ableness and uncertainty which we discover in our hearts are for the most part the result of physical, earthly emotions. And physical emotions are naturally selfish, or belonging to self. Our affections therefore are only valuable in so far as they are sufficiently strong to control and subdue these bodily feelings. Persons talk of their intense affection, and fancy themselves a martyr to it, whilst they cannot, even for those they profess to love most, make an effort to resist indolence, or submit patiently to a little physical discomfort. Feeling, if really intense, swallows up all such care for self; and if it does not, we shall be more true to ourselves and more honourable in the sight of God and man, if we content ourselves with a less profession of its intensity. We must shrink from passing judgment on the affections of one so devoted as St. Peter, yet it is well to remember that to stand and warm himself when his Lord was before him, a Captive, bound and insulted, was but the prelude to bis denial.

It may be said, and said truly, that cold temperaments are not necessarily self-denying. Certainly not; no human being is necessarily anything. But if we look around us, we shall scarcely fail to discover some general principles, by which we may classify characters and temptations, sufficiently to assist us in forming rules for our own guidance. Very affectionate and impulsive persons are not universally given to self-indulgence; yet there can scarcely be a doubt, that the same physical consti

tution which renders them so keenly sensitive to all that touches the feelings of the heart, renders them equally sensitive to all which affects the feelings of the body, and the perception of this fact may unquestionably be found very useful in the exercise of self-government. We may fairly ask ourselves how much of our own personal daily comfort we are willing to sacrifice for those we love ?-how much do we sacrifice? It is not a question how much we feel the sacrifice at the moment, for that is independent of ourselves; and quickness of bodily sensation will, as has been said, probably accord with quickness of feeling; but which gains the victory? In our past experience,-looking back upon seasons of trial, when we think that we have felt the most,— what amount of endurance, self-denial, cheerful acquiescence in hardships for those dear to us, can we trace? Be it much or little, it is the real measure of our affection.

And so with our love to Christ. Not that selfmortification without an end is a test of love, for too often it is but the evidence of pride; but selfmortification for an end, under the regulation of reason, and the guidance of authority,-by that we may try ourselves. For instance, the denial of certain gratifications, otherwise innocent, because we would seek to remember the sufferings of our Lord; the restraint exercised upon lawful indulgences, because we wish to practise ourselves in a stricter self-discipline :-how are we enabled to carry it on? We make excellent rules for ourselves at the begin

ning of Lent; how do we find that we have kept them, when we look back upon them from the end? And they are not such a very severe test. Our selfdenials, taken separately, are indeed so small, that but for our past experience we should probably smile at the idea of not being able to continue them. More especially, if we have any reason to think that we have really given our hearts to our Saviour, that His love is our dearest treasure, and that to be in any way like Him, and suffering with Him, is our greatest honour.

Alas! for the lesson which each Lent teaches us. Alas! for inconsistency, lukewarmness, mean excuses which we should be ashamed to offer to a fellow-creature, professions of self-denying affection followed by delight in the least excuse for selfindulgence. Alas! for the cold, dead heart, which obeys only because it dares not disobey; which dreads the reproach of conscience, but has no thought of sympathy for Christ.

May God judge us more mercifully than we can venture to judge ourselves! May He accept what we dare not offer, and love us,-not as we love,— for Christ's sake!

SELF-GOVERNMENT AND SELF

GUIDANCE.

ST. LUKE, Xxii. 55-60.

"And when they had kindled a fire in the midst of the hall, and were set down together, Peter sat down among them. But a certain maid beheld him as he sat by the fire, and earnestly looked upon him, and said, This man was also with Him. And he denied Him, saying, Woman, I know Him not. And after a little while another saw him, and said, Thou art also of them. And Peter said, Man, I am not. And about the space of one

hour after another confidently affirmed, saying, Of a truth this fellow also was with Him: for he is a Galilean. And Peter said, Man, I know not what thou sayest. And immediately, while he yet spake, the cock crew. "

ST. PETER'S denial of his Lord is only startling to persons who do not know much of their own hearts, or have not had much experience of human nature. It is painfully probable and natural to others, and the circumstances attending it bear upon them a wonderful stamp of truth. Cowardice and selfdeception seem to have been the cause of the apostle's fall. Cowardice might have induced him. to deny his knowledge at first, but it could scarcely have led him to repeat the assertion again and again, whilst still remaining in the place of danger. If he had been entirely cowardly, he would have left the hall.

Self-deception, grounded, no doubt, upon the consciousness of his warmth of affection, appears to have blinded him to the weakness of his natural disposition. Self-examination, if it had ever been practised, must, we may suppose, have been carried on with regard to his feelings rather than his actions; so he placed himself in the way of temptation without misgiving, and cowardice seems only to have been awakened by the earnest, searching glance of the maid-servant. The effect of that glance we can all imagine. A very steady look at any time, from almost any person, has something alarming in it. It is the mind speaking to the mind, without the intervention of the ordinary instrument of communication; and therefore it strikes us as unnatural. With the consciousness of possessing a dangerous secret, it would at overpowering.

once be

The denial followed upon the accusation, calmly as such words would, when suggested by awe as well as fear; and the sin once committed, its repetition followed almost inevitably. It is a rare instance of self-government when a man draws back, after having committed himself in the eyes of the world to a definite assertion, or a fixed line of conduct. And the great defect of St. Peter's character was the absence of moral courage. Once, therefore, having uttered his falsehood, it was almost a necessity that he should repeat it, if he remained in the scene of temptation.

Here, again, was an exhibition both of the good