iss-t. THE HISTORY RISE AND EARLY PROGRESS CHRISTIANITY. BAXTER, PRINTER, OXFORD. THE HISTORY RISE AND EARLY PROGRESS CHRISTIANITY, COMPRISING AN INQUIRY INTO ITS TRUE CHARACTER AND DESIGN. BY THE REV. SAMUEL HINDS, M. A. OF queen's college, and VICE-PRINCIPAL OF ST. ALBAN's HALL, OXFORD. VOL. I. LONDON: printed for baldwin and cradock ; c. and j, rivington; j. duncan; e. hodgson j suttaby, fox, and suttaby; b. fellowes; j. dowding; h.t. hodgson; laycock AND son; g. lawford; and j. fraser : ALSO FOR J. PARKER, OXFORD : AND J. AND J. J. DEIGHTON, CAMBRIDGE. 1828. To THE MOST REVEREND WILLIAM, LORD ARCHBISHOP OF CANTERBURY. MY LORD, It seems very natural that a mem ber of the Cliurch of England, writing on Church history, should seek to procure notice for his book, by connecting it in any way with your Grace's name. But, whatever the influence of this motive may be supposed generally to be, in the present instance it is certainly nei ther the sole nor the principal one. VI DEDICATION. From your Grace's hands I received my ordination as the Church's min ister; it was your Grace who called me to the most animating service of the Church — that of a Missionary ; and a continuance of your counte nance made me Principal of Co- drington College. In the midst of many dark days which have since passed over me, I have experienced one especial blessing, and am de sirous of recording thus publicly my thankfulness for it ; — it is, that I have been enabled to devote the com parative leisure which ill health has forced on me to some inquiries of the deepest interest; and, in pub lishing the result of these, have been permitted still to enjoy the DEDICATION. vii same kind patronage by which the more active employment of my for mer life was encouraged and pro moted. To this simple avowal I should be sorry to add a single sentence, which might awaken an association with the language of mere complimentary dedication : and praise indeed, be stowed by an obscure individual, on one of your Grace's exalted station and long tried character, would pro bably be thought needless, if not intrusive. But I owe it to myself to apprise my readers, that in wholly abstaining from the expression of such sentiments, as they must expect me to feel, and as they know your viii DEDICATION. Grace to merit, I am acting in compliance with an express prohi bition. I am, My Lord, Your Grace's obliged and obedient Servant, SAMUEL HINDS. Oxford, Oct. 18, 1828. PREFACE. JVIANY of my readers may require to be informed, that the chief part of the substance of the following work has already appeared in the ENCYCLOPiEDiA Metropolitana, and forms the first portion of its Ecclesiastical History. Being in itself however an entire work, it has been published apart, with a view of soliciting more attention to the period of Christianity which it embraces, tJian is usually bestowed on it. It is indeed a matter both of regret and of wonder, that in an age and country, dis tinguished for a diffusion of knowledge, and for a spirit of universal inquiry, there should be any need, on so important and interesting a subject, of a publication pretending prin cipally to awaken inquiry. But it cannot be denied, that Ecclesiastical History has X PREFACE. not found the same favour with the great mass of students and general readers, as other branches of knowledge, compared with which its clairas are equal or superior. As an ordinary acquirement, the attempt would be formidable, and might be unnecessary, to grasp at eighteen centuries of detail such as the Church's annals present ; nor are all portions by any means of equal importance* But there is one period with which no edu cated Christian should be unacquainted, or even imperfectly acquainted ; because on the true representation of it, depends much of the character which he asserts for his Church, of whatever denomination it may be. It is, the period which is comprised in the gradual Rise of Christianity during the min istry of Christ and his inspired followers ; and its condition when first left to the falhble conduct of uninspired men. It may be requisite to state distinctly, that in taking a survey of this interesting period, I have not contemplated the support of any particular theory or doctrine; it has been done without the slightest reference to sect or party. In saying this, I by no means PREFACE. xi wish to cast an indirect censure on those whose labours have been, so often worthily, directed to these objects ; but to state simply, that mine has been wholly distinct. It has been, historical truth, pursued for its own sake. I have read, and written, without considering in a single instance how far any theological or ecclesiastical system, contro verted or established, would oppose or sanc tion my conclusions ; and if at the close of my researches I find myself confirmed in my adherence to the Church of England, I have the satisfaction of feeling the more assured, that I am attached to that Church because of its docirines and practices, and not, to its doctrines and practices, because they charac terize the Church into which it was my lot to be baptized. I shall be happy if 1 shall have been the means of inspiring others with the same feeling; but this was not my pri mary object. Nor will the more learned and accomplished Churchman, who needs not such assistance as is here offered, be disposed, if he considers the case of the great majority, to regard my labours as need less. xii PREFACE. It will not of course be supposed, that in investigating a subject so full in many re spects of doubt and difficulty, I have de pended solely on my own original inquiries. To the researches of former writers, both living and dead, I owe much ; as the con tinual references to both will indicate. To some few my obligations are so great as to require a more especial acknowledgment. In the introductory view of the religion of the Gentiles, I have derived great assistance from Brucker's Historia Critica Philosophiae. Warburton's Divine Legation of Moses is another work which has been greatly service able to me in this part of my inquiry ; but still more in my estimate of the state of religion among the Jews previous to the Messiah's Advent, and in some parts of my view of Christ's Ministry. It is hardly possible indeed for any but one well-read in Warburton's works, to understand how much I am indebted to that great and eccentric genius ; and not the less where I have differed from him in the conclusions to which his statements and reasonings lead him. It is a characteristic of the man, that PREFACE. xiii like a whimsical self-confident tactician, who throws into subordinate stations his ablest commanders, he disposes of his most im portant views as episodes and incidental diatribes ; or makes them otherwise sub servient to some one less important. His works will probably on this account long furnish the prominent and leading principles to inquiries which might seem hardly con nected with the primary objects of Warbur ton's researches, and which are even more important than these were. In the next portion of my inquiry, which embraces the state of Christianity during the ministry of apostles and inspired men. Lord Barrington's Miscellanea Sacra has suggested to me the arrangement of periods and some other valuable matter, Mosheim's best work, De Rebus Christianorum ante Constantinum Magnum, has been also of great use to me here. As a sole and ulti mate guide, Mosheim is liable to serious objections ; but in his own proper province he is incomparable. No ecclesiastical writer was ever so well-read in all the secondary sources of information; and no one ever xiv PREFACE. understood better how to apply skilfully, the result of another's labours. This very talent however caused, or was connected with, not merely a neglect of original materials, but a turn of mind which disquahfied him for making the same adroit use of them. He excelled in correcting and finishing off the work of others; in this department his judg ment was acute and his execution masterly : but he was so long and extensively engaged in this kind of employment, that he was the less fitted to contend with any rude and misshapen materials, before they had received some form from another. Certainly he has most failed in those parts where the nature of the subject has apparently most tempted him to fashion the whole view himself, instead of remodelling the theories of others ; in his account, for instance, of the constitu tion of the primitive and apostolic Church, especially of the episcopacy, and of the au thority of the Church assembhes. The constitution and government of the apostoHcal Church, and of the Church in the period immediately succeeding, is the point on which I have had least reason to PREFACE. XV be satisfied, not with Mosheim alone, but with the other authors on the subject from whom I have sought guidance and help. Of all inquiries, no one has been more ob scured by prejudice and party-spirit. Lord King, indeed, wrote his once celebrated Inquiry" in an honest and candid spirit, as the result testifies ; but his research was partial, and led him to adopt the congre gational principle of the Independents. In Mr. Sclater's reply '', principles scarcely less erroneous may be pointed out ; yet, as far as the controversy went, he was right; and his opponent, by an act of candour perhaps unexampled, acknowledged himself con vinced, and gave Sclater preferment for his victory. The errors of a writer, at once sincere and ingenious, can hardly be so predominant " An Enquiry in the Constitution, Discipline, Unity, and Worship of the Primitive Church, By an Impartial Hand. '' An Original Draught of the Primitive Church, in answer to a Discourse, entitled, An Enquiry, &c. By a Presbyter of the Church of England. xvi PREFACE. as to make his speculations wholly useless ; and to Mosheim, at least, I have neverthe less been greatly indebted, not only in the above-mentioned portion of my work, but during my progress through the last stage of my inquiry, — the state of Christianity under its first uninspired teachers. The book, however, which has been here most serviceable, although in a way peculiar to itself, is Bingham's Ecclesiastical Antiquities. Although little more than an index, it is a full and faithful one, of the various informa tion to be collected on the rites, constitution, and government of the early Church ; and this very circumstance, while it renders it less attractive to the mere reader, increases its utility to the inquirer. Such a work is, after all, likely to be more permanently valuable to Ecclesiastical History, than those researches which have been blended with the speculations of the philosopher, the con troversialist, or the historian. The very cloth ing which gives to these their present popu larity, is liable to offend the shifting taste and temper of a succeeding age ; and, even in their own generation, they are generally less fitted for facilitating the independent PREFACE. xvii inquiries of those, who would think and judge for themselves. A mere historical directory, such as Bingham's Antiquities of the Church, may be compared to an ac curate model designed for an anatomy school ; in history, and discussion, the na tural structure is disguised, as in a well- dressed portrait; and thus, what gives grace and beauty to the historical picture, destroys its use, as a source of knowledge, and as an instrument of study. These works have been specified, because they have most intimately affected the plan of my own, and the principles adopted in it; or have furnished, or else directed me to, the materials. But there are many other sources from which I have derived assist ance. It is, for instance, to Lord King's Critical History, that I owe my most valu able remarks on the Apostles' Creed. There is also one who although not oc cupying any ground exactly similar to my own, has really contributed more than any whom I have named. Those vvho are ac quainted with Dr. Whately's publications, VOL. I. c xviii PREFACE. especially his Essays, will on perusing the following pages, readily perceive that it is to him I allude : and yet I have derived far more from his long and famihar intercourse, than from his books. My use of his pub lications, however, is all with which the public is concerned, because to these only they can be referred ; his other assistance is a private and personal favour, the character and extent of which, it would be impertinent, and indeed impossible, to state. In all instances, it has been my endeavour, by accurate reference, to give my reader the means of ascertaining for himself the facts asserted, and of examining for himself the opinions canvassed. Still, with my ut most care, I can hardly expect to have escaped all omissions or mistakes. The references, especially to original authorities, having been made at different times, the same edition of an author was not always accessible ; and generally I have been obliged to content myself with obtaining any, instead of selecting the best. To obviate the in convenience arising from this, I have given for the most part the references in a form PREFACE. xix not accommodated to any particular edition ; or when the page alone was the distinguishing mark, I have specified the edition employed. The instances in which I have omitted to do this are in my references to Epiphanius, which are made to Petavius's edition, re published at Cologne in 1682; in those to Justin Martyr, made to the Paris edition of 1636 ; and in those to Irenaeus, the foho of Grabe, Oxon. 1702, being the book em ployed. CONTENTS. Page INTRODUCTION 1-1 Religion of the Gentiles ..... . 3 Religion of the Jews ..... . 49 Religion of the Samaritans .... . 75 PART I. THE MINISTRY OF CHRIST. His Example ...... . 87 His Teaching ...... . 92 His Miracles ...... . 94 His Institutions ...... . 97 His Prophecies ...... . 100 1. Concerning Himself .... . 101 2. Concerning His Church . 102 3. Concerning certain Individuals . 105 4. Concerning the destruction of Jerusalem . 115 The Temptation . . . . 121 The Transfigukation .... . 129 xxii CONTENTS. PART II. APOSTOLIC AGE. Page CHAP. I. Distinction between Christianity as taught ry our Saviour, and by his apo stles .... .... 134 What preparation Christ had made before his departure for the establishment of Christi anity ... .... 146 CHAP. II. Preaching to the Jews . . 175 Appointment of Matthias to be an apostle . .184 Descent of the Holy Ghost ' 189 Second extraordinary manifestation of the Holy Ghost 206 The case of Ananias and Sapphira . . . 209 Appointment of the seven Deacons . . 216 Effects of Stephen's martyrdom .... 225 Conversion of Saul ...... 230 CHAP. III. Preaching to Jews and devout Gentiles . 352 Conversion of Cornelius ...... ibid. Foundation of the Church of Antioch . . . 245 St. Paul's revelation and appointment . . . 250 CHAP. IV. Preaching to Jews, devout Gen tiles, and Idolaters ..... 255 St. Paul's first Apostolical journey . . ibid. Decree of the Council of Jerusalem . . . 261 CHAP. V. St. Paul's second Apostolical journey •••..... 285 St. Paul at Troas 287 . .CONTENTS. xxiii, Page St. Paul and the Pythoness 301 St. Paul at Athens 306 St. Paul at Corinth and at Cenchrsea . . 311 CHAP. VI. St. Paul's third Apostolical journey 315 St. Paul and the disciples of John the Baptist . . 316 Collections for ihe poor of Judaea .... 321 St. Paul and the Corinthians 324 St. Paul and the Ephesian Presbyters . . 345 St. Paul at Jerusalem ...... 357 CHAP. VII. St. Paul's fourth Apostolical JOURNEY ....... 364 St. Paul a prisoner at Rome ..... 365 St. Paul and Onesimus ...... 369 St. Paul at hberty 371 CHAP. VIII. St. Paul's fifth Apostolical JOURNEY ....... 375 Nekonian persecution 377 INTRODUCTION. History being-the portraiture of '(|hankind, (a subject which admits of two very different aspects,) itself obtains a corresponding difference in its de sign and character. It may represent men merely as inhabitants of this world — considered in their relation to one another, as members of famihes, cities, and empires. Or, again, it may represent them in their relation to an invisible state of things, and to the supreme invisible Being. Whichever of these views we contemplate in this great picture of time, the most striking feature, doubtless, is the ^ coming of our Lord Jesus Christ upon earth. For, considered merely in its results on the temporal condition of mankind, neither conquest, legislation, nor philosophy, has at any period affected society so intimately, so extensively, and so permanently, as Christianity ; whilst aU that concerns our hea- ^ venly connections, seems important, chiefly in pro portion as it has been subservient to, or otherwise connected with, this institution. With the former of these views the present inquiry is not concerned; it is directed to the rise and progress of Chris- VOL. I. B 2 Introduction. tianity, considered only so far as it has affected the relation and intercourse between God and men. And in order to estimate the nature and extent of that change, which the Saviour's coming has wrought on the reUgious condition of mankind, as weU as the fitness of the means employed for effect ing it, it will be first necessary to take a brief survey of the state in which he found religion. It is well known, that, for many centuries precedijig the Advent, aU the world, except the Jews, a small and otherwise inconsiderable people, were not only in the grossest error on the subject, but without any authentic source to supply them with more correct information. An account therefore of the reHgion of the Gentiles (as all other natioas were termed in distinction from the one favoured people of God) wiU be rather an account of their igriorance than of their knowledge. But however widely re moved from truth are the opinions and practices which such an account must contain, it wiU serve the twofold purpose, of instructing us in the sources of that ignorance, and of discovering the propriety of the Christian scheme, wherein truth was so dis pensed, as to apply specially to the more important varieties of existing error. Proceeding from the rehgion of the Gentiles to that of the Jews, the need of the Gospel dispensa tion will appear not less in the state of their know ledge, than in that of the heathen ignorance. It was knowledge insufficient not only in quantity Religion of the (jfentiles. 3 but in kind ; partial, not ^because confined to a feW ttuths, but because the truths which it embraced were each designedly incomplete, and requiring some afterpiece of revelation to render it iiiteUigibie and effective. t Besides the rehgion of the Getitiles and of the Jews, that of the Satnaritans (nattow as was its extent and influence) will deserVfe some slight se parate notice, owing to certain peculiarities in its Origin and chaS-actei*, which distinguish it from the Jewish on the one hand, and still more from all the heathen creeds and modes of worship on the other. I. RELIGION OF THE GENTILES. Were history silent, the concurrent traditions and fables of all nations concerning a chaos^ a delugCj and a r'epeopKng of the earth from a single family, would Suggest the inference, that out oi one origin proceeded the religions of aU the Gentile world. But this conclusion is more directly de duced from the Bible. At the Aspersion of man kind after the attempt to build Babel^, the wan- * The buiidlfig of Babel fortes the first great era in th^ hiStdry of idolatry. The Wdrk is described iti the BiWe, li<€li'ally, iS '' a t&wer whose tOp WEt* to the heAvenS," dhd the confosfon 4s a co&ftiaioft (rf " \i^." Herodotus fflentions the totistefilce' of sfldh a building at Babylon in his time, (lib. i. c. l8l .) arid stcttes that B 2 4 Introduction. derers we know possessed a certain portion of revelation, which they must have carried with them into their respective settlements ; nor is it reasonable to suppose that this knowledge, however it might be neglected, would be soon altogether effaced. Limited as the compass of sacred history becomes from that period, stiU it affords instances amongst the heathen of priests and worshippers of it was dedicated to the Assyrian Jupiter. Diodorus Siculus (lib. ii.) gives nearly the same account of it. Now, comparing these statements — the heathen with the sacred — we_ are per haps warranted in interpreting the latter, as descriptive of a tower whose top was dedicated to the heavens as to an object of idolatrous worship, Jupiter being well understood by all to be the air or the heavens. (See Prideaux's Connection, vol. i. part i. book ii. ann. 570.) It is more agreeable to this view, to understand by the con fusion of lip, a disagreement in worship rather than in speech. A miraculous confusion of tongues is certainly not what we should suppose likely, from the strong marks which the several ancient languages retain of a common original, and of their difference being the gradual result of the dispersion. But a disturbance of the uniformity of worship is highly probable, considered as the means employed by Providence, to prevent the contemplated establishment of one great idolatrous Church and Empire in that early period. See Parkhurst's Hebrew Lexi con, under the word nStf, Vitringae Observ. Sacr. 1. i. c. 9. and Fragments to Calmet's Diet. No. 265. It was, doubtless, in reference to the heavens being the first and chief object of idolatry among the ancients, that the holy Scriptures open with the declaration, " In the beginning God created the heavens and the earth ;" thus claiming for Jehovah, (what none of the heathen ever ascribed to their deities,) the creation of the world, and including in the work of creation all that men called gods. Religion of the Gentiles. 5 Jehovah. Such was Job, such was Melchisedech, such, possibly, I may add, was Potiphera the Egyptian, whose daughter Joseph married, as well as Jethro the father-in-law of Moses. In Balaam we recognize not only a behever, but one divinely inspired. Without denying then the tendency or the ca pacity of mankind to create a system of rehgion for themselves, it may be fairly assumed that no period has yet occurred, which has afforded an op portunity for the experiment. Certainly the ancient heathen creeds could not have been originally the mere invention of fancy, or the independent deduc tions of reason, but rather the corruption of re vealed rehgion — extending, it may be, in most instances, so far, that in process of time the founda tion should be concealed and buried under the su perstructure. Nevertheless, any attempt to trace the origin and progress of false religion, or any estimate of its character, which should have no reference to its connection with the true, would be as unreasonable as an inquiry into the formation of language, which should neglect all consideration of a portion of it being coexistent with the gift of speech. Reasoning from the scriptural account of the several lapses of the Israehtes into heathenish wor ship, it would seem that polytheism did not ori ginally imply a disbelief in the unity of God ; nei ther were the objects of false worship originally 6 tntrQs ; not a God, in the same jaeaning of tfee Wm. as when it was applied to Jehovah, but one of his. miBJi;tering creatures, of a di^erent 0rd.er indeed, but in this respecfe supposed to be such as by divine appointraent "the man Moses" had been ipito them. " Up," (sjEtid they to A^jon,) " make US; gods which shall go before ua ; for as for this Moses, the na^n that byoTjight us out of the land of !lgypt.„ we; wot not what is; beeogje: of haa." Aad ?^(i>wsrdipgly when the image Wfi^, made^, a®d tJie altar was bwitt before it, still tfee proclamAtioia, was, " To-morrow ther? is a fe«§t untft the Lswd/' meajE:t- i^g Jehpyg.h''. ,. Th#. the Israelites thea ^d not^ eonsfefer' polgs^ theism as, implying a, disbeJiel ini the unity of God will hjardly be denied. That ihfi hieathen o»|inally adopted it imder the same impression is also, hi^aly p)?pbable. But whs^t, it may be ssked^ could; have suggested tQ the early world, ppgsp^i^ as they did th^ knoiwledgt; and belief th^t (3^ is Qm, a systeia t" Exodus xxxii. 5. Iji the origiuiaj; it is " Jehoya^." Religion ef the Gentiles. ?;* 7 so strange,, and apparently incongruous, as poly theism? Was it the mere wantonness of fancy? or was there any doctrine ,of revdatioil known to sMf and thus Uable to become perverted by ail? Such a doctrine there is. A behef in angels and laiaaistering spirits appews in the earliest records of God's dispensaticHis ; nor can there be any difficulty ini fixing on this article of behef as tke point from which rehgion first began tO' diverge into error, and stKperstition,^ and impiety. Men, for instance, at tributing whatever blessings they received from God to the iMermediat© agency of his> good alngels, would (if neglectful of tb© appointed preservatives against error) fai inta an undue regaard and re verence for tbese ministers of gocwl. A kindly season, the rain^ whida) caused their corn to^ growy the sun which ripened it, would become associated in their effects witb some invisible superistenfent^ tbe agent andi the creature' of God. Hence the worship of the heaTcnly bodies, and of the various paattS' and operations' of matuKre. In like manner, whatever greait pubhc benefactors arose, these would be. supposed flo be under the guManee of guardian aaagsb, either attached to the indiividualsi, or to the society for whose; welfare they laboured. The reverence and gratitude felt towards the men, wotdd lead to a veneraition and worship ol theiir supposed in/visible guidsSi hi time, the two wofuld be eon- founded fogether, and the human being and the 8 Introduction. guiding angel would be handed down in history and fable as one and the same person. By a similar abuse of Revelation, the doctrine of evil spirits would lead to a new class of gods, such as the Persian Ahriman and the Grecian Furies, whose mahcious disposition would require sacrifice and worship, in order to avert their spleen. The robbers, tyrants, and mighty " hunters" of the earth, would be blended in traditionary lore with these, in like manner as the benefactors of mankind were with good angels. Idolatry would be the necessary and early result of these indistinct notions. An image, originally that of a man, (for to sensible objects only would images be originaUy apphed,) would, in process of time, be transferred to the tutelary spirit whose character was blended with his ; and to the deity, so represented, rites would be instituted, consisting partly of the sepulchral honours paid to the man, and partly of such as were appropriated to the tutelary spirit. In the former we may discem the origin of the impurities and immoraUty of heathen worship,; in the latter its impiety. Rites comme morative of human benefactors, naturally contained some reference to those habits of life, to which when Uving they had been most addicted. Hence, even in the memorials of the wise and brave, the warrior's grave would be stained with the blood of human victims ; whUst the frailties and infirmities of the Religion of the Gentiles. 9 sage and legislator, would be preserved in Bacchana- Uan revels, or in the filthy and disgusting emblems of the PhalUcs. Nor was this- motley adoration addressed to men alone. Whatever was admirable or useful in the whole compass of nature, (it being once assumed that its effects on mankind depended on the ex ercise of a power delegated to one of the host of heaven,) became invested with sinular associations, and was adopted as symbohcal of these unseen stewards of Providence. This was most remarkably the case in Egypt, where beasts, birds, reptiles, and plants became instruments of idolatry, and the works of nature were made to answer the purpose of graven images and other artificial symbols. With the Egyptians, too, the use of hieroglyphic characters cooperated to produce the same eff'ect. The ox, for instance, was an obvious symbol of husbandry ; and an ox, distinguished by colour or by any other arbitrary sign, of him who was their first or chief instructor in agriculture. When ceremonies and sacrifices were appropriated to this pubUc benefactor, and his human character had been lost or blended with that of a tutelary spirit, the hieroglyphic figure under which he had been recorded in this monumental history, would suggest in the Uving animal a stiU more appropriate and vivid emblem. Thus the ox would become to the Egyptian idolater, what the work of Phidias or Praxiteles was to the Greek. Then a further pro- 10 Irdroduction. cess cf association would produce further results.^. The deity would in time be believed to be mysteri ously combined with the animaP; and thus the same piiinciple,^ whidi led at Athais to the banish ment of him who was hardy enough to assert that fhe statue of MinervaTwas but a block of dutt marble«, made it sacrileg^a in Egypt to slay a eat or a stoik. > To advert once more to the case of the Israelites. The methods adapted by Divine wisdora in the Mosaic dispensation to preserve them from false worship,^ aare highly il!histrative of this view of its origin and early nature. That tittey inight have the less, temptation waA pretext for worsiapping any of the host of heaven, Jehovah condescended to be come to them God in both senses of tbe term ;¦ not only as tb© one-, distinct, supreme, uncreated Being, brat also as the tutelary Power presiding over their nation. " I am the Lord,, thy God, who bpougJrt thee out of the land of Egypt," is a decferation, whaich, considered together witb the errors into which ¦^ See Appendix, [A.], '' Herodotus, lib. ii. cap. 65. represents the Egyptians as li^isfomT T« as nu a* n to tn^iit, which indicates that their wor- ahip^ was: not addressed! to thie; brate, 6ut fe the Seitj with whieb it was supposed to be possessed. ' The name of this unfortunate freerthinker was StiJpo, (See Diog. Laert. 1. ii. sect. 116.) A similar fate befel Anaxagoras, the first who ts said to have taug&f them the doctrine of one su preme Being. He was condemned to die for calling their Apollb (or the Sun) a mass of burning matter. Ibid. sect. 12. Religion of the Gentiles. 1 1 they so soon fell after their departure from Egypt, may be fairly interpreted as indicating, that in his dispensation to them he employed no ministering spirit. With the same view, it would seem, that the remonstrance was made against their desire to have a king^, inasmuch as without a king they were Ukely to look more immediately to Jehovah as tbeir govemor, and guide, and judge. In several other pecuharities of their poUty as directed by God, we may trace the samie merciful^ intent toi' remove from them a temptation which proved so fatal to aU the nations of the world : in none more, than in the exclusion from their view of a state of future re wards and punishments, whereby tbeir attention was fixed and Umited to that portion of Ms dispens ation, wbich, witb a more comprehensive revelation, tbey might have rashly deeaaaed the liessi worthy of him, and Ukely ta be delegated to- amgels- or to men. Nor was it umtil the oarigioal charaeter of idolatry, as practised by the nations around them, was dbangedi and Imt, that tb^ prophets were com missioned to pmnt to a better country than Canaan, and a, worse bondage than, that ol Egypt or Assyria. To fhis state of change and utter depravation the Gesitile »eUgioa rapidly advanced. The worship ef ' 1 Samiwl wi.. ' i. e. merciful to mankind at large; for it should be borne in mindi, that God's, favour to his chosen peopte', was shewn- with a view to, presecve reliigioni, not for them, exclusively, but for alt the world. 12 Introduction. God being once transferred to bis creatures, hence forth reU^on became liable to aU tbe accidents and modifications of a mere human institution. Its claim to a holier name and a higher authority was admitted as a matter of courtesy, but proofs and title-deeds were lost. To tbe inquiring mind all was fooUshness and fable, to the vulgar it was only custom. And thus it was handed down from one generation to another, sometimes tbe toy of fancy, sometimes the engine of state pohcy ; or, if tbe serious regard of any were arrested by it, as by an ancient monument of unearthly record, the cha racters on it were so worn, through time, neglect, and outrage, tbat aU attempt to decipher them was fruitless, and aU reasomng on their import con jectural. It is scarcely necessary to observe, that tbe pro gress of false reUgion through its various shapes was not tbe same among the several Gentile na tions. It bas been questioned, for instance, whether tbe Persians ever proceeded to image-worship, and it bas been also asserted that the Scythians never did. Among the Celtic nations, undoubtedly, (and tbey were probably of the same faith originaUy, as they were of the same stock with these latter,) idolatrous figures were first introduced by tbeir Roman invaders^. Egypt, on the other hand, luxu- e Tacitus (De Moribus Germ. c. 9.) represents the Germans as worshipping originally secretum illud quod sola reverentia vident. See also Csesar, lib. vi. c. 20. Rf ligion qf the Gentiles. 13 riated in aU the refinement and subtlety of idolatry, so as even to excite the disgust and contempt of other nations. Quis nescit, Volusi Bithynice, qualia demens ^gyptus portenta colat ? Crocodilon adorat Pars haec; ilia pavet saturam serpentibus Tbin. ££Sgies sacri nitet aurea cercopitheci, Dimidio magicae resonant ubi Memnone chordae, Atque vetus Thebe centum jacet obruta portis. Illic coeruleos, hic piscem fluminis, illic Oppida tota canem venerantur, nemo Dianam. Porrum et csepe nefas violare, aut frangere morsu. O sanctas gentes, quibus haec nascuntur in hortis Numjna''! And besides tbis difference of form and outward cast, which is observable in the different branches of tbe Gentile religion, there are otber characteris tics belonging to each, more strongly marked, and more essentiaUy distinct. Thus, the Persian kin dUng his devotion in the blaze of an Eastern sun, the German and the Briton seeking it beside the blood-stained altar in the chilUng gloom of a forest, tbe Egyptian carrying it about him like a disease, wbich rendered him morbidly sensitive to the sup- •• Juvenal, Sat. xv. See also Diodorus Siculus, (Bibl. Hist. lib. i. cap. 83, 84.) who speaks ofthe various forms of. Egyptian idolatry, as more easy to relate than to credit. Mosheim has reconciled the apparent inconsistencies of history, with respect to these and the like statements, in an admirable note on Cud worth's Intellectual System, c. iv. sect. 18. 14 Introduction. posed influence of the herb beneath his feet, and the reptile which crossed his path, the Roman combining it witb war, triumph, or luxury, and the Greek witb tbe arts, with poetry, and witb phi losophy, — are worshippers diff'ering not so mucb in the nature of the objects adored, as in the frame of their-' devotion, in the ties which boimd them to their faith, and in whatever may be supposed to result from a combination of national pecuUarities, imparting each something to reUgion, and operating all to force it into that shape wbich might best accord with tbe wbole national character. Among these sources of difference, none deserve a specific notice more tban the fine arts, especially sculpture and poetry. Brief mention has already been made of the probable rise and progress of image worship. Its result on the popular conceptions of tbe divine nature is curious and instructive. Sculpture, of all tbe imitative arts, addresses itself most palpably and unequivocaUy to tbe bodily perceptions. Let it represent what it may, its subject forthwith becomes material ; its form must be defined, its sub stance measured, and to aU incorporeal asso ciations it yields unkindly and reluctantly. What wonder then tbat the great mass of a people, habituated from childhood to contemplate their deities so represented, should, in defiance of reason itself, entertain no higher notions of the divine than of tbe human nature ? One can hardly say how far Religion ofthe Gentiles, 1.5 such early impressions may ret|iin their hold, even on more enUghtened and speculative minds ; nor, with the existence of such a phenomenon, can we wonder at tbe doctrine which some attributed to the Stoics, that the supreme Being was cor poreal'. What has been here suggested wiU derive some support from contrasting tbe Greek and Roman superetitions with those of the northem and ori ental nations. In the former a divine vision was somewhat famiUar to mortal eyes, at best "the gods come down to men in tbe shape of men ;" but the Persian found no description immaterial and extra-human enough for his Genii and Peris ; and in the sombre imagination of the northern enthusiast. The mountain mist took form and limb Of noontide hag, or goblin grim. It is true, that, with the highly-gifted idolaters of ancient Greece, sculpture became not merely an imitative but an imaginative art. In tbeir hands it went as far into the province of fancy and pure inteUect, as its nature possibly allows it to go. With them, therefore, its use for reUgious purposes had not exactly the same tendency, as with nations among whom it was more rude and uncouth. The brutal ' See Cie. De Nat. Deorum, lib. ii. c. 17, compared with lib. iii. c. 9—25. 16 Introduction. thirst for blood, for instance, instUled into the heart of the warrior who bowed before a monster like Bel or Dagon, could have found no incitement in the classical image of Mars, arrayed in aU tbe beauty of art, and conveying the stem inspiration of war, softened and humanized by tbe medium through which it passed. It was more Uke, in its eflFects, to tbe fair band buckUng on tbe spur or presenting tbe banner, in the days of chivalry. StUl aU this was no corrective of that peculiar bias which the mind received from the habitual contemplation of sculptured deity ; and in none more conspicu ously than in the most refined nations, has the wisdom of that restriction been justified, which forbade tbe IsraeUtes, not the worship alone, but the most harmless use of images. StiU greater was tbe effect of poetry. What Herodotus "^ has asserted of Hesiod and Homer, tbat from them the Greeks leamt their theology, is nearly true of the earUer poets of all nations. The ancient heroes of each country form the first and natural theme of its bards; and these either had passed into the rank of gods, or were inti mately connected with others who had attained that eminence. Embracing then as his subject gods and de parted heroes, the poet encountered a twofold diffi culty. In his description of the gods, it required no * Lib. ii. c. 53. Religion of the Gentiles. 17 shght exercise of genius and fancy to create a definite image of a divine nature, active, and employed in an appropriate sphere of activity, without exposing it to so exact a scrutiny, as might betray the ma terials of whicb it was composed, and destroy tbe iUusion. Tbe task was doubtless easier where it was aided by the same effbrt%in tbe sculptor, but in all nations tbe method adopted was tbe same. They took as tbeir basis a human being, and by ampUfying its several quaUties, and extending the sphere of their exercise, undertook to produce a god — -a being not merely superior, but of a different nature from man. All their taste and ingenuity were put to tbe test, in keeping out of view those quaUties whicb might betray the real cbaracter of tbis pretended divinity. But a more trying task awaited tbe poet, in his representation of man as existing in a future state. The popular creed admitted no idea of bodily exist ence in a ftiture state, but only of the existence of the soul. How then were men to be brought on the scene, divested of aU which rendered them objects of perception? The same materials were again resorted to, and human nature was again moulded by the fancy into an immaterial essence. In the former instance it was a system of amplifica tion, in this it was one oi diminution. The disem bodied man was described, by sometimes conceal ing one of his corporeal quaUties, sometimes another, and so shifting the point of view, as never to expose VOL. I. c 18 *;' Introduction. more at once, tban was barely enough to render tbe figure perceptible. For an iUustration of tbis we may refer to almost any passage in tbe sixth book of tbe Mneid, or the twelfth book of tbe Odyssey. Thus when Virgil brings his hero into the presence of the Dardan ghosts': Ut ¦videre virum, fulgentiaque arma per umbras, Ingenti trepidare metu : pars vertere terga, Ceu quondam petiere rates. He had made them see, move, and tum their backs. This was carrying the image almost too near ; he therefore makes his escape at the close : pars tollere vocem Exiguam: inceptus clamor yrifsfrafar hiantes. Homer, wbo was a more plain-spoken and inarti ficial poet, by a whimsical contrivance aUowed him self more latitude in his phantasmagoria; but, as if apologizing for his boldness, he occasionaUy puts in an avowal, tbat what he has so dressed up as to seem flesh and blood, bas no more substance than a dream : aSri) 8/xtj ItTTi j3gora>v, ore xh te flav(0(riv Ou yap ETi iragxai ts xa) oittso. Tvsj sp^oucriv, 'A^Xa Toi p,BV rs rroqa^ xgaregov p.evo; ocWopJvoio Aapva., Ittei xe rrgS/ru Xwri) Keix oarsoc 6up,o;- ^^X^ ^ ^"t" ovEigoj krrorrra.p.svri rrsrroTyjTeii''. ' iEneid, lib. vi. 490. »¦ Odyss. lib. xi. 217. Religion of the Gentiles. 19 Now these fictions being interwoven with the most vivid, if not the most serious, notions of reUgion, to the Divine nature was attributed aU tbat was found in the human character — ^passions, prejudices, in firmities ; and the stories which adliered to each god out of his true and original history as a man were perpetuated, and contributed still further to degrade tbe character of tbe deities. Add to this, tbat so palpable were tbe fabulous ingredients which were mixed up with wbat was taught as serious truth, that the least reflection on the subject was productive of scepticism and disbeUef. Hence Pythagoras represented Hesiod and Homer doing penance in heU", and Plato, tbe most poetical of philosophers, condemned all mythological poetry, even that of Homer, as unfit for tbe perusal of the young". Similar to tbis was tbe effect produced on tbe beUef of a future state. The efforts of the poets, to make positive images of what only admitted of a negative description, reduced the notion of future existence to nothing. The rewards of tbe good were only shadows dealt out to shadows, and the punishments of tbe wicked the same. No wonder that the chequered scene of real life should be boldly maintained to be preferable to tbe fair but " Diogenes Laertius, lib. viii. " De Republica, lib. iii. Cicero, in his Tusculan Disputations, (lib. ii. c. 11.) where Plato's censure is spoken of, seems to have overlooked the chief motive for it. c 2 20 Introduction. unsubstantial glories of Elysium, or even of the heavenly mansions. BouXOffAyjv x' srragougos hoav fltjTeus/x-EV aXXio 'AvSgi wag' kxKriqiu, ch p,^ |3j'oTOf rroyMS ew), *H rrdcriv vex6s(r »iV "Agns tct6itmcriti. Sophoclis Frag. SoSAdi fiitrtXim i'lrir i Js fixirlMvs ©««», 0 ©««5 amygvf. Philemonis Reliq. See the re marks of Gassendi and others on Cudworth's Intellect. System, p. 56. and Mosheim's Dissert, ad Hist. Eccl. Pertinentes, vol. i. p. 355. 26 Introduction. systems, or refused to recognize its existence as an independent principle. The term fate, in its original import, is some thing uttered, a decree, a law, or expression of authority of some kind. To admit the existence of such a law, involves tbe admission of two further truths, — tbat there is a being who framed it, and tbat there is a subject to which it is appUcable. Now if in its subject be embraced human affairs, (as was tbe Gentile doctrine,) and the law be not de rived from God, nor controllable by him, the being from whom it proceeds, must at least bold divided empire with him, and the notion of one distinct and supreme nature is destroyed. Nevertheless, in tbis doctrine of fate, however corrupted and abused,— in this universal impression of a supreme Word wbich could not be reversed or gainsaid, we may possibly discover the last imperfect remnant of the true reh gion, as it existed at the era wben men first began to corrupt it. With the GentUes, however, it rather served to perplex their view of a supreme Being, and gave rise to the most mischievous and artful contriv ances of their religion. Under a pretence of dis covering the appUcation of the eternal decrees of fate to any given case, the wUy, or enthusiastic, took on them tbe characters of soothsayers, augurs, and magicians. Tbe abodes o?' those most famous for their skiU became the seats of oracles, and their art was transferred to tbeir successors, and Religion of the Gentiles. 27 at length associated with the places. Agreeably to this notion, few oracles appear to have existed in the earUest ages of whicb there is any record, and the business of the oracle was performed by the soothsayer. These arts and fraudulent practices of course took a tinge from tbe general cbaracter of reUgion, as it existed in diflferent parts of tbe world. Thus in Egypt, where the doctrine of tbe Metempsychosis was most prevalent, they were connected witb magical rites, and tbe consulting of departed souls. In the east, where the heavenly bodies were wor shipped and were supposed to represent demons and spirits, the Wise men pretended to apply to these sources for supernatural information. So arose the practice and the name of Astrology. The flight of birds, and the character of tbe entraUs in victims, (tbe materials of augury,) betray in Uke manner the notion of the soul, tbe divine principle, nugrating through the bodies of these animals ; a doctrine not unknown to the ancient Etrurians, to whom is attributed the invention of tbis art ''. ' Cicero de Divinat. lib. i. c. 2. Ovidii Met. lib. xv. 558. The connection, which has been here suggested, between augury and the belief that life, in man and brate alike, was a particle of the Divine essence, seems to be countenanced by the fact, that the entrails were examined whilst in the act apparently of parting with, and exhibiting, as it were, this imaginary subtle principle, Spirantia consulit exta. Tiiere is a ghastly description in Strabo, of the mode of divination practised by the Cimbrian women on human victims. See lib. vii. p. 425. ed. Falconer. 28 Introduction. Of aU these, the influence of oracles, originaUy tbe greatest, was the earUest overturned. Their extinction at tbe period of the Advent bas been attributed to the miraculous expulsion of tbe spirits whicb presided over them on the appearance of Christ in the world. But tbere are natural causes to which it might certainly be referred. Tbe ma chinery employed in them was more compUcated and clumsy, and less easily disguised, than that used in tbe other similar arts, except perhaps ma gic. Besides wbich, aU tbe arts of prescience had at some period or other enjoyed the patronage of the great empires and mUng powers of the world, and through tbeir influence bad been spread and upheld. Such had been tbe case witb oracles in Greece, with magic in Egypt, astrology in Cbaldaea and tbe East, witb augury at Rome. At the com mencement of tbe Christian era, Rome was aU and sole powerful. Augury being tbe national art, was patronized by the government ; astrology and magic (although contrary to law) received a stiU more powerful support from the secret practice of indi viduals of rank, even of the Emperors themselves*. Oracles alone, having lost aU accidental support, fell into disrepute and disuse. Something Uke an • Taciti Ann. lib. vi. c. 20. Horace's Canidia, and the several allusions to the practice of magic, which are found in his writings, prove how popular the superstition vvas in the reign of Augustus. See Epod. v. Epist. lib. ii. 2, v. 208, &c. Religion of the Gentiles, 29 allusion to this capricious transfer of credulity may be observed in those lines of Juvenal : -Quicquid Dixerit Astrologus, credent a fonte relatuni Ammonis ; quoniam Delphis oracula cessant, Et genus humanum damnat caligo futuri''. As long as tbe learning of tbe Gentile world was confined to tbe priest, tbe statesman, and tbe law giver, it was uniformly employed in tbese and whatever otber superstitious practices tended to maintain the popular reUgion, and, through that, order and decomm. The Brachmans and the Magi might bave despised the vulgar errors of tbeir countrymen, but tbeir more enUghtened views were kept to themselves, or else cautiously communi cated throughthe interior doctrine of the Mysteries. But, in truth, as far as tbere is any ground for conjecture, tbe wise men of old, comprehending tbe Magi, tbe Brachmans, the Druids, and even tbe far-famed sages of ancient Greece, exercised their reasoning powers but little, in investigating tbe truths of reUgion. Tbey were occupied in per petuating and expounding immemorial traditions, rather than in pursuing independent inquiries by the Ught of nature. They were priests and poli ticians, not philosophers. To tbis latter cbaracter none have any claim " Sat. vi. 553. 30 Introduction. before the rise of those celebrated schools of Greek philosophy, whieh divided the learned world at the period of the Advent. Yet even witb tbese so strongly did tbe old custom operate, tbat in their teaching and writing they preserved a distinction simUar to that wbich obtained in the Mysteries, and always framed an exoteric, as well as an esoteric system'^. Their genuine opinions on reUgion were entrusted as secrets to a few, whilst publicly tbey maintained the grossest doctrines of the popular creed. Nay, to sucb an extent did they carry this sense of duty as good citizens, that when Euemerus made tbe alarming discovery of the secret of the Mysteries, the philosophers were the most active in replacing the veil whicb had been drawn aside ; and much of tbat allegorical interpretation of the more absurd parts of the popular theology was appUed to this purpose*^, wbich bas since exercised tbe ingenuity of one greater than the ancient sages*'. Owing to this double doctrine, the religious views of the philosophers exhibit an endless tissue ' Pythagoras, who resided raany years in Egypt, and was there initiated in the Mysteries, introduced the practice into the famous Italic school, (Jamblichus, de Vita Pythag. c. vi.) which was the parent ofthe Eleatic, Heraclitan, Epicurean, and Sceptic sects. But it was not confined to the sects of any one fitmily, nor to the philosophy of any one country. For an account of Aristotle's two Classes, see A. Gellius, lib. xx. c. 5. •i See Appendix [C] *•' See Lord Bacon's Wisdom of the Ancients. Religion of the Gentiles . 31 of inconsistency, wbich renders it (even witb tbis key) not always easy to discover what was tbeir opinion as philosophers, what tbeir doctrine as good citizens ; and to the age for wbich they wrote, it doubtless answered tbe purpose of keep ing their light under a bushel. Besides, although they speculated mucb on the nature of God and of man, yet tbese speculations were not always applicable to religion. All reli gious inquiry, strictly speaking, is directed to the nature of God as connected with man, or again to the nature and condition of man as connected ivith God. Metaphysical discussions on tbe Divine na ture, similar to tbose in which an attempt is made to analyze or arrange the principles of tbe human mind, are sometimes indeed confounded with reli gious views, but are really compatible witb tbe most complete denial of all religion. Religious obUgation arises not from the absolute nature of God, but from its relation to us. Accordingly Epicuras and his foUowers were content to admit tbe existence of a divine Being, as a philosophical truth, provided it was granted that he bad no con nection witb tbe worlds Now much of the specu- ' Cicero represents Velleius as tracing the evils of a belief in religion, not to the doctrine that there is a God, but to the doctrine that he is Lord of the universe. Iinposuistis in cervicibus nostris sempiternum dominum, quem dies et nodes timeremus, quis enim non timeat omnia providentem et cogi- tnntem, el animadvertentem, et omnia ad se pertinere putantem^ 32 Introduction. lation ofthe philosophers was directed to this ob ject, that is, to tbe absolute nature of God. It was indeed the chief, because it seemed tbe more sci entific inquiry, and tbe other was only incidental. The world, at the period in which Christianity was pubUshed to it, was divided by the opinions of the Epicureans, the Stoics, tbe Academics, and the oriental philosophy ; which last had arisen out of an alUance between tbe school of Plato and the eastern creed. To tbese may be added the Alex andrian school, although it was not untd tbe close of the second century, that this last assumed its pecuUar character and importance, in attempting to combine in one Eclectic system, as it was termed, the Christian doctrines, tbe tenets of the Greek phUo sophy, and the fanciful theories of Egypt and of the East. Of these, the Epicureans denying tbe existence, or, wbat amounts to tbe same, the authority and providence of God, contributed nothing to tbe general stock of reUgious knowledge. Tbe remain ing sects, however at issue in other respects, agreed tbus far, that tbe relation between the divine and human nature was that of a whole to its parts ; a doctrine which may be considered under two heads. First, as to tbe divine essence ; that it was the source of the human soul, and the principle curiosum, ct plenum negotii Deum. (De Nat. Deorum, lib. i. c. 20.) Religion of the Gentiles. 33 into which it would, either immediately after death, or ultimately after certain stages of purification, return and be absorbed. Secondly, as to human nature ; tbat it was partly mortal, partly immortal; destined in one sense to survive death, in another to be destroyed by it. Now both tbese views fell very far short of what is commonly understood, when the ancients are said to bave admitted or discovered tbe existence of tbe one true God, and the immor tahty of the soul. As far as the mere expression goes, tbey doubtless acknowledged tbe existence of one God as unequivocaUy as a Jew or a Christian ; but if by the term God tbey understood a being of a different nature from him acknowledged by Jew and Christian, tbeir mode of expression caimot be reasonably urged as a proof tbat they coincided ¦with enhghtened beUevers in tbis fundamental article of faith. Now tbat tbis was tbe case is plain. Taking tbe human soul as a portion and a sample of the Godhead?, tbeir view of a divine source could not bave diflPered essentiaUy from their view of the human soul ; it was necessarily endued with parts and passions, and its nature measured and judged of by reference to ours. The Stoics indeed, (as was before observed,) are by some under stood to have gone so far, as to deem a body requi site for the existence of the Divine mind. s Moj(» ©!oti Kai aretiritiKrparM. Arriani Diss, in Epictetum, lib. i. c. 14. VOL. I. D 34 Introduction. Their notions on the second point, were still further removed from what we are apt to under stand, when it is asserted that the ancients admitted the immortahty of the soul. In truth, the immor tahty which they inculcated was even inconsistent with tbe future existence of man as man. Far from implying any future consciousness of separate exist ence, of happiness or misery, it amounted to tbis, — tbat a portion of the divine essence had gone forth, (which process some iUustrated by the image of emanations and rays proceeding from tbe fountain of Ught, until tbey nearly confounded tbe thing re presented with its emblem,) that whatever sub stance it pervaded became endued with some modi fication of Ufe or reason ; and that the withdrawing and resuming this vital ray occasioned the phe nomena of death. This taking place, tbe deserted mass of matter went to annihilation, or else retumed to a chaos, to await another union with another portion of creative virtue. What bas aU tbis in common with tbe Christian doctrine of tbe resurrec tion ? Was it not natural that men should consider that doctrine when preached to them as somewhat new, and contradicting aU tbeir preconceived opi nions ? From this view of the philosophical creed of tbe Gentile world, it wiU not appear essentiaUy to have differed from tbe esoteric doctrines of the Mysteries. The credit and authority of those doctrines were nevertheless greatly shaken by their appearance in Religion of the Gentiles. 35 this new form. Removed from the old basis of tradition, mystery, and state authority, tbe unsound ness of their foundalion became more apparent to vulgar eyes ; and tbe endless variety of opinion wbich prevaUed, without any acknowledged standard, gave a doubtful character to tbe subject, and de prived every view of it aUke of tbe appearance of divine sanction. Accordingly, witb tbe rise and diffiision of phUoso phy, a disbelief and contempt of religion increased and spread abroad. The ruin of social order began to be predicted in tbe further growth of scepticism so produced. The wisdom of other nations was extoUed, because tbey did no more tban expound tbe traditions of tbeir fathers, and the Greek phUo sophy was stigmatised as the source of innovation, and as tending to unsettle men's minds. " Can one do otherwise," exclaims ^lian, " tban com mend the wisdom of tbe Barbarians ? Amongst tbem, no one ever feU into atheism, amongst them there are no controversies about the gods, no questioning whether there are reaUy sucb beings or not, and whether they are interested about us or not*"." In tbe same spirit Diodoras Siculus com plains of the perpetual innovations of tbe Greek phUosophers in the views of tbeir predecessors, even on the most important topics: " The Bar barians," he observes, " go on in one unvarying "Var. Hist. lib. ii. c. 31. D 2 36 Introduction. course, and are firm to their principles ; but the Greeks, wbo consider phUosophy as a gainful pro fession, are for setting up new sects, and opposing theory to theory on the most momentous subjects, so tbat tbeir pupils only acquire tbe habit of doubt ing, tbeir minds wander in perpetual uncertainty, and become in short incapable of any firm convic tion '.'' Not that the behef of tbe Gentile world was then first shaken, or only by tbese means. The beha viour of professed beUevers, under circumstances wherein faith is put to tbe test, is every where de cisive against tbe existence of sucb a principle, to any great extent at least "*. Thus the Athenians are represented by tbeir observant and faithful his torian and feUow-citizen, as becoming more and more irreligious, as the ravages of tbe famous plague at Athens increased ' ; and Pliny, in bis account of the eruption of Vesuvius, in whicb bis uncle pe rished, records amongst the striking events of that awful scene, a general distmst of divine aid, arising from the notion that tbe gods themselves were possibly involved in the impending ruin ™. Powerful ties there were which bound men to the reUgion of tbeir fathers ; ties which only a divine ' Biblioth. Hist. lib. xi. c. 29. ¦¦ See Whately's Essays on some peculiarities of the Christian Religion. 1 Thucyd. lib. ii. c. 53. " Epist. lib. vi. ep. 20. Religion of the Gentiles. 37 band could have unloosed, but they were not tbe result of conviction. Religion had become, partly through accident, partly through tbe pohcy of legis lators, interwoven into the wbole system of pubUc and private life. Never separated from tbe glories of war, or tbe repose of peace, it came to be con sidered inseparable from each. Its genius haunted every path of life, and adapted itself to every change of manners and circumstances. In the theatre, tbe circus, and tbe midnight revel, it continued as familiar to the degenerate Romans, as wben it gave a zest to tbe rustic festival, or animated tbe rude pageantry of a triumph, in tbeir days of simple hardihood. The tasteful and imaginative Greek believed it, if belief it may be called, not for its own sake, but for the sake of Homer, and Phidias, and Apelles, — for the sake of tbe bard wbose song was voucher for its truth, and tbe monuments of art, in whicb it stood embodied and enshrined. Wben tbe suppUant seated bimself beside tbe household gods, and placed on his knee tbe child of bis enemy, he calculated wisely on the principle, whicb sanctified tbe gods themselves in the eyes of the father and the master of tbe family": nor did JuUan display less policy, wben in his endeavours to restore the reign of paganism, be directed bis efforts, not so " See the description of Themistocles taking refuge with Adoie- tus. Thucyd. lib. i. c. 136. 38 Introduction. much to the conviction of men's minds, as to the renewal of these broken associations". With this view of the Gentile world before us, we shall be able to estimate how far they stood in need of a revelation, what reception tbey inight be expected to give to Christianity, and how the first Christian preachers were likely to shape their teaching, so as to render it acceptable or inteUigible, and to guard against the errors to whicb the hea then were most liable. AU their systems, we see, were recommended and embraced, because they were useful, or honourable, or convenient. Chris tianity alone advanced the singular claim of being tme, and of being adopted because it was tme. ReUgion had not yet become tbe subject of a creed. Its evidences, a theme so famihar to Christian ears, sounded to the Gentiles as an idle topic, the discus sion of whicb tbey could not understand to be necessary to the reception of a religion. " What is tmth ?" said Pilate to Jesus'', not surely in jest, as Lord Bacon would explain it, but as if he had asked. What mean you by speaking about truth ? what has tmth to do with the subject ? It was altogether a new way of propagating a religion, to invite converts, not to conform to its institutions, but to heiieve, and to let their actions be agreeable ° See Gibbon's Decline and Fall of the Koman Empire, vol. iv. c. 23. f John xviii, 38. Religion of the Gentiles. 39 to truth ; and nothing was more natural, than that Christianity should receive names expressive of this grand pecuUarity, the Trath and the Faith. Independently tben of any agreement or dis agreement which the Gentiles might find between the doctrines of tbe Gospel, and their preconceived notions, tbey would be indisposed to attend to the evidence which attested its divine authority. There was another unfavourable circumstance about its claims. It could not but seem unreasonable and presumptuous, that one religion should be expected to prevail all oyer the world, to tbe exclusion of every other ; and that too a religion derived, as it appeared, from a small contemptible tributary of tbe empire. Had the proposal been merely to have Christianity admitted as one among tbe many foreign systems patronised at Rome, it would hardly have been rejected ; and tbis indeed seems to bave been actually contemplated by Tiberius i; but it was deemed preposterous in the Christians to insist on an exclusive claim. There was one circumstance, indeed, which might seem likely to have awakened tbe attention of tbe Gentiles to a more candid and earnest consideration even of these unusual claims. It is well attested, that, at the birth of our Saviour, a very general rumour prevailed, that an extraordinary person was about to appear, and to effect some great change in n Tertulliani Apol. c, v. Eusebii Hist. lib. ii. c. 2. 