__________________________________________________________________

           Title: Short Papers on Church History
      Creator(s): Miller, Andrew (1810-1883)
     Print Basis: Oxford University, 1874
          Rights: Public Domain
   CCEL Subjects: All;
     __________________________________________________________________

Short Papers on Church History

   by

Andres Miller
     __________________________________________________________________

   SHORT PAPERS ON CHURCH HISTORY

   VOLUME 1 - A.D. 32 - 814

PREFACE

   The following "Short Papers" have far outgrown their original
   intention. They were commenced in "Things New and Old," chiefly with
   the view of supplying, in a series of papers, a brief outline of Church
   History, for the convenience of our numerous readers. But the vastness
   of the subject and the limited space of the magazine compelled me to
   abandon the design and publish them in a separate form.

   As all we know of history comes to us through books, I have examined,
   with some care, the authors which are most esteemed in this country and
   considered the most reliable. And although there is frequent reference
   to volume and page, this by no means indicates all that has been
   gathered from those histories. It would be impossible to say how many
   thoughts, words, and sentences, are interwoven with my own. The
   references have been generally given, not so much to verify what has
   been written, as to induce the reader to study the larger works if he
   has an opportunity. The materials are so varied and abundant, that the
   difficulty lies in making a selection, so as to maintain a continued
   historic line, and yet leave out what would now be neither profitable
   nor interesting.

   The following are the principal histories I have consulted, and to
   which I am largely indebted: Milman's; Greenwood's; Neander's; J.C.
   Robertson's; Waddington's; Mosheim's; Milner's; Collier's; Du Pin's;
   and Gardner's "Faiths of the World."

   But I have aimed at more than mere history. It has been my desire to
   connect with it Christ and His word, so that the reader may receive the
   truth and blessing, through grace, to his soul.

   It will be observed that I commence with the Lord's revealed purpose
   concerning His church in Matthew 16. Other parts of the New Testament
   have been carefully examined as to the first planting of the church,
   but its actual history I have endeavoured to trace in the light of the
   seven epistles, addressed to the seven churches in Asia. This of course
   must be in a very general way, as I have been desirous to give the
   reader as broad a view of ecclesiastical history as possible,
   consistently with my plan and brevity.

   The apostle John learnt the history of the church at the feet of Jesus.
   Blessed place for both reader and writer! It is there He reveals His
   mind to His disciples about the church and her enemies, Himself and His
   glories. But the disciple must know Him to learn all at His feet; as
   John says, "When I saw him." None on earth knew the Saviour so
   intimately as John; but the glory of His Person, as now revealed,
   completely overwhelmed him. He was then an exile for his faithfulness
   to "the word of God, and the testimony of Jesus Christ." He was sharing
   in the sufferings of His persecuted church.

   Such was the blessed position of John, when he heard the prophetic
   history of the church as introductory to God's judgment of the world
   that now is. Holding fast the word of God, faithful in his testimony to
   Christ, persecuted for the truth's sake, a humble disciple at the
   Master's feet, the most wonderful histories and glories are revealed to
   him. He had honoured the Lord in his life and in his ways; and now the
   time was come for the Lord to honour His faithful servant. And this He
   did by showing him, from His own point of view, the glories of heaven,
   the miseries of hell, the histories of earth, down to the last and
   closing scene when the dead appear before the judgment-seat of Christ,
   and the annals of time and the universe itself melt into the new
   heavens and new earth wherein dwelleth righteousness.

   The Lord's tender ways in love and grace to His banished one are
   beautiful beyond all description. "And He laid His right hand upon me,"
   John tells us, saying unto me, Fear not; I am the first and the last; I
   am He that liveth and was dead; and, behold, I am alive for evermore,
   Amen: and have the keys of hell and of death." Here the risen Lord
   assures John, and all who believe in Him, that there is nothing now to
   fear. Sin and guilt are put away, every enemy is vanquished, and every
   circumstance of death and the grave completely mastered. "Fear not," He
   says, and why? "Because I am the first and the last" --God as well as
   man; and farther, "I am He that liveth, and was dead:" but now, I am
   alive for evermore in resurrection, where no enemy or evil can ever
   come. And surely every believer, weak or strong, is there with Him, and
   under the shelter of "His right hand." Besides, He has the keys of
   death and hell --the symbol of His authority and power over the whole
   realm of Satan.

   May the Lord's blessing accompany the volume that now goes forth; and
   may He give you, my dear reader, to know Himself, His victories, His
   glories, His revelations: and in true humility, like the beloved
   disciple, to study them all at the Master's feet.

   So prays,

   Ever yours truly,

   Andrew Miller.

   London, Dec. 1, 1873.
     __________________________________________________________________

INTRODUCTION

   In the year 1865 two papers appeared in the Magazine, "Things New and
   Old," under the title of "Philadelphia." These were afterwards
   published separately as a little book, with a few footnotes from church
   history. The reappearance of these papers, in their new form, first
   suggested the thought of the proposed forthcoming papers under the
   above title, in the monthly serial.

   Many of our readers, we know, have neither the time nor the opportunity
   for reading the voluminous works that have been written from time to
   time on the history of the church. Still, that which has been the
   dwelling-p1ace of God for the last eighteen hundred years must be a
   subject of the deepest interest to all His children. We speak not now
   of the church as it is often represented in history, but as it is
   spoken of in scripture. There it is seen in its true spiritual
   character, as the body of Christ, and as the "habitation of God through
   the Spirit." Ephesians, Chapter 2.

   We must always bear in mind, when reading what is called a history of
   the church, that, from the days of the apostles until now, there have
   been two distinct and widely different, classes of persons in the
   professing church: the merely nominal, and the real --the true, and the
   false. This was predicted. "For I know this," says the apostle, "that
   after my departure shall grievous wolves enter in among you, not
   sparing the flock. Also of your own selves shall men arise, speaking
   perverse things, to draw away disciples after them." (Acts 20) His
   Second Epistle to Timothy is also full of warnings and directions as to
   the various forms of evil, which were then but too plainly manifest. A
   rapid change for the worse had taken place from the time that his first
   epistle was written. He exhorts the truly godly to walk in separation
   from those who had a form of godliness, but who denied the power
   thereof. "From such," he says, "turn away." Such exhortations are
   always needed, always applicable --as much now as then. We cannot
   separate ourselves from Christendom without giving up Christianity; but
   we can and ought to separate ourselves from what the apostle calls
   "vessels to dishonour." The promise is, that; "if a man purge himself
   from these, he shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified and meet for
   the master's use, and prepared unto every good work."

   It is interesting --though painfully so --to mark the difference on
   this point between the First and the Second Epistles to Timothy. In the
   first, the church is spoken of according to its true character and
   blessed position on the earth. There it is seen as the house of God
   --the depositary and display of truth to man. In the Second Epistle, it
   is spoken of as what it had become through the failure of those into
   whose hands it had been entrusted.

   Take one passage from each Epistle in illustration:

   1) "These things write I unto thee, hoping to come unto thee shortly;
   but if I tarry long, that thou mayest know how thou oughtest to behave
   thyself in the house of God, the pillar and ground of the truth."

   1 Timothy 3:15

   2) "But in a great house there are not only vessels of gold and of
   silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some to honour, and some to
   dishonour."

   2 Timothy 2:20

   Here all is changed --sadly changed. In place of divine order there is
   hopeless confusion; in place of "the house of God, the pillar and
   ground of truth," there is "a great house" --practically "the mystery
   of iniquity." In place of the house being kept according to the will of
   God and suitable for Him, it was arranged and ordered according to the
   will of man, and for his own personal advantage and exaltation. Thus
   early had the evils, which have been the sin and the disgrace of
   Christendom ever since, made their appearance. But this was overruled
   for good. The Spirit of God, in great mercy, has supplied us with the
   plainest directions for the darkest day of the church's history, and
   has pointed out the way of truth for the worst of times, so that we are
   left without excuse. Times and circumstances change, not the truth of
   God.

   THE MISTAKES OF

   HISTORIANS IN GENERAL

   Some historians, it is sorrowful to say, have not taken into account
   this sad mixture of evil vessels with the good --of true Christians and
   false. They have not themselves been spiritually minded men. Hence they
   have rather made it their chief object to record the many unchristian
   and wicked ways of the mere professors. They have dwelt at great
   length, and with great minuteness, on the heresies that have troubled
   the church, on the abuses that have disgraced it, and on the
   controversies that have distracted it. Much rather would we endeavour
   to trace, all down through the long dark pages of history, the silver
   line of God's grace in true Christians; though at times the alloy so
   predominates that the pure ore is scarcely perceptible.

   God has never left Himself without a witness. He has had His loved and
   cherished, though hidden ones, in all ages and in all places. No eye
   but His could see the seven thousand in Israel who had not bowed the
   knee to the image of Baal, in the days of Ahab and Jezebel. And tens of
   thousands, we doubt not, even from the darkest ages of Christianity,
   will be found at last in the "glorious church," which Christ will
   present to Himself, on the long-looked-for day of His nuptial joy. Many
   precious stones from the rubbish of the "middle ages" will reflect His
   grace and glory on that crowning day. Blessed thought! Even now it
   fills the soul with ecstasy and delight. Lord, hasten that happy day
   for Thine own name's sake!

   The truly godly are instinctively humble. They are generally retiring,
   and for the most part but little known. There is no humility so deep
   and real as that which the knowledge of grace produces. Such lowly and
   hidden ones find but a small place on the historic page. But the
   insinuating or zealous heretic, and the noisy or visionary fanatic, is
   too clamorous to escape notice. Hence it is that the historian has so
   carefully recorded the foolish principles and the evil practices of
   such men.

   We will now turn for a little, and take a general view of the first
   part of our subject, namely:

   THE SEVEN CHURCHES OF ASIA

   These seven Epistles, so far, will guide our future studies. We believe
   they are not only historical, but also prophetical. Doubtless they are
   strictly historical, and this fact must be allowed its full weight in
   studying their prophetic character. Seven churches actually existed in
   the seven cities here named, and in the condition here described. But,
   it is equally clear that He who knows the end from the beginning
   intended them to bear a prophetic meaning as well as an historical
   application. They were selected from amongst many, and so arranged and
   described as to foreshadow what was to come. To limit their application
   to the seven literal churches then in Asia would be to mar the unity of
   the Apocalypse, and to lose the promised blessing. "Blessed is he that
   readeth, and they that hear the words of this prophecy." The character
   of the whole book is prophetic and symbolic. The second and third
   chapters are no exception to this. The Lord Himself introduces them in
   their mystic character. "The mystery of the seven stars which thou
   sawest in my right hand, and the seven golden candlesticks. The seven
   stars are the angels of the seven churches: and the seven candlesticks
   which thou sawest are the seven churches."

   The number seven is characteristic. It marks a complete circle of the
   thoughts or ways of God as to time. Hence the seven days of the week
   --the seven feasts of Israel --the seven parables of the kingdom of
   heaven in mystery. It is often used throughout this book, which takes
   up Jew, Gentile, and the church of God, as responsible on the earth.
   Hence we have seven churches, seven stars, seven candlesticks, seven
   angels, seven seals, seven trumpets, seven vials or the seven last
   plagues. Only in chapters 2, and 3 is the church seen as responsible on
   the earth, and the object of divine government. From chapter 4 - 19,
   she is seen in heaven. Then she appears in full manifested glory with
   her Lord. "And the armies which were in heaven followed him upon white
   horses, clothed in fine linen, white and clean."

   In the body of the book, especially from chapter 6, the Jews and
   Gentiles come before us, and are judicially dealt with from the throne
   of God in heaven. But this will not take place till after the church
   --the true bride of the Lamb --is caught up to heaven, and the merely
   nominal corrupt thing finally rejected.

   The threefold division of the book, as given by the Lord Himself, makes
   the order of events quite plain, and ought to have immense weight as a
   principle of interpretation in the study of the Apocalypse. In chapter
   1:19, He gives us the contents and plan of the whole book: "Write the
   things which thou hast seen, and the things which are, and the things
   which shall be hereafter," --or, literally, "after these things." "The
   things which thou hast seen" refer to the revelation of Jesus as seen
   by John in chapter 1, "the things which are," to the time-condition of
   the professing body as presented in chapters 2, and 3. "The things
   which shall be hereafter" are from chapter 4 to the end. The third
   division begins with chapter 4. A door is opened in heaven, and the
   prophet is called to come up. "Come up hither and I will shew thee
   things which must be hereafter," or "after these things." It is the
   same phrase in chapter 4:1, as in Revelation chapter 1:19. The things,
   which are, and the things which shall be after these things, cannot
   possibly be concurrent. The one must end before the other begins.

   When the number seven is used, not in a literal but in a symbolic
   sense, it always signifies completeness. It is evidently thus used in
   chapters 2, and 3. There were other churches, we know, besides those
   named; but seven are selected and associated to present a complete
   picture of what would afterwards be developed in the church's history
   on earth. The more important moral elements, which then existed, the
   Lord foresaw, would reappear in course of time. Thus we have a
   sevenfold or divinely perfect picture of the successive states of the
   professing church during the entire period of her responsibility on the
   earth.

   We will now take a rapid glance at the outline of the seven churches;
   and give a general idea of the different periods in history to which
   they apply.

   EPHESUS --In Ephesus the Lord detects the root of all declension. "Thou
   hast left thy first love." It is threatened with the removal of the
   candlestick unless there be repentance. Period is from the apostolic
   age to the close of the second century.

   SMYRNA --The message to Ephesus is general, to Smyrna it is specific.
   And though it applied at that time to the assembly there, it shadowed
   forth, in the most striking way, the repeated persecutions through
   which the church passed under the heathen emperors. Yet God may have
   used the power of the world to arrest the progress of evil in the
   church. Period is from the second century to Constantine.

   PERGAMOS --Here we have the establishment of Christianity by
   Constantine as the religion of the State. Instead of persecuting the
   Christians, he patronised them. From that moment the downward course of
   the church is rapid. Her unholy alliance with the world proved her
   saddest and deepest fall. It was then that she lost the true sense of
   her relationship to Christ in heaven, and of her character on earth as
   a pilgrim and a stranger. Period is from the beginning of the fourth to
   the seventh century, when popery was established. (See Note I-1)

   THYATIRA --In Thyatira we have the popery of the Middle Ages,
   Jezebel-like, practising all kinds of wickedness, and persecuting the
   saints of God, under the disguise of religious zeal. Nevertheless there
   was a God-fearing remnant in Thyatira, whom the Lord comforts with the
   bright hope of His coming and with the promise of power over the
   nations, when He Himself shall reign. But the word of exhortation to
   the remnant is, "That which ye have already, holdfast till I come."
   Period is from the establishment of popery to the Lord's coming. It
   goes on to the end, but is characterised by the dark ages.

   SARDIS --Here we see the Protestant part of Christendom --that which
   followed the great work of the Reformation. The foul features of popery
   disappear, but the new system itself has no vitality. "Thou hast a name
   that thou livest and art dead." But there are true saints in these
   lifeless systems, and Christ knows them all. "Thou hast a few names
   even in Sardis which have not defiled their garments; and they shall
   walk with me in white: for they are worthy." Period is from the
   eventful sixteenth century onwards --Protestantism after the
   Reformation.

   PHILADELPHA --The church of Philadelphia presents a feeble remnant, but
   they are faithful to the word and name of the Lord Jesus. That which
   characterised them was keeping the word of Christ's patience, and not
   denying His name. Their condition was not marked by any outward display
   of power; nor of anything externally great, but of close, intimate,
   personal communion with Himself. He is in their midst as the Holy One
   and the True, and is represented as having charge of the house. He has
   "the key of David." The treasures of the prophetic word are unlocked
   for those inside. They are also in the sympathies of His patience, and
   in the expectation of His coming. "Because thou hast kept the word of
   my patience, I also will keep thee from the hour of temptation, which
   shall come upon all the world, to try them that dwell upon the earth."
   Period --especially from an early part of this century, but activity on
   all hands is now rapidly developing the last phases of Christendom.

   LAODICEA --In Laodicea we have lukewarmness -indifference
   -latitudinarianism; but with high pretensions, a boastful spirit, and
   great self-sufficiency. This is the last state of that which bears the
   name of Christ on the earth. But alas! it is intolerable to Him. Its
   final doom has come. Having separated every true believer from the
   corruptions of Christendom to Himself, He spues it out of His mouth.
   That which ought to have been sweet to His taste has become nauseous,
   and it is cast off forever. Period -- beginning after Philadelphia, but
   especially the closing scene.

   Having thus taken a general view of the seven churches, we would now
   endeavour, through the Lord's help, briefly to trace these different
   periods of the church's history. And we purpose examining more fully,
   each of the seven Epistles as we go along, that we may ascertain what
   light is shed on the different periods by these addresses; and, how far
   the facts of church history illustrate the scripture history of these
   two chapters. May the Lord guide for the refreshment and blessing of
   His own beloved ones.

   Note I-1: Hyginus first adopted the title "Pope" in 139, and Pope
   Boniface III induced Phocas, Emperor of the East, to confine it to the
   prelates of Rome in 606. Also, by the connivance of Phocas, the pope's
   supremacy over the Christian church was established --Haydn's
   Dictionary of Dates.
     __________________________________________________________________

Chapter 1

   THE ROCK-FOUNDATION

   In commencing the study of any subject, it is well to know its
   beginnings --the original intention or plan, and the first step in its
   history. These we have in the clearest, fullest way, as to the church,
   in Holy Scripture. There we have not only the original intention, but
   also the plans and specifications of the great Builder, and the early
   history of the work under His own hand. The foundation had been laid,
   and the work was going on; but the Lord Himself was still the only
   builder: therefore up to this time all was real and perfect.

   At the close of the Jewish dispensation the Lord added the saved
   remnant of Israel to the newly formed church: but, at the close of the
   present or Christian dispensation, He will take all who believe in His
   name up to heaven in glorified bodies. Not one belonging to the church
   will be added to the congregation of millennial saints. "For the Lord
   himself shall descend from heaven with a shout, with the voice of the
   archangel, and with the trump of God: and the dead in Christ shall rise
   first; then we which are alive and remain shall be caught up together
   with them in the clouds, to meet the Lord in the air: and so shall we
   ever be with the Lord." (1 Thess. 4:14 - 18) This will be the happy
   close of the history of the church on earth --the true spouse of
   Christ: the dead raised, the living changed, and all, in their bodies
   of glory, caught up together in the clouds to meet the Lord in the air.
   Thus we have the entire limits of the church defined, and the whole
   period of her history before us. But we return to the dawn of her day
   on the earth.

   Under the figure of a building the Lord first introduces the subject of
   the church. And so infinitely precious are His words, that we may adopt
   them as the text or motto of its whole history. They have sustained the
   hearts and the hopes of His people in all ages, and in all
   circumstances; and they will ever be the strongholds of faith. What can
   be more blessed, more assuring, more peace-giving, than these words:

   "UPON THIS ROCK I WILL BUILD MY CHURCH; AND THE GATES OF HELL SHALL NOT
   PREVAIL AGAINST IT."

   In Matthew 16, the Lord questions His disciples as to the sayings of
   men concerning Him. This leads to the confession of Peter, and also to
   the gracious revelation of the Lord concerning His church. It may be
   well to transfer the whole conversation to our pages --it all bears so
   directly on our subject.

   "When Jesus came into the coasts of Cæsarea Philippi, he asked his
   disciples, saying, Whom do men say that I the Son of man am? And they
   said, some say that thou art John the Baptist: some, Elias: and others,
   Jeremias, or one of the prophets. He saith unto them, But whom say ye
   that I am? And Simon Peter answered and said; Thou art the Christ, the
   Son of the living God. And Jesus answered and said unto him, Blessed
   art thou, Simon Bar-jona, for flesh and blood hath not revealed it unto
   thee, but my Father which is in heaven. And I also say unto thee, that
   thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my church; and the
   gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

   Here we have the two main things connected with the proposed building
   --the Rock-foundation, and the divine Builder. "Upon this rock I will
   build my church." But who is, or what is, "this rock"? some may
   inquire. Clearly, we answer, the confession of Peter; not Peter
   himself, as the apostasy teaches. True, he was a stone --a living stone
   in the new temple; "Thou art Peter" --thou art a stone. But the
   Father's revelation, by Peter, of the glory of the Person of His Son,
   is the foundation on which the church is built --"Thou art the Christ,
   the Son of the living God." But the glory of the Person of the Son in
   resurrection is the unveiled truth here. "Flesh and blood hath not
   revealed this unto thee, but my Father which is in heaven." Immediately
   on the confession by Peter, the Lord intimates His intention to build
   His church, and asserts its eternal security. "Upon this rock I will
   build my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it."

   He Himself, the fountain of life, could not be conquered by death; but,
   in dying as the great Substitute for sinners, He triumphed over death
   and the grave, and is alive for evermore, as He said to His apostle
   John after His resurrection: "I am he that liveth, and was dead; and,
   behold, I am alive for evermore, Amen; and have the keys of hell and of
   death." (Rev. 1:18) What majestic, what triumphant words are these!
   They are the words of a conqueror --of one who has power; but of power
   over the gates of Hades --the place of separate spirits. The keys
   --symbol of authority and power --hang at His girdle. The stroke of
   death may fall upon a Christian, but the sting is gone. It comes as a
   messenger of peace to conduct the weary pilgrim home to eternal rest.
   Death is no longer the master, but the servant of the Christian. "For
   all things are yours; whether Paul, or Apollos, or Cephas, or the
   world, or life, or death, or things present, or things to come; all are
   yours: and ye are Christ's and Christ is God's." (1 Corinthians 3:21 -
   23)

   The Person of Christ, then, the Son of the living God --in His
   resurrection-glory --is the foundation, the solid and imperishable
   foundation, on which the church is built. As alive from the dead He
   communicates life in resurrection to all who are built on Him as the
   true foundation stone. This is plain from what Peter says in his first
   Epistle. "To whom coming, as unto a living stone... ye also, as living
   stones, are built up a spiritual house." And further down in the same
   chapter he says, "Unto you therefore which believe, he is precious," or
   "an honour." (May both reader and writer note well these two most
   precious truths in connection with our "Rock foundation.") --divine
   life and divine preciousness are communicated to, and become, the
   possession of all who put their trust in Christ. "To whom coming," not
   to what coming, it is the Person of Christ we come to, and have to do
   with. His life --life in resurrection --becomes ours. From that moment
   He is our life. "To whom coming, as unto a living stone... ye also, as
   living stones, are built up a spiritual house." Christ's own life, as
   the risen Man, and all that He is heir to is ours. Oh, wondrous,
   marvellous, blessed truth! Who would not desire, above all things, this
   life, and this life beyond the power of death --the gates of Hades?
   Eternal victory is stamped on the risen life of Christ, it can never
   more be tested, and this is the believer's life.

   But there is more than life for every living stone in this spiritual
   temple. There is also Christ's preciousness. "Unto you therefore which
   believe he is precious;" literally, "the preciousness." That is, just
   as the life of Christ becomes ours when we believe in Him, so does His
   preciousness. The principle in both is the same. The life may be viewed
   as our capacity to enjoy; and the preciousness, as our title to possess
   our inheritance on high. His honours, titles, dignities, privileges,
   possessions, glories, are ours --all ours in Him. "To them that believe
   he is the preciousness." O wondrous thought! "He loved the church and
   gave himself for it." Such then is our Rock-foundation, and such the
   blessedness of all who are on the Rock. Like Jacob of old, when a
   pilgrim and a stranger he rested on the stone in the desert, the whole
   panorama of heaven's riches in grace and glory passed before him,
   Genesis 28.

   CHRIST THE ONLY

   BUILDER OF HIS CHURCH

   But Christ is also the Builder of His church. The building against
   which no craft or power of the enemy can ever prevail is Christ's own
   work, though we read of other builders. "Upon this rock I will build my
   church." It is well to be clear on this point, so that we may not
   confound what man builds with what Christ builds. There must be the
   greatest confusion of mind, both as to the truth of God, and the
   present state of Christendom, unless this distinction is seen. Nothing
   is more important to note here than that Christ is the only Builder of
   His church; though Paul and Apollo's, and all true evangelists, are
   preachers by whom sinners believe. The Lord's work in the souls of
   believers is perfect. It is a real, spiritual, personal work. Through
   His grace in their hearts they come to Him, as unto a living stone, and
   are built upon Him who is risen from among the dead. They have tasted
   that the Lord is gracious. Such are the living stones with which the
   Lord builds His holy temple; and the gates of hell can never prevail
   against it. Thus Peter himself, and all the apostles, and all true
   believers, are built up a spiritual house. When Peter speaks of this
   building in his First Epistle, he says nothing of himself as a builder.
   Here Christ is the Builder. It is His work, and His only. "I will build
   my church," He says.

   Let us now see from the word of God what man builds, what materials he
   uses, and the way he goes to work. In 1 Corinthians 3, and in 2 Timothy
   2 we have these things brought before us. "A great house" is raised by
   human instrumentality: which, in a certain sense, is also the church,
   and the house of God: as in 1Timothy 3:16, we read of "the house of
   God, which is the church of the living God." It is also spoken of as
   Christ's house in Hebrews 3, "whose house are we." But the house soon
   became sadly corrupted through human infirmity and positive wickedness.
   The authority of God's word by many was set aside, and man's will
   became supreme. The effect of human philosophy on the simple
   institutions of Christ was soon painfully manifest. But wood, hay, and
   stubble, can never be "fitly framed together" with gold, silver, and
   precious stones. The house became great in the world; like the mustard
   tree, in the branches of which many find a convenient lodging.
   Connection with the "great house" gives man a status in the world, in
   place of being like the Master, despised and rejected. The archbishop
   stands next to royalty. But the professing church is not only outwardly
   great, it is most pretentious, and seeks to put the stamp of God on its
   own unhallowed work. This is its greatest wickedness, and the source of
   its blindness, confusion, and worldliness.

   Paul, as one chosen of the Lord to do His work, laid the foundation of
   "God's building" in Corinth, and others built upon it. But they did not
   all build with divine materials. The right foundation was laid, and
   every man was to take heed how he builded thereon. In connection with
   the true foundation, some might build gold, silver, and precious
   stones, and others wood, hay, and stubble. That is, some might teach
   sound doctrine, and look for living faith in all who applied for
   communion: others might teach unsound doctrine, and receive into the
   fellowship of the church persons in whom was no faith --the mere
   outward observance of ordinances taking the place of faith and eternal
   life. Here man's instrumentality, responsibility, and failure came in.
   Nevertheless, the builder himself may be saved, having faith in Christ,
   though his work is destroyed.

   But there is another and a worse class of builders, who corrupt the
   temple of the Lord, and are themselves destroyed. We give, for the
   convenience of the reader; the entire passage. Nothing can be plainer.
   "According to the grace of God which is given unto me, as a wise
   master-builder, I have laid the foundation, and another buildeth
   thereon. But let every man take heed how he buildeth thereupon. For
   other foundation can no man lay than that is laid, which is Jesus
   Christ. Now if any man build upon this foundation gold, silver,
   precious stones, wood, hay, stubble; every man's work shall be made
   manifest; for the day shall declare it, because it shall be revealed by
   fire; and the fire shall try every man's work of what sort it is. If
   any man's work abide which he hath built thereupon, he shall receive a
   reward. If any man's work shall be burned, he shall suffer loss: but he
   himself shall be saved; yet so as by fire... If any man defile the
   temple of God, him shall God destroy." Verses 10 - 17.

   We may further observe on the Lord's words, "upon this rock I will
   build my church," that He had not begun to build it yet: He is telling
   them what He is going to do. He does not say, I have built it, or I am
   building it, but I will build it; and this He began to do at Pentecost.

   But there is another truth most intimately connected with the history
   of the church, and linked up with its condition and character, on the
   earth, that we must notice, before proceeding with its actual history.
   We refer to the truth contained in the expression,

   THE KEYS OF THE

   KINGDOM OF HEAVEN

   This leads to the "great house" --already referred to --of outward
   profession. At the same time we must bear in mind, that though
   intimately connected, the kingdom of heaven and the great house are
   quite distinct. In title the world belongs to the King. "The field is
   the world." His servants are to go on sowing. In result we have "a
   great house," or Christendom. [1] But when all that which is merely
   nominal in Christendom shall be swept away by judgment, the kingdom
   will be established in power and glory. This will be the millennium.

   While still speaking to Peter about the church, the Lord added, "And I
   will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven." The church as
   built by Christ, and the kingdom of heaven as opened by Peter, are
   widely different things. It is one of the great but common mistakes of
   Christendom, to use the terms interchangeably as if they meant the same
   thing. And theological writers in all ages, from assuming as a basis
   that they are the same, have written in the most confused way, both as
   to the church and the kingdom. The expression is dispensational, just
   as the similar phrase, "the kingdom of God," is moral. But unless we
   have some acquaintance with the dispensational ways of God, we can
   never rightly divide His word. That which Christ Himself builds, and
   that which man instrumentally, by means, it may be, of preaching and
   baptizing, must not be confounded. The church, which is Christ's body,
   is built upon the confession that He is the Son of the living God,
   glorified in resurrection. Every truly converted soul has to do with
   Christ Himself before it can have anything to say to the church. The
   kingdom is a wider thing, and takes in every baptised person --the
   whole scene of Christian profession, whether true or false.

   Christ does not say to Peter that He will give Him the keys of the
   church or the keys of heaven. Had He done so, there might have been
   some show of reason for the evil system of popery. But He merely says,
   "I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven" --i.e. of the
   new dispensation. Keys, it has been said, are not for building temples,
   but for opening doors; and the Lord honoured Peter to open the door of
   the kingdom, first to the Jews, and then to the Gentiles. (Acts 2) But
   the language of Christ about His church is of another order. It is
   simple, beautiful, emphatic, and unmistakable. "My church." What depth,
   what fullness there is in these words: "My church!" When the heart is
   in fellowship with Christ about His church, there will be an
   apprehension of His affections towards it, which we have no power of
   expressing. As it is, we love to linger over these two words, "My
   church!" but who can speak of the measure of Christ's heart that is
   therein revealed? Again, think of these other two words, "This rock."
   As if He had said, The glory of My Person, and the power of My life in
   resurrection, from the solid foundation of "My church." And again, "I
   will build." Thus we see in these seven words, that everything is in
   Christ's own hands, as "to the church which is his body, the fullness
   of him that filleth all in all.

   THE OPENING OF

   THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN

   The administration of the kingdom the Lord, in an especial manner,
   committed to Peter, as we see in the early chapters of the Acts. The
   term is taken from the Old Testament. (See Dan. 2 and 7) In chapter 2
   we have the kingdom; in chapter 7 we have the King. The phrase, kingdom
   of heaven, occurs only in the Gospel of Matthew, where the evangelist
   writes chiefly for Israel.

   The bringing in of the kingdom of heaven in power and glory on the
   earth, in the Person of the Messiah, was the natural expectation of
   every godly Jew. John the Baptist, as the Lord's forerunner, came
   preaching, "The kingdom of heaven is at hand." But, in place of the
   Jews receiving their Messiah, they rejected and crucified Him;
   consequently the kingdom, according to Jewish expectations, was set
   aside. Nevertheless, it was introduced in another form. When the
   rejected Messiah ascended to heaven, and took His place at God's right
   hand, triumphant over every foe, the kingdom of heaven began. Now the
   king is in heaven, and as Daniel says, "the heavens do rule," though
   not openly. And from the time that He ascended until He return, it is
   the kingdom in mystery. (Matt. 13) When He comes back again in power
   and great glory it will be the kingdom in manifestation.

   The new economy Peter was privileged to open to both Jew and Gentile.
   This he did in his address to the Jews, Acts 2, and in his address to
   the Gentiles, Acts 10. But again we would draw attention to the fact,
   that the church, or the Assembly of God, and the kingdom of heaven, are
   not the same thing. Let us be clear, in starting, as to this
   fundamental point. The identifying the two things has produced great
   confusion of thought and may be viewed as the origin of Puseyism,
   popery, and every human system in Christendom. The following remarks on
   "the tare-field," from a recent publication, bear directly on this
   subject, though they refer to a later period than the early chapters of
   the Acts. [2]

   THE PARABLE OF THE TARES

   "Matthew13:24-25. Another parable put He forth unto them, saying, The
   kingdom of heaven is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his
   field: but while men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the
   wheat, and went his way' --exactly what is become of the profession of
   Christ. There are two things necessary for the inroad of evil among
   Christians. The first is the un-watchfulness of the Christians
   themselves. They get into a careless state, they sleep, and the enemy
   comes and sows tares. This began at an early epoch in Christendom. We
   find the germs even in the Acts of the Apostles, and still more so in
   the Epistles. First Thessalonians is the first inspired Epistle that
   the Apostle Paul wrote; and the second was written shortly after. And
   yet he tells them that the mystery of iniquity was already at work;
   that there were other things to follow, such as the apostasy and the
   man of sin, and that when the lawlessness should be fully manifest
   (instead of working secretly), then the Lord would put an end to the
   lawless one and all concerned! The mystery of iniquity seems akin to
   the sowing of tares spoken of here. Some time after when the blade was
   sprung up and brought forth fruit' --when Christianity began to make
   rapid strides in the earth --"then appeared the tares also." But it is
   evident the tares were sown almost immediately after the good seed. No
   matter what the work of God is, Satan is always close upon its heels.
   When man was made, he listened to the serpent and fell. When God gave
   the law, it was broken even before it was committed into the hands of
   Israel. Such is always the history of human nature.

   "So the mischief is done in the field, and never repaired. The tares
   are not for the present taken out of the field: there is no judgment of
   them. Does this mean that we are to have tares in the church? If the
   kingdom of heaven meant the church, there ought to be no discipline at
   all: you ought to allow uncleanness of flesh or spirit there. Here is
   the importance of seeing the distinction between the church and the
   kingdom. The Lord forbids the tares to be taken out of the kingdom of
   heaven: "Let both grow together until the harvest" (vs. 30), that is,
   till the Lord comes in judgment. Were the kingdom of heaven the same as
   the church, it would, I repeat, amount to no less than this: that no
   evil, let it be ever so flagrant or plain, is to be put out of the
   church till the day of judgment. We see, then, the importance of making
   these distinctions, which too many despise. They are all-important for
   truth and holiness. Nor is there a single word of God that we can do
   without.

   "What then is the meaning of this parable? It has nothing to do with
   the question of church communion. It is the kingdom of heaven' that is
   spoken of --the scene of the confession of Christ, whether true or
   false. Thus Greeks, Copts, Nestorians, Roman Catholics, as well as
   Protestants, are in the kingdom of heaven, not believers only, but also
   bad people professing the name of Christ. A man, who is not a Jew or a
   pagan, and who outwardly professes Christ's name, is in the kingdom of
   heaven. He may be ever so immoral or heretical; but he is not to be put
   out of the kingdom of heaven. But would it be right to receive him at
   the table of the Lord? God forbid! If a person falling into open sin
   were in the church, he ought to be put out of it; but you ought not to
   put him out of the kingdom of heaven. In fact taking away his life
   could only do this; for this is meant by the rooting up of the tares.
   And this is what worldly Christianity did fall into, in no very long
   space of time after the apostles were departed from the earth. Temporal
   punishments were brought in for discipline: laws were made for the
   purpose of handing over the refractory to the subservient civil power.
   If they did not honour the so-called church, they were not to be
   suffered to live. In this way the very evil our Lord had been guarding
   the disciples against came to pass; and the Emperor Constantine used
   the sword to repress ecclesiastical offenders. He and his successors
   introduced temporal punishments to deal with the tares, to try and root
   them up. Take the church of Rome, where you have so thoroughly the
   confusion of the church with the kingdom of heaven: they claim, if a
   man is a heretic, to hand him over to the courts of the world to be
   burnt, and they never confess or correct the wrong, because they
   pretend to be infallible. Supposing that their victims even were tares,
   this is to put them out of the kingdom. If you root a tare from the
   field, you kill it. There may be men outside profaning the name of God;
   but we must leave them for God to deal with.

   "This does not destroy Christian responsibility towards those who
   surround the Lord's Table. You will find instructions as to all this in
   what is written about the church. The field is the world;' the church
   only embraces those believed to be members of Christ's body. Take 1
   Corinthians, where we have the Holy Ghost showing the true nature of
   ecclesiastical discipline. Supposing there are professing Christians,
   guilty of any sin you please; such persons are not to be owned, while
   they are going on in that sin, as members of Christ's body. A real
   saint may fall into open sin, but the church, knowing it, is bound to
   intervene for the purpose of expressing God's judgment about the sin.
   Were they deliberately to allow such a one to come to the Lord's Table,
   they would in effect make the Lord a party to that sin. The question is
   not whether the person is converted or not. If unconverted: men have no
   business in the church, if converted: sin is not to be winked at. The
   guilty are not to be put out of the kingdom of heaven; they are to be
   put out of the church. So the teaching of the word of God is most plain
   as to both these truths. It is wrong to use worldly punishments to deal
   with a hypocrite, even when he is detected. I may seek the good of his
   soul; but this is no reason for punishing him thus. But if a Christian
   is guilty of sin, the church, though called to be patient in judgment,
   is never to suffer it; but we are to leave guilty people, (who are
   unconverted) to be judged by the Lord at His appearing.

   "This is the teaching of the parable of the tares; and it gives a very
   solemn view of Christianity. As sure as the Son of man sowed good seed,
   His enemy would sow bad, which would spring up along with the rest; and
   this evil cannot for the present be got rid of. There is a remedy for
   evil which enters the church, but not yet for evil in the world."

   It is perfectly clear, both from scripture and history, that the great
   mistake into which the professing body fell was the confounding of
   these two things --tares with wheat; or, those who were admitted by the
   administration of baptism to all the official and temporal privileges
   of the professing church, with those who were truly converted and
   taught of God. But the vast difference between what we may call the
   sacramental and the vital systems, must be clearly understood and
   carefully distinguished, if we would study church history aright.

   Another mistake, equally serious, followed as a consequence. The great
   outward or professing body became, in the eyes and in the language of
   men --the church. Godly men were drawn into this snare, so that the
   distinction between the church and the kingdom was early on, lost sight
   of. All the most sacred places and privileges, in the professing body,
   were thus held in common by godly and ungodly men. The Reformation
   utterly failed to clear the church of this sad mixture. It has been
   handed down to us in the Anglican, Lutheran, and Presbyterian systems,
   as the form of baptism and admission clearly shows. In our own day, the
   sacramental system prevails to an alarming extent, and is rapidly on
   the increase. The real and the formal, the living and the dead, are
   undistinguished in the various forms of Protestantism. But alas! most
   solemn reflection! there are many in the professing church --in the
   kingdom of heaven --who will never be in heaven itself. Here we find
   tares as well as wheat, evil servants as well as faithful ones, and
   foolish virgins as well as wise ones. Though all who have been baptised
   are reckoned in the kingdom of heaven, only those who are quickened and
   sealed with the Holy Ghost belong to the church of God.

   But there is another thing connected with the professing church, which
   demands a brief notice here. We refer to:

   THE DIVINE PRINCIPLE OF

   CHURCH GOVERNMENT

   Not only did the Lord give the keys to Peter that he might open the
   doors of the new dispensation, but He entrusted to him its internal
   administration. This principle is all-important in it's bearing on the
   church of God. The words of the commission are these, "And whatsoever
   thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou
   shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." The question is, "What
   do they mean?" Clearly, we believe, authority and power from the Lord,
   to be exercised in and by the church, but limited, in result, to this
   world. There is no thought in the Lord's words about the church
   deciding anything as to heaven. This is the false interpretation and
   the deceiving power of the apostasy. The church on earth can have
   nothing to say or do with what is done in heaven as to binding or
   loosing. The sphere of its action is within its own limits, and, when
   it so acts according to the commission of Christ, it has the promise of
   ratification in heaven.

   Neither is there any thought here, we may add, of the church, or of any
   of its officials, coming in between the soul and God, as to eternal
   forgiveness or eternal judgment. This is the daring blasphemy of Rome.
   "Who can forgive sins but God only?" He reserves this power to Himself
   alone. Besides, the subjects of church government are pardoned, or, at
   least, are on that ground. "Do not ye judge them that are within?" It
   will only apply to them that are within the pale of the church. "But
   them that are without God judgeth." Of every believer in the wide field
   of Christendom it is said, "For by one offering he hath perfected
   forever them that are sanctified." (Heb. 10) Hence, the retaining or
   the remission of sins by the church is only for the present time, and
   strictly administrative in its character. It is the divine principle of
   receiving persons into the Assembly of God, on the ground of adequate
   testimony to their conversion, soundness in doctrine, and holiness of
   life, and also of putting away impenitent offenders until restored by
   true repentance.

   But some of our readers may have the common impression, that this power
   was only given to Peter and the rest of the apostles, and consequently
   ceased with them. This is a mistake. True, it was given to Peter only
   in the first instance, as we have seen; and no doubt greater power was
   exercised during the days of the apostles than has been since, but not
   greater authority. The church has the same authority now as then as to
   discipline in the assembly, though it lacks the power. The word of the
   Lord remains unchanged. Only an apostle, we believe, could speak as
   Paul does in 1 Corinthians chapter 5. "In the name of our Lord Jesus
   Christ, when ye are gathered together, and my spirit, with the power of
   our Lord Jesus Christ, to deliver such a one unto Satan for the
   destruction of the flesh, that the spirit may be saved in the day of
   the Lord Jesus." This was spiritual power in an individual, not the
   judgment of the church. [3] The same apostle, in reference to the same
   case, says to the assembly, "Therefore put away from among yourselves
   that wicked person." The act of putting away was the act, not merely of
   the apostle, but of the whole assembly. In this case, and in this way,
   the excommunicated person's sins were retained, though evidently a
   converted man. In the Second Epistle, chapter 2, we find him fully
   restored. The assembly accepts his repentance --his sins are remitted.
   The overflowing of the apostle's heart on this occasion, and his
   exhortations to the church, are valuable lessons for all who have to do
   with church government, and are intended to remove that cold suspicion
   with which an erring brother is too often received back to the
   privileges of the assembly. "Sufficient to such a man is this
   punishment [or censure] which was inflicted of many. So that
   contrariwise ye ought rather to forgive him, and comfort him, lest
   perhaps such a one should be swallowed up with overmuch sorrow.
   Wherefore, I beseech you, that ye would confirm your love toward him."
   Here we have a case in point, illustrative of the government of the
   assembly according to the will of Christ. "Whatsoever thou shalt bind
   on earth shall be bound in heaven, and whatsoever thou shalt loose on
   earth shall be loosed in heaven."

   THE DIVINE PRINCIPLE

   STILL APPLICABLE

   But "how can these principles be carried out now?" is still the
   question and difficulty with many. Well, we must just go back to the
   word of God. We ought to be able and willing to say, "We can do nothing
   against the truth, but for the truth." (2 Cor. Chap 13:8)

   The administrative authority and power of which we speak was given not
   only to Peter and the other apostles, but also to the church. In
   Matthew chapter 18, we have the working out of the principle laid down
   in chapter 16, "Tell it to the church: but if he neglect to hear the
   church, let him be unto thee as an heathen man and a publican. Verily I
   say unto you, "Whatsoever ye shall bind on earth shall be bound in
   heaven and whatsoever ye shall loose on earth shall be loosed in
   heaven... For where two or three are gathered together in my name,
   there am I in the midst of them." Thus we learn that the acts of the
   two or three, gathered together in Christ's name, have the same divine
   sanction as the administration of Peter. And again, in John 20, the
   Lord delivers the same principle of government to the disciples, not
   merely to the apostles, and that too on resurrection ground, where the
   assembly is livingly united to Christ as the risen Man. This is
   all-important. The spirit of life in Jesus Christ makes the disciples
   free --every disciple free --from the law of sin and death. The church
   is built upon "this rock" --Christ in resurrection, and the gates of
   Hades shall not prevail against it. "Then the same day at evening,
   being the first day of the week, when the doors were shut where the
   disciples were assembled for fear of the Jews, came Jesus and stood in
   the midst, and saith unto them, Peace be unto you. And when he had so
   said, he showed unto them his hands and His side: then were the
   disciples glad when they saw the Lord. Then said Jesus to them again,
   Peace be unto you: as my Father hath sent me, even so send I you. And
   when he had said this, he breathed on them, and saith unto them,
   Receive ye the Holy Ghost: whose so ever sins ye remit, they are
   remitted unto them; and whose soever sins ye retain, they are
   retained." (John 20:23) Here the Lord sets up, we may say, and fairly
   starts, the new creation. The disciples are filled and clothed with
   peace, and with the Spirit of life in Christ Jesus. They are to go
   forth as His messengers, from the resurrection side of His empty grave,
   bearing the blessed message of peace and eternal life to a world bowed
   down with sin, sorrow, and death. The principle of their own internal
   government is also clearly laid down: and its due administration will
   always give to the Christian assembly a distinctive and heavenly
   character, in the presence of both God and man.

   THE PRINCIPLE OF RECEPTION

   AT THE BEGINNING

   But as this principle is the proper basis of all Christian
   congregations, it may be well to look for a moment at its operation in
   the days of the apostles. Surely they understood its meaning and how to
   apply it.

   On the day of Pentecost, and for some time after, it does not appear
   that the young converts were subjected to any examination as to the
   reality of their faith, either by the apostles or others. "Then they
   that [gladly] received his word were baptised, and the same day there
   were added to them about three thousand souls." Thus receiving the word
   was the ground of baptism, and fellowship; but the work was then
   entirely in Christ's own hands. "And the Lord added [to the church]
   daily such as should be saved." The attempt to deceive by Ananias and
   Sapphira was at once detected. Peter acts in his right place, but the
   Holy Ghost was there in un-grieved majesty and power, and Peter owns
   it. Hence he says to Ananias, "Why hath Satan filled thine heart to lie
   to the Holy Ghost?" But this virgin state (state of un-grieved Holy
   Ghost) soon passed away. Failure set in --the Holy Ghost was grieved,
   and it became necessary to examine the applicants, as to whether their
   motives, objects, and state of soul were according to the mind of
   Christ. We are now in the condition of things described in 2 Timothy,
   chapter 2. We are only to have fellowship "with them that call on the
   Lord out of a pure heart."

   After the church became so mixed with merely nominal professors, great
   care was necessary in receiving persons to communion. It was not enough
   that a person said he was converted and claimed admission into the
   church on the ground of his own statements: he must submit to be
   examined by experienced Christians. When one professes to be awakened
   to a sense of sin, and to be brought to repentance before God, and
   faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, those who have gone through the same
   kind of experience themselves must examine his confession. And even
   where conversion is manifestly genuine, godly care, with tenderness,
   must be exercised in reception; something dishonouring to Christ,
   injurious to themselves, or weakening to the assembly may be
   entertained, even unconsciously. Herein spiritual discernment is
   needed. And this is the truest kindness to the applicant, and nothing
   more than a necessary care for the honour of Christ and the purity of
   communion. Christian fellowship would be at an end, if persons were
   received on the sole ground of their own opinion of themselves.

   In Acts 9 we see the practical working of this principle in the case of
   the great apostle himself. And surely, if he could not be accredited
   without adequate testimony, who need complain? True, his case was
   peculiar; still it may be taken as a practical illustration of our
   subject.

   We find both Ananias at Damascus, and the church at Jerusalem
   questioning the reality of Saul's conversion, even though it was a
   miraculous one. Of course he had been an open enemy to the name of
   Christ, and this would make the disciples still more careful. Ananias
   hesitates to baptise him until fully satisfied of his conversion. He
   consults the Lord on the subject, but after hearing His mind, he goes
   directly to Saul; assures him that the same Jesus that appeared to him
   on his way to Damascus has sent him; and confirms the truth of what had
   taken place. Saul is greatly comforted; he receives his sight, and is
   baptised.

   Then as to the action of the church at Jerusalem we read, "And when
   Saul was come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the
   disciples: but they were all afraid of him, and believed not that he
   was a disciple. But Barnabas took him, and brought him to the apostles,
   and declared unto them how he had seen the Lord in the way, and that he
   had spoken to him, and how he had preached boldly at Damascus in the
   name of Jesus." Paul is a model man to the church in many things, and
   in this also. He is received into the assembly --as all applicants
   should be received --on the ground of adequate testimony to the
   genuineness of his Christianity. But while all godly care must be taken
   that the Simon Maguses may be detected, all tenderness and patience
   must be exercised with the timid and doubting ones. Still, life in
   Christ and consistency therewith must be looked for. (See Romans 14,
   15, 1 Cor. 5, and 2 Cor. 2) The church's path is always a narrow one.

   Popery has shown its desperate wickedness in the evil use it has made
   of the church's prerogative to retain or remit sins, hence all the
   abominations of priestly absolution. Protestantism has gone to the
   other extreme --probably fearing the very appearance of popery --and
   has well nigh set aside discipline altogether. The path of faith is to
   follow the word of the Lord.

   The ground being thus cleared as to the great fundamental principles of
   the church and kingdom, we come to the day of Pentecost --the first
   moment of the church's history on earth. Unless we understand the
   principles of Christianity, we can never understand its history.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [1] The terms " church," " kingdom of heaven," and "great-house," are
   scriptural, and somewhat different in their meaning as used by the Lord
   and His apostles. The term "my church," as used by the Lord, can only
   embrace true and living members. The primary thought in the expression
   "kingdom of heaven," surely refers to the authority of the ascended
   Lord. And all who profess subjection to Him are owned as in the
   kingdom. In the "great house" we see the evil, which had crept into the
   professing body through the failure of men, in activity, so that in
   result it is co-extensive with the kingdom of heaven and the professing
   church. But there is another term in constant use, which is not found
   in scripture --Christendom. It is an ecclesiastical term, and
   originally meant all who were christened, or those portions of the
   world in which Christianity prevails, in distinction from heathen or
   Mahometan lands. But now it is used synonymously with the other three
   terms already considered. In a general way the four terms are used
   interchangeably, though originally different in their meaning and
   application. But where is it that there is not confusion?

   [2] Lectures on the Gospel of Matthew, by W. Kelly London: G. Morrish.

   [3] "Delivering to Satan is an act of power --putting out a wicked
   person, a duty attached to the faithfulness of the assembly. No doubt,
   exclusion from the assembly of God is a very serious thing and leaves
   us exposed to sorrow and just trouble of heart, and that from the
   enemy: but direct delivery to Satan is an act of positive power. It was
   done in Jobs case for his good. It was done by Paul in 1 Corinthians 5
   though acting in the gathered assembly, and for the destruction of the
   flesh; and again, without reference to the assembly, in 1 Timothy 1 as
   to Hymenaeus and Alexander, that they might learn not to blaspheme. All
   discipline is for the correction of the individual, though to maintain
   withal the holiness of the house of God, and clear the consciences of
   the saints themselves." (Present Testimony, vol. 1 page 392, New
   Series)
     __________________________________________________________________

Chapter 2

   THE DAY OF PENTECOST FULLY COME

   The Jewish feast of Pentecost may be called the birthday of the
   Christian Church. It was also the anniversary of the giving of the law
   on Mount Sinai, an event, which it does not appear that the Jews
   observed in commemoration. Fifty days after our Lord's resurrection the
   church was formed --its history commenced. The Old Testament saints
   form no part of the New Testament Church. It had no existence in fact,
   until the day of Pentecost.

   All saints, from the beginning, have the same eternal life, they are
   the children of the same God and Father, and the same heaven will be
   their home for ever; but the Old Testament saints belong to another
   dispensation, or to the different dispensations which ran their course
   before Christ came. Each dispensation has its own rise, progress,
   decline, and fall, in scripture; and will have its own reflection in
   heaven. Neither persons nor dispensations will be undistinguished
   there. Hence the apostle in Hebrews 11:39 - 40; when speaking of the
   ancient worthies, says, "And these all, having obtained a good report
   through faith, received not the promise: God having provided some
   better thing for us, that they without us should not be made perfect."
   Surely if God has provided a better thing for us, it must also be a
   different thing. Let us not object to God's own word. Besides, our Lord
   in Matthew 16 says, "On this rock I will build my church." And at the
   same time, He gave the keys to Peter to open the doors of the new
   dispensation. Then He had not begun to build His church, and the doors
   of the kingdom were not opened. But the difference between the old and
   the new will be more distinctly seen when we speak of the great events
   of the day of Pentecost. We begin with the types of Leviticus, chapter
   23.

   The children of Israel were commanded to bring a sheaf of the first
   fruits of their harvest to the priest, that he might wave it before the
   Lord, to be accepted for them. This rite, we believe, shadowed forth
   our Lord's resurrection on the morning after the Jewish Sabbath, the
   ground of the Christian's acceptance before God in the risen Christ.
   "Speak unto the children of Israel, and say unto them, When ye be come
   into the land which I give unto you, and shall reap the harvest
   thereof, then ye shall bring a sheaf of the first-fruits of your
   harvest unto the priest; and he shall wave the sheaf before the Lord,
   to be accepted for you: on the morrow after the Sabbath the priest
   shall wave it." See Matt. 28, and Mark 16.

   Seven full weeks after the waving of the sheaf, the feast of Pentecost
   was celebrated. The former was reckoned to be the first day of the
   harvest in Judea; the latter supposed the corn to be fully gathered in.
   Then they had a solemn festival of thanksgiving. Two loaves of bread,
   baken with the flour of the new harvest, characterised this festival.
   They were to be baken with leaven, and brought out of their
   habitations. Some have thought that the two loaves prefigured the
   out-calling of the church as composed of Jew and Gentile. Be this as it
   may, the number is significant. Two witnesses were necessary for a
   testimony in Israel. The leaven indicates, we doubt not, indwelling sin
   in the believer, and, of course, in the church, viewed in its time
   condition.

   With the wave sheaf --beautiful type of the risen Christ, pure and holy
   --sacrifices of a sweet savor were offered, but no sacrifice for sin.
   With the two wave loaves --type of those who are Christ's --a sin
   offering was presented. Sin, being there, a sin offering was needed to
   cover it. Though the one perfect sacrifice of Christ answered to God
   for both indwelling sin, and the many actual sins of the life, still,
   as a matter of fact and experience, sin dwells in us, and will do so as
   long as we are in this world. All acknowledge this, though all may not
   see the completeness of the work of Christ. "The Christian has by one
   offering been perfected forever, though he may humble himself and make
   confession to God for every failure."

   The typical significance of Pentecost was remarkably fulfilled in the
   descent of the Holy Ghost. He came down to gather together the children
   of God that were scattered abroad. (John 11:52) By this great event the
   system of Judaism was set aside, and the new vessel of testimony, the
   church of God, was introduced. And now, observe, the order of events.
   First:

   THE RESURRECTION AND

   ASCENSION OF CHRIST

   Incarnation, Crucifixion, Resurrection, are the great facts, or
   foundation truths, of the church of Christianity. Incarnation was
   necessary to crucifixion, and both to resurrection. It is blessedly
   true that Christ died on the cross for our sins; but it is equally
   true, that the believer died in His death. (See Rom. 6, Col. 2) The
   Christian's life is life in resurrection. The church is built on the
   risen Christ. No truths can be more blessed and wonderful than
   incarnation and crucifixion; but the church is associated with Him who
   is risen and glorified.

   In Acts 1, we have that which is connected with the Lord's resurrection
   and ascension; and also with the actions of the apostles before the
   descent of the Holy Ghost. The blessed Lord, though in resurrection,
   still speaks and acts by the Holy Ghost. It was "through the Holy
   Ghost" that He gave commandments unto the apostles whom He had chosen.
   This is worthy of special note as teaching us two things:

   1) The character of our union with Christ; the Holy Ghost in the
   Christian, and in the risen Lord, joins them together. "He that is
   joined unto the Lord is one spirit." The "one Spirit" unites them.

   2) This important fact points out the blessed truth of the Holy Ghost
   dwelling and acting in the Christian also after he is actually in
   resurrection. Then He will not have (as He has now) the flesh in us to
   contend against, but will, un-grieved and unhindered, lead us on to the
   full joys of heaven --the happy worship, the blessed service, and the
   whole will of God.

   The risen Lord next exhorts the apostles to wait in Jerusalem for "the
   promise of the Father," which, saith He, ye have heard of Me. "For John
   truly baptised with water, but ye shall be baptised with the Holy Ghost
   not many days hence." It is no longer a question of temporal promises
   to Israel; that field must be left till a future day. The Father's
   promise of the Holy Ghost was an entirely distinct thing, and widely
   different in its results.

   Several things "pertaining to the kingdom of God" having been spoken of
   between the Lord and His apostles, He ascends to heaven, and a cloud
   receives Him out of their sight. The Lord's return is also most plainly
   and distinctly taught at the same time. "And when He had spoken these
   things, while they beheld, He was taken up; and a cloud received Him
   out of their sight. And while they looked steadfastly towards heaven as
   He went up, behold, two men stood by them in white apparel; which also
   said, Ye men of Galilee, why stand ye gazing up into heaven? This same
   Jesus, which is taken up from you into heaven, shall so come in like
   manner as ye have seen him go into heaven." It is quite evident from
   these words, that He ascended personally, visibly, bodily, and that He
   shall so come again in like manner --that He will again appear beneath
   the heavens, and be manifested to people on the earth, personally,
   visibly, and bodily; but then, it will be in power and great glory.

   The apostles and disciples had now learnt two things:

   1) That Jesus was taken up out of this world into heaven:

   2) That He was coming back again into this world.

   On these two great facts their testimony was founded. But Jerusalem was
   to be the starting point of their ministry, and they were to wait for
   power from above. We now come to the second great event, important
   beyond all others, with respect to man's condition in this world --the
   gift of the Holy Ghost. Now, it is to be, not only God for us, but also
   God in us. This took place on the day of Pentecost.

   THE DESCENT OF THE HOLY GHOST

   The time was now fully come. Redemption was finished --God was
   glorified --Christ at His right hand in heaven, and the Holy Ghost come
   down to earth. God inaugurates the church; and this He does in a way
   suitable to His own wisdom, power, and glory. A mighty miracle is
   wrought and an outward sign is given. The great event is thus recorded.

   Acts 2. "And when the day of Pentecost was fully come, they were all
   with one accord in one place. And suddenly there came a sound from
   heaven as of a rushing mighty wind, and it filled all the house where
   they were sitting. And there appeared unto them cloven tongues like as
   of fire, and it sat upon each of them. And they were all filled with
   the Holy Ghost and began to speak with other tongues, as the Spirit
   gave them utterance." It may be well here to pause for a moment, and
   note a few things connected with the descent of the Holy Ghost and the
   display of His power on this important day.

   There was, in the first place, the accomplishment of the Father's
   promise; the Holy Ghost Himself was sent down from heaven. This was the
   great truth of Pentecost. He came from above to dwell in the church
   --the place prepared for Him by the sprinkling of the blood of Jesus
   Christ. There was also the fulfillment of the word of the Lord to the
   apostles; "Ye shall be baptised with the Holy Ghost not many days
   hence." Not that the disciples then knew the meaning of this word, but
   the fact was now accomplished. The full revelation of the doctrine of
   the "one body" awaited the ministrations of Paul; as he elsewhere says,
   "For by one Spirit are we all baptised into one body, whether we be
   Jews or Gentiles, whether we be bond or free; and have been all made to
   drink into one Spirit." (1 Corinthians 12)

   But further, besides the various gifts dispensed for the work of the
   Lord, we have something most blessedly personal, and quite new on the
   earth. The Holy Ghost Himself came down to dwell, not in the church
   only, but also in each individual who believed in the Lord Jesus. And,
   thank the Lord; this most blessed fact is as true today as it was then.
   He dwells now in every believer who rests on the finished work of
   Christ. The Lord had said, looking forward to this day, "For he
   dwelleth with you, and shall be in you." These two grand aspects of the
   Spirit's presence were fully accomplished on the day of Pentecost. He
   came to dwell in each Christian and in the church; and now, blessed
   truth, we know that God is not only for us, but also in us, and with
   us.

   When "God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and with
   power," He appeared in the form of a dove --beautiful emblem of the
   immaculate purity, of the meekness and lowliness, of Jesus. He was not
   to make His voice heard in the streets, or break the bruised reed, or
   quench the smoking flax. But in the case of the disciples who were
   waiting at Jerusalem, it was altogether different. He descended on them
   in cloven tongues --tongues of fire; and sat upon each of them. This
   was characteristic. It was the power of God in testimony --a testimony
   that was to go forth, not only to all Israel, but also to all the
   nations of the earth. The word of God was also to judge all that came
   before it --it was as tongues of fire. God's judgment on man because of
   sin had been judicially expressed in the cross; and now the solemn fact
   is to be made known, far and wide, by the power, of the Holy Ghost.
   Nevertheless, grace reigns --reigns through righteousness, unto eternal
   life, by Christ Jesus. Pardon is proclaimed to the guilty, salvation to
   the lost, peace to the troubled, and rest to the weary. All that
   believe are, and ever shall be, blessed in and with a risen and
   glorified Christ.

   The astonishment and consternation of the Sanhedrim and the Jewish
   people must have been great indeed at the re-appearance, in such power,
   of the followers of the crucified Jesus. They had, doubtless concluded
   that, as the Master was now gone, the disciples could do nothing of
   themselves. For the most part, they were plain uneducated men. But what
   must have been the people's amazement, when they heard that these plain
   men were preaching boldly in the streets of Jerusalem, and making
   converts by thousands to the religion of Jesus! Even historically
   viewed, the scene is full of the most thrilling interest, and has no
   parallel in the annals of time.

   Jesus had been crucified; His claims to be the Messiah, in popular
   estimation, had been buried in His grave. The soldiers, who guarded His
   sepulchre, had been bribed to spread a false report as to His
   resurrection; the popular excitement had no doubt passed away, and the
   city, and temple worship, had returned to their former course, as if no
   great event had taken place. But on God's part things were not to be
   thus quietly passed over. He was awaiting the appointed time to
   vindicate His Son, and to vindicate Him in the very scene of His
   humiliation. This took place early in the morning on the day of
   Pentecost. Suddenly, and unexpectedly, His scattered followers
   reappeared in miraculous power. They boldly charged the rulers and the
   people with the guilt of His apprehension, trial, and crucifixion
   --that they had killed their own Messiah; but that God had raised Him
   up, to be a Prince and a Saviour, and to set Him at His own right hand
   in heaven. [4] "Where sin abounded, grace did much more abound."
   (Romans 5:20)

   The sentence of Babel, we may also say, was reversed on that wonderful
   day. In the different languages, to which man had been doomed in God's
   just displeasure, salvation is proclaimed. This mighty marvellous work
   of God attracts the multitude. They are amazed, and speculate as to
   this strange thing. Each one, in the language of the country from
   whence he came, hears from the lips of poor Galileans the wonderful
   works of God. The Jews who dwelt at Jerusalem, not understanding these
   foreign languages, mocked. Then Peter stood up, and declared to them in
   their own tongue, and proved from their own scriptures, the true
   character of what had taken place.

   PETER'S FIRST APPEAL TO THE JEWS

   Thus we read: "And there were dwelling at Jerusalem, Jews, devout men,
   out of every nation under heaven. Now when this was noised abroad, the
   multitude came together, and were confounded, because that every man
   heard them speak in his own language. And they were all amazed and
   marveled, saying one to another, Behold, are not all these which speak
   Galileans? And how hear we every man in our own tongue, wherein we were
   born? Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in
   Mesopotamia, and in Judæa, and Cappadocia, in Pontus, and Asia,
   Phrygia, and Pamphylia, in Egypt, and in the parts of Libya about
   Cyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and
   Arabians, we do hear them speak in our tongues the wonderful works of
   God. And they were all amazed, and were in doubt, saying one to
   another, "What meaneth this?" Others mocking said, "These men are full
   of new wine." But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his
   voice, and said unto them, Ye men of Judæa, and all ye that dwell at
   Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and hearken to my words: for these
   are not drunken, as ye suppose, seeing it is but the third hour of the
   day: "or, as we should reckon, nine in the morning --the hour of prayer
   in the temple.

   Thus Peter takes the lead, and explains to the Jews, that the wonderful
   things they had seen and heard that morning, were not the result of
   excitement, but rather that which ought to have been looked for
   according to their own prophetic scriptures. "This is that which was
   spoken by the prophet Joel." But mark the ground on which Peter stands
   and preaches with such boldness. He stands on the ground of the
   resurrection and exaltation of Christ. This is carefully to be noted,
   as showing the foundation on which the church rests, and when and where
   her history commences. This was the first day of her existence, the
   first page of her history, and the first triumphs of God's ineffable
   gift to man. "This Jesus hath God raised up, whereof we all are
   witnesses. Therefore being by the right hand of God exalted, and having
   received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, he hath shed
   forth this, which ye now see and hear. For David is not ascended into
   the heavens: but he saith himself, The LORD said unto my Lord, Sit thou
   on my right hand, until I make thy foes thy footstool. Therefore let
   all the house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same
   Jesus, whom ye have crucified, both Lord and Christ."

   We quote the words of another, on the blessed effects of Peter's first
   sermon, and of the presence of the Holy Ghost on the earth.

   "It was not merely a moral change, but a power which set aside all the
   motives which individualized those who had received it, by uniting them
   as one soul, and in one mind. They continued steadfastly in the
   apostles' doctrine, they were in communion with each other, they broke
   bread, they spent their time in prayer: the sense of God's presence was
   powerful among them; and many signs and wonders were wrought by the
   hands of the apostles. They were united in the closest bonds, no man
   calling anything his own, but all divided their possessions with those
   that needed. They were daily in the temple, the public resort of Israel
   for religious exercises, whilst having their own, apart, breaking bread
   at home daily. They ate with joy and gladness of heart, praising God,
   and having favour with all the people around them. Thus the assembly
   was formed, and the Lord added daily to it the remnant of Israel, who
   were to be saved from the judgments, which should fall on a nation,
   which had rejected the Son of God, their Messiah. God brought into the
   assembly --thus owned of Him by the presence of the Holy Ghost --those
   whom He spared in Israel. A new order of things had commenced, marked
   by the presence of the Holy Ghost. Here was found the presence and the
   house of God, although the old order of things still existed until the
   execution of the judgment.

   The assembly was formed, therefore, by the power of the Holy Ghost come
   down from heaven, on the testimony that Jesus, who had been rejected,
   was raised up to heaven, being made of God both Lord and Christ. It was
   composed of the Jewish remnant who were to be spared, with the reserve
   of bringing in Gentiles whenever God should call them." [5]

   This, then, is the church of God; a gathering together of those whom
   God has called to the name of the Lord Jesus, and by the Spirit of God.
   Love rules and characterises the newly formed assembly. The mighty
   victories, which grace achieved on that memorable day fully attested
   the power of the exalted Lord, and the presence of the Holy Ghost on
   earth; Three thousand souls were converted through one sermon. Those
   who had been the avowed enemies of the Lord, and who had participated
   in the guilt of His murder, agonized under the power of Peter's word.
   Alarmed at the awful thought of having killed their own Messiah, and
   that God, in whose presence they now were, had exalted Him to His own
   right hand in heaven, they cried out, "Men and brethren, what shall we
   do?"

   Peter now seeks to deepen the good work in their souls --He seeks to
   humble the once proud and scornful Jews. "Repent," he says, "and be
   baptised everyone of you in the name of Jesus Christ for the remission
   of sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost." He does not
   say simply, "Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and you shall be saved;"
   though, of course, faith and repentance must go together wherever the
   work is genuine. But Peter, in this case, presses repentance. Their
   guilt had been great, and a deep moral work in their conscience was
   needful for their humbling. They must see their guilt in the sight of
   God, and receive the remission of their sins at the feet of Him whom
   they had rejected and crucified. Nevertheless, all was grace. Their
   hearts were touched. They sided with God against themselves --they
   truly repented, were pardoned, and received the gift of the Holy Ghost.
   Now they are the children of God and have eternal life: the Holy Ghost
   dwells in them. The reality of the change was made manifest by a
   complete change of character. "Then they that gladly received his word
   were baptised: and the same day there were added unto them about three
   thousand souls. And they continued steadfastly in the apostles'
   doctrine and fellowship, and in breaking of bread, and in prayers."

   Baptism, on the confession of faith; reception into the assembly; the
   Lord's Supper; the fellowship of saints, and prayer, were their
   distinguishing observances. For the moment, the Lord's prayer, "that
   they may all be one," was answered, as we read in Acts chapter 4, "And
   the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and of one soul:
   neither said any of them that aught of the things which he possessed
   was his own; but they had all things common." We will now turn for the
   sake of connection, to Acts chapter 10.

   THE CALLING IN OF THE GENTILES

   Cornelius, the centurion, a devout man, and those that were with him,
   are now received into the Assembly of God. Peter had intimated their
   call in his first discourse. He is now summoned of God in a special way
   and with special indications of His purpose, to open the door to those
   God-fearing Gentiles. Up to this time the assembly consisted chiefly,
   if not solely, of Jews. But God dealt tenderly with His ancient people
   considering their national prejudices. "Cornelius was a devout man, and
   one that feared God with all his house, which gave much alms to the
   people, and prayed to God always." They could have no objection,
   personally, to receive such a one. Thus God is gracious, tender, and
   merciful. But no doubt was left on Peter's mind as to the divine will.
   God graciously silenced his reasoning's, and overcame his
   unwillingness, with the mild reproof, "What God hath cleansed, that
   call not thou common."

   Peter now proceeds, though slowly; it was a new kind of work for him.
   But nothing seems more surprising to Peter, than that the Gentiles
   should be brought into blessing, without either becoming Jews, or
   submitting to any Jewish ordinances. This to Peter, to the Gentiles,
   and in itself, was an immense step. It strikes at the very root of
   Popery, Puseyism, Apostolic Succession, and every system of ordinances.
   In this fact a flood of light is shed on the character of the present
   dispensation. "Then Peter opened his mouth and said, of a truth I
   perceive that God is no respecter of persons; but in every nation he
   that feareth God, and worketh righteousness, is accepted of him."
   Clearly, it was no longer necessary to become a Jew, or submit to
   external rites and ceremonies, in order to enjoy the richest blessings
   of heaven. Without the imposition of apostolic hands --though Peter
   himself, in divine power and authority was present --and before being
   baptised with water, they were baptised with the Holy Ghost. While the
   word of God was falling from Peter's lips, the Holy Ghost fell on all
   who heard it. Before this, however, a blessed work, through God's
   grace, had been going on in the heart of Cornelius: he was a divinely
   quickened soul.

   The quickening operations of the Spirit are quite distinct from being
   sealed with the Spirit. Before the Holy Ghost can seal, there must be
   something for Him to seal. He cannot seal our old nature; there must be
   a new nature for Him to seal. So that there must be a moment in every
   Christian's history, when he is quickened and not sealed; but sooner or
   later the work will be completed. (Ephesians 1:13) For example, the
   prodigal son was quickened, or converted, when he left the far country,
   but he was a stranger to the Father's love and grace; and,
   consequently, had not yet the faith that calmly rests in Christ as the
   source of all blessing. He was legal if not unbelieving, though
   quickened. Certainly he was not sealed of the Spirit, as to his pardon
   and acceptance, until he received the kiss of reconciliation, or the
   ring, the symbol of eternal love. The gospel of salvation is more than
   concern for the soul, however real. Christ --dishonouring unbelief may
   accompany, for a while, a genuine work of God's Spirit in the soul. The
   prodigal had a certain belief, that there was something good in his
   Father's heart; therefore he ventures to draw near. But surely this is
   short of evangelic fullness of faith: "He that hath received his
   testimony hath set to his seal that God is true." Wherever there is
   faith in Christ and His work, there is the seal of God. Paul himself
   was at least three days in the deepest exercise of soul, without the
   peace and rest which the sealing of the Holy Spirit gives. "And he was
   three days without sight, and neither did eat nor drink." (Acts 9) But
   we return to the main point before us:

   THE SEALING OF THE GENTILES

   Notice, then, this important fact connected with the bringing in of the
   Gentiles --they receive the gift of the Holy Ghost simply through the
   preaching of the word. At Jerusalem the Jews were baptised before they
   received the Holy Ghost. At Samaria the Samaritans were not only
   baptised, but also had the apostles' hands laid on them with prayer,
   before they received the Holy Ghost. But at Cæsarea, without baptism,
   without the laying on of hands, without prayer, the richest Christian
   blessing was given to the Gentiles; though the doctrine of the church
   as the body of Christ was not yet revealed.

   The grace of God, thus shown to the Gentiles at the commencement of the
   dispensation, has characterised it ever since. We are Gentiles; we are
   neither Jews nor Samaritans. Therefore God's ways in grace, and His
   order of things with the Gentiles, have a special application to us.
   There is no instance recorded by the inspired historians of one being
   baptised without professing faith in Christ; but if we are to follow
   the pattern of things at Cæsarea, we must look for sealing as well as
   quickening --for peace with God as well as faith in Christ before
   baptism. The case of Cornelius stands at the very head of our
   dispensation; it was the first direct expression of grace to the
   Gentiles; and surely it ought to be a model for Gentile preachers and
   disciples. When the word of God, which was then preached to Cornelius
   is now believed, the same effects, as to peace with God, we may rest
   assured, will follow.

   Preaching, believing, sealing, baptizing, is the divine order of things
   here. God and His word never change; though "times change," as men say,
   and human opinions change, and religious observances change; but the
   word of God --never. Jews, Gentiles, and Samaritans, professed faith in
   Christ before they were baptised. Indeed baptism supposed eternal life
   possessed through faith, not communicated by its observance, as
   Anglican Catholics teach. "Grace is communicated, life is communicated,
   by sacraments," they say, "and is only effected through these means;
   irrespective of any exercise of the intellect on the part of the person
   brought into union. Holy baptism is the means of conferring on the
   recipient a new and spiritual life." [6] Such notions, we need scarcely
   say, are utterly opposed to scripture. Baptism, we affirm, confers
   nothing. Life is conferred by other means, as the scriptures plainly
   teach. The Holy Spirit effects conversion, or "being born again," in
   all cases, without exception. As we read in 1 Peter, "Seeing ye have
   purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit unto
   unfeigned love of the brethren, see that ye love one another with a
   pure heart fervently: being born again, not of corruptible seed, but of
   incorruptible, by the word of God, which liveth and abideth for ever."
   Here the truth of the Gospel is viewed as the means, and the Holy
   Spirit as the power, in conversion. Christ, or God in Christ, is the
   new object of the soul. It is by the Spirit and truth of God that this
   blessed change is effected. Those who trust to water baptism as the
   means of effecting it trust, alas! to a great and fatal delusion. [7]

   In the case of the Gentiles, now under consideration, even more than
   life was possessed before baptism was administered. They had the seal
   of God. Baptism is the sign of full deliverance and salvation as
   secured for the believer by the death and resurrection of Christ.
   Cornelius had life, was a devout man, but he must send for Peter, and
   hear words whereby he would be saved or fully delivered. The Old as
   well as the New Testament teaches this blessed truth most plainly.
   Israel, as a typical people, after being brought to God and sheltered
   by the blood of the lamb in Egypt, were baptised to Moses in the cloud
   and in the sea. Thus they were delivered out of Egypt, and saw the
   salvation of Jehovah. Again, Noah and his family were saved through the
   flood --not by it. They left the old world, passed through the waters
   of death, and landed in a new condition of things altogether. "The like
   figure, or antitype, whereunto even baptism doth also now save us... by
   the resurrection of Jesus Christ." (Exodus 14, and 1 Peter 3: 21)

   But what was the word, some may inquire, that Peter preached, which was
   accompanied with such remarkable blessing? He preached peace by Jesus
   Christ, as Lord of all. Christ risen, exalted, and glorified, was the
   grand object of his testimony. He sums up with these words: "To him
   give all the prophets witness that through his name whosoever believeth
   in him shall receive remission of sins." The blessing follows. The Jews
   present were astonished; but they bow, and own God's goodness to the
   Gentiles. "While Peter yet spake these words, the Holy Ghost fell on
   all them that heard the word, and they of the circumcision which
   believed were astonished, as many as came with Peter, because that on
   the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of the Holy Ghost. For they
   heard them speak with tongues, and magnify God. Then Peter answered,
   Can any man forbid water, that these should not be baptised, which have
   received the Holy Ghost as well as we? And he commanded that they
   should be baptised in the name of the Lord, Then prayed they him to
   tarry certain days."(Acts: 10: 44-46)

   We now retrace our steps a little way, and notice some of the leading
   events, which, in order, precede Acts chapter 10.

   THE FIRST CHRISTIAN MARTYR

   STEPHEN, the deacon and evangelist, is the first to receive the crown
   of martyrdom for the name of Jesus. He stands at the head of "the noble
   army of martyrs." He is perfect as a type --as the proto-martyr. Firm
   and unwavering in his faith; bold and undaunted before his accusers;
   pointed and faithful in his defence before the Sanhedrim; free from
   malice in his strongest statements; full of charity towards all men, he
   seals his testimony with his blood, and falls asleep in Jesus.

   In some respects Stephen resembles the blessed Lord Himself. "Lord
   Jesus, receive my spirit," is like "Father, into thy hands I commit my
   spirit;" and again, "Lord, lay not this sin to their charge," resembles
   "Father, forgive them, for they know not what they do;" only Stephen
   does not plead their ignorance.

   Already we see that troubles both within and without assail the young
   assembly. True, the word of God increased, multitudes were converted,
   and great companies of the priests were obedient to the faith. But the
   Grecians, or Hellenists (Jews of Greek origin), murmured against the
   Hebrews (natives of Judæa), because their widows were neglected in the
   daily ministration. This led to the appointment of seven deacons. (Acts
   6) From their names here given it would appear that the seven chosen
   were "Grecians"--all from the side of the murmurers. Thus the Spirit of
   God ruled in grace. Stephen was one of the number; and in his case the
   word of the apostle was exemplified: "Those who have used the office of
   deacon well, purchase to themselves a good degree and great boldness in
   the faith which is in Christ Jesus." He was full of faith and power,
   and did great wonders and miracles among the people. The energy of the
   Holy Spirit was especially manifested in Stephen.

   There were different synagogues in Jerusalem appropriated to the
   different races of Jews. It was the synagogue of the Libertines,
   Cyrenians, etc, that opposed Stephen. But "they were not able to resist
   the wisdom and the spirit by which he spoke." Then followed that which
   has usually been the case with the confessors of Jesus in all ages:
   unable to answer him, they accuse him before the council. False
   witnesses are suborned, who swear that they had heard him speak
   "blasphemous words against Moses, and against God; and that Jesus of
   Nazareth would destroy this place, and change the customs delivered to
   them by Moses." The case was now before the Sanhedrim --the trial
   commences. But what must his judges have thought when they saw his face
   radiant, as the face of an angel?

   We have the noble address of Stephen to the heads of the nation before
   us. To them it was convincing, perplexing, overwhelming. Doubtless, it
   was the testimony of the Holy Ghost to the Jews, from the mouth of
   Stephen; and all the more humbling to the proud Jews to hear their doom
   from the lips of a Hellenist. But the Spirit of God, when unhindered by
   man's arrangements, works by whomsoever He will.

   Stephen recapitulates in bold language the chief points in their
   national history. He refers especially to the history of Joseph and of
   Moses. The former their fathers sold to the Gentiles; the latter they
   despised as a ruler and a judge. He also charges them with always
   resisting the Holy Ghost --with always disobeying the law, and now with
   having been the betrayers and murderers of the Just One. Here Christ's
   faithful witness was interrupted. He was not allowed to finish his
   address: --a picture, too true, of the treatment of martyrs from that
   day even until now. The murmurs, the indignation, the fury of the
   Sanhedrim, were beyond control. "When they heard these things, they
   were cut to the heart, and they gnashed on him with their teeth." But
   in place of pursuing his discourse, he turns in ecstasy of heart to the
   Lord, and fixes his eyes on heaven --the home and centre of gathering
   for all His people.

   "I see," said Stephen, "the heavens opened." He is full of the Holy
   Ghost as he looks on high, and he sees the Son of man standing there
   ready to receive his spirit. "Such, then," as another has said, "is the
   position of the true believer --heavenly upon the earth --in presence
   of the world that rejected Christ, the murderous world. The believer,
   alive in death, sees by the power of the Holy Ghost into heaven, and
   the Son of man at the right hand of God. Stephen does not say, "Jesus."
   The Spirit characterises Him as "the Son of man." Precious testimony to
   man! It is not to the glory that he testifies, but to the Son of man in
   the glory, heaven being open to him... As to the object of faith and
   the position of the believer, this scene is definitively
   characteristic."

   "Foremost and nearest to His throne,

   By perfect robes of triumph known,

   And likest Him in look and tone,

   The holy Stephen kneels,

   With steadfast gaze, as when the sky

   Flew open to his Fainting eye,

   Which like a fading lamp flashed high,

   Seeing what death conceals.

   "He, though he seem on earth to move,

   Must glide in air like gentle dove,

   From yon unclouded depths above

   Must draw his purer breath:

   Till men behold his angel face

   All radiant with celestial grace,

   Martyr all o'er, and meet to trace

   The lines of Jesus' death."

   We have now gone over, with some care, the first section of the
   church's history. And we have been the more careful, as church
   histories in general commence at a later period. Most of them begin
   where scripture ends, at least as to details. None that we have yet
   seen refer to Matthew 16, and few attempt a critical examination of the
   Acts of the Apostles, which, after all, is the only part of her
   history, which commands our faith, and has an absolute claim upon our
   obedience.

   In Acts chapter 8, we find the Holy Ghost in Samaria working by Philip.
   He has, as it were, left Jerusalem. This marks a distinct epoch in the
   history of the church, and especially in her connection with Jerusalem.
   We leave, for the present, the enraged and persecuting Jews, and follow
   the path of the Spirit to the city of Samaria. But we must glance for a
   moment at what some have called the third persecution.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [4] For fuller details, historically given, see History of
   Christianity, by Dean Milman, Vol. 1.

   [5] Synopsis of the Books of the Bible, vol. 4, Page 8.

   [6] The Church and the World, pages 178-188.

   [7] The following brief statements from the fathers of the fourth
   century, on the subject of baptism, will show our readers the sources,
   or the authorities, of much that is said and done in the present day
   among the ritualists. The authority of scripture is entirely set aside.
   "At Easter, and at Pentecost, and in some places at the Epiphany, the
   rite of baptism was administered publicly --that is, in the presence of
   the faithful-- to all the converts of the year, excepting those few
   instances in which it had been expedient to perform the ceremony
   without delay, or where the timid Christian put it off till the close
   of life, after the example of Constantine: a practice for a long time
   condemned in vain by the clergy. But the fact of the delay shows how
   deeply the importance and efficacy of the rite were rooted in the
   Christian mind. It was a complete lustration [purifying] of the soul.
   The Neophyte [new convert] emerged from the waters of baptism in a
   state of perfect innocence. The dove --the Holy Spirit-- was constantly
   hovering over the fountain, and sanctifying the waters to the
   mysterious ablution of all the sins of the past life. If the soul
   suffered no subsequent taint, it passed at once to the realms of purity
   and bliss; that is, the heart was purified, the understanding
   illuminated, the spirit was clothed with immortality. Robed in white,
   emblematic of spotless purity, the candidate approached the baptistery
   --in the larger churches a separate building. There he uttered the
   solemn vows, which pledged him to his religion. The symbolizing genius
   of the East added some significant ceremonies. The Catechumen [one in
   the first stages of Christian instruction] turned to the West, the
   realm of Satan, and thrice renounced his power; he turned to the East,
   to adore the Sun of Righteousness, and to proclaim his compact with the
   Lord of life. The mystic trinal number prevailed throughout: the vow
   was threefold, and thrice pronounced. The baptism was usually by
   immersion; the stripping off the clothes was emblematic of' "putting
   off the old man;" but baptism by sprinkling was allowed, according to
   the exigency of the case. The water itself became, in the vivid
   language of the church, the blood of Christ: it was compared, by a
   fanciful analogy, to the Red Sea: the daring metaphors of some of the
   fathers might seem to assert a transmutation of its color. "Almost all
   the fathers of this age, Basil, the two Gregories, Ambrose, etc, etc,
   have treatises on baptism; and vie, as it were, with each other in
   their praises of its importance and efficacy. Gregory of Nazianzus
   almost exhausts the copiousness of the Greek language in speaking of
   baptism." -- Milman's History of Christianity; Volume Three.
     __________________________________________________________________

Chapter 3

   THE DISCIPLES

   PERSECUTED AND SCATTERED

   After the death of Stephen a great persecution broke out. (Acts 8) The
   Jewish leaders appear to have gained a victory over the disciples, and
   they determined to pursue their apparent triumph with the utmost
   violence. But God, who is above all, and who knows how to restrain the
   rising passions of men, overruled their opposition for the
   accomplishment of His own will.

   Man had not yet learnt the truth of the proverb, that "The blood of the
   martyrs is the seed of the church." In the case of the first and the
   noblest of martyrs, the proverb was fully verified. But all these
   eighteen hundred years, men have been slow to learn, or believe, this
   plain historical fact. Persecution, generally speaking, has advanced
   the cause, which it sought to repress. This will be found true in the
   main, under every form of opposition and persecution. Resistance,
   decision, and firmness are created by such treatment. True, timid minds
   may be driven to apostasy for a time by persecution; but how often have
   such, with the deepest repentance, and in order to regain their former
   position, endured with cheerfulness the keenest sufferings, and
   displayed in their last moments the greatest fortitude! But
   persecution, in one form or another, is to be expected by the followers
   of Jesus. They are exhorted to take up their cross daily and follow
   Him. It tests the sincerity of our faith, the purity of our motives,
   the strength of our affection for Christ, and the measure of our
   confidence in Him.

   Those who are not true in heart for Christ will be sure to fall away in
   a time of sharp persecution. But love can endure for its object, when
   it can do nothing else. We see this perfectly in the blessed Lord
   Himself. He endured the cross --that was of God: He despised the shame
   --that was of man. It was amidst the shame and sufferings of the cross
   that the full strength of His love appeared, and that He triumphed over
   everything. Nothing could turn His love aside from its object; it was
   stronger than death. In this, as in all things, He has left us an
   example that we should walk in His steps. May we ever be found
   following hard after Him!

   From the history of the church in the Acts we learn, that the effect of
   the martyrdom of Stephen was the immediate spread of the truth, which
   his persecutors were seeking to hinder. The impressions produced by
   such a witness, and such a death, must have been overwhelming to his
   enemies, and convincing to the unprejudiced and the thoughtful. The
   last resort of human cruelty is death: but, wonderful to say, Christian
   faith, in its first trial, was proved to be stronger than death, and
   that in its most frightful form. This, the enemy witnessed, and would
   ever after remember. Stephen was on the Rock, and the gates of hell
   could not prevail against Him.

   The whole church at Jerusalem, on this occasion, were scattered abroad;
   but they went everywhere preaching the word. Like the cloud that flies
   before the wind, bearing its refreshing rain to thirsty lands, so the
   disciples were driven from Jerusalem by the storm of persecution,
   bearing the living waters to thirsty souls in distant lands. "And at
   that time there was a great persecution against the church which was at
   Jerusalem; and they were all scattered abroad throughout the regions of
   Judea and Samaria, except the apostles." Some historians have thought,
   that the fact of the apostles remaining in Jerusalem, when the
   disciples fled, proves their greater firmness and faithfulness in the
   cause of Christ; but we are disposed to judge differently, and to
   consider it failure rather than faithfulness. The Lord's commission to
   them was, "Go ye therefore, and teach all nations, baptizing them in
   the name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy Ghost." And
   they had been told before, "When they persecute you in one city, flee
   into another." As far as scripture history informs us, the twelve never
   carried out the commission. Nevertheless, God was mighty in Paul
   towards the Gentiles, and in Peter towards the Jews.

   The Holy Spirit now leaves Jerusalem as to outward manifest power
   --most solemn truth! But that guilty city preferred the patronage of
   Rome to the resurrection-power of their own Messiah. "What do we?" said
   the Jews, "for this man doeth many miracles. If we let him thus alone,
   all men will believe on him: and the Romans shall come and take away
   both our place and our nation." They rejected the Messiah in His
   humiliation, and now they reject the testimony of the Holy Ghost to His
   exaltation. Their iniquity was full, and wrath was coming on them to
   the uttermost. But; for the present, our happier place, in tracing the
   history of the church, is to follow the Holy Spirit on His way to
   Samaria. His path is the silver line of saving grace to precious souls.

   THE TRIUMPS OF THE

   GOSPEL IN SAMARIA

   Philip, the deacon, evidently next to Stephen in zeal and energy, goes
   down to Samaria. The Holy Spirit works with him. In the wisdom of the
   Lord's ways, despised Samaria is the first place outside of Judæa where
   His chosen witnesses preached the Gospel. "Then Philip went down to the
   city of Samaria, and preached Christ unto them. And the people with one
   accord gave heed unto those things which Philip spake, hearing and
   seeing the miracles, which he did. And there was great joy in that
   city." A great many believed and were baptised, both men and women.
   Even Simon Magus, the sorcerer, owned the presence of a power far above
   his own, and bowed to the force and current of the Spirit's work in
   others, though the truth had not penetrated his own heart or
   conscience. But as we have now travelled to another part of the
   country, this may be the fitting place to say a word as to its history.

   The Holy Land, interesting beyond all other nations of the earth, both
   morally and historically, is in size very small. "It is but a strip of
   country, about the size of Wales, less than 140 miles in length, and
   barely 40 in average breadth." [8] The northern portion is Galilee; the
   centre, Samaria; the south, Judæa. But though physically so small, it
   has been the theatre of the most momentous events in the world's
   history.

   There the Saviour was born, lived and was crucified --and there He was
   buried and rose again. And there too, His apostles and martyrs lived,
   testified and suffered; and there the first gospel sermon was preached,
   and there the first church was planted.

   The land originally occupied by Israel, lay between the ancient empires
   of Assyria and Egypt. Hence the frequent reference in the Old Testament
   to "the king of the North," and the "king of the South." Owing to this
   position, it was often the battlefield of these mighty empires, and we
   know it will yet be the scene of their last and deadly conflict. (Dan.
   11) So superstitious have men been about the Holy Land, that it has
   been the object of national ambition, and the occasion of religious
   wars, almost ever since the days of the apostles. Who could estimate
   the blood that has been shed, and the treasure that has been wasted, on
   these sacred plains? --and all, we may add, under the fair name of
   religious zeal, or rather, under the banners of the cross and the
   crescent. Thither the pilgrims in every age have travelled, that they
   might worship at the Holy Sepulchre, and fulfill their vow. It has also
   been the great attraction for travellers of all characters and of all
   nations, and the great emporium for miracle-working relics. The
   Christian, the historian, and the antiquarian have searched it
   diligently, and made known their discoveries. Ever since the days of
   Abraham, it has been the most interesting and attractive spot on the
   earth's surface. And to the student of prophecy, its future history is
   even more interesting than it's past. He knows that the day is coming,
   when the whole land shall be peopled by the twelve tribes of Israel,
   and filled with the glory and majesty of their Messiah. Then shall they
   be owned as the metropolitan people of the earth. We now return to
   Samaria, with its new life and joy.

   The Samaritans through God's blessing readily believed the Gospel, as
   preached by Philip. The effects of the truth, thus received in
   simplicity, were immediate and of the most blessed character. "There
   was great joy in that city," and many were baptised. Such must ever be
   the effects of the Gospel, when believed, unless there be some
   hindrance in connection with ourselves. Where there is genuine
   simplicity of faith, there must be genuine peace and joy, and happy
   obedience. The power of the Gospel, over a people who had for ages
   resisted the claims of Judaism, was thus displayed. What the law could
   not do, in this respect, the Gospel accomplished. "Samaria was a
   conquest," as one has said, "which all the energy of Judaism had never
   been able to make. It was a new and splendid triumph of the Gospel. The
   spiritual subjugation of the world appertained to the church."

   JERUSALEM AND SAMARIA

   UNITED BY THE GOSPEL

   The bitter jealousy that existed between Jews and Samaritans had long
   been proverbial; hence we read, "The Jews have no dealings with the
   Samaritans." But now, in connection with the Gospel of peace, this root
   of bitterness disappears. Nevertheless in the wisdom of God's ways, the
   Samaritans must wait for the highest blessing of the Gospel, until the
   Jewish believers --the apostles from the church at Jerusalem lay their
   hands on them, and offer up prayer for them. Nothing can be more deeply
   interesting than this fact, when we take into consideration the
   religious rivalry that had been so long manifested by both. Had not
   Samaria received this timely lesson of humility, she might have been
   disposed, once more, to maintain her proud independency of Jerusalem.
   But the Lord would not have it so. The Samaritans had believed,
   rejoiced, and were baptised, but they had not received the Holy Ghost.
   "Now when the apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria had
   received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John; who, when
   they were come down, prayed for them that they might receive the Holy
   Ghost. Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the Holy
   Ghost."

   Identification is the great idea of the laying on of hands, and unity
   is the consequence of the gift of the Holy Ghost. These are immense
   facts in connection with the progress of the church. Samaria is thus
   brought into happy association with her ancient rival, and made one
   with the church at Jerusalem. There is no thought in God's mind of the
   one assembly being independent of the other. Had they been each blessed
   separately and independently, their rivalry might have been greater
   than ever. But it was to be no longer: "Neither in this mountain, nor
   yet at Jerusalem," but one Head in heaven, one body on earth, one
   Spirit, one redeemed family worshipping God in spirit and in truth, for
   the Father seeketh such to worship him." [9]

   For the origin of the mixed people and worship of Samaria, see 2 Kings
   17. They were but half Jews, though they boasted of their relation to
   Jacob. They received the five books of Moses as sacred, but undervalued
   the rest of the Bible. They were circumcised, kept the law after a
   sort, and were expecting a Messiah to come. The personal visit of the
   blessed Lord to Samaria is of the deepest and most touching interest.
   (John 4) The well at which He rested, it is said, "lay in a valley
   between the two famous mountains, Ebal and Gerizim, on which the law
   was read. On the latter height stood the rival temple of the
   Samaritans, which had so long afflicted the more zealous Jews by its
   daring opposition to the one chosen sanctuary on Mount Moriah."

   THE ETHIOPIAN EUNUCH

   RECEIVES THE GOSPEL

   Philip is now called to leave his happy and interesting work at
   Samaria, and go down to Gaza --a wilderness --and preaches the gospel
   there to a single person. Surely there is in this fact a lesson for the
   evangelist of the deepest importance, and one that must not be passed
   over without a brief notice.

   The preacher, in such a scene of awakening and conversion as there was
   at Samaria, necessarily becomes greatly interested in the work. God is
   setting His seal on the ministry of the word, and sanctioning the
   meetings with His presence. The work of the Lord prospers. The
   evangelist is surrounded with respect and affection, and his children
   in the faith naturally look up to him for further light and instruction
   as to their path. "How can he leave such a field of labour?" many will
   inquire. Would it be right to leave it? Only, we reply, if the Lord
   called His servant to do so, as He did in the case of Philip. But how
   is one to know now, seeing that angels and the Spirit do not speak to
   him as they did to Philip? Though not spoken to in this way, he ought
   to look for and expect divine guidance. Faith must be his guide.
   Circumstances are unsafe as a guide; they may rebuke and correct us in
   our path, but the eye of God must be our guide. "I will guide thee with
   mine eye" is the promise; "I will instruct thee, and teach thee in the
   way which thou shalt go." (Psalm 32)

   The Lord only knows what is best for His servant and for His work. The
   evangelist in such a scene would be in danger of feeling his own
   personal importance, hence, the value, if not the necessity, of
   changing the place of service.

   "Arise," said the angel of the Lord to Philip, "and go toward the south
   unto the way that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza, which is desert.
   And he arose and went; and, behold, a man of Ethiopia, an eunuch of
   great authority under Candace, queen of the Ethiopians, who had the
   charge of all her treasure and had come to Jerusalem for to worship,
   was returning, and, sitting in his chariot, read Esaias the prophet.
   Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this
   chariot." (Acts. 8 vs. 26 - 40)

   The immediate and unquestioning obedience of Philip at this time is
   beautiful. He raises no question as to the difference between Samaria
   and Gaza --between leaving a wide field of labour, and going away to a
   desert place, to speak to one person about salvation. But the Spirit of
   God was with Philip. And the one desire of the evangelist should ever
   be to follow the leading of the Spirit. From the want of spiritual
   discernment a preacher may remain in a place after the Spirit has
   ceased to work in it, and so labour in vain.

   God, in His providence, takes care of His servant; He sends an angel to
   direct him as to the road he is to take. But when it is a question of
   the gospel and dealing with souls, the Spirit takes the direction.
   "Then the Spirit said unto Philip, Go near, and join thyself to this
   chariot." We know of nothing, in the whole history of the church, more
   interesting than this scene on the way to Gaza. The angel and the
   Spirit of God accompany the evangelist: the former representing the
   providence of God in marking out the very road he is to take, the
   latter representing spiritual power in direct dealing with souls. As it
   was then, so is it now; though we are more in the habit of thinking of
   the guidance of the Spirit, than of the direction of providence. May we
   trust God for everything! He changes not!

   The gospel now finds its way, in the person of the queen's treasurer,
   to the centre of Abyssinia. The eunuch believes, is baptised, and goes
   on his way rejoicing. What he sought for in vain in Jerusalem, and had
   taken a long journey to seek there, he finds in the desert. Beautiful
   instance of the grace of the gospel! The lost sheep is found in the
   wilderness, and living waters spring up in the desert. He is also a
   beautiful instance of an anxious soul. When alone and unemployed, he
   reads the prophet Isaiah. He muses on the prophecy of the suffering,
   unresisting, Lamb of God. But the moment of light and deliverance had
   come. Philip explains the prophet: the eunuch is taught of God --he
   believes: immediately desires baptism, and returns to his home, filled
   with the new joys of salvation. Would he be silent there as to what he
   had found? Certainly not, a man of such character and influence would
   have many opportunities of spreading the truth. But, as both scripture
   and history are silent as to the results of his mission, we venture not
   further.

   The Spirit is still seen in company with Philip and carries him far
   away. He is found at Azotus, and evangelizes all the cities unto
   Cæsarea.

   A new era in the church's history begins to dawn! A new workman enters
   the scene, and the most remarkable in many ways that ever served the
   Lord and His church.

   THE CONVERSION OF SAUL OF TARSUS

   No event in the progress of the church so deeply, or so blessedly,
   affects her after history, as the conversion of Saul of Tarsus. From
   being the chief of sinners, he became the chief of saints --from being
   the most violent opposer of Christ, he became the most zealous defender
   of the faith --as a hater and persecutor of the name of Jesus on the
   earth, he was "chief;" all others, compared with him, were subordinate.
   (Acts 9:1 Timothy 1)

   It is quite evident, from what he says of himself, that he believed
   Judaism to be not only divine, but God's perpetual and unchangeable
   religion to man. It would be difficult to account for the strength of
   his Jewish prejudices on any other principle. Therefore all attempts to
   set aside the Jews' religion, and to introduce another; he considered
   to be of the enemy, and to be strenuously opposed. He had heard the
   noble speech of Stephen --he had witnessed his triumphant death; but
   his subsequent persecution of the Christians showed that the moral
   glory of that scene had made no serious impression on his mind. He was
   blinded by zeal; but zeal for Judaism now was zeal against the Lord. At
   this very time he was "breathing out threatenings and slaughter against
   the disciples of the Lord."

   Hearing that some of the persecuted saints had found a shelter in
   Damascus, an ancient city of Syria, he made up his mind to go there,
   and bring them back to Jerusalem as criminals. For this purpose he
   received letters from the high priest and the estate of the elders,
   that he might bring them bound to Jerusalem to be punished. (Acts 22,
   and 26) He thus became the very apostle of Jewish malice against the
   disciples of Jesus; ignorantly, no doubt, but he made himself their
   willing missionary.

   With his mind wrought up to the most violent pitch of persecuting zeal,
   he sets forth on his memorable journey. Unshaken in his ardent
   attachment to the religion of Moses, and determined to punish the
   converts to Christianity, as apostates from the faith of their
   ancestors, he approaches Damascus. But there, in the full energy of his
   mad career, the Lord Jesus stops him. A light from heaven, above the
   light of the sun, shines around him, and overwhelms him in its dazzling
   brightness. He falls to the earth --broken in will, subdued in mind,
   humbled in spirit, and altogether changed. His heart is now subject to
   the voice that speaks to him; he owns its power and authority.
   Reasoning, extenuation, self-justification, have no place in the
   presence of the Lord.

   A voice from the excellent glory had said unto him, "Saul, Saul, why
   persecutest thou me? And he said, Who art thou, Lord? And the Lord
   said, I am Jesus whom thou persecutest." Thus the Lord Jesus, though in
   heaven, declares Himself to be still identified with His disciples on
   the earth. The oneness of the church with Christ, its Head in heaven,
   the germ of the blessed truth of the "one body," is folded up in these
   few words, "Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou me? --I am Jesus whom thou
   persecutest." To be at war with the saints is to be at war with the
   Lord Himself. Blessed truth for the believer, but how solemn for the
   persecutor!

   The vision Saul had seen, and the terrible discovery he had made,
   completely engross him. He is blind for three days, and can neither eat
   nor drink. Thus he enters Damascus, blind, broken, humbled, beneath the
   solemn judgment of the Lord! How different from what he had intended!
   He now joins himself to the company, which he had resolved to
   exterminate. Nevertheless he enters in by the door, and humbly takes
   his place with the disciples of the Lord. Ananias, a godly disciple, is
   sent to comfort him. He receives his sight, he is filled with the Holy
   Ghost, he is baptised, and he receives meat and is strengthened.

   It is the thought of some, that the Lord gives in the conversion of
   Saul, not only a sample of His long-suffering, as in every sinner that
   is saved, but as a sign of the future restoration of Israel. Paul tells
   us himself, that he obtained mercy because he did it ignorantly in
   unbelief; and this is the very ground of mercy for Israel in the latter
   day. As our Lord Himself prayed for them: --"Father, forgive them, for
   they know not what they do." Peter also, says, "And now, brethren, I
   know that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers." (Acts.
   3:17)

   But as the apostleship of Paul differs in many respects from that of
   the twelve, it will be necessary to notice it briefly. Unless this
   difference is understood, the true character of the present
   dispensation will be but feebly apprehended.

   THE APOSTLESHIP OF PAUL

   The LAW and the PROPHETS were until John; after John the LORD Himself,
   in His own Person, offers the kingdom to Israel; but "his own received
   him not." They crucified the Prince of life, but God raised Him from
   the dead, and seated Him at His own right hand in heavenly places. We
   have next THE TWELVE APOSTLES. They are endued with the Holy Ghost, and
   bear witness to the resurrection of Christ. But the testimony of the
   twelve is despised, the Holy Ghost is resisted, Stephen is martyred,
   the final offer of mercy is rejected, and now the Lord's dealings with
   Israel as a people close for a season. The scenes of Shiloh are enacted
   over again, Ichabod is written on Jerusalem, and a new witness is
   called out, as in the days of Samuel.

   THE GREAT APOSTLE of the Gentiles now comes before us. He is as one
   born out of due time and out of due place. His apostleship had nothing
   to do with Jerusalem, or with the twelve. It was outside of both. His
   call was extraordinary and direct from the Lord in heaven. He is
   privileged to bring out the new thing, the heavenly character of the
   church --that Christ and the church are one, and that heaven is their
   common home. (Eph. 2) So long as God was dealing with Israel these
   blessed truths were kept a secret in His own mind. "Unto me," says
   Paul, "who am less than the least of all saints, is this grace given,
   that I should preach among the Gentiles the unsearchable riches of
   Christ; and to make all men see what is the fellowship of the mystery,
   which from the beginning of the world hath been hid in God, who created
   all things by Jesus Christ." (Ephesians 3)

   There could be no doubt, from the character of the apostle's call, as
   to its divine authority. "Not of men, neither by man," as he says in
   his Epistle to the Galatians, "but by Jesus Christ, and God the Father,
   who raised Him from the dead." That is, it was "not of men," as to its
   source, not of any synod of official men. "Neither by man" was it, as
   to the medium through which his commission came. He was not only a
   saint, but also an apostle, by calling: and that call was by Jesus
   Christ, and God the Father who raised Him from the dead. In some
   respects his apostleship was even of a higher order than that of the
   twelve. Jesus when on the earth had called them; the risen and
   glorified Christ in heaven had called him. And, his call being thus
   from heaven, he wanted neither the sanction nor the recognition of the
   other apostles. "But when it pleased God to reveal His Son in me, that
   I might preach Him among the heathen, immediately I conferred not with
   flesh and blood: neither went I up to Jerusalem to them which were
   apostles before me; but I went into Arabia, and returned again unto
   Damascus." (Galatians 1:15, 16)

   The manner of Saul's call to be an apostle is worthy of special note,
   as it struck at the root of Jewish pride, and may also be viewed as the
   deathblow to the vain notion of apostolic succession. The apostles,
   whom the Lord had chosen and appointed when He was on the earth, were
   neither the source nor the channel, in any way, of Saul's appointment.
   They did not cast lots for him, as they did in the case of Matthias.
   Then they were scarcely off Jewish ground, which may account for their
   deciding by lot. It was an ancient form in Israel of discovering the
   divine will in such matters. But these emphatic words, "Paul, an
   apostle, not of men, neither by man, but by Jesus Christ," completely
   exclude the intervention of man in every shape and way. Apostolic
   succession is set aside. We are saints by calling and servants by
   calling. And that call must come from heaven. Paul stands before us, as
   the true pattern for all preachers of the gospel, and for all ministers
   of the word. Nothing can be simpler than the ground he takes as a
   preacher, great apostle though he was. "We having the same spirit of
   faith, according as it is written, I believed, and therefore have I
   spoken; we also believe and therefore speak." (2 Corinthians 4: 13)

   Immediately after he was baptised and strengthened, he began to confess
   his faith in the Lord Jesus, and to preach in the synagogues, that
   Jesus is the Son of God. This is a new thing. Peter preached that He
   had been exalted to the right hand of God --that He had been made both
   Lord and Christ; but Paul preaches the higher doctrine of His personal
   glory --"that He is the Son of God." In Matthew 16, the Father reveals
   Christ to the disciples, as "the Son of the living God." But now He is
   revealed, not only to Paul, but also in Paul. "It pleased God to reveal
   His Son in me," he says. But who is sufficient to speak of the
   privileges and blessings of those to whom the Son of God is thus
   revealed? The dignity and security of the church rest on this blessed
   truth; and also the gospel of the glory, which was especially entrusted
   to Paul, and which he calls "my gospel."

   "On the Son thus revealed within," as one has sweetly said, "hangs
   everything that is peculiar to the calling and glory of the church
   --her holy prerogatives --acceptance in the Beloved, with forgiveness
   of sins through His blood --entrance into the treasures of wisdom and
   knowledge, so as to have made known to us the mystery of the will of
   God --future inheritance in and with Him in whom all things in heaven
   and earth are to be gathered --and the present seal and earnest of this
   inheritance is the Holy Ghost. This bright roll of privileges is
   inscribed by the apostle, thus --"spiritual blessings in the
   heavenlies;" and so they are; blessings through the Spirit flowing from
   and linking us with Him who is the Lord in the heavens." [10]
   (Ephesians 1:3 - 14)

   But the doctrine of the church --this mystery of love, and grace, and
   privilege --was not revealed until Paul declared it. The Lord had
   spoken of it as that which the presence of the Comforter was to effect,
   saying, "At that day ye shall know that I am in my Father, and ye in
   me, and I in you." And again, when He said to the disciples after the
   resurrection, "I ascend unto my Father and your Father, unto my God and
   your God." Of this "bright roll" of blessing Paul was especially and
   characteristically the apostle.

