' and we understand that this opinion was lately confirmed by 'the unanimous vote of an assembly, which annually meets at

·

6

no great distance from the metropolis, with a peculiar view to 'the study of prophetic subjects. This decision was not a little ' in unison with many of their conclusions, on subjects far more remote from the sphere of their vision than this happens to be; though even it appears far too distant to enable them, in the present state of their visual organs, to conceive of it according ( to truth.' Now, although the analysis of this paragraph would furnish the usual residuum of misrepresentation and falsification which newspapers invariably exhibit on such subjects, yet it proves that the subject, not only of the doctrine generally, but of these specific gifts, was under the consideration of some persons nearly two years ago; yet, until the Twelfth Number of this Journal, not one demand of "assent was required" in any publication which we have met with: and, even in the article which relates to them, there is a special caution against demanding assent from those who had not sufficient opportunities for inquiry.

On the other hand, we think the author has spoken in terms vastly inadequate to the tone and language which has been used against the doctrine, and against the gifted persons, by such persons as Greenwood, Irons, the Record, Evangelical Magazine, &c. This midway steering betwixt Christ and Belial sounds very specious; and is very popular, under the names of candour, dispassionate examination, &c.; but we affectionately entreat the writer to remember that it is the Lord, and not we, who says, I know thy works, that thou art ' neither cold nor hot: I would thou wert cold or hot: so then, 'because thou art lukewarm, and neither cold nor hot, I will " spue thee out of my mouth.'

The tract is divided into three heads: first, into the nature of spiritual gifts, or what is signified by the Apostle under this expression; secondly, what is the source from which these gifts originated, or the foundation for their existence in the Christian church; thirdly, what is the present standing of the Christian church with regard to them. The sentiments conveyed under the first two of these heads are very good. Under the third, the writer proceeds to inquire: first, Is there any

6

6

reason to suppose that the exercise of them is absolutely suspended in the church by God himself? secondly, Have we

scriptural grounds for expecting that they will be again ex'ercised in the church? and, thirdly, Is the church responsible ' for the continued use of them?' On the first point the writer observes, that not a single testimony can be adduced from

Scripture, limiting these spiritual gifts to any one period of the 'church.' And against the alleged historical fact that they

·

have ceased, he says, he has no doubt that God has at various times, in all ages of his church, interposed his arm, and ' revealed himself to his people as the answerer of prayer; and that he has miraculously interposed to vindicate the cause of 'his faithful martyrs and witnesses.' Such facts, however, he wisely distinguishes from the standing power of spiritual gifts.

<

The author observes, that 'it has been said, that, Christianity being now established, we want no such witness to its truths: 'that, having an established creed, we no longer need God to 'bear testimony to his servants' words, as he did of old. But can this be gravely said by any thinking man? What! are the 'credentials of the Christian minister so universally and fully recognised, that all will listen to him as a teacher sent from God? Are the ranks of the infidel, and of the Papist, more penetrable than the strong-holds of heathenism? Besides, is all the 'world even nominally Christian? Are there no triumphs of 'the Cross over heathenism yet to be achieved? Is it possible, that, with all we see around us, and all we hear at a distance 'from us, we can say, that if God should graciously interpose again with his arm of power, it would be altogether useless, 'since we are too far advanced, and too prosperous, to need such helps? Surely we may safely leave this matter in the hands of God. It does not become us thus to prejudge the question. If God should again visit his church, as in the days of old, we 'shall be at no loss to assign abundant reason; and, even if we could not discover the reason, we would believe that he had · one which we could not see.'

·

6

C

This passage does not convey, with sufficient clearness, the author's just estimate of the actual state of religion in the land, and of God's written will upon the subject. The ranks of the 'Infidel and of the Papist,' and 'the strong-holds of Heathenism,' are far more penetrable to the Spirit of God than the delusions of Evangelism. The darkest period of intellectual, moral, and spiritual blackness, is that which immediately precedes the second coming of the Son of Man. Not a single reason can be assigned why it was necessary that the Apostles, who had been instructed by the personal ministry of Christ, should yet be found inadequate to preach to the then world until they had been endowed with miraculous power, which does not in a tenfold degree apply to those who preach to the world in its present condition. The whole argument correctly implies that the world now is less pervious to mere human testimony than it was then; which we believe, both from the description of it in the Bible, and from discernment of its spiritual condition, to be the fact; and which it would have been better to have stated more fully.

We must come to closer quarters with our author in his next

·

paragraph.

A third inquiry which may be proposed is this:

"

"

6

Is the church responsible for the exercise of spiritual gifts? and ' is the absence of them, in any of her members, to be attributed to their sin? Now, in determining this question, it is very important to observe the distinction already noticed between the presence of the Spirit, and the manifestation of the Spirit; between the gift of the Holy Ghost, and the gifts by which the 'Holy Ghost is manifested. This is a distinction for which not one single passage of Scripture is adduced; and we believe it to be a distinction utterly groundless. We may say,' he adds, ' that there is the capacity in all Christians for the possession of 'all gifts, because all are baptized with the Holy Ghost; but 'the gifts are divided to each, according to the sovereign will of God.' Here there is confusion, from the too large, or too restricted, application of the terms. If, by all Christians, be intended all those who have been baptized into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost, then it is not true that all these have a capacity for exercising spiritual gifts. If by all Christians be meant the election, in whom the Holy Ghost personally resides, then there is more than a capacity for possession; and the kind of gift is indeed according to the sovereignty of the Father, but also according to the holiness of the vessel. He proceeds, Hence, I think, we must draw this conclusion, that, while all are placed under the responsibility of baptism with 'the Holy Ghost, the impartation of gifts is a matter entirely dependent upon the sovereignty of God to confer, or withhold, as he sees fit.' (How does the manifestation of the gift depend upon the sovereignty of God more than the responsibility of baptism with the Holy Ghost? What labour to make distinction where none exists!) The Holy Ghost is given to every baptized believer, who is henceforth his temple; while the power of manifesting the Holy Ghost in spiritual gifts, seems never to have been general to the whole Christian body, but was confined to those to whom God chose to assign it. And 'this opinion is confirmed by the method in which the gifts were conferred. On the day of Pentecost, indeed, they 'seemed to have been conferred along with the baptism of the Spirit; and also in the analogous case of Cornelius and his friends, when the Gentiles were first admitted into the church. But, with these exceptions, the gifts seem to have been con'ferred in the primitive church by the laying on of the Apostles'

