descended is the same also that ascended up far above all heavens, that he might fill all things. And he gave some, apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors and teachers; for the perfecting of the saints, for the work of the ministry, for the edifying of the body of Christ." (Eph.iv. 10-12.) "I thank Christ Jesus our Lord, who hath enabled me, for that he counted me faithful, putting me into the ministry." (1 Tim. i. 12.) The same benevolent work is ascribed to the Holy Ghost. "Take heed therefore unto yourselves, and to all the flock, over the which the Holy Ghost hath made ""* you overseers. (Acts xx. 28.) Thus, according to the Scriptures, ministers are the gift of God; according to the successionists, they may be the gift of a bishop, with which God has nothing to do.

In the next place, the Scriptures teach us, that the evidence of any persons being called of God as christian ministers is furnished in their fruits and qualifications, A man professes to be a minister of Christ. The inquiry is not, Has this man been regularly ordained? but, Do his life and spirit evidence that he has been called of God? This is the test to which the Saviour expressly directed his disciples to bring professed teachers. He hints nothing about inquiries as to succession or ordination, but he directs attention to their fruits. 66 Beware of false prophets, which come to you in sheep's clothing, but inwardly they are are ravening wolves. Ye shall know them by their fruits. men gather grapes of thorns, or figs of thistles? Even so every good tree bringeth forth good fruit; but a corrupt tree bringeth forth evil fruit. A good tree cannot bring forth evil fruit, neither can a corrupt tree bring forth good fruit. Every tree that bringeth not forth good fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire. Where

* In the Greek, bishops.

Do

41

fore by their fruits ye shall know them." (Matt. vii. 15-20.) Nothing can be more express or plain than the Lord's directions here, which, though in their principles referrible to the professors of religion generally, have their first and most direct application to the teachers of religion. In conformity with this view are the directions given by the Holy Ghost, respecting the qualifications that christian ministers must possess. "A bishop must be blameless, as the steward of God; not self-willed, not soon angry, not given to wine, no striker, not given to filthy lucre: but a lover of hospitality, a lover of good men, sober, just, holy temperate.' (Titus i. 7, 8.) "A bishop then must be blameless, the husband of one wife, vigilant, sober, of good behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach; not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre; but patient, not a brawler, not covetous; one that ruleth well his own house, having his children in subjection with all gravity; (for if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God?) not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the condemnation of the devil. Moreover he must have a good report of them which are without; lest he fall into reproach and the snare of the devil." (1 Tim. iii. 2-7.) Such, according to the word of eternal truth, are christian ministers to be in their character and conduct. Can it, for one moment, be supposed, that, while these qualifications are required in a christian minister, any act of a human being can make a man a christian minister who is a stranger to them all? The Scriptures further teach, that true christian ministers must be sound in doctrine. "Holding fast the faithful word, as he hath been taught, that he may be able by sound doctrine both to exhort and to convince the gainsayers. For there are many unruly and vain talkers and deceivers, specially they of the circumcision:

ple is erroneous, and hence the inconsistency between the profession and the practice in the world. For instance, the profession is to renounce the pomps and vanities of this wicked world; but what are the pomps and vanities of this wicked world that persons using this form are not eagerly following? The inconsistency here implied ceases to excite surprise when it is recollected that the profession is, in many instances, taken up as a matter of course, without personal conviction. When such a professor is in the world, he acts in his real character. If, however, a renunciation of the pomps and vanity of this world is really implied in the voluntary profession of experimental piety, is there not reason for godly sorrow, that professors are found to patronise by their presence exhibitions of mere popular amusement ? Persons, whose sense of christian propriety would revolt at a proposal to go to the play, scruple not to attend a fashionable concert, and other genteel exhibitions of very doubtful character. To this inconsistency I would respectfully invite, especially the younger part of your readers; and I hope to be considered, not as hypercritically complaining of their enjoyments, but as mourning that any of them can find enjoyment in amusements inconsistent with piety; for, can it consist with true religion to make a part of a public company to hear the singing of songs, not the songs of Zion, and, if they were, perhaps so much the worse, as desecrated to mere amusement, with various blandishments of theatri

cal performance; but songs, judging from their titles, calculated to cherish amorous and romantic passions.

