ment, it did not mean that every individual of every church in every age should cast out devils, should speak with new tongues, &c., for all were not workers of miracles, all had not the gifts of healing, all did not speak with tongues, (vide 1 Cor. xii. 29, 30 ;) but it did mean that the Lord would bear testimony to the truth of the gospel and to the divine mission of its preachers, by signs in attestation of it, in such a degree, as to the number of persons that should perform signs, and in such a measure, as to the time when they should perform them, as in his wisdom should seem sufficient for his purpose, "dividing to every man severally as he will." In this view of the promise, it was fulfilled as to persons, when a sufficient number, though not all, performed these signs; it was fulfilled as to time, when they were performed at the establishment of Christianity, though not at a subsequent period.

We need not go through all the texts which our author quotes, as many of them bear nothing upon the question between him and us, which is not, whether the Lord promised the Holy Ghost, but whether he promised the Holy Ghost to all as conveying a visible manifestation of miraculous power. We would pass on to those texts which speak of the baptism of the Holy Ghost, an expression which our author endeavours to confine in its meaning to the conveying a miraculous power. For this restriction we conceive that our author has no warrant but his own system. When our Lord (Acts i. 4, 5,) promised to his disciples that they should be baptized with the Holy Ghost not many days hence, the promise included, it is true, the miraculous powers conveyed by the sending down on them the Holy Ghost, but was by no means confined to them. In the baptism of the Holy Ghost was included the internal, powerful, enlightening, sanctifying influences of the Spirit, his invisible divine operations, as well as his external visible manifestations; and this we would deduce from the place where the baptism of the Holy Ghost is first spoken of, (Mat. iii. 11,) where John the Baptist says, "I indeed baptize you with water unto repentance, but he that cometh after me is mightier than I, whose shoes I am not worthy to bear, he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost and with fire." As no man was a disciple of John but he whom John baptized with water, so no man was a disciple of Jesus but he whom Jesus baptized with the Holy Ghost. We join with our author in maintaining that the promise of the baptism of the Holy Ghost was not to the apostles alone, but to all that should receive Jesus. John spoke of it as the very essence and characteristic of the Christian scheme; just as Paul says, Rom. viii. 9, "But ye are not in the flesh, but in the spirit, if so be that the spirit of God dwell in you. Now, if any man have not the spirit of Christ, he is none of his." Whence we come to this conclusion, that, as a man might do miraculous works without being a disciple of Jesus, and as a man might be a disciple of Jesus without doing miracles-as those confessed by

our author to have been disciples of Jesus have for ages been without the power of working miracles-it is not an essential part of the baptism of the Holy Ghost to be endued with the power of working miracles. So far from the term, the baptism of the Holy Ghost, being confined, as our author would confine it, to the imparting such a power, it means a more universal and internal operation, which does not necessarily even include the imparting this miraculous power.

Every Christian, in order to be a Christian, must be baptized by Jesus with the Holy Ghost; but every Christian, in order to his being a Christian, must not necessarily be endued with the power of miracles. Therefore, the baptism with the Holy Ghost is not identified with the being endued with miraculous power. We have shown, then, we think, that the promise that signs should follow them that believe, did not convey a promise that every individual in every church, in every age, should be endued with miraculous powers. We have shown, we think, likewise, that the promise of being baptized with the Holy Ghost, was not a promise of being endued with miraculous powers.

We now proceed to consider the second of the facts relied upon by our author, i. e. that in the early times of the church, every church, and every individual member of the church, possessed, in some degree or other, the miraculous gifts of the Spirit :