40 Introduction. the condition ofthe world. Bishop Horsley, leamed and ingenious on this as on every subject, accounts for it by supposing prophecies of the Messiah to have been preserved, together with other records of the primitive reUgion of mankind, in the SibyUine verses, and in other writings of a similar character '^. Admitting that he has made out a plausible case, his. theory is nevertheless liable to this objection, that it supposes tbe prophecies derived from patri archal times, to bave been more determinate and more easily interpreted, tban tbe corresponding prophecies recorded in Genesis, or even than those of a mucb later period. For, if we imagine the case of the Scriptural prophecies themselves being brougbt under tbe notice of the GentUes, in tbe same manner as the SibyUine verses were, tbe Gentiles would never surely have ehcited, even from them, tbe alleged expectation, embracing as it does the precise period of the Messiah's appearance. Perhaps, too, it may be fairly questioned, whether the records of tbe patriarchal era would not in aU UkeUhood have been handed down in the histrionic form, such as was exhibited in tbe Mysteries, or by means of rude monuments, rather than as " the Sibyl's leaves." Whether indeed the character and contents of tbese strange productions were really and altogether sucb as they are represented, is itself a point on which tbe inquirer has no means of ' See Dissertation on the Prophecies relating to the Messiah dispersed among the heathen. Religion of the Gentiles. 41 judging for himself, inasmuch as no specimen of the genuine SibyUine verses bas been preserved. Those, then, to whom Bishop Horsley's view shaU seem unsatisfactory, may be disposed to refer the origin of the expectation (at least as regards the eastern nations) to the Jewish Scriptures. Ta citus and Suetonius, it is to be observed, hmit to the eastem world this expectation of an universal monarch arising thence" ; and nothing is more pro bable, than tbat the prophecies of Daniel especiaUy should be famiUar to the Persian Magi. Indeed, that the Gentile view should, Uke that of the Jewish nation, have been directed to an universal king, forms of itself a powerful objection to tbe notion, that the source of tbat view was dis tinct. In tbe original and primitive view of the Messiah, he would surely bave been characterised as the Antagonist of evil, or the Purifier of man's corrupt nature. Tbe notion of dominion as a promi nent feature in bis office, carries on tbe face of it the Jewish bias of interpreting literally their later prophecies, wlSich described him metaphorically as one qui rerum potiretur. It is remarkable too, tbat the Jews, from the period of their being intmsted witb those prophe cies which were Ukely to be most inteUigible to tbe heathen, were, as if by special appointment, brougbt more immediately into intercourse with • Taciti Hist. lib. v. c. 13. Sueton. Vespasian, c. 4. 42 Introduction. the most powerfiU and influential nations of the world,^ — ^with the Assyrians and Babylonians, with the Persians, with the Greeks, and lastly with the Romans. Of these, tbe Greeks and Romans, it may be said, were Uttle Ukely to have studied tbe sacred volume, even had their attention been solicited to it, by those in wbose hands it was deposited. Yet even these could hardly fail of imbibing some notion of the Messiah, and of tbe fulness of the time, from the conversation of the Jews, wbo were every where resident amongst them. National vanity, and the ardour of a hope such as theirs about to be fulfiUed, must have tempted tbem to descant on this, however reserved in ge neral on reUgious topics ; and tbe more as the fated period drew nearer. The notion having once gained ground among tbe GentUes, they would naturaUy enough see it intimated Ukewise in tbeir national oracles, whose number, variety, and ge neraUty, fitted them to fumish almost any view of any subject. Tbus the attention of men being once directed to the topic, the vagte descriptions of the SibyUine verses might have been appUed to a specific time and person, and have become useful for the intrigue of the poUtician, or tbe dehcate flattery of tbe poet*. ' See Virgil's PoUio, and Heyne's prefatory remarks. Jt ap pears from Dio Cassius and Plutarch, that Julius Caesar searched the Sibylline verses for some prediction respecting a Religion of the Gentiles. 43 Viewing this general expectation of the heathen world then, as derived eitber directly or indirectly from the holy Scriptures, we shaU be at no loss to account for the smaU influence it bad, in exciting the curiosity of the Gentiles, to inquire more eagerly concerning the expected Great One, of tbose wbo proclaimed bim as having now appeared, and as having sent them forth as his delegates. He who was to come, was viewed, through the prejudiced medium of Judaism, as a temporal prince. But the obscure birth of Jesus, bis unambitious course of life, and bis meek submission to a humiUating death, seemed at once to render the prophecy in appUcable to him. None other appearing to claim its appUcation, according to tbis view, it was pro bably soon forgotten or disregarded. No appeal, none at least that we know of, was ever made to it by the Apostles, nor do any of the Gentiles, to whom they went, appear to have connected their misson with it". great king and conqueror, for the purpose of applying it to him self, and assuming the title of king. (Dio. Cass. lib. xliv. p. 247. and Plutarch in Csesare, c. 60.) Cicero probably alludes to the fact in his De Divinatione, (1. ii. c. 54.) " cum antis- tibus agamus, ut quidvis potius ex illis libris, quam Regem proferant." " It was ao-ain brought into notice by the rebellion of the Jews, who are said to have rested their hopes of succour on it ; and it was then applied by some to Vespasian and Titus. See Tacit. Hist. lib. v. c. 1 3. and Euseb. lib. iii. c. 8. 44 Introduction. As to tbe Gospel itself, its doctrines and its precepts, tbe faciUty witb which tbe Gentiles would understand or embrace them, would of course de pend much on their existing views of morals, of the divine nature, eind of a future state. In tbe systems of the Greek philosophers they possessed moral rules,, the close agreement of which with tbe Gospel precepts, could not but cause tbe latter to be famihar, and ensure tbem a favourable reception. Here was the proper sphere of reason, and she had done ber part nobly. It is not perhaps too much to assert, that, with tbe exception of forgiveness of injury and humihty, the heathen sketch of tbe moral character (sucb as is found, for instance, in tbe Ethics of Aristotle) required no feature to be added, but only some correction and a higber finish. This, be it remembered, detracts nothing from the cbaracter of tbe Gospel. To deny it, were indeed to wrong reUgion and its inspired teachers, in more respects than one. For, first, if tbe GentUes had not tbe faculties to enable tbem to arrive at just notions of their duty, bow could tbey be chargeable with that sinfulness wbich St. Paul imputes to them ? Again, wbat right has the Christian advocate to recommend tbe Gospel on the score of its moraUty, if from the Gospel mankind first leamt wbat moraUty was? It is only arguing in a circle. Tlie truest statement wiU always be found the most favourable to the Gospel of truth. Religion of the Gentiles. 49 The connection between reUgion and morals is another matter. To tbis indeed tbe Gentiles were strangers, and not easily to be reconciled. What Josephus bas asserted of bis countrymen, was still more appUcable to the Christians, contrasted with tbe heathen". Others made reUgion a part of virtue, they made virtue a part of reUgion. Tbe duties of sacrifice, of prayer, and of reverence for the gods, impUed no obligation to practise virtue ; and tbe observance of tbese duties was no other wise connected with moral behaviour, tban as it constituted a part of the cbaracter of a good citizen. Tbere was withal a deep-rooted prejudice con cerning the digmty of human nature. Men were supposed capable, of raising themselves by merit to the highest scale of existence, and of deserving to be numbered witb tbe gods. Hac arte Pollux et vagus Hercules Enisus, arces attigit igneas^. That virtue should not be entitled to reward; that the good should find a place in heaven, not as their natural right, but as a favour ; and that a great and mysterious atonement was requisite for the sins of each and of aU; these were doctrines " Adv. Apion, lib. ii, c. 14. y Horat. Carm. lib. iii. 3. So Virgil, Mn. ix. 640. Macte nova virtute puer, sic itur ad astra. 46 Introduction. not merely unacceptable, but almost incompre hensible. Enough bas been already said of the prevaiUng notions concerning tbe nature of tbe gods, to shew that tbe GentUes were famiUar with tbe conception of a Deity assuming tbe form and body of man'' . The doctrine of God manifested in tbe flesh, would not, therefore, be likely to startle tbem, nor do we accordingly hear of any surprise or scruple wbich it occasioned. At tbe same time, nothing could be more revolting to their natural views of such a Being, than that he should lead a life of humi liation and persecution, and submit to an igno minious death. It was Cbrist crucified that was " fooUshness to tbe Greeks." Another popular view which they entertained, concerning the nature of a Deity, must not pass unnoticed. It is weU known, that in the common creed of Greece, Diana, Hecate, and Luna, were held to be different objects of worship. ' The heathen view must not however be confounded with the Christian doctrine of the Incarnation. It so far resembled it, as to prevent it from being strange and unacceptable ; but it differed very materially from it. The heathen supposed the human form, on these occasions, not to be perfect man, but a body animated by the Deity. It is not surprising, accordingly, that among the ancient heresies, there should be this very view taken of the per son of Christ. The Docetae denied his human nature, and asserted him to be God only, in the likeness of man, or rather, a human frame, inhabited and animated, not by a human soul, but by the Mon only, which they called the Word. Religion of the Gentiles. 47 and yet one and tbe same Deity. Tbe Jupiter and ApoUo of one place, could not always be blended with the Jupiter and ApoUo of another a, yet was there only one Jupiter and one ApoUo. A striking illustration of tbis may be found in Xenophon's account of the retreat of tbe ten thou sand. He had made a vow to Ephesian Diana of a portion of the spoUs of war, and he fulfiUed it, according to his own account, not by sending tbese gifts to Ephesus, but by consecrating a tem ple to Ephesian Diana in Greece'' . How far this notion may have operated, in en abUng the Gentiles to understand, or in disposing tbem to Usten to tbe Christian preachers, wbo taught that tbere was one God, and that be was to be worshipped in tbe person of God the Father wbo created aU tbe world, of God the Son wbo redeemed aU mankind, and of God the Holy Ghost wbo sanctifieth aU tbe elect people of God, the Christian reader may determine for himself. Cer tain it is, that no Scriptural tmth is more clearly taught tban this. It is equaUy certain, that, while for so many centuries, of all the Christian doctrines, tbat of a Trinity in Unity has been considered as the most obscure and mysterious, in tbe records and writings of the Apostles, there is not a trace ' Thus Herodotus, enumerating the privileges of the kings of Sparta, distinguishes the Priesthood of the Lacedaemonian Jupiter from that of the Heavenly Jupiter. Erato, c. 56. " Anab. lib. v. c. 3. 48 Introduction. of any scrapie which it created — it seems to have caUed for no explanation, and is not even spoken of as a mystery. That a general disbeUef of a future state pre vaUed, has been already stated. The subject had indeed long ceased to fiimisb any serious argument for hope or fear. When Pericles is represented by the historian, as exhausting even,- topic of con solation, in bis eloquent address to tbe sm^viving friends of tbose wbo had faUen in battie ; he speaks of their glorious memon,-, and of the parents' hope that other sons may be bom to fiU tbeir place and emulate their worth, but not one syUable is there of their future life and immortaUty"". Cicero acknowledges, that the Epistie of Sulpicius on the death of TuUia, comprehended every argument for comfort which the case admitted; yet we search that Epistie in vain, for the sUghtest aUusion to the one topic, which would have been uppermost in the mind of a beUever, professedly consoUng a father for the loss of his daughter''. Even in the Roman Senate, JuUus Caesar once ventured ' Thucyd. lib. ii. c. 35. et seq. * Ciceronis Epist. lib. iv. ep. 5 suad 6. Quod si etiam inferis sensus est, &c. is a mode of expression, which conveys more than a doubt, whether the dead were sensible of joy or sorrow. The introduction of the remark too, without a single suggestion of Tullia's immortal destiny, proves, not merely that Sulpicius was himself a sceptic, but that he considered the mention of it as unfit for a serious argument. Religion of the Jews. 49 to appeal to the real opinion of bis audience, tbat a future state contained nothing either to hope for or to dread ; and was seconded in tbe avowal by Cato". It was, therefore, nothing wonderful tbat St. Paul should be mocked by bis Athenian audience for preaching Jesus and the resu^rection^ Tbe doctrine seemed beneath ^their serious notice, and was despised for its apparent absurdity. And this, not merely because it was disbelieved, but because men's minds had never been accustomed to it, even in tbe fables of Elysium and Tartarus. A bodily resurrection was unheard of, tbe idea of man's identity in a future state was altogetber new ; and heathen records agree witb the statement of the Bible, tbat it was Jesus Cbrist wbo brougbt life and immortality to light through the Gospel. IL RELIGION OF THE JEWS. In estimating tbe state of religion among tbe Jews at tbe period of tbe Advent of our Saviour, two points of inquiry must be kept distinct : tbe one, what their Law and Prophets were apparently designed to teach them ; tbe otber, wbat tbey actuaUy did leam from these sources*. Tbat tbe Jewish Scriptures were so interpreted as to render " Sallust. in Catalin. c. 51, 52. ' Acts xvii. 32. ' See Appendix, [D.] VOL. I. E 50 Introduction. the proraised Messiah unacceptable to the great body of the nation, is plain from a cursory perusal of tbe Gospels. It is equally plain that the Jewish Scriptures were calculated to produce a quite con trary effect. With reference, therefore, to this, and to otber points, it wiU be necessary to consider both tbe Jewish dispensation in itself, and as it was received by the people at large, and by tbe various sects which existed among tbem. In God's occasional communications with any people or individual of old, his messages were con veyed as mucb by signs and types as by words. Of a practice so well known, no example or iUustra tion can be necessary. Agreeably to tbis method, we find tbe reUgion of the Jews deposited, partly in their Scriptures, partly in ceremonies and institu tions, and tbe service required of them consisting even more in representation tban in verbal expres sion. Tbey sacrificed more than they prayed. Instead of a form of words annuaUy addressed to heaven on account of their deUverance from Egypt, the scene was annually represented by tbe ceremony of the Passover. A rehgion so constituted would naturaUy contain a vast body of rites, many of tbem in themselves trivial and unmeaning, and deriving importance and significance only from being viewed as symbols. Had tbe ceremonial Law, indeed, been composed of rites and observances important or more than trivial in themselves, those who practised them would Religion of the Jews. 5 1 have been still more likely to regard tbem as valua ble on tbeir own account, and not for tbe further object to whicb they pointed. Considered tbus, then, tbe ceremonial portion of tbe Law wiU appear as another mode of conveying tbe same instruction as its verbal precepts. It was unto each man " a sign upon bis hand, and a memorial between bis eyes, tbat tbe Lord's law might be in his mouth^." Some of its ordinances, no doubt, bad reference to tbe idolatrous practices of tbe neighbouring Gentiles, concerning wbich our information is too imperfect for us to estimate fuUy tbe fitness of tbose ordi nances. Others again were obviously lessons of moraUty and piety. A third, and the most im portant class, were calculated to prepare tbe nation for a candid and ready admission of tbe Messiah's claims, and of tbe Christian revelation. One or more of tbese objects was probably intended in each rite, however trivial. The minute directions, for instance, respecting the treatment of lepers. To tbe Jews tbese direc tions furnished a sort of histrionic sermon, display ing tbe foul nature of sin, its contagious character, tbe precautions requisite to enable the healthiest and strongest minds to escape its influence ; lastly, its offensiveness to God, and tbe necessity of a myste rious cleansing and sanctification by blood. In all cases of legal defilement, purity was to be restored e Exod. xiii. 9. e2 52 Introduction. by the intervention of a high priest, by the offering of a sacrifice, and (whenever it was practicable) by the blood of a victim. The continual repetition of these scenes was like the continual reading of moral and reUgious lessons to tbe Jews, in a language agreeable to the habits of the most ancient times, and therefore impressive and inteUigible. And if tbese rites did not actuaUy convey a notion of tbe one great High Priest, wbo was to cleanse all mankind from moral defilement by tbe sacrifice of himself, yet they were calculated to habituate the Jews to tbat way of thinking, which should render tbe doctrine nothing strange and revolting, but on the contrary highly natural and acceptable. Nevertheless, Cbrist crucified was to tbe Jews a stumbUng-block ; wbich must bave been owing to some wrong bias, wbich their minds received from those wbo pretended to guide them in tbe interpre tation of the Law and tbe Prophets. To explain tbe nature and origin of tbis bias, two passages of Jewish history must be brougbt under notice. The one is tbe intercourse between tbe Jews and the GentUes, especiaUy the Egyptians ; the other is tbe rise of tbe traditional law into su preme authority. I. As early as tbe period of tbe Babylonian cap tivity some settlement of the Jews in Egypt appears to bave been formed''. At aU events, from tbe ¦' Jeremiah xiii. and xliii. Religion of the Jews. 53 foundation of Alexandria tbey began to be esta bUshed there in great numbers. Tbe illustrious founder of tbat city allowed tbem a share of pri vileges in common witb bis Macedonian colonists, and tbe free exercise of their reUgion ; and bis Uberal poUcy towards tbem was continued by bis successors '. Increasing in numbers and importance, tbey at length obtained permission to build a tem ple for themselves in Egypt, in order to avoid the inconvenience attending tbe yearly resort of so many to Jerusalem''. This was a most important step. Weakening tbe ties of fiUal dependence by whicb tbe Jews of Egypt were bound to the holy city, it was tbe occasion of tbeir becoming more devotedly attached to tbe place of tbeir abode, and more liable to the mischievous effects produced on their faith by tbeir connection witb it. They now began to imbibe many of tbe absurd fancies of the heathen philosophy, so mucb cultivated at that time at Alexandria, and blended it in tbeir view of tbeir own sacred doctrines. Accustomed to contemplate a secondary meaning in their Law and Prophets, tbey too readily yielded to the seduction of tbe famous Platonic school of Alexandria, tbe aim of whicb was, by aUegorical interpretation, so to adapt itself to every otber system, as that aU should appear consistent and tbe same — a method after- ' Josephi Ant. Jud. lib. xi. c. 8. and lib. xii. c. I. '^ Ejusdem, lib. xiii. c. 3. 54 Introduction. ' wards practised with tbe Uke success on Christianity. This false wisdom soon spreading from Egypt to Judaea, tbe Jewish creed, both at home and abroad, became not a little changed and distorted by the ar tificial Ught tbus thrown on it'. As tbe period of tbe Advent drew nigh, tbe rest also of the Gentile world became so interspersed witb Jews, as to justify almost a Uteral acceptation of St. James's assertion, tbat Moses had in every city them that preached bim™. Yet it does not appear that tbe Jewish creed was generaUy affected by tbis varied intercourse. Egypt was tbe channel at least, through wbich any foreign impression was conveyed. Tbere was a fataUty in the connection of the Jews with Egypt, and wben it ceased to be a scourge, it became a snare to tbem. At tbe same time, it must not be supposed tbat the intercourse between the Jews and Gentiles was productive of unmixed mischief to tbe former". ' See Bruckeri Historia Critica Phllosophiae, tom. ii. pp. 690, and 697. "> Acts XV 21. ° Warburton has suggested that the Jews were cured of idolatry from the period of the Babylonish captivity, not so much by the severity of the punishment which they had undergone, as by their subsequent acquaintance with the Greek philosoph-y. Their previous religious knowledge enabled them, he observes, to derive from the heathen writings an advantage of which the heathen themselves were incapable. The wiser and better sort of Gentiles learnt to despise indeed the authority of their popular superstitions, but they had no means of going beyond this Religion of the Jews. 55 Part, indeed, of the scheme of Providence, in ex tending that intercourse so greatly at tbat precise period, might bave been to afford tbe Jews, as weU as tbe Gentiles, an opportunity of acquiring more preparatory Ught tban either enjoyed, for the glori ous scene which was approaching. And although this opportunity was not generally embraced by either, there were, doubtless, many, both of tbe Jews and of tbe Gentiles, on wbom it was not lost ; many among tbe Jews, sucb as Simeon and Anna ; many among the Gentiles, sucb as the good Centu rion and CorneUus. From tbis intercourse tbe Gentiles might have derived clearer notions of the character of tbat universal Lord wbo was expected to arrive out of tbe East, if, indeed, the expectation were not whoUy derived from tbat source. On the otber band, the Jews might have been roused to search their Scriptures for tbe tme account of certain matters on whicb tbe Gentiles speculated largely, and whicb were so imperfectly revealed to tbe Jews, as to be Ukely to be unnoticed without some caU for investigation — as, for instance, the doctrine of a future state. How much tbe pubUca tion of the Gospel was faciUtated by tbe estabUsh ment of synagogues in every great city is obvious ; scepticism and infidelity. The Jews learnt from the same sources to view the heathen worship in its true light; but this immediately confirmed them in their own faith, the contrasted character of which left them no room to pause in general scep ticism. i5ee Divine Legation, book v. sect. 2. 56 Introduction. and tbis, too, was not an exclusive benefit to the Gentiles, for the Jew abroad was Ukely to be more free and fearless in submitting bis mind to tbe humiliating traths which were to be disclosed, inasmuch as be was removed from tbe chief seat of national prejudice, and was unawed by the presence of tbat authority wbich upheld it. II. Of tbe trae origin of tbe traditional Law tbere is no certain account, wbich is remarkable, considering tbat it constituted tbe main Une of separation between tbe contending sects. Accord ing to its advocates, it was deUvered by God to Moses on mount Sinai, together witb the written Law, and was therefore asserted to be of equal authority with it. Tbeir opponents contented them selves witb refusing assent to tbis statement, with out, however, either denying tbe antiquity of tbese traditions, or assigning tbem any specific source or date". It is probable, from this uncertainty, as weU as from the cbaracter of tbe traditions themselves, (for, if they bave been faithfuUy recorded in tbe Talmuds, tbey are Uttle more tban a tissue of minute rules superadded to tbose in Scripture concerning tbe observance of the ritual law,) tbat they were tbe gradual accumulation of many centuries. Ori ginally, perhaps, mere directions for determimng matters left indeterminate in Scripture, they acquired ° Josephi Antiq. Jud. lib. xiii. c. 10. Religion of the Jews. 57 from usage and habitual compUance an equal autho rity witb the law itself''. Be it as it may, tbe enlargement of tbe ritual Law suited weU witb tbat bias of mind in tbe nation at large, wbich in tbose latter days was more fuUy displayed in the character of tbe Pharisee — a tendency, namely, to forget tbe twofold nature of tbe Law, and to consider that as valuable on its own account, wbich there was every reason to beheve was oiUy valuable from its reference to some other object, even although tbat object might not always have been clear and dis tinctly to be seen. Going then on tbe principle, tbat tbe works of tbe Law were to be regarded as an ultimate and independent object, that its intent was to make tbe comers thereunto perfect, not to shadow out tbe good things appointed for that. purpose, tbe traditionist thought, consistently enough, tbat by adding rite to rite, and rule to rale, be should enlarge tbe sphere of meritorious conduct. And if the written Law contained enough for justification, the superadded value of tbe works of tbe unwritten Law would be more tban tbe purchase of divme reward. Tbis was tbe righteousness of tbe Pharisees, tbe most considerable sect at the period of tbe Advent. They were the class into whicb tbe leamed naturaUy p See Prideaux's Connection, part i. b. v. where the source of these traditions is assigned to the age of Ezra and the return from the captivity. 58 Introduction. feU, and being reverenced for their Scriptural erudition, and for the strictness of tbeir Uves, the great body of tbe people was content to subscribe to tbeir doctrines, and to adopt tbeir views of Scrip ture without aspiring to be Pharisees in hoUness any more than in leaming. On tbem the vulgar gazed, as on men wbose righteous attainments went so far beyond what was needful, as to be admirable rather than good, and beheld them in their long fastings, their reiterated prayers, and their profound medita tions, advancing ever, as it seemed, from superior to supreme sanctity "*. It wiU be readily conceived, that to sucb men tbe doctrine of good works being insufficient and ineffectual for salvation, and of tbe necessity of atonement for tbe sins of all, must have been Ught too distressing for them to open their eyes upon without a painful effort ; and that they were Ukely for the most part to be obstinately bUnd to aU evidence. And wbat must have been the result on tbe people who were under tbeir 1 Goodwin, in his Moses and Aaron, gives a quaint but very graphic description of the varieties of the Pharisaical character, as represented in the Talmuds. Among them he enumerates " PhariscBus truncatus, so called, as if he had no feet, because he would scarce lift them from the ground when he walked, to cause the greater opinion of his meditation. " Pharisceus mortarius, so called, because he wore a hat in manner of a deep mortar, such as they use to bray spice in, insomuch that he could not look upward, nor of either side ; only downward on the grouud, and forward, or forthright." Lib. i. c. X. Religion of the Jews. 59 guidance ? The Pharisees bade tbem, indeed, con form to the law, and especiaUy to the ceremonial law, but tbey took away tbe key of knowledge, that unlocked its mysterious meaning, or else, substituted for its true secondary meaning, some thing that was fanciful and foreign. They enjoined obedience to the divine precepts, even to tbe letter of the commandment ; but whenever obedience proved bard or inconvenient, some one of the nu merous traditions (tbe divine source and authority of which tbey maintained) was readily found to make tbe case an exception. It might bave been expected, that the sect which professedly stood forth to oppose the corruptions of the Pharisees would have done something towards bringing tbe Jews back to a purer view of tbeir Scriptures. But tbis was very far from being tbe case. The sect aUuded to — that of tbe Sadducees — is the only other (reUgious sect, at least) noticed in the New Testament. These pseudo-reformers re jected, indeed, the traditions of tbe Pharisees, but they continued to look as bUndly as their oppo nents on the genuine Scriptures; and they have even been charged with denying the authority of aU except tbose written by Moses^ Tbis, it must be confessed, does not appear probable ; at least such a tenet would seem inconsistent with the office of ' Origen. con. Celsum, lib. i. c. 49. Tertullian asserts the same. 60 Introduction. the high priesthood, from which it is certain that they were not excluded'. Nor, again, is it likely that in tbeir controversy witb tbe Pharisees, tbe latter would bave appealed to the Prophets, (as ap pears to bave been tbe case',) unless the Prophets bad been acknowledged as authority by both. The Sadducees were in truth freethinkers and scoffers ; a society wbich was tbe receptacle of aU wbo were wiUing or able to free themselves from tbe restraints of reUgion. Tbe Saddueee was tbe rich sensuaUst, and the man of tbe world; and bis tenets were, doubtless, pUable enough not to interfere with his promotion to the highest office in the Jewish Church. It is observable, that one of the distinguishing features of a sect so characterised, should be tbe assertion tbat man's good and evil destiny depends entirely on bis own exertions. Whilst the Pha risee contended for a fated course of events, so contrived however as to be compatible witb a free agency in man, the Saddueee maintained that he was left altogetber to bimself, to work out bis own bappiness or misery". And yet (notwithstanding bis behef in tbose Scriptures whicb represented reward as attached to virtue, and punishment to vice) he lived the life wbich, a priori, would be assigned to the fatalist. So requisite does it seem, ' Acts V. 17. and Josephi Antiq. lib xiii. c. 10. ' See Basnage Hist. liv. ii. c. 6. and Bruckeri Hist. Crit. Phil. tom. ii. p. 722. " Josephi Antiq. Jud. lib. xiii, c. 5. Religion of the Jews. 61 from every experimental view of human conduct, that other motives to tbe practice of virtue, should be added to tbe hope of reward, and the fear of punishment. Tbe doctrine of tbe Sadducees took its rise, it is said, from a refinement which their founder, Sadoc, made on tbe teaching of his master, Anti- gonus Sochseus. Tbe latter bad been wont to dwell on tbe duty of serving God, not Uke a slave witb a view to reward and punishment, but from dis interested motives". Upon this Sadoc built bis theory, that no reward or punishment would be distributed in a fiiture state. From this point it was a very easy step to tbe denial of man's immor tality, and tbat was as easUy followed up with a denial of tbe existence of angels and of spirits y. Where and wben tbe fraternity of tbe Essenes was first formed is not clearly made out. Most probably they owed tbeir origin to Egypt, where tbe Jewish refugees wbo fled for security after the murder of GedaUab, were compeUed, upon tbe cap tivity of the greater part of their body, to lead a recluse Ufe, out of wbich tbis monkish institution might have grown ^ In direct contrast with tbe " The Pharisees themselves seem to have been divided on this question ; hence the distinction made in the Talmuds between PhariscBUS ex amore, and PhariscBus ex timore. y Basnage, liv. ii. c. 6. and Bruckeri Hist. Crit. Phil. tom. ii. p. 716. ' See Brucker. lib. c. p. 762. Celibacy was enjoined upon the 62 Introduction. Sadducees, they renounced the pomp and pleasures, and the very conveniences of life, and, retiring to caves and deserts, formed so distinct a community, as to withdraw themselves even from the customary attendance on the temple, essential as this was deemed to every trae IsraeUte. Another point in whicb tbey stood opposed to tbe Sadducees, as to tbeir speculative tenets, is, that they were unqua lified fataUsts". Their secession from tbe great body of the nation seems a good reason why tbey should not be noticed in the Gospel narratives of our Lord's ministry. They had Uttle better claim, indeed, to be regarded as a portion of the lost sheep of tbe house of Israel, to wbich he confined bis la bours, than the Samaritans. It is not improbable, however, tbat tbey might bave formed part of the hearers of Jobn tbe Baptist, wbose rude mode of hfe, and wanderings in the desert, were likely to attract some of tbem into the class of his disciples, and to make tbe whole body early acquainted with the offer of salvation through Christ. The mention of tbis distinguished forerunner of greater part, but not upon the whole body of the Essenes ; for even this small community had its subdivisions, or, perhaps, more properly speaking, its gradations of ascetic life. A very interesting sketch of their character and habits is given in The Pilgrimage of Melon. » Joseph. Ant. lib. xiii. c. 5. and lib. xviii. c. 1. secund. ed. Hudsoni. Religion of the Jews. 63 the Messiah suggests the propriety of some brief notice of the probable eflfect of his preaching, in correcting those false views which, agreeably to tbe foregoing remarks and statements, must bave prevailed amongst the Jews. What we gather from the New Testament is, tbat he was employed in calUng on men to repent, and in estabUshing clearer notions of Christ's approaching kingdom tban were generally entertained. Thus his admo nition to " bring forth fruits meet for repentance''," seems to bave been addressed to tbe prevaiUng error, that an outward observance of reUgion was sufficient. By " tbe axe laid to tbe root of tbe tree''," be intimated, tbat the Jewish dispensation was not, as men fondly thought, to be perpetual, but was even now hastening to its faU. And lastly, bis assertion tbat " God was able, out of the stones of tbe desert, to raise up children unto Abraham''," seems to point to tbe adoption of tbe Gentiles into the covenant. Add to this, tbat bis peculiar office being to prepare tbe way of tbe Lord, it is probable that he might also have taught the appUcation of the prophecies to a spiritual, not a temporal. Saviour. The need of some divine messenger to prepare the way of tbe Lord, is indeed manifest fronj tbe foregoing sketch of tbe state of reUgion as it then '¦ Matt, iii, 8. Luke iii. 8. ' Matt. iii. 10. Luke iii. 9. •i Matt. iii. 9. Luke iii. 8. 64 Introduction. existed among tbe Jews. Such a messenger had been useful, even supposing the Jews to bave em ployed their dispensation aright, for it was initself of a nature to leave their minds doubtful, and to render error, on certain points relating to tbe Mes siah,, natural and excusable. With a view to tbese points tben, tbe coming of Jobn would bave been, at aU events, acceptable. But be is described as coming in tbe spirit of EUas, wbo was to restore all things. His ministry, tben, was chiefly a merciful provision, to supply (as far as was consistent witb the general scheme of Providence) the deficiencies of that preparation which tbe Jews had failed to derive from tbeir Law and Prophets. He came to restore the appearance of the law, — that mouldering and defaced image, wbich bad been given them, to the intent tbat tbe original .might be recognized when it appeared amongst men ". Tbe first object wbich the Jews were naturaUy led from tbeir Scriptures to look for in the dawn ' It is to be observed, that the prophetic promise of Elijah's coming immediately follows the injunction to " remember the law of Moses."" Remember ye the law of Moses my servant, which I com manded unto him in Horeb for all Israel, with the statutes and the judgments. " Behold I will send you Elijah the prophet, before the com ing of the great and dreadful day of the Lord." Malachi iv. 4,5. It is necessary to consider these two verses as connected, in order to understand why Elijah was expected as the restorer. Religion of the Jews. 65 of tbe Sun of righteousness, was tbe coming of a messenger, such as Jobn tbe Baptist. But tbat messfnger had been announced under tbe title of Elijah the prophet. Hence, tbe mistake to which tbey obstinately adhered, tbat " EUas must first comeV — a mistake in itseU" natural enough, but one which tbe actual arrival of the messenger so strongly characterised as the Baptist was, ougbt to have been sufficient to remove, even before tbe scene was more fuUy opened by our Lord bimself That the claims of John should be left liable to misapprehension, or rather that tbey should require more than a careless, and much more than an un- candid consideration, in order to be recognized, is only in consistency witb tbe usual tenor of God's deaUng witb mankind. And it may be further ob served, that while it was necessary tbat men should know wbo Cbrist really was, in order tbat tbe beneficial effects of his ministry might be felt, tbis was a point not necessary to the reaping of the fruits of the Baptist's mission. Their recognition of tbe Messiah himself would, of course, depend on tbeir interpretation of tbeir Scriptures, together witb whatever notions tbey might have elsewhere derived concerning him. Of tbe general impression so produced, tbe most pro minent feature, and that wbich operated most strongly to bhnd tbem to aU his mighty works, was f Matt, xvii, 10. and Mark ix. 11. VOL. I. F 66 Introduction. the opinion that be was to be a temporal Saviour. This arose, not merely from a speculative view of the Scriptures relating to him, but much more from the habit of mind wrought into tbem by living under a dispensation, the sanctions of whicb were wholly temporal. This tone of feeling was vastly increased by tbe severe chastisements wbich the nation bad endured from tbe Babylonian captivity down to tbeir tben degraded condition, as a distant tributary of Rome. Tbese circumstances must be viewed as faUing in witb tbe natural propensity of human hope towards " the things whicb are seen," in order to account for that monstrous bhndness which the Jews evinced towards tbose passages of tbeir Scriptures, which tbey acknowledged to be predictive of Cbrist, and which yet represented him under circumstances wholly inconsistent witb tem poral greatness in bimself, or witb temporal deUver ance to be wrought for bis people. So strong was tbis prejudice, tbat the apostles themselves could not, until after tbe resurrection, understand bow bis death was consistent with bis character as the Messiah. " We trasted tbat it bad been be wbich should have redeemed Israel^," was the tone of misgiving in wbich they spoke ; and it is no unreasonable conjecture, tbat when Judas betrayed bim to death, it was under an impression tbat be would be miraculously deUvered ^ Luke xxiv. 21. Religion of the Jews. 67 from his enemies ^ Certain it is, that not only during his life did Peter, James, and Jobn question one with another, what tbe rising from the dead should mean', but on the visit to the holy sepulchre the Evangehst expressly states, that " as yet they knew not tbe Scripture, tbat he must rise again from the dead'';" and accordingly it was tbe point which appears to have required more particular explanation from him in tbe last interview, imme diately before bis ascension. ' ' Tben opened be their understandings, that they might understand tbe Scriptures, and said unto them, Tbus it is written, and thus it behoved Cbrist to suff'er, and to rise from the dead the third day'." So tbat Christ crucified was as strictly a stumbUng-block to the Jews, as it appears to have been fooUshness to tbe Greeks. Tbat tbey should expect tbe Gentiles to be ex cluded from the immediate benefits of the Messiah's reign, is another prejudice, tbe origin of whicb must be sought for, not merely in their mode of interpreting Scripture, but in tbe notions naturaUy imbibed by Uving under a theocracy. God bad hitherto dealt with them, not merely as a portion of the general human race, but as his pecuUar people. Now, being the only people on earth who worshipped Jehovah at aU, tbey bad never '' See Thmston's Night of Treason, p. 33, ' Mark ix. 10. ^ John XX. 9. ' Luke xxiv. 45, 46. F 2 68 Introduction. leamt to think of bim distinctly as tbe God of aU mankind, and also as tbe God of Israel. Tbese two views of him became inseparably blended in tbeir minds. Tbey knew indeed that aU the nations of tbe earth were to be blessed, and tbey doubtless understood tbat it was to be a common blessing witb that which was reserved for themselves ; but agreeably to the above-mentioned mode of thinking, it seemed a requisite step to that object, tbat the nations of tbe earth should be incorporated witb themselves by conquest, tbat Jemsalem should be tbe seat of empire, and the Messiah tbe universal and eternal monarch. With tbis prejudice, the metaphorical images emblematic of bis spiritual reign were regarded as Uteral descriptions ; and when baffled in tbeir attempts to render aU tbe prophetic picture conformable to tbis view, tbey boldly adopted tbe suggestion that two Messiahs might be intended, tbe one a lowly sufferer, tbe otber a triumphant conqueror™. Wben therefore be did appear, even those wbom bis miracles convinced, only looked on in dim suspense for tbe developement of tbe mysterious scheme, still supposing tbat tbe preparatory step would be his assumption of temporal power. On tbe otber band, tbe bitterness with whicb bis adver- " Basnage, liv. iv. c. 25. sect. 10. Prideaux's Connect, p. ii. b. viii. Pocock's Commentary on Malachi ; and Calmet's Diet. under the word Messiah. Religion of the Jews. 69 saries caught bis bints respecting tbe caU of tbe Gentiles, was not, if we consider tbis prejudice aright, mere national selfishness. They doubtless considered tbe threatened transfer of God's king dom, as a transfer of bis pecuUar government lo some other separate nation. Nay, it may be doubted wbether tbeir dark poUcy in dehvering him over to the Roman governor, charged witb treason, might not bave arisen from this suspicion, tbat be was meditating a transfer of tbe temporal kingdom of God from tbem to the Romans, and intending (if indeed he were the Messiah) to assume witb tbem his reign". The design is at least artful enough to be probable ; for tbe object would be, to render tbe Romans unfit for tbe intended favour, if tbey failed in their attempts to crucify him, and if tbey suc ceeded, their success would be a surety tbat be was not tbe Messiah. And an accidental circumstance not a Uttle inflamed tbis prejudice against tbe extension of tbe promised blessing. Tbis was tbe rise of the HeUenistic faction in Egypt. Party spirit was roused, and Jews at home and abroad burned witb " When he was presented with a. Roman coin, and questioned respecting Csesar, and Caesar's rights, it might have been with a design to tempt or try him on this point. (Matt. xxii. 17.) The circumstance was alluded to in his accusation before Pilate. " We found this fellow perverting the nation, and forbidding to give tribute to Cassar, saying that he himself is Christ a King." Luke xxiii. 2. 70 Introduction. zeal for Jerusalem, Judaea, and whatever savoured of Judaism". What was Ukely, too, to confirm tbe Jews in adhering to tbeir erroneous view of the Messiah, was a notion several times aUuded to in the Gospels. Daniel bad described bim, in tbe metaphorical phrase of Prophecy, as " coming in the clouds of heavenP." This they understood literally, and under the im pression tbat if Jesus were indeed tbe Messiah he would, in fulfilment of this prophecy, exhibit himself visibly descending from tbe skies ; tbey were slow to assent to tbe testimony of any other miracles^ ' Basnage, liv. vi. c. 5. sect. 14. ¦¦ Daniel vii. 13. From our Saviour's application of this prophecy it is generally understood. to point to the destruction of Jerusalem. (See Matt. xxiv. 30. Mark xiii. 26. Luke xxi. 27.) It may be doubted bowever whether we are correct in assigning it to that event, so as to nvake it mean the coming of the Son of man in the clouds of heaven in order to take vengeance on the unbelieving city. The destruction of Jerusalem was the main sig-n,, that the Son of man's new kingdom was now completely founded, because the existence of the Jewish temple and of the Jewish polity was inconsistent with that event; and it was the establishment of this new theocracy which was expressed agree ably to the prophetic language respecting change of government, by the phrase of the new Lord coming in the clouds of heaven. The abolition of the temple service would have been the appro priate sign of the Son of man coming in the clouds of heaven, supposing the Jews, instead of rejecting him, to have welcomed him, and not to have incurred the heavy chastisement whicb befel them. Religion of the Jews. 7 1 but continuaUy and perseveringly demanded of bim " the sign of the Son of man in heaven^." ' In reference to tbis point of error, again, it may be suggested, that tbe Jews were justified in adher ing to the literal and more obvious meaning of their prophecies. But this is not the case. For, as was before observed, the form of divine commu nication to tbem was not usuaUy Uteral, but con veyed in types, syrabols, and raetapbors. With them, therefore, a secondary meaning in a prophecy was more natural than tbe primary". It should be observed too, tbat such a method seeras in strict unison witb the general . character of the Mosaic dispensation, whicb was not so mucb a revelation, as a deposit of truths to be revealed ; tbe form in which tbese truths were deposited, being calcu lated rather to mould men's minds for their recep tion, than positively to teach them. It was the Gospel which was to bring tbem to Ught. That, witb these perverse views, the Jewish peo ple at large should be unfavourably disposed to wards tbe claim of Jesus to be tbe Christ, is wbat 1 Matt. xii. 38. and xvi. 1. Mark viii. 11. Luke xi. 16. ¦For this, among other reasons, our Lord might have chosen to convey his instruction to them in parables and allusions. By conforming his plan of teaching thus far to the spirit of the Jewish Scriptures, he reminded them of the true character of those Scriptures, which were so composed, that the indocile and uncandid " seeing might not see, and hearing might not understand." Luke viii. 10. 72 Introduction. might be expected. Tbat wbich to us might seera most startUng, most to deraand doubt and hesi tation, in the cbaracter of a being so wonderful, and a doctrine so spiritual, was to tbem possibly no ground of scrapie or surprise. That God mani fested himself to raankind by bis Spirit, they knew frora the cbaracter of tbeir prophets, and frora tbe record of tbe creation. That he should also raani fest hiraself in tbe flesh, tbis could not bave been strange or unexpected. Tbeir faraUiarity witb the term ImraanuaP, and tbeir acquaintanee witb the early mode of divine intercourse through tbose mysterious messengers, who at sundry times con versed with tbe patriarchs, raust have rendered the doctrine of tbe Incarnation faraiUar and inteUigible*. In Jesus the assertion of tbis was accounted blas- pheray, not because of the doctrine, but because they did not receive him as the Messiah ". So also witb regard to tbe Atonement. It was obviously a notion to which their minds were long habituated. And yet it is not unlikely that tbe ' To the Christian, the prophetical application of the term Immanuel to Christ seems to be (unless the mind be greatly prejudiced) an unanswerable proof of his divine nature. For if the Messiah was to be Immanuel, he could be so only in two ways, either as being so named, or as being what that name signified, i. e. " God with us." He was not called Immanuel by name, and therefore he was " God with us." ' Genesis xviii. xix. xxxii. " Matt. xxvi. 65. Mark xiv. 64. and Luke xxii. 71. Religion of the Jews. 73 same principle whicb afterwards led tbem to sepa rate the sufiering from the triuraphant Messiah, raight bave blinded thera to tbe union of tbe victim and tbe priest in one person ; and bave led them to consider bim wbose soul was to be an offering for sin, as distinct from him who was to make inter cession for the transgressors". One part of this doctrine, too, could not but be unacceptable to tbe Pharisaical party, naraely, tbat tbe atonement was one, once made, for the sins of all. That aU, even tbe righteous, should require this atonement, was of itself mortifying and revolting to tbe self-approv ing Pharisee; but that all tbe rites and forms which typified or aUuded to tbis act, should be pronounced henceforth nuU and void, deprived tbem of every pretence of accumulating raerit by the laborious observance of them, and was perhaps to them tbe hardest obstacle which they had to over come. That the dpctrine of a future state was farailiar to the Jews at tbe period of the Advent adraits of no question. It is weU known to have been one of tbe points of controversy between tbe Pharisees and Sadducees ; and as tbe former gave tbe tone of opinion and faith to the people, their behef in a future state may be fairly ascribed to tbe nation at large. The doctrine had been gradually developed by tbeir prophets, together witb that of the Mes- " Isaiah liii. 10, 12, 74 Introduction. slab's spiritual reign, of wbich indeed it was a necessary adjunct. Tbose then among tbe Jews, who so understood tbeir Scriptures, as to admit tbe spiritual application of tbese latter prophecies, raay be said to have seen tbeir way far into this great secret of revelation. But the case was somewhat diflferent with tbe rest, and tbese we know formed an exceeding great majority. For it is obvious, that to expect a temporal authority to be esta bUshed, and a temporal govemment to be con ducted, by means of eternal rewards and punish ments, is incongruous and absurd ; and under sucb a confused and disjointed view, not only did tbose labour who rejected Jesus, but many of tbose who (however mucb convinced that he was the Messiah) were yet so encumbered witb tbeir national pre judices, as to continue to expect from, bim tbe as sumption of temporal power. So closely did tbe habits of tbe Mosaic dispensation adhere to tbose who had lived under it, and so great pains did it require to clear away tbe old incrustation, as it were, of the Law, witb wbich Christianity had been plastered up and concealed, until it was safe to bring it fortb into the Ught. Of all its glorious features whicb were then made manifest, Ufe and immortaUty were the chief Religion of the Samaritans. 75 III. RELIGION OF THE SAMARITANS. Although the Samaritans claimed for themselves all the privileges of the Mosaic covenant, yet our Saviour in bis first mission of tbe apostles distin guishes these from " the lost sheep of the house of Israel y," and, it may be added, from tbe Gentiles also. Accordingly, if we look to tbe accounts wbich are given of their origin and of the nature of tbeir faith, we shall find religion amongst tbem assuming a somewhat diff'erent cbaracter from that under which it bas appeared, either in the Jewish or in the Gentile world. Witb the Jews it was revelation neglected, witb tbe Gentiles it was reve lation perverted, witb tbe Samaritans it was reve lation corrupted. Their origin and the history of their faith is tbis^. When the king of Assyria carried away the ten tribes into captivity, be repeopled Samaria with colonists drawn from various parts of his dominions. Tbe new settlement becoming infested by wUd beasts, the calamity was attributed to the wrath of tbe neglected God of Israel ; and accordingly, on tbe appUcation of the colonists, one of tbe captive priests was sent from Assyria " to teach them bow to fear the Lord." Thus was tbe knowledge of Jehovah introduced among them, although, in the y Matt. X. 6. and xv. 24. ' 2 Kings xvii. Joseph. Antiq. lib. ix, cap. ultim. 76 Introduction. first instance at least, they could only have re garded him as tbe tutelary deity of the land, whom it was incumbent on tbem to associate with tbe former objects of tbeir worship. Nor is it likely tbat their views would be greatly corrected or im proved by the continual accession of Jewish re fugees to their comraunity ; tbese being for the raost part crirainals, outcasts, tbe very refuse of tbe people". Under all these disadvantages, the trae faith must nevertheless have been gaining ground amongst tbem, for we find them at a subsequent period anxious to become incorporated witb tbe Jews, so as to form one people and one Church. Sanballat tbeir governor sought to bring tbis about, by giving bis daughter in marriage to Manasses, brother to Jaddus tbe Jewish high priest. But the Jews could not brook tbe union. Manasses was forced into banishment, and witb bim went a nuraerous train of adherents into Saraaria. The benefit which raust bave accrued to the Saraaritan religion from this event is obvious. Tbe imraediate result was tbe erection of an independent teraple on mount Gerizira, and tbe raore orderly observance of that which tbey raaintained to be tbe pure Mosaic law ; because on tbe writings of Moses alone did they found tbeir faith and tbeir practice''. » Josephi Ant. lib. xi. c. 8. in fin. Mbid. c. 7, 8. Religion ofthe Samaritans. 77 StiU, it would appear frora our Lord's interview witb tbe woraan of Sychar, that if at that period idolatry was no longer practised araong thera, tbere was some gross error in tbeir conception of tbe supreme Being, probably the reraains of their hea then prejudice respecting tbe local character of a deity. Tbe Evangelist's narrative raight of itself perhaps lead us to tbis conclusion, for tbe reraark of the woraan, which occasioned Christ's censure of the Saraaritan creed, raay be fairly interpreted, as implying, tbat God was not omnipresent, at least, not equaUy tbe object of worship every where '^. Her argument seems to be, that Jerusalem could not be the place for men to worship Jehovah, be cause tbe patriarchs bad worshipped him on mount Gerizim ; his presence having been sought for by tbe patriarchs on tbat mountain, how could he consistently be clairaed as the God of Jerusalera ? Hence the tenor of our Lord's reply, " Ye shall neither in tbis place, nor yet at Jerusalem, worship tbe Father." " God is a Spirit," and " they tbat worship hira must worship bira in spirit and in truth." Other equally false and unworthy tenets have been ascribed to the Samaritans ; and although our information on tbe subject, being chiefly de rived from Jewish authority, raust be received with due allowance, yet there can be Uttle doubt tbat tbeir creed was deeply tinctured with the wild <= John iv. 20. 78 Introduction. fancies of the Platonic school of Alexandria. Among the individuals wbo contributed to this, the most noted was that Simon of whom mention is made in the Acts of the Apostles'". According to the early Christian writers % be is said to bave studied magic and philosophy, and by these means to bave obtained credit in bis native country Samaria, for tbe most preposterous pretensions. St. Luke's account is, tbat " be bewitched the people, giving out that he was some great one," and that the people caUed him ' ' the great power of God." This looks very like an allusion to tbe doctrine of emanations. Simon was no doubt practising on the creduUty of his countrymen, and had persuaded them to regard him as one of those superior ^ons or eternal natures, which are de scribed in tbe philosophical jargon as subsisting within the fulness of the Divine essence. And yet, whatever were the deficiencies or the mistakes of the Samaritan creed, to them, and not to tbe Jews, we know the Messiah vouchsafed, in express terms, to declare wbo be was. Both Jews and Samaritans were anxiously expecting him : but it is plain, tbat the expectation of the Samaritans was widely different from that of tbe Jews ; for when the inhabitants of Sychar thronged forth at " Ch. viii. 9. * Justin Martyr, Apol. ii. 69, 91. Ireneei Haer. lib, i. c. 23. and Clementis Recognit. lib. ii. Religion of the Samaritans. 79 the woman's sumraons, to gaze on bim wbo was reported as fulfiUing tbe prophetic marks of tbe Christ, they were neither surprised nor offended, at meeting with no greater personage than a lowly traveUer, seated beside Jacob's weU, and asking for a draught of water. The grounds of this difference form tbe most interesting point of tbe inquiry con cerning tbe religion of the Samaritans ; and to the superior clearness and correctness of their notions it was doubtless owing, tbat tbey were favoured with this more explicit avowal of bimself by tbe Messiah, and were otherwise noticed by him in the course of his ministry. Amongst the heresies of tbe Samaritans was their rejection of all the Scriptures save tbe Pentateuch', so tbat if tbeir expectation was founded solely on the Scripture prophecies, to the Pentateuch we •must look for tbe ground-work of tbeir faith. Now, whoever wiU run through tbese early proraises of a Saviour, will perceive tbat the most prominent fea ture in them, as far as regards tbe objects of the blessing, is, that aU the nations of the earth shaU be partakers of it ^. It was tbe extension of tbe bless ing tben to aU nations whicb formed tbe essential feature in tbeir expectation, as distinguished from tbat of the Jews. Of spurious descent, and having now faded to identify tbeir case with that of their ' See Appendix, [E.] 8 See especially Gen, xii. 3. xviii. 18. xxii. 18. xxvi. 4. xxviii. 14. 80 Introduction. rivals, they had not like tbem any prejudices to obstract the ready admission of tbis great trath. Indeed, their unsuccessful rivalry witb tbe Jews, might be supposed to have rendered thera raore sharpsigbted, in eUciting wbat to thera was a con solatory view of tbe prophecies. Now tbis being tbe point, which beyond all others formed tbe greatest obstacle to tbe reception of tbe Messiah by bis own people, it is not to be wondered at, that with a view to tbis the Saraaritans should receive some particular notice from our Lord. In Uke manner tben, as upon St. Peter's confession, be declared bimself to that apostle ; so upon tbe Saraaritan woraan's avowal of tbe nature of her country's hope, to ber also be raade a similar declaration. Witb the same view perhaps be pro posed to tbe Jews an exaraple of a Saraaritan as contrasted witb a Levite ; the forraer acting from a principle tbat all raen are brethren, tbe latter devoid of feUow-feeUng, and refusing to extend bis charity to the wayfaring stranger, though be were perishing for want of it''. We are the more authorized to raake such an application of the parable, from the unneighbourly cbaracter of tbe Samaritans, wbo appear to have indulged toward tbe Jews even raore tban an equal share of jealousy and hatred. It was only in their view of the promised blessing tbat they were less selfish and uncharitable, and, " Luke X. 32. Religion ofthe Samaritans. 81 unUke the Jews, wilUng that all wbo needed, enemy or friend, stranger or feUow-countryman, should be free partakers of it. Supposing tben that the Jews understood tbe parable to aUude to tbeir unnatural denial of the greatest of God's blessings to him wbo was perishing in tbe highways for want of it", the reproof which they would read, might be thus interpreted, " If tbe Samaritans, using the Ught to be derived from a portion only of your Scriptures, have been able to see tbis great tmth, bow shaU you stand excused on the score of ignorance, wbo profess to receive the whole volurae of the book ?" Tbus mucb on tbe supposition, that the Sama ritan expectation was derived solely from tbe Jewish Scriptures. But if (as has been stated to be the opinion of some) tbe general expectation of tbe " Elsewhere our Lord designates the Gentiles as persons in need, found in the highways and hedges. (Luke xiv. 23.) Any one accustomed to observe the recurrence of the same doctrine under different forms, in the various discourses of our Lord, will not perhaps be unwilling to admit the connection in this instance. Scarcely any thing of importance is said by him, which we do not find again and again expressed or alluded to, so as to connect the former mention of the subject with the introduction of it -in some fresh shape. This deserves the more notice, because beyond the ordinary advantage of renewing the impression of truth on men's minds, it was a method especially appropriate to one who taught in parables, and whose meaning (without some check of that kind) might have been, even on matters of importance, liable to be perverted or misunderstood, or at least a plea would have been furnished for perversion and mis apprehension, VOL. I. G 82 Introduction. heathen world bad some origin independent of this, it is but natural to conjecture further, that those who were by descent almost altogether heathen, would not have been excluded from tbese sources of traditionary prophecy enjoyed by the rest of tbe Gentiles ; and that their knowledge of these might have helped them to a clearer exposition of the Jewish record tban tbe Jews themselves generally adopted". Before I quit the subject altogetber, it may be proper to notice an apparent inconsistency in tbe Gospel narrative of tbe Samaritans' behaviour to wards Christ.. Wben as yet he had performed no miracles, and merely for his word's sake, one whole city declared themselves satisfied of the truth of his claims, and yet, as those claims came to be more ° The Samaritans might easily have become acquainted with " the fiilness of the time" from the Pentateuch, marked as it there is by Jacob's prophecy of the departure of the sceptre from Judah, a circumstance to which they would most anxiously advert. Bishop Horsley supposes that, besides the agreement of time, the character under which the Messiah presented himself to them as a preacher of righteousness was precisely that under which the writings of Moses would lead them to expect him. The passages which he conjectures to have furnished this view, are those whicb record the promises to Jacob, (Gen. xxviii. 3. xxxv, 11. xlviii. 4. and the song of Moses, Deuteron. xxxiii. 2 — 5.) His argument however requires that the text of the latter should undergo no slight alteration, and even the former texts, as they now stand, will scarcely be allowed by all to war rant his application of them. See Horsley's Sermons, vol. ii. serm. 24—26. Religion of the Samaritans. 83 certainly proved, we find the Samaritans laying aside in tbis one point their opposition to the Jews, and so averse to receive him, as to provoke bis disciples on one occasion to ask of bim if be would call down fire from heaven to consurae thera". But the reason of this is easily found in tbe rule whicb our Saviour laid down for tbe Umits of his raimstry, " I am not sent but to tbe lost sheep of tbe house of Israel." " Go not into the way of tbe Gentiles, and into any city of tbe Samaritans go not. But go rather to tbe lost sheep ofthe house of Israel?." Tbis doubtless seemed to tbem a sanction of the Jewish prejudice, tbat to them alone, and for their sake only, was the Messiah corae. On tbe occasion above aUuded to, the reason given for tbeir refusal to receive bira is, that " his face was as thougb be would go to Jerusalera." Tbey were raortified, disappointed, and perplexed ; and tbe more so be cause of their enmity to tbe Jews. Hence for a season tbeir clearer faith failed tbem ; but as soon as Christianity began to be preached beyond the Jewish nation, they were foremost and readiest to embrace it. When Philip preached, they witb one accord gave beed to himi: and meanwhile, indi viduals, sucb as the grateful leper % might through- " Luke ix. 51. p Matt, XV. 24. X. 5, 6. 