human appointment and invention. These things it may do. do not affirm that it should do them. If mercy can accomplish its purposes without trampling down religious formalities, by all means let it respect and honour them as friends and allies. It may treat them with neglect only when they obstruct its course and progress. We will specify cases in which it is warrantable to give mercy a preference. Our first remark is that it may be done,

For the sake of kindness to an animal. The order of the holy Sabbath, one of the most valued of our positive institutions, which yet is not purely positive, but of a mixed character, half positive, half moral-even the quiet sanctity of this day may be disturbed for the benefit of the inferior animals. The horse, the ox, the ass, may be loosened from the stall and led to the pure stream to drink. Should any accident or casualty befal these useful domestic creatures which God has given us a servants and helpers, so that our attentions to them were necessary within canonical hours, it would be no sin to us to plead absence from church or chapel in order to attend to their wants. We not only might do this, but we ought to do it, and not on the impulse of selfishness either, because the poor creature was worth so many pounds to us, but on the motion of kindness which the Maker of us and them imposes on us towards them. "What man shall there be among you that shall have one sheep, and if it fall into a pit on the Sabbath day, will he not lay hold on it and lift it out?" Matt xii. 11. It is an unhappy accident that turns up in this way to keep us from our place at God's altar, and to rob us of the benefit of prayers and sermon. As such it should be deplored. But we would be very weak-minded indeed if we felt any guilt on our conscience thereabout. God loves his creatures, and is willing for us to slip his worship on occasion for their good. Our next remark is that the same liberty may be exercised

For the sake of kindness to a human being. This follows logically from the foregoing particular. If a breach may be made in divine worship out of favour to a brute, how much more for a man who is lord of the brute, and bears on him the stamp of a nature much higher? There is an error to be guarded against in this matter. It would be wrong to desert the sanctuary regularly in quest of objects of charity and kindness, and systematically to spend our Sabbath time in labours of philanthropy. This would be to exalt the secular above the spiritual, and perversely to bring sacrifice and mercy into collision. It would indicate, also, a distaste for the worship of God in the person so employed. Let the occasion fall out without intentional contrivance on our part, sacrifice and mercy both at once asking our attention, then our way is clear to pass by the sacrifice and do the office of mercy. Large illustrations are available from the pages of the New Testament on

this subject. Once on a time an interesting scene transpired when the disciples were abroad, with Christ at their head. It was sabbath day; and it was harvest time, or on the eve of it. Their road lay through corn plots, where the inviting grain waved to the breeze close to their finger ends. Appetite prompted them, and they put forth their hands and plucked a few ears from the stalk, and came quickly at the grain by the simple process of rubbing them between their palms and blowing out the chaff. So they tasted of the divine bounty aud were grateful. And what fault could be found? It was not forbidden fruit. It was not enclosed ground where it grew. No fence or railing guarded it. It was in an open field, through which there was a lawful pathway, and the laws were not so stringent in Israel as to make a man an offender for a few ears of corn. No! but superstition is very exact and precise, and can see sin where there is none. The separatists were abroad, and their critical eyes caught the disciples in the very act, and took exception to it as a foul breach of sabbath order. A discussion ensued, in which the Master vindicated the freedom that had been taken, and justified it under the shelter of royal and priestly example, quoting also Hosea's noble rule on the comparative value of formality and kindness. See Matt. xii. 3-8; and see also 1 Sam. xxi. 6, where the priest violated the rule of the house, and set holy bread before rough hungry soldiers, as if military men were on a level with the sacerdotal order. And so they were when they were under the pinch of hunger. Urgent necessity sufficed to nullify the rule for the time being. Close after this controversy in the fields occurred another occasion on the same day for inculcating the same doctrine. Christ passed thence into the synagogue. Amongst the worshippers was a man with a dried hand-withered, useless, and dead. That bad hand attracted the eye of Jesus, as all human ailments and infirmities commonly did attract his attention. It was perceived that he was meditating a cure, and was about to disturb the order of the service; and the ruling elders disputed with him the propriety of Sabbath-healing. Defiant of their overstrained sabbatarianism he ordered the man to stretch out his hand. Up went the hand, and when it came down it was as sound and as good as the other. He did the deed, and then vindicated it by asking them which of them would refuse aid even to a distressed animal on a Sabbath-day. Although he knew their superstition and prejudices on this subject, he never restrained himself when a case came fairly before him. Sabbath-day or work-day he healed disease whenever it confronted him. If the reader will pause, and take up his Bible, he may see interesting examples of Sabbath cure in the following places:-Matt. xii. 10-13, Luke xiii. 11-17, xiv. 1-6, John v. 1-16, ix. 14. These may just be recorded as examples, for the Gospels do not pretend to be exhaustive and to give all the

