judging the twelve tribes of Israel.' 19: 28. I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father hath appointed unto me: that ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel.' Luke 22: 29, 30. Compare Eph. 2: 20, and Rev. 21: 14.

In all this there is abundant evidence that Christ endorsed the doings, sayings and writings of the apostles in advance. Every gift of the Spirit which they afterward received, and every miracle which they performed, renewed his endorsement. His credit is inseparable from theirs.

It may be said that Paul, not being one of the original twelve, did not come under this endorsement. We reply, Paul professed to have seen Jesus Christ in the spiritual world, and to have received from him a plenary apostolic commission; and for the truth of his profession we have, besides the assurance arising from his own character as a witness, two sufficient vouchers, viz., the numerous and mighty miracles which he wrought in the name of Jesus, and the recorded acknowledgment of Peter. By this latter voucher he is fully brought in with the other apostles under the endorsement of Christ. Peter was the first officer in the cabinet of Christ; and he not only acknowledged Paul's commission as an apostle co-ordinate with himself, (see Gal. 2: 9,) but expressly recognized his epistles as part of the word of God.— See 2 Pet. 3: 16.

The New Testament is just what we might expect it to be, on the supposition that Christ delegated to his officers authority to expound his principles and works to the world. In order to the full exhibition of Christianity it was necessary that there should be, 1, a history of the life of Christ; 2, a sketch of what followed his resurrection, viz., the advent of the Spirit and the first progress of his kingdom under the administration of his lieutenants; 3, a systematic exposition of the theory of redemption founded on the death and resurrection of Christ; 4, a code of morality, with suitable injunctions and warnings against errors; 5, an exhibition of the mature results of Christian faith; 6, a sketch of the futurity of Christ's administration. The first we have in the evangelists; the second, in the book of Acts; the third, in the epistles of Paul; the fourth, in the whole New Testament; the fifth, in the 1st epistle of John; and the sixth, in the book of Revelations. If Christ did not provide for an authentic and permanent expose of his kingdom, of this kind, it is impossible to defend his wisdom or goodness. If he did, we have that expose in the New Testament; for it can be found no where else.

If a deist will admit that Jesus was a wise and good man, he can be compelled to admit that the New Testament was written by inspiration. For 1. A wise and good man, in undertaking the reformation of mankind, would first of all take pains to insure a correct and incorruptible record of his life and principles. 2. But Jesus did not personally make any record of the kind. He must therefore have had an assurance that his followers would be qualified for the task. 3. But his followers, as uninspired men, were not qualified, and he as a wise man must have known it. 4. Therefore his assurance that they would be qualified, must have been an assurance that they would be inspired. Or the argument may be stated in another form, thus: 1. A wise and good man, undertaking the reformation of mankind, would

>

suffer no record of his principles to be published with his implied permission and authority, unless he had himself superintended the writing of it. 2. But the New Testament was published by his permission and authority, implied in the fact that it was published by his representatives, and that he made no other record of his principles. 3. Therefore he must have superintended the writing of the New Testament; and as he was not visibly present at the writing of it, he must have superintended it by inspiration.

The connection between Christ and the apostles is a vital one, and cannot be severed without breaking the line of communication between God and man. If he is the head, they are the neck of that spiritual body which is the vehicle of salvation to the world. A blow aimed at the neck is as deadly to the body as one aimed at the head. If he sent them even as the Father sent him,' their work was as necessary as his; and contempt of their wri tings is as antichristian as contempt of his words. Accordingly the apostle John sets forth a twofold test of the spirit of antichrist. Beloved,' says he, 'believe not every spirit, but try the spirits whether they be of God; because many false prophets are gone out into the world. Hereby know ye the spirit of God; every spirit that confesseth that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is of God; and every spirit that confesseth not that Jesus Christ is come in the flesh, is not of God. [This is the first criterion, and it relates to the first link in the chain of union between God and man. The apostle proceeds,] And this is that spirit of antichrist, whereof ye have heard that it should come; and even now already is it in the world. Ye are of God, little children, and have overcome them; because greater is he that is in you than he that is in the world. They are of the world; therefore speak they of the world, and the world heareth them. We are of God: he that knoweth God, heareth us; he that is not of God, heareth not us: hereby know we the spirit of truth and the spirit of error.' Here is the second criterion, relating to the second link of the chain. Antichrist attacks Christianity on two vital points. He strikes first at Christ's incarnation; and secondly, at the credit of the apostles. The first point most needed defense in the primitive age; for it was long before the adversary allowed the advent of the Son of God to to become a fixed fact. The principal conflict at the present day seems to be gathering about the second point. The incarnation of Christ has established itself in popular belief; but it is quite a fashionable and spreading custom to doubt and deny the authority of Christ's lieutenants.

