it appears that the funds amount to more than £400 per annum, and that no less than 62 schools come under the influence of, and are assisted by, this Association.

The pecuniary aid afforded to these schools, however valuable, comes short of the benefits which they derive from the labours of the Association in other forms. An excellent system of inspection has been adopted, gratuitously conducted by Clergymen, members of the Association, who visit the schools quarterly, and examine the scholars; and, besides this, an examination of the teachers periodically takes place, from which the most salutary results may be anticipated. In their report for 1835, the Committee state: "All the Scriptural schools, which were published last year as being in connexion with the Society, are not only still in full and active operation, but some additional schools have been opened."

In the diocese of Tuam, the Archbishop has established an Association upon similar principles, to which also he gives the munificent subscription of £100 per annum. About 80 schools are supported in this diocese. In their last report, the Committee observe, that they have found the inspection, as conducted, "admirably calculated to promote the object in view, by maintaining, with the local superintendents, a wholesome control over the various schools," and that the progress of the scholars in the "knowledge of the Scriptures," and in other branches of education, has been "highly satisfactory to your Inspectors."

The funds of this Association, for the past year, have amounted to upwards of £600, and eight new schools have been opened.

In the diocese of Elphin also, a Diocesan School Association has been established, of which the Bishop is president,_and to which he liberally subscribes £100 per annum; Lord Lorton, £50 per annum; Lord Mount Sandford, £30 per annum, &c. There are no less than 95 schools under the direction of this Association, which are visited quarterly by Clergymen of the diocese,-20 new schools have been established, and aid has been granted towards the erection of new school houses. The Committee, in their report, state, that most beneficial results have arisen from the inspection of the schools. Charity sermons have been preached in most of the Churches of the diocese, which have not merely added to the funds, but have "brought forward the nature and importance of Scriptural education before the community."

During the past year, a Diocesan School Association has

been in vigorous operation in the diocese of Cork and Ross, and the Committee have been enabled to pay salaries to 62 schools, besides supplying books and school requisites to many other Scriptural schools in the diocese; they have also revived 8 schools, which had been closed for want of funds, and established 12 new ones. Their funds, for the past year, have amounted to upwards of £600, which have been obtained by application to landed proprietors, charity sermons in the Churches, &c. They have, as in other cases, instituted a plan of inspection. No salary is paid to schools held in large towns. A similar Association has been established in the diocese of Cloyne, during the past year. The Associations of Cork and Cloyne comprehend within their sphere one-twelfth of Ireland. Unitedly, they have assisted 100 schools, and expect to be enabled to extend aid to 50 more.

A Diocesan School Association has been recently established in Limerick; and, in many others, the plan has been brought under consideration.

From the success, the very great success, which has crowned their efforts, in the cause of Bible education, the Directors of the schools, under the Synod of Ulster, cannot fail to derive the greatest encouragement in their labour of love. L. M.

REMARKS ON THE REV. MR. MITCHEL'S LETTERS, RESPECTING THE SCRIPTURE DOCTRINE OF THE UNITY OF GOD." NEWRY, 1834.

(Continued from page 95.)

TO THE EDITOR OF THE ORTHODOX PRESBYTERIAN.

SIR,-In commencing this letter, I would remind your readers of the fact, as stated in my first letter, that my object in writing these strictures or remarks upon Mr. Mitchel's Letters, is more to shew the weakness and fallacy of those arguments which are usually advanced in favour of Unitarianism, with the many absurd and erroneous consequences which naturally result out of the system, than to enter into any formal defence of all those leading doctrines of Christianity, which have, in Mr. M.'s Letters, been openly impugned, and entirely discarded. Having reminded your readers of this, it will account for my not having entered upon more immediate and direct proofs of these doctrines than I have done. I intend, however, after I have finished my stric

tures on these Letters, to take up the subject of the Saviour's proper and essential Deity; and to shew, that it is not only revealed in the Sacred Scriptures, but that it is, in fact, the doctrine-the very doctrine on which all the other important doctrines of the Gospel REST; which, if taken away, or denied, all these other doctrines must necessarily fall, and, compara. tively speaking, dwindle into nothing.

Mr. Mitchel, after having quoted Phil. ii. 10, proceeds to indulge himself, at some length, in a strain of sarcastic irony, in reference to Mr. Bagot and Episcopalians generally, for bowing at the name of Jesus in public worship. He represents Mr. Bagot and his brethren as taking advantage of what he terms "a mistranslation" of the above text, in order to give countenance and support to the above practice which practice, he, in his elegant phraseology, and charitable opinion, pronounces to be "a trick, practised upon the sincere and unlettered Christian, by those who know better, even in the solemnities of their worship." (P. 48.) This may seem all very well to Mr. Mitchel; but I would inquire, why it was that he did not likewise inform his readers, that Episcopalians did not dispute that the text quoted above might have been rendered as he intimates it should? Why did he not candidly inform his readers of this? Was he afraid, that if he would do so, it would refute the foul, the unfounded insinuation, that Episcopalians take advantage of a mistranslation of the text? Let candour decide here. But, to come to the point, we would remark, that the question here at issue between Episcopalians, as Trinitarians, and Mr. M. and his brethren, as Unitarians, is not a question of rendering, but meaning. It is simply this-when the Apostle, in the above text says, that "things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth, should BOW at (or in) the name of JESUS, and that every tongue should confess him to be LORD, &c.," does he then recognise Jesus as being, in his divine nature, the proper object of worship; and as being, in the same capacity, the Supreme LORD of all, to whose Divine majesty and Sovereign authority, all created intelligences, in heaven, in earth, and under the earth, should render divine homage, and be in humble subjection? Or does the Apostle merely mean to say, what Mr. M. affirms, that " things in heaven, &c.," should bow in his name, << as our Mediator?" As this question is one of vast importance, let us, for a few moments, give it our attentive consideration. The passage before us is evidently a quotation from Isaiah, where