acts and deeds of Christ, but only select instances for our edification and for the confirmation of our faith. John xx. 30, 31, xxi. 25. Let us learn from his conduct to be kind to invalids and to persons cut off from Sabbath privileges. As we cannot cure them and do miracles in their behalf, let us at least alleviate their distress, wait on them, accompany them, and minister to them. If we occasionally miss a service in order to sit by the bed-side of a sufferer, to break the tediousness of a lonely hour and to divert his mind from becoming the prey of melancholy, it is not as if we sauntered away the sacred hours in fields or gardens for our own pleasure. Who shall meddle with our right thus to dispose of our sacred time? The claims of sacrifice may be ignored for the sake of filial piety. Filial duty is sacred enough to cancel church claims, if they come into conflict with it. The fifth commandment is of life-long obligation; it is not abrogated on our coming of age. We may concede that the honour due to father and mother is modified when we reach maturity, and is manifested differently from what it required to be during the age of weakness and dependence. The commandment keeps its hoid, and requires "honour" still, if obedience passes out of demand. And it is possible the honour might be costly to us. If in the later stages of life weakness and want combined should overtake the heads of a family, so that they require to be cared for, and their wants behove to be met, what is the course to be taken? on whom should the burden lie? There is public provision made for absolute necessity; but there is an alternative far happier, when circumstances admit of it. The New Testament imposes it on kindred to discharge the duty of supporting the aged, helpless widow; the nearest relatives first, and failing them, the next nearest.-" But if any widow have children or nephews, let them learn first to shew piety (marg. kindness) at home, and to requite their parents; for that is good and acceptable before God." 1 Tim. v. 4. This is indeed the true way to honour an aged father or mother who has fallen into the imbecility and infirmity of age. age. And it is one of the finest sights the sun shines on to see sons or daughters solicitous to provide a comfortable maintenance for a worn-out parent under the same roof-tree with themselves. Such filial piety would deserve to be encouraged by releasing other claims upon the parties concerned, in consideration of the burden they have generously taken on them. If it taxes their means very closely and uses up their income to a nearness, it would not be amiss to let the church dues fall lightly on them, or, if need were, to slip the claim entirely." But go ye and learn what that meaneth, I will have mercy and not sacrifice." The separatists, in whose ears Christ quoted Hosea's rule had no sympathy with such an act as we have now described. Kindness was a very small part of their religion. They poisoned the fountains

of affection with a bitter zeal which they sought to infuse into all whom they could win over to their system. So far from at all releasing their pecuniary demands upon parties charged with the burden of aged parents, they went in the opposite direction, and encouraged donations to their church at the expense of cruel neglect of parents, pretending that it was a holier use of the money, and that the other obligation became null. Their wicked watchword was "Corban." Then came to Jesus scribes and pharisees, which were of Jerusalem, saying, "Why do thy disciples transgress the tradition of the elders? for they wash not their hands when they eat bread. But he answered and said unto them, Why do ye also transgress the commandment of God by your tradition? For God commanded, saying Honour thy father and mother; and, He that curseth father or mother, let him die the death. But ye say, Whosoever shall say to his father or his mother, It is a gift, by whatsoever thou mightest be profited by me; And honour not his father or his mother, he shall be free. Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect by your tradition." Thus cruel bigotry inverts the divine order, and exalts sacrifice to the sublime position which mercy is privileged to hold. It subverts natural tenderness; it eats away the spirit of moral goodness and deflowers its beauty. It is certainly a proper thing to honour the exchequer of the church; but this slaughter of humanity and filial duty and the soft amenities of life for the purpose is rank injustice: it is robbery for burnt-offering, as if a man should steal a lamb and bear it away to God's altar. Any religion, Jewish or Christian, Popish or Protestant, or by whatever designation known, that contravenes benevolence and sours the milk of human kindness, is false by that very token. Again, sacrifice may be suspended—

Mat. xv. 1-6; compare Mark, vii. 11-12.

For the sake of reconciliation and forgiveness. The value which the Divine Being puts upon social rectitude and good will amongst men is in nothing more clearly seen than in the fact, that he will not accept us in our religious offerings unless we be right in our relative dealings. Such is his estimate of kindness that he will allow an informality or a breach in his worship to promote it. If in the midst of our devotions we are visited with a painful memory of some wrong that we have done to a fellowcreature, it is lawful, if not necessary, to make a pause, and retire to rectify the grievance, and then return. Solemn as the worship is, and due upon the strongest obligation, it will give way to allow space for us to adjust such a matter. "Therefore, if thou bring thy gift to the altar, and there rememberest that thy brother bath ought against thee; Leave there thy gift before the altar, and go thy way; first be reconciled to thy brother, and then come and offer thy gift." Matt. v. 23-24. This case only requires the

temporary suspension of the sacrifice. The gift was not to be carried away but left in readiness by the side of the altar, where it would be found upon return, when the ceremony could be completed. The unhappy visitant of the altar must first purge his conscience and take the sting out of his memory by a conference with his brother in order to reconciliation, then finish his religious exercise. "First be reconciled to thy brother," he has something against thee, an unpaid debt perhaps, or some foul slander that you have blown on his character, or some open insult you have offered him and never yet expressed regret for. He waits your acknowledgment that he may have the pleasure of being put into joint with you again. Till then your prayers are at a heavy discount. Bad as it would be to neglect divine worship carefully and lightly for such a purpose, you might break off your devotions in the midst. Let us learn that a bitter, ungracious behaviour to our brethren will spoil all the pains we are at in regard to the church. Prayers, and hymns, and sermons, and liberal benefactions to the funds of the church, are all cancelled and nullified by unkindness. Knowing this, let us correct what is wrong in the past, and be careful in the future.

T. G.