face to face: now I know in part; but then shall I know even as also I am known.'

"This is a confirmation of what precedes. Our present knowledge is imperfect, for we now see through a glass. These words admit of three interpretations. 1. the preposition (dia) may have its ordinary instrumental sense, we see by means of a glass; or, 2. It may have its local sense, through. Then, assuming glass (éσÓTTρov) to mean a window, the meaning is, we see as through a window; and as the windows were commonly made of mica, and therefore imperfectly transparent, to see through a window was to see dimly. As the word, however, properly means a mirror, James i. 23, the best interpretation probably is, 3. We see as through a mirror; the optical impression is that the object is behind the mirror, and the spectator seems to look through it. The ancient mirrors were of imperfectly polished metal, and the reflection which they gave was very obscure. Darkly; literally, in an enigma. This may be taken adverbially, as by our translators, we see enigmatically, i. e. obscurely; or the idea may be that we see divine things as it were wrapped up in enigmas. We do not see the things themselves, but those things as set forth in symbols and words which imperfectly express them. The reference seems to be to Num. xii. 8. Of an ordinary prophet God said, 'I will make myself known unto him in a vision, and speak to him in dream;' but of Moses he says, ' With him will I speak mouth to mouth, even apparently, and not in dark sayings,' i. e. in enigmas. (The Septuagint version is di' aivíyμarwv.) The clearest revelation of the things of God in words is an enigma, when compared to sight. Everything is comparative. The

revelations made to Moses were clear in comparison to the communications made to others by visions and dreams. Paul says the writings of Moses were enigmas compared to the revelations contained in the Gospel, 2 Cor. iii. 12, 13. And the Gospel itself is obscure compared to the lucid medium through which we shall see hereafter. But then face to face, i. e. no longer through a mirror, but immediately. Comp. Gen. xxxii. 31; Num. xii. 8. The word of God is a mirror wherein even now we behold the glory of the Lord (2 Cor. iii. 18), but what is that to seeing him face to face!"

Others say, the ground of

In what sense is love greater than faith? Hodge replies, "Some say, because it includes or is the root of faith and hope. It is said that we believe those whom we love, and hope for what we delight in. According to Scripture, however, the reverse is true. Faith is the root of love. It is the believing apprehension of the glory of God in the face of Jesus Christ, that calls forth love to him. superiority is in their effects. But we are said to be sanctified, to be made the children of God, to overcome the world, to be saved, by faith. Christ dwells in our hearts by faith; he that believes hath eternal life, i. e. faith as including knowledge, is eternal life. There are no higher effects than these, so far as we are concerned. Others say that love is superior to faith and hope, because the latter belong to the present state only, and love is to continue for ever. But, according to the true interpretation of the verse, all these graces are declared to abide. The true explanation is to be found in the use which Paul makes of this word greater, or the equivalent term better. In xii. 31, he exhorts his

readers to seek the better gifts, i. e. the more useful ones. And in xiv. 5, he says, 'Greater is he that prophesies, than he that speaks with tongues ;' i. e. he is more useful. Throughout that chapter the ground of preference of one gift to others is made to consist in its superior usefulness. This is Paul's standard; and, judged by this rule, love is greater than either faith or hope. Faith saves ourselves, but love benefits

others."

CHAPTER XIV.

LOVE RICHER THAN ALL-MEANING OF PROPHECY-ECCLESIASTICAL PRIDE-GIFTS NOT ALWAYS ACCOMPANIED WITH GRACES -SPEAKING IN TONGUES-PRAYERS IN LATIN-AMEN-WOMAN'S PLACE.

HODGE observes, "The superiority of the gift of prophecy to that of tongues is founded, 1. On the consideration that he who speaks with tongues speaks to God, whereas, he who prophesies, speaks to men, vers. 2, 3. 2. That he who speaks with tongues edifies only himself, whereas he who prophesies edifies the Church, vers. 4, 5. That this must be so, is proved, 1. By an appeal to their own judgment and experience. If Paul came to them speaking in a way which they could not understand, what good could it do them? But if, as a prophet, he brought them a revelation from God, or as a teacher, set before them a doctrine, they would be edified, ver. 6. 2. From the analogy of musical instruments. It is only when the sounds are understood, that they produce the desired effect. If a man does not know that a given note of the trumpet is a signal for battle, he would not prepare himself for the conflict, vers. 7-9. 3. From their experience in intercourse with strangers. If a man comes to me speaking a language which I cannot understand, no matter how polished or significant that language may be, he is a barbarian to me, and I to him, vers. 10, 11. In their

zeal, therefore, for spiritual gifts, they should have regard to the edification of the Church, ver. 12. Hence, he who had the gift of tongues should pray for the gift of interpretation; as without the latter gift, however devotional he might be, his prayers could not profit others, vers. 13, 14. It was not enough that the prayers and praises should be spiritual, they must be intelligible; otherwise those who were unlearned could not join in them, ver. 15-17. For himself, the apostle says, although more richly endowed with the gift of tongues than any of his readers, he would rather speak five words so as to be understood, than ten thousand words in an unknown tongue, vers. 18, 19. It was mere childishness in the Corinthians to be so delighted with a gift which they could not turn to any practical account, ver. 20. They should learn wisdom from the experience of the Hebrews. It was as a judgment that God sent among them teachers whom they could not understand. So long as they were obedient, or there was hope of bringing them to repentance, he sent them prophets speaking their own language, vers. 21, 22. Their experience would not be dissimilar. If they came together, each speaking in an unknown tongue, the effect would be only evil. But if, when they assembled, all the speakers spoke so as to be understood, and under the influence of the Spirit, then men would be convinced and converted, and God glorified, vers. 23-25."

There are unquestionably difficulties in the exposition of this chapter; and these difficulties have been distorted by some, who have built upon the gifts indicated here the most extravagant and untenable pretensions. We have read that most eloquent chapter, a poem and