cannot, to say the least, be ever shown to refer to ordination at all. On the contrary there are, we think, good reasons for interpreting it as having reference to the communication of some spiritual gift. Such gifts, we know, were very commonly imparted by individuals singly; and since they were extraordinary and temporary, there was no necessity for that security which is required in the consecration of ministers. Ordination too, as has been shown, was never, so far as is recorded, performed by one individual alone. This view is, we think, forced upon us by the language. For if the word "gift" is made to refer to the office of the ministry, it were nothing short of absurdity to ask any minister to "stir up the sacred office of God, which sacred office is in him, by the putting on of hands;" whereas it would be perfectly correct to exhort such an one to whom had been imparted some spiritual and internal gift, to "stir up this gift of God that was thus in him." And when we look to the whole passage, we find that the apostle speaks to Timothy of the "unfeigned faith that was in him," and "wherefore," adds the apostle, "stir up the gift of God which is in thee;" "for God hath not given us the spirit of fear," "be not thou, therefore, ashamed of the testimony of the Lord," &c. We are, therefore, led to conclude that the allusion of the apostle here, was to the bestowment of an abundant measure of faith, in the way of supernatural gift, by his hands to his son Timothy, and not to ordination at all."

But to proceed, we further remark that the opposition of this doctrine of apostolical succession-by the personal and hereditary transmission of heavenly gifts-to many of the DECISIONS of Scripture, is not less palpable.

The truth-the whole truth, and nothing but the truth of God, as it is cemented together in the writings of the apostles and prophets, this is the foundation, and the only sure foundation, on which the church can rest. That is the church, which has this truth for its ground, and which, as a pillar of testimony, publishes it to the world. That is not the church of God, which is not found holding forth the truth; for it is against this truth, as a rock immovable as the everlasting hills, that the gates of hell shall never prevail. Such is the judgment of God's word. And we are here required to keep aloof from all

1) Bishop Hoadly says, as indeed any one would judge, "that this word rather imports the extraordinary qualifications given to Timothy from above, for the better execution of his office, than the office itself." (See in

Works on Episcopacy, vol. i., p. 146.)

2) See this meaning developed in Plea for Presbytery, p. 26, 28.

3) See this fully shown when we come to discuss what is the true apostolical succession.

pretended ministers who are not men of God, and who do not preach the glorious gospel of the blessed God.' They who "handle the word of God deceitfully," (2 Cor. iv. 2;) who "have corrupted the word of God," (2 Cor. ii. 17;) "denied the resurrection," (Cor. xv.)-such teachers "are to be held accursed by us," (Gal. v. 12, and 1 Tim. vi. 3-5; 2 Thess. v. 15; Rom. xvi. 17, 18; 1 John iv. 1; Acts xx. 29, 30; Rev. ii. 16; Rev. xviii. 1-4.)

Of all the qualifications laid down any where in scripture for the office of a christian bishop, never is it prescribed as necessary, that he should be able to authenticate his lineal descent through a personal succession, from the apostles. And yet, by the theory in question, this is made to be the first and most necessary mark of a true christian bishop.2

How are christians directed in scripture to try the character of their teachers? "Beware of false prophets," said our Lord, "who come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are ravening wolves." But how shall we beware of them, or by what criterion shall we distinguish the false from the true? Shall we critically examine their spiritual pedigree, and see whether, by an uninterrupted succession of regular baptisms and ordinations, they be regularly descended from the apostles? Impossible. A method, this, which would involve every thing in impenetrable darkness, and plunge all the hopes and prospects of the christian into a scepticism, from which there could be no recovery. On the contrary, the test he gives is plain and familiar. Mark his words: "Ye shall know them by their fruits. Do men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit, but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit, is hewn down and cast into the fire. Wherefore, by their fruits ye shall know them." And the apostle John says, "Believe not every spirit, but try the spirits, whether they are of God." And how are we to try them? The sequel plainly shows, that it is by the coincidence of their doctrine with that of the gospel. The like was also the method prescribed under the former dispensation by the prophet. "To the law and to the testimony," says he, "if they speak not according to this word, it is because there is no light in them.” A very different mode of trial would now be

1) Math. vii. 15-20, and xv. 14. John x. 5. 2nd Cor. ii. 13, with 23. 2) See Rev. T. Archer's sixth

Lect. on Popery, Puseyism and Protestantism. Lect. v., § 2.

