child. 2. The term "rod," is to be taken in a literal, and not figurative, sense, for the true meaning of the original is "a staff," "stick," or, as translated and commonly understood, "a rod." And it is referred to as that, the use of which shall make the child so to smart under its strokes, that his crying will tempt the parent to forbear. "Let not thy soul spare for his crying" (Prov. 19: 18). 3. This rod is to be employed for correcting, chastening the child. It is explicitly and emphatically styled "rod of correction." And, instead of sparing that rod, we are called upon to chasten the child betimes, which supposes that other means will or may prove insufficient. Hence, whatever may be proper for other places, no one has a Bible right to legislate the rod of correction out of his family government.

It will be observed, that no mention is made how often we are to use the rod, neither of the number or severity of the strokes. And this very silence, on points like this, is instructive. It clearly leads to the inference that we are not to use the rod for the sake of saying we use it, nor as a binding ceremony, the regular routine of which nothing must interrupt, nor simply because the Bible gives us the right to use it. Our only reason for employing it must be, because it is one of those warranted means which, after all others fail, is absolutely necessary and has the promise of success. The aim, thus far, has been to place the rod just where it ought to be kept, as the last resort. A careful examination of the whole Bible-teaching, on this subject, clearly shows that our permission even to chasten with the rod is granted only when affectionate familiarity, faithful instruction, and careful restraint, have all failed. It is at that point, when, after, and notwithstanding all, we find the child wilfully following his own desires in opposition to our instruction and reproof, that it is not only our privilege, but duty, to take betimes the rod, compel his obedience, and scourge him back, if possible, from the ways of sin.

Without doubt, the instances are numerous in which children, for the most part left uncared for, will need the rod. Indeed, as a rule, this is the class, that seems most frequently and imperatively to demand it. But, in all such cases, a cruel course has been practised. For the parents of such children directly reverse the order, and begin at the wrong end of the instrumentalities to be employed. Alas! how often they end, as well as commence, here! So that all such children ever see and hear and feel, in the process of their training, if training it may be called, is the scowl, the scold, and the rod. A child, thus situated, has a claim upon our warmest sympathy; and parents acting thus themselves, deserve to be rebuked. Such a course, therefore, is neither advocated nor approved. The leading object now in view, is the correction of an attempted (falsely styled) improvement upon the Bible method:an attempt very analogous to that whining, sickly sentimentalism which would erect a prison instead of a gallows for the murderer,

or, in a still more extended charity, offer him a pardon, when God says, emphatically, "Whoso sheddeth man's blood, by man shall his blood be shed." (Gen. 9: 6.) As in this latter case, so in the former, plausible, and, therefore, to some, forcible arguments are employed. "It is too cruel; parents ought to love their children." True, they ought to love them. Therefore, in the course now commended, familiar affection forms the starting-point, and the punishment should not be of such degree, or in such spirit, as is inconsistent with that love. "It is too degrading; every parent's aim should be to awaken self-respect within the child." True, but this is that humility which comes before honour, and is wholly consistent with such aim. It is degradation, in view of the feelings and practices which were wrong, and demanded the rod as a necessary preparative for feelings and practices that are right, and shall, henceforth, secure his own peace and the willing approval of all the wise and good. "It is too much after the manner of dealing with brutes; better instruct and reason with them as intelligent and rational beings." True, but instruction and reason have been already used as a necessary duty, second in order and importance only to that familiarity which will win the confidence and thus the docility of the child. Therefore, it were a great mistake to suppose that the rod is now urged as a substitute for everything else, or as a panacea for all the need and defects of children. This the candid reader will neither affirm nor believe. "Use the great authority which, by nature, every parent has to regulate and curb an otherwise impetuous spirit." True, this is right; and, if the voice of authority prove sufficient to restrain from the way of known wrong, and order the footsteps in the way of known right, nothing that has been said can lead to the belief that, in such a case, more violent means are to be employed. Besides, this very restraint of parental authority, as preceding chastisement, has itself been urged.

