{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_42258/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_42258","id":"gutenberg_42258","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/42258","summary":null,"tags":["Bible. Acts -- Commentaries","Bible. Acts -- Criticism, interpretation, etc.","Category: History - Religious","Category: Religion/Spirituality"],"text":"Transcriber's note:\n\nText enclosed by underscores is in italics (_italics_).\n\nSmall capital text has been replaced with all capitals.\n\nVariations in spelling, punctuation and hyphenation have been retained\nexcept in obvious cases of typographical error.\n\nThe cover for the eBook version of this book was created by the\ntranscriber and is placed in the public domain.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\n\n  THE EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE\n\n  EDITED BY THE REV.\n\n  W. ROBERTSON NICOLL, M.A., LL.D.,\n\n  Editor of \"The Expositor.\"\n\n  THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES.\n\n\n  NEW YORK\n\n  51 EAST TENTH STREET\n\n  (NEAR BROADWAY).\n\n  1891.\n\n\n  BY\n\n  G. T. STOKES, D.D.\n\n  NEW YORK:\n\n  A. C. ARMSTRONG AND SON,\n\n  51 EAST TENTH STREET\n\n  (NEAR BROADWAY).\n\n  1891.\n\n\n  THE EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE.\n\n  EDITED BY THE REV. W. ROBERTSON NICOLL, M.A., LL.D.\n\n  _Crown 8vo, cloth._\n\n\n  FIRST SERIES, 1887-88.\n\n  Colossians.\n  By A. MACLAREN, D.D.\n\n  St. Mark.\n  By Very Rev. the Dean of Armagh.\n\n  Genesis.\n  By Prof. MARCUS DODS, D.D.\n\n  1 Samuel.\n  By Prof. W. G. BLAIKIE, D.D.\n\n  2 Samuel.\n  By the same Author.\n\n  Hebrews.\n  By Principal T. C. EDWARDS, D.D.\n\nSECOND SERIES, 1888-89.\n\n  Galatians.\n  By Prof. G. G. FINDLAY, B.A.\n\n  The Pastoral Epistles.\n  By Rev. A. PLUMMER, D.D.\n\n  Isaiah I.--XXXIX.\n  By G. A. SMITH, M.A. Vol. I.\n\n  The Book of Revelation.\n  By Prof. W. MILLIGAN, D.D.\n\n  1 Corinthians.\n  By Prof. MARCUS DODS, D.D.\n\n  The Epistles of St. John.\n  By Rt. Rev. W. ALEXANDER, D.D.\nTHIRD SERIES, 1889-90.\n\n  Judges and Ruth.\n  By Rev. R. A. WATSON, M.A.\n\n  Jeremiah.\n  By Rev. C. J. BALL, M.A.\n\n  Isaiah XL.-LXVI.\n  By G. A. SMITH, M.A. Vol. II.\n\n  St. Matthew.\n  By Rev. J. MONRO GIBSON, D.D.\n\n  Exodus.\n  By Very Rev. the Dean of Armagh.\n\n  St. Luke.\n  By Rev. H. BURTON, B.A.\n\nFOURTH SERIES, 1890-91.\n\n  Ecclesiastes.\n  By Rev. SAMUEL COX, D.D.\n\n  St. James and St. Jude.\n  By Rev. A. PLUMMER, D.D.\n\n  Proverbs.\n  By Rev. R. F. HORTON, M.A.\n\n  Leviticus.\n  By Rev. S. H. KELLOGG, D.D.\n\n  The Gospel of St. John.\n  By Prof. M. DODS, D.D. Vol. I.\n\n  The Acts of the Apostles.\n  By Rev. Prof. G. T. STOKES, D.D.\n\n  NEW YORK: A. C. ARMSTRONG AND SON.\n\n\n\n\n  THE\n  ACTS OF THE APOSTLES.\n\n  BY THE REV.\n  G. T. STOKES, D.D.,\n\n  PROFESSOR OF ECCLESIASTICAL HISTORY IN THE UNIVERSITY OF DUBLIN,\n  AND VICAR OF ALL SAINTS', BLACKROCK.\n\n  NEW YORK:\n  A. C. ARMSTRONG AND SON,\n  51 EAST TENTH STREET\n  (NEAR BROADWAY).\n  1891.\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE.\n\nThis volume contains an exposition of the Acts of the Apostles down\nto, but not including, the conversion of St. Paul and the baptism of\nCornelius. There is a natural division at that point. Prior to these\nevents, the inspired narrative is engaged with what the late Bishop\nLightfoot of Durham called great \"representative facts,\" prophetical\nor typical of the future developments of the Church, whether among\nJews or Gentiles;[1] while the subsequent course of the history deals\nalmost entirely with missionary work among the heathen and the labours\nof St. Paul.[2]\n\n  [1] See the treatise on the Christian Ministry in his\n  _Philippians_, p. 186.\n\n  [2] Dr. Goulburn, in his _Acts of the Deacons_, suggested this\n  view of the Acts of the Apostles nearly thirty years ago.\n\nWe are dependent for the story of these earliest days of the Church's\nlife upon the Acts of the Apostles. I have endeavoured, however, to\nillustrate the narrative by copious references to ancient documents,\nsome of which may appear of dubious value and authority, such as the\n_Acts of the Saints_ and the writings of the medi\u00e6val Greek\nhagiologist, Simeon Metaphrastes, who lived in the tenth century.[3]\nThe latter writer has been hitherto regarded as more famous for his\nimagination than for his historical accuracy. This age of ours is a\nnoted one, however, for clearing characters previously regarded as\nvery doubtful, and Simeon Metaphrastes has come in for his own share\nof this process of rehabilitation. The distinguished writer just\nreferred to, Dr. Lightfoot, as we have shown in a note on p. 218, has\nproved that Metaphrastes embodied in his works valuable early records,\ndating back to the second century, which in critical hands can shed\nmuch light upon primitive Christian history.[4] In fact, students of\nHoly Scripture and of early Christianity are learning every day to\nlook more and more to ancient Greek, Syriac, and Armenian writers, and\nto the libraries of the Eastern Churches, for fresh light on these\nimportant subjects. It is only natural we should do so. Writers like\nSimeon Metaphrastes and Photius, the student Patriarch of\nConstantinople, lived a thousand years nearer the apostolic times than\nwe do. They flourished in an age of the highest civilization, when\nprecious literary works, in hundreds and thousands, which are no\nlonger known amongst us, lay all around them and at their command.\nThese men and their friends gathered them up and extracted them, and\ncommon sense alone teaches that a critical study of their writings\nwill reveal to us somewhat of the treasures they possessed. The\nlibraries of the East again form a great field for investigation.\nDuring the last fifty years we have paid some little attention to\nthem, which has been amply rewarded. The recovery of the complete\nworks of Hippolytus and of Clement of Rome, the discovery of the\n_Teaching of the Apostles_ and of the _Diatessaron_ of Tatian, are\nonly specimens of what we may yet hope to exhume from the dust of\nages.\n\n  [3] For an account of Simeon Metaphrastes the English reader\n  should consult Dr. Schaff's valuable _Encyclop\u00e6dia of Historical\n  Theology_.\n\n  [4] See Professor Ramsay on \"The Tale of Saint Abercius\" in the\n  _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, vol. iii., p. 338, for a full\n  account of this new source of early Church history which his\n  travels and excavations have brought to our notice.\n\nThe testimony, too, borne by these finds has been of the greatest\nimportance. The _Diatessaron_ alone has formed the most triumphant\nreply to the argument against the Gospels, specially against St.\nJohn's Gospel, formulated some years ago by the author of\n_Supernatural Religion_. And the process of discovery is still going\non. I have said something in the notes to the final lecture of the\npresent volume concerning the latest discovery of this kind which\nthrows some light upon the composition of the Acts. I refer to the\nlost _Apology_ of Aristides, which has just been brought to light. Let\nme very briefly tell its story and show its bearing on the age and\ndate of the Acts. Eusebius, the historian of the fourth century,\nmentions in his _Chronicle_, under the year 124, the two earliest\napologies written in defence of Christianity; one by Quadratus, a\nhearer of the Apostles, the other by Aristides, a philosopher of\nAthens. Now this year 124 was about twenty years after St. John's\ndeath. These apologies have hitherto been best known by this\nhistorian's notice, though Eusebius says they were widely circulated\nin his time. The _Apology_ or defence of Aristides has often been\nsought for. In the seventeenth century it was said to have been extant\nin a monastery near Athens,[5] but no Western had ever seen it in a\ncomplete shape in modern times. Two years ago, however, Professor J.\nRendel Harris, M.A., of Cambridge and of Haverford College,\nPennsylvania, discovered it in a Syriac version in the library of the\nconvent of St. Catharine on Mount Sinai, whence he has published it\nwith an English translation in a new series of _Texts and Studies in\nBiblical and Patristic Literature_, the first number of which has\nappeared at Cambridge within the last few weeks.[6]\n\n  [5] Ceillier, _Hist. des Auteurs Eccl\u00e9siastiques_, i., 403.\n\n  [6] Mr. Harris's discovery is not the first find of this ancient\n  apologist in modern times. The Armenian Mechitarites of Venice\n  published what they called two sermons of Aristides in 1878; which\n  Cardinal Pitra, the learned librarian of the Vatican, reprinted in\n  1883, in his _Analecta Sacra_, t. iv., pp. x, xi, 6-11, 282-86.\n  One of these sermons was a fragment of the _Apology_ of Aristides,\n  which the Mechitarites scarcely at first recognised as such. M.\n  R\u00e9nan, in his _Origines de Christianisme_, vol. vi., p. vi (Paris,\n  1879), scoffed at this fragment, declaring that, from the\n  technical theological terms, such as Theotokos, therein used, it\n  was evidently posterior to the fourth century. Doulcet, in the\n  _Revue des Questions Historiques_ for October 1880, pp. 601-12,\n  made an effective reply with the materials at hand at the time;\n  but Mr. Harris's publication of the complete work triumphantly\n  demonstrates that M. R\u00e9nan's objections were worthless (see\n  Harris, pp. 2, 3, 27). It is another proof that Christians have\n  everything to hope and nothing to fear from such discoveries of\n  early documents. Mr. Harris's preface is specially interesting,\n  because it shows that we have had the _Apology_ of Aristides all\n  the time, though we knew it not, as it was worked in the\n  quasi-oriental tale of Barlaam and Joasaph printed among the works\n  of St. John of Damascus.\n\nI need not go farther into the story of the recovery of this document,\nwhich raises high our expectations of others still more interesting.\nThe _Apology_ of Quadratus would be even more important, as it bore\ndirect testimony to the miracles of our Lord. The brief extract from\nit which Eusebius gives in his _History_, book iv., chap. 3, proves\nhow precious would be the complete work. \"The deeds of our Saviour,\nsays Quadratus, were always before you, for they were true; those that\nwere healed, those that were raised from the dead, who were seen, not\nonly when healed and when raised, but were always present. They\nremained for a long time, not only whilst the Saviour was sojourning\nwith us, but likewise when He had been removed. So that some of them\nhave also survived to our own times.\"\n\nIn the _Apology_ of Quadratus we should obtain a picture of the\npopular theology of the Church during that dark period which elapsed\nbetween the days of Clement of Rome and Ignatius, and those of Justin\nMartyr. The _Apology_ of Aristides which has been found reveals\nsomething indeed in the same direction, but is more occupied with an\nattack upon paganism than in a statement of the Christian faith. Here,\nhowever, consists its bearing on the Acts of the Apostles, not\ndirectly, but by way of contrast. Let me explain what I mean. In\nlecture xvii., when treating of the story of Simon Magus, I have shown\nhow the simple narrative of the Acts concerning that man became\nelaborated in the second century till it formed at last a regular\nromance; whence I conclude that if the Acts had been written in the\nsecond century the story of Simon Magus would not be the simple matter\nwe read in St. Luke's narrative. Now our argument for the date of the\nActs derived from the _Apology_ of Aristides is of much the same kind.\nThis document shows us what the tone and substance of second century\naddresses to the pagans were. It is the earliest of a series of\napologies extending over the whole of that century. The _Apology_ of\nAristides, the numerous writings of Justin Martyr, specially the\n_Oratio_ and the _Cohortatio ad Gr\u00e6cos_ attributed to him, the\n_Oration_ of Tatian addressed to the Greeks, the _Apologeticus_ and\nthe treatise _Ad Nationes_ of Tertullian, the _Epistle to Diognetus_,\nthe writings of Athenagoras, all deal with the same topics, the\ntheories and absurdities of Greek philosophy, the immoral character of\nthe pagan deities, and the purity of Christian doctrine and\npractice.[7] If the Acts of the Apostles had been composed in the\nsecond century, the address of St. Paul to the Athenians would have\nbeen very different from what it is, and must necessarily have\npartaken of those characteristics which we find common to all the\nnumerous treatises addressed to the heathen world of that date. If the\nActs were written in the second century, why does not the writer put\narguments into St. Paul's mouth like those which were current among\nthe Christian apologists of that time? The philosophical argument of\nAristides, which is followed by Justin Martyr[8] and the later\napologists, when contrasted with the simplicity of St. Paul, is a\nconclusive proof of the early date of the composition of the Acts.[9]\nBut this is not the only argument of this kind which modern research\nfurnishes. Aristides shows us what the character of Christian\ncontroversy with the pagans was in the generation succeeding the\nApostles. We can draw the same conclusion when we examine Christian\ncontroversy as carried on against the Jews of the same period.\n\n  [7] The apologists of the second century will be found in a\n  collected shape in Otto's _Corpus Apologetarum_, in nine vols.\n  (Jena, 1842-72). Most of those mentioned above will be found in an\n  English shape in Clarke's Ante-Nicene Library. See also Harnack in\n  _Texte und Untersuchungen_, bd. i., hft. i. (Leipzig, 1882).\n\n  [8] St. Jerome, in _Ep._ 70, addressed to Magnus, a Roman\n  rhetorician, expressly says that Justin Martyr imitated Aristides.\n  The _Cohortatio ad Gr\u00e6cos_ attributed to him is much liker the\n  treatise of Aristides than Justin's admitted first and second\n  apologies.\n\n  [9] Overbeck, Zeller, and Schwegler fix the composition of the\n  Acts between 110 and 130, the very date of the _Apology_ of\n  Aristides. See Zeller's _Acts of the Apostles_, p. 71 (London:\n  Williams & Norgate, 1875).\n\nWe have a number of treatises directed against the Jews by Christian\nwriters of the second century: the _Dialogue_ of Justin Martyr with\nTrypho the Jew, of Jason and Papiscus, and the treatise of Tertullian\ndirected _Ad Jud\u00e6os_. When compared with one another we find that the\nstaple arguments of these writings are much the same.[10] They were\nevidently framed upon the model of St. Stephen's address at Jerusalem,\nof St. Paul at Antioch in Pisidia, and of the Epistle to the\nGalatians. They deal with the transitory and temporary character of\nthe Jewish law, they enter very largely into the fulfilment of Old\nTestament prophecy, and they notice Jewish objections. The second\ncentury works are, however, elaborate treatises, dealing with a great\ncontroversy in a manner which experience had showed to be far the most\neffective and telling. The Jewish controversy in the Acts, whether in\nthe mouth of St. Peter, St. Stephen, or St. Paul, is treated in a much\nsimpler way. The speakers think, speak, write, like men who are making\ntheir first essays in controversy, and have no experience of others to\nguide them. Had the Acts been written in the second century, the\nwriter must have composed the addresses to the Jews as well as those\nto the Gentiles after the model of the age when he was writing. The\nmore carefully, however, we examine and contrast these two\ncontroversies, as conducted in the Acts and in the writings of the\nsecond century respectively, the more thoroughly shall we be convinced\nof the apostolic date of St. Luke's narrative, of its genuine\ncharacter, and of its historic worth.\n\n  [10] For an account of the Jewish controversy in the second\n  century see Gebhardt and Harnack's _Texte_, bd. i., hft. 3\n  (Leipzig, 1883), where Harnack seeks to critically restore the\n  substance of the dialogue between Jason and Papiscus. An article\n  on \"Apologists\" in the _Dictionary of Christian Biography_, vol.\n  i., pp. 140-47, and another on \"Theophilus\" (13) in the same work,\n  vol. iv., p. 1009, should be consulted.\n\nI have written this book from my own standpoint as a decided\nChurchman, but I hope that I have said nothing which can really hurt\nthe feelings of any one who thinks otherwise, or which may tend to\nwiden those differences between Christians which are such a terrible\nhindrance to the cause of true religion and its progress in the world.\n\nI have tried to use the Revised Version consistently throughout my\nexpositions, but I fear that my attempt has been but vain. In my\nformal quotations I think I have succeeded. But then, in commenting\nupon Scripture, a writer constantly refers to and quotes passages\nwithout formal reference. Here is where I must have failed. The\nAuthorized Version is so bound up with all our earliest thoughts and\nassociations that its language unconsciously colours all our ideas and\nexpressions. Any one who at present makes such an attempt as I have\ndone will find illustrated in himself the phenomena which we behold in\nwritings of the fifth and sixth centuries. St. Jerome published a\nRevised Version of the Latin translation of the Scripture about the\nyear 400 A.D. For hundreds of years afterwards Latin writers are found\nusing indiscriminately the old Latin and the new Latin translations.\nSt. Patrick's _Confession_, for instance, was composed about the\nmiddle of the fifth century. Quotations from both versions of the New\nTestament are found in that document, affording a conclusive\nindication of its date; just as the mixture of the Revised and\nAuthorized Versions will form a prominent feature in theological works\ncomposed towards the close of the nineteenth century.\n\nI have to acknowledge the kind assistance of the Rev. H. W. Burgess,\nLL.D., who has patiently read all my proofs, and called my attention\nto many a solecism or mistake which might have otherwise disfigured my\npages; and of Mr. W. Etienne Phelps, B.A., deputy keeper of Primate\nMarsh's Library, who has compiled the index.\n\n  GEORGE T. STOKES.\n\n  ALL SAINTS' VICARAGE, BLACKROCK,\n  _May 27th, 1891_.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS.\n\n\n  CHAPTER I.\n\n  THE ORIGIN AND AUTHORITY OF THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES.\n\n  ACTS i. 1, 2.\n\n                                                                  PAGE\n\n  Title--Apocryphal Acts--Paul and Thecla--Evidence of\n    Tertullian--His Chronological Position--Modern\n    Analogies--Muratorian Fragment and Bobbio--Epistle from\n    Lyons--Pothinus an Apostolic Man--Marcion and St.\n    Luke--Defects of German Criticism--Growth of New Testament\n    Canon--Newly-discovered Second Century Documents--\n    Scillitan Martyrs--Primitive Christians and Biblical\n    Criticism--Advantages of Uncertainty on Theology--\n    Theological Accuracy of St. Luke                              1-22\n\n\n  CHAPTER II.\n\n  THE CONVERSATIONS OF THE GREAT FORTY DAYS.\n\n  ACTS i. 6-9.\n\n  Subject-Matter Revealed in the Acts--Our Lord's\n    Post-Resurrection Appearances--Apostolic Curiosity--\n    Messianic Idea among Jews--Books of Enoch and of\n    Jubilees--Evidence for Inspiration of New Testament--\n    Christianity a Practical Religion--Contrast with\n    Paganism--Mithraism--Spiritual Blessing of Christ's\n    Reticence concerning the Future--Antinomies in\n    Scripture--Bad Effects of Human Curiosity--At\n    Thessalonica--In the Middle Ages--In Last and Present\n    Centuries--Irvingism--Holy Ghost alone the Source of\n    Spiritual Power                                              23-42\n\n\n  CHAPTER III.\n\n  THE ASCENSION OF CHRIST, AND ITS LESSONS.\n\n  ACTS i. 9.\n\n  Position of Doctrine of Ascension in Epistles--And in\n    Apostolic Teaching--Curious and Foolish Questions about\n    it--_The Unseen Universe_--Fitness of the Doctrine--And\n    Necessity if the Church was to rise out of Judaism into\n    Christianity--Illustrations, London and the Papacy--R\u00e9nan's\n    Theory--The Ascension Glorified Human Nature--Paganism\n    Degraded It--Gladiatorial Shows and Story of the Monk\n    Telemachus--Tacitus and Slavery--Cato the Censor and the\n    Treatment of Slaves--The Ascension and Darwinism             43-60\n\n\n  CHAPTER IV.\n\n  THE ELECTION OF MATTHIAS.\n\n  ACTS i. 24-26.\n\n  Expectation Days--Principle of Divine Delay--Christian\n    Seasons and Judaism--Pentecost and Sinai--Continuity of\n    the Divine Purposes--Christian Chronology--Tatian's\n    _Oration_--The Apostles and the Upper Room--Narratives\n    of Epiphanius and Cyril of Jerusalem--Christianity\n    Supra-local--Last Notice of the Blessed Virgin--Doctrine\n    of the Assumption--Self-restraint of Scriptural Writers--\n    Choice of New Apostle--St. Peter's Proposition--His\n    Character--_Privilegium Petri_--Reasons for the Election--\n    The Christian Ministry and the Resurrection--C. Leslie's\n    _Short and Easy Method_--History of St. Matthias--\n    Apocryphal Gospels--Papias on Fate of Judas Iscariot         61-81\n\n\n  CHAPTER V.\n\n  THE PENTECOSTAL BLESSING.\n\n  ACTS ii. 1-4.\n\n  Origin and History of Pentecost--Gnosticism and Antinomianism--\n    Modern Aspect of Ancient Heresies--Ancient Union and\n    Modern Divisions of Christendom--Jeremy Taylor's Prayer--\n    The Fiery Tongues--Protest against Persecution and Penal\n    Laws in Religion--Ussher and Baxter, Mistakes of--\n    Death-Scene of Queen Caroline--Importance of Corporate\n    Aspect of Christianity--Clergy and Laity in Apostolic\n    Church--Gift of Tongues and Irvingism--Modern Theories\n    about Pentecost--Hypnotism--Greek and Latin not Universal\n    Languages in Apostolic Times--Ramsay's _Geography of Asia\n    Minor_                                                      82-106\n\n\n  CHAPTER VI.\n\n  ST. PETER'S FIRST SERMON.\n\n  ACTS ii. 14.\n\n  Reports of Ancient Sermons, how Derived--Use of\n    Shorthand among Ancients--St. Peter's Auditory--Celts\n    of Britain at Crucifixion--Jews in Arabia--Homerite\n    Martyrs--St. Peter's Conduct at Pentecost an Evidence\n    for the Resurrection--Contrast with his Action at\n    Antioch--St. Peter's Universal Conceptions and\n    Language--A Protest against Ebionism and Unitarianism--\n    St. Peter and Christ's Descent into Hades--\n    Apollinarianism and the True Doctrine of Our Lord's\n    Humanity--David's Sepulchre and Christ's Resurrection--\n    Jewish Traditions                                          107-126\n\n\n  CHAPTER VII.\n\n  THE FIRSTFRUITS OF PENTECOST.\n\n  ACTS ii. 37-39.\n\n  Contrast between Our Lord's Preaching and that of His\n    Apostles--Proof of Extraordinary Work of the Spirit--\n    Evidence of Tacitus--Spiritual Power a Different Thing\n    from Religious Knowledge--Character of St. Peter's\n    Teaching--Repentance--Modern Antinomianism--Williams,\n    Baxter, Stillingfleet, Wesley--St. Peter and Baptism--\n    Baptism in the _Didache_--Story of that Manual and its\n    Discovery--The Baptismal Formula--Immersion--Infant\n    Baptism--St. Peter and the Power of the Keys               127-147\n\n\n  CHAPTER VIII.\n\n  FIRST RECORDED MIRACLE AND FIRST PERSECUTION.\n\n  ACTS iii. 1-6.\n\n  The Acts a Mirror of Church History--Pause after\n    Pentecost, Reason of--Need of Pastoral Work--Relapses\n    in Mission Field--The Corinthian Case--Rest and\n    Spiritual Growth--Evils of Excitement--Contrast\n    of Christianity with the Montanists and Cynics--\n    True Religion not, however, Purely Contemplative--\n    Circumstances of First Miracle--Which was Typical\n    of Church's Future Work--Among the Poor and Sick--\n    Story of St. Crispin--St. Chrysostom's Sermons--\n    First Franciscans Contrasted with Early Methodists--\n    Medical Missions--Place of Miracle--Solomon's Porch--St.\n    Peter's Address Model for Preachers--Shows Divinity of\n    Christ--Exalts Christ--Is Bold and Prudent withal          148-172\n\n\n  CHAPTER IX.\n\n  THE FIRST PERSECUTION.\n\n  ACTS iv. 1-3, 5-7.\n\n  St. Peter's Teaching in Solomon's Porch and the Captain of\n    the Temple--The Romans and Jewish Law--Discovery of Temple\n    Tablet--The Sadducees and the Work of Opposition--Sadduceism\n    and Modern Theories--Sceptics and Religious Intolerance--\n    Pliny and the Martyrs--Trial of the Apostles--Constitution\n    of the Sanhedrin--Sadduceism and the Priesthood--St.\n    Peter's Defence and Christ's Promise--Afford no\n    Support to Unprepared Teaching in Ordinary Life--St.\n    Peter and the Power of Christ's Name--The Sanhedrin and\n    Miracles--The Jews and Magic--Reverence towards the Name\n    of God--Early Symbolism and Christ's Name--Salvation\n    through Christ and the Wider Hope                          173-192\n\n\n  CHAPTER X.\n\n  THE COMMUNITY OF GOODS.\n\n  ACTS iv. 32-35.\n\n  The Holy Scriptures and the Errors of their Heroes--\n    Controversy between St. Jerome and St. Augustine--A\n    Mistaken View of Christ's Second Advent the Source of\n    Community of Goods--Communism and the Essenes--And\n    Anabaptists--And Plymouthism--Source of Poverty in\n    Jerusalem Church--Warning to Missionary Churches--\n    Apostolic Constitutions--And Primitive Missions--Fay\u00fbm\n    Documents--Evils of Indiscriminate Almsgiving--True\n    Christian Charity--Post Office Savings Banks--Jerusalem\n    Communism and Modern Legislation and Ideals--A Warning\n    and yet a Noble Conception--Connection of Enthusiasm\n    and Spiritual Power                                        193-210\n\n\n  CHAPTER XI.\n\n  HONESTY AND PRETENCE IN THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH.\n\n  ACTS iv. 36, 37; v. 1-6.\n\n  Hebrews and Hellenists in the Synagogue and in the\n    Church--Original Christians were Hebrews--Introduction\n    of Hellenists--Who became the Bridge whereby Christianity\n    was Communicated to the World--Barnabas and Greek\n    Culture--A Native of Cyprus--His Personal Appearance--And\n    History according to Simeon Metaphrastes--Personal\n    Character--Story of Ananias--His Sin and Punishment--\n    Proved that Christianity had a Stern as well as a\n    Loving Side--Dr. Vaughan's Application of this Incident    211-228\n\n\n  CHAPTER XII.\n\n  GAMALIEL AND HIS PRUDENT ADVICE.\n\n  ACTS v. 38-40.\n\n  The Apostles again Brought before Sanhedrin--Because of\n    St. Peter's Miracles--Note on the Miraculous Effects\n    of St. Peter's Shadow and Hypnotism--St. Peter and\n    Angelic Deliverances--Jortin's Theory--The Incarnation\n    Rendered the Age a Special Time--The Sadducees and\n    Materialism--Gamaliel a Pharisee--Effect of a Spiritual\n    Creed on the Character--His Address--Cases of Judas\n    and Theudas--Modern Illustrations--Gamaliel's Family\n    History--Gamaliel in the _Clementine Recognitions_ and\n    in Greek Christian Tradition--Gamaliel and Nicodemus\n    in the _Bibliotheca_ of Photius--Gamaliel and the\n    Spirit of Toleration--St. Augustine and Cornelius \u00e0\n    Lapide--Conduct of the Apostles                            229-245\n\n\n  CHAPTER XIII.\n\n  PRIMITIVE DISSENSIONS AND APOSTOLIC PRECAUTIONS.\n\n  ACTS vi. 1-4.\n\n  The Election of the Seven a Crisis in Church History--Date\n    of St. Stephen's Martyrdom--Occasion of it--Primal\n    Relation of Judaism to Christianity--Not Mutually\n    Exclusive--Illustrated by those of First Methodists\n    to Church of England--Tyranny and Deposition of\n    Pilate--Multiplication of Christians led to Murmuring\n    and thence to Choice of Seven--Showing Benefits and\n    Drawbacks of Prosperity--Imperfections of Apostolic\n    Church--Fallacy of Roman _\u00e0 priori_ Argument for\n    Infallibility--Reciprocal Influence of Church and\n    World--Various Meanings of Term \"World\"--Murmuring\n    arose from Racial and Linguistic Differences--Hebrews\n    and Hellenists--Modern Analogies--Diversity of Functions\n    in Church--Serving of Tables Differs from Ministry of\n    Word--Which Demands Study, Meditation, and Prayer--\n    Weakness of Modern Pulpit Accounted for--Election\n    of Deacons and Number--The Diaconate and Cardinalate       246-267\n\n\n  CHAPTER XIV.\n\n  ST. STEPHEN AND THE EVOLUTION OF THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY.\n\n  ACTS vi. 5, 6; 8-11.\n\n  The Seven were Scriptural--Origin of Diaconate--Bishop\n    Lightfoot's View--Influence of the Synagogue upon the\n    Church--Illustrated by Marcionites--And by Pilgrim\n    Fathers in New England--Constitution of Synagogues--\n    Jewish Almoners or Deacons--Evidence to Diaconate of\n    Apostolic Fathers--Of Pliny--Of Iren\u00e6us--Connection\n    of Community of Goods with the Eucharist--Poor Law\n    among Jews--And Christians--Testimony of Lucian--\n    Christianity Viewed from the Outside--Difference\n    between Ancient and Modern Office--Life-long\n    Diaconate in Ancient Celtic Church--St. Patrick's\n    Father--Election of Deacons in the Synagogues--\n    Imposition of Hands and Ordination--Names of Deacons\n    and Nicolas of Antioch--St. Stephen and the Charge\n    of Blasphemy--Every True Teacher must expect\n    Misrepresentation                                          268-292\n\n\n  CHAPTER XV.\n\n  ST. STEPHEN'S DEFENCE AND THE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION.\n\n  ACTS vi. 12-14; vii. 1, 2.\n\n  Derivation and Meaning of Name \"Stephen\"--Libertine\n    Assailants of St. Stephen--United with Cilicians--St.\n    Paul and the Sanhedrin--Selden on Sanhedrin--Use of\n    Shorthand among the Ancients--The _Acts_ of the\n    Martyrs and Investigations of M. le Blant--Effective\n    Character of Stephen's _Apology_--Analysis of\n    it--Naturally Irritating to Jewish Officialism--Charity\n    towards Persecutors--Reverence towards the Past--A\n    Good Thing, but may be Pressed too far--Lessons for\n    our Age--Science and Religion--Mistakes in the Martyr's\n    Speech--Natural--Useful, too, as Testifying to Honesty\n    of Report--And Teaching True Doctrine of Inspiration--Dr.\n    Vaughan on St. Stephen's Mistakes--St. Stephen and\n    Freedom of Church Worship--Christian Universalism not\n    Inconsistent with Sacred and Consecrated Buildings         293-321\n\n\n  CHAPTER XVI.\n\n  THE FIRST CHRISTIAN MARTYRDOM.\n\n  Testimony of Church of Lyons to St. Stephen's Martyrdom--\n    Earliest Celtic Martyrdoms and Celtic Assemblies--\n    Christmas Day and St. Stephen's Day--Christmas Season\n    and Three Classes of Martyrs--Dies Natalis and the\n    Liturgies--Immediate Cause of St. Stephen's Death--\n    Locality of the Martyrdom--Newly-discovered\n    Church of St. Stephen--Survey of Western Palestine--\n    Jewish Stonings--St. Stephen died under Forms\n    of Law--Christianity and Human Law--Testimony of St.\n    Clement's Epistle--St. Stephen and Prayer to Jesus\n    Christ--Doctrine of Book of Common Prayer--St.\n    Stephen's Funeral--Early Christian View of\n    Resurrection--Story told by John Malalas--Persecution\n    and Church Extension                                       322-345\n\n\n  CHAPTER XVII.\n\n  SIMON MAGUS AND THE CONVERSION OF SAMARIA.\n\n  Prominence of Hellenists in the Church's Earliest\n    Days--Apostles and Deacons Contrasted--Source of St.\n    Luke's Knowledge of Early Church History--St. Philip\n    at C\u00e6sarea--Exact Locality where Philip taught in\n    Samaria--Our Lord's Ministry in Samaria a Failure--\n    Why?--Because the Spirit was not yet given--Presence of\n    the Holy Ghost the Condition of Permanent Blessing--St.\n    Philip and Simon Magus--Story of Simon as told by\n    Justin Martyr--Evidence for Early Date of the Acts--\n    Justin and Simon's Statue--Simon a Sorcerer--Jews and\n    Sorcery--Jewish Gnosticism--Fay\u00fbm Manuscripts and\n    Magic--Contrast between Philip's Miracles and\n    Simon's Magic--Need of Miracles at Outset of\n    Christianity--Philip's Doctrine Concerning\n    the Kingdom of God--What it involved--Church's\n    Prosperity Dependent entirely upon Christ--Threefold\n    Result of Philip's Teaching--John Keble on Christian Joy   346-368\n\n\n  CHAPTER XVIII.\n\n  THE APOSTLES AND CONFIRMATION.\n\n  Apostolic Mission to Samaria--Development of\n    Church--Position of St. Peter--False Decretals--\n    Confirmation, Origin of--New Testament is not an\n    Exhaustive Manual of Rites and Ceremonies--Tertullian\n    on Standing at Prayer--Conservative Character of\n    Church Ritual--Illustrated by Cases of Dean Hook,\n    J. H. Newman, Tate and Brady, and the Plymouth\n    Brethren--Apostolic Example Perpetuated in Second\n    Century Practice--And in Case of Confirmation--Calvin\n    on its Apostolic Origin                                    369-384\n\n\n  CHAPTER XIX.\n\n  ST. PETER AND SIMON MAGUS.\n\n  ACTS viii. 18, 19.\n\n  Change in Confirmation at Reformation--Yet the Rite\n    remained Essentially the Same as of Old--Importance\n    of Tertullian's Testimony for its Primitive Origin--\n    Cyprian's and Augustine's View--Relation of Cyprian\n    to Tertullian--Imposition of Hands United with Prayer\n    in Ancient and Modern Church--Utility and Blessings\n    of the Rite--Improvement which might be made in its\n    Administration--Conduct of Simon Magus--He was\n    Intellectually Convinced but Spiritually Unconverted--\n    Application of his Example to Foreign Missions--Late\n    Controversy Concerning Educational Missions--Simon's\n    Conduct and Simony--Definition of Simony--Sin not\n    Confined to Established Churches--Takes Subtle Shapes\n    in Every Community--St. Peter's Exhortation to Simon\n    Magus--Corrects a Modern Error                             385-397\n\n\n  CHAPTER XX.\n\n  EVANGELISTIC WORK IN THE PHILISTINE'S LAND.\n\n  ACTS viii. 26-8; ix. 32.\n\n  Those Passages Typical of Evangelistic Efforts and\n    Qualifications for Success in them--St. Philip\n    Contrasted with St. Peter--Need of Education for\n    Mission Field--Christian Missionaries of Early Centuries\n    Partook of Highest Culture--Pant\u00e6nus--Origen--Clement--\n    These Texts show Importance of Clear Conception in\n    Theology--Clear Views need not be Narrow Views--Distinction\n    between St. Philip's Guidance and that of St. Peter--Reasons\n    for Angelic Interference--Archbishop Trench on John v.\n    4.--Apostolic Labours all tended Westward--Philip's\n    Mission towards Gaza--Obstinate Paganism of Gaza--\n    Proved by Survey of Palestine--Ethiopian Eunuch--Candace\n    and her Kingdom--St. Philip's Doctrines--Abyssinian\n    Traditions--Revised Version and the Eunuch's Confession--\n    Creed of Apostolic Church--Witness of Aristides'\n    _Apology_                                                   398-419\n\n\n  INDEX                                                         421-424\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I.\n\n_THE ORIGIN AND AUTHORITY OF THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES._\n\n     \"The former treatise I made, O Theophilus, concerning all that\n     Jesus began both to do and to teach, until the day in which He\n     was received up, after that He had given commandment through the\n     Holy Ghost unto the apostles whom He had chosen.\"--ACTS i. 1, 2.\n\n\nThese words constitute the very brief preface which the writer thought\nsufficient for the earliest ecclesiastical history ever produced in\nthe Church of God. Let us imitate him in his brevity and conciseness,\nand without further delay enter upon the consideration of a book which\nraises vital questions and involves all-important issues.\n\nNow when a plain man comes to the consideration of this book one\nquestion naturally strikes him at once: How do I know who wrote this\nbook, or when it was written? What evidence or guarantee have I for\nits authentic character? To these questions we shall apply ourselves\nin the present chapter.\n\nThe title of the book as given in our Bibles does not offer us much\nhelp. The title varies in different manuscripts and in different\nancient authors. Some writers of the second century who touched upon\napostolic times call it by the name our Bibles retain, The Acts of the\nApostles; others call it The Acts of the Holy Apostles, or at times\nsimply The Acts. This title of \"Acts\" was indeed a very common one,\nin the second and third centuries, for a vast variety of writings\npurporting to tell the story of apostolic lives, as an abundance of\nextant apocryphal documents amply proves. The Acts of Paul and Thecla,\nthe Acts of St. Thomas, of St. Peter, and of St. John, were\nimitations, doubtless, of the well-known name by which our canonical\nbook was then called. Imitation is universally acknowledged to be the\nsincerest form of flattery, and the imitation of the title and form of\nour book is an evidence of its superior claim and authority. One of\nthe oldest of these apocryphal Acts is a document celebrated in\nChristian antiquity as the Acts of Paul and Thecla. We know all about\nits origin. It was forged about the year 180 or 200 by a presbyter of\nAsia Minor who was an enthusiastic admirer of the Apostle St. Paul.\nBut when we take up the narrative and read it, with its absurd legends\nand its manifold touches and realistic scenes drawn from the\npersecutions of the second century, and well known to every student of\nthe original records of those times, we can at a glance see what the\ncanonical Acts of the Apostles would have been had the composition\nbeen postponed to the end of the second century. The Acts of Paul and\nThecla are useful, then, as illustrating, by way of contrast in title\nand in substance, the genuine Acts of the New Testament which they\nimitated.[11]\n\n  [11] See a copious account of this strange second-century forgery\n  in Dr. Gwynne's article on Thecla in the fourth volume of the\n  _Dictionary of Christian Biography_. Dr. Salmon, in his\n  _Introduction to the N.T._, chap. xix., gives a most interesting\n  description of the apocrypha Acts of the Apostles, which even the\n  unlearned can enjoy.\n\nBut then, some one might say, how do we know that the genuine Acts of\nthe Apostles existed prior to the Acts of Paul and Thecla and the\ntime of Tertullian, who first mentions these apocryphal Acts, and\ntells us of their forged origin? The answer to that query is easy\nenough. Yet it will require a somewhat copious statement in order to\nexhibit its full force, its convincing power.\n\nTertullian is a writer who connects the age of apostolic men, as we\nmay call the men who knew the Apostles--Ignatius, Polycarp, Clement of\nRome, and such like--with the third century. Tertullian was born about\nthe middle of the second century, and he lived till the third century\nwas well advanced. He was one of those persons whose chronological\nposition enables them to transmit historical facts and details from\none critical point to another. Let me illustrate what I mean by a\nmodern example. Every unprejudiced thinker will acknowledge that the\nRev. John Wesley was a man who exercised an extraordinary religious\ninfluence. He not only originated a vast community of world-wide\nextent, which calls itself after his name, but he also imparted a\ntremendous impetus to spiritual life and work in the Church of\nEngland. After the departure of Mr. Wesley from this life his mantle\nfell upon a certain number of his leading followers, men like Adam\nClarke, the commentator; Jabez Bunting, the organizer of modern\nWesleyanism; Thomas Coke, Robert Newton, and Richard Watson, the\nauthor of the _Institutes of Theology_. Several of these men lived far\ninto this century, and there are at the present day thousands still\nalive who recollect some of them, while there are many still alive who\ncan recollect all of them. Now let us draw a parallel with all\nreverence, and yet with perfect fairness. John Wesley began his life\nat the beginning of the eighteenth century as our Lord began His\nhuman life at the beginning of the first century. John Wesley's\nimmediate disciples perpetuated their lives till the middle of the\npresent century. Our Lord's apostles and immediate followers\nperpetuated their lives in some cases till well into the second\ncentury. At the close of the nineteenth century there are hundreds, to\nsay the least, who remember Adam Clarke and Thomas Coke, who in turn\nwere personally acquainted with John Wesley. In the last quarter of\nthe second century there must have been many still alive--apostolic\nmen, I have called them--whose youthful memories could bear them back\nto the days when the Apostle St. John, and men like St. Mark, and St.\nLuke, and St. Ignatius, still testified what they had personally seen\nand heard and known. Why, the simple fact is this, that in the year\n1950 there will be still living numerous persons who will be able to\nsay that they have personally known many individuals who were the\nfriends and acquaintances of John Wesley's immediate disciples. Four\nlong lives of ninety years, the one overlapping the other, will easily\ncover three centuries of time.\n\nLet us dwell a little more on this point, for it bears very directly\non Tertullian's witness, not only to the canon of the New Testament,\nbut also to the whole round of Christian doctrine. It is simply\nwonderful what vast tracts of time can be covered by human memory even\nat the present day, when that faculty has lost so much of its power\nfor want of exercise, owing to the printing-press. I can give a\nstriking instance from my own knowledge. There is at present an\nacquaintance of mine living in this city of Dublin where I write. He\nis hale and hearty, and able still to take the keenest interest in the\naffairs of religion and of politics. He is about ninety-five years of\nage, and he has told me within the last twelve months that he\nremembers quite well a grand-aunt of his born in the reign of Queen\nAnne, who used to tell him all the incidents connected with the\nearliest visits of John and Charles Wesley to Ireland about 1745. If\nTertullian's experience was anything like my own, he may quite easily\nhave known persons at Rome or elsewhere who had heard the tale of St.\nPaul's preaching, labour, and miracles from the very men whom the\nApostle had converted at Antioch, Damascus, and Rome. I can give a\nmore striking instance still, which any reader can verify for himself.\nMr. S. C. Hall was a writer known far and wide for the last seventy\nyears. About the middle of this century Mr. Hall was at the height of\nhis popularity, though he only passed to the unseen world within the\nlast year or so. In the year 1842 he, in union with his accomplished\nand well-known wife, composed a beautifully-illustrated work,\npublished in three volumes, called _Picturesque Ireland_, which now\nfinds an honoured place in many of our libraries. In the second volume\nof that work Mr. Hall mentions the following curious fact bearing on\nour argument. He states that he was then (in 1842) staying at the\nhouse of a gentleman, Sir T. Macnaghten, whose father had commanded at\nthe siege of Derry in 1689, one hundred and fifty-three years before.\nYet vast as the distance of time was, the explanation which he offered\nwas easy enough. The Macnaghten Clan was summoned to assist in the\ncelebrated siege of Derry. They refused to march unless headed by\ntheir chief, who was then a boy of seven. The child was placed on a\nhorse and duly headed his clan, who would follow him alone. That child\nmarried when a very old man, and his eldest son attained to an\nequally patriarchal age, carrying with him the traditions of Jacobite\ntimes down to the reign of Queen Victoria. I could give many other\nsimilar instances, illustrating my contention that vivid and accurate\ntraditions of the past can be transmitted over vast spaces of time,\nand that through persons who come into living contact with one\nanother.[12]\n\n  [12] The Irish people are very Oriental in the tenacity with which\n  they retain ancient traditions, transmitting them intact to\n  posterity. Abundant instances have proved this, the traditions\n  having been perpetuated in some cases for five hundred years or\n  more. The following case has come under the writer's notice in his\n  own neighbourhood. There is near Dublin a village called Finglas,\n  celebrated for its ancient Abbey. A cross stood there which had\n  been venerated from the earliest times. When Cromwell's soldiers\n  were advancing to attack Dublin about the year 1648, their\n  iconoclastic fame reached the inhabitants of Finglas, who took the\n  ancient cross and buried it in one of the glebe fields. Some one\n  hundred and sixty years later a vicar of Finglas of antiquarian\n  tastes heard traditions of this event. He learned from an\n  extremely old man that his grandfather when a boy had been present\n  at the burial of the cross, and had shown him the spot where it\n  was concealed. The vicar made excavations, and duly found the\n  cross, which he re-erected some time about 1810, in a spot where\n  it is still to be seen. This instance will show how two long lives\n  could cover the space between St. Paul's middle age and\n  Tertullian's mature years. See _Fingal and its Churches_, by Rev.\n  R. Walsh, D.D., pp. 147-49. Dublin, 1888. St. Jerome, _De Vir.\n  Illust._, 53, mentions a similar case in his time. St. Jerome knew\n  an old man who when young had himself known one of St. Cyprian's\n  secretaries. St. Jerome wrote about A.D. 400, St. Cyprian died in\n  257; the difference exactly between Tertullian and St. Paul.\n\nTertullian must have had ample means, then, of ascertaining the facts\nconcerning the books of the New Testament from living witnesses. There\nis again another point we must bear in mind, and it is this: the\ndistance of time with which Tertullian's investigations had to deal\nwas not so vast as we sometimes imagine. It was by no means so great\nas the spaces we have just now referred to. We naturally think of\nTertullian as living about the year 200, and then, remembering that\nour Saviour was born just two centuries before, we ask, What is the\nvalue of a man's testimony concerning events two centuries old? But we\nmust bear in mind the exact point at issue. We are not enquiring at\nall about events two centuries old, but we are enquiring as to\nTertullian's evidence with respect to the canonical Gospels and the\nActs; and none of these was one hundred years old when Tertullian was\nborn, about 150 A.D., while the Gospel of St. John may not have been\nmore than sixty years old, or thereabouts, at the same date. Now if we\ntake up the writings of Tertullian, which are very copious indeed, we\nshall find that the Acts of the Apostles are quoted at least one\nhundred times in them, long passages being in some cases transcribed,\nand the whole book treated by him as Scripture and true history. If we\naccept the ordinary view, that the Acts were written previously to St.\nPaul's death, the book was only a century old at Tertullian's birth.\nBut we can come nearer to the apostolic times.\n\nThe Muratorian Fragment is a document which came to light by chance\none hundred and fifty years ago. It illustrates the age of the Acts,\nand shows what wondrous testimonies to the New Testament scriptures we\nmay yet gain. Its story is a very curious and interesting one for\nourselves. St. Columbanus was an Irish missionary who, about the year\n600 A.D., established a monastery at Bobbio, a retired spot in North\nItaly. He gathered a library there, and imparted a literary impulse to\nhis followers which never left them.[13] Some Irish monk a hundred\nyears later than Columbanus employed his time in copying into a book\nan ancient manuscript of the second century giving a list of the books\nof the New Testament then received at Rome. This second-century\nmanuscript enumerated among these the four Gospels, the Acts of the\nApostles, and thirteen Epistles of St. Paul. Concerning the Acts of\nthe Apostles, the Roman writer of this document, who lived about A.D.\n170, says: \"The Acts of all the Apostles are written in one book. Luke\nexplains to the most excellent Theophilus everything which happened in\nhis presence, as the omission of Peter's martyrdom and of Paul's\njourney into Spain manifestly proves;\" a passage which clearly shows\nthat about the middle of the second century the Acts of the Apostles\nwas well known at Rome, and its authorship ascribed to St. Luke.[14]\nBut this is not all. We have another most interesting second-century\ndocument, which proves that at the very same period our canonical book\nwas known and authoritatively quoted far away in the south of France.\nIt is hard to exaggerate the evidential value of the Epistle of the\nChurches of Lyons and Vienne written about the year 177, and addressed\nto their brethren in Asia Minor. That letter quotes the books of the\nNew Testament in the amplest manner, and without any formal\nreferences, just as a modern preacher or writer would quote them,\nshowing how common and authoritative was their use. Leader-writers in\nthe _Times_ or the _Saturday Review_ often garnish their articles with\na scriptural quotation; the late Mr. John Bright, in his great popular\norations, loved to point them with an apt citation from Holy Writ; but\nhe never thought it necessary, nor do journalists ever think it\nnecessary, to prefix a formal statement of the place whence their\ntexts have been derived. They presume a wide knowledge and a formal\nrecognition of the text of the Bible. So it was in this epistle\nwritten from Lyons and Vienne, and in it we find an exact quotation\nfrom the Acts of the Apostles--\"According as Stephen the perfect\nmartyr prayed, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge.\"\n\n  [13] See two articles on St. Columbanus and his library in the\n  _Expositor_ for June and August 1889.\n\n  [14] Dr. Salmon, in his _Introd. N.T._, pp. 48-54, describes the\n  Muratorian Fragment.\n\nBut this is not the whole of the argument which can be derived from\nthe Epistle of the Lyonnese Christians, which is given to us at full\nlength in the fifth book of the _Church History_ of the celebrated\nhistorian Eusebius. Their incidental notice of the Acts involves a\nvast deal when duly considered. The Epistle from Lyons implies that\nthe Acts were received as authoritative and genuine in the churches of\ntowns like Ephesus, Philadelphia, Smyrna, Miletus, where the memories\nand traditions of the Apostles were still vivid and living. Then, too,\nthe Bishop of Lyons had suffered in this persecution. His name was\nPothinus. He was the first Bishop of the Church of Lyons, and he died\nwhen he was more than ninety years of age, and may have been a\ndisciple of an apostle, or of one of the first generation of\nChristians. At any rate, his memory would easily carry him back to the\ndays of Domitian and the times of the first century; and yet the\nChurch over which this first-century Christian presided accepted the\nActs of the Apostles. The testimony of Pothinus helps then to carry\nback the Acts of the Apostles to the year 100 at least. But we can go\nfarther still, and closer to apostolic times.\n\nThe Gospel of St. Luke and the Acts of the Apostles are, we may say,\nuniversally admitted to be by the same writer. The reference of the\nActs to the Gospel, the unity of style and tone of thought, all\ndemonstrate them to be the production of one mind. Any circumstance\ntherefore which proves the early existence of the Gospel equally\nproves the existence of the Acts of the Apostles. Now we have proof\npositive that the Gospel of St. Luke occupied an authoritative\nposition and was counted an apostolic and sacred writing at Rome in\nthe early years of the second century, say between 100 and 150,\nbecause when Marcion, whom we might call a primitive Antinomian,\nwished to compile a gospel suited to his own purposes, he took St.\nLuke's Gospel, cut out whatever displeased him, and published the\nremainder as the true version. The perversion and mutilation of St.\nLuke's work shows that it must already have held a high position in\nthe Church at Rome, or else there would have been no object in\nmutilating it. Marcion's treatment of St. Luke proves the use and\nposition the Gospel and the Acts must have occupied in days when the\nconverts and companions of the Apostles were still alive.[15] That is\nas far as we can go back by external testimony. But then we must\nremember what these facts involve--that the Gospel and the Acts\noccupied authoritative positions in various parts of the world, and\nspecially in Rome, Gaul, Africa, and Asia Minor, in the generation\nnext after the Apostles. Then let us take up the Book of Acts itself,\nand what does this book, known at Rome and throughout the Christian\nworld at that early period, tell us? It informs us that it was the\nwork of the writer of the Gospel, and that the writer was a companion\nof the Apostle Paul throughout the portion of his career sketched in\nthe latter part of the book. The Christian Church has never pinned\nits faith to the Lukian authorship of either the Gospel or the Acts.\nThe question of the authorship of these books is an open one, like\nthat of the Epistle to the Hebrews. The Acts has been attributed to\nSilas, to Timothy, to Titus; but I may say, without going into any\nfurther details on this question, that every attempt to ascribe the\nActs to any one else save to the beloved physician has failed, and\nmust fail, because he was the real author, well known to the living\ntradition of the Church of Rome in the early part of the second\ncentury, as that tradition is handed down to us in the language of the\nMuratorian Fragment.\n\n  [15] See Dr. Sanday's _The Gospels in the Second Century_, and Dr.\n  Salmon's _Introd. N.T._, pp. 204-208.\n\nIf we were writing a critical treatise, we should of course have to\nenter upon the full discussion of many questions which might here be\nraised. The Acts of the Apostles in its latter chapters plainly claims\nto be the work of an eye-witness. In its opening words, placed at the\nhead of this dissertation, it claims to be the work of the author of\nthe Gospel. All the facts fall into a simple, natural order if we\naccept the traditional testimony of the Church that the Acts and the\nGospel were both of them written before the martyrdom of St. Paul, and\nwere indited by the hands of St. Paul's companion St. Luke. Any other\nsolution is forced, unnatural, and involves inconsistencies on every\nside. We may turn aside from this brief outline of the critical\nquestion, to some more purely spiritual reflections, simply referring\nthose who desire more information on the questions of date and\nauthorship to such exhaustive works as those of Dr. Salmon's\n_Introduction to the New Testament_; Dr. Westcott on the _New\nTestament Canon_; Dr. Charteris on _Canonicity_, or Meyer's\n_Introduction to the Acts_.\n\nFirst, then, it may strike the intelligent reader, how comes it that\nwe have not much fuller testimony in early Christian writers to the\nActs of the Apostles, and to all the books of the Old Testament? How\nis it that the writings of Polycarp, Ignatius, Clement of Rome, do not\nabound with references, not merely to the Acts, but also to the four\nGospels and to the other works of the New Testament? How is it that we\nhave to depend on this obscure reference and that dubious quotation?\nThese are questions which have often puzzled my own mind before I had\ninvestigated, and must often have raised anxiety and thought in other\nminds sincerely desirous of being rooted and grounded in the truth.\nBut now, after having investigated, and thought, I think I can see\nsolid reasons why things are as they are; clear evidences of the truth\nof the Christian story in the apparent difficulties. Historic\nimagination is one of the necessary requisites in such an\ninvestigation, and historic imagination is one of the qualities in\nwhich our German cousins, from whom most of the objections to the\ncanon of the New Testament have been derived, are conspicuously\ndeficient. They are gifted with prodigious industry, and an amazing\ncapacity for patient investigation. They live secluded lives, however,\nand no one is a worse judge of practical life, or forms wilder\nconclusions as to what men actually do in practical life, than the\nacademic pure and simple. A dear friend, now with God, himself a\ndistinguished resident of a well-known college, used often to say to\nme, \"Never trust the opinion of a mere college fellow or professor\nupon any practical point; they know nothing about life.\" This dictum,\nbegotten of long experience, bears on our argument. German thought and\nEnglish thought offer sharp and strong contrasts on many points, and\non none more than in this direction. English students mix more in the\nworld, are surrounded by the atmosphere of free institutions, and\nrealize more vividly how men spontaneously act under the conditions of\nactual existence. The German thinker evolves his men of the past and\nthe facts of their existence out of his own consciousness, without\nsubmitting them to the necessary corrections which experience dictates\nto his English brother; and the result is, that while we may be very\nready to accept the premises of the Germans, we should be in general\nsomewhat suspicious of their conclusions. Scholarship alone does not\nentitle a man to pronounce on questions of history. It is only one of\nthe elements requisite for the solution of such problems. Knowledge of\nmen, experience of life, enabling a man to form a just and true mental\npicture of the past and of the motives by which men are\ninfluenced,--these are elements equally necessary. Now let us try and\nthrow ourselves back by an effort of historical imagination into the\nage of Polycarp, Ignatius, and Clement of Rome, and I think we shall\nat once see that the omission of such abundant references to the New\nTestament as men at times desiderate was quite natural in their case.\n\nLet us reflect a little. The manner in which the early Christians\nlearned the facts and truths of Christianity was quite different from\nthat which now prevails. If men wish now to learn about original\nChristianity they resort to the New Testament. In the age of Polycarp\nthey resorted to the living voice of the elders who had known the\nApostles, and had heard the truth from their lips. Thus Iren\u00e6us, who\nhad the four Gospels before him, tells us: \"I can recall the very\nplace where Polycarp used to sit and teach, his manner of speech, his\nmode of life, his appearance, the style of his address to the people,\nhis frequent references to St. John and to others who had seen our\nLord; how he used to repeat from memory the discourses which he had\nheard from them concerning our Lord, His miracles, and His mode of\nteaching; and how, being instructed himself by those who were\neye-witnesses of the Life of the Word, there was in all that he said a\nstrict agreement with the Scriptures.\" And it is very natural that\nmen, though possessed of the Gospels, should thus have delighted in\nthe testimony of elders like Polycarp. There is a charm in the human\nvoice, there is a force and power in living testimony, far superior to\nany written words. Take, for instance, the account of a battle\ncontributed to a newspaper by the best-informed correspondent. Yet how\nmen will hang on the lips and follow with breathless attention the\nnarrative of the humblest actor in the actual contest. This one fact,\nknown to common experience, shows how different the circumstances of\nthe early Christians were as touching the canonical books from those\nwhich now exist, or existed in the third and fourth centuries. Again,\nwe must remember that in the age of Polycarp there was no canon of the\nNew Testament as we have it.[16] There were a number of books here\nand there known to have been written by the Apostles and their\nimmediate followers. One Church could show the Epistle written by St.\nPaul to the Ephesians, another that written to the Colossians. Clement\nof Rome, when writing to the Corinthians, expressly refers them to the\nFirst Epistle to the Corinthians, which possibly was treasured by them\nas their one sacred document of the new covenant; and so it was\ndoubtless all over the Christian world till well-nigh the close of the\nsecond century. The New Testament was dispersed in portions, a few\nleading Churches possessing perhaps all or most of the books, and a\nfew remote ones probably only a few detached epistles, or a solitary\ngospel. A Greek document found in the National Library at Paris within\nthe last few years illustrates this point. The Scillitan martyrs were\na body of Africans who sealed their testimony to the faith by\nsuffering martyrdom in the year 180, about three years after the\nsufferings of the Christians of Lyons and Vienne. North Africa, now\nthe chosen home of the false prophet, was then the most fruitful field\nfor the religion of the Crucified, yielding doctors, saints,\nconfessors, in multitudes. The document which has now come to light\ntells the story of these north Africans and their testimony to the\ntruth. The details of their judicial examination are there set forth,\nand in one question, proposed by the heathen magistrate, we have an\ninteresting glimpse of the very point upon which we are insisting, the\nscattered and detached nature of the New Testament writings at that\nperiod. The President of the Roman Court, in the course of his\nexamination, asks the leader of the martyrs, St. Speratus, \"What are\nthose books in your cases?\" \"They are,\" he replied, \"the epistles of\nthat holy man Paul.\" So that apparently the Scillitan Church depended\nfor instruction, in the closing years of the second century, upon the\nEpistles of St. Paul alone.[17]\n\n  [16] The latest enquiries and discoveries confirm this view, which\n  may be deduced from a study of the apostolic Fathers, with which\n  should be compared the new second-century documents belonging to\n  Ephesus and Rome discussed in _Texte u. Untersuch_. of Gebhardt\n  and Harnack for 1888. Their titles are the tract _De Aleatoribus_,\n  by Pope Victor I., and the _Martyrdoms_ of Carpus and Papylus,\n  Companions of St. Polycarp. Pope Victor gives a long extract from\n  the _Shepherd of Hermas_, and calls it \"Divine Scripture;\" which\n  shows that the canon was not closed at Rome in the last fifteen\n  years of the second century.\n\n  [17] An interesting account of this second-century document will\n  be found in the _Texts_, edited by Gebhardt and Harnack, or in the\n  _Dict. Christ. Biog._ under \"Scillitan Martyrs.\" Every scrap of\n  second century evidence is of the greatest importance for biblical\n  criticism.\n\nThe canon of the New Testament grew up by degrees somehow thus. While\nthe Apostles and their followers and the friends of their followers\nlived and flourished, men naturally sought after their living\ntestimonies, consulting doubtless such documents as well which lay\nwithin their reach. But when the living witnesses and their friends\nhad passed away, the natural instinct of the Church, guided by that\nSpirit of Truth which in the darkest times has never wholly left\nChrist's Spouse, led her to treasure up and dwell with greater love\nupon those written documents which she had possessed from the\nbeginning. It is no wonder, then, that we do not find large quotations\nand copious references to the canonical books in the earliest\nwriters--simply because it was impossible they should then have\noccupied the same place in the Christian consciousness as they now do.\nRather, on the contrary, we should be inclined to say that, had they\nbeen largely quoted and frequently referred to by Polycarp, Ignatius,\nor Clement, men might naturally have derived therefrom a forcible\nargument against the genuine character of the works of these primitive\nFathers, as such quotations would have been contrary to the principles\nof human nature. It is very important for us to remember these facts.\nThey have a very clear bearing upon present-day controversies. Friends\nand foes of Christianity have often thought that the truth of our\nreligion was bound up with the traditional view of the canon of the\nNew Testament, or with some special theory of inspiration; forgetting\nthe self-evident truth that Christianity existed at the beginning\nwithout a canon of the New Testament, that the early Christians\ndepended upon personal testimony alone, and that if the Apostles and\ntheir friends had never written a line or left a solitary document\nbehind them, yet that we should have abundant information concerning\nthe work and teaching of our Lord and His Apostles in the writings of\nthe successors of the Apostles, compared with and fortified by\ncontemporaneous pagan testimony. Men have sometimes thought and spoken\nas if the New Testament descended from heaven in its present shape,\nlike the image that fell down from Jupiter which the Ephesians\nworshipped, forgetting the true history of its upgrowth and origin.\nThe critical theories that have been advanced in abundance of late\nyears would have troubled a second-century Christian very little. If\nthe Johannine authorship of the fourth Gospel were denied, or the\nPauline authorship of Colossians or Ephesians questioned; what does it\nmatter? would have been his reply. These documents may have been\nforgeries, but there are plenty of other documents which tell the same\nstory, and I have myself known many men who have suffered and died\nbecause they had embraced the truths, from the lips of the Apostles\nthemselves, which they have taught me. The simple fact is, that if all\nthe books of the New Testament were proved impudent forgeries except\nthe Epistle to the Romans, the two Epistles to the Corinthians, and\nthe Galatians, which every person admits, we should have ample and\nconvincing statements of Christian truth and doctrine. The devout\nChristian may, then, make his mind easy, certain that no efforts and\nno advances in the field of biblical criticism are likely to ruffle\neven a feather of the faith once delivered to the saints.\n\nBut then, some one may come forward and say, is not this a very\nuncomfortable position for us? Would it not have been much more easy\nand consoling for Christians to have had the whole canon of Scripture\ninfallibly decided by Divine authority once for all, so as to save all\ndoubts and disputations on the whole subject? Would it not have been\nbetter had the Acts of the Apostles expressly named St. Luke as its\nauthor, and appended ample proofs that its statement was true? This\nobjection is a very natural one, and springs up at times in every\nmind; and yet it is merely part and parcel of the larger objection,\nWhy has Revelation been left a matter of doubt and disputation in any\nrespect? Nay, it is part of a still wider and vaster question, Why has\ntruth in any department, scientific, philosophical, ethical, or\nhistorical, been left a matter of debate? Why has it not shone forth\nby its own inherent light and compelled the universal consent of\nadmiring mankind? Why has not the great fundamental truth of all, the\nexistence and nature of God, been made so clear that an atheist could\nnot possibly exist? A century and a-half ago Bishop Butler, in his\nimmortal _Analogy_, disposed of this objection, which still crops up\nafresh in every generation as if that work had never been written.[18]\nGod has placed us here in a state of probation, and neither in\ntemporal nor in spiritual matters is the evidence for what is true,\nand right, and wise so clear and overwhelming that no room is left\nfor mistake or error. As it is in every other department of life, so\nis it especially with reference to the canon of Scripture. It would\ndoubtless be very convenient for us if the whole question were settled\nauthoritatively and no doubts possible, but would it be good for us?\nwould it be wholesome for our spiritual life? I trow not. We have,\nindeed, a living and speaking example of the blessings of uncertainty\nin the state of the Roman Catholic Church, which has tried to better\nthe Divine method of training mankind, and banish all uncertainty.\nThat communion undertakes to settle infallibly all questions of\ntheology, and to leave nothing in doubt; and with what result? The\nvast body of the laity take no interest whatsoever in theological\nquestions. They regard theology as outside their sphere, and belonging\nto the clergy exclusively. The clergy in turn believe that the Pope,\nin his office of infallible and universal pastor and teacher, has\nalone the right and authority to settle doctrines, and they leave it\nto him. They have made a solitude, and that they call peace, and the\npretence alone of an authority which undertakes to release man from\ndoubt and the need of investigation has paralysed theological inquiry\namong Roman Catholics.\n\n  [18] See Butler's _Analogy_, Part II., chap. vi.\n\nThe same results on a vastly larger scale must have happened\nthroughout the Christian world had God made His revelation so clear\nthat no doubt could arise concerning it. Man is a lazy animal by\nnature, and that laziness would at once have been developed by the\nvery abundance of the light vouchsafed. Religion would have been laid\naside as a thing settled once for all. All interest would have been\nlost in it, and human attention would have been concentrated on those\npurely mundane matters where uncertainty arises, and therefore\nimperiously demands the mind's thought and care. The blessings of\nuncertainty would offer a very wide topic for meditation. The man of\nvast wealth whose bread is certain can never know the childlike faith\nwhereby the poor man waits upon his God and receives from Him day by\nday his daily dole. The uncertainties of life hide from us much future\nsorrow, teach us to walk by faith, not by sight, and lead us to depend\ncompletely on the loving guidance of that Fatherly Hand which does all\nthings well. The uncertainties of life develop the spiritual life of\nthe soul. The doubts and questions which arise about religion bring\ntheir own blessings with them too. They develop the intellectual life\nof the spirit. They prevent religion becoming a matter of\nsuperstition, they offer opportunities for the exercise of the graces\nof honesty, courage, humility, and love; and thus form an important\nelement in that Divine training by which man is fitted here below for\nthe beatific vision which awaits him hereafter. Human nature ever\ncraves with longing desire to walk by sight. The Divine method\nevermore prescribes, on the contrary, that man must for the present\nwalk by faith. Very wisely indeed, and with truest spiritual instinct,\nthe poet of the _Christian Year_ has sung, in words applicable to life\nand to theology alike:--\n\n     \"There are who, darkling and alone,\n      Would wish the weary night were gone,\n      Though dawning morn should only show\n      The secret of their unknown woe:\n      Who pray for sharpest throbs of pain\n      To ease them of doubt's galling chain:\n      'Only disperse the cloud,' they cry,\n    'And if our fate be death, give light and let us die.'\n\n     \"Unwise I deem them, Lord, unmeet\n      To profit by Thy chastenings sweet,\n      For Thou wouldst have us linger still\n      Upon the verge of good or ill,\n      That on Thy guiding hand unseen\n      Our undivided hearts may lean,\n      And this our frail and foundering bark\n    Glide in the narrow wake of Thy belov\u00e8d ark.\"[19]\n\n  [19] J. Keble, \"The Sixth Sunday after Epiphany.\"\n\nThe thoughts with which we have hitherto dealt connect themselves with\nthe opening words of the text with which we have begun this chapter,\n\"The former treatise I made, O Theophilus.\" There are two other points\nin this passage which are worthy of devout attention. The writer of\nthe Acts took a thoroughly historical view of our Lord's life after\nthe resurrection as well as before that event. He considered that our\nLord's person, no matter how it may have been modified by His death\nand resurrection, was still as real after these events as in the days\nwhen He ministered and wrought miracles in Galilee and Jerusalem. His\nwhole life was continuous, from the day of the birth in Bethlehem\n\"until the day He was taken up.\"\n\nThen again St. Luke recognises the dual personality of our Lord. As we\nshall afterwards have frequently to notice, St. Luke realized His\nDivine character. In the opening verses of this book he recognises His\ncomplete and perfect humanity--\"After that He had given commandment\nthrough the Holy Ghost unto the Apostles.\" There was an ancient heresy\nabout the nature of our Lord's person, which denied the perfection of\nour Lord's humanity, teaching that His Divinity took the place of the\nhuman spirit in Christ. Such teaching deprives us of much comfort and\ninstruction which the Christian can draw from a meditation upon the\ntrue doctrine as taught here by St. Luke. Jesus Christ was God as\nwell as man, but it was through the manhood He revealed the life and\nnature of God. He was perfect Man in all respects, with body, soul,\nand spirit complete; and in the actions of His manhood, in the\nexercise of all its various activities, He required the assistance and\nsupport of the Holy Ghost just as really as we ourselves do. He\ntaught, gave commandments, worked miracles through the Holy Ghost. The\nhumanity of the Eternal Son required the assistance of the Divine\nSpirit. Christ sought that Divine aid in prolonged communion with His\nFather and His God, and then went forth to work His miracles and give\nHis commandments. Prayer and the gift of the Spirit and the works and\nmarvels of Christ were closely connected together, even before the\nopen descent of the Spirit and the wonders of Pentecost. There was a\ncovenant blessing and a covenant outpouring of the Spirit peculiar to\nChristianity which was not vouchsafed till Christ had ascended. But\nthe Divine Spirit had been given in a measure long before Christ came.\nIt was through the Spirit that every blessing and every gift came to\npatriarchs, prophets, warriors, teachers, and workers of every kind\nunder the Jewish dispensation. The Spirit of God came upon Bezaleel\nand Aholiab, qualifying them to work cunningly for the honour and\nglory of Jehovah when a tabernacle was to be reared. The Spirit of God\ncame upon Samson, and roused his natural courage when Israel was to be\ndelivered. The Spirit of God could rest even upon a Saul, and convert\nhim for a time into a changed character. And just as really the Holy\nGhost rested upon the human nature of Jesus Christ, guiding Him in the\nutterance of those commandments, the outcome and development of which\nwe trace in the book of the Acts of the Apostles.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II.\n\n_THE CONVERSATIONS OF THE GREAT FORTY DAYS._\n\n     \"They therefore, when they were come together, asked Him, saying,\n     Lord, dost Thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel? And\n     He said unto them, It is not for you to know times or seasons,\n     which the Father hath set within His own authority. But ye shall\n     receive power, when the Holy Ghost is come upon you: and ye shall\n     be My witnesses both in Jerusalem, and in all Jud\u00e6a and Samaria,\n     and unto the uttermost part of the earth.\"--ACTS i. 6-9.\n\n\nThe conversations and intercourse between our Lord and His apostles\nduring the forty days which elapsed from the resurrection to the\nascension must have been of intensest interest, yet, like so much that\nwe should esteem interesting concerning the heroes of Scripture and\ntheir lives, these things are wrapped round with thickest darkness. We\nget a glimpse of the risen Christ here and there. We are told He was\nconversing with His disciples touching the things concerning the\nkingdom of God. And then we are practically referred to the Acts of\nthe Apostles if we wish to know what topics His resurrection\ndiscourses dealt with. And when we do so refer to the Acts we find\nthat His disciples moved along the line of Christian development with\nsteps sure, unfaltering, and decided, because they doubtless felt\nthemselves nerved by the well-remembered directions, the conscious\nguidance of the Eternal Son of God, vouchsafed in the commandments\ngiven by Him in the power of the Holy Ghost.\n\nLet us reflect for a little on the characteristics of Christ's risen\nappearances to His disciples. I note then in the first place that they\nwere intermittent, and not continuous,--here and there, to Mary\nMagdalene at one time; to the disciples journeying to Emmaus, to the\nassembled twelve, to five hundred brethren at once, at other times.\nSuch were the manifestations of our Lord; and some may feel inclined\nto cavil at them, and ask, Why did He not dwell continuously and\nperpetually with His disciples as before His resurrection? And yet,\nreading our narrative in the light of other scriptures, we might\nexpect the resurrection appearances of Christ to have been of this\ndescription. In one place in the Gospel narrative we read that our\nLord replied thus to a section of His adversaries: \"In the\nresurrection they neither marry nor are given in marriage, but are as\nangels in heaven.\" Now we often read of angelic appearances in Holy\nScripture, in the Old and New Testament alike. We read too of\nappearances of Old Testament saints, as of Moses and Elias on the\nMount of Transfiguration. And they are all like those of our Lord\nJesus Christ after His resurrection. They are sudden, independent of\ntime or space or material barriers, and yet are visible and tangible\nthough glorified. Such in Genesis was Abraham's vision of angels at\nthe tent door, when they did eat and drink with him. Such was Lot's\nvision of angels who came and lodged with him in wicked Sodom. Such\nwas Peter's vision when an angel released him, guided him through the\nintricate mazes of Jerusalem's streets; and such were Christ's\nappearances when, as on this occasion, His disciples, now accustomed\nto His risen and glorified form, tested Him as of old with the\nquestion, \"Lord, dost Thou at this time restore the kingdom to\nIsrael?\"\n\nI. _Now let us here notice the naturalness of this query concerning\nthe restoration of the kingdom._ The Apostles evidently shared the\nnational aspirations of the Jews at that time. A large number of books\nhave come to light of late years, which show what a keen expectation\nof the Messiah's kingdom and His triumph over the Romans existed at\nthe time, and prior to the time, of our Saviour. The book of Enoch,\ndiscovered one hundred years ago in Abyssinia, and translated into\nEnglish in the beginning of the present century, was written a century\nat least before the Incarnation.[20] The book of Jubilees was written\nin Palestine about the time of our Lord's birth; the Psalter of\nSolomon dates from the same period. All these works give us clearest\nglimpses into the inner mind, the religious tone, of the Jewish nation\nat that time.[21] The pious unsophisticated people of Galilee were\ndaily expecting the establishment of the Messianic kingdom; but the\nkingdom they expected was no spiritual institution, it was simply an\nearthly scene of material glory, where the Jews would once again be\nexalted above all surrounding nations, and the hated invader expelled\nfrom the fair plains of Israel. We can scarcely realize or understand\nthe force and naturalness of this question, \"Dost Thou at this time\nrestore the kingdom to Israel?\" as put by these Galilean peasants till\none takes up Archbishop Laurence's translation of the book of Enoch,\nand sees how this eager expectation dominated every other feeling in\nthe Jewish mind of that period, and was burned into the very secrets\nof their existence by the tyranny of Roman rule. Thus, let us take the\nforty-seventh chapter of the book of Enoch, which may very possibly\nhave been in the thoughts of the Apostles as they presented this query\nto their Lord. In that chapter we read the following words, attributed\nunto Enoch: \"There I beheld the Ancient of Days, whose head was like\nwhite wool; and with Him another, whose countenance resembled that of\nman. His countenance was full of grace, like that of one of the holy\nangels. Then I inquired of one of the angels who went with me, and who\nshowed me every secret thing concerning this Son of Man, who He was,\nwhence He was, and why He accompanied the Ancient of Days. He answered\nand said to me, This is the Son of Man, to whom righteousness belongs,\nwith whom righteousness has dwelt, and who will reveal all the\ntreasures of that which is concealed. For the Lord of Spirits has\nchosen Him, and His portion has surpassed all before the Lord of\nSpirits in everlasting uprightness. This Son of Man whom thou\nbeholdest shall raise up kings and the mighty from their couches, and\nthe powerful from their thrones; shall loosen the bridles of the\npowerful, and break in pieces the teeth of sinners. He shall hurl\nkings from their thrones and their dominions, because they will not\nexalt and praise Him, nor humble themselves before Him, by whom their\nkingdoms were granted to them. The countenance likewise of the mighty\nshall He cast down, filling them with confusion. Darkness shall be\ntheir habitation, and worms shall be their bed; nor from that their\nbed shall they hope to be again raised, because they exalted not the\nName of the Lord of Spirits.\" This is one specimen of the Messianic\nexpectations, which were just then worked up to fever pitch among the\nGalileans especially, and were ever leading them to burst out into\nbloody rebellion against the power of the Romans. We might multiply\nsuch quotations fourfold did our space permit. This one extract must\nsuffice to show the tone and quality of the religious literature upon\nwhich the souls of the Apostles had fed and been sustained, when they\nproposed this query, \"Dost Thou at this time restore the kingdom to\nIsrael?\" They were thinking simply of such a kingdom as the book of\nEnoch foretold.\n\n  [20] The book of Enoch was translated into English by Archbishop\n  Laurence, and was first published about seventy years ago. There\n  is an exhaustive article on the subject in the second volume of\n  the _Dictionary of Christian Biography_, written by Professor\n  Lipsius of Jena.\n\n  [21] The book of Jubilees has never been published in English. An\n  interesting account of it will be found in the later editions of\n  Kitto's _Biblical Cyclop\u00e6dia_. The reader will find another\n  account of the book of Jubilees in the _Dict. Christ. Biog._, iv.,\n  507. The Psalms of Solomon are contained in the _Cod. Pseud. Vet.\n  Test._ of J. A. Fabricius. There is a brief notice of them in the\n  _Dict. Chris. Biog._, iv., 508, under the title \"Pseudepigrapha.\"\n\nThis very point seems to us one of the special and most striking\nevidences for the inspiration and supernatural direction of the\nwriters of the New Testament. Their natural, purely human, and\nnational conception of the kingdom of God was one thing; their final,\ntheir divinely taught and inspired conception of that kingdom is quite\nanother thing. I cannot see how, upon any ground of mere human\nexperience or human development, the Apostles could have risen from\nthe gross, material conceptions of the book of Enoch, wherein the\nkingdom of the Messiah would have simply been a purified, reformed,\nand exalted copy of the Roman Empire of that day, to the spiritual and\ntruly catholic idea of a kingdom not of this world, which ruled over\nspirits rather than over bodies.[22] Some persons maintain that\nChristianity in its doctrines, organisation, and discipline was but\nthe outcome of natural forces working in the world at that epoch. But\ntake this doctrine alone, \"My kingdom is not of this world,\" announced\nby Christ before Pilate, and impressed upon the Apostles by revelation\nafter revelation, and experience after experience, which they only\nvery gradually assimilated and understood. Where did it come from? How\nwas it the outcome of natural forces? The whole tendency of Jewish\nthought was in the opposite direction. Nationalism of the most narrow,\nparticular, and limited kind was the predominant idea, specially among\nthose Galilean provincials who furnished the vast majority of the\nearliest disciples of Jesus Christ. Our minds have been so steeped in\nthe principles of Christian liberalism, we have been so thoroughly\ntaught the rejection of race-prejudice, that we can scarcely realize\nthe narrow and limited ideas which must have ruled the minds of the\nfirst Christians, and therefore we miss the full force of this\nargument for the Divine character of the Christian religion. A Roman\nCatholic peasant from Connaught, an Ulster Orangeman, a Celtic\nPresbyterian Highlander, none of these will take a wide, tolerant,\ngenerous view of religion. They view the question through their own\nnarrow provincial spectacles. And yet any one of them would have been\nbroad, liberal, and comprehensive when contrasted with the tone and\nthought of the Galilean provincials of our Lord's day. They lived\nlonely, solitary lives, away from the din, the pressure, and the\nbusiness of daily life; they knew nothing of what the great outside\nworld was thinking and doing; they fed their spirits on the glories of\nthe past, and had no room in their gloomy fanaticism for aught that\nwas liberal and truly spiritual. How could men like them have\ndeveloped the idea of the Catholic Church, boundless as the earth\nitself, limited by no hereditary or fleshly bonds, and trammelled by\nno circumstances of race, climate, or kindred? The magnificence of the\nidea, the grandeur of the conception, is the truest and most\nsufficient evidence of the divinity of its origin. \"In Christ Jesus\nthere is neither Jew nor Greek, bond nor free, male nor female,\" the\nrapt expression of an inspired and illuminated Apostle, when compared\nwith this query, \"Dost Thou at this time restore the kingdom to\nIsrael?\" the darkened utterance of carnal and uninspired minds groping\nafter truth, furnishes to the thinking soul the clearest evidence of\nthe presence of a supernatural power, of a Divine enlightenment,\nvouchsafed to the Apostles upon the Day of Pentecost. If this higher\nknowledge, this nobler conception, this spiritualised ideal, came not\nfrom God, whence did it come?\n\n  [22] The strongest argument, from a mere literary point of view,\n  for the existence of a supernatural element in Christianity and\n  primitive Christian literature will be derived from a contrast\n  between the Jewish literature of the period of the Christian era\n  and the New Testament. Take, for instance, the book of Jubilees.\n  It was written about the time of our Lord, and probably in\n  Galilee. It represents the current tone of Jewish religion, and\n  shows us, with its narrowness and absurdities, what the New\n  Testament would have been had it been the product of unassisted\n  human nature. The book of Jubilees or of Enoch is the strongest\n  argument for the inspiration of the New Testament. I cannot even\n  imagine what explanation can be offered of the difference in tone\n  between the Christian and the Jewish writings save that of the\n  inspiration of the Christian.\n\nI do not think we can press this point of the catholicity and\nuniversality of the Christian idea and the Christian society too far.\nWe cannot possibly make too much of it. There were undoubtedly\nChristian elements, or elements whence Christian ideas were developed,\nprevalent in the current Judaism of the day. Many a clause of the\nLord's Prayer and of the Sermon on the Mount can be paralleled almost\nword for word from the Jewish teachers and writings of the times\nimmediately preceding our Lord. There was nothing in Christ of that\npetty vanity of little minds which craves after complete originality,\nand which will be nothing if not completely new. He was indeed the\nwise and the good householder, who brought forth out of His treasures\nthings old as well as things new. Many a teacher and thinker, like\nPhilo, whose ideas had been broadened by the Divine training of\nbanishment and enforced exile in Alexandria or in Asia Minor, had\nrisen to nobler and wider views than were current in Palestine. But it\nwas not among these, or such as these, that the catholic ideas of the\ngospel took their rise. Christianity took its rise among men whose\nideas, whose national aspirations, whose religious hopes, were of the\nnarrowest and most limited kind; and yet, amid such surroundings and\nplanted in such a soil, Christianity assumed at once a world-wide\nmission, rejected at once and peremptorily all mere Judaic\nexclusiveness, and claimed for itself the widest scope and\ndevelopment. The universality of the Gospel message, the\ncomprehensive, all-embracing character of the Gospel teaching, as set\nforth in our Lord's parting words, is, we conclude, an ample evidence\nof its Divine and superhuman origin.\n\nII. _In this passage again there lies hidden the wisest practical\nteaching for the Church of all ages._ We have warnings against the\nfolly which seeks to unravel the future and penetrate that veil of\ndarkness by which our God in mercy shrouds the unknown. We have\ntaught us the benefits which attend the uncertainties of our Lord's\nreturn and of the end of this present dispensation. \"It is not for you\nto know times or seasons.\" Let us endeavour to work out this point,\ntogether with the manifold illustrations of it which the history of\nthe Church affords.\n\n(_a_) The wisdom of the Divine answer will best be seen if we take the\nmatter thus, and suppose our Lord to have responded to the apostolic\nappeal fixing some definite date for the winding-up of man's probation\nstate, and for that manifestation of the sons of God which will take\nplace at His appearing and His kingdom. Our Lord, in fixing upon some\nsuch definite date, must have chosen one that was either near at hand\nor else one that was removed far off into the distant future. In\neither of these cases He must have defeated the great object of the\nDivine society which He was founding. That object was simply this, to\nteach men how to lead the life of God amid the children of men. The\nChristian religion has indeed sometimes been taunted with being an\nunpractical religion, turning men's eyes and attention from the\npressing business and interests of daily life to a far-away spiritual\nstate with which man has nothing to do, at least for the present. But\nis this the case? Has Christianity proved itself unpractical? If so,\nwhat has placed Christendom at the head of civilization? The\ntendencies of great principles are best shown in the actions of vast\nmasses. Individuals may be better or worse than their creeds, but if\nwe wish to see the average result of doctrines we must take their\nadherents in the mass and enquire as to their effect on them. Here,\nthen, is where we may triumph. The religions of Greece and of Rome are\nidentical in principle, and even in their deities, with the paganism\nof India, as the investigations of comparative historians have\nabundantly shown.[23] Compare Christendom and India from the simply\npractical point of view, and which can show the better record? The\npaganism of India, Persia, and Western Asia was the parent of the\npaganism of Greece and Rome. The child has passed away and given place\nto a noble and spiritual religion, while the parent still remains. And\nnow what is the result? Can the boldest deny that while barbarism,\ndecay, and death reign over the realms of Asiatic paganism, though\nstarting with every advantage upon its side, concerning the religion\nof the Cross, which is taunted with being an unpractical religion, and\nconcerning that religion alone, can it be said in the language of the\nrapt Jewish seer, \"Wheresoever the waters of that river have come,\nbehold there is life,\" and that the fair plains, and crowded cities,\nand the massive material development and civilisation of Europe and of\nAmerica alike proclaim the truth, that Christianity has the promise of\nthe life which now is as well as of that which is to come?\n\n  [23] The most curious instance of the essential identity of the\n  nature deities of the West and East will be found in Mithraism.\n  The worship of Mithras was originally the worship of the sun. It\n  started from India, passed into Persia, thence found its way to\n  Asia Minor, and about 70 B.C. was introduced into Rome, where it\n  became, about A.D. 200, the great rival of Christianity, imitating\n  the sacraments of baptism and holy communion in rites of its own.\n  Mithraism easily combined with the worship of Apollo, or the\n  Sun-God. Apollo, Mithras, and Baal were fundamentally one and the\n  same. Tertullian, Justin Martyr, and Origen call Mithraism a\n  demoniacal imitation of Christianity. See more on this point in\n  the article on Mithras in the _Dictionary of Christian Biography_,\n  vol. iii., p. 925.\n\n(_b_) Our Lord's answer to His Apostles was couched in words suited to\ndevelop this practical aspect of His religion. It refused to minister\nto mere human curiosity, and left men uncertain as to the time of His\nreturn, that they might be fruitful workers in the great field of\nlife. And now behold what ill results would have followed had He acted\notherwise! The Master in fact says, It is not well for you to know the\ntimes or seasons, because such knowledge would strike at the root of\npractical Christianity. Uncertainty as to the time of the end is the\nmost healthful state for the followers of Christ. Christ holds out the\nprospect of His own return for a twofold purpose: first, to comfort\nHis people under the daily troubles of life--\"Rejoice in the Lord\nalway: again I will say, Rejoice. Let your forbearance be known unto\nall men. The Lord is at hand;\" \"Whatever our hope or joy or crown of\nglorying, are not even ye, before our Lord Jesus Christ at His\ncoming;\" \"If we believe that Jesus Christ died and rose again, even so\nthem also that are fallen asleep in Jesus will God bring with\nHim,\"--these and dozens of other passages, which will recur in a\nmoment to every student of St. Paul's writings, prove the power to\ncomfort and sustain exercised by the doctrine of Christ's second\ncoming. But there was another and still more powerful influence\nexercised by this doctrine. It stirred men up to perpetual\nwatchfulness and untiring care. \"Watch, therefore, for ye know neither\nthe day nor the hour;\" \"Therefore be ye also ready, for in an hour\nthat ye think not the Son of man cometh;\" \"The night is far spent, the\nday is at hand; let us therefore cast off the works of darkness, and\nlet us put on the armour of light,\"--these and many a similar\nexhortation of the Master and of his chosen Apostles alike, indicate\nto us that another great object of this doctrine was to keep\nChristians perpetually alive with an intense anxiety and a sleepless\nwatchfulness directed towards the person and appearing of Christ. The\nconstruction of the gospel narrative shows this.\n\n(_c_) There are in the New Testament, taken as a whole, two contrasted\nlines of prophecy concerning the Second Coming of Christ. If in one\nplace the Lord Jesus speaks as if the date of His coming were fixed\nfor His own generation and age, \"Verily, I say unto you, this\ngeneration shall not pass away till all these things shall be\nfulfilled,\" in the very same context He indicates that it is only\n_after a long time_ that the Lord of the servants will return, to take\naccount of their dealings with the property entrusted to them. If St.\nPaul in one place seems to indicate to the Thessalonians the speedy\nappearing of Christ and the end of the dispensation, in another\nepistle he corrects such a misapprehension of his meaning. If the\nRevelation of St. John in one place represents the awful Figure who\nmoves amid the Churches, watching their works and spying out their\nsecret sins, as saying, \"Behold, I come quickly,\" the same book\npictures a long panorama of events, extending over vast spaces of\ntime, destined yet to elapse before the revelation of the city of God\nand the final triumph of the saints. The doctrine of Christ's second\nappearing is like many another doctrine in the New Testament. Like the\ndoctrine of God's election, which is undoubtedly there, and yet side\nby side with election appears as really and truly the doctrine of\nman's free will; like the doctrine of God's eternal and almighty love,\nside by side with which appears the existence of a personal devil, and\nof an abounding iniquity and sorrow which seems to contradict this\ndoctrine; like the doctrine of the Godhead itself, where the Unity of\nthe Divine Nature is most clearly taught, yet side by side therewith\nappears the manifold personality of Father, Son, and Holy Ghost as\nexisting in that Nature;--so too is it in the case of the doctrine of\nChrist's Second Coming. We have a twofold antinomy. In one line of\nprophecy we have depicted the nearness and suddenness of Christ's\nappearing; in another line we behold that tremendous event thrown into\nthe dim and distant future. And what is the result upon the human mind\nof such opposite views? It is a healthy, useful, practical result. We\nare taught the certainty of the event, and the uncertainty of the time\nof that event; so that hope is stirred, comfort ministered, and\nwatchfulness evoked. We can see this more clearly by imagining the\nopposite. Suppose Christ had responded to the spirit of the apostolic\nquery, \"Dost Thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?\" and\nfixed the precise date of His coming? He would in that case have\naltogether defeated the great end of His own work and labour. Suppose\nHe had fixed it a thousand years from the time of His Ascension. Then\nindeed the doctrine of Christ's Second Coming would have lost all\npersonal and practical power over the lives of the generation of\nChristians then living, or who should live during the hundreds of\nyears which were to elapse till the date appointed. The day of their\ndeath, the uncertainty of life, these would be the inspiring motives\nto activity and devotion felt by the early Christians; while, as a\nmatter of fact, St. Paul never appeals to either of them, but ever\nappeals to the coming of Christ and His appearing to judgment as the\nmotives to Christian zeal and diligence. But a more serious danger in\nany such prediction lurks behind. What would have been the result of\nany such precise prophecy upon the minds of the Christians who lived\nclose to the time of its fulfilment? It would have at once defeated\nthe great end of the Christian religion, as we have already defined\nit. The near approach of the great final catastrophe would have\ncompletely paralysed all exertion, and turned the members of Christ's\nChurch into idle, useless, unpractical religionists. We all know how\nthe near approach of any great event, how the presence of any great\nexcitement, hinders life's daily work. A great joy or a great sorrow,\neither of them is utterly inconsistent with tranquil thought, with\nsteady labour, with persistent and profitable exertions. The\nexpectation of some tremendous change, whether it be for happiness or\nmisery, creates such a flutter in the spirit that steady application\nis simply out of the question. So would it have been in our supposed\ncase. As the time fixed for the appearance of our Lord drew nigh, all\nwork, business, labour, the manifold engagements of life, the rearing\nof families, the culture of the ground, the development of trade and\ncommerce, would be considered a grand impertinence, and man's powers\nand man's life would be prostrated in view of the approaching\ncatastrophe.\n\n(_d_) Again and again has history verified and amply justified the\nwisdom of the Master's reply, \"It is not for you to know times or\nseasons.\" It was justified in apostolic experience. The Second Epistle\nto the Thessalonians is a commentary on our Lord's teaching in this\npassage. The Christians of Thessalonica imbibed the notion from St.\nPaul's words that Christ's appearance to judgment was at hand. Perhaps\nSt. Paul's words in his first Epistle led them into the mistake. The\nApostle was not infallible on all questions. He was richly inspired,\nbut he knew nothing of the future save what was expressly revealed,\nand beyond such express revelations he could only surmise and guess\nlike other men.[24] The Thessalonians, however, were led by him to\nexpect the immediate appearance of Christ, and the result was just\nwhat I have depicted. The transcendent event, which they thought\nimpending, paralyzed exertion, destroyed honest and useful labour,\nscandalized the gospel cause, and compelled St. Paul to use the\nsternest, sharpest words of censure and rebuke. The language of St.\nPaul completely justifies our line of argument. He tells us that the\nspirits of the Thessalonians had been upset, the natural result of a\ngreat expectation had been experienced as we might humanly have\npredicted. The beginning of the second chapter of his Second Epistle\nproves this: \"Now we beseech you, brethren, touching the coming of our\nLord Jesus Christ, and our gathering together unto Him; to the end\nthat ye be not quickly shaken from your mind, nor yet be troubled,\neither by spirit, or by word, or by epistle as from us, as that the\nday of the Lord is present.