   We must now leave the history of Saul for a little, and turn to Peter,
   who occupies the field until Saul commences his public ministry in Acts
   13.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [8] Smith's Dictionary of the Bible.

   [9] See Lecture 6 on Acts 2, 7, 10, and 19 Lectures on the New
   Testament Doctrine of the Holy Spirit. By W. Kelly.

   [10] See fuller details on this subject, by J. G. B., Christian
   Witness, vol. 4. Page 221; and in W. K.' s Lectures on Galatians Chap.
   1.
     __________________________________________________________________

Chapter 4

   FIRST MISSIONARIES OF THE CROSS-

   In place of going over consecutively the remaining chapters of the
   Acts, we think it may be more interesting and equally instructive to
   our readers, to consider them in connection with the history of the
   apostles, especially with the history of the two great apostles. The
   book of the Acts is almost entirely occupied with the acts of Peter and
   of Paul, though of course under the guidance of the Holy Ghost: the
   one, as the great apostle of the Jews; the other, as the great apostle
   of the Gentiles. But we would also embrace the present opportunity,
   briefly to notice the first personally chosen companions and
   missionaries of our blessed Lord --the twelve apostles.

   But before attempting an outline of these interesting lives, it may be
   well to state the object we have in view in doing so. We are stepping a
   little out of the usual course. In none of the Church Histories that we
   know are the lives of the apostles presented in a regular form; and we
   think it strange that the great founders of the church should have no
   place in its history. We have also noticed with some surprise that most
   of the histories close with the commencement of the Reformation. Surely
   this is the brightest day in her history --at least since the days of
   Constantine --and the one above all others in which the Spirit of God
   wrought mightily; and thus ought to be the most special part of her
   history.

   At the same time, with regard to the apostles, we have to bear in mind
   that beyond the sacred narrative, there is very little known that can
   be relied upon. The traditional and the scriptural, the certain and the
   uncertain, are almost helplessly blended together in the writings of
   the Fathers. Every distinct ray of historical light we greatly value,
   but it is only to the scriptures that we can turn with certainty.
   Still, the few scattered notices which we have there, of some of the
   apostles, with what may be gathered elsewhere, when brought together
   may give the reader a view of the person and individuality of the
   apostle, which he never had before. Others, of note, besides the
   apostles, will come before us in connection with them, especially with
   Paul; so that our readers will have, in a convenient form, a brief
   outline of nearly all the noble preachers, teachers, confessors, and
   martyrs of the Lord Jesus spoken of in the New Testament.

   THE TWELVE APOSTLES

   were Simon Peter, Andrew, James and John (sons of Zebedee), Philip,
   Thomas, Bartholomew, Matthew, son of James (the Alphaeus), Thaddeus,
   Simon Zelotes, and Matthias, who was chosen in place of Judas Iscariot.
   (See Matthew 10; Luke 6; Mark 3, and Acts 1)

   Paul was also an apostle by the Lord's direct call, and that in the
   highest sense, as we have seen. There were others who were called
   apostles, but soon were more especially the apostles of the churches.
   The twelve and Paul were pre-eminently the apostles of the Lord.
   Compare 2 Corinthians 8:23; Philippians 2:25; and Romans 16:7.

   The official name, "apostle," signifies one "sent forth." "These twelve
   Jesus sent forth." This name was given to the twelve by the Lord
   Himself. "He called unto him his disciples; and of them he chose
   twelve, whom also he called apostles." A personal acquaintance with the
   whole ministerial course of the Lord was the original and a necessary
   qualification of an apostle. Peter stated this before the election of a
   successor to the traitor Judas. "Wherefore of these men which have
   companied with us all, the time that the Lord Jesus went in and out
   among us, beginning from the baptism of John, unto that same day that
   he was taken up from us, must one be [ordained to be] a witness with us
   of the resurrection." By this close personal intercourse with the Lord,
   they were particularly suited to be the witnesses of His earthly path.
   He describes them Himself as "they, which have continued with me in my
   temptations" Luke 22:28.

   The number twelve, we believe, distinctly marks their relation to the
   twelve tribes of Israel. The fancies of the Fathers, as to the meaning
   of the number here chosen, show how little their minds were governed by
   the immediate context. St. Augustine "thinks our Lord herein had
   respect to the four quarters of the world, which were to be called by
   the preaching of the gospel, and which, being multiplied by three, as
   denoting the Trinity, make twelve." From not seeing the distinction
   between Israel and the church, there is much confusion in such writers.

   The number twelve in scripture we understand to mean administrative
   completeness in man. Hence the twelve tribes, and the twelve apostles,
   and the promise to the latter, that they should sit upon twelve
   thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. (Matt. 19:28) But here,
   in plainest terms, the Lord limits the mission of the twelve to the
   lost sheep of the house of Israel. They were not even to visit the
   Samaritans, nor to go in the way of the Gentiles. The mission was
   strictly Jewish. "These twelve Jesus sent forth, and commanded them,
   saying, Go not into the way of the Gentiles, and into any city of the
   Samaritans enter ye not: but go rather to the lost sheep of the house
   of Israel." Surely nothing could possibly be plainer. The calling out
   of the church is not here referred to. This took place after, when
   another and an extra-ordinary apostle was chosen, with a special view
   to the Gentiles. Then the twelve would have their own place in the
   church, but Paul was its divinely called and qualified minister.

   The general notion that the twelve were altogether illiterate, we
   cannot agree with. The expression "unlearned and ignorant men," as used
   by the council in Acts 4:13, we understand as simply denoting persons
   in private stations of life, who had not been taught in the rabbinical
   learning and traditions of the Jews. Our term "laymen" would convey the
   same idea; that is, men of ordinary education, as contrasted with those
   who have been specially trained in the schools of the learned; or men
   not in "holy orders." Thus Peter and John may have been thoroughly
   acquainted with the Holy Scriptures, and with the history of their
   country and people, and yet be considered by the council as "unlearned
   and ignorant men." James and John at least had all the advantages of a
   godly and devoted mother's training, which has often done great things
   for the church of God.

   We will now glance briefly at the twelve, and first in order is the
   apostle:

   PETER. There can be no doubt that Peter held the first place among the
   twelve. The Lord gave him this position. He is first named in every
   list of the apostles. This precedence, we know, did not arise from his
   having known the Lord first, for he was neither first nor last in this
   respect Andrew, and probably John, knew the Lord before Peter. Let us
   here note, with deepest interest, the first meeting of those friends
   who were to be united forever. See John 1:29 - 51.

   John the Baptist bears testimony to Jesus as the Lamb of God who was to
   take away the sin of the world. Two of John's disciples leave him and
   go with Jesus. "One of the two which heard John speak, and followed
   him, was Andrew, Simon Peter's brother. He first findeth his own
   brother Simon, and saith unto him, We have found the Messias, which is,
   being interpreted, the Christ. And he brought him to Jesus." This was
   Peter's first introduction to the Lord --to one who was to be the
   source of his happiness forever. And how significant their first
   interview! "And when Jesus beheld him, he said, Thou art Simon, the son
   of Jona: thou shalt be called Cephas, which is by interpretation, a
   stone." Naturally impulsive, quick in seizing an object, but too ready
   to relinquish it by the force of another impression, he has in the
   Lord's grace firmness given him; though every now and then his natural
   character shines out.

   The first thing that brings Peter into great prominence is his noble
   confession of Christ, as the Son of the living God. (Matt. 16) The Lord
   then honoured him with the keys of the kingdom of heaven, and gave him
   the chief place among his brethren. But this part of Peter's history,
   with some of the early chapters of the Acts, we have already
   considered; therefore we will only refer to what has not been touched
   upon.

   The fourth chapter of the Acts we have not alluded to, though we are
   disposed to think that it presents the brightest day in the apostle's
   history, as the baptism of Cornelius presents the crowning day in his
   ministry. As there is often displayed in the great apostle a mixture of
   strength and weakness, of excellencies and defects, it is deeply
   interesting to trace his path through the first storms which assailed
   the infant church. But we must not forget that the grand secret of the
   boldness, wisdom, and power of the apostles, was not owing to their
   natural character, but to the presence of the Holy Ghost. He was with
   them and in them, and working by them. The Holy Ghost was the strength
   of their testimony.

   Notice in particular the blessed effects of His presence in four
   distinct aspects.

   1) In the courage displayed by Peter and the others. "Then Peter,
   filled with the Holy Ghost, said unto them, Ye rulers of the people and
   elders of Israel; if we this day be examined of the good deed done to
   the impotent man, by what means he is made whole, be it known unto you
   all, and to all the people of Israel, that by the name of Jesus Christ
   of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, whom God raised from the dead, even by
   him doth this man stand here before you whole. This is the stone, which
   was set at nought of you builders, which is become the head of the
   corner. Neither is there salvation in any other: for there is none
   other name under heaven given among men, whereby we must be saved." The
   great and solemn question between God and the rulers of Israel is here
   formally stated. Nothing can be plainer. The testimony of God is no
   longer with the rulers of the temple, but with the apostles of the
   exalted Messiah.

   2) In His presence with the disciples as an assembly. "And when they
   had prayed, the place was shaken where they were assembled together,
   and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost, and they spake the word
   with boldness." This verse clearly teaches what has been so often said,
   as to the Spirit being with the disciples and in them. The place was
   shaken where they were assembled together; this proves His presence
   with them. But they were also filled with the Holy Ghost --so filled,
   we believe, that for the time being, there was no room for the flesh to
   act.

   3) In great power as to service. "And with great power gave the
   apostles witness of the resurrection of the Lord Jesus; and great grace
   was upon them all." Readiness and energy now characterise the apostles.

   4) In whole-hearted devotedness. "As many as were possessors of lands
   or houses sold them, and brought the prices of the things that were
   sold, and laid them down at the apostles' feet." In Acts 2, the rich
   gave to the poor themselves: a thing, which can scarcely be done
   without adding importance to the giver. But in Acts chapter 4, the rich
   laid their money at the apostles' feet. This fact we would accept as a
   sure sign of increased humility, and of greater devotedness.

   It is also in this full and instructive chapter that we have the famous
   answer of Peter and John to the council. "Whether it be right in the
   sight of God to hearken unto you more than unto God, judge ye." From
   that day until now, the true confessors of the name of Jesus have found
   in these words a suitable answer to their inquisitors and oppressors.
   What a difference, we may exclaim, between the man who sat by the fire
   in the hall of the high priest, and the man who takes the lead in Acts
   4 --between the man who fell before the assault of a maid, (when Peter
   denied Jesus at the campfire) and the man who makes a nation tremble
   with his appeals! But, some may ask, how is this difference to be
   accounted for? The presence and power of an un-grieved, unquenched,
   Holy Spirit explains it fully. And the weakness or power of many in our
   day is to be accounted for on the same principle. The Spirit of God
   alone is power in the Christian. May we know the blessedness of living,
   walking, working, in the saving and sanctifying power of the Holy
   Spirit! "And grieve not the Holy Spirit of God, whereby ye are sealed
   unto the day of redemption." (Ephesians 4:30)

   We are now come to the last section in the sacred narrative of the
   history of Peter. From verse 32 of chapter 9, to verse 18 of chapter
   11, we have an account of his preaching and working miracles. There we
   see him once more in full apostolic authority, and the Holy Ghost
   working with him. His mission at this time was greatly blessed, both in
   the towns of Israel, and at Cæsarea. The whole town of Lydda and the
   district of Saron appear to have been awakened. The miracles, which
   Peter wrought, and the gospel which he preached, were used of God for
   the conversion of many. Thus we read, "And all that dwelt at Lydda and
   Saron turned to the Lord." The blessing was general. "Turning to the
   Lord" is the scriptural idea of conversion. And at Joppa also, through
   the raising of Dorcas, there was a great stir and great blessing. "Many
   believed in the Lord throughout all Joppa."

   In Acts 10, (which we have already considered), the Gentiles are
   brought into the church. And now, Peter having finished his mission in
   these quarters, returns to Jerusalem. After the account of his
   deliverance from the power of Herod in Acts chapter 12, we have no
   continuous history of the apostle of the circumcision.

   As Herod Agrippa, the Idumean king, comes so prominently before us
   here, it may be well to notice the part he takes. He professed great
   zeal for the Law of Moses, and maintained a certain respect towards its
   outward observance. He was therefore ready with a pretended pious zeal
   to side with the Jews against the Disciples of Christ. This was his
   policy. He was a type of the adversary king.

   It was about A.D. 44 that Herod sought to ingratiate himself with his
   Jewish subjects, by persecuting the unoffending Christians. Not that
   there was any love between Herod and the Jews, for they hated each
   other heartily; but here they united, as both hating the heavenly
   testimony. Herod killed James with the sword and cast Peter into
   prison. It was his wicked intention to keep him there till after the
   Passover, and then, when a great many Jews from all parts would be in
   Jerusalem, to make a public spectacle of his execution. But God
   preserved and delivered His servant in answer to the prayers of the
   saints. They have weapons of warfare, which the governments of this
   world know nothing of. God allowed James to seal his testimony with his
   blood; but Peter He preserved for further testimony on the earth. Thus
   our God rules over all. He is the Governor among the nations, whatever
   the pride and will of man may be. Power belongeth unto Him. Feeble
   indeed is the power of every enemy when He interferes. Herod, being
   baffled and confounded by the manifestations of a power which he could
   not understand, condemns the keepers of the prison to death, and leaves
   Jerusalem. But he little thought that his own death was to precede that
   of his prisoners.

   At Cæsarea, the Gentile seat of his authority, he ordered a splendid
   festival in honour of the Emperor Claudius. Multitudes, we are
   informed, of the highest rank flocked from all quarters. On the second
   morning of the festivities the king appeared in a silver robe of great
   splendor, which glittered with the rays of the sun, so as to dazzle the
   eyes of the whole assembly, and excite general admiration. When making
   an oration to the people from his throne, some of his flatterers raised
   a shout, "It is the voice of a god!" In place of repressing this
   impious adulation, which spread through the theatre, Herod accepted it.
   But a sense of God's judgment at that very moment pierced the heart of
   the king. In tones of deep melancholy he said, "Your god will soon
   suffer the common lot of mortality." In the forcible language of
   scripture, it is said, "And immediately the angel of the Lord smote
   him, because he gave not God the glory: and he was eaten of worms, and
   gave up the ghost." He was then seized with violent internal pains, and
   carried from the theatre to his palace. There he lingered five days,
   and died in the greatest agony, and in the most humiliating and
   loathsome state of body.

   THE HERODIAN LINE OF KINGS

   As it may not be out of place here, or uninteresting to our readers, we
   would notice for a moment the Herodian line of kings. They frequently
   come before us, both in the life of our Lord, and in the early history
   of the church. We have associated in our minds, from early youth, the
   massacre of the infants of Bethlehem and Herod, king of Judæa, though
   it is somewhat remarkable that Josephus, the principal historian of
   Herod, takes no notice of this event. It is generally thought, that the
   murder of a few children, in an obscure village, compared with Herod's
   other deeds of blood, was too unimportant in the eyes of Josephus to be
   recorded. But not so in the mind of God: both the deceit and cruelty of
   the treacherous heart of the king are recorded in the sacred narrative.
   The eye of God watched over the "Child born" unto Israel --the only
   source of hope for all nations. The cruel design of Herod was thus
   defeated.

   Herod The Great, the first Idumean king over Israel, received the
   kingdom from the senate of Rome through the influence of Mark Antony.
   This took place about thirty-five years before the birth of Christ, and
   about thirty-seven before his own death. These Idumeans were a branch
   of the ancient Edomites, who, while the Jews were in the Babylonish
   captivity, and their land lay desolate, took possession of as much of
   the southern part of it, as contained what had been the whole
   inheritance of the tribe of Simeon, and also half of that which had
   been the inheritance of the tribe of Judah; and there they dwelt ever
   after. In course of time, the Idumeans were conquered by John Hyrcanus,
   and brought over to Judaism. After their conversion, they received
   circumcision, submitted to the Jewish laws, and became incorporated
   with the Jewish nation. In this way they became Jews, though not of the
   ancient stock of Israel. This happened about one hundred and
   twenty-nine years before Christ. They were bold, crafty, and cruel as
   princes: they had great political foresight, courted the favour of
   Rome, and cared only for the establishment of their own dynasty. But,
   as God would have it, with the destruction of Jerusalem, the Idumean
   dynasty passed away, and even the very name of Herod seems to have
   perished from among the nations.

   Besides the slaughter of the children in Bethlehem, which took place
   shortly before Herod's death, he had deeply imbrued his hands in the
   blood of his own family, and in the blood of many noble persons of the
   Asmonean line. His cruel jealousy towards that heroic family never
   slumbered. But one of his last acts was to sign the death warrant of
   his own son. When dying under the signal judgment of God, like his
   grandson, Herod Agrippa, he raised himself up in his bed, gave the
   mandate for the execution of Antipater, named Archelaus as his
   successor to the throne, fell back, and expired.

   Thus, alas! have monarchs often died, dispensing death on the one hand,
   and kingdoms on the other. But, what then? In the naked reality of
   their own moral condition they must stand before the tribunal of God.
   The purple can no longer shield them. Inflexible righteousness rules on
   that throne. Judged according to the deeds done in the body, they must
   be banished beyond the "gulf" which God's judgment has "fixed" forever.
   But, oh! there to remember, in torment, every moment of their past
   history --the privileges they have abused, the opportunities they have
   lost, and all the evil they have done. May the Lord save every soul
   that glances at these pages, from the awful weight of these words
   --remember --tormented --fixed. They describe and characterise the
   future state of impenitent souls. Luke 16.

   The sect of the Herodians may have been the partisans of Herod, and
   chiefly political in their character, their main object being the
   maintenance of the national independence of the Jews, in the face of
   Roman power and ambition. They may have thought to use Herod for the
   accomplishing of this end. In the Gospel history they are represented
   as acting craftily towards the blessed Lord, and in concert with the
   Pharisees. (Matthew 22:15 - 16; Mark 12:13 - 14)

   But we must now return to the history of our apostle.

   In Acts 15, after an absence of about five years, Peter again appears;
   but during that time we know nothing of his abode or of his work. He
   takes an active part in the assembly at Jerusalem, and seems to have
   retained his original place among the apostles and elders.

   PETER AT ANTIOCH

   Soon after this, as we learn from Galatians 2, he paid a visit to
   Antioch. But notwithstanding the decision of the apostles and church at
   Jerusalem, a characteristic weakness of Peter's betrays him into an act
   of dissimulation. It is one thing to settle a question in principle, it
   is quite another to carry it out in practice. Peter had actually stated
   in the assembly before them all, that the gospel which Paul had
   preached, by the revelation given to him, was no less a blessing to the
   Jew than to the Gentile. And while alone at Antioch, he acted on this
   principle, walking in the liberty of the heavenly truth and eating with
   the Gentiles. But when certain Jewish-minded Christians came down from
   James, he no longer dared to use this liberty: "He withdrew and
   separated himself, fearing them which were of the circumcision. And the
   other Jews dissembled likewise with him; insomuch that Barnabas also
   was carried away with their dissimulation." "What a poor thing is man!"
   exclaims one. "And we are weak in proportion to our importance before
   men; when we are nothing, we can do all things, as far as human opinion
   is concerned... Paul, energetic and faithful, through grace, alone
   remains upright; and he rebukes Peter before them all."

   From this time, A.D. 49 or 50, his name does not again appear in the
   Acts of the Apostles; and we have no certain knowledge of the sphere of
   his labours. But, as he inscribes his first Epistle to the Hebrew
   Christians, "scattered throughout Pontus, Galatia, Cappadocia, Asia,
   and Bithynia," he is supposed to have laboured in these countries. His
   second Epistle is of a much later date, and must have been written
   shortly before his death. This we learn from what he says in the first
   chapter: "Knowing that shortly I must put off this my tabernacle, even
   as our Lord Jesus Christ hath showed me." (See John 21:18,19)

   The exact date of Peter's visit to Rome has been a subject of great
   controversy between catholic and protestant writers in all ages. But it
   may now be considered as a settled point, that he did not visit that
   city till near the end of his life. The date of his martyrdom is also
   uncertain. Most probably it took place about A.D. 67 or 68, and about
   the seventieth year of his age. Tacitus dates the burning of Rome by
   Nero about the month of July 64. The persecution against the Christians
   broke out soon after, and it was under this persecution that our
   apostle was honoured with the crown of martyrdom.

   He was sentenced to be crucified, a most severe and shameful death. But
   when he looked on the cross, he entreated the favour of the officers
   that he might not be crucified in the ordinary way, but that he might
   suffer with his head downwards: affirming that he was unworthy to
   suffer in the same posture as his blessed Lord and Master had done
   before him. His request being granted, he was crucified with his head
   downwards. Whether this be a fact or a mere legend, it well agrees with
   the fervent temperament and the deep humility of the great apostle.
   [11] In following the catalogue already given, we next notice the
   apostle --

   ANDREW. The sacred historian has been very full and copious in
   describing the acts of Peter, but very sparing in his accounts of his
   brother Andrew. He was brought up with Peter to his father's trade, and
   continued at his occupation until he was called by the Lord to become a
   "fisher of men."

   Andrew, like other young men of Galilee, had become a disciple of John
   the Baptist. But on hearing his master speak a second time of Jesus as
   the Lamb of God, he left John to follow Jesus. He was, immediately
   after this, the means of bringing his brother Peter to his new Master.
   So far, he has the honour of being the first of the apostles who
   pointed to Christ. (John 1) He comes before us in the sixth and in the
   twelfth of John, and in the thirteenth of Mark; but, beyond these few
   scattered notices, scripture relates nothing concerning him. His name
   does not appear in the Acts of the Apostles, except in the first
   chapter.

   Conjecture and tradition have said many things about him, but it is
   only of fairly established facts that we would speak. He is said to
   have preached in Scythia, and to have travelled over Thrace, Macedonia,
   Thessaly, and to have suffered martyrdom at Patrae in Achaia. His
   cross, it is said, was formed of two pieces of wood crossing each other
   in the middle, in the form of the letter X, hence usually known by the
   name of St. Andrew's cross. He died praying and exhorting the people to
   constancy and perseverance in the faith. The year in which he suffered
   is uncertain.

   From the two brothers, Peter and Andrew, we now proceed to the two
   brothers, James and John. The four had also been partners in business.
   And first in order we notice;

   JAMES. Zebedee and his two sons, James and John, were following their
   usual occupation on the Sea of Galilee, when Jesus passed that way.
   Seeing the two brothers, "He called them; and they left their father
   Zebedee in the ship with the hired servants, and went after him." Peter
   and Andrew were also there. It was on this occasion that the Lord
   desired Peter to launch out into deeper water, and try another cast for
   fish. Peter inclines to reason: they had been very unsuccessful the
   previous night. Nevertheless, at the Lord's word, the net was let down.
   "And when they had thus done, they enclosed a great multitude of
   fishes; and their net brake." Astonished and overwhelmed at this
   draught, Peter beckoned to his partners to come and help in landing the
   fish caught.

   Full conviction was now wrought in the minds of those four young men,
   that Jesus was the true Messiah. They may have had doubts before but
   they have none now. At the call of Jesus they leave all, and become,
   once and forever, His disciples. Henceforward they were to become
   "fishers of men." In every list we have of the apostles, these four
   noble men are placed first; they stand at the head of the twelve
   throughout. (Matthew 4:17 - 20, Mark 1: 16 - 20, Luke 5:1 - 11)

   This is the call of James to the discipleship; about a year after this
   he is called to the apostleship with his eleven brethren. (Matthew 10;
   Mark 3; Luke 6; and Acts 1)

   Peter, James, and John, and occasionally Andrew, were always the most
   intimate companions of the blessed Lord. The first three only were
   admitted to the raising of Jairus' daughter. (Mark 5; Luke 8) The same
   three apostles were alone permitted to be present at the
   transfiguration. (Matt. 17; Mark 9; Luke 9) It was the same three that
   witnessed His agony in Gethsemane. (Matt. 26; Mark 14; Luke 22) But the
   four, Peter, James, John, and Andrew, are joined together when they ask
   the Lord privately about the destruction of the temple. (Mark 13)

   Like the change in Peter's name, or the addition to it, the sons of
   Zebedee are surnamed Boanerges, or, "the sons of thunder." Great
   boldness and faithfulness may have singled out James to Herod, as the
   first to be seized and silenced. It is not a little remarkable that
   "the son of thunder" and the "rock-man" are the first to be
   apprehended. But James has the honour to be the first of the apostles
   that received the crown of martyrdom, A.D. 44. Peter was rescued by a
   miracle.

   A mother's jealousy and her sons' ambition lead Salome to ask for very
   distinguished places in the kingdom for her two sons. The Lord allowed
   the petition to pass with a very mild reproof, but told the brothers
   that they should drink of His cup, and be baptised with His baptism.
   James was early called upon to realize this prediction. After the
   ascension he is seen in company with the other apostles in Acts 1. Then
   he disappears from the sacred narrative until his apprehension and
   death in Acts 12. And there we are simply told, in the brief language
   of the inspired historian, that Herod the king killed James the brother
   of John with the sword.

   Clement of Alexandria relates a tradition concerning James's martyrdom,
   which is not an unlikely thing to have occurred. As he was led forth to
   the place of execution, the soldier or officer that had guarded him to
   the tribunal, or rather his accuser, was so moved by the courage and
   bold confession of James at the time of his trial, that he repented of
   what he had done, and came and fell down at the apostle's feet, and
   begged forgiveness for what he had said against him. James, after a
   little surprise at the thing, raised him up, embraced and kissed him;
   and said, "Peace, my son, peace be to thee, and the pardon of thy
   faults." Whereupon, before all, he publicly professed himself to be a
   Christian, and so both were beheaded at the same time. Thus fell James,
   the apostolic proto-martyr, cheerfully taking that cup which he had
   long since told his Lord that he was ready to drink of. [12]

   JOHN was the son of Zebedee and Salome, and the younger brother of
   James. Though his father was a fisherman it appears from the Gospel
   narrative that they were in good circumstances. Some of the ancients
   speak of the family as wealthy, and even as nobly connected. But these
   traditions are not reconcilable with the facts of scripture. We read,
   however, of their "hired servants," and they may have owned more
   vessels than one. And Salome, we doubt not, was one of those honoured
   women who ministered to the Lord of her substance. And John had a house
   of his own. (Luke 8:3; and John 19:27) We may safely infer from these
   facts that their position was considerably above poverty. As many have
   gone to extremes in speaking of the apostles as poor and illiterate, we
   think it well to notice the few hints of scripture on these subjects.

   Of the character of Zebedee we know nothing. He made no objection to
   his sons leaving him at the call of the Messiah. But we hear no more of
   him afterwards. We frequently find the mother in company with her sons,
   but no mention of the father. The probability is that he died soon
   after the call of his sons.

   The evangelist Mark, in enumerating the twelve apostles (Mark 3:17),
   when he mentions James and John, says that our Lord "surnamed them
   Boanerges, which is, Sons of Thunder." What our Lord particularly
   intended to convey in this title, is not easily determined. Conjectures
   there have been many. Some suppose that it was because these two
   brothers were of a more furious and resolute disposition, and of a more
   fierce and fiery temper than the rest of the apostles. But we see no
   ground for such a conjecture in the Gospel history. Doubtless, on one
   or two occasions their zeal was intemperate, but that was before they
   understood the spirit of their calling. More probably our Lord so
   surnamed them, as prophetic of their burning zeal in openly and boldly
   proclaiming the great truths of the gospel, after they became fully
   acquainted with them. Certain we are, that John in company with Peter,
   in the early chapters of the Acts, displayed a courage that feared no
   threatenings, and was daunted by no opposition.

   John is supposed to have been the youngest of all the apostles; and,
   judging from his writings he appears to have been possessed of a
   disposition singularly affectionate, mild, and amiable. He was
   characterised as "the disciple whom Jesus loved." On various occasions
   he was admitted to free and intimate communication with the Lord. (John
   13)

   "What distinguished John," says Neander, "was the union of the most
   opposite qualities, as we have often observed in great instruments of
   the advancement of the kingdom of God --the union of a disposition
   inclined to silent and deep meditation, with an ardent zeal, though not
   impelling to great and diversified activity in the outward world; not a
   passionate zeal, such as we suppose filled the breast of Paul before
   his conversion. But there was also a love, not soft and yielding, but
   one seizing with all its might, and firmly retaining the object to
   which it was directed --vigorously repelling whatever would disgrace
   this object, or attempt to wrest it from its possession; and this was
   his leading characteristic."

   As the history of John is so intimately connected with the histories of
   Peter and James, which we have already gone over, we may now be very
   brief. These three names are seldom separated in the Gospel history.
   But there is one scene in which John stands alone, and which ought to
   be noted. He was the only apostle who followed Jesus to the place of
   His crucifixion. And there he was specially honoured with the regard
   and confidence of his Master. "When Jesus therefore saw his mother and
   the disciple standing by whom he loved, he saith unto his mother,
   Woman, behold thy son; then saith he to the disciple, Behold thy
   mother! And from that hour that disciple took her unto his own home."
   (John 19:26, 27.)

   After the ascension of Christ, and the descent of the Holy Ghost on the
   day of Pentecost, John became one of the chief apostles of the
   circumcision. But his ministry goes down to the end of the first
   century. With his death the apostolic age naturally closes.

   There is a widely spread and generally received tradition that John
   remained in Judæa till after the death of the Virgin Mary. The date of
   this event is uncertain, but soon after he proceeded to Asia Miner.
   Here he planted and watched over several churches in different cities,
   but made Ephesus his centre. Thence he was banished to the Isle of
   Patmos towards the close of Domitian's reign. There he wrote the
   Revelation. (Chap. 1:9) On his liberation from exile, by the accession
   of Nerva to the imperial throne, John returned to Ephesus, where he
   wrote his Gospel and Epistles. He died about A.D. 100 in the third year
   of the emperor Trajan, and about one hundred years of age. [13]

   From the many traditions about John himself, we select only one, which
   we think the most interesting, and the most likely to be true. As one
   who was unwearied in his love and care for the souls of men, he was
   deeply grieved by the apostasy of a young man in whom he had taken a
   special interest. When revisiting the place where he left him, he heard
   that he had joined a band of robbers and had become their captain. His
   love for him was so great that he determined to find him out. He
   hastened to the retreat of the robbers, suffered himself to be seized,
   and begged to be taken into their captain's presence. When he saw the
   venerable appearance of the aged apostle, his conscience was awakened.
   The recollection of earlier days was more than he could stand, and he
   fled in consternation from his presence. But John, full of paternal
   love, hastened after him. He entreated him to repent and return to the
   church, and encouraged him by the assurance of the forgiveness of his
   sins in the name of the Lord Jesus. His marvellous affection for the
   young man and his deep concern for his soul, completely overcame him.
   He repented, returned, was restored, and afterwards became a worthy
   member of the Christian community. May we seek to do likewise in
   restoring backsliders!

   We now come to what we may call the second group of four apostles; and,
   just as Peter heads the first group, the second is headed by;

   PHILIP. In the first three Gospels he is placed in this order. He is
   mentioned as being of Bethsaida, the city of Andrew and Peter. (John
   1:44) It is more than probable that he was among the Galileans of that
   district who flocked to hear the preaching of John the Baptist. Though
   no part of Palestine was spoken of in such terms of reproach as
   Galilee, it was from these despised but simple, earnest, and devoted
   Galileans that our Lord chose His apostles. "Search and look," said the
   Pharisees, "for out of Galilee ariseth no prophet." But sweeping
   statements, generally speaking, are untrue. "Can there any good thing
   come out of Nazareth?" is a sample of their character.

   Nothing is said in the Gospel history of Philip's parents or
   occupation. Most likely he was a fisherman, the general trade of that
   place. From the similarity of language used by Philip and Andrew, and
   their being repeatedly mentioned together, we may conclude that our
   apostle, and the sons of Jonas and Zebedee, were intimate friends, and
   that they were all looking and waiting for the expected Messiah. But in
   the whole circle of our Lord's disciples Philip has the honour of being
   first called. The first three had come to Christ, and conversed with
   Him before Philip, but afterwards they returned to their occupation,
   and were not called to follow the Lord for about a year after. But
   Philip was called at once. "The day following," we read, "Jesus would
   go forth into Galilee, and findeth Philip, and saith unto him, Follow
   me." These words, so full of meaning and rich blessing to the soul,
   "Follow me," (we believe) were first said to Philip. When the twelve
   were specially set apart for their office, he was numbered among them.

   Immediately after his call, he finds Nathanael and leads him to Jesus.
   It is evident, (from the glad surprise resulting from this information)
   that the two had spoken of these things before. His heart was now well
   assured of their truth; hence the joy expressed in these words, "We
   have found him, of whom Moses in the law, and the prophets, did write,
   Jesus of Nazareth, the son of Joseph." There is an evident earnest
   heartedness about Philip, though little is said of him in the Gospels.
   Our last interview with him, like the first, is deeply interesting.
   Having heard the Lord repeatedly refer to His Father in John 12, 13,
   and 14, he manifested a strong desire to know more of the Father. The
   prophetic words of our Lord about His Father appear to have made a deep
   impression on his heart, and little wonder. "Father, save me from this
   hour;" "Father, glorify thy name;" "In my Father's house are many
   mansions;" are sayings which, we doubt not, sank deep in all the
   disciples' hearts. But there is a beautiful simplicity about Philip,
   though lacking in intelligence. "Philip saith unto him, Lord, show us
   the Father, and it sufficeth us." There is evident reproof, if not
   reproach, in the Lord's reply to Philip. "Jesus saith unto him, Have I
   been so long a time with you, and yet hast thou not known me, Philip?
   he that hath seen me hath seen the Father; and how sayest thou then,
   Show us the Father? Believe me that I am in the Father, and the Father
   in me; or else believe me for the very works' sake." There had been the
   revelation of the Father in His own Person, and he ought to have known
   Him. He had now been a long time with His disciples, and they ought to
   have seen that He was in the Father, and the Father in Him, and thus
   have known where He was going, for He was going to the Father. They had
   both the "words" and the "works" of the Son, to convince them that the
   Father dwelt in Him. They had heard His words, they had seen His works,
   they had witnessed His character; and these things were fitted and
   intended to bring the Father before them. His own Person was the answer
   to every question. "I am the way, the truth, and the life." He was the
   way --the only way to the Father. He was the truth; the truth as to
   every one and everything, as they are, is only known by Him. He is the
   life --"that eternal life, which was with the Father, and was
   manifested unto us." But it is only by the teaching and power of the
   Spirit that he who is "the way, the truth, and the life," is known and
   enjoyed. And there must be subjection of heart to Christ, if we would
   know the teaching of the Spirit.

   After this deeply interesting and instructive conversation with the
   Lord, all is uncertain as to Philip's history --his name disappears
   from the Gospel narrative. He has his own place in the catalogue. (Acts
   1:13)

   Tradition has so frequently confounded Philip the evangelist with
   Philip the apostle, that all is uncertain. No doubt his remaining years
   were spent in devoted service to his Lord and Saviour, but where, it is
   difficult to say. Some think that Upper Asia was the scene of his early
   labours, and that in the latter period of his life he came to
   Hierapolis in Phrygia, where he suffered a cruel martyrdom.

   BARTHOLOMEW. It has been very generally believed, both by ancients and
   moderns, that the history of Bartholomew lies concealed under another
   name. That he was one of the twelve apostles is perfectly clear from
   the Gospel narrative, though nothing more is said of him than the bare
   mention of his name. In the first three Gospels Philip and Bartholomew
   are mentioned together; in John's Gospel, it is Philip and Nathanael.
   This circumstance has given rise to a very common conjecture that these
   are but different names for the same person. Nothing was more common
   than this among the Jews. For example, Simon Peter is called
   "Bar-jona," which simply means --the son of Jona. "Bar-timeus" again,
   means the son of Timeus; and "Bartholomew" is a name of the same class.
   These are merely relative, not proper, names. From this custom being so
   general among the Jews, it is often extremely difficult to identify
   persons in the Gospel history.

   Assuming, then, that Nathanael of John is the Bartholomew of the
   synoptical Gospels, we proceed with what we know of his history. Like
   the rest of the apostles, he was a Galilean; he was "of Cana in
   Galilee." We have seen in a former paper, that he was first conducted
   by Philip to Christ. As he approached the Lord, Jesus greeted him with
   the most honourable distinction, "Behold an Israelite indeed, in whom
   is no guile." He was, no doubt, a man of true simplicity and integrity
   of character, and one that "waited for redemption in Israel." Surprised
   at our Lord's most gracious salutation, and wondering how He could know
   him at first sight, "Nathanael saith unto him, Whence knowest thou me?
   Jesus answered and said unto him, Before that Philip called thee, when
   thou wast under the fig tree, I saw thee." Solemn, yet blessed thought!
   he stood before One --a man --in this world, who knew the secrets of
   his heart and ways. Nathanael was now fully convinced of the absolute
   deity of the Messiah, and owns Him in His higher glory as "the Son of
   God" as well as "the king of Israel."

   The character of Nathanael and his call, are considered by many as
   being typical of the remnant of Israel, without guile in the latter
   day. The allusion to the fig tree --the well-known symbol of Israel
   --confirms this view of the passage; and so does his beautiful
   testimony, "Rabbi, thou art the Son of God; thou art the king of
   Israel." The spared remnant, seen and known by the Lord, will thus
   confess their faith in Him, as the prophets most fully show. And all
   those who thus own the Messiah shall see His universal glory as the Son
   of man, according to Psalm 8. That coming day of widespread glory is
   anticipated by our Lord in His concluding remarks to Nathanael:
   "Verily, verily, I say unto you, Henceforth ye shall see heaven open,
   and the angels of God ascending and descending upon the Son of man."
   Then will the heavens and the earth be joined together, as if by
   Jacob's ladder. But we must now return to the direct history of our
   apostle.

   The most distinct and conclusive passage as to his apostleship is John
   21. There we find him in company with the other apostles, to whom our
   Lord appeared at the Sea of Tiberias after His resurrection. "There
   were together Simon Peter, and Thomas called Didymus, and Nathanael of
   Cana in Galilee, and the sons of Zebedee, and two other of his
   disciples," who probably were Andrew and Philip.

   There is a generally received tradition that Bartholomew travelled as
   far as India preaching the gospel --probably to that part of India,
   which lies nearest to Asia. After travelling in different places,
   seeking to spread Christianity, he at last reached Albanople in Armenia
   the Great, a place overgrown with idolatry. There he was arrested in
   the midst of his labours by the governor of the place, and condemned to
   be crucified. The date is not certainly known.

   MATTHEW --called also Levi, the son of Alpheus; but not the same
   person, we believe, as Alpheus the father of James. (Matt. 10:3, Mark
   2:14, and Luke 5:27 -29) Though a Roman officer, he was "a Hebrew of
   the Hebrews," and probably a Galilean, but of what city or tribe we are
   not informed. Before his call to follow the Messiah, he was a publican,
   or tax-gatherer, under the Romans. He seems to have been stationed at
   Capernaum, a maritime town on the Sea of Galilee. He was what we should
   call a customhouse officer. It was in this capacity that Jesus found
   him. When he passed by, He saw him "sitting at the receipt of custom,
   and said unto him, Follow me'. And he arose and followed him." But
   before proceeding with the history of Matthew, we would say a few words
   on the character of his occupation, as it is so frequently mentioned in
   the New Testament, and is really a generic term.

   Publicans, properly so called, were persons who farmed the Roman taxes
   or revenue. They were, usually, persons of wealth and credit. It was
   considered among the Romans an honourable position, and generally
   conferred on Roman knights. Sabinus (it is said, father of the Emperor
   Vespasian) was the publican of the Asiatic provinces. They employed
   under them inferior officers, and these, generally, were natives of the
   provinces in which the taxes were collected; to this class Matthew no
   doubt belonged.

   These petty officers were everywhere notorious for their fraudulent
   exactions; but to the Jews they were especially odious. The Jews looked
   upon themselves as a freeborn people, and that they had this privilege
   direct from God Himself. "We be Abraham's seed," was their boast, "and
   were never in bondage to any man." Consequently, the Roman tax
   gatherers were the visible proofs of their slavery, and of the degraded
   state of their nation. This was the chain that galled them, and
   betrayed them into many acts of rebellion against the Romans. Hence it
   was that the Jews abhorred publicans. They looked upon them as traitors
   and apostates, and as the ready tools of the oppressor. Besides, they
   were most arbitrary and unjust in their taxations; and having the law
   on their side, they could enforce payment. It was in their power to
   examine each case of goods exported or imported, and to assess the
   alleged value in the most vexatious way. We may gather, from what John
   said to them, that they overcharged whenever they had an opportunity.
   "And he said unto them, Exact no more than is appointed you." (Luke
   3:13) See also the case of Zaccheus. (Luke 19: 9)

   Surely these things were more than enough to bring the whole class into
   the greatest detestation everywhere. But we will confine ourselves to
   what we learn of them in the New Testament. The spirit of truth never
   exaggerates. There we find them classed with sinners; (Matt. 9:11;
   11:19) with harlots; (Matt. 21:31, 32) with heathen. (Matt. 18:17) As a
   class, they were regarded as outside, not only from the privileges of
   the sanctuary, but also from the privileges of civil society. And yet,
   notwithstanding all these disadvantages, their ranks furnished some of
   the earliest disciples both of John the Baptist and of our Lord. They
   had less hypocrisy than those who were esteemed better; they had no
   conventional morality; and they had no false religion to unlearn. These
   things may be fairly argued from the parable of the Pharisee and the
   Publican. (Luke 18) Conventional goodness is a great hindrance to the
   soul's salvation. It is difficult for such to take the place of a lost,
   ruined sinner that grace may have a free course and do her blessed,
   saving, gracious work. He who would be justified of God, must take the
   publican's place, and offer up the publican's prayer, "God be merciful
   to me a sinner." We now return to the history of our apostle.

   With great readiness Matthew obeyed the call of Jesus. His lucrative
   situation was at once given up; and his conversion, so thorough and
   manifest, was accompanied with much blessing to others. There was a
   great awakening and interest among his own class. "And Levi made a
   great feast in his own house, and there was a great company of
   publicans and others that sat down with them." A feast is the symbol of
   joy and rejoicing --the immediate effect of a hearty surrender to
   Christ. It is worthy of note that in his own Gospel he gives his
   well-known name, but neither of the other evangelists speaks of
   "Matthew the publican." Along with the others he was chosen one of the
   twelve. From that time he continued with the Lord like the rest of the
   apostles. Blessed privilege! --"a familiar attendant on His person, a
   spectator of His public and private life, a hearer of His sayings and
   discourses, a beholder of His miracles, a witness of His resurrection
   and ascension to glory." This he does not testify, though he saw it.
   Matthew was with the other apostles on the day of Pentecost, and
   received the gift of the Holy Ghost. How long he continued in Judæa
   after that event, we are not informed. His Gospel is supposed to be the
   first that was written, and has a special reference to Israel.

   Ethiopia is generally assigned as the scene of his apostolic labours.
   There, some say, by preaching and miracles, he mightily triumphed over
   error and idolatry, was the means of the conversion of many, appointed
   spiritual guides and pastors to confirm and build them up, and to bring
   others over to the faith; and there finished his course. But the
   sources of information on these points cannot be trusted.

   THOMAS. The apostle Thomas was duly called by our Lord to the
   apostleship and is duly mentioned in the various apostolic lists. Of
   his birthplace or parents we are not informed in scripture, but
   tradition says he was born at Antioch. John relates all that is known
   of him with any certainty. But though our knowledge of Thomas be thus
   limited, there is no character among the apostles more distinctly
   marked than his. In fact, his name has become, both in the church and
   in the world, a synonym for doubting and unbelieving. It is said of a
   famous artist, when asked to produce a portrait of the apostle Thomas
   that he placed a rule in his hand for the due measuring of evidence and
   argument. His mind was thoughtful, meditative, and slow to believe. He
   looked at all the difficulties of a question, and inclined to take the
   dark side of things. But we will glance for a moment at the portrait,
   which the pen of inspiration has drawn of him in the three following
   passages.

   1) In John 11 his true character distinctly appears. He evidently
   viewed the proposed journey of our Lord into Judæa with the darkest
   forebodings. "Then said Thomas, which is called Didymus, unto his
   fellow disciples, Let us also go that we may die with him." In place of
   believing that Lazarus would be raised from the dead, he feared that
   both the Lord and His disciples would meet their own death in Judæa. He
   could see nothing arising from such a journey but complete disaster.
   Nevertheless, he does not seek to hinder the Lord from going, like the
   other disciples. This too is characteristic. He had deep affection for
   the Lord, and such was his devotedness that, though the journey should
   cost all of them their lives, he was willing to go.

   2) The second time referred to was after the Last Supper. (John 14) Our
   Lord had been speaking of going away, and of the home He would prepare
   for them in heaven, and that He would come again and receive them unto
   Himself, so that where He was they should be also. "And whither I go ye
   know," He added, "and the way ye know." But to our apostle's mind these
   beautiful promises only awaken dark thoughts of the unseen, unknown,
   future. "Thomas saith unto him, Lord, we know not whither thou goest;
   and how can we know the way?" Evidently he was eager to go, and earnest
   in his inquiries, but he wanted to be sure of the way before taking the
   first step. "Jesus saith unto him, I am the way, the truth, and the
   life; no man cometh unto the Father but by me." So long as the eye is
   fixed on Christ, we cannot make a false step. It is the single eye that
   receives the light of heaven, which sheds its radiance over the whole
   path.

   3) The third time was after the resurrection. (John 20) He was absent
   when the Lord appeared the first time to the disciples. When they told
   him that they had seen the Lord, he obstinately refused to believe what
   they said. From what he says, we may fairly gather that he had seen the
   Lord on the cross, and that the overwhelming sight had produced a deep
   impression on his mind. "Except I shall see in his hands the print of
   the nails, and put my finger into the print of the nails, and thrust my
   hand into his side, I will not believe." The following Lord's Day, when
   the disciples were assembled, Jesus appeared, and stood in the midst of
   them --His own place as the centre of the assembly. He again saluted
   them in the same words of peace, "Peace be unto you." But He at once
   turned to Thomas, as if he had been the main object of His appearing
   that day. "Then saith He to Thomas, Reach hither thy finger, and behold
   my hands; and reach hither thy hand, and thrust it into my side; and be
   not faithless, but believing." The effect on Thomas was immediate: all
   his doubts were removed, and in true orthodox faith he exclaimed, "My
   Lord and my God." "Jesus saith unto him, Thomas, because thou hast seen
   me, thou hast believed; blessed are they that have not seen, and yet
   have believed."

   Some have thought that the faith of Thomas in this instance rises far
   above all the other disciples, and that nothing higher in testimony
   ever dropped from apostolic lips. This opinion, though a common one,
   cannot be founded on the general context. Christ, in reply to Thomas,
   pronounces those more blessed who saw not, and yet believed. It can
   scarcely be called even Christian faith, as our Lord evidently hints.
   Christian faith is believing in Him whom we have not seen --walking by
   faith, not by sight.

   Thomas, we have no doubt, represents the slow, unbelieving mind of the
   Jews in the last days, who will believe when they see. (Zech. 12) He
   was not present at the first gathering of the saints after the
   resurrection, the reason why we are not told. But who can estimate the
   blessing that may be lost because of absence from the sanctioned
   meetings of the saints? He missed the blessed revelations of Christ as
   to relationship, "My Father, and your Father; my God, and your God."
   His faith is not connected with the position of son-ship. "He has not
   the communications of the efficacy of the Lord's work," as one has
   said, "and of the relationship with His Father into which Jesus brings
   His own, the church. He has peace, perhaps, but he has missed all the
   revelation of the church's position. How many souls --saved souls, even
   --are there in these two conditions?"

   The future apostolic labours of Thomas, and the end of his life, are so
   filled with traditions or legends, that we know nothing certainly. Some
   say he laboured in India and some in Persia. His martyrdom, it is said,
   was occasioned by a lance, and is still commemorated by the Latin
   Church on December 21, by the Greek Church on October 6, and by the
   Indians on July 1.

   JAMES --the son of Alpheus. The identification of the Jameses, the
   Marys, and the Lord's brethren, has long been a difficult point with
   critics. This would not be the place even to refer to their theories
   and arguments. But after looking at different sides of the question, we
   still believe that our apostle is the James who was a principal man in
   the church at Jerusalem --who is the author of "The General Epistle of
   James" --who is also called the Lord's brother and surnamed "the just,"
   and "the less," probably because he was low in stature. Identification
   of persons is extremely difficult in such histories, from the habit, so
   common among the Jews, of calling near relations, brothers and sisters,
   and from nearly all of them having two or more names.

   In the four lists of the apostles, James holds the same place. He heads
   the third class. They appear to be in fours. Peter heads the first,
   Philip the second, and James the third. Very little is known of James
   until after the resurrection. From what Paul says in 1 Corinthians
   15:7, it is evident that the Lord, before His ascension, honoured James
   with a personal interview. This was before the day of Pentecost, and
   may have been for the special encouragement, guidance, and
   strengthening of the apostle. We will now notice the principal
   passages, from which we gain our knowledge of James.

   In the first chapter of the Acts we find him, with the others, waiting
   for the promise of the Father, the gift of the Holy Ghost. After this
   we lose sight of him, until, he is visited by Paul, (Gal. 1:18, 19)
   which would be about the year A.D. 39. Now we find him equal with Peter
   as an apostle. He was at this time the overseer of the church at
   Jerusalem, and on a level with the very chiefest apostles. The place he
   held in Peter's estimation appears from the fact, that when he was
   delivered from prison, he desires that information of his escape may be
   sent to "James and to the brethren." (Acts 12:17)

   In A.D. 50 we find him in the apostolic council, where he seems to
   deliver the judgment of the assembly. "Wherefore my sentence is, that
   we trouble not them, which from among the Gentiles are turned to God."
   (Acts 15) None of the other apostles speak in this manner. It would
   appear that he had risen greatly in apostolic position and authority.
   About the year 51, when Paul paid another visit to Jerusalem, he
   recognises James as one of the "pillars" of the church, and places his
   name before both Cephas and John. (Gal. 2:9) Again, about the year 58,
   Paul paid a special visit to James in the presence of all the elders.
   "And the day following Paul went in with us to James; and all the
   elders were present." (Acts 21:18) It is easily seen from those few
   notices, that James was held in the very highest esteem by the other
   apostles, and that he filled a most important position in the church at
   Jerusalem. His attachment to Judaism was deep and earnest, and his
   advancement in Christianity appears to have been slow and gradual. He
   was a perfect contrast to Paul; Peter forms a link between them.

   The martyrdom of James is placed at about 62, close upon thirty years
   after Pentecost. The testimony of antiquity is universal, as to his
   distinguished piety and sanctity. His humility, too, appears great:
   though he was the Lord's brother, or near relation, he styles himself
   the servant of Jesus Christ, and does not so much as give himself the
   title of an apostle. For the reputation of his holy and righteous life,
   he was universally styled, "James the Just." And as he conformed to
   Jewish customs with a measure of regularity, he was by no means so
   offensive in the eyes of his unbelieving countrymen, as the apostle of
   the Gentiles. But notwithstanding the high opinion that was entertained
   of his character, his life was prematurely ended by martyrdom.

   For an account of the life, character, and death of James, we are
   chiefly indebted to Hegesippus, a Christian of Jewish origin, who lived
   in the middle of the second century. He is generally received as a
   credible historian. His narrative of the martyrdom of James is given
   fully, and in his own words, in Smith's "Dictionary of the Bible." We
   can only give it in substance.

   As many of the rulers and people of the Jews became believers in Jesus,
   through the labours of James, the scribes and Pharisees were greatly
   stirred up against him. The whole of the people, they said, will
   believe in Christ. Therefore they came together to James, and said, "We
   pray thee, stop the people, for they have gone astray after Jesus as
   though He were the Christ. We pray thee to persuade all that come to
   the Passover concerning Jesus. Persuade the people not to go astray
   about Jesus; for the whole people, and all of us, give heed unto thee.
   Stand, therefore, on a pinnacle of the temple that thou mayest be
   visible, and that thy words may be heard by all the people; for all the
   tribes and even the Gentiles are come together for the Passover." But
   in place of saying what he was told, he proclaimed with a loud voice in
   the ears of all the people that Jesus was the true Messiah; that he
   firmly believed in Him, that Jesus was now in heaven at God's right
   hand, and that He would come again in power and great glory. Many were
   convinced through the preaching of James and gave glory to God, crying,
   "Hosannah to the Son of David."

   When the scribes and Pharisees heard this, they said to each other, "We
   have done wrong in bringing forward such a witness to Jesus; let us go
   up and throw him down, that the people may be terrified and not believe
   in him." And they cried out, saying, Even James the Just has gone
   astray, and they threw him down. But as he was not killed with the
   fall, they began to stone him. Then one of them, who was a fuller, took
   the club with which he pressed the clothes, and brought it down on the
   head of James. Thus the apostle died, and, like the proto-martyr
   Stephen, he died praying for them in a kneeling posture. It was almost
   immediately after this that Vespasian commenced the siege of Jerusalem,
   and the Roman army turned the whole scene into desolation, blood, and
   ruin.

   SIMON ZELOTES --also called "Simon the Canaanite." He seems to be a
   different person from Simon the brother of James. We have no account of
   him in the Gospel history. He is duly named in the Gospels and in the
   Acts, and then disappears from the sacred page.

   It is generally supposed that, before his call to be an apostle, he
   belonged to a sect among the Jews called "The Zealots." They were
   conspicuous for their fierce advocacy of the Mosaic ritual. They looked
   upon themselves as the successors of Phinehas, who, in zeal for the
   honour of God, slew Zimri and Cozbi. (Num. 25) In pretending to follow
   the zeal of the priest of old, they assumed to themselves the right of
   putting to death a blasphemer, an adulterer, or any notorious offender,
   without the ordinary formalities of the law. They maintained that God
   had made an everlasting covenant with Phinehas, and with his seed after
   him, "because he was zealous for his God, and made atonement for
   Israel." These high sounding claims and pretensions deceived both
   rulers and people for a time. Besides, their fury and zeal for the Law
   of Moses, and for the deliverance of the people from the Roman yoke,
   gave them favour in the eyes of the entire nation. But, as must ever be
   the case under similar circumstances, their zeal soon degenerated into
   all manner of licentiousness and wild extravagance. They became the
   pests of every class of society.

   Under a pretended zeal for the honour of God, they charged whom they
   would with being guilty of blasphemy, or of some other grievous sin,
   and immediately slew them and seized their property. Josephus tells us
   that they failed not to accuse some of the "prime nobility," and when
   they had succeeded in turning everything into confusion, they meantime
   "fished in the troubled waters." He bewails them as the great plagues
   of the nation. Attempts were made at different times to suppress the
   society, but it does not appear that they were ever much reduced until,
   with the unbelieving nation, they were swept away in the fatal siege.

   Simon is frequently styled "Simon the Zealot," and is supposed to have
   belonged to this troublesome faction. There may have been true and
   sincere men among them, but good and bad alike passed under the odious
   name of "Zealots." Nothing is certainly known of the future labours of
   our apostle. Some say that, after travelling for a while in the East,
   he turned to the West, and penetrated as far as Britain, where he
   preached, wrought miracles, endured many trials, and at last suffered
   martyrdom.

   JUDAS --the brother of James. This apostle is also called Jude,
   Thaddeus, and Lebbeus. These different names have different shades of
   meaning, but the examination of such niceties comes not within the
   range of our "Short Papers." Judas was the son of Alpheus, and one of
   our Lord's kindred, as we read in Matt. 13:55, "Is not his mother
   called Mary, and his brethren, James, and Joses, and Simon, and Judas?"

   When, or how, he was called to the apostleship we are not informed; and
   there is scarcely any mention of him in the New Testament, except in
   the different catalogues of the twelve apostles. His name only occurs
   once in the Gospel narrative, and that is when he asks the following
   question, "Judas saith unto him, not Iscariot, Lord, how is it that
   thou wilt manifest thyself unto us, and not unto the world?" (John
   14:22) It is quite evident from this question, that he was still
   entertaining, like his fellow-disciples, the idea of a temporal
   kingdom, or the manifestation of Christ's power on the earth, such as
   the world could perceive. But they understood not yet the dignity of
   their own Messiah. They were strangers to the greatness of His power,
   the glory of His Person, and the spirituality of His kingdom. His
   subjects are delivered, not only from this present evil world, but also
   from the power of Satan, and from the realm of death and the grave:
   "Who hath delivered us from the power of darkness, and hath translated
   us into the kingdom of his dear Son." (Colossians 1:13) The answer of
   Christ to the question of Judas is all-important. He speaks of the
   blessings of obedience. The truly obedient disciple shall surely know
   the sweetness of fellowship with the Father and the Son, in the light
   and power of the Holy Ghost. "It is not here a question of the love of
   God in sovereign grace to a sinner, but of the Father's dealings with
   His children. Therefore it is in the path of obedience that the
   manifestation of the Father's love and the love of Christ are found."
   Verses 23 -- 26.

   But we must bear in mind, when remarking on the questions or sayings of
   the apostles, that the Holy Ghost was not yet given, because that Jesus
   was not yet glorified. The thoughts, feelings, and expectations of the
   apostles, after that event were altogether changed. Hence we find our
   apostle, like his brother James, styling himself, "Jude, the servant of
   Jesus Christ, and brother of James." He neither calls himself an
   apostle, nor the Lord's brother. This was true humility, and founded on
   a true sense of the altered relations between them and the exalted
   Lord. On the day of Pentecost it was proclaimed, "Therefore let all the
   house of Israel know assuredly, that God hath made that same Jesus,
   whom ye have crucified, both Lord, and Christ."

   Nothing is certainly known of the later history of our apostle. Some
   say that he first preached in Judæa and Galilee, then through Samaria
   into Idumea, and to the cities of Arabia. But towards the end of his
   course Persia was the field of his labours, and the scene of his
   martyrdom.

   From 1 Corinthians 9:5 it may be fairly inferred that he was one of the
   married apostles. "Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as
   well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas?"
   There is a tradition about two of his grandsons, which is both
   interesting and apparently true. It has been handed down by Eusebius
   from Hegesippus, a converted Jew. Domitian, the Emperor, having heard
   that there were some of the line of David, and kindred of Christ still
   alive, moved with jealousy, ordered them to be seized and brought to
   Rome. Two grandsons of Jude were brought before him. They frankly
   confessed that they were of the line of David, and kindred of Christ.
   He asked them about their possessions and estates. They told him they
   had but a few acres of land, out of the fruits of which they paid him
   tribute and maintained themselves. Their hands were examined, and were
   found rough and callous with labour. He then inquired of them
   concerning the kingdom of Christ, and when and where it would come. To
   this they replied, that it was a heavenly and spiritual, not a temporal
   kingdom; and that it would not be manifested till the end of the world.
   The Emperor, being satisfied that they were poor men and harmless,
   dismissed them unbound, and ceased from his general persecution of the
   church. When they returned to Palestine, they were received by the
   church with great affection, as being nearly allied to the Lord, and as
   having nobly confessed His name --His kingdom, power, and glory.

   MATTHIAS --the apostle elected to fill the place of the traitor Judas.
   He was not an apostle of the first election --immediately called and
   chosen by the Lord Himself. It is more than probable that he was one of
   the seventy disciples, and had been a constant attendant upon the Lord
   Jesus during the whole course of His ministry. This was a necessary
   qualification, as declared by Peter, of one who was to be a witness of
   the resurrection. So far as we know, the name of Matthias occurs in no
   other place in the New Testament.

   According to some ancient traditions, he preached the gospel and
   suffered martyrdom in Ethiopia; others believe that it was rather in
   Cappadocia. Thus the great founders of the church were allowed to pass
   away from earth to heaven without a reliable pen to chronicle their
   labours --their last days --their last sayings, or even the
   resting-place of the body. But all are chronicled in heaven, and will
   be held in everlasting remembrance. How marvellous are the ways of God,
   and how unlike they are to the ways of men!

   The manner of this apostle's election was by lot --an ancient Jewish
   custom. The lots were put into the urn, Matthias' name was drawn out,
   and thereby he was the divinely chosen apostle. "And they appointed
   two, Joseph, called Barabas, who was surnamed Justus, and Matthias. And
   they prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of all men,
   show whether of these two thou hast chosen... And they gave forth their
   lots; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with the
   eleven apostles." The solemn mode of casting lots was regarded as a way
   of referring the decision to God. "And Aaron shall cast lots upon the
   two goats; one lot for the Lord, and the other lot for the scapegoat."
   "The lot is cast into the lap; but the whole disposing thereof is of
   the Lord." (Lev. 16:8; Proverbs 16:33) The apostles, it will be
   remembered, had not yet received the gift of the Holy Ghost. The lot
   was never repeated after the day of Pentecost.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [11] See Cave's Lives of the Apostles; Burton's Ecclesiastical History;
   Smith's Dictionary of the Bible.

   [12] See Cave's Life of St. James the Great.

   [13] See Horne's Introduction to the New Testament.
     __________________________________________________________________

Chapter 5

   THE APOSTLE PAUL

   Having briefly sketched the lives of the twelve apostles, we naturally
   come to what may be called the thirteenth --the Apostle Paul.

   In a former chapter [14] we have spoken of the "conversion," and of the
   "apostleship" of Paul. We will now endeavor to trace his wonderful
   path, and note some of the prominent features of his labours. But,
   first of all, we would gather up what we know of him.

   PAUL BEFORE HIS CONVERSION

   It is very evident, from the few hints that we have in the sacred
   narrative of the early life of Paul, that he was formed in a remarkable
   manner by the whole course of his education for what he was to become,
   and for what he was to accomplish. This was of God, who watched over
   the development of that wonderful mind and heart, from the earliest
   period. (Gal. 1:16) Then he was known as "Saul of Tarsus" --this being
   his Jewish name --the name given him by his Jewish parents. Paul was
   his Gentile name; but we will speak of him as "Saul" until the sacred
   historian names him "Paul".

   Tarsus was the capital of Cilicia, and, as Paul says, "no mean city."
   It was renowned as a place of commerce, and as a seat of literature.
   The tutors of both Augustus and Tiberius were men of Tarsus. But it
   will be chiefly famous to all time as the birthplace and early
   residence of the great apostle.

   But, though born in a Gentile city, he was "an Hebrew of the Hebrews."
   His father was of the tribe of Benjamin, and of the sect of the
   Pharisees, but settled at Tarsus. By some means he had acquired the
   Roman franchise, as his son could say to the chief captain, "But I was
   free-born." At Tarsus he learned the trade of tent making. It was a
   wholesome custom among the Jews, to teach their sons some trade, though
   there might be little prospect of their depending upon it for their
   living.

   When Paul made his defence before his countrymen, (Acts 22) he tells
   them that though born in Tarsus, he had been brought up at the feet of
   Gamaliel, and taught according to the perfect manner of the law of the
   fathers." History speaks of Gamaliel as one of the most eminent of the
   doctors of the law; and from the scriptures we learn that he was
   moderate in his opinions, and possessed of much worldly wisdom. But the
   persecuting zeal of the pupil soon appears in strong contrast with the
   master's counsels for toleration.

   At the time of Stephen's martyrdom Saul is spoken of as yet a young
   man, but as consenting to Stephen's death, and as keeping the clothes
   of them that stoned him. His conversion is supposed to have taken place
   about two years after the crucifixion; but the exact date is unknown.

   From Acts 9, we learn that he made no delay, after his conversion, in
   confessing his faith in Christ to those that were around him. "Then was
   Saul certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus: and
   straightway he preached Christ in the synagogue that he is the Son of
   God." This new testimony is especially worthy of notice. Peter had
   proclaimed Him as the exalted Lord and Christ: Paul proclaims Him in
   His higher and personal glory, as the Son of God. But the time for his
   public ministry had not yet come; he had many things to learn, and, led
   of the Spirit, he retires into Arabia, remains there for three years,
   and returns to Damascus. (Galatians 1:17)

   Strengthened and confirmed in the faith during his retirement, he
   preaches with increased boldness, proving that Jesus is the Christ, the
   Son of God. The Jews, his unrelenting enemies henceforward, are stirred
   up against him. And they watched the gates day and night to kill him.
   But the disciples took him by night, and let him down by the wall in a
   basket. (2 Corinthians 11:32 - 33) He then found his way to Jerusalem;
   and through the friendly testimony of Barnabas he found his place among
   the disciples. Wonderful, blessed triumph of sovereign grace!

   SAUL'S FIRST VISIT TO

   JERUSALEM ABOUT A.D. 39

   The apostle is now at Jerusalem --the holy city of his fathers --the
   metropolis of the Jews' religion, and the acknowledged centre of
   Christianity. But now how changed is his own position since he started
   on his memorable journey to Damascus!

   We may here pause for a moment, and notice in passing the hoary city of
   Damascus. It is intimately connected with the conversion, ministry, and
   history of our apostle. Besides, it is conspicuous all through
   scripture.

   Damascus is supposed to be the oldest city in the world. The records of
   Josephus (Ant. 1:6. 4) indicate that Uz, the son of Aram, and grandson
   of Shem founded Damascus. It is first mentioned in scripture in
   connection with Abraham, whose steward was a native of the place: "The
   steward of my house is this Eliezer of Damascus." (Gen. 15:2) It is
   thus a connecting link between the patriarchal age and modern times.
   Its beauty and richness have been proverbial for full four thousand
   years. The kings of Nineveh, Babylon, Persia, Greece, and Rome have
   conquered it, and it has prospered under every dynasty, and outlived
   them all; but it owes its chief luster and its everlasting memorial to
   the name of the Apostle Paul. [15]

   We now return to Jerusalem. After spending fifteen days with Peter and
   James, and reasoning with the Grecians, the brethren "brought him down
   to Cæsarea, and sent him forth to Tarsus. Then had the churches rest
   throughout all Judæa and Galilee and Samaria, and were edified; and
   walking in the fear of the Lord, and in the comfort of the Holy Ghost,
   were multiplied." (Acts 9:26, 31) For the moment the adversary is
   silenced. Peace reigns, through the goodness of God. Persecution has
   accomplished the purposes of His grace. The two great elements of
   blessing --the fear of the Lord, and the comfort of the Holy Ghost
   --prevail in all the assemblies. Walking in the fear of the Lord, and
   in the comfort of the Holy Ghost, they are edified, and their numbers
   greatly increase.

   While Saul was at Tarsus, his native place, the good work of the Lord
   was making great progress at Antioch. Among those that were scattered
   abroad through the persecution which arose about Stephen, there were
   "men of Cyprus and Cyrene, which, when they were come to Antioch, spoke
   unto the Grecians, preaching the Lord Jesus. And the hand of the Lord
   was with them; and a great number believed and turned unto the Lord."
   (Acts 11:19 - 21) A new order of things commences here. Up to this
   time, the gospel had been preached to "none but unto the Jews only."
   When the report of this blessed work of God among the Gentiles reached
   Jerusalem, the church sent Barnabas on a special mission to Antioch.
   "When he came, and had seen the grace of God, he was glad and exhorted
   them all, that with purpose of heart they would cleave unto the Lord.
   For he was a good man, and full of the Holy Ghost and of faith; and
   much people was added unto the Lord."

   As the work increased, Barnabas --no doubt, feeling the need of help
   --thought of Saul, and, led of the Lord, he departed at once in search
   of him. Having found him, he brought him to Antioch; and there they
   laboured together for a "whole year," both in the assemblies of
   believers, and among the people. Barnabas still takes the lead. Hence
   we read of "Barnabas and Saul." Afterwards the order changes, and we
   read of "Paul and Barnabas."

   An opportunity soon occurred for the young converts at Antioch to show
   their affection for their brethren at Jerusalem. A prophet, "named
   Agabus, signified by the Spirit that there should be a great dearth
   throughout all the world; which came to pass in the days of Claudius
   Cæsar. Then the disciples, every man according to his ability,
   determined to send relief unto the brethren which dwelt at Judæa; which
   also they did, and sent it to the elders by the hands of Barnabas and
   Saul."

   SAUL'S SECOND VISIT TO

   JERUSALEM ABOUT A.D. 44

   Charged with this service, Barnabas and Saul go up to Jerusalem. As
   yet, Jerusalem is owned as the centre of the work, though now rapidly
   extending to the Gentiles. But union is preserved, and the link with
   the metropolis is strengthened by means of the collection now sent.
   Nevertheless a new centre, a new commission, a new character of power,
   in connection with the history of the church, now comes before us.
   Barnabas and Saul, having fulfilled their ministry, return again to
   Antioch, bringing with them John, whose surname was Mark.

   Acts 13 opens up before us an entirely new order of things in
   connection with apostolic work, and we shall do well to mark the mighty
   change. The great fact to be noted here is the place that the Holy
   Ghost takes in calling out and sending forth Barnabas and Saul. It is
   no longer Christ upon earth by His personal authority sending forth
   apostles, but the Holy Ghost. "Separate unto me," He says, "Barnabas
   and Saul for the work whereunto I have called them... so they, being
   sent forth by the Holy Ghost, departed unto Seleucia; and from thence
   they sailed to Cyprus." Not, of course, that there could be any change
   as to the authority or power of either the Lord or the Spirit, but
   their mode of action was now changed. The Holy Ghost on earth, in
   connection with a glorified Christ in heaven, now becomes the source
   and power of the work that opens before us, and which is committed to
   Barnabas and Saul. Hence we now come to:

   SAUL'S FIRST MISSIONARY

   JOURNEY ABOUT A.D. 48

   And here, further remark, before setting out with the apostles on their
   journey, how changed everything is. Observe they start, not from the
   old centre, Jerusalem; but from Antioch, a city of the Gentiles. This
   is significant. Jerusalem and the twelve have lost position as to
   outward authority and power. The Holy Ghost calls Barnabas and Saul to
   the work, fits them for it, and sends them forth, without the
   jurisdiction of the twelve.

   It will not be expected that, in papers of such a brief character, we
   can notice the many incidents in Paul's journeys. The reader will find
   them in the Acts and in the Epistles. We purpose merely to trace their
   outline, and to give prominence to certain landmarks, by which the
   reader will be able to trace for himself the various journeying of the
   greatest apostle --the greatest missionary --the greatest labourer that
   ever lived, the blessed Lord excepted. But in the first place, we would
   notice his companions and their starting-point.

   BARNABAS has been for some time the close companion of Saul. He was a
   Levite of the island of Cyprus. He had been early called to follow
   Christ, and "having land, sold it, and brought the money and laid it at
   the apostles' feet." Comparing his liberality with the fine testimony,
   which the Holy Ghost renders to him, he stands before us as a lovely
   and an exquisite character. And, from his early attachment to Saul, and
   from his heartiness in introducing him to the other apostles, we judge
   that he was more frank and larger-hearted, than those who had been
   trained in the narrowness of Judaism; but he lacked in service the
   thoroughness and determination of his companion Saul.

   JOHN MARK was closely related to Barnabas --"his sister's son." (Col.
   4:10) His mother was a certain Mary who dwelt at Jerusalem, and whose
   house seems to have been a meeting place for the apostles and first
   Christians. When Peter was delivered from prison, he went straight to
   "the house of Mary the mother of John whose surname was Mark." (Acts
   12) It is supposed that on this occasion he was converted through
   Peter's means, for he afterwards speaks of him as "Marcus my son." (1
   Peter 1:13)

   From these notices we learn, that he was neither an apostle nor one of
   the seventy --which he had not companied with the blessed Lord during
   His public ministry. But we may suppose he was anxious to work for
   Christ, and so joined Barnabas and Saul; though it afterwards appeared
   that his faith was not equal to the hardships of a missionary life.
   "Now when Paul and his company loosed from Paphos, they came to Perga
   in Pamphylia; and John departing from them returned to Jerusalem."
   (Acts 13:13) Mark is supposed to have written his Gospel about A.D. 63.

   ANTIOCH, the ancient capital of the Seleucidae, was founded by Seleucus
   Nicator about B.C. 300. It was a city only second to Jerusalem in the
   early history of the church. What Jerusalem had hitherto been to the
   Jews, Antioch now became to the Gentiles. It was a central point. From
   this time it occupied a most important place in the propagation of
   Christianity among the heathen. Here the first Gentile church was
   planted. (Acts 11:20, 21) Here the Disciples of Christ were first
   called Christians. (Chap. 11:26) And here our apostle commenced his
   public ministerial work. We now return to the mission.

   Barnabas and Saul, with John Mark as their ministering attendant, are
   thus sent forth by the Holy Ghost. The Jews in virtue of their
   connection with the promises have the gospel first preached to them;
   but the conversion of Sergius Paulus marks, in a special manner, the
   beginning of the work amongst the Gentiles. It also marks a crisis in
   the history of the apostle. Here his name is changed from Saul to Paul;
   and now --save in Jerusalem (Acts 15:12 - 22) --it is no longer
   "Barnabas and Saul," but "Paul and his company." He takes the lead; the
   others are only those who are with Paul. But the scene has also a
   typical character.

   The Pro-consul was evidently a thoughtful, prudent man, and felt the
   need of his soul. He sends for Barnabas and Saul, and desires to hear
   the word of God. But Elymas the sorcerer withstands them. He knew well
   that, if the governor received the truth that Paul preached, he would
   lose his influence at court. He therefore seeks to turn away the deputy
   from the faith. But Paul, in the conscious dignity and power of the
   Holy Ghost, "set his eyes on him," and, in words of the most withering
   indignation, rebuked him in the presence of the governor. "O full of
   all subtilty and all mischief, thou child of the devil, thou enemy of
   all righteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the
   Lord? And now, behold, the hand of the Lord is upon thee, and thou
   shalt be blind, not seeing the sun for a season... Then the deputy,
   when he saw what was done, believed, being astonished at the doctrine
   of the Lord." The mighty power of God accompanies the word of His
   servant, and the sentence pronounced is executed at the moment. The
   deputy is overwhelmed with the moral glory of the scene, and submits to
   the gospel.

   "I do not doubt," says one, "that in this wretched Bar-jesus we see a
   picture of the Jews at the present time, smitten with blindness for a
   season, because jealous of the influence of the gospel. In order to
   fill up the measure of their iniquity, they withstood its being
   preached to the Gentiles. Their condition is judged, their history
   given in the mission of Paul. Opposed to grace and seeking to destroy
   its effect upon the Gentiles --they have been smitten with blindness;
   nevertheless, only for a season." [16]

   During this first mission among the Gentiles, a great and blessed work
   was done. Compare Acts 13 and 14. Many places were visited, churches
   were planted, elders were appointed, the hostility of the Jews
   manifested, and the energy of the Holy Ghost displayed in the power and
   progress of the truth. At Lystra, Christianity was confronted, for the
   first time, with paganism; but in every place the gospel triumphs, and
   the various gifts of Paul as a workman, most blessedly appear. In
   addressing either the Jews who knew the scriptures, or ignorant
   barbarians, or cultivated Greeks, or enraged mobs, he proves himself to
   be a chosen vessel divinely fitted for his great work.

   ANTIOCH IN PISIDIA deserves a special notice from what took place in
   the synagogue. Though there is a strong resemblance in Paul's discourse
   to those of Peter and of Stephen in the earlier chapters of the Acts,
   yet we discover certain touches strictly Pauline in their character.
   His conciliatory style of address, the way he introduces Christ, and
   his bold proclamation of justification by faith alone, may be
   considered as typical of his after addresses and Epistles. None of the
   sacred writers speaks of justification by faith as Paul does. His
   closing appeal has been a favorite gospel text with all preachers in
   all ages. In a few words he states the blessedness of all who receive
   Christ, and the awful doom of those who reject Him; thereby proving
   that there can be no middle or neutral ground, when Christ is in
   question. "Be it known unto you therefore, men and brethren, that
   through this man is preached unto you the forgiveness of sins: and by
   him all that believe are justified from all things, from which ye could
   not be justified by the law of Moses. Beware therefore, lest that come
   upon you, which is spoken of in the prophets: Behold, ye despisers, and
   wonder, and perish: for I work a work in your days, a work which ye
   shall in no wise believe, though a man declare it unto you." (Acts
   13:38 - 41)

   Their mission being fulfilled, they return to Antioch in Syria. When
   the disciples heard what the Lord had done, and that the door of faith
   was opened to the Gentiles, they could only praise and bless His holy
   name. We must now turn for a moment to Jerusalem.

   The effect of Paul's first mission on the disciples at Jerusalem led to
   a great crisis in the history of the church. The jealousy of the
   pharisaic mind was so aroused, that a division between Jerusalem and
   Antioch was threatened at that early period of the church's history.
   But God ruled in grace, and the matter as to Antioch was happily
   settled. But the bigotry of the believing Jews was unquenchable. In the
   church at Jerusalem they still connected with Christianity the
   requirements of the law, and these requirements they sought to impose
   on the believing Gentiles.

   Some of the more strictly Jewish-minded Christians came down to
   Antioch, and assured the Gentiles that, unless they were circumcised
   after the manner of Moses, and kept the law, they could not be saved.
   Paul and Barnabas had no small dissension and disputation with them;
   but as it was too weighty a question to be settled by the apostolic
   authority of Paul, or by a resolution of the church at Antioch, it was
   agreed that a deputation should go up to Jerusalem, and lay the matter
   before the twelve apostles and the elders there. The choice naturally
   fell on Paul and Barnabas, as they had been the most active in the
   propagation of Christianity among the Gentiles. And now we come to:

   PAUL'S THIRD VISIT TO

   JERUSALEM ABOUT A.D. 50

   When they arrived at Jerusalem, they found the same thing, not only in
   the minds of a few restless brethren, but also in the very bosom of the
   church. The source of the trouble was there, not among unbelieving
   Jews, but among those who professed the name of Jesus. "Then rose up
   certain of the sect of the Pharisees which believed, saying, that it
   was needful to circumcise them [the Gentiles], and to command them to
   keep the Law of Moses." This plain statement brought the whole question
   fairly before the assembly, and their important deliberations
   commenced. Acts chapter 15 contains the account of what took place and
   how the question was settled. The apostles, elders, and the whole body
   of the church at Jerusalem were not only present with one accord, but
   took part in the discussion. The apostles neither assumed nor exercised
   exclusive power in the matter. It is usually called "The first Council
   of the Church," but it may also be called the last council of the
   church, which could say, "It seemed good to the Holy Ghost and to us."

   Many, according to modern notions of "essentials, and non-essentials,"
   will no doubt say, that the mere ceremony of circumcising or not
   circumcising a child was rather unimportant. But not so, according to
   the mind of God. It was a vital question. It affected the very
   foundations of Christianity, the deep principles of grace, and the
   whole question of man's relations with God. Paul's Epistle to the
   Galatians is a commentary on the history of this question.

   There was no rite or ceremony that the converted Jew was so unwilling
   to give up as circumcision. It was the sign and seal of his own
   relationship with Jehovah, and of the hereditary blessings of the
   covenant to his children. It has been the opinion of some, in all ages,
   that the church introduced "infant baptism" in order to meet this
   strong Jewish prejudice. But had it been so intended by the Lord, the
   council at Jerusalem was the very place to announce it. It would have
   fully met the difficulty, and settled the question before them, and
   restored peace and unity between the two parent churches. But none of
   the apostles or others alludes to it.

   Before leaving this important and suggestive part of our apostle's
   history, it maybe well just to notice certain facts which he brings out
   in Galatians 2, but which are not mentioned in the Acts. It was on this
   occasion that Paul went up by revelation, and took Titus with him. In
   the Acts we have the outward history of Paul yielding to the motives,
   desires, and objects of men; in the Epistle we have something deeper
   --that which governed the apostle's heart. But God knows how to combine
   these outward circumstances amid the inward guidance of the Spirit.
   Christian liberty or legal bondage was the question at issue: whether
   the Law of Moses --in particular the rite of circumcision --ought to be
   imposed upon the Gentile converts. Paul, led of God, goes up to
   Jerusalem, and takes Titus with him. In the face of the twelve
   apostles, and of the whole church, he brings in Titus who was a Greek,
   and who had not been circumcised. This was a bold step --to introduce a
   Gentile, and uncircumcised, into the very centre of a bigoted Judaism!
   But the apostle went up by revelation. He had positive communications
   from God on the subject. It was the divine way of deciding the
   question, once and forever, between himself and the Judaizing
   Christians. This step was needful, as he says, "Because of false
   brethren unawares brought in, who came in privily to spy out our
   liberty which we have in Christ Jesus, that they might bring us into
   bondage: to whom we gave place by subjection, no, not for an hour; that
   the truth of the gospel might remain with you."

   The apostle, then, having attained his main object, and having
   communicated his gospel to them at Jerusalem, leaves, with Barnabas,
   and returns to the Gentile Christians at Antioch. The two delegates,
   Judas and Silas, bearing the decrees of the council, accompany them.
   When the multitude of the disciples came together and heard the Epistle
   read, they rejoiced and were comforted.

   Thus closed the first apostolic council, and the first apostolic
   controversy. And, from what we learn of these matters in the Acts, we
   might conclude that the division between the Jewish and Gentile
   Christians had been completely healed by the decision of the assembly;
   but we know from the Epistles, that the opposition of the Judaizing
   party, against the liberty of Gentile Christians, never even slumbered.
   It soon broke out afresh, and Paul had constantly to meet it and to
   contend against it.

   PAUL'S SECOND MISSIONARY

   JOURNEY ABOUT A.D. 51

   After Paul and Barnabas had spent some time with the church at Antioch,
   another missionary journey was proposed. "Let us go again," said Paul,
   "and visit our brethren in every city where we have preached the word
   of the Lord and see how they do. And Barnabas determined to take with
   them John whose surname was Mark. But Paul thought it not good to take
   him with them, who departed from them from Pamphylia, and went not with
   them to the work. And the contention was so sharp between them, that
   they departed asunder one from the other: and so Barnabas took Mark and
   sailed unto Cyprus; and Paul chose Silas and departed, being
   recommended by the brethren unto the grace of God. And he went through
   Syria and Cilicia, confirming the churches." (Acts 15:36 - 41)

   With a journey so important, so full of trials, and so requiring
   courage and steadfastness --before the mind of our apostle --he could
   not trust Mark as a companion; he could not easily excuse one whose
   home attachments rendered him unfaithful in the Lord's service. Paul
   himself gave up all personal considerations and feelings when the work
   of Christ was concerned, and he wished others to do the same. Natural
   affection on this occasion may have betrayed Barnabas into again
   pressing his nephew into the service; but a severe earnestness
   characterised Paul. The ties of natural relationship and human
   attachments still had great influence over the mild Christian character
   of Barnabas. This is evident from his conduct at Antioch on the
   occasion of Peter's weak compliance with the Judaizers from Jerusalem.
   (Gal. 2) The spread of the gospel in the hostile world was too sacred
   in Paul's eyes to admit of experiments. Mark had preferred Jerusalem to
   the work, but Silas preferred the work to Jerusalem. This decided Paul
   as to his choice; though, no doubt, the Spirit guided him.

   Barnabas takes Mark his kinsman, and sails to Cyprus his native
   country. And here we part with Barnabas, that beloved saint and
   precious servant of Christ! His name is not again mentioned in the
   Acts. These words "kinsman" and "native country" must be left to speak
   for themselves to the heart of every disciple who reads these pages.
   Were we meditating on this painful scene, in place of giving a mere
   outline of a great history, we might say much on the subject; but we
   leave it with two happy reflections:

   1) That it was overruled for blessing to the heathen; the waters of
   life now flow in two streams in place of one. This, however, is God's
   goodness, and gives no sanction to the divisions of Christians.

   2) That Paul afterwards speaks of Barnabas with entire affection; and
   desires that Mark should come to him, having found him profitable for
   the ministry. (2 Corinthians 9:6, and 2 Timothy 4:11) We have no doubt
   that Paul's faithfulness was made a blessing to them both. But the
   honey of human affections can never be accepted on the altar of God.

   Having been recommended by the brethren unto the grace of God, they
   start on their journey. All is beautifully simple. No parade is made by
   their friends in seeing them off, and no great promises are made by
   them, as to what they were determined to do. "Let us go again and visit
   our brethren," are the few, simple, unpretending words, which lead to
   Paul's second and great missionary journey. But the master was thinking
   of His servants and providing for them. They had not to go far before
   finding a new companion in Timotheus of Lystra; and one who was to
   supply the void caused by the difference with Barnabas. If Paul lost
   the fellowship of Barnabas as a friend and brother, he found in
   Timothy, as his own son in the faith, sympathy and a fellowship, which
   only closed with the apostle's life. "Him would Paul have to go forth
   with him," but before they go, Paul "circumcised him because of the
   Jews which were in those quarters; for they knew all that his father
   was a Greek." (Acts 16:3) Paul, on this occasion, stoops to the
   prejudice of the Jews, and circumcises Timothy to set it aside.

   TIMOTHEUS, or Timothy, was the son of one of those mixed marriages,
   which have ever been strongly condemned both in the Old and in the New
   Testament. His father was a Gentile, but his name is never mentioned;
   his mother was a pious Jewess. From the absence of any reference to the
   father, either in the Acts or in the Epistles, it has been supposed
   that he may have died soon after the child was born. Timothy was
   evidently left in infancy to the sole care of his mother Eunice and his
   grandmother Lois, who taught him from a child to know the Holy
   Scriptures. And from the many allusions in Paul's Epistles to the
   tenderness, the sensitiveness, and the tears of his beloved son in the
   faith, we may believe that he retained through life the early
   impressions of that gentle, loving, holy, household. Paul's wonderful
   love for Timothy, and his tender recollections of his home at Lystra,
   and his early training there, have dictated some of the most touching
   passages in the writings of the great apostle. When an old man --in
   prison, in want, and martyrdom before him --he writes, "To Timothy, my
   dearly beloved son: grace, mercy, and peace, from God the Father and
   Christ Jesus our Lord. I thank God, whom I serve from my forefathers
   with pure conscience, that without ceasing I have remembrance of thee
   in my prayers night and day: greatly desiring to see thee, being
   mindful of thy tears, that I maybe filled with joy; when I call to
   remembrance the unfeigned faith that is in thee, which dwelt first in
   thy grandmother Lois, and thy mother Eunice: and I am persuaded that in
   thee also." (2 Tim, 1:2 - 5) He urges, and repeats his urgent
   invitation to Timothy to come and see him. "Do thy diligence to come
   shortly unto me" --"to come before winter." We may be permitted to
   believe, that a son so tenderly loved, was allowed to arrive in time to
   soothe the last hours of his father in Christ, to receive his last
   counsel and blessing, and to witness him finish his course with joy.

   SILAS, or Silvanus, first comes before us as a teacher in the church at
   Jerusalem; and probably he was both a Hellenist and a Roman citizen
   like Paul himself. (Acts 16:37) He was appointed as a delegate to
   accompany Paul and Barnabas on their return to Antioch with the decrees
   of the council. But as many details both in the life of Timothy and of
   Silas will naturally come before us in tracing the path of the apostle,
   we need say nothing more of either at present. We will now proceed with
   the journey.

   Paul and Silas, with their new companion, go through the cities,
   enjoining them to keep the decrees ordained by the apostles and elders
   at Jerusalem. The decrees were left with the churches, so that the Jews
   had the decision of Jerusalem itself that the law was not binding on
   the Gentiles. After visiting and confirming the churches already
   planted in Syria and Cilicia, they proceeded to Phrygia and Galatia.
   They travelled "throughout Phrygia and the region of Galatia." Here we
   pause for a moment and wonder as we transcribe such words as these,
   "throughout Phrygia and the region of Galatia." Phrygia and Galatia
   were not towns merely, but provinces, or large districts of country.
   And yet the sacred historian only uses these few words in recording the
   great work done there. How different is the condensed energy of the
   Spirit, from the inflated style of man! We learn from Neander's
   history, that in Phrygia alone, in the sixth century, there were
   sixty-two towns. And it would appear that Paul and those who were with
   him had gone through all then existing.

   The same remarks as to labour would apply to Galatia. And we learn from
   Paul's Epistle to the Galatians, that at this very time he was
   suffering in body. "Ye know how through infirmity of the flesh I
   preached the gospel unto you at the first." But the power of his
   preaching so strikingly contrasted with the infirmity of his flesh,
   that the Galatians were moved even to extravagance in sympathy and
   generous feeling. "And my temptation which was in my flesh ye despised
   not, nor rejected; but received me as an angel of God, even as Christ
   Jesus. Where is then the blessedness ye spake of?' for I bear you
   record, that, if it had been possible, ye would have plucked out your
   own eyes and have given them to me." (Chap. 4:13 - 15) We learn from
   history that the Galatians were Celtic in their origin, impulsive and
   changeable in their character. [17] The whole Epistle is a sorrowful
   illustration of their instability, and of the sad effects of the
   Judaizing element amongst them. "I marvel," says Paul, "that ye are so
   soon removed from him that called you into the grace of Christ unto
   another gospel, which is not another; but there be some that trouble
   you, and would pervert the gospel of Christ." But now, we return to the
   history in the Acts.

   The character and effects of Paul's ministry, as related in chapters 16
   - 20, are truly marvellous. They must ever stand alone on the page of
   all history. Every servant of Christ, and especially the preacher,
   should study them most carefully and read them frequently. "The vessel
   of the Spirit," as one has beautifully said, "shines with a heavenly
   light throughout the whole work of the gospel; he condescends at
   Jerusalem; thunders in Galatia when souls are being perverted; leads
   the disciples to decide for the liberty of the Gentiles, and uses all
   liberty himself to be as a Jew to the Jews, and as without law to those
   who had no law, but always subject to Christ. He was also void of
   offence.' Nothing within hindered his communion with God, whence he
   drew his strength to be faithful among men. He could say --and
   none-other but he --Be ye imitators of me as I am of Christ.' Thus also
   he could say, I endure all things for the elect's sake, that they may
   obtain the salvation which is in Christ Jesus with eternal glory.'"
   [18]

   The way of the Spirit with the apostle in these chapters is also
   remarkable. He alone directs him in his wonderful course, and sustains
   him amidst many trials and opposing circumstances. For example, He
   forbids Paul to preach the word in Asia. He will not suffer him to go
   into Bithynia, but directs him by a vision of the night to go into
   Macedonia. "And a vision appeared to Paul in the night. There stood a
   man of Macedonia, and prayed him, saying, Come over into Macedonia and
   help us. And after he had seen the vision, immediately we endeavored to
   go into Macedonia, assuredly gathering that the Lord had called us for
   to preach the gospel unto them. Therefore, loosing from Troas, we came
   with a straight course to Samothracia, and the next day to Neapolis.
   And from thence to Philippi, which is the chief city of that part of
   Macedonia, and a colony." (Acts, Chapter 16:9 - 12)

   PAUL CARRIES THE

   GOSPEL INTO EUROPE

   This marks a distinct epoch in the history of the church --the history
   of Paul, and the progress of Christianity. Paul and his companions now
   carry the gospel into Europe. And here we may be forgiven if we rest
   for a moment and recall the many interesting historical associations of
   Macedonian conquerors and conquests; and to dwell a little on the plain
   of Philippi, famous also in Roman history. Here the great struggle
   between the republic and the empire was terminated. To commemorate that
   event, Augustus founded a colony at Philippi. This was the first city
   at which Paul arrived on his entrance into Europe. It is called "the
   chief city of that part of Macedonia, and a colony." A Roman colony, we
   are told, was characteristically a miniature resemblance of Rome; and
   Philippi was more fit than any other in the empire to be considered the
   representative of imperial Rome.

   To many of our young and inquiring readers, this short digression, we
   feel sure, will not be uninteresting. Besides, knowledge of such
   histories is useful to the student of prophecy, as they are the
   fulfillment of Daniel's visions, especially of chapter 7. The city of
   Philippi was itself the monument of the rising power of Greece that was
   to crush the declining power of Persia. Alexander the Great, son of
   Philip, was the conqueror of the great king Darius; when the "Leopard"
   of Greece overcame the "Bear" of Persia. [19]

   In looking back from the time that Paul sailed from Asia to Europe,
   nearly four hundred years had passed away since Alexander sailed from
   Europe to Asia. But how different their motives and their objects
   --their conflicts and their victories! The enthusiasm of Alexander was
   aroused by the recollection of his great ancestors, and by his
   determination to overthrow the great dynasties of the East; but though
   unconsciously and unintentionally, he was accomplishing the purposes of
   God. Paul had girded on his armor for another purpose, and to win
   greater and more enduring victories. He was sent forth by the Holy
   Spirit, not only to subdue the West, but also to bring the whole world
   into captivity to the obedience of Christ. Christianity is not for one
   nation or one people only, but for man universally, even as Paul
   himself expresses it in Colossians 1, "For every creature which is
   under heaven." This is the mission of the gospel, and this is its
   sphere.

   But there is another thing we must notice here before proceeding with
   Paul's journey.

   LUKE, the "beloved physician," historian, and evangelist, appears to
   have joined Paul at this particular time. From verse 10 he writes in
   the first person plural: "We endeavored to go into Macedonia." It is
   supposed that he was a Gentile by birth and converted at Antioch. He
   seems to have remained the faithful companion of the apostle till the
   close of his labours and his afflictions. (2 Timothy 4:11)

   EFFECT OF PAUL'S

   PREACHING AT PHILIPPI

   The number of Jews at Philippi appears to have been small, as there was
   no synagogue in the place. But the apostle, as usual, goes first to
   them, even when it is only a few women come together by the riverside.
   (Acts 16) Paul preaches to them, Lydia is converted, the door is
   opened, and others also believe. It was in this unpretending place, and
   to those few pious women, that the gospel was first preached in Europe,
   and the first household baptised. [20] But its quiet beginnings, and
   its peaceful triumphs, were soon to be disturbed by the malice of Satan
   and the covetousness of man. The gospel was not to be advanced in the
   midst of heathenism with ease and comfort, but with great opposition
   and suffering.

   As the apostle and his companion were going to the oratory, or place of
   prayer, a damsel possessed of an evil spirit followed them, and cried,
   saying, "These men are the servants of the most high God, which show
   unto us the way of salvation." At first, Paul took no notice of her. He
   went on with his own blessed work of preaching Christ, and winning
   souls for Him. But the poor possessed slave persisted in following
   them, and in uttering the same exclamation. It was a malicious attempt
   of the enemy to hinder the work of God by bearing a testimony to the
   ministers of the word. It will be observed that she does not bear
   testimony to "Jesus," or to the "Lord," but to His "servants," and to
   "the most high God." But Paul did not want a testimony to himself, or a
   testimony from an evil spirit, and he, "being grieved, turned and said
   to the spirit, I command thee in the name of Jesus Christ to come out
   of her. And he came out the same hour."

   As the damsel could no longer practice her arts of soothsaying, her
   masters saw themselves deprived of the gains, which they had hitherto
   derived from that source. Enraged at the loss of their property, and
   moving the multitude to side with them, they seized Paul and Silas and
   dragged them before the magistrates. As they were well aware that they
   had no real charge to bring against them, they raised the old cry of
   "troubling the peace" --that they were attempting to introduce Jewish
   practices into the Roman colony, and to teach customs which were
   contrary to the Roman laws. And, as it has often been since, the
   clamour of the multitude was accepted in the place of evidence,
   examination, and deliberation. The magistrates, without further
   inquiry, commanded them to be publicly scourged and cast into prison.
   And thus it was; these blessed servants of God, wounded, bleeding, and
   faint, were handed over to a cruel jailor to keep them safely, and he
   added to their sufferings by making their feet fast in the stocks. But
   in place of Paul and Silas being depressed by their bodily sufferings
   and the gloomy walls of a prison, they rejoiced that they were counted
   worthy to suffer shame and pain for the sake of Christ; and in place of
   the silence of midnight being broken with the sighs and groans of the
   prisoners, they "prayed and sang praises to God: and the prisoners
   heard them."

   If Satan is not without resources to carry on his evil work, God is not
   without resources to carry on His good work. He now makes use of all
   that has happened to direct the progress of the work of the gospel, and
   to accomplish the purposes of His love. The jailor is to be converted,
   the church is to be gathered out, and a witness set up for the Lord
   Jesus Christ, in the very stronghold of heathenism. At midnight, while
   Paul and Silas were singing, and the prisoners listening to the unusual
   sound, there was a great earthquake. God enters the scene in majesty
   and grace. He utters His voice, and the earth trembles: the prison
   walls are shaken; the doors fly open, and every man's fetters fall off.
   And now, what are chains and prisons? --what are Roman legions? --what
   is the whole power of the enemy? God's voice is heard in the storm: but
   the violence of the tempest is succeeded by the still small voice of
   the gospel and the peace of heaven.

   Awakened in a moment by the earthquake, the jailor's first thoughts
   were of his prisoners. Alarmed at seeing the prison doors open, and
   supposing that the prisoners were fled, he drew his sword and would
   have killed himself. "But Paul cried with a loud voice saying, Do
   thyself no harm, for we are all here." These words of love broke the
   jailor's heart. The calm serenity of Paul and Silas --their refusing to
   avail themselves of the opportunity to escape --their tender concern
   for him --all combined to make them appear in the eyes of the
   astonished jailor, as beings of a higher order. He laid aside his
   sword, called for a light, sprang into the prison; and, trembling, fell
   down at the apostle's feet. His conscience was now reached, his heart
   was broken, and there was something like the violence of an earthquake
   agitating his whole soul. He takes the place of a lost sinner, and
   cries, "Sirs, what must I do to be saved?" He does not say, like the
   lawyer in Luke 10, "Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?"
   It was no question with the jailor of doing something for life, but of
   salvation for the lost. The lawyer, like many others, did not know
   himself as a lost sinner; therefore he does not speak about salvation.

   In reply to the most important inquiry that human lips can ever make,
   "What must I do to be saved?" the apostle directs the mind of the
   jailor to Christ --"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be
   saved, and thy house." God gave the blessing, and the whole house
   believed, rejoiced, and were baptised. And now all is changed; the
   jailor takes the prisoners into his house --his cruelty is changed into
   love, sympathy, and hospitality. In the same hour of the night he
   washed their stripes --set meat before them --rejoiced, believing in
   God with his entire house. What an eventful night! What a change in a
   few hours! and what a joyful morning dawned on that happy house! The
   Lord be praised!

   Like Darius of old, the magistrates appear to have been disturbed
   during the night. The news of the earthquake might have reached them,
   or that Paul and Silas were Romans. But as soon as it was day, they
   sent word to the jailor to "let those men go." He immediately made
   known the order to Paul and Silas, and wished them to depart in peace.
   But Paul refused to accept his liberty without some public
   acknowledgment of the wrong he had suffered. He also now made known the
   fact that he and Silas were Roman citizens. The famous words of Cicero
   had passed into a proverb, and had immense weight everywhere: "To bind
   a Roman citizen is an outrage, to scourge him is a crime." The
   magistrates had evidently violated the Roman laws, but Paul only
   demanded that, as they had been publicly treated as guilty, the
   magistrates should come and publicly declare that they were innocent.
   This they readily did, seeing what wrong they had done. "And they came
   and besought them, and brought them out, and desired them to depart out
   of the city." The apostles readily complied with the magistrates'
   request, left the prison, and openly entered the house of Lydia; and
   when they had seen the brethren, they comforted them and departed. [21]

   We would only further add before leaving this memorable chapter, that
   it is very pleasant to find, in Paul's Epistle to the Philippians, the
   proofs of an attachment which bound them together, and which continued
   from "the first day" even until Paul's imprisonment at Rome. His
   affection for his beloved Philippians was wonderful. He addressed them
   as --"my brethren dearly beloved and longed for, my joy and crown, so
   stand fast in the Lord, my dearly beloved." And he acknowledges, with
   no small joy, their unwearied fellowship with him in the gospel, and
   the many practical proofs of their loving care and tender sympathy for
   himself. As early as his residence at Thessalonica they thought of his
   need. "For even in Thessalonica ye sent once and again unto my
   necessity." (Philippians 4:15 - 19)

   PAUL AT THESSALONICA AND BEREA

   Paul and Silas now directed their course to Thessalonica. Timothy and
   Luke appear to have remained behind in Philippi for a short time.
   Having passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, Paul and Silas arrived
   at Thessalonica. Here they found a synagogue. It was a commercial town
   of great importance, where many Jews resided. "Paul, as his manner was,
   went in unto them, and three Sabbath days reasoned with them out of the
   scriptures." His preaching touched the hearts of many and a great
   multitude of devout Greeks, and women of high station believed. But
   Paul's old enemy again appears. "The Jews which believed not and being
   moved with envy, took unto them certain lewd fellows of the baser sort,
   and gathered a company, and set all the city on an uproar, and
   assaulted the house of Jason, and sought to bring them out unto the
   people. And when they found them not, they drew Jason and certain
   brethren unto the rulers of the city, crying, "These that have turned
   the world upside down are come hither also; whom Jason hath received:
   and these all do contrary to the decrees of Cæsar, saying that there is
   another king, one Jesus." These verses may suffice to give us the
   character of the universal enmity of the Jews against the gospel and
   against Paul its chief minister.

   The apostle had evidently preached to the Thessalonians the truth
   respecting the exaltation of Christ, and His coming again in glory:
   "saying that there is another king, one Jesus." This could explain the
   constant allusion to "the coming of the Lord," and to "the day of the
   Lord," in Paul's Epistles to that church. From what Paul says in his
   first Epistle we learn that his labours were most abundant and greatly
   owned and blessed of the Lord to many souls. (1 Thessalonians 1:9, 10;
   and 2:10, 11)

   The apostle now proceeded to Berea. Here the Jews were nobler. They
   examined what they heard by the word of God. There was great blessing
   here also. Many believed, but the Jews, like hunters after their prey,
   hastened from Thessalonica to Berea, and raised a tumult, which forced
   Paul to leave the place almost immediately. Accompanied by some of the
   Berean converts, he directed his course to Athens. Silas and Timotheus
   were left behind.

   PAUL'S VISIT TO ATHENS

   The appearance of the apostle in Athens is an event in his history of
   great importance. It was, in some respects, the capital of the world,
   and the seat of Grecian culture and philosophy, but it was also the
   central point of superstition and idolatry.

   It is very interesting to observe, that the apostle was in no haste to
   enter upon his work here. He allowed time for reflection. Deep
   thoughts, and how to weigh up everything in the presence of God, and in
   the light of the death and resurrection of Christ, filled his mind. It
   was his first intention to wait for the arrival of Silas and Timotheus.
   He had sent back a message to Berea, that they were to come to him with
   all speed. But when he saw himself surrounded with temples, and altars,
   and statues, and idolatrous worship, he could keep silence no longer.
   As usual, he begins with the Jews, but also disputes daily with the
   philosophers in the market place. Christianity and paganism thus openly
   confront each other; and, be it observed, the apostle of Christianity
   was alone in Athens; but the place swarmed with the apostles of
   paganism; and so numerous were the objects of worship, that a satirist
   observed, "It is easier to find a god than a man in Athens."

   Some scornfully derided what they heard; others listened and wished to
   hear more. "Then certain philosophers of the Epicureans and of the
   Stoicks encountered him. And some said; What will this babbler say?'
   others said, He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods;' because
   he preached unto them Jesus, and the resurrection." Thus we learn what
   Paul in his daily conversation had been pressing on the attention of
   the people, and the different classes of philosophers. It was "Jesus,
   and the resurrection." These words had made the greatest impression,
   and remained the most distinctly in their minds. What a new thing, and
   what a blessed reality for souls! The Person of Christ; not a theory:
   the fact of the resurrection; not a gloomy uncertainty as to the
   future. The minister of Christ lays bare to the learned Athenians their
   fearful condition in the sight of the true God. Nevertheless, they
   sought to have a fuller and more deliberate exposition of these
   mysterious subjects, and they brought Paul unto Areopagus.

   This place, we are told, was the most convenient and appropriate for a
   public address. The most solemn court of justice had sat from time
   immemorial on the hill of Areopagus. The judges sat in the open air,
   upon seats hewn out in the rock. On this spot many solemn questions had
   been discussed, and many solemn cases decided: beginning with the
   legendary trial of Mars, which gave to the place the name of "Mars'
   hill."

   It was in this scene that Paul addressed the multitude. There is no
   moment in the apostle's history, or in the history of the first
   planting of Christianity, more deeply interesting or better known than
   this. Inspired by feelings for the honour of God, and filled with the
   knowledge of man's condition in the light of the cross, what must he
   have felt as he stood on Mars' hill? Wherever he turned his eyes, the
   signs of idolatry in its thousand forms rose up before him. He might
   have been betrayed, under the circumstances, into speaking strongly;
   but he mastered his feelings, and refrained from intemperate language.
   Considering the fervency of his spirit, and the greatness of his zeal
   for truth, it was a remarkable instance of self-denial and
   self-command. But his Lord and Master was with him, though to the human
   eye he stood alone before the Athenians, and the many foreigners who
   flocked to that university of the world.

   For wisdom, prudence, sound reasoning, and consummate skill, Paul's
   address stands alone in the annals of mankind. He did not begin by
   attacking their false gods, or by denouncing their religion as a
   satanic delusion, and the object of his utter detestation. Zeal without
   proper knowledge might have done so, and would have been pleased with
   its faithfulness, but in the address before us we have an example of
   the best way of approaching the minds and hearts of ignorant and
   prejudiced persons in every age. May the Lord give wisdom to all His
   servants to follow it!

   His opening words are both winning and reproving. "Ye men of Athens, I
   perceive that in all things ye are too superstitious." He thus begins
   by acknowledging that they had religious feelings, but that they were
   wrongly directed; and then speaks of himself as one who was ready to
   lead them to the knowledge of the true God. "Whom therefore ye
   ignorantly worship, him declare I unto you." He wisely selects for his
   text, the inscription, "To the unknown God." This gives him an
   opportunity to commence at the lowest step in the ladder of truth. He
   speaks of the oneness of God the Creator, and the relationship of man
   to Him. Paul soon leaves the argument against idolatry, and proceeds to
   preach the gospel. And yet, he is careful not to introduce the name of
   Jesus in his public address. He had done so fully in his more private
   ministrations: but, being now surrounded by the disciples and admirers
   of such names as Socrates, Plato, Zeno and Epicurus, he sacredly guards
   the holy name of Jesus from the risk of a comparison with such. He well
   knew that the name of the lowly Jesus of Nazareth was "to the Greeks
   foolishness." Nevertheless it is easily seen that towards the close of
   his address, the attention of the whole audience is concentrated on the
   man Christ Jesus, though His name is not mentioned in the whole speech.
   Thus he proceeds: "And the times of this ignorance God winked at, but
   now commandeth all men everywhere to repent: because he hath appointed
   a day, in the which he will judge the world in righteousness by that
   man whom he hath ordained; whereof he hath given assurance unto all
   men, in that he hath raised him from the dead." Here the patience of
   his audience failed --his discourse was interrupted. But, the last
   impression left on their minds was one of eternal weight and
   importance. The inspired apostle addressed himself to the consciences,
   not to the intellectual curiosity, of the philosophers. The mention of
   the resurrection of the dead, and the judgment of the world, with such
   commanding power and authority, could not fail to trouble these proud
   and self-indulgent men. The essential principle, or the highest aim of
   the Epicurean philosopher, was to gratify himself; that of the Stoic,
   was a proud indifference to good and evil, pleasure and pain.