Thus far, then, we are agreed. But now the writer advances a step beyond. If all these fail to secure the end at which the parent ought to aim, then must follow the privilege and the duty of using this extreme method; of employing a corporeal force which the child will regard as the rod of correction; a chastisement which does not spare the rod, while our soul does not spare for his crying. Taking the Bible, thus, for our guide, we shall continually remember that the cause of his persisting in wrong is, that foolishness is bound in that child's heart; that the injunction to use the rod, implies that the foolishness is so deeply scated there that all other and needful methods may wholly fail; but that if, upon such failure, we promptly follow up the other means by the authorized and real punishment, foolishness shall be driven far from him. Now, it is the cheering certainty of such result, from such a guarantee, which leads to the anxiety that this divinely appointed method may not be neglected. Let it be faithfully employed.

But, always as the extreme of effort, which the yearning heart of the anxious parent would put forth to rebuke the wayward and reclaim the child of his vows and prayers, and secure him in the way of righteousness and peace.

L. H. C.

"JOTTINGS OF AN OLD WOMAN OF EIGHTY."

ON EARLY RISING.

To leave the warm nest where we have slumbered so snugly, to renounce its comforts for the opposing duties of the day, is, as some one has said, "an act of heroism," and, like all heroic deeds, needs energy, courage, and decision. It is of no use thinking about it, my dears, it must be done, and that in earnest.

ON ORDERLY HABITS.

Keep your minds as you do your drawers, neatly arranged for use; let every finished object be sorted away till wanted; you will be astonished to find how much more both mind and drawers will hold if things and thoughts are put away properly.

ON MARRIAGE.

We must judge of character, of temper, of abilities; be certain of the energy and endurance of a manly mind, before we promise to obey its dictates.

We must be sure that we are loved, not merely as a useless ornament to his home, but as a friend, the companion whose love must last, when time steals on.

We must feel that our opinion is sought, our judgment appreciated; that confidence, the brightest ray in the diadem of married life, is ours; that not only are we loved in the sunshine, but trusted in the storm. Then, oh, then, only may we safely "climb life's hill together."

The husband should lead the way; he is the stronger, he may be the wiser, and it is his undeniable privilege to be the pioneer in the wilderness of the future. But let him find in his wife no lagging companion; her smile must cheer, her sympathy support, and, if need be, her industry assist their onward course.

TO THE YOUNG MOTHER.

"To train up a child in the way it should go," is the mother's high privilege, from the hour when she folds her first-born to her bosom, but "to go in the way you would train your child," is the perfect rule which turns the sceptre of good King Solomon into the palm-branch of peace, and love, and happiness. "In patience possess ye your souls," who have the charge of children. To steadily oppose the stubborn will with an unruffled temper, needs higher

help than ours; but He who "giveth quietness" will hear the mother's orison; and truly she finds "the wisdom that is from above is gentle."

A mother's influence, even in play-time, is far from being a restraint upon the happy group; let her associate herself with the feelings of the children, follow their quick sensibilities, arrest with a smile the angry word, suggest the gentle answer, and turn the wrath away; reward with a glance the frequent act of self-denial, and be, in short, the mirror that reflects their happiness and joy.— Christian Press.

Biographical and Bistorical.

REV. JOSIAS MACKIE.

[The Rev. ISAAC W. K. HANDY is continuing his historical researches in reference to the Rev. JOSIAS MACKIE, and sends us some of the Oaths and Certificates of the olden time, which we gladly publish. We hope that more and more light will be thrown upon the history of the Church and of the early fathers, and that Brother HANDY will be encouraged to go forward in his good work.

The following note from Mr. H. is explanatory.

Rev. C. Van Rensselaer, D.D.

PORTSMOUTH, VA., May 28th, 1856.