Not to approve of such entertainmaints will perhaps be attributed to a want of taste. Be it so. Though "Once I admired such trifles too, But grace has set me free; Such pleasures now no longer please, No more content afford; Far from my heart be joys like these, Now I have seen the Lord."

43

And, on reflection, I cannot but think that this is the more correct taste for a christian to indulge. To this conclusion the following considerations lead :—

1. Such amusements are a part of the course of this world, which accords with the mind of Satan. (See Eph. ii. 2.) ii. 2.) If any doubt can be entertained whether they ought to be considered as a part of the course of this world, reflect whether they are generally patronised by the pious servants of God, or the men of the world. Do such amusements harmonise more with the house of God and the solemnities of religion, or with the ballroom, the theatre, or any other fashionable scenes of dissipation and frivolity? Let them be assigned to their own class, and then let the christian professor say whether he should patronise them. Sophists may argue by the hour for them, but the broad principles of the Gospel condemn them.

2. They are opposed to that spirituality of mind which true religion requires. (See Rom. viii. 1

14.) To be spiritually minded is to mind, or relish and enjoy, spiritual things. This is descriptive of a character the opposite to that class of persons who mind or enjoy the things of the flesh; that is, those things that are grateful to the mere animal constitution of man. Now, to which class of objects, carnal or spiritual, heavenly or earthly, are fashionable amusements to be assigned? They cannot rank with both. Either to heaven or hell they tend. It is not said that a spiritually minded person cannot be found in them; but, if he be, he will instinctively perceive that he is out of his element, and will have about as much enjoyment as a fish out of water, or as a holy man of God on satan's territories.

3. They are discordant with a christian profession. What is a christian professor, but a professed follower of the Lord Jesus Christ? One that

professes to regard his precepts, and follow his example. But whoever so mistook the genius of christianity as for a moment to imagine, that he was following Christ or his apostles in going to the play, or the ball-room, or the fashionable concert? If the real christian has ever found himself there, has he not sat on thorns, fearing lest he should be known, or that the angel of death should find him there? Does he feel prepared, in such a position, to receive the summons to enter into the presence of his Judge, that Divine Person whom he professes to follow? Rather is he not conscious that he was out of his place, and does he not fervently pray that God would pardon his servant in this thing ?* If professors see not the inconsistency of this conformity to the world, the world observes and proclaims it.

4.-Its influence is to sensuality and formalism. The human mind is so constituted as to receive an impression from the various moral scenes which are the subjects of its observation. Every circumstance produces an effect, more or less perceptible and permanent, in proportion to its impression. If the pious mind witness a scene of amusement without disgust and recoil, the impression will be decidedly inimical to piety, and prepare the mind for a repetition with sensible enjoyment; and thus many a hopeful character has been diverted from serious and devotional habits into the love of pleasure, and has become, if not an avowed enemy to religion, a mere formalist.

To this source is probably to be traced the fact, in many instances, that the families of the more opulent and influential class of dissenters, in a generation or two, degenerate from

* See an excellent book by the Rev. J. A. James, called "The Christian Professor."

the piety of their fathers, and sink back into the arms of the State Church, in which they can repose and appear to be christians while they are manifestly lovers of pleasure more than lovers of God. How many now, from this beginning, have proceeded till they look with scorn on the friends and associates of their pious fathers? As this result should be avoided, let families be allured by seriousness and affection into the ways of piety, and be guarded with solicitous paternal watchfulness from the inroads of a foe that may come with the siren's song to charm and destroy.

