questionable that the Greek fathers, who were likely to understand their native language, took poppy, as here used by the apostle, to signify puois and ουσία. "As the form of a servant," says Chrysostom, "signifies no other than real and perfect man, so the form of God signifies no other than God." See Suiceri Thesaur. II. 377, 378. If there be any propriety in explaining the phraseology of the New Testament by the use of terms among the followers of Aristotle, "it is unquestionable," says the learned and pious Sir Richard Ellys, (Fortuita Sacra, p. 189,) "that with them poppy was used to signify to ewa Tivos, that which constitutes the essence of a subject. I venture, therefore, still to think that Schleusner, in giving this interpretation, had a little more reason on his side than that "he might as well have said that white may mean black." "The form of a slave," says my learned friend, means the death of a slave." That the apostle, in using the expression form of a servant or stave, had no reference at all to "the death of the cross" which he so soon after mentions, 1 by no means affirm but that this was the single circumstance comprised in the allusion, does not appear probable. The frequent use of douλos in the New Testament, in various moral significations, suggests a more extensive application of the ideas of servitude to the circumstances of the Lord Jesus. See John xiii. 16, xv. 20, and the numerous passages in which the apostles and Christians in general are called servants of God, or of Christ; while, on the other hand, wicked men are represented as the servants or slaves of sin. In the whole view of the case, there appears to me most evidence that our Lord's "taking the form of a servant" denotes his submission, in his assumed human nature, to the characteristics of that servitude and dishonour which sin has inflicted upon our nature, and upon all our circumstances in the present state; that which is called in Scripture (dovkaa Ts popas) the bondage, servitude, or slavery of corruption." (Script. Test. II. 410.) 339 Dr. Jones is equally confident that "a form of God can only mean a divine or splendid form:" and he has no hesitation in regarding the expression as an allusion to the transfiguration of Jesus, on the mountain, where " he assumed an appearance bright as the sun, and was seen to converse with Moses and Elias ;" and that, from this magnificent appearance, Peter eagerly conceived the hope of Christ's evading his predicted sufferings and death. The Doctor has depicted the scene with great ingenuity and pathos. On the opinion, I beg leave to remark: 1. That the allusion supposed rests only upon conjectural grounds. 2. That, had it been intended by Paul, it is reasonable to think that he would have made his allusion more definite, as Peter did in referring to the very transaction: 2 Pet. i. 18. 3. That the tense of dragywv does not well agree with the supposition of reference to a single past fact, while it properly comports with the idea of a state or habit. Had the former been the object of reference, the proper form of the participle would have been raptaç. 4. That, if the allusion were admitted, a believer in the proper Deity of the Saviour might reasonably contend that the "form of God" most naturally and justly expresses some manifestation, by the symbol of a visible brightness exceeding that of the most magnificent objects in nature, and probably similar to the representations made to Moses and others of the prophets, of that Divine Nature and Perfection which he believes, on other and independent grounds, that the Scriptures ascribe to Christ. (6.) Dr. Jones, whose soul is filled with the enthusiasm imbibed from his familiarity with Grecian poetry and eloquence, declares his "unspeakable pleasure" in disclosing to the world his discovery that this passage of the Epistle to the Philippians contains allusions to Aristotle's Hymn to Vir tue. I must, however, confess that my duller powers of perception cannot see clearly the evidence of this discovery. The resemblances appear to me to be faint and precarious. Indeed, if I am not mistaken, much closer coincidences of both thought and expression often occur to men of reading, in authors of widely different ages and nations, and of whom it is certain that neither could have received the hint from the other. I am well aware of the "obscurity" which, as Mr. Locke remarks, has been "unavoidably brought upon the writings of men who have lived in remote ages and different countries,"-" wherein the speakers and writers had very different notions, tempers, customs, ornaments, and figures of speech, every one of which influenced the signification of their words then, though to us now they are lost and unknown," so that it would become us to be cha ritable one to another, in our interpre. tation or misunderstanding of ancient writings." (Ess. Hum. Und. Book III. ch. ix. § 10, 22.) I do not therefore take upon me absolutely to contradict the supposition of an infamous concealed meaning in this celebrated little poem; but I own that it appears to me altogether improbable, and that I am disposed to regard the revolting imputation upon the philosopher and the unfortunate ruler of