may yet not much obscure its native and divine simplicity.

Along with those already named, we may mention farther the methods of history, parable, and allegory, as being well adapted for conveying the knowledge of moral and religious truth. These, though they strike the mind less than the former, yet agreeably win the attention and assist the memory. And in an improved age of the world, the history of those symbolical actions which were once performed, may supersede the necessity of continually repeating them, especially if history be aided by constant public recognition, and regular commemorative solemnities. It is here particularly to be observed, that, as striking and symbolical actions arrest the mind more than any other mode of instruction, so the truths which are veiled under them must necessarily be regarded as the bones and sinews of such a popular system, and every interpretation which would throw these into the shade, or assign them a subordinate and secondary place, must therefore be erroneous or defective.

The application of the preceding remarks to that popular system of truth which is contained in the scriptures, is sufficiently obvious. The light of truth was too pure and too strong for the intellectual eyes of a dark and idolatrous age, as was signified by the veil which Moses put upon his

face when he went out to the people; for the near converse and glory of God, to which the prophet had been admitted, imparted a divine and dazzling radiance to his countenance, so that the people could not look upon it uncovered. This fitting emblem points out the veiled and covered character of truth under the Mosaic dispensation, and is rightly so interpreted by St. Paul in his epistle to the Hebrews. The same was signified in the construction of the tabernacle, and afterwards of the temple, by the placing of the ark of the covenant and the mercy seat of God, in the holy of holies behind the veil or curtain, into which the high priest alone entered once a year, but not without sacrifice and sprinkling of blood.

The Israelites having been set apart in an age of universal idolatry, for the purpose of reviving and supporting the knowledge and worship of the one Living and True God, it was necessary to separate them from the surrounding nations by very effectual barriers, that they might regard themselves as a holy nation, and not be led astray by the seductions of neighbouring polytheism. For this end many of their laws and customs are designed, and particularly the distinctions of clean and unclean, in the selection of beasts for food or sacrifice. Walls stronger than adamant may be built of laws, customs, and prejudices. Of the efficacy of such barriers, an instance is afforded in the separation of casts in India, of which a

main distinction is said to be peculiarity of diet. But this primary end hinders not that some subordinate regard might also be had to prohibit the less useful or wholesome kinds, rather than the better and more serviceable. The institutions which were made for preserving the Jews as a separate and peculiar people, are however mere outworks of their religion, of no importance in themselves, but to protect and secure that invaluable treasure of which they were made custodiers. It is of no consequence to our present purpose to treat of them, our business is only with the symbolical system of truth, which was lodged within those entrenchments.

Now the principal types or symbols of the Jewish law are referable to three classes: - sacrifices of atonement or redemption, ceremonies of purification, and offerings of thanksgiving. The last class, including all offerings of first-fruits of corn, wine and oil, and others of a similar nature, plainly acknowledged God the giver of all good things, conveying a simple expression of belief and trust in his providence, and a feeling of gratitude for his bounty. The two former classes may seem to involve more difficulty in their interpretation. The sacrifices of atonement or redemption were various, the principal being the following:

1. The holocaust, or whole burnt-offering for the sins of the officiating priest and his family,

which was a bullock slain at the altar, and his blood sprinkled upon the horns of the altar of incense, but the whole carcass carried without the camp, and there burned with fire. At the same time, for the sins of the people, was offered the double sacrifice of the goat of the sin-offering and the scape-goat, of which the former was slain at the altar, its blood sprinkled on the horns of the altar, and the entire carcass carried without the camp, and burned along with the bullock; but the second, when the priest, laying his hands on its head, had confessed over it the sins of all the people, was turned loose into the wilderness alive, that it might bear their iniquities away from them thus indicating that sin must both be atoned for and removed. These sacrifices were offered annually when the high priest entered into the holiest place.

:

-

2. The annual sacrifice of the paschal lamb, which was slain for each family in the evening, and his blood sprinkled upon the door-posts of the house, in commemoration of the deliverance in Egypt, when the destroying angel, slaying all the first-born of the Egyptians, spared the houses of the Israelites from regard to this covenant of redemption, the lamb being accepted as a substitute for the first-born. It was roasted, and eaten hastily with bitter herbs, and whatever remained was consumed with fire in the morning.

3. The sacrifice offered on the birth of every

first-born male Israelite for his redemption, in commemoration of the same event.

4. The daily commemoration of the atonement, in the morning and evening sacrifices of the altar.

5. Sacrifices of atonement for the special trespasses of individuals, which were offered upon occasion.

The ceremonies of purification, in addition to those of atonement, consisted in various ablutions with water, or in sprinkling of water mingled with the blood of atonement, or with the ashes of an heifer slain and burnt.

Now these various sacrifices and ablutions, in a literal sense, could take away nothing but ceremonial uncleanness, why then do they occupy so conspicuous a place in the laws of Moses, which, in other respects, display so much justice, wisdom, benevolence, and simplicity? The true answer is, that, though in a literal view of small importance, they yet veiled and embodied most momentous truths. Farther, the truth thus embodied was manifestly not of a civil or secular nature; for civil offences among the Jews admitted of no atonement, but criminals were to be taken from the very altar of God, if they should fly to it for refuge, "Thou shalt take him from mine altar that he die." There remains, therefore, no other interpretation but that which is spiritual. Sins atoned by these sacrifices were regarded as offences against the Divine Holiness; man was