Volume 2. Number 1. August 2, 1824, pp. 79-86.

• Prefatory Remarks by Alexander Campbell, pp. 79-80.
• A Review of the General Assembly's Last Report by Alexander Campbell, pp. 80-82.
• Essays on the Work of the Holy Spirit in the Salvation of Men--No. I. by Alexander Campbell, pp. 82-84.
• A Familiar Dialogue between the Editor and a Clergyman--Part II. by Alexander Campbell, pp. 84-86.
• Lay Preaching by Alexander Campbell, p. 86.
• [Five Queries], p. 86.

      THE priesthood of the East and West, or those who claim a divine right of teaching authoritatively the christian religion, have been, and now are, sedulously at work, some in their weekly harangues, and others in their parochial visitations, shewing to their good and loyal subjects the awful danger of reading the "Christian Baptist." They express a great concern about the souls of their hearers, and the dangerous tendency of our feeble efforts to persuade the people to read, examine, and judge for themselves. But whence this alarm--this Demetrian cry of the church in danger! Do these divines sincerely believe that it will be injurious to the souls of their worshipers to read this work! If so, then they only prove how useless they have been to their hearers. Why have they not instructed their hearers better, and thus have rendered them superior to imposition! What would we think of a teacher of grammar or arithmetic, who, after spending seven, seventeen, or twenty seven years in teaching his pupils those sciences, should afterwards express a great fear of their reading any treatise on those same sciences, which had for its object either the approbation or reprobation of his instructions? Would he not, ipse facto, betray himself?

      But, however uncharitable it may appear, we sincerely believe that they are unwilling to have their authority called in question, and fear the experiment of an effort to maintain it. The learned and the unlearned clergy have always exhibited an eager desire to pass themselves off for ambassadors for Christ, or a sort of plenipotentiaries, whose preachings, prayers, and exhortations, have a peculiar efficacy in heaven and earth, of which the prayers and exhortations of a christian cobbler or a christian maid-servant are divested. Now I am just such a simpleton as to believe that the preachings, exhortations, and prayers of sister Phebe, the maid-servant of his Grace the Lord Archbishop of Canterbury, are possessed of as much authority and efficacy as those of her master. By authority, here, I mean just every thing that the clergy claim to have peculiarly conferred on them from heaven. Such pretensions to authority, or a divine right to officiate as they do, are, no doubt, as useful to make the people fear them and pay them, as a mitre, a surplice, a cloven cap, or a sable gown is to a Popish priest, for all the wise and noble ends of his calling. But either the clergy possess an authority or a divine right to preach, pray, and exhort in public assemblies, on "the Sabbath day," which every other member of the religious community does not possess, or they do not. Now if they do, it can be proved that they do; and if they do not, it can be proved that they do not. I have already pledged myself to the public to prove that they do not, whenever any of them attempts to prove that they do. And I will add, that if I cannot prove, and satisfactorily too, to every umpire, that their pretensions, right, and authority to act as they do, is given them, not from heaven, but from men; then I will say that I can prove no point whatever. But how to reconcile their conduct to any correct principles, religious or moral, I find not. If I had a piece of genuine gold, or a coin that I thought genuine, soon as its genuineness was called in question, I, being conscious that the more it was tested the brighter it would shine, would not fear to have it subjected to the severest scrutiny. But were I possessed of a base coin, or of a counterfeit bank bill, which I wished to be reputed genuine I would endeavor (being a rogue) to pass it off amongst the ignorant and unsuspicious, and fearfully avoid examination. The Protestant clergy have, when it suited their interest, laughed at the arrogant pretensions of the Papist clergy to infallibility. We view their pretensions to authority just in the same light.

      The great body of the laity are so completely preached out of their common sense, that they cannot guess or conjecture how the christian religion could exist without priests. And I believe it to be as difficult to persuade many of them that they could do much better without them, as it once was, or as it is now, to persuade the loyal subjects of an eastern monarch, that a nation could exist without a king and nobles at its head. The United States, however, has proved the fallacy of such doctrine; and the primitive church, as well as many congregations of saints in modern times, have proved to those acquainted with their history, that either a learned or an unlearned clergy are now, and ever have been the cause of all division, superstition, enthusiasm, and ignorance of the people.

      These sentiments are, we know, obnoxious to the wrath and vengeance of this order; and woe awaits him that rises up against the Lord's anointed. Our remarks, puny and insignificant as the clergy view them, are honest, well meant, and above board. Their efforts to defend themselves, strong, powerful, and valiant as they are, are in secret, by the fireside, or in the wooden box, where they think themselves protected from exposure and defeat. Two honest men, it is true, my friend, Thomas G. Jones, and the reverend editor of the Pittsburgh Recorder, have once, but not twice, manfully lifted up their pen like a two edged sword; but alas! for the honor of the cloth, it soon sought its scabbard. They cannot, either in honor to their own well meant efforts, nor to [79] the sacredness of their calling, say I am so worthless and vile as to be unworthy of their notice. For why, then, have they noticed me at all? And were they as sacred as the Saviour of the world, and I as vile as the woman of Samaria, they would do well to remember that the former deigned to converse and reason with the latter. Or if they are ambassadors of Heavens Almighty King, and I as common as an Epicurean, a Stoic, or an idolatrous Lycaonian, they should remember that Paul, as great and as well attested an ambassador as they, disputed with Epicureans, Stoics, and Lycaonians. Or if they view me as an erring brother, as Paul did some in his time, they should be as open and as explicit as Paul, who, before them all, rebuked Peter to his face. It is true, indeed, that some of them have made me worse than any of these; for the president of a western college who took it into his head that he was the eloquent orator noticed in a former number, to a friend who asked him his opinion of it and me, very laconically replied, "He is the Devil." Supposing this were the case, and that Satan had actually appeared in human form, his serene highness, though marked D. D. should remember that the Saviour of the world rebutted the Devil with "It is written," and not with saying "You are the Devil."

