respect to a reputed revelation, is twofold: first, to inquire whether it be a revelation; and, secondly, what does it contain. The first of these questions is, in our minds, satisfactorily settled. We most devoutly believe that God has made a revelation of his will to men in the Bible. Well, now, is it not a most important inquiry to ascertain what that will is? Yes, to us in common with all other classes of persons, the study of the Scriptures is of the first importance. Is it important to glorify God? to shun hell? to gain heaven? Then it is important to examine the Scriptures, for they alone can give us authentic counsel on these momentous subjects. Other moral and religious books are only valuable in so far as they illustrate and impress the principles of the Bible. The living ministry are useful no further than their communications are illuminated by the truths and imbued with the spirit of revelation. "The Bible," says Hannah More, "is a lamp to our feet, and a light to our path; it points us to the Way, the Truth, and the Life. It is our guide while we live, and our trust when we die. It is the charter of our salvation, and the pledge of our immortality. If there were but one Bible in the world, all the wealth of the world would not be adequate to the value of that one Bible." But now the whole importance of this divine volume depends upon its being read. Unread, it is no better to you than the veriest romance. Hence, immediately upon the giving of the law, the reading of it was most solemnly enjoined, and hence, too, our Saviour says, "Search the Scriptures, for in them ye think ye have eternal life, and they are they that testify of me."

II. A thorough knowledge of the sacred oracles is important in the ministry, from the influence of our example upon community. "Like priest, like people." How sadly was this illustrated in the dark ages! Look, for instance, at the seventh and eighth centuries, when Gilemar, archbishop of Rheims, being called upon before his consecration to read a portion of the gospels, was found so deplorably ignorant, as not to understand the literal meaning of the passage; when, instead of the appropriate qualifications of the minister, were substituted those of the hunter and hawker, the deans of many of the cathedrals in France actually entering upon their dignities habited in a surplice girt with a sword, in boots and gilt spurs, and a hawk on the fist! Look down even as late as the sixteenth century, nearly a hundred years subsequent to the invention of the art of printing, when Albert, archbishop of Mentz, having met accidentally with a Bible, and read some pages in it, observed: "Indeed, I do not know what this book is, but this I see, every thing in it is against us :" and when even Carolstat, who was after

ward one of the reformers, acknowledged that he never began to read the Bible till eight years after he had taken his highest degree in divinity! It were easy to infer what, under such circumstances, would be the ignorance and stupidity of the laity. If darkness rested upon the priests, gross darkness covered the people. Of this no stronger proof need be adduced than the institution of the feast of the ass; celebrated in several of the churches of France about the tenth century, in commemoration of the Virgin Mary's flight into Egypt.* A young girl, richly dressed, with a child in her arms, was placed upon an ass superbly caparisoned. The ass was led to the altar in solemn procession. High mass was said with great pomp. The ass was taught to kneel at proper intervals. When the ceremony was ended, the priest, instead of the usual words with which he dismissed the assembly, brayed three times like an ass; and the people, instead of the usual response, brayed three times in return! An illustration of our position, more honorable to human nature, is seen in the state of Biblical knowledge about the fifteenth and sixteenth centuries in England; when, by the efforts of such men as Coverdale, Rogers, and Cranmer, the Scriptures had been translated into the vulgar tongue, and permission granted to have them read by all ranks of society. "It was wonderful," says the old historian, "to see with what joy this book of God was received, not only among the learneder sort, and those that were noted for lovers of the Reformation, but generally all England over, among all the vulgar and common people, and with what greediness God's word was read; what resort to the places where the reading of it was. Every body that could bought the book,t or busily read it, or got others to read it to them, if they could not themselves; and diverse more elderly people learned to read on purpose for this, and even little boys flocked among the rest, to hear portions of the Holy Scriptures read." So much for the example and influence of devoted ministers of the gospel in inspiring community with an interest in the word of God. Is it important, then, that impenitent men should be induced to examine that precious volume which teaches them both their danger and their duty? Is it important that the church, in these days of Mormonism, infidelity, and Universalism, should be thoroughly enlightened in Scriptural truth? Is it important to the triumph of the Redeemer's kingdom on earth, that the rising generation, by means of sabbath schools and Bible classes, should be brought up in the nurture and admonition of the truth, and know the Scrip* See Townley's Lit. History of the Bible.

The New Testament alone cost at that time about $180.

tures, which are able to make them wise unto salvation? For the very same reasons, it is important that ministers of the gospel should set the example of a deep and lively interest, of a close and persevering assiduity, in the study of the sacred records. But,

