We infer that the churches and their members cannot be defended, or excused, or held in fellowship on the ground of their want of light, without convicting them of a want of love. And what sort of Christians are these?

2. There is a "Scripture doctrine of Come-outism” that is "holy, just, and good." Let us be cautious then, and discriminating in our satires upon "the kingdom and dispensation of Come-outism."

3. "Slavery is the sum of all villainies." What then is the character of the determined and impenitent slaveholder? Of Churches composed of such? Of Churches that can not be dissuaded from religious fellowship, fraternity, and co-operation with them?"

4. "The pro-slavery spirit exists, extensively throughout the free states, and is, if possible, more shameful, more diabolical than slavery itself." Then "Come-outers” ought not to be derided for acting accordingly.

5. "The churches are the bulwarks of Slavery." Then they are not the bulwarks of Christianity-" the pillar and ground of truth."

19

6. "An intelligent pro-slavery minister, in a free state, is a pre-eminently wicked person." "He is a pro-slavery minister who writes Bible arguments in favor of slavery.' [Who? Hodge, Graham, Stuart, Spring, Hedding, and Wisner?] And "he is a pro-slavery minister who shields such an one from ecclesiastical discipline." What can, or does shield them, if holding continued ecclesiastical connexion with them does not? The spirit and pith of this concession extended to laymen as well as ministers, and applied in New England and the Middle and Western States, would make a broad sweep among the churches, including their anti-slavery members. We almost shrink back, ourselves, from the seemingly inevitable conclusion!

7. "There is now light enough upon the main question of slavery, to warrant us in withholding fellowship from the slaveholder." (pp. 187.) "The time will come, and come soon," when " voting for a slaveholder must be deemed an immorality of such a nature as to exclude a person from the Church?" (pp. 177.)

* But how is this to be done, if it be "foolish and wicked" to "come out immediately, and have no more connexion with churches and ecelesiastical bodies, called pro-slavery because they are composed in part of slaveholders?"

We may then ask- —" What man or set of men is authorized to announce to the world that the day has" NOT "dawn-. ed?" And who shall deny to those who are convinced that it has, the right to express their convictions, and act in conformity with them?"

If "Come-outism" be perceived, by its opponents, to be so nearly correct, now, and destined to be altogether correct, so very soon," perchance it may be, altogether correct now; at any rate, a truth that is to be; a truth in the future tense, and rapidly hastening to be present, should be treated with a good degree of toleration if not respect, by the advocates of “light and love," and the friends of "progressive reform"

In conclusion, this is a great, a momentous subject, and the prayerful and earnest consideration of it should be no longer postponed. The friends of evangelical religion, of an elevated standard of christian holiness, of trustworthy christian institutions, not less than the zealous, and possibly, sometimes extravagant or impatient advocates of specific "one idea" reformations, have an interest, deep and broad as eternity, in the proper settlement of this question. The times require and must have, the RESTORED NEW TESTAMENT CHURCH. For this, the work of a world's renovation is lingering, while Atheism and the Man of Sin, are stalking over Emmanuel's promised possession, unrebuked. The whole creation groans, and travels in pain, until now, for the deliverance that is to come through the instrumentality of a pure church.

ERRATA.

February number:-Article "Light and Love," page 289,, third line from bottom, instead of "all may be bold to affirm," read "we may," &c. Page 293, tenth line from bottom,. instead of "manly doing," read "manly daring." Page 295, eleventh line from top, instead of "quietness," read "gentleness." Page 302, eighteenth line from bottom, in-. stead of "obstruse," read "abstruse." Page 306, ninth line from bottom, instead of "to have," read "to love." Page 307, top line, instead of "precious light," read "previous: light."

ARTICLE LXX.

EXPOSITION OF HOSEA IV: 17.

BY J. R. JOHNSON, PASTOR OF THE CONGREGATIONAL CHURCH, ITHICA, N.Y.

"Ephraim is joined to idols: let him alone."

When we examine a portion of the Bible, and propose to test some popular and long established exposition, we must guard against extremes. We must be cautious that our minds shall not be so influenced by a prior habit of thought, that we shall hastily reject all evidence which op poses our former view of the text. We must also be equally on our guard against a spirit of rash innovation, which, joined with some degree of originality, and an ostentatious affectation of more, and also with a desire for novelty and notoriety, may induce us to reject common-sense views of scripture, eagerly grasping after the phantom-transcendentalism: or, we may adopt most confidently, such a method of expounding the 15th chapter of 1st Corinthians, as shall not permit it to teach the commonly received doctrine of the resurrection of the dead!

