The Lord reigneth, or "Jehovah is king." David saw, in the restoration of the ark, a new and solemn resumption of his direct government by Jehovah; and of this glorious fact he bids the people make acknowledgment and render witness. Explain fully the Jewish conception of the theocracy, and show how it was connected with a present and abiding outward symbol - at first the pillar-cloud, and then the ark. The importance of the theocratic idea, and the actual influence of it on mind and heart, depended on the differing religious dispositions of the people. To the worldly minded Jew it would be a vague notion, a sort of sublime, but impractical, philosophical conception - a sort of hereditary national sentiment, and nothing more. To the truly spiritually minded man it was the first, most impressive, and most practical of all truths. It was the thought that put glorious meaning into commonplace life and labour. Life has its holy issues, and it might well have its shrouded mysteries, for "the Lord reigneth." This Jewish notion passes over into Christianity, and we realize Jehovah's present spiritual reign in the administration of the Lord Jesus Christ. In the Maccabean times there was a tendency to lose the idea that "the Lord doth reign," and to substitute for it a phrase which indicated a great outlooking for a coming Deliverer and a golden age, "the Lord shall reign." And a similar evil tendency still affects the Christian Church; failing to realize Christ's present rule, some sections of the Church keep looking on to some fancied near time, when Christ shall come again and take to himself his great power and reign. And the antidote is full and faithful teaching on the point of which the psalmist makes so much - the present direct, and every way practical, present reign over the earth and the Church, of Jehovah, apprehended in the person of the Lord Jesus Christ. Keeping the present reign in Christ before our minds, it may be instructive to show -

I. THAT CHRIST'S LIFE ON EARTH HELPS OUR APPREHENSION OF THE REIGN. The reign of God the Spirit must ever seem to man an unreal, intangible thing, unless it can take some outward and material shape; and yet that shape and form must be such as will in no sense imperil the spiritual character of the reign. No merely human sovereignty could be satisfactory, for none could be worthy of that sublime royalty which it presumed to represent. Christ's life on earth was the theocracy materialized for human apprehension. Our Lord's humanity sets God before our thought in human terms and figures such as we can understand. And the kingship of Jesus was felt and acknowledged by friend and foe, wherever he went, and not exclusively by those disciples who knew him most intimately. His teaching was given "with authority;" his personal relations were a rule. It can be no wonder that people should cast their garments in his way, and wave palm branches, and shout, saying, "Hosanna to the King that cometh in the Name of the Lord!" His life is the earth-picture of the Divine reign over the hearts and lives of men.

II. THAT CHRIST'S GLORY IN HEAVEN MAKES US REALIZE THE REIGN AS A SPIRITUAL REIGN. It takes all the merely carnal features out of it. The reign is such a one as our exalted, glorified, ascended, spiritual Lord and Saviour may have, who is "Lord of lambs the lowly, King of saints the holy." The risen, heavenly Christ we feel must have, as the sphere for his rule, not our bodily actions only, but our wills, our choices, our affections; gaining, as he must, his beginnings in our souls, and extending his holy authorities over all the relations we sustain. Explain and impress how, in our common, everyday life, we can realize the theocratic conception, and practically live in the joy and impulse of being daily "in the great Taskmaker's eye." - R.T.