\" See here how he dwells on mental\nperturbation as the result of high-strung expectation; and that is\nbad, for mental peace, not mental disturbance, is the portion of\nChrist's people. Then again he indicates another result of which we\nhave spoken as natural under such circumstances. Idleness and its long\ntrain of vices had followed hard upon the mental strain which found\nplace for a time at Thessalonica, and so in the third chapter of the\nEpistle he writes, \"Now we command you, brethren, in the name of our\nLord Jesus Christ, that ye withdraw yourselves from every brother that\nwalketh disorderly;\" and then he defines the disorderliness of which\nhe complains, \"For we hear of some that walk among you disorderly,\nthat work not at all, but are busybodies.\" Or, to put the matter in a\nconcise shape, and interpret St. Paul into modern language, the\nexpectation of the near approach of the judgment and the personal\nappearing of Christ had upset the spirits of the Thessalonians; it had\nso fluttered them they could not attend to ordinary business. Human\nnature then asserted itself. Idleness resulted from the mental\ndisturbance. Idleness begot gossip, disorder, and scandals. The idlers\nindeed professed that they ceased from labour in order to give their\nwhole attention to devotion. But St. Paul knew that there was no\nincompatibility between work and prayer, while he was convinced there\nwas the closest union between idleness and sin. Idleness put on an\nappearance of great spirituality, but St. Paul effectually met the\ndifficulty. He knew that an idler, no matter how spiritual he\npretended to be, must eat, and so he strikes at the root of such mock\nreligion by laying down, \"If any will not work, neither let him\neat,\"--a good healthy practical rule, which soon restored the moral\nand spiritual tone of the Macedonian Church to its normal condition.\n\n  [24] The miraculous gifts of the Spirit possessed by the Apostles\n  did not guard them against mistakes as to the future, nor override\n  the exercise of private judgment and common sense, nor enable them\n  to work miracles or cure sicknesses for their own purposes. St.\n  Paul, for instance, was obliged to depend upon the assistance of\n  St. Luke when he was ill. The miraculous powers were restrained,\n  as in our Lord's example, to cases where God's glory was specially\n  advanced by their exercise.\n\n(_e_) The experiences of Thessalonica have been often repeated down\nthrough the ages till we come to our own day. I remember a curious\ninstance that I once read of exactly the same spirit, and exactly the\nsame method of cure, as St. Paul used, in the case of an Egyptian\nmonastery in the fifth century. The monks were then divided into two\nclasses. There were monks who laboured diligently and usefully in\ncommunities, and there were others who lived idle lives as solitaries,\npretending to a spirituality too great to permit them to engage in\nsecular pursuits. A solitary one day entered a monastery presided over\nby a wise abbot. He found the monks all diligently employed, and,\naddressing them from his superior standpoint, said, \"Labour not for\nthe meat that perisheth.\" \"That is very good, brother,\" said the\nabbot. \"Take our brother away to his cell,\" he said to one of his\nattendants, who left him there to meditate. Nature, after a time,\nbegan to assert its sway, and the solitary became hungry. He heard the\nsignal for the midday meal, and wondered that no man came to summon\nhim. Time passed, and the evening meal was announced, and yet no\ninvitation came. At last the solitary left his cell and proceeded in\nsearch of food, when the wise abbot impressed on him the Pauline rule\nthat it was quite possible to unite work and worship, labouring for\nthe bread that perisheth while feeding on the bread that is eternal.\n\nThe tenth century again verified the wisdom of the Divine denial to\nreveal the future, or fix a date for Christ's second coming. The year\n1000 was regarded in the century immediately preceding it as the limit\nof the world's existence and the date of Christ's appearing. The\nbelief in this view spread all over Europe, and the result was just\nthe same as at Thessalonica. Men abandoned all work, they left their\nfamilies to starve, and thought the one great object worth living for\nwas devotion and preparation for their impending change. And the\nresult was widespread misery, famine, disease, and death, while,\ninstead of working any beneficial change upon society at large, the\nterror through which men had passed brought about, when the dreaded\ntime had gone by, a reaction towards carelessness and vice, all the\ngreater from the self-denial which they had practised for a time. And\nas it was in the earlier ages so has it been in later times. The\npeople of London were, in the middle of the last century, deluded into\na belief that on a certain day the Lord would appear to judgment, with\nthe result that the business of London was suspended for the time. The\nlives of John Wesley and his fellow-evangelists tell us how diligently\nthey seized the opportunity of preaching repentance and preparation\nfor the coming of Christ, though they shared not the belief in the\nprediction which gained them their audience. While again in the\npresent century there was a widespread opinion about the year 1830\nthat the coming of Christ was at hand. It was the time when the\nIrvingite and Darbyite bodies sprang into existence, in which systems\nthe near approach of the Second Coming forms an important element. Men\nthen thought that it was a mere matter of days or weeks, and in\nconsequence they acted just like the Thessalonians. In their ardour\ntheir minds were upset, their business and families neglected, and, as\nfar as in them lay, the work of life and of civilisation was utterly\ndestroyed. While when again we come to later times experience has\ntaught that no men have been more profitless and unpractical\nChristians than the numbers, by no means inconsiderable, who have\nspent their lives in vain attempts to fix now for this year, and again\nfor that day, the exact time when the Son of Man should appear. The\nwisest Christians have acted otherwise. It is told of a foreign\nbishop, eminent for his sanctity and for the wise guidance which he\ncould give in the spiritual life, that he was once engaged in playing\na game of bowls. One of the bystanders was of a critical disposition,\nand was scandalized at the frivolity of the bishop's occupation, so\nmuch beneath the dignity, as it was thought, of his character. \"If\nChrist was to appear the next moment, what would you do?\" he asked the\nbishop. \"I would make the next stroke the best possible one,\" was the\nwise man's reply. And the reply involved the true principle which the\nLord Himself by His refusal to gratify the Apostles' curiosity desired\nto impress on His people. The uncertainty of the time of Christ's\ncoming, combined with the certainty of the event itself, should stir\nus up to intensity of purpose, to earnestness of life, to a hallowed\nenthusiasm to do thoroughly every lawful deed, to think thoroughly\nevery lawful thought, conscious that in so doing we are fulfilling the\nwill and work of the great Judge Himself. Blessed indeed shall be\nthose servants whom the Lord when He cometh shall find so doing.\n\nIII. Christ, after He had reproved the spirit of vain curiosity which\nstrikes at the root of all practical effort, then indicates the source\nof their strength and the sphere of its activity. \"Ye shall receive\npower after the Holy Ghost is come upon you.\" They were wanting then,\nas yet, in power, and the Holy Ghost was to supply the want.\nIntellect, talent, eloquence, wit, all these things are God's gifts,\nbut they are not the source of spiritual power. A man may possess them\none and all, and yet be lacking in that spiritual power which came\nupon the Apostles through the descent of the Spirit. And the sphere of\ntheir appointed activity is designated for them. Just as in the\nearliest days of Christ's public ministry He spake words indicative\nof the universal spirit of the gospel, and prophesied of a time when\nmen from the east and west should come and sit down in the kingdom of\nGod, while the children of the kingdom should be cast out, so, too,\none of His few recorded resurrection sayings now indicates the same:\n\"Ye shall be My witnesses, both in Jerusalem, and in all Jud\u00e6a, and\nSamaria, and unto the uttermost part of the earth.\" Jerusalem,\nJud\u00e6a,--the Apostles were to begin their great practical life of\nwitnessing at home, but they were not to stay there. Samaria was next\nto have its opportunity, and so we shall find it to have been the\ncase; and then, working from home as centre, the uttermost parts of\nthe earth, a distant Spain from Paul, and a distant India from Thomas,\nand a barbarous Scythia from Andrew, and a frigid, ocean-girt Britain\nfrom a Joseph of Arimath\u00e6a,[25] were to learn tidings of the new life\nin Christ.[26]\n\n  [25] See my _Ireland and the Celtic Church_ for the traditions\n  about St. Joseph of England.\n\n  [26] The line of argument followed in this chapter was originally\n  suggested to me by a sermon for the First Sunday in Advent,\n  printed in a volume of _Sermons at the Octagon Chapel, Bath_, by\n  the Rev. W. C. Magee, B.D., now Archbishop of York. London,\n  Hatchards, 1858.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III.\n\n_THE ASCENSION OF CHRIST, AND ITS LESSONS._\n\n     \"When He had said these things, as they were looking, He was\n     taken up; and a cloud received Him out of their sight.\"--ACTS i.\n     9.\n\n\nIn this passage we have the bare literal statement of the fact of\nChrist's ascension. Let us now consider this supernatural fact, the\nAscension, and meditate upon its necessity, and even naturalness, when\ntaken in connection with the whole earthly existence of Incarnate God,\nand then strive to trace the results and blessings to mankind which\nfollowed from it in the gift of the new power, the covenanted gift of\nthe Spirit, and in the spread of the universal religion.\n\n\nI. The ascension of our Lord is a topic whereon familiarity has worked\nits usual results; it has lost for most minds the sharpness of its\noutline and the profundity of its teaching because universally\naccepted by Christians; and yet no doctrine raises deeper questions,\nor will yield more profitable and far-reaching lessons. First, then,\nwe may note the place this doctrine holds in apostolic teaching.\nTaking the records of that teaching contained in the Acts and the\nEpistles, we find that it occupies a real substantial position. The\nascension is there referred to, hinted at, taken as granted,\npre-supposed, but it is not obtruded nor dwelt upon overmuch.[27] The\nresurrection of Christ was the great central point of apostolic\ntestimony; the ascension of Christ was simply a portion of that\nfundamental doctrine, and a natural deduction from it. If Christ had\nbeen raised from the dead and had thus become the firstfruits of the\ngrave, it required but little additional exercise of faith to believe\nthat He had passed into that unseen and immediate presence of Deity\nwhere the perfected soul finds its complete satisfaction. In fact, the\ndoctrine of the resurrection apart from the doctrine of the ascension\nwould have been a mutilated fragment, for the natural question would\narise, not for one age but for every age, If Jesus of Nazareth has\nrisen from the dead, where is He? Produce your risen Master, and we\nwill believe in Him, would be the triumphant taunt to which Christians\nwould be ever exposed. But then when we closely examine the teaching\nof the Apostles, we shall find that the doctrine of the ascension was\njust as really bound up with all their preaching and exhortations as\nthe doctrine of the resurrection; the whole Christian idea as\nconceived by them just as necessarily involved the doctrine of the\nascension as it did that of the resurrection. St. Peter's conception\nof Christianity, for instance, involved the ascension. Whether in his\nspeech at the election of Matthias, or in his sermon on the day of\nPentecost, or in his address in Solomon's Porch after the healing of\nthe crippled beggar, his teaching ever presupposes and involves the\nascension. He takes the doctrine and the fact for granted. Jesus is\nwith him the Being \"whom the heavens must receive until the times of\nrestoration of all things.\" So is it too with St. John in his Gospel.\nHe never directly mentions the fact of Christ's ascension, but he\nalways implies it. So too with St. Paul and the other apostolic\nwriters of the New Testament. It would be simply impossible to exhibit\nin detail the manner in which this doctrine pervades and underlies all\nSt. Paul's teaching. The ascended Saviour occupies the same position\nin St. Paul's earliest as in his latest writings. Is he speaking of\nthe lives of the Thessalonians in his First Epistle to that Church:\n\"they are waiting for God's Son from heaven.\" Is he pointing them\nforward to the second advent of Christ: it is of that day he speaks\nwhen \"the Lord Himself shall descend from heaven.\" Is he in Rom. viii.\ndwelling upon the abiding security of God's elect: he enlarges upon\ntheir privileges in \"Christ Jesus, who is at the right hand of God,\nmaking intercession for us.\" Is he exhorting the Colossians to a\nsupernatural life: it is because they have supernatural privileges in\ntheir ascended Lord. \"If ye then were raised with Christ, seek the\nthings above, where Christ is seated on the right hand of God.\" The\nmore closely the teaching of the Apostles is examined, the more\nclearly we shall perceive that the ascension was for them no ideal\nact, no imaginary or fantastic elevation, but a real actual passing of\nthe risen Saviour out of the region and order of the seen and the\nnatural into the region and order of the unseen and supernatural.\nJust as really as they believed Christ to have risen from the dead,\njust as really did they in turn believe Him to have ascended into the\nheavens.\n\n  [27] The incarnation and the ascension are, in this respect, very\n  much on a level in St. Paul's writings. The incarnation and birth\n  of our Lord are referred to incidentally, but only incidentally,\n  in Rom. i. 3; Gal. iv. 4; 1 Tim. iii. 16; yet the facts of the\n  birth and incarnation must have occupied a great share of St.\n  Paul's attention, if we are to judge of his teaching by the Gospel\n  of St. Luke, his disciple and companion. The Apostle never\n  formally states the doctrine of the incarnation as St. Luke set it\n  forth, because it was well known by all to whom he wrote as the\n  very foundation of his system. A bare reference was therefore\n  enough. It was just the same with the doctrine of the ascension.\n\n\nII. But some one may raise curious questions as to the facts of the\nascension. Whither, for instance, it may be asked, did our Lord depart\nwhen He left this earthly scene? The childish notion that He went up\nand up far above the most distant star will not of course stand a\nmoment's reflection. It suits the apprehension of childhood, and the\ninnocent illusion should not be too rudely broken; but still, as the\nadvance of years and of wisdom dispels other illusions, so too will\nthis one depart, when the child learns that there is neither up nor\ndown in this visible universe of ours, and that if we were ourselves\ntransported to the moon, which seems shining over our heads, we should\nsee the earth suspended in the blue azure which would overhang the\nmoon and its newly-arrived inhabitants. The Book of the Acts of the\nApostles does not describe our Saviour as thus ascending through\ninfinite space. It simply describes Him as removed from off this\nearthly ball, and then, a cloud shutting Him out from view, Christ\npassed into the inner and unseen universe wherein He now dwells. The\nexistence of that inner and unseen universe, asserted clearly enough\nin Scripture, has of late years been curiously confirmed by scientific\nspeculation. Scripture asserts the existence of such an unseen\nuniverse, and the ascension implies it. The second coming of our\nSaviour is never described as a descent from some far-off region. No,\nit is always spoken of as an Apocalypse,--a drawing back, that is, of\na veil which hides an unseen chamber. The angels, as the messengers of\ntheir Divine Master, are described by Christ in Matt. xiii. as\n\"coming forth\" from the secret place of the Most High to execute His\nbehests.[28] What a solemn light such a scriptural view sheds upon\nlife! The unseen world is not at some vast distance, but, as the\nascension would seem to imply, close at hand, shut out from us by that\nthin veil of matter which angelic hands will one day rend for ever.\nAnd then how wondrously the speculations of that remarkable book to\nwhich I have referred, _The Unseen Universe_, lend themselves to this\nscriptural idea, pointing out the necessity imposed by modern\nscientific thought for postulating some such interior spiritual\nsphere, of which the external and material universe may be regarded as\na temporary manifestation and development.[29] The doctrine of the\nascension, when rightly understood, presents then no difficulties from\na scientific point of view, but is rather in strictest accordance with\nthe highest and subtlest forms of modern thought. But when we advance\nstill closer to the heart of this doctrine, and endeavour, quite apart\nfrom all mere carping criticism, to realize its meaning and its power,\nwe shall perceive a profound fitness, beauty, and harmony in this\nmysterious fact. Laying apart all carping criticism, I say, because\nthe critical spirit is not appreciative, it is on the look-out for\nfaults, it necessarily involves a certain assumption of superiority in\nthe critic to the thing or doctrine criticised; and most certainly it\nis not to the proud critic, but to the humble soul alone, that the\ndoctrines of the Cross yield of their sweetness, and make revelation\nof their profound depths. We can perceive a fitness and a naturalness\nin the ascension; we can advance even farther still, and behold an\nabsolute necessity for it, if Christ's work was to be perfected in all\nits details, and Christianity to become, not a narrow local religion,\nbut a universal and catholic Church.\n\n  [28] See Archbishop Trench on the Draw-net in _Notes on the\n  Parables_, p. 145, 10th ed.\n\n  [29] We now live so fast that it may perhaps be necessary to\n  explain that the _Unseen Universe_ was a book written some ten or\n  eleven years ago by two eminent scientists, showing how that it\n  was needful, on the principles, of modern science, to postulate\n  the existence of an unseen universe, out of which the seen\n  universe has been derived, and into which it is in turn passing.\n\n\nIII. The ascension was a fitting and a natural termination of Christ's\nearthly ministry, considering the Christian conception of His sacred\nPersonality. When the Second Person of the Eternal Trinity wished to\nreveal the life of God among men, and to elevate humanity by\nassociating it for ever with the person of Him who was the Eternal\nGod, He left the glory which He had with the Father before the world\nwas, and entered upon the world of humanity through a miraculous door.\n\"The Son, which is the Word of the Father, begotten from everlasting\nof the Father, the very and eternal God, and of one substance with the\nFather, took Man's nature in the womb of the blessed Virgin, of her\nsubstance.\" These are the careful, accurate, well-balanced words of\nthe second Article of the Church of England, in which all\nEnglish-speaking Christians substantially agree. They are accurate, I\nsay, and well-balanced, avoiding the Scylla of Nestorianism, which\ndivides Christ's person, on the one side, and the Charybdis of\nEutychianism, which denies His humanity, on the other. The Person of\nGod, the Eternal Word, assumed human nature, not a human person, but\nhuman nature, so that God might be able, acting in and through this\nhuman nature as His instrument, to teach mankind and to die for\nmankind. God entered upon the sphere of the seen and the temporal by\na miraculous door. His life and work were marked all through by\nmiracle, His death and resurrection were encompassed with miracle; and\nit was fitting, considering the whole course of His earthly career,\nthat His departure from this world should be through another\nmiraculous door. The departure of the Eternal King was, like His first\napproach, a part of a scheme which forms one united and harmonious\nwhole. The Incarnation and the Ascension were necessarily related the\none to the other.\n\n\nIV. Again, we may advance a step further, and say that not only was\nthe ascension a natural and fitting termination to the activities of\nthe Eternal Son manifest in the flesh, it was a necessary completion\nand finish. \"It is expedient,\" said Christ Himself, \"that I go away;\nfor if I go not away the Comforter will not come to you.\" For some\nreason secret from us, but hidden in the awful depths of that Being\nwho is the beginning and the end, the source and the condition of all\ncreated existence, the return of Christ to the bosom of the Father was\nabsolutely necessary before the outpouring of the Divine Spirit of\nLife and Love could take place. How this can have been we know not. We\nonly know the fact as revealed to us by Jesus Christ and affirmed by\nHis Apostles. \"Being therefore by the right hand of God exalted, and\nhaving received of the Father the promise of the Holy Ghost, He hath\npoured forth this which ye see and hear,\" is the testimony of the\nilluminated Apostle St. Peter on the day of Pentecost, speaking in\nstrict unison with the teaching of Jesus Christ Himself as reported in\nSt. John's Gospel. But without endeavouring to intrude into these\nmysteries of the Divine nature, into which even the angels themselves\npry not, we behold in the character and constitution of Christ's\nChurch and Christ's religion sufficient reasons to show us the Divine\nexpediency of our Lord's ascension. Let us take the matter very\nplainly and simply thus. Had our Lord not ascended into the unseen\nstate whence He had emerged for the purpose of rescuing mankind from\nthat horrible pit, that mire and clay of pollution, immorality, and\nselfishness in which it lay at the epoch of the Christian era, He must\nin that case (always proceeding on the supposition that He had risen\nfrom the dead, because we always suppose our readers to be believers)\nhave remained permanently or temporarily resident in some one place.\nHe might have chosen Jerusalem, the city of the great King, as His\nabode, and this would have seemed to the religious men of His time\nquite natural. The same instinct of religious conservatism which made\nthe Twelve to tarry at Jerusalem even when persecution seemed to\nthreaten the infant Church with destruction, would have led the risen\nChrist to fix His abode at the city which every pious Jew regarded as\nthe special seat of Jehovah. There would have been nothing to tempt\nHim to Antioch, or Athens, or Alexandria, or Rome. None of these\ncities could have held out any inducement or put forward any claim\ncomparable for one moment with that which the name, the traditions,\nand the circumstances of Jerusalem triumphantly maintained. Nay,\nrather the tone and temper of those cities must have rendered them\nabhorrent as dwelling-places to the great Teacher of holiness and\npurity.\n\nAt any rate, the risen Saviour, if He remained upon earth, must have\nchosen some one place where His presence and His personal glory would\nhave been manifested. Now let us contemplate, and work out in some\ndetail, the results which would have inevitably followed. The place\nchosen by our Lord as His visible dwelling-place must then have become\nthe centre of the whole Church. At that spot pilgrims from every land\nmust necessarily have assembled. To it would have resorted the doubter\nto have his difficulties resolved, the sick and weak to have their\nailments cured, the men of profound devotion to bathe themselves and\nlose themselves in the immediate presence of Incarnate Deity. All\ninterest in local Churches or local work would have been destroyed,\nbecause every eye and every heart would be perpetually turning towards\nthe one spot where the risen Lord was dwelling, and where personal\nadoration could be paid to Him. All honest, manly self-reliance would\nhave been lost for individuals, for Churches, and for nations.\nWhenever a difficulty or controversy arose, either in the personal or\necclesiastical, the social or political sphere, men, instead of trying\nto solve it for themselves under the guidance of the Divine Spirit,\nwould have hurried off with it to the Fount of supernatural wisdom, as\nan oracle, like the fabled pagan ones of old, whence direction would\ninfallibly be gained. Judaism would have triumphed and the\ndispensation of the Spirit would have ceased.\n\nThe whole idea, too, of Christianity as a scheme of moral probation\nwould have been overthrown. Christ as belonging to the supernatural\nsphere would of course have been raised above the laws of time and\nspace. For Him the powers of earth and the terrors of earth would have\nhad no meaning, and heavenly glory, shooting forth from His sacred\nPerson, would have compelled obedience and acceptance of His laws at\nthe hands of His most deadly and obstinate foes. Sight would have\ntaken the place of faith, and the terrified submission of slaves would\nhave been substituted for the moral, loving obedience of the\nregenerate soul. The whole social order of life would also have been\noverthrown. God has now placed men in families, societies, and\nnations, that they might be proved by the very difficulties of their\npositions. The probation which God thereby exercises over men extends\nnot to those alone who are subject to government, but to those as well\nwho are entrusted with government. God by His present system tries\ngovernors and governed, kings and subjects, magistrates and people,\nparents and children, teachers and pupils, all alike. Any one who has\never made the experiment knows, however, how impossible it is to give\nfull play to one's power and faculties, whether of government or of\nteaching, when overlooked by the conscious presence of one who can\nsupersede and control all the arrangements made or all the\ninstructions offered. Nervousness comes in, and paralyzes the best\nefforts a man might otherwise make. So would it have been had Christ\nremained upon earth. Neither those placed in authority nor those set\nunder authority would have done their best or played their part\neffectually, feeling there was One standing by whose all-piercing gaze\ncould see the imperfection of their noblest actions. A modern\nillustration or two will perhaps exhibit more plainly what we mean.\nLondon, with its enormous and ever-growing population, constitutes in\nmany respects a portentous danger to our national life. But thoughtful\ncolonists often see in it a danger which does not strike us here at\nhome. London has a tendency to sap the springs of local interest and\nlocal self-reliance. Every colonist who attains to wealth and position\nfeels himself an exile till he can get back to London, which he\nregards as the one centre of the empire worth living at; while the\ncolonies, viewing London as the centre of England's wealth, power, and\nresources, feel naturally inclined to fling upon London the care and\nresponsibility of the empire's protection, in which all its separate\nparts should take their proportionate share.\n\nOr again, let us take an illustration from the ecclesiastical sphere.\nM. Renan is a writer who has depicted the early history of the Church\nfrom a sceptical point of view. He has done so with all the skill of a\nnovelist, aided by the resources of immense erudition. Before Renan\nbecame a sceptic he was a Roman Catholic, and a student for the\npriesthood in one of those narrow seminaries wherein exclusively the\nRoman Church now trains her clergy. Renan can never, therefore, view\nChristianity save through a Roman medium, and from a Roman Catholic\nstandpoint. Descended himself from a Jewish stock, and trained up in\nRoman Catholic ideas, Renan, sceptic though he be, is lost in\nadmiration of the Papacy, because it has combined the Jewish and the\nancient imperial ideas, so that Rome having taken the place which\nJerusalem once occupied in the spiritual organisation, has now become\nthe local centre of unity for the Latin Church, where Christ's vicar\nvisibly bears sway, to whom resort can be had from every land as an\nauthoritative guide, and whence he and he alone dispenses with more\nthan imperial sway the gifts and graces of Divine love. Rome is for\nthe Latin Church the centre of the earth, and upon Rome and its\nspiritual ruler all interest is concentrated as Christ's earthly\nrepresentative and deputy. Now what London is to our own colonists,\nwhat Rome is for its adherents, such, and infinitely more, would the\nlocalised presence of Jesus Christ have been for the Christian world\nhad not the ascension taken place. The Papacy, instead of securing\nthe universality of the Church, strikes a deadly blow at it. The\nPapacy, with its centralised ecclesiastical despotism, is not the\nCatholic Church, it is simply the local Church of Rome spread out into\nall the world; just as Judaism never was and never could have been\ncatholic in its ideal, no matter how widely spread it was, from the\nshores of the British Islands in the West to the far-distant regions\nof China in the East. Its adherents, like the eunuch of Ethiopia,\nnever felt a local interest in their religion,--their eyes ever turned\ntowards Zion, the city of the great King. And so would it have been\nwith the bodily presence of Christ manifested in one spot; the\nChristian Church would still have remained a purely local institution,\nand the place where the risen Saviour was manifested would have been\nfor Christian people the one centre towards which all their thoughts\nwould gravitate, to the complete neglect of those home interests and\nlabours in which each individual Church ought to find the special work\nappointed for it by the Master. It was expedient for the Church that\nChrist should go away, to deepen faith, to strengthen Christian\nself-reliance, to offer play and scope for the power and work of the\nHoly Ghost, to render life a testing-ground, and a place of probation\nfor the higher life to come. But above all, it was expedient that\nChrist should go away in order that the Church might rise out of and\nabove that narrow provincialism in which the Jewish spirit would fain\nbind it, might attain to a truly universal and catholic position, and\nthus fulfil the Master's magnificent prophecy to the woman of Samaria,\nwhen, viewing in spirit the Church's onward march, beholding it\nbursting all local and national bonds, recognising it as the religion\nof universal humanity, He proclaimed its destiny in words which shall\nnever die--\"Woman, believe Me, the hour cometh when neither in this\nmountain nor in Jerusalem shall ye worship the Father. God is a\nSpirit, and they that worship Him must worship Him in spirit and in\ntruth.\" The ascension of Jesus Christ was absolutely necessary to\nequip the Church for its universal mission, by withdrawing the bodily\npresence of Christ into that unseen region which bears no special\nrelation to any terrestrial locality, but is the common destiny, the\ntrue fatherland, of all the sons of God.[30]\n\n  [30] The line of thought here worked out was originally suggested\n  to me by Canon Liddon's sermon on \"Our Lord's Ascension the\n  Church's Gain,\" in his first series of University sermons.\n\nV. We have now seen how the ascension was needful for the Church, by\nrendering Christ an ideal object of worship for the whole human race,\nthus saving it from that tendency to mere localism which would have\nutterly changed its character. We can also trace another great\nblessing involved in it. The ascension glorified humanity as humanity,\nand ennobled man viewed simply as man. The ascension thus transformed\nlife by adding a new dignity to life and to life's duties.\n\nThis was a very necessary lesson for the ancient world, especially the\nancient Gentile world, which Christ came to enlighten and to save.\nMan, considered by himself as man, had no peculiar dignity in the\npopular religious estimate of Greece and Rome. A Greek or a Roman was\na dignified person, not, however, in virtue of his humanity, but in\nvirtue of his Greek or Roman citizenship. The most pious Greeks or\nRomans simply despised mankind as such, regarding all other nations\nas barbarians, and treating them accordingly. Roman law exempted Roman\ncitizens from degrading and cruel punishments, which they reserved for\nmen outside the limits of Roman citizenship, because that humanity as\nhumanity had no dignity attached to it in their estimation. The\ngladiatorial shows were the most striking illustration of this\ncontempt for human nature which paganism inculcated.[31]\n\n  [31] The gladiatorial shows form an interesting standard by which\n  we may compare the practical effects of Christian and the very\n  highest pagan sentiment. Tertullian denounced them in the\n  strongest language in his treatise _De Spectaculis_. Cicero, in\n  the _Tusculan Disputations_, ii. 17, defends them warmly as the\n  best discipline against fear of pain and death.\n\nIt is a notable evidence, too, of the firm grasp upon the popular mind\nthis contempt had taken, of the awful depths to which the fatal\ninfection had permeated the public conscience, that it was not till\nfour hundred years after the Incarnation, and not till one hundred\nyears after the triumph of Christianity, that these frightful\ncarnivals of human blood and slaughter yielded to the gentler and\nnobler principles of the religion of the Cross. No name indeed in the\nlong roll of Christian martyrs, who for truth and righteousness have\nlaid down their lives, deserves higher mention than that of\nTelemachus, the Asiatic monk, who, in the year 404, hearing that the\ncity, where the blessed Apostles Peter and Paul had suffered, was\nstill disgraced by the gladiatorial shows, made his way to Rome, and\nby the sacrifice of his own life terminated them for ever within the\nbounds of Christendom. Telemachus rushed between the combatants in the\narena, flung them asunder, and then was stoned to death by the mob,\ninfuriated at the interruption of their favourite amusement.[32] A\ntragic but glorious ending indeed, showing clearly how little the\nRoman mob realized as yet the doctrine of the sanctity of human\nnature; how powerful was the sway which paganism and pagan modes of\nthought held as yet over the populace of nominally Christian Rome; the\ntradition of which even still perpetuates itself in the cruel\nbull-fights of Spain. From the beginning, however, Christianity took\nexactly the opposite course, declaring to all the dignity and glory of\nhuman nature in itself. The Incarnation was in itself a magnificent\nproclamation of this great elevating and civilising truth. The title\nSon of Man, which Christ, rising above all narrow Jewish nationalism,\nassumed to Himself, was a republication of the same dogma; and then,\nto crown the whole fabric, comes the doctrine of the ascension,\nwherein mankind was taught that human nature as joined to the person\nof God has ascended into the holiest place of the universe, so that\nhenceforth the humblest and lowliest can view his humanity as allied\nwith that elder Brother who in the reality of human flesh--glorified,\nindeed, spiritualised and refined by the secret, searching processes\nof death--has passed within the veil, now to appear in the presence of\nGod for us. What new light must have been shed upon life--the life of\nthe barbarian and of the slave--crushed beneath the popular theory of\nSt. Paul's day![33] What new dignity this doctrine imparted to the\nbodies of the outcast and despised, counted fit food only for the\ncross, the stake, or the arena! Man might despise them and ill-treat\nthem, yet their bodies were made like unto the one glorious Body for\never united to God, and therefore they were comforted, elevated,\nenabled to endure as seeing Him who is invisible. Cannot we see many\nexamples of the consoling, elevating power of the ascension in the New\nTestament? Take St. Paul's writings, and there we trace the influence\nof the ascension in every page. Take the very lowest case. Slaves\nunder the conditions of ancient society occupied the most degraded\nposition. Their duties were of the humblest type, their treatment of\nthe worst description, their punishments of the most terrible\ncharacter.[34] Yet for even these oppressed and degraded beings the\ndoctrine of the ascension transformed life, because it endowed that\nmenial service which they rendered with a new dignity. \"Servants, obey\nin all things your masters according to the flesh; not with eye\nservice, as men pleasers, but in singleness of heart, fearing God.\"\nAnd why? Because life has been enriched with a new motive:\n\"Whatsoever ye do, do it heartily as to the Lord, and not unto men;\nknowing that of the Lord ye shall receive the reward of the\ninheritance; for ye serve the Lord Christ.\" _Ye serve the Lord\nChrist._ That was the supreme point. The cooking of a dinner, the\ndressing of an imperious lady's hair, the teaching of a careless or\nrefractory pupil--all these things were transfigured into the service\nof the ascended Lord. And as with the servant, so was it with their\nmasters. The ascension furnished them with a new and practical motive,\nwhich, at first leading to kindly treatment and generous actions,\nwould one day, by the force of logical deduction as well as of\nChristian principle, lead to the utter extinction of slavery.\n\"Masters, render unto your servants that which is just and equal,\nknowing that ye also have a Master in heaven.\" The doctrine of the\nascension diffused sweetness and light throughout the whole Christian\nsystem, furnishing a practical motive, offering an ever-present and\neternal sanction, urging men upwards and onwards; without which\nneither the Church nor the world would ever have reached that high\nlevel of mercy, charity, and purity which men now enjoy. Perhaps here\nagain the present age may see the doctrine of the ascension asserting\nits glory and its power in the same direction. Much of modern\nspeculation tends to debase and belittle the human body, teaching\ntheories respecting its origin which have a natural tendency to\ndegrade the popular standard. If people come to think of their bodies\nas derived from a low source, they will be apt to think a low standard\nof morals as befitting bodies so descended. The doctrine of evolution\nhas not, to say the least, an elevating influence upon the masses. I\nsay nothing against it. One or two passages in the Bible, as Gen. ii.\n7, seem to support it, appearing, as that verse does, to make a\ndivision between the creation of the body of man and the creation of\nhis spirit.[35] But the broad tendency of such speculation lies in a\ndownward moral direction. Here the doctrine of the ascension steps in\nto raise for us, as it raised for the materialists of St. Paul's day,\nthe standard of current conceptions, and to teach men a higher and a\nnobler view. We leave to science the investigation of the past and of\nthe lowly sources whence man's body may have come; but the doctrine of\nthe ascension speaks of its present sanctity and of its future glory,\ntelling of the human body as a body of humiliation and of lowliness\nindeed, but yet proclaiming it as even now, in the person of Christ,\nascended into the heavens, and seated on the throne of the Most High.\nIt may have been once humble in its origin; it is now glorious in its\ndignity and elevation; and that dignity and that elevation shed a halo\nupon human nature, no matter how degraded and wherever it may be\nfound, because it is like unto that Body, the firstfruits of humanity,\nwhich stands at the right hand of God. Thus the doctrine of the\nascension becomes for the Christian the ever-flowing fountain of\ndignity, of purity, and of mercy, teaching us to call no man common or\nunclean, because all have been made like unto the image of the Son of\nGod.\n\n  [32] The original authority for the story of Telemachus is\n  Theodoret's _Eccles. Hist._, v. 26. It is vigorously told by\n  Gibbon in the thirtieth chapter of his _Decline and Fall_.\n\n  [33] The doctrine of the sanctity of human life was unknown under\n  paganism. Tacitus tells us, about the year A.D. 61, how that\n  Pedianus Secundus, prefect of the city, having been murdered by\n  one of his slaves, the whole body of his slaves, numbering more\n  than four hundred persons, of every age and sex, were put to death\n  (_Annals_, xiv., 42-45).\n\n  [34] We have no idea of the frightful character of pagan slavery.\n  The worst form which negro slavery ever took never approached it.\n  The following story will give our readers some idea of it. Cato,\n  the censor, wrote a treatise, very little read or known, called\n  _De Re Rustica_, treating of farming operations. In this he gives\n  directions concerning the economical management of slaves, and\n  among other things tells how wine for their winter consumption was\n  to be prepared. \"Put into a cask ten amphor\u00e6 of sweet wine, two\n  amphor\u00e6 of sour vinegar, and as much wine boiled down by\n  two-thirds. Add fifty amphor\u00e6 of pure water. Mix all together with\n  a stick three times a day for five consecutive days. After this\n  add sixty-four amphor\u00e6 of stale salt and water.\"\n\n  [35] See St. George Mivart, _Genesis of Species_, p. 282. The\n  whole chapter (xii.) on Theology and Evolution is well worth\n  careful study.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV.\n\n_THE ELECTION OF MATTHIAS._\n\n     \"They prayed, and said, Thou, Lord, which knowest the hearts of\n     all men, shew of these two the one whom Thou hast chosen, to take\n     the place in this ministry and apostleship from which Judas fell\n     away, that he might go to his own place. And they gave lots for\n     them; and the lot fell upon Matthias; and he was numbered with\n     the eleven apostles.\"--ACTS i. 24-6.\n\n\nWe have selected the incident of this apostolic election as the\ncentral point round which to group the events of the ten days'\nexpectation which elapsed between the Ascension and Pentecost. But\nthough this election is a most important fact, in itself and in the\nprinciples involved therein, yet there are numerous other\ncircumstances in this waiting time which demand and will amply repay\nour thoughtful attention.\n\nI. There is, for instance, the simple fact that ten days were allowed\nto elapse between Christ's departure and the fulfilment of His promise\nto send the Comforter to take His place with His bereaved flock. The\nwork of the world's salvation depended upon the outcome of this Divine\nagent. \"Tarry ye in the city till ye be endued with power from on\nhigh;\" and all the time souls were hurrying on to destruction, and\nsociety was becoming worse and worse, and Satan's hold upon the world\nwas daily growing in strength. God, however, acted in this interval\naccording to the principles we see illustrated in nature as well as\nin revelation. He does nothing in a hurry. The Incarnation was\npostponed for thousands of years. When the Incarnation took place,\nChrist grew up slowly, and developed patiently, till the day of His\nmanifestation to Israel. And now that Christ's public work on earth\nwas done, there is no haste in the further development of the plan of\nsalvation, but ten days are suffered to elapse before His promise is\nfulfilled. What a rebuke we read in the Divine methods of that\nfaithless unbelieving haste which marks and mars so many of our\nefforts for truth and righteousness, and specially so in these\nconcluding years of the nineteenth century. Never did the Church stand\nmore in need of the lesson so often thus impressed upon her by her\nDivine Teacher. As Christ did not strive nor cry, neither did any man\nhear His voice in the streets, so neither did He make haste, because\nHe lived animated by Divine strength and wisdom, which make even\napparent delay and defeat conduce to the attainment of the highest\nends of love and mercy. And so, too, Christ's Church still does not\nneed the bustle, the haste, the unnatural excitement which the world\nthinks needful, because she labours under a sense of Divine guidance,\nand imitates His example who kept His Apostles waiting ten long days\nbefore He fulfilled His appointed promise. What a lesson of comfort,\nagain, this Divine delay teaches! We are often inclined to murmur in\nsecret at the slow progress of God's Church and kingdom. We think that\nif we had the management of the world's affairs things would have been\nordered otherwise, and the progress of truth be one long-continued\nmarch of triumph. A consideration of the Divine delays in the past\nhelps us to bear this burden, though it may not explain the\ndifficulty. God's delays have turned out to His greater glory in the\npast, and they who wait patiently upon Him will find the Divine delays\nof the present dispensation equally well ordered.\n\nII. Then again, how carefully, even in His delays, God honours the\nelder dispensation, though now it had grown old and was ready to\nvanish away. Christianity had none of that revolutionary spirit which\nmakes a clean sweep of old institutions to build up a new fabric in\ntheir stead. Christianity, on the contrary, rooted itself in the past,\nretained old institutions and old ideas, elevating indeed and\nspiritualising them, and thus slowly broadened down from precedent to\nprecedent. This truly conservative spirit of the new dispensation is\nmanifest in every arrangement, and specially reveals itself in the\ntimes selected for the great events of our Lord's ministry--Easter,\nAscension, then the ten days of expectation, and then Pentecost. And\nit was most fitting that it should be so. The old dispensation was a\nshadow and picture of the higher and better covenant one day to be\nunfolded. Moses was told to make the tabernacle after the pattern\nshown to him in the mount, and the whole typical system of Judaism was\nmodelled after a heavenly original to which Christ conformed in the\nwork of man's salvation.\n\nAt the first Passover, the paschal lamb was offered up and the\ndeliverance from Egypt effected; and so, too, at the Passover the true\nPaschal Lamb, Jesus Christ, was presented unto God as an acceptable\nsacrifice, and the deliverance effected of the true Israel from the\nspiritual Egypt of the world. Forty days after the Passover, Israel\ncame to the mount of God, into which Moses ascended that he might\nreceive gifts for the people; and forty days after the last great\nPaschal Offering, the great spiritual Captain and Deliverer ascended\ninto the Mount of God, that He, in turn, might receive highest\nspiritual blessings and a new law of life for God's true people. Then\nthere came the ten days of expectation and trial, when the Apostles\nwere called to wait upon God and prove the blessings of patient\nabiding upon Him, just as the Israelites were called to wait upon God\nwhile Moses was absent in the mount. But how different the conduct of\nthe Apostles from that of the more carnal Jews! How typical of the\nfuture of the two religions--the Jewish and the Christian! The Jews\nwalked by sight, and not by faith; they grew impatient, and made an\nimage, the golden calf, to be their visible Deity. The Apostles\ntarried in patience, because they were walking by faith, and they\nreceived in return the blessing of an ever-present unseen Guide and\nComforter to lead them, and all who like them seek His help, into the\nways of truth and peace. And then, when the waiting time is past, the\nfeast of Pentecost comes, and at Pentecost, the feast of the giving of\nthe old law, as the Jews counted it, the new law of life and power,\nwritten not on stony tables, but on the fleshy tables of the heart, is\ngranted in the gift of the Divine Comforter. All the lines of the old\nsystem are carefully followed, and Christianity is thus shown to be,\nnot a novel invention, but the development and fulfilment of God's\nancient purposes.[36] We can scarcely appreciate nowadays the\nimportance and stress laid upon this view among the ancient expositors\nand apologists. It was a favourite taunt used by the pagans of Greece\nand Rome against Christianity that it was only a religion of\nyesterday, a mere novelty, as compared with their own systems, which\ndescended to them from the dawn of history. This taunt has been indeed\nmost useful in its results for us moderns, because it led the ancient\nChristians to pay the most careful attention to chronology and\nhistorical studies, producing as the result works like _The Chronicle\nof Eusebius_, to which secular history itself owes the greatest\nobligations.\n\n  [36] See on this point Dr. John Lightfoot's _Hor\u00e6 Hebraic\u00e6_, Acts\n  ii. 1; and a sermon by the learned Joseph Mede of Cambridge on\n  Deut. xvi. 16, 17, in his _Works_, vol. i., p. 350 (London, 1664).\n\nThe heathens reproached Christians with the novelty of their faith,\nand then the early Christians replied by pointing to history, which\nproved that the Jewish religion was far older than any other,\nmaintaining at the same time that Christianity was merely the\ndevelopment of the Jewish religion, the completion and fulfilment in\nfact and reality of what Judaism had shadowed forth in the ritual of\nthe Passover and of Pentecost.[37]\n\n  [37] See this point worked out in Dr. Salmon's article _Chronica_,\n  in the first volume of the _Dict. Christ. Biog._, and in the\n  opening of his article on _The Chronicle of Eusebius_ in the\n  second volume of the same work. A brief extract from one of the\n  earliest and most learned apologists, who lived about the middle\n  of the second century, will show how the Christians elaborated\n  this argument. Tatian, in ch. xl. of his _Oration to the Greeks_,\n  speaks thus: \"Therefore from what has been said it is evident that\n  Moses was older than the ancient heroes, wars, and demons. And we\n  ought rather to believe him, who stands before them in point of\n  age, than the Greeks, who, without being aware of it, drew his\n  doctrines as from a fountain. For many of the sophists among them,\n  stimulated by curiosity, endeavoured to adulterate whatever they\n  learned from Moses, and from those who philosophised like him,\n  first that they might be considered as having something of their\n  own, and secondly, that covering up by a certain rhetorical\n  artifice whatever things they did not understand, they might\n  misrepresent the truth as if it were a fable. But what the learned\n  among the Greeks have said concerning our polity and the history\n  of our laws, and how many and what kind of men have written of\n  these things, will be shown in the treatise against those who have\n  discoursed of Divine things.\"\n\nIII. We notice again in this connection the place where the Apostles\nmet, and the manner in which they continued to assemble after the\nascension, and while they waited for the fulfilment of the Master's\npromise: \"They returned unto Jerusalem, and they went up into an upper\nchamber.\" Round this upper room at Jerusalem has gathered many a story\ndating from very early ages indeed. The upper room in which they\nassembled has been identified with the chamber in which the Last\nSupper was celebrated, and where the gift of the Holy Ghost was first\nreceived, and that from ancient times. Epiphanius, a Christian writer\nof the fourth century, to whom we owe much precious information\nconcerning the early ages of the Church, tells us that there was a\nchurch built on this spot even in Hadrian's time, that is, about the\nyear 120 A.D.[38] The Empress Helena, again, the mother of Constantine\nthe Great, identified or thought she identified the spot, and built a\nsplendid church to mark it out for all time; and succeeding ages have\nspent much care and thought upon it. St. Cyril of Jerusalem was a\nwriter little referred to and little known in our day, who yet has\nmuch precious truth to teach us. He was a learned bishop of Jerusalem\nabout the middle of the fourth century, and he left us catechetical\nlectures, showing what pains and trouble the Early Church took in the\ninculcation of the fundamental articles of the Christian creed. His\ncatechetical lectures, delivered to the candidates for baptism,\ncontain much valuable evidence of the belief, the practice, and the\ndiscipline of the early ages, and they mention among other points the\nchurch built upon Mount Zion on the spot once occupied by this upper\nroom. The tradition, then, which deals with this chamber and points\nout its site goes back to the ages of persecution; and yet it is\nnotable how little trouble the book of the Acts of the Apostles takes\nin this matter. It is just the same with this upper chamber as with\nthe other localities in which our Lord's mighty works were wrought.\nThe Gospels tell us not where His temptations occurred, though man has\noften tried to fix the exact locality. The site of the Transfiguration\nand of the true Mount of Beatitudes has engaged much human curiosity;\nthe scene of Peter's vision at Joppa and of St. Paul's conversion on\nthe road to Damascus,--all these and many other divinely honoured\nlocalities of the Old as well as of the New Testament have been\nshrouded from us in thickest darkness, that we might learn not to fix\nour eyes upon the external husk, the locality, the circumstances, the\ntime, which are nothing, but upon the interior spirit, the love, the\nunity, the devotion and self-sacrifice which constitute in the Divine\nsight the very heart and core of our holy religion.[39] They assembled\nthemselves, too, in this upper chamber in a united spirit, such as\nChristianity, though only in an undeveloped shape, already dictated.\nThe Apostles \"continued steadfastly in prayer, with the women also,\nand Mary, the mother of Jesus.\" The spirit of Christianity was, I say,\nalready manifesting itself.\n\n  [38] Epiphanius, _On Weights and Measures_, ch. xiv.\n\n  [39] The traditions about the upper chamber are given at length in\n  Fr. Quaresmius, _Terr\u00e6 Sanct\u00e6 Elucidatio_, t. ii., p. 119\n  (Antwerp, 1639), with which may be compared Bingham's\n  _Antiquities_, bk. viii., ch. i., sec. 13; Mede's _Discourse Of\n  Churches_ in his _Works_, vol. i., p. 408; and Bishop Milles'\n  notes on Cyril's _Catech._, xvi. 2, in his edition of that writer,\n  p. 225.\n\nIn the temple, as in the synagogues to this day, the women prayed in\na separate place; they were not united with the men, but parted from\nthem by a screen. But in Christ Jesus there was to be neither male nor\nfemale. The man in virtue of his manhood had no advantage or\nsuperiority over the woman in virtue of her womanhood; and so the\nApostles gathered themselves at the footstool of their common Father\nin union with the women, and with Mary the mother of Jesus. How\nsimple, again, this last mention of the Blessed Virgin Mother of the\nLord! how strangely and strongly contrasted the scriptural record is\nwith the fables and legends which have grown up round the memory of\nher whom all generations must ever call blessed. Nothing, in fact,\nshows more plainly the historic character of the book we are studying\nthan a comparison of this last simple notice with the legend of the\nassumption of the Blessed Virgin as it has been held since the fifth\ncentury, and as it is now believed in the Church of Rome. The popular\naccount of this fabled incident arose in the East amid the\ncontroversies which rent the Church concerning the Person of Christ in\nthe fifth century. It taught that the Holy Virgin, a year or so after\nthe ascension, besought the Lord to release her; upon which the angel\nGabriel was sent to announce her departure in three days' time. The\nApostles were thereupon summoned from the different parts of the world\nwhither they had departed. John came from Ephesus, Peter from Rome,\nThomas from India, each being miraculously wafted on a cloud from his\nspecial sphere of labour, while those of the apostolic company who had\ndied were raised for the occasion. On the third day the Lord descended\nfrom heaven with the angels, and took to Himself the soul of the\nVirgin. The Jews then attempted to burn the body, which was\nmiraculously rescued and buried in a new tomb, prepared by Joseph of\nArimathea in the Valley of Jehoshaphat. For two days the angels were\nheard singing at the tomb, but on the third day their songs ceased,\nand the Apostles then knew that the body had been transferred to\nParadise. St. Thomas was indeed vouchsafed a glimpse of her ascension,\nand at his request she dropped him her girdle as a token, whereupon he\nwent to his brother Apostles and declared her sepulchre to be empty.\nThe Apostles regarded this as merely a sign of his customary\nincredulity, but on the production of the girdle they were convinced,\nand on visiting the grave found the body was gone.[40]\n\n  [40] See, for a fuller account, Salmon's _Introduction N. T._, 4th\n  ed., pp. 384-86, and the references there given.\n\nCan any contrast be greater or more striking between the inspired\nnarrative, composed for the purpose of ministering to godly life and\npractice, and such legendary fables as this, invented to gratify mere\nhuman curiosity, or to secure a temporary controversial triumph? The\nDivine narrative shrouds in thickest darkness details which have no\nspiritual significance, no direct bearing on the work of man's\nsalvation. The human fable intrudes into the things unseen, and revels\nwith a childish delight in the regions of the supernatural and\nmiraculous.\n\nWhat a striking likeness do we trace between the composition of the\nActs and of the Gospels in this direction! The self-restraint of the\nevangelical writers is wondrous. Had the Evangelists been mere human\nbiographers, how they would have delighted to expatiate on the\nchildhood and youth and earlier years of Christ's manhood. The\napocryphal Gospels composed in the second and third centuries show us\nwhat our Gospels would have been had they been written by men\ndestitute of an abundant supply of the Divine Spirit. They enter into\nthe most minute incidents of our Lord's childhood, tell us of His\ngames, His schoolboy days, of the flashes of the supernatural glory\nwhich ever betrayed the awful Being who lay hidden beneath. The\nGospels, on the other hand, fling a hallowed and reverent veil over\nall the details, or almost all the details, of our Lord's early life.\nThey tell us of His birth, and its circumstances and surroundings,\nthat we might learn the needful lesson of the infinite glory, the\ntranscendent greatness of lowliness and humiliation. They give us a\nglimpse of our Lord's development when twelve years old, that we may\nlearn the spiritual strength and force which are produced through the\ndiscipline of obedience and patient waiting upon God; and then all\nelse is concealed from human vision till the hour was come for the\nmanifestation of the full-orbed God-Man. And as it was with the\nEternal Son, so was it with that earthly parent whom the consensus of\nuniversal Christendom has agreed to honour as the type of devout\nfaith, of humble submission, of loving motherhood. Fable has grown\nthick round her in mere human narrative, but when we turn to the\ninspired Word, whether in the Gospels or in the Acts,--for it is all\nthe same in both,--we find a story simple, restrained, and yet\ncaptivating in all its details, ministering indeed to no prurient\ncuriosity, yet rich in all the materials which serve to devout\nmeditation, culminating in this last record, where the earthly parent\nfinally disappears from out of sight, eclipsed by the heavenly glory\nof the Divine Son:--\"These all continued stedfastly in prayer, with\nthe women, and Mary, the mother of Jesus.\"\n\nIV. And then we have the record of the apostolic election, which is\nrich in teaching. We note the person who took the first step, and his\ncharacter, so thoroughly in unison with that picture which the four\nGospels present. St. Peter was not a forward man in the bad sense of\nthe word, but he possessed that energetic, forcible character to which\nmen yield a natural leadership. Till St. Paul appeared St. Peter was\nregarded as the spokesman of the apostolic band, just as during our\nLord's earthly ministry the same position was by tacit consent\naccorded to him. He was one of those men who cannot remain inactive,\nespecially when they see anything wanting. There are some men who can\nsee a defect just as clearly, but their first thought is, What have I\nto do with it? They behold the need, but it never strikes them that\nthey should attempt to rectify it. St. Peter was just the opposite:\nwhen he saw a fault or a want his disposition and his natural gifts at\nonce impelled him to strive to rectify it. When our Lord, in view of\nthe contending rumours afloat concerning His ministry and authority,\napplied this searching test to His Apostles, \"But whom do ye say that\nI am?\" it was Peter that boldly responded, \"Thou art the Christ, the\nSon of the living God.\" Just as a short time afterwards the same Peter\nincurred Christ's condemnation when he rebuked the Saviour for the\nprophecy of His forthcoming death and humiliation. The character of\nSt. Peter as depicted in the Gospels and the Acts is at unison with\nitself. It is that of one ever generous, courageous, intensely\nsympathetic, impulsive, but deficient, as impulsive and sympathetic\ncharacters often are, in that staying power, that capacity to bear up\nunder defeat, discouragement, and darkness which so conspicuously\nmarked out the great Apostle of the Gentiles, and made him such a\npillar in the spiritual temple of the New Jerusalem. Yet St. Peter did\nhis own work, for God can ever find employment suitable to every type\nof that vast variety of temperament which finds shelter beneath the\nroof of Christ's Church. St. Peter's impulsiveness, chastened by\nprayer, solemnized by his own sad personal experience, deepened by the\nbitter sorrow consequent on his terrible fall, urged him to take the\nfirst conscious step as the leader of the newly-constituted society.\nHow very similar the Peter of the Acts is to the Peter of St. Matthew;\nwhat an undesigned evidence of the truth of these records we trace in\nthe picture of St. Peter presented by either narrative! Just as St.\nPeter was in the Gospels the first to confess at C\u00e6sarea, the first to\nstrike in the garden, the first to fail in the high priest's palace,\nso was he the first \"to stand up in these days in the midst of the\nbrethren,\" and propose the first corporate movement on the Church's\npart.\n\nHere again we note that his attitude at this apostolic election proves\nthat the interviews which St. Peter held with Christ after the\nResurrection must have been lengthened, intimate, and frequent, for\nSt. Peter's whole view of the Christian organization seems thoroughly\nchanged. Christ had continued with His Apostles during forty days,\nspeaking to them of the things concerning the kingdom of God; and St.\nPeter, as he had been for years one of the Lord's most intimate\nfriends, so he doubtless still held the same trusted position in these\npost-resurrection days. The Lord revealed to him the outlines of His\nkingdom, and sketched for him the main lines of its development,\nteaching him that the Church was not to be a knot of personal\ndisciples, dependent upon His manifested bodily presence, and\ndissolving into its original elements as soon as that bodily presence\nceased to be realized by the eye of sense; but was rather to be a\ncorporation with perpetual succession, to use legal language, whose\ngreat work was to be an unceasing witness to Christ's resurrection. If\nPeter's mind had not been thus illuminated and guided by the personal\ninstruction of Christ, how came it to pass that prior to the descent\nof the Spirit the Apostles move with no uncertain step in this matter,\nand unhesitatingly fill up the blank in the sacred college by the\nelection of Matthias into the place left vacant by the terrible fall\nof Judas? The speech of St. Peter and the choice of this new Apostle\nreflect light back upon the forty days of waiting. No objection is\nraised, no warm debate takes place such as heralded the solution of\nthe vexed question concerning circumcision at the council of\nJerusalem; no one suggests that as Christ Himself had not supplied the\nvacancy the choice should be postponed till after the fulfilment of\nthe Master's mysterious promise, because they were all instructed as\nto our Lord's wishes by the conversations held with Christ during His\nrisen and glorified life.\n\nLet us pause a little to meditate upon an objection which might have\nbeen here raised. Why fill up what Christ Himself left vacant? some\nshort-sighted objector might have urged; and yet we see good reason\nwhy Christ may have omitted to supply the place of Judas, and may have\ndesigned that the Apostles themselves should have done so. Our Lord\nJesus Christ gifted His Apostles with corporate power; He bestowed\nupon them authority to act in His stead and name; and it is not God's\nway of action to grant power and authority, and then to allow it to\nremain unexercised and undeveloped. When God confers any gift He\nexpects that it shall be used for His honour and man's benefit. The\nLord had bestowed upon the Apostles the highest honour, the most\nwondrous power ever given to men. He had called them to an office of\nwhich He Himself had spoken very mysterious things. He had told them\nthat, in virtue of the apostolic dignity conferred upon them, they\nshould in the regeneration of all things sit upon thrones, judging the\ntwelves tribes of Israel. He had spoken, too, of a mysterious\nauthority with which they were invested, so that their decisions here\nupon earth would be ratified and confirmed in the region of heavenly\nrealities. Yet when a gap is made by successful sin in the number of\nthe mystical twelve who are to judge the twelve tribes, He leaves the\nselection of a new Apostle to the remaining eleven, in order that they\nmay be compelled to stir up the grace of God which was in them, and to\nexercise the power entrusted to them under a due sense of\nresponsibility. The Lord thus wished to teach the Church from earliest\ndays to walk alone. The Apostles had been long enough depending on His\npersonal presence and guidance, and now, that they might learn to\nexercise the privileges and duties of their Divine freedom, He leaves\nthem to choose one to fill that position of supernatural rank and\noffice from which Judas had fallen. The risen Saviour acted in grace\nas God ever acts in nature. He bestowed His gifts lavishly and\ngenerously, and then expected man to respond to the gifts by making\nthat good use of them which earnest prayer, sanctified reason, and\nChristian commonsense dictated.\n\nSt. Peter's action is notable, too, in another aspect. St. Peter was\nundoubtedly the natural leader of the apostolic band during those\nearliest days of the Church's history. Our Lord Himself recognised his\nnatural gifts as qualifying him to fulfil this position. There is no\nnecessity for a denial on our part of the reality of St. Peter's\nprivilege as contained in such passages as the verse which says, \"I\nwill give unto thee (Peter) the keys of the kingdom of heaven.\" He was\neminently energetic, vigorous, quick in action. But we find no traces\nof that despotic authority as prince of the Apostles and supreme head\nover the whole Church with which some would fain invest St. Peter and\nhis successors. St. Peter steps forward first on this occasion, as\nagain on the day of Pentecost, and again before the high priest after\nthe healing of the impotent man, and yet again at the council of\nJerusalem; for, as we have already noted, St. Peter possessed in\nabundance that natural energy which impels a man to action without any\ndesire for notoriety or any wish to thrust himself into positions of\nundue eminence. But then on every occasion St. Peter speaks as an\nequal to his equals. He claims no supreme authority; no authority, in\nfact, at all over and beyond what the others possessed. He does not,\nfor instance, on this occasion claim the right as Christ's vicar to\nnominate an Apostle into the place of Judas. He merely asserts his\nlawful place in Christ's kingdom as first among a body of equals to\nsuggest a course of action to the whole body which he knew to be in\nkeeping with the Master's wishes, and in fulfilment of His revealed\nintentions.\n\nV. The address of St. Peter led the Apostles to practical action. He\nlaid the basis of it in the book of Psalms, the mystical application\nof which to our Lord and His sufferings he recognises, selecting\npassages from the sixty-ninth and the one hundred and ninth Psalms as\ndepicting the sin and the fate of Judas Iscariot;[41] and then sets\nforth the necessity of filling up the vacancy in the apostolic office,\na fact of which he had doubtless been certified by the Master Himself.\nHe speaks as if the College of the Apostles had a definite work and\noffice; a witness peculiar to themselves as Apostles, which no others\nexcept Apostles could render. This is manifest from the language of\nSt. Peter. He lays down the conditions of a possible Apostle: he must\nhave been a witness of all that Jesus had done and taught from the\ntime of His baptism to His ascension. But this qualification alone\nwould not make a man an Apostle, or qualify him to bear the witness\npeculiar to the apostolic office. There were evidently numerous such\nwitnesses, but they were not Apostles, and had none of the power and\nprivileges of the Twelve. He must be chosen by his brother Apostles,\nand their choice must be endorsed by Heaven; and then the chosen\nwitness, who had known the past, could testify to the resurrection in\nparticular, with a weight, authority, and dignity he never possessed\nbefore. The apostolic office was the germ out of which the whole\nChristian ministry was developed, and the apostolic witness was\ntypical of that witness to the resurrection which is not the duty\nalone, but also the strength and glory of the Christian ministry; for\nit is only as the ministers and witnesses of a risen and glorified\nChrist that they differ from the officials of a purely human\nassociation.[42]\n\n  [41] Peter may have learned this mystical mode of interpretation\n  from our Lord Himself in His conversations. See Luke xxiv. 44-9.\n\n  [42] The intimate connection between the Christian ministry and\n  the miraculous facts of Christianity has been powerfully argued by\n  Charles Leslie in his _Short and Easy Method with the Deists_. He\n  contends that the existence of the Christian ministry is a\n  standing evidence of the supernatural facts of the gospel which\n  can alone explain that existence. If the facts never happened, how\n  did the Christian ministry arise? Hence he concludes the perpetual\n  character and obligation of the ministry for Christians, or, to\n  quote his own words, \"Now the Christian priesthood, as instituted\n  by Christ Himself, and continued by succession to this day, being\n  as impregnable and flagrant a testimony to the truth of the matter\n  of fact of Christ as the sacraments or any other public\n  institutions; besides that, if the priesthood were taken away, the\n  sacraments and other public institutions which are administered by\n  their hands, must fall with them: therefore the devil has been\n  most busy, and bent his greatest force, in all ages, against the\n  priesthood, knowing that if that goes down, all goes with\n  it.\"--Leslie's _Works_, vol. i., p. 27.\n\nAfter St. Peter had spoken, two persons were selected as possessing\nthe qualifications needful in the successor of Judas. Then when the\nApostles had elected they prayed, and cast lots as between the two,\nand the final selection of Matthias was made. Questions have sometimes\nbeen raised as to this method of election, and attempts have been\nsometimes made to follow the precedent here set. The lot has at times\nbeen used to supersede the exercise of human judgment, not only in\nChurch elections, but in the ordinary matters of life; but if this\npassage is closely examined, it will be seen that it affords no\njustification for any such practice. The Apostles did not use the lot\nso as to supersede the exercise of their own powers, or relieve them\nof that personal responsibility which God has imposed on men, whether\nas individuals, or as gathered in societies civil or ecclesiastical.\nThe Apostles brought their private judgment into play, searched,\ndebated, voted, and, as the result, chose two persons equally well\nqualified for the apostolic office. Then, when they had done their\nbest, they left the decision to the lot, just as men often do still;\nand if we believe in the efficacy of prayer and a particular\nProvidence ordering the affairs of men, I do not see that any wiser\ncourse can ever be taken, under similar circumstances, than that which\nthe Apostles adopted on this occasion. But we must be careful to\nobserve that the Apostles did not trust to the lot absolutely and\ncompletely. That would have been trusting to mere chance. They first\ndid their utmost, exercised their own knowledge and judgment, and\nthen, having done their part, they prayerfully left the final result\nto God, in humble confidence that He would show what was best.\n\nThe two selected candidates were Joseph Barsabas and Matthias, neither\nof whom ever appeared before in the story of our Lord's life, and yet\nboth had been His disciples all through His earthly career. What\nlessons for ourselves may we learn from these men! These two eminent\nservants of God, either of whom their brethren counted worthy to\nsucceed into the apostolic College, appear just this once in the\nsacred narrative, and then disappear for ever. Indeed it is with the\nApostles as we have already noted in the case of our Lord's life and\nthe story of the Blessed Virgin, the self-restraint of the sacred\nnarrative is most striking. What fields for romance! What wide scope\nfor the exercise of imagination would the lives of the Apostles have\nopened out if the writers of our sacred books had not been guided and\ndirected by a Divine power outside and beyond themselves. We are not,\nindeed, left without the materials for a comparison in this respect,\nmost consoling and most instructive for the devout Christian.\n\nApocryphal histories of all the Apostles abound on every side, some of\nthem dating from the second century itself. Many of them indeed are\nregular romances. The Clementine Homilies and Recognitions form a\nreligious novel, entering into the most elaborate details of the\nlabours, preaching, and travels of the Apostle Peter. Every one of the\nother Apostles, and many of the earliest disciples too, had gospels\nforged in their honour; there was the Gospel of Peter, of Thomas, of\nNicodemus, and of many others. And so it was with St. Matthias.[43]\nFive hundred years after Christ the Gospel of Matthias was known and\nrepudiated as a fiction. A mass of tradition, too, grew up round him,\ntelling of his labours and martyrdom, as some said in Ethiopia, and as\nothers in Eastern Asia.\n\n  [43] The literature of the apocryphal Gospels is very extensive.\n  Those who wish to pursue this subject will find abundant materials\n  in an article on \"Gospels, Apocryphal\" in the second volume of the\n  _Dictionary of Christian Biography_, written by Professor Lipsius\n  of Jena; or in Dr. Salmon's _Introduction to the New Testament_,\n  Lect. XI. Origen mentioned the Gospel of Matthias, while again\n  Eusebius (_H. E._, iii., 25) describes it as heretical. See\n  Fabricius, _Cod. Apoc. N. T._ p. 782. The apocryphal Acts of\n  Andrew and Matthias may be seen in Tischendorf's _Acta Apoc._, p.\n  132. Nelson's _Fasts and Festivals_ tells, in a convenient shape,\n  the traditions about St. Matthias and the other Apostles.\n\nClement, a writer who lived about the year 200, at Alexandria,\nrecounts for us some sayings traditionally ascribed to St. Matthias,\nall of a severe and sternly ascetic tone. But in reality we know\nnothing either of what St. Matthias did or of what he taught. The\ngenuine writings of apostolic times carry their own credentials with\nthem in this respect. They are dignified and natural. They indulge in\nno details to exalt their heroes, or to minister to that love of the\nstrange and marvellous which lies at the root of so much religious\nerror. They were written to exalt Christ and Christ alone, and they\ndeal, therefore, with the work of Apostles merely so far as the story\ntends to increase the glory of the Master, not that of His servants.\nSurely this repression of the human agents, this withdrawal of them\ninto the darkness of obscurity, is one of the best evidences of the\ngenuineness of the New Testament. One or two of the earliest witnesses\nof the Cross have their story told at some length. Peter and Paul,\nwhen compared with James or John or Matthias, figure very largely in\nthe New Testament narrative. But even they have allotted to them a\nmere brief outline of a portion of their work, and all the rest is\nhidden from us. The vast majority even of the Apostles have their\nnames alone recorded, while nothing is told concerning their labours\nor their sufferings. If the Apostles were deceivers, they were\ndeceivers who sought their rewards neither in this life, where they\ngained nothing but loss of all things, nor in the pages of history,\nwhere their own hands and the hands of their friends consigned their\nbrightest deeds to an obscurity no eye can pierce.[44] But they were\nnot deceivers. They were the noblest benefactors of the race, men\nwhose minds and hearts and imaginations were filled with the glory of\ntheir risen Redeemer. Their one desire was that Christ alone should be\nmagnified, and to this end they willed to lose themselves in the\nboundless sea of His risen glory. And thus they have left us a noble\nand inspiriting example. We are not apostles, martyrs, or confessors,\nyet we often find it hard to take our part and do our duty in the\nspirit displayed by Matthias and Joseph called Barsabas. We long for\npublic recognition and public reward. We chafe and fret and fume\ninternally because we have to bear our temptations and suffer our\ntrials and do our work unknown and unrecognised by all but God. Let\nthe example of these holy men help us to put away all such vain\nthoughts. God Himself is our all-seeing and our ever-present Judge.\nThe Incarnate Master Himself is watching us. The angels and the\nspirits of the just made perfect are witnesses of our earthly\nstruggles. No matter how low, how humble, how insignificant the story\nof our spiritual trials and struggles, they are all marked in heaven\nby that Divine Master who will at last reward every man, not according\nto his position in the world, but in strict accordance with the\nprinciples of infallible justice.\n\n  [44] The dignified self-restraint of the Acts is nowhere more\n  manifest than in its reference to Judas Iscariot. The only notice\n  bestowed upon him is connected with the election of Matthias.\n  Papias was a writer of the beginning of the second century. He\n  knew some of the Apostles and early disciples, and gathered\n  diligently every tradition about the Church's early days. Papias\n  made an attempt to harmonise the account of the death of Judas\n  given by St. Peter with that told in St. Matthew, which has been\n  preserved for us by two Greek commentators, \u0152cumenius, who\n  lived in the tenth, and Theophylact, who flourished in the\n  eleventh century. The difficulty is this. St. Matthew says that\n  Judas hanged himself; St. Peter says that he burst asunder. Papias\n  harmonises the two by telling that Judas first of all hanged\n  himself on a fig-tree, but the halter broke. He was then seized\n  with a terrible dropsy, and swelled up to an enormous size, so\n  that when endeavouring to pass where a waggon could go he burst\n  asunder. The narrative of Papias is given in Theophylact on Matt.\n  xxvii., and \u0152cumenius on Acts i. Dr. Routh, in his _Reliqui\u00e6\n  Sacr\u00e6_, vol. i., pp. 9, 25, points out that the horrid details of\n  the story, which cannot be here printed, are due to the Greek\n  commentators enlarging on the simple facts stated by Papias.\n  Origen, with characteristic daring, suggests that Judas committed\n  suicide as soon as he saw that our Lord was condemned, in order\n  that he might arise in the region of the dead before Him, and\n  there seek His forgiveness. There is a curious Latin book,\n  published in 1680, which gives all the traditions about the\n  traitor. Its title is Kempius, _On the Life and Fate of Judas\n  Iscariot_.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V.\n\n_THE PENTECOSTAL BLESSING._\n\n     \"And when the day of Pentecost was now come, they were all\n     together in one place. And suddenly there came from heaven a\n     sound as of the rushing of a mighty wind, and it filled all the\n     house where they were sitting. And there appeared unto them\n     tongues parting asunder (or distributing themselves), like as of\n     fire; and it sat upon each one of them. And they were all filled\n     with the Holy Spirit, and began to speak with other tongues, as\n     the Spirit gave them utterance.\"--ACTS ii. 1-4.\n\n\nIn these words we find the record of the event which completed the\nChurch, and endowed it with that mysterious power which then was, and\never since has been, the source of its true life and of its highest\nsuccess.\n\nThe time when the gift of the Spirit was vouchsafed is marked for us\nas \"when the day of Pentecost was now come.\" Here again, as in the\nfact of the ascension and the waiting of the Church, we trace the\noutline of Christianity in Judaism, and see in the typical ceremonial\nof the old dispensation the outline and shadow of heavenly realities.\n\nWhat was the history of the Pentecostal feast? That feast fulfilled in\nthe Jewish system a twofold place. It was one of the great natural\nfestivals whereby God taught His ancient people to sanctify the\ndifferent portions of the year. The Passover was the feast of the\nfirst ripe corn, celebrating the beginning of the barley harvest, as\nagain the Pentecostal loaves set forth, solemnized, and sanctified the\nclose of the wheat harvest. No one was permitted, according to the\ntwenty-third of Leviticus, to partake of the fruits of the earth till\nthe harvest had been sanctified by the presentation to God of the\nfirst ripe sheaf, just as at the greatest paschal festival ever\ncelebrated, Christ, the first ripe sheaf of that vast harvest of\nhumanity which is maturing for its Lord, was taken out of the grave\nwhere the rest of the harvest still lies, and presented in the inner\ntemple of the universe as the first-fruits of humanity unto God. At\nPentecost, on the other hand, it was not a sheaf but a loaf that was\noffered to signify the completion of the work begun at the Passover.\nAt Pentecost the law is thus laid down: \"Ye shall bring out of your\nhabitations two wave loaves of two tenth parts of an ephah: they shall\nbe of fine flour, they shall be baken with leaven, for first-fruits\nunto the Lord\" (Lev. xxiii. 17). Pentecost, therefore, was the harvest\nfestival, the feast of ingathering for the Jews; and when the type\nfound its completion in Christ, Pentecost became the feast of\ningathering for the nations, when the Church, the mystical body of\nChrist, was presented unto God to be an instrument of His glory and a\nblessing to the world at large. This feast, as we have already\nintimated, was a fitting season for the gift of the Holy Ghost, and\nthat for another reason. Pentecost was considered by the Jews as a\nfestival commemorative of the giving of the law at Mount Sinai in the\nthird month after they had been delivered from the bondage of Egypt.\nIt was a fitting season, therefore, for the bestowal of the Spirit,\nwhereby the words of ancient prophecy were fulfilled, \"I will put My\nlaw in their inward parts, and in their heart I will write it; and I\nwill be their God, and they shall be My people\" (Jer. xxxi. 33).[45]\n\nThe time when the Spirit was poured out on the assembled body of\nChristians, and the Church's foundations laid deep and strong,\nrevealed profound reverence for the old dispensation, raising by\nanticipation a protest against the heretical teaching which became\ncurrent among the Gnostics in the second century, and has often since\nfound place in Christian circles, as amongst the Anabaptists of\nGermany and the Antinomians at the time of the Reformation. This view\ntaught that there was an essential opposition between the Old and the\nNew Testament, some maintainers of it, like the ancient Gnostics,\nholding that the Old Testament was the production of a spiritual being\ninferior and hostile to the Eternal God. The Divine Spirit guided St.\nLuke, however, to teach the opposite view, and is careful to honour\nthe elder dispensation and the old covenant, showing that Christianity\nwas simply the perfection and completion of Judaism, and was developed\ntherefrom as naturally as the bud of spring bursts forth into the\nsplendid blossom and flower of summer. We trace these evidences of the\nDivine foreknowledge, as well as of the Divine wisdom, in these\nPentecostal revelations, providing for and forecasting future dangers\nwith which, even in its earlier days, the bark of Christ's Church had\ndesperately to struggle.[46]\n\n  [45] In the last lecture I have already given the reference to\n  Lightfoot's and Mede's works where this point is fully worked out.\n\n  [46] The same view has practically been taught by some modern\n  sects, who have proclaimed that all of the Old Testament and the\n  whole of our Lord's teaching till He died were intended for Jews\n  only, and have no relation to Christians. It is hard to say how\n  such persons regard the Old Testament and the greater part of the\n  four Gospels, save as interesting fossils to be hung up in a\n  museum of comparative religion.\n\nI. Now let us take the circumstances of the Pentecostal blessing as\nthey are stated, for every separate detail bears with it an important\nmessage. The place and the other circumstances of the outpouring of\nthe Spirit are full of instruction. The first disciples were all with\none accord in one place. There was unity of spirit and unity in open\nmanifestation to the world at large. Christ's disciples, when they\nreceived the gifts of heaven's choicest blessings, were not split up\ninto dozens of different organizations, each of them hostile to the\nothers, and each striving to aggrandise itself at the expense of\nkindred brotherhoods. They had keenly in remembrance the teaching of\nour Lord's great Eucharistic supplication when He prayed to His Father\nfor His people that \"they may all be one; even as Thou Father, art in\nMe, and I in Thee ... that the world may believe that Thou didst send\nMe.\" There was visible unity among the followers of Christ; there was\ninterior love and charity, finding expression in external union which\nqualified the disciples for the fuller reception of the spirit of\nlove, and rendered them powerful in doing God's work amongst men. The\nstate of the Apostles and the blessing then received have an important\nmessage for the Christianity of our own and of every age. What a\ncontrast the Christian Church--taking the word in its broadest sense\nas comprising all those who profess and call themselves\nChristians--presents at the close of the nineteenth when compared with\nthe opening years of the first century. May not many of the problems\nand difficulties which the Church of to-day experiences be traced up\nto this woeful contrast? Behold England nowadays, with its two hundred\nsects, all calling themselves by the name of Christ; take the\nChristian world, with its Churches mutually hostile, spending far\nmore time and trouble on winning proselytes one from the other than\nupon winning souls from the darkness of heathenism;--surely this one\nfact alone, the natural result of our departure from the Pentecostal\ncondition of unity and peace, is a sufficient evidence of our evil\nplight. We do not purpose now to go into any discussion of the causes\nwhence have sprung the divisions of Christendom. \"An enemy hath done\nthis\" is a quite sufficient explanation, for assuredly the great enemy\nof souls and of Christ has counterworked and traversed the work of the\nChurch and the conversion of the world most effectually thereby. There\nare some persons who rejoice in the vast variety of divisions in the\nChurch; but they are shortsighted and inexperienced in the danger and\nscandals which have flowed, and are flowing, from them. It is indeed\nin the mission field that the schisms among Christians are most\nevidently injurious. When the heathen see the soldiers of the Cross\nsplit up among themselves into hostile organizations, they very\nnaturally say that it will be time enough when their own divergences\nand difficulties have been reconciled to come and convert persons who\nat least possess internal union and concord. The visible unity of the\nChurch was from the earliest days a strong argument, breaking down\npagan prejudice. Then, again, not only do the divisions of Christians\nplace a stumbling-block in the way of the conversion of the heathen,\nbut they lead to a wondrous waste of power both at home and abroad.\nSurely one cannot look at the religious state of a town or village in\nEngland without realizing at a glance the evil results of our\ndivisions from this point of view. If men believe that the preaching\nof the Cross of Christ is the power of God unto salvation, and that\nmillions are perishing from want of that blessed story, can they feel\ncontentment when the great work of competing sects consists, not in\nspreading that salvation, but in building up their own cause by\nproselytising from their neighbours, and gathering into their own\norganization persons who already have been made partakers of Christ\nJesus? And if this competition of sects be injurious and wasteful\nwithin the bounds of Christendom, surely it is infinitely more so when\nvarious contending bodies concentrate all their forces, as they so\noften do, on the same locality in some unconverted land, and seem as\neagerly desirous of gaining proselytes from one another as from the\nmass of paganism.\n\nThen, too, to take it from another point of view, what a loss in\ngeneralship, in Christian strategy, in power of concentration, results\nfrom our unhappy divisions? The united efforts made by Protestants,\nRoman Catholics, and Greeks, are indeed all too small for the vast\nwork of converting the heathen world if they were made with the\ngreatest skill and wisdom. How much more insufficient they must be\nwhen a vast proportion of the power employed is wasted, as far as the\nwork of conversion is concerned, because it is used simply in\ncounteracting and withstanding the efforts of other Christian bodies.\nI say nothing as to the causes of dissensions. In many cases they may\nhave been absolutely necessary, though in too many cases I fear they\nhave resulted merely from views far too narrow and restrained; I\nmerely point out the evil of division in itself as being, not a help,\nas some would consider it, but a terrible hindrance in the way of the\nChurch of Christ. How different it was in the primitive Church! Within\none hundred and fifty years, or little more, of the ascension of Jesus\nChrist and the outpouring of the Divine Spirit, a Christian writer\ncould boast that the Christian Church had permeated the whole Roman\nempire to such an extent that if the Christians abandoned the cities\nthey would be turned into howling deserts. This triumphant march of\nChristianity was simply in accordance with the Saviour's promise. The\nworld saw that Christians loved one another, and the world was\nconsequently converted. But when primitive love cooled down, and\ndivisions and sects in abundance sprang up after the conversion of\nConstantine the Great, then the progress of God's work gradually\nceased, till at last Mahometanism arose to roll back the tide of\ntriumphant success which had followed the preaching of the Cross, and\nto reduce beneath Satan's sway many a fair region, like North Africa,\nEgypt, and Asia Minor, which once had been strongholds of\nChristianity. Surely when one thinks of the manifold evils at home and\nabroad which the lack of the Pentecostal visible union and concord has\ncaused, as well as of the myriads who still remain in darkness while\nnominal Christians bite and devour one another, we may well join in\nthe glowing language of Jeremy Taylor's splendid prayer for the whole\nCatholic Church, as he cries, \"O Holy Jesus, King of the saints and\nPrince of the Catholic Church, preserve Thy spouse whom Thou hast\npurchased with Thy right hand, and redeemed and cleansed with Thy\nblood. O preserve her safe from schism, heresy, and sacrilege. Unite\nall her members with the bands of faith, hope, and charity, and an\nexternal communion when it shall seem good in Thine eyes. Let the\ndaily sacrifice of prayer and sacramental thanksgiving never cease,\nbut be for ever presented to Thee, and for ever united to the\nintercession of her dearest Lord, and for ever prevail for the\nobtaining for each of its members grace and blessing, pardon and\nsalvation.\"[47]\n\n  [47] Prayer for all estates of men in the Holy Catholic Church, in\n  Jeremy Taylor's _Holy Living_, chap. iv., sec. vii.\n\nII. Furthermore, we have brought before us the external manifestations\nor evidences of the interior gift of the Spirit really bestowed upon\nthe Apostles at Pentecost. There was a sound as of a rushing mighty\nwind; there were tongues like as of fire, a separate and distinct\ntongue resting upon each disciple; and lastly there was the miraculous\nmanifestation of speech in divers languages. Let us take these\nspiritual phenomena in order. First, then, \"there came from heaven a\nsound as of the rushing of a mighty wind, and it filled all the house\nwhere they were sitting;\" a sign which was repeated in the scene\nnarrated in the fourth chapter and the thirty-first verse, where we\nare told that \"when they had prayed, the place was shaken wherein they\nwere gathered together; and they were all filled with the Holy Ghost.\"\nThe appearances of things that were seen responded to the movements\nand powers that were unseen. It was a supernatural moment. The powers\nof a new life, the forces of a new kingdom, were coming into\noperation, and, as the result, manifestations that never since have\nbeen experienced found place among men. We can find a parallel to what\nthen happened in scientific investigations. Geologists and astronomers\npush back the beginning of the world and of the universe at large to a\nvast distance, but they all acknowledge that there must have been a\nperiod when phenomena were manifested, powers and forces called into\noperation, of which men have now no experience. The beginning, or the\nrepeated beginnings, of the various epochs must have been times of\nmarvels, which men can now only dream about. Pentecost was for the\nChristian with a sense of the awful importance of life and of time and\nof the individual soul a far greater beginning and a grander epoch\nthan any mere material one. It was the beginning of the spiritual\nlife, the inauguration of the spiritual kingdom of the Messiah, the\nLord and Ruler of the material universe; and therefore we ought to\nexpect, or at least not to be surprised, that marvellous phenomena,\nsigns and wonders even of a physical type, should accompany and\ncelebrate the scene. The marvels of the story told in the first of\nGenesis find a parallel in the marvels told in the second of Acts. The\none passage sets forth the foundation of the material universe, the\nother proclaims the nobler foundations of the spiritual universe. Let\nus take it again from another point of view. Pentecost was, in fact,\nMoses on Sinai or Elijah on Horeb over again, but in less terrific\nform. Moses and Elijah may be styled the founder and the refounder of\nthe old dispensation, just as St. Peter and the Apostles may be called\nthe founders of the new dispensation. But what a difference in the\ninaugural scene! No longer with thunder and earthquake, and mountains\nrent, but in keeping with a new and more peaceful economy, there came\nfrom heaven the sound as of the rushing of a mighty wind. It is not,\ntoo, the only occasion where the idea of wind is connected with that\nof the Divine Spirit and its mysterious operations. How very similar,\nas the devout mind will trace, are the words and description of St.\nLuke, when narrating this first outpouring of the Spirit, to the words\nof the Divine Master repeated by St. John, \"The wind bloweth where it\nlisteth, and thou hearest the voice thereof, but knowest not whence it\ncometh, and whither it goeth: so is every one that is born of the\nSpirit.\"\n\nThere appeared, too, tongues, separate and distinct, sitting upon each\nof them. The outward and visible sign manifested on this occasion was\nplainly typical of the new dispensation and of the chief means of its\npropagation. The personality of the Holy Ghost is essentially a\ndoctrine of the new dispensation. The power and influence of God's\nSpirit is indeed often recognised in the Old Testament. Aholiab and\nBezaleel are said to have been guided by the Spirit of God as they\ncunningly devised the fabric of the first tabernacle. The Spirit of\nJehovah began to move Samson at times in the camp of Dan; and, on a\nlater occasion, the same Spirit is described as descending upon him\nwith such amazing force that he went down and slew thirty men of\nAshkelon. These and many other similar passages present to us the\nJewish conception of the Spirit of God and His work. He was a force, a\npower, quickening the human mind, illuminating with genius and\nequipping with physical strength those whom God chose to be champions\nof His people against the surrounding heathen. Aholiab's skill in\nmechanical operations, and Samson's strength, and Saul's prophesying,\nand David's musical art, were all of them the gifts of God. What a\nnoble, what a grand, inspiring view of life and life's gifts and work,\nis there set before us. It is the old lesson taught by St. James,\nthough so often forgotten by men when they draw a distinction between\nthings sacred and things secular, \"Every good gift and every perfect\nboon is from above, coming down from the Father of light.\" A deeper\nview, indeed, of the Divine Spirit and His work on the soul can be\ntraced in the prophets, but then they were watchers upon the\nmountains, who discerned from afar the approach of a nobler and a\nbrighter day. \"The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because He hath\nanointed me to preach the gospel to the poor.\" That was Isaiah's\nstatement of his work as adopted by our Lord; and now, at the very\nfoundation of the Church, this deeper and nobler tone of thought\nconcerning the Spirit is proclaimed, when there appeared tongues like\nas of fire sitting upon each of them.