1 Acts viii. 6. ' Luke xvii. 15. g2 84 Introduction. out have been waiting patiently for tbe arrival of of the promised period, notwithstanding the general perverseness and inconsistency'. ¦ See Appendix, [F.] A REVIEW OF THE RISE AND EARLY PROGRESS OF CHRISTIANITY. PART I. THE MINISTRY OF CHRIST. 1 HE period which wiU pass under review in tbe foUowing inquiry, embraces tbe tbree great stages in tbe establishment of Christianity. In the first, it was taught by our Saviour hiraself on earth ; in the second, it was entrusted to tbe rainistry of raen divinely inspired and extraordinarily assisted ; in the last, it was perraanently placed in tbe hands of governors and teachers neither divinely inspired nor extraordinarily assisted. There are several remarkable omissions in our Lord's personal Ministrj^ such as that he never baptized, although baptism was tbe rite of admis sion into his reUgion ; that he did not preach to the Gentiles, although the most distinguishing feature of tbe new dispensation was its extension to aU mankind; tbat be estabUshed no Church during 86 The Ministry of Christ. bis abode on earth, and deft no written laws behind him: aU which seem to indicate, (what the Gospel account of him raore expressly declares,) tbat be carae to be the subject of Christianity raore than tbe author of it. In the former view, he appears as God manifested in tbe flesh, and in that charac ter accomplishing our redemption by his mysterious sufferings and death. In the latter, he appears as the teacher of mankind, instmcting them in tbe method whereby tbey might attain to tbe divine favour tbus made accessible to all. His ministry so considered may be conveniently classed under the following beads : I. His ordinary life, considered in the light of an Example. II. His Teaching. III. His Miracles. IV. His Institutions. V His Prophecies. This view will not include a detailed account of tbe events of bis life, obviously because the Bible is in the hands of all, A famUiarity with them is presumed, and on this presumption tbey wiU be introduced or alluded to, not in the way of narra tive, but as they fall under the several divisions into which the subject has been arranged" ' In the mode of considering Christ's Ministry which has been here adopted, the question of its duration, and also the chrono- His example. 87 L EXAMPLE OF CHRIST. The iraportance of example and precept united in tbe same person is obvious, and consists in the learner being at once irapressed witb a conviction logical arrangement of its several parts, are necessarily excluded. On the former point, namely, the period which it embraced, there is now perhaps little difference of opinion, at least controversy has been long silent on the subject. But few questions histo rical or doctrinal have been more frequently renewed from the earliest period of the Church. It is quite marvellous too, to find the immense difference of time ascribed to our Lord's Ministry among those who differed concerning the point in the period nearest the source of information. Tertullian' and Origen'' have been supposed to fix it, the one within the compass of a year, the other a little beyond it; whilst Irenseus seems to assert a period of twenty years. The subject has been discussed by Bp. Marsh in his notes to Michaelis with his usual learning and judgment. See vol. iii. c. ii. sect. 7. notes. Bp. Kaye, in his Eccl. Hist. p. 158. attributes Tertullian's state ment to a mistake of the year in which Christ was revealed, for the year in which he suffered. See also Benson's Chronology of our Saviour's Life, c. vii. page 241. The arrangement ofthe several portions of Christ's Ministry by Archbishop Newcome in his Harmony, is perhaps as probable as can be suggested. The events of the Resurrection are those to the right disposition of which the most importance attaches, and it is on this part of the subject that most diflficulty is likely to be felt. West on the Resurrection is too popular a book to require any reference to be made to it, as containing the ablest solution of tbe apparent inconsistencies which the Gospel narra tive presents, but like Dr. Less's work on the Authenticity of the Scriptures, it derives a value from one circumstance, which cannot be too often brought into notice ; it was the result of real doubt and scepticism. " Adv, Judseos, u. 8, ^ IIsjJ agx^'i 'i''' '''• *•'• ^- 88 The Ministry of Christ. that the teacher is sincere and bis precept practi cable, and being furnished with a pattem to excite and guide bim in tbe practice of it. If, added to this, the sarae person be moreover the source of tbat object, on account of which the rales enjoined are valuable, tbe combined effect is of course consider ably heightened. Tbat tbe divine coraraandraents, as delivered to mankind before tbe incarnation of the Son of God, laboured under a disadvantage, arising frora tbe want of such an exaraple, cannot be questioned. Tbe disciple of tbe old dispensation, was circura stanced like the tyro, who has to learn an art from written rales, for want of a raaster to practise under. To obviate tbis disadvantage, it was necessary that the coraraands sboiUd be raore numerous, more rainute and specific, and more UteraUy enforced. StiU, in some points, it would seem impossible, tbat any mode of instruction should produce a similar effect, to tbat whicb bas resulted frora the great Christian raystery. He, for instance, whora we bave never- seen nor conceived in tbought, cannot become an object of the affections, in the same manner as be witb whom we are famihar. The coraraand to love the Lord our God witb aU our heart, and all our soul, and all our strength, could never effect tbe same purpose, as God raanifested in tbe flesh, so as to become the natural object of sympathy, of love, and of gratitude. On tbis principle doubtless it is, that the resur- His example. 89 rection of Christ is so rauch insisted on as an earnest of our own resurrection. Not that the same truth would have admitted of a doubt, if only a declaration of it bad been made by our Lord or tbe Holy Spirit; nor, again, that otber proofs of his abiUty to raise us would not have sufficed ; but it was a sample of tbe general resurrection, " tbe first fraits of them tbat slept" :" and a trutb so experimentally proved, differs as mucb in its effect on tbe belief and feeUngs, as mere precept differs from exaraple, or rather as tbe eff'ect of precept, disjoined frora tbe exaraple of him on whose authority it rests, differs frora the effect of precept, example, and authority, united in the sarae person. For this end also the chastisement of our sins may have been exhibited in tbe person of a suffering Redeemer. For it is evident, that (for ougbt we know) tbe redemption of mankind might bave been effected, and the scene neither exhibited nor revealed to men. As it is, we feel the force of St. Paul's appeal, " He that spared not bis own Son, but delivered him up for us all, how sball he not with bim also freely give us all things'' ?" Jesus Christ is set forth by tbe sacred writers as tbe perfect pattern of Christian duty. By whicb we raust understand, not tbat he fulfilled aU tbe duties which a Christian life may embrace, but aU which were within his sphere of action. It is per- " 1 Cor. XV. 26. = Rom. viii. 32. 90 The Ministry of Christ. fection in tbe mode, rather than in the extent which it erabraces. It will nevertheless be found, on a very httle reflection, to be extensive enough to furnish a model for the chief part of every man's Ufe, and to be appUcable in many points, whicb would appear at first to Ue beyond its compass. Tbus, as a worker of miracles, his example cannot indeed be literaUy imitated, but it raay stiU be adapted to the case of aU. The same benevolence which was evinced in the exercise of divine means by bim, may be testified in our behaviour, by the use of human means conducive to the same purpose. We cannot, indeed, redeem a world by the sacrifice of our Uves, but many sacrifices and personal de nials there are which conduce to tbe welfare of otbers, and in making tbese we sbaU be acting Uke our great exaraple. We cannot save raen's souls, but we raay help thera into tbe way of salvation ; and although we have no power to ascend to heaven by any efforts of our own, by looking stedfastly on Him wbo bas gone before us, we may kindle tbat hope, and tbat faith, whereby we sball ascend to heaven like Him. Again, there are relations of domestic and pubhc life out of wbich duties arise, sucb as tbe Saviour cannot be literally said to have fulfiUed, because he stood not in those relations, and had no opportunity of exempUfying the practice of tbe duties. We cannot contemplate him as a father and master of a household, but we see him in tbe bosom of bis His example. 91 apostohc family, — those whom, as if with this de sign, he calls bis mother and his brethren''; and what example could more forcibly recommend tbe observance of faraily prayer, for instance, than tbat which be bas so exhibited, by adding to bis soUtary devotions, and to bis attendance on the pubUc service of tbe synagogue, tbe custom of praying in private with his disciples*? If we consider the sphere of life in which our Lord moved, it will be seen that although bis exara ple thus becarae appUcable to raany cases strictly beyond it, yet it was more particularly suited to the exercise of those moral duties which are pecuUar to the Christian scherae, viz. humiUty and forgiveness of injuries, Tbe propriety and advantage of this is obvious. To the heathen moralist these quaUties, considered as -virtues, were as new as tbe doctrines of tbe Atonement and tbe Resurrection. To tbe Jew, tbe latter at least was equally so ; and both required that the practice of thera should be recom- ^ mended by a hfe such as the Saviour led, in wbich his condescension in dweUing amongst us was raore apparent frora his poverty and lowliness, than if he bad been nurabered witb the rich and powerful ; whilst his every act of raercy, and bis every word of exhortation to tbe Jews, was a retum of good for evil. The closing scene of his rainistry was only ¦' Matt. xii. 49. ' Matt. xxvi. 26. Luke vi, 12. and Luke ix. 28. Matt. vi. 9 92 Th.e Ministry of Christ. a more prominent display of those Gospel virtues exempUfied in tbe whole course of it. He sub mitted voluntarily to a death appropriated to the meanest criminals, and be died praying for bis eneraies. TI. HIS TEACHING. As to bis raode of teaching, it was not sys teraatic ; and in tbis his example was imitated by the apostles. Tbe language and form in which it was dehvered was unpbilosopbical ; tbat is, instead of eraploying terras of science, he forraed his ex pressions frora passing occurrences, and whatever objects happened to be present to bis bearers at tbe time of bis addressing them. Or else be spoke in parables, or raade use of tbat ancient syraboUcal language so often adopted by tbe Jewish prophets, as, wben be washed his disciples' feet, and set a child in tbe raidst of thera ^. Whatever be assigned as tbe probable motive which occasioned our Lord to choose this unpbilo sopbical and unsystematic mode of instruction, it is highly important that tbe fact should be clearly kept in view by tbe Christian who searches the New Testaraent for tbe great doctrines of Chris tianity. Without doing so, he cannot faU to be surprised, and somewhat confounded, at finding these ^ John xiii. 5. Matt, xviii. 2. His tecCching. 93 doctrines, neither arranged in order, nor often di rectly asserted, but lying in detached portions, each difficult perhaps to be found entire, but easily pro duced by combining one passage with another. As -by this method it often happens, that one portion of the doctrine sought for will be found in tbe Old Testament, another in the New, the con nection and unity of tbe two dispensations, of which tbey are the several records, becorae the more ap parent, and this might bave been one end contem plated by our Lord in adopting it. It entailed on the disciple of tbe Gospel tbe necessity of search ing the earUer Scriptures for tbe words of eternal Ufe. A further advantage accrues frora it to tbe evi dence of Christianity. Its doctrines being tbus diffused and intermingled with otber matter, could not by any possibiUty bave been so forged and inserted, as to leave no occasional raark of seaming and joining. Our Saviour's Gospel is like bis robe, " without seara, woven throughout," and be who receives it, must take it all, for it cannot be di vided. As to tbe matter of his teaching, bis discourses aira eitber at correcting wbat was perverted, and explaining what was obscure, in tbe preceding state of morals and reUgious knowledge, or else tbey de clare truths not before revealed. With the several leading topics wbich they embrace, tbe Christian reader is presumed to be familiar; and it is sufficient 94 The Ministry of Christ. to observe briefly, tbat of the former kind are his exhortations to inward purity, as opposed to mere outward acts of obedience, and compUance with the spirit rather than witb the letter of the precept. To tbe latter class belong tbe doctrines of Atone ment and Grace ; of the Trinity in Unity ; certain points of revelation relating to a' future state ; and whatever else may be considered as pecuUar to tbe Christian revelation. III. HIS MIRACLES. The chief object of our Lord's miracles was to prove bis mission ; and it may be observed, that in tbis case, and in tbat of Moses, (of aU wbo ever pre tended to found a reUgion on thera,) the miracles supported tbe credit of tbe reUgion, not the re Ugion the credit of the miracles. As testimony, bowever, tbey do not properly form part of his ministry, (as a teacher,) but tbey bave Uke-wise a moral and a reUgious meaning, and in this point of view tbey do so. Tbey have a moral meaning, because they are aU benevolent, whereas as proofs they might have been destructive or indifferent, as were the miracles of Moses and tbe Prophets. As it is, they not only prove tbat Cbrist came from God, but declare tbat be came witb a benevolent purpose. His miracles. 9^5 They have also a reUgious meaning, because tbey typified sorae of the chief doctrines of his Gospel. Tbus when he converted into wine tbe water set for purification, he taught that sin was cleansed by bis blood, and not by the ritual observances of the law. His divine nature was asserted by walking on the sea ^, and by whatever other miracles invested him witb the scriptural characteristics of Jehovah. Wben he healed tbe sick, gave sigbt to the bhnd, and enabled tbe lame to walk, he not only proved his authority, and exercised bis compassion, but suggested the inference, that he bad come to restore our corrupted nature to its original purity, to en lighten the ignorant, as all raen were, and to en able us to stand in tbe path of life, wben without hira we could not but fail and sink. And lastly, to shew tbat tbe good eff'ects of bis coming were to extend to distant countries and future ages, the objects of bis rairacles were occasionally persons wbo only touched hira, or who were absent from him. Hence possibly tbe necessity of faith in the per sons on whom the miracles of heaUng were wrought; for if tbese miracles had no further intent than to prove bis power, or even his benevolence, it is obvious that be, to whom were coraraitted all things E " Thy way is in the sea, and thy path in the great waters." Paalm Ixxvii. 19. " The Lord is mightier than mighty waves." Psalm xciii. 4. 96 The Ministry of Christ. in heaven and in earth, did not need tbe concur rence of any object of power or of benevolence. But as he had raade Faith necessary to tbat eternal salvation which be carae to offer, it was fitting tbat the teraporal deUverance should in like raanner be off'ered -with the same condition, if we suppose the latter to be intended as a type of tbe forraer ; else the syraboUcal lesson would bave been incomplete, and Uable to misconstruction. One observation more on our Lord's miracles. They were not only proofs of bis authority, and means of instruction, but also specimens of that mercy, tbe full and entire display of which is reserved for hereafter. To understand tbis, it must be borne in mind, that Satan brougbt into tbe world both sin and death, moral and natural evil ; and the result of our Lord's triumph over bim was to be tbe removal of both. In heaUng tbe sick, tben, and raising the dead, tbe Saviour may be considered as giving an instance of tbe exercise of his power in removing natural 'evil ; whilst the same was evinced witb regard to moral evil, by casting out devUs, the agents of bim who was the source of sin. It was doubtless in reference to tbis latter object, that he caused thera on one occasion to depart into a herd of swine, tbus proving tbat the possession was real, and not tbe result of a disordered iraagination. The sarae end might bave been likewise contem- His institutions. 97 plated in the record of tbe Temptation ; for in neither of these instances at least could tbe power of iraagination account for tbe phenoraenon. In the first tbe divine being was above its delusions, in the other the brate was as rauch below it ''. IV. HIS INSTITUTIONS. In tbe first rude state of language, signs, gestures, and actions were no doubt tbe chief raode of expressing all ideas. But in reUgion, custora being raore sacred tban in the ordinary intercourse of hfe, the primitive vehicle of thought continued here longest in use, and was still tbe chief form of worship for ag'es after language became raore in teUigible than signs and syrabols. In proof of tbis, we may observe bow large a proportion of tbe latter was preserved in the reUgious service of the Israelites. As tbe progress of language advanced, the pri mitive usage graduaUy decUned, and in the last estabUshment of religion, only two symbolical in stitutions were appointed, Baptisra and the Lord's Supper. These, then, we raight expect to find expressing the most important truths of tbat last revelation, in a form intelUgible to tbe savage as well as to the philosopher, to raen of all languages, and in all '' Warburton's Divine Legation, b. ix. c. 5. VOL. I. H 98 The Ministry of Christ. ages ; and that such is the instraction which they convey is obvious. Tbe great topics of our Lord's preaching were repentance and faith. The promised result of repentance was, that men were to be freed from the influence of sinful habits. This, in meta phorical language, would be a cleansing from sin, and in embodied metaphor or symbol, tbe act of washing. Again, the proraised result of faith was forgiveness of sins through the atonement to be made by bis death, and also rairaculous assistance from bim, and tbis is set fortb by the bread and wine in the Eucharist. Tbe symbol is twofold. The bread is broken, and tbe wine poured out, to denote his dying for us ; the bread is also eaten, and the wine drunk, to denote tbe spiritual strength and refreshment, the life, whicb we derive from his mysterious presence and union witb us. But why not, it may be said, in tbis latter, as in the former sacrament, adopt tbe most direct and exact representation of tbe scene so recorded, such as would be tbe flesh and blood of an animal ? The case appears to be this : tbe atonement was so represented before the event took place, because a greater exactness was requisite to render tbe agree ment of tbe event with its type so apparent as to be easily recognized and admitted ; but so close a re semblance not being necessary in a comraeraorative syrabol, (the event being already known, and tbe connection between tbem admitted,) tbat symbol was changed, to prevent any confusion between the His institutions. 99 old rite, which was prophetic, and the new one, whicb was comraeraorative; between tbe Jewish sacnfice, whicb had no independent and inherent efficacy, and tbe Christian sacrifice wbich pos sessed it. Christ instituted both tbese sacraraents, and no more tban these, yet it is remarkable that be officiated only in tbe holy Supper. A distinction wbich, considering tbe importance be attached to both, can hardly be supposed to have been accidental. Indeed a design of making tbe distinction, (whatever tbat design was) may perhaps be perceived in several of his parables, and still more in that raost aUegorical of aU his rairacles, the conversion of water into wine. The water when made wine, was then, and not till tben, placed into tbe bands of tbe governor of tbe feast to be dispensed '. That our Lord foresaw the irapious notion wbich would creep into his Church respecting tbe nature of tbe bread and wine adrainistered in tbe Eu charist, and officiated bimself to render its absurdity more palpable ; but that in Baptism tbere being no occasion for a similar precaution, be therefore did not officiate in that also, is by no means improbable. But tbe distinction may also have arisen from the nature ofthe things signified by tbe two Sacraraents. Tbey being, as it were, an epitome of the Christian scheme ; Baptism represents tbe agency of tbe ' John ii. 8. H 2 100 The Ministry of Christ. Comforter, tbe Eucharist the agency of the Son.,' The admission into Christ's Church was the work, not of tbe Lord bimself, but of his disciples fiUed witb tbe Holy Ghost, and tbe ceremony of tbat admission was Baptism. But tbe redemption of tbose so admitted was tbe work of Cbrist, and of tbis tbe Eucharist was a symbolical pledge. By Baptism we are said to be sealed "unto tbe day of redemption, and we are baptized into bis death''. Besides these institutions, our Lord appointed one form of prayer, which (beyond its ob-vious character as a model and a sanction for otber forms) may not unreasonably be viewed in connection witb tbe Sacraments, as uniting witb them to forra a peculiar iUustration and testiraony to the doctrine of the Trinity. One forra of prayer was appointed, and that addressed to the Father ; one Sacrament was instituted declaring the office of tbe Son ; one more declaring the office of tbe Holy Ghost. V. HIS PROPHECIES. A prophecy is a miracle performed for posterity, and to our Lord's prophecies the same observation appUes as to his miracles. One intent of thera was to prove tbe truth of his raission: "Now 1 teU you before it corae, tbat when it is corae to pass ye may beUeve tbat I am he V So considered, tbe ^ Eph. iv. 30. Rom. vi. 3. ' John xiii. 19. xiv. 29. His prophecies. 101 prophecies are not, strictly speaking, a portion of bis ministry. But, like bis rairacles, tbey were also tbe vehicles of instmction, and tbis -view of tbem falls under tbe present subject of reraark. Tbey raay be conveniently arranged under four beads, as treating, 1. Of Hiraself 2. Of bis Cburch or Religion. 3. Of certain individuals of bis Cburch. 4. Of tbe Jewish Church or ReUgion. I, CONCERNING HIMSELF. Christ, in delivering prophecies concerning bim self, may be considered as employed in framing an index to tbe work wbich be bad in band. It is natural to suppose, that those points whicb be tbus selected, were by bim considered as tbe lead ing features of it; and were selected in order to direct attention to tbem especiaUy, and above all otbers. Accordingly he foretold his betrayal, his death, bis resurrection, his ascension, and his second coming. Now if he bad raerely raarked these for special notice by the finger of prophecy, and left tbe doctriues arising out of tbem to be gathered from other parts of bis own discourses, or frora tbe preaching and writings of bis inspired servants, (as is tbe case to a certain extent,) still, to tbese doctrines would belong a cbaracter of importance. 102 The Ministry of Christ. corresponding to that bestowed on the events by his notice of tbem. But his prophecies are fre quently not only predictive, but explanatory; de claring at once the event to be, and tbe meanmg and intent of it. Tbus, in foretelling bis death, tbe prediction conveys also tbe doctrine of the Atone ment. " As Moses Ufted up the serpent in the wilderness, even so must tbe Son of man be lifted up, that whosoever beheveth in him should not perish, but have etemal Ufe""." "I am tbe good Shepherd, tbe good Shepherd giveth his Ufe for the sheep'' " These and similar predictions tben, when accomphshed, became a commentary on the events. As in the first mentioned, for instance, when he was seen lifted up on tbe cross, there could be no doubt that by this raeans it was eflfected, tbat " whosoever beheveth in hira should not perish, but have etemal Ufe." IL CONCERNING HIS CHURCH. A didactic character may also be traced in tbe prophecies relating to his Cburch or Kingdom on earth. Viewed as the display of foreknowledge, they are, like other prophecies, only miracles in reserve, tbe germ of evidence which tirae was to unfold and bring to maturity. But the appUcation "'John iii. 14, 15. " John x. II. His prophecies. 103 of these prophecies to a specific purpose of instruc tion, is tbe circumstance wbich entitles them to be considered as paft of tbe Saviour's ministry. It is said that " holy men" of old spake not of them selves, but as " the Holy Spirit moved thera"." Not so our Lord. He was not the" instrument of prophecy, but prophecy was an instruraent in his hands, eraployed at bis discretion, and so employed as to make a part of his didactic ministry. Speaking of his Cburch, he sometimes alludes to it as already established ; sometiraes he points to the process by which that object was to be accora plished. Of the former subject, tbe leading topic was, that his Church was to embrace within its pale aU the world. Contrasted witb its origin, it was as tbe stately tree compared witb the seed from which it sprang ; and as a little leaven leaveneth the whole mass, even so his httle family of believers were to impart tbe gift which they bad received from bim, not to any one favoured people or sect, but to aU nations. OccasionaUy, too, bis Church is repre sented as a field in whicb tares bad sprung up, or by images of a like import. Now, keeping aU tbis in view, let us caU to mind how much tbe early progress of tbe Gospel was impeded by the Jewish prejudices respecting the nature of a divine dispensation, whicb even those wbo were converts to Christianity could not con- ° 2 Peter i. 21, 104 The Ministry of Christ. ceive to be a thing intended aUke for GentUe and Jew. Tbe ideas of a divine dispensation and of a chosen people were nearly inseparable. Wbat then could be raore appropriate and useful, tban tbat our Lord's prophecies concerning bis Church should point chiefly to its universality? In this point of view tbey were instruction, reproof, and prevention of error. Again, tbe prophecies relating to tbe estabUshing of bis Church, are full of tbe difficulties and dis tresses which awaited tbose wbo were eraployed in tbis work. The very assurance, tbat tbe gates of heU should not prevail against tbe fabric which tbey were appointed to rear, is an iraphed declaration of extrerae peril to be expected; as tbe promise tbat he would be witb tbem always, denotes tbat tbey should always need bira. Of wbat use now could tbis view of tbe raatter be to bis foUowers in their arduous enterprise ? tbat is, of what use, beyond tbe evidence arising frora tbe fulfilraent of prophecy? It was, doubtless, no smaU consolation to thera, to know tbat tbeir Master bad foreseen all tbeir difficulties, and pro-vided against them. But tbere appears also a further design. Under the Mosaic dispensation, men had imbibed two prejudices whicb were inconsistent with the new covenant : the one, that all divine revelation was confined to a particular people ; the otber, tbat God's people were to expect from him temporal rewards and punishments . As tbe former notion was counteracted by the prophecies His prophecies. 105 relating to the universaUty of tbe Gospel, so the latter was to be coiTected, by presenting to thefr minds continual wai-nings of persecution, hardship, and death. Agreeably to tbe doctrine of temporal rewards and punishments, the Jews bad looked for a ]\Iessiali wbo should confer on bis foUowers worldly glory and prosperity ; but tbese earthly motives to obedience were henceforth to be cast out of reUgion, and tbe prophecies in question were placed as a guard to prevent tbeir re-entrance. It is probable then that tbe Saviour's pi"ophecies relating to bis Cburch, considered as part of bis didactic ministry, were designed principaUy to cor rect the en"oneous notion, tbat tbat Church was to be estabUshed on tbe same principles as the Jewish dispensation wbich it was to supersede. III. CONCERNING CERTAIN INDIVIDUALS. St. Peter. Three prophecies relating to St. Peter are recorded in the Gospels, Of tbese tbe most important wiU be first considered. " Thou art Peter, and upon tbis rock wiU I buUd my Church ; and tbe gates of heU shaU not prevaU against it. And I wUl give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shaU be bound in heaven : 106 The Ministry of Christ. and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth sball be loosed in heaven''." As we bave no clue to any connection between tbis saying and any future supremacy vested in the apostle because of it, it is to be considered as a prophecy of the part he was to occupy, rather than an appointment; and as sucb its didactic cbaracter will be bere examined. By many indeed the words are understood as having no peculiar reference to St. Peter; or rather, as declaring no more concerning him than is else where declared of tbe other apostles. And, indeed, if Peter had been the apostle's original name, and not appUed to him by our Lord bimself, as if on account of some peculiarity in his cbaracter or con dition, it might be fairly argued, that our Lord's language to him only differed from that which be addressed to the others, in being an allusion to his name. But the name was obviously given bim because of Ius future destination, not that destina tion so expressed because of tbe name. Bishop Marsh ^, accordingly, has appUed tbe prophecy to bim viewed as the foimder of the Church at Jemsa lem, wbich was, as be contends, more peculiarly the Church of Cbrist. His argument certainly rests upon the surest ground, the result. St. Peter was not the founder of an Universal. Church, but of the Church at Jerusalem. ¦¦Matt. .xvi. 18, 19. 1 See Comparative View, App. p. 23, His prophecies. 107 The images of whicb the prophecy is composed are a rock — a cburch built on it — tbe keys of it — and the gates of hell. At least, these are all the images contained in that portion of the prophecy wbich was addressed to St. Peter, and to none else. Now, whatever meaning we choose to elicit from tbem, it will hardly be denied, on a moment's con sideration, tbat tbey were amongst tbe most fami liar to Jiewish ears, because amongst tbe most cortimon of their scriptural figures. Secondly, tbat they apply in tbeir Uteral signification most remark ably to the Jewish temple, its situation, and other circumstances. Built on a rock — ^the one Cburch of God heretofore, and its keys the badge of autho rity to bim who held them — that Church was now given over to the gates of Hades, and the Christian Church was to be estabhshed instead. Accordingly in this prophecy, concermng the founder of the new Church at Jerusalem, our Lord bas crowded together some of tbe most famiUar Jewish iniages, and those of a kind calculated to recal the ancient temple to men's minds. Now, however obscure his language might become to others, by reason of tbis assemblage of national figures, to the Jews it would on that very account be the more explicit, and they would tbe more readily recognize its particular application to them. We bear of no doubts originating in tbese words, as to St. Peter's rank and authority — of no question, in short, about tbe meaning, being agitated in the 108 The Ministry of Christ. early Church. When St. Peter took on him the ministry of the circumcision, and still raore on his first preaching at Jerasalem, the converted Jew remembered tbe words of the Lord Jesus, and understood that tbe former temple was now con signed to destraction, and the new one in tbe bands of him who bore tbe office designated by tbe keys. One remark may be added in further Ulustration of tbis prophecy, which, from its misapplication, has assumed an iraportance, beyond any which would attach to it from its natural character. The amaz ing size of tbe stones employed, both in the founda tion and the superstructure of tbe temple, was a subject of general admiration ^ Accordingly the disciples are said, on one occasion, to bave pointed thera out to our Lord, witb sorae degree of national vanity: " Master, see what manner of stones, and what buildings are bere ; and Jesus answered, and said unto tbem, Seest thou these great buildings ? tbere shaU not be left one stone upon another which sball not be thrown down' " Now after tbis read the prophecy in question, and it wiU seem nearly in so many words a negation concerning St. Peter's Church, of tbat fate whicb was affirmed of the teraple and its service. In St. Mark's account. See Josephus's description, De Bello Jud. lib. v. c. 5. Mark xiii. 2. His prophecies. 109 (which is the one quoted,) it is said tbat one of the disciples made tbe remark, and as St. Peter's narae is afterwards first raentioned araongst those wbo made further inquiries respecting tbe overthrow of tbe sacred edifice, it is rather probable that be was tbe one. Perhaps, tben, our Saviour might have been calling to bis remembrance this conversation, (for it seems at tbe tirae to have excited no ordinary interest,) when he told bira tbat not such should be the materials, nor sucb tbe fate of tbe new house of God at Jerusalera. The apostle had just acknow ledged him as the Son of tbe Uving God, and our Lord's reply was as if he bad said, " Simon, thou didst heretofore extol the temple and its foundation rock, but in Jerusalem sball be built a nobler edi fice, not by a Moses, an EUas, or any mere prophet, but by bim whom thou bast discovered to be tbe Son of tbe Uving God. And thou shalt find thyself a firmer foundation-stone to that building, than those of which thou didst once boast unto rae'." ' The reader may here require to be reminded of the remark already made on the recurrence of the same topics in the various discourses of our Lord. But, after all, the Protestant advocate need not be very soli citous about settling the precise import of the promise to St. Peter; that is, as far as it affects the controversy between Protestants and Papists ; for, whatever kind of foundation St. Peter was to the Church, it is obvious that the image employed in the metaphor excludes the notion of a succession of persons similarly circumstanced. 1 1 0 The Ministry of Christ. The two remaining prophecies concerning St. Peter appear to have been intended as instractive, chiefly, if not solely, to the individual. Tbat which fore told bis denial of his Master conveyed a rebuke for self-confidence, whilst that which described his ignominious death, was peculiarly applicable to bim, wbo, of all tbe apostles, expressed tbe greatest soUcitude about tbe temporal kingdom attributed to tbe Messiah. St. John. " If this man tarry till I come, what is that to thee "." What was affirmed in tbese words concerning St. Jobn, was appUed on another occasion to sorae whose naraes are not specified. " There be sorae standing here who shall not taste of death, tiU tbey see the Son of raan coining in bis kingdom"." The didactic use of these prophecies seems to have been to check tbe erroneous notion, tbat whenever Cbrist spoke of bis " coming," it raeant bis coining to judge tbe world at tbe laSt day. For the expres sion, " shaU not taste of death until, &c." rather impUes that those persons should afterwards taste death ; and tbat tbis expression concerning St. Jobn was intended only to convey tbe same meaning, we leam from tbat apostle himself: " Tben went tbis saying abroad among the brethren, tbat tbat dis- " John xxi, 22. " Matt. xvi. 28. Mark ix. 1. Luke ix. 27, His prophecies. Ill ciple should not die ; yet Jesus said not unto bim, He shaU not die ; but. If I wiU tbat be tarry tiU I come," &c.>' Judas Iscariot. As our Lord was to be betrayed by one of bis apostles, it seems but natural tbat this should be made the subject of prophecy by him, in order to pre vent any possible objection respecting his want of foresight in tbe choice of tbe twelve'^. Such, then, might have been the priraary design of this pro phecy. But, Uke his others, its record might bave been intended to convey also some instruction to tbe Church in after times — even to us. Indeed it cannot but strike one as remarkable, not that he should be betrayed, but tbat bis betrayal (and tbat by one of bis own friends) should be made a necessary part in bis scheme of hfe as marked out for bim in ancient prophecy, and tbat be should point to it, as to one of those important figures in the great prophetic painting, at wbich we are to pause and learn something. Now tbe circumstances of tbe betrayal were sucb, as to make it highly probable that Judas did not intend the death of his Master, but rather designed to force him to an open declaration of bimself as a temporal King ; the cbaracter under which he was at that time obstinately contemplated, even by his most faithfid foUowers. Otherwise, indeed, it would ' John xxi. 23. ^ Matt, x.xvi. 25, 112 The Ministry of Christ. be impossible to account for his behaviour at the last supper. As, for instance, that he should leave tbe room to execute his purpose, knowing tbat our Lord was aware whither be was going, and witb what intent. Doubtless be tbought, tbat if bis stratagem succeeded, bis impatient zeal would not only bave been excused, but even honoured and rewarded. The rejection of tbe wages of bis guilt too, tbe natural result of severe disappoint ment, is perfectly consistent with this view". It is probable, therefore, tbat the apostles con sidered the crirae of Judas siraply as an act of treachery or treason. He is not caUed murderer, bloody, or inhuman, but traitor. Regarding tbe Cburch as a kingdom of which Cbrist is tbe head, bis offence was not so properly moral as poUtical. It was a presumptuous atterapt to change tbe con stitution of that kingdom, by introducing into it tbe pomp and power of tbis world. And if so, tbis prophecy might have served (among many otbers more obviously framed with this view) to warn tbe apostles and tbeir successors, not to ' The common view of Judas's crime, that it proceeded from avarice, is so unsatisfactory, that many have been at no small pains to set the transaction in a more intelligible light. Mi chaelis (see Introd. to the New Test, vol. iii. p. 23, 24. Marsh's edition) attributes the act of treachery to revenge for the rebuke which Judas received respecting the unction al Bethany. Mr. Thruston's very ingenious book, " The night of Treason," seems to leave no room for further doubt or controversy. His prophecies. 113 betray the holy charge with which they were in tmsted, by attempting, whether from motives of avarice and ambition, or from want of confidence in the support of heaven, to convert Christ's spiritual crown into an eartbly one. Prophecy concerning Mary^^ The incident which gave occasion to tbis was the anointing the Lord's feet by Mary, who ip said to have been the sister to Lazarus ; and tbe prophecy was, " Wheresoever this Gospel shall be preached in the whole world, there sball also tbis that this woman bath done be told for a memorial of her." Our Lord adds the reason, why he made a circumstance apparently so trivial, the occasion of so marked a prophetic declaration; " for in that she hath poured the ointment on my body, she did it for my burial." It would seem, there fore, that he wished to point to some connection between his death and his anointing; and this con nection may perhaps be explained by the conver sation wbich subsequently took place between him and bis disciples, tbe subject of which was tbe nature of his kingdom. Hitherto he bad borne the form and office of a servant or minister, but his work was now done ; and as the prophet of old entered tbe guard-room and anointed Jehu king over Israel "=, '' Matt. xxvi. 12. Mark xiv. 8, ¦^ 2 Kings ix. VOL. I, I 1 14 The Ministry of Christ. so Mary came in to anoint Jesus on his approach ing entrance upon bis kingdom. Immediately after this took place, Judas went out to betray him, and a discussion commenced respecting the rank his foUowers were to hold in his kingdom, as if arising out of some remark which he had made on what Mary bad done. Lastly, we read his declaration, " I appoint unto you a kingdom as my Father hath appointed unto me, tbat ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom, and sit on thrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel''." Nathaniel and the Thief on the Cross^. There are two otber prophetic declarations which our Lord made to individuals, and which may seem to require notice in the -view here taken of his pro phecies. The first is that to Nathaniel. " Here after ye shaU see heaven open, and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man'." But if this be appUcable indeed to Nathaniel individuaUy, for it is expressed in the plural, it can only be considered as a general figura tive aUusion to those signs of divine communica tion, the miracles, by which he was to prove that he was the Son of God, the King of Israel, and '' Luke xxii. 29, 30. • John i. 51. Luke xxiii. 43, 'Johni. 51. His prophecies. 115 is not therefore specific enough to be classed among the prophecies. The otber was a prophetic promise relating to a state beyond the ordinary use of prophecy. We cannot recognise its fulfilment, nor was it, from its Very nature, made with tbe common object and intent of all bis prophecies, " tbat wben tbese things come to pass ye raay know tbat 1 ara be." It is therefore rather to be classed with his otber revelations of a future state, and as sucb belongs not to tbe present point of inquiry. IV. CONCERNING THE DESTRUCTION OF JERUSALEM. The holy city, tbe temple and its service, together witb the existence of tbe Jews as a nation, comprised the externals of the old dispensation. AU tbat was real and vital in that dispensation, bad been done away with on the opening of our Lord's mission ; but tbe closing scene, which was to annihilate the outward form, thus deprived of its living principle, was tbe destruction of Jerasalem and the temple, and the dispersion of its worshippers. The visible church having been ever regarded as coexistent with, and inseparable frora, the dispensation itself, tbe total reraoval of tbe former was the sign and pledge tbat the latter was indeed taken away. Until this event the slow -beUeving Jew raight bave I 2 116 The Ministry of Christ. had some plea for asserting, that "in Judah alone was Grod known V and " that Jerasalem was stiU the place where men ougbt to worship?;" but the prophetic finger which charactered its downfal, wrote a language, the interpretation of which was weU understood to be, " Tbe kingdom of heaven is departed from thee." No wonder tben tbat our Lord should dweU on this subject with such minuteness and solemnity, as to give the prophecy an air of importance beyond aU his others. He came to do away with the old covenant and to estabUsh the new. This was his work, and with reference to this, the propriety of those expressions whereby be announces himself as the author of this formal consummation of his ministry is obvious. Looking to the principle on which these remarks have proceeded, we may ex pect to find, too, the didactic tendency of such a prophecy bearing upon some point of proportionate consequence ; and a brief analysis of the structure of its language wiU shew that such is remarkably the case. That language may be arranged under three heads : 1 . The Uteral description pf the events prophe sied; for instance, " As for these things which ye behold, the days wiU come in the which there shaU not be left one stone upon another''." ' Psalm Ixxvi. 1. t John iv. 20. '' Mark xiii, 2. Luke xix. 44. xxi, 6, His prophecies. 117 2. The metaphorical, or rather hieroglyphic lan guage adopted from the Jewish Scriptures, espe ciaUy the Prophets; for instance, "The sun shaU be darkened, and the moon shall not give her light, and the stars of heaven shaU faU, and tbe powers that are in heaven shall be shaken'." 3. The third source of imagery is tbe day of our Lord's second coming to judge the world ; and as in this is suspended the moral of tbe prophecy, to this aU further remarks will be confined. Up to the period of our Saviour's advent, the progress of tbe Jewish dispensation had been so ordained, as to be made appUcable in its several successive parts to tbe Christian, when it should be given ; applicable, as the type to its counterpart, the shadow to its substance. The history of the Jewish Church is, according to the interpretation of inspired wisdom, a series of prophecies or emblems designed to be fulfilled in the Christian. When our Sa-viour came, and commenced his ministry, tbe closing scene of the old covenant was aU that remained ; and here, by a reversed order, the closing scene of the Christian dispensation was made to fumish the instraments and emblems of prophecy for the end of the Jewish. It may be necessary to explain what is meant by this assertion, before the didactic import of the prophecy so framed is pointed out. ' Mark xiii. 25, 118 The Ministry of Christ. It is not unusual to say, that our Lord bas blended in tbis prophecy, the events of the last day with tbose of the downfal of Jerasalem; wbich is not a complete view of the case, and hardly a correct one as far as it does go. His use of these raysterious iraages, should rather be considered tbe same as his use of tbe hieroglyphic symbols of ancient prophecy ; that is, they are employed in the prophecy only in their secondary and symbolical meaning. When, for instance, we read, that the Lord ' ' will send his angels and gather together his elect from the four winds, from one end of heaven to the other''," the only meaning of the description in this place is, tbat which relates to tbe fate of his elect on tbe destraction of Jerasalem. I do not deny that it is capable of another interpretation, and tbat it is a description of part of the last day's eventful scene ; nay more, I should say, tbat is its hteral and original meaning ; and I should say in hke maimer of the expressions, " tbe stars falUng from heaven," and "the sun being turned into darkness," tbat if tbey were not taking a part as it were in the figurative representation of prophecy, they would signify the actual derangement of the heavenly system. But as, in tbis latter case, the descriptions are here introduced only in their se condary appUcation, so we may conclude that in tbe former instance tbe sarae only is intended. For it 'Matt. xxiv. 31. His prophecies. 119 is to be observed, tbat aU the revelation concerning tbe last day contained in these prophecies had been previously detailed in one form or another. Tbe revelation bad been afready made, and tbis was only an adaptation of its imagery to the destraction of Jerusalem. The propriety of this method is another question ; but those who are disposed to regard it as intricate and unnatural, should remember, tbat the revealed chcumstances of tbe last day, bad to tbe mind of a believer already assumed tbe form and certainty of recorded events, and admitted, in an address to him, of the same use as historical facts. For, to a believer, what is prophecy but anticipated history ? Such appears to be the trae character of tbis prophecy. At the sarae time, tbat some indistinct ness and confusion should exist in a cursory view of it is natural enough, considering tbat a portion of its imagery is derived from a state of things whicb " eye bath not seen, nor ear beard." It is the necesscuy result of our want of an appropriate and literal language for unearthly revelation. All de scription of such mysteries, can only be composed of terms adopted or metaphorical ; and where (as in tbis prophecy) a second transfer of tbese terms has been made, it is not immediately obvious, whether the objects from which tbat language is borrowed, be those whose original property it is, or those others which have invaded, and taken possession of it, for want of a language of their own. 1 20 The Ministry of Christ. But if the introduction of these topics into the prophecy in question was not made with a view to reveal the mysteries of the last day, what was the intent? It has been already suggested, tbat tbe fate of Jerasalem probably represented the fate of the old dispensation. Now if the end of the world was to the Christian dispensation what the destruction of Jerusalem was to tbe Mosaic, the inference forced on raen's minds by having tbese two corre sponding events continuaUy brought in close connec tion before them was, that Christianity was the final covenant of God with man, that Christ having once come, we were never to look for another mediator, and another dispensation. That such was actuaUy the impression wrought by these means on tbe earUest ages, may be not unfairly presumed, from the transition which soon took place in the apphcation of the terms, " the last days," the " end of the world," &c. First adopted as descriptive of the end of Jerusalem, from tbe hint they continuaUy afforded, by the mode of their use, that Christianity was the final dispensation, they graduaUy came to be used for the whole Christian period, considered in that light. Thus tbe Epistle to the Hebrews (the main object of which is to assert this very truth) opens with a contrast between the old and tbe new covenants, and designates the period of tbe latter by " these last days." " God, who at sundry times and in divers manners spake in time past by the prophets The Temptation and Transfiguration. 121 unto the fathers, hath in these last days spoken unto us by his Son"." In short, the images of the end of tbe world, were first employed in our Saviour's prophecy of the destraction of Jerasalem, in the same manner as if, using hieroglyphics, he had expressed tbat event by a picture of the circumstances under which the world was to end : in his choice of tbese images be probably designed to inculcate tbe doctrine, that Christianity was the final dispensation of God to mankind ; and from the impression thus produced, the phrases, " the last days," tbe " end of the world," and the hke, came to signify the whole period of tbe Christian dispensation, viewed in the Ught of God's final covenant with his creatures. THE TEMPTATION AND TRANSFIGURATION. There are two events in our Saviour's history, which, although not generally considered as making part of his ministry to man, yet are so far mysteri ously connected with it as to deserve a particular notice. The first is, The Temptation". In the exposition of this, more perhaps than of " Heb. i. 1,2. ° Matt. iv. 1. Mark i. 13. Luke iv. 2. 122 The Ministry of Christ. any otber passage of Scripture, the theologian requires to be reminded of his proper province. Many exercising their ingenuity in the unpro fitable attempt to explain the real nature oi those mysteries wbich God has disclosed to us, instead of their reference to us, bave made it, and otber awful and glorious spectacles of revelation, sub jects of contemplation and wonder, rather than symbols of instraction. Revelation bas been fitly caUed "Light." Its great Author has desig nated himself as " Light." But it is a Ught to see by, not to gaze at. It is analogous, not to any dazzling meteor in the appearance of nature, or to any splendid spectacle produced by art, but to tbat glorious luminary, which is not the less ser viceable in enabUng us to be sure of our path, that we cannot stedfastly behold it. Out of tbis arises another error. Mistaking tbe character of theological knowledge, we naturally mis take its extent and hmits. If a subject be proposed to us, the real nature of which we are to study, it seems just and reasonable that it should be placed before us in a complete form. If agriculture, for instance, bad been a subject of revelation, men would doubtless not only have been instracted in the right method of preparing tbe earth, but the necessity of sowing the seed; and whatever else might be requisite to secure a complete harvest, would bave been included in the revelation. Ac cordingly, the theologian who expects so to under- The Temptation. 123 stand such parts of tbe scheme of redemption as have been revealed, as if the knowledge were abso lute and not relative, naturaUy atterapts to fiU up tbat scheme, so as to make aU appear rational, in telUgible, wise, merciful, in short, perfect. All which is contrary to Scripture. For, St. Paul affirms, in the ffrst place, that " now we see through a glass darkly," and secondly, tbat " we know in part^." Scenes infinitely raore mysterious, unaccountable, and awful tban tbe temptation, or even tban tbe death of Christ, may have taken place in tbe scheme of man's redemption, of wbich we know no more than the unborn does of hfe. And even witb regard to those points which are revealed, we shaU strangely bewilder ourselves if we so use them, as forgetting tbat they are Ughts to see by, not to look at. The character and design of tbe temptation, may perhaps be best understood, by contrasting it with the crucifixion. The former was tbe commence ment, the latter the close of Christ's work. They correspond too in one remarkable circumstance. Each was the hour of Satan. In the first, Cbrist was led into tbe wUderness purposely to be tempted by him, and that ended, the Devil departed from him "for a season f." That the concluding scene of bis rainistry was the occasion when be was permitted to retum, and once more to display the r 1 Cor, xiii. 12, 9. i Luke iv. 13. 124 The Ministry of Christ. utmost exertion of his power, is not only probable from the character of the event, but seems to be clearly intimated by our Saviour's words, " This is your hour and the power of darkness';" "The Prince of this world cometh'." Now the great object of Christ's ministry was to undo the mischief whicb the evil being had done. And tbis was twofold : first, he bad introduced into the world sin ; secondly, be had introduced death. Now it is admitted by aU rational Cbristians, that the solemn spectacle on the cross had reference to the latter. Christ's death there is said to be vicarious, that is, he died instead of those who were the proper subjects of death : he died, " that who soever beheveth in him should not perish, but have everlasting hfe' ;" in other words, he died for his Church. In the mysterious scene of the cmcifixion, he may be considered as representing the universal Church, undergoing (as it must coUectively, and in its members separately) the mortal decay and disso lution of tbis world, but escaping from the spiritual evUs accompanying that decay and dissolution in a world to come. Christ died and rose again from the dead, in order to exhibit death as it was in ftiture to take place; that is, separated from aU that was most horrible in it, divested of its " terrors," disarmed of its " sting," and no longer the same death. ' Luke xxii. 53. ' John xiv. 30. ' John iii. 15, 16. The Temptation. 125 Now let us turn to our more immediate subject, the temptation. Satan had brought into tbe world sin as weU as death; sin before death; its fore runner, and its cause. .Now the temptation appears to have been with regard to sin, what the cracifbdon was with regard to death. It was a vicarious re presentation. Christ was first tempted instead of his Church, and afterwards died instead of it. But, as his death did not imply that his Cburch was not afterwards to be subject to mortahty, but only tbat the worst and most characteristic evil of death was done away with; so, with regard to tbe temptation, he was tempted instead of his Church, not in order that his Church should be no more tempted, but to shew ' that tbe strongest temptations should no longer be necessarily fatal ; tbat be. who was then tbe earthly abode of tbe Godhead, having mani fested, and given a specimen of, tbe curtailed and no longer resistless power of the evil one, his fol lowers might know, tbat when he left the world, and God was manifested in another way, naraely, by his Holy Spirit, that the abode of the Godhead on earth should stiU be equaUy secure against tempt ation, if the same use were made of the same power "working in it";" that his Church, which is now the earthly residence of tbe Godhead, and ° " Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up," are words, which can be only understood as implying, that Christ was then what the Jewish temple had been, and what the Church was to be, viz. the abode of the Godhead. 126 The Ministry of Christ. whose members are " the temple of tbe Holy Ghost ''," should still indeed be tempted, as was he in whom " dwelt all the fulness of the Godhead bodily ^j" but Uke bim not necessarily unto sin. That the temptation, if exhibited with tbis view, should have some prophetic reference to the trials of the Church in successive ages is natural. We should indeed be surprised to find it otherwise. The temptations of individual Christians being of infinite variety, and being besides less important in detail, the trials of the Church, more particularly as a body, would surely be the trials pointed to by this mystery. EspeciaUy too as it was the Church, and not any individual members, which was to be marked as finaUy triumphant over the wiles of Satan". " 1 Cor. vi. 19. y Col. ii. 9. ' The several circumstances of the temptation, from their manifest reference to the establishment and trials of the Jewish Church, (the great type according to St. Paul of the Christian,) of themselves suggest this view of the transaction. The forty days' fast can hardly be considered as an unintentional coinci dence' with the forty days, during which Moses was in the mount with God, before the promulgation of the Jewish law. The an swers of our Saviour to the tempter too, have all undoubted re ference to the especial trials of God's early Church ih its progress to the earthly Canaan. " The only way in which the temptations of the Chnrch are known is by the success of the tempter. But it must be borne in mind, that the parallel between Christ and his Church, is not impaired by this circumstance. For, it is not the Church which has yielded, but certain members of it for the time being, it matters not how large a proportion of them, suppose all, provided TTie Temptation. 127 Let us then consider what have been the tempt ations of Christ's Church since its establishment, and let us compare them with the several stages of this singular and mysterious transaction. The first suggestion of the de-vil to Cbrist was, tbat, after long fasting, he should " command tbe stones to be made bread''." Now, although it seeras by no means intended that the order of the Church's trials should be the same as tbat of its type, which indeed are not recorded in the same order by St. Matthew and St. Luke, yet it bas so happened, that tbe first temptations of bis Church arose frora poverty and distress ; and great need had it for the first three centuries to reraember, that " man shaU not Uve by bread alone, but by every word that proceedeth out of the mouth of God^" Again, the tempter is represented as suggesting to Christ that, contrary to the course appointed him, and trasting to tbe support of angels, be should cast bimself down from a pinnacle of the temple ; witb a view, perhaps, to dazzle and attract the multitude, amongst whom he would have alighted''. Presumptuous reUance on divine grace that by its recovery and reformation, the Church itself is proved to bave escaped. ' Matt. iv. 3. Luke iv. 3. ' Matt. iv. 4. Luke iv. 4. '' This temptation in its primary import was, perhaps, of a twofold character ; at least there seems to be good ground for 128 The Ministry of Christ. and favour, even to the despising of all appointed means, (such as his Church too has been tempted to indulge in,) is too exact a counterpart to be mis taken. We may even venture, perhaps, to pursue the analogy further, and to consider the suggestion of Satan, " Angels shall bear thee up%" as the same wbich has tempted tbe Church to caU in tbe aid of departed saints, to depend on them to bear it up, and to trast to their interposition for its security and success. The remaining temptation of our Lord is of still more obvious application. The devil is said to have taken him up into an exceeding high mountain, and to have shewn bim all the kingdoms of the world, and tbe glory of them, and to have said unto him, " AU tbese things -wiU I give thee, if thou wUt fall down and worship me'." The paraUel scarcely need be drawn. His Cburch also bas seen the kingdoms of the world, and tbe glory of them, and has been tempted in tbe pride of popish times to grasp at universal temporal dominion, and to forget its spiritual character. To this temptation it is still conjecturing, that more was intended than to tempt the Saviour to an act of presumptuous confidence. The choice of the place, a pinnacle of the temple, from which his descent would have been a public spectacle to the Jews, looks much as if it had some reference to the well-known prejudice, that their Messiah, the Son of man, should be seen descending visibly from the clouds, preparatory to his assumption of a temporal state and authority. • Luke iv. 10, 11, Psalm xci. 11, 12. ' Matt. iv. 9, The Transfiguration. 129 exposed, in proportion as its members look to teraporal power and temporal glory as tbeir proper objects of ambition s. THE TRANSFIGURATION". One cannot but be strack, on perusing tbe Gos pels, witb tbe continual request ofthe Jews to have a sign given tbem from heaven, even whilst our Lord was in the act of performing bis signs and miracles for tbeir conversion. Tbeir desire (as was before observed) appears to have been founded on tbe prophecy of Daniel, which describes the Son of man as " coraing witb the clouds of heaven'." The behef evidently was, tbat tbe Messiah should be seen UteraUy descending frora tbe heavens, and arrayed in sorae brilliant emblem of his glory. That tbe fulfilraent of tbis expectation might have been intended in tbe transfiguration, seems not iraprobable, from the remark of the apostles who were permitted to be witnesses of it. Their words seem to denote tbat all ground of scruple was now removed : " Why say the Scribes then tbat EUas must first come '' ?" The appearance of Moses and EUas conversing 1= See Appendix, [G.] >¦ Matt. xvii. 2. Mark ix. 2. Luke ix. 28. ' Dan. vii. 13, k Matt. xvii. 10. VOL. I. K 130 The Ministry of Christ. with him, was obviously a token tbat the covenant was changed, and the Law and tbe Prophets suc ceeded by the Gospel. CONCLUSION. Befoee I close this part of my subject, the alle gorical interpretation which has been claimed for certain passages of our Lord's ministry, may seem to call for some further remarks. It raay be asked, " Why should such a mode of instraction be adopted, the raore natural way being for our Lord to deliver bis doctrines in express terms ; and as he has actually done so, wbat need of another language to convey the same truth ?" In the first place, tben, to tbe Jews the raore natural raethod was tbe allegorical ; sucb being tbe character of tbeir nuraerous rites, and of tbe greater part of their Scriptures. Besides which, tbe Christian's view ofthe doctrines of his religion was hereby connected with tbe proofs of it. The same miracle furnished at once instruc tion and proof of tbe teacher's authority to instruct; so also did tbe corapletion of a prophecy '. To which I raay add, tbat in tbe case of a mi racle assuming the cbaracter of a prophecy, the miracle carries witb it its own proof tbat it was not a forgery or delusion. The importance then of per ceiving the secondary cbaracter of sucb miracles, at least, is ob-vious. ' See Appendix, [H,] Conclusion. 