   Need we wonder then, that this remarkable assembly should have broken
   up, amidst the scornful derision of some, and the icy indifference of
   others? But, in spite of all, Christianity had gained its first and
   noble victory over idolatry; and, whatever may have been the immediate
   results of Paul's speech, we know it has been blessed to many ever
   since, and that it shall yet bring forth much fruit in many souls, and
   continue to bear fruit to the glory of God for ever and ever.

   Paul now departs from among them. He does not appear to have been
   driven away by any tumult or persecution. The blessed Lord gave him to
   taste His own joy, and the joy of angels over penitent sinners; "Among
   the which was Dionysius the Areopagite, and a woman named Damaris, and
   others with them." But in the military city of Philippi, and the
   mercantile cities of Thessalonica and Corinth, the number of
   conversions seems to have been much greater than in the highly educated
   and polished city of Athens. This is deeply humbling to the pride of
   man, and to the boasted powers of the human mind. One Epistle was
   written to the Philippians, two to the Thessalonians, and two to the
   Corinthians: but we possess no letter written by Paul to the Athenians,
   and we do not read that he ever again visited Athens.

   PAUL'S VISIT TO CORINTH

   The connection of Corinth with the history, teaching, and writings of
   our apostle is almost as intimate and important as either Jerusalem or
   Antioch. It may be considered as his European centre. Here God had
   "much people;" and here Paul "continued a year and six months, teaching
   the word of God among them." It was also when at Corinth that he wrote
   his first apostolic letters --THE TWO EPISTLES TO THE THESSOLONIANS.

   CORINTH, the Roman capital of Greece, was a large mercantile city, in
   immediate connection with Rome and the west of the Mediterranean, with
   Thessalonica and Ephesus on the Aegean, with Antioch and Alexandria in
   the East. Thus by means of its two noted harbours, it received the
   ships of both Eastern and Western Seas. [22]

   Paul appears to have travelled alone to Corinth. If Timotheus came to
   him when at Athens (1 Thess. 3:1), he was sent back again to
   Thessalonica; which place, as we shall soon see, was much on the
   apostle's heart at this time. Soon after his arrival he unexpectedly
   found two friends and fellow labourers in Aquila and his wife
   Priscilla. At this particular time there must have been a greater
   number of Jews in Corinth than usual, "because that Claudius had
   commanded all Jews to depart from Rome." The Lord thus used the
   banishment of Aquila and Priscilla to provide a lodging for His lonely
   servant. They were of his own country --of his own trade --of his own
   heart and spirit. And being "of the same craft, he abode with them, and
   wrought; for by their occupation they were tent makers." (Acts 18)

   Most gracious, and marvellous too, are the ways of the Lord with His
   servant. In a city of wealth and commerce, surrounded by native Greeks,
   Roman colonists, and Jews from all quarters, he quietly works at his
   own trade that he may be burdensome to none of them. Here we have at
   any rate one example of the deepest and loftiest spirituality, combined
   with diligent labour in the common things of this life. What an
   example! and what a lesson! His daily toil was no hindrance to his
   communion with God. None ever knew so well, or felt so deeply, the
   value of the gospel he carried with him: the issues of life and death
   were bound up with it; and yet he could give himself up to ordinary
   labour. But this he did, as readily as preaching, for the Lord and for
   His saints. He frequently refers to this in his Epistles, and speaks of
   it as one of his privileges. "And in all things I have kept myself from
   being burdensome unto you, and so will I keep myself. As the truth of
   Christ is in me, no man shall stop me of this boasting in the regions
   of Achaia." [23] (2 Cor. 9:7 - 12)

   There is another thing connected with this feature of the apostle's
   course, which adds great interest to it. It is generally believed that
   he wrote his two epistles to the Thessalonians about this time; and
   some think the Epistle to the Galatians also. These are still before us
   as the true witnesses of his nearness to God and communion with Him,
   while he "laboured working with his own hands." But the Sabbath of rest
   comes, the workshop is closed, and Paul goes to the synagogue. This was
   his habit. "And he reasoned in the synagogue every Sabbath, and
   persuaded both the Jews and the Greeks." But while Paul was thus
   employed, weekdays and the Sabbath day, Silas and Timotheus arrived
   from Macedonia. It is evident that they brought some assistance with
   them, which would meet the apostle's need at the time, and relieve him
   from such constant labour with his hands.

   The coming of Silas and Timotheus seems to have encouraged and
   strengthened the apostle. His zeal and energy in the gospel are
   evidently increased. He "was pressed in the spirit, and testified to
   the Jews that Jesus was Christ;" but they opposed his doctrine and
   blasphemed. This leads Paul to take his course with great boldness and
   decision. He shakes his raiment, in token of being pure from their
   blood, and declares that now he turns to the Gentiles. In all this he
   was led of God, and acted according to His mind. So long as it was
   possible, he preached in the synagogue; but when he could no longer go
   there, he was compelled to use the most convenient place he could find.
   At Ephesus, he preached in the school of one Tyrannus: at Rome, he
   "dwelt two whole years in his own hired house;" and here, in Corinth, a
   proselyte, named Justus, opened his house to the rejected apostle.

   At this particular crisis in the apostle's history, he was favoured
   with another special revelation from the Lord Himself, "Then spake the
   Lord to Paul in the night by a vision, Be not afraid, but speak and
   hold not thy peace. For I am with thee, and no man shall set on thee to
   hurt thee; for I have much people in this city. And he continued, there
   a year and six months, teaching the word of God among them." But again
   his unrelenting enemies are astir. The great success of the gospel
   among the heathen excited the rage of the Jews against Paul; and they
   sought to use the coming of Gallio, a new governor, to accomplish their
   wicked intentions.

   GALLIO was the brother of Seneca the philosopher, and, like him, given
   to much learning. He was wise, fair, and tolerant as a governor, though
   contemptuous in his treatment of sacred things. But the Lord, who was
   with His servant as He had said, used the unbelieving indifference of
   Gallio to defeat the malicious designs of the Jews, and to turn their
   false accusations against themselves. As they were frustrated in their
   evil purposes, the apostle had greater liberty, and less annoyance, in
   carrying on the work of the gospel. Its blessed fruits were soon
   manifesting throughout the whole province of Achaia. (1 Thessalonians
   1:8, 9)

   PAUL'S PASSING VISIT TO EPHESUS

   The time had now come when Paul thought it right to leave Corinth and
   revisit Jerusalem. He had a great desire to be at the coming feast. But
   before his departure, he took a solemn farewell of the young assembly,
   promising (the Lord willing) to return.

   Accompanied by Aquila and Priscilla, he leaves Corinth in peace. But
   when at the harbour before sailing, a ceremony was performed which has
   given rise to much discussion. Paul, being under a vow, shaves his head
   at Cenchrea. In his own mind, and as led by the Spirit, we feel sure
   that he was far above and beyond a religion of feasts and vows; but he
   stooped in grace to the customs of his nation. To the Jew he becomes a
   Jew. Their constant opposition to his doctrine, and their violent
   persecution of himself, never weakened his affections for his beloved
   people: surely this was of God. While he sought in the energy of the
   Spirit to preach the gospel to the Gentiles, he never forgot, in
   faithfulness to the word of God, to preach to the Jews first. He thus
   stands before us, as the bright expression of God's grace to the
   Gentiles, and of his lingering affections towards the Jews. The
   missionary band lands at Ephesus. Paul goes to the synagogue and
   reasons with the Jews. They seem inclined to hear him, but he has a
   strong desire to go up to Jerusalem, and keep the approaching feast. So
   he "bade them farewell, saying, I must by all means keep this feast
   that cometh in Jerusalem; but I will return again unto you, if God
   will. And he sailed from Ephesus."

   PAUL'S FOURTH VISIT TO JERUSALEM

   The sacred historian does not supply us with any information as to what
   occurred in Jerusalem on this occasion. We are merely told that when
   Paul had "gone up and, saluted the church, he went down to Antioch."
   But his intense desire to pay this visit may assure us of its great
   importance. He may have felt that the time had come when the Jewish
   Christians, assembled at the feast, should hear a full account of the
   reception of the gospel among the Gentiles. Roman colonies and Greek
   capitals had been visited, and a great work of God had been
   accomplished. All this would be perfectly natural and right, but we
   need not seek to remove the veil, which the Holy Ghost has drawn over
   this visit.

   Paul goes down from Jerusalem to Antioch, visiting all the assemblies
   he had first formed; and thus, as it were, binds his work together
   --Antioch and Jerusalem. "So far as we know, Paul's visit to Antioch
   was his last. We have already seen how new centres of Christian life
   had been established by him in the Greek cities of the Aegean. The
   course of the gospel is further and further towards the West, and the
   inspired part of the apostle's biography, after a short period of deep
   interest in Judea, finally centres in Rome."

   THE RETURN OF PAUL TO ANTIOCH

   After a journey which had extended over the space of three or four
   years, our apostle returns to Antioch. He had travelled over a wide
   circuit, and disseminated Christianity in many flourishing and populous
   cities, and almost entirely by his own exertions. If the reader would
   keep up his interest in Paul's history, he must mark distinctly and
   keep clearly before him the great epochs in Paul's life, and the main
   points in his different journeys. But before starting with Paul on his
   third missionary journey, it may be well to notice another great
   preacher of the gospel, who suddenly comes before us just at this time,
   and whose name, next to that of the apostle, is perhaps the most
   important in the early history of the church.

   APOLLOS was a Jew by birth --a native of Alexandria. He was "an
   eloquent man, and mighty in the scriptures; but knowing only the
   baptism of John." He was devoted, earnest, and upright, publicly
   confessing and preaching that which he knew; and the power of the Holy
   Ghost was manifested in him. It does not appear that he had received
   any appointment, ordination, or sanction of any kind, from either the
   twelve or Paul. But the Lord who is above all had called him, and was
   acting in him and by him. We thus see, in the case of Apollos, the
   manifestation of the power and liberty of, the Holy Spirit, without
   human intervention. It is well to note this. The idea of an exclusive
   clericalism is the practical denial of the liberty of the Spirit to act
   by whom He will. But though burning with zeal and a powerful speaker,
   Apollos knew only what John had taught his disciples. This, the Lord
   knew, and provided teachers for him. Among those who were listening to
   his earnest appeals, two of Paul's well instructed disciples were led
   to take a special interest in him. And though he was both learned and
   eloquent, he was humble enough to be instructed by Aquila and
   Priscilla. They invited him to their house, and, no doubt in a lowly
   spirit, "expounded unto him the way of God more perfectly." How simple!
   how natural! and, how beautiful! All is of the Lord. He ordered that
   Aquila and Priscilla should be left at Ephesus --that Apollos should
   come and stir up the people at Ephesus before the arrival of Paul; and,
   after being instructed, that he should go on to Corinth, and help on
   the good work there, which Paul had begun. Apollos watered what Paul
   had planted, and God gave abundant increase. Such are the blessed ways
   of the Lord in His thoughtful love and tender care of all His servants,
   and of all His assemblies.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [14] See "Short Papers" Volume 1, page 32.

   [15] See Porter's Five Years is Damascus, for the latest and best
   account of the city and its environments.

   [16] Synopsis of the Books of the Bible, vol. 4, page 52.

   [17] See Smith's Student's New Testament history.

   [18] Synopsis of the Books of the Bible, vol. 4.

   [19] See Notes on the Book of Daniel, by W. K.

   [20] The action of the Spirit as to the family seems to have obtained
   remarkably among the Gentiles; among the Jews, as far as I know, we do
   not hear of it. We have found, already, districts among the Jews, as
   also among the Samaritans, which were powerfully impressed (to say the
   least) by the gospel: but among the Gentiles, families seem
   particularly visited by divine grace, as recorded by the Spirit. Take
   for example, Cornelius, the jailor, Stephanus; indeed you find it over
   and over again. This is exceedingly encouraging --especially to us--
   Introductory Lectures to the Acts of the Apostles, etc., by W. K.

   [21] See evangelistic papers on the leading characters of this chapter,
   Things New and Old, vol. 12. Pages 29 - 97.

   [22] For full and minute geographical details, see The Life and
   Epistles of St Paul by Conybeare and Howson. We may also state here,
   that we follow them chiefly as to dates. It is the latest and most
   comprehensive, and probably the best history of the great Apostle.

   [23] As some have made too much of this passage, and others too little,
   it may be well to note what we believe to be its true meaning. The
   apostle's resolution not to be burdensome to the saints, as here so
   strongly expressed, applies chiefly, if not exclusively, to the
   Corinthian church. An important principle was involved, but it was a
   special, not a general, principle with the apostle. He acknowledges
   communications from other churches in the most grateful manner
   possible. (Phil. 4) And in writing to the Corinthians afterwards, he
   says, "I robbed other churches, taking wages of them to do your
   service. And when I was present with you, and wanted, I was chargeable
   to no man: for that which was lacking to me the brethren which came
   from Macedonia supplied."The apostle, no doubt, had the best of reasons
   for thus refusing fellowship with the church of Corinth. We know there
   were "false apostles" and many enemies there; and that many grave and
   serious disorders had been allowed amongst them, which he strongly
   rebuked and sought to correct. Under these circumstances, lest his
   motives might be misconstrued, God beforehand had so ordered it that
   the apostle should rather work with his hands than receive support from
   the church at Corinth. And he resolved so to continue. Wherefore?" he
   asks, "Because I love you not?" God knoweth. But what I do, that I will
   do, that I may cut off occasion from them that desire occasion." (2
   Corinthians 9:1 - 15.)
     __________________________________________________________________

Chapter 6

   PAUL'S THIRD MISSIONARY

   JOURNEY A.D. 54

   Having "spent some time" in Antioch, Paul leaves that Gentile centre,
   and commences another missionary journey. Nothing is said of his
   companions on this occasion. He "went over all the country of Galatia
   and Phrygia in order, strengthening all the disciples;" and also giving
   directions for the collection on behalf of the poor saints at
   Jerusalem. (1 Cor. 16:1, 2) In a short time he readied the centre of
   the work in Asia.

   EPHESUS --At this time it was the greatest city in Asia Minor, and the
   capital of the province. Owing to its central position, it was the
   common meeting place of various characters and classes of men. By this
   time Apollos had departed to Corinth, but the remaining twelve of
   John's disciples were still in Ephesus. Paul speaks to them about their
   state or position. We must give a passing notice of what occurred.

   John's baptism required repentance, but not separation from the Jewish
   synagogue. The gospel teaches that Christianity is founded on death and
   resurrection. Christian baptism is the significant and expressive
   symbol of these truths. "Buried with Him in baptism, wherein also ye
   are risen with Him through the faith of the operation of God, who hath
   raised Him from the dead." (Col. 2:12, 13) As these men were entirely
   unacquainted with the foundation truths of Christianity, we suppose
   they had never mingled with Christians. The apostle, no doubt,
   explained to them the efficacy of the death and resurrection of Christ,
   and the descent of the Holy Ghost. They believed the truth and received
   Christian baptism. Then Paul, in his apostolic capacity, laid his hands
   on them; and they were sealed with the Holy Ghost, and "spoke with
   tongues and prophesied."

   Immediately after the mention of this important occurrence, our
   attention is directed to the apostle's labours in the synagogue. During
   three months he preached Christ boldly there, reasoning and
   endeavouring to convince his hearers of all "the things concerning the
   kingdom of God." The hearts of some "were hardened," while others
   repented and believed; but as many of the Jews took the place of
   adversaries, and "spoke evil of that way before the multitude," Paul
   acts in the most definite way. He "separated the disciples" from the
   Jewish synagogue, and formed them into a distinct assembly, and met
   with them "daily in the school of one Tyrannus." This is a deeply
   interesting and instructive action of the apostle, but he acts in the
   consciousness of the power and truth of God. The church in Ephesus is
   now perfectly distinct from both Jews and Gentiles. Here we see what
   the apostle elsewhere refers to in his exhortation, "Give none offence,
   neither to the Jews, nor to the Gentiles, nor to the church of God." (1
   Cor. 10:32) Where this important distinction is not seen, there must be
   great confusion of thought as to both the word and ways of God.

   The apostle now appears before us as the instrument of the power of God
   in a remarkable and striking way. He communicates the Holy Ghost to the
   twelve disciples of John, and he separates the disciples of Jesus and
   formally founds the church in Ephesus. His testimony to the Lord Jesus
   is heard in all Asia, both by Jews and Greeks; special miracles are
   wrought by his hands, diseases departing from many, if they but touch
   the border of his garment. The power of the enemy disappears before the
   power that is in Paul, and the name of Jesus is glorified. The evil
   spirits acknowledge Paul's power, and put his enemies to shame and
   loss; the consciences of the heathen are reached, and the enemy's
   dominion over them is gone. Fear falls on many who "used curious arts,"
   and they burn their books of magic, the cost of which amounts to nearly
   two thousand pounds in English money. "So mightily grew the word of God
   and prevailed." (See Acts 19:1 - 20) Thus the power of the Lord was
   displayed in the person and mission of Paul, and his apostolate
   established beyond a question.

   The apostle had now spent about three years of incessant labour in
   Ephesus. And he says himself when addressing the elders at Miletus,
   "Therefore watch, and remember, that by the space of three years I
   ceased not to warn every one night and day with tears." It is also
   supposed by some, that during this time he paid a short visit and wrote
   his: FIRST EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS.

   THE TUMULT AT EPHESUS

   A great and blessed work had now been accomplished by the mighty energy
   of God's Spirit, through the instrumentality of His chosen servant
   Paul. The gospel had been planted in the capital of Asia, and it had
   spread throughout the whole province. The apostle now felt as if his
   work had been done there, and he longs to go to Rome, the capital of
   the West, and the metropolis of the world. Greece and Macedonia had
   already received the gospel, but there was yet Rome.

   "After these things were ended, Paul purposed in the spirit, when he
   had passed through Macedonia and Achaia, to go to Jerusalem, saying,
   After I have been there, I must also see Rome." (Acts 19:21)

   But while Paul was thus making arrangements for another journey, the
   enemy was planning a fresh attack. His resources were not yet
   exhausted. Demetrius excites the thoughtless multitude against the
   Christians. A great tumult is raised, the passions of men being stirred
   up against the instruments of the testimony of God. The workmen of
   Demetrius raise the cry, not only that their craft is in danger, but
   also that the temple of the great goddess Diana is in danger of being
   despised. When the multitude heard these things, they were filled with
   wrath, and cried, saying, "Great is Diana of the Ephesians!" The whole
   city was now filled with confusion; but Paul was mercifully preserved
   --by his brethren, and by some of the chief rulers in Asia, who were
   his friends --from showing himself in the theatre.

   The Jews evidently began to fear that the persecution might be turned
   against them; for the majority of the people knew not for what purpose
   they had come together. They therefore put forth a certain Alexander,
   probably with the intention of shifting the blame from themselves upon
   the Christians; but the moment the heathen discovered that he was a
   Jew, their fury was increased: the rallying cry was again raised, and
   for two whole hours the people shouted "Great is Diana of the
   Ephesians." Fortunately for all parties, the town clerk was a man of
   great tact and admirable policy. He flattered, calmed, soothed, and
   dismissed the assembly. But to faith it was God using the persuasive
   eloquence of a heathen official to protect His servant and His many
   children there.

   The far-famed temple of Diana was reckoned by the ancients as one of
   the wonders of the world, the sun, it was said, saw nothing in his
   course more magnificent than Diana's temple. It was constructed of the
   purest marble, and was two hundred and twenty years in building. But
   with the spread of Christianity it sank into decay, and scarcely
   anything of it now remains to show us even where it stood. The trade of
   Demetrius was to make small models in silver of the shrine of the
   goddess. These were set up in houses, kept as memorials, and carried
   about on journeys. But as the introduction of Christianity necessarily
   affected the sale of these models, the heathen artisans were instigated
   by Demetrius to raise a popular cry in favour of Diana and against the
   Christians.

   PAUL'S DEPARTURE FROM

   EPHESUS FOR MACEDONIA

   Acts: 20. After the cessation of the tumult, the danger being over and
   the rioters dispersed, Paul sends for the disciples, embraces them, and
   departs for Macedonia. Two of the Ephesian brethren, Tychicus and
   Trophimus, seem to have accompanied him, and to have remained faithful
   to him through all his afflictions. They are frequently mentioned, and
   have a place in the last chapter of his last epistle, 2 Tim. 4.

   The sacred historian is exceedingly brief in his record of Paul's
   proceedings at this time. All the information which he gives us is
   compressed into these following words: --"He departed to go into
   Macedonia: and when he had gone over those parts, and had given them
   much exhortation, he came into Greece, and there abode three months."
   It is generally supposed that these few words embrace a period of nine
   or ten months --from the early summer of A.D. 57 to the spring of A.D.
   58. But the apostle's letters happily accommodates for this lack of
   information. Those that were written on this journey supply us with
   many historical details, and, what is more and better, they give us
   (from his own pen) a living picture of the deep and painful exercises
   of mind and heart, through which he was then passing.

   It appears that Paul had arranged to meet Titus at Troas, who was to
   bring him tidings direct from Corinth, telling of the state of things
   there. But week after week passed, and Titus came not. We know
   something of the workings of that great mind and heart at this time,
   from what he says himself: "Furthermore, when I came to Troas to preach
   Christ's gospel, and a door was opened unto me of the Lord, I had no
   rest in my spirit, because I found not Titus my brother; but taking my
   leave of them, I went from thence into Macedonia." (2 Cor. 2:12, 13)
   His personal anxiety, however, did not hinder him from going on with
   the great work of the gospel. This is evident from verses 14 - 17.

   At length the long-expected Titus arrived in Macedonia --probably at
   Philippi. And now Paul's mind is relieved and his heart is comforted.
   Titus brings him better tidings from Corinth than he had expected to
   hear. The reaction is manifest: he is filled with praise. "Great is my
   boldness of speech toward you," he says; "great is my glorying of you:
   I am filled with comfort, I am exceeding joyful in all our tribulation.
   For, when we were come into Macedonia, our flesh had no rest, but we
   were troubled on every side; without were fighting's, within were
   fears. Nevertheless God, that comforts those that are cast down,
   comforted us by the coming of Titus." (2 Corinthians 7:4 - 6)

   Soon after this, Paul writes his SECOND EPISTLE TO THE CORINTHIANS;
   which we find addressed not to them only, but to all the churches in
   all Achaia. They may have all been more or less affected by the
   condition of things at Corinth. Titus is again the apostle's willing
   servant, not only as the bearer of his second letter to the church at
   Corinth, but as taking a special interest in the collections then
   making for the poor. Paul not only gives Titus strict charges about the
   collections, but also writes two chapters on the subject (chapters 8
   and 9), though it was more deacons' than apostles' work. But, as he had
   said in answer to the suggestion of James, Cephas, and John, that he
   should remember the poor --"The same," he replied, "which I was also
   forward to do."

   The space, which the apostle devotes to subjects connected with
   collections for the poor, is remarkable, and deserves our careful
   consideration. It may be that some of us have overlooked this fact and
   suffered loss in our own souls thereby. Notice, for example, what he
   says of one church. We have good reason to believe that the Philippians
   from the very beginning cared for the apostle --they pressed him to
   accept their contributions for his support, from his first visit to
   Thessalonica, down to his imprisonment in Rome, besides their
   liberality to others. (Phil. 4; 2 Cor. 8:1 - 4) But some may imagine
   from this, that they were a wealthy church. Just the opposite! Paul
   tells us "How that, in a great trial of affliction, the abundance of
   their joy and their deep poverty abounded unto the riches of their
   liberality." It was out of their deep poverty that they gave so
   liberally.

   What the Philippians are in the Epistles, the poor widow is in the
   Gospels --two mites were her all. She could have given one and kept
   one; but she had an undivided heart, and she gave both. She, too, gave
   out of her poverty; and, wherever the gospel is preached throughout the
   whole world, these things shall be told as a memorial of their
   liberality.

   After Paul had sent off Titus and his associates with the Epistle, he
   remained himself in "those parts" of Greece, doing the work of an
   evangelist. His mind, however, was set on paying the Corinthians a
   personal visit; but he allowed time for his letter to produce its own
   effects under the blessing of God. One of the objects of the apostle
   was to prepare the way for his personal ministry among them. It is
   generally thought that it was during this period of delay that he fully
   preached the gospel of Christ round about unto Illyricum. (Rom. 15:19)
   It is probable that he reached Corinth in winter, according to his
   expressed intention. "It may be that I will abide, yea, and winter with
   you." (1 Cor. 16:6) There he abode three months.

   All are agreed, we may say, that it was during these winter months,
   that he wrote his great EPISTLE TO THE R0MANS. Some say, that he also
   wrote his EPISTLE TO THE GALATIANS at the same time. But there is great
   diversity of opinion amongst the chronologists on this point. From the
   absence of names and salutations, such as we have in the Epistle to the
   Romans, it is difficult to ascertain its date. But if it was not
   written at this particular time, we must place it earlier, not later.
   The apostle was surprised at their early departure from the truth. "I
   marvel," he says, "that ye are so soon removed from him that called you
   into the grace of Christ unto another gospel." His great disappointment
   is manifest in the warmth of spirit in which he writes this Epistle.

   But we must return to the history of our apostle: the niceties of
   chronology we cannot enter upon in our "short papers." But after
   comparing the latest authorities, we give what seem to us the most
   reliable dates.

   PAUL LEAVES CORINTH

   The apostle's work was now done at Corinth, and he prepares to leave
   it. His mind was bent upon going to Rome; but there was this mission of
   charity on his heart, to which he must attend first. We are favoured
   with his own words on these different points. "But now having no more
   place in these parts, and having a great desire these many years to
   come unto you; whensoever I take my journey into Spain, I will come
   unto you: for I trust to see you in my journey, and to be brought on my
   way thitherward by you, if first I be somewhat filled with your
   company. "But now I go unto Jerusalem to minister unto the saints. For
   it hath pleased them of Macedonia and Achaia to make a certain
   contribution for the poor saints which are at Jerusalem." (Rom. 15) The
   array of names in Acts 20:4; Sopater, Aristarchus, Secundus, Gaius,
   Tychicus, and Trophimus, are supposed to be brethren with the
   collections, which had been made at the different places named. Instead
   of sailing straight to Syria, he goes round by Macedonia, because of
   the Jews who were lying in wait for him. His companions tarried for him
   at Troas. There he spent a Lord's Day, and even a whole week, in order
   to see the brethren.

   We must notice briefly what took place at this stage of his journey.
   Two things, all-important to the Christian, are connected with it --the
   Lord's Day, and the Lord's Supper. The historian, who was with Paul at
   this time, enters with unusual minuteness on the details of that day.

   It is evident from this incidental notice, that it was the established
   custom of the early Christians to come together on "the first day of
   the week" for the understood purpose of "breaking bread." We have here
   the main object and the ordinary time of their coming together. "And
   upon the first day of the week, when the disciples came together to
   break bread, Paul preached unto them." (See also 1 Cor. 16:2; John
   20:19; Rev. 1:10) Even the apostle's discoursing, precious as it was,
   is spoken of as a secondary thing. The remembrance of the Lord's love
   in dying for us, and all that into which He has brought us as risen
   again, was, and is, the first thing. If there be an opportunity for so
   ministering the word, as to gather up the thoughts and affections of
   the worshippers to Christ, it is well to embrace it; but the breaking
   of bread ought to be the first consideration, and the main object of
   the assembly. The celebration of the Lord's Supper on this occasion was
   after sunset. In early times, it was observed in some places before
   daylight, in others, after sunset. But here the disciples were not
   obliged to meet in secret. "There were many lights in the upper chamber
   where they were gathered together, and Paul continued his speech until
   midnight, ready to depart on the morrow." It was an extraordinary
   occasion, and Paul avails himself of the opportunity to speak to them
   all night. The time had not come, as some one has said, when the warm
   earnest utterances of the heart were measured by the minute --when the
   burning agony of the preacher over lost souls was timed by the icy
   coldness of the mere professor, or the careless indifference of the
   worldly Christian. Eutychus, a young man, overcome with sleep, "fell
   down from the third loft, and was taken up dead." This has been viewed
   by some as a penalty for inattention: but a miracle was wrought; the
   young man was raised from a state of death by the power and goodness of
   God through His servant Paul, and the friends were not a little
   comforted.

   PAUL AT MILETUS

   The most important stage of this journey is Miletus, though the sacred
   historian carefully notes the different places they pass or call at.
   Paul, being filled with the Spirit, gives directions for the journey.
   His companions willingly obey him, not as a master, but as one who
   directs in the humility of love and in the wisdom of God. He arranges
   not to go to Ephesus, though that was a central place, for he had
   purposed in his heart to be at Jerusalem on the day of Pentecost. But
   as the vessel was to be detained some time at Miletus, he sends for the
   elders of the church at Ephesus to meet him. The distance between the
   two places is said to be about thirty miles, so that two or three days
   would be required to go and come, but they had sufficient time for
   their meeting before the ship sailed. Thus the Lord thinks of His
   servants and makes everything work together for their good and His own
   glory.

   Paul's farewell address to the elders of Ephesus is characteristic and
   representative. It demands our most careful study. It sets before us
   the deep and touching affection of the apostle, the position of the
   church at that time, and the work of the gospel among the nations. He
   exhorts them with unusual earnestness and tenderness; he felt he was
   addressing them for the last time; he reminds them of his labours among
   them in "serving the Lord with all humility of mind, and with many
   tears." He warns them against false teachers and heresies --the
   grievous wolves who would enter in among them, and the men of
   themselves that would arise, speaking perverse things, to draw away the
   disciples after them. "And when he had thus spoken, he kneeled down,
   and prayed with them all. And they all wept sore, and fell on Paul's
   neck, and kissed him, sorrowing most of all for the words which he
   spake, that they should see his face no more. And they accompanied him
   unto the ship."

   As this testimony of Paul's is of the highest importance, and marks a
   distinct epoch in the history of the church, besides shedding divine
   light on all ecclesiastical systems, we give the thoughts of another on
   its wide and comprehensive bearing.

   "The church was consolidated over a pretty large extent of country, and
   the church, in divers places at least, had taken the form of a regular
   institution. Elders were established and recognised. The apostle could
   send for them to come to him. His authority also was acknowledged on
   their part. He speaks of his ministry as a past thing --solemn thought!
   ...Thus, what the Holy Ghost here sets before us is, that now, when the
   detail of his work among the Gentiles to plant the gospel is related as
   one entire scene among Jews and Gentiles, he bids adieu to the work; in
   order to leave those whom he had gathered together, in a new position,
   and, in a certain sense, to themselves. It is a discourse which marks
   the cessation of one phase of the church --that of apostolic labours
   --and the entrance into another; its responsibility to stand fast now
   that these labours had ceased; the service of the elders, whom "the
   Holy Ghost had made overseers," and, at the same time, the dangers and
   difficulties that would attend the cessation of apostolic labour, and
   complicate the work of the elders, on whom the responsibility would now
   more especially devolve."

   The first remark that flows from the consideration of this discourse is
   that apostolic succession is entirely denied by it. Owing to the
   absence of the apostle, various difficulties would arise, and there
   would be no one in his place to meet or to prevent these difficulties.
   Successor, therefore, he had none. In the second place, the fact
   appears that this energy, which bridled the spirit of evil, once away,
   devouring wolves from without, and teachers of perverse things from
   within, would lift up their heads and attack the simplicity and the
   happiness of the church; which would be harassed by the efforts of
   Satan, without possessing apostolic energy to withstand them. In the
   third place, that which was principally to be done for the hindrance of
   evil was to feed the flock; and to watch, whether over themselves or
   over the flock, for that purpose. He then commends them --neither to
   Timothy, nor to a bishop, but in a way that sets aside all official
   resources --to God and to the word of His grace. This is where he left
   the church. The free labours of the apostle of the Gentiles were ended.
   Solemn and affecting thought! He had been the instrument chosen of God
   to communicate to the world His counsels respecting the church and to
   establish in the mind of the world this precious object of His
   affections, united to Christ at His right hand. What would become of it
   down here? [24]

   Acts: 21. With a fair wind, Paul and his companions sailed out from
   Miletus, while the sorrowing elders of Ephesus prepared for their
   journey homewards. With a straight course they sailed to Coos, Rhodes,
   and thence to Patara and Tyre. From what took place there --so similar
   to the scene at Miletus --it is evident that Paul soon found his way to
   the hearts of the disciples. Though he had been only one week at Tyre,
   and previously unacquainted with the Christians there, he had gained
   their affections. "And they all brought us on our way," says Luke,
   "with wives and children, till we were out of the city; and we kneeled
   down on the shore and prayed." It seems too, as if a spirit of prophecy
   had been poured out on these affectionate Tyrians, for they warned the
   apostle against going up to Jerusalem. After waiting there seven days,
   they came to Ptolemais, where they abode one day. At Cæsarea, they
   lodged in the house of Philip the evangelist, which was one of the
   seven. He is already well known to us, but it is not a little
   interesting to meet him again, after an interval of more than twenty
   years. Now he has four daughters, virgins, who prophesy. Here Agabus
   the prophet predicted Paul's imprisonment, and said, "He should not go
   up to Jerusalem." All the disciples said the same thing, and entreated
   him with tears not to go. But however much the tears and the entreaties
   of his friends and of his own children in the faith must have moved
   Paul's tender and sensitive heart, he suffered nothing to alter his
   resolution or move him from his purpose. He felt bound in spirit to go,
   and ready to leave all consequences with the will of the Lord. We now
   come to:

   PAUL'S FIFTH VISIT TO

   JERUSALEM A.D. 58

   The apostle and his companions were gladly welcomed on their arrival at
   Jerusalem. "When we were come to Jerusalem," Luke observes, "the
   brethren received us gladly." The day following, Paul and his company
   visited James, at whose house the elders were present. Paul, as chief
   speaker, declared particularly what things God had wrought among the
   Gentiles by his ministry. But though they were greatly interested, and
   praised the Lord for the good news, they evidently felt uneasy. They at
   once called Paul's attention to the fact, that a great number of Jews
   who believed in Jesus as the Messiah were zealous observers of the law
   of Moses, and were strongly prejudiced against himself.

   How to satisfy the prejudices of these Jewish Christians was now the
   important question between Paul and the elders. Multitudes of Jews,
   both converted and unconverted, they knew would come together when they
   heard of Paul's arrival. They had long believed the most serious and
   weighty charges against him --"that he taught all the Jews which are
   among the Gentiles to forsake Moses, saying that they ought not to
   circumcise their children, neither to walk after the customs." What was
   now to be done? The elders proposed that Paul should publicly show
   himself obedient to the law. This was the painful and perplexing
   position of the apostle of the Gentiles. What can he now do? Will the
   messenger of the gospel of the glory --the minister of the heavenly
   calling --stoop to the rules of Nazarite vows? This is the solemn and
   serious question. If he refuses compliance with their wish, the lurking
   suspicion of the Jews will be confirmed; if he acts according to their
   desires, he must humble himself --forget for the moment his high
   calling and yield to the ignorance, prejudice, and pride of the
   Judaizers. But what else can he do? He is in the very centre of a
   bigoted Judaism; and if mistaken, he honestly desires to win over the
   church at Jerusalem to a purer and loftier Christianity.

   Many have been very free in their criticisms on the apostle's course at
   this time. But though it is our privilege humbly to examine all that
   the sacred historian has written, some, we fear, have ventured too far
   in saying hard things of the apostle. We may reverently inquire, how
   far the will and the affections of Paul influenced him on this
   occasion, apart from the warnings of the Spirit through his brethren;
   but surely it becomes us to keep within the limits of what the Holy
   Spirit Himself has said. Let us now carefully view the outward facts,
   which led the apostle to this eventful epoch in his life.

   ROME had been long on his mind. He had a great desire to preach the
   gospel there. This was right --this was according to God --this was not
   of self: he was the apostle of the Gentiles. God had been working there
   most blessedly without Paul or Peter, for as yet, no apostle had
   visited Rome. Paul had been privileged to write an epistle to the
   Romans, and in that letter he expresses the most earnest desire to see
   them, and to labour among them. "For I long to see you," he says, "that
   I may impart unto you some spiritual gift, to the end ye may be
   established." This was his state of mind and the object, which he had
   before him, which we also must keep in view when studying this part of
   his history. Compare Romans 1: vs. 7 - 15 and chapter 15: vs. 15 - 33.

   THE END OF PAUL'S FREE LABOURS

   We have now come to the important question, and to the point on which
   Paul's future history turns. Will he go straight west to Rome, or will
   he go round by way of Jerusalem? All depends on this. Jerusalem was
   also on his heart. But if Christ had sent him far hence to the
   Gentiles, could the Spirit, on Christ's part, lead him to Jerusalem? It
   was just here, we believe, that the great apostle was permitted to
   follow the desires of his own heart; which desires were right and
   beautiful in themselves, but not according to the mind of God at the
   time. He loved his nation dearly, and especially the poor saints at
   Jerusalem; and, having been greatly misrepresented there, he wished to
   prove his love for the poor of his people by bringing to them in person
   the offerings of the Gentiles. "When therefore," he says, "I have
   performed this, and have sealed to them this fruit, I will come by you
   into Spain." Surely, some will say, this was loving and praiseworthy!
   Yes, but on one side only, and that side alas! was the side of nature,
   --not of the Spirit. "And finding disciples, we tarried there seven
   days; who said to Paul through the Spirit, that he should not go up to
   Jerusalem." This seems plain enough; but Paul inclined for the moment
   to the side of his affections "for the poor of the flock" in Jerusalem.
   Could there have been, we ask, a more pardonable mistake? Impossible!
   It was his love to the poor, and the pleasure of carrying to them the
   offerings of the Gentiles, that led him to go round by Jerusalem on his
   way to Rome. Nevertheless, it was a mistake, and a mistake, which cost
   Paul his liberty. His free labours end here. He allowed the flesh its
   liberty, and God allowed the Gentiles to bind it with a chain. This was
   the Master's expression of truest love to His servant. Paul was too
   precious in His sight to be allowed to pass without His righteous
   dealings at such a time; and he was also made to prove, that neither
   Jerusalem nor Rome could be the metropolis of Christianity, Christ the
   Head of the church was in heaven, and there only could the metropolis
   of Christianity be, Jerusalem persecuted the apostle; Rome imprisoned
   and martyred him. Nevertheless, the Lord was with His servant for his
   own good, the advancement of the truth, the blessing of the church, and
   the glory of His own great name.

   Here may we be permitted to offer one reflection. On how many
   histories, since Paul's fifth visit to Jerusalem, has this solemn scene
   been engraved! How many saints have been bound with chains of different
   kinds, but who can say for what, or why? All of us would have said
   --unless enlightened by the Spirit --that the apostle could not have
   been actuated by a more worthy motive in going round by Jerusalem on
   his way to Rome. But the Lord had not told him to do so. All hinges on
   this. How needful then to see, at every stage of our journey, that we
   have the word of God for our faith, the service of Christ for our
   motive, and the Holy Spirit for our guide. We will now return to the
   history of events.

   We left Paul sitting with the elders in the house of James. They had
   suggested to him a mode of conciliating the Jewish believers, and of
   refuting the accusations of his enemies. Disloyalty to his nation and
   to the religion of his fathers was the chief charge brought against
   him. But under the surface of outward events, and especially having the
   light of the epistles shed upon them, we discover the root of the whole
   matter in the enmity of the human heart against the grace of God. In
   order to understand this, we must notice that Paul's ministry was
   twofold.

   1) His mission was to preach the gospel "to every creature which is
   under heaven" --it not only went far beyond the limits of Judaism, but
   it was in perfect contrast with that system.

   2) He was also the minister of the church of God, and preached its
   exalted position, and its blessed privileges, as united with Christ the
   glorified Man in heaven. These blessed truths, it will be seen, lift
   the soul of the believer far above the religion of the flesh, be it
   ever so painstaking --ever so abounding in rites and ceremonies. Vows,
   fasts, feasts, offerings, purifications, traditions, and philosophy,
   are all shut out as nothing of worth before God, and opposed to the
   very nature of Christianity. This exasperated the religious Jew with
   his traditions, and the uncircumcised Greek with his philosophy; and
   the two united to persecute the true witness-bearer of this twofold
   testimony. And so it has been ever since. The religious man with his
   ordinances, and the merely natural man with his philosophy of natural
   process, readily unites in opposing the witness of a heavenly
   Christianity. See Colossians chapter's 1 & 2.

   If Paul had preached circumcision, the offence of the cross would have
   ceased; for this would have given them a place, and the opportunity of
   being something and doing something, and even of taking part with God
   in His religion. This was Judaism, and this gave the Jew his
   pre-eminence. But the gospel of the grace of God addresses man as
   already lost --as "dead in trespasses and sins" --and has no more
   respect to the Jew than to the Gentile. Like the sun in the firmament,
   it shines for all. No nation, kindred, tongue, or people, is excluded
   from its heavenly rays. "Preach the gospel to every creature which is
   under heaven" is the divine commission and the wide sphere of the
   evangelist; to teach those who believe this gospel their completeness
   in Christ is the privilege and duty of every minister of the New
   Testament.

   Having thus cleared the ground as to the motives, objects, and position
   of the great apostle, we will now briefly trace the remainder of his
   eventful life. The time has come when he is to be brought before kings
   and rulers, and even before Cæsar himself, for the name of the Lord
   Jesus.

   PAUL IN THE TEMPLE

   In accordance with the proposal of James and the elders, Paul now
   proceeds to the temple with "the four men, which had a vow." Thus we
   read: "Then Paul took the men, and the next day, purifying himself with
   them, entered into the temple, to signify the accomplishment of the
   days of purification, until that an offering should be offered for
   every one of them." On the completion of the Nazarite's vow, the law
   required that certain offerings should be presented in the temple.
   These offerings involved considerable expense, as we may see from
   Numbers 6; and it was considered an act of great merit and piety for a
   rich brother to provide these offerings for a poor brother, and thereby
   enable him to complete his vow. Paul was not rich, but he had a large
   and tender heart, and he generously undertook to pay the charges of the
   four poor Nazarites. Such readiness on Paul's part to please some and
   help others, ought to have pacified and conciliated the Jews, and
   probably it would, had there only been present such as were associated
   with James; but it had the opposite effect with the inveterate zealots:
   they were only more incensed against him. The celebration of the feast
   had attracted multitudes to the holy city, so that the temple was
   thronged with worshippers from every land.

   Among these foreign Jews were some from Asia, probably some of Paul's
   old antagonists from Ephesus, who were glad of an opportunity to be
   revenged on him who had formerly defeated them. Towards the end of the
   seven days wherein the sacrifices were to be offered, these Asiatic
   Jews saw Paul in the temple, and immediately fell upon him, "crying
   out, Men of Israel, help! This is the man that teacheth all men
   everywhere against the people, and the law, and this place; and further
   brought Greeks also into the temple, and hath polluted this holy place.
   And all the city was moved, and the people ran together; and they took
   Paul and drew him out of the temple: and forthwith the doors were
   shut." The whole city being now in an uproar, the crowd rushed
   furiously to the point of attack; the multitude were excited to
   madness, and but for their sacred care not to shed blood in the holy
   place, Paul would have been instantly torn to pieces. Their object now
   was to hurry him out of the temple, have the doors shut, and dispatch
   him outside the sacred enclosure. But before their murderous plans were
   executed, help from the Lord arrived, and they were unexpectedly
   interrupted.

   The sentries at the gates no doubt communicated at once to the Roman
   garrison, situated over against the temple, that there was a tumult in
   the court. The chief captain, Claudius Lysias, immediately ran to the
   spot in person, taking soldiers and centurions with him. When the Jews
   saw the chief captain and the Roman soldiers approaching, they left off
   beating Paul. The governor, perceiving that Paul was the occasion of
   all this excitement, promptly secured him, and bound him with two
   chains, or chained him by each hand to a soldier. See Acts 12: 6.

   This being done, Lysias proceeded to make inquiry as to the real cause
   of the disturbance, but, as no certain information could be obtained
   from the ignorant and excited crowd, he ordered Paul to be carried into
   the castle. The disappointed mob now made a tremendous rush after their
   victim. They saw him taken out of their hands, and so violently did
   they press upon the soldiers, that Paul was borne in their arms up the
   stairs of the castle; meanwhile deafening shouts arose from the enraged
   multitude below, as they had done nearly thirty years before, "Away
   with him, away with him."

   At this moment of overwhelming interest, the apostle preserved great
   presence of mind, and perfectly controlled the agitation of his
   feelings. He acts prudently without any compromise of truth. Just as
   they had reached the entrance to the castle, Paul most courteously
   addressed himself to the chief captain, and said, "May I speak unto
   thee? Who said, Canst thou speak Greek? Art not thou that Egyptian,
   which before these days madest an uproar, and leddest out into the
   wilderness four thousand men that were murderers? But Paul said, I am a
   man which am a Jew of Tarsus, a city in Cilicia, a citizen of no mean
   city: and, I beseech thee, suffer me to speak unto the people."
   Marvellous to say, this request was granted. Paul had already gained
   the respect of the Roman governor, if not great influence over his
   mind. But the hand of the Lord was in it; He was watching over His
   servant. Paul had thrown himself into the hands of his enemies, by
   seeking to please the believing Jews; but God was with him, and knew
   how to deliver him out of their power, and to use him for the glory of
   His own great name. Acts 21:26 - 40.

   PAUL'S SPEECH ON THE

   STAIRS OF THE CASTLE

   To the chief captain he had spoken in Greek; to the Jews he speaks in
   Hebrew. These little attentions and considerations are the beautiful
   blending of love and wisdom, and ought to serve as a lesson for us. He
   was always ready to win, by "becoming all things to all men, that he
   might gain the more." We see the marvellous effects of his influence
   over the infuriated mob, as well as over the commanding officer. The
   moment he spoke to them, the whole scene was changed. He calmed the
   tumultuous sea of human passion by the sound of their sacred language.
   It fell like oil on the troubled waters; and there was immediately "a
   great silence." We have his noble defence, addressed to his brethren
   and fathers, given at length in Acts 22:1 - 21.

   It will be observed in reading the address, that his countrymen
   listened with great attention, while he spoke to them of his early
   life, his persecution of the church, his mission to Damascus, his
   miraculous conversion, his vision in the temple, and his interview with
   Ananias; but the moment he mentioned his mission to the Gentiles, an
   outburst of unbounded indignation arose from the crowded area below,
   and silenced the speaker. They could not endure the thought of God's
   grace to the Gentiles. That hated name stung them to fury. Their
   national pride rebelled against the thought of uncircumcised heathen
   being made equal to the children of Abraham. They cried down with
   scornful contempt every argument, human or divine, that could have
   influenced their minds. In vain, did the apostle lay great stress on
   what had taken place between himself and the devout Ananias. Every
   appeal was in vain, so long as the Gentiles were to be thus owned. A
   scene of the wildest confusion now followed. They cast off their outer
   garments, threw dust into the air, and "lifted up their voices, and
   said; Away with such a fellow from the earth; for it is not fit that he
   should live."

   The chief captain, seeing the frantic violence of the people, and not
   understanding what it meant, was thrown into new perplexity. He saw the
   results of a speech in the Hebrew tongue --which he probably did not
   understand --and, naturally concluding that his prisoner must be guilty
   of some enormous crime, he ordered him to be bound and scourged to make
   him confess his guilt. But Paul making known the fact that he was a
   Roman citizen instantly arrested this proceeding.

   The soldiers who were engaged in binding him withdrew in alarm, and
   warned the governor as to what he was doing. Lysias came at once, "and
   said unto him, Tell me, art thou a Roman? He said, Yea. And the chief
   captain answered, With a great sum obtained I this freedom. And Paul
   said, But I was free born," Lysias was now in a difficulty; he had
   violated a Roman law. To expose a citizen to such indignity was treason
   against the majesty of the Roman people. But the only way of saving
   Paul's life was by keeping him in custody, and he happily thought of
   another and a milder way of ascertaining the nature of his prisoner's
   offence.

   PAUL BEFORE THE SANHEDRIM

   On the following day he "commanded the chief priests and all their
   council to appear, and brought Paul down and set him before them." The
   policy of Lysias here is interesting. He is active in suppressing the
   tumult; he protects a Roman citizen; he shows deference to the religion
   and customs of the Jews. This blending of policy and courtesy in the
   haughty Roman, under such circumstances, is worthy of a moment's
   reflection; but we press on.

   Paul addresses the council with dignity and gravity; but with an
   evident expression of conscious integrity. "And Paul, earnestly
   beholding the council, said, Men and brethren, I have lived in all good
   conscience before God until this day." This unflinching sense of
   uprightness so enraged Ananias, the high priest that he commanded those
   who stood near to strike him on the mouth. This arbitrary violation of
   the law on the part of the chief of the council so roused the apostle's
   feelings, that he fearlessly exclaimed, "God shall smite thee, thou
   whited wall; for sittest thou to judge me after the law, and commandest
   me to be smitten contrary to the law?" It is evident that the high
   priest was not so clothed as to be recognised; therefore Paul excuses
   himself by his ignorance of the fact, and quotes the formal prohibition
   of the law: "Thou shalt not speak evil of the ruler of thy people."

   The apostle soon perceived, we are told, that the council was divided
   into two parties, the Sadducees and the Pharisees, and therefore he
   cried out, "Men and brethren, I am a Pharisee, the son of a Pharisee;
   of the hope and resurrection of the dead I am called in question." This
   declaration, whether so intended or not, had the effect of dividing the
   assembly, and setting the one party against the other. And so fierce
   did their dissensions become, that some of the Pharisees actually took
   Paul's side, saying, "We find no evil in this man: but if a spirit or
   an angel hath spoken to him, let us not fight against God." The
   judgment hall immediately became the scene of the most violent
   contention, and the presence of Claudius Lysias was absolutely
   necessary. Paul is once more lodged in the castle.

   So passed this eventful morning in the history of our apostle. In the
   evening, when alone, can we wonder if his heart was prone to sink
   within him? From what had taken place, and from the gloomy appearance
   of everything around him, the apostle never stood in greater need of
   the consolation and strength, which the Master's presence always gives.
   But who knew this so well, or could feel so deeply for the lonely
   prisoner as the Master Himself? And so He appears in richest grace to
   comfort and cheer the heart of His servant. It was divinely timed
   comfort. The Lord stood by him, as He had done at Corinth, and as He
   afterwards did on his voyage to Rome; and said, "Be of good cheer,
   Paul; for as thou hast testified of me in Jerusalem, so must thou bear
   witness also at Rome." (Acts 18:9, 10; 23:11; 27:23, 24.) A conspiracy
   of more than forty men to assassinate Paul having been discovered, and
   all their wicked schemes confounded, Claudius Lysias immediately
   summoned his centurions and soldiers, and gave strict orders to have
   Paul conveyed safely to Cæsarea. Luke relates the details of this
   matter with singular fullness. (Acts 23:12 - 25)

   PAUL APPEARS BEFORE FELIX

   As some of our readers may have observed, the character of God's
   dealings with His servant partially changes here. It may be well to
   pause for a moment, and reverently inquire into the apparent causes of
   this change. And, as many have freely given their opinions on this
   difficult point, we will here quote a few lines from one who seems to
   give the mind of the Spirit.

   "I believe, then, that the hand of God was in Paul's journey to
   Jerusalem; that, in His sovereign wisdom, He willed that His servant
   should undertake it, and also have blessing in it: but that the means
   employed to lead him into it, according to that sovereign wisdom was
   the apostle's human affection for the people who were his kindred after
   the flesh; and that he was not led into it by the Holy Ghost acting on
   the part of Christ in the Church. This attachment to his people, this
   human affection, met with that among the people, which put it in its
   place. Humanly speaking, it was an amiable feeling; but it was not the
   power of the Holy Ghost founded on the death and resurrection of
   Christ. There was no longer Jew or Gentile... Paul's affection was good
   in itself; but as a spring of action it did not come up to the height
   of the work of the Spirit, who, on Christ's part, had sent him afar
   from Jerusalem to the Gentiles in order to reveal the church as His
   body united to Him in heaven.

   He was the messenger of the heavenly glory, which brought out the
   doctrine of the church composed of Jews and Gentiles, united without
   distinction in the one body of Christ, thus blotting out Judaism; but
   his love for his nation carried him, I repeat, into the very centre of
   hostile Judaism, a Judaism enraged against the spiritual equality.
   Nevertheless, the hand of God was undoubtedly in it: Paul,
   individually, found his level.

   That which Paul said before the council raises a tumult, and the chief
   captain takes him from among them. God has all things at His disposal:
   a nephew of Paul's, never mentioned elsewhere, hears of an ambush laid
   for him and warns him of it. Paul sends him to the chief captain, who
   expedites the departure of Paul under a guard to Cæsarea. God watched
   over him, but all is on the level of human and providential ways. There
   is not the angel as in Peter's case, or the earthquake as at Philippi.
   We are sensibly on different ground." [25]

   The accusers of Paul were not long in finding their way to Cæsarea.
   "And after five days Ananias the high priest descended with the elders,
   and with a certain orator named Tertullus, who informed the governor
   against Paul." (Acts 24:1) In a short speech, full of flattery and
   insinuating art, Tertullus accuses Paul of sedition, heresy, and the
   profanation of the temple.

   Felix then signified to Paul that he had an opportunity of answering
   for himself. And now, we may say, the apostle of the Gentiles is once
   more in his right place. However humiliating his circumstances, he is
   still God's messenger to the Gentiles, and God is with His beloved
   servant. The Jews were silent and Paul, in his usual straightforward
   manner, met the charges.

   Felix, it appears, knew a good deal about these things, and it is
   evident that a strong impression was made on his mind. Many years
   before this, Christianity had found its way into the Roman army at
   Cæsarea, (Acts 10) so that he probably knew something about it, and was
   convinced of the truth of Paul's statements; but he trifled with his
   convictions, and with his prisoner. He "deferred" further inquiry for
   the present, making some excuse about the coming of Lysias. Meanwhile
   however, he gave orders, that Paul should be treated with kindness and
   consideration, and that his friends should be allowed free access to
   him.

   Not many days after this, Felix entered the audience chamber with his
   wife Drusilla, and sent for Paul. They were evidently curious to hear
   him discourse "concerning the faith of Christ." But Paul was not the
   one to gratify the curiosity of a Roman libertine, and a profligate
   Jewish princess. The faithful apostle, in preaching Christ, spoke
   plainly and boldly to the conscience of his hearers. He had now an
   opportunity in his bonds, which he could otherwise scarcely have
   obtained. "And as he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and
   judgment to come, Felix trembled." And little wonder. If we are to
   believe the historians of his own day, Josephus and Tacitus, a more
   unprincipled or dissolute couple never sat before a preacher. But,
   though conscience stricken, Felix remained impenitent. Fearful
   condition! "Go thy way," said he, "for this time; when I have a
   convenient season, I will call for thee." But that convenient season
   never came, though he frequently saw the apostle afterwards, and, we
   doubt not, gave him to understand that a bribe would procure his
   release. Little did the Roman governor think that his venal justice was
   to be recorded in the book of God, and handed down to all succeeding
   generations. His character is represented as mean, cruel, and
   dissolute; that in the indulgence of all kinds of wickedness he
   exercised the power of a king with the temper of a slave. "But after
   two years, Porcius Festus came into Felix's room, and Felix, willing to
   show the Jews a pleasure, left Paul bound."

   PAUL APPEARS BEFORE

   FESTUS AND AGRIPPA

   Immediately after Festus arrived in the province, he visited Jerusalem.
   There the leading Jews seized the opportunity to demand Paul's return.
   Their plea, doubtless, was that he should be tried again before the
   Sanhedrim, but their real purpose was to kill him on the way. Festus
   refused their petition. He invited them, however, to go down with him
   to Cæsarea and accuse him there. The trial took place and resembles
   that before Felix. It is quite evident that Festus saw clearly enough,
   that Paul's real offence was connected with the religious opinions of
   the Jews, and that he had committed no offence against the law; but at
   the same time, being desirous to ingratiate himself with the Jews, he
   asks Paul whether he would go to Jerusalem to be tried there. This was
   little better than a proposal to sacrifice him to Jewish hatred. Paul,
   being well aware of this, at once appealed to the Emperor --"I appeal
   unto Cæsar."

   Festus was no doubt surprised at the dignity and independence of his
   prisoner. But it was his privilege as a Roman citizen, to have his
   cause transferred to the supreme tribunal of the Emperor at Rome. "Then
   Festus, when he had conferred with the council, answered, Hast thou
   appealed unto Cæsar? unto Cæsar shalt thou go."

   So far as the eye of man can see, this was Paul's only resource under
   the circumstances. But the hand and purpose of the Lord were in it.
   Paul must bear witness for Christ and the truth in Rome also. Jerusalem
   had rejected the testimony to the Gentiles; Rome too must have its
   share in rejecting the same testimony, and in becoming the prison of
   the witness. But in all this Paul is highly favoured of the Lord. His
   position resembles that of his blessed Master, when He was given up to
   the Gentiles by the hatred of the Jews, only the Lord was perfect in it
   all, and He was in His true place before God. He came to the Jews
   --this was His mission: Paul was delivered from the Jews --such was the
   difference. Christ gave Himself up, as we read, "Who through the
   eternal Spirit offered himself without spot to God." Part of Paul's
   commission runs thus: --"Delivering thee from the people and from the
   Gentiles, unto whom now I send thee." But Paul returned to "the people"
   in the energy of his human affections, after he had been placed outside
   of them in the energy of the Holy Ghost. (Acts 26:17) Jesus had taken
   him out from both Jew and Gentile, to exercise a ministry that united
   the two in one body in Christ. As Paul himself says, "Wherefore
   henceforth know we no man after the flesh." In Christ Jesus there is
   neither Jew nor Greek. We now resume the history of the great apostle.

   PAUL APPEARS BEFORE

   AGRIPPA AND BERNICE

   It happened about this time that Agrippa, king of the Jews, and his
   sister Bernice, came to pay a complimentary visit to Festus. And as
   Festus knew not how to state Paul's case to the Emperor, he took the
   opportunity of consulting Agrippa, who was better in-formed than him on
   the points, in question. The Jewish prince, who must have known
   something of Christianity, and had no doubt heard of Paul himself,
   expressed a desire to hear him speak. Festus readily acceded to the
   request. "Tomorrow," said he, "thou shalt hear him."

   The apostle is now to have the privilege of bearing the name of Jesus
   before the most dignified assembly he has ever addressed. Jewish kings,
   Roman governors, military officers, and the chief men of Cæsarea
   assembled "with great pomp" to hear the prisoner give an account of
   himself to Agrippa. It was no mean audience, and it is perfectly clear
   that they regarded the prisoner as no mean person. Festus, having
   acknowledged the difficulty in which he found himself, referred the
   matter to the better knowledge of the Jewish king. Agrippa courteously
   signified to Paul that he was permitted to speak for himself. We have
   now come to one of the most interesting moments in the whole history of
   our apostle.

   The dignity of his manner before his judges, though he stretched out a
   hand that was chained to a soldier, must have deeply impressed his
   audience. The depth of his humiliation only manifested more strikingly
   the moral elevation of his soul. He thought neither of his chain nor of
   his person. Perfectly happy in Christ, and burning with love to those
   around him, self and circumstances were completely forgotten. With a
   dignified deference to the position of those who surrounded him, he
   rose, in the honest declarations of a good conscience, infinitely above
   them all. He addresses himself to the conscience of his audience, with
   the boldness and uprightness of a man accustomed to walking with God,
   and to act for Him. The character and conduct of the governors are
   thrown into painful contrast with the character and conduct of the
   apostle, and show us what the world is when unmasked by the Holy Ghost.

   "I pass over in silence," says one, "the worldly egotism which betrays
   itself in Lysias and Festus, by the assumption of all sorts of good
   qualities and good conduct --the mixture of awakened conscience and the
   absence of principle in the governors --the desire to please the Jews
   for their own, importance, or to facilitate their government of a
   rebellious people. The position of Agrippa and all the details of the
   history have a remarkable stamp of truth, and present the various
   characters in so living a style that we seem to be in the scene
   described; we see the persons moving in it. This, moreover, strikingly
   characterises the writings of Luke."

   Chapter 26. Paul addresses king Agrippa as one well versed in the
   customs and questions prevailing amongst the Jews; and he so relates
   his miraculous conversion and his subsequent career as to act on the
   conscience of the king. By the clear and straightforward narrative of
   the apostle, he was not far from, being convinced; his conscience was
   awakened; but the world and his own passions stood in the way. Festus
   ridiculed. To him it was nothing more than wild enthusiasm --a
   rhapsody. He interrupted the apostle abruptly, and "said with a loud
   voice, Paul, thou art beside thyself; much leaning doth make thee mad."
   The apostle's reply was dignified and self-possessed, but intensely
   earnest; and, with great wisdom and discernment, he appeals at last to
   Agrippa. "I am not mad, most noble Festus; but speak forth the words of
   truth and soberness. For the king knoweth of these things, before whom
   also I speak freely; for I am persuaded that none of these things are
   hidden from him; for this thing was not done in a corner."

   Then turning to the Jewish king, who sat beside Festus, he made this
   direct and solemn appeal to him --"King Agrippa, believest thou the
   prophets? I know that thou believest."

   "Then Agrippa said unto Paul, Almost thou persuadest me to be a
   Christian."

   For the moment, the king was carried away by the power of Paul's
   address, and by the sharpened sting of his appeals. Then Paul made his
   reply --a reply, which stands alone. It is characterised by godly zeal,
   Christian courtesy, burning love for souls, and great personal joy in
   the Lord.

   "And Paul said, I would to God, that not only thou, but also all that
   hear me this day, were both almost and altogether such as I am, except
   these bonds."

   With the expression of this noble wish, the conference closed. The
   meeting was dissolved. Agrippa had no desire to hear more. The appeals
   had been too pointed, too personal, yet so mingled with dignity,
   affection, and solicitude, that he was overcome. Then "the king rose
   up, and the governor, and Bernice, and they that sat with them." After
   a brief consultation, Festus, Agrippa, and their companions came to the
   conclusion that Paul was guilty of nothing worthy of death or even
   imprisonment. "This man;" said Agrippa, "might have been set at
   liberty, if he had not appealed unto Cæsar."

   This was the Lord's care of His beloved servant. He would have his
   innocence proved and acknowledged by his judges, and fully established
   before the world. This being accomplished, the king and his companions
   resume their places in the world and its gaieties, and Paul returns to
   his prison. But never was his heart happier or more filled with the
   spirit of his Master than at that moment.

   PAUL'S VOYAGE TO ROME A.D. 60

   Acts 27. The time was now come for Paul's journey to Rome. No formal
   trial of the apostle had yet taken place. And, no doubt, wearied with
   the unrelenting opposition of the Jews --with two years' imprisonment
   at Cæsarea and repeated examinations before the governors and Agrippa,
   he had claimed a trial before the imperial court. Luke, the historian
   of the Acts, and Aristarchus of Thessalonica, were favoured to
   accompany him. Paul was committed to the charge of a centurion named
   Julius, of the imperial band, an officer, who, upon all occasions,
   treated the apostle with the greatest kindness and consideration.

   It was then "determined" that Paul should be sent along with "certain
   other prisoners," by sea to Italy "And entering into a ship of
   Adramyttium, we launched," says Luke, "meaning to sail by the coast of
   Asia. And the next day we touched at Sidon. And Julius courteously
   entreated Paul, and gave him liberty to go unto his friends to refresh
   himself." Loosing from Sidon they were forced to sail under the lee of
   Cyprus, because the winds were contrary, and come to Myra, a city of
   Lycia. Here the centurion had his prisoners transferred to a ship of
   Alexandria on her voyage to Italy. In this vessel, after leaving Myra,
   "they sailed slowly many days" the weather being unfavourable from the
   first. But running to the leeward of Crete, they safely reached "the
   Fair Havens."

   Winter was now near, and it became a serious question what course
   should be taken --whether they should remain at Fair Havens for the
   winter, or seek some better harbour.

   Here we must pause for a moment and notice the wonderful position of
   our apostle in this serious consultation. As before Festus and Agrippa,
   he appears before the captain, the owner, the centurion, and the whole
   crew, as having the mind of God. He counsels, directs, and acts, as if
   he were really the master of the vessel, in place of being a prisoner
   in the custody of soldiers. He advised that they should remain where
   they were. He warned them that they would meet with violent weather if
   they ventured out to the open sea --that much injury would be done to
   the ship and cargo, and much risk to the lives of those on board. But
   the master and the owner of the ship, who had the greatest interest in
   her, were guided by circumstances and not by faith; they were willing
   to run the risk of seeking a more commodious harbour to winter in, and
   the centurion naturally deferred to their judgment. All were against
   the judgment of the man of faith --the man of God --the man who was
   speaking and acting for God. Even the circumstances in the scene around
   them seemed to favour the opinion of the sailors rather than that of
   the apostle. But nothing can falsify the judgment of faith. It must be
   true in spite of every circumstance.

   It was therefore resolved by the majority that they should leave Fair
   Havens, and sail to Port Phenice as a more secure winter harbour. The
   wind changed just at this moment. Everything seemed to favour the
   sailors. "The south wind blew softly;" so sanguine were they, Luke
   tells us, that they supposed their purpose was already accomplished.
   (Verse. 13) They accordingly weighed anchor and, with a soft breeze
   from the south, the vessel, with her "two hundred threescore and
   sixteen souls" on board, left the port of Fair Havens. But scarcely had
   she rounded Cape Matala, a distance of only four or five miles, when a
   violent wind from the shore caught the vessel, and tossed her in such a
   manner that it was no longer possible for the helmsman to make her keep
   her course. And as Luke observes, "We let her drive;" that is, they
   were compelled to let her run before the wind.

   But our chief concern here is with Paul as the man of faith. What must
   have been the thoughts and feelings now of his fellow-passengers? They
   had trusted to the wind, and they must now reap the whirlwind. The
   solemn counsels and warnings of faith had been rejected. Many, alas!
   heedless of the warning here recorded, and under the flattering wind of
   favourable circumstances, have launched on the great voyage of life,
   utterly regardless of the voice of faith. But like the fawning wind
   that betrayed the vessel from the harbour, all soon changed into a
   furious tempest on the troubled sea of life.

   THE STORM IN THE SEA OF ADRIA

   The term "Euroclydon" given to this tempestuous wind indicates, we are
   told, a storm of the utmost violence. It was accompanied by the
   agitation and whirling motion of the clouds, and by great commotion in
   the sea, raising it in columns of spray. The sacred historian now
   proceeds to give an accurate account of what was done with the vessel
   in these perilous circumstances. Having run to the leeward of Clauda,
   they may have escaped for a little the violence of the tempest. This
   would give them an opportunity to make every preparation for weathering
   the storm.

   The day after they left Clauda --the violence of the storm continuing
   --they began to lighten the ship by throwing overboard whatever could
   be spared. All hands seem to have been at work. "And we being
   exceedingly tossed with a tempest, the next day they lightened the
   ship; and the third day we cast out with our own hands the tackling of
   the ship. And when neither sun nor stars in many days appeared, and no
   small tempest lay on us, all hope that we should be saved was then
   taken away."

   "His race performed, the sacred lamp of day

   Now dipped in western clouds his parting ray;

   His languid fires, half lost in ambient haze,

   Refract along the dusk a crimson blaze:

   Till deep emerged the sinking orb descends,

   And cheerless night o'er heaven her reign extends;

   Sad evening's hour, how different from the past!

   No flaming pomp, no blushing glories cast,

   No ray of friendly light is seen around;

   The moon and stars in hopeless shade are drown'd."

   Nothing could be more dreadful to ancient mariners than the continued
   over-clouded sky, as they were accustomed to be guided by their
   observation of the heavenly bodies. It was at this moment of perplexity
   and despair that the apostle "stood forth" and raised his voice amidst
   the storm. And from his word of sympathy we learn, that all their other
   sufferings were aggravated by the difficulty of preparing food. "But
   after long abstinence Paul stood forth in the midst of them, and said,
   Sirs, ye should have hearkened unto me, and not have loosed from Crete,
   and to have gained this harm and loss. And now I exhort you to be of
   good cheer: for there shall be no loss of any man's life among you, but
   of the ship. For there stood by me this night the angel of God, whose I
   am, and whom I serve, saying, Fear not, Paul; thou must be brought
   before Cæsar: and, lo, God hath given thee all them that sail with
   thee. Wherefore, sirs, be of good cheer: for I believe God; that it
   shall be even as it was told me. Howbeit we must be cast upon a certain
   island." (Acts Chapter 27:21 - 26)

   THE SHIPWRECK

   The shipwreck was not far distant. "When the fourteenth night was come,
   as we were driven up and down in Adria, about midnight the shipmen
   deemed that they drew near to some country; and sounded, and found it
   twenty fathoms: and when they had gone a little further, they sounded
   again, and found it fifteen fathoms." Fourteen days and nights this
   heavy gale continued without abatement; during which time their
   sufferings must have been great beyond description.

   At the close of the fourteenth day, "about midnight," the sailors heard
   a sound, which indicated that they were nearing land. The sound, no
   doubt, was the roar of the breakers on the unknown shore. No time was
   to be lost; so they immediately cast four anchors out of the stern, and
   anxiously wished for day. Here a natural but ungenerous attempt was
   made by the sailors to save their own lives. They lowered the boat with
   the professed purpose of laying out anchors from the bow, but intending
   to desert the sinking ship. Paul, seeing this, and knowing their real
   design, immediately "said to the centurion and to the soldiers, Except
   these abide in the ship, ye cannot be saved. Then the soldiers cut the
   ropes of the boat, and let her fall off." Thus the divine counsel of
   the apostle was the means of saving all on board. "Except these abide
   in the ship, ye cannot be saved." It is no longer the ship's captain or
   the ship's crew that are looked to for wisdom and safety. Every eye is
   turned to Paul the prisoner --the man of faith --the man who believes
   and acts according to the revelation of God. Circumstances often
   mislead when looked to for direction; the word of God is our only sure
   guide, whether in fair or in foul weather.

   During the anxious interval, which remained till the dawn of day, Paul
   had an opportunity of lifting up his voice to God, and for the
   encouragement of the whole company. What a scene of intensified
   interest it must have been! The night dark and stormy --the shattered
   vessel in danger of going down at her anchors, or of being dashed to
   pieces on the rocky shore. But there was one on board who was perfectly
   happy amidst it all. The state of the ship --the shallow water --the
   alarming sound of the breakers, had no terror for him. He was happy in
   the Lord, and in full communion with His very thoughts and purposes.
   Such is the Christian's place in the midst of every storm, though
   comparatively few rise to it, faith only can reach it. This was Paul's
   last exhortation to the ship's company.

   "And while the day was coming on, Paul besought them all to take meat,
   saying; this day is the fourteenth day that ye have tarried and
   continued fasting, having taken nothing. Wherefore I pray you to take
   some meat: for this is for your health: for there shall not a hair fall
   from the head of any of you. And when he had thus spoken, he took
   bread, and gave thanks to God in presence of them all; and when he had
   broken it, he began to eat. Then were they all of good cheer, and they
   also took some meat." (Acts Chapter 27:33 - 36)

   Their only hope now was to run the ship on shore and so escape to land.
   Though ignorant of the coast, "they discovered a certain creek with a
   shore," or, a smooth beach, and determined to run the ship aground
   there. So they cast away the anchors, unloosed the rudder bands,
   hoisted the mainsail to the wind, and made for the shore. The ship thus
   driven, her bow stuck fast in the beach and remained unmoved, but the
   stern was broken to pieces by the violence of the waves.

   Paul's ship has now reached the shore; and once more the man of faith
   is the means of saving the lives of all the prisoners. The centurion,
   greatly influenced by the words of Paul, and anxious at least for his
   safety, prevents the soldiers from killing the prisoners, and gave
   orders that those who could swim should cast themselves first into the
   sea and get to land; and that the rest should follow on such boards or
   broken pieces of the ship as were available. "And so it came to pass,
   that they escaped all safe to land." Their deliverance was as complete
   as Paul had predicted it would be.

   PAUL AT MELITA -- NOW MALTA

   Acts 28. The inhabitants of the island received the shipwrecked
   strangers with no small kindness, and immediately lighted a fire to
   warm them. The sacred historian gives us a living picture of the whole
   scene. We see the persons described moving in it: the apostle gathering
   sticks for the fire --the viper fastening on his hand --the barbarians
   thinking him first a murderer, and then a god from the sting being
   harmless. Publius, the chief man of the island, lodged them courteously
   three days; and his father, who lay sick of a fever, was healed by Paul
   laying his hands on him and praying for him. The apostle was enabled to
   work many miracles during his stay on the island; and the whole
   company, for his sake, was loaded with many honours. We see God is with
   His beloved servant, and he exercises his accustomed power among the
   inhabitants. As the concluding part of Paul's journey to Rome is so
   prosperous, that scarcely any incident in it is recorded, we will only
   notice it briefly.

   After a three months' stay in Malta, the soldiers and their prisoners
   left in a ship of Alexandria for Italy. They touched at Syracuse, where
   they tarried three days; and at Rhegium, from which place they had a
   fair wind to Puteoli. Here they "found brethren," and while they were
   spending a few days with them, enjoying the ministry of brotherly love,
   the news of the apostle's arrival reached Rome. The Christians at once
   sent forth some of their number, who met Paul and his friends at Appii
   Forum and the Three Taverns. A beautiful instance and illustration of
   the fellowship of saints followed. What must have been the feelings of
   our apostle on this first introduction to the Christians from the
   church at Rome! His long cherished desire was at last accomplished; his
   heart was filled with praise; "He thanked God," as Luke says, "and took
   courage."

   PAUL'S ARRIVAL AT ROME

   Along the Appian Road most probably, Paul and his company travelled to
   Rome. On their arrival, "the centurion delivered the prisoners to the
   captain of the guard: [26] but Paul was suffered to dwell by himself
   with a soldier that kept him." Though he was not released from the
   constant annoyance of being chained to a soldier, every indulgence
   compatible with his position was allowed him.

   Paul was now privileged "to preach the gospel to them that were at Rome
   also;" and proceeded without delay to act upon his divine rule --"to
   the Jew first." He sends for the chief of the Jews and explains to them
   his true position. He assures them that he had committed no offence
   against his nation, or the customs of the fathers; but that he was
   brought to Rome to answer certain charges made against him by the Jews
   in Palestine: and so unfounded were the charges, that even the Roman
   Governor was ready to set him free, but the Jews opposed his liberty.
   In fact it was, as he said, "for the hope of Israel I am bound with
   this chain." His only crime has been his firm faith in the promises of
   God to Israel through the Messiah.

   The Roman Jews, in reply, assured Paul that no report to his prejudice
   had reached Rome, and that they desired to hear from himself a
   statement of his faith; adding, that the Christians were everywhere
   spoken against. A day was therefore fixed for a meeting at his own
   private lodgings. At the appointed time many came, "to whom he
   expounded and testified the kingdom of God, persuading them concerning
   Jesus, both out of the law of Moses and out of the prophets, from
   morning till evening." But the Jews at Rome, as at Antioch and
   Jerusalem, were slow of heart to believe. "And some believed the things
   which were spoken and some believed not." But how earnestly and
   unweariedly he laboured to win their hearts for Christ! From morning
   till evening he not only preached Christ, but also sought to persuade
   them concerning Him. He sought, we may be sure, to persuade them
   concerning His Godhead and manhood --His perfect sacrifice --His
   resurrection, ascension, and glory. What a lesson and what a subject
   for the preacher in all ages! Persuading men concerning Jesus from
   morning till evening.

   The condition of the Jews is now set before us for the last time. The
   judgment pronounced by Esaias was about to fall on them in all its
   withering power --a judgment under which they lie to this day --a
   judgment which shall continue until God interpose to give them
   repentance, and to deliver them by His grace to the glory of His own
   name. But, in the meantime, "the salvation of God is sent to the
   Gentiles, and they will hear it;" and, as we know, blessed be His name,
   they have heard it, we ourselves being witnesses of it. [27]

   "And Paul dwelt two whole years in his own hired house, and received
   all that came unto him; preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching
   those things which concern the Lord Jesus Christ, with all confidence,
   no man forbidding him." (Acts 28:30, 31)

   These are the last words of the Acts. The scene on which the curtain
   falls is most suggestive --the opposition of Jewish unbelief to the
   things, which concerned their souls' salvation, suggestive alas! of
   what soon befell them. And here too, ends the history of this precious
   servant of God, so far as it has been directly revealed. The voice of
   the Spirit of truth on this subject becomes silent. Our further
   knowledge of Paul's subsequent history must be gathered almost
   exclusively from his later Epistles; and from these we learn more than
   mere history: they give us a blessed insight into the feelings,
   conflicts, affections, and sympathies of the great apostle, and of the
   condition of the church of God generally, down to the period of his
   martyrdom.

   THE BOOK OF THE ACTS TRANSITIONAL

   But here we must pause and contemplate for a moment our apostle as a
   prisoner in the imperial city. The gospel had now been preached from
   Jerusalem to Rome. Great changes had taken place in the dispensational
   ways of God. The book of the Acts is transitional in its character. The
   Jews, we see, are now set aside, or rather they have set themselves
   aside by their rejection of that which God was setting up. The counsels
   of His grace towards them, no doubt, abide forever sure, but in the
   meantime they are cast off, and others come in and take the place of
   blessed relationship with God. Paul was a witness of God's grace to
   Israel; he was himself an Israelite, but also chosen of God to
   introduce something entirely new --the Church, the body of Christ,
   "Whereof I was made a minister... that I should preach among the
   Gentiles the un-searchable riches of Christ; and to make all men see
   what is the fellowship of the mystery, which from the beginning of the
   world hath been hid in God, who created all things by Jesus Christ."
   (Eph. 3:7 - 9) This new thing set aside all distinction between Jew and
   Gentile, as sinners and in the oneness of this body. The hostility of
   the Jews to these truths never abated, as we have fully seen; and the
   results of this enmity we have also seen. The Jews disappear from the
   scene entirely; and the church becomes the vessel of God's testimony on
   the earth, and His habitation by the Spirit. (Eph. 2: 22) Individual
   Jews, of course, who believe in Jesus, are blessed in connection with a
   heavenly Christ and the "one body;" but Israel for a time is left
   without God, and without present communication with Him. The Epistles
   to the Romans and to the Ephesians fully set forth this doctrine.
   (Especially Romans, chapters 9, 10, & 11.) We now return to:

   PAUL'S OCCUPATION

   DURING HIS IMPRISONMENT

   Though a prisoner, he was allowed the freest communication with his
   friends, and he was then surrounded by many of his oldest and most
   faithful companions. From the Epistles we learn that Luke, Timothy,
   Tychicus, Epaphras, Aristarchus, and others, were with the apostle at
   this time. Still, we must remember that he was, as a prisoner, chained
   to a soldier and exposed to the rude control of such. Owing to the long
   delay of his trial, he was in this condition for two years; during
   which time he preached the gospel and opened up the scriptures to the
   congregations which came to hear him; and wrote several epistles to
   churches in distant places.

   Having fully and faithfully discharged the duty, which he owed to the
   Jews, the favoured people of God, he addressed himself to the Gentiles,
   though not, of course, to the exclusion of the Jews. His door was open
   from morning till night to all who would come and hear the great truths
   of Christianity. And in some respects he never had a better
   opportunity; for, as he was under the protection of the Romans, the
   Jews were not allowed to molest him.

   The effects of Paul's preaching, through the Lord's blessing, were soon
   made manifest. The Roman guards, the household of Cæsar, and "all other
   places" were blessed through his means. "I would ye should understand,
   brethren," he writes to the Philippians, "that the things which
   happened unto me have fallen out rather unto the furtherance of the
   gospel; so that my bonds in Christ are manifest in all the palace (or,
   Cæsar's court), and in all other places." And again, the apostle says,
   "All the saints salute you, chiefly they that are of Cæsar's
   household." (Phil. 1:12, 13; 4:22) The blessing appears to have been
   first manifested in the praetorium, or amongst the praetorian guards.
   "So that my bonds in Christ are manifest in all the palace, and in all
   other places." The gospel of the glory, which Paul preached was heard
   by the whole camp. Even the kind prefect Burrhus, with his intimate
   friend Seneca, Nero's tutor, may have heard the gospel of the grace of
   God. Paul's courteous manners, and great abilities, both natural and
   acquired, were well fitted to attract both the statesman and the
   philosopher. His being there two whole years gave them many
   opportunities.

   With nearly the whole of the guards, we may say, he must have been
   personally acquainted. With every change of guard the door for the
   gospel opened wider and wider. Being constantly chained to one of the
   soldiers as his keeper, and having the guard duly relieved, he thus
   became acquainted with many; and with what love and earnestness and
   burning eloquence, he must have spoken to them of Jesus and of their
   need of Him! But we must wait till the morning of the first
   resurrection to see the results of Paul's preaching there: the day will
   declare it, and God shall have all the glory.

   The apostle gives us also to know that the gospel had penetrated into
   the palace itself. There were saints in Cæsar's household. Christianity
   was planted within the imperial walls, "and in all other places." Yes,
   in "all other places," says the sacred historian. Not only was Paul
   thus labouring within the imperial precincts, but his companions, whom
   he styles his "fellow labourers," were no doubt preaching the gospel in
   "all other places," in and around the imperial city; so that the
   success of the gospel must be ascribed to the efforts of others, as
   well as to the unwearied exertions of the great apostle in his
   captivity.

   THE RUNAWAY SLAVE, ONESIMUS

   But of all the converts whom the Lord gave to the apostle in his bonds,
   none of them seems to have so entirely won his heart as the poor
   runaway slave, Onesimus. Beautiful picture of the strength, the
   humility, and the tenderness of divine love in the heart, which works
   by the Spirit, and sweetly shines in all the details of individual
   life! The apostle's success in the imperial palace weakens not his
   interest in a young disciple from the lowest condition of society. No
   portions of the community were more depraved than the slaves; but what
   must have been the associates of a fugitive slave in that profligate
   city? Yet from those lowest depths Onesimus is drawn forth by the
   unseen hand of eternal love. He crosses the path of the apostle, hears
   him preach the gospel, is converted, devotes himself at once to the
   Lord and to His service, and finds in Paul a friend and brother, as
   well as a leader and teacher. And now shine forth the virtues and the
   value of Christianity; and the sweetest applications of the grace of
   God to a poor, friendless, destitute, fugitive slave.

   "What is Christianity?" we may inquire; and whence its origin, in the
   view of such a new thing in Rome --in the world? Was it at the feet of
   Gamaliel that Paul so learnt to love? No my reader, but at the feet of
   Jesus. Would to God that the eloquent historian of "The Decline and
   Fall of the Roman Empire" had entered into this scene, and learnt to
   value, in place of scornfully ridiculing, divine Christianity! If we
   think for a moment of the apostle's labours at this time --of his age
   --of his infirmities --of his circumstances (to say nothing of the
   lofty subjects, and the immense foundation truths, that were then
   occupying his mind); we may well admire the grace that could enter into
   every detail of the relationships of master and slave, and that with
   such delicate consideration of every claim. The letter he sent with
   Onesimus to his injured master Philemon is surely the most touching
   ever written. Looking at it simply as such, we are at a loss whether
   most to admire the warmth and earnestness of his affections, the
   delicacy and justness of his thoughts, or the sublime dignity which
   pervades the whole epistle. We now refer for a moment to the:

   EPISTLES WRITTEN

   DURING PAUL'S IMPRISONMENT

   There can be no reasonable doubt, that THE EPISTLES TO PHILEMON, TO THE
   EPHESIANS, TO THE COLOSSIANS, and to the PHILIPPIANS were written
   towards the latter part of Paul's imprisonment at Rome. He refers to
   his "bonds" in them all, and repeatedly to the expectation of his
   "release." (Read Philemon 22; Col. 4:18; Ephesians. 3:1; 4:1; 6:20;
   Phil. 1:7, 25; 2:24; & 4:22) Besides he must have been at Rome long
   enough for the news of his imprisonment to reach his affectionate
   Philippians, and for them to send him relief.

   The first three are supposed to have been written some time before that
   to the Philippians. An immediate issue of his cause is more distinctly
   spoken of in his Epistle to them. "Him therefore I hope to send
   presently, so soon as I shall see how it will go with me. But I trust
   in the Lord that I also myself shall come shortly." (Phil. 2:23, 24)
   The first three may have been written about the spring of A.D. 62, and
   sent by Tychicus and Onesimus; the last, in the autumn and sent by
   Epaphroditus.

   The Epistle to the HEBREWS is also supposed by some to have been
   written about the same time, and every just consideration leads to the
   conclusion that Paul was the writer. The expression at the close of the
   epistle, "they of Italy salute you," seems decisive as to where the
   writer was when he wrote it. And the following passages seem decisive
   as to the time; "Know ye that our brother Timothy is set at liberty:
   with whom, if he come shortly, I will see you." Compare this with what
   Paul wrote to the Philippians --"I trust in the Lord Jesus to send
   Timotheus shortly unto you... so soon as I shall see how it will go
   with me. But I trust in the Lord that I also myself shall come
   shortly." We can scarcely doubt that the same pen wrote these passages
   about the same time, and that they refer to the same intended
   movements. But we do not press this point. One thing, however, is
   evident --that the epistle was written before the destruction of
   Jerusalem in A.D. 70, as the temple was standing, and the temple
   worship going on undisturbed. (Compare Hebrews chapter 8:4; 9:25;
   10:11; and 13:10 - 13)

   PAUL'S ACQUITTAL AND RELEASE

   After fully four years' imprisonment, partly in Judea and partly at
   Rome, the apostle is once more at liberty. But we have no particulars
   as to the character of his trial, or the ground of his acquittal. The
   sacred historian tells us that he dwelt two whole years in his own
   hired house; but he does not say what followed at the close of that
   period. Was it followed by the apostle's condemnation and death, or by
   his acquittal and liberation? This is the question, and the only
   certain answer to this question must be gathered chiefly from the
   Pastoral Epistles. The First to Timothy and that to Titus appear to
   have been written about the same time, and the Second to Timothy
   somewhat later.

   It is now admitted, we believe, by nearly all who are competent to
   decide on such a question, that Paul was acquitted, and that he spent
   some years in travelling, at perfect liberty, before he was again
   imprisoned and condemned. And though it is difficult to trace the
   footsteps of the apostle during that period, still we may draw certain
   conclusions from his letters without encroaching on the domain of
   conjecture. Most likely he travelled rapidly and visited many places.
   During the lengthened period of his imprisonment, Paul's enemies had
   done much mischief in churches, which he had been the means of
   planting. They required his presence, his counsel, and his
   encouragement. And from what we know of his energy and zeal, we are
   well assured that no labour would be spared in visiting them.

   PAUL'S DEPARTURE FROM ITALY

   1) When Paul wrote to the Romans, (before being imprisoned by them), he
   expressed intention's of passing through Rome into Spain. "Whensoever I
   take my journey into Spain," he says, "I will come to you." Again,
   "When therefore I have performed this, and have sealed to them this
   fruit, I will come by you into Spain." (Rom. 15:24, 28) Some have
   thought that he did go to Spain immediately after his release. The
   principal evidence adduced in favour of this hypothesis is supplied by
   Clement, a fellow labourer, mentioned in Philippians 4:3, said to be
   afterwards Bishop of Rome. The writer speaks of Paul as having preached
   the gospel in the east and in the west: --that he instructed the whole
   world (meaning, no doubt, the Roman Empire); and that he had gone to
   the extremity of the west, meaning Spain. As Clement was Paul's own
   disciple and fellow labourer, his testimony is worthy of our respect;
   still it is not scripture, and therefore not in itself conclusive.

   2) From Paul's more recent letters, he seems to have altered his plans,
   and to have given up the idea of going to Spain, at least for a time.
   This we gather chiefly from the Epistles to Philemon and to the
   Philippians. To the former he writes, "But withal prepare me also a
   lodging: for I trust that through your prayers I shall be given unto
   you." (Verse. 22) He here gives Philemon to expect that he may soon be
   with him in person. To the Philippians he writes, and speaking of
   Timothy he adds, "Him therefore I hope to send presently, so soon as I
   shall see how it will go with me. But I trust in the Lord that I also
   myself shall come shortly." Again, "But I trust in the Lord Jesus to
   send Timotheus shortly unto you, that I also may be of good comfort
   when I know your state." (Chap. 2:19, 23, 24) The intended movements of
   the apostle and his beloved Timothy seem quite clear from these
   passages. It was evidently the purpose of the apostle to dispatch
   Timothy to Philippi as soon as the trial was over, and to remain in
   Italy himself until Timothy returned with the report of their state.

   3) It may reasonably be expected that Paul fulfilled the intention,
   which he so lately expressed; and that he visited the churches in Asia
   Minor, some of which as yet had not seen his face in the flesh. Having
   accomplished the objects of his mission to Asia Minor, some have
   thought that then he may have undertaken his long meditated journey
   into Spain; but of this we have no reliable information, and mere
   conjecture is of no value.

   4) Another theory is, that he went straight from Italy to Judea, and
   thence to Antioch, Asia Minor, and Greece. This scheme is founded
   chiefly on Hebrews 13:23, 24. "Know ye that our brother Timothy is set
   at liberty; with whom, if he come shortly, I will see you . . . They of
   Italy salute you." It is also supposed that, while he was waiting at
   Puteoli for embarkation, immediately on the return of Timothy, tidings
   reached the apostle that a great persecution had broken out against the
   Christians in Jerusalem. This sad intelligence so filled the heart of
   Paul with such sorrow, that he wrote at once his famous letter to them
   --THE EPISTLE TO THE HEBREWS. Shortly after this Timothy arrived, and
   Paul and his companions sailed from Judea. [28]

   PLACES VISITED BY PAUL

   DURING HIS LIBERTY

   Having stated these different theories for the reader's examination, we
   will now notice the places mentioned in the Epistles as visited by
   Paul.

   1) At some time after leaving Rome, Paul and his companions must have
   visited Asia Minor and Greece. "As I besought thee still to abide at
   Ephesus, when I went into Macedonia, that thou mightest charge some
   that they teach no other doctrine." (1 Tim. 1:3) Feeling, it may be,
   somewhat anxious about his son Timothy, and the weight of the
   responsibilities of his position at Ephesus, he sends him a letter of
   encouragement, comfort, and authority from Macedonia --THE FIRST
   EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY.

   2) Some time after this, Paul visited the island of Crete in company
   with Titus, and left him there. He also very soon after sent him a
   letter of instruction and authority, THE EPISTLE TO TITUS. Timothy and
   Titus may be considered as delegates or representatives of the apostle.
   "For this cause left I thee in Crete, that thou shouldest set in order
   the things that are wanting, and ordain elders in every city, as I had
   appointed thee." (Titus 1:5)

   3) Paul was intending to spend the winter at a place called Nicopolis.
   "When I shall send Artemas unto thee, or Tychicus, be diligent to come
   unto me to Nicopolis, for I have determined there to winter." (Titus 3:
   12)

   4) He visited Troas, Corinth, and Miletum. "The cloak that I left at
   Troas with Carpus, when thou comest, bring with thee, and the books,
   but especially the parchments... Erastus abode at Corinth; but
   Trophimus have I left at Miletum sick." (2 Tim. 4:13, 20)

   PAUL'S SECOND IMPRISONMENT

   AT ROME

   It is supposed by some that the apostle was arrested at Nicopolis
   (where he intended to spend the winter) and thence carried a prisoner
   to Rome. Others suppose that, after wintering at Nicopolis, and
   visiting the places above mentioned, he returned to Rome in a state of
   personal liberty, but was arrested during the Neronian persecution and
   thrown into prison.

   The precise charge now made against the apostle, and for which he was
   arrested, we have no means of ascertaining. It may have been simply on
   the charge of being a Christian. The general persecution against the
   Christians was now raging with the utmost severity. It was no longer
   about certain questions of the law, and under the mild and humane
   prefect Burrhus; but he was now treated as an evil-doer --as a common
   criminal: "wherein I suffer trouble, as an evil-doer even unto bonds"
   --and very different from the bonds of his first imprisonment, when he
   dwelt in his own hired house.

   Alexander --of Ephesus, we believe --evidently had something to do with
   his arrest. He was either one of his accusers, or, at least, a witness
   against him. "Alexander the coppersmith," he writes to Timothy, "did me
   much evil" --"exhibited much evil-mindedness towards me." Ten years
   before this, he had stood forward as the open antagonist of the apostle
   in Ephesus. (Acts 19) He may now have sought his revenge by laying
   information against the apostle before the prefect. That it was the
   same Alexander of Ephesus seems clear from the charge to Timothy; "of
   whom be thou ware also." (2 Timothy 4:14, 15)

   During the apostle's first and lengthened imprisonment, he was
   surrounded by many of his oldest and most valued companions, whom he
   styles "fellow-laborers and fellow-prisoners." By means of these, his
   messengers, though chained to a single spot himself, he kept up a
   constant communication with his friends throughout the empire, and with
   Gentile churches which had not seen his face in the flesh. But his
   second imprisonment was a perfect contrast to all this. He had parted
   from all his ordinary companions. Erastus abode at Corinth; Trophimus
   had been left sick at Miletum; Titus had gone to Dalmatia; Crescens to
   Galatia; Tychicus had been dispatched to Ephesus; and the lukewarm
   Demas had forsaken him, "having loved this present world."

   The apostle was now almost entirely alone. "Only Luke is with me," he
   says. But the Lord thought of His deserted and solitary servant. A
   bright beam, as from the fountain of love, shines amidst the darkness
   and dreariness of his prison. There was one faithful amidst the general
   defection, and one who was not ashamed of the apostle's chain. How
   peculiarly sweet and refreshing to the heart of the apostle must the
   ministry of Onesimus have been at this time! It can never be forgotten.
   Onesimus and his house --which Paul links with himself --shall be held
   in everlasting remembrance; and shall reap the fruit of his courage and
   devotedness to the apostle for ever and ever. "I was in prison, and ye
   came unto me." (Matthew 25:31- 46)

   Concerning the circumstances of Paul's trial we have no certain
   information. Most probably in the spring of A.D. 66 or 67, Nero took
   his seat on the tribunal, surrounded by his jurors, and the imperial
   guard; and Paul was brought into the court. We have reason to believe
   that the large space was filled with a promiscuous multitude of Jews
   and Gentiles. The apostle stood once more before the world. He had
   again the opportunity of proclaiming to all nations that for which he
   had been made a prisoner --"That all the Gentiles might hear." Emperors
   and senators, princes and nobles, and all the great ones of the earth,
   must hear the glorious gospel of the grace of God. All that the enemy
   had done becomes a testimony to the name of Jesus. Those who were
   otherwise inaccessible hear the gospel preached with power from on
   high.

   Fain would we dwell on this wonderful scene for a few moments. Never
   before had there been such a witness, and such a testimony, in Nero's
   judgment hall. The wisdom of God in turning all the efforts of the
   enemy into such a testimony is most profound; while His love and grace
   in the gospel shine ineffable and alike to all classes. The apostle
   himself commands our devout admiration. Though at this moment his heart
   was broken by the unfaithfulness of the church, he stood forth strong
   in the Lord and in the power of His might. Though men had forsaken him,
   the Lord stood by him and strengthened him. He boldly confronted his
   enemies, pleading in his own cause and the cause of the gospel. He had
   an opportunity to speak of Jesus, of His death and resurrection, so
   that the heathen multitude might hear the gospel. His age, his
   infirmities, his venerable form, his fettered arm, would all tend to
   deepen the impression of his manly and straightforward eloquence. But,
   happily, we have an account from his own pen of the first hearing of
   his defence. He writes thus to Timotheus immediately after: "At my
   first answer [when I was heard in my defence] no man stood with me, but
   all men forsook me: I pray God that it may not be laid to their charge.
   Notwithstanding the Lord stood with me, and strengthened me; that by me
   the preaching might be fully known, and that all the Gentiles might
   hear; and I was delivered out of the mouth of the lion." (2 Timothy
   4:16, 17)

   "Look, now, and see Christ's chosen saint

   In triumph wear his Christ-like chain;

   No fear lest he should swerve or faint:

   His life is Christ, his death is gain."

   THE MARTYRDOM OF PAUL

   Although we have no record of the second stage of his trial, we have
   reason to believe that it soon followed the first, and that it ended in
   his condemnation and death. But THE SECOND EPISTLE TO TIMOTHY is the
   divine record of what was passing in his deeply exercised mind at this
   solemn moment. His deep concern for the truth and church of God; his
   pathetic tenderness for the saints, and especially for his beloved son
   Timothy; his triumphant hope in the immediate prospect of martyrdom,
   can only be told in his own words. "I am now ready to be offered, and
   the time of my departure is at hand. I have fought a good fight, I have
   finished my course, I have kept the faith: henceforth there is laid up
   for me a crown of righteousness, which the Lord, the righteous judge,
   shall give me at that day: and not to me only, but unto all them also
   that love his appearing." (Chapter 4:6 - 8)

   The tribunal of Nero here fades from his sight. Death in its most
   violent form has no terror for him. Christ in glory is the object of
   his eye and of his heart --the source of his joy and of his strength.
   His work was finished; and the toils of his love were ended. Though a
   prisoner and poor --though aged and rejected --he was rich in God; he
   possessed Christ, and in Him all things. The Jesus whom he had seen in
   glory at the commencement of his course, and who had brought him into
   all the trials and labours of the gospel, was now his possession and
   his crown. The unrighteous tribunal of Nero, and the bloodstained sword
   of the executioner, was to Paul but as the messengers of peace, who had
   come to close his long and weary path, and to introduce him into the
   presence of Jesus in glory. The time was now come for the Jesus that
   loved him to take him to Himself. He had fought the good fight of the
   gospel to the end; he had finished his course; it only remained for him
   to be crowned, when the Lord, the righteous Judge, appears in glory.

   "In all things more than conquerors

   Through Him that loved us--

   We know that neither death nor life,

   Nor angels, rulers, powers,

   Nor present things, nor things to come,

   Nor even height, nor depth,

   Nor any other creature thing

   Above, below, around,

   Can part us from the love of God,

   In Jesus Christ our Lord."

   We have the concurrent testimony of antiquity that Paul suffered
   martyrdom during the Neronian persecution, and most probably in A.D.
   67. As a Roman citizen, he was beheaded in place of being scourged and
   crucified or exposed to the frightful tortures then invented for the
   Christians. Like his Master he suffered "without the gate." There is a
   spot on the Ostian Road; about two miles beyond the city walls, where
   it is supposed his martyrdom took place. There the last act of human
   cruelty was executed, and the great apostle was "absent from the body,
   and present with the Lord." His fervent and happy spirit was released
   from his feeble and suffering body; and the long cherished desire of
   his heart was fulfilled --"to depart and to be WITH CHRIST; which is
   FAR BETTER."

   CHRONOLOGICAL TABLE OF

   PAUL'S LIFE

   (Years are approximate estimates)

   A.D. 36

   Conversion of Saul of Tarsus (Acts 9)

   A.D. 36 - 39

   At Damascus--preaches in the synagogue--goes into Arabia--returns to
   Damascus--flight from Damascus. His FIRST visit to Jerusalem; three
   years after his conversion. Thence to Tarsus (Acts 9:23 - 26; Galatians
   1:18)

   A.D. 39 - 40

   Rest of the Jewish churches (Acts 9: 31)

   A.D. 40 - 43

   Paul preaches the gospel in Syria and Cilicia. (Galatians. 1:21) A
   period of uncertain length During this time he probably undergoes the
   chief part of the perils and sufferings, which he recounts to the
   Corinthians. (2 Corinthians 11)

   He is brought from Tarsus to Antioch by Barnabas; and stays there a
   year before the famine. (Acts 11)

   A.D. 44

   Paul's SECOND visit to Jerusalem with the collection (Acts 11:30)

   A.D. 45

   Paul returns to Antioch in Syria (Acts 12:2 - 5)

   A.D. 46 - 49

   Paul's FIRST missionary journey with Barnabas --goes to Cyprus, Antioch
   in Pisidia, Iconium, Lystra, Derbe, and back through the same places to
   Antioch. They remain a long time in Antioch. Dissension and disputation
   about circumcision (Acts 13, 14, 15:1, 2)

   A.D. 50

   Paul's THIRD visit to Jerusalem with Barnabas, fourteen years after his
   conversion (Gal. 2:1)

   They attend the council at Jerusalem (Acts 15) Return of Paul and
   Barnabas to Antioch, with Judas and Silas (Acts 15:32 - 35)

   A.D. 51

   Paul's SECOND missionary journey with Silas and Timothy He goes from
   Antioch to Syria, Cilicia, Derbe, Lystra, Phrygia, Galatia & Troas Luke
   joins the apostolic band (Acts 16:10)

   A.D. 52

   Enter the gospel into Europe: Acts 16:11 - 13

   Paul visits Philippi, Thessalonica, Berea, and Athena Corinth. Spends a
   year and six months at Corinth (Acts 18:11) First Epistle to the
   Thessalonians written.

   A.D. 53

   Second Epistle to the Thessalonians written

   Paul leaves Corinth and sails to Ephesus.

   (Acts 18:18, 19)

   A.D. 54

   Paul's FOURTH visit to Jerusalem at the feast Returns to Antioch

   A.D. 54 - 56

   Paul's THIRD missionary journey--He departs from Antioch--visits
   Galatia, Phrygia, and reaches Ephesus, where he stays two years and
   three months. Here Paul separates the disciples from the Jewish
   synagogue. (Acts 19:8, 10)

   Epistle to the Galatians written

   A.D. 57

   (Spring) First Epistle to the Corinthians written

   The tumult at Ephesus--Paul leaves for Macedonia (Acts 19:23 - 20: 1)

   (Autumn) Second Epistle to the Corinth written

   (2 Corinthians 1:8; 2: 13,14; 7:5; 8: l; 9:1) Paul visits
   Illyricum--goes to Corinth--winters there (Romans 15:19; 1 Corinthians
   16: 6)

   A.D. 58

   (Spring) The Epistle to the Romans written (Romans 15:25 - 28; 16:21 -
   23; Acts 20:4) Paul leaves Corinth, passes through Macedonia, sails
   from Philippi, preaches at Troas, addresses the elders at Miletus,
   visits Tyre and Cæsarea. (Acts 20, 21:1 - 14)

   A.D. 58 - 60

   Paul's fifth visit to Jerusalem before Pentecost

   He is arrested in the temple, brought before Ananias and the Sanhedrim,
   sent by Lysias to Cæsarea, where he is kept in bonds two years.

   A.D. 60

   Paul heard by Felix and Festus. He appeals unto Cæsar, preaches before
   Agrippa, Bernice and the men of Cæsarea.

   (Autumn.) Paul sails for Italy.

   (Winter.) Shipwrecked at Malta. (Acts 27)

   A.D. 61

   (Spring) Arrives at Rome, dwells two years in his own hired house.

   A.D. 62

   (Spring) Epistles to Philemon, Colossians, and Ephesians written

   (Autumn) Epistle to the Philippians written

   A.D. 63

   (Spring) Paul acquitted and released. Epistle to the Hebrews written --
   Paul takes another journey, intending to visit Asia Minor and Greece
   (Philemon 22; Phil 2:24)

   A.D. 64

   Visits Crete and leaves Titus there--exhorts Timothy to abide at
   Ephesus, First Epistle to Timothy written, Epistle to Titus written

   A.D. 64 - 67

   Intends to winter at Nicopolis. (Titus 3:12) Visits Troas, Corinth,
   Miletum (2 Tim. 4: 13-20)

   Paul arrested and sent to Rome, Deserted and solitary, having only
   Luke, of his old associates, with him. Second Epistle to Timothy
   written, probably not long before his death. These journeys and events
   are generally supposed to cover a period of about three years.

   A.D. 67

   Paul's Martyrdom
     __________________________________________________________________

   [24] The Present Testimony, volume 8. pp. 405 - 407.

   [25] Synopsis of the Books of the Bible, vol. 4: pp. 84 - 95.

   [26] The wise and humane Burrhus was prefect of the pretorian guard
   when Julius arrived with his prisoners. He was a virtuous Roman, and
   ever treated Paul with the greatest consideration and kindness. --Dr.
   Smith's Dictionary of Biography.

   [27] See Introductory Lectures to the Acts by W. Kelly.

   [28] For particulars of the persecution referred to, see Josephus, Ant.
   20:9, 1.
     __________________________________________________________________

Chapter 7

   THE BURNING OF ROME

   As our two great apostles PETER and PAUL suffered martyrdom during the
   FIRST imperial persecution, it may be interesting to many of our
   readers to know something of the particulars which led to this cruel
   edict.

   But here, however reluctantly, we must turn from the sure word of God
   to the uncertain writings of men. We pass, just at this point, from the
   firm and solid ground of inspiration to the insecure footing of Roman
   historians and ecclesiastical history. Nevertheless, all historians,
   ancient and modern, pagan and Christian, are agreed as to the main
   facts of the burning of Rome, and the persecution of the Christians.

   In the month of July A.D. 64 a great fire broke out in the Circus,
   which continued to spread until it laid in ruins all the ancient
   grandeur of the imperial city. The flames extended with great rapidity,
   and Rome being a city of long narrow streets, and of hills and valleys,
   the fire gathered force from the winds, and soon became a general
   conflagration. In a short time the whole city seemed wrapped in one
   sheet of burning flame.

   TACITUS, a Roman historian of that day, and considered one of the most
   accurate of his time, tells us: "Of the fourteen quarters into which
   Rome was divided four only were left entire, three were reduced to
   ashes, and the remaining seven presented nothing better than a heap of
   shattered houses half in ruins." The fire raged furiously for six days
   and seven nights. Palaces, temples, monuments, the mansions of the
   rich, and the dwellings of the poor perished in this fatal fire. But
   these were nothing compared with the sufferings of the inhabitants. The
   infirmities of age, the weakness of the young, the helplessness of the
   sick, the wild screams and lamentations of women, added to the miseries
   of this dreadful scene. Some endeavoured to provide for themselves,
   others to save their friends, but no place of safety could be found.
   Which way to turn, or what way to go, no one could tell; the fire raged
   on every side, so that numbers fell prostrate in the street, embraced a
   voluntary death, and perished in the flames.

   The important question, as to how the fire originated, was now
   discussed everywhere. That the city was set on fire by incendiaries,
   and by the orders of Nero himself, nearly all believed. It was certain
   that a number of men were seen extending instead of extinguishing the
   flames; and they boldly affirmed that they had authority for doing so.
   It was also generally reported that, while Rome was in a blaze, the
   inhuman monster Nero stood on a tower where he could watch its
   progress, and amused himself by singing the fall of Troy to his
   favorite guitar.

