though it shone on them in the morning of its rays, and it shines on us in its approximation to its meridian splendour. For that meridian splendour the church is still waiting, when "the light of the moon shall be as the light of the sun, and the light of the sun shall be sevenfold as the light of seven days; in the day that the Lord bindeth up the breach of his people, and healeth the stroke of their wound."*

I cannot conclude my letter without again referring to the manifest connexion between the rite of circumcision and that of baptism, differing indeed as prefigurative and commemorative sacraments, but designed, in different states of the church, to symbolize the same important and cardinal truths, and to answer the same purpose as introductory to the visible church of God. Both, it will be observed, inculcate the doctrine of original or birth sin; and if baptism be withheld from infants, its symbolic evidence on this momentous point is lost. If it be postponed to the age in which the sinner becomes capable of actual transgression, though submission to it then implies a confession of sin, it does not mark that sin as being corruption derived by natural generation from Adam; that confession implies nothing more than an imitation of Adam. Circumcision was, on the part of God, a token of his covenant, an

* Is. xxx. 26.

assurance of Divine favour to all who should seek it in the appointed way. It was, on the part of man, a profession of faith in the necessity of atonement for sin and of Divine influence to renew the heart. It was commanded to be performed on all the members of the visible church, whether adults or infants. It admitted them to the external privileges of the Jewish church, and those external privileges were adumbrations of real blessings to be enjoyed in the exercise of faith. The two ordinances of circumcision and baptism resemble one continuous line, in which I can discern no divergence, except in the point I have already mentioned, that the one was prefigurative and the other commemorative. was necessary that when the atoning blood had been shed upon the cross, the symbol should be changed; and, consequently, the cleansing symbol of water was substituted for that of the expiatory virtue of blood.

It

Would you wish to see the variety of questions which have been raised on the institution of this rite of circumcision, I refer you with satisfaction to the eleventh dissertation of Fabricius in his Christologia, and to the authors, Christian and Jewish, to which he has referred. And I conclude with his pious prayer-" May we all be in Christ such Jews as are described, Rom. ii. 29, inwardly and not

outwardly; having the circumcision which is in the spirit and not in the letter; whose praise is not of man, but of God."

I am, my dear friend,

Your's &c.

LETTER XXVIII.

ON THE PERSON AND CHARACTER OF
MELCHIZEDEK.

The short account of Melchizedek which is recorded in the xivth chapter of Genesis, has given rise to a variety of opinion respecting that mysterious personage. Some interpreters of Scripture have maintained that Melchizedek was a mere man, typifying by the office he bore in the time of Abraham, the future priesthood of Christ; while others have been of opinion that Melchizedek was not a type of Christ, but Christ Himself, appointed before all time "a priest for ever" by the oath of THE ALEIM, and appearing to Abraham, for the encouragement of the patriarch's faith, in the high character to which He was appointed, (the effect of which was essential to human salvation), and which He fulfilled (by anticipation) in the ages that preceded his incarnation as well as in those that follow it. *

* "It has been supposed, and not without some degree of probability, that Melchizedek was even more than a mere type; that he was a visible manifestation of the Son of God. Without venturing to decide on so obscure a subject, there is no reason to doubt of the frequent corporeal appearance of the

I hesitate not to say that this latter interpretation appears to me to be the true one, for which I shall assume the liberty of offering you my reasons.

The wonderful personage who bears the name of Melchizedek, is mentioned by that title in three several parts of Scripture: first, in the history of Abraham; then in the cxth Psalm; and lastly, in the epistle to the Hebrews, where we have a comment on the original record concerning him. If, however, the hypothesis, that Melchizedek is Christ himself, be founded in truth, the whole Revelation of the Bible relates to Melchizedek ; for "the testimony of Jesus is the Spirit of prophecy."

In assigning my reasons for believing that the personage who met Abraham after his victory over the confederated kings, was Christ Himself, I shall chiefly have recourse to the Apostle St. Paul's comment on the history; but I shall pursue my usual method by transcribing the several passages in the order in which they occur.

Messiah, during the period of the patriarchal and levitical dispensations. Whatever sentiments are entertained respecting the mysterious character of Melchizedek, his illustrious antitype seems evidently to be the person spoken of in the Hebrew Scriptures, under the name of the Angel Jehovah." Faber's Hor. Mos. vol. ii. p. 137.

"Some of the church took him to have been the Son of God himself, who then appeared to Abram, ev idea av@gwe, in the form of a man." Bp. Patrick.