whether the preposition "from" is to be supplied from "of" or "from a people" in the following line. But the latter supposes a harsh ellipse; and the former hardly makes sense. We therefore taken in the common sense of " some of,' portion of," etc., and translate : At that time shall be brought a gift Unto JEHOVAH, the Lord of hosts; W. H. C. a or 66 Alabaster. This word occurs in Matt. xxvi. 7; Mark xiv. 3, and Luke vii. 37. In each case it is translated "alabaster box;" the consequence of which has been that the true character of the object has been very much overlooked. The ancient versions avoid this ambiguity, and either call the vessel "an alabaster," 'a vase," either of which is more correct than "alabaster box." Many of these vessels have been found not only in Egypt and Assyria, but in Greek and Roman ruins. In his catalogue of the Hartwell Museum, Mr. Bonomi figures some of these, and among them one on which he has the following interesting note:-"This form of vase is the most usual in which costly scented ointment was exported from Egypt. It was made at Alabastron, on the Nile, and from the town the material received its name, and the vase was called 'an Alabastron.' This word in the authorized version of the New Testament is translated 'an alabaster box,' but it might be more correctly translated 'an alabaster jar.' As the scent it contained was of very great price, the vase was never meant to be opened, but was to give out its fragrance through the sides of the porous jar. Hence, no doubt, arose the choice of this particular stone to inclose it; and hence the blame thrown upon the woman who, in her pious zeal for the Saviour, broke it for immediate use, and consumed in a moment scent which might have lasted for years. Vases of the same material, and of this particular form, are found in the tombs of Greece and Etruria, and were made in Egypt, no other quarries of that stone being then known." We have engraved some examples of Egyptian vases from the collection in the British Museum. Some of these vases were so formed as to require stands, which were frequently of a simple tripod form. The same material has since been found in Spain, whence mineralogists have given to it the name of Aragonite. A perfect alabaster vase, bearing the name and title of the queen of Thothmes II., which "still contains some brown matter which gives out an unctuous smell," is in the collection of the Duke of Northumberland, at Alnwick Castle. Two vases, one glass, and one alabaster, found at Nimroud, are figured in Mr. Layard's Nineveh and Babylon, p. 197. They bear the name of Sargon [Isaiah xx. 1], and, says Mr. Layard, "were probably used for holding some ointment or cosmetic." On some vases was inscribed the number of hins they contained. If it were necessary, it would be easy to quote passages, both from Latin and Greek classic authors, to shew that "alabastron," or "alabaster," was the name of the vessel, even when it was formed of gold, or of other materials. The narrow neck of the "alabastron" in the hands of Mary was stopped or sealed, and when it is said she brake the box, we are to understand that she broke it open, by removing the stopper and the seal; she would, at most, only break off the narrow neck, and in this state the alabastra are in fact often met with. The oldest and best of all the ancient versions, the Syriac Peshito, says, in Mark xiv. 3, that the woman had a flask or phial, which she opened, and then poured the precious contents upon the Redeemer's head.--Cassell's Bible Dictionary. A SERMON: BY THE REV. GILBERT WHITE OF SELBORNE. [The Rev. Gilbert White has left a name and memory which are still cherished with affectionate regard by the multitudes who have read the Natural History of Selborne. This is not the place to comment upon the work alluded to, nor to attempt a sketch of its author's character as an indefatigable and accurate observer of nature; but we may say that White's Natural History of Selborne is one of the few books of its class which can be read, understood, and admired, by thousands who are not familiar with the arcana of science, and who would be repulsed by dry technical details. We naturally wish to know all we can of men whose writings have endeared them to us; and as Gilbert White was a clergyman, we may well be curious to know what and how he preached. Very little seems to be known of his pulpit exercises, though we may believe his ministrations were adapted to the edification of his flock. Most of his life was spent at Selborne, the place of his nativity, but only one of his sermons appears to have been preserved. Till now that single sermon has been unprinted. Mr. White's grand nephew, F. Gilbert White, Esq., has the