{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_42303/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_42303","id":"gutenberg_42303","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/42303","summary":null,"tags":["Bible. Acts -- Commentaries","Bible. Acts -- Criticism, interpretation, etc.","Category: History - Religious","Category: Religion/Spirituality"],"text":"THE EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE\n\n  EDITED BY THE REV.\n  W. ROBERTSON NICOLL, M.A., LL.D.\n  _Editor of \"The Expositor\"_\n\n\n\n\n  THE ACTS OF THE APOSTLES\n\n  BY\n\n  G. T. STOKES, D.D.\n\n  _VOLUME II_\n\n  NEW YORK\n  A. C. ARMSTRONG AND SON\n  51 EAST TENTH STREET\n  1892\n\n\n\n\nTHE EXPOSITOR'S BIBLE\n\n_Crown 8vo, cloth, price $1 50c. each vol._\n\n\nFIRST SERIES, 1887-8.\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\n\nSECOND SERIES, 1888-9.\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.\n\n\nTHIRD SERIES, 1889-90.\n\n  Judges and Ruth.\n      By Rev. R. A. WATSON, D.D.\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\n\nFOURTH SERIES, 1890-1.\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 Prof. STOKES, D.D. Vol. I.\n\n\nFIFTH SERIES, 1891-2.\n\n  The Psalms.\n      By A. MACLAREN, D.D. Vol. I.\n\n  1 and 2 Thessalonians.\n      By JAS. DENNEY, B.D.\n\n  The Book of Job.\n      By R. A. WATSON, D.D.\n\n  Ephesians.\n      By Prof. G. G. FINDLAY, B.A.\n\n  The Gospel of St. John.\n      By Prof. M. DODS, D.D. Vol. II.\n\n  The Acts of the Apostles.\n      By Prof. STOKES, D.D. Vol. II.\n\n\nSIXTH SERIES, 1892-3.\n\n  Philippians.\n      By Principal RAINY, D.D.\n\n  1 Kings.\n      By Ven. Archdeacon FARRAR.\n\n  Joshua.\n      By Prof. W. G. BLAIKIE, D.D.\n\n  The Psalms.\n      By A. MACLAREN, D.D. Vol. II.\n\n  Daniel.\n      By Prof. FULLER, M.A.\n\n  Ezra, Nehemiah, Esther.\n      By Prof. W. F. ADENEY, M.A.\n\n\nNEW YORK: A. C. ARMSTRONG & SON, 51 EAST TENTH STREET.\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\n  _VOLUME II_\n\n  NEW YORK\n  A. C. ARMSTRONG AND SON\n  51 EAST TENTH STREET\n  1892\n\n\n\n\nPREFACE.\n\n\nThe following volume terminates my survey and exposition of the Acts\nof the Holy Apostles. I have fully explained in the body of this work\nthe reasons which led me to discuss the latter portion of that book\nmore briefly than its earlier chapters. I did this of set purpose. The\nlatter chapters of Acts are occupied to a great extent with the work\nof St. Paul during a comparatively brief period, while the first\ntwenty chapters cover a space of well-nigh thirty years. The riot in\nJerusalem and a few speeches at C\u00e6sarea occupy the larger portion of\nthe later narrative, and deal very largely with circumstances in St.\nPaul's life, his conversion and mission to the Gentiles, of which the\nearlier portion of this volume treats at large. Upon these topics I\nhad nothing fresh to say, and was therefore necessarily obliged to\nrefer my readers to pages previously written. I do not think, however,\nthat I have omitted any topic or passage suitable to the purposes of\nthe _Expositor's Bible_. Some may desiderate longer notices of German\ntheories concerning the origin and character of the Acts. But, then,\nan expositor's Bible is not intended to deal at length with critical\ntheories. Critical commentaries and works like Dr. Salmon's\n_Introduction to the New Testament_ take such subjects into\nconsideration and discuss them fully, omitting all mere exposition. My\nduty is exposition, and the supply or indication of material suitable\nfor expository purposes. If I had gone into the endless theories\nsupplied by German ingenuity to explain what seems to us the simplest\nand plainest matters of fact demanding no explanation whatsoever, I am\nafraid there would have been little space left for exposition, and my\nreaders would have been excessively few. Those who are interested in\nsuch discussions, which are simply endless, and will last as long as\nman's fancy and imagination continue to flourish, will find ample\nsatisfaction in the eighteenth chapter of Dr. Salmon's _Introduction_.\nPerhaps I had better notice one point urged by him, as an illustration\nof the critical methods of English common sense. German critics have\ntried to make out that the Acts were written in the second century in\norder to establish a parallel between St. Peter and St. Paul when men\nwished to reconcile and unite in one common body the Pauline and\nPetrine parties. This is the view set forth at length by Zeller in his\nwork on the Acts, vol. ii., p. 278, translated and published in the\nseries printed some years ago under the auspices of the Theological\nTranslation Fund. Dr. Salmon's reply seems to me conclusive, as\ncontained in the following passage, _l.c._, p. 336: \"What I think\nproves conclusively that the making a parallel between Peter and Paul\nwas not an idea present to the author's mind, is the absence of the\nnatural climax of such a parallel--the story of the martyrdom of both\nthe Apostles. Very early tradition makes both Peter and Paul close\ntheir lives by martyrdom at Rome--the place where Rationalist critics\ngenerally believe the Acts to have been written. The stories told in\ntolerably ancient times in that Church which venerated with equal\nhonour the memory of either apostle, represented both as joined in\nharmonious resistance to the impostures of Simon Magus. And though I\nbelieve these stories to be more modern than the latest period to\nwhich any one has ventured to assign the Acts, yet what an opportunity\ndid that part of the story which is certainly ancient--that both\nApostles came to Rome and died there for the faith (Clem. Rom.,\n5)--offer to any one desirous of blotting out the memory of all\ndifferences between the preaching of Peter and Paul, and of setting\nboth on equal pedestals of honour! Just as the names of Ridley and\nLatimer have been united in the memory of the Church of England, and\nno count has been taken of their previous doctrinal differences, in\nthe recollection of their first testimony for their common faith, so\nhave the names of Peter and Paul been constantly bound together by the\nfact that the martyrdom of both has been commemorated on the same day.\nAnd if the object of the author of the Acts had been what has been\nsupposed, it is scarcely credible that he could have missed so obvious\nan opportunity of bringing his book to its most worthy conclusion, by\ntelling how the two servants of Christ--all previous differences, if\nthere had been any, reconciled and forgotten--joined in witnessing a\ngood confession before the tyrant emperor, and encouraged each other\nto steadfastness in endurance to the end.\"\n\nBut though I have not dealt in any formal way with the critical\ntheories urged concerning the Acts, I have taken every opportunity of\npointing out the evidence for its early date and genuine character\nfurnished by that particular line of historical exposition and\nillustration which I have adopted. It will be at once seen how much\nindebted I am in this department to the researches of modern scholars\nand travellers, especially to those of Professor Ramsay, whose long\nresidence and extended travels in Asia Minor have given him special\nadvantages over all other critics. I have made a diligent use of all\nhis writings, so far as they had appeared up to the time of writing,\nand only regret that I was not able to use his paper on St. Paul's\nsecond journey, which appeared in the _Expositor_ for October, after\nthis work had been composed and printed. That article seems to me\nanother admirable illustration of the critical methods used by our own\nhome scholars as contrasted with those current abroad. Professor\nRamsay does not set to work to spin criticisms out of his own\nimagination and elaborate theories out of his own inner consciousness\neven as a spider weaves its web; but he takes the Acts of the\nApostles, compares it with the facts of Asia Minor, its scenery,\nroads, mountains, ruins, and then points out how exactly the text\nanswers to the facts, showing that the author of it wrote at the time\nalleged and must have been an eyewitness of the Apostles' doings.\nWhile again by a similar comparison in the case of the apocryphal acts\nof St. Paul and Thecla he demonstrates how easily a forger fell into\ngrievous mistakes. I do not think a better illustration can be found\nof the difference between sound historical criticism and criticism\nbased on mere imagination than this article by Professor Ramsay.\n\nIn conclusion I ought to explain that I systematically quote the\nFathers whenever I can out of the translations published by Messrs. T.\n& T. Clark, or in the Oxford Library of the Fathers. It would have\nbeen very easy for me to give this book a very learned look by adding\nthe references in Greek or Latin, but I do not think I should have\nthus conduced much to its practical utility. The Fathers are now a\ncollection of works much spoken of, but very little read, and the\nreferences in the original added to theological works are much more\noverlooked than consulted. It would conduce much to a sound knowledge\nof primitive antiquity were the works translated of all the Christian\nwriters who flourished down to the triumph of Christianity. Authors\nwho fill their pages with quotations in Latin and Greek which they do\nnot translate forget one simple fact, that ten or twenty years in a\ncountry parish immersed in its endless details make the Latin and\nGreek of even good scholars somewhat rusty. And if so, what must be\nthe case with those who are not good scholars, or not scholars at all,\nwhether bad or good? I am often surprised noting how much more\nexacting from their readers modern scholars are in this direction than\nour forefathers of two hundred years ago. Let any one, for instance,\ntake up the works composed in English by Hammond or Thorndike\ndiscussing the subject of Episcopacy, and it will be found that in\nevery case when they use a Latin, Greek, or Hebrew quotation while\nthey give the original they always add the translation. Finally I have\nto acknowledge, what every page will show, the great assistance I have\nderived from the Lives of St. Paul written by Archdeacon Farrar, Mr.\nLewin, and Messrs. Conybeare & Howson, and to express a hope that this\nvolume together with the previous one will be found helpful by some as\nthey strive to form a better and truer conception of the manner in\nwhich the Church of the living God was founded and built up amongst\nmen.\n\n  GEORGE T. STOKES.\n\n  ALL SAINTS' VICARAGE, BLACKROCK,\n  _Nov. 4th, 1892_.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS.\n\n\n  CHAPTER I.\n\n  THE TRAINING OF SAUL THE RABBI.\n\n  ACTS vii. 58; xxii. 3.\n\n                                                                  PAGE\n\n  St. Paul's Appearance on the Christian Stage and its\n    Results--The T\u00fcbingen Theory--His Parentage--Birthplace--\n    Testimony of St. Epiphanius--Early Friends--Education--\n    Trade--Gamaliel and his Influence--Evidence of Talmud--\n    Pharisaic Schools--Their Casuistry and Exegesis--Parallel\n    between Hagar and Sarah                                       1-21\n\n  CHAPTER II.\n\n  THE CONVERSION OF THE PERSECUTOR.\n\n  ACTS viii. 3; ix. 1-6.\n\n  Saul of Tarsus and St. Stephen--Saul and the Sanhedrin--\n    Conduct of Saul when Unconverted--Continuity of Judaism\n    and Christianity--Saul and Blasphemy of Christ--Sense of\n    Sin compatible with Sense of Forgiveness--Hooker on the\n    Litany--Jeremy Taylor on Humility--Saul's Mission to\n    Damascus--Domestic Tribunal permitted to the Jews by the\n    Romans--Used against the Men of the Way--Meaning of this\n    expression--Influence of it--Saul's Journey--Scene of\n    Conversion--Lord Lyttelton's _Observations upon St. Paul's\n    Conversion_--Supernatural Accompaniments appropriate\n    to--Apostle's own Narrative--Reflections of the\n    Venerable Bede                                               22-47\n\n  CHAPTER III.\n\n  THE NEW CONVERT AND HIS HUMAN TEACHER.\n\n  ACTS ix. 10, 11.\n\n  Saul and the Vision--Which probably produced Ophthalmia--\n    Portrait of St. Paul--Ananias of Damascus--Straight\n    Street--St. Chrysostom on the Spiritual Greatness of\n    Ananias--Seventeenth-century Travellers in Palestine--\n    Conversation between Jesus Christ and Ananias--Its\n    Theology--Meaning of word Saint--Protest against\n    Antinomianism--St. Paul and title Vas Electionis--And\n    Doctrine of Election--Balance of Doctrine--The New\n    Convert and Prayer                                           48-67\n\n  CHAPTER IV.\n\n  SAUL AND SINAI.\n\n  ACTS ix. 19, 20.\n\n  Visit of Ananias to House of Judas--Christ the True\n    Visitor--Keble's Hymn for Easter Monday--Restoration\n    of Saul's Sight--His Baptism--Language of Ananias--\n    Importance of this fact--Saul's Work in Damascus--\n    Narrative in Acts and in Galatians--Difficulties--\n    Reconciliation--Saul in Arabia--Ancient Explanations\n    of--Discipline of--Value of Seasons of Retirement--Waste\n    of Vital Spiritual Tissues in Activity--Abuse of this\n    Principle in Monasticism--Celtic Monasticism--Saul, the\n    Vas Electionis, trained like Jesus Christ                    68-91\n\n  CHAPTER V.\n\n  THE FIRST GENTILE CONVERT.\n\n  ACTS x. 1-6.\n\n  The Turning-points of Primitive Church History--Conversion\n    of Saul and of Cornelius--Saul's earliest Ministry at\n    Jerusalem--His Escape to Tarsus--St. Peter and Church\n    in Joppa--Temporary Peace after Saul's Conversion--\n    Caligula's attempt to erect his Statue in Jerusalem--St.\n    Peter and Simon the Tanner--Time of Conversion of\n    Cornelius was Providential--Place, C\u00e6sarea-by-the-Sea,\n    Providential--Cornelius, a Roman Centurion--The Legions\n    and Palestine--Modern Authorities confirm the Acts--New\n    Testament and Favourable Estimate of Soldiers--Catholic\n    Nature of Christianity--Value of Discipline--Lessons\n    Taught by Example of Cornelius                              92-114\n\n  CHAPTER VI.\n\n  THE PETRINE VISION AT JOPPA.\n\n  ACTS x. 9-15.\n\n  St. Peter led to Joppa Unconsciously--His Period of\n    Repose--Joppa and Missions to the Gentile World--\n    Jonah--Peter and the Hour of Prayer--Value of Forms--\n    Canonical Hours--Tertullian's Testimony--Nature of\n    Peter's Vision--Conditioned by his Natural State--\n    Exactly suited to Destroy his Prejudices--John\n    Calvin's View--St. Peter at C\u00e6sarea--His Sermon--Not\n    Latitudinarian, as some Think--But Truly Catholic--Peter\n    presupposes some Knowledge of Gospel Facts--Evidence of\n    Resurrection--Necessarily Limited--Unless Course of\n    Human Affairs was to be Upset--And God's Usual Laws set\n    Aside--Outpouring of Holy Ghost on Gentiles--Baptism\n    of Cornelius                                               115-141\n\n  CHAPTER VII.\n\n  THE HARVEST OF THE GENTILES.\n\n  ACTS xi. 26.\n\n  Reception of News of Gentile Conversion at Jerusalem--\n    Debate and Strife with St. Peter--The Early Church\n    Knew Nothing of the Privilegium Petri--Fable of Pope\n    Marcellinus--Origin of Antiochene Church--Foundation\n    of Antioch--Scenery and History--Orators and Water\n    Supply--Arrival of Barnabas and of Saul--Invention\n    of the Name Christians--Remarks of Archbishop Trench--\n    The Prophet Agabus and the Outgoings of Charity            142-163\n\n  CHAPTER VIII.\n\n  THE DEFEAT OF PRIDE.\n\n  ACTS xii. 1-3, 23, 24.\n\n  Contact of Sacred and Secular History in this Chapter--\n    Story of Herod Agrippa--Illustration of Principle of\n    Heredity--First Martyrdom among Apostles--Character of\n    James, Son of Zebedee--His Spiritual Eminence--His Death\n    a Real Answer to Prayer--St. Peter's Deliverance--Granted\n    to a Pleading Church--Angelic Interference--And the\n    Proprieties of Christianity--Clement of Alexandria and\n    the P\u00e6dagogue--Herod's Ostentation and Miserable Death--\n    Testimony of Josephus                                      164-187\n\n  CHAPTER IX.\n\n  ST. PAUL'S ORDINATION AND FIRST MISSIONARY TOUR\n\n  ACTS xiii. 2-4, 14; xiv. 1, 26.\n\n  Thirteenth Chapter may be called the Watershed of the\n    Acts--Calvin and St. Paul's Ordination--Title Apostle\n    Henceforth Applied to Him--Ember Seasons, Reason of--\n    First Formal Mission to the Gentile World--Outline of\n    Apostolic Tour--Saul and Sergius Paulus--Discoveries\n    of General Cesnola--St. Paul's Sermon at the Pisidian\n    Antioch--Jewish Jealousy and Opposition--Iconium--Lystra\n    and Greek Legends--Discovery of Site of Lystra--Roman\n    Police in Asia Minor--Dialects of Asia Minor--_Museum\n    of the Evangelical School at Smyrna_--St. Paul and\n    Church Organisation                                        188-218\n\n  CHAPTER X.\n\n  THE FIRST CHRISTIAN COUNCIL.\n\n  ACTS xv. 1, 2, 6, 19.\n\n  History of the great General Councils--Originates at that\n    of Jerusalem--Date and Subject-matter--The Controversy\n    about Circumcision--Social Questions springing from it--\n    St. Paul's Position--His Apparent Inconsistencies--\n    Lessons of Apostolic Council--Early Church Scene of\n    Controversies--No Infallible Guide--Composition of\n    Council--Lay Element in Church Synods--Hooker and the\n    Church of England--Witness of Prayer Book--Experience\n    of Irish Church--Proceedings of the Council--Triumph\n    of Gentile Freedom                                         219-244\n\n  CHAPTER XI.\n\n  APOSTOLIC QUARRELS AND THE SECOND TOUR.\n\n  ACTS xv. 36, 39; xvi. 6, 8, 9.\n\n  Introduction of Christianity to Greece--St. Peter and his Asserted\n  Roman Episcopate of Twenty-five Years--Quarrel between\n  St. Paul and St. Barnabas--Between St. Paul and St. Peter--Patristic\n  Explanations--St. Augustine and St. Jerome--St.\n  Paul's Opposition to Nepotism--Barnabas and Mark--Blessings\n  of Sternness--The Wrath of Man praises God--Outline\n  of St. Paul's Second Tour--Ramsay's Historical Geography of\n  Asia Minor--Timothy's Ordination--The Gospel among the\n  Celts--Jeremy Taylor and the _Via Intelligenti\u00e6_--The Vision\n  at Troas                                                       245-270\n\n  CHAPTER XII.\n\n  ST. PAUL IN MACEDONIA.\n\n  ACTS xvi. 29, 31; xvii. 1, 2, 10.\n\n  Ancient Roads and Rome--The Gospel at Philippi--History\n    of that Town--Constitution of Roman Colonies--Lydia\n    and Jewish Oratory--Francis de Sales and Small\n    Congregations--Politics and Christianity--The Apostle\n    before the Duumviri--The Jailer and the Earthquake--\n    \"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and Thou shalt be\n    Saved\"--The Philippian Church and Persecution--St. Paul\n    at Thessalonica and Ber\u0153a--The Politarchs               271-300\n\n  CHAPTER XIII.\n\n  ST. PAUL IN GREECE.\n\n  ACTS xvii. 16-18; xviii. 1.\n\n  St. Paul and St. Athanasius, a Parallel--Escape to\n    Athens down the Thermaic Gulf--Visit of Pausanias to\n    that City--Ideal Character of Athenian Paganism--\n    Areopagus and St. Paul--The Unknown God--The Greek\n    Poets--Jesus and the Resurrection--The Primitive\n    Athenian Church and its Theology--Aristides and his\n    _Apology_--Dionysius the Areopagite and his reputed\n    Philosophy--Origin of Corinthian Church--The Saintly\n    Tentmakers--The Firstfruits of Achaia--Gallio and the\n    Jews--Philosophy and Christ                                301-330\n\n  CHAPTER XIV.\n\n  THE EPHESIAN CHURCH AND ITS FOUNDATION.\n\n  ACTS xviii. 19-21, 24-26; xix. 1.\n\n  History of Ephesus--Cenchre\u00e6 and its Church--Aquila and\n    his Vow--Christianity and External Actions--Judaism\n    and Christianity confounded by Romans--St. Paul's\n    Journey to Ephesus and Jerusalem--Visit to Galatia--\n    Ephesus and John's Disciples--Slow Progress of Gospel\n    in Apostolic Age--Apollos and Meyer's Theory about\n    Baptism--The Baptismal Formula--The School of\n    Tyrannus--Ephesian Magic and its Professors--Story\n    of St. Chrysostom--The Sons of Sceva                       331-356\n\n  CHAPTER XV.\n\n  THE EPHESIAN RIOT AND A PRUDENT TOWN CLERK.\n\n  ACTS xix. 23-28.\n\n  Duration of St. Paul's Ministry at Ephesus--Date of\n    1st Corinthians--Diana of Ephesus and her Persian\n    Worship--Weakness of Argument _e silentio_--Demetrius\n    and the Craftsmen--Artemisian Festivals and Christian\n    Sufferings--Testimony of Achilles Tatius--Martyrdom of\n    Polycarp--Celtic Conventions--Mr. Wood's Discoveries\n    at Ephesus--Gaius Vibius Salutarius--Extant Specimen\n    of Ephesian Silverwork--Speech of Demetrius--The\n    Asiarchs and the Recorder--Apostolic Controversy and\n    its Methods                                                357-384\n\n  CHAPTER XVI.\n\n  ST. PAUL AND THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY.\n\n  ACTS xx. 1, 7, 17-19, 28.\n\n  St. Paul's Position in A.D. 57--Personal Character of\n    St. Luke's Narrative--Defects of German Criticism--\n    Apostle's Second Visit to Macedonia--\"Round about unto\n    Illyricum\"--Visitation of Corinth--Passover at Philippi--\n    Holy Communion at Troas--The Lord's Day in the Primitive\n    Church--Argument from Silence, Dangers of--Justin Martyr\n    on Sunday--Eucharistic Amen--Evening Celebrations--The\n    Agape--Fasting Communion--St. Paul's Sermon and Eutychus--\n    Miletus and Charge to Ephesian Elders--Its Apologetic\n    Tone--St. Paul's view of Sermons--Decay of Modern\n    Preaching--Apostolic Power of Prevision--The Ministry\n    and Personal Religion--The Holy Ghost and Ordination--\n    Origin of Episcopacy--Dr. Hatch's Theories unhistorical--\n    Iren\u00e6us on Bishops--Derived from Apostles--Communicatio\n    Idiomatum--St. Paul's Farewell                             385-421\n\n  CHAPTER XVII.\n\n  A PRISONER IN BONDS.\n\n  ACTS xxi. 2, 3, 17, 33, 39, 40; xxii. 22, 30; xxiv. 1;  xxvi. 1.\n\n  St. Paul's Voyage from Miletus to Jerusalem--Christianity at\n    Tyre--\"The Seed growing silently\"--The Church at C\u00e6sarea\n    and its Teachers--St. Paul's Interview with St. James--The\n    Nazarite Vow--St. Paul's Arrest and Appearance before the\n    Sanhedrin--His Defence before Felix--Felix and Drusilla--\n    Lessons of St. Paul's Vicissitudes--Agabus and Prophesying--\n    St. James and Compromise--St. Paul and the High Priest--His\n    Quickness and Tact--Tertullian on Flight in Persecution--\n    Quietism and Quakerism--St. Paul and the Herodian Family--\n    Argument of his Address before Agrippa and Bernice--His\n    Appeal to C\u00e6sar                                            422-449\n\n  CHAPTER XVIII.\n\n  \"IN PERILS ON THE SEA.\"\n\n  ACTS xxvii. 1-3; xxviii. 16.\n\n  St. Paul as a Traveller and a Prisoner--Length of his\n    Imprisonment--Blessed Results of his Captivity--\"The\n    Prisoner of the Lord\"--Teaching of the Seventeenth\n    Sunday after Trinity--His Captivity Benefited--(_a_)\n    His Personal Religion--(_b_) The Church at C\u00e6sarea--(_c_)\n    The Church at Rome--(_d_) The Universal Church--\n    Composition of St. Luke's Gospel--Technical Use of word\n    Gospel--Testimony of Aristides and Iren\u00e6us--Epistles of\n    the Captivity--Story of the Voyage to Rome--Roman\n    Provincial Organisation--Writings of Mr. James Smith\n    of Jordanhills--Church at Sidon--The Storm--Malta\n    and Puteoli--Christianity at Pompeii--Christian\n    Inscription there Discovered--St. Paul's Approach to\n    Rome--Intense Humanity of the Apostle--Interview with\n    the local Jewish Sanhedrin--Christianity at Rome--\n    Investigations of Harnack and Sch\u00fcrer                      450-471\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER I.\n\n_THE TRAINING OF SAUL THE RABBI._\n\n     \"A young man named Saul.\"--ACTS vii. 58.\n\n     \"I am a Jew, born in Tarsus of Cilicia, but brought up in this\n     city, at the feet of Gamaliel, instructed according to the strict\n     manner of the law of our fathers, being zealous for God, even as\n     ye all are this day.\"--ACTS xxii. 3.\n\n\nThe appearance of St. Paul upon the stage of Christian history marks a\nperiod of new development and of more enlarged activity. The most\ncasual reader of the Acts of the Apostles must see that a personality\nof vast power, force, individuality, has now entered the bounds of the\nChurch, and that henceforth St. Paul, his teaching, methods, and\nactions, will throw all others into the shade. Modern German critics\nhave seized upon this undoubted fact and made it the foundation on\nwhich they have built elaborate theories concerning St. Paul and the\nActs of the Apostles. Some of them have made St. Paul the inventor of\na new form of Christianity, more elaborate, artificial, and dogmatic\nthan the simple religion of nature which, as they think, Jesus Christ\ntaught. Others have seen in St. Paul the great rival and antagonist of\nSt. Peter, and have seen in the Acts a deliberate attempt to reconcile\nthe opposing factions of Peter and Paul by representing St. Paul's\ncareer as modelled upon that of Peter's.[1] These theories are, we\nbelieve, utterly groundless; but they show at the same time what an\nimportant event in early Church history St. Paul's conversion was, and\nhow necessary a thorough comprehension of his life and training if we\nwish to understand the genesis of our holy religion.\n\n  [1] See this portion of Baur's theory refuted in Dr. Salmon's\n  _Introduction to the New Testament_, ch. xviii., p. 335, 4th ed.,\n  where the writer admits a certain parallelism between the history\n  of SS. Peter and Paul in the Acts, but denies that it was an\n  invented parallelism. He remarks on the next page, \"What I think\n  proves decisively that the making a parallel between St. Peter and\n  St. Paul was not an idea present to the author's mind is the\n  absence of the natural climax of such a parallel--the story of the\n  martyrdom of both the Apostles.... If the object of the author of\n  the Acts had been what has been supposed, it is scarcely credible\n  that he could have missed so obvious an opportunity of bringing\n  his book to its most worthy conclusion, by telling how the two\n  servants of Christ--all previous differences, if there had been\n  any, reconciled and forgotten--joined in witnessing a good\n  confession before the tyrant emperor, and encouraged each other in\n  steadfastness in endurance to the end.\"\n\nWho and whence, then, was this enthusiastic man who is first\nintroduced to our notice in connexion with St. Stephen's martyrdom?\nWhat can we glean from Scripture and from secular history concerning\nhis earlier career? I am not going to attempt to do what Conybeare and\nHowson thirty years ago, or Archdeacon Farrar in later times, have\nexecuted with a wealth of learning and a profuseness of imagination\nwhich I could not pretend to possess. Even did I possess them it would\nbe impossible, for want of space, to write such a biography of St.\nPaul as these authors have given to the public. Let us, however,\nstrive to gather up such details of St. Paul's early life and training\nas the New Testament, illustrated by history, sets before us. Perhaps\nwe shall find that more is told us than strikes the ordinary\nsuperficial reader. His parentage is known to us from St. Paul's own\nstatement. His father and mother were Jews of the Dispersion, as the\nJews scattered abroad amongst the Gentiles were usually called; they\nwere residents at Tarsus in Cilicia, and by profession belonged to the\nPharisees who then formed the more spiritual and earnest religious\nsection of the Jewish people. We learn this from three passages. In\nhis defence before the Council, recorded in Acts xxiii. 6, he tells us\nthat he was \"a Pharisee, a son of Pharisees.\" There was no division in\nreligious feeling between the parents. His home life and his earliest\nyears knew nothing of religious jars and strife. Husband and wife were\njoined not only in the external bonds of marriage, but in the\nprofounder union still of spiritual sentiment and hope, a memory which\nmay have inspired a deeper meaning begotten of personal experience in\nthe warning delivered to the Corinthians, \"Be not unequally yoked with\nunbelievers.\" Of the history of his parents and ancestors we know\npractically nothing more for certain, but we can glean a little from\nother notices. St. Paul tells us that he belonged to a special\ndivision among the Jews, of which we have spoken a good deal in the\nformer volume when dealing with St. Stephen. The Jews at this period\nwere divided into Hebrews and Hellenists: that is, Hebrews who by\npreference and in their ordinary practice spoke the Hebrew tongue, and\nHellenists who spoke Greek and adopted Greek civilisation and customs.\nSt. Paul tells us in Philippians iii. 5 that he was \"of the stock of\nIsrael, of the tribe of Benjamin, a Hebrew of Hebrews,\" a statement\nwhich he substantially repeats in 2 Corinthians xi. 22. Now it was\nalmost an impossibility for a Jew of the Dispersion to belong to the\nHebrews. His lot was cast in a foreign land, his business mixed him\nup with the surrounding pagans, so that the use of the Greek language\nwas an absolute necessity; while the universal practice of his\nfellow-countrymen in conforming themselves to Greek customs, Greek\nphilosophy, and Greek civilisation rendered the position of one who\nwould stand out for the old Jewish national ideas and habits a very\ntrying and a very peculiar one. Here, however, comes in an ancient\ntradition, recorded by St. Jerome, which throws some light upon the\ndifficulty. Scripture tells us that St. Paul was born at Tarsus. Our\nLord, in His conversation with Ananias in Acts ix. 11, calls him \"Saul\nof Tarsus,\" while again the Apostle himself in the twenty-second\nchapter describes himself as \"a Jew born in Tarsus\". But then the\nquestion arises, how came his parents to Tarsus, and how, being in\nTarsus, could they be described as Hebrews while all around and about\nthem their countrymen were universally Hellenists? St. Jerome here\nsteps in to help us. He relates, in his _Catalogue of Illustrious\nWriters_, that \"Paul the Apostle, previously called Saul, being\noutside the number of the Twelve, was of the tribe of Benjamin and of\nthe city of the Jewish Gischala; on the capture of which by the Romans\nhe migrated with them to Tarsus.\" Now this statement of Jerome,\nwritten four hundred years after the event, is clearly inaccurate in\nmany respects, and plainly contradicts the Apostle's own words that he\nwas born in Tarsus.\n\nBut yet the story probably embodies a tradition substantially true,\nthat St. Paul's parents were originally from Galilee. Galilee was\nintensely Hebrew. It was provincial, and the provinces are always far\nless affected by advance in thought or in religion than the towns,\nwhich are the chosen homes of innovation and of progress. Hellenism\nmight flourish in Jerusalem, but in Galilee it would not be tolerated;\nand the tough, sturdy Galileans alone would have moral and religious\ngrit enough to maintain the old Hebrew customs and language, even amid\nthe abounding inducements to an opposite course which a great\ncommercial centre like Tarsus held out. Assuredly our own experience\naffords many parallels illustrating the religious history of St.\nPaul's family. The Evangelical revival, the development of Ritual in\nthe Church of England, made their mark first of all in the towns, and\ndid not affect the distant country districts till long after. The\nPresbyterianism of the Highlands is almost a different religion from\nthe more enlightened and more cultured worship of Edinburgh and\nGlasgow. The Low Church and Orange developments of Ulster bring us\nback to the times of the last century, and seem passing strange to the\ncitizens of London, Manchester, or Dublin, who first make their\nacquaintance in districts where obsolete ideas and cries still retain\na power quite forgotten in the vast tide of life and thought which\nsways the great cities. And yet these rural backwaters, as we may call\nthem, retain their influence, and show strong evidence of life even in\nthe great cities; and so it is that even in London and Edinburgh and\nGlasgow and Dublin congregations continue to exist in their remoter\ndistricts and back streets where the prejudices and ideas of the\ncountry find full sway and exercise. The Presbyterianism of the\nHighlands and the Orangeism of Ulster will be sought in vain in\nfashionable churches, but in smaller assemblies they will be found\nexercising a sway and developing a life which will often astonish a\nsuperficial observer.\n\nSo it was doubtless in Tarsus. The Hebrews of Galilee would delight\nto separate themselves. They would look down upon the Hellenism of\ntheir fellow-countrymen as a sad falling away from ancient orthodoxy,\nbut their declension would only add a keener zest to the zeal with\nwhich the descendants of the Hebrews of Gischala, even in the third\nand fourth generations, as it may have been, would retain the ancient\ncustoms and language of their Galilean forefathers.[2]\n\n  [2] The tradition mentioned by St. Jerome is not the only one\n  which deals with the early life of St. Paul. Another very learned\n  writer of the same, or perhaps we should rather say of a still\n  earlier, period was St. Epiphanius, the historian of Heresies and\n  bishop of Constantia, or Salamis, in Cyprus. He wrote a great work\n  describing the various heresies which had sprung up in the Church,\n  containing much valuable information which his research and early\n  date enabled him to incorporate in his pages. He describes,\n  amongst others, the Ebionites, telling us of their hostility to\n  St. Paul and of the charges they brought against him. The\n  Ebionites denied that he was a Jew at all. The words of Epiphanius\n  are \"They say that he was a Greek, and sprung from the Gentiles,\n  and then afterwards became a proselyte,\" in opposition to which he\n  quotes the Apostle's own words in Phil. iii. 5 and in 2 Cor. xi.\n  22. Epiphanius then proceeds to explain how St. Paul might have\n  been born in Tarsus and yet have been a Jew by nation, because\n  that, under Antiochus Epiphanes and at other times, vast numbers\n  of the Jews had been dispersed as captives among the Gentiles. See\n  Epiphanius, in _Corpus H\u00e6reseologicum_, Ed. Oehler, vol. ii., p.\n  283. Berlin, 1859. This is a good instance how the Jewish\n  hostility, which pursued St. Paul through life, had not quite died\n  out three centuries later. Epiphanius was born about A.D. 310. He\n  wrote his work on Early Heresies about A.D. 375, calling it\n  _Panarion_, or, as he himself explains in his introductory\n  epistle, the Medicine Chest, full of remedies against the bite of\n  the Old Serpent. Epiphanius must have had a great store of early\n  literature at his command which has now completely perished. See a\n  long and critical account of him and his writings, written by Dr.\n  R. A. Lipsius, in the _Dict. Christ. Biog._, vol. ii.\n\nSt. Paul and his parents might seem to an outsider mere Hellenists,\nbut their Galilean origin and training enabled them to retain the\nintenser Judaism which qualified the Apostle to describe himself as\nnot only of the stock of Israel, but as a Hebrew of the Hebrews.\n\nSt. Paul's more immediate family connexions have also some light\nthrown upon them in the New Testament. We learn, for instance, from\nActs xxiii. 16, that he had a married sister, who probably lived at\nJerusalem, and may have been even a convert to Christianity; for we\nare told that her son, having heard of the Jewish plot to murder the\nApostle, at once reported it to St. Paul himself, who thereupon put\nhis nephew into communication with the chief captain in whose custody\nhe lay. While again, in Romans xvi. 7, 11, he sends salutations to\nAndronicus, Junias, and Herodion, his kinsmen, who were residents in\nRome; and in verse 21 of the same chapter joins Lucius and Jason and\nSosipater, his kinsmen, with himself in the Christian wishes for the\nwelfare of the Roman Church, with which he closes the Epistle. It is\nsaid, indeed, that this may mean simply that these men were Jews, and\nthat St. Paul regarded all Jews as his kinsmen. But this notion is\nexcluded by the form of the twenty-first verse, where he first sends\ngreetings from Timothy, whom St. Paul dearly loved, and who was a\ncircumcised Jew, not a proselyte merely, but a true Jew, on his\nmother's side, at least; and then the Apostle proceeds to name the\npersons whom he designates his kinsmen. St. Paul evidently belonged to\na family of some position in the Jewish world, whose ramifications\nwere dispersed into very distant quarters of the empire. Every scrap\nof information which we can gain concerning the early life and\nassociations of such a man is very precious; we may therefore point\nout that we can even get a glimpse of the friends and acquaintances of\nhis earliest days. Barnabas the Levite was of Cyprus, an island only\nseventy miles distant from Tarsus. In all probability Barnabas may\nhave resorted to the Jewish schools of Tarsus, or may have had some\nother connexions with the Jewish colony of that city. Some such early\nfriendship may have been the link which bound Paul to Barnabas and\nenabled the latter to stand sponsor for the newly converted Saul when\nthe Jerusalem Church was yet naturally suspicious of him. \"And when he\nwas come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples:\nand they were all afraid of him, not believing that he was a disciple.\nBut Barnabas took him, and brought him to the apostles\" (Acts ix. 26,\n27). This ancient friendship enabled Barnabas to pursue the Apostle\nwith those offices of consolation which his nascent faith demanded. He\nknew Saul's boyhood haunts, and therefore it is we read in Acts xi. 25\nthat \"Barnabas went forth to Tarsus to seek for Saul\" when a multitude\nof the Gentiles began to pour into the Church of Antioch. Barnabas\nknew his old friend's vigorous, enthusiastic character, his genius,\nhis power of adaptation, and therefore he brought him back to Antioch,\nwhere for a whole year they were joined in one holy brotherhood of\ndevout and successful labour for their Master. The friendships and\nlove of boyhood and of youth received a new consecration and were\nimpressed with a loftier ideal from the example of Saul and of\nBarnabas.\n\nThen again there are other friends of his youth to whom he refers.\nTimothy's family lived at Lystra, and Lystra was directly connected\nwith Tarsus by a great road which ran straight from Tarsus to Ephesus,\noffering means for that frequent communication in which the Jews ever\ndelighted. St. Paul's earliest memories carried him back to the devout\natmosphere of the pious Jewish family at Lystra, which he had long\nknown, where Lois the grandmother and Eunice the mother had laid the\nfoundations of that spiritual life which under St. Paul's own later\nteaching flourished so wondrously in the life of Timothy.[3] Let us\npass on, however, to a period of later development. St. Paul's\nearliest teaching at first was doubtless that of the home. As with\nTimothy so with the Apostle; his earliest religious teacher was\ndoubtless his mother, who from his infancy imbued him with the great\nrudimentary truths which lie at the basis of both the Jewish and the\nChristian faith. His father too took his share. He was a Pharisee, and\nwould be anxious to fulfil every jot and tittle of the law and every\nminute rule which the Jewish doctors had deduced by an attention and a\nsubtlety concentrated for ages upon the text of the Old Testament. And\none great doctor had laid down, \"When a boy begins to speak, his\nfather ought to talk with him in the sacred language, and to teach him\nthe law\"; a rule which would exactly fall in with his father's natural\ninclination.[4] He was a Hebrew of the Hebrews, though dwelling among\nHellenists. He prided himself on speaking the Hebrew language alone,\nand he therefore would take the greatest pains that the future\nApostle's earliest teachings should be in that same sacred tongue,\ngiving him from boyhood that command over Hebrew and its dialects\nwhich he afterwards turned to the best of uses.\n\n  [3] See 2 Tim. i. 5, and iii. 14, 15. It is evident that St.\n  Paul's language implies an acquaintance with Timothy's family of\n  very long standing.\n\n  [4] Sch\u0153ttgen's _Hor. Hebr._, vol. i., p. 89; Lewin's _St.\n  Paul_, vol. i., p. 7.\n\nAt five years old Jewish children of parents like St. Paul's advanced\nto the direct study of the law under the guidance of some doctor,\nwhose school they daily attended, as another rabbi had expressly\nenacted, \"At five years old a boy should apply himself to the study of\nHoly Scripture.\" Between five and thirteen Saul was certainly educated\nat Tarsus, during which period his whole attention was concentrated\nupon sacred learning and upon mechanical or industrial training. It\nwas at this period of his life that St. Paul must have learned the\ntrade of tentmaking, which during the last thirty years of his life\nstood him in such good stead, rendering him independent of all\nexternal aid so far as his bodily wants were concerned. A question has\noften been raised as to the social position of St. Paul's family; and\npeople, bringing their Western ideas with them, have thought that the\nmanual trade which he was taught betokened their humble rank. But this\nis quite a mistake. St. Paul's family must have occupied at least a\nfairly comfortable position, when they were able to send a member of\ntheir house to Jerusalem to be taught in the most celebrated\nrabbinical school of the time. But it was the law of that school--and\na very useful law it was too--that every Jew, and especially every\nteacher, should possess a trade by which he might be supported did\nnecessity call for it. It was a common proverb among the Jews at that\ntime that \"He who taught not his son a trade taught him to be a\nthief.\" \"It is incumbent on the father to circumcise his son, to\nredeem him, to teach him the law, and to teach him some occupation,\nfor, as Rabbi Judah saith, whosoever teacheth not his son to do some\nwork is as if he taught him robbery.\" \"Rabbin Gamaliel saith, He that\nhath a trade in his hand, to what is he like? He is like to a vineyard\nthat is fenced.\" Such was the authoritative teaching of the schools,\nand Jewish practice was in accordance therewith. Some of the most\ncelebrated rabbis of that time were masters of a mechanical art or\ntrade. The Vice-president of the Sanhedrin was a merchant for four\nyears, and then devoted himself to the study of the law. One rabbi was\na shoemaker; Rabbi Juda, the great Cabbalist, was a tailor; Rabbi Jose\nwas brought up as a tanner; another rabbi as a baker, and yet another\nas a carpenter.[5] And so as a preparation for the office and life\nwork to which his father had destined him, St. Paul during his earlier\nyears was taught one of the common trades of Tarsus, which consisted\nin making tents either out of the hair or the skin of the Angora goats\nwhich browsed over the hills of central Asia Minor. It was a trade\nthat was common among Jews. Aquila and his wife Priscilla were\ntentmakers, and therefore St. Paul united himself to them and wrought\nat his trade in their company at Corinth (Acts xviii. 3). It has often\nbeen asserted that at this period of his life St. Paul must have\nstudied Greek philosophy and literature, and men have pointed to his\nquotations from the Greek poets Aratus, Epimenides, and Menander to\nprove the attention which the Apostle must have bestowed upon\nthem.[6] Tarsus was certainly one of the great universities of that\nage, ranking in the first place along with Athens and Alexandria. So\ngreat was its fame that the Roman emperors even were wont to go to\nTarsus to look for tutors to instruct their sons. But Tarsus was at\nthe very same time one of the most morally degraded spots within the\nbounds of the Roman world, and it is not at all likely that a strict\nHebrew, a stern Pharisee, would have allowed his son to encounter the\nmoral taint involved in freely mixing with such a degraded people and\nin the free study of a literature permeated through and through with\nsensuality and idolatry. St. Paul doubtless at this early period of\nhis life gained that colloquial knowledge of Greek which was every day\nbecoming more and more necessary for the ordinary purposes of secular\nlife all over the Roman Empire, even in the most backward parts of\nPalestine.[7] But it is not likely that his parents would have\nsanctioned his attendance at the lectures on philosophy and poetry\ndelivered at the University of Tarsus, where he would have been\ninitiated into all the abominations of paganism in a style most\nattractive to human nature.\n\n  [5] Josephus, _Antiqq._, XVIII., ix., 1, says of certain Jews of\n  Babylon, \"Now there were two men, Asineus and Anileus, brethren to\n  one another. They were destitute of a father, and their mother put\n  them to learn the art of weaving curtains, it not being esteemed a\n  disgrace among them for men to be weavers of cloth.\" Then we find\n  in the New Testament Simon of Joppa was a tanner, Aquila a\n  tentmaker, the apostles fishermen, and our Lord a carpenter. See a\n  long note on this subject by Mr. Lewin in his _Life of St. Paul_,\n  vol. i., p. 8. Massutius, a Jesuit commentator on St. Paul's life,\n  lib. i., cap. iii., notices that Charlemagne, according to his\n  biographer Eginhard, would have his sons and daughters taught some\n  mechanical trade.\n\n  [6] See Acts xvii. 28; Titus i. 12; 1 Cor. xv. 33.\n\n  [7] See an article on \"Greek the Language of Galilee in the time\n  of Christ,\" by the Rev. Dr. Abbott, Professor of Hebrew in the\n  University of Dublin, in his _Essays chiefly on the Original Texts\n  of the Old and New Testaments_. London, 1891.\n\nAt thirteen years of age, or thereabouts, young Saul, having now\nlearned all the sacred knowledge which the local rabbis could teach,\nwent up to Jerusalem just as our Lord did, to assume the full\nobligations of a Jew and to pursue his higher studies at the great\nRabbinical University of Jerusalem. To put it in modern language, Saul\nwent up to Jerusalem to be confirmed and admitted to the full\nprivileges and complete obligations of the Levitical Law, and he also\nwent up to enter college. St. Paul himself describes the period of\nlife on which he now entered as that in which he was brought up at the\nfeet of Gamaliel. We have already touched in a prior volume upon the\nsubject of Gamaliel's history and his relation to Christianity, but\nhere it is necessary to say something of him as a teacher, in which\ncapacity he laid the foundations of modes of thought and reasoning,\nthe influence of which moulded St. Paul's whole soul and can be traced\nall through St. Paul's Epistles.\n\nGamaliel is an undoubtedly historical personage. The introduction of\nhim in the Acts of the Apostles is simply another instance of that\nmarvellous historical accuracy which every fresh investigation and\ndiscovery show to be a distinguishing feature of this book. The Jewish\nTalmud was not committed to writing for more than four centuries after\nGamaliel's time,[8] and yet it presents Gamaliel to us in exactly the\nsame light as the inspired record does, telling us that \"with the\ndeath of Gamaliel I. the reverence for the Divine law ceased, and the\nobservance of purity and abstinence departed.\" Gamaliel came of a\nfamily distinguished in Jewish history both before and after his own\ntime. He was of the royal House of David, and possessed in this way\ngreat historical claims upon the respect of the nation. His\ngrandfather Hillel and his father Simeon were celebrated teachers and\nexpounders of the law. His grandfather had founded indeed one of the\nleading schools of interpretation then favoured by the rabbis. His\nfather Simeon is said by some to have been the aged man who took up\nthe infant Christ in his arms and blessed God for His revealed\nsalvation in the words of the _Nunc Dimittis_; while, as for Gamaliel\nhimself, his teaching was marked by wisdom, prudence, liberality, and\nspiritual depth so far as such qualities could exist in a professor of\nrabbinical learning. Gamaliel was a friend and contemporary of Philo,\nand this fact alone must have imported an element of liberality into\nhis teaching. Philo was a widely read scholar who strove to unite the\nphilosophy of Greece to the religion of Palestine, and Philo's ideas\nmust have permeated more or less into some at least of the schools of\nJerusalem, so that, though St. Paul may not have come in contact with\nGreek literature in Tarsus, he may very probably have learned much\nabout it in a Judaised, purified, spiritualised shape in Jerusalem.\nBut the influence exercised on St. Paul by Gamaliel and through him by\nPhilo, or men of his school, can be traced in other respects.[9]\n\n  [8] Basnage, in his _History of the Jews_, translated by Thomas\n  Taylor, Book III., ch. vi., p. 168 (London, 1708), states, \"It is\n  agreed by the generality of Jewish and Christian doctors that the\n  Talmud was completed in the 505th year of the Christian \u00c6ra.\" Cf.\n  Serarius, _De Rabbinis_, Lib. I., c. ix., p. 251; Bartolocci,\n  _Bibl. Rabbin._, t. i., p. 488, t. iii., p. 359; Morinus, _Exerc.\n  Bibl._, Lib. II., ex. 6, c. ii. and iii., p. 294. Schaff's\n  _Encyclop\u00e6dia of Historical Theology_, vol. iii., pp. 2292-96, has\n  a good article on the Talmud, giving a long list of authorities to\n  which reference may be made by any one interested in this subject.\n\n  [9] Philo is the subject of a very long and learned article by Dr.\n  Edersheim in Smith's _Dict. Christ. Biog._, vol. iv., with which\n  may be compared a shorter article in Schaff's _Encyclop\u00e6dia of\n  Hist. Theol._, vol. ii.\n\nThe teaching of Gamaliel was as spiritual, I have said, as rabbinical\nteaching could have been; but this is not saying very much from the\nChristian point of view. The schools at Jerusalem in the time of\nGamaliel were wholly engaged in studies of the most wearisome, narrow,\npetty, technical kind. Dr. Farrar has illustrated this subject with a\ngreat wealth of learning and examples in the fourth chapter of his\n_Life of St. Paul_. The Talmud alone shows this, throwing a fearful\nlight upon the denunciations of our Lord as regards the Pharisees, for\nit devotes a whole treatise to washings of the hands, and another to\nthe proper method of killing fowls. The Pharisaic section of the Jews\nheld, indeed, that there were two hundred and forty-eight commandments\nand three hundred and sixty-five prohibitions involved in the Jewish\nLaw, all of them equally binding, and all of them so searching that if\nonly one solitary Jew could be found who for one day kept them all and\ntransgressed in no one direction, then the captivity of God's people\nwould cease and the Messiah would appear.[10]\n\n  [10] These facts throw much light upon our Lord's words in Matt.\n  xv. 1-9 and xxii. 34-40.\n\nI am obliged to pass over this point somewhat rapidly, and yet it is a\nmost important one if we desire to know what kind of training the\nApostle received; for, no matter how God's grace may descend and the\nDivine Spirit may change the main directions of a man's life, he never\nquite recovers himself from the effects of his early teaching. Dr.\nFarrar has bestowed much time and labour on this point. The following\nbrief extract from his eloquent words will give a vivid idea of the\nendless puerilities, the infinite questions of pettiest, most minute,\nand most subtle bearing with which the time of St. Paul and his\nfellow-students must have been taken up, and which must have made him\nbitterly feel in the depths of his inmost being that, though the law\nmay have been originally intended as a source of life, it had been\ncertainly changed as regards his own particular case, and had become\nunto him an occasion of death.\n\n\"Moreover, was there not mingled with all this nominal adoration of\nthe Law a deeply seated hypocrisy, so deep that it was in a great\nmeasure unconscious? Even before the days of Christ the rabbis had\nlearnt the art of straining out gnats and swallowing camels. They had\nlong learnt to nullify what they professed to defend. The ingenuity of\nHillel was quite capable of getting rid of any Mosaic regulation which\nhad been found practically burdensome. Pharisees and Sadducees alike\nhad managed to set aside in their own favour, by the devices of the\nmixtures, all that was disagreeable to themselves in the Sabbath\nscrupulosity.[11] The fundamental institution of the Sabbatic year had\nbeen stultified by the mere legal fiction of the Prosbol.[12] Teachers\nwho were on the high road to a casuistry which could construct rules\nout of every superfluous particle, had found it easy to win credit for\ningenuity by elaborating prescriptions to which Moses would have\nlistened in mute astonishment. If there be one thing more definitely\nlaid down in the Law than another, it is the uncleanness of creeping\nthings; yet the Talmud assures us that 'no one is appointed a member\nof the Sanhedrin who does not possess sufficient ingenuity to prove\nfrom the written Law that a creeping thing is ceremonially clean'; and\nthat there was an unimpeachable disciple at Jabne who could adduce one\nhundred and fifty arguments in favour of the ceremonial cleanness of\ncreeping things. Sophistry like this was at work even in the days when\nthe young student of Tarsus sat at the feet of Gamaliel; and can we\nimagine any period of his life when he would not have been wearied by\na system at once so meaningless, so stringent, and so insincere?\"\n\n  [11] The rabbinical device of mixtures is fully explained in\n  Buxtorf's _Lexicon_, col. 1657, Ed. Basil (1639), or in Kitto's\n  _Biblical Encyclop\u00e6dia_, under the article \"Sabbath.\" The Talmud\n  had a special treatise called _Tractatus Mixtorum_, which taught\n  how, for instance, dwellings might be mixed or mingled so as to\n  avoid technical breaches of the Sabbatical law. Planks were laid\n  across intervening residences, so that houses at a very great\n  distance might be brought into touch and connexion, and thus\n  regarded as one common dwelling for a number of people who wished\n  for a common feast on the Sabbath. This was called _Mixtio\n  conclavium_. It was simply one of those wretched devices to which\n  casuistry always leads; something like the rules for banquets on\n  fast days, which we find in Lacroix, _Manners of the Middle Ages_,\n  p. 170, where a most sumptuous Episcopal banquet is described. It\n  was given on a fast day, therefore no flesh is included; but its\n  place was amply supplied by rare fish and other dainties: see G.\n  T. Stokes, _Ireland and Anglo-Norman Church_, p. 143.\n\n  [12] Prosbol is simply a transliteration into Hebrew of two Greek\n  words, \u03c0\u03c1\u1f78\u03c2 \u03b2\u03bf\u03c5\u03bb\u03ae\u03bd. The Jewish Law enacted a cancelling of all\n  debts in the Sabbatic year on the part of Jews towards their\n  brethren. This enactment was found to hinder commerce about the\n  time of Hillel--_i.e._, 75 years B.C. The rich would not lend to\n  the poor on account of the Sabbatical year. So the doctors devised\n  the Prosbol, which was a declaration to the effect that the\n  Sabbatical year was not to affect the debt. There was a legal\n  fiction invented which made void the law. The creditor said to the\n  debtor, \"In accordance with the Sabbatical year I remit thee the\n  debt,\" and then the debtor replied, \"Nevertheless I wish to pay\n  it,\" and then the creditor was free from the obligation of Deut.\n  xv.\n\nThese words are true, thoroughly true, in their extremest sense.\nCasuistry is at all times a dangerous weapon with which to play, a\ndangerous science upon which to concentrate one's attention. The mind\nis so pleased with the fascination of the precipice that one is\nperpetually tempted to see how near an approach can be made without a\ncatastrophe, and then the catastrophe happens when it is least\nexpected. But when the casuist's attention is concentrated upon one\nvolume like the law of Moses, interpreted in the thousand methods and\ncombinations open to the luxuriant imagination of the East, then\nindeed the danger is infinitely increased, and we cease to wonder at\nthe vivid, burning, scorching denunciations of the Lord as He\nproclaimed the sin of those who enacted that \"Whosoever shall swear by\nthe temple, it is nothing; but whosoever shall swear by the gold of\nthe temple, he is a debtor.\" St. Paul's whole time must have been\ntaken up in the school of Gamaliel with an endless study of such\ncasuistical trifles; and yet that period of his life left marks which\nwe can clearly trace throughout his writings. The method, for\ninstance, in which St. Paul quotes the Old Testament is thoroughly\nrabbinical. It was derived from the rules prevalent in the Jewish\nschools, and therefore, though it may seem to us at times forced and\nunnatural, must have appeared to St. Paul and to the men of his time\nabsolutely conclusive. When reading the Scriptures we Westerns forget\nthe great difference between Orientals and the nations of Western\nEurope. Aristotle and his logic and his logical methods, with major\nand minor premises and conclusions following therefrom, absolutely\ndominate our thoughts. The Easterns knew nothing of Aristotle, and his\nmethods availed nothing to their minds. They argued in quite a\ndifferent style, and used a logic which he would have simply scorned.\nAnalogy, allegory, illustration, form the staple elements of Eastern\nlogic, and in their use St. Paul was elaborately trained in Gamaliel's\nclasses, and of their use his writings furnish abundant examples; the\nmost notable of which will be found in his allegorical interpretation\nof the events of the wilderness journey of Israel in 1 Corinthians x.\n1-4, where the pillar of cloud, and the passage of the Red Sea, and\nthe manna, and the smitten rock become the emblems and types of the\nChristian Sacraments; and again, in St. Paul's mystical explanation of\nGalatians iv. 21-31, where Hagar and Sarah are represented as typical\nof the two covenants, the old covenant leading to spiritual bondage\nand the new introducing to gospel freedom.[13]\n\n  [13] The parallel between Hagar and Sarah is drawn out at full\n  length after the rabbinical method in Basnage's _History of the\n  Jews_ (Taylor's translation), book iii., ch. 22; in Lightfoot's\n  _Galatians_, pp. 178, 179, 189-99, and Farrar's _St. Paul_, ch.\n  iii. Philo in his writings uses the very same illustration.\n  Perhaps it may be well to add the concluding words of Bishop\n  Lightfoot when discussing on p. 197 of his _Galatians_, the\n  similar use made by St. Paul and by Philo of this illustration of\n  Hagar: \"At the same time we need not fear to allow that St. Paul's\n  method of teaching here is coloured by his early education in the\n  rabbinical schools. It were as unreasonable to stake the Apostle's\n  inspiration on the turn of a metaphor or the character of an\n  illustration or the form of an argument, as on purity of diction.\n  No one now thinks of maintaining that the language of the inspired\n  writers reaches the classical standard of correctness and\n  elegance, though at one time it was held almost a heresy to deny\n  this. 'A treasure contained in earthen vessels,' 'strength made\n  perfect in weakness,' 'rudeness in speech, yet not in knowledge,'\n  such is the far nobler conception of inspired teaching, which we\n  may gather from the Apostle's own language. And this language we\n  should do well to bear in mind. But, on the other hand it were\n  mere dogmatism to set up the intellectual standard of our own age\n  or country as an infallible rule. The power of allegory has been\n  differently felt in different ages, as it is differently felt at\n  any one time by diverse nations. Analogy, allegory, metaphor--by\n  what boundaries are these separated the one from the other? What\n  is true or false, correct or incorrect, as an analogy or an\n  allegory? What argumentative force must be assigned to either? We\n  should at least be prepared with an answer to these questions\n  before we venture to sit in judgment on any individual case.\"\n\nThese, indeed, are the most notable examples of St. Paul's method of\nexegesis derived from the school of Gamaliel, but there are\nnumberless others scattered all through his writings. If we view them\nthrough Western spectacles, we shall be disappointed and miss their\nforce; but if we view them sympathetically, if we remember that the\nJews quoted and studied the Old Testament to find illustrations of\ntheir own ideas rather than proofs in our sense of the word, studied\nthem as an enthusiastic Shakespeare or Tennyson or Wordsworth student\npores over his favourite author to find parallels which others, who\nare less bewitched, find very slight and very dubious indeed,[14] then\nwe shall come to see how it is that St. Paul quotes an illustration of\nhis doctrine of justification by faith from Habakkuk ii. 4--\"The soul\nof the proud man is not upright, but the just man shall live by his\nsteadfastness\"; a passage which originally applied to the Chaldeans\nand the Jews, predicting that the former should enjoy no stable\nprosperity, but that the Jews, ideally represented as the just or\nupright man, should live securely because of their fidelity;[15] and\ncan find an allusion to the resurrection of Christ in \"the sure\nmercies of David,\" which God had promised to give His people in the\nthird verse of the fifty-fifth of Isaiah.[16]\n\n  [14] The latest instance of this method which I have noticed is\n  _Illustrations of Tennyson_, by J. C. Collins, reviewed by the\n  Dean of Armagh in the January number of the _Bookman_, where a\n  number of such parallelisms are quoted which seem to me rather\n  dubious.\n\n  [15] Bishop Lightfoot, on Galatians iii. 11, says of this verse,\n  \"In its original context the passage has reference to the temporal\n  calamities inflicted by the Chaldean invasion. Here a spiritual\n  meaning and general application are given to words referring\n  primarily to special external incidents.\" See also Farrar on St.\n  Paul's method of scriptural quotation, in his _Life of St. Paul_,\n  ch. iii.\n\n  [16] See St. Paul's address to the Jews of the Pisidian Antioch in\n  Acts xiii. 34. Other specimens of the same rabbinical method used\n  by St. Paul will be found in Rom. iii., iv., and ix. 33; 1 Cor.\n  ix. Eph. iv. 8.\n\nRabbinical learning, Hebrew discipline, Greek experience and life,\nthese conspired together with natural impulse and character to frame\nand form and mould a man who must make his mark upon the world at\nlarge in whatever direction he chooses for his walk in life. It will\nnow be our duty to show what were the earliest results of this very\nvaried education.[17]\n\n  [17] The great leaders in the divine struggle for righteousness,\n  in every great onward movement on behalf of truth have always been\n  men of this varied training. Moses, David, Elijah, Ezra, Saul of\n  Tarsus, were great leaders of thought and action and they were all\n  men whose education had been developed in very various schools.\n  They were not men of books merely, nor men of action alone. They\n  gained the flexibility of mind, the genuine liberality of thought\n  which led them out of the old rucks by experiences gained from\n  very opposite directions. The mere man of books may be very\n  narrow; the practical man, whose knowledge is limited to every day\n  affairs and whose horizon is bounded by to-morrow, is often an\n  unthinking bigot. A man trained like Moses, or David, or Saul is\n  the true leader of men for his mind is trained to receive truths\n  from every quarter.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER II.\n\n_THE CONVERSION OF THE PERSECUTOR._\n\n     \"But Saul laid waste the church, entering into every house, and\n     haling men and women committed them to prison.\"--ACTS viii. 3.\n\n     \"But Saul, yet breathing threatening and slaughter against the\n     disciples of the Lord, went unto the high priest, and asked of\n     him letters to Damascus unto the synagogues, that if he found any\n     that were of the Way, whether men or women, he might bring them\n     bound to Jerusalem. And as he journeyed, it came to pass that he\n     drew nigh unto Damascus: and suddenly there shone round about him\n     a light out of heaven: and he fell upon the earth, and heard a\n     voice saying unto him, Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou Me? And\n     he said, Who art thou, Lord? And He said, I am Jesus whom thou\n     persecutest: but rise, and enter into the city, and it shall be\n     told thee what thou must do.\"--ACTS ix. 1-6.\n\n\nWe have in the last chapter traced the course of St. Paul's life as we\nknow it from his own reminiscences, from hints in Holy Scripture, and\nfrom Jewish history and customs. The Jewish nation is exactly like all\nthe nations of the East, in one respect at least. They are all\nintensely conservative, and though time has necessarily introduced\nsome modifications, yet the course of education, and the force of\nprejudice, and the power of custom have in the main remained unchanged\ndown to the present time. We now proceed to view St. Paul, not as we\nimagine his course of life and education to have been, but as we\nfollow him in the exhibition of his active powers, in the full play\nand swing of that intellectual energy, of those religious aims and\nobjects for which he had been so long training.\n\nSt. Paul at his first appearance upon the stage of Christian history,\nupon the occasion of St. Stephen's martyrdom, had arrived at the full\nstature of manhood both in body and in mind. He was then the young man\nSaul; an expression which enables us to fix with some approach to\naccuracy the time of his birth. St. Paul's contemporary Philo in one\nof his works divides man's life into seven periods, the fourth of\nwhich is young manhood, which he assigns to the years between\ntwenty-one and twenty-eight. Roughly speaking, and without attempting\nany fine-drawn distinctions for which we have not sufficient material,\nwe may say that at the martyrdom of St. Stephen St. Paul was about\nthirty years of age, or some ten years or thereabouts junior to our\nLord as His years would have been numbered according to those of the\nsons of men. One circumstance, indeed, would seem to indicate that St.\nPaul must have been then over and above the exact line of thirty. It\nis urged, and that upon the ground of St. Paul's own language, that he\nwas a member of the Sanhedrin. In the twenty-sixth chapter, defending\nhimself before King Agrippa, St. Paul described his own course of\naction prior to his conversion as one of bitterest hostility to the\nChristian cause: \"I both shut up many of the saints in prisons, having\nreceived authority from the chief priests, _and when they were put to\ndeath, I gave my vote against them_\"; an expression which clearly\nindicates that he was a member of a body and possessed a vote in an\nassembly which determined questions of life and death, and that could\nhave been nothing else than the Sanhedrin, into which no one was\nadmitted before he had completed thirty years. St. Paul, then, when he\nis first introduced to our notice, comes before us as a full-grown\nman and a well-trained, carefully educated, thoroughly disciplined\nrabbinical scholar, whose prejudices were naturally excited against\nthe new Galilean sect, and who had given public expression to his\nfeelings by taking decided steps in opposition to its progress. The\nsacred narrative now sets before us (i) the Conduct of St. Paul in his\nunconverted state, (ii) his Mission, (iii) his Journey, and (iv) his\nConversion. Let us take the many details and circumstances connected\nwith this passage under these four divisions.\n\nI. _The Conduct of Saul._ Here we have a picture of St. Paul in his\nunconverted state: \"Saul, yet breathing threatening and slaughter\nagainst the disciples of the Lord.\" This description is amply borne\nout by St. Paul himself, in which he even enlarges and gives us\nadditional touches of the intensity of his antichristian hate. His\nignorant zeal at this period seems to have printed itself deep upon\nmemory's record. There are no less than at least seven different\nnotices in the Acts or scattered through the Epistles, due to his own\ntongue or pen, and dealing directly with his conduct as a persecutor.\nNo matter how he rejoiced in the fulness and blessedness of Christ's\npardon, no matter how he experienced the power and working of God's\nHoly Spirit, St. Paul never could forget the intense hatred with which\nhe had originally followed the disciples of the Master. Let us note\nthem, for they all bear out, expand, and explain the statement of the\npassage we are now considering.\n\nIn his address to the Jews of Jerusalem as recorded in Acts xxii. he\nappeals to his former conduct as an evidence of his sincerity. In\nverses 4 and 5 he says, \"I persecuted this Way unto the death, binding\nand delivering into prisons both men and women. As also the high\npriest doth bear me witness, and all the estate of the elders: from\nwhom also I received letters unto the brethren,[18] and journeyed to\nDamascus, to bring them also which were there unto Jerusalem in bonds,\nfor to be punished.\" In the same discourse he recurs a second time to\nthis topic; for, telling his audience of the vision granted to him in\nthe temple, he says, verse 19, \"And I said, Lord, they themselves know\nthat I imprisoned and beat in every synagogue them that believed on\nThee: and when the blood of Stephen Thy witness was shed, I also was\nstanding by, and consenting, and keeping the garments of them that\nslew him.\" St. Paul dwells upon the same topic in the twenty-sixth\nchapter, when addressing King Agrippa in verses 9-11, a passage\nalready quoted in part: \"I verily thought with myself, that I ought to\ndo many things contrary to the name of Jesus of Nazareth. And this I\nalso did in Jerusalem: and I both shut up many of the saints in\nprisons, having received authority from the chief priests, and when\nthey were put to death, I gave my vote against them. And punishing\nthem oftentimes in all the synagogues, I strove to make them\nblaspheme; and being exceedingly mad against them, I persecuted them\neven unto foreign cities.\" It is the same in his Epistles. In four\ndifferent places does he refer to his conduct as a persecutor--in 1\nCor. xv. 9; Gal. i. 13; Phil. iii. 6; and 1 Tim. i. 13; while again in\nthe chapter now under consideration, the ninth of Acts, we find that\nthe Jews of the synagogue in Damascus, who were listening to St.\nPaul's earliest outburst of Christian zeal, asked, \"Is not this he\nthat in Jerusalem made havock of them which called on this name? and\nhe had come hither for this intent, that he might bring them bound\nbefore the chief priests\"; using the very same word \"making havock\" as\nSt. Paul himself uses in the first of Galatians, which in Greek is\nvery strong, expressing a course of action accompanied with fire and\nblood and murder such as occurs when a city is taken by storm.\n\n  [18] What an interesting anticipation of Christian times do we\n  find in this passage. \"The estate of the elders\" is the Presbytery\n  in the original Greek, and the words \"the brethren\" by which St.\n  Paul refers to his unconverted fellow-countrymen are an\n  anticipation of the expression he always uses for the Christian\n  believers. Even in these little details Christianity is but an\n  expansion of Judaism, as, in another direction, the Catacombs of\n  Rome and the ornamentation used therein were all derived from the\n  customs of the Jewish colony in Rome long before the time of\n  Christ. See a treatise by Schurer, called _Die Gemeindeverfassung\n  der Juden in Rom in der Kaiserzeit_, p. 13 (Leipzig, 1879), where\n  that learned writer points out the continuity between Judaism in\n  Rome and early Christianity.\n\nNow these passages have been thus set forth at length because they add\nmany details to the bare statement of Acts ix., giving us a glimpse\ninto those four or five dark and bloody years, the thought of which\nhenceforth weighed so heavily upon the Apostle's mind and memory. Just\nlet us notice these additional touches. He shut up in prison many of\nthe saints, both men and women, and that in Jerusalem before he went\nto Damascus at all. He scourged the disciples in every synagogue,\nmeaning doubtless that he superintended the punishment, as it was the\nduty of the Chazan, the minister or attendant of the synagogue, to\nscourge the condemned, and thus strove to make them blaspheme Christ.\nHe voted for the execution of the disciples when he acted as a member\nof the Sanhedrin. And lastly he followed the disciples and persecuted\nthem in foreign cities. We gain in this way a much fuller idea of the\nyoung enthusiast's persecuting zeal than usually is formed from the\nwords \"Saul yet breathing threatening and slaughter against the\ndisciples of the Lord,\" which seem to set forth Saul as roused to wild\nand savage excitement by St. Stephen's death, and then continuing that\ncourse in the city of Jerusalem for a very brief period. Whereas, on\nthe contrary, St. Paul's fuller statements, when combined, represent\nhim as pursuing a course of steady, systematic, and cruel repression,\nwhich St. Paul largely helped to inaugurate, but which continued to\nexist as long as the Jews had the power to inflict corporal\npunishments and death on the members of their own nation. He visited\nall the synagogues in Jerusalem and throughout Palestine, scourging\nand imprisoning. He strove--and this is, again, another lifelike\ntouch,--to compel the disciples to blaspheme the name of Christ in the\nsame manner as the Romans were subsequently wont to test Christians by\ncalling upon them to cry anathema to the name of their Master.[19] He\neven extended his activity beyond the bounds of the Holy Land, and\nthat in various directions. The visit to Damascus may not by any means\nhave been his first journey to a foreign town with thoughts bent on\nthe work of persecution. He expressly says to Agrippa, \"I persecuted\nthem even unto foreign cities.\" He may have visited Tarsus, or Lystra,\nor the cities of Cyprus or Alexandria itself, urged on by the\nconsuming fire of his blind, restless zeal, before he entered upon the\njourney to Damascus, destined to be the last undertaken in opposition\nto Jesus Christ. When we thus strive to realise the facts of the case,\nwe shall see that the scenes of blood and torture and death, the\nruined homes, the tears, the heartbreaking separations which the young\nman Saul had caused in his blind zeal for the law, and which are\nbriefly summed up in the words \"he made havock of the Church,\" were\nquite sufficient to account for that profound impression of his own\nunworthiness and of God's great mercy towards him which he ever\ncherished to his dying day.[20]\n\n  [19] St. Paul, indeed, in his persecuting days may have been the\n  inventor of the test, which seems to have consisted in a\n  declaration that Jesus was not the Christ, but an impostor. We\n  find a reference to the Jewish custom of blaspheming the name of\n  Jesus in the Epistle of James (ii. 6, 7): \"Do not the rich oppress\n  you, and themselves drag you before the judgment-seats? Do not\n  they blaspheme the honourable name by the which ye are called?\"\n  with which may be compared St. Paul's words in 1 Cor. xii. 3: \"No\n  man speaking in the Spirit of God saith, Jesus is anathema.\" The\n  same custom continued in the second century, as we learn from\n  frequent notices in Justin Martyr's _Dialogue_ with Trypho the\n  Jew, as in the following quotations: ch. xvi., \"cursing in your\n  synagogues those that believe on Christ\"; in ch. xlvii. he\n  enumerates amongst those who shall not be saved \"those who have\n  anathematised and do anathematise this very Christ in the\n  synagogues\"; and in ch. cxxxvii. he exhorts the Jews, \"Assent,\n  therefore, and pour no ridicule on the Son of God; obey not the\n  Pharisaic teachers, and scoff not at the King of Israel, as the\n  rulers of your synagogues teach you to do after your prayers.\" The\n  Romans, as I have said, early borrowed the custom from the Jews.\n  They strove to compel the Christians to blaspheme, as we see from\n  Pliny's well-known epistle to Trajan in his _Epistles_, book x.,\n  97, where he describes certain persons brought before him as\n  \"invoking the gods, worshipping the emperor's statue, and reviling\n  the name of Christ, whereas there is no forcing those who are\n  really Christians into any of these compliances.\"\n\n  [20] St. Paul, in 1 Tim. i. 15, says, \"Faithful is the saying, and\n  worthy of all acceptation, that Christ Jesus came into the world\n  to save sinners; of whom I am chief.\" This verse is of ancient and\n  of very modern interest too. It shows that to the last St. Paul\n  retained the keenest sense of his early wickedness. It is of\n  present interest because it helps to correct a modern error. There\n  are people who object to use the Litany and the Lord's Prayer\n  because of the prayers for forgiveness of sins and the occurrence\n  of such expressions as \"Have mercy upon us, miserable sinners.\"\n  Their argument is, that believers have been washed from all their\n  sins, and therefore should not describe themselves as miserable\n  sinners. St. Paul, however, saw no inconsistency between God's\n  free forgiving love and his own humility in designating himself\n  the chief of sinners. God may have cast all our sins behind His\n  back; but, viewing the matter from the human side, it is well,\n  nay, it is absolutely necessary, if spiritual pride is to be\n  hindered in its rapid growth, for us to cherish a remembrance of\n  the sins and backslidings of other days. The greatest saints, the\n  richest spiritual teachers have ever felt the necessity of it. St.\n  Augustine in his _Confessions_ mingles perpetual reminiscences of\n  his own wickedness with his assured sense of God's mercy. Hooker\n  deals in his own profound style with such objection to the Litany\n  in the Fifth Book of his _Ecclesiastical Polity_, ch. xlvii.,\n  where he writes, replying to the objection that the expressions of\n  the Litany implying fear of God do not become God's saints: \"The\n  knowledge of our own unworthiness is not without belief in the\n  merits of Christ. With that true fear which the one causeth there\n  is coupled true boldness, and encouragement drawn from the other.\n  The very silence which our own unworthiness putteth us unto doth\n  itself make request for us, and that in the consequence of His\n  grace. Looking inward we are stricken dumb, looking upward we\n  speak and prevail. O happy mixture, wherein things contrary do so\n  qualify and correct the danger of the other's excess, that neither\n  boldness can make us presume as long as we are kept under with the\n  sense of our own wretchedness; nor while we trust in the mercy of\n  God through Jesus Christ, fear be able to tyrannise over us! As\n  therefore our fear excludeth not that boldness which becometh\n  saints; so if their _familiarity_ with God (referring to his\n  opponents) do not savour of this fear, it draweth too near that\n  irreverent confidence wherewith true humility can never stand.\"\n  Bishop Jeremy Taylor understood the bearing of St. Paul's view on\n  personal religion. In his _Holy Living_, in the chapter on\n  Humility, he teaches those who seek that grace thus: \"Every day\n  call to mind some one of thy foulest sins, or the most shameful of\n  thy disgraces, or the indiscreetest of thy actions, or anything\n  that did then most trouble thee, and apply it to the present\n  swelling of thy spirit and opinion, and it may help to allay it.\"\n\nII. _The Mission of Saul._ Again, we notice in this passage that Saul,\nhaving shown his activity in other directions, now turned his\nattention to Damascus. There were political circumstances which may\nhave hitherto hindered him from exercising the same supervision over\nthe synagogue of Damascus which he had already extended to other\nforeign cities. The political history and circumstances of Damascus\nat this period are indeed rather obscure. The city seems to have been\nsomewhat of a bone of contention between Herod Antipas, Aretas the\nking of Petra, and the Romans. About the time of St. Paul's\nconversion, which may be fixed at A.D. 37 or 38, there was a period of\ngreat disturbance in Palestine and Southern Syria. Pontius Pilate was\ndeposed from his office and sent to Rome for judgment. Vitellius, the\npresident of the whole Province of Syria, came into Palestine,\nchanging the high priests, conciliating the Jews, and intervening in\nthe war which raged between Herod Antipas and Aretas, his\nfather-in-law. In the course of this last struggle Damascus seems to\nhave changed its masters, and, while a Roman city till the year 37, it\nhenceforth became an Arabian city, the property of King Aretas, till\nthe reign of Nero, when it again returned beneath the Roman sway. Some\none or other, or perhaps all these political circumstances combined\nmay have hitherto prevented the Sanhedrin from taking active measures\nagainst the disciples at Damascus. But now things became settled.\nCaiaphas was deposed from the office of high priest upon the departure\nof Pontius Pilate. He had been a great friend and ally of Pilate;\nVitellius therefore deprived Caiaphas of his sacred office, appointing\nin his stead Jonathan, son of Annas, the high priest. This Jonathan\ndid not, however, long continue to occupy the position, as he was\ndeposed by the same Roman magistrate, Vitellius, at the feast of\nPentecost in the very same year, his brother Theophilus being\nappointed high priest in his room; so completely was the whole\nLevitical hierarchy, the entire Jewish establishment, ruled by the\npolitical officers of the Roman state. This Theophilus continued to\nhold the office for five or six years, and it must have been to\nTheophilus that Saul applied for letters unto Damascus authorising him\nto arrest the adherents of the new religion.[21]\n\n  [21] The references for all these changes are given in Lewin's\n  _Fasti_, and in his _Life of St. Paul_, with which Josephus,\n  _Antiqq._, XVIII., iv., should be compared.\n\nAnd now a question here arises, How is it that the high priest could\nexercise such powers and arrest his co-religionists in a foreign town?\nThe answer to this sheds a flood of light upon the state of the Jews\nof the Dispersion, as they were called. I have already said a little\non this point, but it demands fuller discussion.[22] The high priest\nat Jerusalem was regarded as a kind of head of the whole nation. He\nwas viewed by the Romans as the Prince of the Jews,[23] with whom they\ncould formally treat, and by whom they could manage a nation which,\ndiffering from all others in its manners and customs, was scattered\nall over the world, and often gave much trouble. Julius C\u00e6sar laid\ndown the lines on which Jewish privileges and Roman policy were based,\nand that half a century before the Christian era. Julius C\u00e6sar had\nbeen greatly assisted in his Alexandrian war by the Jewish high priest\nHyrcanus, so he issued an edict in the year 47 B.C., which, after\nreciting the services of Hyrcanus, proceeds thus, \"I command that\nHyrcanus and his children do retain all the rights of the high priest,\nwhether established by law or accorded by courtesy; and if hereafter\nany question arise touching the Jewish polity, I desire that the\ndetermination thereof be referred to him\"; an edict which, confirmed\nas it was again and again, not only by Julius C\u00e6sar, but by several\nsubsequent emperors, gave the high priest the fullest jurisdiction\nover the Jews, wherever they dwelt, in things pertaining to their own\nreligion.[24] It was therefore in strictest accord with Roman law and\ncustom that, when Saul wished to arrest members of the synagogue at\nDamascus, he should make application to the high priest Theophilus for\na warrant enabling him to effect his purpose.\n\n  [22] See vol. i., pp. 174-6, 271.\n\n  [23] The decree of Julius C\u00e6sar, upon which the Jewish privileges\n  were built, expressly calls the high priest the ethnarch\n  (\u1f10\u03b8\u03bd\u03ac\u03c1\u03c7\u03b7\u03c2), or ruler, of the Jews. See Josephus, _Antiqq._,\n  XIV., x., 3.\n\n  [24] This point is worked out at great length and with a multitude\n  of references in Lewin's _Life of St. Paul_, ch. iv., vol. i., pp.\n  44-7. Josephus, in his _Antiquities_, book xiv., ch. x., gives the\n  words of C\u00e6sar's decree. In ch. viii. of the same book he\n  describes the warlike assistance lent by the Jews to Julius C\u00e6sar\n  in his Egyptian campaign.\n\nThe description, too, given of the disciples in this passage is very\nnoteworthy and a striking evidence of the truthfulness of the\nnarrative. The disciples were the men of \"the Way.\" Saul desired to\nbring any of \"the Way\" found at Damascus to be judged at Jerusalem,\nbecause the Sanhedrin alone possessed the right to pass capital\nsentences in matters of religion. The synagogues at Damascus or\nanywhere else could flog culprits, and a Jew could get no redress for\nany such ill-treatment even if he sought it, which would have not been\nat all likely; but if the final sentence of death were to be passed,\nthe Jerusalem Sanhedrin was the only tribunal competent to entertain\nsuch questions.[25] And the persons he desired to hale before this\nawful tribunal were the men of the Way. This was the name by which, in\nits earliest and purest day, the Church called itself. In the\nnineteenth chapter and ninth verse we read of St. Paul's labours at\nEphesus and the opposition he endured: \"But when some were hardened\nand disobedient, speaking evil of the Way before the multitude\"; while\nagain, in his defence before Felix (xxiv. 14), we read, \"But this I\nconfess unto thee, that after the Way which they call a sect, so serve\nI the God of our fathers.\" The Revised translation of the New\nTestament has well brought out the force of the original in a manner\nthat was utterly missed in the Authorised Version, and has emphasized\nfor us a great truth concerning the early Christians. There was a\ncertain holy intolerance even about the very name they imposed upon\nthe earliest Church. It was the Way, the only Way, the Way of Life.\nThe earliest Christians had a lively recollection of what the Apostles\nhad heard from the mouth of the Master Himself, \"I am the Way, the\nTruth, and the Life; no one cometh unto the Father but by Me\"; and so,\nrealising the identity of Christ and His people, realising the\ncontinued presence of Christ in His Church, they designated that\nChurch by a term which expressed their belief that in it alone was the\nroad to peace, the sole path of access to God. This name \"the Way\"\nexpressed their sense of the importance of the truth. Their's was no\neasy-going religion which thought that it made not the slightest\nmatter what form of belief a man professed. They were awfully in\nearnest, because they knew of only one way to God, and that was the\nreligion and Church of Jesus Christ. Therefore it was that they were\nwilling to suffer all things rather than that they should lose this\nWay, or that others should miss it through their default. The\nmarvellous, the intense missionary efforts of the primitive Church\nfind their explanation in this expression, the Way. God had revealed\nthe Way and had called themselves into it, and their great duty in\nlife was to make others know the greatness of this salvation; or, as\nSt. Paul puts it, \"Necessity is laid upon me; woe is unto me if I\npreach not the gospel.\"[26]\n\n  [25] I know it is a common opinion that the Jews had no power of\n  capital punishment and that the Romans permitted the infliction\n  merely of scourgings and such minor penalties. Lightfoot, in his\n  _Hor\u00e6 Hebraic\u00e6_ on Matt. xxvi. 3; John xviii. 31; Acts ix. 2,\n  controverts this view in long and learned notes. The Jews\n  certainly stated to Pilate, according to John xviii. 31, \"It is\n  not lawful for us to put any man to death.\" But then, on the other\n  hand, the Sanhedrin put St. Stephen to death, and St. Paul tells\n  us that when the saints were put to death he voted against them;\n  showing that the Sanhedrin did put many of the disciples to death.\n  Lightfoot thinks that the Jews merely wished to throw the odium of\n  our Lord's execution upon the Romans, and therefore pleaded their\n  own inability to condemn Him for a capital offence, because of the\n  particular chamber where the Sanhedrin then sat, where it was\n  unlawful to judge a capital crime. The Pharisees, too, joined in\n  the attempt to bring about our Lord's death, and their traditions\n  made them averse to the shedding of Jewish blood by the Sanhedrin.\n  The Sadducees were, however, the dominant party in the year 37,\n  and they had no such scruples. They were always of a cruel and\n  bloodthirsty disposition and stern in their punishments, as\n  Josephus tells us in his _Antiqq._, XX., ix., 1. This was of\n  course the natural result of their material philosophy which\n  regarded man as devoid of any immortal principle. Lightfoot gives\n  instances too (Matt. xxvi. 3) of a priest's daughter burned to\n  death and of a man stoned at Lydda even after the destruction of\n  the city, showing that the Sanhedrin still contrived to exercise\n  capital jurisdiction. The time when Saul set out for Damascus was\n  very favourable from political reasons for any new or unusual\n  assumptions of authority on the part of the Sanhedrin. Vitellius\n  the Prefect was very anxious to be deferential in every way to the\n  Jewish authorities. He had just restored the custody of the high\n  priest's robes to the Sanhedrin and the priests. This may have\n  encouraged them to adopt the fiercest and sternest measures\n  against the new sectaries. As for the minor punishment of\n  flogging, the synagogues in Holland have been known to exercise it\n  so lately as the seventeenth century.\n\n  [26] The Acts of the Apostles in this respect throws an\n  interesting light upon the _Teaching of the Twelve Apostles_,\n  published a few years ago by Bishop Bryennius, and helps us to fix\n  its early date. That important relic of early Christianity never\n  speaks of the followers of the new religion as Christians. It\n  opens by describing the two ways, the way of Life, which is\n  Christianity, and the way of Death. It must therefore have been\n  composed when the memory of the Church's earliest designation,\n  \"the Way,\" was still fresh. By the time of Aristides (A.D. 125)\n  and of Pliny the title \"Christians\" was the common one both inside\n  and outside the Church.\n\nThe exclusive claims of Christianity are thus early set forth; and it\nwas these same exclusive claims which caused Christianity to be so\nhated and persecuted by the pagans.[27] The Roman Empire would not\nhave so bitterly resented the preaching of Christ, if His followers\nwould have accepted the position with which other religions were\ncontented. The Roman Empire was not intolerant of new ideas in matters\nof religion. Previous to the coming of our Lord the pagans had\nwelcomed the strange, mystic rites and teaching of Egypt. They\naccepted from Persia the curious system and worship of Mithras within\nthe first century after Christ's crucifixion. And tradition tells that\nat least two of the emperors were willing to admit the image of Christ\ninto the Pantheon, which they had consecrated to the memory of the\ngreat and good.[28] But the Christians would have nothing to say or do\nwith such partial honours for their Master. Religion for them was\nChrist alone or else it was nothing, and that because He alone was the\nWay. As there was but one God for them, so there was but one Mediator,\nChrist Jesus.\n\n  [27] This sense of the awful importance of Christianity as the Way\n  made the Christians enthusiastic and determined in their efforts\n  to spread their religion. In the earliest apology or defence of\n  Christianity, that of Aristides, which I have fully described in\n  the previous volume of this Commentary, we find this fact openly\n  avowed and gloried in as in the following passage: \"As for their\n  servants or handmaids, or their children, if they have any, they\n  persuade them to become Christians for the love they have towards\n  them; and when they have become so, they call them without\n  distinction brethren.\" A system so broad as to view all religions\n  as equally important would never have innate force enough to lead\n  a man to become a missionary, and most certainly never would have\n  produced a martyr. Christianity really understood is a very broad\n  religion; its essential dogmas are very few; but there is a kind\n  of breadth in religion now fashionable which the early Christians\n  never understood or they would not have acted as they did. Who\n  would have throw away his life amid the cruellest tortures if it\n  was all the same whether men worshipped Jupiter or Jesus Christ?\n\n  [28] Tertullian, about the year 200, tells us (_Apologet._, ch. v.