oped; for, as the same apostle remarks,-" A covenant has no force while the covenant-victim remains alive."In this point of view, although really prior, it was apparently posterior to the Mosaic covenant; on which account, and with regard more especially to the Israelitish nation, as the depositaries of revelation and the peculiar people of God, it is termed in both volumes of Scripture," the new covenant."*-Thus, in his epistle to the Hebrews, Paul quotes a remarkable passage from the book of Jeremiah, where it is thus described. Christ, observes the apostle," hath obtained a more exalted ministry [than that of Aaron] inasmuch as he is [the] mediator of a better covenant, which was established on better promises. For if the first [covenant] had been faultless, no place would have been sought for a second. Nevertheless, when rebuking [the people], it is said [in the Scripture], Behold the days come, saith the Lord, when I will make a new covenant with the house of Israel, and with the house of Judah, not according to the covenant which I made with their fathers in the day when I took them by the hand to lead them out of the land of Egypt, because they forsook my covenant, and I disregarded them, saith the Lord; for this [is] the covenant which I will make with the house of Israel after those days, saith the Lord, I will put my laws into their minds, and will write them on their hearts, and will be to them a God, and they shall be to me a people, and they shall not teach every one his neighbor, and every one his brother, saying, Know the Lord, for they shall all know me, from the least of them to the greatest; for I will be merciful to their iniquities, and their sins and transgressions I will remember no more."-With similar

* Διαθήκη γὰρ ἐπὶ νεκροῖς βεβαία, ἐπεὶ μήποτε ἰσχύει ὅτε ζῇ ὁ διαθέ Mevos: Heb. chap. 9, v. 15-17; chap. 11, v. 4;-Rom. chap. 4, v. 9-13; -1 Corinth. chap. 11, v. 23-26;-2 Corinth. chap. 3, v. 5, 6;—Galat. chap. 3, v. 1-9.

views, Peter congratulates the Jewish Christians of Asia Minor on having actually made this happy transition; "Ye [are] a chosen race, a royal priesthood, a holy nation, a favored people, and should therefore show forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light; who formerly [were] not a people, but [are] now the people of God, who [had] not obtained mercy, but now [have] obtained mercy." *-At the ratification of the first covenant, says Paul,—“ when every commandment of the law had been recited to all the people by Moses, he took the blood of calves and goats, with water and scarlet wool, and hyssop, and sprinkled both the book and all the people saying, This [is] the blood of the covenant which God hath appointed for you." -At the institution of the Lord's Supper, which immediately followed the last passover celebrated by Christ with his apostles, it is stated that," as they were eating, Jesus took bread, and after offering thanks brake, and gave [it] to the disciples, and said, Take, eat, this is my body which is broken for you. Do this in remembrance of me. In like manner also, after offering thanks, he gave to them the cup after supper, saying, Drink ye all of it. And they did so. And he said to them, This cup [is] the new covenant by my blood which [is] shed for you [and] for many for the discharge of sins. Do this, whenever ye drink [of it] in remembrance of me. I tell you that I will not henceforth drink of this fruit of the vine, till the day when I shall drink it new with you in my Father's kingdom." — The meaning and design of this rite, as well as the super

* Jerem. chap. 31, v. 31–34;—Heb. chap. 8, passim ;-1 Peter, chap. 2, v. 9, 10.

Exod. chap. 24, v. 4-8;-Matt. chap. 26, v. 26-29;-Mark, chap. 14, v. 22-25;-Luke chap. 22, v. 17-20;-1 Corinth. chap. 11, v. 23-26; -Heb. chap. 9, v. 16-23. By the book, in the latter passage, is meant the book or roll of that national covenant, in its more detailed or extended form, which God made with the Israelitish people at Mount Sinai.

natural rending of the veil in the temple, are strongly illustrated by the explanation here given, which in its turn is confirmed and dignified. by the association. This symbol, like the former one, overlooks the minor circumstances of the crucifixion; and singling out the two essential conditions which proved it to be an atoning sacrifice, namely, the rending of the Saviour's body,-in other words, the rupture of his heart, and the consequent effusion of his life's blood,-assigns to them that prominence and importance in the plan of redemption, to which they are justly entitled. By these symbols the seal of divine authority was affixed to the transaction now explained; since with all the weight of that authority they demand attention to two cardinal facts in the death of Christ, which admit of no other interpretation. In this manner only could his body have been broken, or his life's blood poured out, as an atonement for the sins of mankind. By these symbols, therefore, the two parties to the new covenant, the Deity on the one side, and Christian churches on the other, appropriately signified their concurrence in the mediatorial sacrifice by which alone that covenant could have been ratified.

