a more excellent way, in seeking the return to the paths of truth of the most venerable Church on earth, through which have descended to us many inestimable blessings! Christ wept over Jerusalem, and St. Paul declared that he had great heaviness and continual sorrow in his heart respecting the state of his wandering and unbelieving brethren. But what a spectacle is presented in these our days, when one part of the Church anathematizes the other; and, in return, that other applies to its antagonist the direst predictions of wrath and ruin which the pages of the Bible unfold! There is sympathy in abundance for the heathen, for Jews, Turks, infidels, and heretics, but none for Rome, upon whom, in the estimation of thousands, a spiritual leprosy is resting which forbids benevolent approach, and is only to be done away by a fearful and entire destruction. We ask, is this Christian, is this even kind? We inquire what is the cause that the reformation of the Papacy is despaired of, or treated as a thing not to be seriously contemplated? The reply will be found in the fact, that men have applied unto this erring branch of the Church certain striking predictions, and have then acted on the presumption that the case is decided for them by the Almighty. Babylon, that is, they say, the Church of Rome, is foredoomed of God, how then can mortals dare to seek her healing! May we not affirm that it is this tampering with prophecy which has removed Rome out of the pale of Christian pity, and turned gentle affections into a stern acquiescence in imagined divine judgments? Let a calm and reasonable exegesis once throw doubt over this reference of certain texts to the specific object of the Church of Rome, and the most blessed effects would probably follow. Prayers could then be put up, not that God would hasten the downfall of Babylon, in a physical sense, but that he would turn the disobedient to the wisdom of the just; and in the place of a fierce, and we must say, a malignant opposition, there would be gentle efforts made to win and save our brethren.

It is too much taken for granted that Rome is unchangeable. Theoretically indeed it is, in the same sense in which the Church of England and the Protestant sects are so. Can any persons

resist the intimation of an alteration in their articles or formularies more earnestly than the clergy of the Church of England; or predicate of themselves constitutional perfection more zealously than Wesleyans, Independents, or Baptists? But there is a law of nations and communities more powerful than any conventionalities, even the law of God, by which he gradually moulds and fashions society, so that it must ultimately take the form he wishes it to bear. We might say of the grand features of nature that

they are permanent and unalterable, unless some preternatural convulsions should throw them into confusion and alter their configuration. Yet a silent change is every moment going on. No shower descends without wearing the rocks, and displacing the soil of the earth; no river flows along without its motion doing its part in preparing land for new continents, or at least levelling high places and filling up depressions. So is it in social and political life, and so is it with the religious communities into which Christendom is divided. Semper eadem, always the same, may be the motto of a Church, but the magic words can have no power to stop the influences of external things, and sooner or later they will alter the outward forms which men think to be perpetual. The past history of Latin Christianity is one of change, and its future career will doubtless be still more so. The stereotyped form which Rome has taken, has indeed resisted many influences which have given a new character to other societies, but left it in the main unaltered; but that it can continue to be untouched by moulding and disintegrating causes is contrary to all we know of natural laws. A careful comparison of the Papacy just before Luther, with its character at the present moment, will at once show how vain is the attribute of unchangeableness which it arrogates to itself.

If we take the Roman Church as it exists in England, it is manifest that it is a thing very different from that which bears the name in Italy. There is, indeed, an ostensible and outward sameness; but how contrasted are the modes of thought and feeling on religious subjects and their political relations, of English Catholics, and those residing within the rule of the Eternal city! Let this teach us a lesson, and induce us to apply more and more a kind and conciliating policy, in the hope of finally turning our brethren from the error of their ways. On the subject of reading the Holy Scriptures in the vernacular language much advance has been made in the right direction, as an acquaintance with the Roman Catholic book trade will at once prove to an inquirer. In the Catholic Almanac of this year there are advertised several editions of the Bible; some expensive, but others at a low price, for the use of the poor. We have one of the latter now before us,m which we purchased in a country town, where copies were generally exposed for sale. It is a handsome little volume, well printed and bound in roan, the price of which

m The Holy Bible, translated from the Latin Vulgate; diligently compared with the Hebrew, Greek, and other Editions, in divers Languages. With Annotations, References, and an Historical and Chronological Index. Published with the approbation of the Right Rev. Dr. Denvir, R. C. Bishop Down and Connor. London: C. Dolman. 1853.

is half-a-crown. It is the Douay and Rhemish version, with a few notes, some of which, as might be expected, are objectionable to a Protestant; but the bulk of them are of an innocent and instructive character. By way of introduction there is a letter of Pope Pius VI. to the Most Rev. Anthony Martini, Archbishop of Florence, on his translation of the Bible into Italian, showing the benefit which the faithful may reap from their having the Holy Scriptures in the Vulgar tongue.' This letter states: At a time when a vast number of bad books, which grossly attack the Catholic religion, are circulated even among the unlearned, to the great destruction of souls, you judge exceedingly well that the faithful should be excited to the reading of the Holy Scriptures; for these are the most abundant sources, which ought to be left open to every one, to draw from them purity of morals and of doctrine. This you have seasonably effected, as you declare by publishing the Sacred Scriptures in the language of your country, suitable to every one's capacity.' In the recommendatory note of Dr. Denvir, he says: 'I hereby sanction its circulation among the faithful, feeling convinced, that if read with becoming reverence, humility, and pious dispositions, its perusal will be attended with great spiritual advantage.'

