proceed to the ancient Fathers of the Church, on whose authority the authenticity of our present Gospels rest.

But, on bringing our witnesses into court, let us see whether we can establish the respectability of their characters for veracity, good morals, good sense, and competent learning. The inen by whose testimony the authenticity of the Four Evangelists must stand or fall, ought to be witnesses in all respects unexceptionable. Let us see then what the most learned and able of the Christian writers have declared as their deliberate opinions concerning the ancient Fathers of the Church.

On this head, I believe my researches will enable me to furnish a more full, though brief account of the ancient Fathers, than your readers will elsewhere find; and I hope that they will bear in mind, that in proportion to the uncommon character and importance of the fact to be proved, such ought to be the full and unsuspected nature of the evidence adduced to prove it. We cannot fix the wisdom of one blockhead, by the testimony of another; or prove the veracity of a liar, by those who habitually practise falsehood and deception. Let us have unimpeached and unimpeachable testimony, or tell us why you cannot procure it. PHILO VERITAS.

The Rev. Robert Taylor lectures on Tuesday evenings, for the present, at the Windmill-street Chapel, near Finsbury Square; on Friday evenings, at 62, Fleet-street; and assists in sermons and discussions, at Windmill-street, on the Thursday evening, and at Fleet-street on the Sunday evening. Admission to the first place 6d., to the second ls. each evening,

A SERMON,

Preached on Sunday Evening, Nov. 22,

BY THE REV. ROBERT TAYLOR, B. A.

Being the Eighth of a Series on the Internal Evidences of the Christian Religion, in the course of delivery, at 62, Fleet-street.

-

Matt. vii. 28, and viii. 1—7.—And it came to pass,

&c.

HERE is that very sublime disregard and defiance of the relations of time and place, which must put it beyond all doubt that the writer of this story could never have dreamed of any body's being so stupid as to take it to be true. "And it came to pass," you know, that's all of it. Somehow or other, you may suppose that it happened-once upon a time. What's the use of being particular? For if you come to that, you'll spoil the whole story.

"When Jesus had ended these sayings, the people were astonished at his doctrine."-And I dare say they were. Only there were no people to be astonished at it: for if you turn to the beginning of the discourse, in the 5th chapter, you will see that these say ings were delivered on the top of a mountain to which Jesus had withdrawn, on purpose that the multitude might not hear him. To his disciples, and to four of his disciples alone, did he deliver this discourse: as you will see in the discourse itself, repeated

passages not proper to have been delivered to a multitude, but exclusively, and only applicable to those disciples. "Ye are the salt of the earth. Ye are the light of the world. Blessed are ye when men shall revile you." Whereas a multitude, or any promiscuous assembly of men, could only have properly been addressed as the curth, the world, and the men-from whom these salts of the earth-these lights of the world-these cities upon hills-these candles upon candlesticks, are contra-distinguished.

A contradistinction still more emphatically marked in St. Luke's report of the substance of this discourse, who has it, that Jesus "lifted up his eyes on HIS DISCIPLES, and said, Blessed be YE poor, for yours is the kingdom of God. Blessed are YE that hunger. Blessed are YE that weep."-Luke vi., and so on. So that whatever there might be to be envied or wished for in this beggarly, hungry, and finger-in-th'eye blessedness, 'tis evident that the cake was not made for us.

The whole of this "Sermon on the Mount," as it is falsely called, is most strictly a concio ad clerum, or, discourse to the clergy. So that had it contained the finest system of morals that ever was in the world, (and I say nothing against the morals,) those morals were never intended nor proposed to the observance and practice of mankind. They appertain to the clergy, and to the clergy only, as the immediate and professed successors to the poor, hungry, and weeping discipleship of the God that was hanged.

But it has always been this part of salvation, which the clergy have been most willing to make over to any body that would have it; and spite of the most exclusive and emphatic appropriation of it to themselves, which appears in the text, they clap it under their arms, and off with it to the hospitals, and the charity-schools, and the jails. And your Bishop of London, in rochet of silk and sleeves of lawn, as I have heard, could reason with the parish children of Whitechapel, who would have been whipt if they had'nt said, "Yes, my lord."-" O you lucky dogs, don't you pity us, who shall have as much a'do to get into heaven, as a camel to pass through the eye of a needle, while you are almost equipped for swimming into it."

O the blessedness of rags and righteousness, of grace and grease. And O the wonderous charity of the clergy, who would send us all to heaven so much faster than they wish to go themselves!

I have no doubt that the bishop of whom we read in the Gospel, that let the sore-legged Lazarus perish at his palacegate, would have had no objection to have sent him out a religious tract or so; but as for any thing to eat, it would have been a sin to keep the angel waiting, who was come to carry the beggar, legs and all, into Abraham's bosom.

So, in order to make us, if they can, stand and be kickt, turn

our cheeks, chop off our hands, pluck out our eyes, off with our coats, and lend 'em every thing, and give 'em every thing, and be just as obliging as they think we ought to be, they have pretended that this precious code of morals for beggars, slaves, and cowards, was for us. The Devil thank 'em for their kindness. And, in order to bring their Jerry Sneak morality down to a level with our understandings, they have actually altered the text itself; and will tell us, in the teeth of our own reading to the contrary, that this "Sermon on the MOUNTAIN," was a Sermon on a Mount.

Now, if mountains are to be turned into mole-hills, and molehills into mountains, just as their reverences have a mind to come it high, or come it low with us, there's an end, you know, of all criticism, and they may Gospel us to any tune they please.

