for giving him trouble; but he bore all with an unvarying equanimity, and and maintained, even to the immediate authors of his disquiet, a truly christian spirit of meekness and charity, without at all departing from that character of firmness by which he had been through life distinguished. Under all his trials, he was cheered and strengthened by those consolations which flow from communion with God, and an undeviating reliance on his truth, wisdom, and goodness.

His health continuing to de. cline, about the beginning of February, 1583, he became so weak that he felt his end must be near, and spoke with the greatest composure of his approaching dissolution. He was soon after confined to his chamber; but his senses continued perfect to the last. A few days before his death, he sent for several poor people who had been his pensioners, to whom he ad. dressed suitable exhortations, praying God to remember them after he was gone, and to enable them to be faithful to their God, who in that case would never

leave them comfortless. His scholars were next called in; them he earnestly reminded of what he had often told them be fore, that, though learning was well worth their attention, it was piety which ought to be the great object of their ambition, if they would be useful here, and happy hereafter. He next kind. ly exhorted his servants: and sent also for several persons who had hitherto been unaffected by his labors to do them good, in the hope that his dying words might have greater weight with them, and influence them to turn to God. His speech began to falter, before he concluded his exhortations. The remaining hours of his life he spent in pray. er, and in broken conversation with some chosen friends, in which he dwelt much on the con solations of religion, and the peace which exclusively resulted from the faith and hope of the gospel. He died on the 4th of March, 1583, in the 66th year of his age.

It only remains to give some account of his character, and common manner of life.

(To be continued.)

THE great purpose, for which our Lord retired with his disci. ples to Cesarea Philippi, and there held with them the conversation now under review, evidently was, to fix decisively

the foundation of the church. It was for this purpose, that he obtained from Peter, and by him from the twelve, the memorable confession, "THOU ART THE CHRIST, the Messiah, THE SON

OF THE LIVING GOD." After expressing to Peter, therefore, his approbation of the confession, he immediately proceeded to the grand point in view.

And I say also unto thee, that thou art Peter, AND UPON THIS ROCK I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it.

When Simon was first introduced to Jesus, by his brother Andrew, Jesus said to him, "Thou art Simon the son of Jona; thou shalt be called Cephas, which is, by interpretation, A stone." Cephas, in Syriac, and Peter, or Petros, in Greek, are of one signification: they both signify a stone, or a rock. Accordingly, when Simon, after the violent attack upon his Mas. ter, by the Pharisees and Sadducees, made his noble confession of faith; Jesus, alluding to his firmness, reminded him of the significant name, which he had before given him, and said, "Thou art Peter," thou art a rock; and immediately subjoined, "And upon this rock I will build my church." The allusion here is plain; but this important declaration of our Lord has been variously understood.

"Thou art a rock; and upon this rock I will build my church." It is here, say the Romanists, expressly declared, that Peter was to be the rock, or founda. tion of the church. But this, they farther say, could not have been spoken of Peter in his own person only, but must be under. stood to include his successors: for as Peter could not continue by reason of death, he could not be in person, but must be in his successors, the foundation of the church, through all succeeding VOL. II. New Series.

generations. And to complete the argument, Peter, they allege, was the first bishop of Rome; and therefore, his successors in that chair, are to be acknowl. edged, from generation to gen. eration, as the rock of the church. This is the grand papistical argument. But unfortunately for this argument, the premises are false, and the conclusion is absurd.

Peter was never the bishop of Rome. The apostles indeed, were none of them bishops. Their office was, not to have the oversight of any particular church or churches, as stationary pastors; but to preach the gospel to every creature, and to establish churches in all parts of the world: and over the churches which they established, they appointed stationary pastors or bishops. Not only was Peter not bishop of Rome, but the church in that city was not planted by him; nor does it appear that he was ever much there, or that he had ever much to do with that church. It deserves to be stated also, that it was not until about three hundred years after the apostles, that the bishops of Rome claimed to be the successors of Peter. Their first claim to pre-eminence, or supremacy, in the church, was founded on the fact that Rome was the imperial city, the metropolis of the world; and their argument was, that the bishop of the imperial city was entitled to a precedence, or primacy, over all the bishops and churches of the empire. This was the ground, on which their claim was rested, until the imperial residence was removed from Rome to Constantinople. Thus it became necessary to change their ground;

3B

and then, and not till then, it was, that they resorted for the support of their claim, to the pretended succession of Peter.

