churches would have been especially selected; and so also the last chapter and some others. Mr. Scott the commentator justly

remarks:

"It is worthy of notice, in respect of the Revelation, that the views given in it of God and heavenly things; of the kingdom of providence and grace; of the Redeemer's glory; the happiness and character of his people; with the wickedness and ruin of his enemies, are set forth, in so striking and peculiar a manner, that even they, who do not at all understand the prophetical meaning, are uniformly interested and edified by reading it, in proportion to the degree of their humility, faith, and piety."

Mr. Scott also remarks that probably the reason why the authenticity of the book of Revelation came in the third century to be questioned, after having been recognized in the first and second, was that " some absurd opinions respecting the Millennium had been grounded upon it;" the opponents of which "injudiciously, nay presumptuously "-he might have used a stronger word-sought to discredit them by denying the inspiration of the book from which their advocates professed to derive them.

The whole question of partial omission in the consecutive reading of the word of God, whether in private, in the family circle, or in the Church, is one of considerable difficulty. Nothing which God has revealed is to be disparaged, but, at the same time, as only one part can be read at once, it surely is not unlawful to select such portions as appear most peculiarly adapted for particular occasions, or to pass over, even in consecutive reading, certain chapters, or portions of chapters which are not thought suitable for the time or place. I know indeed that some persons maintain the contrary; they would not in the family circle or the church omit any one chapter, verse, or syllable; not even where our translation is expressed in language which would not be used in forming a modern version. Our reformers acted with greater wisdom; and I am far from finding fault with them on this account; but still it is open to consideration whether, in wholly rejecting the Apocalypse, they judged well. They were but fallible, though wise and godly, men. A peculiar blessing is attached to the study of this very book: "Blessed is he that readeth and they that hear the words of this prophecy, and keep the things which are written therein, for the time is at hand." Perhaps I am wrong in supposing that the public reading of it would have been profitable; for I am not willing to set up my own weak judgment against the decision of those eminent servants of the Lord who excluded it; but then let us, in our private studies, meditations, and prayers, make up for the loss; not indeed with that disproportionate addiction by which some holy men make the Bible itself a snare, restricting their attention too much to particular topics; but endeavouring to become acquainted with "the whole counsel of God" as he has revealed it to us in his all-perfect word; and always with self-application and adherence to the general analogy of faith.

VETUS.

ON THE CLAIM OF IGNATIUS TO INSPIRATION.

To the Editor of the Christian Observer.

IF I rightly understand the paper of H. C., in your July Number, he intimates those different means of defence, by which the character of

the martyr-bishop of Antioch may be rescued from the charge either of imposture or fanaticism; and it is perhaps by combining two of these that the cause which he advocates, with a charity that thinketh not the evil against an honoured father of the Church, seems less favourable than if he had fixed on one. It is important to determine whether "it is granted that Ignatius did claim to have been divinely inspired;" and then, if needful, to rest a defence of the claim either on the ground of the gracious influences of the Spirit being even now within the range of promised Christian privilege, or else on the fact that miraculous gifts were extended beyond the apostles themselves, and therefore that inspiration on a particular subject might be claimed without "awful presumption," by a bishop to whom ecclesiastical history ascribes personal intercourse with Peter, Paul, and John.

On the first point I cannot agree with "Justus" in your Number for August, "that Ignatius meant (only) that he spake what the Holy Spirit had proclaimed in Scripture." What were the circumstances? In addressing the Philadelphians, the venerable bishop refers to an exhortation he had delivered in their assembly as he passed through their city, upon the subject of unity and obedience to their bishop and ministers. There was at the time a tendency to division in their Church, and from the peculiar suitability of their visitor's injunction, some of the Philadelphians supposed that he must have been made acquainted with the circumstance. This, however, the expectant martyr with the most solemn asseveration denies; and it is in opposition to this idea, and as explaining why at that particular time and place he had given the exhortation referred to, that he attributes it to a direct motion of the Holy Spirit. "Some suppose that I spake this, as knowing before the separation of some. is my witness, for whose sake I am in bonds, that I knew nothing from any man. But the Spirit spake, saying, &c."

But He

This was assigning a sufficient cause for the coincidence; this explained the fact, that the subject on which he spoke, as well as his directions upon it, had been, unconsciously to himself, so appropriate to those whom he addressed. But how does it meet the case, if we suppose him simply to have affirmed the Scriptural character of the directions he had given? Had the point been to assign a reason why, on a certain subject, one opinion had been given rather than another, then he might well enough have stated, as Justus supposes, that he had "only affirmed, as the Spirit of God guided him, what he found in the sacred oracles." But I submit that this does not meet the case as it existed.