\n  and xxi.) that the Emperor Tiberius, under whom our Lord suffered,\n  was so moved by Pilate's report of the miracles and resurrection\n  of Christ as to propose a bill to the Senate that Christ should be\n  received among the gods of Rome; while, as for Emperor Alexander\n  Severus, A.D. 222 to 235, he went even further. In Christ he\n  recognised a Divine Being equal with the other gods; and in his\n  domestic chapel he placed the bust of Christ along with the images\n  of those men whom he regarded as beings of a superior order--of\n  Apollonius of Tyana, and Orpheus, and such like. Heliogabalus,\n  A.D. 219, is credited with a desire to have blended Christianity\n  with the worship of the Sun: see Neander, _Church History_, vol.\n  i., pp. 128, 173, Bohn's edition.\n\nIII. _Saul's Journey._ \"As he journeyed, it came to pass that he drew\nnigh unto Damascus.\" This is the simple record left us in Holy Writ of\nthis momentous event. A comparison of the sacred record with any of\nthe numerous lives of St. Paul which have been published will show us\nhow very different their points of view. The mere human narratives\ndwell upon the external features of the scene, enlarge upon the light\nwhich modern discoveries have thrown upon the lines of road which\nconnected Jerusalem with Southern Syria, become enthusiastic over the\nbeauty of Damascus as seen by the traveller from Jerusalem, over the\neternal green of the groves and gardens which are still, as of old,\nmade glad by the waters of Abana and of Pharpar; while the sacred\nnarrative passes over all external details and marches straight to the\ngreat central fact of the persecutor's conversion. And we find no\nfault with this. It is well that the human narratives should enlarge\nas they do upon the outward features and circumstances of the\njourney, because they thus help us to realise the Acts as a veritable\nhistory that was lived and acted. We are too apt to idealise the\nBible, to think of it as dealing with an unreal world, and to regard\nthe men and women thereof as beings of another type from ourselves.\nBooks like Farrar's and Lewin's and Conybeare and Howson's _Lives of\nSt. Paul_ correct this tendency, and make the Acts of the Apostles\ninfinitely more interesting by rendering St. Paul's career human and\nlifelike and clothing it with the charm of local detail. It is thus\nthat we can guess at the very road by which the enthusiastic Saul\ntravelled. The caravans from Egypt to Damascus are intensely\nconservative in their routes. In fact, even in our own revolutionary\nWest trade and commerce preserve in large measure the same routes\nto-day as they used two thousand years ago. The great railways of\nEngland, and much more the great main roads, preserve in a large\ndegree the same directions which the ancient Roman roads observed. In\nIreland, with which I am still better acquainted, I know that the\ngreat roads starting from Dublin preserve in the main the same lines\nas in the days of St. Patrick.[29] And so it is, but only to a much\ngreater degree, in Palestine and throughout the East. The road from\nJerusalem to Jericho preserved in St. Jerome's time, four centuries\nlater, the same direction and the same character as in our Lord's day,\nso that it was then called the Bloody Road, from the frequent\nrobberies; and thus it is still, for the pilgrims who now go to visit\nthe Jordan are furnished with a guard of Turkish soldiers to protect\nthem from the Arab bandits. And to-day, as in the first century, the\ncaravans from Egypt and Jerusalem to Damascus follow either of two\nroads: one which proceeds through Gaza and Ramleh, along the coast,\nand then, turning eastward about the borders of Samaria and Galilee,\ncrosses the Jordan and proceeds through the desert to Damascus--that\nis the Egyptian road;[30] while the other, which serves for travellers\nfrom Jerusalem, runs due north from that city and joins the other road\nat the entrance to Galilee. This latter was probably the road which\nSt. Paul took. The distance which he had to traverse is not very\ngreat. One hundred and thirty-six miles separate Jerusalem from\nDamascus, a journey which is performed in five or six days by such a\ncompany as Saul had with him. We get a hint, too, of the manner in\nwhich he travelled. He rode probably on a horse or a mule, like modern\ntravellers on the same road, as we gather from Acts ix. 4 compared\nwith xxii. 7, passages which represent Saul and his companions as\nfalling to the earth when the supernatural light flashed upon their\nastonished vision.\n\n  [29] See Petrie's \"Tara\" in the _Transactions of the Royal Irish\n  Academy_, t. xviii., and _Ireland and the Celtic Church_, by G. T.\n  Stokes, pp. 80, 81, for illustrations of this point.\n\n  [30] See Geikie's _The Holy Land and the Bible_, p. 38.\n\nThe exact spot where Saul was arrested in his mad career is a matter\nof some debate; some fix it close to the city of Damascus, half a mile\nor so from the south gate on the high road to Jerusalem. Dr. Porter,\nwhose long residence at Damascus made him an authority on the\nlocality, places the scene of the conversion at the village of\nCaucabe, ten miles away, where the traveller from Jerusalem gets his\nfirst glimpse of the towers and groves of Damascus. We are not anxious\nto determine this point. The great spiritual truth which is the\ncentre and core of the whole matter remains, and that central truth is\nthis, that it was when he drew near to Damascus and the crowning act\nof violence seemed at hand, then the Lord put forth His power--as He\nso often still does just when men are about to commit some dire\noffence--arrested the persecutor, and then, amid the darkness of that\nabounding light, there rose upon the vision of the astonished Saul at\nCaucabe, \"the place of the star,\" that true Star of Bethlehem which\nnever ceased its clear shining for him till he came unto the perfect\nday.[31]\n\n  [31] The question of the site of the conversion is discussed at\n  length in Lewin's _St. Paul_, vol. i., ch. v., p. 49.\n\nIV. Lastly we have the actual conversion of the Apostle and the\ncircumstances of it. We have mention made in this connexion of the\nlight, the voice, and the conversation. These leading circumstances\nare described in exactly the same way in the three great accounts in\nthe ninth, in the twenty-second, and in the twenty-sixth chapters.\nThere are minute differences between them, but only such differences\nas are natural between the verbal descriptions given at different\ntimes by a truthful and vigorous speaker, who, conscious of honest\npurpose, did not stop to weigh his every word. All three accounts tell\nof the light; they all agree on that. St. Paul in his speeches at\nJerusalem unhesitatingly declares that the light which he beheld was a\nsupernatural one, above the brightness, the fierce, intolerable\nbrightness of a Syrian sun at midday; and boldly asserts that the\nattendants and escort who were with him saw the light. Those who\ndisbelieve in the supernatural reject, of course, this assertion, and\nresolve the light into a fainting fit brought upon Saul by the\nburning heat, or into a passing sirocco blast from the Arabian\ndesert. But the sincere and humble believer may fairly ask, Could a\nfainting fit or a breath of hot wind change a man who had stood out\nagainst Stephen's eloquence and Stephen's death and the witnessed\nsufferings and patience displayed by the multitudes of men and women\nwhom he had pursued unto the death? But it is not our purpose to\ndiscuss these questions in any controversial spirit. Time and space\nwould fail to treat of them aright, specially as they have been fully\ndiscussed already in works like Lord Lyttelton on the conversion of\nSt. Paul, wholly devoted to such aspects of these events.[32] But,\nlooking at them from a believer's point of view, we can see good\nreasons why the supernatural light should have been granted. Next to\nthe life and death and resurrection of our Lord, the conversion of St.\nPaul was the most important event the world ever saw. Our Lord made to\nthe fiery persecutor a special revelation of Himself in the mode of\nHis existence in the unseen world, in the reality, truth, and fulness\nof His humanity, such as He never made to any other human being. The\nspecial character of the revelation shows the importance that Christ\nattached to the person and the personal character of him who was the\nobject of that revelation. Just, then, as we maintain that there was a\nfitness when there was an Incarnation of God that miracles should\nattend it; so, too, when the greatest instrument and agent in\npropagating a knowledge of that Incarnation was to be converted, it\nwas natural that a supernatural agency should have been employed. And\nthen when the devout mind surveys the records of Scripture how similar\nwe see St. Paul's conversion to have been to other great conversions.\nMoses is converted from mere worldly thoughts and pastoral labours on\nwhich his soul is bent, and sent back to tasks which he had abandoned\nfor forty years, to the great work of freeing the people of God and\nleading them to the Land of Promise; and then a vision is granted,\nwhere light, a supernatural light, the light of the burning bush, is\nmanifested. Isaiah and Daniel had visions granted to them when a great\nwork was to be done and a great witness had to be borne, and\nsupernatural light and glory played a great part in their cases.[33]\nWhen the Lord was born in Bethlehem, and the revelation of the\nIncarnate God had to be made to humble faith and lowly piety, then the\nglory of the Lord, a light from out God's secret temple, shone forth\nto lead the worshippers to Bethlehem. And so, too, in St. Paul's case;\na world's spiritual welfare was at stake, a crisis in the world's\nspiritual history, a great turning-point in the Divine plan of\nsalvation had arrived, and it was most fitting that the veil which\nshrouds the unseen from mortal gaze should be drawn back for a moment,\nand that not Saul alone but his attendants should stand astonished at\nthe glory of the light above the brightness of the sun which\naccompanied Christ's manifestation.[34]\n\n  [32] Lord Lyttelton's _Observations on the Conversion of St. Paul_\n  is a work now almost unknown to ordinary students of the Bible. It\n  was written in the reign of George II. by the Lord Lyttelton of\n  that day famous as a historian and a poet. Dr. Johnson said of it\n  that it is \"a treatise to which infidelity has never been able to\n  fabricate a specious answer.\" It will be found reprinted in a\n  cheap and handy shape by the Religious Tract Society, with a\n  valuable preface by the well-known Henry Rogers. Lord Lyttelton\n  touches upon the subject of the light seen by St. Paul on p. 164,\n  and then adds, \"That God should work miracles for the\n  establishment of a most holy religion which, from the insuperable\n  difficulties that stood in the way of it, could not have\n  established itself without such an assistance, is no way repugnant\n  to human reason; but that without any miracles such things (as the\n  light above the brightness of the sun and St. Paul's blindness)\n  should have happened as no adequate natural causes can be assigned\n  for is what human reason cannot believe.\"\n\n  [33] See Exod. iii., Isa. vi., and Dan. x.\n\n  [34] Here it may be well to point out that people should not fancy\n  that their own spiritual experience must necessarily be like St.\n  Paul's. Some persons have troubled themselves because they could\n  not say that they had passed exactly through the same religious\n  feelings and struggles as St. Paul's. But as no two leaves are\n  alike and as no two careers are exactly parallel, so no two\n  spiritual experiences are exactly the same. The true course for\n  any individual to adopt is not to strive and see whether God's\n  dealings with himself and the response which his own spirit has\n  made to the Divine Voice have been exactly like those of others.\n  His true course is rather to strive and ascertain whether he is\n  now really following, obeying, and loving God. He may leave all\n  inquiry as to the methods by which God has guided his soul into\n  the paths of peace to be hereafter resolved in the clear light of\n  eternity. Some God awakens, as He did St. Paul, by an awful\n  catastrophe; others grow up before Him from infancy like Samuel\n  and Timothy; others God gradually changes from sin and worldliness\n  to peace and righteousness, like Jacob of old time.\n\nThen, again, we have the voice that was heard. Difficulties have been\nalso raised in this direction. In the ninth chapter St. Luke states\nthat the attendant escort \"heard a voice\"; in the twenty-second\nchapter St. Paul states \"they that were with me beheld indeed the\nlight, but they heard not the voice of Him that spake to me.\" This\ninconsistency is, however, a mere surface one. Just as it was in the\ncase of our Lord Himself reported in John xii. 28, 29, where the\nmultitude heard a voice but understood not its meaning, some saying\nthat it thundered, others that an angel had spoken, while Christ alone\nunderstood and interpreted it; so it was in St. Paul's case; the\nescort heard a noise, but the Apostle alone understood the sounds, and\nfor him alone they formed articulate words, by him alone was heard\nthe voice of Him that spake. And the cause of this is explained by St.\nPaul himself in chapter xxvi., verse 14, where he tells King Agrippa\nthat the voice spake to him in the Hebrew tongue, the ancient Hebrew\nthat is, which St. Paul as a learned rabbinical scholar could\nunderstand, but which conveyed no meaning to the members of the\ntemple-police, the servants, and constables of the Sanhedrin who\naccompanied him.[35] Many other questions have here been raised and\ndifficulties without end propounded, because we are dealing with a\nregion of man's nature and of God's domain, wherewith we have but\nlittle acquaintance and to which the laws of ordinary philosophy do\nnot apply. Was the voice which Paul heard, was the vision of Christ\ngranted to him, subjective or objective? is, for instance, one of such\nidle queries. We know, indeed, that these terms subjective and\nobjective have a meaning for ordinary life. Subjective in such a\nconnexion means that which has its origin, its rise, its existence\nwholly within man's soul; objective that which comes from without and\nhas its origin outside man's nature. Objective, doubtless, St. Paul's\nrevelation was in this sense. His revelation must have come from\noutside, or else how do we account for the conversion of the\npersecuting Sanhedrist, and that in a moment? He had withstood every\nother influence, and now he yields himself in a moment the lifelong\nwilling captive of Christ when no human voice or argument or presence\nis near. But then, if asked how did he see Christ when he was blinded\nwith the heavenly glory? how did he speak to Christ when even the\nescort stood speechless? we confess then that we are landed in a\nregion of which we are totally ignorant and are merely striving to\nintrude into the things unseen. But who is there that will now assert\nthat the human eye is the only organ by which man can see? that the\nhuman tongue is the only organ by which the spirit can converse? The\ninvestigations of modern psychology have taught men to be somewhat\nmore modest than they were a generation or two ago, when man in his\nconceit thought that he had gained the very utmost limits of science\nand of knowledge. These investigations have led men to realise that\nthere are vast tracts of an unknown country, man's spiritual and\nmental nature, yet to be explored, and even then there must always\nremain regions where no human student can ever venture and whence no\ntraveller can ever return to tell the tale. But all these regions are\nsubject to God's absolute sway, and vain will be our efforts to\ndetermine the methods of his actions in a sphere of which we are\nwell-nigh completely ignorant. For the Christian it will be sufficient\nto accept on the testimony of St. Paul, confirmed by Ananias, his\nearliest Christian teacher, that Jesus Christ was seen by him,[36] and\nthat a voice was heard for the first time in the silence of his soul\nwhich never ceased to speak until the things of time and sense were\nexchanged for the full fruition of Christ's glorious presence.\n\n  [35] The Rev. Dr. Abbott, Fellow of Trinity College, Dublin, in a\n  learned work, _Biblical Essays_, lately published, pp. 142 and\n  146, points out that the lower classes of the Jewish population\n  did not understand the ancient Hebrew, a knowledge of which was in\n  his opinion confined to a few scholars. Cf. also p. 168, where he\n  writes, \"It deserves to be noticed that for the vast majority of\n  the Palestinians the Greek Bible was the only one accessible. The\n  knowledge of the ancient Hebrew was confined to a few scholars, in\n  addition to which the Hebrew books were extremely expensive.\"\n\n  [36] There is nothing about St. Paul's seeing the Lord in the\n  narrative of the conversion in Acts ix. 4-7; but St. Paul asserts\n  that he saw Christ, in his speech before Agrippa, when he\n  represents our Lord as saying (xxvi. 16): \"For to this end have I\n  _appeared_ unto thee to appoint thee a minister,\" etc. And again\n  in 1 Cor. xv. 8, \"And last of all, as unto one born out of due\n  time, He _appeared_ to me also\"; with which should be compared the\n  words of Ananias (ix. 17): \"The Lord who _appeared_ unto thee in\n  the way which thou camest\"; and those of Barnabas (ix. 27): \"But\n  Barnabas declared unto them how Saul had _seen_ the Lord in the\n  way.\" The reader would do well to consult Lewin's _St. Paul_, vol.\n  i., ch. iv., p. 50, for a learned note concerning the apparent\n  inconsistencies in the various narratives of the conversion.\n\nAnd then, lastly, we have the conversation held with the trembling\npenitent. St. Luke's account of it in the ninth chapter is much\nbriefer than St. Paul's own fuller statement in the twenty-sixth\nchapter, and much of it will most naturally come under our notice at a\nsubsequent period. Here, however, we note the expressive fact that the\nvery name by which the future apostle was addressed by the Lord was\nHebrew: \"Saul, Saul, why persecutest thou Me.\" It is a point that our\nEnglish translation cannot bring out, no matter how accurate. In the\nnarrative hitherto the name used has been the Greek form, and he has\nbeen regularly called \u03a3\u03b1\u1fe6\u03bb\u03bf\u03c2. But now the Lord appeals to\nthe very foundations of his religious life, and throws him back upon\nthe thought and manifestation of God as revealed of old time to His\ngreatest leader and champion under the old covenant, to Moses in the\nbush; and so Christ uses not his Greek name but the Hebrew, \u03a3\u03b1\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb,\n\u03a3\u03b1\u03bf\u03cd\u03bb. Then we have St. Paul's query, \"Who art Thou, Lord?\" coupled\nwith our Lord's reply, \"I am Jesus whom thou persecutest,\" or, as St.\nPaul himself puts it in Acts xxii. 8, \"I am Jesus of Nazareth, whom\nthou persecutest.\" Ancient expositors have well noted the import of\nthis language. Saul asks who is speaking to him, and the answer is\nnot, The Eternal Word who is from everlasting, the Son of the Infinite\nOne who ruleth in the heavens. Saul would have acknowledged at once\nthat his efforts were not aimed at Him. But the speaker cuts right\nacross the line of Saul's prejudices and feelings, for He says, \"I am\nJesus of Nazareth,\" whom you hate so intensely and against whom all\nyour efforts are aimed, emphasizing those points against which his\nPharisaic prejudices must have most of all revolted. As an ancient\nEnglish commentator who lived more than a thousand years ago, treating\nof this passage, remarks with profound spiritual insight, Saul is\ncalled in these words to view the depths of Christ's humiliation that\nhe may lay aside the scales of his own spiritual pride.[37] And then\nfinally we have Christ identifying Himself with His people, and\nechoing for us from heaven the language and teaching He had used upon\nearth. \"I am Jesus of Nazareth whom thou persecutest\" are words\nembodying exactly the same teaching as the solemn language in the\nparable of the Judgment scene contained in Matthew xxv. 31-46:\n\"Inasmuch as ye did it unto one of these My brethren, ye did it unto\nMe.\" Christ and His people are evermore one; their trials are His\ntrials, their sorrows are His sorrows, their strength is His strength.\nWhat marvellous power to sustain the soul, to confirm the weakness, to\nsupport and quicken the fainting courage of Christ's people, we find\nin this expression, \"I am Jesus whom thou persecutest\"! They enable us\nto understand the undaunted spirit which henceforth animated the new\nconvert, and declare the secret spring of those triumphant\nexpressions, \"In all these things we are more than conquerors,\"\n\"Thanks be to God which giveth us the victory through our Lord Jesus\nChrist.\" If Christ in the supra-sensuous world and we in the world of\ntime are eternally one, what matter the changes and chances of earth,\nthe persecutions and trials of time? They may inflict upon us a little\ntemporary inconvenience, but they are all shared by One whose love\nmakes them His own and whose grace amply sustains us beneath their\nburden. Christ's people faint not therefore, for they are looking not\nat the things seen, which are temporal, but at the things unseen,\nwhich are eternal.\n\n  [37] See Cornelius \u00e0 Lapide on Acts ix. 5, quoting from Bede; and\n  St. Chrysostom in Cramer's _Catena_, p. 152, as quoted in\n  Conybeare and Howson's _St. Paul_, vol. i., ch. iii., p. 111\n  (London, 1877).\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER III.\n\n_THE NEW CONVERT AND HIS HUMAN TEACHER._\n\n     \"Now there was a certain disciple at Damascus, named Ananias; and\n     the Lord said unto him in a vision, Ananias. And he said, Behold,\n     I am here, Lord. And the Lord said unto him, Arise, and go to the\n     street which is called Straight, and inquire in the house of\n     Judas for one named Saul, a man of Tarsus: for behold, he\n     prayeth.\"--ACTS ix. 10, 11.\n\n\nSaul of Tarsus was converted outside the city, but the work was only\nbegun there. Christ would put honour upon the work of human ministry,\nand therefore He directs the stricken sinner to continue his journey\nand enter into Damascus, where he should be instructed in his future\ncourse of action, though Christ Himself might have told him all that\nwas needful. It was much the same on the occasion of the so-called\nconversion of Cornelius, the pious centurion.[38] The Lord made a\nrevelation to the centurion, but it was only a revelation directing\nhim to send for Peter who should instruct him in the way of salvation.\nGod instituted a human ministry that man might gain light and\nknowledge by the means and assistance of his brother-man, and\ntherefore in both cases the Lord points the anxious inquirer to men\nlike themselves, who could speak to them in Christ's stead and guide\nthem into fuller knowledge. Why could not Christ have revealed the\nwhole story of His life, the full meaning of His doctrine, without\nhuman aid or intervention, save that He wished, even in the very case\nof the messenger whose call and apostleship were neither by man nor\nthrough man, to honour the human agency which He had ordained for the\ndissemination and establishment of the gospel. If immediate revelation\nand the conscious presence of God and the direct work of the Spirit\ncould ever have absolved penitent sinners from using a human ministry\nand seeking direction and help from mortals like themselves, surely it\nwas in the cases of Saul of Tarsus and Cornelius of C\u00e6sarea; and yet\nin both cases a very important portion of the revelation made\nconsisted in a simple intimation where human assistance could be\nfound.[39]\n\n  [38] Conversion is scarcely a fit word to apply to the Lord's\n  dealings with Cornelius. He had evidently been converted long\n  before the angelic message and Peter's preaching, else whence his\n  prayers and devotion? The Lord simply made by St. Peter a fuller\n  revelation of His will to a soul longing to know more of God.\n\n  [39] We should carefully observe, however, that there is a marked\n  difference between the cases of Cornelius and Saul. An angel\n  appeared to Cornelius, Christ Himself to Saul. St. Peter is sent\n  to Cornelius to instruct him in the revelation made by Christ.\n  That revelation was made by Christ Himself to Saul in the vision\n  by the way, during the three days of his blindness, and probably\n  during his stay in Arabia. Ananias was sent to Saul merely to\n  baptize him, and predict his future. \"Enter into the city and\n  there it shall be told thee what thou shalt _do_,\" is our Lord's\n  direction to Saul. St. Paul's knowledge of Christ was neither by\n  man nor through man. His knowledge even about the institution of\n  the sacraments was by immediate revelation: see 1 Cor. xi. 23.\n\nSaul after the vision rose up from the earth and was led by the hand\ninto Damascus. He was there three days without sight, wherein he\nneither did eat nor drink. This period of his life and this terrible\nexperience is regarded by many as the time to which may be traced the\nweakness of eyesight and the delicate vision under which he ever\nafterwards suffered. The question has often been raised, What was St.\nPaul's thorn, or rather stake, in the flesh? Various opinions have\nbeen hazarded, but that which seems to me most likely to be true\nidentifies the thorn or stake with severe ophthalmia. Six substantial\nreasons are brought forward by Archdeacon Farrar in defence of this\nview. (1) When writing to the Galatians St. Paul implies that his\ninfirmity might well have made him an object of loathing to them; and\nthis is specially the case with ophthalmia in the East (see Gal. iv.\n14). (2) This supposition again gives a deeper meaning to the\nApostle's words to these same Galatians that they would at the\nbeginning of their Christian career have plucked out their eyes to\nplace them at his service (Gal. iv. 15). (3) The term \"a stake in the\nflesh\" is quite appropriate to the disease, which imparts to the eyes\nthe appearance of having been wounded by a sharp splinter. (4)\nOphthalmia of that kind might have caused epilepsy. (5) It would\nexplain the words \"See with how large letters I have written unto you\nwith mine own hand,\" as a natural reference to the difficulties the\nApostle experienced in writing, and would account for his constant use\nof amanuenses or secretaries in writing his Epistles, as noted, for\ninstance, in Romans xvi. 22 and implied in 1 Corinthians xvi. 21. (6)\nOphthalmia would account for St. Paul's ignorance of the person of the\nhigh priest (Acts xxiii. 5).[40] This question has, however, been a\nmoot point since the days of the second century, when Iren\u00e6us of Lyons\ndiscussed it in his great work against Heresies, book v., ch. iii.,\nand Tertullian suggested that St. Paul's stake in the flesh was\nsimply an exaggerated head-ache or ear-ache.[41]\n\n  [40] See Tertullian's _De Pudicitia_, \u00a7 13, and compare Bishop\n  Lightfoot's _Galatians_, p. 183 note.\n\n  [41] See Dr. Farrar's long Excursus X., vol. i., p. 652, in his\n  _Life of St. Paul_, for a discussion of this question. There is a\n  portrait of St. Paul in Lewin's _St. Paul_, ii., 210, which shows\n  him as blear-eyed. It is engraved from a Roman diptych of the\n  fourth century. Lightfoot takes quite another view of the thorn in\n  his _Galatians_, pp. 183-8.\n\nLet us now, however, turn to the more certain facts brought before us\nin the words of the sacred narrative. St. Paul was led by the hand\ninto Damascus just as afterwards, on account, doubtless, of the same\nbodily infirmity dating from this crisis, he \"was sent forth to go as\nfar as to the sea,\" and then \"was conducted as far as Athens\" (cf.\nActs xvii. 10, 14, 15). From this time forth the kindly assistance of\nfriends and companions became absolutely necessary to the Apostle if\nhis footsteps were to be guided aright, and hence it is that he felt\nsolitude such as he endured at Athens a very trying time because he\nhad no sense of security whenever he ventured to walk abroad. He\nbecame, in fact, a blind man striving to thread his way through the\ncrowded footpaths of life. The high priest's commissary must then have\ndrawn near to Damascus under very different circumstances from those\nwhich fancy pictured for him a few days before. We know not by what\ngate he entered the city. We only know that he made his way to the\nhouse of Judas, where he remained for three days and three nights,\nwith his whole soul so wrapt up in the wonders revealed to him that he\nhad no thoughts for bodily wants and no sense of their demands.\n\nThe sacred narrative has been amply vindicated so far as its\ntopographical accuracy is concerned. Saul, as he was led by the hand,\ninstructed his escort to go to the house of Judas, a leading man we\nmay be sure among the Jews of Damascus. He dwelt in Straight Street,\nand that street remains to-day, as in St. Paul's time, a thoroughfare\nrunning in a direct line from the eastern to the western gate of the\ncity. Like all Oriental cities which have fallen under Turkish\ndominion, Damascus no longer presents the stately, well-preserved, and\nflourishing aspect which it had in Roman times; and, in keeping with\nthe rest of the city, Straight Street has lost a great deal of the\nmagnificent proportions which it once possessed. Straight Street in\nSt. Paul's day extended from the eastern to the western gate,\ncompletely intersecting the city. It then was a noble thoroughfare one\nhundred feet broad, divided by Corinthian colonnades into three\navenues, the central one for foot passengers, the side passages for\nchariots and horses going in opposite directions. It was to a house in\nthis principal street in the city, the habitation of an opulent and\ndistinguished Jew, that the escort brought the blind emissary of the\nSanhedrin, and here they left him to await the development of God's\npurposes.[42]\n\n  [42] \"In the Roman age, and up to the period of the (Mahometan)\n  Conquest, a noble street extended in a straight line from\n  Bab-el-Jabyah (the West gate) to Bab Shurky (the East gate), thus\n  completely intersecting the city. It was divided by Corinthian\n  colonnades into three avenues, of which the central was for foot\n  passengers, and of the others one was used for chariots and\n  horsemen proceeding eastward, and the second for those going in\n  the opposite direction. I have been enabled to trace the remains\n  of the colonnades at various places over nearly one-third of the\n  length of this street. Wherever excavations are made in the line\n  fragments of columns are found _in situ_, at the depth, in some\n  places, of ten feet and more below the present surface, so great\n  has been the accumulation of rubbish during the course of ages.\n  There can scarcely be a doubt that this is 'the street called\n  Straight' referred to in the history of the Apostle Paul. Its\n  extreme length is about an English mile, and its breadth must have\n  exceeded 100 feet.\"--PORTER'S _Damascus_, p. 47.\n\nI. Let us now consider the persons which cluster round the new\nconvert, and specially the agent whom Christ used in the reception of\nSaul into the Church, and see what Scripture or tradition tells about\nthem. One man stands prominent; his name was Ananias, a common one\nenough among the Jews, as the Acts of the Apostles has already shown\nus, for when we have surveyed the first beginnings of sin and moral\nfailure in the Jerusalem Church we have found that an Ananias with\nSapphira his wife was connected therewith.[43] This Ananias of\nDamascus deserves special attention, for his case reveals to us a good\ndeal of primitive Church history and is connected with many ancient\ntraditions. Let us first strive to gain all the information we can\nabout him from the direct statements of Scripture and the necessary or\nlegitimate deductions from the same. Ananias was a Christian Jew of\nDamascus. He must have held a leading position in the local Christian\nAssembly in that city, within five years of the Ascension, for not\nonly did our Lord select him as His agent or medium of communication\nwhen dealing with the new convert, but Ananias was well acquainted, by\ninformation derived from many persons, with the course of conduct\npursued at Jerusalem by Saul, and knew of the commission lately\nintrusted to him by the high priest. Ananias was probably the head or\nchief teacher of the local Christian or Nazarene synagogue. At the\nsame time he was also in all probability one of the original company\nof Jerusalem Christians who had been scattered abroad by the first\ngreat persecution. We are told in Acts xi. 19 that \"they that were\nscattered abroad upon the tribulation that arose about Stephen\ntravelled as far as Ph\u0153nicia, and Cyprus, and Antioch, speaking the\nword to none save only to Jews.\" Ananias was probably one of these\nfugitives from Jerusalem who came to Damascus, and there sought refuge\nfrom the rage of the destroyer. St. Paul himself tells us of the\ncharacter which Ananias sustained at Damascus: \"He was a devout man\naccording to the law, well reported of by all the Jews that dwell\nthere\" (ch. xxii. 12). It is the character given of Zacharias, and\nElisabeth, and of Simeon. Ananias was, like all the earliest\ndisciples, a rigid observer of the minutest particulars of Jewish\nordinances, though he and they alike rested upon Christ alone as their\nhope of salvation. Further than this, the Scriptures tell us nothing\nsave that we can easily see from the words of the various narratives\nof the conversion that Ananias was a man of that clear faith, that\ndeep spiritual life which enjoyed perpetual converse with the Unseen.\nHe was not perturbed nor dismayed when Christ revealed Himself. He\nconversed calmly with the heavenly Visitor, raised his objections,\nreceived their solution, and then departed in humble obedience to\nfulfil the mission committed to him. There is a marvellous strength\nand power for the man of any age who lives, as Ananias did, with a\nclear vision of the eternal world constantly visible to the spiritual\neye. Life or death, things present or things to come, the world\ntemporal or the world spiritual, all are one to him who lives in the\nlight of God's countenance and walks beneath the shadow of His wing;\nfor he feels and knows that underneath are the everlasting Arms, and\nhe therefore discharges his tasks with an assured calmness, a quiet\ndignity, a heavenly strength of which the tempest-tossed and feverish\nchildren of time know nothing. Beyond these facts and these traits of\ncharacter, which we can read between the lines of Holy Scripture, we\nare told nothing of Ananias.[44] But tradition has not been so\nreticent. The ancient Church delighted to gather up every notice and\nevery story concerning the early soldiers of the Cross, and Ananias of\nDamascus was not forgotten. The Martyrologies both of the Greek and\nLatin Churches give us long accounts of him. They tell that he was\nborn in Damascus, and make him one of the seventy disciples, which is\nnot at all improbable. Then they describe him at one time as bishop,\nat another time as a simple presbyter, of the Church at Damascus.\nThey relate his abundant labours at Damascus and in the neighbouring\ncities, terminating with his martyrdom under a Roman prefect called\nLucian.[45] But these details, though they may lend colour to the\npicture, add nothing of spiritual significance to the information\nvouchsafed in Scripture.\n\n  [43] Josephus, in his _Antiquities_, xx., 23, tells us of an\n  Ananias, a Jewish merchant, who was instrumental in the conversion\n  of Helena, Queen of Adiabene. The name Ananias signifies \"Pleasing\n  to God.\" Ananias was also the name of the messenger who is said to\n  have conveyed the pretended letter of Abgar, King of Edessa, to\n  Christ. See _The Apocryphal Acts of the Apostles_, by R. A.\n  Lipsius (Leipsic, 1891), p. 274.\n\n  [44] St. Chrysostom, in his _Homilies on the Acts_, notes the\n  spiritual eminence of this hidden and unknown disciple. In his\n  nineteenth Homily he observes that when St. Philip, one of the\n  seven, was sent to baptize the eunuch, Christ did not appear but\n  merely sent an angel to the evangelist; but Christ Himself\n  appeared to Ananias, and opened out His whole will to him about\n  the future of St. Paul. His conversation with our Lord was, too,\n  that of one accustomed to Divine visitations and communion with\n  Heaven. See Massutius on the Life of St. Paul, p. 107. Massutius\n  was a Jesuit commentator, whose writings are often rich in\n  spiritual suggestiveness. He published his _Vita S. Pauli\n  Apostoli_ in 1633. In the first and ninth chapters of the second\n  book he has many acute and learned remarks upon Ananias and his\n  history. The calming effect upon life's fever of spiritual\n  religion and close converse with God is a point often dwelt upon\n  in Scripture. The Old Testament prophets knew this secret of a\n  peaceful life right well. Isaiah often sings of it, as in ch. xii.\n  2, \"Behold, God is my salvation; I will trust, and not be afraid\";\n  in ch. xxvi. 3, \"Thou wilt keep him in perfect peace, whose mind\n  is stayed on Thee\"; in ch. xxviii. 16, \"He that believeth shall\n  not make haste\"; in ch. xl. 31, \"They that wait upon the Lord\n  shall renew their strength; they shall mount up with wings as\n  eagles; they shall run, and not be weary; they shall walk, and not\n  faint.\" Habakkuk proclaims it in ch. iii. 17: \"For though the fig\n  tree shall not blossom, neither shall fruit be in the vines; the\n  labour of the olive shall fail, and the fields shall yield no\n  meat; the flock shall be cut off from the fold, and there shall be\n  no herd in the stalls: yet I will rejoice in the Lord, I will joy\n  in the God of my salvation.\" A strain which St. Paul takes up in\n  his Epistle to the Philippians when he bids them (ch. iv. 6), \"In\n  nothing be anxious; but in everything by prayer and supplication\n  with thanksgiving let your requests be made known unto God\"; to\n  which he adds the promise, not that their requests shall be\n  answered, for that would often be very unfortunate, but the much\n  more consoling one, \"And the peace of God, which passeth all\n  understanding, shall guard your hearts and your thoughts in Christ\n  Jesus.\" How much calmer and sweeter life would be did Christ's\n  people thus realise their privileges as God's ancient servants\n  did! Ninety per cent. of life's worries and anxieties would thus\n  pass away for ever. Alas! how pagan nominal Christians are in this\n  respect!\n\n  [45] See, for both the Greek and Latin stories about Ananias,\n  _Acta Sanctorum_, Ed. Bolland., 25 Jan., ii., 613.\n\nJudas, into whose house Saul was received, is another person brought\nbefore us, upon whom a certain eternity of fame has been bestowed by\nhis temporary connexion with the Apostle. He must have been a man of\nposition and wealth among the Jews of Damascus to receive the official\nrepresentative and deputy of the high priest. It is possible that he\nmay have been numbered among those early trophies of St. Paul's zeal\nwhich he won in the earliest days of his first love, when he\n\"confounded the Jews, proving that Jesus is Christ.\" Judas has been\nby some identified with that Judas who was sent with St. Paul, Silas,\nand Barnabas as deputies to console the Church at Antioch and restore\nit to peace when distracted with debates about circumcision (ch. xv.\n22).[46]\n\n  [46] Judas of Acts xv. 22 is surnamed Barsabbas, as is also Joseph\n  Justus of Acts i. 23. Lightfoot, _Hor. Heb._, on Acts i.,\n  conjectures that Judas of Acts xv. may have been the apostle of\n  that name and that Joseph Justus was his brother.\n\nAnd now, to conclude this portion of our subject, we may add that the\ntraditional houses, or at least the sites of the houses, of Ananias\nand Judas, together with the fountain where St. Paul was baptized,\nwere shown in Damascus till the seventeenth century, as Quaresmius, a\ntraveller of that time, tells us that he visited the Straight Street,\nwhich is the bazaar, and saw the house of Judas, a large and\ncommodious building, with traces of having been once a church and then\na mosque; that he visited the place of baptism, which is not far off,\nadding withal a ground plan of the house of Ananias. Dean Stanley,\nhowever, declares that the traditional house of Judas is not in the\nstreet called Straight at all. Let us turn aside from these details,\nthe mere fringes of the story, to the spiritual heart and core\nthereof.[47]\n\n  [47] The seventeenth-century travellers in Palestine, Syria, and\n  the East often give us much valuable information. See, on the\n  subject of Damascus, Quaresmius, _Elucidatio Terr\u00e6 Sanct\u00e6_, t.\n  ii., lib. 7, Peregrinatio 6, cap. 3, with which may be compared\n  Radzivilus, _Peregrinatio_, p. 33, A.D. 1614. See also Conybeare\n  and Howson's _St. Paul_, ch. iii.\n\nII. The conversation between Christ and Ananias next claims our\nattention. Here we may note that it was the Lord Jesus Christ Himself\nwho appeared to Ananias, and when appearing makes the most tremendous\nclaims for Himself and allows them when made by Ananias. We are so\naccustomed to the words of the narrative that we do not recognise\ntheir bold assumptions and what they imply. The Lord calls Ananias, as\nHe called Samuel of old, and then receives the same answer as Samuel\ngave, \"Behold I am here, Lord.\" Ananias speaks to Jesus Christ of the\ndisciples, and describes them as \"_Thy_ saints, who call upon _Thy_\nname.\" He knew that prayer to Jesus Christ was practised by them and\nconstituted their special note or mark. Our Lord describes St. Paul\n\"as a chosen vessel unto _Me_, to bear _My name_ before the Gentiles\nand kings, and the children of Israel, for _I_ will show him how many\nthings he must suffer for _My name's_ sake.\" While again, when Ananias\ncame into the house of Judas, he is so completely dominated by the\nidea of Jesus Christ, His presence, His power, His mission, that his\nwords are, \"The Lord Jesus hath sent me that thou mayest receive thy\nsight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.\" In these passages we have a\nview of primitive Christianity and its doctrine as taught by Christ\nHimself, by His earliest disciples, and as viewed and recorded by the\nsecond generation of Christians, and it is all the same from whatever\npoint it is looked at. The earliest form of Christianity was Christ\nand nothing else. The personality of Christ dominated every other\nidea. There was no explaining away the historical facts of His life,\nthere was no watering down His supernatural actions and claims; the\nLord Jesus--and His ordinary human name was used--the Lord Jesus, whom\nthe Jews had known as the carpenter's son, and had rejected as the\nprophet of Nazareth, and had crucified as the pretended king of\nIsrael, He was for Ananias of Damascus the supernatural Being who now\nruled the universe, and struck down the persecutor of His people, and\nsent His messengers and apostles that they might with Divine power\nheal the wounded and comfort the broken-hearted. Ananias felt no\ndifficulty in identifying Jesus the despised, the crucified, with the\nLord of glory who had appeared to him, upon whose name he called and\nwith whom he communed. Jesus Christ was not for him a dream or a\nghost, or a passing appearance, or a distinguished teacher, or a\nmighty prophet, whose spirit lived with the souls of the good and\nblessed of every age at rest in paradise. The Jesus of Ananias was no\ninhabitant or child of earth, no matter how pure and exalted. The\nJesus of Nazareth was the Being of beings, who had a just right to\ncall God's people \"His saints,\" and to describe the great work of His\nmessengers and ministers to be that of \"bearing His name before the\nGentiles,\" because the Christianity of Ananias and of the earliest\nChurch was no poor, weak, diluted system of mere natural religion\nregarding Jesus Christ as a Divine prophet, but as nothing more. It\ntheorised not, indeed, about the Incarnation and the modes of the\nDivine existence. It was too much wrapped up in adoring the Divine\nmanifestations to trouble itself about such questions, which came to\nthe front when love waxed cold and men had time to analyse and debate.\nFor Ananias and for men like him it was sufficient to know that Jesus\nChrist was God manifest in the flesh. For them and for the earliest\nChurch that one fact embodied the whole of Christianity. Jesus Christ,\nthe same when living in Galilee, suffering in Jerusalem, ascending\nfrom Olivet, reigning on the right hand of the Majesty on high, or\nmanifesting Himself to His people, was the beginning and end of all\nreligion.\n\nThis is a very important point to insist upon in the present age, when\nmen have endeavoured to represent the religion of the primitive\nChurch in quite a different light, and to teach that St. Paul was the\ninventor of that dogmatic system which insists upon the supreme\nimportance and the essential deity of the Person of Jesus Christ. St.\nLuke's narrative in this passage seems to me quite decisive against\nsuch a theory, and shows us how Christianity struck an independent\nmind like that of Ananias, and how it was taught at a distant\nChristian Church like Damascus within five or at most seven years\nafter the Ascension of Jesus Christ.[48]\n\n  [48] Massutius, _loc. cit._, has a long chapter (book ii., ch. i.)\n  on the date of St. Paul's conversion. See Findlay's _Epistles of\n  St. Paul_, pp. 5, 6, for a concise statement of the arguments\n  concerning it. Lewin's _Fasti Sacri_, pp. lxvi. and 253, contains\n  long dissertations upon this point, a simple reference to which\n  must suffice.\n\nThen, again, we have in the vision granted to Ananias and the\nrevelation made to him a description of Christ's disciples. The\ndescription is a twofold one, coming on the one hand from Christ, and\non the other from Ananias, and yet they both agree. Ananias describes\nthe religion of Christ when he says, \"Lord, I have heard from many of\nthis man, how much evil he did to Thy saints at Jerusalem\"; and then\nhe proceeds to identify His \"saints\" with those that called on\nChrist's name at Damascus. We have already noted prayer to Christ as a\ndistinguishing feature of His people[49]; but here we find, for the\nfirst time in the New Testament, the term \"saints\" applied to the\nordinary followers of Christ, though in a short time it seems to have\nbecome the usual designation for the adherents of the crucified\nRedeemer, as we shall see by a reference to Rom. i. 7; 1 Cor. i. 2;\nEph. i. 1, and to numerous other passages scattered throughout the\nEpistles. Our Lord Himself sanctions the use of this title, and\napplies it Himself in a different shape in the fuller account of the\ndivine words given us by St. Paul in his speech before King Agrippa\n(ch. xxvi. 18). Christ tells St. Paul of his destined work \"to turn\nthe Gentiles from darkness to light, that they may receive an\ninheritance among them which are _sanctified_ by faith that is in Me.\"\nThe followers of Christ were recognised as saints in the true sense of\nthe word saint--that is, as separated, dedicated, consecrated persons,\nwho had been made to drink into one Divine Spirit, had been made\npartakers of a new life, had been admitted to a kingdom of light and a\nfellowship of love, and who, by virtue of these blessings, had been\ncut off from the power of Satan and the kingdom of darkness. And all\nthis had been and ever is to be effected \"by faith that is in Christ.\"\nChrist's saints or separated people are sanctified by faith in Christ.\nNot that the bare exercise of a faculty or feeling called faith will\nexercise a sanctifying influence upon human nature,--this would be\nsimply to make man his own sanctifier, and to usurp for his own poor\nweak wretched self the work and power which belong to the Holy Ghost\nalone,--but when Christ is realised as including all the parts of\nGod's final revelation, when no partial or limited view is taken of\nChrist's work as if it were limited to the Incarnation alone, or the\nAtonement alone, or the Resurrection alone, but when the diverse and\nvarious parts and laws of His revelation are recognised as divinely\ntaught, and therefore as tremendously important for the soul's health.\nWhen the Holy Ghost and His mission, and good works and their absolute\nnecessity, and Christ's sacraments and His other appointed means of\ngrace are duly honoured and reverently received, then indeed, and\nthen alone, faith is truly exercised in Christ, and men are not merely\nseparated by an external consecration, such as the Jews received at\ncircumcision, and which qualified even that hard-hearted and stubborn\npeople to be called a nation of saints; but when Christ is thus truly\nand fully received by faith into the hearts and affections of His\npeople, they walk worthy of the high vocation called upon them. Many a\nmistaken exposition has been offered of St. Paul's Epistles, and many\nan effort has been made to explain away the plainest statements,\nbecause men will apply a false meaning to the word saints which\nAnanias here uses. If we first determine that the word saint could\nonly have been applied to a truly converted man, clothed in the robe\nof Christ's imputed righteousness, elected from eternity to\neverlasting salvation, and who could never finally fall away, and then\nfind the term so defined applied, for instance, to the Corinthian\nChurch as a whole, we shall come to some strange results. If truly\nconverted men, true saints of Christ, could be guilty of sins such as\nwere not named amongst the heathen, or could be drunk at the Lord's\nTable, or could cherish all that long and dreary catalogue of\nspiritual crimes enumerated in the Corinthian Epistles, then indeed\nthe words true conversion have completely changed their meaning, and\nChristianity, instead of being the principle and fountain of a\nregenerate life, becomes a cloak under which all kinds of\nmaliciousness and evil-doing may have free course and be glorified.\n\n  [49] See vol. i., pp. 338-41.\n\nOur Lord protests beforehand unto St. Paul against such a perversion\nof the gospel of free grace with which His great Apostle had all his\nlife to struggle. Antinomianism is as old as St. Paul's doctrine--so\nvery much misunderstood--of justification. Our Lord raises His voice\nagainst it in His earliest commission to St. Paul when He sends him to\nthe Gentiles \"to turn them from darkness to light,\" that is, from\nmoral and spiritual darkness to moral and spiritual light, and \"from\nthe power of Satan unto God.\" And the New Testament often enough tells\nus what is meant by \"the power of Satan.\" It was not any mere system\nof false beliefs alone, but it was a wicked, impure belief joined and\nleading to a wicked and impure practice; and St. Paul's work was to\nturn the Gentiles from a wicked faith, combined with a still more\nwicked practice, to a life sanctified and purified and renewed after\nthe image of a living Christ.[50]\n\n  [50] I am referring in this passage to what we may designate the\n  Antinomian method of expounding First Corinthians still current in\n  many circles. They first determine that the word saint is always\n  used by St. Paul to express a truly converted man, one, therefore,\n  in their idea who has no need to ask pardon for sin and who never\n  can finally fall away. They then find this term \"saints\" applied\n  to the Corinthian Church, which must therefore have been composed\n  of truly converted men alone, else, they think, St. Paul would not\n  have called them saints. But then a difficulty arises, How about\n  the gross sins prevalent in that Church? Their peculiar system of\n  theology, however, rapidly solves this perplexing point. All the\n  sins of believers, past, present or to come, have been forgiven\n  long before they were born, therefore these gross immoralities at\n  Corinth were mere believer's slips, as I have heard them called. A\n  believer guilty of them should be sorry for them as causing scanda\n  to the world, but as far as final salvation is concerned he has\n  nothing to do with them save to assure himself of their pardon\n  wrought out by our Lord on the cross. Abundant instances of this\n  method of exposition will be found in the works of Dr. Williams,\n  the Nonconformist of the time of William III., founder of the\n  well-known library in Grafton Street, London. He had a great\n  controversy with the Antinomians of the day, who represented\n  themselves as the true champions of the doctrines of grace. They\n  were simply teaching the ancient Gnostic heresy that the soul can\n  be in communion with God while the body is all the time wallowing\n  in the depths of sin. Precisely the same views are now commonly\n  taught and called as in Williams's day, two hundred years ago,\n  \"the Gospel.\" If, however, we recognise the New Testament use of\n  the word saints as meaning \"dedicated to God, consecrated to His\n  service,\" the meaning of the First Corinthians and of the words of\n  Ananias is quite clear and plain, and no such immoral results\n  follow as the Antinomian exegesis implies, but rather the saintly\n  character of baptized Christians becomes the foundation of the\n  most practical exhortations to holiness of life.\n\nIII. Finally, we notice in this conversation, and that only very\nbriefly, the title given by our Lord to St. Paul, which became the\nfavourite designation of the Apostle of the Gentiles, especially among\nthe Western doctors of the ancient Church. \"Go thy way,\" says Christ\nto Ananias, \"for he is a chosen vessel unto Me,\" or, as the Revisers\nput it in the margin, translating still more literally from the\noriginal, \"for he is a vessel of election.\" \"Vas Electionis\" is the\nusual title for St. Paul in St. Jerome's letters, as also in St.\nChrysostom's homilies, and it expresses a side of his character which\nis prominent throughout his writings. Saul's early life was so\nalienated from Christ, his career had been so completely hostile to\nthe gospel, his conversion had been so entirely God's work and God's\nwork alone, that he ever felt and ever insisted more than the other\nNew Testament writers on God's electing love. If we compare the\nwritings of St. John with those of St. Paul, we shall see how\nnaturally and completely they reflect in their tone the history of\ntheir lives. St. John's life was one long continuous steady growth in\nDivine knowledge. There were no great gaps or breaks in that life, and\nso we find that his writings do not ignore God's electing love and\npreventing grace as the source of everything good in man. \"We love Him\nbecause He first loved us\" are words which show that St. John's gospel\nwas at bottom the same as St. Paul's. But St. John's favourite topic\nis the Incarnation and its importance, and its results in purity of\nheart and in a sweet consciousness of the Divine Spirit. St. Paul's\nlife, on the other hand, was no continuous upgrowth from youth's\nearliest day to life's latest eventide. There was a great gap, a\ntremendous yawning chasm separating the one portion from the other,\nand Paul never could forget that it was God's choice alone which\nturned the persecuting Rabbi into the Christian Apostle. His Epistles\nto the Romans, Ephesians, and Galatians amply testify to the effects\nof this doctrine upon his whole soul, and show that the expositors of\nthe early Church displayed a true instinct and gauged his character\naright when they designated him by this title, \"Vas Electionis.\" And\nyet the Apostle proved his Divine inspiration, for he held and taught\nthis truth in no one-sided manner. He combined the doctrine of\nelecting love with that of intense human free will and awful personal\nresponsibility. He made no effort intellectually to reconcile the two\nopposite sides of truth, but, wiser than many who followed him, he\naccepted both and found in them both, matter for practical guidance.\nGod's eternal and electing love made him humble; man's free will and\nresponsibility made him awfully in earnest. Two passages, drawn from\ndifferent Epistles, sufficiently explain St. Paul's view. Gal. i. 15,\n16--\"When it was the good pleasure of God, who separated me, even from\nmy mother's womb, and called me through His grace, to reveal His Son\nin me\"--are words which show how entirely St. Paul viewed himself as a\n\"Vas Electionis.\" 1 Cor. ix. 27--\"I buffet my body, and bring it into\nbondage, lest by any means, after that I have preached to others, I\nmyself should be rejected\"--are words showing how real and profound\nwas his fear of final defeat and ruin, how convinced he was that no\ndisplay of Divine grace or love assured him of his own final\nperseverance. It is well that people should notice this difference\nbetween the tone and spiritual experience of a Paul and of a John. At\ntimes sincere Christians have been troubled because their spiritual\nexperience and feelings have been very different from St. Paul's. They\nhave limited to a large extent their own reading of Scripture to his\nwritings, and have not noticed the clear distinction which Scripture\nmakes between the tone and ideas of St. Paul and St. Peter, St. James\nand St. John; and why? Just to meet this very tendency, and to show us\nthat spiritual experiences, feelings, temptations, must vary with the\nvarying circumstances of each individual. No saintly life can be taken\nas a universal model or standard; and, above all, the conversion of a\npersecutor and blasphemer like St. Paul is not to be taken as the\nnormal type of God's dealings with men, who grow up, like St. John or\nlike Timothy, in the paths of Divine love from their earliest\nchildhood.[51]\n\n  [51] It should be carefully noted that the great end of St. Paul's\n  election is set forth by our Lord when speaking to Ananias as \"to\n  bear My name before the Gentiles and kings, and the children of\n  Israel.\" From the very outset of Paul's Christian career his work\n  as the Apostle of the Gentiles is thus clearly revealed through\n  Ananias. I say _through_ Ananias, and not _to_ him; for I suppose\n  that Ananias could not himself have realised the real force and\n  meaning of the Divine words.\n\nThere is one common feature, however, which can be traced in all\nreligious lives, whether sternly and even violently ordered like\nSaul's, or gently guided like St. John's. They all agree in presenting\none feature when the fresh breath of the Spirit blows upon them and\nthe deeper sense of life's importance first dawns upon the vision, and\nthat is, they are all marked by prayer. Of every sincere seeker the\nDivine watcher, ever on the outlook for the signs of spiritual life,\nrepeats \"Behold, he prayeth.\" Saul, we may be sure, had never\nforgotten his duty in the matter of the prescribed round of Jewish\ndevotions; but now for the first time he rose above the level of mere\nmechanical saying of prayer to spiritual communion with God in Christ;\nnow for the first time he prayed a Christian prayer, through Christ\nand to Christ; now for the first time perhaps he learned one secret of\nthe spiritual life, which is this, that prayer is something wider and\nnobler than mere asking. Prayer is communion of the spirit with God\nreconciled in Christ Jesus. That communion is often deepest and most\ncomforting when enjoyed in simple silence. Saul, the converted\npersecutor, could know but little yet of what to ask from Christ. But\nin the revelations made in those hours of darkness and penitence and\nsilence, there were vouchsafed to him renewed proofs of the truths\nalready gained, and of the awful trials which those truths, realised\nand acted out, would demand from him, \"I will show him what things he\nmust suffer for My sake.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IV.\n\n_SAUL AND SINAI._\n\n     \"Saul was certain days with the disciples which were at Damascus.\n     And straightway in the synagogues he proclaimed Jesus, that He is\n     the Son of God.\"--ACTS ix. 19, 20.\n\n\nWe have bestowed a great deal of attention upon the incidents at\nDamascus, because the conversion of Saul of Tarsus is more closely\nconnected with the truth and authenticity of Christianity than any\nother event save those immediately connected with the life and\nministry of our Lord Himself. We shall, however, in this chapter,\nendeavour to discuss the remaining circumstances of it which the Acts\nof the Apostles brings under our notice.\n\nI. We are told in verse 17 of the visit of Ananias to Saul. \"Ananias\ndeparted, and entered into the house; and laying his hands on him\nsaid, Brother Saul, the Lord, even Jesus, who appeared unto thee in\nthe way which thou camest, hath sent me, that thou mayest receive thy\nsight, and be filled with the Holy Ghost.\" This conversation with\nAnanias is largely expanded by St. Paul himself in the account which\nhe gives us in Acts xxii., while in his speech to Agrippa in the\ntwenty-sixth chapter he entirely omits all mention of Ananias, and\nseems to introduce our Lord as the only person who spoke to him, and\nyet there is no real inconsistency. St. Paul, in fact, in the latter\naddress is intent on setting vividly before Agrippa the sum total of\nthe revelations made by Christ. He ignores, therefore, every secondary\nagent. Ananias was Christ's messenger. His words were merely those\nwhich Christ put into his mouth. St. Paul goes, therefore, to the root\nof the matter, and attributes everything, whether uttered by our Lord\nor by Ananias, to the former alone, who was, indeed, the great\nInspirer of every expression, the true Director of every minutest\nportion of this important transaction.\n\nThe ninth chapter, on the other hand, breaks the story up into its\ncomponent parts, and shows us the various actors in the scene. We see\nthe Lord Jesus consciously presiding over all, revealing Himself now\nto this person and again to that person. We get a glimpse for a moment\nbehind the veil which Divine Providence throws around His doings and\nthe doings of the children of men. We see Christ revealing Himself now\nto Saul and then to Ananias, informing the latter of the revelations\nmade to the former; just as He subsequently revealed Himself almost\nsimultaneously to Cornelius at C\u00e6sarea and to Simon Peter at Joppa,\npreparing the one for the other. The Lord thus hints at an explanation\nof those simultaneous cravings, aspirations, and spiritual desires\nwhich we often find unaccountably arising amid far distant lands and\nin widely separated hearts. The feelings may seem but vague\naspirations and their coincidence a mere chance one, but the typical\ncases of Saul and Ananias, or of Cornelius and St. Peter, teach the\nbeliever to see in them the direct action and government of the Lord\nJesus Christ, turning the hearts of the fathers to the children and of\nthe disobedient to the wisdom of the just. Surely we have an instance\nof such simultaneous operations of the Divine Spirit, and that on the\nlargest scale, in the cravings of the world after a Saviour at the age\nand time when our Lord came! Virgil was then preaching in tones so\nChristian concerning the coming Saviour whom the world was expecting,\nthat the great Italian poet Dante exempts him from hell on account of\nhis dim but real faith. The Wise Men were then seeking Christ from a\nfar country; Caiaphas was prophesying concerning a man who was to die\nfor God's people. Mankind, all the world over, was unconsciously\nlonging with a divinely inspired desire for that very salvation which\nGod was then revealing; just as upon the narrower stage of Damascus or\nC\u00e6sarea Jesus Christ inspired Saul and Cornelius with a Divine want\nand prepared Ananias and Peter to satisfy it. John Keble in his poem\nfor Easter Monday has well seized and illustrated this point, so full\nof comfort and edification, turning it into a practical direction for\nthe life of the human spirit:--\n\n    \"Even so the course of prayer who knows?\n      It springs in silence where it will,\n    Springs out of sight, and flows\n      At first a lonely rill.\n\n    \"Unheard by all but angel ears,\n      The good Cornelius knelt alone,\n    Nor dreamed his prayers and tears\n      Could help a world undone.\n\n    \"The while upon his terraced roof,\n      The loved apostle to the Lord,\n    In silent thought aloof,\n      For heavenly vision soared.\n\n    \"The saint beside the ocean prayed,\n      The soldier in his chosen bower,\n    Where all his eye surveyed\n      Seemed sacred in that hour.\n\n    \"To each unknown his brother's prayer,\n      Yet brethren true in dearest love\n    Were they--and now they share\n      Fraternal joys above.\"\n\nAnanias, guided by Divine Providence, enters into Saul's presence,\nstates his mission, lays his hands upon him and restores him to sight.\nAnanias is careful, however, to disclaim all merit so far as he is\nhimself concerned in the matter of this miracle. His language is\nexactly the same in tone as that of the apostles Peter and John when\nthey had healed the impotent man: \"Why marvel ye at this man? or why\nfasten ye your eyes on us, as though by our own power or godliness we\nhad made him to walk?... By faith in His name hath His name made this\nman strong,\" were their words to the people. \"In the name of Jesus\nChrist of Nazareth, walk,\" was their command to the man himself. And\nso in the case of Ananias, he attributes the healing power to Jesus\nChrist alone. \"The Lord Jesus, who appeared unto thee, ... hath sent\nme, that thou mayest receive thy sight.\" The theology and faith of the\nChurch at Damascus were exactly the same as those of the Apostles and\nChurch at Jerusalem. And what a confirmation of Saul's own faith must\nthis miracle have been! It was then no passing vision, no fancy of a\nheated imagination which he had experienced; but he had the actual\nproof in his own person of their objective reality, a demonstration\nthat the power of Jesus of Nazareth ordered all things, both in heaven\nand earth, healing the bodily as it could illuminate the spiritual\neye.\n\nII. Ananias restored Saul's sight. According to the ninth of Acts his\nmission was limited to this one point; but, according to St. Paul's\nown account in the twenty-second chapter, he made a much longer\ncommunication to the future Apostle: \"The God of our fathers hath\nappointed thee to know His will, and to see the Righteous One, and to\nhear a voice from His mouth. For thou shalt be a witness for Him unto\nall men of what thou hast seen and heard. And now why tarriest thou?\nArise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins, calling on His name.\"\nAnanias predicted to Saul his future mission, his apostleship to all\nnations, and the fact that the Apostle of the Gentiles would find the\nroot and sustenance of his work in the force of personal conviction\nwith which his miraculous conversion had endowed him. Personal\nknowledge, individual acquaintance with the things of the eternal\nworld was then, as it is still, the first condition of successful work\nfor Jesus Christ. There may be intellectual power, intense energy,\ntranscendent eloquence, consummate ability; but in the spiritual order\nthese things avail nothing till there be joined thereto that sense of\nheavenly force and reality which a personal knowledge of the things\nunseen imparts. Then heart answers to heart, and the great depths of\nman's nature respond and open themselves to the voice and teaching of\none who speaks as St. Paul did of what \"he had seen and heard.\"\n\nThere are two points in this address of Ananias as reported by St.\nPaul himself to which we would direct special attention. Ananias\nbaptized Saul, and used very decided language on the subject, language\nfrom which some would now shrink. These two points embody important\nteaching. Ananias baptized Saul though Christ had personally called\nhim. This shows the importance which the Holy Scriptures attach to\nbaptism, and shows us something too of the nature of Holy Scripture\nitself. St. Luke wrote the Acts as a kind of continuation of his\nGospel, to give an account to Theophilus of the rise and progress of\nChristianity down to his own time. St. Luke in doing so tells us of\nthe institution of the Eucharist, but he does not say one word in his\nGospel about the appointment of baptism. He does not record the\nbaptismal commission, for which we must turn to St. Matthew xxviii.\n19, or to St. Mark xvi. 16. Yet St. Luke is careful to report the\nbaptism of the three thousand on the Day of Pentecost, of the\nSamaritans, of the eunuch, and now of St. Paul, as afterwards of\nCornelius, of Lydia, of the Philippian jailor, and of the Ephesian\nfollowers of John the Baptist. He records the universality of\nChristian baptism, and thus proves its obligation; but he does not\ngive us a hint of the origin of this sacrament, nor does he trace it\nback to any word or command of the Lord Jesus Christ. He evidently\ntook all these things as quite well known and understood, and merely\ndescribes the observance of a sacrament which needed no explanation on\nhis part. The writings of St. Luke were intended to instruct\nTheophilus in the facts concerning our Lord's life and the labours of\ncertain leading individuals among His earliest followers; but they\nmake no pretence, nor do the other Gospels make any pretence, of being\nan exhaustive history of our Lord's ministry or of the practice of the\nearliest Church; and their silence does not necessarily prove that\nmuch was not known and practised in the early Church about which they\nhave no occasion to speak.[52] The words of Ananias and the obedience\nof Saul show us the importance which the Holy Spirit attached to this\nsacrament of baptism. Here was a man to whom Christ Himself had\npersonally appeared, whom Christ had personally called, and to whom He\nhad made long-continued revelations of His will. Yet He instructed him\nby the mouth of Ananias to receive the sacrament of baptism. Surely if\nany man was ever exempted from submission to what some would esteem\nthe outward ordinance, it was this penitent and privileged convert!\nBut no: to him the words of God's messenger are the same as to the\nhumblest sinner, \"Arise, and be baptized, and wash away thy sins.\" I\nhave known of truly good men who showed their want of spiritual\nhumility, or perhaps I should rather say of spiritual thought and\nreflection, in this direction. I have known of persons aroused from\nreligious torpor and death by powerful though one-sided teaching. God\nhas blessed such teaching to the awakening in them of the first\nelements of spiritual life, and then they have stopped short. They\nwere called, as Saul was, in an unbaptized state. They had never\npreviously received the sacrament of regeneration according to\nChrist's appointment, and when Christ aroused them they thought this\nprimal blessing quite sufficient, and judged it unnecessary to obey\nthe full commands of Christ and be united by baptism to His Body the\nChurch. They judged, in fact, that the blessing of conversion absolved\nthem from the sacrament of responsibility; but such was not the view\nof the primitive Church. The blessing of conversion as in St. Paul's\ncase, the visible and audible descent of the Holy Ghost as in the case\nof Cornelius, hindered not the importance nor dispensed with the\nnecessity of the sacrament of baptism, which was the door of admission\nto the Divine society and to a higher level in the Divine life than\nany hitherto attained. Persons who act as those misguided individuals\nof whom we have spoken stop short at the first principles of the\ndoctrine of Christ, and they attain to none of its heights, they sound\nnone of its depths, because they bend not their wills, and learn not\nthe sweetness and the power involved in spiritual humiliation and in\nlowly self-denying obedience taught by the Master Himself when He\nsaid, \"Blessed are the poor in spirit: for theirs is the kingdom of\nheaven.\"[53]\n\n  [52] Archbishop Whately used to make an important distinction\n  between things _anti_-Scriptural and things _un_-Scriptural.\n  Things _anti_-Scriptural cannot be tolerated by the Church,\n  because they contradict the Word of God. Things _un_-Scriptural,\n  that is, things about which Scripture is silent and for which no\n  direct warrant can be produced, may be right or wrong, useful or\n  vicious. Sunday schools, for instance, are in this sense\n  unscriptural. The Scriptures are silent about them, and if direct\n  warrant with chapter and verse be required for them, none such can\n  be produced. Hooker, in his Third Book, ch. v.-viii., has a\n  powerful argument upon this subject as against the ultra-reformers\n  or Puritans of his day, who would have tied the Church within much\n  tighter bonds than ever Judaism submitted to.\n\n  [53] I have known cases where baptism was rejected avowedly on\n  these grounds. This is of course a natural result of the pushing\n  individualism in religion to an extreme, and is often found among\n  what we may call extreme Protestants. It naturally results from\n  two errors. First of all, from a rejection of the article of the\n  Apostles' Creed, \"I believe in the Holy Catholic Church.\" Such men\n  reject the doctrine of a Church as a great fundamental article of\n  the Creed, one of the necessary articles of the Christian faith,\n  and therefore they reject baptism which is the door of entrance\n  into the Divine society. And, secondly, they reject the true\n  definition and idea of a sacrament. They view baptism, for\n  instance, as the expression merely of a faith already received,\n  and as nothing more. If, then, they express this faith\n  sufficiently by their life and actions, baptism seems to them an\n  empty and vain ceremony. But surely this was not St. Paul's view,\n  either when he received baptism at the hands of Ananias, or when\n  he wrote in the sixth of Romans \"We were buried therefore with Him\n  through baptism into death.\"\n\nThe language, again, of Ananias about baptism sounds strange in some\nears, and yet the experience of missionaries is a sufficient\nexplanation of it. What is that language? \"Arise, and be baptized, and\nwash away thy sins.\" These words sound startling to one accustomed to\nidentify the washing away of sin with the exercise of faith, and yet\nthere they stand, and no method of exegesis will avail to make them\nsay anything else than this, that baptism was for Saul the washing\naway of sin, so that if he did not accept baptism his sins would not\nhave been washed away. The experience, however, of those who labour in\nthe mission field explains the whole difficulty. Baptism is the act of\nopen confession and acknowledgment of Christ. St. Paul himself teaches\nthe absolute importance of this confession: \"With the heart man\nbelieveth unto righteousness; with the mouth confession is made unto\nsalvation.\"[54] Pagan converts are even still abundantly found who are\nwilling to accept the pure morality and the sublime teaching of\nChristianity, who are willing to believe and see in Jesus Christ the\nsupreme revelation of God made to the human race, but who are not\nwilling to incur loss and persecution and trial for His sake by the\nreception of Christian baptism and a public confession of their faith.\nThey may believe with the heart in the revelation of righteousness and\nmay lead moral lives in consequence, but they are not willing to make\npublic confession leading them into a state of salvation. They are, in\nfact, in the position of Saul of Tarsus as he prayed in the house of\nJudas, but they will go no farther. They will not act as he did, they\nwill not take the decisive step, they will not arise and be baptized\nand wash away their sins, calling on the name of Jesus Christ. And if\nSaul of Tarsus had been like them and had acted as they do, he might\nhave received the vision and have been convinced of the truth of Jesus\nChrist and of His mission, but yet his moral cowardice would have\nspoilt the whole, and Saul would have remained in his sins,\nunpardoned, unaccepted, reprobate from Christ, because he remained\nunbaptized. Christianity, in fact, is a covenant, and forgiveness of\nsins is one of the blessings attached to this covenant. Until men\nperform its conditions and actually enter into the covenant the\nblessings of the covenant are not granted. Baptism is the door of\nentry into the covenant of grace, and till men humbly enter within the\ndoor they do not exercise true faith. They may believe intellectually\nin the truth and reality of Christianity, but, till they take the\ndecisive step and obey Christ's law, they do not possess that true\nfaith of the heart which alone enables them, like Saul of Tarsus, to\nobey Christ and therefore enter into peace.\n\n  [54] Romans x. 10.\n\nIII. The next step taken by the Apostle is equally plainly stated:\n\"Straightway in the synagogues he proclaimed Jesus, that He is the Son\nof God.\" But, though the words of the Acts are plain enough, it is not\nso easy to reconcile them with St. Paul's own account, as given in the\nEpistle to the Galatians (i. 15, 16, 17), where he states, \"When it\nwas the good pleasure of God to reveal His Son in me, immediately I\nconferred not with flesh and blood, but I went away into Arabia, and\nagain I returned to Damascus.\" In the ninth chapter of the Acts we\nfind the statement made that _immediately_ after his baptism he\npreached Christ in the synagogues of Damascus, while in his own\nbiographical narrative he tells us that _immediately_ after his\nbaptism he went away into Arabia. Is there any way in which we can\nreconcile them? We think so, and that a very simple one. Let us first\nreflect upon the story as told in the Acts. St. Luke is giving a rapid\nhistory, a survey of St. Paul's life of public activity. He is not\ntelling the story of his inner spiritual experiences, his conflicts,\ntemptations, trials, revelations, as St. Paul himself set them forth.\nHe knew not of them, in fact. St. Luke knew merely the exterior public\nlife of which man had cognisance. He knew nothing, or but little, of\nthe interior life of the Apostle, known only to himself and to God.\nSt. Luke therefore tells us of his early work at Damascus. St. Paul\nhimself tells us of that early work, but also shows us how he was\nprepared for that work by his retirement into Arabia. Both agree in\nthe main point, however, and place the scene of his earliest Christian\nefforts in the very spot, Damascus, which he had in his human\nprevision destined for himself as the field of his bitterest\nantagonism to the faith of the Crucified. This is an important point.\nSt. Luke wrote his historical narrative twenty-five years or\nthereabouts after St. Paul's conversion. He may have often visited\nDamascus. Tradition makes Antioch, a town of the same district, his\nbirthplace. St. Luke must have had abundant opportunities of\nconsulting witnesses who could tell the story of those eventful days,\nand could describe St. Paul's earliest testimony to his new\nconvictions. But these men only knew St. Paul as he appeared in\npublic. They may have known very little of the inner history of his\nlife as he reveals it in his Epistle to the Galatians when vindicating\nhis apostolic authority and mission.[55]\n\n  [55] St. Luke's informants, twenty-five years after the events,\n  would naturally only remember the leading points, the most\n  striking events of St. Paul's early Christian career. Few people\n  realise how hard it is to recall the events of twenty-five years\n  ago in anything like consecutive order. We preserve upon the whole\n  a lively and a true impression; but till we go and consult\n  documents, diaries, journals, etc., it is almost impossible to\n  state the succession of events in accurate order. I was trying the\n  other day to recall the events of my own public life twenty-five\n  years ago anent the controversy which raged about the\n  disestablishment of the Irish Church, into which I plunged with\n  the vehemence of early manhood, and I failed to distinguish events\n  which must have been separated by months and even by years. How\n  much more easily must others have failed accurately to follow\n  details of St. Paul's life known only to himself!\n\nLet us now see whether we cannot harmonise St. Paul's autobiographical\nnarrative in the Epistle with the Evangelist's narrative in the Acts;\nalways remembering, however, that an imperfect knowledge is never more\ncompletely felt than in such cases. When we try to harmonise an\naccount written from the subjective side by one individual with an\nobjective and exterior narrative written by some one else, we are like\na man looking at a globe and trying to take it all in at one glance.\nOne side must be hidden from him; and so in this case, many\ncircumstances are necessarily concealed from us which would solve\ndifficulties that now completely puzzle us. But let us to our task, in\nwhich we have derived much assistance from the commentary of Bishop\nLightfoot upon Galatians. St. Paul, we are told in ch. ix. 19,\nreceived meat after the visit of Ananias and was strengthened. St.\nPaul was never one of those high-wrought fanatics who despise food and\nthe care of the body. There was nothing of the Gnostic or the\nManichean about him, leading him to despise and neglect the body which\nthe Lord has given to be the soul's instrument. He recognised under\nall circumstances that if the human spirit is to do its work, and if\nGod's glory is to be promoted, the human body must be sustained in\nforce and vigour. When he was on board ship and in imminent peril of\nshipwreck and death, and men thought they should be at their prayers,\nthinking of the next world alone, he took bread and blessed and set\nthe crew and passengers alike the healthy example of eating a hearty\nmeal, and thus keeping his body in due preparation for whatever\ndeliverances the Lord might work for them; and so, too, at Damascus,\nhis spiritual joy and hallowed peace and deep gratitude for his\nrestoration to sight did not prevent him paying due attention to the\nwants of his body. \"He took food, and was strengthened.\" And now comes\nthe first note of time. \"Then was Saul certain days with the disciples\nwhich were at Damascus. And straightway (\u03b5\u1f50\u03b8\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2) he\npreached Christ in the synagogues, that He is the Son of God.\" The\nvery same expression is used by St. Paul in Galatians, where, after\nspeaking of his conversion, he says, \"Immediately (\u03b5\u1f50\u03b8\u03ad\u03c9\u03c2)\nI conferred not with flesh and blood, but went away into Arabia, and\nagain returned unto Damascus.\" Now my explanation, and not mine alone,\nbut that of Bishop Lightfoot, is this. After the new convert had\nrested for a short time at Damascus, he retired into the Sinaitic\ndesert, where he remained for several months, perhaps for a whole\nyear. During this period he disappeared from the sight and knowledge\nof men as if the earth had opened its mouth and swallowed him. Then he\nreturned to Damascus and preached with such power that the Jews formed\na plot against his life, enlisting the help of the governor on their\nside, so that even the gates were watched that he might be arrested.\nHe escaped their hands, however, through the assistance of his\nconverts, and went up to Jerusalem.[56]\n\n  [56] Mr. Lewin, in his _St. Paul_, vol. i., p. 72, argues that the\n  governor or ethnarch, as he is called by St. Paul in 2 Cor. xi.\n  32, was the Jewish chief magistrate of Damascus, appointed to that\n  post by Aretas, King of Petra, who then held Damascus. The Jews\n  were allowed by the Romans to have chief magistrates of their own\n  wherever they lived in large colonies. At Alexandria, for\n  instance, where they occupied a large portion of the city, the\n  Jews were ruled by an Alabarch. Mr. Lewin shows in the same place\n  a picture of the exact spot in the walls where St. Paul is by\n  tradition said to have escaped.\n\nBut here another difficulty arises. The Acts tells us that \"when Saul\nwas come to Jerusalem, he assayed to join himself to the disciples;\nbut they were all afraid of him, and believed not that he was a\ndisciple,\" whereupon Barnabas, fulfilling his office of mediation,\nexplanation, and consolation, took him and introduced him to the\nApostles; while on the other hand in the first chapter of Galatians\nSt. Paul himself speaks of his first visit to the Jerusalem Church\nthus: \"Then after three years I went up to Jerusalem to visit Cephas,\nand tarried with him fifteen days. But other of the Apostles saw I\nnone, save James the Lord's brother.\" Now the difficulty consists in\nthis. First, how could the disciples at Jerusalem have been suspicious\nof St. Paul, if at least a year and a half had elapsed since his\nconversion? for the Jewish method of counting time would not require\nthree whole years to have elapsed since that event. Secondly, how\ncould Barnabas have brought him to the Apostles as the Acts states, if\nSt. Paul himself says he saw none of them save Peter and James? As to\nthe first difficulty, we acknowledge at once that it seems at first\nsight a very considerable one, and yet a little reflection will show\nthat there are many explanations of it. If St. Paul kept quiet, as we\nbelieve he did, after his conversion and baptism, and departed into\nthe solitudes of Arabia, and then upon his return to Damascus,\nperhaps after a year's retirement, began his aggressive work, there\nmay not have been time for the Church at large to get knowledge of the\nfacts. Communication, again, may have been interrupted because of the\ncontest between Herod and Aretas, in which Damascus played no small\npart. Communication may not have been possible between the two\nChurches.[57] Then, again, the persecution raised by Saul himself\nseems to have practically extirpated the Jerusalem Church for a time.\n\"They were all scattered abroad except the Apostles,\" is the account\ngiven of the Christian community at Jerusalem. The terror of that\npersecution may have lasted many a long month. Numbers of the original\nmembers may never have ventured back again to the Holy City. The\nJerusalem Church may have been a new formation largely composed of new\nconverts who never had heard of a wondrous circumstance which had\nhappened a year or two before to the high priest's delegate, which the\nSanhedrin would doubtless desire to keep secret.[58]\n\n  [57] All thought about Saul and his doings may just then have been\n  swallowed up in the national excitement about Caligula and his\n  attempt to set up his statue in the Temple. The trouble connected\n  with the Nazarene sect would seem to every true Jew but a small\n  matter compared with the outrage to Jehovah threatened by the mad\n  emperor. See more about this in the next chapter.\n\n  [58] It is expressly said in Acts ix. 26 that when Saul came to\n  Jerusalem he tried to join himself to the _disciples_. They,\n  knowing only of his record as a persecutor, were afraid of him.\n  Then Barnabas took him and brought him to the _apostles_.\n\nThese and many other considerations offer themselves when we strive to\nthrow ourselves back into the circumstances of the time and help to a\nsolution of the first difficulty which we have indicated. Human life\nis such a complex thing that the strangest combinations may easily\nfind place therein. In this particular case we are so ignorant of the\nfacts, so many hypotheses offer themselves to account for the seeming\ninconsistencies, that we hesitate not to identify the visit to\nJerusalem mentioned in the Acts with that recorded by St. Paul in the\nEpistle to the Galatians. The second difficulty to which we have\nalluded is this, How could Barnabas have brought him to the Apostles,\nif St. Paul himself states that he saw none of the Apostles save Peter\nand James the Lord's brother? We must remember, however, that St. Luke\nand St. Paul wrote with two distinct objects. St. Paul, in the\nGalatians, wished to show the independence of his revelations as\nregards the Apostles of the circumcision, the Twelve technically so\ncalled. Of these Apostles he saw not one, save St. Peter. St. Luke is\ngiving a broad external account of the new convert's earliest\nreligious history, and he tells us that on his first visit to the Holy\nCity his conversion was acknowledged and guaranteed by the\napostles,--not the Twelve merely, but the apostles, that is, the\nsenior members of the Christian community, embracing not merely the\noriginal company chosen by Christ, but all the senior members of the\nChurch, like Barnabas, James, and others who may have formed a supreme\ncouncil to guide the affairs of the infant society. The word apostle,\nin fact, is used very variously in the New Testament; sometimes in a\nlimited sense as confined to the Twelve, sometimes in a wider and more\ngeneral sense, embracing men like Barnabas, as in Acts xiv. 4, 14; St.\nJames, the Lord's brother, as in 1 Cor. xv. 7; Andronicus and Junias,\nas in Rom. xvi. 7, and many others. It is quite possible, then, that\nBarnabas may have brought Saul to the Apostolic council, and told\nthere the tale of his conversion though not one of the original\nTwelve was present save St. Peter.[59]\n\n  [59] See Bishop Lightfoot's dissertation upon St. Paul's first\n  visit to Jerusalem, and the use of the term apostle in the New\n  Testament in his _Commentary on Galatians_, pp. 91-101. Cf. Volume\n  I. of this Commentary, p. 348.\n\nWe have now endeavoured to explain some of the difficulties which a\ncomparison of St. Paul's own autobiographical narrative with the Acts\ndiscloses. Let us look again at the retirement into Arabia. This\nretirement seems to us full of instruction and pregnant with meaning\nfor the hidden as well as the practical life of the soul. St. Paul as\nsoon as he was baptized retired into Arabia; and why, it may be asked,\ndid he retire thither? Some of the ancient expositors, as St.\nChrysostom and St. Jerome, both of whom wrote about the same period,\nA.D. 400, thought that St. Paul retired into Arabia in order that he\nmight preach to the Arabians. St. Chrysostom, for instance, comments\nthus: \"See how fervent was his soul, he was eager to occupy lands yet\nuntilled. He forthwith attacked a barbarous and savage people,\nchoosing a life of conflict and of much toil.\" And the explanations of\nHilary, Theodore of Mopsuestia, Theodoret, and \u0152cumenius, all of\nthem ancient and acute expositors, are of exactly the same character.\nNow this would have been a reversal of the Divine order in one\nimportant aspect. The power of the keys, the office of opening the\nkingdom of heaven to the Gentiles had been committed to St. Peter by\nJesus Christ. He had not as yet baptized Cornelius, and thus formally\nopened the door of faith to the Gentiles. If St. Paul had preached to\nthe Arabians, he would have usurped St. Peter's place and function. We\nbelieve, on the other hand, that God led the converted persecutor\ninto the deserts of Arabia for very different purposes. Let us note a\nfew of them.\n\nThe Lord led Saul there for the purpose of quiet and retirement. The\ngreat commentators and expositors of the early Church, as we have\nalready noted, used to call St. Paul by the special title of \"Vas\nElectionis,\" the chosen vessel _par excellence_, chosen because\nsurpassing in his gifts and graces and achievements all the other\nApostles. Now it was with the \"Vas Electionis\" in the New Testament as\nwith many of his types in the Old Testament. When God would prepare\nMoses for his life's work in shepherding, ruling, and guiding His\npeople through the deserts of Arabia, He first called him for many a\nlong day into retirement to the Mount of Horeb and the solitudes of\nthe Sinaitic desert. When God would strengthen and console the spirit\ndepressed, wounded and severely smitten, of his servant Elijah, He\nbrought him to the same mysterious spot, and there restored his moral\nand spiritual tone, and equipped him with new strength for his warfare\nby the visions of the Almighty lovingly vouchsafed to him. The Founder\nor Former of the Jewish Dispensation and the Reformer of the same\nDispensation were prepared and sustained for their work amid the\nsolitudes of the Arabian deserts; and what more fitting place in which\nthe \"Vas Electionis,\" the chosen vessel of the New Dispensation,\nshould be trained? What more suitable locality where the Lord Jesus\nshould make those fuller and completer revelations of Christian\ndoctrine and mystery which his soul needed, than there where\nlightning-blasted cliff and towering mountains all alike spoke of God\nand of His dealings with mankind in the mysterious ages of a\nlong-departed past? The Lord thus taught St. Paul, and through him\nteaches the Church of every age, the need of seasons of retirement and\ncommunion with God preparatory to and in close connexion with any\ngreat work or scene of external activity, such as St. Paul was now\nentering upon. It is a lesson much needed by this age of ours when men\nare tempted to think so much of practical work which appears at once\nin evidence, making its presence felt in tangible results, and so very\nlittle of devotional work and spiritual retirement which cannot be\nestimated by any earthly standard or tabulated according to our modern\nmethods. Men are now inclined to think _laborare est orare_, and that\nactive external work faithfully and vigorously rendered can take the\nplace and supply the want of prayer and thought, of quiet study and\ndevout meditation. Against such a tendency the Lord's dealings with\nSt. Paul, yea more, the Divine dealings with and leadings of the\neternal Son Himself, form a loud and speaking protest. The world was\nperishing and men were going down to the grave in darkness and Satan\nand sin were triumphing, and yet Jesus was led up of the Spirit into\nthe wilderness for forty days, and Saul was brought out into the\ndeserts of Arabia from amid the teeming crowds of Damascus that he\nmight learn those secrets of the Divine life which are best\ncommunicated to those who wait upon God in patient prayer and holy\nretirement. This is a lesson very necessary for this hot and fitful\nand feverish age of ours, when men are in such a hurry to have\neverything set right and every abuse destroyed all at once. Their\nhaste is not after the Divine model, and their work cannot expect the\nstability and solidity we find in God's. The nineteenth-century\nextreme is reproved by St. Paul's retirement into Arabia.