\n\nThe sign of the Holy Spirit's presence was a tongue of fire. It was a\nmost suitable emblem, pregnant with meaning, and indicative of the\nlarge place which the human voice was to play in the work of the new\ndispensation, while the supernatural fire declared that the mere\nunaided human voice would avail nothing. The voice needs to be\nquickened and supported by that Divine fire, that superhuman energy\nand power, which the Holy Ghost alone can confer. The tongue of fire\npointed on the Pentecostal morn to the important part in the Church's\nlife, and in the propagation of the gospel, which prayer, and praise,\nand preaching would hereafter occupy. It would have been well, indeed,\nhad the Church ever remembered what the Holy Ghost thus taught,\nspecially concerning the propagation of the gospel, for it would have\nbeen thereby saved many a disgraceful page of history. The human\ntongue, illuminated and sanctified by fire from the inner sanctuary,\nwas about to be the instrument of the gospel's advancement,--not penal\nlaws, not the sword and fire of persecution; and so long as the\ndivinely-appointed means were adhered to, so long the course of our\nholy religion was one long-continued triumph. But when the world and\nthe devil were able to place in the hands of Christ's spouse their own\nweapons of violence and force, when the Church forgot the words of\nher Master, \"My kingdom is not of this world,\" and the teachings\nembodied in the symbol of the tongue of fire, then spiritual paralysis\nfell upon religious effort; and even where human law and power have\ncompelled an external conformity to the Christian system, as they\nundoubtedly have done in some cases, yet all vital energy, all true\ngodliness, have been there utterly lacking in the religion established\nby means so contrary to the mind of Christ. Very good men have made\nsad mistakes in this matter. Archbishop Ussher was a man whose deep\npiety equalled his prodigious learning, yet he maintained that the\ncivil sword ought to be used to repress false doctrine; the divines of\nthe Westminster Assembly have left their opinion on record, that it is\nthe duty of the magistrate to use the sword on behalf of Christ's\nkingdom; Richard Baxter taught that the toleration of doctrines which\nhe considered false was sinful; and all of them forgot the lesson of\nthe day of Pentecost, that the tongue of fire was to be the only\nweapon permissible in the warfare of the kingdom whose rule is over\nspirits, not over bodies. The history of religion in England amply\nproves this. The Church of England enjoyed, about the middle of the\nlast century, the greatest temporal prosperity. Her prelates held high\nestate, and her security was fenced round by a perfect bulwark of\nstringent laws. Yet her life-blood was fast ebbing away, and her true\nhold upon the nation was speedily relaxing. The very highest ranks of\nsociety, whom worldly policy attached nominally to her communion, had\nlost all faith in her supernatural work and commission. A modern\nhistorian has shown this right well in his description of the\ndeath-scene of Queen Caroline, a woman of eminent intellectual\nqualities, who had played no small part in the religious life of this\nnation during the reign of her husband George II. Queen Caroline came\nto die, and was passing away surrounded by a crowd of attendants and\ncourtiers. The whole Court, permeated by the spirit of earthliness\nwhich then prevailed, was disturbed by the death of the Queen's body,\nbut no one seems to have thought of the Queen's soul, till some one\nmildly suggested that, for decency's sake, the Archbishop of\nCanterbury should be sent for that he might offer up prayer with the\ndying woman. Writing here in Ireland, I cannot forget that it was just\nthe same with us at that very period. Religion was here upheld by\nworldly power; the Church, which should have been viewed as simply a\nspiritual power, was regarded and treated as a mere branch of the\ncivil service, and true religion sank to its lowest depths. And we\nreaped in ourselves the due reward of our deeds. The very men whose\nvoices were loudest in public for the repression of Romanism were\nprivately living in grossest neglect of the offices and laws of\nreligion and morality, because they in their hearts despised an\ninstitution which had forgotten the Pentecostal gift, and sought\nvictory with the weapons of the flesh, and not with those of the\nspirit. May God for evermore protect His Church from such miserable\nmistakes, and lead her to depend more and more upon the power of the\nblessed and ever-present Pentecostal gift!\n\nA separate and distinct tongue, too, sat upon each individual\nassembled in the upper room,--significant of the individual character\nof our holy religion. Christianity has a twofold aspect, neither of\nwhich can with impunity be neglected. Christianity has a corporate\naspect. Our Lord Jesus Christ came not so much to teach a new\ndoctrine as to establish a new society, based on newer and higher\nprinciples, and working towards a higher and nobler end than any\nsociety ever previously founded. This side of Christianity was\nexaggerated in the Middle Ages. The Church, its unity, its interests,\nits welfare as a corporation, then dominated every other\nconsideration. Since the Reformation, however, men have run to the\nother extreme. They have forgotten the social and corporate view of\nChristianity, and only thought of it as it deals with individuals. Men\nhave looked at Christianity as it deals with the individual alone, and\nhave forgotten and ignored the corporate side of its existence. Truth\nis many-sided indeed, and no side of truth can with impunity be\nneglected. Some have erred in dwelling too much on the corporate\naspect of Christianity; others have erred in dwelling too much on its\nindividual aspect. The New Testament alone combines both in due\nproportion, and teaches the importance and necessity of a Church, as\nagainst the extreme Protestant, on the one hand, who will reduce\nreligion to a mere individual matter; and of a personal religion, an\nindividual interest in the Spirit's presence, as here indicated by the\ntongues which sat upon each of them, as against the extreme Romanist,\non the other hand, who looks upon the Church as everything, to the\nneglect of the life and progress of the individual. This passage does\nnot at the same time lend any assistance to those who would thence\nconclude that there was no distinction between clergy and laity, and\nthat no ministerial office was intended to exist under the\ndispensation of the kingdom of heaven. The Spirit, doubtless, was\npoured out upon all the disciples, and not upon the Twelve alone, upon\nthe day of Pentecost, as also upon the occasion of the conversion of\nCornelius and his household. Yet this fact did not lead the Apostles\nand early Christians to conclude that an appointed and ordained\nministry might be dispensed with. The Lord miraculously bestowed His\ngraces and gifts at Pentecost and in the centurion's house at C\u00e6sarea,\nbecause the gospel dispensation was opened on these occasions first of\nall to the Jews and then to the Gentiles. But when, subsequently to\nthe formal opening, we read of the gifts of the Spirit, we find that\ntheir bestowal is connected with the ministry of the Apostles, of St.\nPeter and St. John at Samaria, or of St. Paul at Ephesus. The Holy\nGhost was poured out upon all the company assembled in the upper room,\nor in the centurion's house; yet the Apostles saw nothing in this fact\ninconsistent with a ministerial organization, else they would not have\nset apart the seven men full of faith and of the Holy Ghost to\nminister to the widows at Jerusalem, nor would they have laid hands\nupon elders in every church which they founded, nor would St. Paul\nhave written, \"He that seeketh the office of a bishop desireth a good\nwork,\" nor would St. Peter have exhorted the elders to a diligent\noversight of the flock of God after the model of the Good Shepherd\nHimself. St. Peter clearly thought that the Pentecostal gifts did not\nobliterate the distinction which existed between the shepherds and the\nsheep, between a fixed and appointed ministry and the flock to whom\nthey should minister, though in the very initial stages of the\nmiraculous movement the Spirit was bestowed without any human agency\nupon men and women alike.[48]\n\n  [48] In the primitive Church the gift of preaching or prophesying\n  seems to have been widely diffused and exercised among what we\n  should call the laity, while at the same time a fixed and\n  appointed ministry exercised the pastoral office, including\n  therein the celebration of the sacraments and the exercise of\n  Church discipline. This seems the explanation of the phenomena we\n  behold in St. Paul's Epistles, in the manual called the _Teaching\n  of the Twelve Apostles_, and in that curious production of the\n  primitive Church called the _Shepherd of Hermas_. But though\n  preaching and prophesying were at first very freely exercised, the\n  disorders which arose at Corinth and other places quickly taught\n  the necessity for fixed rules. It was just the same in the\n  synagogue. The ritual and worship was conducted by the officials.\n  Preaching was free and open to all, but subject to the control and\n  direction of the ruler of the Synagogue, as the case of St. Paul\n  at Antioch in Pisidia proves (Acts xiii. 15).\n\nIII. Lastly, in this passage we find another external proof of the\nSpirit's presence in the miraculous gift of tongues. That gift\nindicated to the Apostles and to all ages the tongue as the instrument\nby which the gospel was to be propagated, as the symbol fire indicated\nthe cleansing and purifying effects of the Spirit.[49] The gift of\ntongues is one that has ever excited much speculation, and specially\nso during the present century, when, as some will remember, an\nextraordinary attempt to revive them was made, some sixty years ago,\nby the followers of the celebrated Edward Irving. Devout students of\nScripture have loved to trace in this incident at Pentecost, at the\nvery foundation of the new dispensation, a reversal of that confusion\nof tongues which happened at Babel, and have seen in it the removal of\n\"the covering cast over all peoples, and the veil that is spread over\nall nations.\"[50] The precise character of the gift of tongues has of\nlate years exercised many minds, and different explanations have been\noffered of the phenomena. Some have viewed it as a miracle of hearing,\nnot of speaking, and maintained that the Apostles did not speak\ndifferent languages at all, but that they all spake the one Hebrew\ntongue, while the Jews of the various nationalities then assembled\nmiraculously heard the gospel in their own language.\n\n  [49] Lightfoot, _Hor\u00e6 Hebraic\u00e6_, Acts, chap. ii., ver. 3, notes\n  that \"there is a form of prayer in the Jewish writings which was\n  used on the solemn fast of the ninth month Ab, one clause of which\n  illustrates the Divine symbol, 'Have mercy, O God, upon the city\n  that mourneth, that is trodden down and desolate, because Thou\n  didst lay it waste by fire, and by fire wilt build it up again.'\"\n\n  [50] Isa. xxv. 7. See Lightfoot, _Hor\u00e6 Heb._, on Acts ii.\n\nThe miracle is in that case intensified one hundredfold, while not one\nsingle difficulty which men feel is thereby alleviated. Meyer and a\nlarge number of German critics explain the speaking with tongues as\nmere ecstatic or rapturous utterances in the ordinary language of the\ndisciples. Meyer thinks too that some foreign Jews had found their way\ninto the band of the earliest disciples. They naturally delivered\ntheir ecstatic utterances, not in Aramaic, but in the foreign tongues\nto which they were accustomed, and legend then exaggerated this\nnatural fact into the form which the Acts of the Apostles and the\ntradition of the Christian Church have ever since maintained.[51] It\nis, indeed, rather difficult to understand the estimate formed by such\ncritics of the gift of tongues, whether bestowed on the day of\nPentecost or during the subsequent ministrations of St. Paul at\nCorinth and Ephesus. Meyer is obliged to confess that there were some\nmarvellous phenomena in Corinth and other places to which St. Paul\nbears witness. He describes himself as surpassing the whole Corinthian\nChurch in this particular gift (1 Cor. xiv. 18), so that if St. Paul's\ntestimony is to be relied upon,--and Meyer lays a great deal of weight\nupon it,--we must accept it as conclusively proving that there existed\na power of speaking in various languages among the first Christians.\nBut the explanation offered by many critics of the gift of tongues as\nundoubtedly exercised at Corinth reduces it to something very like\nthose fanatical exhibitions witnessed among the earliest followers of\nthe Irvingite movement, or, to put it plainly, to a mere uttering of\ngibberish, unworthy of apostolic notice save in the language of\nsternest censure, as being a disorderly and foolish proceeding\ndisgraceful to the Christian community.\n\n  [51] Meyer on _Acts_ (ii. 4), vol. i., pp. 67, 68. Clark's\n  translation.\n\nMeyer's theory and that of many modern expositors seems, then, to me\nvery unsatisfactory, raising up more difficulties than it solves. But\nit may be asked, what explanation do you offer of the Pentecostal\nmiracle? and I can find no one more satisfactory than the\nold-fashioned one, that there was a real bestowal of tongues, a real\ngift of speaking in foreign languages, granted to the Apostles, to be\nused as occasion required when preaching the gospel in heathen lands.\nDean Stanley, in his commentary on Corinthians, gives, as was his\nwont, a clear and attractive statement of the newer theory, putting in\na vigorous shape the objections to the view here maintained. I know\nthere are difficulties connected with this view, but many of these\ndifficulties arise from our ignorance of the state and condition of\nthe early Church, while others may spring from our very imperfect\nknowledge of the relations between mind and body. But whatever\ndifficulties attend the explanation I offer, they are as nothing\ncompared with the difficulties which attend the modern explanations to\nwhich I have referred.[52] What, then, is our theory, which we call\nthe old-fashioned one? It is simply this, that on the day of Pentecost\nChrist bestowed upon His Apostles the power of speaking in foreign\nlanguages, according to His promise reported by St. Mark (xvi. 17),\n\"They shall speak with new tongues.\" This was the theory of the\nancient Church. Iren\u00e6us speaks of the tongues as given \"that all\nnations might be enabled to enter into life;\" while Origen explains\nthat \"St. Paul was made a debtor to different nations, because,\nthrough the grace of the Holy Spirit, he had received the gift of\nspeaking in the languages of all nations.\" This has been the\ncontinuous theory of the Church as expressed in one of the most\nancient portions of the Liturgy, the proper prefaces in the Communion\noffice. The preface for Whit Sunday sets forth the facts commemorated\non that day, as the other proper prefaces state the facts of the\nIncarnation, the Resurrection, and Ascension. The fact which Whit\nSunday celebrates, and for which special thanks are then offered, is\nthis, that then \"the Holy Ghost came down from heaven in the likeness\nof fiery tongues, lighting upon the Apostles, to teach them, and to\nlead them to all truth; giving them both the gift of divers languages,\nand also boldness with fervent zeal constantly to preach the gospel\nunto all nations.\"[53]\n\n  [52] The speculations and discussions now rife concerning\n  hypnotism ought to teach modesty of assertion as to what is or is\n  not possible. On the 28th of March there appeared in an eminent\n  medical authority, the _Lancet_ newspaper, a review of a number of\n  works on hypnotism, acknowledging the wonders of the subject, and\n  containing this expression of opinion: \"It is quite impossible to\n  assign any limits to the influence of mind upon body, which is\n  probably much more potent and far-reaching than we are usually\n  prepared to admit.\" Now among the works reviewed in that article\n  was one by Dr. Albert Moll of Berlin, published in the\n  \"Contemporary Science Series.\" That book makes statements about\n  hypnotism which would quite cover Scripture miracles at which even\n  devout people have stumbled, such as the miracles wrought by the\n  shadow of St. Peter, or by handkerchiefs brought from the body of\n  St. Paul (Acts v. 15, and xix. 12), which Meyer regards as mere\n  legendary accretions to the genuine story. Moll, however, makes\n  quite as wondrous statements about hypnotism. On page 1 he thus\n  begins his _History of Hypnotism_: \"In order to understand the\n  gradual development of modern hypnotism from actual magnetism we\n  must distinguish two points: firstly, that there are human beings\n  who can exercise a personal influence over others, either by\n  direct contact or even from a distance; and, secondly, the fact\n  that particular psychical facts can be induced in human beings by\n  certain physical processes. This second fact especially has long\n  been known among the Oriental peoples, and was utilized by them\n  for religious purposes. Kiesewetter attributes the early\n  soothsaying by means of precious stones to hypnosis, which was\n  induced by steadily gazing at the stones. This is also true of\n  divination by looking into vessels and crystals, as the Egyptians\n  have long been in the habit of doing, and has often been done in\n  Europe: by Cagliostro, for example. These hypnotic phenomena are\n  also found to have existed several thousand years ago among the\n  Persian magi, as well as up to the present day among the Indian\n  yogis and fakirs, who throw themselves into the hypnotic state by\n  means of fixation of the gaze.\" The phenomena mentioned in the\n  Acts, whether as to the tongues or to miracles worked through\n  inanimate objects, may be compared with Moll's statements on pp.\n  5, 6, 84, and 362.\n\n  [53] The proper preface in the Book of Common Prayer is longer and\n  more minute than the corresponding one in the Missal. The\n  Reformers extended the ancient form, inserting a special reference\n  to the gift of tongues.\n\nNow this traditional interpretation has not only the authority of the\npast on its side; we can also see many advantages which must have\naccrued from a gift of this character. The preface we have just cited\nstates that the tongues were bestowed for the preaching of the gospel\namong all nations. And surely not merely as a striking sign to\nunbelievers, but also as a great practical help in missionary labours,\nsuch a gift of tongues would have been invaluable to the Church at its\nvery birth. There was then neither time, nor money, nor organization\nto prepare men as missionaries of the Cross. An universal commission\nand work were given to twelve men, chiefly Galilean peasants, to go\nforth and found the Church. How could they have been fitted for this\nwork unless God had bestowed upon them some such gift of speech? The\nvast diversity of tongues throughout the world is now one of the chief\nhindrances with which missionary effort has to contend. Years have\noften to elapse before any effective steps can be taken in the work of\nevangelisation, simply because the question of the languages bars the\nway. It would have been only in accordance with God's action in\nnature, where great epochs have been ever signalised by extraordinary\nphenomena, if such a great era-making epoch as the birth of the Church\nof Christ had been marked with extraordinary spiritual powers and\ndevelopments, which supplied the want of that learning and those\norganizations which the Lord now leaves to the spiritual energies of\nthe Church itself. But it is sometimes said, we never hear of this\npower as used by the Apostles for missionary purposes. Nothing,\nhowever, is a surer rule in historical investigations than this,\n\"Never trust to mere silence,\" specially when the records are but few,\nscanty, fragmentary. We know but very little of the ways, worship,\nactions of the Apostles. Silence is no evidence either as to what they\ndid or did not do. Some of them went into barbarous and distant lands,\nas history states. Eusebius (III., 1) tells us that St. Thomas\nreceived Parthia as his allotted region, while St. Andrew taught in\nScythia. Eusebius is an author on whom great reliance is justly\nplaced. He is one, too, whose accuracy and research have been again\nand again confirmed in our own day by discoveries of every kind. I\nsee, then, no reason why we should not depend upon him upon this point\nas well as upon others. Now if the Apostles taught in Scythia and\nParthia, what an enormous advantage it must have given them in their\nwork among a strange and barbarous people if, by means of the\nPentecostal blessing, they could at once proclaim a crucified Saviour.\nIt is sometimes said, however, the gift of speaking with foreign\nlanguages was not required by the Apostles for missionary purposes, as\nGreek alone would carry a man all through the world, and Greek the\nApostles evidently knew. But people in saying so forget that there is\na great difference between possessing enough of a language to travel\nover the world, and speaking with such facility as enables one to\npreach. English will now carry a man over the world, but English will\nnot enable him to preach to the people of India or of China. Greek\nmight carry Apostles all over the Roman Empire, and might enable St.\nThomas to be understood by the courtiers of the great kings of\nParthia, where traces of the ancient Greek language and civilization,\nderived from Alexander's time, long prevailed. But Greek would not\nenable a primitive Christian teacher to preach fluently among the\nCelts of Galatia, or of Britain, or among the natives of Spain or of\nPhrygia, or the barbarians of Scythia.[54] We see from St. Paul's\ncase how powerful was the hold which the Aramaic language had over the\npeople of Jerusalem. When the excited mob heard St. Paul speak in the\nHebrew tongue they listened patiently, because their national\nfeelings, the sentiments which sprang up in childhood and were allied\nwith their noblest hopes, were touched. So must it have been all the\nworld over. The Pentecostal gift of tongues was a powerful help in\npreaching the gospel, because, like the Master's promise to assist\ntheir minds and their tongues in the hour of need, it freed the\nApostles from care, anxiety, and difficulties, which would have sorely\nhindered their great work. But while I offer this explanation, I\nacknowledge that it has its own difficulties; but then every theory\nhas its difficulties, and we can only balance difficulties against\ndifficulties, selecting that theory which seems to have the fewest.\nThe conduct, for instance, of the Corinthians, who seem to have used\nthe gift of tongues simply to minister to the spirit of display, not\nto edification or to missionary work, seems to some a great\ndifficulty. But after all is not their conduct simply an instance of\nhuman sin, perverting and misusing a divine gift, such as we often\nsee still? God still bestows His gifts, the real outcome and work of\nthe Spirit. Man takes them, treats them as his own, and misuses them\nfor his own purposes of sin and selfishness. What else did the\nCorinthians do, save that the gift which they abused was an\nexceptional one; but then their circumstances, times, opportunities,\npunishments, all were exceptional and peculiar. The one thing that was\nnot peculiar was this, the abiding tendency of human nature to degrade\nDivine gifts and blessings. There must, we again repeat, be\ndifficulties and mystery connected with this subject, no matter what\nview we take. Perhaps, too, we are no fitting judges of the gifts\nbestowed on the primitive Church, or the phenomena manifested under\nsuch extraordinary circumstances, when everything, every power, every\nforce, every organization, was arrayed against the company of the\ntwelve Apostles. Surely miracles and miraculous powers seem absolutely\nnecessary and natural in such a case.[55] We are not now sufficient or\ncapable judges of events as they then existed. Perhaps, too, we are\nnot sufficient judges because we do not possess that spirit which\nwould make us to sympathise with and understand the state of the\nChurch at that time. \"They were all together in one place.\" The\nChurch was then visibly united, and internally united too. A\nnineteenth century Christian, with the endless divisions of\nChristendom, is scarcely the most fitting judge of the Church and the\nChurch's blessings when the Spirit of the Master pervaded it and the\nprayer of the Master for visible unity was fulfilled in it.\nChristendom is weak now from its manifold divisions. Even in a mere\nnatural way, and from a mere human point of view, we can see how its\ndivisions destroy its power and efficacy as Christ's witness in the\nworld. But when we take the matter from a spiritual point of view, we\ncannot even guess what marvellous gifts and endowments, needful for\nthe edification of His people and the conversion of the world, we now\nlack from want of the Divine charity and peace which ruled the hearts\nof the twelve as they assembled in the upper room that Pentecostal\nmorn. We shall better understand primitive gifts when we get back\nprimitive union.\n\n  [54] It is a completely mistaken notion, which no one would\n  cherish who had read history with a full-orbed mental eye,\n  realizing the past with its circumstances, that Latin and Greek\n  superseded all other languages throughout the empire. Local\n  dialects and languages continued to flourish all the time, save\n  amongst the official classes. Else how did Welsh survive to this\n  day in England? How did Celtic survive in France side by side with\n  Latin? The two celebrated cases of Gregory of Tours and of St.\n  Patrick show that their Latin was of a very rude and corrupt kind;\n  their real spoken language was Celtic, the tongue of the mass of\n  the people. In a learned work just published I note a confirmation\n  of this view. Professor Ramsay, in his _Historical Geography of\n  Asia Minor_, p. 24, avows how his mind has changed on this\n  question in regard to Asia Minor. \"Romans governed Asia Minor,\n  because with their marvellous governing talent they knew how to\n  adapt their administration to the people of the plateau. It is\n  true that the great cities (of Asia Minor) put on a Western\n  appearance, and took Latin or Greek names. Latin and Greek were\n  the languages of government, of the educated classes, and of\n  polite society. Only this superficial aspect is attested in\n  literature and in ordinary history, and when I began to travel the\n  thought had never occurred to me that there was any other. The\n  conviction has gradually forced itself on me that the real state\n  of the country was very different. Greek was not the popular\n  language of the plateau, even in the third century after Christ;\n  the mass of the people spoke Lycaonian, and Galatian, and\n  Phrygian, although those who wrote books wrote Greek, and those\n  who governed spoke Latin.\" See again pp. 98, 99 for much more on\n  the same subject, showing the prevalence of the native languages\n  of Asia Minor down to the year A.D. 500.\n\n  [55] Christians often give their sceptical opponents an advantage\n  over them by allowing them to state the difficulties of\n  Christianity and never retorting the difficulties of scepticism.\n  There is no historical fact of the distant past that cannot be\n  encumbered with numerous difficulties, deduced, in most cases,\n  from our own ignorance. No difficulty on our side is so great as\n  that which the sceptic has to meet in undertaking to explain, on\n  purely natural grounds, the rise and success of Christianity on\n  the very spot and at the very time its Author had been crucified.\n  The Christian story is simple and natural; the sceptical\n  explanation forced, unnatural, and surrounded by a thousand\n  appalling difficulties.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI.\n\n_ST. PETER'S FIRST SERMON._\n\n     \"But Peter, standing up with the eleven, lifted up his voice, and\n     spake forth unto them, saying, Ye men of Jud\u00e6a, and all ye that\n     dwell at Jerusalem, be this known unto you, and give ear unto my\n     words.\"--ACTS ii. 14.\n\n\nThis verse contains the opening words of St. Peter's address to the\nmultitude who were roused to wonder and inquiry by the miraculous\nmanifestations of Pentecost. That address is full of interest when\nviewed aright, freed from all the haze which the long familiarity of\nages has brought with it. In this second chapter we have the report of\na sermon preached within a few days of Christ's ascension, addressed\nto men many of whom knew Jesus Christ, all of whom had heard of His\nwork, His life, and His death, and setting forth the apostolic\nestimate of Christ, His miracles, His teaching, His ascended condition\nand glory. We cannot realize, unless by an intellectual effort, the\nspecial worth of these apostolic reports contained in the Acts. Men\nare sometimes sceptical about them, asking, how did we get them at\nall? how were they handed down? This is, however, an easier question\nto answer than some think. If we take, for instance, this Pentecostal\naddress alone, we know that St. Luke had many opportunities of\npersonal communication with St. Peter. He may have learned from St.\nPeter's own mouth what he said on this occasion, and he could compare\nthis verbal report with the impressions and remembrances of hundreds\nwho then were present. But there is another solution of the difficulty\nless known to the ordinary student of Holy Scripture. The ancients\nmade a great use of shorthand, and were quite well accustomed to take\ndown spoken discourses, transmitting them thus to future ages.\nShorthand was, in fact, much more commonly used among the ancients\nthan among ourselves. The younger Pliny, for instance, who was a\ncontemporary of the Apostles, never travelled without a shorthand\nwriter, whose business it was to transcribe passages which struck his\nmaster in the books he was perpetually studying. The sermons of\nChrysostom were all extemporaneous effusions. In fact, the\ngolden-mouthed patriarch of Constantinople was such an indefatigable\npulpit-orator, preaching almost daily, that it would have been\nimpossible to have made any copious preparation. The extensive reports\nof his sermons which have come down to us, the volumes of his\nexpositions on the books of Scripture which we possess, prove that\nshorthand must have been constantly used by his hearers.[56] Now what\nwould we give for a few shorthand reports of sermons by Clement of\nRome, by St. Luke, by Timothy, by Apollos, preached in Rome,\nAlexandria, or Antioch? Suppose they were discovered, like the\nnumerous Egyptian manuscripts which have of late years come to light,\ndeposited in the desert sands, and were found to set forth the\nmiracles, the ministry, and the person of Christ exactly as now we\npreach them, what a marvellous confirmation of the faith we should\nesteem them! And yet what should we then possess more than we already\nhave in the sermons and discourses of St. Peter and St. Paul, reported\nby an eye and ear-witness who wrote the Acts of the Apostles?\n\n  [56] I read the other day the report of an eminent Unitarian\n  divine who was lecturing upon the Gospels. He was upholding the\n  view that it was impossible that reports of the discourses of\n  Christ and of His Apostles could have been handed down in anything\n  like their shape as given in the New Testament, because it was an\n  age without shorthand. The lecturer is an eminent metaphysical and\n  philosophical critic, but he is evidently not versed in the social\n  life of the ancients. Had the lecturer but referred to Prof. J. E.\n  B. Mayor's edition of Pliny's _Letters_, Book iii., p. 96, he\n  would have found abundant references proving that shorthand was a\n  usual accomplishment among educated men long prior to the\n  Christian era.\n\nI. The congregation assembled to listen to this first Gospel discourse\npreached by a human agent was a notable and representative one. There\nwere Parthians, and Medes, and Elamites, and the dwellers in\nMesopotamia and in Jud\u00e6a,--or, as an ancient expositor (Tertullian)\nputs it, in Armenia[57] and Cappadocia,--in Pontus and Asia, in\nPhrygia and Pamphylia, in Egypt and in the parts of Libya about\nCyrene, and strangers of Rome, Jews and proselytes, Cretes and\nArabians. The enumeration of the various nationalities listening to\nSt. Peter begins from the extremest east; it proceeds then to the\nnorth, from thence to the south, terminating with Rome, which\nrepresents the west. They were all Jews or Jewish proselytes, showing\nhow extremely wide, at the epoch of the Incarnation, was the\ndispersion of God's ancient people. St. Paul, in one profound passage\nof the Epistle to the Galatians, notes that \"God sent forth His Son in\nthe fulness of time,\" that is, at the exact moment when the world was\nprepared for the advent of the truth. This \"fulness of time\" may be\nnoted in many directions. Roman roads, Roman law, commerce, and\ncivilization opened channels of communication which bore the tidings\nof the gospel into every land. A sweet singer of our own time, the\nlate Sir Samuel Ferguson, has depicted in his _Lays of the Western\nGael_ this diffusion of the gospel through the military organization\nof Rome. He represents a Celt from Ireland as present at the\ncrucifixion. This may seem at first somewhat improbable, as Ireland\nwas never included within the bounds of the Roman Empire; and yet the\npoet's song can be justified from history. Though never included\nformally within the Empire, Irishmen and Scotch Highlanders must often\nhave served in the ranks of the Roman army, just as at the present\nday, and especially in India, men of foreign nationalities are often\nfound serving in the ranks of the British army. In later times\nIrishmen most certainly formed a Roman legion all to themselves. St.\nJerome tells us[58] that he had seen them acting in that capacity at\nTreves, in Germany. They were noted for their bravery, which, as\nJerome believes, they sustained by consuming human flesh. Three\nhundred years earlier Irishmen may often have enlisted in the service\nof those British legions which the Romans withdrew from Britain and\nlocated in the East; and thus Sir Samuel Ferguson does not pass the\nbounds of historic credibility when he represents a certain centurion,\nwho had been present at the crucifixion, as returning to his native\nland, and there proclaiming the tidings of our Lord's atoning\nsacrifice:--\n\n  [57] Tertullian, _Against the Jews_, chap. vii.\n\n  [58] _Adv. Jovin._, lib. ii., cap. 7, in Migne's _Pat. Lat._, t.\n  xxiii., col. 296.\n\n    \"And they say, Centurion Altus, when he to Emania came,\n    And to Rome's subjection called us, urging C\u00e6sar's tribute claim,\n    Told that half the world barbarian thrills already with the faith,\n    Taught them by the God-like Syrian, C\u00e6sar lately put to death.\"[59]\n\n  [59] I have worked out this point at some length in _Ireland and\n  the Celtic Church_, chap. i., pp. 14-20.\n\nThe dispersion of the Jews throughout not only the Roman Empire, but\nfar beyond its limits, served the same end, and hastened the fulness\nof time needed for the Messiah's appearance. We must remember,\nhowever, that the long list of varied nationalities present at this\nPentecostal feast were not Gentiles, they were Jews of the dispersion\nscattered broadcast among the nations as far as Central Asia towards\nthe east, as far as southern Arabia and Aden on the south, and Spain\nand Britain on the west. The course of modern investigation and\ndiscovery amply confirms the statement of this passage, as well as the\nsimilar statement of the eighth chapter, which represents a Jewish\nstatesman of Abyssinia or Ethiopia as coming up to Jerusalem for the\npurposes of devotion. Jewish inscriptions have been found in Aden\ndating back long before the Christian era. A Jewish colony existed\nages before Christ in the region of Southern Arabia, and continued to\nflourish there down to the Middle Ages.[60] At Rome, Alexandria, and\nGreece the Jews at this period constituted an important factor in the\ntotal population.[61] The dispersion of the Jews had now done its\nwork, and brought with it the fulness of time required by the Divine\npurposes. The way of the Messiah had been effectually prepared by it.\nThe Divine seed fell upon no unploughed and unbroken soil. Pure and\nnoble ideas of worship and morality had been scattered broadcast\nthroughout the world. Some years ago the Judgment of Solomon was found\ndepicted on the ceiling of a Pompeian house, witnessing to the spread\nof scriptural knowledge through Jewish artists in the time of Tiberius\nand of Nero. A race of missionaries, too, equipped for their work, was\ndeveloped through the discipline of exile. The thousands who hung upon\nPeter's lips needed nothing but instruction in the faith of Jesus\nChrist, together with the baptism of the Spirit, and the finest, the\nmost enthusiastic, and the most cosmopolitan of agencies lay ready to\nthe Church's hand. While, again, the organization of synagogues, which\nthe exigencies of the dispersion had called into existence, was just\nthe one suited to the various purposes of charity, worship, and\nteaching, which the Christian Church required. Whether, indeed, we\nconsider the persons whom St. Peter addressed, or the machinery they\nhad elaborated, or the diffusion of pure religious ideas they had\noccasioned, we see in this passage a splendid illustration of the care\nand working of Divine Providence bringing good out of evil and real\nvictory out of apparent defeat. Prophet and psalmist had lamented over\nZion's ruin and Israel's exile into foreign lands, but they saw not\nhow that God was thereby working out His own purposes of wider\nblessing to mankind at large, fitting Jews and Gentiles alike for that\nfulness of time when the Eternal Son should be manifested.\n\n  [60] The history of the Jewish settlement in the south of Arabia\n  is very little known by the average student of the Acts, and yet\n  it is a wonderful confirmation of its accuracy both here and in\n  the account of the Ethiopian eunuch. This colony existed in Arabia\n  long before the Christian era. They claimed, indeed, to have been\n  a portion of the Jews of the Captivity. They established an\n  independent kingdom in Southern Arabia, which bitterly persecuted\n  the Christians about the year 500. A full account of this\n  little-known persecution, and of the Homerite martyrs who suffered\n  in it, will be found by those curious in such matters in that\n  great monumental work the _Acta Sanctorum_ of the Bollandists,\n  vols. x. and xii. for October, under the names of St. Arethas and\n  St. Elesbaan. Large quantities of manuscripts about this Jewish\n  colony were discovered some years ago in the mosques of Southern\n  Arabia. A considerable number of Jews still find a place there.\n  See, for an account of the Jewish kingdom in Arabia, an article on\n  Elesbaan, in vol. ii. of the _Dictionary of Christian Biography_.\n  Gibbon in his forty-second and fiftieth chapters has much about\n  it.\n\n  [61] The Jewish cemeteries discovered at Rome date back to the\n  time of our Lord, or even before it. They were the models on which\n  the Christians made the catacombs. The symbols of Judaism appear\n  in the Christian tombs. See Northcote's _Epitaphs of the\n  Catacombs_, and Brownlow and Northcote's _Roma Sotteranea_.\n\nII. The brave, outspoken tone of this sermon evidences the power and\ninfluence of the Holy Spirit upon St. Peter's mind. St. Chrysostom, in\nhis famous lectures on the Acts of the Apostles, notes the courageous\ntone of this address as a clear evidence of the truth of the\nresurrection. This argument has been ever since a commonplace with\napologists and expositors, and yet it is only by an effort that we can\nrealize how very strong it is. Here was St. Peter and his fellow\nApostles standing up proclaiming a glorified and ascended Messiah.\nJust seven weeks before, they had fled from the messengers of the High\nPriest sent to arrest their Master, leaving Him to His fate. They had\nseen Him crucified, knew of His burial, and then, feeling utterly\ndefeated, had as much as possible withdrawn themselves from public\nnotice. Seven weeks after, the same band, led by St. Peter, himself a\nshort time before afraid to confess Christ to a maidservant, boldly\nstand up, charge upon the multitude, who knew all the circumstances of\nChrist's execution, the crime of having thus killed the Prince of\nLife, and appeal to the supernatural evidence of the gift of tongues,\nto which they had just listened, as the best proof of the truth of\ntheir message. St. Peter's courage on this occasion is one of the\nclearest proofs of the truth of his testimony. St. Peter was not\nnaturally a courageous man. He was very impulsive and very\nsympathetic. He was the creature of his surroundings. If he found\nhimself in the midst of Christ's friends, he was the most forward to\nuphold Christ's cause, but he had not much moral stamina. He was sadly\ndeficient in staying power. His mind was very Celtic in its tone, to\ndraw an illustration from national characteristics. The Celtic mind is\nvery sympathetic, ardent, enthusiastic. It is swept along in moments\nof excitement, either of victory or of defeat, by the dominating power\nof numbers. How often has this quality been manifested by the French\npeople, for instance? They are resistless when victorious; they\ncollapse utterly and at once when defeated. St. Peter was just the\nsame. He was sympathetic, ardent, enthusiastic, and fell, in later as\nwell as in earlier age, into the perils which attend such\ntemperaments. He denied his Master when surrounded by the menials of\nthe high priest. He was ready to die for that Master a few hours\nbefore, when sitting surrounded by Christ's disciples in the secrecy\nof the upper room. Divine grace and the baptism of the Spirit did not\nat all change his natural character in this respect. Divine grace,\nwhether granted in ancient or in modern times, does not destroy\nnatural character, which is God's gift to man. It merely refines,\npurifies, elevates it. We find, indeed, a striking illustration of\nthis law of the Divine life in St. Peter's case.\n\nOne of the most convincing proofs of the truth of the New Testament is\nthe identity of character we behold in the representations given of\nSt. Peter by writers who produced their books quite independently of\neach other. St. Paul wrote his Epistle to the Galatians long prior to\nany of the Gospel narratives. Yet St. Paul's picture of St. Peter in\nthe Epistle to the Galatians is exactly the same as that drawn by the\nfour Evangelists alike. St. Paul depicts him as the same intensely\nsympathetic, and therefore the same unstable person whom the\nEvangelists describe. The brave scene in the upper chamber, and the\nscene of cowardice and disgrace in the high priest's palace, were in\nprinciple re-enacted twenty years after, about the year A.D. 53, at\nAntioch. St. Peter was very bold in maintaining the right of Gentile\nfreedom, and hesitated not to live like the Gentile Christians of\nAntioch, so long as none of the strict Jewish Christians of Jerusalem\nknew about it. St. Peter wished, in fact, to stand well with both\nparties, and therefore strove to conciliate both. He was, for the\ntime, a type of that famous character Mr. Facing-two-ways. He lived,\ntherefore, as a Gentile, until some of the Jerusalem brethren arrived\nat Antioch, when he at once quailed before them and retreated,\nbetraying the cause of Christian freedom, and sacrificing, just as men\ndo still, Christian principle and honesty upon the altar of\nself-seeking popularity. St. Peter, we therefore maintain, always\nremained at heart the same character. He was bold and forward for\nChrist so long as all went well, because he was intensely sympathetic;\nbut he had very little of that power of standing alone which marked\nSt. Paul, and nerved him, even though a solitary witness, when the\ncause of truth was involved. This somewhat lengthened argument is\nabsolutely necessary to show the strength of our conclusion: that it\nmust have been an overpowering sense of the awful reality of Christ's\nresurrection and ascension which alone could have overcome this\nnatural weakness of St. Peter, and make him on the day of Pentecost as\nbrave in proclaiming Jesus Christ to his red-handed murderers as he\nwas bold to propose a new Apostle in place of the hapless traitor to\nthe assembled disciples in the upper chamber. St. Peter evidently\nbelieved, and believed with an intense, overwhelming, resistless\nconviction, in the truth of Christ's resurrection and ascension, which\nthus became to him the source of personal courage and of individual\npower.\n\nIII. Again, the tone of St. Peter's sermon was remarkable because of\nits enlarged and enlightened spirituality. It proved the Spirit's\npower in illuminating the human consciousness. St. Peter was rapidly\ngaining a true conception of the nature of the kingdom of God. He\nenunciates that conception in this sermon. He proclaims Christianity,\nin its catholic and universal aspect, when he quotes the prophet Joel\nas predicting the time when the Lord would pour out His Spirit upon\nall flesh. St. Peter does not indeed seem to have realized all at once\nthe full significance of his own teaching. He did not see that his\nwords applied to the Gentiles equally with the Jews, sounding the\ndeath-knell of all national exclusiveness in religion. Had he seen the\nfull meaning of his own words, he would not have hesitated so much\nabout the baptism of Cornelius and the admission of the Gentiles. It\nhas been found true, not only of St. Peter, but of teachers,\nreformers, politicians, statesmen, that they have not at once\nrecognised all the vast issues and undeveloped principles which lay\nwrapped up in their original message. The stress and trial of life\nalone draw them out, at times compelling their authors to regret their\nearlier actions, at other times leading them to follow out with\nintensified vigour the principles and movements which they had\nthemselves set in operation. Luther, when he protested against\nindulgences; Erasmus, when he ridiculed the ignorance of the monks\nand advocated the study of the Greek New Testament; John Hampden, when\nhe refused to pay ship money; or Bishop Ken, when he declined\nobedience to the orders of King James II.;--none of them saw whereunto\ntheir principles would necessarily grow till time had thoroughly\nthreshed their teaching and their actions, separating the husk of\nexternal circumstances, which are so variable, from the kernel of\nprinciple, which is eternally the same, stern, severe, inexorable, in\nits operations. So it was with St. Peter, and still earlier with the\nprophets. They sang of and preached a universal religion, as in this\npassage, but yet none of them realized the full scope and meaning of\nthe words they had used, till a special revelation upon the housetop\nat Joppa compelled St. Peter to grasp and understand and apply the\nprinciples he had been already proclaiming.\n\nIn this respect, indeed, we recognise the greatness, the divinity of\nthe Master Himself towering above the noblest of His followers; above\neven Peter himself, upon whom He pronounced such an eulogium, and\nbestowed such privileges. Our Lord Jesus Christ taught this\nuniversality of Christianity, and expressly recognised it. St. Peter\nindeed taught it in this sermon, but he did not recognise the force of\nhis own words. Jesus Christ not only taught it, but realized the\nmeaning of His teaching. It was indeed no part of Christ's earthly\nministry to preach to the Gentiles. He came to the house of Israel\nalone. Yet how clearly He witnesses, how distinctly He prophesies of\nthe future universality of His kingdom. He heals a centurion's\nservant, proclaiming at the same time that many shall come from the\neast and west, and sit down in the kingdom, while the children of the\nkingdom shall be cast out. He risks His life among the inhabitants of\nthe city where He had been brought up, in order that He may deliver\nthis truth. He repeats it to the woman of Samaria, in order that He\nmay chase away her national superstition. He embodies it in His great\neucharistic prayer for His Apostles and for His Church at large. The\nmore carefully and the more devoutly we study Christ's words, the more\nlofty will be our conception of His personality and character, who\nfrom the very beginning recognised the full force of His message, the\ntrue extent of that Divine society He was about to establish. The\navowed catholicity of Christ's teaching is one of the surest proofs of\nChrist's divinity. He had not to wait as Peter waited, till events\nexplained the meaning of His words; from the beginning He knew all\nthings which should happen.\n\nStill the tone of St. Peter's sermon proved that the Spirit had\nsupernaturally enlightened him. He had already risen to spiritual\nheights undreamt-of hitherto, even by himself. A comparison of a few\npassages proves this. In the sixteenth chapter of St. Matthew we have\nnarrated for us the scene where our Lord extracts from St. Peter his\ncelebrated confession, \"Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living\nGod,\" and then soon after bestows upon him the equally celebrated\nrebuke, \"Get thee behind Me, Satan! thou art a stumblingblock unto Me:\nfor thou mindest not the things of God, but the things of men.\" St.\nPeter, with his horror-struck opposition to the very idea of Christ's\ndeath and suffering, evidently cherished the same notions of the\nkingdom of God, which Christ had come to establish, as James and John\ndid when they petitioned for the highest place in the Master's\nkingdom. This carnal conception of a temporal kingdom and earthly\nforces and human weapons St. Peter retained when he armed himself\nwith a sword and prepared to defend his Master in the Garden of\nGethsemane; and even later still when, after the resurrection, the\nApostles, acting doubtless through Peter as their spokesman, demanded,\n\"Dost Thou at this time restore the kingdom to Israel?\" But the Spirit\nwas vouchsafed, and new power, of which the Master had spoken, was\ngranted, and that power raised Peter above all such low Jewish ideas,\nand the kingdom announced to the Jews is no longer a kingdom of earth,\nwith its carnal weapons and its dignities. He now understood what the\nMaster had taught when He witnessed before Pontius Pilate His good\nconfession, \"My kingdom is not of this world: if My kingdom were of\nthis world, then would My servants fight, that I should not be\ndelivered to the Jews: but now is My kingdom not from hence.\" The\ncarnal conception passes away under the influence of the heavenly\nsolvent, and St. Peter proclaimed a kingdom which was a purely\nspiritual dominion, dealing with remission of sins and a purified\ninterior life, through the operation and indwelling of the Holy Ghost.\nThe power of the Holy Ghost was shown in St. Peter's case by the vast\nand complete change which passed at once over his spiritual ideas and\noutlook. The thoughts and expectations of the pious Jews of\nGalilee--the very class from whom St. Peter sprang--were just then\nshaped and formed by the popular apocalyptic literature of the period,\nas we have already pointed out in the second lecture. The Second\nEpistle of St. Peter and the Epistle of Jude prove that the Galileans\nof that time were careful students of works like the Assumption of\nMoses, the Book of Enoch, and the Ascension of Isaiah, which agree in\nrepresenting the kingdom of God and the reign of the Messiah as\nequivalent to the triumph of the Jewish nation over all foreign\ndominion and bondage. St. Peter and the other eleven Apostles shared\nthese natural ideas and expectations till the Spirit was poured out,\nwhen they learned in a profounder spiritual comprehension to estimate\naright the scope and meaning of our blessed Lord's teaching. St. Peter\ndwells, therefore, in his sermon on Christ's person, His sufferings,\nHis resurrection, His ascension, no longer indeed for the purpose of\nexalting the Jewish nation, or predicting its triumph, but to point a\npurely spiritual lesson. \"Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you\nin the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission of your sins; and ye\nshall receive\"--not honour, riches, temporal freedom, but \"ye shall\nreceive the gift of the Holy Ghost.\" The subject-matter of St. Peter's\nsermon, the change in his tone of teaching, is another great proof of\na supernatural force and power imparted on the Day of Pentecost.\n\nIV. Let us look somewhat farther into the matter of this earliest\nChristian sermon, that we may learn the apostolic view of the\nChristian scheme. Some persons have asserted that the earliest\nChristians were Ebionites,[62] and taught a system of doctrine akin to\nmodern Unitarianism. This theory can best be tested by an appeal to\nthe Acts of the Apostles. What, for instance, was the conception of\nChrist's life, work, and ascended state, which St. Peter presented to\nthe astonished multitude? We must not expect, indeed, to find in this\nsermon a formulated and scientific system of Christian doctrine. St.\nPeter was as yet far too near the great events he declared, far too\nclose to the superhuman personality of Christ, to co-ordinate his\nideas and arrange his views. It is a matter of every-day experience\nthat when a new discovery is suddenly made, when a new revelation\ntakes place in the region of nature, men do not grasp at once all the\nnew relations thereby involved, all the novel applications whereof it\nis capable. The human mind is so limited in its power that it is not\ntill we get some distance away from a great object that we are enabled\nto survey it in the fulness of its outline. Inspiration assisted St.\nPeter, elevated his mind, raised his tone of thought to a higher\nlevel, but it did not reverse this fundamental law under which the\nhuman mind works. Yet St. Peter's discourse contains all the great\nprinciples of Catholic Christianity as opposed to that low view which\nwould represent the earliest Christians as preaching the purely\nhumanitarian scheme of modern Unitarianism. St. Peter taught boldly\nthe miraculous element of Christ's life, describing Him as \"a man\napproved of God by mighty works and wonders and signs which God did\nby Him.\" Yet he did not dwell as much as we might have expected upon\nthe miraculous side of Christ's ministry. In fact, the earliest\nheralds of the Cross did not make as much use of the argument from\nmiracles as we might have expected them to have done. And that for a\nvery simple reason. The inhabitants of the East were so accustomed to\nthe practices of magic that they simply classed the Christian\nmissionaries with magicians. The Jewish explanation of the miracles of\nour Lord is of this description. The Talmudists do not deny that He\nworked miracles, but assert that He achieved them by a special use of\nthe Tetragammaton, or the sacred name of Jehovah, which was known only\nto Himself. The sacred writers and preachers refer, therefore, again\nand again to the miracles of our Saviour, as St. Peter does in the\nsecond chapter, as well-known and admitted facts, whatever explanation\nmay be offered of them, and then turn to other aspects of the\nquestion. The Apostles had, however, a more powerful argument in\nreserve. They preached a spiritual religion, a present peace with God,\na present forgiveness of sins; they point forward to a future life of\nwhich even here below believers possess the earnest and the pledge.\nWe, with our minds steeped in ages of Christian thought and teaching,\ncan have no idea of the convincing self-evidencing force of teaching\nlike that, to a Jew reared up in a system of barren formalism, and\nstill more to a Gentile, with spiritual instincts longing for\nsatisfaction, and which he was expected to satisfy with the\nbloodstained shows of the amphitheatre or with the immoralities and\nimpure banquetings of the pagan temples. To persons in that condition,\nan argument derived from a mere wonderful work brought little\nconviction, for they were well accustomed to behold very marvellous\nand apparently miraculous actions, such as to this day the wandering\njugglers of India exhibit.[63] But when they beheld lives transfused\nby the love of God, and heard pure spiritual teaching such as\nresponded to the profoundest depths of their own hearts, then deep\nanswered unto deep. The preaching of the Cross became indeed the power\nof God unto salvation, because the human soul instinctively felt that\nthe Cross was the medicine fittest for its spiritual maladies.\n\n  [62] The term Ebionite is thus well explained by the Rev. J. M.\n  Fuller in the _Dict. Christ. Biog._, vol. ii., p. 25: \"The term\n  Ebionism expresses conveniently the opinions and practices of the\n  descendants of the Judaizers of the apostolic age, and is very\n  little removed from Judaism. Judaism was for them not so much a\n  preparation for Christianity as an institution eternally good in\n  itself, and but slightly modified in Christianity. Whatever merit\n  Christianity possessed, was possessed as the continuation and\n  supplement of Judaism. The divinity of the old covenant was the\n  only valid guarantee for the truth of the new. Hence the tendency\n  of this class of Ebionites to exalt the old at the expense of the\n  new, to magnify Moses and the prophets, and to allow Jesus Christ\n  to be 'nothing more than a Solomon or a Jonas' (Tertull., _De\n  Carne Christi_, c. 18); 'Legal righteousness was to them the\n  highest type of perfection; the earthly Jerusalem, in spite of its\n  destruction, was an object of adoration, as if it were the House\n  of God' (Iren\u00e6us, _Adv. H\u00e6r._, i., 26); its restoration would take\n  place in the millennial kingdom of Messiah, and the Jews would\n  return there as the manifested chosen people of God.\"\n\n  [63] See Moll's _Hypnotism_, p. 216, in the \"Contemporary Science\n  Series.\"\n\nV. Again, this sermon shows the method of interpreting the Psalms and\nProphets popular among the pious Jews of St. Peter's time. St. Peter's\nmethod of interpretation is identical with that of our Lord, of St.\nPaul, and of the author of the Epistle to the Hebrews. He beholds in\nthe Psalms hints and types of the profoundest doctrines of the Creed.\nWe can see this in both the quotations which he makes. St. Peter finds\nin the sixteenth Psalm a prophecy of the intermediate state of souls\nand of the resurrection of our Lord. \"Thou wilt not leave my soul in\nHades\" is a text which has furnished the basis of the article in the\nApostles' Creed which teaches that Christ descended into hell. It is a\npity indeed that the translation which the last revisers have adopted,\n\"Hades\" instead of \"Hell,\" was not used in the English translation of\nthe Apostles' Creed; for the ordinary reading has misled many a\nthoughtful and serious soul, as if the Creed taught that the pure and\nsinless spirit of the Saviour had been made partaker of the horrors of\neternal misery. Whereas, in truth, the doctrine of Scripture and of\nthe Creed alike merely asserts that our Lord's spirit, when separated\nfrom the body, entered and thereby sanctified and prepared the place\nor state where Christian souls, while separated from their bodies,\nawait the general resurrection of the just and the completion of their\nhappiness. The doctrine of the intermediate state, as taught by Bishop\nPearson and other great divines, is primarily based on two texts, the\npassage before us and the words of our Saviour to the penitent thief,\n\"To-day shalt thou be with Me in Paradise\" (Luke xxiii. 43). This\ndoctrine accurately corresponds with the catholic doctrine of our\nLord's Person. The Arian heresy denied the true deity of our Lord. The\nsecond great heresy was the Apollinarian, which denied His true and\nperfect humanity. The orthodox doctrine taught the tripartite nature\nof man, that is, that there was in man, first, a body, secondly, the\nanimal soul which man possesses in common with the beasts, and which\nperishes at death, and, lastly, the human spirit which is immortal and\nby which he maintains communion with God. Now the Apollinarian heresy\nasserted that Jesus Christ possessed a body and a soul, but denied His\npossession of a spirit. Its theory was that the Divine nature took the\nplace of a true human spirit in Christ, so that Christ was unlike His\nbrethren in this respect, that when the body died, and the animal soul\nperished, He had no human spirit by which He might enter into Hades,\nor dwell in Paradise. The Divine nature was the only portion of the\nIncarnate Lord which then survived. Against this view the words of St.\nPeter testified beforehand, teaching, by his adaptation of David's\nprophecy, that our Lord possessed the fulness of humanity in its\nthreefold division, whereby He was enabled to share the experience and\nlot of His brethren, not only in this life, but also in the\nintermediate state of Hades, wherein the spirits of the blessed dead\nawait re-union with their bodies, and expect in hope the second advent\nof their Lord.[64]\n\n  [64] See the article on \"Apollinaris the Younger\" in the _Dict.\n  Christ. Biog._, vol. i., for a concise account of the Apollinarian\n  heresy.\n\nSt. Peter's interpretation again of the Psalms recognised in David's\nwords a prophecy of the resurrection: \"Neither wilt Thou give Thy Holy\nOne to see corruption,\"--a rendering of the New Testament revisers\nwhich, however literal, is not nearly as vigorous or suggestive as the\nold translation, \"Neither wilt Thou suffer Thy Holy One to see\ncorruption.\" St. Peter then proceeds to point out how impossible it\nwas that this prediction could have been fulfilled in David. David's\nflesh undoubtedly did see corruption, because every one knew where his\ntomb was. St. Peter's speech here touches upon a point where we can\nconfirm his accuracy out of ancient historians. David was buried,\naccording to ancient writers, in the city of David (2 Kings ii. 10).\nThe Rabbis went even further, they determined the time of his death.\nAccording to a writer quoted by that great seventeenth-century\nteacher, Dr. John Lightfoot,[65] \"David died at Pentecost, and all\nIsrael bewailed him, and offered their sacrifices the day following.\"\nAfter the return from Babylon the site of the sepulchre was known, as\nNeh. iii. 16 reports, telling us that Nehemiah the son of Azbuk\nrepaired the wall over against the sepulchre of David; while still\nlater Josephus[66] tells us that Hyrcanus, the high priest, and Herod\nthe Great opened David's tomb, and removed vast treasures from it. St.\nPeter's words on this occasion possess an important evidential\naspect, and suggest one of the gravest difficulties which the\nassailants of the resurrection have to face. St. Peter appealed to the\nevidence of David's tomb as demonstrating the fact that he was dead,\nand that death still held him in its power. Why did not his opponents\nappeal to the testimony of Christ's tomb? It is evident from St.\nPeter's argument that Christ's tomb was empty, and was known to be\nempty. The first witnesses to the resurrection insisted, within a few\nweeks of our Lord's crucifixion, upon this fact, proclaimed it\neverywhere, and the Jews made no attempt to dispute their assertions.\nOur opponents may indeed say, we acknowledge the fact of the emptiness\nof the tomb, but the body of Christ was removed by St. Peter and his\nassociates. How then, we reply, do you account for St. Peter's action?\nDid conscious guilt and hypocrisy make him brave and enthusiastic? If\nthey say, indeed, Peter did not remove the body, but that his\nassociates did, then how are we to account for the conversations St.\nPeter thought he had held with his risen Master, the appearances\nvouchsafed to him, the close converse, \"eating and drinking with him\nafter He was risen from the dead\"? St. Peter, by his appeal to David's\ntomb, and its bearing on the sixteenth Psalm, proves that he believed\nin no ideal resurrection, no phantasm,--no ghost story, to put it\nplainly; but that he taught the doctrine of the resurrection as the\nChurch now accepts it.\n\n  [65] _Hor\u00e6 Hebraic\u00e6_ on Acts ii. 29.\n\n  [66] See Josephus, _Antiqq._, XIII., viii., 4; XVI., vii., 1;\n  _Wars_, I., ii., 5.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII.\n\n_THE FIRSTFRUITS OF PENTECOST._\n\n     \"Now when they heard this, they were pricked in their heart, and\n     said unto Peter and the rest of the apostles, Brethren, what\n     shall we do? And Peter said unto them, Repent ye, and be baptized\n     every one of you in the name of Jesus Christ unto the remission\n     of your sins; and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy Ghost.\n     For to you is the promise, and to your children, and to all that\n     are afar off, even as many as the Lord our God shall call unto\n     Him.\"--ACTS ii. 37-39.\n\n\nThe sermon of St. Peter on the day of Pentecost and the sermon of our\nLord present a striking contrast. Our Lord's sermons were of various\nkinds; they were at times consoling, yet full of instruction and\ndirection. Such, for instance, was the Sermon on the Mount. At other\ntimes His discourses were stern, and full of sharp reproof. Such was\nHis teaching in His parting addresses to the Jews delivered in the\ntemple, recorded in the synoptic Gospels. Yet they apparently failed,\nfor the time at least, in producing any great practical results. In\nfact, His temple discourses served only to irritate His foes, and\narouse their hostility.\n\nSt. Peter delivered a sermon on the day of Pentecost which was quite\nas stern and quite as calculated to irritate, and yet that discourse\nwas crowned with results exceeding those ever achieved by our Lord,\nthough His discourses far surpassed St. Peter's in literary skill, in\nspiritual meaning, in eternal significance and value. Whence came\nthis fact? It simply happened in fulfilment of Christ's own prophecy\nrecorded by St. John, where He predicts that His Apostles shall\nachieve greater works than He had achieved, \"because I go unto the\nFather\" (John xiv. 12). The departure of Christ into the true Holy of\nHolies opened the channel of communication between the eternal Father\nand the waiting Church; the Spirit was poured out through Christ as\nthe channel, and the result was conviction and conversion; leading the\npeople to cry out, in response to St. Peter's simple statement of\nfacts, \"Men and brethren, what shall we do?\"\n\nI. One of the first qualifications absolutely necessary, if a man is\nto write history tellingly and sympathetically, is a historical\nimagination. Unless a man can, from a multitude of separate and often\nindependent details, reconstruct the past, realize it vividly for\nhimself, and then depict it with life and force to his readers, he\nwill utterly fail as a historian. The same historical imagination is\nneeded, too, if we wish to realize the full force of the circumstances\nwe are considering. It is hard even for those who do possess such an\nimagination to throw themselves back into all the circumstances and\nsurroundings of the Apostles at Pentecost; but when we succeed in\ndoing so, then all these circumstances can only be explained on the\nsupposition--the orthodox and catholic supposition--that there must\nhave happened a supernatural occurrence, and that there must have been\ngranted a supernatural power and blessing on the day of Pentecost.\n\nThe courage of St. Peter when preaching his sermon is, as we have\nalready noticed, a proof of the descent of the Spirit. The\nresurrection of his Master had doubtless inspired him with all the\npower of a new idea. But St. Peter's history, both before the day of\nPentecost and after it, amply proved that mere intellectual conviction\ncould be united with grievous moral cowardice. We cannot doubt, for\ninstance, that St. Peter was intellectually convinced of the justice\nof the Gentile claims, and their right to a full equality with the\nJews, when St. Paul felt compelled to withstand him at Antioch. Yet he\nwas possessed with no such spiritual enthusiasm on the question as\nthat which moved St. Paul, or else he never would have fallen into\nsuch lamentable hypocrisy as he displayed on that occasion. The gift\nof the Spirit was needed by St. Peter before an intellectual\nconviction could be transformed into an overwhelming spiritual\nmovement, which swept every obstacle from its path. Again, the conduct\nof the people is a proof of the descent of the Spirit. St. Peter\nassails their actions, charges upon them the murder of the Messiah,\nand proclaims the triumph of Christ over all their machinations. Yet\nthey listen quietly, respectfully, without opposition, as mobs do not\nusually listen to speeches running counter to their prejudices. Some\nwondrous phenomena, such as the gift of tongues, combined with\ndivinely persuasive eloquence, flinging the \u00e6gis of their protection\nover the preacher's defenceless person, must have so struck the minds\nof these fanatical Jews as to keep them quiet while St. Peter spoke.\nBut the result of St. Peter's speech was the chiefest evidence that\nsomething extraordinary must have happened at Jerusalem in the\nearliest days of the Church's history. Secular history tells us, as\nwell as the sacred narrative, that Christianity rose again from what\nseemed its grave at the very spot where, and at the very moment when,\nthe crucifixion had apparently extinguished it for ever.\n\nThe evidence of the historian Tacitus is conclusive upon this point.\nHe lived and flourished all through the time when St. Paul's ministry\nwas most active. He was born about the year 50, and had every\nopportunity of becoming acquainted with the facts concerning the\nexecution of Christ and the rise of Christianity, as they were\ndoubtless laid up in the imperial archives at Rome. His testimony,\nwritten at a period when, as some maintain, neither the Acts of the\nApostles nor the Gospels of the New Testament were in existence,\nexactly tallies with the account given by our sacred books. In his\n_Annals_, book xv., chap. 44, he writes concerning Christianity:\n\"Christus, from whom the name of Christian has its origin, suffered\nthe extreme penalty during the reign of Tiberius at the hands of one\nof our procurators, Pontius Pilate, and a most mischievous\nsuperstition, thus checked for the moment, again broke out in Jud\u00e6a.\"\nSo that the Pagan historian, who knew nothing about Christianity save\nwhat official pagan documents or popular report told him, agrees with\nthe Scriptures that Christianity was checked for a moment by the death\nof its founder, and then gained its earliest and most glorious triumph\non the very scene of its apparent defeat where--and this is a very\nimportant part of the argument--previously the most marvellous wisdom\nand the most striking signs and wonders had utterly failed to gain any\nlarge measure of success. Whence, then, can we explain this fact, or\nhow account for this conscience-stricken cry, \"Men and brethren, what\nshall we do?\" unless we assume, what the narrative of our text\ndeclares, that the Holy Ghost, in all His convincing and converting\npower, had been poured out from on high?\n\nAnd surely our own personal experience daily corroborates this view.\nThere may be intellectual conviction and controversial triumph without\nany spiritual enthusiasm. Sermons may be clever, powerful, convincing,\nand yet, unless the Spirit's power be sought, and an unction from on\nhigh be vouchsafed, no spiritual harvest can be expected. St. Peter's\nsermon, if viewed from a human standpoint, could no more have been\nexpected to succeed than the Master's. The one new element, however,\nwhich now entered into the combination, explains the difference. The\nSpirit was now given, and men therefore hearkened to the servant where\nthey had turned a deaf ear to the Master. It is a lesson much needed\nfor our generation, especially in the case of the young, and of our\nSunday-school system. The religious instruction of youth is much more\ncarefully looked after than it used to be. Primers, handbooks,\nelementary commentaries, catechists' manuals, are published in\nprofusion, and many think that provided a Sunday or day school\ndistinguishes itself in the examination list, which is now the one\ngreat educational test, religious knowledge has been secured. The\ncontrast between St. Peter's success and our Lord's failure warns us\nthat there is a vast difference between religious life and religious\nknowledge. The most irreligious people, the most bitter opponents of\nChristianity, have been produced by schools and systems where\nreligious knowledge was literally crammed down the throats of the\nchildren in a hard, mechanical, unloving style. But let there be no\nmistake. I do not object to organised religious instruction. I think,\nin fact, that a vast amount of Sunday-school teaching is utterly\nworthless for want of such organization. Our Sunday-school system\nwill, in fact, be thoroughly inefficient, if not useless, as a system,\ntill every Sunday-school has its teachers' meeting, presided over by\na competent instructor, who will carefully teach the teachers\nthemselves in a well-ordered, systematic course. But after all this\nhas been done, we must still remember that Christianity is something\nmore than a system of doctrine, or a Divine scheme of philosophy,\nwhich can be worked up like Aristotle's _Ethics_ or Mill's _Logic_.\nChristianity is a Divine power, a power which must be sought in faith,\nin humiliation, and in prayer; and till the Holy Ghost be duly\nhonoured, and His presence be humbly sought, the finest system and the\nmost elaborate organizations will be found devoid of any fruitful life\nand vigour.\n\nII. There are many other points of interest in this passage; let us\ntake them one by one as they offer themselves. The people, seized by\nconviction and in acute pain of conscience, cried out, \"What shall we\ndo?\" St. Peter replied, \"Repent, and be baptized.\" Repent is the\nApostle's first rule,--contrasting very strongly with some modern\nsystems which have been devised on a plan very different from that of\nour Lord and of His Apostles. The preaching of the New Testament is\never the same. John the Baptist came, and his teaching was briefly\nsummed up thus, \"Repent ye, for the kingdom of heaven is at hand.\"\nJohn was removed, and Christ came. The lamp ceased to shine, and then\nthe true Light stood revealed; but the teaching was the same, and the\nMessiah still proclaims, \"Repent, for the kingdom of heaven is at\nhand.\" The system of teaching to which I refer parries the force of\nour Lord's example, as well as of the Baptist's words, by saying, that\nwas the old dispensation. Till Christ died, the new covenant did not\ncome into force, and therefore Christ taught in His public ministry\nmerely as a Jew, speaking on Jewish grounds to Jews. But let us see\nwhether such an explanation, which makes void our Lord's personal\nteachings and commands, is tenable. A reference to this passage\nsufficiently settles this point. The Master departs and the Spirit is\noutpoured, and still the apostolic and inspired teaching is just the\nsame. The cry of the multitude, \"Men and brethren, what shall we do?\"\nproduces, from the illuminated Apostle, the same response, \"Repent,\"\ncoupled with a new requirement, \"Be baptized, every one of you, for\nthe remission of sins.\" And the same message has ever since continued\nto be the basis of all real spiritual work. Simon Magus is found by\nSt. Peter with his mind intellectually convinced, but with his\naffections untouched and his heart spiritually dead. To Simon Magus\nPeter delivers the same message, \"Repent of this thy wickedness, and\npray God if perhaps the thought of thine heart may be forgiven thee.\"\nJohn Wesley was one of the greatest evangelists that ever lived and\nworked for God. During the whole sixty years of his continuous\nlabours, from the time when he taught his pupils in Oxford College and\nthe prisoners in Oxford jail down to the last sermon that he preached,\nhis ministry and teaching were modelled upon that of the New\nTestament,--it was ever a preaching of repentance. He counted it\nutterly useless and hopeless to preach the comforts of the gospel\nbefore he had made men feel and wince beneath the terrors of the law\nand the sense of offended justice. Modern times have seen, however, a\nstrange perversion of the gospel method, and some have taught that\nrepentance was not to be urged or even mentioned to Christian\ncongregations.\n\nThis is one of the leading points which the Plymouth Brethren\nspecially press in the course of their destructive and guerilla-like\nassaults upon the communions of reformed Christendom. The apostolic\ndoctrine of repentance finds no place in their scheme; while again\ntheir teaching on this subject, or something very like it, is often\nreproduced, all unconsciously it may be, by the conductors of those\nmission services so common throughout the country. It is as hard now\nto preserve a just balance in teaching, as it was in the days of St.\nPaul and St. James. It is no easy matter so to preach repentance as\nnot to discourage the truly humble soul; so to proclaim God's\nforgiving love as not to encourage presumption and carelessness.\n\nI have said, indeed, that the doctrine of the Plymouth body on this\npoint is a modern one. It is modern, indeed, when compared with the\ngenuine teaching of the New Testament; but still it is, in fact,\nancient, for it dates back to the Antinomians, who, two hundred and\nfifty years ago, created a great sensation among the Puritan divines.\nA brief historical narrative will prove this. The sermons of Dr.\nTobias Crisp and Fisher's _Marrow of Modern Divinity_ are books whose\nvery titles are now forgotten, and yet the diligent student will there\nfind all those ideas about repentance, justification, and assurance\nwhich are now produced as marvellous new truths, though reprobated two\ncenturies ago as earnestly by Churchmen, like Bull, Beveridge, and\nStillingfleet, as by Howe, and Baxter, and Williams among the\nNonconformists and Puritans. The denial of the necessity for Christian\nrepentance was based, by the logical Antinomians of the olden time,\nupon the theory that Christ bore in His own person the literal sins of\nthe elect; so that an elect person has nothing whatsoever to do with\nhis sins save assure himself, by an act of faith, that his sins were\nforgiven and rendered completely non-existent eighteen hundred years\nago. The formula which they delight in and I have heard used, even by\nChurchmen, is this: \"Believe that you are saved, and then you are\nsaved.\" The result of this teaching in every age, wherever it has\nappeared, is not far to seek. The main stress of all Christian effort\nis devoted not to the attainment of likeness to Christ, or that\npursuit of holiness without which the beatific vision of God is\nimpossible. The great point urged by this party in every age is the\nsupreme importance of assurance which they identify with saving\nfaith.[67] Therefore it is that they discourage, aye, and go farther,\nutterly reject, all teaching of repentance. The words of one of those\nold writers puts the matter in its simplest form. In the reign of\nJames II. and William III. there arose a great controversy in London\ntouching this very point. Dr. Williams, the founder of the well-known\nlibrary in Grafton Street, London, was the leader on one side, while\nthe sermons of Tobias Crisp were the rallying-point on the other.\nWilliams and Baxter maintained the importance of repentance and the\nabsolute necessity of good works for salvation. On the opposite side,\nthe views and doctrines which we have seen pressed in modern times\nwere explicitly stated, but with far more fearlessness and logical\npower than are ever now used. Here are a few of the propositions which\nDr. Williams felt himself bound to refute. I shall give them at some\nlength, that my readers may see how ancient is this heresy. \"The elect\nare discharged from all their sins by the act of God laying their sins\nupon Christ on the cross, and consequently that the elect upon the\ndeath of Christ ceased to be sinners, and ever since sins committed by\nthem are none of their sins, they are the sins of Christ.\" Again, the\nAntinomians taught, in language often still reproduced, \"Men have\nnothing to do in order to salvation, nor is sanctification a jot the\nway of any person to heaven. Nor can the duties and graces of the\nelect, nor even faith itself, do them the least good, or prevent the\nleast evil; while, on the other hand, the grossest sins which the\nelect commit cannot do them the least harm, nor ought they to fear the\nleast hurt from their own sins.\" While again, coming still closer to\nthe point on which we have been insisting, they declared, according to\nDr. Williams, that \"the covenant of grace hath no condition to be\nperformed on man's part, even though in the strength of Christ.\nNeither is faith itself the condition of this covenant, but all the\nsaving benefits of this covenant actually and really belong to the\nelect before they are born, yea, and even against their will;\" while\nas to the nature of faith, they taught \"that saving faith is nothing\nelse but our persuasion or absolute concluding within ourselves that\nour sins are pardoned, and that Christ is ours.\" Hence they derived a\ndogma of their own, directly and plainly contradictory of the teaching\nof the New Testament on the subject of repentance, \"that Christ is\noffered to blasphemers, murderers, and the worst of sinners, that\nthey, remaining ignorant, unconvinced, and resolved in their purpose\nto continue such, may be assured they have a full interest in Christ;\nand this by only concluding in their own minds that Christ is theirs.\"\nIt is plain to any one fully acquainted with modern religious thought,\nthat all the special doctrines of Plymouthism concerning\njustification, repentance, and faith, are involved in the statements\nwhich Dr. Williams set himself to refute, and which he does refute\nmost ably, in works long since consigned to the oblivion of our great\nlibraries, though well worthy of careful study amid the troubles of\nthe present age.[68] Assurance, a present knowledge of a present\nsalvation, present peace, these are the only topics pressed upon the\nunconverted. If the multitude at Jerusalem had asked the same question\nfrom our modern teachers which they asked from the Apostles, \"Men and\nbrethren, what shall we do?\" the reply would have been, \"Do you know\nyou are saved? If not, believe that you are saved, believe that Jesus\ndied for you.\" But not one of them would have given the apostolic\nreply, \"Repent, and be baptized, and ye shall receive the gift of the\nHoly Ghost,\" because the doctrine of repentance and the value and use\nof the sacrament of baptism find no place in this new-fangled scheme.\n\n  [67] This point has been admirably discussed by Dr. Salmon in his\n  sermon on \"Present Salvation\" in his volume of sermons styled _The\n  Reign of Law_, pp. 295-99.\n\n  [68] This controversy between the Antinomian party and the London\n  Nonconformists of the orthodox sort is now almost unknown, and yet\n  it created great excitement in religious circles, conformist and\n  nonconformist, in the time of William III. Bishop Stillingfleet of\n  Worcester, the aged Baxter, and many of the leading divines,\n  joined in it. The echoes of it will be found resounding in the\n  more modern controversy between John Wesley and Fletcher on the\n  one side, and Rowland Hill and Lady Huntingdon on the other, about\n  the year 1770. A brief account of Dr. Daniel Williams will be\n  found in Schaft's edition of Herzog's _Cyclop\u00e6dia_; see also\n  Calamy's _Life_ i., 323.\n\nIII. \"Repent, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus\nChrist for the remission of your sins.\" These words form the basis of\na well-known clause in the Nicene Creed, which says, \"I acknowledge\none baptism for the remission of sins.\" They suggest in addition some\nvery important discussions. The position which baptism occupies in\napostolic teaching is worthy of careful notice. It is pressed upon\nthe multitude as a present duty, and as the result there were three\nthousand persons baptized in that one day. It was just the same with\nCornelius the centurion, and with the Philippian jailer whom St. Paul\nconverted. Baptism did not then succeed a long course of preparatory\ntraining and instruction, as now is the case in the mission field.\nWhen men in apostolic times received the rudiments of the faith, the\nsacrament of baptism was administered, as being the channel or door of\nadmission into Christ's Church; and then, being once admitted into\nGod's house, it was firmly believed that the soul's life would grow\nand develop at a vastly accelerated rate. A grave question here\nsuggests itself, whether baptism of converts from paganism is not\noften too long delayed? The Apostles evidently regarded the Church as\nan hospital where the wounds of the soul were to be healed, as a\nDivine school where the ignorance of the soul was to be dissipated,\nand therefore at once admitted the converts to the sacrament upon the\nprofession of their rudimentary faith. The Church soon reversed this\nprocess, and demanded an amount of spiritual knowledge and a\ndevelopment of spiritual life as the conditions of baptism, which\nshould have been looked for as the result of admission within her\nsacred ranks, forgetful of that great missionary law laid down by the\nMaster Himself, which places baptism first and teaching afterwards,\n\"Go ye, therefore, and make disciples of all the nations, baptizing\nthem into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy Ghost:\nteaching them to observe all things whatsoever I have commanded you.\"\nWe freely admit that there may have been a quickened spiritual\nvitality, a stronger spiritual life, in the case of the earliest\nconverts, enabling them in the course of a few hours to attain a\nspiritual level which demanded a more prolonged effort on the part of\nthe later disciples. When we come to the times of the later apostolic\nage, and inquire from such a book as the lately-discovered _Teaching\nof the Twelve Apostles_, what the practice of the Church was then, we\nsee that experience had taught a more regular, a less hasty course of\naction.[69] The law of baptism in the _Didache_, as the _Teaching of\nthe Twelve Apostles_ is usually called, runs thus: \"Now concerning\nbaptism, thus baptize ye; having first uttered all these things,\nbaptize into the name of the Father and of the Son and of the Holy\nSpirit, in running water. But if thou hast not running water, baptize\nin other water; and if thou canst not in cold, then in warm. But if\nthou hast neither, pour water upon the head thrice, into the name of\nthe Father and Son and Holy Spirit. But before the baptism let the\nbaptizer and the baptized fast, and whatever others can; but the\nbaptized thou shalt command to fast for one or two days before.\"\n\n  [69] As some readers may not know what the work called the\n  _Teaching of the Twelve Apostles_ is, let me explain its history\n  in a few words. Early Christian writers, from the year A.D. 200,\n  speak of a work called the _Teaching of the Twelve Apostles_ in\n  the highest terms. It was evidently, as known by them, a manual\n  used in the catechetical instruction of the young. This manual was\n  known to all the early ages, but disappeared from the view of the\n  Western Church during the middle ages. Nearly twenty years ago it\n  was discovered in Constantinople by the learned Greek Bishop\n  Bryennios, and published by him about ten years ago. It is\n  assigned by some critics to the concluding years of the first\n  century. A convenient and cheap edition of it will be found in the\n  second volume of the Apostolic Fathers in Griffith and Farran's\n  \"Ancient and Modern Library.\" It is called the _Teaching of the\n  Twelve Apostles_, or else the _Didache_, using a Greek title,\n  which has the advantage of being shorter.\n\nFrom these words it is plain that the immediate baptism of converts\nhad ceased probably with the first organization of the Church. A\npause was instituted between the first conviction of the truth and the\ncomplete initiation which baptism involved, but not such a period of\ndelay as the months and even years over which the preparation for\nbaptism was subsequently spread. This delay of baptism sprang out of a\nmistaken view of this Divine sacrament. Men came to look on it as a\ncharm, whereby not merely admission was obtained to the Divine society\nwhich our Lord had founded, but also as bringing with it a complete\npurgation from the sins of a careless life. Men postponed it,\ntherefore, to the very last, so that all sins might be swept away at\nonce. The Emperor Constantine was a good example of this mischievous\nextreme. He was a man who took a kind of interest in theological\nmatters. Like our own King James I., he considered it his duty to\nsettle the religious affairs of his empire, even as his predecessors\nhad done in the days of paganism. He presided over Church councils,\ndictated Church formularies, and exercised the same control in the\nChurch as in the State, being all the time unbaptized. He was scarce\naught but a pagan too in disposition and temper. He retained pagan\nsymbols, titles, and observances, and imbrued his hands, Herod-like,\nin the blood of his own family. Yet he delayed his baptism to the very\nlast, under the notion that then there could be thus effected at one\nstroke the complete removal of the accumulated sins of a lifetime.\n\nIV. The comparison of the passage just quoted from the _Teaching of\nthe Apostles_ with the words of my text suggests other topics. The\nPlymouth Brethren, at least in some of their numerous ramifications,\nand other sects, have grounded upon the words, \"be baptized, every one\nof you, in the name of Jesus Christ,\" a tenet that baptism should not\nbe conferred in the name of the Trinity, but in that of Jesus alone.\nIt is indeed admitted that while our Lord commanded the use of the\nhistoric baptismal formula in the concluding words of St. Matthew's\nGospel, the formula itself is never expressly mentioned in the Acts of\nthe Apostles. Not merely on the day of Pentecost, but on several other\noccasions, Christian baptism is described as if the Trinitarian\nformula was unknown. In the tenth chapter Cornelius and his household\nare described as \"baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.\" In the\nnineteenth chapter St. Paul converts a number of the Baptist's\ndisciples to a fuller and richer faith in Christ. They were at once\n\"baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus.\" But a reference to the\nnewly-discovered _Teaching of the Twelve Apostles_ explains the\ndifficulty, offering an interesting example of the manner in which\nmodern discoveries have helped to illustrate and confirm the Acts of\nthe Apostles. In the _Didache_, as in the Acts, the expression\n\"baptism in the name of the Lord\" is used. The _Didache_ lays down\nwith respect to the communion, \"Let no one eat or drink of your\nEucharist except those baptized into the name of the Lord.\" Yet this\ndoes not exclude the time-honoured formula of Christendom. The same\napostolic manual lays down the rule, a little before this prohibition\nwhich we have just quoted, \"Baptize into the name of the Father and of\nthe Son and of the Holy Spirit,\" and then in the tenth chapter\ndescribes baptism thus administered in the threefold name, as baptism\nin the name of the Lord; and thus it was doubtless in the case of the\nActs. For the sake of brevity St. Luke speaks of Christian baptism as\nbaptism in the name of Christ, never dreaming at the same time that\nthis was exclusive of the divinely appointed formula, as certain\nmoderns have taught. The Acts of the Apostles, and the _Didache_ prove\ntheir primitive character, and show that they deduce their origin from\nthe same early epoch, because they both describe Christian baptism as\nperformed in the name of Christ; and yet this fact does not exclude,\naccording to either, the use of the threefold Name. It is evident\nthat, whether in the Acts or in the _Didache_, baptism in the name of\nthe Father, Son, and Holy Ghost was regarded as baptism especially in\nthe name of Jesus Christ, because while the Father and the Spirit were\nknown to the Jews, the one new element introduced was that of the name\nof Jesus, whom God had made both Lord and Christ. Baptism in the\nTriune Name was emphatically baptism in the name of the Lord. This\npassage, when compared with the _Didache_, sheds light on another\npoint. The mode wherein baptism should be administered has been a\npoint often discussed. Some have maintained the absolutely binding and\nuniversal character of immersion; others have stood at the opposite\nextreme, and upheld the method of sprinkling. The Church of England,\nin union with the ancient Church, has laid down no hard-and-fast rule\non the subject. She recognises immersion as the normal idea in a warm\nEastern climate, but she allows pouring (not sprinkling) of water to\nbe substituted for immersion, which has, as a matter of fact, taken\nthe place in the Western Church of the more regular and ancient\nimmersion.[70] The construction of the ancient Churches, with their\nbaptisteries surrounded with curtains, and the female assistants for\nthe service of their own sex, amply proves that in the ancient Church,\nas to this day in the Eastern Church, baptism was ordinarily\nadministered by immersion. The Church proved its Eastern origin by the\nmode wherein its initial sacrament was at first applied. But it also\nshowed its power of adaptation to Western nations by allowing the\nalternative of pouring water when she dealt with the needs of a colder\nclimate. Yet from the beginning the Church cannot have made the\nvalidity of her sacraments depend upon the quantity of water that was\nused. Take the cases reported in the Acts of the Apostles, or the\nrules prescribed in the apostolic manual, the _Didache_. In the latter\nit is expressly said that pouring with water shall suffice if a larger\nquantity is not at hand. On the day of Pentecost it was clearly\nimpossible to immerse three thousand persons in the city of Jerusalem.\nThe Ethiopian eunuch baptized by St. Philip in the wilderness could\nnot have been immersed. He came to a stream trickling along, scarce\nsufficient to lave his feet, or perhaps rather to a well in the\ndesert; the water was deep down, and reached only, as in the case of\nJacob's well, by a rope or chain. Even if the water could have been\nreached, common sense, not to speak of any higher motive, would have\nforbidden the pollution of an element so needful for human life. The\nbaptism of the eunuch must have been by pouring or affusion, as must\nalso have been the case with the Philippian jailer. The difficulties\nof the case are forgotten when people insist that immersion must\nnecessarily have been the universal rule in ancient times.[71] Men and\nwomen were baptized separately, deaconesses officiating in the case\nof the women. When immersion was used the men descended naked, or\nalmost so, into the baptistery, which was often a building quite\nseparate and distinct from the church, with elaborate arrangements for\nchanging garments.[72] The Church, in the days of earliest freedom and\npurity, left her children free in those points of minor detail,\nrefusing to hamper herself or limit her usefulness by a restriction\nwhich would have equally barred entrance to her fold in the burning\ndeserts or in the ice-bound regions of the frozen north, where baptism\nby immersion would have been equally impossible.\n\n  [70] The method of sprinkling is completely unknown to the Church\n  ancient or modern, and should be absolutely rejected, as tending\n  to a disuse of the element of water at all.\n\n  [71] The case of Perpetua and Felicitas, and the other famous\n  martyrs of Carthage in the beginning of the third century, proves\n  that pouring with water must have sufficed for baptism in a Church\n  so intensely conservative as the Church of North Africa.\n  Tertullian in his writings often reproves its members for the\n  superstitious extremes to which they pushed their conservative\n  feelings, imitating every ancient Christian custom, rational or\n  irrational. Felicitas and her friends were baptized in prison,\n  where they were thrust into a noisome dungeon. How could they have\n  been immersed in such a place? This case is good evidence for the\n  practice of the second century as well.\n\n  [72] See the articles on Baptism and Baptistery in Smith and\n  Cheetham's _Dictionary of Christian Antiquities_, vol. i.\n\nAgain, the extent of the baptismal commission is indicated in this\npassage. \"Make disciples of all the nations by baptism\" are the words\nof our Lord. \"Be baptized, every one of you, for the promise is to you\nand to your children, and to all that are afar off,\" is St. Peter's\napplication of this passage. St. Peter's language admits of various\ninterpretations. Like much of Scripture, the speaker, when uttering\nthese words, meant probably one thing, while the words themselves mean\nsomething much wider, more catholic and universal. When Peter spake\nthus he proclaimed the world-wide character of Christianity, just as\nwhen he quoted the prophet Joel's language he declared the mission of\nthe Comforter in its most catholic aspect, embracing Gentiles as well\nas Jews. \"I will pour out My Spirit upon all flesh.\" But St. Peter\nnever thought of the full scope of his words. He meant, doubtless,\nthat the promise of pardon, and acceptance, and citizenship in the\nheavenly kingdom was to those Jews that were present in Jerusalem, and\nto their children, and to all of the Jews of the dispersion scattered\nafar off amid the Gentiles. Had Peter thought otherwise, had he\nperceived the wider meaning of his words, he would have had no\nhesitation about the reception of the Gentiles, and the baptism of\nCornelius would not have demanded a fresh revelation.\n\nWe often, indeed, invest the Apostles and the writers of Holy\nScripture with an intellectual grasp of a supernatural kind, which\nprevents us recognising that growth in Divine knowledge which found\nplace in them, as it found place in the Divine Master Himself. We\nsilently vote them infallible on every topic, because the Spirit's\npresence was abundantly vouchsafed. The inspiration they enjoyed\nguided their language, and led them to use words which, while\nexpressing their own sentiments, admitted a deeper meaning and\nembraced a wider scope than the speaker intended. It was just the same\nwith the Apostles' words as with their conduct in other respects. The\npresence and inspiration of the Spirit did not make them sinless, did\nnot destroy human infirmities. It did not destroy St. Peter's moral\ncowardice, or St. Paul's hot temper, or St. Barnabas's family\npartiality and nepotism; and neither did that presence illumine at\nonce St. Peter's natural prejudices and intellectual backwardness,\nwhich led him long to restrain the mercies and lovingkindness of the\nLord to His ancient people, though here on the day of Pentecost we\nfind him using language which plainly included the Gentiles as well as\nthe Jews within the covenant of grace. A farther question concerning\nthe language of St. Peter here arises. Do not his words indicate that\nchildren were fit subjects for baptism? Do they not justify the\npractice of infant baptism? I honestly confess that, apart from the\nknown practice of the Jews, St. Peter's language would not necessarily\nmean so much. But then when we take the known practice of the Jews\ninto consideration; when we remember that St. Peter was speaking to a\ncongregation composed of Jews of the dispersion, accustomed, in their\nown missionary work among the heathen, to baptize children as well as\nadults, we must admit that, in the absence of any prohibition to the\ncontrary, the effect of the words of St. Peter upon his hearers must\nhave been this; they would have acted when Christians as they had\nalready done as Jews, and baptized proselytes of every age and\ncondition on their admission to the Christian fold. (See Lightfoot,\n_Hor. Heb._, St. Matt. iii. 6.)\n\nV. Such was St. Peter's sermon on the day of Pentecost. The results of\nit in the unity of doctrine and discipline and the community of goods\nwill come before us in subsequent chapters. One thought stands out\nprominent as we survey this second chapter. Here in very deed we find\nan ample fulfilment of our Lord's promise to St. Peter which has been\nso completely misused and misunderstood, \"I will give unto thee the\nkeys of the kingdom of heaven;\" a passage which has been made one of\nthe scriptural foundations of the monstrous claims of the See of Rome\nto an absolute supremacy alike over the Christian Church and over the\nindividual conscience. In this respect, however, Scripture is its own\nbest interpreter. Just reflect how it is in this matter. Christ first\nof all defines, in the celebrated series of parables related in the\nthirteenth of St. Matthew, what the kingdom of heaven is. It is the\nkingdom He had come to reveal, the society He was establishing, the\nChurch and dispensation of which He is the Head and Chief. To St.\nPeter he gave the keys, or power of opening the doors, of this\nkingdom; and this office St. Peter duly executed. He opened the door\nof the kingdom of heaven to the Jews on the day of Pentecost, and to\nthe Gentiles by the conversion and baptism of Cornelius. St. Peter\nhimself recognised on one occasion the special Providence which\nwatched over him in this matter. He points out, in his speech to the\nbrethren gathered at the first council held at Jerusalem, that \"a good\nwhile ago God made choice among you, that by my mouth the Gentiles\nshould hear the word of the gospel;\" a passage which seems a\nreminiscence of the earlier promise of Christ, which Peter must have\nso well remembered, and a humble recognition of the glorious\nfulfilment which that promise had received at the Divine hand.[73] The\npromise was a purely personal one peculiar to St. Peter, as purely\npersonal as the revelation made to him on the housetop at Joppa, and\nas such received a complete fulfilment in the Church's infant days.\nBut Rome's vaulting ambition would not be content with the fulfilment\nwhich satisfied St. Peter himself, and on this text has been built up\na series of claims which, culminating in the celebrated traffic in\nindulgences, precipitated the great revolution involved in the German\nReformation.