131 It cannot be denied that an injudicious appUca tion of tbe method very soon prevailed among Christians, and to this it is owing that it bas so long faUen into disuse, and is so generaUy regarded as at best but fanciful. Nevertheless, to reject it altogether (as many are disposed to do) is, perhaps, to close our eyes against one half of the meaning of Scripture ; and it may always be at least safely adopted, when it is not made the ground of any new doctrine. k2 PART II. APOSTOLIC AGE. From A. D. 33—100. CHAP. 1. IHE same reasons, which induced me to decline a detailed account of the biography of our blessed Lord, (although a necessary constituent in the his tory of Christianity,) vnM apply also to the most important portion of tbe Uves of tbe apostles ; and, indeed, to the whole narrative of the early progress of the Gospel, whicb bas been written by tbe finger of God himself, and intended doubtless to be read in tbat sacred cbaracter, not merely by tbe plu- iosopherand the scholar, but by tbe unlearned, and by aU. As the records of Christianitycbange their cha racter, and are presented to us by human authorities, tbis scrapie -will cease to operate ; and the -propriety and need of completeness and detail wUl vary, according to the circumstances under which any portion of ecclesiastical history raay be already before the public — according to the popular and ac cessible form in which it is circulated, together with the merits andthe defects ofthe perforraance. 134 Distinction in Christianity, Even in the former case, however, much assist-* ance may be afforded to tbe reader of holy writ, by providing tbose collateral points of information, wbich are requisite to a fuU and fair view of tbe sacred records. Much, too, may in tbis case be done, in the way of pointing out the general scheme — ^the combining principle, as it were, of events and circumstances, which, without sucb assistance, to some may wear tbe aspect of detached and unconnected fragments. It is by reference to these objects, then, that the course observed in pursuing the history of Christianity will be regulated. Distinction between Christianity, as taught by oUr Saviour and by his Apostles. In treating of our Lord's ministry, it was re marked, that some of tbe most important points of tbe Christian scheme were either whoUy omitted by him, or Ughtly touched on. Few, even pre paratory, steps appear to have been taken for the establishment of bis Church^-that kingdom which was to comprehend all mankind. As if tbe very office of initiating raembers into tbis great society did not properly belong to him, be baptized none. His revelations were for tbe most part corarauni cated in parables, or by hints and aUusions equsdly obscure ; and although it is trae, that his apostles were allowed an explanation of tbese, yet it is clear tbat at his death, and even after his ascen- as taught by our Saviour and his Apostles. 135 sion, tbey were as rauch in the dark on some of tbe raain traths of redemption, as were the Jews wbo crucified hira. It is evident, indeed, tbat our Saviour's object -in bis rainistry was not to teach Christianity, nor to establish the Christian society. It was necessary that he should leave the world, in order that he might becorae tbe subject of the one, and the head of the otber. "It is expedient for you that I go away"," are words in wbich he plainly declares tbis hiraself The office of raaking Christians was the office of tbe Coraforter. God raanifested bim self in the flesh, to redeem the world, and to atone for sin — -to be made the object of a new faith, the subject of a new rehgion. God manifested himself by the Spirit, to instruct men in what be bad done, and to teach tbem wbat they were bound in conse quence of this, to do. Evident as this may be wben stated, it is very apt to be overlooked or forgotten. Many have been tbe fruitless and unsatisfactory attempts to reconcile the Gospels with the Epistles, — one part of the new covenant with the other, proceeding on a vague conception, of the whole being promul gated at tbe same tirae, and witb tbe same intent. It may be useful therefore, for the purpose of marking clearly tbe distinction aUuded to, to con sider it more exactly, as exhibited in wbat was taught and wbat was done — ^in tbe words and tbe * John xvi, 7. 136 Distinction in Christianity, works of our Liord on the one hand, and of our Lord's apostles on the other ; both proceeding from the same diAdne source, and harmonizing so as to produce one common result ; yet so different in tbeir cbaracter and import, as to occasion serious error in tbose wbo neglect tbe difference. First, then, our Saviour wrought miracles, and so did tbe Apostles, and so did Moses, EUas, and many others comraissioned by heaven. To a care less observer, then, it may be satisfactory to say, tbat Christ's were superior to the otbers, because they were more in nuraber, and perhaps greater in kind, than bad been performed by bis predecessors, or were to be performed by bis foUowers. Granting tbis, bowever, we may stiU reasonably expect to find in Christ's mfracles, not raerely superior power, but somewhat in tbat superiority whicb. should especiaUy denote the character of his mission. Else the manifestation of superiority would be only a barren display of power, a thing very inconsistent with the general scherae of God's deaUngs. Indeed as if to denote tbat the difference was not to be sought for in superiority of power, he expressly told his disciples, " he that beheveth on me, the works that I do shall be do also ; and greater works than these shall he do ; because I go to my Fatber""." Let any one, tben, candidly and attentively ex amine tbe raode of exercising tbis power in both cases, and he wiU scarcely fail to observe, ^ John xiv. 12, as taught by our Saviour and his Apostles. 137 I. That in our Lord's miracles, he was the pri mary agent, in tbose of tbe apostles and others, tbey were instruraents. Several incidental circum stances may be noticed in iUustration of this posi tion. No one, forinstance, was. more fully invested with tbe power of healing than was St. Paul ; for we read, tbat certain sick folk recovered only by touching bis garments'^; yet we are equally sure, that be was but tbe raediura through wbich tbe Comforter perforraed tbese mfraculous cures; be cause we find bim, on one occasion, leaving behind bim at Miletum a useful coadjutor, because he was sick^, and on another occasion, suggesting to Timo thy an ordinary reraedy for an infirraity under which be was labouring'. In our Saviour's rainistry, on tbe contrary, human raeans are never resorted to, so as to iraply the want of miraculous power. His miracles are at one time tbe result of persever ing importunity^, at another the dictate of friendship or of pitys ; on thera bis raissionaries and bis foUowers were taught to rely for food, for raoney, and for raiment'' ; and on one remarkable occasion = Acts xix. 12. " 2 Tim. iv. 20. = I Tim. V. 23, f E, g. Luke xviii. 35. Matt. xv. 22. 5 E. g. The case of Lazarus, that of the widow of Nain's son, &c. „ i" Luke xxii. 35. Markvi. 8. and more particularly Matt. xvii. 27. The provision for the Passover which preceded his death may perhaps be classed among these. 138 Distinction in Christianity, he rebuked them for having recourse to ordinary means, as implying the failure of this resource in bim. " Thinkest thou tbat I cannot now pray to ray Father, and he shall presently give rae raore tban twelve legions of angels'?" AU tbis was surely intended to point to the discretionary power wbich was peculiarly his. To bira alone God gave tbe Spirit not by measure. Tbe very words wbich he used in the exercise of miraculous power bave a distinct cbaracter; such as, " Lazarus, come forth''," " Young man, I say unto thee. Arise' ;" whilst in the miracles themselves, in many of them at least, the marks are more unequivocal. Take the cure of Malchus's ear — wbo does not see in such an act as tbis, tbe unconstrained agency of divinity, called into exercise by the circumstances themselves, and not connected, as in the case of tbe apostles, witb any special commission, nor directed to any special purpose, beyond the display of Christ's real cbarac ter? Who, in short, can peruse tbe course of bis ministry, and not sympathize witb the sister of Lazarus, in that tone of mind which caused ber to exclaim, " Lord, if thou hadst been here, my brother bad not died™?" II. Tbere is another line of distinction, stUl raore discernible, between our Lord's miracles and tbose of the apostles, and of aU otbers. They were generaUy symbolical — tbe vehicles of instmction, as i Matt. xxvi. 53. " John xi. 43. ' Luke vii. 14. «» Johnxi. 21, 32. as taught by our Saviour and his Apostles. 139 well as the signs of power. Like the voice frora mount Sinai, tbey were at once rairacles and revela tions, a divine language, conveying a divine raes sage. And this circumstance, if rightly considered, not a Uttle confirms the view wbich has been taken of the primary, immediate, and independent agency of Cbrist, as contrasted witb tbe instrumental character of bis apostles ; tbe former, not only per forming acts above human nature, but moulding them at will to serve occasional purposes, as if the power were bis own, part of his original nature ; tbe latter hurably, fearfully, and alraost passively obeying tbe dictates of a secretly controlling power, and avowing that tbey " had nothing to glory of, for necessity was laid on thera"." III. Among all the rairaculous acts, in wbich our Lord and his apostles raay be contrasted, tbe one wherein an equality between them is raost likely to be presuraed, is tbe power of imparting the gifts of the Holy Ghost. Of this raore particular notice will be taken by and by. At present it deserves attention, raerely in the light of a rairaculous power, as distinctly superior to aU others, as the power of imparting life exceeds tbe privilege of partaking it. Yet it is obvious, tbat in their use of this, as of the other powers, tbe apostles were restricted, whereas our Lord's conduct exhibits no signs of any Umitatioij. As no one would suppose the apostles to be tbe authors of life, because they were occa- " 1 Corinth, ix. 16. 140 Distinction in Christianity, sionally perraitted to recal the dead to Ufe ; so, tbe office of iraparting tbe gifts of the Holy Spirit, did not imply that tbese gifts proceeded originally from "tbem, or that tbey were any but the instru ments and agents of communication. A simUar character (as bas been already pointed out) pervades our Lord's prophecies, as distinguished from aU otbers, wbether of tbe Old or the New Tes tament. The exercise of the predictive power, proved in all cases alike, that tbe prophet was commissioned by God. But tbe constant and unvaried employ raent of tbat very prophetic spirit for doctrinal instraction — its use, in short, for purposes not prophetical, could only bave been designed to indi cate, wbat it does most plainly, that the prophet wielded that divine instrument at pleasure, and not as one, " wbo spake only as tbe Holy Ghost moved bim." In Cbrist, tbe prophetic faculty was ex ercised as bis own, in bis apostles and otbers, it was only exhibited as through agents and instra ments. The language of the inspired mortal is, " I cannot go beyond the comraandment of the Lord, to do either good or bad of mine own mind";" that of tbe Author of inspiration, " If I wUl that be tarry tiU I come, wbat is tbat to theeP ?" It would be easy to pursue this subject fiirtber, but it may be sufficient merely to add, that in con- ° Numbers xxii, 18. xxiv. 13. P John xxi. 22, as taught by our Saviqur,md , his Apostles. 141 sidering the secondary use.^'^MeiEXJhrist applied the divine agenc/,; as an iA'dicatfon that be was a divine person, it deserves notice that it was of hiraself, or of bis kingdom, or of bis -^vork — of himself, in short, eitber immediately or reraotely, tbat be caused his miracles to speak. So tbat every rairacle, every prophecy, is used by bim for some purpose beyond its specific and appropriate one, and tbat purpose one connected with bimself, " Tbe works wbich the Father hath given me to finish, the same works that I do, bear witness of me that the Father hath sent rae''." His sermons, exhortations, precepts, coramand raents, all lead us forcibly to tbe same conclusion. All are addressed to mankind, no less tban the law frora mount Sinai, in the person of God himself As to the language, it is " a new commandment I give unto you'." " It was said to them^ of old time, Thou shalt not kill ; but / say unto you, Tbat whosoever is angry with his brother v/ithout a cause, shall be in danger of tbe judgment," Still raore raay tbe matter of bis discourses be appealed to, for marks of a difference occasioned by tbe sarae cause. Our Lord did not, indeed could not, preach tbe wbole of Christianity to his disciples and to tbe world ; because the subject was incomplete, until be bad suffered on tbe cross, risen from the dead, and ascended into heaven. The most essential 1 John V. ,!o. ' John xiii, 34. * Matt. V. 21, 22, and Whitby on the passage. l42 Distinction in Christianity, points of Christian instruction, were precisely those whicb could not yet be given, for the simple reason, that the events out of whicb tbey arose had not yet taken place. Hence his assertion, " It is expedient for you tbat I go away ; for if I go not away, the Comforter will not corae unto you ; but if I depart, I will send bira unto you*." Christianity tben, strictly speaking, commenced with the preaching of the apostles. It is tbe dis pensation of the Spirit, and by the Spirit only has it been conducted. Our Lord is the subject, the foundation stone", not the founder of it. It holds up to us as the object of our faith, " God manifested in the flesh* ;" but the world is directed to this trath, and assisted in embracing it, and acting on it, by God manifested by tbe Spfrit. The apostles accord ingly were expressly forbidden to begin their minis try, until the formal sign was given, that the Comforter had descended amongst tbem. UntU that event, the world was no more under the Christian dispensation, than Israel was imder the Mosaic before tbe Law was actuaUy given, — what ever anticipation, either Moses on the one band or tbe apostles on the other, might be supposed to ' John xvi. 7. " Thus St. Paul, in his use of this very metaphor, addresses the Ephesian Church, as a building whose " chief corner stone was Jesus Christ, in whom," adds he, " ye also are builded together for an habitation of God through the Spirit." Eph. ii. 22. * 1 Tim. iii, 16. as taught by our Saviour and his Apostles. 143 bave bad of the revelation whicb was preparing. That the apostles were iraperfectly acquainted witb the leading principles of Christianity, is evident beyond a donbt. Why else, indeed, should it be necessary to send one, not only " to bring all things to their remembrance," but "to teach tbem aU things^?" Why tbat expression of disappointment and despondency, " We trusted tbat it had been be whicb should bave redeemed Israel", if indeed tbey knew ought of the doctrine of redemption by his death ? None, surely, wbo understood tbe nature of Cbrist and of Christ's kingdom, can be supposed to have put sucb a question to bim as, " Lord, ¦wilt thou at tbis tirae restore again the kingdora to Israel* ?" a question wbich goes tbe farther to prove tbat our Lord was not fuUy qualifying his disciples to instruct tbe world, tbat manifestly as it arose from ignorance and error, be did not attempt to correct thera ; but only referred thera to the coraing of him, whose proper office it was to do so, and reminded tbem of tbe only part wbich he had qualified them to assume, to be his witnesses. " He said unto them. It is not for you," (or as it may be rendered,) you cannot be expected, "to know the times or seasons whicb the Father bath put in bis own power. But ye sball receive power after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you, and ye shall be ray witnesses''." ' John xiv, 26. ' Luke xxiv. 21. 'Actsi, 6. ''Acts i. 7,8. 144 Distinction in Christianity, Even after that ffrst descent of the Holy Ghost, Christianity was in its infancy. The illuraination of the Spirit was gradual, and as more Ught was required, tben, and tben only, was the supply given. It is easy to trace three distinct periods in the ApostoUc History, in tbe first of which the Church was kept in ignorance of tbe second, and had advanced far upon tbe second before tbe third was declared to tbem, and each by a special revela tion''. Their ministry commenced witb tbe Jews alone. It appears certain, that tbe apostles them selves did not tben understand that it was ever to be extended beyond tbeir countrymen. Their an cient national error was not yet removed, that through Judaism tbe world must be admitted to tbe benefits of the Messiah's advent — must be saved, not as the sons of faUen Adam, but as the children of righteous Abraham. Under this impression they taught through Judaea, Samaria, and at last at Antioch''. Then it was, that, by a special vision sent to Peter '^, his scruples were first removed, and he was' made to understand, by the conversion of CorneUus and his household, that a door was opened to tbe Gentiles. But to what GentUes? Not to aU in discriminately, but to such as, Uke CorneUus, were " devout Gentiles," " fearing God," othervpise known as " proselytes of the gate." Gentiles who, ' See Lord Barrington's Miscellanea Sacra, <> Acts xi. 19, From A. D. 33—41. = Acts .^. 10. as taught by our Saviour and his Apostles. 145 without becoming '"^^altogetber Jews, bad adopted their belief in the one true God, and sought ac ceptance with him by alms, by fasting, and by prayer. Yet of the baptism even of tbese, St. Peter's report to tbe Church of Jerusalem is but an apology. ' ' Forasmuch tben as God gave them the like gift, as he did unto us who believed on tbe Lord Jesus Christ, wbat was I, tbat I could with stand God^?" Lastly, a further hght broke fortb on the Church, when, by another express revfelation, Paul and Bar nabas were separated for tbe conversion of tbe idolatrous GentUes s. Of aU tbe wonderful counsel of the Lord, this was considered the raost won derful. This it is whicb is especially styled " tbe mystery of godliness," tbe reveaUiig of whicb pro duced a sensation, both within and without tbe Cburch, to whicb, no one wbo would understand the writings and the history of the great apostle of tbe Gentiles, should be inattentive. These three classes of converts — tbe Jewish, the devout Gentile, and tbe idolatrous Gentile — con tinued to be addressed and treated as in certain respects distinct, until " tbe end of all things," the grand consummation which took place in tbe de struction of Jerasalem, and tbe downfaU of the nation''. By tbis act of divine visitation, tbe Je-wish society was dissolved, and the Jews were ' Actsxi. 17, A, D, 41— 45. b Acts xiii, 2, "A,D. 70. VOL. I. L 146 What preparation Christ made before his departure no longer entitled to be treafed as a distinct civil body. Witb this event, 'a&ordingly, ceased that scrapulous regard which pre-viously the Chris tian preachers had paid to tbem as such. The converted Jew was henceforth under no civU obU gation to retain the customs of bis fathers, and the proselyte of tbe gate was released from obedience to a society which was extinct, and was henceforth no more bound to abstain frora things strangled and from blood, than was the idolater wbo bad never entered into a compact witb the worshippers ofthe temple. Christ's kingdom was come*". What preparation Christ had made before his departure for the establishment of Christianity. Notwithstanding the assertion, that tbe estabhsh ment of Christianity was tbe pro-vince of the Com forter — of God the Holy Ghost — ^that assertion by no means impUes that our Saviour's Ministry con tributed nothing, towards the forming of that insti- '¦ Lardner argues from this slow and gradual illumination of the inspired Church, that neither St. Matthew nor St. Luke's Gos pel could have been composed very early ; inasmuch as both display an insight into that mystery , which was reserved for the last stage of revelation. But his reasoning is scarcely admissible. For, the apostles, as witnesses, may have recorded or assisted others in recording facts, before the full import of those facts was revealed to them ; and St. Luke and St. Matthew write narratives in the strictest sense, and not treatises. for the establishment of Christianity. 147 tution, of which he was properly the subject. Dur ing his abode on earth, be had sent forth twelve of his followers, and again seventy, with a coraraission to baptize, and to proclaim " tbe kingdom of hea ven is at hand'." He had instituted tbe sacraments, and had appointed a form of prayer. All which may be considered as preparatory to tbat whicb was peculiarly the work of tbe Holy Spirit, and analogous to that preparation which bad been made for bis appearance on earth as our Redeeraer, by the previous raanifestations of God. Accordingly, although his teaching, it raay be, embraces aU the essential doctrines of Christianity, yet from the very form adopted, tbat of parables, symbohcal miracles, and didactic prophecies, the traths so deposited witb bis foUowers were plainly not designed to be understood, until tbe Holy Spirit should not only have brought aU Christ's rainistry to their remem brance, but taught them also aU things implied and intended by it. Until such assistance was given, they were in possession of a revelation which they did not understand ; and without tbis assistance tbere can be no question, that tbe Christian doc trines could never have been understood, explained, and preached. So, likewise, tbe Mosaic estabUsh ment had continued in its most important fea tures inexpressive, ineffectual, and useless, until our Saviour's fulfilment of tbe law displayed it in i Matt. X. 5. 7. Mark vi. 7, 12. Luke ix, 1,2. x. 1, 9. L 2 148 What preparation Christ made before his departure its trae character, and explained its chief meaning. In short, from Adam until Christ the scheme of man's redemption was prefigured ; in Christ's min istry it was accompUshed; by the Spirit it was explained. From Adam until Christ, the religious knowledge of the world was Uke the gradual dawn ing of light which precedes tbe sunrise, and from wbich we infer the existence and anticipate tbe approach of tbe sun itself. Cbrist came ; but his coming was as when the sun has risen in mist and cloud, and can scarcely be discerned. And then came the Holy Spirit, like the breath of hea ven which blows aside the cloud, and enables us to look upon the source of aU tbe day-hght witb which we bave been gradually blessed. So, also, our present condition as a Church may have some latent connection witb futurity, which we shall then only be quaUfied to perceive, when God shaU again manifest himself, and we " see him even as he is." What is now to be considered is, how far the min istry of the Holy Spirit had been anticipated by our Saviour. I. His promulgation of the Christian doctrines has afready been noticed, as conveyed in a form not designed to be understood, until tbe iUumination of the Holy Ghost should be appUed ; many of tbem depending on events which had not as yet taken place ; as e. g. the doctrine of the Atonement, wbich arose out of his death, and of the Resurrection, which was testified by himself rising from the grave. for the establishment of Christianity. 149 The most remarkable anticipation, bowever, was the command to baptize in the name of the Holy Ghost, as weU as of the Father and the Son ; inas much as God, in the person of the Spirit, had not yet assumed the government of the Church. II. With a Uke prospective view, the twelve apostles had been commissioned, first, by baptism and preaching repentance, to prepare men for the new era ; secondly, in bis last interview with them, to be his vdtnesses. Their former commission (as from its nature might seem natural) expfred on tbeir return to resume their attendance on him ; but this latter (as appears from its cbaracter and from bis own words) tbey were intended to bear permanently under the new dispensation. Hence tbe office of apostle was reaUy two-fold. He was a -witness of Christ, and he was a minister of tbe Holy Ghost. By virtue of his forraer appointment he was invested with the power of working miracles, which power he accordingly received from Christ himself. In tbe latter capaxiity he was fumished with those extraordinary endowments of the Holy Ghost, which are therefore caUed pecuUarly the gifts of tbe Spirit. Of tbese, it is, the Psalmist speaks, wben be describes our Lord as " ascending up on high to receive gifts for men''." For thus Christ also said, " If I go not away the Comforter AviU not come, but if I go I will send him unto " Psalm Ixviii. 18. 1 50 What preparation Christ made before his departure you'." As witnesses, then, the apostles performed those miracles which are termed " signs" ((rrip-fta) and " wonders ;" (rspuru,) and inasmuch as this office was of our Lord's appointing, to him perpetually, and not to the Holy Spfrit, they refer them"". ' John xvi. 7. "¦ The scriptural expression is "in his name," and " in that name ;'' a mode of speaking, which seems to denote an anxiety to avoid conveying the notion of Tritheism, in teaching the doctrine of the Trinity. It reminds the Christian, that he of whom the Scriptures are speaking, was the same God, in whose former name the old revelations had been made, and the miracles of old had been wrought; that it was " God in Christ reconciling the world unto himself" (2 Corinth, v. 19.) Accordingly, when the apostles were forbidden to preach Christianity to the Jews, the prohibition is said to have been " that they speak henceforth to no man in this name," (Acts iv. 17.) No one acquainted with the Scriptllres of the Old Testament can suppose that the Jews, in making use of this expression, were pointing to Jesus either as a preacher or as a worker of miracles. To the term, used in a second intention, which is here denoted by the emphatic pronoun this, they attached a solemn and mysterious meaning, from the days of Moses, The origin of this is plainly set forth in Exodus, (iii. 13,) " And Moses said unto God, Behold, when I come unto the children of Israel, and shall say unto them. The God of your fathers hath sent me unto you ; and they shall say unto me. What is his name ? what shall I say unto them ? And God said unto Moses, I AM That I AM : and he said, Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel, ' I AM hath sent me unto you;' and God said moreover unto Moses, ' Thus shalt thou say unto the children of Israel,' The Lord God of your fathers, the God of Abraham, the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob, hath sent me unto you : this is my name for ever, and this is my memorial unto all generations." God commanded Moses to announce to his people, that he had appeared in a new name ; but God said moreover to him, that he must caution his for the establishment of Christianity. 151 Thus Peter bids the lame man at the beautiful gate of the temple, " In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth rise up and walk ;" and to .^neas he people, that he was still the same God of their fathers, &c. In a subsequent interview Moses was reminded of this in these terms, " I appeared unto Abraham, unto Isaac, and unto Jacob, by the name of God Almighty, hut by my name Jehovah was I not known unto them." (Exodus vi. 3.) The expression thus adopted to denote a new manifestation of the Godhead naturally enough became an object of scrupulous veneration to the Israelites. They studiously avoided all mention of the name which denoted God in his new dispensation : a scruple which may be considered as sanctioned by the comraand ment, " Thou shalt not take the name of the Lord thy God in vain." Through every successive period of their history the same feeling is recorded. It was the name of the Lord that dwelt at Jerusalem, in that name the pious are said to walk, his name it is which is praised, and in his name their enemies are to be de stroyed. When, therefore, the Messiah was foretold, Isaiah had not only used the term Immanuel, but this expression, which to the Jews equally indicated another manifestation of the God of their fathers. The promise is, that " he would give them a name, an everlasting name ; that they should be called by a new name ;" and Christ himself is spoken of as one " whose name is holy." (Isaiah Ivi. 5. Ixii. 2.) The Jews who attempted to stone him for making himself " equal with God," because he had said, " My Father worketh hitherto and I work,'' must (with these prophecies before them) have understood him, as claiming to be this new manifestation of the Godhead, and applying to hiraself this additional name, under which God was to appear for the purpose of establishing a new dispensation. (John v. 17.) Our form of baptism is an obvious allusion to it, and is equivalent to a command to baptize unto the Father as God, unto the Son as God, and unto the Holy Ghost as God. By this, too, may be explained (what is elsewhere re- 152 What preparation Christ made before his departure says ; " Jesus Christ makel:h thee whole" ;" because in each instance he was proving his credibihty as a witness. But wben he passes sentence on Ana nias and Sapphira, be is acting as minister of tbe Holy Ghost ; and therefore so expresses himself as to imply that tbeir death was a miracle wrought by God tbe Holy Ghost, for tbe purpose of proving and vindicating the reaUty of bis agency. " How is it tbat ye have agreed together to tempt tbe Spirit of the Lord ? Behold, the feet of them which have buried thy husband are at the door, and shall carry thee out°." Another act of Christ's preparatory ministry tben was, his ordaining an order of men, — his apostles, — for tbe special pur pose of being -witnesses to wbat he bad said and done ; and also, qualifying tbem to become agents and ministers, in the new state of religion, which was to commence after his departure. III. Besides this, be bad appointed seventy disci ples'', apparently with the same temporary coramis sion as tbat with which bis apostles were first sent. Perhaps by tbis tirae a greater nuraber of mission aries might bave been required ; or the apostles marked) that our Saviour's command to address prayer to the Father in his name, appears to have been fulfilled by the Apostles and early Christians, by addressing their prayers to the Lord Jesus. n Acts iii. 6. ix. 34. " Acts v. 9. p Luke x. 1 , for the establishment of Christianity. 153 might have been detained about the person of our Lord, on account of some passages of bis life, whicb rendered their presence necessary as his witnesses, — their permanent and pecuUar duty. However that may be, the commission of the seventy had expired before the descent of the Holy Ghost ; indeed, as far as we can see, immediately on their retum to bim. Meanwhile tbey, as weU as the apostles, bad scattered abroad much instmction, which God's blessed Spirit was sure to render eff'ectual in aU honest and good hearts. And al though they were found on tbe descent of the Holy Ghost without any commission, yet it is highly probable tbat the first appointments to ministerial offices in the infant Church were made from tbis class : as from persons afready prepared and prac tised by our Lord in a portion of bis ministerial service, and, Uke the apostles themselves, pecuUarly fitted for a second commission from the Holy Ghost. To this number, indeed, tradition has assigned more tban one of the primitive worthies of the Church — Barnabas, Stephen, and others'. IV. In addition to these, Christ had left behind him a body of disciples ; adherents pledged to the good cause by the sacrament of baptism, and pre pared, by tbe instraction which they had received from him and his apostles, for the Christian traths P Clemen. Alexandr. Strom, lib. ii. p. 410. (ed. Heinsii Lutet. 1629.) Eusebii Hist. Eccl. lib. i. c. 12. lib. ii. cl. Epiph. Hseres, xx. lib. i. 154 What preparation Christ made before his departure with which the world was now to be enUghtened. Of their number and precise character as a body, there is little to be leamed, beyond the ffe;ct, that one hundred and twenty were found assembled on tbe election of Matthias''. Some have supposed them to have constituted a pecuUar assembly ; and con sider tbem to be intended by "the apostles' com pany'," to which Peter and John retired after thefr appearance before the Sanhedrim. Wbether this were so or not, certainly they must have been so far prepared by their admission into the train of our Lord, as to have furnished capable and ready minis ters for tbe Spirit, at tbat pecuhar season when the harvest was greatest and tbe reapers fewest. Here then was a third order of faithful and experienced men, wbo, hke the apostles and tbe seventy, were left qualified for a coraraission from that Comforter whom he had proraised. V. The sacraments form another portion of the Christian institution which was embraced by our Lord's preparatory ministry. Their object and cbaracter have already been pointed out. Why they were instituted by bim, and not, Uke aU the other forms and ceremonies, left to tbe Holy Spirit, and to tbe Cburch under its guidance, is worthy of inquiry. Looking to the character of the apostles as appointed by our Lord, they appear only in the Ught of witnesses. Is there then any thing in the 1 Acts i. 15—26. ' Acts iv. 23. for the establishment of Christianity. 155 sacraments which rendered these men under that character peculiarly fittmg to be trastees, as it were, of those sacred rites ? If there be, an answer may be thereby given to the inquiry ; the question being always considered witb that diffidence and humUity, which the wisdom of Christ in bis arrange ment of the scheme of salvation, clairas from every Christian. Now sucb a connection is discoverable. Baptism, first, is the symbol of a covenant between two parties — ^between tbe Christian and bis Lord. On the part of tbe Sa-viour, it was instituted as the raeans whereby grace was given ; and, as a proof of this, in the primitive Church it was always perhaps accompanied by some extraordinary gifts of the Spirit. On the part of the redeemed, it was a pledge that be believed. Tbus, wben the eunuch requested to be baptized -by Phihp, bis answer is, " If thou believest with all thy heart thou mayest'." To 'the gaoler at Philippi, St. Paul raade the sarae reply, when asked what was the requisite quaUfica tion to fit hira for admission into the covenant of salvation ; " Believe on tbe Lord Jesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved'," (i. e. made a Christian.) Baptism tben was, on the part of tbe Christian, the pledge that he believed. Now tbe apostles were the especial witnesses of what was to be beUeved, they were the persons wbose report was to be credited ; and to tbem, therefore, most suitably was ¦ Acts viii. 37. ' Acts xvi, 31. 1 56 What preparation Christ made before his departure committed tbe sacrament of admission into the Church, " the keys of the kingdom," as to men afready intmsted with the pass-word into it. Thus, the appointment of witnesses and the rite of bap tism seem to be naturaUy connected, and to belong to one and the same period of the institu tion. The sacrament of the Lord's supper is empha tically termed a memorial. It was enjoined on tbe apostles, and through them on aU Christians, as a symbolical rite to be observed for ever in remem brance of Christ ; in remerabrancp of him in his fulfilment of the most important part of his ministry. Being, then, in itself a sort of monument, or histrionic record, of the most mysterious of those events to wbich they were appointed witnesses, a reason presents itself, why the institution of this sacrament also, sboiUd have been assigned to the same period of the new dispensation, as the appoint ment of the witnesses theraselves. TTiey could surely best understand and explain its origin, wbo were chosen to bear testimony to the event which it was to caU to reraerabrance ; and wbo, if not all present Uke St. John at the awful scene, were yet present on those various occasions, when it had been prefigured and foretold, by words and by signs, by allusions to mysterious prophecies, by parables, or by typical miracles. Beyond tbese, no institution of the new dis pensation was anticipated by our Lord, unless we for the establishment of Christianity. 157 except the dictation of that one prayer which on that account is called his". Why this should bave been done, especially as the suggestion of prayer seems so accordant with the other offices of inspira tion by the Holy Ghost, and more especiaUy as it actuaUy did raake a prominent feature amongst spiritual endowments, is a question whicb wUl per haps seem not to admit of so obvious a reply as the foregoing inquiries. In truth, there is no httle un certainty as to the precise object of this prayer. To some it has appeared only in the Ught of a sanction and a model for prayer in general. Others have received it as a particular form of words, enjoined on Christians to be used according to tbe letter of the comraandment whenever tbey prayed. Tbe question bas seldom perhaps appeared of moment to tbe Christian inquirer, and hence, generally, all tbese are acquiesced in as legitimate objects of the Lord's prayer. With reference to the present consideration,, however, it may be neces sary to take a more accurate and determinate view of it. Adopting the Uteral and obvious import of tbe passages in each Evangehst, which contain the accounts of its first being taught, we should cer tainly say, that our Lord was enjoining that very form of words exclusively or . especially. In tbe Churchy too, from the earliest times, the prayeriias hem used as it was given j and certainly has never, " Matt. vi. 9. Luke xi, 2. 1 58 What preparation Christ made before Jiis departure as far as we can judge, been regarded as a model or a rale for the coraposition of other prayers. Far frora it, its cbaracter in some respects is very dis tinct ; although the difference is likely enough to escape our notice, from the very circumstance that we become famiUar with it earher tban we do with any other composition. But it may be safely as serted, that as a model for prayer it was not re ceived by the apostles and primitive Cburch. If we doubt it, let us refer only to the first prayer recorded in tbe Acts ; that, naraely, whicb was offered up before the election of Matthias ; and we shaU find it irapossible to trace any special reference in this to the Lord's prayer. Again, it may -with equal confidence be said, tbat it could not have been intended as a sanction for prayer, because tbis was not requisite. Tbe very words witb which it is pre faced, " When ye pray," impUes that prayer was al ready understood and practised as a duty. To which we may add another weighty consideration. Our Saviour, in his directions concerning tbe prayers of Cbristians, expressly commands that they should be offered up in his name ; a command whicb we know has in aU ages of the Church been most reUgiously observed. How comes it that the only prayer framed by him who gave the rule should violate it ? It cannot be said, that this was because he was himself to join in that form of prayer, for it was evidently a prayer for the disciples only, the request being, " teach us to pray," and the reply, " when for the establishment of Christianity. 159 ye pray"." Nor was it because he was not yet glorified, and seated on tbe right band of God to make intercession for sinners, if, at least, we claim for it tbe cbaracter of a perpetual appointraent. Without denying tben, that in the record of tbis singular prayer, the Christian of all ages finds tbe highest authority and sanction for prayer in general, perhaps to a certain extent, a rule and guide, still tbe primary and specific object of tbis particular form of words must be sought for elsewhere ; in some reference to the office and condition of the apostles and disciples, or in some other connection -with tbe infant state of the Church. In suggesting then, that this prayer was composed and in tended for the apostles and tbe other disciples, considered as attendants on our Lord and helpers in his ministry, it will not I hope, be thought that I am lessening the character of tbe prayer, or at tempting to make its universal use among Chris tians seem less becoming or less a duty. Far from it, the conclusion to which it should lead is tbe very reverse. That such is the case ^ then, is probable from the contents of the prayer. 1st, It is addressed to God the Father, and yet, notwithstanding Christ's repeated declaration, " Whatsoever ye shall ask of tbe Father in my name, he wiU give it you''," this iraportant omission is made in the only form which he dictates. Now ' Luke xi. 2, y John xv. 16. xvi. 23. 160 What preparation Chiist made before his departure supposing this prayer "to have been composed for his apostles and disciples, in the character of his companions and helpers while on earth, tbis is exactly wbat we should expect ; for it was not until be should be glorified tbat prayer was to be made to him or in his name. Accordingly, when that time was now approaching, he tells bis disciples, " hitherto have ye asked nothing in my name; ask and receive''." Which amounted to this, " Henceforth ye are to pray in another character and another form. I go to be myself the object of prayer, and even to the Father must prayers be addressed in my narae." Look, too, at the first prayers of tbe Church, and you will observe precisely tbis charge. Take, e. g. that before the election of Matthias, " Thou, Lord, whicb knowest the hearts of aU men" :" or tbat of Stephen, " Lord Jesus, receive my spirit ; Lord, lay not tbis sin to their charge''." This last is most to the point, because it is obviously an imita tion of the prayer whicb the blessed Jesus made on the cross for his murderers, " Father, forgive them%" &c. the precise change to which we have been aUuding being adopted. It is not any more " Our Father," but " Lord Jesus." With this, very strikingly accords the testimony of Phny, whose careful inquiry into the Christian rites for the purpose of reporting tbem to Trajan, • John xvi. 24. ¦ Acts i. 24. '' Acts vii. 59, 60. ' Luke xxiii. 34. for the establishment of Christianity. 161 cannot but coramand credit, although he was no Christian. " They sing a hymn," be states, " to Christ" as to God. Indeed it may be worth con sidering, although it is immaterial to tbe present arguraent, whether the primitive Church did not, in addressing prayer to Cbrist glorified, consider them selves as fulfiUing his coramand to pray to the Father in his name, understanding that coraraand as if its tenour was tbis, " Hitherto ye bave only leamed to address God as the Father, now you must address him as the Son, in my name, under my character, in my person." It cannot be denied, at least, tbat such is actuaUy tbe form of the Scripture prayers, as just quoted. Let us tben suppose, tbat as attendants on and coadjutors with the Lord during his abode on earth, the apostles were instructed to address God in the name and person of tbe Father ; and tben let us see whether the matter of the Prayer wUl confirm us in tbis supposition. Our Father which art in heaven. — ^This expression, if it had any reference to the point in question, must be intended to mark the difference between God manifested in tbe flesh, and the invisible God, God the Father in heaven — in whicb character tbe address was made to him. But pass we on to the petitions themselves, and let us see wbether they are not chiefly, whether they are not exclusively, appropriate to the state of Christ's dispensation as it tben was. VOL. I. M 162 What preparation Christ made before his departure For this purpose it will be only requisite to repeat the several clauses with, the briefest com ment : — "Hallowed be thy name'." " Thy king dom come." The expressions cannot fail to bring us back most forcibly to a time, when tbe Gospel kingdom was not yet estabUshed ; but was the one great object of Christ's preparatory labours, and of tbe labours of those bis attendants, wbo were sent from time to time to preach tbat king dom at hand. It was a petition for tbat moment to be hastened, when these preparations should be corapleted, and when he should be able to say, ' ' I have glorified thee on tbe earth, I have finisKed the work which thou hast given me to do. J have manifested thy name to tbe men wbom thou gavest me"." But to himself — to God in his name, were prayers to be addressed when tbat work was finished, and their petition granted. Therefore, he adds, " And now, O Father, glorify thou me with "• See note on the secondary meaning of the word Name, p, 150. ' Add inter alia, John xii. 28. " Father, glorify thy name. Then came a voice from heaven, saying, / kave both glorified it, and will glorify it again. The people that stood by and heard it, said that it thundered ; others said that an angel spoke unto him." What voice was this which sounded like the thun ders of mount Sinai? and what did it signify, but that as from amidst those thunders God had glorified his name as Father and Creator, so would he again glorify it as Son and Redeemer. " This voice," added Jesus, " came not because of me, but for your sakes." fox: the establishment of Christianity. 163 thine ownself, (rraqA o-eauTcS,) with tbe glory which I bad with thee (rta.qa. ito\) before the world was ^" Thy will be done in earth as it is in heaven.- — This brings us still nearer to tbe closing scene of that wbich the Saviour called his work. Wben in agony in the garden of Gethsemane, and bis mind was fuU of the cup of bittemess prepared for him, it was, " Thy -will be done," whicb closed his medi tations ^. Doubtless, then, to that raysterious and awful accompUshment of God's wiU, this clause of tbe Lord's Prayer related''. It was tbat wiU against the fulfilment of which human nature revolted'. ' John xvii. 5. ^ His reproof to the apostles on this occasion was, " Could ye not watch with me one hour?" as if the object of their watching and of his was to a certain extent the same. In like manndf, he sometimes prayed with tkem alone ; and although in this re markable scene he withdrew from them to pray, preparatory to a portion of his ministry in which he was the sole agent, and according to the prophet's image, " trod the wine-press alone," yet his injunction to tbem seems addressed to them as ministers and fellow-labourers. " Watch and pray, that ye enter not into temptation." Matt. xxvi. 40, 41 . " Matt. xxvi. 39. Mark xiv. 36. Luke xxii. 42. ' " O, my Father, if it be possible, let this cup pass from me !" What an agony of soul is conveyed in these words ! Scarcely less affecting is his request to Peter and James and John to " tarry with him," as if even their presence was a comfort to him in that tremendous hour of trial. " And he took with him Peter and the two sons of Zebedee, and began to be sorrowful and very heavy. Then saith he unto them, My soul is exceeding sorrow ful even unto death, tarry ye here and watch with me." Matt. xxvi. 37—39. M 2 164 What preparation Christ made before his departure Satan tempted the Saviour, and his boldest apostle remonstrated, until our Lord rebuked him with a severity of expression denoting the extraordinary seriousness of the subject. " Get thee behind me, Satan, for thou savourest not the things that be of God, but thosethat be of men''." As if he bad said, " Tbis is the wiU of God, — pray that his will be done, instead of seeking conjointly witb the evil one to thwart it." In the same strain Peter bim self afterwards spoke of tbe crucifixion, in his first address to the Jews; " Him being delivered by the determinate wiU and foreknowledge of God', ye have taken, and by wicked bands have crucified and slain." This, too, was the prophetic language of the Psalmist, " Lo, I corae, to do thy wiU, O God""." Not that the disciples used this Prayer with a fuU comprehension of its import. They may have offered it up in humble faith ; instracted, perhaps, as in tbe case of Peter, that the sacrifice of Christ was erainently and pecuUarly the wiU of God, but not understanding how to reconcile it with tbeir hopes, their aff'ections, and their tenets respecting him. StiU they might have used it, going on Uke Abraham with his son, and preparing for a sacrifice, wbich, as in bis case, seemed to put an end to thefr best hopes, as well as to bUght their tenderest afiec- '' Matt, xvi. 23. 1 BouA^, our Bible translation is " counsel." Acts ii. 23. ¦" Psaim xl, 7, 8. for the establishment of Christianity. 165 tions : but supported by a confidence like Abra ham's, tbat God would provide himself a victim — would find some way of doing wbat to them seemed impossible and inexplicable. Give us this day our daily bread. — This might seera at first to be as appUcable to tbe destitute con dition of tbe apostles and disciples under tbe dis pensation of tbe Spirit, as it was to tbem during the abode of tbe Lord amongst tbem. But tbeir situation was, in truth, very different. Whilst our Lord was witb tbem, tbey were rairaculously pro vided as often as tbey stood in need; afterwards they were left to the ordinary raeans of maintaining themselves. Thus St. Paul boasts of working with his own hands, that he may not be chargeable to the society". But our Lord's disciples, whilst be was witb tbem, were continuaUy supplied, in their ministry more particularly, by tbe extraordinary interposition of God. It was the occasion of raore than one miracle. Food, and even money, were thus provided ; their garments in their journeys waxed not old, and their purses never failed. But nothing can more clearly mark the distinction, tban our Lord's words to thera, immediately before his apprehension, and when be was in the act of taking leave of them: " When I sent you fortb without scrip or purse or shoes, lacked ye any thing ? And they said, ' Nothing.' Then said he to them. But " 2 Thess. iii: 8. 166 What preparation Christ made before his departure now, he that hath scrip let him take it, and likewise his purse : and he that hath no sword, let him seU his garment, and buy one°." Forgive us our trespasses, as we forgive them that trespass against us. — Forgiveness of injuries, as tbe means of fitting us to receive tbe forgiveness of God for our trespasses against bira, is a precept which, so far from being confined to tbe apostles and dis ciples during our Lord's Ufe, was evidently incul cated as binding on all Christians in every age. "If ye forgive not men their trespasses, neither wiU your father forgive your trespasses p." A peti tion for forgiveness -therefore, haAdng reference to such an injunction, seems to form an exception to the general character of the Lord's Prayer, in the present view of it. But, although tbe duty of for giveness be of universal obhgation, and although it be a preparatory requisite in tbe case of aU, before they can properly ask God to forgive them; stiU, it is not usual in prayer, one might almost say that it is not becoming, to set fortb the possession of this or any qualification; but rather humbly to suppress it, as better known and judged of by God than by his self-partial supphant. Such was the differ ence between the prayers of two whom our Lord bimself once described to bis disciples, tbe one for thefr iraitation, the other for a warning : the one recounting alms, fastings, and if not forgiveness of ° Luke xxii. 35, 36. p Matt, vi. 15. for the establishment of Christianity. 167 wrongs received, yet more tban reparation for wrongs done ; tbe other regarding himself only as he was an offender, and expressing all in " God be merciful to rae a sinner." A prayer tben, setting fortb any quaUfication in the suppUant, would not perhaps be consistent with the lesson so inculcated, unless tbere were sorae special and extraordinary rea son for it, sucb as tbe particular cbaracter of tbe Lord's Prayer may be expected to furnisb. It is therefore not unreasonable to suppose, that this and tbe two next clauses, "Lead us not into temptation, but deliver us from evil," related to those parts of Christ's work, in which, although his apostles and coadjutors re quired much assistance, yet the trial and difficulty were most apparent in tbeir Lord's course. He was most obviously exposed to temptation, Satan employing every wile to turn him aside from the preparation wbich was going on through him and his agents the apostles and other disciples, for tbe estabUshment of that kingdora which was to corae. But were tbe agents and rainisters themselves likely to be unmolested, in tbeir part of tbe sarae work, by the same tempter? What said our Lord? " Watch and pray tbat ye enter not into temptation-." — and at the last, " Ye are they which bave continued with me in my temptations; and I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father bath appointed unto mei." But besides the ordinary attempts of Satan, Jesus 1 Luke xxii. 28, 29. 168 What preparation Christ made before his departure was expressly led into tiie 'wilderness to be tempted. What he there withstood no mere human being can be tliought capable of witlistandinij. Well, therefore, might those who had joined him in that work, from whicb the devil wished in that mystrrious interview to seduce him, well u\ight tbey be taught to pray, " Lead u.^ not into ttinptation." The meaning of such a rtniucst, indocd, can only be understood by reference to our Lord's pot u- liar case; for ordinaiily "no man is tempted of God." Our Lord had been led into temptation, mid left alone with the evil one. But lu' was more tlian man. With him it was a necessary trial. In liis case therefore it was ordained. But how could his fol lowers and coadjutors have escaped, if the same ex ercise of infernal art and power had been enqiloyed against them ? Such an opportunity Satan we know did desire, and was disappointed through our Lord's prayer of intercession, in the case of one at least, " Simon, Simon, behold Satan hath desired to have you (op-Sis) that he may .s//'/ you as ¦wheat, but 1 have prayed for thee (^rsgl o-oS) tbat thy faitii fail not'." Why Peter most needed his jiiayeis, the event sufficiently shews. That Peter esc-iqied this ex traordinary trial by tbe intercession of his Master, we know. That tbe temptation was connected with his ministry, as preacher of Christ crucified, is highly probable. His strong prejudice in favour of ' Luke xxii. 31, .12. for the estabUshment of Christianity. 169 a temporal Messiah has already been noticed, as accounting for the severity with whicb our Lord on one occasion rebuked him. In the present instance, too, this warning was soon followed by his attempt to rescue Jesus by force, and probably to assert his right to temporal supremacy. " Put up thy sword," were the words witb which Jesus recalled him to liimself; he instantly obeyed, Christ had prayed for bim, and his faith, even against hope, failed him not. He submitted to see his Master led to death, and Satan was disappointed of his victira. Still, as he followed and looked on, and saw no divine aid interposed in behalf of the forsaken Messiah, his heart misgave him, and his resolution graduaUy failed. The tempter was at hand, and tbe apostle had already denied him whose kingdom was now seen to be not of tbis world, when a look from Jesus roused and rescued him. In all this there is doubt less every appearance of an attempt directed by Satan against Peter, not merely as a member of the human race, but as the first foundation stone of that work, against which tbe chief agency of evil was di rected. In his efforts to prevent or interrapt this work, the otber apostles may be supposed likewise, although in different degrees, to have been the ob jects of his malicious schemes ; and hence this clause of the Lord's Prayer, Lead us not into tempt ation, as well as the one following, " Deliver us from evil, or from the evil one." 170 What preparation Christ made before his departure The same principle wiU lead us to the true meaning and intent of the former clause, " Forgive us our trespasses as we forgive them that trespass against us." Most sinned against was the Lord Jesus, and most conspicuous was his office of forgiving ; when asked to heal, be forgave sins ; when suffering on tbe cross, it forraed the last act of bis rainistry ; it was tbis, in short, for which he Uved on earth, and for which he died. "While on earth, tbe apostles were fellow-labourers witb him in proclaiming that forgiveness, and in preparing men to receive it. But although joined with Cbrist tbus far in bis raercifiU work, and thus far partaking of bis rainisterial cbaracter, there was one especial difference. They needed of God that same forgive ness, which they were subordinate agents in pro curing for mankind, and wbich they as such preached. Christ might pray simply that the scheme of forgiveness may prosper amongst the objects of his ministry; they were bound so to express thefr prayer for tbis, as to include themselves. Tbe spfrit of the petition from their Ups might be, " Grant us that forgiveness, which we, in our capacity of agents and fellow- workers witb tbe Lord, are proclaiming to others." — ^Their forgiving otbers was not assigned as a reason or claim on God's forgiveness of them selves, but renders tbeir prayer more humble, by setting them on a level, as far as the right to salvation went, with those who were obstinately for the establishment of Christianity. 171 refiising it; who were resistmg thefr ministry, trespassing against them as ministers of Christ and stewards of the grace of God. It would be uncandid, however, not to notice, that against tbis explanation there is one strong objection, nor do I at aU desfre to detract from its force. In St. Matthew's narrative of the institution of tbe Prayer, it is foUowed immediately by the observa tion,- tbat in order to render our prayers for forgive ness eff'ectual, we must first forgive aU others ; and to strengthen tbe connection, the particle " for" is used. This is strong, although by no means con clusive. Other passages raay be readily pointed out, in which sentences are thus strung together by one Evangelist, which, by comparison witb tbe other narratives, we certainly conclude not to have been uttered together. In St. Luke tbe prayer is found disjoined from the precept*. In St. Mark, again, the precept is given and the prayer omitted". St. Mark, indeed, introduces it as part of a regular exposition of that frame of mind which is suitable for a Chiistian prayer; and which is summarily described, by faith in God and charity to man. The concluding sentence could scarcely have made part of the Prayer, as originaUy taught by our Saviour. In that Prayer, " thy kingdom come" is one of the petitions, in this sentence, the exist ence and establishment of that kingdom is asserted, ' Matt. vi. 14. ' Luke xi. 4. " Mark xi. 25. 1 72 What preparation Christ made before his departure and a new sense required for the expression in the petition. Wben Christ taught tbe Prayer, his kingdom was not yet ; the power with which his Cburch was to be strengthened from on high was not exercised"; nor tbe glory resumed, which he had witb tbe Father before the world v^as. The concluding sentence of the Lord's Prayer was after wards added, probably before tbe close of the apostolic age, and on apostolic authority, wben tbe Prayer had been adopted as a form for aU Chris tians. Hence tbe doubt and uncertainty, whether it be a genuine portion of the New Testament re cord, or not. Its want of support from the manu scripts is such, as to afford decisive proof tbat it is not ; and yet some connection with apostohcal authority, such as I have supposed, seems requisite to account for its having been so early and so gene raUy appended to the Prayer, as used by aU Chris- * So St. Paul, (speaking of the exceeding greatness of God's power,) " which he wrought in Christ, when he raised him from the dead, and set him at his own right hand in the heavenly places ; far above all principality and power, and might and do minion, and every name that is named, not only in this world, but also in that which is to come. And hath put all things under his feet, and gave him to be the head over all things to the Church ; which is his body, the fulness of him that fiUeth all in all." (Ephes. i. 20 — 23.) To the revelation of this glorious state of Christ's power, the same apostle may be supposed to allude in his 2d Epistle to the Thessalonians, (i. 9.) when speaking of the condition of the disobedient at the last day, he describes them as undergoing 'iMl^tt *idiic», iiri rr^uraircv nv Kv(icv, K»i urri t?? 3»|)u t?{ ISXYOS »inev. for the establishment of Christianity. 173 tians, as weU as for its having occasionally crept into tbe sacred text. In assenting to tbis view of the Lord's Prayer, the pious Christian cannot but use it with a pecuhar feeUng of devotion. Although its original object and designation has been accorapUshed, stiU, like what befel the prophet's mantle, a new devotional spirit has been attached to it by tbe apostoUc Church, and by God who bas guided it. If tbe teraple of Jerusalem had been converted into a house of Chris tian prayer, could any other edifice have furnished the like accidental excitements to devotion ? Much more may we be aUowed and expected to attach to a form of prayer so adopted, a character of sanctity, beyond all whicb bave been subsequently framed for our peculiar use. Besides, a further apphcation ofthe Lord's Prayer (or, as it may be caUed, on the above principle, tbe apostles' prayer) is quite in unison with the general tenor of Christ's temporary measures ; they were generaUy also prospective. This bas been pointed out in the view of his miracles more especially ; and in the present instance, if the institution of this Prayer involved, as bas been suggested, a prophetic allusion and adaptation to tbe successive trials of the Church, its divine Author raust bave intended it to be preserved. In what way, the Church and the Holy Spirit within it knew best, and has doubt less best deterrained. CHAP. IL PREACHING TO THE JEWS. From A. D. 33—41. Shall we say then that the period of the Chris tian dispensation, of that dispensation under which we now live, commences where our Lord's ministry closes ? Sucb appears to be tbe case, tbat rainistry being only preparatory : first, as forming and furnishing the subject of Christianity ; secondly, as providing certain instruments, and raaking certain arrangements to faciUtate the first measures of tbe Holy Spirit, whose office it was to Christianize the world. The history of that great work naturaUy faUs into a twofold division : the former portion extending through tbe period in which tbe Holy Guide and Governor of tbe Cburch effected bis purpose by a manifest interference; by extraordinary gifts and endowments bestowed on bis agents, and an ex traordinary and sensible reception, and welcome, as it were, of all, who by their means were introduced into tbe new kingdom of God. In due season, this 176 Distinction of periods manifest and sensible interference of the Holy Spirit was withdrawn, and has continued to be so unto the present day. The history of the latter period will be therefore treated separately from that of the former, because of this great hne of division. In that, the' extraordinary display of the Spirit was a necessary guide and beacon to direct men to the Church, and to keep tbem from wandering in thefr progress to it. It served a similar purpose witb the piUar and cloud, which for a time were mani fested to guide tbe Israehtes to the earthly Canaan. In this, the kingdom being settled, although the God of the true Israel stiU resides amongst his people, that residence is secret and invisible — within a holy of hoUes — ^within the hearts of the faithful. Like tbe Jews, we only for a short season enjoyed the open and palpable symbol of God's guiding presence, but, like them, we were not left comfortless. " We have such an High Priest, who is set on tbe right hand of the throne of tbe Majesty in the heavens ; a minister of tbe sanctuary and of the trae tabernacle, wbich the Lord pitched and not man'," and through hira, and by him, we have access unto God. It is the first of these periods, however, to wbich our attention must be now confined ; that is, to Christianity as it was taught and conducted by the apostles and other inspired rainisters of » Heb. viii. 1, 2, in the ministry ofthe Apostles. 