promote their sacred and vital union with him. But it cannot do so, if the doctrine be not true and scriptural. And, practically, it never has done so. It has done the very contrary. The majority of mankind will take occasion, from such doctrines, to satisfy themselves with the external relation, and substitute it for individual faith; as the annals of the Jewish and the Roman Catholic Churches too fatally demonstrate. Such is, in fact, the natural bias, which needs to be constantly opposed.

not

What, then, is the church, if it is a life-giving ordinance," a "sacrament," in which the mysteries of eternal life are contained and communicated in the hands of whose rulers the ordinances of life are deposited? What the church is, and what the church is not, may perhaps be made clearer by changing, for a moment, the light in which the object is viewed.

An offended Sovereign sends a message to his people; proposes terms of reconciliation; and engages, that whoever shall swear allegiance to a certain Commander, and remain faithful to him, shall receive indemnity for what is past, and be possessed of peculiar privileges for life. A multitude come in; accept the terms, and swear allegiance; pass through the prescribed form; such, for example, as Christian baptism. These are united, enrolled together, and formed into a regiment. It becomes the favoured regiment, the peculiar, the chosen, the royal regiment.

Such is the church of Christ. The promise is, "He that believeth, and is baptized, shall be saved." Many trust the promise, cleave to Him, and are baptized. And these are collected in a company, called by His name, and entitled to many blessed privileges, of guidance, and superintendence, and spiritual protection. This they enjoy in the pre

*Church Principles, pp. 147-150.
+ British Critic, lix.

Church Principles, p. 217.

sent world; and in the world to come, life everlasting.

Here, however, we have a company of persons, receiving privileges, not conferring them. When and how does the change take place, empowering the members of this church, whether its teachers or its scholars, to impart "religious life?" Or where is it implied, that simply to be a member of this church, is to be in possession of spiritual life, or to "have life eternal?'

In

The Sovereign has made his promises, not to the members of the regiment, but to the faithful adherents of the Commander. And we see the important difference. process of time, the privileges become attractive; and many may enrol themselves in the regiment, and comply with the appointed service, who in their hearts intend no fidelity to the Commander, and are ready to desert him on the first occasion.

Now, had the promises been made to all who enrolled themselves in the regiment, all would be equally entitled to reward, whether in their hearts they were faithful or not to the Commander.

But, as the case really stands, the Sovereign is under no obligation to any who have not this inward qualification. Some such may have entered into the body, with the usual ceremonies; nay, they may hold the colours, or wear the dress of the truly faithful; but the state of their hearts disqualifies them for any effectual claim.

It is thus between Christ and the church of Christ. As long as all the company are believers, all is well. To believe, to be baptized, to be in the company, and to be saved, are the same thing. But if, from whatever cause, those become enrolled in the company who bear no fealty towards the Head of the company, these have no claim upon Him who knows the heart, and who made the faith of the heart a condition of the promised privileges.-Bishop of Chester's Charge to his Clergy (1841).

THIS is the Eighth Series of the 'Congregational Lectures," preached by eminent Ministers of that denomination. The theme which Dr. Bennett has selected, is not only in itself a very important one, but, because of its connexion with some of the leading controversies of the day, possesses such a peculiar interest, that there are, we think, few of our readers who will not wish to have some account of the volume afforded them. We take an early opportunity, therefore, of laying before them such a brief analysis of the Lectures, accompanied by such illustrative extracts, as shall be sufficient to convey an accurate idea of the entire work.

