loftiness of mind and profound respect as to the spirit of the Gospel. He grappled with the doctrines which St. Augustine had defended with the stern earnestness of a man who felt that they were vital to salvation were revelations of infinite wisdom which could not be disregarded. He recognized the majesty of God and the littleness of man, and these were fundamental; -on these truths were built his whole system. A sublime realism pervades his writings, like those of Bernard and Arnauld. Like Pascal, he showed the everlasting gulf which lies between Reason and Faith. Like Bacon, he showed that Persuaded of this, he did not

one would not explain the other. attempt to harmonize, with his intellectual pride, the things that angels desire to know. Here he was like all the great masterintellects which have adorned our race the real giants of the mind who have penetrated to the limits of useless inquiry. Here he was unlike those quacks and pretenders who have disbelieved or ridiculed what they could not understand, from those flippant philosophers who combated St. Augustine, to the observers of rocks, and shells, and bugs, who call themselves savants, in our own day-wise men, like the Sophoi among the Greeks. There is no profound theology which does not recognize the helplessness and misery of man until aided by supernatural grace. The cant about the dignity of human nature is Pagan and shallow. The Bible speaks of man as a worm of the dust defiled and polluted by sin- and hopelessly enslaved by the Prince of the Power of the air, until released by a greater arm than his. When man is seen in his true relations to God, then his divine sovereignty is accepted as the only ground of rest; and it is divested of every repulsive featurewhich the proud and rebellious profess to see in its application. We lose ourselves in the divine glory, and attain the end for which we were created. God be merciful to me a sinner-O God, thou infinite and holy, give me the spirit of abasement and gratitude; it is then, in these depths of penitence we begin to live, and from these only do we begin to rise. Such is the spirit of Bossuet's theology, in accordance with the views of St. Augustine, pervading all his writings, and carried by him to the chamber of death. From the helplessness of man, of which Augustine was so firmly persuaded, by his own experiences and

the word of God, Bossuet was led, like him, to meditate on the Power which had rescued him from bondage, and his profound meditations made him exalt the Divine Majesty and Sovereignty as the highest subject of thought, as well as the only glory of the universe. Not on a mystic theology would he, like Plato and Porphyry, repose, but in the arms of Christian faith, which alone explained the origin of life and the destiny of man. A positive religion alone could bring him consolation, and he embraced, with profound conviction, the dogmas he did not profess or seek to explain on principles of reason. The spiritual philosophy with which this doctrine harmonized, inspired him with incomparable eloquence, and set at defiance his mental doubts and weaknesses. And Bossuet was also a stern guardian of public morals, as he was of the Catholic faith. He did not hesitate to expostulate with the King himself, in view of the scandals he created, though he was too much of a blind worshipper of royalty to reprove him openly in his sermons as Bourdaloue did not scruple to do. Like Fenélon, he attempted to impress on the mind of the royal egotist, that he reigned for the good of his people, rather than for his own pleasure. He preached the vanity of military glory to an infatuated people as he did to a blinded monarch. He lifted up his voice against theatres, and all demoralizing intellectual enjoyments. At the court of an absolute prince, he was a censor rather than a flat

terer.

Thus this great man lived, a father of the Church, surrounded with admiring friends, and universally revered for his learning, sanctity, and lofty principles. As he grew old, he retired more and more, to the quiet repose of his diocesan city; but literary and theological labors employed his mind and hand to the last. He resigned himself, without bitterness, to the great disappointment of his life in not attaining an archbishopric and a cardinal's hat. He was never heard to murmur the words of Strafford, "Nolite fidem principibus," and faith and piety closed, to all human eyes, the wounds of his ambition. A lamp was always seen burning in his chamber, and he frequently arose from his bed to write down the thoughts which visited his waking hours. He slept but little, and lived with frugality, although he dispensed a splendid hospitality. His opulence for

tunately permitted him to neglect domestic affairs, and he led a life of alternate study and active labor, devoted to the duties of his cathedral, yet finding leisure for conversation and familiar intercourse with friends, among whom might be mentioned those most distinguished in France for learning and renown. The conqueror of Rocroi was one of the most ardent of his admirers. D'Ormesson the Administrator, D'Herbelot the Orientalist, Pellisson the Dramatist, La Bruyère, Boileau himself, Racine, Santeuil, Fleury, Ledieu, Bourdaloue, Massillon, were his 'chosen companions. He was cheerful and easy in conversation, but he avoided jests, and raillery, and laughter. He was accessible and courteous to all. His nature, however, was reserved, proud, and ambitious, and dogmatism was the stain of his private life.