[60] Man is,\nhowever, such a creature that if he avoids one extreme he generally\ntumbles into another. And so it is in this matter. Men have been ready\nto push this matter of retirement into an extreme, and have considered\nthat they were following St. Paul's example in retiring into the\nArabian and similar deserts and remaining there. But they have made a\ngreat mistake. St. Paul retired into Arabia for a while, and then\n\"returned again unto Damascus.\" They have retired into the deserts and\nhave remained there engaged in the one selfish task of saving their\nown souls, as they thought, by the exercises of prayer and meditation,\napart from that life of active good works for the sake of others which\nconstitutes another department of Christianity equally vital to the\nhealth of the soul.\n\n  [60] We may apply this typical fact in primitive Church history in\n  a very modern direction. It would be very well if candidates for\n  the sacred ministry always imitated St. Paul's departure into\n  Arabia. I have known a great many promising careers spoiled\n  because young deacons would select a heavy, laborious town or city\n  charge for the opening work of their ministry. They know nothing\n  of life or the world. They know nothing of preaching or pastoral\n  work. They have, too, all their mistakes to make, and they select\n  the most public place for their perpetration. But this is not the\n  worst. They form habits of busy idleness and of mental dissipation\n  which never leave them. The first two or three years of a young\n  clergyman's life generally determine his whole career. His life\n  never recovers the effect of the initial movement. I think the\n  great outcry, in the Church of England at least, against sermons\n  largely owing to the decay of study resulting from premature\n  activity on the part of the junior clergy. Premature development\n  in any direction is ever followed by premature decay, and when a\n  young priest or deacon is engaged every day and every night in the\n  week from an early service at 8 a.m. till night-school is finished\n  at 10 p.m. in external work, how can he prepare for teaching an\n  educated congregation on Sundays? And surely there ought to be\n  some little consideration for thinking men and educated women as\n  well as for others.\n\nThe history of Eastern monasticism is marked from its earliest days by\nan eager desire to follow St. Paul in his retirement into Arabia, and\nan equal disinclination to return with him unto Damascus. And this\ncharacteristic, this intense devotion to a life of solitude strangely\nenough passed over to our own Western islands, and is a dominant\nfeature of the monasticism which prevailed in Great Britain and\nIreland in the days of Celtic Christianity. The Syrian and Egyptian\nmonks passed over to Lerins and Southern Gaul, whence their disciples\ncame to England and Ireland, where they established themselves,\nbringing with them all their Eastern love of solitary deserts. This\ntaste they perpetuated, as may be seen especially on the western coast\nof Ireland, where the ruins of extensive monastic settlements still\nexist, testifying to this craving. The last islands, for instance,\nwhich a traveller sees as he steams away from Cork to America, are\ncalled the Skelligs. They are ten miles west of the Kerry coast, and\nyet there on these rocks where a boat cannot land sometimes for months\ntogether the early monks of the fifth and six centuries established\nthemselves as in a desert in the ocean. The topography of Ireland is\nfull of evidences and witnesses of this desire to imitate the Apostle\nof the Gentiles in his Arabian retirement. There are dozens of town\nlands--subdivisions of the parishes--which are called deserts or\ndiserts,[61] because they constituted solitudes set apart for hermit\nlife after the example of St. Paul in Arabia and John the Baptist in\nthe deserts of Jud\u00e6a. While, again, when we turn northwards along the\nwestern seaboard of Ireland, we shall find numerous islands like the\nSkelligs, Ardoilen or the High Island, off the coast of Connemara, and\nInnismurry off the Sligo coast, where hermit cells in the regular\nEgyptian and Syrian fashion were built, and still exist as they did a\nthousand years ago, testifying to the longing of the human mind for\nsuch complete solitude and close communion with God as Saul enjoyed\nwhen he departed from Damascus.[62] The monks of ancient times may\nhave run into one extreme: well would it be for us if we could avoid\nthe other, and learn to cultivate self-communion, meditation,\nself-examination, and that realisation of the eternal world which God\ngrants to those who wait upon Him apart from the bustle and din and\ndust of earth, which clog the spiritual senses and dim the heavenly\nvision.\n\n  [61] See Joyce's _Irish Names of Places_, vol. i., p. 325.\n\n  [62] I have touched upon the subject of the connexion between\n  Syria and Egypt and Oriental monasticism on the one hand, and\n  Gaul, England, and Ireland on the other, during the period which\n  elapsed between A.D. 400 and 900, in _Ireland and the Celtic\n  Church_, chs. ix. and xi. I have discussed it at greater length\n  and with fuller details in two papers upon the Knowledge of Greek\n  in Gaul and Ireland, read before the Royal Irish Academy in\n  February 1892, now published in the Proceedings of that body; and\n  also in two papers, one upon the Island Monasteries of Great\n  Britain and Ireland and the other on St. Fechin of Fore,\n  published, the former in the Journal of the Royal Society of\n  Antiquaries of Ireland for 1891, and the latter in the same\n  Journal for April 1st, 1892.\n\nWe can see many other reasons why Paul was led into Arabia. He was led\nthere, for instance, that he might make a thorough scrutiny of his\nmotives. Silence, separation, solitude, have a wondrous tendency to\nmake a man honest with himself and humbly honest before his God. Saul\nmight have been a hypocrite or a formalist elsewhere, where human eyes\nand jealous glances were bent upon him, but scarcely when there alone\nwith Jehovah in the desert. Again, Saul was led there that his soul\nmight be ennobled and enlarged by the power of magnificent scenery, of\nhigh and hallowed associations. Mountain and cliff and flood,\nspecially those which have been magnified and made honourable by grand\nmemories such as must have crowded upon Saul's mind, have a marvellous\neffect, enlarging, widening, developing, upon a soul like Saul's, long\ncribbed, cabined, and confined within the rigorous bonds of Pharisaic\nreligionism. Saul, too, was led up into those mysterious regions away\nfrom the busy life and work, the pressing calls of Damascus, that he\nmight speak a word in season to us all, and especially to those young\nin the Christian life, who think in the first burst of their zeal and\nfaith as if they had nothing to do but go in and possess the whole\nland. Saul did not set out at once to evangelise the masses of\nDamascus, or to waste the first weak beginnings of his spiritual life\nin striving to benefit or awaken others. He was first led away into\nthe deserts of Arabia, in order that there he might learn of the deep\nthings of God and of the weak things of his own nature, and then, when\nGod had developed his spiritual strength, He led him back to Damascus\nthat he might testify out of the fulness of a heart which knew the\nsecrets of the Most High. The teaching of Saul's example speaks loudly\nto us all. It was the same with Saul as with a greater than he. The\nEternal Son Himself was trained amid years and years of darkness and\nsecrecy, and even after His baptism the day of His manifestation unto\nIsrael was delayed yet a little. Jesus Christ was no novice when He\ncame preaching. And Saul of Tarsus was no novice in the Christian life\nwhen he appeared as the Christian advocate in the synagogue of\nDamascus. Well would it have been for many a soul had this Divine\nexample been more closely copied. Again and again have the young and\nignorant and inexperienced been encouraged to stand up as public\nteachers immediately after they have been seriously impressed. They\nhave yielded to the unwise solicitation. The vanity of the human heart\nhas seconded the foolish advice given to them, and they have tried to\ndeclare the deep things of God when as yet they have need of learning\nthe very first principles of the doctrine of Christ. Is it any wonder\nthat such persons oftentimes make shipwreck of faith and a sound\nconscience? Truth is very large and wide and spacious, and requires\nmuch time and thought if it is to be assimilated; and even when truth\nis grasped in all its mighty fulness, then there are spiritual enemies\nwithin and without and spiritual pitfalls to be avoided which can be\nknown only by experience. Woe is then to that man who is not assisted\nby grace and guided by Divine experience, and who knows not God and\nthe powers of the world to come, and the devious paths of his own\nheart, as these things can only be known and learned as Saul of Tarsus\nknew and learned them in the deserts of Arabia. There was marvellous\nwisdom contained in the brief apostolic law enacted for candidates for\nholy orders in words gathered from St. Paul's own personal history,\n\"Not a novice, lest being lifted up with pride he fall into the\ncondemnation of the devil.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER V.\n\n_THE FIRST GENTILE CONVERT._\n\n     \"Now there was a certain man in C\u00e6sarea, Cornelius by name, a\n     centurion of the band called the Italian band, a devout man, and\n     one that feared God with all his house, who gave much alms to the\n     people, and prayed to God alway. He saw in a vision openly, as it\n     were about the ninth hour of the day, an angel of God coming in\n     unto him, and saying to him, Cornelius. And he, fastening his\n     eyes upon him, and being affrighted, said, What is it, Lord? And\n     he said unto him, Thy prayers and thine alms are gone up for a\n     memorial before God. And now send men to Joppa, and fetch one\n     Simon, who is surnamed Peter: he lodgeth with one Simon a tanner,\n     whose house is by the sea side.\"--ACTS x. 1-6.\n\n\nWe have now arrived at another crisis in the history of the early\nChurch of Christ. The Day of Pentecost, the conversion of Saul of\nTarsus, the call of Cornelius, and the foundation of the Gentile\nChurch of Antioch are, if we are to pick and choose amid the events\nrelated by St. Luke, the turning-points of the earliest ecclesiastical\nhistory. The conversion of St. Paul is placed by St. Luke before the\nconversion of Cornelius, and is closely connected with it. Let us then\ninquire by what events St. Luke unites the two. German commentators of\nthe modern school, who are nothing unless they are original, have not\nbeen willing to allow that St. Luke's narrative is continuous. They\nhave assigned various dates to the conversion of Cornelius. Some have\nmade it precede the conversion of St. Paul, others have fixed it to\nthe time of Paul's sojourn in Arabia, and so on, without any other\nsolid reasons than what their own fancies suggest. I prefer, however,\nto think that St. Luke's narrative follows the great broad outlines of\nthe Christian story, and sets forth the events of the time in a\ndivinely ordered sequence. At any rate I prefer to follow the course\nof events as the narrative suggests them, till I see some good reason\nto think otherwise. I do not think that the mere fact that the sacred\nwriter states events in a certain order is a sufficient reason to\nthink that the true order must have been quite a different one. Taking\nthem in this light they yield themselves very naturally to the work of\nan expositor. Let us reflect then upon that sequence as here set forth\nfor us.\n\nSaul of Tarsus went up to Jerusalem to confer with St. Peter, who had\nbeen hitherto the leading spirit of the apostolic conclave. He\nlaboured in Jerusalem among the Hellenistic synagogues for some\nfifteen days. A conspiracy was then formed against his life. The Lord,\never watchful over His chosen servant, warned him to depart from\nJerusalem, indicating to him as he prayed in the Temple the scope and\nsphere of his future work, saying, \"Depart: for I will send thee forth\nfar hence unto the Gentiles\" (see Acts xxii. 21). The Christians of\nJerusalem, having learned the designs of his enemies, conveyed Saul to\nC\u00e6sarea, the chief Roman port of Palestine, whence they despatched him\nto Cilicia, his native province, where he laboured in obscurity and\nquietness for some time. St. Peter may have been one of the rescue\nparty who saved Saul from the hands of his enemies escorting him to\nC\u00e6sarea, and this circumstance may have led him to the western\ndistrict of the country. At any rate we find him soon after labouring\nin Western Palestine at some distance from Jerusalem. Philip the\nEvangelist had been over the same ground a short time previously, and\nSt. Peter may have been sent forth by the mother Church to supervise\nhis work and confer that formal imposition of hands which from the\nbeginning has formed the completion of baptism, and seems to have been\nreserved to the Apostles or their immediate delegates. Peter's visit\nto Western Palestine, to Lydda and Sharon and Joppa, may have been\njust like the visit he had paid some time previously, in company with\nSt. John, to the city of Samaria, when he came for the first time in\ncontact with Simon Magus. St. Luke gives us here a note of time\nhelping us to fix approximately the date of the formal admission of\nCornelius and the Gentiles into the Church. He mentions that the\nChurches then enjoyed peace and quietness all through Palestine,\nenabling St. Peter to go upon his work of preaching and supervision.\nIt may perhaps strike some persons that this temporary peace must have\nbeen attained through the conversion of Saul, the most active\npersecutor. But that event had happened more than two years before, in\nthe spring of 37 A.D., and, far from diminishing, would probably have\nrather intensified the hostility of the Jewish hierarchy. It was now\nthe autumn of the year 39, and a bitter spirit still lingered at\nJerusalem, as Saul himself and the whole Church had just proved.\nExternal authorities, Jewish and Roman history, here step in to\nillustrate and confirm the sacred narrative.\n\nThe Emperor Caius Caligula, who ascended the throne of the empire\nabout the time of Stephen's martyrdom, was a strange character. He was\nwholly self-willed, madly impious, utterly careless of human life, as\nindeed unregenerate mankind ever is. Christianity alone has taught the\nprecious value of the individual human soul the awful importance of\nhuman life as the probation time for eternity, and has thereby\nameliorated the harshness of human laws, the sternness of human\nrulers, ready to inflict capital punishment on any pretence\nwhatsoever. Caligula determined to establish the worship of himself\nthroughout the world. He had no opposition to dread from the pagans,\nwho were ready to adopt any creed or any cult, no matter how\ndegrading, which their rulers prescribed. Caligula knew, however, that\nthe Jews were more obstinate, because they alone were conscious that\nthey possessed a Divine revelation. He issued orders, therefore, to\nPetronius, the Roman governor of Syria, Palestine, and the East, to\nerect his statue in Jerusalem and to compel the Jews to offer\nsacrifice thereto. Josephus tells us of the opposition which the Jews\noffered to Caligula; how they abandoned their agricultural operations\nand assembled in thousands at different points, desiring Petronius to\nslay them at once, as they could never live if the Divine laws were so\nviolated. The whole energies of the nation were for months\nconcentrated on this one object, the repeal of the impious decree of\nCaligula, which they at last attained through their own determination\nand by the intervention of Herod Agrippa, who was then at Rome.[63]\nIt was during this awful period of uncertainty and opposition that the\ninfant Church enjoyed a brief period of repose and quiet growth,\nbecause the whole nation from the high priest to the lowest beggar had\nsomething else to think of than how to persecute a new sect that was\nas yet rigorously scrupulous in observing the law of Moses. During\nthis period of repose from persecution St. Peter made his tour of\ninspection \"throughout all parts,\" Samaria, Galilee, Jud\u00e6a,\nterminating with Lydda, where he healed, or at least prayed for the\nhealing of, \u00c6neas,[64] and with Joppa, where his prayer was followed\nby the restoration of Tabitha or Dorcas, who has given a designation\nnow widely applied to the assistance which devout women can give to\ntheir poorer sisters in Christ.\n\n  [63] See the whole story told at length in Josephus,\n  _Antiquities_, Book XVIII., ch. viii., 8, and in his _Wars_, Book\n  II., ch. x. This story, which is little known to Bible students,\n  is most interesting. It fully explains the repose from persecution\n  which the Church enjoyed at the time of the conversion of\n  Cornelius and helps us to fix its date. In the year 39 Petronius,\n  the prefect of Syria, received orders from the Emperor Caligula to\n  set up his statue as a god in the Temple. He advanced to fulfil\n  the Emperor's command with two legions and a number of auxiliary\n  troops, and came as far as Ptolemais, a maritime town of Galilee,\n  which is mentioned in Acts xxi. 7 as a place where St. Paul\n  visited a Church, of which we hear nothing else. The Jewish nation\n  met the prefect there in tens of thousands, entreating him to\n  desist or else to put them to immediate death. He halted his army\n  and appointed a further conference at Tiberias, where the people\n  met him and continued their entreaties for fifty days, though it\n  was seed-time and a famine might result from their neglect of the\n  spring operations. Petronius suspended his operations for the\n  time, and wrote back to the Emperor an account of the Jewish\n  opposition. Herod Agrippa too, who was then at Rome and in high\n  favour with the Emperor, lent his assistance, and obtained a\n  temporary respite for the Jews by a timely and expensive banquet\n  which he prepared for him. Towards the close of A.D. 40 Caligula,\n  however, determined to set out and personally compel the obedience\n  of the Jews. But his assassination in January 41 relieved their\n  apprehensions, and freed the world from Caligula's mad freaks.\n  During that period of anxiety, lasting fully a year and a half,\n  the Jews had neither time nor thought for the new sect, which was\n  opposed as strongly as themselves to the Emperor's impious\n  projects and whose members doubtless flung themselves as heartily\n  into the opposition. The Jews at Alexandria suffered at the same\n  time a terrible persecution, of which Philo and Josephus tell: see\n  Mommsen's _Provinces of the Roman Empire_, vol. ii., pp. 190-96\n  (Dickson's Translation). This is one of those incidental touches\n  which prove the wonderful accuracy of this book of the Acts. Dr.\n  Lightfoot has remarked (_Essays on Supernatural Religion_) that no\n  book of the Bible has so many points of contact with current\n  history and politics as the Acts, and can therefore be more easily\n  tested. This special case is an interesting illustration of the\n  learned bishop's view.\n\n  [64] Perhaps it is well to note that this is not the classical\n  word \u00c6neas, which in Greek would be represented by \u0391\u1f30\u03bd\u03b5\u03af\u03b1\u03c2,\n  but a different name with a short _e_, and is written\n  in Greek \u0391\u1f30\u03bd\u03ad\u03b1\u03c3. The latter is found in Thucydides and\n  Xenophon: see Meyer _in loco_.\n\nWe thus see how God by the secret guidance of His Spirit, shaping his\ncourse by ways and roads known only to Himself, led St. Peter to the\nhouse of Simon the tanner, where he abode many days waiting in\npatience to know God's mind and will which were soon to be opened out\nto him. We have now traced the line of events which connect the\nconversion of Saul of Tarsus with that of Cornelius the centurion of\nC\u00e6sarea. Let us apply ourselves to the circumstances surrounding the\nlatter event, which is of such vital importance to us Gentile\nChristians as having been the formal Divine proclamation to the Church\nand to the world that the mystery which had been hid for ages was now\nmade manifest, and that the Gentiles were spiritually on an equality\nwith the Jews. The Church was now about to burst the bonds which had\nrestrained it for five years at least. We stand by the birth of\nEuropean Christendom and of modern civilisation. It is well, then,\nthat we should learn and inwardly digest every, even the slightest,\ndetail concerning such a transcendent and notable crisis. Let us take\nthem briefly one by one as the sacred narrative reports them.\n\nI. I note, then, in the first place that the _time_ of this conversion\nwas wisely and providentially chosen. The time was just about eight\nyears after the Ascension and the foundation of the Church. Time\nenough therefore had elapsed for Christianity to take root among the\nJews. This was most important. The gospel was first planted among the\nJews, took form and life and shape, gained its initial impulse and\ndirection among God's ancient people in order that the constitution,\nthe discipline, and the worship of the Church might be framed on the\nancient Jewish model and might be built up by men whose minds were\ncast in a conservative mould. Not that we have the old law with its\nwearisome and burdensome ritual perpetuated in the Christian Church.\nThat law was a yoke too heavy for man to bear. But, then, the highest\nand best elements of the old Jewish system have been perpetuated in\nthe Church. There was in Judaism by God's own appointment a public\nministry, a threefold public ministry too, exercised by the high\npriest, the priests, and the Levites. There is in Christianity a\nthreefold ministry exercised by bishops, presbyters or elders, and\ndeacons.[65] There were in Judaism public and consecrated sanctuaries,\nfixed liturgies, public reading of God's Word, a service of choral\nworship, hymns of joy and thanksgiving, the sacraments of Holy\nCommunion and baptism in a rudimentary shape; all these were\ntransferred from the old system that was passing away into the new\nsystem that was taking its place. Had the Gentiles been admitted much\nearlier all this might not have so easily happened. Men do not easily\nchange their habits. Habits, indeed, are chains which rivet\nthemselves year by year with ever-increasing power round our natures;\nand the Jewish converts brought their habits of thought and worship\ninto the Church of Christ, establishing there those institutions of\nprayer and worship, of sacramental communion and preaching which we\nstill enjoy. But we must observe, on the other hand, that, had the\nGentiles been admitted a little later, the Church might have assumed\ntoo Jewish and Levitical an aspect. This pause of eight years, during\nwhich Jews alone formed the Church, is another instance of those\ndelays of the Lord[66] which, whether they happen in public or in\nprivate life, are always found in the long run to be wise, blessed,\nand providential things, though for a time they may seem dark and\nmysterious, according to that ancient strain of the Psalmist, \"Wait on\nthe Lord, ... and He shall strengthen thine heart: wait, I say, upon\nthe Lord.\"[67]\n\n  [65] I do not intend to raise any disputed question as to Church\n  polity and government in this book, and so I may point out,\n  without compromising my own views in the least, that even a\n  Presbyterian may agree in this statement, as he may hold that his\n  own teaching elder or minister corresponds to the primitive\n  bishop, his ruling elders to the presbyters, and his own deacons\n  to the ancient deacons. Presbyterianism claims thus a threefold\n  ministry as well as Episcopacy.\n\n  [66] What a fine subject for historical study the delays of the\n  Lord would prove. The delay of the Incarnation till the world was\n  ready is a supreme instance of them. The delay of the triumph of\n  Christianity, of the break up of the Roman Empire, of the\n  Reformation so often attempted but never effected till the\n  invention of printing and the revival of learning,--these and\n  numerous other illustrations fling light upon the darkness which\n  still surrounds the Divine methods and dispensations amid which we\n  live.\n\n  [67] This and several other thoughts in this chapter will be found\n  worked out in a sermon of Bishop Jebb, a well-known preacher of\n  the last generation who is now almost forgotten. Yet he published\n  several volumes of sermons and other theological works, which had\n  no small influence in laying the foundations of the Oxford\n  movement. His sermons are full of matter, though not composed in a\n  modern style. This cannot be wondered at when we find from his\n  well-known correspondence with Alexander Knox that a single sermon\n  sometimes was the work of several months, if not even years. The\n  leisurely character of even busy lives in the opening years of\n  this century is strikingly illustrated by the correspondence\n  between these learned men. Bishop Jebb preached a sermon in 1804\n  on the well-known Vincentian rule of faith, \"Quod semper, quod\n  ubique, etc.\" This sermon he elaborated till 1815, and then\n  published it. It played no small part in religious controversies\n  between 1815 and 1840, as a reference to the _Christian Observer_,\n  the _Christian Examiner_, and other religious periodicals of that\n  time will show.\n\nII. Again, the _place_ where the Church burst its Jewish shell and\nemerged into full gospel freedom is noteworthy. It was at C\u00e6sarea. It\nis a great pity that people do not make more use of maps in their\nstudy of Holy Scripture. Sunday evenings are often a dull time in\nChristian households, and the bare mechanical reading of Scripture and\nof good books often only makes them duller. How much livelier,\ninteresting, and instructive they would be were an attempt made to\ntrace the journeys of the apostles with a map, or to study the scenes\nwhere they laboured--Jerusalem, C\u00e6sarea, Damascus, Ephesus, Athens,\nand Rome--with some of the helps which modern scholarship and\ncommercial enterprise now place within easy reach. I can speak thus\nwith the force of personal experience, for my own keen interest in\nthis book which I am expounding dates from the Sunday evenings of\nboyhood thus spent, though without many of the aids which now lie\nwithin the reach of all. This is essentially the modern method of\nstudy, especially in matters historical. A modern investigator and\nexplorer of Bible sites and lands has well expressed this truth when\nhe said, \"Topography is the foundation of history. If we are ever to\nunderstand history, we must understand the places where that history\nwas transacted.\"[68] The celebrated historians the late Mr. Freeman\nand Mr. Green worked a revolution in English historical methods by\nteaching people that an indefatigable use of maps and a careful study\nof the physical features of any country are absolutely needful for a\ntrue conception of its history. In this respect at least secular\nhistory and sacred history are alike. Without a careful study of the\nmap we cannot understand God's dealings with the Church of Christ, as\nis manifest from the case of C\u00e6sarea at which we have arrived. The\nnarratives of the Gospels and of the Acts will be confused,\nunintelligible, unless we understand that there were two C\u00e6sareas in\nPalestine, one never mentioned in the Gospels, the other never\nmentioned in the Acts. C\u00e6sarea Philippi was a celebrated city of\nNorth-eastern Palestine. It was when our Lord was within its borders\nthat St. Peter made his celebrated confession, \"Thou art the Christ,\nthe Son of the living God,\" told of in St. Matthew xvi. 13-16. This is\nthe only C\u00e6sarea of which we hear in the Gospels. It was an inland\ntown, built by the Herods in joint honour of themselves and of their\npatrons the Emperors of Rome, and bore all the traces of its origin.\nIt was decorated with a splendid pagan temple, was a thoroughly pagan\ntown, and was therefore abhorred by every true Jew. There was another\nC\u00e6sarea, the great Roman port of Palestine and the capital, where the\nRoman governors resided. It was situated in the borders of\nPh\u0153nicia, in a north-westerly direction from Jerusalem, with which\nit was connected by a fine military road.[69] This C\u00e6sarea had been\noriginally built by Herod the Great. He spent twelve years at this\nundertaking, and succeeded in making it a splendid monument of the\nmagnificence of his conceptions. The seaboard of Palestine is totally\ndevoid to this day of safe harbours. Herod constructed a harbour at\nvast expense. Let us hear the story of its foundation in the very\nwords of the Jewish historian. Josephus tells us that Herod, observing\n\"that Joppa and Dora are not fit for havens on account of the\nimpetuous south winds which beat upon them, which, rolling the sands\nwhich come from the sea against the shores, do not admit of ships\nlying in their station; but the merchants are generally there forced\nto ride at their anchors in the sea itself. So Herod endeavoured to\nrectify this inconvenience, and laid out such a compass toward the\nland as might be sufficient for a haven, wherein the great ships might\nlie in safety; and this he effected by letting down vast stones of\nabove fifty feet in length, not less than eighteen in breadth and nine\nin depth, into twenty fathoms deep.\"[70] The Romans, when they took\npossession of Palestine, adopted and developed Herod's plans, and\nestablished C\u00e6sarea on the coast as the permanent residence of the\nprocurator of Palestine. And it was a wise policy. The Romans, like\nthe English, had a genius for government. They fixed their provincial\ncapitals upon or near the sea-coast that their communications might be\never kept open. Thus in our own case Calcutta, Bombay, Madras,\nCapetown, Quebec, and Dublin are all seaport towns. And so in ancient\ntimes Antioch, Alexandria, Tarsus, Ephesus, Marseilles, Corinth,\nLondon, were all seaports and provincial Roman capitals as C\u00e6sarea was\nin Palestine. And it was a very wise policy. The Jews were a fierce,\nbold, determined people when they revolted. If the seat of Roman rule\nhad been fixed at Jerusalem, a rebellion might completely cut off all\neffective relief from the besieged garrison, which would never happen\nat C\u00e6sarea so long as the command of the sea was vested in the vast\nnavies which the Roman State possessed. C\u00e6sarea was to a large extent\na Gentile city, though within some seventy miles of Jerusalem. It had\na considerable Jewish population with their attendant synagogues, but\nthe most prominent features were pagan temples, one of them serving\nfor a lighthouse and beacon for the ships which crowded its harbour,\ntogether with a theatre and an amphitheatre, where scenes were daily\nenacted from which every sincere Jew must have shrunk with horror.\nSuch was the place--a most fitting place, Gentile, pagan, idolatrous\nto the very core and centre--where God chose to reveal Himself as\nFather of the Gentiles as well as of the Jews, and showed Christ's\ngospel as a light to lighten the Gentiles as well as the glory of His\npeople Israel.\n\n  [68] See Ramsay's _Historical Geography of Asia Minor_, pp. 51,\n  52.\n\n  [69] The most detailed account of C\u00e6sarea-on-the-Sea, its ruins\n  and present state, will be found in the _Memoirs_ of the Survey of\n  Western Palestine, vol. ii., pp. 13-29. It is accompanied with\n  plans and maps, which show that ancient Roman C\u00e6sarea was ten\n  times the size of the medi\u00e6val city which the Crusaders occupied.\n  Geikie's _The Holy Land and the Bible_, ch. iv., gives a very\n  interesting account of the ancient and modern state of C\u00e6sarea.\n\n  [70] See Josephus, _Antiquities_, XV. ix. 6; _Wars of Jews_, I.\n  xxi. Mr. Lewin, in his _Life of St. Paul_, vol. ii., ch. iv.,\n  spends several pages in an elaborate discussion of the buildings\n  and plan of C\u00e6sarea, to which it must here suffice to refer.\n\nIII. Then, again, the _person_ chosen as the channel of this\nrevelation is a striking character. He was \"Cornelius by name, a\ncenturion of the band called the Italian band.\"[71] Here, then, we\nnote first of all that Cornelius was a Roman soldier. Let us pause\nand reflect upon this. In no respect does the New Testament display\nmore clearly its Divine origin than in the manner in which it rises\nsuperior to mere provincialism. There are no narrow national\nprejudices about it like those which nowadays lead Englishmen to\ndespise other nations, or those which in ancient times led a\nthorough-going Jew to look down with sovereign contempt on the Gentile\nworld as mere dogs and outcasts. The New Testament taught that all men\nwere equal and were brothers in blood, and thus laid the foundations\nof those modern conceptions which have well-nigh swept slavery from\nthe face of civilised Christendom. The New Testament and its teaching\nis the parent of that modern liberalism which now rules every circle,\nno matter what its political designation. In no respect does this\nuniversal catholic feeling of the New Testament display itself more\nclearly than in the pictures it presents to us of Roman military men.\nThey are uniformly most favourable. Without one single exception the\npictures drawn for us of every centurion and soldier mentioned in the\nbooks of the New Testament are bright with some element of good\nshining out conspicuously by way of favourable contrast, when brought\nside by side with the Jewish people, upon whom more abundant and more\nblessed privileges had been in vain lavished. Let us just note a few\ninstances which will illustrate our view. The soldiers sought John's\nbaptism and humbly received John's penitential advice and direction\nwhen priests and scribes rejected the Lord's messenger (Luke iii. 14).\nA soldier and a centurion received Christ's commendation for the\nexercise of a faith surpassing in its range and spiritual perception\nany faith which the Master had found within the bounds and limits of\nIsrael according to the flesh. \"Verily I have not found so great\nfaith, no, not in Israel,\" were Christ's almost wondering words as He\nheard the confession of His God-like nature, His Divine power involved\nin the centurion's prayer of humility, \"I am not worthy that Thou\nshouldest come under my roof: but only say the word, and my servant\nshall be healed\" (cf. Matt. viii. 5-13). So was it again with the\ncenturion to whom the details of our Lord's execution were committed.\nHe too is painted in a favourable light. He had an open mind, willing\nto receive evidence. He received that evidence under the most\nunfavourable conditions. His mind was convinced of our Lord's mission\nand character, not by His triumphs, but by His apparent defeat. As the\nvictim of Jewish malice and prejudice yielded up the ghost and\ncommitted His pure, unspotted soul to the hands of His heavenly\nFather, then it was that, struck by the supernatural spirit of love\nand gentleness and forgiveness--those great forces of Christianity\nwhich never at any other time or in any other age have had their full\nand fair play--the centurion yielded the assent of his affections and\nof his intellect to the Divine mission of the suffering Saviour, and\ncried, \"Truly this man was the Son of God\" (Matt. xxvii. 54). So it\nwas again with Julius the centurion, who courteously entreated St.\nPaul on his voyage as a prisoner to Rome (Acts xxvii. 3); and so again\nit was with Cornelius the centurion, of the band called the Italian\nband.\n\n  [71] Cornelius was a centurion of the Italian band. This is\n  another of the accidental coincidences which attest the\n  genuineness of the Acts. The Roman army was divided into two broad\n  divisions, the legions and the auxiliary forces. Now the legions\n  were never permanently quartered in Palestine till the great war\n  which ended in the destruction of Jerusalem, which began in A.D.\n  66 and ended in A.D. 70. A legion was then for the first time\n  stationed with a fixed camp upon the site of the Holy City: see\n  Mommsen's _Roman Provinces_, ii. 218. The auxiliary forces were a\n  kind of militia raised upon the spot. Palestine was made a\n  province of the second rank in A.D. 6, and from that time to the\n  year 66 was garrisoned, like all second-rank provinces,\n  exclusively by auxiliary troops, the headquarters of which were at\n  C\u00e6sarea. These auxiliaries, recruited amongst the Samaritans and\n  Syrian Greeks, numbered one ala and five cohorts, about three\n  thousand men: see Mommsen, _loc. cit._, p. 186. It would not have\n  been prudent, however, to have a garrison in Palestine exclusively\n  composed of troops locally recruited, even though restricted to\n  Samaritans and Syrians, just as no prudent English government\n  would garrison Ireland with a militia drawn from Ulster Orangemen\n  alone. The Roman Government therefore mingled with the garrison of\n  C\u00e6sarea an auxiliary cohort composed of Italians. There were\n  thirty-two Italian auxiliary cohorts which were thus used as a\n  salutary precaution against treachery on the part of the local\n  militia. See, on this interesting point, Marquardt, _L'\n  Organisation Militaire chez les Romains_, p. 189 (French Edition),\n  where this learned German writer often quotes the Acts of the\n  Apostles to illustrate the military arrangements in Palestine\n  during the first sixty years of the first century. Such was the\n  military organisation of Palestine from _A.D._ 6 to 66. After that\n  period Palestine was ruled in the sternest military manner, and\n  treated like a border province subject to martial law with\n  legionaries scattered all over it. Now if the Acts were written in\n  the beginning of the second century, a writer would almost\n  certainly have missed the correct description of the troops\n  stationed at C\u00e6sarea as St. Luke gives it in this passage. See\n  also the article \"Exercitus\" in the new edition of Smith's\n  _Dictionary of Roman and Greek Antiquities_; Mommsen, on the Roman\n  Legions, in _Ephemeris Epigraphica_, vol. v. and Pfitzner,\n  _Geschichte der R\u00f6mischen Kaiserlegionen_.\n\nNow how comes this to pass? What a striking evidence of the workings\nand presence of the Divine Spirit in the writers of our sacred books\nwe may find in this fact! The Roman soldiers were of course the\nsymbols to a patriotic Jew of a hated foreign sway, of an idolatrous\njurisdiction and rule. A Jew uninfluenced by supernatural grace and\nunguided by Divine inspiration would never have drawn such pictures of\nRoman centurions as the New Testament has handed down to us. The\npictures, indeed, drawn by the opposition press of any country is not\ngenerally a favourable one when dealing with the persons and officials\nof the dominant party. But the apostles--Jews though they were of\nnarrow, provincial, prejudiced Galilee--had drunk deep of the spirit\nof the new religion. They recognised that Jesus Christ, the King of\nthe kingdom of heaven, cared nothing about what form of government\nmen lived under. They knew that Christ ignored all differences of\nclimate, age, sex, nationality, or employment. They felt that the only\ndistinctions recognised in Christ's kingdom were spiritual\ndistinctions, and therefore they recognised the soul of goodness\nwherever found. They welcomed the honest and true heart, no matter\nbeneath what skin it beat, and found therefore in many of these Roman\nsoldiers some of the ablest, the most devoted, and the most effective\nservants and teachers of the Cross of Jesus Christ. Verily the\nuniversal and catholic principles of the new religion which found\ntheir first formal proclamation in the age of Cornelius met with an\nample vindication and a full reward in the trophies won and the\nconverts gained from such an unpromising source as the ranks of the\nRoman army. This seems to me one reason for the favourable notices of\nthe Roman soldiers in the New Testament. The Divine Spirit wished to\nimpress upon mankind that birth, position, or employment have no\ninfluence upon a man's state in God's sight, and to prove by a number\nof typical examples that spiritual conditions and excellence alone\navail to find favour with the Almighty.\n\nAnother reason, however, may be found for this fact. The Scriptures\nnever make light of discipline or training. \"Train up a child in the\nway he should go\" is a Divine precept. St. Paul, in his Pastoral\nEpistles, lays down as one great qualification for a bishop that he\nshould have this power of exercising discipline and rule at home as\nwell as abroad: \"For if he knoweth not how to rule his own house, how\nshall he take care of the Church of God?\" (1 Tim. iii. 5). By\ndiscipline, the discipline of Egypt and the wilderness, did God\nprepare His people for Canaan. By the discipline of captivity and\ndispersion, by the discipline of Greek philosophy spreading novel\nintellectual ideas, by the discipline of Roman dominion executing\nmighty public works, carrying roads and intercommunication to the\nremotest and most barbarous nations, did God prepare the world for the\nrevelation of His Son. By the discipline of life, by joy and sorrow,\nby strife and suffering, by parting and by loss, does God still\nprepare His faithful ones for the beatific vision of eternal beauty,\nfor the rest and joy of everlasting peace. And discipline worked out\nits usual results on these military men, even though it was only an\nimperfect and pagan discipline which these Roman soldiers received.\nLet us note carefully how this was. The world of unregenerate man at\nthe time of our Lord's appearance had become utterly selfish.\nDiscipline of every kind had been flung off. Self-restraint was\npractically unknown, and the devil and his works flourished in every\ncircle, bringing forth the fruits of wickedness, uncleanness, and\nimpurity in every direction. The army was the only place or region\nwhere in those times any kind of discipline or self-restraint was\npractised. For no army can permit--even if it be an army of\natheists--profligacy and drunkenness to rage, flaunting themselves\nbeneath the very eye of the sun. And as the spiritual result we find\nthat this small measure of pagan discipline acted as a preparation for\nChristianity, and became under the Divine guidance the means of\nfitting men like Cornelius of C\u00e6sarea for the reception of the gospel\nmessage of purity and peace.[72]\n\n  [72] \"The Roman camps were also the best training-schools for the\n  old-fashioned virtues of faithfulness, straightforwardness, and\n  hardihood; and in them were to be found the best types of the old\n  Roman character, which, as moralists complained, were to be found\n  elsewhere no more. If the funds of a country town had fallen into\n  disorder, or uprightness was needed for a special post, the\n  curator chosen by the Government was often an old soldier, who had\n  long been tried and trusted; and early Christian history throws,\n  incidentally, a favourable light upon the moral qualities of the\n  Roman officer. These qualities were mainly formed by thoroughness\n  of work and discipline.\"--W. W. CAPES, _The Early Empire_, p.\n  210.\n\nBut we observe that Cornelius the centurion had one special feature\nwhich made him peculiarly fitted to be God's instrument for opening\nthe Christian faith to the Gentile world. The choice of Cornelius is\nmarked by all that skill and prudence, that careful adaptation of\nmeans to ends which the Divine workmanship, whether in nature or in\ngrace, ever displays. There were many Roman centurions stationed at\nC\u00e6sarea, yet none was chosen save Cornelius, and that because he was\n\"a devout man who feared God with all his house, praying to God\nalways, and giving much alms to the people.\" He feared Jehovah, he\nfasted, prayed, observed Jewish hours of devotion. His habits were\nmuch more those of a devout Jew than of a pagan soldier. He was\npopular with the Jewish people therefore, like another centurion of\nwhom it was said by the Jewish officials themselves \"he loveth our\nnation and hath built us a synagogue.\" The selection of Cornelius as\nthe leader and firstfruits of the Gentiles unto God was eminently\nprudent and wise. God when He is working out His plans chooses His\ninstruments carefully and skilfully. He leaves nothing to chance. He\ndoes nothing imperfectly. Work done by God will repay the keenest\nscrutiny, the closest study, for it is the model of what every man's\nwork in life ought as far as possible to be--earnest, wise, complete,\nperfect.\n\nIV. Again, looking at the whole passage we perceive therein\nillustrations of two important laws of the Divine life. We recognise\nin the case of Cornelius the working of that great principle of the\nkingdom of God often enunciated by the great Master: \"To him that hath\nshall be given, and he shall have more abundantly,\" \"If any man will\ndo His will, he shall know of the doctrine\"; or, to put it in other\nlanguage, that God always bestows more grace upon the man who\ndiligently uses and improves the grace which he already possesses; a\nprinciple which indeed we see constantly exemplified in things\npertaining to this world as well as in matters belonging to the\nspiritual life. Thus it was with Cornelius. He was what was called\namong the Jews a proselyte of the gate. These proselytes were very\nnumerous. They were a kind of fringe hanging upon the outskirts of the\nJewish people. They were admirers of Jewish ideas, doctrines, and\npractices, but they were not incorporated with the Jewish nation nor\nbound by all their laws and ceremonial restraints. The Levitical Law\nwas not imposed upon them because they were not circumcised. They were\nmerely bound to worship the true God and observe certain moral\nprecepts said to have been delivered to Noah.[73] Such was Cornelius\nwhom the providence of God had led from Italy to C\u00e6sarea for this very\npurpose, to fulfil His purposes of mercy towards the Gentile world.\nHis residence there had taught him the truth and beauty of the pure\nworship of Jehovah rendered by the Jews. He had learned too, not only\nthat God is, but that He is a rewarder of them that diligently seek\nHim. Cornelius had set himself, therefore, to the diligent discharge\nof all the duties of religion so far as he knew them. He was earnest\nand diligent in prayer, for he recognised himself as dependent upon an\ninvisible God. He was liberal in alms, for he desired to show forth\nhis gratitude, for mercies daily received. And acting thus he met with\nthe divinely appointed reward. Cornelius is favoured with a fuller\nrevelation and a clearer guidance by the angel's mouth, who tells him\nto send and summon Peter from Joppa for this very purpose. What an\neminently practical lesson we may learn from God's dealings with this\nearliest Gentile convert! We learn from the Divine dealings with\nCornelius that whosoever diligently improves the lower spiritual\nadvantages which he possesses shall soon be admitted to higher and\nfuller blessings.\n\n  [73] See the article on \"Proselytes\" in Schaft's _Encyclop\u00e6dia of\n  Theology_.\n\nIt may well have been that God led him through successive stages and\nrewarded him under each. In distant Italy, when residing amid the\nabounding superstitions of that country, conscience was the only\npreacher, but there the sermons of that monitor were heard with\nreverence and obeyed with diligence. Then God ordered the course of\nhis life so that public duty summoned him to a distant land. Cornelius\nmay have at the time counted his lot a hard one when despatched to\nPalestine as a centurion, for it was a province where, from the nature\nof the warfare there prevalent, there were abundant opportunities of\ndeath by assassination at the hands of the Zealots, and but few\nopportunities of distinction such as might be gained in border warfare\nwith foreign enemies. But the Lord was shaping his career, as He\nshapes all our careers, with reference to our highest spiritual\npurposes. He led Cornelius, therefore, to a land and to a town where\nthe pure worship of Jehovah was practised and the elevated morality\nof Judaism prevailed. Here, then, were new opportunities placed within\nthe centurion's reach. And again the same spiritual diligence is\ndisplayed, and again the same law of spiritual development and\nenlarging blessing finds a place. Cornelius is devout and liberal and\nGod-fearing, and therefore a heavenly visitor directs his way to still\nfuller light and grander revelations, and Cornelius the centurion of\nthe Italian band leads the Gentile hosts into the fulness of blessing,\nthe true land flowing with milk and honey, found only in the\ndispensation of Jesus Christ and within the borders of the Church of\nGod. This was God's course of dealing with the Roman centurion, and it\nis the course which the same loving dealings still pursues with human\nsouls truly desirous of Divine guidance. The Lord imparts one degree\nof light and knowledge and grace, but withholds higher degrees till\nfull use has been made of the lower. He speaks to us at first in a\nwhisper; but if we reverently hearken, there is a gradual deepening of\nthe voice, till it is as audible in the crowd as it is in the\nsolitude, and we are continually visited with the messages of the\nEternal King.\n\nNow cannot these ideas be easily applied to our own individual cases?\nA young man, for instance, may be troubled with doubts and questions\nconcerning certain portions of the Christian faith. Some persons make\nsuch doubts an excuse for plunging into scenes of riot and\ndissipation, quenching the light which God has given them and making\ncertain their own spiritual destruction. The case of Cornelius points\nout the true course which should in such a case be adopted. Men may be\ntroubled with doubts concerning certain doctrines of revelation. But\nthey have no doubt as to the dictates of conscience and the light\nwhich natural religion sheds upon the paths of morals and of life.\nLet them then use the light they have. Let them diligently practise\nthe will of God as it has been revealed. Let them be earnest in\nprayer, pure and reverent in life, honest and upright in business, and\nthen in God's own time the doubts will vanish, the darkness will clear\naway, and the ancient promises will be fulfilled, \"Light is sown for\nthe righteous,\" \"The path of the just shineth more and more unto the\nperfect day,\" \"In the way of righteousness is life, and in the pathway\nthereof there is no death.\"\n\nBut the example of Cornelius is of still wider application. The\nposition of Cornelius was not a favourable one for the development of\nthe religious life, and yet he rose superior to all its difficulties,\nand became thus an eminent example to all believers. Men may complain\nthat they have but few spiritual advantages, and that their station in\nlife is thickly strewn with difficulties, hindering the practices and\nduties of religion. To such persons we would say, compare yourselves\nwith Cornelius and the difficulties external and internal he had to\novercome. Servants, for instance, may labour under great apparent\ndisadvantages. Perhaps, if living in an irreligious family, they have\nfew opportunities for prayer, public or private. Men of business are\ncompelled to spend days and nights in the management of their affairs.\nPersons of commanding intellect or of high station have their own\ndisadvantages, their own peculiar temptations, growing out of their\nvery prosperity. The case of Cornelius shows that each class can rise\nsuperior to their peculiar difficulties and grow in the hidden life of\nthe soul, if they but imitate his example as he grew from grace to\ngrace, improving his scanty store till it grew into a fuller and\nampler one, till it expanded into all the glory of Christian\nprivilege, when Cornelius, like Peter, was enabled to rejoice in the\nknowledge and love of a risen and glorified Redeemer.[74]\n\n  [74] I owe a great many of the devout thoughts dealing with the\n  latter portion of this subject to a volume of sermons preached by\n  the celebrated Golden Lecturer, the eloquent Henry Melville,\n  styled _Voices of the Christian Year_. Melville is now as a\n  preacher quite forgotten, and yet he deserves to be gratefully\n  remembered, for he was the first of the old Evangelical school to\n  break through the traditional repetition of commonplaces which\n  formed the main part of the preaching of the leading popular\n  orators of fifty years ago. From a preacher's point of view his\n  sermons will still repay study. His sermons, for instance, on the\n  less known characters of Scripture, will teach a young divine how\n  to extract edification and instruction out of most unpromising\n  materials, and to apply the essential principles of the Bible to\n  the changed circumstances of modern life. And assuredly this is\n  the real object of a pastor's preaching in a Christian\n  congregation, not the mere repetition of the first elements of\n  Christianity, but an application of its great principles, first\n  proclaimed in the language of the East, to the actions and lives\n  of the men of the West. Preaching of that kind need never be dull\n  and uninteresting.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VI.\n\n_THE PETRINE VISION AT JOPPA._\n\n     \"Now on the morrow, as they were on their journey, and drew nigh\n     unto the city, Peter went up upon the housetop to pray, about the\n     sixth hour: and he became hungry, and desired to eat: but while\n     they made ready, he fell into a trance; and he beholdeth the\n     heaven opened, and a certain vessel descending, as it were a\n     great sheet, let down by four corners upon the earth: wherein\n     were all manner of fourfooted beasts and creeping things of the\n     earth and fowls of the heaven. And there came a voice to him,\n     Rise, Peter; kill and eat. But Peter said, Not so, Lord; for I\n     have never eaten anything that is common and unclean. And a voice\n     came unto him again the second time, What God hath cleansed, make\n     not thou common.\"--ACTS x. 9-15.\n\n\nThere are two central figures in the conversion of Cornelius. The one\nis the centurion himself, the other is St. Peter, the selected and\npredestined agent in that great work. We have studied Cornelius in the\nlast chapter, and have seen the typical character of all his\ncircumstances. His time, his residence, his training, had all been\nprovidential, indicating to us the careful superintendence, the\nwatchful oversight, which God bestows upon the history of individuals\nas well as of the Church at large. Let us now turn to the other\nfigure, St. Peter, and see if the Lord's providence may not be traced\nwith equal clearness in the circumstances of his case also. We have\nfound Cornelius at C\u00e6sarea, the great Roman port and garrison of\nPalestine, a very fitting and natural place for a Roman centurion to\nbe located. We find Peter at this very same time at Joppa, a spot\nthat was consecrated by many a memory and specially associated with a\nmission to the Gentiles in the times of the Elder Dispensation. Here\nwe trace the hand of the Lord providentially ruling the footsteps of\nPeter though he knew it not, and leading him, as Philip was led a\nshort time before, to the spot where his intended work lay. The\nsickness and death of Tabitha or Dorcas led St. Peter to Joppa. The\nfame of his miracle upon that devout woman led to the conversion of\nmany souls, and this naturally induced Peter to make a longer stay in\nJoppa at the house of Simon the tanner. How natural and\nunpremeditated, how very ordinary and unplanned to the natural eye\nseem the movements of St. Peter! So they would have seemed to us had\nwe been living at Joppa, and yet now we can see with the light which\nthe sacred narrative throws upon the story that the Lord was guiding\nSt. Peter to the place where his work was cut out when the appointed\ntime should come. Surely the history of Peter and his actions have\nabundant comfort and sustaining hope for ourselves! Our lives may be\nvery ordinary and commonplace; the events may succeed one another in\nthe most matter-of-fact style; there may seem in them nothing at all\nworthy the attention of a Divine Ruler; and yet those ordinary lives\nare just as much planned and guided by supernatural wisdom as the\ncareers of men concerning whom all the world is talking. Only let us\ntake care to follow St. Peter's example. He yielded himself completely\nto the Divine guidance, trusted himself entirely to Divine love and\nwisdom, and then found in such trust not only life and safety, but\nwhat is far better, perfect peace and sweetest calm.\n\nThere is something very restful in the picture drawn for us of St.\nPeter at this crisis. There is none of that feverish hurry and\nrestlessness which make some good men and their methods very trying to\nothers. The notices of him have all an air of repose and Christian\ndignity. \"As Peter went throughout all parts, he came down also to the\nsaints which dwelt at Lydda\"; \"Peter put them all forth and prayed\";\n\"Peter abode many days in Joppa\"; \"Peter went up upon the housetop to\npray about the sixth hour.\" St. Peter, indeed, did not live in an age\nof telegrams and postcards and express trains, which all contribute\nmore or less to that feverish activity and restlessness so\ncharacteristic of this age. But even if he had lived in such a time, I\nam sure his faith in God would have saved him from that fussiness,\nthat life of perpetual hurry, yet never bringing forth any abiding\nfruit, which we behold in so many moderns. This results a good deal, I\nbelieve, from the development--I was almost going to say the tyranny,\nthe unwitting tyranny of modern journalism, which compels men to live\nso much in public and reports their every utterance. There are men\nnever tired of running from one committee to another, and never weary\nof seeing their names in the morning papers. They count that they have\nbeen busily and usefully employed if their names are perpetually\nappearing in newspaper reports as speaking, or at any rate being\npresent at innumerable meetings, leaving themselves no time for that\nquiet meditation whereby St. Peter gained closest communion with\nheaven. It is no wonder such men's fussiness should be fruitless,\nbecause their natures are poor, shallow, uncultivated, where the seed\nsprings up rapidly but brings forth no fruit to perfection, because it\nhas no deepness of earth. It is no wonder that St. Peter should have\nspoken with power at C\u00e6sarea and been successful in opening the door\nof faith to the Gentiles, because he prepared himself for doing the\nDivine work by the discipline of meditation and thought and spiritual\nconverse with his Risen Lord. And here we may remark, before we pass\nfrom this point, that the conversion of the first Gentile and the full\nand complete exercise of the power of the keys committed to St. Peter\nrun on lines very parallel to those pertaining to the Day of Pentecost\nand the conversion of the earliest Jews in one respect at least. The\nDay of Pentecost was preceded by a period of ten days' waiting and\nspiritual repose. The conversion of Cornelius and the revelation of\nGod's purposes to St. Peter were preceded by a season of meditation\nand prayer, when an apostle could find time amid all his pressing\ncares to seek the housetop for midday prayer and to abide many days in\nthe house of one Simon a tanner. A period of pause, repose, and\nquietness preceded a new onward movement of development and of action.\n\nI. Now, as in the case of Cornelius, so in the case of St. Peter, we\nnote the _place_ where the chief actor in the scene abode. It was at\nJoppa, and Joppa was associated with many memories for the Jews. It\nhas been from ancient times the port of Jerusalem, and is even now\nrising into somewhat of its former commercial greatness, specially\nowing to the late development of the orange trade, for the production\nof which fruit Jaffa or Joppa has become famous. Three thousand years\nago Joppa was a favourite resort of the Ph\u0153nician fleets, which\nbrought the cedars of Lebanon to King Solomon for the building of the\ntemple (2 Chron. ii. 16). At a later period, when God would send Jonah\non a mission to Gentile Nineveh, and when Jonah desired to thwart\nGod's merciful designs towards the outer world, the prophet fled to\nJoppa and there took ship in his vain effort to escape from the\npresence of the Lord. And now again Joppa becomes the refuge of\nanother prophet, who feels the same natural hesitation about admitting\nthe Gentiles to God's mercy, but who, unlike Jonah, yields immediate\nassent to the heavenly message, and finds peace and blessing in the\npaths of loving obedience. The very house where St. Peter abode is\nstill pointed out.[75] It is situated in the south-western part of the\ntown, and commands a view over the bay of Joppa and the waters of that\nMediterranean Sea which was soon to be the channel of communication\nwhereby the gospel message should be borne to the nations of the\ndistant West. We remark, too, that it was with Simon the tanner of\nJoppa that St. Peter was staying. When a great change is impending\nvarious little circumstances occur all showing the tendencies of the\nage. By themselves and taken one by one they do not express much. At\nthe time when they happen men do not regard them or understand their\nmeaning, but afterwards, and reading them in the light of accomplished\nfacts, men behold their significance. Thus it was with Simon Peter and\nhis visit to Simon the tanner of Joppa. Tanners as a class were\ndespised and comparatively outcast among the Jews. Tanning was counted\nan unclean trade because of the necessary contact with dead bodies\nwhich it involved. A tanyard must, according to Jewish law, be\nseparated by fifty yards at least from human dwellings. If a man\nmarried a woman without informing her of his trade as a tanner, she\nwas granted a divorce. The whole trade of tanners was under a ban, and\nyet it was to a tanner's house that the Apostle made his way, and\nthere he lodged for many days, showing that the mind even of St. Peter\nwas steadily rising above narrow Jewish prejudices into that higher\nand nobler atmosphere where he learned in fullest degree that no man\nand no lawful trade is to be counted common or unclean.\n\n  [75] The house of Simon the tanner is depicted in Lewin's _St.\n  Paul_, vol. i., pp. 87, 88. There is a good description of it, as\n  also of Joppa at large, in Geikie's _The Holy Land and the Bible_,\n  vol. i., p. 18, from which we take the following: \"On the south\n  side of the town, at the edge of the sea, close to the lighthouse,\n  one is reminded of the visit of St. Peter to Joppa by the claim of\n  a paltry mosque to occupy the house of Simon the tanner. The\n  present building is comparatively modern, and cannot be the actual\n  structure in which the Apostle lodged. It is, however, regarded by\n  the Mohammedans as sacred, one of the rooms being used as a place\n  of prayer in commemoration, we are told, of the Lord Jesus having\n  once asked God, while here, for a meal; on which a table forthwith\n  came down from heaven. Strange variation of the story of St.\n  Peter's vision! The waves beat against the low wall of the\n  courtyard, so that, like the actual house of Simon, it is close on\n  the sea-shore. Tanning, moreover, in accordance with the\n  unchanging character of the East, is still extensively carried on\n  in this part of the town.\"\n\nII. We note, again, the _time_ when the vision was granted to St.\nPeter and the mind of the Lord was more fully disclosed to him. Joppa\nis separated from C\u00e6sarea by a distance of thirty miles. The leading\ncoast towns were then connected by an excellent road, along which\nhorses and vehicles passed with ease. The centurion Cornelius, when he\nreceived the angelic direction, forthwith despatched two of his\nhousehold servants and a devout soldier to summon St. Peter to his\npresence. They doubtless travelled on horseback, leading spare beasts\nfor the accommodation of the Apostle. Less than twenty-four hours\nafter their departure from C\u00e6sarea they drew nigh to Joppa, and then\nit was that God revealed His purposes to His beloved servant. The very\nhour can be fixed. Cornelius saw the angel at the ninth hour, when, as\nhe himself tells us, \"he was keeping the hour of prayer\" (x. 30).\nPeter saw the vision at the sixth hour, when he went up on the house\ntop to pray, according to the example of the Psalmist when he sang,\n\"In the evening and morning and at noon-day will I pray, and that\ninstantly.\"[76] St. Peter evidently was a careful observer of all the\nforms amid which his youthful training had been conducted. He did not\nseek in the name of spiritual religion to discard these old forms. He\nrecognised the danger of any such course. Forms may often tend to\nformalism on account of the weakness of human nature. But they also\nhelp to preserve and guard the spirit of ancient institutions in times\nof sloth and decay, till the Spirit from on high again breathes upon\nthe dry bones and imparts fresh life. St. Peter used the forms of\nJewish externalism, imparting to them some of his own intense\nearnestness, and the Lord set His seal of approval upon his action by\nrevealing the purposes of His mercy and love to the Gentile world at\nthe noontide hour of prayer. The wisest masters of the spiritual life\nhave ever followed St. Peter's teaching. We may take, for instance,\nDr. Goulburn in his valuable treatise on Personal Religion. In the\nsixth chapter of the fourth part of that work he has some wise\nthoughts on living by rule in the Christian life, where he points out\nthe use of rules and their abuse, strongly urging upon those who\ndesire to grow in grace the formation of rules by which the practices\nof religion and the soul's inner life may be directed and shielded.\nThere is, for instance, no law of Christ which ties men down to\nmorning and evening prayer. Yet does not our own daily experience\nteach that, if this unwritten rule of the Christian life be relaxed\nunder the pretence of higher spirituality, and men pray only when they\nfeel specially inclined to communion with the unseen, the whole\npractice of private as well as of public prayer ceases, and the soul\nlives in an atheistic atmosphere without any recognition or thought of\nGod.[77] This danger has been recognised from the earliest times.\nTertullian was a man of narrow views, but of the most intense piety.\nHe was a devout student of the New Testament, and a careful observer\nof the example of our Lord and His Apostles. The early Christians\nadopted from the Jews the custom of prayer at the various hours of the\nday, and turned it into a practical rule of Christian discipline,\nacknowledging at the same time that there was no Scriptural obligation\nin the rule, but that it was a mere wise advice for the development of\nthe spiritual life. This was the origin of what is technically called\nthe Canonical Hours, Matins with Lauds, Prime, Tierce, Sext, Nones,\nEvensong, and Compline, which can be traced back in germ to the age\nnext after the Apostles, and were originally grounded upon the example\nof the Apostles themselves, and specially upon that of St. Peter's\npractice at Joppa. Let us hear Tertullian on this matter. He wrote a\ntreatise on prayer, in which he presses upon the men of his time the\nduty of earnestness and intensity in that holy exercise, and when\ndoing so touches upon this very point: \"As respecting the time of\nprayer the observance of certain hours will not be unprofitable--those\ncommon hours I mean which mark the intervals of the day--the third,\nsixth, ninth--which we find in Scripture to have been made more solemn\nthan the rest. The first infusion of the Holy Spirit into the\ncongregated disciples took place at the third hour. Peter saw his\nvision on the housetop at the sixth hour. Peter and John went into the\nTemple at the ninth hour when he restored the paralytic to his\nhealth.\" Tertullian then adds the following wise observations, showing\nthat he quite grasped the essential distinction between the slavery of\nthe law and the freedom of the gospel in the matter of external\nobservances: \"Albeit these practices stand simply without any Divine\nprecept for their observance; still it may be granted a good thing to\nestablish some definite rule which may both add stringency to the\nadmonition to pray and may as it were by a law tear us out of our\nordinary business unto such a duty. So that we pray not less than\nthrice in the day, debtors as we are to Three--Father, Son, and Holy\nSpirit--besides of course our regular prayers on the entrance of light\nand of night.\" The ecclesiastical practice of the Hours may be turned\ninto a mere formal repetition of certain prescribed tasks; but, like\nall other ordinances which trace themselves back to primitive\nChristianity, the Hours are based on a true conception and a noble\nideal of the prevailing and abounding place which prayer should occupy\nin the soul's life, according to the Saviour's own teaching when He\nspake a parable to His disciples to this end that men ought always to\npray and not to faint.[78]\n\n  [76] This is the rendering of Psalm lv. 18 according to the\n  version in the Book of Common Prayer.\n\n  [77] A deceased friend of mine, a well-known member of the Society\n  of Friends, once remarked to me about this very point that his\n  Society, to which he belonged to his dying day, while aiming at\n  the highest spirituality, in its neglect of all rules, and\n  suitable therefore for persons of specially exalted tone, had\n  rendered itself unfitted for the training of children. Children\n  cannot be trained without rules, and a society which trusts to\n  educate them in things religious without fixed and definite\n  training must be a hopeless failure. The original principles of\n  \"Friends\" preclude them from teaching children forms of private\n  prayer, from using fixed Bible reading and regular religious\n  instruction, as well as from stated family worship. Efforts have\n  been made in later times to remedy this effect, but they are\n  merely confessions of the failure of the principles inculcated by\n  George Fox and Robert Barclay and acknowledgments that the Church\n  from which they dissented was right.\n\n  [78] Tertullian's treatise on Prayer will be found in Clark's\n  translation of his works, vol. i., pp. 178-204.\n\nIII. We now arrive at the vision which Peter saw upon the housetop.\nThe Apostle, having ascended upon the housetop commanding a view over\nthe blue waters of the Mediterranean lying shimmering and sweltering\nbeneath the rays of the noonday sun, became hungry, as was natural\nenough, because the usual time of the midday meal was drawing nigh.\nBut there was a deeper reason for the Apostle's felt need of\nrefreshment, and a more immediate providence was watching over his\nnatural powers and their action than ever before had been revealed.\nThe natural hunger was divinely inspired in order that just at that\ninstant when the representatives and delegates of the Gentile world\nwere drawing nigh to his abode he might be prepared to accord them a\nfitting reception. To the mere man of sense or to the mere carnal mind\nthe hunger of St. Peter may seem a simple natural operation, but to\nthe devout believer in Christianity, who views it as the great and\nperfect revelation of God to man, who knows that His covenants are in\nall things well-ordered and sure, and that in His works in grace as\nwell as in His works in nature the Lord leaves nothing to mere chance,\nbut perfectly orders them all down to the minutest detail, to such an\none this human hunger of St. Peter's appears as divinely planned in\norder that a spiritual satisfaction and completeness may be imparted\nto his soul unconsciously craving after a fuller knowledge of the\nDivine will. St. Peter's hunger is, in fact, but a manifestation in\nthe human sphere of that superhuman foresight which was directing the\nwhole transaction from behind this visible scene; teaching us, in\nfact, the lesson so often repeated in Holy Scripture that nothing, not\neven our feelings, our infirmities, our passions, our appetites, are\ntoo minute for the Divine love and care, and encouraging us thereby to\nact more freely upon the apostolic injunction, \"In everything by\nprayer and supplication let your requests be made known unto God.\" If\nSt. Peter's hunger were taken up and incorporated with the Divine plan\nof salvation, we may be sure that our own wants and trials do not\nescape the omniscient eye of Him who plans all our lives, appointing\nthe end from the very beginning. St. Peter was hungry, and as food was\npreparing he fell into a trance, and then the vision answering in its\nform to the hunger which he felt was granted. Vain questions may here\nbe raised, as we noted before in the case of St. Paul, concerning the\ntrance of the Apostle and the communications he held with the unseen\nworld. They are vain questions for us to raise or to attempt to\nanswer, because they belong to an unexplored land full, as many modern\nexperiments show, of strange mysterious facts peculiar to it. This\nalone we can say, some communication must have been made to St. Peter\nwhich he regarded as a Divine revelation. The conversion and reception\nby St. Peter of the Gentile centurion are facts, the prejudices of St.\nPeter against such a reception are also undoubted facts. Hitherto he\nshared the opinion common to all the Twelve that such a reception was\ncontrary to the Divine law and purposes. He must have received upon\nthe housetop some kind of a heavenly communication which he regarded\nas equivalent in authority to that ancient rule by which he esteemed\nthe promises and mercy of God limited to the seed of Abraham. But as\nfor any endeavour to understand or explain the mode of God's action on\nthis occasion, it will be just as vain as attempts to pierce the\nmysteries of God's action in creation, the incarnation, or, to come\nlower still, in the processes by which life has been communicated to\nthis world and is now sustained and continued thereon. We are in very\ndeed living and moving amid mysteries, and if we refuse to learn or\nmeditate till the mysteries we meet with, the very first step we take,\nbe cleared, we must cease to think and be content to pass life like\nthe beasts that perish. We know not, indeed, the exact manner in which\nGod communicated with St. Peter, or for that matter with any one else\nto whom He made revelation of His will. We know nothing of the manner\nin which He spoke to Moses out of the bush, or to Samuel in the night\nseason, or to Isaiah in the Temple. As with these His servants of the\nElder Dispensation, so it was with St. Peter on the housetop. We know,\nhowever, how St. Luke received his information as to the nature of the\nvision and all the other facts of the case. St. Luke and St. Peter\nmust have had many an opportunity for conversation in the thrilling,\nall-important events amid which he had lived. St. Luke too accompanied\nSt. Paul on that journey to Jerusalem described in the twenty-first\nchapter, and was introduced to the Christian Sanhedrin or Council over\nwhich St. James the Just presided. But even if St. Luke had never seen\nSt. Peter, he had abundant opportunities of learning all about the\nvision. St. Peter proclaimed it to the world from the very time it\nhappened, and was obliged to proclaim it as his defence against the\nparty zealous for the law of Moses. St. Peter referred to what God had\njust shown him as soon as he came into the centurion's presence. He\ndescribed the vision at full length as soon as he came to Jerusalem\nand met the assembled Church, where its power and meaning were so\nclearly recognised that the mouths of all St. Peter's adversaries were\nat once stopped. And again at the Council of Jerusalem held, as\ndescribed in the fifteenth chapter, St. Peter refers to the\ncircumstances of this whole story as well known to the whole Church in\nthat city. St. Luke then would have no difficulty, writing some twenty\nyears later, in ascertaining the facts of this story, and naturally\nenough, when writing to a Gentile convert and having in mind the needs\nand feelings of the Gentiles, he inserted the narrative of the vision\nas being the foundation-stone on which the growing and enlarging\nedifice of Gentile Christianity had been originally established. The\nvision too was admirably suited to serve its purpose. It based itself,\nas I have said, on Peter's natural feelings and circumstances, just as\nspiritual things ever base themselves upon and respond to the natural\nshadows of this lower life, just as the Holy Communion, for instance,\nbases itself upon the natural craving for food and drink, but rises\nand soars far away above and beyond the material sphere to the true\nfood of the soul, the Divine banquet wherewith God's secret and loved\nones are eternally fed. Peter was hungry, and a sheet was seen let\ndown from heaven containing all kinds of animals, clean and unclean,\ntogether with creeping things and fowls of heaven. He was commanded to\nrise and slay and appease his hunger. He states the objection, quite\nnatural in the mouth of a conscientious Jew, that nothing common or\nunclean had ever been eaten by him. Then the heavenly voice uttered\nwords which struck for him the death-knell of the old haughty Jewish\nexclusiveness, inaugurating the grand spirit of Christian liberalism\nand of human equality--\"What God hath cleansed, make thou not common.\"\nThe vision was thrice repeated to make the matter sure, and then the\nheavens were shut up again, and Peter was left to interpret the Divine\nteaching for himself. Peter, in the light of the circumstances which a\nfew moments later took place, easily read the interpretation of the\nvision. The distinction between animals and foods was for the Jew but\nan emblem and type, a mere object lesson of the distinction between\nthe Jews and other nations. The Gentiles ate every kind of animal and\ncreeping thing; the favourite food of the Roman soldiers with whom the\nPalestinian Jews came most in contact being pork. The differences\nwhich the Divine law compelled the Jew to make in the matter of food\nwere simply the type of the difference and separation which God's love\nand grace had made between His covenant people and those outside that\ncovenant. And just then, to clinch the matter and interpret the vision\nby the light of divinely ordered facts, the Spirit announced to the\nApostle, as \"he was much perplexed in himself what the vision might\nmean,\" that three men were seeking him, and that he was to go with\nthem doubting nothing, \"for I have sent them.\"[79] The hour had at\nlast come for the manifestation of God's everlasting purposes, when\nthe sacred society should assume its universal privileges and stand\nforth resplendent in its true character as God's Holy Catholic\nChurch,--of which the Temple had been a temporary symbol and\npledge,--a house of prayer for all nations, the joy of the whole\nearth, the city of the Great King, until the consummation of all\nthings.\n\n  [79] Calvin, in his commentary on Acts x. 12, has some excellent\n  remarks on the scope and meaning of this vision. \"I think that\n  hereby is shown to Peter that the distinction which God hitherto\n  made had now been removed. For as He had made a difference between\n  animals; so by the choice of one nation for Himself, God showed\n  that other nations were common and unclean. Now the distinction\n  between animals being removed, He consequently shows that there is\n  no longer any difference between men, and that the Jew does not\n  differ from the Greek. Hence Peter is warned not to shrink from\n  contact with the Gentiles as if they were unclean. There is no\n  doubt but that God wished to encourage Peter to come boldly to\n  Cornelius. Therefore, in order that he might be perfectly\n  satisfied, God shows him as in a picture that the distinctions\n  made by the law between clean and unclean had been abolished;\n  whence he may conclude that the partition which had hitherto\n  divided Jews from Gentiles was now overthrown. Now Paul teaches\n  that this mystery had been hid from the ages that the Gentiles\n  should be partakers with God's people and grafted into one body.\n  Therefore Peter never would have dared to open the gate of the\n  Kingdom of Heaven, unless God Himself had shown him that the wall\n  had been removed and that entrance was free to all.\" He then goes\n  on to consider the objection that St. Peter must have known of the\n  call of the Gentiles from the words of Christ's commission to go\n  and make disciples of all nations, and therefore this vision was\n  unnecessary. \"I answer that there was so much difficulty in the\n  novelty of the whole state of affairs that the apostles could not\n  at once grasp the position. They knew indeed in theory the\n  prophecies and the precept of Christ about preaching to the\n  Gentiles, but when they came to practice, struck by the awful\n  novelty, they hesitated. Wherefore it is not wonderful that the\n  Lord should confirm St. Peter's mind by a new sign.\" Calvin\n  clearly recognised that the inspiration enjoyed by St. Peter did\n  not remove his natural slowness of perception. The apostles were\n  like the bulk of ordinary men, very slow to grasp the full meaning\n  of a novel position or principle.\n\nIV. The sacred historian next presents St. Peter at C\u00e6sarea. The\nApostle rose up obedient to the Divine communication, admitted the men\nwho sought him, lodged them for the night, departed back the next day\nalong the same road which they had followed, and arrived at C\u00e6sarea on\nthe fourth day from the original appearance to Cornelius; so that if\nthe angel had been seen by the centurion on Saturday or the Sabbath\nthe vision would have been seen at Joppa on the Lord's Day, and then\non Tuesday St. Peter must have arrived at C\u00e6sarea. St. Peter did not\ntravel alone. He doubtless communicated the vision he had seen to the\nChurch at Joppa at the evening hour of devotion, and determined to\nassociate with himself six prominent members of that body in the\nfulfilment of his novel enterprise that they might be witnesses of\nGod's actions and assistants to himself in the work of baptism and of\nteaching. As soon as the missionary party arrived at the house of\nCornelius, they found a large party assembled to meet them, as\nCornelius had called together his kinsmen and acquaintances to hear\nthe message from heaven. Cornelius received St. Peter with an\nexpression of such profound reverence, prostrating himself on the\nearth, that St. Peter reproved him: \"But Peter raised him up, saying,\nStand up: I myself also am a man.\" Cornelius, with his mind formed in\na pagan mould and permeated with pagan associations and ideas,\nregarded Peter as a superhuman being, and worthy therefore of the\nreverence usually rendered to the Roman Emperor as the living\nembodiment of deity upon earth. He fell down and adored St. Peter,\neven as St. John adored the angel who revealed to him the mysteries of\nthe unseen world (Rev. xxii. 8), till reminded by St. Peter that he\nwas a mere human being like the centurion himself, full of human\nprejudices and narrow ideas which would have prevented him accepting\nthe invitation of Cornelius if God Himself had not intervened.\nCornelius then describes the circumstances of his vision and the\nangelic directions which he had received, ending by requesting St.\nPeter to announce the revelation of which he was the guardian. The\nApostle then proceeds to deliver an address, of which we have recorded\na mere synopsis alone; the original address must have been much\nlonger. St. Peter begins the first sermon delivered to Gentiles by an\nassertion of the catholic nature of the Church, a truth which he only\njust now learned: \"Of a truth I perceive that God is no respecter of\npersons: but in every nation he that feareth Him, and worketh\nrighteousness, is acceptable to Him\": a passage which has been much\nmisunderstood. People have thought that St. Peter proclaims by these\nwords that it was no matter what religion a man professed, provided\nonly he led a moral life and worked righteousness. His doctrine is of\nquite another type. He had already proclaimed to the Jews the\nexclusive claims of Christ as the door and gate of eternal life. In\nthe fourth chapter and twelfth verse he had told the Council at\nJerusalem that \"in none other than Jesus Christ of Nazareth is there\nsalvation: for neither is there any other name under heaven, that is\ngiven among men wherein we must be saved.\" St. Peter had seen and\nheard nothing since which could have changed his views or made him\nthink conscious faith in Jesus Christ utterly unimportant, as this\nmethod of interpretation, to which I refer, would teach. St. Peter's\nmeaning is quite clear when we consider the circumstances amid which\nhe stood. He had hitherto thought that the privilege of accepting the\nsalvation offered was limited to the Jews. Now he had learned from\nHeaven itself that the offer of God's grace and mercy was free to all,\nand that wherever man was responding to the dictates of conscience\nand yielding assent to the guidance of the inner light with which\nevery man was blessed, there God's supreme revelation was to be\nproclaimed and for them the doors of God's Church were to be opened\nwide.\n\nSt. Peter then proceeds, in his address, to recapitulate the leading\nfacts of the gospel story. He begins with John's baptism, glances at\nChrist's miracles, His crucifixion, resurrection, and mission of the\napostles, concluding by announcing His future return to be the Judge\nof quick and dead. St. Peter must, of course, have entered into\ngreater details than we possess in our narrative; but it is not always\nnoticed that he was addressing people not quite ignorant of the story\nwhich he had to tell. St. Peter begins by expressly stating, \"The word\nwhich God sent unto the children of Israel, preaching good tidings of\npeace by Jesus Christ (He is Lord of all)--that saying ye yourselves\nknow.\" Cornelius and his friends were devout and eager students of\nJewish religious movements, and they had heard in C\u00e6sarea vague\nreports of the words and doings of the great prophet who had caused\nsuch commotion a few years before. But then they were outside the\nbounds of Israel, whose religious authorities had rejected this\nprophet. The religion of Israel had illuminated their own pagan\ndarkness, and they therefore looked up to the decision of the high\npriests and of the Sanhedrin with profound veneration, and dared not\nto challenge it. They had never previously come in personal contact\nwith any of the new prophet's followers, and if they had, these\nfollowers would not have communicated to them anything of their\nmessage. They simply knew that a wondrous teacher had appeared, but\nthat his teaching was universally repudiated by the men whose views\nthey respected, and therefore they remained content with their old\nconvictions. The information, however, which they had gained formed a\nsolid foundation, upon which St. Peter proceeded to raise the\nsuperstructure of Christian doctrine, impressing the points which the\nJews denied--the resurrection of Christ and His future return to judge\nthe world.\n\nIn this connexion St. Peter touches upon a point which has often\nexercised men's minds. In speaking of the resurrection of Christ he\nsays, \"Him God raised up the third day, and gave Him to be made\nmanifest, not to all the people, but unto witnesses that were chosen\nbefore of God, even to us, who did eat and drink with Him after He\nrose from the dead.\" From the time of Celsus, who lived in the second\ncentury, people have asked, Why did not the risen Saviour manifest\nHimself to the chief priests and Pharisees? Why did He show Himself\nmerely to His friends? It is evident that from the very beginning this\npoint was emphasised by the Christians themselves, as St. Peter\nexpressly insists upon it on this occasion. Now several answers have\nbeen given to this objection. Bishop Butler in his _Analogy_ deals\nwith it. He points out that it is only in accordance with the laws of\nGod's dealings in ordinary life. God never gives overwhelming\nevidence. He merely gives sufficient evidence of the truth or wisdom\nof any course, and till men improve the evidence which He gives He\nwithholds further evidence. Christ gave the Jews sufficient evidences\nof the truth of His work and mission in the miracles which He wrought\nand the gracious words which distilled like Divine dew from His lips.\nThey refused the evidence which He gave, and it would not have been in\naccordance with the principles of Divine action that He should then\ngive them more convincing evidence. Then, again, the learned Butler\nargues that it would have been useless, so far as we are concerned, to\nhave manifested Christ to the Jewish nation at large, unless He was\nalso revealed and demonstrated to be the risen Saviour to the Romans,\nand not to them merely, but also to each successive generation of men\nas they arose. For surely if men can argue that the apostles and the\nfive hundred brethren who saw Christ were deceived, or were the\nsubjects of a temporary illusion, it might be as justly argued that\nthe high priests and the Sanhedrin at Jerusalem were in their turn\ndeceived or the subjects of a hallucination which their longing desire\nfor a Messiah had produced. In modern times, again, Dr. Milligan in an\nable and acute work on the Resurrection has argued that it was\nimpossible, from the nature of the resurrection body and the character\nof the resurrection state, for Christ to be thus manifested to the\nJewish nation. He belonged to a different plane. He lived now on a\nhigher level. He could not now be submitted to a coarse contact with\ngross carnal men. He was obliged therefore to depend upon the\ntestimony of His chosen witnesses, fortified and confirmed by the\nevidence of miracles, of prophecy, and of the Holy Ghost speaking in\nthem and working with them. All these arguments are most true and\nsound, and yet they fail to come home to many minds. They leave\nsomething to be desired. They fail in showing the wisdom of the actual\ncourse that was adopted. They leave men thinking in their secret\nhearts, would it not after all have been the best and most\nsatisfactory course if the risen Lord had been manifested to all the\npeople and not merely to witnesses chosen before of God? I think there\nis an argument which has not been sufficiently worked out, and which\ndirectly meets and answers this objection. The risen Saviour was not\nmanifested to all the people because such a course would have wrecked\nthe great cause which He had at heart, and defeated the great end of\nHis Incarnation, which was to establish a Church on the earth where\nrighteousness and joy and peace in the Holy Ghost would find place and\nabound. Let us take it in this way. Let us inquire what would have\nbeen the immediate consequence had Christ been revealed to all the\npeople gathered in their millions for the celebration of the Passover.