My kingdom is not of this world." Strange that this principle has been so slowly apprehended by the Christian consciousness; yet, on the other hand, he must be blind indeed who does not see how naturally the other arose in the attempt to solve the great problem of the church's outward constitution. The discussion of this question is not, however, suited to the limits of the present article.

The Genevese soon began to repine at the severity of the rules which had been drawn up by Farel for the regulation of their social morality. The adherence to them implied a revolution of manners far greater than any merely political revolution, and it was impossible that such a change should take place without the most formidable and obstinate resistance. The first serious trouble, however, arose from certain Anabaptists who attempted to take advantage of this discontent, and introduce themselves to notice and influence; but failing to maintain their ground in a public disputation held with Calvin and Farel in the presence of the council and a numerous audience, they were ordered to retract, and refusing to do so were banished.

The next difficulty sprang from the restless temper of Caroli, a vain and ambitious man who afterward vacillated between Protestantism and Romanism according to the interests of the moment. He ventured to attack the orthodoxy of the three teachers, Calvin, Viret, and Farel, accusing them before the Council of Berne of Arianism. Though the ministers refused to subscribe at his requisition the Nicene and Athanasian creeds not, apparently, because they could not do so with honesty, but because they did not recognize any authority in Caroli to compel them-the affair ended in their own complete acquittal before two synods which were successively convened to inquire into the matter, and in the disgrace of Caroli, who, to avoid being exposed by others, voluntarily confessed some of his past misdeeds and crimes, not, however, to the full extent of his guilt. The kindness afterward shown to this man, even by those whom he had thus endeavored to injure, was very great. Calvin soon after expresses his regret that they had hesitated to subscribe the creeds; "for," says he, in a letter to Farel, “it was certainly somewhat discreditable that we should have rejected those documents, which, since they have been received

by the approving judgment of the whole church, ought to be considered as beyond controversy."

Calvin, Viret, and Farel, though afterward separated in the scenes of their ministry, continued to be intimately associated with each other, both in labors and in affection, throughout their lives. Beza, who knew them all, thus speaks of their friendship: "It was indeed a most delightful spectacle, these three men so illustrious in the church of God, joining together with such consent in the divine work. Farel excelled in a certain greatness of spirit; his thunders no one could hear without trembling, nor could any listen to his ardent prayers without being lifted up almost into heaven itself. Viret so excelled in sweetness of eloquence that his auditors could not but hang upon his lips. Calvin filled the mind of his hearers with weighty thoughts, as many as the words he uttered; so that it has often occurred to me that he would be in some degree a perfect pastor who should be combined of all these three."

The troubles at Geneva rapidly increased. Though Popery was expelled, the licentious vices which had thriven so long unchecked under its dominion still continued to flourish. Private enmities, which had arisen during the war with Savoy, were still cherished, and the admonitions and corrections now administered only seemed to exasperate the evil. Finally a faction was distinctly formed, in opposition to the new order of things, to which many utterly refused to submit ; and matters went so far, that Calvin and Farel at last declared that they could not celebrate the Lord's Supper in a community where such discord prevailed, and among citizens who would not submit themselves to any kind of ecclesiastical discipline. Another occasion of difficulty arose about this time. Among its outward regulations the church of Geneva had determined upon the use of common bread in the celebration of the Lord's Supper. It rejected the use of the baptistery or stone font as necessary in baptism, and had also abolished all festival days except Sunday. But the church of Berne had decided differently on these points; and, having obtained the acquiescence of Lausanne, now desired Geneva to accede to their practice, that the churches might preserve as much uniformity as possible, not in their belief only, but also in their external rules. To

this proposition Calvin and his associates would not consent, though afterward, when the use of unleavened bread had been adopted in their absence, they were silent with regard to it, thinking it by no means a matter worthy of contention. Their present refusal, however, was displeasing to many of the people; and the Libertine party, as it was called, gathering strength from this circumstance, seem to have succeeded in electing the yearly syndics of their own party. The latter called an assembly of the people, who passed a decree banishing Calvin, Farel, and Conrad, an aged and blind, but intrepid and zealous preacher whom they had brought with them from Paris. When Calvin heard this news, "Certainly," he replied, "if I had been serving men, an ill reward had been paid me; but it is well that I have been obedient to Him who never fails to give his servants what he has once promised."