He died 1704, worn out with a lingering disease, leaving no equals to succeed him, and a fame which has not been dimmed by time. France lost in him one of the most enlightened of her patriots, and the church one of the brightest of her ornaa man of genius a man faithful to his trust a man of unblemished virtue—a man who fought a fight, and believed in God.

ments

But his greatness is seen in himself rather than in his works -one of the highest prerogatives of those who are immortal, illustrated by Michael Angelo, Dr. Johnson, Sir Robert Walpole, Mackintosh, Dr. Dwight, Henry Clay, - in the force of character and marked individuality, rather than in original genius or majestic labors. His memory is august. He is identified with the glory of France, and the splendid reign of Louis XIV. It was his own nature that survives his writings. These are not much prized except as bursts of magnificent wordshigh-sounding witnesses of the insignificance of those who were only great in their generation. But his name, and example, and influence still live. Nor will either his country or his Church ever suffer him to be forgotten, since he reflected immeasurable glory on both.

ARTICLE IV.

COMMUNING WITH SPIRITS.

ONE of the popular opinions of the day is that all systems of Idolatry are only so many different modes of worshipping the true God; that though the forms of Idolatry differ from those of Christianity, yet one and the same God is worshipped through them all; and to this it is added, that the peculiarities of each form of worship are those best adapted for the people that use them.

We do not propose to examine all that has been advanced in favor of this opinion, for that were an endless task, and would lead us very far away from that infallible guide which is the only arbiter in such a debate ; but our purpose is to consider the subject briefly in the light of the written word.

This testifies that all outside of Christ is under the control of Satan. For the divine commission of Paul appointed him "to turn men from darkness unto light, and from the power of Satan unto God." (Acts xxvi. 18.) And he testifies to the Ephesians, that previous to conversion they "walked according to the course of this world," and that was according to "the prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the children of disobedience." (Eph. ii. 2.) Satan is elsewhere called the Prince of this world, the God of this world, and is represented as "blinding the minds of them which believe not, lest the light of the glorious gospel of Christ, who is the image of God, should shine unto them." (2 Cor. iv. 4.) These Scriptures would lead us to infer that we must either serve God or Satan; and that all refusal to worship God, in his appointed way, is so much service rendered to Satan, and places us entirely at his mercy; or, to use the expressive words of Scripture, makes us to be led captive by him at his will.

It may be objected to this, that there is nothing in the "course of this world," as it now appears, to justify such awful statements. That this may be so, to the superficial observer, we do not deny; but the danger does not lie in the apparent charac

ter of any act whereby we conform to this world or serve its Prince; no, nor in the real nature of such an act viewed in itself alone. But the danger lies in this, that it is something whereby the Adversary is working out our eternal ruin. The act itself may seem like that tree in Eden, good and pleasant, and to be desired; but it brings death to every one who yields. to the temptation. The bait may be something wholesome in itself, but it conceals the fatal hook, and the enemy of God and man holds the other end of the line. Little do the simple ones, who play round the tempting bait, think of the Satanic eyes that watch their every motion. They may reason, “all natural instincts must be innocent; God would not create in me a taste for any gratification which I may not indulge; " but they forget that such reasoning would fill the earth with transgressions of the sixth, the seventh, the eighth, indeed of all the command

ments.

These general views would lead us to expect some special connection of Satan with Idolatry; if, indeed, the extensive prevalence of Idol worship did not of itself lead us to suspect some powerful secret influence coöperating with apparent causes that are themselves insufficient to explain the phenomenon.

But we are not left to deductions from general statements. The Bible explicitly affirms the connection of Satan with Idolatry. There is one passage especially that does this so plainly, we wonder it has not received more notice from students of the Bible. The apostle expressly declares, in his Epistle to the Corinthians, that "the things which the Gentiles sacrifice they sacrifice to devils and not to God." (1 Cor. x. 20.) This declaration is so much to the point as to claim particular attention in this connection, for if it means just what it says, it settles the question once for all.

The notion that heathens worship the true God only after a different manner from Christians, and the truth that whatever they sacrifice they sacrifice to devils and not to God, are totally irreconcilable. Either the modern notion is false, or the apostle affirms what is not true. The latter alternative we cannot think of for a moment. Holy men of God who spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost," (2 Pet. i. 21,) are infallible in all their teachings. How can they be other

66