original, and to his courtesy we owe the careful copy from which we have printed it. We have scrupulously retained the author's spelling and punctuation. Our readers will accept the sermon as a pleasing memorial of a great and good man. Its author, who was born in 1720, wrote this sermon in 1748, and preached it for the last time in 1792, only eight months before his death. We are quite sure that many who have learned to love and honour the name of Gilbert White, will be pleased to meet with him in his clerical character. The transcriber has sent to a friend, through whom we have received the copy, an interesting letter, from which we will quote only the following remarks: "As to its substance, I need say nothing; it speaks for itself: only it is interesting as shewing that at all events it was not every clergyman in the middle of the last century, who preached a dry morality from which every distinctively Christian element was struck out for the sake of a barren philosophy.' This is certainly the popular view of the preaching of a hundred years ago; and this sermon, at all events, tells its own tale the other way. It is curious to see how the character which he draws of a true Christian takes in just those marks which seem to have distinguished his own character: in both there is more of the passive than the active virtues, more aim at innocence than at heroism. This is the more to be noticed because the sermon was written in 1748, when he was only twenty-eight, quite a young man; and perhaps not long in orders: so that as far as this evidence goes, he seems to have been much the same man all through life."] IST. EPISTLE OF ST. JOHN 4. 20. "He that says, he loves God, but hateth his Brother, is a Lyar: for if he loves not his Brother, whom he hath seen; how can he love God, whom he hath not seen ?" THE text consists of two parts; 1st, an Assertion; He that says, he loves God, & hateth his Brother, is a Lyar: & 2ndly, the Reason of that Assertion; For if he loves not his Brother, whom he hath seen; how can he love God, whom he hath not seen? Where the Interrogative is equal to a Negative; & is the same as if 'twere said, For he that loveth not his Brother, whom he hath seen, cannot love God, whom he hath not seen. Which Assertion may to some perhaps seem untrue, & the reason, by which the Apostle here establishes it, insufficient; it being much easier, as they may think, to love God without seeing him, than their Brother whom they daily see. Because tho' God doth not exhibit himself to human View; yet his Wisdom, Power, & Goodness, are so visible in his Works, as to allure any one, that duly considers them, to the Love of so excellent a Being. But on the contrary human Nature is so depraved, & wicked, as appears by the general practices of Men, which are mostly vitious; that barely to know it, is to be under a kind of Necessity of hating it, unless we will love that which is continually evil. And therefore why may we not, say they, love God, whom we have not seen, better than our Brother, whom we have seen; since for the most part, what we do, or can see in him, is more likely to discourage than invite our Love. But how specious soever this arguing may appear, yet undoubtedly the Assertion in the Text must be true; it being the Dictate of the Spirit, which cannot deceive, not be deceived. And of this we shall be convinced, if we duly weigh the meaning of the words, & the reasons whereby they may be made out. And first of all the common Excuse for not loving Men urged by those, who would be thought to love God, is wholly taken away by a right Understanding of the Word Brother in this place. Whereby is meant a Brother in the Faith; one who by the Divine Word is transformed into the Image of Xst, and walks no longer after the Flesh, but after the Spirit; ever exercising himself as St. Paul did, to keep a Conscience void of offence, towards God, and towards men, by the Practice of all the Virtues. Now as against such an one, there is no Law, so neither, without the grossest Injustice, can there be any Hatred or Ill-will. For the proper return to virtue and Good-works is Honour, & Love; this is their Due, and which ought to be rendered to them by all people, where ever they are found; & therefore 'tis great Iniquity to repay them in any other Sort. And who then can hate his Brother? such an amiable, & engaging person, who hath all the Charms of Sobriety, Righteousness, and Holiness: who lives like an Angel, or Son of God, here on Earth, having his Conversation all the while in Heaven, where by the Eye of Faith he continually beholds the great Judge of the World, & in regard to him, & for his Sake, doth every thing as if He was still present with him; never willingly