As all authority derives from God as its source, and is the visible image of his dominion, I conceive it to be our duty to attend to every intimation we find in Scripture on this subject, which may assist our habitual conduct. There are few persons but what possess some kind and degree of authority, however limited or temporary: in proportion as they consider it a part of the image of the divine government, they may learn to tremble, lest they abuse and deface it. Murder is declared the greatest of social crimes, «because in the image of God made he man." All sins derive their de gree of turpitude as they terminate in offence to God. It may further be considered, that very few persous in the world are exempted by their station from some obedience, and it is evident that the same view which is necessary to a conscientious, will alone constitute a a right, submission. This may apologize for my troubling you with the present inquiry, which, after all, you may judge to contain nothing worthy a place in your miscellany. If so, I must entreat your pardon for the intrusion, being, with real respect, Sir, Your's, MARIA. To the Editor of the Christian Observer. I HAVE been reading, with serious attention, the two papers inserted in your last Number, in answer to Nascitur's question on the duty of ministers who succeed to a parish into the rebellion of Korah. seems to have been generally used indiscri minately, as if synonimous, (see Genesis xli. 45, 50, Chap. xlvii. 22. Exod. ii. 16.) and hence I suppose the princes of the congregation, Numbers xvi. 2. entered so readily The princes of Israel, heads of the house of their fa thers" (Numbers 7th) were only twelve; but (Chap. xvi.) "two hundred and fifty princes of the assembly" are mentioned. I suppose the former were eldest sons of the senior family of each tribe, and the other eldest sons of other families. ignorant of the Gospel; and in con sequence I take the liberty of troubling you with a few remarks upon the subject, which have occurred to my own mind, especially as the papers already published seem to require some farther expla nation.-Your correspondent, Academicus, contends "that no Christian minister can safely blench, for a single week, from a full and un. equivocal statement of the genuine doctrines of the Gospel" and he supports his position by a very sălemn consideration. Ö, Sir, we who preach can never sufficiently keep in view that we are DYING MEN speaking to DYING MEN. We preside over the same congregation for years; but seldom, perhaps, do we address an audience in which there is not some individual who never heard us before, who never will hear us again, and who, perhaps, is an utter stranger to the truth as it is in Jesus. Surely, Sir, with this consideration before us, we should say with the pious professor Franck, "The design and drift of every sermon should be such, that if a person should happen to hear the preacher but once in all his life, he might even, by means of that one sermon, get some notion of the one thing needful, and be just entered at least into the way of salvation!" But your correspondent, N-E, seems in some respects to differ from Academicus. He thinks, that "the peculiar doctrines of the Gospel cannot be plainly, familiarly, and broadly preached among a people unac customed to them, without exciting virulent opposition and bitter prejudice;" that, therefore, the new incumbent "should preach and act at first with caution, avoid shewing any invidious distinction between himself and his brethren; and be careful, while endeavouring to conciliate his flock by shewing how far he and they agree, not for a *See Franck's most useful way of preaching, printed for Button, price 6d. 4811.] Duty of a Minister who succeeds to a Parish ignorant of the Gospel. 541 can point out the imprudences of a Whitfield, or the mistakes of a Fletcher; but where can we find that love, that zeal, that impas sioned warmth, that never-ceasing activity, which made them offer up themselves for the sacrifice and service of the church of God? In attempting to answer the ques- moment to betray those grand and himself somewhat in this way. L vincing them of their danger, and pointing out their remedy. In duced by these considerations, he will probably begin, as N-E intimates, with some generally acknowledged principle; for instance, that as the Bible is the word of God, to it all appeals must be made, &c. But without stopping in limine to prove this point, he will, perhaps, rather wish immediately to bring his hearers to this conclusion; if the Bible is right, we are wrong; and, therefore, we need the mercy which the Bible offers to sinners. This effect he will probably at tempt to produce, by setting before his hearers the extensive nature of God's law, the spirituality of its requirements; that it calls upon us to love the Lord our God with all our heart, and mind, and soul, and strength, and our neighbour as ourselves; that every thing short of this is sin; and that every sin will assuredly be punished, unless pardoned through the Redeemer's blood. Here he will probably bring in the remedy; that "the wages of sin is death, but