4. Yet you courteously add, "If from the passages referred to above, or any other, it should appear probable to any, that they were favoured on some occasions, with some extraordinary illuminations, visions, or divine impressions; I shall not dispute that point, but remind them only that these gifts were granted for their particular comfort, and do not therefore in any manner affect, or relate to the question now before us." (p. 10.)

I ask pardon, Sir. These do so deeply affect, so nearly relate to the question now before us, even as stated by yourself, (Pref. p. 28,)" that in allowing these, you give up the substance of the question. You yourself have declared, that one great end of the extraordinary gifts conferred on the apostles was, "To enable them to bear up against the shocks of popular rage and persecution." Now were not "extraordinary illuminations, visions, and impressions," if given at all, given for this very end? "For their particular comfort," as you now word it? Therefore in allowing these to the apostolic fathers, you allow extraordinary gifts, which had been formerly granted to the apostles, to have "subsisted in the church after the days of the apostles," and for the same end as they did before.

5. Therefore the apostolic writers have" not "left us in the dark," with regard to our present argument. And consequently your triumph comes too soon: "Here then we have an interval of half a century, in which we have the strongest reason to presume, that the extraordinary gifts of the apostolic age were withdrawn," (p. 9.) No: not if all "the apostolic fathers speak of spiritual gifts, as abounding among the Christians of that age :" not if " extraordinary illuminations, visions, and divine impressions still subsistedamong them." For as to your now putting in," as exerted openly in the church for the conviction of unbelievers," I must desire you to put it out again; it comes a great deal too late. The question between you and me was stated without it, above a hundred pages back. Although if it be admitted, it will do you no service seeing your proposition is overthrown, if there were "miraculous gifts after the days of the apostles," whether they were "openly exerted for the conviction of unbelievers" or not.

6. I was a little surprised, that you should take your leave of the apostolic fathers so soon. But upon looking forward, my surprise was at an end: I found you were not guilty of any design to spare them but only delayed your remarks till the reader should be prepared for what might have shocked him, had it stood in its proper place.

I do not find indeed, that you make any objection to any part of the Epistles of Ignatius, nor of the Catholic Epistle which is inscribed with the name of Barnabas. This clearly convinces me, you have not read it; I am apt to think, not one page of it; seeing, if you had, you would never have let slip such an opportunity of exposing one that was called an apostolic father.

7. But it would have been strange, if you had not somewhere brought in the famous phoenix of Clemens Romanus. And yet you

are very merciful upon that head, barely remarking concerning it, that he alleged the ridiculous story of the phoenix, as a type and proof of the resurrection," (p. 59.) Whether "all the heathen writers treat it as nothing else but a mere fable," I know not. But that it is so, is certain; and consequently the argument drawn from it is weak and inconclusive. Yet it will not hence follow, that either Clemens was a wicked man, or that he had none of the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit.

8. There is no real blemish to be found, in the whole character of St. Polycarp. But there is one circumstance left upon record concerning him, which has the appearance of weakness. And with this you do not fail to acquaint your reader at a convenient season: namely, "That in the most ancient dispute, concerning the time of holding Easter; St. Polycarp and Anicetus severally alleged apostolic tradition for their different practice," (p. 60.) And it is not improbable, that both alleged what was true; that in a point of so little importance the apostles varied themselves; some of them observing it on the fourteenth day of the moon, and others not. But be this as it may, it can be no proof, either that Polycarp was not an holy man, or that he was not favoured with the extraordinary, as well as ordinary gifts of the Spirit.

9. With regard to the "narrative of his martyrdom," you affirm, "It is one of the most authentic pieces in all primitive antiquity," (p. 124.) I will not vouch for its authenticity: nor therefore for the story of the dove, the flame forming an arch, the fragrant smell, or the revelation to Pionius. But your attempt to account for these things, is truly curious. You say, "An arch of flame round his body is an appearance which might easily happen, from the common effects of wind. And the dove said to fly out of him, might be conveyed into the wood which was prepared to consume him," (p. 129.) How much more naturally may we account for both, by supposing the whole to be a modern fiction, written on occasion of that account mentioned by Eusebius, but lost many ages ago? But whatever may be thought of this account of his death, neither does this affect the question, whether during his life he was endued with the miraculous gifts of the Holy Ghost.

