ening to desolate and destroy! And as the rainbow throws its radiant arch over the expanse between heaven and earth, and as with a wreath of beauty unites the two together again, after they have been engaged in an elemental war, it strikingly images to the thoughtful eye the essential harmony that is still to subsist between the higher and the lower spheres. Such undoubtedly is its symbolic import, as the sign peculiarly connected with the Noachic covenant; it holds out, by means of its very form and nature, an assurance of God's mercy, as engaged to keep perpetually in check the floods of deserved wrath, and continue to the world the manifestation of his grace and goodness. Such also is the import attached to it, when forming a part of prophetic imagery, in the visions of Ezekiel (ch. i. 28), and of St John (Rev. iv. 3); it is the symbol of grace, as ever ready to return after judgment, and to stay the evil from proceeding so far as to accomplish a complete destruction.

1 Far too general is the explanation often given of the symbolic import of the rainbow by writers on such topics—as when it is described to be "in general a symbol of God's willingness to receive men into favour again" (Wemyss' Clavis Symbolica), or that "it indicates the faithfulness of the Almighty in fulfilling the promises that he has made to his people" (Mill's Sacred Symbology). Sound Christian feeling, with something of a poetic eye for the imagery of nature, finds its way better to the meaning-as in the following simple lines of John Newton :

"When the sun with cheerful beams

Smiles upon a low'ring sky,

Soon its aspect softened seems,
And a rainbow meets the eye;
While the sky remains serene,

This bright arch is never seen.

Thus the Lord's supporting power
Brightest to his saints appears,
When affliction's threat'ning hour
Fills their sky with clouds and fears

He can wonders then perform,

Paint a rainbow on the storm.

Favoured John a rainbow saw

Circling round the throne above;
Hence the saints a pledge may draw

Of unchanging covenant-love:
Clouds awhile may intervene,

But the bow shall still be seen,

Yet gracious as this covenant with Noah was, and appropriate and beautiful the sign that ratified it, all bore on it still the stamp of imperfection; there was an indication and a prelude of the better things needed to make man truly and permanently blessed, not these things themselves. For, what was this new world, which had its perpetuity secured, and over which Noah was set to reign, as heir of the righteousness that is by faith? To Noah himself, and each one in succession of his seed, it was still a region of corruption and death. It had been sanctified, indeed, by the judgment of God, and as thus sanctified it was not to perish again as it had done before. But this sanctification was only by water-enough to sweep away into the gulf of perdition the mass of impurity that festered on its surface, but not penetrating inwards, to the elements of evil which were bound up with its very framework. Another agency, more thoroughly pervasive in its nature, and in its effects more nobly sublimating, the agency of fire, is required to purge out the dross of its earthliness, and render it a home and an inheritance fit for those who are made like to the Son of God (2 Pet. iii. 7-13). And Noah himself, though acknowledged heir of the righteousness by faith, and receiving on it the seal of heaven, in the salvation granted to him and his household, yet how far from being perfect in that righteousness, or by this salvation placed beyond the reach of evil! How mournfully did he afterwards fall under the power of temptation! and how much of the serpent's seed still lurked in the members of his household! High, therefore, as Noah stood compared with those who had gone before him, he was after all but the representative of an imperfect righteousness, and the heir of a corruptible and transitory inheritance. He was the type, but no more than the type, of Him who was to come-in whom the righteousness of God should be perfected, salvation should rise to its higher sphere, and all, both in the heirs of glory, and the inheritance they are to occupy, should by the baptism of fire be rendered incorruptible and undefiled, and fading not away.

SECTION FOURTH.

THE CHANGE IN THE DIVINE CALL FROM THE GENERAL TO THE PARTICULAR -SHEM, ABRAHAM.

THE obvious imperfections just noticed, both in the righteousness of the new head of the human family, and in the constitution of the world over which he was placed, clearly enough indicated, that the divine plan had only advanced a stage in its progress, but had by no means reached its perfection. As the world, however, in its altered condition, had become naturally superior to its former state, so-in necessary and causal connection with this-it was to stand superior to it also in a spiritual respect: secured against the return of a general perdition, it was also secured against the return of universal apostacy and corruption. The cause of righteousness was not to be trodden down as it had been before, nay, was to hold on its way and ultimately rise to the ascendant in the affairs of men.