I. We will state the popular exposition of Hosea 4: 17.

"No means should be used to bring them to repentance. Ephraim is joined to idols, is in love with them, and addicted to them, and therefore, let him alone, as in verse 4th. See what their end will be-Deut. 32: 20. It is a sad and sore judgment for any man, to be let alone in sin: conscience, let him alone; minister, let him alone; providences, let him alone. Let nothing awake him till the flames of hell do it. The father corrects the rebellious son no more, when he determines to disinherit him. (Matthew Henry in the Comp. Com.)

II. Does this exposition express a sentiment which is at variance with reason?

We can discover nothing of the kind. abandon the wicked to their own way.

God has a right to If God himself give

them up, he can consistently require all other benevolent

-beings, and reproving influences, to abandon them. He may give the universal command- "Cease all effort to rescue them from their deep and hopeless degradation." If, therefore, we should ultimately reject the popular exposition of this text, it will not be because of its promulgating any unreasonable sentiment.

III. This exposition contains nothing which is inconsistent with other parts of the Bible.

The Bible frequently teaches the sentiment, that God may abandon the wicked to destruction. "There is a sin unto death: I do not say that ye shall pray for it."-1st John, 5: 16. Here is a plain intimation that the sinner may be so far given up of God, that it may be the duty of good men to cease to pray for the forgiveness of his sin. The case of the Amorites is familiar to all of our readers. So God may give up others to fill up the measure of their iniquity. He may make the proclamation that He has thus given them up, and may require corresponding manifestation on the part of His people. The popular exposition of this text, therefore, is not to be rejected, because of its being opposed to other parts of the Bible.

IV. There is nothing in the context which requires us to adopt the popular exposition.

Henry refers to the fourth verse-"Yet let no man strive or reprove another." But Bishop Newton translates it, thus: "Yet no man contendeth, and no man reproveth." And he adds "This is a natural rendering, and gives a very usual sense to the Hebrew future." That it is a "natural rendering," in accordance with the context, is apparent, if we read from the first to the fourth verse inclusive: "Hear the word of the Lord, ye children of Israel: for the Lord hath a controversy with the inhabitants of the land, because there is no truth, nor mercy nor knowledge of God in the land. By swearing, and lying, and killing, and stealing, and committing adultery, they break out, and blood toucheth blood. Therefore shall the land mourn, and every one that dwelleth therein shall languish, with the beasts of the field, and with the fowls of heaven; yea, the fishes of the sea also shall be taken away. Yet no man contendeth, (remonstrateth) nor reproveth; for thy people are as they that strive with the priest."

"Yet no man contendeth nor reproveth;" the degradation is so universal, and so complete, that none are found

who have piety and decision enough to resist the demoralizing desolation.

V. The context requires an exposition which is distinct from the popular one.

See verses 15, 17: "Though thou Israel, (Ephraim) play the harlot, yet let not Judah offend; and come not ye unto Gilgal, neither go ye up to Bethoven, nor swear, The Lord liveth. For Israel (Ephraim) slideth back as a backsliding heifer: now the Lord will feed them as a lamb in a large place. Ephraim is joined to idols: let him alone." Judah, gonot with Ephraim yet let not Judah offend." The Lord is willing to feed Ephraim as a lamb in a large place, but he is joined to idols-therefore, Judah, beware! keep clear of such a company: shun such a fearful destiny. The text teaches this sentiment, namely: STAND ALOOF FROM CONFED

ERACY WITH THOSE WHO ARE JOINED TO IDOLS.

This interpretation accords with our Savior's instructions in the 15th chapter of Matthew. He gave instructions which counteracted the wrong teachings of others. "Then eame his disciples and said unto him, Knowest thou that the Pharisees were offended after they heard this saying? But he answered and said, Every plant which my heavenly Father hath not planted, shall be rooted up. Let them alone: [withdraw from them,] they be blind leaders of the blind. And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch."

DEDUCTIONS.

If the exposition of which we have given of Hosea 4:17, is correct, then,

1. We ought not to remain in connection with those political parties which sustain Slavery. Whatever anti-Slavery resolutions they may occasionally publish, they sustain Slavery, if they vote for Slave-holders for civil office, or for those who vote for such. There may have been some plausible arguments in days which are past, adapted to quiet the consciences of honest anti-Slavery men, who remained with pro-Slavery political parties, for the sake of reforming them; but all such arguments have now vanished. Both of the great national political parties of the United States are now joined to idols. They vie with each other to see which will make the most acceptable obeisance. We have no means of calculating which will ultimately excel. It is true that