eproves, and exhorts them to exercise their
gifts in a more regular and decent manner, for the edification of the
church. This being the case, it is strange to plead this passage as a
warrant for the preaching of the gospel by those who are in no office,
and who neither have any miraculous power to prove their immediate call
by Christ to the work of the ministry, nor are admitted thereto by the
call of the church.

4th. Further, we are referred to Acts viii. 1-4, for an example of the
preaching of the gospel by persons not in office. We are told, ver. 1,
that "there was a great persecution against the church which was at
Jerusalem, and they were all scattered abroad--_except the apostles_."
And it is said, ver. 4, "_they_, that were scattered abroad, went
everywhere _preaching the word_." From this it is argued, that _the
Church in general_ proclaimed the gospel of the Lord Jesus. But why
mention the Church in general, when the method of reasoning used would
equally prove that the Church universally did so; and the absurdity of
such reasoning must be evident upon a very little consideration of the
subject. How absurd to suppose that _all_ mentioned in ver. 1, refers to
and comprehends all the members of that church, and that all the
thousands and ten thousands belonging to it were all scattered abroad,
or that they all, men, women, and children, went _everywhere preaching_
the word! Are we not told, ver. 3, that some of them, probably many of
them, both men and women, were haled and committed to prison? Or, had
all the members of the church been driven from Jerusalem, how were the
apostles to be employed? Did they only tarry to gather a new church?
When it is said, ver. 3, that Saul entered into every house, how absurd
would it be to suppose that it is meant every house in Jerusalem, or
even every house in which there was a Christian! The expression, also,
_everywhere_, ver. 4, must be limited. It would therefore be
unreasonable to object against a proper limitation of the word _all_,
ver. 1. And about the just limitation of it we need be at no loss. They
were all scattered abroad--except the apostles. What reason can there be
for mentioning only the apostles as excepted, while there were so many
other members of that church still remaining at Jerusalem, but this,
that the persons referred to were of the same description in general
with the apostles, persons in office, ministers of the church? Others
might also be scatt