177 «, God. And bere it will be proper to mark dis tinctly tbe breaks by wbich even tbis brief period is itself subdivided. For the new dispensation was not coraraunicated to mankind at once, but gra dually, and, it would seem, just in proportion as their weak and prejudiced minds could bear it. According to St. Paul's iUustration, they were at first fed witb milk, and as tbey gained strength truths harder of digestion were presented to them. It is quite necessary, therefore, to consider the records of the infant Church with reference to tbese stages, else we shaU be continually startled by apparent inconsistencies : what is the subject of a command in one part, in another appearing, perhaps, as the subject of a prohibition, and wbat is at one tirae spoken of as a portion of Christian law, at another being disclaimed and disowned. What indistinctness and confusion, for instance, may be occasioned by the want of sorae sucb prin ciple, in attempting to reconcile the decree of tbe council of Jerasalem, respecting the obUgation of Gentile converts to adhere to certain portions of the Jewish cereraonial law, with those passages in St. Paul's writings which expressly condemn such a compliance as sinful ? Some allusion bas been already made to this distinction of periods, whicb will now be more fully pointed out. VOL. I. 178 Distinction of periods I THE GOSPEL PREACHED TO THE JEWS ONLY. The first instraction of the Holy Ghost wasf Uke that of our Lord, addressed only to the Jews. ' Of this, the apostles were informed by our Saviour before he left them. " Ye shaU receive power, after that the Holy Ghost is come upon you : and ye shaU be witnesses unto me, both in Jerusalem, and in all Judaa, and in Samaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth"." Precisely in this order was the course of their ministry directed. They preached at Jerasalem until Stephen's mar tyrdom, and the persecution which ensued dispersed the brethren through the rest of Judaea and Sa maria, in whicb places the word was of course next preached ''. II, THE GOSPEL PREACHED TO THE DEVOUT GENTILES. Notwithstanding the frequent aUusions of our Lord to this event, notwithstanding his last words respecting the extent of their preaching and wit nessing even to the uttermost parts of the earth, the apostles were still as much in tbe dark on "Actsi. 8. "A.D. 33— 41. in the ministry of the Apostles. 179 tbe subject, as they had before been about his death and resurrec^on, after all his repeated de clarations concerning both. As they forraerly won dered what the rising frora the dead could raean, so they now marvelled, what would be tbe ex planation of the prophecy concerning tbe Call of the Gentiles. Of tbese Gentiles there were two descrip tions ; the idolatrous and unbelieving Gentiles, and those who were termed by the Jews prose lytes of the gate. These latter are designated in the New Testament as " devout raen," " fearing God," " testified of by the Jews^" They were those wbo, in consequence of tbe dispersion of the Jews through their respective countries, had re nounced idolatry, and had becorae worshippers of tbe one trae God. As a sign and pledge of tbis change of behef, they conformed to sorae few ob servances of the Jewish law. Like the Jews and pro selytes of righteousness, they abstained frora things offered unto idols, and never used blood as food, or tbe flesh of any animal strangled, as retaining the blood. In opposition, perhaps, to a very general corruption of the moral perception in tbis respect, they also bound themselves to consider fornication as an offence against the law of God ; and, of course, as such to abstain from it. Other portions of the moral cofle being already acknowledged by tbe Gentiles ' Acts X. 2, 22. N 2 180 Distinction of periods in coramon with the Jews, were probably on that account not formally enjoined on them. . Next in order to the Jews, it was reasonable tbat the Gospel should be preached to tbese, both as being better prepared tban the idolaters to receive it, and also because the prejudices of the Jewish converts were less Ukely to be startled, than if aU Gentiles had been at once caUed. For, if tbe apostles themselves were at first unable to bear this hard trath, what may we suppose to have been the case with the great mass of Christians? The event, indeed, fuUy justifies the wisdom of God in this gradual disclosure of his scheme. Al though it was not until the seventh year of the Holy Spirit's descent, tbat any steps were taken for the admission even of tbe devout Gentiles, yet it was necessary to prepare one apostle especiaUy for tbe opening of tbis commission ; and this too, after having so frequently exercised him by divine impulses, as to render hira of all others the least Uable to mistake, or to distrust its suggestions, and the rest more hkely, from the conspicuous part he bad taken, to confide now in his assurance. Even at this late period then, it was necessary that the GentUe CorneUus, although a raan who " feared God and all his house'^," and could appeal for his character to tbe Jews theraselves, should be emboldened by a special revelation to seek for '' Acts X, 2. in the ministry of the Apostles. 181 admission into the Church ; and that Peter, by a corresponding vision, should be required to lay aside his scruples, and be taught then for the first tirae to see, that God having cleansed the GentUes, tbe3s- were to be received on a footing witb the clean and holy IsraeUtes. The pains which be was at to justify his conduct to the Cburch of Jerasa lem, and the opposition whicb be subsequently encountered, prove tbe deUcate nature of bis com mission, and the need of some extraordinary and special interference of tbe Holy Ghost to enforce it. The tirae which elapsed from the descent of the Holy Spirit on tbe day of Pentecost to the conversion of ComeUus, forms what may be termed the first period in' tbe dispensation of the Spirit. From tbis, again to the further extension of the Gospel kingdom, forms a second distinct period, extending from A. D. 41. to A. D. 45. III. THE GOSPEL PREACHED TO THE IDOLA TROUS GENTILES'. At that time Paul and Bamabas were caUed on by a special revelation to undertake an extension of spiritual conquest and dominion, far beyond that with which Peter bad been commissioned. It was tben seen tbat the fulness of the time was corae for ' Acts xiii. 1 — 3. 182 Distinction of periods the offer of salvation to the Gentile idolaters. What preparation Barnabas had for this great attempt, we are not informed. It is only said, that he was a " good raan, fuU of faith and of the Holy Ghost f." But of St. Paul, as of St. Peter, a special and dis tinct revelation is recorded : one, indeed, more solemn and mysterious, because involving what he describes as " the mystery, which in other ages was not made known unto tbe sons of men^," whereof he was made minister. This was the dis pensation of the grace of God which was given unto him, and for a right view of which he was taken up into tbe third heaven''. That his apostleship to the GentUes was conferred on him in bis second visit to Jerusalem, and by the revelation which he describes as having then re ceived in the temple, is evident frora the terms of tbe coraraand addressed to bira, " Make haste and get thee quickly out of Jerasalem, for they wiU not receive thy testimony concerning rae:" and again, " Depart, for I wiU send thee far hence to the GentUes','' " deUvering thee frora the people and frora the Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee ; to open their eyes, and to tum thera from darkness to light, and from tbe power of Satan unto God"*;" allusions which are manifestly appUcable to the idolatrous Gentiles only. For, as to the devout ' Acts xi. 24. f Eph. iii. 5. ° 2 Cor. xii. 2. ' Acts xxii. 18, 21. " Acts xxvi. 17, 18. in the ministry of the Apostles. 183 Gentiles, Peter and l^ul bimself, had for many years been preaching to them ; nor could tbey be said so properly to be in darkness and under the power of Satan. His appointraent, in conjunction with Barnabas, by tbe Cburch of Antioch, took place not long after, and, as we know, by the especial command of tbe Holy Ghost. From, this time tbe ministry of tbe Spirit appears to have been directed to three distinct orders of persons ; each of which required some slight difference of discipUne and governraent, although tbe doctrines of Christianity were ahke imparted to aU. The Jews compose the ffrst, whether Jews by birth or prose lytisra. To these, and it would seem to these alone, ministered all the apostles, except Peter, Paul, and Barnabas, who had also special commissions. Tbe second are tbe devout Gentiles, who were first in tmsted to the rainistry of Peter, and afterwards in cluded in Paul's charge also. Tbe last are the idola trous Gentiles, to whora Paul and Bamabas alone of all the apostles were sent, but more especially, as it would seem from the memoirs of their labours, Paul. This stage in the administration of the Spirit will be found to comprehend a period of twenty-five years, extending from A. D. 45, when St. Paul received his apostleship, to A. D. 70, when Jerasa lem was taken, the Jewish polity dissolved, and the grounds on which the above-raentioned distinctions were founded were for ever removed. 184 Appointment of Matthias. The appointment of Matthias to be an apostle\ Between the ascension of our Lord and the com ing of the Comforter, a short interval of ten days occurs, during which tbe only raeasure taken for the furtherance of Christianity was the election of an apostle in tbe room of Judas. This pause in tbe work of God may bave been intended, to mark more strongly the distinction, between the forraer and latter ministration — that of Jesus which was now completed, and tbat of tbe Comforter whicb was to succeed. That this intermission was not accidental, at least, but part of tbe general scheme of Pro vidence, was expressly declared to tbe disciples by tbeir Master. Tbey reraained inactive by his coraraand"' Tbis interval then was only marked by tbe repair of that portion of tbe Church's preparatory structure which had been injured by tbe faU of Judas. An apostle was wanting to complete " the twelve," as tbey were emphaticaUy styled. Peter accordingly proposed to his feUow apostles and the otber disciples, (wbo, to the number of one hundred and twenty men, were collected in an upper room, for fear of tbe Jews,) the expediency — or sball we rather say, be explained to them, that it was the will of heaven — that another disciple should supply tbe vacancy ? As yet, it must be borne in mind, of tbe two offices of an apostle, tbat only witb which ' Acts i. 26. '" Luke xxiv, 49. Acts i, 4. Appointment of Matthias. 185 they had been invested by Christ was known. As yet they were only witnesses, or, as tbey are often called, in aUusion to the most raaterial circurastance in tbeir evidence, " witnesses ofthe resurrection"." Two, therefore, quahfied for tbis office by their con stant attendance on tbe Lord, were presented as candidates; and tbe choice fell on Matthias in preference to Joseph, wbo was surnaraed Bar- sabas. The raode in wbich tbis election was conducted has not been viewed in tbe same light by all, the sacred narrative admitting, certainly, great variety of interpretation. Mosheim supposes that tbe election was made by the suffrages of the assembled Cbris tians, tbe apostles having previously norainated the candidates" Otbers understand the noraination to bave been raade by tbe asserably, and tbe de cision by the rival candidates drawing lots. This latter, which is the raore usual view of it, seems also, on a careful consideration of all the circumstances, to be tbe true one. For, First, the election is expressly referred to the Lord who had himself appointed all tbe other apostles, and who, even after the dispensation of the Spirit had commenced, manifested hiraself wben a further apostolic appointraent was to be made. They prayed and said, " Thou, Lord, who knowest " Acts i. 8, 22. ° De Rebus Christianorum ante Const. Magn. p. 78. 1 86 Appointment of Matthias. tbe hearts of all mert shew whether of these two thou hast chosen^." Add to this, tbat the as serably was not inspired, for the Holy Ghost was not yet given, and therefore could not know what was the divine wiU and pleasure. Mosheim's con jecture throughout proceeds on a forgetfulness of this circumstance, which makes tbis so materiaUy to differ from any congregation of primitive Chris tians assembled after the descent of the Spirit. Whether the apostles or the asserably proposed the two candidates — a point which the narrative leaves doubtful — cannot with this view of the case then be of any raoraent i. P Acts i. 24. ¦• The terms of the narrative strongly favour the popular opinion and militate against Mosheim's; notwithstanding his proposed accoramodation of the text to his view. In the phrase eSaicaf K>,i^ov( xutm he reads avrat. But the chief obstacle lies not here, but in the construction of the sentence contained in ver. 26. In our translation it is, " the lot fell on Matthias and he was num bered witb tbe eleven." The meaning of the former part of the sentence in the original is more properly, perhaps, " the oiSce fell to Matthias." But this does not affect the point to which 1 am adverting, which is, that the two acts are given as separate. First comes the choice or election of Matthias, and then his being numbered with the eleven. Now the Greek word, which has been rendered " numbered with," is irvyx,ciTei/n in ubtless, after that appoint ment that he was invested with the ofBce by the Church of An tioch, and by prayer and imposition of hands commended to the grace of God. 1 88 Appointment of Matthias. flee and disperse on tbe crucifixion of Jesus so far, as not yet to have returned to their little society. Tbe apostles (independently of that very con stancy whicb might bave qualified them for tbe office) were detained by an extraordinary sense of duty, by affection, and by other motives which could not so forcibly operate on the rest. Sup posing tben tbat two only were found, tbese two bad given proof of possessing, beyond the qua lification raentioned by Peter, a superior constancy, faithfulness, and disregard of personal risk, which were quahties equaUy essential to tbe office which was to be filled. Of these then, Matthias was chosen and Joseph left. But both would seera to bave been tried and proved for the situation. And if the general report of tbe early Church be trae, Joseph indeed was only rejected for a sesison. Barnabas, the fellow-labourer and feUow-apostle of Paul, has been coramonly identified with this same Joseph, who was also caUed Barsabas. Nor is it unreasonable to suppose that tradition highly likely to be trae, which states, that of all who were competent witnesses besides the eleven, the only two wbo gave proof of apostohcal faithfulness and fearlessness became advanced to the rank and of fice of apostles, — the one supplying a vacancy in tbe number of tbose more especiaUy sent to the Jews, the other joined in a coraraission to the Gentiles. It appears then that this interruption in tbe Descent of the Holy Ghost. 189 Sabbath time, as it were, of God's great work, the interval between the ascension of Christ and tbe coming of the Holy Ghost, was not properly a con tinuance of that work, but only the repair of what was broken by the sin and death of Judas. And it was appointed, perhaps, tbat tbe election of Mat thias should take place in tbis interval, in order that the Holy Ghost might on tbe day of Pentecost fall on him witb the sarae effects as on the other apostles ; they, as will appear in tbe sequel, being affected by the descent of the Spirit differently from the great body of Christians. Descent of the Holy Ghost', (A. D. 33.) The descent of tbe Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost naturaUy leads us to call to raind tbe object and design of tbat holy day araong tbe Jews, presuming, tbat as tbeir passover contained so much instractive allusion to tbe death of Christ, we may learn frora this also a sirailar lesson respecting tbe descent of the Comforter. Fifty days from the paschal sacrifice was the feast of Pentecost ' ; tbe sarae period intervened from the sacrifice of Cbrist to the descent of the Holy Ghost. In the former, tbe rite of the Pass over reminded the observers of a temporal salvation and deliverance ; the feast of Pentecost, of the law ' Acts ii. ' Exod. xxiii. 15, 16. 190 Descent of the Holy Ghost. given to those so rescued and saved by God himself speaking from mount Sinai. Christ had been tbe new and the true Passover, and, in like manner and after a Uke interval, our Passover was foUowed up by tbe promulgation of a new law, delivered also by God himself. By means of tbis contrast, we may see more clearly the distinction whicb bas been drawn be tween the ministry of Jesus and of the Holy Spirit. With the deUvery of the law frora raount Sinai coraraenced the Mosaic dispensation ; with the Christian Pentecost that under which we now live. In each case, aU that preceded was preparatory; the signs, miracles, and other acts which authenticated the commission of Moses, and those wbich bore witness to tbat greater Prophet who " arose Uke unto him' ;" the blood of tbe lamb wbich saved the Israelites from the destroyer, as weU as the sacrifice of him who by his blood has saved us aU from destruction". With the records of that day the Christian reader needs not to be instructed bere ; nor does it enter • Deut. xviii. 15—18. Acts iii. 22. " As if to impress the importance of the analogy on our atten tion, we are not simply told that the descent of the Holy Ghost took place on the day of Pentecost, for then might the reader have overlooked the coincidence as casual ; but the narrative is prefaced in a pointed and particular way, " When the day of Pentecost was fully come ;" and thence St. Luke proceeds to detail tjie glorious and gracious manifestation of the Spirit, iu this solemn entrance on its office. Descent of the Holy Ghost. 191 into my plan, on this or any other part of the inspired history, to attempt a substitute for the narratives of the Bible. I am only like the travel lers' guide, pointing out the reraarkable features of a venerable portrait, and placing tbe observer in the raost favourable light for seeing thera, and not raaking sketches or copies for persons wbo want tbe opportunity or tbe inchnation frequently to visit the original. Tbis kind of assistance, however, tbe pre sent occasion raore especially requires. For the history of Christianity being the history of tbe dis* pensation of God's Spirit, it is proper that together with the notice of the Holy Ghost's first raanifest ation as the guide and dispenser of reUgion, there should be given whatever hints may seem useful to shew the connection between the incidents recorded in that history, and the guiding wisdom of tbat holy One, — in other words, to clear away aU that might hinder the events preserved in the Scriptures from being contemplated as parts of the scheme of the divine Dispenser, and that scheme itself from appearing fully adapted to the purposes for which it was framed, and which it has so signaUy answered. The first point to which with this view I would advert, is, ^ L The distinction between the modes whereby the Holy Ghost was communicated, and its efects mani fested on the members of the primitive Church. Now this was done in two ways ; either, as in this first instance, immediately and visibly, or by the laying on 192 Descent of the Holy Ghost. of the apostle's hands, wben the communication was secret and invisible. In the former case, a flarae shaped like a tongue was seen to descend, and r^st on the persons so favoured, and tbe descent is therefore said to be visible, that is, accompanied with a visible sign. For God hiraself no raan hath seen at any time" ; and these fiery tongues, hke the flame in the bush at Horeb, and that of tbe Shechinah, only denoted a peculiar character in the several com munications which were accompanied by such tokens. Simple and obvious as is this view of the subject, it is requisite to keep it distinctly before us, because tbere has arisen rauch confusion of thought, not to say irapiety of doctrine, frora rais- taking, as it would seera, tbe various raodes in whicb it bas pleased God to provide an intercourse between hiraself and bis creatures, for views of bis real nature. In the old world it led to idolatry ; raen associating, and graduaUy blending in idea, the God of nature witb tbose of his works, which were his most conspicuous witnesses, or tokens of his presence, the heavens and the earth, the heavenly bodies, and the seasons'. Each successive revela tion has been eraployed in dispersing the error and obscurity witb which man has thus contrived ever to darken the light of the preceding one. But, with "John i. 18. 1 .lohn iv. 12, ' Thus, the brazen serpent, which Moses set up in the wilder ness by the command of God, was converted into an object of idolatry. See 2 Kings xviii, 4. Descent of the Holy Ghost. 193 the progress of each new day-spring, fresh clouds have gathered, nor has tbe Christian dispensation itself escaped. From the earliest controversies, even to those of the present day, disputes have been blindly carried on concerning the Divine essence, by parties alike acknowledging tbat it is incomprehen sible, and alike forgetting that God reveals not himself properly, but his will, to raan ; that what is said to be a revelation of the Divine nature, is often rather a warning not to seek after the know ledge, inasmuch as it chiefly teUs us wbat God is not; and that what positive knowledge of God is to be found in Scripture, seems to be placed tbere, like the forbidden tree of Paradise, not to gratify man's presumptuous curiosity, but to try his obe dience, and to animate bis exertions, not as an object of present fruition, but of future reward. " Tbe secret things belong unto tbe Lord our God : but those things which are revealed belong unto us, and to our cbildren for ever, that we may do all the words of this law'." Thus, when it is written that God appeared to Moses in tbe bush, our first, unthinking apprehen sion may be, tbat an object of sight before invisible was then made visible. But then, a raoraent's re flection rerainds us, that " no raan hath seen God at any time ;" and we learn to consider the ex- ^ Deut. xxix. 29. VOL. 1. O 1 94 Descefit of the Holy Ghost. pression as an accommodation of language like " the wrath of God," " the counsels of God," and even the " eye" and the " arm" of the Lord^ On the other hand, if we chance to overlook this, it is impossible to say bqw far we may go wrong. To retum, however, to the imme diate point of inquiry. The descent of tbe Holy Ghost, when aceotti- panied with this sign, must have been wbat our Saviour meant when be spoke to the apostles of being baptized with fire and the Holy Ghost. It was manifested only on some great occasion; and appears to have produced effects, if not always greater in kind, certainly greater in degree, than when tbe communication was made through the mediation of the apostles. Those wbo were thus favoured, were, by way of distinction from the others, said to be " filled with the Holy Ghost," and pro bably, from their superior spiritual endowments, formed the class out of which all elections were made to tbe higher offices in the Church. It was so, e. g. in tbe case of the seven Deacons, whose appointment is recorded in the sixth chapter of the Acts, and in that of Bamabas. Through this " baptism" aU the apostles (St. Paul, it would seem, no less than the others) passed ; and by virtue of it they certainly obtained gifts greater, not in degree only, but in kind, as we shall presently observe. ' See Abp. King's Sermon on Predestination. Descent of the Holy Ghost. 195 There are only five occasions on which tbe Holy Ghost seems to have been thus communicated, and in each there was some grea.t object to be effected, some signal event to be marked. First, it occurred on the. day of Pentecost ^ Next, on the return of the apostles from the Jewish council to their brethren^, (touj iSiouj.) The third extraordinary descent was on St. Paul'', for, although tbis is not expressly stated, it may be certainly inferred, as weU frpm the expressions, that he was " filled witb tbe Holy Ghost," and was " not a whit behind the chiefest of tbe apostles," as frora the uniformity observed in the mode of appointing and einpowering tbe apostles in otber respects. If our Lord thought it good to return to tbe earth, in order tbat St. Paul's appointment to be a witness might be altoge tber the sarae as was tliat of the others, it is raore than Ukely that he was invested with his second apostolical office, the ministry of the Spirit, by tbe sarae peculiarity of the Spirit's manifestation as were bis fellow rainisters. The fourth occasion was the admission of the ffrst devout Gentiles or proselytes of the gate unto the Church'. The fifth and last time of its occurring, as far as sacred testimony goes, was at Antioch in Pisidia, on tbe first fhiits of tbe idolatrous Gentiles''. In this case, also, as in St. Paul's, it is only to be inferred from f Acts ii, I. f Actsiv. 31. " Acts ix, 17. ' Acts X, 45. ^ Acts xiii. 14, 52. o2 196 Descent of the Holy Ghost. the occasion being strictly analogous to tbat of the conversion of the first devout Gentiles, taken in connection with tbe pecuUar expression wbich is used in the narrative of that event, viz. that ' ' they were filled with tbe Holy Ghost," an expression which certainly seems to bave been appropriated to this mode of coraraunication'. On aU otber occasions, the descent of tbe Holy Ghost was such as our Lord alluded to, wben he said to Nicodemus, " Tbe wind bloweth where it hsteth, and thou hearest tbe sound thereof, biit canst not teU whence it cometh, and whither it goeth ; so is every one that is born of the Spirit"'." In otber words, its operation was not accorapanied by any impression on tbe senses. It was known only by its effects. But, the effects themselves being partly sensible and extraordinary, it was stiU in one sense a palpable coraraunication. The apostles ' St. Luke seems to apply the phrase to cases wherein immedi ate utterance was the result — to the overflowings, as it were, of the Spirit. In like manner heathen writers use the expression plenus deo. Accordingly, whilst in the Acts it is confined (as it would seem) to the instances of the Holy Ghost's descent which were marked by the symbol of fiery tongues, and the gift of languages, whicb it typified, in the Gospel, it is applied to Zacharias, whose inspiration was manifested by an extemporane ous and divinely suggested hymn. So too John Baptist is said to have been filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother's womb, to denote, by the strong expression, what is elsewhere described by " a voice crying out. Prepare ye the way ofthe Lord." "¦ John iii. 8. Descent of the Holy Ghost. 197 laid tbeir hands on the disciples, and tbe Holy Ghost was given. The gifts wbich followed in this, as in tbe forraer case, were various, and iraparted in different degrees, as wiU be raore dis tinctly ^pointed out as we proceed. It does not appear, however, to have been attended with aU the effects or gifts of tbe Spirit ; as, for instance, the power of conferring the Holy Ghost, which was confined to the apostles, and therefore conveyed by tbe forraer raanifestation of tbe Coraforter. The gifts wbich it did convey were probably too imparted in a lower degree. This communication of the Spirit appears to have been dispensed indiscriminately to all beUevers. AU who were baptized, eitber at tbe time of their baptism, or as soon afterwards as an opportunity offered, ' were favoured through tbe apostles with " sorae spiritual gift." Hence tbe desire so ear nestly expressed by St. Paul, to be witb the Romans, in order to irapart to thera tbis their right and privilege". Tbe members of the Roman Church ° " I long to see you, that I may impart unto you some spiri tual gift, to the end that ye may be established." Rom. i, 11. Many other texts of Scripture may be added, in confirmation of this view, e. g. the same apostle, in Ephes. i. 13, 14, speaks generally of believers, that they " were sealed with that Holy Spirit of promise, which is the earnest of our inheritance." St. John's words are still more applicable : " hereby know we that we dwell in him, and he in us, because he hath given us of his Spirit." 1 John iv. 13. 1 98 Descent of the Hbly Ghost. bad been baptized, but not by an apostle ; and had as yet therefore no opportunity of receiving this seal of their baptisra-^this evidence, which it was thought good to grant to every member of the early Church, to satisfy hiin tbat be was indeed a portion of tbat edifice which was the temple of the Holy Ghost — tbat the descent of the Spirit, tbe natural ordinary and proper descent, was real, although insensible. So to tbe Israelites, tbe piUar of fire, and tbe fiame of tbe Shechinah, were long left visible even to all, until a belief in the divine presence amongst tbem had been not only proved as an object of faith, but faraiUarized into an habitual irapression. Various terms occur in the New Testament ex pressive of tbe offices and powers witb which tbe Holy Spirit tbus invested the raerabers of the pri raitive^ Church. We read of the word of wisdom, and the word of knowledge, of prophecy, discertUng of spirits, tbe utterance and the interpretation of languages, besides teaching, faith, and several other naraes which served the temporary purpose of mark ing a minute subdivision of ministerial qualifications, which it would ht impossible, as it is unnecessary, for us now to ascertain" To a certain extent, bowever, this enumeration of gifts is not unedifying to succeeding ages. In the number of persons gifted, and still more, perhaps, in the distribution of " 1 Cor, xii, 4—10, Descent of the Holy Ghost. 199 endowments, we are presented at least with a fact, which makes it morally irapossible that tbe inspired persons could either have imposed on themselves pr on otbers. When enthusiasm and fanaticism spread themselves, the syniptoms axe uniform. That mor bid sympathy, which is, as it were, the moral conductor of the delusion, requires that it should be so. One man's pretension to " discern spirits," may act on the heated iraagination of-another, until that other supposes that he too is endowed with tbe same faculty ; but this would never lead hira to fancy himself leamed in a foreign language. On considering tbe manner, too, in which the various terms are used, together with their previous and ordinary import, we are not a little guided in our view of the economy of the Christian society, during tbis interesting period of its incompleteness and infancy, and are enabled to distinguish the charac teristic endowments of those at least who held the highest rank. Some occasional use wiU accordingly be made of this source of information. The word of wisdom, for instance, may be fairly interpreted to mean, that insight into the true import of Christ's ministry vv^hich it pertained to the apostles more especiaUy to possess, and which, as was before observed, they were without, untU tbey received it of the Spirit. Such an interpretation is fair and reasonable; because St. Paul speaks of it as " tbe hidden wisdom," as if to intimate, that it comprised things either not before revealed, or not so revealed as 200 Descent of the Holy Ghost. to be at tbe time comprehended. One of these points, and the most remarkable, is called, by the same apostle, " tbe wisdom of God." " We preach Christ crucified, unto tbe Jews a sturabUng-block, but unto them which are caUed, Christ the power of God, and tbe wisdom of God?." Again, there can be little doubt tbat the word of knowledge was an expression used to denote sacred lore — ^know ledge of tbe scheme of past Revelations recorded in Scripture, tbeir reference to Christianity, and, per haps, tbeir connection and extension through fu turity, such as appears in the Revelations of St. John. This gift is accordingly described, both as unlocking the Scriptures of the prophets, wherein was " the mystery tbat was kept from ages, but was then made manifest," and also as that whereby the ancient prophets had foreseen tbis mystery. Without pursuing tbese remarks further, it may be sufficient to observe, that these two gifts of wisdom and of prophecy seem to have been pe cuUar to tbe apostles, and to have been distin guished, the former from teaching, the latter from prophecy, on tbis very account ; the apostles pos sessing so rauch clearer views of Christ's rainistry and of the future state of tbe Church, as to entitle tbeir endowraents to naraes distinct from teaching and prophecy. P 1 Cor. i. 23, 24. 1 Rom. xvi, 25, 26. Coloss. i. 26. Descent of the Holy Ghost. 201 The event wbich suggested these remarks was the descent of tbe Holy Ghost on tbe day of Pentecost, fiUing the apostles and tbeir company each with his proper gifts. This then being the first, not only of the five manifestations of the Spirit, but of aU its manifestations as guide and Comforter, the propriety of a visible and sym bohcal descent is easily perceived. It has been afready observed, tbat the office of apostle was twofold: ffrst, he had an appointment from Christ as his witness ; secondly, be was ordained by the Holy Ghost as minister of tbe word — expounder and preacher of the word of wisdom and the word of knowledge. In bis former capacity, he bore testi- ifllbny to facts, wbich be was qualified to do wbether he understood the import of those facts or not. In his second office, he became also an expounder of tbe true character of those facts. To quaUfy tbe apostles for tbe former, it was requisite, for their own satisfaction, that tbey should be in constant attendance on the Lord'' ; for that of others, that they should possess the power of working miracles. ' What good end was probably attained, by qualifying them to be witnesses of the facts before they were even moderately ac quainted with tbe doctrines depending on them? The question may be partly answered, by considering how important it was that the apostles should not begin to preach Christianity too soon. With this object in view, whenever our Lord was more than usually explicit with them or with others, his disclosure was accompanied with a charge " that they should tell no man." Matt. xvi. 20. xvii. 9. Mark viii. 30. ix. 9. 202 Descent of the Holy Ghost. Both these qualifications therefore they derived from our Lord himself At his command they left aU and foUowed him while on e^th, and before his departure received the power of performing signs and wonders. StiU, as the office of testifying was not to begin until the new dispensation was opened by the Spirit, tbey were commanded to wait for that event. So that tbe fii^t descent of the Holy Ghost, appears to have been made in its most il lustrious and striking form, first as a sign that that great period was come, and next for the pur pose of ordaining the apostles as the chief ministers of the Spirit. To this ordination our Lord may have aUuded, when he told them and others tbat they should be " baptized vdth the baptism wberewiljt he had been baptized';" and also when he spoke of a kingdom for the aposties, as bis Father had prepared one for bim ; and promised that tiiey should sit upon thrones judging tbe twelve tribes of Israel'. From this period the apostles and their feUow- labourers appear in their full course of duty. On a single address from Peter, three thousand were con verted, baptized, and gifted with the Holy Ghost, and thereby admitted to the constant instruction of the apostles, and tbe coraraunion ofthe Church''. These reUgious duties were performed in private ' Matt. XX. 23. Mark x. 39. ' Luke xxii. 29, 30. " Acts ii. 41. Descent of the Holy Ghost. 203 houses", and by them as Christians. Nevertheless, as Jewish citizens they continued to frequent tbe * K»t' c'Udt, as opposed to the temple service, of which mention is made immediately after. The etptession, taken in connection with the existing circum stances ofthe Church, may however imply more, as the following considerations shew. At this time the believers were more in number tban tbree thousand, and besides the regular increase which Was going on from day to day, about five thousand were shortly after added at once. Now it is impossible that any one private house (and those of the Christians must have been among the humblest) could have had an upper room, or any place within its precincts, capable of containing so large a number. And if any such house there were, still it is equally difiicult to understand how such a crowd of suspected pereons should have been allowed, in the irritable state of the Jewish Antichristian spirit, to as semble thus regularly for prayer and other Christian intercourse. Is it not likely, or rather certain, that the Church almost from the first must have been divided into several congregations ? If so, each must have had one at least to preside, and also some one place of worship. This stipposition furnishes a key to many expressions of the New Testament, some of which are of no very obvious import. St. Paul is said before his conversion to bave gone »«tiJ t»»5 afxotfj; haling men and women to pi-ison. Now, where was an inquisitor so likely to go in search of ChTistians, as into their ordinai'y places of meeting; and what would more naturally express these than the term t«us c'txtes, the bouses, i. e. tbe houses of prayer. St. Pa:.al sends to the Corinthians, the salu tation of Aquila and Priscilla and of " the Church which is in their house." May it not here too be meant that theirs was a house so used, that it served the purpose of a church, and was appropriated to a particular congregation ? Similar expressions, suggesting the same interpretatioB, will readily occur to the reader of the New Testament. But, now, if this be so, wbat shall be said of the assembly of the wliole Church, such as took place at Jerusalem when the famous decree was issued ? Supposing such an assembly to have 204 Descent of the Holy Ghost. temple. Thus Peter and John wben they wrought the celebrated miracle on the raan lame from his been held sub dio, (for no private room could have contained .them,) still it is almost absurd to suppose tbat their meeting would have been allowed to proceed without molestation ; and the more public we suppose such a meeting to be rendered from the numbers composing it, the greater the difficulty. One solution naturally presents itself, Why may not some one order in the Church have been called the Church kcit ^ojcvf, — have conducted the internal affairs of the whole society of which they were a part, — have represented it in its intercourse with other Churches ? Perhaps each presiding elder took the sense of his own congregation, and then the matter in question was decided by a meeting of these elders and the apostles. The apostles themselves might eitber have belonged to some one privileged congregation, such as the original one hundred and twenty, or have been divided. The latter is the more probable. Peter and John are said to have returned after their release from prison us tov; liUvs, and perhaps their preaching together may have arisen from this very circum stance, that they were attached to the same congregation. But again, if the assemblies of the primitive Christians were held in separate houses, what shall we say of the descent of the Holy Spirit on the return of Peter and John from the San hedrim ? Was it a partial favour, and not extended to the whole Church ? This follows necessarily, and is in itself not unlikely, A particular manifestation of God's Spirit, in which the endowments conferred were of a superior kind, was likely to be limited. Certainly the term tows iSi'ous, which is used to denote the congregation to which they returned, seems to imply a particular class of Christians. Those who consider it to have been formed out of the original one hundred and twenty, will see an obvious reason for the privilege in the circumstance, that they were fellow-labourers with the apostles and fellow-disciples of the Lord Jesus himself At all events, it would be nothing strange, that this sign should be given only to that congregation, to which those apostles were attached, whose ministry was the occasion of it. Descent of the Holy Ghost. 20.5 birth, did it as they were entering the beautiful gate at the hour of prayer''. This and other instances which wiU occur to the reader of tbe history of the apostles, clearly shew that, for a tirae, tbat is, as long as Jerusalera and the Jewish poUty remained, Jewish converts were expected to conforra to the cereraonials of tbe law; not indeed as Christians, but agreeably to tbe spirit of Christianity, which interfered not with existing institutions, further tban they were incompatible with tbe Gospel faith and practice. The Jew remained, as far as re garded conformity to the custoras and habits of his country and sect, stiU a Jew, even after his con version. The devout Gentile Ukewise, although received into tbe Christian society, was still not only permitted but enjoined to retain his customs as proselyte of tbe gate, and as such to abstain from things offered to idols, and from blood''. The converted idolater, on the otber hand, was left free to eat of raeat offered to idols, and to violate also the raere cereraonial parts of God's superseded dispensation. To have attached any spiritual grace to tbese ordinances would, indeed, in the Jewish convert have been a sin, and was forbidden ; to have sought a fuUer participation in the Jewish ceremonies and ritual communion, under an idea that they could render " the comers thereunto per fect*," would have been equally sinful in tbe con- y Acts iii. 1. Mcts XV. 20. a Heb. x. 1. 206 Second esatr aor dinary manifestation vert«i proselyte of the gate ; and tbe converted idolater also, although free to eat of meai offered to idols, and, in short, to enjoy from the first the fuU " Uberty" of the Gospel of Christ, smned, if there were so much of tbe taint of old superstition re maining on bis mind, as to make bim feel, tiiat while be eat and associated with the reveUers, an evil being was receiving his homage — ^or that while he was indulging in any act, indifferent and innocent in itself, it was too strongly associated in his mind with guilty meaning, to be indifierent and innocent to him*'. Regard to the feeUngs of weaker and raore scrupulous brethren mi^t in some instances render more restraint requisite, but these were tbe main clauses of the charter of dbristian Uberty, as it stood before the destraction of Jerusalera. Seoond extraordinary mamfestation of the Holy Ghost". The wonderful success of Peter's first address, and the effect of the mfracle which bad been wrought by the hands of John and hiniseif, soon aroused the attention of the Jewish mlers. The cripple wbose Umbs had been restored, chnging round the apostles, detained them as they were proceeding to join the public service, while the b 1 Cor. viii. 7. <= Acts iii. and iv. 1—33. of the Holy Ghost. 207 people as they arrived for the same purpose flocked round and formed a crowd. The high priest and chief police officer, hearing tbe disturbance, came out; and, assisted by the Sadducees, seized the persons who appeared to them to be the cause of all tbe turault and interruption of the pubUc worship. Peter was afready far advanced in a harangue, in which, as in the last, he was fulfilhng his office of witness, and inviting his countryraen to baptism in the name of Jesus, when Jobn and himself were arrested and imprisoned. Next morning they were brought before the 'rulers and elders, who had assembled at Jerusalem for examination of the culprits. The man whose lameness had been re moved was in attendance, and his evidence secured them frora the charge of iraposture. But tbe in fluence which their doctrine was gaining, was more alarming to the council, than any crime which could have been laid to their charge. Three thousand converts had been made by thefr first appeal ; by this second, notwithstanding the interraption, five thousand raore were added : and in the interval no day had passed without the Holy Spirit giving proof of divine power and care, in bringing those qualified into the Church. They were disraissed therefore from the council, with repeated warnings, that if they continued to preach " as witnesses of Jesus" they did it at their peril. It was on their return to their party, and while all were engaged in prayer and thanksgiving, that the symbol of the 208 Second extraordinary manifestation Spfrit's coramunication was recognized, and his second descent was manifested''. An extraordinary display on this occasion was obviously in unison with the rest of that divine Person's ministry. Tbus it feU on the first devout Gentile converts. Thus it fell also (as we have endeavoured to prove) at Antioch in Pisidia, on the ffrst idolaters who etnbraced Christianity. The ffrst fraits of the Jewish conversion would naturaUy seera to require a corresponding blessing and honouring ofthe Spirit. Of those on whom this descent of the Comforter (too nagax^rjTou) produced the most striking effects, Bamabas was so conspicuous as to derive his farai liar narae from tbe circumstance, (vio; Tragaxx^a-sa)?,) and to deserve especial notice from the brief his torian of the event ^ Beyond the gifts bestowed on tbe rest, perhaps, he then received the fuU endow ments of an apostle, and was thenceforth qualifiedfor tbe occasion when he was caUed on to act as one, in conjunction with St. Paul. That his quahfications as a witness had been afready ascertained, was suggested as probable in the remarks on Matthias's election. In the present instance, the apphcation of tbat singu lar title to bim, ' ' the son of consolation" — the record too of certain Uttle circumstances in his history, such as that he was a Levite — of a Cyprian family^ — all seem to denote, that something had at this time '' Actsiv. 31. 'Actsiv. 36. The case of Ananias and Sapphira. 209 occurred, and was alluded to respecting him, which was important in the history of the Church — some thing which distinguished him from the nuraber of those, who no less than be, sold their possessions, and laid the money at the apostles' feet. The interpretation subjoii^d to the word Barnabas ex plains this, and serves perhaps to point out, what is not elsewhere alluded to, the time and occasion of his inspiration and appointment as an apostle. The case of Ananias and Sapphira^. Among those who, hke Barnabas, converted their possessions into raoney, and placed tbe amount at the disposal of the apostles, appeared Ananias and bis wife Sapphira. They, however, are said to " have kept back part of the price," and thereby to have " lied to the Holy Ghost." For which crime tbe Spirit of God, as if to vindicate his authority as ruler in the new .dispensation, smote them pubUcly and separately with death. As their case involves two interesting questions, in the solution of which aU are not agreed, it may be as weU to pause, and to consider the incident with reference to both of tbese inquiries. The one is, the community of goods among the primitive Christians, tbe other, the sin against the Holy Ghost. As the two subjects are by this event ' Acts V. P 210 The case of Ananias and Sapphira. accidentaUy thrown together, so by their concur rence they seem to illustrate and explain each other. Many commentators and ecclesiastical writers have represented tbis comraunity of goods, as im plying a hteral resignation of aU private and indi vidual property, — each surrendering bis aU to tbe pubUc, and aU receiving from tbe common stock what was requisite for their support. Wbat end would bave been gained by this, it is not easy to understand ; and to raeet the question concerning its inutihty, and also its impracticabiUty, it has been conjectured, tbat tbe custom was from certain pecuUar circurastances rendered necessary in the Church of Jerusalera, but did not extend to otber Churches. But that such was not tbe custora, even of the Cburch at Jerusalera, raay be proved frora this very instance. For Peter expressly reminds Ananias, tbat be had no temptation to commit this crime of falsehood, inasmuch as he was not caUed on, merely as a raember of tbe Cliristian society, to sell his property, or, if sold, to bestow any of it on the Church. " While it remained, was it not thine own ? and after it was sold, was it not in thine own power?" The XXXVIIIth Article of the Church of England, in opposition to the raischievous tenets of tbe early anabaptists, merely disavows tbe obUga tion of Christians as such, to surrender thefr pro perty to tbe Church, without adopting (as was indeed uncalled for) any explanation of the primi- The case of Ananias and Sapphira. 211 tive custom. The difficulty, however, under which tbe ordinary view of it laboured, bas not escaped notice. Mosheim accordingly attempts to prove, that St. Luke's account impUes a community of use, and not of possession, — that the supply of what was needed by tbe societ/" and by individuals, was ac knowledged by all as a bounden duty, and unani mously compUed with^. But here, again, the case of Ananias, of Barnabas, and of otbers similarly, cir cumstanced proves, tbat from whatever motive tbey contributed, they resigned not a part, but all of their property. Else, wherein tbe offence of Ananias ? Tbe foUowing suggestion then may perhaps be raore satisfactory. 'Nothing is raore certain tban that the ministers of tbe word, including tbe apostles, were raaintained out of this pubhc purse. If sorae, like St. Paul, relieved it by daily labour, his own words prove that they were not required to do so. And why were they thus maintained ? Because, no doubt, they had in strict conformity with our Lord's words forsaken lands, houses, and all tbeir goods for his sake, for his service. " Sell aU tbat thou hast, and foUow me'"," raay perhaps aptly describe tbe first qualification of one wbo was to have, for the most part, no certain abode, and whose time and atten tion were necessarily to be withdrawn from the « Dissertationes ad Hist. Eccles. pert. vol. ii. p. 14. " Matt. xix. 21. Mark X, 21. Luke xviii. 22, p2 212 T^e case of Ananias and Sapphira. pursuits of gain, and even from tbe ordinary cares for the mortow. From the character, then, in wbich the original preachers of Christianity present them selves to our notice, frdm the promise of our Lord to those " who should forsake lands, houses, &c. for his sake and the Gospef ," and from the fact, that they aU did receive support from the pubUe fund — ^frora these circurastances taken together, does it not seem Ukely, that a resignation of aU individual and separate property into the apostles' hands, was the first step taken by those wbo de- toted themselves to the ministry? — the pledge, that they having now forsaken all, were ready to foUow the standard of the Cross ? On tbis pledge, perhaps then, tbey were put into office by tbe apostles, thefr other quahfications having been at tbe same time ascertained by the power of disceridtig spfrits''. ' Luke xviii. 29, 30. ''There is a passage in Eusebius's history, (lib. iii. c. 137.) which certainly stems to confinn Ihis suggestion. Adverting to the fact, that in the first days of Christianity, a great portion of the converts became themselves preachers and ministers of the word, he expressly mentions, as a preparatory step, the resigna tion of their property for the relief of the poor, t«» truri^w nPOTEPON uvi7rXif»vv w«j««e>ituri», inJswi tipoiiTes rai curiiti- EHEITA AE iieiimipieii rtti^htftiiDi 'i^yn iirtrihaui tuxyylMrrSy. Again in discussing the question, whether the Therapeutse were Christians, (lib. ii. c. 17.) he argues in favour of their being so, from the existence of such a custom amongst them, and appeal ing to this very passage of the Acts, asserts that it was practised in one period of the Church. That the custom should require this kind of notice by the historiaft, at the close of the third The case of Ananias and Sapphira. 213 One remark there is, certainly, in St. Luke's account, which may be considered by some to stand in the way of this suggestion. He states, that oi the second manifestation of the Holy Ghost, " al, wbo had lands and houses sold them, and brought in the amount." But, when we remember the pro phetic exclamation of tbe Psalmist, " The Lord spake, and great was the company ofthe preachers'," and consider how many were required now for the dispersion of the faith, this in a society of poor men cannot imply a very disproportionate number. Add to this, that the statement of their bringing in tbeir rhoney to the apostles, by no means impUes that it was in aU instances accepted. In the general ex citement, produced by two rapidly successive mani festations of the Holy Ghost and of its gifts, aU may have rushed eagerly to claim employment in a service so evidently divine, and so gloriously sanc tioned by God. AU wbo had property would natu raUy have thrown it up, as a pledge that they were ready to be employed, leaving the apostles and the Holy Spirit who guided thera to decide whether the offer of themselves would be accepted. So considering tbe matter, the erime of Ananias and Sapphira assumes a very pecuhar character. century, proves however, that it was soon abandoned. The temptation to employ spiritual talents for worldly advantage, might have created an expediency and need for the rule, which would only last during the inspired age, ' Psalm Ixviii. 1 1 • 214 The case of Ananias and Sapphira. They sought to obtain the office of ministry, and the spiritual gifts and privileges attached to it, under a false pretence. The pledge wbich they gave, in offering, as their all, only a portion of tbeir property, to the apostles, — the agents of God the Holy Ghost, — was a bold test, apphed to the omniscience of God in his present governraent of the Church, a practical Ue unto tbe God of truth. Theirs was not a negative but a positive offence against the Holy Spirit ; not, hke other sins, an act of disobedience, but one of aggression ; and as such perhaps falUng under that denoraination, of which Christ had said, that tbey should not be forgiven, " neither in this world, neither in tbe world to come""." Thefr awful sentence might have been twofold in its effects, tbe one teraporal, tbe otber etemal ; tbe one for the crirae of treason, in attempting to cor rapt the pure constitution of the Cburch, the other for tbe sin of blasphemy against the omniscient God. That besides tbis consecration of the whole of tbe ministers' property to the service of tbe Church, frequent and large contributions were made by others cannot be doubted. Mosheim's interpreta tion, therefore, as apphcable to the great body of Christians, is undoubtedly trae, that vrith them it was a community oiuse, not oi possession. Besides the rainisters, tbe poor were supplied from this " Matt, xii, 31, 32, Mark iii, 28, 29. Luke xii, 10. The ease of Ananias and Sapphira. 215 fund; and especial raention is raade of "the widows," if indeed these were not rather an order of ministers than part of tbe poor. More properly, perhaps, they belonged to both classes. As deacon esses were early required in the Church, it seems raost natural, that tbose feraales wbo, from thefr poverty and widowhood, were deriving support from the Church, should be employed in tbis capacity, according to the apostle's precept, " if any work not neither should he eat"." The narae of dea conesses raight not have been given thera for sorae tirae after they exercised tbe duties belonging to that order, for they are called widows before the terra deacon even appears in tbe Acts. Wherein their service consisted, raay be sufficiently under stood frora tbe office of deacons, which wiU be next considered. It raay be enough to observe, that tbeir order was requisite in tbe first promulgation of Christianity ; because the frequent intercourse between raale catechists and tbe young female cate chumens raight have brougbt a scandal on the Church. In the East, where tbe strict separation between raale and female society was then as now proverbial, tbis measure was quite indispens able. " 2 Thess. iii. 10. 216 Appointment of the seven deacons. Appointment of the seven deacons". The terrible display of the Holy Spirit's power, in the death of Ananias and Sapphfra, was suc ceeded by many iUustrious mfracles,, performed through tbe apostle Peter. In frequency, and per haps in tbeir extraordinary cbaracter, tbey equaUed our Lord's; agreeably to bis promise, "He tbat beheveth on me, the works tbat I do shall he do also, and greater works than these shall he do""." On the line of difference between them, some re marks have been already made and a reason sug gested, why, during tbis first period of the Holy Spirit's dispensation, tbis apostle's ministry was so prominent. Tbis latter point, as one of some im portance, wiU be again adverted to. The effect of aU this was what raight be expected. The number of converts daily increased, and the spirit of persecution was exasperated. The apo stles were again imprisoned, scourged, and threatened with heavier vengeance. But God released them by his angels ; and, in proportion to their need, his spirit emboldened and guided tbem, juid " his strength was made perfect in weakness." But the storm was now only gathering. , Meanwhile within the Church itself were dis played sorae shght symptoms of discontent, which " Acts vi. 3. P John xiv. 12. Appointment of the seven deaco^. 217 deserve to be noticed particularly, on account of the raeasure to which they gave rise. The com plaint is caUed " a murmuring of the Grecians (or foreign Jews) against the Hebrews, (or native Jews,) because their widows were neglected in the daily ministration." Wbo these widows probably were has already been suggested ; and if the suggestion, tbat they were deaconesses, be admitted, the grounds pf the complaint may be readUy surmised. As the greater share of duty would at tbis time devolve on the Hebrew widows or deaconesses, they might have been paid more UberaUy, as their services seemed to require, and hence the discontent. This, it is true, supposes that the order of dea cons and deaconesses afready existed, and may seem at first to contradict the statement of St. Luke, that in consequence of this mujTnuring dea cons were appointed. It does not bowever reaUy contradict it; for evidently some dispensers there must have been, and if so, either the apostles must have officiated as deacons, or special deacons there must have been, by whatever name they went. Tbat the apostles did not officiate, is plain from the tenour of the narrative, which indicates tbat the appeal was made to them, and that they excused themselves from presiding personaUy at the " min istration," (as was probably desired by the discon tented party,) aUeging that it was incompatible with their proper duties. "It is not reason that we should leave the word of God, and serve tables." 2 1 8 Appointment of the seven deacons. This very assertion, then, is proof certain|tbat they did not officiate. Again, on reading over tbe names of the seven deacons, we find them aU of tbe Grecian or HeUenistic party. Stephen, PhiUp, Prochorus, Nicanor, Timon, Parmenas, and Nicolas, the last of whora is expressly described as a proselyte of Antioch''. Now tbis surely would have pro duced a murmuring of the Hebrews against tbe Grecians, unless tbey had afready some in office interested in looking after their rights. With tbese presumptions in favour of a previous appointment of deacons, it would seem then, tbat these seven were added to tbe forraer number because ofthe complaint. AU tbat is thus far intimated of thefr office is, tbat tbey were employed in the daily distribution of the alms and the stipends due from the pubUc fund. Whether, even at the first, their duties were Umited to tbis department of service ", may be reasonably doubted. Of tbis portion of thefr duties we are now informed, obviously, because to the unsatisfactory mode in wbich tbis had been hitherto perforraed it was ovring, tbat tbe new appointraent took place, and tbat tbe subject was noticed at all. It is, however, by no raeans improbable, that the young men who carried out the dead bodies of Ananias and Sapphira, and who are described as " ready" in attendance, were of the same order ; in other words, deacons by office, if not by name. *• 1 Acts vi. 5. ¦¦ AiMtmu. Appointment of the seven deacons. 219 What may serve to conffrra this view of it is, tbe opposition between wbat would seera to bave been tbeir original title, and another order in tbe Cburch, They are caUed " juniors" and " young men," (veceregoi and veavl(rxoi,) terms SO Strongly opposed to presbyters or elders, as to incUne one at the ffrst glance to consider them as expressive of the two orders of tbe ministry, the seniors and the juniors, tbe 7rgso-/3uTlgoi Siaxovoi and tbe vecorsgoi itoLxovor, the two orders, in short, which at length received the fixed and perpetual titles of presbyters and deacons'. Accordingly, there is no just ground for supposing, that when the same term deacon occurs in the Epistles of St. Paul, a different order of men is intended* ; ffrst, because an office may preserve its original name long after the duties originaUy at tached to it have been changed ; and, secondly, because whatever duties may have been added ' It may be objected, indeed, that although the terms might have been different at different periods, yet the writer would have adopted one only, because that one would now have been expressive of the class as it existed at all times. But the case is not necessarily so. There might have been some distinction coincident with the change of naraes, which occasioned him to adopt the one to a certain period of his history, and the other subsequently. So he has applied the name of Saul to the great Gentile apostle in the early part of the Acts, and afterwards as invariably that of Paul, although no one can doubt the identity of the person. ' 1 Tim. iii. 8, 12, 13. 