word pupiades EIOI,' Acts xxi. 21. These myriads of Christian converts could not assemble together; for if such a thing had been practicable, there was no building for the purpose: their best accommodation, for more than a century, being, according to the professor's admission, private houses. From whence it follows, that the Bishop of Jerusalem must have had many congregations of Christians under his superintendance at a time, and consequently many presbyters officiating under him for the discharge of ministerial purposes. And St. Luke's history confirms this representation; for when St. Paul went in unto James, the Bishop of Jerusalem, for the purpose of making his report relative to the success of his mission to the Gentiles, all the presbyters (we read) were present,' Acts xxi. 18.

"To this testimony of the inspired penmen may be added that of Tertullian, who lived most of his time in the second century; who, in his apology to the Roman magistrates, which was written about the year 200, glories in the multitude of Christian professors. 'We (says he) are of yesterday*; yet every place is filled with us; your cities, the islands, the forts, your corporations, the councils, the armies, the tribes and companies: yea, the palace, senate, and courts of justice; your temples only have we left free. Should we go off and separate from you, you would stand amazed at your own desolation, be affrighted at the stop and deadness of affairs amongst you: and you would have more enemies than subjects left you.'-And in his treatise addressed to the persecuting Scapula, he fairly tells him, which he would not have ventured to have done, had not the fact been true, that so great was the multitude of Christians, that they constituted almost the greatest part of every city: pars pane major cujusque civitatis. Tertul. ad Scap. c. ii. p. 86. The accurate historian Eusebius, who wrote his history early in the fourth century, speaking in general of the primitive Christian churches in every city and country about the close of the apostolic age, uses such singular terms to express the number contained in them, as denote them to be rather hosts and legions, than congregations of middling parishes," as the professor describes them, by comparing their thronged and crowded societies to grain heaped upon a barn floor.' And speaking of the peaceful times which the Christians enjoyed during the last forty

6

years

* Hesterni sumus, et vestra omnia implevimus; urbes, insulas, castella, municipia, conciliabula, castra ipsa, tribus, decurias, palatium, senatum, forum: sola vobis reliquimus templa." Tertul. Apol. p. 33. cap. 37.-Si tanta vis hominum in aliquem orbis remoti sinum abrupissemus a vobis,-procul dubio expavissetis ad solitudinem vestram, ad silentium verum, et stuporem quendam quasi mortui orbis.' Ib. ib.

+ • Καὶ δητα ανὰ πάσας πόλεις τε καὶ κώμας, πληθυέσης ἄλωνος δίκην, μυρίανδροι και παμπληθείς αθρόως ἐκκλησίαι συνεςήκεσαν. Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 1. 2. c. 3.

years of the third century, he thus expresses himself: Who can describe (says he) the innumerable increase and concourse of them? the numbers of assemblies in each city? and the extraordinary meetings in their houses of prayer? So that not content with the buildings they had of old, they founded new and larger churches throughout every city*? To which shall be added only what Optatus, bishop of Milevis, says, that when Dioclesian destroyed the Christian churches, (which was within five years after the expiration of the third century,) there were above forty Ba silicæ, or public places, for Christian worship, in the single city of Rome +.

From the foregoing testimony, (to which much might be easily added,) when opposed to the description given by the professor of the state of the Church in the primitive days, in which, according to the professor's imaginary calculation, one bishopric, in order to afford a congregation equal to that of a middling parish, is supposed to have been equal in extent to thirty modern parishes; p. 216.

We shall conclude this analysis of Mr. Daubeney's excellent, clear, and satisfactory account of the primitive government of the Church of Christ, with one quotation more.

"Let this simple principle of Unity be applied to the several primitive expressions of our church, one altar, one bishop;' and it will be found to consist with as many churches, altars, and bishops, as can be proved to be undeniably derived from one and the same original institutor. The unity of whose divine power and spirit, diffused at first among the chosen twelve, stamps a character of unity upon all who regularly descend from them; and upon every individual, who only claims under, and owns his authority from, and his dependance on such as them. Consequently the unity of separate congregations of Christians assembled within the same diocese, consisted, according to the primitive idea on this subject, in the ministerial offices of each congregation being performed by a person duly authorised, and acting under the appointment and direction of the rightful bishop of the whole flock.

