doors being flung open to the general public, the throng came rushing in like a tide to fill every vacant corner of pew and passage.

"In this state of matters, a respectable looking woman was one day ushered into my study, who came with a most earnest request that she might get a sitting in the gallery of our church—the only part of it allotted to outsiders or extra-parishioners. She would grudge no money for it. I advised her to seek a sitting elsewhere, as there were hundreds before her making similar application. She looked so much mortified and distressed that I was induced, as she opened the door to leave, to ask her who and what she was. "The housekeeper of Lord Medwyn," she said. At once I called her back, told her what her master had done to serve us, and that, thinking that she had on that account a better right to a sitting than almost any other body in the church, I would find accommodation for her in my own family pew until a vacancy in the gallery occurred.

66 6

Well, I resumed my work, the work she had interrupted; and next morning was thinking no more of Lord Medwyn or the matter when on hearing my study door open, and turning round to see who the intruder was, what was my astonishment, after the letter he had written me, and the cool determined way in which he had three times cut me in the street, to see Lord Medwyn himself! Before I had recovered my astonishment he stepped up to me, and said, with a noble generosity of temper, sense of justice, and true Christian_humility, "Mr. Guthrie, before 1 ask how you are, let me say how sorry I am that I ever wrote you that letter. I have heard from my housekeeper the manner in which you received her and spoke of me, and I have hastened over here to acknowledge my error and tender this apology."

"I mention this to the honour of his memory, and that we may learn charity, and how much more of the grace of God there may be in those from whom we differ than in ourselves.

The book ends felicitously with this splendid instance of Christian love, so creditable alike to the eminent judge and the eminent orator.

We may remark, in conclusion, that, in our opinion, the Messrs. Guthrie have done their part well in this instalment of their honoured father's biography. They have hidden themselves and have revealed him-a revelation of whose inner life is, to so large an extent, the revelation of the heart of God. They have not spoken themselves, but have let him speak whose words all readers are so anxious to hear—or if they have spoken, it has been only to give force to his words. The book is intensely interesting, being brimful of anecdote, and so entertaining that the reader cannot lay it down till he has reached its close. We will wait with impatience for the second volume; and meanwhile thank the sons of the eminent divine for the literary treat with which we have been supplied.

216

MAN MADE IN THE IMAGE OF GOD.*

IN the study of any theme it is good to begin at the beginning, and lay a good foundation, or be well assured of the goodness and trustworthiness of the foundation already laid. The present theme is Man, as a being, in the very make of whose being a law is to be found under which he is placed, as a being who has sinned by transgressing the law, and who is to be delivered from sin by the propitiation of Christ. The law in the being is designed to secure the holiness, or health, of the spirit, by moving its various powers to work together in an easy and orderly manner as one whole. Sin is like a disease which has disturbed the orderly manner of working, and made the spirit uneasy and infirm. The propitiation is the healing remedy fitted to the disease, to remove the disturbance, uneasiness, and infirmity, and to restore the originally designed easy, orderly, or healthy manner of working among the various powers of the spirit, making it firm and strong to do all the will of God. But how shall the fitness of the remedy be seen unless we see first the disease or disorder to be removed, and the originally designed order which the remedy is to secure? Wherefore, as the true physician studies first the body of man anatomically, seeking to know its various parts and powers in their relation to each other, and how they should work together in a healthy state; next, the disorder or disease that may have interfered with their proper working; and then the best means by which what is wrong may be set right again, so the physician of the spirit has to consider, first, the spirit

*The following essay by the late Rev. John Geddes, of Wigan, is the first chapter of a work which has been sent us by the brother of that young minister, whose early death, a year or two ago, took us all much by surprise. The title of the work, on which Mr. Geddes expended much thought and labour during the latter years of his life, was, as the MS. title-page shows, The Sacrifice of Christ fitted to the Nature of Man. On his death-bed the author requested his relations either to endeavour to get the treatise published in a separate volume, or to send it to the Editor of the Evangelical Repository, that it might be inserted in that magazine in successive numbers. When the matter was submitted to us for our judgment, we strongly discouraged the idea of separate publication, for this among other reasons, that the author had not been able to bring his work to a close. We insert the first chapter in our present issue as a specimen of the work, as well as on account of its own excellences; for it bears marks of the same thoughtfulness and metaphysical power which generally characterized the lamented author's communications. We by no means promise that we will bring out the papers seriatim; although, at fitting intervals we may accompany the author along some of the subsequent stages of his argument especially if encouraged to do so by the approval of our readers.-ED. E. R.

of man, with its various powers in their relation to each other, and how they should work together in a healthy or holy state; next, the disorder or disease which is called sin; and then the best means by which man may be set free from it, which will be found to be the propitiation of Christ.

In this section the being of the spirit of man is to be considered as possessed of various faculties or powers, related to each other, as will, and law to regulate the will. And as the view which I take of these powers and their relation to each other has been learned from Scripture, I therefore give to the statements of Scripture the first place in the argument, though showing by the way also what true philosophy is to be found in or suggested by them. So I begin with the very first statement of the Bible regarding the being of the spirit of man, affirming its likeness to God. Is it not a singularly striking fact that Scripture begins by affirming such likeness, as it must be confessed to be the most certain ground on which a revelation of God to man became possible on the one hand, and a knowledge of God by man became possible on the other? The profound meaning of this first saying of the Bible regarding the spirit of man, this whole first part is an attempt to unfold in the light of other Scripture statements and common

sense.