      I honestly confess that the popular clergy and their schemes appear to me fraught with mischief to the temporal and eternal interests of men, and would anxiously wish to see them converted into useful members, or bishops, or deacons of the christian church. How has their influence spoiled the best gifts of heaven to men! Civil liberty has always fallen beneath their sway--the inalienable rights of men have been wrested from their hands--and even the very margin of the bible polluted with their inventions, their rabbinical dreams and whimsical nonsense. The bible cannot be disseminated without their appendages, and if children are taught to read in a Sunday school, their pockets must be filled with religious tracts, the object of which is either directly or indirectly to bring them under the domination of some creed or sect. Even the distribution of the bible to the poor, must be followed up with those tracts, as if the bible dare not be trusted in the hands of a layman, without a priest or his representative at his elbow. It is on this account that I have, for some time, viewed both "bible societies," and "Sunday schools," as a sort of recruiting establishments, to fill up the ranks of those sects which take the lead in them. It is true that we rejoice to see the bible spread, and the poor taught to read by those means; but notwithstanding this, we ought not, as we conceive, to suffer the policy of many engaged therein to pass unnoticed, or to refrain from putting those on their guard who are likely to be caught by" the sleight of men and cunning craftiness."

      As we have in the first volume devoted a number of articles to the exposition of modern devices, we shall still continue true and faithful to the principles on which we have set out; and in this volume, pay a little more attention to the primitive state of things, than we have in the former. For while we would endeavor to unmask the clergy and their kingdom, we would wish to call the attention of our readers, occasionally at least, to the contemplation of that glorious superstructure built by the founder and his skilful architects, described in the New Testament.

      We have only to assure every one who may read this work, that any, article written in proper style, by any person, clergyman or layman, in opposition to any sentiment we have expressed, shall be received with pleasure and correctly inserted. We will give every opportunity to our readers to judge for themselves; for we have never yet been afraid to publish the remarks of our warmest opposers; nor could we ever yet see the propriety of laying an embargo on the ears of those who hear us, lest they should be misled. We wish the exhortation of the apostle to have its fullest latitude--"Prove all things; hold fast that which is good." And as both the Old and New Testament wise men, teach us to answer different persons in a different style, for reasons there assigned, so we shall ever discriminate betwixt those "of whom we ought to make a difference," the interested and the disinterested errorist. We hope ever to manifest that good will is our motive, and truth our object.

EDITOR.      

      THIS ecclesiastical paper was published by order of the general assembly, and signed by the stated clerk. It is, therefore, an authentic document. It may also be fairly presumed that it is a fair specimen of the religious feelings and literary talents of this ambitious and aspiring party. It must be as interesting to the people of that religious community, as the president's message is to the good citizens of the commonwealth.

      Every religious system, like every human body, has a spirit peculiar to itself. It is also true, that as there is a great similarity in human spirits, so there is a great similarity in the spirits of religious systems. This general similarity does not, however, annihilate or obscure the predominant peculiarities of each. This is as evident as that, although every perfect face exhibits eyes, nose, mouth and cheeks, yet there is such a variety in the adjustment of these, and other, constituents of human countenance, as render the discrimination of face from face easy to all. The Presbyterian system exhibits a countenance specifically the same as other religious systems; yet the peculiarities in its aspect easily distinguish it from every other. One thing is certain, that the spirit of Presbyterianism is a lofty and aspiring one. Like a Roman chief, it cannot bear an equal or a superior. It aims for the chief place in the nation, and views every other system as an impudent intruder upon its rights and liberties. A full proof of this is afforded in all their plans and manoeuvres, from the kirk session to the supreme court; and more especially in their synodical reports. Let us take a specimen from the title of the last report, the present subject of review:--

      "A Narrative of the state of religion within the bounds of the general assembly of the Presbyterian church, and its corresponding churches, in the United States of America."

      "The bounds of the general assembly;" that is, the whole United States, as would seem from the scope of the review. The Presbyterian church is, then, bounded on the North by the British provinces, on the East by the Atlantic ocean, on the South by the gulf of Mexico, &c., and on the West, for aught I know, by the Pacific ocean. A report of the state of religion within these bounds is a matter of no small moment. All the Arians, Socinians, Arminians, Deists, Quakers, Methodists, Episcopalians, Papists. Baptists, Shakers, New Jerusalemites, [80] &c. &c. &c., live within the bounds of the general assembly, and are consequently embraced by this report. An important document truly!! But as the report pays no very courtly attention to these residents within its bounds, it must be supposed that they do not consider these religionists at all, and observe, it is the state of religion, within these bounds, that is reported. This is, perhaps, the fact. This denomination, from the loftiness of its spirit, contemplates every other persuasion as irreligious and profane. Hence the editor of the Pittsburgh Recorder did positively declare, July 6, that he is the only religious editor in nine states and three territories; or to use his own words, "the Recorder is now the only religious paper published in all the western country, including nine states and three territories, with considerable parts of other states." And if even a Presbyterian paper tell of marriages, battles, tariffs, dry goods, silks and fancy goods, bank note exchange, tavern keepers, and candle manufacturers; it is all religious--for this only religious paper occupies more than half its columns in such religious intelligence. This is a plain proof that the altar sanctifies the gift; that the Pittsburgh Recorder, formerly of Chillicothe, is the only religious paper in nine states and three territories, and in considerable parts of other states. And so it is, that whatever a Presbyterian does is religious, and whatever any other man does is profane. But to the report again.