Atarneus, as a calumny. The charge of impiety, brought by an obscure person against Aristotle, appears to have referred solely to his having been in the habit of singing this hymn, in honour of the memory of his murdered friend, patron and relative, though it was deemed a Pæan, and, consequently, was considered as an affront to Apollo: very unreasonably, for a Pæan was et hominum et deorum laudes, and was not restricted to its primary application, Athenæus, however, maintains that it is not a Paæan, but a Scolion. In no part of this little production is Her meias said, or so far as I can perceive implied, to be "invested with a form splendid as the sun;" and ad is applied, not to him, but to Virtue. The supposed parallelism of οι άρπαγμος and θηραμα is not very close, and is at least too weak a cir. cumstance on which to build the belief of an allusion: for more striking coincidences are often to be found, where no design of reference could have existed. As for the honour which the poet sings as conferred by the Muses upon the patron of letters and victim of Persian treachery, the idea is so common to the classic poets that I cannot see any propriety in taking it as the correlative of the apostle's doctrine of the exaltation of Jesus. The enumeration of persons or things "in heaven, and on earth, and under the earth," is, I conceive, nothing more than a Jewish idiomatical expres+ sion to denote the whole created uni verse. The same phraseology, with an unimportant variation, occurs in Rev. v. 3, 13; where surely no one will dream of an allusion to the Hea then gods, dæmons and heroes. We are, therefore, under no necessity of accepting Dr. Jones's alternative,either that the apostle is treading in the steps of Aristotle, or that his language "might be deemed the rant of a mystagogue." But, to form a proper judgment upon Dr. Jones's opinion, it is necessary to have the whole hymn in view. Your learned readers are probably well ace quainted with this beautiful little poem. Those who are not, will find it in Sto bæus, in Athenæus, in Diogenes Laer, tius, in the first volume of Brunck's Anthology, and in other collections. For the sake of readers who have not the opportunity of consulting any of those authorities, and as the poem is very short, I subjoin a literal transla tion. Virtue, thou object of severe labour to our mortal race, fairest (Onpapa) acquisition in life! For thy (app) heauty, O virgin, even to die, or to undergo glowing, unwearied toils, is in Greece an envied destiny. Such immortal fruit thou castest into the mind, nobler than riches or ances tors, or gentle sleep. For thy sake, Hercules the child of Jove, and the sons of Leda, bore their many toils, eagerly pursuing (aypEvortes, hunting, chasing, which accounts for the use of Onpaua) thine excellence. From desire of thee, Achilles and Ajax went to the abodes of the dead. For the sake of thy friendly (μορφη) form, the favourite of Atarneus widowed the rays of the sun; thus, for his deeds, renowned in song. And the Muses, daughters of Memory, will advance him to immortality, as they celebrate the glory of Jove, the guardian of the hospitable, and [celebrate] the recompence of constant friendship." ["Widowed the rays of the sun." I follow Brunck, Buhle, and Schweighæuser in reading avyás. Dr. Jones prefers the genitive singular auyas, as was given by the older editors. this requires a harsh ellipsis, and But would convey the idea that Hermeias committed suicide, instead of the fact that he was most perfidiously betrayed and cruelly put to death. The former reading not only gives a more regular and natural construction, but it also preserves the consistency of the imagery. To be dear to Apollo and the Muses was a common classical com insulated form, are constructed of solic materials, and whether their total amount be sufficient to establish the proposition. SIR, J. P. SMITH. Clapton, February 10, 1822. pliment: and in conformity with it, THE learned author of "The the murdered protector of science and its votaries is described as, by his untimely and disastrous death, causing "the rays," the offspring, "of the sun," to mourn as widows for him; while the Muses, the children of Memory, do their part to perpetuate his honour. Xnpow properly signifies, to reduce to the condition of widowhood.] I now submit it to the judgment of candid and competent scholars, whether the interpretation of Phil. ii. 6-8, proposed in the Scripture Testimony, has been overthrown by the learned, ingenious and able, but I humbly think untenable, animadversions of Dr. Jones. A single observation more you will indulge me briefly to make. (7.) The Doctor, in his conclusion, says, "The above passage is justly regarded as one of the strongest in favour of this doctrine;" that is, the doctrine of a divine nature in the person of the Christ: and he represents it as "that fortress which he [Paul] is said to have erected in support of the orthodox faith." Now, I beg leave to rejoin that I have by no means represented this passage as supplying the strongest, or one of the strongest, arguments in favour of the doctrine which appears to me to be contained in the Scriptures. It appears to me to recognize that doctrine in a