It appears from the preceding argument, that the Bible as a whole is under the protection of Christ's endorsement, and can only be assailed by assailing him. The books of the Old and New Testaments are not to bear the brunt of the infidel onset, but Christ who stands in the midst of them, staking his credit for theirs, and challenging the hosts of hell to strike him, if they wish to strike them. They who sneer at Moses and Paul, while they pretend to honor Christ, will find, when they understand the relation which Christ bears to Moses and Paul, that they have mistaken their policy.Concessions in favor of Christ and the four gospels, give believers a standpoint, from which they can sally both ways, and rout with ease and certainty all adversaries both of the Old and New Testaments. The semi-infidels may

as well return, first as last, to the war-cry of Voltaire-Crush the wretch! --for they can never crush any part of the Bible-phalanx till they crush Christ.

§ 2. INFIDELITY AMONG REFORMERS.

Thus

THE spirit of infidelity, when it works under the cover of reform, and with professions of respect for some portions of the Bible, is more captivating and dangerous than when it stands forth in honest nakedness. disguised, it infects not merely open despisers of religion, but many who were once sober and devout. Having given some attention to this particular disease, we propose to present our views of its nature, and of its rise and progress among reformers in this country.

I. THE NATURE OF THE DISEASE. Infidelity in general, is a state of mind, in which the moral affection, called by phrenologists, Veneration, is overborne and neutralized by some stronger affection. As the fear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom,' so casting off the fear of the Lord is the beginning of skeptical folly. Reverence for God is the protecting rampart of the Bible. Whoever fears his Maker will handle carefully the book which professes to be his word, and search diligently, before he rejects it. This reverent cautiousness is all that the Bible or its Author demands from those who have not yet ascertained its truth by rational investigation. The Bible asks no favors of mere marvelousness. Infidels will be condemned in the day of account, not for refusing to swallow all the absurd marvels which priesteraft offered them, nor even for hesitating to believe all the contents of the Bible: but because they had not humility and reverence enough to suspend judgment until they had given the message of God a fair trial; because they spoke evil of things which they understood not;' because they would not take the trouble to discriminate between a true revelation and the impostures of fanatics, but condemned the innocent with the guilty, in lynchlaw recklessness.

Probably in most cases of infidelity, Veneration is overborne by Self-esteem in combination with Causality and Combativeness. Men are too proud and confident in the sufficiency of their reason, to give the Bible a reverent examination. But in the particular form of the disease of which we are treating, there is reason to believe that Benevolence, in many cases, is the usurping affection which prostrates Veneration. The enthusiasm of reform which has burst forth within a few years, has made many exceedingly fierce for doing good. Their zeal has been too fervent to wait on the slow movements, by which God and the Bible are working out redemption for man.--They have devised more summary processes; and then, by little and little, casting off conservative reverence, they have learned at last to trample on the Bible boldly, whenever they conceive that it crosses the path of their favorite enterprises for human improvement.

Persons who have been beguiled into this course, may flatter themselves that a sentiment so lovely and virtuous as benevolence, cannot lead to any great mischief; that the fervor of their philanthropy will excuse them for stifling veneration, and thrusting aside the word of God. But we are sure

that any amount of good which they can do without the Bible, will be accounted in the day of judgment as but dust in the balance, against the mischief effected by discrediting God's main instrument of redemption. We are sure that nothing can excuse ignorance or forgetfulness of the truth that the fear of the Lord is a higher duty than philanthropy; that the rights of God are immeasurably superior to human rights.' Incontinent, misdirected benevolence is not less-perhaps more destructive in its ultimate effects, than any lust of human nature. And it must be considered, that the evil of any usurpation is incurable in proportion to the apparent virtue, and consequent popularity of the usurper.

Let political and religious Jacobins rail at the abuses of subordination, with which this priest-and-king-ridden world abounds, as they may; they can never erase the inscription which the finger of God has written on the scroll of nature, as well as revelation; assigning the throne of all human affections to Veneration. The organ of that sentiment is literally the crown of the head' -the top-stone of the cerebral temple-the center, around which all the other moral affections cluster as constituents. Accordingly, reverence for parents is the beauty of childhood; and the fear of the Lord is the glory of manhood. The dethronement of Veneration, therefore, can never be a trivial disorder, even though Benevolence heads the insurrection.