3) Campbell's Lect. on Eccl. His. Lect. iv., p. 60, ed. third.

assigned by a zealous patronizer of the hierarchy, popish or protestant.

"Who are false prophets?" asks Tertullian, "but false teachers-who are false apostles? but they who preach an adulterated gospel." "The church is not bound, therefore, to an ordinary succession, as they call it, of bishops, but to the gospel. When bishops do not teach the truth, an ordinary succession avails nothing to the church: they ought, of necessity, to be forsaken." So speaks Melancthon.2

Now, by this decision, the fair fabric of apostolical succession is scattered to the four winds and blasted for ever. In Jackson's Works, there is a chapter in which he professes to show that "the Romish church hath defiled the catholic faith, and by defiling it, hath lost true union with the primitive and apostolic church." Hear also the great and good Bishop Jewell: "The grace of God is promised to pious souls, and to those who fear God, and is not affixed to bishop's chairs and personal succession. For that ye tell so many fair tales about Peter's succession, we demand of you wherein the pope succeedeth Peter? You answer, he succeeded him in his chair; as if Peter had been some time installed in Rome, and had solemnly sat all day with his triple crown, in his pontificalibus, and in a chair of gold. And thus, having lost both religion and doctrine, ye think it sufficient, at last, to hold by the chair, as if a soldier that had lost his sword would play the man with his scabbard. But so Caiaphas succeeded Aaron; so wicked Manassas succeeded David; so may antichrist easily sit in Peter's chair."4

But, as the present succession of the Anglican church must stand or fall with this corrupt and faulty source, therefore, is it associated with it in its merited condemnation.

It has been already shown, on the testimony of a learned episcopal writer, who has lately investigated the subject, that this system stands inseparably connected with that apostacy predicted by the apostles; (see 2 Thess. ch. ii., 2 Pet. ch. ii., 1 Tim. ch. iv., &c.) and is, therefore, involved in the condemnatory sentence passed upon it." And we are afraid we shall make it

1) De Præscript, c. 4.

2) In Powell on Ap. Suc., p. 151, where are similar statements from Ambrose, Peter Martyr, Bishop Jewell, &c.

3) See vol. iii., p. 870.

4) Def. of Apology, p. 634, Edin., 1609.

5) That the mystery of iniquity, spoken of by the apostles, refers, in its consummation, to the papal primacy, and in its progress to that prelacy on which IT was based, has been shown by presbyterian writers in former times as it has recently by Mr. Taylor. Thus it is largely

too plainly evident, when we come to investigate the decisions of scripture respecting schism, that it must be also reprobated as schismatical by the just judgment of Heaven.

We allow these arguments at present to pass with this mere allusion to them, and would bring this question finally, as it regards the tests of scripture, to what we would term scripture MANIFESTATIONS, or the testimony of God's word, as it is interpreted by the workings of God's grace, in the dispensations of his mercy.1

Do other denominations, beside those which are prelatical, claim to be, in truth, churches of Christ? Then, what is easier than to bring them to the test of experiment, and prove them in this same confident boasting? If churches of Christ, then it is but fair that they should be required to show the signs of a church. If good, and not wild olive trees, then should they be found, not merely garnished with leaves, or even fair seeming blossoms, but laden also with fruit fit for the master's use, and worthy of the care bestowed upon them by the husbandman. "By their fruits ye shall know them." This is a rule given to us by the Lord himself; and in no case could it be applied more safely than in the present. For, assuredly, if we are not churches of Christ, but mere human conventicles, and voluntary societies;-if we are not true worshippers of God, but mere "meetingers," who rather offend and provoke him by our unauthorized forms;-if the promises of grace apply not to us, and are, therefore, unfulfilled in us—if our ministry and our sacraments are no better than mere mockeries-then it is most truly an easy thing to make evident the fact, that, like the fleece of Gideon, we remain dry, while they enjoy the refreshing dews of divine grace. God is not a man, that he should lie; neither hath he said what he will not accomplish, whether it be in giving or in withholding. For he is faithful who hath promised, and he cannot deny himself; and surely no second Prometheus can steal down grace from heaven, and thus vivify, with divine energy, the lifeless carcass of a mere self-willed ceremonial.