66

10. There is one of those whom you style apostolic fathers yet behind, of whom you talk full as familiarly as of the rest. I mean, Hermas: "to whom," you say, some impute the fraud of forging the Sibylline books," (p. 37.) It would not have been amiss, if you had told us, which of the ancients, whether Christian, Jew, or Heathen, ever accused him of this. If none ever did, some will be apt to think, it is giving a person but hard measure, to bring an accusation against him which never was heard of, till sixteen hundred years after his death.

But I can the more easily excuse you, because he is a person whom you are wholly unacquainted with. Though it is much curiosity did not lead you, when you had archbishop Wake's translation in your hand, to read over if it were but half a dozen pages of his

famous Shepherd. But charity obliges me to believe you never did. Otherwise I cannot conceive you would so peremptorily affirm, of him and the rest together, "There is not the least claim or pretension, in all their several pieces, to any of these extraordinary gifts, which are the subject of this inquiry," (p. 3.) I am amazed! Sir, have you never a friend in the world? If you were yourself ignorant of the whole affair, would no one inform you, that all the three books of Hermas, from the first page to the last, are nothing else than a recital of his "extraordinary gifts," his visions, prophecies, and revelations?

Can you expect after this, that any man in his senses, should take your word for any thing under heaven? That any one should credit any thing which you affirm? Or believe you any farther than he can see you? Jesus whom you persecute can forgive you this; but how can you forgive yourself? One would think, you should be crying out, day and night, The Shepherd of Hermas will not let me sleep.' 11. You proceed to the testimony of "Justin Martyr, who wrote about fifty years after the apostles," (p. 10.) He says (I translate his words literally,) "There are prophetic gifts among us even until now. You may see with us both women and men, having gifts from the Spirit of God." He particularly insists on that of "casting out devils, as what every one might see with his own eyes."

66

"Irenæus," who wrote somewhat later," affirms, That all who were truly disciples of Jesus, wrought miracles in his name; some cast out devils; others had visions, or the knowledge of future events; others healed the sick,' (p. 11.) ." And as to raising the dead, he declares it, to have been frequently performed on necessary occasions, by great fasting, and the joint supplication of the church. And we hear many,' says he, speaking with all kinds of tongues, and expounding the mysteries of God,'" p. 12.

"Theophilus, bishop of Antioch, who lived in the same age, speaks of casting out devils as then common in the church," ibid.

6

12. Tertullian, who flourished toward the end of the second. century, challenges the Heathen magistrates, to call before any of their tribunals, any person possessed with a devil. And if the evil spirit, when commanded by any Christian, did not confess himself to be a devil, who elsewhere called himself a god, they should take the life of that Christian," " ibid.

"Minutius Felix, supposed to have written in the beginning of the third century, addressing himself to his heathen friend, says, The greatest part of you know what confessions the demons make concerning themselves, when we expel them out of the bodies of men,' p. 13.

13. "Origen, something younger than Minutius, declares, that there remained still the manifest indications of the Holy Spirit. For the Christians,' says he cast out devils, perform many cures, foretell things to come. And many have been converted to Christianity by visions. I have seen many examples of this sort,' (p. 14.) "In another place he says, 'Signs of the Holy Ghost were shown

at the beginning of the teaching of Jesus:' (not as you translate it, miracles began with the teaching of Jesus; that is quite a different thing :) more were shown after his ascension, but afterwards fewer. However, even now there are still some remains of them with a few, whose souls are cleansed by the word, and a life conformable to it,'" (p. 15.) "Again, Some,' says he, heal the sick. I myself have seen many so healed, of loss of senses, madness, and innumerable other evils, which neither men nor devils can cure,' (ibid.) • And this is done, not by magical arts, but by prayer, and certain plain adjurations, such as any common Christian may use; for generally common men do things of this kind,”” p. 16.

14. " Cyprian, who wrote about the middle of the third century, says, Beside the visions of the night, even in the day-time, innocent children among us are filled with the Holy Spirit; and in ecstasies see, and hear, and speak those things by which God is pleased to admonish and instruct us,' (ibid.) Elsewhere he particularly mentions the casting out devils: which,' says he, either depart immediately, or by degrees, according to the faith of the patient, or the grace of him that works the cure, p. 17.