entertaining so much as a thought or uttering a word, or venturing upon any action whereby he doth not hope to please him. Who moreover studies to be helpful to all Mankind, to the utmost of his power, & also beyond it, pitying, & succouring even them by his prayers, & good wishes, whom his alms & Estate will not reach & who is so tender of injuring any person, that he had much rather take, than do wrong; & in all Cases, after the Example of his Blessed Lord, strives to overcome evil with good. This is the Brother meant by the Apostle in the Text; viz: a true one, who is regenerated after the Image of God in Righteousness, & true Holiness. And who can lay any thing to the Charge of such an one; who can condemn him, or find any occasion to be at variance with him: nay how can any one chuse but love & cherish him? Which shews that there is no extraordinary Difficulty in loving our Brother, in the 1st Sense of that Word, as taken for a good man, & a good Xtian; & that nothing more is needful thereto, than to keep our Hearts free from Envy, & Covetuousness, & Pride, & the like destructive Sins, which are apt to banish all true love out of the Soul. But 2ly this is not all that the Text requires of us; but moreover as the Word Brother may be & often is taken in a larger Sense, viz: for every Descendant from our first parent Adam; it calls us to higher & nobler Exertions of our Love, namely to communicate it to those who much less deserve it, as for Instance to the Evil & unjust, & even our Enemies, Haters, & Persecutors, who, notwithstanding all these ill Qualities, are still our Brethren, Partakers of the same Flesh & Blood, & of the same humane Nature, & Divine Extraction, & equally the Children of God, & of the promise of being blessed in his Son, who tasted Death no less for them, than for us. And in this large Sense we are commanded by the Law of God to love our Brethren as ourselves; & none of these things, which some people are apt to urge as reasons why they cannot love their Brethren, ever hinder us from loving ourselves. We are of the same inconstant, impotent, corrupted Nature; as frail, & false, & vitious, as they ; & yet we still love ourselves, & why not then our Brethren too? And God knows these things of us, both of our Brethren, & ourselves, & of all Mankind, that we are a vile, & sinful Generation, still prone to evil, & averse to Good. Yet did not this seem a sufficient reason to him, why he should not embrace us all in the Arms of his Mercy, & pour out upon us the richest blessings of his Pity, & Love; by which 'tis evident, that the Vices & Imperfections of men are no justifiable Ground for not loving them. Besides what is more common than for people to connive at the Faults & Infirmities of those whom by nature, or upon carnal motives, they have a kindness for; & to love them never the worse. As who almost are there, who do not know these things of their Children, & yet are in much more Danger of loving them too much, than too little? And is it not usual for men to bear with the ill Humours, & Vices of those from whom they have worldly Expectations, & a prospect of temporal Advantages? Which shows the possibility of putting the Duty of general Love in practice, not withstanding the forementioned objections of the Impracticability of it, upon the Score of the Immorality & Odiousness of the greatest part of mankind. For if these things do not obstruct our love to ourselves & our Children, & to such, from whom we look for Advantages, when such persons have as great Infirmities, & Defects, & are guilty of as gross Faults as other of our Neighbours; why should they stop the current of our affections to any one whatsoever? Doth Relation to us alter the Case, & that Respect alone impart worth & amiableness to things, which otherwise have none: or is there no such thing as virtue in the world, but all our actions are to be guided by Interest? And if we can love worthless, & Sinful Objects, when influenced thereto by natural Propensity, Hopes of Gain, Humor or the like mean Incitements; surely 'tis but just, that God should require as much of us towards the whole Race of Mankind. And considering what great things God has already done for us, & what more & greater he assures us he will do, if we please him; certainly no motive whatsoever ought to be half so powerful to perswade us to the Exercise of this Affection in it's largest Extent, (if we will not by reason, & an eye to our supreme Good) as his commanding it, & enforcing it with the most pretious promises on the one side, & with the most dreadful threats, & terrors on the other. 2ly. "Twill appear plainly that they are Lyars who say they love God, when they do not love their neighbours, because the |