IMMATERIALITY AND IMMORTALITY.

MANY persons, in order to prove the separate existence of the soul, make use of an argument founded on what they call "its immaterial nature." I have no disposition to enter the lists of controvertists upon this abstruse subject. I entertain no doubts whatever of the absurdity of the positions of the materialists, and have but little confidence in the piety of a man who believes himself to be nothing more than a superior animal. Still, to sustain a correct position, their opponents, in my opinion, make use of an inconclusive, if not a false argument, and thus endanger the truth when they argue the necessary "immortality of the soul" from its immaterial nature. This argument has been long since abandoned by the most learned and reflecting who have discussed the subject, and who nevertheless entertain no doubts that the soul or spirit of man lives on after the blow of death. The argument is met and overthrown by a simple position, namely, What God has made he can destroy; which is alike the dictate of reason and revelation. If the soul be immaterial, and consequently indestructable, then even the power that made it cannot destroy it-that is, God has divested himself of the power of destroying it. I think the question of the existence of the spirit of man without his present organization, or after death, depends not upon an argument that would make man a part of the Deity himself; and I am always sorry when I hear it used. The argument was borrowed from Plato, and never was very much relied upon by those who have sought to demonstrate the scriptural doctrine of the existence of spirit.

Neither the phrase immortal or mortal soul is to be found in our Bibles. If we seek a pure speech we should use neither. "God only hath immortality," is an inspired declaration. He is immortal in a sense in which no other being in heaven or earth can be. He never knew a beginning; he will never know an end. We and all creatures have had a beginning; we may never have an end; and we are assured we will "never die," if we obey him who holds the keys of death and hades. I think this is a true statement of the subject, and whilst I have no fellowship for the dogmas of no-soulism, nor for the principal men now propagating them in our midst; though I believe them to be self-refuting and absurd, yet I believe this not from any argument drawn from the so called immaterial, or necessarily immortal nature of the soul. "If a man die, shall he live again ?" is the question that embraces the whole subject in my mind. I do not mean, nor did Job, that he should live after death. We who believe shall enjoy an athanasian, an immortality, a life without end-not because God cannot destroy the soul of man, but because he will not destroy those who believe. No power short of that of God can destroy-not even death, nor him who once had the power of it. J. B. F.

MINISTERIAL COURTESY.

A DISCOURSE ADDRESSED TO BISHOPS AND EVANGELISTS.

You will find the words of my text in the last clause of the eighth verse of the third chapter of the first epistle general of Peter: "Be courteous."

The great design of Christianity is the perfection of human character, in order to obtain eternal life. Not only does it aim to improve a few leading moral and intellectual powers, but the whole man.

In dedicating himself to the Lord, the Christian does not merely lend a few faculties for occasional use to worship God, but his entire constitution-body, soul, and spirit. It becomes him, therefore, to cultivate every function of his mind, so that his own best moral interests shall be guarded, his fellow-men enlightened, and God glorified.

Without making any further preliminary remarks, I call your earnest attention to the words of my text-Be courteous. The exhortation is addressed to all the brethren, and we might consider the subject of Christian courtesy in its whole extent; but I only propose presenting so much of it as pertains to the public teachers of the Gospel in their intercourse with one another.

To give some order to my discourse, I will first give a definition of the term Courteous; secondly, speak of the importance of courtesy, and its cultivation; and, thirdly, of its neglect and the consequences.

I. Definition. To be courteous is to be polite-to exhibit that civility, good breeding, elegance of manners, which commonly obtains among enlightened and refined people. It is altogether unnecessary to dwell upon this point. I shall therefore proceed to a more important matter, and consider,

II. The importance of courtesy, and its cultivation. Much depends upon a preacher's manner, both in and out of the pulpit. It is not my purpose, however, to speak of this branch of my subject. Here is the truth I would impress upon your minds-it is the duty of bishops and evangelists to extend to one another that courtesy which the genius of Christianity and the genius of common sense dictates. This is important from several considerations. It engenders and sustains a delightful condition of the finer emotions, fits one for the pleasant and profitable discharge of duty, and makes a most happy impression upon all the brethren and upon the world, fitting both for the reception of the Word.