   Many of our readers will no doubt wonder what object he could have in
   burning down the greater part of Rome? His object we believe was that
   he might rebuild the city on a scale of greater magnificence, and call
   it by his own name. And this he attempted immediately in the grandest
   way. But everything he did failed to restore him to popular favour, or
   remove the infamous charge of having set the city on fire. And when all
   hope was gone of propitiating either the people or the gods, he fell
   upon the plan of shifting the imputation from himself to others. He
   knew enough of the unpopularity of the Christians, both with the Jews
   and the heathen, to fix on them as his sin-bearers. A rumor was soon
   spread that the incendiaries had been discovered, and that the
   Christians were the criminals. Numbers were immediately arrested, that
   they might be brought to condign punishment, and satisfy the popular
   indignation. And now we arrive at:

   THE FIRST PERSECUTION

   UNDER THE EMPERORS

   But here we may pause for a moment, and contemplate the progress of
   Christianity, and the state of the church in Rome at this time. At a
   very early period, and without the aid of any apostle, Christianity had
   found its way to Rome. It was no doubt first earned thither by some who
   had been converted under Peter's preaching on the day of Pentecost.
   Amongst his hearers we have expressly mentioned "strangers of Rome,
   Jews, and proselytes." And Paul, in his Epistle to that church, thanks
   God that their "faith was spoken of throughout the whole world." And in
   his salutations he speaks of "Andronicus and Junia," his kinsmen and
   fellow prisoners, who were chief men among the apostles, and whose
   conversion was of an earlier date than his own. But great wonders had
   been wrought by the gospel in the course of thirty years. Christians
   had become a marked, a separate, and a peculiar people. They were now
   known as perfectly distinct from the Jews, and bitterly disclaimed by
   them.

   The labours of Paul and his companions, during the two years of his
   imprisonment, were no doubt blessed of the Lord to the conversion of
   great numbers. So that the Christians were by this time no secret or
   inconsiderable community, but were known to embrace in their numbers
   both Jews and Gentiles of all ranks and conditions, from the imperial
   household to the runaway slave. But their present suffering, as we have
   seen, was not for their Christianity. They were really sacrificed by
   Nero to appease the popular fury of the people, and to reconcile their
   offended deities.

   This was the first legal persecution of the Christians; and in some of
   its features it stands alone in the annals of human barbarity.
   Inventive cruelty sought out new ways of torture to satiate the blood
   thirsty Nero --the most ruthless Emperor that ever reigned. The gentle,
   peaceful, unoffending followers of the Lord Jesus were sewn in the
   skins of wild beasts, and torn by dogs; others were wrapped in a kind
   of dress smeared with wax, with pitch, and other combustible matter,
   with a stake under the chin to keep them upright, and set on fire when
   the day closed, that they might serve as lights in the public gardens
   of popular amusements. Nero lent his own gardens for these exhibitions,
   and gave entertainments for the people. He took an active part in the
   games himself, sometimes mingling with the crowd on foot, and sometimes
   viewing the awful spectacle from his chariot. But, accustomed as these
   people were to public executions and gladiatorial shows, they were
   moved to pity by the unexampled cruelties inflicted on the Christians.
   They began to see that the Christians suffered, not for the public
   good, but to gratify the cruelty of a monster. But fearful as their
   death was, it was soon over, and to them, no doubt, the happiest moment
   of their existence. Long, long before the lights were quenched in
   Nero's garden, the martyrs had found their home and rest above --in the
   blooming garden of God's eternal delights. This precious truth we learn
   from what the Saviour said to the penitent thief on the cross --"Today
   shalt thou be with me in Paradise." (Luke 23)

   Although historians are not agreed either as to the extent or the
   duration of this terrible persecution, there is too good reason to
   believe that it spread throughout the empire, and lasted till the end
   of the tyrant's life. He died by his own hand in utter wretchedness and
   despair, in A.D. 68, about four years after the burning of Rome, and
   one year after the martyrdom of PETER and PAUL. Towards the end of his
   reign the Christians were required, under the heaviest penalties, even
   that of death, to offer sacrifices to the emperor and to the heathen
   gods. While such edicts were in force the persecution must have
   continued.

   After the death of Nero the persecution ceased, and the followers of
   Jesus enjoyed comparative peace until the reign of Domitian, an emperor
   little behind Nero in wickedness. But meanwhile we must turn aside for
   a moment and notice the accomplishment of the Lord's most solemn
   warnings, in:

   THE DOWNFALL OF JERUSALEM A.D. 70

   The dispersion of the Jews, and the total destruction of their city and
   temple, are the next events of consideration in the remainder of the
   first century, though, strictly speaking, that fearful catastrophe is
   no part of church history; it belongs to the history of the Jews. But
   as it was a literal fulfillment of the Saviour's prophecy, and
   immediately affected those who were Christians, it deserves a place in
   our history.

   The disciples, before the death and resurrection of Christ, were
   strongly Jewish in all their thoughts and associations. They connected
   the Messiah and the temple together. Their thought was that He should
   deliver them from the power of the Romans, and that all the prophecies
   about the land, the tribes, the city and the temple would be
   accomplished. But the Jews rejected the Messiah Himself, and,
   consequently, all their own hopes and promises in Him. Most significant
   and weighty are the opening words of Matthew 24, "And Jesus went out
   and departed from the temple." It was now empty indeed in the sight of
   God. All that gave it value to Him was gone. "Behold your house is left
   unto you desolate." It was now ripe for destruction.

   "And his disciples came to him for to show him the buildings of the
   temple." They were still occupied with the outward greatness and glory
   of these things. "And Jesus said unto them, See ye not all these
   things? verily I say unto you, There shall not be left here one stone
   upon another, that shall not be thrown down." These words were
   literally accomplished by the Romans about forty years after they were
   spoken, and in the very way that the Lord predicted. "For the days
   shall come upon thee, that thine enemies shall cast a trench about
   thee, and compass thee round, and keep thee in on every side, and shall
   lay thee even with the ground, and thy children within thee; and they
   shall not leave in thee one stone upon another; because thou knewest
   not the time of thy visitation." (Luke 19:43, 44)

   After the Romans had experienced many disappointments and defeats in
   attempting to make a breach in the walls, through the desperate
   resistance of the insurgent Jews, even until little hope was left of
   taking the city, Titus summoned a council of war. Three plans were
   discussed: to storm the city immediately; to repair the works and
   rebuild the engines; or to blockade and starve the city to surrender.
   The last was preferred, and the whole army was set to work "to cast a
   trench" around the city. But the siege was long and difficult. It
   lasted from the spring till September. And during all that time, the
   most unexampled miseries of every kind were experienced by the
   besieged. But at last the end came, when both the city and the temple
   were in the hands of the Romans. Titus was anxious to save the
   magnificent temple and its treasures. But, contrary to his orders, a
   soldier, mounting on the shoulders of one of his comrades threw a
   blazing brand into a small gilded door in the outer building or porch.
   The flames sprang up at once. Titus, observing this, rushed to the spot
   with the utmost speed; he shouted, he made signs to his soldiers to
   quench the fire; but his voice was drowned, and his signs unnoticed in
   the fearful confusion. The splendor of the interior filled him with
   wonder. And as the flames had not yet reached the holy place, he made a
   last effort to save it, and exhorted the soldiers to stay the
   conflagration; but it was too late. Blazing brands were flying in all
   directions, and the fierce excitement of battle, with the insatiable
   hope of plunder had reached its highest pitch. Titus little knew that a
   greater than he had said: "There shall not be left here one stone upon
   another, that shall not be thrown down." The word of the Lord, not the
   commands of Titus, must be obeyed. The whole was thoroughly levelled,
   and razed to the foundations, according to the word of the Lord.

   For nearly every particular of this terrible siege, we are indebted to
   Josephus, who was in the Roman camp, and near the person of Titus at
   the time. He acted as interpreter when terms were talked of between
   Titus and the insurgents. The walls and bulwarks of Zion seemed
   impregnable to the Roman, and he felt most anxious to come to terms of
   peace; but the Jews rejected every proposal, and the Romans at length
   triumphed. On entering the city, Josephus tells us, Titus was struck
   with wonder at its strength; indeed when he contemplated the solid
   altitude of the towers, the magnitude of the several stones, and the
   accuracy of their joining, and saw how great was their breadth, how
   vast their height, "Surely," he exclaimed, "we fought with God on our
   side; and God it was who brought the Jews down from these bulwarks; for
   what could human hands or engines avail against these towers?" Such
   were the confessions of the heathen general. It certainly was the most
   terrible siege that the whole history of the world records.

   The accounts given by Josephus of the sufferings of the Jews during the
   siege are too awful to be transferred to our pages. The numbers that
   perished under Vespasian in the country, and under Titus in the city,
   from A.D. 67-7O, by famine, internal factions, and the Roman sword,
   were one million three hundred and fifty thousand four hundred and
   sixty, besides one hundred thousand sold into slavery. [29] Such alas!
   alas! were the awful consequences of disbelieving and disregarding the
   solemn, earnest, and affectionate entreaties of their own Messiah. Need
   we wonder at the Redeemer's tears, shed over the infatuated city? And
   need we wonder at the preacher's tears now, as he appeals to infatuated
   sinners, in view of coming and eternal judgments? Surely the wonder is
   that so few tears are shed over thoughtless, careless, perishing
   sinners. Oh, for hearts to feel as the Saviour felt, and eyes to weep
   like His!

   The Christians, with whom we have more especially to do, remembering
   the Lord's warning, left Jerusalem in a body before the siege was
   formed. They journeyed to Pella, a village beyond the Jordan, where
   they remained till Hadrian permitted them to return to the ruins of
   their ancient city. And this brings us to THE CLOSE OF THE FIRST
   CENTURY.

   During the milder reigns of Vespasian and his son Titus, the number of
   Christians must have increased exceedingly. This we learn, not from any
   direct account that we have of their prosperity, but from incidental
   circumstances that prove it, and which we shall meet with immediately.

   THE CRUEL REIGN OF DOMITIAN

   DOMITIAN, the younger brother of Titus, ascended the throne in A.D. 81.
   But he was of a temper totally different from his father and brother.
   They tolerated the Christians; he persecuted them. His character was
   cowardly, suspicious, and cruel. He raised a persecution against the
   Christians because of some vague and superstitious fear that he
   entertained of the appearance of a person born in Judea of the family
   of David, who was to obtain the empire of the world. But neither did he
   spare Romans of the most illustrious birth and station who had embraced
   Christianity. Some were martyred on the spot, others, were banished to
   be martyred in their exile. His own niece, Domitilla, and his cousin,
   Flavius Clemens, to whom she had been given in marriage, were the
   victims of his cruelty for having embraced the gospel of Christ. Thus
   we see that Christianity, by the power of God, in spite of armies and
   emperors, fire and sword, was spreading, not only amongst the middle
   and lower, but also amongst the higher classes.

   "Domitian," says Eusebius, the father of ecclesiastical history,
   "having exercised his cruelty against many, and unjustly slain no small
   number of noble and illustrious men at Rome, and having, without cause,
   punished vast numbers of honourable men with exile and the confiscation
   of their property, at length established himself as the successor of
   Nero in his hatred and hostility to God." He also followed Nero in
   deifying himself. He commanded his own statue to be worshipped as a
   god, revived the law of treason, and put in fearful force its terrible
   provisions: under these circumstances, surrounded as he was with spies
   and informers, what must this second persecution of the Christians have
   been! [30]

   But the end of this weak, vain, and despicable tyrant drew near. He was
   in the habit of writing on a roll the names of those persons whom he
   designed to put to death, keeping it carefully in his own possession.
   And in order to throw such off their guard, he treated them with the
   most flattering attention. But this fatal roll was one day taken from
   under a cushion, on which he was reclining asleep, by a child who was
   playing in the apartment, and who carried it to the Empress. She was
   struck with astonishment and alarm at finding her own name on the dark
   list, together with the names of others apparently high in his favour.
   To such the Empress communicated the knowledge of their danger, and
   notwithstanding all the precaution that cowardice and cunning could
   suggest, he was dispatched by two officers of his own household.

   THE SHORT BUT PEACEFUL

   REIGN OF NERVA

   On the very day of Domitian's death, Nerva was chosen by the Senate to
   be Emperor, September 18^th, A.D. 96. He was a man of blameless
   reputation. The character of his reign was most favourable to the peace
   and prosperity of the church of God. The Christians who had been
   banished by Domitian were recalled, and recovered their confiscated
   property. The Apostle John returned from his banishment in the isle of
   Patmos, and resumed his place of service among the churches in Asia. He
   survived till the reign of Trajan, when, at the advanced age of about
   100 years, he fell asleep in Jesus.

   Nerva commenced his reign by redressing grievances, repealing
   iniquitous statutes, enacting good laws, and dispensing favours with
   great liberality. But feeling unequal to the duties of his position, he
   adopted Trajan as his colleague and successor to the empire, and died
   in A.D. 98.

   THE CONDITION OF CHRISTIANS DURING THE REIGN OF TRAJAN

   A.D. 98 - 117

   As the outward history of the church was then affected by the will of
   one man, it will therefore be necessary to notice, however briefly, the
   disposition or ruling passion of the reigning prince. Thus it was that
   the condition of the Christians everywhere depended to a great extent,
   on him who was master of the Roman world, and in a certain sense of the
   whole world. Still, God was and is over all.

   Trajan was an emperor of great renown. Perhaps none more so ever sat on
   the throne of the Cæsars. The Roman earth or world, it is said, reached
   its widest limits by his victories. He caused the terror of the Roman
   arms and the Roman discipline to be felt on the frontier as none before
   him had done. He was thus a great general and a military sovereign; and
   being possessed of a large and vigorous mind, he was an able ruler, and
   Rome flourished under his sway. But in the history of the church his
   character appears in a less favourable light. He had a confirmed
   prejudice against Christianity, and sanctioned the persecution of
   Christians. Some say that he meditated the extinction of the name. This
   is the deepest stain, which rests on the memory of Trajan.

   But Christianity, in spite of Roman emperors, and Roman prisons, and
   Roman executions, pursued its silent steady course. In little more than
   seventy years after the death of Christ, it had made such rapid
   progress in some places as to threaten the downfall of paganism. The
   heathen temples were deserted, the worship of the gods was neglected,
   and victims for sacrifices were rarely purchased. This naturally raised
   a popular cry against Christianity, such as we had at Ephesus: "This
   our craft is in danger to be set at naught, and the temple of the great
   goddess Diana to be despised." Those whose livelihood depended on the
   worship of the heathen deities, laid many and grievous complaints
   against the Christians before the governors. This was especially so in
   the Asiatic provinces where Christianity was most prevalent.

   About the year 110 many Christians were thus brought before the
   tribunal of Pliny the younger, the governor of Bithynia and Pontus. But
   Pliny, being naturally a wise, candid, and humane man, took pains to
   inform himself of the principles and practices of the Christians. And
   when he found that many of them were put to death who could not be
   convicted of any public crime, he was greatly embarrassed. He had not
   taken any part in such matters before, and no settled law on the
   subject then existed. The edicts of Nero had been repealed by the
   Senate, as were those of Domitian by his successor, Nerva. Under these
   circumstances, Pliny applied for advice to his master, the Emperor
   Trajan. The letters, which then passed between them, being justly
   considered as the most valuable record of the history of the church
   during that period, deserve a place in our "Short Papers." But we can
   only transcribe a portion of Pliny's celebrated epistle, and chiefly
   those parts, which refer to the character of Christians, and the
   extension of Christianity.

   C. PLINY to TRAJAN EMPEROR

   "Health. --It is my usual custom, sire, to refer all things, of which I
   harbour any doubt, to you. For who can better direct my judgment in its
   hesitation, or instruct my understanding in its ignorance? I never had
   the fortune to be present at any examination of Christians before I
   came into this province. I am therefore at a loss to determine what is
   the usual object either of inquiry or of punishment, and to what length
   either of them is to be carried... In the mean time this has been my
   method with respect to those who were brought before me as Christians.
   I asked them whether they were Christians: if they pleaded guilty, I
   interrogated them --a second and a third time --with a menace of
   capital punishment. In case of obstinate perseverance, I ordered them
   to be executed ...An anonymous "Libel" was published, containing the
   names of many who denied that they were, or had been, Christians, and
   invoked the gods, as I prescribed, and prayed to your image, with
   incense and wine, and moreover reviled Christ --none of which things I
   am told a real Christian can ever be compelled to do. So I thought
   proper to dismiss them.

   The whole of the crime or error of the Christians lay in this --they
   were accustomed on a certain day to meet before daylight, and to sing
   among themselves a hymn to Christ, as a god; and to bind themselves by
   an oath not to commit any wickedness; not to be guilty of theft, or
   robbery, or adultery; never to falsify their word, nor to deny a pledge
   committed to them when called upon to return it. When these things were
   performed, it was their custom to separate, and then to come together
   again to a harmless meal, of which they partook in common without any
   disorder; but this last practice they have ceased to attend to since
   the publication of my edict, by which, according to your commands, I
   prohibited assemblies.

   After this account, I judged it the more necessary to examine, and that
   by torture, two females, who were said to be deaconesses; but I have
   discovered nothing except a bad and excessive superstition. Suspending,
   therefore, all judicial proceedings, I have recourse to you for advice.
   The number of the accused is so great as to call for serious
   consultation. Many persons are informed against, of every age and rank,
   and of both sexes; and many more will be accused. Nor has the contagion
   of this superstition seized cities only, but the lesser towns also, and
   the open country: nevertheless, it seems to me that it may be
   restrained and corrected. It is certain that the temples, which were
   almost forsaken, begin to be more frequented; and the sacred
   solemnities, after a long intermission, are revived. Victims likewise
   are everywhere bought up, whereas for a time there were few purchasers.
   Whence it is easy to imagine what numbers of them might be reclaimed if
   pardon were granted to those who repent."

   TRAJAN TO PLINY

   "You have done perfectly right, my dear Pliny, in the inquiry which you
   have made concerning Christians. For truly no one general rule can be
   laid down which will apply itself to all cases. These people must not
   be sought after: if they are brought before you and convicted, let them
   be capitally punished; yet with this restriction, that if any one
   renounce Christianity, and evidence his sincerity by supplicating our
   gods, however suspected he may be for the past, let him on his
   repentance obtain pardon. But anonymous libels in no case ought to be
   attended to: for it is a very dangerous precedent, and perfectly
   incongruous with the maxims of our age."

   The clear and unsuspected testimony of these two letters awakens
   thoughts and feelings of the deepest interest in the Christian's mind
   of today. The First Epistle of St. Peter was addressed to the fathers
   of these holy sufferers, and possibly to some of themselves then alive;
   and it is not unlikely that Peter laboured amongst them personally.
   Thus were they taught and encouraged beforehand to give to the Roman
   governor "a reason for the hope that was in them with meekness and
   fear." Indeed the whole of the first Epistle seems divinely fitted to
   strengthen these unoffending Christians against the unjust and
   unreasonable course of Pliny. "Forasmuch then as Christ hath suffered
   for us in the flesh, arm yourselves likewise with the same mind" Peter
   contemplates in his epistle the family of faith as on a journey through
   the wilderness, and God as the supreme Governor ruling over all
   --believers and unbelievers. "For the eyes of the Lord are over the
   righteous, and his ears are open to their prayers: but the face of the
   Lord is against them that do evil." With such a scene before us, and
   such witnesses, making allowance for the position of Trajan and Pliny
   as heathen statesmen, it may be well to inquire at this early stage of
   our history, What was and is:

   THE REAL CAUSE OF PERSECUTION

   Although different reasons may be given by different persons and
   governments for persecuting Christians, yet we believe that the real
   cause is the heart's enmity against Christ and His truth, as seen in
   the godly lives of His people. Besides, their light makes manifest the
   darkness around, and exposes and reproves the inconsistencies of false
   professors, and the godless lives of the wicked. The enemy, taking
   occasion by these things, stirs up the cruel passions of those in power
   to quench the light by persecuting the light bearer. "For every one
   that doeth evil hateth the light." Such has been the experience of all
   Christians, in all ages, both in times of peace and in times of
   trouble. There is no exemption from persecution, secretly or openly, if
   we live according to the Spirit and truth of Christ. Amongst the last
   words that the great apostle wrote were these: "Yea, and all that will
   live godly in Christ Jesus shall suffer persecution." (2 Timothy 3: 12)

   These divine truths, given for the instruction and guidance of the
   church in all ages, were strikingly illustrated in the case of Pliny
   and the Christians of Bithynia. All historians speak of him as one of
   the most enlightened, virtuous, and accomplished men of antiquity. He
   was also possessed of great wealth, and he had the reputation of being
   most liberal and benevolent in private life. Why then, it may he asked,
   as a Roman statesman and governor, did he become such a persecutor of
   the Christians? This question he answers in his own letter. It was
   simply for their faith in Christ --nothing else. It had been proved to
   him, both by friends and foes, that the Christians were guilty of no
   evil, morally, socially, or politically. Having thrice asked the
   question, "Are you Christians?" if they steadfastly affirmed that they
   were, he condemned them to death. The only pretext, which he gave to
   cover the injustice of his conduct as a governor, was the fact that the
   Christians were obstinate professors of a religion not established by
   the laws of the empire.

   Many, from private malice and other reasons, were at this time
   anonymously accused of being Christians, who were not really so. These
   were tested, by being called upon to deny the faith, offer incense to
   the gods, worship the image of the emperor, and revile Christ. All who
   complied with these terms were dismissed. But none of those things,
   Pliny is made to witness, can those who are true Christians ever be
   compelled to do. He next had recourse to the brutal custom of examining
   innocent persons by torture. Two females, noted servants of the church,
   were thus examined. But, instead of the expected disclosures as to the
   rumored seditious and licentious character of their meetings, nothing
   unfavourable to the Christian community could be tortured out of them.
   The governor could detect nothing by every means he tried, except what
   he calls "a perverse and extravagant superstition."

   It must also be borne in mind, both to the credit and also to the
   deeper guilt of Pliny, that he did not proceed against the Christians
   from mere popular prejudice --unlike his friend Tacitus, who allowed
   himself to be carried away by prevailing rumors, and without further
   inquiry, to write against Christianity in the most unreasonable and
   disgraceful manner. But Pliny considered it his duty to enter into a
   careful investigation of the whole matter before giving his judgment.
   How then can we account for such a man, apparently desirous of acting
   impartially, persecuting to death a blameless people? To answer this
   question, we must inquire into the outward, or ostensible causes of
   persecution.

   THE OSTENSIBLE

   CAUSES OF PERSECUTION

   The Romans professed to tolerate all religions, from which the
   commonwealth had nothing to fear. This was their boasted liberality.
   Even the Jews were allowed to live according to their own laws. What
   was it then, we may well ask, that could have caused all their severity
   to the Christians? Had the commonwealth anything to fear from them? Had
   it anything to fear from those whose lives were blameless, whose
   doctrines was the pure truth of heaven, and whose religion was
   conducive to the people's welfare, both publicly and privately?

   The following may be considered as some of the unavoidable causes of
   persecution, looking at both sides of the question:

   1) Christianity, unlike all other religions that preceded it, was
   aggressive in its character. Judaism was exclusive; the religion of one
   nation, Christianity was proclaimed as the religion of mankind or the
   whole world. This was an entirely new thing on the earth. "Go ye into
   all the world, and preach the gospel to every creature," was the Lord's
   command to the disciples. They were to go forth and make war with
   error, in every form and in all its workings. The conquest to be made
   was the heart for Christ. "The weapons of our warfare," says the
   apostle, "are not carnal, but mighty through God to the pulling down of
   strongholds; casting down imaginations, and every high thing that
   exalteth itself against the knowledge of God, and bringing into
   captivity every thought to the obedience of Christ." (2 Cor. 10:4, 5)
   In this war of aggression with existing institutions, and with the
   corrupt habits of the heathen, the disciples of Jesus had little to
   expect but resistance, persecution, and suffering.

   2) The pagan religion, which Christianity was rapidly undermining and
   destined to overthrow, was an institution of the State. It was so
   closely interwoven with the entire civil and social systems, that to
   attack the religion was to be brought into conflict with both the civil
   and the social. And this was exactly what took place. Had the primitive
   church been as accommodating to the world as Christendom is now, much
   persecution might have been avoided. But the time had not come for such
   lax accommodation. The gospel, which the Christians then preached, and
   the purity of doctrine and life which they maintained, shook to the
   very foundation the old and deeply rooted religion of the State.

   3) The Christians naturally withdrew themselves from the pagans. They
   became a separate and distinct people. They could not but condemn and
   abhor polytheism, as utterly opposed to the one living and true God,
   and to the gospel of His Son Jesus Christ. This gave the Romans the
   idea that Christians were unfriendly to the human race, seeing they
   condemned all religions but their own. Hence they were called
   "Atheists," because they did not believe in the heathen deities, and
   derided the heathen worship.

   4) Simplicity and humility characterised the Christians' worship. They
   peaceably came together before sunrise or after sunset, to avoid giving
   offence. They sang hymns to Christ as to God; they broke bread in
   remembrance of His love in dying for them; they edified one another and
   pledged themselves to a life of holiness. But they had no fine temples,
   no statues, no order of priests, and no victims to offer in sacrifice.
   The contrast between their worship and that of all others in the empire
   became most manifest. The heathen, in their ignorance, concluded that
   the Christians had no religion at all, and that their secret meetings
   were for the worst of purposes. The world now, as then, would say of
   those who worship God in spirit and in truth, "these people have no
   religion at all." Christian worship, in true simplicity, without the
   aid of temples and priests, rites and ceremonies, is not much better
   understood now by professing Christendom than it was then by pagan
   Rome. Still it is true, "God is a Spirit; and they that worship him
   must worship him in spirit and in truth." (John 4:24)

   5) By the progress of Christianity the temporal interests of a great
   number of persons were seriously affected. This was a fruitful and
   bitter source of persecution. A countless throng of priests,
   image-makers, dealers, soothsayers, augurs, and artisans, found good
   livings in connection with the worship of so many deities.

   6) All these, seeing their craft in danger, rose up in united strength
   against the Christians, and sought by every means to arrest the
   progress of Christianity. They invented and disseminated the vilest
   calumnies against everything Christian. The cunning priests and the
   artful soothsayers easily persuaded the vulgar, and the public mind in
   general, that all the calamities, wars, tempests, and diseases that
   afflicted mankind, were sent upon them by the angry gods, because the
   Christians who despised their authority were everywhere tolerated. [31]

   Many other things might be mentioned, but these were everywhere the
   daily causes of the Christians' sufferings, both publicly and
   privately. Of the truth of this a moment's reflection will convince
   every reader. But faith could see the Lord's hand and hear His voice in
   it all: "Behold, I send you forth as sheep in the midst of wolves; they
   will deliver you up to the councils, and they will scourge you in their
   synagogues; and ye shall be brought before governors and kings for my
   sake, for a testimony against them and the Gentiles... Think not that I
   am come to send peace on earth: I came not to send peace, but a sword."
   (Matthew 10)

   This much having been said as to the great opposition which the early
   church had to contend against, it will be necessary to glance for a
   moment at the real cause or causes and means of:

   THE RAPID PROGRESS

   OF CHRISTIANITY

   Doubtless the causes and the means were divine. They proved themselves
   to be so. The Spirit of God, who descended in power on the day of
   Pentecost, and who had taken up His abode in the church and in the
   individual Christian, is the true source of all success in preaching
   the gospel, in the conversion of souls, and in testimony for Christ
   against evil. "Not by might, nor by power, but by my Spirit, saith the
   Lord." Besides, the Lord has promised to be with His people at all
   times. "Lo, I am with you always, even unto the end of the world."
   (Zech. 4:6, 7; Matt. 28:18 - 20) But our object at present is to look
   at things historically, and not merely according to the assurance of
   faith.

   1) One great cause of the rapid spread of Christianity is its perfect
   adaptation to man in every age, in every country, and in every
   condition. It addresses all as lost, and supposes a like want in all.
   Thus it suits the Jew and the Gentile, the king and the subject, the
   priest and the people, the rich and the poor, the young and the old,
   the learned and the ignorant, the moral and the profligate. It is God's
   religion for the heart, and there asserts His sovereignty, and His
   only! It announces itself as the "power of God unto salvation to every
   one that believeth." It proposes to raise man from the deepest depths
   of degradation to the loftiest heights of eternal glory. Who can
   estimate, in spite of every prejudice, the effect of the proclamation
   of such a gospel to miserable and benighted heathen? Thousands,
   millions, tired of a worthless and worn out religion, responded to its
   heavenly voice, gathered around the name of Jesus, took joyfully the
   spoiling of their goods, and were ready to suffer for His sake. Love
   ruled in the new religion, hatred in the old.

   2) Its sanction and maintenance of all earthly relations, according to
   God, were other reasons for the acceptance of the gospel among the
   heathen. Each one was exhorted to remain in these relationships, and
   seek to glorify God therein. The blessings of Christianity to wives,
   children and servants, are unspeakable. Their love, happiness, and
   comfort were astonishment to the heathen, and a new thing amongst them.
   Yet all was natural and orderly. A Christian, who is said to have lived
   about this time --the early part of the second century, thus describes
   his contemporaries: "The Christians are not separated from other men by
   earthly abode, by language, or by customs. They dwell nowhere in cities
   by themselves, they do not use a different language, or affect a
   singular mode of life. They dwell in the cities of the Greeks, and of
   the barbarians, each where his lot has been cast: and while they
   conform to the usages of the country, in respect to dress, food, amid
   other things pertaining to the outward life, they yet show a
   peculiarity of conduct wonderful and striking to all. They obey the
   existing laws, and conquer the laws by their own living." [32]

   3) The blameless lives of the Christians; the divine purity of their
   doctrines; their patient, cheerful endurance of sufferings worse than
   death, as well as death itself; their disregard for all the objects of
   ordinary ambition; their boldness in the faith at the risk of life,
   credit and property, were chief means in the rapid spread of
   Christianity. "For who," says Tertullian, "that beholds these things,
   is not impelled to inquire into the cause? And who, when he has
   inquired, does not embrace Christianity; and when he has embraced it,
   does not himself wish to suffer for it?"

   These few particulars will enable the reader to form a more definite
   judgment as to what it was that tended on the one hand to hinder, and
   on the other hand to further the progress of the gospel of Christ.
   Nothing can be more interesting to the Christian mind than the study of
   this great and glorious work. The Lord's workmen, for the most part,
   were plain unlettered men; they were poor, friendless and destitute of
   all human aid; and yet, in a short time, they persuaded a great part of
   mankind to abandon the religion of their ancestors, and to embrace a
   new religion which is opposed to the natural dispositions of men, the
   pleasures of the world, and the established customs of ages. Who could
   question the inward power of Christianity with such outward facts
   before them? Surely it was the Spirit of God who clothed with power the
   words of these early preachers! Surely their force on the minds of men
   was divine. A complete change was produced: they were born again
   --created anew in Christ Jesus.

   In less than a hundred years from the day of Pentecost the gospel had
   penetrated into most of the provinces of the Roman Empire, and was
   widely diffused in many of them. In our brief outline of the life of
   St. Paul, and in the chronological table of his missions, we have
   traced the first planting of many churches, and the propagation of the
   truth in many quarters. In large central cities, such as Antioch in
   Syria, Ephesus in Asia, and Corinth in Greece, we have seen
   Christianity well established, and spreading its rich blessings among
   the surrounding towns and villages.

   We also learn from ecclesiastical antiquity, that what these cities
   were to Syria, Asia, and Greece, Carthage was to Africa. When Scapula,
   the president of Carthage, threatened the Christians with severe and
   cruel treatment, Tertullian, in one of his pointed appeals, bids him
   bethink himself. "What wilt thou do," he says, "with so many thousands
   of men and women of every age and dignity as will freely offer
   themselves? What fires, what swords wilt thou stand in need of! What is
   Carthage itself likely to suffer if decimated by thee: when every one
   there shall find his near kindred and neighbours, and shall see there
   matrons, and men perhaps of thine own rank and order, and the most
   principal persons, and either the kindred or friends of those who are
   thy nearest friends? Spare then, therefore, for thy sake, if not for
   ours." [33]

   We now resume the narrative of events, and the next in order to be
   related is:

   THE MARTYRDOM OF IGNATIUS

   There is no fact in early church history more sacredly preserved than
   the martyrdom of Ignatius the bishop of Antioch; and there is no
   narrative more celebrated than his journey, as a prisoner in chains,
   from Antioch to Rome.

   According to the general opinion of historians, the Emperor Trajan,
   when on his way to the Parthian war in the year 107, visited Antioch.
   From what cause it is difficult to say, but it appears that the
   Christians were threatened with persecution by his orders. Ignatius,
   therefore, being concerned for the church in Antioch, desired to be
   introduced to Trajan's presence. His great object was to prevent, if
   possible, the threatened persecution. With this end in view, he set
   forth to the Emperor the true character and condition of the
   Christians, and offered himself to suffer in their stead.

   The details of this remarkable interview are given in many church
   histories; but there is such an air of suspicion about them that we
   forbear inserting them. It ended, however, in the condemnation of
   Ignatius. He was sentenced by the Emperor to be carried to Rome, and
   thrown to the wild beasts for the entertainment of the people. He
   welcomed the severe sentence, and gladly submitted to be bound,
   believing it was for his faith in Christ and as a sacrifice for the
   saints.

   Ignatius was now committed to the charge of ten soldiers, who appear to
   have disregarded his age and to have treated him with great harshness.
   He had been bishop of Antioch for nearly forty years, and so must have
   been an old man. But they hurried him over a long journey, both by sea
   and land, in order to reach Rome before the games were ended. He
   arrived on the last day of the festival, and was carried at once to the
   amphitheatre, where he suffered according to his sentence in the sight
   of the assembled spectators. And thus the weary pilgrim found rest from
   the fatigues of his long journey in the blessed repose of the paradise
   of God.

   It has been asked, "Why was Ignatius taken all the way from Antioch to
   Rome to suffer martyrdom?" The answer can only be conjecture. It may
   have been with the intention of striking fear into other Christians, by
   the spectacle of one so eminent, and so well known, brought in chains
   to a dreadful and degrading death. But if this was the Emperor's
   expectation he was entirely disappointed. It had just the opposite
   effect. The report of his sentence and of his intended route spread far
   and wide, and deputations from the surrounding churches were sent to
   meet him at convenient points. He was thus cheered and greeted with the
   warmest congratulations of his brethren; and they, in return, were
   delighted to see the venerable bishop and to receive his parting
   blessing. Many of the saints would be encouraged to brave, if not
   desire, a martyr's death and a martyr's crown. Among the number who met
   him by the way was Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, who, like Ignatius, had
   been a disciple of St. John, and was destined to be a martyr for the
   gospel. But besides these personal interviews, he is said to have
   written seven letters on this journey, which have been preserved in the
   providence of God and handed down to us. Great interest has ever been,
   and still is attached to these letters.

   THE WRITINGS OF

   THE FATHERS AND SCRIPTURE

   But however worthy of all honour Ignatius may be as a holy man of God,
   and as a noble martyr for Christ, we must ever remember that his
   letters are not the word of God. They may interest and instruct us, but
   they cannot command our faith. This can only stand on the solid ground
   of the word of God, never on the infirm ground of tradition. "Scripture
   stands alone," as one has said, "in majestic isolation, pre-eminent in
   instruction, and separated by unapproachable excellence from everything
   written by the apostolic fathers: so that those who follow close to the
   apostles have left us writings which are more for our warning than our
   edification." At the same time these early Christian writers have every
   claim to the respect and veneration with which antiquity invests them.
   They were the contemporaries of the apostles, they enjoyed the
   privilege of hearing their instruction, and they shared with them the
   labours of the gospel, and freely conversed with them from day to day.
   Paul speaks of a Clement --a so called apostolic father --as his
   "fellow-laborer, whose name is in the book of life;" and what he says
   of Timothy may have been at least partly true of many others, "But thou
   hast fully known my doctrine, manner of life, purpose, faith, long
   suffering, charity, patience, persecution, and afflictions."
   (Philippians 4:3; 2 Timothy 3:10, 11)

   From those who were so highly privileged, we should naturally expect
   sound apostolic doctrine --a faithful repetition of the truths and
   instructions, which were delivered to them by the inspired apostles.
   But such, alas! is not the case. Ignatius was one of the earliest of
   the apostolic fathers. He became bishop of Antioch, the metropolis of
   Syria, about the year 70. He was a disciple of the apostle John, and
   survived him only about seven years. Surely from such a one we might
   have expected a close resemblance to the apostle's teaching; but it is
   not so. The definite and absolute statements of scripture, as coming
   direct from God to the soul, are widely different from the writings of
   Ignatius and of all the Fathers. Our only safe and sure guide is the
   word of God. How seasonable then is that word in the First Epistle of
   John, "Let that therefore abide in you, which ye have heard from the
   beginning. If that which ye have heard from the beginning shall remain
   in you, ye also shall continue in the Son and in the Father." (1 John
   2:24) This passage evidently refers more especially to the person of
   Christ, and consequently to the scriptures of the New Testament, in
   which we have the display of the Father in the Son, and made known to
   us by the Holy Spirit. In Paul's Epistles, we have more fully revealed
   the counsels of God concerning the church, Israel, and the Gentiles, so
   that we must go further back than "the Fathers" to find a true ground
   of faith; we must go back to that which existed from "THE BEGINNING."
   Nothing has direct divine authority for the believer, but that which
   was from "the beginning." This alone secures our continuing "in the Son
   and in the Father."

   The Epistles of Ignatius have been long esteemed by Episcopalians as
   the chief authority for the system of the English church; and this must
   be our excuse for referring so fully to this "Father." Nearly all their
   arguments in favour of episcopacy are founded on his letters. So
   strongly does he press submission to the Episcopal authority, and so
   highly does he extol it, that some have been induced to question their
   genuineness altogether, and others have supposed that they must have
   been largely interpolated to serve the prelatical interest. But with
   the controversy on these points we have nothing to do in our "Short
   Papers." [34]

   We will now resume our history from the death of Trajan in the year
   117, and briefly glance at the condition of the church during:

   THE REIGNS OF HADRIAN AND THE

   ANTONINES FROM - A.D. 117 - 180

   Although it would be unjust to class Hadrian and the first Antonine
   with the systematic persecutors of the church, nevertheless Christians
   were often exposed to the most violent sufferings and death during
   their dominion. The cruel custom of ascribing all public calamities to
   the Christians, and of calling for their blood as an atonement to the
   offended deities, still continued, and was generally yielded to by the
   local governors, and unchecked by the indifferent emperors. But under
   the reign of the second Antonine, Marcus Aurelius, the evil spirit of
   persecution greatly increased. It was no longer confined to the
   outbursts of popular fury, but was encouraged by the highest
   authorities. The slender protection which the ambiguous edicts of
   Trajan, Hadrian, and Antoninus afforded the Christians was withdrawn,
   and the excited passions of the idolatrous pagans were unrestrained by
   the government. It is most interesting to the student of scripture
   history to see how this could take place under the reign of a prince
   who was distinguished for learning, philosophy, and general mildness of
   character.

   The past sixty years of comparative peace had opened a wide field for
   the propagation of the gospel. During that period it made rapid
   progress in many ways. Christian congregations increased in numbers,
   influence, and wealth throughout every quarter of the Roman dominions.
   Many of the rich, being filled with divine love, distributed their
   substance to the poor, travelled into regions, which as yet had not
   heard the sound of the gospel, and, having planted Christianity, passed
   onto other countries. The Holy Spirit could not thus work without
   awakening the jealousy and stirring up all the enmity of the supporters
   of the national religion. Aurelius saw with an evil eye the superior
   power of Christianity over men's minds compared with his own heathen
   philosophy. He then became an intolerant persecutor, and encouraged the
   provincial authorities to crush what he considered a contumacious
   spirit of resistance to his authority. But the gospel of the grace of
   God was far beyond the reach of Aurelius and neither his sword nor his
   lions could arrest its triumphant career. In spite of the bloody
   persecutions which he excited or sanctioned, Christianity was
   propagated throughout the known world.

   But here we must pause for a little, and look around us. There is
   something deeper far in the change of government towards the church
   than the merely historical eye can discern. We believe that we are now
   come to:

   CLOSE OF THE FIRST PERIOD AND

   OPENING OF THE SECOND PERIOD

   The EPHESIAN condition of the church, looking at it in this light, may
   be said to have ended with the death of Antoninus Pius, in the year
   161; and the Smyrnean condition commenced with the reign of Marcus
   Aurelius. The persecution in Asia broke out with great violence in the
   year 167, under the new edicts of this Emperor; and Smyrna especially
   suffered greatly: the justly esteemed Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna,
   suffered martyrdom at this time. But in order to prove the view we have
   taken, it will be necessary to glance briefly at the addresses to the
   churches of Ephesus and Smyrna. And first, we begin with:

   THE ADDRESS TO THE CHURCH OF

   EPHESUS -- REVELATION 2:1-7

   The grand object of the church in this world was to be "the pillar and
   ground of the truth." It was set up to be a light bearer for God. A
   "golden candlestick" --a vessel, which bears the light, thus symbolizes
   it. It ought to have been a true witness of what God had manifested in
   Jesus on the earth, and of what He is now when Christ is in heaven. We
   further learn from this address, that the church, as a vessel of
   testimony in this world, is threatened with being set aside unless its
   first estate is maintained. But alas! it fails, as the creature always
   does. The angels, Adam, Israel, and the church, kept not their first
   estate. "Nevertheless I have somewhat against thee," saith the Lord,
   "because thou hast left thy first love. Remember therefore from whence
   thou art fallen, and repent, and do the first works; or else I will
   come unto thee quickly; and will remove thy candlestick out of his
   place, except thou repent."

   There was still, however, much that He could praise, and He does praise
   all that He can. As an assembly, they had patience; they had laboured
   and not fainted; they could not bear "evil men," or those who were
   seeking the highest place in the church. Nevertheless He feels the
   departure from Himself. "Thou hast left thy first love." He speaks as
   one disappointed. They had ceased to delight in His love to them, and
   hence their own love to Him declined. "First love" is the happy fruit
   of our appreciation of the Lord's love to us. "Outward testimony might
   go on," as one has said, "but that is not what the Lord most values,
   though value it He does, so far as it is simple genuine, and faithful.
   Still He cannot but prize most of all hearts devoted to Himself, the
   fruit of His own personal, self-sacrificing, perfect love. He has a
   spouse upon earth, whom He desires to see with no object but Himself,
   and kept pure for Him from the world and its ways. God has called us
   for this: not only for salvation, and a witness for Himself in
   godliness, though this is most true and important, but beyond all for
   Christ --a bride for His Son! Surely this should be our first and last,
   and constant and dearest thought, for we are affianced to Christ, and
   He at least has proved the fullness and faithfulness of His love to us.
   But what of ours!" [35]

   It was this state of things in Ephesus, and in the church at large,
   that called for the intervention of the Lord in faithful discipline.
   The church, as planted by Paul, had already fallen from its first
   estate. "All seek their own," he says, "not the things of Jesus
   Christ." And again, "All they which are in Asia be turned away from
   me." Hence, the "tribulation spoken of in the address to the church in
   Smyrna." Though the Lord is full of grace and love in all His ways
   towards His fallen and failing church, still He is righteous withal,
   and must judge evil. He is not seen in these addresses as the Head in
   heaven of the one body, nor as the Bridegroom of His church; but in His
   judicial character, walking in the midst of the candlesticks, having
   the attributes of a judge. (See chapter 1)

   It will be observed by the reader, that there is a measured distance
   and reserve in the style of His address to the church at Ephesus. This
   is in keeping with the place He takes in the midst of the golden
   candlesticks. He writes to the angel of the church, not to "the saints
   which are at Ephesus, and to the faithful in Christ Jesus," as in the
   Epistle by Paul.

   There have been many disputes about "who is meant by the angel." He was
   a person, we believe, so identified morally with the assembly that he
   represented it, and characterised it. The Lord addresses the angel, not
   the church immediately. "The angel," therefore, gives the idea of
   representation. For example, in the Old Testament we have the angel of
   Jehovah; the angel of the covenant; and in the New Testament we have
   the angels of the little children; and so of Peter, in Acts 12, they
   said, "It is his angel." We will now briefly glance at:

   THE ADDRESS TO THE CHURCH AT

   SMYRNA -- REVELATION 2:8-11

   Our interest in the history of the church is greatly increased when we
   see that the Lord has distinctly marked its successive epochs. The
   outward condition of the church down to the death of the first Antonine
   --so far as it can be ascertained from the most authentic histories
   --answers in a remarkable way to what we lean from scripture, and
   especially from the address to Ephesus. There was outward consistency
   and zeal; they were unwearied. It is also evident that there was
   charity, purity, devotedness, and holy courage, even to the greatest
   readiness to suffer in every way for the Lord's sake. At the same time
   it is clear, from both scripture and history, that false doctrine was
   making its way, and that many were manifesting a most unworthy zeal for
   official pre-eminence in the church. That forgetfulness of self, and
   that care for Christ and His glory, which are the first fruits of His
   grace, were gone. Historically we now come to the Smyrnean period. For
   the convenience of the reader we will give the address entire.

   "And unto the angel of the church in Smyrna write: These things saith
   the First and the Last, which was dead, and is alive; I know thy works,
   and tribulation, and poverty (but thou art rich), and I know the
   blasphemy of them which say they are Jews, and are not, but are the
   synagogue of Satan. Fear none of those things, which thou shalt suffer:
   behold, the devil shall cast some of you into prison, that ye may be
   tried; and ye shall have tribulation ten days: be thou faithful unto
   death, and I will give thee a crown of life. He that hath an ear, let
   him hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches; he that overcometh
   shall not be hurt of the second death." Here the Lord meets the
   declension by sore tribulation. Milder means had not answered the end.
   This is no uncommon case; though they may have thought that some
   strange thing had happened to them. But, the Lord knew of all of their
   afflictions, which were measured by Him and ever under His control. "Ye
   shall have tribulation ten days." The period of their sufferings is
   exactly specified. And He speaks to them as one that had known the
   depths of tribulation Himself. "These things saith the First and the
   Last, which was dead, and is alive." He had gone through the deepest
   sorrow, and through death itself --He had died for them, and was alive
   again. They had this blessed One to flee to in all their trials. And as
   He looks on, and walks in the midst of His suffering ones, He says, "Be
   thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life." Thus
   He holds in His hand the martyr's crown, ready to place it on the head
   of His faithful overcomer.

   We will now turn to our history, and mark its resemblance to the above
   Epistle.

   SECOND PERIOD OF CHURCH HISTORY COMMENCED ABOUT A.D. 167

   The reign of Aurelius is marked, under the providence of God, by many
   and great public calamities. We see the hand of the Lord in faithful
   love chastening His own redeemed and beloved people, but His anger was
   kindled against their enemies. The eastern army, under Verus, returning
   from the Parthian war, brought with it to Rome the infliction of a
   pestilential disease which was then raging in Asia, and which soon
   spread its ravages through almost the whole of the Roman Empire. There
   was also a great inundation of the Tiber River, which laid a large part
   of the city under water, and swept away immense quantities of grain
   from the fields and public storehouses. These disasters were naturally
   followed by a famine, which consumed great numbers.

   Such events could not fail to increase the hostility of the heathen
   against the Christians. They ascribed all their troubles to the wrath
   of the gods, which the new religion was supposed to have provoked. Thus
   it was that the persecution of the Christians in the Roman Empire began
   with the populace. The outcry against them rose up from the people to
   the governors. "Throw the Christians to the lions!" "Throw the
   Christians to the lions!" was the general outcry: and the names of the
   most prominent in the community were demanded with the same
   uncontrollable hostility. A weak or superstitious magistrate would
   tremble before the voice of the people, and lend himself as the
   instrument of their will.

   But we will now take a nearer view, under the guidance of the various
   histories that are before us, of the manner of these persecutions, and
   of the behavior of the Christians under them:

   THE PERSECUTION IN ASIA -- A.D. 167

   In Asia Minor the persecution broke out with great violence, such as
   had never been before. Christianity was now treated as a direct crime
   against the State. This changed the face of everything. Contrary to the
   re-script of Trajan, and the conduct of still milder emperors, Hadrian
   and Antonine, the Christians were to be sought for as common criminals.
   They were torn from their homes by the violence of the people, and
   subjected to the severest tortures. If they obstinately refused to
   sacrifice to the gods, they were condemned. The wild beast, the cross,
   the stake, and the axe were the cruel forms of death that met the
   Lord's faithful ones everywhere.

   The prudent and dignified Melito, bishop of Sardis, was so moved by
   these unheard of barbarities, that he appeared before the emperor as
   the Christians' advocate. His address throws much light both on the law
   and on the conduct of the public authorities. It is as follows: --"The
   race of God's worshippers in this country are persecuted, as they never
   were before, by new edicts; for the shameless sycophants, greedy of the
   possessions of others --since they are furnished by these edicts with
   an opportunity of so doing --plunder their innocent victims day and
   night. And let it be right, if it is done by your command, since a just
   emperor will never resolve on any unjust measure; and we will
   cheerfully bear the honourable lot of such a death. Yet we would submit
   this single petition, that you would inform yourself respecting the
   people who excite the contention, and impartially decide whether they
   deserve punishment and death, or deliverance and peace. But if this
   resolve, and this new edict --an edict which ought not so to be issued
   even against hostile barbarians --comes from yourself, we pray you the
   more not to leave us exposed to such public robbery." [36]

   There is, we fear, no ground to believe that this noble appeal brought
   any direct relief to the Christians. The character and ways of Aurelius
   have perplexed the historians. He was a philosopher of the sect of the
   Stoics, but naturally humane, benevolent, gentle and pious, even
   childlike in his disposition, some say, from the influence of his
   mother's training, yet he was an implacable persecutor of the
   Christians for nearly twenty years. And the perplexity is increased
   when we look to Asia, for the procounsul at this time was not
   personally opposed to the Christians. Still he yielded to the popular
   fury and the demands of the law. But faith sees beyond the emperors,
   governors, and people; it sees the prince of darkness ruling these
   wicked men, and the Lord Jesus overruling all. "I know thy works and
   tribulation... Fear none of these things which thou shalt suffer... Be
   thou faithful unto death, and I will give thee a crown of life... He
   that overcometh shall not be hurt of the second death."

   Aurelius, with all his philosophy, was an utter stranger to the
   sweetness and power of that Name which alone can meet and satisfy the
   longings of the human heart. All the speculations and boastings of
   philosophy have never done this. Hence the enmity; of the human heart
   to the gospel. Self-sufficiency, which leads to pride and
   self-importance, is the principal part of the Stoic's religion. With
   these views there could be no humility, no sense of sin, and no idea of
   a Saviour. And the more earnest he was in his own religion, the more
   bitter and vehement would he be against Christianity.

   In a circular-letter addressed by the church of Smyrna to other
   Christian churches, we have a detailed account of the sufferings of the
   faithful unto death. "They made it evident to us all," says the church,
   "that in the midst of those sufferings they were absent from the body;
   or rather, that the Lord stood by them, and walked in the midst of
   them; and, staying themselves on the grace of Christ, they bid defiance
   to the torments of the world." Some, with a strange momentary
   enthusiasm, rushed in self-confidence to the tribunal, declared
   themselves to be Christians; but when the magistrate pressed them,
   wrought upon their fears, showed them the wild beasts, they yielded and
   offered incense to the gods. "We therefore," adds the church, "praise
   not those who voluntarily surrendered themselves; for so are we not
   taught in the gospel." Nothing less than the presence of the Lord Jesus
   could strengthen the soul to endure with tranquility and composure the
   most agonizing torments, and the most frightful deaths. But thousands
   did bear with meekness, cheerfulness, and even with joyfulness, the
   utmost that the power of darkness and the fourth beast of Daniel could
   do. The pagan bystanders were often moved to pity by their sufferings,
   but never could understand their calmness of mind, love to their
   enemies, and willingness to die.

   We will now conclude this general account of the persecution in Asia,
   and notice particularly the two most eminent persons who suffered death
   at this time; namely, Justin and Polycarp.

   THE MARTYRDOM OF JUSTIN

   SURNAMED MARTYR

   Justin was born at Neapolis, in Samaria, of Gentile parents. He
   carefully studied in his youth the different philosophical sects; but
   not finding the satisfaction, which his heart longed for, he was
   induced to hear the gospel. In it he found, through God's blessing, a
   perfect rest for his soul, and every desire of his heart fully met. He
   became an earnest Christian, and a celebrated writer in defence of
   Christianity.

   Early in the reign of Aurelius, Justin was a marked man. One Crescens
   laid information against him. He was apprehended with six of his
   companions, and all were brought before the prefect. They were asked to
   sacrifice to the gods. "No man," replied Justin, "whose understanding
   is sound, will desert true religion for the sake of error and impiety."
   "Unless you comply," said the prefect, "you shall be tormented without
   mercy." "We desire nothing more sincerely," he replied, "than to endure
   tortures for our Lord Jesus Christ." The rest assented, and said, "We
   are Christians, and cannot sacrifice to idols." The governor then
   pronounced sentence --"As to those who refuse to sacrifice to the gods,
   and to obey the imperial edicts, let them be first scourged, and then
   beheaded, according to the laws." The martyrs rejoiced, and blessed
   God, and being led back to prison, were scourged, and afterwards
   beheaded. This took place at Rome about the year 165. Thus slept in
   Jesus one of the early Fathers, and earned the glorious title,
   "Martyr," which usually accompanies his name. Many have carefully
   examined his writings, and great importance is attached to them.

   LINES ON THE MARTYDOM OF

   A ROMAN CENTURION

   "Give the Christian to the lion"

   Wildly cry the Roman throng;

   Yes, to Africa's tawny lion

   Shout the warriors bold and strong.

   "Let the hungry lion tear him!"

   Echoed glad the laughing crowd;

   "Fling him --fling him to the lion!"

   Shrieked the noble matron loud.

   "Give the Christian to the lion!"

   Spake in accents grave and slew,

   From their curule seats of honour,

   Senators in goodly row.

   Then from flight to flight, redouble

   Shout, and cheer, and laughter peal,

   Till the giant Colosseum

   Neath the tumult seemed to reel;

   And the clamours of the people

   Through the Arch of Titus roll,

   All adown the Roman forum,

   To the towering Capitol,

   Then a pause --but hush, and listen,

   Whence that wild and savage yell?

   Tis the lion of Sahara,

   Raging in his grated cell!

   Fierce with famine and with fetter,

   Shaketh he his tawny mane!

   For his living pray impatient,

   Struggling' gainst his bar and chain,

   But a voice is stealing faintly

   From the next cell, chill and dim;

   Tis the death doomed Christian, chanting

   Soft and low his dying hymn!

   With uplifted hands he prayeth

   For the men that ask his blood!

   With a holy faith he pleadeth

   For that shouting multitude.

   They are waiting! Lift the grating

   --Comes he forth, serene to die:

   With a radiance round his forehead,

   And a lustre in his eye.

   Never! when' midst Roman legions,

   With the helmet on his brow,

   Press'd he to the front of battle

   With a firmer step than now.

   Lift the grating! He is waiting.

   Let the savage lion come!

   He can only rend a passage

   For the soul to reach her home!

   THE MARTYRDOM OF POLYCARP

   The behavior of the venerable bishop of Smyrna, in view of his
   martyrdom, was most Christian and noble in its bearing. He was prepared
   and ready for his persecutors, without being rash or imprudent, as some
   at times, through excitement, had been. When he heard the shouts of the
   people demanding his death, it was his intention to remain quietly in
   the city, and await the issue, which God might ordain for him. But, by
   the entreaties of the church, he suffered himself to be persuaded to
   take refuge in a neighboring village. Here he spent the time, with a
   few friends, occupied, night and day, in praying for all the churches
   throughout the world. But his pursuers soon discovered his retreat.
   When told that the public officers were at the door, he invited them
   in, ordered meat and drink to be set before them, and requested that
   they would indulge him with one hour of quiet prayer. But the fullness
   of his heart carried him through two hours. His devotions, age, and
   appearance greatly affected the pagans. He must have been over ninety
   years of age.

   The time being now come, he was conveyed to the city. The proconsul
   does not appear to have been personally hostile to the Christians. He
   evidently felt for the aged Polycarp, and did what he could to save
   him. He urged him to swear by the genius of the emperor, and give proof
   of his penitence. But Polycarp was calm and firm, with his eyes
   uplifted to heaven. The proconsul again urged him, saying, "Revile
   Christ, and I will release thee." The old man now replied, "Six and
   eighty years have I served Him, and He has done me nothing but good;
   and how could I revile Him, my Lord and Saviour?" The governor, finding
   that both promises and threatenings were in vain, caused it to be
   proclaimed by the herald in the circus that "Polycarp has declared
   himself to be a Christian." The heathen populous, with an infuriated
   shout, replied, "This is the teacher of atheism, the father of the
   Christians, the enemy of our gods, by whom so many have been turned
   away from offering sacrifices." The governor yielded to the people's
   demands that Polycarp should die at the stake and Jews and pagans
   hastened together to bring wood for that purpose. As they were about to
   fasten him with nails to the stake of the pile, he said, "Leave me
   thus: He who has strengthened me to encounter the flames, will also
   enable me to stand firm at the stake." Before the fire was lighted he
   prayed, "Lord, Almighty God, Father of Thy beloved Son, Jesus Christ,
   through whom we have received from Thee the knowledge of Thyself; God
   of angels, and of the whole creation; of the human race, and of the
   just that live in Thy presence; I praise Thee that Thou hast judged me
   worthy of this day and of this hour, to take part in the number of Thy
   witnesses, in the cup of Thy Christ."

   The fire was now kindled, but the flames played around the body,
   forming the appearance of a sail filled with wind. The superstitious
   Romans, fearing that the fire would not consume him, plunged a spear
   into his side: and Polycarp was crowned with victory.

   These are but short extracts from the accounts that have been handed
   down to us of the martyrdom of the revered and venerable bishop. The
   martyrologies are full of particulars. But the Lord greatly blessed the
   Christ like way in which he suffered for the good of the church. The
   rage of the people cooled down, as if satisfied with revenge; and their
   thirst for blood seemed quenched for the time. The proconsul, too,
   being wearied with such slaughter, absolutely refused to have any more
   Christians brought before his tribunal. How manifest is the hand of the
   Lord in this wonderful and sudden change! He had limited the days of
   their tribulation before they were cast into the furnace, and now they
   are accomplished: and no power on earth or in hell can prolong them
   another hour. They had been faithful unto death and received the crown
   of life.

   THE PERSECUTIONS IN FRANCE

   A.D. 177

   We will now turn to the scene of the second persecution under this
   emperor's reign. It took place in France, and exactly ten years after
   the persecution in Asia. There may have been other persecutions during
   these ten years, but, so far as we know, there are no authentic records
   of any until 177. The source from which we derive our knowledge of the
   details of this latter persecution is a circular letter from the
   churches of Lyons and Vienne to the churches in Asia. Whether there be
   any allusion to these ten historical years in the words of the Lord to
   the church at Smyrna, we cannot say. Scripture does not say there is.
   Comparing the history with the epistle, the thought is likely to be
   suggested. "Ye shall have tribulation ten days." In other parts of this
   mystical book, a day being taken for a year, so it may be in the
   Epistle to Smyrna. History gives us the beginning and the end as to
   time, and the east and west as to breadth of scene. But we will now
   look at some of the details, in which the resemblance may be more
   manifest.

   Imprisonment was one of the main features of their sufferings. Many
   died from the suffocating air of the noisome dungeons. In this respect
   it differed from the persecution in Asia. The popular excitement rose
   even higher than at Smyrna. The Christians were insulted and abused
   whenever they appeared abroad, and even plundered in their own houses.
   As this popular fury burst forth during the absence of the governor,
   many were thrown into prison by the inferior magistrates to await his
   return. But the spirit of persecution on this occasion, though it
   sprang from the populace, was not confined to them. The governor, on
   his arrival, seems to have been infected with the fanaticism of the
   lower classes. To his dishonour as a magistrate, he began the
   examination of the prisoners with tortures. And the testimony of
   slaves, contrary to an ancient law in Rome, was not only received
   against their masters but also wrung from them by the severest
   sufferings. Consequently they were ready to say what they were
   required, to escape the whip and the rack. Having proved, as they said,
   that the Christians practiced the most unnatural and worst of crimes in
   their meetings, they now believed that it was right to indulge them in
   every cruelty. No kindred, no condition, no age, nor sex was spared.

   Vettius, a young man of birth and rank, and of great charity and
   fervency of spirit, on hearing that such charges were laid against his
   brethren, felt constrained to present himself before the governor as a
   witness of their innocence. He demanded a hearing; but the governor
   refused to listen, and only asked him if he too was a Christian? When
   he distinctly affirmed that he was, the governor ordered him to be
   thrown into prison with the rest. He afterwards received the crown of
   martyrdom.

   The aged bishop, Pothinus, now over ninety years of age, and probably
   the one who had brought the gospel to Lyons from Asia, was of course
   good prey for the lion of hell. He was afflicted with asthma and could
   scarcely breathe, but notwithstanding he must be seized and dragged
   before the authorities. "Who is the God of the Christians?" asked the
   governor. The old man quietly told him that he could only come to the
   knowledge of the true God by showing a right spirit. Those who
   surrounded the tribunal strove with each other in giving vent to their
   rage against the venerable bishop. He was ordered to prison, and after
   receiving many blows on his way thither, was cast in among the rest,
   and in two days fell asleep in Jesus, in the arms of his suffering
   flock.

   What a weight of comfort and encouragement the words of the blessed
   Lord must have been to these holy sufferers! "Fear none of these things
   which thou shalt suffer" had been addressed to the church in Smyrna,
   and probably carried to the French churches in Lyons and Vienne by
   Pothinus. They were experiencing an exact fulfillment of this solemn
   and prophetic warning: "Behold, the devil shall cast some of you into
   prison, that ye may be tried." They knew who was the great enemy --the
   great persecutor --though emperors, governors, and mobs might be his
   instruments. But the Lord was with His beloved suffering ones. He not
   only sustained and comforted them, but He brought out, in the most
   blessed way, the power of His own presence in the feeblest forms of
   humanity. This was, we venture to say, a new thing on the earth. The
   superiority of the Christians to all the inflictions of tortures, and
   to all the terrors of death, utterly astonished the multitude, stung to
   the quick their tormentors, and wounded the stoic pride of the Emperor.
   What could be done with a people who prayed for their persecutors, and
   manifested the composure and tranquility of heaven, in the midst of the
   fires and wild beasts of the amphitheatre? Take one example of what we
   affirm --an example worthy of all praise, in all time and in all
   eternity --divine power displayed in human weakness.

   BLANDINA, a female slave, was distinguished above the rest of the
   martyrs for the variety of tortures she endured. Her mistress, who also
   suffered martyrdom, feared lest the faith of her servant might give way
   under such trials. But it was not so, the Lord be praised! Firm as a
   rock, but peaceful and unpretending, she endured the most excruciating
   sufferings. Her tormentors urged her to deny Christ and confess that
   the private meetings of the Christians were only for their wicked
   practices, and they would cease their tortures. But, no! her only reply
   was, "I am a Christian, and there is no wickedness amongst us." The
   scourge, the rack, the heated iron chair, and the wild beasts, had lost
   their terror for her. Her heart was fixed on Christ, and He kept her in
   spirit near to Himself. Her character was fully formed, not by her
   social condition, of course --that was the most debased in those times
   --but by her faith in the Lord Jesus Christ, through the power of the
   indwelling Holy Ghost.

   Day after day she was brought forth as a public spectacle of suffering.
   Being a female and a slave, the heathen expected to force her to a
   denial of Christ, and to a confession that the Christians were guilty
   of the crimes reported against them. But it was all in vain. "I am a
   Christian, and there is no wickedness amongst us," was her quiet but
   unvarying reply. Her constancy wearied out the inventive cruelty of her
   tormentors. They were astonished that she lived through the fearful
   succession of her sufferings. But in her greatest agonies she found
   strength and relief in looking to Jesus and witnessing for Him.
   "Blandina was endued with so much fortitude," says the letter from the
   church at Lyons, written seventeen hundred years ago, "that those who
   successively tortured her from morning to night were quite worn out
   with fatigue, and owned themselves conquered and exhausted of their
   whole apparatus of tortures, and amazed to see her still breathing
   whilst her body was torn and laid open." [37]

   Before narrating the closing scene of her sufferings, we would notice
   what appears to us to be the secret of her great strength and
   constancy. Doubtless the Lord was sustaining her in a remarkable way as
   a witness for Him, and as a testimony to all ages of the power of
   Christianity over the human mind, compared with all the religions that
   then were or ever had been on the earth. Still, we would say
   particularly, that her humility and godly fear were the sure
   indications of her power against the enemy, and of her unfaltering
   fidelity to Christ. She was thus working out her own salvation
   --deliverance from the difficulties of the way --by a deep sense of her
   own conscious weakness, indicated by "fear and trembling."

   When on her way back from the amphitheatre to the prison, in company
   with her fellow-sufferers, they were surrounded by their sorrowing
   friends when they had an opportunity, and in their sympathy and love
   addressed them as "martyrs for Christ." But this they instantly
   checked; saying, "We are not worthy of such an honour. The struggle is
   not over; and the dignified name of Martyr properly belongs to Him only
   who is the true and faithful witness, the firstborn from the dead, the
   Prince of life; or, at least, only to those whose testimony Christ has
   sealed by their constancy to the end. We are but poor humble
   confessors." With tears they besought their brethren to pray for them
   that they might be firm and true to the end. Thus their weakness was
   their strength, for it led them to lean on the mighty One. And so it
   always is, and ever has been, in small as well as in great trials. But
   a fresh sorrow awaited them on their return to the prison. They found
   some who had given way through natural fear, and had denied that they
   were Christians. But they had gained nothing thereby; Satan had not let
   them off. Under a charge of other crimes they were kept in prison. With
   these weak ones Blandina and the others prayed with many tears, that
   they might be restored and strengthened. The Lord answered their
   prayers; so that, when brought up again for further examination, they
   steadfastly confessed their faith in Christ, and thus passed sentence
   of death on themselves and received the crown of martyrdom.

   Nobler names, as men would say, than Blandina's had passed off the
   bloody scene; and honoured names too that had witnessed with great
   fortitude, such as Vettius, Pothinus, Sanctus, Naturus, and Attalius;
   but the last day of her trial was come, and the last pain she was ever
   to feel, and the last tear she was ever to shed. She was brought up for
   her final examination with a youth of fifteen, named Ponticus. They
   were ordered to swear by the gods; they firmly refused, but were calm
   and unmoved. The multitude was incensed at their magnanimous patience.
   The whole round of barbarities was inflicted. Ponticus, though animated
   and strengthened by the prayers of his sister in Christ, soon sank
   under the tortures, and fell asleep in Jesus.

   And now came the noble and blessed Blandina, as the church styles her.
   Like a mother who was needed to comfort and encourage her children, she
   was kept to the last day of the games. She had sent her children on
   before, and was now longing to follow after them. They had joined the
   noble army of martyrs above, and were resting with Jesus, as weary
   warriors rest, in the peaceful paradise of God. After she had endured
   stripes, she was seated in a hot iron chair; then she was enclosed in a
   net and thrown to a bull; and having been tossed some time by the
   animal, a soldier plunged a spear into her side. No doubt she was dead
   long before the spear reached her, but in this she was honoured to be
   like her Lord and Master. Bright indeed will be the crown, amidst the
   many crowns in heaven, of the constant, humble, patient, enduring
   Blandina.

   But the fierce and savage rage of the heathen, instigated by Satan, had
   not yet reached its height. They began a new war with the dead bodies
   of the saints. Their blood had not satiated them. They must have their
   ashes, Hence the mutilated bodies of the martyrs were collected and
   burned, and thrown into the river Rhone, with the fire that consumed
   them, lest a particle should be left to pollute the land. But rage,
   however fierce, will finally expend itself: and nature, however savage,
   will become weary of bloodshed; and so, many Christians survived this
   terrible persecution.

   We have thus gone, more than usual, into details in speaking of the
   persecutions under Marcus Aurelius. So far, they are a fulfillment, we
   believe, of the solemn and prophetic warnings of the address to Smyrna;
   and also, in a remarkable manner, of the Lords promised grace. The
   sufferers were filled and animated by His-own Spirit. Neander says that
   they never mentioned "Even their persecutors," with resentment; but
   they prayed that God would forgive those who had subjected them to such
   cruel sufferings. They left a legacy to their brethren, not of strife
   and war, but of peace and joy, unanimity and love."

   Thou art home at last, each waymark past,

   Thou hast sped to the goal before me;

   Mid oh, my tears fall thick and fast,

   Like the hopes that had blossomed o'er thee.

   My lips refuse to say, Farewell,

   For our life-link nought can sever;

   Thou'rt early gone with Christ to dwell,

   Where we both shall be forever.

   THE POWER OF PRAYER

   In tracing the silver line of God's grace in His beloved people, we
   have now to notice a report, which was widely spread among the
   Christians after the beginning of the third century. It occurred
   towards the close of the reign of Aurelius, and led him it is said, to
   change the course of his policy towards the Christians. In one of his
   campaigns against the Germans and Samaritans he was thrown into a
   situation of extreme peril. The burning sun shone full in the faces of
   his soldiers; the barbarians hemmed them in; they were exhausted by
   wounds and fatigue, and parched with thirst: while, at the same time,
   the enemy was preparing to attack them. In this extremity the twelfth
   legion, said to be composed of Christians, stepped forward and knelt
   down in prayer; suddenly the sky was overspread with clouds, and the
   rain began to fall heavily. The Roman soldiers took off their helmets
   to catch the refreshing drops; but the shower speedily increased to a
   storm of hail, accompanied with thunder and lightning, which so alarmed
   the barbarians that the Romans gained an easy victory.

   The Emperor, so struck with such a miraculous answer to prayer,
   acknowledged the interposition of the God of the Christians, conferred
   honours on the legion, and issued an edict in favour of their religion.
   After this, if not before, they were called "the thundering legion."
   Historians, from Eusebius down, have noticed this remarkable
   occurrence.

   But, like a tale that is often told, many things have been added to it.
   There is good reason to believe, however, that a providential answer in
   favour of the Romans was given to prayer. This much seems quite
   evident. And to faith there is nothing incredible in such an event;
   though some of the circumstances related are questionable. For example,
   a Roman legion at that time would probably number five thousand men:
   while there may have been a great many Christians in the twelfth, which
   was a distinguished legion, yet it would be hard to believe that they
   were all Christians.

   On their return from the war, they no doubt related to their brethren
   the merciful intervention of God in answer to prayer, which the church
   would record and spread amongst the Christians to His praise and glory.
   But the facts are even more fully confirmed by the Romans. They also
   believed that the deliverance came from heaven, but in answer to the
   Emperor's prayers to his gods. Hence the event was commemorated, after
   their usual manner, on columns, medals, and paintings. On these the
   Emperor is represented as stretching forth his hands in supplication;
   the army as catching the rain in their helmets; and Jupiter as
   launching forth his bolts on the barbarians, who lie slain on the
   ground.

   A few years after this remarkable event Marcus Aurelius, the
   philosopher and the persecutor, died. Great changes quickly followed.
   The glory of the empire, and the effort to maintain the dignity of the
   old Roman religion, expired with him; but Christianity made great and
   rapid advancement. Men of ability and learning were raised up about
   this time, men who boldly and powerfully advocated its claims with
   their pens. These are called Apologists. TERTULLIAN, an African, who it
   is said was born in A.D. 160, may be considered as the ablest and the
   most perfect type of this class.

   The more enlightened of the heathen now began to feel that, if their
   religion was to withstand the aggressive power of the gospel, it must
   be defended and reformed. Hence the controversy commenced; and one
   Celsus, an Epicurean philosopher, said to have been born in the same
   year as Tertullian, stood forth as the leader on the controversial side
   of paganism. From about this period --the closing years of the second
   century --church records become more interesting because they were more
   definite and reliable. But before proceeding farther with the general
   history, it may be well to retrace our steps and glance briefly at the
   internal history of the church from the beginning. We shall thus see
   how some of the things which are still observed, and with which we are
   familiar, were first introduced.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [29] See Dean Milman's History of the Jews, volume 2, book 16, page
   380.

   [30] See Roman History, Encyclopedia Britannica, Seventh Edition,
   volume 19, page 406.

   [31] See Mosheim's Ecclesiastical History, volume one p. 67. Cave's
   Primitive Christianity, early chapters.

   [32] Neander's Church History, volume 1, p.95.

   [33] Caves Primitive Christianity, Page 20.

   [34] See The Genuine Epistles of Clement, Polycarp, Ignatius, and
   Barnabas, by Ap. Wake, 6th ed. Bagster and Sons.

   [35] See "Lectures on Revelation" by W. K.

   [36] Neander's Ecclesiastical History, volume 1, page 142.

   [37] For full details, see Milner's Church History, volume 1, page 194.
     __________________________________________________________________

Chapter 8

   THE INTERNAL

   HISTORY OF THE CHURCH

   Here we step once more on sure ground. We have the privilege and
   satisfaction of appealing to the sacred writings. Before the canon of
   scripture was closed, many of the errors, both in doctrine and
   practice, which have since troubled and rent in pieces the professing
   church, were allowed to spring up. These were, in the wisdom and grace
   of God, detected and exposed by the inspired apostles. If we keep this
   in mind, we shall not be surprised to meet with many things in the
   internal history of the church entirely contrary to scripture. Neither
   need we have any difficulty in withstanding them. The apostles have
   armed us. The love of office and preeminence in the church was
   manifested at an early period, and many observances of mere official
   invention were added. The "grain of mustard seed" became a great tree
   --the symbol of political power on the earth: this was and is the
   outward aspect of Christendom but inwardly the leaven did its evil
   work, "till the whole was leavened."

   Those who have carefully studied Matthew 13 with other passages in the
   Acts and the Epistles relating to the profession of the name of Christ
   should have a very correct idea of both the early and later history of
   the church. It embraces the entire period, from the sowing of the seed
   by the Son of man, until the harvest, though under the similitude of
   the kingdom of heaven. This is a great relief to the mind, and prepares
   us for many a dark and distressing scene, wickedly perpetrated under
   the fair name and cloak of Christianity. We will now turn to some of
   these passages.

   1) Our blessed Lord, in the parable of the wheat and tares, predicts
   what would take place. "The kingdom of heaven," He says, "is likened
   unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: but while men slept, his
   enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went his way." In
   course of time "the blade sprang up and brought forth fruit." This was
   the rapid spread of Christianity in the earth. But we also read, "then
   appeared the tares also." These were false professors of Christ's name.
   The Lord Jesus sowed good seed. Satan, through the carelessness and
   infirmity of man, sowed tares. But what was to be done with them? Were
   they to be rooted out of the kingdom? The Lord says, No, "Lest while ye
   gather up the tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. Let both grow
   together until the harvest;" that is, till the end of the age or
   dispensation when the Lord comes in judgment.

   But here, some may inquire, "Does the Lord mean that the wheat and the
   tares are to grow together in the church?" Certainly not! They were not
   to be rooted out of the field, but to be put out of the church when
   manifested as wicked persons. The church and the kingdom are quite
   distinct, though the one may be said to be in the other. The field is
   the world, not the church. The limits of the kingdom stretch far beyond
   the limits of the true church of God. Christ builds the church; men
   have to do with extending the proportions of Christendom. If the
   expression, "the kingdom of heaven," meant the same as "the church of
   God," there ought to be no discipline of evildoer's at all. Whereas the
   apostle, in writing to the Corinthians, expressly says, "Put away from
   among yourselves that wicked person." But he was not to be put out of
   the kingdom, for that, could only be done by taking away his life. The
   wheat and the tares are to grow together in the field until the
   harvest. Then the Lord Himself, in His providence, will deal with the
   tares. They shall be bound in bundles and cast into the fire. Nothing
   can be plainer than the Lord's teaching in this parable. The tares are
   to be put away from the Lord's Table, but not rooted out of the field.
   The church was not to use worldly punishments in dealing with
   ecclesiastical offenders. But alas! the very thing, which the Lord is
   here guarding His disciples against came to pass, as the long list of
   martyrs so painfully shows. Pains and penalties were brought in as
   discipline, and the refractory were handed over to the civil power to
   be punished with fire and sword.

   2) In Acts 20 we read that "grievous wolves" would make their
   appearance in the church after the departure of the apostle. In Paul's
   Epistles to the Thessalonians --supposed to be his first inspired
   Epistles --he tells them that the mystery of iniquity was already at
   work, and that other evil things would follow. In writing to the
   Philippians he tells them, weeping, that many walk as "the enemies of
   the cross of Christ; whose end is destruction, whose god is their
   belly, and whose glory is in their shame, who mind earthly things."
   Many were calling themselves Christians, but minding earthly things.
   Such a state of things could not escape the spiritual eye of him whose
   one object was Christ in glory, and practical conformity to His ways
   when on earth. In his Second Epistle to Timothy --probably the last he
   ever wrote --he compares Christendom to "a great house," in which are
   all manner of vessels, "some to honour and some to dishonour." This is
   a picture of the outward universal church. Nevertheless, the Christian
   cannot leave it, and individual responsibility can never cease. But he
   is to clear himself from all that is contrary to the name of the Lord.
   The directions are most plain and precious for the spiritually minded
   in all ages. The Christian must have no association with that which is
   untrue. Such is the meaning of purging himself from the vessels to
   dishonour. He is to clear himself from all that is not to the Lord's
   honour. John and the other apostles speak of the same things, and give
   the same divine directions; but we need not here pursue them farther.
   Enough has been pointed out to prepare the reader for what we must meet
   with in that which calls itself Christian.

   THE IMMEDIATE

   FOLLOWERS OF THE APOSTLES

   Here an important question arises, and one that has been often asked,
   At what time, and by what means, did clericalism --the whole system of
   clergy --gain so firm a footing in the professing church? To answer
   this question fully would be to write in detail the internal history of
   the church. Its constitution and character were wholly changed by the
   introduction of the clerical system. But its growth and organization
   was gradual. Arguments were drawn from the Old Testament, and, in a
   short time, Christianity was recast in the mould of Judaism. The
   distinction between bishops and presbyters, between a priestly order
   and the common priesthood of all believers, and the multiplication of
   church offices, followed rapidly as consequences. But however difficult
   it may be now to trace the inroads of clericalism, the synagogue was
   its model.

   We learn from the whole of the New Testament that Judaism was the
   unwearied and unrelenting enemy of Christianity in every point of view.
   It laboured incessantly, on the one hand to introduce its rites and
   ceremonies; and on the other to persecute unto the death all who were
   faithful to Christ and to the true principles of the church of God.
   This we see especially from the Acts and the Epistles. But when the
   extraordinary gifts in the church ceased, and when the noble defenders
   of the faith, in the persons of the inspired apostles, passed away, we
   may easily imagine how Judaism would prevail. Besides, the early
   churches were chiefly composed of converts from the Jewish synagogue,
   who long retained their Jewish prejudices.

   CLERICALISM, then, we firmly believe sprang from JUDAISM. From the days
   of the apostles until now the root of the whole fabric and dominion of
   clericalism is there. Philosophy and heterodoxy, no doubt, did much to
   corrupt the church and lead her to join hands with the world: but the
   order of the clergy and all that belongs to it must be founded on the
   Jews' religion. It is more than probable, however, that many may have
   been persuaded then, as many have been since, that Christianity is a
   continuation of Judaism, in place of being its perfect contrast. The
   Judaizing teachers boldly affirmed that Christianity was merely a graft
   on Judaism. But throughout the epistles we everywhere learn that the
   one was earthly and the other heavenly; that the one belonged to the
   old, and the other to the new creation; that the law was given by
   Moses, but grace and truth came by Jesus Christ.

   We will now return to the immediate followers of the apostles.

   THE APOSTOLICAL FATHERS, as they are called, such as Clement, Polycarp,
   Ignatius, and Barnabas, were the immediate followers of the inspired
   apostles. They had listened to their instructions, laboured with them
   in the gospel, and probably had been familiarly acquainted with them.
   But, notwithstanding the high privileges, which they enjoyed as
   scholars of the apostles, they very soon departed from the doctrines,
   which had been committed to them, especially as to church government.
   They seem to have completely forgotten, (judging from the Epistles,
   which bear their names) the great New Testament truth of the Holy
   Spirit's presence in the assembly. Surely both John and Paul speak much
   of the presence, indwelling, sovereign rule, and authority of the Holy
   Spirit in the church. John 13 - 16, Acts 2, 1 Corinthians 12, 14,
   Ephesians 1 - 4, give plain directions and instructions on this
   fundamental truth of the church of God. Had this truth been maintained
   according to the apostle's exhortation, "Endeavouring to keep" --not to
   make --"the unity of the Spirit," clericalism could never have found a
   place in Christendom.

   The new teachers of the church seem also to have forgotten the
   beautiful simplicity of the divine order in the church. There were only
   two orders of office bearers --elders and deacons. The one was
   appointed to attend to the temporal, the other to the spiritual need of
   the assembly of the saints. Elder, or bishop, simply means overseer,
   one who takes a spiritual oversight. He may have been "apt to teach,"
   or he may not; he was not an ordained teacher, but an ordained
   overseer. And as for the institutions of divine appointment, we only
   find in the New Testament, Baptism and the Lord's Supper. Nothing could
   be simpler, plainer, or more easily understood, as to all the
   directions given for faith and practice; but there was no room left for
   the exaltation and glory of man in the church of God. The Holy Ghost
   had come down to take the lead in the assembly, according to the word
   of the Lord, and the promise of the Father; and no Christian, however
   gifted, believing this, could take the place of leader, and thus
   practically displace the Holy Spirit. But, from the moment that this
   truth was lost sight of, men began to contend for place and power, and
   of course the Holy Spirit had no longer His right place in the
   assembly.

   Scarcely had the voice of inspiration become silent in the church,
   when, we hear the voice of the new teachers crying loudly and earnestly
   for the highest honours being paid to the bishop, and a supreme place
   being given to him. Not a word about the Spirit's place as sovereign
   ruler in the church of God. This is evident from the Epistles of
   Ignatius, said to have been written A.D. 107. Many great names, we are
   aware, have questioned their authenticity; and many great names contend
   that they have been satisfactorily proved to be genuine. The proofs on
   either side lie outside of our line. The Church of England has long
   accepted them as genuine, and considers them as the basis, and as the
   triumphant vindication, of the antiquity of episcopacy. The following
   are a few specimens of his admonitions to the churches.

   IGNATIUS, in the course of his journey from Antioch to Rome, [38] wrote
   seven Epistles; one to the Ephesians, Magnesians, Tralliams,
   Philadelphians, Romans, Smyrneans, and one to his friend Polycarp.
   Being written on the eve of his martyrdom, and with great earnestness
   and vehemence, and having been the disciple and friend of St. John, and
   at that time bishop of Antioch, probably the most renowned in
   Christendom, his Epistles must have produced a great impression on the
   churches; besides the way to office, authority, and power has always a
   great charm for vain human nature.

   In writing to the church at Ephesus he says, "Let us take heed,
   brethren, that we set not ourselves against the bishop, that we may be
   subject to God... It is therefore evident that we ought to look upon
   the bishop even as we do upon the Lord Himself." In his Epistle to the
   Magnesians he says, "I exhort you that ye study to do all things in a
   divine concord; your bishops presiding in the place of God; your
   presbyters in the place of the council of the apostles; and your
   deacons, most dear to me, being entrusted with the ministry of Jesus
   Christ." We find the same strain in his letter to the Trallians;
   "Whereas ye are subject to your bishop as to Jesus Christ, ye appear to
   me to live, not after the manner of men, but according to Jesus Christ
   who died for us. Guard yourselves against such persons; and that you
   will do if you are not puffed up: but continue inseparable from Jesus
   Christ our God, and from your bishop, and from the commands of the
   apostles." Passing over several of his letters to the churches, we only
   give one more specimen from his Epistle to the Philadelphians: "I cried
   whilst I was among you, I spoke with a loud voice, Attend to the
   bishop, and to the presbytery, and to the deacons. Now some supposed
   that I spoke this as foreseeing the division that should come among
   you. But He is my witness for whose sake I am in bonds, that I knew
   nothing from any man; but the Spirit spoke, saying on this wise: Do
   nothing without the bishop; keep your bodies as the temples of God:
   love unity; flee divisions; be the followers of Christ, as He was of
   His Father." [39]

   In the last quotation it is very evident that the venerable father
   wishes to add to his theories the weight of inspiration. But, however
   extravagant and unaccountable this idea may be, we must give him credit
   for believing what he says. That he was a devout Christian, and full of
   religious zeal, no one can doubt; but that he greatly deceived himself
   in this and in other matters there can be as little doubt. The leading
   idea in all his letters is the perfect submission of the people to
   their rulers, or of the laity to their clergy. He was, no doubt,
   anxious for the welfare of the church, and fearing the effect of the
   "divisions" which he refers to, he probably thought that a strong
   government, in the hands of rulers, would be the best means of
   preserving it from the inroads of error. "Give diligence," he says, "to
   be established in the doctrine of our Lord and the apostles, together
   with your most worthy bishop, and the well woven spiritual crown of
   your presbytery, and your godly deacons. Be subject to your bishop and
   to one another, as Jesus Christ to the Father, according to the flesh;
   and as the apostles to Christ, and to the Father, and to the Spirit;
   that so there may be a union among you both in body and in spirit."
   Thus the miter was placed on the head of the highest dignitary, and
   henceforth became the object of ecclesiastical ambition, and not
   infrequently of the most unseemly contention, with all their
   demoralizing consequences.

   CLERICALISM, MINISTRY, AND INDIVDUAL RESPONSIBILITY

   It is assumed that these Epistles were written only a few years after
   the death of St. John, and that the writer must have been intimately
   acquainted with his mind, and was only carrying out his views. Hence it
   is said, that episcopacy is coeval with Christianity. But it matters
   comparatively little by whom they were written, or the precise time;
   they are not scripture, and the reader must judge of their character by
   the word of God, and of their influence by the history of the church.
   The mind of the Lord, concerning His church, and the responsibility of
   His people, must be learnt from His own word, and not from the writings
   of any Father, however early or esteemed. And here, it may be well,
   before leaving this point, to place before our readers a few portions
   of the word, which they will do well to compare with the above
   extracts. They refer to Christian ministry and individual
   responsibility. Thus learn the mighty difference between ministry and
   office; or, between being esteemed for your work's sake, not merely
   office' sake.

   In the Gospel of St. Matthew, from verse 45 of chapter 24 to verse 31
   of chapter 25, we have three parables, in which the Lord addresses the
   disciples as to their conduct during His absence.

   1) The subject of the first is the responsibility of ministry within
   the house --in the church. "Whose house are we." Thus we read, "Who
   then is a faithful and wise servant, whom his lord hath made ruler over
   his household, to give them meat in due season? Blessed is that
   servant, whom his lord when he cometh shall find so doing. Verily I say
   unto you, That he shall make him ruler over all his goods." Real
   ministry is of the Lord and of Him alone. This is what we have to note
   in view of what took place on the very threshold of Christianity. And
   He makes much of faithfulness or unfaithfulness in His house. His
   people are near and dear to His heart. Those who have been humble and
   faithful during His absence will be made rulers over all His goods when
   He returns. The true minister of Christ has to do directly with
   Himself. He is the hireling of no man, or of any particular body of
   men. "Blessed is that servant, whom his lord, when he cometh, shall
   find so doing." Failure in ministry is also spoken of and dealt with by
   the Lord Himself.

   But and if that evil servant shall say in his heart, "My lord delayeth
   his coming; and shall begin to smite his fellow servants, and to eat
   and drink with the drunken." This is the other and sad side of the
   picture. The character of ministry is greatly affected by holding or
   rejecting the truth of the Lord's coming. In place of devoted service
   to the household, with his heart set on the master's approval on his
   return, there is assumption, tyranny, and worldliness. The doom of
   such, when the Lord comes, will be worse than that of the world, "He
   shall appoint him his portion with the hypocrite" --Judas' place
   --where "there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth." Such are the
   fearful consequences of forgetfulness of the Lord's return. But this is
   more than a mere doctrinal mistake, or a difference of opinion, about
   the coming of the Lord. It was "in his heart," his will was concerned
   in it. He wished in his heart that his Lord would stay away, as His
   coming would spoil all his schemes, and bring to a close all his
   worldly greatness. Is not this too true a picture of what has happened?
   And what a solemn lesson for those who take to themselves a place of
   service in the church! The mere appointment of the sovereign, or the
   choice of the people, will not be enough in that day, unless they have
   also been the chosen of the Lord and faithful in His house.

   2) In the second parable, professing Christians, during the Lord's
   absence, are represented as virgins who went out to meet the Bridegroom
   and light Him the way to His house. This was the attitude of the early
   Christians. They came out from the world, and from Judaism, to go forth
   and meet the Bridegroom. But we know what happened. He tarries: they
   all slumbered and slept. "And at midnight there was a cry made, Behold,
   the bridegroom cometh, go ye out to meet him." From the first till the
   beginning of the present century, we hear very little about the coming
   of the Lord. Now and then, here and there, a feeble voice may be heard
   on the subject; but not until the early part of the nineteenth century
   did the midnight cry go forth. Now we have many tracts and volumes on
   the subject, and many are preaching it in nearly all lands under
   heaven. The midnight is past, the morning cometh.

   The revival of the truth of the Lord's coming marks a distinct epoch in
   the history of the church. And, like all revivals, it was the work of
   the Holy Spirit, and that by instruments of His own choosing, and by
   means which He saw fitting. And how like the Lord's long-suffering,
   that in this great movement there should be time given between the cry
   and the arrival of the Bridegroom to prove the condition of each. Five
   of the ten virgins had no oil in their lamps --no Christ, no Holy
   Spirit dwelling in them. They had only the outward lamp of profession.
   How awfully solemn the thought, if we look at Christendom from this
   point of view! Five of every ten are unreal, and against them the door
   will be shut forever. How this thought should move to earnestness and
   energy in evangelizing! May we wisely improve the time thus graciously
   given between the going forth of the midnight cry, and the coming of
   the Bridegroom.

   3) In the first parable, it is ministry inside the house; in the third,
   it is ministry outside the house --evangelizing. In the second parable,
   it is the personal expectation of the Lord's coming, with the
   possession of that which is requisite to go in with Him to the marriage
   supper of the King's son.

   "The kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country, who
   called his own servants and delivered unto them his goods. And unto one
   he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one, to every man
   according to his several ability; and straightway took his journey."
   Here the Lord is represented as leaving this world and going back to
   heaven; and while He is gone there, His servants are to trade with the
   talents committed to them. "Then he that had received the five talents
   went and traded with the same, and made them other five talents. And
   likewise he that had received two, he also gained other two." Here we
   have the true principle and the true character of Christian ministry.
   The Lord Himself called the servants, and gave them the talents, and
   the servant is responsible to the Lord Himself for the fulfillment of
   his calling. The exercise of gift, whether inside or outside the house,
   although subject to the directions of the word, and always to be
   exercised in love and for blessing, is in nowise dependent on the will
   of sovereign, priest, or people, but on Christ only, the true Head of
   the church. It is a grave and solemn thing for any one to interfere
   with Christ's claims on the service of His servant. To touch this is to
   set aside responsibility to Christ, and to overthrow the fundamental
   principle of Christian ministry.

   Priesthood was the distinguishing characteristic of the Jewish
   dispensation; ministry, according to God, is characteristic of the
   Christian period. Hence the utter failure of the professing church,
   when it sought to imitate Judaism in so many ways, both in its
   priesthood and its ritualism. If a priestly order, with rites and
   ceremonies, are still necessary, the efficacy of the work of Christ is
   called into question. In fact, though not in words, it strikes at the
   root of Christianity. But all is settled by the word of God. "But this
   man, after he had offered one sacrifice for sins, forever sat down at
   the right hand of God: from henceforth expecting till his enemies be
   made his footstool. For by one offering he hath perfected forever them
   that are sanctified... Now where remission of these is, there is no
   more offering for sin." (Hebrews 10:1-25)

   Ministry, then, is a subject of the highest dignity and the deepest
   interest. It testifies to the work, the victory, and the glory of
   Jesus, that the lost may be saved. It is the activity of God's love
   going out to an alien and ruined world, and earnestly beseeching souls
   to be reconciled to Him. "God was in Christ, reconciling the world unto
   himself, not imputing their trespasses unto them; and hath committed to
   us the word of reconciliation." (2 Cor. 5:19-21) Jewish priesthood
   maintained the people in their relations with God: Christian ministry
   is God in grace by His servants delivering souls from sin and ruin, and
   bringing them near to Himself, as happy worshippers in the most holy
   place.

   To return to our parable, there is one thing specially to be noticed
   here, as showing the Lord's sovereignty and wisdom in connection with
   ministry. He gave differently to each, and to each according to his
   ability. Each one had a natural capacity, which fitted him for the
   service in which he was employed, and gifts bestowed according to the
   measure of the gift of Christ for its fulfillment. "He gave some,
   apostles; and some, prophets; and some, evangelists; and some, pastors
   and teachers." (Ephesians. 4) The servant must have certain natural
   qualifications for his work, besides the power of the Spirit of God. If
   the Lord calls a man to preach the gospel, there will be a natural
   ability for it. Then the Lord may create in his heart by the Holy
   Spirit a real love for souls, which is the best gift of the evangelist.
   Then he ought to stir up and exercise his gift according to his
   ability, for the blessing of souls and the glory of God. May we
   remember that we are responsible for these two things --the gift
   graciously bestowed, and the ability in which the gift is to be
   exercised. When the Lord comes to reckon with His servants, it will not
   be enough to say, I was never educated for, or appointed to, the
   ministry. The question will be, "Did I wait on the Lord to be used by
   Him according to what He had fitted me for?" or, did I hide my talent
   in the earth? Faithfulness or unfaithfulness to Him will be the only
   thing in question.

   That which distinguished the faithful from the unfaithful servant was
   confidence in their master. The unfaithful servant knew not the Lord:
   he acted from fear, not from love, and so hid his one talent in the
   earth. The faithful knew the Lord, trusted Him, and served from love,
   and was rewarded. Love is the only true spring of service for Christ,
   either in the church or in the outside world. May we never be found
   making excuses for ourselves, like the "wicked and slothful" servant,
   but be ever reckoning on the love, grace, truth, and power of our
   blessed Saviour and Lord.

   THE EFFECT OF THE

   NEW ORDER OF CLERGY

   It may be only fair to suppose that those good men, by whose means a
   new order of things was brought into the church, and the free ministry
   of the Holy Spirit in the members of the body excluded, had the welfare
   of the church at heart. It is evident that Ignatius, by this
   arrangement, hoped to avoid "divisions." But, however good our motives
   may be, it is the height of human folly --if not worse --to interfere
   with, or seek to change, the order of God. This was Eve's mistake, and
   we all know the consequences too well. It was also the original sin of
   the church, from which it has suffered these eighteen hundred years.

   The Holy Ghost sent down from heaven is the only power of ministry; but
   the Lord must be left free to choose and employ His own servants. Human
   arrangements and appointments necessarily interfere with the liberty of
   the Spirit. They quench the Holy Spirit: He only knows where the
   ability is, and where, when, and how to dispense the gifts. Speaking of
   the church as it was in the days of the apostles, it is said, "But all
   these worketh that one and the selfsame Spirit, dividing to every man
   severally as he [the Holy Ghost] will." And again, we read, "There are
   diversities of gifts, but the same Spirit. And there are differences of
   administrations, but the same Lord. And there are diversities of
   operations, but it is the same God, which worketh all in all. But the
   manifestation of the Spirit is given to every man to profit withal," or
   for the profit of all. (1 Cor. 12) Here all is in divine hands. The
   Holy Spirit dispenses the gift. It is to be exercised in acknowledgment
   of the Lordship of Christ; and God gives efficacy to the ministry. What
   a ministry --Spirit, Lord, and God --its source, power, and character!
   How great, how sad, the change to king, prelate, or people! Is not this
   apostasy? But while we object to mere human appointment to office,
   qualified or not qualified, we would contend most earnestly for the
   ministry of the word to both saints and sinners.

   The church alas! soon found that to hinder ministry, as it is set
   before us in the word of God, and to introduce a new order of things,
   did not hinder divisions, heresies, and false teachers springing up.
   True, the flesh, in the most real and gifted Christian, may manifest
   itself; but when the Spirit of God is acting in power, and the
   authority of the word owned, the remedy is at hand: the evil will be
   judged in humility and faithfulness to Christ. From this time --the
   beginning of the second century, and before it --the church was greatly
   disturbed by heresies; and as time rolled on, things never grew better,
   but always worse.

   IRENAEUS, a Christian of great celebrity, who succeeded Pothinus as
   bishop of Lyons, A.D. 177, has left us much information on the subject
   of the early heresies. He is supposed to have written about the year
   183. His great book "against heresies" is said to contain a defence of
   the holy catholic faith, and an examination and refutation of the false
   doctrines advocated by the principal heretics. [40]

   ORIGIN OF DISTINCTION

   BETWEEN CLERGY AND LAITY

   Christianity at the beginning had no separate priestly order. Its first
   converts went everywhere preaching the Lord Jesus. They were the first
   to spread abroad the glad tidings of salvation, even before the
   apostles themselves had left Jerusalem. (Acts 8:11) In course of time,
   when converts were found sufficient in any place to form an assembly,
   they came together in the name of the Lord on the first day of the week
   to break bread, and to edify one another in love. (Acts 20:7) When the
   opportunity came for an apostle to visit such gatherings, he chose
   elders to take the oversight of the little flock; and the assembly
   chose deacons. This was the entire constitution of the first churches.
   If the Lord raised-up an evangelist, and souls were converted, they
   were baptised unto the name of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost.
   This was, of course, outside the assembly, and not a church act. After
   due examination by the spiritual as to the genuineness of the
   evangelist's work, the assembly being satisfied, the converts were
   received into communion.

   It will be seen, from this brief sketch of the divine order of the
   churches, that there was no distinction such as "the clergy," and "the
   laity." All stood on the same ground as to priesthood, worship, and
   nearness to God. As the apostles Peter and John say, "Ye also, as
   living stones, are built up a spiritual house, an holy priesthood, to
   offer up spiritual sacrifices acceptable to God by Jesus Christ." And
   thus could the whole assembly sing, "Unto him that loved us, and washed
   us from our sins in his own blood; and hath made us kings and priests
   unto God and his Father; to Him be glory and dominion for ever and
   ever. Amen." The only priesthood, then, in the church of God is the
   common priesthood of all believers. The humblest menial in the palace
   of the archbishop, if washed in the blood of Christ, is whiter than
   snow, and fitted to enter the most holy place, and worship within the
   veil.

   There is no outer court worship now. The separation of a privileged
   class --a sacerdotal order --is unknown in the New Testament. Judaism
   suggested the distinction between clergy and laity and human invention
   soon made it great; but it was episcopal ordination that established
   the distinction, and widened the separation. The bishop gradually
   assumed the title of Pontiff. The presbyters, and at length the
   deacons, became, as well as the bishops, a sacred order. The place of
   mediation and of greater nearness to God was assumed by the priestly
   caste, and also of authority over the laity. In place of God speaking
   direct to the heart and conscience by His own word, and the heart and
   conscience brought direct into the presence of God, it was priesthood
   coming in between them. Thus the word of God was lost sight of, and
   faith stood in the opinions of men. The blessed Lord Jesus, as the
   Great High Priest of His people, and as the one Mediator between God
   and men, was thus practically displaced and set aside. [41]

   Thus alas! we see in the church what has been true of man from Adam
   downwards. Everything that has been entrusted to man has failed. From
   the time that the responsibility of maintaining the church as the
   pillar and ground of the truth fell into man's hands, there has been
   nothing but failure. The word of God, however, remains the same, and
   its authority can never fail, blessed be His name. One of the main
   objects of these "Short Papers" is to recall the reader's attention to
   the principles and order of the church, as taught in the New Testament.
   "God is a Spirit; and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit
   and in truth." That is, we must worship and serve Him according to the
   truth, and under the guidance and unction of the Holy Spirit, if we
   would glorify His name, and worship and serve Him acceptably.

   Almost all ecclesiastical writers affirm that neither the Lord Himself
   nor His apostles gave any distinct precepts as to the order and
   government of the church --that such things were left to the wisdom and
   prudence of her office-bearers, and the character of the times. By this
   assumption the widest range was given to the human will. We know the
   consequences. Man sought his own glory. The simplicity of the New
   Testament, the lowly path of the Lord and His apostles, the zeal and
   self-denial of a Paul, all were overlooked, and worldly greatness soon
   became the object and ambition of the clergy. A brief sketch of the
   bishop's office will set these things in a clear light, and, we doubt
   not, will greatly interest our readers.

   WHAT A BISHOP WAS

   IN EARLIER TIMES

   The humblest peasant is familiar with the grandeur and worldly
   greatness of a bishop; but he may not know how a minister of Christ,
   and a successor of the humble fishermen of Galilee, came to such
   dignity. In the days of the apostles, and for more than a hundred years
   after, the office of a bishop was a laborious but "good work." He had
   the charge of a single church, which might ordinarily be contained in a
   private house. He was not then as a "lord over God's heritage," but in
   reality its minister and servant, instructing the people, and attending
   on the sick and poor in person. The presbyters, no doubt, assisted in
   the management of the general affairs of the church, and also the
   deacons; but the bishop had the chief part of the service. He had no
   authority, however, to decree or sanction anything without the approval
   of the presbytery and people. There then was no thought of "inferior
   clergy" under him. And at that time the churches had no revenues,
   except the voluntary contributions of the people, which, moderate as
   they doubtless were, would leave a very small emolument for the bishop
   after the poor and needy were attended to.

   But in those early times office bearers in the church continued, in all
   probability, to carry on their former trades and occupations,
   supporting themselves and their families in the same manner as before.
   "A bishop," says Paul, "must be given to hospitality." And this he
   could not have been, had he depended for his income on the earnings of
   the poor. It was not until about the year 245 that the clergy received
   a salary, and were forbidden to follow their worldly employments; but
   towards the close of the second century circumstances arose in the
   history of the church, which greatly affected the original humility and
   simplicity of its overseers, and which tended to the corruption of the
   priestly order. "This change began," says Waddington, "towards the end
   of the second century; and it is certain that at this period we find
   the first complaints of the incipient corruption of the clergy." Once
   the interests of the ministers became distinguished from the interests
   of Christianity, many and great changes for the worse may be considered
   to have begun. We will notice some of these circumstances; and first;

   THE ORIGIN OF DIOCESES

   The bishops, who lived in cities, were either by their own preaching,
   or by the preaching of others --presbyters, deacons, or people --the
   means of gathering new churches in the neighboring towns and villages.
   These young assemblies, very naturally, continued under the care and
   protection of the city churches by whose means they had received the
   gospel, and were formed into churches. Ecclesiastical provinces were
   thus gradually formed, which the Greeks afterwards denominated
   dioceses. The city bishops claimed the privilege of appointing
   office-bearers to these rural churches; and the persons to whom they
   committed their instruction and care were called district bishops.
   These formed a new class, coming in between the bishops and the
   presbyters, being considered inferior to the former, and superior to
   the latter. Thus were distinctions and divisions created, and offices
   multiplied.

   THE ORIGIN OF THE

   METROPOLITAN BISHOP

   Churches thus constituted and regulated rapidly increased throughout
   the empire. In the management of their internal affairs every church
   was essentially distinct from every other, though walking in spiritual
   fellowship with all others, and considered as part of the one church of
   God. But, as the number of believers increased, and churches were
   extended, diversities in doctrine and discipline sprang up, which could
   not always be settled in the individual assemblies. This gave rise to
   councils, or synods. These were composed chiefly of those who took part
   in the ministry. But when the deputies of the churches were thus
   assembled, it was soon discovered that the control of a president was
   required. Unless the sovereign action of the Holy Spirit in the church
   be owned and submitted to, there would be anarchy without a president.
   The bishop of the capital of the province was usually appointed to
   preside, under the lofty title of the Metropolitan. On his return home
   it was hard to lay aside these occasional honours, so he very soon
   claimed the personal and permanent dignity of the Metropolitan.

   The bishops and presbyters, until about this time, were generally
   viewed as equal in rank, or the same thing, the terms being used
   synonymously; but now the former considered themselves as invested with
   supreme power in the guidance of the church, and were determined to
   maintain themselves in this authority. The presbyters refused to
   concede to them this new and self-assumed dignity, and sought to
   maintain their own independence. Hence arose the great controversy
   between the presbyterian and the episcopalian systems, which has
   continued until this day, and of which we may speak more particularly
   hereafter. Enough has been said to show the reader the beginning of
   many things, which still live before us in the professing church. In
   the consecrated order of clergy he will find the germ out of which
   sprang at length the whole medieval priesthood, the sin of simony, the
   laws of celibacy, and the fearful corruptions of the dark ages. [42]

   Having thus glanced at what was going on inside the church from the
   beginning, and especially amongst her rulers, we will now resume the
   general history from the death of Marcus Aurelius.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [38] See journey and Martyrdom of Ignatius, page 254.

   [39] The above extracts are taken from Wake's Translation. See also "A
   Full and Faithful Analysis of the Writings of Ignatius, Clement,
   Polycarp, and Hermas." The Inquirer, volume 2, page 317.

   [40] Irenaeus Against Heresies, Clark, Edinburgh

   [41] One of the highest authorities as to episcopal order is of opinion
   that the distinction between the clergy and the laity is derived from
   the Old Testament: that as the high priest had his office assigned him,
   and the priests also their proper station, and the Levites their
   peculiar service; so laymen in like manner were under the obligations
   proper to laymen. He also states that the common priesthood of all
   believers is taught in the New Testament, but that the Fathers from the
   earliest times formed the church on the Jewish system. --Bingham on the
   Antiquity of the Christian Church, vol. 1. p. 42.

   [42] For full details, see Neander, vol. 1, p. 259; Mosheim, vol. 1, p
   91; Bingham, vol. 1.
     __________________________________________________________________

Chapter 9

   FROM COMMODUS TILL THE ACCESSION OF CONSTANTINE

   A.D. 180 - 313

   Christianity under the successors of Aurelius enjoyed a season of
   comparative repose and tranquility. The depravity of Commodus was
   overruled to sub-serve the interests of the Christians after their
   long-sufferings under his father; and the brief reign of many of the
   emperors left them no leisure to war against the aggressions of
   Christianity. "During little more than a century," says Milman, "from
   the accession of Commodus to that of Diocletian, more than twenty
   emperors flitted like shadows along the tragic scene of the imperial
   palace. The empire of the world became the prize of bold adventure, or
   the precarious gift of a lawless soldiery. A long line of military
   adventurers, often strangers to the name, to the race, to the language
   of Rome --Africans, Pyreans, Arabs, and Goths --seized the quickly
   shifting sceptre of the world. The change of sovereign was almost
   always a change of dynasty, or, by some strange fatality, every attempt
   to re-establish a hereditary succession was thwarted by the vices or
   imbecility of the second generation."

   Thus the Christians had about a hundred years of comparative rest and
   peace. There were, no doubt, many cases of persecution and martyrdom
   during that period; but such cases were more the result of personal
   hostility in some individual than from any systematic policy pursued by
   the government against Christianity. The first and commanding object of
   each succeeding emperor was to secure his contested throne. They had no
   time to devote to the suppression of Christianity, or to the social and
   religious changes within the empire. Thus the great Head of the church
   --who is also "head over all things to the church" --made the weakness
   and insecurity of the throne the indirect means of the strength and
   prosperity of the church.

   But although the reign of Commodus was generally favourable to the
   progress of Christianity, there was one remarkable instance of
   persecution, which we must note.

