hushed heart and tearful eyes, let us sadly linger.

Let us call to mind that night of grief when the man of sorrows left the noise and confusion of the city to seek its calm retirement, and be alone with God-the moon shone brightly down; but never since creation's dawn had she looked upon a scene like this—a scene which doubtless caused friends to triumph, and angels (if ever they wept) to stand in mute yet tearful wonder.

The meek and sinless sufferer, borne down by the weight of sins, not his own, sinks to the cold damp earth ; and while the dews of night are fast falling, in most plaintive accents makes his petition to God-the stillness of the night is broken by his bitter groans, while tears and blood attest the bitter agony which wrings his soul, as he prays, "Let this cup pass from me." Yes, that cup, when pressed to his lips, caused him for a moment to shrink at its bitterness; yet, nerving his soul for a final effort, he added, "Not my will, but thine be done;" and for us he drained the cup of sorrow to its dregs.

Sacred Gethsemane! Scene of infinite condescension—of infinite love! To me thou shalt ever be hallowed ground; and while I gaze on the solemn scene which transpired in thee, may my heart be melted into tenderness at the recollection of the Saviour's love, and my eyes overflow with tears at the sorrows he endured for me! And oh, if my life should be marked by suffering, amid all my sufferings may I imitate the meek and suffering One who once knelt in thee! Like him, may I pray, not my will, oh God, but thine be done.

B.

The present convulsed state of Europe, with the constant and earnest yearning of the public mind in Great Britain, political an decclesiastical, for something more settled and peaceful than at present exists, indicate events at hand of a very different character to those that must be characteristic of a millennium of rest and glory. Nothing can be more clearly predicted than the downfall and entire overthrow of that religious system which is so truly designated "The mystery of iniquity, and the abomination of the earth." It has been remarked, with great propriety, that with those of the Second Advent school, or premillennial reign advocates, there is no special vivification of the downfall of Babylon no reign of a thousand years; indeed with them the common fate involves the whole world, Pagan, Jewish, Infidel, and Papistical. The ONE HOUR of John's desolation of Babylon, is the last hour of the present earth. There are none to weep over her ruins, or lament that the mart of their commerce is no more. There are neither sellers, buyers, nor bidders to mourn her catastrophe, or to condole with each other on their respective misfortunes. Time is no more, and six thousand years of travail consummates its whole career : and this year has no sabbatical year -no millennium of rest-swords are never beaten into ploughshares, nor spears into pruning hooks the wilderness and the solitary place are never made glad - no desert rejoices and blossoms as the rose. But what shall we say ? The 18th, 19th, and 20th chapters of the Apocalypse have no special meaning or accomplishment on the theories of these parties. Of course, if, as some contend, the

COMING OF THE LORD-No. IX.

THE consideration of the pre-millennial advent of our Lord will, after this number, for a short time be discontinued.

now at the door, Babylon, any more than other nations and systems, is never to be overthrown, nor need we expect any thousand years' tranquillity while the present earth exists.

for the benefit of our young readers, but a want of space prevents us from doing so. A cheap re-print of this work would assist in dispelling the delusions of priestcraft on this matter. But to our extracts. The first is from the concluding part of the Hon. C. Lindsay's letter, in which he arrogates to himself and his class, as the Popes were wont to do, the high honor of being the successors of the apostles.