III. It is important in view of the main business of our calling; which is, to preach the gospel. For as revelation is the grand authentic source from which we derive all religious truth, whether doctrinal or practical, a thorough and intimate knowledge of the Bible is indispensable. It were as absurd for a preacher to think of succeeding without this, as for a person to set up for a surgeon who knew nothing of anatomy; or to imagine he could guide a ship across the pathless ocean while utterly ignorant of the principles of navigation. This will be the more manifest if we consider for a moment the different kinds of preaching. These may be classed under four heads :-Hortatory, doctrinal, ethical, and expository. First, the hortatory. In this mode of sermonizing you take certain doctrines and facts for granted, and proceed directly to draw your inferences, and make your application. For instance, you take it for granted that the unconverted man acknowledges himself a sinner, that he ought to repent and reform, that while he neglects this he is slighting infinite mercy, and in danger of perdition. And your object is, so to illustrate these points and press them home upon the conscience, as to arouse him to action. But what are the motives which you will present? Why, those of duty and interest. But upon what does duty depend? Upon God's commands. And by what is interest determined? Surely by the promises and threatenings of God. But the commands, the threatenings, and the promises of God, are to be found only in the word of God. And hence it is clear, that even in those discourses which consist mainly of exhortation, very little can be said to purpose without immediate recourse to the sacred oracles. And if this be true of hortatory preaching, where every thing is taken for granted, how much more of doctrinal, where every thing must be proved? where you must convince the unconverted that they are sinners; must convince them that they ought to repent and reform; must convince them that every moment they delay they are trampling upon blood-bought mercies, and are in peril of damnation! And the same is true of ethical or moral subjects, where the object of the preacher is to define, illustrate, and enforce moral duties. He cannot advance a single step toward the accomplishment of his design, only as he is sustained by a "Thus saith the Lord." But least of all can you do without a knowledge of the Bible in expository preaching, whose chief end, as its name imports, is to

expound the word of God. In every mode of sermonizing the text should be explained; and we virtually give our views of every passage we quote in support of any doctrine or duty. But in the expository method explanation is the principal thing. Here we have nothing to do but explain and apply the written word. And what kind of a figure would such a mitred ignoramus as Albert or Gilemar have made in this sort of work; who, had they been called upon to explain a portion of Romans, or Acts, would probably not have known whether Romans was an epistle written to the Romans, or by them; and whether Acts were a record of the doings of the apostles, or whether it were the name of a fifth evangelist! But a knowledge of the Scriptures was no more necessary for this purpose in that age of the church than the present. For how can a minister, under any circumstances, explain to others what he does not understand himself? The very idea is absurd. Let us beware how we attempt it; lest it happen to us according to the saying of Christ, "And if the blind lead the blind, both shall fall into the ditch." But what then, shall we dispense with this mode of preaching? So far from it, we firmly believe that, of all the methods of sermonizing, the expository deserves the preference. Not that we would have a minister always confined to this style; but we would have him employ it more than any other. And in every discourse, whatever the category under which its. particular structure should require it to be classed, let the business of explaining Scripture constitute a principal object, and let it occupy a prominent place in the sermon. Permit us to state two or three reasons for this opinion. First, it is according to our Discipline :-" Frequently read and enlarge upon a portion of Scripture."-P. 50. "Take thou authority to read the Holy Scriptures in the church of God, and to preach the same."P. 125. "Take thou authority to preach the word of God."— P. 138. Secondly, it is the Scriptural mode. We must all have observed, in the New Testament, the frequency of such phrases as the following:-"Teaching the word of God." "Hearing the word."

"The ministry of the word." "Speaking the word of the Lord." "Preaching the word of God." Preaching the word." The last of these occurs some ten times in the book of the Acts alone. Now, by "the word," "the word of God," &c., must be meant the Scriptures. And by "speaking," "teaching," and "preaching" that word, must be understood the proclaiming, expounding, and enforcing the Scriptures. Such was the preaching of Ezra and his coadjutors: "They read in the book of the law, and gave the sense, and caused the people to understand the

meaning,” Neh. viii, 9. Such was also the mode adopted by those itinerant preachers sent out from among the priests and Levites by the pious Jehoshaphat: "They taught in Judah, and had the book of the law of the Lord with them, and went about throughout all the cities of Judah, and taught the people," 2 Chron. xvii, 9. This was likewise the apostolic method. The first sermon delivered under the Christian dispensation was preached by St. Peter, and it was of the expository kind. In the course of the sermon he quotes ten verses of Scripture, five from Psalms, and five from the prophet Joel; and the discourse consists entirely of the exposition and application of those passages. The second was delivered by St. Stephen, and belongs to the same class. In that discourse he gives an epitome of the history of the people whom he addressed, drawn from the first two books of the Pentateuch and the Kings, with quotations from the prophets Isaiah and Amos: the object of the whole of which was to prepare the way for this most ingenious, though awful and pungent application: "Ye stiff-necked and uncircumcised in heart and ears; ye do always resist the Holy Ghost: as your fathers did, so do ye. Which of the prophets have not your fathers persecuted, and they have slain them which showed before the coming of the Just One, of whom ye have been now the slayers and murderers?" I need hardly remind you that this was Paul's manner of preaching. A sketch of the first sermon of his, which is contained in the Acts, is found in the thirteenth chapter in which having, like Stephen, presented a succinct account of early Scriptural events in the history of his nation-thereby preparing the way to introduce the genealogy of Christ, the prophecies which went before on him, his great forerunner; his condemnation, death, and resurrection; all of which he proves to have transpired, in accordance with the predictions—he avails himself of the force of the whole by exhorting his hearers to embrace this Saviour by the hope of pardon on one hand, and by the fear of aggravated punishment on the other. His wonderful knowledge of the Scriptures, exhibited on the occasion of his trial before Festus, was what led the latter to exclaim, "Paul! thou art beside thyself: much learning doth make thee mad!" The expository was his general, if not invariable mode; for it is said (Acts xvi, 2) that he went in unto the Jews, in the synagogue, and, as his manner was, reasoned with them three days out of the Scriptures." And again, (xxvi, 22,) he says, "Having therefore obtained help of God, I continue unto this day witnessing both to small and great, and saying none other things than those which the prophets and Moses did say should come." Thirdly, divine authority en