earliest conditions and fragments of Philosophy have asserted, figuratively of course, that God can only be known through a divine emanation which dwells among men, or is incarnate in them, for the purpose of guiding them again to God. All the names of this 'light of God which lighteth all men that come into the world,' and so becomes their Reason, agree in a fundamental notion of Rule or Government. Among the Jews of Palestine that divine manifestation is called the Messiah, i. e. the Anointed or King: among the Greek Platonists, especially the Egyptian Jews, it was denoted by the name Logos, or Reason -the most powerful of all Guides or Rules to the rational or logical being; among the Stoics, especially of the later and purer school, it is called the 'Hyeur, the Supreme Commander, the Leader.

"The Emperor Marcus Aurelius Antoninus, whose works in many passages agree with those of Saint Paul, has some beautiful observations on the Deity within us; I think they cannot fail to interest every sincerely devout mind. I therefore extract some passages from my common-place book.

Allured by the power and spirit of some passages in Jeremy Collier's Preface to his Translation of Marcus A. Antoninus, I procured a copy of that Translation, which I have kept some time by me, without having any occasion to compare any part of it with the original. Wishing, however, in this dreary state of my whole being, to refresh some of the great Philosopher's sublime and strengthening

thoughts, upon which my mind had habitually dwelt for a long season, I met that passage (B. ii. c. x.) in which the truly inspired moral teacher urges every man to dwell constantly in the sanctuary of his own mind, adhering inseparably to the Deity that inhabits it, and offering to him the only suitable service which a man can offer to God. The description of that service is not surpassed in beauty, in moral truth, in sublime simplicity, by any thing in the New Testament.

'Unfortunately, Jeremy Collier, either from want of a thorough understanding of the original, or (what is more probable) from dulness of perception in these matters, has reduced the passage to a most commonplace piece of moral advice. Yet he might have taken a hint from Causabon, whose translation of this passage, though rather diffuse and over anxious, possesses considerable merit. Let us compare the two translations.

(Causabon, B. ii. part of c. xi. His division of chapters is different from that followed by Gataker.)

'There is nothing more wretched than that soul which, in a kind of circuit, compasseth all things, searching (as he saith) even the very depths of the earth; and by all signs and conjectures prying into the very thoughts of other men's souls; and yet of this is not sensible, that it is sufficient for a man to apply himself wholly, and to confine his thoughts and cares, to the tendance of that Spirit which is within

him, and truly and really to serve him. His service doth consist in this,-that a man keep himself pure from all violent passion and evil affection, from all rashness and vanity, and from all manner of discontent, either in regard of the gods or men. For, indeed, whatsoever proceeds from the gods deserves respect for their worth and excellency; and whatsoever proceeds from men, as they are our kinsmen, should by us be entertained with love always; sometimes as proceeding from their ignorance of that which is truly good and bad (a blindness no less than that by which we are not able to discern between white and black), with a kind of pity and compassion also.

'Causabon, in a long note, appears anxious to apologise, as it were, for so much knowledge, in a Heathen, of the indwelling spirit; as well as for translating Aaíuwv by Spirit, which he seems to regard as a consecrated word. I think the substitution very judicious. The Aaíuwv, who has his sanctuary within the Spirit, the superior part of the rational being, Man, is God himself. The rational creature must be such, through the rationality of God: there is but one Reason in the Universe. The Stoics held this doctrine most distinctly; but found it difficult to express that mysterious union of the divine nature with man-a union which preserves a perfect distinction between the personality of Man and that of his Creator. Here, of course, they set up various theories; but chiefly that of Emanations

from the Deity; subordinate beings, directly partaking of the divine nature-Aaíμoves; but they did not pretend to be very definite about them. The Stoics used that name to indicate certain spiritual phenomena; leaving, however, all explanation of the unquestionable fact unattempted. Those who can read St. Paul (and many other passages of the New Testament) with a mind totally unprejudiced by Church Theology, will find that the expression HOLY SPIRIT is used very much in the sense in which the Stoics employ the Aaíuwv. A well-known passage of Seneca will make this evident, and the more so, in consequence of the intimate connection of the Latin word with our word SPIRIT.

'Sacer intra nos Spiritus sedet, malorum, bonorumque nostrorum OBSERVATOR (this applies to the evils) et CUSTOS (this to the good), hic prout a nobis tractatus est ita nos ipse tractat. (Causabon quotes this passage in a note; I have transcribed it here from memory.) How perfectly consistent with this language would the scriptural phrases be-Grieve not the Holy Spirit; Ye are the Temple of the Holy Spirit, &c.

'Let us now compare Collier's version.

'Nothing can be more unhappy than the curiosity of that man that ranges every where, and digs into the earth for discovery; that is wonderfully busy to force a passage into other people's thoughts, and dive into their bosom; but does not consider that his own mind is large enough for inquiry and entertainment, and that the care and improvement of himself will

afford him sufficient business. And how is all this to be done? Why, by being neither passionate nor heedless, nor yet displeased upon any account, either

with the gods

or men. For as for the gods, their

administration ought to be revered upon the score

of excellency and station.

And as for men, their actions should be well taken for the sake of common kindred. Besides, they are often to be pitied for their ignorance of good and evil; which incapacity of discerning between moral qualities is a greater misfortune than that of a blind man, who can't distinguish between white and black.

"This is making short work of difficulties. The passage might be called a commentary; but it would be a commentary most injurious to the text, which it in fact strips of every characteristic, both of the Stoic school and of the mind of the most distinguished disciple of that school. I will not copy the Greek passage, to avoid fatigue, but must endeavour to translate it, as it impresses my own mind.

'Nothing can be more wretched than the man who moves in a perpetual whirl after knowledge, who will (as people say) undermine the earth in search of it, and try to discover, by conjecture, what is in other men's minds; forgetting all the while that it is sufficient for us to keep inseparably near to that one Deity who dwells within us, devoting ourselves sincerely to his worship. Now, that worship consists in keeping oneself pure from passion, from rash

'I have doubted whether to translate oneself or him; but I think