“I was somewhat struck with three expressions in Mr. Roaf's letter, namely, the church of the Pope, church of Victoria, and the church of Christ.' I am really at a loss to know the meanings of these expressions. If neither the Church of the Pope' nor the Church of Victoria,' (by which I suppose he means the churches of Rome and England,) are the true church, where, may I ask, is the church of Christ? I do not anticipate that your correspondent means to assert that the innumerable sects at present existing (cach having its own creed and its own traditions, contradicting one another in every article of Faith,) form the one church of Christ. If so, I should like to see their commission to preach and administer Christ's sacraments, and also their Revelation, which, of course, they must have received, or they would not venture to take upon themselves the awful duties of the stewards of the Mysteries of God. If they claim the Sacred Scriptures, our answer is, that they belong to Christ's holy Catholic church, bequeathed to her by Him, and the promises contained therein, are addressed to those who are living in communion with the Apostles, and the authorised English version is the property of the English church, the work of our bishops and learned priests: so that it is manifest, that he who belongs not to Christ's church, has no right to use them. Therefore, to justify their claim to the diguity of the church of Christ, they who never existed before the 16th or 17th centuries, must show their authority to do religious rites, and likewise a revelation proving the new creed they have received, and if they cannot show us their letters of credit, to be ambassadors of Christ, it is clear they are none of His, that they are intruders, and are guilty of tearing asunder the Lord's Body. Now, if Mr. Roaf should reply to this, demanding our proofs, we could show him and his brethren that the church of Victoria, as he calls the venerable Church of England, owes her existence ALONE to God. I will now attempt to prove this: on the evening of the day of our Lord's resurrection, he appeared to the Eleven Apostles, (St. John xx- 21-23) | ordained them to be His apostles, and just before His ascension He commanded them to go and teach all nations baptizing them in the

had commanded them. Now, what was the

name of the Father, &c. (St. Matt. xxviii. 19) and to teach them to observe all things He first act of the Apostles after the ascension of our Lord? the election and ordination of St. Matthias, in the room of Judas, the traitor, Acts i. The next great act A.D. 45, is the ordination to the Apostleship of Sts. Paul and Barnabas, Acts xiii. 2-3 We likewise read that St. Paul ordained elders in every Church, A.D. 48, Acts xiv. 23. These were the acts of Apostles themselves; but, I will now further prove that the Apostles gave power to those whom they ordained, to ordain others. For example, Timothy A.D. 65, is enjoined to 'lay hands suddenly on no man.' (1 Tim. v. 22, and 2 Tim. 2) Likewise Titus, who was sent to Crete by St. Paul, for the purpose of setting the Church in order, and for ordaining elders in every city,' Titus i. 5. Now, here we have four generations, so to speak, of the church, the second deriving their authority immediately from the Apostles, the 3rd and 4th from the successors of the Apostles who had received from them the power of ordination. Is it, then, incredible, that by continued succession, the very church of the Aposfles should exist in this very day? and does it not follow as a natural conclusion, that if a man really desires to be saved, he must belong to that church which has descended in an unbroken line from the Holy Apostles? If the church died with the Apostles, what is the meaning of such texts as the following: St. Matt.xvi. 18; xxviiii. 20; St. John xiv. 16, which guarantee the existence of a visible church, founded by Christ the rock, and established by the Apostles. Now to apply this, the question is, is the Church of England the church of Victoria, or is she, as she is indeed, a portion of the Catholie church of Christ? This can be proved by documentary evidence far more clearly than the most illustrious families their pedigree.

We have enrolled in our archives the names of all the Archbishops of Canterbury, from A.D. 596 to 1849 inclusive, numbering 88 Prelates, with the dates of their consecration: and before that period, we, in common with the Catholic world, have the names, 65 in number, of the Bishops of the Roman Church, from the times of St Peter and St. Paul, to A.D. 590, when St. Gregory the Great ascended the then illustrious throne of the Roman church. Now this is THE authority by which the Bishop of Chester, the rector, and other regularly ordained clergymen of the church in Wigan, presume to preach the gospel of our blessed Lord, and to administer the sacraments of the church. These are stubborn facts, which cannot be gainsayed, and it would be well for all those who frequent the meeting houses to reconsider their awful position, and to ask themselves the solemn question, can this place, with ministers un-ordained, by any of the Apostles or their successors, without any revelation, save that which has been deli

vered by the Apostles to the church, be really sanctioned by our Lord, or visited by his gracious Presence. Surely every individual who may happen to read this letter, if he calmly and dispassionately consider this subject, must come to the inevitable conclusion, it cannot be. With many apologies for occupying so much space in your valuable paper,

66

I remain,

"Your obedient servant,
"COLIN LINDSAY."

