made, absurd as it is, it may be proper to add a few further remarks on the subject. Some persons, then, have objected that, though they admit instances of social prayer do occur in the New Testament, yet the extraordinary circumstances in which they took place, and the miracles with which they were connected, render them unfit subjects for our imitation, afford no indication of the mind of Christ, and give no sanction to social worship as a general practice; nay, others have gone so far as to affirm without hesitation, that "the prayers of the first Christians formed a part of the supernatural gifts;" which affirmation, if it mean any thing but a quibble, must signify that these prayers were themselves supernatural gifts, that is, inspired prayers. To this we reply in the first place, that the whole force of this objection applies equally to any sanction or encouragement we may derive from the exhortations and example of Christ and his apostles to zeal and exertion in our endeavours to disseminate the pure principles of Christianity, either by public teaching, by writing in their defence, or by any other method; for, if we admit the truth of their own declarations, we have no doubt that the teaching of Christ and his apostles was not only accompanied by miracles, and took place in the most extraordinary circumstances, but was itself "part of the supernatural gifts." As their commission for that purpose was divine, so their qualifications were such as no other human being has any pretensions to. Christ spoke in the name and with the authority of God: "The words that I speak unto you, I speak not of myself; and the Father who abideth in me, he doeth the works a. The doctrines which I teach are not mine, but his that sent me. The apostles also in like manner laid claim to divine inspiration, and delivered what they taught, not as the word of man, but as in truth the word of God; and Christ assured them, that the comforter, which the Father would send in his name, should teach them all things, and bring all things to their remembrance, whatsoever he had spoken unto them." And accordingly they, as well as the prophets, spoke as the spirit gave them utterance. Paul especially declared that the gospel preached by him was not according to man. "For," says he, "I neither received it from man, nor was I taught it but by the revelation of Jesus Christ." And he says in another place, "Which things we speak also, not in the words which man's wisdom teacheth, but which the holy spirit teacheth." Nothing can be plainer, therefore, than that the apostles lay claim to divine inspiration in preaching the gospel, and consequently that their teaching, as well as that of Christ, was among the supernatural gifts. Of course then, according to the objection just stated, the command given to them to teach what they a John xiv. 10. b 1 Thess. ii. 13. a Gal. i. 2. had thus learned, and the various directions respecting this important work, belong exclusively to them; their zeal and fidelity in this undertaking afford no example to us; nor are Christians now under any obligation either to teach in any way, or to hear, the great truths of the gospel of Christ. So that in this manner we should get rid not only of social prayer, but of public teaching also, or of publishing the pure gospel, either by speaking or writing. And why not? We are told that social prayer has been introduced and upheld by crafty, designing, hypocritical, worldly, ambitious, and consequently wicked men, in order to serve their own selfish purposes, and ought therefore to be discontinued: and why should not all public teaching of the Christian religion in any may whatever be considered as introduced and continued by similar instruments, for the like unworthy purposes and if so, why should it not, for this reason, be abolished altogether? For does it not afford the most favourable opportunity of at once blinding the understanding, and corrupting the heart, under pretence of moral and religious instruction? Nay; what reason can be given why the authority of Christianity itself in the present day should not be annihilated altogether by this notable argument? "Christianity is founded upon miracles; it was published to the world in circumstances the most extraordinary, and by the most singular means. Christianity was itself a supernatural gift; for it was 'not the word of man, but the word of God.' Now that miracles have ceased we have nothing to do with it. It ought to have been confined to the age of miracles. If it were a revelation to others, it is no revelation to us." And thus have unbelievers argued in fact. The argument, however, in all these cases is alike sophistical, and serves only to show the weakness of a cause that is compelled to have recourse for support to the shadow of a reason like this. In a word, as observed before, the whole conduct of Christ and his apostles in the midst of the most painful sufferings and distresses, and their benevolent and generous exertions for the temporal and everlasting benefit of mankind, if the force of this reasoning were admitted, would entirely lose their effect as affording an example to us. According to the Scriptures, they were supernaturally assisted to endure afflictions in a manner of which we can have no expectation. Their perseverance and fortitude in the arduous and painful duties they had to perform, were in a great measure the effects of divine aid to which we can have no pretensions, or were produced by the miraculous powers which have now ceased. Notwithstanding this, however, we still say, "Christ hath left us an example" expressly for this pur"that we should follow his steps; and if any pose, man say he abideth in him, he ought also to walk even as he walked." And we respect the admonition of St. Paul, "Be ye followers of me, as I am also of Christ. Those things which ye have both learned and received, and heard, and seen in me, do:" and among other things that were excellent, both in him and in his great master the saviour of the world, we have seen unequivocal instances of social prayer, as well as the most exalted benevolence, and exemplary fortitude in sufferings: nor do we consider the obligation to imitate their example, either in the one case or the other, at all impaired by the supernatural powers imparted to them by God, or by the extraordinary circumstances in which they were called to act. To this moreover it may added, if we could see any reason for believing that the prayers of the first Christians had any thing in them supernatural, then we should say, Still they were social prayers, and therefore social prayer has the sanction of divine authority, and it is impossible that supernatural aid should have been afforded in the practice of a custom which Christ himself had discouraged and forbidden. However, we utterly deny the truth of the assertion that the prayers of the first Christians were a "part of the supernatural gifts;" and we ask for proof. Where is the passage in which any thing like this is affirmed, or from which it can be deduced with any fairness of inference? And where, moreover, was the necessity for the exercise of a miraculous power to enable them to pray? Having become Christians, had they no capacity to feel and ex- |