timacy of the argument, or basis of the reasoning, but here they failed. They bantered, but soon found, or ought to have found, that that did not befit the subject. They endeavoured to reason, but fairly proved they had lost their reason or their christian temper. In fact, they writhed under the torture of witnessing the popular display of a cause which is every day growing in strength, as its opponents are declining in numbers and in power.

Is it then come to this, that discussion, however honorable and however dispassionate, is not to be tolerated, if it involves the interests of a dominant establishment, or the endowments of a secular priesthood? Are men to look at truth only through the medium of their passions and their possessions, and to determine its claims by the law of patronage, and not the law of Christ? Is it come to this, that the best men are to be vilified, and the purest motives denounced at the very whisper of a wish to ascertain the will of heaven, and to settle the discords of the church at the foot of the cross? Are those who differ in opinion to be for ever divided in affection; or are differences never to be determined by the divine philosophy of reason, and the diviner inspiration of Scripture? we weep over fallen humanity and a degraded church! A man can now be neither patriot nor christian, but at the cost of martyrdom!

The general plan of the Evangelical Voluntary Church Association, is to advocate and extend, by means of public lectures, through the press, and in every other practicable way, the prin'ciple of voluntary churches.'. It is, in fact, at once a plan of enlightenment and of conciliation. The lectures are to be gratuitous; the society defraying the entire expense of employing well qualified lecturers to pervade the country, or, at least, to occupy some of its most important places. It is undoubted that, such advocacy is much needed; for not only do the prejudiced of every class need to be instructed and won to inquiry, but multitudes of professed voluntaries themselves require to be better informed with regard to the history and the true intent of their own avowed principles. With the plan of lecturing, it is intended soon to unite that of public meetings. This is wise, inasmuch as the platform is become, in our days, a very effective instrument of awakening the popular mind to the importance of subjects of the most surpassing interest; and, moreover, it is a legitimate and necessary method of obtaining support to the society. This proceeding will, naturally, soon connect itself with the formation of local auxiliaries which will bring corresponding members into useful combination, and exhibit a delightful phalanx for the worthy Times to contemplate. The committee are, we understand, perfectly up and doing.' Besides these efforts, from which important results may be anticipated, they have engaged one

whole side of the Hertford paper, called the Reformer,' already a spirited journal, which, under their own superintendence and with their own title, continually pours forth intelligent communications on the voluntary system. We refer to it as, in consequence, become worthy of additional patronage.

The first of the society's series of publications is now before us in the cheap form which adapts itself to the taste of the age. It is Mr. Burnet's lecture at Hertford: and is distingushed by all his characteristic qualities. We need only say it is worthy of his reputation, and we hope it will be very extensively circulated.

The general design is to explain and illustrate two definitions; the one of what Christianity is; namely, a great moral system, ' revealed from heaven, and capable of universal application; diffusing its principles by the force of their own evidence, and 'maintaining them by their moral power over the minds and con'duct of those who feel its influence;' the other, of what a church establishment of religion is, namely, a national institution, dictated by the votes of the majority of the community, diffusing its principles by legal sanction, and maintaining them by the force of law.' We can only afford space for a single extract, the character of which will, doubtless, induce our readers to wish to peruse the whole.

Suppose, then, we come to the New Testament, we find there that the maintenance of the cause of Christ is connected exclusively with the principle I have just laid down-the operation of truth on the mind. And the apostle reasons on this principle with the Corinthians throughout the ninth chapter of his second epistle to the church at Corinth. He merely reasons the case with them. Does he insist on any thing as a right, which he was entitled to demand? No; he had a right to support, it is true, and he says so; but rather than press that right, even by moral suasion, he would work with his own hands, and thus avoid the necessity for such a demand. And if he did so, do you think he would ever have turned to the state, had it then been Christian, and asked its sword to aid him in enforcing a demand which he would rather have worked with his own hands than even urge? Would he have asked the constable's aid to secure it? The whole tenor of the Christianity of the New Testament is against this idea. And to do our friends on the opposite side justice, they never come to the New Testament for support. If, then, they do not come to the New Testament for the support of their system-and if, as we have seen, the Old has nothing to do with their system-must not our friends allow that Christianity ought to be left to its own principles, not to the power of the state, but to its own power? and, if so left, can it not be extended through all the kingdoms of the world, by the influence and example of its professors? Let it be carried into the distant portions of the earth, in its pure and unadulterated form; not to touch upon the

