merely unnecessary-but degrading. For if the conscious particle of divinity continue immortal, after its disengagement from its dust to re-unite it to that dust, is to debase it with a corporeal mixture, -and to clog the wing of a pure spirit with a needless weight of clay.

The strength of this argument rests mainly on that beautiful portion of St. Paul's writings, the 15th chapter of the first epistle to the Corinthians,-introduced into our impressive burial service : and since this chapter certainly inculcates the resurrection of the body-it may be well to examine-critically-its drift, and general argument.

Advert, then, to the state of opinions in the time of the Apostles. The Epicureans and Sadducees being materialists, that is, thinking the soul to be only an attribute of the body-conceiving the reasoning powers to be only the natural result of a superior organization in man, -and arguing consequently against the immortality of the soul, from the moul

dering of the bodily frame-it is plain that this conclusion would be a sound and unanswerable deduction from the premises, unless God were to recompose the scattered particles of the deceased body, and furnish it with its former organization and recollections. The first object of St. Paul, therefore, is to prove the resurrection of the body— against these philosophers and sceptics; -and this he does, by analogy, from the sowing and springing up of grain-which is not quickened, except it die.

But, on the other hand, that a spirit, when disengaged from its bodily frame at the moment of death, was re-absorbed into the vast ocean of spirit,—and there wholly and irrecoverably lost; and that its immortality consisted in its being a part and parcel of the wide ever-living principle of motion, vegetation, and life ;was likewise a favourite sentiment among certain philosophers of the ancient world. On this hypothesis, all consciousness was lost-all identity was lost in death:

and it is mere trifling to prove immortality in that sense-because immortality is an object of no desire or interest without happiness, and there can be no happiness without consciousness. Death in this view would still be an object of horror and would be regarded as another word for annihilation :-for what nonsense is it to tell me of the survival of my soul as a portion of the great living principle of the universe-if I am never more to exist as an individual; to know-to remember to love-to feel to thinkto converse-or to enjoy. St. Paul was concerned, then-to combat THIS notion likewise. In order to make eternity a thing desirable-to give true consolation under the loss of friends,-and to impart tranquillity in death-it was necessary for God to raise again the deceased body --and for St. Paul to prove that he raised it;-as a substratum of identity,-as a case or habitation for the former individual and partner spirit;-as a means and assurance of consciousness. This, ac

cordingly, you will find to be next proved by the apostle, in the fine chapter referred to ;-by shewing that as in Adam all die, so in Christ-and after the manner of Christ-that is-in distinct individuality, shall all be made alive.

But here another set of objections would present themselves to both these classes of opponents, but particularly to the materialist philosophers.

It might be justly said, that the bodily frame, having contained within itself the seeds of decay and dissolution, and having thus once died;—would, even if its particles could be again collected and put together, again moulder into its native dust. St. Paul allows this to be a fair conclusion. He closes with it: he admits it he boldly and positively declares it to be in the nature of things impossible that FLESH AND BLOOD,the present mortal structure of the human body, should inherit the kingdom of heaven-neither doth or CAN corruption inherit incorruption. And what is the

1

consequence? What are his next words? How does he deliver Christianity out of this difficulty? "Behold I shew you a mystery-in a moment—in the twinkling of an eye, at the last trump-we shall all be changed;—we shall be raised incorruptible :-for this corruptible must put on incorruption-and this mortal must put on immortality." This argument is turned by him, throughout the greater part of the chapter-with all the arts of eloquence. The difference between the corruptible dust which is interred, and the incorruptible frame into which it shall be transmuted,-is insisted on with various beautiful illustrations, and with the finest rhetorical antitheses. Illustrations :-for he represents it as the paler glory of the moon-to the dazzling splendour of the sun :-as the dim and watery sickliness of a distant star, to the full brilliance of the evening folding-planet. Antitheses:-for it is sown in corruption-it is raised in incorruption it is sown in dishonour; it is