\nThey would either have rejected Him afresh or they would have accepted\nHim. If they rejected Him, they would be only intensifying their\nresponsibility and their guilt. If they accepted Him as their\nlong-expected Messiah, then would have come the catastrophe. In their\nstate of strained expectation and national excitement they would have\nswept away every barrier, they would have rushed to arms and burst\ninto open rebellion against the Romans, initiating a war which would\nhave only ended with the annihilation of the Jewish race or with the\ndestruction of the Roman Empire. The immediate result of the\nmanifestation of the risen Saviour to the chief priests and the people\nwould have been a destruction of human life of such a widespread and\nawful character as the world had never seen. This we know from history\nwould have been infallibly the case. Again and again during the first\nand second centuries the Jews burst forth into similar rebellions,\nurged on by some fanatic who pretended to be the long-expected\ndeliverer, and tens of thousands, aye, even hundreds of thousands of\nhuman lives Jewish and Gentile were repeatedly sacrificed on the altar\nof this vain carnal expectation.\n\nWe are expressly informed too that our Lord had experience in His own\nperson of this very danger. St. John tells us that Christ Himself had\non one occasion to escape from the Jews when they were designing to\ntake Him by force and make Him a King; while again the first chapter\nof this Book of Acts and the query which the apostles propounded upon\nthe very eve of the Ascension show that even they with all the\nteaching which they had received from our Lord concerning the purely\nspiritual and interior nature of His kingdom still shared in the\nnational delusions, and were cherishing dreams of a carnal empire and\nof human triumphs. We conclude, then, on purely historical grounds,\nand judging from the experience of the past, that the course which God\nactually adopted was profoundly wise and eminently calculated to avoid\nthe social dangers which surrounded the path of the Divine\ndevelopments. I think that if we strive to realise the results which\nwould have followed the manifestation of Christ in the manner which\nobjectors suggest, we shall see that the whole spiritual object, the\ngreat end of Christ's Incarnation, would have been thus defeated. That\ngreat end was to establish a kingdom of righteousness, peace, and\nhumility; and that was the purpose attained by the mode of action\nwhich was in fact adopted. From the Day of Pentecost onward the Church\ngrew and flourished, developing and putting in practice, however\nimperfectly, the laws of the Sermon on the Mount. But if Christ had\nrevealed Himself to the unconverted Jews of Jerusalem after the\nResurrection, it would not have had the slightest effect towards\nmaking them Christians after the model which He desired. Nay, rather\nsuch an appearance would merely have intensified their narrow Judaism\nand confirmed them in those sectarian prejudices, that rigid\nexclusiveness from which Christ had come to deliver His people. The\nspiritual effects of such an appearance would have been absolutely\nnothing. The temporal effects of it would have been awfully\ndisastrous, unless indeed God had consented to work the most\nprodigious and astounding miracles, such as smiting the Roman armies\nwith destruction and interfering imperiously with the course of human\nsociety.\n\nThen again it is worthy of notice that such a method of dealing with\nthe Jews would have been contrary to Christ's methods and laws of\naction as displayed during His earthly ministry. He never worked\nmiracles for the mere purposes of intellectual conviction. When a sign\nfrom heaven was demanded from Him for this very purpose He refused it.\nHe ever aimed at spiritual conversion. An exhibition of the risen Lord\nto the Jewish nation might have been followed by a certain amount of\nintellectual conviction as to His Divine authority and mission. But,\napart from the power of the Holy Ghost, which had not been then poured\nout, this intellectual conviction would have been turned to disastrous\npurposes, as we have now shown, and have proved utterly useless\ntowards spiritual conversion. The case of the Resurrection is, in\nfact, in many respects like the case of the Incarnation. We think in\nour human blindness that we would have managed the manifestations and\nrevelations of God much better, and we secretly find fault with the\nDivine methods, because Christ did not come much earlier in the\nworld's history and thousands of years had to elapse before the Divine\nMessenger appeared. But then, Scripture assures us that it was in the\nfulness of time Christ came, and a profounder investigation will\nsatisfy us that history and experience bear out the testimony of\nScripture. In the same way human blindness imagines that it would have\nmanaged the Resurrection far better, and it has a scheme of its own\nwhereby Christ should have been manifested at once to the Jews, who\nwould have been at once converted into Christians of the type of the\napostles, and then Christ should have advanced to the city of Rome,\ncasting down the idols in His triumphant march, and changing the Roman\nEmpire into the Kingdom of God. This is something like the scheme\nwhich the human mind in secret substitutes for the Divine plan, a\nscheme which would have involved the most extravagant interruptions of\nthe world's business, the most extraordinary interpositions on God's\npart with the course of human affairs. For one miracle which the\nDivine method has necessitated, the human plan, which lies at the\nbasis of the objections we are considering, would have necessitated\nthe working of a thousand miracles and these of a most stupendous\ntype. These considerations will help to show what bad judges we are of\nthe Divine methods of action, and will tend towards spiritual and\nmental humility by impressing upon us the inextricable confusion into\nwhich we should inevitably land the world's affairs had we but the\nmanagement of them for a very few hours. Verily as we contemplate the\nResurrection of Christ and the management of the whole plan of\nsalvation, we gather glimpses of the supernatural wisdom whereby the\nwhole was ordered, and learn thus to sing with a deeper meaning the\nancient strain, \"Thy way, O God, is in the sea, and Thy paths in the\ngreat waters, and Thy footsteps are not known. Thou leddest thy\npeople like sheep, by the hand of Moses and Aaron.\"[80]\n\n  [80] The aim of Christianity was to strike at the essential evil\n  of the human heart. One darling sin of man is ostentation. It was\n  one special vice of society in the age of the Incarnation, as\n  students of the history of that period know right well. Now the\n  real objection to the Divine method of action about Christ's\n  Resurrection is that it was not ostentatious. If the human scheme\n  had been adopted, it would simply have encouraged and sanctioned\n  the ostentation which already dominated the world. But the Divine\n  rule ever is this, \"The kingdom of God cometh not with\n  observation,\" and in the very method of its development\n  Christianity has taught men humility and self-abasement.\n\nThe sacred narrative then tells us that \"while Peter yet spake these\nwords, the Holy Ghost fell on all them which heard the word.\" The\nbrethren which came from Joppa, strict observers of the law of Moses\nas they were, beheld the external proofs of God's presence, and were\namazed, \"because that on the Gentiles also was poured out the gift of\nthe Holy Ghost,\" which is further explained by the words, \"they heard\nthe Gentiles speaking with tongues and magnifying God.\" The gift of\nthe Holy Ghost takes the same and yet a different shape from that in\nwhich it was manifested on the Day of Pentecost. The gifts of tongues\non the Day of Pentecost was manifested in a variety of languages,\nbecause there was a vast variety of tongues and nationalities then\npresent at Jerusalem. But it would seem as if on this occasion the\nHoly Ghost and His gift of speech displayed itself in sacred song and\nholy praise: \"They heard them speak with tongues and magnify God.\"\nGreek was practically the one tongue of all those who were present.\nThe new converts had been inhabitants for years of C\u00e6sarea which was\nnow one of the most thoroughly Greek towns in Palestine, so that the\ngift of tongues as displayed on this occasion must have been of\nsomewhat different character from that exercised on the Day of\nPentecost, when a vast variety of nations heard the company of the\ndisciples and apostles speaking in their own languages. There is\nanother difference too between the original outpouring of the Holy\nGhost and this repetition of the gift. The Holy Ghost on the first\noccasion was poured out upon the preachers of the word to qualify them\nto preach to the people. The Holy Ghost on the second occasion was\npoured out upon the persons to whom the word was preached to sanction\nand confirm the call of the Gentiles. The gifts of the Holy Spirit are\nconfined to no rank or order. They are displayed as the common\nproperty of all Christian people, and indicate the freedom and the\nplenteousness wherewith God's blessings shall be dispensed under the\nnew covenant which was taking the place of the old Levitical Law.\n\nAnd then comes the last touch which the narrative puts to the whole\nstory: \"Then answered Peter, Can any man forbid the water, that these\nshould not be baptized, which have received the Holy Ghost as well as\nwe? And he commanded them to be baptized in the name of Jesus Christ.\"\nWhat a corrective we here find of those ultra-spiritual views which\nmake shipwreck of faith! We have known intelligent men speak as if the\napostles laid no stress upon holy baptism, and valued it not one whit\nas compared with the interior gift of the Holy Ghost. We have known\nintelligent members of the Society of Friends who could not see that\nthe apostles taught the necessity for what they call water baptism.\nFor both these classes of objectors these words of St. Peter, this\nincident in the story of Cornelius have an important lesson. They\nprove the absolute necessity in the apostolic estimation of the rite\nof Holy Baptism as perpetually practised in the Church of God. For\nsurely if ever the washing of water in the name of the Holy Trinity\ncould have been dispensed with, it was in the case of men upon whom\nGod had just poured the supernatural gift of the Holy Ghost; and yet\neven in their case the divinely appointed sacrament of entrance into\nthe sacred society could not be dispensed with. They were baptized\nwith water in the sacred name, and then, cherishing that sweet sense\nof duty fulfilled and obedience rendered and spiritual peace and joy\npossessed which God bestows upon His elect people, they entered into\nthat fuller knowledge and richer grace, that feast of spiritual fat\nthings which St. Peter could impart, as he told them from his own\npersonal knowledge of the life and teaching of Christ Jesus. It is no\nwonder that the history of this critical event should terminate with\nthese words: \"Then prayed they him to tarry certain days,\"[81]\nexpressing their keen desire to drink more deeply of the well of life\nthus lately opened to their fainting souls.\n\n  [81] Tradition tells very little about Cornelius. There is indeed\n  a long article devoted to him by the Bollandists, _Acta\n  Sanctorum_, Feb. t. 1, p. 280, but there is nothing in it. He is\n  commemorated on Feb. 2nd. The Greeks make him bishop of Scepsis,\n  the Latins of C\u00e6sarea. St. Jerome says that in his time the house\n  of Cornelius had been turned into a church. The story of his life\n  as told in the Martyrologies is evidently a mere medi\u00e6val\n  concoction. At Scepsis the prefect Demetrius brings him into a\n  temple of Apollo, when at his prayer the idol is smashed to pieces\n  and the magistrate converted. Such stories are, however, the\n  stock-in-trade of the legend-mongers of the Middle Ages.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VII.\n\n_THE HARVEST OF THE GENTILES._\n\n     \"The disciples were called Christians first at Antioch.\"--ACTS\n     xi. 26.\n\n\nThe eleventh chapter of the Acts is clearly divisible into two\nportions. There is first the narrative of St. Peter's reception at\nJerusalem after the conversion of Cornelius, and secondly the story of\nthe origin of the Antiochene Church, the mother and metropolis of\nGentile Christendom. They are distinct the one from the other, and yet\nthey are closely connected together, for they both deal with the same\ngreat topic, the admission of the Gentiles to full and free communion\nin the Church of God. Let us then search out the line of thought which\nruns like a golden thread through this whole chapter, sure that in\ndoing so we shall find light shed upon some modern questions from this\ndivinely written ecclesiastical history.\n\nI. St. Peter tarried a certain time with Cornelius and the other new\nconverts at C\u00e6sarea. There was doubtless much to be taught and much to\nbe set in order. Baptism was in the early Church administered when the\nconverts were yet immature in faith and knowledge. The Church was\nviewed as a hospital, where the sick and feeble were to be admitted\nand cured. It was not therefore demanded of candidates for admission\nthat they should be perfectly instructed in all the articles and\nmysteries of the Christian faith. There were indeed some points in\nwhich they were not instructed at all till they had been \"buried with\nChrist through baptism into death.\" Then when they had taken their\nstand upon the Christian platform, and were able to view the matter\nfrom the true vantage point, they were admitted into fuller and deeper\nmysteries. Peter too must have had his work cut out for him at C\u00e6sarea\nin striving to organise the Church. St. Philip may have here lent his\naid, and may have been constituted the resident head of the local\nChurch.[82] After the baptism of the Ethiopian eunuch he worked his\nway up to C\u00e6sarea, preaching in all the towns and villages of that\npopulous district. There he seems to have fixed his residence, as\nfifteen years or so later we find him permanently located in that city\nwith his \"four daughters, virgins, which did prophesy\" (Acts xxi. 8,\n9). We may be sure that some such Church organisation was immediately\nstarted at C\u00e6sarea. We have already traced the work of organisation in\nJerusalem. The apostles originally embraced in themselves all\nministerial offices, as in turn these offices were originally all\nsummed up in Jesus Christ. The apostles had taken an important step in\nthe establishment of the order of deacons at Jerusalem, retaining in\ntheir own hands the supreme power to which appeal and reports could be\nmade. At Damascus it is evident that at the time of St. Paul's\nconversion there was an organised Church, Ananias being the head and\nchief of it, with whom communications were officially held; while the\nnotices about Joppa and the six witnesses of his action whom St.\nPeter brought with him to C\u00e6sarea indicate that an assembly or Church\norganised after the model of the Jerusalem Church existed in that\ntown.\n\n  [82] The Church tradition reports, however, that Cornelius was\n  first bishop of C\u00e6sarea, but without any solid authority for the\n  statement. See, however, the note in last chapter, p. 141.\n\nHaving concluded his work in C\u00e6sarea St. Peter returned to Jerusalem,\nand there had to render an account of his action and was placed upon\nhis defence. \"When Peter was come up to Jerusalem, they that were of\nthe circumcision contended with him, saying, Thou wentest in to men\nuncircumcised, and didst eat with them.\" This simple circumstance\nthrows much light upon the character of earliest Christianity. It was\nto a large extent a Christian democracy. The apostles exercised the\nsupreme executive power, but the collective Christian assembly claimed\nthe exercise of their private judgment, and, above all, knew not\nanything of the fancied privilege of St. Peter, as Prince of the\nApostles, to lay down on his own authority the laws for the whole\nChristian Commonwealth. Here was St. Peter exercising his ministry and\napostolic power among the earliest Christians. How were his ministry\nand authority received? Were they treated as if the personal authority\nand decision of St. Peter settled every question without any further\nappeal? This will be best seen if we tell a story well known in the\nannals of ecclesiastical history. The fable of Papal Supremacy began\nto be asserted about the year 500, when a series of forgeries were\ncirculated concerning the bishops of Rome and their decisions during\nthe ages of persecution. One of these forgeries dealt with a pope\nnamed Marcellinus, who presided over the See of Rome during the\nbeginning of the great Diocletian persecution. The story goes on to\ntell that Marcellinus fell into idolatry in order to save his life. A\ncouncil of three hundred bishops was summoned at Sinuessa, when the\nassembled bishops are reported to have refused to pass sentence on\nthe Pope, the successor of St. Peter, saying that the Holy See may be\njudged by no man. They therefore called upon the Pope to condemn\nhimself, as he alone was a judge competent to exercise such a\nfunction. This story, according to D\u00f6llinger, was forged about the\nyear 500, and it clearly exhibits the different view taken of the\nposition of St. Peter in the Church of Jerusalem and of his alleged\nsuccessors in the Church of Rome five centuries later. In the latter\ncase St. Peter's successor cannot be judged or condemned by any\nmortal.[83] According to the Acts of the Apostles the members of the\nstricter party in the Church of Jerusalem had no hesitation in\nchallenging the actions and teaching of St. Peter himself, and it was\nonly when he could prove the immediate and manifest approval of Heaven\nthat they ceased their opposition, saying, \"Then to the Gentiles also\nhath God granted repentance unto life.\"\n\n  [83] See the article on Marcellinus (1) in the _Dictionary of\n  Christian Biography_, vol. iii., p. 804, where all the facts are\n  told of this curious story.\n\nWe can in this incident see how the Church was slowly but surely\ndeveloping itself under the Divine guidance. The incident when the\norder of deacons was instituted was the primary step. There was then\nfirst manifested that combination of authority and freedom united with\nopen discussion which, originating in the Christian Church, has been\nthe source of all modern society, of modern governments, and modern\nmethods of legislation. Now we see the same ideas applied to questions\nof doctrine and discipline, till we come in a short time to the\nperfection of this method in the celebrated Council of Jerusalem which\nframed the charter and traced out the main lines of development upon\nwhich the Church of the Gentiles and true gospel freedom were\nestablished.\n\nII. The centre of Christian interest now shifts its position and fixes\nitself in the city of Antioch, where a further step in advance was\ntaken. Our attention is first of all recalled to the results of St.\nStephen's death. \"They therefore that were scattered abroad upon the\ntribulation that arose about Stephen travelled as far as Ph\u0153nicia,\nand Cyprus, and Antioch, speaking the word to none save only to Jews.\nBut there were some of them, men of Cyprus and Cyrene, who, when they\nwere come to Antioch, spake unto the Greeks also, preaching the Lord\nJesus.\" This is clearly a case of preaching the gospel to the\nGentiles, and the question has been raised, Was the action of these\nmen of Cyprus and Cyrene quite independent of the action of St. Peter\nor an immediate result of the same? Did the men of Cyprus and Cyrene\npreach the gospel to the Gentiles of Antioch of their own motion, or\ndid they wait till tidings of St. Peter's action had reached them, and\nthen, yielding to the generous instincts which had been long beating\nin the hearts of these Hellenistic Jews, did they proclaim at Antioch\nthe glad tidings of salvation which the Gentiles of that gay and\nbrilliant but very wicked city so much needed? Our answer to these\nqueries is very short and plain. We think that the preaching of the\nHellenists of Cyprus to the Gentiles of Antioch must have been the\nresult of St. Peter's action at C\u00e6sarea, else why did they wait till\nAntioch was reached to open their mouths to the pagan world? Surely if\nthe sight of sin and wickedness and civilised depravity was necessary\nto stir them up to efforts for the spiritual welfare of the Gentile\nworld, Ph\u0153nicia and Cyprus abounded with scenes quite sufficient\nto unseal their lips. But the force of national prejudice and of\nreligious exclusiveness was too strong till they came to Antioch,\nwhere tidings must have reached them of the vision and action of St.\nPeter at C\u00e6sarea.\n\nIt is easy to see why this information reached the missionaries at\nAntioch. C\u00e6sarea was the Roman capital of Palestine, and was a\nseaport. Antioch was the Roman capital of the province of Syria, an\nimmense extent of territory, which included not merely the country\nwhich we call Syria, but extended to the Euphrates on the west and to\nthe desert intervening between Palestine and Egypt on the south. The\nprefect of the East resided at Antioch, and he was one of the three or\nfour greatest officials under the Roman emperor. Palestine was, in\nfact, a part of the province of Syria, and its ruler or president was\ndependent upon the governor of Syria. It is therefore in strictest\naccordance with the facts of Roman history when St. Luke tells in his\nGospel (ii. 2) concerning the taxation of Augustus C\u00e6sar, \"This was\nthe first enrolment made when Quirinus was governor of Syria.\" Antioch\nbeing then the seat of the central government of the eastern division\nof the Roman Empire, and C\u00e6sarea being the headquarters of an\nimportant lieutenant of the Syrian proconsul, it is no wonder there\nshould have been very constant intercourse between the two places. The\ngreat magazines of arms for the entire east were located at Antioch,\nand there too the money was coined necessary to pay the troops and to\ncarry on commercial intercourse. It must have been very easy for an\nofficial like Cornelius, or even for any simple private soldier or for\nan ordinary Jew or Christian of C\u00e6sarea, to communicate with Antioch,\nand to send word concerning the proceedings of St. Peter and the\nblessings vouchsafed by God to any devout person who might be there\nseeking after light and truth.[84] It is quite natural therefore that,\nwhile the Christians dispersed into various lands by the persecution\nat Jerusalem restrained themselves to the Jews alone throughout their\nprevious labours, when the men of Cyprus and Cyrene heard tidings at\nAntioch of St. Peter and his doings and revelations at C\u00e6sarea, they\nat last allowed free scope to their longings which long ago had found\nplace in their more liberalised hearts, and testified to the Gentiles\nof Antioch concerning the gladsome story of the gospel. Here again we\nbehold another instance of the value of culture and travel and\nenlarged intelligence. The Hellenists of Cyprus and Cyrene were the\nfirst to realise and act out the principle which God had taught St.\nPeter. They saw that God's mercies were not restrained to the\nparticular case of Cornelius. They realised that his was a typical\ninstance, and that his conversion was intended to carry with it and to\ndecide the possibility of Gentile salvation and the formation of a\nGentile Church all over the world, and they put the principle in\noperation at once in one of the places where it was most needed: \"When\nthe men of Cyprus and Cyrene were come to Antioch, they spake unto the\nGreeks also, preaching the Lord Jesus.\" The method of the Divine\ndevelopment was in the primitive ages very similar to that we often\nstill behold. Some improvement is required, some new principle has to\nbe set in motion. If younger men begin the work, or if souls\nnotorious for their freer thought or less prejudiced understandings,\nattempt to introduce the novel principle, the vast mass of stolid\nconservative opposition and attachment to the past is at once\nquickened into lively action. But then some Peter or another, some man\nof known rectitude and worth, and yet of equally well-known narrow\nviews and devoted adherence to the past, takes some hesitating step in\nadvance. He may indeed strive to limit its application to the special\ncase before him, and he may earnestly deprecate any wider application\nof the principle on which he has acted. But it is all in vain. He has\nserved the Divine purposes. His narrowness and respectability and\npersonal weight have done their work, and have sanctioned the\nintroduction of the principle which then is applied upon a much wider\nscale by men whose minds have been liberalised and trained to seize a\ngreat broad principle and put it into practical operation.\n\n  [84] C\u00e6sarea and Antioch were about two hundred miles distant from\n  each other by sea. A Roman trireme travelling at express speed\n  would easily have accomplished this distance in two or at most\n  three days.\n\nIII. \"When they came to Antioch, they spake the word to the Greek\nalso.\" And verily the men of Cyprus and Cyrene chose a fitting spot to\nopen the kingdom of heaven to the Greek world and to found the mother\nChurch of Gentile Christendom, for no city in the whole world was more\ncompletely Satan's seat, or more entirely devoted to those works which\nSt. John describes as the lusts of the flesh, and the lust of the eye,\nand the vain-glory of life. Let us reflect a little on the history and\nstate of Antioch, and we shall then see the Divine motive in selecting\nit as the site of the first great Gentile Church, and we shall see too\nthe Divine guidance which led St. Luke in this typical ecclesiastical\nhistory to select the Church of Antioch for such frequent notice,\nexceeding, as it does, all other Churches save Jerusalem in the\namount of attention bestowed upon it in the Acts of the Apostles.[85]\n\n  [85] The various Lives of St. Paul and Gibbon in his _Decline and\n  Fall_ give minute accounts of Antioch, its grandeur and\n  wickedness; K. O. M\u00fcller's _Antiquities of Antioch_, G\u00f6ttingen,\n  1839 is an exhaustive work on the subject; see also Mommsen's\n  _Provinces_, Book VIII., ch. x.\n\nAntioch and Alexandria were towns dating from the same epoch. They\ncame into existence about the year 300 B.C., being the creation of\nAlexander the Great himself, or of the generals who divided his empire\nbetween them. The city of Antioch was originally built by Seleucus\nNicator, the founder of the kingdom of Syria, but was subsequently\nenlarged, so that in St. Paul's time it was divided into four\nindependent districts or towns, each surrounded by its own walls, and\nall included within one vast wall some fifty feet high, which\nsurmounted mountain tops and was carried at vast expense across\nvalleys and ravines. Antioch was in the first century counted the\nthird city in the world, Rome being first, Alexandria second, and\nAntioch third. It had marvellous natural advantages. It was blessed\nwith charming mountain scenery. The peaks rising up on all sides could\nbe seen from every part of the city, imparting thus to life in Antioch\nthat sense not merely of beauty and grandeur, but of the nearness of\nsuch beauty and grandeur combined with solitude and freedom from the\nmadding crowd which seem so sweet to a man who passes his life amid\nthe noise and hurry of a great city. What a change in the conditions\nof life in London would be at once brought about could the scenery\nsurrounding Edinburgh or Lucerne be transferred to the world's\nmetropolis, and the toiler in Fleet Street and the Strand be enabled\nto look amid his daily labours upon cloud-piercing mountains or peaks\nclad in a robe of virgin white! Antioch was built upon the southern\nbank of the river Orontes, along which it extended about five miles.\nThe main street of the city, otherwise called the Street of Herod\nafter the celebrated Herod the Great who built it, was four and a half\nmiles long. This street was unrivalled among the cities of the world,\nand was furnished with an arcade on both sides extending its whole\nlength, beneath which the inhabitants could walk and transact business\nat all times free from the heat and from the rain. The water supply of\nAntioch was its special feature. The great orator Libanius, a native\nof Antioch, who lived three hundred years later than St. Paul, while\nthe city yet stood in all its grandeur and beauty, thus dwells on this\nfeature of Antioch in a panegyric composed under the Emperor\nConstantius: \"That wherein we beat all other is the water supply of\nour city; if in other respects any one may compete with us, all give\nway so soon as we come to speak of the water, its abundance and its\nexcellence. In the public baths every stream has the proportions of a\nriver, in the private baths several have the like, and the rest not\nmuch less. One measures the abundance of running water by the number\nof the dwelling-houses; for as many as are the dwelling-houses, so\nmany are also the running waters. Therefore we have no fighting at the\npublic wells as to who shall come first to draw--an evil under which\nso many considerable towns suffer, when there is a violent crowding\nround the wells and outcry over broken jars. With us the public\nfountains flow for ornament, since every one has water within his\ndoors. And this water is so clear that the pail appears empty, and so\npleasant that it invites us to drink.\"[86] Such was the description\nof a pagan who saw Antioch even as St. Paul saw it, and testified\nconcerning the natural gifts with which God had endowed it. But, alas!\nas with individuals, so is it with cities. God may lavish His best\nblessings, and yet instead of bringing forth the fruits of\nrighteousness His choicest gifts of nature may be turned into fruitful\nseed plots of lust and sin. Sodom and Gomorrha were planted in a vale\nthat was well watered and fair and fruitful, even as the Garden of the\nLord; but the inhabitants thereof were wicked, and sinners before the\nLord exceedingly; and so it was with Antioch. This city so blessed in\nsituation and in nature's richest and most precious gifts was\ncelebrated for its wicked pre-eminence amid the awful corruption which\nthen overspread the cities of the world. When the Roman satirist\nJuvenal, writing about this period of which we treat, would fain\naccount for the excessive dissolution of morals which then prevailed\nat Rome, his explanation of it was that the manners of Antioch had\ninvaded Rome and corrupted its ancient purity:\n\n  \"Jampridem Syrus in Tiberim defluxit Orontes.\"[87]\n\n  [86] The same orator informs us that the streets of Antioch were\n  lighted at night with public lamps. In this respect it stood alone\n  among the cities of antiquity: see Libanius, I., 363, and the\n  notes of Valesius on Ammianus Marcellinus, xiv., 1, 9.\n\n  [87] Juv., _Sat._, iii., 62. See Farrar's _St. Paul_, ch. xvi.,\n  for a more minute account of the wickedness of Antioch than we can\n  give in this place. He well remarks: \"Cities liable to the influx\n  of heterogeneous races are rarely otherwise than immoral and\n  debased. Even Rome in the decadence of its C\u00e6sarism could groan to\n  think of the dregs of its degradation--the quacks and pandars, and\n  musicians and dancing girls--poured into the Tiber by the Syrian\n  Orontes.... It seems as though it were a law of human intercourse\n  that, when races are commingled in large masses, the worst\n  qualities of each appear intensified in the general iniquity.\"\n\nAmid the general wickedness of Antioch there was one element of life\nand hope and purity. The Jews of Antioch formed a large society in\nthat city governed by their own laws and preserving themselves by\ntheir peculiar discipline free from the abounding vices of Oriental\npaganism. It was at Antioch as it was at Alexandria and Damascus. The\nJews at Alexandria had their alabarch to whom they owed special\nallegiance and by whom alone they were ruled; the Jews of Damascus had\ntheir ethnarch who exercised peculiar jurisdiction over them; and so\ntoo had the Jews of Antioch a peculiar ruler of their own, forming\nthus an _imperium in imperio_ running counter to our Western notions\nwhich in many respects demand an iron uniformity very foreign to the\nEastern mind, and show themselves eminently deficient in that\nflexibility and diversity which found an abundant play even among the\narrangements of the Roman Empire.[88] This Jewish quarter of Antioch\nhad for centuries been growing and extending itself, and its chief\nsynagogue had been glorified by the reception of some of the choicest\ntemple spoils which the kings of Syria had at first carried captive\nfrom Jerusalem and then in a fit of repentance or of prudent policy\nhad bestowed upon the Jewish colony in their capital city.\n\n  [88] We shall have frequent occasions to notice the numerous\n  varieties of rule, privileges, and local liberties which prevailed\n  under the Roman Empire. The Romans seem to have scrupulously\n  respected ancient rights and customs wherever possible, provided\n  only the supreme sovereignty of Rome was recognised.\n\nSuch was the city to which the men of Cyprus and Cyrene were now\ncarrying the news of the gospel, intending, doubtless, to tell merely\ntheir Jewish fellow-countrymen and religionists of the Messiah whose\nlove and power they had themselves experienced. Here, however, they\nwere met by the startling information from C\u00e6sarea. They were,\nhowever, prepared for it. They were Hellenistic Jews like St. Stephen.\nThey had listened to his burning words, and had followed closely his\nepoch-making speeches whereby he confounded the Jews and clearly\nindicated the opening of a new era. But then God's dispensations\nseemed to have terminated his teaching and put a fatal end to the\nhopes which he had raised. Men then misread God's dealings with His\nservants, and interpreted His ways amiss. The death of Stephen seemed\nperhaps to some minds a visible condemnation of his views, when in\nreality it was the direct channel by which God would work out a wider\npropagation of them, as well as the conversion of the agent destined\nto diffuse them most powerfully. Apparent defeat is not always\npermanent disaster, whether in things temporal or things spiritual;\nnay, rather the temporary check may be the necessary condition of the\nfinal and glorious victory. So it was in this case, as the men of\nCyprus and Cyrene proved, when the news of St. Peter's revelation and\nhis decisive action arrived and they realised in action the principles\nof Catholic Christianity for which their loved teacher St. Stephen had\ndied. And their brave action was soon followed by blessed success, by\na rich harvest of souls: \"The hand of the Lord was with them; and a\ngreat number that believed turned to the Lord.\" Thus were laid the\nfoundations of the headquarters, the mother Church of Gentile\nChristianity.\n\nIV. Now we come to another step in the development. Tidings of the\naction taken at Antioch came to Jerusalem. The news must have\ntravelled much the same road as that by which, as we have indicated,\nthe story of St. Peter's action was carried to Antioch. The\nintercourse between Jerusalem and Antioch was frequent enough by land\nor by sea; and no synagogue and no Jewish society was more liberal in\nits gifts towards the support of the supreme council and hierarchy at\nJerusalem than the Jewish colony and its synagogues at Damascus. And\nthe old custom of communication with Jerusalem naturally led the\nNazarenes of Antioch to send word of their proceedings up to the\napostles and supreme council who ruled their parent society in the\nsame city. We see a clear indication that the events at Antioch\nhappened subsequently to those at C\u00e6sarea in the manner in which the\nnews was received at Jerusalem. There seems to have been no strife, no\ndiscussion, no controversy. The question had been already raised and\ndecided after St. Peter's return. So the apostles simply select a\nfitting messenger to go forth with the authority of the apostles and\nto complete the work which, having been initiated in baptism, merely\nnow demanded that imposition of hands which, as we have seen in the\ncase of the Samaritan converts, was one of the special functions of\nthe apostles and chiefs of the Church at Jerusalem. And in choosing\nBarnabas the apostles made a wise choice. They did not send one of the\noriginal Twelve, because not one of them was fitted for the peculiar\nwork now demanded. They were all narrow, provincial, untravelled,\ndevoid of that wide and generous training which God had given to\nBarnabas. It may be too that they felt restrained from going beyond\nthe bounds of Canaan before the twelve years had elapsed of which\nancient Christian tradition tells as the limit of their stay in\nJerusalem fixed by our Lord Himself.[89] He was a Hellenistic Jew, and\nhe could sympathise with the wider feelings and ideas of the\nHellenists. He was a man of Cyprus, a friend and perhaps connexion of\nmany, both Jews and Gentiles, among those whose new-born faith and\nhope were now in question. And above all he was a man of kindly heart\nand genial temper and loving thought and blessed charity, fitted to\nsoothe jealousies and allay suspicions, and make the long alienated\nand despised Gentiles feel at home in the Church and family of Jesus\nChrist. Barnabas was a person peculiarly fitted to prove a mediator\nand uniting link in a society where divergent elements found a place\nand asserted themselves. He was not the man to take a new step or to\nhave decided the question of the admission of the Gentiles if it had\nnot been already settled. He must have come therefore fortified by the\nauthority of the apostles, and then, knowing right well what they\napproved, he was just the man to carry out the details of an\narrangement requiring tact and skill and temper; though he was by no\nmeans suited to decide a great question on its own merits or to\ninitiate any great movement. In the Church of God then, as in the\nChurch of God still, there is a place and a work for the strong man of\nkeen logic and vigorous intellect and profound thought. And there is\ntoo a place and a work for the man of loving heart and a charity which\nevermore delights in compromise. \"Barnabas, when he was come, and had\nseen the grace of God, was glad; and he exhorted them all, that with\npurpose of heart they would cleave unto the Lord. For he was a good\nman, and full of the Holy Ghost and faith; and much people was added\nunto the Lord.\" Barnabas had another virtue too. He knew his own\nweakness. He did not imagine like some men that he was specially\nstrong where he was eminently weak. He felt his want of the active\nvigorous mind of his friend of boyhood the new convert Saul. He knew\nwhere he was living in comparative obscurity and silence; so after a\nlittle experience of the atmosphere of Antioch he departed to Tarsus\nto seek for him and bring him back where a great work was awaiting his\npeculiar turn of mind. There is an ancient historian of Antioch who\nhas preserved for us many stories about that city in these apostolic\nand even in much earlier ages. His name is John Malalas; he lived\nabout six hundred years after Christ, but had access to many ancient\ndocuments and writers that are no longer known to us. He tells us many\nthings about the primitive Church of Antioch. He has his own version\nof the quarrel between St. Paul and St. Peter which happened in that\ncity; and he fixes even the very spot where St. Paul first preached,\ntelling us that its name was Singon Street, which stood near the\nPantheon. This may seem to us a minuteness of detail too great to be\nbelieved. But then we must remember that John Malalas expressly cites\nancient chronologers and historians as his authorities, and he himself\nlived while as yet Antioch retained all the ancient arrangements of\nstreets and divisions. And surely Saul, as he travelled from Tarsus\nresponding at once to the call of Barnabas, must have seen enough to\nstir his love to Christ and to souls into heartiest exertion. He came\ndoubtless by sea and landed at Seleucia, the port of Antioch, some\nsixteen miles distant from the city. As he travelled up to Antioch he\nwould get distant glimpses of the groves of Daphne, a park ten miles\nin circumference, dedicated indeed to the poetic worship of Apollo,\nbut dedicated also to the vilest purposes of wickedness intimately\nassociated with that poetic worship. Poetry, whether ancient or\nmodern, can be very blessed, ennobling and elevating man's whole\nnature. But the same poetry, as in ancient paganism and in some modern\nwriters, can become a festering plague-spot, the abounding source to\nits votaries of moral corruption and spiritual death.[90]\n\n  [89] See Eusebius, _Eccles. Hist._, v., 18.\n\n  [90] There is a good description of Daphne as St. Paul may have\n  seen it in Gibbon's _Decline and Fall_, ch. xxiii. We borrow a few\n  extracts from it to give a more vivid idea of Antioch in St.\n  Paul's day. \"At the distance of five miles from Antioch the\n  Macedonian kings of Syria had consecrated to Apollo one of the\n  most elegant places of devotion in the pagan world. A magnificent\n  temple rose in honour of the God of light; and his colossal figure\n  almost filled the capacious sanctuary which was enriched with gold\n  and gems and adorned by the skill of the Grecian artists. The\n  deity was represented in a bending attitude, with a golden cup in\n  his hand, pouring out a libation on the earth, as if he\n  supplicated the venerable mother to give to his arms the cold and\n  beauteous Daphne; for the spot was ennobled by fiction, and the\n  fancy of the Syrian poets had transported the amorous tale from\n  the banks of the Perseus to the town of the Orontes.\" \"The temple\n  and village were deeply bosomed in a thick grove of laurels and\n  cypresses, which reached as far as a circumference of ten miles,\n  and proved in the most sultry summers a cool and impenetrable\n  shade. A thousand streams of the purest water, issuing from every\n  hill, preserved the verdure of the earth and the temperature of\n  the air; the senses were gratified with harmonious sounds and\n  aromatic odours; and the peaceful grove was consecrated to health\n  and joy, to luxury and love. The soldier and the philosopher\n  wisely avoided the temptations of this sensual paradise, where\n  pleasure, assuming the character of religion, imperceptibly\n  dissolved the firmness of manly virtue.\" Gibbon's notes abound\n  with ample proof of the statements he makes. To them we may refer\n  the reader curious about the details of ancient paganism.\n\nDaphne and its associations would rouse the whole soul, the healthy\nmoral nature of Saul of Tarsus, inherited originally from his ancient\nJewish training, and now quickened and deepened by the spiritual\nrevelations made to him in Christ Jesus. It is no wonder then that\nhere we read of St. Paul's first long and continuous period of\nministerial work: \"It came to pass that even for a whole year they\nwere gathered together with the Church, and taught much people.\" The\nresults of the new force which Barnabas introduced into the spiritual\nlife of Antioch soon became manifested. \"The disciples were first\ncalled Christians at Antioch.\" Saul of Tarsus possessed what Barnabas\ndid not possess. He possessed a powerful, a logical, and a creative\nintellect. He realised from the beginning what his own principles\nmeant and to what they were leading him. He taught not Judaism or the\nLaw with an addition merely about Jesus of Nazareth. He troubled not\nhimself about circumcision or the old covenant, but he taught from the\nvery beginning Christ Jesus, Christ in His Divine and human nature,\nChrist in His various offices, Jesus Christ as the one hope for\nmankind. This was now at Antioch, as before at Damascus, the staple\ntopic of St. Paul's preaching, and therefore the Antiochenes, with\ntheir ready wit and proverbial power of giving nicknames, at once\ndesignated the new sect not Nazarenes or Galileans as the Jews of\nJerusalem called them, but Christians or adherents of Christ.[91]\nHere, however, I prefer to avail myself of the exposition which one of\nthe great spiritual teachers of the last generation gave us of this\nexpression. The well-known and learned Archbishop of Dublin, Dr.\nTrench, in his _Study of Words_ (21st Ed.: Lond. 1890), p. 189, thus\ndraws out the lesson connected with this word and the time of its\nappearance: \"'The disciples were called Christians first in Antioch.'\nThat we have here a notice which we would not willingly have missed\nall will acknowledge, even as nothing can be otherwise than curious\nwhich relates to the infancy of the Church. But there is here much\nmore than a curious notice. Question it a little closer, and how much\nit will be found to contain, how much which it is waiting to yield up!\nWhat light it throws on the whole story of the Apostolic Church to\nknow where and when this name of Christians was first imposed on the\nfaithful; for imposed by adversaries it certainly was, not devised by\nthemselves, however afterwards they may have learned to glory in it as\nthe name of highest dignity and honour. They did not call themselves,\nbut, as is expressly recorded, they 'were called' Christians first at\nAntioch; in agreement with which statement the name occurs nowhere in\nScripture, except on the lips of those alien from or opposed to the\nfaith (Acts xxvi. 28; 1 Peter iv. 16). And as it was a name imposed by\nadversaries, so among these adversaries it was plainly heathens, and\nnot Jews, who were its authors; for Jews would never have called the\nfollowers of Jesus of Nazareth 'Christians,' or those of Christ, the\nvery point of their opposition to Him being, that He was not the\nChrist, but a false pretender to the name. Starting then from this\npoint that 'Christians' was a title given to the disciples by the\nheathen, what may we deduce from it further? At Antioch they first\nobtained this name--at the city, that is, which was the headquarters\nof the Church's mission to the heathen, in the same sense as Jerusalem\nhad been the headquarters of the mission to the seed of Abraham. It\nwas there and among the faithful there that a conviction of the\nworld-wide destination of the gospel arose; there it was first plainly\nseen as intended for all kindreds of the earth. Hitherto the faithful\nin Christ had been called by their adversaries, and indeed were often\nstill called 'Galileans' or 'Nazarenes'--both names which indicated\nthe Jewish cradle wherein the Church had been nursed, and that the\nworld saw in the new society no more than a Jewish sect. But it was\nplain that the Church had now, even in the world's eyes, chipped its\nJewish shell. The name Christians or those of Christ, while it told\nthat Christ and the confession of Him was felt even by the heathen to\nbe the sum and centre of this new faith, showed also that they\ncomprehended now, not all which the Church would be, but something of\nthis; saw this much, namely, that it was no mere sect and variety of\nJudaism, but a Society with a mission and a destiny of its own. Nor\nwill the thoughtful reader fail to observe that the coming up of this\nname is by closest juxtaposition connected in the sacred narrative,\nand still more closely in the Greek than in the English, with the\narrival at Antioch, and with the preaching there, of that Apostle who\nwas God's appointed instrument for bringing the Church to a full sense\nthat the message which it had was not for some men only, but for all.\nAs so often happens with the rise of new names, the rise of this one\nmarked a new epoch in the Church's life, and that it was entering upon\na new stage of development.\" This is a long extract, but it sets forth\nin dignified and aptly chosen words, such as Archbishop Trench always\nused, the important lessons which the thoughtful student of the Acts\nmay gather from the time and place where the term \"Christians\" first\nsprang into existence.\n\n  [91] The Antiochenes were always famous for the dangerous power of\n  ridicule and giving nicknames. They quarrelled on this account\n  with the emperors Hadrian, Verus, Marcus, Severus, and Julian. The\n  last mentioned has celebrated these tendencies in his celebrated\n  treatise entitled _Misopogon, or the Beard-hater_. Even in its\n  final overthrow the city preserved this distinction. In the year\n  540 the Persian king Chosroes Nushirvan took it by storm. When he\n  appeared before the city he was received with a shower of arrows\n  mingled with obscene sarcasms, which so enraged him that he\n  removed the inhabitants when he had taken the town to a new\n  Antioch in the province of Susa.\n\nFinally, we notice in connexion with Antioch that the foundation of\nthe great Gentile Church was marked by the same universal impulse\nwhich we trace wherever Christ was effectually preached. The faith of\nthe Crucified evermore produced love to the brethren. Agabus, a\nprophet whom we shall again meet many years after in the course of St.\nPaul's life, and who then predicted his approaching arrest and\ncaptivity at Jerusalem, made his earliest recorded appearance at\nAntioch, where he announced an impending famine. Agabus exercised the\noffice of a prophet, which implied under the New Dispensation rather\nthe office of preaching than of prediction. Prediction, indeed,\nwhether under the Old or the New Dispensation, formed but a small\nportion of the prophetical office. The work of the prophet was\npre-eminently that of telling forth God's will and enforcing it upon a\ncareless generation. Occasionally indeed, as in the case of Agabus,\nthat telling forth involved prediction or announcement of God's\nchastisements and visitations; but far oftener the prophet's work was\nfinished when he enforced the great principles of truth and\nrighteousness as the Christian preacher does still. Agabus seems to\nhave been specially gifted in the direction of prediction. He\nannounced a famine as impending over the whole world, which came to\npass in the age of Claudius, offering to the Gentile Church of Antioch\nan opportunity, of which they gladly availed themselves, to repay\nsomewhat of the spiritual obligation which the Gentiles owed to the\nJews according to St. Paul's own rule: \"If the Gentiles have been made\npartakers of their spiritual things, they owe it to them also to\nminister unto them in carnal things.\"[92] We can trace here the force\nand power of ancient Jewish customs. We can see how the mould and form\nand external shape of the Church was gained from the Jew. The Jewish\ncolony of Antioch had been of old famous for the liberality of its\ngifts to the mother community at Jerusalem. The predominant element in\nthe Church of Antioch was now Gentile, but still the ancient customs\nprevailed. The Gentile Christian community acted towards the Jerusalem\nChurch as the Jewish community had been used to treat their\ncountrymen: \"The disciples, every man according to his ability,\ndetermined to send relief unto the brethren that dwelt in Jud\u00e6a: which\nalso they did, sending it to the elders by the hand of Barnabas and\nSaul.\"\n\n  [92] This famine is thoroughly historical. It is noticed by\n  several who wrote of this time, as Dion, lx., 11; Suetonius,\n  Claud., 20; Aurelius, Victor; and is confirmed by the testimony of\n  the coins: see Eckhel, vi., 238, 239, 240. Cf. Lewin's _Fasti\n  Sacri_, p. 274, A.D. 42.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER VIII.\n\n_THE DEFEAT OF PRIDE._\n\n     \"Now about that time Herod the king put forth his hands to\n     afflict certain of the Church. And he killed James the brother of\n     John with the sword. And when he saw that it pleased the Jews, he\n     proceeded to seize Peter also.... Immediately an angel of the\n     Lord smote Herod, because he gave not God the glory: and he was\n     eaten of worms, and gave up the ghost. But the word of God grew\n     and multiplied.\"--ACTS xii. 1-3, 23-24.\n\n\nThe chapter at which we have now arrived is very important from a\nchronological point of view, as it brings the sacred narrative into\ncontact with the affairs of the external world concerning which we\nhave independent knowledge. The history of the Christian Church and of\nthe outside world for the first time clearly intersect, and we thus\ngain a fixed point of time to which we can refer. This chronological\ncharacter of the twelfth chapter of the Acts arises from its\nintroduction of Herod and the narrative of the second notable\npersecution which the Church at Jerusalem had to endure. The\nappearance of a Herod on the scene and the tragedy in which he was the\nactor demand a certain amount of historical explanation, for, as we\nhave already noted in the case of St. Stephen five or six years\npreviously, Roman procurators and Jewish priests and the Sanhedrin\nthen possessed or at least used the power of the sword in Jerusalem,\nwhile a word had not been heard of a Herod exercising capital\njurisdiction in Jud\u00e6a for more than forty years. Who was this Herod?\nWhence came he? How does he emerge so suddenly upon the stage? As\ngreat confusion exists in the minds of many Bible students about the\nramifications of the Herodian family and the various offices and\ngovernments they held, we must make a brief digression in order to\nshow who and whence this Herod was concerning whom we are told, \"Now\nabout that time Herod the king put forth his hands to afflict certain\nof the Church.\"\n\nThis Herod Agrippa was a grandson of Herod the Great, and displayed in\nthe solitary notice of him which Holy Scripture has handed down many\nof the characteristics, cruel, bloodthirsty and yet magnificent, which\nthat celebrated sovereign manifested throughout his life.[93] The\nstory of Herod Agrippa his grandson was a real romance. He made trial\nof every station in life. He had been at times a captive, at times a\nconqueror. He had at various periods experience of a prison house and\nof a throne. He had felt the depths of poverty, and had not known\nwhere to borrow money sufficient to pay his way to Rome. He had\ntasted of the sweetness of affluence, and had enjoyed the pleasures of\nmagnificent living. He had been a subject and a ruler, a dependant on\na tyrant, and the trusted friend and councillor of emperors. His story\nis worth telling. He was born about ten years before the Christian\nera, and was the son of Aristobulus, one of the sons of Herod the\nGreat. After the death of Herod, his grandfather, the Herodian family\nwas scattered all over the world. Some obtained official positions;\nothers were obliged to shift for themselves, depending on the\nfragments of the fortune which the great king had left them. Agrippa\nlived at Rome till about the year 30 A.D., associating with Drusus,\nthe son of the Emperor Tiberius, by whom he was led into the wildest\nextravagance. He was banished from Rome about that year, and was\nobliged to retire to Palestine, contenting himself with the small\nofficial post of \u00c6dile of Tiberias in Galilee, given him by his uncle\nHerod Antipas, which he held about the time when our Lord was teaching\nin that neighbourhood. During the next six years the fortunes of\nAgrippa were of the most chequered kind. He soon quarrelled with\nAntipas, and is next found a fugitive at the court of Antioch with the\nPrefect of the East. He there borrowed from a money-lender the sum of\n\u00a3800 at 12-1/2 per cent. interest, to enable him to go to Rome and\npush his interests at the imperial court. He was arrested, however,\nfor a large debt due to the Treasury just when he was embarking, and\nconsigned to prison, whence the very next day he managed to escape,\nand fled to Alexandria. There he again raised another timely loan, and\nthus at last succeeded in getting to Rome. Agrippa attached himself to\nCaligula, the heir of the empire, and after various chances was\nappointed by him King of Trachonitis, a dominion which Caligula and\nsubsequently Claudius enlarged by degrees, till in the year 41 he was\ninvested with the kingdom of the whole of Palestine, including\nGalilee, Samaria, and Jud\u00e6a, of which Agrippa proceeded to take formal\npossession about twelve months before the events recorded in the\ntwelfth chapter of Acts.[94]\n\n  [93] The Herodian family form a notable instance of the modern\n  doctrine of heredity, which yet is only the ancient principle of\n  Divine action announced long ago in the Second Commandment,\n  \"Visiting the sins of the fathers upon the children unto the third\n  and fourth generation.\" The moral taints which we behold in Esau,\n  passion, self-indulgence quenching all forethought, ostentation\n  joined with magnificent generosity, displayed themselves in Herod\n  the Great. In him they were joined with absolute power, and they\n  produced their natural results. They made his heart, his life, his\n  home a howling wilderness, and handed down to his descendants a\n  legacy of wickedness which ceased not to bear fruit so long as his\n  name survived. Herod's family cruelties were so celebrated that we\n  are told by a pagan writer, named Macrobius, that when the Emperor\n  Augustus heard of the slaughter of the innocents of Bethlehem,\n  thinking they were Herod's children, he jokingly said, \"It were\n  better to be Herod's pigs than Herod's children.\"\n\n  [94] See Lewin's _Fasti Sacri_, A.D. 41, p. 271, for the\n  authorities on the subject of Herod's career.\n\nHerod's career had been marked by various changes, but in one respect\nhe had been consistent. He was ever a thorough Jew, and a vigorous and\nuseful friend to his fellow-countrymen. We have already noticed that\nhis influence had been used with Caligula to induce the Emperor to\nforgo his mad project of erecting his statue in the Holy of Holies at\nJerusalem.[95] Herod had, however, one great drawback in the eyes of\nthe priestly faction at Jerusalem. All the descendants of Herod the\nGreat were tainted by their Edomite blood, which they inherited\nthrough him. Their kind offices and support were accepted indeed, but\nonly grudgingly. Herod felt this, and it was quite natural therefore\nfor the newly appointed king to strive to gain all the popularity he\ncould with the dominant party at Jerusalem by persecuting the new sect\nwhich was giving them so much trouble. No incident could possibly have\nbeen more natural, more consistent with the facts of history, as well\nas with the known dispositions and tendencies of human nature, than\nthat recorded in these words--\"Now about that time Herod the king put\nforth his hands to afflict certain of the Church. And he killed James\nthe brother of John with the sword.\" Herod's act was a very politic\none from a worldly point of view. It was a hard dose enough for the\nJewish people to swallow, to find a king imposed upon them by an\nidolatrous Gentile power; but it was some alleviation of their lot\nthat the king was a Jew, and a Jew so devoted to the service of the\nruling hierarchy that he was willing to use his secular power to crush\nthe troublesome Nazarene sect whose doctrine threatened for ever to\ndestroy all hopes of a temporal restoration for Israel. Such being the\nhistorical setting of the picture presented to us, let us apply\nourselves to the spiritual application and lessons of this incident in\napostolic history. We have here a martyrdom, a deliverance, and a\nDivine judgment, which will all repay careful study.\n\n  [95] See p. 95 above.\n\nI. A martyrdom is here brought under our notice, and that the first\nmartyrdom among the apostles. Stephen's was the first Christian\nmartyrdom, but that of James was the first apostolic martyrdom. When\nHerod, following his grandfather's footsteps, would afflict the\nChurch, \"he killed James the brother of John with the sword.\" We must\ncarefully distinguish between two martyrs of the same name who have\nboth found a place in the commemorations of Christian hope and love.\nMay-day is the feast devoted to the memory of St. Philip and St.\nJames, July 25th is the anniversary consecrated to the memorial of St.\nJames the Apostle, whose death is recorded in the passage now under\nconsideration. The latter was the brother of John and son of Zebedee;\nthe former was the brother or cousin according to the flesh of our\nLord. St. James the Apostle perished early in the Church's history.\nSt. James the Just flourished for more than thirty years after the\nResurrection. He lived indeed to a comparatively advanced period of\nthe Church's history, as is manifest from a study of the Epistle\nwhich he wrote to the Jewish Christians of the Dispersion. He there\nrebukes shortcomings and faults, respect for the rich and contempt of\nthe poor, oppression and outrage and irreverence, which could never\nhave found place in that first burst of love and devotion to God which\nthe age of our Herodian martyr witnessed, but must have been the\noutcome of long years of worldly prosperity and ease. James the Just,\nthe stern censor of Christian morals and customs, whose language\nindeed in its severity has at times caused one-sided and narrow\nChristians much trouble, must often have looked back with regret and\nlonging to the purer days of charity and devotion when James the\nbrother of John perished by the sword of Herod.\n\nAgain, we notice about this martyred apostle that, though there is\nvery little told us concerning his life and actions, he must have been\na very remarkable man. He was clearly remarkable for his Christian\nprivileges. He was one of the apostles specially favoured by our Lord.\nHe was admitted by Him into the closest spiritual converse. Thus we\nfind that, with Peter and John, James the Apostle was one of the three\nselected by our Lord to behold the first manifestation of His power\nover the realms of the dead when He restored the daughter of Jairus to\nlife; with the same two, Peter and John, he was privileged to behold\nour Saviour receive the first foretaste of His heavenly glory upon the\nMount of Transfiguration; and with them too he was permitted to behold\nhis great Master drink the first draught of the cup of agony in the\nGarden of Gethsemane. James the Apostle had thus the first necessary\nqualification for an eminent worker in the Lord's vineyard. He had\nbeen admitted into Christ's most intimate friendship, he knew much of\nhis Lord's will and mind. And the privileges thus conferred upon St.\nJames had not been misused or neglected. He did not hide his talent in\nthe dust of idleness, nor wrap it round with the mantle of sloth. He\nutilised his advantages. He became a foremost, if not indeed the\nforemost worker for his loved Lord in the Church of Jerusalem, as is\nintimated by the opening words of this passage, which tells us that\nwhen Herod wished to harass and vex the Church he selected James the\nbrother of John as his victim; and we may be sure that with the keen\ninstinct of a persecutor Herod selected not the least prominent and\nuseful, but the most devoted and energetic champion of Christ to\nsatisfy his cruel purpose. And yet, though James was thus privileged\nand thus faithful and thus honoured by God, his active career is\nshrouded thick round with clouds and darkness. We know nothing of the\ngood works and brave deeds and powerful sermons he devoted to his\nMaster's cause. We are told simply of the death by which he glorified\nGod. All else is hidden with God till that day when the secret\nthoughts and deeds of every man shall be revealed. This incident in\nearly Apostolic Church history is a very typical one, and teaches many\na lesson very necessary for these times and for all times. If an\napostle so privileged and so faithful was content to do his work, and\nthen to pass away without a single line of memorial, a single word to\nkeep his name or his labours fresh among men, how much more may we,\npetty, faithless, trifling as we are, be contented to do our duty, and\nto pass away without any public recognition! And yet how we all do\ncrave after such recognition! How intensely we long for human praise\nand approval! How useless we esteem our labours unless they are\nfollowed by it! How inclined we are to make the fallible judgment of\nman the standard by which we measure our actions, instead of having\nthe mind's eye ever steadily fixed as James the brother of John had on\nHis approval alone who, now seeing our secret trials, struggles,\nefforts, will one day reward His faithful followers openly! This is\none great lesson which this typical passage by its silence as well as\nby its speech clearly teaches the Church of every age.[96]\n\n  [96] The tradition of the second century has only one story to\n  tell about this martyrdom. We find it in Eusebius, _H. E._, ii.,\n  9, where we read: \"Concerning this James Clement hands down a\n  story worthy of remembrance in the seventh book of his Hypotyposes\n  (or Outlines) delivering it from the traditions of his\n  predecessors, that the messenger who led him to the judgment-seat,\n  beholding his witness, was moved to confess himself a Christian.\n  Both were therefore led away, says he, and on the road (to\n  execution) he asked forgiveness from James. And he, having\n  considered for a little, said, Peace be to thee, and he kissed him\n  tenderly. And thus both were beheaded together.\"\n\nAgain, this martyrdom of St. James proclaims yet another lesson. God\nhereby warns the Church against the idolatry of human agents, against\nvain trust in human support. Let us consider the circumstances of the\nChurch at that time. The Church had just passed through a season of\nviolent persecution, and had lost one of its bravest and foremost\nsoldiers in the person of Stephen, the martyred deacon. And now there\nwas impending over the Church what is often more trying far than a\ntime short and sharp of violence and blood,--a period of temporal\ndistress and suffering, trying the principles and testing the\nendurance of the weaker brethren in a thousand petty trifles. It was a\ntime when the courage, the wisdom, the experience of the tried and\ntrusted leaders would be specially required to guide the Church amid\nthe many new problems which day by day were cropping up. And yet it\nwas just then, at such a crisis, that the Lord permits the bloody\nsword of Herod to be stretched forth, and removes one of the very\nchiefest champions of the Christian host just when his presence seemed\nmost necessary. It must have appeared a dark and trying dispensation\nto the Church of that day; but though attended doubtless with some\npresent drawbacks and apparent disadvantages, it was well and wisely\ndone to warn the Church of every age against mere human dependence,\nmere temporal refuges; teaching by a typical example that it is not by\nhuman might or earthly wisdom, not by the eloquence of man or the\ndevices of earth that Christ's Church and people must be saved; that\nit is by His own right hand, and by His own holy arm alone our God\nwill get Himself the victory.\n\nYet again we may learn from this incident another lesson rich laden\nwith comfort and instruction. This martyrdom of St. James throws us\nback upon a circumstance which occurred during our Lord's last journey\nto Jerusalem before His crucifixion, and interprets it for us. Let us\nrecall it. Our Lord was going up to Jerusalem, and His disciples were\nfollowing Him with wondering awe. The shadow of the Cross projecting\nitself forward made itself unconsciously felt throughout the little\ncompany, and men were astonished, though they knew not why. They\nsimply felt, as men do on a close sultry summer's day when a\nthunderstorm is overhead, that something awful was impending. They\nhad, however, a vague feeling that the kingdom of God would shortly\nappear, and so the mother of Zebedee's children, with all that\nboldness which affection lends to feminine minds, drew near and strove\nto secure a boon before all others for her own children. She prayed\nthat to her two sons might be granted the posts of honour in the\ntemporal kingdom she thought of as now drawing so very near. The Lord\nreplied to her request in very deep and far-reaching language, the\nmeaning of which she then understood not, but learned afterwards\nthrough the discipline of pain and sorrow and death: \"Ye know not what\nye ask. Are ye able to drink the cup that I am about to drink?\" And\nthen, when James and John had professed their ability, he predicts\ntheir future fate: \"My cup indeed ye shall drink.\" The mother and the\nsons alike spoke bold words, and offered a sincere but an ignorant\nprayer. Little indeed did the mother dream as she presented her\npetition--\"Command that these my two sons may sit, one on Thy right\nhand, and one on Thy left hand in Thy kingdom\"--how that prayer would\nbe answered, and yet answered it was. To the one son, James, was\ngranted the one post of honour. He was made to sit on the Master's\nright hand, for he was the first of the apostles called to enter into\nParadise through a baptism of blood. While to the other son, St. John,\nwas granted the other post of honour, for he was left the longest upon\nearth to guide, direct, and sustain the Church by his inspired wisdom,\nlarge experience, and apostolic authority.[97] The contrast between\nthe prayer offered up to Christ in ignorance and shortsightedness and\nthe manner in which the same prayer was answered in richest abundance\nsuggests to us the comforting reflection that no prayer offered up in\nsincerity and truth is ever really left unanswered. We may indeed\nnever see how the prayer is answered. The mother of St. James may\nlittle have dreamt as she beheld her son's lifeless body brought home\nto her that this trying dispensation was a real answer to her\nambitious petition. But we can now see that it was so, and can thus\nlearn a lesson of genuine confidence, of holy boldness, of strong\nfaith in the power of sincere and loving communion with God. Let us\nonly take care to cultivate the same spirit of genuine humility and\nprofound submission which possessed the souls of those primitive\nChristians enabling them to say, no matter how their petitions were\nanswered, whether in joy or sorrow, in smiles or tears, in riches or\npoverty, \"Not my will, but thine, O Lord, be done.\"\n\n  [97] Bishop Lightfoot, in his celebrated essay on the Christian\n  Ministry, _Philippians_, pp. 200-205, 2nd edition, regards\n  Episcopacy as the work of St. John. \"By whom was the new\n  constitution organised? To this question only one answer can be\n  given. This great work must be ascribed to the surviving apostles.\n  St. John especially, who built up the speculative theology of the\n  Church, was mainly instrumental in completing its external\n  constitution also, for Asia Minor was the centre from which the\n  new movement spread.\" These words occur in his analysis of Rothe's\n  views, with which Dr. Lightfoot substantially agrees.\n\nII. We have again in this twelfth chapter the record of a Divine\ndeliverance. Herod, seeing that the Jewish authorities were pleased\nbecause they had now a sympathetic ruler who understood their\nreligious troubles and was resolved to help in quelling them,\ndetermined to proceed farther in the work of repression. He arrested\nanother prominent leader, St. Peter, and cast him into prison. The\ndetails are given to us of Herod's action and Peter's arrest. Peter\nwas now making his first acquaintance with Roman methods of\npunishment. He had been indeed previously arrested and imprisoned, but\nhis arrest had been carried out by the Jewish authorities, and he had\nbeen consigned to the care of the Temple police, and had occupied the\nTemple prison. But Herod, though a strict Jew in religion, had been\nthoroughly Romanised in matters of rule and government, and therefore\nhe treated St. Peter after the Roman fashion: \"When he had taken him,\nhe put him in prison, and delivered him to four quarternions of\nsoldiers to guard him; intending after the Passover to bring him forth\nto the people.\" He was delivered to sixteen men, who divided the night\ninto four watches, four men watching at a time, after the Roman method\nof discipline.[98] And then, in contrast to all this preparation, we\nare told how the Church betook herself to her sure refuge and strong\ntower of defence: \"Peter therefore was kept in prison; but prayer was\nmade earnestly of the Church unto God for him.\" These early Christians\nhad not had their faith limited or weakened by discussions whether\npetition for temporal blessings were a proper subject of prayer, or\nwhether spiritual blessings did not alone supply true matter for\nsupplication before the Divine throne. They were in the first fervour\nof Christian love, and they did not theorise, define, or debate about\nprayer and its efficacy. They only knew that their Master had told\nthem to pray, and had promised to answer sincere prayer, as He alone\nknew how; and so they gathered themselves in instant ceaseless prayer\nat the foot of the throne of grace. I say \"ceaseless\" prayer because\nit seems that the Jerusalem Church, feeling its danger, organised a\ncontinuous service of prayer. \"Prayer was made earnestly of the Church\nunto God for him\" is the statement of the fifth verse, and then when\nSt. Peter was released \"he came to the house of Mary, where many were\ngathered together and were praying,\" though the night must have been\nfar advanced. The crisis was a terrible one; the foremost champion,\nSt. James, had been taken, and now another great leader was\nthreatened, and therefore the Church flung herself at the feet of the\nMaster seeking deliverance, and was not disappointed, as the Church\nhas never since been disappointed when she has cast herself in\nlowliness and profound submission before the same holy sanctuary.[99]\nThe narrative then proceeds to give us the particulars of St. Peter's\ndeliverance, as St. Peter himself seems to have told it to St. Luke,\nfor we have details given us which could only have come either\ndirectly or indirectly from the person most immediately concerned. But\nof these we shall treat in a little. The story now introduces the\nsupernatural, and for the believer this is quite in keeping with the\nfacts of the case. A great crisis in the history of the Jerusalem\nChurch has arrived. The mother Church of all Christendom, the fountain\nand source of original Christianity, is threatened with extinction.\nThe life of the greatest existing leader of that Church is at stake,\nand that before his work is done. The very existence of the Christian\nrevelation seems imperilled, and God sends forth an angel, a heavenly\nmessenger, to rescue His endangered servant, and to prove to\nunbelieving Jew, to the haughty Herod, and to the frightened but\npraying disciples alike the care which He ever exercises over His\nChurch and people. Here, however, a question may be raised. How was\nit that an angel, a supernatural messenger, was despatched to the\nspecial rescue of St. Peter? Why was not the same assistance\nvouchsafed to St. James who had just been put to death? Why was not\nthe same assistance vouchsafed to St. Peter himself when he was\nmartyred at Rome, or to St. Paul when he lay in the dungeon in the\nsame city of Rome or at C\u00e6sarea? Simply, we reply, because God's hour\nwas not yet come and the Apostle's work was not yet done. St. James's\nwork was done, and therefore the Lord did not immediately interfere,\nor rather He summoned His servant to His assigned post of honour by\nthe ministry of Herod. The wrath of man became the instrument whereby\nthe praises of God were chanted and the soul of the righteous conveyed\nto its appointed place. The Lord did not interfere when St. Paul was\ncast into the prison house at C\u00e6sarea, or St. Peter incarcerated in\nthe Roman dungeon, because they had then a great work to do in showing\nhow His servants can suffer as well as work. But now St. Peter had\nmany a long year of active labour before him and much work to do as\nthe Apostle of the Circumcision in preventing that schism with which\nthe diverse parties and opposing ideas of Jew and Gentile threatened\nthe infant Church, in smoothing over and reconciling the manifold\noppositions, jealousies, difficulties, misunderstandings, which ever\nattend such a season of transition and transformation as now was fast\ndawning upon the Divine society. The arrest of St. Peter and his\nthreatened death was a great crisis in the history of the primitive\nChurch. St. Peter's life was very precious to the existence of that\nChurch, it was very precious for the welfare of mankind at large, and\nso it was a fitting time for God to raise up a banner against\ntriumphant pride and worldly force by the hand of a supernatural\nmessenger.\n\n  [98] These elaborate precautions were doubtless taken on account\n  of his escape on the previous occasion, when the Sanhedrin had\n  arrested him, as narrated in the nineteenth verse of the fifth\n  chapter.\n\n  [99] In the fifth century an order of monks was established at\n  Constantinople who practised this ceaseless worship. They were\n  called Acoimet\u00e6, or the Watchers. They are described at length in\n  Bingham's _Antiquities_, Book VII., ch. ii., sect. 10, and in\n  Smith's _Dict. Christ. Antiqq._, vol. i., p. 13. A similar attempt\n  was made in the reigns of James I. and Charles I. by the\n  well-known Nicholas Ferrar in a monastic institution which he\n  planned in connection with the Church of England: see the article\n  in the _Dictionary of National Biography_ upon his name.\n\nThe steps by which St. Peter was delivered are all of them full of\nedification and comfort. Let us mark them. \"When Herod was about to\nbring him forth, the same night Peter was sleeping between two\nsoldiers, bound with two chains: and guards before the door kept the\nprison.\" It was on that fateful night the same as when the angels\ndescended on the Resurrection morning: the guards were in their\nrightful place and discharging their accustomed duties, but when God\nintervenes then human precautions are all useless. The words of the\nnarrative are striking in their quiet dignity. There is no working up\nof details. There is no pandering to mere human curiosity. Everything\nis in keeping with the sustained force, sublimity, elevation which we\never behold in the Divine action. Peter was sleeping between two\nsoldiers; one chained to each arm, so that he could not move without\nawaking them. He was sleeping profoundly and calmly, because he felt\nhimself in the hands of an Almighty Father who will order everything\nfor the best. The interior rest amid the greatest trials which an\nassured confidence like that enjoyed by St. Peter can confer is\nsomething marvellous, and has not been confined to apostolic times.\nOur Lord's servants have in every age proved the same wondrous power.\nI know of course that criminals are often said to enjoy a profound\nsleep the night before their execution. But then habitual criminals\nand hardened murderers have their spiritual natures so completely\novermastered and dominated by their lower material powers that they\nrealise nothing beyond the present. They are little better than the\nbeasts which perish, and think as little of the future as they do.\nBut persons with highly strung nervous powers, who realise the awful\nchange impending over them, cannot be as they, specially if they have\nno such sure hope as that which sustained St. Peter. He slept calmly\nhere as Paul and Silas rejoiced in the Philippian prison house, as the\nMaster Himself slept calmly in the stern of the wave-rocked boat on\nthe Galilean lake, because he knew himself to be reposing in the arms\nof Everlasting Love, and this knowledge bestowed upon him a sweet and\ncalm repose at the moment of supreme danger of which the fevered\nchildren of time know nothing.\n\nAnd now all the circumstances of the celestial visit are found to be\nmost suitable and becoming. The angel stood by Peter. A light shined\nin the cell, because light is the very element in which these heavenly\nbeings spend their existence. The chains which bind St. Peter fell off\nwithout any effort human or angelic, just as in a few moments the\ngreat gate of the prison opened of its own accord, because all these\nthings, bonds and bolts and bars, derive all their coercive power from\nthe will of God, and when that will changes or is withdrawn they cease\nto be operative, or become the instruments of the very opposite\npurpose, assisting and not hindering His servants. Then the angel's\nactions and directions are characteristic in their dignified vigour.\nHe told the awakened sleeper to act promptly: \"He smote him on the\nside, and awoke him, saying, Rise up quickly.\" But there is no undue\nhaste. As on the Resurrection morning the napkin that was upon\nChrist's head was found not lying with the rest of the grave-cloths,\nbut rolled up in a place by itself, so too on this occasion the angel\nshows minute care for Peter's personal appearance. There must be\nnothing undignified, careless, untidy even, about the dress of the\nrescued apostle: \"Gird thyself, and bind on thy sandals.\" St. Peter\nhad naturally laid aside his external garments, had unloosed his inner\nrobes, and taken off his sandals when preparing for sleep. Nothing,\nhowever, escapes the heavenly messenger, and so he says, \"Cast thy\ngarment about thee, and follow me,\" referring to the loose upper robe\nor overcoat which the Jews wore over their underclothes; and then the\nangel led him forth, teaching the Church the perpetual lesson that\nexternal dignity of appearance is evermore becoming to God's people,\nwhen not even an angel considered these things beneath his notice amid\nall the excitement of a midnight rescue, nor did the inspired writer\nomit to record such apparently petty details. Nothing about St. Peter\nwas too trivial for the angel's notice and direction, as again nothing\nin life is too trivial for the sanctifying and elevating care of our\nholy religion. Dress, food, education, marriage, amusements, all of\nlife's work and of life's interests, are the subject-matter whereon\nthe principles inculcated by Jesus Christ and taught by the ministry\nof His Church are to find their due scope and exercise.[100]\n\n  [100] The early Church has left us a treatise showing how\n  thoroughly it recognised its duty in this respect. The \"P\u00e6dagogue\"\n  or the \"Instructor\" of Clement of Alexandria is a handbook of the\n  social life of the early Christians, teaching them what to do and\n  wear and say under every conceivable circumstance. Clement thinks\n  nothing too trivial for the rule of Christian principle,\n  prescribing the kind of clothes, shoes, and beds which should be\n  used. He may seem at times to border on the ludicrous in his\n  minuteness; but then we cannot realise how profoundly paganism had\n  corrupted human life and manners. Thus in Book III., ch. xi., he\n  treats of the management of the hair by men. Paganism had\n  introduced many sensual practices in this direction. Clement lays\n  down: \"Let the head of men be shaven, unless it has curly hair.\n  But let the chin have the hair. But let not twisted locks hang far\n  down from the head gliding into womanish ringlets.... Since\n  cropping is to be adopted, not on account of elegance, but for the\n  necessity of the case; the hair of the head, that it may not grow\n  so long as to come down and interfere with the eyes, and that of\n  the moustache similarly which is dirtied in eating, is to be cut\n  round, not by a razor, for that were unbecoming, but by a pair of\n  cropping scissors. But the hair on the chin is not to be\n  disturbed, as it gives no trouble, and lends to the face dignity\n  and paternal terror.\" This treatise of a very early Christian\n  writer can be easily consulted in Clark's Ante-Nicene Library.\n\nPeter's deliverance was now complete. The angel conducted him through\none street to assure him that he was really free and secure him from\nbewilderment, and then departed. The Apostle thereupon sought out the\nwell-known centre of Christian worship, \"the house of Mary the mother\nof John, whose surname was Mark,\" where stood the upper chamber,\nhonoured as no other upper chamber had ever been. There he made known\nhis escape, and then retired to some secret place where Herod could\nnot find him, remaining there concealed till Herod was dead and direct\nRoman law and authority were once more in operation at Jerusalem.[101]\nThere are two or three details in this narrative that are deserving of\nspecial notice, as showing that St. Luke received the story most\nprobably from St. Peter himself. These touches are expressions of St.\nPeter's inner thoughts, which could have been known only to St. Peter,\nand must have been derived from him. Thus we are told about his state\nof mind when the angel appeared: \"He wist not that it was true which\nwas done by the angel, but thought he saw a vision.\" Again, after his\ndeliverance, we are told of the thoughts which passed through his\nmind, the words which rose to his lips when he found himself once\nagain a free man: \"When Peter was come to himself, he said, Now I know\nof a truth that the Lord hath sent forth His angel, and delivered me\nout of the hand of Herod, and from all the expectation of the people\nof the Jews.\" While, again, how true to life and to the female nature\nis the incident of the damsel Rhoda! She came across the courtyard to\nhearken and see who was knocking at the outer gate at that late hour:\n\"When she knew Peter's voice, she opened not the gate for joy, but ran\nin and told that Peter stood before the gate.\" We behold the\nimpulsiveness of the maid. She quite forgot the Apostle's knocking at\nthe gate in her eager desire to convey the news to his friends. And,\nagain, how true to nature their scepticism! They were gathered praying\nfor Peter's release, but so little did they expect an answer to their\nprayers that, when the answer does come, and in the precise way that\nthey were asking for it and longing for it, they are astonished, and\ntell the maid-servant who bore the tidings, \"Thou art mad.\" We pray as\nthe primitive Church did, and that constantly; but is it not with us\nas with them? We pray indeed, but we do not expect our prayers to be\nanswered, and therefore we do not profit by them as we might.\n\n  [101] There is an ancient tradition that our Lord bade the\n  apostles remain twelve years in Jerusalem before they dispersed to\n  preach the gospel all the world over (Eusebius, _H. E._, V.,\n  xviii.). Some think that the famine and persecution which now\n  happened may have been the occasion of their dispersion.\n\nSuch were the circumstances of St. Peter's deliverance, which was a\ncritical one for the Church. It struck a blow at Herod's new policy of\npersecution unto death; it may have induced him to depart from\nJerusalem and descend to C\u00e6sarea, where he met his end, leaving the\nChurch at Jerusalem in peace; and the deliverance must have thrown a\ncertain marvellous halo round St. Peter when he appeared again at\nJerusalem, enabling him to occupy a more prominent position without\nany fear for his life.\n\nIII. We have also recorded in this chapter a notable defeat of pride,\nostentation, and earthly power. The circumstances are well known.\nHerod, vexed perhaps by his disappointment in the matter of Peter,\nwent down to C\u00e6sarea, which his grandfather had magnificently adorned.\nBut he had other reasons too. He had a quarrel with the men of Tyre\nand Sidon, and he would take effective measures against them. Tyre and\nSidon were great seaports and commercial towns, but their country did\nnot produce food sufficient for the maintenance of its inhabitants,\njust as England, the emporium of the world's commerce, is obliged to\ndepend for its food supplies upon other and distant lands.[102] The\nmen of Tyre and Sidon were not, however, unacquainted with the ways of\nEastern courts. They bribed the king's chamberlain, and Herod was\nappeased. There was another motive which led Herod to C\u00e6sarea. It was\nconnected with his Roman experience and with his courtier-life. The\nEmperor Claudius C\u00e6sar was his friend and patron. To him Herod owed\nhis restoration to the rich dominions of his grandfather. That emperor\nhad gone in the previous year, A.D. 43, to conquer Britain. He spent\nsix months in our northern regions in Gaul and Britain, and then, when\nsmitten by the cold blasts of midwinter, he fled to the south again,\nas so many of our own people do now. He arrived in Rome in the\nJanuary of the year 44, and immediately ordered public games to be\ncelebrated in honour of his safe return, assuming as a special name\nthe title Britannicus. These public shows were imitated everywhere\nthroughout the empire as soon as the news of the Roman celebrations\narrived. The tidings would take two or three months to arrive at\nPalestine, and the Passover may have passed before Herod heard of his\npatron's doings. Jewish scruples would not allow him to celebrate\ngames after the Roman fashion at Jerusalem, and for this purpose\ntherefore he descended to the Romanised city of C\u00e6sarea, where all the\nappliances necessary for that purpose were kept in readiness. There is\nthus a link which binds together the history of our own nation and\nthis interesting incident in early Christian history. The games were\nduly celebrated, but they were destined to be Herod's last act. On an\nappointed day he sat in the theatre of C\u00e6sarea to receive the\nambassadors from Tyre and Sidon. He presented himself early in the\nmorning to the sight of the multitude clad in a robe of silver which\nflashed in the light reflecting back the rays of the early sun and\ndazzling the mixed multitude--supple, crafty Syrians, paganised\nSamaritans, self-seeking and worldly-wise Ph\u0153nicians. He made a\nspeech in response to the address of the envoys, and then the\nflattering shout arose, \"The voice of a god, and not of a man.\"\nWhereupon the messenger of God smote Herod with that terrible form of\ndisease which accompanies unbounded self-indulgence and luxury, and\nthe proud tyrant learned what a plaything of time, what a mere\ncreature of a day is a king as much as a beggar, as shown by the\nnarrative preserved by Josephus of this event. He tells us that, when\nseized by the mortal disease, Herod looked upon his friends, and said,\n\"I, whom you call a god, am commanded presently to depart this life;\nwhile Providence thus reproves the lying words you just now said to\nme; and I, who was by you called immortal, am immediately to be\nhurried away by death.\"[103] What a striking picture of life's\nchanges and chances, and of the poetic retributions we at times behold\nin the course of God's Providence! One short chapter of the Acts shows\nus Herod triumphant side by side with Herod laid low, Herod smiting\napostles with the sword side by side with Herod himself smitten to\ndeath by the Divine sword. A month's time may have covered all the\nincidents narrated in this chapter. But, short as the period was, it\nmust have been rich in support and consolation to the apostles Saul\nand Barnabas, who were doubtless deeply interested spectators of the\nrapidly shifting scene, telling them clearly of the heavenly watch\nexercised over the Church. They had come up from Antioch, bringing\nalms to render aid to their afflicted brethren in Christ. The famine,\nas we have just now seen from the anxiety of the men of Tyre and Sidon\nto be on friendly terms with Herod, was rapidly making itself felt\nthroughout Palestine and the adjacent lands, and so the deputies of\nthe Antiochene Church hurried up to Jerusalem with the much-needed\ngifts.[104] It may indeed be said, how could St. Paul hope to escape\nat such a time? Would it not have been madness for him to risk his\nsafety in a city where he had once been so well known? But, then, we\nmust remember that it was at the Passover season Saul and Barnabas\nwent from Antioch to Jerusalem. Vast crowds then entered the Holy\nCity, and a solitary Jew or two from Antioch might easily escape\nnotice among the myriads which then assembled from all quarters. St.\nPaul enjoyed too a wondrous measure of the Spirit's guidance, and that\nSpirit told him that he had yet much work to do for God. The Apostle\nhad wondrous prudence joined with wondrous courage, and we may be sure\nthat he took wisest precautions to escape the sword of Herod which\nwould have so eagerly drunk his blood. He remained in Jerusalem all\nthe time of the Passover. His clear vision of the spiritual world must\nthen have been most precious and most sustaining. All the apostles\nwere doubtless scattered; James was dead, and Peter doomed to death.