handled by the author of Causa Episcopatus Hierarhici Lucifuga, Edinburg, 1706, ch. iv., lect. 2, p. 123-162, and 410.

It is there shown that this was the opinion of Beza, (p. 126,) and other protestant divines.

The powers assumed by the prelacy are also particularly shown to be condemned in such passages, and to be in principle identical with the papacy.

"That the state of churches in after ages," says Dr. Owen, (Works, vol. 19, p. 132,) "was moulded and framed after the pattern of the civil government of the Roman empire, is granted; and that conformity (without offence to any be it spoken) we take to be a fruit of the working of the mystery of iniquity."

1) See some remarks on this point in Dr. Mitchell's Letters to Bishop Skinner, p. 45.

As a criterion of the true church, nothing can be fairer than to take the evidence of facts, in proof of the withholdment, or bestowment of the promised blessings of Heaven; seeing that to the true church it is secured as a divine gift, that whatsoever she binds on earth shall be bound in Heaven. This canon of judgment is allowed even by Dr. Wiseman, the learned advocate of Romanism, and by Dr. Hough, the able episcopal reviewer of his disingenuous and jesuitical work against protestant missions. "It must be," says Dr. Wiseman, "an important criterion of the true rule of faith, delivered by our blessed Redeemer to his church, whether the preaching according to any given rule has received the success promised in this engagement on his part; or whether its total failure proves it not to have satisfied the conditions which he required."1

Consonant to these views, are those of Mr. Bristed, himself an episcopalian, as contained in his thoughts on the AmericanAnglo churches. "However this may be, one thing is certain, that there is no exclusive church, to the professing members of which eternal salvation is exclusively confined. For it is manifest, that divine Providence blesses every sect and denomination of christians among whom the doctrines of the cross are faithfully preached, whether they be episcopalian, or presbyterian, or congregational. All these religious bodies have been blessed, as instruments in the hand of God, and under the quickening, sanctifying influences of the Spirit, to the conversion of sinners, the purifying of the life and conduct, and the salvation of souls, as is evident by a cloud of witnesses, in different ages, and in every clime."2

"Now, if any one church, whether Greek, or Latin, or protestant, either as a whole, or in any of its various parts, subdivisions, or sects, were an exclusive church, the Lord Jesus Christ, who is the head of the church, would not bless the ministers of any other denomination with his presence, nor aid them with the illuminations of his spirit. It behooves us, therefore, to extend a catholc spirit of love, esteem and reverence,

1) Lectures on the Romish church during the Lent of 1836, p. 109, 110, and p. 27, lect. 7, and Hough's Vindic. of Prot. Missions, p. 104, so also by Bishop Davenant. "At quot spectat ecclesias integras utrum fundamento suo salutariter maneant conjunctæ necne, ex operationibus quæ ab eisdem exerceri indies possunt et solent est statuendum. In quibus enim ecclesiis illi actus omnes exercentur per quos homines

christo uniri, in christo manere et per christum ad vitam eternam perduci possunt, eos ab hoc vinculo salutis humanæ, fundamento alienatos et divulsos nemo affirmare aut cogitare potest." Bishop Davenant ad Pacem Eccl. Adhortatio Cant., 1640, 59, and p. 101, chap. 8.

2) The same rule is adopted by Mr. Newman (on Romanism, p. 53,) in reference to the Romish church.