the Prophet, or rather God by the Prophet, says-" There is no God else beside me, a just God and a Saviour: there is none beside me look unto me, and be ye saved, all the ends of the earth, for I am God, and there is none else. I have sworn by myself, the word is gone out of my mouth in righteousness, that unto me every knee shall bow, every tongue shall swear." (45, 21, 23.) The last or concluding part of this passage, (marked in italics,) it will be observed, is the part quoted by the Apostle-which words he quotes and applies to JESUS, in his epistle to the Romans, as well as in that to the Philippians. In the former epistle he says, "We shall all stand before the judgment-seat of Christ, for it is written, as I live, saith the Lord, every knee shall bow to me, and every tongue shall confess to God." (14, 10, 11.) In the judgment of the Apostle, then, Christ is that LORD who sware by himself, that "to him every knee should bow, and every tongue should swear," or confess.* In Phil. ii. 10, (the passage before us,) the Apostle says, At (or in) the name of JESUS every knee should bow, of things in heaven, and things in earth, and things under the earth-and every tongue should confess that Jesus Christ is LORD, to the glory of God the Father." Every one will perceive, that the words in italics are a quotation from the passage in Isaiah, and that the Apostle here most expressly applies them to the LORD JESUS CHRIST, as he also does in his epistle to the Romans. The question, then, now comes to this:-Does the Apostle, in the above instances, properly apply these words of JEHOVAH,( for, be it recollected, they are JEHOVAH's own words,)-does the Apostle, then, properly apply them to the LORD JESUS CHRIST? If he does, the question is settled; for then we can be at no loss for their proper meaning. Now, that the

66

"

• It has been well observed, that the reasoning of the Apostle, here, is quite absurd, and perfectly inconclusive, if Christ were not that same Lord or Jehovah whom the prophet speaks of, as swearing by himself, that "unto HIM every knee should bow-every tongue should swear.' For, let it be carefully observed, that the Apostle's intention is to prove, that we shall all hereafter have to stand before Christ to be judged ; and the argument he makes use of, in order to prove this, is, the words of Jehovah which we have just now quoted, where he most solemnly assures us, that it is "UNTO HIM every knee shall bow," &c. But if Christ and Jehovah be not essentially ONE-ONE BEING, this argument of the Apostle's proves not what he intended, but the very reverse; that is, it proves that we shall not stand before CHRIST, to be judged, but before another Beinga Being, who is essentially distinct from, and infinitely superior to, Christ.

Apostle properly applies these words of JEHOVAH to CHRIST, none, who believe that he wrote under the immediate direction and guidance of the HOLY SPIRIT, can for a moment doubt. And, as to the meaning of these words of Jehovah, which here, in two several instances, apply to our LOED, there can be but one opinion. They evidently represent God to us, under the character of the Supreme and Sovereign LORD of the universe-to whose divine and awful majesty all creatures should render divine homage, and be in humble subjection— and not under the character of a Mediator, in whose name we should worship God. Must not the fact, then, strike every one, that when the Apostle quoted these same words, and applied them to our LORD, he recognised him under the very same character of SUPREME LORD, TO WHOM every knee in heaven, in earth, and under the earth, should bow" in humble adoration and worship, and not under his character of a Mediator, in whose name all creatures "in heaven, &c.' should worship Deity ?* But, to leave no room for doubt upon this subject, we can here easily demonstrate, that the Unitarian interpretation of the passage cannot possibly be the true one. To prove this, we have only to assume, that Unitarians correctly interpret this passage, as meaning that Christ is the Medium, through which religious worship should be offered, and not, himself, the immediate object of that worship. Assuming this, then, as the true meaning of the passage, let us see what conclusions it would lead us to. In it the Apostle speaks of beings "in heaven, in earth, and under the earth, bowing at (in or to) the name of Jesus; and of every tongue confessing him to be LORD;" so that we here have things celestial, terrestrial, and subterranean, bowing, according to the Unitarian interpretation, "in the name of Jesus, as their Mediator!" But, are we to suppose that the ANGELS-the pure and holy ANGELS-those beings who have never sinned that they are required to worship God, through Jesus, as our or their Mediator? How absurd the idea! Every one knows that mediation implies the existence of sin. To suppose, therefore, as Unitarians do, that the Apostle in the passage speaks of Christ, not as the object, but the medium of divine adoration and worship, is to suppose or entertain one

* That Christ is, in the Scriptures, represented as the "only Mediator between God and men," I readily admit; and that he IS so, is my only ground of hope; but that he is, in this passage, so represented, I unhesitatingly deny.