I. "Let us make man in our own image, after our likeness.” 1. Evidently this first word of the Bible regarding man refers only to his spirit, and not to his body; for "God is spirit" (John iv, 24). When the Creator said, "Let us make man in our own image," he had not a body. Only in his spirit therefore can man have been made in the likeness of God.

Hence there is no need to consider, in this connection, the body of man, with its various appetites and passions. The spirit only is to be considered, with its powers of thought, and feeling, and will. In so far as the appetites and passions of the body may be said to have a moral aspect, it is simply the duty of man to keep them under, or subject them entirely to the control and regulation of the law of the mind (1 Cor. ix, 27).

2. This saying evidently refers to the metaphysical essence of spirit, affirming a likeness in this respect between the being of God and the being of the spirit of man.

In one respect both are spirit. But on this point of resemblance the Bible does not enlarge in the way of explaining what spirit is in its essence. Only it declares plainly that spirit is not flesh; and so draws a clear distinction between the being of the spirits of men and that of the most highly organized living animals, alleging, for example, of the horses

No. 15.

Vol. 4.

of the Egyptians, that they are “flesh, and not spirit” (Isai. xxxi, 3).

Though we know nothing of the soul's metaphysical essence, we know its essential powers and characteristics-thought, feeling, and will, with invisibility to the eye of sense. And the Scripture doctrine, that man is made in the likeness of God assumes, that as really as man thinks, so does God to whom he is like, as really as man feels, so does God.

3. This saying also refers to the moral aspect of spiritual being, and affirms a likeness in susceptibility of moral character and life between the being of God and the being of the spirit of man. This is the point of likeness to which attention is now to be called. It is worthy of all consideration; because ability for moral character and life is the glory of the being of God, and therefore also of the being of man. That in man, in virtue of which he can become good or righteous in character, is the chief point of his likeness to God. He was made like God in being, that he might become like God in doing, in righteousness of character and life, and so have the joy of the life of God, which is life eternal.

Now the passage of Scripture under consideration does not give in detail the features of that image of God after the likeness of which man is made. To discover what these are, attention must be turned to other two passages of Scripture which are much to our purpose.

II. Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?

1. This question of Abraham recognizes in the being of God a power of will, which is essentially a power free to choose between two opposites-right and wrong. In other words, the divine will is free from any metaphysical necessitating influence, though not from moral or motive influence, which, strictly speaking, is not really necessitating.

Never would the patriarch have asked this question if he had not believed in such a power of will in God. Neither would he have asked the other question which comes immediately before this one, in which express reference is made to this power of will-" Wilt thou also destroy the righteous with the wicked?" Think of the circumstances. Sodom for its sin was doomed to destruction. Abraham thought of the righteous persons who might be in the city, his friend Lot and others; that it would be wrong to destroy these with the wicked. Deeming it wrong to destroy and right to save, he yet confesses God free to choose between the two, saying "Wilt thou destroy?" That would be wrong. "That be far from thee: "Shall not the Judge do right?" And, because he believed that

God had power of will to destroy all in the general overthrow, he asked, "Wilt thou do it?"

His question is not equivalent to this,-Is thy will already set upon destroying the righteous with the wicked? if so, thy will be done; it must be right. For Abraham boldly says"That be far from thee to do after this manner, to slay the righteous with the wicked"-in other words, it would be wrong; and hence he asks, "Shall not the Judge of all the earth do right?" The question therefore is, "Having in thee the power to will the destruction of the righteous with the wicked, wilt thou do it?" Believing that thus to slay the righteous with the wicked would be wrong, he yet confesses or recognizes in God, not the will, but the power of will to do it. Think away the power of will to destroy; hold that God really could not will otherwise than to save the righteous, this being right; and then is it not nonsense to ask, Wilt thou destroy them? Power to will their destruction is denied. Why ask then, Wilt thou do it? For the question becomes equivocal to this-Wilt thou do what thou canst not will to do? That is very like a flat contradiction.

Hence even when the actual or certain determination of will

is to save, power to will otherwise, even to destroy, free from any necessitating influence, is confessed to be in God, Scripture itself being witness. Apart from the infallibility of Abraham's question, or inspiration of his sayings generally, the Lord does not give the slightest indication that this question was untrue to his character, or a slander upon either, as surely he would have done had it been so. And while it is most certain that the power to will otherwise than right in the being of God never shall pass over into actual will to do wrong, yet it is because he has the power to destroy even when he saves that he is in character the perfection of goodness. And in addition to the Scriptural argument, it can be said on strictly philosophical grounds, that without this power of will, free from any necessitating influence, moral character, goodness worthy of praise, would be impossible to God as any being. Without it, even God would be no more worthy to be praised for his goodness than a noble tree is worthy of praise for growing beautiful.

Now, there is in every man, because made in the image of God, a like freedom of will, in virtue of which each is able to will either good or evil, to choose life or death, and so to become in character righteous or wicked. Moses recognizes it in saying to Israel, "Therefore choose life;" and Joshua in saying likewise, "Choose you this day whom you will serve" (Deut. xxx, 19; Josh. xxiv, 15). This is one feature of God's