I. NOW, WHAT IS THE PREVALENT TENDENCY OF OPINION, AS ILLUSTRATED IN OUR DAY, IN SCIENCE, IN ART, IN JOURNALISM, IN LITERATURE, IN SOCIAL SPECULATION? It may certainly be summed up in the one word "pessimism" — that is, unbelief and hopelessness. The illustrations of the tendency are manifold, they come from every side. If we turn to philosophy, we find, as a consequence of unbelief, the revival of the old doctrine that life is not worth living, that man is a failure, just as Pyrrho, the ancient sceptic, compared mankind to swine pent up in a foundering, wrecked, and rudderless vessel in the midst of a hurricane. "Since the human race," says Schopenhauer, "always tends from bad to worse, there is no prospect but ever-deepening confusion and wretchedness." "Existence," says Von Hartmann, "is unspeakably wretched, and society will grow worse and worse." "More dreary, barren, base and ugly," said Carlyle, "seem to me the aspects of this poor, diminished, quack world, doomed to speedy death," which he can only wish to be speedy. "A wave of doubt, desolation, and despondency has passed over the world," says an English poet, Mr. Alfred Austin, in a lecture before the Royal Institution. "One by one all the fondly cherished theories of life, society, and empire have been abandoned; we no longer seem to know whither we are marching, and many appear to think that we are travelling to perdition." This pessimistic spirit, he said, pervades all society and all thought.

II. I will speak mainly of THE SUPPOSED CONNECTION OF SCIENCE WITH THIS PESSIMISTIC TENDENCY. To science many attribute its growth and its spread. "Science," says M. Zola, the French novelist, in his speech, "hath emptied nations, and is incapable of re-peopling them; it has ravished happiness from our human souls, and is incapable of restoring it; in proportion as science advances the ideal slips away." Now I believe science to be beneficent, and I believe pessimism to be destructive, and, desiring to combat the predominant pessimism, I shall try to prove to you that science gives no ground for it at all. Science is part of revelation. Religion on one side is nothing but a knowledge of God, and science deepens our knowledge of God. Religion on the other side is nothing but morality. It is a good mind and a good life. There is not one law of morality which science does not repromulgate and emphasise in thunders louder than those of Sinai. Science is one of the Bibles of God by which, as St. Paul boldly says, the invisible things of Him are rendered visible; it is God's revelation to the mind of man through the works of Nature, and whatever may be the voice in which God speak to us, it is impossible for Him to lie. If we are faithless, He abideth faithful; He is not able to deny Himself. The supposed antagonism between science and religion is merely due to the passion and ignorance of men. And science has been to men a boon unspeakable, an archangel of beneficence as well as an archangel of power. She has prolonged life, she has mitigated disease, she has minimised torture, she has exorcised superstitious terrors; she has given to feeble humanity the eyes of Argus and the arms of Briareus, she has opened to men's thoughts unimaginable realms of faerie, and has made fire, flood, and air the vassals of His will

III. DOES SCIENCE TEND TO UNBELIEF? And it is not true that science leads to unbelief. Whose name stands first in the modern era of science? The name of Sir Isaac Newton. Was he an unbeliever? He was one of the whitest, purest, simplest, most believing souls that ever lived. Whose name stands first in science in our own generation? The name of Michael Faraday. Was he an atheist? His friend found him one day bathed in tears, and asked if he was ill. "No," he said, "it is not that"; but pointing to his Bible, he said, "While men have this blessed book to teach them, why will they go astray?" It has been sometimes assumed that Charles Darwin was an unbeliever; yet he wrote in his book on the descent of man: "The question whether there is a Creator and Ruler of the Universe has been answered in the affirmative by the highest intellects that ever lived." There have been scientific atheists, but such men have not been atheists as a necessary consequence of their science, but because they have committed the very fault which they scorn so utterly in priests: it is because they have tried to soar into the secrets of the Deity on the waxen wings of the understanding; it is because they have pushed their science to untenable conclusions and mingled it with alien inquiries. H unbelief were a necessary result of science, no benefit which science could possibly bestow could equipoise its curse, for religion means that by which the spirit of man can live. The destruction of religion would be first the triumph of despair, and next the destruction of morality. Once persuade man that he is no better than the beasts that perish, and he will live like the beasts that perish; he will cease to recognise the intangible grandeur of the moral law, and will abandon himself to the struggles of mad selfishness. All religion is based on three primary convictions, of God, of righteousness, and of morality, and these convictions science strengthens and does not destroy.

(Dean Farrar.)