\n\n  [73] See Dr. John Lightfoot's _Hor\u00e6 Hebraic\u00e6_, St. Matt. xvi. 19.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VIII.\n\n_THE FIRST MIRACLE._\n\n     \"Now Peter and John were going up into the temple at the hour of\n     prayer, being the ninth hour. And a certain man that was lame\n     from his mother's womb was carried, whom they laid daily at the\n     door of the temple which is called Beautiful, to ask alms of them\n     that entered into the temple; who seeing Peter and John about to\n     go into the temple, asked to receive an alms. And Peter,\n     fastening his eyes upon him, with John, said, Look on us. And he\n     gave heed unto them, expecting to receive something from them.\n     But Peter said, Silver and gold have I none; but what I have,\n     that give I thee. In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth,\n     walk.\"--ACTS iii. 1-6.\n\n\nThe Acts of the Apostles considered as the first history of the Church\nmay be viewed as typical of all ecclesiastical history. It is in this\nrespect a microcosm wherein, on a small scale, we see represented the\ntriumphs and the mistakes, the strength and the weakness, of God's\nelect people throughout the ages. Thus in the incident before us,\nembracing the whole of the third chapter and the greater portion of\nthe fourth, we have set forth a victory of the Apostles, their\nsubsequent persecution, together with the blessing and strength\nvouchsafed in and through that persecution. The time of these events\ncannot be fixed with any great exactness. They occurred probably\nwithin a few weeks or months of the day of Pentecost. That is the\nnearest we can approach to a precise date. There seems indeed to have\nbeen a pause after the excitement and success of Pentecost, and for\nthis we think that we can see a good reason. The Apostles must have\nhad plenty to do with the vast multitude gathered upon the day of\nPentecost, striving to lead them into a fuller knowledge of the faith.\nWe are apt to imagine at first sight that supernatural enlightenment\nwas vouchsafed to these earliest converts, superseding any necessity\nfor careful and patient instruction, so that upon their baptism the\nwhole work was completed. But when we reflect upon other cases in the\nNew Testament, we can easily see that the three thousand souls\nconverted by St. Peter's speech must have needed and received a great\ndeal of teaching. The Church of Corinth was one of St. Paul's own\nfounding, and upon it he lavished careful attention for a year and a\nhalf; yet we see from his Epistles to the Corinthians how much\nguidance was needed by them even in elementary questions of morals,\nhow rapidly the Church fell into grossest licence when deprived of his\npersonal ministrations. Theophilus again, to whom the Acts were\naddressed by St. Luke, is reminded, in the preface of the Gospel, of\nthe catechetical instruction in Christian truth which he had\nreceived.[74] Assuredly, then, the small band of the twelve Apostles\nand their few male assistants must have had their hands full enough\nfor many weeks after Pentecost, endeavouring to give their converts\nsuch an insight into the great principles of the faith as would enable\nthem to carry back to their various distant homes a competent\nknowledge of the laws and doctrines of the new dispensation. A few\nmoments' reflection will show that the newly-baptized had much to\nlearn about Christ,--the facts of His life, His doctrines, sacraments,\nthe constitution of His Church, and the position allotted to the\nApostles,--before they could be considered sufficiently rooted and\ngrounded in the faith. And if this was so with converts from Judaism,\nthen how much more must such careful instruction after baptism have\nbeen found needful in the case of the Gentiles when the time came for\ntheir admission? Much preparatory work had been done for the Jews by\ntheir Old Testament training. They had not much to learn from the\nApostles in practical morality; they had a right conception of God,\nHis character, and His service. But as for the Pagans, their whole\nintellectual and spiritual life, all their notions and conceptions\nabout God, and life, and morals, were all hopelessly wrong. The\nApostles and the earliest teachers had then, and missionaries amongst\nthe heathen have still, to make a clearance of the whole pagan ground,\nlaying a new foundation, and erecting thereon a new structure,\nintellectual, moral, and spiritual. St. Paul recognised the vast\nimportance of such diligent pastoral work and catechetical training\nafter baptism when writing his pastoral Epistles, because bitter\nexperience had taught him their value. At Corinth for more than two\nyears, and at Ephesus for three years, he had laboured diligently in\nbuilding up his converts. And notwithstanding all his exertions, how\nquickly the Corinthians fell away into pagan habits of unbridled\nlicence as soon as he left them! The Acts of the Apostles by this\npause in evangelistic work which we here trace, strikes a note of\nwarning concerning the future missionary work of the Church, speaking\nclearly about the necessity of diligent pastoral care, and\nprophesying of the certain relapses into wild excesses which may be\nexpected to occur among those who have only been just rescued from the\nmire of paganism. This is one explanation of the pause in apostolic\nwork we here seem to perceive.\n\n  [74] The apostolic manual called the _Teaching of the Twelve\n  Apostles_, to which we have already referred, proves that the\n  Church of the Apostles' day required catechisms and introductory\n  formularies just as much as we do.\n\nAgain, the analogy of the faith, the laws of human nature, suggest the\nneed of a period of restful calm after the Pentecostal excitement, and\nprevious to any new and successful advance. So it has been in God's\ndealing in the past. The excitement connected with the first attempts\nmade by Moses to rescue his people was followed by the forty years'\nexile in Midian, which again led to their triumphant rescue from\nbondage. Elijah's victory over Jezebel and her idol priests was\nfollowed by the retreat of forty days to Horeb. The excitement of our\nLord's baptism was succeeded by the forty days' fast in the\nwilderness. The human mind cannot be ever on the strain. Excitement\nmust be followed by repose, or else the course of action adopted will\nbe hurried, imperfect, transient in its results. The works of God in\nnature are never such. As a modern poet has nobly sung:--\n\n    \"One lesson, Nature, let me learn of thee;\n    One lesson which in every wind is blown;\n    One lesson of two duties kept at one,\n    Though the loud world proclaim their enmity;--\n    Of toil unsever'd from tranquillity;\n    Of labour, that in lasting fruit outgrows\n    Far noisier schemes, accomplished in repose,\n    Too great for haste, too high for rivalry.\"[75]\n\n  [75] Sonnet by Matthew Arnold on Rural Work.\n\nThere is great calm and dignity in nature; and there was great calm\nand dignity in grace when God was laying the foundations of His\nkingdom by the hands of His Apostles. There never was an age which\nmore needed this lesson of nature and grace alike than this nineteenth\ncentury.[76] The religion of the age has been infected by the Spirit\nof the world, and men think that the fortresses of sin and ignorance\nwill fall, provided there be used a sufficient quantity of noise, of\npuffing, and of excitement. I do not wish to find the slightest fault\nwith energetic action. The Church of Christ has been in the past\nperhaps a little too dignified in its methods and operations. It has\nhesitated, where St. Paul never would have hesitated, to adapt itself\nto changed circumstances, and has ofttimes refused, like a timorous\nlawyer, to venture on some new and untried sphere because there was no\nprecedent. The Reformers and their first followers were an\nillustration of this. The utter lack of missionary spirit and effort\namong the Reformers is one of the darkest blots upon their history.\nHow sadly they contrast with the Jesuit Society, which started into\nexistence at the same period of the world's history. No one is more\nkeenly alive to the faults and shortcomings of that world-renowned\nSociety than I am, yet I heartily admire the energy and devotion with\nwhich, from its earliest days, the Society of Jesus flung itself into\nmissionary work, endeavouring to repair the losses which the Papacy\nsustained in Europe by fresh conquests in India, China, and America.\nThe Reformers were so busy in bitter controversies among themselves,\nand so intent upon endeavouring to fathom God's decrees and purposes,\nthat they forgot the primary duty of the Church to spread the light\nand truth which it has received; they were deficient in Christian\nenergy, and thus brought upon themselves the blight and curse of\nspiritual barrenness. Controversy evermore brings with it the\ndesolation of spiritual leanness. Men cease to really believe in a\nreligion which they only know upon paper, and only think of as a thing\nto be discussed. Living contact with human souls and human wants saves\nreligion, because it translates it from a mere dead dogma into a\nliving fact. A man who has come to doubt doctrinal statements which he\nhas never verified, will be brought back to faith by the irresistible\nevidence of sinful lives changed and broken hearts comforted.\n\n  [76] This line of thought has been already touched upon in Lect.\n  IV., pp. 61-3.\n\nThe Church of England has again and again manifested this spirit. In\nIreland she refused to give the nation the Liturgy and the Bible in\nthe Irish tongue. In Wales she hesitated in condescending to vulgar\nwants, and long refused to bestow a native episcopate upon the Celts\nof England, because the evil tradition of centuries, down from the age\nof the Norman conquest, had ordained that no Welshman should be a\nbishop. But still, while I am opposed to the Church binding itself in\nfetters of that kind, I am equally of opinion that there is a middle\ncourse between dignified idleness and extravagant carnal\nsensationalism. I have heard efforts advocated for home missionary\nwork which, I am sure, would never have met with the approbation of\nthe first missionaries of the Cross. The Church must be energetic, but\nthe Church need not adopt the methods of quack medicine-sellers, or of\nthe strolling circus. Such methods were not unknown in the primitive\nages of the Church.\n\nThe preachers of the stoic philosophy strove in the second century to\ncounteract the efforts of the Christian Church by reforming paganism,\nand by preaching it vigorously. They adopted every means to attract\nthe public attention and interest--eccentricity, vulgarity,\ncoarseness; and yet they failed, and were defeated by a society which\ntrusted, not in human devices and carnal forces, but in the\nsupernatural power of God the Holy Ghost.[77] The Montanists again,\ntowards the close of the second century, fell into the same error. The\nMontanists are in many respects one of the most interesting of the\nearly Christian sects. They tried to retain the customs and the spirit\nof apostolic Christianity, but they mistook the true methods of\naction. They confounded physical excitement with spiritual fervour,\nand strove by weird dances and strange cries, borrowed from the pagans\nof the Phrygian mountains, to bind to themselves the sweet influences\nof the Heavenly Comforter. The Church of that period diligently\navoided the error of pagan stoics and of Christian schismatics. As it\nwas in the second century, so was it just after Pentecost. The Church\nfollowed close upon its Master's footsteps, of whom it was said, \"He\nshall not strive nor cry, neither shall any man hear His voice in the\nstreets,\" and developed in quietness and retirement the spiritual life\nof the thousands who had crowded into the door of faith which Peter\nhad opened.\n\n  [77] This episode in the history of paganism in the second century\n  is very little known. It has been well depicted in an interesting\n  little book, _The Age of the Antonines_, by the Rev. W. W. Capes,\n  M.A., which only costs a couple of shillings. Chap. VIII. should\n  specially be consulted.\n\nAgain there is a lesson in this period of pause and seclusion, not\nmerely for the Church in its corporate capacity, but for individual\nsouls. The spirit of interior sanctity is nourished most chiefly\nduring such times of retirement and obscurity. Obscurity has indeed\nmany advantages when viewed from the standpoint of the spiritual life.\nPublicity and high station and multiplicity of affairs bring with them\nmany disadvantages. They deprive us of that peace and calm which\nenable a man to contrast the things of time with those of eternity,\nand to value them in their true light. Over-activity, fussiness, even\nin the most spiritual matters, is a dire enemy of true heart belief,\nand therefore of true strength of spirit. The Master Himself felt it\nso. There were many coming and going, and they had no leisure so much\nas to eat. Then it was He said, \"Come ye into the desert, that ye may\nrest awhile.\" The excitement and strain of Pentecost, and all the\nsubsequent efforts which Pentecost entailed, must have told seriously\nupon the Apostles, and so they imitated the Master, that they might\nrenew their exhausted vigour at its primal fountain. How many a man,\nbusy in missions, or preaching, or the thousand other forms which\nevangelistic and religious work now takes, would be infinitely better\nif this apostolic lesson were duly learned. How many a terrible\nscandal has arisen simply from a disregard and contempt for it. If men\nwill think they can labour, as this passage shows the Apostles could\nnot, without thought and reflection, and interior communion with God;\nif they will spend all their strength in external effort and never\nmake time and secure seasons for spiritual replenishment, they may\ncreate much noise for a time, but their toil will be fruitless, and if\nthey are saved themselves it will only be as by fire.\n\nThe period of retirement and obscurity came however to an end at last.\nThe Apostles never intended to form an order purely contemplative.\nSuch an idea, in fact, never could have entered into the mind of one\nof those early Christians. They remembered that their Master had\nexpressly said, \"Ye are the salt of the earth,\" and salt is useless if\nkept stored up in a vessel by itself, and never applied to any object\nwhere its curative properties might have free scope. When the spirit\nof Eastern gnosticism, springing from the dualism of Persia, invaded\nthe Church, and gained a permanent hold within it, then men began to\ndespise their bodies and life, and all that life entails. Like Eastern\nfanatics, they desired to abstract themselves as much as possible from\nthe things and duties of the present, and they invented, or rather\nadopted from the farther East, purely contemplative orders, which\nspent useless lives, striving, like their prototypes of India, to rise\nsuperior to the positions which God had assigned them. Such were not\nthe Apostles. They used rest, contemplation, they did not abuse them;\nand when their tone and power was restored, they issued forth again\nupon the field of religious activity, and joined in the public worship\nof the crowd. \"Peter and John went up together into the temple at the\nhour of prayer, being the ninth hour.\"\n\nThe action of Peter and John in thus frequenting the temple worship\ngives us a glimpse into the state of feeling and thought which\nprevailed then and for a great many years after in the Church of\nJerusalem. The Church of that city naturally clung longest of all to\nthe old Jewish connection. Eusebius, in his _Ecclesiastical History_\n(iv. 5), tells us that the first fifteen bishops of Jerusalem were\nHebrews, and that all the members of the Church were Hebrews too. It\nwas only, in fact, upon the final destruction of Jerusalem, which\nhappened under Hadrian, after the rebellion of Barcochba, A.D. 135,\nthat the Church of Jerusalem shook itself completely free from the\ntrammels of Judaism.[78]\n\n  [78] See the article on Barcochba in the _Dict. Christ. Biog._,\n  vol. i.\n\nBut in those earliest days of the Church the Apostles naturally could\nnot recognise the course of the Divine development. They cherished the\nnotion that Judaism and Christianity would be found compatible the one\nwith the other. They had not yet recognised what St. Stephen first of\nall, and then St. Paul, and most chiefly the author of the Hebrews,\ncame to recognise, that Judaism and Christianity as full-blown systems\nwere absolutely antagonistic; that the Jewish dispensation was\nobsolete, antiquated, and must utterly and for ever fade before a\nnobler dispensation that was once for all to take its place. It is\nhard for us to realize the feelings of the Apostles at this great\ntransition epoch, and yet it is well for us to do so, because their\nconduct is full of lessons specially suited for seasons of transition.\nThe Apostles never seem to me more clearly under the direction of the\nDivine Spirit than in their whole course of action at this time. They\nproceeded in faith, but not in haste. They held firmly to the truths\nthey had gained, and they waited patiently upon God, till the course\nof His providence showed them how to co-ordinate the old system with\nthe new truths,--until He had taught them what parts of the ancient\ncovenant should be dropped and what retained. Their conduct has\ninstruction very suitable for the present age, when God is giving His\nChurch fresh light on many a question through the investigations of\nscience. Well, indeed, will it be for Christian people to have their\nhearts grounded, as the Apostles' were, in a spirit of Divine love,\nknowing personally in whom they have believed; and then, strong in\nthat inner revelation of God to the spirit, which surpasses in might\nand power all other evidences, they may patiently wait the evolution\nof His purposes. The prophetic declaration is true for every age, \"He\nthat believeth will not make haste.\"\n\nThe circumstances of the first apostolic miracle were simple enough.\nPeter and John were going up into the temple at the hour of the\nevening sacrifice. They were entering the temple by the gate well\nknown to all dwellers at Jerusalem as the Beautiful Gate, and there\nthey met the cripple whom they healed in the name and by the power of\nJesus of Nazareth. The spot where this miracle was performed was\nfamiliar to the Jews of that day, though its precise locality is still\na matter of controversy. Some hold that this Beautiful Gate was one\ndescribed by Josephus in his _Wars of the Jews_ (v. 5, 3) as\nsurpassingly splendid, being composed of Corinthian brass, and called\nthe Gate of Nicanor. Others think that it was the gate Shushan, which\nstood in the neighbourhood of Solomon's Porch; while others identify\nit with the gate Chulda, which led into the Court of the Gentiles. It\nwas most probably the first of these which was situated on the eastern\nside of the outermost court of the temple, looking towards the valley\nof Kedron.[79] Here was gathered a crowd of beggars, such as then\nfrequented the temples of the pagans as well as of the Jews, and such\nas still throng the approaches of Eastern and many Western churches.\nOut of this crowd one man addressed Peter and John, asking an alms.\nThis man was well known to the regular worshippers in the temple. He\nwas a cripple, and one long accustomed to haunt the same spot, for he\nwas above forty years old. Peter replied to his prayer in the\nwell-known words, \"Silver and gold have I none: but what I have, that\ngive I thee. In the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, walk;\" and then\nhe performed one of the few miracles ascribed to the direct action of\nSt. Peter. Here it may be asked, Why was this miracle of healing the\ncripple at the temple gate the only one recorded of those earliest\nsigns and wonders wrought by apostolic hands? The answer seems to be\nthreefold: this miracle was typical of the Church's future work; it\nwas the occasion of St. Peter's testimony before the Sanhedrin; and it\nled up to the first persecution which the Jewish authorities raised\nagainst the Church.\n\n  [79] See Lightfoot's _Hor\u00e6 Hebraic\u00e6_, Acts iii. 2. De Vogu\u00eb in his\n  great work on the Temple of Jerusalem, fully gives the traditions\n  which attached themselves to this gate. In the fourth century it\n  was celebrated by the Christian poet Prudentius, and in the fifth\n  or sixth a gate called the Golden Gate was erected on its site.\n  This gate still remains, and De Vogu\u00eb in his plates vii. to xii.\n  gives a series of views of it.\n\nViewing the Acts of the Apostles as a type of what all Church history\nwas to be, and a Divine exposition of the principles which should\nguide the Church in times of suffering as well as in times of action,\nwe can see good and solid reasons for the insertion of this particular\nnarrative. First, then, this miracle was typical of the Church's work,\nfor it was a beggar that was healed, and this beggar lay helpless and\nhopeless at the very doors of the temple. The beggar typified humanity\nat large. He was laid, indeed, in a splendid position,--before him was\nextended the magnificent panorama of hills which stood round about\nJerusalem; above him rose the splendours of the building upon which\nthe Herods had lavished the riches and wonders of their gorgeous\nconceptions,--but he was nothing the better for all this material\ngrandeur till touched by the power which lay in the name of Jesus of\nNazareth. And the beggar of the Beautiful Gate was in all these\nrespects the fittest object for St. Peter's earliest public miracle,\nbecause he was exactly typical of mankind's state. Humanity, Jew and\nGentile alike, lay at the very gate of God's temple of the universe.\nMen could discourse learnedly, too, concerning that sanctuary, and\nthey could admire its beauteous proportions. Poets, philosophers, and\nwise men had treated of the temple of the universe in works which can\nnever be surpassed, but all the while they lay outside its sacred\nprecincts. They had no power to stand up and enter in, leaping, and\nwalking, and praising God. It is very important, in this age of\nmaterial civilization and of intellectual advance, that the Church\nshould insist vigorously upon the great truth taught by this miracle.\nThe age of the Incarnation must have seemed to the men of that time\nthe very acme of civilization and of knowledge; and yet the testimony\nof all history and of all literature is that just then mankind was in\nthe most deplorable state of moral and spiritual degradation. The\nwitness of St. Paul in the first chapter of the Epistle to the Romans\nis amply borne out by the testimony, conscious and unconscious, of\npagan antiquity. A writer of the last century, now to a great extent\nforgotten, Dr. Leland by name, investigated this point in the fullest\nmanner in his great work on the necessity of a Divine revelation,\ndemonstrating that mankind, even when highly civilized, educated,\ncultured, lies like a beggar at the door of the temple, till touched\nby the hand and power of the Incarnate God.\n\nThis miracle of healing the beggar was typical of the Church's work\nagain, because it was a beggar who thus received a blessing when the\nChurch roused itself to the discharge of its great mission. The first\nman healed and benefited by St. Peter was a poor man, and the Church's\nwork has ever led her to deal with the poor, and to interest herself\nmost keenly in their well-being. This first miracle is typical of\nChristian work, because Christianity is essentially the religion of\nthe masses. At times, indeed, Christian teachers may have seemed to\nrank themselves on the side of power and riches alone; but then men\nshould take good care to distinguish between the inconsistent conduct\nof Christian teachers and the essential principles of Christianity.\nThe founder of Christianity was a carpenter, and its earliest\nbenediction pronounced the blessedness of those that are poor in\nspirit, and ever since the greatest triumphs of Christianity have been\ngained amongst the poor. Christian hagiology, Christian legend, and\nChristian history alike, have combined to attest this truth. The\nChurch calendar is decorated with lists of saints, some of them of\nvery doubtful character, while others of them have stories connected\nwith their careers full of meaning and rich with lessons for this\ngeneration. Thus, for instance, October 25th is the feast of a martyr,\nSt. Crispin, from whom the great trade of shoemakers is designated.\n\"The sons of St. Crispin\" is a title going back to the earliest ages\nof the Church's love. St. Crispin was a Roman senator, brought up and\nnourished amid all that luxury with which pagan Rome surrounded the\nchildren of the highest classes. Crispin became acquainted with the\nfaith of the followers of the Carpenter of Nazareth amid the dire\npersecutions which marked the final struggle between Christianity and\npaganism under the Emperor Diocletian during the earliest years of the\nfourth century. He was baptized, and feeling that a life of gilded\nidleness was inconsistent with his Master's example, he resigned his\nplace, position, and property, retired into Gaul, and there devoted\nhimself to the trade of shoemaking, as being one which could be\nexercised in great quietness. Manual toil was at that time considered\nan occupation fitted only for slaves, for we ought never to forget\nthat the dignity of labour is no human invention, nor is it part of\nthe religions of nature. Nay, rather, the dignity of idleness was the\ndoctrine of Greek and Roman paganism. St. Crispin recognized the great\nlaw of labour taught by Christ and taught by His Apostles, and became\nthe most successful of shoemakers, preaching at the same time the\ngospel with such success that the persecutors selected him as one of\ntheir earliest victims in that district of Gaul where he resided.[80]\nIt has been just the same in every age. The true power of the Church\nhas been ever displayed in preaching the gospel to the children of\ntoil. An interesting example of this may be gathered from an age which\nwe are apt to think specially dark. In medi\u00e6val times the secular or\nparochial clergy became very lax and careless throughout these\nislands. The mendicant friars, the followers of St. Francis, came and\nsettled everywhere in the slums of the great towns, devoting\nthemselves to the work of preaching to the poor. And they speedily\nattained a marvellous power over men. The Franciscans in the\nthirteenth century were exactly like the early Methodists in the last\ncentury. Both societies placed their chapels among the abodes of want;\nthere they laboured, and there they triumphed, because they worked in\nthe spirit and power indicated by this first recorded miracle of the\nbeggar healed at the temple gate.[81] It will be a bad day for\nreligion and for society when the Church ceases to be the Church and\nchampion of the weak, the down-trodden, the destitute. Here, however,\nlies a danger. Its work in this direction must be done in no one-sided\nspirit. Christianity must never adopt the language or the tone of the\nmere agitator. I fear that some who now pose as specially the\nchampions of the poor are missing that spirit of mental balance and\nfairness which will alone enable them to be Christian champions,\nbecause seeking to do justice unto all men. It is easy enough to\nflatter any class, rich or poor; and it is specially tempting to do so\nwhen the class so flattered chances to hold the reins of political\npower. It is very hard to render to all their due, shrinking not from\ntelling the truth, even when unpleasant, and reproving the faults of\nthose whose side we favour. A Christianity which triumphs through\nappeals to popular prejudices, and seeks a mere temporary advantage by\nriding on the crest of popular ignorance, is not the religion taught\nby Christ and His Apostles.\n\n  [80] The story of St. Crispin is told at length by the Bollandists\n  in the _Acta Sanctorum_ for October, vol. xi., pp. 495 to 540. St.\n  Chrysostom in one of his orations paints a vigorous picture of two\n  imaginary cities, one where all the people were rich, with an\n  abundance of slaves, and therefore dependent on others for all the\n  necessaries and conveniences of life; the other city inhabited by\n  none but poor freemen, where everyone laboured at manual toil and\n  provided for his wants by his own exertions. He then asks which is\n  the happier; unhesitatingly giving the palm to the city of\n  poverty, labour, and freedom.\n\n  [81] The analogy I have drawn between the early Methodists and the\n  Franciscans will be amply borne out if one will take the trouble,\n  in any of our large towns, to notice where the Franciscans have\n  left traces of their existence. The name Francis Street and the\n  ruins of Franciscan foundations will almost always be found just\n  outside the original walls, among the slums of the people. This\n  point is noticed by Mr. Brewer in his interesting introduction to\n  the _Monumenta Franciscana_, in the Rolls Series. He says, on p.\n  xvii, \"In London, York, Warwick, Oxford, Bristol, Lynn, and\n  elsewhere, the Franciscan convents stood in the suburbs and\n  abutted on the city walls. They made choice of the low, swampy,\n  and undrained spots in the large towns, amongst the poorest and\n  most neglected quarters.\" The Franciscans proved that splendid\n  material structures are not necessary for great spiritual\n  triumphs. An investigation of the topography of our older towns\n  would show exactly the same great truth about early Methodist\n  chapels. They were almost always placed in poor localities, as the\n  name of Preaching Lane, often still connected with them, shows.\n  See my _Ireland and the Anglo-Norman Church_, pp. 331-34, for more\n  on this point.\n\nBut yet, again, the conversion of this beggar was effected through his\nhealing; and here we see a type of the Church's future work. The\nChurch, then, as represented by the Apostles, did not despise the\nbody, or regard efforts after bodily blessing beneath its dignity.\nSpiritual work went hand in hand with healing power. This has been a\nlesson which Christian people, at home and abroad, have been slow\nenough to learn. The whole principle, for instance, of medical\nmissions is covered by this action on the part of the Apostles. For a\nlong time the Church thought it was its solitary duty to preach the\ngospel by word of mouth, and it has only been in comparatively modern\ndays that men have learned that one of the most powerful means of\npreaching the gospel was the exercise of the healing art; for surely\nif the gift of healing, conveyed from God by supernatural means, could\nbe an effective help towards evangelistic work, the same gift of\nhealing, conveyed from precisely the same source by natural channels\nindeed, but channels none the less truly Divine, can still be\neffective to the same great end. The Church should count no human\ninterest beyond its sway, and should take the keenest interest and\nclaim a living share in every portion of life's work. At home or\nabroad the bodies of men are her care as well as their souls, because\nbodies as well as souls have been redeemed by Jesus Christ, and both\nalike await their perfection and glorification through Jesus Christ.\nSchools, hospitals, sanitary and medical science, the dwellings and\namusements of the people, trade, commerce, all should be the care of\nthe Church, and should be based on Christ's law, and carried out on\nChristian principles. The Incarnation of Christ has given a deeper\nmeaning than he ever dreamt of to the pagan poet's words,--\n\n  \"Homo sum; humani nihil a me alienum puto.\"\n\nWe think, furthermore, that this miracle has been divinely recorded\nbecause it was the occasion of St. Peter's testimony both to the\npeople and to their rulers. Let us strive to realize the circumstances\nand the locality. Peter and John, going up to the temple, met this\nimpotent beggar at the entrance to the Court of the Women, into which\nthe Beautiful Gate led. Our modern notions about churches confuse all\ntrue conceptions concerning the temple. The vast majority of people,\nwhen they think of the temple, form to themselves an idea of a vast\ncathedral, when they ought instead to think of a large college, with\nsquare succeeding square and court following court. As Peter and John\nascended the temple hill they came first to the Court of the Gentiles,\nwhich served as a market, and in which a crowd of mendicants were\nassembled to solicit alms. Out of this Court of the Gentiles the\nBeautiful Gate led into the Court of the Women, which was reserved for\nthe ordinary religious offices of the Jewish people.[82] One of the\nbeggars addressed the Apostles, soliciting a gift; whereupon the\nApostles worked the miracle of healing. Upon this a crowd collected,\nattracted by the excited conduct of the man who had received such an\nunexpected blessing. They ran together after the manner of all crowds\nwhich assemble so easily and so rapidly in a city, and then, hurrying\ninto the cloister, called Solomon's Porch, which was a remnant of the\nancient temple, heard the address of St. Peter. It must have been a\nspot filled with cherished memories for the Apostle. Every Jew\nnaturally venerated this cloister, because it was Solomon's; just as\nmen in the grandest modern cathedral still love to point out the\nsmallest relic of the original structure out of which the modern\nbuilding grew. At San Clemente, in Rome, the priests delight to show\nthe primitive structure where they say St. Clement ministered about\nthe year A.D. 100.[83] At York the vergers will indicate far down in\nthe crypt the fragments of the earliest Saxon church, which once stood\nwhere that splendid cathedral now rears its lofty arches. So, too, the\nJews naturally cherished this link of continuity between the ancient\nand the modern temples. But for St. Peter this Solomon's Porch must\nhave had special memories over and above the patriotic ideas that were\nlinked with it. He could not forget that the very last feast of the\nDedication which the Master had seen on earth, He walked in this\nporch, and there in His conversation with the Jews claimed an equality\nwith the Father which led them to make an attempt on His life.\n\n  [82] See Lightfoot on the Court of the Women in his _Chorography\n  of the Holy Land_, chap. xix. in his _Works_, vol. ii., p. 29. The\n  best modern description will be found in Count de Vogu\u00eb's _Le\n  Temple de J\u00e9rusalem_, pp. 53-6 (Paris, 1864), with which may be\n  compared a paper on the site of the Temple by Colonel Warren in\n  the _Transactions_ of the Society of Biblical Arch\u00e6ology, vol.\n  vii., pp. 308-30.\n\n  [83] In the new edition of _Clement of Rome_, by Bishop Lightfoot,\n  vol. i., pp. 92, 93, there is an account of this ancient church.\n\nHere, then, it was that within twelve months the Apostle Peter makes a\nsimilar claim on his Master's behalf, in a discourse which extends\nfrom the twelfth to the twenty-sixth verse of the third chapter. That\ndiscourse has two distinct divisions. It sets forth, first the claims,\ndignity, and nature of Christ, and then makes a personal appeal to the\nmen of Jerusalem. St. Peter begins his sermon with an act of profound\nself-renunciation. When the Apostle saw the people running together,\nhe answered and said, \"Ye men of Israel, why marvel ye at this? or why\nlook ye so earnestly on us, as though by our own power or holiness we\nmade this man to walk?\" The same spirit of renunciation appears at an\nearlier stage of the miracle. When the beggar solicited an alms, Peter\nsaid, \"Silver and gold have I none: but what I have, that give I thee.\nIn the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, walk.\" One point is at once\nmanifest when St. Peter's conduct is compared with his Master's under\nsimilar circumstances. St. Peter acts as a delegate and a servant;\nJesus Christ acted as a principal, a master,--the Prince of Life, as\nSt. Peter calls Him in the fifteenth verse of this third chapter. The\ndistinction between the miracles of Christ and the miracles of the\nApostles declares the New Testament conception of Christ's dignity and\nperson. Compare, for instance, the narrative of the healing of the\nimpotent man at the Pool of Bethesda, told in the fifth chapter of St.\nJohn, with that of the healing of the impotent man laid at the temple\ngate. Christ said, \"Rise, take up thy bed, and walk.\" He made no\nappeal, He used no prayer, He invoked no higher name. He simply spake\nand it was done. The Apostle Peter, the rock-man, the leader of the\napostolic band, takes the greatest care to assure the multitude that\nhe had himself neither power nor efficacy in this matter, and that\nall the power lay in the Name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth. Now,\nleaving aside for the moment any question of the truth or reality of\nthese two miracles, is it not manifest from these two parallel cases\nthat the New Testament writings place Jesus Christ on an exalted\nstandpoint far above that of any human being whatsoever; in a\nposition, in fact, which from the boldness and magnificence of its\nclaims can only be fitly described in the language of the Nicene Creed\nas \"God of God, Light of Light, Very God of very God.\"\n\nSt. Peter's words teach another lesson. They are typical of the spirit\nwhich should ever animate the Christian preacher or teacher. They turn\nthe attention of his hearers wholly away from himself, and exalt\nChrist Jesus alone. And such has ever been and ever must be the secret\nof successful preaching. Self-consciousness, in fact, injures the\neffect of any kind of labour. The man who does not lose himself in his\nwork, of whatever kind--political, philanthropic, or religious--his\nwork may be, but is ever thinking of himself and the results of his\nactions upon his own prospects, can never become an enthusiast; and it\nis only enthusiasm and enthusiastic action which can really affect\nmankind. And surely the preacher of Christian truth who thinks of\nhimself rather than of the great subject of his mission, who only\npreaches that he may be thought clever or eloquent, debases the\nChristian pulpit, and must be an awful failure in that day when God\nshall judge the secrets of men by Jesus Christ. St. Peter here, John\nthe Baptist in still earlier days, ought to be the models for\nChristian teachers. Men came to the Baptist, did him homage, yielded\nhim respect; but he pointed them from himself to Christ. He was a\nlamp, but Christ was the light; and the Baptist's teaching reached\nits highest, noblest level when he turned his disciples' gaze away\nfrom himself, saying, \"Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the\nsin of the world.\" Let me, however, not be mistaken. I do not mean to\nsay that a Christian teacher, whether writer or speaker, should never\nallow a single reflex thought as to his own performances to rise in\nhis mind, should never desire to preach ably or eloquently. A man who\ncould set up such a standard must be ignorant of human nature and of\nScripture alike. One cannot, for instance, read St. Paul's Second\nEpistle to the Corinthians without noting how sorely he was touched by\nhis own unpopularity amongst them and the successful machinations of\nhis opponents. Daily experience will prove that no attainments in the\nspiritual life will prevent a man from valuing the esteem and\nrecognition of his fellow men. But such a desire to please and be\nsuccessful must be kept in stern control. It must not be the great\nobject of a Christian. It must never lead him to keep back one jot or\ntittle of the counsel of God. The natural desire to please must be\nclosely watched. It easily leads men to idolatry, to the installation\nof human fame, power, influence, gold, in the place of that Eternal\nSaviour whose worship ought to be the great end and the true life of\nthe soul.\n\nSt. Peter, after his act of abnegation and self-humiliation, then\nproceeds to set forth the claims and to narrate the history of Jesus\nChrist, and in doing so enters into the particulars of His trial and\ncondemnation, which he charges boldly home upon his listeners, who, as\ndistinguished from his audience on the day of Pentecost, were most\nprobably the permanent residents in Jerusalem. The Apostle narrates\nthe events of our Lord's trial just as we find them in the\nGospels--His interviews with Pilate, the outcry of the people, the\nchoice and character of Barabbas. He asserts His resurrection, and\nimplies, without asserting, His ascension, by the words, \"Whom the\nheavens must receive until the times of the restitution of all\nthings.\" The primitive gospel of St. Peter was just like that taught\nby St. Paul, as he puts it forward in the fifteenth chapter of First\nof Corinthians, \"Brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I have\nreceived, how that Christ died for our sins according to the\nscriptures: and that He was buried, and that He rose again.\" The\nearliest message, proclaimed by St. Paul or St. Peter, was one and the\nsame; it was a declaration of certain historical facts, and what it\nwas then such it must ever remain. Whenever the historical facts are\ndisbelieved, then men may speak beautifully of the spiritual ideas and\nthe moral truths symbolised by Christianity, just as Hypatia and the\nNeo-Platonists of Alexandria could speak in picturesque language\nconcerning the deep poetic meaning of the old pagan legends. Poetry\nand legends are, however, the veriest husks wherewith to support an\nimmortal soul under the great trials of life; and when that day comes\nfor any soul when the great historical facts set forth in the Creed\nare rejected, then Christianity may remain in name and appearance, but\nit will cease to be the gospel of joy and peace and comfort, for the\nhuman soul can only sustain itself in the supreme moments of sorrow,\nseparation, and death by the solid realities of fact and truth.\n\nSt. Peter, again, in this sermon leaves us a type of what Christian\nsermons should be. He was plain spoken, yet he was tender and\nsympathetic. He was plain spoken. He does not hesitate to state the\ncrimes of the Jews in the most vigorous language. God had glorified\nHis servant Jesus, but they delivered Him up to the agents of the\nidolatrous Romans; they denied Him, desired a murderer to be granted\nin place of the Prince of Life; urged His death when even the Roman\njudge would have let Him go,--and all this they had done to the\nlong-expected and long-desired Messiah. Peter is not wanting in\nplainness of speech. And the Christian teacher, whether clergyman or\nlayman, whether a pastor in the pulpit, a teacher in the\nSunday-school, or the editor of a newspaper at his desk, ought to\ncultivate and exercise the same Christian boldness and courage. The\ntrue Christian ideal will be attained by following St. Peter's example\non this occasion. He combined boldness and prudence, courage and\ngentleness. He spoke the truth in all honesty, but he did not adopt an\nattitude or use language which would arouse unnecessary opposition.\nWhat courtesy, what sympathetic, charitable politeness is manifest in\nSt. Peter's excuse, which he offers in the course of his sermon for\nthe Jews, rulers and people alike! \"And now, brethren, I wot that\nthrough ignorance ye did it, as did also your rulers.\" Some men think\nthat prudence is an idea which should never enter the head of a\nmessenger of Christ, though no one impressed more frequently the\nnecessity of that great virtue than did the Master, for He knew how\neasily imprudence may undo all the good that faithfulness might\notherwise attain. Wisdom like the serpent's, gentleness like the\ndove's, was Christ's own rule for His Apostles. Boldness, and courage,\nand honesty, are blessed things, but they should be guided and\nmoderated by charity. Earthly motives easily insinuate themselves in\nevery man's heart, and when a man feels urged on to declare some\nunpleasant truth, or to raise a violent and determined opposition, he\nshould search diligently, lest that while he imagines himself\nfollowing a heavenly vision and obeying a Divine command, he should be\nonly yielding to mere human suggestions of pride, or partisanship, or\nuncharitableness.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IX.\n\n_THE FIRST PERSECUTION._\n\n     \"And as they spake unto the people, the priests, and the captain\n     of the temple, and the Sadducees, came upon them, being grieved\n     that they taught the people, and preached through Jesus the\n     resurrection from the dead. And they laid hands on them, and put\n     them in hold unto the next day: for it was now eventide.... And\n     it came to pass on the morrow, that their rulers, and elders, and\n     scribes, and Annas the high priest, and Caiaphas, and John, and\n     Alexander, and as many as were of the kindred of the high priest,\n     were gathered together at Jerusalem. And when they had set them\n     in the midst, they asked, By what power, or by what name, have ye\n     done this?\"--ACTS iv. 1-3, 5-7.\n\n\nThe fourth chapter of the Acts brings the Apostles into their first\ncontact with the Jewish state organisation. It shows us the secret\nsprings which led to the first persecution, typical of the fiercest\nthat ever raged against the Church, and displays the calm conviction\nand moral strength by which the Apostles were sustained. The\nhistorical and local circumstances narrated by St. Luke bear all the\nmarks of truth.\n\nI. The miracle of healing the lame man had taken place in Solomon's\nporch or portico, which overlooked the Kedron valley, and was an usual\nresort as a promenade or public walk, specially in winter. Thus we\nread, in St. John x. 22, 23, that our Lord walked in Solomon's porch,\nand it was winter. Solomon's porch looked towards the rising sun, and\nwas therefore a warm and sunny spot. It was popular with the\ninhabitants of Jerusalem for the same reason which led the Cistercians\nof the Middle Ages, when building magnificent fabrics like Fountains\nAbbey, to place their cloister garths, where exercise was taken, on\nthe southern side of their churches, that there they might receive and\nenjoy the heat and light of our winter sun.\n\nThe crowd which was collected by Peter soon attracted the attention of\nthe temple authorities, who had a regular police under their control.\nThe Jews were permitted by the Romans to exercise the most unlimited\nfreedom within the bounds of the temple to secure its sanctity. In\nordinary cases the Romans reserved to themselves the power of capital\npunishment, but in the case of the temple and its profanation they\nallowed it to the Sanhedrin.\n\nAn interesting proof of this fact has come to light of late years,\nattesting, in a most striking manner, the accuracy of the Acts of the\nApostles. Josephus, in his _Antiquities_ (xv. xi. 5), when describing\nthe Holy Place, tells us that the royal cloisters of the temple had\nthree walks, formed by four rows of pillars, with which they were\nadorned. The outermost walk was open to all, but the central walk was\ncut off by a stone wall, on which were inscriptions forbidding\nforeigners--that is, Gentiles--to enter under pain of death. Now in\nthe twenty-first chapter of the Acts we read that a supposed breach of\nthis law was the occasion of the riot against St. Paul, wherein he\nnarrowly escaped death.[84]\n\n  [84] \"Moreover he brought Greeks also into the temple, and hath\n  defiled this holy place. For they had before seen with him in the\n  city Trophimus the Ephesian, whom they supposed that Paul had\n  brought into the temple\" (Acts xxi. 28, 29).\n\nThe Jews were actually about to kill St. Paul when the soldiers came\nupon them. To this fact, Tertullus the orator, when speaking before\nthe governor Felix, alludes, and that without rebuke, saying of St.\nPaul, \"Whom we took, and would have judged according to our law.\"[85]\nHere comes in our illustration of the Acts derived from modern\narch\u00e6ological research. Some few years ago there was discovered at\nJerusalem, and there is now laid up in the Sultan's Museum at\nConstantinople, a sculptured and inscribed stone, containing one of\nthese very Greek notices upon which the Apostles must have looked,\nwarning Gentiles not to enter within the sacred bounds, and denouncing\nagainst transgressors the penalty of death which the Jews sought to\ninflict upon St. Paul.[86] Now it was just the same about the other\ndetails of the temple worship. Inside the sacred area the Jewish law\nwas supreme, and Jewish penalties were enacted. In order, therefore,\nthat the temple might be duly protected the priests watched in three\nplaces, and the Levites in twenty-one places, in addition to all their\nother duties connected with the offering of the sacrifices and the\ndetails of public worship. These guards discharged the duties of a\nsacred or temple police, and their captain was called the captain of\nthe temple, or, as he is denominated in the Talmud, \"The ruler of the\nmountain of the House.\"\n\n  [85] Acts xxiv. 6.\n\n  [86] I have never seen a notice of this interesting biblical\n  discovery in any English magazine or journal. There is an account\n  of it in the _Revue Arch\u00e9ologique_ for 1885, series iii., t. v.,\n  p. 241, by Clermont-Ganneau, its original discoverer. He calls it\n  an authentic page of the New Testament.\n\nMuch confusion has, indeed, arisen concerning this official. He has\nbeen confounded, for instance, with the captain of the neighbouring\nfortress of Antonia. The Romans had erected a strong square castle,\nwith lofty walls, and towers at the four corners, just north of the\ntemple, and connected with it by a covered way. One of these flanking\ntowers was one hundred and five feet high, and overlooked all the\ntemple area, so that when a riot began the soldiers could hurry to\nquell it. The captain of the garrison which held this tower is called,\nin our version, the chief captain, or, more properly, the chiliarch,\nor colonel of a regiment, as we should put it in modern phraseology.\nBut this official had nothing whatever to say to questions of Jewish\nlaw or ritual. He was simply responsible for the peace of Jerusalem;\nhe represented the governor, who lived at C\u00e6sarea, and had no concern\nwith the disputes which might arise amongst the Jews. But it was quite\notherwise with the captain of the temple. He was a Jewish official,\ntook cognisance of Jewish disputes, and was responsible in matters of\nJewish discipline which Roman law respected and upheld, but in which\nit did not interfere. This purely Jewish official, a priest by\nprofession, appointed by the Jewish authorities, and responsible to\nthem alone, appears prominently on three distinct occasions. In the\ntwenty-second of St. Luke's Gospel we have the account of the betrayal\nby the traitor Judas. When he was meditating that action he went first\nto the chief priests and the captains to consult with them. A Roman\ncommander, an Italian, a Gaul, or possibly even a Briton,--as he might\nhave been, for the Romans were accustomed to bring their Western\nlegionaries into the East, as in turn they garrisoned Britain with the\nmen of Syria,--would have cared very little whether a Galilean teacher\nwas arrested or not. But it was quite natural that a Jewish and a\ntemple official should have been interested in this question. While\nagain on this occasion, and once more upon the arrest of the Apostles\nafter the death of Ananias and Sapphira, the captain of the temple\nappears as one of the highest Jewish officials.[87]\n\n  [87] See more on this point in Dr. John Lightfoot's _Hor\u00e6\n  Hebraic\u00e6_, Luke xxii. 4 and Acts iv.\n\nII. We see too the secret source whence the opposition to apostolic\nteaching arose. The priests and the captain of the temple and the\nSadducees came upon them. The captain was roused into action by the\nSadducees, who were mingled in the crowd, and heard the words of the\nApostles proclaiming the resurrection of Jesus Christ, \"being grieved\nthat they taught the people, and preached through Jesus the\nresurrection from the dead.\" It is noteworthy how perpetually the\nSadducees appear as the special antagonists of Christianity during\nthese earliest years. Our Lord's denunciations of the Pharisees were\nso often repeated that we are apt to think of them as the leading\nopponents of Christianity during the apostolic age. And yet this is a\nmistake. There was an important difference between the Master's\nteaching and that of His disciples, which accounts for the changed\ncharacter of the opposition. Our Lord's teaching came specially into\nconflict with the Pharisees and their mode of thought. He denounced\nmere external worship, and asserted the spiritual and inner character\nof true religion. That was the great staple of his message. The\nApostles, on the other hand, testified and enforced above everything\nelse the risen, the glorified, and the continuous existence in the\nspirit world of the Man Christ Jesus. And thus they came into conflict\nwith the central doctrine of Sadduceism which denied a future life.\nHence at Jerusalem, at least, the Sadducees were ever the chief\npersecutors of the Apostles, while the Pharisees were favourable to\nChristianity, or at least neutral. At the meeting of the Sanhedrin of\nwhich we read in the fifth chapter, Gamaliel, a Pharisee, proposes the\ndischarge of the imprisoned Apostles. In the twenty-third chapter,\nwhen St. Paul is placed before the same Sanhedrin the Pharisees take\nhis side, while the Sadducees are his bitter opponents. We never read\nof a Sadducee embracing Christianity; while St. Paul, the greatest\nchampion of the gospel, was gained from the ranks of the Pharisees.\nThis fact sheds light on the character of the apostolic teaching. It\nwas not any system of evanescent Christianity; it was not a system of\nmere ethical teaching; it was not a system where the facts of Christ's\nlife were whittled away, where, for instance, His resurrection was\nexplained as a mere symbolical idea, typifying the resurrection of the\nsoul from the death of sin to the life of holiness; for in that case\nthe Sadducees would not have troubled themselves on this occasion to\noppose such teaching. But apostolic Christianity was a system which\nbased itself on a risen Saviour, and involved, as its fundamental\nideas, the doctrines of a future life and of a spiritual world, and of\na resurrection where body and soul would be again united.\n\nSome strange representations have been from time to time put forward\nas to the nature of apostolic and specially of Pauline Christianity,\nbut one of the strangest is what we may call the Matthew Arnold\ntheory, which makes the apostolic teaching a poor, emasculated thing,\ndevoid of any real foundation of historical fact. If Christianity, as\nproclaimed by St. Peter and St. Paul, was of this type, why, we ask,\nwas it so bitterly opposed by the Sadducees? They at any rate\nunderstood the Apostles to teach and preach a Jesus Christ literally\nrisen from the dead and ascended in the truth of human nature into\nthat spiritual and unseen world whose existence they denied. For the\nSadducees were materialists pure and simple. As such they prevailed\namong the rich. The poor, then as ever, furnished very few adherents\nto a creed which may satisfy persons who are enjoying the good things\nof this life. It has very few attractions, however, for those with\nwhom life is dealing hardly, and to whom the world presents itself in\na stern aspect alone. It is no wonder the new teaching concerning a\nrisen Messiah should have excited the hatred of the rich Sadducees,\nand should have been welcomed by the poorer classes, among whom the\nPharisees had their followers. The system of the Sadducees was a\nreligion indeed. It satisfied a want, for man can never do without\nsome kind of a religion. It recognised God and His revelation to\nMoses. It asserted, however, that the Mosaic revelation contained\nnothing concerning a future life, or the doctrine of immortality. It\nwas a religion, therefore, without fear of a future, and which could\nnever indeed excite any enthusiasm, but was very satisfactory and\nagreeable for the prosperous few as long as they were in prosperity\nand in health. Peter and John came preaching a very disturbing\ndoctrine to this class of people. If Peter's view of life was right,\ntheirs was all wrong. It was no wonder that the Sadducees brought upon\nthem the priests and the captain of the temple, and summoned the\nSanhedrin to deal with them. We should have done the same had we been\nin their position. In every age, indeed, the bitterest persecutors of\nChristianity have been men like the Sadducees. It has often been said\nthat persecution on the part of a sceptic or of an unbeliever is\nillogical. The Sadducees were unbelievers as regards a future life.\nWhat matter to them was it, then, if the Apostles preached a future\nlife, and convinced the people of its truth? But logic is always\npushed impetuously aside when it comes in contact with deep-rooted\nhuman feeling, and the Sadducees instinctively felt that the conflict\nbetween themselves and the Apostles was a deadly one; one or other\nparty must perish. And so it was under the Roman empire. The ruling\nclasses of the empire were essentially infidel, or, to use a modern\nterm, we should rather perhaps style them agnostic. They regarded the\nChristian teaching as a noxious enthusiasm. They could not understand\nwhy Christians should not offer incense to the deity of the emperor,\nor perform any act of idolatry which was commanded by state law, and\nregarded their refusal as an act of treason. They had no idea of\nconscience, because they were essentially like the Sadducees.[88] So\nwas it again in the days of the first French Revolution, and so we\nfind it still. The men who reject all spiritual existence, and hold a\nSadducean creed, fear the power of Christian enthusiasm and Christian\nlove, and had they only the power would crush it as sternly and\nremorselessly as the Sadducees desired to do in apostolic times, or as\nthe Roman emperors did from the days of Nero to those of Diocletian.\n\n  [88] Pliny in his _Letters_, x., 97, writes to the Emperor Trajan\n  expressing this view when telling how he dealt with the Christians\n  of Bithynia: \"I asked them whether they were Christians: if they\n  admitted it, I repeated the question twice, and threatened them\n  with punishment; if they persisted, I ordered them to be at once\n  punished: for I was persuaded, whatever the nature of their\n  opinions might be, a contumacious and inflexible obstinacy\n  certainly deserved correction.\" A philosopher could not understand\n  a man keeping a conscience in opposition to the law. The martyrs\n  vindicated the freedom of the Christian conscience.\n\nIII. The Apostles were arrested in the evening and put in prison. The\ntemple had an abundance of chambers and apartments which could be used\nas prisons, or, as the Sanhedrin were accustomed to sit in a basilica\nerected in the court outside the Beautiful Gate, and inside Solomon's\nporch or cloister, there was probably a cell for prisoners connected\nwith it. The next morning St. Peter and St. John were brought up\nbefore the court which met daily in this basilica, immediately after\nthe hour of the morning sacrifices. We can realize the scene, for the\npersons mentioned as having taken part in the trial are historical\ncharacters. The Sanhedrin sat in a semicircle, with the president in\nthe centre, while opposite were three benches for the scholars of the\nSanhedrists, who thus practically learned law. The Sanhedrin, when\ncomplete, consisted of seventy-one members, comprising chief priests,\nthe elders of the people, and the most renowned of the rabbis; but\ntwenty-three formed a quorum competent to transact business.[89] The\nhigh priest when present, as Annas and Caiaphas both were on this\noccasion, naturally exercised great influence, though he was not\nnecessarily president of the council. The sacred writer has been\naccused, indeed, of a historical mistake, both here and in his Gospel\n(iii. 2), in making Annas high priest when Caiaphas was actually\noccupying that office, Annas, his father-in-law, having been\npreviously deposed by the Romans. St. Luke seems to me, on the other\nhand, thus to prove his strict accuracy. Caiaphas was of course the\nlegal high priest so far as the Romans were concerned. They recognised\nhim as such, and delivered to him the high priest's official robes,\nwhen necessary for the fulfilment of his great office, keeping them\nsafe at other times in the tower of Antonia. But then, as I have\nalready said, so long as the Roman law and constitutions were observed\non great state occasions, they allowed the Jews a large amount of Home\nRule in the management of their domestic religious concerns, and were\nnot keen in marking offences, if only the offences were not thrust\ninto public notice. Annas was recognised by the Sanhedrin and by the\nJews at large as the true high priest, Caiaphas as the legal or\nofficial one; and they kept themselves on the safe side, as far as the\nRomans were concerned, by uniting them in their official consultations\nin the Sanhedrin. The Sadducees, doubtless, on this occasion made\nevery effort that their own party should attend the council meeting,\nfeeling the importance of crushing the rising sect in the very bud. We\nread, therefore, that with the high priest came \"John, and Alexander,\nand as many as were of the kindred of the high priest.\"[90] The\npriestly families were at this period the aristocracy of the Jews, and\nthey all belonged to the Sadducees, in opposition to the democracy who\nfavoured the Pharisees. These latter, indeed, had their own\nrepresentatives in the Sanhedrin, as we shall see on a later\noccasion,--men of light and leading, like Gamaliel; but the permanent\nofficials of the Jewish senate were for the most part Sadducees, and\nwe know how easily the permanent officials can pack a popular body,\nsuch as the Sanhedrin was, with their own adherents, when any special\nend is to be attained.\n\n  [89] It would take more space than we can now afford to explain\n  the constitution of the Sanhedrin. There is an admirable and\n  concise article on the subject in Schaff's edition of Herzog's\n  _Cyclop\u00e6dia_, and another in Kitto's _Biblical Cyclop\u00e6dia_. Dr.\n  John Lightfoot describes it in his _Hor\u00e6 Hebraic\u00e6_, which we so\n  often quote. The most extensive and minute account of it will,\n  however, be found in Latin in Selden's treatise _De Synedriis_,\n  illustrated with plates.\n\n  [90] Dr. John Lightfoot, in his _Hor\u00e6 Hebraic\u00e6_, chap. iv., verse\n  6, identifies John mentioned in this passage with Rabban Jochanan\n  ben Zaccai, the priest who lived till after the destruction of\n  Jerusalem, and prophesied of that event forty years before it\n  occurred. He was, however, a Pharisee, though the vast majority of\n  the priests were Sadducees. Lightfoot tells the following story of\n  him from the ancient Jewish books: \"Forty years before the\n  destruction of the city, when the gates of the temple flew open of\n  their own accord, Rabban Jochanan ben Zaccai said, O Temple,\n  Temple, why dost thou disturb thyself? I know thy end, that thou\n  shalt be destroyed, for so the prophet Zechary hath spoken\n  concerning thee, Open thy doors, O Lebanon, that the fire may\n  devour thy cedar.\" He lived to be one hundred and twenty years\n  old. He was permitted by Titus to remove the Sanhedrin to Jabneh\n  on the destruction of the city, where he presided over it.\n\nIt was before such a hostile audience that the Apostles were now\ncalled to witness, and here they first proved the power of the Divine\nwords, \"When they deliver you up, take no thought how or what ye shall\nspeak: for it shall be given you in that same hour what ye shall\nspeak.\"[91] St. Peter threw himself upon God, and found that his trust\nwas not in vain. He was at the moment of need filled with the Holy\nGhost, and enabled to testify with a power which defeated his\ndetermined foes. He had a special promise from the Master, and he\nacted upon it. But we must observe that this promise was a special\none, limited to the Apostles and to those in every age placed in\nsimilar circumstances. This promise is no general one. It was given to\nthe Apostles to free them from care, anxiety, and forethought as to\nthe matter and form of the addresses which they should deliver when\nsuddenly called to speak before assemblies like the Sanhedrin. Under\nsuch circumstances they would have no time to prepare speeches\nsuitable for ears trained in all the arts of oratory as then practised\namongst the ancients, whether Jews or Gentiles. So their Master gave\nthem an assurance of strength and skill such as none of their\nadversaries could equal or resist. \"It is not ye that speak, but the\nSpirit of your Father which speaketh in you.\" This promise has been,\nhowever, misunderstood and abused when applied to ordinary\ncircumstances. It was good for the Apostles, and it is good for\nChristian men placed under similar conditions, persecuted for the sake\nof their testimony, and deprived of the ordinary means of preparation.\nBut it is not a promise authorising Christian teachers, clerical or\nlay, to dispense with careful thought and industrious study when\ncommunicating the truths of Christianity, or applying the great\nprinciples contained in the Bible to the manifold circumstances of\nmodern life. Christ certainly told the Apostles not to premeditate\nbeforehand what they should say. When relying, however, upon the\npromises of God, we should carefully seek to ascertain how far they\nare limited, and how far they apply to ourselves; else we may be\nputting our trust in words upon which we have no right to depend. A\npresumptuous trust is next door to an act of rebellion, and has often\nled to unbelief. Our Lord said to the Apostles, \"Provide neither gold\nnor silver nor brass in your purses,\" because He would provide for\nthem; but He did not say so to us, and if we go out into life\npresumptuously relying upon a passage of Scripture that does not\nbelong to us, unbelief may overtake us as a strong man armed when we\nfind ourselves disappointed. And so, too, with this promise of\nsupernatural guidance which the Apostles enjoyed, and which saints of\nevery age have proved true when placed in similar circumstances; it is\na special one for them, it does not apply to us. Christian teachers,\nwhether in the pulpit, or the Sunday school, or the home circle, must\nstill depend as completely as the Apostles did upon the Holy Ghost as\nthe source of all successful teaching. But in the case of the Apostles\nthe inspiration was immediate and direct. In the case of ordinary\nChristians like ourselves placed amid all the helps which God's\nprovidence gives, we must use study, thought, meditation, prayer,\nexperience of life, as channels through which the same inspiration is\nconveyed to us. The Society of Friends, when George Fox established\nit, testified on behalf of a great truth when it asserted that the\nHoly Ghost dwelt still, as in apostolic times, in the whole body of\nthe Church, and spake still through the experience of Christian\npeople. Their testimony was a great truth and a much-needed one in the\nmiddle of the seventeenth century, when Churchmen were in danger of\nturning religion into a great machine of state police, such as the\nGreek Church became under the earlier Christian emperors, and when\nPuritans were inclined to smother all religious enthusiasm beneath\ntheir intense zeal for cold, rigid scholastic dogmas and confessions\nof faith. The early Friends came proclaiming a Divine power still\npresent, a Church of God still energised and inspired as of old, and\nit was a revelation for many an earnest soul. But they made a great\nmistake, and pushed a great truth to a pernicious extreme, when they\ntaught that this inspiration was inconsistent with forethought and\nstudy on the part of their teachers as to the substance and character\nof their public ministrations. The Society of Friends teaches that\nmen should speak forth to their assemblies just what the Holy Ghost\nreveals on the spot, without any effort on their own part, such as\nmeditation and study involve. They have acted without a promise, and\nthey have fared accordingly. That Society has been noted for its\nphilanthropy, for the peaceful, gentle lives of its members; but it\nhas not been noted for expository power, and its public teachers have\nheld but a low place among those well-instructed scribes who bring\nforth out of God's treasures things new and old.[92]\n\n  [91] St. Matt. x. 19.\n\n  [92] The decay in the numbers of the Society of Friends may be\n  traced to several causes. The Society has done its work. Its\n  testimony has borne its appointed fruit, and, like other systems\n  which have sufficiently acted their part, it is passing away. One\n  of the most evident causes of its decline is the decay of\n  preaching consequent upon their notion of immediate inspiration.\n  The advance of general education has told on their members, who\n  cannot endure the unprepared and undigested expositions which\n  satisfied their fathers. The decay in the preaching power of the\n  Evangelical party in the Church of England may, in many cases, be\n  traced to much the same source. No Church or society can now hope\n  to retain the allegiance of its educated members which does not\n  recognise that the help of the Holy Spirit is vouchsafed through\n  the ordinary channels of study and meditation.\n\nExpositors of Scripture, teachers of Divine truth, whether in the\npublic congregation or in a Sunday-school class, must prepare\nthemselves by thought, study, and prayer; then, having made the way of\nthe Lord clear, and removed the hindrances which barred His path, we\nmay humbly trust that the Holy Ghost will speak by us and through us,\nbecause we honour Him by our self-denial, and cease to offer burnt\nsacrifices unto the Lord of that which costs us nothing.[93]\n\n  [93] As a Sunday school teacher for more than thirty years I feel\n  bound to say that half the teaching in Sunday schools is useless\n  from want of preparation on the part of teachers. A large\n  proportion of them never think of opening their Bibles beforehand\n  and studying the appointed lessons, jotting down a number of\n  leading questions to assist their memories. The result is, that\n  after a few questions suggested by the text, the teacher turns to\n  read a story or indulge in gossip with his pupils. A well-prepared\n  teacher will never find an hour too long for the work appointed. I\n  have already said something on pp. 131, 132, above, upon this\n  subject, which is an extremely important and practical one.\n\nIV. The address of St. Peter to the Sanhedrin is marked by the same\ncharacteristics as we find in those directed to the people. It is\nkindly, for though the Apostles could speak sternly and severely just\nas their Master did at times, yet they have left in this special\ndirection an example to public speakers and public teachers of truth\nin every age. They strove first of all to put themselves in sympathy\nas much as possible with their audience. They did not despise the art\nof the rhetorician which teaches a speaker to begin by conciliating\nthe good feelings of his audience towards himself. To the people St.\nPeter began, \"Ye men of Israel;\" he recognises their cherished\nprivileges, as well as their sacred memories,--\"Ye are the children of\nthe prophets, and of the covenant which God made with our fathers.\" To\nthe bitterly hostile audience of the Sanhedrin, where the Sadducees\nlargely predominated, Peter's exordium is profoundly respectful and\ncourteous, \"Ye rulers of the people, and elders of Israel.\" The\nApostles and the earliest Evangelists did not despise human feelings\nor outrage human sentiment when setting out to preach Christ\ncrucified. We have known men so wrong-headed that they were never\nhappy unless their efforts to do good or spread their peculiar\nopinions eventuated in a riot. When evangelistic work or any kind of\nattempt to spread opinions evokes violent opposition, that very\nopposition often arises from the injudicious conduct of the\npromoters; and then when the opposition is once evoked or a riot\ncaused, charity departs, passion and violent feelings are aroused, and\nall hope of good evaporates for the time. There was profound practical\nwisdom in that command of our Lord to His Apostles, \"When they\npersecute you in this city, flee ye into another,\" even taking the\nmatter only from the standpoint of a man anxious to spread his\npeculiar sentiments.\n\nThe Apostle's address was kindly, but it was plain-spoken. The\nSanhedrin were sitting as a board of inquisitors. They did not deny\nthe miracle which had been wrought. We are scarcely fit judges of the\nattitude of mind occupied by an Eastern, specially by an Eastern Jew\nof those earlier ages, when confronted with a miracle. He did not deny\nthe facts brought under his notice. He was too well acquainted with\nmagic and the strange performances of its professors to do so. He\nmerely inquired as to the sources of the power, whether they were\nDivine or diabolical. \"By what power or by what name have ye done\nthis?\" was a very natural inquiry in the mouth of an ecclesiastical\nbody such as the Sanhedrin was. It was disturbed by facts, for which\nno explanation such as their philosophy furnished could account. It\nwas upset in its calculations just as, to this day, the performances\nof Indian jugglers or the weird wonders of hypnotism upset the\ncalculations of the hard, narrow man who has restricted all his\ninvestigations to some one special branch of science, and has so\ncontracted his horizon that he thinks there is nothing in heaven or in\nearth which his philosophy cannot explain. We should mark the\nexpression, \"By what _name_ have ye done this?\" for it gives us a\nglimpse into Jewish life and practice. The Jews were accustomed in\ntheir incantations to use several kinds of names; sometimes those of\nthe patriarchs, sometimes the name of Solomon, and sometimes that of\nthe Eternal Jehovah Himself. Of late years vast quantities of Jewish\nand Gnostic manuscripts have come to light in Egypt and Syria\ncontaining various titles and forms used by the Jewish magicians and\nthe earlier Christian heretics, who were largely imbued with Jewish\nnotions. It is quite in keeping with what we know of the spirit of the\nage from other sources that the Sanhedrin should ask, \"By what power\nor by what name have ye done this?\" While again, when we turn to the\nbook of the Acts of the Apostles itself we find an illustration of the\ncouncil's inquiry in the celebrated case of the seven sons of Sceva,\nthe Jewish priest at Ephesus, who strove to use for their own magical\npurposes the Divine name of Jesus Christ, and suffered for their\ntemerity. St. Peter's reply to the question of the court proves that\nthe Christian Church adopted in all its Divine offices, whether in the\nworking of miracles then or of baptism and of ordination, as still,\nthe invocation of the Sacred Name, after the Jewish model. The Church\nstill baptizes and ordains in the name of the Father and of the Son\nand of the Holy Ghost. Christ Himself had adopted the formula for\nbaptism, and the Church has extended it to ordination, pleading thus\nbefore God and man alike the Divine power by which alone St. Peter\nhealed the cripple and the Church sends forth its ministers to carry\non Christ's work in the world.\n\nSt. Peter's address was, as we have already said, very kindly, but\nvery bold and plain-spoken in setting forth the power of Christ's\nname. He had learnt by his Jewish training the tremendous importance\nand solemnity of names. Moses at the bush would know God's name\nbefore he went as His messenger to the captive Israelites. On Sinai\nGod Himself had placed reverence towards His name as one of the\nfundamental truths of religion. Prophet and psalmist had conspired\ntogether to teach St. Peter that holy and reverend was the name of\nGod, and to impress upon him thus the power and meaning which lies in\nChrist's name, and indeed in all names, though names are things we\ncount so trifling. St. Peter dwells upon this point all through his\naddresses. To the people he had said, \"His name, through faith in His\nname, hath made this man strong.\" To the rulers it was the same. It\nwas \"by the name of Jesus Christ of Nazareth, whom ye crucified, this\nman doth stand here before you whole.\" \"There is none other name under\nheaven whereby we must be saved.\" The Sanhedrin understand the\nimportance of this point, and tell the Apostles they must not teach in\nthis name. St. Peter pointedly refuses, and prays, when come to his\nown company, \"that wonders may be done through the name of Thy holy\nservant Jesus.\"\n\nSt. Peter realized the sanctity and the power of God's name, whether\nrevealed in its ancient form of Jehovah or its New Testament form of\nJesus Christ. Well would it be if the same Divine reverence found a\nlarger place amongst ourselves. Irreverence towards the sacred name is\nfar too prevalent; and even when men do not use God's name in a\nprofane way, there is too much lightness in the manner in which even\nreligious men permit themselves to utter that name which is the\nexpression to man of supreme holiness,--\"God bless us,\" \"Lord help us\nand save.\" How constantly do even pious people garnish their\nconversations and their epistles with such phrases or with the\nsymbols D.V., without any real feeling that they are thereby appealing\nto Him who was and is and is to come, the Eternal. The name of God is\nstill holy as of old, and the name of Jesus is still powerful to calm\nand soothe and bless as of old, and Christian people should sanctify\nthose great names in their conversation with the world.[94]\n\n  [94] The primitive Christians had a profound reverence for the\n  names of our Saviour, which they delighted to depict in different\n  ways, some of them so secret as to defy the curiosity of the\n  pagans. They used the symbol I.H.S., which I have known to arouse\n  the susceptibilities of suspicious Protestants, though nothing but\n  a Latin or Western adaptation of the three first letters of the\n  Greek word \u0399\u0397\u03a3\u039f\u03a5\u03a3 written in capitals. The fish, again,\n  was a favourite symbol, because each letter of the Greek word\n  \u1f30\u03c7\u03b8\u03cd\u03c2 stood for a different title of our Lord, \u1f38\u03b7\u03c3\u03bf\u1fe6\u03c2,\n  \u03a7\u03c1\u03b9\u03c3\u03c4\u03cc\u03c2, \u0398\u03b5\u03cc\u03c2, \u1f59\u03b9\u03cc\u03c2, \u03a3\u03c9\u03c4\u03b7\u03c1, or Jesus, Christ, God,\n  Son, Saviour.\n\nSt. Peter was bold because he was daily comprehending more and more of\nthe meaning of Christ's work and mission, was gaining a clearer\ninsight into the dignity of His person, and was experiencing in\nhimself the truth of His supernatural promises. How could a man help\nbeing bold, who felt the Spirit's power within, and really held with\nintense belief that there was salvation in none other save Christ?\nPersonal experience of religion alone can impart strength and courage\nand boldness to endure, to suffer, and to testify. St. Peter was\nexclusive in his views. He would not have suited those easy-going\nsouls who now think one religion just as good as another, and\nconsequently do not regard it as of the slightest moment whether a man\nbe a follower of Christ or of Mahomet. The earliest Christians had\nnone of this diluted faith. They believed that as there was only one\nGod, so there was only one Mediator between God and man, and they\nrealized the tremendous importance of preaching this Mediator. The\nApostles, however, must be cleared from a misconstruction under which\nthey have at times suffered. St. Peter proclaims Christ to the\nSanhedrin as the only means of salvation. In his address to Cornelius\nthe centurion of C\u00e6sarea, he declares that in every nation he that\nfeareth God and worketh righteousness is accepted of Him. These\npassages and these two declarations appear inconsistent. Their\ninconsistency is only superficial, however, as Bishop Burnet has well\nexplained in his exposition of the Thirty-Nine Articles, a book not\nread very much in these times.[95] St. Peter taught exclusive\nsalvation through Christ. Christ is the only means, the only channel\nand way by which God confers salvation. Christ's work is the one\nmeritorious cause which gains spiritual blessing for man. But then,\nwhile there is salvation only in Christ, many persons may be saved by\nChrist who know not of Him consciously, else what shall we say or\nthink about infants and idiots? It is only by Christ and through\nChrist and for His sake that any soul can be saved. He is the only\ndoor of salvation, He is the way as well as the truth and the life.\nBut then it is not for us to pronounce how far the saving merits of\nChrist may be applied and His saving power extend. St. Peter knew and\ntaught that Jesus Christ was the one Mediator, and that by His name\nalone salvation could be obtained. Yet he did not hesitate to declare\nas regards Cornelius the centurion, that in every nation he that\nfeareth God and worketh righteousness is accepted of Him. It ought to\nbe sufficient for us, as it was for the Apostles, to believe that the\nknowledge of Christ is life eternal, while satisfied to leave all\nother problems in the hands of Eternal Love.\n\n  [95] See Burnet's exposition of the eighteenth Article in his\n  commentary on the Thirty-Nine Articles.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER X.\n\n_THE COMMUNITY OF GOODS._\n\n     \"And the multitude of them that believed were of one heart and\n     soul: and not one of them said that aught of the things which he\n     possessed was his own; but they had all things common. And with\n     great power gave the apostles their witness of the resurrection\n     of the Lord Jesus: and great grace was upon them all. For neither\n     was there among them any that lacked: for as many as were\n     possessors of lands or houses sold them, and brought the prices\n     of the things that were sold, and laid them at the apostles'\n     feet: and distribution was made unto each, according as any one\n     had need.\"--ACTS iv. 32-5.\n\n\nThe community of goods and its results next claim our attention in the\ncourse of this sacred record of primitive Church life. The gift of\ntongues and this earliest attempt at Christian communism were the two\nspecial features of apostolic, or perhaps we should rather say of\nJerusalem, Christianity. The gift of tongues we find at one or two\nother places, at C\u00e6sarea on the first conversion of the Gentiles, at\nEphesus and at Corinth. It then disappeared. The community of goods\nwas tried at Jerusalem. It lasted there a very short time, and then\nfaded from the ordinary practice of the Christian Church. The record\nof this vain attempt and its manifold results embodies many a lesson\nsuitable to our modern Christianity.\n\nI. The book of the Acts of the Apostles in its earliest chapters\nrelates the story of the triumph of the Cross; it also tells of the\nmistakes made by its adherents. The Scriptures prove their Divine\norigin, and display the secret inspiration and guidance of their\nwriters, by their thorough impartiality. If in the Old Testament they\nare depicting the history of an Abraham or of a David, they do not,\nafter the example of human biographies, tell of their virtues and\nthrow the mantle of obscurity over their vices and crimes. If in the\nNew Testament they are relating the story of apostolic labours, they\nrecord the bad as well as the good, and hesitate not to tell of the\ndissimulation of St. Peter, the hot temper and the bitter disputes of\na Paul and a Barnabas.\n\nIt is a notable circumstance that, in ancient and modern times alike,\nmen have stumbled at this sacred impartiality. They have mistaken the\nnature of inspiration, and have busied themselves to clear the\ncharacter of men like David and the holy Apostles, explaining away the\nplainest facts,--the lie of Abraham, the adultery of David, the\nweaknesses and infirmities of the Apostles. They have forgotten the\nprinciple involved in the declaration, \"Elijah was a man of like\npassions with ourselves;\" and have been so jealous for the honour of\nscriptural characters that they have made their history unreal,\nworthless as a living example. St. Jerome, to take but one instance,\nwas a commentator upon Scripture whose expositions are of the greatest\nvalue, specially because he lived and worked amid the scenes where\nScripture history was written, and while yet living tradition could be\nused to illustrate the sacred narrative. St. Jerome applied this\ndeceptive method to the dissimulation of St. Peter at Antioch of which\nSt. Paul tells us in the Galatians; maintaining, in opposition to St.\nAugustine,[96] that St. Peter was not a dissembler at all, and that\nthe whole scene at Antioch was a piece of pious acting, got up between\nthe Apostles in order that St. Paul might have the opportunity of\ncondemning Judaizing practices. This is an illustration of the\ntendency to which I am referring. Men will uphold, not merely the\ncharacter of the Scriptures, but the characters of the writers of\nScripture. Yet how clearly do the Sacred Writings distinguish between\nthese things; how clearly they show that God imparted His treasures in\nearthen vessels, vessels that were sometimes very earthy indeed, for\nwhile in one place they give us the Psalms of David, with all their\ntreasures of spiritual joy, hope, penitence, they in another place\ngive us the very words of the letter written by King David ordering\nthe murder of Uriah the Hittite. This jealousy, which refuses to admit\nthe fallibility and weakness of scriptural personages, has been\napplied to the doctrine of the community of goods which finds place in\nthe passage under review. Some expositors will not allow that it was a\nmistake at all; they view the Church at Jerusalem as divinely guided\nby the Holy Spirit even in matters of temporal policy; they ascribe to\nit an infallibility greater and wider than any claimed for the Roman\nPontiff. He claims infallibility in matters pertaining to faith and\nmorals, when speaking as universal doctor and teacher of the Universal\nChurch; but those writers invest the Church at Jerusalem with\ninfallibility on every question, whether spiritual or temporal, sacred\nor secular, because the Holy Ghost had been poured out upon the\ntwelve Apostles on the day of Pentecost. Now it is quite evident that\nneither the Church of Jerusalem nor the Apostles themselves were\nguided by an inspiration which rendered them infallible upon all\nquestions. The indwelling of the Holy Spirit which was granted to them\nwas a gift which left all their faculties in precisely the same state\nas they were before the descent of the Spirit. The Apostles could make\nmoral mistakes, as Peter did at Antioch; they were not infallible in\nforecasting the future, as St. Paul proved when at Ephesus he told the\nEphesian elders that he should not again visit their Church,[97]\nwhile, indeed, he spent much time there in after years. The whole\nearly Church was mistaken on the important questions of the calling of\nthe Gentiles, the binding nature of the Levitical law, and the time of\nChrist's second coming. The Church of Jerusalem, till the conversion\nof Cornelius, was completely mistaken as to the true nature of the\nChristian dispensation. They regarded it, not as the new and final\nrevelation which was to supersede all others; they thought of it\nmerely as a new sect within the bounds of Judaism.\n\n  [96] See an interesting letter from St. Augustine to St. Jerome on\n  this question in the _Letters_ of St. Augustine (Clark's edition),\n  vol. i., pp. 30-2. With which compare Bishop Lightfoot on\n  _Galatians_, p. 128.\n\n  [97] _Cf._ Acts xx. 25; 1 Tim. i. 3, iii. 14, iv. 13; 2 Tim. i.\n  18. St. Paul's address to the Ephesian elder was delivered in the\n  spring of 58 A.D. He twice revisited Ephesus, six years later, in\n  64 A.D. See Lewin's _Fasti Sacri_, pp. 314, 334,--a book of\n  marvellous learning and research, which every critical student of\n  the Acts should possess, together with the same author's _Life of\n  St. Paul_.\n\nIt was a similar mistake which led to the community of goods. We can\ntrace the genesis and upgrowth of the idea. It cannot be denied that\nthe earliest Christians expected the immediate return of Christ. This\nexpectation brought with it a very natural paralysis of business life\nand activity. We have seen the same result happening again and again.\nAt Thessalonica St. Paul had to deal with it, as we have already noted\nin the second of these lectures. Some of the Thessalonians laboured\nunder a misunderstanding as to St. Paul's true teaching: they thought\nthat Jesus Christ was immediately about to appear, and they gave up\nwork and labour under the pretence of preparing for His second coming.\nThen St. Paul comes sharply down upon this false practical deduction\nwhich they had drawn from his teaching, and proclaims the law, \"If any\nman will not work, neither shall he eat.\" We have already spoken of\nthe danger which might attend such a time. Here we behold another\ndanger which did practically ensue and bring forth evil fruit. The\nfirst Christian Pentecost and the days succeeding it were a period of\nstrained expectation, a season of intense religious excitement, which\nnaturally led to the community of goods. There was no apostolic rule\nor law laid down in the matter. It seems to have been a course of\naction to which the converts spontaneously resorted, as the logical\ndeduction from two principles which they held; first, their\nbrotherhood and union in Christ; secondly, the nearness of Christ's\nsecond advent. The time was short. The Master had passed into the\ninvisible world whence He would shortly reappear. Why should they not\nthen, as brethren in Christ, have one common purse, and spend the\nwhole time in waiting and watching for that loved presence? This seems\na natural explanation of the origin of a line of policy which has been\noften appealed to in the practical life of modern Europe as an example\nfor modern Christians; and yet, when we examine it more closely, we\ncan see that this book of the Acts of the Apostles, while it tells of\ntheir mistake, carries with it the correction of the error into which\nthese earliest disciples fell.[98] The community of goods was adopted\nin no other Church. At Corinth, Ephesus, Rome, we hear nothing of it\nin those primitive times. No Christian sect or Church has ever tried\nto revive it, save the monastic orders, who adopted it for the special\npurpose of completely cutting their members off from any connection\nwith the world of life and action; and, in later times still, the wild\nfanatical Anabaptists at the Reformation period, who thought, like the\nChristians of Jerusalem, that the kingdom of God, as they fancied it,\nwas immediately about to appear.[99] The Church of Jerusalem, as the\napostolic history shows us, reaped the natural results of this false\nstep. They adopted the principles of communism; they lost hold of that\nprinciple of individual life and exertion which lies at the very root\nof all civilisation and all advancement, and they fell, as the natural\nresult, into the direst poverty. There was no reason in the nature of\nits composition why the Jerusalem Church should have been more\npoverty-stricken than the Churches of Ephesus, Philippi, or Corinth.\nSlaves and very humble folk constituted the staple of these Churches.\nAt Jerusalem a great company of the priests were obedient to the\nfaith, and the priests were, as a class, in easy circumstances. Slaves\ncannot at Jerusalem have constituted that large element of the Church\nwhich they did in the great Greek and Roman cities, simply because\nslavery never reached among the Jews the same development as in the\nGentile world. The Jews, as a nation, were a people among whom there\nwas a widely diffused comfort, and the earliest Church at Jerusalem\nmust have fairly represented the nation. There was nothing to make the\nmother Church of Christendom that pauper community we find it to have\nbeen all through St. Paul's ministry, save the one initial mistake,\nwhich doubtless the Church authorities found it very hard afterwards\nto retrieve; for when men get into the habit of living upon alms it is\nvery difficult to restore the habits of healthy independence.\n\n  [98] The communism of the early Christians was not a novel notion.\n  The Essenes, a curious Jewish sect of that time, had long\n  practised it; see Bishop Lightfoot's essay on the Essenes in his\n  commentary on Colossians, 3rd ed., p. 416. Josephus, in his\n  _Antiqq._, XVIII., i., 5, and in his _Wars_, II., viii., 3,\n  describes the communism of the Essenes in language that would\n  exactly apply to that of the early Christians. Thus in the latter\n  place he says: \"These men are despisers of riches, and so very\n  communicative as raises our admiration. Nor is there to be found\n  any one among them who hath more than another; for it is a law\n  among them, that those who come to them must let what they have be\n  common to the whole order; insomuch that among them all there is\n  no appearance of poverty or excess of riches, but every one's\n  possessions are intermingled with every other's possessions, and\n  so there is, as it were, one patrimony among all the brethren.\"\n\n  [99] The thirty-eighth Article of the Church of England is\n  directed against the Anabaptist theory. A paralysis of ordinary\n  life and action was temporarily produced at Jerusalem after the\n  day of Pentecost. This quickly led to the community of goods, with\n  its evil results. The paralysis produced at Jerusalem by the\n  excitement and expectation of those early days was reproduced in\n  this century at the time when Irvingism and Plymouthism took their\n  first rise, some sixty years ago. The best illustration of the\n  practical effects of such one-sided spiritual expectation will be\n  found in a book forgotten by this generation, _The Letters and\n  Papers of Lady Powerscourt_, published in 1838. She was eminent in\n  the religious world of her day, and was intimately mixed up with\n  the prophetical movement out of which Irvingism and Plymouthism\n  were developed. The fundamental doctrine of both these sects was\n  the immediate personal appearance and reign of Christ on earth.\n  Lady Powerscourt's correspondence shows the results on an ardent\n  mind of such an idea. She gave up society, separated herself from\n  the world in a hermit's cottage at Lough Bray in the deepest\n  recesses of the Wicklow Mountains, and there occupied herself in\n  writing to her friends exhortations to cease from life's work,\n  such as the following, which we find on p. 235: \"There is much\n  seemingly to be said for the things of this world being sanctified\n  to heavenly uses; yet I cannot help feeling more and more assured\n  every day that a divorce must take place,--that God and the world\n  cannot be joined,--that it behoves us to make plain that we are\n  the risen ones by our portion not being in any degree from\n  hence,--that we are not struggling upwards through mire and dirt,\n  but we are as let down from heaven. We take our stand in the\n  kingdom of heaven, looking from above at earth, not from earth at\n  heaven.\" When people begin to \"look from above at earth,\" the step\n  to communism is not a long one. Vast numbers of persons never\n  recovered themselves from the strain of that time (A. D. 1830),\n  but remained all their lives in a state of dreamy disappointment.\n  I have enlarged on this subject in an article on J. N. Darby in\n  the _Contemporary Review_ for 1885.\n\nII. This incident is, however, rich in teaching for the Church of\nevery age, and that in very various directions. It is a significant\nwarning for the mission field. Missionary Churches should strive after\na healthy independence amongst their members. It is, of course,\nabsolutely necessary that missionaries should strive to supply\ntemporal employment to their converts in places and under\ncircumstances where a profession of Christianity cuts them off at once\nfrom all communication with their old friends and neighbours. The\nprimitive Church found it necessary to give such temporal relief, and\nyet had to guard against its abuse; and we have been far too remiss in\nlooking for guidance to those early centuries when the whole Church\nwas necessarily one great missionary organization. The Apostolic\nCanons and Constitutions are documents which throw much light on many\nquestions which now press for solution in the mission field. They\npretend to be the exact words of the Apostles, but are evidently the\nwork of a later age. They date back in their present shape, at latest,\nto the third or fourth centuries, as is evident from the fact that\nthey contain elaborate rules for the treatment of martyrs and\nconfessors,--and there were no martyrs after that time,--directing\nthat every effort should be made to render them comfort, support, and\nsympathy. These Constitutions prove that the Church in the third\ncentury was one mighty co-operative institution, and an important\nfunction of the bishop was the direction of that co-operation. The\nsecond chapter of the fourth book of the Apostolic Constitution lays\ndown, \"Do you therefore, O bishops, be solicitous about the\nmaintenance of orphans, being in nothing wanting to them; exhibiting\nto the orphans the care of parents; to the widows the care of\nhusbands; to the artificer, work; to the stranger, an house; to the\nhungry, food; to the thirsty, drink; to the naked, clothing; to the\nsick, visitation, to the prisoners, assistance.\" But these same\nConstitutions recognise equally clearly the danger involved in such a\ncourse. The wisdom of the early Church saw and knew how easily alms\npromiscuously bestowed sap the roots of independence, and taught\ntherefore, with equal explicitness, the absolute necessity for\nindividual exertion, the duty of Christian toil and labour; urging the\nexample of the Apostles themselves, as in the sixty-third Constitution\nof the second book, where they are represented as exhorting, \"Let the\nyoung persons of the Church endeavour to minister diligently in all\nnecessaries; mind your business with all becoming seriousness, that so\nyou may always have sufficient to support yourselves and those that\nare needy, and not burden the Church of God. For we ourselves, besides\nour attention to the Word of the Gospel, do not neglect our inferior\nemployments; for some of us are fishermen, some tent-makers, some\nhusbandmen, that so we may never be idle.\" In the modern mission field\nthere will often be occasions when, as in ancient times, the\nprofession of Christianity and the submission of the converts to\nbaptism will involve the loss of all things.[100] And, under such\ncircumstances, Christian love, such as burned of old in the hearts of\nGod's people and led them to enact the rules we have now quoted, will\nstill lead and compel the Church in its organized capacity to lend\ntemporal assistance to those that are in danger of starvation for\nChrist's sake; but no missionary effort can be in a healthy condition\nwhere all, or the greater portion, of the converts are so dependent\nupon the funds of the mission that if the funds were withdrawn the\napparent results would vanish into thin air. Such missions are utterly\nunlike the missions of the apostolic Church; for the converts of the\napostolic age were made by men who went forth without purse or scrip,\nwho could not give temporal assistance even had they desired to do so,\nand whose great object ever was to develop in their followers a\nhealthy spirit of Christian manliness and honest independence.\n\n  [100] An interesting illustration of ancient missionary work and\n  its likeness to modern efforts turned up a few years ago among the\n  Fay\u00fbm papyri. It was a document containing the curse pronounced by\n  a pagan mother upon her son who had turned Christian, solemnly\n  cutting him off from his kith and kin. It will be found in a\n  translated shape in the _Transactions_ of the Society of Biblical\n  Arch\u00e6ology for 1884, Part I. Modern converts, too, just like the\n  ancient, have often to suffer the loss of all things for Christ's\n  sake.\n\nIII. Then, again, this passage teaches a much-needed lesson to the\nChurch at home about the methods of poor relief and almsgiving.\n\"Blessed,\" says the Psalmist, \"is he that considereth the poor.\" He\ndoes not say, \"Blessed is he that giveth money to the poor,\" but,\n\"Blessed is he that considereth the poor.