The

behaviour, given to hospitality, apt to teach, not given to wine, no striker, not greedy of filthy lucre, not a brawler, not covetous: one that ruleth well his own bonse, having his children in subjection with all chastity.” σεμνοτητος. Apostle says that the man in whom these excellent qualities are found ought to be created a bishop. For these are the characteristic marks of the episcopal dignity. Yet if any one, aiming at better things, shall have dedicated both body and soul to God, so as not to connect himself in matrimony, he will become so much the more worthy: for he purposely stated the case of the inferior, that no one might have a doubt about the matter.'

Let me draw your attention to the translation of the word ceμvos and σeμvorns, in the Vulgate, as in Ambrose, it is pudicus and castitas, evidently in accommodation to the virginity principle, though our words grace and gravity are, almost invariably, the meaning attached to the words. You will not be surprised to hear that Ambrose speaks of the γυναίκες, which we, from their evident connexion with the bishops and deacons, translate 'their wives,' as simply women,' and takes occasion to denounce the Cataphrygians a set of heretics, who, amidst other errors, claimed a distinct ordination for deaconesses.

He thus gives this verse the slip: but the deacons return upon him, and each with his wife and his family. What shall he do to dissolve the unseemly union.

'Let the deacons be the husbands of one wife, ruling their children and their own houses well." What the apostle said partially, (ver. 8.) concerning the ordination of a deacon he now supplies. He shews that they should be the husband of one wife, so that they be chosen for God's service, who have not departed from God's institutions. For it has been God's purpose to bless man with one wife, no one being blessed with a second. And if they have governed their houses, that is, their servants and domestics well, they may become worthy of the priesthood, and have confidence with God: SO as to know that they may obtain what they require, provided they refrain hereafter from women. For on this account was permission given of old to Levites or Priests, to have wives for their use, because there were long intervals in which they did not exercise their ministry or priest

hood for there were great numbers of them, and they served, not constantly, but in rotation, (by courses,) so that when it was not their turn to serve at the altar, they might take care of their families. But whenever their time of service approached, they purified themselves for some days, and then drew near to make the offerings to God at the temple. But now there must be seven deacons, and a certain number of presbyters, so that there may be two to each church, and one bishop in a city; and all on this account should abstain from women, because it is incumbent upon them to be in readiness daily in the church, and to make no delay in purifying themselves in a legal manner, like the ancients. For every week there must be an offering, although not daily for strangers, yet for inhabitants, seldom less than twice a week; besides that there are sick people who are baptised almost daily. For the concession was therefore made to the ancients, because, for a considerable time they were not seen in the temple, but were private For if he enjoins ordinary men to abstain for a time, (1 Cor. viii. 5.) that they may give themselves unto prayer: how much more would he enforce it upon the Levites or Priests, whose duty it is to pray, day and night for the people committed to their care. They ought to be, therefore, more pure than others, because they are God's agents.

men.

Such a comment, from such a man as Ambrose, must be painful to every devout Christian. The Archbishop labours to pervert the plain expression of the text, and evidently to save the unquestioned celibacy principle. But hear him again commenting in his treatise on the dignity of the priesthood, upon the same portion of Scripture. And I may here observe, that in his short notes on the Exposition to Titus, he says not a word upon the parallel passage. He passes it but in the Treatise alluded to, he thus writes:

'A little afterwards the apostle says, "the husband of one wife." If we look, superficially, at the mere letter of the precept, he forbids the ordination of a twicemarried bishop. But if we dive into a deeper sense, he prohibits a bishop from taking the charge of two churches; and if we penetrate its still profounder meaning it gives a caution that no bishop be found, after the catholic doctrine, to hold heretical sentiments, but that he take to himself only the Christian orthodox and catholic faith; that the bishop may be called

the husband of one wife, and she the catholic church. He adds, "One who is able to preside well over his own house, having his children in subjection with all chastity," (TeuvотηTOS.) He is able to preside well over his own house who keeps his own body in chastity. He so rules his house, saith he, that is, his body, that it be not subject to its own will, lest being surrendered to the love of luxury, it sink headlong, but rather teaches his children the rule of modesty by the example of his own chastity. "For if a man know not how to rule his own house, how shall he take care of the church of God." This is what we have said before: How can he take care of many who cannot manage the house of his own heart: and how shall he be able to remove the mote from the eye of another, who cannot take the beam out of his own.'

Some of your readers may think that the writer of this comment, supposing him to be a well informed man, which Ambrose certainly was, must have been a conscious deceiver. He must have studied to impose upon his readers. I cannot but believe so too, and yet to impose upon them as a man who has first imposed upon himself. Judging of Ambrose by his actions, and the general strain of his writings, I cannot give him the name of hypocrite. He thought himself doing right; he meant to do right; but he had been accustomed, and so had most of the best men of their day before him, to reason and to act upon the supposition that certain errors were sacred and unquestionable truths, and thus his judgment was confused. The light which was in him, in this respect, was darkness, and as might be expected, very great the darkness was.