      The report, perhaps, means better than it speaks--It means only a report of the state of religion amongst the communicants of the Presbyterian church--Let us try if this be its meaning. It reports that;

      "Within our extensive bounds, there is a vast wilderness, filled with immortal souls who are destitute of religious instruction and hope. There are regions just beginning to enjoy the "day spring from on high," still dark in error and ignorance, and cold in indifference and sin. Where the gospel is preached, it is met with powerful opposition by error of every form, and is assailed by enemies of every name. Amid many of our churches are to be found cold and worldly professors, and many who having a name to live are dead, and the enemies of Jesus are sometimes established in the house of his friends. We do not recollect to have heard more deep and afflicting representations from the presbyteries, of the want of zeal and the life giving energies of the Spirit. On every side there are complaints of prevailing error, of licentious practice, of gross intemperance, and disregard to the Lord's day. In many parts of our widely extended and extending church, the want of ministers is still most painfully felt, and even those who can support them cannot obtain them."

      "From almost every direction we learn that the Lord's day is most shamefully profaned, and that even professors sanction this destructive and most offensive sin, by the looseness of their own example, or their open conformity to the world, in some of the most popular modes by which its sanctity is invaded. Even ministers, in some instances, have been known to travel in public conveyances on this "day of rest." The Assembly have learned the fact with pain; and while they deplore, they wholly disapprove it."

      "In many parts of our country the odious and' destructive sin of intemperance is, we fear, increased to an alarming degree; producing blasting and destruction to individuals, families, end churches. The Assembly, while they record the fact with shame and sorrow, and real alarm, will not cease to publish it, until those who profess to love the Lord Jesus shall awake to the dangers of our country and the church. We will warn our beloved people until they shall all arouse to duty and self-denial, to watchfulness and prayer."

      What a picture of communicants of this church, and that from its own supreme court!!! If this learned and pious Assembly were to have reported the state of religion "within the bounds" of Arians, Socinians, and Papists, could its language have been more expressive of awful rottenness and corruption!!! Is this that church which is sanctified through the truth "that chosen generation, that royal priesthood, that holy nation, that peculiar people," of whom the apostle spoke!!--We have never read a more lamentable account of any religious community than that under review. We have never seen any thing like it, if we except the report of a missionary, in the Recorder of July 13th, who gives an account of his tour through the New Jersey Pines. He says--

      "Had I not been an eye witness, I never could have believed such wretchedness, such total ignorance of divine things, could have been permitted in the sight of a theological seminary, containing upwards of one hundred students preparing for the ministry, and of the enlightened city of Philadelphia. What will the christian public say, if told that in the state of New Jersey, a state abounding with men of science, talent and piety, there are whole neighborhoods which enjoy no preaching, no schools, no sabbaths, and no bibles; many precious immortals who never saw a bible--never heard of God their creator, nor of Jesus Christ who died to open a way for the salvation of our fallen race."

      Mark it well--In sight of a theological school, in the vicinity of a hundred students of divinity, in the vicinity of the annual meeting of the supreme court of the church of the United States--a tract of country "seventy miles long and forty wide," the inhabitants are in a worse state than the Pagans in Asia!! Query--What has this theological school, and this general assembly been doing for years, when their nighest neighbors have been so long without every thing they call christian?

      But what is still worse, the very report itself partakes of the general deterioration. It is, in a literary point of view, one of the poorest of the poor; and in a moral point of view, (pardon the expression) the most defective. It is self-contradictory--Let us adduce the proof. The assembly says, in one part of it, that "we do not recollect to have heard more deep (mark the expression more deep) and afflicting representations from the presbyteries, of the want of zeal, and of the life-giving energies of the Spirit." Now, reader, mark what they say in another paragraph of the self-same report--"We believe that the cause of truth is advancing, that it is gaining victories over error, that knowledge is increasing, that the church is more engaged, steadfast, and prayerful, there is more zeal, more liberality, and more self-denial." Now put the two ends of the testimony together, and reconcile it, if you can. They say "we do not recollect to have heard more deep and afflicting representations from the presbyteries, of a want of zeal," and in a minute afterwards declare "there is more zeal" than formerly, and yet they never heard of less!!! But this is not all. They say they never heard "more deep and afflicting representations of the want of the life-giving [81] energies of the Spirit;" and yet tell us of thirty-one revivals, of some of which they say, "One of the most extensive works of the Spirit, that has been known in our country, has occurred in Moreau, and has spread with astonishing power through the surrounding country." And stranger still, they say, "We learn from almost all our presbyteries that the word of God has been faithfully preached, and the people have attended with punctuality upon the stated worship of God, and in many instances have given earnest heed to the word spoken"--and yet "more deep and afflicting representations of the want of the life-giving energies of the Spirit, from the presbyteries, were not recollected ever to have been heard." Astonishing indeed!! Some of those ministers whom the Assembly deplored as sabbath-breakers, must certainly have penned this: but then, how could the others approve it!! This is as astonishing as the reported revival in Jefferson College, which again appears in the report of the Assembly--But tell it not in India, nor publish it in the Isles of the Pacific, that the "Supreme court of the most learned (as they say) body of interpreters of scripture have, all, with one consent, ascribed to the words spoken by their divines the same character and epithets which belong to the oracles of God, and have styled themselves 'the day spring from on high.'"