\" Well-directed, wise,\nprudent almsgiving is a good and beneficial thing, but indiscriminate\nalmsgiving, almsgiving bestowed without care, thought, and\nconsideration such as the Psalmist suggests, brings with it far more\nevil than it prevents. The Church of Jerusalem very soon had\nexperience of these evils. Jealousies and quarrels soon sprang up even\nwhere Apostles were ministering and the supernatural gifts of the\nSpirit were present,--\"There arose a murmuring of the Grecians against\nthe Hebrews because their widows were neglected in the daily\nministrations;\" and it has been ever since the experience of those\ncalled to deal with questions of temporal relief and the distribution\nof alms, that no classes are more suspicious and more quarrelsome than\nthose who are in receipt of such assistance. The chaplains and\nmanagers of almshouses, asylums, charitable funds, and workhouses know\nthis to their cost, and ofttimes make a bitter acquaintance with that\nevil spirit which burst forth even in the mother Church of Jerusalem.\nTime necessarily hangs heavy upon the recipients' hands, forethought\nand care are removed and cease to engage the mind, and people having\nnothing else to do begin to quarrel. But this was not the only evil\nwhich arose: hypocrisy and ostentation, as in the case of Ananias and\nSapphira, deceit, thriftlessness, and idleness showed themselves at\nJerusalem, Thessalonica, and other places, as the Epistles of St. Paul\namply testify. And so it has been in the experience of the modern\nChurch. I know myself of whole districts where almsgiving has quite\ndemoralised the poor and eaten the heart out of their religion, so\nthat they value religious ministrations, not for the sake of the\nreligion that is taught, but solely for the sake of the temporal\nrelief that accompanies it. I know of a district where, owing to the\nwant of organization in religious effort and the shattered and broken\ncharacter of Protestant Christianity, the poor people are visited and\nrelieved by six or seven competing religious communities, so that a\nclever person can make a very fair income by a judicious manipulation\nof the different visitors. It is evident that such visitations are\ndoing evil instead of good, and the labour and money expended are\nworse than useless. The proper organization of charitable relief is\none of the desirable objects the Church should set before it. The\ngreat point to be aimed at should be not so much the ministration of\ndirect assistance to the people as the development of the spirit of\nself-help. And here comes in the action of the Christian State. The\ninstitution of the Post Office Savings Bank, where the State\nguarantees the safety of the depositor's money, seems a direct\nexposition and embodiment of the principle which underlay the\ncommunity of goods in the apostolic Church. That principle was a\ngenerous, unselfish, Christlike principle. The principle was right,\nthough the particular shape which the principle took was a mistaken\none. Experience has taught the Church of Christ a wiser course, and\nnow the system of State-guaranteed Savings Banks enables the Church to\nlead the poor committed to her care into wiser courses. Parochial and\ncongregational Savings Banks ought to be attached to all Christian\norganizations, so as to teach the poor the industrial lessons which\nthey need. We have known a district in a most thriftless\nneighbourhood, where immense sums used to be wasted in indiscriminate\nalmsgiving, and yet where the people, like the woman in the Gospels,\nwere never one whit the better, but rather grew worse. We have seen\nsuch a district, in the course of a few years, quite regenerated in\ntemporal matters, simply by the action of what is called a parochial\nPenny Savings Bank. Previously to its institution the slightest fall\nof snow brought heart-rending appeals for coal funds, blankets, and\nfood; while a few years of its operation banished coal funds and\npauperism in every shape, simply by teaching the people the magic law\nof thrift, and by developing within them the love and the power of\nself-respecting and industrious independence. And yet efforts in this\ndirection will not be destructive of Christian charity. They tend not\nto dry up the springs of Christian love. Charity is indeed a blessing\nto the giver, and we should never desire to see the opportunity\nwanting for its display. Ill indeed would be the world's state if we\nhad no longer the poor, the sick, the needy with us. Our sinful human\nnature requires its unselfish powers to be kept in action, or else it\nquickly subsides into a state of unwholesome stagnation. Poor people\nneed to be taught habits of saving, and this teaching will require\ntime, and trouble, and expense. The clergy and their congregations may\nteach the poor thrift by offering a much higher interest than the Post\nOffice supplies, while, at the same time, the funds are all deposited\nin the State Savings Bank. That higher interest will often demand as\nmuch money as the doles previously bestowed in the shape of mere gifts\nof coal and food. But then what a difference in the result! The mere\ndole has, for the most part, a demoralising tendency, while the money\nspent in the other direction permanently elevates and blesses.[101]\n\n  [101] It is not generally known that the Post Office offers\n  special facilities for the establishment of such Penny Savings\n  Banks as I advocate. The Post Office will supply books for\n  depositors and permit a deposit account to be opened without any\n  limit. I have seen in my own parish the beneficial working of such\n  an institution, increasing annually in its results for the last\n  twenty years.\n\nIV. But there is a more important lesson still to be derived from this\nincident in the apostolic Church. The community of goods failed in\nthat Church when tried under the most favourable circumstances,\nterminating in the permanent degradation of the Christian community at\nJerusalem; just as similar efforts must ever fail, no matter how broad\nthe field on which they may be tried or how powerful the forces which\nmay be arrayed on their behalf. Christian legislatures of our own age\nmay learn a lesson of warning against perilous experiments in a\ncommunistic direction from the disastrous failure in Jerusalem; and\nthere is a real danger in this respect from the tendency of human\nnature to rush to extremes. Protestantism and the Reformation\naccentuated the individual and individual independence. The feeling\nthus taught in religion reacted on the world of life and action,\ndeveloping an intensity of individualism in the political world which\nparalysed the efforts which the State alone could make in the various\nmatters of sanitary education and social reform. In the last\ngeneration Maurice and Kingsley and men of their school raised in\nopposition the banner of Christian socialism, because they saw clearly\nthat men had run too far in the direction of individualism,--so far,\nindeed, that they were inclined to forget the great lesson taught by\nChristianity, that under the new law we are members one of another,\nand that all members belong to one body, and that body is Christ. Men\nare so narrow that they can for the most part take only one view at a\ntime, and so now they are inclined to push Christian socialism to the\nsame extreme as at Jerusalem, and to forget that there is a great\ntruth in individualism as there is another great truth in Christian\nsocialism. Dr. Newman in his valuable but almost forgotten work on\nthe Prophetical Office of the Church defined the position of the\nEnglish Church as being a _Media Via_, a mean between two extremes.\nWhatever may be said upon other topics, the office of the Christian\nChurch is most certainly a _Via Media_, a mean between the two\nopposite extremes of socialism and individualism. Much good has been\neffected of late years by legislation based upon essentially\nsocialistic ideas. Reformatory and industrial schools, to take but one\ninstance, are socialistic in their foundations and in their\ntendencies. The whole body of the State undertakes in them\nresponsibilities and duties which God intended individuals to\ndischarge, but which individuals persistently neglect, to the injury\nof their innocent offspring, and of society at large. Yet even in this\nsimple experiment we can see the germs of the same evils which sprang\nup at Jerusalem. We have seen this tendency appearing in connection\nwith the Industrial School system, and have known parents who could\neducate and train their children in family life encouraged by this\nwell-intentioned legislation to fling their responsibilities over upon\nthe State, and neglecting their offspring because they were convinced\nthat in doing so they were not only saving their own pockets but also\ndoing better for their children than they themselves could. It is just\nthe same, and has ever been the same, with all similar legislation. It\nrequires to be most narrowly watched. Human nature is intensely lazy\nand intensely selfish. God has laid down the law of individual effort\nand individual responsibility, and while we should strive against the\nabuses of that law, we should watch with equal care against the\nopposite abuses. Foundling hospitals as they were worked in the last\ncentury, for instance, form an object-lesson of the dangers inherent\nin such methods of action. Benevolent persons in the last century\npitied the condition of poor children left as foundlings. There was,\nsome sixty years ago, an institution in Dublin of this kind, which was\nsupported by the State. There was a box into which an infant could be\nplaced at any hour of the day or night; a bell was rung, and by the\naction of a turn-stile the infant was received into the institution.\nBut experience soon taught the same lesson as at Jerusalem. The\nFoundling Hospital may have temporarily relieved some deserving cases\nand occasionally prevented some very painful scenes, but the broad\nresults upon society at large were so bad, immorality was so\nincreased, the sense of parental responsibility was so weakened, that\nthe State was compelled to terminate its existence at a very large\nexpense. Socialism when pushed to an extreme must necessarily work out\nin bad results, and that because there is one constant and fixed\nquantity which the socialist forgets. Human nature changes not; human\nnature is corrupt and must remain corrupt until the end, and so long\nas the corruption of human nature remains the best-conceived plans of\nsocialism must necessarily fail.\n\nYet the Jerusalem idea of a voluntary community of goods was a noble\none, and sprang from an unselfish root. It was purely voluntary\nindeed. There was no compulsion upon any to adopt it. \"Not one of them\nsaid that aught that he possessed was his own,\" is St. Luke's\ntestimony on the point. \"While it remained, did it not remain thine\nown? And after it was sold, was it not in thy power?\" are St. Peter's\nwords, clearly testifying that this Christian communism was simply the\nresult and outcome of loving hearts who, under the influence of an\novermastering emotion, had cast prudence to the winds. The communism\nof Jerusalem may have been unwise, but it was the proof of generous\nand devout spirits. It was an attempt, too, to realize the conditions\nof the new life in the new heaven and the new earth wherein dwelleth\nrighteousness, while still the old heaven and the old earth remained.\nIt was an enthusiasm, a high, a holy, and a noble enthusiasm; and\nthough it failed in some respects, still the enthusiasm begotten of\nfervent Christian love succeeded in another direction, for it enabled\nthe Apostles \"with great power to give witness to the resurrection of\nthe Lord Jesus.\" The union of these two points in the sacred narrative\nhas profound spiritual teaching for the Church of Christ.\nUnselfishness in worldly things, enthusiasm about the kingdom of\nChrist, fervent love to the brethren, are brought into nearest contact\nand united in closest bonds with the possession of special spiritual\npower over the hearts of the unbelievers. And then, again, the\nunselfishness existed amongst the body of the Church, the mass of the\npeople at large. We are sure that the Apostles were leaders in the\nacts of self-denial. No great work is carried out where the natural\nand divinely-sent leaders hang back. But it is the love and enthusiasm\nof the mass of the people which excite St. Luke's notice, and which he\nillustrates by the contrasted cases of Barnabas and Ananias; and he\nconnects this unselfish enthusiasm of the people with the possession\nof great power by the Apostles. Surely we can read a lesson suitable\nfor the Church of all ages in this collocation. The law of interaction\nprevails between clergy and people still as it did between the\nApostles and people of old. The true minister of Christ will\nfrequently bear before the throne of God those souls with whom the\nHoly Ghost has entrusted him, and without such personal intercession\nhe cannot expect real success in his work. But then, on the other\nhand, this passage suggests to us that enthusiasm, fervent faith,\nunselfish love on the people's part are the conditions of ministerial\npower with human souls. A people filled with Christ's love, and\nabounding in enthusiasm, even by a mere natural process produce power\nin their leaders, for the hearts of the same leaders beat quicker and\ntheir tongues speak more forcibly because they feel behind them the\nimmense motive power of hallowed faith and sacred zeal. But we believe\nin a still higher blessing. When people are unselfish, brimming over\nwith generous Christian love, it calls down a supernatural, a Divine\npower. The Pentecostal Spirit of love again descends, and in roused\nhearts and converted souls and purified and consecrated intellects\nrewards with a blessing such as they desire the men and women who long\nfor the salvation of their brethren, and are willing, like these\napostolic Christians, to sacrifice their dearest and their best for\nit.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XI.\n\n_HONESTY AND PRETENCE IN THE PRIMITIVE CHURCH._\n\n     \"And Joseph, who by the apostles was surnamed Barnabas (which is,\n     being interpreted, Son of exhortation), a Levite, a man of Cyprus\n     by race, having a field, sold it, and brought the money, and laid\n     it at the apostles' feet.\"--ACTS iv. 36, 37.\n\n     \"But a certain man named Ananias, with Sapphira his wife, sold a\n     possession, and kept back part of the price, his wife also being\n     privy to it, and brought a certain part, and laid it at the\n     apostles' feet. But Peter said, Ananias, why hath Satan filled\n     thy heart to lie to the Holy Ghost, and to keep back part of the\n     price of the land? Whiles it remained, did it not remain thine\n     own? and after it was sold, was it not in thy power? How is it\n     that thou hast conceived this thing in thy heart? thou hast not\n     lied unto men, but unto God. And Ananias hearing these words fell\n     down and gave up the ghost; and great fear came upon all that\n     heard it. And the young men arose and wrapped him round, and they\n     carried him out and buried him.\"--ACTS v. 1-6.\n\n\nThe exact period in the history of the apostolic Church at which we\nhave now arrived is a most interesting one. We stand at the very first\norigin of a new development in Christian life and thought. Let us\nobserve it well, for the whole future of the Church is bound up with\nit. Christianity was at the beginning simply a sect of Judaism. It is\nplain that the Apostles at first thus regarded it. They observed\nJewish rites, they joined in the temple and synagogue worship, they\nrestricted salvation and God's favour to the children of Abraham, and\nmerely added belief in Jesus of Nazareth as the promised Messiah to\nthe common Jewish faith. The Spirit of God was indeed speaking through\nthe Apostles, leading them, as it led St. Peter on the day of\nPentecost, to speak words with a meaning and scope far beyond their\nthoughts. They, like the prophets of old, knew not as yet what manner\nof things the Spirit which was in them did signify.\n\n    \"As little children lisp, and tell of Heaven,\n    So thoughts beyond their thought to those high bards were given.\"\n\nTheir speech had a grander and wider application than they themselves\ndreamt of; but the power of prejudice and education was far too great\neven for the Apostles, and so, though the nobility and profuseness of\nGod's mercy were revealed and the plenteousness of His grace was\nannounced by St. Peter himself, yet the glory of the Divine gift was\nstill unrecognised. Jerusalem, the Temple, the Old Covenant, Israel\nafter the flesh,--these things as yet bounded and limited the horizon\nof Christ's Church. How were the new ideas to gain an entrance? How\nwas the Church to rise to a sense of the magnificence and universality\nof its mission? Joseph, who by the Apostles was surnamed Barnabas,\nemerges upon the scene and supplies the answer, proving himself in\nvery deed a son of consolation, because he became the occasion of\nconsoling the masses of mankind with that truest comfort, the peace of\nGod which passes all understanding. Let us see how this came about.\n\nI. The Christian leaders belonged originally to the extreme party in\nJudaism. The Jews were at this time divided into two sections. There\nwas the Hebrew party on the one hand; extreme Nationalists as we might\ncall them. They hated everything foreign. They clung to the soil of\nPalestine, to its language and to its customs. They trained up their\nchildren in an abhorrence of Greek civilisation, and could see nothing\ngood in it. This party was very unprogressive, very narrow-minded,\nand, therefore, unfit to recognise the developments of God's purposes.\nThe Galileans were very prominent among them. They lived in a\nprovincial district, remote from the influences of the great centres\nof thought and life, and missed, therefore, the revelations of God's\nmind which He is evermore making through the course of His\nprovidential dealings with mankind. The Galileans furnished the\nmajority of the earliest Christian leaders, and they were not fitted\nfrom their narrowness to grasp the Divine intentions with respect to\nChristianity and its mission. What a lesson for every age do we behold\nin this intellectual and spiritual defect of the Galileans. They were\nconscientious, earnest, devout, spiritually-minded men. Christ loved\nthem as such, and devoted Himself to their instruction. But they were\none-sided and illiberal. Their very provincialism, which had sheltered\nthem from Sadduceism and unbelief, had filled them with blind\nprejudices, and as the result had rendered them unable to read aright\nthe mind of God and the development of His purposes. Man, alas! is a\nvery weak creature, and human nature is very narrow. Piety is no\nguarantee for wisdom and breadth, and strong faith in God's dealings\nin the past often hinders men from realizing and obeying the Divine\nguidance and the evolution of His purposes amid the changed\ncircumstances of the present. The Galilean leaders were best fitted to\ntestify with unfaltering zeal to the miracles and resurrection of\nChrist. They were not best fitted to lead the Church into the\npossession of the Gentiles.\n\nThere was another party among the Jews whom God had trained by the\nguidance of His Providence for this purpose. The Acts of the Apostles\ncasts a strong and comforting light back upon the history of the\nLord's dealings with the Jews ever since the days of the Babylonish\nCaptivity. We can see in the story told in the Acts the reason why God\npermitted the overthrow of Jerusalem by the hands of Nebuchadnezzar,\nand the apparent defeat for the time of His own designs towards the\nchosen people. The story of the dispersion is a standing example how\nwonderfully God evolves good out of seeming ill, making all things\nwork together for the good of His Church. The dispersion prepared a\nsection of the Jews, by travel, by foreign civilization, by culture,\nand by that breadth of mind and sympathy which is thereby produced, to\nbe mediators between the Hebrew party with all their narrowness, and\nthe masses of the Gentile world whom the strict Jews would fain have\nshut out from the hope of God's mercy. This liberal and progressive\nparty is called in the Acts of the Apostles the Hellenists. They were\nlooked at askance by the more old-fashioned Hebrews. They were Jews,\nchildren of Abraham indeed, of the genuine stock of Israel. As such\nthey had a true standing-ground within the Jewish fold, and as true\nJews could exercise their influence from within much more effectually\nthan if they stood without; for it has been well remarked by a shrewd\nobserver, that every party, religious or political, is much more\npowerfully affected by movements springing from within than by attacks\ndirected from without. An explosive operates with much more\ndestructive force when acting from within or underneath a\nfortification than when brought into play from outside. Such was the\nHellenistic party. No one could deny their true Jewish character, but\nthey had been liberalized by their heaven-sent contact with foreigners\nand foreign lands; and hence it is that we discern in the Hellenistic\nparty, and specially in Joseph who by the Apostle was surnamed\nBarnabas, the beginnings of the glorious ingathering of the Gentiles,\nthe very first rift in the thick dark cloud of prejudice which as yet\nkept back even the Apostles themselves from realizing the great object\nof the gospel dispensation. The Hellenists, with their wealth, their\nculture, their new ideas, their sense and value of Greek thought, were\nthe bridge by which the spiritual life, hitherto wrapped in Jewish\nswaddling clothes, was to pass over to the masses of the Gentile\nworld. The community of goods led Joseph Barnabas to dedicate his\nsubstance to the same noble cause of unselfishness. That dedication\nled to disputes between Hellenists and Hebrews, and these disputes\noccasioned the election of the seven deacons, who, in part, at least,\nbelonged to the more liberal section. Among these deacons we find St.\nStephen, whose teaching and martyrdom were directly followed by St.\nPaul and his conversion, and St. Paul was the Apostle of the Gentiles\nand the vindicator of Christian freedom and Christian liberty. St.\nBarnabas and his act of self-denial and self-sacrifice in surrendering\nhis landed estate are thus immediately connected with St. Paul by\ndirect historic contact, even if they had not been subsequently\nassociated as joint Apostles and messengers of the Churches in their\nfirst missionary journeys; while again the mistaken policy of\ncommunism is overruled to the world's abiding benefit and blessing.\nHow wonderful, indeed, are the Lord's doings towards the children of\nmen!\n\nII. We have thus suggested one of the main lines of thought which run\nthrough the first half of this book of the Acts. Let us now look a\nlittle more particularly at this Joseph Barnabas who was the occasion\nof this great, this new departure. We learn then, upon consulting the\nsacred text, that Joseph was a Levite, a man of Cyprus by race; he\nbelonged, that is, to the class among the Jews whose interests were\nbound up with the maintenance of the existing order of things; and yet\nhe had become a convert to the belief proclaimed by the Apostles. At\nthe same time, while we give full credit to this Levite for his\naction, we must not imagine that either priests or Levites or Jews at\nthat period fully realized all the consequences of their decisions. We\nfind that men at every age take steps blindly, without thoroughly\nrealizing all the results which logically and necessarily flow forth\nfrom them. Men in religious, political, social matters are blind and\ncannot see afar off. It is only step by step that the purposes of God\ndawn upon them, and Joseph Barnabas, the Levite of Cyprus, was no\nexception to this universal rule. He was not only a Levite, but a\nnative of Cyprus, for Cyprus was then a great stronghold and resort of\nthe Jewish race. It continued to be a great centre of Jewish influence\nfor long afterwards. In the next century, for instance, a great Jewish\nrebellion burst forth wherever the Jews were strong enough. They rose\nin Palestine against the power of the Emperor Hadrian, and under their\nleader Barcochba vindicated the ancient reputation of the nation for\ndesperate and daring courage; while, in sympathy with their brethren\non the mainland, the Jews in Cyprus seized their arms and massacred a\nvast multitude of the Greek and Roman settlers, numbering, it is said,\ntwo hundred and forty thousand persons. The concourse of Jews to\nCyprus in the time of the Apostles is easily explained. Augustus C\u00e6sar\nwas a great friend and patron of Herod the Great, and he leased the\ncelebrated copper mines of the island to that Herod, exacting a\nroyalty upon their produce, as we learn from Josephus, the well-known\nJewish historian (_Antiqq._, xvi. iv. 5). It was only to be expected,\nthen, that when a Jewish monarch was leaseholder and manager of the\ngreat mining industry of the island, his Jewish subjects should flock\nthither, and it was very natural that amongst the crowds who sought\nCyprus there should be found a minister of the Jewish faith whose\ntribal descent as a Levite reminded them of Palestine, and of the City\nof God, and of the Temple of Jehovah and of its solemn, stately\nworship.[102] This residence of Barnabas in Cyprus accounts for his\nlanded property which he had the right to sell just as he liked. A\nLevite in Palestine could not, according to the law of Moses when\nstrictly construed, possess any private landed estate save in a\nLevitical city. Meyer, a German commentator of great reputation, has\nindeed suggested that Jer. xxxii. 7, where Jeremiah is asked to redeem\nhis cousin's field in the suburbs of Anathoth, proves that a member of\nthe tribe of Levi could possess landed estate in Palestine. He\ntherefore concludes that the old explanation that the landed property\nof Barnabas was in Cyprus, not in Palestine, could not stand. But the\nsimple fact is that even the cleverest German expositors are not\nfamiliar with the text of their Bibles, for had Meyer been thus\nfamiliar he would have remembered that Anathoth was a city belonging\nto the priests and the tribe of Levi, and that the circumstance of\nJeremiah the priest possessing a right to landed property in Anathoth\nwas no proof whatsoever that he could hold landed property anywhere\nelse, and, above all, affords no ground for the conclusion that he\ncould dispose of it in the absolute style which Barnabas here\ndisplayed.[103] We conclude then that the action of Barnabas on this\noccasion dealt with his landed estate in Cyprus, the country where he\nwas born, where he was well known, and where his memory is even still\ncherished on account of the work he there performed in conjunction\nwith St. Paul.\n\n  [102] Philo was a contemporary of the Apostles. He has left us\n  many works dealing with this period. He speaks of the Jews of\n  Cyprus in the account of his embassy to the Emperor Caius\n  Caligula. See Milman's _History of Jews_, iii., 111, 112, and\n  Conybeare and Howson's _Life of St. Paul_, chap. v.\n\n  [103] See Lightfoot's _Hor\u00e6 Heb._, Acts iv. 36; _cf._ Josh. xxi.\n  18.\n\nIII. Let us see what else we can glean concerning this personage thus\nprominent in the early Church, first for his generosity, and then for\nhis missionary character and success. It is indeed one of the most\nfruitful and interesting lines upon which Bible study can be pursued,\nthus to trace the scattered features of the less known and less\nprominent characters of Scripture, and see wherein God's grace\nspecially abounded in them.\n\nThe very personal appearance of Barnabas can be recalled by the\ncareful student of this book.[104] Though it lies a little out of our\nway, we shall note the circumstance, as it will help us to form a\nmore lively image of Barnabas, the Son of Consolation. The two\nApostles, Paul and Barnabas, were on their first missionary tour when\nthey came to the city of Lystra in Lycaonia. There the multitude,\nastonished at the miracle wrought upon the cripple by St. Paul,\nattempted to pay divine honours to the two Christian missionaries.\n\"They called Barnabas Jupiter, and Paul Mercurius, because he was the\nchief speaker.\" It must have been their physical characteristics as\nwell as the mode of address used by the Apostles which led to these\nnames; and from the extant records of antiquity we know that Jupiter\nwas always depicted as a man with a fine commanding presence, while\nMercury, the god of eloquent speech, was a more insignificant figure.\nJupiter, therefore, struck the Lycaonian people as the fittest name\nfor the taller and more imposing-looking Apostle, while St. Paul, who\nwas in bodily presence contemptible, was designated by the name of the\nactive and restless Mercury. His character again shines through every\nrecorded action of St. Barnabas. He was a thoroughly sympathetic man,\nand, like all such characters, he was ever swept along by the\nprevailing wave of thought or action, without allowing that supreme\nplace to the judgment and the natural powers which they should always\nhold if the feelings and sympathies are not to land us in positions\ninvolving dire ruin and loss. He was carried away by the enthusiasm\nfor Christian communism which now seized upon the Jerusalem Church.\nHe was influenced by the Judaizing movement at Antioch, so that \"even\nBarnabas was carried away with the Petrine dissimulation.\" His\nsympathies got the better of his judgment in the matter of St. Mark's\nconduct in abandoning the ministry to which St. Paul had called him.\nHis heart was stronger, in fact, than his head. And yet this very\nweakness qualified him to be the Son of Consolation. A question has,\nindeed, been raised whether he should be called the Son of Consolation\nor the Son of Exhortation, but, practically, there is no difference.\nHis consolations were administered through his exhortations. His\nspeech and his advice were of a consoling, healing, comforting kind.\nThere are still such men to be found in the Church. Just as all other\napostolic graces and characteristics are still manifested,--the\neloquence of a Paul, the courage of a Peter, the speculative flights\nof a John,--so the sympathetic power of a Barnabas is granted to some.\nAnd a very precious gift it is. There are some good men whose very\ntone of voice and bodily attitudes--their heads thrown back and their\narms akimbo, and their aggressive walk--at once provoke opposition.\nThey are pugnacious Christians, ever on the look out for some topic of\nblame and controversy. There are others, like this Barnabas, whose\nvoices bring consolation, and whose words, even when not the clearest\nor the most practical, speak counsels of peace, and come to us\nthick-laden with the blessed dews of charity. Their advice is not,\nindeed, always the wisest. Their ardent cry is always, Peace, peace.\nSuch a man on the political stage was the celebrated Lucius Carey,\nLord Falkland, in the days of the great civil war, who, though he\nadhered to the Royalist cause, seemed, as the historian tells us, to\nhave utterly lost all heart once that active hostilities commenced.\nMen of this type appear in times of great religious strife. Erasmus,\nfor instance, at the time of the Reformation, possessed a good deal of\nthis spirit which is devoted to compromise, and ever inclined to place\nthe interests of peace and charity above those of truth and principle,\njust as Barnabas would have done at Antioch were it not for the\nprotest of his stronger and sterner friend St. Paul. And yet such men,\nwith their sympathetic hearts and speech, have their own great use,\ninfusing a healing, consoling tone into seasons of strife, when others\nare only too apt to lose sight of the sweet image of Christian love in\npursuit of what they consider the supreme interests of religious or\npolitical truth. Such a man was Barnabas all his life, and such we\nbehold him on his first visible entrance upon the stage of Church\nhistory, when his sympathies and his generosity led him to consecrate\nhis independent property in Cyprus to his brethren's support, and to\nbring the money and lay it down at the Apostles' feet.\n\n  [104] The early history of Barnabas is thus described by\n  Metaphrastes, an ancient Greek writer. Barnabas was born in\n  Cyprus, of rich parents, who sent him to be trained at Jerusalem\n  under Gamaliel. There he formed an early friendship with St. Paul.\n  He was a witness of our Lord's miracles, and was converted by the\n  healing of the impotent man at Bethesda. He then was the means of\n  converting his sister Mary and her son Mark, who was the young man\n  with the pitcher of water whom our Lord commanded His disciples to\n  follow when He was sending them to prepare the Passover. Mary's\n  house was the place where the upper room was situated, and\n  continued to be the meeting-place of the Christians, as we find\n  from Acts xii. Metaphrastes had formerly a very bad reputation as\n  regards truthfulness, but modern investigation has shown that his\n  _Lives_ contain some very ancient documents, going back to the\n  second century at least. See Bishop Lightfoot's address to the\n  Carlisle Church Congress in _Expositor_ 1885, vol. i., p. 3; Prof.\n  Ramsay in _Expositor_ 1889, vol. ix., p. 265 and refs., and Cave's\n  _Lives of the Primitive Fathers_, p. 35.\n\nIV. Now for the contrast drawn for us by the inspired pen of St. Luke,\na contrast we find oft repeating itself in Church history. Here we\nhave the generous sympathetic Son of Consolation on the one side, and\nhere, too, we have a warning and a type for all time that the tares\nmust evermore be mingled with the wheat, the false with the true, the\nhypocrites with real servants of God, even until the final separation.\nThe accidental division of the book into chapters hinders casual\nreaders from noticing that the action of Ananias and his wife is set\nby the writer over against that of Barnabas. Barnabas sold his estate\nand brought the price, the whole price, and surrendered it as an\noffering to the Church. The spirit of enthusiastic giving was abroad,\nand had seized upon the community; and Barnabas sympathized with it.\nAnanias and Sapphira were carried away too, but their spirits were\nmeaner. They desired to have all the credit the Church would give them\nfor acting as generously as Barnabas did, and yet, while getting\ncredit for unselfish and unstinting liberality, to be able to enjoy in\nprivate somewhat of that which they were believed to have surrendered.\nAnd their calculations were terribly disappointed. They tried to play\nthe hypocrite's part on most dangerous ground just when the Divine\nSpirit of purity, sincerity, and truth had been abundantly poured out,\nand when the spirit of deceit and hypocrisy was therefore at once\nrecognised. It was with the Apostles and their spiritual natures then\nas it is with ourselves and our physical natures still. When we are\nliving in a crowded city we notice not strange scents and ill-odours\nand foul gases: our senses are dulled, and our perceptive powers are\nrendered obtuse because the whole atmosphere is a tainted one. But\nwhen we dwell in the pure air of the country, and the glorious breezes\nfrom mountain and moor blow round us fresh and free, then we detect at\nonce, and at a long distance, the slightest ill-odour or the least\ntrace of offensive gas. The outpoured presence of the Spirit, and the\nabounding love which was produced thereby, quickened the perception of\nSt. Peter. He recognised the hypocrisy, characterized the sin of\nAnanias as a lie against the Holy Ghost; and then the Spirit and Giver\nof life, seconding and supporting the words of St. Peter, withdrew His\nsupport from the human frame of the sinner, and Ananias ceased to\nlive, just as Sapphira, his partner in deceit, ceased to live a few\nhours later. The death of Ananias and Sapphira have been ofttimes the\nsubject of much criticism and objection, on the part of persons who\ndo not realize the awfulness of their position, the full depths of\ntheir hypocrisy, and the importance of the lesson taught by their\npunishment to the Church of every age. Their position was a specially\nawful one, for they were brought into closest contact, as no Christian\ncan now be brought, with the powers of the world to come. The Spirit\nwas vouchsafed during those earliest days of the Church in a manner\nand style which we hear nothing of during the later years of the\nApostles. He proved His presence by physical manifestations, as when\nthe whole house was shaken where the Apostles were assembled; a\nphenomenon of which we read nothing in the latter portion of the Acts.\nBy the gift of tongues, by miracles of healing, by abounding spiritual\nlife and discernment, by physical manifestations, the most careless\nand thoughtless in the Christian community were compelled to feel that\na supernatural power was present in their midst and specially resting\nupon the Apostles. Yet it was into such an atmosphere that the spirit\nof hypocrisy and of covetousness, the two vices to which Christianity\nwas specially opposed, and which the great Master had specially\ndenounced, obtruded itself as Satan gained entrance into Eden, to\ndefile with their foul presence the chosen dwelling-place of the Holy\nGhost. The Holy Ghost vindicated His authority therefore, because, as\nit must be observed, it was not St. Peter sentenced Ananias to death.\nNo one may have been more surprised than St. Peter himself at the\nconsequences which followed his stern rebuke. St. Peter merely\ndeclared his sin, \"Thou hast not lied unto men, but unto God;\" and\nthen it is expressly said, \"Ananias hearing these words fell down, and\ngave up the ghost.\" It was a stern action indeed; but then all God's\njudgments have a stern side. Ananias and Sapphira were cut off in\ntheir sins, but men are every day summoned into eternity in precisely\nthe same state and the same way, and the only difference is that in\nthe case of Ananias we see the sin which provoked the punishment and\nthen we see the punishment immediately following. Men object to this\nnarrative simply because they have a one-sided conception of\nChristianity such as this period of the world's history delights in.\nThey would make it a religion of pure unmitigated love; they would\neliminate from it every trace of sternness, and would thus leave it a\npoor weak flabby thing, without backbone or earnestness, and utterly\nunlike all other dispensations of the Lord, which have their stern\nsides and aspects as well as their loving.\n\nIt may well have been that this incident was inserted in this typical\nChurch history to correct a false idea which would otherwise have\ngrown up. The Jews were quite well accustomed to regard the Almighty\nas a God of judgment as well as a God of love. Perhaps we might even\nsay that they viewed Him more in the former light than in the latter.\nOur Lord was obliged, in fact, to direct some of His most searching\ndiscourses to rebuke this very tendency. The Galileans, whose blood\nPilate mingled with their sacrifices, the men upon whom the tower of\nSiloam fell,--neither party were sinners above all that were at\nJerusalem, or were punished as such. Such was his teaching in\nopposition to the popular idea. The Apostles were once quite ready to\nascribe the infirmity of the man born blind to the direct judgment of\nthe Almighty upon himself or upon his parents. But men are apt to rush\nfrom one extreme to another. The Apostles and their followers were\nnow realizing their freedom in the Spirit; and some were inclined to\nrun into licentiousness as the result of that same freedom. They were\nrealizing, too, their relationship to God as one of pure filial love,\nand they were in great danger of forgetting that God was a God of\njustice and judgment as well, till this stern dispensation recalled\nthem to a sense of the fact that eternal love is also eternal purity\nand eternal truth, and will by no means clear the guilty. This is a\nlesson very necessary for every age of the Church. Men are always\ninclined, and never, perhaps, so much as at the present time, to look\naway from the severe side of religion, or even to deny that religion\ncan have a severe side at all. This tendency in religious matters is\nindeed simply an exhibition of the spirit of the age. It is a time of\ngreat material prosperity and comfort, when pain is regarded as the\ngreatest possible evil, softness, ease, and enjoyment the greatest\npossible good. Men shrink from the infliction of pain even upon the\ngreatest criminals; and this spirit infects their religion, which they\nwould fain turn into a mere matter of weakly sentiment. Against such a\nnotion the judicial action of the Holy Ghost in this case raises an\neternal protest, warning the Church against one-sided and partial\nviews of truth, and bidding her never to lower her standard at the\nworld's call. Men may ignore the fact that God has His severe aspect\nand His stern dispensations in nature, but yet the fact remains. And\nas it is in nature so is it in grace: God is merciful and loving to\nthe penitent, but towards the hypocritical and covetous He is a stern\njudge, as the punishment of Ananias and Sapphira proved.\n\nV. This seems one of the great permanent lessons for the Church of\nevery age which this passage embodies, but it is not the only one.\nThere are many others, and they most important. An eminent modern\ncommentator and expositor[105] has drawn out at great length, and with\nmany modern applications and illustrations, four great lessons which\nmay be derived from this transaction. We shall just note them, giving\na brief analysis of each. (1) There is such a thing as acting as well\nas telling a falsehood. Ananias did not say that the money he brought\nwas the whole price of his land; he simply allowed men to draw this\nconclusion for themselves, suggesting merely by his conduct that he\nwas doing exactly the same as Barnabas. There was no science of\ncasuistry in the apostolic Church, teaching how near to the borders of\na lie a man may go without actually being guilty of lying. The lie of\nAnanias was a spiritual act, a piece of deception attempted in the\nabyss of the human soul, and perpetrated, or attempted rather, upon\nthe Holy Spirit. How often men lie after the same example. They do not\nspeak a lie, but they act a lie, throwing dust into the eyes of others\nas to their real motives and objects, as Ananias did here. He sold his\nestate, brought the money to the Apostles, and would fain have got the\ncharacter of a man of extraordinary liberality and unselfishness, just\nlike others who truly sacrificed their all, while he enjoyed in\nprivate the portion which he had kept back. Ananias wished to make the\nbest of both worlds, and failed in his object. He sought to obtain a\ngreat reputation among men, but had no regard to the secret eye and\njudgment of the Almighty. Alas! how many of our actions, how much of\nour piety and of our almsgiving, is tainted by precisely the same\nvice. Our good works are done with a view to man's approbation, and\nnot as in the sight of the Eternal God.\n\n  [105] C. J. Vaughan, D.D., _The Church of the First Days_, pp.\n  105-12.\n\n(2) What an illustration we find in this passage of the saying of the\nApostle, \"The love of money is the root of all evil; which while some\ncoveted after, they have erred from the faith, and pierced themselves\nwith many sorrows!\" The other scriptures are full of warnings against\nthis vice of covetousness; and so this typical history does not leave\nthe Church without an illustration of its power and danger. Surely if\nat a time when the supernatural forces of the unseen life were\nspecially manifested, this vice intruded into the special sphere of\ntheir influence, the Church of every age should be on its perpetual\nguard against this spirit of covetousness which the Bible\ncharacterises as idolatry.\n\n(3) What a responsibility is involved in being brought near to God as\nmembers of His Son's Church below! There were hypocrites in abundance\nat Jerusalem at that time, but they had not been blessed as Ananias\nhad been, and therefore were not punished as he. There is a reality in\nour connection with Christ which must tell upon us, if not for good,\nthen inevitably for evil. Christ is either the savour of life unto\nlife or else the savour of death unto death unto all brought into\ncontact with Him. In a far more awful sense than for the Jews the\nwords of the prophet Ezekiel are true, \"That which cometh into your\nmind shall not be at all, that ye say, We will be as the heathen, as\nthe families of the countries, to serve wood and stone;\"[106] or as\nthe poet of the _Christian Year_ has well put it in his hymn for the\neighteenth Sunday after Trinity:--\n\n    \"Fain would our lawless hearts escape,\n        And with the heathen be,\n    To worship every monstrous shape\n        In fancied darkness free.\n\n    Vain thought, that shall not be at all,\n        Refuse we or obey;\n    Our ears have heard th' Almighty's call,\n        We cannot be as they.\n\n    We cannot hope the heathen's doom\n        To whom God's Son is given,\n    Whose eyes have seen beyond the tomb,\n        Who have the key of Heaven.\"\n\n  [106] Ezek. xx. 32.\n\n(4) Lastly, let us learn from this history how to cast out the fear of\none another by the greater and more awful fear of God. The fear of man\nis a good thing in a degree. We should have respect to the opinion of\nour fellows, and strive to win it in a legitimate way. But Ananias and\nhis consort desired the good opinion of the Christian community\nregardless of the approval or the watchful eye of the Supreme Judge,\nwho interposed to teach His people by an awful example that in the new\ndispensation of Love, as well as in the old dispensation of Law, the\nfear of the Lord is the beginning of wisdom, and that they and they\nalone have a good understanding who order their lives according to\nthat fear, whether in their secret thoughts or in their public\nactions.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XII.\n\n_GAMALIEL AND HIS PRUDENT ADVICE._\n\n     \"And now I say unto you, Refrain from these men, and let them\n     alone: for if this counsel or this work be of men, it will be\n     overthrown: but if it is of God, ye will not be able to overthrow\n     them; lest haply ye be found even to be fighting against God. And\n     to him they agreed: and when they had called the Apostles unto\n     them, they beat them and charged them not to speak in the name of\n     Jesus, and let them go.\"--ACTS v. 38-40.\n\n\nWe have set forth in these verses an incident in the second appearance\nbefore the council of the Apostle Peter and the other Apostles,\nconspicuous among whom must have been James the brother of John. It is\nalmost certain that James the son of Zebedee was at this time very\nprominent in the public work of the Church, for we are told in the\nopening of the twelfth chapter that when Herod would vex and harass\nand specially weaken the Church, it was neither Peter nor John he\nfirst arrested, but he laid hands on James, and placed on him the\nhonour of being the earliest martyr from amongst the sacred band of\nthe Apostles. Peter we may, however, be sure was the centre of\nSadducean hate at this period, and one of the most conspicuous members\nof the Church. We should at the same time beware of exaggeration, and\nstrive to estimate the events of these earliest days of the Church,\nnot as we behold them now, but as they must have then appeared unto\nthe members of the Sanhedrin. The deaths of Ananias and Sapphira seem\nnow to us extraordinary and awe-inspiring, and sufficient to strike\nterror into the hearts of all unbelievers; but probably the story of\nthem had never reached the ears of the authorities. Human life was but\nlittle accounted of among the Romans who ruled Palestine. A Roman\nmaster might slay or torture his slaves just as he pleased; and the\nRomans, scorning the Jews as a conquered race, would trouble\nthemselves but little concerning quarrels or deaths among them, so\nlong as public order and the stated business of society were not\ninterfered with. The public miracles which St. Peter wrought, these\nwere the things which brought matters to a crisis, and called afresh\nthe attention of the Sanhedrin, charged as they were with all\nreligious authority, as the miracle of healing wrought upon the\nimpotent man had led to the arrest of the Apostles on a previous\noccasion.[107] It is a mistake often made, in studying the history of\nthe past, to imagine that events which we now see to have been\nimportant and epoch-making must have been so regarded by persons\nliving at the time when they happened. Men are never worse judges of\nthe true value of current history than when they are placed in the\nmidst of it. It is always the on-lookers who see most of the play. Our\nminds are so limited, our thoughts are so completely filled up with\nthe present, that it is not till we have got away from the events, and\ncan view them in their due proportion and symmetry, surrounded with\nall their circumstances, that we can hope to form a just appreciation\nof their relative importance. I have often seen a hill of a few\nhundred feet in height occupying a far more commanding position in\nmen's eyes than a really lofty mountain, simply because the one was\nnear, the other far off. The deaths of Ananias and Sapphira are\nrecorded therefore at full length, because they bring eternal lessons\nof justice, judgment, and truth along with them. The numerous public\nmiracles wrought by Peter when \"multitudes came together from the\ncities round about Jerusalem, bringing sick folk and them that were\nvexed with unclean spirits, and they were healed every one,\" seemed to\nthe Sanhedrin and the religious public of Jerusalem the all-important\ntopics, though they are passed wholly over in the Scriptures as\nmatters of no spiritual interest. If it requires a vast exercise of\npatience and wisdom to estimate events aright in their mere worldly\naspect, it requires the operation and guidance of the Holy Ghost to\nform a sound judgment upon the relative spiritual value of events\nfalling within the sphere of Church history; and there indeed it is\nmost true that matters which seem all-important and striking to man\nare judged by God as insignificant and unworthy of notice. So\ncontradictory are ofttimes the ways of God and the opinions of man.\n\n  [107] Acts v. 12-16 states that St. Peter wrought many miracles,\n  and further that men sought to place their sick in such a position\n  that even his shadow might fall upon them, thinking that it\n  brought healing with it. This statement has been spoken of as a\n  demonstrative proof of legendary growth by Zeller in his work on\n  the Acts, and is weakly apologised for by Meyer. But the analogy\n  of hypnotism at the present time, when cures are wrought and\n  extraordinary influence exercised without corporeal contact, is\n  quite sufficient to vindicate St. Luke's account from the charge\n  of legend. If moderns can produce marvellous results without\n  immediate touch; if, for instance, hypnotised patients when\n  blindfolded can read a book by means of their stomachs or their\n  noses (Moll, p. 366, already quoted), or blisters can be raised by\n  a piece of white paper merely by suggestion, as stated by Moll,\n  pp. 114-22, surely the statement of St. Luke is no necessary proof\n  of legend and old wives' fables. See my remarks on p. 100 above.\n\nThe public miracles wrought by St. Peter had this effect,--the only\none noted at length by the sacred writer: they led to the fresh arrest\nof Peter and the other Apostles by the High Priest and the sect of the\nSadducees, and to their incarceration in the public prison attached to\nthe temple. Thence they were delivered by an angel and sent to speak\npublicly in the temple, where their adversaries officially assembled;\njust as on a later occasion Peter, when imprisoned by himself, was\nreleased by angelic interference. Men looking back upon the history of\nthe primitive Church, and judging of it as if it were the history of\nan ordinary time and age, have objected to the angelic interventions\nnarrated here and in a few other places in the New Testament. They\nobject because they do not realize the circumstances of the time. Dr.\nJortin was a shrewd writer of the last century, now too much\nneglected. He remarked in one place that, suppose we admit that a\nspecial revelation of the good powers of the heavenly world was made\nin Christ, it was natural and fair that a special manifestation of the\npowers of evil should have been permitted at the time of Christ's\nIncarnation, in order that the triumph of good might be the greater;\nand thus he would account for the diabolical possessions which play\nsuch an important part in the New Testament. The principle thus laid\ndown extends much farther indeed. The great miracle of the\nIncarnation, the great manifestation of God in Christ, naturally\nbrought with it lesser heavenly manifestations in its train. The\nIncarnation raises for a believer the whole level of the age when it\noccurred, and makes it an exceptional time. The eternal gates were for\na moment lifted up, and angels went in and out for a little; and\ntherefore we accept without endeavouring to explain the words of the\nnarrative which tells us that an angel opened the prison doors for the\nApostles, bidding them go and speak in the temple all the words of\nthis life. And then from the temple, where they were teaching early in\nthe morning, about daybreak of the day following their arrest, they\nare led by the officers before the Sanhedrin which was sitting in the\ncity. Here let us pause to note the marvellous accuracy of detail in\nSt. Luke's narrative. The Sanhedrin used to sit in the temple, but a\nfew years before the period at which we have arrived, four or five at\nmost, they removed from the temple into the city, a fact which is just\nhinted at in the fifth verse of the fourth chapter, where we are told\nthat the rulers, and elders, and scribes were gathered together in\nJerusalem, that is, in the city, not in the temple; while again in\nthis passage we read that when the High Priest came and convened the\ncouncil and all the senate of the children of Israel, they sent their\nofficers to bring the prisoners before them. These officers after a\nwhile returned with the information that the Apostles were preaching\nin the temple. If the Sanhedrin were meeting in the temple, they would\ndoubtless have learned this fact as soon as they assembled, especially\nas they did not sit till after the morning sacrifice, several hours\nafter the Apostles appeared in the temple.[108] When brought before\nthe council the Apostles boldly proclaimed their intention to\ndisregard all human threats, and persevere in preaching the death and\nresurrection of Christ. The majority would then have proceeded to\nextreme measures against the Apostles, and in doing so would only\nhave acted after their usual manner.\n\n  [108] See Dr. John Lightfoot, _Hor\u00e6 Hebraic\u00e6_, on the Acts, iv. 5.\n  _Cf._ his remarks on St. Mark xv. 1, where that learned Hebraist\n  seems to support this view, though admitting that there is\n  something to be said on the other side, viz., that the council met\n  in the temple as of old.\n\nThe greater part of the Sanhedrin were Sadducees, and they, as\nJosephus tells us, were men of a bloodthirsty character, ever ready to\nproceed to punish in the most cruel manner. The simple fact is this,\nthe Sadducees were materialists. They looked upon man as a mere\nanimated machine, and therefore, like the pagans of the same period,\nthey were utterly regardless of human sufferings or of the value of\nhuman life. We little recognise, reared up as we have been in an\natmosphere saturated with Christian principles, how much of our\nmerciful spirit, of our tender care for human suffering, of our\nreverent respect for human life, is owing to the spiritual ideas of\nthe New Testament, teaching as it does the awful importance of time,\nthe sanctity of the body, and the tremendous issues which depend upon\nlife. Sadducees and pagans knew nothing of these things, because they\nknew nothing of the inestimable treasure lodged in every human form.\nLife and time would have been very different for mankind had not the\nspiritual principles inculcated by Pharisee and by Christian alike\ntriumphed over the cold stern creed which strove on this occasion to\nstifle the religion of the Cross in its very infancy. When the\nSadducees would have adopted extreme measures, the words of one man\nrestrained them and saved the Apostles, and that one man was Gamaliel,\nwhose name and career will again come before us. Now let us apply\nourselves to the consideration of his address to the Sanhedrin.\nGamaliel saw that the large public gathering to whom he was speaking\nwere thoroughly excited and full of cruel purposes. He therefore, like\na true orator, adopts the historical method as the fittest one for\ndealing with them. He points out how other pretenders had arisen,\ntrading on the Messianic expectations which then existed all over\nPalestine, and specially in Galilee, and how they had been all\ndestroyed without any action on the part of the Sanhedrin. He\ninstances two cases: Judas, who lived in the days of Cyrenius and the\ntaxing under Augustus C\u00e6sar; and Theudas, who some time previous to\nthat event had arisen, working upon the religious and national hopes\nof the Jews, as the persons now accused before them seemed also to be\ndoing. He points to the fate of the pretenders he had mentioned, and\nadvises the Sanhedrin to leave the Apostles to the same test of Divine\nProvidence, confident that if mere impostors, like the others, they\nwill meet with the same death at the hands of the Romans, without any\ninterference on their part.\n\nIt is evident that Gamaliel must have had some special reason for\nselecting the risings of Theudas and Judas, beyond the fact that they\nwere rebels against established authority. The closing years of the\nkingdom of Herod the Great were times when numberless rebellions took\nplace. Josephus gives us the names of several leaders who took part in\nthem, but, as he tells us (_Antiqq._, XVII. x. 4), there were then\n\"ten thousand other disorders,\" into the details of which he did not\nenter. All these risings had, however, these distinguishing features,\nthey were all unsuccessful, and they were all quenched in blood.\nGamaliel must have seen some feature common to the Christian movement\nand to those headed by Theudas and Judas some thirty years earlier,\nleading him to adduce these examples. That common feature was their\nMessianic character. They all alike proclaimed new hopes for Israel,\nand appealed to the religious expectations which then excited the\npeople, and still are embodied in works like the book of Enoch,\nproduced about that period; while all the other attempts were animated\nby a mere spirit of plunder or of personal ambition. But here we are\nmet with a difficulty. The rationalistic commentators of Germany have\nurged that St. Luke composed a fancy speech and put it into the mouth\nof Gamaliel, and in doing so made a great historic mistake. They\nappeal to Josephus as their authority. He states that a Theudas arose\nabout A.D. 44, some ten years later than this meeting of the\nSanhedrin, and drew a large number of adherents after him, but was\ndefeated by the Roman governor. On the other hand, the words of\nGamaliel refer to the case of a Theudas who lived half a century\nearlier, and preceded Judas the Galilean. To put the matter plainly,\nSt. Luke is accused of having composed a speech for Gamaliel, and,\nwhen doing so, of having committed a great blunder, representing\nGamaliel as appealing to an incident which did not happen till ten\nyears later.[109]\n\n  [109] See, for instance, Zeller on the Acts of the Apostles, vol.\n  i., p. 228 (Norgate and Williams: London, 1875), where he says:\n  \"We must therefore maintain the possibility that our author, after\n  the fashion of ancient historians, freely invented Gamaliel's\n  speech; and it is a question how much of it belongs to history at\n  all, and especially whether Gamaliel delivered the discourse in\n  favour of the Christian cause;\" with which statement the whole\n  context, pp. 223-32, should be compared. The report of Gamaliel's\n  speech is due of course to St. Paul, who was doubtless present\n  during its delivery.\n\nThis circumstance has long attracted the notice of commentators, and\nhas been explained in different ways. Some maintain that there was an\nolder Theudas, who headed an abortive Messianic rebellion previous to\nthe time of Cyrenius and the days of the taxing. This is a very\npossible explanation, and the identity of names constitutes no valid\nobjection. The same names often occur in connection with the same\nmovements, political or religious. In the third century, for instance,\nthe Novatian heresy arose at Carthage, and thence was transferred to\nRome. It was headed by two men, Novatus and Novatian, the former a\nCarthaginian, the latter a Roman presbyter. What a fine subject for a\nmythical theory, were not the facts too indisputably historical! How a\nGerman critic would revel in depicting the impossibility of two men\nwith names so like holding precisely the same office and supporting\nexactly the same views in two cities so widely separated as Rome and\nCarthage! Or let us take two modern instances. The Tractarian movement\nis not yet quite sixty years old. It has not therefore yet passed out\nof the sphere of personal experience. It started in Oxford during the\nthirties, and there in Oxford we find at that very period two divines\nnamed William Palmer, both favouring the Tractarian views, both\neminent writers and scholars, but yet tending finally in different\ndirections, for one William Palmer became a Roman Catholic, while the\nother remained a devoted son of the Reformation. Or to come to still\nmore modern times. There was an Irish movement in 1848 which numbered\namongst its most prominent leaders a William Smith O'Brien, and there\nis now an Irish movement of the same character, and it also numbers a\nWilliam O'Brien amongst its most prominent leaders. A Parnell leads\nthe movement for repeal of the Union in 1890. Ninety years earlier, a\nParnell resigned high office sooner than consent to the consummation\nof the same legislative union of Great Britain and Ireland. We might\nindeed produce parallel cases without number from the range of\nhistory, specially of English history, showing how political and\nreligious tendencies run in families, and reproduce exactly the same\nnames, and that at no distant intervals. But the very passage before\nus, the speech of Gamaliel and its historical argument, affords a\nsufficient instance. Gamaliel adduced the case of Judas the Galilean\nas an illustration of an unsuccessful religious movement. Every one\nadmits that here at least Josephus and the Acts of the Apostles are at\none. Judas the Gaulonite, as Josephus styles him in one place, or the\nGalilean as he calls him in another place, was the founder of the sect\nof the Zealots, who \"have an inviolable attachment to liberty, and say\nthat God is to be their only ruler and Lord\" (Josephus, _Antiqq._,\nXVIII., i. 6). Judas was defeated at the time of the taxing under\nCyrenius, and yet more than forty-five years later we find his sons\nSimon and James suffering crucifixion under the Romans because they\nwere following their father's example.[110]\n\n  [110] The family of Gamaliel himself illustrates the principle for\n  which we are contending, viz., that families have a tendency to\n  reproduce exactly the same political and religious tendencies.\n  Gamaliel himself was grandson of the Jewish patriarch Hillel I.,\n  who presided over the Sanhedrin long before the Christian era.\n  Gamaliel's grandson, Gamaliel II., was president of the Sanhedrin\n  during the first twenty years of the second century. He was\n  distinguished by the same liberal principles as characterised his\n  grandfather. Gamaliel II. was succeeded by his son Simon. So that\n  the presidency of the Sanhedrin continued in the same family for\n  nearly two centuries. It is a notable fact, and not without its\n  bearing on some modern controversies, that the Jewish canon of the\n  Old Testament was not finally closed till the time of the\n  presidency of Gamaliel II., that is, about the year 117 A.D. \"Up\n  to this time the members of the Sanhedrin themselves, in whom was\n  vested the power to fix the canon, disputed the canonicity of\n  certain portions of the Hebrew Scriptures. Thus the school of\n  Shammai excluded Ecclesiastes and the Canticles from the text of\n  Holy Writ, declaring that they proceeded from Solomon's uninspired\n  wisdom. It was the Sanhedrin at Zabne which decided that these\n  books are inspired, and that they form part of the canon.\"--See\n  Mr. Ginsburg's article on Gamaliel II. in the _Dictionary of\n  Christian Biography_, vol. ii., p. 607.\n\nAnother explanation has also been offered. It has been suggested that\nTheudas was simply another name for one of the many rebels whom\nJosephus mentions,--for Simon, for instance, who had been a slave of\nHerod the Great, and had upon his death headed a revolt against\nauthority. Either explanation is quite tenable, as opposed to the view\nwhich represents St. Luke as committing a gross historical error. And\nwe are the more justified in offering these suggestions when we\nreflect upon the numberless instances where modern research has\nconfirmed, and is every year confirming, the minute accuracy of this\nwriter, who doubtless derived his information concerning what passed\nin the Sanhedrin, on this occasion, from St. Paul, who either as a\nmember of the council or a favourite pupil of Gamaliel may have been\npresent listening to the debates, or even sharing in the final\ndecisions.[111]\n\n  [111] Upon the question of the historical accuracy of the Acts of\n  the Apostles, the appendix to the late Bishop Lightfoot's\n  collected essays on _Supernatural Religion_ (London, 1889) should\n  be consulted. The opening paragraph bears directly upon our point.\n  \"In a former volume M. Renan declared his opinion that the author\n  of the third Gospel and the Acts was verily and indeed (_bien\n  r\u00e9ellement_) a disciple of St. Paul.... Such an expression of\n  opinion, proceeding from a not too conservative critic, is\n  significant; and this view of the authorship, I cannot doubt, will\n  be the final verdict of the future, as it has been the unbroken\n  tradition of the past. But at a time when attacks on the\n  genuineness of the work have been renewed, it may not be out of\n  place to call attention to some illustrations of the narrative\n  which recent discoveries have brought to light. No ancient work\n  affords so many tests of veracity, for no other has such numerous\n  points of contact in all directions with contemporary history,\n  politics, topography, whether Jewish, or Greek, or Roman.\"\n\nLet us now turn from the purely historical side of Gamaliel's speech,\nand view it from a spiritual standpoint.\n\nThe address of Gamaliel was so favourable to the Apostles that it has\nhelped to surround his name and memory with much legendary lore. It\nwas the tradition of the ancient Greek Church from the fifth century\nthat he was converted to Christianity and baptized, along with his son\nAbibus and Nicodemus, by St. Peter and St. John.[112] This story of\nGamaliel's secret adherence to Christianity goes even much farther\nback. There is a curious Christian novel or romance, which dates back\nto close upon the year 200, called the _Clementine Recognitions_. We\nfind the same tradition in the sixty-fifth chapter of the first book\nof these _Recognitions_.[113] But the sacred narrative itself gives us\nno hint of all this, contenting itself with setting forth the prudent\nadvice which Gamaliel gave to the assembled council. It was wise\nadvice, and well would it have been for the world if influential\nreligious and political teachers in all ages had given similar\ncounsel. Gamaliel was a man of large scholarship, combined with a wide\nmind, and he had learned that time is a great solvent, and the\ngreatest of tests. Beneath its influence the most pretentious\nschemes, the most promising of structures, fade away if built upon the\nsand of human wisdom, while opposition only tends to consolidate and\ndevelop those that are built upon the foundation of Divine strength\nand power. The policy of patience recommended by Gamaliel is a wise\none, either for the Church or for the state, in things spiritual and\nthings secular alike. And yet it is one from which the natural man\nrecoils with an instinctive repugnance. It speaks well for the Jewish\nSanhedrin that on this occasion they yielded accord to the advice of\ntheir president. We are glad to recognise this spirit in these men,\nwhere we so often have to find matter for blame. Well would it have\nbeen for the Church and for the credit of Christianity had the spirit\nwhich moved even the Sadducean majority in the Jewish council been\nallowed to prevail; and yet how little have the men of tolerant mind\nbeen regarded in moments of temporary triumph such as the Sanhedrin\njust then enjoyed. Gamaliel's advice, \"Refrain from these men and let\nthem alone. If the work be of man it will be overthrown; if of God, ye\nwill not be able to overthrow them,\" strikes a blow at the policy of\npersecution, which is essentially a policy of impatience. The\nintolerant man is an impatient man, not willing to imitate the Divine\ngentleness and long-suffering, which waits, endures, and bears with\nthe sins and ignorance of the children of men. And the Church of\nChrist, when she became intolerant, as she did as soon as ever\nConstantine placed within her reach the sword of human power, forgot\nthe lesson of the Divine patience, and reaped within herself, in a\nshallow religion, in a poorer life, in a restrained intellectual and\nspiritual grasp, the due reward of those who had fallen away from an\nimitation of the Divine example to a mere human level. It is sad to\nsee, for instance, in the case of a man so thoroughly spiritual as St.\nAugustine was, how easily he fell into this human infirmity, how\nquickly he became intolerant when the secular arm was ranged on the\nside of his own opinions. The Church in his own boyhood, during the\ndays of Julian, had to strive against the intolerance of the pagans;\nthe orthodox, who upheld the Catholic view of the nature of the\nGodhead and the scriptural doctrine of the Holy Trinity, had to\nstruggle against the intolerance of the Arians. Yet as soon as power\nwas placed in St. Augustine's own hand he thought it right to exercise\ncompulsion against those who differed from him.\n\n  [112] We learn this from the _Bibliotheca_ of Photius, Cod. 171.\n  Photius was a very learned Greek patriarch of the ninth century.\n  He was a diligent student, and made an analysis of every book he\n  read. These extracts have been gathered into one volume called his\n  _Bibliotheca_ or _Library_, and can now be consulted in any\n  collection of the Greek fathers. Photius reports his story about\n  Gamaliel and Nicodemus from two earlier writers, Chrysippus and\n  Lucian, presbyters of Jerusalem.\n\n  [113] For an account of the Clementine _Recognitions_ see Dr.\n  Salmon's Introduction to the N. T., 4th ed., pp. 14-19, 373-75.\n  Translations, both of the _Recognitions_ and _Homilies_, can be\n  consulted in Clark's Ante-Nicene Library.\n\nIt was exactly the same in later days. Men may take up commentators of\nthe sixteenth and seventeenth centuries, Protestant and Roman Catholic\nalike. There they will find many remarks, acute, devout,\nheart-searching, but very few of them will be found to have arrived at\nthe mental fairness and balance involved in those words, \"Refrain from\nthese men, and let them alone.\" Cornelius a Lapide was a Jesuit\ncommentator of those times. He wrote many valuable expositions of Holy\nScripture, including one dealing with this book of the Acts, filled\nwith thoughts suggestive and stimulating. It is, however, almost\nludicrous to notice how he strives to evade the force of Gamaliel's\nwords, and to escape the application of them to his own Protestant\nopponents. The Sanhedrin were quite right, he thinks, in adopting\nGamaliel's advice, and in showing themselves tolerant of the apostolic\npreaching because the Apostles worked miracles; and so, though they\nwere unconvinced, still they had just reason to suspend their\njudgment. But as for the Protestants of his time, they were heretics;\nthey were the opponents of the Church, the bride of Christ, and\ntherefore Gamaliel's words had no application to them; as if the very\nquestion that was raised by the Protestants was not this--whether\nCornelius a Lapide himself and his Jesuit brethren did not represent\nAntichrist, and whether the Protestants were not the true Church of\nGod, who therefore on his own principles were quite justified in\npersecuting their Romish opponents. It is very difficult to get men to\nacknowledge their own fallibility. Every party, when triumphant,\nbelieves that it has a monopoly of truth, and has a Divine right of\npersecution; and every party when downcast and in adversity sees and\nadmires the beauties of toleration. Verily societies, churches,\nfamilies, as well as individuals, have good right diligently to pray,\n\"In all time of our wealth, good Lord, deliver us,\" for never are men\nin greater spiritual danger than when prosperity leads them to vote\nthemselves infallible, and to practise intolerance towards their\nfellow-men on account of their intellectual or religious opinions.\n\nThe sentiment of Gamaliel on this occasion may however be pushed to a\nmischievous extreme. He advised the Sanhedrin to exercise patience and\nself-control, but he did not apparently go any farther. He did not\nrecommend them to adopt the noblest course, which would have been\nunprejudiced examination into the claims put forward by the Christian\nteachers. Gamaliel's advice was good, it was perhaps the best he could\nhave given, or at least which could have been expected under the\ncircumstances, but it was not the highest or noblest conceivable. It\nwas the kind of advice always given by men who do not wish to commit\nthemselves untimely, but who are waiters upon Providence, postponing\ntheir decision as to which side they shall join until they first see\nwhich side will win. Opportunists, the French call them; men who are\nsitting upon the fence, we in homelier phrase designate them. It is\nwell to be prudent in our actions, because true prudence is only\nChristian wisdom, and such wisdom will always lead us to take the most\neffectual ways of doing good. But then prudence may be pushed to the\nextreme of moral cowardice, or at least the name of prudence may be\nused as a cloak for a contemptible desire to stand well with all\nparties, and thereby advance our own selfish interests. Prudence\nshould be united with moral courage; it should be ready to take the\nunpopular side, and to champion truth and righteousness even when in a\ndepressed and lowly condition. It was easy enough to side with Christ\nwhen the multitude cried, \"Hosanna in the Highest.\" But the test of\ndeepest love and unfailing devotion was when the women stood by the\ncross, and when the Magdalen sought out the grave in the garden that\nshe might anoint the dead body of her loved Lord.\n\nFinally, let us just notice the conduct of the Apostles under those\ncircumstances. The Apostles were freed from the pressing danger of\ndeath, but they did not entirely escape. The Sanhedrin were logically\ninconsistent. They refrained from putting the Apostles to death, as\nGamaliel advised, but they flogged them as Roman laws permitted; and a\nJewish disciplinary flogging, when forty stripes save one were\ninflicted, was so severe that death sometimes resulted from it.[114]\nMan is a curiously inconsistent being, and the Sanhedrin showed on\nthis occasion that they had their own share of this weakness. Gamaliel\nadvised not to kill the Apostles, but let time work out the Divine\npurposes either of success or failure. They adopt the first part of\nhis advice, but are not willing to allow Providence to develop His\ndesigns without their interference, and so by their stripes endeavour\nto secure that failure shall attend the apostolic efforts. But it was\nall in vain. The Apostles were living under a realized sense of\nheavenly things. The love of Christ, and communion with Christ and the\nSpirit of Christ, so raised them above all earthly surroundings that\nwhat things seemed loss and shame and grief to others were by them\ncounted highest joy, because they looked at them from the side of God\nand eternity. Human threats availed nothing with men animated by such\na spirit,--nay, rather as proofs of the opposition of the evil one,\nthey only quickened their zeal, so that \"every day, in the temple and\nat home, they ceased not to teach and to preach Jesus as the Christ.\"\nHow wondrously life would be transformed for us all did we view its\nchanges and chances, its sorrows and its pains, as the Apostles\nregarded them. Poverty and disgrace, undeserved loss and suffering,\nall alike would be transfigured into surpassing glory when endured for\nChrist's sake, while our powers of labour and work, and our active\nzeal in the holiest of causes, would be quickened, because, like them,\nwe should walk and live and toil in the loved presence of One who is\ninvisible.\n\n  [114] St. Paul, as he tells us in 2 Cor. xi. 24, was five times\n  flogged by the Jews. When the Jews inflicted this punishment the\n  culprit was tied to a pillar in the synagogue; the executioner,\n  armed with a scourge of three distinct lashes, inflicted the\n  punishment; while an official standing by read selected portions\n  of the law between each stroke. Thirteen strokes of the threefold\n  scourge was equivalent to the thirty-nine stripes. This was the\n  flogging the Apostles suffered on this occasion.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIII.\n\n_PRIMITIVE DISSENSIONS AND APOSTOLIC PRECAUTIONS._\n\n     \"Now in these days, when the number of the disciples was\n     multiplying, there arose a murmuring of the Grecian Jews against\n     the Hebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily\n     ministration. And the twelve called the multitude of the\n     disciples unto them, and said, It is not fit that we should\n     forsake the word of God, and serve tables. Look ye out therefore,\n     brethren, from among you seven men of good report, full of the\n     Spirit and of wisdom, whom we may appoint over this business. But\n     we will continue stedfastly in prayer, and in the ministry of the\n     word.\"--ACTS vi. 1-4.\n\n\nThe sixth chapter of the Acts, and the election of the Seven, mark a\ndistinct advance in the career of the early Church. This sixth chapter\nis like the twelfth of Genesis and the introduction of Abraham upon\nthe stage of sacred history. We feel at once as if the narrative of\nGenesis had come into contact with modern times, leaving the\nmysterious period of darkness all behind. So is it with the Acts of\nthe Apostles. The earliest days of the primitive Church were quite\nunlike all modern experience. The Church had received a great blessing\nand a wondrous revelation, and had been enriched with marvellous\npowers. But just as men act when they have experienced a surpassing\njoy or a tremendous calamity,--they are upset for a time, they do not\nrealize their position, they do not take all the circumstances in at\nonce, nor can they quite settle what their future course shall be;\nthey must get a little way distant from the joy or the sorrow before\nthey make their future arrangements,--so was it with the Apostles\nduring that space of time which elapsed from the Pentecostal\noutpouring down to the election of the Seven. We are so accustomed to\nthink of the Apostles as inspired men, that we forget that inspiration\ndid not destroy their natural powers or infirmities, but rather must\nhave acted in consonance with the laws of their constitution. The\nApostles must, to a certain extent, have been upset by the\nextraordinary events they had witnessed. They sought and found daily\nguidance in the power of the Spirit; but they had made no settled\nplans, had not compared or arranged their ideas, had formed no scheme\nof doctrine or teaching, had realized nothing concerning the future of\nthe society they were unconsciously building up under the Divine\nleading. God had His plans; the ascended Lord had spoken to the\nApostles concerning the future of the Kingdom of Heaven; but it would\nbe making the Apostles more than men of like passions and like\ninfirmities with ourselves to imagine that during those stirring and\neventful days they had consciously realized the whole scheme of\nChristian doctrine and government. That period of a few months--for it\ncould not have been more--was a period of Divine chaos, out of which\nthe final settlement of the Church of God began slowly to evolve\nitself under the direction of God the Holy Ghost. How long, it may be\nasked, did this period of unsettlement last? A question which resolves\nitself into the further one bearing directly on our present\nsubject,--what was the date of the election and subsequent martyrdom\nof Stephen? The answer to this throws much light on the apostolic\nhistory and the events recorded in the first five chapters of this\nbook.\n\nI. St. Stephen was put to death some time in the year 37 A.D., after\nPontius Pilate had been recalled from the government of Palestine, and\nbefore his successor had arrived to take up the reins of power.[115]\nThe Jewish authorities took advantage of the interregnum in order to\ngratify their spite against the eminent orator who was doing so much\ndamage to their cause. Under ordinary circumstances the Jewish\nSanhedrin could not put a man to death unless they had received the\nfiat of the Roman authorities. Now, however, during this interval,\nthere was no supreme authority from whom this fiat could be secured,\nand so they seized the opportunity and executed Stephen as a\nblasphemer, according to the method prescribed in the law of Moses.\nThis happened in the year 37 A.D., about four years after the\nCrucifixion. We must, however, observe another point. During the\nlatter years of his administration, Pontius Pilate had been acting in\na most tyrannical manner. This fact explains a circumstance which must\nstrike the most casual reader of the Acts. We there read that the\nsupreme Jewish council made two attempts to restrain the Apostles; the\nfirst after the healing of the cripple at the Temple Gate, and the\nsecond when Gamaliel dissuaded them from their purposes of blood.\nAfter that they allowed the Apostles to pursue their course without\nany hostility. This appears to the casual reader more striking, more\ndifficult to understand, than it was in reality. We are now obliged to\nthink of Judaism and Christianity as opposed and mutually exclusive\nreligions; we cannot conceive of a man being a Jew and a Christian at\nthe same time. But it was not so with the Apostles and their followers\nat the period of which we are writing. This may seem contradictory to\nwhat I have elsewhere stated as to the antagonistic character of the\ntwo religions. But the apparent inconsistency is easily explained. As\nfull-blown and realized systems, Judaism and Christianity are\ninconsistent. The one was a bud, the other an expanded flower. The\nsame individual bulb cannot be at the same moment a bud and a flower.\nBut the Apostles had not as yet realized Christianity as a full-blown\nsystem, nor grasped all its consequences. There was no inconsistency\nwhen they made a conjoint profession of Judaism and Christianity. The\nApostles and their followers were all scrupulous observers of the law\nof Moses; and no dwellers in Jerusalem were more regular attendants at\nthe Temple worship than the persons who had as yet no distinct name,\nand were known only as followers of the Prophet of Nazareth. To take\nan illustration from modern ecclesiastical history, the Apostles and\nthe early Jerusalem Church must have been simply known to the Jewish\nauthorities, just as the first Methodists at Oxford were known to the\nChurch authorities of John Wesley's earlier days, as stricter members\nof the Church of England than the usual run of people were. This fact\nalone lessens the difficulty we might find in accounting for the\nstatements made as to the continued activity of the Apostles, and the\nfreedom they enjoyed even after they had been solemnly warned by the\nSanhedrin. Neither the Apostles themselves nor the Jewish council\nrecognised as yet any religious opposition in the teaching of Peter\nand his brethren. The Apostles themselves had not yet formulated\ntheir ideas nor perceived whither their principles would ultimately\nlead them. No one indeed would have been more surprised than\nthemselves had they foreseen the antagonistic position into which they\nwould be ultimately forced; and as for the Sanhedrin, the only charge\nthey brought against the Apostles was not a religious one at all, but\nmerely that they were challenging the conduct and decision of the\nauthorities concerning the execution of Jesus Christ, and, as the High\nPriest put it, \"intend to bring this Man's blood upon us.\"[116] But\nthen history reveals to us some other facts which completely explain\nthe difficulty and vindicate the historical accuracy of the sacred\nnarrative. St. Stephen was put to death in the year 37. At that time\nhe may have been acting as a deacon for two, or even three, years,\nduring which Christian teaching and views made very rapid progress,\nall unopposed by the Jewish authorities, simply because their\nattention was concentrated on other topics of much more pressing\ninterest. Pilate was appointed governor of Palestine in 26 A.D. He\nruled it for ten years, till the end of 36 A.D., when he was recalled.\nGod causes all things to work together for good, and overrules even\nstate changes to the development of His purposes. Pilate's whole\nperiod of rule was, as I have already said, marked by tyranny; but the\nconcluding years were the worst. The members of the Sanhedrin were\nthen specially excited by two actions which touched themselves most\nkeenly. He seized on the accumulated proceeds of the Temple-tax of\ntwo drachmas, about eighteen pence, paid by every Jew throughout the\nworld, which then amounted to a vast sum, expending it in making an\naqueduct for the supply of Jerusalem. This action affected the\npecuniary resources of the Jewish authorities. But he attacked them on\na dearer point still, for he set up the images of the emperor in the\nHoly City, and thus wounded them in their religious feelings,\nintroducing the abomination of desolation into the most sacred\nplaces.[117]\n\n  [115] See the authorities for the chronology of this period as\n  given in Lewin's _Fasti Sacri_, pp. 247-53.\n\n  [116] The Church during its earliest years called itself merely\n  the Way, not recognising the term Christian at all. This is\n  brought out clearly in the Revised Version, as in Acts ix. 2, xix.\n  9, 23, xxiv. 14. The adoption of the name Christian probably\n  marked the more distinct separation of the Church from the\n  synagogue.\n\n  [117] See Josephus, _Antiqq._, XVIII., iii., 1, 2.\n\nAll the attention of the priests, the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and\nthe people, was concentrated upon the violent deeds of Pilate. They\nhad no time to think of the Apostles,--who, indeed, must themselves\nhave shared in the national enthusiasm and universal hostility which\nPilate's attempts excited. A common opposition stilled, for the time,\nthe internal strife and controversy about the prophet of Nazareth\nwhich had, for a little, rent asunder the inhabitants of Jerusalem.\nLet us now repeat the dates to which we have attained. St. Stephen was\nexecuted in 37 A.D.; his election took place probably in 34 A.D. The\nfirst seven chapters of the Acts set before us, then, all we know of\nthe history of the earliest four years of the Church's life and work;\nand yet though very briefly told, that history tallies with what we\nlearn from writers like Josephus and Philo.\n\nII. Let us now return to the text of our narrative. This sixth chapter\noffers a very useful glimpse into the inner life of the primitive\nChurch. It shows us what led up to the election of the Seven in these\nwords: \"Now in these days, when the number of the disciples was\nmultiplying, there arose a murmuring of the Grecian Jews against the\nHebrews, because their widows were neglected in the daily\nministration.\"\n\n(_a_) The election sprang out of the multiplying, and the multiplying\nbegat a murmuring among the disciples. There is here teaching for the\nChurch of all time, plain and evident to every reader, a lesson which\nhistory has repeated from age to age. Increase of numbers does not\nalways mean increase of happiness, increase of devotion, increase of\ntrue spiritual life, but has often brought increase of trouble and\ndiscontent alone. What a lesson of patient submission under present\ntrials the wise man may here read. God has made all things double one\nagainst another; and when He bestows such notable increase as He\ngranted to the apostolic Church, He adds thereto some counter-balancing\ndisadvantage to keep His people low and make them humble. Undiluted\njoy, unmitigated success, is not to be the portion of God's people\nwhile tabernacling here below. How often has the lesson been repeated\nin their experience of the past as in our own personal experience as\nwell!\n\nThe trial of the apostolic Church was typical of the trials which\nawaited future ages. The Church in the Diocletian persecution, for\ninstance, was wasted and torn. The records of that last great trial\nthrough which the Church passed, just prior to her final triumph over\nPaganism, are lighted up by the fires of the most determined attempt\never made to crush the faith of the Crucified One. How often during\nthat last persecution God's faithful ones must have wept in secret\nover the ruin of the holy places and the threatened destruction of the\nfaith! Yet the trials of the hours of adversity were as nothing\ncompared with the dangers which beset the Church when the faith\ntriumphed under Constantine, and the multitude of the disciples was\nincreased and multiplied by the power of imperial patronage. The\ntrials of the day of persecution were external, and utterly powerless\nto affect the spiritual life of Christ's mystical body. The trials of\na multiplying and enlarging Church were internal; they arose from\nunbelief, and hypocrisy, and want of Christian love, and were\ndestructive of the life of God in the human soul. The dangers of\nsuccess, the subtle temptations of prosperity, making us proud,\ncontemptuous of others, self-conscious, dependent wholly upon man and\nindependent of God, are the lessons, ecclesiastical, social, and\npersonal, pressed upon us by the opening words of this sixth chapter.\n\n(_b_) These words, again, correct a popular mistake, and reproduce a\nwarning of our Master too often forgotten. When the disciples were\nincreasing, and the hearts of the Apostles all aglow with the success\nvouchsafed them, \"a murmuring arose between the Grecian Jews and the\nHebrews.\" What a glimpse we get here into the very heart and centre of\nearly Christian social life. It is often the hardest task in\nhistorical researches to get such a glimpse as here is given. We know\nthe outer life of societies, of families, of dynasties. We see them in\ntheir external form and symmetry: we behold them in their company\ndress and in their public appearances; but till we get to know and\nrealize their common every-day life, how they ate, drank, slept, how\ntheir social intercourse was maintained, we fail to grasp the most\nimportant side of their existence. The primitive Church is often\nthought of and spoken of as if its social and spiritual life were\nwholly unlike our own; as if sin and infirmity were entirely absent,\nand perfect holiness there prevailed. This expression, \"Now in these\ndays there arose a murmuring,\" shows us that the presence of\nsupernatural gifts, the power of working miracles and speaking with\nother tongues, did not raise the spiritual level of individual\nbelievers above that we find in the Church of the present day. The\ndistribution of alms is always attended by jealousies and disputes,\nrendering the work one of the most unpleasant tasks which can be\nundertaken by any man. No matter how earnestly one strives to be fair\nand just, no matter how diligently one may seek to balance claim\nagainst claim and righteously to satisfy the wants of those who seek\nrelief, still there will always be minds that will never be content,\nand will strive to detect injustice and wrong and favouritism, no\nmatter how upright the intention may be. What a comfort to God's\nservant striving to do his duty is the study of this sixth chapter of\nthe Acts! Fretting and worry, weary days and sleepless nights, are\noften the only reward which the Christian philanthropist receives in\nreturn for his exertions. But here comes in the Acts of the Apostles\nto cheer. It was just the same with the Apostles, for they must have\nbeen the chief almoners or distributers of the Church's common fund\nprior to the election of the Seven. The Apostles themselves did not\nescape the accusation of favouritism, and we may be well content to\nbear and suffer what the Apostles were compelled to endure. Let us\nonly take heed that like them we suffer wrongfully, and that our\nconscience testify that we have striven to do everything in the sight\nof the Lord Jesus Christ; and then, disregarding all human murmuring\nand criticism, we should calmly proceed upon our work, in no way\ndiscouraged because the recipients of Christian bounty still act as\neven the primitive Christians did. This is one important lesson we\ngain from this passage.\n\n(_c_) We may, again, learn another great truth from this incident, and\nthat is, that the primitive Church was no ideal communion, but a\nsociety with failings and weaknesses and discontent, exactly like\nthose which exist in the Church of our own times. The favourite\nargument with controversialists of the Church of Rome, when trying to\ndraw proselytes from among Protestants, is, as logicians say, of an _\u00e0\npriori_ type. They will enlarge upon the importance of religion and\nreligious truth, and upon the awful consequences which will result\nfrom a mistake on such a vital question, and then they will argue that\nGod must have constituted a living infallible guide on such an\nimportant topic, and that guide is in their opinion the Pope, as the\nhead of the Catholic Church. The Scriptures are full of\nwarnings--unnoticed warnings they often are, but still they are full\nof them--as to the untrustworthy character of all such kind of\narguments. In this sixth chapter, for instance, the thoughtful and\nmeditative student can see a specimen of these providential\nadmonitions, and a reason for its insertion in the sacred story.\nChrist came to establish the Christian Church upon earth. For this\npurpose He lived and suffered and rose again. For this purpose He sent\nforth the Third Person of the Holy Trinity to lead and guide and dwell\nin His Church; and surely, _\u00e0 priori_, we might as well conclude that\nin the Church so founded, so guided, so ruled by Peter and the rest of\nthe Apostles, there would have been found no such thing as\nfavouritism, or murmuring, or discontent,--sentiments which might\nexist in the unregenerate world, but which should find no place in the\nkingdom of the Spirit. But, when we turn to the sacred record of\nChrist's sayings, and the inspired history of Christ's Church, we find\nthat all our _\u00e0 priori_ presumptions and all our logical anticipations\nare put to flight, for the Master warns us in the thirteenth of St.\nMatthew, when speaking His wondrous parables concerning the Kingdom of\nHeaven, that sin and imperfection will ever find their place in His\nChurch; and then the history of the Acts of the Apostles comes in to\nconfirm the inspired prophecy, and we see from this chapter how the\nprimitive Church of Christ was torn and racked with mere earthly\nfeelings and mere human infirmities, like the ordinary worldly\nsocieties which existed all around; \"there arose a murmuring\" even in\nthe Church where Apostles taught, where the Holy Ghost dwelt, and\nwhere the Pentecostal gifts were displayed. The occasion of the\nmurmuring, too, is noteworthy and prophetic. It was like the trial\nunder which man fell and by which Christ was tempted. It was a mere\nmaterial temptation. Even in the primitive Church, living as it did in\nthe region and presence of the supernatural, expecting every day and\nhour the return of the ascended Lord, even there material\nconsiderations entered, and the world and the things thereof found a\nplace, and caused divisions where they would seem to have been\nstrictly excluded by the very conditions of the Church's existence.\nThe Church and the world there touched and influenced one another; and\nso it must be always. There is a world indeed against which the Church\nmust ever protest--the world of impure lusts and wicked desires, the\nworld of which Paganism was the presiding genius; but then there is a\nworld in which the Church must exist and with which it must deal, the\nworld which God has created and ordained, the world of human society\nand human wants, feelings, desires, appetites. With these the Church\nmust ever come in contact. Monasticism and asceticism have endeavoured\nindeed in the past to get rid of this world. They cut men and women\noff from marriage and separated them from society, and reduced human\nwants to a minimum; and yet nature asserted itself, and the\ncorruptions of monasticism have been a divinely-ordered protest\nagainst foolish attempts to separate between things spiritual and\nthings secular, between the Church founded by Christ and the world\ncreated by God.[118] The murmuring arose on this occasion because the\nApostles made no such mistake, but recognised fearlessly that the\nChurch of Christ took cognizance of such a question as the daily\ndistribution and the temporal wants of its disciples. The apostolic\nChurch did not disdain a mere economic question, and yet the Church of\nour own time has been slow enough to follow its example; but, thank\nGod, it is learning more and more of its duty in this respect. The\ntime has been when nothing was considered worthy of the notice of the\nChristian pulpit or of Church synods and Church courts save purely\nspiritual and doctrinal questions. The vast subjects of education, of\nthe social life, of the amusements of the people, the methods of\nlegislation or statesmanship, were thought outside the region of\nChristian activity, and were utterly neglected or else left wholly to\nthose who made no profession at least of being guided by Christian\nprinciple. But now we have learned the important truth that the Church\nis a Divine leaven placed in the mass of human society to permeate it\nthrough and through; and perhaps the present danger is that the clergy\nshould forget the apostolic warning, true for every age, that while\nthe Church in its totality, priests and people, should take an active\ninterest in these questions, and strive to mould the whole life of man\non Christian principles, it is not at the same time \"fit that the\nministry should forsake the word of God and serve tables.\"\n\n  [118] The term world is one that has very various meanings in\n  Scripture, and good people have often made serious practical\n  mistakes by confounding these meanings. I once met a serious young\n  man disposed to the views of the \"Brethren,\" who gravely told me\n  that he thought it wrong to admire beautiful scenery because it\n  was written, \"Love not the world, neither the things that are in\n  the world.\" There are three distinct uses of the term \"world\" in\n  Scripture: as expressing, (1) the material earth, Psalm xxiv. 1,\n  \"The earth is the Lord's, and the fulness thereof; the world, and\n  they that dwell therein;\" (2) the people on the earth, John iii.\n  16, \"God so loved the world, that He gave His only begotten Son\"\n  for it; (3) the impure lusts and desires which found full scope\n  under paganism, and still intrude themselves into the kingdom of\n  Christ, 1 John ii. 15, 16, \"Love not the world, neither the things\n  that are in the world.... For all that is in the world, the lust\n  of the flesh, and the lust of the eyes, and the vainglory of life,\n  is not of the Father, but is of the world.