As to the subject brought before us by Dr. Bennett, as we are not at all disposed to deny that it possesses an intrinsic-and, viewed in its proper aspect, a considerable-importance; so neither are we, notwithstanding all that has been said in favour of what are called "church principles," moved in the slightest degree from the position which we previously occupied. And yet we were not unwilling to remove, had sufficient reason been shown. We trust that our submission to the authority of Him whom all the parties in this great controversy acknowledge to be Lord and Master, -the absolutely supreme Head of his church,-is not less than that professed by the modern asserters of (what they term) church principles. Let them show us, from the records of His will, that salvation is only, or even chiefly, conveyed through physical instrumentality; and that a certain line of appointment and succession is necessary, to give to that physical instrumentality its mighty power; and that, for a full and true account of evangelical religion, we are to consult the writings

of the men who lived in the first four or five centuries, avoiding all "private interpretation" with the utmost care, as being a sinful violation of Christian order;-let them show all this by certain warrant of Scripture, and it "sufficeth us." But, till they do this, we must continue as we were before, asking leave to remind them, that if it be a sin to take aught away from the word of inspiration, it is not less a sin to add anything to it. They must excuse us for continuing to require from them the positive declaration of Scripture on the subject, and for not being satisfied with their own authoritative assertions and claims; especially when we find, that the principle for which they so stoutly contend as necessary, not merely to the perfection, but to the very being, of the Christian church, was solemnly condemned by our Lord, in reference to the Jewish congregation; and condemned, we cannot avoid seeing, for a reason by no means growing out of the circumstances of the Jews, as Jews, but applying to Jews and Christians with equal propriety and force. Isaiah had said, "Wherefore the Lord said, Forasmuch as this people draw near me with their mouth, and with their lips do honour me, but have removed their heart far from me, and their fear toward me is taught by the precept of men: therefore, behold, I will proceed to do a marvellous work among this people, even a marvellous work and a wonder: for the wisdom of their wise men shall perish, and the understanding of their prudent men shall be hid." And, applying this solemn language to the Jews of his day, our Lord said, "Thus have ye made the commandment of God of none effect through your tradition. Ye hypocrites, well did Esaias pro

phesy of you, saying, This people draweth nigh unto me with their mouth, and honoureth me with their lips; but their heart is far from me. But in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men." Very remarkably there are here connected together, as though they were only different developements of the same principle, a formal externalism, with a religious regard to human authority. But, whatever the originating principle, that which was fact in the days of Isaiah, that which was equally so in the days of our Lord, has continued to be so even within the pale of the professing Christian church: the externalists have always been, and still are, traditionists.

And it is a serious, and even melancholy, consideration, that thus do they make "the commandment of God of none effect." The divine precepts do not refer merely to those duties which grow out of the social nature and condition of man, but embrace those which he owes to God, both as his Creator and his Redeemer. Now, let it be supposed that justification, as forensically understood, is a blessing promised to the personal faith of the penitent sinner, and that by its possession he is to be brought, individually, into the full favour of God, and made a partaker of the comforting and sanctifying influence of the Holy Ghost let it be supposed, that the text (Rom. xiv. 17) is intended to describe the essential nature of true religion, personally considered, and that thus "the kingdom of God is not meat and drink, but righteousness, peace, and joy in the Holy Ghost: let this ground be taken, and it necessarily, undeniably, follows, that as it is the duty of all to seek the possession of true religion in the very way in which God has commanded it to be sought, they who send men to what they call "the church," instead of directing them to Christ, and who justify their conduct by referring, not to the inspired text, but to the patristie comment, do, by their tradition, make void the commandment of God.

Nor is this all. The class of which we are speaking, instead of acknowledging the importance of both the worship of God, (strictly so called,) and the ministry of the word, very lightly esteem the last, and regard the ritual and symbolical acts of the former as directly ministering salvation to the worshipper. To their rites and symbols, therefore, they endeavour to communicate an imposing (generally, a splendid) solemnity, in some degree proportioned to the importance attached to them. Worship, in their view of it, is everything with them; it is to do everything for them; and the wisdom of God meets them with the condemnatory sentence: "Howbeit, in vain do they worship me, teaching for doctrines the commandments of men."