II. THE RISE And progress oF INFIDELITY AMONG MODERN REFORMERS. Phrenologists say (we think with reason) that the atmosphere of the republican principles and leveling tendencies of this country, is unfavorable to the due development of Veneration. A people whose political and social institutions constantly teach them that independence is their chief glory, and that subordination is disgrace, will naturally have but a stinted growth of reverence toward man; and it would be strange if the deficiency did not extend, in some degree, to the kindred and almost identical sentiment of reverence toward God. Bigoted democrats certainly can have but little sympathy with the principles of that kingdom described and predicted by the Bible, in which one man (viz., Jesus Christ) is appointed, not by the people, but by God, the absolute monarch of all; and claims as his first tribute from all his subjects, unconditional loyalty and subordination.

The divisions of Protestant Christendom have generated another influence, tending especially to weaken reverence for the Bible. As sect after sect has arisen, conflicting commentaries have been multiplied, until men have accustomed themselves to regard the Bible, not as an authoritative judge of controversy, but as a pliable witness that may be brought by a skillful lawyer to favor any side of any question. Such a witness cannot be held in much respect.

Such were the predisposing influences in operation, when the enthusiasm of reform which has characterized the last sixteen years, commenced its career. In the Temperance cause, benevolence first essayed the usurping

process, by which veneration has since been subverted. In hurrying on the triumphs of total abstinence, it was found necessary to remove certain ob structions placed in the way by the Bible. These obstructions might have been removed without injury to the Bible, if the leaders in the cause had chosen to defend total abstinence as an expedient, not of intrinsic and permanent obligation, but adapted to the exigency of the times, and adopted on the principle which justifies fasting, and which Paul sanctioned when he said, If meat make my brother to offend, I will not eat meat while the world standeth.' But to press the Bible into the service of total abstinence, by denying that the writers of the Old and New Testaments, with Jesus Christ at their head, countenanced the drinking of wine; or by asserting that Bible wines were not intoxicating, is a violence which no man, under the influence of due respect for the Bible, would undertake. The language of such art attempt is The Bible is too sacred to be contradicted; but we will evade its force by dexterous commentary. Yet this attempt was made; and that too, by such men as Stuart, Beecher, and Hewitt. The mighty men' of the popular churches planted the noxious germ, which, in the apostate and blaspheming ultraists of later times, has 'gone to seed."

6

Next came Anti-slavery. The nature of this enterprise, harmonizing and co-operating with the liberty-spirit of our political institutions, inevitably increased the atmospheric predisposition to merge veneration in benevolence. It was soon found in this as in the Temperance cause, that the Bible stood in the way of the extreme ultraisms suggested by enthusiastic zeal. The doctrine that slave-holding is necessarily sinful, and that immediate abolition is in all cases a matter of religious obligation, could not be maintained without forcing a new construction on many things in the writings of Moses and Paul. Theodore D. Weld had learned in the Temperance service the importance of wresting the Bible out of the hands of the adversaries of reform. With lawyer-like shrewdness, in his Bible Argument' against slavery he crossquestioned the opposing witness, till he apparently made that witness his own. As it was the favorite position of Temperance men that Bible-wines were not intoxicating, so Weld boldly averred and plausibly proved that Bible-slavery was not slavery. The argument was as good in one case as in the other; and no better. Thus the Bible was the second time placed on the rack of reform, and benevolence prevailed over veneration.

'Woman's Rights' was the next topic of agitation. In both the previous cases, the language of the Bible adverse to the views of the reformers, had been so far dubious, as to admit of favorable construction; and veneration had not yet been so prostrated, as to permit a direct attack. The collision was oblique; and the Bible, though dishonored, was not mutilated. But now the time had come for open hostilities. Many influences conspired to bring on this issue. A new baptism of the spirit of irreverence had come upon the reformers, by the accession to their ranks of those Perfectionists who had learned from T. R. Gates to blaspheme Paul. The Quaker, Unitarian, Universalist and Transcendental elements in the spiritual compound engaged in the reforming enterprises, had begun to prevail against the more conserva tive influences of orthodoxy: and the 'Evangelicals' were preparing to with