"Let us again turn to the first chapter of the Acts. We there read (v. 13, &c.) that after the apostles had witnessed the ascension of our Lord, they went up into an upper room, where they abode; and that they continued with one accord, in prayer, and supplication, with the women, and Mary the mother of Jesus, and his brethren. After this, they proceeded to elect a successor to the apostate Judas; and the election by lot took place, if not among all the brethren, men and women, who continued together in prayer, and supplication, yet certainly in their presence. In those days, Peter stood up in the midst of the disciples, and said (the number of the names together were about an hundred and twenty), men and brethren, this Scripture must needs have been fulfilled concerning Judas,' &c. And they gave forth their lots, and the lot fell upon Matthias.' And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, (they who continued with one accord in prayer, and supplication,' the hundred and twenty, men and women,) were all, with one accord, in one place; and suddenly there came a sound from heaven, as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where they (the hundred and twenty) were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues, like as of fire, and it sat upon each of them; and they (the hundred and twenty) were ALL filled with the Holy Ghost, and began to speak with other tonges, as the Spirit gave them utterance." (Acts ii. 1-4.) Here was the first fulfilment of the promise, made in St. Mark's Gospel, that the sign of speaking with new tongues, should follow, among those who believed in Jesus. Here was the fulfilment of the promise of the baptism of the Holy Ghost, for which the Apostles, and they that

were with them,' (Luke xxiv. 33, 49,) were directed to wait at Jerusalem; and that, not confined to the eleven apostles, but bestowed upon the whole company of believers, men and women, with whom they were associated."

Acts ii. 4, proves that the disciples were all filled with the Holy Ghost, but by no means that they all spake with tongues : they spake with tongues" as the Spirit gave them to speak." According to what we read, 1 Cor. xii. 11, "The Spirit dividing to every man severally as he will." It is not said that the Spirit gave them all utterance (though we freely admit that nothing is said to the contrary); but as it was not the common way in those churches where there were gifts, to make all speak with tongues, to make all to be one member, instead of being many different members, we think it is more probable, in the absence of direct testimony, that the Spirit, which filled them all, did not give to them all to speak with tongues. But as we do not by any means assert that none but the apostles had the gift of tongues or other miraculous powers, we freely concede to all who think that this text implies that all spake with tongues, their full right to think so; but much more is necessary to prove that all in the church in these early days were so gifted. Our author would infer, that the three thousand spoken of as converted in the sequel of this 2d chapter, were all made partakers of the miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost. "In consequence of Peter's sermon, three thousand persons were baptized; and Peter having promised that, if baptized, they should receive the baptism of the Holy Ghost, we may fairly conclude that ALL received that gift." Yes, all received the gift of the Holy Ghost; but as we have seen that the baptism of the Holy Ghost is not to be identified with the gift of miraculous powers, it does not follow that, by receiving the gift of the Holy Ghost, they received the gift of miraculous powers. It no more proves that these three thousand had the gift of miraculous powers, than it proves, contrary to fact, that all now called by the Lord have those gifts. All now called by the Lord receive the Holy Ghost; but, as our respected author admits and grieves, they have not the gift of tongues, nor any other manifestation of miraculous powers; and yet they have the same promise as those three thousand :-"The promise is to you and to your children, and to all that are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call." And we would remark, that here there is nothing that can be construed into contingency in the promise, as God's calling is of his own sovereign grace, and not contingent upon faith or anything else in man so the gift that God has promised to as many as he shall call, is, in like manner, not contingent upon faith or anything else in man; and if it is the fact that, to those whom God hath called for the last fifteen centuries, he has not given the gift of miraculous powers, it is evident that these gifts of miraculous powers did not form a part of his promise, and therefore are not a necessary part of the

gifts of the Spirit. Our truly estimable author is so prepossessed in favour of the system which he has adopted, that we are sure he is totally unconscious of the want of sound argument for the position which he advocates. But a little further in his tract, our author is hurried on to assert, not as he had done before, that every believer was baptized with the Holy Ghost, and had some manifestation or other of the miraculous power of the Spirit, but he unguardedly asserts that every believer had the gift of tongues :

"The THIRD question proposed was the OBJECT of the baptism of the Holy Ghost. The opinion very generally prevails, that it was in order to qualify the Apostles to preach in languages, which they had not learned by common course of study; that they might speak, at once, to foreigners; and that, thus, the spread of the Gospel might be facilitated. In other words, that it was a gift for teaching. If so, this object must have been answered in all who received it. But every believer received it-three thousand one hundred and twenty, on the day of Pentecost-men and women, who could not all have been teachers; therefore, the gift was not conferred for the object of spreading the Gospel by teaching."

