purposes, and are therefore rightly to be cared for by sacredly ordained officers.

3. And there is the due stimulating of the Church's members to a systematic liberality towards the Church's mission-work. To sustain a regular flow of their liberality, an organized plan for receiving it is needful. And it is the duty of the deacon, by himself, or by collectors under his supervision, periodically to gather in from his own allotted district the free-will offerings of the people, and to see that, when so gathered in, they are in due course applied to the furtherance of the objects for which they were contributed.

4. And, in the doing of this, what room for friendly intercourse and mutual help! The healthy tone of a congregation is stimulated by a regular circulation of its officers amongst its members, and in the conduct of meetings for religious conversation and prayer. In visiting from house to house, for which the periodical collection of the bounty of the brethren gives the opportunity, there is a field of Christian usefulness, delightfully interesting, and of width enough to occupy all the sanctified energies of the earnest and loving man of God.

Associated with the pastor and elder in the deliberative session, where plans of usefulness and improvement are originated, the deacon's local knowledge is claimed and afforded. From the chamber of council he goes forth, the administrator, to put the well-considered plan into practical operation.

And he who uses the office of a deacon well purchases for himself a good degree-a good degree in the reflex good which his own better nature gathers from works of faith and labours of love; a good degree in the enviable estimation he is held in for his work's sake; a good degree, in the promised "Well done" for the good and faithful servant, acknowledged by the Master as his benefactor-" For inasmuch as ye did it unto one of the least of these, ye did it unto me."

"A good degree." "Such is the will of God." (I am using language first heard from the pulpit of Regent Square in affectionate tribute to John Angell James.) "Such are the beneficent offices towards our brethren which our gracious Master is pleased to accept as offerings of affection to himself. They involve some sacrifice. They require time and thought, toil and selfdenial; nay, they sometimes require what is more life-wasting than the sweat of the brow-the sweat of the brain, the exhausting expenditure of mind, the pouring forth of affection, and thought, and feeling. But it is well worth while. It is the only way to follow the worthies; it is the only way to follow the Forerunner himself, and join the cloud of witnesses; it is the only way to make delightful hereafter to ourselves the reminiscences of our earthly sojourn; and, after passing away to the everlasting habitations, it is the only way to survive a little longer here in those best shrines the grateful memories of the good. And thus to work hard through the day is the true plan to fall softly on sleep at its close-no thorn in the pillow, no dread of next awaking; the gentle "good night," and faint sobs of survivors, melting into angels' songs and heaven's "good morrow;" the work finished, the world made better, the generation served, the Master glorified."

ON THE NATURE OF SUBSTITUTION.*

ALL who have thought on the subject of the atonement, and especially in connection with the controversies of these days, will have seen the necessity of forming right notions of substitution before we can clearly understand the subject of the atonement itself; or that, in fact, our ideas of the atonement will just be according to our ideas of substitution.

to us.

Substitution is, literally, standing in the place of another, or acting in the place of another. A substitute is one who acts for another; or, in the case of suffering, who suffers for another. In the transactions of life substitution is not an uncommon thing One who pays the debts of another is that other's substitute. In the high offices of law a substitute often performs the part of a principal. So far the word is plain and intelligible. It is when it is applied to the case of atonements that it suffers some obscuration, or that our ideas of it are not so precise and determinate. And yet we do not see why it should be any more unintelligible in this than in any other case, or in regard to any other matter. One would think that in the case of an atonement, substitution would just be what it is in everything else-standing in the place of another; and that it would be on the part of the substitute the doing of that thing which the person in whose place the substitute stands would otherwise have been required to do. In the instance of human punishment, the cases of atonement have been rare; history hardly furnishes an example. So true are the words of Scripture:-" SCARCELY for a righteous man will one die." The story of Damon and Pythias is the only instance of substitution that occurs But supposing the instances had been as frequent as they are rare, it would have been the substitution of one person for another, and that person doing the very thing which would have been required to be done by that other. Pythias put himself in the place of his friend Damon, in case the latter should not return in time to suffer, himself, the death which he had been condemned to die. Pythias was the substitute of Damon, and would have died in his room had not Damon returned in time to redeem his pledge; and, along with the devotion of Pythias, to give such a proof of human virtue as melted the heart of the tyrant by whose sentence he was to suffer. Such is plainly substitution; and we see not why any refinement or ingenuity should have given such a gloss to the subject as to pervert the ideas of substitution altogether, and make it impossible to perceive in the atonement, which is theorised upon and contended for, anything like substitution at all. The case of Zaleucus is the favourite one of these modern theorisers, as if that was substitution--although, even in this instance, there was one main element of substitution, viz., suffering for another. In substitution, strict substitution, or rather, proper substitution, there are these two things— the substitution of a person; and not the substitution of a punishment, but the bearing of the same punishment which would have fallen to be endured by the party for whom the substitution takes place. It is not substitution without these. According to the modern views, atonement, properly speaking, is the substitution of punishment, and not of person; one punishment being accepted for another; and it might as well be accepted in the person who should have borne the original punishment, as in another who stands in his stead; or, the system of expedients being introduced in the plan of government to evade punishments, we do not see why one expedient may not be as good as another. According to these views, it is not an atonement if there