Oh, we may thank our Lord God for the light shed abroad upon this church and nation at the time of the reformation. It was a blessed time; and every Protestant may well rise up and call those holy men blessed, whom the Lord awakened to investigate the errors of ages past, and to allow nothing to pass for sacred and unquestionable, which would not bear to be brought under the full light of

Holy Scripture. It would indeed argue great presumption, and consequent weakness of mind, to examine the sentiments of the great and the good of former times, without a modest disposition to defer somewhat, in doubtful matters, to their judgment-but the palpable mistakes of even the best of the 'Fathers,' and Ambrose is thought to be second only to Augustine, may well teach us to make a very close application of our Lord's warning, "Call no man your Father," or your Master upon

66

earth." None but Christ is to be honoured with an ipse dixit. Whatever He has said by his prophets, apostles, and evangelists, that we receive as truth. And he who, with a modest diffidence of his own judgment, earnestly prays for the promised assistance of the Holy Spirit, while he diligently studies the scriptures himself, and reads and hears what are the sentiments of good and learned men who have studied them in the same spirit; such a one may claim the fulfilment of the promise "All thy children shall be taught of the Lord," and count upon being guided into all saving truth. Those who will yield themselves up to any human authority, and give to man's tradition any such importance as detracts from the entire supremacy of God's written word, after the experience which the Christian church has had of the extreme peril of such a procedure, must indeed be written in the earth."

It should be said with regard to Ambrose and the other good Fathers, that it was, apparently, no part of their professed principles to yield any great deference to the judgment of preceding teachers. They seldom quoted the Fathers; though they certainly took up the great errors connected with professed celibacy and asceticism, as they were handed down from them. I must confess that it has occasioned

me much surprise to read so much as I have of Ambrose, a very free, forcible, and practical writer, without meeting scarcely a single reference to any mere human witness of those who had gone before. All his appeals and references, and they are most abundant, are to the inspired scriptures. But the idea of superior merit attaching more particularly to devoted virginity and austere modes of life small as the dead fly may seem to those unacquainted with the dangers of self-righteousness-gives an ill scent to the whole pot of their ointment, which, for the sake of the better part of its ingredients, might otherwise be called precious.

I would not altogether adduce it as a defence of Ambrose's sincerity, though, with the charitable, it will be considered as an extenuation of his apparent disingenuousness in the interpretation of scripture in the instances above quoted

-that his honest mind was in this respect pitifully perverted, in consequence, as it is thought, of his adoption of the style of interpretation of that learned, ingenious, subtle writer, Origen. The plainest parts become the subjects of allegory, frequently far-fetched and strange; and the habit once acquired of straining scripture into agreement with the image presented to the expositor's fancy, had a strong tendency to lead even a holy man into an irreverent abuse of it. This origenism, as it is called, pervades St. Ambrose's expositions to such a degree, that those who would consult his annotations, on the narrative parts of scripture more particularly, with the hope of arriving at an accurate view of a text, will, in two cases out of three, find themselves disappointed. The expositor is running from the plain sense, in pursuit of some supposed allegorical meaning; and this even in cases where there is no temptation to evade the force of the simple truth: as when he

'And why a householder? to let you see that the man is marked by his sanctity, not by his income. But why having a large upper room furnished? That you may take notice of his merit, in which the Lord with his disciples rested, in the pleasing enjoyment of his sublime virtues. Would that it were my lot to drink of that pitcher of water, to carry that flaggon, which the householder carries, who has the large upper room furnished. For what is the pitcher, but a more perfect measure. They are not mean men who have measure. And does not the Lord say, good measure pressed together and running over shall men give into your bosom. For what shall I say of water? Upon water before the very birthday of the world, the Holy Spirit hovered as you

read.'

Then follows a strange rhapsody upon the virtues of water, with allusion to Baptism and the Lord's Supper.

I say this is no unfair specimen of Ambrose's style of exposition, where Scripture facts are concerned, but your readers must not take the measure of the man from examples of this kind, so far at least as to think that he could not write both sensibly and powerfully. Some of his letters, tracts, and addresses, discover powers of no common order, and it is no matter of surprise that the man who applied them as he did, was so greatly admired and revered. The wonder is, that a man so high in natural talent and moral and religious character, should be so very incompetent an expositor of Scrip

ture.