   APOLLONIUS, a Roman senator, renowned for learning and philosophy, was
   a sincere Christian. Many of the nobility of Rome, with their whole
   families, embraced Christianity about this time. The dignity of the
   Roman senate felt itself lowered by such innovations. This led, it is
   supposed to the accusation of Apollonius before the magistrate. His
   accuser, under an old and un-repealed law of Antoninus Pius, which
   enacted grievous punishments against the accusers of Christians, was
   sentenced to death and executed. The magistrate asked the prisoner,
   Apollonius, to give an account of his faith before the senate and the
   court. He complied, and boldly confessed his faith in Christ; in
   consequence of which, by a decree of the senate, he was beheaded. It is
   said by some to be the only trial recorded in history where both the
   accused and the accuser suffered judicially. But, the Lord's hand being
   high above both the accuser and the magistrate (Perennius who condemned
   them both) was in control and, from this period, many Roman families of
   distinction and opulence professed Christianity; and sometimes we meet
   with Christians in the imperial family.

   After a reign of about twelve years the unworthy son of Aurelius died
   from the effects of a poisoned cup of wine.

   PERTINAX was elected to the throne by the senate immediately upon the
   death of Commodus; but after a brief reign of sixty-six days, he was
   killed in an insurrection. A civil war followed, and Septimius Severus
   ultimately obtained the sovereign power in Rome.

   CHRISTIANITY UNDER THE REIGN

   OF SEVERUS - A.D. 194-210

   In the early part of the reign of Severus he was rather favourable to
   the Christians. A Christian slave, named Proculus, was the means of
   restoring the Emperor to health, by anointing him with oil. This
   remarkable cure --no doubt in answer to prayer -- gave the Christians
   great favour in the eyes of Severus. Proculus received a honourable
   position in the imperial family, and a Christian nurse and a Christian
   tutor were engaged to form the character of the young prince. He also
   protected from the popular indignation men and women of the highest
   rank in Rome --senators, their wives and families --who had embraced
   Christianity. But alas! all this favour towards the Christians was
   merely the result of local circumstances. The laws remained the same,
   and violent persecutions broke out against them in particular
   provinces.

   PERSECUTIONS UNDER SEVERUS

   A.D. 202

   It was not till about the tenth year of his reign that the native
   ferocity of his dark and relentless mind was manifested against the
   Christians. In 202, after his return from the East, where he had gained
   great victories, and no doubt lifted up with pride, he put forth his
   hand, and impiously dared to arrest the progress of Christianity --the
   chariot of the gospel. He passed a law, which forbade, under severe
   penalties, that any of his subjects should become either Jews or
   Christians. This law, as a matter of course, kindled a severe
   persecution against young converts and Christians in general. It
   stimulated their enemies to all kinds of violence. Large sums of money
   were extorted from timid Christians by some of the venal governors as
   the price of peace. This practice, though yielded to by some for the
   sake of life and liberty, was strongly denounced by others. It was
   considered by the more zealous as degrading to Christianity, and an
   ignominious barter of the hopes and glories of martyrdom. Still the
   persecution does not appear to have been general. It left its deepest
   traces in Egypt and Africa.

   At Alexandria, Leonides, father of the famous Origen, suffered
   martyrdom. Young people at schools, who were receiving a Christian
   education, were subjected to severe tortures, and some of their
   teachers were seized and burned. The young Origen distinguished himself
   at this time by his active and fearless labours in the now almost
   deserted schools. He longed to follow in his father's footsteps, and
   rather sought than shunned the crown of martyrdom. But it was in Africa
   --a place we only think of now as a dark, miserable, and thinly peopled
   desert --that the silver line of God's marvellous grace was most
   distinctly marked in the heavenly patience and fortitude of the holy
   sufferers. We must indulge our readers with a few brief details.

   THE PERSECUTION IN AFRICA

   Historians say that in no part of the Roman Empire had Christianity
   taken more deep and permanent root than in the province of Africa.
   Then, it was crowded with rich and populous cities. The African type of
   Christianity was entirely different from what has been called the
   Egyptian. The former was earnest and impassioned, the latter dreamy and
   speculative through the evil influence of Platonism. Tertullian belongs
   to this period, and is a true type of the difference we have referred
   to; but more of this farther on. We will now notice some of the African
   martyrs

   PERPETUA AND HER COMPANIONS

   Amongst others who were apprehended and martyred in Africa during this
   persecution, Perpetua and her companions, in all histories, hold a
   distinguished place. The history of their martyrdom not only bears
   throughout the stamp of circumstantial truth, but also abounds with the
   most exquisite touches of natural feeling and affection. Here we see
   the beautiful combination of the tenderest feelings and the strongest
   affections, which Christianity recognises in all their rights, and
   makes even more profound and tender, but yet causes all to be
   sacrificed on the altar of entire devotedness to Him who died entirely
   devoted to us. "Who loved me," as appropriating faith says, "and gave
   himself for me." (Galatians 2:20)

   At Carthage, in the year 202, three young men, Revocatus, Saturnius,
   and Secundulus, and two young women, Perpetua and Felicitas, were
   arrested, all of them being still catechumens, or candidates for
   baptism and communion. Perpetua was of a good fami1y, wealthy and
   noble, of liberal education, and honourably married. She was about
   twenty-two years of age, and was a mother, with her child at the
   breast. Her whole family seems to have been Christians, except her aged
   father who was still a pagan. Nothing is said of her husband. Her
   father was passionately fond of her, and greatly dreaded the disgrace
   that her sufferings for Christ would bring on his family. So, not only
   did she have the possibility of death, in its most frightful form to
   struggle with, but also every sacred tie of nature.

   When she was first brought before her persecutors, her aged father came
   and urged her to recant and say she was not a Christian. "Father," she
   calmly replied, pointing to a vessel that lay on the ground, "Can I
   call this vessel anything else than what it is?" "No," he replied.
   "Neither can I say to you anything else than that I am a Christian." A
   few days after this, the young Christians were baptised. Though they
   were under guard, they were not yet committed to prison. But shortly
   after this, they were thrown into the dungeon. "Then," she says, "I was
   tempted, I was terrified, for I had never been in such darkness before.
   Oh what a dreadful day! The excessive heat occasioned by the number of
   persons, the rough treatment of the soldiers, and, finally, anxiety for
   my child, made me miserable." The deacons, however, succeeded in
   purchasing for the Christian prisoners a better apartment, where they
   were separated from the common criminals. Such advantages could usually
   be purchased from the venal overseers of prisons. Having her child
   brought to her now cheered Perpetua. She placed it at her breast, and
   exclaimed; "Now this prison has become a palace to me!"

   After a few days there was a rumour that the prisoners were to be
   examined. The father hastened to his daughter in great distress of
   mind. "My daughter," he said, "pity my gray hairs, pity thy father, if
   I am still worthy to be called thy father. If I have brought thee up to
   this bloom of thy age, if I have preferred thee above all thy brothers,
   expose me not to such shame among men. Look upon thy child --thy son
   --who, if thou should die, cannot long survive thee. Let thy lofty
   spirit give way, lest thou plunge us all into ruin. For if thou dies
   thus, not one of us will ever have courage again to speak a free word."
   Whilst saying this, he kissed her hands, threw himself at her feet,
   entreating her with terms of endearment, and many tears. But, though
   greatly moved and pained by the sight of her father, and his strong and
   tender affection for her, she was calm and firm, and felt chiefly
   concerned for the good of his soul. "My father's gray hairs," she said,
   "pained me, when I considered that he alone of my family would not
   rejoice in my martyrdom." "What shall happen," she said to him, "when I
   come before the tribunal, depends on the will of God; for we stand not
   in our own strength, but only by the power of God."

   On the arrival of the decisive hour --the last day of their trial --an
   immense multitude was assembled. The aged father again appeared, that
   he might for the last time try his utmost to overcome the resolution of
   his daughter. On this occasion he brought her infant son in his arms,
   and stood before her. What a moment! what a spectacle! Her aged father,
   his gray hairs, and her tender infant; to say nothing of his agonizing
   importunities: what an appeal to a daughter --to a young mother's
   heart! "Have pity on thy father's gray hairs," said the governor, "have
   pity on thy helpless child, offer sacrifice for the welfare of the
   Emperor." Thus she stood before the tribunal, before the assembled
   multitude, before the admiring myriads of heaven, before the frowning
   hosts of hell. But Perpetua was calm and firm. Like Abraham of old, the
   father of the faithful, her eye was not now on her son, but on the God
   of resurrection. Having commended her child to her mother and her
   brother, she answered the governor, and said, "That I cannot do." "Art
   thou a Christian?" he asked. "Yes," she replied, "I am a Christian."
   Her fate was now decided. They were all condemned to serve as a cruel
   sport for the people and the soldiers, in a fight with wild beasts, on
   the anniversary of young Geta's birthday. They returned to their
   dungeon, rejoicing that they were thus enabled to witness and suffer
   for Jesus' sake. The gaoler, Pudas, was converted by means of the
   tranquil behaviour of his prisoners.

   When led forth into the amphitheatre, the martyrs were observed to have
   a peaceful and joyful appearance. According to a custom which prevailed
   in Carthage, the men should have been clothed in scarlet like the
   priests of Saturn, and the women in yellow as the priestesses of Ceres;
   but the prisoners protested against such a proceeding. "We have come
   here," they said, "of our own choice, that we may not suffer our
   freedom to be taken from us; we have given up our lives that we may not
   be forced to such abominations." The pagans acknowledged the justice of
   their demand, and yielded. After taking leave of each other with the
   mutual kiss of Christian love, in the certain hope of soon meeting
   again, as "absent from the body and present with the Lord," they came
   forward to the scene of death in their simple attire. The spectators
   heard the voice of praise to God. Perpetua was singing a psalm. The men
   were exposed to lions, bears, and leopards; the women were tossed by
   the horns of a furious cow. All were speedily released from their
   sufferings by the sword of the gladiator, and entered into the joy of
   their Lord.

   The interesting narrative, which is here abridged, and said to have
   been written by Perpetua's own hand, breathes such an air of truth and
   reality as to have commanded the respect and confidence of all ages.
   But our main object in writing it for our readers is to present to them
   a living picture, in which many of the finest features of Christian
   faith are beautifully blended with the warmest and tenderest Christian
   feelings; and that we may learn, not to be complainers, but to endure
   all things for Christ's sake, that so His grace may shine, our faith
   triumph, and God be glorified.

   A few years after these events, Severus turned his attention to
   Britain, where the Romans had been losing ground. The Emperor, being at
   the head of a very powerful army, drove back the independent natives of
   Caledonia, and regained the country south of the wall of Antoninus, but
   lost so many troops in the successive battles which he was obliged to
   fight, that he did not think proper to push his conquests beyond that
   boundary. Feeling at length his end approaching, he retired to York,
   where he soon expired, in the eighteenth year of his reign, A.D. 211.

   THE ALTERED POSITION

   OF CHRISTIANITY

   After the death of Septimius Severus --except during the short reign of
   Maximin --the church enjoyed a season of comparative peace till the
   reign of Decius, A.D. 249. But during the favourable reign of Alexander
   Severus, a considerable change took place in the relation of
   Christianity to society. Throughout his life, Alexander had always been
   under the influence of his mother, Mammaea, who is described by
   Eusebius as "a woman distinguished for her piety and religion." She
   sent for Origen, of whose fame she had heard much, and learnt from him
   something of the doctrines of the gospel. She was afterwards favourable
   to the Christians, but there is not much evidence that she was one
   herself.

   Alexander was of a religious disposition. He had many Christians in his
   household, and bishops were admitted even at the court in a recognised
   official character. He frequently used the words of our Saviour, "As ye
   would that men should do to you, do ye also to them likewise." (Luke
   6:81) He had them inscribed on the walls of his palace and on other
   public buildings. But all religions were nearly the same to him, and on
   this principle he gave Christianity a place in his eclectic system.

   THE FIRST PUBLIC BUILDINGS

   FOR CHRISTIAN ASSEMBLIES

   An important point in the history of the church, and one that proves
   its altered position in the Roman Empire now comes before us for the
   first time. It was during the reign of this excellent prince that
   public buildings were first erected for the assemblies of Christians. A
   little circumstance connected with a piece of land in Rome shows the
   true spirit of the Emperor and the growing power and influence of
   Christians. A congregation selected some common (publicly owned) land
   as a site for a church; but the Company of Victuallers contended that
   they had a prior claim. The case was judged by the Emperor who awarded
   the land to the Christians, on the ground that it was better to devote
   it to the worship of God in any form than apply it to a profane and
   unworthy use.

   Public buildings --Christian churches, so-called, now began to rise in
   different parts of the empire, and to possess endowments in land. The
   heathen had never been able to understand why the Christians had
   neither temples nor altars. Their religious assemblies, up till this
   time, had been held in private. Even the Jew had his public synagogue,
   but no separate and distinguished building indicated where the
   Christians met. The private house, the catacombs, the cemetery of their
   dead, contained their peaceful congregations. Their privacy, which had
   often been in those troublous times their security, was now passing
   away. On the other hand, it must also be observed that their secrecy
   was often used against them. We have seen from the first, that the
   pagans could not understand a religion without a temple, and were
   easily persuaded that these private and mysterious meetings, which
   seemed to shun the light of day, were only for the worst of purposes.

   The outward condition of Christianity was now changed --wonderfully
   changed --but alas! not in favour of spiritual health and growth, as we
   shall soon see. There were now well-known edifices in which the
   Christians met, and the doors of which they could throw wide open to
   all mankind. Christianity was now recognised as one of the various
   forms of worship, which the government did not prohibit. The toleration
   of the Christians during this period rested only on the favourable
   disposition of Alexander. No change was made in the laws of the empire
   in favour of Christians, so that their time of peace was brought to a
   close by his death, caused by a conspiracy formed against him by the
   demoralized soldiery, who could not endure the discipline which he
   sought to restore; and the youthful Emperor was slain in his tent, in
   the twenty-ninth year of his age and the thirteenth of his reign.

   THE LORD'S DEALINGS

   WITH THE CLERGY

   Scarcely had the new churches been built, and the bishops received at
   court, when the hand of the Lord was turned against them. It happened
   in this way.

   MAXIMIN, a rude Thracian peasant, raised himself to the imperial
   throne. He had been the chief instigator, if not the actual murderer of
   the virtuous Alexander. He began his reign by seizing and putting to
   death all the friends of the late Emperor. Those who had been
   Alexander's friends he recognised as his own enemies. He ordered the
   bishops, and particularly those who had been the intimate friends of
   Alexander, to be put to death. His vengeance fell more or less on all
   classes of Christians, but chiefly on the clergy. It was not however
   for their Christianity that they suffered on this occasion, for Maximin
   was against all religions, because of the position they had reached in
   the world. What can be more sorrowful than this reflection?

   About the same time destructive earthquakes in several provinces
   rekindled the popular hatred against the Christians in general. The
   fury of the people under such an emperor was unrestrained, and,
   encouraged by hostile governors, they burnt the newly built churches
   and persecuted the Christians. But happily the reign of the savage was
   of short duration. Maximin became intolerable to mankind. The army
   mutinied and slew him in the third year of his reign; and a more
   favourable season returned for the Christians.

   The reign of GORDIAN, A.D. 238 - 244, and PHILIP, A.D. 244 - 249, was
   friendly to the church. We have repeatedly found that when a government
   favourable to the Christians ruled, another government, which oppressed
   them, immediately followed it. This was the case at this time. Under
   the smiles and patronage of Philip the Arabian, the church enjoyed
   great outward prosperity; but she was on the eve of a persecution more
   terrible and more general than any she had yet passed through.

   One of the causes, which may have contributed to this, was the absence
   of the Christians from the national ceremonies, which commemorated the
   thousandth year of Rome, A.D. 247. Philip celebrated the secular games
   with unexampled magnificence; but as he was favourable to the
   Christians, they escaped the fury of the pagan priests and populace.
   The Christians were now a recognised body in the State, and however
   carefully they might avoid mingling in the political factions or the
   popular festivities of the empire, they were considered the enemies of
   its prosperity and the cause of all its calamities. We now come to a
   complete change of government --a government that afflicts the whole
   church of God.

   THE GENERAL PERSECUTION

   UNDER DECIUS

   DECIUS, in the year 249, conquered Philip and placed himself on the
   throne. His reign is remembered in church history for the first general
   persecution. The new Emperor was unfavourable to Christianity and
   zealously devoted to the pagan religion. He resolved to attempt the
   complete extermination of the former, and to restore the latter to its
   ancient glory. One of the first measures of his reign was to issue
   edicts to the governors, to enforce the ancient laws against the
   Christians. They were commanded, on pain of forfeiting their own lives,
   to exterminate all Christians utterly, or bring them back by pains and
   tortures to the religion of their fathers.

   From the time of Trajan there had been an imperial order to the effect,
   that the Christians were not to be sought for; and there was also a law
   against private accusations being brought against them, especially by
   their own servants, as we have seen in the case of Apollonius; and
   these laws had been usually observed by the enemies of the church, but
   now they were wholly neglected. The authorities sought out the
   Christians, the accusers ran no risk, and popular clamour was admitted
   in place of formal evidence. During the two succeeding years a great
   multitude of Christians in all the Roman provinces were banished,
   imprisoned, or tortured to death by various kinds of punishments and
   sufferings. This persecution was much more cruel and terrible than any
   that preceded it. But the most painful part of those heart-rending
   scenes was the enfeebled state of the Christians themselves --the sad
   effect of worldly ease and prosperity.

   THE EFFECTS OF

   WORLDLINESS IN THE CHURCH

   The student of church history now meets with the manifest and appalling
   effect of the world in the church. It is a most sorrowful sight, but it
   ought to be a profitable lesson to the Christian reader. What then was,
   is now, and ever must be. The Holy Spirit, who dwells in us, is not now
   less sensitive to the foul and withering breath of the world than He
   was then.

   What the enemy could not do by bloody edicts and cruel tyrants, he
   accomplished by the friendship of the world. This is an old stratagem
   of Satan. The wily serpent proved more dangerous than the roaring lion.
   By means of the favour of great men, and especially of emperors, he
   threw the clergy off their guard, led them to join hands with the
   world, and deceived them by his flatteries. The Christians could now
   erect temples as well as the heathen, and their bishops were received
   at the imperial court on equal terms with the idolatrous priests. This
   unhallowed intercourse with the world sapped the very foundations of
   their Christianity. This became painfully manifest when the violent
   storm of persecution succeeded the long calm of their worldly
   prosperity.

   In many parts of the empire the Christians had enjoyed undisturbed
   peace for a period of thirty years. This had told unfavorably on the
   church as a whole. With many it was not now the faith of an ardent
   conviction, such as we had in the first and second centuries, but of
   truth instilled into the mind by means of Christian education. --Just
   what prevails in the present day to an alarming extent. A persecution
   breaking out with great violence, after so many years of tranquility,
   could not fail to prove a sifting process for the churches. The
   atmosphere of Christianity had become corrupted. Cyprian in the West,
   and Origen in the East, speaks of the secular spirit, which had crept
   in --of the pride, the luxury, and the covetousness of the clergy --of
   the careless and irreligious lives of the people.

   "If," says Cyprian, bishop of Carthage, "the cause of the disease is
   understood, the cure of the affected part is already found. The Lord
   would prove His people; and because the divinely prescribed regimen of
   life had become disturbed in the long season of peace, a divine
   judgment was sent to re-establish our fallen, and, I might almost say,
   slumbering faith. Our sins deserve more; but our gracious Lord has so
   ordered it that all which has occurred seems rather like a trial than a
   persecution. Forgetting what believers did in the times of the
   apostles, and what they should always be doing; Christians laboured
   with insatiable desire to increase their earthly possessions. Many of
   the bishops who, by precept and example, should have guided others,
   neglected their divine calling, to engage in the management of worldly
   concerns." Such being the condition of things in many of the churches,
   we need not wonder at what took place.

   The Emperor ordered rigorous search to be made for all suspected of
   refusing compliance with the national worship. Christians were required
   to conform to the ceremonies of the pagan religion. In case they
   declined, threats, and afterwards tortures, were to be employed to
   compel submission. If they remained firm, the punishment of death was
   to be inflicted, especially on the bishops, whom Decius hated most
   bitterly. The custom was, wherever the dreadful edict was carried into
   execution, to appoint a day when all the Christians in the place were
   to present themselves before the magistrates, renounce their religion,
   and offer incense at the idol's altar. Many before the dreadful day
   arrived, had fled into voluntary banishment. The goods of such were
   confiscated, and they were forbidden to return, under penalty of death.
   Those who remained firm, after repeated tortures, were cast into
   prison, where the additional sufferings of hunger and thirst were
   employed to overcome their resolution. Many who were less firm and
   faithful were let off without sacrificing, by purchasing themselves, or
   allowing their friends to purchase, a certificate from the magistrate.
   Needless to say the unworthy practice was condemned. The church
   described it as a tacit abjuration.

   DIONYSIUS, bishop of Alexandria, in describing the effect of this
   terrible decree, says, "that many citizens of repute complied with the
   edict. Some were impelled by their fears, and some, were forced by
   their friends. Many, stood pale and trembling, neither ready to submit
   to the idolatrous ceremony, nor prepared to resist even unto death.
   Others endured their tortures to a certain point, but finally "gave
   in." Such were some of the painful and disgraceful effects of the
   general relaxation through tampering with this present evil world.
   Still it would ill become us, who live in a time of great civil and
   religious liberty, to say hard things of the weakness of those who
   lived in such sanguinary times. Rather, let us feel the disgrace as our
   own, and pray that we may be kept from yielding to the attractions of
   the world in every form. But all was not defective --thank the Lord.
   Let us look for a moment at the bright side.

   THE POWER OF FAITH AND

   CHRISTIAN DEVOTEDNESS

   The same Dionysius tells us that many were as pillars of the Lord, who
   through Him were made strong, and became wonderful witnesses of His
   grace. Among these he mentions a boy of fifteen, Dioscurus by name, who
   answered, in the wisest manner, all questions, and displayed such
   constancy under torture, that he commanded the admiration of the
   governor himself, who dismissed him, in the hope that riper years would
   lead him to see his error. A woman, who had been brought to the altar
   by her husband, was forced to offer incense by someone holding her
   hand; but she exclaimed, "I did it not: it was you that did it;" and
   she was thereupon condemned to exile. In the dungeon at Carthage the
   Christians were exposed to heat, hunger, and thirst, in order to force
   them to comply with the decree; but although they saw death by
   starvation staring them in the face, they continued steadfast in their
   confession of Christ. And from the prison in Rome, where certain
   confessors had been confined for about a year, the following noble
   confession was sent to Cyprian: "What more glorious and blessed lot
   can, by God's grace, fall to man than, amidst tortures and the fear of
   death itself, to confess God the Lord --than, with lacerated bodies and
   a spirit departing but yet free, to confess Christ, the Son of God
   --than to become fellow-sufferers with Christ in the name of Christ? If
   we have not yet shed our blood, we are ready to shed it. Pray then,
   beloved Cyprian, that the Lord would daily confirm and strengthen each
   one of us, more and more, with the power of His might; and that He, as
   the best of leaders, would finally conduct His soldiers, whom He has
   disciplined and proved in the dangerous camp, to the field of battle
   which is before us, armed with those divine weapons which never can be
   conquered."

   Among the victims of this terrible persecution was Fabian, bishop of
   Rome, Babylas of Antioch, and Alexander of Jerusalem. Cyprian, Origen,
   Gregory, Dionysius, and other eminent men, were exposed to cruel
   tortures and exile, but escaped with their lives. The hatred of the
   Emperor was particularly directed against the bishops. But in the
   Lord's mercy the reign of Decius was a short one; he was killed in
   battle with the Goths, about the end of 251. [43]

   THE MARTRDOM OF CYPRIAN

   UNDER VALERIAN

   As the name of Cyprian must be familiar to all our readers, and a name
   most famous in connection with the government and discipline of the
   church, it may be well to notice particularly the serene fortitude of
   this Father in the prospect of martyrdom.

   He was born at Carthage about the year 200, but he was not converted
   till about 246. Though in mature age, he possessed all the freshness
   and ardor of youth. He had been distinguished as a teacher of rhetoric;
   he was now distinguished as an earnest devoted Christian. He was early
   promoted to the offices of deacon and presbyter, and in 248 he was
   elected bishop by the general desire of the peop1e. His labours were
   interrupted by the persecution under Decius, but his life was preserved
   till the year 258. On the morning of September 13^th, an officer with
   soldiers was sent by the proconsul to bring Cyprian into his presence.
   Cyprian then knew his end was near. With a ready mind and a cheerful
   countenance he went without delay. His trial was postponed for a day.
   The intelligence of his apprehension drew together the whole city. His
   own people lay all night in front of the officer's house with whom
   Cyprian was lodged.

   In the morning he was led to the proconsul's palace surrounded by a
   great multitude of people and a strong guard of soldiers. After a short
   delay, the proconsul appeared. "Art thou Thascius Cyprian, the bishop
   of so many impious men?" said the proconsul. "I am," answered Cyprian.
   "The most sacred Emperor commands thee to sacrifice." "I do not
   sacrifice," he replied. "Consider well," rejoined the proconsul.
   "Execute thy orders," answered Cyprian, "the case admits of no
   consideration."

   The governor consulted with his council, and then delivered his
   sentence. "Thascius Cyprian, thou hast lived long in thy impiety, and
   assembled around thee many men involved in the same wicked conspiracy.
   Thou hast shown thyself an enemy alike to the gods and to the laws of
   the empire; the pious and sacred emperors have in vain endeavoured to
   recall thee to the worship of thy ancestors. Since then thou hast been
   the chief author and leader of these guilty practices, thou shalt be an
   example to those whom thou hast deluded to thy unlawful assemblies.
   Thou must expiate thy crime with thy blood." "God be praised," answered
   Cyprian, and the crowd of his brethren exclaimed, "Let us too be
   martyred with him." The bishop was carried into a neighboring field and
   beheaded. It was remarkable that but a few days afterwards, the
   proconsul died. And, the following year, Emperor Valerian was defeated
   and taken prisoner by the Persians, who treated him with great and
   contemptuous cruelty --a calamity and disgrace without example in the
   annals of Rome.

   The miserable death of many of the persecutors made a great impression
   on the public mind, and forced on many the conviction that the enemies
   of Christianity were the enemies of heaven. For about forty years after
   this outrage, the peace and prosperity of the church were not seriously
   interrupted; we will pass over these years for the present, and come to
   the final contest between paganism and Christianity.

   THE GENERAL

   STATE OF CHRISTIANITY

   Before attempting a brief account of the persecution under Diocletian,
   it may be well to review the history and condition of the church as the
   final struggle drew near. But in order to form a correct judgment of
   the progress and state of Christianity at the end of three hundred
   years, we must consider the power of the enemies with which it had to
   contend.

   1) JUDAISM. We have seen at some length, and especially in the life of
   St. Paul, that Judaism was the first great enemy of Christianity. It
   had to contend from its infancy with the strong prejudices of the
   believing, and with the bitter malice of the unbelieving Jews. In its
   native region, and wherever it travelled, it was pursued by its
   unrelenting foe. After the death of the apostles the church suffered
   much from yielding to Jewish pressure, and ultimately, remodeling
   Christianity on the system of Judaism. The new wine was put into old
   bottles.

   2) ORIENTALISM. Towards the close of the first and the beginning of the
   second century, Christianity had to make its way through the many and
   conflicting elements of eastern philosophy. Its first conflict was with
   Simon Magus, as recorded in the Acts of the Apostles. Though a
   Samaritan by birth, he is supposed to have studied the various
   religions of the East at Alexandria. On returning to his native
   country, he advanced very high pretensions to superior knowledge and
   power; and bewitched the people of Samaria, giving out that he himself
   was some great one, to whom they all gave heed, from the least to the
   greatest, saying, "This man is the great power of God." From this
   notice of Simon we may learn what influence such men had over the minds
   of the ignorant and the superstitious, and also what a dreadful power
   of Satan the early church had to contend with in these evil workers. He
   assumed not merely the lofty title of "the great power of God," but
   that he combined in himself the other perfections of Deity. He is
   spoken of by writers generally as the head and father of the whole host
   of impostors and heretics.

   After being so openly and shamefully defeated by Peter, he is said to
   have left Samaria, and travelled through various countries, choosing
   especially those, which the gospel had not yet reached. From this time
   he introduced the name of Christ into his system, and thus endeavoured
   to confound the gospel with his blasphemies, and confuse the minds of
   the people. As to his miracle and magic working, his marvellous
   theories about his own descent from heaven, and other emanations, we
   say nothing, only that they proved, especially in the East, a mighty
   hindrance to the progress of the gospel.

   The successors of Simon, such as Cerinthus and Valentinus, so
   systematized his theories as to become the founders of that form of
   Gnosticism with which the church had to contend in the second century.
   The name implies pretensions to some superior knowledge. It is
   generally thought that St. Paul refers to this meaning of the word when
   warning his son Timothy against "science," or knowledge, "falsely so
   called."

   Although it would be out of place in these "Short Papers" to attempt
   anything like an outline of this wide spread Orientalism or Gnosticism,
   yet we must give our readers some idea of what it was. It proved for a
   time the most formidable opponent of Christianity. But as the facts and
   doctrines of the gospel prevailed, Gnosticism declined.

   Under the head of the Gnostics may be included all those in the first
   ages of the church who incorporated into their philosophical systems
   the most obvious and suitable doctrines of both Judaism and
   Christianity. Thus Gnosticism became a mixture of oriental philosophy,
   Judaism, and Christianity. By means of this Satanic confusion the
   beautiful simplicity of the gospel was destroyed, and for a long time,
   in many places, its real character was obscured. It was a deep laid
   plan and a mighty effort of the enemy, not only to corrupt, but to
   undermine and subvert the gospel altogether. No sooner had Christianity
   appeared than the Gnostics began to adopt into their systems some of
   its more subtle doctrines. Judaism was deeply tinged with it before the
   Christian era, probably from the captivity.

   But Gnosticism, we must remember, was not a corruption of Christianity,
   though ecclesiastical writers call the whole school of Gnostics
   heretics. As to its origin, we must go back to the many religions of
   the East, such as Chaldean, Persian, Egyptian, and others. In our own
   day such philosophers would be viewed as infidels and utter aliens from
   the gospel of Christ, but in early times the title heretic was given to
   all who in any way whatever introduced the name of Christ into their
   philosophical systems. Hence it has been said, "If Mahomet had appeared
   in the second century, Justin Martyr, or Irenaeus, would have spoken of
   him as a heretic." At the same time we must own that the principles of
   the Greek philosophy, especially the Platonic, forced their way into
   the church at a very early period, corrupted the pure stream of truth,
   and threatened for a time to change the design and the effects of the
   gospel upon mankind.

   ORIGEN, who was born at Alexandria --the cradle of Gnosticism --about
   the year 185, was the Father who gave form and completeness to the
   Alexandrian method of interpreting scripture. He distinguished in it a
   threefold sense --the literal, the moral, and the mystical --answering
   respectively to the body, soul, and spirit in man. Any attentive
   reader, he held, might understand the literal sense; the moral required
   higher intelligence; the mystical was only to be apprehended through
   the grace of the Holy Spirit, which was to be obtained by prayer.

   It was the great object of this eminent teacher to harmonize
   Christianity with philosophy; this was the leaven of the Alexandrian
   school. He sought to gather up the fragments of truth scattered
   throughout other systems, and unite them in a Christian scheme, so as
   to present the gospel in a form that would not offend the prejudices,
   but insure the conversion, of Jews, Gnostics, and of cultivated
   heathen. These principles of interpretation, and this combination of
   Christianity with philosophy, led Origen and his followers into many
   grave and serious errors, both practical and doctrinal. He was a
   devoted, earnest, zealous Christian himself, and truly loved the Lord
   Jesus, but the tendency of his principles has been, from that day to
   this, to weaken faith in the definite character of truth, if not to
   pervert it altogether by means of spiritualizing and allegorising,
   which his system taught and allowed.

   THE MALIGNITY OF MATTER was a first principle in all the sects of the
   Gnostics; it pervaded all the religious systems of the East. This led
   to the wildest theories as to the formation and character of the
   material universe, and all corporeal substances. Thus it was, that
   persons believing their bodies to be intrinsically evil, recommended
   abstinence and severe bodily mortifications, in order that the mind or
   spirit, which was viewed as pure and divine, might enjoy greater
   liberty, and be able the better to contemplate heavenly things. Without
   saying more on this subject --which we do not much enjoy --the reader
   will see that the celibacy of the clergy in later years, and the whole
   system of asceticism and monasticism, had their origin, not in the
   scriptures, but in oriental philosophy. [44]

   Paganism --Not only had the church to contend with Judaism and
   Orientalism, it also suffered from the outward hostility of Paganism.
   These were the three formidable powers of Satan with which he assailed
   the church during the first three hundred years of her history. In
   carrying out her Lord's high commission --"Teach all nations"..."preach
   the gospel to every creature" --she had these enemies to face and
   overcome. But, these could not have hindered her course, had she only
   walked in separation from the world, and remained true and faithful to
   her heavenly and exalted Saviour. But alas! alas! what Judaism,
   Orientalism, and Paganism could not do, the allurements of the world
   accomplished. And this leads us to a close survey of the condition of
   the church when the great persecution broke out.

   SURVEY OF THE CHURCH'S

   CONDITION -- A.D. - 303

   Diocletian ascended the throne in 284. In 286 he associated with
   himself Maximian, as Augustus, and in 292 Galerius and Constantius were
   added to the number of the princes, with the inferior title of Cæsar.
   Thus, when the fourth century began, the Roman Empire had four
   sovereigns. Two bore the title of Augustus, and two, the title of
   Cæsar. Diocletian, though superstitious, indulged no hatred towards
   Christians. Constantius, the father of Constantine the Great, was
   friendly to them. At first the face of Christian affairs looked
   tolerably bright and happy, but the pagan priests were angry and
   plotting mischief against the Christians. They saw in the wide
   spreading triumphs of Christianity their own downfall. For fully fifty
   years the church had been very little disturbed by the secular power.
   During this period the Christians had attained an unexampled degree of
   prosperity, but it was only outward; they had deeply declined from the
   purity and simplicity of the gospel of Christ.

   Churches had arisen in most of the cities of the empire and, with some
   display of architectural splendor. Vestments and sacred vessels of
   silver and gold began to be used. Converts flocked in from all ranks of
   society; even the wife of the Emperor, and his daughter Valeria,
   married to Galerius, appear to have been among the number. Christians
   held high offices in the state, and in the imperial household. They
   occupied positions of distinction, and even supreme authority in the
   provinces and the army. But alas! this long period of outward
   prosperity had produced its usual consequences. Faith and love decayed
   and pride and ambition crept in. Priestly domination began to exercise
   its usurped powers, and the bishop assumed the language and the
   authority of the vicegerent of God. Jealousies and dissensions
   distracted the peaceful communities, and disputes sometimes proceeded
   to open violence. The peace of fifty years had corrupted the whole
   Christian atmosphere and the lightning of Diocletian's rage was
   permitted of God to refine and purify it.

   Such is the melancholy confession of the Christians themselves, who,
   according to the spirit of the times, considered the dangers and the
   afflictions to which they were exposed in the light of divine
   judgments. [45]

   THE ACTS OF DIOCLETIAN AND THE CLOSE OF THE SMYRNEAN PERIOD

   Already the church has passed through nine systematic persecutions. The
   first was under Nero, then Domitian, Trajan, Marcus Aurelius, Severus,
   Maximin, Decius, Valerian, and Aurelian. And now the fearful moment has
   arrived when she must undergo the TENTH, according to the prophetic
   word of the Lord: "Ye shall have tribulation Ten days." And it is not a
   little remarkable that not only should there be exactly ten government
   persecutions, but that the last should have continued exactly TEN
   years. And, as we saw at an earlier part of the Smyrnean period,
   exactly TEN years elapsed from the beginning of the persecution, under
   Aurelius, in the East, till its close in the West. The Christian
   student may trace other features of resemblance: we would rather
   suggest such features than press their acceptance upon others, though
   we surely believe they are foreshadowed in the Epistle to Smyrna.

   The reign of Diocletian is one of great historical importance. First,
   it was rendered conspicuous by the introduction of a new system of
   imperial government. He virtually removed the capital from ancient Rome
   to Nicomedia, which he made the seat of his residence. There he
   maintained a court of eastern splendour, to which he invited men of
   learning and philosophy. But the philosophers who frequented his court,
   being all animated with extreme hatred against Christianity, used their
   influence with the Emperor to exterminate a religion too pure to suit
   their polluted minds. This led to the last and greatest persecution of
   the Christians, it is only with the latter we have to do. And as all
   histories of this period are gathered chiefly from the records of
   Eusebius and Lactantius, who wrote at this time, and witnessed many
   executions, we can do little more than select and transcribe from what
   has been already written, consulting the various authors already named.

   The pagan priests and philosophers above referred to, not succeeding
   well in their artifices with Diocletian to make war against the
   Christians, made use of the other Emperor, Galerius, (his son-in-law)
   to accomplish their purpose. This cruel man impelled partly by his own
   inclination, partly by his mother, a most superstitious pagan, and
   partly by the priests, gave his father-in-law no rest until he had
   gained his point.

   During the winter of the year 302 - 303, Galerius paid a visit to
   Diocletian at Nicomedia. His great object was to excite the old Emperor
   against the Christians. Diocletian for a time withstood his
   importunity. He was averse, from whatever motive, to the sanguinary
   measures proposed by his partner. But the mother of Galerius, the
   implacable enemy of the Christians, employed all her influence over her
   son to inflame his mind to immediate and active hostilities. Diocletian
   at length gave way, and a persecution was agreed to, but the lives of
   the Christians were to be spared. Previously to this, Galerius had
   taken care to remove all from the army who refused to sacrifice. Some
   were discharged, and some were sentenced to death.

   THE FIRST EDICT

   About the 24^th of February the first edict was issued. It ordained
   that all who refused to sacrifice should lose their offices, property,
   rank, and civil privileges; that slaves persisting in the profession of
   the gospel should be excluded from the hope of liberty; that Christians
   of all ranks should be liable to torture; that all churches should be
   destroyed; that religious meetings should be suppressed; and that the
   scriptures should be burnt. The attempt to exterminate the scriptures
   was a new feature in this persecution, and, no doubt, was suggested by
   the philosophers who frequented the palace. They were well aware that
   their own writings would have but little hold on the public mind if the
   scriptures and other sacred books were circulated. Immediately these
   measures were resolved upon, the church of Nicomedia was attacked, the
   sacred books were burnt, and the building entirely demolished in a few
   hours. Throughout the empire the churches of the Christians were to be
   levelled to the ground, and the sacred books were to be delivered to
   the imperial officers. Many Christians who refused to give up the
   scriptures were put to death, while those who gave them up to be burnt
   were considered by the church as traitors to Christ, and afterwards
   caused great trouble in the exercise of discipline towards them. [46]

   No sooner had this cruel edict been affixed in the accustomed place
   than a Christian of noble rank tore it down. His indignation at
   injustice so flagrant hurried him into an act of inconsiderate zeal
   --into a violation of that precept of the gospel, which enjoins respect
   towards all in authority. Welcome was the occasion thus furnished to
   condemn a Christian of high station to death. He was burnt alive at a
   slow fire, and bore his sufferings with a dignified composure, which
   astonished and mortified his executioners. The persecution was now
   begun. The first step against the Christians having been taken, the
   second did not linger.

   Not long after the publication of the edict, a fire broke out in the
   palace of Nicomedia, which spread almost to the chamber of the Emperor.
   The origin of the fire appears to be unknown, but, of course, the guilt
   was charged on the Christians. Diocletian believed it. He was alarmed
   and incensed. Multitudes were thrown into prison, without any
   consideration of those who were or were not liable to suspicion, the
   most cruel tortures were resorted to for the purpose of extorting a
   confession; but in vain. Many were burnt to death, beheaded, and
   drowned. About fourteen days after, a second fire broke out in the
   palace. It now became evident that it was the work of an incendiary.
   The heathen again accused the Christians, and loudly cried for
   vengeance; but as no proof could ever be found that the Christians had
   any hand in any way with these fatal conflagrations, a strong, and, we
   believe, truthful suspicion rested on the Emperor Galerius himself. His
   great object from the first was to incriminate the Christians, and
   alarm Diocletian by his own more violent measures. As if fully aware of
   the effect of these events on the dark, timid, and superstitions mind
   of the old Emperor, he immediately left Nicomedia, pretending that he
   could not consider his person safe within the city.

   But the end was gained; and that to the utmost extent, which even
   Galerius or his pagan mother, could have desired. Diocletian, now
   thoroughly aroused, raged ferociously against all sorts of men and
   women who bore the Christian name. He compelled his wife Prisca, and
   his daughter Valeria, to offer sacrifice. Officers of the household, of
   the highest rank and nobility, and all the inmates of the palace, were
   exposed to the cruelest tortures, by the order, and even in the
   presence, of Diocletian himself. The names of some of his ministers of
   state have been handed down who preferred the riches of Christ to all
   the grandeur of his palace. One of the chamberlains was brought before
   the Emperor and was tortured with great severity, because he refused to
   sacrifice. As if to make an example of him to the others, a mixture of
   salt and vinegar was poured on his open wounds, but it was all to no
   purpose. He confessed his faith in Christ as the only Saviour, and
   would own no other God. He was then gradually burnt to death.
   Dorotheus, Gorgonius, and Andreas, eunuchs who served in the palace,
   were put to death. Anthimus, the bishop of Nicomedia, was beheaded.
   Many were executed, many were burnt alive; but it became tedious to
   destroy men singly, and large fires were made to burn many together;
   others were rowed into the midst of the lake, and thrown into the water
   with stones fastened to their necks.

   From Nicomedia, the centre of the persecution, the imperial orders were
   dispatched, requiring the cooperation of the other emperors in the
   restoration of the dignity of the ancient religion, and the entire
   suppression of Christianity. Thus the persecution raged throughout the
   whole Roman world, excepting Gaul. There the mild Constantius ruled,
   and, though he made a show of concurring in the measure of his
   colleagues, by the demolition of the churches, he abstained from all
   violence against the persons of the Christians. Though not himself a
   decided Christian, he was naturally humane, and evidently a friend to
   Christianity and its professors. He presided over the government of
   Gaul, Britain, and Spain. But the fierce temper of Maximian, and the
   savage cruelty of Galerius, only awaited the signal to carry into
   effect the orders from Nicomedia. And now the three monsters raged, in
   the full force of the civil power, against the defenseless and
   unoffending followers of the meek and lowly Jesus, the Prince of Peace.

   "Grace begun shall end in glory;

   Jesus, He the victory won;

   In His own triumphant story

   Is the record of our own."

   THE SECOND EDICT

   Not long after the first edict had been carried into execution
   throughout the empire, rumors of insurrections in Armenia and Syria,
   regions densely peopled with Christians, reached the Emperor's ears.
   These troubles were falsely attributed to the Christians, and afforded
   a pretext for a second edict. It was intimated that the clergy, as
   leaders of the Christians, were particularly liable to suspicion on
   this occasion, and the edict directed that all of the clerical order
   should be seized and thrown into prison. Thus in a short time prisons
   were filled with bishops, presbyters, and deacons.

   THE THIRD EDICT

   A third edict was immediately issued prohibiting the liberation of any
   of the clergy, unless they consented to offer sacrifice. They were
   declared enemies of the State, and wherever a hostile prefect chose to
   exercise his boundless authority, they were crowded into prisons
   intended only for the basest criminals. The edict provided that such of
   the prisoners as were willing to offer sacrifice to the gods should be
   set free, and that the rest should be compelled by tortures and
   punishments. Great multitudes of the most devout, godly, and venerable
   in the church, either suffered capitally, or were sent to the mines.
   The Emperor vainly thought, that if the bishops and teachers were once
   overcome, the churches would soon follow their example. But finding
   that the most humiliating defeat was the result of his measures, he was
   goaded on by the united influence of Galerius, the philosophers, and
   the pagan priesthood, to issue another and a still more rigorous edict.

   THE FOURTH EDICT

   By a fourth edict the orders, which applied only to the clergy, were
   now to be extended to the whole body of Christians. The magistrates
   were directed to make free use of torture for forcing all Christians
   --men, women, and children --into the worship of the gods. Diocletian
   and his colleagues were now committed to the desperate but unequal
   contest. The powers of darkness --the whole Roman Empire --stood,
   armed, determined, pledged, to the defence of ancient polytheism, and
   to the complete extermination of the Christian name. To retreat would
   be the confession of weakness; to be successful the adversary must be
   exterminated; as to victory there could be none, for the Christians
   made no resistance. Historically, it was the final and fearful struggle
   between paganism and Christianity; the contest was now at its height,
   and drawing to a crisis.

   Public proclamation was made through the streets of the cities, that
   men, women, and children, were all to report to the temples of the
   gods. All must undergo the fiery ordeal --sacrifice or die. Every
   individual was summoned by name from lists previously made out. At the
   city gates all were subjected to rigid examination, and such as were
   found to be Christians were immediately secured.

   Details of the sufferings and martyrdoms that followed would fill
   volumes. As edict followed edict, in rapid succession and in wrathful
   severity, the spirit of martyrdom revived; it rose higher and higher,
   until men and women, in place of being seized and dragged to the
   funeral piles, leaped into the burning flames, as if ascending to
   heaven in a chariot of fire. Whole families were put to various kinds
   of death; some by fire, others by water, after enduring severe
   tortures; some perished by famine, others by crucifixion; and some were
   fastened with their heads downwards, and preserved alive, that they
   might die a lingering death. In some places as many as ten, twenty,
   sixty, and even a hundred men and women, with their little ones, were
   martyred by various torments in one day. [47]

   In almost every part of the Roman world such scenes of pitiless
   barbarity continued with more or less severity for the long period of
   ten years. Constantius alone, of all the emperors, contrived to shelter
   the Christians in the west, especially in Gaul, where he resided. But
   in all other places they were given up to all sorts of cruelties and
   injuries, without the liberty to appeal to the authorities, and without
   the smallest protection from the State. Free leave was given to the
   heathen populace to practice all sorts of excesses against the
   Christians. Under these circumstances the reader may easily imagine
   what they were constantly exposed to, both in their persons and
   estates. Each one felt sure of never being called to account for any
   violence he might be guilty of towards the Christians. But the
   sufferings of the men, however great, seemed little compared with those
   of the women. The fear of exposure and violence was more dreaded than
   mere death.

   Take one example. "A certain holy and devout female," says Eusebius,
   "admirable for her virtue, and illustrious above all in Antioch for her
   wealth, family, and reputation, had educated her two daughters --now in
   the bloom of life, noted for their beauty --in the principles of piety.
   Their concealment was traced, and they were caught in the toils of the
   soldiery. The mother; being at a loss for herself and her daughters,
   knowing what was before them, suggested that it was better to die,
   betaking themselves to the aid of Christ, than to fall into the hands
   of the brutal soldiers. After this, all agreeing to the same thing, and
   having requested the guards for a little time, they cast themselves
   into the flowing river, to escape a greater evil." Although this act
   cannot be fully justified, it must be judged with many considerations.
   They were driven to despair. And sure we are that the Lord knows how to
   forgive all that is wrong in the action, and to give us full credit for
   all that is right in our motives.

   For a moment the persecutors vainly imagined that they would triumph
   over the downfall of Christianity. Pillars were raised, and medals were
   struck, to the honour of Diocletian and Galerius, for having
   extinguished the Christian superstition, and for restoring the worship
   of the gods. But He who sits in heaven was at that very moment
   overruling the very wrath of these men for the complete deliverance and
   triumph of His people, and the acknowledged defeat and downfall of
   their enemies. They could martyr Christians, demolish churches, and
   burn books, but the living springs of Christianity were beyond their
   reach.

   THE HAND OF THE LORD IN JUDGMENT

   Great and important changes began to take place in the sovereignty of
   the empire. But the Head of the church watched over everything. He had
   limited and defined the period of her sufferings, and neither the hosts
   of hell, nor the legions of Rome, could extend these one-hour. The
   enemies of the Christians were smitten with the direst calamities. God
   appeared to be making requisition for blood. Galerius, the real author
   of the persecution, in the eighteenth year of his reign and the eighth
   of the persecution, lay expiring of a most loathsome malady. Like Herod
   Agrippa and Philip II of Spain, he was "eaten of worms." Physicians
   were sought for, oracles were consulted, but all in vain; the remedies
   applied only aggravated the virulence of the disease. The whole palace
   was so infected from the nature of his affliction, that all his friends
   deserted him. The agonies, which he suffered, forced from him the cry
   for mercy, and also an earnest request to the Christians to intercede
   for the suffering Emperor in their supplications to their God.

   From his dying bed he issued an edict, which, while it condescended to
   apologise for the past severities against the Christians, under the
   specious plea of regard for the public welfare and unity of the state,
   admitted to the fullest extent the total failure of the severe measures
   for the suppression of Christianity; and provided for the free and
   public exercise of the Christian religion. A few days after the
   promulgation of the edict Galerius expired. For about six months the
   merciful orders of this edict were acted upon, and great numbers were
   liberated from the prisons and the mines, but, alas! bearing the marks
   of bodily torture only short of death. This brief cessation of the
   persecution showed at once its fearful character and alarming extent.

   But Maximin, who succeeded Galerius in the government of Asia, sought
   to revive the pagan religion in all its original splendour, and the
   suppression of Christianity, with renewed and relentless cruelty. He
   commanded that all the officers of his government, from the highest to
   the lowest, both in the civil and military service; that all free men
   and women, all slaves, and even little children, should sacrifice, and
   even partake of what was offered at heathen altars. All vegetables and
   provisions in the market were to be sprinkled with the water or the
   wine, which had been used in the sacrifices, that the Christians might
   thus be forced into contact with idolatrous offerings.

   New tortures were invented, and fresh streams of Christian blood flowed
   in all the provinces of the Roman Empire, with the exception of Gaul.
   But the hand of the Lord was again laid heavily both on the empire and
   on the Emperor. Every kind of calamity prevailed. Tyranny, war,
   pestilence, and famine depopulated the Asiatic provinces. Throughout
   the dominions of Maximin the summer rains did not fall; a famine
   desolated the whole East; many opulent families were reduced to
   beggary, and others sold their children as slaves. The famine produced
   its usual accompaniment, pestilence. Boils broke out all over the
   bodies of those who were seized with the malady, but especially about
   the eyes, so that multitudes became helplessly and incurably blind. All
   hearts failed, and all who were able fled from the infected houses so
   that myriads were left to perish in a state of absolute desertion. The
   Christians, moved by the love of God in their hearts, now came forward
   to do the kind offices of humanity and mercy. They attended the living,
   and decently buried the dead. Fear fell upon all mankind. The heathen
   concluded their calamities to be the vengeance of heaven for
   persecuting its favoured people.

   Maximin was alarmed, and endeavoured, when too late, to retrace his
   steps. He issued an edict, avowing the principles of toleration, and
   commanding the suspension of all violent measures against the
   Christians, and recommending only mild and persuasive means to win back
   these apostates to the religion of their forefathers. Having been
   defeated in battle by Licinius, he turned his rage against the pagan
   priests. He charged them with having deceived him with false hopes of
   victory over Licinius, and of universal empire in the East, and now
   revenged his disappointment by a promiscuous massacre of all the pagan
   priests within his power. His last imperial act was the promulgation of
   another edict, still more favourable to the Christians, in which he
   proclaimed an unrestricted liberty of conscience, and restored the
   confiscated property of their churches. But death came and closed the
   dark catalogue of his crimes, and the dark line of persecuting
   emperors, who died of the most excruciating torments, and under the
   visible hand of divine judgment. Many names, of great celebrity both
   for station and character, are among the martyrs of this period; and
   many thousands, unknown and unnoticed on earth, but whose record is on
   high, and whose names are written in the Lamb's book of life.

   Thus closed the most memorable of all the attacks of the powers of
   darkness on the Christian church, and thus closed the last hope of
   paganism to maintain itself by the authority of the government. The
   account of the most violent, most varied, most prolonged, and most
   systematic attempt to exterminate the gospel ever known well deserves
   the space we have given to it, so that we offer no apology for its
   length. We have seen the arm of the Lord lifted up in a gracious but
   solemn manner to chastise and purify His church, to demonstrate the
   imperishable truth of Christianity, and to cover with everlasting shame
   and confusion her daring but impotent foes. Like Moses, we may exclaim,
   "Behold, the bush burned with fire, and the bush was not consumed. And
   Moses said, I will now turn aside, and see this great sight, why the
   bush is not burned. And when the Lord saw that he turned aside to see,
   God called unto him out of the midst of the bush." Thus we see why the
   bush was not burned, or Israel in Egypt not consumed, or the church in
   this world not exterminated: God was in the midst of the bush --He is
   in the midst of His church --it is the habitation of God through the
   Spirit. Besides, Christ hath plainly said, referring to Himself in His
   risen power and glory, "Upon this rock I will build my church, and the
   gates of hell shall not prevail against it." (Exodus 3; Matthew 16)
     __________________________________________________________________

   [43] See Neander, vol. 1, p. 177; Mosheim, vol. 1, p. 317; Milner, vol.
   3, p. 332.

   [44] For minute details of the different sects, see Dictionary of
   Christian Churches and Sects, by Marsden; Robertson, vol. 1, 94;
   Neander, vol. 2, 387; Milman, vol. 2, 80; Mosheim, vol. 1, 117.

   [45] See Milman, volume 2, page 261.

   [46] It may interest the reader to know that no MSS. of the New
   Testament still existing are any older than the middle of the fourth
   century. One fact, which accounts for this in great measure, is the
   destruction of the Christian writings, the scriptures especially, in
   the reign of Diocletian during the early part of that century. Under
   Constantine it is known that special efforts were made to have correct
   copies made, of which the celebrated critic, Tischendorf, believes the
   Sinai MS. to be one.

   [47] For the names and particulars of many of the sufferers, see
   Milner, volume 1, pp. 473 - 506.
     __________________________________________________________________

Chapter 10

   CONSTANTINE

   THE reign of "Constantine the Great" forms a most important epoch in
   the history of the church. Both his father Constantius and his mother
   Helena were religiously inclined, and always favourable to the
   Christians. Some years of Constantine's youth were spent at the court
   of Diocletian and Galerius, in the character of a hostage. He witnessed
   the publication of the persecuting edict at Nicomedia in 303 and the
   horrors, which followed. Having affected his escape, he joined his
   father in Britain. In 306 Constantius died at York. He had nominated as
   his successor his son Constantine, who was accordingly saluted Augustus
   by the army. He continued and extended the toleration, which his father
   had bestowed on the Christians.

   There were now six pretenders to the sovereignty of the empire
   --Galerius, Licinius, Maximian, Maxentius, Maximin, and Constantine. A
   scene of contention followed, scarcely paralleled in the annals of
   Rome. Among these rivals, Constantine possessed a decided superiority
   in prudence and abilities, both military and political. In the year 312
   Constantine entered Rome victorious. In 313 a new edict was issued, by
   which the persecuting edicts of Diocletian were repealed, the
   Christians encouraged, their teachers honoured, and the professors of
   Christianity advanced to places of trust and influence in the state.

   This great change in the history of the church introduces us to:

   THE PERGAMOS PERIOD

   A.D. 313 - 606

   The Epistle to the church in Pergamos exactly describes, we believe,
   the state of things in Constantine's time. But we will quote the
   address entire for the convenience of our readers, and then compare it:
   "And to the angel of the church in Pergamos write; These things saith
   he which hath the sharp sword with two edges; I know thy works, and
   where thou dwellest, even where Satan's seat is, and thou holdest fast
   my name, and hast not denied my faith, even in those days wherein
   Antipas was my faithful martyr, who was slain among you, where Satan
   dwelleth. But I have a few things against thee, because thou hast there
   them that hold the doctrine of Balaam, who taught Balac to cast a
   stumbling block before the children of Israel, to eat things sacrificed
   unto idols, and to commit fornication. So hast thou also them that hold
   the doctrine of the Nicolaitanes, which thing I hate. Repent, or else I
   will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them with the sword
   of my mouth. He that hath an ear, let him hear what the Spirit saith
   unto the churches; To him that overcometh will I give to eat of the
   hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a new
   name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it."
   (Revelation 2:1 - l7)

   In Ephesus we see the first point of departure, leaving their "first
   love" --the heart slipping away from Christ, and from the enjoyment of
   His love. In Smyrna the Lord allowed the saints to be cast into the
   furnace, that the progress of declension might be stayed. The heathen
   persecuted them. By means of these trials Christianity revived; the
   gold was purified; the saints held fast the name and the faith of
   Christ. Thus was Satan defeated; and the Lord so ruled that the
   emperors, one after the other, in the most humiliating and mortifying
   circumstances, publicly confessed their defeat. But in Pergamos the
   enemy changes his tactics. In place of persecution from without, there
   is seduction from within. Under Diocletian Satan was the roaring lion;
   under Constantine he is the deceiving serpent. Pergamos is the scene of
   Satan's flattering power; he is within the church. Nicolaitanism is the
   corruption of grace --the flesh acting in the church of God. In Smyrna
   Satan is outside as an adversary, in Pergamos he is inside as a
   seducer. This was exactly what took place under Constantine.

   Historically, it was when the violence of persecution had spent itself
   --when men had grown weary of their own rage, and when they saw that
   their efforts were to no purpose --that the sufferers ceased to care
   for the things of the world, and became more devoted to Christianity;
   while even the numbers of the Christians seemed to increase; Satan
   tries another and an old artifice, once so successful against Israel.
   (Numbers chapter 25) When he could not obtain the Lord's permission to
   curse His people Israel, he allured them to their ruin, by unlawful
   alliances with the daughters of Moab. As a false prophet he was now in
   the church at Pergamos, seducing the saints into unlawful alliance with
   the world --the place of his throne and authority. The world ceases to
   persecute; great advantages are held out to Christians by the civil
   establishment of Christianity; Constantine professes to be converted,
   and ascribes his triumphs to the virtues of the cross. The snare alas!
   is successful; the church is flattered by his patronage, shakes hands
   with the world, and sinks into its position --"even where Satan's seat
   is." All was now lost as to her corporate and proper testimony, and the
   way to popery laid open. Every worldly advantage was no doubt gained,
   but alas! alas! it was at the cost of the honour and glory of her
   heavenly Lord and Saviour.

   The church, we must remember, is an outcalling (Acts 15:14) --called
   out from Jew and Gentile to witness that she was not of this world, but
   of heaven --that she is united to a glorified Christ, and not of this
   world, even as He is not of this world. So He says Himself, "They are
   not of the world, even as I am not of the world. Sanctify them through
   thy truth: thy word is truth. As thou hast sent me into the world, even
   so have I also sent them into the world." (John 17)

   The Christian's mission is on the same principle and of the same
   character as was Christ's. "As my Father hath sent me," He says, "even
   so send I you." The blessed Lord sent them, as it were, from heaven to
   the world, to do His will, to care for His glory, and to return home
   when their work was done. Thus the Christian should be the heavenly
   witness of the truth of God, especially of such truths as man's total
   ruin, and God's love in Christ to a perishing world; and thereby should
   seek to gather souls out of the world, that they may be saved from the
   wrath to come. But when we lose sight of our high calling, and
   associate with the world as if we belonged to it, we become false
   witnesses; we do the world a great injury, and Christ a great
   dishonour. This, we shall see by-and-by, was what the church did as to
   her corporate position and action. Doubtless there were many cases of
   individual faithfulness in the midst of the general declension. The
   Lord Himself speaks of His faithful Antipas who was martyred. Heaven
   takes special notice of individual faithfulness, and remembers the
   faithful by name.

   But the eye and the heart of the Lord had followed His poor faithless
   church to where she had fallen. " I know thy works," He says, "and
   where thou dwellest, even where Satan's seat is." What solemn words are
   these, and from the lips of her dishonoured Lord! Nothing was hidden
   from His eye. I know, He says, I have seen what has happened. But what
   alas! had now taken place? Why, the church as a body had accepted the
   Emperor's terms, was now united to the State, and was dwelling in the
   world. This was Babylon spiritually --committing fornication with the
   kings of the earth. But He who walks in the midst of the golden
   candlesticks judges her action and her condition. "And to the angel of
   the church in Pergamos write, These things saith he which hath the
   sharp sword with two edges." He takes the place of one who was armed
   with the divine sword --with the all searching, piercing, and power of
   the word of God. The sword is the symbol of that by which questions are
   settled, whether it is the carnal sword of the nations or "the sword of
   the Spirit, which is the word of God."

   It has been often said, that there is always a marked and instructive
   connection between the way in which Christ presents Himself, and the
   state of the church, which He is addressing. This is most true in the
   present address. The word of God evidently had lost its right place in
   the assembly of His saints; it was no longer the supreme authority in
   divine things. But the Lord Jesus takes care to show that it had not
   lost its power, or place, or authority in His hands. "Repent," He says,
   "or e1se I will come unto thee quickly, and will fight against them
   with the sword of my mouth." He does not say, observe, I will fight
   against thee, but against them. As exercising discipline in the church
   the Lord acts with discrimination and with mercy. The public position
   of the church was now a false one. There was open association with the
   prince of this world, in place of faithfulness to Christ, the Prince of
   heaven. But he that had an ear to hear what the Spirit said unto the
   church had secret fellowship with Him who sustains the faithful soul
   with the hidden manna. "To him that overcometh will I give to eat of
   the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a
   new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it."
   The general defection would, no doubt, isolate the faithful few --a
   remnant. To them the promise is given.

   The manna, as we learn from John 6, represents Christ Himself as He
   came down from heaven to give life to our souls. "I am the living bread
   which came down from heaven: if any man eat of this bread he shall live
   forever." As the lowly One who took the place of humiliation in this
   world, He is our provision for the daily walk through the wilderness.
   The manna was to be gathered daily, fresh from the dew drops every
   morning. The "hidden manna" refers to the golden pot of manna that was
   laid up in the ark as a memorial before the Lord. It is the blessed
   remembrance of Christ, who was the humbled, suffering Man in this
   world, and who is the eternal delight of God, and of the faithful in
   heaven. Not only has the truehearted saint communion with Christ as
   exalted on high, but with Him as the once humbled Jesus here below. But
   this cannot be if we are listening to the flatteries and accepting the
   favours of the world. Our only strength against the spirit of the world
   is walking with a rejected Christ, and feeding on Him as our portion
   even now. Our high privilege is to eat, not of the manna only, but of
   the "hidden manna." But who can speak of the blessedness of such
   communion, or of the loss of those who slip away in heart from Christ,
   and settle down in worldliness?

   The "white stone" is a secret mark of the Lord's special favour. As the
   promise is given in the address to Pergamos, it may mean the expression
   of Christ's approval of the way the "overcomers" witnessed and suffered
   for Him, when so many were led away by the seductions of Satan. It
   gives the general idea of a secret pledge of entire approbation. But it
   is difficult to explain. The heart may enter into its blessedness, and
   yet feel unable to describe it. Happy are they who so know it for
   themselves. There are joys, which are common to all; but there is a
   joy, a special joy, which will be our own peculiar joy in Christ, and
   that forever. This will be true of all. "And in the stone a new name
   written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it." What an
   unknown source of calm repose, sweet peace, true contentment, and
   divine strength, we find in the "white stone," and in the "new name,"
   written by His own hand. Others may misunderstand us, many may think us
   wrong; but He knows all, and the heart can afford to be quiet, whatever
   may be passing around. At the same time we must judge everything by the
   word of God --the sharp sword with two edges --even as we ourselves are
   judged.

   "There on the hidden bread

   Of Christ --once humbled here

   God's treasured store --forever fed,

   His love my soul shall cheer.

   Called by that secret name

   Of undisclosed delight

   Blest answer to reproach and shame

   Graved on the stone of white."

   Having thus briefly glanced at the Epistle to Pergamos, we shall be
   better able to understand the mind of the Lord as to the conduct of
   Christians under the reign of Constantine. The professing church and
   the world had joined hands, and were now enjoying themselves together.
   As the world could not rise to the high level of the church, she must
   fall to the low level of the world. This was exactly what took place.
   Nevertheless the fair form of Christianity was maintained, and there
   were doubtless many who held fast the faith and the name of Jesus. We
   now return to the conversion and history of Constantine the Great.

   THE CONVERSION OF CONSTANTINE

   A.D. - 312

   The great event in the religious history of Constantine took place in
   312. He was marching from France to Italy against Maxentius. The
   approaching contest was one of immense moment. It was likely either to
   be his ruin or his rise to the highest pinnacle of power. He was in
   deep thought. It was known that Maxentius was making great preparations
   for the struggle, by enlarging his army, and by scrupulously attending
   to all the customary ceremonies of paganism. He consulted with great
   pains the heathen oracles, and relied for success on the agency of
   supernatural powers.

   Constantine, though a wise and virtuous heathen, was a heathen still.
   He knew what he had to give battle to; and while considering to what
   god he should betake himself for protection and success, he thought on
   the ways of his father, the Emperor of the West. He remembered that he
   prayed to the God of the Christians and had always been prosperous,
   while the emperors who persecuted the Christians had been visited with
   divine justice. He resolved therefore to forsake the service of idols,
   and to ask the aid of the one true God in heaven, he prayed that God
   would make Himself known to him, and that He would make him victorious
   over Maxentius, notwithstanding all his magical arts and superstitious
   rites.

   While engaged in such thoughts, Constantine imagined that he saw, soon
   after mid-day, some extraordinary appearance in the heavens. It assumed
   the sign of a glittering cross, and above it the inscription, "BY THIS
   CONQUER." The Emperor and the whole army, who were witnesses of this
   wonderful sight, stood awestruck. But while the Emperor was gravely
   meditating on what the vision could signify, night came on, and he fell
   asleep. He dreamed that the Saviour appeared to him, bearing in His
   hand the same sign which he had seen in the heavens, and directed him
   to cause a banner to be made after the same pattern, and to use it as
   his standard in war, assuring him that while he did so he would be
   victorious. Constantine, on awaking, described what had been shown to
   him while asleep, and resolved to adopt the sign of the cross as his
   imperial standard.

   THE BANNER OF THE CROSS

   According to Eusebius, the workers in gold and precious stones were
   immediately sent for, and received their orders from the lips of
   Constantine. Eusebius had seen the standard, and gives a long account
   of it. As the greatest interest has been thrown around this relic of
   antiquity by all ecclesiastical writers, we will give our readers a
   brief but minute sketch of it.

   The shaft, or perpendicular beam, was long, and overlaid with gold. On
   its top was a crown, composed of gold and precious stones, with the
   engraving of the sacred symbol of the cross and the first letters of
   the Saviour's name, or the Greek letter X intersected with the letter
   P. Object1 [48] Just under this crown was a likeness of the Emperor in
   gold, and below that a crosspiece of wood, from which hung a square
   flag of purple cloth, embroidered and covered with precious stones. It
   was called the Labarum. This resplendent standard was borne at the head
   of the imperial armies, and guarded by fifty chosen men, who were
   supposed to be invulnerable from its virtues.

   Constantine now sent for Christian teachers, of whom he inquired
   concerning the God that appeared to him, and the import of the symbol
   of the cross. This gave them an opportunity of directing his mind to
   the word of God, and of instructing him in the knowledge of Jesus and
   of His death on the cross. From that time the Emperor declared himself
   a convert to Christianity. The superstitious hopes and confidence of
   Constantine and his army were now raised to the highest pitch. The
   decisive battle was fought at the Milvian Bridge. Constantine gained a
   signal victory over his enemy, though his troops did not number
   one-fourth of the troops of Maxentius.

   EDICT OF CONSTANTINE

   AND LICINIUS -- A.D. 313

   The victorious Emperor paid a short visit to Rome. Amongst other things
   which he did, he caused to be erected in the forum a statue of himself,
   holding in his right hand a standard in the shape of a cross, with the
   following inscription: "By this salutary sign, the true symbol of
   valor, I freed your city from the yoke of the tyrant." Maxentius was
   found in the Tiber River the morning after the battle. The Emperor
   evidently felt that he was indebted to the God of the Christians and to
   the sacred symbol of the cross for his victories. And this, we dare
   say, was the extent of his Christianity at that time. As a man he had
   not expressed his need of Christianity; as a warrior he embraced it
   earnestly. Afterwards, as a statesman, he owned and valued
   Christianity; but God only knows whether as a lost sinner he ever
   embraced the Saviour. It is difficult for princes to be Christians.

   Constantine now proceeded towards Illyricum to meet Licinius, with whom
   he had formed a secret alliance before going to meet Maxentius. The two
   emperors met at Milan, where their alliance was ratified by the
   marriage of Licinius to Constantine's daughter. It was during this
   quiet moment that Constantine prevailed upon Licinius to consent to the
   repeal of the persecuting edicts of Diocletian, and the issuing of a
   new edict of complete toleration. This being agreed upon, a public
   edict, in the joint names of Constantine and Licinius, was issued at
   Milan, A.D. 313, in favour of the Christians, and may be considered as
   the great charter of their liberties. Full and unlimited toleration was
   granted to them; their churches and property were restored without
   compensation; and, outwardly, Christianity flourished.

   But peace between the emperors, which seemed to be established on a
   firm foundation, was soon interrupted. Jealousy, love of power, and
   ambition for absolute sovereignty in the Roman Empire, would not allow
   them to remain long in peace. A war broke out in the year 314, but
   Licinius was defeated with heavy losses, both in men and territory. A
   peace was again concluded, which lasted about nine years. Another war
   became unavoidable, and once more it assumed the form of a religious
   strife between the rival emperors. Licinius attached the pagan
   priesthood to his cause, and persecuted the Christians. Many of the
   bishops he put to death, knowing they were special favorites at the
   court of his rival. Both parties now made preparations for a contest,
   the issue of which should be final. Licinius, before proceeding to war,
   sacrificed to the gods, and extolled them in a public oration.
   Constantine, on the other hand, relied upon the God whose symbol
   accompanied his army. The two hostile armies met. The battle was
   fierce, obstinate, and sanguinary. Licinius was no mean rival; but the
   commanding genius, activity, and courage of Constantine prevailed. The
   victory was complete. Licinius survived his defeat only about a year.
   He died, or rather was privately killed, in A.D. 326. Constantine had
   now reached the height of his ambition. He was sole master --absolute
   sovereign of the Roman Empire, and continued so until his death in 337.
   For a description of the political and military career of this great
   prince we must refer the reader to civil history; we will briefly
   glance at his religious course.

   THE RELIGIOUS HISTORY

   OF CONSTANTINE

   All that we knew of the religion of Constantine up to the period of his
   conversion, so-called, would imply that he was outwardly, if not
   zealously, a pagan. Eusebius himself admits that he was at this time in
   doubt which religion he would embrace. Policy, superstition, hypocrisy,
   divine inspiration, has been in turn assigned as the sole or the
   predominant influence, which decided his future religious history. But
   it would surely be unjust to suppose that his profession of
   Christianity, and his public declarations in its favour, amounted to
   nothing more than deliberate and intentional hypocrisy. Both his
   religious and ecclesiastical course admits of a far higher and more
   natural explanation. Neither could we believe that there was anything
   approaching to divine inspiration, either in his midday vision or in
   his midnight dream. There may have been some unusual appearance about
   the sun or in the clouds, which imagination converted into a miraculous
   sign of the cross; and the other appearance may have been the
   exaggeration of a dream from his highly excited state: but the whole
   -story may now be considered as a fable, full of flattery to the great
   Emperor, and very gratifying to his great admirer and panegyrist,
   Eusebius. Few will now be found to give it a place among the authentic
   records of history.

   Policy and superstition, we have no doubt, had a great deal to do with
   the change that was wrought in the mind of Constantine. From his youth
   he had witnessed the persecution of the Christians and must have
   observed vitality in their religion, which rose above the power of
   their persecutors, and survived the downfall of all other systems. He
   had seen one emperor after another, who had been the open enemies of
   Christianity, die the most fearful death. His father only --of all the
   emperors --the protector of Christianity during the long persecution,
   had gone down to an honoured and peaceful grave. Facts so striking
   could not fail to influence the superstitious mind of Constantine.
   Besides, he might appreciate with political sagacity the moral
   influence of Christianity; its tendency to enforce the peaceful
   obedience to civil government; and the immense hold which it obviously
   had on the mind of something like the one-half of his empire.

   The Emperor's motives, however, are no part of our history, and need
   not occupy us longer. But, in order to have this most important period
   or great turning point in church history clearly before our minds, it
   may be well to look at the state of the church as he found it in 313,
   and as he left it in 337.

   THE CHURCH AS

   CONSTANTINE FOUND HER

   Up to this time the church had been perfectly free and independent of
   the state. She had a divine constitution --direct from heaven --and was
   outside the world. She made her way, not by state patronage, but by
   divine power, against every hostile influence. In place of receiving
   support from the civil government, she had been persecuted from the
   first as a foreign foe, as an obstinate and pestilent superstition. Ten
   times the devil had been permitted to stir up against her the whole
   Roman world, which ten times had to confess weakness and defeat. Had
   she kept in mind the day of her espousals, and the love of Him who
   says, "No man ever yet hated his own flesh, but nourishes and cherishes
   it, even as the Lord the church," she never would have accepted the
   protection of Constantine at the cost of her fidelity to Christ. But
   the church as a whole was now much mixed up with the world, and far
   away from her first love.

   We have already seen, that since the days of the apostles there had
   been a growing love of the world, and of outward display. This
   tendency, so natural to us all, the Lord in His love checked, by
   allowing Satan to persecute. But in place of the church accepting the
   trial as chastening from the hand of the Lord, and owning her
   worldliness, she grew weary of the place and path of rejection, and
   thinking she might still please and serve the Lord, she walks in the
   sunshine of the world. Constantine accomplished this satanic delusion,
   though he knew not what he was doing. "Whatever the motives of his
   conversion," says Milman, "Constantine, no doubt, adopted a wise and
   judicious policy, in securing the alliance, rather than continuing the
   strife, with an adversary which divided time, wealth, the intellect, if
   not the property, and the population of the empire."

   THE UNION OF THE

   CHURCH AND STATE

   In the month of March, 313, the banns of the unholy alliance between
   the Church and the State were published at Milan. The celebrated edict
   of that date conferred on the Christians the fullest toleration, and
   led the way to the legal establishment of Christianity, and to its
   ascendancy over all other religions. This was publicly displayed on the
   new imperial standard --the Labarum. Besides the initials of Christ,
   [49] and the symbol of His cross, there was also an image of the
   Emperor in gold. These signs, or mottoes, were intended as objects of
   worship for both heathen and Christian soldiers, and to animate them to
   enthusiasm in the day of battle. Thus he who is called the great
   Christian Emperor publicly united Christianity to idolatry.

   But if we have read the mind of Constantine aright, we should have no
   hesitation in saying, that at this time he was a heathen in heart, and
   a Christian only from military motives. It was only as a superstitious
   soldier that he had embraced Christianity. At that moment he was ready
   to welcome the assistance of any tutelary divinity in his struggles for
   universal empire. We can see no trace of Christianity, far less any
   trace of the zeal of a new convert: but we can easily trace the old
   superstition of heathenism in the new dress of Christianity. Were it
   not for such considerations, the Labarum would have been the display of
   the most daring dishonour to the blessed Lord. But it was done in
   ignorance. He was also anxious to meet the mind of his heathen soldiers
   and subjects, and to dissipate their fears as to the safety of their
   old religion.

   The earlier edicts of Constantine, though in their effects favourable
   to Christianity, were given in such cautious terms as not to interfere
   with the rights and liberties of paganism. But the Christians gradually
   grew in his favour, and his acts of kindness and liberality spoke
   louder than edicts. He not only restored to them the civil and
   religious rights of which they had been deprived, the churches and
   estates which had been publicly confiscated in the Diocletian
   persecution; but enabled them, by his own munificent gifts, to build
   many new places for their assemblies. He showed great favour to the
   bishops, and had them constantly about him in the palace, on his
   journeys, and in his wars. He also showed his great respect for the
   Christians, by committing the education of his son Crispus to the
   celebrated Lactantius, a Christian. But with all this royal patronage
   he assumed a supremacy over the affairs of the church. He appeared in
   the synods of the bishops without his guards, mingled in their debates,
   and controlled the settlement of religious questions. From this time
   forward the term Catholic was invariably applied, in all official
   documents, to the church.

   CONSTANTINE; HEAD OF THE CHURCH

   AND HIGH PRIEST OF THE HEATHEN

   After the total defeat of Licinius already referred to, the whole Roman
   world was reunited under the sceptre of Constantine. In his
   proclamation issued to his new subjects in the East, he declares
   himself to be the instrument of God for spreading the true faith; and
   that God had given him the victory over all the powers of darkness, in
   order that His own worship by his means might be universally
   established. "Freedom," he says, in a letter to Eusebius, "being once
   more restored, and, by the providence of the great God and my own
   ministry, that dragon driven from the ministration of the State, I
   trust that the divine power has become manifest to all, and that they,
   who through fear or unbelief have fallen into many crimes, will come to
   the knowledge of the true God, and to the right and true ordering of
   their lives." Constantine now took his place more openly to the whole
   world as the head of the church; but at the same time retained the
   office of the Pontifex Maximus --the high priest of the heathen; this
   he never gave up, and he died head of the church and high priest of the
   heathen.

   This unholy alliance, or unhallowed mixture of which we have spoken,
   and which is referred to and mourned over in the address to Pergamos,
   meets us at every step in the history of this great historical prince.
   But having given some explanation of the address, we must leave the
   reader to compare the truth and the history in a godly way. What a
   mercy to have such a guide in studying this remarkable period in the
   history of the church!

   Among the first acts of the now sole Emperor of the world was the
   repeal of all the edicts of Licinius against the Christians. He
   released all prisoners from the dungeon or the mine, or the servile and
   humiliating occupation to which they had been contemptuously condemned.
   All who had been deprived of their rank in the army or in the civil
   service he restored, and restitution was made for the property of which
   they had been despoiled. He issued an edict addressed to all his
   subjects, advising them to embrace the gospel, but pressed none; he
   wished it to be a matter of conviction. He endeavoured, however, to
   render it attractive by bestowing places and honours on proselytes of
   the higher classes and donations on the poor --a course, which, as
   acknowledged by Eusebius, produced a great amount of hypocrisy and
   pretended conversion. He ordered that churches should be everywhere
   built, of a size sufficient to accommodate the whole population. He
   forbade the erection of statues of the gods, and would not allow his
   own statue to be set up in the temples. All state sacrifices were
   forbidden, and in many ways he exerted himself for the elevation of
   Christianity and the suppression of heathenism.

   THE EFFECTS OF ROYAL FAVOUR

   We now come to the consideration of that which has been the great
   historical problem to men of all creeds, nations and passions; namely,
   whether the State which seeks to advance Christianity by the worldly
   means at its command, or the earthly power which opposes it by legal
   violence, does the greater injury to the church and people of God on
   the earth? Much may be said, we admit, as to the great blessing of
   impartial toleration, and of the great advantages to society of the
   legal suppression of all wicked customs; but court favour has always
   been ruinous to the true prosperity of the church of God. It is a great
   mercy to be unmolested, but it is a greater mercy to be un-patronized
   by princes. The true character of Christians is that of strangers and
   pilgrims in this world. The possession of Christ, and of Christ in
   heaven, has changed everything on earth to Christians. They belong to
   heaven; they are strangers on earth. They are the servants of Christ in
   the world, though not of it. Heaven is their home; here they have no
   continuing city. What has the church to expect from a world that
   crucified her Lord? or rather, what would she accept from it? Her true
   portion here is suffering and rejection; as the apostle says, "For thy
   sake we are killed all the day long: we are accounted as sheep for the
   slaughter." The Lord may spare His people, but if trial should come, we
   are not to think that some strange thing has happened to us. "In the
   world ye shall have tribulation." (Romans 8:36; John 16:33)

   THE WITNESS OF HISTORY

   But even from history, we think it can be proved that it was better for
   Christianity when Christians were suffering at the stake for Christ,
   than when they were feasted in kings' palaces and covered with royal
   favours. By way of illustrating our question, we will give our readers
   a page from the history of the great persecution under Diocletian, and
   one from the brightest days of Constantine; and we will quote both from
   Milman, late Dean of St. Paul's, who will not be suspected of
   unfairness to the clergy. We speak of the faithful only. It is well
   known that in the later persecutions, when the assemblies of Christians
   had greatly increased, many proved unfaithful in the day of trial,
   though these were comparatively few, and many of them afterwards
   repented.

   "The persecution had now lasted for six or seven years (309), but in no
   part of the world did Christianity betray any signs of decay. It was
   far too deeply rooted in the minds of men, far too extensively
   promulgated, far too vigorously organized, not to endure this violent
   but unavailing shock. If its public worship was suspended, the
   believers met in secret, or cherished in the unassailable privacy of
   the heart, the inalienable rights of conscience. But of course the
   persecution fell most heavily upon the most eminent of the body. Those
   who resisted to death were animated by the presence of multitudes,
   which, if they dared not applaud, could scarcely conceal their
   admiration. Women crowded to kiss the hems of the martyrs' garments,
   and their scattered ashes, or unburied bones, were stolen away by the
   devout zeal of their flocks."

   Under the edict issued from the dying bed of Galerius the persecution
   ceased, and the Christians were permitted the free and public exercise
   of their religion. This breathing time lasted only a few months. But
   how grand the sight that followed, and what a testimony to the truth
   and power of Christianity! The Dean goes on to say: --

   "The cessation of the persecution showed at once its extent. The prison
   doors were thrown open; the mines rendered up their condemned
   labourers; everywhere long trains of Christians were seen hastening to
   the ruins of their churches, and visiting the places sanctified by
   their former devotions. The public roads, the streets, and market
   places of the towns were crowded with long processions singing psalms
   of thanksgiving for their deliverance. Those who had maintained their
   faith under these severe trials received the affectionate
   congratulations of their brethren; those who had failed in the hour of
   affliction hastened to confess their failure and seek for re-admission
   into the now joyous fold."

   We now turn to time altered state of things under Constantine, about
   twenty years after the death of Galerius. Mark the mighty change in the
   position of the clergy.

   "The bishops appeared as regular attendants upon the court; the
   internal dissensions of Christianity became affairs of state. The
   prelate ruled, not now so much by his admitted superiority in Christian
   virtue, as by the inalienable authority of his office. He opened or
   closed the door of the church, which was tantamount to an admission to
   or an exclusion from everlasting bliss; he uttered the sentences of
   excommunication, which cast back the trembling delinquent amongst the
   lost and perishing heathen. He had his throne in the most distinguished
   part of the Christian temple, and though yet acting in the presence and
   in the name of his college of presbyters, yet he was the acknowledged
   head of a large community, over whose eternal destiny he held a vague
   but not therefore less imposing and awful dominion." [50]

   Intellectual and philosophical questions took the place of the "truth
   of the gospel," and mere outward religion for faith, love, and
   heavenly-mindedness. A crucified Saviour, true conversion,
   justification by faith alone, separation from the world, were subjects
   never known by Constantine, and probably never introduced in his
   presence. "The connection of the physical and moral world had become
   general topics; they were, for the first time, the primary truths of a
   popular religion, and naturally could not withdraw themselves from the
   alliance with popular passions. Mankind, even within the sphere of
   Christianity, retrograded to the sterner Jewish character; and in its
   spirit, as well as its language, the Old Testament began to dominate
   over the gospel of Christ."

   THE TRUE CHARACTER OF

   THE CHURCH DISAPPEARS

   However agreeable to mere nature the sunshine of the imperial favour
   might be, it was destructive of the true character of the individual
   Christian and of the church corporately. All testimony to a rejected
   Christ on earth, and an exalted Christ in heaven was gone. It was the
   world baptised, in place of believers only as dead and risen with
   Christ --as having died in His death, and risen again in His
   resurrection. The word of God is plain: --"Buried with him in baptism,
   wherein also ye are risen with him through the faith of the operation
   of God, who hath raised him from the dead." (Col. 2:12) Baptism is here
   used as the sign both of death and resurrection. But to whom was that
   solemn and sacred ordinance now administered? Again, we repeat, To the
   Roman world. The obsequious clergy did, not look for faith in Christ,
   the forgiveness of sins, and acceptance in the Beloved.

   The profession of Christianity being now the sure way to wealth and
   honours, all ranks and classes applied for baptism. At the Easter and
   Pentecostal festivals, thousands, all clothed in the white garments of
   the neophyte, crowded round the different churches, waiting to be
   baptised. The numbers where so great, and the whole scene so striking,
   that many thought these conspicuous neophytes must be the innumerable
   multitude spoken of in the Revelation, who stood before the Lamb,
   clothed with white robes. According to some writers, as many as twelve
   thousand men, beside women and children, were baptised in one year in
   Rome; and a white garment, with twenty pieces of gold, was promised by
   the Emperor to every new convert of the poorer classes. Under these
   circumstances, and by these venal means, the downfall of heathenism was
   accomplished, and Christianity seated on the throne of the Roman world.

   THE BAPTISM AND DEATH

   OF CONSTANTINE

   The baptism of Constantine has given rise to almost as much speculation
   as his conversion. Notwithstanding the great zeal he displayed in
   favour of Christianity, he delayed his baptism, and consequently his
   reception into the church, till the approach of death. Many motives,
   (both political and personal), have been suggested by different writers
   as reasons for this delay; but the real one, we fear, was personal.
   Superstition had by this time taught men to connect the forgiveness of
   sins with the rite of baptism. Under this dreadful delusion Constantine
   seems to have delayed his baptism until he could no longer enjoy his
   imperial honours, and indulge his passions in the pleasures of the
   world. It is impossible to conceive of any papal indulgence more
   ruinous to the soul, more dishonouring to Christianity, or more
   dangerous to every moral virtue. It was a license for such as
   Constantine to pursue the great objects of his ambition through the
   darkest paths of blood and cruelty, as it placed in his hands the means
   of an easy forgiveness, when convenient to himself. But on the other
   hand we think it was a great mercy of the Lord, that one, whose private
   and domestic life, as well as his public career, was so stained with
   blood, should not have made a public profession of Christianity by
   receiving baptism and the Lord's supper. Let us hope that he really
   repented on his deathbed.

   The bishops, whom he summoned in his last illness to the palace of
   Nicomedia, heard his confession, were satisfied, and gave him their
   blessing. Eusebius, bishop of Nicomedia, baptised him! He now professed
   for the first time, that if God spared his life, he would join the
   assembly of His people, and that, having worn the white garment of the
   neophyte, he would never again wear the purple of the emperor. But
   these resolutions were too late in coming: he died shortly after his
   baptism, in the year A.D. 337. [51]

   HELENA, the Emperor's mother, deserves a passing notice. She embraced
   the religion professed by her son. Her devotion, piety, and munificence
   were great. She travelled from place to place; visited the scenes,
   which had been hallowed by the chief events of scripture history;
   ordered the temple of Venus to be demolished, which Hadrian had built
   on the site of the Holy Sepulchre, and gave directions for a church to
   be built on the spot, which should exceed all others in splendor. She
   died A.D. 328.

   Alas! We too plainly now have the sorrowful truth of the Lord's words
   that the church was dwelling where Satan's seat is. Constantine left it
   there. He found it imprisoned in mines, dungeons, and catacombs, and
   shut out from the light of heaven; he left it on the throne of the
   world. But the picture is not yet complete; we must notice other
   features in the history, answering to the likeness in the Epistle.

   The reign of Constantine was marked, not only by the church being taken
   out of her right place, through the deceptions of Satan, but by the
   bitter fruits of that degrading change. The seeds of error, corruption,
   and dissension sprang up rapidly, and now came publicly before the
   tribunals of the world, and in some instances before the pagan world.

   THE DONATISTIC AND

   ARIAN CONTROVERSIES

   Two great controversies --the Donatistic and the Arian --had their
   beginning in this reign: the former, arising in the West, from a
   disputed appointment to the Episcopal dignity at Carthage: the latter,
   of Eastern origin, and involving the very foundations of Christianity.
   The latter was a question of doctrine, the former of practice. Both
   were now corrupted in their very springs and essence, and may have been
   represented by the false prophet and the Nicolaitanes; but more as to
   this afterwards. We will now briefly notice the two schisms, as they
   throw light on the nature and results of the union of church and State.
   The Emperor took part in the councils of the bishops as head of the
   church.

   On the death of Mensurius, bishop of Carthage, a council of neighboring
   bishops was called to appoint his successor. The council was small
   --through the management of Botrus and Celesius, two presbyters who
   aspired to the office --but Caecilian, the deacon, who was much loved
   by the congregation, was elected bishop. The two disappointed persons
   protested against the election. Mensurius died when absent from
   Carthage on a journey; but before leaving home he had entrusted some
   plate and other property of the church to certain elders of the
   congregation, and had left an inventory in the hands of a pious female.
   This was now delivered to Caecilian, as he of course demanded the
   articles from the elders; but they were unwilling to deliver them up,
   as they had supposed no one would ever inquire for them, the old bishop
   being dead. They now joined the party of Botrus and Celesius, in
   opposition to the new bishop. The schism was also supported by the
   influence of Lucilla, a rich lady whom Caecilian had formerly offended
   by a faithful reproof; and the whole province assumed the right of
   interference.

   DONATUS, bishop of Cosae Nigrae, placed himself at the head of the
   Carthaginian faction. Secundus, primate of Numidia, at the summons of
   Donatus, appeared in Carthage at the head of seventy bishops. This
   self-installed council cited Caecilian before them, alleging that he
   ought not to have been consecrated except in their presence and by the
   primate of Numidia; and inasmuch as he had been consecrated by a bishop
   who was a Traditor, [52] the council declared his election void.
   Caecilian refused to acknowledge the authority of the council; but they
   proceeded to elect Majorinus to the see, declared to be vacant by the
   excommunication of Caecilian. But, unfortunately for the credit of the
   bishops, Majorinus was a member of Lucilla's household, who, to support
   the election, gave large sums of money, which the bishops divided among
   themselves. A decided schism was now formed, and many persons who
   before stood aloof from Caecilian, returned to his communion.

   Some reports of these discords reached the ears of Constantine. He had
   just become master of the West; and had sent a large sum of money for
   the relief of the African churches. They had suffered greatly during
   the late persecutions. But as the Donatists were considered sectaries,
   or dissenters from the true Catholic Church, he ordered that the gifts
   and privileges conferred on the Christians by the late edicts should be
   confined to those in communion with Caecilian. This led the Donatists
   to petition the Emperor, desiring that their cause might be examined by
   the bishops of Gaul, from whom, it was supposed that impartiality might
   be expected. Here for the first time we have application to the civil
   power, to appoint a Commission of Ecclesiastical Judges.

   Constantine agreed: a council was held at Rome in 313, consisting of
   about twenty bishops. The decision was in favour of Caecilian, who
   thereupon proposed terms of reconciliation and reunion, but the
   Donatists disdained all compromise. They prayed the Emperor for another
   hearing, declaring that a synod of twenty bishops was insufficient to
   overrule the sentence of seventy who had condemned Caecilian. On this
   representation Constantine summoned another council. The number of
   bishops present was very large, from Africa, Italy, Sicily, and
   Sardinia, but especially from Gaul. This was the greatest
   ecclesiastical assembly, which had yet been seen. They met at Aries, in
   314. Caecilian was again acquitted, and several canons were passed with
   a view to the African dissensions.

   In the meantime Majorinus died, and a second Donatus was appointed his
   successor. For the sake of distinction from the first Donatus, his
   followers surnamed him "the Great." He is described as learned,
   eloquent, of great ability, and as possessing the energy and fiery zeal
   of the African temperament. The sectaries, as they were called, now
   assumed the name of the Donatists, and took their character as well as
   their name from their chief.

   CONSTANTINE AS ARBITER OF ECCLESIASTICAL DIFFERENCES

   The Emperor was again entreated to take up their cause, and on this
   occasion to take the matter entirely into his own hands, to which he
   agreed, though offended by their obstinacy. He heard the case at Milan
   in the year 316; where he gave sentence in accordance with the councils
   of Rome and Aries. He also issued edicts against them, which he
   afterwards repealed, from seeing the dangerous consequences of violent
   measures. But Donatism soon became a fierce widespread and intolerant
   schism in the church. As early as 330 they had so increased that a
   synod was attended by two hundred and seventy bishops; in some periods
   of their history they numbered about four hundred. They proved a great
   affliction to the provinces of Africa for above three hundred years,
   indeed down to the Mahometan invasion.

   REFLECTIONS ON THE FIRST

   GREAT SCHISM IN THE CHURCH

   As this was the first schism that divided the church, we have thought
   it well to give a few details. The reader may learn some needed lessons
   from this memorable division. It began with an incident so
   inconsiderable in itself that it scarcely deserves a place in history.
   There was no question of bad doctrine or of immorality, but only of a
   disputed election to the see of Carthage. A little right feeling; a
   little self-denial; a true desire for the peace, unity, and harmony of
   the church; and above all, a proper care for the Lord's glory, would
   have prevented hundreds of years of inward sorrow and outward disgrace
   to the church of God. But pride, avarice, and ambition --sad fruits of
   the flesh --were allowed to do their fearful work. The reader will also
   see, from the place that the Emperor had in the councils of the church,
   how soon her position and character were utterly changed. How strange
   it must have appeared to Constantine that, immediately on his adopting
   the cross as his standard, an appeal should be made from an episcopal
   decision on ecclesiastical matters to his own tribunal! This proved the
   condition of the clergy. But mark the consequences, which such an
   appeal involves, if the party against whom the judgment of the civil
   power is given refuse's to comply, they become transgressors against
   the laws. And so it was in this case.

   The Donatists were henceforth treated as offenders against the imperial
   laws; they were deprived of their churches; many of them suffered
   banishment and confiscation. Even the punishment of death was enacted
   against them, although it does not appear that this law was enforced in
   any case during the reign of Constantine. Strong measures, however,
   were resorted to by the State, with the view of compelling the
   Donatists to reunite with the Catholics; but as is usual in such cases,
   and as experience has taught ever since, the force that was used to
   compel them only served to develop the wild spirit of the faction that
   already existed in the germ. Aroused by persecution, stimulated by the
   discourses of their bishops, and especially by Donatus who was the head
   and soul of his party, they were hurried on to every species of
   fanaticism and violence.

   Constantine, taught by experience, at length found that although he
   could give the church protection, he could not give her peace; and
   issued an edict, granting to the Donatists full liberty to act
   according to their own convictions, and, declaring that this was a
   matter, which belonged to the judgment of God. [53]

   THE ARIAN CONTROVERSY

   Scarcely had the outward peace of the church been secured by the edict
   of Milan, when it was distracted by internal dissensions. Shortly after
   the breaking out of the Donatist schism in the province of Africa, the
   Arian controversy, which had its origin in the East, extended to every
   part of the world. We have already spoken of these angry contentions as
   the bitter fruit of the unscriptural union of the church with the
   State. Not that they necessarily sprang from that union, but from
   Constantine becoming the avowed and ostensible head of the church, and
   presiding in her solemn assemblies, questions of doctrine and practice
   produced an agitation throughout the whole church, and not the church
   only, but they exercised a powerful political influence on the affairs
   of the world. This was unavoidable from the new position of the church.
   The empire being now Christian, at least in principle, such questions
   were of worldwide interest and importance. Hence the Arian controversy
   was the first that rent asunder the whole body of Christians, and
   arrayed in almost every part of the world the hostile parties in
   implacable opposition.

   Heresies, similar in nature to that of Arius, had appeared in the
   church before her connection with the State; but their influence seldom
   extended beyond the region and period of their birth. After some noisy
   debates and angry words were discharged, the heresy fell into
   dishonour, and was soon almost forgotten. But it was widely different
   with the Arian controversy. Constantine, who sat upon the throne of the
   world, and assumed to be the sole head of the church, interposed his
   authority, in order to prescribe and define the precise tenets of the
   religion he had established. The word of God, the will of Christ, the
   place of the Spirit, the heavenly relations of the church, were all
   lost sight of, or rather had never been seen, by the Emperor. He had
   probably heard something of the numerous opinions by which the
   Christians were divided; but he saw, at the same time, that they were a
   community who had continued to advance in vigour and magnitude; that
   they were really united in the midst of heresies, and strong under the
   iron hand of oppression. He could not see, or neither could he
   understand, that then, in spite of her failure, she was looking to the
   Lord and leaning on Him only in the world. Every other hand was against
   her, and was led on by the craft and power of the enemy. But,
   professedly, she was going up through the wilderness leaning on her
   Beloved, and no weapon formed against her could prosper.

   The Emperor, being entirely ignorant of the heavenly relation of the
   church, may have thought that as he could give her complete protection
   from outward oppression, he could also by his presence and power give
   her peace and rest from inward dissensions. But he little knew that the
   latter was not only far beyond his reach, but that the very security,
   worldly ease, and indulgence, which he so liberally granted to the
   clergy, were the sure means of fomenting discords, and of inflaming the
   passions of the disputants. And so it tuned out; he was continually
   assailed by the complaints and mutual accusations of his new friends.

   THE BEGINNING OF ARIANISM

   Arianisim was the natural growth of the Gnostic opinions; and
   Alexandria, the hotbed of metaphysical questions and subtle
   distinctions, its birthplace. Paul of Samosata, and Sabellius of Libya,
   in the third century, taught similar false doctrines to Arius in the
   fourth. The Gnostic sects in their different varieties and the
   Manichean, which was the Persian religion with a mixture of
   Christianity, may be considered rather as rival religions, than as
   Christian factions; nevertheless they did their evil work among
   Christians as to the doctrine of the Trinity. Nearly all of these
   heresies, as they are usually called, had fallen under the royal
   displeasure, and their followers subjected to penal regulations. The
   Montanists, Paulites, Novatians, Marcionites, and Valentinians were
   amongst the proscribed and persecuted sects. But there was another, a
   deeper, a darker, and a much more influential heresy than had yet
   arisen, about to burst forth, and that from the very bosom of the
   so-called holy Catholic Church. It happened in this way.

   Alexander, the bishop of Alexandria, in a meeting of his presbyters,
   appears to have expressed himself rather freely on the subject of the
   Trinity, when Arius, one of the presbyters, questioned the truth of
   Alexander's positions, on the ground that they were allied to the
   Sabellian errors, which had been condemned by the church. This
   disputation led Arius to state his own views of the Trinity; which were
   substantially the denial of the Saviours Godhead --that He was, in
   fact, only the first and noblest of those created beings whom God the
   Father formed out of nothing --that, though immeasurably superior in
   power and in glory to the highest created beings, He is inferior in
   both to the Father. He also held, that though inferior to the Father in
   nature and in dignity, He is the image of the Father, and vicegerent of
   the divine power by whom He made the worlds. What his views were of the
   Holy Spirit are not so plainly stated. [54]

   Alexander, indignant at the objections of Arius to himself, and also
   because of his opinions, accused Arius of blasphemy. "The impious
   Arius," he exclaimed, "the forerunner of Antichrist, had dared to utter
   his blasphemies against the divine Redeemer." He was judged by two
   councils, which assembled at Alexandria, and cast out of the church. He
   retired into Palestine, but was in no way discouraged by the disgrace.
   Many sympathized with him, among who were the two prelates named
   Eusebius: one of Cæsarea, the ecclesiastical historian, the other,
   bishop of Nicomedia, and a man of immense influence. Arius kept up a
   lively correspondence with his friends, veiling his more offensive
   opinions, and Alexander issued warnings against him, and refused all
   the intercessions of his friends to have him restored. But Arius was a
   crafty antagonist. He is described in history as tall and graceful in
   person; calm, pale, and subdued in countenance; of popular address, and
   an acute reasoner; of strict and blameless life, and agreeable manners;
   but that, under a humble and mortified exterior, he concealed the
   strongest feelings of vanity and ambition. The adversary had skillfully
   selected his instrument. The apparent possession of so many virtues
   fitted him for the enemy's purpose. Without these fair appearances he
   would have had no power to deceive.

   CONSTANTINE'S FIRST IMPRESSION

   OF THE CONTROVERSY

   The dissension soon became so violent, that it was judged necessary to
   appeal to the Emperor. He at first considered the whole question as
   utterly trifling and unimportant. He wrote a letter to Alexander and
   Arius jointly, in which he reproves them for contending about idle
   questions and imaginary differences, and recommends them to suppress
   all unhallowed feelings of animosity, and to live in peace and unity.
   [55] It is more than probable that the Emperor had not thought of the
   serious nature of the dispute, or he could not have spoken of it as
   trifling and unimportant: but if the letter was drawn up by Hosius,
   bishop of Cordova, as is generally believed, he could not plead
   ignorance of its character; and must have framed the document according
   to the expressed feelings of Constantine, rather than according to his
   own judgment. The letter has been highly extolled by many as a model of
   wisdom and moderation; and, had the matter been of no graver importance
   than fixing the time for the Easter festival, it might have deserved
   that praise; but the Godhead and the glory of Christ were in question,
   and consequently the salvation of the soul.

   Hosius was sent to Egypt as the imperial commissioner, to whom the
   settlement of the affair was committed. But he found that the
   dissensions occasioned by the controversy had become so serious, that
   both parties refused to listen to the admonitions of the bishop, though
   accompanied with the authority of the sovereign.

   Note 10-1: The blasphemous doctrine of Arius was an offshoot of
   Gnosticism, perhaps the least offensive in appearance, but directly and
   inevitably destructive of the personal glory of the Son as God, and
   hence overthrowing the basis of redemption. Modern Unitarianism denies
   the Lord Jesus to be more than man, and thus even His supernatural
   birth of the Virgin Mary; though Socinus asserted the singular
   modification of such an exaltation after His resurrection as
   constituted Him an adequate object of divine worship. Arius seemed to
   approach the truth on the side of His preexistence before He came into
   the world, owned that He, the Son of God, made the universe, but
   maintained that He was Himself created, though the very first and
   highest of creatures. It was not the Sabellian denial of distinct
   personality, but the refusal to the Son and of course to the Spirit, of
   true, proper, essential, and eternal Deity.

   Not only is Arianism fundamentally inconsistent with the place given to
   the Son from first to last throughout scripture, as well as with the
   infinite work of reconciliation and new creation, for which the old
   creation furnished but the occasion, but it is distinctly refuted
   beforehand by many passages of holy writ. A few of these it may be well
   here to cite. Him who, when born of woman, was named Jesus, the Spirit
   of God declares (John 1:1-3) to be in the beginning the Word who was
   with God and was God. "All things were made by him; and without him was
   not anything made that was made." It is impossible to conceive a
   stronger testimony to His uncreated subsistence, to His distinct
   personality when He was with God before creation, and to His divine
   nature. He is here spoken of as the Word, the correlate of which is not
   the Father, but God (and thus leaving room for the Holy Spirit); but,
   lest His own consubstantiality should be overlooked, He is carefully
   and at once declared to be God. (See Note 10-2) Go back beyond time and
   the creature, as far as one may in thought, "in the beginning was the
   Word." The language is most precise; He was in the beginning with God,
   not "egeneto", "He was" in the sense of coming into being or caused to
   be, but "en", "He was" in His own absolute being. All things,
   "egeneto", "came into being," through Him. He was the Creator so
   completely that St. John adds, "and without him not one thing came into
   being which is come into being." On the other hand, when the
   incarnation is stated in verse 14, the language is, "The Word was made
   flesh," not "en" but "egeneto". Further, when come among men, He is
   described as "the only-begotten Son who is' ["o on", not merely who
   was] in the bosom of the Father" --language unintelligible and
   misleading, unless to show that His manhood in no way detracted from
   His Deity, and that the infinite nearness of the Son with the Father
   ever subsists.

   Again, Romans 9:5 is a rich and precise expression of Christ's
   underivative and supreme Godhead, equally with the Father and the
   Spirit. Christ came, "who is over all, God Blessed for ever. Amen." The
   efforts of heterodox critics bear witness to the all importance of the
   truth, which they vainly essay to shake by unnatural efforts, which
   betray the dissatisfaction of their authors. There is no such emphatic
   predication of supreme Deity in the Bible: not, of course, that the
   Father and the Holy Spirit are not co-equal, but because the
   humiliation of the Son in incarnation and the death of the cross made
   it fitting that the fullest assertion of divine supremacy should be
   used of Him.

   Next, the apostle says of Christ, "who is the image of the invisible
   God, the first-born of every creature; for by him were all things
   created, that are in heaven and that are on earth, visible and
   invisible, whether thrones, or dominions, or principalities, or powers:
   all things were created by him and for him; and he is before all
   things, and by him all things subsist." (Colossians 1:15 - 17) The
   reveries of the Gnostics are here anticipatively cut off; for Christ is
   shown to have been chief of all creation, because He was Creator, and
   this of the highest invisible beings as well as of the visible: all
   things are said to have been created for Him as well as by Him; and as
   He is before all, so all subsist together in virtue of Him.

   The only other passage I need now refer to is Hebrews 1, where the
   apostle illustrates the fullness of Christ's Person among other Old
   Testament scriptures by Psalms 45, and 102. In the former He is
   addressed as God and anointed as man; in the latter He is owned as
   Jehovah, the Creator, after He is heard pouring out His affliction as
   the rejected Messiah to Jehovah.

   It is impossible then to accept the Bible without rejecting Arianism as
   a heinous Libel against Christ and the truth; for it is not more
   certain that He became a man than that He was God before creation,
   Himself the Creator, the Son, and Jehovah. --From unpublished MSS of W.
   K.

   Note 10-2: The absence of the article here is necessarily due to the
   fact that "Theos" is the predicate of "o Logos" in no way to an
   inferior sense of His Godhead, which would contradict the context
   itself. Indeed, if the article had been inserted, it would be the
   grossest heterodoxy, because its effect would be to deny that the
   Father and the Spirit is God by excluding all but the Word from
   Godhead.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [48] [(Christos), Christ.]

   [49] The letters usually employed to represent the Saviours name are I.
   H. S., which mean Jesus Hominum Salvator--Jesus the Saviour of men.

   [50] History of Christianity, vol. 2, p. 283 - 308. Neander, vol. 3, p.
   41. Life of Constantine, by Eusebius.

   [51] Eusebius's Life of Constantine, p. 147.

   [52] Traditor - "A name of infamy given to those who, to save their
   lives in the persecution, had delivered the scriptures or goods of the
   church to the persecuting powers." (Milner, vol. 1. p. 513.)

   [53] Neander, vol. 3, p. 244; Robertson, vol. 1, p. 175; Milman, vol.
   2. p. 364.

   [54] See Note 10 - 1 page 144, at the end of chapter 10.

   [55] See the Letter in Eusebius's Life of Constantine, 2:64 - 72)
     __________________________________________________________________

Chapter 11

   THE COUNCIL OF NICE

   Constantine was now obliged to look more closely into the nature of the
   dispute. He began to understand that the question was one not of
   trifling, but of the highest and most essential, importance; and
   resolved to convoke an assembly of bishops, in order to establish the
   true doctrine, and to allay forever, as he vainly hoped, this
   propensity to hostile disputation. Everything necessary for their
   journey was provided at the public charge, as if it had been an affair
   of State.

