easy retaliation is! I might exhibit the frightful spectacle of a seceder whose love of singularity had overcome his love of tithes ; or whose thirst to appear disinterested had secretly instigated him to accuse his brethren of covetousness; or whose vanity of personal distinction, ill brooking the self-denying retirement of a silent worshipper, and longing to bear a part in the edification of the congregation, had urged him gladly to avail himself of some plausible objection against the sobriety and order of our established worship. I might, I say, exhibit such a one, endeavouring to wrest the words of Scripture, or misrepresent the formularies of the church, into a sanction for separation. But retaliation is not my object—I write in self-defence. Retaliation Retaliation upon this point is not my judgment. I do not believe that you are actuated by any such motives. Judging of you by myself, I give you full credit for perfect sincerity. Retaliation is not my temper. I desire to persuade, not to irritate; and I do pray, with full purpose of soul, for a blessing upon those who speak evil of us, and despitefully use us.

My object in this hint, is to remind you, that thirst of distinction is as deeply rooted a passion in the human heart, as thirst of money; not perhaps existing in so many hearts, but fully as influential where it does exist that to be distinguished in the path of order, requires extraordinary talents-that when men of ordinary talents are overcome by a desire to be somebody, and are determined to be spoken about, and “ monstrari digito;" their obvious course is to be disorderly. I wish thus to make you see, that when evil motives are ascribed, retaliation is at the door, and so to impress upon you a valuable present application, of Christ's celebrated saying, "Judge not, that ye be not judged."

I am faithfully yours.

108

LETTER VII.

MODERN PRETENSIONS TO THE MIRACULOUS GIFTS OF THE HOLY GHOST, DESTITUTE OF ALL EVIDENCE.

MY DEAR

I AM truly sorry to find, that instead of carefully replying to the arguments in my former letters, you have cut short all arguments, and all reason, by an appeal to what you suppose to be immediate and plenary inspiration.

This is, it must be confessed, a bold step. If your first assertion be admitted, there is truly an end of controversy. But can, or ought, such an assertion to be admitted without proof? And where is your proof?

I have carefully observed what has been going on. I have been thrown into close contact with some of the leaders in this affair.

I have been sedulously pressed to join it, by both male and female entreaties, and by the awful intelligence, oracularly repeated, that God himself had declared I would do so. On one occasion, a prophecy to this effect was addressed to me personally, with all pomp and power of manner and voice, by Mr. Baxter, when in the plenitude of his own assurance, and of their confidence in him, as peculiarly and highly gifted. You know, of course, that he has since forsaken the party, and declared his conviction, that "the power" among them is satanic.

There

On the same occasion I heard a Mr. Taplin, who was made to speak (as they express it) in a tongue. At first, they thought that the tongue would turn out to be a language, and lead to some missionary success. was something rational in this expectation, had the gift of languages been indeed revived; and at that period, the persons in question had not given up their reason. But the expectation failed, simply because the gift was not, and is not, revived. And the persons who quitted Scotland, with, as we were informed, lively hope of being directed by the

Lord into some region of heathenism, where the difficulty of the language had hitherto proved a barrier to all missionary labour; have for nearly two years been residing in my little parish, in the county of Surrey, and edifying a congregation of from fifty to two hundred persons, collected chiefly from Shere, and Guildford, and Godalming.

The missionary project being abandoned, they found out another use for the tongue. It is difficult to say how they would have managed, or to what device they must have been driven, had yλwoon been uniformly translated language, as it might very properly have been, throughout the Epistle to the Corinthians.*

* The tongue, the physical organ by which language is uttered, is used metaphorically, to denote the language itself. In 1 Cor. xiv. 9, the word is used literally, to signify the material organ. "Except ye utter, by the tongue, words easy to be understood," &c. The only other passage, connected with this subject, which requires absolutely that the word tongue, and not language, should be used, is Acts ii. 3, where we read, that pieces of fire, similar in shape to cloven tongues (the organ of speech)