Here, if we understand him, he asserts that every believer received from the Holy Ghost the gift of tongues; for a confutation of which we would only refer him to 1 Cor. xii., especially ver. 30.

We think we need not spend our time in replying to what our author says, as an argument for the church's present possession of the gifts, that they are more required now than they were at the beginning. We would only reply to this, that we submit to the wisdom of our God, who knows far better than we do, what his church requires: we repose upon his unerring wisdom, and his unchanging love. We would say, with Paul, "he that spared not his own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how shall he not, with him, freely give us all things?" We come to this conclusion because the God of power and love does not now give to his believing people miraculous gifts, we feel assured, in opposition to our author, that the church does not require them now.

In a subsequent part of his pamphlet, our author, from Eph. iii. 4, &c. goes more at length into an attempt to prove that all the churches were endued with miraculous powers; but, from the very strange things which he brings forward as proofs, we consider that he has most entirely failed. He further takes texts out of all the epistles, as evidences that each of the churches addressed possessed miraculous powers; and he sees his own favorite doctrine in some, in which, we verily believe, no human being ever saw it before; such, for example, as Gal. v. "Walking in the Spirit"-"Being led by the Spirit"-" Living in the Spirit"-" Fruit of the Spirit." He does this whilst in the very place the inspired Apostle states what he conceives to be the fruit of the Spirit, and never mentions one miraculous power.

But the most strange thing, by way of argument, is that by which he attempts to prove that the seven churches of Asia were possessed of miraculous powers. We give his own words; for, were we to attempt to describe his arguments in our words, we are sure that no person would believe that we had not mistaken and misrepresented him :

"With regard to the seven churches of Asia,' the Epistles to which are contained in the 2d and 3d chapters of Revelation, we may make these observations. They are represented as being all similarly constituted. Their 'Angels,' or presiding ministers, are said to have been under the immediate care of Christ, who held them in his right hand; (chap. i. 20,) and who also had the seven Spirits' for the churches, (chap. iii. 1.) In the midst of the seven churches, Christ is represented to have walked. (chap. i. 20. ii. 1.) So that the condition of all being the same, what was true of one, was true of all. We take the first, then, as a sample of all. The church of Ephesus, whose Angel is considered to have been Timothy, (1 Tim. i. 3, 4,) a gifted officer, and apostle, was endowed with the gifts of the Holy Ghost, as has already been shown from the Acts; (chap, xix. 1—7,) and from St. Paul's Epistle to that church. We may also take the last of these seven Epistles, addressed to the church of Laodicea, which is mentioned by St. Paul in his Epistle to the Colossians; in which he directs that there should be an exchange of Epistles between those two churches, (Col. iv. 16,) from which we infer that they were of similar constitution; and that as the church of Colosse had the power of the Spirit, so had also the church of Laodicea. Thus, then, it appears that the first, and last mentioned of the seven churches of Asia, possessed the power of the Spirit-the baptism of the Holy Ghost; and as all were alike, that the other five possessed that power also."

If this deserves the name of an argument, we know not what an argument is. It demonstrates the total want of solid foundation for our valued author's opinions.

We think, then, we have said enough on our author's second position, that, in the early times of the church, every church, and every individual member of the church, possessed, in some degree or other, "the Spirit in power." We think we have shown that he has totally failed in proving this position.

We come now to his third position, that the early church had an unity, a spirituality, a knowledge, a holiness, almost perfect, which ought to be the state of the church now, and which would be so, but that the church has lost the miraculous powers of the Spirit.

In order to maintain this position, our author quotes many of the beautiful traits of Christian unity, sympathy, and love, which we meet with in various parts of the New Testament, particularly Acts iv. 32, Phil. ii. 2, Eph. iv. 3; and, having given a very glowing and interesting sketch of the love manifested between Paul and Epaphroditus, as set forth at the end of Phil. 2, he adds: