Obrazy na stronie
PDF
ePub
[blocks in formation]

:

rence to the Scriptures and the said arguments, come to the only conclusion it appears to me I can. The case of Philip and that of the Samaritans brought me to a complete standthat of the latter especially for if the hands of the apostles were necessary in this case, it appears to me they must have been necessary in all. The only exception I know of to this rule is that of laying on of hands on being appointed to any particular office in the church. Paul says to Timothy," Neglect not the gift that is in thee, which was given thee by prophecy, with the laying on of the hands of the presbytery." Again, in giving directions to Timothy, Paul says, " Lay hands suddenly on ." If these two passages have reference to the practice of laying on hands on the appointment to any office in the church, they certainly cannot have reference to all the members of a church.

no man.

That there were practices peculiar to the apostles and to their day, no one who has instituted a fair comparison can, we think, deny. For instance, where do we find the anointing oil now used as efficacious, except in the Roman church, with its "extreme unction" and pretended miracles. Everything that the apos

[We are of opinion that the penitent thief might have heard of the baptism of John, and even himself been baptized, which are not at all improbable (Luke vii. 29); or he might have been present at the baptism of Jesus, and witnessed the extraordinary mauifestation of the Heavenly Father which, on that occasion, attested the divinity of his mission, "This is my beloved Son, in whom I delight." John came to prepare a people for the Lord, and as men of his character would be certain to be present at the popular assemblies which attended the proclamations of this distinguished messenger of the Saviour, it is not unreasonable to conclude, that the dying malefactor had heard of Jesus, if he had not actually listened to histles teaching, while pursuing his marvellous career on earth. The inscription which, by the authority of Pilate, was placed on the cross in three languages, "This is the King of the Jews," might awaken former impressions, and carry conviction to his conscience. Whether these reflections be just or not, we know that the Saviour never practiced the least deception towards any one, and, as this dying criminal was evidently made happy by the promise of Jesus, we believe that he was pardoned and accepted, and that he will be found among the saved and glorified at the resurrection of the just.-ED.]

LETTER FROM AUSTRALIA.

ADELAIDE, July 29, 1856. On the receipt of the last two numbers (March and April, 1856) of the Harbinger, I purposed writing a few lines in reply to S. S. on the subject of "the laying-on of hands after baptism.' Previous to my leaving England, our friend addressed a few kind words to me on Christian subjects, alluding, among others, to that of laying on hands after baptism, desiring me to give this subject an impartial and scriptural consideration. I did not reply to this letter, but have frequently thought of sending a few lines to the Harbinger, giving my candid view of the matter. As to the arguments pro and con. which have been advanced previous to those contained in the numbers of the Harbinger above referred to, I am quite ignorant; and have, therefore, with a refe

attempted to do, after they had received power from on high, they did; and whatever they commanded to be done, was of equal force; therefore, if the apostles laid hands on any for the gift of the Holy Spirit, the Holy Spirit was given, and it was known that these Simon Magus, when persons had received it. he saw that through laying on of the apostles' hands the Holy Spirit was given, offered money that he might have the same power. Peter showed him his error in supposing that the gift of God could be purchased with money. I think it is a fair inference, that if the apostles only had or exercised this power, that it was confined to them. I do not see the force of my friend S. S.'s argument, in the laying on of hands being coupled with baptisms, &c. as a proof that they must now be united. They each and all applied to the persons to whom the apostles wrote, and to have left either of them out then, when the apostles actually and unmistakably had conferred the gifts of the Holy Spirit, would be as great an omission, as now to contend for what no one has the power to do would be superfluous. If any one has the power to confer the gift of the Holy Spirit, or the authority to do so, he ought by no means to withhold such a blessed gift. I feel assured that this is a very different case to that of baptism. A disciple could preach and teach, baptize and pray, and do many other things in the days of the apostles, which they can now do if necessary; but we find no instance, neither then nor now, of their possessing this power of giving the Holy Spirit.

Baptism will be valid so long as there is the word of God, a penitent believer, water to im

merse in, and an immerser. So is it with the blood of Christ. He hath by His oue offering, "perfected for ever them that are sanctified." And lastly the word of God, which contains the knowledge of salvation, is of the same enduring character.

Peter says, "The word of the Lord endureth for ever, and this is the word which by the Gospel is preached unto you." Therefore while we have the word of God, the blood of Christ, penitent believers, the waters of baptism, and some one to preach and immerse, we have all the machinery that is necessary for salvation. As to the gifts of the Spirit, more than God has promised to give to His adopted children, whereby they may call Abba, Father;" for the shedding abroad of His love in their hearts, and for them to abound in hope, no one can now give any evidence that they possess, or that they have the power to give. And as regards the gifts we have just mentioned, I consider them as the gift of God alone, and that they are the common property of all that believe and obey the Gospel. Nor do I know of one instance recorded in the New Testament, of these being given by the laying on of hands. In the case of the Samaritans, (Acts viii. 16-19) I think it is very evident that they received the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, which must have been visible to Simon. In the case of the Eunuch we have no mention made at all of any gifts. In the case of Cornelius and his friends, they received the extraordinary gifts (Acts x. 46.) In the case of some of John's disciples, (Acts xix. 6) they received the extraordinary gifts. I think I have mentioned all the cases in which the Holy Spirit was given by the laying on of hands. Christ taught his followers not merely to "observe the times and seasons" of the weather, but of the days in which they lived; and it is of little use for us, in these degenerate and apostate days, to contend for what was given by the founders of Christianity, in so far as the gifts of the Spirit are concerned and ths gifts of God. No persons, except the Mormons, or some of the latter day deceivers, would, I imagine, now contend, that because God "set some in the church, first apostles, secondarily prophets, thirdly teachers, after that miracles, then gifts of healings, helps, governments, diversities of tongue," that these are now in the church; but noe on believing the sacred record would deny that they were. These, if not coupled together, are classed together; but I am sure my friend S. S. would not make the same use of this passage in 1 Cor. xii. 28, as he does that in Heb. vi. 1 and 2. I hope my friend S. S. will receive these few observatious as kindly as they are made. I entertain a great regard for him, and take this opportunity of covneying my love and best respects to him, hoping he may be led to view this matter in a different light, that there may not only be a

union of heart between us, but a united effort in the cause of our dear Redeemer.

I have little to report in the way of progress, except in the preliminaries of our building, which are going on favorably.

I was invited to occupy the pulpit of the United Presbyterian church last Lord's day, which I did. Their minister having some time since joined the Free Church of Scotland, they have been dependent lately on such assistance as they can get.

At an ordination held a few days since by the Bishop of Adelaide, an objection was made to one of the candidates for priests orders. The objection was made, I think, by an ex-minister of the Church of England. One of the objections was an ignorance of the Latin tongue; but the Bishop, contrary to the directions of the rubric, proceeded with the service, showing how little deference is paid by these functionaries to them rules and orders. The candidate resides some distance up the country, where I imagine Latin would be of very little use, but some of the gentlemen who have been to college, think it is not right to admit any into the profession" who have not been trained. Why (they think) should they be put to all the expense of a college education, if others are admitted without snch an expensive process? Besides, it is hurting their dignity, and placing them on a level with common folks. How can these unlearned men mystify the minds of others, if they have not been taught to substitute the philosophy of the Schools for the teachings of the Apostles, and the book of Homer or Virgil for the Word of God.

[ocr errors]

A few days since I received a note from Brother John Laurie, residing some distance in the country, in which he says, "We have had meetings for the last two months in my house on the first days. About all the people in the neighbourhood attend. Our kitchen is generally crowded, and occasionally we have people from a distance; and although it is intended to resume the meetings at Brother Watson's, soon as the whether and roads will allow, I am not quite sure as to the propriety of breaking up our meetings here. Heretofore I have always had most success among my neighbors and acquaintances, and our giving up the meetings here, would leave the greater proportion of the people in this locality destitute of all public teaching. We established also a meeting on the Thursday evenings, about three months ago, which is also well attended."

Since I commenced writing I have been informed that a young man, for some years a member of the Wesleyan body, has applied for immersion; the particulars of which I will furnish in my next.

I must now conclude, hoping to have something interesting to communicate by the next mail. Your's faithfully, H. HUSSEY.

66

99 66

NOTES AND CRITICISM S.

BABELDOM.

CHRISTENDOM, according to lexicographers, is "the collective body of Christians." Evangelical Christendom" is, hawever, talked about; and we have, therefore, been moved to ask, What Evangelical Christendom" may be? Is it one of a number of Christendoms? Is it a section of the one Christendom? -or, What is it? To this reasonable inquiry we have received no answer sufficiently reasonable and satisfactory to induce us to repeat it, and consequently we shall henceforth for Christendom substitute Babeldom, and the publishers of future editions of English dictionaries will oblige us by inserting the following line :

BABELDOM The collective body of the diverse and opposing sects improperly called Christian.

Having before us a pretty good map of this "land of Shinar," a sketch of its territory is now presented.

66

where these most prevail there is the greatest licentiousness. The people, so far as religion is concerned, are in such ignorance the like of which is nowhere seen. I have been myself informed in Rome, by respectable, wellinformed persons, that this ignorance amounts even to brutishness. ** None has any liberty to think, nor liberty to speak, nor liberty to write, according to the purity of the Gospel and the spirit of the Fathers; in Rome there is the Inquisition to strangle the truth. * * * If you wish to be Catholic, abjure your reason and your conscience, leave there your holy fathers, cast aside the Word of God, make yourselves blind, and devote your whole life to the danger of being led by others as blind as yourselves."*

The city is certainly ancient, but it boasts of an antiquity to which it has no claim. It also proclaims itself invulnerable, defies the world, and promises to obtain universal dominion; but we know, though its battlements are high, they are fast rotting at the foundation, and that the city, with all pertaining to it, is doomed to entire destruction.

In the country surrounding are innumerable towns and cities, all of them proclaiming war against Babylon; yet, strange to say, their founders emigrated therefrom, and their people, more or less, keep up the customs and do homage to the laws of that city, and, while battling against it, professedly under the Jerusalem banner, are really rendering just that amount of help which enables it to maintain its pretensions.

Babeldom, taking another view of it, may be described as an immense tract of country, from which the tops of the mountains of Judea, though generally undiscernible, owing to a thick mist, may at times be seen in the distance. The metropolis of Babeldom is Babylon, from which the entire region takes its name. Babylon is a wonderful city, built upon seven hills, and boasts of great wealth and innumerable inhabitants. The government is despotic, the people are slaves, and the intellectual and moral state of the city is incomparably deplorable. The most astounding anomalies prevail. With the largest profession of love, there are the most marvellous arrangements for inflicting tortures upon all who refuse to acknow-in ledge the supremacy, and submit to the laws of its chief magistrate. Indeed, so have the thoroughfares of this city been again and again saturated with blood, shed at the instigation of its government, that it seems next to impossible so to cover the evidences thereof, as to make it appear anything better than the world's abattoire. The most extraordinary apeings of sanctity are everywhere paraded, yet according to the testimony of its living dignitaries,

We, of course, do not dwell in Babeldom, though we have, with most of our immediate neighbors, sojourned there

days gone by. Our tent is pitched on the rising ground at the base of the Judean mountains, where the authority of Babeldom is not acknowledged, and from whence we take excursions into the country which lies stretched out at our feet; not, however, to participate in the rights of its subjects, but only to spy out the land, and to administer instruction and assistance, calculated to deliver the inhabitants from wrongs

* The Archbishop of Paris, in 1855.

and sufferings to which they are, or will be, subjected. We expect, as the result of these journeyings, to be able to supply such information from the cities and townships of Babeldom, as will prove serviceable to the Immanuel company encamped upon the mountain side, for the purpose of acting upon the vast regions which, though given to Immanuel by the only Power which can rightly dispose of them, have not yet submitted to his authority.

old? A demand for money. The seal of Mammon is found upon the envelope. If the Apostles were to visit their own churches they could not get a decent seat in a pew without paying rent for the accommodation. What meets us in the choir ? Pews where the rich stones where the poor may may recline

shiver. If there comes into your assemblage a man wearing goodly apparel and a poor weareth goodly apparel, sit thou there, and to man in vile raiment, and ye say to him that the poor, stand thou there * * * ye become judges of evil' (James ii. 2, 3.) What meets us at the altar? A lawned and mitred priest. What mean those lawn sleeves? Which of the apostles wore lawn, mitres, and aprons ?

"LOOK ON THIS PICTURE AND What means that English Papacy? If the

ON THAT."

A NUMEROUS and respectable London audience were recently gathered to look upon two word-pictures, sketched by one of those class-leaders who often lead the uneducated into the ditch. The first was a picture of England's State Church, which, though by no means a flattering one, does it no particular injustice. It may be contemplated by dwelling upon the following statement:

tiara of a Pope is wrong, why is not the mitre
of an Archbishop? What is he but a lesser
Pope? They call him 'your grace!' and 'my
lord! Why callest thou me good ?' (Mat-
thew xix. 16, 17.) Neither as being lords over
God's heritage' (Peter v. 3.) 'Be ye not called
rabbi ?' (Matthew xxviii. 8) Who appointed
the Head of the Church rising drunk from a
him? A temporal sovereign. So be it. Fancy
gaming-table on a Sunday morning, and ap-
pointing a bishop over Christ's flock-like
Charles the Second! Fancy the Head of the
Church driving a flock of geese from Kew to
London, for a wager-like George the Fourth!
in princes (Psalm cxlvi. 3.)
What says the Scripture ? Put not your trust
'Princes are
of this world, and this world is the enemy of
separate, saith the Lord.' (2 Cor vi. 17.)
'Come out from among them, and be
But whence does he come? From the Privy
Council and the House of Lords. What say

God.'

"Its origin is a sample of its aftercourse.
As it began, so it grew. It flowed from per-
sonal vice, and it pandered throughout to in-
dividual iniquity. It is another of those pil-ye
lars of oppression that bear the dark roofing
of misrule above our heads. I have shown

you the foundation, the pavement of work and
idleness, the mosaic of misery and want, on
which the superstructure rests. I have shown
yon one of its vast supports, aristocracy. To-
night I bid you to behold another. And here
I wish again, to direct your attention to the
facts I shall attempt to prove; that the Estab-
lished Church has been one of the chief evils
of this country; that it is not the exponent of
the Reformation, but its destroyer, and to the
full as cruel and iniquitous as any other church
that has preceded it (you have heard it called
the church of the reformed); that it has done
its utmost to prevent constitutional liberty and
Parliamentary legislation (you have been told
that it has saved our liberties and been the
champion of the people's rights); that the
good the Dissenters effected, it effaced (they
fought the battle-the State Church seized the
fruits and nullified the victory); that it has
been the abettor of immorality and vice, and
presents not one redeeming feature to our view,
in the least commensurate with the vast amount
of injury it has effected."
"Let
us next withdraw the veil and pass into the
sanctuary itself. What meets us on the thresh-

*

[ocr errors]

the Scriptures? Apostles shall not take unto them the power of rulers. What said the Bishop? He voted for an Indian massacre or European war. What stands beside him? Times, and other daily papers, inform us :A man in muslin. Who appointed him? The

"Advertisement.-Presentation for sale. Va

luable living; fifty miles from London; situation high, dry, and healthy. Capital house and grounds. Income, about £1000 per annum. Population moderate."

[ocr errors]

These things are true enough, and perhaps well enough known. Churchmen call them "the abuses -Christians know the system to be an abuse The speaker's description of himself. altogether. But the other picture? Look at it!

"I am no infidel, I am no atheist; I try to be a Christian, but I like to get my religion at first hand, and I prefer living always in a church, instead of visiting it merely once a week. My church is my house, my congregation is my family, my altar is my own fire side.

Yet I am also willing to go into a larger temple-I am glad to listen to a noble preacher. But if I do, let me have the noblest and the

best.

Glasgow, seems to have gone a little out of his way to say a few words for the Bible. When Presbyterianism calls out against the creed, we may certainly live in hope. In a paper entitled “An Apology for the Organ," he observes

"There are thousands who reverence hausted Christianity, and left nothing our reforming ancestors as having exto be done by their descendants but implicitly to follow them. They deny the Pope the character of infallibility, that they may confer it on John Knox ; or at least lodge the attribute in the Council of Westminster, which most undoubtedly perfected all things, and at once inscribed nihil minus and ne plus ultra on the doctrine, discipline, ceremonies, and order of the Christian church. I know well that I make no caricature of the faith of multitudes; and, slanderer though I should be called, yet I must persist in the slander till I have heard more pleading of the autho

"I, too, go to church-and my church is the great cathedral—whose vault is the concave azure, whose floor is the tesselated pavement of the dark green grass, the rich mosaic of the varied flowers, the refulgent bronzes of the ripening harvest, or the shining marble of the spotless snow; mountains are its pillars-and the evershifting pageantries of cloud, the glorious curtains that moderate its splendour. Show me a priest's church like that. It is from that the churchman would exclude you! I, too, love to hear a great preacher-but then it is the greatest that I love to hear. His oratory rolls in the thunder and whispers in the winds--it glides in soft persuasion through the murmuring leaves, and sounds its lofty periods in the heaving-tide; its eloquence is brilliant with the glory of the sun; its pathos melts beneath the gentle moon amid the dews of night. Oh! temple ever open-oh! preacher ever true if I must hear a sermon, let me listen to God himself sooner than to the mise-rity of the Scripture of God, and less of rable counterfeit, who makes a trade of hiding heaven lest you should overlook the churchand silencing God's voice lest you should forget to listen to his own!"

Now we have the two pictures before us-the State Church and the churchmade man. Thousands of such are around us. They are Christians without submitting to the authority of Christ listening to God's speech in thunder-claps, and disregarding, him when he speaks through his Son, the Lord from heaven. Calling themselves Christians, on ground common to the Jew, Moslem, and Deist. They are ignorant of Christianity, because an infidel church has substituted a base counterfeit, which multitudes turn from with aversion, either to carve out a Christianity for themselves, or to denounce its very name.

66

Reader, the Apostles foretold this state of things. There is a Christianity worthy of all acceptation"—not that of the State Church-not that of Ernest Jones, whose words you have above.

A STRANGE VOICE.

A STRANGE Voice from a strange place, but at the same time not an uncertain voice has been heard. Dr. Anderson, of the United Presbyterian Church,

the confessions, the catechisms, the directories, the assembly acts, and parliament acts of erring men, much though I respect some of these things when assigned their proper place.”

RELIGION.

"THE universe, as its name denotes, is a stupendous unit-a standing poem (which means work,) in commemoration of the one God. As such it is a sublime harmony. The magnetic needle will quiver at a breath, but it never rests till it points where it pointed before. The well known circumpola constellation is ever in motion; but its pointers ever steadfastly look to the pole. In like manner, the universe has its complicated motions, and countless multiplicities, which, however, always conspire and converge towards glorious unities, rising one above another in one cloud-piercing pyramid, whose apex points straight to the throne of the Infinite One.

'All nature is but art, unknown to thee;
All chance, direction which thou canst not see;
All discord, harmony not understood;
All partial evil, universal good.'

"We take no account here of the intrusion of moral evil into God's system

« PoprzedniaDalej »