very sufficient and decided manner; but I should not hold it forth as ranking among the most cogent of detached evidences. Indeed the great strength of the proof in favour of that sentiment lies, to my apprehension, in the variety, frequency and constancy of the modes by which it is involved, implied and incidentally assumed, as well as directly asserted in the great and only rule of faith. It seems to me to be rather an idle inquiry whether this argument or that, in a given case, is separately the strongest. The question for a rational man is whether the arguments, whatever may be their Scripture Testimony" will, I hope, excuse me if I hazard a remark on the representations in his letter (p. 37). Benevolus, to whom, so far as I know, I am an entire stranger, must, I think, have received more satisfaction, could it have been shewn that his "citations" would not merely be painful and offensive" to a guarded polemic like Dr. Owen, (p. 38,) or to a modern liberal scholar, such as my justly-respected acquaintance, in whose hands a Trinity, as Burke profligately said of courtly vice, may at length become almost harmless, by losing all its grossness;" but that those "citations" had pained and offended the contemporaries and in other respects the admirers of the writers and preachers from whom Benevolus made his selections. A Protestant would not be contented to represent Transubstantiation as described by such a Roman Catholic as the late Dr. Geddes. Thus my friend Mr. Belsham had, I conceive, a clear right to turn from the qualified language of cautious disputants, and to assume, as "the orthodox doctrine," the popular representations; among which appears prominent "the incarceration of the Creator of the world, in the body of a helpless, puling infant." Proceeding downwards from the pious father, whose marvellous faith produced the exclamation, credo quia impossibile est, we find "the infant-deity" (which, according to Watts, the reason, but, as I should say, the religion of Locke could not bear) adored for ages by the people, as a mystery, without such worship appearing to have excited any censure from their more learned instructors, whether Papal or Protestant, who would, indeed, have hazarded their own reputation for orthodoxy, had they ventured to teach the people that their mystery was an absurdity, and especially to be rejected as painful and offensive to a very high degree." The author of the Scripture Tes-"Jesus, we bless thy Father's name; timony" has very justly characterized some of Dr. Watts's Hymns, with which, indeed, there is reason to believe, no one was, at length, less satisfied than the pious poet himself. Yet those hymns, connected with their repeated republication for general use, even down to the present day, form a host in support of Mr. Belsham's representation of "the orthodox doctrine." Nor should it be forgotten that the Psalms, a later composition of the pious author, and containing, comparatively, few passages offensive to any Christian, were, as is well known, slowly admitted to a competition with the Hymns, which in some orthodox congregations still maintain their ascendancy. Thy God and ours are both the same." In consistency with this method of early orthodox institution, when about 10 years of age, in a school-exercise for turning English into Latin, which has escaped the accidents of half a century, I was taught, with my classfellows, in the manner of Lord Bacon's Christian Paradoxes, to regard these among the " unparalleled opposites" in the person of the Saviour: But the principal, though a very large use of those pious compositions, has not been, I apprehend, in public worship. With a most laudable design of worthily occupying intervals of leisure, and forming a devout Christian temper, the Hymn-book of Watts, always republished in an uncastigated form, has been recommended, as a daily manual, to children and servants, in the most unqualified. terms. At least, the exemplary Christians by whom I had the unspeakable happiness of being led into life, and who were by no means ultra-orthodox, never directed me to pass over a page or even a line in the whole volume, as containing "language" calculated to "wound a thinking and pious mind," or in the least opposed to the language of the Assembly's Catechism, in which, like other infants, I had been taught to dogmatize on the nature of Deity, the supposed complex person of the Saviour, and the Divine decrees. No; I was left, with the thousands of my contemporaries, by parents little inclined to neglect the highest interests of their children, either to hymn an “infant of days” as "the mighty God Come to be suckled and ador'd;" or escaping this Christianized Paganism, only worthy to be compared with "the old Heathens' song Of great Diana and of Jove,” "The eternal God once an infant of an hour old; "The immense God, once a child of a span long." My schoolmaster was a highly popular Calvinistic preacher, who riveted the attention of crowded congregations, as I have often witnessed. To his manners were attributed some innocent eccentricities, but his orthodoxy was never questioned. Such, then, are the authorities which occur to me, and they may be easily multiplied, for