   In the month of June, A.D. 325, the first general council of the church
   assembled at Nice in Bithynia. About three hundred and eighteen bishops
   were present, besides a very large number of priests and deacons. "The
   flower of the ministers of God," as Eusebius says, "from all the
   churches which abound in Europe, Africa and Asia, now met together."
   The spectacle was altogether new, and surely to none more so than to
   the bishops themselves. Not many years had elapsed since they had been
   marked as the objects of the cruelest persecution. They had been chosen
   on account of their eminence, as the peculiar victims of the
   exterminating policy of the government. Many of them bore in their
   bodies the marks of their sufferings for Christ. They had known what it
   was to be driven into exile; to work in the mines; to be exposed to
   every kind of humiliation and insult; but now all was changed, so
   changed, that they could scarcely believe that it was a reality and not
   a vision. The palace gates were thrown open to them, and the Emperor of
   the world acted as moderator of the assembly.

   Nothing could so confirm and declare to the world the sad fall of the
   church, and her subjection to the State, as the place, which the
   Emperor had in these councils. He did not arrive at Nice till the 3^rd
   of July. On the following day the bishops assembled in the hall of the
   palace, which had been prepared for the purpose. We learn from
   Eusebius, that the assembly sat in profound silence, while the great
   officers of State and other dignified persons entered the hall, and
   waited in trembling expectation the appearance of the Emperor.
   Constantine at length entered; he was splendidly attired: the eyes of
   the bishops were dazzled by the gold and precious stones upon his
   raiment. The whole assembly rose to do him honour while he advanced to
   a golden seat prepared for him, and there stood, in respectful
   deference to the spiritual dignitaries, till he was requested to sit
   down. After a hymn of praise was sung, he delivered an exhortation on
   the importance of peace and union. The council sat for rather more than
   two months; and Constantine seems to have been present during the
   greater part of the sittings, listening with patience, and conversing
   freely with the different prelates.

   THE NICENE CREED

   The celebrated confession of faith usually called "The Nicene Creed,"
   was the result of the long and solemn deliberations of the assembly.
   They decided against the Asian opinions, and firmly maintained the
   doctrines of the Holy Trinity, of the true Godhead of Christ, and of
   His oneness with the Father in power and glory. Arius himself was
   brought before the council, and questioned as to his faith and
   doctrine; he did not hesitate to repeat, as his belief, the false
   doctrines, which had destroyed the peace of the church. While Arius was
   advancing his blasphemies, the bishops, with one accord, stopped their
   ears, and cried out that such impious opinions were worthy of anathema
   together with their author. St. Athanasius, although at the time but a
   deacon, drew the attention of the whole council by his zeal in defence
   of the true faith, and by his penetration in unraveling and laying open
   the artifices of the heretics; but more of the noble Athanasius
   by-and-by.

   All the bishops present, with the exception of a few Arians, subscribed
   this famous creed. The decision of the council having been laid before
   Constantine, he at once recognised in the unanimous consent of the
   council the work of God, and received it with reverence, declaring that
   all those persons should be banished who refused to submit to it. The
   Arians, hearing this, through fear subscribed the faith laid down by
   the council. They thus laid themselves open to the charge of being
   dishonest men. Two bishops only, Secundus and Theonas, both Egyptians,
   continued to adhere to Arius; and they were banished with him to
   Illyria. Eusebius of Nicomedia, and Theognis of Nice, were condemned
   about three months later, and sentenced by the Emperor to banishment.
   Severe penalties were now denounced against the followers of Arius: all
   his books were sentenced for burning; and it was even made a capital
   offence to conceal any of his writings. Their labours being completed,
   the bishops dispensed to their respective provinces. Besides the solemn
   declaration of their opinion of the doctrine in question, they finally
   set at rest the question respecting the celebration of Easter; [56] and
   settled some other matters, which were brought before them.

   CONSTANTINE CHANGES HIS MIND

   As the Emperor had no independent judgment of his own in ecclesiastical
   matters, and certainly no spiritual discernment into these doctrinal
   controversies, the continuance of his favour could not be relied upon.
   In little more than two years his mind was completely changed. But
   these two years were eventful in the domestic history of Constantine,
   in what was much more serious than a change of mind as to Arianism. The
   same year that he convened the council of Nice, he gave private orders
   for the execution of Crispus, his eldest son, and for the suffocation
   of his wife, Fausta, in a hot bath, who had been married to him for
   about twenty years. History can find no better reasons for these deeds
   of darkness than a mean and an unworthy jealousy. The wisdom and
   bravery of Crispus, in the final overthrow of Licinius, is said to have
   excited his father's jealousy, which was probably fomented by Fausta,
   who was his stepmother. Knowing that he was bitterly reproached for his
   cruelty to his own son, he ordered the death of Fausta in his remorse
   and misery. As we have expressed a very decided judgment against the
   unhallowed nature of the church's connection with the State, we have
   said this much of the private life of the Emperor, so that the reader
   may judge as to the fitness, or rather, the unfitness, of one so
   polluted with blood, to sit as president in a Christian council. From
   that day to this, the state church has been exposed to the same
   defilement, in the person either of the sovereign or the royal
   commissioner.

   Constantia, the widow of Licinius, and sister of Constantine, possessed
   great influence with her brother. She sympathised with the Arians, and
   was under their influence. On her deathbed in 327, she succeeded in
   convincing her brother that injustice had been done to Arius, and
   prevailed on him to invite Arius to his court. He did so, and Arius
   appeared, presenting to the Emperor a confession of his faith. He
   expressed in a general way his belief in the doctrine of the Father,
   Son, and Holy Ghost, and besought the Emperor to put a stop to idle
   speculations, so that the schism might be healed, and all, united in
   one, might pray for the peaceable reign of the Emperor, and for his
   whole family. By his plausible confession, and his fair speeches, he
   gained his point. Constantine expressed himself satisfied, and Arius
   and his followers, in turn, stood high in the imperial favour. The
   banished ones were recalled. A breath of court air changed the outward
   aspect of the whole church. The Arian party had now full possession of
   the Emperor's weighty influence, and they hastened to use it.

   ATHANASIUS, BISHOP OF ALEXANDRIA

   In the council of Nice Athanasius had borne a distinguished part; his
   zeal and abilities designated him at once as the head of the orthodox
   party, and as the most powerful antagonist of the Arians. On the death
   of Alexander, in the year 326, he was elevated to the see of Alexandria
   by the universal voice of his brethren. He was then only thirty years
   of age, and knowing something of the dangers as well as the honours of
   the office, he would have preferred a less responsible position; but he
   yielded to the earnest desires of an affectionate congregation. He held
   the see for nearly half a century. His long life was devoted to the
   service of the Lord and His truth. He continued steadfast in the faith,
   and inflexible in his purpose, according to the noble stand, which he
   made in the council of Nice, down to his latest hour. The divinity of
   Christ was to him no mere speculative opinion, but the source and
   strength of his whole Christian life. And nowhere else is it to be
   found by any one, as the apostle assures us. "And this is the record,
   that God hath given to us eternal life, and this life is in his Son. He
   that hath the Son hath life; and he that hath not the Son of God hath
   not life." (1 John verses 11, 12) This life dwells in the only begotten
   Son of the Father. He is "the eternal life." And this life, to the
   praise of the glory of God's grace, is given to all who believe in the
   true Christ of God. In receiving Christ, we receive eternal life, and
   become the sons of God --heirs of God --and joint heirs with Christ.
   This life is not the property of any mere creature, however exalted.
   The holy angels have a most blessed and an unceasing existence by the
   power of God; but the Christian has eternal life through faith in
   Christ, by the grace of God. Nothing could be more fatal to the well
   being of the human soul than the doctrine of Arius, but now, to return
   to our history.

   While the advancement of Athanasius to the see of Alexandria gave great
   joy and hope to his friends, it filled his enemies with the bitterest
   resentment. They now saw the great leader of the Catholics [57] the
   bishop of that church from which Arius had been expelled; and that he
   was supported by the affections of his people and by a hundred bishops
   who owned allegiance to the great see of Alexandria. They knew his
   power and indefatigable zeal in defence of the decrees of the Nicene
   Council; and might well judge, that if his influence had been so great
   when in a private capacity, what might now be expected when he was
   placed in so eminent a station? Wherefore, they laid their plans and
   united their powers to overthrow him.

   ATHANASIUS CONTESTS THE AUTHORITY OF CONSTANTINE

   Eusebius, of Nicomedia, first resorted to apparently friendly measures
   with Athanasius, for the purpose of inducing him to re-admit Arius to
   the fellowship of the church; but, failing completely in this, he
   influenced the Emperor to command him. An imperial mandate was issued
   to receive Arius and all his friends who were willing to connect
   themselves once more with the Catholic Church; and informing him that,
   unless he did so, he should be deposed from his station, and sent into
   exile. Athanasius, however, was not to be intimidated by imperial
   edicts, but firmly replied, that he could not acknowledge persons who
   had been condemned by a decree of the whole church. "Constantine now
   found to his astonishment," says Milman, "that an imperial edict
   --which would have been obeyed in trembling submission from one end of
   the Roman empire to the other, even if he had enacted a complete
   political revolution, or endangered the property and privileges of
   thousands --was received with deliberate and steady disregard by a
   single Christian bishop. During two reigns, Athanasius contested the
   authority of the Emperor." [58] He endured persecution, calumny, exile;
   his life was frequently endangered in defence of the one great and
   fundamental truth --the Godhead of the blessed Lord; he confronted
   martyrdom, not for the broad distinction between Christianity and
   heathenism, but for that one central doctrine of the Christian faith.

   The Arian, or more properly the Eusebian party, carried a succession of
   complaints against Athanasius to the Emperor. But it would be outside
   our purpose to go into details: still we must trace the silver line a
   little farther in this noble and faithful witness.

   The weightiest charge was, that Athanasius had sent a sum of money to a
   person in Egypt, to aid him in the prosecution of a design of
   conspiracy against the Emperor. He was ordered to appear and answer the
   charge. The prelate obeyed and stood before him. But the personal
   appearance of Athanasius, a man of remarkable power over the minds of
   others, seems for the moment to have overawed the soul of Constantine.
   Athanasius, triumphantly refuted the frivolous and groundless
   accusations before a tribunal of his enemies, and the unblemished
   virtue of his character undeniably established. And such was the effect
   of the presence of Athanasius on the Emperor, that he styled him a man
   of God, and considered Athanasius's enemies to be the authors of the
   disturbances and divisions; but this impression was of short duration,
   as the Emperor continued to be governed by the Eusebian party.

   THE COUNCIL OF TYRE

   In 334 Athanasius was summoned to appear before a council at Cæsarea.
   He refused on the ground that the tribunal was composed of his enemies.
   In the following year he was cited before another council to be held at
   Tyre by imperial authority, which he attended. Upwards of a hundred
   bishops were present; a lay commission of the Emperor directed their
   proceedings. A multitude of charges were brought against the undaunted
   prelate; but the darkest, and the only one we will notice, was the
   twofold crime of magic and murder. It was said that he had killed
   Arsenius, a Miletian bishop --had cut off one of his hands, and had
   used it for magical purposes; the hand was produced. But Athanasius was
   prepared for the charge. The God of truth was with him. He calmly asked
   whether those present were acquainted with Arsenius? He had been well
   known to many. A man was suddenly brought into the court, with his
   whole person folded in his mantle. Athanasius first uncovered the head.
   He was at once recognised as the murdered Arsenius. His hands were next
   uncovered; and on examination he was proved to be Arsenius, alive,
   un-mutilated. The Arian party had done their utmost to conceal
   Arsenius, but the Lord was with His guiltless servant, and the friends
   of Athanasius succeeded in discovering him. The malice of the
   unprincipled Arians was again exposed, and the innocence of Athanasius
   triumphantly vindicated.

   But the implacable enemies of the bishop were yet fruitful in their
   accusations against him. Once more he was commanded to appear in
   Constantinople, and to answer for himself in the imperial presence.

   The old charges on this occasion were dropped, but a new one was
   skillfully chosen, with the view of arousing the jealousy of the
   Emperor. They asserted that Athanasius had threatened to stop the
   sailing of the vessels laden with corn from the port of Alexandria to
   Constantinople. By this means a famine would be produced in the new
   capital. This touched the pride of the Emperor; and whether from belief
   of the charge, or from a wish to remove so influential a person, he
   banished him to Treves in Gaul. The injustice of the sentence is
   unquestionable.

   THE DEATH OF ARIUS

   Neither Constantine nor Arius long survived the exile of Athanasius.
   Arius subscribed an orthodox creed; Constantine accepted his
   confession. He sent for Alexander, bishop of Constantinople, and told
   him that Arius must be received into communion on the following day,
   which was Sunday. Alexander, who had almost completed a hundred years,
   was greatly distressed by the Emperor's orders. He entered the church,
   and prayed earnestly that the Lord would prevent such a profanation. On
   the evening of the same day Arius was talking lightly, and in a
   triumphant tone, of the ceremonies appointed for the morrow. But the
   Lord had ordered otherwise; He had heard the prayer of His aged
   servant; and that night the great heresiarch died. His end is related
   with circumstances, which recall to mind that of the traitor Judas.
   What affect the event had on Constantine we are not informed; but he
   died soon after in his sixty-fourth year. [59]

   REFLECTIONS ON THE GREAT

   EVENTS IN CONSTANTINE'S REIGN

   Before proceeding farther with our general history, we shall do well to
   pause for a moment, and consider the bearings of the great changes,
   which have taken place, both in the position of the church and the
   world, during the reign of Constantine the Great. It would not be too
   much to say, that the church has passed through the most important
   crisis of her history; and that the downfall of idolatry may be
   considered as the most important event in the whole history of the
   world. From a period shortly after the flood, idolatry had prevailed
   among the nations of the earth, and Satan, by his craft, had been the
   object of worship. But the whole system of idolatry was doomed
   throughout the Roman earth, if not finally overthrown, by Constantine;
   it had, at any rate, received its deadly wound.

   The church had undoubtedly lost much by her union with the State. She
   no longer existed as a separate community, and was no longer governed
   exclusively by the will of Christ. She had surrendered her
   independence, lost her heavenly character, and become inseparably
   identified with the passions and interests of the ruling power. All
   this was sad in the extreme, and the fruit of her own unbelief. But, on
   the other hand, the world gained immensely by the change. This must not
   be overlooked in our lamentations over the failure of the church. The
   standard of the cross was now raised all over the empire; Christ was
   publicly proclaimed as the only Saviour of mankind; and the holy
   scriptures acknowledged to be the word of God, the only safe and
   certain guide to eternal blessedness. The professing church was no
   doubt in a low unspiritual state, before she was connected with the
   civil power, so that she may have thought more of her own ease than of
   her mission of blessing to others; nevertheless, God could work by
   means of these new opportunities, and hasten the disappearance from the
   face of the Roman world of the fearful abominations of idolatry.

   The general legislation of Constantine bears evidence of the silent
   under working of Christian principles; and the effect of these humane
   laws would be felt far beyond the immediate circle of the Christian
   community. He enacted laws for the better observance of Sunday; against
   the sale of infants for slaves, which was common among the heathen; and
   also against child stealing for the purpose of selling them; with many
   other laws, both of a social and moral character, which are given in
   the histories already noted. But the one grand all-influential event of
   his reign was the casting down of the idols, and the lifting up of
   Christ. The Ethiopians and Iberians are said to have been converted to
   Christianity during his reign.

   THE SONS OF CONSTANTINE

   A.D. 337 - 361

   His three sons, Constantine, Constantius, and Constans succeeded
   Constantine the Great. They had been educated in the faith of the
   gospel, and had been named Cæsars by their father, and on his death
   they divided the empire among them. Constantine obtained Gaul, Spain,
   and Britain; Constantius, the Asiatic provinces, with the capital,
   Constantinople; and Constans held Italy and Africa. The beginning of
   the new reign was characterised --as was usual in these times --by
   killing the relatives who might one day prove rivals to the throne; but
   along with the old and usual political jealousies and hostilities, a
   new element now appears --that of religious controversy.

   The eldest son, Constantine, was favourable to the Catholics, and
   signalised the commencement of his reign by recalling Athanasius, and
   replacing him in his see at Alexandria. But in 340 Constantine was
   killed in an invasion of Italy; and Constans took possession of his
   brother's dominions, and thus became the sovereign of two-thirds of the
   empire. He was favourable to the decisions of the Nicene Council, and
   adhered with firmness to the cause of Athanasius. Constantius, his
   Empress, and court, were partial to Arianism. And thus the religious
   war began between the two brothers --between the East and the West
   --and was carried on without either justice or humanity, to say nothing
   of the peaceful spirit of Christianity. Constantius, like his father,
   interfered much in the affairs of the church; he pretended to be a
   theologian, and throughout his reign the empire was incessantly
   agitated by religious controversy. On both sides councils were
   assembled to oppose councils and the councils became so frequent, that
   public posting establishments were constantly employed because of the
   continual travelling of the bishops. But, as the principal events of
   the period, as well as the silver line of God's grace are connected
   with Athanasius, we will return to his history.

   THE HISTORY OF ATHANASIUS

   After a banishment of two years and four months, the younger
   Constantine restored Athanasius to his diocese where he received a
   joyful welcome by his flock. But the death of the younger Constantine
   exposed Athanasius to a second persecution. Constantius, who is
   described as a vain but weak man, soon became the secret accomplice of
   the Eusebians. In the end of 340, or beginning of 341, a council met at
   Antioch for the dedication of a splendid church, which had been founded
   by Constantine the elder. The number of bishops is said to have been
   about ninety-seven, of whom forty were Eusebians. Amongst the number of
   canons, which were passed, it was decided, and with some appearance of
   equity, that a bishop deposed by a synod should not resume his
   episcopal functions till he had been absolved by the judgment of
   another synod equal in authority. This law was evidently passed with a
   special reference to the case of Athanasius; and the council
   pronounced, or rather confirmed, his degradation. Gregory, a
   Cappadocian, who was a man of a violent character, was appointed to the
   see, and Philagrius, the prefect of Egypt, was instructed to support
   the new primate with the civil and military powers of the province.
   Since Athanasius was the favorite of the people, they refused to have a
   bishop thrust upon them by the Emperor: scenes of disorder, outrage,
   and profanation followed. "Violence was found necessary to support
   iniquity," says Milner, "and an Arian prince was obliged to tread in
   the steps of his pagan predecessors, to support what he called the
   church."

   Athanasius, oppressed by the Asiatic prelates, withdrew from
   Alexandria, and passed three years in Rome. The Roman pontiff, Julius,
   with a synod of fifty Italian bishops, pronounced him innocent, and
   confirmed to him the communion of the church. No fewer than five creeds
   had been drawn up by the Eastern bishops in assemblies convened at
   Antioch between 341 and 345, with the view of concealing their real
   opinions; but not one of them was admitted to be free from an Arian
   element, though the more offensive positions of Arianism were
   professedly condemned. The two Emperors, Constantius and Constans, now
   became anxious to heal the breach which existed between the Eastern and
   the Western churches; and accordingly they summoned a council to meet
   at Sardica, in Illyria, A.D. 347, to decide the disputed points.
   Ninety-four bishops of the West, twenty-one of the East, having
   assembled, and duly considered the matter on both sides, decided in
   favour of Athanasius: the orthodox party restoring the persecuted
   primate of Alexandria, and condemning all who opposed him as the
   enemies of the truth. In the meantime the intruder, Gregory, died, and
   Athanasius, on his return to Alexandria, after an exile of eight years,
   was received with universal rejoicing. "The entrance of the archbishop
   into his capital," says one, "was a triumphal procession: absence and
   persecution had endeared him to the Alexandrians; and his fame was
   diffused from Ethiopia to Britain over the whole extent of the
   Christian world."

   After the death of Constans, the friend and protector of Athanasius, in
   A.D. 350, the cowardly Constantius felt that the time was now come to
   avenge his private injuries against Athanasius, who had no longer
   Constans to defend him. But how to accomplish his object was the
   difficulty. Had he decreed the death of the most eminent citizen, the
   cruel order would have been executed without any hesitation; but the
   condemnation and death of a popular bishop must be brought about with
   caution, delay, and some appearance of justice. The Arians set to work;
   they renewed their machinations; more council was convened.

   THE COUNCILS OF ARLES AND MILAN

   In the year 353 a synod was held at Arles; and in 355 another met at
   Milan. Upwards of three hundred bishops were present at the latter. The
   sessions of the council were held in the palace, Constantius and his
   guards being present. The condemnation of Athanasius was artfully
   represented as the only measure, which could restore the peace and
   union of the Catholic Church. But the friends of the primate were true
   to their leader and the cause of truth. They assured the Emperor, in
   the most manly and Christian spirit, that neither the hope of his
   favour, nor the fear of his displeasure, would prevail on them to join
   in the condemnation of an absent, an innocent, an honoured servant of
   Christ. The contest was long and obstinate; the interest excited was
   intense, and the eyes of the whole empire became fixed on a single
   bishop. But the Arian Emperor was impatient, and before the council of
   Milan was dissolved, the archbishop of Alexandria had been solemnly
   condemned and deposed. A general persecution was directed against all
   who favoured him, with the hope of enforcing conformity to the
   Emperor's opinion. And so sharp did this persecution become, that the
   orthodox party raised the cry that the days of Nero and of Decius had
   returned. Athanasius himself found a refuge in the deserts of Egypt.

   THE DEATH AND SUCCESSORS

   OF CONSTANTIUS

   In the year A.D.361 Constantius, the patron of the Arians, died. Like
   his father, he delayed his baptism till a short time before his death.
   The prosperous days of the Arians were now ended.

   JULIAN, commonly called the Apostate, succeeded to the throne; and
   probably to show his utter indifference to the theological question in
   dispute, he ordered the restoration of the bishops whom Constantius had
   banished. After a brief reign of twenty-two months, and a vain attempt
   to revive heathenism, he died suddenly of a wound in the breast from a
   Persian arrow.

   JOVIAN, who immediately succeeded Julian to the throne, professed
   Christianity. He is the first of the Roman Emperors who gave anything
   like clear evidence that he really loved the truth as it is in Jesus.
   He seems to have been a sincere Christian before he came to the throne,
   as he told the apostate Julian that he would rather quit the service
   than his religion; nevertheless Julian valued him, and kept him near
   his person until his death. The army declared itself Christian; the
   Labarum, which had been thrown aside during the reign of Julian, was
   again displayed at its head. Jovian, however, had learnt from the
   preceding times that religion could not be advanced by outward force.
   Hence he allowed full toleration to his pagan subjects; and, with
   respect to the divisions' among Christians, he declared that he would
   molest no one on account of religion, but would love all who studied
   the peace and welfare of the church of God. Athanasius, on hearing of
   the death of Julian, returned to Alexandria, to the agreeable surprise
   and joy of his people. Jovian wrote to Athanasius, confirming him in
   his office, and inviting him to his court. The bishop complied; the
   Emperor desired instruction and advice; by personal exchange he gained
   an influence over Jovian, which his enemies vainly attempted to
   disturb. But the reign of this Christian prince lasted only about eight
   months. He was found dead in his bed, on February 17^th, 364, having
   been suffocated, as was supposed, by charcoal.

   VALENTINIAN and VALENS. Two brothers, Valentinian and Valens, succeeded
   Jovian; the former governed in the West, the latter in the East. In the
   affairs of the church Valentinian is said to have followed the plan of
   Jovian. He declined all interference in questions of doctrines, but
   adhered firmly to the Nicene faith. As a soldier and a statesman he was
   possessed of many great abilities. Both brothers are said to have
   exposed themselves to danger by the profession of Christianity in the
   reign of Julian. Eventually, Valens was won ever to Arianism by the
   efforts of his wife, who persuaded him to receive baptism from the
   Arian bishop of Constantinople. It is said that the bishop exacted of
   him an oath to persecute the Catholics. Be this as it may, it is
   certain that soon after his baptism he manifested great zeal in favour
   of the Arians, and bitterly persecuted the ecclesiastics for their
   adherence to the Nicene faith, and the exercise of their influence on
   its behalf.

   Under the edict of Valens, A.D. 367, the Arians --the enemies of
   Christian piety, once more attacked Athanasius; Tatian, governor of
   Alexandria, attempted to drive him out of the city; but the feeling of
   the people was so strong in favour of the venerable bishop, that he
   dared not for some time to execute his orders. In the meantime,
   Athanasius, knowing what was near at hand, quietly retired, and
   remained for four months concealed in his father's sepulchre. This was
   the fourth time he had fled from Alexandria. Valens, however, from the
   dread he seems to have had of the people, recalled him, and permitted
   him, without any further hindrance, to prosecute his pastoral labours,
   until A.D. 373, when he was summoned from his work on earth to his rest
   in heaven. Valens perished in a battle with the Goths in the year 378,
   after having reigned fourteen years.

   WHAT SERVICE DID ATHANASIUS RENDER TO THE CHURCH

   We are disposed to believe that, under the blessing of God, Athanasius
   was the means of preserving the church from the Arian heresy, which
   threatened to extinguish from Christianity both the name and the faith
   of the Lord Jesus Christ. The enemy aimed at nothing short of a
   Christ-less system, which might ere long issue in an utter abandonment
   of Christianity. But the Nicene council was used of God to overthrow
   his wicked devices. The assertion of the Godhead of Christ and of the
   Holy Ghost as equal with God the Father, was greatly blessed of God
   then, and has been from that day even until now. Though the church had
   been unfaithful, and drifted into the world, "even where Satan's seat
   is," the Lord in mercy raised up a great testimony to His holy name,
   and to the faith of His saints. Historians, both civil and
   ecclesiastical, bear the most honourable testimony to the ability,
   activity, constancy, self-denial, and unwearied zeal of Athanasius in
   the defence of the great doctrine of the Holy Trinity. "Thou holdest
   fast my name, and hast not denied my faith," are words that refer, we
   doubt not, to the faithfulness of Athanasius and his friends, as also
   to the faithful in other times.

   The overcomers spoken of in the address were also there, without doubt;
   but it is not permitted of the Lord that they should be seen or
   recorded by the historian. They were God's hidden ones who were
   nourished on the hidden manna. They will have a place of great nearness
   to the Lord in the glory. "To him that overcometh will I give to eat of
   the hidden manna, and will give him a white stone, and in the stone a
   new name written, which no man knoweth saving he that receiveth it."
   (Revelation 2:17)

   CHRISTIANITY UNDER THE

   REIGN OF GRATIAN

   His son, Gratian, succeeded Valentinian in 375. He was then only
   sixteen years of age. He admitted as a nominal colleague his half
   brother, the younger Valentinian; and soon after he chose Theodosius as
   an active colleague, on whom he bestowed the sovereignty of the East.
   Gratian had been educated in the Christian faith, and gave evidence of
   being a true believer. He was the first of the Roman Emperors who
   refused the title and robe of high priest of the ancient religion. How
   could a Christian, he said, be the high priest of idolatry? It is an
   abomination to the Lord. Thus we see in the early piety of this young
   prince the blessed effects of the testimony of the faithful. What a new
   and strange thing in me; a pious prince to ascend the throne of Rothe
   Cæsars at the age of sixteen! But he was humble as well as pious.

   Being conscious of his own ignorance in divine things, he wrote to
   Ambrose, bishop of Milan, to visit him. "Come," he said, "that you may
   teach the doctrines of salvation to one who truly believes; not that we
   may study for contention, but that the revelation of God may dwell more
   intimately in my heart." Ambrose answered him in an ecstasy of
   satisfaction: "Most Christian prince," he says, "modesty, not want of
   affection, has hitherto prevented me from waiting upon you. If,
   however, I was not with you personally, I have been present with my
   prayers, in which consists still more the duty of a pastor."

   The young Emperor was generally popular; but his attachment to the
   orthodox clergy, the time he spent in their company, the influence they
   gained over him (especially Ambrose) exposed him to the contempt of the
   more warlike part of his subjects. The barbarians sorely pressed the
   frontiers at this time, but Gratian was unable to undertake the conduct
   of a war against them. Maximus, taking advantage of the disaffection of
   the army, raised the standard of revolt. Gratian, seeing the turn
   things had taken, fled, with about three hundred horse, but was
   overpowered and killed at Lyons in the year 383. Maximus, the usurper
   and assassin, placed himself on the throne of the West. He was
   afterwards overthrown and slain by Theodosius, and the younger
   Valentinian placed upon the throne of his father.

   THEODOSIUS, SURNAMED THE GREAT

   The measure of our interest in the history of the Roman Emperors must
   be proportionate to their acknowledgment of the truth, and their
   treatment of Christians. Did we not seek to discern God's hand in their
   government; it would be wearisome and profitless, at this distant
   period, to examine what remains of them. But to see God's hand, and to
   hear His voice, and to trace the silver line of His grace, throughout
   those rude times, keeps us in company with Himself, and our experience
   is increased. But almost everything depends, as to service to God, or
   blessing to ourselves, in the motive or object with which we study the
   history of the church, and that, which affects it. According to this
   principle of estimation, Theodosius claims an earnest and careful
   study. He was God's minister, as well as the Roman Emperor; was used of
   Him to subdue Arianism in the East, and to abolish the worship of idols
   throughout the Roman world. Idolatry is the boldest sin of man, and can
   never be exceeded until "that man of sin be revealed, the son of
   perdition; who opposeth and exalteth himself above all that is called
   God, or that is worshipped: so that he, as God, sitteth in the temple
   of God, shewing himself that he is God." (2 Thess. 2:3, 4) The full
   expression of this blasphemy is still future, and will be the signal
   for immediate judgment, and the dawn of the millennial day.

   But the zeal of Theodosius was not merely negative. He supported
   Christianity, according to his light, more vigorously than any of his
   predecessors. He completed what Constantine commenced, and far
   surpassed him in Christian zeal and earnestness. Soon after his baptism
   he assembled a council, which met at Constantinople on May 2^nd, A.D.
   381. The principal objects for which this council was convoked were the
   following: --To give greater fullness and definiteness to the Nicene
   creed; to condemn heresies, such as those of the Arians, Eunomians,
   Eudoxians, Sabellians, Apollinarians, and others; and to take measures
   for the union of the church.

   THE BARBARIC INVADERS

   Most of our readers, even the youngest, have heard of "The Decline and
   Fall of the Roman Empire" --the fourth great world-empire spoken of by
   the prophet Daniel, and by St. John in the Apocalypse. It had been on
   the decline for some time, and was rapidly approaching its fall, when
   Theodosius was called to the throne. The barbarians, who dwelt
   immediately outside the Roman earth, menaced the frontiers on all
   sides. "On the shores of each of the great rivers which bounded the
   empire," says Dean Milman, "appeared a host of menacing invaders. The
   Persians, the Armenians, the Iberians, were prepared to pass the
   Euphrates or the eastern frontier; the Danube had already afforded a
   passage to the Goths; behind them were the Huns, in still more
   formidable and multiplying swarms; the Franks and the rest of the
   German nations were crowding to the Rhine." This frightful array of
   barbaric invasion will show the reader at a glance the then position of
   the fourth empire; and that it is as easy for God to break in pieces
   the iron, as the brass, the silver, or the gold.

   Within the limits of the Roman earth idolatry still existed, and its
   worship was undisturbed. Its thousands of temples, in all their ancient
   grandeur and imposing ceremony, covered the land. Scarcely could the
   Christian turn anywhere without seeing a temple and inhaling the
   incense offered to idols. Christianity had only been raised to an equal
   toleration. Arianism and semi-Arianism, in their many forms, greatly
   prevailed. In Constantinople and the East they were supreme. Other
   heresies abounded. Such was the state of things, both within and
   without the empire, on the accession of Theodosius. But for the details
   of his civil history, we must refer the reader to the authors already
   noted. We would only add, that he was used of God in arresting for a
   time the progress of invasion; in demolishing the images and some of
   the temples of heathen worship; in abolishing idolatry; in suppressing
   superstition; in causing the decisions of the Nicene council to prevail
   everywhere; and in giving triumph and predominance to the profession of
   Christianity.

   THE RELIGIOUS HISTORY

   OF THEODOSIUS

   We will now glance at some of the leading events in the history of the
   great Theodosius. In the circumstances of these events will be found
   the best commentary on the life of the Emperor, the power of the
   priesthood, and the character of the times.

   Theodosius was a Spaniard. Christianity, at an early period, had been
   established in the Peninsula. It was famous for its firm adherence to
   the Athanasian doctrines throughout the Trinitarian controversy.
   Hosius, a Spanish bishop, was president of the Nicene council. Towards
   the end of the first year of his reign, Theodosius was admonished by a
   serious illness not to delay his baptism, as the practice then was. He
   sent for the bishop of Thessalonica and was at once baptised. Some say
   that he was the first of the Emperors baptised in the full name of the
   Holy Trinity. His admission to the church was immediately followed by
   an edict, which proclaimed his own faith, and prescribed the religion
   of his subjects. "It is our pleasure that all the nations that are
   governed by our clemency and moderation, should steadfastly adhere to
   the religion which was taught by St. Peter to the Romans... According
   to the discipline of the apostles, and the doctrine of the gospel, let
   us believe the sole deity of the Father, the Son, and the Holy Ghost,
   under an equal majesty, and a pious Trinity... Beside the condemnation
   of divine justice they must expect to suffer the severe penalties which
   our authority, guided by heavenly wisdom, shall think proper to inflict
   upon them."

   Such was the stern and uncompromising orthodoxy of Theodosius. Still,
   however mistaken, he believed it was his duty so to rule as a Christian
   Emperor, and the bishops that he consulted were more inclined to
   increase than to soften its severity. On one occasion his sense of
   justice determined him to order some Christians to rebuild at their own
   expense a Jewish synagogue, which, in a tumult, had been pulled down.
   But the vigorous bishop of Milan interfered and prevailed on him to set
   aside the sentence, on the ground that it was not right for Christians
   to build a Jewish synagogue. Herein the bishop evidently failed in a
   matter of common justice. He was less righteous than his imperial
   master.

   THE FAILINGS AND VIRTUES

   OF THEODOSIUS

   The most prominent defect in the character of Theodosius was a
   proneness to violent anger; yet he could be softened down and moved to
   be most merciful after great provocation, if properly appealed to. We
   have a remarkable instance of this in his forgiving the people of
   Antioch. It happened in this way:

   In the year 387 the inhabitants became impatient on account of a tax,
   which the Emperor had imposed upon them, and, as the rulers haughtily
   treated them, to whom they had respectfully applied for relief, a great
   tumult arose in the city. The statues of the imperial family were
   thrown down and treated with contempt. But, a company of soldiers
   immediately appearing, the sedition was suppressed. The governor of the
   province, according to the duty of his office, dispatched a faithful
   narrative of the whole transaction to the Emperor. But as eight hundred
   miles lay between Antioch and Constantinople, weeks must elapse before
   an answer could be received. This gave the Antiochians leisure to
   reflect on the nature and consequences of their crime. They were
   greatly and constantly agitated with hopes and fears, as may be well
   supposed. They knew their crime was a serious one, but they had
   confessed it to Flavian their bishop, and to other influential persons,
   with every assurance of genuine repentance. At length, twenty-four days
   after the sedition, the imperial commissioners arrived, bearing the
   will of the Emperor, and the sentence of Antioch. The following
   imperial mandate will show the reader how much depended on the will or
   temper of a single man in those times.

   Antioch, the metropolis of the East, was degraded from the rank of a
   city; stripped of its lands, it's privileges, and its revenues; it was
   subjected, under the humiliating denomination of a village, to the
   jurisdiction of Laodicea. The baths, the circus, and the theatres were
   shut; and, that every source of plenty and pleasure might at the same
   time be intercepted, the distribution of corn was abolished. The
   commissioners then proceeded to inquire into the guilt of individuals.
   The noblest and wealthiest of the citizens of Antioch appeared before
   them in chains; the examination was assisted by the use of torture, and
   their sentence was pronounced, or suspended, according to the judgment
   of these extraordinary magistrates. The houses of the criminals were
   exposed to sale, their wives and children were suddenly reduced from
   affluence and luxury to the most abject distress; and a bloody
   execution was expected to close the horrors of the day, which the
   eloquent Chrysostom has represented as a lively image of the final
   judgment of the world. But God, who has the hearts of all men in His
   hand, and in the remembrance of what Antioch had been in the early days
   of the church, moved the ministers of Theodosius to pity. They are said
   to have shed tears over the calamities of the people; and they listened
   with reverence to the pressing entreaties of the monks and hermits, who
   descended in swarms from the mountains. The execution of the sentence
   was suspended, and it was agreed that one of the commissioners should
   remain at Antioch, while the other returned with all possible speed to
   Constantinople.

   The exasperated rage of Theodosius had cooled down. The deputies of the
   distressed people obtained a favourable audience. The hand of the Lord
   was in it: He had heard their cry. Grace triumphed in Theodosius. A
   free and general pardon was granted to the city and citizens of
   Antioch; the prison doors were thrown open; and senators, who despaired
   of their lives, recovered the possession of their houses and estates;
   and the capital of the East was restored to the enjoyment of her
   ancient dignity and splendor. Theodosius condescended to praise and
   reward the bishop of Antioch and others who had generously interceded
   for their distressed brethren; and confessed, that if the exercise of
   justice is the most important duty, the indulgence of mercy is the most
   exquisite pleasure, of a sovereign. [60]

   THE SIN AND REPENTANCE

   OF THEODOSIUS

   In A.D. 390, the history of the tumult and massacre at Thessalonica,
   graves yet deeper lines in the character of Theodosius. In studying
   this period of his life, we are reminded of David, the king of Israel.
   In this sorrowful affair the enemy gained a great advantage over the
   Christian Emperor; but God overruled it for the deeper blessing of his
   soul.

   On the occasion of a chariot-race Botheric, commander in chief of the
   district, along with several of his principal officers, were killed by
   some of the populace. A favorite charioteer had been thrown into prison
   for a notorious crime, and, consequently, was absent on the day of the
   games. The populace unreasonably demanded his liberty; Botheric
   refused, and thus the tumult was raised and the dreadful consequences
   followed. The news exasperated the Emperor, and he ordered the sword to
   be let loose upon them. Ambrose interceded, and Theodosius promised to
   pardon the Thessalonians. His military advisers, however, artfully
   insisted on the heinous character of the crime, and procured an order
   to punish the offenders; which was carefully kept secret from the
   bishop. The soldiers attacked the people indiscriminately when
   assembled in the circus, and thousands were slain, to avenge the death
   of their officers.

   The mind of Ambrose was filled with horror and anguish on hearing of
   this massacre. As the servant of God he rises to the place of
   separation from evil, even in his imperial master. He retired into the
   country to indulge his grief, and to avoid the presence of the Emperor.
   But he wrote a letter to him, in which he set before him, in the most
   solemn manner, his fearful guilt; and assuring him that he could not be
   allowed to enter the church of Milan until satisfied of the genuineness
   of his repentance. The Emperor, by this time, was deeply affected by
   the reproaches of his own conscience, and by those of his spiritual
   father. He bitterly bewailed the consequences of his rash fury in
   substituting barbarity for justice; and proceeded to perform his
   devotions in the church of Milan. But Ambrose met him at the porch,
   and, laying hold of his robe, desired him to withdraw as a man stained
   with innocent blood. The Emperor assured Ambrose of his contrition; but
   he was told that private regrets were insufficient to expiate public
   offences. The Emperor referred to David, a man after God's own heart.
   "You have imitated him in his crime, imitate him in his repentance,"
   was the reply of the undaunted bishop.

   The Emperor submitted to the priest. For eight months he remained in
   penitential seclusion; laying aside all his imperial ornaments, until
   at the Christmas season he presented himself before the archbishop, and
   humbly entreated re-admission into the church. "I weep," said he, "that
   the temple of God, and consequently heaven, is shut from me, which is
   open to slaves and beggars." Ambrose was firm, and required some
   practical fruit of his repentance. He demanded that in future the
   execution of capital punishment should be deferred until thirty days
   after the sentence, in order that the ill effects of intemperate anger
   might be prevented. The Emperor readily agreed, and was then allowed to
   enter the church. The scene, which followed, was overwhelming. The
   Emperor, pulling off his imperial robes, prayed prostrate on the
   pavement. "My soul cleaveth to the dust," he cried, "quicken thou me
   according to thy word." The people wept and prayed with him, being
   moved with his grief and humiliation.

   Ambrose mentions in his funeral oration, that from the time of the
   Emperor's deep anguish he never passed a day without recalling to mind
   the crime into which he had been betrayed by his great failing --an
   infirmity of temper.

   REFLECTIONS ON THE DISCIPLINE OF AMBROSE, AND THE PENANCE OF THEODOSIUS

   There are few events in the annals of the church more deeply
   interesting than the penance of the great Theodosius, and the rigorous
   conditions of restoration demanded by Ambrose. Stripped of the
   superstition and formalities peculiar to the times, we have a case
   before us of the most genuine and salutary discipline. We must not
   suppose for a moment, that the behavior of Theodosius was the result of
   weakness or pusillanimity, but of a true fear of God; a real feeling of
   his guilt, a tender conscience, an acknowledgment of the claims of God,
   to whom all worldly greatness is subject.

   Ambrose was neither haughty nor hypocritical, as we find many of the
   pontiffs became in later times. He cherished a strong affection for the
   Emperor, and a sincere concern for his soul; but he acted towards him
   from a solemn sense of his duty. He had a great idea, no doubt, of the
   dignity with which his office invested him; and he felt himself bound
   to use it in behalf of justice and humanity, and in controlling the
   power of earthly sovereignty: a character of power, most certainly,
   never granted by God to a Christian minister; and which often proved in
   after ages to be a most dangerous power, as the priest who holds in his
   hands the king's conscience may inflame or moderate his sanguinary
   passions. In the case of Ambrose it was pure Christian influence. He
   appeared, though somewhat out of character, as the vindicator of
   outraged humanity, and as exercising a judicial authority over the
   meanest and the mightiest of mankind. But it is always disastrous to
   interfere with God's order, even when the best of objects seems to be
   thereby gained.

   About four months after his victory over Eugenius, and the chastisement
   of the assassins of Gratian Valentinian, Theodosius the Great died at
   Milan, in the year 395, not exceeding fifty years of age, the last
   Emperor who maintained the dignity of the Roman name. Ambrose did not
   long survive his imperial friend. He died at Milan on Easter eve, 397.
   He deepened and strengthened the foundations of ecclesiastical power,
   which was to influence Christianity in all future ages. Basil, the two
   Gregories, and Chrysostom flourished about this time.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [56] The Eastern churches from an early period observed the festival of
   Easter in commemoration of the crucifixion of Christ, which answered to
   the Jewish Passover, on the fourteenth day of the month. This may have
   arisen from the fact that in the East there were many Jewish converts.
   The Western churches observed the festival in commemoration of the
   resurrection. This difference as to the day gave rise to a long and
   fierce controversy. But after much contention between the Eastern and
   Western churches, it was ordained by the council of Nice to be observed
   in commemoration of the resurrection throughout the whole of
   Christendom. Thus, Easter day is the Sunday following the fourteenth
   day of the paschal moon which happens upon or next after the 21st of
   March: so that, if the said fourteenth day be a Sunday, it is not that
   Sunday but the next. It may be any Sunday of the five weeks, which
   commence with March 22nd, and end with April 25th.

   [57] The term Catholic Church, was given by Constantine, simply means
   the established church.

   [58] History of Christianity, vol. 2, P. 540.

   [59] See Robertson's Church History, vol. 1. p. 199; Cave's Lives of
   the Fathers, vol. 2, p. 145.

   [60] Milman's History of Christianity; vol. 3. p.140; Robertson's
   History of the Church, vol. 1. p. 242; Milner's Church History, vol. 2,
   p. 28.
     __________________________________________________________________

Chapter 12

   THE INTERNAL

   HISTORY OF THE CHURCH

   THE century, which closes with the death of the great Theodosius and
   Ambrose, has been full of the deepest interest to the Christian reader.
   Events, the most momentous --affecting the majesty and glory of God,
   and mankind's well being --have transpired. From 303 till 313, the
   church passed through her most trying ordeal under Diocletian. Ten
   years she was in a fiery furnace; but in place of being consumed, as
   her enemies vainly imagined, she seemed to increase in numbers as well
   as in purity and power. Satan was permitted to do his utmost against
   her; and he so moved and stirred up the heathen population, that in all
   parts of the empire they arose in arms; first, to defend their ancient
   polytheism; and, secondly, to root out Christianity, by persecuting the
   Christians, and destroying their sacred books. Thus the century
   commenced with the great and final struggle between paganism and
   Christianity, and closed with the total ruin of the former, and the
   complete triumph of the latter. The contest ended with the fourth
   century, and victory has rested with Christianity ever since.

   Such has been the external history of the church, and the
   accomplishment, so far, of the word of the Lord in the Epistles to
   Smyrna and Pergamos. But there are other things which most reasonably
   demand a little of our attention before entering on the fifth century;
   and no part of the wide field which lies before us seems to have a
   stronger claim than the sphere and influence of the great prelates of
   the East and the West. It must also have occurred to our readers from
   the necessary allusions to baptism, that the observance of that rite
   had an immense place in the minds of those early Christians. They
   believed that the waters of baptism purified the soul completely. We
   have thought, then, of combining the two --of giving a brief history of
   baptism from the writings of the Fathers; which will, at the same time,
   give us an opportunity of seeing what views they held, not only on
   baptism, but on the fundamental truths of the gospel.

   ECCLESIASTICAL

   VARIATIONS OF BAPTISM

   In the New Testament there is perfect uniformity, both as to precept
   and example, on the subject of baptism; but in our own day, and ever
   since the beginning of the third century, we find in the professing
   church endless variations both as to theory and practice on this
   important subject. Those not acquainted with ecclesiastical history
   naturally inquire, when, and by what means, did such differences arise
   in the church?

   As it has been our plan all through these "Short Papers" to find out
   the beginnings of great questions which have affected the peace and
   prosperity of the church, we will endeavor, very briefly, to point out
   the beginning and early history of ecclesiastical baptisms. We use the
   term ecclesiastical, as distinguished from scriptural. Nothing is of
   divine authority, either in theory or practice that was introduced
   after the days of the inspired apostles, so nothing can be a Christian
   baptism that varies from the institution of Christ and the practice of
   His apostles. To bring in alterations is to change the thing itself,
   and make it not the same, but another baptism; hence we find in history
   there were baptisms many.

   As the early history of these variations, and not controversy, is our
   object, we will avoid giving any opinion on the long agitated question.
   For more than sixteen hundred years the controversy (with great
   determination) has been maintained, and by able men on both sides. No
   controversy in the history of the church has been of such continuance,
   or conducted with such confidence of victory by both parties. As there
   is no express mention of infant baptism in scripture, the Baptists
   think that their position is beyond question: and the paedobaptists,
   just as firmly, believe that it may be inferred from several well-known
   passages that infant baptism was practiced in the days of the apostles.
   There has not been so much controversy as to the mode of baptism. The
   Greeks, Latins, Franks, and Germans, appear to have baptised by
   immersion. "Baptism is a Greek word," says Luther, "and in Latin it may
   be rendered mersio, immersion... and though among the greater part of
   us this practice has fallen into disuse, nevertheless they that are
   baptised ought to be entirely immersed, and forthwith lifted out of the
   water, and this the etymology of the word indicates, as also in the
   German language." Neander's testimony is to the same effect: "Baptism
   was originally administered by immersion; and many of the comparisons
   of St. Paul allude to this form of its administration. The immersion is
   a symbol of death, of being buried with Christ; the coming forth from
   the water is a symbol of resurrection with Christ; and both, taken
   together, represent the second birth, the death of the old man, and a
   resurrection to a new life." [61] Cave, Tillotson, Waddington, etc,
   etc, speak of the mode of baptism in a similar way. And as all these
   testimonies are from paedobaptists, we may dismiss this part of the
   subject as fairly proved in church history; nevertheless faith can only
   stand on the word of God. We follow not the Fathers, but Christ.

   IRENAEUS, bishop of Lyons, is the first of the Fathers that alludes to
   infant baptism. He died about the year 200, so that his writings are
   placed towards the close of the second century. The apostolical fathers
   never mention it. By this time superstition, to a great extent, had
   taken the place of faith, so that the reader must be prepared to hear
   some extravagant notions advanced by some of the great doctors, yet
   many of them, we doubt not, were true earnest Christians. "Christ came
   to save all persons by Himself," says Irenaeus, "all, I mean, who by
   Him are regenerated --baptised --unto God: infants and little ones;
   children and youths, and elder persons. Therefore He went through the
   several ages: for infants being made an infant, sanctifying infants: to
   little ones He was made a little one, sanctifying those of that age:
   and also giving to them an example of godliness, justice, and
   dutifulness: to youths He was a youth," etc. etc. Baptism was thus
   taught to be a complete lustration of the soul for all ages and
   conditions of mankind. But the controversy soon resolved itself into
   the one question --infant or adult. Regeneration, born again, baptism,
   is used as interchangeable terms, and as meaning the same thing, in the
   writings of the Fathers. [62]

   Here we have the origin, so far as ecclesiastical antiquity informs us,
   of infant baptism. The passage is somewhat obscure and extremely
   fanciful; but it is the first trace we have of the yet unsettled
   question, and probably the root of all its variations ecclesiastically
   viewed. The effect of such teaching on superstitious minds was immense.
   Anxious parents hastened to have their delicate infants baptised lest
   they should die under the curse of original sin, and the man of the
   world delayed his baptism until the near approach of death to avoid any
   subsequent stain, and that he might emerge from the waters of
   regeneration to the realms of pure and unmingled blessedness. The
   example and reputation of Constantine led many thus to delay their
   baptism, though the clergy testified against the practice.

   TERTULLIAN. The testimony of this Father would prove that infants were
   baptised in his day --he died about 240 --but that he was not
   favourable to the practice: as he says, "But they whose duty it is to
   administer baptism are to know that it must not be given rashly...
   Therefore according to every man's condition and disposition, and also
   their age, the delaying of baptism is more profitable, especially in
   the case of little children. For what need is there that the godfathers
   should be brought into danger? --because they either fail of their
   promises by death, or they may be mistaken by a child's proving of
   wicked disposition."

   ORIGEN, in discoursing on the sin of our nature, alludes to baptism as
   the appointed means for its removal. "Infants are baptised," he says,
   "for the forgiveness of sins. Of what sins? or, when have they sinned?
   or, how can any reason of the laver in their ease hold good, but
   according to that sense that we mentioned even now: none is free from
   pollution, though his life be but of the length of one day upon the
   earth? And it is for that reason, because by the sacrament of baptism
   the pollution of our birth is taken away, that infants are baptised."

   CYPRIAN, bishop of Carthage, about the year 253, received a letter from
   one Fidus, a country bishop, inquiring whether an infant, before it was
   eight days old, might be baptised if need required. The answer proves,
   not only that infant baptism was then practiced, but the necessity of
   it in their minds because of its efficacy. Cyprian, with sixty-six
   bishops in council, says, "As to the case of infants; whereas you judge
   that they must not be baptised within two or three days after they are
   born; and that the rule of circumcision is to be observed, so that none
   should be baptised and sanctified before the eighth day after he is
   born: we were all in our assembly of the contrary opinion. For as for
   what you thought fitting to be done, there was not one that was of your
   mind; but all of us, on the contrary, judged that the grace and mercy
   of God is to be denied to no person that is born. For whereas our Lord
   in His gospel says, "the Son of man came not to destroy men's lives,
   but to save them," so far as lies in us, no soul, if possible, is to be
   lost, etc. etc.

   Gregory Nazianzen, bishop of Constantinople, was a Father of great note
   about the year 380. He was the means of destroying the power of
   Arianism in the Eastern capital, where it had been maintained in great
   strength for nearly forty years. He had to encounter much opposition
   and even persecution at first; but by degrees his eloquence, the
   practical and serious tone of his teaching, and the influence of his
   godly life, began to tell, and gained him a firm footing, though he
   never liked the imperial style of the capital.

   Dr. Wall quotes largely from Gregory on baptism; our extracts will be
   brief. Like the rest of the Fathers, he is wild on this subject. "What
   say you to those that are as yet infants, and are not in capacity to be
   sensible of either the grace or the lack of it? Shall we baptise them
   too? Yes, by all means, if any danger make it requisite. For it is
   better that they be sanctified without their own sense of it, than that
   they should die unsealed and uninitiated. And a ground of this to us is
   circumcision, which was given on the eighth day, and was a typical
   seal, and was practiced on those that had no use of reason." Against
   the practice of delaying baptism till a deathbed experience he speaks
   strongly and earnestly, comparing the service to the washing of a
   corpse, rather than to Christian baptism.

   Basil, bishop of Cæsarea, is constantly associated with the two
   Gregories. Gregory of Nyssa was his brother, the other, his chief
   friend. Cappadocia gave birth to the three Fathers. Basil was faithful
   to the Athanasian creed during its days of depression and adversity,
   but did not live to behold its final triumph. He died about 379. He was
   a great admirer and a true example of monastic Christianity. He
   embraced the ascetic faith, abandoned his property, and practiced such
   severe austerities as to injure his health. He fled into the desert;
   his fame collected, as it were, a city around him; he built a
   monastery, and monasteries sprang up on every side.

   His views of baptism are similar to those of his friend Gregory; he
   urges the necessity of it from the same superstitious feeling that they
   all had. "If Israel had not passed through the sea," he says, "they had
   not got rid of Pharaoh: and unless thou pass through the waters of
   baptism, thou shalt not be delivered from the cruel tyranny of the
   devil," etc. etc. This he would apply to all ages, and enforce it by
   the words of the Lord to Nicodemus, "Verily, verily, I say unto thee,
   Except a man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into
   the kingdom of God."

   Ambrose, bishop of Milan, like all the Fathers we have yet met with, is
   thoroughly mistaken as to the meaning of John 3:5: "Except a man be
   born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of
   God." "You see," he says, "that Christ excepts no person, not an
   infant, not even one that is hindered by unavoidable accident."

   JOHN, surnamed CHRYSOSTOM, which means the golden-mouthed; he obtained
   this name from his smooth, flowing eloquence. He was such a favorite of
   the people, that they used to say, "We had rather the sun should not
   shine, than that John should not preach." He was evidently in favor of
   infant baptism, though it is not clear that he believed in original
   sin. "For this cause we baptise infants also," he says, "though they
   are not defiled with sin; that there may be superadded to them
   saint-ship, righteousness, adoption, inheritance, a brotherhood with
   Christ, and to be made members with Him." It would be difficult to say
   more as to the alleged benefits of baptism than what we have here
   enumerated. But extravagant as the whole sentence may seem, it has been
   the text of the paedobaptists from that day to this. Most of our
   readers are familiar with these words, "Baptism, wherein I was made a
   member of Christ, a child of God, and an inheritor of the kingdom of
   heaven." These words are taken, not from scripture, but from
   Chrysostom.

   Dr. Wall is anxious to make it appear, that this great doctor was not
   unsound as to original sin. He suggests that the meaning of his words
   may be, "they are not defiled with their own actual sins." But
   Chrysostom does not say with their own, but that they are not defiled
   with sin. And surely every child is defiled, as saith the Psalmist,
   "Behold, I was shapen in iniquity; and in sin did my mother conceive
   me." (Psalm 51:5) In vain do we look for soundness on many of the
   fundamental doctrines of Christianity among the Fathers; to say nothing
   of what they all overlooked, such as the presence of the Holy Ghost in
   the assembly, the heavenly calling, and the heavenly relations of the
   church, the difference between the house of God and the body of Christ,
   and the blessed hope, and the glorious appearing of the great God and
   our Saviour Jesus Christ. (See Titus 2:11 - 15)

   REFLECTIONS ON THE

   HISTORY OF INFANT BAPTISM

   Enough, we believe, for our present purpose, has been said on the
   subject of infant baptism. The reader has before him the testimony of
   the most trustworthy witnesses for the first two hundred years of its
   history. The practice seems to have taken its rise, and derived all its
   wondrous influence, from a misinterpretation of John 3:5: "Except a man
   be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the kingdom of
   God," It was argued from this passage that baptism was necessary to
   salvation and all the blessings of grace. The efficacy of the blood of
   Christ, the purifying power of the word of God, and the gracious
   operations of the Holy Spirit, were all attributed to the due
   observance of external baptism. And need we wonder at the place it has
   held in the professing church these sixteen hundred years, or at its
   mighty influence on all classes and all ages? though many do not hold
   baptismal regeneration.

   The ancient Christians, Dr. Wall affirms, without the exception of one
   man, teach that these words of the Saviour refer to baptism. Calvin, he
   believes, was the first man that ever objected to this interpretation,
   or that refused to accept it as teaching the necessity of baptism to
   salvation. Supposing these statements to be correct, they prove, that
   the great ecclesiastical fabric that arose out of baptism was founded
   on a misinterpretation. The Church of Rome, Lutherans, Greeks and
   Anglicans, continue to follow the Fathers in this misapplication of the
   truth. "Shall that," says Hooker, referring to Calvin's new
   interpretation of John 3:5, "which hath always received this and no
   other construction be now disguised with the toy of novelty? God will
   have baptism embraced, not only as a sign or token of what we receive,
   but also as an instrument or means whereby we receive grace." Bishop
   Burnet also observes, speaking of the ancient times: "The words of our
   Saviour to Nicodemus were expounded so as to import the absolute
   necessity of baptism in order to salvation. These words the kingdom of
   God,' being taken to mean eternal glory, that expression of our
   Saviours was understood to import this, that no man could be saved
   unless he were baptised." [63] Calvin taught, that the benefits of
   baptism were limited to the children of the elect, and thus introduced
   the idea of hereditary Christianity. The Presbyterians follow Calvin;
   and, as a consequence of his teaching, circumcision becomes both the
   warrant and the rule of infant baptism. But some of our readers may be
   anxious to know what we believe to be the true interpretation of John
   3:5, seeing that so much is built upon it.

   THE TEACHING OF JOHN 3:5

   The expression "born of water," we believe, in no way means baptism.
   The new birth is the Saviours theme, without which no man can see or
   enter into the kingdom of God. It was not yet come visibly --"not with
   observation" --but it was there among them, as God's new sphere of
   power and blessing. Flesh cannot even perceive this kingdom. Christ had
   not come to teach and improve the flesh, as Nicodemus seemed to think,
   but that man might be partaker of a divine nature, which is imparted by
   the Spirit. No mere external rite admits to the kingdom. There must be
   a new nature or life suited to the new order of things. "And Jesus
   answered and said unto him, Verily, verily, I say unto thee, "Except a
   man be born again, he cannot see the kingdom of God." Then the Lord
   shows Nicodemus the only way of entering into the kingdom. "Except a
   man be born of water and of the Spirit, he cannot enter into the
   kingdom of God." Water is here used as the symbol of the cleansing and
   purifying power of the word of God; as in Peter, "seeing that ye have
   purified your souls in obeying the truth through the Spirit." Here, the
   truth is spoken of as the instrument, and the Spirit as the agent, in
   the new birth as he goes on to say, "Being born again not of
   corruptible seed, but of incorruptible, by the word of God." Two things
   are necessary --the word and the Spirit. (1 Peter 1:22, 23)

   The passage obviously means the application of the word of God in the
   power of the Spirit --operating in the heart, conscience, thoughts, and
   actions; and thereby bringing in a new life from God, in which we have
   His mind, and His thoughts about the kingdom. The following passages
   will make it still plainer. "Of his own will begat he us with the word
   of truth." (James 1:18) "That he might sanctify and cleanse it with the
   washing of water by the word." (Eph. 5:26) "Now ye are clean through
   the word which I have spoken unto you." (John 15:3) Here we have the
   moral cleansing or purifying of the soul, by the application of the
   word through the Spirit which judges all things, and which works in us
   new thoughts and affections, suitable to the presence and glory of God.

   As a question of interpretation, then, we see no allusion to baptism in
   John 3:5: baptism may set forth that which is conveyed by it, but
   baptism itself conveys nothing. On the other hand --according to the
   inspired commentaries in the Epistles --baptism is the sign of death,
   not of giving life, as the Fathers uniformly affirm. "Know ye not,"
   says the apostle, "that so many of us as were baptised into Jesus
   Christ were baptised into his death? Therefore are we are buried with
   him by baptism into death." (Rom. 6; Col. 2; 1 Peter 3) Besides it is
   perfectly plain that Nicodemus could not possibly have known anything
   of proper Christian baptism, as it was not instituted by our Lord till
   after He arose from the dead.

   MODERN PAEDOBAPTISTS

   The Church of Rome and all who follow the Fathers confess that the
   origin of their practice is tradition. But there are many in our day,
   as there have been since the Reformation, [64] who holds infant baptism
   from the writings of the New Testament.

   The following are the principal passages they refer to: "Suffer the
   little children to come unto me, and forbid them not, for of such is
   the kingdom of God." (Mark 10:14B) "Else were your children unclean;
   but now are they holy." (1 Cor. 7:14B) "For the promise is unto you,
   and to your children." (Acts 2:39A) "Bring them up in the nurture and
   admonition of the Lord."(Ephesians 6:4B) And many draw their arguments
   chiefly from the baptism of households, (Acts 16:15) and from the
   Abrahamic covenant. (Genesis 17)

   ANTI-PAEDOBAPTISTS, or "the Baptists," as they call themselves, simply
   affirm, that in all the allusions to baptism in the writings of the
   apostles, it is uniformly coupled with faith in the gospel; and that
   such expressions as "buried with him by baptism," and "planted together
   in the likeness of his death," etc., must mean, that the person so
   baptised has part with Christ by faith. And, further, that as baptism
   is an ordinance of Christ, it must of necessity be celebrated exactly
   as He appointed. Nothing, it is said, but "direct scripture" ought to
   be the foundation of our faith and practice in divine things. And since
   to the very being of baptism a subject to whom it must be administered
   is necessary, and a mode of administering, without which it would only
   be a notion in the human mind, these things, therefore, are as
   necessary as baptism itself. And hence it follows that the true
   subjects, which are professed believers only, and the true mode, which
   is immersion only, are necessary to true Christian baptism. [65]

   THE ORIGIN OF INFANT COMMUNION

   When superstition in general takes the place of faith, and human
   notions the place of God's word, where will even serious and
   enlightened men not be carried! Augustine strongly advocated the
   practice of infant communion. But it followed infant baptism as a
   necessary consequence. The Fathers affirmed that the grace of God
   bestowed upon the subjects of baptism was given without measure, and
   without any limitation as to age; therefore, they reasoned, that the
   Lord's supper might consistently be administered to all who had been
   baptised, whether infants or adults. The custom prevailed for many
   ages; it is still observed by the Greek Church; but we refrain from
   details. In general, the inward spiritual meaning and true design of
   the Lord's Supper was greatly lost sight of and the most superstitious
   reverence was expressed for the external symbols of the ordinance.

   THE POSITION AND CHARACTER

   OF THE CLERGY

   In studying the internal history of the church during the fourth
   century, innumerable things crowd for a brief notice: but we can only
   refer to those, which characterise the period. The altered position of
   the clergy is an important one, and will account for many changes that
   were introduced by them. From the time of Constantine, the members of
   the Christian ministry attained a new social position with certain
   secular advantages. This led great numbers to join the sacred order
   from the most unworthy motives. Hence the sorrowful influence of this
   unhallowed mixture on the whole professing church. We constantly meet
   with it in the pride, arrogance, luxury, and assumed dignity of the
   whole clerical order. Thus, it is said that Martin of Tours, when at
   the court of Maximus, allowed the Empress to wait on him at table; and
   that when the Emperor had desired him to drink before him, and expected
   to receive the cup back after the bishop had drunk, Martin passed it to
   his own chaplain, as being higher in honour than any earthly potentate.
   This circumstance shows us where the clergy now were, what they thought
   of themselves and of spiritual dignity in opposition to secular rank.
   The church had now become like "a great house, wherein are not only
   vessels of gold and of silver, but also of wood and of earth; and some
   to honour and some to dishonour." And such it has been ever since, and
   such it will be to the end; but the path of the faithful is plain. "If
   a man therefore purge himself from these, [the vessels to dishonour] he
   shall be a vessel unto honour, sanctified, and meet for the master's
   use, and prepared unto every good work." (2 Timothy 2:20, 21)

   THE ORIGIN AND GROWTH

   OF MONASTICISM

   Before we approach the period of "the Church of Thyatira," it may be
   well to notice the rise and growth of the early ascetic tendencies. The
   influence of monasticism was indeed great during the dark ages, and
   throughout the Western churches. Let us trace it to its source. It is
   well to know the beginning of things, especially of important and
   influential things.

   During the violence of the Decian persecution, about the year 251, many
   Christians fled into voluntary exile. Among these was a young man named
   PAUL of Alexandria; who took up his abode in the desert of Thebais, or
   Upper Egypt. By degrees he became attached to the mode of life he had
   adopted from necessity, and is celebrated as the first Christian
   hermit, though without fame or influence at the time. Not so with his
   immediate and great successor.

   ANTONY, who is regarded as the father of monasticism, was born at Coma,
   in Upper Egypt, about the year 251. In boyhood and youth, it is said,
   he was thoughtful, serious, and of a retiring disposition. He cared
   little for worldly learning, but desired earnestly the knowledge of
   divine things. Before reaching the age of nineteen, he lost his
   parents, and came into possession of considerable property. One day
   while in church, it so happened that the gospel concerning the rich
   young man was read before the assembly. Antony considered the words of
   the Saviour as addressed from heaven to himself: "Sell all that thou
   hast, and distribute unto the poor, and thou shalt have treasure in
   heaven: and come, follow me." (Luke 18:22) He forthwith made over his
   land to the inhabitants of his village, turned the rest of his estates
   into money, and gave all to the poor, except a small portion, which he
   reserved for the maintenance of his only sister. On another occasion he
   was deeply impressed with the words of the Lord, "Take no thought for
   the morrow" (Matt. 6:25 - 34), and taking these words in a literal
   sense, he parted with the remainder of his property, placed his sister
   with a society of pious virgins, that he might be free from all cares
   about earthly things and embraced a life of rigid asceticism.

   Antony is said to have visited Paul the hermit, and all the most famous
   ascetics he could hear of, endeavouring to learn from each his
   distinguishing virtue, and to combine all their graces in his own
   practice. He shut himself up in a tomb, where he lived ten years. By
   excessive fastings, exhaustion, and an overexcited imagination, he
   fancied himself beset by evil spirits, with whom he had many and severe
   conflicts. Antony became famous. Many visited the unnatural place of
   his abode in the hope of seeing him, or of hearing the noise of his
   conflicts with the powers of darkness. But he left his tomb, and dwelt
   in a ruined castle near the Red Sea for other twenty years. He
   increased his mortifications with the view of overcoming the evil
   spirits, but the same temptations and conflicts followed him.

   Strange as it may seem, this remarkable and deluded man had a true
   heart for Christ, and a tender heart for his people. The persecution
   under Maximus (A.D. 311) drew him from his cell to the public scenes in
   Alexandria. His appearance produced a great effect. He attended on the
   sufferers, exhorting them to unwavering confidence in their confession
   of Christ, and manifested great love to the confessors in the prisons
   and in the mines. He exposed himself in every way to danger, yet no one
   ventured to touch him. A kind of inviolable sanctity was supposed to
   surround these unearthly, ghostly looking men. When the fury of the
   persecution was past, he escaped to a new place of solitude in the side
   of a lofty mountain. Here he cultivated a small piece of ground;
   multitudes flocked to him; great numbers imitated him. Mourners came to
   him to be comforted, the perplexed to be advised, and enemies to be
   reconciled. Miracles were ascribed to him and his influence seemed
   boundless.

   In the year 352, when he was a hundred years old, he appeared a second
   time in Alexandria. This was to counteract the spread of Arianism, and
   defend with all his influence the true orthodox faith. His appearance
   produced a great sensation; multitudes thronged to see the monk --the
   man of God, as he was called --and hear him preach; and many pagans
   were converted to Christianity by his means. Antony and his monks were
   steady and powerful supporters of the Nicene Creed. He lived to the age
   of a hundred and five, and died only a few days before Athanasius found
   a refuge among the monks of the desert in 356.

   THE VIRTUES AND FAILURES

   OF ANTONY

   Antony was evidently sincere and honest, though utterly mistaken and
   misled by the craft and power of Satan. In place of acting upon the
   Saviour's commission to His disciples, "Go ye into all the world and
   preach the gospel to every creature," or following His example who went
   about doing good, he thought to attain to a more elevated spirituality
   by withdrawing from mankind, and devoting himself to austerity of life,
   and to uninterrupted communion with heaven. He was a Christian, but
   utterly ignorant of the nature and object of Christianity. Holiness in
   the flesh was his one grand object; though the apostle had said, "In me
   --that is, in my flesh --dwelleth no good thing." Therefore all was
   failure, utter failure; as it ever must be, if we think there is any
   good thing in human nature, or try to become better in ourselves. In
   place of sanctifying his nature by fastings and idleness, he found that
   every evil passion was excited to greater activity.

   "Hence, in his solitude," says Neander, "he had to endure many
   conflicts with sense, which, in some active vocation demanding the
   exertion of all his powers, might perhaps have been avoided. The
   temptations he had to battle with were so much the more numerous and
   powerful, as he was given to idle self-occupation, as he busied himself
   in fighting down the impure images that were constantly coming in from
   the abyss of corruption within his heart, instead of forgetting himself
   in worthier employments, or in looking away to the everlasting source
   of purity and holiness. At a later period, Antony, with a conviction
   grounded on long years of experience, acknowledged this, and said to
   his monks, "Let us not busy our imaginations in painting spectres of
   evil spirits; let us not trouble our minds as if we were lost. Let us
   rather be comforted and cheerful at all times, as those who have been
   redeemed; and let us be mindful that the Lord is with us who has
   conquered them and made them nothing. Let us ever remember that, if the
   Lord is with us, the enemy can do us no harm. The spirits of evil
   appear different to us, according to the different moods of mind in
   which they find us... But if they find us joyful in the Lord, occupied
   in the contemplation of future blessedness and of the things of the
   Lord, reflecting that everything is in the Lord's hand, and that no
   evil spirit can do any harm to the Christian, they turn away in
   confusion from the soul which they see preserved by such good
   thoughts." [66]

   It is perfectly plain from these counsels to his monks, that Antony was
   not only a sincere Christian, but that he had a good knowledge of the
   Lord and of redemption, though so completely turned aside by a deceived
   heart. We are never safe unless moving on the direct lines of the truth
   of God. The system, which this man introduced in his false dreams of
   perfection in the flesh, became, in process of time, the very hotbed of
   profligacy and vice. And thus it continued for more than a thousand
   years. It was not until the sixteenth century, that the divine light of
   the blessed Reformation, bursting upon a scene of dense moral darkness,
   revealed the deep-seated corruptions and the flagrant enormities of the
   different monastic orders. The monks at that time, like swarms of
   locusts, covered all Europe; they proclaimed everywhere, as history
   informs us, the obedience due to holy mother church, the reverence due
   to the saints, and more especially to the Virgin Mary, the efficacy of
   relics, the torments of purgatory, and the blessed advantages arising
   from Indulgences. But as the monks lost their popularity and influence
   at the Reformation, a new order was necessary to fill their place and
   do their evil work: and such was found in the Society of Jesus founded
   by Ignatius Loyola --the Jesuits. But we must take another glance at
   the early history of monasticism.

   THE FIRST SOCIETY OF ASCETICS

   The earliest form in which the ascetic spirit developed itself in the
   Christian church was not in the formation of societies or communities,
   as we find in later times, but in the seclusion of single individuals.
   They believed, however mistaken, that they had a special call to strive
   after a higher Christian life; and in order to attain this eminent
   holiness, they imposed upon themselves the most severe restraints. They
   retired to desert places, that they might give themselves up to close
   meditation on divine things, and that their minds might be entirely
   abstracted from all natural objects, and from whatever delights the
   senses. Both men and women supposed that they must emaciate their
   bodies with watchings, fasting, toil, and self-torture. As the poor
   body was considered an oppressive load and hindrance to their spiritual
   aspirations, they vied with each other in the extent to which they
   could carry their self-mortifications. They existed on the coarsest and
   most unwholesome diet: they sometimes abstained from food and sleep
   till nature was almost wholly exhausted. The contagion of this new
   device of Satan spread far and wide. The mysterious recluse was
   regarded as necessarily invested with peculiar sanctity. The hermit's
   cell was visited by the noble, the learned, the devout --all desirous
   to pay homage to the holy man of God; and thus spiritual pride was
   engendered by the flattery of the world. From this time the monastic
   life was held in such esteem, that many adopted it as a highly
   honourable employment; and afterwards formed themselves into
   communities, or monastic institutions.

   PACHOMIUS, who was, like Antony, a native of Thebais, was converted to
   Christianity in the early part of the fourth century. After practicing
   austerities for some time, he was told by an angel in his dreams, that
   he had made sufficient progress in the monastic life, and must now
   become a teacher of others. Pachomius then founded a society on an
   island of the Nile. Thus began ascetics to live in an association. The
   institution soon extended, so that before the founder's death it
   embraced eight monasteries, with three thousand monks; and in the
   beginning of the following century the number of monks was no less than
   fifty thousand. They lived in cells, each of which contained three.
   They were under engagements of absolute obedience to the commands of
   the Abbot, or father. They wore a peculiar dress, the chief article of
   which was a goatskin, in imitation of Elijah, who, with John the
   Baptist, was regarded as exemplifying the monastic condition. They were
   never to undress; they slept with their clothes on, and in chairs so
   constructed as to keep them almost in a standing posture. They prayed
   many times a day, fasted on the fourth and sixth days of the week, and
   communicated on the Sabbath and on the Lord's Day. Their meals were
   eaten in silence, and with their hoods drawn over their faces, so that
   no one could see his neighbor. They employed themselves in agriculture
   and various forms of industry, and had all things in common, in
   imitation of the first Christians after the day of Pentecost. [67]
   Pachomius founded similar societies for women.

   THE MONASTERIES AND

   THE ROMAN PONTIFF

   Until nearly the close of the fifth century, the monasteries were
   placed under the superintendence of the bishops; the monks were
   regarded as simply laymen, and had no claim to be ranked among the
   sacerdotal order. Circumstances, however, in course of time, led the
   monks to assume a clerical character. Many of them were occupied in the
   work of reading and expounding the scriptures, and all of them were
   supposed to be engaged in the cultivation of the higher spiritual life
   so that they were in great favour with the multitude, especially as
   they began to exercise their clerical functions beyond the confines of
   their establishments. Jealousies soon sprung up between the bishops and
   the abbots: the result was, that the abbots, to deliver themselves from
   dependence upon their spiritual rivals, made application to be taken
   under the protection of the Pope at Rome. The proposal was gladly
   accepted, and very quickly all the monasteries, great and small,
   abbeys, priories, and nunneries, were subjected to the authority of the
   See of Rome. This was an immense step towards the pontifical power of
   Rome.

   The Pope could now establish in almost every quarter a kind of
   spiritual police, who acted as spies on the bishops as well as on the
   secular authorities. This event is carefully to be noted, if we would
   watch the ways and means of the rising power, and ultimate supremacy,
   of the Roman Pontiff.

   The monastic system soon spread far beyond the borders of Egypt: and
   all the great teachers of the age, both in the East and in the West,
   advocated the cause of celibacy and monasticism. St. JEROME, in
   particular, the most learned man of his day, is regarded as the
   connecting link between the two great divisions of the church --the
   Greek and the Roman, or the Eastern and the Western. He was the means
   of powerfully forwarding the cause of celibacy and monasticism,
   especially among females. Many Roman ladies of rank became nuns through
   his influence. AMBR0SE so extolled virginity in his sermons that the
   mothers of Milan restrained their daughters from attending his
   ministry; but crowds of virgins from other quarters flocked to him for
   consecration. BASIL introduced monastic life into Pontus and
   Cappadocia; MARTIN, into Gaul; AUGUSTINE, into Africa; and CHRYSOSTOM
   was prevented by the wisdom of his mother from retiring in his youth to
   a remote hermitage in Syria.

   Before leaving this subject it may be well, once for all, to notice the
   rise and establishment of nunneries.

   THE ORIGIN OF FEMALE RECLUSES

   From an early period of the history of the church we read of devout
   virgins, who professed religious chastity, and dedicated themselves to
   the service of Christ. Their duties and devotions were self-imposed, so
   that they might preserve their domestic relations, or enter without
   scandal into the state of marriage. But the origin of communities of
   female recluses is attributed to Pachomius, the great founder of the
   regular monastic systems. Before his death, which took place about the
   middle of the fourth century, no fewer than twenty-seven thousand
   females in Egypt alone had adopted the monastic life. The rules, which
   he formed for the convents of nuns, were similar to those, which bound
   the monks. "They lived from common funds, used a common dormitory, a
   table, and wardrobe. The same religious services were prescribed;
   habitual temperance and occasional fasting were enjoined with the same
   severity. Manual labour was no less rigidly enforced; but instead of
   the agricultural toil imposed upon their "brethren," to them were
   committed the easier tasks of the needle or the distaff. By duties so
   numerous, by occupations admitting so great variety, they beguiled the
   tediousness of the day, and the dullness of monastic seclusion." [68]

   It is certain that many such establishments were founded during the
   fourth century, and that they were propagated throughout Egypt, Syria,
   Pontus, and Greece, and that gradually they penetrated into every
   province where the name of Christ was known; and even until now they
   abound in all Roman Catholic countries, and form a strange and
   incongruous appendage to the church.

   THE CEREMONY OF TAKING THE VOW

   At the consecration of a nun, even her own members painfully feel the
   cruel and merciless spirit of popery. It is unnatural, unscriptural, an
   outrage on every feeling of our humanity, ruinous both to soul and
   body, and could only be submitted to through the blinding power of
   Satan. What a mercy to be far away from her unaccountable influence and
   fatal delusions! The following description of the ceremonial of a
   novice taking the vows is from the pen of an eyewitness of the scene as
   it took place in Rome; slightly abridged.

   "By particular favour we had been furnished with billets for the best
   seats, and, after waiting about half-an-hour, two footmen in rich
   liveries made way for the young countess, who entered the crowded
   church in full dress, her dark hair blazing with diamonds. Supported by
   her mother she advanced to the altar. The officiating priest was
   Vicario; the discourse from the pulpit was pronounced by a Dominican
   monk, who addressed her as the affianced spouse of Christ and a saint
   on earth, one who had renounced the vanities of the world for a
   foretaste of the joys of heaven.

   The sermon ended, the lovely victim herself, kneeling before the altar
   at the feet of the cardinal, solemnly abjured the world whose pleasures
   and affections she seemed so well calculated to enjoy, and pronounced
   those vows which severed her from them forever. As her voice softly
   chanted those fatal words, I believe there was scarcely an eye in the
   whole of that vast church un-moistened with tears. The diamonds that
   sparkled in her hair were taken off; and her long and beautiful tresses
   fell luxuriantly down her shoulders.

   The grate that was to entomb her was opened. The abbess and her black
   train of nuns appeared. Their choral voices chanted a strain of
   welcome. It said, or seemed to say, sister spirit, come away!' She
   renounced her name and title, adopted a new appellation, received the
   solemn benediction of the cardinal, and the last embraces of her
   weeping friends, and passed into that bourne from whence she was never
   to return. A panel behind the other now opened, and she appeared at the
   grate again. Here she was despoiled of her ornaments and her splendid
   attire; her beautiful hair was mercilessly severed from her head by the
   fatal shears of the sisters, enough to make the whole congregation
   shudder. As she was shorn of her natural covering, the sisters hastened
   to invest her with the sober robes of the nun, the white coif and the
   noviciate veil.

   Throughout the whole ceremony she showed great calmness and firmness;
   and it was not till all was over that her eyes were moistened with
   tears of natural emotion. She afterwards appeared at the little postern
   gate of the convent, to receive the sympathy and praise and
   congratulations of all her friends and acquaintances, nay, even of
   strangers, all of whom are expected to pay their compliments to the new
   spouse of heaven." [69]

   The description now given refers to the profession of a nun on the
   taking of the white veil, a step that forms the commencement of the
   noviciate or year of trial, and is not irrevocable. The ceremony of
   taking the black veil at the end of the year is still more solemn and
   dreadful; but when it has been gone through, she is a recluse for life,
   and can only be released from her vow by death. In the eye of Roman
   law, both civil and ecclesiastical, the step she has taken is beyond
   recall. Imprisonment, torture, death temporal and eternal, is held out
   as the punishments of disobedience. And who can tell, outside the
   convent walls, what refined and prolonged cruelties may be practiced
   inside? The power is despotic; there is no appeal; until the deceiver
   and the deceived, the persecutor and the helpless victim, stand side by
   side before the righteous tribunal of God.

   REFLECTIONS ON THE

   PRINCIPLES OF ASCETICISM

   It is truly sorrowful to reflect on the many and serious mistakes, or
   rather positive errors, of the great doctors or early fathers as they
   are usually called. We know of nothing more grave and solemn than the
   fact, that they greatly misled the people then, and that by their
   writings they have been misleading the professing church ever since.
   Who can estimate the evil consequences of such teaching for the last
   fourteen hundred years at least? The misinterpretation or the
   misapplication of the word of God is evidently the rule with these
   leaders, to teach sound doctrine, the exception. And still they are the
   boast and the alleged authority of a large portion of Christendom even
   until now.

   On the subject of asceticism, any one having an ordinary acquaintance
   with scripture may see their ignorance of the mind of God, and their
   perversion of His word. We are exhorted, for example, to "mortify the
   deeds of the body," but never to mortify the body itself. The body is
   the Lord's, and to be cared for. "Know ye not," says the apostle, "that
   your bodies are the members of Christ?" True, they are to be kept under
   and brought into subjection, but that is the wisest way of caring for
   the body. (Rom. 8:13; I Cor. 6:15; 9: 27) Again, the apostle says,
   "Mortify therefore your members which are upon the earth;" and then he
   states what these are: "fornication, uncleanness, inordinate affection,
   evil concupiscence, and covetousness, which is idolatry." These are the
   deeds of the body, which we are to mortify --to put to death
   practically; and this on the ground that the flesh was put to death on
   the cross. "They that are Christ's have crucified the flesh with its
   affections and lusts;" not, observe, are crucifying it, or ought to
   crucify it, but have crucified it. God has put it out of His sight by
   the cross, and we are to keep it out of sight by self-judgment. The
   body, on the contrary, has in the New Testament a most important place
   as the temple of the Holy Ghost; but the tendency of asceticism is to
   starve the body, and feed the flesh. "Which things have indeed a shew
   of wisdom in will-worship, and humility, and neglecting of the body;
   not in any honour to the satisfying of the flesh." (Colossians 2:23)

   The Fathers seem to have overlooked that asceticism was the offspring
   of heathen philosophy, and not in any way of divine Christianity; but
   they never fairly looked into scripture for the mind of God on these
   subjects. The total ruin of man in the flesh not being understood by
   them, they vainly thought it might be improved, and were thus led
   astray in ways innumerable, especially as to the work of Christ, God's
   judgment of the flesh, the true principle of worship, and the whole
   path of Christian service.

   Having now seen the foundation laid of the great monastic system, which
   was to exert so powerful an influence in connection with Christianity,
   literature, and civilization, throughout the dark ages, we may leave it
   for the present, and return to our general history.

   ARCADIUS AND HONORIUS, A.D. 395

   Theodosius the Great left two sons, Arcadius, aged eighteen years, and
   Honorius who was only eleven. The elder succeeded to the sovereignty of
   the East, the younger to that of the West. Nothing can be more striking
   than the condition of the Roman world at this moment, or more fitted to
   excite our compassion: two Emperors of such weakness as to be incapable
   of conducting the administration of public affairs, and the whole
   empire in a state of danger and alarm from the Gothic invaders. The
   hand of the Lord is manifestly here. Where now is the genius, the
   glory, and the power of Rome? They expired with Theodosius. At a moment
   when the empire required the prudence, the martial skill, and the
   talents of a Constantine, professedly, two imbecile princes govern it.
   But in the providence of God, its days were numbered and it was fast
   passing away.

   The fiercest storm that had ever assailed the empire was now ready to
   burst upon it in its hour of weakness. The able general, Stilicho, the
   only hope of Rome, was assassinated soon after the death of Theodosius,
   and all Italy lay within the grasp of the barbarians. The Goths had
   yielded to the arms and especially to the policy of Theodosius, but it
   needed only the news of his death to arouse them to revolt and revenge.
   The famous Marie, the crafty and able leader of the Goths, only waited
   for a favourable opportunity to carry out a scheme of greater magnitude
   and daring than had entered into the mind of any of Rome's enemies
   since the time of Hannibal. He was, we doubt not, the minister of God's
   righteous judgments on a people so deeply stained with the blood of His
   saints, besides having crucified the Lord of glory, and slain His
   apostles. Details we must leave to the civil historian of Rome's
   decline and fall: but we may briefly say, that Alaric was now followed,
   not only by the Goths, but by tribes of almost every name, and race.
   The fury of the desert was now to be poured out on the mistress and
   corrupter of the world. He led his forces into Greece without
   opposition; he devastated its fruitful land, and plundered Athens,
   Corinth, Argos, and Sparta; and that which was impiously called "the
   eternal city," he besieged and sacked. For six days she was given up to
   remorseless slaughter and universal pillage. Thus fell the guilty, the
   devoted, city by the judgment of God: no hand held out to help: no man
   lamenting her fate. The richest provinces of Europe too, Italy, Gaul,
   and Spain, were laid waste by the immediate successors of Alaric,
   especially Attila, and new kingdoms set up by the barbarians. Thus the
   history of the fourth great world-empire closes about A.D. 478, and in
   the twelve hundred and twenty-ninth year from the foundation of Rome.

   Theodoric, king of the Ostrogoths, a prince alike excellent in the arts
   of war and of government, restored an age of peace and prosperity,
   swept away all vestiges of the imperial government, and formed Italy
   into a kingdom. [70]

   REFLECTIONS ON THE

   CALAMITIES OF ROME

   The Christian reader may here find it profitable to pause for a moment
   and contemplate the overthrow of the Western empire, and the division
   of its territory amongst the various hordes of the barbarians. It is
   our privilege and for our edification in all this, to see the
   fulfillment and harmony of scripture, the overruling providence of God,
   and the accomplishment of His purposes. We can also afford to drop the
   tear of compassion over the miseries of our deluded fellow men. This
   would be nothing more than the tender compassion of Him who wept over
   the devoted city Jerusalem. It is our duty to study history by the sure
   light of scripture; not scripture --as some have attempted --by the
   uncertain light of history. Thus we may be happy in the presence of God
   with the page of history open before us, and our faith strengthened by
   the mighty contrast between the kingdom of God and all earthly glory.
   "Wherefore," says the apostle, "we receiving a kingdom which cannot be
   moved, let us have grace, whereby we may serve God acceptably with
   reverence and godly fear." (Heb. 12:28) The superiority of Christianity
   to the most powerful of Pagan institutions was now manifest to all.
   When the overwhelming judgments of God fell upon Italy, and broke in
   pieces the iron rule of the empire, the church suffered no harm. Rather
   than being exposed to danger, it was shielded, and was the means of
   shielding others. Like the ark, which rose above the dark waters of the
   deluge, the church was preserved from the fury of the invader. There
   was no instance of the barbarians embracing the old religion of Greece
   and Rome; they either adhered to the superstitions of their ancestors,
   or adopted some form of Christianity. There is no sure footing for the
   sinner amidst the convulsions of earth, the rise and fall of empires,
   but the Rock of Ages --the risen and exalted Christ of God. "Blessed
   are all they that put their trust in Him." (Psalm 2:12) The Lord
   provided for the safety of His people by the previous conversion of
   those who subverted the empire.

   THE CONVERSION OF THE BARBARIANS

   It is always interesting and edifying to trace the hand of the Lord in
   turning the wrath of man to His own praise, and in bringing the
   greatest good to His own people out of that which appears to be their
   heaviest calamity. In the reign of Gallienus, about 268, a great number
   of Roman provincials had been led away into captivity by the Gothic
   bands; many of these captives were Christians, and several belonged to
   the ecclesiastical order. They were dispersed by their masters as
   slaves in the villages but as missionaries by the Lord. They preached
   the gospel to the barbarous people, and numbers were converted. Their
   increase and order may be inferred from the fact that they were
   represented at the Nicene council by a bishop, named Theophilus.

   ULPHILAS, who is commonly called "the Apostle of the Goths," has
   deserved the grateful remembrance of posterity, but especially of
   Christians. About the middle of the fourth century, he invented an
   alphabet and translated the scriptures into the Gothic language, with
   the exception of the books of Samuel and Kings, lest their warlike
   contents should be found too congenial to the ferocity of the
   barbarians. At first they appear to have been simple and orthodox in
   their faith, but afterwards became deeply tinged with Arianism,
   especially after the Arian ministers, who were ejected from their
   churches by Theodosius, had laboured diligently among them.

   Alaric and his Goths were professed Christians; they directed their
   wrath against the heathen temples, but greatly reverenced the churches.
   This was the great mercy of God to His people, numbers of who fled to
   the churches, where they found a sanctuary. The earnest faith and the
   indefatigable zeal of Ulphilas, together with his blameless life, had
   gained the love and confidence of the people. They received in faith
   the doctrines of the gospel, which he preached and practiced: so that
   the first invaders of the empire had previously learnt in their own
   land to profess, or at least to respect, the religion of the
   vanquished. And herein we see the truth, or rather the fulfillment of
   the Apostle's words in his Epistle to the Romans: "The gospel of Christ
   is the power of God unto salvation to every one that believeth; to the
   Jew first and also to the Greek;" and again, "I am debtor both to the
   Greeks and to the barbarians; both to the wise and the unwise." The
   learned citizens of the Roman Empire, and the rude inhabitants of
   Scythia and Germany, were alike brought under the saving power of the
   gospel.

   THE CONVERSION OF CLOVIS

   As the conversion of Clovis is said to have been the most important in
   the fifth century, we must give a few particulars of the event
   --important, we mean, as to its consequences, both immediate and
   remote, on the history of Europe, and so far of the church.

   The Franks, a people of Germany, had settled in the north of France,
   near Cambray; a most religious part of the country, rendered famous by
   the shrine of Saint Martin of Tours, and by the legendary virtues of
   other saints. Clovis was a pagan, but Clotilda, his wife, had embraced
   the Catholic faith. She had long urged him to become a Christian, but
   he was slow to believe. At length, however, when engaged in battle with
   the Alemanni, and finding himself in danger, he thought of Clotilda's
   God, and prayed to Him, declaring that his old gods had failed him, and
   vowing to become a Christian if he should gain the victory. The tide of
   battle turned; his enemies defeated and, true to his vow, at Christmas,
   496, Clovis was baptised at Rheims by the bishop Remigius. Three
   thousand warriors followed his example, declaring their readiness to be
   of the same religion as their king.

   Here we have another Constantine. Clovis found the profession of
   Christianity most favourable to his political interests, but it
   produced no change for the better in his life. His object was conquest,
   his ambition was boundless, and his deeds were daring and cruel. From
   being only a Frankish chief with a small territory, he became the
   founder of the great French monarchy. And from his confession of the
   Catholic faith, and his alliance with the Roman Pontiff, he was
   acknowledged champion of Catholicism, and declared to be the only
   orthodox sovereign in the West: all the others were Arians. Alaric who
   conquered Rome, Genseric who conquered Africa, Theodoric the Great who
   became king of Italy, and many of the Lombard kings, were Arians. Hence
   the kings of France derive from Clovis the title of "eldest Son of the
   Church."

   To the student of prophecy it is interesting to see, that by this time
   at least five or six barbarian kings were in possession of the Roman
   provinces, and ruled over what had been the Latin empire. But this had
   passed away. It had died as an empire, and must remain in the place of
   death until resuscitated, according to the word of the Lord, in the
   latter day. (Revelation 13 & 17)

   Before concluding the Pergamos period, we find it will be necessary to
   notice, however briefly, three things --the internal state of the
   church, the Pelagian, and Nestorian controversies.

   RITES AND CEREMONIES

   The more general adoption of Christianity, as will easily be imagined,
   was followed by an increase of splendor in all that concerned the
   worship of God, so-called. Churches were built and adorned with greater
   cost; the officiating clergy were attired in richer dresses; the music
   became more elaborate, and many new ceremonies were introduced. And
   these usages were then justified on the same ground that we find the
   high church party justifying the extraordinary rites and ceremonies of
   the present day. [71] It was intended to recommend the gospel to the
   heathen by ceremonies, which might surpass those of their old religion.
   Multitudes were drawn into the church then, as they are now, without
   any sufficient understanding of their new position, and with minds
   still possessed of heathen notions, and corrupted by heathen morality.
   Even in the earliest days of Christianity we find irregularities in the
   church at Corinth through the unforgotten practices of the heathen. The
   burning of candles in daylight, incense, images, processions,
   lustrations, and innumerable other things, were introduced in the
   fourth and fifth centuries. For, as Mosheim observes, "While the
   good-will of the Emperors aimed to advance the Christian religion, the
   indiscreet piety of the bishops obscured its true nature and oppressed
   its energies, by the multiplication of rites and ceremonies." [72]

   THE DEGENERATING

   INFLUENCE OF RITUALISM

   The tendency of all ecclesiastical ritualism is to produce a spirit of
   superstition to the subversion of faith, of mere formality to the
   guidance of the Holy Spirit, and of resting in our own good works to
   the rejection of the finished work of Christ. The word of God is thus
   practically set aside, the Holy Spirit grieved, and the heart laid open
   to the inroads of Satan. When faith is in lively exercise, the word of
   God strictly followed, and the promised guidance of the Comforter
   relied upon, the soul is strong and vigorous in the divine life, and
   the suggestions of the enemy unheeded. Satan is a keen observer of the
   different states of the believer's soul, and of the professing church.
   He knows when he will be successful in his attempts against the
   individual believer or the church; he waits his time --he watches his
   opportunity. When he sees the mind taking a wrong direction, he
   soothes, flatters, stimulate. Solemn thought for us all!

   THE PELAGIAN HERESY

   The condition of the church in the beginning of the fifth century gave
   the adversary an opportunity to bring in a new heresy, which introduced
   a fresh controversy that has continued with more or less violence from
   that day even until now. This was Pelagianism. The great heresy,
   Arianism, which had hitherto agitated the church, originated in the
   East and related to the Godhead of Christ; now one was to arise in the
   West, which had for its subject the nature of man after the fall and
   his relations to God. The last misrepresented the lost sinner, the
   first, the divine Saviour.

   Pelagius is said to have been a monk of the great monastery of Bangor,
   in Wales, and probably the first Briton who distinguished himself as a
   theologian. His real name was Morgan. His follower, Celestius, is
   supposed to have been a native of Ireland. Angustine speaks of him as
   younger than Pelagius --bolder and less crafty. These two companions in
   error visited Rome, where they became intimate with many persons of
   ascetic and saintly reputation, and disseminated their opinions with
   caution and in privacy; but after the siege in the year 410 they passed
   into Africa, where they more openly advanced their opinions.

   It does not appear that Pelagius was animated by any desire to form a
   new doctrinal system, but rather to oppose what he considered moral
   indolence, and a worldly spirit among his brethren. Hence he maintained
   that man possessed inherent power for doing the will of God, and for
   reaching the highest degree of holiness. In this way his theological
   views were to a great extent formed and determined. But utterly false
   as they are, they were only consistent with his rigid asceticism, and
   its native fruit. As scripture undeniably refers all good in man to the
   grace of God, Pelagius too, in a sense of his own, acknowledges this;
   but his ideas of divine grace were really nothing more than outward
   means to call forth man's efforts: a work of heavenly grace in the
   heart, and the operations of the Holy Spirit he did not think were
   needed. This led him to teach that the sin of our first parents had
   injured no one but themselves; that man is now born as innocent as Adam
   was when God created him, and possessed of the same moral power and
   purity. These doctrines, and such as are connected with them,
   especially the idea of man's free will --"an unbiased power of choosing
   between good and evil," Pelagius and his colleague, Celestius, secretly
   disseminated in Rome, Sicily, Africa, and Palestine; but, excepting in
   the East, the novel opinions were generally condemned. There, John,
   bishop of Jerusalem, who considered the doctrines of Pelagius as
   agreeing with the opinions of Origen, to which John was attached,
   patronized Pelagius, allowing him to profess his sentiments freely, and
   to gather disciples. [73]

   AUGUSTINE AND DIVINE GRACE

   AUGUSTINE the famous bishop of Hippo, the great evangelic light of the
   West, and the most influential of all the Latin Christian writers,
   began about this time to assail with his pen the doctrines of Pe1agius
   and Celestius; and to him chiefly is due, as God's instrument, the
   credit of checking the growth of this sect at that time. By a
   remarkable conversion, and by deep exercise of soul, he had been
   trained under the Lord's discipline for this great work. Thus did the
   all-wise God secretly raise up a testimony in opposition to Pelagius,
   and by means of his heresy, bring out more scriptural views of the
   gospel of grace than had been taught since the days of the apostles;
   and also fuller views of Christian truth, holiness and humility. The
   Western churches, led on by Augustine, continued perseveringly to
   assail the false doctrines with councils, books, and letters. The Gaul,
   the Britons, and even the Palestinians, by their councils, and the
   Emperors by their laws and penalties, so far crushed the controversy in
   its commencement; but the fundamental principles of Pelagianism in many
   forms and degrees remain to the present time. Rather, however, than
   pursue the history of this heresy, we will briefly refer to what the
   scriptures teach on the two main points of the subject.

   REFLECTIONS ON THE CONDITION

   OF MAN AND THE GRACE OF GOD

   If mere human reason were allowed in this controversy, it must be
   interminable; but if the authority of the word of God were owned, it is
   soon settled. That there is something good in fallen human nature, and
   that man, as such, has power to choose what is good and reject what is
   evil, lies at the root of Pelagianism in its numerous forms. The total
   ruin of man is denied, and all ideas of divine grace that appear
   inconsistent with man's free will are excluded from their system. But
   what does the scripture say? A single line of God's word satisfies the
   man of faith. And this ought to be the only argument of the teacher,
   the evangelist, and the private Christian. We must always take the
   ground of faith against all adversaries.

   In Genesis 6, God gives His estimate of fallen human nature. "And GOD
   saw that the wickedness of man was great in the earth, and that every
   imagination of the thoughts of his heart was only evil continually?"
   God could find nothing in man but evil, and evil without cessation.
   Again, in the same chapter, we read, "And God looked upon the earth,
   and, behold, it was corrupt; for all flesh had corrupted his way upon
   the earth." Not some flesh, observe, but all flesh had corrupted his
   way upon the earth. Here we have God's judgment of corrupt nature; but
   at the same time, He reveals His sovereign grace to meet the condition
   of man as thus judged. God provides an ark of salvation, and then sends
   forth the free invitation, --"Come thou and all thy house into the
   ark." The cross is the standing witness, and the grand expression, of
   the great truths shadowed forth by the ark. There we have in a way, as
   nowhere else, God's judgment of human nature with all its evil; and at
   the same time, the revelation of His love and grace in all their
   fullness and saving power. [74]

   But all scripture is consistent with Genesis 6 and the cross of Christ.
   Take, for example, Romans 5 and Ephesians 2. In the former we are said
   to be "without strength," but in the latter, that we are "dead," dead
   in trespasses and sins. The apostle, in an earlier part of his Epistle
   to the Romans, most carefully proves the ruin of man and the
   righteousness of God; here we have His love displayed in the great fact
   of the death of Christ for us. "For when we were yet without strength,
   in due time Christ died for the ungodly." But why say the "due time"?
   Because man had been fully proved to be not only "ungodly," but
   "without strength" to do one good thing God-ward, or move one-step in
   that direction. Under the law God showed man the way, appointed means,
   and gave him a long trial; but he was powerless to come out of his sad
   condition as a sinner. How humbling, but how wholesome, the truth of
   God! It is good to know our lost condition. How different from the
   false theology, and the proud philosophy of men! But on God's part,
   blessed be His name, man's state (so demonstrated) was just the
   opportunity for the manifestation of His saving grace, and for such
   Jesus died. "God commended his love toward us, in that, while we were
   yet sinners, Christ died for us." Now man has to do either with God's
   judgment in unbelief, or with His salvation by faith. There is no
   middle path. The fullest proof of our lost condition and of God's
   gracious love is, "that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us."
   (Romans 5:6 - 10)

   In Ephesians 2 it is not merely a question of man's moral disease, but
   of his death. "You hath he quickened, who were dead in trespasses and
   sins." In Romans man is viewed as powerless, godless, a sinner, and an
   enemy; here, as morally dead: and this is the worst kind of death, for
   it is the very spring of the most active wickedness. "Wherein in time
   past ye walked according to the course of this world, according to the
   prince of the power of the air, the spirit that now worketh in the
   children of disobedience." What a blow to man's boasted unbiassed power
   of choosing between good and evil! Here, on the contrary, he is viewed
   as under the government of demons --as the slave of Satan. Man will
   much more readily admit that he is godless than that he is powerless.
   He will boast of having his own opinion --of being independent and
   quite able to judge and choose for himself in spiritual things.

   It was one of the favorite dogmas of Pelagius, if not the foundation of
   his system, "That as man has ability to sin, so has he also not only
   ability to discern what is good, but likewise power to desire it and to
   perform it. And this is the freedom of the will, which is so essential
   to man that he cannot lose it." We refer to this false notion, simply
   because it so cleaves to the natural mind, and is most difficult to get
   rid of even after we are converted, being always a great hindrance to
   the work of God's grace in the soul. Since man is dead in his sins, God
   and His own work must be everything. Of course there is great variety
   amongst men naturally, when they are "fulfilling the desires of the
   flesh, and of the mind." Some are benevolent and moral, some living in
   gross and open wickedness, and some may be gratifying a kind and
   feeling heart: but from what motive? To do the will of God? Certainly
   not! God is not in all their thoughts. They are energized by the spirit
   of Satan, and driven by him according to the course of this world. "No
   man can serve two masters; for either he will hate the one, and love
   the other; or else he will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye
   cannot serve God and mammon." (Luke 16:13)

   HOW IS MAN RESPONSIBLE?

   But where, it may be asked, and in what way does man's responsibility
   come in? Surely man is responsible to own that God is true, and to
   accept as just, however humiliating, His judgment of his nature and
   character. "If we receive the witness of men, the witness of God is
   greater." Take up the dark picture, which God has drawn of man, and
   say, "That is myself, that is what I have done and what I am."
   Salvation is by faith, not by willing, choosing, doing, but by
   believing. "For God so loved the world, that he gave his only begotten
   Son, that whosoever believeth in him should not perish, but have
   everlasting life. For God sent not his Son into the world to condemn
   the world, but that the world through him might be saved. And this is
   the condemnation that light is come into the world; and men loved
   darkness rather than light, because their deeds were evil." (John 3:16
   - 19)

   Who can fail to see that this display of divine goodness in Christ, and
   that of the most obvious, solemn, and weighty character creates a
   responsibility on the part of man? Indeed so much so, that the evidence
   is decisive and final, and the unbeliever is judged before God. Notice
   it is not a question of their not finding forgiveness, but of their
   preferring darkness to light, that they may continue in sin. This is
   what God lays to their charge, and could there be a more just or
   reasonable ground of condemnation? Impossible. May it be the happy lot
   of all who read these pages to bow to the humiliating sentence of
   scripture upon our nature, and to take the ground of lost sinners in
   the sight of God. So shall an all-merciful and gracious God meet us in
   the greatness of His love, and bless us with all that is due to Christ
   as the Saviour of mankind.

   THE NESTORIANS

   As the sect, called Nestorians, occupies an important place in church
   history, we must briefly notice its formation. They are sometimes
   called Syrians, their founder being a Syrian. They are numerous, we
   believe, in Syria at the present time, but they have not received from
   the Turkish government that protection to which they are entitled; and
   hence they have been exposed to frequent assaults from the predatory
   tribes. Thousands of the Nestorians in the mountains of Kurdistan,
   including men, women, and children, were massacred in 1843, and their
   villages utterly destroyed, by the Kurdish tribes. Since the year 1834
   the American Board of Foreign Missions has established an interesting
   mission among them. The character and proceedings of the mission are
   highly spoken of. Dr. Grant, one of the missionaries, who resided among
   the Nestorians for a considerable time, and had studied their manners
   and customs with the greatest minuteness and care, published a treatise
   with the view of proving that this interesting class of people may be
   the descendants of the lost ten tribes of Israel. But his conclusions,
   like others on the same subject, may well be doubted. [75]

   NESTORIOUS, a Syrian monk, became a presbyter of the church at Antioch.
   He was esteemed and celebrated on account of the rigid austerity of his
   life, and the impressive fervor of his preaching. He attracted large
   and attentive audiences, and soon became a great favorite with the
   people. In the year 428 he was consecrated patriarch of Constantinople.
   But the discipline of the cloister had ill prepared him for so
   important a position in public life. No sooner was he promoted to this
   elevation than he began to display an intemperate zeal against the
   various descriptions of heretics, which partook more of the bigotry of
   the monk than of the gentle forbearing spirit of genuine Christianity.
   In his inaugural discourse, addressing the Emperor, Theodosius the
   younger, he gave utterance to these violent expressions, "Give me a
   country purged of all heretics, and in exchange for it I will give you
   heaven. Help me to subdue the heretics, and I will help you to subdue
   the Persians." But it was not long till Nestorius himself was also
   accused of heresy.

   The new bishop soon followed up his declaration of war against the
   heretics by deeds of violence and persecution. He excited tumults among
   the people: the Arians were attacked, their meetinghouse burnt down;
   and other sects were persecuted. Such proceedings, however, soon raised
   up against Nestorius, even amongst the orthodox, a numerous host of
   enemies, who sought and soon accomplished his downfall. It happened in
   this way.

   ANASTASIUS AND MARIOLATRY

   ANASTASIUS, a presbyter who had accompanied Nestorius from Antioch, and
   was his intimate friend, attacked, in a public discourse, the use of
   the expression, Mother of God, as applied to the Virgin Mary. The term
   thus violently opposed had on its side the authority of ancient usage,
   and many names of great weight with the people. Nestorius approved the
   discourse, supported his friend, and in several addresses explained and
   defended his attack. Many were pleased with these discourses, and many
   were stirred up against Nestorius and his friend: the excitement at
   Constantinople was immense; but the cry of heresy, heresy, arose, and
   the flames of a great and painful controversy were kindled.

   THE DIFFERENCE BETWEEN NESTORIUS AND HIS OPPONENTS

   Never was there a doctrinal strife in which the contending parties
   approximated so closely. Both subscribed, both appealed to, the Nicene
   creed: both believed in the absolute Godhead and the perfect manhood of
   the Lord Jesus but it was inferred by the enemies of Nestorius,
   especially by Cyril, that he was unsound as to the incarnation from his
   objecting to the term, "mother of God." The meaning or import of the
   disputed term, as used by the doctors in the preceding century, was not
   to imply that the Virgin communicated the divine nature to the Saviour,
   but to affirm the union of Godhead and manhood in one Person --that
   "the child born, the son given," was God incarnate. It was attributed
   to Nestorius, that he maintained the mere humanity of the Redeemer, and
   that the Spirit only dwelt in Him after He became a man, as of old in
   the prophets. But Nestorius, as long as he lived, professed himself
   utterly opposed to such sentiments. Nor does it appear that such
   sentiments were ever directly made by him, but only inferred by his
   adversaries from his rejection of the epithet, Mother of God, and from
   some incautious and ambiguous terms, which he used in his public
   discourses on the subject.