Thus closes Calvin's first experience in Geneva. It extended over a period of about a year and a half of conflict, and, entered on with reluctance, was afterwards looked back upon with terror. Had he never returned thither, not only would the future history of Geneva, and through her of the whole Reformed church, have been different, but the character of Calvin himself would doubtless have been essentially modified. The events that followed this change must be reserved for a succeeding article.

ARTICLE V.

THE TEMPTATION OF CHRIST.

SATAN was no visionary being to the Saviour. He had the most vivid faith in his personal presence. His language in speaking of him, subsequently, has a lifelike reality and visibility. "Get thee behind me, Satan," he said to Peter; as though Satan still stood before him, a terrible remembrance. "Satan hath desired to have you, that he may sift you as wheat." "I beheld Satan as lightning fall from heaven." is fair to infer that this graphic force of expression is attribu

It

table, in part at least, to a previous sensible contact with the tempter. We are glad that a writer so learned and reverent as Ellicott declares his conviction of the outward nature of the temptation, of the presence of the Evil One, real and external, to our Lord, to be as strong as that of his own existence.

That the temptation of our Lord is to be understood literally and objectively, that there was an actual appearance of the tempter, we argue from the harmony of this view with the incarnation of Jesus. The fact of the appearance of Satan is in entire keeping with the bodily appearance of the Son of God. They are both spirits standing out before us. Not both incarnate spirits; for the appearance of Satan was not an incarnation, but rather like the occasional temporary assumption of the human form by Christ, before he came in the flesh, and took into indissoluble union with himself the human nature. Again, the appearance of Satan accords with the appearance of angels in the Old Testament history. They assumed the shape of men -why not the angel of the bottomless pit? At this very temptation the angels of God were present. They came and ministered unto Christ, at the close-brought him food, doubtlessthat word, "ministered," is such a human word. The angel appeared to Zacharias. He announced his birth to Mary. The hosts of them sung to the shepherds over the plains of Judea. They appeared at his resurrection, in human shape, like two young men, and again at his ascension, as two men ; and there is every reason to believe that they thus appeared in the temptation; and why not Satan appear as well as they? Why should not Satan come to him in the manner in which all other spirits come to him? All appearances to him, all approaches to him, by the inhabitants of the other world, were in bodily shape. Moses and Elias, two men in glory, appeared and talked with him in the transfiguration.

This view accords best with the record. It is the most obvious and natural way in which to regard the account the first impression it makes on the reader. "The tempter came to him, and said "- spoke articulate words, pointed to the stones, "these" particular stones. Christ answered him and spoke — quoted a passage of Scripture. "The devil taketh him up into the holy city, and setteth him on a pinnacle of the temple."

There are just as conclusive reasons for believing this to be all actual, as there are to believe that the scene on the mount of transfiguration was actual. There is no more reason to believe that the temptation was a dream, or a vision, or was subjective in Christ's thought only, than there is to believe this of the transfiguration. The temptation partakes of the substantial reality of all the other great events of Christ's life.

It could not have been a struggle within Christ's soul. There was no place for such a struggle in his holy nature. It could not be that Satan attempted to approach him unconscious; for Christ anticipated, and prepared to meet some such encounter. Why should he be impelled by the Spirit, and driven into the wilderness, if the temptation were subjective, or a vision? Moreover, the analogy of the first temptation forbids any such interpretation; for then we should have to regard the garden of Eden, the tree of life, and the serpent as all subjective. It was as essential that Christ's temptation should be like the first great temptation of man, as like our subsequent temptations. The necessary and causal connection between these two great temptations — the temptation of Adam, and the temptation of Christ, the second Adam-is too often disregarded. The temptation of Christ was not the testing of an individual, like the trial of Job, and like ours; but the testing of the Messiah, the Son of God; the proof of his perfect holiness, that Satan had nothing in him. "If thou be the Son of God" is the key to the whole temptation. After Satan has got within man, as he did by the temptation of Adam, there is no necessity for his approaching him externally. There may have been an awful significance to Christ, in Satan's coming to him in human form. It was the human nature, possessed by the devil, under his .power, that Christ came to save. He was manifest to eject Satan from man. There was Christ in human form, and there was Satan in human form, contending for the control of man. Angels in human form might be suggestive of what man ought to be. Satan in human form, the god of this world, is a terrible picture of what man is in his latent tendencies.

The only objection brought against the appearance of Satan is, that this makes the temptation of Christ essentially different from our own, contrary to the scripture, which says, "he was