The public teacher of the Christian religion should, therefore, cultivate this grace—always treating his fellow-labourers with affectionate politeness. Brethren, be courteous.

III. I come, in the third and last place, to speak of the neglect of courtesy, and of the consequence of this neglect. Under this head I remark, first, that bishops are sometimes uncourteous to evangelists; secondly, evangelists are sometimes uncourteous to one another.

Allow me here to lay down a few plain principles which, I think, may be assumed without debate :

1. It is the duty of a bishop to wait upon an evangelist, in a house of worship, and to show him all those little attentions due to him as a stranger or travelling preacher; the same treatment is due from local to travelling preachers, be they ordained officers or not.

2. It is the duty of an evangelist to await these attentions, and not push himself forward as if he were the only person present capable of conducting religious services.

3. It is the duty of evangelists, when assembled together for the

purpose of conducting a meeting, to regard one another with the utmost civility. If one among the number is selected to superintend affairs, it devolves upon him to exhibit such courteous attentions as will ensure peace and harmony.

REFLECTIONS ON AUTUMN.

AUTUMN has come again! One more is added to the list of years that have passed over us, and as the ripe fruit and fallen leaf turns pale, we too must cease our mortal career. What a thought! the stream runs on, but we cease to be! the moonlight falls on the hillside, but in the course of time it will fall on our graves! The leaf will be reddened, and the fruit will be ripened-but man lives not again on earth! He leaves only a perishing monument of good or evil in the memory of surviving friends, a trace in the sand, which the returning tide of time will soon obliterate. The insect on which we tread, the fabled God of olden times, the wish as yet unwished; are not more frail, feeble, and unlasting than man is, and must be! Like the meteor he lights the sky for a moment, passes in darkness and is forgotten! There is melancholy in contemplating the sear and yellow leaf. The autumnal season is one dear to memory, the saddest of the year, and at the same time the sweetest.

The estimation in which a thing is held is, in some measure, determined by its quantity. When the desolation of winter is in the advance, we shudder and turn with fondness to look upon the melancholy scene still before us; surprised with the fleetness of time, and determined to enjoy what remains. We see things die around us, and remember departed friends.

Then the eye naturally looks back to the vales and mountains of existence, over which we have fondly sported in youth. We have ever found it to be the case, that the autumn call up our rememberance of those who have long since departed; the playmates of our youth, the first kindling of the parlour fire-the gathering around the newly heated hearth—the innocent smile and the hearty laugh-these circumstances alone call up the recollections of the past, and turn the tide of thought from anticipation to memory.

CONTENTMENT.

CONTENTMENT, rosy, dimpled maid,
Thou brightest daughter of the sky,

Why doest thou to the hut repair,
And from the gilded palace fly?

I've traced thee on the peasant's cheek;
I've marked thee in the milk-maid's smile
I've heard thee loudly laugh and speak

Amid the sons of want and toil.

Yet in the circles of the great

Where fortune's gifts are all combined,
I've sought thee early, sought thee late,

And ne'er thy lovely form could find:
Since then from wealth and pomp you flee,
I ask but competence and thee.

S. J. D.

MANNERS.

ORIGINAL COMMUNICATIONS, &c.

ANTI-STATE-CHURCH.

[A speech, delivered by a Christian brother at an anti-state-church meeting.] RESPECTED FRIENDS.-If the meeting of this evening should be the means of advancing a step or a stride towards the separation of church and state, it will be to me a source of great pleasure.

In furthering this cause, I feel decidedly convinced, it will be promoting the interests of pure and undefiled religion.