      Once more, and we dismiss the report pro tem. The assembly says,

      "The theological seminary at Princeton is every year becoming more and more important. Its present condition is flourishing. The number of its pupils is greater than at any former period; and it promises to be a favored and powerful instrument of disseminating the gospel through the earth."

      "Now, reader, remember that the only religious paper in nine states and three territories, did, on the 13th ult. declare, in the name of a sacred missionary, that there is a district of country, seventy miles long and forty broad, "in sight of this theological seminary, in darkness, great as any part of the Indies"--that there are "many precious immortals who never saw a bible, nor heard of God their creator, nor of Jesus Christ." How impudent is Satan thus to reign on the very borders of the camp of the Lord!!! How much are one hundred such students of divinity worth? One Benjamite with his sling and stone, would put a thousand such to flight.

EDITOR.      

      TO THE Spirit of God are we immediately indebted for all that is known, or knowable of God, of the invisible world, and of the ultimate destinies of man. All that ancient Pagans and modern Sceptics pretend to have known of these sublime topics, was either borrowed from the oracles of the Revealer of secrets, or was mere uncertain conceits or conjectures of their own. Were it our design, we could easily prove, upon the principles of all modern sceptics, upon their own philosophical notions, that unaided by the oracles of the Spirit, they never could have known that there is a God, that there was a creation or Creator, or that there is within them a spark of life superior to that of a brute. Indeed this has been unanswerably done already, in a work published a few years since, by James Fishback, D. D. This ingenious and profound reasoner has shown with demonstrative certainty, that, on the acknowledged principles of Locke, "the christian philosopher," and of Hume, the subtle sceptic, all the boasted intelligence of the deistical world is a plagiarism from the oracles of this Divine One. Indeed it all comes to this--if there be no innate ideas as these philosophers teach, then the bible is proved, from the principles of reason, and from the history of the world, to be what it purports, a volume indited by the Spirit of the invisible God. To pursue this argument is, however, foreign to our present purpose. We are not now, on set purpose, addressing infidels, but those who profess to believe that the christian religion is of divine authenticity. We may, perhaps, find it our duty to drop a few hints on this subject. In the mean time, we speak to those who profess faith in the sacred scriptures.

      It being granted that the bible was dictated from heaven, it follows that it is revealed truth, that there is one God and father of all, one only begotten Son of God who is Lord of all, and one Spirit of God, who alone reveals to men the secrets of God. Leaving out of view all the metaphysical divinity of ancient councils or modern theological schools on the philosophical doctrine of the Trinity, we may safely assert, upon the plainest evidence, that these THREE must occupy the attention of every reader of the holy oracles. Scarcely have we time to exhaust one breath in reading the history of the creation, as written by Moses, until the Spirit of God is introduced to our view as operating in this marvelous demonstration of almighty power. And scarcely do we read a page in any one of the four Evangelists, until this Divine One appears to our view as a mighty agent in some work connected with the redemption of man. Even the New Testament closes with a gracious discovery of his benevolence, and the last welcome of heaven to the sons of misery and wretchedness is echoed by this self-same Spirit, who says, "COME and drink of the water of life FREELY."

      Without presuming to roam in the regions of conjecture, or to indulge in the flights of imagination; or even to run at random through all that is recorded concerning this sacred name, into which we have been baptized, we shall confine our inquiries, and if possible, the attention of our readers, to that office which the Spirit of God evidently occupies in the salvation revealed in the New Testament.

      That the christian religion was to be established and consummated by the ministration of this Spirit, is one of the plainest truths in revelation. It was a subject of ancient prophecy, and the facts recorded in the New Testament concerning the gifts and operations of this Spirit, are but the accomplishment of what was long foretold and anxiously expected.

      The christian religion was established by the personal labors of its founder, who appeared to be no more than a Jewish peasant, and the labors of a few illiterate fishermen. It is the most singular fact on the page of history, sacred or profane, the best established, and most universally admitted, by friends and foes, that a Jewish peasant (as his enemies called him) and a dozen of individuals, without learning, without money, without family, without name, without any kind of human influence, revolutionized, in a few years, the whole world, as the Roman empire was then called; and that, too, at a crisis the most forbidding in its aspect, the most unfavorable that ever existed. Paganism was long established and strongly guarded by the sword [82] of the civil magistrate, and myriads of hungry, sunning, and avaricious priests. Judaism, still better confirmed, as it had truth well attested on its side, and the imposing influence of the most venerable antiquity. On the one side, prejudices, creeds, rubrics, temples, gods in the Gentile world innumerable and indescribable--established and confirmed by many succeeding generations. On the other, the most inveterate antipathies, the most unrelenting malevolence, aggravated and embittered by a superstition that once had much to recommend it. Before their face, poverty, shame, sufferings through life, and martyrdom at last, were presented, not as matters of conjecture, but as awful certainties, to forbid their efforts and to daunt their souls. But by the energies of this Holy Spirit, its gifts and its endowments, they triumphed. Temples were vacated, altars pulled down, and idols abolished in every land, and a new religion established in Asia, Africa, and Europe. Such is the fact, the marvelous fact, recorded, recommended, and proved by a combination of evidence, the splendor of which throws into the shade all the evidence adduced in support of any other historical fact in the annals of the world.