the gift of God is eternal life," that" whosoever shall call on the name of the Lord, shall be saved;" and that "God will give his Holy Spirit to them that ask it." A discourse embracing these points may doubtless be varied and modified in many different ways, and different proportions; but if these doctrines,that man is a condemned sinner, that Christ is the only and all-sufficient Saviour, that justification is by faith alone; which faith invariably produces, and is distinguished by, holiness of life,-be not in a greater or a less degree inculcated, I think we cannot say that "the Gospel message is delivered in all its purity." I must contend that every sermon in which these all-important truths are not advanced, is defective; and the more ignorant any congregation is, the more necessity I conceive there exists for their being plainly, familiarly, and broadly preached. I fully agree with N-E, that the young incumbent should care fully avoid shewing any invidious distinction between himself and his brethren. Supposing, for instance, he has been in the habit of preaching from notes, it may be expedient for him to adopt for a time written discourses; nor do I conceive it necessary that he should manifest apar. tiality for either the Calvinistic or Arminian systems; nor should I re commend him to inveigh very loud. ly against cards, or dancing, or the other censurable amusements which may exist in his neighbourhood, until he has had frequent opportu nities of bringing forwards doctrines and establishing principles of essential importance. Yet still it appears to me that there is some danger, lest, under the name of invidious distinction, we should condemn all distinction. I know not how to preach one sermon upon any one point of faith or practice, so as to discharge my conscience to God and my people, without differing so much, both in matter and in manner, from many of the clergy around me, as must inevitably be termed an invidious distinction by any person in the least prejudiced.-Let our young incumbent try the expe riment. Let him take, for instance, the Fourth Commandment for his text; and in the course of the following week, I have little doubt but somewhat will be said in his parish, if not in his hearing, about preciseness. "Our old parson used to take a walk or a ride, and call of his neighbours, or have a few friends to see him, on a Sunday; but this young man does not know what he would be at." In fact, the cross of Christ was to the Jew a stumbling block, and to the Greek foolishness, and so it is yet. As far as we conceal or fritter away its doctrines, ignorant men will go with us; but the moment we bring them forwards with due prominence, they will be offended. "Some indeed have thought, that by a nice adjust ment of their phrases, habits, and connections, they might maintain by scriptural arguments, carefully the truth and yet escape the term*. I pity from my heart an honest man making such fruitless attempts. He is another Sisyphus. He may be wise, but he is not wise enough: he does not see, that so far as he is of the world, the world will love its own, and no further." the I am fully aware that N-E has no idea of eventually concealing the offensive doctrines of the Gospel, and that, therefore, the above quotation is inapplicable to him; it appears, however, to contain at least a salutary caution, and as such is deserving of serious consideration. It may indeed be objected, that very writer of that passage, Mr. Cecil, when entering on his ministry at St. John's, adopted the cautious measures which N-2 recommends; but it should also be remembered, that, while we are told generally that he was cautious, we have no data by which we may estimate how far that caution was carried. His being condemned of unfaithfulness by some, proves nothing; since to omit the doctrine of election, may be, in some instances, an unpardonable transgression. It may also be added, that the peculiar character of Mr. Cecil, and the peculiar circumstances of that congregation, were such as to render the precedent almost entirely inapplicable to any other case; and that, notwithstanding his great ultimate success, some very wise and good men, even of his most intimate friends and companions, entertain doubts whether his conduct was, in this instance, altogether justifi able. Indeed, I am not quite certain that it is expedient for the inhabitants of a parish ignorant of the Gospel to suppose, even for one single week, that their new and their old incumbent are of the same opinion. On the contrary, I am inclined to think that a modest and temperate statement of the truth, well supported ⚫METHODIST. See Cecil's Works, vol, I p. 27. Life of Cadogan. guarded from erroneous inferences, and clearly and plainly discrimi nating between true and false doctrine, in such language as to make the difference intelligible even to the lowest of the people, would, if evidently delivered with an affectionate spirit, produce most beneficial effects. It might awaken prejudice, but it would also excite attention; and attention is of infinite importance,-for, in fact, the most difficult part of our work is