them, as they regard our mutual welfare, to have an eye on our conduct, and to be prompt in acquainting us with our faults; and with sincerity and earnestness should we avail ourselves of the least hint from them to amend our characters.

We must listen likewise to the voice from the pulpit. It is the preacher's duty to adapt his instructions to the circumstances and wants of every hearer. If he draws them from his own experience, from his observations on society, and from the volume of inspiration, they will apply in a greater or less degree to every individual. We should therefore listen for our own direct improvement. We should listen as those who expect to give an account for the use made of all the means of virtue. We ought to listen as those who are deeply solicitous to be made wiser, better, and happier. And when we examine the scriptures to ascertain the correctness of the preacher's statements, we must never omit to prove our own hearts and lives by the same holy standard. Let us beware of that misplaced criticism, which wastes the precious moments when our recollections of what we have heard are the freshest, in idle comments on the preacher's talents. The first use we make of a sermon should be the application of it to our own hearts. He who neglects this, let him go to conventicle or to church, and hear the most gifted or the most indifferent preacher, is alike unprofited, and might as well not have gone to the house of worship at all.

Finally, we must hear to the voice of conscience. This inward monitor, we must daily seek to enlighten by the devout study of christian principles. We must let her admonitions guide us as implicitly as a man follows a

conductor whom he believes to be trust-worthy, through paths to himself all unknown. But we must never mistake the wicked suggestions of passion, or interest, or obstinacy for her instructions. We must not plead conscience as an excuse for any action, or any course of conduct, unless it is in strict accordance with the precepts and example of Jesus. Any feelings, or any actions which are not sanctioned by the plain rules and acknowledged spirit of his religion, are not the fruits of a healthy conscience. We must therefore, scrutinize every motive and principle of action, and bring them into subjection to the divine standard. And in order to succeed in our endeavors, we must ever accompany our hearing, our reading, our self-examination, and our self-cultivation with this humble ejaculation-Lord, cleanse thou me from secret faults, keep back thy servant also from presumptuous sins! B. W.

EXPLANATION OF TEXTS.

ROMANS ix. 5.

ST. PAUL begins this chapter by declaring in very strong terms his grief for the condition to which his own nation were to be reduced. This grief is enhanced by the consideration of those remarkable circumstances by which God had distinguished them from all other people, for so many ages. The most striking of these, he enumerates thus, "who are Israelites, whose was the adoption, and the glory, and the covenants, and the law, and the ritual service, and the promises; whose were the fathers, and of whom, according to the flesh, was the Christ; he who

was over all, being God blessed forever." This rendering is a little varied from the common English version, but not from the Greek construction. The phrase "to whom pertaineth" in our version does not answer to the original, but the translation we give does precisely correspond. The phrase "as concerning the flesh" is different from what our translators themselves give for the same Greek terms in the preceding verse, "kinsmen according to the flesh." The Jews were Paul's kinsmen, inasmuch as he was descended from a Jewish parentage. It was the pride of that people that the Messiah was to be of their own lineage. The only other change in the version we give, is a slight alteration in the punctuation, which we are warranted in making by the well known fact that the points as we now have them are of no authority whatever. The Apostle's design in the whole passage would lead him to crown his enumeration of Jewish privileges with that which was the most striking of all, that God was their king, sustaining the place of a political head over them. Their government was a Theocracy, and this above every thing else, made them a peculiar people. It was their national prerogative. The Apostle could not more naturally close an enumeration of Jewish privileges, than with this.

The writer from whom we have borrowed the substance of this explanation, (see Christian Disciple for Sept. and Oct. 1819, Review of Stuart's Letters,) has also stated a fact which confirms this understanding of the passage in the most satisfactory manner. In the controversies about the nature of Christ, which existed among the early fathers, the most Orthodox never applied to our Lord the title of "God over all." "On the contrary,

some of their number have expressly denied that this title belongs to him. It was applied to him by the Sabellians, and was considered as a distinguishing mark of their heresy." Would this text have been overlooked, if it was rendered by the Greek fathers themselves as it is now by Trinitarians?

LETTER OF A BOSTON GENTLEMAN TO A UNITARIAN

CLERGYMAN OF THAT CITY.

It is an old way of excusing a defection from a cause we have long supported, that of disparaging our associates in it, as no longer worthy our confidence and aid. But we believe this is not the real character of the pamphlet before us, however much appearances are against it. We think this gentleman has been led away by some strong and sudden impulses, or perhaps by some secret sympathies hitherto repressed by his better judgment, but now overpowering his reason, and producing a recoiling in the mind from its soundest conclusions in times past, as if they were treacherous,

As to the charges against Unitarians, if they are true, God grant we may profit by them to our amendment ! But it is natural to ask our accuser, if while he was of our number, he did not pray, give liberally, aid in all religious charities, such as Sunday schools, missions, and the like? We have reason to say that he did, that he was exemplary in these matters, unless we attribute this book to a wrong pen. If we are right, then he is a living testimony that one need not quit the Unitarian denomination in order to keep clear of all the faults he ascribes He has certainly not laid to his own charge any

to us.

such sins as would argue that his principles were ruining his soul. We wish he had confined himself to that topic, of the effects of Unitarianism on his own heart and life. It is invidious to draw comparisons between large bodies of men. We could easily make out a picture of Orthodoxy more shocking than his picture of his ancient friends. But we will not. We only say, that man must know a great deal, who is qualified to testify against some thousands of his fellow creatures, most of whom he never saw or heard of, that they do not pray in secret, are not spiritual in their thoughts, but are Sabbath-breakers and without benevolent affections, and profanely negligent of God and duty.

Upon the principle advanced in this pamphlet, no christian sect could stand its ground. What ought an unconverted Corinthian to have inferred from the drunkenness of the church in Corinth, during the celebration of the supper? What ought to have been said of Christianity when all Christians were Roman Catholics, and all Roman Catholics bought indulgences to sin? What was the religion of those worth, who having fled from home and country, to escape persecution, had no sooner become settled in a new dwelling-place, than they would fain hang Quakers, and burn old women for witches?

The whole principle is unsound. The gospel must be judged by its own truths, and not by the conduct of those who embrace those truths. Unitarianism must be tried by the word of God, and that alone. What Jesus teaches and not what Christians do, is Christianity. To the word and to the testimony!