As confirming the view that the words contain a claim to inspiration, on the occasion referred to, the opinion of Archbishop Wake may be adduced, from the Preliminary discourse prefixed to his translation of the Apostolical Fathers. Speaking of miraculous gifts, the learned translator says, "Ignatius plainly intimates that he himself was endued with a large portion of them;" and again of inspiration, “by the help of it, he warned the Philadelphians against falling into those divisions which he foresaw were about to rise up amongst them." Two editions of the original which I have, those of Thilo 1821, and of Hefele 1829, both give readings which explain the "loud voice" with which the bishop spake, as the voice of God, and this at least shews that the explanation is certainly not novel.

Shall we then, in the next place, fall back on the gracious influences of the Spirit, and seek, in their still continued enjoyment by the believer, at once the measure of the professed inspiration, and the plea to justify its claim? On this ground, if the bishop of antiquity used language which the actual guidance of the Spirit over his words really justified, there was in this something, at least in degree, of a higher character than belongs to the accustomed operations of the Spirit at the present time; and yet the plea employed supposes that it was the same in nature as the inspiration of the Holy Spirit by which we pray that our hearts may be cleansed. Now, is there not a danger of lowering the high and sacred character of the inspired word of God, if we suppose, as H. C. seems willing to do, that Ignatius was inspired to give utterance to an authoritative precept, but not to the same extent with the Apostles and other writers of Scripture, and in a subordinate sense according to which "it is still necessary for us all to be divinely inspired?" "All Scripture is given by inspiration of God;" and this is our assurance for the unerring truth of its announcements, the divine authority of its commands. "The Comforter, which is the Holy Ghost, even the Spirit of truth dwelleth with you, and shall be in you;" this is the inheritance of the believer; but whilst the flesh lusteth against the Spirit, His dominion over the heart is but partial; the utterance of the lip may one while proceed from His promptings, and then again tell forth some error of the deceived heart. Now, to suppose a connecting link between the high spiritual enthronement of truth, from which holy men of God spake as they were moved by the Holy Ghost, and the chequered dominance of spiritual guidance to which the believer attains now, seems to me calculated to lower our reverence for the word of Scripture, and to open the door for many fanatical pretensions. But to return to the case before us.

I pass then from this intermediate admission, and I would rather receive the words as a recorded revelation, answering exactly to one of those gifts of the Spirit which the Apostle enumerates in 1 Cor. xii. To say, however, that Ignatius either possessed or claimed the authority of inspiration in his Epistles which remain to us, would misrepresent my position. As a writer he is on the same footing as every other father of the early Church, without any guarantee against the fallibilities of human judgment; living in an age when the corruptions of heresy and the mistakes of fanaticism were already doing much to pervert the simple truth of the Gospel; not entitled to any of that submission of faith with which we receive inspired Scripture as our authoritative guide, but amenable to the very same test of Scriptural comparison as any Christian author of a later age. Yet I would ask, does not the manner in which he refers whilst writing, to what he had spoken on this particular occasion, shew that whilst he had no pretensions as an inspired writer, something had been then revealed to him which had a higher source than any human knowledge; and does not the language of the Apostle teach us, that in the assemblies of the Corinthian and other Churches (1 Cor. xiv. 33), it did please God at that time to grant "the word of knowledge" and other gifts, to those on whom the Apostles had laid hands? Again, I would repeat, an admission of this kind invests the writings of this early father with no peculiar claim on our reverence; for Balaam uttered the truths of God from the high places of Moab, and Ignatius

may have spoken what was revealed to him in the assembly at Philadelphia, and be open in his seven Epistles to any charge of " errors," "fancies," or " extravagancies," which may be brought against him. To the minds of some these may appear so glaring as to weaken the authority even of the inspired exhortation which had been given at Philadelphia, and for the record of which we depend on the personal testimony of the individual himself, who may have misrepresented or have been mistaken as to the fact. I am not aware, however, that the nicety of modern censure has gone so far as to dispute his veracity in points of narration; and certainly it would seem no light "onus probandi;" which rests with those who regard the whole as a fable, to make out that no dependence can be placed on a fact recorded by one who had the sanction of an Apostolic appointment to his office, who sealed his adherence to the faith by the martyr's agony, and records a circumstance in which he was himself chief actor, a body of believer's witnesses, and which is too much in agreement with the known state of the Church, to involve any difficulty from improbability. At the same time the contrast between this case and the Scriptures shews the fuller assurance we may have in their revelations, and may call forth our praises of the mercy and wisdom of the great Head of the Church, in appointing that what immediately concerns salvation should be there given us in inspired declarations registered in records themselves also divinely inspired. But let us not therefore too hastily reject a revelation especially referring to the constitution of the outward Church, because we hear it recorded on human au thority. Shall we set no value on the jewel within, because the casket which is said to contain it is not itself resplendent with diamonds?

