Greeks and Trojans; yet, wherein do they substantially differ? The one catches at a nutshell, and contends for it as for his life; while the others are so disgusted at the folly of him, and such as he is, that they conclude there is nothing but nutshell in the whole matter, and, therefore, take no other concern than to laugh at the fools who are so anxious about a shadow, or to lash the knaves who contrive to turn that shadow into the substance of emolument and dignity.

To meet both Pharisees and Sadducees, we must do what we can to bring into view the very kernel itself, freed from all its husky integuments; and when this is rightly done, it will be seen, that genuine Christianity is that centre where intellect, judgment, taste, interest, prudence, principle, the firmness of the Stoic, the elevation of the Platonist, the tranquillity of the Epicurean, the archetypal realities, to which all earthly objects, in the shape of pleasure, profit, or honour, correspond, as gilded clouds do to the sun, all meet, and is, of course, that identical chief good, which human nature, so soon as its higher faculties have, at any time, come into action, has invariably panted after, and which the wisest sages have so agreed in describing, that even by their marks alone, we might be satisfied of its genuine existence in the Gospel.

In endeavours to do this justice to our holy religion, we have many noble aids. Baxter, whatever your friend may think of him, is a firstrate workman in such a process as I speak of; perhaps, on the whole, the first the world has yet seen. Sir Matthew Hale also has done

invaluable service, particularly in his "Victory of Faith over the World," his "Wisdom of fearing God," and his "Discourse of Religion." The Cambridge men of the seventeenth century are also our "great and good allies," if I may employ a phrase not a little abused; and amongst these, in an eminent degree, Smith and Cudworth. Lucas, of a later day, is not to be forgotten; but of this class of writers (meaning the Cambridge men, Lucas, and such like) Chrysostom appears to me the patriarch. I do indeed think that, since the departure of St. John, no man ever possessed more sublime views of the dignity and happiness of Christianity than he. If Leighton had been less melancholy and not Calvinistic, he would have been the nearest to Chrysostom in spirit, though not at all like him in mode of expression.

I have so very weak a memory, that I cannot be sure whether I am not saying what I may have said again and again; nor do I remember whether I ever gave you a specimen of Chrysostom's mode of speaking. At any rate I will do it now, being pretty sure, at least, that the passage will be new to you. I copy it from what I take to be a Port Royal translation. It is the beginning of one of those exhortations with which he always concludes his lectures on Scripture. He had been speaking on the wise men from the East.

"Travaillons donc sérieusement, mes frères, à bannir de notre esprit ces deux vices, l'envie et la tiédeur, celui qui les veut combattre doit être plus brûlant que le feu. C'est pourquoi Jesus Christ a dit, 'Je suis venu apporter un feu sur la terre, et

que desirai-je sinon qu'il s'allume? C'est aussi pour ce sujet que le St. Esprit parût en forme de feu. Et après cela, néanmoins, nous demeurons plus froids que la cendre, et plus insensibles que les morts. Nous ne sommes point touchés en voyant le bienheureux Paul s'élever au dessus du ciel, et passer même le ciel du ciel, voler plus vite qu'une flamme, vaincre tous les obstacles qui se présentent à lui, et se mettre au-dessus du ciel et de l'enfer, du present et de l'avenir.

"Si ce modèle est trop grand pour vous, c'est une marque de votre lâcheté. Car qu'a eu St. Paul plus que vous, pour croire qu'il vous soit impossible de l'imiter? Mais pour ne point disputer de ceci, laissons St. Paul à part, et jettons la vue sur les premiers Chrêtiens. Considerez de quelle manière ils ont vecu, et nous trouverons qu'ils ont quitté leurs biens et toutes les occupations de la vie, et qu'ils se sont donnés tout entiers à Dieu, meditant sur sa parole durant le jour et durant la

nuit.

"Car le feu du S. Esprit ne souffre point que la personne qu'il enflamme désire aucune chose de tout ce qui est dans le monde; mais il nous porte à un autre amour. C'est pourquoi celui qui suivait ses passions et ses désirs deviendra prêt tout d'un coup à donner tout ce qu'il possède; à mépriser la gloire, à quitter les délices, et même à exposer sa vie s'il est necessaire; et il fera tout cela avec une facilité merveilleuse, parce que lorsque l'ardeur de ce feu est entrée dans l'âme de quelqu'un, elle en chasse toute la froideur et toute la lâcheté. Elle la rend plus légère que n'est un

oiseau, et lui donne un mépris général de toutes les choses presentes."

That there should be some excess in a Father of the fourth century is not extraordinary; or rather, perhaps, it could not be otherwise. But is there not something very noble in these passages? And what higher evidence could we have of the excellency and energy of our blessed religion, than that, at a time when intellect was sinking more and more, and the human mind had fallen into unexampled languor, the spirit of the devoted Christian should be thus heroical, and his unstrained, spontaneous language thus eloquent? In point of talent, however, it must be allowed that Chrysostom stands very high; still, talent alone would scarcely, at any time, and much less at that time, have furnished such glowing expressions. It is, obviously, the subject which raised the mind of the speaker; which, happily, was a mind as capable of being raised as any, probably, that ever resided in a merely human bosom.

Still, however (as, perhaps, you may remember to have heard from me already), I consider Austin to have had his great department in the Church, as well as Chrysostom; nor do I think that the superstructure of the one could be upheld or accomplished without the deep foundation of the other. Austin, I conceive, was the great teacher of efficient grace, Chrysostom of consummate holiness (consummate, I mean, with regard to the Gospel standard). I do not intend to say, that no one can attain to Chrysostom's heights, without first actually descending to Austin's depths. Because this evi

dently was not the case with Chrysostom himself, nor with our Cambridge friends, or Lucas; nor has it, I imagine, hitherto (except in rare instances) taken place (at least in any striking degree), where, through God's blessing on early education, religion has so grown with a person's growth, as to prevent wilful deviations. But my idea is, that in order to such a conversion as should rise to full grown holiness, Chrysostom, excellent as he is himself, both in urging and exemplifying the latter, could not be a successful labourer, without an alliance with Austin. I even think further, that there is no case, in which the want of this alliance, either of Chrysostom with Austin, or of Austin with Chrysostom, does not imply comparative loss, and of consequence, the realising of this alliance induce invaluable benefit.

I am inclined to think, however, that this alliance is, as yet, very much a desideratum. Baxter has more of it than any one I know in the Christian world, except one, whom to you I may venture to name; I mean John Wesley; a man of many errors and foibles, innocent ever, I am confident, as to himself, but far from harmless to his followers; yet still, I conceive, he hit astonishingly, or rather he was wonderfully led to, the union of grace with holiness of which I speak. But he has not left what he actually did accomplish, in a state for general use. On the contrary, though the pure kernel is there, it is so enveloped in cortical integuments, some of no pleasing appearance, that there must be attention and discrimination to come at it. Still, in my opinion, it is there, in a more