believing that Mr. Belsham has been inaccurately charged with misrepresenting and stigmatizing the orthodox doctrine." My friend's language is, as he designed it, highly disgusting. The disgust, however, is chargeable on a system, by which, according to the general understanding of its professors, whatever may be the guarded representations of its more learned advocates, that language is authorized, and not on those who, regarding such a system as a misrepresentation of Christianity, will, if they are conscientious and consistent, seize every fair occasion to develope and to expose it. Such, I am persuaded, will be the conduct of the learned author of "the Scripture Testimony," should he ever discover that the faith for which he ably contends, is not "the faith once delivered to the saints." I scarcely need to add, that disapprobation of any system, and even contempt for some representations which it appears to authorize, are both perfectly consistent with a high respect for the virtues and talents of those by whom that system is maintained. Protestants, amidst all their differences, have agreed to assail, with to say in the words of truth and so- unsparing ridicule, the breaden deity berness, of the Romish Church. Yet they justly February, 1822. HE Monthly Repository tages under which they still labour, and of which they may justly complain, as members of the civil community, constitute a numerous and respectable class of his Majesty's loyal subjects, in various parts of the British empire. In making this assertion, I fear no contradiction from any who are acquainted with the population of the country. I am ready to allow, that they, as well as persons Tbecome a respectable and valu- of every other description, have had, able publication; and it owes its reputation, in a great degree, to the attention, assiduity and impartiality that have been exercised on your part, as its principal conductor. It is of little or no consequence what my opinion may be of the peculiar doctrines which it inclines to favour. These are fit subjects of fair and candid examination; and as long as every writer or reader is left at liberty to form his own judgment of their truth and importance, the inquiry and discussion, which are not only allowed but invited and encouraged, cannot fail, upon the whole, and in the final issue, to be highly advantageous. Although, after mature reflection and long experience, I have not thought that controversial preaching on subjects of mere speculation, indirectly and remotely connected with practice, is calculated to do much good, and 1 have had occasion to observe, in the course of many years, that it has irritated the passions more than it has enlightened the understanding; yet subjects of this kind, discussed with judgment and candour, form an useful part of our periodical publications. With this view I am anxious to promote the more general diffusion of the Monthly Repository, as it is at present conducted; which, with regard to the importance and utility of its disquisitions, and the liberal plan that is adopted and pursued by those who have the principal direction of it, seems to me to be daily improving, and to merit public patronage and encouragement. After these preliminary remarks, the view in which I now wish to regard the Monthly Repository is that of a correct and impartial detail of historical facts, relating to Protestant Dissenters. Persons of this description, notwithstanding the disadvan and may still have, their prejudices and errors; but I am happy to find, as far as my observation has extended, that liberality of sentiment and just notions of religious liberty are che rished and promoted among them, however they may differ from one another, and from others of their fellow-subjects, with respect to theology or politics, in a greater degree than those who knew them some years ago had reason to expect. I wish there were no limitations to this general remark. The excepted cases, however, are few in number, and, from mistake or malignity, exaggerated in aggravation. To the former cause, with total exclusion of the latter, I ascribe a paragraph, which I was surprised to find in a letter of the late Mr. Howe, of Bridport, published in your last number (pp. 28, 29). Dr. Toulmin is reported to have received a letter from London, informing him that, in order to obstruct and defeat a proposed application of the Catholics for a repeal of the Test laws, the Dissenters, of several classes, wished to waive their petition for redress of this grievance, lest the Catholics should succeed in their endeavours to obtain emancipation. Less enlightened as the Dissenters then were on the subject of religious liberty than they are now, I will venture to affirm, that this report was founded on mistake or misrepresentation. Dr. T., whom I well knew, was too honest and liberal to fabricate such a tale; but he was an industrious collector of anecdotes, and too ready to receive and record as facts, unauthenticated reports, which his correspondent, depending, perhaps, on a newspaper of the day, transmitted to him, as the intelligence of the passing moment. It is possible, indeed, that some few unenlightened Dissenters might be hostile to the |