we could. If we had stood upon the sea-coast during the recent gales, and seen the ships driven upon the shore-the sailors crowding up the rigging, and signalling for help-the sea breaking over them, and washing one after another into a watery grave, should we not gladly have rendered help, had it been in our power to do so? We should not deserve the name of man, nay, we should despise ourselves, unless we had gladly done all in our power.

But there is a more terrible storm raging, and men are perishing, not by units or by hundreds only, but by millions-perishing not in regard to time and the body merely, but to eternity and the soul. "The dreadful work of stupendous destruction is going on all around us. Do we believe it? This year 20,000,000 of souls will be wrecked in life and hope, cast desolate and wretched upon the strand of eternity. Oh, some are perishing now." Some of our own relatives and neighbours are exposed to this danger. They are perishing before our eyes, and we see them indifferent-yea, perhaps laughing and singing-as the wave of iniquity carries them down to de

struction.

We are able to help. Great abilities are not required. Eloquence is not essential. God can work by the feeblest agency, and has often produced the mightiest results by the simplest means. How did the great revival in Ireland originate? Was it through the burning eloquence of some great preacher ? Was it the result of some imposing organization? No. A Christian lady from Newcastle was on a visit to Ballymena, and employed herself in visiting from house to house, distributing tracts, and speaking a word for Christ. She met with a young man who was a great disputer on doctrine. She declined disputation, but strove to enforce the practical doctrine of the Saviour, "Ye must be born again." Her words carried conviction to his heart, and were the means of his conversion. As soon as he found pardon he became earnest in prayer for others. His prayers were answered, and one young man after another was brought to the Saviour. Their views expanded as their number increased. They felt for their neighbours. They began to hold prayer-meetings-they read portions of the Word of God-they added earnest exhortations. Many became alarmed, fled for refuge to Jesus, and found redemption in his blood. Thus the work went on, slowly at first, but increasing in power and in extent, until it spread over whole countries-waking up slumbering ministers and drowsy churches-breaking through time-honoured forms-sweeping away long-cherished prejudices-and bearing on the bosom of one mighty wave of salvation nearly half a million of souls to the feet of Jesus. The good lady referred to above had no conception of the work she was doing. Had it been proposed to her to seek to effect a great revival, the suggestion would have seemed preposterous. She could do but little. That little, however, she attempted, not thinking whereunto it would grow; and "God gave the increase.” We have not to do with results, so much as with duties. What our hand "findeth to do" we must do, or we are unfaithful stewards. But no effort put forth for Christ shall lose its reward. If we are "faithful in that which is least"-not despising the littleness of our capabilities-remembering that the "power is of God, and

not of man," we shall escape the doom of the "wicked and slothful servant," we shall secure the approval of our Master, and, in many cases, God will crown our labours with such fruit as will astonish and yet humble, whilst it delights us, and by its very greatness will save us from all disposition to boasting, extorting from us the adoring cry, "It is the Lord's doing, and marvellous in our eyes."

One other thing is needed-on which, indeed, all the rest depends, viz., prayer. We have not learnt the full meaning of those words, "Thy Father who seeth in secret shall reward thee openly." If we are to be "rewarded openly," as we desire, in the increased joy of our religious experience in the augmented power of our Christian character-in the richer influences of the means of grace-in greater personal usefulness, and more abundant Church prosperity, the one essential thing, without which all else will fail, from which all else will follow, is: We must be "seen of our Father in secret,” praying more frequently and more earnestly, and praying in faith." AYEL.

RITUALISM AND PRIESTHOOD.

SECOND PAPER.

THE priestly power assumed by the Anglo-Catholic clergy, on the ground of the apostolic commission, was never claimed by the apostles themselves; yet they understood that commission, and the power with which it invested them, and their subsequent conduct was in harmony with the spirit of their commission. But it is evident the apostles never understood their mission and power to be priestly in its character, and they never hint their possession of priestly prerogative.

