understand the passage as referring to spiritual beings only, notwithstanding the word was applied to civil judges; and so we may say, that the Chinese would understand Te to refer to invisible and divine beings, notwithstanding the word was used with a civil acceptation.

It has been said, that Taou-kwang is as much a Te or Ruler, as Shang-te is, though he rules in a much smaller space; and if we were to tell the Chinese that they must have no other Tes besides Jehovah, Taou-kwang might complain of our interfering with his sovereignty, and forbid the propagation of our religion in his dominions. But such apprehensions are entirely groundless; because, in the first place, the title given to Taou-kwang in those state-papers which are published under his sanction is not Te, but Hwang-shang, or Hwang-te; in the next place, Taou-kwang himself, and all his progenitors, in their essays and public documents, have been in the habit of using the word Te for the Supreme Being, (as far as they were acquainted with him,) and for inferior divinities, without seeming to imagine for a moment that their subjects would understand by such term, either themselves or their office. Of such uses of the term, there are very frequent instances; among the rest we may notice, that Shun-che, the first emperor of the present dynasty, speaks of "carrying out the business entrusted to him by Te, and of handing it down to future ages." Kien-lung, speaking of his father Yungching, says, that "the virtue of his sincerity was such, that he could submit himself to the inspection of Te." In another place the Imperial writer asks, on whom are we to rely for the staff of life but Te?" Further, Te is said to be "universally acquainted with affairs, how much more with our reverence in worship? looking up to him we supplicate a favourable year, upon which our wishes are perpetually set." Again, the emperor says, that "the clouds and storms encircle the throne of Te, as the people surround the standard of their sovereign." Also speaking of prayer he says, "If there be but the smallest degree of sincerity, it will be perceived by the glance of Te" for "Te delights in fostering human life;" and "Te will bestow the wished-for rain." "Te alone can discern between the right and the wrong;" and "the sincere thoughts in us are to be ascribed to the virtuous nature bestowed on us by Te." Now in all the above sentences it is manifest that the imperial writers used the word Te in the sense of a Divine Being; by it they certainly did not refer to themselves, neither was there any danger of their subjects understanding the word as referring to earthly rulers. In fact we find that, in the state ritual, the being honoured with supreme adoration, and

occupying the chief shrine in the imperial sacrifice is Te, to whom the emperor accords the highest honours which the theory of his religion acknowledges. If, grounded on this service, any one were to urge the necessity of confining religious adoration to one, and the propriety of excluding all others, it would not appear so extraordinary as some may suppose; and certainly no Chinese would imagine, from such a requisition, that civil odedience was improper; or that they were not to render to Cæsar the things that are Caesar's as well as to God the things that are God's. The jealousy of the Divine Being as to the worship paid to any besides himself is purely a doctrine of Scripture and we could not expect to meet in the Chinese system with a prohibition of having more gods than one; but if such a doctrine were propounded to Taou-kwang, we have no doubt that he would see the justice of allowing, that such a God as the Scripture reveals might well require the sole adoration of mankind: at any rate the emperor could not be so absurd as to suppose, that a human sovereign was alluded to by the use of the word Te, when he knows that from all antiquity down to the present day, all the learned in his nation have been in the habit of using the term in question to designate the Ruler of all.

If it be still urged, that the Chinese would be in danger of misunderstanding the sense of the first commandment, were Te employed for God; we reply, that there would be equal danger of their misunderstanding it, if Shin were used. For according to the

Luh shoo koo, "every thing ethereal and spiritual is called Shin; the soul is the Shin, and the anima is the Kwei of the two-fold breath of nature. In the Imperial Dictionary, we read, that "Shin is ling, spirit," and again, "Ling, spirit, is Shin." In all the above instances, Shin cannot be rendered God, and it is translated spirit by the most celebrated European Sinologues. But as we expect to dwell on this point more fully in a subsequent part of this paper, we shall take it for granted here, that the principal meaning of the word Shin is spirit or spiritual beings. Such being assumed, we ask, what would the Chinese understand by the requisition to have none other Shins before the one making the demand. To have, means not only to possess, but to hold, or regard as existing; and when a Chinese is told that he must not possess nor regard as existing, any other Shins besides the one addressing him, he might possibly understand it as requiring him to renounce the idea of the existence of anything else ethereal and spiritual, or of any other invisible and inscrutable thing, besides the being issuing the command; in

short, that there are no spirits in heaven, nor on earth, but that one. That a Chinese, taking the native dictionaries for his guide, would be in danger of thus interpreting the first commandment, cannot be denied by any one who considers that his own spirit is a Shin, and that Shin is used in Chinese books for mere spirits, a hundred times to one where it designates divine persons. If it be said, that no sensible Chinese would misunderstand the term, from its connection; we answer, that the saine and much more may be said with regard to Te for Te is used for the author and disposer of all things, as well as for the object of supreme regard, while Shin never is.

