correspondencies is among the most fascinating occupations of the mind. It has all the charm of poetry. On this the parables, figures, and metaphors of Scripture are founded. But these, except in prophetic imagery, which must receive a part of its interpretation in its fulfilment, readily speak their own meaning, to the plain and sincere reader, more accurately and powerfully than mere naked literality. This is heaven-wide of that correspondence of Swedenborg, which melts away the obvious meaning into some interior angelic significance that requires a new seer and revelator to unfold it. This obliterates all metes and bounds, all articulate sense, in the meaning of Scripture. Such an exaggeration and perversion of a beautiful truth makes it a monstrous error. But still it affords boundless scope for imaginative soarings, ecstasies, and revelries. And therefore to those who are Unitarians, or entertain the repugnance of Unitarians to the faith and practice obviously taught in Scripture and embraced by the church of Christ, while they nauseate the barren negations and dead husks of mere Socinianism, Swedenborgianism has presented an enchanting side.

Further still, the Swedenborgians maintain a more positive, earnest, strict type of practical religion than the Unitarians; thus often satisfying consciences that could not be quiet under the religious indifference and inanity of Socinianism. Eminent integrity, gentleness, charity towards men, with a strict observance of the Sabbath, and a tone of reverence and devoutness in the public worship and services of that day, have drawn towards them many, who, finding the cross a stumbling-block or foolishness, yet crave a more earnest religion than they find among the adherents of liberal Christianity. So they espouse this system which, in its own fashion, is alive with a zeal for God, though not according to knowledge.

Thus we have a partial explanation of the power and prevalence of this system among a select class, in spite of its unscriptural absurdities and enormities. But though an explanation, it is no justification of it, or of adhesion to it. The attitude it assumes in regard to the person and work of Christ, and all the fundamentals of Christianity, stamp it as one form of

Antichrist. "Being ignorant of God's righteousness, and going about to establish their own righteousness, they have not submitted themselves unto the righteousness of God. For Christ is the end of the law for righteousness to every one that believeth." Rom. x. 3, 4.

ART. IV.-The Position of the Book of Psalms in the Plan of the Old Testament.

THE Old Testament is in several respects a unit. As it is contemplated in literary history and in diplomatic criticism, it has an external and mechanical unity, inasmuch as it constitutes one volume, its sundry treatises having been collected at a very ancient period, since which time it has had a common history, the record of its preservation, circulation, and interpretation, is the same for all its parts, and the principles and methods by which the state of its text is to be ascertained or its true text restored, are the same throughout. In the question of the canon, or the evidences of a supernatural revelation, or the doctrine of Divine inspiration, we recognize beyond this external unity, and lying at the basis of it, a formal oneness of its several parts, a unity of source, and, in so far as this determines it, of character, the whole being inspired of God and divinely authoritative, constituting the sum of the inspired writings belonging to the former dispensation. Such a unity, however, might be little more than negative, distinguishing the Old Testament Scriptures as a body of writings to be classed by themselves, because diverse in this important particular from all others, but without establishing any positive relation or intimate connection between themselves. Again, systematic theology attributes to the Old Testament a real and essential unity, inasmuch as the whole is occupied with one great theme, the will of God, in regard to man's duty and salvation; and this is consistently treated throughout, so that entire harmony reigns everywhere, and each part agrees perfectly with every other.

But beyond all this, deeper than all, and comprehending all, the Old Testament is possessed of a structural and organic unity, exhibiting not only harmony, but arrangement and skilful disposition. Not only do the revealed teachings contained in it agree perfectly together, but there is a method in their communication. The unity, which we discover, is not that of a tame uniformity. There are endless diversities in detail; yet with all, there is not only no jar or discord, but nothing fortuitous or at random. Everything is designed agreeably to a wellconsidered, prearranged plan and purpose, so that nothing is superfluous, nothing lacking, and nothing out of place. Above the human agents yet controlling them and operating through them, we trace a Divine scheme unfolding from first to last. Each part has its specific function in the plan of the whole, and contributes in its measure to fill up the general design. And there is a reason and a fitness, which determines not only the aggregate amount and purport of its revelations, but which graduates the proportion of its several parts and fixes their relative position. There is a propriety in each being what it is and standing where it does. So that to alter the disposition of its parts, even if the whole mass were retained in its integrity, would be a dislocation and dismemberment, impair its organism, disturb its well-adjusted relations, and obliterate some of the traces of His wisdom, who arranges all things by number, weight, and measure.

