under the divine auspices; that rational intellect, the head, and just sentiment, and lovely affection,

spiritual. If not, then we are all material, and materialists. But a man may say, that air is not emblematic of spirit, and he may demand a proof that it is so.

Direct proof, in those very words, cannot perhaps be given; but circumstantial evidence may be collected in abundance from Holy Scripture. The same word denotes both air and spirit, both in the Old Testament and in the New. This by a Christian should be, and will be, regarded as strong testimony.

Our Lord "breathed on his disciples, and said unto them, "receive ye the Holy Ghost." John, xx. And the operations of the Holy Spirit are by our Lord compared to the wind; "the wind bloweth where it listeth," &c.-" so is every

one that is born of the Spirit," John, iii. In the first general Epistle of St. John, the three great witnesses for God on earth, are said to be "the spirit, the water, and the "blood." The word used for spirit in the original is air, or TIVEμa. It is probable, that this ought to have been rendered air, and not spirit, because water and blood are material things, as well as air. Nevertheless, it does not much signify to one who has been taught that all natural things are types, because he will be enabled by faith, and by the grace of the Spirit of truth, properly to arrange the various parallels he meets, without confusion.

In the first chapter of Genesis it is said, "And the Lord "God formed man of the dust of the ground, and breathed

into his nostrils the breath of life; and man became a "LIVING SOUL." Observe here, that the breath of life is (or means) also the spirit of life; for "man became a "LIVING SOUL," as well as a living body.

The above evidence appears to be quite sufficient to satisfy any one, who does not shut his eyes against the light

the heart, (or the spiritual male and female) might under the influence of divine truth, or

of truth, in consequence of prejudices. Hence it will perhaps be allowed, that as the heart is the organ of natural blood, or life; and as the lungs, united with the heart, are the organ of natural air, or life; also, that as the blood is the emblem of moral life, or love, and as the air is the emblem of spiritual life, or truth in love; so they are the two grand members of the body which represent the whole; in short, the types of the male and female component parts of the individual soul, and also of the whole church at large, under CHRIST THE GREAT HEAD.

But there still remains another weighty objection to answer; not indeed weighty in its own merits, but in the clouds of prejudice and unconsciousness which invest, and magnify, as well as obscure it; and in the eonfidence, the popular unchecked confidence, with which it is advanced. It is asserted, or admitted by many pious persons, among whom is the late excellent Rev. Joseph Milner, (in his Sermon on the Brazen Serpent, as the Type of our Lord Jesus Christ)" that types and emblems are seldom to be "taken strictly." But he adds, "very true, neither ought

they ever to be explained away entirely. They seldom hold, "it is acknowledged, if we descend to minute particulars; "but this instructive emblem would fail in its leading and "most essential circumstance, if an eager longing sight of "the Saviour on the cross did not perfectly heal the most "inveterate spiritual malady."

But with all due deference and respect to the worthy and eminent character above-mentioned (who, however, is more for than against the use of types and figures), and all other such, I would humbly submit, that every man's opinion, who has an opinion of his own upon this subject, will be formed by his own experience. Suppose a parable

the spirit of the Deity, propagate the offspring of the soul, or vital truths, unto eternal life

of Holy Scripture to contain various distinct members or branches, all capable of an edifying and apposite interpretation, though not all by any means equally obvious to every disposition of mind. Let any number of ecclesiastics endeavour to give the true interpretation of the parable. It is probable, that some one may only give the interpretation of the most obvious member; another may interpret two, another three, and so on; until some one shall interpret the whole truly.

Now, it is certain, from the nature of the human mind and heart, that every one of these persons would form an opinion to himself, concerning the interpretation of the parable, different from every other in some particular; and that this opinion would be determined by his own success. When they came to compare notes, as it is called, those who had made the most scanty interpretations, would call, or think, the more copious explanations of their brethren bold and fanciful; and intimate, with a shake of the head, their apprehensions (quite unaffectedly) that they might induce dangerous errors.

But are those who see least, to be always credited above those who see most? Yes; it will be answered, if the former see through the medium of reason, and the latter through that of imagination only. But who is to judge of this point? The bird imagination soars to many heights, which the reasoning elephant with all his force cannot reach.

My situation, in writing analogically, is somewhat similar to that of the Hebrews making bricks, and building cities in Egypt; and I perceive, that, as a writer on spiritual subjects, I am in an evil case. For I fear, from experience, that my judges will consider my analogy as so much chaff, or stubble, or at the best straw. They require me to prove my

and happiness. I considered the actual present union of my own reason and sentiments, as such

assertions without the help of this analogy; or, figuratively, to make my figurative bricks, and to construct my figurative building, without using this straw, or stubble.

If I were to tell these judges, that analogy is " a reed, "like unto a rod," and that it is able to " measure the temple "of God, and the altar, and them that worship therein," Revelations, xi. some would laugh, and some would frown, and perhaps some would say, Show us how. I will therefore try to do so, praying for, and trusting in, the aid of that Holy Spirit of truth which gave the parable, and who alone can give a sure interpretation.

ANALOGY, or proportion, is an instrument, by help of which we are enabled to measure unseen things, by means of things that are seen. It is declared by my judges to be a weak fragile instrument; yet they concede that it will measure worldly, temporal, carnal things, with general success; but not spiritual things, or the connection between spirituals and temporals. I contend, that it measures both.

A REED, is a weak fragile instrument; but if carefully used it will serve to measure accessible magnitudes actually. The external appearance is like that of a rod, as well as the measuring use to which it may be applied; and it is so applied mystically, to measure spiritual things by analogy, both in the Old and New Testaments, viz. Ezekiel, xl. and in Revelations as above. Consider this well.

A ROD, in Scripture language, means a measuring instrument, or a rule of true proportion, which includes the idea of chastisement for the breech. Thus the law of Moses is a spiritual rod, and the natural rod that he bore was an emblem or symbol of the law. Hence analogy, which measures both spirituals and temporals, and compares them together (for instance, in the Parables of our Lord Jesus Christ), however weak in itself, is like unto the rod, or law

a marriage; and these very truths, proceeding from the said union, to be the children so be

of spiritual measurement; and by the help of faith is able to measure inaccessibles, by means of their proportion to accessibles, which it can actually measure.

THE TEMPLE OF GOD, in prophetical and figurative language, means both the soul and body of the Christian; see first of Corinthians, vi. and second of St. John's Gospel.

THE ALTAR of that temple is the heart, from which every sacrifice must be offered in order to be acceptable.

"THOSE WHO WORSHIP THEREIN" are they who worship in spirit, and in truth; therefore all these things are measured by the reed analogy, like unto a rod.

After all, a resolute objector may say, "this, at best, is only a fanciful though plausible interpretation, in the way of accommodation; but you cannot prove that such was the very precise meaning of the Parable, as given by the Holy Spirit."

I reply, it is very true, I cannot prove it directly and verbally as you require. For instance, I cannot produce any text which says in so many words, "analogy is a reed, like unto a rod." But judging all Scripture by this concise rule, how many expositions, admitted by the above objector as conformable to divine truth, must be cut off! St. Paul says to the Philippians, "beware of the concision." The same Apostle, after filling nearly half the eleventh chapter of the first of Corinthians with propositions of a spiritual nature respecting the difference between the man and the woman; which can neither be understood nor demonstrated, except by means of the reed analogy; foreseeing that they would be warmly disputed and contradicted by cavillers, says, "but "if any man seem to be contentious, we have no such custom, "neither the churches of God." If St. Paul, therefore, despaired of convincing those who were full of the spirit of contention and contradiction, it will be high time for me to