   CYRIL AND ORTHODOXY

   CYRIL, bishop of Alexandria, in the controversy, which had thus arisen,
   appears as the great champion of orthodoxy. But all historians agree in
   giving him a most unchristian like, imperious, character. He is accused
   of being moved with jealousy because of the increasing power and
   authority of the bishop of Constantinople; and of being restless,
   arrogant, and unscrupulous in his ways. He was also as violent against
   the heretics, as Nestorius. He persecuted the Novatianists, and
   expelled the Jews from Alexandria. An honest and pious zeal may have
   animated these great prelates, but the zeal utterly failed in uniting
   Christian prudence and moderation, and too readily allied with it the
   worst passions of human nature.

   Cyril was first drawn into the controversy by finding that copies of
   Nestorius' sermons had been circulated among his monks in Egypt, and
   that they had abandoned the term, Mother of God. He at once blamed both
   the monks and Nestorius, and denounced the novelty as heretical. All
   parties were soon excited, and angry words were used by all parties;
   words which need not now be repeated. Suffice it to say, that when
   Nestorius found that Cyril had skillfully managed to secure the
   influence of Celestine, bishop of Rome, and that he was beset with
   other difficulties, he appealed to a general council. As some of his
   opponents had already petitioned for such an assembly, it was agreed
   to, and the Emperor Theodosius issued orders for the meeting of one at
   Ephesus in the year 431, which was called the THIRD GENERAL COUNCIL.
   They met in June. Cyril, in virtue of the dignity of his see, presided.
   Matters went against Nestorius. He was condemned as guilty of
   blasphemy, deprived of the episcopal dignity, cut off from all part in
   the priesthood, and sent into banishment, in which he closed his days
   about the year 450.

   About two hundred bishops signed the sentence against Nestorius; still
   it remains a question with most historians, whether he was really
   guilty of holding the errors for which he was condemned. But all are
   agreed that he was rash and intemperate in his language, vain of his
   own eloquence, disregarded the writings of the earlier Fathers, and was
   apt to see heresy in everything that differed from the dogmatic
   phraseology which he had been accustomed to in his youth. But it is
   difficult to determine which was the principal cause of this great
   contest, Cyril or Nestorius. [76]

   THE CLOSE OF THE PERGAMOS PERIOD

   The council of Ephesus was far from putting an end to these disgraceful
   contentions; in place of restoring harmony to the church, it rather
   increased her troubles. John, bishop of Antioch, and other Eastern
   prelates, judged Cyril and his friends to have acted most unfairly and
   with unbecoming haste in the matter of Nestorius: hence arose a new
   controversy, and out of this sprang a new heresy --Eutychianism --which
   greatly troubled the Eastern churches for about twenty years.

   EUTYCHES, abbot of a convent at Constantinople, in the eagerness of his
   opposition to Nestorianism, ran into the opposite extreme. He was
   accused of unsoundness on the doctrines of the incarnation, and
   denounced as a heretic. This led to another council, which was held at
   Chalcedon in the year 451, and is called, THE FOURTH GENERAL COUNCIL.
   But the details of these local contests fall not within the limits of
   our "Short Papers." Our plan is to give the reader a distinct outline,
   in the smallest space possible; and only to present a few details in
   cases where the name of the person has become a synonym for the
   opinions he taught; such as Arius, Pelagius, etc., or when the events,
   such as the great persecutions, have a claim on the sympathy of the
   church throughout all ages.

   In carrying out these purposes, it will now be necessary to turn our
   attention more especially to the growing power and the lofty
   pretensions of the Church of Rome. In Leo the Great we may see the
   passing away of the Pergamos period, and the approach of the papal
   monarchy. But before venturing on these troubled waters, we shall do
   well to study our divine chart --God's prophetic history of the church
   during that dark and often stormy period.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [61] The Inquirer, 1839, p. 232.

   [62] See Dr. Wall's History of Infant Baptism. We quote from his
   translation of the Fathers. Having received the thanks of the clergy of
   the lower house of Convocation, and the honour of D.D. from the
   University of Oxford, for his great work in defence of infant baptism,
   we may rely on his quotations as, in the main, correct, and as the most
   favourable to his object.

   [63] Hooker's Ecclesiastical Polity, book 5. 59 - 60. Burnet on the
   Articles, Art. 27.

   [64] Then, by the Reformers, and afterwards by the Puritans, an effort
   was made to find scripture for what the Church of Rome had held as
   tradition; the Protestants went to the Bible for everything, the
   Catholics to the Fathers.

   [65] Gale's Reflections of Wall's History, vol. 3, p. 84.

   [66] General Church History, vol. 3, p. 310. See also History of the
   Church by James Craigie Robertson, vol. 1, page 295.

   [67] Robertson, vol. 1, p. 296; Neander, vol. 3, p. 317; Gardner's
   Faiths of the World, vol. 2, p. 473.

   [68] Waddington, vol. 2, p. 252.

   [69] Gardener's Faiths of the World.

   [70] Encyclopedia Britannia. Volume 19: p. 420. White's Eighteen
   Christian Centuries, p. 94.

   [71] See The Church and the World, 1866.

   [72] Ecclesiastical History. Vol. 1. p. 366 Murdock and Soames
   Robertson. Vol. 1, p. 316.

   [73] "The fundamental error of the monk Pelagius was the denial of our
   total corruption by sin derived from Adam, and met only by the death
   and resurrection of the second Man, the last Adam, Jesus Christ. Hence
   he asserted liberty as now true of all men, not merely in the sense of
   exemption from external restraint, but of freedom within the nature as
   to good and evil, denying thus in the race internal bondage to sin. So
   he appears to have seen little more in grace, even in its Christian
   application, than pardon for this or that offence, not the impartation
   to the believer of a new nature, in virtue of which he does not
   practice sin, because he is born of God. Thus no room was left in the
   Pelagian scheme for man being lost now on the one side, or for the
   believer being saved now on the other. In fact the race was conceived
   to be in innocence like the primeval state of Adam till each sinned and
   thus fell under guilt and its consequences. The Pelagians denied the
   imputation of Adam's sin, seeing no more than the influence of a bad
   example. As the moral ruin of man was thus enfeebled and the relation
   of the head lost, so on the other hand under grace were reckoned all
   the natural endowments of the human family, as well as the
   supernatural. Hence conscience, law, and Gospel were regarded as
   different methods, as well as advancing stages of righteousness, in
   every case the means and operations of grace being effectual only
   according to the measure of the tendencies of the will. Again, the
   redemption of Christ became thus, if not an amelioration, certainly an
   exaltation and transfiguration of humanity. Christ Himself was but the
   highest pattern of righteousness, some before Him having perfectly kept
   the moral law, and others since being stimulated by His work, love, and
   example to the evangelical counsels of moral perfection beyond
   law."--W. K.

   [74] For details see Notes on the Book of Genesis, p. 51.

   [75] See Gardner's Faiths of the World, vol. 2, page. 531.

   [76] Landon's Manual of Councils, p. 225; Neander, vol. 4, p.141
   Mosheim, vol. 1, p. 468.
     __________________________________________________________________

Chapter 13

   THE EPISTLE TO

   THE CHURCH IN THYATIRA

   AND unto the angel of the church in Thyatira write: "These things saith
   the Son of God, who hath his eyes like unto a flame of fire, and his
   feet are like fine brass; I know thy works, and charity, and service,
   and faith, and thy patience, and thy works; and the last to be more
   than the first. Notwithstanding I have a few things against thee,
   because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a
   prophetess, to teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication,
   and to eat things sacrificed unto idols. And I gave her space to repent
   of her fornication, and she repented not. Behold, I will cast her into
   a bed, and them that commit adultery with her into great tribulation,
   except they repent of their deeds. And I will kill her children with
   death; and all the churches shall know that I am He which searcheth the
   reins and hearts: and I will give unto every one of you according to
   your works. But unto you I say, [and unto] the rest in Thyatira, as
   many as have not this doctrine, and which have not known the depths of
   Satan, as they speak; I will put upon you none other burden. But that
   which ye have already hold fast till I come. And he that overcometh,
   and keepeth my works unto the end, to him will I give power over the
   nations: and he shall rule them with a rod of iron; as the vessels of a
   potter shall they be broken to shivers even as I received of my Father.
   And I will give him the morning star. He that hath an ear let him hear
   what the Spirit saith unto the churches." (Revelation 2:18 - 29)

   It requires but little spiritual discernment, we think, and a very
   moderate acquaintance with ecclesiastical history, to see the popery of
   the middle ages foreshadowed in this epistle. We saw in Ephesus the
   decline of first love, in Smyrna persecution from the Roman power, in
   Pergamos Balaam seducing the church and uniting her to the world; but
   things are even worse in Thyatira. Here we have the sad but natural
   consequences of this unhallowed union. How could it be otherwise, when
   all who merely submitted to the outward rite of baptism were regarded
   as born of God? The door was thus thrown open for the spoiler and the
   corrupter to enter the sacred enclosure of the church of God. All
   testimony was now gone as to her heavenly character and her place of
   separation from the world. She had falsified the word of the Lord,
   which says of His disciples, "They are not of the world, even as I am
   not of the world." True, in appearance, Christianity had gained a
   victory. The cross was now arrayed in gold and precious stones; but
   this was the glory of the world, not of a crucified Christ. It was the
   world really that gained the victory, and the humiliation of the church
   was completed.

   The Lord foreknew the fearful consequences of such a state of things.
   His eye saw the corruptions, the idolatries, and the persecutions of
   the so-called dark ages, of which the church in Thyatira was a
   remarkable foreshadowing. We will now glance briefly at the contents of
   the epistle.

   1) The titles of the Lord are first to be noticed. They are full of the
   most suited instruction for the faithful few, when the general body of
   Christians is identified with this world. He introduces Himself as the
   Son of God, who has eyes like unto a flame of fire, and His feet like
   unto fine brass. When Peter confessed Jesus to be the Christ, the Son
   of the living God, He immediately added, "Upon this rock I will build
   my church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it." And
   now, in anticipation of all that was coming, He recalls the thoughts of
   His people to that immutable foundation on which the church is built.
   He also assumes the attributes of divine judgment. Fire is the symbol
   of penetrating judgment; eyes like unto a flame of fire, of
   all-searching judgment; and feet like burnished brass, of impending
   judgment.

   Here then we have, in the character, which the blessed Lord takes, the
   assurance of the perfect security of the faithful remnant, and the
   assertion of the unfailing judgment of the false prophetess, and her
   numerous broods of corrupt children --children of her seduction and
   corruption. Jezebel was not only a prophetess but a mother: she not
   only seduced God's people by her false doctrines, slaying many of them
   also; but a large class of the worst of men derived their existence
   from her corruption. This is painfully manifest all through the dark
   ages --the Jezebel-state of the church. She established herself within
   the church as in her own house, and published to all the world that she
   was infallible and to be implicitly obeyed in all matters of faith. To
   acquiesce in this blasphemous assumption was unfaithfulness to Christ;
   to oppose it was suffering and death.

   2) As the pretensions of Rome waxed louder and louder, and the darkness
   grew thicker and thicker, many of the saints of God became more and
   more devoted to Christ and His claims. What is due to Christ must ever
   be the watchword of the Christian, not what is due to those in high
   stations. There seems to have been a spiritual energy displayed at this
   time, which rises above all that had been seen since the days of the
   apostles. This is grace --the marvellous grace of God to His real
   saints in a most trying time. It is the silver line of His own love,
   which is so precious in His sight. We may not always be able to trace
   it in ecclesiastical history, but there it is, and there it shines to
   the eye and the heart of God in the midst of abounding iniquity. This
   is to be noted, and always to be remembered, as most encouraging to the
   Christian when placed in circumstances of trial. Hear what the Lord
   Himself says --"I know thy works, and charity, and service, and faith,
   and thy patience, and thy works; and the last to be more than the
   first." Here we have love, faith, and hope, in lively exercise, the
   three great foundation principles of sound practical Christianity; and
   the last works to be more than the first. We have not met with such a
   faithful testimony, or such a measure of devotedness, since the early
   days of the church in Thessalonica. It may be, however, that the
   surrounding wickedness made their faithfulness all the more precious to
   the heart of the Lord, and led Him to praise them more. But no heart
   that beats true to Himself in an evil day is unknown, unnoticed, or
   un-rewarded.

   3) But though the Lord loves to praise what He can in His people, and
   notice the good things before He speaks of the evil things, He is also
   quick-sighted in detecting their failures. They were in danger of
   tampering with the false doctrine and with the false religious system
   of Jezebel; so He says: "I have a few things against thee, because thou
   sufferest that woman Jezebel, which calleth herself a prophetess, to
   teach and to seduce my servants to commit fornication, and to eat
   things sacrificed unto idols." (Verse 20) Notwithstanding the
   faithfulness of many earnest souls in Thyatira, (or, in the medieval
   church) there was the public allowance of the spirit of evil: "Thou
   sufferest that woman Jezebel." This was the dark shade on the silver
   line: sometimes the latter seems completely obscured. But the Lord did
   not fail, as of old, to raise up suited witnesses for Himself. Just as
   there were saints in Cæsar's household, an Obadiah in the house of
   Ahab, and a faithful remnant in Israel who had not bowed the knee to
   Baal, so the Lord was never left without a faithful witness all through
   the middle ages. Nevertheless there was an allowance of evil in the
   general state of things, which grieved the heart of the Lord and
   brought down His judgments.

   "The woman," it may be well to observe, is used as a symbol of the
   general state; "the man," it is said, is a symbol of responsible
   activity. Balaam and Jezebel are symbolic names --a prophet and
   prophetess. The former acted as a seducer among the saints: the latter
   established herself within the professing church, and pretended to have
   absolute authority there. This was going much farther than even the
   wickedness of Balaam. But we all know what Jezebel was when she sat as
   queen in Israel. Her name has come down to us as swathed in cruelties
   and blood. She hated and persecuted the witnesses of God; she
   encouraged and patronized the idolatrous priests and prophets of Baal;
   she added violence to corruption: all was ruin and confusion. And this
   is the name, which the Lord has chosen to symbolise the general state
   of the professing church during the middle ages. In Thyatira He, whose
   eyes were as a flame of fire, could see the germ of that which was to
   bear such evil fruit in after days, and so warns His people to hold
   fast that which they have already, even Himself. "I will put upon you
   none other burden; but that which ye have already, hold fast till I
   come." As the Jezebel state continues to the end and can never get
   right, the Lord now directs the faith of the remnant to His own return
   --"Till I come." The bright hope of His coming is thus presented as a
   comfort to the heart in the midst of the general ruin; and His saints
   are relieved (by the Lord Himself) from vain attempts to set either the
   church or the world right. Most merciful deliverance! But poor human
   nature cannot understand this, and so tries, and tries again, to mend
   matters both in church and state.

   4) We have evidently three classes of persons spoken of in this
   epistle:

   A) The children of Jezebel --these who owe their Christian name and
   place to her corrupt system. Unsparing judgment will overtake all such.
   Space had been given for repentance, but they repented not; therefore
   the full judgment of God falls upon them. "I will kill her children
   with death."

   B) Those who are not her children but make no stand against her; they
   are easy-going. This alas is a large class in our own day. It
   characterises the public state of Christendom. Without conscience
   before God, they are content to float smoothly down the stream, in
   fellowship with some religious system, most agreeable to their own
   minds. As to whether it is agreeable to God's mind, they have never
   inquired. Still they are His children. The judgment of such is "great
   tribulation, except they repent of their deeds."

   C) The faithful remnant, the " overcomers." They are here addressed as
   "the rest" or remnant; they will have power over the nations in
   association with Christ when He comes to reign. In the mean time they
   have this sweet and precious promise: "And I will give him the morning
   star." This is conscious association with Himself even now. The
   medieval church was especially guilty of two things: she arrogantly and
   wickedly sought to possess supreme power over the nations; and she
   persecuted the faithful remnant of the saints, such as the Waldenses
   and others. But the saints, once so persecuted, shall yet possess the
   kingdom, and reign with Christ a thousand years; and the whole system
   of Jezebel shall be utterly and for ever rejected: "Strong is the Lord
   God who judgeth her."

   5) There is only one other thing to notice in this sketch of the public
   state of Christendom since the commencement of the papal system. The
   exhortation to "hear" is placed after the special promise. This marks
   out the remnant as distinct and separate from the general body. In the
   first three churches the warning word --"He that hath an ear, let him
   hear what the Spirit saith unto the churches" --comes before the
   promise; but in the four concluding churches we have the promise before
   the call to hear. The obvious meaning of this change is deeply solemn.
   In the first three the call to hear is addressed to the whole assembly,
   but in the last four only to the remnant. It would seem that none are
   expected to hear but the overcomers. The general professing body seems
   both blind and deaf through the power of Satan and the pollutions of
   Jezebel; fearful condition! We must also bear in mind that the four
   states as represented by the last four churches run on to the end or to
   the coming of the Lord. May He keep us from all that savors of Jezebel
   that we may duly appreciate our oneness with Himself, and His promised
   blessings to the "overcomers".

   Having now briefly examined the divinely drawn picture of the
   Jezebel-state of the church during the dark ages, we turn to the ample
   but dreary records of its history.

   COMMENCEMENT OF

   THE PAPAL PERIOD

   It is generally admitted that this period begins with the pontificate
   of Gregory the Great, 590, and ends with the Reformation in the early
   part of the sixteenth century. But before entering on the general
   history, we will endeavor to answer a question which has been asked,
   and which, we doubt not, is on the minds of many: When, and by what
   means, did the power fall into the hands of the Roman pontiffs, which
   led to their supremacy and despotism during the middle ages? The
   question is an interesting one, but to answer it fully would lead us
   beyond our limits. We can only point out a few facts in the chain of
   events, which laid the foundation of the great power and sovereignty of
   the See of Rome.

   From the time of the famous edict of Milan in 313 the history of the
   church changes in its character. She then passed from a condition of
   distress and persecution to the summit of worldly prosperity and
   honour: other questions besides those of Christianity were henceforth
   involved in her history. Having entered into an alliance with the
   State, her future path was necessarily formed by her new relations. She
   could no longer act simply in the name of the Lord Jesus, and according
   to His holy word. But complete amalgamation there could never be. The
   one was from heaven, and the other of this world. They are, in nature,
   opposed to each other. Either the church aspired to be the mistress of
   the State, or the State encroached on the province of the church and
   disregarded her inherent rights. This was exactly what took place. Soon
   after the death of Constantine the struggle between these two great
   powers, the church and the State, for the government of the world,
   commenced; and, in order to ensure success in this warfare, the Roman
   pontiffs had recourse to ways and means which we will not characterise
   here, as they will come before us in due course.

   Before Constantine transferred the seat of the empire to Byzantium and
   built Constantinople, Rome was the acknowledged metropolis, and her
   bishop the primate. But when Constantinople became the imperial city,
   her bishop was raised to the rank of patriarch, and soon began to lay
   claim to the dignity of the Roman pontiffs. This was the commencement
   of the Greek Church as a separate communion, and of the long contest
   between the East and the West. There were now four patriarchs,
   according to the plan of the Emperor, Rome, Constantinople, Antioch,
   and Alexandria. The rank of the bishop was governed by the superiority
   of the city in which he presided; and as Constantinople was now the
   capital of the world, her bishops would yield to none in honour and
   magnificence. The others were jealous, Rome complained, the strife
   began, the breach widened; but Rome never rested until she had gained
   the ascendancy over her feeble and less ambitious rival.

   THE ADVANTAGES OF ROME

   The court of Constantinople, although it may have encouraged the hopes
   and ambition of the bishops, affected them to govern the church with
   despotic power, and to decide on religious controversies of the gravest
   kind. But in the West it was not so. The Roman pontiff from this period
   showed the independent and aggressive spirit of popery, which rose to
   such heights in after ages. The bishops of the East were thus placed at
   a disadvantage in consequence of their dependence on the court and of
   their quarrels with the emperors. Besides, the presence and grandeur of
   the Eastern sovereign kept the dignity of the bishop in a very
   secondary place. In Rome, there were none left to develop the rank or
   style of the pontiff.

   The withdrawal of the emperors from Rome, as the royal residence, was
   thus favourable to the development of the ecclesiastical power there;
   for, though deserted by her rulers, she was still venerated as the real
   capital of the world. Hence Rome possessed many advantages as the seat
   of the supreme bishop. But that which chiefly pushed on and
   consolidated the power of the Roman See was the growing belief, all
   over Christendom, that St. Peter was its founder. The Roman bishops
   denied that their precedence originated in the imperial greatness of
   the city, but in their lineal descent from St. Peter. This dogma was
   generally received about the commencement of the fifth century.

   By such arguments the Church of Rome established her right to govern
   the universal church. She maintained that Peter was primate amongst the
   apostles, and that the bishops of Rome inherit his primacy. But it may
   be well to notice here, the twofold aspect of Romanism --ecclesiastical
   and political. In both characters she claimed supremacy.

   Ecclesiastically she maintained:

   1) The bishop of Rome is the infallible judge in all questions of
   doctrine.

   2) The bishop of Rome has the inherent right to supreme government in
   assembling general councils, and presiding over them.

   3) The right of making ecclesiastical appointments belongs to the
   bishop of Rome.

   4) Separation from the communion of the Church of Rome involves the
   guilt of schism.

   Politically she claimed:

   She aspired to, and gained preeminence and power over all European
   society as well as all European governments. We shall see abundant
   proof of these particulars in the course of her well-defined history,
   which we will now go on with.

   It was not till after the first council of Nice that the supremacy of
   the Romish bishops was generally allowed. The early bishops of Rome are
   scarcely known in ecclesiastical history. The accession of "Innocent I"
   in the year 402, gave force and definition to this new tenet of the
   Latin Church. Till this time there had been no legal recognition of the
   supremacy of Rome, though she was considered the principal church in
   the West, and had been frequently appealed to by the other great
   bishops for a spiritual judgment in matters of dispute. When the Greek
   church fell into Arianism, the Latin adhered firmly to the Nicene
   creed, which raised her much in the opinion of all the West, "Upon the
   mind of Innocent," says Milman, "appears first to have dawned the vast
   conception of Rome's universal ecclesiastical supremacy; dim as yet
   and, shadowy, but full and comprehensive in its outline."

   LEO THE FIRST,

   SURNAMED THE GREAT

   We may proceed without interruption from the name of Innocent to that
   of Leo, who ascended the chair of St. Peter in the year 440, and
   occupied it for one-and-twenty years. He was remarkable for his
   political skill, theological learning, and great ecclesiastical energy.
   He maintained with the haughtiness of the Roman, and with the zeal of
   the churchman, that all the pretensions and all the practices of his
   church were matters of unbroken apostolical succession. But withal he
   seems to have been sound in the faith as to salvation, and zealously
   opposed to all heretics. The Eastern churches had lost the respect of
   Christendom, from their long and disgraceful controversies. Power, not
   subtleties, was the ambition of Rome. Leo condemned the whole race of
   heretics from Arius to Eutyches; but more especially the Manichaean
   heresy.

   By his great exertions and extraordinary genius he raised the claims of
   the Roman bishop as the representative of St. Peter, to a height before
   unknown. "The apostle" he says, was called Petra, the rock, by which
   denomination he is constituted the foundation. --In his chair dwelleth
   the ever living, the super-abounding, authority. Let the brethren
   therefore acknowledge that he is the primate of all bishops, and that
   Christ, who denieth His gifts to none, yet giveth unto none except
   through him." [77]

   Making due allowance for the character of the times and for official
   and inherited opinions, we believe Leo was sincere in his convictions,
   and probably a Christian. At heart he cared for God's people, and more
   than once, by his prayers and political sagacity, saved Rome from the
   barbarians. When Attila, the most terrible of the foreign conquerors,
   with his countless hosts, was hovering over Italy, ready to fall upon
   the defenceless capital, Leo went forth to the "Destroyer" in the name
   of the Lord, and as the spiritual head of Rome; and so earnestly did he
   pray for his people, that the wild passions of the Hun were soothed,
   and, to the astonishment of all, he agreed to terms by which the city
   was saved from havoc and slaughter. But Leo's main object through life,
   and that which he fully accomplished, was to lay the groundwork of the
   great spiritual monarchy of Rome. During his pontificate he had the
   greatest name in the empire, if not in all Christendom. He died in the
   year 461.

   THE EMPEROR JUSTINIAN

   The name of Justinian is so famous in history, and so connected with
   legislation both civil and ecclesiastical, that it would be unfair to
   our readers to pass it without a notice, though not immediately of the
   Latin Church. He belonged to the East, and rather hindered the rise of
   the West.

   In the year 527 Justinian ascended the throne of Constantinople, and
   occupied it for nearly forty years. The political and military affairs
   of the empire he committed to his ministers and generals, and devoted
   his own time to those things, which he thought more important. He spent
   much of his time in theological studies, and in the regulation of the
   religions affairs of his subjects, such as prescribing what the priests
   and the people should believe and practice. He was fond of mixing in
   controversy and of acting as a lawgiver in religious matters. His own
   faith --or rather, slavish superstition --was distinguished by the most
   rigid orthodoxy, and a large portion of his long reign was spent in the
   extinction of heresy. But this led to many instances of persecution,
   both public and private.

   In the mean time Justinian saw a new field opening for his energies in
   another direction, and immediately turned his attention to it. After
   the death of Theodoric the Great in 526, the affairs of Italy fell into
   a very confused condition, and the new conquerors were far from being
   firmly seated on their thrones. Rousing the national hostility of the
   Romans against the barbarians, the imperial army was united and
   determined; and, led by the able generals Belisarius and Narses, the
   conquests of Italy and Africa were achieved in a very short space of
   time. At the sight of the well-known eagles the soldiers of the
   barbarians refused to fight, and the nations threw off the supremacy of
   the Ostrogoths. The imperial generals now prosecuted an exterminating
   war. It is reckoned that during the reign of Justinian, Africa lost
   five millions of inhabitants. Arianism was extinguished in that region;
   and in Italy the numbers who perished by war, by famine, or in other
   ways, is supposed to have exceeded the whole of its present population.
   --The sufferings of these countries, during the revolutions of this
   period, were greater than they had ever endured in either earlier or
   later times. So that both the secular events of Justinian's reign and
   his own legislative labours had an important, but most unfortunate,
   bearing on the history of Christianity.

   After erecting the church of St. Sophia, and twenty-five other churches
   in Constantinople, and publishing a new edition of his code, he died
   A.D. 565. [78]

   We now pass on to the third great founder of the papal edifice.

   GREGORY THE FIRST,

   SURNAMED THE GREAT, A.D. 590

   We have now come to the close of the sixth century of Christianity. At
   this period the early history of the church ends, and the mediaeval
   begins. The pontificate of Gregory may be regarded as the line that
   separates the two periods. A great change takes place. The Eastern
   churches decline and receive but little notice; while the churches of
   the West, especially that of Rome, largely engage the attention of the
   historian. And as Gregory may be considered the representative man of
   this transitional period, we will endeavour to place him fairly before
   the reader.

   Gregory was born at Rome about the year 540, his family being of
   senatorial rank, and himself the great grandson of a pope named Felix,
   so that in his descent he blended both civil and ecclesiastical
   dignity. By the death of his father he became possessed of great
   wealth, which he at once devoted to religious uses. He founded and
   endowed seven monasteries, six in Sicily, and the other, which was
   dedicated to St. Andrew, in his family mansion at Rome. His costly
   robes, jewels, and furniture, he reduced to money, and lavished it on
   the poor. About the age of thirty-five he gave up his civil
   appointments, took up his abode in the Roman monastery, and entered on
   a strictly ascetic life. Although it was his own convent, he began with
   the lowest monastic duties. His whole time was spent in prayer,
   reading, writing, and the most self-denying exercises. The fame of his
   abstinence and charity spread far and wide. In course of time he became
   abbot of his monastery and, on the death of the pope Pelagius, he was
   chosen by the senate, the clergy, and the people, to fill the vacant
   chair. He refused, and endeavoured by various means to escape the
   honours and difficulties of the papacy; but he was forcibly ordained,
   by the love of the people, as the supreme bishop.

   Drawn from the quiet of a cloister and from his peaceful meditations
   there, Gregory now saw himself involved in the management of the most
   various and perplexing affairs of both Church and State. But he was
   evidently fitted for the great and arduous work, which lay before him.
   We will notice first:

   THE FERVENT CHARITY OF GREGORY

   The character of Gregory was distinguished by the fervour of his
   almsgiving. Though raised to the papal throne, he lived in a simple and
   monastic style. The suffering poor surrounded his palace, as his
   monastery had been, and relief was distributed with a liberal hand. Nor
   was he content to exercise his almsgiving alone; he powerfully exhorted
   his episcopal brethren to abound in the same. "Let not the bishop
   think," he said, "that reading and preaching alone suffice, or
   studiously to maintain himself in retirement, while the hand that
   enriches is closed. But let his hand be bountiful; let him make
   advances to those who are in necessity; let him consider the wants of
   others as his own; for without these qualities the name of bishop is a
   vain and empty title."

   The wealth of the Roman See enabled him to exercise extensive
   charities. As administrator of the papal funds, Gregory has the
   reputation of being just, humane, and most labourious. But his
   biographers are so voluminous in their accounts of his good works that
   it is bewildering to attempt a brief sketch. However, as we can esteem
   him as a believer in Christ, notwithstanding the false position he was
   in, and his consequent blindness as to the true character of the
   church, we delight to dwell a little on his memory, and also to trace
   the silver line of God's grace in spite of the unhallowed mixture of
   secular and sacred things.

   On the first Monday of every month he distributed large quantities of
   provisions to all classes. Persons appointed to inspect every street
   superintended the sick and infirm. Before sitting down to his own meal,
   a portion was separated and sent to the hungry at his door. The names,
   ages, and dwellings of those receiving papal relief filled a large
   volume. So severe was the charity of Gregory, that one day, on hearing
   of the death of a poor man from starvation, he condemned himself to a
   hard penance for the guilt of neglect as steward of the divine bounty.
   But his active benevolence was not confined to the city of Rome; it was
   almost worldwide. He entered into all questions affecting the welfare
   of all classes, and prescribed minute regulations for all, lest the
   poor should be exposed to the oppression of the rich, or the weak to
   the strong. But this will more fully appear as we notice:

   THE ECCLESIASTICAL AND

   TEMPORAL POSITION OF GREGORY

   The pastoral care of the church was evidently the main object and
   delight of Gregory's heart. This he believed to be his work, and fain
   would he have devoted himself entirely to it; for according to the
   superstitious credulity of the times, he had the deepest conviction
   that the care and government of the whole church belonged to him as the
   successor of St. Peter; and also, that he was bound to uphold the
   special dignity of the See of Rome. But he was compelled, from the
   disturbed state of Italy, and for the safety of his people --his dear
   flock --to undertake many troublesome kinds of business, altogether
   foreign to his spiritual calling. The Lombard [79] invaders were at
   that moment the terror of the Italians. The Goths had been to a great
   degree civilised and Romanised; but these new invaders were remorseless
   and pitiless barbarians; though, strange to say, they were the avowed
   champions of Arianism. And the imperial power, instead of protecting
   its Italian subjects, acted only as a hindrance to their exerting
   themselves for their own defence. War, famine, and pestilence, had so
   wasted and depopulated the country, that all hearts failed, and all
   turned to the bishop as the only man for the emergency of the times; so
   firmly was the opinion of his integrity and ability established among
   men.

   Thus we see that temporal power, in the first instance, was forced upon
   the Pope. It does not appear that he sought the position --a position
   so eagerly grasped by many of his successors; but rather that he
   entered with reluctance upon duties so little in accordance with the
   great object of his life. He unwillingly threw off the quiet
   contemplative life of the monk, and entered into the affairs of state
   as a duty to God and to his country. The direction of the political
   interests of Rome devolved for the most part upon Gregory. He was
   guardian of the city, and the protector of the population in Italy
   against the Lombards. All history bears witness to his great ability,
   his incessant activity, and the multiplicity of his occupations as the
   virtual sovereign of Rome.

   But however unconscious Gregory may have been of what the effects would
   be of his great reputation, it nevertheless contributed much to the
   ecclesiastical and secular domination of Rome. The pre-eminence in his
   case, however sorrowful for a Christian, was disinterested and
   beneficially exerted, but not so with his successors. The infallibility
   of the Pope, spiritual tyranny, persecution for a difference of
   opinion, idolatry, the doctrine of the merit of works, purgatory and
   masses for the relief of the dead, which became the discriminating
   marks of the papacy, had not, as yet a settled establishment at Rome;
   but, we may say, they were all in sight.

   We must not, however, pursue this subject farther at present; we turn
   to one more interesting, and more congenial to our minds:

   THE MISSIONARY ZEAL OF GREGORY

   Notwithstanding the depression of the church, and of all classes of
   society, through the inroads of the barbarians, the blessed Lord was
   watching over the spread of the gospel in other countries. And surely
   it was of His great mercy, that the hosts of invaders which poured down
   on the provinces of the empire were soon converted to Christianity.
   They may have had very little understanding of their new religion, but
   it greatly softened their ferocity, and mitigated the sufferings of the
   vanquished. Gregory was most zealous in his endeavours to extend the
   knowledge of the gospel, and to bring over the barbarous nation to the
   Catholic faith. But his favourite scheme, and that which had been long
   on his heart, was the evangelisation of the Anglo-Saxons.

   The beautiful story of the incident, which first directed Gregory's
   mind to the conversion of Britain, is too pleasing not to find a place
   in our "Short Papers." In the early days of his monastic life, at least
   before his elevation to the papacy, his attention was arrested one day
   by seeing some beautiful fair-haired boys exposed for sale in the
   market place. The following conversation is said to have taken place.
   He inquired from what country they came. "From the island of Britain,"
   was the reply. "Are the inhabitants of that island Christians or
   Pagans?" "They are still Pagans." "Alas!" said he, "that the prince of
   darkness should possess forms of such loveliness! That such beauty of
   countenance should want that better beauty of the soul." He then asked
   by what name they were called, "Angles," was the reply. Playing on the
   words, he said, "Truly they are Angels! From what province?" "From that
   of Deira --Northumberland" "Surely they must be rescued deira" --from
   the wrath of God, and called to the mercy of Christ. "What is the name
   of their king?" "Ella," was the answer. Yea! said Gregory, "Alleluia
   must be sung in the dominions of that king."

   "To be the first missionary to this beautiful people," says Milman,
   "and to win the remote and barbarous island, like a Christian Cæsar, to
   the realm of Christ, became the holy ambition of Gregory. He extorted
   the unwilling consent of the Pope; he had actually set forth and
   travelled three days' journey, when the messengers sent to recall him
   overtook him. All Rome had risen in pious mutiny and compelled the Pope
   to revoke his permission." [80] But although he was thus prevented from
   executing this mission in person, he never lost sight of his noble
   object. From this time he was not allowed to return to his monastery.
   He was forced to embark in public affairs, first as a deacon, then as
   supreme pontiff. But all this was compulsory dignity to Gregory. His
   heart was set on the salvation of the fair-haired youths of England,
   and he would a thousand times rather have undertaken a journey to our
   island, with all its hardships and unknown dangers, than be crowned
   with the honours of the papacy. But such was the character of his mind
   that he pursued with unwearied attention and devotion any scheme of
   piety, which he had once planned. Hence it was that, after he was
   raised to the papal chair, he was enabled to furnish and send forth a
   band of forty missionaries to the shores of Britain. But before
   speaking of the character and results of this mission, it will be
   interesting to glance briefly at the history of the church in the
   British Isles from the beginning.

   THE FIRST PLANTING OF

   THE CROSS IN BRITAIN

   Far back in the early days of apostolic simplicity, the cross of
   Christ, we believe, was planted in our island. There is fair historical
   evidence for believing that "Claudia," mentioned by Paul in his Second
   Epistle to Timothy, was the daughter of a British king, who married a
   distinguished Roman named "Pudens." This circumstance will not seem
   unlikely if we bear in mind that, during the whole period of the Roman
   dominion in this country, there must have been many opportunities for
   the spread of Christianity, and that those who loved the Lord Jesus and
   the souls of men would readily embrace these. Besides, it was the
   custom at that time for the British kings and nobles to send their sons
   to Rome for education, and this practice, it is said, prevailed to such
   an extent, that a mansion was established expressly for them, and a tax
   of one penny was levied on every house in England for its support. [81]

   Another witness for the early planting of Christianity in this country
   is the testimony of the Fathers. Justin Martyr, Irenaeus, and
   Tertullian, who wrote in the second century, affirm, that in every
   country known to the Romans there were professors of Christianity
   --from those who rode in chariots, or were houseless, there was no race
   of men amongst whom there were not prayers offered in the name of a
   crucified Jesus. We have also the testimony of later Fathers. The
   historic chain seems to be carried down by the mention of British
   bishops as having attended several of the general councils in the
   fourth century, and the weighty evidence of Athanasius and Hilary has
   attested their orthodoxy throughout the Arian controversy. It is also
   worthy of note that Constantine --who had spent some time with his
   father in Britain --when writing to the churches of the Empire about a
   dispute concerning Easter, quoted the British church as an example of
   orthodoxy. The Pelagian heresy, it is said, was introduced into Britain
   by one Agricola in the year 429, and found much acceptance, but in a
   conference at St. Albans the orthodox clergy defeated the heretical
   teachers. [82]

   THE ANCIENT BRITISH CHURCH

   Although the British church had acquired such credit for orthodoxy, we
   have very little reliable information as to its rise and progress, or
   as to the means by which this was affected. There are many traditions,
   but they are scarcely worth repeating, and are unsuitable for a brief
   history. There is ample evidence, however, that in the early part of
   the fourth century, and at least two hundred years before the arrival
   of the Italian monks, the British church had a complete organization,
   with its bishops and metropolitans.

   According to the testimony of both ancient and modern historians, the
   doctrines and the ritual of the old church were of the simplest
   character compared with the Greek or Roman, though a long way from the
   simplicity of the New Testament. They taught the oneness of the
   Godhead; the Trinity, the divine and human nature of Christ, redemption
   through His death, and the eternity of future rewards and punishments.
   They regarded the Lord's Supper as a symbol, not a miracle; they took
   the bread and wine as our Lord commanded these should be taken --in
   remembrance of Him --and they did not refuse the wine to the laity.
   Their hierarchy consisted of bishops and priests, with other ministers,
   and that a particular service was employed at their ordination.
   Marriage was usual among the clergy. There were also monasteries with
   monks living in them, sworn to poverty, chastity, and obedience to
   their abbot. That churches were built in honour of martyrs; each church
   had many altars; and the priests chanted the service, which was
   performed in the Latin tongue. Disputes were finally settled by
   provincial synods, held twice a year, beyond which, on matters of
   discipline, there was no appeal. So that we see the doctrines of the
   old church were characterised by a true apostolic simplicity, and as an
   institution it was free and unfettered. [83]

   It is matter of unfeigned thankfulness that the early church of our own
   country has left so fair a name behind her, compared with the
   superstitions and corruptions of the East and the West. But, alas! her
   existence as a separate establishment was not of long duration. She
   scarcely survived the middle of the seventh century. Her calamities
   were brought on by three successive steps, and these outside of her own
   jurisdiction --the withdrawal of the Roman troops from Britain; the
   Saxon Conquest; and the Angustinian Mission. We will now briefly glance
   at each step, and its effects.

   We have seen something of the decline and approaching fall of the Roman
   Empire. In consequence of the heavy calamities, which befell the city
   and provinces of Rome, the troops were gradually withdrawn from this
   island for the protection of the seat of dominion. And the Romans,
   finding that they could no longer spare the forces necessary for a
   military establishment in Britain, took their final departure from our
   island towards the middle of the fifth century, and about four hundred
   and seventy-five years after Julius Cæsar first landed on its shores.

   The government then fell into the hands of a number of petty princes,
   who, of course, quarreled. Civil wars, national weakness, and
   demoralization soon followed, with their usual judgments.

   The withdrawal of the Roman troops necessarily exposed the country to
   the inroads of invaders, especially the Picts and Scots. The British
   chiefs, unable to resist these audacious robbers and spoilers, appealed
   in their distress to Rome. "The barbarians," they said, "break through
   our walls, like wolves into a sheep-fold, retire with their booty, and
   return every succeeding year." But however much the Romans might pity
   their old friends, they were now unable to help them. Disappointed of
   aid from Rome, and despairing of their ability to defend themselves
   against the desolating tribes of the North, the Britons turned to the
   Saxons for help. [84]

   THE ARRIVAL OF

   THE SAXONS IN ENGLAND

   About the middle of the fifth century the Saxon ships reached the
   British coast, and under their leaders, Hengist and Horsa, a few
   hundred fierce and desperate warriors disembarked. These famous leaders
   immediately took the field at the head of their followers, and
   completely defeated the Picts and Scots. But the remedy proved worse
   than the disease. One great evil was averted, but another and a greater
   followed. The Saxons, finding the country they had been hired to defend
   possessed a more genial climate than their own, and eager to exchange
   the bleak shores of the North for the rich fields of Britain, invited
   fresh bodies of their country-men to join them; and thus, from being
   the defenders, they became the conquerors and masters of the ill-fated
   Britons. The Angles and other tribes poured in on the country, and
   although the British did not yield without a severe struggle, the Saxon
   power prevailed and reduced the natives to entire submission, or drove
   them to seek shelter in the mountains of Wales, Cornwall, and
   Cumberland. Many emigrated, and some settled in Armorica, now Brittany,
   in the northwest of France.

   But the Saxons and Angles were not only wild warriors they were savage
   merciless pagans. They exterminated Christianity wherever they
   conquered. According to the "venerable Bede," the bishops and their
   people were indiscriminately slaughtered with fire and sword, and there
   was no one to bury the victims of such cruelty. Public and private
   buildings were alike destroyed, priests were everywhere murdered at the
   altar; some who had fled to the mountains were seized, and slain by
   heaps; others, worn out with hunger, surrendered themselves, embracing
   perpetual slavery for the sake of life; some made for regions beyond
   the sea, and some led a life of poverty among mountains, forests, and
   lofty rocks.

   Britain, after this event, relapsed into a state of obscure barbarism,
   was withdrawn from the view of the civilised world, and was sunk down
   to the depths of misery and cruelty; and yet these are the very people
   whom the Lord had laid on the heart of Gregory to win over to Himself
   by the gospel of peace. How could a few poor monks, without fleet or
   army, we may well exclaim, venture on such a shore, far less hope to
   gain the hearts and subdue the lives of such savages to the faith and
   practice of the gospel of peace? It is the same gospel that triumphed
   over Judaism, Orientalism, and Heathenism, and by the same divine
   power, was soon to triumph over the fierce barbarism of the
   Anglo-Saxons. How weak and foolish is the infidelity that questions its
   divine origin, power, and destiny! We will now watch the progress of
   the mission.

   MISSION OF AUGUSTINE TO ENGLAND

   In the year 596, and about 150 years after the arrival of the Saxons in
   Britain, Gregory's famous mission left Italy for our island. A company
   of forty missionary monks, under the direction of Augustine, was sent
   to preach the gospel to the benighted Anglo-Saxons. But hearing of the
   savage character and habits of the people, and being ignorant of their
   language, they became seriously discouraged, and were afraid to
   proceed. Augustine was sent back by the others to entreat Gregory to
   discharge them from the service. But he was not the man to abandon a
   mission of that kind. He had not done it in haste; it was the result of
   much prayer and deliberation. He therefore exhorted and encouraged them
   to go forward, trusting in the living God, and in the hope of seeing
   the fruit of their labours in eternity. He gave them letters of
   introduction to bishops and princes, and secured for them all the
   assistance in his power. Thus animated they pursued their journey, and,
   travelling by way of France, they arrived in Britain.

   The forty-one missionaries, having landed on the Isle of Thanet,
   announced to Ethelbert, king of Kent, their arrival from Rome, and
   their errand with glad tidings of great joy to himself and all his
   people. Circumstances greatly favoured this remarkable mission. Bertha,
   the queen (daughter of Clotaire the First, king of the Franks), was a
   Christian. Her father stipulated in her marriage settlement that she
   was to be allowed the free profession of Christianity, in which she had
   been educated. A bishop attended her court, several in her household
   were Christians, and divine service was conducted after the Romish
   form. The Lord in this instance made use of a woman, as He often did,
   for the propagation of the gospel among the heathen. These favourably
   contrast with the Jezebel class of women, and preserve the silver line
   of God's grace in these dark ages. Bertha was of the house of Clovis
   and Clotilda.

   Ethelbert, influenced by his queen, received the missionaries kindly.
   Augustine and his retinue were allowed to proceed to Canterbury, the
   residence of the king. He consented to an interview, but in the open
   air for fear of magic. The monks approached the royal party in the most
   imposing manner. One of their numbers, bearing a large silver cross
   with the figure of the Saviour, led the procession; the others
   followed, chanting their Latin hymns. On reaching the oak appointed for
   the place of conference, permission was given to preach the gospel to
   the prince and his attendants. The king was then informed that they had
   come with good tidings, even eternal life to those that received them,
   and the enjoyment of the blessedness of heaven forever. The king was
   favourably impressed, and gave them a mansion in the royal city of
   Canterbury, and liberty to preach the gospel to his court and his
   people. They then marched to the city, singing in concert the litany;
   "We pray thee, O Lord, in all thy mercy, that thine anger and thy fury
   may be removed from this city, and from thy holy house, because we have
   sinned. Alleluia."

   By these preparatory steps the missionaries' way was now plain and
   easy. The approval of the monarch inspired his subjects with
   confidence, and opened their hearts to the teachers. Converts, such as
   they were, multiplied rapidly. On the Christmas day of the year 597 no
   fewer, it is said, than ten thousand heathen were gathered into the
   fold of the Catholic Church by baptism. Ethelbert also submitted to
   baptism, and Christianity, in the Romish form, became the established
   religion of his kingdom. This was Rome's first footing in England. She
   now determined on subduing the British church to the papacy, and
   establishing her authority in Great Britain, as she had done in France.
   She set to work in this way.

   ROMISH HIERARCHY

   FORMED IN ENGLAND

   Gregory, on hearing of the great success of Augustine, sent him more
   missionaries, who carried with them a number of books, including the
   Gospels, with church plate, vestments, relics, and the pallium, which
   was to invest Augustine as Archbishop of Canterbury. Gregory also
   directed Augustine to consecrate twelve bishops in his province; and,
   if he should see it advantageous to the propagation of the faith, to
   establish another metropolitan at York, who should then have authority
   to nominate twelve other bishops for the northern districts of the
   island. Such were the rudiments of the English church, and such the
   excessive eagerness of Gregory for ecclesiastical supremacy, that he
   settled a plan of government for places before the evangelist had
   visited them.

   "In the ecclesiastical view of the case," says Greenwood; "the
   Anglo-Saxon church was the genuine daughter of Rome. But, beyond the
   limits of that establishment, no right of parentage can be assigned to
   her within the British islands. A numerous Christian population still
   existed in the northern and western districts, whose traditions gave no
   countenance to the Roman claim of maternity. The ritual and discipline
   of the British, Welsh, and Irish churches differed in many points from
   those of Rome and the Latins generally. They celebrated the Easter
   festival in conformity with the practice of the Oriental churches; and
   in the form of their tonsure, as well as in that of the baptismal rite,
   they followed the same model: differences which of themselves seem
   sufficient to preclude all probability of a purely Latin pedigree."
   [85]

   Augustine, now at the head of a hierarchy composed of twelve bishops,
   immediately made the bold attempt to bring the ancient British church
   under the Roman jurisdiction. Through the influence of Ethelbert he
   obtained a conference with some of the British bishops at a place,
   which from that time was called Augustine's oak, on the Severn. There
   the Roman and the British clergy met for the first time; and
   Augustine's first and imperious demand was, "Acknowledge the authority
   of the bishop of Rome." "We desire to love all men" they meekly
   replied, "and whatever we do for you, we will do for him also whom you
   call the Pope."

   Surprised and indignant at their refusal, Augustine exhorted them to
   adopt the Roman usages as to the celebration of Easter, the tonsure,
   and the administration of baptism, that a uniformity of discipline and
   worship might be established in the island. This they positively
   refused to do. Having received Christianity at first not from Rome but
   from the East, and never having acknowledged the Roman church as their
   mother, they looked upon themselves as independent of the See of Rome.
   A second and a third council were held, but with no better results.
   Augustine was plainly told that the British church would acknowledge no
   man as supreme in the Lord's vineyard. The archbishop demanded, argued,
   censured, wrought miracles; but all to no purpose --the Britons were
   firm. At last he was plainly told that they could not submit either to
   the haughtiness of the Romans, or to the tyranny of the Saxons. Aroused
   to wrathful indignation at their quiet firmness, the angry priest
   exclaimed, "If you will not receive brethren who bring you peace, you
   shall receive enemies who bring you war! If you will not unite with us
   in showing the Saxons the way of life, you shall receive from them the
   stroke of death." The haughty archbishop withdrew, and is supposed to
   have died soon after; (A.D. 605) but his ill-omened prophecy was
   accomplished soon after his decease.

   Edelfrid, one of the Anglo-Saxon kings, still a pagan, collected a
   numerous army, and advanced towards Bangor, the centre of British
   Christianity. The monks fled in great alarm. About twelve hundred and
   fifty of them met in a retired spot, where they agreed to continue
   together in prayer and fasting. Edelfrid drew nearer, and happening to
   see a number of unarmed men, inquired who they were. On being told that
   they were the monks of Bangor, who had come to pray for the success of
   their countrymen, "Then," he cried; "although they have no weapons,
   they are fighting against us;" and he ordered his soldiers to fall upon
   the praying monks. About twelve hundred, it is said, were slain, and
   only fifty escaped by flight. Thus the dominion of Rome commenced in
   England, which continued for nearly a thousand years.

   Whether Augustine had really anything to do with the murder of the
   monks, it seems hard and is difficult to say. Those who take a strong
   protestant view of the case plainly affirm that his last days were
   occupied in making arrangements for the accomplishment of his own
   threatening. Others, who take an opposite view, deny that there is any
   evidence that he influenced the pagans to the dreadful tragedy. But, be
   that as it may, a dark suspicion must ever rest on the policy of Rome.
   Augustine's own revengeful words, and her whole history, confirm the
   suspicion. Such was the nature of the intolerant Jezebel --when
   argument failed, she appealed to the sword. Henceforth Romanism was
   characterised by arrogance and blood. The ancient church of Britain,
   which was limited to the mountainous districts of Wales, gradually
   diminished and died away. [86]

   REFLECTION ON AUGUSTINE'S MISSION AND GREGORY'S CHARACTER

   Some historians speak of Augustine as a devout Christian, and his
   missionary enterprise as one of the greatest in the annals of the
   church. But, without wishing to detract in the least degree from the
   greatness of the man or his mission, we must not forget that scripture
   is the only true standard of character and works. There we learn that
   the fruit of the Spirit is "love, joy, peace, long-suffering,
   gentleness, goodness, faith, meekness, temperance." And certainly the
   great churchman did not manifest towards his brethren, the British
   Christians, the grace of love, peace, or conciliation; on the contrary,
   he was proud, imperious, haughty, and vainglorious.

   These serious defects in his character were not unknown to Gregory, as
   he says, in a letter addressed to himself: "I know that God has
   performed, through you, great miracles among that people; but let us
   remember that when the disciples said with joy to their divine Master,
   "Lord, even the devils are subject to us through thy name," He answered
   them, "Rather rejoice because your names are written in heaven." While
   God thus employs your agency without, remember, my dear brother, to
   judge yourself secretly within, and to know well what you are. If you
   have offended God in word or deed, preserve those offences in your
   thoughts to repress the vain-glory of your heart, and consider that the
   gift of miracles is not granted to you for yourself, but for those
   whose salvation you are labouring to procure. In another letter he
   cautioned him against "vanity and personal pomp;" and reminded him
   "that the pallium of his dignity was only to be worn in the service of
   the church, and not to be brought into competition with royal purple on
   state occasions."

   He was most unsuited for a mission, which required patience, and a
   tender consideration of others. The British church had existed for
   centuries; her bishops had taken part in great ecclesiastical councils
   and signed their decrees. The names of London, York, and Lincoln are
   found in the records of the Council of Arles (A.D. 314), so that we
   cannot but respect in the Britons their desire to adhere to the liturgy
   transmitted from their ancestors, and to resist the foreign assumption
   of the spiritual supremacy of Rome. Augustine utterly failed to profit
   by the lessons of humility which he received from his great master, and
   has fewer claims upon our esteem and admiration.

   The great prelate, like his great missionary, did not long survive the
   spiritual conquest of England. Worn out at length by his great labours
   and infirmities, he died in the year 604, assuring his friends that the
   expectation of death was his only consolation, and requesting them to
   pray for his deliverance from bodily sufferings.

   The conduct of Gregory, during the thirteen years and six months that
   he was bishop of Rome, displays a zeal and sincerity, which have
   scarcely been equalled in the history of the Roman church. He was
   labourious and self-denying in what he believed to be the service of
   God, and in his duty to the church and to all mankind. The collection
   of his letters, nearly eight hundred and fifty in number, bears ample
   testimony to his ability and activity in all the affairs of men, and in
   every sphere of life. "From treating with patriarchs, kings, or
   emperors on the highest concerns of Church and State, he passes to
   direct the management of a farm, or the relief of some distressed
   petitioner in some distant dependence of his See. He appears as a pope,
   as a sovereign, as a bishop, as a landlord. He takes measures for the
   defence of his country, the conversion of the heathen, the repression
   and reconciliation of schismatics." [87]

   But notwithstanding the varied Excellencies of Gregory, he was deeply
   infected with the principles and spirit of the age in which he lived.
   The spirit of Jezebel was evidently at work, though yet in its youth.
   We look in vain for anything like Christian simplicity in the church of
   God at this time. The piety of Gregory himself we cannot doubt; but, as
   an ecclesiastic, what was he? Poisoned to the heart's core by the gross
   delusion of the universal claims of the chair of St. Peter, he could
   brook no rival, as we see in his determined and bitter opposition to
   the pretensions of John, bishop of Constantinople; and, what was darker
   still, we see the same spirit in his triumphing over the murder of the
   Emperor Maurice and his family by the cruel and treacherous Phocas,
   merely because he suspected Maurice of what he called heresy. It
   appears that Maurice countenanced what Gregory thought the usurpation
   of John in assuming the title of universal bishop. But even to sanction
   such a claim was no small crime in the mind of a Roman pontiff. And so
   it was with Gregory. When the intelligence of the bloody tragedy
   reached him, he rejoiced; it appeared to him in the light of a
   providential dispensation for the deliverance of the church from her
   enemies. The very wellsprings of charity seem to have been dried up in
   the hearts of all who ever sat on a papal throne, towards all
   ecclesiastical rivals. Justice, candor, humanity, and every right
   feeling of Christianity, must yield to the dominant claims of the false
   church. Even Gregory bowed before, and was fearfully corrupted by,
   "that woman Jezebel."

   THE SUPERSTITION AND

   IDOLATRY OF GREGORY

   Ambition, mingled with humility, and superstition, mingled with faith,
   characterised the great pontiff. This strange mixture and confusion was
   no doubt the result of his false position. It is difficult to
   understand how a man of such sound sense could be so debased by
   superstition as to believe in the working of miracles by means of
   relics, and to have recourse to such things for the confirmation of the
   truth of scripture. But, the sad truth is he was blinded by the one
   great absorbing object; the interests of the Church of Rome, in place
   of being devoted to the interests of Christ. Paul could say, "One thing
   I do;" another said, "One thing I know." First, we must know that we
   are pardoned and accepted; then, to do the things that please Christ is
   the high and heavenly calling of the Christian. "That I may know him,
   and the power of his resurrection, and the fellowship of his
   sufferings, being made conformable unto his death . . But this one
   thing I do, forgetting those things which are behind, and reaching
   forth unto those things which are before, I press toward the mark for
   the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus." (Phil. 3) Such
   was, and ever ought to have been, the spirit and breathings of
   Christianity. But what do we find at the close of the sixth century?
   What was the one thing Gregory had in view? Clearly it is not the
   claims of a heavenly Christ, and conformity to Him in His resurrection,
   sufferings, and death. We may safely affirm, that the one great object
   of his public life was to establish beyond dispute the universal
   bishopric of Rome. And to this end, in place of leading souls to
   delight in the ways of Christ, as well as in Himself, which Paul ever
   did, he sought to advance the claims of the Romish See by idolatry and
   corruption. Neither was the spirit of persecution altogether absent.

   Monasticism, under the patronage of Gregory, especially according to
   the stricter rules of Benedict, was greatly revived and widely
   extended. The doctrine of purgatory, respect for relics, the worship of
   images, the idolatry of saints and martyrs, the merit of pilgrimages to
   holy places were either taught or sanctioned by Gregory, as connected
   with his ecclesiastical system; all which we must own to be the
   unmistakable features of the activity of Balaam and the corruption of
   Jezebel.

   But we are now in the seventh century. The dark ages are at hand, and
   dark indeed they are. The papacy begins to assume a definite form. And
   as we have reached in our history the close of one age of Christianity
   and the commencement of another, we may profitably pause for a moment
   and take a general survey of the progress of the gospel in different
   countries.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [77] Greenwood's Cathedra Petri, vol. 1, p. 348.

   [78] Milman, vol. 1, p. 350; J. C. Robertson, vol. 1, p. 473; Milner,
   vol. 2, p. 336.

   [79] The Lombards were a German tribe from Brandenburg. According to
   the popular belief they had been invited into Italy by Justinian to
   serve against the Goths. Their chief, Alboin, established a kingdom,
   which lasted from 568 to 774. Charlemagne dethroned the last king
   Desiderius. As we shall meet them again in connection with our history,
   we give this notice of their origin. --Haydn's Dictionary of Dates.

   [80] Latin Christianity, vol. 1, p. 434.

   [81] For details, see Life of Paul by Conybeare and Howson, and English
   Monasticism by Travers Hill.

   [82] J. C. Robertson, vol. 1, p. 450.

   [83] See English Monasticism by Travers Hill, p. 141; the works of
   Gildas; The Ecclesiastical History of the English Nation by Bede; The
   Ecclesiastical History of Great Britain by Jeremy Collier, vol. 1.

   [84] Encyclopedia Britannica, vol. 5, p. 301.

   [85] Cathedra Petri, book 3, page 215.

   [86] Gardner, vol. 1, p. 391.

   [87] J. C. Robertson, vol. 2, p. 4.
     __________________________________________________________________

Chapter 14

   THE SPREAD OF CHRISTIANITY

   OVER EUROPE

   The ecclesiastical system, which the Italian monks introduced into
   England rapidly spread, and ultimately triumphed. In about a hundred
   years after the arrival of Augustine it was professed and believed
   throughout Anglo-Saxon Britain. The English church, thus founded on the
   Roman model, could not fail to hold a position especially dependent on
   Rome. This union at an early period was promoted and strengthened by
   English monks, nuns, bishops, nobles, and princes, making frequent
   pilgrimages to the grave of St. Peter at Rome. In no country were the
   Roman missionaries more successful than among our Anglo-Saxon
   ancestors, though they were considered the fiercest of the Teutonic
   race. The British clergy, though still adhering to their old ways, and
   disposed to resist foreign assumption, were compelled to seclude
   themselves in the extremities of the land. Romanism now prevailed all
   over England.

   SCOTLAND AND IRELAND appears to have been blessed with Christianity
   about the same time as Britain. By means of soldiers, sailors,
   missionaries, and persecuted Christians from the south, the gospel was
   preached, and many believed. But, as the early religious history of
   these countries is so overlaid with legends, we will only refer to
   names and events that are well authenticated.

   THE FIRST PREACHERS OF CHRISTIANITY IN IRELAND

   PATRICK, the apostle of Ireland, is supposed to have been born about
   the year 372 on the banks of the Clyde. Kilpatrick is said to have
   taken its name from him. His parents were earnest Christians; his
   father was a deacon, and his grandfather was a presbyter. His mother,
   who sought to instil into his heart the doctrines of Christianity, was
   sister to the celebrated Martin, Archbishop of Tours. But the young
   Succath --for such was his original name --was not seriously inclined.
   Some time after, his parents left Scotland and settled in Brittany. At
   the age of sixteen, when Succath and his two sisters were playing on
   the sea-shore, some Irish pirates, commanded by O'Neal, carried them
   all three off to their boats and sold them as captives in Ireland. For
   six years he was employed in keeping cattle.

   During the period of his slavery he endured many and great hardships.
   But his sin had found him out. He became serious and thoughtful. When
   about the age of fifteen, he had committed some great sin which now
   pressed heavily on his conscience both night and day. He prayed often,
   and wept much; indeed such was the inward fervour of his soul, that he
   became insensible to the cold, the rain, and other inconveniences to
   which he was exposed. He now thought of home, of his mother's tender
   words and earnest prayers; and God graciously used the remembrance of
   the gospel to the blessing of his soul. He was born again. "I was
   sixteen years old," he says, "and knew not the true God; but in that
   strange land the Lord opened my unbelieving eyes, and, although late, I
   called my sins to mind, and was converted with my whole heart to the
   Lord my God, who regarded my low estate, had pity on my youth and
   ignorance, and consoled me as a father consoles his children. The love
   of God increased more and more in me, with faith and the fear of His
   name. The Spirit urged me to such a degree that I poured forth as many
   as a hundred prayers in one day. And during the night, in the forests
   and on the mountains when I kept my flock, the rain and snow and frost
   and sufferings, which I endured, excited me to seek after God. At that
   time I felt not the indifference which now I feel; the Spirit fermented
   my heart." [88]

   If these words can be relied upon as flowing from the lips of Succath,
   they present a much purer testimony to the truth of the gospel than we
   ever find in the Church of Rome. They present an exercised soul in
   close quarters with God Himself. The forms and priesthood of Romanism
   destroy this beautiful, personal, direct communion with God and with
   His Christ through the grace and power of the Holy Ghost. But such, no
   doubt, was the Christianity of these British Isles before the papal
   emissaries corrupted it.

   In the course of time Succath gained his liberty, and after travelling
   much and preaching, he returned to his family. But he soon felt an
   irresistible desire to return to Ireland and preach the gospel to the
   pagans, among whom he had found the Saviour. In vain his parents and
   friends sought to detain him. He broke through all hindrances, and with
   a heart full of Christian zeal departed for Ireland. He was now over
   forty years of age, and, according to some writers, had been ordained a
   presbyter, and was now consecrated bishop of the Irish. After this he
   is known as Saint Patrick. He devoted the remainder of his life to the
   Irish, and laboured among them with great effect, though amidst many
   difficulties and dangers. The conversion of Ireland is ascribed to his
   means. The year of his death is uncertain.

   THE MISSIONARY ZEAL OF IRELAND

   The blessed fruits of St. Patrick's labours were abundantly manifested
   in after years. Ireland at this time is described as a kind of elysium
   of peace and piety; and its fame for pure scriptural teaching rose so
   high, that it received the honourable appellation of "the Isle of
   Saints." The labours of the Irish clergy, however, were not confined to
   their own country. Naturally fond of travelling or wandering, and being
   energised by a love for souls, numbers left their native country, as
   missionary bands, under the leadership of a loved and devoted abbot.
   The monasteries, it is generally said, were so filled with pious monks
   at this time, that there was not sufficient room in their own country
   for the employment of their zeal, so that they felt it was their duty
   to exercise their activity in other lands. Thus we see a broad silver
   line of God's grace in that rude people, more distinctly marked than in
   any other part of Christendom. The Lord's name be praised. But let us
   take an example to see its working.

   THE MISSION OF COLUMBA

   COLUMBA, a pious man, of royal descent, and full of good works, became
   deeply impressed with the importance of carrying the gospel to other
   lands. He thought of Scotland, and determined to visit the country of
   the famous Succath. Having communicated his intention to some of his
   fellow Christians, who thoroughly entered into his scheme, the mission
   was agreed upon. About the year 565 Columba, accompanied by twelve
   companions, sailed from the shores of Ireland in an open boat of
   wicker-work, covered with skins; and, after experiencing much tossing
   in their rude little vessel, the noble missionary band reached the
   Western Isles --a cluster of islands off the west coast of Scotland,
   called the Hebrides. They landed near the barren rock of Mull, to the
   south of the basaltic caverns of Staffa, and fixed their abode on a
   small island, afterwards known as Iona, or Icolmkill. There he founded
   his monastery, afterwards so famous in the history of the church.
   Tradition has preserved a point on the coast at which they landed by an
   artificial mound, faintly resembling an inverted boat, fashioned after
   the pattern of the currach, in which the pious monks navigated the sea.
   [89]

   A goodly number of Christians, it is thought, had already found a
   refuge on that barren rock. At that time it must have been almost
   completely isolated from the abodes of men. The waters of the Hebrides
   are so tempestuous that navigation in open boats must have been
   extremely dangerous. The name Iona signifies "the Island of Waves."
   Besides its cross-tides, currents, and headlands, the heavy swell of
   the Atlantic rolls in upon its shores. Of the monks of Iona we shall
   speak by-and-by; but we have not yet done with Ireland.

   COLUMBANUS, another monk of great sanctity, appears to have left his
   cell about sixty years after Columba. He was born in Leinster, and
   trained in the great monastery of Bangor on the coast of Ulster. A
   society of three thousand monks, under the government of its founder,
   Comgal, was fostered in this convent. And the church in Ireland was
   still free; the Church of Rome had not yet enslaved it. They were
   simple and earnest in their Christianity, compared with the lifeless
   forms and the priestly element of the papacy. Neither did the religious
   houses of that period resemble the popish convents of later times.
   Still they had travelled far away from the simplicity of apostolic
   Christianity.

   The word of God was not their only guide. Christianity had not existed
   in the world six hundred years without contracting many corruptions. It
   had passed through many events of very great importance in the history
   of the church. Gnosticism, Monasticism, Arianism, and Pelagianism, were
   giant evils in those early days; but Monasticism was the popular
   institution at the close of the sixth century.

   THE CHARACTERISTICS OF

   A MONK SUPERIOR

   A proficient in the mystic piety of that day was believed to work
   miracles, utter prophecies, and enjoy divine visions. He was surrounded
   with such a fearful sanctity, that none dared to touch the man of God.
   He emerged from his miserable cell as from another world, himself and
   his garments covered with dust and ashes; he boldly rebuked the vices
   of kings, confronted the most cruel of tyrants, threatened the
   overthrow of dynasties, and assumed the lofty tone of superiority over
   all secular dignities.

   Such was Columbanus. With a colony of monks he sailed from Ireland
   about the year 590. He had intended to preach the gospel beyond the
   Frankish dominions; but he landed in Gaul. The fame of his piety
   reached the ears of Guntram, king of Burgundy, who invited him to
   settle in that country. Declining the king's offer, the abbot requested
   permission to retire into some unapproachable wilderness. He
   established himself in the Vosges. For a time the missionaries had to
   endure great hardships. They had often for days no other food than wild
   herbs, the bark of trees, and probably fish from the stream. But by
   degrees they made a favourable impression on the people of the
   neighbourhood. All classes looked on them with reverence. Provisions
   were sent to them, especially by those who were desirous of profiting
   by the prayers of these holy men. The supply was described as
   miraculous. The piety and wonder-working powers of the abbot soon
   gathered numbers around him. Monasteries arose in different places, and
   votaries flocked in to fill them.

   Columbanus presided as abbot over all these institutions. His rule was
   probably that of the Irish Bangor. Although his delight was ever to
   wander in the wild woods, or to dwell for days in his lonely cave, he
   still exercised strict superintendence over all the monasteries, which
   he had formed. He ruled all work, diet, reading, time for prayer, and
   the adjustment of punishment. He at length fell into disputes with his
   neighbours as to the time of keeping Easter. He wrote on the subject to
   Pope Gregory and to Boniface; and placed the church of Jerusalem above
   that of Rome, as being the place of the Lord's resurrection. He
   laboured also in Metz, Switzerland, and Italy; after founding many
   monasteries, he died in Rome A.D. 610.

   The most celebrated follower of the great abbot was his countryman St.
   Gall, who had accompanied him in all his fortunes; but being ill when
   his master passed through Italy, he could not follow him, and was left
   in Helvetia. He afterwards preached to the people in their own
   language, founded the famous monastery, which bears his name, and is
   honoured as the apostle of Switzerland. He died about the year 627.
   From the time of St. Patrick until the middle of the twelfth century
   the church in Ireland continued to assert its independence of Rome, and
   to maintain its position as an active living branch of the church, not
   owning any earthly head. [90] We will now turn to Scotland.

   THE FIRST PREACHERS OF CHRISTIANITY IN SCOTLAND

   About a hundred and fifty years before the famous Columba landed on the
   isle of Iona, St. Ninian, "a most holy man of the British nation," as
   Bede calls him, preached the gospel in the southern districts of
   Scotland. This missionary, like almost all the saints of early times,
   is declared to have been of royal blood. He received his education at
   Rome, studied under the famous Martin of Tours, and, returning to
   Scotland, fixed his principal residence in Galloway.

   If his biographers can be trusted, we are to believe that he went
   everywhere preaching the word, and that the naked savages listened,
   wondered, and were converted. "He hastened about the work to which he
   had been sent by the Spirit, under the command of Christ; and being
   received in his country, there was a great concourse and running
   together of the people, much joy in all, wonderful devotion; the praise
   of Christ everywhere resounded; some took him for a prophet. Presently
   the strenuous husbandman entered the field of his Lord, began to root
   up these things which were badly planted, to disperse those badly
   collected, and destroy those badly built." Thousands, it is said, were
   baptised and joined the army of the faithful.

   He began to build a church of stone on the shores of the Solway, but,
   before it was finished, he received intelligence of the death of his
   friend and patron St. Martin, and piously dedicated the church to his
   honour. This is said to have been the first stone building erected in
   Scotland, and, from its white and glittering appearance compared with
   the log and mud cabins hitherto used, it attracted great attention. It
   was called in Saxon, whithern, or whithorn, from its appearance, and so
   it is till the present day. [91]

   We know nothing of the immediate successors of St. Ninian: down to the
   mission of Columba the history of Christianity in Scotland is little
   known. Doubtless the Lord would keep alive the fire, which He had
   kindled, and preserve and spread the truth of the gospel, which had
   been received by so many. Among the Picts, south of the Grampians,
   Ninian appears to have laboured chiefly and successfully; but with the
   celebrated Columba begins the most interesting period in the ancient
   ecclesiastical annals of Scotland.

   We have already seen Columba and his colony of monks settling down in
   Iona. There he built his monastery, such as it was. And so famous did
   the college of Iona become, that it was considered for many years, nay,
   for centuries, the light of the Western world. Men, eminent for
   learning and piety, were sent forth to found bishoprics and
   universities in every quarter of Europe. For thirty-four years Columba
   lived and laboured on that solitary rock. Occasionally he visited the
   mainland, doing the work of an evangelist among the barbarous Scots and
   Picts, planting churches, and exercising an immense influence over all
   classes; but his great object was training men for the work of the
   gospel at home and abroad. A close and friendly connection would, no
   doubt, be maintained between the North of Ireland and the West of
   Scotland; indeed, at that time they were considered as identical and
   were known by the general appellation of Scots.

   THE IONA MISSIONARIES

   About the close of the sixth, or the beginning of the seventh century,
   missionaries began to issue from the cloisters of Iona carrying the
   light of Christianity not merely to the different parts of Scotland,
   but to England and the continent. Augustine and his Italian monks
   landed in Kent a little before the famous Aidan from Iona and his monks
   entered Northumberland; thus Christian missionaries invaded Saxon
   England at its two extremities.

   Oswald, then king of Northumbria, was a Christian. He had been
   converted, baptised, and received into the communion of the Scottish
   Church when a youth, and an exile in that country. On recovering the
   throne of his ancestors he naturally desired that his people should be
   brought to the knowledge of the Saviour. At his request the elders of
   Iona sent him a missionary band, headed by the pious and faithful
   Aidan. The king assigned them the island of Lindisfarne for their
   residence. Here Aidan established the system of Iona; and the community
   lived according to monastic rule. Numbers gathered to the new monastery
   both from Scotland and Ireland. The king himself zealously assisted in
   spreading the gospel: sometimes in preaching, and sometimes acting as
   an interpreter, having learnt Celtic during his exile. Bede, though
   strongly Roman in his affections, bears hearty testimony to the virtues
   of these Northern clergy --"Their zeal, their gentleness, their
   humility and simplicity, their earnest study of scripture, their
   freedom from all selfishness and avarice, their honest boldness in
   dealing with the great, their tenderness and charity towards the poor,
   their strict and self-denying life." [92]

   The work of conversion appears to have prospered in the hands of both
   Augustine and Aidan. The Italian monks extended their teaching and
   influence over the south and southwest of the kingdom, while the
   Scottish monks spread the truth of a clearer and simpler gospel over
   the northern, eastern, and midland provinces. At one time, Scotchmen
   filled the sees of York, Durham, Lichfield and London. Thus Rome and
   Iona met on English ground, a collision was inevitable; who would be
   master? Augustine, who had been consecrated primate of England by the
   pope, required the Celtic monks to conform to the Roman discipline;
   this they steadfastly refused to do, and defended with great firmness
   their own discipline and the rules of Iona. Serious disputes now arose.
   Rome could submit to no rival; she was determined to hold England in
   her grasp.

   After the death of the pious and generous Oswald, his brother Oswy, who
   also had been converted to Christianity and baptised in Scotland during
   his captivity, filled the throne. But his princess adhered to the
   customs of Rome, and the family followed the mother. A strong influence
   was thus brought to bear against the Scottish monks; and wearied with
   the continual taunts and unscrupulous conduct of the pontiff s agents,
   both sacred and secular; the unyielding presbyters determined to leave
   England and return to Iona. By far the largest and most important part
   of the country had been converted to Christianity by means of their
   labours; but the triumph of Rome at the Whitby conference in 664,
   through the subtlety of the priest Wilfred, so discouraged them that
   they quietly withdrew from the field after occupation of about thirty
   years. "However holy thy Columba may have been," said the crafty
   Wilfred, "wilt thou prefer him to the prince of the apostles, to whom
   Christ said, Thou art Peter, and I will give unto thee the keys of the
   kingdom of heaven?" King Oswy was present, and professed obedience to
   St. Peter, lest, he said, when I appear at the gate of heaven, there
   should be no one to open it to me. The people soon followed their
   prince, and in a short time all England became subservient to Rome. But
   derision, arguments, or intimidation, had any effect on the presbyters
   of the North. They refused to acknowledge that they owed any allegiance
   to the bishop of Rome. Scotland was still free. How to enslave her was
   now the great question with the Romanists. The priests, as usual, set
   to work with the princes. It was accomplished in this way:

   THE CLERICAL TONSURE

   Amongst the many subjects of dispute between the Celtic and Italian
   missionaries, the true day for the celebration of Easter, and the true
   form of the clerical tonsure, excited the fiercest controversies,
   stirred up the strongest passions, and ultimately led to the fall of
   the Church in Scotland and the triumph of the priests of Rome. But,
   having already spoken of the Easter question in connection with the
   council of Nice, we will only now notice the dispute about the tonsure.

   It must appear strange to our youthful protestant readers, who may
   never have seen a catholic priest with his hat off that the shaving of
   his crown was of more weight in his ordination than either his learning
   or his piety. And the mere form in which it was shaven was considered
   of such importance that it was made a test of orthodoxy. The Scottish
   monks followed the churches of the East both in the observance of
   Easter and in the form of the tonsure. They shaved the fore part of the
   head from ear to ear in the form of a crescent. The Eastern monks
   claimed John and Polycarp as their example and authority. The Italians
   professed to be greatly shocked by such barbarity, and called it the
   tonsure of Simon Magus. The Roman clergy used the circular form. This
   was done by making bald a small round spot on the very crown of the
   head, and enlarging the spot as the ecclesiastic advanced in holy
   orders. The tonsure was made requisite as a preparation for orders
   about the fifth or sixth century.

   Augustine and his successors in the see of Canterbury, following the
   writings of the most ancient and venerable Fathers, affirmed that the
   tonsure was first introduced by the prince of the apostles, in honour
   of the crown of thorns which was pressed upon the head of the Redeemer;
   and that the instrument devised by the impiety of the Jews for the
   ignominy and torture of Christ may be worn by His apostles as their
   ornament and glory. For more than a century the controversy raged with
   great fierceness. So far did matters proceed, that a man was or was not
   a heretic according as he made bare the crown or the fore part of his
   head. Rome was filled with anger; human means appeared insufficient to
   conquer a miserable band of presbyters in a remote corner of the
   island. They refused to bend before her. What was to be done? As
   always, finding herself unable to accomplish her object by the priest,
   she had recourse to court favourites, nobles, and princes. Naitam, king
   of the Picts, was made to believe, that by submitting to the pope he
   would be equal to Clovis and Clotaire. Flattered by such greatness of
   future glory, he recommended all the clergy of his kingdom to receive
   the tonsure of St. Peter. Then without delay he sent agents and letters
   into every province, and caused all the monasteries and monks to
   receive the circular tonsure according to the Roman fashion. Some
   refused. The elders of the rock held out for a time; but the orders of
   the king, the example of the clergy, and the weakness of some amongst
   themselves led the way to the downfall of Iona and all Scotland. About
   the beginning of the eighth century the razor was introduced, they
   received the Latin tonsure; they became serfs of Rome and continued so
   until the period of the Reformation. [93]

   WHO WERE THE CULDEES?

   The Culdees, as their name imports, were a kind of religious recluses,
   who lived in retired places. The Christian community of Iona was called
   Culdees. And that, probably was the reason why, that isolated spot was
   chosen by Columba as the seat of his monastery. Though utterly free
   from the corruptions of the great monasteries on the continent, the
   life and institutions of Columba were strictly monastic. And from
   fragments gathered up it appears pretty certain, that "they gloried in
   their miracles, paid respect to relics, performed penances, fasted on
   Wednesdays and Fridays, had something very like to auricular
   confession, absolution, and masses for the dead; but it is certain they
   never submitted to the decrees of the papacy in regard to celibacy."
   Many of the Culdees were married men. St. Patrick was the son of a
   deacon and the grandson of a priest. [94]

   But though these good and holy men were so far infected by the
   superstition of the times; the remoteness of their situation, the
   simplicity of their manners, and the poverty of their country must have
   greatly preserved them from Roman influences, and from the prevalent
   vices of more opulent monasteries. We would rather think of it as a
   seminary, in which men were trained for the work of the ministry. In
   after years the monks were frequently disturbed, and sometimes
   slaughtered by pirates. In the twelfth century Iona passed into the
   possession of Roman monks. "Its pure and primitive faith," says
   Cunningham, "had departed; its renown for piety and learning was gone;
   but the memory of these survived, and it was now regarded with greater
   superstitious reverence than ever. Long before this it had been made
   the burial-place of royalty, numerous pilgrimages were made to it, and
   now kings and chiefs began to enrich it with donations of tithes and
   lands. The walls which are now crumbling were then reared; and the
   voyager beholds these venerable ecclesiastical remains rising from a
   bare moor in the midst of a wide ocean, with feelings akin to those
   with which he regards the temples of Thebes standing half buried amid
   the sands of the desert."

   We will now take our leave for a while of the British Isles. The first
   planting of the cross in England, Scotland, and Ireland, and the
   ultimate triumph of Rome in these countries are events of the deepest
   interest in themselves; but as happening in our own country they are
   entitled to our special attention. From this time little outward change
   takes place in the history of the church, though there may have been
   many internal struggles from the numerous abuses and the audacious
   demands of Rome.

   THE SPREAD OF CHRISTIANITY

   IN GERMANY AND PARTS ADJACENT

   It is more than probable that the cross was planted, at an early
   period, in the heart of the German forests, as well as in those cities
   and districts, which were in subjection to the Roman Empire. The names
   of several bishops from Germany are found in the lists of the councils
   of Rome and Aries held under the authority of Constantine in the years
   313, 314. But it was not till the close of the sixth and the beginning
   of the seventh century, that it was widely spread and firmly rooted.
   The Britons, Scots, and Irish were honoured of God as the principal
   instruments in this great and blessed work. The ardent Columbanus,
   whose mission we have already noticed, was the leader of the earliest
   band who went to the help of the heathen on the continent of Europe. He
   first crossed over into France, then passed the Rhine, and laboured for
   the conversion of the Swabians, Bavarians, Franks, and other nations of
   Germany. St. Kilian, a Scotchman, and a most devoted evangelist,
   followed him. He is regarded as the apostle of Franconia, and honoured
   as a martyr for his Christian faithfulness about the year 692.
   Willibrord, an English missionary with eleven of his countrymen,
   crossed over to Holland to labour among the Frieslanders, but like
   other Anglo-Saxons of the period, he was warmly devoted to the Roman
   See. He was ordained bishop of Witteburg by the pope; his associates
   spread the gospel through Westphalia and the neighbouring countries.

   But the man, who brought the nations of Germany like a flock of sheep
   under the shepherd of Rome, was the famous Winfrid. He was born at
   Crediton in Devonshire, of a noble and wealthy family, about the year
   680. He entered a monastery in Exeter at the age of seven, and was
   afterwards removed to Nursling in Hampshire. Here he became famous for
   his ability as a preacher, and as an expositor of scripture. He felt
   called of God in early life to go abroad as a missionary to the
   heathen. He sailed to Frisia in the year 716. His labours were long and
   abundant. Three times he visited Rome and received great honours from
   the pope. Under the title of St. Boniface, and as the apostle of
   Germany, he died as a martyr at the age of sixty-five. But though he
   was a most successful missionary, a man of great strength of character,
   of great learning, and of saintly life, he was the sworn vassal of the
   pope and sought rather the advancement of the Church of Rome than the
   extension of the Gospel of Christ. [95]

   THE GREAT PAPAL

   SCHEME OF AGGRANDISEMENT

   The diffusion of Christianity in this century far exceeded its former
   bounds both in the Eastern and Western countries. We have seen
   something of its triumphs in the West. In the East the Nestorians are
   said to have laboured with incredible industry and perseverance to
   propagate the truth of the gospel in Persia, Syria India, and among the
   barbarous and savage nations inhabiting the deserts and the remotest
   shores of Asia. In particular, the vast empire of China was illumined
   by their zeal and industry with the light of Christianity. During
   several succeeding centuries, the patriarch of the Nestorians sent out
   a bishop to preside over the churches then in China. These interesting
   people reject image worship, auricular confession, the doctrine of
   purgatory, and many other corrupt doctrines of the Roman and Greek
   churches.

   The Eastern or Greek Church appears to have been hindered by internal
   dissensions from caring much for the spread of Christianity among the
   heathen. In the West all was activity, but alas! not for the spread of
   the gospel, or the conversion of souls. [96]

   THE TRANSITIONAL PERIOD

   OF THE PAPACY

   We now return to Rome. Her importance and influence as a centre claim
   our closest attention for a little. The spiritual dominions of the pope
   were now extended far and wide. From all parts of the empire bishops,
   princes, and people looked to Rome as the parent of their faith, and
   the highest authority in Christendom. But, though thus exalted to the
   highest spiritual sovereignty, the supreme pontiff, in his relation to
   the eastern empire, was still a subject. This was unbearable to the
   pride and ambition of Rome. The mighty struggle for political life and
   power now commenced. It lasted during the whole course of the seventh
   and eighth centuries. This was the period of transition from a state of
   subordination to the civil power to that of political self-existence.
   How this could be accomplished was now the great problem, which the
   Vatican had to solve. But the spiritual dominion could not be
   maintained without secular power.

   The Lombards --the nearest and most dreaded neighbours of the popes
   --and the Greek empire were the two great obstacles in the way of the
   pope's temporal sovereignty. The downfall of the western empire, and
   the absence of any truly national government, left the Roman people to
   look to the bishop as their natural chief. He was thus invested with a
   special political influence, distinct from his ecclesiastical
   character. The invasions of the Lombards, as we have already seen, and
   the feebleness of the Greeks, contributed to the increase of political
   power in the hands of the pontiffs. But this was only accidental, or
   the necessity of unforeseen emergencies. The Roman states were still
   governed by an officer of the eastern empire, and the pope himself, if
   he offended the Emperor, was liable to be seized and thrown into
   prison, as was actually the case with Pope St. Martin in the year 653,
   who died in exile the following year.

   THE ONE GRAND OBJECT

   OF THE PAPACY

   Every day it became more and more obvious, that there could be no solid
   peace for Rome, no sure foundation for the spiritual supremacy already
   achieved, except for the total overthrow both of the Greek and Lombard
   powers in Italy, and the appropriation of their spoils by the holy See.
   This was now the one grand object of the successors of St. Peter, and
   was the battle they determined to fight. But like the vineyard of
   Naboth the Jezreelite, it must be possessed, by fair means or foul.
   Jezebel plots, and the death of Naboth is accomplished. The history of
   the Lombard kings, and of the great Iconoclastic controversy, during
   the seventh and eighth centuries, throws much light on the means used
   to gain this end; but of these we can only say a word as we pass along,
   and must refer our readers to the general histories. [97]

   "There is abundant historical ground to believe," says Greenwood, "that
   this object had by this time shaped itself very distinctly in the mind
   of the papacy: the territory of its religious enemy, the Emperor, must
   be definitively annexed to the patrimony of St. Peter, together with as
   much more extensive a territorial estate as opportunity might bring
   within its grasp. But there remained the arduous and apparently
   hopeless task of wresting these prospective acquisitions from the hands
   of the Lombard enemy. And, in fact, the whole course of the papal
   policy was thenceforward directed to the accomplishment of this single
   object."

   PEPIN AND CHARLEMAGNE

   A.D. 741 - 814

   The eyes of the popes had, for some time, been turned to France as the
   quarter from which deliverance was to come. The Frankish nation had
   been catholic from the beginning of their Christianity; but a closer
   connection with Rome had been lately formed by means of St. Boniface,
   the English monk. Filled as he was with the reverence of his nation for
   St. Peter and his successors, he exerted all his influence among the
   bishops of France and Germany, to extend the authority of the Roman
   See. This prepared the way for the solution of the great problem now in
   hand.

   PEPIN, who was high steward or mayor of the palace to Childeric III,
   king of the Franks, had long exercised all the powers of the State
   together with all the attributes of sovereignty excepting the title; he
   thought that the time was now come to put an end to the pageant royalty
   of his master, and assume the kingly name and honours. He possessed in
   full measure all the qualities which the nobility and people were
   accustomed to respect at that period in princes. He was a gallant
   warrior and an experienced statesman. By a brilliant series of
   successes he had greatly extended the dominion of the Franks. The poor
   king being destitute of such abilities sank in popular favour, and was
   surnamed the Stupid. Pepin, however, had the wisdom to proceed
   cautiously at this stage of his plans. Boniface, who played an
   important part in this matter, was secretly dispatched to Rome to
   prepare the pope for Pepin's message, and with instructions how to
   answer it. In the meantime he assembled the states of the realm to
   deliberate on the subject. The nobles gave it as their opinion, that
   first of all the pontiff should be consulted, whether it would be
   lawful to do what the mayor desired. Accordingly two confidential
   ecclesiastics were sent to Rome to propose the following question to
   Pope Zachary --"Whether the law did not permit a valiant and warlike
   people to dethrone an imbecile and indolent monarch, who was incapable
   of discharging any of the functions of royalty, and to substitute in
   his place one more worthy of rule, and one who had already rendered
   most important service to the state?" The laconic answer of the pope
   --already in possession of all the secrets --was prompt and favourable.
   "He who lawfully possesses the royal power may also lawfully assume the
   royal title."

   The pope no doubt replied as his questioners desired. Pepin now felt
   secure of his prize. Fortified by the approval of the highest
   ecclesiastical authority, and assured of the acquiescence of the
   people, he boldly assumed the royal title. Boniface crowned him in the
   presence of the assembled nobles and prelates of the realm, at
   Soissons, A.D. 752. But the religious character of coronation marked
   the growing power of the clergy. The Jewish ceremony of anointing was
   introduced by Boniface to sanctify the usurper; and the bishops stood
   around the throne as of equal rank with the armed nobles. According to
   the usage of the Franks, Pepin was elevated on the shield, amid the
   acclamations of the people, and proclaimed king of the Franks.
   Childeric, the last of the Merovingian kings, was stripped of royalty
   without opposition, shorn of his long hair, tonsured, and shut up in a
   monastery.

   ZACHARY'S SANCTION

   OF PEPIN'S PLOT

   The part, which Boniface and his patron the pope had in this
   revolution, and the morality of the proceedings, have been the subjects
   of much controversy. Papal writers have been at some pains to exonerate
   the unscrupulous priests, and protestant writers to criminate them. But
   if we compare their conduct with the principles of the New Testament,
   there can be no controversy. Every right principle and feeling, both
   human and divine, was readily sacrificed to secure the alliance of
   Pepin against the Greeks and Lombards. The violation of the sacred
   rights of kings, the great law of hereditary succession, the rebellious
   ambition of a servant, the degradation of a lawful sovereign absolving
   subjects from their allegiance, are here sanctioned by the papacy as
   right in the sight of God, provided they are the means of raising the
   pope to temporal sovereignty. Such was the daring wickedness and awful
   blasphemy of the Roman See in the middle of the eighth century. Let the
   student of church history note this occurrence as characteristic of the
   papacy, and as a precedent for its future pretensions. It is generally
   related as the first instance of the pope's interference with the
   rights of princes and the allegiance of subjects. But the successors of
   Zachary made ample use of the precedent in after years. They asserted
   that the kings of France, from this time, held their crown only by the
   authority of the pope, and that the papal sanction was their only legal
   title. Little did either Pepin or Zachary foresee the immense effects
   of this one negotiation on the history of the church and the world. It
   was the first great step towards the future kingdom of the bishop of
   Rome --the important link in the chain of events.

   THE TEMPORAL SOVEREIGNTY OF

   THE PAPACY ESTABLISHED

   By a mutual exchange of good offices, in less than three years Pepin
   crossed the Alps at the head of a numerous army, overthrew the
   Lombards, and recovered the Italian territory which they had wrested
   from the Eastern empire. Justice would indeed have demanded that it
   should be returned to the Emperor to whom it belonged; or he might have
   retained it for himself. But he did neither. Mindful of his obligation
   to the holy See, he replied, that he had not gone to battle for the
   sake of any man, but for the sake of St. Peter alone, and to obtain the
   forgiveness of his sins. He then transferred the sovereignty of the
   provinces in question over to the bishop of Rome. This was the
   foundation of the whole temporal dominion of the popes.

   Astolph, king of the Lombards, upon having sworn to Pepin that he would
   restore to St. Peter the towns he had seized, convinced Pepin to
   withdraw the French troops. But the magnificent "donation," so far as
   the pope was concerned, was only on paper. He had not been put into
   actual possession of the ceded territories, neither had he the means of
   putting himself in possession of the royal gift. No sooner, therefore,
   had the Frankish king re-crossed the Alps than Astolph refused to
   fulfil his engagements. He collected his scattered divisions, and
   resumed his attacks upon the scattered territories of the church. He
   wasted the country up to the very walls of Rome, and laid siege to the
   city. The pope, incensed as much at the evasive conduct of Pepin as at
   the perfidy of the Lombards, sent messages to his Frankish protectors
   in all haste by sea, for every way by land was closed by the enemy. His
   first letter reminded king Pepin, that he was risking eternal
   condemnation if he did not complete the donation, which he had vowed to
   St. Peter. A second letter followed, more pathetic, more persuasive.
   Still the Franks were tardy. And finally the pope wrote a third as from
   St. Peter himself. The daring and assumption of this letter is so
   awful, that we give it entire as a specimen of the means used by the
   pope to terrify the barbarians into the protection of the holy See and
   the advancement of her dominions. He considered all means justifiable
   for such high purposes. Thus it reads:

   "I, Peter the apostle, protest, admonish, and conjure you, the most
   Christian kings, Pepin, Charles, and Carloman, with all the hierarchy,
   bishops, abbots, priests and all monks; all judges, dukes, counts, and
   the whole people of the Franks. The mother of God likewise adjures you,
   and admonishes and commands you, she as well as the thrones and
   dominions and all the host of heaven, to save the beloved city of Rome
   from the detested Lombards. If ye hearken, I, Peter the apostle,
   promise you my protection in this life and in the next, will prepare
   for you the most glorious mansions in heaven, and will bestow on you
   the everlasting joys of paradise. Make common cause with my people of
   Rome, and I will grant whatever ye may pray for. I conjure you not to
   yield up this city to be lacerated and tormented by the Lombards, lest
   your own souls be lacerated and tormented in hell with the devil and
   his pestilential angels. Of all nations under heaven the Franks are
   highest in the esteem of St. Peter; to me you owe all your victories.
   Obey, and obey speedily; and, by my suffrage, our Lord Jesus Christ
   will give you in this life length of days, security, victory; in the
   life to come, will multiply His blessings upon you, among His saints
   and angels." [98]

   FORESHADOWING OF THE MAN OF SIN

   Nothing could give us a more expressive idea of the fearful apostasy of
   the Church of Rome than this letter. The one title to eternal life is
   obedience to the pope; the highest duty of man is the protection and
   enlargement of the Holy See. But where is Christ? where are His claims?
   where is Christianity? In place of seeking to convert the barbarians
   and win their souls for Christ, the Lord's most holy name, and the name
   of the apostle are prostituted to the basest of purposes. The soldier
   that fights hardest for the Roman See, though destitute of every moral
   and religious qualification, is assured of great temporal advantages in
   this present life, and in the life to come the highest seat in heaven.
   Surely we have here the mystery of iniquity, and the fore shadowing of
   that man of sin, the son of perdition; who opposeth and exalteth
   himself above all that is called God, or that is worshipped; so that he
   as God sitteth in the temple of God, showing himself that he is God
   --even of him, whose coming is after the working of Satan, with all
   power and signs and lying wonders. (2 Thessalonians 2:3 - 12)

   Pepin soon had his Franks in marching order. The threatening and
   promises of St Peters letter had the desired effect. They again invaded
   Italy. Astolph yielded at once to the demands of Pepin. The contested
   territory was abandoned. Ambassadors from the East were present at the
   conclusion of the treaty, and demanded the restitution of Ravenna and
   its territory to their master, the Emperor; but Pepin declared that his
   sole object in the war was to show his veneration for St. Peter; and he
   bestowed by the right of conquest the whole territory upon his
   successors. The representatives of the pope now passed through the land
   receiving the homage of the authorities and the keys of the cities. But
   the territory he accepted from a foreign potentate in the form of a
   donation belonged to his acknowledged master, the Eastern Emperor. He
   had hired for a large sum, which he took care to make payable in
   heaven, a powerful stranger to rob his lawful sovereign for his own
   advantage, and without shame or hesitation he accepted the plunder. The
   French king (Childeric III) may be dethroned and humbled by his servant
   Pepin, and the Greek Emperor may be robbed and defied by his priest,
   (the pope) as long as the church was aggrandised. Such has ever been
   the policy of Rome.

   But the munificent donation of Pepin --who died in the year 768
   --awaited the confirmation of his son Charlemagne. In the year 774,
   when the Lombards once more threatened the Roman territories, the aid
   of France was implored. Charlemagne proceeded to their help. He arrived
   in Rome on Easter eve. The Romans, we are told, received the king with
   unbounded demonstrations of joy. Thirty thousand citizens went forth to
   meet him; the whole body of the clergy with crosses and banners; the
   children of the schools, who bore branches of palm and olive, and
   hailed him with hymns of welcome. He dismounted, and proceeded on foot
   towards St. Peter's church where the pope and all the clergy were in
   waiting. The king devoutly kissed each step of the stairs, and, on
   reaching the landing kissed the pope, and entered the building holding
   his right hand. He spent the eve of Easter in devout exercises and
   prayers. But when the king's heart was warm and tender, pope Hadrian
   opened the subject of a new deed of donation to the Holy See.
   Charlemagne now greatly enlarged the donation, which Pepin had made to
   the church, confirmed it by an oath, and solemnly laid the deed of gift
   on the apostle's tomb. After the conclusion of the Easter solemnities,
   he took his leave of the pontiff, and rejoined his army. His armies
   were victorious everywhere; nor did he pause till he had entirely and
   finally subverted the empire of the Lombards, and proclaimed himself
   King of Italy.

   THE TERRITORIAL

   DONATION OF CHARLEMAGNE

   The actual extent of his donation is very difficult to ascertain. But
   it seems to be the general opinion of the historians, that it included
   not only the exarchate of Ravenna, but the dukedoms of Spoleto and
   Benevento, Venetia, Istria, and other territories in the north of Italy
   --in short, almost the whole peninsula with the island of Corsica.
   Every Naboth was robbed of his vineyard, and his blood shed, for the
   gratification of Jezebel's ambition, and for the establishment of her
   throne of iniquity. But mark the consummation and seal of all
   wickedness in the way that the pope sought to reconcile his character,
   as vicar of Christ, with his new position. As all men are subject to
   Christ he reasoned, so likewise are they subject to His vicar and
   representative on earth in all that appertains to His kingdom. But that
   kingdom extends over all; therefore nothing belonging to this world or
   its affairs can be above or beyond the jurisdiction of St. Peter's
   chair. Our kingdom is not of this world; it is like that of Christ, in
   all, above all, over all. According to this theory, no amount of
   temporal dominion was to be regarded as inconsistent with the Saviour's
   declaration respecting the nature of His kingdom. On this impious
   assumption thenceforward, the popes ever acted. Hence; their
   interference with priest and people, king and subject, land and sea,
   all over the world.

   Charlemagne visited Rome again in 781, and a third time in 787, and on
   each occasion the church was enriched by gifts, bestowed, as he
   professed in the language of the age, "for the good of his soul."
   Overwhelmed with gratitude, and fully conscious of his own need of a
   permanent defender, the pope crowned Charlemagne on the Christmas-eve
   of the year 800 with the crown of the Western empire, and proclaimed
   him Cæsar Augustus. A Frankish prince, a Teuton, was thus declared the
   successor of the Cæsars and wielded all the power of the Emperor of the
   West. "The empire of Charlemagne," says Milman, "was almost
   commensurate with Latin Christendom; England was the only large
   territory which had acknowledged the ecclesiastical supremacy of Rome,
   not in subjection to the new Western empire." [99] This event forms the
   great epoch in the annals of Roman Christendom.

   We must now leave the West for a time, and turn our attention to
   another great religious revolution, which suddenly and unexpectedly
   sprang up in the East --Mahometanism.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [88] D'Aubigné, volume 5, page 25.

   [89] For interesting details, see "The Church History of Scotland from
   the commencement of the Christian era to the present time," by the Rev.
   John Cunningham, minister of Crieff. A & C Black Edinburgh 1859

   [90] Gardner's Faiths of the World, vol. 1, p. 150.

   [91] Cunningham, vol. 1, p. 52.

   [92] J. C. Robertson, vol. 2, p. 62.

   [93] D'Aubigné, vol. 5, p. 77. Cunningham, vol. 1, p. 90.

   [94] Cunningham, vol. 1, p. 94.

   [95] For particulars see Hardwicke's "Middle Ages," J. C. Robertson,
   vol. 2, p. 95.

   [96] Mosheim, vol. 2, p. 29.

   [97] See especially Greenwood's Cathedra Petri.

   [98] For an able description of this important period, see Milman's
   Latin Christianity, vol. 2, p. 243.

   [99] See Milman, vol. 2, Greenwood, vol. 2.
     __________________________________________________________________

Chapter 15

   MAHOMET

   THE FALSE PROPHET OF ARABIA

   It has been with much interest, that we have traced the steady progress
   and subduing power of Christianity throughout the whole of Europe,
   during the seventh and eighth centuries, though in its Latin or Roman
   dress. The name of Jesus was spread abroad, and God could use the sweet
   savour of that name for blessing, in spite of the rigid formularies of
   Rome, which everywhere surrounded it. But all these conquests of the
   gospel, through the management of the pope and the influence of his
   missionaries, became the conquests of the Roman See. How far her
   spiritual dominion might have extended, and how great her power might
   have become, had she met with no formidable opposition; it would be
   impossible to imagine. But God permitted an enemy to arise, who not
   only arrested the progress of Romanism on all sides, but more than once
   made the pontiff himself tremble for his safety even in the chair of
   St. Peter. This was Mahomet, the imposter of Arabia.

   The beginning of the seventh century -the time when this remarkable man
   appeared- was peculiarly favourable for the accomplishment of his great
   objective. Almost the whole world was mad after idols. The prevailing
   religion of his birth country was grossly idolatrous. There were 360
   idols in the temple of Mecca, which was the precise number of days in
   the Arab year. Paganism, with its numberless false gods, still covered
   a large portion of the earth; and even Christianity alas! had become
   extensively idolatrous both in the Greek and Roman churches. It was at
   this moment that Mahomet appeared before the world as a stern and
   austere monotheist. He felt himself called to restore the fundamental
   doctrine of the divine Unity to its due prominence in the religious
   belief of mankind. But the very ideas of incarnation, of redemption, of
   a Redeemer, of relationship and communion with God --the pervading
   influences of a holy love --have no place in the prophets system. The
   yawning gulf that separates between God and the sinner is left
   impassable by the religion of Mahomet. But, before speaking of his
   system, we will briefly glance at his family and youth.

   THE FAMILY AND YOUTH

   OF MAHOMET

   According to Arabian tradition, he was of the noble family of the
   Koreish. That tribe, the Koreishite, at the time of Mahomet's birth
   (which is generally placed about the year 569) was a kind of hierarchy
   exercising religious supremacy, and the acknowledged guardians of the
   Caaba, the sacred stone of Mecca, with its temple. His father died soon
   after his birth, and his mother when he was very young; so that he was
   left an orphan and destitute. Other male members of his family having
   died, the governorship of Mecca, and the keys of the Caaba, passed into
   the hands of another branch of the family. Little is known of the first
   twenty-five years of his life, save that he engaged in mercantile
   pursuits, and was so successful and honourable in his dealings that he
   received the title of the Amin, or faithful. At the age of twenty-eight
   he married a widow of his kindred, possessed of great wealth. Twelve
   years after his marriage --in his fortieth year --the prophet began to
   listen to the intimations of his future mission. The misfortunes of his
   family and how to recover its ancient dignity and power may have been
   at first in his mind. According to a custom, which was common among his
   countrymen, he withdrew every year to a cave in a mountain, and spent
   some time in religious solitude. It was in one of these caves,
   according to his own account, that he received his first communication
   from heaven, or rather, as we believe, from the dark abyss. He was,
   however, gradually wrought up to a belief that he was especially called
   of God to be an instrument for the destruction of idolatry and for the
   propagation of the true faith. His oracles, which he professed to
   receive direct from heaven by the angel Gabriel, are preserved in the
   Koran, and regarded by the faithful as the word of God.

   THE RELIGION OF ISLAM

   The new religion thus announced was Islam --a word that means
   submission or resignation to the will of God. His doctrine was summed
   up in his own aphorism, "There is no God but the true God, and Mahomet
   is his prophet." The six main articles in the theoretical faith of
   Islam were:
     * Belief in God;
     * Belief in His angels;
     * Belief in His scriptures;
     * Belief in His prophets;
     * Belief in the resurrection and day of judgment
     * Belief in predestination

   The practical part of the prophet's creed was equally unobjectionable,
   according to the prevalent thoughts of religious observance at the
   time. It embraces four great precepts:
     * Prayers and purification;
     * Alms;
     * Fasting
     * The pilgrimage to Mecca, which was held to be so essential that any
       one who died without performing it might as well have died a Jew or
       a Christian.

   The only really new and startling article in the religion of Islam was
   the divine mission of Mahomet as the apostle and prophet of God. But in
   these fair appearances the craft of Satan is most manifest. Such simple
   and elementary religious principles would do violence to none, but
   deceive many. History clearly proves that his opinions changed with his
   success, and that his violence and intolerance increased with his
   power, until it became a religion of the sword, of rapine, and of
   sensuality. "He is a gentle preacher," says Milman, "until he has
   unsheathed his sword." The sword once unsheathed is the remorseless
   argument. At one time we find the broad principle of Eastern toleration
   explicitly avowed; diversity of religion is ascribed to the direct
   ordinance, and all share in the equal favour, of God. But the Koran
   gradually recasts all these gentler sentences, and assumes the language
   of insulting superiority or undisguised aversion. But, although the
   Koran has many points of resemblance both to Judaism and Christianity,
   it is thought that Mahomet was not acquainted with either the Old or
   the New Testament --that he rather drew his materials from Talmudical
   legends, from spurious Gospels, and other heretical writings, mixed
   with the old traditions of Arabia.

   The first converts whom Mahomet gained over to his new religion were
   among his friends and near relations; but the work of conversion
   proceeded very slowly. At the end of three years his followers only
   numbered fourteen. Not content with his progress, he resolved to make a
   public declaration of his religion. He first called upon his own family
   to recognise him as a prophet of God; and, having been accepted as the
   prophet of his family, he then aspired to be the prophet of his tribe.
   But the Koreishites refused his demands and his pretensions
   disbelieved, and he and his followers were persecuted.

   MAHOMET'S

   TRIUMPHANT ENTRY INTO MEDINA

   Hitherto he had endeavoured to spread his opinions by persuasion only,
   but the people were obstinate and superstitious, and threatened the
   prophet with martyrdom. He was obliged to flee from his native city
   Mecca, the central spot of the commerce and of the religion of Arabia,
   and the hoped for centre of his new spiritual empire. He fled to
   Medina, where he was received as a prince. Some of its most
   distinguished citizens had embraced his cause; a party had been already
   formed in his favour. His flight, A.D. 622, is regarded as the great
   era in the prophet's life, and as the foundation of the Mahometan
   chronology. Now that he was possessed of a force, he was charged by a
   fresh revelation to use it for the propagation of the faith. The
   character of his heavenly revelations was now changed; they became
   fierce and sanguinary. His mouth was filled, like the prophets of Ahab,
   with a lying spirit.

   In a few years, after some fighting between the rival cities and the
   followers of the rival religions, the strength of the prophet so
   increased, that in 630 he gained possession of Mecca. He cleansed the
   Caaba of its 360 idols, and erected it into the great sanctuary of
   Islam. From that time Mecca became the centre of his system; the whole
   population swore allegiance; all the tribes of Arabia were now under
   his dominion and in the profession of his religion.

   MECCA THE CAPITAL OF ISLAM

   Mahomet was now lord of Mecca. The unity of God was proclaimed and his
   own prophetic mission from the highest pinnacle of the Mosque. The
   idols were broken to pieces. The old system of idolatry sank before the
   fear of his arms and the outward simplicity of his new creed. The next
   important step in the policy of the prophet was to secure the absolute
   religious unity of all Arabia. By this means the old hereditary feuds
   of the tribes and races disappeared, and all were turned into one
   united religious army against the infidels. War was now declared
   against all forms of unbelief, which was especially a declaration of
   war against Christendom, and an expressed determination to propagate
   Mahometanism, by the power of his sword.