\nThe temporal troubles, famine and poverty, which called Saul and\nBarnabas to Jerusalem, brought with them corresponding spiritual\nblessings, as we still so often find, and the brave words of the\nchosen vessel, the Vas Electionis, aided by the sweet gifts of the Son\nof Consolation, may have been very precious and very helpful to those\ndeepest souls in the Jerusalem Church who gathered themselves for\ncontinuous prayer in the house of Mary the mother of John, teaching\nthem the true character, the profound views, the genuine religion of\none whose earlier life had been so very different and whose later\nviews may have been somewhat suspected. Saul and Barnabas arrived in\nJerusalem at a terrible crisis, they saw the crisis safely passed, and\nthen they returned to an atmosphere freer and broader than that of\nJerusalem, and there in the exercise of a devoted ministry awaited the\nfurther manifestation of the Divine purposes.\n\n  [102] It is noteworthy, indeed, that it was with Tyre and Sidon in\n  the days of Herod as it was with them in the earlier days of King\n  Solomon and of the prophets. In 1 Kings v. 10, 11 we see that\n  Hiram, king of Tyre, depended on Solomon for food: \"So Hiram gave\n  Solomon timber of cedar and timber of fir according to all his\n  desire. And Solomon gave Hiram twenty thousand measures of wheat\n  for food to his household, and twenty measures of pure oil: thus\n  gave Solomon to Hiram year by year\"; with which may be compared\n  Ezekiel xxvii. 17.\n\n  [103] The story of the death of Herod Agrippa as told by Josephus,\n  _Antiqq._, Book XIX., ch. viii., is in striking unison with that\n  given in the Acts. \"Now when Agrippa had reigned three years over\n  all Judea, he came to the city C\u00e6sarea, formerly called Strato's\n  Tower; and there he exhibited shows in honour of C\u00e6sar, upon his\n  being informed that there was a certain festival celebrated on\n  account of his safety. At which festival a great multitude was\n  gotten together of the principal persons, and such as were of\n  dignity through his province. On the second day of which shows he\n  put on a garment made wholly of silver, and of a contexture truly\n  wonderful, and came into the theatre early in the morning; at\n  which time the silver of his garment, being illuminated by the\n  fresh reflexion of the sun's rays upon it, shone out after a\n  surprising manner, and was so resplendent as to spread a terror\n  over those that looked intently upon him; and presently his\n  flatterers cried out, one from one place, and another from another\n  (though not for his good), that he was a god; and they added, 'Be\n  thou merciful to us; for though we have hitherto reverenced thee\n  only as a man, yet shall we henceforth own thee as superior to\n  mortal nature.' Upon this the king did neither rebuke them, nor\n  reject their impious flattery. But as he presently afterwards\n  looked up he saw an owl sitting on a certain rope over his head,\n  and immediately understood that this bird was the messenger of ill\n  tidings, as it had once been the messenger of good tidings to him,\n  and fell into the deepest sorrow. A severe pain also arose in his\n  stomach, and began in a most violent manner. He therefore looked\n  upon his friends, and said, 'I, whom you call a god, am commanded\n  presently to depart this life; while Providence thus reproves the\n  lying words you just now said to me; and I, who was by you called\n  immortal, am immediately to be hurried away by death. But I am\n  bound to accept of what Providence allots, as it pleases God; for\n  we have by no means lived ill, but in a splendid and happy\n  manner.' When he said this his pain became violent, and he was\n  carried into the palace.\" The reference to the owl relates to a\n  story about Agrippa's earlier life told by Josephus in his\n  _Antiqq._, Book XVIII., ch. vi. The Emperor Tiberius had bound\n  Agrippa, and placed him in his purple garments opposite his\n  palace, with a number of other prisoners, among whom was a German.\n  An owl perched on a tree near Agrippa, whereupon the German\n  predicted that he would be freed from his bonds, and be raised to\n  highest station; but that when he saw the owl again his death\n  would be only five days distant.\n\n  [104] The Jews themselves received at the same time the support of\n  their foreign proselytes. Helena, Queen of Adiabene, sent liberal\n  gifts to Jerusalem to support the famine-stricken multitudes of\n  that city, as Josephus tells in his _Antiquities_, XX., ii., 5.\n  Cf. Lewin's _Life of St. Paul_, vol. i., p. 108, where the reader\n  will find engravings of her mausoleum as it is still to be seen at\n  Jerusalem.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER IX.\n\n_ST. PAUL'S ORDINATION AND FIRST MISSIONARY TOUR._\n\n     \"As they ministered to the Lord, and fasted, the Holy Ghost said,\n     Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I have\n     called them. Then, when they had fasted and prayed and laid their\n     hands on them, they sent them away. So they, being sent forth by\n     the Holy Ghost, went down to Seleucia; and from thence they\n     sailed to Cyprus.... But they, passing through from Perga, came\n     to Antioch of Pisidia; and they went into the synagogue on the\n     sabbath day, and sat down.\"--ACTS xiii. 2-4, 14.\n\n     \"And it came to pass in Iconium, that they entered together into\n     the synagogue of the Jews, and so spake, that a great multitude\n     both of Jews and of Greeks believed.... They sailed to Antioch,\n     from whence they had been committed to the grace of God for the\n     work which they had fulfilled.\"--ACTS xiv. 1, 26.\n\n\nWe have now arrived at what we might call the watershed of the Acts of\nthe Apostles. Hitherto we have had very various scenes, characters,\npersonages to consider. Henceforth St. Paul, his labours, his\ndisputes, his speeches, occupy the entire field, and every other name\nthat is introduced into the narrative plays a very subordinate part.\nThis is only natural. St. Luke knew of the earlier history by\ninformation gained from various persons, but he knew of the later\nhistory, and specially of St. Paul's journeys, by personal experience.\nHe could say that he had formed a portion and played no small part in\nthe work of which he was telling, and therefore St. Paul's activity\nnaturally supplies the chief subject of his narrative. St. Luke in\nthis respect was exactly like ourselves. What we take an active part\nin, where our own powers are specially called into operation, there\nour interest is specially aroused. St. Luke personally knew of St.\nPaul's missionary journeys and labours, and therefore when telling\nTheophilus of the history of the Church down to the year 60 or\nthereabouts, he deals with that part of it which he specially knows.\nThis limitation of St. Luke's vision limits also our range of\nexposition. The earlier portion of the Acts is much richer from an\nexpositor's point of view, comprises more typical narratives, scenes,\nevents than the latter portion, though this latter portion may be\nricher in points of contact, historical and geographical, with the\nworld of life and action.\n\nIt is with an expositor or preacher exactly the opposite as with the\nChurch historian or biographer of St. Paul. A writer gifted with the\nexuberant imagination, the minute knowledge of a R\u00e9nan or a Farrar\nnaturally finds in the details of travel with which the latter portion\nof the Acts is crowded matter for abundant discussion. He can pour\nforth the treasures of information which modern arch\u00e6ological research\nhas furnished shedding light upon the movements of the Apostle. But\nwith the preacher or expositor it is otherwise. There are numerous\nincidents which lend themselves to his purpose in the journeys\nrecorded in this latter portion of the book; but while a preacher\nmight find endless subjects for spiritual exposition in the conversion\nof St. Paul or the martyrdom of St. Stephen, he finds himself confined\nto historical and geographical discussions in large portions of the\nstory dealing with St. Paul's journeys. We shall, however, strive to\nunite both functions, and while endeavouring to treat the history from\nan expositor's point of view, we shall not overlook details of another\ntype which will impart colour and interest to the exposition.\n\nI. The thirteenth chapter of the Acts records the opening of St.\nPaul's official missionary labours, and its earliest verses tell us of\nthe formal separation or consecration for that work which St. Paul\nreceived. Now the question may here be raised, Why did St. Paul\nreceive such a solemn ordination as that we here read of? Had he not\nbeen called by Christ immediately? Had he not been designated to the\nwork in Gentile lands by the voice of the same Jesus Christ speaking\nto Ananias at Damascus and afterwards to Paul himself in the Temple at\nJerusalem? What was the necessity for such a solemn external\nimposition of hands as that here recorded? John Calvin, in his\ncommentary on this passage, offers a very good suggestion, and shows\nthat he was able to throw himself back into the feelings and ideas of\nthe times far better than many a modern writer. Calvin thinks that\nthis revelation of the Holy Ghost and this ordination by the hands of\nthe Antiochene prophets were absolutely necessary to complete the work\nbegun by St. Peter at C\u00e6sarea, and for this reason. The prejudices of\nthe Jewish Christians against their Gentile brethren were so strong,\nthat they would regard the vision at Joppa as applying, not as a\ngeneral rule, but as a mere personal matter, authorising the reception\nof Cornelius and his party alone. They would not see nor understand\nthat it authorised the active evangelisation of the Gentile world and\nthe prosecution of aggressive Christian efforts among the heathen. The\nHoly Ghost therefore, as the abiding and guiding power in the Church,\nand expressing His will through the agency of the prophets then\npresent, said, \"Separate me Barnabas and Saul for the work whereunto I\nhave called them\"; and that work to which they were expressly sent\nforth by the Holy Ghost was the work of aggressive effort beginning\nwith the Jews--but not terminating with them--and including the\nGentiles. This seems to me thoroughly true, and shows how Calvin\nrealised the intellectual weakness, the spiritual hardness of heart\nand slowness of judgment which prevailed among the apostles. The\nbattle of Christian freedom and of catholic truth was not won in a\nmoment. Old prejudices did not depart in an hour. New principles were\nnot assimilated and applied in a few days. Those who hold nobler views\nand higher principles than the crowd must not be surprised or dismayed\nif they find that year after year they have to fight the same battles\nand to proclaim the same fundamental truths and to maintain what may\nseem at times even a losing conflict with the forces of unreasoning\nprejudices. If this was the case in the primitive Church with all its\nunity and love and spiritual gifts, we may well expect the same state\nof affairs in the Church of our time.[105]\n\n  [105] One great lesson which the true expositor will derive from\n  this typical history is this, the long, doubtful, painful strife\n  which the battle of truth and justice ever involves. The struggle\n  for Gentile freedom waged by St. Paul is typical of the battle for\n  freedom of conscience, for freedom of knowledge, for human rights\n  against slavery, and of every other battle against tyranny and\n  wrong which the world has ever seen. The combat has ever been long\n  and wearisome, and the chiefest of God's champions have always\n  been compelled to suffer much for their support of the truth,\n  which must, however, triumph in the long run.\n\nAn illustration borrowed from Church history will explain this.\nNothing can well be more completely contrary to the spirit of\nChristianity than religious persecution. Nothing can be imagined more\ncompletely consonant with the spirit of the Christian religion than\nfreedom of conscience. Yet how hard has been the struggle for it! The\nearly Christians suffered in defence of religious freedom, but they\nhad no sooner gained the battle than they adopted the very principle\nagainst which they had fought. They became religiously intolerant,\nbecause religious intolerance was part and parcel of the Roman state\nunder which they had been reared. The Reformation again was a battle\nfor religious freedom. If it were not, the Reformers who suffered in\nit would have no more claim to our compassion and sympathy on account\nof the deaths they suffered than soldiers who die in battle. A soldier\nmerely suffers what he is prepared to inflict, and so it was with the\nmartyrs of the Reformation unless theirs was a struggle for religious\nfreedom. Yet no sooner had the battle of the Reformation been won than\nall the Reformed Churches adopted the very principle which had striven\nto crush themselves. It is terribly difficult to emancipate ourselves\nfrom the influence and ideas of bygone ages, and so it was with the\nJewish Christians. They could not bring themselves to adopt missionary\nwork among the Gentiles. They believed indeed intellectually that God\nhad granted unto the Gentiles repentance unto life, but that belief\nwas not accompanied with any of the enthusiasm which alone lends life\nand power to mental conceptions. The Holy Ghost therefore, as the\nParaclete, the loving Comforter, Exhorter, and Guide of the Church,\ninterposes afresh, and by a new revelation ordains apostles whose\ngreat work shall consist in preaching to the Gentile world.\n\nThis seems to me one great reason for the prominent place this\nincident at Antioch holds. The work of Gentile conversion proceeded\nfrom Antioch, which may therefore well be regarded as the mother\nChurch of Gentile Christendom; and the apostles of the Gentiles were\nthere solemnly set apart and constituted. Barnabas and Saul were not\npreviously called apostles. Henceforth this title is expressly applied\nto them,[106] and independent apostolic action is taken by them. But\nthere seems to me another reason why Barnabas and Saul were thus\nsolemnly set apart, notwithstanding all their previous gifts and\ncallings and history. The Holy Ghost wished to lay down at the very\nbeginning of the Gentile Church the law of orderly development, the\nrule of external ordination, and the necessity for its perpetual\nobservance. And therefore He issued His mandate for their visible\nseparation to the work of evangelisation. All the circumstances too\nare typical. The Church was engaged in a season of special devotion\nwhen the Holy Ghost spoke. A special blessing was vouchsafed, as\nbefore at Pentecost, when the people of God were specially waiting\nupon Him. The Church at Antioch as represented by its leading teachers\nwere fasting and praying and ministering to the Lord when the Divine\nmandate was issued, and then they fasted and prayed again. The\nordination of the first apostles to the Gentiles was accompanied by\nspecial prayer and by fasting, and the Church took good care\nafterwards to follow closely this primitive example. The institution\nof the four Ember seasons as times for solemn ordinations is derived\nfrom this incident. The Ember seasons are periods for solemn prayer\nand fasting, not only for those about to be ordained, but also for the\nwhole Church, because she recognises that the whole body of Christ's\npeople are interested most deeply and vitally in the nature and\ncharacter of the Christian ministry. If the members of that ministry\nare devoted, earnest, inspired with Divine love, then indeed the work\nof Christ flourishes in the Church, while if the ministry of God be\ncareless and unspiritual, the people of God suffer terrible injury.\nAnd we observe, further, that not only the Church subsequent to the\napostolic age followed this example at Antioch, but St. Paul himself\nfollowed it and prescribed it to his disciples. He ordained elders in\nevery Church, and that from the beginning. He acted thus on his very\nfirst missionary journey, ordaining by the imposition of hands\naccompanied with prayer and fasting, as we learn from the fourteenth\nchapter and twenty-third verse. He reminded Timothy of the gift\nimparted to that youthful evangelist by the imposition of St. Paul's\nown hands, as well as by those of the presbytery; and yet he does not\nhesitate to designate the elders of Ephesus and Miletus who were thus\nordained by St. Paul as bishops set over God's flock by the Holy Ghost\nHimself. St. Paul and the Apostolic Church, in fact, looked behind\nthis visible scene. They realised vividly the truth of Christ's\npromise about the presence of the Holy Ghost in the Church. They took\nno miserably low and Erastian views of the sacred ministry, as if it\nwere an office of mere human order and appointment. They viewed it as\na supernatural and Divine office, which no mere human power, no matter\nhow exalted, could confer. They realised the human instruments indeed\nin their true position as nothing but instruments, powerless in\nthemselves, and mighty only through God, and therefore St. Paul\nregarded his own ordination of the elders whom he appointed at Derbe,\nIconium, Lystra, or Ephesus as a separation by the Holy Ghost to their\nDivine offices. The Church was, in fact, then instinct with life and\nspiritual vigour, because it thankfully recognised the present power,\nthe living force and vigour of the third person of the Holy Trinity.\n\n  [106] See, for instance, ch. xiv. 4: \"Part held with the Jews and\n  part with the apostles\"; and again, verse 14: \"But when the\n  apostles Barnabas and Paul heard of it.\" It must be remembered\n  that the term apostle was one used very freely among the Jews to\n  signify the official delegates of the high priest, the Sanhedrin,\n  or even the smallest synagogue. It has, however, gained a sanctity\n  and special application in the Christian Church which causes a\n  certain amount of mental confusion. At the same time, we must\n  remember that the title apostle was continued in the primitive\n  Church after the age of the Twelve. It was applied to their\n  successors, as we learn from the _Didache_, xi.; _Hermas_, Sim.\n  ix.; 15, 16, 25. Cf. Origen on John iv., and Euseb., _H. E._, i.\n  12.\n\nII. The apostles having been thus commissioned lost no time. They at\nonce departed upon their great work. And now let us briefly indicate\nthe scope of the first great missionary tour undertaken by St. Paul,\nand sketch its outline, filling in the details afterwards. According\nto early tradition the headquarters of the Antiochene Church were in\nSingon Street, in the southern quarter of Antioch.[107] After earnest\nand prolonged religious services they left their Christian brethren.\nSt. Paul's own practice recorded at Ephesus, Miletus, and at Tyre\nshows us that prayer marked such separation from the Christian\nbrethren, and we know that the same practice was perpetuated in the\nearly Church; Tertullian, for instance, telling us that a brother\nshould not leave a Christian house until he had been commended to\nGod's keeping. They then crossed the bridge, and proceeded along the\nnorthern bank of the Orontes to Seleucia, the port of Antioch, where\nthe ruins still testify to the vastness of the architectural\nconceptions cherished by the Syrian kings. From Seleucia the apostles\nsailed to the island of Cyprus, whose peaks they could see eighty\nmiles distant shining bright and clear through the pellucid air.\nVarious circumstances would lead them thither. Barnabas was of Cyprus,\nand he doubtless had many friends there. Cyprus had then an immense\nJewish population, as we have already pointed out; and though the\napostles were specially designated for work among the Gentiles, they\never made the Jews the starting-point whence to influence the outside\nworld, always used them as the lever whereby to move the stolid mass\nof paganism. The apostles showed a wholesome example to all\nmissionaries and to all teachers by this method of action. They\naddressed the Jews first because they had most in common with them.\nAnd St. Paul deliberately and of set purpose worked on this principle,\nwhether with Jews or Gentiles. He sought out the ideas or the ground\ncommon to himself and his hearers, and then, having found the points\non which they agreed, he worked out from them. It is the true method\nof controversy. I have seen the opposite course adopted, and with very\ndisastrous effects. I have seen a method of controversial argument\npursued, consisting simply in attacks upon errors without any attempt\nto follow the apostolic example and discover the truths which both\nparties held in common, and the result has been the very natural one,\nthat ill-will and bad feeling have been aroused without effecting any\nchanges in conviction. We can easily understand the reason of this, if\nwe consider how the matter would stand with ourselves. If a man comes\nup to us, and without any attempt to discover our ideas or enter into\nsympathetic relations with us, makes a very aggressive assault upon\nall our particular notions and practices, our backs are at once put\nup, we are thrown into a defensive mood, our pride is stirred, we\nresent the tone, the air of the aggressor, and unconsciously determine\nnot to be convinced by him. Controversial preaching of that class,\nhard, unloving, censorious, never does any permanent good, but rather\nstrengthens and confirms the person against whose belief it is\ndirected. Nothing of this kind will ever be found in the wise,\ncourteous teaching of the apostle Paul, whose few recorded speeches to\nJews and Gentiles may be commended to the careful study of all\nteachers at home or abroad as models of mission preaching, being at\nonce prudent and loving, faithful and courageous.\n\n  [107] An elaborate plan of ancient Antioch, accompanied with a\n  description of its various parts and references to the authorities\n  for the same, will be found in Lewin's _St. Paul_, vol. i., p. 92.\n\nFrom Seleucia the apostles itinerated through the whole island unto\nPaphos, celebrated in classical antiquity as the favourite seat of the\ngoddess Venus, where they came for the first time into contact with a\ngreat Roman official, Sergius Paulus, the proconsul of the island.\nFrom Paphos they sailed across to the mainland of Asia Minor, landed\nat Perga, where John Mark abandoned the work to which he had put his\nhand. They do not seem to have stayed for long at Perga. They\ndoubtless declared their message at the local synagogue to the Jews\nand proselytes who assembled there, for we are not to conclude,\nbecause a synagogue is not expressly mentioned as belonging to any\nspecial town, that therefore it did not exist. Modern discoveries have\nshown that Jewish synagogues were found in every considerable town or\ncity of Asia Minor, preparing the way by their pure morality and\nmonotheistic teaching for the fuller and richer truths of\nChristianity.[108] But St. Paul had fixed his eagle gaze upon Antioch\nof Pisidia, a town which had been made by Augustus C\u00e6sar the great\ncentre of this part of Asia Minor, whence military roads radiated in\nevery direction, lending thereby the assistance of imperial\norganisation to the progress of the gospel. Its situation was, in\nfact, the circumstance which determined the original foundation of\nAntioch by the Syrian princes.[109]\n\n  [108] Hyp\u00e6pa, for instance, was a celebrated sanctuary of Diana,\n  between Sardis and Ephesus. Jewish inscriptions have been found\n  there proving that a Jewish synagogue and community existed even\n  in that pagan stronghold: see _Revue Arch\u00e9ologique_ for 1885, vol.\n  ii., p. 111.\n\n  [109] There is a series of plates in Lewin's _Life of St. Paul_,\n  vol. i., pp. 130-36, depicting the site and ruins of Antioch, and\n  showing the roads which connected it with all the leading towns of\n  the neighbourhood, Iconium, Lystra, Derbe. Professor Ramsay, in\n  his _Historical Geography of Asia Minor_, bestows a good deal of\n  attention on Antioch of Pisidia and its position: see pp. 47, 57,\n  85, 391, 453.\n\nFacility of access, commercial convenience were points at which they\nchiefly aimed in selecting the sites of the cities they built, and the\nwisdom of their choice in the case of Antioch in Pisidia was confirmed\nwhen Augustus and Tiberius, some few years previous to St. Paul's\nvisit, made Antioch the centre from which diverged the whole system of\nmilitary roads throughout this portion of Asia Minor. It was a very\nlarge city, and its ruins and aqueducts testify to this day concerning\nthe important position it held as the great centre of all the Roman\ncolonies and fortresses which Augustus planted in the year B.C. 6\nalong the skirts of the Taurus Range to restrain the incursions of the\nrude mountaineers of Isauria and Pisidia. When persecution compelled\nthe apostles to retire from Antioch they took their way therefore to\nIconium, which was some sixty miles south-east of Antioch along one of\nthese military roads of which we have spoken, constructed for the\npurpose of putting down the brigands which then, as in modern times,\nconstituted one of the great plagues of Asia Minor.[110] But why did\nthe apostles retire to Iconium? Surely one might say, if the Jews had\ninfluence enough at Antioch to stir up the chief men of the city\nagainst the missionaries, they would have had influence enough to\nsecure a warrant for their arrest in a neighbouring city. At first\nsight it seems somewhat difficult to account for the line of travel or\nflight adopted by the apostles. But a reference to ancient geography\nthrows some light upon the problem. Strabo, a geographer of St. Paul's\nown day, tells us that Iconium was an independent principality or\ntetrarchy, surrounded indeed on all sides by Roman territory, but\nstill enjoying a certain amount of independence. The apostles fled to\nIconium when persecution waxed hot because they had a good road\nthither, and also because at Iconium they were secure from any legal\nmolestation being under a new jurisdiction.[111]\n\n  [110] St. Paul, writing in 2nd Corinthians, speaks of himself as\n  at times in perils of robbers. This danger may well have happened\n  to him in the central districts of Asia Minor. There is an\n  interesting story of St. John and the bandits in Eusebius, _H.\n  E._, iii., 23. The incidents there told took place in Asia Minor.\n\n  [111] Iconium was in St. Paul's day the centre of an independent\n  tetrarchy ruled by native princes. See Pliny's _Nat. Hist._, v.\n  27. The site of Iconium has never been uncertain. It was made the\n  capital of their dominions by the Sultans of the Seldjuk Turks,\n  and continued to occupy that position till the conquest of\n  Constantinople. It is still called Konia, a modification of its\n  original name, and still continues to attract a large population\n  on account of the beauty and convenience of its situation, which\n  gives it the title of the Damascus of Asia Minor. According to\n  tradition Sosipatros, one of the seventy disciples, was the bishop\n  of Iconium, and was succeeded by Terentius, another member of the\n  same sacred company; _Acta Sanctorum_, June 20th, p. 67; Ramsay,\n  _Historical Geography of Asia Minor_, p. 332. The latest account\n  of Iconium as it is at present will be found in Sterrett's\n  _Epigraphical Journey in Asia Minor_, printed among the Papers of\n  the American School of Classical Studies at Athens, Boston, 1884.\n  vol. ii., p. 188-225.\n\nAfter a time, however, the Jews from Antioch made their way to Iconium\nand began the same process which had proved so successful at Antioch.\nThey first excited the members of the Jewish synagogue against the\napostles, and through them influenced the towns-people at large, so\nthat, though successful in winning converts, St. Paul and his\ncompanion were in danger of being stoned by a joint mob of Jews and\nGentiles. They had therefore to fly a second time, and when doing so\nthey acted on the same principle as before. They again removed\nthemselves out of the local jurisdiction of their enemies, and passed\nto Derbe and Lystra, cities of Lycaonia, a Roman province which had\njust been formed by the Emperor Claudius.[112]\n\n  [112] The apostles seem to have acted as in former times persons\n  harassed by legal processes could do in this country. A writ\n  directed to a sheriff only ran within his own county. A man could\n  not be arrested under it if he passed one step beyond the county\n  bounds, till countersigned by the sheriff of the county into which\n  the delinquent had passed. Under the Roman empire the local\n  liberties and jurisdictions were simply infinite, a fact which of\n  course lent much assistance to persons persecuted as the apostles\n  were. Derbe, for instance, was a native city of Lycaonia, and\n  belonged to the Koinon or local assembly of that province. Lystra\n  was situated indeed in Lycaonia, but being a Roman colony had\n  therefore exceptional privileges, and scorned to belong to the\n  local Assembly of native cities. See Ramsay, _Hist. Geog._, pp.\n  332, 375, 376.\n\nThen after a time, when the disturbances which the Jews persistently\nraised wherever they came had subsided, the apostles returned back\nover the same ground, no longer indeed publicly preaching, but\norganising quietly and secretly the Churches which they had founded\nin the different towns through which they had passed, till they\narrived back at Perga, where perhaps, finding no ship sailing to\nAntioch, they travelled to the port of Attalia, where they succeeded\nin finding a passage to that city of Antioch whence they had been sent\nforth.[113] This brief sketch will give a general view of the first\nmissionary tour made in the realms of paganism, and will show that it\ndealt with little more than two provinces of Asia Minor, Pisidia and\nLycaonia, and was followed by what men would count but scanty results,\nthe foundation and organisation of a few scattered Christian\ncommunities in some of the leading towns of these districts.\n\n  [113] It is well perhaps to note that the \u03b9 in this name\n  is long, representing the diphthong \u03b5\u03b9, the Greek name of\n  the town being \u1f08\u03c4\u03c4\u03ac\u03bb\u03b5\u03b9\u03b1.\n\nIII. Let us now more particularly notice some of the details recorded\nconcerning this journey. The apostles began their work at Cyprus,\nwhere they proclaimed the gospel in the Jewish synagogues. They were\nattracted as we have said to this island, first, because it was the\nnative land of Barnabas, and then because its population was in large\ndegree Jewish, owing to the possession of the famous copper mines of\nthe island by Herod the Great.[114] Synagogues were scattered all over\nthe island and proselytes appertained to each synagogue, and thus a\nbasis of operations was ready whence the gospel message might operate.\nIt was just the same even at Paphos, where St. Paul came in contact\nwith the proconsul Sergius Paulus. The Jewish element here again\nappears, though in more active opposition than seems to have been\nelsewhere offered. Sergius Paulus was a Roman citizen like Cornelius\nof C\u00e6sarea. He had become dissatisfied with the belief of his\nforefathers. He had now come into contact with the mystic East, and\nhad yielded himself to the guidance of a man who professed the Jewish\nreligion, which seems to have charmed by its pure morality and simple\nmonotheism many of the noblest minds of that age. But, like all\noutsiders, Sergius Paulus did not make accurate and just distinctions\nbetween man and man. He yielded himself to the guidance of a man who\ntraded on the name of a Jew, but who really practised those rites of\nweird sorcery which real Judaism utterly repudiated and denounced.\nThis alone accounts for the stern language of St. Paul: \"O full of all\nguile and all villany, thou son of the devil, thou enemy of all\nrighteousness, wilt thou not cease to pervert the right ways of the\nLord?\" St. Paul never addressed a lawful opponent in this manner. He\ndid not believe in the efficacy of strong language in itself, nor did\nhe abuse those who withstood him in honest argument. But he did not\nhesitate, on the other hand, to brand a deceiver as he deserved, or to\ndenounce in scathing terms those who were guilty of conscious fraud.\nSt. Paul might well be taken as a model controversialist in this\nrespect. He knew how to distinguish between the genuine opponent who\nmight be mistaken but was certainly conscientious, and the fraudulent\nhypocrite devoid of all convictions save the conviction of the value\nof money. With the former St. Paul was full of courtesy, patience,\nconsideration, because he had in himself experience of the power of\nblind unthinking prejudice. For the latter class St. Paul had no\nconsideration, and with them he wasted no time. His honest soul took\ntheir measure at once. He denounced them as he did Elymas on this\noccasion, and then passed on to deal with nobler and purer souls,\nwhere honest and good hearts offered more promising soil for the\nreception of the Word of the Kingdom. Controversy of every kind is\nvery trying to tongue and temper, but religious controversy such as\nthat in which St. Paul spent his life is specially trying to the\ncharacter. The subject is so important that it seems to excuse an over\nzeal and earnestness which terminates in bad temper and unwise\nlanguage. And yet we sometimes cannot shrink from controversy, because\nconscience demands it on our part. When that happens to be the case,\nit will be well for us to exercise the most rigorous control over our\nfeelings and our words; from time to time to realise by a momentary\neffort of introspection Christ hanging upon the cross and bearing for\nus the unworthy and unjust reproaches of mankind; for thus and thus\nonly will pride be kept down and hot temper restrained and that great\nadvantage for the truth secured which self-control always bestows upon\nits possessor.\n\n  [114] See vol. i., p. 216.\n\nThere is an interesting illustration of the historic accuracy of St.\nLuke connected with the apostolic visit to Paphos and to Sergius\nPaulus the proconsul. Thrice over in the narrative of St. Luke,\nSergius Paulus is called proconsul--first in the seventh verse of the\nthirteenth chapter, where Elymas the sorcerer is described thus, \"who\nwas with the proconsul, Sergius Paulus, a man of understanding,\" while\nagain the same title of proconsul is applied to Sergius in the eighth\nand twelfth verses. This has been the cause of much misunderstanding\nand of no small reproach hurled against the sacred writer. Let us\ninquire into its justice and the facts of the case. The Roman\nprovinces were divided into two classes, senatorial and imperial. The\nsenatorial provinces were ruled by proconsuls appointed by the\nSenate; the imperial by propr\u00e6tors appointed by the emperors. This\narrangement was made by Augustus C\u00e6sar, and is reported to us by\nStrabo who lived and wrote during St. Paul's early manhood. But now a\ndifficulty arises. Strabo gives us the list of the provinces\nsenatorial and imperial alike, and expressly classes Cyprus amongst\nthe imperial provinces, which were ruled by propr\u00e6tors and not by\nproconsuls. In the opinion of the older critics, St. Luke was thus\nplainly convicted of a mistake and of a flagrant contradiction of that\ngreat authority the geographer Strabo. But it is never safe to jump to\nconclusions of that kind with respect to a contemporaneous writer who\nhas proved himself accurate on other occasions. It is far better and\nfar safer to say, Let us wait awhile, and see what further\ninvestigations will reveal. And so it has proved in this special case.\nStrabo tells us of the original arrangement made about thirty years\nB.C. between the Emperor Augustus and the Senate, when Cyprus was most\ncertainly numbered amongst the imperial provinces; but he omits to\ntell us what another historian of the same century, Dion Cassius, does\nrelate, that the same Emperor modified this arrangement five years\nlater, handing Cyprus and Gallia Narbonensis over to the rule of the\nSenate, so that from that date and henceforth throughout the first\ncentury of our era Cyprus was governed by proconsuls alone, as St.\nLuke most accurately, though only incidentally, reports.[115] Here,\ntoo, the results of modern investigation among inscriptions and coins\nhave come in to supplement and support the testimony of historians.\nThe Greek inscriptions discovered prior to and during the earlier half\nof this century have been collected together in Boeckh's _Corpus of\nGreek Inscriptions_, which is, indeed, a vast repertory of original\ndocuments concerning the life, Pagan and Christian, of the Greek\nworld. In the inscriptions numbered 2631 and 2632 in that valuable\nwork we have the names of Q. Julius Cordus and L. Annius Bassus\nexpressly mentioned as proconsuls of Cyprus in A.D. 51, 52; while on\ncoins of Cyprus have been found the names of Cominius Proclus and\nQuadratus, who held the same office. But the very latest\ninvestigations have borne striking testimony to the same fact. The\nname of the very proconsul whom St. Paul addressed appears on an\ninscription discovered in our own time. Cyprus has been thoroughly\ninvestigated since it passed into British hands, specially by General\nCesnola, who has written a work on the subject which is well worth\nreading by those who take an interest in Scripture lands and the\nscenes where the apostles laboured. In that work, p. 425, Cesnola\ntells us of a mutilated inscription which he recovered dealing with\nsome subject of no special importance, but bearing the following\nprecious notice giving its date as \"Under Paulus the Proconsul\";\nproving to us by contemporary evidence that Sergius Paulus ruled the\nisland, and ruled it with the special title of proconsul. Surely an\ninstance like this--and we shall have several such to notice--is quite\nenough to make fair minds suspend their judgment when charges of\ninaccuracy are alleged against St. Luke dependent upon our own\nignorance alone of the entire facts of the case. A wider knowledge, a\nlarger investigation we may well be sure will suffice to clear the\ndifficulty and vindicate the fair fame of the sacred historian.\n\n  [115] The words of Dion are: \"Eo tempore Cyprum ac Galliam\n  Narbonensem, quia nihil armis suis indigerent, populo reddidit;\n  atque ita proconsules etiam in istas provincias mitti\n  c\u0153perunt.\" See the works of Dion, edited by H. Valerius, vol.\n  i., p. 733 (Hamburg, 1750). Valerius, in his note on this passage,\n  notes the inaccuracies into which the older critics--Grotius,\n  Hammond, Baronius--had fallen about Acts xiii. 7.\n\nFrom Cyprus the apostles passed over to the continent, and opened\ntheir missionary work at Antioch of Pisidia, where the first recorded\naddress of St. Paul was delivered. This sermon, delivered in the\nPisidian synagogue, is deserving of our special notice because it is\nthe only missionary address delivered by St. Paul to the Jews of the\nDispersion which has been handed down to us, unless we include the few\nwords delivered to the Roman Jews reported in the twenty-eighth\nchapter from the seventeenth to the twenty-eighth verses. Let us\nbriefly analyse it, premising that it should be carefully compared\nwith the addresses of St. Peter to the Jews upon the Day of Pentecost\nand with the speech delivered by St. Stephen before the Sanhedrin,\nwhen all three will be found to run upon the same lines. The apostles\nhaving reached Antioch waited until the Sabbath came round, and then\nsought the local meeting-place of the Jews. The apostles felt indeed\nthat they were entrusted with a great mission important for the human\nrace, but yet they knew right well that feverish impetuosity or\nrestless activity was not the true way to advance the cause they had\nin hand. They did not believe in wild irregular actions which only\nstir up opposition. They were calm and dignified in their methods,\nbecause they were consciously guided by the Divine Spirit of Him\nconcerning whom it was said in the days of His flesh, \"He did not\nstrive nor cry, neither did any man hear His voice in the streets.\" On\nthe Sabbath day they entered the synagogue, and took their place on a\nbench set apart for the reception of those who were regarded as\nteachers. At the conclusion of the public worship and the reading of\nthe lessons out of the law and the prophets, such as still are read in\nthe synagogue worship, the Rulers of the Synagogue sent to them the\nminister or apostle of the synagogue intimating their permission to\naddress the assembled congregation, whereupon St. Paul arose and\ndelivered an address, of which the following is an analysis. St. Paul\nopened his sermon by a reference to the lessons which had just been\nread in the service, which--as all the writers of the Apostle's life,\nLewin, Conybeare and Howson, and Archdeacon Farrar, agree--were taken\nfrom the first chapter of Deuteronomy and the first of Isaiah. He\npoints out, as St. Stephen had done, the providential dealings of God\nwith their forefathers from the time of the original choice of Abraham\ndown to David. The Jews had been divinely guided throughout their\nhistory down to David's days, and that Divine guidance had not then\nceased, but continued down to the present, as the Apostle then\nproceeds to show. In David's seed there had been left a hope for\nIsrael which every true Jew still cherished. He then announces that\nthe long-cherished hope had now at last been fulfilled. This fact\ndepended not on his testimony alone. The Messiah whom they had long\nexpected had been preceded by a prophet whose reputation had spread\ninto these distant regions, and had gained disciples, as we shall\nafterwards find, at Ephesus. John the Baptist had announced the\nMessiah's appearance, and proclaimed his own inferiority to Him. But\nthen an objection occurs to the Apostle which might naturally be\nraised. If John's reputation and doctrine had penetrated to Antioch,\nthe story of the crucifixion of Jesus may also have been reported\nthere, and the local Jews may therefore have concluded that such an\nignominious death was conclusive against the claims of Jesus? The\nApostle then proceeds to show how that the providential rule of God\nhad been exercised even in that matter. The wrath of man had been\ncompelled to praise God, and even while the rulers at Jerusalem were\nstriving to crush Jesus Christ they were in reality fulfilling the\nvoices of the prophets which went beforehand and proclaimed the\nsufferings of the Messiah exactly as they had happened. And further\nstill, God had set His seal to the truth of the story by raising Jesus\nChrist from the dead according to the predictions of the Old\nTestament, which he expounds after the manner of the Jewish schools,\nfinding a hint of the Resurrection of Christ in Isaiah lv. 3: \"I will\ngive you the holy and sure blessings of David\"; and a still clearer\none in Psalm xvi. 10: \"Thou wilt not give Thine Holy One to see\ncorruption.\" The Apostle, after quoting this text, which from its use\nby St. Peter on the Day of Pentecost seems to have been a passage\ncommonly quoted in the Jewish controversy, terminates his discourse\nwith a proclamation of the exalted blessings which the Messiah has\nbrought, indicating briefly but clearly the universal character of the\ngospel promises, and finishing with a warning against stupid obstinate\nresistance drawn from Habakkuk i. 5, which primarily referred to the\ndisbelief in impending Chald\u00e6an invasion exhibited by the Jews, but\nwhich the Apostle applies to the Jews of Antioch and their spiritual\ndangers arising from similar wilful obstinacy.\n\nWe have of course not much more than the heads of the apostolic\nsermon. Five or seven minutes of a not very rapid speaker would amply\nsuffice to exhaust the exact words attributed to St. Paul. He must\nhave enlarged on the various topics. He could not have introduced\nJohn the Baptist in the abrupt manner in which he is noticed in the\ntext of our New Testament. It seems quite natural enough to us that he\nshould be thus named, because John occupies a very high and exalted\nposition in our mental horizon from our earliest childhood. But who\nwas John the Baptist for these Jewish settlers in the Pisidian\nAntioch? He was simply a prophet of whom they may have heard a vague\nreport, who appeared before Israel for a year or two, and then\nsuffered death at the hands of Herod the Tetrarch: and so it must have\nbeen with many other topics introduced into this discourse. They must\nhave been much more copiously treated, elaborated, discussed, or else\nthe audience in the Pisidian synagogue must have loved concentrated\ndiscourse more keenly than any other assembly that ever met together.\nAnd yet, though the real discourse must have been much longer--and did\nwe only possess the sermon in its fulness many a difficulty which now\npuzzles us would disappear at once--we can still see the line of the\napostolic argument and grasp its force. The Apostle argues, in fact,\nthat God had chosen the original fathers of the Jewish race. He had\ngone on conferring ever fresh and larger blessings in the wilderness,\nin Canaan, under the Judges, and then under the Kings, till the time\nof David, from whose seed God had raised up the greatest gift of all\nin the person of Jesus Christ, through whom blessings unknown before\nand unsurpassed were offered to mankind. St. Paul contends exactly as\nSt. Stephen had done, that true religion has been a perpetual advance\nand development; that Christianity is not something distinct from\nJudaism, but is essentially one with it, being the flower of a plant\nwhich God Himself had planted, the crown and glory of the work which\nHe had Himself begun. This address, as we have already noticed in the\npreface to the first volume of this work, will repay careful study;\nfor it shows the methods adopted by the early Christian when dealing\nwith the Jews.[116] They did not attack any of their peculiar views or\npractices, but confining themselves to what they held in common strove\nto convince them that Christianity was the logical outcome of their\nown principles.\n\n  [116] Cf. vol. i., pp. xi, 300.\n\nThe results of this address were very indicative of the future. The\nJews of the synagogue seem to have been for a time impressed by St.\nPaul's words. Several of them, together with a number of the\nproselytes, attached themselves to him as his disciples, and were\nfurther instructed in the faith. The proselytes especially must have\nbeen attracted by the Apostle's words. They were, like Cornelius,\nProselytes of the Gate, who observed merely the seven precepts of Noah\nand renounced idolatry, but were not circumcised or subject to the\nrestrictions and duties of the Jewish ritual. They must have welcomed\ntidings of a religion embodying all that which they venerated in the\nJewish Law and yet devoid of its narrowness and disadvantages.\n\nNext Sabbath the whole city was stirred with excitement, and then\nJewish jealousy burst into a flame. They saw that their national\ndistinctions and glory were in danger. They refused to listen or\npermit any further proclamation of what must have seemed to them a\nrevolutionary teaching disloyal to the traditions and existence of\ntheir religion and their nation. They used their influence therefore\nwith the chief men of the city, exercising it through their wives, who\nwere in many cases attracted by the Jewish worship, or who may have\nbeen themselves of Jewish birth, and the result was that the apostles\nwere driven forth to preach in other cities of the same central region\nof Asia Minor. This was the first attack made by the Jews upon St.\nPaul in his mission journeys. He had already had experience of their\nhostility at Damascus and at Jerusalem, but this hostility was\ndoubtless provoked by reason of their resentment at the apostasy to\nthe Nazarene sect of their chosen champion. But here at Antioch we\nperceive the first symptom of that bitter hostility to St. Paul\nbecause of his catholic principles, his proclamation of salvation as\nopen to all alike, Jew or Gentile, free from any burdensome or\nrestrictive conditions, a hostility which we shall find persistently\npursuing him, both within the Church, and still more without the\nChurch, at Iconium, at Lystra, at Thessalonica, at Corinth, and at\nJerusalem. It would seem indeed as if the invention of the term\n\"Christian\" at Antioch marked a crisis in the history of the early\nChurch. Henceforth St. Paul and his friends became the objects of\nkeenest hatred, because the Jews had recognised that they taught a\nform of belief absolutely inconsistent with the Jewish faith as\nhitherto known; a hatred which seems, however, to have been limited to\nSt. Paul and his Antiochene friends, for the temporising measures and\nthe personal prejudices, the whole atmosphere, in fact, of the\nJerusalem Church led the unbelieving Jews to make a broad distinction\nbetween the disciples at Jerusalem and the followers of St. Paul.\n\nIV. So far we have dealt with St. Paul's address at Antioch as typical\nof his methods in dealing with the Jews, and their treatment of the\nApostle as typical of that hostility which the Jews ever displayed to\nthe earliest teachers of Christian truth, as witnessed not only by\nthe New Testament, but also by the writings and histories of Justin\nMartyr, and of Polycarp of Smyrna, and of all the early apologists.\nBut we are not left in this typical Church history without a specimen\nof St. Paul's earlier methods when dealing with the heathen. St. Paul,\nafter his rejection at Antioch, escaped to Iconium, sixty miles\ndistant, and thence, when Jewish persecution again waxed hot, betook\nhimself to Lystra, some forty miles to the south. There the Apostle\nfound himself in a new atmosphere and amid new surroundings. Antioch\nand Iconium had large Jewish populations, and were permeated with\nJewish ideas. Lystra was a thoroughly Gentile town with only a very\nfew Jewish inhabitants. The whole air of the place--its manners,\ncustoms, popular legends--was thoroughly pagan. This offered St. Paul\na new field for his activity, of which he availed himself right\ndiligently, finishing up his work with healing a lifelong cripple, a\nmiracle which so impressed the mob of Lystra that they immediately\ncried out in the native speech of Lycaonia, \"The gods are coming down\nto us in the likeness of men,\" calling Barnabas Jupiter, on account of\nhis lofty stature and more commanding appearance, and Paul Mercurius\nor Hermes, because of his more insignificant size and more copious\neloquence. Here again we have, in our writer's words, an incidental\nand even unconscious witness to the truth of our narrative. The cry of\nthe men of Lystra, these rude barbarian people of the original\ninhabitants of the land, who, though they could understand Greek,\nnaturally fell back on their native Lycaonian language to express\ntheir deeper feelings,--this cry, I say, refers to an ancient legend\nconnected with their history, of which we find a lengthened account\nin the works of the poet Ovid. Jupiter attended by Mercury once\ndescended to visit the earth and see how man was faring. Some scoffed\nat the deities, and were punished. Others received them, and were\nblessed accordingly.[117] The wondrous work performed on the cripple\nnaturally led the men of Lystra to think that the Divine Epiphany had\nbeen repeated. The colony of Lystra--for Lystra was a Roman\ncolony[118]--was devoted to the worship of Jupiter, in memory\ndoubtless of this celebrated visit. A temple to Jupiter stood before\nand outside the gate of the city, as the temple of Diana stood outside\nthe gate of Ephesus, lending sanctity and protection to the\nneighbouring town. The priest and the people act upon the spur of the\nmoment. They bring victims and garlands prepared to offer sacrifice to\nthe deities who, as they thought, had revisited their ancient haunts.\nThey were approaching the house where the apostles were\ndwelling--perhaps that of Lois and Eunice and Timothy--when Paul\nsprang forward and delivered a short impassioned address deprecating\nthe threatened adoration. Let us quote the address in order that we\nmay see its full force: \"Sirs, why do ye these things? We also are men\nof like passions with you, and bring you good tidings, that ye should\nturn from these vain things unto the living God, who made the heaven\nand the earth and the sea, and all that in them is: who in the\ngenerations gone by suffered all the nations to walk in their own\nways. And yet He left not Himself without witness, in that He did\ngood, and gave you from heaven rains and fruitful seasons, filling\nyour hearts with food and gladness.\" How very different St. Paul's\nwords to the pagans are from those he addressed to the Jews and\nproselytes, believers in the true God and in the facts of revelation!\nHe proves himself a born orator, able to adapt himself to different\nclasses of hearers, and, grasping their special ideas and feelings, to\nsuit his arguments to their various conditions. St. Paul's short\naddress on this occasion may be compared with his speech to the men of\nAthens, and the first chapter of the Epistle to the Romans, and the\nvarious apologies composed by the earliest advocates of Christianity\nduring the second century. Take, for instance, the Apology of\nAristides, of which we gave an account in the preface to the first\nvolume of this commentary on the Acts. We shall find, when we examine\nit and compare it with the various passages of Scripture to which we\nhave just referred, that all run upon exactly the same lines. They all\nappeal to the evidence of nature and of natural religion. They say not\none word about Scripture concerning which their hearers know nothing.\nThey are not like unwise Christian advocates among ourselves who think\nthey can overthrow an infidel with a text out of Scripture, begging\nthe question at issue, the very point to be decided being this,\nwhether there is such a thing at all as Scripture. St. Paul does with\nthe men of Lystra and the men of Athens what Aristides did when\nwriting for the Emperor Hadrian, and what every wise missionary will\nstill do with the heathen or the unbeliever whose salvation he is\nseeking. The Apostle takes up the ground that is common to himself and\nhis hearers. He shows them the unworthiness of the conception they\nhave formed of the Godhead. He appeals to the testimony of God's works\nand to the interior witness of conscience prophesying perpetually in\nthe secret tabernacle of man's heart, and thus appealing in God's\nbehalf to the eternal verities and evidences of nature exterior and\ninterior to man, he vindicates the Divine authority, glorifies the\nDivine character, and restrains the capricious and ignorant folly of\nthe men of Lystra.\n\n  [117] See the story of Philemon and Baucis as told in Smith's\n  _Dictionary of Classical Biography and Mythology_.\n\n  [118] The site of Lystra and the fact that it was a Roman colony\n  were unknown till 1884, when Sterrett discovered an inscription\n  which ascertained both facts: see Ramsay's _Historical Geography\n  of Asia Minor_, p. 332, and Sterrett's _Epigraph. Journey_,\n  already quoted, from \"Papers of American School at Athens,\" vol.\n  iii., p. 142 (Boston, 1888). Artemas, one of the seventy\n  disciples, is said to have been bishop of Lystra: see _Acta\n  Sanct._, June 20th, p. 67.\n\nLastly, we find in this narrative two typical suggestions for the\nmissionary activity of the Church in every age. The men of Lystra with\nmarvellous facility soon changed their opinion concerning St. Paul. M.\nR\u00e9nan has well pointed out that to the pagans of those times a miracle\nwas no necessary proof of a Divine mission. It was just as easily a\nproof to them of a diabolical or magical power. The Jews, therefore,\nwho followed St. Paul, had no difficulty in persuading the men of\nLystra that this assailant of their hereditary deities was a mere\ncharlatan, a clever trickster moved by wicked powers to lead them\nastray. Their character and reputation as Jews, worshippers of one God\nalone, would lend weight to this charge, and enable them the more\neasily to effect their purpose of killing St. Paul, in which they had\nfailed at Antioch and Iconium. The fickle mob easily lent themselves\nto the purposes of the Jews, and having stoned St. Paul dragged his\nbody outside the city walls, thinking him dead. A few faithful\ndisciples followed the crowd, however. Perhaps, too, the eirenarch or\nlocal police authority with his subordinates had interfered, and the\nrioters, apprehensive of punishment for their disturbance of the\npeace, had retired.[119] As the disciples stood around weeping for\nthe loss they had sustained, the Apostle awoke from the swoon into\nwhich he had fallen, and was carried into the city by the faithful\nfew, among whom doubtless were Timothy and his parents. Lystra,\nhowever, was no longer safe for St. Paul. He retired, therefore, some\ntwenty miles to Derbe, where he continued for some time labouring with\nsuccess, till the storm and the excitement had subsided at Lystra.\nThen he returned back over the same ground which he had already\ntraversed. He might have pushed on along the great Eastern Road, nigh\nas Derbe was to the passes through the Taurus Range which led directly\nto Cilicia and Tarsus. He wished to go back indeed to Antioch. He had\nbeen a year or so absent on this first excursion into the vast fields\nof Gentile paganism. Wider and more extensive missions had now to be\nplanned. The wisdom gained by personal experience had now to be\nutilised in consultation with the brethren. But still a work had to be\ndone in Lycaonia and Pisidia if the results of his labours were not to\nbe lost. He had quitted in great haste each town he had visited,\nforced out by persecution, and leaving the organisation of the Church\nincomplete. St. Paul came, like his Master, not merely to proclaim a\ndoctrine: he came still more to found and organise a Divine society.\nHe returns therefore back again along the route he had first taken. He\ndoes not preach in public, nor run any risks of raising riots anew.\nHis work is now entirely of a character interior to the Church. He\nstrengthens the disciples by his teaching, he points out that earthly\ntrials and persecutions are marks of God's love and favour rather than\ntokens of His wrath, he notes for them that it is needful \"through\nmany tribulations to enter into the kingdom of God,\" and above all he\nsecures the permanence of his work by ordaining presbyters after the\nfashion of the Church at Antioch, with prayer and fasting and\nimposition of hands. This is one great typical lesson taught us here\nby St. Paul's return journey through Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch of\nPisidia. Preaching and evangelistic work are important; but pastoral\nwork and Church consolidation and Church order are equally important,\nif any permanent fruits are to be garnered and preserved. And the\nother typical lesson is implied in the few words wherein the\ntermination of his first great missionary journey is narrated. \"When\nthey had spoken the word in Perga, they went down to Attalia; and\nthence they sailed to Antioch, from whence they had been committed to\nthe grace of God for the work which they had fulfilled.\"\n\n  [119] The Romans had a local police in Asia Minor, organised after\n  the manner of our own local police. The chief of the police in\n  each town was called the eirenarch, and was annually appointed by\n  the proconsul. The Romans never made the mistake of placing the\n  police in the hands of discontented subjects. See, on this curious\n  topic, Le Bas and Waddington's _Voyage Arch\u00e9ologique_, t. iii.,\n  pp. 27 and 255.\n\nAntioch was the centre whence Paul and Barnabas had issued forth to\npreach among the Gentiles, and to Antioch the apostles returned to\ncheer the Church with the narrative of their labours and successes,\nand to restore themselves and their exhausted powers with the\nsweetness of Christian fellowship, of brotherly love and kindness such\nas then flourished, as never before or since, amongst the children of\nmen. Mission work such as St. Paul did on this great tour is very\nexhausting, and it can always be best performed from a great centre.\nMission work, evangelistic work of any kind, if it is to be\nsuccessful, makes terrible demands on man's whole nature, physical,\nmental, spiritual, and bodily. The best restorative for that nature\nwhen so exhausted is conversation and intercourse with men of like\nminds, such as St. Paul found when, returning to Antioch, he cheered\nthe hearts and encouraged the hopes of the Church by narrating the\nwonders he had seen done and the triumphs he had seen won through the\npower of the Holy Ghost.[120]\n\n  [120] It has often been argued that the gift of tongues conferred\n  by the Holy Ghost at Pentecost was not necessary, as Greek was\n  universally spoken in Asia Minor. The use of the Lycaonian tongue\n  at Lystra, even though a Roman colony, is an important fact on the\n  other side. Mr. Ramsay, in his _Hist. Geog. of Asia Minor_, says;\n  \"Greek was not the popular language of the plateau, even in the\n  third century after Christ; the mass of the people spoke Lycaonian\n  and Galatian and Phrygian, though those who wrote books wrote\n  Greek and those who governed spoke Latin.\" Cf. pp. 98, 99 of Mr.\n  Ramsay's work, and p. 103 of the previous volume of this\n  commentary. This subject of the original languages of Asia Minor\n  and their survival to Christian times is an interesting and novel\n  subject of study, for which materials are gradually accumulating.\n  Thus the ancient Cappadocian language is discussed and a lexicon\n  of it compiled in a monograph which appeared in the _Museum_ of\n  the Evangelical school at Smyrna (1880-84), pp. 47-265. A large\n  number of inscriptions in the Phrygian language have also been\n  recovered. St. Paul, addressing the natives of the central plateau\n  of Asia Minor in Greek, would have been like an Englishman\n  preaching to the inhabitants of Wales or of Connemara in English.\n  I never heard of any powerful results thus following, save in the\n  case of Giraldus Cambrensis who tells us in his _Itinerary in\n  Wales_ of the melting character of his own Latin sermons upon the\n  Welsh people, though they did not understand a word of them. But\n  then Giraldus was, to say the least, an imaginative historian.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER X.\n\n_THE FIRST CHRISTIAN COUNCIL._\n\n     \"And certain men came down from Jud\u00e6a and taught the brethren,\n     saying, Except ye be circumcised after the custom of Moses, ye\n     cannot be saved. And when Paul and Barnabas had no small\n     dissension and questioning with them, the brethren appointed that\n     Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to\n     Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question....\n     And the apostles and the elders were gathered together to\n     consider of this matter.\"... James said, \"My judgment is, that\n     we trouble not them which from among the Gentiles turn to\n     God.\"--ACTS xv. 1, 2, 6, 19.\n\n\nI have headed this chapter, which treats of Acts xv. and its\nincidents, the First Christian Council, and that of set purpose and\nfollowing eminent ecclesiastical example. People often hear the canons\nof the great Councils quoted, the canons of Nice, Constantinople,\nEphesus, and Chalcedon, those great assemblies which threshed out the\ncontroversies concerning the person and nature of Jesus Christ and\ndetermined with marvellous precision the methods of expressing the\ntrue doctrine on these points, and they wonder where or how such\nancient documents have been preserved. Well, the answer is simple\nenough. If any reader, curious about the doings of these ancient\nassemblies, desires to study the decrees which proceeded from them,\nand even the debates which occurred in them, he need only ask in any\ngreat library for a history of the Councils, edited either by Hardouin\nor Labbe and Cossart, or, best and latest of all, by Mansi. They are\nnot externally very attractive volumes, being vast folios; nor are\nthey light or interesting reading. The industrious student will learn\nmuch from them, however; and he will find that they all begin the\nhistory of the Christian Councils by placing at the very head and\nforefront thereof the history and acts of the Council of Jerusalem\nheld about the year 48 or 49 A.D., wherein we find a typical example\nof a Church synod which set a fashion perpetuated throughout the ages\nin councils, conferences, and congresses down to the present time. Let\nus inquire then into the origin, the procedure, and the results of\nthis Assembly, sure that a council conducted under such auspices,\nreported by such a divinely guided historian, and dealing with such\nburning questions, must have important lessons for the Church of every\nage.[121]\n\n  [121] Mansi, A.D. 1692-1769, was Archbishop of Lucca. He was a\n  very learned man. Besides valuable editions of other men's works\n  he published his _Sarcorum Conciliorum Collectio_ in thirty-one\n  vols. folio, Florence and Venice, 1759-98. Mansi fixes the date of\n  the Jerusalem Synod either to 49 or 51 A.D. He counts it the third\n  synod, regarding as the first synod that held for the election of\n  Matthias, and as the second that assembled for the choice of the\n  deacons.\n\nI. The question, however, naturally meets us at the very threshold of\nour inquiry as to the date of this assembly, and the position which it\nholds in the process of development through which the Christian Church\nwas passing. The decision of this Synod at Jerusalem did not finally\nsettle the questions about the law and its obligatory character. The\nrelations between the Jewish and Gentile sections of the Church\ncontinued in some places, especially in the East, more or less\nunsettled well into the second century; for the Jews found it very\nhard indeed to surrender all their cherished privileges and ancient\nnational distinctions. But the decree of the Jerusalem Assembly,\nthough only a partial settlement, \"mere articles of peace,\" as it has\nbeen well called, to tide over a pressing local controversy, formed in\nSt. Paul's hands a powerful weapon whereby the freedom, the unity, and\nthe catholicity of the Church was finally achieved. Where, then, do we\nlocate this Synod in the story of St. Paul's labours?\n\nThe narrative of the Acts clearly enough places it between the first\nand the second missionary tours in Asia Minor undertaken by that\napostle. Paul and Barnabas laboured for the first time in Asia Minor\nprobably from the autumn of 44 till the spring or summer of 46. Their\nwork at that time must have extended over at least eighteen months or\nmore. Their journeys on foot must alone have taken up no small time.\nThey traversed from Perga, where they landed, to Derbe, whence they\nturned back upon their work, a space of at least two hundred and fifty\nmiles. They made lengthened sojourns in large cities like Antioch and\nIconium. They doubtless visited other places of which we are told\nnothing. Then, having completed their aggressive work, they retraced\ntheir steps along the same route, and began their work of\nconsolidation and Church organisation, which must have occupied on\ntheir return journey almost as much, if not more, time that they had\nspent in aggressive labour upon their earlier journey. When we\nconsider all this, and strive to realise the conditions of life and\ntravel in Asia Minor at that time, eighteen months will not appear too\nlong for the work which the apostles actually performed. After their\nreturn to Antioch they took up their abode in that city for a\nconsiderable period. \"They tarried no little time with the disciples\"\nare the exact words of St. Luke telling of their stay at Antioch.\nThen comes the tale of Jewish intrigues and insinuations, followed by\ndebates, strife, and oppositions concerning the universally binding\ncharacter of the Jewish law, terminating with the formal deputation\nfrom Antioch to Jerusalem. These latter events at Antioch may have\nhappened in a few weeks or months, or they may have extended over a\ncouple of years. But then, on the other hand, we note that St. Paul's\nsecond missionary journey began soon after the Synod of Jerusalem.\nThat journey was very lengthened. It led St. Paul right through Asia\nMinor, and thence into Europe, where he must have made a stay of at\nleast two years. He was at Corinth for eighteen months when Gallio\narrived as proconsul about the middle of the year 53, and previously\nto that he had worked his way through Macedonia and Greece. St. Paul\non his second tour must have been then at least four years absent from\nAntioch, which he must therefore have left about the year 49 or 50.\nThe Synod of Jerusalem must therefore be assigned to the year 48 A.D.\nor thereabouts; or, in other words, not quite twenty years after the\nCrucifixion.\n\nII. And now this leads us to consider the occasion of the Synod. The\ntime was not, as we have said, quite twenty years after the\nCrucifixion, yet that brief space had been quite sufficient to raise\nquestions undreamt of in earlier days. The Church was at first\ncompletely homogeneous, its members being all Jews; but the admission\nof the Gentiles and the action of St. Peter in the matter of Cornelius\nhad destroyed this characteristic so dear to the Jewish heart. The\nDivine revelation at Joppa to St. Peter and the gift of the Holy Ghost\nto Cornelius had for a time quenched the opposition to the admission\nof the Gentiles to baptism; but, as we have already said, the extreme\nJewish party were only silenced for a time, they were not destroyed.\nThey took up a new position. The case of Cornelius merely decided that\na man might be baptized without having been _previously_ circumcised;\nbut it decided nothing in their opinion about the _subsequent_\nnecessity for circumcision and admission into the ranks of the Jewish\nnation. Their view, in fact, was the same as of old. Salvation\nbelonged exclusively to the Jewish nation, and therefore if the\nconverted Gentiles were to be saved it must be by incorporation into\nthat body to which salvation alone belonged. The strict Jewish section\nof the Church insisted the more upon this point, because they saw\nrising up in the Church of Antioch, and elsewhere among the Churches\nof Syria and Cilicia, a grave social danger threatening the existence\nof their nation as a separate people. There were just then two classes\nof disciples in these Churches. There were disciples who lived after\nthe Jewish fashion,--abstaining from unlawful foods, using food slain\nby Jewish butchers, and scrupulous in washings and lustrations; and\nthere were Gentiles who lived after the Gentile fashion, and in\nespecial ate pork and things strangled. The strict Jews knew right\nwell the tendency of a majority to swallow up a minority, specially\nwhen they were all members of the same religious community, enjoying\nthe same privileges and partakers of the same hope. A majority does\nnot indeed necessarily absorb a minority. Roman Catholicism is the\nreligion of the majority in Ireland and France; yet it has not\nabsorbed the small Protestant minority. The adherents of Judaism were\nscattered in St. Paul's day all over the world, yet Paganism had not\nswallowed them up. In these cases, however, the minority have been\ncompletely separated from the majority by a middle wall, a barrier of\nrigid discipline, and of strong, yea, even violent religious\nrepugnance. But the prospect now before the strict Jewish party was\nquite different. In the Syrian Church as they beheld it growing up Jew\nand Gentile would be closely linked together, professing the same\nfaith, saying the same prayers, joining in the same sacraments,\nworshipping in the same buildings. All the advantages, too, would be\non the side of the Gentile. He was freed from the troublesome\nrestrictions--the more troublesome because so petty and minute--of the\nLevitical Law. He could eat what he liked, and join in social converse\nand general life without hesitation or fear. In a short time a Jewish\ndisciple would come to ask himself, What do I gain by all these\nobservances, this yoke of ordinances, which neither we nor our fathers\nhave been able perfectly to bear? If a Gentile disciple can be saved\nwithout them, why should I trouble myself with them? The Jewish party\nsaw clearly enough that toleration of the presence of the Gentiles in\nthe Church and their admission to full communion and complete\nChristian privileges simply involved the certain overthrow of Jewish\ncustoms, Jewish privileges, and Jewish national expectations. They saw\nthat it was a case of war to the death, one party or the other must\nconquer, and therefore in self-defence they raised the cry, \"Unless\nthe Gentile converts be circumcised after the manner of Moses they\ncannot be saved.\"\n\nAntioch was recognised at Jerusalem as the centre of Gentile\nChristianity. Certain, therefore, of the zealous, Judaising disciples\nof Jerusalem repaired to Antioch, joined the Church, and secretly\nproceeded to organise opposition to the dominant practice, using for\nthat purpose all the authority connected with the name of James the\nLord's brother, who presided over the Mother Church of the Holy City.\n\nNow let us see what position St. Paul took up with respect to these\n\"false brethren privily brought in, who came in privily to spy out the\nliberty he enjoyed in Christ Jesus.\" Paul and Barnabas both set\nthemselves undauntedly to fight against such teaching. They had seen\nand known the spiritual life which flourished free from all Jewish\nobservances in the Church of the Gentiles. They had seen the gospel\nbringing forth the fruits of purity and faith, of joy and peace in the\nHoly Ghost; they knew that these things prepare the soul for the\nbeatific vision of God, and confer a present salvation here below; and\nthey could not tolerate the idea that a Jewish ceremony was necessary\nover and above the life which Christ confers if men are to gain final\nsalvation.\n\nHere, perhaps, is the proper place to set forth St. Paul's view of\ncircumcision and of all external Jewish ordinances, as we gather it\nfrom a broad review of his writings. St. Paul vigorously opposed all\nthose who taught the _necessity_ of Jewish rites so far as salvation\nis concerned. This is evident from this chapter and from the Epistle\nto the Galatians. But, on the other hand, St. Paul had not the\nslightest objection to men observing the law and submitting to\ncircumcision, if they only realised that these things were mere\nnational customs and observed them as national customs, and even as\nreligious rites, but not as _necessary_ religious rites. If men took a\nright view of circumcision, St. Paul had not the slightest objection\nto it. It was not to circumcision St. Paul objected, but to the\nextreme stress laid upon it, the intolerant views connected with it.\nCircumcision as a voluntary practice, an interesting historical relic\nof ancient ideas and customs, he never rejected,--nay, further, he\neven practised it, as we shall see in the case of Timothy;\ncircumcision as a compulsory practice binding upon all men St. Paul\nutterly abhorred. We may, perhaps, draw an illustration from a modern\nChurch in this respect. The Coptic and Abyssinian Churches retain the\nancient Jewish practice of circumcision. These Churches date back to\nthe earliest Christian times, and retain doubtless in this respect the\npractice of the primitive Christian Church. The Copts circumcise their\nchildren on the eighth day and before they are baptized; but they\nregard this rite as a mere national custom, and treat it as absolutely\ndevoid of any religious meaning, significance, or necessity. St. Paul\nwould have had no objection to circumcision in this aspect any more\nthan he would have objected to a Turk for wearing a fez, or a Chinaman\nfor wearing a pigtail, or a Hindoo for wearing a turban. National\ncustoms as such were things absolutely indifferent in his view. But if\nTurkish or Chinese Christians were to insist upon all men wearing\ntheir peculiar dress and observing their peculiar national customs as\nbeing things absolutely necessary to salvation, St. Paul, were he\nalive, would denounce and oppose them as vigorously as he did the\nJudaisers of his own day.[122]\n\n  [122] We miss the true standpoint whence to judge St. Paul's\n  conduct aright, when we think as people generally do that St. Paul\n  opposed circumcision _per se_. He simply opposed it when connected\n  with wrong ideas. The Judaising disciples viewed the Jewish nation\n  as the covenant people to whom alone salvation belonged. St. Paul\n  viewed the Church as the body to whom alone salvation belonged,\n  admission to which was gained by baptism. If any Christian holding\n  St. Paul's view chose to add any private ceremony such as\n  circumcision in order to gain admission into any human society,\n  St. Paul would not have opposed him any more than, if he were now\n  alive, he would have opposed or denounced a Christian man because\n  he became a Freemason, or an Orangeman, or joined the Oddfellows,\n  observing the special ceremonies appointed for admission. The\n  nearest approach in later times to the position taken up by the\n  strict Jewish party will be found in the history of medi\u00e6val\n  monasticism. The Cistercians and subsequently the Mendicant Orders\n  endeavoured to persuade every person that every one who wished to\n  be saved must join their Orders and assume their peculiar dress.\n  On this account Fitz Ralph, Archbishop of Armagh, and his friend\n  Wickliffe denounced them most vigorously. I have given some\n  amusing instances of the opposition to the Cistercians evoked two\n  centuries earlier by similar claims in _Ireland and the\n  Anglo-Norman Church_, p. 42.\n\nThis is the explanation of St. Paul's own conduct. Some have regarded\nhim as at times inconsistent with his own principles with regard to\nthe law of Moses. And yet if men will but look closer and think more\ndeeply, they will see that St. Paul never violated the rules which he\nhad imposed upon himself. He refused to circumcise Titus, for\ninstance, because the Judaising party at Jerusalem were insisting upon\nthe absolute necessity of circumcising the Gentiles if they were to be\nsaved. Had St. Paul consented to the circumcision of Titus, he would\nhave been yielding assent, or seeming to yield assent, to their\ncontention (see Gal. ii. 3). He circumcised Timothy at Lystra because\nof the Jews in that neighbourhood; not indeed because they thought it\nnecessary to salvation that an uncircumcised man should be so treated,\nbut because they knew that his mother was a Jewess, and the principle\nof the Jewish law, and of the Roman law too, was that a man's\nnationality and status followed that of his mother, not that of his\nfather, so that the son of a Jewess must be incorporated with Israel.\nTimothy was circumcised in obedience to national law and custom not\nupon any compromise of religious principle. St. Paul himself made a\nvow and cut off his hair and offered sacrifices in the Temple as being\nthe national customs of a Jew. These were things in themselves utterly\nmeaningless and indifferent; but they pleased other people. They cost\nhim a little time and trouble; but they helped on the great work he\nhad in hand, and tended to make his opponents more willing to listen\nto him. St. Paul, therefore, with his great large mind, willing to\nplease others for their good to edification, gratified them by doing\nwhat they thought became a Jew with a true national spirit beating\nwithin his breast. Mere externals mattered nothing in St. Paul's\nestimation. He would wear any vestments, or take any position, or use\nany ceremony, esteeming them all things indifferent, provided only\nthey conciliated human prejudices and cleared difficulties out of the\nway of the truth. But if men insisted upon them as things necessary,\nthen he opposed with all his might. This is the golden thread which\nwill rule our footsteps wandering amid the mazes of this earliest\nChristian controversy. It will amply vindicate St. Paul's consistency,\nand show that he never violated the principles he had laid down for\nhis own guidance. Had the spirit of St. Paul animated the Church of\nsucceeding ages, how many a controversy and division would have been\nthereby escaped![123]\n\n  [123] I have often noted what I consider an unfair use of this\n  controversy and of St. Paul's position in it. Men in the heat of\n  argument have represented the High Church, or rather the so-called\n  Ritualists in the Church of England, as answering to the Judaisers\n  of St. Paul's day. There seems to me, however, no parallel between\n  them. The Judaisers contended for a certain ceremony as _necessary\n  to salvation_. I never heard of any Ritualist who considered any\n  of his dearest practices in this light. He may view them as\n  lawful, as edifying, and very necessary for the instruction of the\n  people; but I have never heard of their most extreme adherents\n  contending for their necessity to salvation. It would be just as\n  true to identify their opponents with the Judaisers, because they\n  have insisted, and often with great vigour, upon the use of the\n  black gown in the pulpit. I have known extreme men to take up the\n  position that the gospel could not be preached where the black\n  gown was not used. Any one who will take the trouble to read the\n  _Life of Bishop Blomfield_ of London, edited by his son, vol. ii.,\n  will see some striking illustrations of the extent to which such\n  views were pushed half a century ago.\n\nIII. Now let us turn our attention to the actual history of the\ncontroversy and strife which raged at Antioch and Jerusalem, and\nendeavour to read the lessons the sacred narrative teaches. What a\nstriking picture of early Church life is here presented! How full of\nteaching, of comfort, and of warning! How corrective of the false\nnotions we are apt to cherish of the state of the primitive Church!\nThere we behold the Church of Antioch rejoicing one day in the tidings\nof a gospel free to the world, and on the next day torn with\ndissension as to the points and qualifications necessary to salvation.\nFor we must observe that the discussion started at Antioch touched no\nsecondary question, and dealt with no mere point of ritual. It was a\nfundamental question which troubled the Church. And yet that Church\nhad apostles and teachers abiding in it who could work miracles and\nspeak with tongues, and who received from time to time direct\nrevelations from heaven, and were endowed with the extraordinary\npresence of the Holy Ghost. Yet there it was that controversy with all\nits troubles raised its head, and \"Paul and Barnabas had no small\ndissension\" with their opponents. What a necessary warning for every\nage, and specially for our own, we behold in this narrative! Has not\nthis sacred Book a message in this passage specially applicable to\nour own time? A great Romeward movement has within the last seventy\nyears, more powerful in the earlier portion of that period than in the\nlatter, extended itself over Europe. English people think that they\nhave themselves been the only persons who have experienced it. But\nthis is a great mistake. Germany forty and fifty years ago felt it\nalso to a large extent. And what was the great predisposing cause of\nthat tendency? Men had simply become tired of the perpetual\ncontroversies which raged within the churches and communions outside\nthe sway of Rome. They longed for the perpetual peace and rest which\nseemed to them to exist within the Papal domains, and they therefore\nflung themselves headlong into the arms of a Church which promised\nthem relief from the exercise of that private judgment and personal\nresponsibility which had become for them a crushing burden too heavy\nto be borne. And yet they forgot several things, the sudden discovery\nof which has sent many of these intellectual and spiritual cowards in\nvarious directions, some back to their original homes, some far away\ninto the regions of scepticism and spiritual darkness. They forgot,\nfor instance, to inquire how far the charmer who was alluring them\nfrom the land of their nativity by specious promises could satisfy the\nhopes she was raising. They hoped to get rid of dissension and\ncontroversy; but did they? When they had left their childhood's home\nand their father's house and sought the house of the stranger, did\nthey find there halcyon peace? Nay, rather did they not find there as\nbitter strife, nay, far more bitter strife, on questions like the\nImmaculate Conception and Papal Infallibility than ever raged at home?\nDid they not find, and do they not find still, that no man and no\nsociety can put a hook in the jaws of that Leviathan, the right of\nprivate judgment, which none can tame or restrain, and which asserts\nitself still in the Roman Communion as vigorously as ever even now\nwhen the decree of Papal infallibility has elevated that dogma into\nthe rank of those necessary to salvation? Else whence come those\ndissensions and discussions between minimisers and maximisers of that\ndecree? How is it that no two doctors or theologians will give\nprecisely the same explanation of it, and that, as we in Ireland have\nseen, every curate fresh from Maynooth claims to be able to express\nhis own private judgment and determination whether any special Papal\ndecree or bull is binding or not?[124] This is one important point\nforgotten by those who have sought the Roman Communion because of its\npromises of freedom from controversy. They forgot to ask, Can these\npromises be fulfilled? And many of them, in the perpetual unrest and\nstrife in which they have found themselves involved as much in their\nnew home as in their old, have proved the specious hopes held out to\nbe the veriest mirage of the Sahara desert. But this was not the only\nomission of which such persons were guilty. They forgot that, suppose\nthe Roman Church could fulfil its promises and prove a religious home\nof perfect peace and freedom from diverging opinions, it would in\nthat case have been very unlike the primitive Church. The Church of\nAntioch or of Jerusalem, enjoying the ministry of Peter and John and\nJames and Paul,--these pillar-men, as St. Paul calls some of\nthem,--was much more like the Church of England of fifty years ago\nthan any society which offered perfect freedom from theological\nstrife; for the Churches of ancient times in their earliest and purest\ndays were swept by the winds of controversy and tossed by the tempests\nof intellectual and religious inquiry just like the Church of England,\nand they took exactly the same measures for the safety of the souls\nentrusted to them as she did. They depended upon the power of free\ndebate, of unlimited discussion, of earnest prayer, of Christian\ncharity to carry them on till they reached that haven of rest where\nevery doubt and question shall be perfectly solved in the light of the\nunveiled vision of God.\n\n  [124] The conduct of the Romish clergy in Ireland when the Papal\n  rescripts were issued concerning the Parnell tribute, boycotting,\n  and the Plan of the Campaign was an amusing commentary on their\n  view of Papal Infallibility. Any one who will take the trouble to\n  search the columns of the _Freeman's Journal_ at that time will\n  see how freely curates even criticised the Papal infallible\n  utterances. One of them remarked to me at the time, \"I think we\n  have taught the old gentleman a lesson he will not forget,\"\n  referring to the Papal rescripts. Infallibility is very good so\n  long as it is with us, but when against us it becomes very\n  fallible. Such is clearly the view of Irish Roman Catholics.\n\nThen, again, we learn another important lesson from a consideration of\nthe persons who raised the trouble at Antioch. The opening words of\nthe fifteenth chapter thus describes the authors of it: \"Certain men\ncame down from Jud\u00e6a.\" It is just the same with the persons who a\nshort time after compelled St. Peter to stagger in his course at the\nsame Antioch: \"When certain came from James, then St. Peter separated\nhimself, fearing them of the circumcision\" (Gal. ii. 12). Certain\nbigots, that is, of the Jewish party, came, pretending to teach with\nthe authority of the Mother Church, and secretly disturbing weak\nminds. But they were only pretenders, as the apostolic Epistle\nexpressly tells us: \"Forasmuch as we have heard, that certain which\nwent out from us have troubled you with words, subverting your souls;\n... to whom we gave no such commandment.\" These religious agitators,\nwith their narrow views about life and ritual, displayed the\ncharacteristics of like-minded men ever since. They secretly crept\ninto the Church. There was a want of manly honesty about them. Their\npettiness of vision and of thought affected their whole nature, their\nentire conduct. They loved the by-ways of intrigue and fraud, and\ntherefore they hesitated not to claim an authority which they had\nnever received, invoking apostolic names on behalf of a doctrine which\nthe apostles had never sanctioned. The characteristics thus displayed\nby these Judaisers have ever been seen in their legitimate descendants\nin every church and society, East and West alike. Narrowness of mind,\npettiness and intolerance in thought, have ever brought their own\npenalty with them and have ever been connected with the same want of\nmoral uprightness. The miserable conception, the wretched fragment of\ntruth upon which such men seize, elevating it out of its due place and\nrank, seems to destroy their sense of proportion, and leads them to\nthink it worth any lie which they may tell, any breach of Christian\ncharity of which they may be guilty, any sacrifice of truth and\nhonesty which they may make on behalf of their beloved idol. The\nJudaisers misrepresented religious truth, and in doing so they\nmisrepresented themselves, and sacrificed the great interests of moral\ntruth in order that they might gain their ends.\n\nIV. The distractions and controversies of Antioch were overruled,\nhowever, by the Divine providence to the greater glory of God. As the\nJudaisers continually appealed to the authority of the Church at\nJerusalem, the brethren at Antioch determined to send to that body and\nask the opinion of the apostles and elders upon this question. They\ntherefore despatched \"Paul and Barnabas and certain other of them,\"\namong whom was Titus, an uncircumcised Gentile convert, as a\ndeputation to represent their own views. When they came to Jerusalem\nthe Antiochene deputies held a series of private conferences with the\nleading men of Jerusalem. This we learn, not from the Acts of the\nApostles, but from St. Paul's independent narrative in Galatians ii.,\nidentifying as we do the visit there recorded with the visit narrated\nin Acts xv.[125] St. Paul here exhibits all that tact and prudence we\never trace in his character. He did not depend solely upon his own\nauthority, his reputation, his success. He felt within himself the\nconscious guidance of the Divine Spirit aiding and guiding a\nsingularly clear and powerful mind. Yet he disdained no legitimate\nprecaution. He knew that the presence and guidance of the Spirit does\nnot absolve a man anxious for the truth from using all the means in\nhis power to ensure its success. He recognised that the truth, though\nit must finally triumph, might be eclipsed or defeated for a time\nthrough man's neglect and carelessness; and therefore he engaged in a\nseries of private conferences, explaining difficulties, conciliating\nthe support, and gaining the assistance of the most influential\nmembers of the Church, including, of course, \"James, Cephas, and John,\nwho were reputed to be pillars.\"\n\n  [125] The reader should consult what Mr. Findlay has written on\n  this point in his _Galatians_, chs. vi. and vii., pp. 92-112.\n\nIs there not something very modern in the glimpse thus given us of the\nnegotiations and private meetings which preceded the formal meeting of\nthe Apostolic Council? Some persons may think that the presence and\npower of the Holy Ghost must have superseded all such human\narrangements and forethought. But the simple testimony of the Bible\ndispels at once all such objections, and shows us that as the\nprimitive Church was just like the modern Church, torn with\ndissension, swept with the winds and storms of controversy, so too the\ndivinely guided and inspired leaders of the Church then took precisely\nthe same human means to attain their ends and carry out their views of\ntruth as now find place in the meetings of synods and convocations and\nparliaments of the present time. The presence of the Holy Ghost did\nnot dispense with the necessity of human exertions in the days of the\napostles; and surely we may, on the other hand, believe that similar\nhuman exertions in our time may be quite consonant with the presence\nof the Spirit in our modern assemblies, overruling and guiding human\nplans and intrigues to the honour of God and the blessing of man.