general councils. If the question be still urged, how was the canon of Scripture determined? We may reply in the words of the eminent Dr. Lardner, "Determined not by the authority of councils, but the books of which it consists were known to be the writings of the apostles and evangelists, in the same way and manner that we know the works of Cæsar, Cicero, Horace, Tacitus to be theirs, and the canon was formed upon the ground of & unanimous or generally concurring testimony and tradition." (Credibility, vol. 6. p. 27.) Whatever church or council might pronounce a declaration in favour of the books of the New Testament, their authenticity could not depend on such authoritative declaration, but must be proved from the antecedent evidence upon which it was founded.

We shall now proceed to examine more particularly the authority assumed by the Church of Rome. Her members claim for her an infallible authority to determine what is truth, and to exercise uncontrolled dóminion over all Christians-of every age and country. The council of Trent calls her "the Mother and Mistress of all churches." It will be no difficult task to prove that this arrogant assumption of superiority is totally unsupported by the New Testament.

1 1st. The sense in which the word "church" is used in this instance, is decidedly erroneous. The Greek word itself, Ecclesia, simply means an assembly of the people, either convened by the civil

magistrate for public business, (Acts xix. 39,) or an accidental, or even a disorderly assembly or mob. It commonly occurs in the New Testament with but two different significations. According to the first of these, it represents the whole company of the redeemed, whether in heaven or on earth, the whole collective body of believers which ever has existed, which does now exist, or which ever shall exist to the end of time. The general assembly and church of the first-born which are written in heaven. Heb. xii. 23. This church is at present invisible to us, and will not appear till Christ shall "come to be glorified in his saints, and to be admired in all them that believe. 2 Thess. i. 10. This is what is commonly called "the catholic or universal church." The New Testament in its letter and spirit utterly discountenances the notion of a catholic or universal visible church in the world.

The term "church" is also applied in the New Testament, to a particular congregation of professed believers in Christ Jesus, regularly assembling in one place for the performance of religious worship, and obedience to the positive institutions of Christ. These then are the two senses in which the word is used in the New Testament. Dr. Campbell, than whom, few scholars have devoted more time and learning to the study of that sacred book, says, "In any intermediate sense, between a single congregation and the whole community of

We speak

Christians, not one instance can be brought of the application of the word in sacred writ. now indeed, (and this has been the manner for ages,) of the Gallican Church, the Greek Church, the Church of England, the Church of Scotland, as of Societies independent and complete in themselves. Such a phraseology was never adopted in the days of the apostles. They did not say, the church of Asia, or the church of Macedonia, or the church of Achaia, but the churches of God in Asia, the churches in Macedonia, the churches in Achaia. The plural number is invariably used, when more congregations than one is spoken of, unless the subject be of the whole commonwealth of Christ."* The nineteenth article of the Church of England says, "The visible church of Christ is a congregation of faithful men, in which the pure word of God is preached, and the sacraments be duly administered according to Christ's ordinance in all these things that of necessity are requisite to the same." To this definition of a Christian church there can be no objection, if we except so much in phraseology as implies the existence of a universal visible church. We think it would be more scriptural to say, "A visible church, &c." In agreement with this, it has been well observed, "In the constitution of a scriptural church, we recognize the authority of Christ as its warrant, the truth of Christ as its foundation, and

*Lectures on Ecclesiastical History, vol. 1, p. 204, 205.

agreement respecting that truth as the principle of fellowship :" A church so constituted must acknowledge the authority of the New Testament* and not like the church of Rome, claim a power above it. The authority of Christ, can only be derived from his written word, which will therefore be regarded by every humble Christian, and by every true church, as the only standard of appeal in all questions of religious faith and practice.

2. The arguments adduced by Romanists in defence of the infallibility of the church are insufficient and unscriptural. They require not merely to prove that such power is committed to the church, but that the church of Rome alone and exclusively is the church of Christ. This is frequently asserted by them. But where is the proof? To what part of the Bible may we turn with the least probability, of finding it either expressed or implied, that the true church of Christ is nothing more nor less than the church of Rome? Antiquity is the favourite argument in support of this claim. The Church of Rome it is said, was the first Christian church that existed; but this false

* These remarks apply exclusively to the New Testament. Although every part of the Word of God is good and profitable, and all Scripture is given by the inspiration of God, yet we do well to remember, that the ceremonial law has been entirely abolished. We are not to follow Judaism but Christianity, and Christianity can only be learned from the teaching and example of Christ, as explained and illustrated in the New Testament.

representation is directly contradicted by Scripture. The first church, in order of time, under the new dispensation, was the church at Jerusalem: Peter having on the day of Pentecost successfully proclaimed the gospel, "They that gladly received his word were baptized: and the same day there were added unto them about three thousand souls. And they continued stedfastly in the apostles' doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread and in prayer. *And the Lord added to the church daily such as should be saved." Acts ii. 41, 42, 47. There are other reasons that would render this claim on the part of Jerusalem or Antioch far more plausible.

* *

Under the Mosaic economy, Jerusalem was signally hallowed as the appointed seat of worship -thither the tribes were assembled from all parts of the land, three times in every year-and here Jehovah deigned to vouchsafe to his church his spiritual presence. It had on these accounts been regarded as a type of the whole church of God. The apostle Paul calls "Jerusalem the mother of us all." Gal. iv. 26, and applies this figure especially to the spiritual Jerusalem, the New Testament church, calling it the Jerusalem which is from above, and stating that the literal Jerusalem which now is, is in bondage with her children."

Soon after the admission of Gentile converts into the church, a dispute arose at Antioch where these converts were numerous, on the subject of

C