220 Appointment of the seven deacons. to the office of deacons, it is certain that the duty of attending to the poor was for several centuries at tached to it. Even after the deacons ceased to hold the office of treasurers, and the Bishops began to re ceive the revenues of their respective sees, the distribution of that portion which was aUotted to charity stUl passed through tbe bands of the dea cons. Hence in a stUl later period, the title of cardinal deacon ; and hence, too, the appropriation of the the term diaconies to those Churches wherein alms used to be coUected and distributed to the poor". Not that it is possible to point out, with any thing Uke precision, tbe course of duty which belonged to the primitive deacons. That it corre sponded entfrely witb that of our present order of deacons is very unUkely, whatever analogy be aUowed from their relative situation in the Church. As the Church during the greater part of the ffrst century was a shifting and progressive institution, tbeir duties probably underwent continual change and modification. If we were to be guided, for instance, by tbe office in which we find the " young men" (veav/o-xoi) engaged when the dead bodies of Ananias and Sapphira were removed, we should say " Lud. Anton. Muratori Antiquitates Italica medii eevi, tom. iii. p. 571. Also Du Cange, in Glossar. Latin, medii cevi. ad v. Diaconia, Diaconites, Diaconus. Mosheniii Comm. De Reb. Christ, ante Const, p. 121. Appointment of the seven deacons. 22 1 that they performed tbe business, which, in tbe present day, would devolve on tbe inferior at tendants of our churches. If, again, we were to judge of their cbaracter from tbe dccasion on whicb we find tbeUi acting as stewards of the Church fund, a higher station would be doubtless assigned to them, but stiU, one not raore nearly connected with the rainistry of tbe word, nor approaching more to the sphere of duty which belongs to our deacons. On the other hand, the instances of Stepheii and PhiUp prove, that the title was appUed to those who were engaged in tbe higher depart ments of the ministry, although not in the highest". After aU, it is most Ukely tbat tbe word deacoii was OriginaUy appUed, as its etyikiology suggests, td ali tbe ministers ofthe Gospel establishment''. But the Apostles having from tbe first a specific title, it more properly denoted any minister inferior to them, — any, however employed in the service of the Cburch. Between tbese, also, there sodn obtained a distinction. If we suppose, tben, that the seniors, or superior class, were distinguished by tbe obvious title df elder deacons, (wgEo-|3oTE|0( haxovoi,) " Acts vi. 8. viii. 5. y Tijus the apostles on this very occasion are represented as speaking of their own office under the title of a deaconship, iftitf 3e ry *joo"Swjgj *«/ Tt) AIAKONIAf rev Aoytv Tt^enuc^rl^ieepiv. So also St. Paul writes to the Corinthians, 1 Ep. xii. 4, 5. Au«i£Ers(; 9s ^x^iffcctruv iM, ro ai dirt irtivftee k»i 3i»i^i ». r. X. ftd^rvgx rm iva- v/tat ftet^ru^ovfKMvs tvrct,, n-A«'^E<;, rr»«-iui etiritv, yinrlici rv> tifUi «,, r. X. wf x.»rarrinfiit hri T?f au, revrai. X^*i rainni;. 4." mu,) 'irrttrcif iit . 4. Ka< l|eAE|«>ra — «v$ irrvirav tva^ut ray iinrri^iay. S. Tl^env^dfCifci . 5. II^tFtv^tiftiyoi. 6. ''eS«x«v KXifcvf KvrSy ». r. 6. 'E^riitay uiroif ris Xf'C^- /.. mil ruyxccrpl'n(plc6» furi rat e'v^sks. In the proceedings of the two assemblies the only material difference is in the last point. In Matthias's case no laying on of hands is mentioned, because the Holy Ghost not having then been given, (or we should perhaps rather say, tbe gift of confer ring the Holy Ghost,) this sign, whereby it was afterwards com municated, would have been a mere empty form. What in other ordinations ivas effected by the laying on of the apostles' hands, in Matthias's was effected by the descent of the Spirit on the day of Pentecost ; with a view to which it is likely that his election was made to take place before that event. Again, in the election of deacons only a single office was conferred, and that they held frohi God the Holy Ghost, or his agents, who as such laid their bands on them. But in the election of Mattliias, his first ap pointment preceded the dispensation of the Spirit. Like the other apostles, he was ordained a witness by the Lord himself, and his ordination by the Spirit was a subsequent procedure. Thus, St. Paul appears first to have received his revelation and apostleship, his appointtnent as witness from the Lord Jesus Christ at Jerusalem, and tben, after a considerable interval, the imposition of hands, as a servant of the Church and a aunister of the Spirit. Effects of Stephen's Martyrdom. 225 meeting was a full one, or, what is certainly more in accordance with the general analogy of the original language, it may be used for " tbe great body of the disciples," by the sarae obvious figure of speech whicb we employ when we call the representatives ofthe commonalty of England " the Commons." Effects of Stephen's Martyrdom^. It was, obviously, an iraportant feature in tbe divine scheme, that the sceptre should depart from Judab soon after the coming of tbe Messiah. Had the Jews continued to possess the right of inflicting capital punishment, an effectual check must im mediately have been given to the progress of the Gospel, Even as it was, tbe disciples bad to dread every thing which calumny, intrigue, and tumul tuary violence, could effect. Imprisonment, stripes, and menaces, bad proved of no avail. Tbe po pulace thirsted for blood, and Stephen was the first victim. His death was preparatory to the preaching of the Gospel beyond Jerusalem and Judaea. In exact conformity with tbe words of tbe Son of God to his apostles, " Ye shaU be witnesses unto rae, both in Jerusalera, and in all Judaea, and in Samaria/ and to the uttermost part of the earth'," bis •> Acts vii. ° Acts i. 8, VOL. I. Q 226 Effects of Stephen's Martyrdom. Holy Spirit directed the course of that Ught which he was dispensing. To escape further acts of out rage, all the disciples once more forsook Jerasalem and fled. But the dispersion was not as on the day of the crucifixion. They were no longer comfortless, no longer dispirited, no longer at a loss what to do, or what to expect. As in tbe former dispersion, the apostles, and it raay be sorae few besides, reraained in Jemsalem, whilst the Holy Spirit guided the flight of the others through " aU Judaea and Samaria ''." Philip, — he whose name appears second in the list of the seven deacons, — no less than Stephen, justified the wisdom of bis appointraent. Samaria being al ready prepared for the Gospel, gladly heard the word from him. Here the far-famed Simon, who was endeavouring, as it would seem, to impose on his countrymen under the pretended character of the Messiah, if not converted, was defeated in his scheme of imposture". PhiUp, however, could only preach and baptize. The privilege of receiv ing some extraordinary gift of the Spirit, as a pledge to the young and inexperienced Cburch, that tbat unseen Spirit bad indeed taken up its abode witb them and within them, could only be con ferred by an apostle. PhUip's baptism, no doubt, conveyed all the beneficial effects of Christian bap tism ; and the Holy Ghost was as reaUy and fully coramunicated thereby, as if it had been performed '' Acts viii. ]. ' Acts viii. 9. Effects of Stephen's Martyrdom. 227 by an apostle. The descent and operation of the Holy Ghost was then, as now, unseen, unfelt, — the object of faith only. But while tbis doctrine was yet strange and new, some assurance of it was requisite, in order to induce each believer to be satisfied that the Comforter was present to him, — that these effects, though impalpable, were real. For the purpose of granting this sign of assurance then to the Saraaritan converts, Peter ahd John were sent to them from Jerusalem. The forra, as has been afready noticed, consisted in the laying on of hands, and in prayer, and must have cor responded to our present ceremony of Confirmation, which, doubtless, arose out of it. As the apostles were gradually removed from the earth, tbose on whom their perpetual rainistry devolved, might have continued tbis temporary custom, from a view of its expediency for other purposes beyond its original and specific one ; and thus Confirmation may have rightly and reasonably retained a place among the ceremonies of the Church for ever, although the sign of Confirmation, to which it owes its name, has been long withdrawn. The fact, that the apostles only could irapart the extraordinary gifts of the Holy Spirit, raay serve to guide us in an inquiry, wbich has never perhaps been satisfactorily concluded, as to, the precise time wben tbose gifts ceased. For, if tbe above assertion be trae, they must of course have ceased with the generation which was contemporary q2 228 Effects of Stephen's Martyrdom. with the last of the apostles. If St. John then con tinued to the close of his Ufe to exercise his aposto lical power of imparting tbe Holy Ghost, his life being prolonged to tbe end of the first century, some workers of miracles may bave been found as late as the middle of the second century, but we cannot account (on scriptural grounds) for the ex istence of any beyond tbat period. Tbat the Holy Ghost may after this have inter posed, and empowered its agents to perform mira cles, cannot certainly be denied, any more tban we can now pretend to affirm, that the same power wUl never again be granted. It would seem too, from the writings of Justin Martyr, TertulUan, and Cy prian, tbat they were famiUar with the exercise of sucb a power in tbe Church. Gregory, Bishop of Neocsesaraea, who Uved as late as the thfrd century, received the title of Thaumaturgus from his mfracles or pretended miracles. And, if we may credit Theodoret and Sozomen, there were instances of weU-attested mfracles later tban bis. The earUest positive testiraony to their cessation, perhaps, is to be found in the writings of Chrysostora. In his Sermons, for instance, on the Resurrection, and in that on the Pentecost ; in both of whicb he at tempts to reraove any scruples wbich the fact might have occasioned, by suggesting the reason why mi raculous power should bave been withdrawn from the Church ^ . ' Chrysost. Opera, (ed. Frontonis Ducaei Rani 1621.) vol. v. pp. 521,553. Effects of Stephen's Martyrdom. 229 Tlus is a species of evidence whicb outweighs any more dfrect assertion to the contrary. When we read accordingly in Augustin, suad other writers, that at the very period when Chrysostom was thus writing and preaching, miracles were commonly wi-ougbt at the tombs of the saints, such testi mony only tends to make us look back with sus picion and distrast on tbe accomits given of tbose of an earlier date, and to attribute a similar inac curacy and rash creduUty to Ruffinus, Theodoret, Sozomen, and others, which is proved agauist Augustin and raany of his contemporaries. Indeed, even during the latter part of the aposto hcal era, instances cannot be supposed to have been common, wben we consider tbe trae cbaracter Euid probable intent for wbich such a power was lodged for a time witb tbe Church, and put to ourselves the questions, Why was such extraordinary assist ance granted for a season, and tben withdrawn, not at once, but graduaUjr? Why were the aposties themselves, wbo certainly possessed the extraor dinary gifts of tbe Spfrit in a degree beyond that wbich tbey could impart to others, restrained in the exercise of tbem, so as to employ tbem, not at thefr own discretion, but as tbe Spirit raoved tbem ? PhiUp's labours in Samaria having been superseded by the arrival ofthe two apostles, he was sent by the Holy Spirit to meet an Ethiopian eunuch in his return from Jerusalem to his home, and to baptize him ^. Who this person was, and whether he was 'Acts viii. 26. 230 Conversion of Saul. afterwards employed amongst his own people by the blessed Spirit, and for that purpose converted and baptized thus early by an especial mission, are points left untouched. It raay be observed, how ever, that he was by religion a Jew, a proselyte of righteousness, and not merely a proselyte of the gate; for to this latter description of persons the Church was not yet thrown open. That he was so, appears both from his being found by PhiUp busied with a passage in the Jewish Scriptures?, and also from the very remarkable circurastances which after wards attended the conversion and baptism of Cor nelius''. Conversion of Saul'. The holy Comforter rendered the murder of Stephen subservient in another way to the further ance of his great work. He wbo out of tbe stones of Jerusalem could have raised up chUdren unto Abraham, chose to form the noblest champion of his cause on earth out of its earhest and bitterest persecutor''. The most conspicuous in the scene ' Acts viii. 28. ¦¦ Acts X. ' Acts ix. '' He states, in his Epistle to the Galatians, that " God sepa rated him from his mother's womb, and called him by his grace;" on whicb, and other the like expressions, has been founded the doctrine that the salvation of every individual is a Conversion of Saul. 231 of lawless violence to which we have been alluding, was Saul of Tarsus. Beyond aU the rest be bad distinguished bimself in searching out, and finding grounds for imprisonment against, those Cbristians who still lurked in Jerusalem. Having exhausted his misguided zeal there, he departed for Damascus with a sort of inquisitorial coraraission from the high priest. It was on his joumey thither', that his, miraculous conversion took place™. Although the details of that signal event must be familiar to all, and although the subject has been often thoroughly and ably discussed, stUl the foUowing notices raay to many be not unacceptable. The point which is perhaps the most Ukely to be overlooked is, tbat tbis first revelation was totaUy distinct in its object from that which Saul afterwards received at Jerusalem". AU intended by tbe first was, to convert bira to Christianity ; by the second be was appointed an apostle. That he immediately began to propagate the faith whicb he once de stroyed, is no proof to the contrary. For this was ,%^*'^-' matter of arbitrary election. But to what was St. Paul " sepa- ' rated" and " called?" Clearly not to eternal life, but to a par ticular station of duty, which he filled with the most anxious sense of extraordinary responsibility, lest, as he tells us, " when he had preached to others, he should himself be a cast away." (I Cor. ix. 27.) ' Acts ix. 3. "¦ A. D. 35. " A. D, 44. or according to some 38. See the reasons fot assigning the former dale in note, page 729. 232 Conversion of Saul. the privilege ,if not the duty, of all Christians ; as it had been before supposed to be of aU Jews. Besides, although not yet appointed a witness, he was at his baptism " fiUed with tbe Holy Ghost," and thereby ordained a minister of the Spirit. Certain it is, that although, after his conversion, he began forthwith to preach, and preached first at Damascus, tben, perhaps, in Arabia", and then again at Damascus, even so as to endanger bis Ufe : yet on his going ultimately to Jerasalem, he needed the introduction and assurance of Bamabas, to re move from the apostles thefr suspicion of him. Possessing as they did the gift of discerning spirits, this could hardly have happened if St. Paul were tben an apostle. This wUl be more apparent from a sUght con sideration of the narrative of his conversion. He was strack blind by tbe glorious Ught which shone round about hira, and he heard and answered a divine voice, but it does not appear that he then saw the Lord. Tbe contrary indeed is iniplied. Now Ius appointment to the apostleship is described by bim, as taking place in a visible interview with tbe Lord, — witb God manifest in tbe flesh, in the " Although from the narrative of the Acts taken alone, it would appear tbat he went immediately from Damascus to Jerusalem, yet by comparing the passage with his own account in the Galatians, it is certain that he went first into Arabia, returned to Damascus, then, after an interval of three years, proceeded to Jerusalem, See Acts ix. compared with Gala tians i. Conversion bf Saul: 233 person of Jesus Christ. Again, Ananias was sent to him, for what purpose ? Not, surely, tp appoint bim an apostle : Ananias was not himself an apostle, and could not therefore, as we suppose, confej- any extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, much less the greatest of those gifts. He was sent to restore his sight, and to baptize him. This is, clearly, aU that Ananias was commissioned to do, and all he is represented as doing. He laid his bands on Saul, and Saul recovered his sight. He baptized bim, and tbe Holy Ghost descended on hira. That the descent was marked by tbe pecuhar symbol of tbe Comforter, and consequently con ferred on hira gifts of the highest order, has been before pointed out, as an inference fairly to be drawn frora the sacred records of his ministry. Ananias's declaration alone may be taken as strong presump tion of the fact. " Tbe Lord bath sent me that thou mayest receive thy sight," and " be filled unth the Holy Ghost." It is in itself, we say, a strong pre sumption of the fact, because (independently of the consideration that he did possess extraordinary gifts) the latter expression does not ever seem to have been extended to a coramunication of the Spirit by the imposition of hands. St. Luke, to whose writings it is pecuUar, uses it from tbe ffrst only on those occasions when the immediate agency of God is bis subject, e. g. tbe appointment of John the Baptist, and tbe baptism and manifestation ofChrist. Observing tbis same phrase in his account also of 234 Conversion of Saul. the descent of the Holy Ghost on the day of Pentecost, his sparing use of it subsequently, and the very remarkable occasions on which it does occur, the conclusion is inevitable. CHAP. III. PREACHING TO JEWS AND DEVOUT GENTILES. From A. D. 41—45. Conversion of Cornelius "- Hitherto the messengers of Christ and of the Holy Spirit had been sent only to the Jews, to " the lost sheep of the house of Israel ''," or to those to whom they had communicated their privileges and hopes. Hitherto all who had been baptized were, either by bfrth or proselytisra, members of that' society which God had set apart as "his own," had elected, sanctified, taught, and governed. Meanwhile the divine Dispenser was preparing, by a bold and unexpected innovation, to extend his sphere of operation. Among the unsanctified and unclean, of tbose who belonged not to the Mosaic covenant, and held no interest in its promises, a portion was now to be invited on equal terms into the kingdom of the Messiah. Saul had been converted, and was engaged in a course of duty which might train him for stiU ° Acts X. '' Matt. X. 6, xv. 24. 236 Conversion of Cornelius. hardier efforts in bis peculiar and more important commission. By his removal from the persecuting faction at Jerasalem too,' " the Churches throughout all Judaea and Galilee and Samaria"" were left unmolested. AU was ripe, then, for the counsel of God to take effect. In one sense tbis change was not unexpected. It had been too often and too plainly intiraated by our Lord, for his apostles, at least, to have misunder stood him. In those remarkable parables especiaUy, of the great supper, and of tbe labourers in tbe vineyard'', the very circumstance of the gradual admission of tbe Gentiles is unfolded. Nevertheless, they were far frora comprehending the exact import of these hints and declarations, and seem in this instance, as on the subject of Christ's death, to have received them in humble faith, expecting still that some unforeseen method would be devised, to reconcile the truth df their Master's assertions with tbeir own preconceived views. Few points in the general cbaracter of the apostles is raore worthy of attention than this uncertainty, tbis vague surmise, vrith which they received so raany iraportant objects of faith. It is thoroughly in keeping, not as a feature of Judaism merely, but of human nature ; and explains to us why our Lord so often repeated his admonition to tbem to believe. Belief under such circumstances formed their chief trial during " Acts ix. 31. ^ Luke xiv. 16. Matt. xx. 1. Conversion of Cornelius. 237 his abode on earth. It was the trial under which Judas sank, Peter wavered, and all forsook him and fled. IU fares it with the Christian, wben he at tempts to force tbe doctrine of his Master into an unnatural accordance with prejudices however sanc tified. So it was then, that nothing less tban an express and particular revelation, corroborated by a train of circumstances equaUy extraordinary, was found reqmsite to induce the apostle chosen for tbis new ministry to engage in an enterprise so strange and revolting to tbe whole Church. Doubtless, be (and so also the Jews) conceived that God regarded with some difference of favour tbose " devout Gentiles" who, having forsaken idolatry, worshipped him in spfrit and in trath ; but tbat this favour should be so far extended, as to make them feUow-befrs with the Israelites of the promises of tbe Messiah's reign, promises which they had ever considered as peculiar and unaUenable, this was as yet quite incomprehen sible. Up to this period in the history of the infant Cburch, we raay observe that Peter occupies the chief, almost tbe wbole attention of tbe sacred historian. Whatever of an extraordinary nature is to be done, whatever implies a more immediate intercourse with tbe Holy Spirit, is committed td Peter, either alone, or as the principal agent. It is he who first rouses the drooping brethren to ex ertion. It is he whose inspired preaching on tbe 238 Conversion of Cornelius. day of Pentecost works conviction in tlu'ee thousand souls. It is he who passes the sentence of the Holy Ghost on Ananias and Sapphira: it is he whose prayer is made effectual for the lame, the palsied, and the dead — whose shadow is deemed holy, and whose very garments convey virtue in their touch. It is Peter who is prominent, and ffrst in every gift and endowment of the Spirit, and in none more than in tiiat " boldness" or " freedom of speech" (7ra^(5»i(r(a) before the people of the Sanhedrim, which was an especial and high characteristic of an apostle*. One cannot help perceiving in all this, and in the attention wluch tbe sacred writer has directed to il, that some object must have been intended by the Holy Spirit in tbus selecting for a time one apostle for repeated communications, instructions, and pdwers, and also in leaving a record of tins pre ference, whUst the contemporary labours of the others are scarcely noticed. Peter was evidently going through a course of discipUne and preparation for his pecuhar and trying office. It was — or we should rather say it might have been — necessary thus to accustom him to the frequent instructions of the Spirit, in order that he might be so famiUar with the heavenly vision, as to entertain no momen tary doubt as to its reality, however much tlie import of its message should astonish and confound him. " Rise and go with them, nothing doubting, ' See Acts i. 15. ii. 14. v. 15, 16, 29, ix. 34, 36. iv. 13. Conversion' of CorneUus. 239 because / have sent thee," I the voice with which thou art familiar. For tbe better assurance of the Church, tbat the apostle had not been deluded, it might have been requisite that they should be ac customed to regard him as the chief agent of the Spirit, and the great worker of miracles. With their strong disposition to revolt against the unex- peoted tum whicb tbe new dispensation was taking, it might have been necessary that he who was the agent in so unpopular a work, should, by this course of eminent ministry, and especially by acting as the mainspring in the regulation of such affairs, as were left to their uninspired decision, acquire an autho rity and weight of official character, which might of itself repress or soften down the spirit of murmuring. That all this might have been requisite, the event proves. For although it was Peter who converted the first Gentile convert ; although he pleaded in his defence an express revelation ; although that revelation had received a counterpart in a vision to the devout Gentile, who was to be the first-fruits of his order ; although the Holy Spirit had, as it were, reproved his backwardness, by descending before baptism on the destined converts : still, on tbis subject, there long lurked in the bosoms of the elder members of the Church a stubborn and implacable feeling. This ill suppressed jealousy at length shewed itself in the disputes at Syrian Antioch, concerning the conformity of these converts to the Jewish law, and subsequently so far prevailed over 240 Conversion of Cornelius. tbe firraness of their own apostle, as to subject hiiri to the well known rebuke of St. Paul^ Some few circumstances attending this opening of the Gospel commission to the devout GentUes wiU be now considered. At the same time, in con- ffrmation of the remarks whicb have just been made on tbe preparatory discipUne of Peter for this work, it may be observed, tbat with the conversion of Cornelius, all that exclusive or pecuUzur regard to him in the narrative of the Acts ceases ». Hence forward he is not represented as forming a raore prominent feature in the scene than others. The object of his having been raade to do so was accom plished, and with the same view the remainder, and by far the greater portion, of the Acts is occupied with St. Paul. In his ministry was henceforth developed the mystery of godhness, to trace the progressive stages of which is the main object of St. Luke's history. Merely judging from tbe result of thefr collective ministry, we know that the otber apostles and ministers of the Spfrit must have been actively engaged, each in his own course of duty ; but St. Paul's line was the main road in the course of Christianity, into which St. Peter's gradually 'Gal. ii. 11. ^ His imprisonment is indeed subsequently recorded in full detail, but only, it would seem, in order the more fully to illustrate the effect of his new commission on all parties. Herod im prisoned him, and designed to take away his life, because he saw that it was pleasing to the Jews. (Acts xii. 3.) Conversion of Cornelius. 241 widened, and to whicb therefore the brief historian of the Holy Spirit's progressive dispensation naturally and judiciously confined tbe residue of his narrative. I have remarked that St. Peter, at the tirae be was sent to the devout Gentiles, had no raore intiraation than the great body of the Cburch, tbat the Gospel was ever to be preached to the idolatrous Gentiles also. It raay be observed, tbat Cornelius is parti cularly described as a devout Gentile, " who feared God with all bis bouse." The representation under whicb be was announced to • Peter, is that of " a righteous raan, and one who feared God, and could ap peal for his cbaracter to tbe whole nation of the Jews," (jttagTUgooftenJf utto o\ou roo 'iSvou; raiv 'louSuiaiv.) Peter, know ing all this, and having coramunicated personally with the good centurion, yet prefaces bis address to those assembled in bis house by saying, tbat be had hitherto considered such as be shut out from coraraunion witb God's people ; but that God having declared '' the contrary, by teUing bira to call no raan coramon or unclean, he bad come to thera without scrapie. This shews that he understood his revelation as ''"E3e(|e. Is there not some probability that Cornelius, and the centurion, whose sick servant Jesus healed, were one and the same? Several points in the brief description of the latter coin cide very closely with Cornelius's character and circumstances ; e. g. that he was anxiously careful of his household, and was held in very high estimation by the Jews. Otherwise, too, it seems strange, that nothing further should have been noticed of one so promising, as to receive the Saviour's praise, " 1 have not found so great faith, no not in Israel," (Matt. viii. 10.) VOL. I. R 242 Conversion of Cornelius. intended only to remove the barrier between the Jew and the proselyte of the gate, or mere beUeyer in Jehovah. That he certainly considered the ex tension as proceeding no further, may be made more clear from the words which he exultingly uttered on the descent of the Holy Ghost upon CorneUus and his household — words spoken in the rapture of the moment, and therefore tbe more likely to convey the UveUest impression vfbich his mind had conceived of the liberality and unre- servedness of the Spirit's dispensation. " Of a truth, I perceive that God is no respecter of per sons ; but in every nation he that feareth him and worketh righteousness, is accepted by him." This unquestionably Uraits his view to those of the Gentiles who had afready renounced idolatry — ^in short, the devout Gentiles. It explains, also, in what sense he had understood the divine commu nication made to him, that " what God had cleansed, it was not for him to caU comraon ;" namely, that in every nation he who afready feared God, and worked righteousness, and he only, had been cleansed and accepted by God. With the same sentiment, the Church of Jerasalem received his statement of what had taken place, " glorifying God and saying. Then hath God slso granted even to the Gentiles repentance unto life^" In this sense, then, it will be necessary to consider the admission of the Gen tiles to be spoken of, until the period when it shall ' Acts xi. 18. Conversion of Cornelius. 243 appear that the Church became acquainted with tbe design of the Holy Spirit to offer baptisra to tbe idolatrous Gentiles also. Another remark was, tbat on this occasion, as on one of the greatest moment, the Holy Ghost manifested his descent by the same visible signs as on the day of Pentecost. To this conclusion we are led' by remarking, ffrst, in tbe narrative of the event, " that the Holy Ghost /eZZ on them," and was " poured out on them ;" expressions which could only properly apply to tbe above-mentioned extra ordinary descent of the Holy Ghost. Again, as on the day of Pentecost, it was followed by an involun tary display ofthe gift of tongues, that gift which was especiaUy denoted by the visible syrabol of " tongues of fire." By tbis, no doubt, God gave now the same proof to tbe Jewish Christians, that the devout Gen tiles were called, as he bad before given to tbe unbe Ueving Jews, in favour of tbeir converted brethren. " And accordingly those believers of tbe circum cision who had come with Peter, were araazed at the gifts of the Holy Ghost having been poured out even on the Gentiles ; for tbey heard thera " speak ing in divers tongues, and raagnifying God." Lastly; St. Peter's words are decisive of tbe fact, tjfiat the mode of the Spirit's descent was the same as on the day of Pentecost, " The Holy Ghost," said be, " feU on them as on us at the beginning, putting no dif ference between them and us "." ^ Acts xi. 15. R 2 244 Conversion of Cornelius. It was further observed, as a solitary instance on record, that the Holy Ghost descended on the can didates for baptism before the ceremony was per forraed. This strongly confirras the view already taken of the extraordinary manifestations of tbe Spirit. They were for confirmation of its real but unseen and perpetual descent, and residence in the heart of every meraber of the Church in every age. Baptisra, tbe appointed ceremony to whicb tbis was for ever attached, was not superseded by tbe mira culous signs ; but tbose signs only hailed as a sanction for baptism, inasmuch as tbey proved that even the Gentiles would receive tbe raysterious and insensible influence of the Spirit through tbat rite. The signs were the appropriate miracles of God raanifested by tbe Spirit ; as heaUng the sick, cleansing tbe lepers, walking on tbe sea, raising the dead, and the like, were the rairaculous evidence of God raanifested in the flesh. When the apostles healed the sick and raised tbe dead, tbey did it by virtue of their appointraent by Christ as bis wit nesses ; but wben they exercised the gifts of " tongues," of " wisdora," &c. or imparted any. divine powers to otbers, they did so by virtue of their appointment by the Spirit. Tbe one class of rairaculous evidence exactly corresponds to the ' other. "Nor is this correspondence diminished by the circumstance, that these gifts were also the raeans whereby tbe Holy Spirit taught and spread Christianity, but is rather increased thereby ; for a Foundation of the Church of Antioch. 245 like purpose did even the testiraonial miracles wrought by our Saviour serve, as has been al ready, it is presuraed, sufficiently proved and il lustrated. Foundation of the Church of Antioch. This second period of tbe Holy Spirit's, dispen sation does not require tbat we should pause long on any of the transactions whicb it erabraces. Whilst the conversion of Cornelius was taking place, and indeed after Peter had raade the Church acquainted with the new enactraent of tbe Spirit respecting tbe devout Gentiles, tbose Cbristians who were scattered abroad still continued to call and to baptize only Jews. At 'length, certain converts of Cyprus and Cyrene baAang, doubtless, heard of Peter's revelation, boldly foUowed his example, and obeyed tbe command of their divine Guide, in attempting the conversion of the Gentiles also. Going to Antioch of Syria, tbey there com menced their labours ; " and tbe hand of the Lord was with tbem, and a great multitude beheved and tumed unto the Lord""." On tidings of this being brought to the Church at Jerusalera, tbey took the matter into their own hands, and gave direc tions for tbe formation of tbe first Gentile Church. Tbe commission was intrusted to Barnabas, air 1 Actsxi. 22. " Actsxi. 19—21. 246 Foundation of the Church of Antioch. 1, frora the sacred narrative, it does not appear under what precise character he went. little more is specified, than that he exhorted thera to perseverance on his arrival, and, (as a reason probably for his appointraent,) tbat he was " a good raan, full of faith and of the Holy Ghost." Tbis description might merely imply, that ,being more highly and fully endowed witb tbe gifts of the Holy Ghost, than the above-mentioned Cyprian and Cyrenian preachers, he was better fitted for the work of conversion. But wben we also read that tbe band of tbe Lord was afready with these, and that tbe work prospered greatly under thefr management, tbis could hardly be the reason. What seems more likely is, that they had no presbyter among thera, and that therefore thefr Church esta blishraent was incoraplete without one. Barnabas then might have been sent to them in that ca pacity. But a more probable reason stiU suggests itself. Is there not some ground to suppose that he went in the cbaracter of an apostle? In this case tbis higher office might supersede, and for a tirae render unnecessary, tbe inferior one of pres byter. Wbat gives sorae shew of plausibility to this is, tbat we know Barnabas bad tbe title of apostle". If appointed as such, and in the same manner as tbe others, tbat appointraent, as was before suggested, must bave taken place at a period " Acts xiv. 14. Foundation of the Church of Antioch. 247 preceding this. Now we know that when Samaria was first converted, although he who instructed and baptized there was no less a person than Phihp the deacon, yet the Church of Jerusalem sent thi ther two apostles". The reason for sending tbese has been explained. It was because none but apostles could confer the extraordinary gifts of the Spirit, and these gifts or some of tbem were pro bably granted to aU members of tbe infant Church. The instance of St. Paul regretting that he had not been able to visit tbe Roman converts for this purpose, was noticed in illustration of the truth of this stateinent. On so important a con version then as this at Antioch, we are naturally led to expect the same procedure on tbe part of the Church of Jerasalem, as was observed in the conversion of Samaria. Finding it recorded, tbat, as on that occasidn an official embassy was ap pointed to Antioch, we naturally expect that he whora they sent (airia^TstXav) should be an apostle, and that he should be sent for a similar purpose as Peter and John bad been to Saraaria. In Bamabas accordingly we find much which ren ders it by no raeans iraprobable that he was one, especially if viewed in connection with tbe pre sumption arising out of that embassy. To all that has been already suggested, in accordance with this view, it may be added, that, for no " Acts viii. 14. 248 Foundation of the Church of Antioch. reason assigned, Barnabas's narae always precedes Paul's, although the latter was equally proved to be " fuU of tbe Holy Ghost," untU by inflicting bUndness on the sorcerer Elymas he displayed his evidence, that he was not only a rainister of tbe Spirit, but one bearing a commission also from the Lord Jesus, — in short, an apostle^. Does not tbis then seem to intiraate, tbat up to tbat pe riod Bamabas was treated as Paul's superior ? Af terwards, we raay observe, tbe order is not re versed, but soraetiraes tbe one narae, sometimes the other, takes precedence. Doubtless, Paul's is thenceforward more frequently placed first ; but this, if it affect the arguraent at aU, only renders the circurastance noticed raore remarkable. Supposing Barnabas to have been an apostle, a reason obviously suggests itself, why, in preference to the others, he should be chosen for this mission. " A Levite and of tbe country of Cyprus," is tbe P Acts xiii. 8. He is however called a prophet in ver. 1. per haps because he is there described as exercising the office of pro-. phet, which was no doubt comprehended in the apostoTic com mission. Eusebius (lib. i. c. 12.) suggests, that others besides the twelve must have been called apostles during our Lord's abode on earth. His conjecture is founded on St. Paul's account of the Resurrection, in the fifteenth chapter of his first Epistle to the Corinthians. It must be confessed, however, that his inter pretation of the passage is a forced one ; and the notion is besides inconsistent with the indifferent use wbich is constantly made by the Evangelists of the terras " the agostles" and " the twelve." It is moreover expressly contradicted by St. Luke's assertion, (c. vi. 13.) " He chose twelve, whom he named apostles." Foundation of the Church of Antioch. 249 character under whicb he is first introduced to our notice 1. Belonging tben to tbe nuraerous settle raent of Jews in that island, he was naturally fixed on as tbe most proper apostle for converts wbo had received their first instmction and baptism from his fellow-countrymen, perhaps frora his friends or acquaintance '. 1 Acts iv. 36. ' In this view of the Church of Antioch, the reader of the New Testament in the original Greek will perceive, that of the two rival readings given in Acts xi. 20."EAX>ii'e5 has been adopted in preference to 'iXMturrui. Waving so much of the question, as de pends on the balance of authority between the manuscripts, the circumstances of the record, and the context itself plainly deter mines the former to be genuine. For the opposition expressed by the particles, ftev and Ss, indicate that the Cyprians and Cyrenians were not doing what the dispersed were doing, namely, preaching to the Jews alone ; but that they, on the contrary, were preach ing, to whom ? Not Is TOU? 'EAA))iiio-t«5, for they were Jews, and to them by the dispersed the Gospel had been preached as in the case of Philip, but ir^of r<>W'S.XMt*i — to the Gentiles, namely, the devout Gentiles. Among the circumstances which confirm this, it would be wrong to pass over the notice, tbat at Antioch the disciples were first called Christians. Why such a record should be left by the inspired historian, — why the name should appear just there, and should have been wanted and coined just then, are questions which will be naturally answered by reference to the event which had lately and only now taken place. The word Christian is obviously Latin, and the Roman language was now so widely spread, that whether the Gentile converts were natives of Rome or not, the invention of tbe term by them is likely. Its use by the Jewish Christians too would be natural. Before any Gentile Christians had been made, the " believers" were only a sect of the Jews. But when these Gentiles were added, the strange admixture seemed to call 250 St. Paul's revelation and appointment. St. Paul's revelation and appointment". To the establishment of the Church of Antioch, tbe first society whicb admitted the Gentiles as brethren and members of one Christian body, we may reasonably attribute the second burst of maUg nant feeUng in the Jewish unbeUevers towards thefr beheving brethren. At tbeir instance, Herod put to death James the brother of John ; and his imprison ment of Peter, with the intent to execute him also, is said to have taken place, because he observed that the former " pleased the Jews." Peter, indeed, would at this time be naturaUy the chief object of their vengeance, and could have escaped from tbe fate wbich tbey had prepared for him only by the interposition of God's angel. On his deUverance from prison he left Jerasalem, as it is probable aU the other apostles had afready done. St. Paul, at least, when be undertakes to shew the impossibi Uty of his having received his instruction from the otber apostles, instead of what be asserted to be tbe case, from Christ himself, and for this purpose enu- ibr some associating name, to denote tliat these last were, in common with the others, members of the believing body— some term was now requisite to class together the converted Jews with tbe converted Gentiles. The word Christian was expressive of the doctrine, that " there is no difference between the Jew and the Greek : for the same Lord over all is rich unto all that call upon him." ' Acts xiii. 22. xxii. 17. St, Paul's revelation and appointment. 251 merates his several visits * to Jerusalem, makes no mention of this, which the course of bis argument required, had there been at that time any one apostle at Jerusalem ¦¦. ' St. Paul, after his conversion, appears to have visited Jerusa lem five times. I. After his return from Arabia to Damascus, at which time he was introduced to Peter and James by Barnabas. See Acts ix. 26, 28. and Galat. i. 18. II. When he and Barnabas were sent from Antioch with the contribution. No apostle was then at Jerusalem, but the ma nagement of affairs was left to the elders. It was during this visit that he probably received his revelation in the temple, as mentioned in 2 Corinth, xii. This .visit is omitted in his Epistle to the Galatians. See Acts xi. 30. III. On his return firom his first apostolical journey, when he went with Barnabas to consult the Church of Jerusalem, con cerning the obligation of tbe Mosaic law on the Gentile Chris tians. It was during this visit that he communicated " his Gospel" privately to Peter, and James, and John. See Acts xv. and Galat. ii. IV. When, in fulfilment of a vow made at Cenchraea, he went from Ephesus, and returned after a very short stay. Acts xviii. 18, 22. V. This was at the close of his third apostolical journey, when he went up to keep the feast of Pentecost, and to declare openly to all the Church " his Gospel," or his mission to the idolatrous Gentiles. '• See the first and second chapters of his Epistle to tho Galatians. His statement there is, that he could have had no opportunity of being instructed by the apostles, because on his first visit-to Jerusalem he only saw two of them, and that for fifteen days, and no more ; and, when again he was fourteen years afterwards in their company, he was employed, not in re ceiving , but communicating his revelation to them. The account 252 St. Paul's revelation and appointment. Trifling as the circumstance is, it becoraes im portant when connected with tbe evidence of Paul's immediate and apostoUc revelation. How it hap pened that be should go to Jemsalem at tbat parti cular juncture will be readUy recollected. Soon after Barnabas bad been sent to preside over the Church of Antioch, he went to Tarsus, and brougbt back with him Saul as his coadjutor. Tradition reports, that they were educated together under Garaahel ; which, if trae, accounts for the friendly office whicb he bad previously perforraed in intro ducing hira to Peter and James" ; as well as for his now choosing him to be his associate. At tbe very commencement of their joint labours, the disturb ances to whicb we have been adverting occurred at Jerasalem. Among tbose who, together with the apostles, withdrew from the scene of danger, were very probably the prophets, who then raade thefr appearance at Antioch, and gave notice of a famine which was to take place throughout Judaea. It was for the purpose of conveying to Jerasalem a contri bution, which was in consequence raised and sent as in the Acts agrees witb this, but then, between these two visits, occurs the one in question ; and, if he had found any apostles at Jerusalem, his argument was of course open to tbe objection — how do we know that the borrowed information may not f Aere have been received. " Only to these, by his own account, (.See Galat. i.) and accord ingly he asserts, that after that first visit he was still unknown by face to the Churches of Judaea. St. Paul's revelation and appointment. 253 a provision against the season of distress, tbat Barnabas and his companion went thither. Tbey went accordingly, not commissioned to tbe apo stles — nor to the apostles and brethren — but only to the presbyters^. The apostles were absent, and tbe presbyters, or those who represented the disciples at large, were all wbo composed tbe asserably. During tbis visit tben of Saul to Jerusalera, be received that revelation which was hitherto wanting to coraplete in hira the character of an apostle". Falhng into a trance in tbe temple, he was per mitted, like the other apostles, to be an " eye witness of tbe resurrection," to see his Lord and his God manifested in the fiesh* ; and, hke the rest, to receive frora Jesus hiraself the appointraent of wit ness, and tbe powers attached to it". All that y Acts xi. 30. ' 'idut To» Vxuiet, Kui ccKovrut (patiiv Ik rtv rrifturti uvrtv. "Ort la-Yi ftdfrvg »vra Ttgcs ircitTiti; atS^ajrovi, ay ia^uxec; ku) VKovritg. "2 Cor. xii. Acts xxii. 17, 18. '' The period when this took place is not distinctly marked in the New Testament ; and it is generally referred to the first visit to Jerusalem. But direct testimony being wanting, it is surely more natural to assign it to the visit which immediately preceded his formal appointment by the Church at Antioch, and his entrance on the course of duty, with a view to which the revelation was made. This, too, is more agreeable to the train of argument which he adopts in his Epistle to the Galatians, and to which allusion has already been made. If he professed to have received his Gospel during the fifteen days of his first visit to Jerusalem, it might have been supposable, at least by his ob jectors, that it carae from Peter and John, and not, as he asserts. 254 St. Paul's revelation and appointment. portion of the apostolical character, which it was the office of the Holy Ghost to confer, had been previously bestowed on him. He had now aU the endowments of an apostle, and, thus quaUfied, he returned with Bamabas to Antioch, ready to enter upon the work with which the third period of the Holy Spirit's dispensation commences. John (better known by the name of Mark) accorapanied thera''. from Jesus Christ ; but, in the absence of all the apostles from the scene, even this slight ground for suspicion was removed. It is somewhat surprising, by the way, that any doubt on the subject of Paul's apostleship should have existed, considering that an apostle was known by so unequivocal a mark as the pos session of superior miraculous power. On this, accordingly, he ultimately rests his claims, and prevails over the jealous attempts of his rivals and enemies.— It is surprising, but it is, after all, quite consistent with the waywa,rdness of man's heart. ' Acts xii. 25. CHAP. IV. PREACHING TO JEWS, DEVOUT GEN TILES, AND IDOLATERS. ST. PArL'S FIRST APOSTOLICAL JOURNEY. A. D. 45—52. ROUTE. Antioch in Syria; Selencia; Salamis; Faphos; Feiga in Fampbylia; Antioch in Pisidia ; Iconhira; Lystia; Deibe; Lystiaagain; Iconimn again; Kodia again; Fe^a again; AttaUa; Antioch in Syria, (second time:) Phoenicia; Samaria; Jerasalem; Antioch in Syria, (third time.) ^ The return of Paul and Bamabas to Antioch was foUbwed by thefr formal raission to the idolatrous Gentiles''. And here we cannot but observe how carefuUy the Holy Spirit has declared, in its deaUngs with tbe early Church, that from the first its opera tions, as guide and govemor, were twofold ; that it exercised an occasional and extraordinar)- authority, by means of visions, and sundry forms of revelation, inspiration, and endowment ; and also a permanent authority, imaccompanied by extraordinary signs, ^ Acts xiii. to XV. 30. '¦' Acts xi. 26. 256 St. Paul's first Apostolical journey. by means of the Church as a body, which Church was and is its Temple. Thus the intercourse of the Holy Spirit with Christians, as a society, was not unlike his intercourse with them as individuals. Of tbe Cburch he required certain estabUshed forms, the laying on of bands, prayer, and fasting, and to these attached bis ordinary operations. These were indis pensable to its authority, and of perpetual obUgation, whatever further extraordinary acts were manifested. Notwithstanding then that Barnabas and Saul had beon appointed to the conversion of the Gentiles by an especial communication of the Holy Ghost, it was necessary, we find, that some fiirther grace should be iraparteid, — sorae further sanction given to them, which could only be conveyed, according to the system of the Spirit's dispensation, through certain forms and ceremonies of the Cburch. Without these forms the Church had no power to confer, and the individuals were incapable of receiving, a por tion of tbe spiritual endowment ". The mode in which grace was conferred on indi viduals, was analogous to that in which authority was given to the Church. It mattered not what extraordinary gifts were bestowed ; as Christians, — as redeemed, tbey were obUged to be formaUy bap tized. The extraordinary gifts of the Spirit de scended on tbem as agents and instruments, eraployed for tbe general welfare ; the ordinary gifts, as objects ' Acts ix. 15. xiii. 2. St. Paul's first Apostolical journey . 257 of regeneration and rederaption, and for tbeir indi vidual welfare. Many individuals are conspicuous for both kinds of endowraent ; and so it was with the Church itself There was an ordinary grace or authority in it, wbich it exercised by raeans of stated forras, and independently of aU extraordinary manifestations : and ever as occasion . required, that same divine person, wbo dwelt in it, and from wbom tbe authority proceeded, gave some extraor dinary display of his government. In both cases, what was occasional has passed away ; wbat was regular and continual still remains. In raaking tbese assertions, however, we raust be prepared to raeet two questions. The first is, how do we know, tbat tbere was in the early Cburch a secret and regular opera tion of the Holy Ghost exercised in tbese outward forms ? Secondly, how do we know, tbat it did not cease with the extraordinary operation ? The case now ofi'ering itself for consideration, namely, the appointment of Bamabas and Saul, is one of several which furnish to every candid mind a sufiicient reply to tbe first question. The bare circumstance, tbat tbe forras of fasting, laying on of hands, and prayer, were observed even witb persons " full of the Holy Ghost;" and afready caUed to be apostles of the Lord, is a strong ground of presuraption tbat such was the case. But the terms of tbe narrative render it yet stronger, VOL. I. s 258 St. Paul's first Apostolical journey . " Then having fasted and prayed and laid tbeir hands on tbem, dismissed tbem ; they then, having been sent forth by the Holy Spirit," &;c.^ In the original, tbe connection between the two sentences is perhaps more forcibly marked by oSv, than by the EngUsh iUative conjunction " then." Without re ference, however, to grammatical nicety, no one can read the sentences, and attend to the train of thought running through them, and through tbe whole passage to which they belong, without ac knowledging that their being sent forth by the Holy Ghost referred to the ceremony of prayer, &c. Nor does it aff'ect the argument, tbat the Holy Ghost bad specially directed the Church to ordain these raen. For, that this was only a revelation of God's will and special interference, and not an investiture of power delegated to the Cburch, is manifest, — inasmuch as the investiture of power bad already taken place, and the words of the divine message contain a reference to it as afready in force, and are, indeed, an acknowledgment and proof tbat it was so. " The Holy Ghost said. Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them«." The next question was, supposing this ordinary and indispensable operation of the Spirit to have been exercised in tbe primitive Church, how do we certainly know that it did not cease with that which <^ Acts xiii. 3, 4. • Acts xiii. 2. St. Paul's first Apostolical journey. 259 was extraordinary? If the latter was given as a sign of the reality of tbe forraer, tbe sign being ~ reraoved, what proof have we now tbat the thing attested exists ? To this also tbere is an adequate reply ; and it depends on tbe truth of tbis proposition, " If we are assured tbat God has appointed any outward forras as tbe means of divine grace or divine autho rity, we are bound to believe that they wiU continue effectual, until God has annulled tbe appointraent." If instead of tbe cereraony of baptisra, e. g. it bad pleased Hira to appoint a pool like that of Bethesda, which at certain seasons should be troubled by his angel ; and to ordain, that aU who bad diseases should go to tbat pool on tbese occasions to bathe for tbeir recovery : we should be bound to rely on tbe efficacy of tbe pool, until God should make known that his decree had been annuUed. In the case of tbe pool, this would require no positive sign ; because the effects being sensible, when the water ceased to beal, its failure would be of itself proof that God had ceased to impart a virtue to it. On the sarae principle, no formal, no positive sign or revelation was necessary, to inform the Cburch that the extraordinary operation of the Spirit and the power of working miracles were withdrawn. The failure of its ministers in their atterapts to work mfracles, was itself the sign that God had annuUed the temporary grant. But as the ordinary opera tions of the Spirit were always unseen and unfelt, s2 260 St. Paul's first Apostolical journey . the only indication of their failure and cessation would be a positive revelation. Until such is given, we are obliged to believe in tbem as a duty, and have as much reason to do so, as to suppose tbat to-morrow the sun wiU be the means of conveying light and warmth. But to return to Bamabas, Saul, and their assist ant Mark, wbom we left preparing for thefr journey. Their course was through Cypras first, (probably on account of tbe connection of Bamabas with that island,) thence across to tbe continent, and through the countries of Pampbylia, Pisidia, and Lycaonia'^. As they were about to leave Cyprus, Mark must have become raore ahve to tbe risk of the enter prise ; for, although tbus far tbeir reception had been gracious, he forsook the apostles and returned*. His place seeras to have been suppUed by Titus, although it is not expressly so stated. Adverting to what has been afready observed of the office of deacons, it is not unhkely tbat Mark bad accora panied tbe apostles in that capacity, and that on his refusal to proceed, sorae one would be wanted to act as deacon in the performance of the Christian Church service, wherever there might be an oppor tunity. Tbat Titus was accordingly sent for — pos sibly from Antioch — is inferred from his being found in their company at the end of the journey''. The mode in which the mission was conducted ' Acts xiii. 4. « Acts xiii. 13. ° Gal. ii. 1. Decree of the Council of Jerusalem. 261 was, as the reader raay recoUect, to preach first to^ the Jews and proselyted Gentiles, and then to tbe idolaters'. Notwithstanding this raarked precedence and preference, aU their persecutions arose frora the forraer. Frora tbe Gentiles (wben the Jews did not prepossess their rainds against them) all they had to fear as yet, was a misapprehension of their objegt, — lest their miracles might make them appear to tbe multitude as " gods corae down to them in the shape of men''." Another, point to be observed in their proceedings is, tbat tbey ordained presbyters in every Church on tbeir return'. So brief a ministry could hardly have quahfied any of the new converts for the office, unless some rairaculous interposition of tbe Spirit bad taken place, such as was supposed to have oc curred at Antioch in Pisidia — tbe first scene of idolatrous conversion". Decree of the Council of Jerusalem ". Before St. Paul renewed his labours araong the idolatrous GentUes, be was comraissioned by the Church of Syrian Antioch to proceed witb Barnabas to Jerusalera, for tbe purpose of taking the sense of tbe Church there respecting a question which was now warmly canvassed at Antioch ". Peter's mis- ' Acts xiii. 46, '' Acts xiv. 11. ' Acts xiv. 23. "¦ Acts xi. 26. " Acts xv. ° Acts xv. 1, 2. 262 Decree of the Council of Jerusalem. sion, as was observed, received indeed the sanction of Judaizing Christians ; but their old prejudices were StiU so strong, as to raake thera expect tbat these new associates, to whom the apostles bad opened the gate of Christianity, should first pass through that of Judaisra. They accordingly insisted on the Gentile converts at Antioch being cfrcumcised, and made to conforra to all tbe Jewish law. Jerasalem being stiU tbe residence of tbe apostles, and there fore tbe chief seat of Church authority, to Jera salem was the decision of the question referred. That the decree of the Christian body there , only related to tbe devout Gentile Cbristians is certain ; because none but tbese bad as yet been admitted into tbe Church of Antioch. What confirras tbis is, that tbe decree was obviously fraraed witb refer ence to their condition as such. St. Peter spoke first in tbe assembly which had been called for discussing the question, and declared bis opinion to be, that on the Gentile party tbe Cburch ougbt not to impose a burthen of cere monies which neither tbe Jewish party nor thefr fathers could bear. St. James supported bira in bis view of the question, and proposed the words of tbe decree, in a raanner which shews that be fully coincided with St. Peter, and did not think tbat he was placing any yoke on the neck of tbe Gentile converts which they had not borne before tbeir conversion. " Wherefore ray opinion is, not to introduce any thing which may disturb and con- Decree of the Council of Jerusalem. 263 found those Gentiles wbo turn to GodP; but to coraraand tbem to abstain frora raeats off'ered to idols, and from fornication, and from things strangled, and from blood''," — tbat is, to coramand them to observe just so much and no more of tbe Jewish law as tbey had observed before Christianity was preached to them. To this they would hardly object, (as the apostle p"robably means to. say,) because, in every part of the world, the devout Gentiles readily consented to keep these few ob servances of the Jewish law, bowever unwiUing to I" This is certainly the force of a-»j«. The word leu^iytjf^xut expresses that confusion of thought which would almost certainly have been produced in the mind of a convert taught Judaism and Christianity together, as two distinct systems. He was in danger of considering them both necessary and both coexistent, rather than successive portions of the same religion. Even as it was, such was doubtless the impression made on the minds of many, for the first century, and longer. That Tertullian, e. g. considered it in this light is more than pro bable. See Apol. sect. 9. < This non-interference with established usages beyond what was absolutely necessary, was, it is to be observed, in exact con formity with the method by which the Jewish religion had been established. The Jews had been allowed to retain many Egyp tian rites, as Warburton points out in his fourth book of the Divine Legation ; and hence, the error of assigning a heathen origin to several of the corruptions of the Christian Church, which, although manifestly resembling heathen ceremonies, were immediately derived from the Jews. Some, doubtless, were im mediately drawn from Gentile practices ; but not all which cor respond with heathen rites. s Acts XV. 19, 20. 264 Decree of the Council of Jerusalem. burthen theraselves further, and to become prose lytes of righteousness. " For Moses of old tirae hath in every city them that preach bira, being read in the synagogues every sabbath day"'." When, therefore, Paul is afterwards represented as distributing tbis sentence or opinion of the Council of Jerasalem to tbe several Churches through wbich be passed in his second joumey, it cannot be supposed that he intended to recoraraend it as a rule binding on the converts frora idolatry also. Tbis, indeed, would be whoUy irreconcileable with bis own repeated declarations to thera in his Epistles', and is not iraplied by any statement in St. Luke's narrative. It may be even doubted whether St. Paul's preaching to tbe idolatrous Gentiles was at tbat tirae known generaUy to tbe Churches of Judaea, or to that particular CouncU of Jerusalera. It is said, indeed, that tbe conversion of tbe Gentiles was proclairaed by Paul and Barna bas as tbey passed through Phoenicia and Saraaria in their journey to Jerasalem, and tbat tbey even ' Acts XV. 21. ' Inter al. Rom. xiv. 14, " I know and am persuaded by the Lord Jesus, that tliere is nothing unclean in itself" 1 Corinth. X. 25, " Whatsoever is sold in the shambles, that eat, asking no questions for conscience sake." Rom. xiv. 1 7, " The kingdom of God is not meat and drink." Colos. ii. 16, " Let no man judge you in meat or in drink." 1 Tim. iv. 4, " Every creature of God is good and nothing to be refused, if it be received with thanks giving." Decree of the Council of Jerusalem. 