\" It is evident that if\n  we take the bad meaning of world in this last passage and apply it\n  to the other two we shall end in the old Manichean view that the\n  material world and the men on it are the handiwork of a bad or\n  inferior deity, and therefore should be entirely rejected. I know\n  that some very grave and serious people have fallen into this\n  confusion, and have thus banished all sweetness and light from\n  their own lives and from those of their families. It is a curious\n  circumstance, too, that we read in ancient writers that the\n  Manichean heresy always recommended itself to persons of a similar\n  temperament, who in consequence led lives of a very strict and\n  puritanical type. They looked upon the world and all that was in\n  it as the devil's creation. How then could they smile upon, love,\n  or enjoy anything therein? See the article \"Manicheans\" in the\n  _Dict. Christ. Biog._\n\nIII. But we have not yet done with this murmuring or with the lessons\nit furnishes for the Church of the future. What lay at the basis of\nthis murmuring, and of the jealousy thereby indicated? \"There arose a\nmurmuring of the Grecian Jews against the Hebrews;\" a racial question\ndeveloped itself, and racial, or perhaps we should rather say, in this\ncase, social and linguistic, differences found place in the apostolic\nChurch, and gave rise to serious quarrels even where the Spirit in\nfullest measure and in extraordinary power was enjoyed. There was\nbitter dissension between Jews and Samaritans, though they believed in\nthe same God and reverenced the same revelation. Political\ncircumstances in the past sufficiently explain that quarrel. There was\nalmost, if not quite, as bitter hostility between the Grecians and the\nHebrews, because they spoke different languages and practised diverse\ncustoms, and that though they worshipped in the same temple and\nbelonged to the same nation. The origin of these differences in the\nChristian Church of Jerusalem goes back to a very distant period. Here\ncomes in the use of the Apocrypha, \"which the Church doth read for\nexample of life and instruction of manners.\" If we wish to understand\nthe course of events in the Acts we must refer to the books of\nMaccabees, where is told the romantic story of the struggle of the\nJews against the Greek kings of Syria, who tried to force them into\nconformity with the religion of Greece, which then was counted the\nreligion of civilization and of culture. The result was that the\nintensely national party became bitterly hostile to everything\npertaining to Greece and its civilization. The Jews of Palestine of\nthat period became like the purely Celtic Irish of the Reformation\nepoch. The Irish identified the Reformation with England and English\ninfluence, just as the Jews identified Paganism with Greece and Syria,\nand Greek influence; and the result was that the Irish became the most\nintensely ultramontane nation, and the Palestinian Jews became the\nmost intensely narrow and prejudiced nation of their time. The\nPalestinian or Hebrew Jews, speaking the Aramaeic or Chaldee tongue,\nscorned Greek language and all traces of Greek civilization, while\nthe Jews of the Dispersion, specially those of Alexandria, strove to\nrecommend the Jewish religion to the Gentile world, whose civilization\nand culture they appreciated, and whose language they used. The\nopposition of the Hebrew to the Grecian Jews was very bitter, and\nexpressed itself in language which has come down to us in the Talmudic\nwritings. \"Cursed be he who teacheth his son the learning of the\nGreeks,\" was a saying among the Hebrews; while again, we hear of\nRabban Simeon, the son of Gamaliel, St. Paul's teacher, who used to\nembody his hatred of the Grecians in the following story: \"There were\na thousand boys in my father's school, of whom five hundred learned\nthe law and five hundred the wisdom of the Greeks; and there is not\none of the latter now alive, excepting myself here and my uncle's son\nin Asia.\"[119] Heaven itself was supposed by the Hebrews to have\nplainly declared its hostility against their Grecian opponents. Hence,\nnaturally, arose the same divisions at Jerusalem. There were in that\ncity nearly five hundred synagogues, a considerable proportion of\nwhich belonged to the Grecian Jews. All classes and all the\nsynagogues, Hebrew and Grecian alike, contributed their quota to the\nearliest converts won by the Apostles; and these converts brought\ntheir old jealousies and oppositions with them into the Church of\nChrist. The Hebrew or the Grecian Jew of yesterday could not forget,\nto-day, because he had embraced a belief in Jesus of Nazareth as the\nMessiah, all his old feelings and his old hereditary quarrels, and\nhence sprang the Christian dissensions of which we read, prophetic of\nso many similar racial and social and linguistic dissensions in the\nChurch down to the present time. The Acts of the Apostles is a kind of\nmagic mirror for Church history. In the olden times men dreamt of a\nmagic mirror into which one could look and see the course of their\nfuture life depicted. We can see something of the same in this\ninspired book. The bitter dissensions which racial and linguistic\ndifferences have made in the Church of every age are here depicted in\nminiature. The quarrels between East and West, between Greeks and\nLatins, between Latins and Teutons, between Teuton and Celt, between\nRoman Catholic and Protestant, between the Whites and Negroes, between\nEuropean Christians and Hindoo converts; the scandalous scenes still\nenacted round the Holy Place at Jerusalem, where peace is kept between\nnominal Christians only by the intervention of Mahometan\nsoldiers,--all turn upon the same points and embody the same\nprinciples, and may best find solution upon the lines laid down by the\nApostles. And what were these lines? They laid down that there are\ndiversities of functions and of work in the Church of Christ; there is\na ministry of the word, and there is a serving of tables. One class\nshould not absorb every function; for if it does, the highest function\nof all, the ministry of the word and prayer, will inevitably suffer.\nWell, indeed, would it have been had this lesson been far more laid to\nheart. How many a schism and rent in the visible Church of Christ has\nbeen caused because no work, no spiritual function, was found for a\nnewly-awakened layman anxious to do something for Him who had done so\nmuch for his soul. The principle here laid down in germ is a very\nfruitful one, suitable for every age. A new crisis, a fresh\ndeparture, an unexpected need, has arisen, and a new organization is\ntherefore at once devised by the Apostles; and well would it have been\nhad their example found closer imitation. We have been too much in the\nhabit of looking upon the Church of Christ as if it were once for all\nstereotyped in apostolic times, and as if there were nothing to be\ndone in the living present save to adapt these ancient institutions to\nour modern needs. The Roman Catholic Church has been in many respects\nmore true to apostolic principles than the children of the\nReformation. With all her intense conservatism Rome has never\nhesitated to develop new organizations as new needs have arisen, and\nthat in the boldest manner. It has often been remarked that the Church\nof Rome would never have lost John Wesley and the Wesleyans as the\nChurch of England did. She would have put a brown cassock upon him,\nand girded him with a rope, and sent him forth as the head of a new\norder, to do the work to which he felt impelled and for which God had\nqualified him. Experience has taught us, however, that we cannot\nsafely neglect apostolic precedent; and the warning implied in the\nwords of the Apostles, \"it is not fit that we should forsake the word\nof God and serve tables,\" has been amply fulfilled. The highest\nministry of the word has been injured by the accumulation of all\npublic work in the Church on one class alone. What minister of Jesus\nChrist does not feel that, even with the wider and more apostolic\nviews now prevalent, with all the recognition of the service which\ngodly Christian laymen render, the old tradition is still strong, and\nclergymen are too absorbed in the mere serving of tables, to the\nneglect of their higher functions? The laity often complain of the\npoor, thin, meagre character of the preaching to which they are\ncompelled to listen; but how can it be otherwise when they demand so\nmuch purely secular service, so much serving of tables from those\nwhose great work is to teach? The Church of England, in her service\nfor the ordination of priests, demands from the candidates whether\nthey will devote themselves to the study of the Word of God, and such\nother studies as bear upon the same. I often wonder how her clergy are\nnow to fulfil this solemn vow, when frequently they have not a night\nin the week at home, save perhaps Saturday evening, and when, from\nearly morning to late at night, all their energies are swallowed up in\nthe work of schools, and clubs, and charitable organizations, and\nparochial visitation, leaving little time and still less energy for\nthe work of meditation and thought and study. The clergy are the\nLord's prophets, watchmen upon the walls of Zion. It is their great\nbusiness to explain the Lord's will, to translate the ideas of the\nBible into the language of modern life, to apply the Divine principles\nof doctrine and discipline laid down in the Bible to the ever-varying\nwants of our complex modern civilization; and how can this function be\ndischarged unless there be time for reading and for thinking, so as to\ngain a true notion of what are these modern wants, and to find out how\nthe eternal principles of the Scriptures are to be applied to them? We\nrequire a great deal more organized assistance in the work of the\nChurch, and then, when that assistance is forthcoming, we may expect\nand demand that the highest ministry of all, \"the ministry of the Word\nand prayer,\" shall be discharged with greater efficiency and blessing.\nThe Apostles in meeting this crisis, laid down a law of true\ndevelopment and living growth in the divine society. The Church of\nChrist is ever to have the power to organize herself in face of new\ndepartures, while at the same time they proclaim the absolute\nnecessity and the perpetual obligation of the Christian ministry in\nits highest aspect; for surely if even for Apostles it was needful\nthat their whole time should be devoted to the ministry of the word of\nGod and prayer, and the Church of that time, with all its wondrous\ngifts, demanded such a ministry, there ought to exist in the modern\nChurch also an order of men wholly separated unto those solemn duties.\n\n  [119] Lightfoot's _Hor\u00e6 Heb._, Acts vi. 1, where there is a long\n  and learned discussion, extending over several pages, upon the\n  distinction between the Hebrew and the Grecian Jews.\n\nIV. The Apostles having determined upon the creation of a new\norganization to deal with a new need, then appeal to the people for\ntheir assistance, and call upon them to select the persons who shall\nbe its members; but they, at the same time, reserve their own rights\nand authority, and, when the selection has been made, claim the power\nof ordination and appointment for themselves. The people nominated\nwhile the Apostles appointed. The Apostles took the most effective\nplan to quiet the trouble which had arisen when they took the people\ninto their confidence. The Church has been often described as the\nmother of modern freedom. The councils of old time were the models and\nforerunners of modern parliaments. The councils and synods of the\nChurch set an example of open discussion and of legislative assemblies\nin ages when tyrannical authority had swallowed up every other vestige\nof liberty. The Church from the beginning, and in the Acts of the\nApostles, clearly showed that its government was not to be an absolute\nclerical despotism, but a free Christian republic, where clergy and\npeople were to take counsel together. It is a noteworthy thing indeed,\nthat even in the Roman Catholic Church, where the exclusive claims of\nthe clergy have been most pressed, the recognition of the rights of\nthe laity in the matter of Church councils and debates has found place\ndown to modern times. The representatives of the Emperor and other\nChristian princes took their seats in the Council of Trent, jointly\nwith bishops and other ecclesiastics; and it was only at the Vatican\nCouncil of 1870 that this last lingering trace of lay rights finally\ndisappeared. The Apostles laid down by their action the principle of\nChurch freedom, and the mutual rights of clergy and people; but they\nalso gave a very practical hint for the peaceful management of\norganizations, whether ecclesiastical, or social, or political. They\nknew what was the right thing to do, but they did not impose their\nwill by the mere exercise of authority; they took counsel with the\npeople, and the result was that a speedy solution of all their\ndifficulties was arrived at. How many a quarrel in life would be\navoided, how many a rough place would be made smooth, were the\napostolic example always followed. Men naturally resist a law imposed\nfrom without without any appearance of consultation with them or of\nsanction on their part; but men willingly yield obedience to laws,\neven though they may dislike them, which have been passed with their\nassent and appeal to their reason. In Church matters especially would\nthis rule apply, and the example of the Apostles be most profitably\nfollowed. Autocratic action on the part of the clergy in small matters\nhas often destroyed the unity and harmony of congregations, and has\nplanted roots of bitterness which have ruined ministerial usefulness.\nWhile steadily maintaining great fundamental principles, a little tact\nand thought, a wise condescension to human feeling, will often win the\nday, and carry measures which would otherwise be vigorously resisted.\n\nFinally, the Apostles enunciate the principles which should guide the\nChurch in its selection of officials, specially when they have to deal\nwith the temporal concerns of the Society. \"Look ye out therefore from\namong you seven men of good report.\" Attempts have been made to\nexplain why the number was fixed at seven. Some have asserted that it\nwas so determined because it was a sacred number, others because there\nwere now seven congregations in Jerusalem, or seven thousand converts.\nPerhaps, however, the true reason was a more commonplace one, and that\nwas that seven is a very convenient practical number. In case of a\ndifference of opinion a majority can always be secured on one side or\nother, and all blocks avoided. The number seven was long maintained in\nconnection with the order of deacons, in imitation of the apostolic\ninstitution. A council at Neo-C\u00e6sarea, in the year 314, ordained that\nthe number of seven deacons should never be exceeded in any city,\nwhile in the Church of Rome the same limitation prevailed from the\nsecond century down to the twelfth, so that the Roman Cardinals, who\nwere the parochial clergy of Rome, numbered among them merely seven\ndeacons down to that late period. The seven chosen by the primitive\nChurch were to be men of good report because they were to be public\nfunctionaries, whose decisions were to allay commotions and\nmurmurings; and therefore they must be men of weight, in whom the\npublic had confidence. But, further, they must be men \"full of the\nSpirit and of wisdom.\" Piety was not the only qualification; they must\nbe wise, prudent, sound in judgment as well. Piety is no security for\nwisdom, just as in turn wisdom is no security for piety; but both must\nbe combined in apostolic officials. The Apostles thereby teach the\nChurch of all time what are the qualifications necessary for effective\nadministrators and officials. Even in charitable distributions and\nfinancial organizations the Church should hold up the high standard\nset before her by the Apostles, and seek out men actuated by religious\nprinciple, guided by religious truth, swayed by Divine love, the\noutcome of that Spirit whose grace and blessing are necessary for the\ndue discharge of any office, whether of service, of charity, or of\nworship, in the Church of Jesus Christ; but possessed withal of strong\ncommon sense and vigorous intellectual power, for love and zeal\nseparated from these often fall into mistakes which make religion and\nits adherents a laughing-stock to the world and a hindrance to the\ncause of truth and holiness. God can indeed make the weak things of\nthis world to confound the high and mighty, but it would be\npresumptuous in us to think that we can do the same, and therefore\nmust seek out the instruments best suited in every way to do God's\nwork and accomplish His purposes.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIV.\n\n_ST. STEPHEN AND THE EVOLUTION OF THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY._\n\n     \"And the saying pleased the whole multitude: and they chose\n     Stephen, a man full of faith and of the Holy Spirit, and Philip,\n     and Prochorus, and Nicanor, and Timon, and Parmenas, and Nicolas\n     a proselyte of Antioch: whom they set before the Apostles: and\n     when they had prayed, they laid their hands on them.... Stephen,\n     full of grace and power, wrought great wonders and signs among\n     the people. But there arose certain of them that were of the\n     synagogue called the synagogue of the Libertines, and of the\n     Cyrenians, and of the Alexandrians, and of them of Cilicia and\n     Asia, disputing with Stephen. And they were not able to withstand\n     the wisdom and the Spirit by which he spake. Then they suborned\n     men, which said, We have heard him speak blasphemous words\n     against Moses, and against God.\"--ACTS vi. 5, 6; 8-11.\n\n\nThe names of the seven chosen on the suggestion of the Apostles raises\nvery naturally the question, To what office were they appointed? Did\nthe seven elected on this occasion represent the first beginning of\nthat office of deacon which is regarded as the third rank in the\nChurch, bishops being first, and presbyters or priests second. It is\nagreed by all parties that the title of deacon is not given to them in\nthe sixth chapter of the Acts, and yet such an unprejudiced and fair\nauthority as Bishop Lightfoot, in his Essay on the Christian Ministry,\nmaintains that the persons selected and ordained at this crisis\nconstituted the first origin of the diaconate as it is now\nknown.[120] The Seven are not called, either here or wherever else\nthey are mentioned in the Acts, by the name of deacons, though the\nword \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd (serve), which cannot be exactly rendered\ninto English, as the noun deacon has no equivalent verb answering to\nit, is applied to the duties assigned to them. But all the best\ncritics are agreed that the ordination of the Seven was the occasion\nof the rise of a new order and a new office in the Church, whose work\ndealt more especially with the secular side of the ministerial\nfunction. The great German critic Meyer, commenting on this sixth\nchapter, puts it well, though not so clearly as we should like. \"From\nthe first regular overseership of alms, the mode of appointment to\nwhich could not but regulate analogically the practice of the Church,\nwas gradually developed the diaconate, which subsequently underwent\nfurther elaboration.\" This statement is somewhat obscure, and\nthoroughly after the manner of a German critic; let us develop it a\nlittle, and see what the process was whereby the distributers of alms\nto the widows of the earliest Church organization became the officials\nof whom St. Laurence of Rome in the third, and St. Athanasius of\nAlexandria in the fourth century were such eminent examples.\n\n  [120] Bishop Lightfoot, commenting on Philippians, p. 186, says:\n  \"I have assumed that the office thus established represents the\n  later diaconate; for though this point has been much disputed, I\n  do not see how the identity of the two can reasonably be called in\n  question. If the word deacon does not occur in the passage, yet\n  the corresponding verb and substantive, \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03b5\u1fd6\u03bd and\n  \u03b4\u03b9\u03b1\u03ba\u03bf\u03bd\u03af\u03b1, are repeated more than once. The functions,\n  moreover, are substantially those which devolved on the deacons of\n  the earliest ages, and which still in theory, though not\n  altogether in practice, form the primary duties of the office.\n  Again, it seems clear, from the emphasis with which St. Luke\n  dwells on the new institution, that he looks on the establishment\n  of this office, not as an isolated incident, but as the\n  institution of a new order of things in the Church. It is, in\n  short, one of those representative facts of which the earlier part\n  of his narrative is almost wholly made up.\"\n\nI. The institutions of the synagogue must necessarily have exercised a\ngreat influence over the minds of the Apostles and of their first\nconverts. One fact alone vividly illustrates this idea. Christians\nsoon began to call their places of assembly by the name of churches or\nthe Lord's houses, but the old habit was at first too strong, and so\nthe churches or congregations of the earliest Christians were called\nsynagogues. This is evident even from the text of the Revised Version\nof the New Testament, for if we turn to the second chapter of the\nEpistle of James we read there, \"If there come into your _synagogue_ a\nman with a gold ring,\"--showing that in St. James's day a Christian\nchurch was called a synagogue. This custom received some few years ago\na remarkable confirmation from the records of travel and discovery.\nThe Marcionites were a curious Christian sect or heresy which sprang\nup in the second century. They were intensely opposed to Judaism, and\nyet so strong was this tradition that even they seem to have retained,\ndown to the fourth century, the name of synagogue as the title of\ntheir churches, for some celebrated French explorers have discovered\nin Syria an inscription, still in existence, carved over the door of a\nMarcionite church, dated A.D. 318, and that inscription runs thus:\n\"The Synagogue of the Marcionites.\"[121]\n\n  [121] See Le Bas and Waddington's _Voyage Arch\u00e9ologique_, vol.\n  iii., p. 583, _Inscriptions_, No. 2558; and Dr. Salmon's article\n  on Marcion in Smith's _Dict. Christ. Biog._, iii., 819. There is\n  one passage in the Epistles which shows that not merely the name\n  but the organization of synagogues was adopted by the early\n  Church. In 1 Cor. vi. 1 it is written, \"Dare any of you, having a\n  matter against his neighbour, go to law before the unrighteous,\n  and not before the saints?\" This verse cannot be rightly\n  understood unless we remember that every synagogue had its own\n  judicial tribunal, composed of ten men, who decided on Mondays and\n  Thursdays every controversy among the Jews, inflicting immediate\n  corporal punishment on the condemned. The Romans permitted and\n  supported this domestic jurisdiction, just as the Turkish Empire,\n  which has inherited so many of the Roman traditions, allows the\n  Greek and other Eastern Churches to exercise jurisdiction over\n  their own members in all questions touching religion, supporting\n  their decisions by force if necessary. St. Paul, in this passage,\n  wishes the members of the Christian synagogues to act like those\n  of the Jewish, and avoid the scandal of Christians going to law\n  with their brethren before pagans.\n\nNow seeing that the force of tradition was so great as to compel even\nan anti-Jewish sect to call their meeting-houses by a Jewish name, we\nmay be sure that the tradition of the institutions, forms, and\narrangements of the synagogue must have been infinitely more potent\nwith the earliest Christian believers, constraining them to adopt\nsimilar institutions in their own assemblies. Human nature is always\nthe same, and the example of our own colonists sheds light upon the\ncourse of Church development in Palestine. When the Pilgrim Fathers\nwent to America, they reproduced the English constitution and the\nEnglish laws in that country with so much precision and accuracy that\nthe expositions of law produced by American lawyers are studied with\ngreat respect in England. The American colonists reproduced the\ninstitutions and laws with which they were familiar, modifying them\nmerely to suit their own peculiar circumstances; and so has it been\nall the world over wherever the Anglo-Saxon race has settled--they\nhave done exactly the same thing. They have established states and\ngovernments modelled after the type of England, and not of France or\nRussia. So was it with the early Christians. Human nature compelled\nthem to fall back upon their first experience, and to develop under a\nChristian shape the institutions of the synagogue under which they had\nbeen trained. And now when we read the Acts we see that here lies the\nmost natural explanation of the course of history, and specially of\nthis sixth chapter. In the synagogue, as Dr. John Lightfoot expounds\nit in his _Hor\u00e6 Hebraic\u00e6_ (Matt. iv. 23), the government was in the\nhands of the ruler and the council of elders or presbyters, while\nunder them there were three almoners or deacons, who served in the\nsame capacity as the Seven in superintending the charitable work of\nthe congregation. The great work for which the Seven were appointed\nwas distribution, and we shall see that this was ever maintained, and\nis still maintained, as the leading idea of the diaconate, though\nother and more directly spiritual work was at once added to their\nfunctions by St. Stephen and St. Philip.[122] Now just as our\ncolonists brought English institutions and ideas with them wherever\nthey settled, so was it with the missionaries who went forth from the\nMother Church of Jerusalem. They carried the ideas and institutions\nwith them which had been there sanctioned by the Apostles, and thus we\nfind deacons mentioned in conjunction with bishops at Philippi,\ndeacons joined with bishops in St. Paul's Epistle to Timothy, and the\nexistence of the institution at Corinth, and its special work as a\ncharitable organization, implied in the description given of Ph\u0153be\nto the Roman Christians in the sixteenth chapter of the Epistle to the\nRomans. St. Paul's directions to Timothy in the third chapter of his\nfirst Epistle deal both with deacons and deaconesses, and in each case\nlay down qualifications specially suited for distributers of\ncharitable relief, whose duty called upon them to visit from house to\nhouse, but say nothing about any higher work. They are indeed \"to hold\nthe mystery of the faith in a pure conscience;\" they must be sound in\nthe faith like the Seven themselves; but the special qualifications\ndemanded by St. Paul are those needed in almoners: \"The deacons must\nbe grave, not double-tongued, not given to much wine, not greedy of\nfilthy lucre.\"\n\n  [122] Bishop Lightfoot, in his well-known Essay on the Christian\n  Ministry, from which we have already quoted, does not admit any\n  likeness between the office of the diaconate in the Church and any\n  similar office in the synagogue. He refuses to recognise the\n  Chazzan or sexton of the synagogue as in any sense typical of\n  Christian deacons. But he has not noticed the three almoners or\n  deacons attached to every synagogue, whom his seventeenth-century\n  namesake, Dr. John Lightfoot, in his tract on synagogues (_Hor\u00e6\n  Hebr._, St. Matt. iv. 23), considers the origin of the Christian\n  deacons.\n\nSo far as to the testimony of Scripture. When we pass beyond the\nbounds of the canonical books, and come to the apostolic fathers, the\nevidence is equally clear. They testify to the universality of the\ninstitution, and bear witness to its work of distribution. Clement of\nRome was a contemporary of the Apostles. He wrote an Epistle to the\nCorinthians, which is the earliest witness to the existence of St.\nPaul's Epistles to the same Church. In Clement's epistle we find\nexpress mention of deacons, of their apostolic appointment, and of the\nuniversal diffusion of the office. In the forty-third chapter of his\nepistle Clement writes to the Corinthians concerning the\nApostles:--\"Thus preaching through countries and cities they appointed\nbishops and deacons for those who should afterwards believe,\" clearly\nimplying that deacons then existed at Rome, though we have no express\nnotice of them in the epistle written by St. Paul to the Roman\nChurch.\n\nThere is a rule, however, very needful for historical investigations.\nSilence is no conclusive argument against an alleged fact, unless\nthere be silence where, if the alleged fact had existed, it must have\nbeen mentioned. Josephus, for instance, is silent about Christ and\nChristianity. Yet he wrote when its existence was a matter of common\nnotoriety. But there was no necessity for him to notice it. It was an\nawkward fact too, and so he is silent. St. Paul does not mention\ndeacons as existing at Rome, though he does mention them at Philippi.\nBut Clement's words expressly assert that universally, in all cities\nand countries, this order was established wherever the Apostles\ntaught; and so we find it even from pagan records. Pliny's letter to\nTrajan, written about A.D. 110, some fifteen or twenty years later\nthan Clement, testifies that the order of deacons existed in far\ndistant Bithynia, among the Christians of the Dispersion to whom St.\nPeter directed his Epistle. Pliny's words are, \"I therefore thought it\nthe more necessary, in order to ascertain what truth there was in this\naccount, to examine two slave-girls who were called deaconesses\n(_ministr\u00e6_), and even to use torture.\" (See the article Trajanus in\nthe _Dict. Christ. Biog._, iv., 1040.) It is exactly the same with St.\nIgnatius in the second chapter of his Epistle to the Trallians, which\ndates about the same period. The spiritual side of the office had now\ncome more prominently into notice, as the occasion of their first\nappointment had fallen into disuse; but still Ignatius recognises the\norigin of the diaconate when he writes that \"the deacons are not\ndeacons of meats and drinks, but servants of the Church of God\"\n(Lightfoot, _Apost. Fathers_, vol. ii., sec. i., p. 156). While again\nPolycarp, in his Epistle to the Philippians, ch. v., recognises the\nsame qualities as necessary to deacons which St. Paul requires and\nenumerates in his Epistle to Timothy. Justin Martyr, a little later,\ntwenty years or so, tells us that the deacons distributed the elements\nconsecrated in the Holy Communion to the believers that were absent\n(Justin, _First Apol._, ch. lxvii.). This is most important testimony,\nconnecting the order of deacons as then flourishing at Rome and their\nwork with the Seven constituted by the Apostle. The daily distribution\nof the Apostle's time was closely connected with the celebration of\nthe Eucharist, which indeed in its meal or food, common to all the\nfaithful, and its charitable collections and oblations, of which\nJustin Martyr speaks, retained still some trace of the daily\ndistribution which prevailed in the early Church, and occasioned the\nchoice of the Seven. The deacons in Justin Martyr's day distributed\nthe spiritual food to the faithful, just as in earlier times they\ndistributed all the sustenance which the faithful required, whether in\ntheir spiritual or their temporal aspect. It is evident, from this\nrecital of the places where the deacons are incidentally referred to,\nthat their origin was never forgotten, and that distribution of\ncharitable relief and help was always retained as the essence, the\ncentral idea and notion, of the office of deacon, though at the same\ntime other and larger functions were by degrees entrusted to them, as\nthe Church grew and increased, and ecclesiastical life and wants\nbecame more involved and complex.[123] History bears out this view.\nIren\u00e6us was the disciple of Polycarp, and must have known many\napostolic men, men who had companied with the Apostles and knew the\nwhole detail of primitive Church government; and Iren\u00e6us, speaking of\nNicolas the proselyte of Antioch, describes him as \"one of the seven\nwho were first ordained to the diaconate by the Apostles.\" Now Iren\u00e6us\nis one of our great witnesses for the authenticity of the Four\nGospels; surely then he must be an equally good witness to the origin\nof the order of deacons and the existence of the Acts of the Apostles\nwhich is implied in this reference. It is scarcely necessary to go\nfarther in Church history, but the lower one goes the more clearly we\nshall see that the original notion of the diaconate is never\nforgotten. In the third century we find that there were still only\nseven deacons in Rome, though there were forty-six presbyters, a\nnumber which was retained down to the twelfth century in the seven\ncardinal deacons of that Church.[124] The touching story of the\nmartyrdom of St. Laurence, Archdeacon of Rome in the middle of the\nthird century, shows that he was roasted over a slow fire in order to\nextort the vast sums he was supposed to have in charge for the purpose\nof relieving the sick and the poor connected with the Roman Church;\nproving that the original conception of the office as an executive and\ncharitable organization was then vigorously retained; just as it is\nstill set forth in the ordinal of the Church of England, where, after\nreciting how the deacon's office is to help the priest in several\nsubordinate positions, it goes on to say, \"Furthermore, it is his\noffice, where provision is so made, to search for the sick, poor, and\nimpotent people of the parish, to intimate their estates, names, and\nplaces where they dwell, unto the curate, that by his exhortation they\nmay be relieved by the alms of the parishioners.\"\n\n  [123] The community of goods may have evolved itself naturally\n  enough out of the celebration of the Eucharist. Just let us\n  realize what must have happened, say, on the day of Pentecost and\n  the few succeeding days. The Apostles seem to have been living a\n  common life during the ten days of expectation. They dwelt in the\n  house where the upper room was. The day after Pentecost there must\n  have been a great deal to do, in prayer, baptism, and celebration\n  of the Eucharist. Their converts would join with them in the\n  eucharistic feast, from day to day celebrated after the primitive\n  fashion at the end of a common meal. Some enthusiast may then have\n  suggested that, as the Master might at any moment appear, they\n  should always live and eat in common. After a time, as the numbers\n  increased, this arrangement had to be modified, and a daily\n  distribution was substituted for daily common meals. The community\n  of goods may thus have been developed out of the spiritual feast\n  of the Eucharist, which they took in common. When the daily\n  distribution terminated by the exhaustion of the funds, the Agape\n  or lovefeast took its place, remaining as a fragment or relic of\n  the earlier custom. Pliny in his letter mentions the Agape, and\n  rightly distinguishes it from the worship of the Christians which\n  was celebrated in the early morning. \"After these ceremonies they\n  used to disperse, and assemble again to share a common meal of\n  innocent food.\"\n\n  [124] In the twelfth century the number of cardinal deacons was\n  fixed at fourteen, at which it has ever since remained.\n\nThe only objection of any value which has been raised to this line of\nargument is based on a mere assumption. It has been said that the\nSeven were appointed for a special emergency, and to serve a temporary\npurpose connected with the community of goods which existed in the\nearly Church of Jerusalem, and therefore when this arrangement ceased\nthe office itself ceased also. But this argument is based on the\nassumption that the Christian idea of a community of goods wholly\npassed away, so that services of an order like the Seven were no\nlonger required. This is a pure assumption. The community of goods as\npractised at Jerusalem was found by experience to be a mistake. The\nshape of the idea was changed, but the idea itself survived. The old\nform of community of goods passed away. The Christians retained their\nrights of private property, but were taught to regard this private\nproperty as in a sense common, and liable for all the wants and needs\nof their poor and suffering brethren. A charitable order, or at least\nan order charged with the care of the poor and their relief, must\ninevitably have sprung up among the Jewish Christians. The relief of\nthe poor was a necessary part of the duty of a synagogue. The Jewish\ndomestic law enforced a poor-rate, and collected it through the\norganization of each synagogue, by means of three deacons attached to\neach. Selden, in his great work on _The Laws of the Hebrews_, bk. ii.,\nchap. vi. (_Works_, i., 632), tells us that if \"any Jew did not pay\nhis fair contribution he was punished with stripes.\" As soon as the\nJewish Christians began to organize themselves, the idea of almoners,\nwith their daily and weekly distributions, after the synagogue model,\nwas necessarily developed.[125] We have an unexceptionable piece of\nevidence upon this point. The satirist Lucian lived at the close of\nthe second century. He was a bitter scoffer, who jeered at every form\nof religion, and at Christianity above all. He wrote an account of a\ncertain Syrian named Peregrinus Proteus, who was an impostor trading\nupon the religious principles of various philosophical sects, and\nspecially on those of the Christians. Lucian tells us that the\nChristians were the easiest persons to be deceived, because of their\nopinions. Lucian's words are interesting as showing what a\nsecond-century pagan, a clever literary man too, thought of\nChristianity, viewing it from the outside. For this reason we shall\nquote a little more than the words which immediately bear upon the\nsubject. \"It is incredible with what alacrity these people (the\nChristians) support and defend the public cause. They spare nothing,\nin fact, to promote it. These poor men have persuaded themselves that\nthey shall be immortal, and live for ever. They despise death\ntherefore, and offer up their lives a voluntary sacrifice, being\ntaught by their lawgiver that they are all brethren, and that,\nquitting our Grecian gods, they must worship their own sophist, who\nwas crucified, and live in obedience to His laws. In compliance with\nthem, they look with contempt on all worldly treasures, and hold\neverything in common--a maxim which they have adopted without any\nreason or foundation. If any cunning impostor, therefore, who knows\nhow to manage matters, come amongst them, he soon grows rich by\nimposing on the credulity of those weak and foolish men.\" We can see\nhere that the great outer world of paganism considered a community of\ngoods as still prevailing among the Christians. Their boundless\nliberality, their intense devotion to the cause of their suffering\nbrethren, proved this, and therefore, because a practical community of\ngoods existed amongst them, an order of men was required to\nsuperintend the distribution of their liberality in the Second Century\njust as truly as the work of the Seven was needed in the Church of\nJerusalem.\n\n  [125] See Kitto's _Biblical Cyclop\u00e6dia_, articles on Synagogue and\n  Deacon, or Schaff's edition of Herzog's _Cyclop\u00e6dia_, article on\n  Synagogues.\n\nII. We thus can see that the office of deacon, as now constituted, had\nits origin in apostolic times, and is built upon a scriptural\nfoundation; but here we are bound to point out a great difference\nbetween the ancient and the modern office. An office or organization\nmay spring up in one age, and after existing for several centuries may\ndevelop into a shape utterly unlike its original. Yet it may be very\nhard to point out any special time when a vital change was made. All\nwe can say is that the first occupants of the office would never\nrecognise their modern successors. Take the papacy as an instance.\nThere has been at Rome a regular historical succession of bishops\nsince the first century. The succession is known and undoubted. Yet\ncould one of the bishops of Rome of the first three centuries,--above\nall, could a first-century bishop of Rome like St. Clement, by any\npossibility recognise himself or his office in the present Pope Leo\nXIII.? Yet one would find it difficult to fix the exact moment when\nany vital change was made, or any unwonted claims put forward on\nbehalf of the Roman See.[126] So was it in the case of deacons and\ntheir office. Their modern successors may trace themselves back to the\nseven elected in the primitive Church at Jerusalem, and yet the office\nis now a very different one in practice from what it was then. Perhaps\nthe greatest difference, and the only one we can notice, was this. The\ndiaconate is now merely the primary and lowest rank of the Christian\nministry; a kind of apprenticeship, in fact, wherein the youthful\nminister serves for a year, and is then promoted as a matter of\ncourse; whereas in Jerusalem or Rome of old it was a lifelong office,\nin the exercise of which maturity of judgment, of piety, and of\ncharacter were required for the due discharge of its manifold duties.\nIt is now a temporary office, it was of old a permanent one. And the\napostolical custom was much the best. It avoided many difficulties\nand solved many a problem. At present the office of the diaconate is\npractically in abeyance, and yet the functions which the ancient\ndeacons discharged are not in abeyance, but are placed upon the\nshoulders of the other orders in the Church, already overwhelmed with\nmanifold responsibilities, and neglecting, while serving tables, the\nhigher aspects of their work. The Christian ministry in its purely\nspiritual, and specially in its prophetical or preaching aspect, is\nsorely suffering because an apostolic office is practically set aside.\nIn the ancient Church it was never so. The deacons were chosen to a\nlife-office. It was then but very seldom that a man chosen to the\ndiaconate abandoned it for a higher function. It did not indeed demand\nthe wholesale devotion of time and attention which the higher offices\nof the ministry did. Men even till a late period, both in East and\nWest, combined secular pursuits with it. Thus let us take one\ncelebrated instance. The ancient Church of England and of Ireland\nalike was Celtic in origin and constitution. It was intensely\nconservative, therefore, of ancient customs and usages derived from\nthe times of persecution, when Christianity was first taught among the\nGauls and Celts of the extreme West. The well-known story of the\nintroduction of Christianity into England under St. Augustine and the\nopposition he met with prove this. As it was in other matters, so was\nit with the ancient Celtic deacons; the old customs remained; they\nheld office for life, and joined with it at the same time other and\nordinary occupations. St. Patrick, for instance, the apostle of\nIreland, tells us that his father Calpurnius was a deacon, and yet he\nwas a farmer and a decurion, or alderman, as we should say, of a Roman\ntown near Dumbarton on the river Clyde. This happened about the year\n400 of the Christian era.[127]\n\n  [126] The College of Cardinals offers another illustration of\n  this. The Cardinals were originally the parochial clergy of Rome.\n  As Rome's ecclesiastical ambition increased, so did that of her\n  parochial clergy, who came to imagine that, standing so close to\n  the Pope, who was the door, they were themselves the hinges\n  (cardines) on whom the door turned. I wonder if one of the\n  original presbyters of Rome would be able to recognise his office\n  in that of a modern cardinal claiming princely rank and\n  precedence!\n\n  [127] I have expanded this subject in _Ireland and the Celtic\n  Church_, ch. ii., viii., ix.; and in _Ireland and the Anglo-Norman\n  Church_, pp. 352-70.\n\nHere indeed, as in so many other cases, the Church of Christ needs to\ngo back to scriptural example and to apostolic rule. We require for\nthe work of the Church deacons like the primitive men who devoted\ntheir whole lives to this one object; made it the subject of their\nthoughts, their cares, their studies, how they might instruct the\nignorant, relieve the poor and widows, comfort the prisoners, sustain\nthe martyrs in their last supreme hour; and who thus using well the\noffice of a deacon found in it a sufficient scope for their efforts\nand a sufficient reward for their exertions, because they thereby\npurchased for themselves a good degree and great boldness in the faith\nof Jesus Christ. The Church now requires the help of living agencies\nin vast numbers, and they are not forthcoming. Let her avail herself\nof apostolic resources, and fall back upon primitive precedents. The\nreal diaconate should be revived. Godly and spiritual men should be\ncalled upon to do their duty. Deacons should be ordained without being\ncalled to give up their ordinary employments. Work which now unduly\naccumulates upon overburdened shoulders should be assigned to others\nsuitably to their talents, and thus a twofold blessing would be\nsecured. Christian life would flourish more abundantly, and many a\nrent and schism, the simple result of energies repressed and\nunemployed, would be destroyed in their very commencement.\n\nWe have devoted much of our space to this subject, because it is one\nof great interest, as touching the origin and authority of the\nChristian ministry, and also because it has been a subject much\ndebated; but we must hurry on to other points connected with the first\nappointment to the diaconate. The people selected the person to be\nordained to this work. It is probable that they made their choice out\nof the different classes composing the Christian community. The mode\nof election of the Seven, and the qualifications laid down by the\nApostles, were derived from the synagogue. Thus we read in Kitto's\n_Cyclop\u00e6dia_, art. \"Synagogue:\"--\"The greatest care was taken by the\nrulers of the synagogue and of the congregation that those elected\nalmoners should be men of modesty, wisdom, justice, and have the\nconfidence of the people. They had to be elected by the harmonious\nvoice of the people.\" Seven deacons altogether were chosen. Three were\nprobably Hebrew Christians, three Grecian Christians or Hellenists,\nand one a representative of the proselytes, Nicolas of Antioch. This\nwould have been but natural. The Apostles wanted to get rid of\nmurmurs, jealousies, and divisions in the Church, and in no way could\nthis have been more effectually done than by the principle of\nrepresentation. Had the Seven been all selected from one class alone,\ndivisions and jealousies would have prevailed as of old. The Apostles\nthemselves had proved this. They were all Hebrew Christians. Their\nposition and authority might have secured them from blame. Yet\nmurmurings had arisen against them as distributers, and so they\ndevised another plan, which, to have been successful, as it doubtless\nwas, must have proceeded on a different principle. Then when the seven\nwise and prudent men were chosen from the various classes, the\nApostles asserted their supreme position: \"When the Apostles had\nprayed, they laid their hands on them.\" And as the result peace\ndescended like a shower upon the Church, and spiritual prosperity\nfollowed upon internal peace and union.\n\nIII. \"They laid their hands on them.\" This statement sets forth the\nexternal expression and the visible channel of the ordination to their\noffice which the Apostles conferred. This action of the imposition of\nhands was of frequent use among the ancient Jews. The Apostles, as\nwell acquainted with Old Testament history, must have remembered that\nit was employed in the case of designation of Joshua as the leader of\nIsrael in the place of Moses (Num. xxvii. 18-23; compare Deut. xxxiv.\n9), that it was used even in the synagogue in the appointment of\nJewish rabbis, and had been sanctioned by the practice of Jesus\nChrist. The Apostles naturally, therefore, used this symbol upon the\nsolemn appointment of the first deacons, and the same ceremonial was\nrepeated upon similar occasions. Paul and Barnabas were set apart at\nAntioch for their missionary work by the imposition of hands. St. Paul\nuses the strongest language about the ceremony. He does not hesitate\nto attribute to it a certain sacramental force and efficacy, bidding\nTimothy \"stir up the gift of God which is in thee through the laying\non of my hands\" (2 Tim. i. 6); while again when we come down a few\nyears later we find the \"laying on of hands\" reckoned as one of the\nfundamental elements of religion, in the sixth chapter of the Epistle\nto the Hebrews. But it was not merely in the solemn appointment of\nofficials in the Church that this ceremony found place. It was\nemployed by the Apostles as the rite which filled up and perfected the\nbaptism which had been administered by others. Philip baptized the\nSamaritans. Peter and John laid their hands on them and they received\nthe Holy Ghost. The ceremony of imposition of hands was so essential\nand distinguishing a point that Simon Magus selects it as the one he\ndesires above all others effectually to purchase, so that the outward\nsymbol might be followed by the inward grace. \"Give me also this\npower, that on whomsoever I lay my hands, he may receive the Holy\nGhost,\" was the prayer of the arch-heretic to St. Peter; while again\nin the nineteenth chapter we find St. Paul using the same visible\nceremony in the case of St. John's disciples, who were first baptized\nwith Christian baptism, and then endued by St. Paul with the gift of\nthe Spirit. Imposition of hands in the case of ordination is a natural\nsymbol, indicative of the transmission of function and authority. It\nfitly indicates and notifies to the whole Church the persons who have\nbeen ordained, and therefore has ever been regarded as a necessary\npart of ordination. St. Jerome, who was a very keen critic as well as\na close student of the Divine oracles, fixes upon this public and\nsolemn designation as a sufficient explanation and justification of\nthe imposition of hands in ordinations, lest any one should be\nordained without his knowledge by a silent and solitary prayer. Hence\nevery branch of the Church of Christ has rigorously insisted upon\nimposition of hands after the apostolic example, in the case of\nordinations to official positions, with one or two apparent and very\ndoubtful exceptions, which merely prove the binding character of the\nrule.\n\nIV. The list of names again is full of profit and of warning. How\ncompletely different from human histories, for instance, is this\nDivine record of the first doings of the Church! How thoroughly shaped\nafter the Divine model is this catalogue of the earliest officials\nchosen by the Apostles! Men have speculated whether they were Hebrews\nor Grecians, whether they belonged to the seventy sent forth by Christ\nor to the hundred and twenty who first gathered into the upper room at\nJerusalem. All such speculations are curious and interesting, but they\nhave nothing to do with man's salvation; therefore they are sternly\nput on one side and out of sight. How we should long to know the\nsubsequent history of these men, and to trace their careers! yet Holy\nWrit tells us but very little about them, nothing certain, in fact,\nsave what we learn about St. Stephen and St. Philip. God bestowed Holy\nScripture upon men, not to satisfy or minister to their curiosity, but\nto nourish their souls and edify their spirits. And surely no lesson\nis more needed than the one implied in the silences of this passage;\nthere is in truth none more necessary for our publicity-seeking and\npopularity-hunting age than this, that God's holiest servants have\nlaboured in obscurity, have done their best work in secret, and have\nlooked to God alone and to His judgment for their reward. I have said\nindeed that concerning the list of names recorded as those of the\nfirst deacons, we know nothing but of St. Stephen and St. Philip,\nwhose careers will again come under our notice in later chapters.\nThere is, however, a current tradition that Nicolas, the proselyte of\nAntioch, did distinguish himself, but in an unhappy direction. It is\nasserted by Iren\u00e6us in his work _Against Heresies_ (Book I., ch. 26),\nthat Nicolas was the founder of the sect of Nicolaitans denounced in\nthe Revelation of St. John (ch. ii., 6, 16). Critics are, however,\nmuch divided upon this point. Some clear Nicolas of this charge, while\nothers uphold it. It is indeed impossible to determine this matter.\nBut supposing that Nicolas of Antioch was the author of this heresy,\nwhich was of an antinomian character, like so many of the earliest\nheresies that distracted the primitive Church, this circumstance would\nteach us an instructive lesson. Just as there was a Judas Iscariot\namong the Apostles, and a Demas among St. Paul's most intimate\ndisciples, so was there a Nicolas among the first deacons. No place is\nso holy, no office so sacred, no privileges so great, but that the\ntempter can make his way there. He can lurk unseen and unsuspected\namid the pillars of the temple, and he can find us out, as he did the\nSon of God Himself, amid the wilds of the desert. Official position\nand exalted privileges confer no immunity from temptation. Nay,\nrather, they bring with them additional temptations over and above\nthose which assail the ordinary Christian, and should therefore lead\neveryone called to any similar work to diligent watchfulness, to\nearnest prayer, lest while teaching others they themselves fall into\ncondemnation. There is, however, another lesson which a different\nversion of the history of Nicolas would teach. Clement of Alexandria,\nin his celebrated work called the _Stromata_ (Book II., chap. 20, and\nBook III., chap. 4), tells us that Nicolas was a most strictly\nvirtuous man. He was extreme even in his asceticism, and, like many\nascetics, used language that might be easily abused to the purposes of\nwickedness. He was wont to say that the \"flesh must be abused,\"\nmeaning that it must be chastised and restrained. One-sided and\nextreme teaching is easily perverted by the wicked nature of man, and\nmen of impure lives, listening to the language of Nicolas, interpreted\nhis words as an excuse for abusing the flesh by plunging into the\ndepths of immorality and crime. Men placed in official positions and\ncalled to the exercise of the clerical office should weigh their\nwords. Extreme statements are bad unless duly and strictly guarded.\nThe intention of the speaker may be good, and a man's own life\nthoroughly consistent, but unbalanced teaching will fall upon ground\nwhere the life and intention of the teacher will have no power or\ninfluence, and bring forth evil fruit, as in the case of the\nNicolaitans.\n\nV. The central figure of this whole section of our narrative is St.\nStephen. He is introduced into the narrative with the same startling\nsuddenness which we may note in the case of Barnabas and of Elijah. He\nruns a rapid course, flings all, Apostles and every one else, into the\nshade for a time, and then disappears, exemplifying those fruitful\nsayings of inspiration, so true in our every-day experience of God's\ndealings, \"The first shall be last, and the last first.\" \"Paul may\nplant, Apollos may water, but it is God alone that giveth the\nincrease.\" Stephen, full of grace and power, did great signs and\nwonders among the people. These two words, grace and power, are\nclosely connected. Their union in this passage is significant. It was\nnot the intellect, or the eloquence, or the activity of St. Stephen\nwhich made him powerful among the people and crowned his labours with\nsuch success. It was his abundant grace. Eloquence and learning,\nactive days and laborious nights, are good and necessary things. God\nuses them and demands them from His people. He chooses to use human\nagencies, and therefore demands that the human agents shall give Him\nof their best, and not offer to Him the blind and lame of their flock.\nBut these things will be utterly useless and ineffective apart from\nChrist and the power of His grace. The Church of Christ is a\nsupernatural society, and the work of Christ is a supernatural work,\nand in that work the grace of Christ is absolutely necessary to make\nany human gift or exertion effectual in carrying out His purposes of\nlove and mercy. This is an age of organizations and committees and\nboards; and some good men are so wrapped up in them that they have no\ntime to think of anything else. To this busy age these words,\n\"Stephen, full of grace and power,\" convey a useful warning, teaching\nthat the best organizations and schemes will be useless to produce\nStephen's power unless Stephen's grace be found there as well. This\npassage is a prophecy and picture of the future in another aspect. The\nfulness of grace in Stephen wrought powerfully amongst the people. It\nwas the savour of life unto life in some. But in others it was a\nsavour of death unto death, and provoked them to evil deeds, for they\nsuborned men \"which said, We have heard him speak blasphemous words\nagainst Moses, and against God.\"\n\nWe get in these words, in this false accusation, even through its\nfalsehood, a glimpse into the character of St. Stephen's preaching. A\nfalse accusation need not be necessarily altogether false. Perhaps\nrather we should say that, in order to be effective for mischief, a\ntwisted, distorted charge, with some basis of truth, some semblance of\njustification about it, is the best for the accuser's purpose, and the\nmost difficult for the defendant to answer. St. Stephen was ripening\nfor heaven more rapidly than the Apostles themselves. He was learning\nmore rapidly than St. Peter himself the true spiritual meaning of the\nChristian scheme. He had taught, in no ambiguous language, the\nuniversal character of the Gospel and the catholic mission of the\nChurch. He had expanded and applied the magnificent declarations of\nthe Master Himself, \"The hour cometh, when neither in this mountain,\nnor in Jerusalem, shall ye worship the Father;\" \"The hour cometh, and\nnow is, when the true worshippers shall worship the Father in spirit\nand in truth.\" And then the narrow-minded Grecian Jews, anxious to\nvindicate their orthodoxy, which was doubted by their Hebrew brethren,\ndistorted Stephen's wider and grander conceptions into a charge of\nblasphemy against the holy man. What a picture of the future of\nChrist's best and truest witnesses, especially when insisting on some\nnobler and wider or forgotten aspect of truth. Their teaching has been\never suspected, distorted, accused as blasphemous; and so it must ever\nbe. And yet God's servants, when they find themselves thus\nmisrepresented, can realize to themselves that they are but following\nthe course which the saints of every age have run, that they are being\nmade like unto the image of Stephen the first martyr, and of Jesus\nChrist Himself, the King of Saints, who suffered under a similar\naccusation. The mere popularity-hunter will, of course, carefully\neschew such charges and suspicions. His object is human praise and\nreward, and he shapes his teaching so as to carefully avoid giving\noffence. But then the mere popularity-hunter seeks his reward here\nbelow, and very often gets it. Stephen, however, and every true\nteacher looks not for reward in this world. Stephen taught truth as\nGod revealed it to his soul. He suffered the consequence, and then\nreceived his crown from that Almighty Judge before whose awful\ntribunal he ever consciously stood. Misrepresentation must ever be\nexpected by God's true servants. It must be discounted, borne with\npatiently, taken as a trial of faith and patience, and then, in God's\nown time, it will turn out to our greater blessing. One consideration\nalone ought to prove sufficient to console us under such\ncircumstances. If our teaching was not proving injurious to his cause,\nthe Evil One would not trouble himself about it. Let us only take good\nheed lest our own self-love and vanity should lead us to annoy\nourselves too much about the slander or the evil report, remembering\nthat misrepresentation and slander is ever the portion of God's\nservants. Jesus Christ and Stephen were thus treated. St. Paul's\nteaching was accused of tending to licentiousness; the earliest\nChristians were accused of vilest practices; St. Athanasius in his\nstruggles for truth was accused of rebellion and murder; the Reformers\nwere accused of lawlessness; John Wesley of Romanism and disloyalty;\nWilliam Wilberforce of being an enemy to British trade; John Howard of\nbeing an encourager of crime and immorality. Let us be content then if\nour lot be with the saints, and our portion be that of the servants of\nthe Most High.\n\nAgain, we learn from this place how religious zeal can overthrow\nreligion and work out the purposes of evil. Religious zeal, mere party\nspirit taking the place of real religion, led the Hellenists to suborn\nmen and falsely accuse St. Stephen. They made an idol of the system of\nJudaism, and forgot its spirit. They worshipped their idol so much\nthat they were ready to break the commandments of God for its sake.\nThe dangers of party spirit in matters of religion, and the evil deeds\nwhich have been done in apparent zeal for God and real zeal for the\ndevil, these are still the lessons, true for the future ages of the\nChurch, which we read in this passage. And how true to life has even\nour own age found this prophetic picture. Men cannot indeed now\nsuborn men and bring fatal charges against them in matters of\nreligion, and yet they can fall into exactly the same crime. Party\nreligion and party zeal lead men into precisely the same courses as\nthey did in the days of St. Stephen. Partisanship causes them to\nviolate all the laws of honour, of honesty, of Christian charity,\nimagining that they are thereby advancing the cause of Christ,\nforgetting that they are acting on the rule which the Scriptures\nrepudiate,--they are doing evil that good may come,--and striving to\nfurther Christ's kingdom by a violation of His fundamental precepts.\nOh for more of the spirit of true charity, which will lead men to\nsupport their own views in a spirit of Christian love! Oh for more of\nthat true grasp of Christianity which will teach that a breach of\nChristian charity is far worse than any amount of speculative error!\nThe error as we think it may be in reality God's own truth; but the\nviolation of God's law implied in such conduct as Stephen's\nadversaries displayed, and as party zeal now often prompts, can never\nbe otherwise than contrary to the mind and law of Jesus Christ.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XV.\n\n_ST. STEPHEN'S DEFENCE AND THE DOCTRINE OF INSPIRATION._\n\n     \"[The Grecian Jews] stirred up the people, and the elders, and\n     the scribes, and came upon him, and seized him, and brought him\n     into the council, and set up false witnesses, which said, This\n     man ceaseth not to speak words against this holy place, and the\n     law: for we have heard him say, that this Jesus of Nazareth shall\n     destroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses\n     delivered unto us.\"--ACTS vi. 12-14.\n\n     \"And the high priest said, Are these things so? And he said,\n     Brethren and fathers, hearken.\"--ACTS vii. 1, 2.\n\n\nSt. Stephen and St. Philip are the two prominent names among the\nprimitive deacons. Stephen, however, much surpasses Philip. Devout\nexpositors of Scripture have recognised in his name a prophecy of his\ngreatness. Stephen is Stephanos, a garland or crown, in the Greek\nlanguage. Garlands or crowns were given by the ancient Greeks to those\nwho rendered good services to their cities, or brought fame to them by\nwinning triumphs in the great national games. And Stephen had his name\ndivinely chosen for him by that Divine Providence which ordereth all\nthings, because he was to win in the fulness of time an imperishable\ngarland, and to gain a crown of righteousness, and to render highest\nservices to the Church of God by his teaching and by his testimony\neven unto death. St. Stephen had a Greek name, and must have belonged\nto the Hellenistic division of the Jewish nation. He evidently\ndirected his special energies to their conversion, for while the\nprevious persecutions had been raised by the Sadducees, as the persons\nwhose prejudices had been assailed, the attack on Stephen was made by\nthe Grecian Jews of the synagogues belonging to the Libertines or\nfreedmen, in union with those from Cyrene, Alexandria, Cilicia, and\nAsia. The Libertines had been slaves, Jewish captives, taken in the\nvarious wars waged by the Romans. They had been dispersed among the\nRomans at Rome and elsewhere. There in their captivity they had\nlearned the Greek language and become acquainted with Greek culture;\nand now, when they had recovered their freedom through that suppleness\nand power of adaptation which the Jewish race has ever displayed, they\nreturned to Jerusalem in such numbers that a synagogue of the\nLibertines was formed. Their captivity and servitude had, however,\nonly intensified their religious feelings, and made them more jealous\nof any attempts to extend to the Gentiles who had held them captives\nthe spiritual possessions they alone enjoyed. There is, indeed, an\nextremely interesting parallel to the case of the Libertines in early\nEnglish history, as told by Bede. The Saxons came to England in the\nfifth century and conquered the Christian Celts, whom they drove into\nWales. The Celts, however, avenged themselves upon their conquerors,\nfor they refused to impart to the pagan Saxons the glad tidings of\nsalvation which the Celts possessed.[128] But the Libertines were not\nthe only assailants of St. Stephen. With them were joined members of\nsynagogues connected with various other important Jewish centres.\nJerusalem was then somewhat like Rome at the present time. It was the\none city whither a race scattered all over the world and speaking\nevery language tended. Each language was represented by a synagogue,\njust as there are English Colleges and Irish Colleges and Spanish\nColleges at Rome, where Roman Catholics of those nationalities find\nthemselves specially at home. Among these Hellenistic antagonists of\nSt. Stephen we have mention made of the men of Cilicia. Here,\ndoubtless, was found a certain Saul of Tarsus, enthusiastic in defence\nof the ancient faith, and urgent with all his might to bring to trial\nthe apostate who had dared to speak words which he considered\nderogatory of the city and temple of the great king.\n\n  [128] See Bede's _Ecclesiastical History_, Book ii., chap. 2.\n\nSaul, indeed, may have been the great agent in Stephen's arrest. It is\na nature and an intellect like his that can discern the logical\nresults of teaching like St. Stephen's, and then found an accusation\nupon the deductions he makes rather than upon the actual words spoken.\nSaul may have placed the Church under another obligation on this\noccasion. To him may be due the report of the speech made by Stephen\nbefore the Sanhedrin. Indeed, it is to St. Paul in his unconverted\nstate we feel inclined to attribute the knowledge which St. Luke\npossessed of the earlier proceedings of the council in the matter of\nthe Christians.[129] After St. Paul's conversion we get no such\ndetails concerning the deliberations of the Sanhedrin as we do in the\nearlier chapters of the Acts, simply because Saul of Tarsus, the\nrising champion and hope of the Pharisees, was present at the earlier\nmeetings and had access to their inmost secrets, while at the later\nmeetings he never appeared save to stand his trial as an accused\nperson. The question, How was Stephen's speech preserved? has been\nasked by some critics who wished to decry the historic truth of this\nnarrative, and to represent the whole thing as a fancy sketch or\nromance, worked up on historic lines indeed, but still only a romance,\nwritten many years after the events had happened. Critics who ask this\nforget what modern research has shown in another department. The\n_Acts_ of the martyrs are sometimes very large documents, containing\nreports of charges, examinations, and speeches of considerable length.\nThese have often been considered mere fancy history, the work of\nmedi\u00e6val monks wishing to celebrate the glory of these early witnesses\nfor truth, and sceptical writers have often put them aside without\nbestowing even a passing notice upon them.\n\n  [129] I have already said something on p. 181 of the meetings of\n  the council, but not perhaps quite enough to explain St. Paul's\n  relation to St. Luke as far as the Acts of the Apostles is\n  concerned. The Sanhedrin sat in a semicircle. In the centre of the\n  arc the president was placed; at either extremity there sat a\n  scribe, while the disciples or pupils of the Sanhedrists were\n  arranged in three rows appropriate to their respective\n  attainments. In Selden's _Works_, i., 1323, in his treatise on the\n  _Assemblies of the Hebrews_, the reader can see a plan of the\n  Sanhedrin when sitting. St. Paul, as a favourite pupil of the\n  President Gamaliel, would have the best place among the disciples,\n  if he were not actually one of the council. Selden says that the\n  disciples were arrayed in this prominent position not only that\n  they might be instructed in law, but also might be available for\n  serving on the council if any member died suddenly or was taken\n  ill. St. Paul probably made numerous notes of the speeches\n  delivered before him, and could supply St. Luke with notices\n  written and verbal. The article in Schaff's _Theological\n  Cyclop\u00e6dia_ on Sanhedrin should be consulted for more information\n  and references on this point, as well as the other references on\n  p. 181.\n\nModern investigation has taken these documents, critically\ninvestigated them, compared them with the Roman criminal law, and has\ncome to the conclusion that they are genuine, affording some of the\nmost interesting and important examples of ancient methods of legal\nprocedure anywhere to be found. How did the Christians get these\nrecords? it may be asked. Various hints, given here and there, enable\nus to see. Bribery of the officials was sometimes used. The notaries,\nshorthand writers, and clerks attendant upon a Roman court were\nnumerous, and were always accessible to the gifts of the richer\nChristians when they wished to obtain a correct narrative of a\nmartyr's last trial. Secret Christians among the officials also\neffected something, and there were numerous other methods by which the\nRoman judicial records became the property of the Church, to be in\ntime transmitted to the present age.[130] Now just the same may have\nbeen the case with the trials of the primitive Christians, and\nspecially of St. Stephen. But we know that St. Paul was there. Memory\namong the Jews was sharpened to an extraordinary degree. We have now\nno idea to what an extent the human memory was then developed. The\nimmense volumes which are filled with the Jewish commentaries on\nScripture were in those times transmitted from generation to\ngeneration simply by means of this power. It was considered, indeed, a\ngreat innovation when those commentaries were committed to writing\ninstead of being intrusted to tradition. It is no wonder then that St.\nPaul could afford his disciple, St. Luke, a report of what Stephen\nsaid on this occasion, even if he had not preserved any notes\nwhatsoever of the process of the trial. Let us, however, turn to the\nconsideration of St. Stephen's speech, omitting any further notice of\nobjections based on our own ignorance of the practices and methods of\ndistant ages.\n\n  [130] M. Le Blant is one of the greatest living authorities on\n  ancient art and history. He has been head of the French\n  Arch\u00e6ological School at Rome. He has published an extremely able\n  work on the subject of the _Acts_ of the martyrs, in which he\n  treats them in a strictly scientific manner. He confronts them\n  with the processes of Roman law, the facts of chronology and\n  history, and triumphantly shows the vast amount of truth contained\n  in these documents. He also explains how the Christians got\n  possession of the Roman magistrates' notes, which they then\n  inserted in the local Church records, and dispersed amid other\n  Churches, after the manner of the Epistle of the Lyonnese Church,\n  to which reference has been already made. Le Blant, on p. 9 of his\n  memoir, quotes one ancient document, which incidentally mentions\n  that \"inasmuch as it was necessary to collect all the records of\n  the martyrs' confessions, the Christians paid one of the javelin\n  men two hundred denarii for the privilege of transcribing them.\"\n  We are apt to forget that both Jews and Romans conducted all their\n  persecutions under strict judicial forms. We sometimes think that\n  the persecutions were mere outbursts of popular rage, managed\n  after the manner of a street riot. The examples of the magistrates\n  at Corinth and Ephesus in the Acts of the Apostles ought to dispel\n  this illusion. The Romans had a perfect horror of civil\n  commotions, and sternly repressed them. If a sect was to be put\n  down, it should be put down in a legal manner, with questions and\n  answers and due records of the proceedings.\n\nI. The defence of St. Stephen was a speech delivered by a Jew, and\naddressed to a Jewish audience. This is our first remark, and it is an\nimportant one. We are apt to judge the Scriptures, their speeches,\narguments, and discussions, by a Western standard, forgetting that\nOrientals argued then and argue still not according to the rules of\nlogic taught by Aristotle, nor by the methods of eloquence derived\nfrom the traditions of Cicero and Quinctilian, but by methods and\nrules essentially different. What would satisfy Westerns would have\nseemed to them utterly worthless, just as an argument which now seems\npointless and weak appeared to them absolutely conclusive. Parallels,\nanalogies, parables, mystical interpretations were then favourite\nmethods of argument, and if we wish to understand writers like the\nauthors of the scriptural books we must strive to place ourselves at\ntheir point of view, or else we shall miss their true interpretation.\nLet us apply this idea to St. Stephen's defence, which has been often\ndepreciated because treated as if it were an oration addressed to a\nWestern court or audience. Erasmus, for instance, was an exceedingly\nlearned man, who lived at the period of the Reformation. He was well\nskilled in Latin and Greek learning, but knew nothing of Jewish ideas.\nHe hesitates not, therefore, to say in his Annotations on this passage\nthat there are many things in Stephen's speech which have no bearing\non the question at issue; while Michaelis, another German writer of\ngreat repute in the earlier days of this century, remarks that there\nare many things in this oration of which we cannot perceive the\ntendency, as regards the accusation brought against the martyr. Let us\nexamine and see if the case be not otherwise, remembering that promise\nof the Master, given not to supersede human exertion or to indulge\nhuman laziness, but given to support and sustain and safeguard His\npersecuted servants under circumstances like those amid which Stephen\nfound himself. \"But when they deliver you up, be not anxious how or\nwhat ye shall speak; for it shall be given you in that hour what ye\nshall speak. For it is not ye that speak, but the Spirit of your\nFather that speaketh in you.\" What, then, was the charge brought\nagainst Stephen? He was accused of \"speaking blasphemous words against\nMoses, and against God,\" or, to put it in the formal language used by\nthe witnesses, \"We have heard him say that Jesus of Nazareth shall\ndestroy this place, and shall change the customs which Moses delivered\nunto us.\" Now Stephen, if merely a man of common sense, must have\nintended to reply to this indictment. Some critics, as we have just\nnoted, think that he failed effectually to do so. We are indeed often\nin great danger of paying too much attention and lending too great\nweight to objections of this kind urged by persons who assume to\nthemselves the office of critics; and to counteract this tendency\nperhaps it is as well to note that a leading German writer of a\nrationalistic type, named Zeller, who has written a work to decry the\nhistorical character of the Acts, finds in St. Stephen's words an\noration \"not only characteristic, but also better suited to the case\nand to the accusation raised against him than is usually supposed.\"\n\nDisregarding, then, all cavils of critics whose views are mutually\ndestructive, let us see if we cannot discern in this narrative the\nmarks of a sound and powerful mind, guided, aided, and directed by the\nSpirit of God which dwelt so abundantly in him. St. Stephen was\naccused of irreverence towards Moses, and hostility towards the\ntemple, and towards all the Jewish institutions. How did he meet this?\nHe begins his address to the Sanhedrin at the earliest period of their\nnational history, and shows how the chosen people had passed through\nmany changes and developments without interfering with their essential\nidentity amid these changes. His opponents now made idols of their\nlocal institutions and of the buildings of the temple, but God's\nchoice and God's promise had originally nothing local about them at\nall. Abraham their great father was first called by God in Ur of the\nChaldees, far away across the desert in distant Mesopotamia. Thence he\nremoved to Charran, and then, only after the lapse of years, became a\nwanderer up and down in Canaan, where he never possessed so much of\nthe land as he could set his foot upon. The promises of God and the\ncovenant of grace were personal things, made to God's chosen children,\nnot connected with lands or buildings or national customs. He next\ntakes up the case of Moses. He had been accused of blasphemy and\nirreverence towards the great national law-giver. His words prove that\nhe entertained no such feelings; he respected and revered Moses just\nas much as his opponents and accusers did. But Moses had nothing to\nsay or do with Canaan, or Jerusalem, or the temple. Nay, rather, his\nwork for the chosen people was done in Egypt and in Midian and on the\nside of Horeb, where the presence and name of Jehovah were manifested\nnot in the temple or tabernacle, but in the bush burning yet not\nconsumed.\n\nThe Grecian Jews accused Stephen of irreverence towards Moses. But how\nhad their forefathers treated that Moses whom he recognised as a\ndivinely-sent messenger? \"They thrust him from them, and in their\nhearts turned back again into Egypt.\" Moses, however, led them onward\nand upward. His motto was hope. His rod and his voice ever pointed\nforward. He warned them that his own ministry was not the final one;\nthat it was only an intermediate and temporary institution, till the\nprophet should come unto whom the people should hearken. There was a\nchosen people before the customs introduced by Moses. There may\ntherefore be a chosen people still when these customs cease, having\nfulfilled their purpose. The argument of St. Stephen in this passage\nis the same as that of St. Paul in the fourth chapter of Galatians,\nwhere he sets forth the temporary and intermediate character of the\nLevitical law and of the covenant of circumcision. So teaches St.\nStephen in his speech. His argument is simply this:--I have been\naccused of speaking blasphemous words against Moses because I\nproclaimed that a greater Prophet than he had come, and yet this was\nonly what Moses himself had foretold. It is not I who have blasphemed\nand opposed Moses: it is my accusers rather. But then he remembers\nthat the accusation dealt not merely with Moses. It went farther, and\naccused him of speaking blasphemous words against the national\nsanctuary, \"saying that Jesus of Nazareth shall destroy this place.\"\nThis leads him to speak of the temple. His argument now takes a\ndifferent turn, and runs thus. This building is now the centre of\nJewish thoughts and affections. But it is a mere modern thing as\ncompared with the original choice and promise of God. There was no\nchosen dwelling-place of the Almighty in the earliest days of all; His\npresence was then manifested wherever His chosen servants dwelt. Then\nMoses made a tent or tabernacle, which abode in no certain spot, but\nmoved hither and thither. Last of all, long after Abraham, and long\nafter Moses, and even after David, Solomon built God an house. Even\nwhen it was built, and in all its original glory, even then the\ntemporary character of the temple was clearly recognised by the\nprophet Isaiah, who had long ago, in his sixty-sixth chapter,\nproclaimed the truth which had been brought forward as an accusation\nagainst himself: \"Heaven is My throne, and earth is My footstool; what\nhouse will ye build Me, saith the Lord, or what is the place of My\nrest? Hath not My hand made all these things?\"--a great spiritual\ntruth which had been anticipated long before Isaiah by King Solomon,\nin his famous dedication prayer at the opening of the temple: \"But\nwill God indeed dwell on the earth? Behold the heaven and the heaven\nof heavens cannot contain Thee; how much less this house that I have\nbuilded\" (1 Kings viii. 27). After St. Stephen had set forth this\nundeniable truth confirmed by the words of Isaiah, which to the\nPharisaic portion of his audience, at least, must have seemed\nconclusive, there occurs a break in the address.\n\nOne would have thought that he would then have proceeded to describe\nthe broader and more spiritual life which had shone forth for mankind\nin Christ, and to expound the freedom from all local restrictions\nwhich should henceforth belong to acceptable worship of the Most High.\nMost certainly, if the speech had been invented for him and placed in\nhis mouth, a forger would naturally have designed a fuller and more\nbalanced discourse, setting forth the doctrine of Christ as well as\nthe past history of the Jews. We cannot tell whether he actually\nentered more fully into the subject or not. Possibly the Sadducean\nportion of his audience had got quite enough. Their countenances and\ngestures bespoke their horror of St. Stephen's doctrine. Isaiah's\nopinion carried no weight with them as contrasted with the\ninstitutions of Moses, which were their pride and glory; and so, borne\nalong by the force of his oratory, St. Stephen finished with that\nvigorous denunciation which led to his death: \"Ye stiffnecked and\nuncircumcised in heart and ears, ye do always resist the Holy Ghost:\nas your fathers did, so do ye.\" This exposition of St. Stephen's\nspeech will show the drift and argument of it as it appears to us. But\nit must have seemed to them much more powerful, plain-spoken, and\naggressive. He vindicated himself to any right-thinking and fair mind\nfrom the accusation of irreverence towards God, towards Moses, or\ntowards the Divine institutions. But the minds of his hearers were\nnot fair. He had trampled upon their prejudices, he had suggested the\nvanity of their dearest ideas, and they could not estimate his reasons\nor follow his arguments, but they could resort to the remedy which\nevery failing though for the present popular cause possesses,--they\ncould destroy him. And thus they treated the modern as their ancestors\nhad treated the ancient prophets. What a lesson Stephen's speech has\nfor the Church of every age! How wide and manifold the applications of\nit! The Jewish error is one that is often committed, their mistake\noften repeated. The Jews identified God's honour and glory with an old\norder that was fast passing away, and had no eyes to behold a new and\nmore glorious order that was opening upon them. We may blame them then\nfor their murder of St. Stephen, but we must blame them gently,\nfeeling that they acted as human nature has ever acted under similar\ncircumstances, and that good motives were mingled with those feelings\nof rage and bigotry and narrowness that urged them to their deed of\nblood. Let us see how this was. Stephen proclaimed a new order and a\nnew development, embracing for his hearers a vast political as well as\na vast religious change. His forecast of the future swept away at once\nall the privileges and profits connected with the religious position\nof Jerusalem, and thus destroyed the political prospects of the Jewish\npeople. It is no wonder the Sanhedrin could not appreciate his\noration. Men do not ever listen patiently when their pockets are being\ntouched, their profits swept away, their dearest hopes utterly\nannihilated. Has not human experience often repeated the scene acted\nout that day in Jerusalem? On the political stage men have often seen\nit,--we ourselves have seen it. The advocates of liberty, civil and\nreligious, have had to struggle against the same spirit and the same\nprejudices as St. Stephen. Take the political world alone. We now look\nback and view with horror the deeds wrought in the name of authority\nand in opposition to the principles of change and innovation. We read\nthe stories of Alva and the massacres in the Netherlands, the bloody\ndeeds of the seventeenth century in England and all over Europe, the\nmiseries and the bloodshed of the American war of independence, the\nfierce opposition with which the spirit of liberty has been resisted\nthroughout this century; and our sympathies are altogether ranged on\nthe side of the sufferers,--the losers and defeated, it may have been,\nfor the time, but the triumphant in the long run.\n\nThe true student, however, of history or of human nature will not\ncontent himself with any one-sided view, and he will have some\nsympathy to spare for those who adopted the stern measures. He will\nnot judge them too harshly. They reverenced the past as the Jews of\nJerusalem did, and reverence is a feeling that is right and blessed.\nIt is no good sign for this age of ours that it possesses so little\nreverence for the past, thinks so lightly of the institutions, the\nwisdom, the ideas of antiquity, and is ready to change them at a\nmoment's notice. The men who now are held up to the execration of\nposterity, the high priest and the Sanhedrin who murdered Stephen, the\ntyrants and despots and their agents who strove to crush the\nsupporters of liberty, the writers who cried them down and applauded\nor urged on the violent measures which were adopted and sometimes\ntriumphed for the time,--we should strive to put ourselves in their\nposition, and see what they had to say for themselves, and thus seek\nto judge them here below as the Eternal King will judge them at the\ngreat final tribunal. They knew the good which the old political\ninstitutions had worked. They had lived and flourished under them as\ntheir ancestors had lived and flourished before them. The future they\nknew not. All they knew was that changes were proposed which\nthreatened everything with which their dearest memories were bound up,\nand the innovators seemed dangerous creatures, obnoxious to God and\nman, and they dealt with them accordingly.\n\nSo it has been and still is in politics. The opponents of political\nchange are sometimes denounced in the fiercest language, as if they\nwere morally wicked. The late Dr. Arnold seems a grievous offender in\nthis respect. No one can read his charming biography by Dean Stanley\nwithout recognising how intolerant he was towards his political\nopponents; how blind he was to those good motives which inspire the\ntimorous, the ignorant, and the aged, when brought face to face with\nchanges which appear to them thickly charged with the most dangerous\nresults. Charity towards opponents is sadly needed in the political as\nwell as in the religious world. And as it has been in politics so has\nit been in religion. Men reverence the past, and that reverence easily\nglides into an idolatry blind to its defects and hostile to any\nimprovement. It is in religion too as in politics; a thousand other\ninterests--money, office, expectations, memories of the loved and\nlost--are bound up with old religious forms, and then when the prophet\narises with his Divine message, as Stephen arose before the Sanhedrin,\nthe ancient proverb is fulfilled, the corruption of the best becomes\nthe worst, the good motives mingle with the evil, and are used by the\npoor human heart to justify the harshest, most unchristian deeds done\nin defence of what men believe to be the cause of truth and\nrighteousness. Let us be just and fair to the aggressors as well as to\nthe aggrieved, to the persecutors as well as to the persecuted. But\nlet us all the same take good heed to learn for ourselves the lessons\nthis narrative presents. Reverence is a good thing, and a blessed\nthing; and without reverence no true progress, either in political or\nspiritual things, can be made. But reverence easily degenerates into\nblind superstitious idolatry. It was so with the Sanhedrin, it was so\nat the Reformation, it has ever been so with the opponents of true\nreligious progress. Let us evermore strive to keep minds free, open,\nunbiassed, respecting the past, yet ready to listen to the voice and\nfresh revelations of God's will and purposes made to us by the\nmessengers whom He chooses as He pleases. Perhaps there was never an\nage which needed this lesson of Stephen's speech and its reception\nmore than our own. The attitude of religious men towards science and\nits numerous and wondrous advances needs guidance such as this\nincident affords. The Sanhedrin had their own theory and\ninterpretation of God's dealings in the past. They clung to it\npassionately, and refused the teaching of Stephen, who would have\nwidened their views, and shown them that a grand and noble development\nwas quite in accordance with all the facts of the case, and indeed a\nnecessary result of the sacred history when truly expounded. What a\nparable and picture of the future we here find! What a warning as to\nthe attitude religious men should take up with respect to the progress\nof science! Patience, intellectual and religious patience, is taught\nus. The Sanhedrin were impatient of St. Stephen's views, which they\ncould not understand, and their impatience made them lose a blessing\nand commit a sin. Now has it not been at times much the same with\nourselves? Fifty or sixty years ago men were frightened at the\nrevelations of geology,--they had their own interpretations of the\npast and of the Scriptures,--just as three centuries ago men were\nfrightened at the revelations and teaching of modern astronomy.\nPrejudiced and narrow men then strove to hound down the teachers of\nthe new science, and would if they could have destroyed them in the\nname of God. Patience here, however, has done its work and has had its\nreward. The new revelations have been taken up and absorbed by the\nChurch of Christ. Men have learned to distinguish between their own\ninterpretations of religion and of religious documents on the one hand\nand the religion itself on the other. The old, human, narrow,\nprejudiced interpretations have been modified. That which could be\nshaken and was untrue has passed away, while that which cannot be\nshaken has remained.\n\nThe lesson taught us by these instances of astronomy and geology ought\nnot to be thrown away. Patience is again necessary for the Christian\nand for the scientist alike. New facts are every day coming to light,\nbut it requires much time and thought to bring new facts and old\ntruths into their due correlation, to look round and about them. The\nhuman mind is at best very small and weak. It is blind, and cannot see\nafar off, and it is only by degrees it can grasp truth in its fulness.\nA new fact, for instance, discovered by science may appear at first\nplainly contradictory to some old truth revealed in Scripture. But\neven so, we should not lose our patience or our hope taught us by this\nchapter. What new fact of science can possibly seem more\ncontradictory to any old truth of the Creeds than St. Stephen's\nteaching about the universal character of God's promise and the\nfreeness of acceptable worship must have seemed when compared with the\nDivine choice of the temple at Jerusalem? They appeared to the\nSanhedrin ideas mutually destructive, though now we see them to have\nbeen quite consistent one with another. Let this historic retrospect\nsupport us when our faith is tried. Let us welcome every new fact and\nnew revelation brought by science, and then, if they seem opposed to\nsomething we know to be true in religion, let us wait in confidence\nbegotten of past experience that God in His own good time will clear\nup for His faithful people that which now seems difficult of\ncomprehension. Patience and confidence, then, are two lessons much\nneeded in this age, which St. Stephen's speech and its reception bring\nhome to our hearts.\n\nII. We have now spoken of the general aspect of the discourse, and the\nbroad counsels we may gather from it. There are some other points,\nhowever, points of detail as distinguished from wider views, upon\nwhich we would fix our attention. They too will be found full of\nguidance and full of instruction. Let us take them in the order in\nwhich they appear in St. Stephen's address. The mistakes and\nvariations which undoubtedly occur in it are well worthy of careful\nattention, and have much teaching necessary for these times. There are\nthree points in which Stephen varies from the language of the Old\nTestament. In the fourteenth verse of the seventh chapter Stephen\nspeaks thus: \"Then sent Joseph, and called his father Jacob to him,\nand all his kindred, threescore and fifteen souls;\" while, if we turn\nto the Pentateuch, we shall find that the number of the original\nHebrew immigrants is placed three times over at seventy, or threescore\nand ten, that is in Gen. xlvi. 27, Exod. i. 5, and Deut. x. 22. This,\nhowever, is only a comparatively minor point. The Septuagint or Greek\nversion of the Pentateuch reads seventy-five in the first of these\npassages, making the sons of Joseph born in Egypt to have been nine\npersons, and thus completing the number seventy-five, at which it\nfixes the roll of the males who came with Jacob. The next two verses,\nthe fifteenth and sixteenth, contain a much more serious mistake. They\nrun thus:--\"So Jacob went down into Egypt, and died, he, and our\nfathers, and were carried over into Sychem, and laid in the sepulchre\nthat Abraham bought for a sum of money of the sons of Emmor the father\nof Sychem.\" Now here there occur several grave errors. Jacob was not\ncarried over and buried at Sychem at all, but at the cave of\nMachpelah, as is plainly stated in Gen. l. 13. Again, a plot of ground\nat Sychem was certainly bought, not by Abraham, however, but by Jacob.\nAbraham bought the field and cave of Machpelah from Ephron the\nHittite. Jacob bought his plot at Sychem from the sons of Emmor. There\nare in these verses, then, two serious historical mistakes; first as\nto the true burial-place of Jacob, and then as to the purchaser of the\nplot of ground at Sychem. Yet, again, there is a third mistake in the\nforty-third verse, where, when quoting a denunciation of Jewish\nidolatry from Amos v. 25, 26, he quotes the prophet as threatening, \"I\nwill carry you away beyond Babylon,\" whereas the prophet did say,\n\"Therefore I will cause you to go into captivity beyond Damascus.\" St.\nStephen substituted Babylon for Damascus, two cities between which\nseveral hundred miles intervened. I have stated the difficulty thus\nas strongly as possible, because I think that, instead of constituting\na difficulty, they are a real source of living help and comfort, as\nwell as a great practical confirmation of the story. Let us take this\nlast point first. I say that these mistakes, admitted mistakes which I\nmake no vain attempt to explain away, constitute a confirmation of the\nstory as given in the Acts against modern rationalistic opponents. It\nis a favourite theme of many of these writers that the Acts of the\nApostles is a mere piece of fancy history, a historical romance\ncomposed in the second century for the purpose of reconciling the\nadherents of St. Paul, or the Gentile Christians, with the followers\nof St. Peter, or the Jewish Christians. The persons who uphold this\nview fix the date of the Acts in the earlier half of the second\ncentury, and teach that the speeches and addresses were composed by\nthe author of the book and put into the mouths of the reputed\nspeakers. Now, in the mistake made by St. Stephen, we have a\nrefutation of this theory. Surely any man composing a speech to put\ninto the mouth of one of his favourite heroes and champions would not\nhave represented him as making such grave errors when addressing the\nsupreme Jewish senate. A man might easily make any of these slips\nwhich I have noticed in the heat of an oration, and they might have\neven passed unnoticed, as every speaker who has much practice in\naddressing the public still makes precisely the same kind of mistake.\nBut a romancer, sitting down to forge speeches suitable to the time\nand place, would never have put in the mouth of his lay figures grave\nerrors about the most elementary facts of Jewish history. We conclude,\nthen, that the inaccuracies reported as made by St. Stephen are\nevidences of the genuine character of the oration attributed to him.\nThen again we see in these mistakes a guarantee of the honesty and\naccuracy of the reports of the speech. The other day I read the\nobjections of a critic to our Gospels. He wished to know, for\ninstance, how the addresses of our Lord could have been preserved in\nan age when there was no shorthand. The answer is, however, simple\nenough, and conclusive: there was shorthand in that age.[131]\nShorthand was then carried to such perfection that an epigram of\nMartial (xiv. 208), a contemporary poet, celebrating its triumphs may\nbe thus translated:--\n\n    \"Swift though the words, the pen still swifter sped;\n    The hand has finish'd ere the tongue has said.\"\n\n  [131] See p. 108 above, where I have touched on this point.\n\nWhile even if the Jews knew nothing of shorthand, the human memory, as\nwe have already noted, was then developed to a degree of which we have\nno conception. Now, whether transmitted by memory or by notes, this\naddress of St. Stephen bears proofs of the truthfulness of the\nreporter in the mistakes it contains. A man anxious for the reputation\nof his hero would have corrected them, as parliamentary reporters are\naccustomed to make the worst speeches readable, correcting evident\nblunders, and improving the grammar. The reporter of St. Stephen's\nwords, on the contrary, gave them to us just as they were spoken. But\nthen, I may be asked, how do you account for St. Stephen's mistake?\nWhat explanation can you offer? My answer is simple and plain enough.\nI have no other explanation to offer except that they are mistakes\nsuch as a speaker, filled with his subject, and speaking to an excited\nand hostile audience, might naturally make; mistakes such as truthful\nspeakers every day make in their ordinary efforts. Every man who\nspeaks an extemporaneous discourse such as Stephen's was, full of\nreferences to past history, is liable to such errors. Even when the\nmemory retains the facts most accurately, the tongue is apt to make\nsuch lapses. Let a number of names be mingled up together in a speech\nor sermon where frequent mention has to be made of one now and of\nanother again, how easily in that case a speaker substitutes one for\nanother. But it may be objected that it is declared of Stephen that he\nwas \"full of the Holy Ghost and wisdom,\" that \"he was full of faith\nand power,\" and that his adversaries \"were not able to resist the\nwisdom and the spirit with which he spake.\" But surely this might be\nsaid of able, devoted, and holy men at the present day, and yet no one\nwould say that they were miraculously kept from the most trivial\nmistakes, and that their memories and tongues were so supernaturally\naided that they were preserved from the smallest verbal inaccuracies.\nWe are always inclined to reverse the true scientific method of\nenquiry, and to form notions as to what inspiration must mean, instead\nof asking what, as a matter of fact, inspiration did mean and involve\nin the case of the Bible heroes. People when they feel offended by\nthese mistakes of St. Stephen prove that they really think that\nChristianity was quite a different thing in the apostolic days from\nwhat it is now, and that the words \"full of the Holy Ghost\" and the\npresence of the Divine Spirit meant quite a different gift and\nblessing then from what they imply at the present time. I look upon\nthe mistakes in this speech in quite a different light. St. Luke, in\nrecording them exactly as they took place, proves, not merely his\nhonesty as a narrator, but he also has handed down to us a most\nimportant lesson. He teaches us to moderate our notions and to chasten\nour _\u00e0 priori_ expectations. He shows us we must come and study the\nScriptures to learn what they mean by the gift and power of the Holy\nSpirit. St. Luke expressly tells us that Stephen was full of the Holy\nGhost, and then proceeds to narrate certain verbal inaccuracies and\ncertain slips of memory to prove to us that the presence of the Holy\nGhost does not annihilate human nature, or supersede the exercise of\nthe human faculties. Just as in other places we find Apostles like St.