Another objection to the use of Te is, that if employed in the first commandment, it would not exclude from religious worship, multitudes of beings who are worshipped by the Chinese; because many of these are called Shins and not Tes, and therefore to forbid only the worship of all other Tes besides Jehovah would not prohibit the worship of the Shins. To this we may reply, that the object of the command was, to prohibit the worship of any other gods besides Jehovah the word Elohim meant gods and not spirits; if spirits were worshipped by any people, and accounted by them in that instance as gods, the command of course would prohibit them; but it would not become necessary in any country where spirits were worshipped, as well as higher beings, that the terms of the command should be The ancient altered, and the word spirits employed instead of Gods. Arabs worshipped spirits or genii, which word, says Sale, "signifies the genus of rational invisible beings, whether angels, devils, or that Intermediate species usually called genii." The Jews worshipped angels, (see Col. 2: 18.) and the Greeks daimones, whom they considered as intermediate between gods and men; they worshipped also the manes of ancestors, without comprehending them among the Theoi; but it was not thought necessary, in either of those languages, to employ the word malak, djin, or daimon, in order to forbid the worship of the beings known under such names. It is agreed on all hands, that the prohibition of all other Tes but one, would exclude a few of the higher sort of invisible beings worshipped by the Chinese: and we may say, the greater always including the less, inferior spiritual beings would of course be prohibited by the employment of that term If the superior objects of worship cannot be brought into competition with Jehovah, much less can the inferior; and we might say to the Chinese, even the Tes, other than the Supreme, whose attributes are revealed in Scripture, are not to be adored: how much less those Shins, who, when viewed as distinct from Shang-te or the

five Tes, you admit to be far inferior to these." The word Elohim does not cover the host of angels, spirits, or genii among the western nations of antiquity, any more than the word Te does the class of mere spirits among the Chinese; and yet there can be no doubt that the prohibition in the first commandment included them; as the interdiction of the worship of all other Tes besides the one Supreme, would involve the forbidding of the Shins also.

Other passages of Scripture, besides the first commandment have been adduced, in order to shew the impropriety of using Te for God; such as Isa. 45: 5. “I am Jehovah, there is none else, there is no God besides me." In the chapter from which these words are taken God is addressing Cyrus, whose right hand he has holden, to subdue nations before him, to loose the loins of kings, and to open before him the two-leaved gates, that he might know that Jehovah, who From the above concalled Cyrus by name, was the God of Israel.

nection, it would appear to any attentive reader, that an invisible and spiritual being was speaking: supposing the word Te were employed, it would be seen that a divine and not a human person was intended by the term, even such a one as could claim preeminence over It would not all the kings of the earth and the spirits of heaven. surprise any one, therefore, to hear such a one declare, that there was no other being that could be classed with him. Emperors would not take umbrage at the statement, (supposing Te to be employed.) neither would their subjects imagine that they were loosed from the obligations of civil obedience, because Jebovah claimed to be the only Te who could form light and create darkness, who could make peace and create evil. Another has been referred to with the same view: Isaiah 44:8. 'Is there a God besides me? yea there is no God (rock). I know not any." The latter clause of this sentence, if literally rendered, would mean that there was no rock besides Jehovah; which would be a thousand times more stumbling to the Chinese, than to say, that there was no Te besides him; and yet supposing Te employed as the rendering of tsur, when the reader came to peruse the context, and found the indvidual speaking describe himself as the first and the last, he would no more wonder that such a one should claim to exist alone, than that the Te from whom all things came forth, should be considered as the Lord and Governor of Heaven, to the exclusion of all others.

passage

With regard to the meaning of the word Te, we have already shewn, that Morrison gives it çarious renderings: such as God, the God of

Heaven, Divine Majesty, Supreme Ruler, Heaven's Sovereign, the Most High, and the Most High God; he also affirms, that the five Tes mean the God of Heaven, and the gods that rule over the seasons. Te, he says, in loco, is "the appellation of one who judges the world, or of one who rules over the nations: an epithet of respect and honour to one who rules as a lord or sovereign; an emperor, an independent monarch." We have, in the present essay, produced a number of passages from Chinese authors, in which Te is used; from a comparison of which it will be seen, that the word is employed in the sense of God, whether as signifying the supreme or inferior deities; and that the Chinese understand it in both of these senses, according to the requirements of the context. The meaning of a word in any language is the sense in which good writers in that language use it, and if we can shew that we use the word in the same way in which they have employed it, then we are warranted in the application we make of it; particularly if it should appear, that the Chinese would no more misunderstand it in books published by us, than they do in works composed by themselves. If it be said, that the word Te does not convey the same idea to the Chinese as the word God does to us, we reply, that the word God does not convey any idea at all, except as the persons who use it have been in the habit of attaching some idea to it. The meaning of God according to the usus loquendi of the English language, is "the Supreme Being, the Creator and Sovereign of the Universe; also a false god, a heathen deity, as well as a prince, ruler, magistrate, or judge." (Webster.) The meaning of the word Te, according to the Imperial Dictionary, is "judge, sovereign, prince, Heaven or the Divinity, and by metonymy, earthly rulers; also those spiritual beings who preside over the elements, and are honoured with religious worship." In what important particulars do these definitions differ? The usages of Chinese as well as English writers agree in giving these various meanings to the respective terms, and therefore we conclude, that the one as well as the other signifies God.

Another objection urged against Te is, that it would be likely to open a wide door to Arianism, upon the ground that dominion is the chief idea contained in the word, and that Te is regarded as the universal sovereign by the Chinese. Under this head of objection, much has been quoted from Waterland, according to whom four things must combine to constitute the nature of God, viz. dominion, spirituality, the being made an object of worship, and the being divested of all frailty; which combined are distinctive of the divine