Whatever may be the first as pect of our Lord's declaration, it surely cannot be admitted for a moment, that he intended to designate Peter, as the foundation of his church. For Christ himself is the foundation. Of him it is said, "Behold I lay in Zion for a foundation, a stone, a tried stone, a precious corner stone, a sure foundation;" and throughout the Scriptures, he is constantly presented as the Rock of the church. Any construction, therefore, which makes Peter the foundation, must be false. When Jesus had driven the buyers and sellers from the temple, the Jews came and asked him, "What sign shewest thou, sceing thou doest these things ?" His answer was, "Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up but he spake of the temple of his body." His mean. ing, on that occasion, was indicated, doubtless, by some partic. ular manner, tone, or gesture. Such also was probably the fact in the present case. When he said, "Thou art a Rock; and on THIS ROCK, I will build my church," he might very distinct ly, by his manner, tone, or gesture, signify to his disciples what he meant by THIS ROCK. Unquestionably they did not understand him to mean, that Peter was to be the foundation of his church.

In strictness, Christ himself is the foundation; but in a proper sense, as it respects the outward administration, a true confession of him is the basis, on which his church in the world is built. Peter had said, "Thou art the

Christ, the Son of the living God." Alluding to the verity and firmness of this confession, Jesus rejoined, "Thou art Peter, the firmness of thy confession justifies the name which before I have given thee; and upon this rock, this firm and sure confes sion of eternal truth, I will build my church." The confes. sion of Peter, was the confession of all the apostles; and the same, essentially, was the faith of all the ancient prophets, and patriarchs, and righteous men. Hence, the church is said to be "bailt upon the foundation of the apos tles and prophets, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone.' The foundation of the apostles and prophets is the same. Their faith in the Messi ah was, in essence, the same, (the same which Peter confess ed ;) and on the truth of this faith, Christ, from the earliest ages has been building his church, and will continue thus to build it to the end of time; when this glorious temple of our God shall be completed.

Peter's confession then, or the great truth contained in it, w what our Lord meant by the rock, on which he would build his church. Accordingly Paul to the Corinthians, says, "Oth er foundation can no man lay, than that is laid, which is Jesus Christ." Or, as it is expressed in the original, and more justly rendered by Macknight, "Jesu THE CHRIST." The agreement here is exact. "THOU (Jesus,) says Peter, ART THE CHRIST, THE SON OF The Living God." "ON THIS ROCK, says Jesus,! WILL BUILD MY CHURCH." OTHER FOUNDATION, Paul, can no man lay, than that

66

is laid, which is, JESUS THE CHRIST" or this truth, "JESUS IS THE CHRIST." That Paul, when he penned this eleventh verse of the third chapter of the first epistle to the Corinthians, had his eye on Peter's confession, and the immediately subjoined declaration of our Lord, can scarcely admit of a doubt. To the rock, so emphatically designated in this memorable conversation at Cesarea Philippi, he evidently referred, as the foundation, than which no other could be laid; and by his words, our Savior's meaning is most conclusively determined.

The basis of the church then, is not the infallibility of man, but the truth of the everlasting God; a foundation as immovea. ble as the throne of Heaven; a rock, which has stood the shocks of ages, and against which "the gates of hell shall never prevail." At the gates of their cities, the ancients held their courts and their councils, and through them, their armies issued for war. At the entrance of the gate of Samaria, Ahab and Jehoshaphat Consulted, respecting the Syrian war; and thence they proceeded with their forces to the battle at Ramoth Gilead. In obvious allusion to ancient custom, our Lord uses the figure, "gates of Hades," to denote at once the policy and the power of the infernal world. Neither by poli. ey nor by power shall Satan, with all his legions, ever prevail to overthrow the church, supported, as it is, by the Rock of ages.