265 reported to the Church there*, " all things tbat God bad done with them"^." But stUl, tbe wbole account, considered as a wbole, looks very rauch as if they were understood by all — by aU, at least, except the apostles — to speak of the devout Gentiles. Tbat there was a good reason why St. Paul should not yet venture to give pubhcity to his mission, nobody wiU question, wbo considers the rancorous persecution which assailed bim, when the Jewish Cbristians, (for the first tirae, as it seeras,) becarae acquainted with it. Possibly for this very reason the appointraent took place at Antioch, and not at Jerusalem. His own account of this transaction, too, as given in his Epistle to the Galatians, is tbat be told tbe secret privately, and only to Peter, James, and John, "lest by any means be should run, or had run, in vain''." The narrative of the last visit wbich he paid to Jerasalem tends to produce the same impression. He is represented as explaining bis ministry to the Church, in terms which strongly indicate that the whole Cburch tben for the first time understood the nature of it. On tbis occasion it is particularly recorded, tbat all the presbyters were presenf. His Gospel is then more ' Acts XV. 4. ° This and the like expressions may be noticed in reference to the distinction pointed out between the miracles of Jesus and those of his apostles. = Gal. ii. 2. ' Acts xxi. 18, 266 Decree of the Council of Jerusalem. pointedly declared to be one appropriated to bira, tbe details of it are given one by one, (xaff h 'ixcurrov,) and the asserably glorify God, as for some new and marvellous act". Then, too, it is for the first time thought necessary to warn him of the danger to which his mission was likely to expose him from the Jewish party : and it is then, indeed, that he first incurs any risk amongst his countrymen at Jerusalem ; although the same reason had long been operating to render him an object of deadly hatred to Jews and Judaizing Christians out of Palestine. And how did the persecution comraence? Not with the Jews residing at Jerusalera ; but after he bad been alraost seven days in tbe temple, without incurring any suspicion from tbem, " the Jews which were of Asia," (and who doubtless recog nized bira as the person they bad often seen preaching to the idolaters, and who perhaps bad before tbis assaulted him,) wben they saw him in tbe temple, stirred up all the people, and laid hands on him, " crying out. Men of Israel, help : this is the man that teacheth all raen every where against the peo ple, and tbe law, and tbis place*," &c. One powerful objection, it must be confessed, bears upon this supposition. If it be correct, the most iraportant act of the blessed Spirit's dispens ation, and tbe raost reraarkable, must bave re- • Acts xxi. 19, 20. ' Acts xxi. 27, 28. Decree of the Council of Jerusalem. 267 mained a secret from the Church of Jerasalem (tbe aposties being excepted) for fifteen yeai-s. '^^Tietber our famiharity vrith tbe ordinaiy modes of com munication in modem days, may not cause us un duly to magnify the objection, especiaUy as the want of such modes must have been peculiaiiy felt in tbe intercourse between the members of a poor and sus pected sect on domestic affafrs, tbe reader is left to consider. However, be it aUowed or not, it must be admitted that this would not be a solitary instance of a strange ignorance in one part of the Christian society of its proceedings elsewhere. ^Tiat, for instance, could have been a more in teresting subject of report than the conversion of St. Paul? And yet, although this took place almost on tbe borders of Judsea, it is clear that tbe aposties themselves could not have loiown it for certain, when after an interval of several yeai's be visited Jerusalem ; else it would not have been necessaiy for Barnabas to assm'e them of it, be fore they received bim to their confidence and feUow ship''. The ignorance of tbose disciples of John Baptist whom St. Paul met witii in Asia JVIinor, whether there was any Holy Ghost, is another simUar case"". But, whatever was tbe rnfomiation of tbe Church of Jerusalem respecting the admission of idolatrous converts^ to Christianity, the decree of the CouncU ' Acts ix. 27. ' Acts xviii. 24. to xix. 2, 3. 268 Decree of the Council of Jerusalem. could not, for the reasons assigned, have been in tended to apply to thera also. The proselytes of the gate — the devout Gentiles — ^were enjoined to observe the rules enumerated, on tbe principle, tbat Christi anity did not interfere with any civil or social institu tion, but left tbe raerabers of aU societies bound, as before, by their social or civil obligations. On tbis principle it was, doubtless, tbat St. Paul circura cised Tiraotby, and not, Titus'" ; and, on tbe sarae principle, tbe Cburch was not inconsistent in observ ing the first day of the week, as appears from Acts XX. 7. and also tbe seventh day of the week, as appears from Acts xin. 14, 42. and xvi. 13. Tbese points tbey observed as partial adherents of the Jewish society ; and accordingly, wben Jerasalem was destroyed, its rites overthrown, and tbe nation as a nation annihilated, they, as weU as the Jewish Christians themselves, were released from the obU gation. Sorae superstitious observance of the de cree indeed long existed in the Cburch, although it does not appear to have been by any raeans generaUy looked on as binding ^ StiU, its di- '' Acts xvi. 3. and Gal. ii. 3. ' See Justin Martyr, Dialog, cum Trypho, p. 237. Origen, cont. Celsum, lib. viii, c. 30. and Tertullian Apolog. c. 9. In like manner, we find the eastern Churches in the second century alleging the example of St. John and St. Philip for celebrating Easter on the day of the Jewish Passover, while the western Churches urged the practice of St. Peter and St, Paul in support of their observance of the day of the Resurrection. The question Decree of the Council of Jerusalem. 269 rections are sanctioned in tbe decrees of at least one council', and its authority has frora tirae to tirae been recognized by several Christian cora raunities s. Individuals, too, araong tbe raost learned and enlightened of later tiraes, have maintained its per- pltual authority, — Grotius among others. Tbat the introduction of one raoral rule into the Ust of injunctions might have biassed tbese, in tbeir view of it, is not impossible. In rejecting it tbey seemed to be annuUing, not only the precept to abstain from meats offered to idols and from blood, but tbat also which forbade fornication. Lightfoot accordingly avoids the scrapie by making fornica tion and polygamy synonymous. And, tbat tbe word translated " fomication" should erabrace under its general signification polygaray and adultery is per haps admissible ; but tbat it should be appUed to either specificaUy, is more than can be proved. In trutb, all the doubt and difficulty may be traced to a false, or rather an indistinct, view was not set at rest until the decree of the Nicene Council on the subject ; and even then some refused to acquiesce, and were on that account stigmatized as Quartodecimani. ' Cone. Gangr. can. 2. 5 The more rigid Anabaptists have maintained its perpetual oblio-ation on Christians ; and likewise the sect founded by Glass and Sandeman in the beginning of the last century. The Copts are reported not only to observe the decree, but to circumcise ; probably with the view of conciliating the Mahometans. See Boone's Book of Churches and Sects, p. 163. 270 Decree of the Council of Jerusalem. of tbe true character of the Jewish law, of which this was, after aU, only a-portion. As tbe observ ance of the old law was sanctioned by the apostle in the case of tbose Christians who bad been subject to it before tbeir conversion ; so, in the case of the proselytes of tbe gate, tbat portion of it wbich extended to them received a sirailar sanction. The Mosaic law, it is well known, comprises moral coraraandments and ceremonial rales all blended together, not only in tbe great body of Jewish Scripture, but even in tbe Ten Comraand raents written by the finger of God. The cora raand to keep tbe seventh day as a sabbath is tbere found side by side with tbose which enjoin love to God and our neighbour, and witb tbose wbich prohibit raurder, theft, adultery, and false-witness. Nevertheless, a distinction is drawn by universal consent between tbe two portions of tbe law. It is agreed, that the cereraonial part bas been abrogated, tbe raoral left in force ; and this is trae, and for all practical purposes sufficient. It would, however, be a raore exact and correct raode of expressing tbe tmth, to say, tbat the, whole of the Mosaic law was done away with, as far as it was binding because found in the law of Moses; but that the moral portion of the law continues in force, because it was in force prior to the pro mulgation of the Mosaic law. If, for instance, tbe sinfulness of murder depends on its being a Decree of the Council of Jerusalem. 271 violation of the sixth commandment, tben was Cain guiltless''. Why what was afready written on men's hearts should bave been specified in God's written law ; whether it be, that in this, as in tbe whole course of God's deahngs witb man, each succeeding re velation was a coraraent on the former ; or tbat these precepts were incorporated with tbe ceremonial or judicial law, in order to annex to thera civil and teraporal rewards and punishraents, are questions which need not now be discussed. It is enough for tbe present purpose tbat such was tbe case. Now, the Gentiles, as members of the human race, had aU the raoral law engraven on their hearts ; " their consciences," as St. Paul teUs us, " accusing or else excusing tbem'." In admitting these, there fore, to a partial feUowship with tbem, (such as the proselyte of the gate enjoyed,) it was not to be expected that the Jews would enjoin on them any rales beyond those which were cere raonial, and of these only enough to serve as a badge of distinction, and a test of sincere pro selytisra. The observance of the moral law would ¦¦ Tertullian points out the manner in which our first parents may be convicted of having violated every command in the Deca logue by eating the forbidden fruit; and thence argues for the prior existence of a law equivalent in authority aud import to the Decalogue. Such a law has been communicated and is regis tered on every man's conscience. See his Tract, adv. Judaeos, c. 2, See also Whately's Essays, Second Series, Essay 5. ' Rom. ii. 15. 272 Decree of the Council of Jerusalem. be considered as otherwise binding. History, how ever, sufficiently explains, why it may have been ex pedient to place araong tbese ceremonial rules one moral precept, that, namely, whicb enjoined them to abstain from fornication. Murder, theft, false- witness, and all otber moral offences, were stiU universally recognized as sucb by tbe consent of conscience in aU. Fomication, alone, was not raerely a coraraon vice, but bad ceased to be ge nerally regarded as a sin. In its excess only it was held to be blaraeworthy'. What raore natural, therefore, tban tbat tbe Jews should bind the proselyte, by an express law, to abstain from this vice, when be bad ceased to feel bimself bound to do so by the law of nature. And it is a coincidence worthy of notice, tbat the de nial of a moral obhgation in this particular bas formed a prominent feature in the ethical systems of the most celebrated modem infidels, Bohng- broke, Hurae, Voltaire, Helvetius. If tbis view of tbe subject be correct, it wiU ap pear, tbat when tbe authority of the decree of Jerasalem ceased. Christians were thereby no more absolved from tbe duty of continence, tban tbey were, by the cessation of the authority of the whole law of Moses, from the duty of honouring tbeir parents, or abstaining from theft and raurder. In- Ne sequerer moechas, concessa cum Venere uti, Possem, &c. Horace. Decree of the Council of Jerusalem. 273 deed, he who is contented to do only wbat forms an express precept in holy writ, and to abstain from tbat only which is formally forbidden, misapplies the Scriptures. On man's conscience alone it is that the whole moral law is written, like the Ten Commandments, by tbe finger of God himself, but not, hke tbese, in perishable characters. This was the first revelation of God to man, and coexistent witb his creation ; and even the last dispensation was not at all designed to supersede tbe use of tbis original internal revelation. The New Testament does not contain any code of ethics; it only alludes to the raoral law as already known and provided ; or seeks to correct and reforra tbose parts which, although engraven perfect on man's heart by God, had becorae indistinct, and, in sorae few instances, nearly effaced. It furnishes motives to tbe observ ance of this law, and promises assistance in the per forraance of it. Tbis, and not a revelation of the moral law, is the instruction which a Christian is to expect from his Bible. As the autbor of tbis in struction, our Lord speaks of himself, and of him wbom be was to send to us, under tbe title of God encouraging us, (that is, exciting us by new motives, and new promises of aid,) and not under that of lawgiver : ' ' aXXov riagaxXriTOv SaJcrsi ifuv — He shall give you another Comforter^ ." So much for the teraporary character of tbis faraous decree, whatever authority it may be sup- •^ John xiv. 16. VOL. I. T 274 Decree of the Council of Jerusalem. posed to have had while it remained in force. On this point, mucb difference of opinion has existed. Our estimate of its authority must, of course, greatly depend on the character we assign to the persons who composed the assembly, and the circurastances under which they were acting. Without, therefore, referring to tbe specific con clusions wbich have been drawn, eitber for or against the authority of general councils, from the various assumptions witb regard to this, it wiU be plainer, and less tedious, to state concisely tbe leading questions by which those views may be elicited, and to direct the attention to that which appears on the wbole to be the most satisfactory reply. I. The first question is. Was this a general coun cil ? that is, did it represent the wbole Church ? or only one branch of it, namely, the Cburch of Jeru salem ? There is nothing in St. Luke's acount of it to imply, even reraotely, that it assumed the former character. It was not general, as composed of the heads of all tbe Churches, for none were present but the ambassadors of Antioch ; and tbese came to con sult, and not to join the council: nor again as com posed of all the apostles ; for St. Paul, and doubt less St. Barnabas too, were apostles ; and they were present indeed', but it was in tbe character of ambassadors, and not of delegates. II. The next question is, Was it an inspired or ' Acts XV. 22. Decree of the Council of Jerusalem. 275 uninspired council ? ITie opponents of the authority of general councils, in later times j have mainly insisted on the formet view ; and point out this cir cumstance as creating the essential hne between tbis afid aiiy that has been subsequently held. The leamed and candid Mosheim agrees so far vdth tbis view, as to suppose, tbat all the business on this occasion being left to tbe apostles, tbey as inspired persons, must have pronounced an inspired deci sion'. Perhaps all inquiries into the ecclesiastical affairs of this extraordinary period lean too rabcb to the notion, that every transaction in which an iriSpfred person appears, raust have befen the result of immediate inspiration. As far as tbe narrative guides us, no sucb intiraation is given in the pre sent instance ; and it may be safely asserted, tbat tbe apostles themselves were not throughout their ministry passive agents of the Holy Spirit*". The ' De Rebus Christian, ante Const. Magn. p. 153. '" Thus St. Paul writes to tbe Corinthians, " Unto the married I command — not /, but the Lord, Let not the wife depart from her husband," &c. " But to the rest speak /, not the Lord, If any brother hath a wife," &c. See 1 Corinth, vii. 10, 12. The greater part of what the apostles wrote was, doubtless, entirely the suggestion of their own minds, and, properly speak ing, uninspired. Its authority is not at all diminished by this circumstance, if Vi'e grant (what it would be absurd to doubt) that every wrong suggestion must have been checked by the impulse of the Spirit, every deficiency supplied by actual revela tion, and every failure or fault of memory miraculously remedied. The re^oelaiion was miraculous, but it was recorded just as any man would record any ordinary information which might be the t2 .276 Decree of the Council of Jerusalem. office of that blessed Comforter was to gvdde them to the truth, when the trath could not otherwise be obtained. He watched over the proceedings of that asserably, doubtless, as he. has ever watched over the concerns of the Church to this day." Judging from tbe apparent course of bis government, we should say, tbat had tbere been error suggested, his presence would have been manifested, or a divine impulse given to some particular raerabers of tbe council — but not otherwise. It was Christ only wbose inspiration was perpetual, and who needed no fresh coraraunication as new eraergencies presented themselves". What was meant by the result of reasoning, or of report. The Bible is the only book in the world which appeals to God for its authority, without affecting or pretending to the immediate authorship of God. Mahomet publishes, but Allah indites, the Koran ; and its very style is more than human. The authors of the Bible, on the other hand, write, as God's servants act. The modes of thought, the man ner, the language, are different in each, and in each, no less than his actions, his own. Here and there are marks of an inspiration which dictates to the very letter ; but ordinarily it is only a, divine superintendence, preventing error or omission, and interposing only for that purpose. God bas enabled man to record and to teach his word, as he has enabled hira to do his will ; not by superseding the use of his natural faculties, but by aiding them. With a view to both, his Spirit was given, in order to be called in when assistance should be needed, and was hence designated by the expressive name nAFAKAHTOS, " It was, perhaps, to indicate this that the Bible records the failure of the disciples, in their attempt to perform certain mira cles. " This kind," says Jesus, " goeth not out but by prayer and fasting." It is not said, that they were incapable of per forming these miracles, but it is intimated, that their endowment Decree of the Council of Jerusalem. 277 expression, " It seemed good to tbe Holy Ghost and to us"," will perhaps be seen more clearly when we examine the third question. III. Under what cbaracter was tbe Church of Jerusalera appealed to by tbe Church of Antioch ? Whatever tbe practice might be in later times, as yet, no jurisdiction was exercised by one Christian society over another — not even by the Church of Jerusalera over ber children in Cbrist. Paul and Barnabas bad been sent to convert tbe idolatrous Gentiles, (iraportant as tbis raeasure was beyond all otbers which engaged the attention of the early Christians,) solely by the appointment of tbeir own Cburch at Antioch, without the advice or know ledge of tbe sister Church at Jerasalem. In tbe present instance, too, tbey were coraraissioned with an erabassy, tbe circurastances of which, if duly considered, raust satisfy any candid inquirer, that its object was not perhaps even advice and assist ance in dehberation. First, certain merabers of tbe Church of Jerusalem come to the Church at Antioch preaching a new doctrine — a doctrine of which the Church at Antioch bad received no intimation, even although Paul so highly favoured was witb tbem. They taught the brethren, and said, " Except ye was different from Christ's, — that they must first by means of stated forms apply for specific powers from God, and then, indeed, these, and greater than these, should they perform. See Mutt, xvii. 21. Mark ix, 29. ° Acts XV. 28. 278 Decree of the Council of Jerusalem. he circuracised, after tbe manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved p." It was natural, therefore, that they of Antioch should send to Jemsalem, to as certain whether any credence was to be given to the report of these men who had come from them — whether the Church tbere, the apostles or other members, had indeed received any new communica tion from the Holy Spfrit, concerning the universal obUgation of the Jewish rites, as necessary to salva tion. For a fuU investigation of the matter the Church was assembled, and it being found that the notion had originated with certain unauthorized persons of the Pharisaical sect^, in their perverse zeal for the law, Peter and James explained the inexpediency of making any innovation ; and Paul and Bamabas were dismissed, together witb some members of tbeir own society, to assure tbe Church of Antioch, that no new revelation had been given on tbe subject — tbat tbeir rule at Jerusalem, the only one sanctioned by the Holy Ghost, was to oblige the converts to observe that which they were accustomed to observe before tbeir conversion, and nothing more. If the foregoing remarks are correct, we must seek elsewhere for the origin of general councils, and find sorae other foundation for the authority which bas since been claimed for them. Elsewhere, also, we must search for an exaraple in the apostolical I' Acts .XV. 1. 1 Acts XV. 5, Decree of the Council of Jerusalem. 279 age of one Church exercising jurisdiction over another. As to general councils, indeed, tbey obviously cease to be practicable as soon as tbe union of the universal Church bas been dissolved; in truth, they were before that event irapracticable — tbe history of these councils prove it — as to all purposes of unanimity. One Church may ask ad vice of another, or refer a difficult question to another; but for independent and unassociated Churches to raeet all in one council, is a practical contradiction. It supposes the Cburch to be one, in the sarae sense, in which each separate Christian society alone is, and ever was, one, from tbe first establishment of our faith. Christian Unity, the never-faiUng plea for these measures, has been so often a topic of bitter controversy, tbat we need not wonder at its assum ing at tbis day a difficult and subtil character. More of it by and by. In concluding these remarks, one caution suggests itself, which cannot be too early inserted in a review of the progress of Christianity. It is, not to look at every portion of the ecclesiastical stracture as it appears rising under the hands of tbe divine Builder, as if conveying a correct notion of tbe finished work. Objects prorainent at first, and reserabhng in their use the scaffolding or props of a real building, were afterwards removed. Others, by the application of new pieces, becarae so altered as not iraraediately to be recognized. One part, without undergoing any alteration, was yet gradually 280 Decree of the Council of Jerusalem. plastered up and removed out of sight. Another, the divine Architect has left to tbe discretion of posterity, to be modified from time to tirae so as to suit the changing circurastances of those wbo were to occupy fr. In exaraining this edifice, ranch more in the bold attempt to repair it, tbe most judicious raethod is, not to begin by coraparing it with the rude draughts in which it was projected; but rather to survey the Church as it stands, and reraoving one by one (where needful) tbose parts whicb are detected to be tbe work of men's bands, and no more, to let the holy Builder's name appear on those parts alone of tbe remainder, on wbich it is visible in bis own writing. This only is " not to diminish, not to add thereto ;" and this is wbat our reformers did. We bave conducted Paul and Barnabas through their embassy to Jerasalem, and must now prepare to trace tbeir second raission to the idolatrous Gentiles. It is probable that they reraained at Antioch no longer tban was necessary for securing tbe disputed rights of tbe Gentile converts at that place, an office wbich seeras to bave devolved on Paul alone. Peter bad indeed been the especial apostle of tbe devout Gentiles, of whora alone the Gentile portion of the Church at Antioch was at first coraposed; and on tbis account, no doubt, soon foUowed Paul and Barnabas thither. But his arrival was, probably, only a signal for the zealots to press tbeir point more earnestly. So successful Separation of Paul and Barnabas. 281 were they, that the Gentile advocate shrank from his office, and was ready to yield to their demands. Bamabas followed bis example. Paul alone re tained bis firmness, roused his noble feUow-labourer to a sense of his duty, and for a time quieted the spirit of faction'. AU was now ready for a second apostohcal jour ney ; tbe Church was at rest, and tbe services of Barnabas and Paul were no longer requfred at home. But the reader will recoUect, that hence forth he is to trace their course of ministerial labour apart'. On the grounds of tbeir separation, and on its probable results, it is unnecessary to dweU ; but, leaving Barnabas's future history for a subsequent consideration, let us foUow the record of tbe Holy Spfrit, and holding the thread whicb He has left us, pass on through tbe gradual enlargement of tbe covenant, under the agency of the great apostle selected for tbis purpose. One previous observation raay not, indeed, be unacceptable to him, who feels that it is inconsistent with the character of tbese good and holy men, friends frora their youth, tbus to bave parted in bitterness, under circumstances whicb might seem sufficient to bave repressed aU private differences. Did they part in bitterness? Paul afterwards spoke of Barnabas witb respect and affection, and received even Mark into his service when he thought him worthy ' Gal. ii. 11. 'Acts .xv. 39. 282 Separation of Paul and Barnabas. of it'. But that zeal which was indeed strong enough to have subdued the mere impulse of anger, had a similar power over feelings of friendship, and even over the ties of nature. Who shaU say, that in voluntarily separating their course for ever, as appears to have been the case, each was not submitting to a painful restraint, under the con sciousness of doing the best for tbe great good cause ? Who shall say, that each may not, by virtue of this very act, have inherited a portion of the reward promised to those who should forsake father, mother, brethren, or friends, for the sake of Christ and of his Gospel"? Hence we obtain a further proof, if indeed any sucb be requisite, tbat tbe extraordinary inspfr ation of the apostles was not an abiding or continual endowment, but only Qccasional. On matters of doubt or difference tbe Holy Spirit interposed its aid. But here no interference took place ; probably, because the result of the disagreement was most ' 1 Cor. ix. 6. Gal. ii. 9. Col. iv. 10. and 2 Tim. iv. 11. " Both may have done wha.t according to their best judgment was most beneficial to the Gospel. Had one been right, and the otber wrong, some special direction would probably have beea vouchsafed by tbeir divine Guide. But in this instance, a division of labour, the result of difference of opinion, was no doubt the most advantageous measure which could have been adopted. It was not, tberefore, to be expected, that any divine interference should take place, in order to effect that which would be effected by the ordinary course of things; especially if, as is suggested, the resolution was a trial to each- Separation of Paul and Barnabas. 283 beneficial to tbe coraraon welfare; because both were right. By a division of rainisterial labour between tbe only two who had as yet been commis sioned to tbe idolatrous Gentiles, the extension of the Gospel was no doubt promoted. It has been remarked, that Paul only was recopimended to tbe grace of God. St. Luke's silence, however, does not altogetber imply, that Barnabas received no such formal disnussal. In Paul's case alone it might be mentioned, because to hira now, and to the details of his raission, the narrative was to be limited. CHAP. V. ST. PAUL'S SECOND APOSTOLICAL JOURNEY. A. D. 53—56. ROUTE. Rest of Syria ; Cilicia ; Derbe ; Lystra ; Iconium ; Phrygia ; Galatia ; Troas; Samothracia ; Neapolis; Philippi; Amphipolis; ApoUonia; Thessa lonica ; Berasa ; Athens ; Corinth ; Cenchrsea ; Ephesus ; Caisarea ; Jerusalera ; Antioch in Syria /. Silas and Judas Barsabas were tbe raessengers appointed by tbe Church of Jerusalem to accompany Paul and Barnabas on their return to Antioch". Here Silas was induced to remain, and being a prophet, was fixed on by Paul as the fittest substi tute whicb he could provide for the feUow-labourer of whose assistance he was now to be deprived. Soon after he coraraenced his joumey, be found at Lystra another meet companion in the young and faithful Timothy. At Troas it would seem, from the narrative of tbe Acts, tbat Luke was added to their company*. Tbis then is the httle band of y Acts XV. 41. and xvi. to xviii. 22. » Acts XV. 22. " Acts xvi. 11. 286 Second mission to the idolatrous Gentiles. Christian heroes, whose progress, under the second mission of the Holy Spirit to the idolatrous Gentiles, we are now to consider. In wbat numbers these were added to the Church cannot be deterrained frora the sacred record. Mention is raade of the success of the raission at Philippi, at Bersea, at Athens, and especially at Corinth; and frora St. Paul's Epistle to the Tbessa lonians'', it appears tbat some Cdnversion of idolaters took place amongst these also. Probably some were converted in most of the places through which the apostle and his corapany journeyed, the notices in the Acts being evidently Uraited to tbe more re raarkable instances, sucb as Dionysius the Areo pagite, and " tbe honourable women" at Bereeai. It is not of course intended to pursue tbe apostle through the several stages of his work, but, agreeably with my plan, only to point to those parts of his route at which for any reason it may be desirable that we should pause. Thus, passing over the interraediate points of his joumey, at Troas we find bira receiving frora his divine Guide an especial communication. As one of the various modes in which God was wont to visit bis servants and the agents of his wiU, this then deserves to be particularly noticed. ^ 1 Thess. i. ' Acts xvii. 1 1—13. and 34. St. Paul at Troas. 287 St. Paul at Troas ". Whilst Paul was at Troas, a vision appeared to him in tbe night. A man of Macedon seemed to Stand before him, and say, " Pass over and help us." Frora this dream or apparition, the apostle inferred that the Lord had called him thither to preach the Gospel ; and the result proved that he was not mistaken. The Holy Ghost, which had hitherto checked and diverted tbeir course when proceeding contrary to tbe Une marked out in tbe divine counsels, now perraitted them to pass over, and crowned their efforts with success. Fi'oin the words of tbe sacred nartative, it cannot be certainly detemiined, whether this were a wak ing vision or a dream. Supposing it, however, to have been of the latter description, it would be by no means a singular instance of God thus commu nicating his will to his servants, and even to others. Abraham, Abimelech, Jacob, Jdseph, Pharaoh, So lomon, Nebuchadnezzar, are farailiar instances''. Of these " last days," tbo, it had been expressly foretold, amdng the ordinary signs, that men should " see visions and dream dreams'." It is no where suggested, that tbere was any thing ¦^ Acts xvi. 8. " Genesis xv. 12. xx. 3. xxviii. 12 — 16. xxxvii. 5. and xii. 1. 1 Kings iii. 5. Daniel iv. 5. ° Joel ii. 28. quoted and applied by St, Peter in his harangue on the great day of Pehteeost. Acts ii. 17. 288 St. Paul at Troas. pecuUar in the raanner of drearaing on these occa sions. Sometimes, too, as in tbe present instance, they look hke the ordinary result of the circum stances under wbich tbey are reported to have occurred. If this were a dream of St. Paul, (it may be said,) what ground bad he and his company to suppose it a divine irapulse, and to class it with tbe hght and tbe voice sent to bim wben on tbe road to Damascus, or witb the vision of " unutterable things," which he received in his trance in tbe temple. Would it not have been more sober and reasonable to conclude, tbat the approach to tbe verge of the Asiatic continent, and the sight of tbat faraous strait which forraed tbe slight barrier between them and Europe, had carried Paul's meditations to the opposite shores ? Musing upon tbose especiaUy who, crossing here with Alexander, made conquest of tbe east, even of bis own Judaea, and estabhshed in Egypt a rival to Jerusalem, be could not but expect to retain in bis dreams sorae irapression of a train of thought so deeply interesting, tinged, as every dreara of his raight well be, with tbe one subject whicb was predorainant in his raind. It raust be recollected, bowever, that the Holy Ghost (by some raode of coraraunication not specified) bad of late been making known bis approval or disap proval of tbe several steps of tbeir journey as soon as they were attempted. Tbe absence of this check tberefore raight have formed an appropriate evidence tbat tbe caU was divine. Still, as the same solu- St. Paul at Troas. 289 tion wiU not serve in other cases, it will be more satisfactory to take a general view of the question, extending it not only to aU inspired drearas, but to all otber raodes of divine coraraunication. Let us consider then, first, wbat those modes were, and then, what evidence the persons addressed bad, that tbe communication in each instance was divine. I. Visions. — By which is meant, any corarauni cation conveyed through an object of sight. Of this kind were, tbe hand-writing on the waU of Belshazzar's banquet roora, the pillar of fire and cloud which guided the IsraeUtes through tbe wilderness, and the Uke '. II. Voices, or revelations conveyed through the sense of bearing. Tbese were the raost frequent, and although often accorapanied with extraordinary impressions on tbe otber senses, yet were naturally the readiest and most distinct mode of corarauni cation. Such was the giving of tbe Ten Coramand raents, tbe call of Moses, and probably all those revelations designated in Genesis by the expression, " Tbe Lord said unto him s." ' III. Dreams. — Under which is included what ever was addressed to tbe imagination only; whether the abstraction from a consciousness of surrounding objects were the effect of sleep, or of some super natural influence, as in a trance or Exo-Tao-ij. As in- f Daniel v. 5. Exodus xiii. 21, 22. 5 Exodus iii. 2. xx. 1. Genesis xvii. VOL. I. U 290 St. Paul at Troas. stances 'of this class raay be raentioned, St. Paul's revelation in the teraple, Peter's vision of tbe sheet, Jacob's dream, and the hke*". IV. Instinctive impulses. — This terra is used to denote sorae raethod of making known the divine wiU, which does not appear to have been an address eitber to the senses or to tbe imagination, but to have operated on the desfres, affections, and other inchnations, as those other coraraunications did on the senses or tbe iraagination. Such may we con ceive to have been tbe method whereby Paul and bis company are described in this joumey as hin dered by the Holy Ghost frora pursurag a wrong course. By this, it raay be, they were enabled to interpret Paul's vision of the man of Macedon to be of divine origin". Tbis too might have been wbat the disciples of our Lord experienced, wben walking with him after his resurrection. For, although at tbe time they failed to attend to it, tbey afterwards expressed their surprise that they should have been so dull. " Did not our hearts burn within us as he talked witb us "^ ?" Perhaps this raode of reve lation being then new to thera, was not at once recognized. These will include all the various revelations of God to man, for tbere is no other conceivable form. '' 2 Cor. xii. 2. Acts x. 10. Genesis x. xviii. 12. ' Acts xvi, 6, 7, 9, and Rom. i. 13. " Luke xxiv. 32. St. Paul at Troas. 291 except where the mediation of sorae being is inter posed; and this belongs to a distinct considera tion. To tbis general stateraent, tbe first reraark to be added is, that in all the different methods, the senses and tbe imagination were probably affected only as in the ordinary course of nature — that tbe exercise of sight, of bearing, and of fancy, was in every case of the same kind as that produced by natural objects, natural sounds, and natural sleep. Thus Sarauel is described as raistaking the voice of God for tbat of EU ' ; and another, raore experienced, as desiring to be certified by a sign, tbat the irapres sion was supernatural, and being gratified in bis desire as reasonable "". This being so, it follows tbat besides the vehicle of communication, whether voice, vision, or dream, some sign of confirmation raust always have been provided, in order to satisfy tbe person visited, that he was not iraposed on, or else iraposing on hiraself — ^iraposed on, as in the case of " lying spirits," or of huraan contrivances, or of acci dental phenoraena ; iraposing on hiraself, as in the case of enthusiasra. Not tbat in aU, or in raost instances any record will be found of the sign of confirraation ; because the revelation alone concerns those to whora the records of the event are addressed, — the sign, the persons visited. StiU it is in many instances mentioned; perhaps in ' 1 Sam. iii. '" Judges vi. 17. U 2 292 St. Paul at Troas. all, of very great raoraent. In sorae indeed it was unavoidable; whenever, naraely, tbe sarae display served tbe double purpose of confirming sign and vehicle of communication, as in the case of the hand- writing addressed to Belshazzar". In some cases, again, the two are connected together, so as to form what is caUed in loose phrase one vision. Of tbis kind was tbat whicb occurred at St. Paul's conversion". Tbe voice alone was tbe raediura of communication ; while the Ught served to certify that it proceeded from no human lips'". The sarae raay be observed of tbe call of Moses at the bush''. Sometimes also the two were so joined, as that the sign should not become proof until afterwards ; it being in tbis case a sort of prophetic appendage. Of this kind was Zacbarias's revelation respecting Jobn the Baptist, tbat of Cor neUus concerning his ov^n adraission into tbe Church, and the Uke'. The last case is where the two were disjoined; and then tbe confirraation might be effected in some distinct revelation, or by specific rairacle. Thus tbe budding of Aaron's rod was a sign of confirmation to Aaron, and ¦ Dan, V, 5. " Acts ix. 3 — 5. r It is often asserted, that St. Paul then saw the Lord. But this could not have been the case. He was immediately struck blind, and the manifestation of Christj of which he speaks, took place subsequently in the Temple at Jerusalem. ¦< Exod. iii. 2, 4. ¦ Luke i. IL Acts x. St. Paul at Troas. 293 the miracle of the fleece to Gideon'. Thus, too, tbe power of working rairacles, granted in all ages to tbe messengers of God, were signs not only to tbose to wbom tbey were sent, but to theraselves also, that they were really so corarais sioned'. It is probable, that witb tbose who were in tbe habit of receiving frequent coraraunications, a miracle in every case might not have been requi site ; or if any, merely what bas been described as an instinctive impulse", sucb as was supposed to have confirmed St. Paul's view of his vision at Troas. Certain it is, tbat be is said on that occasion to have acted " immediately" on the authority of tbe vision". The word is introduced, as if for tbe purpose of marking a case in which no further sign of Confirmation was waited for. Perhaps then the vision alone was sufficient for one like St. Paul, thoroughly accustomed to the divine com munications. For although it is trae that this mode of operating on the senses or imagination was apparently the same, as if ordinary and na- ' Numb. xvii. 8. Judges vi. 37. ' In very arduous and doubtful undertakings, the prophet or messenger was first assured, as in the appointment of Moses. See Exod, iv. ° This would seem to be the appropriate one for correcting false impressions, and checking wrong measures. By this, pro bably, the apostles were prevented from preaching or writing any thing false. ' Acts xvi, 8, 10. 294 St. Paul at Troas. tural causes were operating; stiU, the eye, the ear, or the raind, would becorae familiarized to these, as to any other sounds, sights, or even dreams'". Thus, when Samuel is represented, (in the instance afready noticed,) as ignorant of the nature of the heavenly caU, the expression of Scripture is, that " he did not yet know tbe Lord^ ;" the natural interpretation of which seeras to be, that he had not yet become acquainted with the voice by ex perience. In hke raanner, Adara is said to have " known" or recognized the voice of the Lord God walking in the garden'*. Whether, even in these cases, it might have been tbe duty of the inspired to wait for a confirming sign, — suppose sucb only as the instinctive impulse or prohi bition, — and tbat for neglecting to do so they might have been soraetimes misled, as in tbe case of Balaara, it is scarcely necessary here to inqufre'". This topic has been afready more than suffici ently dwelt on for our iraraediate purpose ; and ' The experience of many may be appealed to, for the fact, that dreams do recur, and are remembered as repetitions of former dreams. Now, a dream ascertained to be divine, might contain some peculiarities which would, doubtless, be remembered so vi vidly, as by repetition to stamp a sure character on the class of dreams in which they were recognized. ' 1 Sam. iii. 7, '¦' Genesis iii. 8, 10. '' Numbers xxii. 20, et seq. St. Paul at Troas. 295 yet it leads to a consideration so important to Christian faith, tbat it is difficult to refrain from pursuing it a httle further. Has tbe reader ever attempted to state to himself distinctly, wbat he understands by tbe terra revelation, meaning a revelation of the Divine-nature ? Neither the voice, tbe vision, the dream, nor the instinct can be said to be God. AU are evidently vehicles, and modes of communicating bis messages to man. " Him no raan bath seen at any time^" Suppose, then, we vrished to convey a description of an object of sigbt to one born bhnd; (for that is our con dition in relation to the Divine-nature ;) he raay perhaps be raade to receive sorae indistinct idea of it through his sense of bearing ; and tbe vehicle of tbis revelation, as it raay be terraed, would be a voice. Sorae contrivance raay be afterwards in vented wbich should convey to bim the same de scription, by subraitting to bis touch figures repre senting it, or, as is done in sorae asylums, by letters and words strongly impressed, so as to be distinctly felt. If it had so happened, tbat he was at length favoured with tbe gift of sight, (as occurred witb sorae in the rairaculous period of the Church,) that same description might be set before his eyes in a painting. ^ Meanwhile, suppose him never yet to have witnessed the object itself, thus variously represented. He would 'Johni, 18. 296 St. Paul at Troas. then have become acquainted with it in three dis tinct ways, and have been enabled to iraprove and to apply his knowledge of it by raeans of each; still, he would hardly be absurd enough to make either of these assertions, 1. That the sounds, the figures, the writing, or the painting, were the very thing described. 2, That the variety in the mode of conveying the description iraphed any corresponding distinction in that one object, tbe idea of which was tbus variously communicated to him. Is the reader sufficiently assured of the truth of tbese remarks, to apply thera to tbe descriptions raan has received of the Divine-nature ? God has been omnipresent^ from tbe begiiming, and caimot be supposed at any time to be more in one place <• In truth, omnipresent is a relative term. God is said to be omnipresent, because all things are present to him, not because he ia present to all things. The original error consists in assign ing him any place at all, — in attributing locality to a Beino- who cannot be affected, as we are, by the distinctions of space. The same may be observed of eternity, as applied to the Divine- nature. We can only judge of time by a succession of impressions on the mind; and it is usually by supposing an infinite succession that we arrive at our notion of eternity. But why should we presume to say, that any such succession is requisite for the Divine mind? A savage would instruct a traveller in his route, by a successive enumeration of point after point , and line after line in his course ; a civilized man would do the same at once, by placing a map before him. If then human nature exerts itself so differently, as it is cultivated or neglected, how cautious should we be in framing analogies between the energies and capacities ofthe most perfect mind, and of God who formed it. St. Paul at Troas. 297 than in another. Yet it has pleased Him frora time to time to " lift up an ensign," to which men might come to ask for communication of his wiU, and to be made sensible of his presence. Such was tbe Shechinah granted to tbe Israelites, from between the Cherabim, where God is accordingly said to have dwelt". Witb this flame the voice or other vehicle of coraraunication was so connected, tbat tbe priest was obliged to corae to tbe forraer, in order to avail hiraself of the latter. The flarae was the sign; and besides this there was the voice or other channel of revelation. It afterwards pleased the Most High to set up an ensign for aU tbe world to resort unto, even " for the nations afar^." This ensign was, the Human-nature of our blessed Lord. To Him, all were now to come who desired to receive the divine coraraunications. His words and syra boUcal rairacles, and other acts, forraed tbe vehicle of that communication — as mucb so, and in like manner, as the voice wbich gave the Ten Command ments from raount Sinai, or which spoke at different tiraes to Adara, to the patriarchs, to the prophets, and otbers bis servants of old. Hence it is written, tbat " tbe Word was made flesh and dwelt among us," and that " men beheld his glory," in allusion to the analogy between Hira and tbe Shechinah^. Hence, too, the occasional radiant appearances ' Exodus xxix. 43. , ' Isaiah v. 26. » John i, H. 298 St. Paul at Troas. wbich could not fail to have suggested to Jewish witnesses the syrabol of divine manifestation. At tbe same time it raust be borne in raind, that the incarnation of the Son of God differed from all other modes of divine communication, in that Christ did not only represent, personate, and raanifest, God, but man also. Hence he is caUed the " only mediator'' ;" and witb reference to this pecuharity it is, perhaps, tbat St. Paul speaking of him says, " now a mediator is not a raediator of one, but God is one ;" i. e. Christ as raediator is at once tbe mean of coraraunication frora God to man, and from raan to God — the representative of both — God in person, and also Man in person; nevertheless, as God, He is one'. But tbe Alraighty has not hraited bis raodes of coraraunication to sensible objects, to voices and visions. He bas also addressed himself im mediately to tbe raind, to the affections and under standings of raen. In this kind of coraraunication effected by tbe Spirit, tbe vehicle is not raaterial, nor an object of the senses. Its effects, indeed, have been raade visible in the rafraculous gifts of the apostles, and in tbe prophetic raonuraents of the Cburch in aU ages ; its effects we stiU see in the behaviour of individuals and of nations, and still " Gal. iii. 20. 1 Tim, ii. 5. ' The text is a difficult one, and no interpretation given of it is perhaps free from objections ; the term Mediator is generally referred to Moses, St. Paul at Troas. 299 hear, in those sounds whicb are going forth into all lands ; but, according to our Lord's illustration, Uke the wind, we cannot tell whence it cometh nor whither it goeth. For us is this mode of divine coramunication ap pointed. To us the Spirit speaks, as the raan Christ Jesus did to bis followers ; as the voice or vision frora between the cherabim addressed itself to tbem of older time ; as, in short, each different organ of communication bath spoken at sundry times to the several generations of God's people; for He, says the apostle, hath spoken " in divers raanners''." But then, where are we to seek for the appendage to this, as to the other appointed and regular vehi cles of divine communication ? Where, asks tbe Christian, is our Shechinah ? Where tbe ensign to which is attached this unheard voice, this unseen vision? To be sure it may be said, that God is not to be found here or tbere, but is omnipresent. So He was before the flame of the Shechinah was Ughted, or the Word was made flesh ; nor was He less so, during either manifestation. It is not his presence, but tbe sign of bis presence we ask for. To the Heathen themselves, from wbom the Jewish ensign was removed. He was indeed present, — " not far from any of tbem," as tbeir apostle told them'; but the great privUege of being a pecuUar people consists in having this Sign to resort to. •t Heb. i. 1. ' Acts xvii. 27. 300 St. Paul at Troas. See then. Christian, whether we have it not as distinct and as accessible, nay, raore accessible and more distinct, tban ever before was given. Re member, that the mode of coraraunication is no longer by sound or by sight, — no longer a sensible medium, but spirit. Tbe corresponding ensign, also, is not addressed to the eye nor to the ear, but to tbe mind. It is not a flarae, which, however briUiant, iUumines only tbe holy of hoUes. It is not a raan, whora only a sraaU portion of the huraan race can see, and hear, and foUow. But it is, wbat better suits an unUraited dispensation, it is a MIRACULOUS RECORD. The Bible and tbe Sacra raents are our Shechinah, our Sign ; not, indeed, to be recognized as such by gazing at tbem, hfting thera up, and carrying thera about, but by humbly reading, marking, leaming, and inwardly digesting. We, unhke God's people of old, walk by faith, and not by sigbt. It appears then, that besides the occasional com munications made by God to his servants and to others, he has, in the course of bis ordinary and perpetual deaUngs with his Church or People, ap pointed three distinct modes of coraraunication, whereby be was to be accessible to those who should seek hira ; and that appended to each was the Sign of his presence in such raodes of intercourse. To prevent the error of attributing the divine agency to tbree different Beings, in consequence of tbis dif ference, we are instructed in the Unity of God, and St. Paul and the Pythoness. 301 baptized in his narae as tbe Father, in bis narae as the Son, and in his name as the Holy Ghost. Again, as under this threefold dispensation we ob serve that the Ahnighty bas in each manifestation assuraed to hiraseU certain characteristics, we pre surae not to confound God tbe Father who created us, with God the Son wbo redeeraed us, and witb God the Holy Ghost wbo sanctifies us ; but, agree ably to the sense and language of the Christian Church frora tbe earUest tiraes, we worship Him as one in three Persons. St. Paul and the Pythoness'" . Tbe foregoing remarks raay serve to guide us in another question, tbat, naraely, concerning the knowledge we possess of the evil Being. With his origin and his absolute nature we are whoUy unac quainted. Our view of him, like that of tbe Author of aU good, is chiefly negative. Whence be too is caUed a spirit; tbat is, his real nature is incapable of being perceived by our senses ; and even the modes whereby he has been manifested to us are accommodated, not to tbe sight, tbe hearing, or to any external perception, but only to the imma terial part of man. But, as God hiraself has vouch safed so also to address hiraself to us, it was neces sary, in contradistinction to Hira, to designate the author of evU by the terra evil spirit. " Acts xvi. 16. 302 St. Paul and the Pythoness. According to the Scriptures, he has been to us the author of those two original evils, tbe eff'ects of which tbe whole world stiU daily experiences; sin and death. In perpetuating these, his ordinary and continual agency appears to have been ever exerted; as to counteract tbe effects of these, has been tbe objects of God's ordinary deaUngs witb mankind. But the evil spfrit has also displayed bis extraordi nary and occasional operations on the objects of his mahce. He has sometiraes vexed raen's rainds and bodies, as in the instances of Job, of Saul king of Israel, and of those who laboured under tbat pe cuUar raalady which is called in the Gospels de moniacal possession. On the reaUty of these pos sessions sorae observations were offered, in treating of our Saviour's rainistry, under the bead of mira cles, and under that of tbe temptation. But besides tbe inffiction of pain and disease, wbich was there especially noticed, he seems to have exercised a power of delusion, — inspiring agents, over whom he had obtained control, to foretel future events. Tbe most obvious, although by no raeans the only great raischief produced thereby, was, that to him were ascribed the power and praise which were due only to God. Foreknowledge was considered as a pecuhar attribute of the Deity ; and the Being therefore who enabled his agents to foretel events, was regarded as tbe one wbo ordained and dispensed tbem. Hence he is caUed in Scripture " the prince St. Paul and the Pythoness. 303 of this world," and " the father of lies"," This by no raeans impUes, that with deraoniacal inspiration coraraenced the various superstitious arts which have obtained in the world, or tbat they were altogether kept up by this influence. It is raore consonant with what is observed of the rest of the evil one's agency, to suppose, that finding, these corrapt devices to have sprung out of his original depravation of raan's heart, he ever and anon sup ported them by extraordinary interposition. Why tbis was ever perraitted, the source of goodness being almighty ; — why, indeed, such a Being ever existed, are questions which the inquirer of the present day has leamed to consider in their true Ught as vain, unprofitable, and presumptuous. During our Saviour's rainistry. He often exercised bis power over the forraer class of evil raanifesta tions, naraely, demoniacal possessions. Of tbe latter class none are raentioned, until we find Paul at PhiUppi exercising a sirailar authority over tbe possession of a Pythoness ; a sort of fortune-teUer, whose raaster raade a gain of her gift, or rather of her curse ; and wbo, regarded siraply frora the ac- -count of her way of Ufe, might appear in tbe light of a common irapostor. Her interview witb the apostle, however, contains circurastances, which render it unquestionable, that in her case, as in that of the demoniacs, the agency of the devil was manifested. " John viii. 44., xii. 31. xiv. 30. 304 St. Paul and the Pythoness. Philippi was the first place in which Paul, after his departure from Troas, found " a door opened unto him ;" and of the results of bis ministry there, this rairacle, and tbe conversion of Lydia a devout Gentile, are tbe main circumstances recorded. It is worthy of remark, tbat in tbis, as in the cases which. occurred during tbe Saviour's personal minis try, the evil spirit acknowledged in Christ the agency of tbe most high God. It was through his narae stiU tbat these rairacles were performed. Agree ably to the account which bis commissioned servants gave him, whilst he was yet with them, " In thy name we cast out devils"," Paul now addressed the spirit of divination, and found it, as Christ had fore told, obedient unto bim. The believer hopes and expects to find a beautiful propriety in every part of tbe Christian scherae ; and where be does not perceive it, still he infers its existence. Thus, observing tbat of the two kinds of deraoniacal possession our Saviour frequently exercised his power in person over those afiUcted witb tbe raalady so characterized, while tbe exercise of a sirailar power over tbose visited by a spirit of divination was reserved for his apostle to the Gen tiles ; one is naturaUy prorapted to look for sorae mark of propriety and consistency in the arrange ment. Such may, perhaps, be foimd by contem plating tbe difference of character in the rainistry " Luke X, 17. St. Paul and the Pythoness. 305 of Cbrist, and of his apostles guided by bis Spirit. It was the business of the forraer to do the work of rederaption, of the latter to instruct men in it. Tbe rainistry of Christ, therefore, would be directed generaUy against all the evil and hurtful agency of the Devil; the rainistry of the apostles raore par ticularly against tbe propagation of falsehood. The forraer would naturaUy counteract the works of Satan ; tbe latter his words, as conveyed through agents, such as was the rescued Pythoness. It was during the apostle's third journey, bow ever, tbat his success in this branch of his ministry appears to have been greatest. At Ephesus, among tbe erainent rairacles (Auvafteif ov ra; Tvxovd-as) which be displayed, some appear to have been of tbis charac ter'" ; and to have operated so powerfuUy on the minds of many wbo witnessed thera, that tbey came forward and burned pubUcly their books of magic. The high valuation of these, marks at once the extent of tbe evil, and also the wonderful suc cess of the apostle. Tbis wbole portion of his ministry proves too, that demoniacal possession was not, as some have rashly imagined, confined to the Jews. p The attempt of the Jewish exorcists to imitate Paul, proves that these cures were wrought, like that of the Pythoness, " in the name of the Lord Jesus." " Then certain vagabond Jews, exorcists, took upon them to call over them that had evil spirits the name of the Lord Jesus, saying. We adjure thee by Jesus. whom Paul preacheth." (Acts xix. 13.) VOL. I. X 306 St. Paul at Athens. St. Paul at Athens'^. The apostle and his company, when dismissed by the raagistrates from PhiUppi, passed through Ampbipolis, ApoUonia, Thessalonica, and Bersea; and in each left traces of their inspfred agency. At Thessalonica, as we know from the Epistle soon after addressed to the converts there, tbeir labours were reraarkably successful, even araong the idolaters. Athens is next in the hst of places which received thus early a suraraons from the Holy Spirit to repent, believe, and be baptized. Athens was stiU the principal seat, of leaming, and of those arts whicb furnished tbe chief at traction of idolatry. It was tbe University of tbe Roraan erapire and of tbe world. At Athens there fore it raight be expected, that argument, not force, would be opposed to the efforts of tbe Christian orator ; and that on bis part, as deaUng vrith a people accessible in a high degree through their reasoning powers, the words more than tbe works of tbe Spirit would be employed. It is not, how ever, merely to point out the propriety of the Holy Spirit's ministry tbere — although, hke every othqr instance, it affords a strong presumption of the tmth of the Bible narrative, and ought not to be overlooked — ^but it is not merely on this ac count, nor yet for tbe sake of tbat interest whicb 1 Acts xvii. St. Paul at Athetis. 307 the name of Athens inspires, tbat Paul's arrival there is noticed; but on account oftwo circurastances which occurred while he was there, and which, ad raitting each of different views, may not be regarded at first by all in tbat which seems to be tbe correct one. Preaching, in the first instance, (as his custora was,) to the Jews and devout Gentiles of tbe place, bis discourses were so rauch noised abroad, as to attract the attention, not of the raagistraey, but of the philosophical idlers. Idlers, I say, be cause at Athens tbese speculators forraed a body of literary loungers, and presented in the porches and otber places of pubhc resort a wbirasical scene of fashionable relaxation, of which the arauseraents and conceits were raetaphysical and raoral discussions. Surrounded by corapany like this, and possibly unable, frora tbe variety and nuraber of tbe questions addressed to hira, to raake his raeaning understood, Paul was conducted — not as a crirainal, for of this there is no intiraation — but as the promulgator of a new system, to Mars' Hill, and was there desired publicly to explain his views His speech, accordingly, bears no marks of a de fence, nor was it followed up eitber by acquittal or condemnation, — by sentence from a Court, or violence from the multitude. At his mention of a resurrection from the dead, the doctrine seems to have struck his audience as so monstrous and preposterous, that he could no longer proceed for x2 308 St. Paul at Athens. the jests and witticisms which it occasioned. His speech is doubtless, therefore, only a part of what he intended to say to tbem, and what raight thus have proved raore generaUy effectual, had bis audi tors " had ears to hear" bim out". As St. Paul's examination bas been raost comraonly represented in tbe Ught of a judicial proceeding, these reraarks wiU not be useless, if, by determimng more pre cisely tbe circumstances, they shaU raake his cele brated harangue appear raore natural, and more fuUy adapted to the occasion. One consideration too should be bome in mind, that at Athens, the chief, if not the only, persuasive which he chose to era ploy was eloquence — the very weapon in the use of which tbe Athenians were most skilful. With mi racles he had confounded the people wbose boast was " an image tbat feU frora heaven," and he now pleads for Christianity in the city of Demosthenes. In the speech itself there is only one, topic wbich wiU be noticed ; it is the aUusion to an altar erected to " the unknown God." Some few, who have considered St. Paul's be haviour here as an eminent iUustration of the cba racter wbich he bas given to himself, of being " aU ¦¦ " Some mocked, andothers said, We will hear thee again of this matter.'' This may be understood to imply a division of senti ment among the auditory ; some mocking him, so as to render it impossible for him to proceed; others, as Dionysius and Damaris, encouraging him, and telling him that they at least would con tinue to hear him. St. Paul at Athens. 309 things to aU men," have so far departed from tbe comraon acceptation of the passage, as to imagine that " the unknown God" was no one particular object of worship which the Athenians had adopted ; but tbe trae God, whom, he tells them, they igno rantly worshipped in the various characters of Jupiter, ApoUo, &c. To Jehovah (they understood bim to say) are justly due your worship and your altars. It is not your Jupiter wbo is the God, but the Being who made the Heavens or Jupiter'. The objections to this interpretation are tbese : first, the apostle so expresses hiraself as clearly to denote tbat tbe words, " to God unknown," were inscribed on sorae altar * ; secondly, respectable testiraonies bave been found of tbe existence of sucb an altar ; lastly, it is not in accordance with St. Paul's otber addresses on the subject of idolatry, — ^his custom being to point out to tbe heathen, not that they were worshipping God under false names, but serving the devil ". It reraains, tberefore, to deterraine what parti cular God was raeant by the inscription on 'the ' Pope's creed, as expressed in his universal prayer, was no other than this : Father of all, in every age. In every clime, ador'd; By saint, by savage, and by sage, Jehovah, Jove, and Lord. * BfUiUov 111 a lyriyiyPBtTTra Ayvaa-ra Qiar. " 1 Cor, X, 20. 1 Tim. iv. 1. 