\nAfter these private conferences the apostles and elders came together\nto consider the difficult subject laid before them. And now many\nquestions rise up which we can only very briefly consider. The\ncomposition of this Synod is one important point. Who sat in it, and\nwho debated there? It is quite clear, from the text of the Acts, as to\nthe persons who were _present_ at this Synod. The sixth verse says,\n\"The apostles and the elders were gathered together to consider of\nthis matter\"; the twelfth verse tells us that \"all the multitude kept\nsilence, and hearkened unto Barnabas and Paul rehearsing what signs\nand wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles by them\"; in the\ntwenty-second verse we read, \"Then it seemed good to the apostles and\nthe elders, with the whole Church, to choose men out of their company,\nand to send them to Antioch\"; while, finally, in the twenty-third\nverse we read the superscription of the final decree of the Council,\nwhich ran thus, \"The apostles and the elder brethren unto the brethren\nwhich are of the Gentiles in Antioch and Syria and Cilicia.\" It seems\nto me that any plain man reading these verses would come to the\nconclusion that the whole multitude, the great body of the Church in\nJerusalem, were present and took part in this assembly.[126] A great\nbattle indeed has raged round the words of the Authorized Version of\nthe twenty-third verse, \"The apostles and elders and brethren send\ngreeting unto the brethren which are of the Gentiles,\" which are\notherwise rendered in the Revised Version. The presence or the absence\nof the \"and\" between elders and brethren has formed the battle-ground\nbetween two parties, the one upholding, the other opposing the right\nof the laity to take part in Church synods and councils.\n\nUpon a broad review of the whole affair this Apostolic Assembly seems\nto me to have an important bearing upon this point. There are various\nviews involved. Some persons think that none but bishops should take\npart in Church synods; others think that none but clergymen, spiritual\npersons, in the technical and legal sense of the word \"spiritual,\"\nshould enter these assemblies, specially when treating of questions\ntouching doctrine and discipline.[127] Looking at the subject from\nthe standpoint of the Apostolic Council, we cannot agree with either\nparty. We are certainly told of the speeches of four individuals\nmerely--Paul, Barnabas, Peter, and James--to whom may be conceded the\nposition of bishops, and even more. But, then, it is evident that the\nwhole multitude of the Church was present at this Synod, and took an\nactive part in it. We are expressly told (vv. 4 and 5): \"When they\nwere come to Jerusalem, they were received of the Church and the\napostles and the elders.... But there rose up certain of the sect of\nthe Pharisees who believed, saying, It is needful to circumcise them.\"\nThis indeed happened at the first meeting of the Church held to\nreceive the Antiochene deputation when they arrived. But there does\nnot seem to have been any difference between the constitution and\nauthority of the first and second meetings. Both were what we should\ncall Ecclesiastical Assemblies. Laymen joined in the discussions of\nthe first, and doubtless laymen joined in the discussions and much\nquestioning of the second.\n\n  [126] The fifth verse states that after Paul had rehearsed the\n  wonders done among the Gentiles certain of the sect of the\n  Pharisees rose up saying, \"It is needful to circumcise them.\" Some\n  maintain that this was in a missionary meeting before the Synod,\n  but that this is no proof that such laymen, if they were laymen,\n  were allowed to raise the question in the Synod. Of course the\n  next verse states that \"the apostles and elders\" came together to\n  consider this matter; but it also states that there was much\n  questioning before St. Peter opened his mouth to speak on the\n  subject. Surely the much questioning must have been on the part of\n  the \"certain of the sect of the Pharisees who believed\"!\n\n  [127] It is a curious thing that three parties otherwise very much\n  opposed unite in this view: the extreme High Church party in\n  England, the Roman Catholic Church, and the Wesleyan Conference,\n  which latter body restrains all questions of doctrine and\n  discipline to ministers alone as rigorously as either of the\n  others. The Presbyterian Assemblies are in many respects open to\n  the same charge, the elders who represent the laity being ordained\n  by imposition of hands as truly as the ministers and signing the\n  same doctrinal tests. I cannot say how far this may be true of the\n  Established Assembly in Scotland, but as far as the Free Church\n  and the Irish General Assemblies are concerned, I am bold to say\n  that no unordained layman sits in them. I was much amused some\n  time ago reading the charge of a Wesleyan President of Conference\n  to the newly ordained ministers of the Irish Conference, when he\n  bid them remember that Christ had entrusted to them alone the care\n  of all questions touching doctrine and discipline. See for the\n  High Anglican theory, which is just the same as the Wesleyan\n  President's, Joyce's _Acts of the Church_, A.D. 1531-1885, p. 12.\n\nThere is not indeed a hint which would lead us to conclude that the\nPharisees, who rose up and argued on behalf of the binding character\nof the law of Moses, held any spiritual office whatsoever. So far as\nthe sacred text puts it, they may have been laymen pure and simple,\nsuch as were the ordinary Pharisees. I cannot, indeed, see how any\nmember of the Church of England can consistently maintain either from\nHoly Scripture, ancient ecclesiastical history, or the history of his\nown Church, that laymen are quite shut out from councils debating\nquestions touching Christian faith, and that their consideration must\nbe limited to bishops, or at least clergymen alone. The Apostolic\nChurch seems to have admitted the freest discussion. The General\nCouncils most certainly tolerated very considerable lay interference.\nThe Emperor Constantine, though not even baptized, obtruded much of\nhis presence and exercised much of his influence upon the great Nicene\nCouncil. Why even down to the sixteenth century, till the Tridentine\nCouncil, the ambassadors of the great Christian Powers of Europe sat\nin Church synods as representing the laity; and it was only in the\nCouncil of the Vatican, which met in 1870, that even the Roman\nCatholic Church formally denied the right of the people to exercise a\ncertain influence in the determination of questions touching faith and\ndiscipline by the exclusion of the ambassadors who had in every\nprevious council held a certain defined place. While again, when we\ncome to the history of the Church of England, we find that the\ncelebrated Hooker, the vindicator of its Church polity, expressly\ndefended the royal supremacy as exercised within that Church on the\nground that the king represented by delegation the vast body of the\nlaity, who through him exercised a real influence upon all questions,\nwhether of doctrine or discipline. I feel a personal interest in this\nquestion, because one of the charges most freely hurled against the\nChurch of Ireland is this, that she has admitted laymen to discussions\nand votes concerning such questions. I cannot see how consistently\nwith her past history as an established Church she could have done\notherwise. I cannot see how the Church of England, if she comes in the\nfuture to be disestablished, can do otherwise. That Church has always\nadmitted a vast amount of lay interference, even prior to the\nReformation, and still more since that important event. Extreme men\nmay scoff at those branches of their own Communion which have admitted\nlaymen to vote in Church synods upon all questions whatsoever; but\nthey forget when doing so that statements and decrees most dear to\nthemselves bear manifest traces of far more extreme lay intervention.\nThe Ornaments Rubric, standing before the order for Morning Prayer, is\na striking evidence of this. It is dear to the hearts of many, because\nit orders the use of eucharistic vestments and the preservation of the\nchancels in the ancient style; but on what grounds does it do so? Let\nthe precise words of the rubric be the answer: \"Here it is to be noted\nthat such ornaments of the Church and of the ministers thereof, at all\ntimes of their ministration, shall be retained, and be in use, as were\nin this Church of England, _by the authority of Parliament_, in the\nsecond year of the reign of King Edward the Sixth.\" Objections to the\ndeterminations, rules, and canons of the Irish Church Synod might have\nsome weight did they profess, as this rubric does, to have been\nordained and imposed by the order of laymen alone. But when the\nbishops of a Church have an independent vote, the clergy an\nindependent vote, the free and independent vote of the laity is\ntotally powerless by itself to introduce any novelty, and is only\npowerful to prevent change in the ancient order. I do not feel bound\nto defend some ill-judged expressions and foolish speeches which some\nlay representatives may have made in the Irish Church Synod as again\nno member of the Church of England need trouble himself to defend some\nrash speeches made in Parliament on Church topics. In the first\nmoments of unaccustomed freedom Irish laymen did and said some rash\nthings, and, overawing the clergy by their fierce expressions, may\nhave caused the introduction of some hasty and ill-advised measures.\nBut sure I am that every sincere member of the Church to which I\nbelong will agree that the admission of the lay representatives to a\nfree discussion and free vote upon every topic has had a marvellous\ninfluence in broadening their conceptions of Scripture truth and\ndeepening their affections and attachment to their Mother Church which\nhas treated and trusted them thus generously.[128]\n\n  [128] I may perhaps be allowed to refer to a little tract of my\n  own on this topic published at the time, on \"The Work of the Laity\n  in the Church of Ireland,\" as embodying the principles of Hooker\n  applied to modern times and needs.\n\nV. The proceedings of the Apostolic Synod next demand our attention.\nThe account which has been handed down is doubtless a mere outline of\nwhat actually happened. We are not told anything concerning the\nopening of the Assembly or how the discussion was begun. St. Luke was\nintent merely on setting forth the main gist of affairs, and therefore\nhe reports but two speeches and tells of two others. Some Christian\nPharisee having put forward his objections to the position occupied by\nthe Gentile converts, St. Peter arose, as was natural, he having been\nthe person through whose action the present discussion and trouble had\noriginated. St. Peter's speech is marked on this occasion by the same\nwant of assumption of any higher authority than belonged to his\nbrethren which we have noted before when objections were taken to his\ndealings with Cornelius. His speech claims nothing for himself, does\nnot even quote the Scriptures of the Old Testament, but simply repeats\nin a concise shape the story of the conversion of Cornelius, points\nout that God put no difference between Jew and Gentile, suggesting\nthat if God had put no difference between them why should man dare to\ndo so, and then ends with proclaiming the great doctrine of grace that\nmen, whether Jews or Gentiles, are saved through faith in Christ\nalone, which purifies their hearts and lives. After Peter's speech\nthere arose James the Lord's brother, who from ancient times has been\nregarded as the first bishop of Jerusalem, and who most certainly,\nfrom the various references to him both here and elsewhere in the Acts\n(chs. xii. 17, xxi. 18) and in the Epistle to the Galatians, seems to\nhave occupied the supreme place in that Church. James was a striking\nfigure. There is a long account of him left us by Hegesippus, a very\nancient Church historian, who bordered on apostolic times, and now\npreserved for us in the _Ecclesiastical History_ of Eusebius, ii., 23.\nThere he is described as an ascetic and a Nazarite, like John the\nBaptist, from his earliest childhood. \"He drank neither wine nor\nfermented liquors, and abstained from animal food. A razor never came\nupon his head, he never anointed with oil, and never used the bath. He\nalone was allowed to enter the sanctuary. He never wore woollen, but\nlinen garments. He was in the habit of entering the Temple alone, and\nwas often found upon his bended knees, and interceding for the\nforgiveness of the people; so that his knees became as hard as\ncamels', in consequence of his habitual supplication and kneeling\nbefore God. And indeed on account of his exceeding great piety he was\ncalled the Just and Oblias, which signifies the Rampart of the\nPeople.\" This description is the explanation of the power and\nauthority of James the Just in the Apostolic Assembly. He was a strict\nlegalist himself. He desired no freedom for his own share, but\nrejoiced in observances and restrictions far beyond the common lot of\nthe Jews. When such a man pronounced against the attempt made to\nimpose circumcision and the law as a necessary condition of salvation,\nthe Judaisers must have felt that their cause was lost. St. James\nexpressed his views in no uncertain terms. He begins by referring to\nSt. Peter's speech and the conversion of Cornelius. He then proceeds\nto show how the prophets foretold the ingathering of the Gentiles,\nquoting a passage (Amos ix. 11, 12) which the Jewish expositors\nthemselves applied to the Messiah. His method of Scriptural\ninterpretation is exactly the same as that of St. Paul and St. Peter.\nIt is very different from ours, but it was the universal method of his\nday; and when we wish to arrive at the meaning of the Scriptures, or\nfor that matter of any work, we ought to strive and place ourselves at\nthe standpoint and amid the circumstances of the writers and actors.\nThe prophet Amos speaks of the tabernacle of David as fallen down. The\nrebuilding of it is then foretold, and James sees in the conversion of\nthe Gentiles this predicted rebuilding. He then pronounces in the most\ndecided language against \"troubling those who from among the Gentiles\nare turned to God\" in the matter of legal observances, laying down at\nthe same time the concessions which should be demanded from the\nGentiles so as not to cause offence to their Jewish brethren. The\nsentence thus authoritatively pronounced by the strictest Jewish\nChristian was naturally adopted by the Apostolic Synod, and they wrote\na letter to the disciples in Syria and Cilicia embodying their\ndecision, which for a time settled the controversy which had been\nraised. This epistle begins by disclaiming utterly and at once the\nagitators who had gone forth to Antioch and had raised the\ndisturbances. It declared that circumcision was unnecessary for the\nGentile converts. This was the great point upon which St. Paul was\nmost anxious. He had no objection, as we have already said, to the\nJews observing their legal rites and ceremonies, but he was totally\nopposed to the Gentiles coming under any such rule as a thing\nnecessary to salvation. The epistle then proceeds to lay down certain\nconcessions which the Gentiles should in turn make. They should\nabstain from meats offered in sacrifice unto idols, from blood, from\nthings strangled, and from fornication; all of them points upon which\nthe public opinion of the Gentiles laid no stress, but which were most\nabhorrent to a true Jew. The decrees of the Synod of Jerusalem, as the\ninspired historian expressly terms them in ch. xvi. 4, were mere\ntemporary expedients. They determined indeed one important question,\nthat circumcision should not be imposed on the Gentiles--that Judaism,\nin fact, was not in and by itself a saving dispensation; but left\nunsolved many other questions, even touching this very subject of\ncircumcision and the Jewish law, which had afterwards to be debated\nand threshed out, as St. Paul's Epistle to the Galatians proves. But,\nturning our eyes from the obsolete controversy which evoked the\nApostolic Epistle, and viewing the subject from a wider and a modern\nstandpoint, we may say that the decrees of this primitive Synod\nnarrated in this typical history bestow their sanction upon the great\nprinciples of prudence, wisdom, and growth in the Divine life and in\nChurch work. It was with the apostles themselves as with the Church\never since. Apostles even must not make haste, but must be contented\nto wait upon the developments of God's providence. Perfection is an\nexcellent thing, but then perfection cannot be attained at once. Here\na little and there a little is the Divine law under the New as under\nthe Old Dispensation. Truth is the fairest and most excellent of all\npossessions, but the advocates of truth must not expect it to be\ngrasped in all its bearings by all sorts and conditions of men at one\nand the same time. They must be content, as St. Paul was, if one step\nbe taken at a time; if progress be in the right and not in the wrong\ndirection; and must be willing to concede much to the feelings and\nlong-descended prejudices of short-sighted human nature.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XI.\n\n_APOSTOLIC QUARRELS AND THE SECOND TOUR._\n\n     \"And after some days Paul said unto Barnabas, Let us return now\n     and visit the brethren in every city wherein we proclaimed the\n     word of the Lord, and see how they fare.... And there arose a\n     sharp contention between them, so that they parted asunder one\n     from the other.\"--ACTS xv. 36, 39.\n\n     \"And they went through the region of Phrygia and Galatia, having\n     been forbidden of the Holy Ghost to speak the word in Asia....\n     They came down to Troas. And a vision appeared to Paul in the\n     night; There was a man of Macedonia standing, beseeching him, and\n     saying, Come over into Macedonia and help us.\"--ACTS xvi. 6, 8,\n     9.\n\n\nThe second missionary tour of St. Paul now claims our attention,\nspecially because it involves the first proclamation of Christianity\nby an apostle within the boundaries of Europe. The course of the\nnarrative up to this will show that any Christian effort in Europe by\nan apostle, St. Peter or any one else prior to St. Paul's work, was\nalmost impossible. To the Twelve and to men like-minded with them, it\nmust have seemed a daring innovation to bring the gospel message\ndirectly to bear upon the masses of Gentile paganism. Men of\nconservative minds like the Twelve doubtless restrained their own\nefforts up to the time of St. Paul's second tour within the bounds of\nIsrael according to the flesh in Palestine and the neighbouring lands,\nfinding there an ample field upon which to exercise their diligence.\nAnd then when we turn to St. Paul and St. Barnabas, who had dared to\nrealise the freeness and fulness of the gospel message, we shall see\nthat the Syrian Antioch and Syria itself and Asia Minor had hitherto\nafforded to them scope quite sufficient to engage their utmost\nattention. A few moments' reflection upon the circumstances of the\nprimitive Christian Church and the developments through which\nApostolic Christianity passed are quite sufficient to dispel all such\nfabulous incrustations upon the original record as those involved in\nSt. Peter's episcopate at Antioch or his lengthened rule over the\nChurch at Rome. If the latter story was to be accepted, St. Peter must\nhave been Bishop of Rome long before a mission was despatched to the\nGentiles from Antioch, if not even before the vision was seen at Joppa\nby St. Peter when the admission of the Gentiles to the Church was\nfirst authorised under any terms whatsoever.[129] In fact, it would be\nimpossible to fit the actions of St. Peter into any scheme whatsoever,\nif we bring him to Rome and make him bishop there for twenty-five\nyears beginning at the year 42, the time usually assigned by Roman\nCatholic historians. It is hard enough to frame a hypothetical scheme,\nwhich will find a due and fitting place for the various recorded\nactions of St. Peter, quite apart from any supposed Roman episcopate\nlasting over such an extended period. St. Peter and St. Paul had, for\ninstance, a dispute at Antioch of which we read much in the second\nchapter of the Galatian Epistle. Where shall we fix that dispute? Some\nplace it during the interval between the Synod at Jerusalem and the\nsecond missionary tour of which we now propose to treat. Others place\nit at the conclusion of that tour, when St. Paul was resting at\nAntioch for a little after the work of that second journey. As we are\nnot writing the life of St. Paul, but simply commenting upon the\nnarratives of his labours as told in the Acts, we must be content to\nrefer to the Lives of St. Paul by Conybeare and Howson, and Archdeacon\nFarrar, and to Bishop Lightfoot's _Galatians_, all of whom place this\nquarrel before the second tour, and to Mr. Findlay's _Galatians_ in\nour own series, who upholds the other view. Supposing, however, that\nwe take the former view in deference to the weighty authorities just\nmentioned, we then find that there were two serious quarrels which\nmust for a time have marred the unity and Christian concord of the\nAntiochene Church.\n\n  [129] St. Jerome places the beginning of St. Peter's twenty-five\n  years' episcopate at Rome in A.D. 42--that is, two years before\n  Herod's attempt to put St. Peter to death. This idea has been\n  worked up into an elaborate story, which will be found duly set\n  forth in great detail in Fleury's _Ecclesiastical History_, Book\n  I., where St. Peter is made Bishop of Rome prior to the death of\n  Herod Agrippa, whence he despatches disciples to found Churches in\n  various towns of Italy, and whence he writes his first Epistle to\n  the Jews of the Dispersion in Asia Minor. A simple statement of\n  this is sufficient refutation for any one who knows the bare text\n  of the Acts. There seems, however, no reason whatsoever to doubt\n  the ancient tradition which fixes the martyrdom of St. Peter at\n  Rome. See on the whole subject the interesting article on St.\n  Peter in Schaff's _Encyclop\u00e6dia of Theology_, p. 1814. In the\n  _Acta Sanctorum_, published by the Bollandists, April, vol. iii.,\n  p. 346, we are told that St. Peter despatched St. Mark to found\n  the Church of Aquileia, which claims the next rank to the Church\n  of Rome among the Italian sees. In fact, the Bishops of Aquileia\n  regarded themselves as of such importance, owing to their\n  apostolic origin, that they headed a separation from the Church of\n  Rome, which lasted from about A.D. 570 to 700. See Robertson's\n  _History of the Church_, ii., p. 306, and the authorities there\n  quoted, on this interesting anticipation of the Reformation in\n  England.\n\nThe reproof of St. Peter by St. Paul for his dissimulation was made\non a public occasion before the whole Church. It must have caused\nconsiderable excitement and discussion, and raised much human feeling\nin Antioch. Barnabas too, the chosen friend and companion of St. Paul,\nwas involved in the matter, and must have felt himself condemned in\nthe strong language addressed to St. Peter. This may have caused for a\ntime a certain amount of estrangement between the various parties. A\nclose study of the Acts of the Apostles dispels at once the notion men\nwould fain cherish, that the apostles and the early Christians lived\njust like angels without any trace of human passion or discord. The\napostles had their differences and misunderstandings very like our\nown. Hot tempers and subsequent coolnesses arose, and produced evil\nresults between men entrusted with the very highest offices, and paved\nthe way, as quarrels always do, for fresh disturbances at some future\ntime. So it was at Antioch, where the public reproof of St. Peter by\nSt. Paul involved St. Barnabas, and may have left traces upon the\ngentle soul of the Son of Consolation which were not wholly eradicated\nby the time that a new source of trouble arose.\n\nThe ministry of St. Paul at Antioch was prolonged for some time after\nthe Jerusalem Synod, and then the Holy Ghost again impelled him to\nreturn and visit all the Churches which he had founded in Cyprus and\nAsia Minor. He recognised the necessity for supervision, support, and\nguidance as far as the new converts were concerned. The seed might be\nfrom heaven and the work might be God's own, but still human effort\nmust take its share and do its duty, or else the work may fail and the\ngood seed never attain perfection. St. Paul therefore proposed to\nBarnabas a second joint mission, intending to visit \"the brethren in\nevery city wherein they had proclaimed the word of the Lord.\" Barnabas\ndesired to take with them his kinsman Mark, but Paul, remembering his\nweakness and defection on their previous journey, would have nothing\nto say to the young man. Then there arose a sharp contention between\nthem, or, as the original expression is, there arose a paroxysm\nbetween the apostles, so that the loving Christian workers and friends\nof bygone years, \"men who had hazarded their lives for the name of our\nLord Jesus Christ,\" separated the one from the other, and worked from\nhenceforth in widely different localities.\n\nI. There are few portions of the Acts more fruitful in spiritual\ninstruction, or teeming with more abundant lessons, or richer in\napplication to present difficulties, than this very incident. Let us\nnote a few of them. One thought, for instance, which occurs at once to\nany reflecting mind is this: what an extraordinary thing it is that\ntwo such holy and devoted men as Paul and Barnabas should have had a\nquarrel at all; and when they did quarrel, would it not have been far\nbetter to have hushed the matter up and never have let the world know\nanything at all about it? Now I do not say that it is well for\nChristian people always to proclaim aloud and tell the world at large\nall about the various unpleasant circumstances of their lives, their\nquarrels, their misunderstandings, their personal failings and\nbackslidings. Life would be simply intolerable did we live always, at\nall times, and under all circumstances beneath the full glare of\npublicity. Personal quarrels too, family jars and bickerings have a\nrapid tendency to heal themselves, if kept in the gloom, the soft,\ntoned, shaded light of retirement. They have an unhappy tendency to\nharden and perpetuate themselves when dragged beneath the fierce\nlight of public opinion and the outside world. Yet it is well for the\nChurch at large that such a record has been left for us of the fact\nthat the quarrel between Paul and Barnabas waxed so fierce that they\ndeparted the one from the other, to teach us what we are apt to\nforget, the true character of the apostles. Human nature is intensely\ninclined to idolatry. One idol may be knocked down, but as soon as it\nis displaced the heart straightway sets to work to erect another idol\nin its stead, and men have been ready to make idols of the apostles.\nThey have been ready to imagine them supernatural characters, tainted\nwith no sin, tempted by no passion, weakened by no infirmity. If these\nincidents had not been recorded--the quarrel with Peter and the\nquarrel with Barnabas--we should have been apt to forget that the\napostles were men of like passions with ourselves, and thus to lose\nthe full force--the bracing, stimulating force--of such exhortations\nas that delivered by St. Paul when he said to a primitive Church,\n\"Follow me, as I, a poor, weak, failing, passionate man, have followed\nChrist.\" We have the thorough humanity of the apostles vigorously\npresented and enforced in this passage. There is no suppression of\nweak points, no accentuation of strong points, no hiding of defects\nand weaknesses, no dwelling upon virtues and graces. We have the\napostles presented at times vigorous, united, harmonious; at other\ntimes weak, timorous, and cowardly.\n\nAgain, we note that this passage not only shows us the human frailties\nand weaknesses which marked the apostles, and found a place in\ncharacters and persons called to the very highest places; it has also\na lesson for the Church of all time in the circumstances which led to\nthe quarrel between Paul and Barnabas. We do well to mark carefully\nthat Antioch saw two such quarrels, the one of which, as we have\nalready pointed out, may have had something to say to the other. The\nquarrel between St. Paul and St. Peter indeed has a history which\nstrikingly illustrates this tendency of which we have just now spoken.\nSome expositors, jealous of the good fame and reputation and temper of\nthe apostles, have explained the quarrel at Antioch between St. Paul\nand St. Peter as not having been a real quarrel at all, but an\nedifying piece of acting, a dispute got up between the apostles to\nenforce and proclaim the freedom of the Gentiles, a mere piece of\nknavery and deception utterly foreign to such a truth-loving character\nas was St. Paul's.[130] It is interesting, however, to note as\nmanifesting their natural characteristics, which were not destroyed,\nbut merely elevated, purified, and sanctified by Divine grace, that\nthe apostles Paul and Barnabas quarrelled about a purely personal\nmatter. They had finished their first missionary tour on which they\nhad been accompanied by St. Mark, who had acted as their attendant or\nservant, carrying, we may suppose, their luggage, and discharging all\nthe subordinate offices such service might involve. The labour and\ntoil and personal danger incident to such a career were too much for\nthe young man. So with all the fickleness, the weakness, the want of\nstrong definite purpose we often find in young people, he abandoned\nhis work simply because it involved the exercise of a certain amount\nof self-sacrifice. And now, when Paul and Barnabas are setting out\nagain, and Barnabas wishes to take the same favourite relative with\nthem,[131] St. Paul naturally objects, and then the bitter passionate\nquarrel ensues. St. Paul just experienced here what we all must more\nor less experience, the crosses and trials of public life, if we wish\nto pass through that life with a good conscience. Public life, I\nsay--and I mean thereby not political life, which alone we usually\ndignify by that name, but the ordinary life which every man and every\nwoman amongst us must live as we go in and out and discharge our\nduties amid our fellow-men,--public life, the life we live once we\nleave our closet communion with God in the early morning till we\nreturn thereto in the eventide, is in all its departments most trying.\nIt is trying to temper, and it is trying to principle, and no one can\nhope to pass through it without serious and grievous temptations. I do\nnot wonder that men have often felt, as the old Eastern monks did,\nthat salvation was more easily won in solitude than in living and\nworking amid the busy haunts of men where bad temper and hot words so\noften conspire to make one return home from a hard day's work feeling\nmiserable within on account of repeated falls and shortcomings. Shall\nwe then act as they did? Shall we shut out the world completely and\ncease to take any part in a struggle which seems to tell so\ndisastrously upon the equable calm of our spiritual life? Nay indeed,\nfor such a course would be unworthy a soldier of the Cross, and very\nunlike the example shown by the blessed apostle St. Paul, who had to\nbattle not only against others, but had also to battle against himself\nand his own passionate nature, and was crowned as a victor, not\nbecause he ran away, but because he conquered through the grace of\nChrist.\n\n  [130] \"Origen started this theory that the dispute between Peter\n  and Paul was simulated; in other words, being of one mind in the\n  matter they got up this scene that St. Paul might the more\n  effectually condemn the Judaisers through the chief of the\n  apostles, who, acknowledging the justice of the rebuke, set them\n  an example of submission. Thus he, in fact, substituted the much\n  graver charge of dishonesty against both apostles in order to\n  exculpate the one from the comparatively venial offence of moral\n  cowardice and inconsistency. Nevertheless this view commended\n  itself to a large number of subsequent writers, and for some time\n  may be said to have reigned supreme.\" (Lightfoot's _Galatians_, p.\n  129.) St. Chrysostom and St. Jerome maintained the same view,\n  while St. Augustine opposed it. The epistles exchanged between\n  Jerome and Augustine on this topic are very interesting. They may\n  be most easily perused in Augustine's _Epistles_, vol. i., pp. 131\n  and 280, as translated in T. & T. Clark's series (Edinburgh,\n  1872).\n\n  [131] Mark is usually regarded as nephew to Barnabas. This opinion\n  is grounded upon Col. iv. 10, as translated in the Authorised\n  Version. They were, however, cousins merely. The Revised Version\n  translates Col. iv. 10 thus: \"Mark, the cousin of Barnabas.\" Dr.\n  Lightfoot, in his _Colossians_, p. 236, has a long note showing\n  that the word used about St. Mark in that passage is \u1f41 \u1f00\u03bd\u03b5\u03c8\u03b9\u03cc\u03c2,\n  which always means cousin german: see Thayer's edition of Grimm's\n  _Lexicon of New Testament_, _s.v._\n\nAnd now it is well that we should note the special trials he had to\nendure. He had to fight against the spirit of cowardly self-indulgence\nin others, and he had to fight against the spirit of jobbery. These\nthings indeed caused the rupture in the apostolic friendship. St.\nBarnabas, apostle though he was, thought far more of the interests of\nhis cousin than of the interests of Christ's mission. St. Paul with\nhis devotion to Christ may have been a little intolerant of the\nweakness of youth, but he rightly judged that one who had proved\nuntrustworthy before should not be rapidly and at once trusted again.\nAnd St. Paul was thoroughly right, and has left a very useful and\npractical example. Many young men among us are like St. Mark. The St.\nMarks of our own day are a very numerous class. They have no respect\nfor their engagements. They will undertake work and allow themselves\nto be calculated upon, and arrangements to be made accordingly. But\nthen comes the stress of action, and their place is found wanting,\nand the work undertaken by them is found undone. And then they wonder\nand complain that their lives are unsuccessful, and that men and women\nwho are in earnest will not trust or employ them in the future! These\nare the men who are the social wrecks in life. They proclaim loudly in\nstreets and highways the hard treatment which they have received. They\ntell forth their own misery, and speak as if they were the most\ndeserving and at the same time the most ill-treated of men; and yet\nthey are but reaping as they have sown, and their failures and their\nmisfortunes are only the due and fitting rewards of their want of\nearnestness, diligence, and self-denial. To the young this episode\nproclaims aloud: Respect your engagements, regard public employments\nas solemn contracts in God's sight. Take pains with your work. Be\nwilling to endure any trouble for its sake. There is no such thing as\ngenius in ordinary life. Genius has been well defined as an infinite\ncapacity for taking pains. And thus avoid the miserable weakness of\nSt. Mark, who fled from his work because it entailed trouble and\nself-denial on his part.\n\nThen, again, we view St. Paul with admiration because he withstood the\nspirit of jobbery when it displayed itself even in a saint. Barnabas\nin plain language wished to perpetrate a job in favour of a member of\nhis family, and St. Paul withstood him. And how often since has the\nsame spirit thus displayed itself to the injury of God's cause! Let us\nnote how the case stood. St. Barnabas was a good pious man of very\nstrong emotional feelings. But he allowed himself to be guided, as\npious people often do, by their emotions, affections, prejudices, not\nby their reason and judgment. With such men when their affections\ncome into play jobbery is the most natural thing in the world. It is\nthe very breath of their nostrils. It is the atmosphere in which they\nrevel. Barnabas loved his cousin John Mark, with strong, powerful,\nabsorbing love, and that emotion blinded Barnabas to Mark's faults,\nand led him on his behalf to quarrel with his firmer, wiser, and more\nvigorous friend. Jobbery is a vice peculiar to no age and to no\nprofession. It flourishes in the most religious as in the most worldly\ncircles. In religious circles it often takes the most sickening forms,\nwhen miserable, narrow selfishness assumes the garb and adopts the\nlanguage of Christian piety. St. Paul's action proclaims to Christian\nmen a very needful lesson. It says, in fact, Set your faces against\njobbery of every kind. Regard power, influence, patronage as a sacred\ntrust. Permit not fear, affection, or party spirit to blind your eyes\nor prejudice your judgment against real merit; so shall you be\nfollowing in the footsteps of the great Apostle of the Gentiles, with\nhis heroic championship of that which was righteous and true, and of\nOne higher still, for thus you shall be following the Master's own\nexample, whose highest praise was this: \"He loved righteousness, and\nhated iniquity.\"[132]\n\n  [132] The sequel of this story as made known through the Epistles\n  is most interesting. The quarrel between St. Paul and St. Barnabas\n  was not a permanent one. Five years or so later, when writing the\n  1st Epistle to the Corinthians (ix. 6), St. Paul associates\n  himself with Barnabas as if they were companions once again: \"Or I\n  only, and Barnabas, have we not a right to forbear working?\" It is\n  interesting too to trace the change that came in subsequent years\n  over the relations between St. Paul and St. Mark as revealed by\n  the Epistles. About the year 50 St. Paul treated Mark sternly, and\n  that same sternness was most beneficial to the young man. It was\n  just what his character wanted. Fifteen years passed over both\n  their heads, and the scene was then very different. In Col. iv.\n  10, 11 Mark is commended unto the Church of Coloss\u00e6 as one of the\n  few Jewish Christians who had been a comfort in his bonds to the\n  prisoner of Jesus Christ; while again, when on the point of his\n  departure, in the 2nd Epistle to Timothy, iv. 11, the once weak\n  disciple is most touchingly and lovingly remembered: \"Only Luke is\n  with me. Take Mark, and bring him with thee: for he is useful to\n  me for ministering.\" St. Mark, after being the cause of this\n  quarrel, appears no more in the Acts. The traditions about him\n  will be found collected in English in Nelson's _Fasts and\n  Festivals_, under his Feast Day, April 25th; or better still in\n  Cave's _Lives of the Apostles_, pp. 217-23 (London, 1684); and in\n  Latin in the _Acta Sanctorum_, Ed. Boll., April, iii., 344-58.\n  Cave and the Bollandists give all the traditions about his\n  foundation of the Church of Alexandria, the patriarchs of which\n  still claim descent from him. Some historical writers have\n  maintained, that they used to be ordained by the imposition of St.\n  Mark's dead hand. This seems a mistake, however. Mr. Butler, in\n  his _Coptic Churches of Egypt_, vol. ii., p. 311, says that the\n  newly ordained Patriarch of Alexandria used to hold St. Mark's\n  head in his hands during the celebration of Mass after his\n  consecration. (See also COPTIC CHURCH in _Dict. Christ. Biog._).\n  Renaudot, a learned French writer, published a history of the\n  Alexandrian Patriarchate in 1713, which industriously collects all\n  the details of St. Mark's life true and imaginary alike. St.\n  Mark's supposed body was carried to Venice from Alexandria about\n  A.D. 1235.\n\nWe have now bestowed a lengthened notice upon this quarrel, because it\ncorrects a very mistaken notion about the apostles, and shows us how\nthoroughly natural and human, how very like our own, was the everyday\nlife of the primitive Church. It takes away the false halo of\ninfallibility and impeccability with which we are apt to invest the\napostles, making us view them as real, fallible, weak, sinful men like\nourselves,[133] and thereby exalts the power of that grace which made\nthem so eminent in Christian character, so abundant in Christian\nlabours. Let us now apply ourselves to trace the course of St. Paul's\nsecond tour.\n\n  [133] It is curious to note how widespread is this notion that the\n  apostles always possessed supernatural powers in virtue of their\n  office, enabling them, for instance, infallibly to read men's\n  hearts and thoughts. In a letter in the _Church Times_ for August\n  19th, 1892, from an eminent dignitary of the Church of England, I\n  noticed an example of it. He was discussing a question with which\n  I have nothing to say, and in doing so writes: \"The commission\n  given by our Lord to the apostles cannot be used in precisely the\n  same sense by ourselves. The apostles' powers were miraculous....\n  They could tell whether the condition of the soul of the recipient\n  of their gifts was right or the reverse in a manner not possible\n  for us.... They could perceive and gauge faith in a way that is\n  not our prerogative.... It is clear that the apostles could have\n  perceived whether repentance and faith were genuine.\" I do not\n  deny that God sometimes made such special revelations to them. But\n  _qu\u00e2_ apostles they had no such gift of discerning spirits, else\n  why did Peter baptize Simon Magus, or St. Paul and Barnabas take\n  Mark with them at all, or St. Paul tolerate Demas even for a\n  moment, or why did he not indicate the \"grievous wolves\" who\n  should ravage the Ephesian Church after his departure?\n\nThe effect of the quarrel between the friends was that St. Paul took\nSilas and St. Barnabas took Mark, and they separated; the latter going\nto Cyprus, the native country of Barnabas, while Paul and Silas\ndevoted themselves to Syria and Asia Minor and their Churches. The\ndivision between these holy men became thus doubly profitable to the\nChurch of Christ. It is perpetually profitable, by way of warning and\nexample, as we have just now shown; and then it became profitable\nbecause it led to two distinct missions being carried on, the one in\nthe island of Cyprus, the other on the continent of Asia. The wrath of\nman is thus again overruled to the greater glory of God, and human\nweakness is made to promote the interests of the gospel. We read, too,\n\"they parted asunder the one from the other.\" How very differently\nthey acted from the manner in which modern Christians do! Their\ndifference in opinion did not lead them to depart into exactly the\nsame district, and there pursue a policy of opposition the one against\nthe other. They sought rather districts widely separated, where their\nsocial differences could have no effect upon the cause they both\nloved. How very differently modern Christians act, and how very\ndisastrous the consequent results! How very scandalous, how very\ninjurious to Christ's cause, when Christian missionaries of different\ncommunions appear warring one with another in face of the pagan world!\nSurely the world of paganism is wide enough and large enough to afford\nscope for the utmost efforts of all Christians without European\nChristendom exporting its divisions and quarrels to afford matter for\nmockery to scoffing idolaters! We have heard lately a great deal about\nthe differences between Roman Catholic and Protestant missionaries in\nCentral Africa, terminating in war and bloodshed and in the most\nmiserable recriminations threatening the peace and welfare of the\nnations of Europe. Surely there must have been an error of judgment\nsomewhere or another in this case, and Africa must be ample enough to\nafford abundant room for the independent action of the largest bodies\nof missionaries without resorting to armed conflicts which recall the\nreligious wars between the Roman Catholic and Protestant Cantons of\nSwitzerland! With the subsequent labours of Barnabas we have nothing\nto do, as he now disappears from the Acts of the Apostles,[134] though\nit would appear from a reference by St. Paul--1 Cor. ix. 6, \"Or I\nonly, and Barnabas, have we not a right to forbear working?\"--as if\nat that time four or five years after the quarrel they were again\nlabouring together at Ephesus, where First Corinthians was written, or\nelse why should Barnabas be mentioned in that connexion at all?\n\n  [134] Ecclesiastical history and tradition tell us more about\n  Barnabas and Cyprus. They represent Barnabas as the Apostle of the\n  Church of Cyprus. This idea played a prominent part in the fifth\n  century. The ancient connection between Antioch and Cyprus was\n  then kept up, and the patriarchs of Antioch wished to subject the\n  Archbishop and Bishops of Cyprus to their rule. The Seventh\n  Session of the Great Council of Ephesus, which dealt with the\n  Nestorian controversy, was engaged with this question of Cyprus.\n  The session was held on July 31st, 431. The Cypriote bishops\n  claimed that they had been free from the dominion of Antioch back\n  to apostolic times, and the Council confirmed their freedom: see\n  Mansi's _Councils_, iv., 1465-1470; Hefele's _Councils_ (T. & T.\n  Clark's translation), vol. ii., p. 72. Forty years later the same\n  claim was advanced by the celebrated Peter the Fuller, Patriarch\n  of Antioch, and resisted by Anthemius, Bishop of Salamis or\n  Constantia. The bishops of Cyprus were again successful, owing to\n  the timely discovery of the body of Barnabas lying in a tomb with\n  a copy of the Gospel of St. Matthew upon his heart, which,\n  according to the opinion of the times, settled the point in\n  dispute: see Anthemius in the _Dict. Christ. Biog._, vol. i., p.\n  118. Cave, in his _Apostolici, or Lives of the Fathers_, pp.\n  33-43, diligently collects every scrap of information about St.\n  Barnabas. An early tradition found in the Clementine\n  _Recognitions_, lib. i., cap. 7, and dating from about A.D. 200,\n  makes him the first apostle to preach in Rome, preceding St. Peter\n  himself, against which theory as trenching on St. Peter's\n  prerogatives Cardinal Baronius disputes very vigorously in his\n  _Annals_, A.D. 51, lii.-liv.; see also Dr. Salmon on Clementine\n  Literature in the _Dict. Christ. Biog._, i., 568.\n\nLet us now briefly indicate the course of St. Paul's labours during\nthe next three years, as his second missionary tour must have extended\nover at least that space of time. St. Paul and his companion Silas\nleft Antioch amid the prayers of the whole Church. Evidently the\nbrethren viewed Paul's conduct with approbation, and accompanied him\ntherefore with fervent supplications for success in his self-denying\nlabours. He proceeded by land into Cilicia and Asia Minor, and\nwherever he went he delivered the apostolic decree in order that he\nmight counteract the workings of the Judaisers. This decree served a\ntwofold purpose. It relieved the minds of the Gentile brethren with\nrespect to the law and its observances, and it also showed to them\nthat the Jerusalem Church and apostles recognised the Divine authority\nand apostolate of St. Paul himself, which these \"false brethren\" from\nJerusalem had already assailed, as they did four or five years later\nboth in Galatia and at Corinth. We know not what special towns St.\nPaul visited in Cilicia, but we may be sure that the Church of Tarsus,\nhis native place, where in the first fervour of his conversion he had\nalready laboured for a considerable period, must have received a visit\nfrom him. We may be certain that his opponents would not leave such an\nimportant town unvisited, and we may be equally certain that St. Paul,\nwho, as his Epistles show, was always keenly alive to the opinion of\nhis converts with respect to his apostolic authority, would have been\nspecially anxious to let his fellow townsmen at Tarsus see that he was\nno unauthorised or false teacher, but that the Jerusalem Church\nrecognised his work and teaching in the amplest manner.\n\nStarting then anew from Tarsus, Paul and Silas set out upon an\nenormous journey, penetrating, as few modern travellers even now do,\nfrom the south-eastern extremity of Asia Minor to the north-western\ncoast, a journey which, with its necessarily prolonged delays, must\nhave taken them at least a year and a half. St. Paul seems to have\ncarefully availed himself of the Roman road system. We are merely\ngiven the very barest outline of the course which he pursued, but then\nwhen we take up the index maps of Asia Minor inserted in Ramsay's\n_Historical Geography of Asia Minor_, showing the road systems at\nvarious periods, we see that a great Roman road followed the very\nroute which St. Paul took. It started from Tarsus and passed to\nDerbe, whence of course the road to Lystra, Iconium, and Antioch had\nalready been traversed by St. Paul.[135] He must have made lengthened\nvisits to all these places, as he had much to do and much to teach. He\nhad to expound the decree of the Apostolic Council, to explain\nChristian truth, to correct the errors and abuses which were daily\ncreeping in, and to enlarge the organisation of the Christian Church\nby fresh ordinations. Take the case of Timothy as an example of the\ntrouble St. Paul must have experienced. He came to Derbe, where he\nfirst found some of the converts made on his earlier tour; whence he\npassed to Lystra, where he met Timothy, whose acquaintance he had\ndoubtless made on his first journey. He was the son of a Jewess,\nthough his father was a Gentile. St. Paul took and circumcised him to\nconciliate the Jews. The Apostle must have bestowed a great deal of\ntrouble on this point alone, explaining to the Gentile portion of the\nChristian community the principles on which he acted and their perfect\nconsistency with his own conduct at Jerusalem and his advocacy of\nGentile freedom from the law. Then he ordained him. This we do not\nlearn from the Acts, but from St. Paul's Epistles to Timothy. The Acts\nsimply says of Timothy, \"Him would Paul have to go forth with him.\"\nBut then when we turn to the Epistles written to Timothy, we find that\nit was not as an ordinary companion that Timothy was taken. He went\nforth as St. Paul himself had gone forth from the Church of Antioch, a\nduly ordained and publicly recognised messenger of Christ. We can\nglean from St. Paul's letters to Timothy the order and ceremonies of\nthis primitive ordination. The rite, as ministered on that occasion,\nembraced prophesyings or preachings by St. Paul himself and by others\nupon the serious character of the office then undertaken. This seems\nplainly intimated in 1 Tim. i. 18: \"This charge I commit unto thee, my\nchild Timothy, according to the prophecies which went before on thee\";\nwhile there seems a reference to his own exhortations and directions\nin 2 Tim. ii. 2, where he writes, \"The things which thou hast heard\nfrom me among many witnesses, the same commit thou to faithful men.\"\nAfter this there was probably, as in modern ordinations, a searching\nexamination of the candidate, with a solemn profession of faith on his\npart, to which St. Paul refers in 1 Tim. vi. 12, \"Fight the good fight\nof faith, lay hold on the life eternal, whereunto thou wast called,\nand _didst confess the good confession in the sight of many\nwitnesses_. I charge thee in the sight of God who quickeneth all\nthings, and of Christ Jesus, who before Pontius Pilate witnessed the\ngood confession; that thou keep the commandment, without spot, without\nreproach, until the appearing of our Lord Jesus Christ.\" And finally\nthere came the imposition of hands, in which the local presbyters\nassisted St. Paul, though St. Paul was so far the guiding and ruling\npersonage that, though in one place (1 Tim. iv. 14) he speaks of the\ngift of God which Timothy possessed, as given \"by prophecy with the\nlaying on of the hands of the presbytery,\" in another place he\ndescribes it as given to the young evangelist by the imposition of St.\nPaul's own hands (2 Tim. i. 6). This ordination of Timothy[136] and\nadoption of him as his special attendant stood at the very beginning\nof a prolonged tour throughout the central and northern districts of\nAsia Minor, of which we get only a mere hint in Acts xvi. 6-8: \"They\nwent through the region of Phrygia and Galatia, having been forbidden\nof the Holy Ghost to speak the word in Asia; and when they were come\nover against Mysia, they assayed to go into Bithynia; and the Spirit\nof Jesus suffered them not; and passing by Mysia, they came unto\nTroas.\" This is the brief sketch of St. Paul's labours through the\nnorth-western provinces of Asia Minor, during which he visited the\ndistrict of Galatia and preached the gospel amid the various tribal\ncommunities of Celts who inhabited that district.\n\n  [135] The record of a very similar journey performed five years\n  ago in July 1887 may be read in the _Journal of Hellenic Studies_\n  for April 1890. Mr. D. G. Hogarth, who writes the story, travelled\n  on that occasion from the borders of Galatia to the Cilician\n  coast. His narrative gives a vivid picture of the scenery over the\n  Taurus Range as St. Paul must have seen it on this second\n  missionary tour, and of the difficulties by which he must have\n  been surrounded. Cf. Ramsay's _Historical Geography of Asia\n  Minor_, p. 362.\n\n  [136] Cave has a long account of Timothy in his _Apostolici, or\n  Lives of the Fathers_, pp. 45-53, where he gives an account of\n  Timothy's martyrdom at Ephesus from Photius, the celebrated Greek\n  scholar and patriarch of the ninth century: see Photius,\n  _Bibliotheca_, cod. 254, and the _Acta Sanctorum_ for January,\n  vol. ii., pp. 562-69. Timothy is said in the Martyrologies to have\n  been buried on Mount Prion, a hill upon the side of which ancient\n  Ephesus was built (see Wood's _Ephesus_, chap. i.), after he was\n  cruelly put to death by the Ephesians enraged at his protest\n  against one of their popular feasts. He suffered under Domitian\n  about thirty years after St. Paul, and according to Photius was\n  succeeded at Ephesus by St. John, who had been recalled from\n  exile. His feast-day in the Calendar is January 24th.\n\nSt. Paul's work in Galatia is specially interesting to ourselves. The\nCeltic race certainly furnished the groundwork of the population in\nEngland, Ireland, and Scotland, and finds to this day lineal\nrepresentatives in the Celtic-speaking inhabitants of these three\nislands. Galatia was thoroughly Celtic in St. Paul's day. But how, it\nmay be said, did the Gauls come there? We all know of the Gauls or\nCelts in Western Europe, and every person of even moderate education\nhas heard of the Gauls who invaded Italy and sacked Rome when that\ncity was yet an unknown factor in the world's history, and yet but\nvery few know that the same wave of invasion which brought the Gauls\nto Rome led another division of them into Asia Minor, where--as Dr.\nLightfoot shows in his Introduction to his Commentary--about three\nhundred years before St. Paul's day they settled down in the region\ncalled after them Galatia, perpetuating in that neighbourhood the\ntribal organisation, the language,[137] the national feelings, habits,\nand customs which have universally marked the Celtic race whether in\nancient or in modern times. St. Paul on this second missionary tour\npaid his first visit to this district of Galatia. St. Paul usually\ndirected his attention to great cities. Where vast masses of humanity\nwere gathered together, there St. Paul loved to fling himself with all\nthe mighty force of his unquenchable enthusiasm. But Galatia was\nquite unlike other districts with which he had dealt in this special\nrespect. Like the Celtic race all the world over, the Gauls of Galatia\nspecially delighted in village communities. They did not care for the\nsociety and tone of great towns, and Galatia was wanting in such. St.\nPaul, too, does not seem originally to have intended to labour amongst\nthe Galatians at all. In view of his great design to preach in large\ncities, and concentrate his efforts where they could most effectually\ntell upon the masses, he seems to have been hurrying through Galatia\nwhen God laid His heavy hand upon the Apostle and delayed his course\nthat we might be able to see how the gospel could tell upon Gauls and\nCelts even as upon other nations. This interesting circumstance is\nmade known to us by St. Paul himself in the Epistle to the Galatians\niv. 13: \"Ye know that because of an infirmity of the flesh I preached\nthe gospel unto you for the first time.\" Paul, to put it in plain\nlanguage, fell sick in Galatia.[138] He was delayed on his journey by\nthe ophthalmia or some other form of disease, which was his thorn in\nthe flesh, and then, utilising the compulsory delay, and turning every\nmoment to advantage, he evangelised the village communities of Galatia\nwith which he came in contact, so that his Epistle is directed, not as\nin other cases to the Church of a city or to an individual man, but\nthe Epistle in which he deals with great fundamental questions of\nChristian freedom is addressed to the Churches of Galatia, a vast\ndistrict of country. Mere accident, as it would seem to the eye of\nsense, produced the Epistle to the Galatians, which shows us the\npeculiar weakness and the peculiar strength of the Celtic race, their\nenthusiasm, their genuine warmth, their fickleness, their love for\nthat which is striking, showy, material, exterior.[139] But when we\npass from Galatia we know nothing of the course of St. Paul's further\nlabours in Asia Minor. St. Luke was not with him during this portion\nof his work, and so the details given us are very few. We are told\nthat \"the Spirit of Jesus\" would not permit him to preach in Bithynia,\nthough Bithynia became afterwards rich in Christian Churches, and was\none of the districts to which St. Peter some years later addressed his\nfirst Epistle.[140] The Jews were numerous in the districts of\nBithynia and Asia, and \"the Spirit of Jesus\" or \"the Holy Ghost\"--for\nthe sacred writer seems to use the terms as equivalent the one to the\nother--had determined to utilise St. Paul in working directly among\nthe Gentiles, reserving the preaching of the gospel to the Dispersion,\nas the scattered Jews were called, to St. Peter and his friends. It is\nthus we would explain the restraint exercised upon St. Paul on this\noccasion. Divine providence had cut out his great work in Europe, and\nwas impelling him westward even when he desired to tarry in Asia. How\nthe Spirit exercised this restraint or communicated His will we know\nnot. St. Paul lived, however, in an atmosphere of Divine communion. He\ncultivated perpetually a sense of the Divine presence, and those who\ndo so, experience a guidance of which the outer world knows nothing.\nBishop Jeremy Taylor, in one of his marvellous spiritual discourses\ncalled the _Via Intelligenti\u00e6_, or The Way of Knowledge, speaks much\non this subject, pointing out that they who live closest to God have a\nknowledge and a love peculiar to themselves.[141] And surely every\nsincere and earnest follower of Christ has experienced somewhat of the\nsame mystical blessings! God's truest servants commit their lives and\ntheir actions in devout prayer to the guidance of their heavenly\nFather, and then when they look back over the past they see how\nmarvellously they have been restrained from courses which would have\nbeen fraught with evil, how strangely they have been led by ways which\nhave been full of mercy and goodness and blessing. Thus it was that\nSt. Paul was at length led down to the ancient city of Troas, where\nGod revealed to him in a new fashion his ordained field of labour. A\nman of Macedonia appeared in a night vision inviting him over to\nEurope, and saying, \"Come over into Macedonia, and help us.\" Troas was\na very fitting place in which this vision should appear. Of old time\nand in days of classic fable Troas had been the meeting-place where,\nas Homer and as Virgil tell, Europe and Asia had met in stern\nconflict, and where Europe as represented by Greece had come off\nvictorious, bringing home the spoils which human nature counted most\nprecious. Europe and Asia again meet at Troas, but no longer in carnal\nconflict or in deadly fight. The interests of Europe and of Asia\nagain touch one another, and Europe again carries off from the same\nspot spoil more precious far than Grecian poet ever dreamt of, for\n\"when Paul had seen the vision, straightway we sought to go forth into\nMacedonia, concluding that God called us for to preach the gospel unto\nthem.\" Whereupon we notice two points and offer just two observations.\nThe vision created an enthusiasm, and that enthusiasm was contagious.\nThe vision was seen by Paul alone, but was communicated by St. Paul\nunto Silas and to St. Luke, who now had joined to lend perhaps the\nassistance of his medical knowledge to the afflicted and suffering\nApostle. Enthusiasm is a marvellous power, and endows a man with\nwondrous force. St. Paul was boiling over with enthusiasm, but he\ncould not always impart it. The two non-apostolic Evangelists are\nmarked contrasts as brought before us in this history. St. Paul was\nenthusiastic on his first tour, but that enthusiasm was not\ncommunicated to St. Mark. He turned back from the hardships and\ndangers of the work in Asia Minor. St. Paul was boiling over again\nwith enthusiasm for the new work in Europe. He has now with him in St.\nLuke a congenial soul who, when he hears the vision, gathers at once\nits import, joyfully anticipates the work, and \"straightway sought to\ngo forth into Macedonia.\" Enthusiasm in any kind of work is a great\nassistance, and nothing great or successful is done without it. But\nabove all in Divine work, in the work of preaching the gospel, the man\ndevoid of enthusiasm begotten of living communion with God such as St.\nPaul and St. Luke enjoyed is sure to be a lamentable and complete\nfailure.\n\n  [137] The provinces of Asia Minor all retained their ancient\n  languages at the time of St. Paul. Latin and Greek were the\n  language of society, but the mass of the people all spoke the\n  original language of the country. In the time of St. Jerome, four\n  centuries after St. Paul, Celtic was still spoken in Galatia as\n  well as in Gaul. St. Paul must then have heard a language\n  identical with that of Wales and the western districts of Ireland\n  and Scotland, as is shown by Bishop Lightfoot in his _Galatians_,\n  pp. 240-44, by his analysis of the remains of the Galatian\n  language which ancient writers have handed down to us. Texier, a\n  modern French traveller, thought that he could even trace Celtic\n  features in the present inhabitants of the district. Cf.\n  Lightfoot's _Galatians_, p. 12. It is very probable that a careful\n  study of the existing language of Galatia, when treated according\n  to the methods of modern scientific philology, would disclose\n  Celtic elements. When Celtic elements survived in England and\n  France, it is not likely they died out in Galatia. We know at any\n  rate that the other original languages of Asia Minor have not\n  perished without leaving some traces behind. There is a learned\n  Review published at Smyrna from time to time. It is called the\n  _Museum of the Evangelical School of Smyrna_. In the volume\n  published for 1880-84 there is an article of more than 200 pages\n  treating of the ancient Cappadocian and Lycaonian dialects, and\n  the traces of them which remain. On p. 71 there is a notice of the\n  accuracy with which Acts xiv. 11 mentions the speech or dialect of\n  the men of Lystra, which Mr. Hogarth, in the article in the\n  _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, April 1890, p. 157, to which we\n  have already referred, identifies with the Phrygian dialect spoken\n  till the sixth century of our era. Mr. Hogarth copied several\n  inscriptions in this ancient Lycaonian or Phrygian speech. See\n  also an English article by Professor W. M. Ramsay in K\u00fchn's\n  _Journal of Comparative Philology_ for 1887, where he treats of\n  this Lycaonian speech, and avows his belief (p. 382) that\n  Gr\u00e6co-Roman civilisation and language did not begin to affect the\n  rural parts of Northern and Eastern Phrygia till A.D. 100, long\n  after St. Paul's day. The mass of the people spoke nothing but the\n  original Phrygian. The reader who wishes to investigate what I\n  consider the bearing of this subject on the gift of tongues should\n  consult another article in English by Professor Ramsay, styled\n  _Laodicea Combusta_, in the Transactions of the German\n  Arch\u00e6ological Institute, vol. xiii., p. 248 (Athens, 1888).\n\n  [138] See Lightfoot's _Galatians_, pp. 22 and 172.\n\n  [139] Those who have access to great libraries will see a good\n  description of Galatia accompanied with splendid plates in\n  Texier's _Description de l'Asie_, in 3 vols. folio, published at\n  Paris between 1839 and 1849. Mr. Lewin has reproduced some of the\n  pictures in his _Life of St. Paul_.\n\n  [140] We owe one of the earliest glimpses of the Christian Church\n  after apostolic days to this same province of Bithynia. Pliny went\n  there as proconsul about 110 A.D. He found the whole country\n  covered with Christians, and the Church organised, with\n  deaconesses even, as in Greece and Ephesus. See the first volume\n  of this commentary, p. 274. The picture of the saintly slave\n  deaconesses tortured for their faith within ten years of St.\n  John's death is an interesting confirmation of the faith. It would\n  be instructive to trace back the connexion of the second-century\n  martyrs who have been well authenticated, with the Churches\n  founded by the apostles. Justin Martyr suffered, for instance, at\n  Rome about A.D. 165. With him there died Hierax, who had been born\n  of Christian parents at Iconium. His grandfather might have been\n  converted by St. Paul. In his examination he dwells upon the fact\n  that he had been born of believing parents. See Ruinart's _Acta\n  Sincera_, p. 44, a translation of which passage will be found in\n  the works of Justin Martyr, in Clark's Series of Ante-Nicene\n  Writers.\n\n  [141] See this sermon in Taylor's works, vol. viii., Ed. C. P.\n  Eden (London, 1850). On p. 380 we find the following eloquent and\n  profound passage bearing on this point: \"Lastly there is a sort of\n  God's dear servants who walk in perfectness, who perfect holiness\n  in the fear of God, and they have a degree of charity and divine\n  knowledge more than we can discourse of, and more certain than the\n  demonstrations of geometry, brighter than the sun and indeficient\n  as the light of heaven. This is called by the Apostle the\n  \u1f00\u03c0\u03b1\u03cd\u03b3\u03b1\u03c3\u03bc\u03b1 \u03c4\u03bf\u1fe6 \u03b8\u03b5\u03bf\u1fe6. Christ is this 'brightness of God' manifested\n  in the hearts of His dearest servants. But I shall say  no more of\n  this at this time, for this is to be felt and not to be talked of;\n  and they that have never touched it with their finger, may secretly\n  perhaps laugh at it in their heart, and be never the wiser. All\n  that I have now to say of it is, that a good man is united unto\n  God, \u03ba\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03c1\u03bf\u03bd \u03ba\u03ad\u03bd\u03c4\u03c1\u1ff3 \u03c3\u03c5\u03bd\u03ac\u03c8\u03b1\u03c2, as a flame touches a flame and combines\n  into splendour and glory; so is the spirit of a man united unto\n  Christ by the Spirit of God. These are the friends of God, and\n  they best know God's mind, and they only that are so know how much\n  such men do know. They have a special unction from above.\"\n\nThen again, and lastly, we note the slow progress of the gospel as\nshown to us by this incident at Troas. Here we are a good twenty years\nafter the Crucifixion, and yet the chief ministers and leaders of the\nChurch had not yet crossed into Europe. There were sporadic Churches\nhere and there. At Rome and at possibly a few Italian seaports, whence\nintercourse with Palestine was frequent, there were small Christian\ncommunities; but Macedonia and Greece were absolutely untouched up to\nthe present. We are very apt to overrate the progress of the gospel\nduring those first days of the Church's earliest Church life. We are\ninclined to view the history of the Church of the first three\ncenturies all on an heap as it were. We have much need to distinguish\ncentury from century and decennium from decennium. The first ten years\nof the Church's history saw the gospel preached in Jerusalem and\nPalestine, but not much farther. The second decennium saw it\nproclaimed to Asia Minor; but it is only when the third decennium is\nopening that Christ despatches a formal mission to that Europe where\nthe greatest triumphs of the gospel were afterwards to be won.\nIgnorance and prejudice and narrow views had been allowed to hinder\nthe progress of the gospel then, as they are hindering the progress of\nthe gospel still; and an express record of this has been handed down\nto us in this typical history in order that if we too suffer the same\nwe may not be astonished as if some strange thing had happened, but\nmay understand that we are bearing the same burden and enduring the\nsame trials as the New Testament saints have borne before us.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XII.\n\n_ST. PAUL IN MACEDONIA._\n\n     \"The jailor called for lights, and sprang in, and, trembling for\n     fear, fell down before Paul and Silas, and said, Sirs, what must\n     I do to be saved? And they said, Believe on the Lord Jesus, and\n     thou shalt be saved, thou and thy house\"--ACTS xvi. 29-31.\n\n     \"When they had passed through Amphipolis and Apollonia, they came\n     to Thessalonica, where was a synagogue of the Jews: and Paul, as\n     his custom was, went in unto them, and for three Sabbath days\n     reasoned with them from the Scriptures.... And the brethren\n     immediately sent away Paul and Silas by night into Ber\u0153a: who\n     when they were come thither went into the synagogue of the\n     Jews.\"--ACTS xvii. 1, 2, 10.\n\n\nTroas was at this time the termination of St. Paul's Asiatic travels.\nHe had passed diagonally right through Asia Minor, following the great\nRoman roads which determined his line of march. From Troas he\nproceeded to Philippi, and for exactly the same reason. All the great\nroads formed under the emperors down to the time of Constantine the\nGreat led to Rome. When the seat of empire was moved to\nConstantinople, all the Asiatic roads converged upon that city; but in\nSt. Paul's day Rome was the world's centre of attraction, and thither\nthe highways all tended. This fact explains St. Paul's movements. The\nEgnatian Road was one of the great channels of communication\nestablished for State purposes by Rome, and this road ran from\nNeapolis, where St. Paul landed, through Philippi on to Dyrrachium, a\nport on the Adriatic, whence the traveller took ship to Brundusium,\nthe modern Brindisi, and thence reached Rome. What a striking\ncommentary we find in this simple fact upon the words of St. Paul in\nGalatians iv. 4: \"When the fulness of the time came God sent forth His\nSon.\" Roman dominion involved much suffering and war and bloodshed,\nbut it secured the network of communication, the internal peace, and\nthe steady, regular government which now covered Europe as well as\nAsia, and thus for the first time in the world's history rendered the\ndiffusion of the gospel possible, as St. Paul's example here shows.\nThe voyage from Troas to Neapolis was taken by the Apostle after the\nusual fashion of the time.[142] Neapolis was the port of Philippi,\nwhence it is distant some eight miles. Travellers from the East to\nRome always landed there, and then took the Egnatian Road which\nstarted from Neapolis. If they were official persons they could use\nthe public postal service, post-houses being established at a distance\nof six miles from one another, where relays of horses were kept at the\npublic expense, to carry persons travelling on the imperial\nservice.[143] Paul and Silas, Timothy and Luke, must, however, have\ntravelled on foot along the Egnatian Road from Neapolis to Philippi,\nwhich was their first objective point, according to St. Paul's usual\npolicy, of attacking large and important centres of population, and\nthen leaving the sacred leaven to work out into the surrounding mass\nof paganism. Philippi amply rewarded the wisdom of his plan, and the\nPhilippian Church became notable for its zeal, its faith, its\nactivity, among the Churches which owed their origin to the Apostle,\nas we learn from the Epistles addressed to the Corinthians and to the\nPhilippians themselves a short time after the foundation of the\nPhilippian Church.\n\n  [142] Both Lewin and Conybeare and Howson in their _Lives of St.\n  Paul_ enter into great details about the scenery and other\n  circumstances of St. Paul's voyage from Troas to Neapolis, which\n  would be out of place in this commentary, even if space did allow\n  their insertion. Mr. Lewin's account is specially interesting, as\n  he gives the impressions made upon himself when going over the\n  ground. These writers all point out that St. Paul must have\n  travelled with a fair wind; Conybeare and Howson even try to\n  determine its exact direction, which they maintain was from the\n  southward. Otherwise he could not have made the passage in two\n  days, or followed the course actually taken. On a subsequent\n  occasion (Acts xx. 6) St. Paul took five days in sailing from\n  Philippi to Troas.\n\n  [143] Posts for the conveyance of intelligence were established by\n  Augustus (see Suetonius, _Aug._, 49). Gibbon, in the second\n  chapter of his _History_, has much information on this point. The\n  reader curious in such matters will find a learned account of the\n  Roman postal service in Godefroy's _Commentary on the Theodosian\n  Code_, vol. ii., p. 526, where he traces the system down from\n  Augustus to the year 400 A.D. It was somewhat similar to that\n  which now prevails in Russia. An interesting story is told\n  concerning Constantine the Great, which illustrates the system.\n  During the Diocletian persecution Constantine, whose leanings\n  towards Christianity were suspected, was residing in Asia Minor\n  with the Emperor Galerius, the determined enemy of Christianity.\n  Constantine knew that there was a plot against him, so, having\n  obtained the authority necessary to use the post, he fled secretly\n  one night, and as he rode along took fresh horses, and at the same\n  time brought the tired animals with him. When his enemies followed\n  him next day, they found the post stables empty, and their prey\n  escaped without any possibility of pursuit. See _Dict. Christ.\n  Biog._, vol. i., p. 526, Art. Constantinus I., and De Broglie,\n  _L'\u00c9glise et L'Empire_, vol. i., p. 192.\n\nNow let us look at the circumstances under which that foundation was\nlaid. To understand them we must go back upon the course of history.\nPhilippi was a city built by King Philip, the father of Alexander the\nGreat. After the conquest of Macedonia by the Romans, it became famous\nas the scene of the great battle between Brutus and Cassius on the one\nhand, and Mark Antony and Augustus on the other, which decided the\nfate of the empire and influenced the course of the world's history as\nfew other battles have done. At the time of St. Paul's visit the\nmemory of that battle was fresh, and the outward and visible signs\nthereof were to be seen on every side, as indeed some of them are\nstill to be seen, the triumphal arches, for instance, erected in\nmemory of the victory and the mound or rampart of earth raised by\nBrutus to hinder the advance of the opposing forces.[144] But these\nthings had for the holy travellers a very slight interest, as their\nhearts were set upon a mightier conflict and a nobler war far than any\never before waged upon earth's surface. There is no mention made in\nthe sacred narrative of the memories connected with the place, and yet\nSt. Luke, as an honest writer setting down facts of which he had\nformed an important part, lets slip some expressions which involve and\nthrow us back upon the history of the place for an explanation,\nshowing how impossible it is to grasp the full force and meaning of\nthe sacred writers unless we strive to read the Bible with the eyes of\nthe people who lived at the time and for whom it was written. St. Luke\ncalls Philippi \"a city of Macedonia, the first of the district, a\ncolony.\" Now this means that in that time it was situated in the Roman\nprovince of Macedonia, that it was either the capital of the division\nof Macedonia, in which it was situated, Macedonia being subdivided\ninto four distinct divisions which were kept perfectly separate, or\nelse that it was the first city the traveller met upon entering\nMacedonia from Asia, and further that it was a Roman colony, and thus\npossessed peculiar privileges. When we read in the Bible of colonies\nwe must not understand the word in our modern sense. Colonies were\nthen simply transcripts of the original city whence they had come.\nRoman colonies were miniatures or copies of Rome itself transplanted\ninto the provinces, and ruling as such amid the conquered races where\nthey were placed. They served a twofold purpose. They acted as\ngarrisons to restrain the turbulence of the neighbouring tribes; and\nif we study Roman geography carefully we shall find that they were\nalways placed in neighbourhoods where their military importance is\nplainly manifest; and further still, they were used as convenient\nplaces to locate the veteran soldiers of Italy who had served their\ntime, where they were rewarded with grants of land, and were utilising\nat the same time the skill and experience in military matters which\nthey had gained, for the general benefit of the State.\n\n  [144] The remains of this rampart still exist. They are described\n  in the _Mission Arch\u00e9ologique de Mac\u00e9doine_, p. 103, carried out\n  under the direction of M. Leon Heuzey, by order of Napoleon III.,\n  and published at Paris between 1864 and 1876.\n\nAugustus made Philippi into a colony, erecting a triumphal arch to\ncelebrate his victory over Brutus, and placing there a large\nsettlement of his veterans who secured for him this important outpost.\nThe colonies which were thus dispersed along the military frontier, as\nwe should put it in modern language, were specially privileged. All\nthe settlers were Roman citizens, and the government of the colony was\nlike that of the mother city itself, in the hands of two magistrates,\ncalled in Greek Strategoi, or in Latin Pr\u00e6tors,[145] who ruled\naccording to the laws of the Twelve Tables and after Roman methods,\nthough perhaps all the neighbouring cities were still using their\nancient laws and customs handed down from times long prior to the\nRoman Conquest. The details given us by St. Luke are in the strictest\naccordance in all these respects with the facts which we know\nindependently concerning the history and political status of Philippi.\n\n  [145] The proper official title of the highest magistrates of a\n  colony was Duumviri. The colonies where a Greek spirit prevailed\n  did not like this title, and called themselves Pr\u00e6tors, or\n  \u03a3\u03c4\u03c1\u03b1\u03c4\u03b7\u03b3\u03bf\u03af, as in the case of Philippi. In exact accordance with\n  St. Luke's usage Cicero, a century earlier, tells us in one of his\n  Epistles, speaking of the vanity of Capua, which was thoroughly\n  Greek in spirit, and therefore very vain: \"While in other colonies\n  the magistrates are called Duumviri, these wish themselves to be\n  styled Pr\u00e6tors,\" a weakness laughed at in Horace's _Satires_, lib.\n  i., v. 34-6. Dion Chrysostom, a Greek rhetorician of St. Paul's\n  day, mocks the Greeks for the same flashy spirit.\n\nSt. Paul and his companions arrived in Philippi in the early part of\nthe week. He was by this time a thoroughly experienced traveller. Five\nyears later, when writing his Second Epistle to Corinth, he tells us\nthat he had been already three times shipwrecked; so that, unless\npeculiarly unfortunate, he must have already made extended and\nrepeated sea voyages, though up to the present we have only heard of\nthe journeys from Antioch to Cyprus, from Cyprus to Perga, and from\nAttaleia back to Antioch.[146] A two days' voyage across the fresh and\nrolling waters of the Mediterranean, following by a steep climb over\nMountain Pang\u00e6us which intervenes between Philippi and its port\nNeapolis, made, however, a rest of a day or two very acceptable to the\nApostle and his friends. St. Paul never expected too much from his own\nbody, or from the bodies of his companions; and though he knew the\nwork of a world's salvation was pressing, yet he could take and enjoy\na well-earned holiday from time to time. There was nothing in St. Paul\nof that eternal fussiness which we at times see in people of strong\nimaginations but weak self-control, who, realising the awful amount of\nwoe and wickedness in the world, can never be at rest even for a\nlittle. The men of God remained quiet therefore (ch. xvi. 12, 13) till\nthe Sabbath Day, when, after their usual custom, they sought out in\nthe early morning the Jewish place of worship, where St. Paul always\nfirst proclaimed the gospel. The Jewish colony resident at Philippi\nmust have been a very small one. The Rabbinical rule was that where\nten wise men existed there a synagogue might be established.[147]\nThere cannot therefore have been ten learned, respectable, and\nsubstantial Jews in Philippi competent to act as a local sanhedrin or\ncourt. Where, however, the Jews could not establish a synagogue, they\ndid not live without any external expression of religion. They knew\nhow easily neglect of public worship is followed by practical atheism,\nas we often see. Men may say indeed that God can be realised, and can\nbe worshipped anywhere,--a very great truth and a very precious one\nfor those who are unavoidably cut off from the public worship of the\nMost High; but a truth which has no application to those who wilfully\ncut themselves off from that worship which has the covenanted promise\nof His presence. It is not a good sign for the young men of this\ngeneration that so many of them utterly neglect public worship; for as\nsurely as men act so, then present neglect will be followed by a total\nforgetfulness of the Eternal, and by a disregard of the laws which He\nhas established amongst men. The Jews at Philippi did not follow this\nexample; when they could not establish a synagogue they set apart an\noratory or Place of Prayer, whither they resorted on the Sabbath Day\nto honour the God of their fathers, and to keep alive in their\nchildren's hearts the memory of His laws and doings.[148]\n\n  [146] The common pronunciation of Attaleia, or as it is spelt in\n  the Authorised Version, Attalia, is with the \u03b9 short. The\n  \"i\" represents, however, the Greek diphthong \u03b5\u03b9, and is\n  long.\n\n  [147] See Dr. John Lightfoot's _Hor\u00e6 Hebraic\u00e6_ on Matt. iv. 23;\n  Works (London, 1684), vol. ii., pp. 132-34, for the Rabbinical\n  legislation on Synagogues and their erection.\n\n  [148] A local illustration of this typical Church history occurs\n  to me. Oliver Cromwell planted Ireland, especially the golden vale\n  of Tipperary, with his Puritan soldiers. They were strong\n  Nonconformists, and refused therefore after the Restoration to\n  worship according to the forms of the Established Church. Their\n  children after a generation or two almost universally fell into\n  the arms of the Church of Rome, and now many of the leading\n  members of the National League are Roman Catholic descendants of\n  Cromwell's Puritans, and display still the same vigorous qualities\n  which adorned their Protestant ancestors in the copious abuse they\n  pour upon the memory of the men from whom they are descended.\n\nThe original name of Philippi was Crenides, or Place of Streams.[149]\nBeside one of these streams the Jews had placed their oratory, and\nthere St. Paul preached his first sermon in Europe and gained Lydia,\nhis first European convert, a Jewess by blood, a woman of Thyatira in\nAsia Minor by birth, of Philippi in Macedonia by residence, and a dyer\nin purple by trade.[150] The congregation of women assembled at that\noratory must have been a very small one. When Philippi did not afford\na sufficient Jewish population for the erection of a synagogue such as\nwas found among the smaller towns of Asia Minor, and such as we shall\nin the course of the present tour find to have existed at towns and\ncities of no great size in Greece and Macedonia, then we may be sure\nthat the female population, who assembled that Sabbath morning to pray\nand listen to the Scriptures, must have been a small one. But St. Paul\nand his companions had learned already one great secret of the true\nevangelist's life. They never despised a congregation because of its\nsmallness. I have read somewhere in the writings of St. Francis de\nSales, Bishop of Geneva, a remark bearing on this point. De Sales was\nan extreme Roman Catholic, and his mind was injured and his mental\nviews perverted in many respects by the peculiar training he thus\nreceived. But still he was in many respects a very saintly man, and\nhis writings embody much that is good for every one. In one of his\nletters which I have read he deals with this very point, and speaks of\nthe importance of small congregations, first, because they have no\ntendency to feed the preacher's pride, but rather help to keep him\nhumble; and secondly, because some of the most effective and fruitful\nsermons have been preached to extremely small congregations, two or\nthree persons at most, some one of whom has afterwards turned out to\nbe a most vigorous soldier of the Cross of Christ. The most effective\nsermon perhaps that ever was preached was that delivered to Saul of\nTarsus when to him alone came the voice, \"Saul, Saul, why persecutest\nthou Me?\" And here again, in the Philippian Oratory, the congregation\nwas but a small one, yet the Apostle despised it not. He and his\ncompanions bent all their powers to the work, threw their whole hearts\ninto it, and as the result the Lord rewarded their earnest, thorough,\nfaithful service as He rewards such service in every department of\nlife's action. The Lord opened the heart of Lydia so that she attended\nto the apostolic teaching, and she and all her household when duly\ninstructed became baptized disciples of Jesus of Nazareth.\n\n  [149] I am here reminded of a place with exactly the same name\n  which became as famous in the history of the Celtic Church as\n  Philippi did in that of the Macedonian Church. Fore, in the county\n  of Westmeath, means Place or Valley of Streams. It was celebrated\n  in the seventh century as a great missionary establishment, at the\n  head of which stood St. Fechin, a primitive Celtic missionary. His\n  oratory, cell, and ancient church are still to be seen. I have\n  described them in a paper contributed to the Journal of the\n  Society of Irish Antiquaries for this year (1892). A comparison of\n  St. Paul's missionary methods with those of St. Fechin would be\n  interesting. They are fully described in Colgan's _Acts of the\n  Irish Saints_.\n\n  [150] The guild of dyers at Thyatira is celebrated in the\n  inscriptions belonging to that city found in B\u0153ckh's _Corpus\n  Inscriptionum Gr\u00e6carum_.\n\nThis was an important incident in the history of the Philippian\nChurch, and was attended by far-reaching results. Lydia herself, like\nso many others of God's most eminent saints, disappears at once and\nfor ever from the scene. But her conversion was a fruitful one. St.\nPaul and his friends continued quietly but regularly working and\nteaching at the oratory. Lydia would seem to have been a widow, and\nmust have been a woman of some position in the little community; for\nshe was able to entertain the Apostle and his company as soon as she\nembraced the faith and felt its exceeding preciousness. When inviting\nthem, too, she uses the language of a woman independent of all other\ncontrol. \"If ye have judged me to be faithful to the Lord, come into\nmy house and abide there,\" are words with the tone of one who as a\nwidow owned no superior, and whose will was law within her own\nhousehold; as well as the language of a woman who felt that the gospel\nshe had embraced demanded and deserved the consecration to its service\nof all her worldly possessions. Previously to this conversion St. Paul\nhad lived in hired lodgings, but now he moved to Lydia's residence,\nabiding there, and thence regularly worshipping at the Jewish oratory.\nThe presence of these Jewish strangers soon attracted attention. Their\nteaching too got noised abroad, exaggerated doubtless and distorted\nafter the manner of popular reports. And the crowd were ready to be\nsuspicious of all Eastern foreigners. The settlers in the colony of\nPhilippi belonged to the rural population of Italy, who, after the\nmanner of countrified folk of every generation, were a good way\nbehind, for good or ill, their city brethren. The excavations made at\nPhilippi have brought to light the fact that the colonists there were\nworshippers of the primitive Italian rustic gods, specially of the god\nSilvanus, eschewing the fashionable Greek deities, Jupiter, Juno,\nVenus, Diana, Apollo, and such like. A temple of Silvanus was erected\nat Philippi for the hardy Italian veterans, and numerous inscriptions\nhave been found and have been duly described by the French Mission in\nMacedonia to which we have already referred, telling of the building\nof the temple and of the persons who contributed towards it.[151]\nThese simple Western soldiers were easily prejudiced against the\nEastern strangers by reports spread concerning their doctrines, and\nspecially concerning the Jewish King, of whose kingdom they were the\nheralds. Political considerations were at once raised. We can scarcely\nnow realise the suspicions which must have been roused against the\nearly preachers of Christianity by the very language they used. Their\nsacramental language concerning the body and blood of Christ, the\nlanguage of Christian love and union which they used, designating\nthemselves brethren and sisters, caused for more than two centuries\nthe dissemination of the most frightful rumours concerning the\nhorrible nature of Christian love-feasts. They were accused of\ncannibalism and of the most degraded and immoral practices; and when\nwe take up the Apologists of the second century, Justin Martyr and\nsuch like, we shall find that the efforts of these men are largely\ndirected to the refutation of such dreadful charges.[152] And as it\nwas in morals so was it too in politics. The sacred and religious\nlanguage of the Christians caused them to be suspected of designs\nhostile to the Roman Government. The apostles preached about a King\nwho ruled the kingdom of God. Now the Romans abhorred the very name\nand title of king, which they associated with the cruel acts of the\nearly tyrants who reigned in the times of Rome's fabulous antiquity.\nThe hostility to the title was so great that, though the Roman people\nendured a despotism much worse and crushing at the hands of the\nC\u00e6sars, they never would allow them to assume the title of kings, but\nsimply called them emperors, imperators or commanders of the army, a\nname which to their ears connoted nothing savouring of the kingly\noffice, though for moderns the title of emperor expresses the kingly\noffice and much more. The colonists in Philippi, being Italians, would\nfeel these prejudices in their full force. Easterns indeed would have\nhad no objection to the title of king, as we see from the cry raised\nby the mob of Jerusalem when they cried in reference to Christ's\nclaim, \"We have no king but C\u00e6sar.\" But the rough and rude Roman\nveterans, when they heard vague reports of St. Paul's teaching to the\nJews who met at the oratory by the river-side, quite naturally mistook\nthe nature of his doctrine, and thought that he was simply a political\nagitator organising a revolt against imperial authority.[153] An\nincident which then occurred fanned the slumbering embers into a\nflame. There was a female slave the property of some crafty men who by\nher means traded on the simplicity of the colonists. She was possessed\nwith a spirit of divination. What the nature of this spirit was we\nhave not the means of now determining. Some would resolve it into mere\nepilepsy, but such an explanation is not consistent with St. Paul's\naction and words. He addressed the spirit, \"I charge thee in the name\nof Jesus Christ to come out of her.