Not only was this pre-supposed in the covenant of perpetuity established for the world, as the internal ground on which it rested, but it was also distinctly announced by the father of the new world, in the prophetic intimation he gave of the future destinies of his children. It was a melancholy occasion which drew this prophecy forth, as it was alike connected with the mournful backsliding of Noah himself, and the wanton indecency of his youngest son. When Noah recovered from his sin, and understood how this son had exposed, while the other two had covered his nakedness, he said, "Cursed is Canaan; a servant of servants (i. e. a servant of the lowest grade) shall he be to his brethren. And he said, Blessed is the Lord God of Shem, and Canaan shall be his servant. God shall enlarge Japheth, and he shall dwell in

the tents of Shem; and Canaan shall be his servant” (Gen. ix. 25-27).

There are various points of interest connected with this prophecy, and the occurrence that gave rise to it, which it does not fall within our province to notice. But the leading scope of it, as bearing on the prospective destinies of mankind, is manifestly of a hopeful description; and in that respect it differs materially from the first historical incident, that revealed the conflict of nature and grace in the family of Adam. The triumph of Cain over righteous Abel, and his stout-hearted resistance to the voice of God, gave ominous indication of the bad pre-eminence which sin was to acquire, and the fearful results which it was to achieve in the old world. But the milder form of this outbreak of evil in the family of Noah, the immediate discouragement it meets with from the older members of the family, the strong denunciation it draws down from the venerable parent, above all, the clear and emphatic prediction it elicits of the ascendancy of the good over the evil in these seminal divisions of the human family, one and all perfectly accorded with the better state to which the world had now risen; they bespoke the cheering fact, that righteousness should now hold its ground in the world, and that the dominant powers and races should be in league with it, while servility and degradation should rest upon its adversaries.

This, any one may see at a glance, is the general tendency and design of what was uttered on the occasion; but there is a marked peculiarity in the form given to it, such as plainly intimates the commencement of a change in the divine economy. There is a striking particularism in the prophetic announcement. It does not, as previously, give forth broad principles, or foretel merely general results of evil and of good; but it explicitly announcesthough still, no doubt, in wide and comprehensive terms-the characteristic outlines of the future state and relative positions of Noah's descendants. Such is the decided tendency here to the particular, that in the dark side of the picture, it is not Ham, the offending son and the general head of the worse portion of the postdiluvian family, who is selected as the special object of vengeance, nor the sons of Ham generally, but specifically Canaan, who, it seems all but certain, was the youngest son (Gen. x. 6). Why this son, rather than the offending father, should have been

singled out for denunciation, has been ascribed to various reasons; and resort has not unfrequently been had to conjecture, by supposing that this son may probably have been present with the father, or some way participated with him in the offence. Even, however, if we had been certified of this participation, it could at most have accounted for the introduction of the name of Canaan, but not for that being substituted in the room of the father's. Nor can we allow much more weight to another supposition, that the omission of the name of Ham may have been intended for the very purpose of proving the absence of all vindictive feeling, and shewing that these were the words, not of a justly indignant parent giving vent to the emotions of the passing moment, but of a divinely inspired prophet calmly anticipating the events of a remote futurity. Undoubtedly such is their character; but no extenuating consideration of this kind is needed to prove it, if we only keep in view the judicial nature of this part of the prophecy. The curse pronounced is not an ebullition of wrathful feeling, not a wish for the infliction of evil, but the announcement of a doom, or punishment for a particular offence; and one that was to take, as so often happens in divine chastisements, the specific form of the offence committed. Noah's affliction from the conduct of Ham was in the most peculiar manner to find its parallel in the case of Ham himself: He, the youngest son of Noah,1 had proved a vexation and disgrace to his father, and in meet retaliation his own youngest son was to have his name in history coupled with the most humiliating and abject degradation.

It was, therefore, in the first instance at least, for the purpose of marking more distinctly the connection between the sin and its punishment, that Canaan only was mentioned in the curse. Viewed as spoken to Ham, the word virtually said, I am pained to the heart on account of you, my youngest son, and you in turn, shall have good cause to be pained on account of your youngest son-your own measure shall be meted back with increase to

1 Gen. ix. 24. The expression in the original is 1, and is the same that is applied to David in 1 Sam. xvii. 14. There can, therefore, be no reasonable doubt that it means youngest, and not tender or dear, as some would take it. It is not so expressly said, that Cannan was Ham's youngest son, but the inference that he was such is fair and natural, as he is mentioned last in the genealogy, ch. x. 6, where no sufficient reason can be thought of for deviating from the natural order.