Have any of the great Councils of the world dwelt on themes like these, or promulgated truths so rich with divine instruction? One text of Scripture is more potent than all their decrees. The doctrines of the Bible are a better creed and a stronger defense of the faith delivered to the saints. They have kept watch over the safety of the Church like the angelic guard over the gate of Eden. They are the pure fountain ; the theses of men are but unfiltered

streams.

The greatest question that can engage the study of men in their probationary state was started by Job in the early dawn of revelation-"How should man be just with God?" If infinite Justice be, as it must, scrupulously exact, how shall an offender escape the penalty of the oft-broken law? God himself hath devised "means that his banished be not expelled from him." The scheme far transcends all man's intellectual comprehension, and the purpose of God in the mystery of redemption cannot, therefore, be a subject of man's knowledge, save only as it is revealed to him. In vain should we appeal to the dialectics of philosophers or the decrees of councils. Christianity bows not to such authority, and rests not on such uncertain support; but deeper and surer are the solid foundations of her faith, even the established fact of the great atonement for sin and the revealed truth that whosoever believeth shall be saved. Human philosophy has tried what it could do without the Bible. The French literati, in the skeptical age, were deeply versed in human lore. The surprising advances of that age in science and philosophy, doubtless, brought many blessings to humanity. The mind, long fettered by the dialectics of centuries, was emancipated, but the light of Christian faith and hope was put out, and the altars of religion torn down. A modern philosophy usurped the places of both. Lamartine says: "From the seat of geometry to the consecrated pulpit, the philosophy of the eighteenth century had invaded and altered every thing. D'Alembert, Diderot, Condorcet, Bernardin de St. Pierre, Helvetius, La Harpe, were the Church of the new era. One sole thought animated these minds-the revolution of ideas. Arithmetic, science, history, society, economy, politics, the stage, morals, poetry-all served as a vehicle of the modern philosophy. It ran through all the

veins of the times; it had enlisted every genius-spoke every language.'

The faith by which we lay hold of the record of divine truth is not like that which apprehends the logic of philosophy; but it is that faculty of the soul prepared for, and made commensurate with, what it is given to receive; not an intellectual power supplied with earthly knowledge, but a spiritual faculty attuned to a state of aptness and liberty to apprehend the truths revealed in the word of God. Compared with this, the highest scientific knowledge is as earth to heaven. Poetry and philosophy may be exercised in the "sharpening of the thoughts," but they have no other kindred with the soul's higher aspirations after the things of God. "Works are but

the hem of the garment of faith, which waves abroad to the liberal observation of men, but the soft and warm substance of the garment, which enwrappeth the tender frame of our own being, and protecteth it from inclement weather and rude wintry blasts, that is faith." Is this faith, which is the condition of salvation, learned in the schools or bred in the councils? The food on which it feeds is the nectar of heaven; it is not conveyed in the earthen vessels of human philosophy.

It is not asserted that important Christian doctrines have not been discussed in the so-called General Councils, nor, indeed, that some of them have not been of service to the Church. Those of Nice and Chalcedon confessedly were; but the value of their decisions "depends, not on their authority, but upon their conformity to the word of God." At times when error and despotism prevailed, their public deliberations were means of arriving at the truth, and resulted in some good. The doctrine of the person of Christ was settled at Nice, A. D. 327; but they have more often debated over dubious traditions, and promulgated dogmas which Christendom has rejected, and in respect of which the Councils have not agreed with one another.

The Nicene creed, accepted by all Christendom, is in conflict with the Council of Chalcedon. The decretals of Isidore, which the Council of Trent and the Roman Church have set forth as the grounds of the Papal power, are declared by "the unwavering criticism of the modern civilized world" to be a gross imposture." The Apocrypha was incorporated into

the sacred canon at the fourth session of the Council of Trent; but, at the Reformation, it was rejected by Protestants as forming no part of the Jewish oracles. The Council of Carthage committed the same error in the year 397, and so did the Council of Hippo, which met four years earlier. But these writings, which bear internal evidence of their apocryphal character, which, according to their own terms, advance no claim to inspiration, and which were not quoted by the Saviour or his Apostles, have never been enumerated in the books of holy scripture by the Jews or the early Fathers. Councils have not defined the authorship of any of the sacred books; but they have recognized the text of the Vulgate as sacred, though it is replete with confessed and manifold errors. The truth is, inspiration does not reside in councils, but it does dwell in the revealed word of God. Since the days of the Apostles, councils have not met by divine direction, nor pronounced decrees by inspiration. There was one inspired Council-the first ever held in the Christian Church-which was convened at Jerusalem, and was composed of "the Apostles and elders." "When there had been much disputing," by Cerinthus and other Pharisees, who "labored to unite the law and the gospel, and to make the salvation promised by the latter dependent on the performance of the rites and ceremonies prescribed by the former," the Council declared its inspired judgment against the error. Peter first showed how, without any right of circumcision, God had made choice that "the Gentiles should hear the word of the Gospel and believe." Barnabas and Paul then related what miracles and wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them; and then James, who presided in the Council, pronounced the final decree, "that we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles, are turned to God." Acts xv, 19. Well would it be if all ecclesiastical councils had adhered to that inspired sentence. It is asserted by Rome that Peter, before this Council sat, had received his commission and title from our Lord, which gave him pre-eminence in the Church; but, so far from his asserting it, he assumes the lowest place in the Council, does not preside in it, is mentioned by James not by any title, but by his name of "Simeon," and he, with the other Apostles, assents to the occupancy of the chief place in the Council by the Apostle James. The decree

