cross: the profession of religion could not in any way promote their worldly interests; and both at home and abroad they felt the predicted "sword" of the Gospel (Matt. x. 34). The afflictions of the kingdom of Christ were constantly taught as the unfailing concomitant of the Christian name; there was no effort to conceal or modify the truth “that all who live godly in Christ Jesus must suffer persecution"--and that “if they were without chastisement, whereof all were partakers, then would they be bastards and not sons:" and so far from apprehending that by these means they might weaken the Churches, and terrify believers into apostasy, they rather supposed that they were thereby strengthening them in the faith; for Paul and Barnabas "confirmed the souls of the disciples" by telling them, "that they must through much tribulation enter into the kingdom of heaven." Many and severe were the sacrifices that the early Christians made for the love of Christ: many a bitter pang they felt when driven out by domestic, or social persecution, from their comfortable hearths; and there can be no question that it required all their faith, and all the grace of God in its fullest donations, to restrain them from drawing "back unto perdition." Thus, then, when they came to compare their distresses with the merriment of the world, and all their troubles and tumults with the peace of them who were at ease, and who cared for neither the fears nor the hopes of the Christian struggle, well might they say, "if in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable." But nevertheless, within the precincts of the Church they found the promise good, that if they left their houses, lands, and friends for the sake of Christ, they should even in this life receive an hundredfold (Matt. xix. 29). In the communion of saints, in the love of the brethren, in the firm union of hearts overflowing with pure affections by the regenerating influence of the Holy Spirit, and in the participation of one sure hope "of the joy set before them," they "had gladness in their hearts, more than in the time when their corn and wine increased." With their sins freely forgiven, not for works of righteousness which they had done, they all as "a royal priesthood, a holy nation" had close access to God "by faith into that favour (xapy) wherein they stood." Their desire was to walk in the light of the countenance of a reconciled God; their privilege was to enjoy the communion of saints, and to live the life of faith supported by the indefectible intercession of the divine invisible Head of the Church. This was their church-order, and so it is expressed by the apostle; "If we walk in the light as he is in the light, we have fellowship one with another; and the blood of Jesus Christ cleanseth us from all sin."

The doctrine of justification by faith was clear, pure, and unmixed; all manner of works, either before or after grace received, were excluded from their justification: they were justified freely; not by works of righteousness, either legal or evangelical, not by any works at all; for they fully believed that "to him who worketh not, but believeth on him that justifieth the ungodly, his faith is counted for righteousness" (Rom. iv. 5). The law of God with all the rigor of its holiness, they knew was fulfilled in the Holy Son of God: his resurrection was the public manifestation of his acquittal, as a public person to the Church, and as its representative: and because he was, by his resurrection, solemnly declared not guilty of any sin, so they were confident that all the members of his body, all believers, were acquitted in his acquittal, and justified in his justification; hence his resurrection was considered the justification of the Church

(1 Cor. xv. 17; Rom. iv. 25); and all the arguments of men and devils against the peace of their consciences, as settled in this justification, they steadily answered by a reference to the resurrection of Christ (Rom. viii. 34); for they knew that no condemnation could touch them, as long as their acquittal stood in their union with him, and was supported by no other plea (Rom. viii. 1). Hence their righteousness was not their own; they had neither devised it, nor produced it: it was the righteousness of God (Rom. iii. 22), and from God (Phil. iii. 9), a gift, a free gift, an *imputation (Rom. iv. 11); and if they expected to reign in eternal life, it was "by abundance of grace, and the gift of righteousness" (Rom. v. 17).

Hence, the worship of Christians was not perplexed with a confusion of Law and Gospel, they knew nothing of a "progressive justification"they had not turned Christ into Moses, nor infused Judaism into the Gospel Christ was the end of the law for righteousnesss to every one that believed (Rom. x. 4); and that which was ended, was finished: nor had they any concern to restore it. The law and grace, the righteousness of works, and the righteousness of faith were kept apart; the law and works for the Jew, and grace and faith for the Christian: so that believers " were perfect as touching the conscience," and, in the full privileges of the new priesthood, they entered into the "holiest of all," having their hearts sprinkled from an evil conscience, and their bodies washed with pure

water.

Having full confidence in the spiritual government of the Head of the Church, they sought not to strengthen themselves by human ordinances, but cheerfully submitted to the arrangements of God. Their Churchgovernment was by appointment of the Holy Ghost; and according as the gifts of teaching, evangelising, preaching, governing, prophesying were exhibited, they were allowed to take their proper place, without exciting the murmurs or provoking the jealousies of the brethren. They had not created an ecclesiastical despotism, as was attempted in the next age, in order to preserve that order by power, which they had lost with their first love; but knowing that the holy brethren were led of the Spirit, they rejoiced to see any member of the body of Christ manifesting by an active spiritual vitality, in any way unto edification, the presence of the Lord God in their Churches. To assign the whole task of the ministry to one man, and to allow the whole of the ministry to be absorbed in the single gift of preaching, was as little a part of their system as to perform high mass and to elevate the host. They had not a learned ministry;" in the many churches established in the apostolical age, in Asia, Syria, Macedonia, Greece, Italy and other parts of the world, they took no thought to institute establishments for "ministerial education:" and this is especially remarkable, because, as it was the glory of the Gospel to gather in numerous converts amongst the heathen-amongst strangers to the new "theology"-so should we have naturally expected, according