politics of any kingdom. Let it thus go to Turkey; let it thus go to China; let it thus go to Japan; to any state, the most barbarous on the face of the earth; let its messengers be able to say, ' Here is a system that connects itself with no politics under heaven, that touches no state affairs, that is designed to influence solely the minds and hearts of men; and then the emperor of China, and the emperor of Turkey, and the emperor of Japan, can permit their subjects, without the least apprehension, to believe this system-finding that it touches no cabinet, that it interferes with no state movements, and that there is no connexion between the Church and State. We cannot tell them so now. We cannot address them thus on the principles of a State Establishment. What are we obliged to tell them if we tell them the truth? This book is part and parcel of the laws of England; the mode of supporting the ministers of religion is described in these laws; the government have the burden of raising the money with which these ministers are sustained. The churches are supported by the government.' 'What!' says the sovereign, have the government all this to do for their subjects? If I admit this book, then, into my dominions, I shall have to build churches and pay pastors, and do all this with state money. Why, you are coming to change my government without my consent. I imagined that you were coming to teach my people virtuous principles, and take them to heaven when they die; but you are going to change our constitution, and subvert the laws of our empire, while we are alive.' Could we refuse to allow that he reasoned soundly? 'Away, then, with Christianity; tell me what you may of that, or any other system, by which men are to be pure and happy on earth, and by which they are to rise to heaven when they die; but do not bring a system to me which will alter my government, which will raise up a band of emissaries whom I must pay. Do you expect the tithes of the Celestial Empire?' Would he not be reasoning soundly? I do not know really how it could be met. Why, you tell me, he would say, that these ministers have a tenth of the country to support them. Do you suppose that I should allow such emissaries to settle in China?' What reply can we make? But let us be able to say, 'This book is maintained by the congregations converted by its instrumentality-this book is maintained by the spirit of the Christianity it diffuses; it quarters no emissaries upon the country; it has nothing to do with politics; it seeks no state support for its ministers.' Then, and not till then, shall we recover from the effects of a system which has so long proved injurious to the diffusion of Christianity through the world.'

Scarcely had the ink dried upon the last page of our manuscript, when we received an intimation, that the Christian Influence Society had engaged the Rev. Hugh M'Neile, of Liverpool, to deliver a course of six lectures at the Hanover Square Rooms, On the Scriptural Character of the English National Church Establishment, and the Duty of the Legislature so to extend it as 'to maintain its national dimensions, together with some of the

VOL. VII.

2 E

'circumstances which impede its practical efficiency, and the best ' remedies for such defects.' This course of lectures is avowedly in continuation of the lucubrations of Dr. Chalmers in the summer of 1838, under the auspices of the same association; and, doubtless, they will all have been delivered before the issuing of this article from the press. We cannot help, however, expressing at once our unfeigned satisfaction on the occasion of this announcement. It places the matter in debate, between churchmen and dissenters, just where it should be placed; and we await the result of these lectures, and of the present movements, both in and out of the Establishment, with much joyous anticipation.

When the first rumor of the probability of these lectures being delivered, reached our ears, we are free to confess that we were full of questionings and doubts. We entertained no small apprehension that we should be compelled again to fag along the dry and dusty road which ecclesiastical polemics had so often trodden, and on which they had dragged us after them, in spite of our outcries to be conducted along a better path. We were in truth, afraid, that we should be forced to go through the everlasting iteration of common places on expediency, tradition, councils, and creeds; whereas now, it appears, and we are refreshed at the thoughtour controversialist (or lecturer) will appeal to Scripture. That is exactly what we want, and have never yet been able to gain from our opponents. Again and again we have said, Scripture, Scripture -let us come to the word and testimony. Let that speak, and we will hear; we will obey. It is for truth we inquire, not system; it is for christianity we plead, not party.

One word more. We trust we are not misled in our hopes, and that we shall not find we have misunderstood the purpose and plan of the lecturer. We hope he will not, like his predecessor, smother us with words; but keep to the point. We hope he will reason, and not abuse; give evidence fairly, and not pronounce judgment prematurely; but let the world determine for themselves upon the real merits of the controversy. We promise we will do our best to understand all his statements; we will give his volume(for printing, we presume, will follow lecturing) a cool, careful, and, as far as may be, impartial examination.

383

Art. II. A Lexicon of the Greek Language, for the Use of Colleges and Schools; containing, 1. A Greek-English Lexicon, combining the Advantages of an Alphabetical and Derivative Arrangement; II. An English-Greek Lexicon, more copious than any that has yet appeared. To which is added, A Concise Grammar of the Greek Language. By the Rev. J. A. GILES, LL.D. 8vo. London: Longman and Co.

To compile an elementary vocabulary and grammar of a modern language with which a man is well acquainted, is no very arduous task; although it is much harder than those suppose who have never tried. But when something more perfect is aimed at; to convey to another a full and systematic account of an entire language;--even with all the assistance derived from previous laborers in the same field, this is indeed a work of no common intellect, and needing various qualifications. If it be an ancient language with which we are dealing, the difficulties are vastly multiplied; especially because we are then expected to embrace the changes which it underwent in a series of ages. Beside the various dialects under the term Greek (to confine our attention to this tongue), we have to consider the altered phases which the common Greek exhibits in writers of different times and places.

No small difficulty depends on the immense number of facts to be recorded; for unless an orderly distribution of them be effected, the learner will constantly be at a loss. He may, as it were, starve in the midst of plenty. But such distribution is by no means easy of attainment: and as we apprehend that there is much confusion of thought abroad on this subject, we shall a little expand our views concerning it.

Nothing is more obvious than the primary distinction between a grammar and a dictionary. The former lays down all general principles discovered in a language: the pervading analogies which determine its structure and its idiom: the latter furnishes us with details; with the stuff or material itself of which the language is composed. It is true that neither of the two accurately preserves its own limits. Numerous details, as of irregular nouns and verbs, are ordinarily registered in a grammar: some grammatical doctrines are occasionally expounded in a dictionary. The latter circumstance is more rare, and the former is limited by convenience; so that on the whole this broad division is sufficiently intelligible and pretty well preserved.

But when so great a mass of matter presses on us as is con