This version of the Scriptures is in substance the same as those circulated by our Bible Societies on the continent; it is a translation of the Vulgate, the Bible which for a thousand years was the source of religious knowledge to the greater part of Christendom. A fastidious piety, neglecting available means for unattainable ones of greater perfection, may disparage such an edition of the Scriptures as this, but more prudent and thoughtful persons will rejoice that the bread of life can be furnished to our Roman Catholic fellow-countryman, although with a small admixture of worldly chaff with the wheat. But our only object in referring to this Bible is to illustrate our position, that Rome cannot remain unchangeable. Here are the Scriptures printed, advertised, and sold, for the use of the members of the Papacy, and it is to be wished that Protestant benevolence would seize this opportunity of assisting to circulate copies of the Word of Life having on them that best introduction to a Roman Catholic, the imprimatur of the Holy See. We fear, yea we know, that the priests are not anxious that the people should avail themselves of these cheap copies of the Scriptures; but they exist, and have high sanction, and a little enlightened zeal could employ against popery its own

weapons.

ON THE HISTORICAL ORIGIN OF THE PASSOVER.

THE prefigurative intent of typical religious rites is too well known, and granted by every member of the Christian community, to be dwelt upon here. There is a theological view running parallel with an historical view of such questions; and for the present I am dealing exclusively with the latter.

Every Biblical student knows that some of the formulæ and ordinances of the paschal sacrifice and feast of unleavened bread had a past and commemorative as well as a future and prefigurative intent; but as regards some others, there are several very important ordinances in which the reference to a past event, the especial commemorative intent, has never yet come to light.

Now it throws the commemorative design of such a religious national festival out of keeping with itself, to suppose that some of its formulæ represented in the most significant and intelligible manner, leading circumstances in the events which gave rise to the institution itself, while others were mere arbitrary ordinances representing nothing at all to those who assisted at the ceremony. We know, for example, what past circumstance was represented in the ordinance that the Hebrews should eat the paschal lamb in haste, with bitter herbs, and with their loins girded and their sandals on, and staff in hand. But what past event was represented by the order that there should be any victim slain to be thus eaten? or why should it be a lamb or kid possessing certain specified qualifications rather than any other clean animal? Again, why must this victim be taken on the 10th day of the month, and kept, to be slain only on the eve of the 15th? and when slain, why was it not offered with the usual forms of an eucharistic sacrifice, but in a manner wholly unprecedented and singular? And again, we know the circumstance in the past event, commemorated in the formula of eating unleavened bread, but why was this ceremony to last just seven days rather than six or five?

Finally, what logical account can be given of the ordinance for the redemption of the first-born, considered also as representing, and thus historically commemorating, another series of facts connected with the leading event of the deliverance? The first-born of man and cattle were smitten by the hand of God, throughout the land of Egypt, apparently in the stead of the first-born of Israel; thus far we see the fact, but still ask in vain, What had the first-born of Israel done that this substitution should be accepted as an act of mercy to themselves, and of retribution on

their oppressors, and commemorated accordingly? Such are the historical points with which our present inquiry professes to deal. By the details it brings to light, we shall be enabled to trace, in every special ordinance, the original reason of its appointment; we shall understand how every Hebrew of old was able to say with truth of every formality he religiously fulfilled, THIS is done because of what THE LORD did unto me when I came forth out of Egypt.'

I.-Egyptian Dates of the First Passover.

There are few persons who, being well acquainted with the peculiarities of the ancient Egyptian division of time, will not have been more or less struck with the resemblance to this which is occasionally found in the books of Moses. Indeed, a familiar acquaintance with the Egyptian method is so frequently betrayed by the Hebrew legislator, as to furnish grounds for a suspicion that, in giving the dates of the Exodus, he might actually be using the Egyptian manner of computation.

;

In the first place, the very name of the month in which the event occurred is suggestive; for Abib is the same name as the Coptic Ebib, written by the Greeks 'EQ, the eleventh Egyptian month. The Hebrews originally had no names for their months but designated them by their numeral order. Had it been otherwise, no writer had such frequent opportunities of giving their names as Moses, whose numerous legislative ritual ordinances would oblige him to specify as distinctly as possible the periods of their observance, and in whose records of primeval history so many chronological references occur. It is therefore very singular that the only month to which he does attach a name-a month, too, connected with events which occurred in Egypt-should be found bearing a name so decidedly Egyptian as Abib.

Some etymologists, however on the supposition that it must be a Hebrew proper name-have strained etymology to interpret the word with reference to a Hebrew root, as signifying 'green ears of corn,' and thus denoting the spring-season. But any good Hebraist, with a concordance at hand, can easily satisfy himself by a reference to the original Hebrew text itself, that Åbib N neither means green ears of corn, nor anything else green. It is an augmented form of the root 28, conveying a general idea of derivation, origin, or production: whence y, a father;' and a rarer form, expressing, according to the same radical sense applied to a plant, a productive or flourishing state; hence, fruits.a

6

I cannot so unequivocally condemn a misinterpretation of this word, sanctioned even by our best lexicons, without adducing all available proofs of the true sense