In examining the apostolic Epistles, we fail to discover their application of the word priest to themselves. The only passages in which priest or priesthood is employed to designate the followers of our Lord are

1. 1 Pet. ii. 5, 9-"Ye also, as lively stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to offer up spiritual sacrifices, acceptable to God by Jesus Christ." "But ye are a chosen generation, a royal priesthood, an holy nation, a peculiar people; that ye should show forth the praises of him who hath called you out of darkness into his marvellous light." This Epistle was sent to the "strangers scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia, and Bithynia." Whether these strangers were Jews scattered by persecution, or Gentiles who had received the Gospel and forsaken idolatry, or, as Michaelis with much probability supposes, Gentiles, heathens who had received Judaism without circumcision, and afterwards embraced Christianity, cannot affect the case. Clearly they were Christians. What then? They were, assuredly, not all clerics. They nevertheless were a priesthood; but a priesthood "to offer up spiritual sacrifices," to "show forth the praises of him who called them out of darkness into his marvellous light." Here is nothing of penance, absolution, or eucharistic sacrifice-no clerical priesthood, but a lay priesthood to offer spiritual praise. At the close of this Epistle there is a caution against, not a sanction of, clerical lordship,

or priestly authority. At chapter v. and 1st verse, Peter, himself an elder, exhorts the elders which are among the scattered strangers not to exercise their functions as "lords over God's heritage ;" and in the enumerated duties he bids them discharge, there is nothing of a sacerdotal nature, or in any way favourable to priesthood.

2. Rev. v. 10 and xx. 6. The fifth chapter records the vision of the book having the seven seals. The Lamb with the seven horns and seven eyes took the book from the hand of him who, looking like a jasper and a sardine stone, sat in the midst of the throne, round about which the rainbow, like an emerald, was encircled. At the taking of the book by the Lamb, the four beasts, and the four-andtwenty elders, with harps and vials, fell down before the Lamb, and sang a new song-"Thou art worthy to take the book, and to open the seals thereof: for thou wast slain, and hast redeemed us to God by thy blood out of every kindred, and tongue, and people, and nation; and hast made us unto our God kings and priests; and we shall reign on the earth." When the elders sang this song they were not in the flesh. John saw them, in vision, round the throne. They had been human and sinful. They had struggled, believed, and triumphed through the blood of the Lamb, and the sacrifice that they offered, as they fell down with their harps, before their Redeemer, was a sacrifice of praise-a new song; not a sacrifice of blood-a vicarious victim.

Chapter xx. gives us a description of the first resurrection and second death, with the interval of a thousand years between them. In verse 6 we read-"Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first resurrection: on such the second death hath no power, but they shall be priests of God and of Christ." This passage being propheticalhaving reference to the future-cannot sanction the present assumption of priestly power. We need not trouble ourselves to inquire whether the priesthood of the first resurrection will be such as Ritualism now claims, because we are not dealing with what is to be, but with what is; not with the future, but with the present.

It appears clear, from this brief review of the terms priest and priesthood as employed by the apostles, that they never directly claimed sacerdotal power; never, in so many words, declared themselves priests in an ecclesiastical sense.

But, while lacking literal proofs of such a claim being made, may there not be in the apostolic offices and appellations some indirect or presumptive evidence in favour of the Ritualistic view? Let us see.

St. Paul speaks of himself as "an apostle of Jesus Christ," "an apostle of Christ," and "the apostle of the Gentiles." The word "apostolos" signifies one sent, a messenger, and contains no ground for the adoption of priestly prerogative by the clergy.

The apostles are sometimes called elders. Peter uses this term in his first Epistle (v. 1), as we have already shown-"The elders which are among you I exhort, who am also an elder." John employs the same word in his second and third Epistles-"The elder unto the elect lady;" "The elder unto the well-beloved Gaius." But the eldership was not confined to the apostles, or the ministers of the word. There is proof that it embraced the laity, and that the elders are sometimes distinguished from the apostles. It is written in the Acts of the Apostles (xv. 2, 4, 6), that Barnabas and Paul, and

certain others, were sent from Antioch to Jerusalem, "unto the apostles and elders," concerning the question of circumcision. "And when they were come to Jerusalem, they were received of the Church, and of the apostles and elders;" "And the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter." In 1 Tim. v. 17, we read-"Let the elders that rule well be counted worthy of double honour, especially they who labour in the word and doctrine." From these passages it is evident that an elder was not necessarily an apostle; for the eldership included some who did not labour in word and doctrine. It was not exclusively a clerical order, and did not contain the idea of clerical priesthood.