We propose now to take an individual book of the Old Testament, and inquire into its position and meaning in this general scheme. With this design we have selected the book of Psalms, on account of its intrinsic interest and importance, as well as because it will afford a sufficient specimen of the method of study to be pursued in such inquiries, and supply a test of the correctness of the views already indicated.

Looking at the Old Testament in its organic character, three things are necessary to the due appreciation of any book that it contains, viz., a knowledge, first, of the constitution of the book itself; secondly, of the place it holds and the function it fulfils, in that more general division of the Old Testament to which it belongs, that is to say, in the inspired writings of its own class or period; and thirdly, of the relation in which it VOL. XXXIX.-NO. II. 33

stands to the Old Testament as a whole, and the part assigned to it in the work of that entire dispensation or economy.

In regard to the first of the points suggested, the constitution of the book of Psalms, we shall confine ourselves to such a general consideration of its character as will prepare the way for the second and third points which form the main topic before us, its relation to other books of its own period or class in the Old Testament, and its position and value in the scheme of the whole. It would be impossible in the limited space at our disposal, as well as foreign to our more immediate purpose, to characterize the individual psalms or even to discuss the internal structure and divisions of the book and the mutual relations of its several parts. We are, however, concerned to inquire into the formative principle of this book, by which its contents and extent are determined, which gives it its specific character and constitutes it an organic part of the Old Testament revelation.

Each of the books of the prophets represents the work performed by one inspired servant of God, an individual organ employed in the communication of his revelation. The specific task committed to each, by the Divine author of the revelation, defines the function of the book in the economy of the whole. But the Psalms not only consist of one hundred and fifty distinct compositions, varied in their style and subject, each complete in itself and unconnected with any other, but these have besides proceeded from different authors and even belong to different ages. There are psalms from Moses, David, Solomon, Asaph, Ethan, Heman, and the sons of Korah, besides fortyone whose authors are unknown, and even the time when they were written can only be doubtfully conjectured. Some critics have entertained the opinion that there are psalms of as late a date as the period of the Maccabees, which describe the troubles and triumphs of that eventful and glorious epoch. But although this conclusion is at variance with the well-established fact that the canon of the Old Testament was definitively closed before that time, there can be no doubt that some of the psalms were written during and after the Babylonish exile. This book was accordingly prepared at intervals extending over the entire period of the composition of the Old Testament itself.

Shall we then seek to ascertain the organic relations of this book and its function in the revelation of the Old Testament, by sundering the psalms which belong to different periods, and then in each period distinguishing the psalms of each different author, presuming that each psalmist has his specific function to perform, and each successive age of psalmody has its peculiar mission? But whatever advantages may accrue from the adoption of this method, and however it may contribute to a better knowledge of the history of sacred song, and to a fuller acquaintance with the mutual relations of these inspired lyrics, this belongs properly to the study of the inward structure and organization of the book itself. In respect to the general structure and plan of the Old Testament this book must, like the rest, be contemplated as a unit.

For, 1. The form and compass of each book is authoritative as well as its contents. And in this particular instance there must be a reason why all these various compositions from different authors and different ages were included in a single collection instead of being dispersed in several. The principle of unity which presided over the collection and brought it together into one whole, will indicate to us its specific character and its organic relations.

2. It is impracticable to divide the psalms with certainty and accuracy either in respect to their age or authorship, so that we must either seek another mode of fixing their organic relations, or we must content ourselves with the results of a vague approximation and abandon the hope of obtaining anything more. The latest and best results of criticism concede the correctness of the titles to the psalms, to which it was at one time the fashion to refuse all credit, thus turning everything topsy-turvy, and throwing the whole matter open to wild conjecture, with no fixed or reliable criteria on which to base it.

Still one-third (50) of the whole number have no titles, or none which afford any hint of the author or of the occasion upon which they were composed. If the absence of titles could be compensated by proofs or evidences of any other sort, this objection might be removed; but the wide divergence in the results of those, who have presumed to speak oracularly on the