But I proceed to my other

'Lastly, those whom the Lord looks upon, lament their fault. Peter denied once, and did not weep, because the Lord had not looked upon him. He denied again, and wept not, because the Lord still had not looked upon him. He denied him a third time, then Jesus looked upon him, and he wept most bitterly. Lord Jesus look on us, that we may know how to weep for our sins to wash away our offence. Hence it is that the falls of the saints are useful. Peter's denial has done me no harm; his recovery has done me good. I have learnt to beware of the communications of unbelievers. Peter denied when in the company of Jews. Solomon was led astray by companionship with heathens. Peter therefore wept most bitterly. He wept that he might wash away his offences with his tears. And thou, if thou wilt merit pardon, wash away thy fault with tears. At that very moment Christ is looking on thee !'

This man, who could talk, and write, as if there were a virtue in human tears to wash away sin : knew, yes, he knew, that nothing but the blood of Jesus Christ, God's Son, could do so, and trusted in that blood as the only atonement for his own. But how calculated is such language to mislead! And the same uncertain strain of doctrine runs more or less through the whole of his writings. It would seem as if nothing but a purely gratuitous salvation would serve himself, but he was afraid to preach the Gospel of the grace of God with the same distinctness

to others, as he found it necessary to receive it for his own comfort.

However I must have done. I hope that you will excuse the length to which my letter has run. It is an affecting thing for one who feels himself so much inferior, to sit, as it were, in júdgment upon such a man as Ambrose ; -but there are his writings; and they are appealed to as if they contained the standard exposition of Christian doctrines, precepts and observances, in conformity with which we ought to re-model the principles and practices established at the time of the blessed Reformation. There are his writings,and they are throughout, more or less, tainted with superstition and self-righteousness, by reason of the admission of one or two great fallacies into the writer's mind, under the sanction of a former age, as if they were truths incontrovertible. There they are, and though they contain much that is excellent, especially on the Arian controversy, of which Ambrose was master, and on the controversy with the Gentiles, there is much that must mislead the unwary, and perplex the sincere : much too that is contradictory to that, whereas the Romish Church insists upon having such an interpretation of the Scripture as shall meet with the unanimous consent of the Fathers. Ambrose alone would pose them, for in matters of doctrine be frequently contradicts himself. This, Sir, is my censure of this great Father's writing. If any one thinks me mistaken, let him read and judge for himself; and thus, I remain, yours, Sir, very sincerely,

Z.A.

FIRST of all, our baptism must put us in mind, that we are admitted and received into the family of God; and consequently, that we must carry ourselves as the servants of God, and that we may do so indeed, we must divide our lives into two parts, the life past, and the life to come.

Touching the life that is past, we must perform three things. The first is, Examination, whereby we must call ourselves to an account for all our sins, even from our cradle. The second is Confession, whereby we must with sorrowful hearts bewail and acknowledge our sins in the presence of God, accusing and condemning ourselves for them. The third is, Deprecation, whereby we are to intreat the Lord in the name of Christ, and that most incessantly from day to day, till we receive a comfortable answer, in the peace of conscience, and joy of the Holy Ghost.

And for the life to come, there must be two things in use: the first is, the purpose of not sinning; and it must be a lively and distinct purpose, daily renewed in us, even as we renew our days; so as we may say, if we sin, it is against our purpose and resolution. The second is, an endeavour to perform new obedience, according to all the commandments of God. These things if we do, we shall shew ourselves to be the servants of God. And of all these things, baptism must be (as it were) a daily sermon unto us; and so oft to think on them, as oft as we think or speak of our names given us in baptism. This is the doctrine of Paul, who teaches us that we must be conformable to the death and resurrection of Christ, because we have been baptised. (Rom. vi. 3, 4.)

* From his Commentary on Galatians, (1617,) iii. 26-28.

APRIL, 1840.

Again, our baptism into the name of the Father, &c. must teach us, that we must learn to know and acknowledge God aright; that is, to acknowledge him to be our God and Father in Christ; to acknowledge his presence, and therefore to walk before him; to acknowledge his providence, and therefore to cast our care on him; to acknowledge his goodness and mercy, in the pardon and free forgiveness of our sins.

Thirdly, our baptism must be unto us a storehouse of all comfort in the time of our need. If thou be tempted of the Devil, oppose against him thy baptism, in which God hath promised and sealed unto thee the pardon of thy sins, and life everlasting. If thou be troubled with doubtings, and weakness of faith, consider that God hath given thee an earnest and pledge of his loving-kindness to thee. We often use to look upon the wills of our fathers and grandfathers, that we may be resolved in matters of doubt, and so, often look upon the will of thy heavenly Father, sealed and delivered to thee in thy baptism, and thou shalt be the better resolved in the midst of all thy doubts. If thou lie under any cross or calamity, have recourse to thy baptism, in which God promised to be thy God, and of this promise he will not fail thee.

Lastly, if a man would be a student in divinity, let him learn and practise his baptism. Commentaries are needful to the study of the Scriptures; and the best commentary to a man's own self, is his own baptism. For if a man have learned to know aught,* and to practise his own baptism, he shall the better be able to understand the whole; and without this help, the Scriptures themselves shall be as a riddle unto us.