Having thus fixed the foundation of his church, our Lord proceeded to declare the grand principle of its order.

"And I will give unto thee THE KEYS OF THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN ; and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven.”

This, as well as the preceding verse, is alleged by the Roman. ists in support of the hierarchal supremacy of the pope. The keys of the kingdom of heaven, say they, were delivered to Pe. ter, and from him have been transmitted to his successors, in the Roman see; and therefore, in him and his successors, must be considered as lodged the whole power of the church; to open its doors and to shut them; to admit members and to exclude them; to forgive sins and to retain them; and in a word to govern the whole body and to dispose of all its interests. But this reasoning is no better found. ed than the other.

Whatever be understood by "the keys," they were not giv. en to Peter to the exclusion of the other apostles. As Peter spoke, on this occasion, not for himself only, but for the twelve; so Jesus, in his reply, had respect, it is natural to suppose, not to Peter only, but to his brethren with him. It deserves also to be particularly noticed, that the tense here used is not the present, but the future. Our Lord did not say, I now give, but, I will, that is, at some time hereafter, give unto thee the keys. The keys were not delivered ei. ther to Peter, or to any of the apostles, until after the Savior's resurrection; for it was not un. til after his resurrection, that he gave them their commission in the kingdom of heaven, or un.

Ac.

der the new dispensation. cordingly, as we learn from the twentieth of John, when Jesus appeared in the midst of his disciples after his resurrection, he breathed on them and said, "Receive ye the Holy Ghost ;" add. ing at the same time, "Whose soever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto them; and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained." Then it was that the apostles were installed, as officers in "the kingdom of heaven;" then, and not till then, were 66 the keys of the kingdom" delivered to them, to bind and to loose, to remit sins and to retain them; and then it was, that our Lord's promise to Pe. ter, respecting the keys, was fulfilled. But here, there is no distinction of Peter from the rest of the apostles. To him, indeed, we see the keys given, according to promise; but given to him, in common only with his breth.

ren.

It is to be considered, more over, that in the eighteenth of Matthew, Christ speaks of this power of binding and loosing, which is properly the power of the keys, as being lodged not in the apostles only, but also in the church. In the case of a trespass, or offence, he directs that the matter be brought, in the last resort, to the church; and with immediate reference to the decisions of the church, says, in the very language before used in reference to the apostles, "Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth, shall be bound in heaven; and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth, shall be loosed in heaven." It was not therefore to Peter exclusively, that the keys of the kingdom of heaven were given.

But what are we to understand by these keys? Anciently to the stewards of great families, and especially of the royal household, keys were delivered as a token of their office, and of their authority, over the treasures, or stores, under their care. With the Jewish doctors also, it was a standing custom, when any one was admitted to the office of a Rabbin, or sacred instructor, to deliver to him a key, as a symbol of his power to open and explain the divine oracles. To one, or the other of these well known customs, and possibly to both of them, our Lord had allusion in the figurative expression now before us. As the apostles were made stewards of the mysteries of God, the keys of the kingdom were committed to them, in token of their stewardship, or, as they were admit. ted to the office of sacred instruc. tors, or scribes of the kingdom of heaven, they received the keys, in token of their commission, to open and declare the great things of the gospel. Or, if we consider the keys with ref. erence to doors, and suppose them to denote the power to open and to shut the doors of the kingdom of heaven, or of the church, it still amounts to much the same thing. For how are the doors to be opened and shut? Is it not by a declaration and proper application of the doc. trines and precepts of the gospel? Indubitably in no way, other than this, had the apostles power to forgive sins, or to retain them. They had a commission to declare the great truths of the gospel, and in the name of their Divine Master to give assurance, that

the sins of all, who obeyed