to bring men to think. And the very cir cumstance of a minister's differing from his predecessor, is so calculated to excite curiosity, that many persons will probably be brought to the house of God in order to know what these new doctrines are: so that perhaps the loss sustained by prejudice may be abundantly compensated by curiosity. Nor should it be forgotten, that, in parishes where the Gospel is not preached, the congregations are usually so very small that no great number can withdraw through prejudice, and probably the greater part of them may be conciliated by judicious private attentions. Here, however, I would just inquire, are we not apt to indulge too great regard for the characters, and too great delicacy for the feel ings, of ministers who preach not the Gospel? And are we not, in consequence, too remiss in attempting to awaken those who have fallen asleep under their ministrations, from their death-like condition? We are apt to speak of amiable and respectable lergymen, though they do not enter into right views of Christianity. Is this correct? As men they may be amiable or respectable, but as ministers, unless they preach the truth as it is in Jesus, they have no claim to these titles: they are "false witnesses," and "blind leaders of the blind." They must stand, and, may I add, ought always to be placed, in the same class with a physician administering poison instead of medicine, since every excuse which can apply to their conduct will apply also to his. With this view of the subject, it seems to me that it is neither prudent hor justifiable to lead a congregation to suppose that there is any resemblance between those, who, in fact, are as totally and essentially different from each other as light from darkness. I am aware that much may be objected to these views, and I am also aware that much may be done by mildness and conciliation; but I fear lest, whilst labouring to become all things to all men, that by all means we may gain some, we should countenance the idea that what are called speculative points are of comparatively small importance. Nor do I find any thing in the word of God which authorises us to carry our moderation, or conciliatory attempts, to the extent to which many in the present day endeavour to carry them. On the contrary, all the sermons of the apostles are of a directly opposite nature. They always seem to speak as men who never expected to have another opportunity. Their hearers might say, We will hear you again; but they never seem to think of such a thing. They appear full of their subject, and seem determined never to close a discourse until they have declared the whole counsel of God. They speak with authority, and not as the scribes; and so far are they from making conciliation the great object, that in many instances they adopt language the most offensive that can well be conceived. "Ye denied the holy one and the just, and desired a murderer to be granted unto you, and killed the Prince of life," "I perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious." "Whom ye ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you.' "The times of their ignorance God winked at, but now he commandeth all men every where to repent." Let a man consider when and where these words were spoken, and then let him say, can any thing beconceived more offensive than such language. Possibly it was with re ference to this conduct that St. Paul declared he went not to the Corinthians with wisdom of words: he not merely neglected the captivating arts of Grecian eloquence, but much also of that flattering, conciliatory strain so generally prescribed and practised by those who endeavoured to secure popular applause, or render themselves the leaders of a party: and possibly many of the most use ful ministers of the present day will be found among those who, in these respects, have followed the apostle's example; who, inflamed with love to God, zeal for his glory, and compassion to perishing sinners, have gone forth, and, with simplicity and godly sincerity, stated fully and clearly from the very first what they thought truth; and, without giving themselves much anxiety about the opinions and sentiments of their hearers concerning it, have left all consequences in God's hands, recollecting that their commission was, "Go thou and preach the Gospel." My paper and my time admonish me to conclude. I could say to the friend of Nascitur, and all in similar circumstances, Study diligently, with fervent prayer, the example set be fore you in the Acts and the Epistles. I would request N-Σ to excuse the freedom of my animadver. sions, and assure him, that, though I suspect we differ in some particulars, 1 conceive his paper calculated to convey most important instruction. And lastly, I would apologize to you, Mr. Editor, and your readers, for the length and imperfections of this communication, assuring you and them, that it proceeds from a hear ty desire to promote the glory of God and the welfare of poor pe rishing sinners. FAMILY SERMONS. ELIAS. No. XXXIII. 1 Thess. ii. 13. For this cause also thank we God without ceasing, because when ye received the word |