* This able article appeared in the "Free Church Magazine," September, 1847.

purposes, and are therefore rightly to be cared for by sacredly ordained officers.

3. And there is the due stimulating of the Church's members to a systematic liberality towards the Church's mission-work. To sustain a regular flow of their liberality, an organized plan for receiving it is needful. And it is the duty of the deacon, by himself, or by collectors under his supervision, periodically to gather in from his own allotted district the free-will offerings of the people, and to see that, when so gathered in, they are in due course applied to the furtherance of the objects for which they were contributed.

4. And, in the doing of this, what room for friendly intercourse and mutual help! The healthy tone of a congregation is stimulated by a regular circulation of its officers amongst its members, and in the conduct of meetings for religious conversation and prayer. In visiting from house to house, for which the periodical collection of the bounty of the brethren gives the opportunity, there is a field of Christian usefulness, delightfully interesting, and of width enough to occupy all the sanctified energies of the earnest and loving man of God.

Associated with the pastor and elder in the deliberative session, where plans of usefulness and improvement are originated, the deacon's local knowledge is claimed and afforded. From the chamber of council he goes forth, the administrator, to put the well-considered plan into practical operation.

And he who uses the office of a deacon well purchases for himself a good degree-a good degree in the reflex good which his own better nature gathers from works of faith and labours of love; a good degree in the enviable estimation he is held in for his work's sake; a good degree, in the promised "Well done" for the good and faithful servant, acknowledged by the Master as his benefactor-" For inasmuch as ye did it unto one of the least of these, ye did it unto me.'

"A good degree." "Such is the will of God." (I am using language first heard from the pulpit of Regent Square in affectionate tribute to John Angell James.) "Such are the beneficent offices towards our brethren which our gracious Master is pleased to accept as offerings of affection to himself. They involve some sacrifice. They require time and thought, toil and selfdenial; nay, they sometimes require what is more life-wasting than the sweat of the brow-the sweat of the brain, the exhausting expenditure of mind, the pouring forth of affection, and thought, and feeling. But it is well worth while. It is the only way to follow the worthies; it is the only way to follow the Forerunner himself, and join the cloud of itnesses; it is the only way to make delightful hereafter to ourselves the reminiscences of our earthly sojourn; and, after passing away to the everlasting habitations, it is the only way to survive a little longer here in those best shrines the grateful memories of the good. And thus to work hard through the day is the true plan to fall softly on sleep at its close--no thorn in the pillow, no dread of next awaking; the gentle "good night," and faint sobs of survivors, melting into angels' songs and heaven's "good morrow;" the work finished, the world made better, the generation served, the Master glorified."

ON THE NATURE OF SUBSTITUTION.*

ALL who have thought on the subject of the atonement, and especially in connection with the controversies of these days, will have seen the necessity of forming right notions of substitution before we can clearly understand the subject of the atonement itself; or that, in fact, our ideas of the atonement will just be according to our ideas of substitution.