The force of the argument rests on comparing the pretensions of Ignatius with the information furnished by the Apostle Paul in his epistle to the Corinthians; and the more the language of both is examined in detail, the more, I think, will it appear that the former refers to an occasion similar to that provided for in the injunctions of the latter When he denies the suspicion of some that he had spoken ὡς προειδότα των μερισμον τινων, he varies the word, and adds απο σαρκος ἀνθροπινης οὐκ ἔγνων. Λογος γνωσεως is amongst the miraculous gifts spoken of by St. Paul, in 1 Cor. xii. 8. The bishop then distinctly affirms тo de πvevμa Ekŋpuσσev, the Spirit PREACHED: how was this different from the miraculous revelation supposed in 1 Cor. xiv. 30? Immediately after he says, I did then what was appropriate, as a man qualified for producing unity, εἰς ἑνωσιν κατηρτισμένος. From Ephes. iv. 12, 13, we learn that the very object for which spiritual gifts were given was προς τον καταρτισμόν των ἁγιων, and the ulterior result was to be, that all should come εἰς τὴν ἑνότητα της πίστεως to the unity of the faith. When we have then one of the saints acting so as to produce unity, to what shall we refer the qualification wherewith he was perfected but to that Spirit whose miraculous gifts were for this very end? I cannot but think this coincidence of terms striking, and that it marks an identity of idea in the Apostle and the bishop, who at a venerable age followed him in the chariot of martyrdom, after an interval of only forty-three years.

PRESBYTER.

*It is time to drop this discussion. Ignatius might mean that he believed he spake according to the mind of the Spirit, and under his guidance,

but without claiming special inspiration. We cannot think he would be justified in going further, if he did so.

TWO ORIGINAL LETTERS BY THE REV. J. NEWTON.

To the Editor of the Christian Observer.

HAPPENING to have it in my power to send you copies of two letters written by the Rev. John Newton, which have never before appeared in print, I have much pleasure in transmitting them. The second, in particular, will, I apprehend, excite considerable interest in your readers. It contains one sentiment upon the danger of reposing on "the velvet cushion" of a mere instrumental usefulness, whether in the church or the world, which deserves to be written in letters of gold. The delusion of promoting even the best interests of religion itself, without personal advancement in holiness, or of contributing to the temporal advantage of our fellow creatures, and there resting, cannot be too often brought before the clergy and the laity, as modifications of self-righteousness, and stumbling-blocks in our progress to the eternal state.

ZENAS.

To the Rev. Mr. Edward Spencer at Bradford, Wiltshire. DEAR SIR, I do not intend this as an answer to your obliging letter of the 23rd, which I have just now received; but only to acquaint you that, on consideration of your postscript, I have written to some friends in London, without whose advice and concur rence I should not chuse to attempt any thing of consequence. When I receive an answer I will write either to you or to Mr. Chapman. I was rejoiced to hear from you, and indeed meditating a second letter to you; for I was apprehensive my former might have miscarried, and very unwilling to lose your correspondence. I rejoice in your comfortable situation, and that the Lord is pleased to own your ministry-I rejoice that your letters shew a humbled and guarded spirit. It is a great and needful mercy to be in some measure acquainted with the depths of our own hearts, and the devices of Satan. We may well join the Apostle, and say, "I thank God through Jesus Christ my Lord." Without Him we are nothing; but His name is as ointment poured forth to revive us when fainting; it is a strong tower of defence to receive us when attacked; it is an inexhaustible magazine of grace, from whence we may derive supplies suited to all I can easily procure the needed testimonial, having had one upon a former prospect, and I am not upon ill terms with the clergy here.

our wants.

I pray our gracious Lord to keep you, and fill you with His peace and love, for His sake.

I remain your affectionate humble servant,
JOHN NEWTON.

Liverpool, 30th Dec. 1763.

DEAR SIR, Your kind letter was forwarded to me here from Liverpool. The Lord, in His own good time, removed all obstacles, and opened me an unexpected door into His vineyard, at the critical time when I was upon the point of giving up the thought and pros