Thus the plurality of Eucharists is made one, throughout all the united provinces and dioceses of the Catholic church, in conformity to the well known maxim, Qui facit per alium, facit per se.' Thus Ignatius, one of the great advocates for the unity

of

* Πᾶς δ ̓ ἄν τις διαγράψειε τὰς μυριάνδρας έκεινας ἐπισυναγωρας; και τὰ πλήθη τῶν κατα πάσαν πόλιν ἀθροισμάτων, τὰς τε επισήμως ἐν τοις προσευκτήριοις συνδρομὰς; ὧν δὴ ενεκα μηδαμώς" ετι, τοις παλαιοις οίκοι δομήμασι ἀρχόμενοι, εύρειας εις πλάτος ἀνὰ πάσας τὰς πόλεις εκ θημε Alwv aviswv 'Exxanoiais."-Euseb. Hist. Eccl. 1. viii. c. 1.

Vide Optat. de Schism. Donat. l. ii. p. 39.

of the Christian altar, when he says, Let that Eucharist be looked upon as firm and established,' interprets his meaning, by adding which is either offered by the bishop, or by him to whom the bishop has committed it.' The bishop was then, in the primitive church, considered as the centre of unity to that particular church over which he was placed. So long as all order of ministration in that church was regularly derived from him, and carried on under his superintending authority, so long the unity of that church was preserved. Thus Tertullian, in his book about baptism, to the question, who may baptize?' answers positively, the high priest, who is the bishop, hath the power of baptizing; and after him (or in subordination to him,) presbyters and deacons; but not without the bishop's authority.'* And before his time, the apostolical Ignatius, who spent almost all his days in the first century, said in express terms, That it is not lawful to babtize without the bishop.'

To which we add, in the words of the learned Dr. George Hickes, that as there never was any church founded, but in and with episcopacy, so no sect ever assumed the title of a church, till they had a pretended rightful bishop, before the time of the reformation. So essential did all Christians, till that time, think bishops to the Church as a society, according to that assertion of St. Cyprian in 66th epist. Illi sunt Ecclesia, Plebs Sacerdoti adunata, et Pastori suo grex adhærens. Unde scire debes Episcopum in ecclesia esse et ecclesiam in Episcopo, et si qui cum Episcopo non sint, en ecclesia non esse.' 'A church is composed of the people united to the bishop, and the flock to their pastor; therefore you ought to know, that the bishop is in the church, and the church in the bishop; so that they who are not with the bishop, are not in the church.”

Eight discourses follow the preliminary discourse, which, on account of its importance, occupies one hundred and forty-nine pages. Three of the eight are upon Heb. xiii. 8. of which the principal design is to shew, by the collective evidence of prophecies delivered, and miracles recorded in holy writ, that the truth of Christianity is placed on that firm basis of revelation, which bids defiance to every attack that infidelity can make against it; to maintain that the doctrine of salvation through Christ was, and is, and always will be the same, independent of the imaginations of wayward and sinful men; and from hence to infer, that the great object of the dispensation of God must be the same in every age; though the form and manner after which that object is pursued may be different; so that what God spake in former times to

* Ἡ ὑπο τῇ ἐπισκοπε οὖσα, ἡ ἄν αὐτος ἐπιτρεψη.

·

Dandi quidem jus habet summus Sacerdos, qui est episcopus; dehine Presbyteri

et Diaconi; non tamen sine episcopi auctoritate.' C. 17.

† Οὐκ ἔξόν ἔτιν χωρις το Επισκόπε ετε βαπτίζειν.

Vol. III. Churchm. Mag. Sup.

Epist. ad Smyrn. p. 6.

the fathers by the prophets, will be found the same in sense and effect with what he spake in the last days of his son.