Another order of labourers called deacons existed in the early Church, and the episcopate recognizes the office of deacon as a clerical office. The deacons of the apostolic Church were specially appointed as almoners of the Church's charity. In Acts vi. we have the record of the origin of the diaconate. There was a murmuring about the Grecian widows being neglected in the daily administration of alms. The twelve averred that it was not reasonable that they should leave the word of God to serve tables. They thereupon advised the disciples to look out seven men of honest report, and full of the Holy Ghost, to take charge of the business. The office of deacon is recognized by St. Paul, in his Epistle to the Philippians (i. 1) and in 1 Tim. iii. 8, and five following verses; but that the diaconal office gives no claim to the priesthood is evident from the fact that in the early Church it was a lay office, instituted for the relief of the poor. It is true that deacons did occasionally preach; but ministering the Word was not their chief and especial work.

We read of bishops in the apostolic Church, and St. Paul minutely describes to Timothy what a bishop should be. But the terms bishop and elder, as applicable to the apostolate, or clerical office, appear to be synonymous. In the Epistle to Titus (i. 5-7), we read-" For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had appointed thee if any be blameless, the husband of one wife, having faithful children, not accused of riot, or unruly. For a bishop must be blameless." Here it is evident that the eldership and episcopate were regarded as one and the same office; and the use of the term of qualification-" blameless"-in connection with the word elder and the word bishop in this passage, seems to be conclusive upon the matter. Now, as the eldership excluded the notion of priesthood, and as the eldership and episcopate were, in reference to the apostolic office, synonymous, the episcopate excluded the notion of priesthood also.

There remains for examination one other term by which the apostle of the Gentiles designates himself in 1 Cor. iv. 1-"Let a man so account of us, as of the ministers of Christ, and stewards of the mysteries of God." A steward is a man in trust-popularly, one who has charge of the property of another, and who is responsible for the right management of such property; one who holds an office of trust and accountability.

In attempting to interpret the passage now under consideration, two questions present themselves :

I. What is a mystery?

II. What are the mysteries of God?

gene

I. What is a mystery? A mystery does not necessarily imply insolubility, or something altogether inexplicable and incomprehensible. Such, certainly, is sometimes its meaning; but it rally denotes that which has been, or which is for a season, kept secret, and which has been, or in due season will be, revealed. În the account of the parable of the sower, given by St. Matthew in his 13th chapter, and St. Mark in his 4th chapter, it is stated that the disciples asked Jesus why he addressed the multitudes in parables. His reply was, "Because it is given unto you to know the mysteries of the kingdom of heaven, but to them it is not given;" from which saying it is evident that some things are termed mysteries which may be revealed and understood. But the apostle, as a steward of God's mysteries, had to enforce or maintain truths whose profound depths he could not fathom, and whose great mysteries his reason could not grasp; for in the writings of the "beloved brother Paul," are "things hard to be understood," mysteries we cannot know, even as mysteries which we can comprehend.

II. The next question is, "What are the mysteries of God?" In answering this question, "Paul shall himself direct me."

In Rom. xvi. 25, the Gospel and the preaching of Christ is called a mystery-"The mystery which was kept secret since the world began, but now is made manifest, and by the scriptures of the prophets, according to the commandment of the everlasting God, made known to all nations for the obedience of faith."

In 1 Cor. ii. 7, the purpose of God towards man, even for man's exaltation and glory, is spoken of as the "wisdom of God in a mystery," followed by the explanatory term, "hidden wisdom;" and the assurance that the princes of this world were ignorant of it-knew it not. This mystery, this hidden wisdom, was God's plan of redemption-"Jesus Christ, and him crucified"-as appears from the context, and was revealed by the deep-searching Spirit of God.

In the same epistle (xv. 51), it is written-"Behold, I show you a mystery: We shall not all sleep, but we shall all be changed." It is needless to say more of this passage than that it has direct reference to the resurrection, which, though a profound mystery, is not in the least connected with the work of the ministry, except as a doctrine to be held and proclaimed.

In Eph. i. 9, the term mystery occurs in connection with the revelation of the Divine will concerning the headship of Christ, and the time when all things in heaven and in earth shall be gathered together in him, and he (Christ) shall be all in all. In the same Epistle (iii. 3, 4, 9; vi. 19), the same term is employed to designate the will and Gospel of God.

In chap. v. 32, another use is made of the word mystery. It is there employed to signify the intimate, secret, spiritual union of Christ and the Church, a union alluded to under the figure of marriage.

In Col. i. 26, 27; ii. 2; and iv. 3, the same word is used to set forth the redemptive scheme, as originating in the will and purpose of God.