In the passage cited above from Isaiah, the reader would observe the threatening of judicial confusion and obscurity directed against the wise and prudent men of the party previously described. The evangelical study of "the Fathers," as they are now commonly called, will show nothing more monitory than this unquestionable fact,—that, in proportion as they wander from that true spirituality of the Gospel which rests upon what is emphatically termed by St. Paul, "the righteousness of God," in that proportion do they seem to lose that guiding light which, from other circumstances, they might have been supposed to possess; and while they unite in bearing testimony to the essential doctrines, constituting the system of religious belief which had been delivered to them, on the numerous questions relating to Christian conduct and character, they often write in a manner which presents a decided and most melancholy contrast to the clearness and precision, the purity and elevation, of the writers of the New Testament. Dr. Bennett refers to this subject; but, before we come to the result of his inquiries, we will furnish the reader with one or two testimonies from a writer, to whose " History of Christianity" we have recently directed their attention. The Pharisees whom our

Lord condemned, seemed at times to attach far more guilt to ceremonial, than to moral, impurity; and as the Fathers mistook the real character of Christian spirituality, they moved towards a similar error. On this point, Mr. Milman is an unexceptionable witness; and the more so, that, in giving his testimony, he enables the reader to judge of the conclusiveness of his reasoning. He says,

"It is singularly characteristic of the Christianity of the times, to observe the charges against which Chrysostom protests, with greatest vehemence; and this part of the oration in question is confirmed by one of his letters to Cyriacus. Against that of personal impurity with a female, he calmly offers the most unquestionable evidence. But he was likewise accused of having administered baptism after he had eaten. On this he breaks out: If I have done this, anathema upon me! May I be no longer accounted among Bishops, nor be admitted among the angels accepted of God!' He was said to have administered the sacrament to those who had, in like manner, broken their fast: If I have done so, may I be rejected of Christ!' He then justifies himself, even if guilty, by the example of Paul, and even of Christ himself; but still seems to look on this breach of discipline with the utmost horror." *

Another extract may be given from Mr. Milman, affording direct testimony to the mistaken (not to say unscriptural) notions into which so many among the Fathers fell, on the subject of Christian purity. Still speaking of Chrysostom, he says,

"Among his letters may be remarked those written to the celebrated Olympias. This wealthy widow, who had refused the solicitations or commands of Theodosius to marry one of his favourites, had almost washed away, by her austerities and virtues, the stain of her nuptials, and might rank in Christian estimation with those unsullied virgins who had never been

* Milman, vol. iii., p. 229, note.

contaminated by marriage. She was the friend of all the distinguished and orthodox Clergy,-of Gregory of Nazianzum, and of Chrysostom. Chrysostom records, to her PRAISE, that, by her austerities, she had brought on painful diseases, which baffled the art of medicine." ↑

The mind must have been in a sad state of confusion, both respecting the true way of obtaining the forgiveness of sins and acceptance with God, and the real principles and character of evangelical purity, when such opinions could take deep root in the professing church, and such practices find favour. The "wisdom of their wise men" had begun to "perish," and "the understanding of their prudent men" to be "hid.”

46

Dr. Bennett devotes his Lectures to the exhibition, by quotations from the writers of the first three centuries," of the "theology of the early Christian church: and though he does not forget that he is a Calvinist, an Independent, and a Voluntary; yet, for the most part, he confines himself within the limits which are marked out by the important subject which he has chosen. The volume contains little that is strictly novel: the object proposed. by the Lecturer was simply to ascertain the opinions of the Fathers, and, having ascertained, to exhibit them. The proper merit of the work consists in the due accomplishment of the prescribed task. Dr. Bennett has comprised, in comparatively little room, a large quantity of important information, clearly arranged, and well stated.