Nor was this their only use; for they also powerfully contributed to mark the important distinction between the two covenants, which by many persons, more especially at the commencement of the gospel dispensation, were apt to be confounded. In reference to religion, the whole human race was at that time divided into four classes of very unequal extent; namely, Christian Jews, Christian Gentiles, and those who, whether Jews or Gentiles, had not embraced the gospel. For acceptance with God unbelieving Jews relied on the old covenant, Christians of both sections on the new, and unbelieving Gentiles, who had no covenant at all, on their self-imposed and idolatrous worship. In repudiating open idolatry

Christians and unbelieving Jews were agreed, but respecting the nature and import of the two covenants they widely differed. Both covenants were in fact of divine origin, but the Mosaic was merely a national and external covenant, introductory to the Christian, which it typified and predicted. During the apostolical period of nearly forty years both dispensations were coexistent; and, while Christian Gentiles had no connection with the old covenant, and unbelieving Israelites rejected the new, Christian Jews were consistent members of both. Το prevent as far as possible the confusion which was liable to arise from so extraordinary a state of things, it pleased God to ordain that Christianity, like Judaism, should have its initiatory and commemorative rites, whereby the true relation, as well as distinction between the two covenants might be clearly displayed. The initiatory rite of Judaism intimated that impurity of conduct was incompatible with a divine alliance; that of Christianity represented the special influence of the Holy Spirit, which purifies and consecrates the heart. The commemorative rite of Judaism intimated that an adequate atoning sacrifice was necessary for salvation; that of Christianity represented this sacrifice as actually accomplished. By observing the Christian rites, both Jews and Gentiles professed that they sought the favor of God, not through the works of the law, but through faith in Christ. Both parties, however, evinced a proper reverence for the Mosaic institution, which, although temporary and subordinate, was nevertheless divinely appointed, and highly impor tant; the former by a cheerful compliance with all its requirements, until by the interposition of its supreme author it was finally abolished; the latter by abstaining from blood as an article of food, so long as by its sacrificial employment at the temple in Jerusalem it typified the blood of Christ. Nothing could be better adapted

than these symbols to show that, although both religions came from God, Judaism was merely the scaffolding, and Christianity the finished edifice. By adopting them, the Jewish convert publicly professed that he renounced all dependence on the old covenant for the salvation of the soul; and, in common with the Gentile convert, sought reconciliation with God exclusively from the new. By refusing them, the unconverted Jew made it manifest that he preferred the shadow to the substance, rejected the counsel of God against himself; and, in his idolatry of the temple and its ceremonies, was guilty, like the unconverted Gentile, of worshipping the creature more than the Creator.*

The distinctive character and mutual relation of the two covenants were, however, chiefly intimated by their commemorative rites. In order to make a powerful and vivid impression on the human mind during the many ages which preceded the coming of Christ, it was expedient that his sacrificial death should be represented by that of animals. The rupture of his heart owing to mental agony could not indeed be thus expressed; but the effusion of his life's' blood was plainly foreshown by the manner in which victims were slain, namely, by the rapid division of the large vessels of the neck, which necessarily occasioned a copious and fatal discharge of blood, derived almost directly from the heart. Yet, from the intrinsic worthlessness of these sacrifices, and from their perpetual repetition, as well as from the continued suspension of the veil before the inner sanctuary of the tabernacle, or temple, notwithstanding their oblation, it might reasonably

*This charge seems to be preferred by the apostle Paul against unbelieving Jews, in Philipp. chap. 3, v. 2, 3;-Heb. chap. 8, v. 3, 5; chap. 9, v. 11-14; and chap. 13, v. 10; as against unbelieving Gentiles in Rom. chap. 1, v. 21-25. See also John, chap. 4, v. 19–24;—Acts, chap. 15, v. 19, 20, 28, 29; chap. 21, v. 17-26.