Such are the views entertained by the Hon. C. Lindsay regarding his high spiritual pedigree and noble descent. This gentleman has yet to learn that Phoebe the deaconess, and Aquilla and Priscilla had infinitely better claim to be considered as the

successors of the apostles, than any of whom he boasts, and whose names may be enrolled in the archives of Canterbury. We must now give the more interesting portion of W. B. Roaf's reply, commencing with his third proposition:

“3. The Establishment and Independent churches.

66

Mr. Lindsay evidently has more than a doubt concerning the scripturalness of the thousands on thousands of Dissenting churches which are being formed all over the globe, and he seems to think, that the Establishment of this country is really the church of Christ. Here again we revert to our favorite proverb, borrowed from an eminent Episcopalian, that 'The Bible and the Bible alone is the religion of Protestants.' Hence, we believe that the churches formed by inspired Apostles were to be the model churches to the end of the world; and we challenge Mr. Lindsay to disprove that they were totally unconnected with the civil governments of that day that they were composed of persons giving credible evidence of regeneration, not by the baptism of man, but of the spirit-that their officers were only two-fold, the bishop for sacred, and the deacon for secular matters-and that they were supported, not by compulsory rates, enforced if needful by the bailiff, as is done in Wigan; but by the voluntary offerings of a willing people. Between those churches and the Establishment of this country, there is little or no correspondence. Apostolic churches often met in private houses. They are mentioned as the churches of Asia, or the churches of Judea, not as the church of any kingdom or province. A church is a company of faithful men,' and whether they assemble in the name of Christ in a steeple-house, or in a meeting"se, they will have the gracious presence of Lord and Master. In the Establishment

of Great Britain there are many persons, who, I believe belong to the church of the first-born, whose names are written in Heaven. They are better than their system; but the Establishment is no more the church of Christ, than is the East India Company. It is a mere worldly incorporation, founded by Act of Parliament, inimical to the civil rights of Britains—a bridge to Popery, rather than a bulwark against itutterly incapable of performing many most solemn duties, and, as a bishop once said, 'Destroying more souls than it saves.' Its severance from the state would, I believe, be the signal for a celestial jubilee. Will Mr. Lindsay permit me to recommend to his candid clergyman, one of the Queen's chaplains, who perusal, a work written recently by an eminent abandoned the Establishment? I refer to the Honorable and Rev. Baptist Noel.

" 4. The Clergy and Dissenting Ministers. Apostolic times down to modern days, is one "An unbroken succession of the Clergy from of Mr. Lindsay's favourite theories. His letter implies a belief that some saving virtue and efficiency attend their ministration, while those of dissenting bishops are mere forgeries to This is a very tempting subject; but I must remain unendorsed by the hand of Christ. restrain my pen. I beg, however, to observe:-1. That on the ground of history, not of tradition, it is impossible to complete the chain between Peter and the Prelates of the present day. There are difficulties about it which I suppose has not crossed Mr. Lindsay's path. Archbishop Whately says:-There is not a Minister in Christendom (on the assumed theory) who is able to trace up, with any approach to certainty, his own spiritual pedigree.' The attempt strikes us as resembling the folly of Indians who pretend to trace the fire in their pipes, through the burning tobacco of their ancestors, until in a very remote antiquity, their first sire lighted his pipe at the sun. An unbroken succession of shoemakers, since the days of St. Crispin, is not necessary for the comfort of our feet. 2. That if the chain could be completed, some of the links are so rotten as to be incapable of conveying the celestial grace. Some of the parties through whom the sacramental virtue has flowed, were steeped in the gall of bitterness. Christ is the fountain head of saving grace, and the Holy Spirit the medium of its communication, by the inspired word; and if the fruits of righteousness in holy living and dying' are the evidence of Christ's presence in our meeting-houses, we think we have reason for some encouragement; nor shall we at present leave our humble chapels, and vainly attempt to seek the living among the dead.