DEAR BROTHER:-Enclosed I send you Mackie's Oaths, Certificates, &c., as I have found them upon the records of Norfolk County. I have endeavoured to transcribe them just as they appear in the old books, the singular penmanship excepted. The want of punctuation, errors in spelling, &c., belong no doubt to the clerk,-they may have some interest, however, as pertaining to the past. I know of no safer or more durable repository for these antiquities than the Magazine.

I have Mackie's Will, which can also be forwarded if you desire it. I think it ought to have some such conservator as the Magazine.

Make such use of the enclosed as you think proper. Publish or not, as may be desirable; and with or without corrections.

Mackey" in quotation, as in your last number, should be "Macky," without the e. Thomas Joy should be Thomas Ivy.

August 15, 1692. I, JOSIAS MACKIE, doe solemnly and sincerely, in the presence of God, profess, testifie, and declare, that I doe believe that in the Sacrament of the Lord's Supper there is nott any transubstantiation of the elements of bread and wine into the body and blood of Christ, at or after the consecration thereof by any person whatsoever, and that the invocation or adoration of the Virgin Mary, or any other saint, and the Sacrifice of the Mass, as they are now used in the Church of Rome, are supersticious and idolatrous; and I doe solemnly, in the presence of God, profess, testifie, and declare, that I doe make this Declaration, and every part thereof, in the plain and ordinary sense of the words read unto mee, as they are commonly understood by English Protestants, without

any evasion, equivocation, or mentall reservation whatsoever, and without any dispensation granted mee for this purpose by the Pope, or any authority or person whatsoever, or without any hope of any such dispensation from any person or authority whatsoever, or without thinking that I am or can be acquitted before God or man, or absolved of this declaration or any part thereof, although the Pope or any other person or persons or power whatsoever should dispence with or annull the same, or declare that it was null and void from the beginning.

JOSIAS MACKIE.

I doe further, as a Minister of the Gospel, declare my approbation of, and doe subscribe unto, the Articles of Religion mentioned in the statute made in the thirteenth year of the reign of the late Queen Elizabeth, except the thirty-fourth, about the traditions of the Church; the thirty-fifth, concerning homilies; the thirty-sixth, of consecration of bishops and ministers; and the words of the twentieth article, viz., the Church hath power to decree rites and ceremonies and impose. I say I doe hereby declare my approbation of and subscribe the aforesaid Articles of Religion excepting above expressed by act of Parliament.

JOSIAS MACKIE.

The oaths were these, viz., the oath of fidelity: I doe sincerely promise and swear that I will be faithful, beare true allegiance to their majesties King William and Queen Mary, soe help mee, God.

I doe swear that I doe from my hart abhorre, detest, and abjure, as impious and heretical, that damnable doctrine and position that princes excommunicated or deprived by, on any authority of the See of Rome, may be deposed or murthered by their subjects or any other whatsoever; and I do declare that no foreign princes, person, prelate, state, or potentate, hath or ought to have any power, jurisdiction, superiority, preeminence, or authority, ecclesiastical or spiritual, within this realm, so help mee, God.

Norfolk.

Whereas, in the first year of the raign of William and Mary, King and Queen of England, Scotland, &c., being the year of our Lord one thousand six hundred eighty and nine, the twenty-fourth day of May, an Act of the Parliament for exempting their majesties' Protestant subjects decenting from the Church of England, from penalties of sertain laws passed the royal assent; these are therefore to certifie that Mr. Josias Mackie, Minister of the Gospel, hath this day appeared before us, Thomas Butt and James Willson, two of their majesties' Justices for this county, and hath performed the conditions or terms of toleration enjoyned Protestant desenters by the late Act of Parliament for Indulgence 'pon the performance whereof they are to enjoy the liberty therein granted, viz., hath taken the oaths by the said Act enjoyned, and hath made and subscribed the declaration therein mentioned and within written, and hath also declared his approbation of and subscribed the Articles of Religion, excepting what are to be excepted as is required by Act of Parliament, and also within written. Dated under o. hands this 22d day of June, the year of our Lord 1692.

THO. BUTT,
JAMES WILLson.