\nPeter or St. Paul spoken of as equally inspired, and yet the\ninspiration enjoyed by them did not destroy their human weakness and\ninfirmities, and, full of the Holy Ghost as they were, St. Paul could\nwax wroth and engage in bitter dissension with Barnabas, his\nfellow-labourer; and St. Peter could fall into hypocrisy against which\nhis brother Apostle had publicly to protest. It is wonderful how\nliable the mind is, in matters of religion, to embrace exactly the\nsame errors age after age, manifesting themselves in different shapes.\nMen are ever inclined to form their theories beforehand, and then to\ntest God's actions and the course of His Providence by those theories,\ninstead of reversing the order, and testing their theories by facts as\nGod reveals them. This error about the true theory of inspiration and\nthe gifts of the Holy Ghost which Protestants have fallen into is\nexactly the same as two celebrated mistakes, one in ancient, the other\nin modern times. The Eutychian heresy was very celebrated in the fifth\ncentury. It split the Eastern Church into two parts, and prepared the\nway for the triumph of Mahometanism. It fell, too, into this same\nerror. It formed an _\u00e0 priori_ theory of God and His nature. It\ndetermined that it was impossible for the nature of Deity to be united\nto a nature which could feel hunger and thirst and weakness, because\nthat God cannot be affected by any human weakness or wants. It denied,\ntherefore, the real humanity of the Lord Jesus Christ and the reality\nof His human life and actions; teaching that His human body was not\nreal, but merely a phenomenal or apparent one, and then explaining\naway all the statements and facts of Gospel history which seemed to\nthem to conflict with their own private theory. In the West we have\nhad ourselves experience of the same erroneous method of argument. The\nadherents of the Church of Rome argue for the infallibility of the\nPope in the same way. They dilate on the awful importance of religious\ntruth, and the fearful consequences of a mistake in such matters.\nHence they conclude that it is only natural and fitting that a living,\nspeaking, teaching, infallible guide should be appointed by God to\ndirect the Church, and thence they conclude the infallibility of the\nPope; a method of argument which has been amply exposed by Dr. Salmon\nin his work on the Infallibility of the Church. The Roman Catholics\nform their theory first, and when they come to facts which conflict\nwith their theory, they deny them or explain them away in the most\nextraordinary manner.\n\nProtestants themselves, however, are subject to the same erroneous\nmethods. They form a theory about the Holy Ghost and His operations.\nThey conclude, as is true, that He is Himself right, and just, and\ntrue in all His doings, and then they conclude that all the men whom\nHe chose in the earliest age of the Church, and who are mentioned in\nScripture as endued with His grace, must have been as free from every\nform of error as the Holy Spirit Himself. They thus fashion for\nthemselves a mere _\u00e0 priori_ theory like the Eutychian and the\nRomanist, and then, when they apply their theory to passages like St.\nStephen's speech, they feel compelled to deny facts and offer forced\nexplanations, and to reject God's teaching as it is embodied in the\ndivinely taught lessons of history. Let us be honest, fearless\nstudents of the Scriptures. St. Stephen was full of the Holy Ghost,\nand as such his great, broad, spiritual lessons were taught by the\nSpirit, and commend themselves as Divine teaching to every Christian\nheart. But these lessons were given through human lips, and had to be\nconveyed through human faculties, and as such are not free from the\nimperfections which attach themselves to everything human here below.\nSurely it is just the same still. God the Holy Ghost dwells with His\npeople as of old. There are men even in this age of whom it still may\nbe said, that in a special sense \"they are full of the Holy Ghost,\" a\nblessing granted in answer to faithful prayer and devout communion and\na life lived closely with God. The Holy Spirit speaks through them and\nin them. Their sermons, even on the simplest topics, speak with power,\nthey teem with spiritual unction, they come home with conviction to\nthe human conscience. Yet surely no one would dream of saying that\nthese men are free from slips of speech and lapses of memory in their\nextemporaneous addresses, or in their private instructions, or in\ntheir written letters, because the Holy Ghost thus proves His presence\nand His power in His people as of old. The human heart and conscience\neasily and at once distinguish between that which is due to human\nweakness and what to Divine grace, according to that most pregnant\nsaying of an Apostle himself gifted above all others, \"We have this\ntreasure in earthen vessels, that the excellency of the power may be\nof God and not of us.\" This view may be startling to some persons who\nhave been accustomed to look to the Bible as some persons look to the\nPope, as an oracle which will give them infallible guidance on every\ntopic without the exercise of any thought or intelligence on their own\npart. Yet it is no original or novel notion of my own, but one that\nhas been luminously set forth by a devout expositor of Scripture,\ndealing with this very passage many years ago. Dr. Vaughan, in his\nlectures on the Acts, preaching at Doncaster when vicar of that place,\nthus states his conclusions on this point:--\"Now I will address one\nearnest word to persons who may have noticed with anxiety in this\nchapter, or who may have heard it noticed by others in a tone of cavil\nor disbelief, that in one or two minor points the account here given\nof Jewish history seems to vary from that contained in the narrative\nof the Old Testament. For example, the history in the book of Genesis\ntells us that the burying-place bought by Abraham was in Mamre or\nHebron, not at Sychem; and that it was bought by him of Ephron the\nHittite, Jacob (not Abraham) being the purchaser of the ground at\nShechem of the sons of Hamor, Shechem's father. My friends, can you\nreally suppose that a difference of this nature has anything to do,\nthis way or that, with the substantial truth of the gospel revelation?\nI declare to you that I would not waste the time in endeavouring (if I\nwas able) to reconcile such a variance. It is to be regretted that\nChristian persons, in their zeal for the literal accuracy of our Holy\nBook, have spoken and written as if they thought that anything could\npossibly depend upon such a question. We all know how easy it is to\nget two witnesses in a court of justice to give their stories of an\noccurrence in the same words. We know also how instant is the\nsuspicion of falsehood which that formal coincidence of statement\nbrings upon them. Holy Scripture shows what I may indeed call a noble\nsuperiority to all such uniformity. Each book of our Bible is an\nindependent witness; shown to be so, not least, by verbal or even\nactual differences on some trifling points of detail. And they who\ndrink most deeply at the fountain head of Divine truth learn to\nestimate these things in the same manner; to feel what we might\ndescribe as a lordly disdain for all infidel objections drawn from\nthis sort of petty, paltry, cavilling, carping, creeping criticism.\nLet our faith at last, God helping us, be strong enough and decided\nenough to override a few or a multitude of such objections. We will\nhear them unmoved; we will fearlessly examine them; if we cannot\nresolve them, then, in the power of a more majestic principle, we will\ncalmly turn from them and pass them by. What we know not now, we may\nknow hereafter; and if we never know we will believe still.\" These are\nwise words, very wholesome, very practical, and very helpful in this\npresent age.\n\nIII. Let us briefly gather yet another lesson from this passage. The\ndeclaration of the Church's catholicity and the universal nature of\nChristian worship contained in verses 47-50 deserve our attention.\nWhat did St. Stephen say?--\"But Solomon built Him a house. Howbeit the\nMost High dwelleth not in houses made with hands; as saith the\nprophet, The heaven is My throne, and the earth the footstool of My\nfeet; what manner of house will ye build Me? saith the Lord; or what\nis the place of My rest? Did not My hand make all these things?\"\nThese words must have sounded as very extraordinary and very\nrevolutionary in Jewish ears, because they most certainly struck at\nthe root of the exclusive privilege claimed for Jerusalem, that it was\nthe one place upon earth where acceptable worship could be offered,\nand where the Divine presence could be manifested. It seems no wonder\nthat they should have roused the Sanhedrin to the pitch of fury which\nended in the orator's judicial murder. But these words have been at\ntimes pressed farther than Stephen intended. He merely wished to teach\nthat God's special and covenanted presence was not for the future to\nbe limited to Jerusalem. In the new dispensation of the Messiah whom\nhe preached, that special covenanted presence would be found\neverywhere. Where two or three should be gathered in Christ's name\nthere would God's presence be found. These words of Stephen have\nsometimes been quoted as if they sounded the death-knell of special\nplaces dedicated to the honour and glory of God, such as churches are.\nIt is evident, however, that they have no such application. They\nsounded the death-knell of the exclusive privilege of one place, the\ntemple, but they proclaimed the freedom which the Church has ever\nsince claimed, and the Jewish Church of the dispersion, by the\ninstitution of synagogues, had led the way in claiming teaching that\nwherever true hearts and true worshippers are found, there God reveals\nHimself. But we must bear in mind a distinction. Stephen and the\nApostles rejected the exclusive right of the Temple as the one place\nof worship for the world. They asserted the right to establish special\nplaces of worship throughout the world. They rejected the exclusive\nclaims of Jerusalem. But they did not reject the right and the duty of\nGod's people to assemble themselves as a collective body for public\nworship, and to realize Christ's covenanted presence. This is an\nimportant limitation of St. Stephen's statement. The absolute duty of\npublic collective worship of the Almighty cannot be too strongly\ninsisted upon. Men neglect it, and they support themselves by an\nappeal to St. Stephen's words, which have nothing to do with public\nworship more than with private worship. The Jews imagined that both\npublic and private worship offered in the Temple had some special\nblessing attached, because a special presence of God was there\ngranted. St. Stephen attacked this prejudice. His words must, however,\nbe limited to the exact point he was then dealing with, and must not\nbe pressed farther. Private prayer was binding on all God's people in\nthe new and freer dispensation, and so, too, public worship has a\nspecial covenant blessing attached to it, and the blessing cannot be\nobtained if people neglect the duty. Public worship has been by\nProtestants looked at too much, as if it were only a means of their\nown edification, and thus, when they have thought that such\nedification could be as well or better attained at home, by reading a\nbetter sermon than they might chance to hear in the public\ncongregation, they have excused their absence to their own conscience.\nBut public worship is much more than a means of edification. It is the\npayment of a debt of worship, praise, and adoration due by the\ncreature to the Creator. In that duty personal edification finds a\nplace, but a mere accidental and subsidiary place. The great end of\npublic worship is worship, not hearing, not edification even, though\nedification follows as a necessary result of such public worship when\nsincerely offered. The teaching of St. Stephen did not then apply to\nthe erection of churches and buildings set apart for God's service,\nor to the claim made for public worship as an exercise with a peculiar\nDivine promise annexed. It simply protests against any attempt to\nlocalise the Divine presence to one special spot on earth, making it\nand it alone the centre of all religious interest. St. Stephen's words\nare indeed but a necessary result of the ascension of Christ as we\nhave already expounded its expediency. Had Christ remained on earth,\nHis personal presence would have rendered the Church a mere local and\nnot an universal institution; just as the doctrine of Roman Catholics\nabout the Pope as Christ's Vicar, and Rome as his appointed seat, has\nso far invested Rome with somewhat of the characteristics of Jerusalem\nand the Temple. But our Lord ascended up on high that the hearts and\nminds of His people might likewise ascend to that region where, above\ntime, and sense, and change, their Master evermore dwells, as the\nloadstone which secretly draws their hearts, and guides their\ntempest-tossed spirits across the stormy waters of this world to the\nhaven of everlasting rest.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVI.\n\n_THE FIRST CHRISTIAN MARTYRDOM._\n\n     \"And they cast him out of the city, and stoned him: and the\n     witnesses laid down their garments at the feet of a young man\n     named Saul. And they stoned Stephen, calling upon the Lord, and\n     saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit. And he kneeled down, and\n     cried with a loud voice, Lord, lay not this sin to their charge.\n     And when he had said this, he fell asleep. And Saul was\n     consenting unto his death.\"--ACTS vii. 58-60; viii. 1.\n\n\nThe apology of Stephen struck the keynote of Christian freedom, traced\nout the fair proportions of the Catholic Church, while the actual\nmartyrdom of Stephen taught men that Christianity was not only the\nforce which was to triumph, but the power in which they were to\nsuffer, and bear, and die. Stephen's career was a type of all martyr\nlives, and embraces every possible development through which Christ's\nChurch and His servants had afterwards to pass,--obscurity, fame,\nactivity, death, fixing high the standard for all ages.\n\nI. We have in this passage, telling the story of that martyrdom, a\nvast number of topics, which have formed the subject-matter of\nChristian thought since apostolic times. We have already remarked that\nthe earliest quotation from the Acts of the Apostles connects itself\nwith this scene of Stephen's martyrdom. Let us see how this came\nabout. One hundred and forty years later than Stephen's death, towards\nthe close of the second century, the Churches of Vienne and Lyons\nwere sending an account of the terrible sufferings through which they\nhad passed during a similar sudden outburst of the Celtic pagans of\nthat district against the Christians. The aged Pothinus, a man whose\nlife and ministry touched upon the apostolic age, was put to death,\nsuffering violence very like that to which St. Stephen was subjected,\nfor we are told expressly by the historian Eusebius that the mob in\nits violence flung missiles at him. \"Those at a distance, whatsoever\nthey had at hand, every one hurled at him, thinking it would be a\ngreat sin if they fell short in wanton abuse against him.\"[132] The\nChurch of Lyons, according to the loving usage of those early times,\nsent an account of all their trouble to the brethren in Asia and\nPhrygia, that they might read it at the celebration of the Eucharist\nfor their own comfort and edification. They entered into great\ndetails, showing how wonderfully the power of God's grace was\nmanifested, even in the weakest persons, sustaining their courage and\nenabling them to witness. The letter then goes on to note the\nmarvellous humility of the sufferers. They would not allow any one to\ncall them martyrs. That name was reserved to Jesus Christ, \"the true\nand faithful Martyr,\" and to those who had been made perfect through\ndeath. Then, too, their charity was wonderful, and the epistle,\nreferring to this very incident, tells how they prayed \"like Stephen,\nthat perfect martyr, Lord, impute not this sin to them.\" The memory of\nSt. Stephen served to nerve the earliest Gallic martyrs, and it has\never since been bound up with the dearest feelings of Christians. The\narrangements of the Calendar, with which we are all familiar, are\nmerely an expression of the same feeling as that recorded in the\nsecond-century document we have just now quoted. Christmas Day and St.\nStephen's Day are closely united,--the commemoration of Christ's birth\nis joined with that of the martyrdom of St. Stephen, because of a\ncertain spiritual instinct. Christmas Day records the fact of the\nIncarnation, and then we have according to the order of the Calendar\nthree holy days, St. Stephen's, St. John's, and the Holy Innocents'\nDay, which follow one another in immediate succession. Many persons\nwill remember the explanation of an old commentator on the Calendar\nand Liturgy, of which Keble makes a very effective use in his hymns in\nthe _Christian Year_ set apart for those days. There are three classes\nof martyrs: one in will and deed like St. Stephen,--this is the\nhighest class, therefore he has place next to Christ; another in will,\nbut not in deed, like St. John the Divine, who was ready to suffer\ndeath but did not,--this is the second rank, therefore his place comes\nnext St. Stephen; and lastly come the Holy Innocents, the babes of\nBethlehem, martyrs in deed but not in will, and therefore in the\nlowest position. The Western Church, and specially the Church of\nNorthern Europe, has always loved the Christmas season, with its\ncheerful fires, its social joys, its family memories; and hence, as it\nwas in the Church of the second century, so with ourselves, none has a\nhigher or dearer place in memory, doubtless largely owing to this\nconjunction, than the great proto-martyr. Men have delighted,\ntherefore, to trace spiritual analogies and relationships between\nStephen and Christ; fanciful perhaps some of them are, but still they\nare devout fancies, edifying fancies, fancies which strengthen and\ndeepen the Divine life in the soul. Thus they have noted that\nChristmas Day and St. Stephen's Day are both natal days. In the\nlanguage of the ancient Church, with its strong realizing faith, men\nspoke of a saint's death or martyrdom as his _dies natalis_. This is,\nindeed, one of the many traces of primitive usage which the Church of\nRome has preserved, like a fly fixed in amber, petrified in the midst\nof her liturgical uses. She has a Martyrology which the ordinary laity\nscarcely ever see or use, but which is in daily use among the clergy\nand the various ecclesiastical communities connected with that Church.\nIt is in the Latin tongue, and is called the _Martyrologium Romanum_,\ngiving the names of the various saints whose memories are celebrated\nupon each day throughout the year, and every such day is duly styled\nthe natal or birthday of the saint to whom it is appropriated. The\nChurch of Rome retains this beautiful custom of the primitive Church,\nwhich viewed the death-day of a saint as his birthday into the true\nlife, and rejoiced in it accordingly. That life was not, in the\nconception of the primitive believers, a life of ghosts and shadows.\nIt was the life of realities, because it was the life of eternity, and\ntherefore the early Christians lived for it, they longed for it, and\ncounted their entrance upon it their true natal or birthday. The\nChurch brought the two birthdays of Christ and Stephen into closest\nunion, and men saw a beautiful reason for that union, teaching that\nChrist was born into this lower world in order that Stephen might be\nborn into the heavenly world. The whole of that dreadful scene enacted\nat Jerusalem was transformed by the power of that beautiful\nconception. Stephen's death was no longer a brutal murder; faith no\nlonger saw the rage, the violence, the crushed body, the mangled and\noutraged humanity. The birthday of Jesus Christ, the Incarnation of\nthe Master, transfigured the death-scene of the servant, for the shame\nand sufferings were changed into peace and glory; the execrations and\nrage of the mob became angelic songs, and the missiles used by them\nwere fashioned into messengers of the Most High, ushering the faithful\nmartyr through a new birth into his eternal rest. Well would it be for\nthe Church at large if she could rise to this early conception more\nfrequently than she commonly does. Men did not then trouble themselves\nabout questions of assurance, or their Christian consciousness. These\ntopics and ideas are begotten on a lower level, and find sustenance in\na different region. Men like Stephen and the martyrs of Vienne and\nLyons lived in the other world; it was the world of all their\ninterests, of all their passionate desires, of all their sense of\nrealities. They lived the supernatural life, and they did not trouble\nthemselves with any questions about that life, no more than a man in\nsound physical health and spirits cares to discuss topics dealing with\nthe constitution of the life which he enjoys, or to debate such\nunprofitable questions as, How do I know that I exist at all?\nChristians then knew and felt they lived in God, and that was enough\nfor them. We have wandered far enough afield, however; let us retrace\nour steps, and seek to discover more in detail the instruction for the\nlife of future ages given us in this first martyr scene.\n\n  [132] Epistle of the Church of Lyons in Eusebius, _Eccles. Hist._,\n  v. 1. This letter relates the earliest Celtic martyrdoms of which\n  we have any knowledge. They took place at the annual Convention of\n  the Celtic tribes of Gaul, which assembled at Lyons and Vienne.\n  These conventions were much the same as the assembly at Tara in\n  Meath, where St. Patrick began the work of converting Ireland. See\n  my _Ireland and the Celtic Church_, chap. iv., and also p. 9\n  above.\n\nII. We have brought before us the cause of the sudden outburst against\nStephen. For it was an outburst, a popular commotion, not a legal\nexecution. We have already explained the circumstances which led the\nSanhedrin to permit the mob to take their own course, and even to\nassist them in doing so. Pilate had departed; the imperial throne too\nwas vacant in the spring or early summer of the year 37; there was an\ninterregnum when the bonds of authority were relaxed, during which the\nJews took leave to do as they pleased, trusting that when the bonds\nwere again drawn tight the misdeeds of the past and the irregularities\ncommitted would be forgotten and forgiven. Hence the riot in which\nStephen lost his life. But what roused the listeners--Sanhedrists,\nelders, priests, and people alike--to madness? They heard him\npatiently enough, just as they afterwards heard his successor Paul,\ntill he spoke of the wider spiritual hope. Paul, as his speech is\nreported in the twenty-second chapter, was listened to till he spoke\nof being sent to the Gentiles. Stephen was listened to till he spoke\nof the free, universal, spiritual character of the Divine worship,\ntied to no place, bounded by no locality. Then the Sanhedrin waxed\nimpatient, and Stephen, recognising with all an orator's instinct and\ntact that his opportunity was over, changes his note--charging home\nupon his hearers the same spirit of criminal resistance to the\nleadings of the Most High as their fathers had always shown. The older\nJews had ever resisted the Holy Ghost as He displayed His teaching and\nopened up His purposes under the Old Dispensation; their descendants\nhad now followed their example in withstanding the same Divine Spirit\nmanifested in that Holy One of whom they had lately been the betrayers\nand murderers. It is scarcely any wonder that such language should\nhave been the occasion of his death. How exactly he follows the\nexample of our Saviour! Stephen used strong language, and so did\nJesus Christ. It has even been urged of late years that our Lord\ndeliberately roused the Jews to action, and hastened His end by His\nviolent language of denunciation against the ruling classes recorded\nin the twenty-third chapter of St. Matthew. There is, however, a great\nlesson of eternal significance to be derived from the example of St.\nStephen as well as of our Lord. There are times when strong language\nis useful and necessary. Christ's ordinary ministry was gentle,\npersuasive, mild. He did not strive nor cry, neither did any man hear\nHis voice in the streets. But a time came when, persuasion having\nfailed of its purpose, the language of denunciation took its place,\nand helped to work out in a way the Pharisees little expected the\nfinal triumph of truth. Stephen was skilful and gentle in his speech;\nhis words must at first have sounded strangely flattering to their\nprejudices, coming from one who was accused as a traitor to his race\nand religion. Yet when the gentle words failed, stern denunciation,\nthe plainest language, the keenest phrases,--\"Stiff-necked and\nuncircumcised in heart and ears,\" \"Betrayers and murderers of the\nRighteous One,\"--prove that a Christian martyr then, and Christ's\nmartyrs and witnesses of every age, are not debarred under certain\ncircumstances from the use of such weapons. But it is hard to know\nwhen the proper time has come for their employment. The object of\nevery true servant and witness of Christ will be to recommend the\ntruth as effectually as possible, and to win for it acceptance. Some\npeople seem to invert this course, and to think that it is unworthy a\ntrue follower of Christ to seek to present his message in an\nattractive shape. They regard every human art and every human motive\nor principle as so thoroughly bad that men should disregard and\ndespise them. Human eloquence, or motives of policy and prudence, they\nutterly reject. Their principles lead some of them farther still. They\nreject the assistance which art and music and literature can lend to\nthe cause of God, and the result is that men, specially as they grow\nin culture and civilisation, are estranged from the message of\neverlasting peace. Some people, with a hard, narrow conception of\nChristianity, are very responsible for the alienation of the young and\nthe thoughtful from the side of religion through the misconceptions\nwhich they have caused. God has made the doctrines of the cross\nrepugnant to the corrupt natural feelings of man, but it is not for us\nto make them repugnant to those good natural principles as well which\nthe Eternal Father has implanted in human nature, and which are an\necho of His own Divine self in the sanctuary of the heart. It is a\nreal breach of charity when men refuse to deal tenderly in such\nmatters with the lambs of Christ's flock, and will not seek, as St.\nStephen and the apostles did, to recommend God's cause with all human\nskill, enlisting therein every good or indifferent human motive. Had\nSt. Stephen thought it his duty to act as some unwise people do now,\nwe should never have had his immortal discourse as a model for\nfaithful and skilful preaching. We should merely have had instead the\nfew words of vigorous denunciation with which the address closed. At\nthe same time the presence of these stern words proves that there is a\nplace for such strong language in the work of the Christian ministry.\nThere is a time and place for all things, even for the use of strong\nlanguage. The true teacher will seek to avoid giving unnecessary\noffences, but offence sharp and stern may be an absolute duty of\ncharity when prejudice and bigotry and party spirit are choking the\navenues of the soul, and hindering the progress of truth. And thus\nJohn the Baptist may call men a generation of vipers, and Paul may\nstyle Elymas a child of the devil, and Christ may designate the\nreligious world of His day as hypocrites; and when occasion calls we\nshould not hesitate to brand foul things with plain names, in order\nthat men may be awakened from that deadly torpor into which sin\nthreatens to fling them. The use of strong language by St. Stephen had\nits effect upon his listeners. They were sawn asunder in their hearts,\nthey gnashed their teeth upon the martyr. His words stirred them up to\nsome kind of action. The Gospel has a double operation, it possesses a\ntwofold force--the faithful teaching of it cannot be in vain. To some\nit will be the savour of life unto life, to others the savour of death\nunto death. Opposition may be indeed unwisely provoked. It may be the\nproof to us of nothing else save our own wilfulness, our own folly and\nimprudence. But if Christian wisdom be used, and the laws of Christian\ncharity duly observed, then the spirit of opposition and the violence\nof rage and persecution prove nothing else to the sufferers than that\nGod's word is working out His purposes, and bringing forth fruit\nthough it be unto destruction.\n\nIII. Again, the locality, the circumstances, and the surroundings of\nStephen's martyrdom deserve a brief notice. The place of his execution\nis pointed out by Christian tradition, and that tradition is supported\nby the testimony of Jewish custom and of Jewish writings. He was tried\nin the Temple precincts, or within sight of it, as is manifest from\nthe words of the witnesses before the council, \"He ceaseth not to\nspeak against _this_ holy place. We have heard him say that this\nJesus of Nazareth shall destroy _this_ place.\" The mob then rushed\nupon him. Under ordinary circumstances the Roman garrison stationed in\nthe neighbouring town of Antonia, which overlooked the temple, would\nhave noticed the riot, and have hastened to intervene, as they did\nmany years after, when St. Paul's life was threatened in a similar\nJewish outburst. But the political circumstances, as we have already\nshown, were now different.[133] Roman authority was for the moment\nparalysed in Jerusalem. People living at great centres such as Rome\nonce was, or London now is, have no idea how largely dependent distant\ncolonies or outlying districts like Jud\u00e6a are upon personal authority\nand individual lives. In case of a ruler's death the action of the\nofficials and of the army becomes necessarily slow, hesitating; it\nloses that backbone of energy, decision, and vigour which a living\npersonal authority imparts. The decease of the Roman Emperor\nsynchronising with the recall of Pontius Pilate must have paralysed\nthe action of the subordinate officer then commanding at Antonia, who,\nunaware what turn events might take, doubtless thought that he was\nsafe in restraining himself to the guardianship and protection of\npurely Roman interests.\n\n  [133] See chap. xiii., p. 248, above.\n\nThe scene of Stephen's murder is sometimes located in the Valley of\nJehoshaphat, near the brook Kedron, under the shadow of Olivet, and\nover against the Garden of Gethsemane. To that spot the gate of\nJerusalem, called the Gate of St. Stephen, now leads.[134] Another\ntradition assigns the open country north-east of Jerusalem, on the\nroad to Damascus and Samaria, as the place consecrated by the first\ndeath suffered for Jesus Christ. It is, however, according to the\nusual practice of Holy Scripture to leave this question undecided, or\nrather completely disregarded and overlooked. The Scriptures were not\nwritten to celebrate men or places, things temporary and transient in\nthemselves, and without any bearing on the spiritual life. The\nScriptures were written for the purpose of setting forth the example\nof devotion, of love, and of sanctity presented by its heroes, and\ntherefore it shrouds all such scenes as that of Stephen's martyrdom in\nthickest darkness. There is as little as possible of what is merely\nlocal, detailed, particular about the Scriptures. They rise into the\nabstract and the general as much as is consistent with being a\nhistorical narrative. Perhaps no spot in the world exhibits more\nevident and more abundant proofs of this Divine wisdom embodied in the\nScriptures than this same city of Jerusalem as we now behold it. What\nlocality could be more dear to Christian memory, or more closely\nallied with Christian hope, than the Holy Places, as they are\nemphatically called--the Church of the Holy Sepulchre and its\nsurroundings? Yet the contending struggles of Roman Catholics, Greeks,\nand Armenians have made the whole subject a reproach and disgrace, and\nnot an honour to the Christian name, showing how easily strife and\npartisanship and earthly passions enter in and usurp the ground which\nis nominally set apart for the honour of Christ Jesus. It is very hard\nto keep the spirit of the world out of the most sacred seasons or the\nholiest localities.\n\n  [134] See _Survey of Western Palestine_, iii., 126 and 383-88,\n  where an account is given of the ruins of the ancient church\n  erected in honour of St. Stephen by the Empress Eudocia, about\n  A.D. 440. It is on the north side of Jerusalem.\n\nStephen is hurried by the mob to this spot outside the Holy City, and\nthen they proceed in regular judicial style so far as their fury will\nallow them. Dr. John Lightfoot, in his great work _Hor\u00e6 Hebraic\u00e6_,\ndealing with this passage, notes how we can trace in it the leading\nideas and practices of Jewish legal processes. The Sanhedrin and their\nsupporters dragged St. Stephen out of the city because it was the law\nas laid down in Lev. xxiv. 14--\"Bring forth him that hath cursed\nwithout the camp.\" The Jews still retained vivid memories of their\nearlier history, just as students of sociology and ethnology still\nrecognise in our own practices traces of ancient pre-historic usages,\nreminiscences of a time, ages now distant from us, when our ancestors\nlived the savage life in lands widely separated from our modern homes.\nSo did the Jews still recognise the nomad state as their original\ncondition, and even in the days of our Saviour looked upon Jerusalem\nas the camp of Israel, outside of which the blasphemer should be\nstoned.\n\nLightfoot then gives the elaborate ceremonial used to insure a fair\ntrial, and the re-consideration of any evidence which might turn up at\nthe very last moment. A few of the rules appointed for such occasions\nare well worth quoting, as showing the minute care with which the\nwhole Jewish order of execution was regulated: \"There shall stand one\nat the door of the Sanhedrin having a handkerchief in his hand, and an\nhorse at such a distance as it was only within sight. If any one\ntherefore say, I have something to offer on behalf of the condemned\nperson, he waves the handkerchief, and the horseman rides and calls\nthe people back. Nay, if the man himself say, I have something to\noffer in my own defence, they bring him back four or five times one\nafter another, if it be a thing of any moment he has to say.\" I\ndoubt, adds Lightfoot, they hardly dealt so gently with the innocent\nStephen. Lightfoot then describes how a crier preceded the doomed man\nproclaiming his crime, till the place of execution was reached; where,\nafter he was stripped of his clothes, the two witnesses threw him\nviolently down from a height of twelve feet, flinging upon him two\nlarge stones. The man was struck by one witness in the stomach, by the\nother upon the heart, when, if death did not at once ensue, the whole\nmultitude lent their assistance. Afterwards the body was suspended on\na tree. It will be evident from this outline of Lightfoot's more\nprolonged and detailed statement that the leading ideas of Jewish\npractice were retained in St. Stephen's case; but as the execution was\nas much the act of the people as of the Sanhedrin, it was carried out\nhurriedly and passionately. This will account for some of the details\nleft to us. We usually picture to ourselves St. Stephen as perishing\nbeneath a deadly hail of missiles, raised upon him by an infuriated\nmob, before whom he is flying, just as men are still maimed or killed\nin street riots; and we wonder therefore when or where St. Stephen\ncould have found time to kneel down and commend his spirit to Christ,\nor to pray his last prayer of Divine charity and forgiveness under\nsuch circumstances as those we have imagined. The Jews, however, no\nmatter how passionate and enraged, would have feared to incur the\nguilt of murder had they acted in this rough-and-ready method. The\nwitnesses must first strike their blows, and thus take upon themselves\nthe responsibility for the blood about to be shed if it should turn\nout innocent. The culprits, too, were urged to confess their sin to\nGod before they died. Stephen may have taken advantage of this\nwell-known form to kneel down and offer up his parting prayers, which\ndisplaying his steadfast faith in Jesus only stirred up afresh the\nwrath of his adversaries, who thereupon proceeded to the last\nextremities.[135]\n\n  [135] Dr. John Lightfoot in his _Hor\u00e6 Hebraic\u00e6_ on Acts vii. 58,\n  when dealing with this incident, enters into copious details as to\n  the Jewish method of execution by stoning.\n\nStephen's death was a type of the vast majority of future martyrdoms,\nin this among other respects: it was a death suffered for Christ, just\nas Christ's own death was suffered for the world at large, and that\nunder the forms of law and clothed with its outward dignity.\nChristianity proclaims the dignity of law and order, and supports\nit--teaches that the magistrate is the minister of God, and that he\ndoes a divinely-appointed work; but Christianity does not proclaim the\ninfallibility of human laws or of human magistrates.[136] Christianity\ndoes not teach that any human law or human magistrate can dictate to\nthe individual conscience, or intrude itself into the inner temple of\nthe soul. Christianity indeed has, by a long and bitter experience,\ntaught the contrary, and vindicated the rights of a free conscience,\nby patiently suffering all that could be done against it by the powers\nof the world assuming the forms and using the powers of law.\nChristians, I say, have taught the dignity of law and order, and yet\nthey have not hesitated to resist and overturn bad laws, not however\nso much by active opposition as by the patient suffering of all that\nfiendish cruelty and lust could devise against the followers of the\nCross. Just as it was under the forms of law that our Saviour died and\nStephen was executed, and Peter and Paul passed to their rest, so was\nit under the same forms of law that the primitive Church passed\nthrough those ten great persecutions which terminated by seating her\non the throne of the C\u00e6sars. Law is a good thing. The absence of law\nis chaos. The presence of law, even though it be bad law, is better\nthan no law at all. But the individual Christian conscience is higher\nthan any human law. It should yield obedience in things lawful and\nindifferent. But in things clearly sinful the Christian conscience\nwill honour the majesty of law by refusing obedience and then by\nsuffering patiently and lovingly, as Stephen did, the penalty attached\nto conscientious disobedience.\n\n  [136] The termination of St. Clement's Epistle to the Corinthians,\n  discovered some few years ago, is most instructive on this point.\n  It is a litany or liturgical prayer used in the primitive Roman\n  Church. Bishop Lightfoot, in his new edition of Clement, vol. i.,\n  p. 382, commenting on it, has some very interesting thoughts on\n  the relation between early Christianity and the Roman State.\n\nIV. Let us now briefly notice the various points of interest, some of\nthem of deep doctrinal importance, which gather round St. Stephen's\ndeath. We are told, for instance, that the martyr, seeing his last\nhour approaching, \"looked up steadfastly into heaven, and saw the\nglory of God, and Jesus standing on the right hand of God.\" Surely\ncritics must have been sorely in want of objections to the historical\ntruth of the narrative when they raised the point that Stephen could\nnot have looked up to heaven because he was in a covered chamber and\ncould not have seen through the roof! This is simply a carping\nobjection, and the expression used about St. Stephen is quite in\nkeeping with the _usus loquendi_ of Scripture. In the seventeenth of\nSt. John, and at the first verse, we read of our Lord that \"lifting up\nHis eyes to heaven\" He prayed His great eucharistic prayer on behalf\nof His Apostles. He lifted His eyes to heaven though He was in the\nupper chamber at the time. The Scriptural idea of heaven is not that\nof the little child, a region placed far away above the bright blue\nsky and beyond the distant stars, but rather that of a spiritual world\nshrouded from us for the present by the veil of matter, and yet so\nthinly separated that a moment may roll away the temporary covering\nand disclose the world of realities which lies behind. Such has been\nthe conception of the deepest minds and the profoundest teaching. St.\nStephen did not need a keen vision and an open space and a clear sky,\nfree from clouds and smoke, as this objection imagines. Had St.\nStephen been in a dungeon and his eyes been blind, the spiritual\nvision might still have been granted, and the consolation and strength\nafforded which the sight of his ascended Lord vouchsafed. This view of\nheaven and the unseen world is involved in the very word revelation,\nwhich, in its original Greek shape, apocalypse, means simply an\nuncovering, a rolling away of something that was flimsy, temporary,\nand transient, that a more abiding and nobler thing may be seen. The\nroof, the pillars, the solid structure of the temple, the priests and\nLevites, the guards and listeners, all were part of the veil of matter\nwhich suddenly rolled away from Stephen's intensified view, that he\nmight receive, as the martyrs of every age have received, the special\nassistance which the King of Martyrs reserves for the supreme hour of\nman's need. The vision of our Lord granted at this moment has its own\nteaching for us. We are apt to conjure up thoughts of the sufferings\nof the martyrs, to picture to ourselves a Stephen perishing under a\nshower of stones, an Ignatius of Antioch flung to the beasts, a\nPolycarp of Smyrna suffering at the stake, the victims of pagan\ncruelty dying under the ten thousand forms of diabolical cruelty\nsubsequently invented; and then we ask ourselves, could we possibly\nhave stood firm against such tortures? We forget the lesson of\nStephen's vision. Jesus Christ did not draw back the veil till the\nlast moment; He did not vouchsafe the supporting vision till the need\nfor it had come, and then to Stephen, as to all His saints in the\npast, and to all His saints in the future, the Master reveals Himself\nin all His supporting and sustaining power, reminding us in our humble\ndaily spheres that it is our part to do our duty, and bear such\nburdens as the Lord puts upon us now, leaving to Him all care and\nthought for the future, content simply to trust that as our day is so\nshall our grace and our strength be. Stephen's vision has thus a\nlesson of comfort and of guidance for those fretful souls who, not\ncontent with the troubles and trials of the present, and the help\nwhich God imparts to bear them, will go on and strive to ascertain how\nthey are to bear imaginary dangers, losses, and temptations which may\nnever come upon them.\n\nThen, again, we have the final words of Stephen, which are full of\nimportant meaning, for they bear witness unto the faith and doctrine\nof the apostolic Church. They stoned Stephen, \"calling upon the Lord,\nand saying, Lord Jesus, receive my spirit;\" while again a few moments\nlater he cried, \"Lord, lay not this sin to their charge.\" The latter\npetition is evidently an echo of our Lord's own prayer on the cross,\nwhich had set up a high standard of Divine charity in the Church. The\nfirst martyr imitates the spirit and the very language of the Master,\nand prays for his enemies as Christ himself had done a short time\nbefore; while the other recorded petition, \"Lord Jesus, receive my\nspirit,\" is an echo likewise of our Lord's, when He said, \"Father,\ninto Thy hands I commend My spirit.\" We note specially about these\nprayers, not only that they breathe the spirit of Christ Himself, but\nthat they are addressed to Christ, and are thus evidences to us of the\ndoctrine and practice of the early Church in the matter of prayer to\nour Lord. St. Stephen is the first distinct instance of such prayer,\nbut the more closely we investigate this book of the Acts and the\nEpistles of St. Paul, the more clearly we shall find that all the\nearly Christians invoked Christ, prayed to Him as one raised to a\nsupernatural sphere and gifted with Divine power, so that He was able\nto hear and answer their petitions. St. Stephen prayed to Christ, and\ncommended his soul to Him, with the same confidence as Christ Himself\ncommended His soul to the Father. And such commendation was no chance\nexpression, no exclamation of adoring love merely. It was the outcome\nof the universal practice of the Church, which resorted to God through\nJesus Christ. Prayer to Christ and the invocation of Christ were notes\nof the earliest disciples. Saul went to Damascus \"to bind all that\ncalled upon the name of Jesus\" (ch. ix. 14). The Damascene Jews are\namazed at the converted Saul's preaching of Jesus Christ, saying, \"Is\nnot this he that in Jerusalem made havoc of them which called on this\nname?\" (ch. ix. 21). While again Rom. x. 12 and 1 Cor. i. 2 prove that\nthe same custom spread forth from Jerusalem to the uttermost parts of\nthe Church. The passage to which I have just referred in the\nCorinthian Epistle is decisive as to St. Paul's teaching at a much\nlater period than St. Stephen's death, when the Church had had time to\nformulate its doctrines and to weigh its teaching. Yet even then, he\nwas just as clear on this point as Stephen years before, addressing\nhis Epistle to the Church of God at Corinth, \"with all that call upon\nthe name of the Lord Jesus Christ in every place;\" while again, when\nwe descend to the generation which came next after the apostolic age,\nwe find, from Pliny's celebrated letter written to Trajan, describing\nthe practices and ideas of the Christians of Bithynia in the earliest\nyears of the second century, that it was then the same as in St.\nPaul's day. One of the leading features of the new sect as it appeared\nto an intelligent pagan was this: \"They sang an hymn to Christ as\nGod.\" St. Stephen is the earliest instance of such worship directly\naddressed to the Lord Jesus Christ, a practice which has ever since\nbeen steadily maintained in every branch of the Church of Christ. It\nhas been denied, indeed, in modern times that the Church of England in\nher formularies gives a sanction to this practice, which is\nundoubtedly apostolical. A reference, however, to the collect\nappointed for the memorial day of this blessed martyr would have been\na sufficient answer to this assertion, as that collect contains a very\nbeautiful prayer to Christ, beseeching assistance, similar to that\ngiven to St. Stephen, amid the troubles of our own lives. The whole\nstructure of all liturgies, and specially of the English liturgy,\nprotests against such an idea. The Book of Common Prayer teems with\nprayer to Jesus Christ. The Te Deum is in great part a prayer\naddressed to Him; so is the Litany, and so are collects like the\nprayer of St. Chrysostom, the Collect for the First Sunday in Lent,\nand the well-known prayer for the Third Sunday in Advent--\"O Lord Jesu\nChrist, who at Thy first coming didst send Thy messenger to prepare\nThy way.\"[137] The Eastern Church indeed addresses a greater number\nof prayers to Christ directly. The Western Church, basing itself on\nthe promise of Christ, \"Whatsoever ye shall ask the Father in My Name,\nHe will give it you,\" has ever directed the greater portion of her\nprayers to the Father through the Son; but the few leading cases just\nmentioned, cases which are common to the whole Western Church,\nReformed or unreformed, will prove that the West also has followed\nprimitive custom in calling upon the name and invoking the help of the\nLord Jesus Himself. And then when Stephen had given us these two\nlessons, one of faith, the other of practice; when he had taught us\nthe doctrine of Christ's divinity and the worship due to Him, and the\npractice of Christian charity and the forgiving spirit which flows\nforth from it, even towards those who have treated His servants most\ncruelly, then Stephen \"fell asleep,\" the sacred writer using an\nexpression for death indicative of the new aspect which death had\nassumed through Christ, and which henceforth gave the name of\ncemeteries to the last resting-places of Christian people.\n\n  [137] See on this point a note in Liddon's _Bampton Lectures_,\n  14th edition, pp. 531-43, on the worship of Jesus Christ in the\n  services of the Church of England.\n\nV. The execution of St. Stephen was followed by his funeral. The\nbodies of those that were stoned were also suspended on a tree, but\nthere was no opposition to their removal, as afterwards in the great\npersecutions. The pagans, knowing that Christians preached the\ndoctrine of the resurrection of the body, strove to prove the\nabsurdity of this tenet by reducing the body to ashes. The Christians,\nhowever, repeatedly proved that they entertained no narrow views on\nthis point, and did not expect the resurrection of the identical\nelements of which the earthly body was composed. They took a broader\nand nobler view of St. Paul's teaching in the fifteenth of 1st\nCorinthians, and regarded the natural body as merely the seed out of\nwhich the resurrection body was to be developed. This is manifest from\nsome of the stories told us by ancient historians concerning the\nChristians of the second century. The martyrs of Vienne and Lyons have\nbeen already referred to, and their sufferings described. The pagans\nknew of their doctrine of the resurrection of the body, and thought to\ndefeat it by scattering the ashes of the martyrs upon the waters of\nthe Rhone; but the narrative of Eusebius tells us how foolish was this\nattempt, as if man could thus overcome God, whose almighty power\navails to raise the dead from the ashes scattered over the ocean as\neasily as from the bones gathered into a sepulchre. Another story is\nhanded down by a writer of Antioch named John Malalas, who lived about\nA.D. 600, concerning five Christian virgins, who lived some seventy\nyears earlier than these Gallic martyrs, and fell victims to the\npersecution which raged at Antioch in the days of the Emperor Trajan,\nwhen St. Ignatius perished. They were burned to death for their\nconstancy in the faith, and then their ashes were mingled with brass,\nwhich was made into basins for the public baths. Every person who used\nthe basins became ill, and then the emperor caused the basins to be\nformed into statues of the virgins, in order, as Trajan said, that \"it\nmay be seen that I and not their God have raised them up.\"[138]\n\n  [138] See Malalas' _Chronographia_, lib. xi., and the article on\n  Malalas in the _Dict. Christ. Biog._, where this story is given at\n  length.\n\nBut while it is plainly evident from the records of history that the\nearliest Christians had no narrow views about the relation between the\npresent body of humiliation and the future body of glory, it is\nequally manifest that they paid the greatest attention to the mortal\nremains of their deceased friends, and permitted the fullest\nindulgence in human grief. In doing so they were only following the\nexample of their Master, who sorrowed over Lazarus, and whose own\nmortal remains were cared for by the loving reverence of Nicodemus and\nJoseph of Arimathea. Christianity was no system of Stoicism. Stoicism\nwas indeed the noblest form of Greek thought, and one which approached\nmost closely to the Christian standpoint, but it put a ban upon human\naffection and feeling. Christianity acted otherwise. It flung a bright\nlight on death, and illuminated the dark recesses of the tomb through\nthe resurrection of Jesus Christ and the prospect for humanity which\nthat resurrection opens up. But it did not make the vain attempt of\nStoicism to eradicate human nature. Nay, rather, Christianity\nsanctified it by the example of Jesus Christ, and by the brief notice\nof the mourning of the Church for the loss of their foremost champion,\nSt. Stephen, which we find in our narrative. Such a gratification of\nnatural feeling has never been inconsistent with the highest form of\nChristian faith. There may be the most joyous anticipation as to our\nfriends who have been taken from us joined with the saddest\nreflections as to our own bereavement. We may be most assured that our\nloss is the infinite gain of the departed, and for them we mourn not;\nbut we cannot help feeling that _we_ have sustained a loss, and for\n_our_ loss we must grieve. The feelings of a Christian even now must\nbe thus mixed, and surely much more must this have been the case when\n\"devout men buried Stephen and made great lamentation over him.\"\n\nThe last results we note in this passage of Stephen's death are\ntwofold. Stephen's martyrdom intensified the persecution for a time.\nSaul of Tarsus was made for a while a more determined and active\npersecutor. His mental position, his intellectual convictions, had\nreceived a shock, and he was trying to re-establish himself, and\nquench his doubts, by intensifying his exertions on behalf of the\nancient creed. Some of the most violent persecutions the Church has\never had to meet were set on foot by men whose faith in their own\nsystems was deeply shaken, or who at times have had no faith in\nanything at all. The men whose faith had been shaken endeavoured, by\ntheir activity in defence of the system in which they once fully\nbelieved, to obtain an external guarantee and assurance of its truth;\nwhile the secret unbeliever was often the worst of persecutors,\nbecause he regarded all religions as equally false, and therefore\nlooked upon the new teachers as rash and mischievous innovators.\n\nThe result then of Stephen's martyrdom was to render the Church's\nstate at Jerusalem worse for the time. The members of the Church were\nscattered far and wide, all save the Apostles. Here we behold a\nnotable instance of the protecting care of Providence over His infant\nChurch. All save the Apostles were dispersed from Jerusalem. One might\nhave expected that they would have been specially sought after, and\nwould have been necessarily the first to flee. There is an early\ntradition, however, which goes back to the second century, and finds\nsome support in this passage, that our Lord ordered the Apostles to\nremain in the city of Jerusalem for twelve years after the Ascension,\nin order that every one there might have an opportunity of hearing the\ntruth.[139] His protecting hand was over the heads of the Church\nwhile the members were scattered abroad. But that same hand turned the\napparent trial into the Church's permanent gain. The Church now, for\nthe first time, found what it ever after proved to be the case. \"They\nthat were scattered abroad went about preaching the word.\" The\nChurch's present loss became its abiding gain. The blood of the\nmartyrs became the seed of the Church. Violence reacted on the cause\nof those who employed it, as violence--no matter how it may\ntemporarily triumph--always reacts on those who use it, whether their\ndesigns be intrinsically good or bad; till, in a widely disseminated\nGospel, and in a daily increasing number of disciples, the eye of\nfaith learned to read the clearest fulfilment of the ancient\ndeclaration, \"The wrath of man shall praise God, and the remainder of\nwrath shalt Thou restrain.\"[140]\n\n  [139] See Eusebius, v. 18; Clem. Alex., _Strom._, vi. 5.\n\n  [140] St. Augustine, in his sermons on the festival of St.\n  Stephen, concisely puts the matter thus: \"Si Stephenus non nasset,\n  ecclesia Paulum non haberet\" (\"If St. Stephen had not prayed, the\n  Church would not have had St. Paul\").\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVII.\n\n_SIMON MAGUS AND THE CONVERSION OF SAMARIA._\n\n     \"And Philip went down to the city of Samaria, and proclaimed unto\n     them the Christ.... But there was a certain man, Simon by name,\n     which beforetime in the city used sorcery, and amazed the people\n     of Samaria, giving out that himself was some great one: to whom\n     they all gave heed, from the least to the greatest, saying, This\n     man is that power of God which is called Great.\"--ACTS viii. 5,\n     9, 10.\n\n\nThe object of the earlier part of this book of the Acts is to trace\nthe steady, gradual development of the Church among the Jews, the\nevolution, never ceasing for a moment, of that principle of true\ncatholic and universal life which the Master implanted within her, and\nwhich never ceased working till the narrow, prejudiced, illiberal\nlittle company of Galileans, who originally composed the Church,\nbecame the emancipated Church of all nations. This process of\ndevelopment was carried on, as we have already pointed out, through\nthe agency of the Hellenistic Jews, and specially of the deacons who\nwere so intimately connected with that class. We have in the last few\nlectures surveyed the history of one deacon, St. Stephen; we are now\nled to the story of another, St. Philip. His activity, as described in\nthe eighth chapter, runs upon exactly the same lines. St. Stephen\nproclaims the universal principles of the gospel; St. Philip acts upon\nthese principles, going down to the city of Samaria, and preaching\nChrist there. The prominent position which the deacons had for the\ntime taken is revealed to us by two notices. Philip leaves Jerusalem\nand goes to Samaria, where the power of the high priest and of the\nSanhedrin does not extend, but would rather be violently resisted.\nHere he is safe for the time, till the violence of the persecution\nshould blow over. And yet, though Philip has to leave Jerusalem, the\nApostles remain hidden by the obscurity into which they had for a\nlittle fallen, owing to the supreme brilliancy of St. Stephen: \"They\nwere all scattered abroad except the Apostles.\" The deacons were\nobliged to fly, the Apostles could remain: facts which sufficiently\nshow the relative positions the two classes occupied in the public\nestimation, and illustrate that law of the Divine working which we so\noften see manifesting itself in the course of the Church's chequered\ncareer, the last shall be first and the first last. God, on this\noccasion, as evermore, chooses His own instruments, and works by them\nas and how He pleases.\n\nI. This reticence and obscurity of the Apostles may seem to us now\nsomewhat strange, as it certainly does seem most strange how the\nApostles could have remained safe at Jerusalem when all others had to\nfly. The Apostles naturally now appear to us the most prominent\nmembers of the Jerusalem, nay, farther, of the Christian Church\nthroughout the world. But then, as we have already observed, one of\nthe great difficulties in historical study is to get at the right\npoint of view, and to keep ourselves at that point under very varying\ncombinations of circumstances. We are apt to fling ourselves back, or,\nif the expression be allowed, to project ourselves backwards into the\npast, and to think that men must always have attributed the same\nimportance to particular persons or particular circumstances as we\ndo. We now see the whole course of events, and can estimate them, not\naccording to any mere temporary importance or publicity they may have\nattained, but according to their real and abiding influence. Viewing\nthe matter in this light, we now can see that the Apostles were much\nmore important persons than the deacons. But the question is, not how\nwe regard the Apostles and the deacons, but how did the Sanhedrin and\nthe Jews of Jerusalem in Stephen's and Philip's time view these two\nclasses. They knew nothing of the Apostles as such.[141] They knew of\nthem simply as unlearned and ignorant men who had been once or twice\nbrought before the Council. They knew of Stephen, and perhaps, too, of\nPhilip, as cultured Grecian Jews, whose wisdom and eloquence and\npersuasive power they were not able to resist; and it is no wonder\nthat in the eyes of the Sadducean majority, who then ruled the Jewish\nsenate, the deacons should be specially sought out and driven away.\n\n  [141] The very name Apostle connotes for us an extraordinary\n  office and dignity, placing the Twelve upon an exalted plane far\n  above all others. But the Jewish Council knew nothing of this. The\n  term Apostle was in common use amongst the Jews. To us it seems\n  almost presumptuous to apply the name to any but the Twelve,\n  though the New Testament applies it more widely. The title Apostle\n  was given among the Jews to the legate or Church officer who\n  attended on every synagogue and discharged its commands. It was\n  also specially bestowed upon the messengers of the Jewish high\n  priest or patriarch who collected the temple tax while the temple\n  existed, and afterwards the poll tax or tribute paid by every Jew\n  throughout the world towards the support of the patriarch and the\n  Sanhedrin. The name Apostle is found in this sense in the\n  Theodosian Code down to so late a period as the fifth century. Our\n  Lord and the early Church simply adopted this title Apostle from\n  the synagogue, as they adopted so many other rites and usages,\n  baptism, holy communion, the various orders of the ministry, and a\n  liturgical service.\n\nThe action of the Apostles themselves may have conduced to this. Here\nlet us recur to a thought we have already touched upon. We are\ninclined to view the Apostles as if the Spirit which guided them\ntotally destroyed their human personality and their human feelings. We\nare apt to cherish towards the Apostles the same reverential but\nmisleading feeling which the believers of the early Church cherished\ntowards the prophets, and against which St. James clearly protested\nwhen he said, \"Elijah was a man of like passions with ourselves.\" We\nare inclined to think of them as if there was nothing weak or human or\nmistaken about them, and yet there was plenty of all these qualities\nin their character and conduct. The Apostles were older than the\ndeacons, and they were men of much narrower ideas, of a more\nrestricted education. They had less of that facility of temper, that\npower of adaptation, which learning and travel combined always confer.\nThey may have been somewhat suspicious too of the headlong course\npursued by Stephen and his fellows. Their Galilean minds did not work\nout logical results so rapidly as their Hellenistic friends and\nallies. They had been slow of heart to believe with the Master. They\nwere slow of heart and mind to work out principles and to grasp\nconclusions when taught by His servants and followers. The Apostles\nwere, after all, only men, and they had their treasure in earthen\nvessels. Their inspiration, and the presence of the Spirit within\ntheir hearts, were quite consistent with intellectual slowness, and\nwith mental inability to recognise at once the leadings of Divine\nProvidence. It was just then the same as it has ever been in Church\nhistory. The older generation is always somewhat suspicious of the\nyounger. It is slow to appreciate its ideas, hopes, aspirations, and\nit is well perhaps that the older generation is suspicious, because it\nthus puts on a drag which gives time for prudence, forethought, and\npatience to come into play. These may appear very human motives to\nattribute to the Apostles, but then we lose a great deal of Divine\ninstruction if we invest the Apostles with an infallibility higher\neven than that which Roman Catholics attribute to the Pope. For them\nthe Pope is infallible only when speaking as universal doctor and\nteacher, a position which some among them go so far as to assert he\nhas never taken since the Church was founded, so that in their opinion\nthe Pope has never yet spoken infallibly. But with many sincere\nChristians the Apostles were infallible, not only when teaching, but\nwhen thinking, acting, writing on the most trivial topics, or\ndiscoursing on the most ordinary subjects.\n\nII. Let us now turn our attention to Philip and his work, and its\nbearing on the future history and development of the Church. Here,\nbefore we go any farther, it may be well to note how St. Luke gained\nhis knowledge of the events which happened at Samaria. We do not\npretend indeed, like some critics, to point out all the sources whence\nthe sacred writers gathered their information. Any one who has ever\nattempted to write history of any kind must be aware how impossible it\noften is for the writer himself to trace the sources of his\ninformation after the lapse of some time. How much more impossible\nthen must it be for others to trace the original sources whence the\nsacred or any other ancient writers derived their knowledge, when\nhundreds and even thousands of years have elapsed. Our own ignorance\nof the past is a very unsafe ground indeed on which to base our\nrejection of any ancient document whatsoever.\n\nIt is well, however, to note, where and when we can, the sources\nwhence information may have been gained, and fortunately this book of\nthe Acts supplies us with instruction on this very point. A quarter of\na century later the same Saul who, doubtless, helped to make St.\nPhilip fly on this occasion from Jerusalem, was dwelling for several\ndays beneath his roof at C\u00e6sarea. He was then Paul the Apostle of the\nGentiles, who bore in his own person many marks and proofs of his\ndevotion to the cause which Philip had proclaimed and supported while\nPaul was still a persecutor. The story of the meeting is told us in\nthe twenty-first chapter of this book. St. Paul was on his way to\nJerusalem to pay that famous visit which led to his arrest, and, in\nthe long run, to his visit to Rome and trial before C\u00e6sar. He was\ntravelling up to Jerusalem by the coast road which led from Tyre,\nwhere he landed, through C\u00e6sarea, and thence to the Holy City. St.\nLuke was with him, and when they came to C\u00e6sarea they entered into the\nhouse of Philip the Evangelist, with whom they abode several days.\nWhat hallowed conversations St. Luke must there have listened to! How\nthese two saints, Paul and Philip, would go over the days and scenes\nlong since past and gone! How they would compare experiences and\ninterchange ideas; and there it was that St. Luke must have had\nabundant opportunities for learning the history of the rise of\nChristianity in Samaria which here he exhibits to us.\n\nLet us now look a little closer at the circumstances of the case. The\nplace where Philip preached has raised a question. Some have\nmaintained that it was Samaria itself, the capital city, which Philip\nvisited and evangelized. Others have thought that it was a city,--some\nindefinite city of the district Samaria, probably Sychar, the town\nwhere our Lord had taught the Samaritan woman. Some have held one\nview, some the other, but the Revised Version would seem to incline to\nthe view that it was the capital city which St. Philip visited on this\noccasion, and not that city which our Lord Himself evangelized. It may\nto some appear an additional difficulty in the way of accepting Sychar\nas the scene of St. Philip's ministry, that our Lord's work and\nteaching some five years previously would, in that case, seem to have\nutterly vanished. Philip goes down and preaches Christ to a city which\nknew nothing of Him. How, some may think, could this have possibly\nbeen true, and how could such an impostor as Simon have carried all\nthe people captive, had Christ Himself preached there but a few short\nyears before, and converted the mass of the people to belief in\nHimself? Now I maintain that it was Samaria, the capital, and not\nSychar, some miles distant, that Philip evangelized, but I am not\ncompelled to accept this view by any considerations about Christ's own\nministry and its results. Our Lord might have taught in the same city\nwhere Philip taught, and in the course of five years the effect of His\npersonal ministry might have entirely vanished.\n\nThere is no lesson more plainly enforced by the gospel story than\nthis, Christ's own personal ministry was a comparatively fruitless\none. He taught the Samaritan woman, indeed, and the people of the city\nwere converted, as they said, not so much by her witness as by the\npower of Christ's own words and influence. But then the Holy Ghost was\nnot yet given, the Church was not yet founded, the Divine society\nwhich Christ, as the risen Saviour, was to establish, had not yet come\ninto existence; and therefore work like that done at Samaria was a\ntransient thing, passing away like the morning cloud or the early dew,\nand leaving not a trace behind. Christ came not to teach men a Divine\ndoctrine, so much as to establish a Divine society, and, till this\nsociety was established, the work done even by Christ Himself was a\nfleeting and evanescent thing. The foundation of the Church as a\nsociety was absolutely necessary if the doctrine and teaching of\nChrist was to be preserved. The article of the creed, \"I believe in\nthe Holy Catholic Church,\" has been neglected, slighted, and\nundervalued by Protestants. I have heard even of avowed expositors of\nthe Apostles' Creed who, when they came to this article, have passed\nit over with a hasty notice because it did not fit into their narrow\nsystems. And yet here again the Supreme wisdom of the Divine plan has\nbeen amply vindicated, and the experience of the New Testament has\nshown that if there had not been a Church instituted by Christ, and\nestablished with Himself as its foundation, rock, and chief\ncorner-stone, the wholesome doctrine and the supernatural teaching of\nChrist would soon have vanished. I am here indeed reminded of the\nwords and experience of one of the greatest evangelists who have lived\nsince apostolic times. John Wesley, when dealing with a cognate\nsubject, wrote to one of his earliest preachers about the importance\nof establishing Methodist societies wherever Methodist preachers found\naccess, and he proceeds to urge the necessity for doing so on\nprecisely the same grounds as those on which we explain the failure of\nour Lord's personal ministry, so far at least as present results were\nconcerned. Wesley tells his correspondent that wherever Methodist\nteaching alone has been imparted, and Methodist societies have not\nbeen founded as well, the work has been an utter failure, and has\nvanished away.\n\nSo it was with the Master, Christ Jesus. He bestowed His Divine\ninstruction and imparted His Divine doctrine, but as the time for the\noutpouring of the Spirit and the foundation of the Church had not yet\ncome, the total result of the personal work and labours of the\nIncarnate God was simply one hundred and twenty, or at most five\nhundred souls. It constitutes, then, to our mind no difficulty in the\nway of regarding Sychar as the scene of Philip's teaching, that Christ\nHimself may have laboured there a few years before, and yet that there\nshould not have been a trace of His labours when St. Philip arrived.\nThe Master might Himself have taught in a town, and yet His disciple's\npreaching a few years later might have been most necessary, because\nthe Spirit was not yet given. The plain meaning, however, of the words\nof the Acts is that it was to the city of Samaria, the capital city,\nthat Philip went; and it is most likely that to the capital city a\ncharacter like Simon would have resorted, and not to any smaller town,\nas affording him the largest field for the exercise of his peculiar\ntalents, just as afterwards we shall find, in the course of his\nhistory, that he resorted to the capital of the world, Rome itself, as\nthe scene most effectual for his purposes.[142]\n\n  [142] Samaria, the capital, was at this period called by the\n  Romans Sebaste. Herod the Great rebuilt it in honour of the\n  emperors, and erected a splendid temple there, which he\n  inaugurated with games and gladiatorial shows. It was a suitable\n  spot for the peculiar talents of a man like Simon Magus, as in\n  turn it would have been specially repugnant for every reason to a\n  strict Jew. But a Divine instinct was leading Philip on to the\n  revelation of God's purposes of love and mercy. See Joseph.,\n  _Antiqq._, XV., viii., 5; Stanley's _Sinai and Palestine_, p.\n  245.\n\nIII. St. Philip went down, then, to Samaria and preached Christ there,\nand in Samaria he came across the first of those subtle opponents with\nwhom the gospel has ever had to struggle,--men who did not directly\noppose the truth, but who corrupted its pure morality and its simple\nfaith by a human admixture, which turned its salutary doctrines into a\ndeadly poison. Philip came to Samaria, and there he found the\nSamaritans carried away with the teaching and actions of Simon. The\npreaching of the pure gospel of Jesus Christ, and the exercise of true\nmiraculous power, converted the Samaritans, and were sufficient to\nwork intellectual conviction even in the case of the Magician. All the\nSamaritans, Simon included, believed and were baptized. This is the\nintroduction upon the stage of history of Simon Magus, whom the\nearliest Church writers, such as Hegesippus, the father of Church\nhistory, who was born close upon the time of St. John, and flourished\nabout the middle of the second century, and his contemporary Justin\nMartyr, describe as the first of those gnostic heretics who did so\nmuch in the second and third centuries to corrupt the gospel both in\nfaith and practice. The writings of the second and third centuries are\nfull of the achievements and evil deeds of this man Simon, which\nindeed are related by some writers with so much detail as to form a\nvery considerable romance. Here, then, we find a corroborative piece\nof evidence as to the early date of the composition of the Acts of the\nApostles. Had the Acts been written in the second century, it would\nhave given us some traces of the second-century tradition about Simon\nMagus; but having been written at a very early period, upon the\ntermination of St. Paul's first imprisonment, it gives us simply the\nstatement about Simon Magus as St. Luke and St. Paul had heard it\nfrom the mouth of Philip the Evangelist. St. Luke tells us nothing\nmore, simply because he had no more to tell about this first of the\ncelebrated heretics. When we come to the second century Simon's story\nis told with much more embellishment. The main outlines are, however,\ndoubtless correct. All Christian writers agree in setting forth that\nafter the reproof which, as we shall see, Simon Peter the Apostle\nbestowed upon the magician, he became a determined opponent of the\nApostles, especially of St. Peter, whose work he endeavoured\neverywhere to oppose and defeat. With this end in view he went to\nRome, as Justin Martyr says, in the reign of Claudius C\u00e6sar, and as\nother writers say, in the time of Nero.\n\nThere he successfully deceived the people for some time. We have early\nnotices of his success in the Imperial city. Justin Martyr is a writer\nwho came close upon the apostolic age. He wrote an Apology for the\nChristians, which we may safely assign to some year about 150 A.D. At\nthat time he was a man in middle life, whose elder contemporaries must\nhave been well acquainted with the history and traditions of the\nprevious century. In that first Apology Justin gives us many\nparticulars about Christianity and the early Church, and he tells us,\nconcerning Simon Magus, that his teaching at Rome was so successful in\nleading the Roman people astray that they erected a statue in his\nhonour, between the two bridges. It is a curious fact, and one, too,\nwhich confirms the accuracy of Justin, that in the year 1574 there was\ndug up on the very spot indicated by Justin, the island in the Tiber,\na statue bearing the inscription described by Justin, \"Semoni Sanco\nDeo Fidio.\" Critics, indeed, are now pretty generally agreed that\nthis statue was the one seen by Justin, but that it was originally\nerected in honour of a Sabine deity, and not of the arch-heretic as\nthe Apologist supposed; though there are some who think that the\nappeal of Justin to a statue placed before men's eyes, and about which\nmany at Rome must have known all the facts, could not have been made\non such mistaken grounds. It is not altogether safe to build theories\nor offer explanations based on our ignorance, and opposed to the\nplain, distinct statements of a writer like Justin, who was a\ncontemporary with the events of which he speaks. It seems indeed a\nplausible explanation to say that Justin Martyr mistook the name of a\nSabine deity for that of an Eastern heretic. But there may have been\ntwo statues and two inscriptions on the island, one to the heretic,\nanother to the ancient Sabine god. Later writers of the second and\nthird centuries improved upon Justin's story, and entered into great\ndetails of the struggles between Simon and the two Apostles, St. Peter\nand St. Paul, terminating in the death of the magician when attempting\nto fly up to heaven in the presence of the Emperor Nero. His death did\nnot, however, put an end to his influence. The evil which he did and\ntaught lived long afterwards. His followers continued his teaching and\nproved themselves active opponents of the truth, seducing many\nproselytes by the apparent depth and subtlety of their views. Such is\nthe history of Simon Magus as it is told in Church history, but we are\nnow concerned simply with the statements put forward in the passage\nbefore us.[143] There Simon appears as a teacher who led the\nSamaritans captive by his sorcery, which he used as the basis of his\nclaim to be recognised as \"that power of God which is called Great.\"\nMagic and sorcery have always more or less prevailed, and do still\nprevail, in the Eastern world, and have ever been used in opposition\nto the gospel of Christ, just as the same practices, under the name of\nSpiritualism, have shown themselves hostile to Christianity in Western\nEurope and in America. The tales of modern travellers in India and the\nEast, respecting the wondrous performances of Indian jugglers, remind\nus strongly of the deeds of Jannes and Jambres who withstood Moses,\nand illustrate the sorcery which Simon Magus used for the deception of\nthe Samaritans. The Jews, indeed, were everywhere celebrated at this\nperiod for their skill in magical incantations--a well-known fact, of\nwhich we find corroborative evidence in the Acts. Bar-Jesus, the\nsorcerer who strove to turn the proconsul of Cyprus from the faith,\nwas a Jew (Acts xiii. 6-12). In the nineteenth chapter we find the\nseven sons of Sceva, the Jewish priest, exercising the same trade of\nsorcery; while, as is well known from references in the classical\nwriters, the Jews at Rome were famous for the same practices.\n\n  [143] The story of the quarrels between Simon Magus and St. Peter\n  has been used by the T\u00fcbingen school of critics in Germany to\n  support their theory of a fundamental opposition between St. Paul\n  and St. Peter. See Dr. Salmon's _Introduction_, chap. xix., for a\n  full statement of this strange view.\n\nThese statements of writers sacred and secular alike have been\nconfirmed in the present age. There has been a marvellous discovery of\nancient documents in Egypt within the last twelve or fifteen years,\nwhich were purchased by the Austrian government and duly transferred\nto Vienna, where they have been investigated. They are usually called\nthe Fay\u00fbm Manuscripts.[144] They contain some of the oldest documents\nnow existing, and embrace among them large quantities of magical\nwritings, with the Hebrew formul\u00e6 used by the Jewish sorcerers when\nworking their pretended miracles. So wondrously does modern discovery\nconfirm the statements and details of the New Testament!\n\n  [144] See about the Fay\u00fbm MSS. and their contents a series of\n  articles in the Records of the _Contemporary Review_ from December\n  1884, and in the _Expositor_ for 1885 and 1888. These Fay\u00fbm\n  documents go back to the remotest times, one of them being dated\n  so long ago as 1200 B.C. It is very curious that this\n  extraordinary discovery has been apparently overlooked by the\n  great majority of English learned societies.\n\nIt is not necessary now to discuss the question whether the\nachievements of sorcery and magic, either ancient or modern, have any\nreality about them, or are a mere clever development of sleight of\nhand, though we incline to the view which admits a certain amount of\nreality about the wonders performed, else how shall we account for the\ndoings of the Egyptian magicians, the denunciations of sorcery and\nwitchcraft contained in the Bible, as well as in many statements in\nthe New Testament? A dry and cold age of materialism, without life and\nfire and enthusiasm, like the last century, was inclined to explain\naway such statements of the Scriptures. But man has now learned to be\nmore distrustful of himself and the extent of his discoveries. We know\nso little of the spirit world, and have seen of late such strange\npsychological manifestations in connection with hypnotism, that the\nwise man will hold his judgment in suspense, and not hastily conclude,\nwith the men of the eighteenth century, that possession with devils\nwas only another name for insanity, and that the deeds of sorcerers\nwere displays of mere unassisted human skill and subtlety.[145] As it\nwas with the Jews, so was it with the Samaritans. They were indeed\nbitterly separated the one from the other, but their hopes, ideas, and\nfaith were fundamentally alike. The relations between the Samaritans\nand the Jews were at the period of which we treat very like those which\nexist between Protestants and Roman Catholics in Ulster,--professing\ndifferent forms of the same faith, yet regarding one another with\nbitterer feelings than if far more widely separated. So it was with\nthe Jews and Samaritans; but the existing hostility did not change\nnature and its essential tendencies, and therefore as the Jews\npractised sorcery, so did Simon, who was a native of Samaria; and with\nhis sorcery he ministered to the Messianic expectation which\nflourished among the Samaritans equally as among the Jews. The\nSamaritan woman testified to this in her conversation with our Lord,\nand as she was a woman of a low position and of a sinful character,\nher language proves that her ideas must have had a wide currency among\nthe Samaritan people. \"The woman saith unto Him, I know that Messiah\ncometh, which is called Christ: when He is come, He will declare unto\nus all things.\" Simon took advantage of this expectation, and gave\nhimself out to be \"that power of God which is called Great;\"\ntestifying by his assertion to the craving which existed all through\nthe Jewish world for the appearance of the long-expected deliverer, a\ncraving which we again find manifesting itself in the many political\npretenders who sprang up in the regions of more orthodox Judaism, as\nJosephus amply shows. The world, in fact, and specially the world\nwhich had been affected with Jewish ideas and Jewish thought, was\nlonging for a deeper teaching and for a profounder spiritual life than\nit had as yet known. It was athirst for God, yea, even for the living\nGod; and when it could find nothing better, it turned aside and strove\nto quench the soul's desires at the impure fountains which magic and\nsorcery supplied.\n\n  [145] Moll's work on hypnotism, which we have already several\n  times quoted, admits the reality of Eastern magic, accounting for\n  the mango trick which Indian jugglers perform, and which every\n  Indian resident has seen, on the ground that even vegetables can\n  be hypnotised. It may be hard for us to admit it, but such books\n  compel us to allow that there may be more in heaven and earth than\n  is dreamt of in our philosophy. The presence of the grand heathen\n  temple at Sebaste or Samaria would have made it the fitter scene\n  for Simon's magical incantations. Magic and Paganism always\n  flourished side by side, as we see at Ephesus.\n\nIV. Philip the Evangelist came with his teaching into a society which\nacknowledged Simon as its guide, and his miracles at once struck the\nminds of the beholders. They were miracles worked, like the Master's,\nwithout any secret preparations, without the incense, the\nincantations, the muttered formul\u00e6 which accompanied the lying wonders\nof the magician. They formed a contrast in another direction too,--no\nmoney was demanded, no personal aims or low objects were served; the\nthorough unselfishness of the evangelist was manifest. Then, too, the\nteaching which accompanied the miracles was their best evidence. It\nwas a teaching of righteousness, of holy living, of charity, of\nhumility; it was transparently unworldly. It was not like Simon's,\nwhich gave out that he himself was some great one, and treated of\nhimself alone; but it dealt with \"the kingdom of God and the name of\nJesus Christ;\" and the teaching and the miracles, testifying the one\nto the other, came home to the hearts of the people, leading them\ncaptive to the foot of the Cross. It has often been a debated\nquestion whether miracles alone are a sufficient evidence of the\ntruth of a doctrine, or whether the doctrine needs to be compared with\nthe miracles to see if its character be worthy of the Deity. The\nteaching of the New Testament seems to be plainly this, that miracles,\nin themselves, are not a sufficient evidence. Our Lord warns His\ndisciples that deceivers shall one day come working mighty signs and\nwonders, so as to lead astray, if it be possible, even the very elect;\nand He exhorts His disciples to be on their guard against them. But\nwhile miracles alone are no sufficient evidence of the truth of a\ndoctrine, they were a very needful assistance to the doctrines of the\ngospel in the age and country when and where Christianity took its\nrise. Whether the sorcery and magic and wonders of Simon, and the\nother false teachers against whom the Apostles had to contend, were\ntrue or false, genuine or mere tricks, still they would have given the\nfalse teachers a great advantage over the preachers of the gospel, had\nthe latter not been armed with real divine supernatural power which\nenabled them, as occasion required, to fling the magical performances\ncompletely into the shade. The miraculous operations of the Apostles\nseem to have been restricted in the same way as Christ restricted the\nworking of His own supernatural power. The Apostles never worked\nmiracles for the relief of themselves or of their friends and\nassociates. St. Paul was detained through infirmity of the flesh in\nGalatia, and that infirmity led him to preach the gospel to the\nGalatian Celts. He did not, perhaps he could not, employ his\nmiraculous power to cure himself, just as our Lord refused to use His\nmiraculous power to turn stones into bread. St. Paul depended upon\nhuman skill and love for his cure, using probably for that purpose\nthe medical knowledge and assistance of St. Luke, whom we find\nshortly afterwards in his company.[146] Miraculous power was bestowed\nupon the first Christian teachers, not for the purposes of display or\nof selfish gratification, but simply for the sake of God's kingdom and\nman's salvation.\n\n  [146] See Acts xvi. 6-10, compared with Gal. iv. 13.\n\nAnd as it was with St. Paul so was it with his companions. Timothy was\nexhorted to betake himself to human remedies to cure his physical\nweakness, while when another apostolic man, Trophimus, was sick, he\nwas left behind by the Apostle at Miletus till he should get well (2\nTim. iv. 20). Miracles were for the sake of unbelievers, not of\nbelievers, and for this purpose we cannot see how they could have been\ndone without, under the circumstances in which the gospel was launched\ninto the world. Man's nature had been so thoroughly corrupted, the\nwhole moral atmosphere had been so permeated with wickedness, the\nwhole moral tone of society had been so terribly lowered, that the\nApostles might have come preaching the purest morality, the most\nDivine wisdom, and it would have fallen on ears so deaf, and eyes so\nblind, and hearts so seared and hardened, that it would have had no\neffect unless they had possessed miraculous power which, as occasion\ndemanded, served to call attention to their teaching. But when the\npreliminary barriers had been broken down, and the miracles had\nfulfilled their purpose, then the preaching of the kingdom of God and\nthe name of Jesus Christ did their work. Here again a thought comes\nforward on which we have already said a little. The subject matter of\nPhilip's preaching is described in the fifth verse as Christ, \"Philip\nwent down to the city of Samaria, and proclaimed unto them the\nChrist,\" and then in the twelfth verse it is expanded for us into \"the\nkingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ.\" These two subjects are\nunited. The kingdom of God and the name of Jesus Christ. The Apostles\ntaught no diluted form of Christianity. They preached the name of\nJesus Christ, and they also taught a Divine society which He had\nestablished and which was to be the means of completing the work of\nChrist in the world. Our Lord Jesus Christ and His Apostles recognised\nthe great truth, that a mere preaching of a philosophical or religious\ndoctrine would have been of very little use in reforming the world.\nThey therefore preached a Church which should be the pillar and ground\nof the truth, which should gather up, safeguard, and teach the truth\nwhose principles the Apostles set forth. To put it in plain language,\nthe Evangelist St. Philip must have taught the doctrine of a Church of\nJesus Christ as well as of a doctrine of Jesus Christ. Had the\ndoctrine of Jesus Christ been taught without and separate from the\ndoctrine of a Church, the doctrine of Christ's person and character\nmight have vanished, just as the doctrine of Plato or Aristotle or\nthat of any of the great ancient teachers vanished. But Jesus Christ\nhad come into the world to establish a Divine society, with ranks,\ngradations, and orderly arrangements; He had come to establish a\nkingdom, and they all knew then what a kingdom meant. For the Greek,\nRoman, or Jewish mind, a kingdom meant more even than it does for us.\nIt meant in their conceptions a despotism where the king ordered and\ndid just what he liked. The Romans, in fact, abominated the name king,\nand invented the term emperor instead, because for them the word king\nconnoted what it does not connote for us, the possession and exercise\nof absolute power. Yet, for all this, the Apostles preached Christ as\na King and His society as a kingdom, because in that new society which\nHe had called into existence, the graces, the gifts, the offices of\nthe society are totally dependent upon and entirely subservient to\nJesus Christ alone.\n\nHow wondrously the life, the activity, the fervour and power of the\nChurch would have been changed had this truth been always recognised.\nThe Church of Jesus Christ, as regards its hidden secret life, is a\ndespotism. It depends upon Christ alone. It depends not upon the\nState, not upon man, not upon wealth or position or earthly influences\nof any kind: it depends upon Christ alone. The Church has often forgot\nthis secret of its strength. It has trusted in the arm of flesh, and\nhas relied upon human patronage and power, and then it has grown,\nperhaps, in grandeur and importance as far as the world is concerned;\nbut, as it has grown in one direction, it has lost in the other, and\nthat the only direction worthy a Church's attention. The temptation to\nrely on the help of the world alone has assailed the Church in various\nways. It assails individual Christians, it assails congregations, it\nassails the Church at large. All of them, whether individuals,\ncongregations, or churches, are apt to imagine that power and\nprosperity consist in wealth, or worldly position, or the number of\nadherents, forgetting that Christ alone is the source of power to the\nChurch or to individual souls, and that where He is wanting, no matter\nwhat may be the outward appearance, or the numerical increase or the\npolitical influence, there indeed all true life has departed.\n\nV. The results of Philip's teaching and work in Samaria were\nthreefold.\n\n(1) The Samaritans believed Philip, and among the believers was Simon.\nThere are some people who teach faith and nothing else, and imagine\nthat if they lead men to exercise belief then the whole work of\nChristianity is done. This incident at the very outset of the Church's\nhistory supplies a warning against any such one-sided teaching. The\nSamaritans believed, and so did Simon the Magician, who had for long\ndeceived them. The very same word is used here for the faith exercised\nby the Samaritans and by Simon, as we find used to describe the belief\nof the three thousand on the day of Pentecost, or of the Philippian\njailer who accepted St. Paul's teaching amid all the terror of the\nearthquake and the opened prison. They were all intellectually\nconvinced and had all accepted the Christian faith as a great reality.\nIntellectual faith in Christ is the basis on which a true living faith\nwhich works by love is grounded. A faith of the heart which is not\nbased on a faith of the head is very much akin to a superstition. Of\ncourse we know that there are people whose faith is deep-rooted and\nfruitful who cannot state the grounds of their belief, but they are\nwell aware that others can thus state it, that their faith is capable\nof being put into words and defended in argument. Intellectual faith\nin Christianity must ever be regarded as a gift of the Holy Ghost,\naccording to that profound word of the Apostle, \"No man can say, Jesus\nis Lord, but in the Holy Ghost.\" But intellectual faith in the truth\nand reality of Christ's mission may exist in a heart where there is no\nsense of sin and of spiritual want, and then belief in Christ avails\nnothing. There were cravings after righteousness and peace in\nSamaritan bosoms, but there was none in one heart, at least, and that\nheart was therefore unblessed. The results of St. Philip's work teach\nus that faith is not everything in the Christian life.\n\n(2) Again we find that another result was, that the Samaritans were\nall baptized, including their arch-deceiver Simon. Philip, then, in\nthe course of his preaching of Christ, must have told them of Christ's\nlaw of baptism. The preaching of the name of Jesus Christ and of the\nkingdom of God must have included a due setting forth of His laws and\nordinances. We do no honour to Christ when we neglect any part of His\nrevelation. If God has revealed any doctrine or any practice or any\nsacrament, it must be of the very greatest importance. The mere fact\nof its revelation by Him makes it of importance, no matter how we, in\nour short-sighted wisdom, may think otherwise. Philip set forth\ntherefore the whole counsel of God, and as the result all the\nSamaritans were baptized, including Simon; but then again, as Simon's\ncase taught that faith by itself availed not to change the heart, so\nSimon's case teaches that baptism, neither alone nor in conjunction\nwith intellectual faith, avails to convert the soul and purify the\ncharacter. God offers His graces and His blessings, faith and baptism,\nbut unless there be receptivity, unless there be consent of the will,\nand a thirst of the soul and a longing of the heart after spiritual\nthings, the graces and gifts of the Spirit will be offered in vain.\n\n(3) And then, lastly, the final and abiding result of Philip's work\nwas, there was great joy in that city. They rejoiced because their\nsouls had found the truth, which can alone satisfy the cravings of the\nhuman heart and minister a joy which leaves no sting behind, but is a\njoy pure and exhaustless. The joys of earth are always mixed, and the\nmore mixed the more unsatisfying. The joy of a Christian soul which\nknows Christ and His preciousness, which has been delivered by Christ\nfrom deceit and impurity and vice, as these Samaritans had, and which\nfeels and enjoys the new light thrown on life by Christ's revelations,\nthat joy is a surpassing one, ravishing the soul, satisfying the\nintellect, purifying the life. There was great joy in that city, and\nno wonder, for as the poet has well sung, contrasting the \"world's gay\ngarish feast\" with God's sacred consolations bestowed upon holy\nsouls,--\n\n    \"Who, but a Christian, through all life\n      That blessing may prolong?\n    Who, through the world's sad day of strife,\n      Still chant his morning song?\n\n    \"Such is Thy banquet, dearest Lord;\n      O give us grace, to cast\n    Our lot with Thine, to trust Thy word,\n      And keep our best till last.\"[147]\n\n  [147] _The Christian Year_, 2nd Sunday after Epiphany.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVIII.\n\n_THE APOSTLES AND CONFIRMATION._\n\n     \"Now when the Apostles which were at Jerusalem heard that Samaria\n     had received the word of God, they sent unto them Peter and John:\n     who, when they were come down, prayed for them, that they might\n     receive the Holy Ghost: for as yet He was fallen upon none of\n     them: only they had been baptized into the name of the Lord\n     Jesus. Then laid they their hands on them, and they received the\n     Holy Ghost.\"--ACTS viii. 14-18.\n\n\nIn the last lecture we noticed the work of Philip in Samaria, the\npresent one will deal with the mission of the Apostles Peter and John\nto complete and perfect that work.\n\nThe story, as told in the sacred narrative, is full of instruction. It\nreveals the ritual of the apostolic Church, the development of its\norganization and practice, the spiritual lessons which the earliest\ngospel teachers imparted and the latest gospel teachers will find\napplicable. Philip converted the Samaritans and laid the basis of a\nChristian Church. Word was at once brought of this new departure to\nthe Apostles at Jerusalem, because it was a new step, a fresh\ndevelopment which must have given a great shock to the strict Jewish\nfeeling, which regarded the gospel as limited by the bounds of\northodox Judaism. The Apostles may have felt some surprise at the\nnews, but they evidently must have acknowledged the Samaritans as\nstanding on a higher level than the Gentiles, for they do not seem to\nhave raised any such objections to their baptism as were afterwards\nurged against St. Peter when he preached to and baptized Cornelius.\n\"Thou wentest in to men uncircumcised,\" was the objection of the\nJerusalem Church urged against St. Peter as regards Cornelius. The\nSamaritans were circumcised, and therefore this objection did not\napply. The Jews, indeed, of Jud\u00e6a and of Galilee hated the Samaritans\nwith a perfect hatred, but neither hatred nor love is ever guided by\nreason. Our feelings always outrun our judgment, and the judgment of\nthe Jews compelled them to recognise the Samaritans as within the\nbounds of circumcision, and therefore the Apostles tolerated, or at\nleast did not except against, the preaching of the gospel to the\nSamaritans, and their admission by baptism into the Messianic kingdom.\nIt is a phenomenon we often see repeated in our own experience. A\nbrother or a relation alienated is harder to be won and is more\nbitterly regarded than a total stranger with whom we may have\nquarrelled, though, at the same time, reason, perhaps even pride and\nself-respect and regard for consistency, compel us to recognise that\nhe occupies a different position from that of a perfect stranger. The\nconversion of the Samaritans must be viewed as one of the\ndivinely-appointed steps in the plan of human unification, one of the\ndivinely-appointed actions gently leading to the final overthrow of\nthe wall of partition between Jew and Gentile which the earlier\nchapters of this book trace for us. How beautiful the order, how\nsteady and regular the progress, that is set before us! First we have\nthe call of the strict Jews, then that of the Hellenistic Jews, next\nthat of the Samaritans, and then the step was not a long one from the\nadmission of the hated Samaritans to the baptism of the devout though\nuncircumcised Gentile, Cornelius. God does His work in grace, as in\nnature, by degrees. He teaches us that changes must come, and that\neach age of the Church must be marked by development and improvement;\nbut He shows us here in His word how changes should be made,--not\nrashly, unwisely, impetuously, and therefore uncharitably, but gently,\ngradually, sympathetically, and with explanations abundantly\nvouchsafed to soothe the feelings and calm the fears of the weaker\nbrethren. This method of the Divine government receives an\nillustration in this passage. God led the Church of the first age very\ngradually, and therefore we see the apostolic college steadily, though\nperhaps blindly and unconsciously, advancing on the road of progress\nand of Christian liberality.