\" And the spirit, we are told, came\nout that very hour. The simple fact is that psychology is at the best\na very obscure science, and the mysteries of the soul a very puzzling\nregion, even under the Christian Dispensation and surrounded by the\nspiritual blessings of the kingdom of God. But paganism was the\nkingdom of Satan, where he ruled with a power and freedom he no longer\nenjoys, and we can form no conception of the frightful disturbances\nSatanic agency may have raised amid the dark places of the human\nspirit. Without attempting explanations therefore, which must be\ninsufficient, I am content to accept the statement of the sacred\nwriter, who was an eye-witness of the cure, that the spirit of\ndivination, the spirit of Python, as the original puts it, yielded\nobedience to the invocation of the sacred Name which is above every\nname, leaving the damsel's inner nature once more calm and at union\nwithin itself. This was the signal for a riot. The slave owners\nrecognised that their hopes of gain had fled. They were not willing to\nconfess that these despised Jews possessed a power transcending far\nthat which dwelt in the human instrument who had served their covetous\npurposes. They may have heard, it may be, of the tumults excited about\nthis same time by the Jews at Rome and of their expulsion from the\ncapital by the decree of the Emperor, so the owners of the slave-girl\nand the mob of the city dragged the Apostles before the local Duumvirs\nand accused them of like disturbances: \"These men, being Jews, do\nexceedingly trouble our city, and set forth customs which it is not\nlawful for us to receive or to observe, being Romans.\" The accusation\nwas sufficient. No proof was demanded, no time for protest allowed.\nThe magistrates with their own hands dragged the clothes off the backs\nof the Apostles, and they were flogged at once by the lictors or\nsergeants, as our translation calls them, in attendance upon the\nDuumvirs, who then despatched their victims to the common prison.\nHere a question may be raised, Why did not St. Paul save himself by\nprotesting that he was a Roman citizen, as he did subsequently at\nJerusalem when he was about to be similarly treated? Several\nexplanations occur. The colonists were Italians and spoke Latin. St.\nPaul spoke Hebrew and Greek, and though he may have known Latin too,\nhis Latin may not have been understood by these rough Roman soldiers.\nThe mob again was excited, and when a mob gets excited it is but very\nlittle its members attend to an unfortunate prisoner's words. We know\ntoo, not only from St. Paul's own words, but from the testimony of\nCicero himself, in his celebrated oration against Verres, that in\nremote districts this claim was often disregarded, even when urged by\nItalians, and much more when made by despised Jews. St. Paul tells us\nin 2 Cor. xi. 25, that he received three Roman floggings\nnotwithstanding his Roman citizenship, and though the Philippian\nmagistrates were afraid when they heard next day of the illegal\nviolence of which they had been guilty, the mob, who could not be held\naccountable, probably took right good care that St. Paul's protest\nnever reached the official ears to which it was addressed. These\nconsiderations sufficiently account for the omission of any notice of\na protest on the Apostle's part. He simply had not the opportunity,\nand then when the tumultuous scene was over Paul and Silas were\nhurried off to the common dungeon, where they were secured in the\nstocks and thrust into the innermost prison as notorious and\nscandalous offenders.\n\n  [151] See Leon Heuzey's _Mission Arch\u00e9ologique de Mac\u00e9doine_, p.\n  71 (Paris, 1864-76). One tablet found furnishes a list of\n  benefactions. One man gives a bronze statue of the deity, another\n  helps to roof the building. Another tablet gives a list of the\n  officials of the temple worship. Curiously enough among these\n  officials occur names well known to us from St. Paul's Epistles,\n  as Crescens, Secundus, Trophimus, Aristarchus, Pudens, Urbanus,\n  and Clemens: cf. the Philippian inscriptions in the _Corpus\n  Inscriptionum Latinarum_, vol. iii., par. i., pp. 120-28. Among\n  these rude Italian veterans, unspoilt by the glitter and vices of\n  Greek idolatry and civilisation, the Cross may have found out many\n  true soldiers of Jesus Christ: see Lewin's _St. Paul_, vol. i., p.\n  210. It is interesting to notice that a similar set of tablets\n  commemorating the benefactors of the temple of Diana at Ephesus\n  was discovered in the excavations made twenty years ago at that\n  place. The inscriptions are translated in the Appendix to Wood's\n  _Ephesus_.\n\n  [152] See, for instance, Justin Martyr's _First Apology_, ch.\n  xxix., _Second Apology_, ch. xii., and Athenagoras' _Apology_,\n  chs. xxxi.-xxxv. These passages will be found in Justin Martyr and\n  Athenagoras as translated in T. & T. Clark's Ante-Nicene Series,\n  pp. 32, 81, 415-19.\n\n  [153] This political prejudice against Christianity lasted into\n  the second century: see the _First Apology_ of Justin Martyr, ch.\n  xi.: \"When you hear that we look for a kingdom, you suppose,\n  without making any inquiry, that we speak of a human kingdom;\n  whereas we speak of that which is with God, as appears also from\n  the confession of their faith made by those who are charged with\n  being Christians, though they know that death is the punishment\n  awarded to him who so confesses\"; words which imply that in\n  Justin's day many had been martyred on mere political accusations.\n\nNo ill-treatment could, however, destroy that secret source of joy and\npeace which St. Paul possessed in his loved Master's conscious\npresence. \"I take pleasure in weaknesses, in injuries, in\nnecessities, in persecutions, in distresses for Christ's sake,\" is his\nown triumphant expression when looking back a few years later over the\nway by which the Lord had led him, and therefore at midnight the\nastonished prisoners heard the inner dungeon ringing with unwonted\nsongs of praise raised by the Jewish strangers. An earthquake, too,\nlent its terrors to the strange scene, shaking the prison to its\nfoundations and loosing the staples to which the prisoners' chains\nwere fastened. The jailor, roused from sleep, and seeing the prison\ndoors opened wide, would have committed suicide were it not for Paul's\nrestraining and authoritative voice; and then the astonished official,\nwho must have heard the strange rumours to which the words of the\ndemoniac alluded--\"These men are the servants of the Most High God,\nwhich proclaim unto you the way of salvation\"--rushed into the\npresence of the Apostles crying out in words which have ever since\nbeen famous, \"Sirs, what must I do to be saved?\" to which the equally\nfamous answer was given, \"Believe on the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be\nsaved, thou and thy house.\" The jailor then took the Apostles, bathed\ntheir bruised bodies, set food before them, gathered his household to\nlisten to the glad tidings, which they received so rapidly and grasped\nso thoroughly that they were at once baptized and enabled to rejoice\nwith that deep spiritual joy which an experimental knowledge of God\nalways confers. The jailor, feeling for the first time in his life the\npeace which passeth all understanding, realised the truth which St.\nAugustine afterwards embodied in the immortal words: \"Thou, O God,\nhast formed us for Thyself, and our hearts are restless till they find\nrest in Thee.\"[154]\n\n  [154] Augustine's _Confessions_, i. 1.\n\nLet us look for a little at the question of the jailor and the answer\nof the Apostle. They are words very often used, and very often\nmisused. The jailor, when he rushed into St. Paul's presence crying\nout \"What must I do to be saved?\" was certainly not the type of a\nconscience-stricken sinner, convinced of his own sin and spiritual\ndanger, as men sometimes regard him. He was simply in a state of\nfright and astonishment. He had heard that these Jewish prisoners\ncommitted to him were preaching about some salvation which they had to\noffer. The earthquake seemed to him the expression of some deity's\nwrath at their harsh treatment, and so in his terror he desires to\nknow what he must do to be saved from this wrath. His words were\nnotable, but they were not Christian words, for he had yet much to\nlearn of the nature of sin and the nature of the salvation from it\nwhich the Apostles were preaching. The Philippian jailor was a\nspecimen of those who are saved violently and by fear. Terror forced\nhim into communion with the Apostles, broke down the barriers which\nhindered the approach of the Word, and then the power of the Holy\nGhost, working through St. Paul, effected the remainder, opening his\neyes to the true character of salvation and his own profound need of\nit. St. Paul's words have been misunderstood. I have heard them\naddressed to a Christian congregation and explained as meaning that\nthe jailor had nothing to do but just realise Christ Jesus as his\nSaviour, whereupon he was perfect and complete so far as the spiritual\nlife was concerned; and then they were applied to the congregation\npresent as teaching that, as it was with the jailor, so was it with\nall Christians; they have simply to believe as he did, and then they\nhave nothing more to do,--a kind of teaching which infallibly\nproduces antinomian results.[155] Such an explanation ignores the\nfact that there is a great difference between the jailor, who was not\na Christian in any sense and knew nothing about Christ when he flung\nhimself at St. Paul's feet, and a Christian congregation, who know\nabout Christ and believe in Him. But this explanation is still more\nerroneous. It misrepresents what St. Paul meant and what his hearers\nunderstood him to mean. What did any ordinary Jew or any ordinary\npagan with whom St. Paul came in contact understand him to mean when\nhe said, \"Believe on the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved\"? They\nfirst had to ask him who Jesus Christ was, whence He had come, what He\nhad taught, what were the obligations of His religion. St. Paul had to\nopen out to them the nature of sin and salvation, and to explain the\nobligation and blessing of the sacrament of baptism as well as the\nnecessity of bodily holiness and purity. The initial sacrament of\nbaptism must have held a foremost place in that midnight colloquy or\nconference concerning Christian truth. St. Paul was not the man to\nperform a rite of which his converts understood nothing, and to which\nthey could attach no meaning. \"Believe on the Lord Jesus\" involved\nrepentance and contrition and submission to Christian truth, and these\nthings involved the exposition of Christian truth, history, doctrines,\nand duties.\n\n  [155] See more on this point in vol. i., pp. 134-37, where I have\n  given conclusive proofs of the misuse of this text from the\n  writers of the seventeenth century.\n\nThis text, \"Believe on the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved,\" is\noften quoted in one-sided and narrow teaching to show that man has\nnothing to do to be saved. Of course in one sense this is perfectly\ntrue. We can do nothing _meritoriously_ towards salvation; from first\nto last our salvation is all of God's free grace; but then, viewing\nthe matter from the human side, we have much to do to be saved. We\nhave to repent, to seek God for ourselves, to realise Christ and His\nlaws in our life, to seek after that holiness without which no man\nshall see the Lord. There were two different types of men who at\ndifferent times addressed practically the same inquiry to the\nApostles. They were both outside the Church, and they were both\nseekers blindly after God. The Jews on the day of Pentecost said,\n\"Brethren, what shall we do?\" and Peter replied, \"Repent ye, and be\nbaptized, every one of you, in the name of Jesus Christ, unto the\nremission of your sins, and ye shall receive the gift of the Holy\nGhost.\" Such was apostolic teaching to the Jews of Jerusalem. The\njailer demanded, \"What must I do to be saved?\" and St. Paul replied,\n\"Believe on the Lord Jesus, and thou shalt be saved.\" Such was\napostolic teaching to an ignorant pagan at Philippi; more concise than\nthe Jerusalem answer, but meaning the same thing, and involving\nprecisely the same doctrines in the hands of such a great master of\nthe spiritual life as was the Apostle of the Gentiles.[156]\n\n  [156] Mr. Sadler, in his Commentary on the Acts, treating of this\n  passage has a long explanation identical in meaning with that\n  which we have above urged. He says, for instance, p. 314: \"This\n  statement of the way of salvation is one of the most important in\n  the New Testament. It contains the seed of the whole body of\n  apostolic doctrine respecting salvation by Christ. When I say\n  apostolic, I mean the doctrine of SS. Peter and John, as well as\n  of St. Paul; for all being full of the Holy Ghost preached the\n  same. Few places have been more perverted in order to uphold a\n  heresy which, if St. Paul had been alive now, he would have\n  abhorred, and denounced as fatal to the whole revelation of the\n  Son of God, and that is antinomianism.... The Philippian jailor to\n  whom the words were first addressed had never in all probability\n  heard the name of Jesus Christ before.... 'Believe on the Lord\n  Jesus Christ' then meant to him, 'Believe on Him whom we are now\n  about to set forth to thee.' And they there and then began to set\n  Him forth, for they spake unto him 'the word of the Lord.'... This\n  Word must have shown him how--on what principle--he could exercise\n  faith in Him so as to be saved. But did they call on him in his\n  then state to believe anything respecting the Church and the\n  sacraments of Christ? Unquestionably; for St. Paul would certainly\n  not baptize a man who was totally ignorant of the grace of union\n  with Christ which he would receive, and the obligations to serve\n  Christ which he would come under, by being baptized.\"\n\nThe remainder of the story is soon told. When the morning came there\ncame quiet reflection with it as far as the magistrates were\nconcerned. They became conscious of their illegal conduct, and they\nsent their lictors to order the release of the Apostles. St. Paul now\nstood upon his rights. His protest had been disregarded by the mob. He\nnow claimed his rights as a Roman citizen. \"They have beaten us\npublicly, uncondemned men, that are Romans, and have cast us into\nprison; and do they now cast us out privily? Nay, verily; but let them\ncome themselves and bring us out.\" These are St. Paul's words, and\nthey are brave, and at the same time wise words. They were brave words\nbecause it took a strong man to send back such an answer to\nmagistrates who had treated him so outrageously only the day before.\nThey were wise words, for they give us an apostle's interpretation of\nour Lord's language in the Sermon upon the Mount concerning the\nnon-resistance of evil, and show us that in St. Paul's estimation\nChrist's law did not bind a man to tolerate foul injustice. Such\ntoleration, in fact, is very wrong if it can be helped; because it is\nsimply an encouragement to the wicked doers to treat others in the\nsame scandalous manner. Toleration of outrage and injustice is unfair\nand uncharitable towards others, if they can be lawfully redressed or\nat least apologised for. It is a Christian man's duty to bring public\nevil-doers and tyrants, instruments of unrighteousness like these\nDuumvirs of Philippi, to their senses, not for his own sake, but in\norder that he may prevent the exercise of similar cruelties against\nthe weaker brethren. We may be sure that the spirited action of St.\nPaul, compelling these provincial magnates to humble themselves before\nthe despised strangers, must have had a very wholesome effect in\nrestraining them from similar violence during the rest of their term\nof office.\n\nSuch was St. Paul's stay at Philippi. It lasted a considerable time,\nand made its mark, as a flourishing Church was established there, to\nwhich he addressed an Epistle when he lay the first time a captive at\nRome. This Epistle naturally forms a most interesting commentary on\nthe notices of the Philippian visit in the Acts of the Apostles, a\npoint which is worked out at large in Bishop Lightfoot's Commentary on\nPhilippians and in Paley's _Hor\u00e6 Paulin\u00e6_. The careful student of Holy\nWrit will find that St. Paul's letter and St. Luke's narrative when\ncompared illuminate one another in a wondrous manner. We cannot afford\nspace to draw out this comparison in detail, and it is the less\nnecessary to do so as Dr. Lightfoot's writings are so generally\naccessible. Let us, however, notice one point in this Epistle to the\nPhilippians, which was written about the same time (a few months\npreviously, in fact) as the Acts of the Apostles. It corroborates the\nActs as to the circumstances under which the Church of Philippi was\nfounded. St. Paul in the Epistle refers again and again to the\npersecutions and afflictions of the Philippian Church, and implies\nthat he was a fellow-sufferer with them.[157] St. Paul dwells on this\nin the beginning of the Epistle in words whose force cannot be\nunderstood unless we grasp this fact. In the sixth verse of the first\nchapter he expresses himself as, \"Confident of this very thing, that\nHe which began a good work in you will perfect it until the day of\nJesus Christ: even as it is right for me to be thus minded on behalf\nof you all, because I have you in my heart, inasmuch as, both in my\nbonds and in the defence and confirmation of the gospel, ye all are\npartakers with me of grace.\" St. Paul speaks of the Philippians as\npersonally acquainted with chains and sufferings and prison-houses for\nChrist's sake, and regards these things as a proof of God's grace\nvouchsafed not only to the Apostle, but also to the Philippians; for\nSt. Paul was living at that high level when he could view bonds and\ntrials and persecutions as marks of the Divine love. In the\ntwenty-eighth verse of the same chapter he exhorts them to be in no\nwise \"affrighted by the adversaries,\" and in the next two describes\nthem as persons to whom \"it hath been granted in the behalf of Christ,\nnot only to believe on Him, but also to suffer in His behalf: having\nthe same conflict which ye _saw_ in me, and now hear to be in me,\"\nwords which can only refer to the violence and afflictions which they\nwitnessed as practised against himself, and which they were now\nthemselves suffering in turn. While to complete St. Paul's references\nwe notice that in an Epistle written some five years later than his\nfirst visit to Philippi he expressly refers to the persecutions which\nthe Philippian Church in common with all the Macedonian Churches seems\nto have suffered from the very beginning. In 2 Cor. viii. 1, 2, he\nwrites: \"Moreover, brethren, we make known to you the grace of God\nwhich hath been given in the Churches of Macedonia; how that _in much\nproof of affliction_ the abundance of their joy and their deep poverty\nabounded unto the riches of their liberality.\" Now all these passages\nput together confirm for us what the Acts expressly affirms, that from\nthe very outset of their Christian career the Philippian Church had\nendured the greatest trials, and experienced a fellowship in the\nApostle's sufferings. And surely we may see in the character of the\nPhilippian Epistle something eminently characteristic of this\nexperience! It has been remarked that the Philippian Epistle is the\nonly Epistle addressed to a Church in which there is no trace of blame\nor reproof. Temptation and trial and chastisement had there worked\ntheir appointed purpose. The Philippian Church had been baptized in\nblood, and grounded in afflictions, and purified by the cleansing\nfires of persecution, and consequently the tried Church gathered\nitself closer to its Divine Lord, and was perfected above all others\nin His likeness, and profited above all others in the Divine\nlife.[158]\n\n  [157] Bishop Lightfoot (_Philippians,_ p. 57) says: \"St. Paul's\n  first visit to Philippi closed abruptly amid the storm of\n  persecution. It was not to be expected that where the life of the\n  teacher had been so seriously endangered, the scholars would\n  escape all penalties. The Apostle left behind him a legacy of\n  suffering to this newly born Church. This is not a mere\n  conjecture; the affliction of the Macedonian Christians, and of\n  the Philippians especially, are more than once mentioned in St.\n  Paul's Epistles (cf. 1 Thess. ii. 2). If it was their privilege to\n  believe in Christ, it was equally their privilege to suffer for\n  Him.\"\n\n  [158] Bishop Lightfoot, in his _Commentary on Philippians, l.c._,\n  dwells on this point: \"The unwavering loyalty of his Philippian\n  converts is the constant solace of the Apostle in his manifold\n  trails, the one bright ray of happiness piercing the dark clouds\n  which gather ever thicker about the evening of his life. They are\n  his 'joy and crown, his brethren beloved and eagerly desired.'\n  From them alone he consents to receive alms for the relief of his\n  personal wants. To them alone he writes in language unclouded by\n  any shadow of displeasure or disappointment.\"\n\nAfter the terrible experience of Philippi Paul and Silas passed on to\nother towns of the same province of Macedonia. The Apostle, however,\nwhen quitting Philippi to do the same evangelistic work, breaking up\nthe ground in other towns after the manner of a pioneer, did not leave\nthe Church of Philippi devoid of wisest pastoral care. It is most\nlikely, as Dr. Lightfoot points out in the Introduction to his\nCommentary on Philippians, that St. Luke was left behind to\nconsolidate the work which had been thus begun by such a noble\ncompany. Then Paul and Silas and Timotheus proceeded to Thessalonica,\none hundred miles west, the capital of the province, where the\nproconsul resided, and where was a considerable Jewish population, as\nwe see, not only from the fact that a synagogue is expressly said to\nhave existed there, but also because the Jews were able to excite the\ncity pagan mob against the Apostles and drag them before the local\nmagistrates.[159] St. Paul at Philippi had for the first time\nexperienced a purely pagan persecution. He had indeed previously\nsuffered at the hands of the heathen at Lystra, but they were urged on\nby the Jews. At Philippi he gained his first glimpse of that long\nvista of purely Gentile persecution through which the Church had to\npass till Christianity seated itself in the person of Constantine on\nthe throne of the C\u00e6sars. But as soon as he got to Thessalonica he\nagain experienced the undying hostility of his Jewish fellow-countrymen\nusing for their wicked purposes the baser portion of the city\nrabble.[160] St. Paul remained three weeks in Thessalonica teaching\nprivately and publicly the gospel message, without experiencing any\nJewish opposition. It is an interesting fact that to this day St.\nPaul's visit to Thessalonica is remembered, and in one of the local\nmosques, which was formerly the Church of Sancta Sophia, a marble\npulpit is shown, said to have been the very one occupied by the\nApostle, while in the surrounding plains trees and groves are pointed\nout as marking spots where he tarried for a time. The Jews were at\nlast, however, roused to opposition, possibly because of St. Paul's\nsuccess among the Gentiles, who received his doctrines with such\navidity that there believed \"of the devout Greeks a great multitude,\nand of the chief women not a few.\" In Thessalonica, as elsewhere, the\nspirit of religious selfishness, desiring to have gospel promises and\na Messiah all to themselves, was the ruin of the Jewish people. The\nJews therefore, assisted by the pagans, assaulted the residence of\nJason, with whom St. Paul and his friends were staying. They missed\nthe Apostles themselves, but they seized Jason and some of the\napostolic band, or at least some of their converts whom they found in\nJason's house, and brought them before the town magistrates, who,\nacting under the eye of the resident proconsul, did not lend\nthemselves to any irregular proceedings like the Philippian pr\u00e6tors. A\ncharge of treason was formally brought against the prisoners: \"These\nall act contrary to the decrees of C\u00e6sar, saying that there is another\nKing, one Jesus\"; in the words of which charge we get a glimpse of the\nleading topic on which the Apostles insisted. Jesus Christ, the\ncrucified, risen, glorified King and Head of His people, was the great\nsubject of St. Paul's teaching as it struck the heathen. The\nThessalonian magistrates acted very fairly. They entered the charge\nwhich was a serious one in the eye of Roman law. Bail was then taken\nfor the accused and they were set free. The Apostles, however, escaped\narrest, and the local brethren determined that they should incur no\ndanger; so while the accused remained to stand their trial, Paul and\nSilas and Timotheus were despatched to Ber\u0153a, where they were for a\ntime welcomed, and free discussion permitted in the synagogue\nconcerning the truths taught by the Evangelists. After a time,\nhowever, tidings having reached Thessalonica, agents were despatched\nto Ber\u0153a, who stirring up the Jewish residents, St. Paul was\ndespatched in charge of some trusty messengers who guided the steps of\nthe hunted servant of God to the city of Athens. We see the physical\ninfirmities of St. Paul, the difficulties he had to contend with,\nhinted at in the fourteenth and fifteenth verses of the seventeenth\nchapter. \"Then immediately the brethren sent forth Paul,\" and \"They\nthat conducted Paul brought him to Athens,\" words which give us a\nglimpse of his fearfully defective eyesight. His enemies might be\npressing upon him and danger might be imminent, but he could make no\nunaided effort to save himself. He depended upon the kindly help of\nothers that he might escape his untiring foes and find his way to a\nplace of safety.\n\n  [159] Thessalonica is to this day the abode of a large Jewish\n  population. Tozer, in his _Highlands of Turkey_, vol. i., p. 146,\n  says: \"Of the sixty thousand inhabitants of Salonica two-thirds\n  are Jews, the rest being Turks and Greeks.... From early times the\n  Hebrew race seem to have been attracted by the commercial\n  advantages of Salonica. Thus when St. Paul preached there he found\n  a considerable Jewish community.... A large number of the Salonica\n  Jews are rich merchants, and a great part of the wealth of the\n  place is in their hands.\" Mr. Lewin, in his _St. Paul_, vol. i.,\n  p. 222, gives a table of the distances all along St. Paul's route.\n\n  [160] Mr. Findlay, in a little work lately published, _The\n  Epistles of Paul the Apostle_, has many valuable observations on\n  the subject of the Jewish opposition experienced by the Apostle at\n  Thessalonica.\n\nThus ended St. Paul's first visit to Thessalonica so far as the Acts\nof the Apostles is concerned; but we have interesting light thrown\nupon it from an Epistle which St. Paul himself wrote to the\nThessalonians soon after his departure from amongst them. A comparison\nof First Thessalonians with the text of the Acts will furnish the\ncareful student with much information concerning the circumstances of\nthat notable visit, just as we have seen that the text of the\nPhilippian Epistle throws light upon his doings at Philippi. The\nThessalonian Epistles are more helpful even than the Philippians in\nthis respect, because they were written only a few months after St.\nPaul's visit to Thessalonica, while years elapsed, eight or ten at\nleast, before the Philippian Epistle was indited. First Thessalonians\nshows us, for instance, that St. Paul's visit to Thessalonica lasted a\nconsiderable time. In the Acts we read of his discussing in the\nsynagogue three Sabbath days, and then it would appear as if the riot\nwas raised which drove him to Ber\u0153a and Athens. The impression left\non our minds by St. Luke's narrative is that St. Paul's labours were\nalmost entirely concentrated upon the Jews in Thessalonica, and that\nhe bestowed very little attention indeed upon the pagans. The Epistle\ncorrects this impression. When we read the first chapter of First\nThessalonians we see that it was almost altogether a church of\nconverted idolaters, not of converted Jews. St. Paul speaks of the\nThessalonians as having turned from idols to serve the living God; he\nrefers to the instructions on various points like the resurrection,\nthe ascension, the second coming of Christ, which he had imparted,\nand describes their faith and works as celebrated throughout all\nMacedonia and Achaia. A large and flourishing church like that,\ncomposed of former pagans, could not have been founded in the course\nof three weeks, during which time St. Paul's attention was principally\nbestowed on the Jewish residents. Then too, when we turn to\nPhilippians iv. 16, we find that St. Paul stayed long enough in\nThessalonica to receive no less than two remittances of money from the\nbrethren at Philippi to sustain himself and his brethren. His whole\nattention too was not bestowed upon mission work; he spent his days\nand nights in manual labour. In the ninth verse of the second chapter\nof First Thessalonians he reminds them of the fact that he supported\nhimself in their city, \"For ye remember, brethren, our labour and\ntravail: working night and day, that we might not burden any of you,\nwe preached unto you the gospel of God.\" When we realise these things\nwe shall feel that the Apostle must have spent at least a couple of\nmonths in Thessalonica. It was perhaps his tremendous success among\nthe heathen which so stirred up the passions of the town mob as\nenabled the Jews to instigate them to raise the riot, they themselves\nkeeping all the while in the background. St. Paul, in First\nThessalonians, describes the riots raised against the Christians as\nbeing the immediate work of the pagans: \"Ye, brethren, became\nimitators of the Churches of God which are in Jud\u00e6a in Christ Jesus.\nFor ye also suffered the same things of your own countrymen as they\ndid of the Jews\"; a statement which is quite consistent with the\ntheory that the persecution was originally inspired by the Jews. But\nwe cannot further pursue this interesting line of inquiry which has\nbeen thoroughly worked out by Mr. Lewin in vol. ii., ch. xi., by\nConybeare and Howson in ch. ix., and by Archdeacon Farrar, as well as\nby Dr. Salmon in his _Introduction to the New Testament_, ch. xx. The\ncareful student will find in all these works most interesting light\nreflected back upon the Acts from the apostolic letters, and will see\nhow thoroughly the Epistles, which were much the earlier documents,\nconfirm the independent account of St. Luke, writing at a subsequent\nperiod.\n\nBefore we terminate this chapter we desire to call attention to one\nother point where the investigations of modern travel have helped to\nillustrate the genuineness of the Acts of the Apostles. It has been\nthe contention of the rationalistic party that the Acts was a\ncomposition of the second century, worked up by a clever forger out of\nthe materials at his command. There are various lines of proof by\nwhich this theory can be refuted, but none appeal so forcibly to\nordinary men as the minute accuracy which marks it when describing the\ntowns of Asia Minor and Macedonia. Macedonia is a notable case. We\nhave already pointed out how the Acts give their proper title to the\nmagistrates of Philippi and recognise its peculiar constitution as a\ncolony. Thessalonica forms an interesting contrast to Philippi.\nThessalonica was a free city, like Antioch in Syria, Tarsus, and\nAthens, and therefore, though the residence of the proconsul who ruled\nthe province of Macedonia, was governed by its own ancient magistrates\nand its own ancient laws, without any interference on the part of the\nproconsul. St. Luke makes a marked distinction between Philippi and\nThessalonica. At Philippi the Apostles were brought before the\npr\u00e6tors, at Thessalonica they were brought before the politarchs,[161]\na title strange to classical antiquity, but which has been found upon\na triumphal arch which existed till a few years ago across the main\nstreet of the modern city of Thessalonica. That arch has now\ndisappeared; but the fragments containing the inscription were\nfortunately preserved and have been now placed in the British Museum,\nwhere they form a precious relic proving the genuineness of the sacred\nnarrative.\n\n  [161] This case of Thessalonica is an interesting illustration of\n  Bishop Lightfoot's statement:--\"The government of the Roman\n  provinces at this time was peculiarly dangerous ground for the\n  romance-writer to venture upon\" (_Essays on Supernatural\n  Religion_, p. 291). If the Roman provinces were a dangerous ground\n  for a romance-writer, such as some critics would make the author\n  of the Acts, the government of the large Gr\u00e6co-Roman towns and\n  cities was still more dangerous, as scarcely any two successive\n  ones were alike. Thessalonica is a good instance of this. St. Luke\n  calls the magistrates politarchs, and the triumphal arch at\n  Thessalonica calls them politarchs; a title which seems to have\n  been a very rare one, as only one other instance of its occurrence\n  has been discovered. Monastir, in the north-west of Macedonia, is\n  an important town, and there an inscription belonging to the\n  ancient Deuriopus, twelve miles distant, was found more than\n  twenty years ago containing the same title, politarchs. Surely the\n  stones out of the walls of Thessalonica and of Monastir cry out in\n  defence of St. Luke's accuracy! See Mr. Tozer's _Highlands of\n  Turkey_, vol. i., p. 145, and vol. ii., p. 358, Append. B;\n  B\u0153ckh's _Corp. Ins. Gr\u00e6c._, No. 1967; articles by the Abb\u00e9\n  Belley in the _Acad. des Inscript._, xxxviii., p. 125, and by Mr.\n  Vaux in the _Trans. of Roy. Soc. of Literature_, vol. viii., new\n  series.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIII.\n\n_ST. PAUL IN GREECE._\n\n     \"Now while Paul waited for them at Athens, his spirit was\n     provoked within him, as he beheld the city full of idols. So he\n     reasoned in the synagogue with the Jews and the devout persons,\n     and in the market-place every day with them that met with him.\n     And certain also of the Epicurean and Stoic philosophers\n     encountered him. And some said, What would this babbler say?\n     other some, He seemeth to be a setter forth of strange gods:\n     because he preached Jesus and the resurrection.\"--ACTS xvii.\n     16-18.\n\n     \"After these things Paul departed from Athens, and came to\n     Corinth.\"--ACTS xviii. 1.\n\n\nThere are parallelisms in history which are very striking, and yet\nthese parallelisms can be easily explained. The stress and strain of\ndifficulties acting upon large masses of men evolve and call forth\nsimilar types of character, and demand the exercise of similar powers.\nSt. Paul and St. Athanasius are illustrations of this statement. They\nwere both little men, both enthusiastic in their views, both pursued\nall their lives long with bitter hostility, and both had experience of\nthe most marvellous and hairbreadth escapes. If any reader will take\nup Dean Stanley's _History of the Eastern Church_, and read the\naccount given of St. Athanasius in the seventh chapter of that work,\nhe will be strikingly reminded of St. Paul in these various aspects,\nbut specially in the matter of his wondrous escapes from his deadly\nenemies, which were so numerous that at last they came to regard\nAthanasius as a magician who eluded their designs by the help of his\nfamiliar spirits. It was much the same with St. Paul. Hairbreadth\nescapes were his daily experience, as he himself points out in the\neleventh chapter of his Second Epistle to Corinth. He there enumerates\na few of them, but quite omits his escapes from Jerusalem, from the\nPisidian Antioch, from Iconium, Lystra, Thessalonica, and last of all\nfrom Ber\u0153a, whence he was driven by the renewed machinations of the\nThessalonian Jews, who found out after a time whither the object of\ntheir hatred had fled. Paul's ministry at Ber\u0153a was not fruitless,\nshort as it may have been. He established a Church there which took\ngood care of the precious life entrusted to its keeping, and therefore\nas soon as the deputies of the Thessalonian synagogue came to Ber\u0153a\nand began to work upon the Jews of the local synagogue, as well as\nupon the pagan mob of the town, the Ber\u0153an disciples took Paul, who\nwas the special object of Jewish hatred, and despatched him down to\nthe sea-coast, some twenty miles distant, in charge of certain trusty\nmessengers, while Silas remained behind, in temporary concealment\ndoubtless, in order that he might consolidate the Church.[162] Here we\nget a hint, a passing glimpse of St. Paul's infirmity. He was\ndespatched in charge of trusty messengers, I have said, who were to\nshow him the way. \"They that conducted Paul brought him as far as\nAthens.\" His ophthalmia, perhaps, had become specially bad owing to\nthe rough usage he had experienced, and so he could not escape all\nsolitary and alone as he did in earlier years from Damascus, and\ntherefore guides were necessary who should conduct him \"as far as the\nsea,\" and then, when they had got that far, they did not leave him\nalone. They embarked in the ship with him, and, sailing to Athens,\ndeposited him safely in a lodging. The journey was by sea, not by\nland, because a sea journey was necessarily much easier for the sickly\nand weary Apostle than the land route would have been, offering too a\nmuch surer escape from the dangers of pursuit.\n\n  [162] It is well, perhaps, to bear in mind the distances which\n  separate the various stages of St. Paul's progress through\n  Macedonia. Thessalonica was about a hundred miles from Philippi,\n  Ber\u0153a fifty from Thessalonica, and the sea-coast of the\n  Thermaic Gulf, or the Gulf of Salonica, as it is now called, some\n  twenty miles from Ber\u0153a.\n\nThe voyage was an easy one, and not too prolonged. The boat or ship in\nwhich the Apostle was embarked passed through splendid scenery. On his\nright hand, as he steered for the south, was the magnificent mountain\nof Olympus, the fabled abode of the gods, rising a clear ten thousand\nfeet into the region of perpetual snow, while on his left was Mount\nAthos, upon which he had been looking ever since the day that he left\nTroas. But the Apostle had no eye for the scenery, nor had St. Luke a\nword to bestow upon its description, though he often passed through\nit, absorbed as they were in the contemplation of the awful realities\nof a world unseen. The sea voyage from the place where St. Paul\nembarked till he came to Phalerum, the port of Athens, where he\nlanded, lasted perhaps three or four days, and covered about two\nhundred miles, being somewhat similar in distance, scenery, and\nsurroundings to the voyage from Glasgow to Dublin or Bristol, land in\nboth cases being in sight all the time and splendid mountain ranges\nbounding the views on either side.[163]\n\n  [163] The best description which I know of this neighbourhood is\n  that given by Mr. Tozer in his _Highlands of Turkey_, vol. ii., p.\n  8. St. Paul embarked at the head of the long, narrow gulf, called\n  anciently the Thermaic Gulf, leading up to the city of\n  Thessalonica. The Apostle must have sailed in a mere fishing smack\n  or good-sized boat, as the iron-bound western coast of this gulf\n  is devoid of harbours sufficient for large ships. Mr. Tozer\n  himself sailed from Thessalonica in such a vessel, see _l.c._,\n  vol. ii., p. 4: \"We chartered a vessel to convey us down the bay,\n  a six-oared Smyrna ca\u00efque, quite elegant in her appointments as\n  compared with the ordinary lumbering market boats and coasters of\n  these seas, and a tight little craft withal, for though not more\n  than six feet in width, and without a deck, she had made a voyage\n  to the Crimea during the war.\" Cicero, even when going as\n  proconsul into Asia travelled in the \"undecked vessel of the\n  Rhodians,\" of whose weakness and slowness he complains: see his\n  letters to Atticus, v. 12 and 13.\n\nSt. Paul landed about November 1st, 51, at Phalerum, one of the two\nports of ancient Athens, the Pir\u00e6us being the other, and thence his\nuncertain steps were guided to the city itself, where he was left\nalone in some lodging. The Ber\u0153an Christians to whom he was\nentrusted returned perhaps in the same vessel in which they had\npreviously travelled, as the winter season, when navigation largely\nceased, was now fast advancing, bearing with them a message to Timothy\nand Silas to come as rapidly as possible to his assistance, the\nApostle being practically helpless when deprived of his trusted\nfriends. At Athens St. Paul for a time moved about examining the city\nfor himself, a process which soon roused him to action and brought\nmatters to a crisis. St. Paul was well used to pagan towns and the\nsights with which they were filled. From his earliest youth in Tarsus\nidolatry and its abominations must have been a pain and grief to him;\nbut Athens he found to exceed them all, so that \"his spirit was\nprovoked within him as he beheld the city full of idols.\" We have in\nancient Greek literature the most interesting confirmation of the\nstatement here made by St. Luke. We still possess a descriptive\naccount of Greece written by a chatty Greek traveller named\nPausanias, in the days of the Antonines, that is, less than a hundred\nyears after St. Paul's visit, and when Athens was practically the same\nas in the Apostle's day. Pausanias enters into the greatest details\nabout Athens, describing the statues of gods and heroes, the temples,\nthe worship, the customs of the people, bestowing the first thirty\nchapters of his first book upon Athens alone. Pausanias's _Description\nof Greece_[164] is most interesting to every one because he saw Athens\nin the height of its literary glory and architectural splendour, and\nit is specially interesting to the Bible student because it amply\nconfirms and illustrates the details of St. Paul's visit.\n\n  [164] This important work may be most easily consulted in\n  Shilleto's translation, published in Bohn's Classical Library,\n  Bell & Sons, London, 1886.\n\nThus we are told in words just quoted that St. Paul found \"the city\nfull of idols,\" and this provoked his spirit over and above the usual\nprovocation he received wherever he found dead idols like these\nusurping the place rightfully belonging to the Lord of the universe.\nNow let us take up Pausanias, and what does he tell us? In his first\nchapter he tells how the ports of Athens were crowded on every side\nwith temples, and adorned with statues of gold and silver. Phalerum,\nthe port where Paul landed, had temples of Demeter, of Athene, of\nZeus, and \"altars of gods unknown,\" of which we shall presently speak.\nThen we can peruse chapter after chapter crowded with descriptions of\nstatues and temples, till in the seventeenth chapter we read how in\ntheir pantheistic enthusiasm they idolised the most impalpable of\nthings: \"The Athenians have in the market-place, among other things\nnot universally notable, an altar of Mercy, to whom, though most\nuseful of all the gods to the life of man and its vicissitudes, the\nAthenians alone of all the Greeks assign honours. And not only is\nphilanthropy more regarded among them, but they also exhibit more\npiety to the gods than others; for they have also an altar to Shame\nand Rumour and Energy. And it is clear that those people who have a\nlarger share of piety than others have also a larger share of good\nfortune.\" While again, in chapter xxiv., dwelling upon the statues of\nHercules and Athene, Pausanias remarks, \"I have said before that the\nAthenians, more than any other Greeks, have a zeal for religion.\"\nAthens was, at the time of St. Paul's visit, the leading university of\nthe world, and university life then was permeated with the spirit of\npaganism, the lovers of philosophy and science delighting to adorn\nAthens with temples and statues and endowments as expressions of the\ngratitude they felt for the culture which they had there gained.[165]\nThese things had, however, no charm for the Apostle Paul. Some\nmoderns, viewing him from an unsympathetic point of view, would\ndescribe him in their peculiar language as a mere Philistine in\nspirit, unable to recognise the material beauty and glory which lay\naround. And this is true. The beauty which the architect and the\nsculptor would admire was for the Apostle to a large extent\nnon-existent, owing to his defective eyesight; but even when\nrecognised it was an object rather of dislike and of abhorrence than\nof admiration and pleasure, because the Apostle saw deeper than the\nman of mere superficial culture and \u00e6sthetic taste. The Apostle saw\nthese idols and the temples consecrated to their use from the moral\nand spiritual standpoint, and viewed them therefore as the outward and\nvisible signs of an inward festering corruption and rottenness, the\nmore beautiful perhaps because of the more awful decay which lay\nbeneath.\n\n  [165] The Emperor Hadrian, for instance, adorned Athens with\n  expensive buildings and libraries, and enriched it with\n  endowments. See Duhr's work, p. 44, on the _Journeys of the\n  Emperor Hadrian_, published in the Proceedings of the\n  Arch\u00e6ological Society of Vienna; and cf. Pausanias, i. 18.\n\nThe glimpses which St. Paul got of Athens as he wandered about roused\nhis spirit and quickened him to action. He followed his usual course\ntherefore. He first sought his own countrymen the Jews. There was a\ncolony of Jews at Athens, as we know from independent sources. Philo\nwas a Jew the authenticity of whose writings, at least in great part,\nhas never been questioned. He lived at Alexandria at this very period,\nand was sent, about twelve years earlier, as an ambassador to Rome to\nprotest against the cruel persecutions to which the Alexandrian Jews\nhad been subjected at the time when Caligula made the attempt to erect\nhis statue at Jerusalem, of which we have spoken in a previous\nchapter. He wrote an account of his journey to Rome and his treatment\nby the Emperor, which is called _Legatio ad Caium_, and in it he\nmentions Athens as one of the cities where a considerable Jewish\ncolony existed.[166] We know practically nothing more about this\nJewish colony save what we are told here by St. Luke, that it was\nlarge enough to have a synagogue, not a mere oratory like the\nPhilippian Jews.[167] It cannot, however, have been a very large one.\nAthens was not a seat of any considerable trade, and therefore had no\nsuch attractions for the Jews as either Thessalonica or Corinth; while\nits abounding idolatry and its countless images would be repellant to\ntheir feelings. Modern investigations have, indeed, brought to light a\nfew ancient inscriptions testifying to the presence of Jews at Athens\nin these earlier ages; but otherwise we know nothing about them. The\nsynagogue seems to have imbibed a good deal of the same easy-going\ncontemptuously tolerant spirit with which the whole atmosphere of\nAthens was infected. Jews and pagans alike listened to St. Paul, and\nthen turned away to their own pursuits. In a city where every religion\nwas represented, and every religion discussed and laughed at, how\ncould any one be very much in earnest? St. Paul then turned from\nthe Jews to the Gentiles. He frequented the market-place, a\nwell-known spot, near to the favourite meeting-place of the Stoic\nphilosophers.[168] There St. Paul entered into discussion with\nindividuals or with groups as they presented themselves. The\nphilosophers soon took notice of the new-comer. His manner, terribly\nin earnest, would soon have secured attention in any society, and much\nmore in Athens, where whole-souled and intense enthusiasm was the one\nintellectual quality which was completely wanting. For who but a man\nthat had heard the voice of God and had seen the vision of the\nAlmighty could be in earnest in a city where residents and strangers\nsojourning there all alike spent their time in nothing else but either\nto tell or to hear some new thing? The philosophers and Stoics and\nEpicureans alike were attracted by St. Paul's manner. They listened to\nhim as he discoursed of Jesus and the Resurrection, the two topics\nwhich absorbed him. They mistook his meaning in a manner very natural\nto the place, strange as it may seem to us. In Athens the popular\nworship was thoroughly Pantheistic. Every desire, passion, infirmity\neven of human nature was deified and adored, and therefore, as we have\nalready pointed out, Pity and Shame and Energy and Rumour, the last\nindeed the most fitting and significant of them all for a people who\nsimply lived to talk, found spirits willing to prostrate themselves in\ntheir service and altars dedicated to their honour. The philosophers\nheard this new Jewish teacher proclaiming the virtues and blessings of\nJesus and the Resurrection, and they concluded Jesus to be one\ndivinity and the Resurrection another divinity, lately imported from\nthe mysterious East. The philosophers were the aristocracy of the\nAthenian city, reverenced as the University professors in a German or\nScotch town, and they at once brought the new-comer before the court\nof Areopagus, the highest in Athens, charged, as in the time of\nSocrates, with the duty of supervising the affairs of the national\nreligion, and punishing all attacks and innovations thereon. The\nApostle was led up the steps or stairs which still remain, the judges\ntook their places on the rock-hewn benches, St. Paul was placed upon\nthe defendant's stone, called, as Pausanias tells us, the Stone of\nImpudence, and then the trial began.\n\n  [166] Any one wishing to consult the writings of this contemporary\n  of St. Paul can find Philo's works translated into English in 4\n  vols. in Bohn's Library of Ecclesiastical Antiquity. A comparison\n  of St. Paul's writings with those of Philo will show us the\n  wondrous superiority of those of the Christian Apostle, owing to\n  his inspiration by the Holy Ghost. St. Paul's writings are a\n  perpetual feast of fat things nourishing the soul unto everlasting\n  life. The writings of Philo are curious and interesting, but no\n  one would dream of taking them as a spiritual guide of life.\n\n  [167] The Athenians had for a long time previous to St. Paul's\n  visit some commercial relations with the Jewish nation. Josephus,\n  _Antiqq._, XIV. 8, tells us how they erected a brass statue of the\n  high priest Hyrcanus, as an expression of their good will to the\n  Jewish nation. This was a hundred years before St. Paul's visit.\n  Bayet discovered early Jewish inscriptions among the Athenian\n  cemeteries. See his _De Titulis Attic\u00e6 Christianis_, pp. 122-24,\n  of which we treat in a note _infra_.\n\n  [168] Pausanias, i. 15, gives a description of the Porch or\n  Painted Chamber, the Stoa P\u0153cile, whence the Stoics derived\n  their name, showing that it was close to the Agora, or\n  market-place, where Paul disputed.\n\nThe Athenian philosophers were cultured, and they were polite. They\ndemand, therefore, in bland tones, \"May we know what this new teaching\nis, which is spoken by thee? For thou bringest certain strange things\nto our ears; we would know, therefore, what these things mean.\" And\nnow St. Paul has got his chance of a listening audience. He has come\nacross a new type of hearers, such as he has not enjoyed since those\nearly days of his first Christian love, when, after his escape from\nJerusalem, he resided at the university city of Tarsus for a long\ntime, till sought out by Barnabas to come and minister to the crowds\nof Gentiles who were flocking into the Church at Antioch.[169] St.\nPaul knew right well the tenets of the two classes of men, the Stoics\nand the Epicureans, with whom he had to contend, and he deals with\nthem effectually in the speech which he delivered before the court. Of\nthat address we have only the barest outline. The report given in the\nActs contains about two hundred and fifty words, and must have lasted\nlittle more than two minutes if that was all St. Paul said. It\nembodies, however, merely the leading arguments used by the Apostle as\nTimothy or some other disciple recollected them and told them to St.\nLuke. Let us see what these arguments were. He begins with a\ncompliment to the Athenians. The Authorised, and even the Revised,\nVersion represent him indeed as beginning like an unskilled and unwise\nspeaker with giving his audience a slap in the face. \"Ye men of\nAthens, in all things I perceive that ye are somewhat superstitious,\"\nwould not have been the most conciliatory form of address to a\nkeen-witted assembly like that before which he was now standing. It\nwould have tended to set their backs up at once. If we study St.\nPaul's Epistles, specially his First Epistle to Corinth, we shall find\nthat even when he had to find the most grievous faults with his\ndisciples, he always began like a prudent man by conciliating their\nfeelings, praising them for whatever he could find good or blessed in\nthem. Surely if St. Paul acted thus with believers living unworthy of\ntheir heavenly calling, he would be still more careful not to offend\nmen whom he wished to win over to Christ! St. Paul's exordium was\ncomplimentary rather than otherwise, bearing out the description which\nPausanias gives of the Athenians of his own day, that \"they have more\nthan other Greeks, a zeal for religion.\" Let us expand his thoughts\nsomewhat that we may grasp their force. \"Men of Athens, in all things\nI perceive that ye are more religious and more devoted to the worship\nof the deity than other men. For as I passed along and observed the\nobjects of your worship, I found also an altar with this inscription,\nTo the unknown God.\" St. Paul here displays his readiness as a\npractised orator. He shows his power and readiness to become all\nthings to all men. He seizes upon the excessive devotion of the\nAthenians. He does not abuse them on account of it, he uses it rather\nas a good and useful foundation on which he may build a worthier\nstructure, as a good and sacred principle, hitherto misapplied, but\nhenceforth to be dedicated to a nobler purpose. The circumstance upon\nwhich St. Paul seized, the existence of an altar dedicated to the\nunknown God, is amply confirmed by historic evidence. St. Paul may\nhave noticed such altars as he passed up the road from Phalerum, where\nhe landed, to the city of Athens, where, as we learn from Pausanias,\nthe next-century traveller, such altars existed in his time; or he may\nhave seen them on the very hill of Areopagus on which he was standing,\nwhere, from ancient times, as we learn from another writer, altars\nexisted dedicated to the unknown gods who sent a plague upon\nAthens.[170] St. Paul's argument then was this. The Athenians were\nalready worshippers of the Unknown God. This was the very deity he\ncame proclaiming, and therefore he could not be a setter forth of\nstrange gods nor liable to punishment in consequence. He then proceeds\nto declare more fully the nature of the Deity hitherto unknown. He was\nthe God that made the world and all things therein. He was not\nidentical therefore with the visible creation as the Pantheism of the\nStoics declared,[171] but gave to all out of His own immense fulness\nlife and wealth, and all things; neither was He like the gods of the\nEpicureans who sat far aloof from all care and thought about this\nlower world. St. Paul taught God's personal existence as against the\nStoics, and God's providence as against the Epicureans. Then he struck\nstraight at the root of that national pride, that supreme contempt for\nthe outside barbaric world, which existed as strongly among these\ncultured agnostic Greek philosophers as among the most narrow,\nfanatical, and bigoted Jews: \"He made of one every nation of men for\nto dwell on all the face of the earth, having determined their\nappointed seasons, and the bounds of their habitation; that they\nshould seek God, if haply they might feel after Him, and find Him.\" A\ndoctrine which must have sounded exceeding strange to these Greeks\naccustomed to despise the barbarian world, looking down upon it from\nthe height of their learning and civilisation, and regarding\nthemselves as the only favourites of Heaven. St. Paul proclaims on the\nHill of Mars Christian liberalism, the catholic and cosmopolitan\ncharacter of the true religion in opposition to this Greek contempt\ngrounded on mere human position and privilege, as clearly and as\nloudly as he proclaimed the same great truth at Jerusalem or in the\nsynagogues of the Dispersion in opposition to Jewish exclusiveness\ngrounded on the Divine covenant. St. Paul had grasped the great lesson\ntaught by the prophets of the Old Testament as they prophesied\nconcerning Babylon, Egypt, and Tyre. They proclaimed the lesson which\nJewish ears were slow to learn, they taught the Jews the truth which\nPaul preached to the philosophers of Athens, they acted upon the\nprinciple which it was the great work of Paul's life to exemplify,\nthat God's care and love and providence are over all His works, that\nHis mercies are not restrained to any one nation, but that, having\nmade of one all nations upon the face of the earth, His blessings are\nbestowed upon them all alike. This truth here taught by St. Paul has\nbeen slow to make its way. Men have been slow to acknowledge the\nequality of all nations in God's sight, very slow to give up their own\nclaims to exceptional treatment and blessing on the part of the\nAlmighty. The great principle enunciated by the Apostle struck, for\ninstance, at the evil of slavery, yet how slowly it made its way. Till\nthirty years ago really good and pious men saw nothing inconsistent\nwith Christianity in negro slavery. Christian communions even were\nestablished grounded on this fundamental principle, the righteous\ncharacter of slavery. John Newton was a slave trader, and seems to\nhave seen nothing wrong in it. George Whitfield owned slaves, and\nbequeathed them as part of his property to be held for his Orphan\nHouse in America. But it is not only slavery that this great principle\noverthrows. It strikes down every form of injustice and wrong. God has\nmade all men of one; they are all equally His care, and therefore\nevery act of injustice is a violation of the Divine law which is thus\nexpressed. Such ideas must have seemed exceedingly strange, and even\nunnatural to men accustomed to reverence the teaching and study the\nwritings of guides like Aristotle, whose dogma was that slavery was\nbased on the very constitution of nature itself which formed some men\nto rule and others to be slaves.\n\n  [169] That period of retirement at Tarsus may have been utilised\n  by St. Paul in studying classical literature and Greek philosophy\n  by way of preparation for that life's work among the Gentiles, to\n  which he was appointed at his conversion.\n\n  [170] There are frequent notices of the altars to the unknown gods\n  in ancient Greek writers: as in Pausanias, _Description of\n  Greece_, vol. i., p. 2 (Shilleto's translation); _Life of\n  Apollonius_, by Philostratus, vi., 3; Lucian's _Philopatris_, 29.\n  See, however, for exhaustive discussions of this point, and the\n  whole subject of the topography of ancient Athens, Lewin's _St.\n  Paul_, vol. i., p. 242; Farrar's _St. Paul_, ch. xxvii., and\n  Conybeare and Howson's _St. Paul_, vol. i., ch. x. Spon and\n  Wheeler were travellers of the seventeenth century, whose works on\n  this subject are important as showing Athens as it existed before\n  modern changes. Some of the reports of travels in Greece, made by\n  eminent scholars in the same century, and now very little known,\n  may be found in the early volumes of the Philosophical\n  Transactions of the Royal Society.\n\n  [171] St. Paul shows that he could sympathise with the true\n  element in pantheistic stoicism by his famous words which have a\n  certain pantheistic ring, but still a very different one from that\n  of the Stoics: \"In Him we live and move and have our being.\"\n\nSt. Paul does not finish with this. He has not yet exhausted all his\nmessage. He had now dealt with the intellectual errors and mistakes of\nhis hearers. He had around him and above him, if he could but see the\nmagnificent figure of Athene, the pride and glory of the Acropolis,\nwith its surrounding temples, the most striking proofs how their\nintellectual mistakes had led the wise of this world into fatal and\ndegrading practices. In the course of his argument, having shown the\nnearness of God to man, \"In Him we live and move and have our being,\"\nand the Divine desire that man should seek after and know God, he\nquoted a passage common to several well-known poets, \"For we are also\nHis offspring.\"[172] This was sufficient for St. Paul, who as we see,\nin all his Epistles, often flies off at a tangent when a word slips as\nit were by chance from his pen, leading him off to a new train of\nideas. We are the offspring of God. How is it then that men can\nconceive the Godhead, that which is Divine, to be like unto those gold\nand silver, brass or marble statues, even though wrought with the\ngreatest possible skill. The philosophers indeed pretended to\ndistinguish between the Eternal Godhead and these divinities and\nimages innumerable, which were but representations of his several\ncharacteristics and attributes. But even if they distinguished\nintellectually, they did not distinguish in practice, and the people\nfrom the highest to the lowest identified the idol with the deity\nitself, and rendered thereto the honour due to God.[173]\n\n  [172] These words are directly and literally taken out of the\n  _Ph\u00e6nomena_ of Aratus, a Greek poet of Cilicia and a\n  fellow-countryman of the orator. He was absolutely correct,\n  however, in saying \"certain of your own poets,\" as the same\n  sentiment is found in a hymn to Jupiter, composed by the Stoic\n  philosopher and poet Cleanthes, a poem which will be found with a\n  Latin version in Cudworth's _Intellectual System_. Cleanthes was\n  the immediate successor of Zeno, the founder of Stoicism. His\n  words therefore would have the more weight with his disciples\n  three centuries later. He died, like a Stoic, of hunger, aged\n  eighty, and a statue was erected to him by the Roman Senate in his\n  native place Assos, a town of \u00c6olis in Greece. See for more about\n  Cleanthes and Aratus, Fabricius, _Bibliotheca Gr\u00e6ca_, or Smith's\n  _Dict. Greek and Rom. Biog._\n\n  [173] As it was with the ancient image worshippers, so is it with\n  the modern. The excuses made for the pagans in ancient times are\n  exactly the same as those made for the image worshippers of the\n  eighth and later centuries: see the article on Iconoclasm in the\n  _Dict. Christ. Biog._\n\nSt. Paul then proceeds to enunciate his own doctrines. He lightly\ntouches upon, as he did previously at Lystra (ch. xiv. 16), a subject\nwhich neither the time at his disposal nor the position of his hearers\nwould permit him to discuss. He glances at, but does not attempt to\nexplain, why God had postponed to that late date this novel teaching:\n\"The times of ignorance God overlooked; but now He commandeth men that\nthey should all everywhere repent.\" This doctrine of repentance,\ninvolving a sense of sin and sorrow for it, must have sounded\nexceeding strange to those philosophic ears, as did the announcement\nwith which the Apostle follows it up, the proclamation of a future\njudgment by a Man whom God had ordained for the purpose, and\nauthenticated by raising him from the dead. Here the crowd interrupted\nhim. The Resurrection, or Anastasis, which Paul preached was not then\na new deity, but an impossible process through which no man save in\nfable had ever passed. When the Apostle got thus far the assembly\nbroke up. The idea of a resurrection of a dead man was too much for\nthem. It was too ludicrous for belief. \"Some mocked: but others said,\nWe will hear thee again of this matter,\" and thus ended St. Paul's\naddress, and thus ended too the Athenian opportunity, for St. Paul\nsoon passed away from such a society of learned triflers and\nscoffers. They sat in the seat of the scorner, and the seat of the\nscorner is never a good one for a learner to occupy who wishes to\nprofit. He felt that he had no great work to do in such a place. His\nopportunity lay where hearts were broken with sin and sorrow, where\nthe burden of life weighed upon the soul, and men heavy laden and sore\npressed were longing for real deliverance and for a higher, nobler\nlife than the world could offer. His work, however, was not all in\nvain, nor were his personal discussions and his public address devoid\nof results. The Church of Athens was one of those which could look\nback to St. Paul as its founder. \"Not many wise after the flesh were\ncalled\" in that city of wisdom and beauty, but some were called, among\nwhom was one of those very judges who sat to investigate the Apostle's\nteaching: \"But certain clave unto him, and believed: among whom also\nwas Dionysius the Areopagite, and a woman named Damaris, and others\nwith them.\" And this Church thus founded became famous; Dionysius the\nAreopagite became afterwards a celebrated man, because his name was\nattached some five centuries later to a notorious forgery which has\nplayed no small part in later Christian history.[174] Dionysius was\nthe first bishop of the Athenian Church according to the testimony of\nanother Dionysius, Bishop of Corinth, who lived in the middle of the\nsecond century, while persons were yet living who could remember the\nAreopagite. He was succeeded by Publius, who presided over the Church\nat an important period of its existence. The Emperor Hadrian came to\nAthens, and was charmed with it about the year 125 a.d. At that time\nthe Athenian Church must have included among its members several\nlearned men; for the two earliest _Apologies_ in defence of\nChristianity were produced by it. The Athenian Church had just then\nbeen purified by the fiery trials of persecution. Quadratus and\nAristides stood forth to plead its cause before the Emperor.[175] Of\nQuadratus and his work we know but little. Eusebius, the great Church\nhistorian, had, however, seen it, and gives us (_H. E._, iv. 3) a\nbrief abstract of it, appealing to the miracles of our Saviour, and\nstating that some of the dead whom Christ had raised had lived to his\nown time. While as for Aristides, the other apologist, his work, after\nlying hidden from the sight of Christendom, was printed and published\nlast year, as we have told in the former volume of this commentary.\nThat _Apology_ of Aristides has much important teaching for us, as we\nhave there tried to show. There is one point, however, to which we did\nnot allude. The _Apology_ of Aristides shows us that the Athenian\nChurch accepted in the fullest degree and preserved the great Pauline\ndoctrine of the freedom and catholic nature of Christianity. In the\nyear 125 Judaism and Christianity were still struggling together\nwithin the Church in other places; but at Athens they had clean\nseparated the one from the other. Till that year no one but a\ncircumcised Jewish Christian had ever presided over the Mother Church\nof Jerusalem, which sixty years after the martyrdom of St. Peter and\nSt. Paul preserved exactly the same attitude as in the days of James\nthe Just.[176] The Church of Athens, on the other hand, as a\nthoroughly Gentile Church, had from the first enjoyed the ministry of\nDionysius the Areopagite, a Gentile of culture and education. He had\nbeen attracted by the broad liberal teaching of the Apostle in his\naddress upon Mars' Hill, enunciating a religion free from all narrow\nnational limitations. He embraced this catholic teaching with his\nwhole heart, and transmitted it to his successors, so that when some\nseventy years later a learned Athenian stood forth in the person of\nAristides, to explain the doctrines of the Church, contrasting them\nwith the errors and mistakes of all other nations, Aristides does not\nspare even the Jews. He praises them indeed when compared with the\npagans, who had erred on the primary questions of morals; but he\nblames them because they had not reached the final and absolute\nposition occupied by the Christians. Listen to the words of Aristides\nwhich proclaim the true Pauline doctrine taught in St. Paul's sermons,\nre-echoed by the Epistles, \"Nevertheless the Jews too have gone astray\nfrom accurate knowledge, and they suppose in their minds that they are\nserving God, but in the methods of their service, their service is to\nangels and not to God, in that they observe Sabbaths and new moons,\nand the passover, and the great fast, and the fast and circumcision,\nand cleanness of meats,\" words which sound exactly the same note and\nembody the same conception as St. Paul in his indignant language to\nthe Galatians (iv. 9-11): \"Now that ye have come to know God, or\nrather to be known of God, how turn ye back again to the weak and\nbeggarly elements, whereunto ye desire to be in bondage over again? Ye\nobserve days, and months, and seasons, and years. I am afraid of you,\nlest by any means I have bestowed labour upon you in vain.\"[177]\n\n  [174] Few biblical characters have been so surrounded with a haze\n  of fable as Dionysius the Areopagite. All that we certainly know\n  about him is from this passage in the Acts, and from two notices\n  by Eusebius, _H. E._, iii. 4, and iv. 23. In the _Acta Sanctorum_\n  the Bollandists bestow an immense quantity of space on Dionysius\n  and the literature of the subject under the date Oct. 9th, in\n  their Fourth Volume for October, pp. 696-987. The name of\n  Dionysius became specially celebrated when about the year 500 it\n  was attached to an impudent forgery called the _Heavenly\n  Hierarchy_, from which has been largely derived the modern Roman\n  doctrine of the Assumption of the Blessed Virgin, and which has\n  also exercised a great influence on the development of modern\n  pantheism: see the article on Dionysius in vol. i. of Smith's\n  _Dict. Christ. Biog._ Johannes Scotus Erigena, an Irish scholar of\n  the ninth century, was the only man in France found capable of\n  translating these Greek works when brought to Western Europe from\n  the East: see _Vett. Epistt. Hibernic. Sylloge_, xxii., xxiii.,\n  xxiv., in Ussher's Works (Ed. Elrington), iv. 474-87. Dionysius is\n  commemorated on Oct. 3rd in the ancient Latin Martyrologies, on\n  Oct. 9th in the modern Roman Martyrology. The ancient\n  Martyrologies--the ancient Roman, Ado's, Usaurd's--have a curious\n  notice stating that Aristides the Athenian, in a work which he\n  wrote about the Christian religion, described the martyrdom of\n  Dionysius in the reign of Hadrian. There is no notice of this in\n  the _Apology_ of Aristides which has lately come to light. A\n  curious story is told in one of his alleged letters, addressed to\n  Polycarp. Apollophanes, a pagan sophist, was attacking Polycarp\n  about Christianity. Dionysius tells Polycarp to remind his\n  opponent of the miraculous darkness on the day of Crucifixion\n  which Dionysius and Apollophanes had seen at Hierapolis, where\n  they were then both students, when Dionysius said, \"Either the God\n  of nature suffers, or the world is in process of dissolution.\"\n\n  [175] The visits of the Emperor Hadrian to Athens, and his delight\n  in that city, have been confirmed by the latest antiquarian\n  investigations in the region of coins and inscriptions. The\n  student who wishes to make acquaintance with the evidence on this\n  point, which has an important bearing upon the historic proof of\n  our holy religion, should consult the learned treatise of Julius\n  D\u00fcrr, styled, _Die Reisen der Kaisers Hadrian_, (Vienna, 1881). It\n  minutely investigates the records of Hadrian's life, and shows us\n  that Hadrian visited and lived at Athens in A.D. 125. This work\n  was published ten years before the _Apology_ of the Athenian\n  Christian Aristides was discovered, serving to illustrate its\n  history from an independent point of view. I have endeavoured to\n  set forth the bearing of this point at greater length than I can\n  now bestow upon it in a series of papers on the _Apology_ of\n  Aristides in the _Sunday at Home_ for 1891-2. Mrs. Rendal Harris,\n  the wife of the discoverer of it, has published an interesting\n  work on this _Apology_, to which I would refer the reader (London:\n  Hodder & Stoughton, 1892). The _Apology_ itself was published in\n  1891, in the series called _Cambridge Texts and Studies_.\n\n  [176] The testimony of Eusebius, _H. E._, iv. 5, is express on\n  this point: \"Down to the siege of the Jews under Hadrian there\n  were fifteen bishops in the Church of Jerusalem, all of whom, as\n  they say, were Hebrews from the first, and received the genuine\n  knowledge of Christ, so that in the estimation of those able to\n  judge they were counted worthy of the episcopal office.\"\n\n  [177] The whole subject of the origin and history of the primitive\n  Church of Athens has been minutely investigated by a modern French\n  scholar, C. Bayet, a member of the French school of antiquaries at\n  Athens. The title of his book, to which I have already referred,\n  is _De Titulis Attic\u00e6 Christianis Antiquissimis Commentatio_\n  (Thorin: Paris, 1878). He gives a large number of primitive\n  Christian and Jewish inscriptions found at Athens. The above\n  quotation from Aristides will be found in Rendal Harris's edition,\n  p. 48, in the Cambridge _Texts and Studies_.\n\nSt. Paul did not stay long at Athens. Five or six weeks perhaps, two\nmonths at most, was probably the length of his visit, time enough just\nfor his Ber\u0153an guides to go back to their own city two hundred\nmiles away, and forward their message to Thessalonica fifty miles\ndistant, desiring Timothy and Silas to come to him. Timothy,\ndoubtless, soon started upon his way, tarried with the Apostle for a\nlittle, and then returned to Thessalonica, as we learn from 1 Thess.\niii. 1: \"When we could no longer forbear, we thought it good to be\nleft at Athens alone, and sent Timothy to establish you and comfort\nyou.\" And now he was again all alone in that scoffing city where\nneither the religious, moral, nor intellectual atmosphere could have\nbeen pleasing to a man like St. Paul. He quitted Athens therefore and\ncame to Corinth. In that city he laboured for a period of a year and a\nhalf at least; and yet the record of his brief visit to Athens,\nunsuccessful as it was so far as immediate results are concerned, is\nmuch longer than the record of his prolonged work in Corinth.\n\nNow if we were writing a life of St. Paul instead of a commentary on\nthe history told us in the Acts, we should be able to supplement the\nbrief narrative of the historical book with the ample details\ncontained in the Epistles of St. Paul, especially the two Epistles\nwritten to Corinth itself, which illustrate the life of the Apostle,\nhis work at Corinth, and the state of the Corinthians themselves prior\nand subsequent to their conversion. A consideration of these points\nwould, however, lead me to intrude on the sphere of the commentator on\nthe Corinthian Epistles, and demand an amount of space which we cannot\nafford. In addition, the three great biographies of St. Paul to which\nwe have so often referred--Lewin's, Farrar's, and that of Conybeare\nand Howson--treat this subject at such great length and with such a\nprofusion of arch\u00e6ological learning as practically leave a fresh\nwriter nothing new to say in this direction. Let us, however, look\nbriefly at the record in the Acts of St. Paul's work in Corinth,\nviewing it from the expositor's point of view. St. Paul went from\nAthens to Corinth discouraged, it may have been, by the results of his\nAthenian labours. Opposition never frightened St. Paul; but learned\ncarelessness, haughty contemptuous indifference to his Divine message,\nthe outcome of a spirit devoid of any true spiritual life, quenched\nhis ardour, chilled his enthusiasm. He must indeed have been sorely\nrepelled by Athens when he set out all alone for the great capital of\nAchaia, the wicked, immoral, debased city of Corinth. When he came\nthither he united himself with Aquila, a Jew of Pontus, and Priscilla\nhis wife, because they were members of the same craft. They had been\nlately expelled from Rome, and, like the Apostle, were tentmakers:\nfor convenience' sake therefore, and to save expense, they all lodged\ntogether.[178] Here again St. Paul experienced the wisdom of his\nfather's training and of the Rabbinical law, which thus made him in\nCorinth, as before in Thessalonica, thoroughly independent of all\nexternal circumstances, and able with his own hands to minister to his\nbody's wants. And it was a fortunate thing too for the gospel's sake\nthat he was able to do so. St. Paul never permits any one to think for\na moment that the claim of Christ's ministry for a fitting support is\na doubtful one. He expressly teaches again and again, as in 1 Cor.\nix., that it is the Scriptural as well as rational duty of the people\nto contribute according to their means to the maintenance of Christ's\npublic ministry. But there were certain circumstances at Thessalonica,\nand above all at Corinth, which made St. Paul waive his just claim and\neven cramp, limit, and confine his exertions, by imposing on himself\nthe work of earning his daily food. Thessalonica and Corinth had\nimmense Jewish populations. The Jews were notorious in that age as\nfurnishing the greatest number of impostors, quack magicians and every\nother kind of agency which traded upon human credulity for the\npurposes of gain. St. Paul was determined that neither Jew nor Gentile\nin either place should be able to hinder the work of the gospel by\naccusing him of self-seeking or covetous purposes. For this purpose he\nunited with Aquila and Priscilla in working at their common trade as\ntentmakers, employing the Sabbath days in debating after his usual\nfashion in the Jewish synagogues; and upon ordinary days improving the\nhours during which his hands laboured upon the coarse hair cloth of\nwhich tents were made, either in expounding to his fellow-workmen the\nglorious news which he proclaimed or else in meditating upon the\ntrials of his converts in Macedonia, or perhaps, most of all, in that\nperpetual communion with God, that never-ceasing intercession for\nwhich he ever found room and time in the secret chambers of the soul.\nSt. Paul's intercessions as we read of them in his Epistles were\nimmense. Intercessory prayers for his individual converts are\nfrequently mentioned by him. It would have been impossible for a man\nso hard pressed with labours of every kind temporal and spiritual to\nfind place for them all in formal prayers if St. Paul did not\ncultivate the habit of ceaseless communion with his Father in heaven,\nperpetually bringing before God those cases and persons which lay\ndearest to his heart. This habit of secret prayer must be the\nexplanation of St. Paul's widespread intercessions, and for this\nreason. He commends the same practice again and again to his converts.\n\"Pray without ceasing\" is his language to the Thessalonians (1 Thess.\nv. 17). Now this could not mean, prolong your private devotions to an\ninordinate length, because great numbers of his converts were slaves\nwho were not masters of their time. But it does mean cultivate a\nperpetual sense of God's presence and of your own communion with Him,\nwhich will turn life and its busiest work into a season of refreshing\nprayer and untiring intercession.\n\n  [178] This expulsion of the Jews from Rome by Claudius, which in\n  the providence of God brought Aquila and Priscilla into contact\n  with St. Paul, is mentioned by the Roman historian Suetonius,\n  _Claudius_, 25, in the following suggestive words: \"He expelled\n  the Jews who were continually creating tumults, Chestus impelling\n  them.\" The tumults roused by the teaching of Christian doctrine,\n  like those in the Thessalonian and Ber\u0153an synagogues, were\n  evidently the origin of the edict. Aquila and Priscilla were\n  constant travellers, and seem to have been influential Christians.\n  We find them afterwards at Ephesus, where they tarried some time:\n  see Acts xviii. 18, 19, 26; 1 Cor. xvi. 19; and subsequently 2\n  Tim. iv. 19. They also lived at Rome for a period between their\n  two residences at Ephesus, as we learn from the fact that St. Paul\n  sends a salutation to them in Romans xvi. 3, 4.\n\nMeanwhile, according to Acts xviii. 5, Silas and Timothy arrived from\nMacedonia, bringing contributions for the Apostle's support, which\nenabled him to fling himself entirely into ministerial and\nevangelistic work. This renewed activity soon told. St. Paul had no\nlonger to complain of contemptuous or listless conduct, as at Athens.\nHe experienced at Jewish hands in Corinth exactly the same treatment\nas at Thessalonica and Ber\u0153a. Paul preached that Jesus was the\nChrist. The Jews blasphemed Him, and called Him accursed. Their\nattitude became so threatening that Paul was at length compelled to\nretire from the synagogue, and, separating his disciples, Jews and\nGentiles alike, he withdrew to the house of one Justus, a man whose\nLatin name bespeaks his Western origin, who lived next door to the\nsynagogue. Thenceforth he threw himself with all his energy into his\nwork. God too directly encouraged him. The very proximity of the\nChristian Church to the Jewish Synagogue constituted a special danger\nto himself personally when he had to deal with fanatical Jews. A\nheavenly visitor appeared, therefore, to refresh the wearied saint. In\nhis hour of danger and of weakness God's strength and grace were\nperfected, and assurance was granted that the Lord had much people in\nthe city of Corinth, and that no harm should happen to him while\nstriving to seek out and gather God's sheep that were scattered abroad\nin the midst of the naughty world of Corinthian life. And the secret\nvision did not stand alone. External circumstances lent their\nassistance and support. Crispus, the chief ruler of the synagogue, and\nhis family became converts, and were baptized. Gaius and Stephanas\nwere important converts gathered from amongst the Gentiles; so\nimportant indeed were these three individuals and their families that\nSt. Paul turned aside from his purely evangelistic and missionary\nlabours and devoted himself to the pastoral work of preparing them for\nbaptism administering personally that holy sacrament, a duty which he\nusually left to his assistants, who were not so well qualified for the\nrough pioneer efforts of controversy, which he had marked out for\nhimself.[179] And so the work went on for a year and a half, till the\nJews thought they saw their opportunity for crushing the audacious\napostate who was thus making havoc even among the officials of their\nown organisation, inducing them to join his Nazarene synagogue.[180]\nAchaia, of which Corinth was the capital, was a Roman province,\nembracing, broadly speaking, the territory comprised in the modern\nkingdom of Greece. Like a great many other provinces, and specially\nlike Cyprus, to which we have already called attention, Achaia was at\ntimes an imperial, at times a senatorial province. Forty years earlier\nit was an imperial province. The Acts describes it as just then, that\nis, about A.D. 53, a senatorial or proconsular province; and\nSuetonius, an independent Roman historian, confirms this, telling us\n(_Claud._, 25) that the Emperor Claudius restored it to the senate.\n\n  [179] See 1 Cor. i. 14-17: \"I thank God that I baptized none of\n  you, save Crispus and Gaius; lest any man should say that ye were\n  baptized into my name. And I baptized also the household of\n  Stephanas: besides, I know not whether I baptized any other. For\n  Christ sent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel.\" I have\n  often heard a very wrong conclusion drawn from this passage.\n  People think that St. Paul was here casting a certain slight upon\n  baptism as contrasted with preaching. His meaning, however, is\n  evident to any one who will realise the circumstances. The\n  Corinthians were breaking up into sects, calling themselves by the\n  names of various Christian leaders. St. Paul thanks God that very\n  few can call themselves by his name, as they had not even the poor\n  excuse for doing so, which his officiating at their baptism might\n  give. To him, in God's providence, had been assigned the rough,\n  dangerous pioneer work of preaching to the adversaries, Jews and\n  pagans, outside the Church; to others the work of introducing the\n  converts made by him into the Mystical Body of Christ.\n\n  [180] In vol. i., p. 270, I have pointed out that in Corinth the\n  Christians probably adopted, not only the name, but the\n  organisation of the synagogues.\n\nGallio, a brother of the celebrated philosophic writer Seneca, had\nbeen sent to it as proconsul, and the Jews thought they now saw their\nopportunity. Gallio, whose original and proper name was Ann\u00e6us\nNovatus, was a man distinguished by what in Rome was considered his\nsweet, gentle, and loving disposition. His reputation may have\npreceded him, and the Jews of Corinth may have thought that they would\nplay upon his easy-going temper. The Jews, being a very numerous\ncommunity at Corinth, had it of course in their power to prove very\nunpleasant to any ruler, and specially to one of Gallio's reputed\ntemper.[181] The Roman governors were invested with tremendous powers;\nthey were absolute despots, in fact, for the time being, and yet they\nwere often very anxious to gain popularity, especially with any\ntroublesome body of their temporary subjects. The Roman proconsuls, in\nfact, adopted a principle we sometimes see still acted out in\npolitical life, as if it were the highest type of statesmanship. They\nwere anxious to gain popularity by gratifying those who made\nthemselves specially obnoxious and raised the loudest cries. They\npetted the naughty, and they neglected the good. So it was with\nPontius Pilate, who perpetrated a judicial murder because it\ncontented the multitude; so it was with Festus, who left an innocent\nman in bonds at C\u00e6sarea because he desired to gain favour with the\nJews; and so too, thought the Jews of Corinth, it would be with\nGallio. They arrested the Apostle, therefore, using the messengers of\nthe synagogue for the purpose, and brought him to the proconsular\ncourt, where they set him before the bema, or elevated platform,\nwhence the Roman magistrates dispensed justice. Then they laid their\nformal accusation against him: \"This man persuadeth men to worship God\ncontrary to the law\"; expecting perhaps that he would be remitted by\nthe proconsul to the judgment and discipline of their own domestic\ntribunal, even as Pilate said to the Jews about our Lord and their\naccusation against Him: \"Take ye Him, and judge Him according to your\nlaw.\" But the philosophic brother of the Stoic Seneca had a profound\ncontempt for these agitating Jews. His Stoic education too had trained\nhim to allow external things as little influence upon the mind as\npossible. The philosophic apathy which the Stoics cultivated must have\nmore or less affected his whole nature, as he soon showed the Jews;\nfor before the Apostle had time to reply to the charge Gallio burst in\ncontemptuously. If it were a matter of law and order, he declares, it\nwould be right to attend to it; but if your complaint is touching your\nown national law and customs I will have nothing to say to it. And\nthen he commanded his lictors to clear the court. Thus ended the\nattempt on St. Paul's freedom or life, an attempt which was indeed\nmore disastrous to the Jews themselves than to any one else; for the\nGentile mob of Corinth, hating the Jews, and glad to see them baulked\nof their expected prey, seized the chief accuser Sosthenes, the ruler\nof the synagogue, and beat him before the judgment-seat; while Gallio\nall the while cared for none of these things, despising the mob, Jew\nand Gentile alike, and contemptuously pitying them from the height of\nhis philosophic self-contentment. Gallio has been at all times\nregarded as the type of the mere worldling, who, wrapped in material\ninterests, cares for nothing higher or nobler. But this is scarcely\nfair to Gallio. The Stoic philosopher was not dead to better things.\nBut he is the type rather of men who, blinded by lower truths and mere\nintellectual wisdom, are thereby rendered careless of those spiritual\nmatters in which the soul's true life alone consists. He had so\nthoroughly cultivated a philosophic contempt for the outside world and\nits business, the sayings and doings, the joys and the sorrows of the\npuny mortals who fume and strut and fret their lives away upon this\nearthly stage, that he lost the opportunity of hearing from the\nApostle's lips of a grander philosophy, a deeper contentment, of a\ntruer, more satisfying peace than was ever dreamt of in stoical\nspeculation. And this type of man is not extinct. Philosophy, science,\nart, literature, politics, they are all great facts, all offer vast\nfields for human activity, and all may serve for a time so thoroughly\nto content and satisfy man's inner being as to render him careless of\nthat life in Christ which alone abideth for evermore.\n\n  [181] Cicero, in his oration Pro Flacco, ch. xxviii., shows how\n  troublesome and dangerous, even to the very highest persons, the\n  Jews at Rome could be one hundred years earlier than Gallio's day.\n\nThe attempt of the Jews marked the termination of St. Paul's work in\nCorinth. It was at least the beginning of the end. He had now laboured\nlonger in Corinth than anywhere else since he started out from\nAntioch. He had organised and consolidated the Church, as we can see\nfrom his Corinthian Epistles and now he longed once more to visit his\nold friends, and report what God had wrought by his means during his\nlong absence. He tarried, therefore, yet a while, visiting doubtless\nthe various Churches which he had established throughout all the\nprovince of Achaia, and then, accompanied by a few companions, set\nsail for Syria, to declare the results of his eventful mission, taking\nEphesus on his way. This was his first visit to that great city, and\nhe was probably led to pay it owing to the commercial necessities of\nAquila. Life's actions and deeds, even in the case of an apostle, are\nmoulded by very little things. A glance, a chance word, a passing\ncourtesy, forgotten as soon as done, and life is very different from\nwhat it otherwise would have been. And so, too, the tent-making and\ntent-selling of Aquila brought Paul to Ephesus, shaped the remainder\nof his career, and endowed the Church with the rich spiritual heritage\nof the teaching imparted to the Ephesian disciples by word and\nepistle.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XIV.\n\n_THE EPHESIAN CHURCH AND ITS FOUNDATION._\n\n     \"Paul, and with him Priscilla and Aquila, came to Ephesus, and he\n     left them here: but he himself entered into the synagogue, and\n     reasoned with the Jews. And when they asked him to abide a longer\n     time, he consented not; but taking his leave of them, and saying,\n     I will return again unto you, if God will, he set sail from\n     Ephesus.... Now a certain man named Apollos, an Alexandrian by\n     race, a learned man, came to Ephesus; and he was mighty in the\n     Scriptures. This man had been instructed in the way of the Lord;\n     and being fervent in spirit, he spake and taught carefully the\n     things concerning Jesus, knowing only the baptism of John: and he\n     began to speak boldly in the synagogue. But when Priscilla and\n     Aquila heard him, they took him unto them, and expounded unto him\n     the way of God more carefully.\"--ACTS xviii. 19-21, 24-26.\n\n     \"And it came to pass, that, while Apollos was at Corinth, Paul\n     having passed through the upper country, came to Ephesus.\"--ACTS\n     xix. 1.\n\n\nEphesus has been from very ancient times a distinguished city. It was\nfamous in the religious history of Asia Minor in times long prior to\nthe Christian Era. It was celebrated at the time of the Roman Empire\nas the chief seat of the worship of Diana and of the magical practices\nassociated with that worship; and Ephesus became more celebrated still\nin Christian times as the city where one of the great \u0152cumenical\nCouncils was held which served to determine the expression of the\nChurch's faith in her Divine Lord and Master. It must then be of great\ninterest to the Christian student to note the first beginnings of\nsuch a vast transformation as that whereby a chief seat of pagan\nidolatry was turned into a special stronghold of Christian orthodoxy.\nLet us then devote this chapter to tracing the upgrowth of the\nEphesian Church, and to noting the lessons the modern Church may\nderive therefrom.\n\nSt. Paul terminated his work in Corinth some time about the middle or\ntowards the close of the year 53 A.D. In the early summer of that year\nGallio came as proconsul to Achaia, and the Jewish riot was raised.