Say not, dear reader, "It cannot be proved sinful to enjoy a little amusement." Cannot it? And is this the rule of christian conduct? May we consistently do every thing that cannot be proved to be positively sinful? Is it prudent to venture to the very edge of the line which separates between right and wrong? Far otherwise are the christian precepts. "Be not conformed to this world." "Abstain from all appearance of evil." "Whatsoever is not of faith is sin;" that is, whatever a person does, of which he doubts whether it is morally right. And can a serious christian attend a meeting of fashionable amusement without any question of the propriety of this step? Even if he could, how undesirable, as an example to others; but it is doubtful whether any pious person can attend without sinning against the conviction of his own conscience. And how much more like an angel of mercy appears the christian lady when visiting the sick and relieving the necessitous, distributing tracts and giving Bibles, than when dissipating in personal amusement the money that might give bread to the hungry, and cause the widow's heart to sing for joy!

AT the burial of Abraham, his sons, Isaac and Ishmael engaged, and, doubtless, mingled their tears over his grave. Ishmael, the father of the tribes of Arabia, has but little notice in the inspired record; but the prediction which was uttered concerning him has been most remarkably fulfilled, even down to the present times. "And he shall be a wild man; his hand shall be against every man, and every man's hand against him; and he shall dwell in the presence of his brethren." (Gen. xvi. 12.)

Our attention is properly directed to the line of promise. Isaac, on whom the promise concerning the Messiah rested, was twenty years with Rebecca before he had a son born to him; and, when twins were born, the prediction given to Rebecca was, that the elder should serve the younger, and, therefore, that the line of promise should be continued in the younger.

These two sons, as they grew to maturity, gave evidence of very different dispositions. Esau, the elder, so called from his red appearance, was a daring, reckless, and irreligious person. He was a man of the field, and set a low value on the promise that had been made to Abraham and Isaac, in relation to the Messiah. He was so regardless of the privilege of the birthright, to which was attached the priesthood of the family, as well as a double portion of goods, that he wantonly bartered his right to it to his brother, for a mess of pottage.

Jacob, on the other hand, was a quiet, plain, and contemplative person, who greatly valued the promises God had made, and desired their accomplishment in himself; so that, probably instructed by Rebecca as to the revelation she had received from God concerning him, he gladly availed himself of the unbelieving profanity of his brother, to possess himself of the birthright to which the priesthood belonged, in the hope that the blessing would descend through his line. Whether the means Jacob used to obtain the birthright were commendable or not, it is clear his motives were good, and that Esau indicated a sinful and unbelieving disregard to its sacred privileges, to barter them away for " VOL. 6.-N.S,

one

morsel of meat." At this time Esau was about thirty-two years of age. In the course of a few years, like a profane person, he formed matrimonial alliances with the daughters of the idolaters in the land, and thus gave much "bitterness of spirit" to Isaac and Rebecca. So sometimes it happens with men. There is a time when they deliberately give up piety and the service of God, and, as they forsake him, he forsakes them, and leaves them to pursue their own downward course!

Isaac, who had removed from Lahairoi, near Kadesh, in the desert, to Gerar, on the border of Philistia, on account of the famine, and thence afterward to Hebron, where God had appeared to Abram before the destruction of Sodom, became afflicted with partial, or total blindness, when he attained his 138th year. He had displayed a weak partiality to Esau, notwithstanding `his irreligious character, and was anxious to bestow on him the patriarchal blessing. He therefore called him, and directed him to prepare him a savoury dish, such as was the fruit of his hunting, and intimated that then he would give him his blessing before he died. Rebecca, who had heard the language of Isaac, and was concerned that Jacob, of whom the promise had been given to her, and who had received the birthright, should also receive the blessing which was its token, determined, by artifice, that she would accomplish her purpose. She therefore requested Jacob to personate his brother Esau, and to take food that she had prepared to the aged patriarch, and obtain his benediction. Jacob shuddered at such a proposal, and remarked the difference in their persons, and observed that detection was sure, and that he should receive a curse rather than a blessing; but Rebecca, intent on her object, prevailed with him, and he went in habited as Esau; and Isaac, after some little scruple, but under an inspiring influence, gave him his blessing. Thus was the pre-eminence of Jacob complete; but the means by which he obtained the blessing were exceedingly unworthy. They were also unnecessary; for, as God had designed