      In the contemplation of this wonderful revolution, the Holy Spirit is the most striking object presented to our view, and to it are to be ascribed all these marvelous results. And here we open the New Testament and commence our inquiries into the character of its operations.

      That faith is necessary to salvation, is a proposition the truth of which we need not now attempt to prove, as all professors of christianity admit it; and that testimony is necessary to faith, is a proposition equally true, evident, and universally admitted. He that believes, believes something, and that which he believes is testified to him by others. A man, every body who thinks, knows cannot see without light, hear without sound, nor believe without testimony. Some people, we know, say they believe what they see; but this is an abuse of language. I know what I see, and I believe what I hear--upon the evidence adduced in the first case to my eye, and in the second to my ear. It is as natural for a child to believe as it is to hear, when its capacity expands: and were it not for lying and deceit, it would continue to believe every thing testified to its understanding. Children become incredulous merely from experience. Being deceived by lies and deceit, they become incredulous. Having experienced that some things reported to their ears are false, they afterwards refuse to believe every thing which they hear. The more frequently they have been deceived, the more incredulous they become. Hence the examination of testimony becomes as natural, in a little time, as it is necessary. The first lie that was told on earth was believed to be a truth. Fatal experience has rendered the examination of testimony necessary. These observations are altogether gratuitous, as all we demand is cheerfully granted by all professors of christianity, viz. that faith is necessary to salvation, that testimony is necessary to faith; and that owing to the existence of falsehoods and deceits, the examination of testimony is necessary to full conviction. These positions being adopted as indisputable truth, we proceed to observe that Matthew, Mark, Luke, and John testify that there was a woman named Mary who brought forth a son supernaturally, who was called Jesus; that the child was announced by John the Baptist as the Redeemer, or Lamb of God, that was to take away the sin of the world, who had been foretold and expected for many generations; that he was distinguished above all that were born of woman, in the circumstances of his nativity, childhood, baptism, and it every personal accomplishment; that he spoke and taught truths, and performed actions peculiar to himself; that he was maliciously put to death in Judea in the reign of Tiberius Cæsar, under the procuratorship of Pontius Pilate, by the Jewish sanhedrim; that he rose from the dead the third day, and after appearing alive for forty days on the earth, he afterwards ascended into heaven, and was placed upon the throne of the universe, and appointed Judge of the living and the dead; and that until his second coming to Judge the world, he is exalted to bestow repentance and remission of sins to all that call upon him. These things and many others of the same character the Evangelists and Apostles, una voce, declare. Now their testimony is either true or false. If false, then all christians are deceived, and all the religion in christendom and in the world is delusion; for if christianity is not true, it will be readily admitted by my readers that neither is Mahometanism, Judaism, nor Paganism. If true, then all the christian religion depends upon their testimony. Their testimony, on either hypothesis, is worthy of the most impartial and patient investigation. But such a testimony required supernatural attestations. For although there is nothing in this astonishing narrative impossible in the nature of things, nor indeed improbable on the acknowledged principles of human reason itself; yet the marvelous character of the facts testified, the frequent impositions practised, and, above all, the momentous stress laid upon them, required that they should be authenticated from heaven. In the attestation of this testimony, and in the proof of these facts, the office of the Holy Spirit first presents itself to our notice.

      It was not enough that the Apostles were qualified by the Spirit to deliver a correct, intelligible, and consistent testimony, but for the reasons above specified, that this testimony be attested by such accompaniments as would render the rejector of it damnably criminal, as well as afford the fullest ground of certainty and joy to all that received their testimony. Nor are we in this inquiry so much called to consider the import of their testimony or their qualifications to deliver it, as we are to exhibit the attestations afforded by the Holy Spirit.

      Miracles were wrought by the influence of the Holy Spirit in confirmation of their testimony that is, signs or proofs of a supernatural character followed their testimony. The very circumstance of miracles being added, proved their necessity; for all declare that God does nothing in vain. If miracles were wrought by the Saviour and his apostles, those miracles were necessary appendages to their testimony. For if faith, which we have agreed, is necessary to salvation, and if testimony is necessary to faith, as also admitted, then, in the case before us, miracles were necessary in order to the confirmation of this testimony, or to its credibility; for this is apparent from the fact that they were exhibited, and from the acknowledged principle that God does nothing in vain. But our remarks upon miracles must be postponed to the next number.