A national establishment of religion! Why, sir, there is something in the term incongruous and unscriptural. In the nature of things is it possible to hope for a national religion? On the contrary, is it not a melancholy fact, that by far the largest bulk of mankind, in every country of the world, neither know, believe, love, or obey the truthnay, more, their character and conduct is diametrically opposed to the very principles of Christianity. Then how inappropriate the termNational Religion! To suppose the religion of Christ need the arm of kings or queens to uphold or defend, is an aspersion against its author and founder. Is he not King of kings and Lord of lords? And did not the words proceed from his gracious lips, "All power is given unto me in heaven and on earth?" Then he that would enlist the aid of the curl magistrate, controverts the truth of this assertion. Yes, indeed, the very connexion of church and state is itself corruption and a source from whence all corruption flows. It is the alliance of God and mammon, a mixture of things sacred with things carnal, and must be viewed not only as a profanation but as an abomination in the sight of God.

To say the Christian religion would not long exist, either extend or flourish, independant of the state, is language totally irrelevant with a knowledge of divine things.

That persons whose interests are interwoven with the existence of a national establishment, should, from motives purely worldly, be anxious for its continuance, need not surprise us-but that men, wise, sensible, and reflective, and no ways connected with its emoluments, should be the abettors of such a profane alliance, is matter of real astonishment. When Henry Brougham was Lord High Chancellor of England, he asserted in his place, that if anything from Holy Writ could be shown him inconsistent with the civil establishment of religion, he must give it up. One passage to an honest God-fearing mind is enough, "My kingdom is not of this world;" and yet to this hour, with all his enlightenment, shall I say blind? no, but worse, that he continues wilfully blind!

Still, from what I have heard this evening, from what I see before me, and from what is transpiring in most quarters of the world, I am not without hopes, that we are on the eve of brighter and better days. And if in all matters of religion, an appeal was made to the only source of true religion-THE NEW TESTAMENT-the country would not for centuries have been supporting a national establishment

D

of religion. No, nor never would such an incongruity have had existence.

Awful indeed is the reflection, that myriads upon myriads of deceived souls have passed into eternity, believing they were safe (and taught to think so) because identified as members of this presumptuous establishment. And my fear is that a very large majority of national Christians spurn and despise the religion established by Jesus.

Many of the doctrines of the church are doubtless good and orthodox, but so long as it remains connected with the state, every spiritual thing is likely to be contaminated.

Many of the clergy, I firmly believe, are honest and sincere. The majority, however, from the very nature of the establishment, will necessarily consist of the opposite description. They may be men of science, literature, and wisdom, but if not wise in the things of God and have not been turned from darkness to light, is it not worse than mockery to appoint them teachers of what they neither understand or believe?

That dissent is so general and increasing need astonish no one. No enlightened mind once brought to consider the subject without prejudice, on comparing the system with the only standard of truth, but must be forcibly struck with its want of conformity to the mind and will of God.

Civil and religious liberty we all admire and we should all enjoy. It is our birthright. To be taxed and compelled to contribute towards the support of what we conscientiously disapprove, and from which we derive not a particle of benefit, is not only a denial of liberty-it is a gross injustice! We have long endured the hardship, and have patiently suffered the disgrace, but now, is it not high time that we awake out of sleep?

The severance of church and state is devoutly to be wished as the only means of securing the unrestrained exercise of speech and conscience.

That persons calling themselves dissenters, should feel indifferent and careless upon so interesting a subject, is, indeed, a matter of surprise. A dissenter! and not be solicitous to separate what is purely spiritual from a contagion really sordid and worldly!! Neutrality belies your dissent.

I am one of those who, loyal from Bible principles, do indeed cherish and entertain the deepest reverence for our queen and constitution, so far, at least, as that constitution does not invade the authority of the King of kings, and of individual rights-and, may I not assert, these are the sentiments of all who hear me. There may be those present whose eyes and whose ears are closed. That subjects truly loyal and devoted, honest, peaceable, and submissive, should be subjected to unjust and cruel exactions, or denied one single privilege of citizenship, is bondage worse than slavish.

What an expensive institution is this civil and religious establish, ment. If its immense requirements were drawn only from the pockets of those who loved and adored the system, the chief cause of complaint I would be removed.

And why services requiring little or no talent should be so extrava