   Mahomet is now an independent sovereign. Arabia, delivered from idols,
   embraces the religion of Islam. But, though the prophet is now a
   temporal prince and a successful warrior, he neglects not the duties of
   a priest. He constantly led the devotions of his followers, offered up
   the public prayers, and preached at the weekly festivals on the
   Fridays. He blasphemously assumed to be a prophet, priest and a king.
   The mixture, the delusion, is the inspiration of hell; it is like the
   masterpiece of Satan, issuing forth from the realm of darkness. The
   fanaticism of his followers was urged on by the inducements of plunder,
   and the gratification of every evil passion. The appropriation of all
   female captives was recognised as one of the laws of war, and the
   reward held out to valour. The maxims inculcated on all the faithful
   were such as, "One drop of blood shed in the cause of God, or one night
   spent in arms, is of more avail than two months' employment in fasting
   and prayer. Whosoever falls in battle, his sins are forgiven; at the
   Day of Judgment his wounds shall be resplendent as vermilion and
   odoriferous as musk: and the loss of his limbs shall be supplied by the
   wings of angels and cherubim." The war cry of the intrepid Khaled was,
   "Fight on, fight on and fear not! Paradise, paradise, is under the
   shadow of your swords! Hell with its fires is behind him who flies from
   battle; paradise is open to him who falls in battle." Thus animated,
   the Moslem armies were fired with enthusiasm; and, thirsting for the
   spoils of victory here and a sensual paradise hereafter, they rushed
   fearlessly into battle.

   The foundation of the Arabian empire was now laid. Mahomet summoned,
   not only the petty potentates of the neighbouring kingdoms, but the two
   great powers of the more civilised world, the king of Persia and the
   Emperor of the East, to submit to his religious supremacy. Heraclius is
   said to have received the communication with respect; but Chosroes, the
   Persian, contemptuously tore the letter to pieces: the prophet, on
   hearing of the act, exclaimed, "It is thus that God will tear the
   kingdom, and reject the supplications of Chosroes." And so it happened;
   the kingdom of Persia was reduced in a short time by the Mahometan arms
   to a few scattered communities. But though the circle of Islam was
   widening, the centre was passing away. Having followed his eldest son
   to the grave with tears and sighs, the prophet made his farewell
   pilgrimage to Mecca, and died in the year 632, in the sixty-fourth year
   of his age. It would appear that he was untouched by remorse on his
   deathbed; but the blood he had shed, and the multitudes he had
   beguiled, would follow him to the judgment-seat.

   The evil mission of the false prophet was fulfilled. He had organized
   the most terrible confederacy a world ever saw. In the short space of
   ten years he planted in the East a religion, which has taken root so
   firmly that amid all the revolutions and changes of twelve centuries it
   still exercises a powerful controlling influence over the minds and
   consciences of more than a hundred millions of human beings.

   THE SUCCESSORS OF MAHOMET

   After the death of the prophet, war was declared against mankind by his
   successors the Caliphs. The chief of these were, Abou Beker, the wise;
   Omar, the faithful; Ali, the brave; Khaled, the sword of God. These
   were the oldest companions and relatives of the prophet. In a few
   months after his death these generals were followed by the swarms of
   the desert, and overran the plains of Asia. The history of these wars,
   though deeply affecting the progress of Christianity, lies not within
   the sphere of our "Short Papers." But as many nations and multitudes of
   the Lord's people were the victims of this fearful scourge, it fairly
   claims a brief consideration. Many believe that the Saracen locusts
   were a partial fulfillment of Revelation 9:1 - 12.

   The persecuting heathen, such as Chosroes the infidel and defiant king
   of Persia and the merely nominal professors of Christianity, were alike
   chastised of God by the successors of Mahomet; but the proud bishops
   and priests were the especial objects of their vengeance. "Destroy not
   fruit-tree nor fertile field in your path," said the Caliphs; "be just,
   and spare the feelings of the vanquished. Respect all religious persons
   who live in hermitages or convents, and spare their edifices. But
   should you meet with a class of unbelievers of a different kind, who go
   about with shaven crowns and belong to the synagogue of Satan, be sure
   you cleave their skulls, unless they embrace the true faith or render
   tribute." And so the mighty horde moved on with an enthusiasm, which
   nothing could check. "Syria fell; Persia and Egypt fell; and many other
   countries yielded to their power." Many great cities, such as
   Jerusalem, Bozrah, Antioch, Damascus, Alexandria, Cyrene, and Carthage,
   fell into their hands. They also invaded India, assailed Europe,
   overran Spain, and advanced even to the banks of the Loire; but there
   they were defeated and driven back by Charles Martel in the year 732.
   We would only further notice their treatment of the vanquished in the
   case of Jerusalem.

   In the year 687 Jerusalem fell into the hands of the Caliph Omar, who
   built a mosque on the site of the temple. The whole people of that
   guilty city were degraded into a marked and abject caste by the haughty
   conqueror. Everywhere they were to honour the Mussulmans, and give
   place before them. Christianity was subjected to the ignominy of
   toleration; the cross was no longer to be exhibited on the outside of
   the churches; the bells were to be silent; the Christians were to
   bewail their dead in secrecy; the sight of the devout Mussulman was not
   to be offended by the symbols of Christianity in any way; and his
   person was to be considered sacred, so that it was a crime in a
   Christian to strike a Mussulman.

   Such was the condition to which the Christian inhabitants of Jerusalem
   fell at once, and in which they remained undisturbed by any serious
   aggression of the Christians till the time of the crusades. Nearly the
   same terms, we may believe, were enforced on all the Christians in
   Syria. Thus God, in His holy providence, did deal with many nations
   both in the East and in the West that were thickly peopled with Jews
   and Christians, and doom millions to a long night of servitude under
   Mahometanism, which continues, to this day. [100]

   REFLECTIONS ON

   MAHOMETANISM AND ROMANISM

   Having brought down our history, both civil and ecclesiastical, to the
   close of the eighth century, we may pause for a moment and reflect on
   what we have seen, where we are, and what we have to expect. We have
   watched the growth of the Roman See in the West, and how she gained the
   summit of her ambition. We have also seen the rise of a great
   antagonistic power in the East, inferior only in the extent of its
   religious and social influence to Christianity itself. The first sprang
   up gradually in the very centre of enlightened Christendom; the latter
   arose suddenly in an obscure district of a savage desert. But what, it
   may be asked, is the moral lesson to be drawn from the character and
   results of these two great powers? Both have been permitted by God,
   and, if we rightly judge, have been permitted by Him as a divine
   judgment on Christendom for its apostasy, and on the heathen for their
   idolatry. On the one hand, the war-cry was raised against all who
   refused faith or tribute to the creed and to the armies of the Caliphs;
   on the other hand, a more merciless war-cry was raised against all who
   refused to believe in the Virgin and the saints, their visions and
   miracles, their relics and images, according to the intolerant demands
   of idolatrous Rome. The Eastern churches had been weakened and wasted
   from the days of Origen by a Platonic philosophy, in the form of a
   metaphysical theology, which caused continual dissension. In the West,
   controversy had been greatly avoided: power was the object there. Rome
   had aspired, for centuries, to the dominion of Christendom --of the
   world. God judicially dealt both with in the fiery deluge from Arabia;
   but Mahometanism remains as the mighty scourge of God in the East, and
   Romanism in the West.

   MONOTHELITES, ICONOCLASM

   While the Arabs under Abou Beker and Omar were overrunning the Greek
   countries, and wresting province after province from the empire, the
   Emperor contented himself by sending out armies to repel them, and
   remained in his capital for the discussion of theological questions.
   From the conclusion of his successful wars with Persia, religion had
   become almost the exclusive object of his solicitude. Two great
   controversies were at that moment agitating the whole of the Christian
   world. The first of these, the so-called Monothelite controversy, may
   be described generally as a revival, under a somewhat different form,
   of the old Monophysite, or Eutychian, heresy. Under the general name of
   Monophysites are comprehended the four main branches of separatists
   from the Eastern Church, namely the Syrian Jacobites, the Copts, the
   Abyssinians, and the Armenians. The originator of this numerous and
   powerful Christian community was Eutyches, abbot of a convent of monks
   at Constantinople in the fifth century. The Monophysites denied the
   distinction of the two natures in Christ; the Monothelites, on the
   other hand, denied the distinction of the will, divine, and human, in
   the blessed Lord. A well-meant but unsuccessful attempt was made by the
   Emperor Heraclius to reconcile the Monophysites to the Greek Church.
   But as the sound of controversy is seldom heard among the Eastern
   sectaries after this period, and as a detailed account of their
   disputes would possess no interest to our readers, we leave them on the
   pages of ecclesiastical history. [101]

   ICONOCLASM, or the IMAGE-BREAKING storm, claims a fuller consideration.
   It went to the heart of Christendom as no other controversy had ever
   done before; and it forms an important epoch in the history of the
   Roman See. Jezebel now appears in her true colours, and, from this time
   onward, her evil character is indelibly stamped on the papacy. The
   popes who then filled the chair of St. Peter openly defended and
   justified image-worship. This was surely the beginning of the popedom
   --the maturity of the God dishonouring system. The foundations of
   popery were laid bare, and it was thus seen that persecution and
   idolatry were the two pillars on which her arrogant dominion rested.

   THE FIRST VISIBLE OBJECT OF CHRISTIAN VENERATION

   For more than three hundred years after the first publication of the
   gospel there is good reason to believe, that neither images nor any
   other visible objects of religious reverence were admitted into the
   public service of the churches, or adopted into the exercises of
   private devotion. Probably Christians had never thought of such a thing
   before the days of Constantine; and we can only regard it as an early
   fruit of the union of Church and State. Up till this period the great
   protest of Christians was against the idolatry of the heathen: for this
   they suffered unto death. And it is not a little remarkable, that the
   Empress Helena, Constantine's mother, was the first to excite the
   Christian mind to this degrading superstition. She is said, in her zeal
   for religious places, to have discovered and disinterred the wood of
   the "true cross." This was enough for the enemy's purpose. The
   predilection of human nature for objects of veneration was kindled; the
   flame spread rapidly; and the usual consequence --idolatry --followed.

   Similar memorials of the Saviour, the Virgin Mary, the inspired
   Apostles, and the Fathers, were found. The most sacred relics that had
   been concealed for centuries were now discovered by visions. So great,
   so successful, was the delusion of the enemy that the whole church fell
   into a snare. From the age of Constantine till the epoch of the Arab
   invasion, veneration for images, pictures and relics gradually
   increased. The reverence for relics was more characteristic of the
   Western, and that for images of the Eastern churches; but from the time
   of Gregory the great feeling of the West became more favourable to
   images. In consequence of the almost total decay of literature, both
   among the clergy and the laity, the use of images was found to give
   immense power to the priesthood. Pictures, statues, and visible
   representations of sacred objects became the readiest mode of conveying
   instruction, encouraging devotion, and strengthening religious
   sentiments in the minds of the people. The more intellectual or
   enlightened of the clergy might endeavour to maintain the distinction
   between respect for images as a means and not as objects of worship.
   But the undiscriminating devotion of the vulgar utterly disregards
   these subtleties. The apologist may draw fine distinctions between
   images as objects of reverence and as objects of adoration; but there
   can be no doubt that with ignorant and superstitious minds the use, the
   reverence, the worship of images, whether in pictures or statues,
   invariably degenerates into idolatry.

   Before the close of the sixth century idolatry was firmly established
   in the Eastern Church, and during the seventh century it made a gradual
   and very general progress in the West, where it had previously gained
   some footing. It became usual to fall down before images, to pray to
   them, to kiss them, to adorn them with gems and precious metals, to lay
   the hand on them in swearing, and even to employ them as sponsors at
   baptism.

   LEO ATTEMPTS THE ABOLITION OF IMAGE-WORSHIP ABOUT A.D. 726

   The Emperor Leo III, surnamed Isauricus, a prince of great abilities,
   had the boldness to undertake, in the face of so many difficulties, to
   purify the church of its detestable idols. As the writings of the
   unsuccessful party were carefully suppressed or destroyed, history is
   silent as to the Emperor's motives: but we are disposed to believe that
   the new creed and the success of Mahomet greatly influenced Leo.
   Besides, there was a very general feeling among Christians in the East,
   that it was the increasing idolatry of the church that had brought down
   upon them the chastisement of God by the Mahometan invasion. The
   Christians were constantly hearing from both Jews and Mahometans the
   odious name of idolaters. The great controversy evidently arose out of
   these circumstances.

   Leo ascended the throne of the East in the year 717, and, after
   securing the empire against foreign enemies, began to concern himself
   with the affairs of religion. He vainly thought that he could change
   and improve the religion of his subjects by his own imperial command.
   About the year 726 he issued an edict against the stuperstitious use of
   images --not their destruction. We cannot suppose that the Isaurian was
   actuated by the fear of the true God in this, but rather that his
   motives were purely selfish. Being head of the empire and still
   ostensibly head of the church, he no doubt thought that by his edicts
   he could accomplish the total and simultaneous abolition of idolatry
   throughout the empire, and establish an ecclesiastical autocracy. But
   Leo had greatly overrated his temporal power in spiritual matters. The
   time was past for imperial edicts to change the religion of the empire.
   He had yet to learn, to his deep mortification, the disdainful,
   insolent, haughty pride and power of the pontiff's, and the religious
   attachment of the people to their images.

   The first edict merely interdicted the worship of images, and commanded
   them to be removed to such a height that they could not be touched or
   kissed. But the moment that the impious hand of the Emperor touched the
   idols, the excitement was immense and universal. The proscription
   affected all classes: learned and unlearned, priest and peasant, monk
   and soldier, clergyman and layman, men, women, and even children were
   involved in this new agitation. The effect of the edict immediately
   occasioned a civil war both in the East and in the West. The monkish
   influence was especially strong. They set up a pretender to the throne,
   armed the multitude, and appeared in an ill-equipped fleet before
   Constantinople. But the Greek fire discomfited the disorderly
   assailants; the leaders were taken and put to death. Leo, provoked by
   the resistance, which his edict had met with, issued a second and more
   stringent decree. He now commanded the destruction of all images, and
   the whitewashing of walls on which such things had been painted.

   THE SECOND EDICT PUBLISHED

   Sweeping as the second edict was, the imperial officers, it is said,
   went even beyond their orders. The most sacred statues and pictures
   were everywhere ruthlessly broken, torn to pieces, or publicly
   committed to the flames under the eyes of the enraged worshippers.
   "Heedless of danger and death," says Greenwood, "men, women, and even
   children, rushed to the defence of objects as dear to them as life
   itself. They attacked and slew the imperial officers engaged in the
   work of destruction; the latter, supported by the regular troops,
   retaliated with equal ferocity; and the streets of the metropolis
   exhibited such a scene of outrage and slaughter as can only proceed
   from envenomed religious passions. The leaders of the tumult were for
   the most part put to death on the spot; the prisons were filled to
   repletion; and multitudes, after suffering various corporal
   punishments, were transported to places of penal banishment." [102]

   The populace was now excited to fury; even the presence of the Emperor
   did not overawe them. An imperial officer had orders to destroy a
   statue of the Saviour, which stood over the Brazen Gate of the imperial
   palace, and was known by the name of the Surety. This image was
   renowned for its miracles, and was held in great veneration by the
   people. Crowds of women gathered about the palace and eagerly entreated
   the soldier to spare their favourite. But he mounted the ladder, and
   with his axe struck the face, which they had so often gazed upon, and
   which, they thought, benignly looked down upon them. Heaven interfered
   not, as they expected; but the women seized the ladder, threw down the
   impious officer, and tore him to pieces. The Emperor sent an armed
   guard to suppress the tumult; the mob joined the women, and a frightful
   massacre took place. "The Surety" was taken down, and its place was
   filled with an inscription in which the Emperor gave vent to his enmity
   against images. [103]

   The execution of the imperial orders was everywhere resisted, both in
   the capital and the provinces; the popular enthusiasm was so great that
   it could only be quelled by the strongest efforts of the civil and
   military power. Passions were kindled on both sides, which had their
   natural issue in the most daring rebellion and the most violent
   persecution.

   THE POPE REJECTS

   THE EDICTS OF LEO

   The intelligence of the first assault of Leo against the images of
   Constantinople filled the Italians with grief and indignation; but when
   the orders arrived to put the fatal decrees in force within the Italian
   dependencies of the empire, all rose to arms from the greatest to the
   least. The pope refused to obey orders and defied the Emperor; and all
   the people swore to live and die in the defence of the pope and the
   holy images. But the political complication of matters at that moment
   made it impossible for the Emperor to enforce his edicts in the papal
   dominions. Gregory addressed the Emperor in the haughtiest strain; the
   tone of his reply to the imperial manifesto breathes a spirit of the
   most seditious defiance. The monks, who saw their craft in danger --the
   superstition to which they owed their riches and influence, preached
   against the Emperor as an abandoned apostate. He was painted by these
   slaves of idolatry, as one who combined in him every heresy that had
   ever polluted the Christian faith and endangered the souls of men. But
   as exhibiting the true spirit of popery, both in the defence of their
   darling superstition, idolatry, and in their defiance of temporal
   power, we will transcribe parts of the original epistles of the second
   and third Gregory, leaving the reader to examine the portrait.

   Pope Gregory II says to the Emperor, "During ten pure and fortunate
   years, we have tasted the annual comforts of your royal letters,
   subscribed in purple ink with your own hand, the sacred pledges of your
   attachment to the orthodox creed of your fathers. How deplorable is the
   change! How tremendous the scandal! You now accuse the Catholics of
   idolatry; and, by the accusation, you betray your own impiety and
   ignorance. To this ignorance we are compelled to adapt the grossness of
   our style and arguments: the first elements of holy letters are
   sufficient for your confusion; and, were you to enter a grammar school,
   and avow yourself the enemy of our worship, the simple and pious
   children would cast their tablets at your head."

   After this disloyal and offensive salutation, the pope attempts in the
   usual way the defence of image-worship. He endeavours to prove to Leo
   the vast difference between Christian images and the idols of
   antiquity. The latter were the fanciful representation of demons; the
   former are the genuine likeness of Christ, His mother, and His saints.
   He then appeals in justification of their worship to the decorations of
   the Jewish temple; the mercy seat, the cherubim, and the various
   ornaments made by Bezaleel to the glory of God. The Jewish law, he
   affirms, forbade only the idols of the Gentiles. He denies that the
   Catholics worship wood and stone: these are memorials only, intended to
   awaken pious feelings.

   The pope, in speaking of his own edification from beholding the
   pictures and images in the churches, gives us a passage of great
   historical interest as showing the usual subjects of these paintings.
   "The miraculous portrait of Christ sent to Abgarus, king of Edessa; the
   paintings of the Lord's miracles; the virgin mother, with the infant
   Jesus on her breast, surrounded by choirs of angels; the last supper;
   the raising of Lazarus; the miracles of giving sight to the blind; the
   curing the paralytic and the leper; the feeding of the multitudes in
   the desert; the transfiguration; the crucifixion, burial, resurrection,
   and ascension of Christ; the gift of the Holy Ghost, and the sacrifice
   of Isaac." [104]

   Gregory enters at length into the common arguments in behalf of images,
   and reproaches the Emperor with his breach of the most solemn
   engagements, and then breaks out in a contemptuous tone, such as, "You
   demand a council: --revoke your edicts, cease to destroy images; a
   council will not be needed. You assault us, o tyrant, with a carnal and
   military band: unarmed and naked, we can only implore the Christ, the
   prince of the heavenly host, that He will send into you a devil for the
   destruction of your body and the salvation of your soul. You declare,
   with foolish arrogance, I will dispatch my orders to Rome, I will break
   in pieces the image of St. Peter; and Gregory, like his predecessor
   Martin, shall be transported in chains, and in exile, to the foot of
   the imperial throne. Would to God that I might be permitted to tread in
   the footsteps of the holy Martin; but may the fate of Constans serve as
   a warning to the persecutors of the church. But it is our duty to live
   for the edification and support of the faithful people; nor are we
   reduced to risk our safety on the event of a combat. Incapable as you
   are of defending your Roman subjects, the maritime situation of the
   city may perhaps expose it to your depredations; but we have only to
   retire to the first fortress of the Lombards, and then you may as well
   pursue the winds. Are you ignorant that the popes are the bond of
   union, the mediators of peace between the East and the West? The eyes
   of the nations are fixed on our humility; and they revere, as a God
   upon earth, the apostle St. Peter, whose image you threaten to
   destroy."

   The conclusion of the pope's letter evidently refers to his new allies
   beyond the Alps. The Franks had dutifully listened to the papal
   recommendation of Boniface, the apostle of Germany. Secret negotiations
   were already begun to secure their assistance. The history and results
   of these we have, in a previous paper, examined. Hence the pope assured
   his royal correspondent, that "the remote and interior kingdoms of the
   West present their homage to Christ and His vicegerent: and we now
   prepare to visit one of their most powerful monarchs, who desires to
   receive from our hands the sacrament of baptism. The barbarians have
   submitted to the yoke of the gospel, while you alone are deaf to the
   voice of the Shepherd. These pious barbarians are kindled into rage;
   they thirst to avenge the persecutions of the East. Abandon your rash
   and fatal enterprise; reflect, tremble, and repent. If you persist, we
   are innocent of the blood that will be spilt in the contest; may it
   fall on your head." [105]

   A LYING SPIRIT IN

   THE MOUIH OF POPERY

   After carefully reading these ancient epistles, it is impossible to
   believe that Gregory could have been so ignorant as to state so many
   things to Leo in favour of image-worship that were positively false: we
   are more inclined to believe that he knew them to be untrue, but
   counted on the ignorance of the Emperor. "You say," continued Gregory,
   "that we are forbidden to venerate things made by men's hands. But you
   are an unlettered person, and ought therefore to have inquired of your
   learned prelates the true meaning of the commandment. If you had not
   been obstinately and wilfully ignorant, you would have learned from
   them that your acts are in direct contradiction to the unanimous
   testimony of all the fathers and doctors of the church, and in
   particular repugnant to the authority of the six general councils." So
   glaringly false are these statements, that we can only wonder how any
   one could have had the effrontery to write them as true, especially the
   highest ecclesiastic in Christendom. But it proves that there has been
   from the beginning a lying spirit in the mouth of popery, as there was
   in the prophets of Baal. (1 Kings 22:23) Even Greenwood says, "In none
   of the general councils does a word about images or image-worship
   occur. The statement as to the unanimous testimony of the fathers is
   equally at fault. Excepting in the works of Gregory the Great, I have
   not met with any mention of the practice of image-worship in the
   fathers of the first six centuries of the Christian era." [106]

   But the lying spirit goes on to say, that the visible appearance of
   Christ in the flesh made such an impression on the minds of the
   disciples, that "no sooner had they cast their eyes upon Him than they
   hastened to make portraits of Him, and carried them about with them,
   exhibiting them to the whole world, that at the sight of them men might
   be converted from the worship of Satan to the service of Christ, --but
   so only that they should worship them, not with an absolute adoration,
   but only with a relative veneration." In like manner the pope assured
   Leo, that "pictures and images had been taken of James, the Lord's
   brother, of Stephen, and all other saints of note. And so having done,
   he dispersed them over every part of the earth, to the manifest
   increase of the gospel cause."

   By a strange perversion or confusion of scriptural facts, the pope
   compares the Emperor with "the impious Uzziah, who," he tells him,
   "sacrilegiously removed the brazen serpent, which Moses had set up, and
   broke it in pieces." Here we may give the pope the benefit of
   ignorance. He was less likely to know his Bible than the six general
   councils. He seems to have had some confused recollection of the story
   of Uzziah whom the Lord smote, because he put forth his hand to stay
   the ark when the oxen stumbled, and of the act of Hezekiah, who broke
   in pieces the brazen serpent expressly to prevent the people from
   paying divine homage to it. (1 Chronicles 13:9; 2 Kings 18:4) "Uzziah,"
   he says, though it was really Hezekiah, --"Uzziah truly was your
   brother, as self-willed, and, like you, daring to offer violence to the
   priests of God." It might now be asked, what would the children of our
   schools say to the pope who mistook the good king Hezekiah for a wicked
   king, and his destroying the brazen serpent for an act of impiety? As
   well might we expect them to throw their tablets at Gregory's, as at
   Leo's head? But enough has been said on this point to show the reader
   what has been the spirit and character of popery from its very
   foundation. It has ever been a barefaced, lying, idolatrous system,
   though countless numbers of God's saints have been in it during its
   darkest periods. The saving Name of Jesus has ever been maintained
   amidst its grossest absurdities and idolatries, and whosoever believes
   in that Name shall surely be saved. The finger of faith that touches
   but His garment's hem, though pressed through a throng of idolaters,
   opens the everlasting springs of all healing virtue, and the very
   fountain of disease is immediately dried up. And whatever the press or
   throng may be, He will look round to see the one that touched Him by
   faith, and speak peace to the troubled soul. (Mark 5:25 - 34)

   CLOSE OF ICONOCLASM

   Gregory did not long survive his epistles. In the following year a
   third pope of the same name succeeded him. Gregory III was also zealous
   in the cause of images; he laboured to increase the popular veneration
   for them. In Rome he set the example of image worship on the most
   splendid scale. A solemn council was convoked, consisting of all the
   bishops of the Lombard and Byzantine territories in Northern Italy to
   the number of ninety-three. The assembly was held in the actual
   presence of the sacred relics of the apostle Peter, and was attended by
   the whole body of the city clergy, the consuls, and a vast concourse of
   people; and a decree was framed, unanimously adopted and signed by all
   present, to the effect that, "if any person should hereafter, in
   contempt of the ancient and faithful customs of all Christians, and of
   the apostolic church in particular, stand forth as a destroyer,
   defamer, or blasphemer of the sacred images of our God and Lord Jesus
   Christ, and of His mother, the immaculate ever-Virgin Mary, of the
   blessed apostles, and all other saints, he be excluded from the body
   and blood of the Lord, and from the communion of the universal church."
   [107]

   Leo, indignant at the pope's audacity, arrested his messengers, and
   resolved to fit out a numerous fleet and army to reduce Italy into
   better subjection. But this Greek Armada encountered a terrible storm
   in the Adriatic; the fleet was disabled; and Leo was compelled to
   postpone his designs for enforcing the execution of his edicts against
   images in the Italian dependencies of the empire. He indemnified
   himself, however, by confiscating the papal revenues in Sicily,
   Calabria, and other parts of his dominions, and transferring Greece and
   Illyricum from the Roman patriarchate to that of Constantinople. But
   here, with both, the scene closes, but not the contest. Gregory and Leo
   both died in 741. His son Constantine, whose reign extended to the
   unusual length of thirty-four years, succeeded the Emperor. Gregory was
   succeeded by Zachary, a man of great ability, and deeply imbued with
   the spirit of popery. To the end of his reign, Constantine was
   unrelenting in his enmity against the worshippers of images. He is
   blamed for great cruelty towards the monks, but he was no doubt
   provoked to the last degree by their violent and fanatical behaviour.

   IRENE, wife to the son and heir of Constantine, an ambitious,
   intriguing, haughty princess, seized the government on the death of her
   feeble husband, in the name of her son, who was only ten years old. She
   dissembled for a time her designs for the restoration of images. Policy
   and idolatry took counsel together in her heart. She was jealous,
   crafty and cruel. Her history is the record of inward hatred and
   treachery with an outward appearance of courtesy. But we have only to
   do with the religious part of her reign.

   THE SECOND COUNCIL OF NICÆA

   Decrees were issued for a council to be held at Nicæa --a city,
   hallowed by the sittings of the first great council of Christendom --to
   decide the question of image-worship. The number of ecelesiastics
   present was about 350. Her chosen men took the lead; everything was, no
   doubt, pre-arranged. Among the preliminary acts of the council, it was
   debated to what class of heretics the Iconoclasts were to be ascribed.
   Tarasius, president of the assembly, asserted that it was worse than
   the worst heresy, being an absolute denial of Christ. The whole
   proceedings of the council were characterised by the same condemnatory
   tone towards the adversaries of image-worship. After assenting to the
   decrees of the first six councils, and to the anathemas against the
   heretics denounced therein, they passed --acting, as they declared,
   under the guidance of the Holy Spirit --the following canon:

   "With the venerable and life-giving cross shall be set up the venerable
   and holy images, whether in colours, in mosaic work, or any other
   material, within the consecrated churches of God, on the sacred vessels
   and vestments, on the walls and on tablets, in houses and in highways.
   The images, that is to say, of our God and Saviour Jesus Christ; of the
   immaculate mother of God; of the honoured angels; of all saints and
   holy men --these images shall be treated as holy memorials, worshipped,
   kissed, only without that peculiar adoration which is reserved for the
   Invisible, Incomprehensible, God. All who shall violate this, as is
   asserted, immemorial tradition of the church, and endeavour, forcibly
   or by craft to remove any image, if ecelesiastics, are to be deposed
   and excommunicated; if monks or laymen, to be excommunicated."

   The council was not content with this formal and solemn subscription.
   With one voice they broke out into a long acclamation. "We all believe,
   we all assert, we all subscribe. This is the faith of the apostles,
   this is the faith of the church, this is the faith of the orthodox, and
   this is the faith of the entire world. We who adore the Trinity worship
   images. Whoever do not the like, anathema upon them! Anathema on all
   who call images idols! Anathema on all who communicate with those who
   do not worship images . . .. Everlasting glory to the orthodox Romans,
   to John of Damascus! To Gregory of Rome, everlasting glory! Everlasting
   glory to all the preachers of truth!"

   HELENA AND IRENE

   Thus ended the most critical question that had ever been raised since
   Christianity became the religion of the Roman world. By the seventh
   general council idolatry was formally and vehemently established as the
   worship of the great papal system, and anathemas were denounced against
   all who should dare to depart from it; hence the merciless persecution
   of so-called separatists. But it is worthy of note, as according with
   our view of Jezebel's character, that a woman was the first mover in
   the worship of images, and a woman was the restorer of images when they
   had been cast down. Helena, the mother of Constantine the Great, was a
   blameless and devout woman, but she was used of the enemy to introduce
   exciting relics and sacred memorials, which changed Christianity from a
   purely spiritual worship to that paganising form of religion, which
   grew up with such rapidity in the succeeding centuries. The crafty
   Irene was again used of Satan to restore and re-establish the worship
   of images. From that day to this both the Greek and Latin churches have
   adhered to that form of worship, and maintained the sanctity of their
   images and pictures.

   The political results of the Iconoclastic controversy were equally
   great and important. Rome now burst the bonds of her connection with
   the East, separating herself forever from the Byzantine Empire; and
   Greek Christianity from this time becomes a separate religion, and the
   empire a separate state. The West, receiving a great accession of power
   through this revolution, ultimately created its own empire, formed
   alliances with the Frankish kings, and placed the crown of the Western
   empire on the head of Charlemagne, as we have already seen.
     __________________________________________________________________

   [100] See Milman's Latin Christianity vol. 2, 4 - 52; James White's
   Eighteen Christian Centuries, p. 143.

   [101] For full details of the different sects, see Marsden's Dictionary
   of Christian Churches and Sects, and Gardner's Faiths of the World.

   [102] Greenwood's Cathedra Petri, vol. 3, p. 474.

   [103] J. C. Robertson, vol. 2, p. 83; Milman, vol. 2, p. 156.

   [104] Milman's Latin Christianity, vol. 2, p. 160.

   [105] See Greenwood's Cathedra Petri, vol. 3.

   [106] Greenwood, vol. 3, p. 476.

   [107] Cathedra Petri, vol. 3, p. 480.
     __________________________________________________________________

Chapter 16

   THE SILVER LINE OF

   SOVEREIGN GRACE

   THE papal monarchy is now established. The court of France and the
   papacy are united. Rome is now dissevered from the East, and become the
   centre of influence over the entire West. But having traced the dark
   lines of the apostasy of Latin Christianity from the beginning of the
   fourth to the beginning of the ninth century, we will now turn for a
   little and endeavour to trace the silver line of God's sovereign grace
   in those who separated from her communion during the same period. If
   Satan was active in corrupting the outward church, God was active in
   gathering out His own from the corrupt mass, and strengthening them as
   His own special witnesses. From the days of Augustine, the noble
   witness for His grace against Pelagianism in Western Christendom, down
   to the Reformation, a line of faithful witnesses may be traced who
   testified against the idolatry and tyranny of Rome, and preached
   salvation through faith in Christ Jesus without works of merit. [108]

   Besides multitudes who were nourished in private, both in convents and
   families, on the simple truth of the gospel, we would briefly notice
   some of the most prominent who form an important link in the great
   chain of witnesses, especially as connected with the history of the
   church in Europe.

   THE NESTORIANS AND

   THE PAULICIANS

   The rise of the Nestorians in the fifth century and their great
   missionary zeal have been already mentioned. At their head stood a
   bishop, known by the title of Patriarch of Babylon. His residence was
   originally at Seleucia. From Persia, it is said, they carried the
   gospel to the North, the East, and the South. In the sixth century they
   preached the gospel with great success to the Huns, the Indians, the
   Medes, and the Elamites: on the coast of Malabar, and the isles of the
   ocean, great numbers were converted. Following the course of trade, the
   missionaries made their way from India to China, and penetrated across
   the deserts to its northern frontier. In 1625 a stone was discovered by
   the Jesuits near Singapore, which bears a long inscription, partly
   Syriac and partly Chinese, recording the names of missionaries who had
   laboured in China, and the history of Christianity in that country from
   the year 636 -781. But the propagation of Christianity, it is thought,
   awakened the jealousy of the State, and, after witnessing the success
   of the gospel, and experiencing persecution, they probably were
   exterminated, or fled, about the close of the eighth century. The
   Nestorians were patronised by some of the Persian kings, and under the
   reign of the caliphs they were protected and prospered greatly. They
   assumed the designation of Chaldean Christians, or Assyrians, and still
   exist under that name. [109]

   The doctrines, character, and history of the Paulicians have been
   subjects of great controversy; but they have not been allowed to speak
   for themselves to posterity. The Catholics carefully destroyed their
   writings, and we know them only through the reports of bitter enemies
   who brand them as heretics, and as the ancestors of the protestant
   reformers. On the other hand, some protestant writers accept the
   pedigree, and assert that they were the maintainers of a purely
   scriptural Christianity, which may have appeared to the papacy as
   heretical. This latter circumstance, from what we have already shown,
   will be easily believed. The most grievous corruptions, both in the
   doctrine and the worship of the Catholic Church, had been not only
   admitted, but also enforced, long before the rise of the Paulicians.
   Neither the spirit nor the simplicity of the gospel remained; hence,
   scriptural Christianity must have appeared to the image-worshippers as
   a heresy.

   Passing over many individual names from the time of St. Augustine, who
   were worthy witnesses of the truth, we will come at once and inquire
   into:

   THE ORIGIN OF THE

   PAULICIANS A.D. 653

   The Gnostics, who had been so numerous and powerful during the early
   days of Christianity, were now an obscure remnant, chiefly confined to
   the villages along the borders of the Euphrates. The all-powerful
   Catholics had driven them from the capitals of the East and the West,
   and the remains of their different sects passed under the general and
   odious name of the Manicheans.

   In this region, at the village of Mananalis, near Samosata, lived about
   the year 653 one Constantine, whom the Roman writers describe as
   descended from a Manichean family. Soon after the Saracens' conquest of
   Syria, an Armenian deacon, who was returning from captivity among the
   Saracens, became the guest of Constantine. In acknowledgment of his
   hospitality the deacon made him a present of a manuscript, containing
   the four Gospels and the fourteen Epistles of St. Paul. This was indeed
   a rare gift, as the scriptures were already concealed from the laity.
   The study of these sacred books produced a complete revolution in his
   religious principles, and in the whole subsequent course of his life.
   Some say he had been trained in Gnosticism, others, that he was a
   member of the Greek established church; but, however this may have
   been, those books now became his only study and the rule of his faith
   and practice.

   Constantine now thought of forming a new sect, or rather, of restoring
   apostolic Christianity. He renounced and cast away his Manichean books,
   say his enemies; he abjured Manicheism, and made it a law to his
   followers not to read any other books whatsoever, but the Gospels and
   the Epistles of the New Testament. This may have given their enemies a
   pretext for charging them with rejecting the Old Testament and the two
   Epistles of St. Peter. But it is more than probable that they did not
   possess these portions of the word of God, it is to be feared however,
   from their peculiar attachment and devotion to the writings and
   character of St. Paul, that other scriptures were neglected.

   It is generally agreed that the word Paulician is formed from the name
   of the great apostle of the Gentiles. Constantine and his disciples
   represented Paul's fellow labourers, Silvanus, Timothy, Titus, and
   Tychicus, and, as their congregations sprang up in different places,
   were called after the names of the apostolic churches. It is difficult
   to see, in this "innocent allegory," as it has been termed, how the
   Catholics could have been so grievously offended with the Paulicians,
   or could have found a pretext for hunting them down with fire and
   sword. Yet so they did, as we shall presently see. Their unpardonable
   sin was their separation from the State church; their testimony against
   superstition and apostasy, their reviving the memory of a pure
   primitive Christianity.

   SILVANUS AT CIBOSSA

   Constantine, who styled himself Silvanus, addressed his first appeals
   to the inhabitants of a place called Cibossa in Armenia, whom he styled
   Macedonians. "I am Silvanus," he said, "you are Macedonians." There he
   fixed his residence and laboured with untiring energy for nearly thirty
   years; he made many converts, both from the Catholic Church, and the
   Zoroastrian religion. At length, the sect having become sufficiently
   considerable to attract attention, the matter was reported to the
   Emperor, and an edict was issued A.D. 684 against Constantine and the
   Paulician congregations. The execution of the decree was entrusted to
   an officer of the imperial court, named Simeon. He had orders to put
   the teacher to death, and to distribute his followers among the clergy
   and in monasteries, with a view to their being reclaimed. The
   government, no doubt, ordered as directed by the church; as in the case
   of Ahab, "whom Jezebel his wife stirred up." (1 Kings 21:25) But the
   Lord is above all, and He can make the wrath of man to praise Him.

   Simeon placed Constantine --the chief object of the priests' revenge
   --before a large number of his companions, and commanded them to stone
   him. They refused, and, instead of obeying, all dropped the stones with
   which they were armed, excepting one young man; and a stone from the
   hand of that heartless youth --his own adopted son Justus, killed
   Constantine. This ungrateful apostate has been extolled by the enemies
   of the Paulicians, as another David who with a stone slew another
   Goliath --the giant of heresy. But from the stoning of Constantine, as
   from the stoning of Stephen, a new leader was raised up in the person
   of his imperial murderer. Impressions were made on Simeon's mind by
   what he had seen and heard that he could not shake off. He entered into
   conversation with some of the sectaries, and the result was that he
   became their convert. He returned to the imperial court, but after
   spending three years at Constantinople in great uneasiness of mind, he
   fled, leaving all his property behind him, and took up his abode at
   Cibossa, where, under the name of Titus, he became the successor of
   Constantine Sylvanus.

   About five years after the martyrdom of Constantine, the same renegade
   Justus betrayed the Paulicians. He knew, like the traitor of old, the
   habits and movements of the community, and also where he would be
   rewarded for his treachery. He went to the bishop of Colonia, and
   reported the revival and spread of the so-called heresy. The bishop
   communicated his information to the Emperor Justinian II, and, in
   consequence, Simeon, and a large number of his followers were burnt to
   death on one large funeral pile. The cruel Justinian vainly thought to
   extinguish the name and memory of the Paulicians in a single
   conflagration, but the blood of the martyrs seemed only to multiply
   their numbers and strength. A succession of teachers and congregations
   arose from their ashes. The new sect spread over all the adjacent
   regions, Asia Minor, Pontus, the borders of Armenia and to the westward
   of the Euphrates. They bore, during many successive reigns, with
   Christian patience, the intolerant wrath of the rulers through the
   instigation of the priests. But the prize for cruelty, as one observes,
   must doubtless be awarded to the sanguinary devotion of Theodora, who
   restored the images to the Oriental church.

   ANOTHER JEZEBEL IN POWER A.D. 842

   After the death of the Emperor Theophilas, his widow Theodora governed
   as regent during the minority of her son. Her concealed attachment to
   idolatry was well known to the priesthood, and no sooner was Theophilus
   dead than she applied herself to the complete accomplishment of her
   great object. When the way was clear, a solemn festival was appointed
   for the restoration of images. "The whole clergy of Constantinople, and
   all who could flock in from the neighbourhood, met in and before the
   palace of the archbishop, and marched in procession with crosses,
   torches, and incense, to the church of St. Sophia. There the Empress
   and her infant son Michael met them. They made the circuit of the
   church, with their burning torches, paying homage to every statue and
   picture, which had been carefully restored, never again to be effaced
   till the days of later, more terrible Iconoclasts, the Ottoman Turks."
   [110]

   After so triumphant a re-establishment of images, the victorious party
   no doubt thought the right time was come to propose and endeavour to
   secure another triumph; they now urged the Empress to undertake the
   entire suppression of the Paulicians. They had preached against images,
   relics, and the rotten wood of the cross. They were not fit to live.
   The Catholics gained their object! An edict was issued under the
   regency of Theodora, which decreed that the Paulicians should be
   exterminated by fire and sword, or brought back to the Greek Church.
   But, they refused all attempts which were made to gain them, and the
   fiery demon of persecution was let loose among them. Her inquisitors
   explored the cities and mountains of the lesser Asia, and executed
   their commission in the cruelest manner. The numbers of the sect, and
   the severity of the persecution, may be judged by the multitudes who
   were slain by the sword, beheaded, drowned, or consumed in the flames.
   It is affirmed by both civil and ecclesiastical historians, that, in a
   short reign, one hundred thousand Paulicians were put to death. Was
   there ever a more genuine daughter of Jezebel? She had not even an Ahab
   to stir up to do this cruel work, but with her own hand, as it was
   --alas! a woman's hand --by her own decree, she slaughtered one hundred
   thousand of God's saints, re-established the worship of idols, and
   nourished with royal favour the idolatrous priests of Rome. [111]

   The history of Iconoclasm has been remarkable for female influence.
   Helena was the first to suggest and encourage veneration for relics;
   Irene was the restorer of image-worship when threatened with
   destruction; and now Theodora not only re-establishes the idolatry,
   which her husband had endeavoured to suppress, but persecutes the true
   worshippers. Surely that woman Jezebel --symbol of the dominant church
   in the dark ages --has her antitype in these three women, especially
   the last two. The likeness is too striking to be questioned. But the
   whole system of Catholicism breathes the fearful spirit, and is
   characterised by the dark features of Jezebel's character. The word of
   the Lord cannot be broken. "There was none like unto Ahab, which did
   sell himself to work wickedness in the sight of the Lord, whom Jezebel
   his wife stirred up." This is the type. The antitype is, "I have a few
   things against thee, because thou sufferest that woman Jezebel, which
   calleth herself a prophetess, to teach and seduce my servants to commit
   fornication, and to eat things sacrificed unto idols. And I gave her
   space to repent of her fornication; and she repented not." (1 Kings
   21:25; Revelation 2:20, 21)

   ROME'S ADMIRATION OF

   THEODORA'S CONDUCT

   Nicolas I, who became pope of Rome in 858, highly commends, by letter,
   the conduct of the superstitious and cruel Theodora. He especially
   admires and approves her implicit obedience to the Roman See. "She
   resolved," he says, "to bring the Paulicians to the true faith, or cut
   them all off root and branch. Pursuant to that resolution, she sent
   noblemen and magistrates into the different provinces of the empire;
   and by them some of those unhappy wretches were crucified, some put to
   the sword, and some thrown into the sea and drowned." Nicolas at the
   same time observes, that the heretics, experiencing in her all the
   resolution and vigour of a man, could scarcely believe her to be a
   woman. Indeed the blinding power of an idolatrous superstition had
   changed in Theodora (as it did in our queen, "the bloody Mary") the
   tender and compassionate heart of a woman into that of a merciless and
   bloodthirsty tyrant. From the pope's own words, it is perfectly evident
   that the Roman See had chiefly to do with the slaughter of the
   Paulicians. After telling her that the heretics dreaded, and at the
   same time admired, her resolution and steadiness in maintaining the
   purity of the catholic faith, he adds, "and why so, but because you
   followed the directions of the Apostolic See?" [112]

   It is difficult to believe that the professed vicar of Christ, and the
   shepherd of His sheep, could ever have put on record such sayings. But
   so he was permitted, and thus they have come down to us as the true
   witness of the established antichristian tyranny of Rome in the ninth
   century.

   THE PAULICIANS REBEL

   AGAINST THE GOVERNMENT

   Like certain of the Albigenses, Hussites of Bohemia, and Calvinists of
   France, the Paulicians of Armenia and the adjacent provinces determined
   on more decided resistance to their persecutors. This was their sad
   failure, and the sad fruit of listening to the suggestions of Satan.
   For nearly two hundred years they had suffered as Christians, adorning
   the gospel by a life of faith and patience. So far as we have the means
   of judging, they seem to have maintained the truth through a long
   course of suffering, in the noble though passive spirit of conformity
   to Christ. But faith and patience failed at length, and they openly
   rebelled against the government. It happened in this way:

   CARBEAS, an officer of high rank in the imperial service, on hearing
   that his father had been impaled by the catholic inquisitors, renounced
   his allegiance to the empire, and, with five thousand companions,
   sought a refuge among the Saracens. The Caliph gladly welcomed the
   deserters, and gave them leave to settle within his territory. Carbeas
   built and fortified the city of Tephrice, which became the headquarters
   of the Paulicians. They naturally flocked to this new home, and sought
   an asylum from the imperial laws. They soon became a powerful
   community. Under the command of Carbeas, war was waged with the empire,
   and maintained with various successes for more than thirty years; but
   as details would be more depressing than interesting, we forbear.

   THE PAULICIAINS IN EUROPE

   About the middle of the eighth century Constantine, surnamed
   Copronymus, either as a favour or as a punishment, transplanted a great
   number of Paulicians into Thrace, an outpost of the empire; and there
   they acted as a religious mission. By this emigration their doctrines
   were introduced and diffused in Europe. They seem to have laboured with
   great success amongst the Bulgarians. It was in order to guard the
   infant church of Bulgaria, that Peter of Sicily, about the year 870,
   addressed to the archbishop of the Bulgarians a tract warning him
   against the infection of the Paulicians. This document is the chief
   source of information as to the sect. In the tenth century the Emperor
   John Zimisces conducted another great migration to the valleys of Mount
   Haemus. Their history after this period is European. They were favoured
   with a free toleration in the land of their exile, which greatly
   softened their condition and strengthened their community. From these
   Bulgarian settlements their way was opened into Western Europe. Many
   native Bulgarians associated with them; hence the name of Bulgarians,
   in a coarse or corrupted form, is one of the appellations of hatred,
   which clung to the Paulicians in all quarters.

   As to the subsequent religious history of these interesting people
   historians are greatly divided. Nothing is known of them but from the
   writings of their enemies; therefore, in common justice, we are bound
   to suspend our belief of their statements. One thing however is
   certain; they protested against the saint and image-worship of the
   Catholics, and the legitimacy of the priesthood by which idolatry was
   upheld. They also protested against many things in the doctrines, the
   discipline, and the assumed authority of the Church of Rome. The
   catholic writers usually speak of them as Manicheans --the most odious
   of all heretics. But there are some protestant writers, who have
   examined with great care all that can throw light on their history, and
   have come to the conclusion, that they were guiltless of the heresies
   imputed to them, and maintain that they were the true and faithful
   witnesses of Christ and His truth during a very dark period of the
   middle ages. [113]

   We now turn to our general history.

   RELIGIOUS WARS OF CHARLEMAGNE FROM ABOUT 771 - 814

   Ecclesiastical history, so-called, from the time of Pepin, is so
   interwoven with the history of the Frankish kings, and the disgraceful
   intrigues of the popes, that we must further, though briefly, trace the
   course of events which have an important bearing on the character of
   popery and the history of the church.

   The rising power of Charlemagne, the younger son of Pepin, was watched
   by the occupants of St Peter's chair with the greatest possible
   interest, and skillfully used by them for the accomplishment of their
   ambitious designs. Pope Hadrian I and Leo III, both able men, filled
   the papal throne during the long reign of Charles, and succeeded in
   greatly aggrandising, through what he called his religious wars, the
   Roman See.

   A quarrel between Desiderius, king of the Lombards, and pope Hadrian
   led to a war with France, which ended in the complete overthrow of the
   Lombard kingdom in Italy. This was the result of the grand scheme of
   the papacy, and brought about by the unprincipled and treacherous
   policy of the pontiff. Charles was son-in-law to Desiderius; but after
   one year's wedlock he divorced Hermingard, the Lombard's daughter, and
   immediately married Hildegard, a lady of a noble Swabian house. The
   insulted father, on receiving back his repudiated daughter, naturally
   sought for redress from the pope, the head of the church, of which
   Charles was so dutiful a son. But although the church, when it suited
   its own purposes, had asserted in the strongest terms the sanctity of
   the marriage bond, its open violation in this instance was passed
   quietly over; the pope refused to interfere.

   Rome was reckoning on good service from the great Charles, and could
   not afford to risk his displeasure. Not a word was said against the
   conduct of the dissolute monarch. Desiderius at length resented the
   bitter insult of Charles and the wicked connivance of Hadrian; he
   appeared at the head of his troops in papal Italy; he besieged,
   stormed, and spread devastation everywhere, and threatened the pope in
   his capital.

   HADRIAN SENDS FOR CHARLEMAGNE

   The pope now sent messages in the utmost haste to entreat immediate
   help from Charles; at the same time diligently superintending in person
   the military preparations for the defence of the city and the security
   of its treasures. And, according to an old strategy of Rome, Hadrian
   sent three bishops to overawe the king and to threaten him with
   excommunication if he dared to violate the property of the church. The
   pope thus gained time; and Charles, with his usual rapidity, assembled
   his forces, crossed the Alps, and laid siege to Pavia. During the
   siege, which continued several months, Charles paid a visit to the pope
   in great state, and was received with every honour. Nobles, senators
   and citizens, hailed him as patrician of Rome and the dutiful son of
   the church, who had so speedily obeyed the summons of his spiritual
   father, and had come to deliver them from the hated and dreaded
   Lombards. When the holy season was over, Charles and his officers
   returned to the army.

   Pavia at length fell. Desiderius, successor of the great and wise
   Luitprand, was dethroned, and took refuge in a monastery --the usual
   asylum of dethroned kings; his valiant son, Adelchis, fled to
   Constantinople; and thus expired the kingdom of the Lombards, the
   deadly enemies of the Italians, and the great hindrance to the papal
   aggression. The way was now clear for the conqueror to give the pope a
   kingdom, not on paper merely, like his father Pepin, but in cities,
   provinces, and revenues. And so he did, and thereby ratified the
   munificent gift of his father. As lord by conquest, Charlemagne
   presented to the successors of St. Peter, by an absolute and perpetual
   grant, the kingdom of Lombardy; some say, the whole of Italy. At the
   same time Charles claimed the royal title, and exercised a kind of
   sovereignty over all Italy and even over Rome itself. But the pope,
   being now secure in the possession of the territory, could well afford
   to allow all royal honours to his great benefactor.

   THE SOVEREIGNTY OF

   THE ROMAN PONTIFFS A.D. 775

   The pope was now a temporal prince. The long looked for and sighed for
   day was come; the fond dream of centuries was realised. The successors
   of St. Peter are proclaimed sovereign pontiffs and the lords of the
   city and territories of Rome. The last link of the shadowy vassalage
   and subserviency to the Greek empire is broken forever, and Rome has
   again become the acknowledged capital of the West.

   The great Pope Hadrian at once assumes the power, privileges, and
   language of a temporal sovereign to whom fealty is due. Murmurs from
   Ravenna and the East were speedily silenced; and Rome reigned supreme.
   The pope's language even to Charlemagne is that of an equal: "As your
   men," he said, "are not allowed to come to Rome without your permission
   and special letter, so my men must not be allowed to appear at the
   court of France without the same credentials from me." He claimed the
   same allegiance from the Italians, which the subjects of Charlemagne
   owed to him. "The administration of justice was in the pope's name; not
   only the ecclesiastical dues, and the rents of estates forming part of
   the patrimony of St. Peter, the civil revenue likewise came into his
   treasury... Hadrian, with the power, assumed the magnificence of a
   great potentate . . .Rome, with the increase of the papal revenues,
   began to resume more of her ancient splendour."

   THE GREAT EPOCH IN

   THE ANNALS OF POPERY

   As the empire of Charlemagne is in a peculiar manner connected with the
   history of the church, and forms the great epoch in the annals of the
   Roman See, it demands a fuller consideration. Roman Catholicism was
   just about as much indebted to that great prince, as Mahometanism was
   to the great Arab prophet and his successors. "The Saxon wars of
   Charlemagne," says Milman, "which added almost the whole of Germany to
   his dominions, were avowedly religious wars. If Boniface was the
   Christian, Charlemagne was the Mahometan, apostle of the gospel. The
   declared object of his invasions was the extinction of heathenism,
   subjection to the Christian faith, or extermination. Baptism was the
   sign of subjugation and fealty; the Saxons accepted or threw it off
   according as they were in a state of submission or revolt. These wars
   were inevitable; they were but the continuance of the great strife
   waged for centuries from the barbarous North and East against the
   civilised South and West; only that the Roman and Christian population,
   now invigorated by the large infusion of Teutonic blood, instead of
   awaiting aggression, had become the aggressor. The tide of conquest was
   rolling back; the subjects of the Western kingdoms, of the Western
   empire, instead of waiting to see their homes overrun by hordes of
   fierce invaders, now boldly marched into the heart of their enemies'
   country, penetrated their forests, crossed their morasses, and planted
   their feudal courts of justice, their churches, and their monasteries
   in the most remote and savage regions, up to the Elbe and the shores of
   the Baltic."

   The Saxons were divided into three leading tribes, the Ostphalians, the
   Westphalians, and the Angarians. Each clan, according to old Teutonic
   usage, consisted of nobles, freemen, and slaves; but at times the whole
   nation met in a great-armed convention. The Saxons scorned and detested
   the Romanised Franks, and the Franks held the Saxons to be barbarians
   and heathens. For three and thirty years the powerful Charles was
   engaged in subduing these wild Saxon hordes. "The tract of country
   inhabited by these tribes," says Greenwood, "comprehended the whole of
   the modern circle of Westphalia, and the greater portion of that of
   lower Saxony, extended from the Lippe to the Weser and the Elbe;
   bordering to the Northward upon the kindred Jutes, Angles, and Danes;
   and to the Eastward of Sclavic origin, who had gradually advanced upon
   the more ancient Teutonic races of Eastern Germany." But we must limit
   ourselves chiefly to the religious aspect of these wars; still, it is
   interesting at this moment to study these ancient records, as we have
   just witnessed the conclusion of the great war of 1870 - 71 between the
   descendants of the Franks and Germans of antiquity.

   THE SWORD OF CHARLEMAGNE

   OR BAPTISM

   The professed object of Charlemagne was to establish Christianity in
   the remote parts of Germany, but it must ever be regretted that he used
   such violent means to accomplish his end. Thousands were forced into
   the waters of baptism to escape a cruel death. The sword or baptism was
   the conqueror's terms. A law was enacted which denounced the penalty of
   death against the refusal of baptism. He could offer no terms of peace;
   enter into no treaty, of which baptism should not be the principal
   condition. Conversion or extermination was the watchword of the Franks.
   And though the old religion might sit loosely enough on the conscience
   of the Saxon, he could see nothing better in the new; for to his mind
   baptism was identified with slavery, and Christianity with subjugation
   to a foreign yoke. To submit to baptism was to renounce, not only his
   old religion, but also his personal freedom.

   With such anti-Christian, such inhuman, feelings the war was carried
   on, as we have said, for thirty-three years. At the head of his
   superior armies, he oppressed the savage tribes who were incapable of
   confederating for their common safety; and he never did, it is said,
   encounter an equal antagonist in numbers, discipline, or arms. But
   after a struggle of incalculable bloodshed, and of almost unexampled
   obstinacy and duration, the numbers, the discipline, and the valour of
   the Franks prevailed at length over the undisciplined and desultory
   efforts of the Saxons. "The remnant of thirty campaigns of
   undistinguished slaughter," says Greenwood, "and wholesale
   expatriation, accepted baptism, and became permanently incorporated
   with the empire of the Franks and Christianity. Abbeys, monasteries,
   and religious houses of all descriptions sprang up in every part of the
   conquered territory, and the new churches were supplied with ministers
   from the school of Boniface --a school which admitted no distinction
   between the law of Christ and the law of Rome."

   Baptism was the only security and pledge of peace, which the Franks
   would accept for the submission of the Saxons. And thus it was --how
   sad and humbling to relate! --when the conquest was complete, and the
   carnage over, the priests entered the field. Their office was to
   baptise the vanquished. Thousands of the barbarians were thus forced,
   at the point of the sword, into what the priests called the
   regenerating waters of baptism. But to the Saxons their baptism meant
   neither more nor less than the renunciation of their religion and their
   liberty. The consequence was, that no sooner were the armies of Charles
   withdrawn, than the indefatigable Saxons rose again, and burst through
   the encroaching limits of the empire, ravaging as they went. In their
   burning rage and bitter revenge they hewed down crosses, burnt
   churches, destroyed monasteries, slaughtered their inmates, respected
   neither age nor sex, until the whole country seemed wrapped in flames
   and deluged with blood. Such revolts, it is said, were often provoked
   by the insolent language, and still more by the offensive demeanour of
   the missionary monks, and the severe avarice with which they exacted
   their tithes. But such outbursts, on the part of the Saxons, were
   followed by a fresh invasion and a merciless slaughter by the Franks,
   until tribe after tribe yielded to the conquering arms of Charlemagne.
   On one occasion, after a severe revolt, Charles massacred 4,500 brave
   warriors in cold blood who had surrendered. This cruel and cowardly
   abuse of power leaves a dark, an indelible stain on his history, which
   no apology can ever remove. Even the sceptic historian alludes to it in
   a most truthful and touching way. "In a day of equal retribution," he
   says, "the sons of his brother Carloman, the Merovingian prince of
   Aquitaine, and the four thousand five hundred Saxons who were beheaded
   on the same spot, would have something to allege against the justice
   and humanity of Charlemagne. His treatment of the vanquished Saxons was
   an abuse of the right of conquest."

   THE EVIL INFLUENCE OF

   THE POPE'S MISSIONARIES

   Sad as it is to reflect on the fearful slaughter of the Saxons, and the
   forced baptism of the helpless remnant, our sadness is infinitely
   increased when we find that the professed messengers of mercy were the
   great movers in these long and exterminating wars. In place of being
   the merciful missionaries of the gospel of peace, they were in reality
   the cruel emissaries of the papacy --of the power of darkness:
   Charlemagne was, no doubt, to a great extent deceived and urged on by
   the priests.

   Under the avowed object of cementing the union between Church and
   State, for the temporal and spiritual benefit of mankind, and for the
   enduring strength of the imperial government, the artful priests saw
   the way opening for their own temporal greatness and the more absolute
   sovereignty of Rome. And so it happened, as all history affirms. They
   very soon gained a position of worldly greatness over the conquered
   people and their lands. An entire change takes place just at this time
   in the outward condition of the clergy, and indeed in society
   generally. Ancient history disappears, we are told, at the death of
   Pepin, and mediaeval life begins. His son --the last of barbaric kings
   and the first of feudal monarchs, inaugurates a new state of society.
   But it is with ecclesiastical history we have to do, and here, again,
   we prefer giving a few extracts from the Dean --so often referred to
   --who will not be accused of unnecessary severity, but whose testimony
   is of the very highest integrity.

   "The subjugation of the land appeared complete before Charlemagne
   founded successively his great religious colonies, the eight bishoprics
   of Minden, Seligenstadt, Verden, Bremen, Munster, Hildesheim, Osnaburg,
   and Paderborn. These, with many richly endowed monasteries like
   Hersfuld, became the separate centres from which Christianity and
   civilisation spread in expanding circles. But though these were
   military as well as religious settlements, the ecclesiastics were the
   only foreigners. The more faithful and trustworthy Saxon chieftains,
   who gave the security of seemingly sincere conversion to Christianity,
   were raised into counts: thus the profession of Christianity was the
   sole test of fealty.

   Charlemagne, in Christian history, commands a more important station
   even than for his subjugation of Germany to the gospel, on account of
   his complete organisation, if not foundation, of the high feudal
   hierarchy in a great part of Europe. Throughout the Western empire was,
   it may he said, constitutionally established this double aristocracy,
   ecclesiastical and civil. Everywhere the higher clergy and the nobles,
   and so downwards through the different gradations of society, even of
   the same rank, and liable to many of the same duties, of equal, in some
   cases of co-ordinate, authority. Each district had its bishop and its
   count; the dioceses and the counties were mostly of the same extent.'

   Charlemagne himself was no less prodigal than weaker kings of
   immunities and grants of property to churches and monasteries. With his
   queen Hildegard, he endows the church of St. Martin, in Tours, with
   lands in Italy. His grants to St. Denys, to Lorch, to Fulda, to Prum,
   more particularly to Hersfuld, and many Italian abbeys, appear among
   the acts of his reign.'

   Nor were these estates always obtained from the king or the nobles. The
   stewards of the poor were sometimes the spoilers of the poor. Even
   under Charlemagne there are complaints against the usurpation of
   property by bishops and abbots, as against counts and laymen. They
   compelled the poor free man to sell his property, or forced him to
   serve in the army, and that on permanent duty, and so to leave his land
   either without owner, with all the chances that he might not return, or
   to commit it to the custody of those who remained at home in quiet, and
   seized every opportunity of entering into possession. No "Naboth's
   vineyard" escaped their watchful avarice.'

   In their fiefs the bishop or abbot exercised all the rights of a feudal
   chieftain... Thus the hierarchy, now a feudal institution, parallel to
   and co-ordinate with the temporal feudal aristocracy, aspired to enjoy,
   and actually before long did enjoy, the dignity, the wealth, the power,
   of suzerain lords. Bishops and abbots had the independence and
   privileges of inalienable fiefs; and at the same time began either
   sullenly to contest, or haughtily to refuse, those payments, or
   acknowledgments of vassalage, which sometimes weighed heavily on other
   lands. During the reign of Charlemagne this theory of spiritual
   immunity slumbered, or rather had not quickened into life. It was
   boldly announced --so rapid was its growth --in the strife with his
   son, Louis the Pious. It was then asserted by the hierarchy, that all
   property given to the church, to the poor, to the saints, to God
   Himself --such were the specious phrases --was given absolutely,
   irrevocably, with no reserve. The king might have power over the
   knights' fees; over those of the church he had none whatever. Such
   claims were impious, sacrilegious, and implied forfeiture of eternal
   life. The clergy and their estates belonged to another realm, to
   another commonwealth; they were entirely, absolutely, independent of
   the civil power." [114]

   THE FEUDAL HIERARCHICAL SYSTEM

   For centuries the papal cry to each succeeding monarch had been, "Give,
   give; endow, endow; and the blessed Peter shall surely send you victory
   over your enemies, prosperity in this world, and a place near himself
   in heaven." This cry was in a great measure answered about the
   beginning of the ninth century. The above extracts will give the reader
   some idea of the spoils, which came to the clergy from the victories of
   Charles in Germany. It was chiefly out of these thirty-three years of
   internecine war, that the great feudal hierarchical system arose.
   Innumerable thousands were slain to make room for the bishops and
   abbots --an ecclesiastical aristocracy. Up rose the princely palaces of
   these great ecclesiastics all over the conquered land: but their
   foundations were laid in cruelty, injustice, and blood.

   Though more than a thousand years have passed away since the great
   patron of the church died, the palaces still live and are thickly
   planted all over Europe. But the heart sickens at the thought of the
   origin of these avowed palaces of peace, especially if we bear in mind
   the true character of the gospel, and that the ministers of Christ
   should ever seek to manifest the spirit of the meek and lowly Jesus.
   The souls, not the property, of men should be their object. "We seek
   not yours, but you" should be their motto; going forth taking nothing
   of the Gentiles. But the example of Christ had been long forgotten. The
   church sank to the level and spirit of the world when Constantine
   united her to the State. This was her great fall, from which her
   painful inconsistency flows. The love of the world, of absolute power,
   of universal dominion, then took possession of her whole being. Misled
   by Satan, on whose throne (Rev. 2) she sits, the shameless iniquity of
   her course can only be accounted for on the ground of his blinding
   power. All means, in her sight, were justifiable which had for their
   object the advancement of the Roman See.

   REFLECTIONS ON

   THE LORD'S CARE FOR HIS OWN

   The Lord had, no doubt, His many hidden ones, even in the darkest
   times, as in Thyatira: "But unto you I say, [and unto] the rest in
   Thyatira, as many as have not this doctrine, and which have not known
   the depths of Satan, as they speak; I will put upon you none other
   burden. But that which ye have already hold fast till I come." One
   thing, and only one, was to occupy the faithful after the apostasy had
   set in --the ascended Saviour, the Man in the glory. And to all such
   the sweet promise is, "And I will give him the Morning Star." But the
   outward or mere professing church, as allied to the State, was corrupt
   to the very core, and sunk, and blinded, and hardened, in the most
   unblushing wickedness; for the concentration of every form of evil was
   to be found in the chair of St Peter. Even as to the religious wars
   Charlemagne himself stands before us guiltless, compared with Hadrian.

   We must remember that Charles was a barbaric king, though the greatest
   perhaps in European history with the exception of Alexander and Cæsar;
   so that we can understand his object in seeking to unite and
   consolidate a great empire; but he was ignorant and superstitious as to
   divine things, though the religious element was strong in his mind. On
   this the pope acted, and led him to believe that a strong and wealthy
   church would make a strong and wealthy State; and that if he would
   please heaven and gain eternal life, the harmonious union of Church and
   State must be the basis of all his governmental schemes. He personally
   loved Hadrian, readily obeyed his call, yielded to his counsels, and
   wept when he heard of his death; which took place on the 26^th of
   December is the year 795, after the unusually long pontificate of
   twenty-three years and upwards. He might sometimes see the pope's real
   object under the greatest artifice; but, strong in his own self-reliant
   power, he could allow such things to pass without these feelings of
   distrust and jealousy, which would have been engendered in a feebler
   mind. Not given to change, he made a good friend.

   THE PAPAL FORGERY

   But the kindness of Charlemagne only excited the cupidity and envy of
   the rapacious priests. Not content with their estates and tithes, they
   aspired to a position far above the lay-lords, and even above the
   monarch himself. Stimulated by past success, they now attempted by a
   daring forgery to accomplish the object of their secular ambition. A
   title to almost imperial power is now for the first time, after the
   lapse of 450 years, brought to light. By this original deed of gift it
   was discovered, that all which Pepin or Charlemagne had conferred on
   the Church of Rome was only an installment of the royal grant to the
   chair of St. Peter by the "pious emperor Constantine."

   As our main object throughout this period of the church's history is to
   present the real character of the papal system, the means by which it
   reached its wonderful influence and power, and the secularising effects
   of the Church and State alliance, we copy the pope's own letter from
   Greenwood. The reader will, no doubt, be surprised to find that any man
   with the smallest pretension to respectability --far less the head of
   the church --could ever have fabricated such a document, and that
   merely to gain more territory and power. But we must remember that
   Thyatira was characterised by "the depths of Satan," and so has the
   papacy ever since she drew her first breath, and so must she be until
   she draws her last. Revelation 17, 18 describe both her character and
   her end.

   "Considering," says pope Hadrian, "that in the days of the blessed
   pontiff Sylvester, that most pious Emperor did, by his donation, exalt
   and enlarge the holy catholic and apostolic church of Rome, giving unto
   her supreme power over all the region of the West, so now we beseech
   you, that in this our own happy day, the same holy church may sprout
   forth and exult, and be ever more and more lifted up, so that all
   people who shall hear thereof may exclaim, God save the king, and hear
   us in the day in which we call upon thee!' For behold, in those days
   arose Constantine, the Christian Emperor, by whom God vouchsafed to
   give all things to His most holy church, the church of the blessed
   Peter, prince of the apostles. All this, and many territories besides,
   which divers Emperors, patricians, and other God-fearing persons, had
   given to the blessed Peter and the holy Roman and apostolical church of
   God, for the benefit of their souls and the forgiveness of their sins,
   lying in the parts of Tuscany, Spoletum, Beneventum, Corsica, Savona
   --territories which were taken and kept by the impious nations of the
   Lombards, cause all this to be restored to us in these your days,
   according to the tenor of your several deeds of gift deposited in our
   archives of the Lateran. To that end we have directed our envoys to
   exhibit those deeds to you for your satisfaction; and in virtue of them
   we now call upon you to command the undiminished restitution of this
   patrimony of St. Peter into our hands; that by your conformity
   therewith the holy church of God may be put into full possession and
   enjoyment of its entire right; so that the prince of the apostles
   himself may intercede before the throne of the Almighty for long life
   to yourself and prosperity in all your undertakings."

   THE IGNORANCE AND

   CREDULITY OF THE TIMES

   So deep was the ignorance and credulity of those times, that the most
   absurd fables were received with great reverence by all classes. The
   cunning priests knew how to clothe their religious frauds with the most
   specious piety, and to blind both king and people. According to the
   legend, Constantine was healed of the leprosy by Pope Sylvester; and so
   penetrated with gratitude was the Emperor, that he resigned to the pope
   the free and perpetual sovereignty of Rome, Italy, and the provinces of
   the West; and resolved on founding a new capital for himself in the
   East.

   The object of Hadrian in forging such a deed, and in writing such a
   letter, was no doubt to influence Charlemagne to imitate the alleged
   liberality of his great predecessor. If he merely put the popes in
   possession of the said donation of Constantine, he was only acting as
   his executor; if he aspired to be a spontaneous benefactor of the
   church, he must exceed the limits of the original deed of gift. But the
   depths of this forgery we have not yet fathomed. It went to prove that
   the Greek Emperors, all these centuries, had been guilty of usurpation,
   and robbing the patrimony of St. Peter; that the popes were justified
   in appropriating their territory, and in rebelling against their
   authority; that the gifts of Pepin and Charlemagne were nothing more
   than the restitution of a small portion of the just and lawful
   dominions originally granted to the chair of St. Peter; and that he,
   Charlemagne, must consider himself as debtor to God and His church, so
   long as a single item of the debt thus entailed upon him remained
   unpaid.

   Such were some of the convenient effects of the document for the
   purposes of Hadrian at the time; but though it may have been productive
   of great advantages to the papacy both then and afterwards, the forgery
   has long since been exposed. With the revival of letters and liberty
   the fictitious deed was condemned, together with the False Decretals
   --the most audacious and elaborate of all pious frauds. Speaking of the
   Decretals, Milman observes, "They are now given up by all; not a voice
   is raised in their favour; the utmost that is done, by those who cannot
   suppress all regret at their exposure, is to palliate the guilt of the
   forger, to call in question or to weaken the influence which they had
   in their own day, and throughout the later history of Christianity."
   [115]

   THE FOUNDATIONS AND

   EDIFICE OF POPERY

   Such, alas! alas! were the foundations of the great papal edifice. We
   have been at some pains to see them laid; we are not mistaken. Were we
   to characterise the separate foundation stones, we might speak of them
   as the most extravagant pretensions, the most insulting arrogance, the
   most barefaced forgeries, the most openly avowed and even death defying
   love of idolatries, the most unscrupulous appropriation of stolen
   territory, the most unrelenting spirit of persecution, and, what may be
   said to be the topmost (as well as the foundation) stone, the most
   inordinate love of temporal sovereignty. But if we look inside the
   house, what do we find there? It is full of blasphemies, the worst kind
   of corruptions, and the concentration of all attractions for the flesh.
   (Rev. 18:12, 13) The very essentials of Christianity were either
   corrupted or rejected --such as sacrifice, ministry, and priesthood.
   The mass was substituted for the finished work of Christ; the dogmatic
   teaching of the church for the ministry of the Spirit of God; and the
   great ecclesiastical system of priesthood --or rather, priestcraft
   --for the common priesthood of all believers, yea, for that of Christ
   Himself.

   The Lord's Supper had been gradually changed from the simple
   remembrance of His love, and showing forth His death, to the idea of a
   sacrifice. Many superstitions were practiced with the consecrated
   bread, or rather wafers. The sacrifice was supposed to avail for the
   dead as well as for the living; hence the practice of giving it to the
   dead, and burying it with them. The soul-destroying doctrine of
   purgatory, which had been sanctioned by Gregory the Great, was now
   spreading far and wide. It appears to have specially taken root in the
   English church before the ninth century. But the deception is manifest,
   for there is no purgatory but the blood of Jesus Christ, God's Son; as
   saith the apostle John, "The blood of Jesus Christ his Son cleanseth us
   from all sin." Thank God, there is no limit to the cleansing power of
   the blood of Jesus His Son; all who have faith in that blood are whiter
   than snow --perfectly fitted for the presence of God. But the doctrine
   of purgatory struck at the very root of this foundation-truth, and
   became a powerful instrument in the hands of the priests for extorting
   money from the dying, and for securing large legacies to the church;
   but almost everything was now made subservient to these base objects.
   The truth of God, the work of Christ, the character of the church, the
   souls and bodies of men, were all readily sacrificed for the
   aggrandisement of the See of Rome, and for the aggrandisement of the
   clergy in subordination to the papal system.

   The ungodly lives of those entrusted with the government of the church
   and the care of souls are also matters of bitter complaint with all
   honest historians, both then and now. But here it may be well to
   introduce one of good report --Mosheim --as a witness and confirmation
   of what we have said as to this period.

   MOSHEIM'S SUMMARY

   "In the East sinister designs, rancour, contentions, and strife were
   everywhere predominant. At Constantinople, or New Rome, those who were
   in favour at court were elevated to the patriarchal chairs, and upon
   losing that favour; a decree of the Emperor hurled them from their
   elevated station. In the West the bishops hung around the courts of
   princes, and indulged themselves in every species of voluptuousness:
   while the inferior clergy and the monks were sensual, and by the
   grossest vices corrupted the people whom they were sent to reform. The
   ignorance of the clergy in many places was so great, that few of them
   could read or write. Hence, whenever a letter was to be penned, or
   anything of importance was to be committed to writing, recourse was
   generally had to some one individual, whom common fame invested with
   certain dexterity in such matters...

   "The bishops and the heads of monasteries held much real estate or
   landed property by feudal tenure; therefore, when a war broke out, they
   were summoned personally to the camp, attended by the number of
   soldiers which they were bound to furnish to their sovereign. Kings and
   princes, moreover, that they might be able to reward their servants and
   soldiers for their services, often seized upon consecrated property,
   and gave it to their dependants; in consequence, the priests and monks,
   before supported by it, sought relief for their necessities in
   committing any sort of crimes, and in contriving impostures.

   "Few of those who were raised, about this time, to the highest stations
   in the church can be commended for their wisdom, learning, virtue, and
   other endowments proper for a bishop. The greater part of them, by
   their numerous vices, and all of them, by their arrogance and lust of
   power, entailed disgrace upon their memories. Between Leo IV, who died
   A.D. 855, and Benedict III, a woman who concealed her sex, and assumed
   the name of John, it is said, opened her way to the political throne by
   her learning and political genius, and governed the church for a time.
   She is commonly called the Papess Joanna. During the five subsequent
   centuries the witness to this extraordinary event are without number;
   nor did any one, prior to the Reformation by Luther, regard the thing
   as either incredible, or disgraceful to the church.

   "All agree that in those dark days the state of Christianity was
   everywhere most deplorable; not only from amazing ignorance, the parent
   of superstition and moral debasement, but also from other causes... The
   sacred order, both in the East and in the West, were composed
   principally of men who were illiterate, stupid, and ignorant of
   everything pertaining to religion.

   ...What the Greek pontiffs were, the single example of Theophylact
   shows; who, as credible historians testify, made traffic of everything
   sacred, and cared for nothing but his hounds and his horses. But though
   the Greek patriarchs were very unworthy men, yet they possessed more
   dignity and virtue than the Roman pontiffs. That the history of the
   Roman bishops in this century is a history, not of men, but of
   monsters, a history of the most atrocious villanies and crimes, is
   acknowledged by all the best writers, those not excepted even who plead
   for pontifical authority...

   "The essence of religion was thought, both by Greeks and Latins, to
   consist in the worship of images, in honouring departed saints, in
   searching for and preserving relics, and in enriching priests and
   monks. Scarcely an individual ventured to approach God until interest
   had been duly sought with images and saints. In getting relics
   together, and seeking after them, all the world was busy to insanity."
   [116]

   Nothing more, we think, need be said at present as to the nature --root
   and branch --of the papal system. In the mouth of at least three
   competent witnesses, all that we have said of Rome, from the beginning
   of the Thyatirian period, has been confirmed. And the half has not been
   told, especially on the subject of immorality. We could not transfer to
   our pages the open profligacy of the priests and monks. It is thought
   by some that the papacy fell to the deepest point of degradation in the
   ninth and tenth centuries. For many years the infamous Theodora and her
   two daughters, Marozia and Theodora, disposed of the papal tiara. Such
   was their power and evil influence, by means of their licentious lives,
   that they placed in the chair of St. Peter whom they would --men,
   wicked like themselves. Our pages would be defiled by an account of
   their open unblushing immoralities. Such has been the papal succession.
   Surely Jezebel was truly represented by these women, and in the
   influence they obtained over the popes and the city of Rome. But, alas!
   alas! Jezebel, with all her associations, corruptions, tyrannies,
   idolatries, and uses of the civil sword, has been too faithfully
   represented by popery from its very foundation.

   [ END OF VOLUME 1 ]
     __________________________________________________________________

   [108] See E. B. Elliott's Horæ Apocalypticæ, vol. 2: p. 219.

   [109] See Faiths of the World, vol. 2: p. 527, J. C. Robertson, vol. 2:
   p. 163.

   [110] Latin Christianity, vol. 2: p. 202.

   [111] We do not mean to affirm that all who were slain by Theodora, as
   Paulicians were true Christians. We cannot judge the heart; but they
   professed to be and willingly died as martyrs.

   [112] Milner, vol. 2: p. 498.

   [113] For a careful inquiry and details, see Horæ Apocalypticæ, vol.
   2:249 - 344, 5th edition.

   [114] Latin Christianity, vol. 2: p. 286.

   [115] Milman, vol. 2: p. 875; Greenwood, book 6: chap. 3: p. 82.

   [116] Mosheim's History, vol. 3: p.p. 184, 272.
     __________________________________________________________________

                                    Indexes
     __________________________________________________________________

Index of Scripture References

   Genesis

   [1]6   [2]6   [3]15:2   [4]17   [5]28

   Exodus

   [6]3   [7]14

   Leviticus

   [8]16:8

   Numbers

   [9]6   [10]25

   1 Kings

   [11]21:25   [12]21:25   [13]22:23

   2 Kings

   [14]17   [15]18:4

   1 Chronicles

   [16]13:9

   Psalms

   [17]2:12   [18]8   [19]32   [20]45   [21]51:5

   Proverbs

   [22]16:33

   Daniel

   [23]2   [24]7   [25]11

   Zechariah

   [26]4:6   [27]4:7   [28]12

   Matthew

   [29]4:17   [30]6:25   [31]9:11   [32]10   [33]10   [34]10   [35]10:3
   [36]11:19   [37]13   [38]13   [39]13:55   [40]16   [41]16   [42]16
   [43]16   [44]16   [45]16   [46]16   [47]17   [48]18:17   [49]19:28
   [50]21:31   [51]21:32   [52]22:15   [53]24   [54]25:31   [55]26
   [56]28   [57]28:18

   Mark

   [58]1   [59]2:14   [60]3   [61]3   [62]3:17   [63]5   [64]5:25
   [65]9   [66]10:14   [67]12:13   [68]13   [69]14   [70]16

   Luke

   [71]3:13   [72]5:1   [73]5:27   [74]6   [75]6   [76]6:81   [77]8
   [78]8:3   [79]9   [80]10   [81]16   [82]16:13   [83]18   [84]18:22
   [85]19   [86]19:43   [87]19:44   [88]22   [89]22:28   [90]23

   John

   [91]1   [92]1:1-3   [93]1:29   [94]1:44   [95]3:5   [96]3:5   [97]3:5
   [98]3:5   [99]3:5   [100]3:16   [101]4   [102]4:24   [103]6   [104]11
   [105]11:52   [106]12   [107]13   [108]13   [109]13   [110]14
   [111]14:22   [112]15:3   [113]16:33   [114]17   [115]19:26
   [116]19:27   [117]19:27   [118]20   [119]20   [120]20:19   [121]20:23
   [122]21   [123]21:18   [124]21:19

   Acts

   [125]1   [126]1   [127]1   [128]1   [129]1   [130]1:13   [131]2
   [132]2   [133]2   [134]2   [135]2   [136]2   [137]2:39   [138]3:17
   [139]4   [140]4:13   [141]6   [142]7   [143]8   [144]8   [145]8:11
   [146]9   [147]9   [148]9   [149]9   [150]9   [151]9:1   [152]9:23
   [153]9:26   [154]9:31   [155]10   [156]10   [157]10   [158]10
   [159]11   [160]11:19   [161]11:20   [162]11:21   [163]11:30   [164]12
   [165]12   [166]12   [167]12   [168]12:2   [169]12:17   [170]13
   [171]13   [172]13   [173]13   [174]13:13   [175]13:38   [176]14
   [177]15   [178]15   [179]15   [180]15   [181]15:12   [182]15:14
   [183]15:32   [184]15:36   [185]16   [186]16:3   [187]16:10
   [188]16:11   [189]16:15   [190]16:37   [191]18   [192]18:9
   [193]18:10   [194]18:11   [195]18:18   [196]18:19   [197]19
   [198]19:1   [199]19:8   [200]19:10   [201]19:21   [202]19:23
   [203]20   [204]20   [205]20   [206]20:4   [207]20:4   [208]20:7
   [209]21   [210]21:18   [211]21:26   [212]22   [213]22   [214]22:1
   [215]23:11   [216]23:12   [217]24:1   [218]26:17   [219]27   [220]27
   [221]27:23   [222]27:24   [223]28   [224]28:30   [225]28:31

   Romans

   [226]1   [227]5   [228]5:6   [229]5:20   [230]6   [231]6   [232]8:13
   [233]8:36   [234]9:5   [235]14   [236]15   [237]15   [238]15:19
   [239]15:19   [240]15:24   [241]15:25   [242]15:28   [243]16:7

   1 Corinthians

   [244]3   [245]3:21   [246]5   [247]5   [248]6:15   [249]7:14   [250]9
   [251]9:5   [252]10:32   [253]12   [254]12   [255]15:7   [256]16
   [257]16:1   [258]16:2   [259]16:2   [260]16:6

   2 Corinthians

   [261]1:8   [262]2   [263]2   [264]2:12   [265]2:13   [266]4
   [267]5:19-21   [268]7:4   [269]8:1   [270]8:23   [271]9:1   [272]9:6
   [273]9:7   [274]10:4   [275]10:5   [276]11   [277]11:32

   Galatians

   [278]1:15   [279]1:16   [280]1:16   [281]1:17   [282]1:18   [283]1:18
   [284]1:19   [285]1:21   [286]2   [287]2   [288]2   [289]2:1
   [290]2:9   [291]2:20

   Ephesians

   [292]1   [293]1:3   [294]1:13   [295]2   [296]2   [297]2   [298]2
   [299]3   [300]3:1   [301]3:7   [302]4   [303]4:1   [304]4:30
   [305]5:26   [306]6:20

   Philippians

   [307]1:7   [308]1:12   [309]1:13   [310]1:25   [311]2:23   [312]2:24
   [313]2:24   [314]2:24   [315]2:25   [316]3   [317]4   [318]4
   [319]4:3   [320]4:3   [321]4:15   [322]4:22

   Colossians

   [323]1   [324]1:13   [325]1:15   [326]2   [327]2   [328]2:12
   [329]2:12   [330]2:13   [331]2:23   [332]4:10   [333]4:18

   1 Thessalonians

   [334]1:8   [335]1:9   [336]1:9   [337]1:10   [338]3:1   [339]4:14

   2 Thessalonians

   [340]2:3   [341]2:3   [342]2:4

   1 Timothy

   [343]1   [344]1:3   [345]3:15   [346]3:16

   2 Timothy

   [347]2   [348]2:20   [349]2:20   [350]2:21   [351]3   [352]3:10
   [353]3:11   [354]4   [355]4   [356]4:11   [357]4:11   [358]4:13
   [359]4:14   [360]4:15   [361]4:16   [362]4:17   [363]4:20

   Titus

   [364]1:5   [365]2:11   [366]3   [367]3:12

   Philemon

   [368]1:22   [369]1:22

   Hebrews

   [370]1   [371]3   [372]10   [373]10:1-25   [374]11:39   [375]12:28
   [376]13:23   [377]13:24

   James

   [378]1:18

   1 Peter

   [379]1:13   [380]1:22   [381]1:23   [382]3   [383]3

   1 John

   [384]2:24

   Revelation

   [385]1:10   [386]1:18   [387]2   [388]2:1   [389]2:17   [390]2:18
   [391]2:20   [392]2:21   [393]9:1   [394]13   [395]17   [396]18
   [397]18:12   [398]18:13
     __________________________________________________________________

            This document is from the Christian Classics Ethereal
               Library at Calvin College, http://www.ccel.org,
                   generated on demand from ThML source.

References

   1. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Gen&scrCh=6&scrV=0#xv-p131.1
   2. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Gen&scrCh=6&scrV=0#xv-p132.1
   3. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Gen&scrCh=15&scrV=2#viii-p20.1
   4. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Gen&scrCh=17&scrV=0#xv-p37.5
   5. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Gen&scrCh=28&scrV=0#iv-p11.1
   6. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Exod&scrCh=3&scrV=0#xii-p144.1
   7. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Exod&scrCh=14&scrV=0#v-p51.1
   8. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Lev&scrCh=16&scrV=8#vii-p112.1
   9. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Num&scrCh=6&scrV=0#ix-p62.1
  10. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Num&scrCh=25&scrV=0#vii-p102.1
  11. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Kgs&scrCh=21&scrV=25#xix-p20.1
  12. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Kgs&scrCh=21&scrV=25#xix-p27.1
  13. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Kgs&scrCh=22&scrV=23#xviii-p80.1
  14. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Kgs&scrCh=17&scrV=0#vi-p22.1
  15. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Kgs&scrCh=18&scrV=4#xviii-p82.2
  16. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Chr&scrCh=13&scrV=9#xviii-p82.1
  17. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Ps&scrCh=2&scrV=12#xv-p99.2
  18. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Ps&scrCh=8&scrV=0#vii-p75.1
  19. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Ps&scrCh=32&scrV=0#vi-p27.1
  20. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Ps&scrCh=45&scrV=0#xiii-p132.2
  21. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Ps&scrCh=51&scrV=5#xv-p24.1
  22. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Prov&scrCh=16&scrV=33#vii-p112.2
  23. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Dan&scrCh=2&scrV=0#iv-p33.1
  24. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Dan&scrCh=7&scrV=0#iv-p33.2
  25. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Dan&scrCh=11&scrV=0#vi-p15.1
  26. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Zech&scrCh=4&scrV=6#x-p74.1
  27. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Zech&scrCh=4&scrV=7#x-p74.2
  28. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Zech&scrCh=12&scrV=0#vii-p90.1
  29. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=4&scrV=17#vii-p51.1
  30. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=6&scrV=25#xv-p51.2
  31. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=9&scrV=11#vii-p82.1
  32. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=10&scrV=0#vii-p52.1
  33. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=10&scrV=0#vii-p9.1
  34. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=10&scrV=0#x-p69.1
  35. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=10&scrV=3#vii-p79.1
  36. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=11&scrV=19#vii-p82.2
  37. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=13&scrV=0#iv-p34.1
  38. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=13&scrV=0#xi-p5.1
  39. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=13&scrV=55#vii-p105.1
  40. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=16&scrV=0#ii-p8.1
  41. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=16&scrV=0#iv-p6.1
  42. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=16&scrV=0#v-p3.2
  43. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=16&scrV=0#v-p80.1
  44. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=16&scrV=0#vi-p51.1
  45. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=16&scrV=0#vii-p18.1
  46. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=16&scrV=0#xii-p144.2
  47. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=17&scrV=0#vii-p53.3
  48. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=18&scrV=17#vii-p82.5
  49. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=19&scrV=28#vii-p13.1
  50. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=21&scrV=31#vii-p82.3
  51. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=21&scrV=32#vii-p82.4
  52. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=22&scrV=15#vii-p37.1
  53. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=24&scrV=0#x-p18.1
  54. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=25&scrV=31#ix-p203.1
  55. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=26&scrV=0#vii-p53.6
  56. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=28&scrV=0#v-p4.1
  57. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Matt&scrCh=28&scrV=18#x-p74.3
  58. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=1&scrV=0#vii-p51.2
  59. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=2&scrV=14#vii-p79.2
  60. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=3&scrV=0#vii-p52.2
  61. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=3&scrV=0#vii-p9.3
  62. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=3&scrV=17#vii-p59.1
  63. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=5&scrV=0#vii-p53.1
  64. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=5&scrV=25#xviii-p82.3
  65. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=9&scrV=0#vii-p53.4
  66. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=10&scrV=14#xv-p37.1
  67. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=12&scrV=13#vii-p37.2
  68. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=13&scrV=0#vii-p53.9
  69. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=14&scrV=0#vii-p53.7
  70. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Mark&scrCh=16&scrV=0#v-p4.2
  71. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=3&scrV=13#vii-p81.1
  72. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=5&scrV=1#vii-p51.3
  73. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=5&scrV=27#vii-p79.3
  74. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=6&scrV=0#vii-p52.3
  75. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=6&scrV=0#vii-p9.2
  76. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=6&scrV=81#xii-p38.1
  77. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=8&scrV=0#vii-p53.2
  78. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=8&scrV=3#vii-p57.1
  79. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=9&scrV=0#vii-p53.5
  80. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=10&scrV=0#viii-p86.1
  81. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=16&scrV=0#vii-p36.1
  82. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=16&scrV=13#xv-p134.1
  83. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=18&scrV=0#vii-p82.6
  84. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=18&scrV=22#xv-p51.1
  85. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=19&scrV=0#vii-p81.2
  86. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=19&scrV=43#x-p19.1
  87. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=19&scrV=44#x-p19.2
  88. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=22&scrV=0#vii-p53.8
  89. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=22&scrV=28#vii-p11.1
  90. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Luke&scrCh=23&scrV=0#x-p13.1
  91. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=1&scrV=0#vii-p47.1
  92. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=1&scrV=1#xiii-p129.1
  93. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=1&scrV=29#vii-p16.1
  94. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=1&scrV=44#vii-p67.1
  95. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=3&scrV=5#xv-p22.1
  96. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=3&scrV=5#xv-p28.1
  97. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=3&scrV=5#xv-p29.1
  98. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=3&scrV=5#xv-p29.3
  99. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=3&scrV=5#xv-p33.1
 100. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=3&scrV=16#xv-p137.1
 101. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=4&scrV=0#vi-p22.2
 102. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=4&scrV=24#x-p66.1
 103. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=6&scrV=0#xiii-p18.1
 104. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=11&scrV=0#vii-p86.1
 105. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=11&scrV=52#v-p7.1
 106. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=12&scrV=0#vii-p69.1
 107. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=13&scrV=0#vii-p60.1
 108. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=13&scrV=0#vii-p69.1
 109. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=13&scrV=0#xi-p16.1
 110. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=14&scrV=0#vii-p87.1
 111. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=14&scrV=22#vii-p106.1
 112. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=15&scrV=3#xv-p32.3
 113. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=16&scrV=33#xiii-p72.2
 114. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=17&scrV=0#xiii-p14.2
 115. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=19&scrV=26#vii-p62.1
 116. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=19&scrV=27#vii-p57.2
 117. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=19&scrV=27#vii-p62.2
 118. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=20&scrV=0#iv-p56.1
 119. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=20&scrV=0#vii-p88.1
 120. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=20&scrV=19#ix-p34.2
 121. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=20&scrV=23#iv-p56.2
 122. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=21&scrV=0#vii-p76.1
 123. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=21&scrV=18#vii-p43.1
 124. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=John&scrCh=21&scrV=19#vii-p43.2
 125. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=1&scrV=0#v-p12.1
 126. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=1&scrV=0#vii-p52.4
 127. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=1&scrV=0#vii-p55.1
 128. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=1&scrV=0#vii-p9.4
 129. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=1&scrV=0#xi-p16.2
 130. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=1&scrV=13#vii-p70.1
 131. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=2&scrV=0#iv-p28.1
 132. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=2&scrV=0#iv-p35.1
 133. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=2&scrV=0#v-p24.1
 134. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=2&scrV=0#vi-p21.2
 135. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=2&scrV=0#vii-p24.1
 136. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=2&scrV=0#xi-p16.2
 137. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=2&scrV=39#xv-p37.3
 138. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=3&scrV=17#vi-p43.1
 139. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=4&scrV=0#vii-p25.1
 140. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=4&scrV=13#vii-p14.1
 141. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=6&scrV=0#v-p58.1
 142. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=7&scrV=0#vi-p21.2
 143. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=8&scrV=0#vi-p3.1
 144. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=8&scrV=0#vi-p29.1
 145. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=8&scrV=11#xi-p46.1
 146. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=9&scrV=0#iv-p63.1
 147. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=9&scrV=0#v-p45.2
 148. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=9&scrV=0#viii-p12.1
 149. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=9&scrV=0#ix-p236.1
 150. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=9&scrV=0#ix-p243.1
 151. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=9&scrV=1#vi-p37.1
 152. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=9&scrV=23#ix-p239.1
 153. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=9&scrV=26#viii-p21.1
 154. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=9&scrV=31#viii-p21.2
 155. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=10&scrV=0#iv-p35.2
 156. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=10&scrV=0#vi-p21.2
 157. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=10&scrV=0#vii-p27.1
 158. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=10&scrV=0#ix-p88.1
 159. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=11&scrV=0#ix-p248.1
 160. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=11&scrV=19#viii-p22.1
 161. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=11&scrV=20#viii-p38.1
 162. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=11&scrV=21#viii-p38.2
 163. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=11&scrV=30#ix-p252.1
 164. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=12&scrV=0#vii-p55.2
 165. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=12&scrV=0#viii-p36.2
 166. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=12&scrV=0#ix-p64.1
 167. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=12&scrV=0#x-p109.1
 168. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=12&scrV=2#ix-p256.1
 169. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=12&scrV=17#vii-p95.3
 170. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=13&scrV=0#vi-p54.1
 171. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=13&scrV=0#ix-p260.1
 172. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=13&scrV=0#viii-p29.1
 173. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=13&scrV=0#viii-p42.1
 174. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=13&scrV=13#viii-p37.1
 175. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=13&scrV=38#viii-p43.1
 176. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=14&scrV=0#ix-p260.1
 177. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=15&scrV=0#vii-p96.1
 178. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=15&scrV=0#vii-p39.1
 179. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=15&scrV=0#ix-p260.1
 180. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=15&scrV=0#ix-p265.1
 181. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=15&scrV=12#viii-p39.1
 182. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=15&scrV=14#xiii-p14.1
 183. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=15&scrV=32#ix-p265.2
 184. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=15&scrV=36#viii-p59.1
 185. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=16&scrV=0#viii-p82.1
 186. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=16&scrV=3#viii-p64.1
 187. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=16&scrV=10#ix-p268.1
 188. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=16&scrV=11#ix-p272.1
 189. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=16&scrV=15#xv-p37.4
 190. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=16&scrV=37#viii-p66.1
 191. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=18&scrV=0#viii-p110.2
 192. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=18&scrV=9#ix-p79.1
 193. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=18&scrV=10#ix-p79.2
 194. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=18&scrV=11#ix-p273.1
 195. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=18&scrV=18#ix-p278.1
 196. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=18&scrV=19#ix-p278.2
 197. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=19&scrV=0#ix-p201.1
 198. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=19&scrV=1#ix-p8.1
 199. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=19&scrV=8#ix-p284.1
 200. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=19&scrV=10#ix-p284.2
 201. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=19&scrV=21#ix-p13.1
 202. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=19&scrV=23#ix-p290.1
 203. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=20&scrV=0#iii-p3.1
 204. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=20&scrV=0#ix-p295.3
 205. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=20&scrV=0#xi-p8.1
 206. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=20&scrV=4#ix-p32.2
 207. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=20&scrV=4#ix-p295.2
 208. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=20&scrV=7#xi-p46.2
 209. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=21&scrV=0#ix-p295.3
 210. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=21&scrV=18#vii-p96.3
 211. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=21&scrV=26#ix-p66.1
 212. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=22&scrV=0#vi-p39.1
 213. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=22&scrV=0#viii-p10.1
 214. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=22&scrV=1#ix-p70.1
 215. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=23&scrV=11#ix-p79.3
 216. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=23&scrV=12#ix-p79.6
 217. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=24&scrV=1#ix-p86.1
 218. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=26&scrV=17#ix-p95.1
 219. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=27&scrV=0#ix-p112.1
 220. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=27&scrV=0#ix-p304.1
 221. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=27&scrV=23#ix-p79.4
 222. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=27&scrV=24#ix-p79.5
 223. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=28&scrV=0#ix-p146.1
 224. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=28&scrV=30#ix-p154.1
 225. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Acts&scrCh=28&scrV=31#ix-p154.2
 226. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=1&scrV=0#ix-p49.1
 227. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=5&scrV=0#xv-p132.2
 228. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=5&scrV=6#xv-p132.4
 229. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=5&scrV=20#v-p29.2
 230. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=6&scrV=0#v-p11.1
 231. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=6&scrV=0#xv-p33.2
 232. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=8&scrV=13#xv-p88.1
 233. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=8&scrV=36#xiii-p72.1
 234. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=9&scrV=5#xiii-p130.1
 235. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=14&scrV=0#iv-p65.1
 236. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=15&scrV=0#iv-p65.1
 237. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=15&scrV=0#ix-p32.1
 238. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=15&scrV=19#ix-p27.1
 239. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=15&scrV=19#ix-p292.3
 240. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=15&scrV=24#ix-p183.1
 241. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=15&scrV=25#ix-p295.1
 242. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=15&scrV=28#ix-p183.2
 243. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rom&scrCh=16&scrV=7#vii-p10.3
 244. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=3&scrV=0#iv-p17.1
 245. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=3&scrV=21#iv-p9.2
 246. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=5&scrV=0#iv-p51.2
 247. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=5&scrV=0#iv-p65.2
 248. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=6&scrV=15#xv-p88.2
 249. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=7&scrV=14#xv-p37.2
 250. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=9&scrV=0#xv-p88.3
 251. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=9&scrV=5#vii-p109.1
 252. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=10&scrV=32#ix-p7.1
 253. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=12&scrV=0#v-p25.1
 254. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=12&scrV=0#xi-p40.1
 255. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=15&scrV=7#vii-p94.1
 256. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=16&scrV=0#ix-p292.4
 257. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=16&scrV=1#ix-p4.1
 258. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=16&scrV=2#ix-p4.2
 259. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=16&scrV=2#ix-p34.1
 260. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Cor&scrCh=16&scrV=6#ix-p27.2
 261. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=1&scrV=8#ix-p292.1
 262. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=2&scrV=0#iv-p65.3
 263. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=2&scrV=0#ix-p292.2
 264. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=2&scrV=12#ix-p22.1
 265. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=2&scrV=13#ix-p22.2
 266. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=4&scrV=0#vi-p50.1
 267. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=5&scrV=19#xi-p33.1
 268. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=7&scrV=4#ix-p23.1
 269. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=8&scrV=1#ix-p25.2
 270. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=8&scrV=23#vii-p10.1
 271. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=9&scrV=1#viii-p111.3
 272. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=9&scrV=6#viii-p63.1
 273. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=9&scrV=7#viii-p111.4
 274. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=10&scrV=4#x-p63.1
 275. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=10&scrV=5#x-p63.2
 276. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=11&scrV=0#ix-p247.2
 277. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Cor&scrCh=11&scrV=32#viii-p13.1
 278. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=1&scrV=15#vi-p49.1
 279. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=1&scrV=16#vi-p49.2
 280. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=1&scrV=16#viii-p7.1
 281. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=1&scrV=17#viii-p12.2
 282. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=1&scrV=18#vii-p95.1
 283. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=1&scrV=18#ix-p239.2
 284. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=1&scrV=19#vii-p95.2
 285. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=1&scrV=21#ix-p247.1
 286. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=2&scrV=0#vii-p42.1
 287. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=2&scrV=0#viii-p53.1
 288. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=2&scrV=0#viii-p60.1
 289. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=2&scrV=1#ix-p264.1
 290. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=2&scrV=9#vii-p96.2
 291. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Gal&scrCh=2&scrV=20#xii-p26.1
 292. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=1&scrV=0#xi-p16.3
 293. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=1&scrV=3#vi-p52.2
 294. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=1&scrV=13#v-p45.1
 295. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=2&scrV=0#vi-p48.1
 296. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=2&scrV=0#ix-p158.2
 297. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=2&scrV=0#xv-p132.3
 298. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=2&scrV=0#xv-p133.1
 299. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=3&scrV=0#vi-p48.2
 300. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=3&scrV=1#ix-p174.3
 301. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=3&scrV=7#ix-p158.1
 302. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=4&scrV=0#xi-p34.1
 303. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=4&scrV=1#ix-p174.4
 304. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=4&scrV=30#vii-p25.2
 305. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=5&scrV=26#xv-p32.2
 306. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Eph&scrCh=6&scrV=20#ix-p174.5
 307. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Phil&scrCh=1&scrV=7#ix-p174.6
 308. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Phil&scrCh=1&scrV=12#ix-p164.1
 309. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Phil&scrCh=1&scrV=13#ix-p164.2
 310. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Phil&scrCh=1&scrV=25#ix-p174.7
 311. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Phil&scrCh=2&scrV=23#ix-p175.1
 312. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Phil&scrCh=2&scrV=24#ix-p174.8
 313. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Phil&scrCh=2&scrV=24#ix-p175.2
 314. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Phil&scrCh=2&scrV=24#ix-p315.2
 315. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Phil&scrCh=2&scrV=25#vii-p10.2
 316. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Phil&scrCh=3&scrV=0#xvi-p143.1
 317. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Phil&scrCh=4&scrV=0#viii-p111.2
 318. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Phil&scrCh=4&scrV=0#ix-p25.1
 319. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Phil&scrCh=4&scrV=3#ix-p183.3
 320. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Phil&scrCh=4&scrV=3#x-p91.1
 321. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Phil&scrCh=4&scrV=15#viii-p89.1
 322. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Phil&scrCh=4&scrV=22#ix-p164.3
 323. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Col&scrCh=1&scrV=0#viii-p76.1
 324. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Col&scrCh=1&scrV=13#vii-p106.2
 325. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Col&scrCh=1&scrV=15#xiii-p131.1
 326. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Col&scrCh=2&scrV=0#v-p11.2
 327. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Col&scrCh=2&scrV=0#xv-p33.3
 328. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Col&scrCh=2&scrV=12#ix-p6.1
 329. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Col&scrCh=2&scrV=12#xiii-p85.1
 330. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Col&scrCh=2&scrV=13#ix-p6.2
 331. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Col&scrCh=2&scrV=23#xv-p88.4
 332. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Col&scrCh=4&scrV=10#viii-p36.1
 333. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Col&scrCh=4&scrV=18#ix-p174.2
 334. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Thess&scrCh=1&scrV=8#viii-p115.1
 335. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Thess&scrCh=1&scrV=9#viii-p93.1
 336. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Thess&scrCh=1&scrV=9#viii-p115.2
 337. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Thess&scrCh=1&scrV=10#viii-p93.2
 338. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Thess&scrCh=3&scrV=1#viii-p110.1
 339. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Thess&scrCh=4&scrV=14#iv-p3.1
 340. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Thess&scrCh=2&scrV=3#xiv-p70.1
 341. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Thess&scrCh=2&scrV=3#xvii-p89.1
 342. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Thess&scrCh=2&scrV=4#xiv-p70.2
 343. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Tim&scrCh=1&scrV=0#iv-p51.3
 344. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Tim&scrCh=1&scrV=3#ix-p191.1
 345. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Tim&scrCh=3&scrV=15#iii-p9.1
 346. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Tim&scrCh=3&scrV=16#iv-p17.3
 347. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Tim&scrCh=2&scrV=0#iv-p17.2
 348. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Tim&scrCh=2&scrV=20#iii-p12.1
 349. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Tim&scrCh=2&scrV=20#xv-p45.1
 350. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Tim&scrCh=2&scrV=21#xv-p45.2
 351. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Tim&scrCh=3&scrV=0#x-p54.1
 352. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Tim&scrCh=3&scrV=10#x-p91.2
 353. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Tim&scrCh=3&scrV=11#x-p91.3
 354. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Tim&scrCh=4&scrV=0#ix-p20.1
 355. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Tim&scrCh=4&scrV=0#ix-p321.2
 356. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Tim&scrCh=4&scrV=11#viii-p63.2
 357. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Tim&scrCh=4&scrV=11#viii-p78.1
 358. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Tim&scrCh=4&scrV=13#ix-p194.1
 359. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Tim&scrCh=4&scrV=14#ix-p201.2
 360. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Tim&scrCh=4&scrV=15#ix-p201.3
 361. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Tim&scrCh=4&scrV=16#ix-p205.1
 362. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Tim&scrCh=4&scrV=17#ix-p205.2
 363. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=2Tim&scrCh=4&scrV=20#ix-p194.2
 364. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Titus&scrCh=1&scrV=5#ix-p192.1
 365. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Titus&scrCh=2&scrV=11#xv-p24.2
 366. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Titus&scrCh=3&scrV=0#ix-p193.1
 367. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Titus&scrCh=3&scrV=12#ix-p321.1
 368. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Phlm&scrCh=1&scrV=22#ix-p174.1
 369. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Phlm&scrCh=1&scrV=22#ix-p315.1
 370. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=1&scrV=0#xiii-p132.1
 371. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=3&scrV=0#iv-p17.4
 372. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=10&scrV=0#iv-p50.1
 373. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=10&scrV=1#xi-p32.1
 374. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=11&scrV=39#v-p3.1
 375. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=12&scrV=28#xv-p99.1
 376. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=13&scrV=23#ix-p186.1
 377. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Heb&scrCh=13&scrV=24#ix-p186.2
 378. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Jas&scrCh=1&scrV=18#xv-p32.1
 379. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Pet&scrCh=1&scrV=13#viii-p36.3
 380. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Pet&scrCh=1&scrV=22#xv-p31.1
 381. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Pet&scrCh=1&scrV=23#xv-p31.2
 382. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Pet&scrCh=3&scrV=0#v-p51.2
 383. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1Pet&scrCh=3&scrV=0#xv-p33.4
 384. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=1John&scrCh=2&scrV=24#x-p92.1
 385. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rev&scrCh=1&scrV=10#ix-p34.3
 386. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rev&scrCh=1&scrV=18#iv-p9.1
 387. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rev&scrCh=2&scrV=0#xix-p82.1
 388. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rev&scrCh=2&scrV=1#xiii-p11.1
 389. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rev&scrCh=2&scrV=17#xiv-p61.1
 390. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rev&scrCh=2&scrV=18#xvi-p4.1
 391. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rev&scrCh=2&scrV=20#xix-p27.2
 392. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rev&scrCh=2&scrV=21#xix-p27.3
 393. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rev&scrCh=9&scrV=1#xviii-p41.1
 394. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rev&scrCh=13&scrV=0#xv-p110.1
 395. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rev&scrCh=17&scrV=0#xix-p91.1
 396. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rev&scrCh=18&scrV=0#xix-p91.1
 397. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rev&scrCh=18&scrV=12#xix-p102.1
 398. file:///ccel/m/miller/history/cache/history.html3?scrBook=Rev&scrCh=18&scrV=13#xix-p102.2