310 St. Paul at Athens. altar. On this point the reraarks afready made, on tbe occasion of tbe speech, may not a little help to guide inquiry. Nothing is more probable, than that tbe Athenians, the raost inquisitive people on earth, should by tbis time have heard, and bave taken sorae interest in tbe report, of a new God which tbe Christians were represented as proclaira ing to the world". In tbeir characteristic vivacity and eagerness for novelty, an altar raight have been erected to hira, before they had ascertained his narae. On Paul's arrival, their very conversation witb him would lead them to surmise that he was » Christo ut Deo carmen dicunt, Plinii Epist. May not the remark, that Paul was a setter forth of strange gods, because he preached Jesus and the Resurrection, have arisen from his state ment of the doctrine of the Trinity, in reply to some question put to him concerning the new God? The opening of his speech obviously falls in with this view. Having first declared Him to be the same God who made the world, he was proceeding to speak of his manifestation in the flesh, viz. " the man whom he had ordained,'' when he was interrupted. Nor is this altogether unfounded conjecture. For, that Christ was represented as a strange God, worshipped by tbe Christians, is, I think, plain from the very terms in which Pliny describes the new sect. " They sing a hymn to Christ as to a God," which is precisely the remark of the Athenians respecting Paul, that he was " a setter forth of strange gods." This then is at least plausible, whether we admit or reject the notion that the accomplished Christian orator was so misunder stood in the use of the term dtdirrarii, (resurrection,) by an Athenian audience, as to leave the impression that he was dis coursing of a goddess so named — a notion first suggested by Chrysostom, and adopted by many after him. St. Paul at Corinth and Cenchrea. 311 one of tbe proraulgators of this new rehgion. Hence the eagerness with whicb he was brought before tbe public, led purposely perhaps by this very altar, which would on tbat account be pointed out to hira, and would forra a natural topic for the opening of his speech. It is scarcely necessary to add to tbese remarks, that tbe expression'' " too superstitious," whicb is mistranslated, was raeant, no doubt, as a cora- pUraent, and not as a reproach, by character izing the people as one who displayed a high sense of religion. St. Paul at Corinth and Cenchrea''. At Corinth the apostle made a longer sojourn than in any other city during his journey. Here were written his Epistles to tbe Tliessalonians ; per haps that also to the Galatians. Here, too, he probably received frora Aquila and Priscilla the first intelUgence of Christianity having been preached to the Romans. Here, lastly, he founded tbat Cburch, which, above aU otbers, engaged bis chief personal interest. In tbe rainute internal regulations of tbis, more tban of any other, he appears to have busied bimself; and, accordingly, his Epistles to the Corin- hi. Of aU the incidents, however, which mark Paul's residence at Ephesus, the most interesting, perhaps, is his raeeting with certain disciples of John the Baptist. St. Paul and the disciples of John the Baptist. No raention is raade by any of the Evangelists of the disciples of Jobn the Baptist, subsequently to tbeir raaster's iraprisonraent and death. Probably tbe greater part of them became foUowers of Jesus ; having been indeed caUed and instracted by Jobn to this very end. Some notice of tbis transfer might have been intended in the formal erabassy on which be sent tbem to our Saviour, when be found his own removal from thera likely to be at hand". But before it actually took place, sorae might have quitted Palestine ; and thus, although convinced by tbe preaching of Christ's forerunner, might have had no opportunity of attaching themselves either to Him or to the disciples of Him whose way tbeir inaster had prepared. Such inight have been the case with these, who, about twelve in number, were found by Paul at Ephesus. ApoUos, one similarly circurastanced, bad, before tbe apostie's arrival, received baptism from Aquila and PrisciUa; and had already, from his eloquence and knowledge of the Scriptures, become erainently serviceable to the '' Colossians i. 7. " JVIatt. xi. 2. See Appendix, [I.] St. Paul and the disciples of John the Baptist. 317 Christian cause in Achaia''. As ApoUos is said to have been of Alexandria, these otbers also raight have come from tbe same place. Even so, thefr total ignorance of aU that had occurred at Jerusalem during an interval of more than twenty years, on a subject which so nearly concemed thera as the de scent of the Holy Ghost, and the preaching and baptizing of the apostles*; and tbis, too, notwith standing thefr raanifest expectation of the events, strongly confirms the reraark forraerly raade, on tbe extrerae tardiness with which intelhgence of the several stages of the new dispensation was cora raunicated; even between places the most con nected by frequent intercourse. Between Alexandria and Jerasalem there was at this time nearly as much intercourse, as between the holy city and the remote parts of Judea itself; and the Passover, at least, was yearly attended by numbers, with, perhaps, a more scrupulous punctuahty than by the Jews who were resident in thefr native country. The rebaptism of these disciples of John the Bap tist, first by AquUa and PriscUla, and, in a second instance, by St. Paul, suggests an inqufry into the difference between tbe baptism of John and that of Paul ; which again leads us to ask, what was the difference between tbis leist and tbat of Jesus Christ himself. '' Acts xviii. 24. * Acts xix.5 2. 318 St. Paul and the disciples of t/ohn the Baptist. John baptized with water only; that is, tbere was no inward grace bestowed on tbe disciple through the cereraony. Baptisra was only a sign of admission into the temporary society over which he presided ; and as such, a pledge also that the initiated would conform to the rale of that society, repentance. But, while John baptized, be pointed to the coming of Jesus, as of one wbo should " baptize witb the Holy Ghost and witb fire ;" raeaning, tbat his baptism should be perforraed, with water indeed, but not witb water only — that theimmersion and sprin kling should not be raerely tbe sign of adraission into a society, or tbe pledge of conformity with rules, but tbe appointed means for iraparting tbe Holy Spirit. It was reaUy then a baptizing witb tbe Holy Ghost, rather tban witb water ; for tbe sarae reason as we should say, tbat he who was sent by the prophet to wash in Jordan was cured, not by the washing, but by tbe secret grace attached to it ; or, again, that it was not the clay on the bUnd man's eyes which restored him to sight, but the vfrtue which went forth frora Jesus with the act of putting it on. " With the Holy Ghost," says St. John, there fore, "He shall baptize, and witb fire'';" tbat is, with the Holy Ghost, whose emblem and attesting '< Matt.-iii. 11. Mark i. 8. Luke iii. 16. John i. 33. St. Paul and the disciples of John the Baptist. 319 sign shaU be fire. He speaks of the flame which descended on the day of Pentecost, in proof of the true iuAdsible descent of the Holy Ghost. Such then was the baptism of Jesus, as distin guished from that of John. Jesus himself indeed baptized not, but sucb was the baptism of his foUowers. At the sarae time, an evident distinction obtains between this rite as performed by his dis ciples during his abode on earth, and as perforraed by those wbo after the day of Pentecost were enabled to fulfil his commission of baptizing, not only in tbe name of the Father and of tbe Son, but also of tbe Holy Ghost. It was, doubtless, owing to this very ground of difference, that they were forbidden to enter upon thefr duties until tbe descent of the Holy Ghost bad taken place. For, until that event, they could neither impart that holy gift to the initiated, nor have properly baptized thera into that name. It is plain, for the same reason, that whatever baptisms took place during our Saviour's rainistry must have been similarly defective. And yet it would seem, that to that stage of Christian baptism raore especiaUy John's words relate, " He shaU baptize you','' &c. And, doubtless, they are to be so understood. The baptism of Jesus, during his abode on earth, was defective; no more intemal grace was conveyed at the tirae through it than through John's. But this was in conformity with ' Luke iii. 16. John i, 33. 320 St. Paul and the disciples of John the Baptist. the character of Christ's whole ministry. It was imperfect /or the time, but so framed as to become perfect afterwards. Those whom he baptized by the hands of his apostles and of the seventy were in one sense incompletely baptized ; because the most important effects of the ceremony did not in these instances immediately foUow the performance of it. StiU, when he sent the Holy Spirit on them, he may be said to have himself completed thefr baptism; wbich was tbus raore honourable than any otbers could boast of receiving. With them the giving of the Holy Ghost was not by the agency of human ministers, but iraraediately by thefr Lord and thefr God. Being baptized too by a manifesta tion of the Holy Ghost, these had no more need to be rebaptized unto tbat name, in addition to the form wherewith they had afready been admitted as disciples, than had tbe apostles to be baptized unto Christ, wben caUed by bira in person. The pre sence of the divine Being in each raanifestation, superseded and impUed aU that could be intended by specific baptisra unto that narae, which, in each case, designated tbe Person of tbe Grodhead then present. None of Christ's disciples accordingly were rebaptized after tbe descent of tbe Holy Ghost'' ; but witb John's, the case was widely different. On ¦' Tertullian mentions certain freethinkers of his day, who argued from this fact, that either Christian baptism was not necessary to salvation, or else the apostles were not saved. De Baptismo, c. 12. CoUectioiijf for the poor of Judaea. 321 the present occasion it is particularly recorded, that Paul explained to than the difference, baptized tbem in the Christian form, and imparted to them the Holy Ghost, testified by the gift of tongues and of prophecy. CoUections for the poor of Judtea ^ So repeated mention is made in the Epistles of St. Paul, of contributions for the rehef of the Chris tians of Jadsea, that it may be useful to notice tbis subject also in connection with the apostie's stay at Ephesus. Whilst he was preparing to make ex cursions alone into tbe other parts of Asia, for the purpose of convertiiig or confirming converts in the faith, Timothy and Erastus were despatched to Macaionia, to urge the claims erf the necessitous brethren, and to hasten the contributions, so that he might find them ready on his arrival there. It may be necessary to remind the reader, who inquires why the Christians of Judasa espedaUy should need this assistance, that, according to the prediction of the prophets at Antiodi. they had been distressed by a general scarcity le glory, but of the drrine Spirit himEdi^ of wboee indwelling- it bad been tbe ancient s^mbtri. y John xiv. 23. " 1 Conaih. SL 16, 17, * Hence onr Lord's ^orcs. •' He that ^eaketfa a ¦watd against the Son of man, it sbaU be forsiven him ; bot wbos'r-erer soeafceth ijoinst the H:!v Gtosr, it sball not be rorsiren him, neither in 334 St. Paul and the Corinthians. lated; rauch more, then, their successors. Ananias's visitation was the first instance of the infliction of ecclesiastical punishment, and it is expressly said to have been for an offence against the Holy Ghost. Certainly, to deterraine wbat behaviour constitutes an offence of tbis kind, supposes a knowledge of wbat is inconsistent with tbe abode of tbe Holy Spirit in tbe Cburch, and also wbat bis operations are ; and these are matters of revelation, — seen, doubtless, witb raore or less clearness, (as all otber raatters of instraction are,) in proportion as raen exert their faculties ¦ to understand, and God sees good to bless that exertion. Tbus mucb may be sufficient, on tbe nature of offences against the Church, for the reader to understand the principle which renders them such ; and it now remains to inqufre, wbat are the proper penalties ? The same method wiU be adopted as in tbe forraer case, viz. first, to consider what practices would naturaUy result frora tbe principles laid down ; and tben, to see wbether tbe sacred writings con- this world, nor in the world to come ;" that is, he shall be amenable to the Church as a crirainal, as well as to God as a sinner. The assertion is a plain disavowal on the part of Christ, of his being the ruler of the Churck. The whole passage may be referred to, as deserving the most attentive consideration. Our Lord's remark had been, that his casting out devils by the Spirit of God was a sign that the kingdom of God was coming on them unawares. In this kingdom, the Holy Ghost, the Com forter, was ruler and governor, and consequently blasphemy against the Holy Ghost was treason. St. Paul and the Corinthians. 335 tain or allude to such a system of coercion, as we may have been thus led to infer. It was observed then, tbat the inherent right of every society is exclusion in its various gradations : that every society must possess this, but nothing beyond tbis, as an inherent right. Whatever otber punishraents are adopted by any society, raust be founded on a right created by tbe perraission of its raerabers, if its formation was a matter of choice to thera, or by the corapelling person, if it was a raatter of com pulsion. Now, apply this to the case of tbe Church. There is a society left by its founder without any penal code ; and the question is, whether any right of punishment therefore is vested in it, and of wbat punishment? Exclusion, or excommunication, in all its shades and degrees, presents itself as a kind of penalty, the infliction of whicb is an inherent and perpetual right. Referring to the pages of apo stohcal history, we see every reason to conclude frora the incidental aUusions to ecclesiastical dis cipline, tbat sucb was the raode of coercion sanc tioned by tbe infaUible guides and founders of the Church. Our Saviour's direction had been, " If thy brother sball trespass against thee, go and tell hira bis fault between thee and bira alone ; if be shaU bear thee, thou bast gained thy brother. But if be wiU not hear thee, then take with thee one or two raore, that in the raouth of two or tbree witnesses every word may be established. And if ¦ he shall neglect to hear them, teU it unto tbe Church; 336 St. Paul and the Corinthians. but if he neglect to hear the Church, let him be unto thee as an heathen rnan and a publican^." To the Corinthian Church the apostle's rebuke siraply is, " Ye are puffed up, and bave not rather raourned that be that hath done this deed might be taken away from among you''." And a Uttle after, he adds, in explanation of certain figurative expressions with whicb be bad been illustrating tbe same principle, " I bave written unto you not to keep company, if any man that is caUed a brother be a fornicator, or covetous, or an idolater, or a railer, or a drunkard, or an extortioner ; witb such an one no not to eat^" In the energetic language of the apostle on tbis occasion occurs tbe expression, " to dehver over the person to Satan for tbe destraction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in tbe day of tbe Lord '• Matt, xviii, 15 — 17. "= 1 Corinth, v. 2, 11. "* This was an allusion to the Agapce, or love-feasts, which formed the least important act of Christian communion. It is unreasonable to interpret it of all intercourse with the offending brother ; which was a prohibition as mucb beyond the boundary of Gbtirch discipline, as it was inconsistent with the apostle's rpmark on another occasion, that if a Christian were perversely and superstitiously to abstain from commerce with all but the faithful, he must go out of the world. It was of St. Peter's withdrawing himself from this test of communion with the Gen tile converts, that St. Paul chiefly complained in the memorable strugg^le for Christian equality at Antioch, " For before that certain came frora James, he did eat with tke Gentiles. ' Galatians ii. 12. St. Paul and the Corinthians. 337 Jesus ^" In tbis, tben, there would seem to be something raore irapUed tban raere excommunica tion. It is spoken of, too, as a sentence proceeding by pecuUar right from hiraself, and not, as tbe other, frora one vested in the Church as a body. Whether in tbe present instance it was executed, or only threatened, is not explicitly stated; that it was actuaUy inflicted on Hymenaeus and Alexander, and by St. Paul, is proved by bis Epistle to Timothy f. Here, then, the inquiry concerning tbe right of punishment takes apparently a new turn. Tbe in quirer having satisfied hiraself that tbe Church has the right of exclusion, as well from its nature, as from the aUusions to tbe exercise of sucb a right in tbe apostohcal writings, perceives, in tbe course of bis search, instances of punishment which seera to wear a different character, and looks for sorae differ ent principle to which be raay refer thera. He re- coUects, that not only tbose above raentioned were delivered over to Satan by St. Paul, but, what is raore unequivocally expressed, and more awful in its cbaracter, tbat Ananias, tbe first offender against tbe Church, was visited witb death. And tbat tbere may be no misapprehension as to tbe nature of bis crirae, it is caUed an offence against the Holy Ghost — against Him whose teraple we are, as a Church. From tbe savage and unholy practices ' 1 Corinth. V, 5. ' 1 Tim. i. 20. VOL. I. Z 338 St. Paul and the Corinthians. which have defiled that temple of the aU-mercifuI God, in tbe rash assuinption of some other right than the right of exclusion, and to sanction which these instances have been aUedged, tbe Protestant of the ninteenth century turns vrith abhorrence. He searches for any other principle and any other right in vain. Moreover, tbese very instances require only an bumble consideration to set tbem also in the manifest Ught of cases of exclusion. To understand this, it is necessary to state what is meant by excoraraunication or exclusion frora the Church. Evidently, it is not exclusion frora any particular place; for the Cburch is not sucb ; but from certain common privileges. These are, the benefits ofthe Christian covenant, or of some portion of it. Now let us see whether this, and no more, was not the case vrith those whom St. Paul de livered over to Satan. In those days tbe presence of the Holy Ghost was manifested by extraordinary signs, tbat is, certain sensible tokens were given in testiraony of it. Tbe presence of the evil Being was in Uke manner manifested or evidenced by possession and its various symptoms. Now, what is raore natural than that in the sarae dispensation, as the presence of God's Spirit in the Christian was made visible by an ap propriate sign, so the reraoval of its protection, and the abandonment of its object, for a season, to the enemy, should be evidenced by some corresponding sign of evil agency, such as, for instance, marked St. Paul and the Corinthians. 339 the case of a demoniac. And, as the power of causing the former sign to appear was vested only in the apostles, tbe case would naturaUy be tbe same with respect to the sign of evil, or the sign of desertion. It is to be remembered, tbat there was — that there is — no intermediate condition between the absence of the Holy Spirit and tbe presence of the EvU Spirit ; and where tbe influence of the one ceases, tbat of tbe other must begin. " He that is not with rae," (said ourLord,) " is against me^," — aU is Mammon's that is not God's. On the same principle, the case of Ananias raay perhaps be explained. It was final exclusion frora God's Church, accompanied by the only sign which could prove that the spiritual punishment wa,s final. Why that offence was so visited is not now iraportant. Most probably, (as was elsewhere sug gested,) it was an attempt to elude tbe extraordinary suggestions of tbe Spirit ; and if so, tbe more ap propriate seeras tbe extraordinary mark of spiritual punishment. It is by no means necessary, however, to tbe correctness of tbe view here taken of ecclesiastical discipUne, that the nature of Ananias's crime and punishment should be shevpn not to form any ex ception to it. Like tbe pardoning of the thief on the cross, it arose out of cfrcurastances whicb caimot recur in the ordinary course of tbe world ; cfrcura stances not only extraordinary, but of those so K Luke xi. 23. z 2 340 St. Paul and the Corinthians. characterized, the raost soleran and important. Tbe one was a remarkable speciraen of raercy and for giveness, and as such fitly appended to tbe scene in which God was exhibiting hiraself as our Saviour; the other, an awful instance of severity and punish ment, and no less properly attached to tbe scene in wbich God was exhibiting bimself as the Ruler of his people. But it may be urged, do not tbese reraarks lead to a suspicious conclusion ? If tbe case be so, eccle siastical punishments would be attended with spi ritual privations. For although aU extraordinary signs are withheld, stiU tbis is no reason for pre suming that tbe sentence of the Church should be less effectual. Tbe extraordinary manifestation in this, as in the analogous instance of the gifts of the Spirit, was only a proof oi the reaUty of tbat which was invisible and insensible ; and it has been afready shewn, that the cessation of tbese visiJyle and sensible signs, without further proof, leaves the Christian bound to beUeve in the continuance of aU the invisible operations, to which, for a time, they bore testimony. Now would not tbis be a perverse proceeding which should deprive the culprit of grace and assistance, at tbe very time wben raost he needs it ? It does not deprive hira of it. It only sets on him tbe mark oi tbat privation which would, at aU events, have taken place. Thus, exclusion from good company does not cause, but only indicates, iU-manners. If God's Spirit prevents and assists St,. Paul and the Corinthians. 341 tbe Christian in proportion to bis own exertions, he must always have less and less in proportion as he needs it more. But surely a change of circum stances may malie hira raore ready to attend to tbe feeble voice, than he was before, when it was louder. Israel raay hear in Babylon what it would not hear in Judea. And such, as far as regards tbe offender, is reaUy the object of excoraraunica tion. If inflicted on an innocent person, it could, of cora-se, no raore have an evil effect, than Baptisra or the Lord's Supper would have a good one on a person wbo receives either unworthily. Ecclesiastical censures bave, bowever, fallen into disuse araongst us ; and whatever be the counter balancing benefits of tliis disuse, it has been attended witb one ill eftect. The wbolesorae association be tween tbe outward forra and tbe inward benefit of Church communion, is no longer generaUy felt. Absence from tbe sacraraents and from pubhc wdr ship has lost the character of privation ; and whilst the apostles and early preachers laboured only to direct tbeir congregations to a proper behaviour at the Lord's table and in tbe public assembUes, witb om* ministers now, not tiie least difficult portion of exhortation is employed in persuading tbem to attend. A fiu'tber mention of those offenders in the Church of Corinth, whose case bas fiirnished the ground for these reraarks, is raade in tbe apostle's second Epistle to tbat Church. In order that the 342 iS^. Paul and the Corinthians. matter might be settled without his personal in terference, he prolonged his "stay at Ephesus ; ex pecting to hear a favourable account of tbe im pression made by bis first Epistle. Meantime, an occurrence took place which hastened his departure. In his forraer journey, tbe cure of tbe Pythoness excited tbe Ul-will of ber raaster, whose gains were at an end, and caused the first persecution of bis party which originated with the idolatrous Gentiles. At Ephesus, the faraous seat of tbe temple of Diana, and " of the image which feU down from Jupiter ''," he was exposed even to greater danger, from the tendency of his doctrine to rain all those trades which depended for their support on idolatry and false worship. Demetrius, a silversmith, en tered into, a combination witb tbose of his own trade ; and the tumult excited by the appeal made to the superstitious feehngs of the raultitude in behalf of tbeir tutelary goddess, whose shrine they represented as hkely to be forsaken, was with some difficulty appeased. St. Paul, after having been subjected to one night's imprisonment, thought it prudent to withdraw for tbe time, and to pursue his joumey at once to Corinth. The prejudice, however, whicb now began to be awakened against Christianity, was not of a character likely to pass away vrith the occasion. Throughout the world, the livelihood of a portion of every comraunity " Acts xix, 35. St. Paul and the Corinthians. 343 arose out of the sale of iraages, the decoration of temples, and, more than all,' the rearing of victiras for the festivals. In proportion as Christianity spread, this circurastance formed an increasing source of opposition in the idolatrous world, scarce ly less active and deterrained tban that which was caused by Jewish prejudice among the more en Ughtened portion of mankind. Tbe complaints and informations wMch from time to time were laid be fore the magistrates, against this " pestUent sect," as it was termed, although made under the various pleas of loyalty, patriotism, or piety, originated, for the most part, as in the case of Demetrius, out of self-interest. Phny, whose account deserves credit as an official document, and as tbe result of an in vestigation raade by a highly-gifted raind, evidently saw through aU tMs ; and accordingly he raentions, as the best proof and symptom of returning order and content produced by Ms measures, tbat the victims were once raore brought to raarket, and that the altars blazed. As yet, however, tbe Church was too insignificant to attract tbe notice of tbe im perial government, although tbe tumult at Ephesus proves that it was spreading fast. It was not until St. Paul's arrival in Greece, that he received any tidings of the CorintMans ; to whom he immediately addressed his second Epistle, to prepare tbem for his coming. To Corinth, ac cordingly, be proceeded, and made it, as before, tbe boundary of Ms third apostohcal journey. It is not. 344 St. Paul and the Corinthians. bowever, improbable, that, but for his anxiety to be at Jerusalem in time for tbe approaching festival, he would now have atterapted to pass over into Italy, and visit Rorae. The inforraation which be bad received respecting that iraportant Church, could not but iiave rendered hira anxious to per form bis errand as soon as might be amongst tbem. His Epistle to it, written from Corinth, amply testifies tMs ; and explams tbe cause of Ms anxiety. Converted as it would seem by Jewish Christians, whose eyes were not yet open to the trae nature of St. Paul's raission, they bad received tbe sarae erroneous impression respect ing tbe obUgation of tbe old law on the converted idolater, wMcb stiU prevailed in tbe great body of the Church at Jerusalem. Accordmgly, the wbole tenour of bis Epistle bespeaks an anxiety to remove tbis raistake ; and the strong terms in wMcb he has, naturaUy enough, advocated tbe independence of tbe Gentiles, by speakmg of than as, equaUy with the Jewish people, " elect" by tbe foreknowledge of God, are as remarkable for tbe perverse interpretation wMcb is often put on them, as for tbe striking transcript wMch tbey present of tbe apostle's anxious zeal, in endeavour ing to effect by letter wbat circumstances prevented him frora doing in person. St. Paul and the Ephesian Presbyters. 345 St. Paul and thf Ephesian Presbyters' . St. Paul's corapany on his return was increased by tbe addition of tbose deputed from the several Churches to convey tbeir respective contributions to Jerasalem. It was a joumey of no sraall risk. Independently of the prophetic bodings witb wMch the Holy Spirit addressed Mra by sundry indi viduals as he passed onwards, he could not but feel that Ms raission to the Gentiles had rendered Ms Ufe unsafe any where araong Ms countrymen. And what could he expect at Jerasalem? His very departure from Corinth was marked witb plots against Mra, which obUged bira to change Ms m- tention of going by sea, and to retrace bis steps tMough Achaia and Macedoma. Mitylene, CMos, Samos, TrogyMura, and Miletus, formed the next Une of Ms course ; and by tMs time tbe feast of Pentecost, at wMch, for some reason, be earnestly desfred to be present, was so near as to render it impossible tbat he should visit Ephesus, wMch he thought it equaUy incurabent on Mm to do. To obviate this difficulty, be requested tbe at tendance of tbe Ephesian Elders or Presbyters at MUetus ; a cfrcumstance wMcb is here noticed, because in tbe interview wMcb thereupon took place, he remrads them that the Holy Ghost had raade thera Bishops, (l^no-xoTrouf,) a terra whicb has ' Acts XX, 346 St. Paul and the Ephesian Presbyters. not before occurred in tbe sacred narrative. Hav ing, in tbe last section, exarained into the nature of offences against tbe Church, and of the penalties due to thera, I shaU take tMs occasion of inquir ing, with whom the power of inflicting and remit ting these penalties was lodged ; and not only tMs power, but aU other authority and adrainistration, whether supreme or subordinate. One previous caution may, perhaps, be reqmsite. Various objections have been urged frora tirae to time against our Church govemment, against tbe tMee orders of the Cburch, and tbe functions which tbey respectively exercise. To answer tbese nierely by an attempt to prove thefr existence in the apo stohcal age and their Scriptural sanction, is to aUow the objector an unfair advantage, and to submit our own rainds to an unfair view bf tbe question. The proof of the contrary rests vrith those who ob ject. We find these raatters so estabUshed, and tracing them further and further back, we stiU find evidence of them, without any coincident raarks of human innovation. Tried by the touchstone of Scripture, they are found to be at least not in consistent with its records ; and tberefore it would be a wanton and dangerous exercise of the Church's discretionary power to annul them. This was the spirit of tbe Reformation in England ; and on tMs principle it has taught us , Thus far shalt thou go , and no further. There are two questions which in a discussion of this point require distinct consideration. The first St. Paul and the Ephesian Presbyters. 347 is, What were the orders of the priraitive Cburch ? The second. Were they intended altogetber, or partly, or not at aU, as raodels for tbe forraation of ecclesiastical estabhsbraents of aftertiraes ? As to tbe first question, it raay adrait of a dif ferent answer frora different periods ofthe apostolical history ; inasmuch as tbe Cburch econoray was certainly not fraraed at once, but rose progressively vrith the exigencies of the Church. At the very period on which we are now dwelling, it is obvious, that the terra Bishop and Presbyter were not only appUed to the sarae order, but that no order of ministers (setting aside tbe apostles) was generaUy established, superior to tbe presbytery. At a later period in tbe apostolical history, tbe sarae assertion would be altogether untenable''. The asserably, or 'exxKyjo^Ix, raust from its nature have been the only order, besides tbat of the apostles, on tbe first atterapt of the Christians to act as a society. AU Christians coraposed this body, and the term, in short, signified the Church. But wbe ther tbis general assembly at any period exercised any elective, legislative, or other powers, may per haps be questioned. No doubt the Church or ^ Theology, like every other system, has its tecknical terms. In a system of tkeology, then, we should be startled to find such various uses of the same important term. But the Bible is not a system of tkeology, aud has not any technical language. Its use is to furnish matter which the Church digests — to prove what the Church teaches. 348 St. Paul and the Ephesian Presbyters. Asserably is raentioned as taking part with the presbyters in the elections and enactments ; but when we consider tbe immense concourse, which a general meeting would suppose in tbe very earUest times, is it Ukely tbat any one private room would be found capable of containing all? On tbe otber hand, is it likely that in Jerusalera especiaUy, so large a multitude would be permitted to raeet in public, openly discuss their affairs, and take raea sures for the support and propagation of obnoxious doctrines, when even individuals were exposed to continual risk in thefr preacMng and other raimstry? Tbe raeetings of CMistians for purposes of prayer, and other devotional exercises, raust, for the same reason, have taken place in different houses as signed for tbe purpose. And tbis (as has been before observed) raay iUustrate the expression used by the historian in his account of Paul's search after the disciples " in every one of tbe houses','' (xara tovs oi'xouj ;) wMcb, UO doubt, implies, tbat be obtained information concerning their several places of raeeting, and by going from one to another at the time of prayer was sure of apprehending sorae. Tbe sarae allusion raay be perceived in St. Paul's expression of " tbe Church in the bouse of AquUa and PrisciUa""," &c. Sucb a division of the Chris tian body into separate congregations would require tbe appointraent of sorae one, at least, to preside ' Acts viii. 3. '" 1 Cor. xvi. 19. St. Paul and the Ephesian Presbyters. 349 over and officiate in each; and also of some one or raore subordinate rainisters or deacons, sucb as have been before noticed. When, therefore, we read that a decree was made, &c. by the apostles, presbyters, and the wbole Church, one of two things must be supposed to have taken place : either the presbyters took each the sense of bis own congregation; or tbe presbyters and other official persons, it raay be, raet as the representatives, each of Ms own congregation, and all of the Church coUectively. The forraer supposition is certainly encurabered with raore and greater difficulties tban the latter. The subject proposed at these Christian raeetings seeras, frora the tenour of the narrative throughout, to have been tben first presented to tbe Cburch in any shape ; and tbe decisions took place before the raeeting was dissolved. There are no raarks of any previous notice of the raatter to be discussed, f so as to enable tbe several presbyters to consult the opinions and wishes of their constituents ; and the decision took place without any interval to aUow of an after consultation. Against the reraaining supposition, namely, that the presbyters and otber official persons, perhaps, met as the plempotentiaries each of his own body, tbe strongest obstacle Ues in tbe phrase, " It seemed good to the presbyters witb the whole Church"." Now this expression, after aU, may " Acts XV. 22, 350 St. Paul and the Ephesian Presbyters. imply no more than that it seemed good to the presbyters, and whatever other members of the Council, in conjunction with them, may be caUed the whole Church, because appointed to represent it. In like manner, when the CouncU of Jemsalem declared respecting their famous decree, that " it seeraed good to thera and to tbe Holy Ghost"," our knowledge of the relation in which tbese stood to one another, prevents aU doubt ; but the ex pression itself, without any such clue, would raake it questionable, whether the Council and the Holy Spirit were not recorded as two separate sources of the ecclesiastical authority from which the decree had emanated. Now tbe sentences on wMcb we ground our conjectures respecting tbe authority of the whole Christian body, are precisely so cfrcum- stanced. The appointraent of Deacons has been elsewhere discussed, and the origin of tbe Presbytery has been now suggested. The order of Bishops therefore only reraains to be accounted for. At the period of St. Paul's suramons to tbe Church of Ephesus, no sucb order could have existed there ; and, if' not in so large and iraportant a Church, probably no where. The title cannot iraply it, for it is one used for aU the presbyters of Ephesus ; and thefr nuraber proves that he was not addressing bishops, for they carae frora one Church. Again, although the word ° Acts XV. 28. St. Paul and the Ephesian Presbyters. 351 occurs elsewhere in St. Paul's Episties, it cannot intend one cMef govemor of any Cburch ; because bis Epistles are addressed to the Churches, as to assembUes in wbom aU the authority was vested. The terra bishop became afterwards appropriated to an order, of which we cannot infer tbe existence, certainly from any expression of St. Luke. How sucb an order should bave arisen, it is not difficult to discover. St. Paul's Epistles to Timothy and Titus present us with at least its embryo form. Not only are both commissioned to ordain mims ters, to determine raatters left undeterrained, and to inflict ecclesiastical punishments, even to excorarau nication p ; but their respective dioceses are dis tinctly raarked out- Ephesus was assigned to Tiraotby, Crete to Titus t. At the sarae tirae it would certainly seem that, in Timothy's case especiaUy, the appointment was rather tbat of locum tenens for the apostle, and so far a teraporary office. But tMs, far frora being an objection to tbe apostohc authority of episcopacy, really suppUes us witb the clue to trace its origin and object. What was needed for a tirae at Ephesus or Crete, in tbe temporary absence of tbe presiding apostle, woMd be permanently requisite, when death for ever deprived these Churches of apostohcal superintend ence. 1]he same cause, in short, which produced p 1 Tim. V. 22. Titus i. 5, iii. 10. ") 1 Tim. i. 3. Titus i. 5. 352 St. Paul and the Ephesian Presbyters. tbe appointraent of presbyters, continued, as tbe nuraber of congregations in each Church increased, to render tbe rise of a new order equally necessary. A sraall presbytery, occasionaUy visited by an apostle, raight not require a head ; but a large one, especially as the apostles were reraoved by death or accident, would soon feel tbis want. That such an order was reqmred before tbe close of the apo stohc era, tbe tben state of Christianity would render of itself nearly certain. Although at the tirae of tbe appointraents of Titus and Tiraothy they may not have been general, yet when St. Jobn wrote his Revelations, each of tbe seven Churches of Asia had its own bishop. And if tMs were so in tbat district, wMch tben alone enjoyed tbe guidance of an apostle, rauch raore was it Ukely to bave been tbe case elsewhere. St. John, we know, addressed tbem as angels ; but whether by a figure of speech, or because sucb was at tbat tirae their only designa tion, no candid raind can doubt tbat an episcopal order is intended ; and tbat to thera, as such, cora mands and revelations were given by God through his last apostle ^ Tbus, episcopacy would seem to ' The genuine remains of the apostolic Fathers shew, that during the age immediately following, official letters were ad dressed indifferently to and from " the Church," " the bishop and presbyters," and " the bishop," although the more usual form was still " the Church." But that this was then - considered in the same light, as if the bishop of the Church alone had been speci fied, may be inferred from the first Epistle of Clement, which St. Paul and the Ephesian Presbyters. 353 be the fimshing of the sacred edifice, wbich the aposties were commis^oned to build. Until tMs was corapleted and firra, they presented theraselves as props to whatever part required such support. One by one they were withdrawn ; and at length the whole bmldrag having " grown together rato an boh' teraple %" the Lord's proraise was fulfiUed to tiie one surviving apostle. He only tarried until God's last teraple was coraplete, and the Lord's second " coraing" unto it' had been amiounced by an especial casion ". ^ - ,. although called Clement's, by the united testimony of all who mention it, professes to be, and is in substance, an Epistle from •' the Church of God at Rome, to the Church of God at Corinth." Polycarp's is addressed frora " Polycarp and the presbyters with him" to " the Church of God at Philippi." Ignatius addresses two Epistles to the Smyrnseans, one to " the Church at Smyrna," the other to " Polycarp bishop of the Church at Smyrna." And tbat this latter, no less than the former, was a letter to the Church, and not to its bishop personally, will he evident from the following passages in it," Heeirken unto the bishop, that God also may hearken unto you. My soul, be security for them that submit to their bishop, with their presbyters and deacons." sect. vi. " Labour with one another, contend together, run together, ^c."' ' Ephesians ii. 21. ' See Malachi iii. 1 . " The revelation to St. John, in the close of his life, presents several obvious points of connection witb the prophetic promise, that he should tarry until the Lord's coming. Throughout the Scriptures, and especially in our Saviour's language, the Chris tian Church is designated by the emblem of the temple.^ Its foundation stones, its corner stone, its holy of holies, its one high priest, are images familiar to the sacred writers. Nor is the connection to be considered as fanciful, and merely founded VOL, I. A a 354 St. Paul and the Ephesian Presbyters. There is stiU another point to be settled. Was tMs form of Church government intended to be perpetual, and universal, — is it enjoined on aU Christian societies in every age ? On the one hand, it may be urged, that as the constitution of the Cburch was only what was then most convenient for tbe support and propagation of rehgion, whenever that end may be better attained by any alteration or deviation, the innovators are acting up to the spirit of the original institution, and thereby are raore truly foUowers of the apo stles, than those wbo sacrifice tbe object to tbe observance of the means, which are only valuable on an accidental analogy, serving the purpose of illustrations. The temple, its uses, and its ordinances, were designed, like the other portions of the older establishment, as types of the new. It was, therefore, the image in which ancient prophecy repre sented the future Church. Of this last temple it was foretold, that its glory should surpass Solomon's; and into this it is that Malachi proclaimed the Lord's coming. The final mode of divine residence, intended by this coming, commenced when the various parts of the Church were corapleted, and the extraordinary portions removed, St. John was permitted to see all ready for this before his death. He was permitted to do more. The future fate and history of that figurative temple was revealed to him, at the time his Master came to announce the filling of it with his glory. The prophetic history is of course all that con cerned us, the fulfilment of the promise only him. Yet he has not left the former without a memorandum, as it were, of the import of that revelation to him. The terms in which it opens are, " Behold he cometh " and the close, " He which testifieth these things, saitK, Surely, I come quickly: Amen. Even so, coine, Lord Jesus.'' St. Paul and the Ephesian Presbyters, 355 as regards that object. Those who maintain the otber side of the question may assert, that these being the means originaUy appointed by tbe Holy Spirit, through whicb His office as governor of tbe Cburch was to be exercised, we bave no right to alter tbem, any raore than we are authorized to alter the raeans of grace, unless sorae positive per mission can be shewn ; and that it is, moreover, a wicked presumption to suppose, tbat any otber means, (however humanly probable,) would more truly obtain tbe object of Church govemment. As a reason why tbis form of Church government was not positively enjoined, it may be suggested, that it was not hke an abstract doctrine or precept, the only safe raode of recording which is " tbe written word," but a raatter which is its own record. Like tbe Mysteries of tbe heathen, it was a practical docu raent; the daily and continual practice of the Church, perpetuated frora ons age to another, superseded all need of otber record. Mucb of tbis latter stateraent is doubtless unan swerable. At the sarae tirae, it would be unchari table and unchristian, to pronounce those to be no raembers of Christ's Church, wbo regulate tbeir comraunity without bishops. Tbe particular ar rangement of ministerial orders is of course tbe means, and the preservation of the Gospel, tbe end. Whether those, who have in any instance deviated from the pure apostolic practice, had cause to justify such a departure, (and such a case doubtless is A a2 356 St. Paul and the Ephesian Presbyters. supposable,) is a matter between God and tbe Cburch itself The case of those, too, who find themselves by birth merabers of sucb a society, is to be distinctly separated frora the case of those, with whora the innovation originated. Some departure in the form of government, frora tbe pattem of tbe priraitive Church, has necessarily taken place in every community, nor does tbis de parture of itself imply presumption. A very large coramunity, for instance, bas every where required a new order above bishops themselves ; and this need being raanifest, tbe appointraent of the arcMepis- copal office is as purely consonant to the apostolical views, as tbat of subordinate bishops. It bas arisen in tbe sarae way, and in coraphance witb a similar need to that whicb gave rise to the episcopal order, in the apostolical Church ; namely, the increased extent and more compUcated government of each Church. Thus, too, tbe appointment of catechists, once a branch of every Church estabUshraent, was properly discontinued as soon as tbey ceased to be required ; and as properly has been revived in our colonies, where their services are once raore appli cable. The choro-episcopi served, in Uke raanner, to raeet another occasional eraergency. No Church has ever raore anxiously and con scientiously shaped its course by the spirit, and by the very letter of the apostolic precedents, tban has the Church of England. And yet even that Church has found circurastances powerful enough to justify Sf. Paul at Jerusalem. 357 a deviation scarcely less momentous, in tbe transfer of suprerae ecclesiastical authority to the civil magistrate. It is not raerely a variation frora tbe origmal arcMtecture of CMist's holy bmlding tbat constitutes disproportion and deformity. We raust look also to the changmg features of the scene around, and see wbether tbese bave not deraanded corresponding alterations, and let tbese be tbe raea sure of our judgment. St. Paul at Jerusalem^. St. Paul's interview witb the Ephesian elders was rendered pecuUarly solemn and affecting, frora a feeling of wMch be hiraself partook, tbat death awaited bira at Jerasalem ^. StiU he went on, and tbe prophetic warnings which pursued bim, and tbe anxious entreaties of Ms friends, contmued to con firm Ms fears, and to sadden Ms pUgrimage, without mducmg Mm to discontinue it ^. On Ms arrival at Caesarea especiaUy, Agabus carae frora Judaea, and, ' by virtue of Ms prophetic gift, told hira expressly by syrabol and by word, that the Jews should bind Mm, and deUver Mra over to tbe Gentiles. So that he arrived at Jerusalera fuUy apprised of tbe perse- ^ Acts xxi. >' This is another proof, that the prophetic spirit was not at his command, but dealt out to him by measure ; and its suggestions perfectly distinguishable from other, even the strongest, impres sions on the mind. ^ Acts XX. 16, 358 St. Paid at Jerusalem. cution whicb be was to encounter, and uncertain wbether bis life would be spared or not. Tbe terras of Agabus's prediction were raore likely to por tend death ; for in tbat he was to be bound by tbe Jews, and deUvered up to the Gentiles, the fate of bis Lord and Master could not but recur to him, and seera likely to be now bis own : nor was it, perhaps, any shght stiraulus and support to bim in bis perseverance, tbat be seemed, in tbus pressing on to Jerusalem, in spite of his own forebodings, and of the remonstrance of others, to be inutatmg bira. Tbe studious iraitation of Christ, wherever any sirailarity of circumstances could be perceived and felt, forms a marked feature in the lives, not only of tbe apostles, but of the primitive worthies who inherited tbeir tone of CMistian feeUng ". On otber grounds he bad reason to surraise that his work was finished. His third apostohcal journey was now ended, and the conversion of tbe Gentiles far enough advanced, to raake it safe and expedient for hira to coramunicate openly to the wbole Church tbat secret, wbich had been Mtherto confided to a select few. For tbis, probably, more even tban to keep tbe feast, he had hastened Ms journey to Jerasalera. Whether the result of tMs open avowal would be tbe forfeit of life, might have been con- " See the description ofthe martyrdom of Stephen and of James in the Acts. A similar remark applies to the account given of the deaths of Polycarp, Ignatius, and many more among the pri mitive Christians. 'S'^ Paul at Jerusalem. 359 cealed from his prophetic view purposely to try hira. At aU events, the present raight have seeraed to Mra a seasonable period for the terraination of bis la bours, — in aU human probabiUty it would be so. Hence the tender farewell, in wMch be bad told the Church of Ephesus " be should see tbeir face no more '' ;" hence his anxiety, even in haste, to pay them tbat parting visit ; hence, perhaps, that very haste and urgency, tbat with the enlightened views of a Christian indeed, but stiU witb the patriotic feeUngs of one wbose early habits bad been moulded in the " straitest sect" of tbe Jews, be might once more keep the festival with his countryraen, and die. His Master's example might again, in tMs particular, bave influenced tbe tone of irand which kept up his resolve to go on to Jerusalera. As he approached, what train of thought so natural and so cheering as the iraage of the blessed Jesus in his last jom'ney to Jerusalera, — his earnestness to keep tbe passover there, unabated by tbe certain foreknowledge that he was to be bound by his countrymen, and deUvered up to the Gentiles ? Sucb then was, probably, tbe frarae of raind with which St. Paul disclosed to tbe rulers of tbe Church of Jerasalera the true nature of his extraordinaiy apostleship to tbe Gentiles, and the properous re sult of tbree journeys cunongst thera. Like the other mar\"eUous disclosures of the mysteries of tbe '' .Arts XX. 38, See note y, p, 357. 360 St. Paul at Jerusalem. new dispensation, it caUed fortb that peculiar thanks giving, wMch is styled in Scripture " glorifying God^" Thefr joy and wonder were however ira raediately foUowed by a sense of the danger to wMch he stood exposed. One expedient suggested itself. It was proposed tbat be should jom four Jevrish Cbristians in performing tbe rite of purifi cation in tbe temple''. TMs, it was thought, would convince tbe Jews of tbe real design of Ms mission ; namely, that it was not, as far as con cemed thefr law, to forbid the Jewish Cbristians to observe it, but only the GentUes, and especiaUy tbe idolaters. So public and unequivocal a testimony of conformity to the Mosaic ceremoraes, would, it was thought, reraove the worst ground of enmity against bim, and at least soften down the spirit of ill-will. It produced however a contran,' result. His appearance in the holy place was constraed into a design to defUe it, and the suspicion was confirmed by the accidental cfrcumstance of Tro- phiraus, (tbe Asiatic deputy and a Gentile convert,) having been seen witb him witMn tbe haUowed pre cincts. Lysias, the comraander of tbe Roraan garrison, was obliged to mterfere, and rescue him from tbe fury of the raultitude. In vam he ob tained permission to address them frora the steps of tbe castle, whither they were conductrag Mra to imprisonment. Eloquence, even sucb as Paul's, <^ Acts xxi. 19, 20. '' Acts xxi. 23, St. Paul at Jerusalem. 361 conveymg to tbem the avowal, that tbe kragdora of God was tMown open to GentUes and idolaters, could only serve to exasperate thera : and it was with rauch difficult}' that even then he was pre served from outrage and death. Here Ms trial, at least Ms uncertain apprehen sions, ended. That mght tbe Lord stood by bim, and informed him, that he was appomted to beai" witness to Him in Rome^ In what raanner the treacherous deigns of Ms eneraies were rendered subservient to tMs purpose is weU known. His appeal frora the tribunal of Festus to tbat of Caesar was made, not only with the view of defeating the stratagem devised for sendmg bira back to Jeru salem, but in fulfilment of tbe command of the Lord deUvered to bim that night. In obedience to this, be erabraced the early opportumty, tbus pro- videntiaUy afforded, for Ms visit to the imperial citv', ' Acts xxiii. 11. CHAP. VII. ST. PAUL'S FOURTH APOSTOLICAL JOURNEY. A. D. 63—66. ROUTE. Antipatris ; Caesarea ; Sidon ; Myra ; Tair Havens ; Meiita ; Syracuse ; RLegium ; Puteoli ; Appii Forum ; Three Taverns ; Rome ; Italy ; Spain ; Crete; Jerusalem; Antioch in Syria >. St. LUICE's narrative, as bas been already ob served, was very evidently composed witb tbe design of recording tbe progress of tbe Holy Spirit's dis pensation tMough its several stages : first, as con fined to tbe Jews ; next, as erabracing tbe devout Gentiles also ; and lastly, as unUraited in its appli cation, and open to idolaters of every caste". On " Acts xxiii. 31. to xxviii. ^ Some intimations of this might be intended in the words, with which the Gospel opens, " Forasmuch as many have taken in hand to write in order ;" and with reference to this it is, per haps, that we are told so pointedly in the 19th chapter of the Acts, ver. 21. " After these things were ended," (he had been recording the rapid progress which the word was making, and how it " mightily grew and prevailed,") " Paul purposed in the Spirit, when he had passed through Macedonia and Achaia, to go to Jerusalem, saying, After I have been there / must go to 364 St. Paul at Rome. tbis account it is, that the first part of his httle history embraces the raimstry of aU the apostles ; tben is occupied cMefly with St. Peter, as tbe person selected by tbe Spirit for tbe first extension of tbe Gospel scheme ; then it follows Barnabas and Paul through the next and last enlargeraent of tbe cove nant, for tbe management of wMcb they had been appointed ; and, at length, is confined to the mirastry of St. Paul, in wbose bands it was left on tbe separation between bira and Barnabas. With equal propriety, tbe account closes with the period, wben the apostle ofthe idolatrous Gentiles, having forraally announced the greatest raystery of tbe Gospel to tbe Cburch of Jerasalem, bas arrived at the capital of tbe world, and the work bas been commenced in tbe imperial city itself. His voyage thither is ac cordingly related with an unusual nunuteness of detail ; not only, perhaps, because of the miraculous circurastances which it embraces, but because it was preparatory to tbat which the Mstorian considered the iraportant boundary of Ms plan, his arrival and first rainistry at Rorae. Rome also. Rome was the mistress and representative of the world ; and when therefore the apostle had preached the Gospel there, our Saviour's declaration concerning that sign which was to precede the destruction of Jerusalem, might be fairly under stood to have had its accomplishment. " This Gospel must first be preached in all tke world," St. Paul a prisoner at Rome. 365 St. Paul a prisoner at Rome''. Araong tbe faithful friends and assistants who forraed bis corapany bere, are recorded, I. Tiraotby, who carae with hira from Macedonia, and wbose name appears joined witb his in the Epistles to the PhiUppians, Colossians, and Philemon''. II. Luke, who had been long his constant cora panion, as appears frora the form of his own narra tive^; and wbo is mentioned as still with bira in tbe Epistle to the Colossians, and in tbat to Pbileraon*^. III. Aristarchus, one of his fellow travellers frora Macedonia, and it would seera now bis fellow prisoner also^, (Coloss. iv. 10.) IV. Tychicus, another of his fellow traveUers, and his messenger to tbe Colossian Church'", (Coloss. iv. 7.) V. Lastly, Mark the nephew of Barnabas, (Coloss. iv. 10.) wbo had now regained tbe esteem and trust whicb he forfeited on his ffrst journey witb Paul. Tbe account given by Festus of his prisoner could not but have been, favourable ; as be was permitted to lodge in a " hired house," witb free access to Mm >= Acts xviii. '' Acts XX. 4. Philip, i. 1. Col, i. 1. Philem. 1. ' Acts XX. 5, 6, ' Col, iv. 14. Philem. 24, « Acts XX. 4. " Acts XX, 4. 366 St. Paul a prisoner at Rome. from aU Ms friends, and sufficient Uberty to be able to discuss the subject of Ms iraprisonraent, and the persecution which bad led to it, with the cMef Jewish settlers at Rorae'. Under tbese circura stances, he was probably better able to effect the object of his raission in the first instance, than if he had corae to Rorae free, and more obviously by choice. He was respected by tbe Jews, as one whose situation placed bim immediately under tbe protection of the government ; wMlst the govem ment was seasonably raade acquainted, from the na ture of the charge agamst him, vrith the innocent ob ject of Ms raission; and tberefore was unUkely to be excited against htm, as " a pestilent feUow, or a ring leader of sedition." For two years tbe Gospel was thus suffered to take root in tbe seat of erapfre un molested and alraost unobserved, tMough a tram of providential cfrcurastances, such as the importance of the case seeras to have required. A turault in Rome, hke tbat wMch bad occurred at Ephesus and PMUppi, would, humanly speaking, have been fatal to tbe infant state of tbe reUgion, and as sucb, seems to have been expressly guarded agamst by Providence. The particular mode in wbich tbe apostle raade Ms ffrst appearance at Rorae, was serviceable to the cause in another point of view. It brought hira into an intercourse vrith the soldiery. His ' Acts xxviii. 30, 31. St. Paul a prisoner at Rome. 367 voyage, with aU its perils and the rairacles to wMch it gave rise, might have been intended to impress the minds of the soldiers who guarded Mm (as was actuaUy the result) witb tbe con viction that he was an extraordinary man. Its length might have been protracted with the sarae view ; and the record may have been left in exact minuteness to direct our attention to tbe cfrcum stance. His mtegrity had been proved by Ms mode of life vrith them ^neraUy, and especiaUy by Ms dismterested care to preserve the whole crew in tbe shipwreck, — ^Ms view of fiiturity, by foretelUng tbat accident, — ^Ms support and guid ance by a superior power, from the dehverance in wMch aU shared, as weU as by tbe barraless efforts of the viper, and tbe heaUng virtue of Ms prayer. AU tMs would naturaUy be related, and even raagnified, in the social meetings between the soldiers retumed from foreign service and tbeir corarades and friends at home. The praetorian guard itself would find in the marveUous prisoner frora tbe east a subject for passing conversation, and Ms narae and acts would be known in Caesar's palace, and among Caesar's household. Curiosity would induce some of all these descriptions of per sons to visit Mm; and of these the conversion of a portion could not but take place. Such then was the case. To the PhUippians he sends, in Ms Epi stle, the brotherly reraerabrance of the " saints. 368 St. Paul a prisoner at Rome. especially tbose who were of Caesar's household'';" assures thera, that what had befallen bim, instead of being a hindrance, had so far proved a further ance to his Gospel, that his bonds were made ma nifest in CMist in tbe whole Praetoriura, and to all others'. Before the first persecution of Nero, the little mustard seed had become a tree too firmly rooted to be shaken by the storm ; and tbe Roman historians speak of the converts to Christianity in the Capital, as an immEnse raultitude of different ages and sexes. The apostle was not unraindful of those Churches, where otbers were now engaged in following up tbe rainistry wbich be bad coraraenced, nor was be forgotten by thera. His first Epistle frora Rorae was occasioned by the arrival of EpapModitus from PhiUppi, whence he had been sent by the bretMen to inquire after him, and to take some supphes for bira". Epapbras arrived frora Colosse soon after on tbe same errand ". This was the occasion of his " Philip, iv. 22. ' Philip, i. 12, 13. "" Philip, ii. 25. and iv. 18. " Epaphras's visit must have caused some suspiciou, as for some reason he appears certainly to have been detained in con finement with Paul, (Philem. 23.) Unless this expression, as well as that relating to Aristarchus, be taken, not literally, but as implying that they were the companions of Paul the prisoner, and by their society had put themselves in the condition of prisoners. St. Paul and Onesimus. 369 Epistles to the Churches of PhiUppi and Colosse ". As Ephesus was so near to the latter city, Tychi cus, who was his messenger thither, was coramis sioned with another for the Ephesians^. The pre vaiUng tone of aU these Epistles is tbat of warning against the seductive practices of the Judaizing Christians, whose doctrine had now begun to be tinged vrith the oriental philosophy. It is pleasing to pursue the apostle, frora this his path of pubhc duties, to any of those scenes of private Ufe which bring us more, as it were, into a personal acquaintance with him. Such was the occasion of his Epistle to Philemon, in behalf of his slave Onesimus. St. Paul and Onesimus'*. In the zeal with which the advocates of humanity and the natural rights of raan, have endeavoured to aboUsh slavery frora the civilized world, it has been not unusual to represent it as inconsistent with CMistianity. On the other hand, the absence of all negative precepts respecting it, the frequent aUusions and comparisons adopted by our Lord himself from the state of slavery, to iUustrate the condition of God's servants, and, lastly, the cor respondence between Paul and the master of Onesimus, without any reproof from the bpld and " Coloss. i. 7, 8. ''Eph, vi. 21, t Epistle to Philemon, VOL. 1. B b 370 St. Paul and Onesimus. uncompromising apostle to his convert PMleraon, on his assuraed right of ownership, even over Onesiraus, have been urged as tacit sanctions to the systera, whatever abstract objections raay lie against it. The subject for its own sake alone would not per haps have clairaed attention ; but it furnishes a reinarkable illustration of a general systera observed in the propagation of Christianity, for the sake of wbich it is here noticed. The whole controversy proceeds on tbe raistaken notion, tbat slavery is a subject to wMch the precepts of CMistianity were appUcable. But surely, whatever be the raagnitude of tbe evil, and great it doubtless is, it is a political, not a moral evil; and as sucb, we raay as weU expect to find arguraents in tbe New Testament for or against the Christian character of absolute monarchy or repubUcanism, as against slavery. Imraoral and unchristian practices there are doubt less which arise out of tbis poUtical or social evil, as well as out of tyranny ; and these are consistently stigraatized in the New Testaraent. The avSgoi7roSi