"Arnobius, who is supposed to have written in the year of Christ 303, tells us, Christ appears even now to men unpolluted, and eminently holy, who love him-whose very name.puts evil spirits to flight, strikes the prophets dumb, deprives the soothsayers of the power of answering, and frustrates the acts of arrogant magicians,' p. 18.

"Lactantius, who wrote about the same time, speaking of evil spirits, says, Being adjured by Christians, they retire out of the bodies of men-confess themselves to be demons, and tell their names, even the same which are adored in the temples,' ibid.

15. "These," you say, " are the principal testimonies which assert miraculous gifts through the three first centuries; which might be supported by many more of the same kind, from the same as well as different writers. But none can scruple to risk the fate of the cause upon these," (p. 19.). Thus far I do not scruple it. I do not doubt but the testimonies of these nine witnesses, added to the evidence of the apostolic Fathers, will satisfy every impartial man with regard to the point in question. Yet I see no cause, if there are nine witnesses more, to give up their evidence; seeing you may possibly raise objections against these which the others are unconcerned in.

If then you should invalidate what I have to reply in behalf of the witnesses now produced, you will have done but half your work : I shall afterwards require a fair hearing for the others also.

16. You close this head with remarking, 1. "That the silence of all the apostolic writers on the subject of these gifts, must dispose us to conclude they were withdrawn," (p. 19.) O, Sir, mention this no more.. I entreat you, never name their silence again. They speak loud enough to shame you as long as you live. You cannot therefore talk with any grace of "the pretended revival of them,

after a cessation of forty or fifty years;" or draw conclusions from that which never was.

Your second remark is perfectly new: I dare say none ever observed before yourself, that this particular circumstance of the primitive Christians, “carried with it an air of imposture, namely, their 'challenging all the world to come and see the miracles which they wrought!" (p. 21.) To complete the argument, you should have added, And their staking their lives upon the performance of them.

17. I doubt you have not gone one step forward yet. You have indeed advanced many bold assertions; but you have not fairly proved one single conclusion with regard to the point in hand. But a natural effect of your lively imagination is, that from this time you argue more and more weakly; inasmuch, as the farther you go, the more things you imagine (and only imagine) yourself to have proved. Consequently, as you gather up more mistakes every step you take, every page is more precarious than the former.

II. 1. The second thing you proposed was, " To throw together all which those Fathers have delivered concerning the persons said to have been endued with the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit," p. 21.

"Now whenever we think or speak with reverence," say you, "of those primitive times, it is always with regard to these very Fathers, whose testimonies 1. have been collecting. And they were indeed the chief persons and champions of the Christian cause, the pastors, bishops, and martyrs of the primitive church; namely, Justin Martyr, Irenæus, Theophilus, Tertullian, Minutius Felix, Origen, Cyprian, Arnobius, Lactantius." Sir, you stumble at the threshold. A common dictionary may inform you that these were not all, either pastors, bishops, or martyrs.

2. You go on as you set out. "Yet none of these have any where affirmed, that they themselves were endued with any power of working miracles," (p. 22.) You should say, with any of those extraordinary gifts promised by our Lord, and conferred on his apostles.

No! Have "none of these any where affirmed, that they themselves" were endued with any extraordinary gifts? What think you of the very first of them, Justin Martyr? Either you are quite mistaken in the account you give of him elsewhere, (p. 27, 30,) or he affirmed this of himself over and over. And as to Cyprian, you will by and by spend several pages together, on the extraordinary gifts he affirmed himself to be endued with, p. 101.

But suppose they had not "any where affirmed this of themselves," what would you infer therefrom? That they were not endued with any extraordinary gifts? Then by the very same method of arguing, you might prove that neither St. Peter, nor James, nor John were endued with any such. For neither do they "any where affirm this of themselves" in any of the writings which they left behind them.

3. Your argument concerning the apostolic Fathers is just as conelusive as this. For if you say, "The writers following the apostolic Fathers, do not affirm them to have had any miraculous gifts; there