\n\nWe have in this section of primitive Church history a two-fold\ndivision: the action of the Apostles on one side, the attitude and\nconduct of Simon Magus on the other. Each division has quite distinct\nteaching. Let us in this chapter take note of the Apostles.\n\nI. The Apostles who were at Jerusalem heard of the conversion of\nSamaria, and they at once sent thither Peter and John to supervise the\nwork. The deacons had, for a time, appeared to supersede the Apostles\nbefore the world, but only in appearance. The Apostles retained the\nchief government in their own hands, though to the men of the time\nothers seemed the more prominent workers. The Apostles gave free scope\nto the gifts entrusted to their brilliant subordinates, but none the\nless they felt their own responsibility as rulers of the Divine\nsociety, and never for a moment did they relinquish the authority over\nthat society which God had entrusted to them. They felt that Christ\nhad instituted an organized society with ranks and offices duly\ngraduated, with officials--of whom they were themselves the\nchief--assigned to their appointed tasks, and never did they surrender\nto any man their divinely-given power and authority. Philip might\npreach in Samaria; but though he was successful in winning converts,\nthe Apostles claimed the right of inspecting and controlling his\nlabours. They successfully solved a problem which has often proved a\nvery troublesome one. They combined the exercise of power with the\nfree play of enthusiasm, and the result was that the enthusiasm was\nshielded from mistakes, and the power was vivified by the touch of\nenthusiasm and prevented from falling into that cold, heartless,\nice-like thing which autocratic rule, in Church and State alike, has\nso often become. What a picture and guide we here behold for the\nChurch of all ages! What a needed lesson is here taught! What errors\nand schisms would have been avoided throughout the long ages which\nhave since elapsed, had the example of the apostolic Church been more\nclosely followed, had power been more sympathetic with enthusiasm, and\nenthusiasm more loving, obedient, and submissive as regards authority!\n\nThe Apostles recognised their own responsibility and acted upon their\nown sense of authority, and they sent forth Peter and John to minister\nin Samaria and supply what was wanting as soon as they heard of the\nwork done by St. Philip. The persons whom the college of Apostles thus\ndespatched are worthy of notice, and have a direct bearing on some of\nthe great theological and social problems of this age. They sent Peter\nand John. Peter, then, was the messenger of the Apostles,--the sent\none, not the sender. We can find nothing of the supremacy of Peter in\nthese early apostolic days of which men began to dream in later years.\nThe supreme authority in the Church and the burden of the Christian\nministry were laid upon the twelve Apostles as a whole, and they, as a\nbody of men entrusted with co-equal power, exercised their functions.\nThey knew nothing of Peter as the prince of the Apostles; nay, rather,\nwhen occasion demanded, they sent Peter as well as John as their\ndelegates. The choice of these two men, just as their previous\nactivity, depended again upon spiritual grounds, upon their love,\ntheir zeal, their Christian experience, not upon any official\nprivilege or position which they enjoyed above the other Apostles.\n\nSurely in this view again the Acts of the Apostles may be regarded as\na mirror of all Church history. The pretended supremacy of St. Peter\nabove his brethren has been the ground on which the claim of Roman\nsupremacy over all other Christian Churches has been urged. That claim\nhas been backed up by forgeries like the False Decretals, where\nfictitious letters of Popes dating from the first century downwards\nhave been used to support the papal assertions. But plain men need not\ngo into abstruse questions of Church history, or into debates upon\ndisputed texts. We have one undoubted Church history, admitted by all\nparties who profess and call themselves Christians. That history is\nthe Acts of the Apostles, and when we examine it we can find nothing\nabout St. Peter, his life or his actions, answering in the remotest\ndegree to that imperial and absolute authority which the papacy claims\nin virtue of its alleged descent from that holy Apostle. The Acts\nknows of St. Peter sometimes as the leader and spokesman of the\nApostles, at other times as their delegate, but the Acts knows\nnothing and hints nothing of St. Peter as the ruler, the prince, the\nabsolute, infallible guide of his fellow Apostles and of the whole\nChurch.\n\nPeter and John were the persons despatched as the apostolic delegates\nto complete the work begun by Philip. We can see spiritual reasons\nwhich may have led to this choice. Peter and John, with James his\nbrother, had been specially favoured with Christ's personal\ncommunications, they had been admitted into His most intimate\nfriendship, and therefore they were spiritually eminent in the work of\nChrist, and peculiarly fitted to do work like that which awaited them\nin Samaria,--pointing Christian men to the great truth, that eminence\nin Christ's Church and cause will evermore depend, not upon official\nposition or hierarchical or ministerial authority, but upon spiritual\nqualifications and the vigour of the interior life. How wonderfully\nhas the prophecy involved in the pre-eminence of Peter, James, and\nJohn been fulfilled. When we look back over the ages of Christian\nlabour which have since elapsed, whose are the foremost names? Whose\nfame as Christian workers is the greatest? Not popes or princes, or\nbishops of great cities, but an Augustine, the bishop of an obscure\nAfrican see; an Origen, a presbyter of Alexandria; a Thomas \u00e0 Kempis\nwhom no man knows; or presbyters like John Wesley, or George Herbert,\nor Fletcher of Madeley, or John Keble;--men like them, holy and humble\nof heart, obscure in station or in scenes of labour, they have lived\nmuch with God and they have gained highest places in the saintly army,\nbecause they were specially the friends of Jesus Christ. The world\nknew nothing of them, and the men of affairs and the children of time,\nwhose thoughts were upon rank, and place, and titles, knew nothing of\nthem; and such men had their reward perhaps, they gained what they\nsought; but the despised ones of the past have had their reward as\nwell, for their names have now become as ointment poured forth, whose\nsweet fragrance has filled the whole house of the Lord.\n\nII. And now why were Peter and John sent to Samaria from Jerusalem?\nThey were doubtless sent to inspect the work, and see whether the\napostolic approval could be given to the step of evangelizing the\nSamaritans. They had to form a judgment upon it; for no matter how\nhighly we may rate the inspiration of the Apostles, it is clear that\nthey had to argue, debate, think, and balance one side against another\njust like other people. The inspiration they enjoyed did not save them\nthe trouble of thinking and the consequent danger of disputation; it\ndid not force them to adopt a view, else why the debates we read of\nconcerning the baptism of Cornelius, or the binding character of\ncircumcision? It is clear, from the simple fact that controversy and\ndebate held a prominent place in the early Christian Church, that\nthere was no belief in the existence of infallible guides, local and\nvisible, whose autocratic decisions were final and irreversible,\nbinding the whole Church. It was then believed that the guidance of\nthe Holy Spirit was vouchsafed through the channel of free discussion\nand interchange of opinion, guided and sanctified by prayer. Peter and\nJohn had to go down to Samaria and keenly scrutinize the work, so as\nto see whether it bore the marks of Divine approval, completing the\nwork by the imposition of their hands and prayer for the gifts of the\nHoly Ghost. The Apostles duly discharged their mission, and by their\nministry the converts received the gift of the Holy Spirit, together\nwith some or all of those external signs and manifestations which\naccompanied the original blessing on the day of Pentecost at\nJerusalem. This portion of our narrative has been always regarded by\nthe Church, whether in the East or the West, as its authority for the\npractice of the rite of confirmation. The assertion of the Church of\nEngland, in one of the collects appointed for use by the bishop in the\nConfirmation Service, may be taken as expressing on this point the\nopinion of the Churches--Roman, Greek, and Anglican. \"Almighty and\neverliving God, who makest us both to will and to do those things that\nbe good and acceptable unto Thy Divine Majesty; We make our humble\nsupplications unto Thee for these Thy servants, upon whom (after the\nexample of Thy holy Apostles) we have now laid our hands, to certify\nthem (by this sign) of Thy favour and gracious goodness towards them.\"\nLet us reflect for a little on these words. The reference to apostolic\nexample in this collect is not, indeed, merely to this incident at\nSamaria. The example of St. Paul at Ephesus, as narrated in the\nnineteenth chapter, is also claimed as another case in point. There we\nfind that St. Paul came to a place where he had previously laboured\nfor a short time. He discovered in Ephesus some disciples who had\nreceived the imperfect and undeveloped form of teaching which John the\nBaptist had communicated. A sect had apparently been already formed to\ncontinue John's teaching, such as we still find perpetuated amid the\nwilds of distant Mesopotamia, in the shape of the semi-Christian\nsociety which there practises daily baptism as a portion of its\nreligion.[148] St. Paul explains to them the richer and fuller\nteaching of Christ, commands them to be baptized after the Christian\nmodel, by one of his attendants, and then, like Peter and John,\ncompletes the baptismal act by the imposition of hands and prayer for\nthe gift of the Spirit. These two apostolic incidents are not,\nhowever, the only scriptural grounds which can be alleged for the\ncontinued use of confirmation. It might be said that the practice of\nthe Apostles was not sufficient to justify or authorize confirmation\nas a scriptural rite, unless it can be shown that the imposition of\nhands, after baptism and as its completion, passed into the ordinary\nusage of the early Church. Let me here make a brief digression. The\nNew Testament cannot be used as a guide-book to the whole life and\npractice of the early Church, because it was merely a selection from\nthe writings of the Apostles and of their companions. If we possessed\neverything that the Apostles wrote, we doubtless should have\ninformation upon many points of apostolic doctrine and ritual\nconcerning which we now can only guess, some of which would doubtless\nvery much surprise us. Thus, to take an example, we should have been\nleft without one single reference to the Holy Communion in all the\nwritings of St. Paul, had not the disorders at Corinth led to grave\nabuses of that sacrament, and thus caused St. Paul incidentally to\nmention the subject in the tenth and eleventh chapters of his first\nepistle to that Church.\n\n  [148] See about this curious sect of the Hemero-baptists\n  Lightfoot's _Colossians_, pp. 402-407.\n\nOr to take another case. The _Teaching of the Twelve Apostles_ has\nbeen already referred to and described. It is manifestly a manual\ndealing with the Church of apostolic times, and there we find\nreference to customs which were practised in the Apostolic Church, to\nwhich no reference, or at least very slight reference, is made in the\nEpistles or other books of the New Testament. The Apostles practised\nfasting as a preparation for important Church actions, as we learn\nfrom the account of the ordination of Paul and Barnabas at Antioch.\nThe _Teaching of the Apostles_ shows us that this practice, derived\nfrom the Jews, was the rule before baptism (of this we read nothing in\nthe New Testament), as well as before ordination (of this we do read\nsomething), and that not only by the persons to be baptized, but by\nthe ministers of baptism as well.[149] It mentions Wednesday and\nFriday fasts as instituted in opposition to the Monday and Thursday\nfasts of the Jews; it shows us how the lovefeasts of the Primitive\nChurch were celebrated, and sheds much light upon the Order of\nprophets and their activity, to which St. Paul barely alludes. If we\ncould regain the numberless writings of the Apostles and other early\nChristians which have perished, we should doubtless possess\ninformation upon many other practices and customs of early Church life\nwhich would much surprise us. The New Testament cannot then be used as\nan exhaustive account of the Primitive Church; its silence is no\nconclusive argument against apostolic origin or sanction as regards\nany practice, any more than the Old Testament is to be regarded as an\nexhaustive history of the Jewish nation. And yet, though we speak\nthus, confirmation or laying on of hands upon the baptized as the\ncompletion of the initial sacrament is not left without notice in the\nEpistles. The imposition of hands as the complement of baptism did not\ncease with the Apostles and was not tied to them alone, any more than\ndid the use of water in the sacrament of baptism itself cease with the\nApostles, as some of the Society of Friends have contended, or the\nimposition of hands in ordination terminate with apostolic times, as\nothers have argued. This appears from two passages. St. Paul, in the\ntwenty-second verse of the fifth chapter of 1 Timothy, when dealing\nwith Timothy's conduct in the usual pastoral oversight of the Church,\nlays down, \"Lay hands suddenly on no man.\" These words referred not to\nordination, for St. Paul had passed from that subject and was treating\nof Timothy's ministerial conduct towards the ordinary members of his\nflock, directing how he was to care for their souls, reproving\npublicly the notorious transgressor, and putting him to open shame. We\nadmit, indeed, at once that this notice of the imposition of hands may\nrefer to another use of it which was practised in the early Church.\nSt. Paul may be referring to the imposition of hands when a lapsed or\nexcommunicated member was readmitted into the Church; or both uses of\nthe ceremony, in confirmation as well as in absolution, may be\nincluded under the one reference. But in any case we have another\ndistinct, though incidental, mention of this rite, and that at a time,\nin a manner, and in a book which clearly proves the practice to have\npassed into the general custom of the Church. Let us see how this is.\n\n  [149] The order for adult baptism in the Book of Common Prayer was\n  drawn up by the divines of the Restoration. They must have been\n  well skilled in Christian antiquity, for they lay down expressly\n  the same rule as the _Teaching of the Apostles_. They order that\n  notice shall be given of an adult's baptism a week at least\n  beforehand, that the persons to be baptized may be duly exhorted\n  to prepare themselves by prayer and fasting for that holy\n  ordinance.\n\nThe Epistle to the Hebrews was written by one of the second generation\nof Christians, one of the generation who could look back to and wonder\nat the miracles and gifts of the apostolic age. The writer of the\nHebrews tells us himself that he was in this position; for when\nspeaking, in the opening of the second chapter, concerning the danger\nof neglecting the Gospel message, he describes it as a \"great\nsalvation; which having at the first been spoken through the Lord, was\nconfirmed unto us by them that heard; God also bearing witness with\nthem, both by signs and wonders, and by manifold powers, and by gifts\nof the Holy Ghost, according to His own will.\" So that it is evident\nthat the Church of the Hebrews was the composition of a man who\nbelonged to a time when the Church had passed out of the fluid state\nin which we find it in the earlier chapters of the Acts. It had passed\ninto a condition when rites and ceremonies and Church government and\necclesiastical organisations had crystallised, and when men repeated\nwith profoundest reverence the forms and ceremonies which had become\nassociated with the names and persons of the earliest teachers of the\nfaith; names and persons which now were surrounded with all that\nsacred charm and halo which distance, and above all else, death, lend\nto human memories. There is an interesting passage in Tertullian which\nshows how this feeling worked among the early Christians, making them\nanxious in divine worship to repeat most minutely and even absurdly\nthe circumstances of the Church's earliest days. In Tertullian's works\nwe have a treatise on Prayer, in which he expounds the nature of the\nLord's Prayer, going through it petition by petition, proving\nconclusively that Tertullian and the Christians nearest the apostolic\nage knew nothing of that modern absurdity which asserts that the\nLord's Prayer should not be used by Christians. He then proceeds to\nexplain certain useful customs, and to reprove certain superstitious\nceremonies practised by the Christians of his day. He approves and\nexplains the custom of praying with hands outstretched, because this\nis an imitation of our Lord, whose hands were outstretched upon the\ncross.[150] He disapproves of the practice of washing the hands before\nevery prayer, which Tertullian says was done in memory of our Lord's\nPassion, when water was used by Pilate to wash his hands, and\ndesignates as superstitious the custom of sitting down upon their\ncouches or beds after they had prayed, in imitation of Hermas who\nwrote the _Shepherd_, of whom it was said, that after finishing his\nprayer, he sat down on his bed.[151] Now this last instance exactly\nillustrates what must have happened in the case of the second\ngeneration of Christians, to whom the Epistle to the Hebrews was\ndirected. Men at the end of the second century, when Tertullian lived,\nlooked back to the Shepherd of Hermas with the same profound reverence\nas to the Apostles. They imitated, therefore, every action and\nceremony practised by the Shepherd, whom they regarded as inspired,\nreading his writings with the same reverence as those of the Apostles.\n\n  [150] There is no ceremony which proves more conclusively the\n  identity between the ritual of apostolic ages and, say, of the\n  year 200, than this custom of standing at public prayer with hands\n  outstretched. St. Paul, writing to Timothy (1 Tim. ii. 8), says,\n  \"I desire therefore that the men pray in every place, lifting up\n  holy hands,\" and then he prescribes rules for the women. This\n  passage will not be understood in its full force till one grasps\n  the notion of an early Christian at prayer, as described by\n  Tertullian in the treatise on Prayer to which I have referred.\n  Tertullian lays down, with other writers of the second century,\n  that Christians should pray in public on the Lord's Day standing\n  with the hands lifted up and the arms stretched out horizontally.\n  On this point the practices of the East and West alike were\n  identical, and had not changed one atom from St. Paul's to\n  Tertullian's time. From the way some people speak one would think\n  that the Christians of the second century were wild\n  revolutionaries, who were only too anxious to change the ritual\n  derived from apostolic days. Tertullian's works prove that they\n  were, on the other hand, almost too slavish in their adherence to\n  ancient customs. Human nature is the same in every age, and a\n  moment's reflection will show us that whether in England,\n  Scotland, or Ireland, the ritual of old-fashioned congregations of\n  every denomination is the same to-day as in the seventeenth\n  century. A few instances occur to me which illustrate this. Dean\n  Hook, in a letter dated April 5th, 1838, tells us that the old\n  Presbyterian way of administering the Holy Communion, carrying the\n  elements to the communicants sitting in their pews, still existed\n  in the parish church of Leeds. The custom had been introduced\n  early in the seventeenth century, and never was discontinued,\n  notwithstanding a plain rubric forbidding it. I have read that the\n  same custom prevailed at St. Mary's in Oxford, when Newman became\n  Vicar. Again, down to a few years ago, in the country parts of\n  Ulster and Connaught, the separation between the sexes in public\n  worship continued among the Methodists, in obedience to John\n  Wesley's law made one hundred and twenty years before. It is two\n  hundred years since Sternhold and Hopkins' version of the Psalms\n  was authoritatively laid aside, and Tate and Brady substituted.\n  Yet I have within the last ten years seen Prayer-books in use at\n  Bolton Abbey in Yorkshire, with Sternhold and Hopkins attached to\n  them. Surely the early Christians were at least as Conservative as\n  their modern followers.\n\n  [151] See Tertullian on Prayer, in his Works, vol. i., pp. 188-92,\n  as translated in Clark's Ante-Nicene Library.\n\nHuman nature is ever the same. The latest sect started in the present\ngeneration will be found acting on the same principles as the\nChristians of the apostolic age. The practices and ceremonial of their\nfirst founders become the model on which they shape themselves, and\nevery departure from that model is bitterly resented. Human nature is\ngoverned universally by principles which are essentially conservative\nand traditional.[152] So it must have been with the immediate\nfollowers of the Apostles; they conformed themselves as exactly as\nthey could to everything--rite, ceremony, form of words--which the\nApostles delivered or practised. And the Apostles certainly delivered\nprecepts and laid down rules on various liturgical questions, of which\nwe have now no written record. St. Paul expressly refers to traditions\nand customs which he had delivered or intended to deliver, some of\nwhich we know, others of which we know not.[153] Now wherefore have we\nmade this long excursion into the dim regions of primitive antiquity?\nSimply to show that it is _\u00e0 priori_ likely that the writer of the\nEpistle to the Hebrews, and men like him of the second and third\ngeneration of Christians, would have followed the example of the\nApostles, and practised imposition of hands together with prayer for\nthe gift of the Spirit in the case of those baptized into Christ,\nmerely because the Apostles had beforetime practised it. And then,\nwhen we come to the actual study of the Epistle to the Hebrews, and\nread the sixth chapter, we find our anticipations fulfilled. In the\nfirst two verses of that chapter the writer lays down the first\nprinciples of Christ, the foundation doctrines of the Christian\nsystem, which he takes for granted as known and acknowledged by every\none; they are, repentance from dead works, faith towards God, the\nteaching of baptisms, and of laying on of hands, and of the\nresurrection of the dead and of eternal judgment. Here the imposition\nof hands cannot refer to ordination, because, as all the other points\nare matters of personal religion and individual practice, not of\necclesiastical organisation, so we must restrict the imposition of\nhands referred to as a principle of the Christian religion, to some\nimposition of hands needful for every Christian, not for the few\nmerely who should be admitted to the work of the ministry. While,\nagain, its close connection with baptism clearly points to the\nimposition of hands in Confirmation, which the Apostles practised and\nthe primitive Christians adopted from their example. And then, when we\npass to ecclesiastical antiquity and study the works of Tertullian,\nthe earliest writer who enters into the details of the practices and\nritual established in the Churches, we find imposition of hands\nconnected with baptism exactly as stated in the Epistle to the\nHebrews, and viewed as the channel by which the gift of the Holy Ghost\nis conveyed,[154] not in the shape of miraculous gifts, but in all\nthat edifying, consoling, and sanctifying power which every individual\nneeds, and in virtue of which the New Testament writers, in common\nwith Tertullian, call baptized men temples of the Holy Ghost and\npartakers of the Holy Ghost.[155]\n\n  [152] I was much struck the other day with a modern instance of\n  this. The Plymouth Brethren boast themselves as the least\n  traditional of sects. They are, however, just at present split all\n  the world over into two divisions, the great subject of debate\n  being the writings of a Mr. Raven. He has ventured upon some\n  perilous speculations concerning the nature of Christ's person. I\n  have seen a formal indictment drawn out by his opponents, in which\n  his opinions are contrasted with statements in the writings of\n  their founder, the late J. N. Darby, which are evidently the final\n  authority and standard of appeal for them.\n\n  [153] Thus in 1 Cor. xi. 2 St. Paul says, \"Now I praise you that\n  ye remember me in all things, and hold fast the traditions, even\n  as I delivered them to you,\" and then goes on to discuss the\n  question of veiling of women, showing the character of the\n  traditions thus delivered. With this verse may be compared similar\n  references in 1 Cor. vii. 17, 2 Thess. ii. 15 and iii. 9.\n\n  [154] See Tertullian on Baptism, chap. vi., where he says, \"Not\n  that in the waters we obtain the Holy Spirit, but in the water,\n  under the influence of the angel, we are cleansed, and thus\n  prepared for the Holy Spirit.\" And again, in chap. viii. he\n  describes the course followed after baptism thus: \"In the next\n  place the hand is laid on us, invoking and inviting the Holy\n  Spirit through the words of benediction.\" To pass from Tertullian\n  to a very different witness, we may note that Calvin in his\n  commentary on Heb. vi. 2 says, \"This one place abundantly\n  testifies that the origin of this ceremony (imposition of hands on\n  the baptized) came from the Apostles.\" He differs from Tertullian,\n  however. Calvin does not view it so much as a channel of Divine\n  grace as a rite for profession of faith and solemn prayer, and as\n  such would have confirmation continued as a necessary complement\n  of infant baptism.\n\n  [155] Compare 1 Cor. vi. 19 with Heb. vi. 4, 5.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIX.\n\n_ST. PETER AND SIMON MAGUS._\n\n     \"Now when Simon saw that through the laying on of the Apostles'\n     hands the Holy Ghost was given, he offered them money, saying,\n     Give me also this power, that on whomsoever I lay my hands, he\n     may receive the Holy Ghost.\"--ACTS viii. 18, 19.\n\n\nWe have in the last exposition endeavoured to explain the origin of\nthe rite of Confirmation and to connect its development in the second\ncentury with the first notice of its rise in germ and principle at\nSamaria. There have been from time to time modifications and changes\nin the ordinance. The Church has availed itself of the power she\nnecessarily possesses to insist upon different aspects of Confirmation\nat different periods. The Church of England at the Reformation brought\nout into prominence the human side of Confirmation as we may call it,\nwhich views the rite as a renewal and strengthening of the baptismal\nvows of renunciation, faith, and obedience, which had fallen too much\nout of sight, while still insisting on the Divine side as well, which\nregards Confirmation as a method of Divine action, a channel of Divine\ngrace, strengthening and blessing the soul. Yet no one can imagine\nthat the Reformers invented a new ordinance because they insisted on a\nforgotten and latent side of the old rite. So it was during the second\ncentury and in Tertullian's time. The exigencies of the Christian\nChurch of that age had led to certain modifications of apostolic\ncustoms, but the central idea of solemn imposition of hands continued,\nand was regarded as of apostolic appointment. If we descend a little\nlower this is plain enough. St. Cyprian, the contemporary and disciple\nof Tertullian, expressly attributes the institution of the rite to the\naction of the Apostles at Samaria, a view which is subsequently\nattested by those great lights of the ancient Church, St. Jerome and\nSt. Augustine.[156] As my object is, however, not to write a treatise\non Confirmation, but to trace the evolution and development of\napostolic customs and ritual, and to show how they were connected with\nthe Church of the second century, I restrain myself to Tertullian\nalone.\n\n  [156] The evidence from these writers will be found in a collected\n  shape in Bingham's _Antiquities_, book xii., chap. iii., sec. vi.\n  St. Augustine, in his Tract VI., on 1 St. John iii., expressly\n  deals with the objection that because the Apostles imparted\n  miraculous gifts by the imposition of hands, therefore their\n  conduct forms no precedent for us. \"In the first age the Holy\n  Ghost fell on them that believed; and they spake with tongues\n  which they had never learned, as the Spirit gave them utterance.\n  These were signs proper for that time; for then it was necessary\n  that the Holy Ghost should be thus demonstrated in all kinds of\n  tongues, because the gospel was to run throughout the whole world\n  in all sorts of languages. But this demonstration once made, it\n  ceased.\" I have above called Cyprian the disciple of Tertullian,\n  because we learn from St. Jerome that Cyprian when asking for the\n  works of Tertullian always said, \"Da Magistrum,\" \"Give me the\n  master.\"\n\nI cannot see how this argument is to be evaded without rejecting the\ntestimony of Tertullian and denying what we may call the historic\nmemory and continuity of the Church at the close of the second\ncentury. Upon the testimony of Tertullian we very largely depend for\nour proof of the canonicity of the books of the New Testament. Men\nwhen impugning or rejecting Tertullian's witness on this or any\nsimilar question, should bear in mind what the results of their\nteaching may be; for surely if Tertullian's clear evidence avails not\nto prove the apostolic character of confirmation, it cannot be of much\nuse to establish the still more important question of the canon of the\nNew Testament or the authorship of the Gospels and Acts. We think, on\nthe other hand, that Tertullian's references to this practice are\nnaturally and easily explained by our theory that the Churches\nestablished by the Apostles followed their example. The first converts\nthat were made after the Apostles had founded a Church were treated by\nthe resident bishop and presbyters exactly as the Apostle had treated\nthemselves. Timothy at Ephesus acted as he had seen St. Paul do.\nTimothy completed his converts' baptism by the imposition of hands,\nand then his successor followed the example of Timothy, and so\nconfirmation received that universal acceptation which the writings of\nthe Fathers disclose.\n\nI. Let us now return to the consideration of the actual doings of\nPeter and John at Samaria, and the lessons we may draw from thence as\ntouching the manner in which men should follow the example left by\nthem at this crisis in Church history. The Apostles prayed for those\nthat had been baptized into the name of the Lord Jesus, and then they\nlaid their hands upon them, and the baptized received the Holy Ghost.\nPrayer went before the imposition of hands, to show that there was\nnothing mechanical in their proceedings; that it was not by their own\npower or virtue that any blessing was granted, but that they were only\ninstruments by whom the Lord worked. The Apostles always acted,\ntaught, ordained, confirmed, in the profoundest confidence, the surest\nfaith that God worked in them and through them. St. Paul in his\naddress to the elders of Miletus and Ephesus, whom he had himself\nordained, spoke of their ordination, not as the work of man, but of\nthe Holy Ghost. He pierced the veil of sense and saw, far away and\nbehind the human instrument, the power of the Divine Agent who was the\nreal Ordainer. \"Take heed unto yourselves and to all the flock, in the\nwhich the Holy Ghost hath made you bishops.\" And so again in his words\nto Timothy there was not a shadow of doubt when he bid him \"stir up\nthe gift of God, which is in thee through the laying on of hands:\" a\ngift which was doubtless no miraculous power, but the purely spiritual\nendowment, needful now as in ancient times for the edification and\nstrengthening of human souls. As it was in ancient times so is it\nstill, the Church of Christ unites prayer with imposition of hands.\nShe cannot recognise any difference in the methods of God's dealing\nwith human souls in apostolic times and in modern ages. Human wants\nare the same, human nature is the same, the promises of God and the\nministry of God are the same; and therefore as in Samaria, so in\nEngland, the work of baptism is completed when further prayer is\noffered, and the imposition of hands by the chief ministers of God's\nChurch signifies her holy confidence in the abiding presence and work\nof the Divine Spirit.\n\nWe desire to insist upon this devotional side of confirmation, because\nthe rite of confirmation has been too often treated as a mere\nmechanical function, just indeed as men in times of spiritual deadness\nand torpor come to regard all spiritual functions in a purely\nmechanical aspect. The New Testament brought to light a religion of\nthe spirit; but human nature ever tends to become formal in its\nreligion, and therefore has persistently striven, and still\npersistently strives, to turn every external function and office in a\nmechanical direction. The Apostles prayed and then laid their hands\nupon the Samaritan converts, and we may be sure that these prayers\nwere intense personal supplications, dealing directly with the hearts\nand consciences of the individuals. Confirmation, united with fervent\nprayer, public and private, with searching addresses directed to the\nconscience, with personal dealing as regards individual hearts,\nfollowed by public imposition of hands,--surely every one must\nacknowledge that such a solemnisation and sanctification of the great\ncrisis when boyhood and girlhood pass into manhood and womanhood must\nhave very blessed effects. Experience has, indeed, proved the wisdom\nof the ancient Church concerning this ordinance. Confirmation has not\ndeveloped itself exactly in the East as we know it in the West. In the\nEastern Church, as amongst the Lutherans of Germany, confirmation can\nbe administered by a presbyter as well as by a bishop, to whom alone\nthe Western Church limits the function. But whether in the East or\nWest, confirmation is regarded as the transition step connecting\nbaptism and the Eucharist. Christian bodies which have rejected the\nancient customs have felt themselves obliged to adopt a similar\nmethod. Preparation for first Communion has taken the place of\nconfirmation. There has been the same earnest dealing with conscience,\nthe same fuller instruction in Christian truth and life, and the one\nthing lacking has been that following of the apostolic example in\nsolemn imposition of hands, which would have thrown back the young\nmind to the days of the Church's earliest life, and helped it to\nrealize something of the continuity of the Church's work and\nexistence.\n\nMany, as I know, ministering in societies where confirmation after the\nancient model has been rejected, have bitterly lamented its disuse as\ndepriving them of a solemn appointed time when they should have been\nbrought into closer contact with the lives, the feelings, and the\nconsciences of the lambs of Christ's flock. I am bound to confess, at\nthe same time, that no one is more alive than I am to the many defects\nand shortcomings in the modes and fashions in which confirmation is\nsometimes viewed and conferred. The mere mechanical view of it is far\ntoo prevalent. Careful and prayerful preparation, systematic\ninstruction in the field of Christian doctrine, is still in many cases\nfar too little thought of. Confirmation offers a splendid opportunity\nwhen an earnest pastor may open out to young minds eager to receive\ntruth, a fuller acquaintance with the deep things of God. Alas! how\nmiserably such earnest young minds are sometimes met. It is stated\nthat it was by injudicious treatment at such a time that the ardent,\nenthusiastic mind of the late Charles Bradlaugh was alienated from\nChristian truth. Intelligent sympathy is what the young desire and\ncrave for at such seasons. Then it is that the man who has kept his\nmind fresh and active by wide and generous study finds the due reward\nof his labours. He does not attempt to meet doubts and difficulties by\nfoolish denunciations. He knows that such doubts are in the air; that\nthey meet the young in the newspapers, magazines, conversations of the\nday. He proves by his instructions that he knows of them and enters\ninto them. He encourages frank discussion of them, and thus often\nproves himself at a very trying time the most helpful and consoling\nfriend to the young and troubled spirit.\n\nConfirmation, if viewed merely from the purely human side, and if we\nsay nothing at all about a Divine blessing, offers a magnificent\nopportunity for a wise pastor of souls. He will, indeed, treat\ndifferent ranks in different ways. A class of ploughboys or of village\nlads and girls need plain speaking on the great facts of life and of\nthe Gospel, while the higher and more educated or sharper inhabitants\nof cities and towns require teaching which will embrace the problems\nof modern thought, as well as the foundation truths of morals. A\nperfunctory repetition of the Church Catechism, as in some parishes,\nor a brief study of a portion of the Greek Testament, as in some of\nour public schools, is a miserable substitute for that careful\npreparation embracing devotional as well as intellectual preparation,\nwhich such an important function demands.[157] Then, again, the method\nin which confirmation is administered calls for improvement and\nchange. The confirmation of immense crowds at central churches tends\nto confirm the mere mechanical idea about confirmation. Parochial\nconfirmations, a confirmation of the young of each congregation in\npresence of the congregation itself, that is the standard at which we\nshould aim. The Church of Rome can give us wise suggestions on this\npoint. Some time ago I noticed an account of a Roman Catholic\nconfirmation in the west of Ireland. It was held in a town of twelve\nor fifteen thousand inhabitants. The bishop took a week for the\nconfirmations in that town, examining all the children beforehand,\nbringing them thus into direct contact with himself as their supreme\npastor, and assuring himself of the sufficiency of their preparation.\n\n  [157] It seems to me a great pity that, owing to the modern public\n  school system, the confirmation of boys of the upper and middle\n  classes is almost entirely passing from their own home pastors to\n  the masters of public schools, and not always with happy results.\n  This tends to increase the hard mechanical view of confirmation\n  against which I protest.\n\nII. We have now noted some of the defects connected with modern\nconfirmations; but the conduct of Simon Magus and this incident at\nSamaria remind us that defects and shortcomings must ever exist, as\nthey existed in the Church of the Apostles. We note here Simon's offer\nand St. Peter's address. Simon Magus had believed, had been baptized,\nand doubtless had also been confirmed by the Apostles. In the case of\nsome of the Samaritans, at least, the presence of the Holy Ghost must\nhave been proved by visible or audible signs, for we are told that\nwhen Simon _saw_ that through the imposition of apostolic hands the\nHoly Ghost was given, he offered them money to enable him to do the\nsame. His offer sufficiently explains the nature of his faith. He was\nconvinced intellectually of the truth of certain external facts which\nhe had seen. He knew nothing of spiritual want, or the power of sin,\nor a desire for interior peace and sanctity. He looked upon the\nApostles as cleverer jugglers and sorcerers than himself, accessible\nto precisely the same motives, and therefore he offered them money if\nthey would endow him with the knowledge and power they possessed and\nexercised. The Acts of the Apostles, as a mirror of all Church\nhistory, thus selects for our instruction an event which sounds a\nwarning needful for every age.\n\nSimon Magus had a mere intellectual knowledge of the truth, and that\nmere intellectual knowledge, apart from a moral and spiritual\nconception of it, plunged him into a deeper fall than otherwise might\nhave been the case. Simon Magus was a typical example of this, and\nsuccessive centuries have offered many notable imitations. Julian the\nApostate was brought up as a Christian clergyman, and used to read the\nlessons in Church, whence he would adjourn to join in the polluting\nrites of paganism; and so it has been from age to age, till in our own\ntime some of the bitterest opponents of Christianity, at home or in\nthe mission field, have been those who, like Simon, knew of the Gospel\nfacts but had tasted nothing of the Gospel life.\n\nWe may derive from this incident guidance in a difficult controversy\nwhich has of late made much stir. Men have asserted that Christian\nmissionaries were giving far too much time to mere intellectual\ntraining of pagans, instead of devoting themselves to evangelistic\nwork. A writer who has never visited the mission-field has no right to\npass judgment on such a matter. But cannot we read in this passage a\nwarning against such a tendency? Intellectual conviction does not mean\nspiritual conversion. Of course we know that no human effort can\nensure spiritual blessings, but if intellectual training of clever\npagan youths, and not spiritual work, be regarded as the great object\nof Christian missions; if the Holy Ghost be not honoured by being made\nthe supreme lord of heart and life and work, we cannot expect any\nblessed results to follow. We read very little in the earliest ages of\nthe Church about educational missions. The work of education was not\ndespised. The school of Alexandria from the earliest times held high\nthe standard of Christian scholarship. But that school, though open,\nlike all ancient academies, to every class, was primarily intended for\nthe training of Christian youth, placing before all other studies the\nDivine science of theology.\n\nThe offer, again, of Simon Magus has given a name to a sin which has\nbeen found prevalent in every age and in every country. The sin has,\nindeed, taken different shapes. Simony, throughout the Middle Ages,\nwas a common vice against which some of the more devout popes strove\nlong and vigorously. In England and according to English law simony\nmeans still the purchase of spiritual office or spiritual functions.\nIt would be simoniacal for a bishop to receive money for conferring\nholy orders or for appointment to a living. It would be an act of\nsimony for a man to offer or give money to attain either holy orders\nor a living. How then, it may be said, does the unhallowed traffic in\nChurch livings continue to flourish? Simply because, through\ncolourable evasions, men bring themselves to break the spirit of the\nlaw while they keep within its strict letter. Simony, however, is a\nmuch more extensive and far-reaching corruption than the purchase of\necclesiastical benefices. Simony can take subtler shapes and can adapt\nitself to conditions very different from those which prevail under an\nestablished Church. Every one recognises, in word at least, the\nscandalous character of money traffic in Church offices. Even those\nwho really practise it, hide from themselves, by some device or\nexcuse, the character of their action. But the simoniacal spirit, the\nessence of Simon's sin, is found in many quarters which are never\nsuspected. What is that essence? Simon desired to obtain spiritual\npower and office, not in the Divine method, but in low earthly ways.\nMoney was his way because it was the one thing he valued and had to\noffer; but surely there are many other ways in which men may\nunlawfully seek for spiritual office and influence in the Church of\nChrist. Many a man who would never dream of offering money in order to\nobtain a high place in the Church, or would have been horrified at the\nvery suggestion, has yet resorted to other methods just as effective\nand just as wrong. Men have sought high position by political methods.\nThey have given their support to a political party, and have sold\ntheir talents to uphold a cause, hoping thereby to gain their ends.\nThey may not have given gold which comes from the mine to gain\nspiritual position, but they have all the same given a mere human\nconsideration, and sought by its help to obtain spiritual power; or\nthey preach and speak and vote in Church synods and assemblies with an\neye to elections to high place and dignity. An established Church,\nwith its legally-secured properties and prizes, may open a way for the\nexercise of simony in its grosser forms. But a free Church, with its\npopular assemblies, opens the way for a subtler temptation, leading\nmen to shape their actions, to suppress their convictions, to order\ntheir votes and speeches, not as their secret conscience would direct\nthem, but as human nature and earthly considerations would tell them\nwas best for their future prospects. How many a speech is spoken, how\nmany a sermon is preached, how many a vote is given, not as the Holy\nGhost directs, but under the influence of that unhallowed spirit of\nsheer worldliness which led Simon to offer money that he too might be\nenabled to exercise the power which the unworldly Apostles possessed.\nThe spirit of simony may just as really lead a man to give a vote or\nto abstain from voting, to make a speech or keep silence, as it led\nmen in a coarser and plainer age to give bribes for the attainment of\nprecisely the same ends. In this respect, again, as warning against\nthe intrusion of low earthly motives in the concerns of the Divine\nsociety, the Acts of the Apostles proves itself a mirror of universal\nChurch history.\n\nThen we have the address of St. Peter to this notorious sinner. It is\nvery plain-spoken. The Apostle had been himself a great sinner, but he\nhad not been harshly or roughly dealt with, because he had become a\ngreat penitent. St. Peter was most sympathetic, and could never have\nspoken so sharply as he did to Simon Magus had he not perceived with\nquick spiritual insight the inborn baseness and hollowness of the\nman's character. Still he does not cut him off from hope. He speaks\nplainly, as Christ's ministers should ever do when occasion requires.\nSimon Magus was a man of great influence in Samaria, but there was no\n\"fear of man which bringeth a snare\" about the Apostles, and so St.\nPeter fearlessly tells Simon his true position. \"He was in the gall of\nbitterness and bond of iniquity.\" He indicates to him, however, the\nsteps which, whether then or now, a person in that position should\ntake if he desires to escape from the due reward of his deeds. \"Repent\ntherefore of this thy wickedness.\" Repentance, then, is the first step\nwhich a man whose heart is not right in God's sight has to take. There\nwas no hesitation, as we have already remarked when speaking of St.\nPeter's preaching at Jerusalem, about pressing upon men the duty of\nhearty, sincere repentance, embracing sorrow for sin and genuine\namendment of life. Then having exhorted to repentance, the Apostle\nproceeds, \"And pray the Lord, if perhaps the thought of thy heart\nshall be forgiven thee.\" Prayer is the next step. First comes\nrepentance, then prayer, and then forgiveness. There was nothing in\nSt. Peter's teaching which lends the least countenance to the modern\nerror which teaches that an unconverted man should not pray, that his\none duty is to believe, and, till he does so, that his prayer is\nunacceptable to God. Simon Magus was as estranged from God as a human\nsoul could well have been, yet St. Peter's word to him then, and his\nword to every sinner still, would be an exhortation to diligent\nprayer. \"Pray God if perhaps the thought of thine heart shall be\nforgiven thee.\" The exhortation of Peter was blessed, for the time, to\nthe sinner. It awoke a temporary sense of sin, though it wrought no\npermanent change. It has left, however, an eternal blessing and a\npermanent direction to the Church of Christ. In his preaching on the\nday of Pentecost to the Jews of Jerusalem, he shows us how to deal\nwith those who are not as yet partakers of the Christian covenant.\n\"Repent ye, and be baptized every one of you in the name of Jesus\nChrist,\" was his message to the devout Jews of Jerusalem; \"Repent and\npray\" is his message to the sinner who has been brought, all unworthy,\ninto the kingdom of light and grace, but knows nothing of it in heart\nand life. St. Peter valued the blessings of belief in Christ and\nadmission by baptism into His kingdom, but he knew that these benefits\nonly intensified a man's condemnation if not realized in heart and\nlived in practice. St. Peter's visit to Samaria in company with St.\nJohn has much to teach the Church on many other points, as we have\npointed out, but no lesson which can be derived from it is so\nimportant as that which declares the true road for the returning\nsinner to follow, the value of repentance, the efficacy of heartfelt\nprayer, the supreme importance of a heart right in the sight of God.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XX.\n\n_EVANGELISTIC WORK IN THE PHILISTINES' LAND._\n\n     \"But an angel of the Lord spake unto Philip, saying, Arise, and\n     go toward the south unto the way that goeth down from Jerusalem\n     unto Gaza: the same is desert. And he arose and went: and behold,\n     a man of Ethiopia, a eunuch of great authority under Candace,\n     queen of the Ethiopians, who was over all her treasure, who had\n     come to Jerusalem for to worship; and he was returning and\n     sitting in his chariot, and was reading the prophet\n     Isaiah.\"--ACTS viii. 26-8.\n\n     \"And it came to pass, as Peter went throughout all parts, he came\n     down also to the saints which dwelt at Lydda.\"--ACTS ix. 32.\n\n\nI have united these two incidents, the conversion of the Ethiopian\neunuch and the mission of St. Peter to the people of Lydda, Sharon,\nand Joppa, because they relate to the same district of country and\nthey happened at the same period, the pause which ensued between the\nmartyrdom of St. Stephen and the conversion of St. Paul. The writer of\nthe Acts does not seem to have exactly followed chronological order in\nthis part of his story. He had access to different authorities or to\ndifferent diaries. He selected as best he could the details which he\nheard or read, and strove to weave them into a connected narrative.\nSt. Luke, when gathering up the story of these earliest days of the\nChurch's warfare, must have laboured under great difficulties which we\nnow can scarcely realize. It was doubtless from St. Philip himself\nthat our author learned the details of the eunuch's conversion and of\nSt. Peter's labours. St. Luke and St. Paul tarried many days with St.\nPhilip at C\u00e6sarea. Most probably St. Luke had then formed no intention\nof writing either his Gospel or his apostolic history at that period.\nHe was urged on simply by that unconscious force which shapes our\nlives and leads us in a vague way to act in some special direction. A\nman born to be a poet will unconsciously display his tendency. A man\nborn to be a historian will be found, even when he has formed no\ndefinite project, note-book in hand, jotting down the impressions of\nthe passing hour or of his current studies. So probably was it with\nSt. Luke. He could not help taking notes of conversations he heard, or\nmaking extracts from the documents he chanced to meet; and then when\nhe came to write he had a mass of materials which it was at times hard\nto weave into one continuous story within the limits he had prescribed\nto himself. One great idea, indeed, to which we have often referred,\nseems to have guided the composition of the first portion of the\napostolic history. St. Luke selected, under Divine guidance, certain\nrepresentative facts and incidents embodying great principles, typical\nof future developments. This is the golden thread which runs through\nthe whole of this book, and specially through the chapters concerning\nwhich we speak in this volume, binding together and uniting in one\norganic whole a series of independent narratives.\n\nI. The two incidents which we now consider have several representative\naspects. They may be taken as typical of evangelistic efforts and the\nqualifications for success in them. Philip the deacon is aggressive,\nmany-sided, flexible, and capable of adapting himself to diverse\ntemperaments, whether those of the Grecian Jews at Jerusalem, the\nSamaritans in central Palestine, or the Jewish proselytes from distant\nAfrica. Peter is older, narrower, cannot so easily accommodate\nhimself to new circumstances. He confines himself, therefore, to quiet\nwork amongst the Jews of Palestine who have been converted to Christ\nas the result of the four years' growth of the Church. \"As Peter went\nthroughout all parts, he came down also to the saints which dwelt at\nLydda.\" This incident represents to us the power and strength gained\nfor the cause of Christ by intellectual training and by wider culture.\nIt is a lesson needed much in the great mission field. It has hitherto\nbeen too much the fashion to think that while the highest culture and\ntraining are required for the ministry at home, any half-educated\nteacher, provided he be in earnest, will suffice for the work of\npreaching to the heathen. This is a terrible mistake, and one which\nhas seriously injured the progress of religion. It is at all times a\ndangerous thing to despise one's adversary, and we have fallen into\nthe snare when we have despised systems like Buddhism and Hindooism,\nendeavouring to meet them with inferior weapons.[158] The ancient\nreligions of the East are founded on a subtle philosophy, and should\nbe met by men whose minds have received a wide and generous culture,\nwhich can distinguish between the chaff and the wheat, rejecting what\nis bad in them while sympathising with and accepting what is good. The\nnotices of Philip and Stephen and their work, as contrasted with that\nof St. Peter, proclaim the value of education, travel, and thought in\nthis the earlier section of the Acts, as the labours of St. Paul\ndeclare it in the days of Gentile conversion. The work of the Lord,\nwhether among Jews or Gentiles, is done most effectually by those\nwhose natural abilities and intellectual sympathies have been\nquickened and developed. A keen race like the Greeks of old or the\nHindoos of the present, are only alienated from the very consideration\nof the faith when it is presented in a hard, narrow, intolerant,\nunsympathetic spirit. The angel chose wisely when he selected the\nGrecian Philip to bear the gospel to the Ethiopian eunuch, and left\nPeter to minister to \u00c6neas, to Tabitha, and to Simon the tanner of\nJoppa; simple souls, for whom life glided smoothly along, troubled by\nno intellectual problems and haunted by no fearful doubts.\n\n  [158] The primitive Church never made this mistake. The great\n  missionaries who dealt with the heathen in the second century were\n  profoundly skilled in philosophy, several of them being\n  philosophers by profession. Aristides, whose long-lost _Apology_\n  has just been recovered, Justin Martyr, and Tatian were Christian\n  philosophers in the second century, and consecrated their powers\n  to missionary labours. Pant\u00e6nus, Clement, and Origen, profound\n  scholars of Alexandria, took the greatest trouble to understand\n  Greek paganism before they proceeded to refute it. I think that\n  candidates in training for foreign missions might be taken with\n  great advantage through a course of the second century apologists.\n  Clement and Origen never poured indiscriminate abuse on the system\n  they opposed; their teaching was no bald negative controversy;\n  they always strove, like St. Paul at Athens, to ascertain what was\n  good and true in their opponents' position, and to work from\n  thence. See pp. 214, 215 above, where much the same line of\n  thought has been insisted upon.\n\nII. Again, we may remark that these incidents and the whole course of\nChurch history at this precise moment show the importance of clear\nconceptions as to character, teaching, and objects. The Church at this\ntime was vaguely conscious of a great mission, but it had not made up\nits mind as to the nature of that mission, because it had not realized\nits own true character, as glad tidings of great joy unto _all_\nnations. And the result was very natural: it formed no plans for the\nfuture, and was as yet hesitating and undecided in action. It was with\nthe Church then as in our every-day experience of individuals. A man\nwho does not know himself, who has no conception of his own talents\nor powers, and has formed no idea as to his object or work in life,\nthat man cannot be decided in action, he cannot bring all his powers\ninto play, because he neither knows of their existence, nor where and\nhow to use them. This is my explanation of the great difference\nmanifest on the face of our history as between the Church and its life\nbefore and after the conversion of Cornelius. It is plain that there\nwas a great difference in Church life and activity between these two\nperiods. Whence did it arise? The admission of the Gentiles satisfied\nthe unconscious cravings of the Church. She felt that at last her true\nmission and her real object were found, and, like a man of vigorous\nmind who at last discovers the work for which nature has destined him,\nshe flung herself into it, and we read no longer of mere desultory\nefforts, but of unceasing, indefatigable, skilfully-directed labour;\nbecause the Church had at last been taught by God that her great task\nwas to make all men know the riches hidden in Christ Jesus. We have in\nthis fact a representative lesson very necessary for our time. Men are\nnow very apt to mistake mistiness for profundity, and clearness of\nconception for shallowness of thought. This feeling intrudes itself\ninto religion, and men do not take the trouble to form clear\nconceptions on any subject, and they lapse therefore into the very\nweakness which afflicted the Church prior to St. Peter's vision. The\nroot of practical, vigorous action is directly assailed if men have no\nclear conceptions as to the nature, the value, and the supreme\nimportance of the truth. If, for instance, a man cherishes the notion,\nnow prevalent in some circles, that Mahometanism is the religion\nsuited for the natives of Africa, how will he make sacrifices either\nof time, of money, or of thought, to make the Gospel known to that\ngreat continent? I do not say that we should seek to have sharp and\nclear conceptions on all points. There is no man harder, more\nunsympathetic with the weak, more intolerant of the slightest\ndifference, more truly foolish and short-sighted, than the man who has\nformed the clearest and sharpest conceptions upon the profoundest\nquestions, and is ready to decide offhand where the subtlest and\ndeepest thinkers have spoken hesitatingly. That man does not, in the\nlanguage of John Locke, recognise the length of his own tether. He\nwishes to make himself the standard for everyone else, and infallibly\nbrings discredit on the possession of clear views on any topics. There\nare vast tracts of thought upon which we must be content with doubt,\nhesitancy, and mistiness; but the man who wishes to be a vigorous,\nself-sacrificing servant of Jesus Christ must seek diligently for\nclear, broad, strong conceptions on such great questions as the value\nof the soul, the nature of God, the person of Jesus Christ, the work\nof the Spirit, and all the other truths which the Apostles' Creed sets\nforth as essentially bound up with these doctrines. Distinct and\nstrong convictions alone on such points form for the soul the basis of\na decided and fruitful Christian activity; as such decided convictions\nenergised the whole life and character of the blessed apostle of love\nwhen writing, \"We know that we are of God, and the whole world lieth\nin the evil one.\"\n\nIII. Now turning from such general considerations, we may compare the\ntwo incidents, St. Philip's activities and St. Peter's labours, in\nseveral aspects. _We notice a distinction in their guidance._ Greater\nhonour is placed on Philip than upon Peter. An angel speaks to Philip,\nwhile St. Peter seems to have been left to that ordinary guidance of\nthe Spirit which is just as real as any external direction, such as\nthat given by an angel, but yet does not impress the human mind or\nsupersede its own action, as the external direction does. Dr.\nGoulburn, in an interesting work from which I have derived many\nimportant hints,[159] suggests that the external message of the angel\ndirecting Philip where to go may have been God's answer to the\nthoughts and doubts which were springing up in His servant's mind. The\nincident of Simon Magus may have disturbed St. Philip. He may have\nbeen led to doubt the propriety of his action in thus preaching to the\nSamaritans and admitting to baptism a race hitherto held accursed. He\nhad dared to run counter to the common opinion of devout men, and one\nresult had been that such a bad character as Simon Magus had crept\ninto the sacred fold. The Lord who watches over His people and sees\nall their difficulties, comes therefore to his rescue, and by one of\nHis ministering spirits conveys a message which assures His fainting\nservant of His approval and of His guidance. Such is Dr. Goulburn's\nexplanation, and surely it is a most consoling one, of which every\ntrue servant of God has had his own experience. The Lord even still\ndeals thus with His people. They make experiments for Him, as Philip\ndid; engage in new enterprises and in fields of labour hitherto\nuntried; they work for His honour and glory alone; and perhaps they\nsee nothing for a time but disaster and failure. Then, when their\nhearts are cast down and their spirits are fainting because of the\nway, the Lord mercifully sends them a message by some angelic hand or\nvoice, which encourages and braces them for renewed exertion.\n\n  [159] _The Acts of the Deacons_, p. 276. This work discusses\n  Philip's dealings with the eunuch at very great length. The reader\n  desirous of seeing the spiritual teaching of that incident fully\n  drawn out should consult it.\n\nAn external voice of an angel may, in the peculiar circumstances of\nthe case, have directed St. Philip. But the text does not give us a\nhint as to the appearance or character of the messenger whom God used\non this occasion. The Old and New Testament alike take broader views\nof Divine messengers, and of angelic appearances generally, than we\ndo. A vision, a dream, a human agent, some natural circumstance or\ninstrument, all these are in Holy Scripture or in contemporary\nliterature styled God's angels or messengers. Men saw then more deeply\nthan we do, recognised the hand of a superintending Providence where\nwe behold only secondary agents, and in their filial confidence spoke\nof angels where we should only recognise some natural power. Let me\nquote an interesting illustration of this. Archbishop Trench,\nspeaking, in his _Notes on the Miracles_, of the healing of the\nImpotent Man at Bethesda, and commenting on St. John v. 4, a verse\nwhich runs thus, \"For an angel of the Lord went down at certain\nseasons into the pool, and troubled the water: whosoever then first\nafter the troubling of the water stepped in was made whole, with\nwhatsoever disease he was holden,\" thus enunciates the principle which\nguided the ancient Christians, as well as the Jews, in this matter. He\nexplains the origin of this verse, and the manner in which it crept\ninto the text of the New Testament. \"At first, probably, a marginal\nnote, expressing the popular notion of the Jewish Christians\nconcerning the origin of the healing power which from time to time the\nwaters of Bethesda possessed, by degrees it assumed the shape in which\nwe now have it.\" The Archbishop then proceeds to speak of the Hebrew\nview of the world as justifying such expressions. \"For the statement\nitself, there is nothing in it which need perplex or offend, or which\nmight not find place in St. John. It rests upon that religious view of\nthe world which in all nature sees something beyond and behind nature,\nwhich does not believe that it has discovered causes when, in fact, it\nhas only traced the sequence of phenomena, and which everywhere\nrecognises a going forth of the immediate power of God, invisible\nagencies of His, whether personal or otherwise, accomplishing His\nwill.\"[160] The whole topic of angelic agencies is one that has been\nmuch confused for us by the popular notions about angels, notions\nwhich affect every one, no matter how they imagine themselves raised\nabove the vulgar herd. When men speak or think of angelic appearances,\nthey think of angels as they are depicted in sacred pictures. The\nconception of young men clad in long white and shining raiment, with\nbeautiful wings dependent from their shoulders and folded by their\nsides, is an idea of the angels and angelic life derived from medi\u00e6val\npainters and sculptors, not from Holy Writ. The important point,\nhowever, for us to remember is that Philip here moved under external\ndirection to the conversion of the eunuch. The same Spirit which sent\nHis messenger to direct Philip, led Peter to move towards exactly the\nsame south-western quarter of Palestine, where he was to remain\nworking, meditating, praying, till the hour had come when the next\ngreat step should be taken and the Gentiles admitted as recognised\nmembers of the Church.\n\n  [160] The verse John v. 4 of the Authorised Version has now been\n  relegated to the margin of the Revised Version.\n\nIV. This leads us to the next point. Philip and Peter were both\nguided, the one externally, the other internally; but whither? They\nwere led by God into precisely the same south-western district of\nPalestine. Peter was guided, by one circumstance after another, first\nto Lydda and Sharon, and then to Joppa, where the Lord found him when\nhe was required at the neighbouring C\u00e6sarea to use the power of the\nkeys and to open the door of faith to Cornelius and the Gentile world.\nOur narrative says nothing, in St. Peter's case, about providential\nguidance or heavenly direction, but cannot every devout faithful soul\nsee here the plain proofs of it? The book of the Acts makes no attempt\nto improve the occasion, but surely a soul seeking for light and help\nwill see, and that with comfort, the hand of God leading St. Peter all\nunconscious, and keeping him in readiness for the moment when he\nshould be wanted. We are not told of any extraordinary intervention,\nand yet none the less the Lord guided him as really as He guided\nPhilip, that his life might teach its own lessons, by which we should\norder our own. And has not every one who has devoutly and faithfully\nstriven to follow Christ experienced many a dispensation exactly like\nSt. Peter's? We have been led to places, or brought into company with\nindividuals, whereby our future lives have been ever afterwards\naffected. The devout mind in looking back over the past will see how\nwork and professions have been determined for us, how marriages have\nbeen arranged, how afflictions and losses have been made to work for\ngood; so that at last, surveying, like Moses, life's journey from some\nPisgah summit, when its course is well-nigh run, God's faithful\nservant is enabled to rejoice in Him because even in direct\nafflictions He has done all things well. A view of life like that is\nstrictly warranted by this passage, and such a view was, and still\nis, the sure and secret source of that peace of God which passeth all\nunderstanding. Nothing can happen amiss to him who has Almighty Love\nas his Lord and Master. St. Peter was led, by one circumstance after\nanother, first to Lydda, which is still an existing village, then,\nfarther, into the vale of Sharon, celebrated from earliest time for\nits fertility, and commemorated for its roses in the Song of Solomon\n(Cant. ii. 1, Isa. xxxiii. 9), till finally he settles down at Joppa,\nto wait for the further indications of God's will.\n\nBut how about Philip, to whom the Divine messenger had given a\nheavenly direction? What was the message so imparted? An angel of the\nLord spake unto Philip, saying, \"Arise, and go toward the south, unto\nthe way that goeth down from Jerusalem unto Gaza: the same is desert.\"\nNow we should here carefully remark the minute exactness of the Acts\nof the Apostles in this place, because it is only a specimen of the\nmarvellous geographical and historical accuracy which distinguishes it\nall through, and is every year receiving fresh illustrations. Gaza has\nalways been the gateway of Palestine. Invader after invader when\npassing from Egypt to Palestine has taken Gaza in his way. It is still\nthe trade route to Egypt, along which the telegraph line runs. It was\nin the days of St. Philip the direct road for travellers like the\nEthiopian eunuch, from Jerusalem to the Nile and the Red Sea. This man\nwas seeking his home in Central Africa, which he could reach either by\nthe Nile or by the sea, and was travelling therefore along the road\nfrom Jerusalem to Gaza. The Acts, again, distinguishes one particular\nroad. There were then, and there are still, two great roads leading\nfrom Jerusalem to Gaza, one a more northern road, which ran through\nvillages and cultivated land as it does to this day. The other was a\ndesert road, through districts inhabited then as now by the wandering\nArabs of the desert alone. Travellers have often remarked on the local\naccuracy of the angel's words when directing Philip to a road which\nwould naturally be taken only by a man attended by a considerable body\nof servants able to ward off attack, and which was specially suitable,\nby its lonely character, for those prolonged conversations which must\nhave passed between the eunuch and his teacher. Cannot we see,\nhowever, a still more suggestive and prophetic reason for the heavenly\ndirection? In these early efforts of the Apostles and their\nsubordinates we read nothing of missions towards the east. All their\nevangelistic operations lay, in later times, towards the north and\nnorth-west, Damascus, Antioch, Syria, and Asia Minor, while in these\nearlier days they evangelised Samaria, which was largely pagan, and\nthen worked down towards Gaza and C\u00e6sarea and the Philistine country,\nwhich were the strongholds of Gentile and European influence,--the\nChurch indicated in St. Luke's selection of typical events; the\nWestern, the European destiny working strong within. It already\nforetold, vaguely but still surely, that, in the grandest and\nprofoundest sense,\n\n  \"Westward the course of Empire takes its way;\"\n\nthat the Gentile world, not the Jewish, was to furnish the most\nsplendid triumphs to the soldiers of the Cross. Our Lord steadily\nrestrained Himself within the strict bounds of the chosen people,\nbecause His teaching was for them alone. His Apostles already indicate\ntheir wider mission by pressing close upon towns and cities, like\nGaza and C\u00e6sarea, which our Lord never visited, because they were the\nstrongholds and chosen seats of paganism.[161] The providential\ngovernment of God ordering the future of His Church and developing its\ndestinies can thus be traced in the unconscious movements of the\nearliest Christian teachers. Their first missionary efforts in\nPalestine are typical of the great work of the Church in the\nconversion of Europe.\n\n  [161] See Dean Stanley's _Sinai and Palestine_, p. 263, where this\n  thought is further worked out. It is curious that notwithstanding\n  the preaching of St. Philip and St. Peter in its neighbourhood,\n  Gaza remained true to paganism longer than any other city of\n  Palestine. The old Philistine opposition to Israel seems to have\n  perpetuated itself in a pagan opposition to Christianity. Even in\n  the fifth century, when St. Jerome boasted that Bethlehem was so\n  completely Christian that the very ploughmen sang psalms and hymns\n  as they laboured, Gaza still remained devoted to idol-worship. The\n  inhabitants of Gaza, in union with those of Askelon, even rose in\n  rebellion in defence of paganism towards the end of the fourth\n  century (see Neander's _Church History_, iii., 105, Bohn's ed.).\n  An interesting illustration of its obstinate paganism has come to\n  light of late years. There were in Gaza eight public temples of\n  idols, including those of the Sun, Venus, Apollo, Proserpine,\n  Hecate, Fortune, and Marnas, dedicated to the Cretan Jupiter,\n  believed by the people to be more glorious than any other temple\n  in the world. All these temples were destroyed by the influence of\n  the Empress Eudoxia, about A.D. 400; the words of the edict which\n  overthrew the temples of Gaza can be read in the Theodosian Code,\n  book xvi., title x., law 16. The statue of Marnas was then hidden\n  by the pagans in the sand outside the city, where it was\n  discovered in 1880. It is now figured and described in the _Survey\n  of Western Palestine_, Memoirs, vol. iii., p. 254. It is\n  especially interesting to us Christians, as being a statue which\n  was almost certainly seen by St. Philip. See Selden, _De Dis\n  Syris_, p. 215, and Murray's _Handbook for Palestine_, pp. 271-73.\n\nV. St. Philip was brought from Samaria, in the centre, to the Gaza\nroad leading from Jerusalem to the coast; and why? Simply in order\nthat he might preach the Gospel to one solitary man, the eunuch who\nwas treasurer to Candace, Queen of the Ethiopians. Here again we have\nanother of those representative facts which are set before us in the\nearlier portion of this book. On the day of Pentecost, Jews from all\nparts of the Roman Empire, and from the countries bordering upon the\neast of that Empire, Parthians, Medes, Elamites, and Arabians, came in\ncontact with Christianity. Philip had ministered in Samaria to another\nbranch of the circumcision, but Africa, outside the Empire at least,\nhad as yet no representative among the firstfruits of the cross. But\nnow the prophecy of the sixty-eighth Psalm was to be fulfilled, and\n\"Ethiopia was to stretch out her hands unto God.\" We have the\nassurance of St. Paul himself that the sixty-eighth Psalm was a\nprophecy of the ascension of Christ and the outpouring of the Holy\nGhost. In Eph. iv. 8 he writes, quoting from the eighteenth verse,\n\"Wherefore He saith, when He ascended up on high, He led captivity\ncaptive, and gave gifts unto men.\" And then he proceeds to enumerate\nthe various offices of the apostolic ministry, with their blessed\ntidings of peace and salvation, as the gifts of the Spirit which God\nhad bestowed through the ascension of Jesus Christ. And now, in order\nthat no part of the known world might want its Jewish representative,\nwe have the conversion of this eunuch, who, as coming from Ethiopia,\nwas regarded in those times as intimately associated with India.\n\nLet us see, moreover, what we are told concerning this typical African\nconvert. He was an Ethiopian by birth, though he may have been of\nJewish descent, or perhaps more probably a proselyte, and thus an\nevidence of Jewish zeal for Jehovah. He was an eunuch, and treasurer\nof Candace, Queen of the Ethiopians. He was like Daniel and the three\nHebrew children in the court of the Chald\u00e6an monarch. He had utilised\nhis Jewish genius and power of adaptation so well that he had risen\nto high position. The African queen may have learned, too, as Darius\ndid, to trust his Jewish faith and depend upon a man whose conduct was\nregulated by Divine law and principle. This power of the Jewish race\nleading them to high place amid foreign nations and in alien courts\nhas been manifested in their history from the earliest times. Moses,\nMordecai and Esther, the Jews in Babylon, were types and prophecies of\nthe greatness which has awaited their descendants scattered among the\nGentiles in our own time. This eunuch was treasurer of Candace, Queen\nof the Ethiopians. Here again we find another illustration of the\nhistorical and geographical accuracy of the Acts of the Apostles. We\nlearn from several contemporary geographers that the kingdom of Mero\u00eb\nin Central Africa was ruled for centuries by a line of female\nsovereigns whose common title was Candace, as Pharaoh was that of the\nEgyptian monarchs.[162] There were, as we have already pointed out,\nlarge Jewish colonies in the neighbourhood of Southern Arabia and all\nalong the coast of the Red Sea. It was very natural, then, that\nCandace should have obtained the assistance of a clever Jew from one\nof these settlements. A question has been raised, indeed, whether the\neunuch was a Jew at all, and some have regarded him as the first\nGentile convert. The Acts of the Apostles, however, seems clear enough\non this point. Cornelius is plainly put forward as the typical case\nwhich decided the question of the admission of the Gentiles to the\nbenefits of the covenant of grace. Our history gives not the faintest\nhint that any such question was even distantly involved in the\nconversion and baptism of the Ethiopian. Nay, rather by telling us\nthat he had come to Jerusalem for the purpose of worshipping God, it\nindicates that he felt himself bound, as far as he could, to discharge\nthe duty of visiting the Holy City and offering personal worship there\nonce at least in his lifetime. Then, too, we are told of his\nemployment when Philip found him. \"He was returning, and sitting in\nhis chariot read Esaias the prophet.\" His attention may have been\ncalled to this portion of Holy Scripture during his visit to the\ntemple, where he may have come in contact with the Apostles or with\nsome other adherents of the early Church. At any rate he was employing\nhis time in devout pursuits, he was making a diligent use of the means\nof grace so far as he knew them; and then God in the course of His\nprovidence opened out fresh channels of light and blessing, according\nto that pregnant saying of our Lord, \"If any man will do God's will,\nhe shall know of the doctrine.\" The soul that is in spiritual\nperplexity or darkness need not and ought not to content itself with\napathy, despair, or idleness. Difficulties will assault us on every\nside so long as we remain here below. We cannot escape from them\nbecause our minds are finite and limited. And some are ready to make\nthese difficulties an excuse for postponing or neglecting all thoughts\nconcerning religion. But quite apart from the difficulties of\nreligion, there are abundant subjects on which God gives us the\nfullest and plainest light. Let it be ours, like the Ethiopian eunuch,\nto practise God's will so far as He reveals it, and then, in His own\ngood time, fuller revelations will be granted, and we too shall\nexperience, as this Ethiopian did, the faithfulness of His own\npromise, \"Unto the righteous there ariseth up light in the darkness.\"\nThe eunuch read the prophet Esaias as he travelled, according to the\nmaxim of the rabbis that \"one who is on a journey and without a\ncompanion should employ his thoughts on the study of the law.\" He was\nreading the Scriptures aloud, too, after the manner of Orientals; and\nthus seeking diligently to know the Divine will, God vouchsafed to him\nby the ministry of St. Philip that fuller light which he still grants,\nin some way or other, to every one who diligently follows Him.\n\n  [162] See the article \"Mero\u00eb\" in Smith's _Dictionary of Greek and\n  Roman Geography_, for a long account of the land whence the eunuch\n  came.\n\nAnd then we have set forth the results of the eunuch's communion with\nthe heaven-sent messenger. There was no miracle wrought to work\nconviction. St. Philip simply displayed that spiritual power which\nevery faithful servant of Christ may gain in some degree. He opened\nthe Scriptures and taught the saving doctrine of Christ so effectually\nthat the soul of the eunuch, naturally devout and craving for the\ndeeper life of God, recognised the truth of the revelation.\nChristianity was for the Ethiopian its own best evidence, because he\nfelt that it answered to the wants and yearnings of his spirit. We are\nnot told what the character of St. Philip's discourse was. But we are\ninformed what the great central subject of his discourse was. It was\nJesus. This topic was no narrow one. We can gather from other passages\nin the Acts what was the substance of the teaching bestowed by the\nmissionaries of the Cross upon those converted by them.[163] He must\nhave set forth the historic facts which are included in the Apostles'\nCreed, the incarnation, the miracles, death, resurrection, and\nascension of Christ, and the institution of the sacrament of baptism\nas the means of entering into the Church. This we conclude from the\neunuch's question to Philip, \"See, here is water; what doth hinder me\nto be baptized?\" Assuredly Philip must have taught him the appointment\nof baptism by Christ; else what would have led the eunuch to propound\nsuch a request? Baptism having been granted in response to this\nrequest, the eunuch proceeded on his homeward journey, rejoicing in\nthat felt sense of peace and joy and spiritual satisfaction which true\nreligion imparts; while Philip is removed to another field of labour,\nwhere God has other work for him to do. He evangelised all through the\nPhilistine country, preaching in all the cities till he came to\nC\u00e6sarea, where in later years he was to do a work of permanent benefit\nfor the whole Church, by affording St. Luke the information needful\nfor the composition of the Acts of the Apostles.[164]\n\n  [163] Justin Martyr's _Dialogue_ with Trypho the Jew was written\n  about a hundred years after the eunuch's conversion. It is a good\n  specimen of the methods adopted by the early Church in dealing\n  with the Jews. St. Philip's teaching was doubtless of much the\n  same kind. Justin upheld the application to Christ and its\n  fulfilment in Him alone of the fifty-third of Isaiah, repeatedly\n  quoting large portions of it, in the _Dialogue_, as, for instance,\n  in chap. xiii. The apology of St. Stephen furnished the model upon\n  which all subsequent missionaries to the Jews framed their\n  arguments. They all dealt largely with the transitory and typical\n  character of the Levitical law. The apologies addressed to the\n  Gentiles were quite different, as was natural. They dealt with the\n  true nature of God, the conceptions men ought to form of Him, and\n  the immoralities of the pagan deities. The newly-discovered\n  _Apology_ of Aristides, which I have described in the preface,\n  dating from about 124 A.D., set a fashion which we find reproduced\n  in Justin Martyr, Tatian's _Oration to the Greeks_, and in\n  Tertullian's Apology and Address, _Ad Nationes_. The moral proofs\n  of Christianity and its adaptation to the soul's wants are their\n  leading topics. I have treated more of this point in the preface.\n\n  [164] The eunuch's name, according to Ethiopian tradition, was\n  Indich or Indicus. He is believed by the Abyssinians to have\n  converted Queen Candace, and then to have departed into India,\n  where he taught in Ceylon. See Ludolf's _History of Ethiopia_,\n  book iii., chaps. i. and ii.; and Bzovius' continuation of\n  Baronius' _Annals_, A.D. 1524, where there is a long\n  correspondence between the pope and the king of Abyssinia in that\n  year. The Abyssinians retain to this day a great many Jewish\n  customs mixed with their Christianity. The Abyssinian tradition is\n  incorrect, however. Modern Abyssinia is not the same as the\n  ancient Mero\u00eb. The conversion of Abyssinia is due to the labours\n  of a shipwrecked merchant in the time of St. Athanasius, and\n  derived its faith from Egypt. The Coptic Church retains still many\n  Jewish rites. See \"Ethiopian Church\" in _Dict. Christ. Biog._,\n  vol. ii.\n\nVI. Let us in conclusion note one other point. Our readers will have\nnoticed that we have said nothing concerning the reply of Philip to\nthe eunuch's question, \"What doth hinder me to be baptized?\" The\nAuthorized Version then inserts ver. 37, which runs thus: \"And Philip\nsaid, If thou believest with all thy heart, thou mayest. And he\nanswered and said, I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of God.\"\nWhile if we take up the Revised Version we shall find that the\nRevisers have quite omitted this verse in the text, placing it in the\nmargin, with a note stating that some ancient authorities insert it\nwholly or in part. This verse is now given up by all critics as an\nintegral part of the original text, and yet it is a very ancient\ninterpolation, being found in quotations from the Acts as far back as\nthe second century. Probably its insertion came about somehow thus,\nmuch the same as in the case of John v. 4, to which we have already\nreferred in this lecture. It was originally written upon the margin of\na manuscript by some diligent student of this primitive history.\nManuscripts were not copied in the manner we usually think. A scribe\ndid not place a manuscript before him and then slowly transcribe it,\nbut a single reader recited the original in a scriptorium or\ncopying-room, while a number of writers rapidly followed his words.\nHence a marginal note on a single manuscript might easily be\nincorporated in a number of copies, finding a permanent place in a\ntext upon which it was originally a mere pious reflection. Regarding\nthis thirty-seventh verse, however, not as a portion of the text\nwritten by St. Luke, but as a second-century comment or note on the\ntext, it shows us what the practice of the next age after the Apostles\nwas. A profession of faith in Christ was made by the persons brought\nto baptism, and probably these words, \"I believe that Jesus Christ is\nthe Son of God,\" was the local form of the baptismal creed wherever\nthis note was written. Justin Martyr in his first _Apology_, chap. 61,\nintimates that such a profession of belief was an essential part of\nbaptism, and this form, \"I believe that Jesus Christ is the Son of\nGod,\" may have been the baptismal formula used in the ritual appointed\nfor these occasions. Some persons indeed have thought that this short\nstatement represented the creed of the Church of the second century.\nThis raises a question which would require a much longer treatment\nthan we can now bestow upon it. Caspari, an eminent Swedish\ntheologian, has discussed this point at great length in a work which\nthe English student will find reviewed and analysed in an article by\nDr. Salmon published in the _Contemporary Review_ for August 1878,\nwhere that learned writer comes to the conclusion that the substance\nof the Apostles' Creed dates back practically to the time of the\nApostles. And now, as I am concluding this volume, an interesting\nconfirmation of this view comes to us from an unexpected quarter. The\n_Apology_ of Aristides was a defence of Christianity composed earlier\neven than those of Justin Martyr. Eusebius fixes the date of it to the\nyear 124 or 125 A.D. It was at any rate one of the earliest Christian\nwritings outside the Canon. It has been long lost to the Christian\nworld. We knew nothing of its contents, and were only aware of its\nformer existence from the pages of the Church History of Eusebius. Two\nyears ago it was found by Professor J. Rendel Harris, in Syriac, in\nthe Convent of St. Catharine on Mount Sinai, and has just been\npublished this month of May 1891 by the Cambridge University Press. It\nis a most interesting document of early Christian times, showing us\nhow the first Apologists defended the faith and assailed the\nsuperstitions of paganism. Professor Harris has added notes to it\nwhich are of very great value. He points out the weak points in\npaganism which the first Christians used specially to assail.\nAristides' _Apology_ is of peculiar value in this aspect. It shows us\nhow the first generation after the last Apostle was wont to deal with\nthe false gods of Greece, Rome, and Egypt. It is, however, of special\nimportance as setting forth from a new and unexpected source how the\nearly Christians regarded their own faith, how they viewed their own\nChristianity, and in what formularies they embodied their belief.\nProfessor Harris confirms Dr. Salmon's contention set forth in the\narticle to which we have referred. In the time of Aristides the\nChristians of Athens, for Aristides was an Athenian philosopher who\nhad accepted Christianity, were at one with those of Rome and with the\nfollowers of Catholic Christianity ever since. Aristides wrote\naccording to Eusebius in 124 A.D., according to Professor Harris in\nthe earliest days of Antoninus Pius, that is, before 140 A.D.; but\nstill we can extract from his _Apology_ all the statements of the\nApostles' Creed in a formal shape. Thus Professor Harris restores the\nCreed as professed in the time of Aristides, that is, the generation\nafter St. John, and sets it forth as follows:--\n\n    We believe in one God Almighty,\n    Maker of Heaven and Earth:\n    And in Jesus Christ His Son,\n\n      *   *   *   *   *\n\n    Born of the Virgin Mary.\n\n      *   *   *   *   *\n\n    He was pierced by the Jews,\n    He died and was buried:\n    The third day He rose again:\n    He ascended into Heaven.\n\n      *   *   *   *   *\n\n    He is about to come to judge.[165]\n\n      *   *   *   *   *\n\n  [165] _Texts and Studies_, edited by J. A. Robinson, M.A.\n  (Cambridge: University Press, 1891). There are several passages in\n  Justin's _Dialogue_ with Trypho which seem to be extracts from the\n  primitive Creed. Thus in chap. xvii. we read the following words\n  of Justin to Trypho: \"For after you had crucified Him ... when you\n  knew that He had risen from the dead and ascended into heaven.\" In\n  chap. xxxviii. Trypho objects to Justin: \"For you utter many\n  blasphemies, in that you seek to persuade us that this crucified\n  Man was with Moses and Aaron, and spoke to them in the pillar of\n  the cloud; that He became man, was crucified, and ascended up to\n  heaven, and comes again to earth and ought to be worshipped.\" The\n  date of the _Apology_ of Aristides is fixed by the Armenian\n  version of the _Chronicle_ of Eusebius at 124 A.D. The _Paschal\n  Chronicle_ apparently assigns it to 134 A.D.\n\nThis _Apology_ of Aristides is a most valuable contribution to\nChristian evidence, and raises high hopes as to what we may yet\nrecover when the treasures of the East are explored. The _Diatessaron_\nof Tatian was a wondrous find, but the recovery of the long-lost\n_Apology_ of Aristides endows us with a still more ancient document,\nbringing us back close upon the very days of the Apostles. As this\ndiscovery has only been published when these pages are finally passing\nthrough the press, I must reserve a farther notice of it for the\npreface to this volume.\n\n\n\n\nINDEX.\n\n\n  Abercius, St., vi.\n\n  _Acta Sanctorum_, 111, 162.\n\n  _Acts of the Apostles_, authenticity of, 11.\n\n  ---- authorship of, 8, 11.\n\n  ---- title of, 1.\n\n  Altus, centurion, 110.\n\n  Ananias and his wife, chap, xi., 225-228.\n\n  Antinomians, 134.\n\n  _Apocryphal Acts_, 2.\n\n  ---- _Gospels_, 79.\n\n  Apollinarian heresy, 124.\n\n  Apostles' Creed, 417.\n\n  _Apostolic constitutions_, 201.\n\n  Arian heresy, 124.\n\n  Aristides' _Apology_, see Preface and 400, 419.\n\n  Aristotle's _Ethics_, 132, 298.\n\n  Arnold, Dr., 306.\n\n  Arnold, Matthew, _Sonnets_, 151, 178.\n\n  _Ascension of Isaiah, The_, 119.\n\n  Assumption of B. V. Mary, 68.\n\n  _Assumption of Moses, The_, 119.\n\n  Athanasius, St., 270, 291, 416.\n\n  Augustine, St., _Letters_, 195, 242, 386.\n\n\n  Barcochba, 157.\n\n  Barlaam and Joasaph, viii.\n\n  Barnabas, early life of, 218.\n\n  ---- personal appearance of, 219.\n\n  Baxter, 134, 137.\n\n  Bede, _Eccles. Hist._, 294.\n\n  Beveridge, 134.\n\n  Bingham, _Antiquities_, 67, 386.\n\n  Bollandists, 111, 162.\n\n  Brady, Tate and, _Psalms_, 381.\n\n  Brownlow and Northcote, _Roma Sotteranea_, 112.\n\n  Buddhism, 400.\n\n  Bull, 134.\n\n  Bunting, Jabez, 3.\n\n  Burgess, Rev. H. W., LL.D., xiii.\n\n  Burnet, Bishop, _Commentary on the Thirty-Nine Articles_, 192.\n\n  Butler, Bishop, 18.\n\n  Bzovius, _Continuation of Baronius' Annals_, 415.\n\n\n  Calvin, 384.\n\n  Candace, 411, 412.\n\n  Capes, Rev. W. W., M.A., _The Age of the Antonines_, 154.\n\n  Cardinals, College of, 280.\n\n  Cato, _de Re Rustica_, 58.\n\n  Cave, _Lives of Fathers_, 219.\n\n  Charteris, Dr., 11.\n\n  Chrysostom, St., 113.\n\n  Cicero, _Tusc. Disp._, 56, 298.\n\n  Cistercians, 174.\n\n  Clarke, Adam, 3.\n\n  Clement of Alexandria, 286, 344.\n\n  Clement of Rome, 3, 273, 280, 400.\n\n  Clementine literature, 79.\n\n  Coke, Thomas, 3.\n\n  Columbanus, St., 7.\n\n  Confirmation, rite of, chaps. xviii., xix.\n\n  _Contemporary Review_, 199, 359, 417.\n\n  Conybeare and Howson, _Life and Epistles of St. Paul_, 217.\n\n  Coptic Church, 416.\n\n  Cornelius \u00e0 Lapide, 242.\n\n  Court of the Gentiles, 158.\n\n  Crisp, Tobias, Dr., _Sermons_, 134.\n\n  Crispin, St., 161.\n\n  Cyprian, St., 386.\n\n  Cyprus, 216.\n\n  Cyril, St., of Jerusalem, 66.\n\n\n  Darby, J. N., 382.\n\n  David, tomb of, opened, 125.\n\n  Deacons, choice and work of, chaps. xiii., xiv.\n\n  De Vogu\u00eb, _Le Temple de J\u00e9rusalem_, 158, 165.\n\n  _Dictionary of Christian Biography_, xi, 2, 16, 25, 32, 65, 79,\n        112, 120, 125, 157, 239, 257, 259, 270, 274, 342.\n\n  ---- ---- _Antiquities_, 144.\n\n  ---- ---- _Greek and Roman Geography_, 412.\n\n  _Didache_, 97, 139, 149, 377.\n\n  Douket, in _Rev. des Quest. Hist._, viii.\n\n\n  Ebionites, 120.\n\n  Emania, 110.\n\n  Egypt, 38.\n\n  _Enoch, Book of_, 25, 28, 119.\n\n  Epiphanius, _on Weights and Measures_, 66.\n\n  Ethiopian eunuch, chap. xx.\n\n  Eusebius, _Chronicle of_, vii, 65, 419.\n\n  ---- _Hist. Eccles._, viii, 9, 79, 102, 156, 323, 344, 418.\n\n  Eutychianism, 48, 314.\n\n  _Expositor, The_, 359.\n\n\n  Fabricius, _Cod. Apoc._, 79.\n\n  ---- _Cod. Pseud. V. T._, 25.\n\n  _False Decretals_, 373.\n\n  Fay\u00fbm MSS., 359.\n\n  Ferguson, Sir S., _Lays of Western Gael_, 110.\n\n  _Fingal and its Churches_, 6.\n\n  Fisher, _Marrow of Modern Divinity_, 134.\n\n  Fox, George, 185.\n\n  Franciscans, 163.\n\n  Friends, Society of, 185, 186.\n\n  Fuller, Rev. J. M., 120.\n\n\n  Gamaliel, 232-242.\n\n  Gate of Temple (Chulda), 158.\n\n  Gaza, 401.\n\n  Gibbon, _History_, 57.\n\n  Golden Gate, 158.\n\n  Goulburn, Dean, _Acts of the Deacons_, v., 404.\n\n  Gwynn, Dr., 2.\n\n\n  Hadrian, Emperor, 66.\n\n  Hall, S. C., 5.\n\n  Harnack, _Texte u. Untersuch._, x, xi.\n\n  Harris, Professor, vii, viii, 418.\n\n  Helena, Empress, 66.\n\n  Herzog, _Encyclop\u00e6dia_, 137, 181, 278.\n\n  Hippolytus, vii.\n\n  Hook, Dean, 381.\n\n  Howard, John, 291.\n\n  Hyreanus, 125.\n\n\n  Indich, 415.\n\n  Iren\u00e6us, 13, 276, 286.\n\n  ---- _Adv. H\u00e6r._, 121.\n\n  Irish longevity, 5.\n\n  Irvingites, 198.\n\n\n  Jason and Papiscus, xi.\n\n  Jerome, St., x, xii, 6, 110, 194, 386.\n\n  Jesuits, 152.\n\n  John, St., _Acts of_, 2.\n\n  Jortin, 232.\n\n  Josephus, _Antiqq._, 125, 174, 198, 217, 235, 236, 238,\n        251, 274, 354.\n\n  ---- _Wars_, 125, 158, 198.\n\n  _Jubilees, Book of_, 25, 28.\n\n  Judas Iscariot, 80, 81.\n\n  Julian the Apostate, 393.\n\n  Justin Martyr, ix, x, xi, 275, 355, 400, 414, 417.\n\n\n  Keble, John, _Christian Year_, 21, 227, 324, 368.\n\n  Kingsley, Charles, 206.\n\n  Kitto, _Bib. Cyclop._, 25, 181, 278, 282.\n\n\n  Le Bas and Waddington, _Voyage Arch\u00e9olog._, 270.\n\n  Le Blant, 297.\n\n  Leslie, Charles, _Short and Easy Method with the Deists_, 77.\n\n  Lewin, _Fasti Sacri_, 196, 248.\n\n  Liddon, Canon, _University Sermons and Bampton Lectures_,\n        55, 340.\n\n  Lightfoot, Bishop, _Apostolic Fathers_, 274.\n\n  ---- ---- _Clement of Rome_, 166, 335.\n\n  ---- ---- _Essays_, 268.\n\n  ---- ---- _Supernatural Religion_, 239.\n\n  ---- ---- _Commentaries on Epistles_, v, 195, 269, 376.\n\n  Lightfoot, Dr. J., _Hor\u00e6 Hebraic\u00e6_, 64, 84, 97, 125, 147, 158,\n        177, 181, 182, 233, 260, 272, 333, 335.\n\n  Lipsius, Professor, 25.\n\n  Locke, J., 402.\n\n  Lucian, 278.\n\n  Ludolf, _Hist. of Ethiopia_, 415.\n\n  Luke, St., authorship of Gospel, 10.\n\n  _Lyons, Epistle of the Church of_, 8.\n\n\n  Mahometanism, 314, 402.\n\n  Malalas, _Chronographia_, 342.\n\n  Marcion, 10, 270.\n\n  Marnas, the God of Gaza, 410.\n\n  Martial, _Epigrams_, 312.\n\n  _Martyrologium Romanum_, 325.\n\n  Matthias, election of, 73, 77, 78, 79.\n\n  Maurice, F. D., 206.\n\n  Mechitarites, viii.\n\n  Mede, Joseph, _Works of_, 64, 67, 84.\n\n  Mero\u00eb, 412.\n\n  Metaphrastes, Simeon, vi, 218.\n\n  Meyer on the Acts, 98, 217, 230.\n\n  Mill, J. S., _Logic_, 132.\n\n  Milles, Bishop, _Works of St. Cyril_, 67.\n\n  Milman, _History of the Jews_, 217.\n\n  Mithraism, 32.\n\n  Mivart, St. George, _Genesis of Species_, 60.\n\n  Moll, Dr. A., on _Hypnotism_, 100, 123, 230, 360.\n\n  Montanists, 154.\n\n  _Monumenta Franciscana_, 163.\n\n  _Muratorian Fragment_, 7.\n\n\n  Nelson, _Fasts and Festivals_, 79.\n\n  Neo-C\u00e6sarea, 266.\n\n  Nestorianism, 48.\n\n  New Testament, Canon of, 16.\n\n  Newman, Cardinal, 381, 206.\n\n  Newton, Robert, 3.\n\n  Nicanor, Gate of, 158.\n\n  Nicodemus, 240.\n\n  Nicolas, proselyte of Antioch, 286.\n\n  Northcote, _Epitaphs of the Catacombs_, 112.\n\n  Novatianus, 237.\n\n  Novatian heresy, 237.\n\n  Novatus, 237.\n\n\n  Origen, 79, 101, 400.\n\n  Otto, _Corp. Apologet._, x.\n\n  Overbeck, x.\n\n\n  Palmer, William, 237.\n\n  Pant\u00e6nus, 400.\n\n  Papias, 80.\n\n  Papiscus, xi.\n\n  Patrick, St., _Confession_, xii.\n\n  ---- his family, 281.\n\n  Paul, St., _Acts of_, 2.\n\n  ---- at Thessalonica, 37.\n\n  Peregrinus Proteus, 278.\n\n  Peter, St., _Acts of_, 2.\n\n  ---- character of, 71.\n\n  Phelps, W. E. C., xiii.\n\n  Philip, St., chaps. xvii.-xx.\n\n  Philo, 30.\n\n  Photius, vi.\n\n  Pilate, Pontius, 250.\n\n  Pitra, Card., _Analecta Sacra_, viii, 240.\n\n  Pliny, _Letters_, 108, 180, 274, 276.\n\n  Plymouth Brethren, 133, 198, 382.\n\n  Polycarp, 3, 274.\n\n  ---- teaching of, 14.\n\n  Pothinus, 9.\n\n  Powerscourt, Lady, _Letters and Papers of_, 198.\n\n  Prudentius, 158.\n\n\n  Quadratus, _Apology of_, vii, viii, ix.\n\n  Quaresmius, Fr., _Terr\u00e6 Sanct\u00e6 Elucidatio_, 67.\n\n  Quinctilian, 298.\n\n\n  Ramsay, Professor, _Historical Geog. of Asia Minor_, 103.\n\n  ---- in _Jour. Hellenic Studies_, vi.\n\n  Reformers, 152.\n\n  R\u00e9nan, viii, 53.\n\n  _Revue Arch\u00e9ologique_, 175.\n\n  Robinson, J. A., _Texts and Studies_, 419.\n\n  Routh, Dr., _Reliqui\u00e6, Sacr\u00e6_, 81.\n\n\n  Salmon, Dr., _Introduction to N.T._, 2, 8, 10, 11, 69, 79, 358.\n\n  ---- in _Cont. Review_, 417.\n\n  ---- _Sermons_, 135.\n\n  Sanday, Dr., 10.\n\n  Savings Banks, 205.\n\n  Schaff, _Theological Encyclop\u00e6dia_, v, 296.\n\n  Schwegler, x.\n\n  Scillitan Martyrs, 15.\n\n  Second coming of Christ, discussion about, 36.\n\n  Selden, _De Synedriis_, 181, 278, 295.\n\n  _Shepherd of Hermas_, 97, 382.\n\n  Shushan Gate, 158.\n\n  Simon Magus, chaps. xvii., xix.\n\n  Simony, 394.\n\n  Solomon, _Psalms_ of, 25.\n\n  Speratus, St., 15.\n\n  Stanley, Dean, _Sinai and Palestine_, 354.\n\n  Stephen, St., chaps. xiv., xv., xvi.\n\n  Sternhold and Hopkins, _Psalms_, 381.\n\n  Stewart and Tait, _The Unseen Universe_, 47.\n\n  Stillingfleet, 134, 137.\n\n  Stoics, 153, 342.\n\n  Stokes, G. T., _Celtic Church_, 111, 282, 323.\n\n  ---- ---- _Norman Church_, 163, 282.\n\n  _Survey of Western Palestine_, 331.\n\n\n  Tacitus, _Annals_, 58, 130.\n\n  _Talmud_, 175.\n\n  Tatian, vii, 65, 400, 415, 419.\n\n  Taylor, Jeremy, _Holy Living_, 89.\n\n  Telemachus, St., 56.\n\n  Tertullian, 3, 7, 56, 109, 381, 382, 384, 386, 415.\n\n  ---- _De Carne Christi_, 121.\n\n  _Texts and Studies_, viii, 419.\n\n  Theodoret, _Eccles. Hist._, 57.\n\n  Theodosian Code, 348.\n\n  Theophylact, 81.\n\n  Thomas, St., _Acts_ of, 2.\n\n  Tischendorf, _Acta Apoc._, 79.\n\n  Tractarian movement, 237.\n\n  _Transactions of the Society of Bibl. Arch._, 166, 202.\n\n  Trench, Archbishop, _Notes on the Parables_, 47.\n\n  ---- ---- _Notes on the Miracles_, 405.\n\n  _Twelve Apostles, Teaching of_ (see Didache), 97, 139, 149, 377.\n\n\n  _Unseen Universe, The_, by Messrs. Stewart and Tait, 47.\n\n\n  Vatican Council, 265.\n\n  Vaughan, C. J., D.D., _The Church of the First Days_, 226, 317.\n\n  Victor I., Pope, 14.\n\n\n  Watson, Richard, 3.\n\n  Wesley, John, 3, 137, 291, 381.\n\n  Wilberforce, William, 291.\n\n  Williams, Dr., 134, 135, 137.\n\n\n  Zeller, _Acts of the Apostles_, 230, 326.","title":"The Expositor's Bible: The Acts of the Apostles, Vol. 1","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":135732}