      Two conclusions are fairly deducible from the preceding observations. The first is that the truth to be believed could never have been known but by the revelation of the Spirit; and secondly, that though it had been pronounced in the most explicit language, yet it could not have [83] been believed with certainty, but by the miracles which were offered in attestation of it. It may then be safely affirmed that no man could believe the gospel facts without this work of the Holy Spirit in attestation thereof; for the Spirit of God would not have empowered those witnesses to have wrought those miracles if their mere testimony without them was sufficient to produce faith. For let it be remembered, that it is universally granted that God's works are all perfect, and that he does nothing superfluous or in vain.

EDITOR.      

      Clergyman. I TOLD you of our last interview that I wished to resume the passage in the Romans which says, "how shall they preach except they be sent?" This I suppose to be applicable to all preachers authorized according to the law of God.

      Editor. I presume it is. But I think it is by no means applicable to those licensed by a presbytery, except you can prove that a presbytery is authorized by God to send, in his name, whom it pleases. And for my part, I have long thought that those sent to preach by a presbytery are not sent by God; and amongst many other reasons I have for so thinking, this is one, that the presbytery has authorized itself so to act, and consequently its authority being self-bestowed, its acts and deeds are altogether human. Those whom it commissions are sent by men, as much so as a physician, who is authorized by the medical board under the recent law in Ohio, is sent by men to practice.

      C. But is not a physician licensed by the board, authorized by the state, seeing the state constituted the medical board? Every licensed physician in Ohio is really sent or commissioned by the governor or the highest authority in the state, to act as a physician; and consequently the board is but a mean appointed to convey the authority of the state to the individual. Just in this sense I argue that a person licensed to preach by a presbytery is licensed by God, inasmuch as the presbytery is a means appointed by God to convey his authority to the individual. Now that a presbytery is a divine institution, and that it did in the age of the apostles convey such a right as I contend for, I will explicitly prove. Read with me if you please, 1st. Tim. iv. 14. Paul says to Timothy, "Neglect not the gift that is in you, which was given you by prophecy with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery."

      E. I confess you have found the word presbytery once in the New Testament, and in the connexion with the imposition of hands too; but really I had thought that none but those sometimes called the ignorant laity, who are wont to be carried more by sound than sense, would appeal to this passage in proof that a presbytery, in modern style, is a means appointed by God to license, commission, or send forth preachers in the name and by the authority of God. Before you can bring this passage into your service, three things must be done--First, show that the word presbytery meant in that age, what you mean by it in your church style. In the second place, prove that the gift here said to be conferred on Timothy, was a license to preach, or to exercise his ministry in one congregation. In the third place that the laying on of the hands of the presbytery conferred this gift. I should be glad to hear you attempt these things because I think that there lives not the man who can do any one of the three, and because I think that these three things must be explicitly proved before you can at all quote the passage in your favor. You yourself, in arguing with a Romanist, would adopt this same method. Suppose your controversy was about the church, or the church of Rome, and he should say that the "church of Rome" was actually once mentioned in the New Testament, therefore of divine authority; but as the church of Scotland was never mentioned, therefore it is an imposition. You would immediately say that he was now using the words church, or church of Rome, in a sense of his own, and not in the New Testament sense. So I say of your presbytery. You may call your son Paul or Peter, if you please, but your son and the Paul and Peter of the New Testament are very different characters. Six men may meet in an inn and form a constitution for themselves, and call themselves a presbytery, but you would dispute their right to the name. Now every argument you would bring against their assumptions I would turn against your canonized presbytery. It is to me all one and the same, whether your system of presbytery be five or five hundred years old. I pay it no more deference than I do the modern discoveries and improvements of the most modern errorists.

      Your laying hold of the word "presbytery" in Paul's Epistle to Timothy, reminds me of an anecdote I read somewhere a few years ago, perhaps in Hunter's Sacred Biography. Some Jew I think it was, in his researches in Asia, found in some mound or other singular place, a tomb at some distance from the surface of the ground On examination of the inscription it was found that, in ancient style, there was written upon it these words, "Here lies the body of Moses, the servant of God." Great speculations were afloat, and in a little time it was agreed that this was actually the tomb of that Moses who brought Israel out of Egypt. The discoverer was just upon the eve of making his fortune by his discovery, when it unfortunately was found out that this was the tomb of a Moses who had died a century or two before, who was reputed a servant of God. So ensnaring and dangerous is it to appropriate names of great antiquity, or of sacred import, to things which are every way incongruous. Believe me, sir, that they who thought they had got the body of Moses, the servant of God, were not more cheated than they who think they have found the presbytery of Lystra or of Ephesus in one of your church courts.

      C. And do tell me what ideas you attach to the word presbytery? You admit it is a bible term. Now it must have a bible signification.

      E. This I have no objections to do, provided you first give me a definition of what you call a presbytery.

      C. I will. "A presbytery consists of the ministers and representative lay elders of the congregations of a certain district."

      E. Now let me ask, Did you ever read in the scriptures of "representative lay elders" or ministers of a certain district meeting for any purpose? or rather, Was there ever such a being as a lay elder in the primitive church?

      C. You promised me a definition of the word presbytery to its bible import. I am waiting to hear it. Those questions you ask will lead us off from the subject altogether. Let them be reserved till another time.

      E. In doing this, then, I will read you a Presbyterian Doctor's translation of this verse. [84] Your brother Macknight thus translated it: "Neglect not the spiritual gift which is in you, which was given you according to prophecy, together with the imposition of the hands of the eldership."