The first Lecture explains the sources" whence the Lecturer has derived the "information" which he intends to communicate. It thus opens :-

church, the theme of the present course of Lectures, is not the peculiar creed of one era, but, in reality, the theology of every age. To use the language of the ancients, the church of God, through the whole world, and under all dispensations, has one Lord, one faith;' for she

"The theology of the early Christian

† Ibid., p. 237, note,

relies, not on the changeable opinions of fallible men, but on a revelation from the omniscient and infallible Mind. The faith may, however, have existed, at some periods, in greater purity, with the unlearned and unobtrusive, who leave no records to posterity, than among the authors from whom alone our information must be obtained; and as the catholic church is the aggregate of catholic churches, each of these is liable to fluctuations, one being commended by the sovereign Head for holding fast the truth,' while another is threatened with the loss of its church state, the removal of the candlestick out of its place.' But, in proportion as a church loses the spirit of religion, her degenerate sons make their boast of a name, with the apostate Jews exclaiming, The temple of the Lord are these;' and that which

calls herself the Church, claiming an immutability derived from an infallible chair, is precisely the one which an Apostle was inspired thus to warn : 'Be not high-minded, but fear, lest God spare not thee.'

"If ancient churches perish, new ones are called into existence; and while the body is immortal, its constituent parts may be so changed, as to require much spiritual discernment to discover their 'local habitation and name.' Truth being the test of that church against which the gates of hell shall not prevail,' it cannot be uninteresting to inquire how much, or how little, of this vital principle is found among communities, or individuals, at any given period of time and what excites more intense interest than the primitive age? The history of the earliest church at 'Jerusalem, which is the mother of us all,' is, with that of her elder daughters, recorded in the inspired book of the Apostles' Acts. Here begins (and, alas! ends, too, as some of the ancients have observed) all veritable ecclesiastical history. Through the age that immediately followed, (since it is left unrecorded,) we have to feel, rather than see, our way, by the aid of guides who are often little else than blind and lame. So many early writings have perished, that we might conclude they were thought not worth preserving, did we not know that accident, or negligence, or craft, rather than judgment or good design, have deprived us of works whose titles alone survive. Some that had been for ages lost, have, in modern times, been recovered; while of those that were always extant, many are anonymous, and not a few are the productions of men once in

high repute, but subsequently branded as heretics." (Page 5.)

Dr. Bennett then proceeds to give a sketch of the writers from whom he derives his information, commencing with those whose supposed connexion with the Apostles has conferred on them the title of Apostolical Fathers. He refers to the author of the letter to Diognetus, Clemens Romanus, Ignatius, Polycarp, Justin Martyr, Tatian, Theophilus of Antioch, Athenagoras, Irenæus, Clemens Alexandrinus, Origen, Minutius Felix, Tertullian, Cyprian; to the translators of Scripsiastical historians; and to the apoture, Latin and Syriac; to the ecclecryphal writings.

As a specimen of the manner in which these references are made, we select that which has Polycarp for its object.

"Polycarp, Bishop of the church in Smyrna, was, for good sense, far superior to Ignatius; and, if we are to judge by his letter, he was a more eminent Christian; but we know that he has escaped the injury done to the memory of the martyr of Antioch, by writings forged in his name. An epistle addressed to the church at Philippi, by Polycarp and the Elders with him,' contains little else but texts of Scripture, wisely and devoutly applied to the exigencies of the times. The salutation is simple and scriptural, a beautiful contrast to the Asiatic pomp of Ignatius.

"A letter from the Christians at Smyrna, to the Philippians, which records the martyrdom of Polycarp, is rendered suspicious by a confession, that when it was lost, and almost destroyed by time, it was recovered by a revelation from the martyred saint. He is said to have been burnt alive at Smyrna, in the year 166; and the stories told of miracles wrought at his death, serve only to show the simplicity and truth of the Scriptures in their account of the martyrdom of Stephen,

"When commanded to abjure the Saviour, Polycarp replied, Eighty-six years have I served Him, who has never injured me how can I curse my Saviour?' He has been pronounced, but without sufficient evidence, the angel of the church at Smyrna, to whom Christ addressed one of the seven epistles of the Revelations, and to have been acquainted