The fourth and two succeeding discourses are upon 1 Cor. i. 30; and take into consideration the work of redemption by Jesus Christ. The seventh is upon Rom. vi. 23; annexed to this discourse are some excellent notes, tending to demonstrate "That heathanism being brought to bear its appropriate testimony to divine revelation, may be made to answer a purpose contrary to its intentions and nature, by confirming what it was intended to confound and thus the devil himself be compelled to support the cause of truth. And here, by the way, the learned author adverts to Dr. Rennell's charge of a resolute, systematic, and contemptuous neglect of all consideration of the revealed will of God in some of our best endowed seminaries.' To which assertion we have already given, and do now join Mr. Daubeney, in giving our flat denial. Dr. Vincent, now Dean of Westminster, has repelled the charge with a vigour, that has borne down all opposition, and not only refuted the charge itself, but convinced the world that the contrary of what it contains is the fact, and that between a pagan education, and a classical one, there is a broad line of distinction. Of Dr. Vincent, the writer of this article, from experience bears testimony-'Inest tanta illius gravitate aspersa comitas, tam suasavis summæ eruditioni adjuctus urbanitatis lepos, ut licet non possis non vehementer admirari hominis doctrinam et ingenium, magis tamen ames indolem.'

The eighth and last discourse is upon Heb. xii. 1, 2.

We lament the want of room to give for the proofs, displayed in this volume, of the learning, the ability, the zeal and judgment of Mr. Daubeney, both as an excellent scholar and a sound orthodox Divine. His exertions in the cause of divine truth, and his meritorious ardour in the cause of that church, of which he may be said to be Decus atque Tutamen,' deserve the thanks of the clergy, and fairly entitle him to one of the highest dignities in the hierarchy.

D.

An ESSAY upon the Use, Meaning, and Importance, of NATURAL RELIGION, as furnishing the only possible Proof of the Divinity of transmitted Revelation.

Y religion, in its most general signification, I mean know

of Providence, receive this knowledge only from his works, or his transmitted word. Such knowledge of God as men collect from the deductions of reason, founded upon the use of their several senses, I call NATURAL RELIGION. Such knowledge as

is

is imparted to them from God himself, whether by immediate or transmitted revelation, I call REVEALED RELIGION. Unless then we suppose all religions to be equally valuable and equally credible, we cannot ascertain, without the exercise of our intellectual faculties, what religion is most valuable and most credible. Now, the value of any religion must in the first place depend upon the truth of it; and our judgment of the truth of such religion as we receive upon the evidence of human testimony (and this is and must be the ground of all religion which is not received by immediate revelation) can alone be founded upon the exercise of our reason. In order, therefore, to prove the truth of the Christian religion, we must prove,

1st. That a miraculous communication of miraculous information has been vouchsafed by God to some particular persons.By miraculous information, I understand such information as men cannot attain by the customary use of their natural faculties; and by a miraculous communication of such information, I mean that persons claiming to be in possession of this miraculous information, must have become possessed of it by some supernatural way. -And,

2dly. That this knowledge has been communicated from our CREATOR; because, prior to the knowledge received from revelation, we cannot be under MORAL obligations to attend or yield obedience to any other Being. Acts xiv. 17. Rom. i. 20-21. It might, indeed, be prudent, it might be for our interest, to listen to the information of superior beings; but prudential obligations, and moral obligations, are very different matters. Nor,—

3dly. Can we be assured that any revelation proceeds from our Creator, unless it accords with his moral character, as we can collect that character from his works and providence; for we have NO way of collecting the moral characters of beings superior to us. It is only that of our Creator that we can collect with certainty; and this character ONLY from his works and providence.

4thly. Though the substance of any revelation, transmitted through men, should accord with the character of our Creator, yet, before we can receive it, we must further be able to prove that our Creator is a Being of veracity; and also to shew,

5thly. That this miraculous knowledge has been faithfully transmitted to us.

1st. Then, a miraculous communication of miraculous knowledge to particular persons, and which communication is not, and cannot be an object of sense to others, can only be ascertained from the exercise of SUPERNATURAL powers by such persons. . Now, that the Apostles exercised miraculous powers, we believe upon the unquestionable testimony of eye-witnesses; that the Apostles

312

claimed