"3. That without wishing to rob Peter of his honours, I must ask, why he is made the only source of this sacramental grace? Why a connection with him is sought to the exclusion of Paul and John, and the other of the Lord's

Apostles? How is it that he is the only one from whom the streams of grace descend? He gave no proof of having an extraordinary supply of this mysterious authority and power when the seventy were called, or when the hundred and twenty were baptized with fire. He is never called a bishop. He showed no symptoms, even when advanced in years, of wishing to Lord it over God's heritage. The disciple whom Jesus loved' was, I suppose, the last on earth, and consequently would be, in my judgment, the most likely to bequeath the precious legacy. Admitting, as I do, that Peter was preeminent in the early days of the Apostleship; yet, when, I ask, was the mysterious virtue of the whole college of Apostles deposited in him for conveyance, through its clergy to the members of one sect only? I could enlarge here, but I forbear.

DEAR BROTHER, -I have for a long time been wishing to write to you, but, until now, I have never seemed to have a favorable opportunity. The excitement consequent upon leaving home, and coming into a new country, turning to a new employment, associating with a new kind of people, and having my mind constantly at the utmost stretch, have, for the last five years, left me without opportunity to turn round and say to my old friends and brethren over the water, how are you getting along, and what are your hopes or your fears, and how does God's great work progress among you? But now, when things begin to appear more settled, my feelings again flow in their old channels, and I am beginning to write to many who, though never forgotten, have been much neglected. It is always with peculiar feelings of joy I remember one who first was the means of opening my eyes, and turning me from darkness unto light, and from the power of Satan unto God, that I might receive the forgiveness of sins, and an inheritance among them that are sanctified by faith that is in Jesus. No doubt you have many times been cast down in the midst of your labours, and ready to despair, perhaps saying you have labored in vain, and spent your strength for naught "who hath believed our report, and to whom is the arm of the Lord revealed ?" But I rejoice that all your

labour was not lost; the seed you sowed took deep root, and I hope it will spring up unto eternal life. I often call to mind your earnest appeals in public, as well as your instructive conversation in private, and do not forget your sacrifice and devotion in publishing the CHRISTIAN MESSENGER. From all these I have derived unmeasured benefit. You know me too well to think I am attempting to flatter you: I felt as if honesty required that I should tell you the gratitude of my heart. To be sure I had before feared God; but I had walked in darkness; I had not learned what God had prepared for them that love him; I had not learned what was the hope of my calling, and what the riches of the glory of his inheritance in the saints— the inheritance promised to Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, which is to be obtained through a resurrection from the dead, according to the mighty power which he wrought in Christ when he raised him from the dead. Many infidels would make the miracles of Christ only so many mesmeric phænomena, and reduce the Son of God to a travelling mesmeriser. No doubt you have many such among you. Let them prove it is all mesmerism; Jesus of Nazareth is the professor I will follow. He said, "I can lay down my life, and take it up again." He died for our sins, and rose again the third day, according to the prophetic scriptures written hundreds of years before; and he says, "Because I live, you shall live also." His magnetic power is so great, that when he comes and utters his voice, it will awake the dead out of their graves, who have long been mouldered to dust. will glorify them with the glory he had with the Father before the world began. What a source of joy does the gospel afford! How much I have to rejoice that my attention was ever directed towards it! Yet how often have I to lament that I have not loved and obeyed it with more earnestness!

He

It is now about five years and six months since I left my native land. Yet, so happily has passed the time, that it seems but as yesterday. An involuntary shudder comes over me when I look back on the six and a half years I spent behind a counter; and, excepting the first year, professing to be a Christian too. How often did I try to escape from that bondage! but it was not until I was completely broken down in spirit, and looked up to God for deliverance, that any hope appeared. Does not God only humble us that he may exalt us?

I arrived in New York about the 28th October, 1843, on the Saturday night; and on the Monday morning, though very weak from the voyage, walked round and looked for work. I got employment at mould candle making, but after I had been a few weeks, I was told to go to work on Sunday, and as I would not I had to leave. I got steady work in another shop, and remained all the winter. My brother was in Buffalo, and at his request I came in April, and for a time lived with him. Candle making