sent forth from that Council, with the letter and messengers of the Apostles and brethren, allayed a wide-spread disputation, established many in the faith, and the Church had daily accessions of believers. It was not a bull or encyclical of Peter as pope; but a letter of all the Apostles and Elders who composed the Council, written after this manner: "The Apostles and Elders and brethren send greeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia." Acts xv, 23. It had been revealed to Paul that his mission was to preach the Gospel to the Gentiles, and, according to this revelation, he had journeyed to Jerusalem to attend the apostolic Council, and there, in the public assembly, as well as in private conferences with eminent men, he proclaimed how God had blessed his ministry among the heathen. "They saw," says he," that the Gospel of the uncircumcision was committed unto me, as the Gospel of the circumcision was to Peter." Gal. ii, 7. He was sent to preach it to the Gentiles and Peter to the Jews. The latter went to Antioch, where Paul "withstood him to the face, because he was to be blamed." He could not, therefore, have been thought to be chief among the Apostles, nor endowed with the faculty of infallibility.

The claim of the Councils to represent the Christian world is absurd. After the fourth century only Bishops were admitted; the lower clergy and the laity being excluded. It has been justly observed that, in the strict and proper sense of the term, no Ecumenical Council has ever been held. But there were seven councils admitted to be cecumenical both by the Greek and Latin Churches. Rome adds twelve more, making nineteen in all. The beginning of the system is traced to the Council at Jerusalem, composed of the Apostles and Elders; but that differed from all others in that it was under the special inspiration of the Holy Spirit. From that time until the middle of the second century, no such assembly was convened. After the middle of the second century there were synods or councils, composed of representatives from particular districts, but none comprising delegates from all parts of Christendom. On the theory of Romanists, the Pope can convene a general council; and, when convened, it represents the Church universal, because they exclude from the pale of the Church those who are not Roman Catholics. But such a supposed council

6

is now, even according to a confession of a Roman Catholic, "a chimera." "The ablest advocate of the Papal theory whom the Roman Church has ever produced-Joseph de Maistre-declared, Que dans les temps modernes un Concile Ecuménique est devenu une chimère." Gregory of Nazianzus, who presided for a time over the second Ecumenical Council, said: "I am inclined to avoid conventions of bishops; I never knew one that did not come to a bad end, and create more disorders than it attempted to rectify." How can men with unregenerate natures, with deceitful and deceivable hearts, represent the Christian Church? Natural sinfulness and alienation from the love of God are not qualities that fit men as representatives of Christianity. "God resides among his own." Those alone who have received the word of doctrine, reproof, correction, and instruction in righteousness, and who have been conformed to the image of Christ through the blessed influences of the Spirit, belong to that holy communion called the Church, and are alone fit to represent it. Yet secular princes and rulers have found place in the councils, and because they saw their thrones tottering, have offered their adherence to the Church in return for her support. They looked for the continuance or advancement of political dominion in return for their alliance with the Church. Many who were ignorant of the principles of Christianity have thus "prostrated themselves at the feet of the chief priest of Rome." While any thing was to be gained by such secular alliance, the Roman Church was quick to seize the apparent advantage; but, in the ninth century, when disunion had every-where weakened the civil authority, when the crown of Charles was broken, "and its fragments scattered over his former empire," then the forged decretals of Isidorus appeared. The impostor who had fabricated these pretended decrees used the barbarous Latin of the ninth century, and in them he makes the ancient bishops of the classic times of Tacitus and Quintillian speak the corrupted language of his own day. He blindly attributed to the Romans, under the Emperors, the obsolete customs of the Franks. His Popes quote the Bible from the Latin translation of St. Jerome, who lived several hundred years after them; and he makes Victor, Bishop of Rome in 192, write to Theophilus, who was Archbishop of Alexandria in 385! It is unimpeached history, that