·

6

6

hands; they seem to have been the special privilege of some, not the general privilege of all.' Every baptized person has not the person of the Holy Ghost dwelling in him. But what the author had to shew was, that it was the special privilege of NONE: he had to point to one single church without any gift at all; for he is beating the air in contending against the idea that

every member ought to have exhibited a particular gift. While at the same time we confess that we are at a loss to point out one single passage in the New Testament which separates believers from persons possessing the Holy Ghost, and persons possessing gifts from those who possess none, we are fully aware of the extent to which this principle will lead us; but the question is, What says the word of God? Perhaps the solution is, that there can be no church, although there may be individuals, who do not manifest supernatural gifts: they, whose Spirit within them sympathized with the voice of the Holy Ghost in the Prophets, would feel that it was the selfsame Spirit which was in them also.-He proceeds: In agree'ment with this, we find St. Paul (Rom. i. 11) expressing his 'desire to see the Roman Christians, that he might impart 'unto them some spiritual gift, to the end they might be established. Observe, he does not reprove them as guilty of a sin, that they did not manifest the gift; nay, he even placed 'their possession of it upon the ground of his being present

6

6

to confer it,-obviously implying that the church was not ' responsible for any such gift, until God had specially conferred 'it by the laying on of his hands.'

Once more we repeat, that there is no such thing to be found in the New Testament as a church without the Holy Ghost, or with any such distinction as that which the author here tries to substantiate between the gifts and fruits of the Spirit. He is unfortunate in his selection of the church of Rome, as that in which none of the gifts of the Spirit prevailed until the Apostles arrived there to confer them, because the Apostle himself says directly the reverse, and gives them cautions not to be puffed up by these gifts, as he gave also to the Corinthians (Rom. xii. 3): "Now I say, through the grace given unto me, to every man that is among you, not to think of himself more highly than he ought to think; but to think soberly, according as God hath dealt to every man the measure of faith: for as we have many members in one body, and all members have not the same office, so we, being many, are one body in Christ, and every one members one of another. Having then gifts differing according to the grace that is given us, whether prophecy, let us prophesy according to the proportion of faith; or ministry, let us wait on our ministering; or he that teacheth on teaching;" &c. &c. The subject of the gifts, the administrations, and operations of the Spirit, are all referred to as things existing in the church, about which the Apostle gives directions. It is very probable that they might not have had all the gifts which the Corinthians had; or that there might not have been so many gifted persons; and therefore, in his love to them, knowing the advantage and blessedness of the gifts, he hopes to be enabled to

impart either an additional gift, or some gift to an additional number of persons.-On page 24 our author has pointed, in a note, to the Ordination Service, which inculcates the bestowal and the reception of a miraculous gift for the purpose of the ministry. We have no doubt that any man going, in this faith in God's ordinance, to it for that purpose, would receive the gift intended by it; but we are quite certain that scarcely any, even amongst the most pious, ever go for ordination with any such faith. In the whole round of our acquaintance we never heard of more than one who did, or who would not have thought it pure fanaticism to have done so. Nevertheless the church is still the church, and the ministry is still the ministry; and if men will be faithful, and trust the Lord, and deny themselves, He will give them gifts through its means, and they will receive again, by the laying on of hands, all the gifts and power of the Holy Ghost, as at first. as at first. But if the ministers of any church will teach their flocks neither to desire nor to feel the necessity of the baptism of the Holy Ghost, Jesus the Baptizer will destroy them, for putting such dishonour on His especial office, and for feeding His flock with the dry and profitless husks of their own sermons, instead of with the refreshing pastures and waters of His Spirit. As to the obvious implication, that the church was not responsible for the gifts, there is not the shadow of a shadow for such an assertion. After some remarks of the same nature, the author sums up his opinion as follows: After much consideration, then, I have come to the conclusion, that no ground of general responsibility for the exercise of spiritual gifts can be made out 'from Scripture.' After much consideration, we have come to an exactly opposite conclusion; and we think the opinion of the author arises from that total misapprehension of the nature of the gifts, and inadequate view of their importance, which paralyses the whole religious community. In our opinion, they are the sum and substance of a church; the sine qua non of its existence for any one purpose for which a church was constituted, whether of exhibiting God, or of utility to the world: they are the armour, without which the church can perform no act which is enjoined to it.

6

To deny the church's responsibility for the right use of all that Christ ever gave it, because it is not now possessed of it, is in fact to throw the blame on God for its own defection. The servant, who, possessing the one talent, hid it in a napkin, was surely more excusable than he who would lose the talent with which he was entrusted, and then make excuse to the Master that the talent was of little value; that he could do just as well without it; and that, though indeed he did lose it, the loss was not owing to any fault of his, for that his Master must himself have withdrawn it, although he never knew when nor why.