The text expressly is, that " he went up into a mountain" to deliver this discourse; and it is again repeated, that "he came down from the mountain." And then it was, and not till then, that the "great multitudes followed him;" that is, after the discourse was finished.

How could it possibly be otherwise? or how could we suppose that the great multitudes could possibly have understood it; even if it had been delivered in their hearing, when, by St. Paul! nobody understands it to this day?

The Scripture alone is the sure expositor of Scrpiture. We should compare spiritual things with spiritual." Our duty is, to "trust in the Lord with all our might, and lean not to our own understanding."

You can bear me witness, my brethren, how entirely I have made this the rule and guide of all the interpretations I have given of holy writ; I sweat with "trusting in the Lord."

Never have ye heard, nor will ye hear any preachers of the Gospel, who treat the Gospel with so much respect, and stand to the strict letter of its sacred text so bravely, so faithfully, and so through thick and thin, as I do.

It isn't, Sirs, because a difficulty, or an apparent contradiction, may present itself in the text (for I contend that the difficulties and contradictions which may appear are only apparent), that we are to raise objections to the Gospel on that account.

The Devil a bit shall any body catch me at such impiety. The very notion of revelation, implies that something is to be revealed, or uncovered, which we could have formed no notion of, if it had not been so revealed. And surely, Sirs, it is not because any thing that is thus uncovered and revealed may appear absurd to our imaginations, and revolting to our reason, that we are to take the audacious liberty of shaping and moulding it to our imagination or our reason.

Nay, these very apparent absurdities, and unreasonablenesses of the Gospel, do themselves supply the best proof I know that

the whole must have been the work of inspiration, since they serve to show that reason was never consulted in the business.

And the more contradictory and monstrous any part of the Gospel may seem to be, the more of a piece with all the rest

on't.

Let me say rather with holy David, " O Lord, thy word shall be a light unto my feet, and a lantern to my path." And though it be but a stable-lantern with a farthing rushlight in it, I'l look at nothing but what that light shall shine on.

And finding here, in this blessed Gospel of St. Matthew, that Jesus preached this Sermon on the top of a mountain; and finding from the chapter immediately preceding, that there really was a very remarkable mountain indeed in that neighbourhood, a mountain from the top of which he could see all the kingdoms of the world, and the glory of them in a moment of time;" I make no doubt that that, and none other than that, was the very identical mountain from which this Sermon was preached. We are not to make mountains where we find 'em ready made. And if, as they say, this Sermon was delivered" for the instruction of the whole human race," then was there a peculiar propriety in its being delivered from a pulpit of such a height as admitted of his seeing all the congregation. And this literal understanding of the text is in beautiful accordance with the miracle of the "great multitudes which followed him;" which consisting, as I dare say they did, of the whole human race, must have been very great multitudes indeed: there was no occasion for them all to be born first, as you and I were. As it accords with the miracle of Jesus coming down again from the mountain, which had it been but a mere mount, was a circumstance no more worthy to have been so particularly noticed in this miraculous history, than my coming down out of this pulpit.

But we are expressly instructed that he came down again from this mountain, which was exceeding high; and which coming down again was the more worthy to be so expressly noted, in as much as we shall by-and-bye have to be instructed of his going up somewhere, from which he never got down again.

When we are dealing with miracles, my brethren, we should not skip over any of them. The more the better; and the greater, the more credible. Remember, I beseech ye, that miracles can never be too miraculous. I never liked your mealy-mouthed miracle-mongers, that couldn't give us a good one, when they were about it; but who, calling in their Hercules to get their waggon out of the mire, are for lending him their cart greasewho set the Almighty to work, but are afraid the job should be too much for him.

Before entering on the miracles which Jesus performed, after coming down from the mountain, I think it necessary to shield the character of the Levi, or Matthew mentioned in this Gospel, as “sitting at the receipt of custom," from any suspicion of

having been concerned in the getting up of the spell, which is called the spell, or Gospel according to St. Matthew.

This need not be more effectually done, than by referring to the list of the various and contradictory titles that the spell has borne, before its final settlement and succession to our times, under the title which now it bears.

A late learned Bishop of London, "now with Jesus,” assurés us that St. Jerom never makes the Gospel of Matthew to have been the current title of that Gospel.

Jerom, Theodoret, Irenæus, Clemens Alexandrinus, Eusebius, and others, among the Fathers-Beausobre, Jones, Sandius, Reynolds, among the most renowned of modern Biblical scholars, - authenticate the titles of

1. The Gospel according to the Hebrews..

Twelve Apostles.

Nazarenes.

to which I can add, the Gospel according to the 21st of September ; which is St. Matthew's day, and the Gospel according to God knows who; but certainly never was it the Gospel according to reason. The uncertainty persons were under as to the author," says the highest authority I could appeal to on this subject, the great Jones,* * "and the various denominations of heretics who made use of it, occasioned its having different titles."

But that's all settled now you know, and my scowling masters of the Holy Ghost shop, are cock sure, that it's inspired. And so I s'pose it is, or they'll set their Rev. Dr. John Pye Smith at me, and beliar and befool me till all the "Syntagmas" and "Diegeses" should be impotent to save my reputation, either as scholar or a man. Well then, we're “looking unto Jesus."

"And when he was come down from the mountain." Be sure now, we're going to have another miracle, for here's another lo and behold.

"Kneeled

"Behold, there came a leper and worshipped him." down to him," says Mark. Fell on his face," says Luke. 1. How came the leper to know him?

2. How came the leper to worship, and kneel, and fall down by him?

"Method of settling the Canon," part 2, chap. 2.-Reynold's Defenor, page 27.