      C. But what was this eldership?

      E. I will let Macknight explain it. His comment on the verse reads thus; "That you may understand the scriptures, neglect not to exercise the spiritual gift which is in you, which was given you by the imposition of my hands, according to a prophetic impulse, together with the imposition of the hands of the eldership, at Lystra, who thereby testified their approbation of your ordination as an evangelist." It seems, then, that the Greek word presbytery, according to the most learned of your own fraternity, implied no more than the eldership of one congregation. And so we read that the apostles ordained them elders in every city or church. As for your "lay elders," they were not yet got into fashion. If you cannot bring some other scripture to countenance your presbytery, it must appear altogether destitute of scripture warrant. Again, Paul, in the next epistle to Timothy, declares that this gift was given by the imposition of his own hands; and in no instance on record, does it appear that spiritual gifts of any kind were bestowed by the imposition of any hands save those of the apostles. But, as you have already said, this may lead us into another discussion. I would then in the mean time propose that we would confine our attention to the passage in Romans, until its meaning is ascertained; as you see nothing can be obtained in support of your views, from 1st. Tim. iv. 14.

      C. And what do you say of the passage in the Romans?

      E. I appeal to the context for its meaning--to the design of the apostle in the passage. If this does not determine the meaning, it must be indeterminate, as you will readily admit.

      C. And was not the apostle speaking of the ordinary preachers of the gospel--of those we now call ministers of the gospel?

      E. Those you call the ordinary ministers of the gospel, are very ill defined in the popular creeds, and not at all defined in the New Testament. But I will say without hesitation, that the passage in dispute exclusively appertains to those who received a commission from Jesus Christ to announce or to publish the gospel to all nations, and that the prophetic allusion in the prophecy of Isaiah, which, in the style of the Easterns, and indeed in the style of Sophocles, the Grecian poet, is descriptive of the feet of those who publish good news, is wholly applicable to the apostles and their associates and to none else.

      C. And have the apostles no successors in this commission; or are there none now divinely commissioned to do the things enjoined in that commission?

      E. I know of none. If you and your brethren in office, conceive yourselves acting under this commission, your conduct is altogether unjustifiable. You should be always employed in announcing the gospel to all nations, and not stationed in a parish.

      C. Strange and singular as your views are on many topics, I did not think that you were so extravagantly wild as to say or to think that the commission given in Matt. xxviii. 18, 19, had ceased to be a commission authorizing a regular ministry, seeing it expressly says, "I will be with you always to the end of the world." Did the apostles live to the end of the world, or are they yet alive?

      E. Novel and extravagant as you view the sentiment offered, and ancient and sacred as you view that opposed to it, 1 confidently assert that yours is unfounded and novel, and that mine is capable of the clearest proof, and that the very words you quote to prove its perpetuity, prove that it was but temporary.

      C. What! the promise, "I will be with you always to the end of the world," you say will prove that it was only of limited duration!!

      E. Yes, and with confidence of making it evident too. Let me read the commission, and as I read, propose a few queries: "And he said to the eleven, [what eleven?] Go you, [who] therefore, and teach or disciple all nations, baptizing them, &c., teaching them to observe all things whatever I have commanded you, [who?] and lo! I am with you [who] always--even to the end of the world!" What is meant by "the end of the world?" There is one question yet of great consequence which I have intentionally omitted to the last, merely to give it a marked emphasis. It is this: What does he mean by the promise, "I AM WITH YOU?" Now I conceive the very promise, "I am with you," determines the whole matter.

      C. I will hear your exposition of it before I offer any remark.

      E. You shall have an infallible exposition of it from the pen of an infallible writer. John Mark gives the promise "I am with you," in the following words. See his statement of the commission, xvi. 15-17. Campbell's translation. It reads thus: "And these miraculous powers shall attend the believers--(I am with you.) In my name they shall expel demons--they shall speak languages unknown to them before--they shall handle serpents with safety, and if they drink poison it shall not hurt them. They shall cure the sick by laying hands upon them." Thus the Lord was with them. Hear John Mark once more, and more explicit still, 20th verse: "They went out and proclaimed the tidings every where, the Lord co-operating WITH THEM, and confirming their doctrine by the miracles wherewith it was accompanied."

      The promise, "I am with you," then, is infallibly explained to denote that Christ would, upon the invocation of his name, be present with all his power, to confirm their testimony by open and visible miracles, performed not only by the apostles themselves, but also by their immediate converts. So says Paul in his exposition of it, (Heb.) "God also bearing them witness, with signs and wonders, with diverse gifts and miracles." If such be the meaning of the promise, "I am with you," as it doubtless is, then where are the pretensions of those who suppose themselves authorized by this commission? Let any one of them prove that Christ is with him in the common sense of the words, and I will sit down at his feet and open my mouth only to echo his oracles. And in fact there is no other way it can be understood that will help your views. For if Christ be not with the clergy in some peculiar sense in which he is not with other men, then all their pretensions are vain. That this is the very sense in which it was necessary for him to be with the commissioned preachers, the very sense in which he was with them, and the only sense in which he was understood by them, I presume no man of common (I mean ordinary) sense can or will controvert. If so, then the commission is not to be extended to any in our time, nor is it given to any in our time.