66

"“Christ is said to be our Righteousness, because he hath made satisfaction for us to the Father; and doth so give and communicate that satisfaction unto us, when he justifieth us, that it may be said to be our satisfaction and righteousness. And in this sense, it would not be absurd if any one should say, that the righteousness of Christ and his merits are imputed unto us, as if we ourselves had satisfied God." Bellarmine de Justificat. ii. 10. The greatest of all the divines of the Roman Catholic communion is here quoted, to show how the force of truth will occasionally overcome its chief opponents. Bellarmine, in these unguarded words, gives up the Council of Trent and the whole theology of Rome.

to our notions and customs, that they would have required "a learned class of men to explain the difficulties of the Christian religion." But they required nothing of the sort, because they dared to trust the power and grace of God, for the support of that fabric of which he himself was the architect: but when they ceased to trust in God, they then put their trust in man, and consigned to a "learned class of men," the whole labour of the Gospel in all its branches of ministration, which ere long were reduced to little else than performing ceremonies, and delivering studied orations, miscalled "preaching the Gospel."

In their worship they had no formularies of prayer; a prayer-book was unknown in all the churches: they prayed in the Spirit. They had no ceremonies: there were no officiating clergy: the brothers in liturgy did not officiate in robes of ceremony, black or white: surplices, stoles, scarfs, tippets, square-caps, and other ornaments of that description were utterly unknown. They had no "churches," no holy places, no chancels, altars, consecrated grounds, and consecrated yards for the dead. There was but one building which, in those days, they called "a Church;" and it was that of which the Apostle speaks" In Jesus Christ all the building fitly framed together, groweth unto an holy temple in the Lord."

In no respect had they invoked the aid of the senses to elevate their languid faith; their piety was not excited by organs and chaunters; their love of God was not titillated by anthems, nor did the melodious strains of a full-voiced choir, charm their imaginations into poetical dreams of heaven. Their knowledge of the person and offices of Christ, and their faith in his unfailing life and intercession, were not strengthened by pictures, or images, or painted windows: to kneel before a crucifix, and to embrace, adore, and bedew with "pious tears" some well-wrought representation of the suffering Redeemer, would have been in their opinion rank idolatry: and as they had not lapsed into this tragical mistake of carnal minds misunderstanding spiritual things, so had they not imbibed the curse and venom, which unfailingly accompany a sensual worship of Him, who is a Spirit and will be worshipped in spirit and in truth; for they who make their senses a vehicle of their religion, must derive the nutriment they are seeking from physical things, all of which labour under the curse of the primal fall, and unfailingly administer seeds of vexation, deception, and delusion, to those who employ their assistance.

Such were the Churches of the first age; and such being their constitution, their practices, their principles-Christianity had not then either been loved by one portion of the wicked world, or hated by the other, for those reasons for which it is now an object of affection or aversion. A priest was unknown in the Christian religion; and therefore all the inevitable consequences of a sacerdotal order were also unknown where Christianity prevailed. "Christian Priests," as they are called had not entered into a league with the state; and therefore the state had no predilection for Christianity, nor did those whom the state oppressed, hate Christianity because it was in league with the state. The union of Church and State was utterly unknown, and not even contemplated as a possibility. For whatever reasons the heathens hated and despised Christianity, it was not because they perverted, but because they adhered to the holy

Even in the fourth century, Basil has incidentally affirmed that they had no formulary of words for the Lord's supper, "Which of the Holy men," says he, " has left us in writing the words of a prayer, at the consecration of the eucharistic bread, and the cup of blessing?" See Jewel's Apology.

principles of the Gospel in all their integrity: and though the heathens were exasperated against the new sect for its separation from the world's pleasures and the popular forms of religion, yet they had no complaints to make of the political intrigues of the ministers of the Christian faith, nor was the state agitated with those scandalous controversies of clerical bigotry and intolerance, with those contentions of avarice, and struggles for ecclesiastical dominion which now form the melancholy characteristics of established Christianity. The serious Inquirer, anxiously on the look out for salvation, need not, in those blessed days, turn away from the sanctuary in deep disgust with the secular deformities that met him on the threshold, but might enter into the very penetralia of the Christian tabernacle, and, finding there, not any impostures of this world's idolatry, but the kingdom of grace and the excellent beauties of the spiritual polity, might say with supreme satisfaction, "Truly has Jehovah beautified this his sanctuary, and made the place of his feet glorious " (Is. lx. 13).