Substitution is, literally, standing in the place of another, or acting in the place of another. A substitute is one who acts for another; or, in the case of suffering, who suffers for another. In the transactions of life substitution is not an uncommon thing One who pays the debts of another is that other's substitute. In the high offices of law a substitute often performs the part of a principal. So far the word is plain and intelligible. It is when it is applied to the case of atonements that it suffers some obscuration, or that our ideas of it are not so precise and determinate. And yet we do not see why it should be any more unintelligible in this than in any other case, or in regard to any other matter. One would think that in the case of an atonement, substitution would just be what it is in everything else-standing in the place of another; and that it would be on the part of the substitute the doing of that thing which the person in whose place the substitute stands would otherwise have been required to do. In the instance of human punishment, the cases of atonement have been rare; history hardly furnishes an example. So true are the words of Scripture:-" SCARCELY for a righteous man will one die." The story of Damon and Pythias is the only instance of substitution that occurs to us. But supposing the instances had been as frequent as they are rare, it would have been the substitution of one person for another, and that person doing the very thing which would have been required to be done by that other. Pythias put himself in the place of his friend Damon, in case the latter should not return in time to suffer, himself, the death which he had been condemned to die. Pythias was the substitute of Damon, and would have died in his room had not Damon returned in time to redeem his pledge; and, along with the devotion of Pythias, to give such a proof of human virtue as melted the heart of the tyrant by whose sentence he was to suffer. Such is plainly substitution; and we see not why any refinement or ingenuity should have given such a gloss to the subject as to pervert the ideas of substitution altogether, and make it impossible to perceive in the atonement, which is theorised upon and contended for, anything like substitution at all. The case of Zaleucus is the favourite one of these modern theorisers, as if that was substitution-although, even in this instance, there was one main element of substitution, viz., suffering for another. In substitution, strict substitution, or rather, proper substitution, there are these two thingsthe substitution of a person; and not the substitution of a punishment, but the bearing of the same punishment which would have fallen to be endured by the party for whom the substitution takes place. It is not substitution without these. According to the modern views, atonement, properly speaking, is the substitution of punishment, and not of person; one punishment being accepted for another; and it might as well be accepted in the person who should have borne the original punishment, as in another who stands in his stead; or, the system of expedients being introduced in the plan of government to evade punishments, we do not see why one expedient may not be as good as another. According to these views, it is not an atonement if there * This able article appeared in the "Free Church Magazine," September, 1847.

is the same punishment as would have been otherwise inflicted; or, at all events, it would appear from these views that the further away from the actual punishment the expedient adopted, the more does it partake of the nature of an atonement. An atonement is something done, it would appear (without saying any more about it, and no more can be said about it), by which, or in virtue of which, the actual infliction of punishment may be evaded. Even the etymology of the word is pressed into the service; and an atonement being an at-one-ment, is enough to show that if a reconciliation can be effected by anything that may satisfy law, whether the law is actually satisfied or not; that is, whether the demands of the law have been complied with or not, or the law has not just let down its demands, and been contented with a mere expedient in place of satisfaction; an atonement has been made i. e., a reconciliation has been effected. A reconciliation has been effected; but whether by an atonement or not is another thing. And here comes the difficulty in regard to the divine atonement-has the actual punishment been borne which the sinner should have suffered, so that law is satisfied and justice is appeased? Now, in regard to this question there is this to be stated, that it is impossible for us to determine what was suffered by Christ; and that till this is determined, we are warranted to say that Christ suffered For us, or for sinners, and that he was, therefore, strictly a substitute for sinners-their substitute in the strictest sense of the term. We hold that it is rash and presumptuous speculation to inquire into the nature of Christ's sufferings, and form ideas about them, which can only be the conjecture or suggestion of our own imaginations. I would not intrude within the mysterious garden, and upon the mysterious agony there; or attempt, as some have done, to weigh the exact amount of these words on the cross, which were uttered amid a darkness that seems to have been emblematic of what Christ actually complained of the hidings of his Father's countenance: "My God, my God, why hast thou forsaken me?" I know not what Christ endured in these moments, nor can any say what he endured. That he was suffering as the substitute of sinners, I believe. That he was enduring the wrath of God, as their substitute, I cannot doubt. How he was doing so I am not required to determine. The agony of Christ can never be comprehended in this life, and will probably never be comprehended in the next. One thing may be allowed, that Christ was not enduring the wrath of God as a guilty person; but can we presume to say that he was not enduring the wrath of God as a substitute for the guilty? Is not this the very thing in dispute? To endure the wrath of God for the guilty. Can any one presume to say this was impossible? God was not angry with Christ on account of his own sins; but did not God's anger rest on him on account of the sins of others? Those who affirm the contrary have other ideas of Scripture than I entertain, and can go a step farther in determining the precise nature of Christ's sufferings than I would venture. What means this expression?" Being in an agony he prayed more earnestly, and his sweat was as it were great drops of blood falling down to the ground." Why did he seek the cup to be withdrawn? Was he not forsaken of God? And was there not the expression of God's anger in this temporary forsaking?

It would appear, from the general tenor of the language of Scripture on the subject of Christ's sufferings and death, that he was a substitute. What could be more precise and satisfactory than the language of Isaiah? Surely he hath borne our griefs, and carried our sorrows; yet we did esteem him stricken, smitten of God, and afflicted. But he was wounded for our transgressions, he was bruised for our iniquities; the chastisement of our peace was upon him, and with his stripes we are healed. All we, like sheep,