      C. Until I hear you define the last clause, "always to the end of the world," I will make no remarks. [85]

      E. Your Presbyterian brother, Dr. George Campbell, offers a very handsome criticism, and a very correct one too, on this passage, and shews that it ought to have been translated "to the conclusion of this state." I have some remarks to offer upon the Greek phrase, "sunteleia tou aionos," which the present moment will not permit.

      C. I will make only one objection, which I think is enough to destroy your whole theory, viz. On your speculations on the commission Paul was not included, for he was not one of the eleven, and so you have reasoned away Paul's apostolic character--so dangerous it is to follow seemingly ingenious speculations without adverting to facts.

      E. My dear sir, I am often confirmed in the truth by the puny efforts of those who attempt to overthrow it. Some, however, thought with you in ancient times on this subject; for they would make Paul some kind of a little apostle, or a second-hand one, because he was called after the others were commissioned; and, indeed, both your objection and theirs to Paul would have been well founded, had it not been that he received a peculiar commission of his own, which I need not tell you is often referred to in the New Testament. But you may consult Acts xxvi. 16-18. where the items of his commission are specified; so true it is that Paul's commission differed from the others, that he was not sent to baptize, but to evangelize the heathen.

      But as the evening is far advanced, I will leave you with these views of the commission till our next interview, hoping then to find you reconciled to them, or to hear a more vigorous defence of your own. I understand the commission as follows: 'Go you, Peter and Andrew, James and John Zebedee, Philip and Bartholomew, Thomas and Matthew Levi, James Alpheus and Lebbeus Thadeus, with Simon the Canaanite, and disciple all nations, immersing the believers of all nations into the faith of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Spirit, teaching the baptized disciples to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you, either before or since my resurrection from the dead--and take notice that I shall be ever present, with signs and wonders, to confirm your testimony, to the end of this state; for before this generation shall have passed away, the gospel shall be preached to all nations for a testimony to them.'

      C. If such be the meaning of the commission, I have yet to learn the meaning of all the New Testament.

      E. And if this be not the meaning of the commission, pray inform me what it is!

      C. Adieu for the present.

      MR. CHURCH, of Pittsburgh, at his baptism on the 11th ult. delivered a discourse of three hours and one quarter in length, in the presence of a very numerous congregation, assembled on the banks of the Allegany. Having myself been one of his hearers, I can give my readers a brief outline of his object and method. Mr. Church had been a member of different religious communities, and once a ruling elder of a congregation of Covenanters. He is well versed in all the systems of presbyterianism, and has, for a number of years, been a diligent searcher after truth. He brought with him to the water the creeds, testimonies, and formulas of those churches, as well as the holy scriptures. After having vindicated himself from the foul aspersions of some of his quondam brethren and friends, which are the usual lot of those who presume to judge and act for themselves in religious matters, he informed his audience that he would,

      1st. Prove from the holy scriptures and the standards of the different churches his right to search, judge, and act for himself, and especially that he had an inalienable right, as well as the most justifiable reasons, to separate from every branch of the presbyterian church.

      2d. Demonstrate from the scriptures the true nature and character of the church of Jesus Christ, her members, ministers, modes of worship, discipline; and contrast these with the genius of those societies that had assumed the title of christian churches, their members, ministers, modes of worship, and government.

      3d. Exhibit the sacred import of christian baptism, its various corruptions and abuses in the Presbyterian churches, and others, as well as the character of those who were admitted to this ordinance in primitive times.

      It would be altogether out of our power, in the size of this number, even to give any thing like a fair miniature of this discourse. Suffice it to say, that Mr. Church redeemed the pledge he had given in his method; and did, at least to my satisfaction, as well as, no doubt, to that of many of his auditors, fully prove his right of search from all the documents mentioned, and exhibit the corruptions of the systems proposed. He stripped the clergy of all their exorbitant claims and pretensions, and fully expatiated on the vices and deformities of the clerical system. He read many extracts from the popular creeds and testimonies, the national covenant and solemn league, on which he presented many appropriate remarks. And such was the efficacy of his remarks, that they produced, in some instances, the same effect on some of the sons of the national convention and solemn league which the discourse of Stephen produced on the Jews, such as a literal gnashing of the teeth, and an equivalent to stopping of the ears. He was, however, patiently heard by a respectable congregation to the close, although it rained for more than an hour of the time, and the people were by no means comfortably circumstanced. The discourse has, we have since understood, caused a great "shaking among the dry bones." Indeed, he sometimes appeared to me like Sampson amongst the Philistines, at least likely to kill more by his emblematical death, and in his emblematical burial, than during his former life. Very few of the regular clergy could have made so lengthy and so appropriate a discourse, and have assembled such a congregation, as this erudite layman.

EDITOR.      

      THE following QUERIES came from the pen of a diligent student of the Bible. We wish our readers to attempt, each, to answer them for himself.

      1st. The order of the first churches when supernatural gifts were abundant, being discovered; what, if any example, will it form to us who live in these last days when supernatural gifts have ceased?

      2d. What duty or duties are peculiar to the Bishop and not common to the brethren?

      3d. Was it the Bishops who chiefly spoke in the first churches where they presided, or did they commonly sit as judges (1 Cor. xiv. 29.) to correct, &c. while the brethren edified the body in love? Eph. iv. 16.

      4th. What are the peculiar duties of a Deacon!

      5th. Was it to the deaconship that those seven mentioned in Acts, 6th chap. were appointed, or what were they? [86]

[TCB 79-86]