TRADITIONS.-Little can be said of the History of the Church in the days of the Apostles, except from the authority of Scripture. From the Acts of the Apostles to the history of Eusebius, a period of two hundred and fifty years at least, there intervenes a large chasm in Church history, to be supplied by relicks of lost authors, passing allusions, uncertain traditions or palpable legends, and most of these occurring in polemical writings not a little infected with controversial acrimony.

Hegisippus wrote a history of the Church, about A. D. 170; it was divided into five books; but of this book only a few fragments remain, preserved by Eusebius. Hegisippus was originally a Jew: but after his conversion he came to Rome, where, it is supposed he wrote his history. Of the fragments of his work, some are narrations so fabulous as to leave little regret for the loss of the rest.

Of Mary, the mother of Jesus, we know nothing; but that she was with the Church at Jerusalem, immediately after the ascension of our Lord that she lived with the apostle John after the crucifixion, and was ever afterwards treated by him as his mother, seems to be asserted by John himself in his Gospel; but beyond this, nothing is known. An author of the 8th century says, that "it was thought" that Mary lived to an extreme old age: and Baronius, the chief Roman Catholic historian, approves the suggestion, wishing us to believe, according to some legends, that she, together with "Saint" Magdalene, followed John to Ephesus, and died there. Epiphanius, in the 4th century, declares, that he cannot say whether she died, or remained immortal; whether she died by martyrdom, or any other way; whether she was buried or not-that in one word, he knows not what her end was; but of this he is certain, that if she died her death was glorious, and that she carried off the crown of pure and entire chastity, and that her body enjoys an honor worthy of her by whom light was brought into the world." This candid and very unusual confession of historical ignorance from one of the Fathers, ought to silence the legends and figments of the papal school; but Tillemont draws this extraordinary and amusing deduction from the words of Epiphanius, "therefore the Saint (i. e. Epiphanius) would have had no difficulty to adopt that sentiment which has been embraced for many centuries by different Greek and Latin writers, that God raised her up from the grave, and glorified her body a few days after her death."

The traditionists have fixed her death from the year A. D. 48, though

others dispute the date and place it much later. The Roman Catholic legend has it that she died in Jerusalem; that the Apostles were miraculously transported from different parts of the world to be present at her death, which was without any pain; and that on the third day she was raised from the dead, and taken up into heaven. The 15th of August, as has already been noticed, is their festival to commemorate this fable.

The Apostle Peter, that innocent name on which is based the vast superstructure of the Man of Sin, was in Jerusalem at the meeting of the Church convened to decide on the Jewish observances (Acts xv.) about the year 52; afterwards at Antioch (Gal. ii. 11); most probably in some period of his ministry at Corinth (1 Cor. i. 12); then in Babylon (1 Pet. v. 33); and according to various ancient traditional testimonies, was put to death at Rome, A. D. 67. That Peter ever was at Rome at any period of his life has been questioned by some writers; but as Irenæus, who wrote about the year 180, says, with confidence,* that the Churches at Rome were founded or established by Peter and Paul, we may listen to the assertion corroborated by the general opinion of antiquity. Still earlier than Irenæus, Ignatius, who wrote his Epistle to the Romans, A. D. 110 -115 says to the Church at Rome, "I do not, as Peter and Paul, command you: they were Apostles, I a condemned man; they were free, but I am even to this day a slave" (4), a clear allusion to the tradition in question, and not above 60 years after the death of Peter, according to the popular story. It is nevertheless remarkable, that Paul, in all his Epistles, some of which he certainly wrote from Rome, makes no mention of Peter either as a founder, or Elder, or assistant in the Church of Rome. Peter was not at Rome when Paul wrote his second Epistle to Timothy, nor in that period of his residence in the great city, when he says, "at my first answer no man stood with me, but all forsook me." In naming Eubulus, Pudens, Linus, and Claudia, as leading Christians in Rome, he omits all mention of Peter, though this Linus was probably the same who is placed in the Romish catalogue, as "a successor of Peter in "the papal chair." In the whole of the New Testament there is no intimation that Peter ever was at Rome, or that he intended to go thither.

The traditions that place Peter at Rome, also make him a fellow prisoner with Paul there, and assert that these two great Apostles received martyrdom on the same day, and in the same place. Now, if we believe Eusebius, that Peter came to Rome in the reign of the emperor Claudius, and that he was a fellow-prisoner with Paul, the silence of the latter respecting one who was so famous amongst Christians, who, by this account, had also preceded him in the ministry at Rome, and with whom he was ultimately associated in bonds, is wholly unaccountable. We must not, therefore, receive what the ancients have left us on this subject with too much confidence. The question is certainly open to still further investigation.

The Fathers and the traditionists have brought Simon Magus from Samaria to Rome, where they place him in collision with Peter; indeed they assert that Peter's chief reason for going to Rome, was to oppose that celebrated impostor and magician. They say that Simon Magus undertook to mount up in the air before the emperor Nero, and to fly up

“Maximæ et antiquissimæ, et omnibus cognatæ, a gloriosissimis duobus Apostolis Petro et Paulo Romæ fundatæ et constitutæ ecclesiæ." ii. 3.