\nAfter a due interval, to show that he was not driven out by Jewish\nmachinations, St. Paul determined to return once more to Jerusalem and\nAntioch, which he had left some four years at least before. He went\ndown therefore to Cenchre\u00e6, the port of departure for passengers going\nfrom Corinth to Ephesus, Asia Minor, and Syria. A Christian Church had\nbeen established there by the exertions of St. Paul or some of his\nCorinthian disciples. As soon as an early Christian was turned from\nsin to righteousness, from the adoration of idols to the worship of\nthe true God, he began to try and do something for Him whose love and\ngrace he had experienced. It was no wonder that the Church then spread\nrapidly when all its individual members were instinct with life, and\nevery one considered himself personally responsible to labour\ndiligently for God. The Church of Cenchre\u00e6 was elaborately organised.\nIt had not only its deacons, it had also its deaconesses, one of whom,\nPh\u0153be, was specially kind and useful to St. Paul upon his visits to\nthat busy seaport, and is by him commended to the help and care of the\nRoman Church (Rom. xvi. 1, 2).\n\nFrom Cenchre\u00e6 St. Paul, Aquila, and Priscilla sailed for Ephesus,\nwhere, as we have already hinted, it is most likely the latter pair\nhad some special business avocations which led them to stay at that\ncity. They may have been large manufacturers of tents, and have had a\nbranch establishment at Ephesus, which was then a great mercantile\nemporium for that part of Asia Minor.\n\nAn incidental remark of the sacred writer \"having shorn his head in\nCenchre\u00e6, for he had a vow,\" has raised a controverted question. Some\nrefer this expression to Aquila, and I think with much the greater\nprobability. It was customary with the Jews at that time when in any\nspecial danger to take a temporary Nazarite vow, binding themselves to\nabstain from wine and from cutting their hair till a certain definite\nperiod had elapsed. Then when the fixed date had arrived, the hair was\ncut off and preserved till it could be burned in the fire of a\nsacrifice offered up at Jerusalem upon the individual's next visit to\nthe Holy City. The grammatical order of the words naturally refer to\nAquila as the maker of this vow; but I cannot agree in one reason\nurged for this latter theory. Some have argued that it was impossible\nfor Paul to have made this vow; that it would, in fact, have been a\nreturn to the bondage of Judaism, which would have been utterly\ninconsistent on his part. People who argue thus do not understand St.\nPaul's position with respect to Jewish rites as being things utterly\nunimportant, and, as such, things which a wise born Jew would do well\nto observe in order to please his countrymen. If St. Paul made a vow\nat Corinth it would have been simply an illustration of his own\nprinciple, \"To the Jews I became as a Jew, in order that I might gain\nthe Jews.\" But further, I must say that the taking of a vow, though\nderived from Judaism, need not have necessarily appeared to St. Paul\nand the men of his time a purely Jewish ceremony. Vows, in fact,\nnaturally passed over from Judaism to Christianity.[182] Vows, indeed,\nof this peculiar character, and with this peculiar external sign of\nlong hair, are no longer customary amongst Christians; but surely\nspecial vows cannot be said to have gone out of fashion, when we\nconsider the wide spread of the teetotal movement, with its vows\nidentical in one important element with that of the Nazarites! But\nviewing the matter from a still wider standpoint, people, when\ncontending thus, forget what a large part the tradition of ancient\ncustoms must have played in the life, manners, and customs of St.\nPaul. All his early life he was a strict Pharisaic Jew, and down to\nthe end of life his early training must have largely modified his\nhabits. To take but one instance, pork was the common and favourite\nfood of the Romans at this period. Now I am sure that St. Paul would\nhave vigorously resisted all attempts to prevent the Gentile\nChristians eating bacon or ham; but I should not be in the least\nsurprised if St. Paul, trained in Pharisaic habits, never once touched\na food he had been taught to abhor from his earliest youth. Life is a\ncontinuous thing, and the memories of the past are very powerful. We\ncan to this day trace among ourselves many customs and traditions\ndating back to the times antecedent to the Reformation, and much\nfarther. The fires still lighted on St. John's Eve throughout Ireland,\nand once customary in Scotland, are survivals of the times of\nDruidical paganism in these islands. The ceremonies and social customs\nof Shrove Tuesday and Hallow E'en are survivals of the rude mirth of\nour pre-Reformation forefathers, on the nights before a celebrated\nfast, Ash Wednesday, in one case, before a celebrated feast, All\nSaints' Day, in the other. Or perhaps I may take another instance more\nclosely analogous still which every reader can verify for himself. The\nuse of the Church of England has to this day a curious instance of the\npower of tradition as opposed to written law. There is a general\nrubric placed in the Book of Common Prayer before the first Lord's\nPrayer. It runs as follows: \"Then the minister shall kneel and say the\nLord's Prayer with an audible voice; the people also kneeling and\nrepeating it with him, both here, and wheresoever else it is used in\nDivine Service.\" This rubric plainly prescribes that clergy and people\nshall always say the Lord's Prayer conjointly. And yet, let my readers\ngo into any church of the Anglican Communion on Sunday next, I care\nnot what the tone of its theological thought, and observe the first\nLord's Prayer used at the beginning of the Communion Service. They\nwill find that this general rubric is universally neglected, and the\ncelebrating priest says the opening Lord's Prayer by himself with no\nvoice of the people raised to accompany him. Now whence comes this\nuniversal fact? It is simply an illustration of the strength of\ntradition. It is a survival of the practice before the Reformation\nhanded down by tradition to the present time, and over-riding a\npositive and written law. In the days before the Reformation, as in\nthe Roman Catholic Church of the present day, the opening Dominical or\nLord's Prayer in the Mass was said by the priest alone. When the\nservice was translated into English the old custom still prevailed,\nand has lasted to the present day.[183] This was only human nature,\nwhich abhors unnecessary changes, and is intensely conservative of\nevery practice which is linked with the fond memories of the past.\nThis human nature was found strong in St. Paul, as in other men, and\nit would have argued no moral or spiritual weakness, no desire to play\nfast and loose with gospel liberties, had he, instead of Aquila,\nresorted to the old Jewish practice and bound himself by a vow in\nconnexion with some special blessing which he had received, or some\nspecial danger he had incurred. When we are studying the Acts we must\nnever forget that Judaism gave the tone and form, the whole outer\nframework to Christianity, even as England gave the outward shape and\nform to the constitutions of the United States and her own numberless\ncolonies throughout the world. St. Paul did not invent a brand new\nreligion, as some people think; he changed as little as possible, so\nthat his own practice and worship must have been to mere pagan eyes\nexactly the same as that of the Jews, as indeed we might conclude\nbeforehand from the fact that the Roman authorities seem to have\nviewed the Christians as a mere Jewish sect down to the close of the\nsecond century.[184]\n\n  [182] Jeremy Taylor, in his _Holy Living_, in his chapter on\n  Prayer, has some wise remarks on vows. He includes them under the\n  head of Prayer: \"A vow to God is an act of prayer and a great\n  degree and instance of opportunity, and an increase of duty by\n  some new uncommanded instance, or some more eminent degree of duty\n  or frequency of action, or earnestness of spirit in the same. And\n  because it hath pleased God in all ages of the world to admit of\n  intercourse with His servants in the matter of vows, it is not ill\n  advice that we make vows to God in those cases in which we have\n  great need or great danger.\" He then proceeds to lay down rules\n  and cautions for making vows.\n\n  [183] See Procter on the Common Prayer, p. 212; Canon Evan Daniel\n  on the Prayer Book, pp. 87 and 300.\n\n  [184] See on this subject of the confusion of Christianity with\n  Judaism by the Romans, Wieseler's _Die Christenverfolgungen der\n  C\u00e4saren_, pp. 1-10.\n\nI. Let us now take a rapid survey of the extensive journey which our\nbook disposes of in very concise fashion. St. Paul and his companions,\nAquila and Priscilla, Timothy and Silas, sailed from Cenchre\u00e6 to\nEphesus, which city up to this seems to have been untouched by\nChristian influences. St. Paul, in the earlier portion of his second\ntour, had been prohibited by the Holy Spirit from preaching in\nEphesus, or in any portion of the provinces of Asia or Bithynia.\nImportant as the human eye of St. Paul may have viewed them, still the\nDivine Guide of the Church saw that neither Asia nor Bithynia, with\nall their magnificent cities, their accumulated wealth, and their\npolitical position, were half so important as the cities and provinces\nof Europe, viewed from the standpoint of the world's conversion. But\nnow the gospel has secured a substantial foothold in Europe, has taken\na firm grasp of that imperial race which then ruled the world, and so\nthe Apostle is permitted to visit Ephesus for the first time. He seems\nto have then paid a mere passing visit to it, lasting perhaps while\nthe ship discharged the portion of her cargo destined for Ephesus. But\nSt. Paul never allowed time to hang heavy on his hands for want of\nemployment. He left Aquila and Priscilla engaged in their mercantile\ntransactions, and, entering himself into the principal synagogue,\nproceeded to expound his views. These do not seem to have then aroused\nany opposition; nay, the Jews even went so far as to desire him to\ntarry longer and open out his doctrines at greater length. We may\nconclude from this that St. Paul did not remain during this first\nvisit much beyond one Sabbath day. If he had bestowed a second Sabbath\nday upon the Ephesian synagogue, his ideas and doctrines would have\nbeen made so clear and manifest that the Jews would not have required\nmuch further exposition in order to see their drift. St. Paul, after\npromising a second visit to them, left his old friends and associates,\nAquila and his wife, with whom he had lived for nearly two years, at\nEphesus, and pushed on to C\u00e6sarea, a town which he must have already\nwell known, and with which he was subsequently destined to make a long\nand unpleasant acquaintanceship, arriving at Jerusalem in time\nprobably for the Feast of Tabernacles, which was celebrated on\nSeptember 16th, A.D. 53. Concerning the details of that visit we know\nnothing. Four years at least must have elapsed since he had seen James\nand the other venerated heads of the Mother Church. We can imagine\nthen how joyously he would have told them, how eagerly they would have\nheard the glad story of the wonders God had wrought among the Gentiles\nthrough the power of Jesus Christ. After a short sojourn at Jerusalem\nSt. Paul returned back to C\u00e6sarea, and thence went on to Antioch, the\noriginal seat of the Gentile mission for the propagation of the faith.\nAfter refreshing himself with the kindly offices of fraternal\nintercourse and conversation at this great Christian centre, where\nbroad liberal sentiment and wide Christian culture, free from any\nnarrow prejudices, must have infused a tone into society far more\nagreeable to St. Paul than the unprogressive Judaising views which\nflourished in Jerusalem, St. Paul then determined to set off upon his\nthird great tour, which must have begun at the earliest some time in\nthe spring of A.D. 54, as soon as the snows of winter had passed away\nand the passes through the Taurus Range into the central regions of\nAsia Minor had been opened. We know nothing more concerning the\nextended journey he took on this occasion. He seems to have avoided\ntowns like Lystra and Derbe, and to have directed his march straight\nto Galatia, where he had sufficient work to engage all his thought. We\nhave no mention of the names of the particular Churches where he\nlaboured. Ancyra, as it was then called, Angora as it is now named, in\nall probability demanded St. Paul's attention. If he visited it, he\nlooked as the traveller does still upon the temple dedicated to the\ndeity of Augustus and of Rome, the ruins of which have attracted the\nnotice of every modern antiquary. Glad, however, as we should have\nbeen to gratify our curiosity by details like these, we are obliged to\ncontent ourselves with the information which St. Luke gives us, that\nSt. Paul \"went through the region of Galatia and Phrygia, in order,\nstablishing all the disciples,\" leaving us a speaking example of the\nenergising power, the invigorating effects, of a visitation such as\nSt. Paul now conducted, sustaining the weak, arousing the careless,\nrestraining the rash, guiding the whole body of the Church with the\ncounsels of sanctified wisdom and heavenly prudence. Then, after his\nPhrygian and Galatian work was finished, St. Paul betook himself to a\nfield which he long since desired to occupy, and determined to fulfil\nthe promise made a year previously at least to his Jewish friends of\nthe Ephesian Synagogue.\n\nII. Now we come to the foundation of the Ephesian Church some time in\nthe latter part of the year 54 A.D. Here it may strike some reader as\nan extraordinary thing that more than twenty years after the\nCrucifixion Ephesus was as yet totally untouched by the gospel, so\nthat the tidings of salvation were quite a novel sound in the great\nAsiatic capital. People sometimes think of the primitive Church as\nif, after the Day of Pentecost, every individual Christian rushed off\nto preach in the most distant parts of the world, and that the whole\nearth was evangelised straight off. They forget the teaching of Christ\nabout the gospel leaven, and leaven never works all on an heap as it\nwere; it is slow, regular, progressive in its operations. The\ntradition, too, that the apostles did not leave Jerusalem till twelve\nyears after His ascension ought to be a sufficient corrective of this\nfalse notion; and though this tradition may not have any considerable\nhistorical basis, yet it shows that the primitive Church did not\ncherish the very modern idea that enormous and immediate successes\nfollowed upon the preaching of the gospel after Pentecost, and that\nthe conversion of vast populations at once occurred. The case was\nexactly contrary. For many a long year nothing at all was done towards\nthe conversion of the Gentile world, and then for many another long\nyear the preaching of the gospel among the Gentiles entirely depended\nupon St. Paul alone. He was the one evangelist of the Gentiles, and\ntherefore it is no wonder he should have said in 1 Cor. i. 17, \"Christ\nsent me not to baptize, but to preach the gospel.\" He was the one man\nfitted to deal with the prejudices, the ignorance, the sensuality, the\ngrossness with which the Gentile world was overspread, and therefore\nno other work, no matter how important, was to be allowed to interfere\nwith that one task which he alone could perform. This seems to me the\nexplanation of the question which might otherwise cause some\ndifficulty, how was it that the Ephesians, Jews and Gentiles alike,\ninhabiting this distinguished city, were still in such dire ignorance\nof the gospel message twenty years after the Ascension? Now let us\ncome to the story of the circumstances amid which Ephesian\nChristianity took its rise. St. Paul, as we have already said, paid a\npassing visit to Ephesus just a year before when going up to\nJerusalem, when he seems to have made a considerable impression in the\nsynagogue. He left behind him Aquila and Priscilla, who, with their\nhousehold, formed a small Christian congregation, meeting doubtless\nfor the celebration of the Lord's Supper in their own house while yet\nfrequenting the stated worship of the synagogue. This we conclude from\nthe following circumstance which is expressly mentioned in Acts xviii.\n26. Apollos, a Jew, born in Alexandria, and a learned man, as was\nnatural coming from that great centre of Greek and Oriental culture,\ncame to Ephesus. He had been baptized by some of John's disciples,\neither at Alexandria or in Palestine. It may very possibly have been\nat Alexandria. St. John's doctrines and followers may have spread to\nAlexandria by that time, as we are expressly informed they had been\ndiffused as far as Ephesus (see ch. xix. 1-4). Apollos, when he came\nto Ephesus, entered, like St. Paul, into the synagogue, and \"spake and\ntaught carefully the things concerning Jesus, knowing only the baptism\nof John.\" He knew about Jesus Christ, but with an imperfect knowledge\nsuch merely as John himself possessed. This man began to speak boldly\nin the synagogue on the topic of the Messiah whom John had preached.\nAquila and Priscilla were present in the synagogue, heard the\ndisputant, recognised his earnestness and his defects, and then,\nhaving taken him, expounded to him the way of God more fully,\ninitiating him into the full mysteries of the faith by baptism into\nthe name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost.[185] This incident has\nan important bearing upon the foundation and development of the\nEphesian Church, but it hears more directly still upon the point on\nwhich we have been dwelling. Apollos disputed in the synagogues where\nAquila and Priscilla heard him, so that they must have been regular\nworshippers there notwithstanding their Christian profession and their\nclose intercourse with St. Paul for more than eighteen months. After a\nlittle time further, Apollos desired to pass over to Greece. The\nlittle Christian Church which met at Aquila's house told him of the\nwonders they had seen and heard in Achaia and of the flourishing state\nof the Church in Corinth. They gave him letters commendatory to that\nChurch, whither Apollos passed over, and rendered such valuable help\nthat his name a year or two later became one of the watchwords of\nCorinthian party strife. The way was now prepared for St. Paul's great\nmission to Ephesus, exceeding in length any mission he had hitherto\nconducted, surpassing in its duration of three years the time spent\neven at Corinth itself. His own brief visit of the year before, the\nvisit and work of the Alexandrian Jew, the quiet conversations, the\nholy lives, the sanctified examples of Aquila and Priscilla, these had\ndone the preliminary work. They had roused expectation, provoked\ndiscussion, developed thought. Everything was ready for the great\nmasterful teacher to step upon the ground and complete the work which\nhe had already so auspiciously begun.\n\n  [185] Meyer, in his Commentary on ch. xix. 5, enunciates the\n  following extraordinary theory about Apollos, which plainly shows\n  that, valuable as may be his textual criticism, his conception of\n  Christian doctrine and of Apostolic Church life is very defective:\n  \"We may not infer from this passage that the disciples of John,\n  who passed over to Christianity, were uniformly re-baptized; for\n  in the case of the apostles who passed over from John to Jesus\n  this certainly did not take place; and even as regards Apollos the\n  common opinion that he was baptized by Aquila is purely arbitrary,\n  as in xviii. 26 his instruction in Christianity, and not his\n  baptism, is narrated.\" Again: \"Apollos could dispense with\n  re-baptism, seeing that he, with his fervid spirit, following the\n  references of John to Christ, and the instruction of his teachers,\n  penetrated without any new baptismal consecration into the\n  pneumatic elements of life.\" Meyer evidently fails to grasp what\n  the sacrament of baptism was, as conceived by St. Paul, and uses\n  the most dangerous line of argument, that from silence, concluding\n  that, because there is no mention of the Christian baptism of\n  Apollos, therefore such a baptism never took place. But this is\n  not all. Meyer's theory cannot possibly explain why baptism was\n  necessary for Cornelius, though he enjoyed the gift of the Holy\n  Ghost, while it was not necessary for Apollos, \"who penetrated\n  without any new baptismal consecration into the pneumatic element\n  of life.\" Meyer says, indeed, that in the whole New Testament\n  there is no example except in xix. 1-5 of the re-baptism of a\n  disciple of John. But then in the Acts and Epistles, where alone\n  we read of the administration of Christian baptism, there are only\n  two examples of the admission of John's disciples. In one case\n  twelve such were admitted, and they were all baptized by Paul's\n  own order. In the case of Apollos there is silence. Surely the\n  sounder conclusion is that Christian baptism was administered\n  there too, though nothing is said about it! As for the apostles\n  not being baptized with Christian baptism, the explanation is not\n  far to seek. Baptism is the reception of a disciple into covenant\n  with Christ through the medium of water. In the case of the\n  apostles this reception took place in person, and not through any\n  medium. In the apostles' case, too, there is another\n  consideration. Meyer's conclusion is simply one _e silentio_ even\n  in their case. We know not, however, everything that Christ did as\n  regards His apostles.\n\nI do not propose to discuss the roads by which St. Paul may have\ntravelled through the province of Asia on this eventful visit, nor to\ndiscuss the architectural features, or the geographical position of\nthe city of Ephesus. These things I shall leave to the writers who\nhave treated of St. Paul's life. I now confine myself to the notices\ninserted by St. Luke concerning the Apostle's Ephesian work, and about\nit I note that upon his arrival St. Paul came in contact with a small\ncongregation of the disciples of John the Baptist,[186] who had\nhitherto escaped the notice of the small Church existing at Ephesus.\nThis need not excite our wonder. We are apt to think that because\nChristianity is now such a dominant element in our own intellectual\nand religious atmosphere it must always have been the same. Ephesus,\ntoo, was then an immense city, with a large population of Jews, who\nmay have had many synagogues. These few disciples of John the Baptist\nmay have worshipped in a synagogue which never heard of the brief\nvisit of a Cilician Jew, a teacher named Saul of Tarsus, much less of\nthe quiet efforts of Aquila and Priscilla, the tentmakers, lately come\nfrom Corinth. St. Paul, on his second visit, soon came in contact with\nthese men. He at once asked them a question which tested their\nposition and attainments in the Divine life, and sheds for us a vivid\nlight upon apostolic doctrine and practice. \"Did ye receive the Holy\nGhost when ye believed?\" is plainly an inquiry whether they had\nenjoyed the blessing connected with the solemn imposition of hands,\nfrom which has been derived the rite of confirmation, as I showed in\nthe previous volume. The disciples soon revealed the imperfect\ncharacter of their religion by their reply: \"Nay, we did not so much\nas hear whether the Holy Ghost was,\" words which led St. Paul to\ndemand what in that case was the nature of their baptism. \"Into what\nthen were ye baptized?\" and they said, \"Into John's baptism.\"\n\n  [186] The movement instituted by St. John the Baptist was\n  perpetuated into the second century, and in some measure developed\n  into, or connected itself with, the sect subsequently called the\n  Hemerobaptists. The history of this movement from apostolic days\n  is elaborately traced by Bishop Lightfoot in his Essay on the\n  Essenes, contained in his _Colossians and Philemon_; see\n  especially pp. 400-407, to which we must refer the reader desirous\n  of more information. The Hemerobaptists are mentioned in the\n  _Clementine Recognitions_, i. 54, the _Clementine Homilies_, ii.\n  23, which date from about 200 A.D., and in the _Apostolic\n  Constitutions_, vi. 6, which may be put down as a century later.\n  This shows the continuity of the sect. There are still some\n  fragments of it existing in Babylonia, under the name of Mandeans:\n  see further the article \"Sabians\" in Smith's _Dict. Christ.\n  Biog._, iv. 569-73.\n\nNow the simple explanation of the disciples' ignorance was that they\nhad been baptized with John's baptism, which had no reference to or\nmention of the Holy Ghost. St. Paul, understanding them to be baptized\ndisciples, could not understand their ignorance of the personal\nexistence and present power of the Holy Ghost, till he learned from\nthem the nature of their baptism, and then his surprise ceased. But\nthen we must observe that the question of the Apostle astonished at\ntheir defective state--\"Into what then were ye baptized?\"--implies\nthat, if baptized with Christian baptism, they would have known of the\nexistence of the Holy Ghost, and therefore further implies that the\nbaptismal formula into the name of the Father, Son, and Holy Ghost,\nwas of universal application among Christians; for surely if this\nformula were not universally used by the Church, many Christians might\nbe in exactly the same position as these disciples of John, and never\nhave heard of the Holy Ghost![187] St. Paul, having expounded the\ndifference between the inchoate, imperfect, beginning knowledge, of\nthe Baptist, and the richer, fuller teaching of Jesus Christ, then\nhanded them over for further preparation to his assistants, by whom,\nafter due fasting and prayer, they were baptized,[188] and at once\npresented to the Apostle for the imposition of hands; when the Holy\nGhost was vouchsafed in present effects, \"they spake with tongues and\nprophesied,\" as if to sanction in a special manner the decided action\ntaken by the Apostle on this occasion.\n\n  [187] See my remarks on this topic on pp. 141, 142 of my first\n  volume on Acts.\n\n  [188] See the _Didache_, or _Teaching of the Twelve Apostles_,\n  concerning the methods used in preparation for baptism.\n\nThe details concerning this affair, given to us by the sacred writer,\nare most important. They set forth at greater length and with larger\nfulness the methods ordinarily used by the Apostle than on other\nsimilar occasions. The Philippian jailor was converted and baptized,\nbut we read nothing of the imposition of hands. Dionysius and Damaris,\nAquila and Priscilla, and many others at Athens and Corinth, were\nconverted, but there is no mention of either baptism or any other holy\nrite. It might have been very possible to argue that the silence of\nthe writer implied utter contempt of the sacraments of the gospel and\nthe rite of confirmation on these occasions, were it not that we have\nthis detailed account of the manner in which St. Paul dealt with\nhalf-instructed, unbaptized, and unconfirmed disciples of Christ\nJesus. They were instructed, baptized, and confirmed, and thus\nintroduced into the fulness of blessing, required by the discipline of\nthe Lord, as ministered by his faithful servant. If this were the\nroutine observed with those who had been taught \"carefully the things\nof Jesus, knowing only the baptism of John,\" how much more would it\nhave been the case with those rescued out of the pollutions of\npaganism and called into the kingdom of light!\n\nIII. After this favourable beginning, and seeing the borders of the\ninfant Church extended by the union of these twelve disciples, St.\nPaul, after his usual fashion, flung himself into work amongst the\nJews of Ephesus upon whom he had previously made a favourable\nimpression. He was well received for a time. He continued for three\nmonths \"reasoning and persuading as to the things concerning the\nkingdom of God.\" But, as it was elsewhere, so was it at Ephesus, the\noffence of the Cross told in the long run upon the worshippers of the\nsynagogue. The original Christian Church was Jewish. Aquila and\nPriscilla, Apollos and Timothy, and the disciples of John the Baptist\nwould have excited no resentment in the minds of the Jews; but when\nSt. Paul began to open out the hope which lay for Gentiles as well as\nfor Jews in the gospel which he preached, then the objections of the\nsynagogue were multiplied, riots and disturbances became, as\nelsewhere, matters of daily occurrence, and the opposition became at\nlast so bitter that, as at Corinth, so here again at Ephesus the\nApostle was obliged to separate his own followers, and gather them\ninto the school of one Tyrannus, a teacher of philosophy or rhetoric,\nwhom perhaps he had converted, where the blasphemous denunciations\nagainst the Divine Way which he taught could no longer be heard.[189]\nIn this school or lecture-hall St. Paul continued labouring for more\nthan two years, bestowing upon the city of Ephesus a longer period of\ncontinuous labour than he ever vouchsafed to any place else. We have\nSt. Paul's own statement as to his method of life at this period in\nthe address he subsequently delivered to the elders of Ephesus. The\nApostle pursued at Ephesus the same course which he adopted at Corinth\nin one important direction at least. He supported himself and his\nimmediate companions, Timothy and Sosthenes, by his own labour, and\nthat we may presume for precisely the same reason at Ephesus as at\nCorinth. He desired to cut off all occasion of accusation against\nhimself. Ephesus was a city devoted to commerce and to magic. It was\nfull of impostors too, many of them Jewish, who made gain out of the\nnames of angels and magical formul\u00e6 derived from the pretended wisdom\nof Solomon handed down to them by secret succession, or derived to\nthem from contact with the lands of the far-distant East. St. Paul\ndetermined, therefore, that he would give no opportunity of charging\nhim with trading upon the credulity of his followers, or working with\nan eye to covetous or dishonest gains. \"I coveted no man's silver or\ngold or apparel. Ye yourselves know that these hands ministered unto\nmy necessities, and to them that were with me,\" is the description he\ngave of the manner in which he discharged his apostolic office in\nEphesus, when addressing the elders of that city. We can thus trace\nSt. Paul labouring at his trade as a tentmaker for nearly a period of\nfive years, combining the time spent at Ephesus with that spent at\nCorinth. Notwithstanding, however, the attention and energy which this\nexercise of his trade demanded, he found time for enormous\nevangelistic and pastoral work. In fact, we find St. Paul nowhere else\nso much occupied with pastoral work as at Ephesus. Elsewhere we see\nthe devoted evangelist, rushing in with the pioneers, breaking down\nall hindrances, heading the stormers to whom was committed the\nfiercest struggle, the most deadly conflict, and then at once moving\ninto fresh conflicts, leaving the spoils of victory and the calmer\nwork of peaceful pastoral labours to others. But here in Ephesus we\nsee St. Paul's marvellous power of adaptation. He is at one hour a\nclever artisan capable of gaining support sufficient for others as\nwell as for himself; then he is the skilful controversialist\n\"reasoning daily in the school of one Tyrannus\"; and then he is the\nindefatigable pastor of souls \"teaching publicly, and from house to\nhouse,\" and \"ceasing not to admonish every one night and day with\ntears.\"\n\n  [189] See pp. 32, 33 above for some remarks on this title, the\n  Way, used in the Acts for the Gospel Dispensation or the Christian\n  Church. Cf. also ch. ix. 2, xix. 23, xxii. 4, xxiv. 14, and the\n  expression the Way of Life in the _Didache_.\n\nBut this was not all, or nearly all, the burden the Apostle carried.\nHe had to be perpetually on the alert against Jewish plots. We hear\nnothing directly of Jewish attempts on his life or liberty during the\nperiod of just three years which he spent on this prolonged visit. We\nmight be sure, however, from our previous experience of the\nsynagogues, that he must have run no small danger in this direction;\nbut then when we turn to the same address we hear something of them.\nHe is recalling to the minds of the Ephesian elders the circumstances\nof his life in their community from the beginning, and he therefore\nappeals thus: \"Ye yourselves know from the first day that I set foot\nin Asia, after what manner I was with you all the time, serving the\nLord with all lowliness of mind, and with tears, _and with trials\nwhich befell me with plots of the Jews_.\" Ephesus again was a great\nfield wherein he personally worked; it was also a great centre for\nmissionary operations which he superintended. It was the capital of\nthe province of Asia, the richest and most important of all the Roman\nprovinces, teeming with resources, abounding in highly civilised and\npopulous cities, connected with one another by an elaborate network of\nadmirably constructed roads. Ephesus was cut out by nature and by art\nalike as a missionary centre whence the gospel should radiate out into\nall the surrounding districts. And so it did. \"All they which dwelt in\nAsia heard the word of the Lord, both Jews and Greeks,\" is the\ntestimony of St. Luke with respect to the wondrous progress of the\ngospel, not in Ephesus alone, but also throughout all the province, a\nstatement which we find corroborated a little lower down in the same\nnineteenth chapter by the independent testimony of Demetrius the\nsilversmith, who, when he was endeavouring to stir up his\nfellow-craftsmen to active exertions in defence of their endangered\ntrade, says, \"Ye see and hear that not alone at Ephesus, but almost\nthroughout all Asia, this Paul hath persuaded and turned away much\npeople.\" St. Paul's disciples laboured, too, in the other cities of\nAsia, as Epaphras for instance in Coloss\u00e6. And St. Paul himself, we\nmay be certain, bestowed the gifts and blessings of his apostolic\noffice by visiting these local Churches, as far as he could\nconsistently with the pressing character of his engagements in\nEphesus.[190] But even the superintendence of vast missions throughout\nthe province of Asia did not exhaust the prodigious labours of St.\nPaul. He perpetually bore about in his bosom anxious thoughts for the\nwelfare, trials, and sorrows of the numerous Churches he had\nestablished in Europe and Asia alike. He was constant in prayers for\nthem, mentioning the individual members by name, and he was unwearied\nin keeping up communications with them, either by verbal messages or\nby written epistles, one specimen of which remains in the First\nEpistle to the Corinthians, written to them from Ephesus, and showing\nus the minute care, the comprehensive interest, the intense sympathy\nwhich dwelt within his breast with regard to his distant converts all\nthe while that the work at Ephesus, controversial, evangelistic and\npastoral, to say nothing at all of his tentmaking, was making the most\ntremendous demands on body and soul alike, and apparently absorbing\nall his attention. It is only when we thus realise bit by bit what the\nweak, delicate, emaciated Apostle must have been doing, that we are\nable to grasp the full meaning of his own words to the Corinthians:\n\"Besides those things that are without, there is that which presseth\nupon me daily, anxiety for all the Churches.\"\n\n  [190] Bishop Lightfoot, _Colossians_, Introd., p. 30, has some\n  good remarks bearing on this topic: \"How or when the conversion of\n  the Colossians took place we have no direct information. Yet it\n  can hardly be wrong to connect the event with St. Paul's long\n  sojourn at Ephesus. Here he remained preaching for three whole\n  years. It is possible, indeed, that during this period he paid\n  short visits to other neighbouring cities of Asia; but if so, the\n  notices in the Acts oblige us to suppose these interruptions to\n  his residence in Ephesus to have been slight and infrequent. Yet,\n  though the Apostle himself was stationary in the capital, the\n  Apostolic influence and teaching spread far beyond the limits of\n  the city and its immediate neighbourhood. It was hardly an\n  exaggeration when Demetrius declared that 'almost throughout all\n  Asia this Paul had persuaded and turned away much people.' The\n  sacred historian himself uses equally strong language in\n  describing the effects of the Apostle's preaching: 'All they which\n  dwelt in Asia heard the word of the Lord, both Jews and Greeks.'\n  In accordance with these notices the Apostle himself, in an\n  Epistle written during this sojourn, sends salutations to Corinth,\n  not from the Church of Ephesus specially, as might have been\n  anticipated, but from the 'Churches of Asia' generally (1 Cor.\n  xvi. 19). St. Luke, it should be observed, ascribes this\n  dissemination of the gospel not to journeys undertaken by the\n  Apostle, but to his preaching at Ephesus itself. Thither, as to\n  the metropolis of Western Asia, would flock crowds from all the\n  towns and villages far and near. Thence they would carry away,\n  each to his own neighbourhood, the spiritual treasure which they\n  had so unexpectedly found.\"\n\nThis lengthened period of intense activity of mind and body terminated\nin an incident which illustrates the peculiar character of St. Paul's\nEphesian ministry. Ephesus was a town where the spiritual and moral\natmosphere simply reeked with the fumes, ideas, and practices of\nOriental paganism, of which magical incantations formed the\npredominant feature. Magic prevailed all over the pagan world at this\ntime. In Rome, however, magical practices were always more or less\nunder the ban of public opinion, though at times resorted to even by\nthose whose office called upon them to suppress illegal actions. A\ncouple of years before the very time at which we have arrived, workers\nin magic, among whom were included astrologers, or mathematicians, as\nthe Roman law called them, were banished from Rome simultaneously with\nthe Jews, who always enjoyed an unenviable notoriety for such occult\npractices.[191] In Asia Minor and the East they flourished at this\ntime under the patronage of religion, and continued to flourish in all\nthe great cities down to Christian times. Christianity itself could\nnot wholly banish magic which retained its hold upon the\nhalf-converted Christians who flocked into the Church in crowds during\nthe second half of the fourth century; and we learn from St.\nChrysostom himself, that when a young man he had a narrow escape for\nhis life owing to the continuance of magical practices in Antioch,\nmore than three hundred years after St. Paul.[192] It is no wonder\nthat when Diana's worship reigned supreme at Ephesus, magical\npractices should also flourish there. If, however, there existed a\nspecial development of the power of evil at Ephesus, God also bestowed\na special manifestation of Divine power in the person and ministry of\nSt. Paul, as St. Luke expressly declares: \"God wrought special\nmiracles by the hands of Paul, insomuch that unto the sick were\ncarried away from his body handkerchiefs or aprons, and the diseases\ndeparted from them, and the evil spirits departed from them.\" This\npassage has been often found a stumbling-block by many persons. They\nhave thought that it has a certain legendary air about it, as they in\nturn think that there is a certain air of legend about the similar\npassage in Acts v. 12-16, which makes much the same statement about\nSt. Peter. When writing about this latter passage in my previous\nvolume, p. 230, I offered some suggestions which lessen, if they do\nnot quite take away, the difficulty; to these I shall now only refer\nmy readers. But I think we can see a local reason for the peculiar\ndevelopment or manifestation of miraculous power through St. Paul. The\ndevil's seat was just then specially at Ephesus, so far as the great\nprovince of Asia was concerned. The powers of evil had concentrated\nall their force and all their wealth of external grandeur,\nintellectual cleverness, and spiritual trickery in order to lead men\ncaptive; and there God, in order that He might secure a more striking\nvictory for truth upon this magnificent stage, armed His faithful\nservant with an extraordinary development of the good powers of the\nworld to come, enabling him to work special wonders in the sight of\nthe heathen. Can we not read an echo of the fearful struggle just then\nwaged in the metropolis of Asia in words addressed some years later to\nthe members of the same Church, \"For our wrestling is not against\nflesh and blood, but against the principalities, against the powers,\nagainst the world-rulers of this darkness, against the spiritual hosts\nof wickedness in the heavenly places\"? We make a great mistake when we\nthink of the apostles as working miracles when and as they liked. At\ntimes their evangelistic work seems to have been conducted without any\nextraordinary manifestations, and then at other times, when the power\nof Satan was specially put forth, God displayed His special strength,\nenabling His servants to work wonders and signs in His Name. It was\nmuch the same as in the Old Testament. The Old Testament miracles will\nbe found to cluster themselves round the deliverance of Israel out of\nEgypt, and its Reformation at the hand of Elijah. So, too, the\nrecorded miracles of the apostles will be found to gather round St.\nPeter's earlier work in Jerusalem, where Satan strove to counter-work\nGod's designs in one way, and St. Paul's ministry in Ephesus, where\nSatan strove to counter-work them in another way. One incident at\nEphesus attracted special attention. There was a priestly family,\nconsisting of seven sons, belonging to the Jews at Ephesus. Their\nfather had occupied high position among the various courses which in\nturn served the Temple, even as Zacharias, the father of the Baptist,\ndid. These men observed the power with which St. Paul dealt with human\nspirits disordered by the powers of evil, using for that purpose the\nsacred name of Jesus. They undertook to use the same sacred\ninvocation; but it proved, like the censers of Korah, Dathan and\nAbiram, a strange fire kindled against their own souls. The man\npossessed by the evil spirit recognised not their presumptuous\nefforts, but attacked them, and did them serious bodily injury. This\ncircumstance spread the fame of the man of God wider and wider. The\npower of magic and of the demons fell before him, even as the image of\nDagon fell before the Ark. Many of the nominal believers in\nChristianity had still retained their magical practices as of yore,\neven as nominal Christians retained them in the days of St.\nChrysostom. The reality of St. Paul's power, demonstrated by the awful\nexample of Sceva's sons, smote them in their inmost conscience. They\ncame, confessed their deeds, brought their magical books\ntogether,[193] and gave the greatest proof of their honest\nconvictions; for they burned them in the sight of all, and counting\nthe price thereof found it fifty thousand pieces of silver, or more\nthan two thousand pounds of our money. \"So mightily grew the word of\nthe Lord and prevailed\" in the very chosen seat of the Ephesian Diana.\n\n  [191] I allude, of course, to the decree of Claudius against the\n  Jews in A.D. 52, to which Suetonius (_Claudius_, 25) and Dio\n  Cassius, lx. 6, refer; cf. Tacitus, _Annals_, xii. 52, and Lewin's\n  _Fasti Sacri_, A.D. 52.\n\n  [192] The story is an interesting one. It will be found in\n  Stephens' _Life of St. Chrysostom_, p. 61. The Emperor Valens had\n  discovered that some of his enemies had been endeavouring, through\n  magical contrivances something like table-rapping, to spell out\n  the name of his successor, and had succeeded so far that they had\n  found out the first part of the name as Theod, but the oracle\n  could tell nothing more. The jealous Emperor ordered every\n  prominent man with the names Theodore or Theodosius to be slain,\n  vainly thinking to kill his own successor. He also ordered every\n  one found with magical books in their possession to be at once\n  slain. Chrysostom and a friend were walking in A.D. 374 on the\n  banks of the Orontes when they saw a book floating down the\n  stream. They stretched forth and rescued it, when, seeing that it\n  was a magical book, they at once flung it back into the river, and\n  not a moment too soon, as just then a police officer on detective\n  duty appeared on the scene, from whom a moment earlier they could\n  not have escaped. St. Chrysostom always regarded this as one of\n  the great escapes of his life: see Art. \"Chrysostom\" in _Dict.\n  Christ. Biog._, vol. i., p. 520, and his own reference to the\n  escape in his 38th Homily on the Acts, translated in the Oxford\n  Library of the Fathers. Mr. Stephens, _l.c._, gives an account of\n  the magical rites and their ceremonial, which was doubtless much\n  the same in A.D. 374 as in A.D. 54, whence we take a brief\n  extract: \"The twenty-four letters of the alphabet were arranged at\n  intervals round the rim of a kind of charger, which was placed on\n  a tripod consecrated by magic songs and frequent ceremonies. The\n  diviner, habited as a heathen priest, in linen robes, sandals, and\n  with a fillet wreathed about his head, chanted a hymn to Apollo,\n  the god of prophecy, while a ring in the centre of the charger was\n  slipped rapidly round a slender thread. The letters in front of\n  which the ring successively stopped indicated the character of the\n  oracle.\"\n\n  [193] The magical books thus consigned to the flames by the\n  Christian believers who practised magic were filled with figures\n  or characters technically called \"Ephesian letters,\" \u0393\u03c1\u03ac\u03bc\u03bc\u03b1\u03c4\u03b1\n  \u1f18\u03c6\u03ad\u03c3\u03b9\u03b1. These were mystic characters and strange\n  words which were engraven on the crown, zone, and feet of the\n  goddess. Clement of Alexandria discusses their use, and says the\n  Greeks were greatly addicted to them, in his _Stromata_, v. 8, as\n  translated in Clement's works, vol. ii., p. 247, in Clark's\n  Ante-Nicene Library. The same use of curious mystic words passed\n  over to the Manich\u00e6ans and other secret sects of medi\u00e6val times.\n  See also Guhl's _Ephesiaca_, p. 94 (Berlin, 1843), where all the\n  authorities on this curious subject are collected together.\n  Conybeare and Howson, ch. xiv., give them from Guhl in a handy\n  shape. Great quantities of these \"Ephesian letters\" have been\n  found among the Fay\u00fbm Manuscripts discovered in Egypt, which\n  almost universally make a large use of the name Iao or Jehovah,\n  showing their contact with Judaism.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XV.\n\n_THE EPHESIAN RIOT AND A PRUDENT TOWN CLERK._\n\n     \"About that time there arose no small stir concerning the Way.\n     For a certain man named Demetrius, a silversmith, which made\n     silver shrines of Diana, brought no little business unto the\n     craftsmen; whom he gathered together, with the workmen of like\n     occupation, and said, Sirs, ye know that by this business we have\n     our wealth. And ye see and hear, that not alone at Ephesus, but\n     almost throughout all Asia, this Paul hath persuaded and turned\n     away much people, saying that they be no gods, which are made\n     with hands; and not only is there danger that this our trade come\n     into disrepute; but also that the temple of the great goddess\n     Diana be made of no account, and that she should even be deposed\n     from her magnificence, whom all Asia and the world\n     worshippeth.\"--ACTS xix. 23-8.\n\n\nSt. Paul's labours at Ephesus covered, as he informs us himself, when\naddressing the elders of that city, a space of three years. The\ngreater portion of that period had now expired, and had been spent in\npeaceful labours so far as the heathen world and the Roman authorities\nwere concerned. The Jews, indeed, had been very troublesome at times.\nIt is in all probability to them and their plots St. Paul refers when\nin 1 Cor. xv. 32 he says, \"If after the manner of men I fought with\nbeasts at Ephesus, what doth it profit me?\" as the unbelieving\nGentiles do not seem to have raised any insurrection against his\nteaching till he felt his work was done, and he was, in fact,\npreparing to leave Ephesus. Before, however, we proceed to discuss\nthe startling events which finally decided his immediate departure, we\nmust consider a brief passage which connects the story of Sceva's sons\nand their impious temerity with that of the silversmith Demetrius and\nthe Ephesian riot.\n\nThe incident connected with Sceva's sons led to the triumph over the\nworkers in magic, when the secret professors of that art came and\npublicly acknowledged their hidden sins, proving their reality by\nburning the instruments of their wickedness. Here, then, St. Luke\ninserts a notice which has proved to be of the very greatest\nimportance in the history of the Christian Church. Let us insert it in\nfull that we may see its bearing: \"Now after these things were ended,\nPaul purposed in the spirit, when he had passed through Macedonia and\nAchaia, to go to Jerusalem, saying, After I have been there, I must\nalso see Rome. And having sent into Macedonia two of them that\nministered unto him, Timothy and Erastus, he himself stayed in Asia\nfor a while.\" This passage tells us that St. Paul, after his triumph\nover the practices of magic, and feeling too that the Church had been\neffectually cleansed, so far as human foresight and care could effect\nit, from the corroding effects of the prevalent Ephesian vice, now\ndetermined to transfer the scene of his labours to Macedonia and\nAchaia, wishing to visit those Churches which five years before he had\nfounded. It was full five years, at least, since he had seen the\nPhilippian, Thessalonian, and Ber\u0153an congregations. Better than\nthree years had elapsed since he had left Corinth, the scene of more\nprolonged work than he had ever bestowed on any other city except\nEphesus. He had heard again and again from all these places, and some\nof the reports, especially those from Corinth, had been very\ndisquieting. The Apostle wished, therefore, to go and see for himself\nhow the Churches of Christ in Macedonia and Achaia were faring. He\nnext wished to pay a visit to Jerusalem to consult with his brethren,\nand then felt his destiny pushing him still westwards, desiring to see\nRome, the world's capital, and the Church which had sprung up there,\nof which his friends Priscilla and Aquila must have told him much.\nSuch seems to have been his intentions in the spring of the year 57,\nto which his three years' sojourn in Ephesus seems now to have brought\nhim.\n\nThe interval of time covered by the two verses which I have quoted\nabove is specially interesting, because it was just then that the\nFirst Epistle to the Corinthians was written. All the circumstances\nand all the indications of time which the Epistle itself offers\nconspire to fix the writing of it to this special date and place. The\nEpistle, for instance, refers to Timothy as having been already sent\ninto Macedonia and Greece: \"For this cause have I sent unto you\nTimothy, who shall put you in remembrance of my ways which be in\nChrist\" (1 Cor. iv. 17). In Acts xix. 22 we have it stated, \"Having\nsent into Macedonia Timothy and Erastus.\" The Epistle again plainly\ntells us the very season of the year in which it was written. The\nreferences to the Passover season--\"For our passover also hath been\nsacrificed, even Christ; wherefore let us keep the feast\"--are words\nwhich naturally were suggested by the actual celebration of the Jewish\nfeast, to a mind like St. Paul's, which readily grasped at every\npassing allusion or chance incident to illustrate his present\nteaching. Timothy and Erastus had been despatched in the early spring,\nas soon as the passes and roads were thoroughly open and navigation\nestablished. The Passover in A.D. 57 happened on April 7th, and the\nApostle fixes the exact date of the First Epistle to Corinth, when in\nthe sixteenth chapter and eighth verse he says to the Corinthians, \"I\nwill tarry at Ephesus until Pentecost.\" I merely refer now to this\npoint to illustrate the vastness of the Apostle's labours, and to call\nattention to the necessity for comparing together the Acts and the\nEpistles in the minute manner exemplified by Paley in the _Hor\u00e6\nPaulin\u00e6_, if we wish to gain a complete view of a life like St.\nPaul's, so completely consecrated to one great purpose.[194]\n\n  [194] This subject properly belongs to commentators on 1\n  Corinthians. Paley, in _Hor\u00e6 Paulin\u00e6_, ch. iii., and Dr. Marcus\n  Dods, in his _Introduction to the New Testament_, pp. 104, 105,\n  set forth the evidence in a convenient shape. I may remark that\n  here, as elsewhere, I adopt in the main Mr. Lewin's chronology, as\n  contained in his _Fasti Sacri_. Without pledging myself to agree\n  in all his details, his scheme forms a good working hypothesis, on\n  which a writer can work when composing an expositor's commentary,\n  not one for professed critics or profound scholars.\n\nMan may propose, but even an apostle cannot dispose of his fate as he\nwill, or foretell under ordinary circumstances how the course of\nevents will affect him. St. Paul intended to stay at Ephesus till\nPentecost, which that year happened on May 28th. Circumstances however\nhastened his departure. We have been considering the story of St.\nPaul's residence in Ephesus, but hitherto we have not heard one word\nabout the great Ephesian deity, Diana, as the Romans called her, or\nArtemis, as St. Luke, according to the ordinary local use, correctly\ncalls her in the Greek text of the Acts, or Ana\u00eftis, as her ancient\nname had been from early times at Ephesus and throughout Asia\nMinor.[195] If this riot had not happened, if our attention had not\nbeen thus called to Diana and her worship, there might have been a\ntotal blank in St. Luke's narrative concerning this famous deity, and\nher equally famous temple, which was at the time one of the wonders of\nthe world. And then some scoffers reading in ancient history\nconcerning the wonders of this temple, and finding the records of\nmodern discoveries confirming the statements of antiquity might have\ntriumphantly pointed to St. Luke's silence about Diana and the\nEphesian temple as a proof of his ignorance. A mere passing riot alone\nhas saved us from this difficulty. Now this case well illustrates the\ndanger of arguing from silence. Silence concerning any special point\nis sometimes used as a proof that a particular writer knew nothing\nabout it. But this is not the sound conclusion. Silence proves in\nitself nothing more than that the person who is silent either had no\noccasion to speak upon that point or else thought it wiser or more\nexpedient to hold his tongue. Josephus, for instance, is silent about\nChristianity; but that is no proof that Christianity did not exist in\nhis time, or that he knew nothing about it. His silence may simply\nhave arisen because he found Christianity an awkward fact, and not\nknowing how to deal with it he left it alone. It is well to bear this\nsimple law of historical evidence in mind, for a great many of the\npopular objections to the sacred narratives, both of the Old and New\nTestaments, are based upon the very dangerous ground of silence\nalone.[196] Let us, however, return to Diana of the Ephesians. The\nworship of the goddess Artemis dominated the whole city of\nEphesus,[197] and helped to shape the destinies of St. Paul at this\nseason, for while intending to stay at Ephesus till Pentecost at the\nend of May, the annual celebration of Artemisia, the feast of the\npatron deity of the city, happened, of which celebration Demetrius\ntook advantage to raise a disturbance which hastened St. Paul's\ndeparture into Macedonia.\n\n  [195] The student may consult on the identification of Artemis and\n  the Oriental or Persian deity Ana\u00eftis, the _Revue Arch\u00e9ologique_\n  for 1885, vol. ii., pp. 105-115, and Derenbourg and Saglio's\n  _Dict. des Antiq._, s.v. Diana.\n\n  [196] This argument may be pressed further. The silence which we\n  observe in much of second-century literature about the New\n  Testament Canon and Episcopacy is of the same character. The best\n  known and most notorious facts are those about which authors are\n  most apt to be silent when writing for contemporaries, simply\n  because every person acknowledges them and takes them for granted.\n\n  [197] This is manifest at once if the reader will consult Mr.\n  Wood's _Ephesus_ or Guhl's _Ephesiaca_, a work which, though\n  published (in 1843) before modern discoveries had taught all we\n  now know, is a most elaborate account of ancient Ephesus gleaned\n  out of ancient writers.\n\nWe have now cleared the way for the consideration of the narrative of\nthe riot, which is full of the most interesting information concerning\nthe progress of the gospel, and offers us the most wonderful instances\nof the minute accuracy of St. Luke, which again have been illustrated\nand confirmed in the fullest manner by the researches so abundantly\nbestowed upon Ephesus within the lifetime of the present generation.\nLet us take the narrative in the exact order given us by St. Luke:\n\"About that time there arose no small stir about the Way.\" But why\nabout that special time? We have already said that here we find an\nindication of the date of the riot. It must have happened during the\nlatter part of April, A.D. 57, and we know that at Ephesus almost the\nwhole month of April, or Artemisius, was dedicated to the honour and\nworship of Artemis.[198] But here it may be asked, How did it come to\npass that Artemis or Diana occupied such a large share in the public\nworship of Ephesus and the province of Asia? Has modern research\nconfirmed the impression which this chapter leaves upon the mind, that\nthe Ephesian people were above all else devoted to the worship of the\ndeity? The answers to both these queries are not hard to give, and\nserve to confirm our belief in the honesty and accuracy of the sacred\npenman. The worship of Artemis, or of Ana\u00eftis rather, prevailed in the\npeninsula of Asia Minor from the time of Cyrus, who introduced it six\nor seven centuries before.[199] Ana\u00eftis was the Asiatic deity of\nfruitfulness, the same as Ashtoreth of the Bible, whom the Greeks soon\nidentified with their own goddess Artemis. Her worship quickly spread,\nspecially through that portion of the country which afterwards became\nthe province of Asia, and through the adjacent districts; showing how\nrapidly an evil taint introduced into a nation's spiritual life-blood\nspreads throughout its whole organisation, and when once introduced\nhow persistently it holds its ground; a lesson taught here in New\nTestament times, as in Old Testament days it was proclaimed in\nIsrael's case by the oft-repeated statement concerning her kings,\n\"Howbeit from the sins of Jeroboam [king after king] departed not.\"\nThe spiritual life and tone of a nation is a very precious thing, and\nbecause it is so the Church of England does well to bestow so much of\nher public supplication upon those who have power, like Cyrus and\nJeroboam, to taint it at the very foundation and origin thereof. When,\nfor instance, St. Paul landed at Perga in Pamphylia, on the first\noccasion when he visited Asia Minor as a Christian missionary, his eye\nwas saluted with the splendid temple of Diana on the side of the hill\nbeneath which the city was built, and all over the country at every\nimportant town similar temples were erected in her honour, where their\nruins have been traced by modern travellers.[200] The cult or worship\nintroduced by Cyrus exactly suited the morals and disposition of these\nOriental Greeks, and flourished accordingly.\n\n  [198] See on the exact time of the Macedonian and Ephesian month\n  of Artemisius, Ussher's treatise on the Macedonian and Asiatic\n  solar year, in the seventh volume of his works Ed. Elrington, p.\n  425, with which may be compared Bishop Lightfoot's _Ignatius_, i.\n  660-700. Mr. Lewin, in his _Fasti Sacri_, p. 309, makes it the\n  month of May. The Macedonian month Artemisius extended from March\n  25th to April 24th. This point is further discussed in Lewin's\n  _St. Paul_, vol. i., p. 405. If St. Paul wrote 1 Corinthians at or\n  shortly before April 7th, the date of the Passover, the riot which\n  hastened his departure must have happened within the succeeding\n  fortnight. B\u0153ckh, in the Corpus of Greek Inscriptions, No.\n  2954, inserts a long Greek inscription, found one hundred and\n  seventy years ago at Ephesus, laying down the ceremonial to be\n  observed in honour of the deity throughout the whole month, which\n  Mr. Lewin translates, vol. i., p. 405. See, however, more upon\n  this below.\n\n  [199] The Persian language was still used in the worship of Diana\n  at Hieroc\u00e6sarea and Hyp\u00e6pa, two well-known towns of the province\n  of Asia in the second century of our era. See Pausanias, v. 27;\n  cf. Tacitus, _Annals_, iii. 62, and Ramsay's _Hist. Geog._, p.\n  128.\n\n  [200] Voluntary associations were formed all over Asia Minor to\n  cultivate the worship of Artemis. Modern research, for instance,\n  has found inscriptions raised by the Xenoi Tekmoreioi indicating\n  their peculiar devotion to Diana and her worship. They specially\n  flourished at a place called Saghir, near Antioch in Pisidia. It\n  is a curious fact that the cult of the B.V.M. has been substituted\n  for that of Artemis by the Greeks of the neighbourhood, and a\n  feast in her honour is celebrated at the same time as the ancient\n  feast. See _Revue Arch\u00e9ologique_, 1887, vol. i., p. 96; Ramsay, in\n  his _Geography of Asia Minor_, p. 409, and in _Jour. Hell.\n  Studies_ for 1883.\n\nArtemis was esteemed the protectress of the cities where her temples\nwere built, which, as in the case of Ephesus and of Perga, were placed\noutside the gates like the temple of Jupiter at Lystra, in order that\ntheir presence might cast a halo of protection over the adjacent\ncommunities. The temple of Diana at Ephesus was a splendid building.\nIt had been several times destroyed by fire notwithstanding its\nrevered character and the presence of the sacred image,[201] and had\nbeen as often rebuilt with greater splendour than before, till the\ntemple was erected existing in St. Paul's day, which justly excited\nthe wonder of mankind, as its splendid ruins have shown, which Mr.\nWood has excavated in our own time at the expense of the English\nGovernment.[202] The devotion of the Ephesians to this ancient Asiatic\ndeity had even been increasing of late years when St. Paul visited\nEphesus, as a decree still exists in its original shape graven in\nstone exactly as St. Paul must have seen it enacting extended honours\nto the deity. As this decree bears directly upon the famous riot which\nDemetrius raised, we insert it here in full, as an interesting\nconfirmation and illustration of the sacred narrative: \"To the\nEphesian Diana. Forasmuch as it is notorious that not only among the\nEphesians, but also everywhere among the Greek nations, temples are\nconsecrated to her, and sacred precincts, and that she hath images and\naltars dedicated to her on account of her plain manifestations of\nherself, and that, besides, the greatest token of veneration paid to\nher, a month is called after her name, by us Artemision, by the\nMacedonians and other Greek nations and their cities, Artemisius, in\nwhich month general gatherings and festivals are celebrated, and more\nespecially in our own city, the nurse of its own, the Ephesian\ngoddess. Now the people of Ephesus deeming it proper that the whole\nmonth called by her name should be sacred and set apart to the\ngoddess, have resolved by this decree, that the observation of it by\nthem be altered. Therefore it is enacted, that the whole month\nArtemision in all the days of it shall be holy, and that throughout\nthe month there shall be a continued celebration of feasts and the\nArtemisian festivals and the holy days, seeing that the entire month\nis sacred to the goddess; for from this improvement in her worship our\ncity shall receive additional lustre and enjoy perpetual\nprosperity.\"[203] Now this decree, which preceded St. Paul's labours\nperhaps by twenty years or more, has an important bearing on our\nsubject. St. Luke tells us that \"about this time there arose no small\nstir about the Way\"; and it was only quite natural and quite in accord\nwith what we know of other pagan persecutions, and of human nature in\ngeneral, that the precise time at which the Apostle had then arrived\nshould have been marked by this riot. The whole city of Ephesus was\nthen given up to the celebration of the festival held in honour of\nwhat we may call the national religion and the national deity. That\nfestival lasted the whole month, and was accompanied, as all human\nfestivals are apt to be accompanied, with a vast deal of drunkenness\nand vice, as we are expressly told in an ancient Greek romance,\nwritten by a Greek of whom little is known, named Achilles\nTatius.[204] The people of Ephesus were, in fact, mad with excitement,\nand it did not require any great skill to stir them up to excesses in\ndefence of the endangered deity whose worship was the glory of their\ncity. We know from one or two similar cases that the attack made upon\nSt. Paul at this pagan festival had exact parallels in these early\nages.\n\n  [201] The original sacred image, which was preserved inside a\n  screen or curtain in the inmost temple, was a shapeless mass of\n  wood something like the prehistoric blocks of wood or stone which\n  were esteemed at Athens and elsewhere the most venerable images of\n  their favourite deities: see Pausanias, _Description of Greece_,\n  i. 26. The legend at Ephesus was just the same as at Athens and\n  elsewhere, that these prehistoric images had fallen down from\n  heaven. Some of them may have been aerolites.\n\n  [202] The temple of Ephesus is depicted in Conybeare and Howson's\n  and Lewin's _St. Paul_, as well as it could have been restored\n  from a study of books. At the time of their publication neither\n  Mr. Wood's discoveries had been made nor his work on Ephesus\n  published. The plans and engravings in Mr. Wood's work of course\n  supersede all others. The plans, etc., in the other works are\n  sufficiently accurate to enable the reader to realise the language\n  of the Acts.\n\n  [203] The original of this decree will be found in B\u0153ckh's\n  _Corp. Inscriptt. Gr\u00e6c._, No. 2954, and the translation in Lewin's\n  _St. Paul_, 405.\n\n  [204] There is a long account of Achilles Tatius in the\n  _Bibliotheca Gr\u00e6ca_ of Fabricius. He was a pagan first, and then\n  became a Christian. His age is uncertain, but he certainly seems\n  to have lived when pagan feasts were still observed in their\n  ancient splendour. The book in which he describes them is called\n  _De Amoribus Clitophontis et Leucippes_, where in Book VI., ch.\n  iii. there is an account of the drunkenness and idleness at the\n  feast of Diana. The words of Achilles Tatius bring the scene\n  vividly before us as St. Paul must have seen it: \"It was the\n  festival of Artemis, and every place was full of drunken men, and\n  all the market-place was full of a multitude of men through the\n  whole night.\" In Mason's _Diocletian Persecution_, p. 361, there\n  will be found an account of a festival celebrated in honour of\n  Artemis in the same spring season at Ancyra in Galatia. This\n  latter account is useful as giving us an authentic account of a\n  Celtic festival of Diana about the year 306 A.D. It would seem as\n  if an annual public washing of the image of Diana constituted an\n  important part of the ceremonial. Both at Ancyra as told in the\n  Acts of St. Theodotus and at Ephesus the image of Diana was\n  annually carried about in a waggon drawn by mules: see Guhl's\n  _Ephesiaca_, p. 114. At Ancyra, during the Diocletian persecution,\n  seven Christian virgins were dressed as priestesses of Diana and\n  condemned to publicly wash the idol. Upon their refusal they were\n  all drowned in the lake where the image was washed. The Seven\n  Virgins of Ancyra are celebrated in the annals of Christian\n  martyrdom for their heroic resistance on this occasion. See Mason,\n  _l.c._, and the _Dict. Christ. Biog._, _s.v._ Seven Virgins of\n  Ancyra and Theodotus.\n\nThis festival in honour of Diana was generally utilised as the\nmeeting-time of the local diet or parliament of the province of Asia,\nwhere deputies from all the cities of the province met together to\nconsult on their common wants and transmit their decisions to the\nproconsul, a point to which we shall later on have occasion to refer.\nJust ninety years later one of the most celebrated of the primitive\nmartyrs suffered upon the same occasion at Smyrna. Polycarp, the\ndisciple of St. John, lived to a very advanced period, and helped to\nhand down the tradition of apostolic life and doctrine to another\ngeneration. Polycarp, is, in fact, through Iren\u00e6us, one of the chief\nhistoric links uniting the Church of later times with the apostles.\nPolycarp suffered martyrdom amid the excitement raised during the\nmeeting of the same diet of Asia held, not at Ephesus, but at Smyrna,\nand attended by the same religious ceremonies and observances. Or let\nus again turn towards the West, and we shall find it the same. The\nmartyrdoms of Vienne and Lyons described by Eusebius in the fifth book\nof his history are among the most celebrated in the whole history of\nthe Church, and as such have been already referred to and used in this\ncommentary.[205] These martyrdoms are an illustration of the same fact\nthat the Christians were always exposed to peculiar danger at the\nannual pagan celebrations. The Gallic tribes, the seven nations of the\nGauls, as they were called, were holding their annual diet or\nassembly, and celebrating the worship of the national deities when\ntheir zeal was excited to red-hot pitch against the Christians of\nVienne and Lyons, resulting in the terrible outbreak of which Eusebius\nin his fifth book tells us.[206] As it was in Gaul about 177 A.D. and\nin Smyrna about 155 A.D., so was it in Ephesus in the year 57; the\nmonth's festival, celebrated in honour of Diana, accompanied with\neating and drinking and idleness in abundance, told upon the populace,\nand made them ready for any excess, so that it is no wonder we should\nread, \"About that time there arose no small stir about the Way.\" Then\ntoo there is another circumstance which may have stirred up Demetrius\nto special violence. His trade was probably falling off owing to St.\nPaul's labours, and this may have been brought home to him with\nspecial force by the results of the festival which was then in process\nof celebration or perhaps almost finished. All the circumstances fit\nthis hypothesis. The shrine-makers were, we know, a very important\nelement in the population of Ephesus, and the trade of shrine-making\nand the manufacture of other silver ornaments conduced in no small\ndegree to the commercial prosperity of the city of Ephesus. This is\nplainly stated upon the face of our narrative: \"Ye know that by this\nbusiness we have our wealth, and ye see and hear that not alone at\nEphesus, but almost throughout all Asia, this Paul hath turned away\nmuch people,\" facts which could not have been more forcibly brought\nhome to them than by the decreasing call they were experiencing for\nthe particular articles which they produced.\n\n  [205] See vol. i., pp. 8, 9.\n\n  [206] See the articles on Polycarp in the _Dict. Christ. Biog._,\n  iv. 426, and on Martyrs of Lyons, iii. 764. As regards Polycarp,\n  see also Lightfoot's _Ignatius_, vol. i., p. 436; and as regards\n  the Martyrs of Lyons, see R\u00e9nan's _Marc-Aur\u00e8le_, pp. 329, 331. It\n  is interesting to notice, in the writings of St. Paulinus of Nola\n  written about the year 400 A.D., his complaints about the abuses,\n  drunkenness and idleness, connected with the feasts and holy days\n  observed in honour of his great patron and hero St. Felix the\n  Martyr. A similar feeling of the moral dangers connected with\n  religious holy days led to the abbreviation of the week's holiday\n  following Easter and Whitsunday to Monday and Tuesday as at\n  present.\n\nNow the question may be proposed, Was this the fact? Was Ephesus\ncelebrated for its shrine-makers, and were shrines and silver\nornaments a favourite manufacture in that city? Here modern research\ncomes in to testify to the marked truthfulness, the minute accuracy of\nSt. Luke. We do not now need to appeal to ancient authors, as _Lives\nof St. Paul_ like those written by Mr. Lewin or by Messrs. Conybeare\nand Howson do. The excavations which have taken place at Ephesus since\nthe publication of these valuable works have amply vindicated the\nhistoric character of our narrative on this point. Mr. Wood in the\ncourse of his excavations at Ephesus discovered a vast number of\ninscriptions and sculptures which had once adorned the temple of\nEphesus, but upon its destruction had been removed to the theatre,\nwhich continued in full operation long after the pagan temple had\ndisappeared.[207] Among these inscriptions there was one enormous one\nbrought to light. It was erected some forty years or so after St.\nPaul's time, but it serves in the minuteness of its details to\nillustrate the story of Demetrius, the speech he made, and the riot he\nraised. This inscription was raised in honour of a wealthy Roman named\nGaius Vibius Salutarius, who had dedicated to Artemis a large number\nof silver images weighing from three to seven pounds each, and had\neven provided a competent endowment for keeping up a public festival\nin her honour, which was to be celebrated on the birthday of the\ngoddess, which happened in the month of April or May. The inscription,\nwhich contains the particulars of the offering made by this Roman,\nwould take up quite too much space if we desired to insert it. We can\nonly now refer our readers to Mr. Wood's book on Ephesus, where they\nwill find it given at full length. A few lines may, however, be quoted\nto illustrate the extent to which the manufacture of silver shrines\nand silver ornaments in honour of Artemis must have flourished in\nEphesus. This inscription enumerates the images dedicated to the\ngoddess which Salutarius had provided by his endowments, entering into\nthe most minute details as to their treatment and care. The following\npassage gives a vivid picture of Ephesian idolatry as the Apostle saw\nit: \"Let two statues of Artemis of the weight of three pounds three\nounces be religiously kept in the custody of Salutarius, who himself\nconsecrated them, and after the death of Salutarius, let the aforesaid\nstatues be restored to the town-clerk of the Ephesians, and let it be\nmade a rule that they be placed at the public meetings above the seat\nof the council in the theatre before the golden statue of Artemis and\nthe other statues. And a golden Artemis weighing three pounds and two\nsilver deer attending her, and the rest of the images of the weight of\ntwo pounds ten ounces and five grammes, and a silver statue of the\nSacred Senate of the weight of four pounds two ounces, and a silver\nstatue of the council of the Ephesians. Likewise a silver Artemis\nbearing a torch of the weight of six pounds, and a silver statue of\nthe Roman people.\" And so the inscription proceeds to name and devote\nsilver and golden statues literally by dozens, which Salutarius\nintended to be borne in solemn procession on the feast-day of Diana.\nIt is quite evident that did we possess but this inscription alone, we\nhave here amply sufficient evidence showing us that one of the staple\ntrades of Ephesus, one upon which the prosperity and welfare of a\nlarge section of its inhabitants depended, was this manufacture of\nsilver and gold ornaments directly connected with the worship of the\ngoddess.[208] For it must be remembered that the guild of\nshrine-makers did not depend alone upon the chance liberality of a\nstray wealthy Roman or Greek like Salutarius, who might feel moved to\ncreate a special endowment or bestow special gifts upon the temple.\nThe guild of shrine-makers depended upon the large and regular demand\nof a vast population who required a supply of cheap and handy shrines\nto satisfy their religious cravings. The population of the surrounding\ndistricts and towns poured into Ephesus at this annual festival of\nDiana and paid their devotions in her temple. But even the pagans\nrequired some kind of social and family religion. They could not live\nas too many nominal Christians are contented to live, without any\nfamily or personal acknowledgment of their dependence upon a higher\npower. There was no provision for public worship in the rural\ndistricts answering to our parochial system, and so they supplied the\nwant by purchasing on occasions like this feast of Diana, shrines,\nlittle silver images, or likenesses of the central cell of the great\ntemple where the sacred image rested, and which served as central\npoints to fix their thoughts and excite the gratitude due to the\ngoddess whom they adored. Demetrius and his fellow-craftsmen depended\nupon the demand created by a vast population of devout believers in\nArtemis, and when this demand began to fall off Demetrius traced the\nbad trade which he and his fellows were experiencing to the true\nsource. He recognised the Christian teaching imparted by St. Paul as\nthe deadly enemy of his unrighteous gains, and naturally directed the\nrage of the mob against the preacher of truth and righteousness. The\nactual words of Demetrius are deserving of the most careful study, for\nthey too have been illustrated by modern discovery in the most\nstriking manner. Having spoken of the results of St. Paul's teaching\nin Asia of which they all had had personal experience, he then\nproceeds to expatiate on its dangerous character, not only as regards\ntheir own personal interests, but as regards the goddess and her\nsacred dignity as well: \"And not only is there danger that this our\ntrade come into disrepute, but also that the temple of the great\ngoddess Diana be made of no account, and that she should be deposed\nfrom her magnificence whom all Asia and the world worshippeth.\"\nDemetrius cleverly but lightly touches upon the self-interest of the\nworkmen. He does not dwell on that topic too long, because it is never\nwell for an orator who wishes to rouse his hearers to enthusiasm to\ndwell too long or too openly upon merely selfish consideration. Man is\nindeed intensely selfish by nature, but then he does not like to be\ntold so too openly, or to have his own selfishness paraded too\nfrequently before his face. He likes to be flattered as if he\ncherished a belief in higher things, and to have his low ends and\nbaser motives clothed in a similitude of noble enthusiasm. Demetrius\nhints therefore at their own impoverishment as the results of Paul's\nteaching, but expatiates on the certain destruction which awaits the\nglory of their time-honoured and world-renowned deity if free course\nbe any longer permitted to such doctrine. This speech is a skilful\ncomposition all through. It shows that the ancient rhetorical skill of\nthe Greeks still flourished in Ephesus, and not the least skilful, and\nat the same time not the least true touch in the speech was that\nwherein Demetrius reminded his hearers that the world were onlookers\nand watchers of their conduct, noting whether or not they would\nvindicate Diana's assailed dignity. It was a true touch, I say, for\nmodern research has shown that the worship of the Ephesian Artemis was\nworld-wide in its extent; it had come from the distant east, and had\ntravelled to the farthest west. We have already noted the testimony of\nmodern travellers showing that her worship extended over Asia Minor in\nevery direction. This fact Demetrius long ago told the Ephesians, and\nancient authors have repeated his testimony, and modern travellers\nhave merely corroborated them. But we were not aware how accurate was\nDemetrius about the whole world worshipping Artemis, till in our own\ntime the statues and temples of the Ephesian goddess were found\nexisting so far west as Southern Gaul, Marseilles, and the coast of\nSpain, proving that wherever Asiatic sailors and Asiatic merchants\ncame thither they brought with them the worship of their favourite\ndeity.[209]\n\n  [207] The pagan temples were almost universally destroyed about\n  the year 400. The edicts dealing with this matter and an ample\n  commentary upon them will be found in the Theodosian Code, edited\n  by that eminent scholar Godefroy.\n\n  [208] An interesting confirmation of this fact came to light in\n  modern times. In the year 1830 there was found in Southern France\n  a piece of such Ephesian silver work wrought in honour of Artemis,\n  and carried into Gaul by one of her worshippers. It is now\n  deposited in the Biblioth\u00e8que Nationale, and has been fully\n  described in an interesting article in the _Journal of Hellenic\n  Studies_, vol. iii., pp. 104-106, written by that eminent\n  antiquary C. Waldstein.\n\n  [209] See the _Revue Arch\u00e9ologique_ for 1886, vol. ii., p. 257,\n  about the worship of the Ephesian Artemis in Marseilles and\n  Southern Gaul, and an article in the _Journal of Hellenic Studies_\n  for 1889, vol. x., p. 216, by Professor Ramsay, on the vast extent\n  of Artemis worship in Asia. In the same journal, for 1890, vol.\n  xi., p. 235, we have an account of the discovery of one of the\n  original seats of Artemis worship in Eastern Cilicia by Mr. J. T.\n  Bent; while again, in vol. iv., p. 40-43, Ramsay gives us a\n  subscription list raised in Pisidia for the purpose of building a\n  temple of Artemis in a country district.\n\nLet us pass on, however, and see whether the remainder of this\nnarrative will not afford us subject-matter for abundant\nillustrations. The mob drank in the speech of Demetrius, and responded\nwith the national shout, \"Great is Diana of the Ephesians,\" a cry\nwhich has been found inscribed on altars and tablets all over the\nprovince of Asia, showing that it was a kind of watchword among the\ninhabitants of that district. The crowd of workmen whom Demetrius had\nbeen addressing then rushed into the theatre, the usual place of\nassembly for the people of Ephesus, dragging with them \"Gaius and\nAristarchus,[210] men of Macedonia, Paul's companions in travel.\" The\nJews too followed the mob, eager to make the unexpected tumult serve\ntheir own hostile purposes against St. Paul. News of the riot was soon\ncarried to the Apostle, who learning of the danger to which his\nfriends were exposed desired to enter that theatre the magnificent\nproportions and ornamentation of which have been for the first time\ndisplayed to modern eyes by the labours of Mr. Wood. But the local\nChristians knew the Ephesian mob and their state of excitement better\nthan St. Paul did, and so they would not allow him to risk his life\namid the infuriated crowd. The Apostle's teaching too had reached the\nvery highest ranks of Ephesian and Asiatic society. The very Asiarchs,\nbeing his friends, sent unto him and requested him not to enter the\ntheatre. Here again we come across one of those incidental references\nwhich display St. Luke's acquaintance with the local peculiarities of\nthe Ephesian constitution, and which have been only really appreciated\nin the light of modern discoveries. In the time of King James I.,\nwhen the Authorised Version was made, the translators knew nothing of\nthe proof of the sacred writer's accuracy which lay under their hands\nin the words, \"Certain of the Asiarchs or chief officers of Asia,\" and\nso they translated them very literally but very incorrectly, \"Certain\nof the chief of Asia,\" ignoring completely the official rank and title\nwhich these men possessed. A few words must suffice to give a brief\nexplanation of the office these men held. The province of Asia from\nancient times had celebrated this feast of Artemis at an assembly of\nall the cities of Asia. This we have already explained. The Romans\nunited with the worship of Artemis the worship of the Emperor and of\nthe City of Rome; so that loyalty to the Emperor and loyalty to the\nnational religion went hand in hand. They appointed certain officials\nto preside at these games, they made them presidents of the local\ndiets or parliaments which assembled to discuss local matters at these\nnational assemblies, they gave them the highest positions in the\nprovince next to the proconsul, they surrounded them with great pomp,\nand endued them with considerable power so long as the festival\nlasted, and then, being intent on uniting economy with their\ngenerosity, they made these Asiarchs, as they were called, responsible\nfor all the expenses incurred in the celebration of the games and\ndiets. It was a clever policy, as it secured the maximum of\ncontentment on the people's part with the minimum of expense to the\nimperial government. This arrangement clearly limited the position of\nthe Asiarchate to rich men, as they alone could afford the enormous\nexpenses involved. The Greeks, specially those of Asia, as we have\nalready pointed out, were very flashy in their disposition. They loved\ntitles and decorations; so much so that one of their own orators of\nSt. Paul's day, Dion Chrysostom, tells us that, provided they got a\ntitle, they would suffer any indignity. There were therefore crowds of\nrich men always ready to take the office of Asiarch, which by degrees\nwas turned into a kind of life peerage, a man once an Asiarch always\nretaining the title, while his wife was called the Asiarchess, as we\nfind from the inscriptions. The Asiarchs were, in fact, the official\naristocracy of the province of Asia. They had assembled on this\noccasion for the purpose of sitting in the local parliament and\npresiding over the annual games in honour of Diana.[211] Their\ninterests and their honour were all bound up with the worship of the\ngoddess, and yet the preaching of St. Paul had told so powerfully upon\nthe whole province, that even among the very officials of the State\nreligion St. Paul had friends and supporters anxious to preserve his\nlife, and therefore sent him a message not to adventure himself into\nthe theatre. It is no wonder that Demetrius the silversmith roused his\nfellow-craftsmen into activity and fanned the flame of their wrath,\nfor the worship of Diana of the Ephesians was indeed in danger when\nthe very men whose office bound them to its support were in league\nwith such an uncompromising opponent as this Paul of Tarsus. St. Luke\nthus gives a glimpse of the constitution of Ephesus and of the\nprovince of Asia in his time. He shows us the peculiar institution of\nthe Asiarchate, and then when we turn to the inscriptions which Mr.\nWood and other modern discoverers have unearthed, we find that the\nAsiarchs occupy a most prominent position in them, vindicating in the\namplest manner the introduction of them by St. Luke as assembled at\nEphesus at this special season, and there interesting themselves in\nthe welfare of the great Apostle.[212]\n\n  [210] Aristarchus is described in the Martyrologies as the first\n  bishop of Thessalonica, and is said to have suffered martyrdom\n  under Nero. He is commemorated on August 4th.\n\n  [211] These local parliaments under the Roman Empire have been the\n  subject of much modern investigation at the hands of French and\n  German scholars. See for references to the authorities on the\n  point an article which I wrote in _Macmillan's Magazine_ for 1882.\n\n  [212] See the index to Lightfoot's _Ignatius and Polycarp_ for\n  extended references to the Asiarchate, and also Mommsen's _Roman\n  Provinces_ (Dickson's translation), vol. i., pp. 345-7.\n\nBut now there comes on the scene another official, whose title and\noffice have been the subject of many an illustration furnished by\nmodern research. The Jews who followed the mob into the theatre, when\nthey did not see St. Paul there, put forward one Alexander as their\nspokesman.[213] This man has been by some identified with Alexander\nthe coppersmith, to whom St. Paul refers (2 Tim. iv. 14) when writing\nto Timothy, then resident at Ephesus, as a man who had done much\ninjury to the Christian cause. He may have been well known as a\nbrother-tradesman by the Ephesian silversmiths, and he seems to have\nbeen regarded by the Jews as a kind of leader who might be useful in\ndirecting the rage of the mob against the Christians whom they hated.\nThe rioters, however, did not distinguish as clearly as the Jews would\nhave wished between the Christians and the Jews. They made the same\nmistake as the Romans did for more than a century later, and\nconfounded Jews and Christians together. They were all, in any case,\nopponents of idol worship and chiefly of their favourite goddess, and\ntherefore the sight of Alexander merely intensified their rage, so\nmuch that for the space of two hours they continued to vociferate\ntheir favourite cry, \"Great is Diana of the Ephesians.\"\n\n  [213] The Ephesian mob four hundred years later displayed at the\n  third General Council held at Ephesus in 431 an extraordinary\n  power of keeping up the same cry for hours. See the story of the\n  Council as told by Hefele in the third volume of his _General\n  Councils_ (Clark's translation). Nothing will give such a vigorous\n  idea of the confusion which then prevailed at Ephesus as a glance\n  at Mansi's Acts of that Council. The cry \"Anathema to Nestorius,\"\n  the heretic against whom the Council declared, was maintained so\n  long and so continuously that one would imagine that orthodoxy\n  depended on strength of lungs.\n\nNow, however, there appeared another official, whose title and\ncharacter have become famous through his action on this occasion:\n\"When the town-clerk had quieted the multitude, he saith, Ye men of\nEphesus, what man is there who knoweth not that the city of the\nEphesians is temple-keeper (or Neocoros) of the great Diana, and of\nthe image which fell down from Jupiter?\" Here we have several terms\nwhich have been illustrated and confirmed by the excavations of Mr.\nWood. The town-clerk or recorder is introduced, because he was the\nchief executive officer of the city of Ephesus, and, as such,\nresponsible to the Roman authorities for the peace and order of the\ncity. The city of Ephesus was a free city, retaining its ancient laws\nand customs like Athens and Thessalonica, but only on the condition\nthat these laws were effective and peace duly kept. Otherwise the\nRoman authorities and their police would step in. These town-clerks or\nrecorders of Ephesus are known from this one passage in the Acts of\nthe Apostles, but they are still better known from the inscriptions\nwhich have been brought to light at Ephesus. I have mentioned, for\ninstance, the immense inscription which Mr. Wood discovered in the\ntheatre commemorating the gift to the temple of Diana of a vast number\nof gold and silver images made by one Vibius Salutarius. This\ninscription lays down that the images should be kept in the custody of\nthe town-clerk or recorder when not required for use in the solemn\nreligious processions made through the city. The names of a great many\ntown-clerks have been recovered from the ruins of Ephesus, some of\nthem coming from the reign of Nero, the very period when this riot\ntook place. It is not impossible that we may yet recover the very name\nof the town-clerk who gave the riotous mob this very prudent advice,\n\"Ye ought to be quiet, and to do nothing rash,\" which has made him\nimmortal. Then, again, a title for the city of Ephesus is used in this\npacific oration which is strictly historical, and such as would\nnaturally have been used by a man in the town-clerk's position. He\ncalls Ephesus the \"temple-keeper,\" or \"Neocoros,\" as the word\nliterally is, of the goddess Diana, and this is one of the most usual\nand common titles in the lately discovered inscriptions. Ephesus and\nthe Ephesians were indeed so devoted to the worship of that deity and\nso affected by the honour she conferred upon them that they delighted\nto call themselves the temple-sweepers, or sextons, of the great\nDiana's temple. In fact, their devotion to the worship of the goddess\nso far surpassed that of ordinary cities that the Ephesians were\naccustomed to subordinate their reverence for the Emperors to their\nreverence for their religion, and thus in the decree passed by them\nhonouring Vibius Salutarius who endowed their temple with many\nsplendid gifts, to which we have already referred, they begin by\ndescribing themselves thus: \"In the presidency of Tiberius Claudius\nAntipater Julianus, on the sixth day of the first decade of the month\nPoseideon, it was resolved by the Council and the Public Assembly of\nthe Necori (of Artemis) and Lovers of Augustus.\" The Ephesians must\nhave been profoundly devoted to Diana's worship when in that age of\ngross materialism they would dare to place any deity higher than that\nof the reigning emperor, the only god in whom a true Roman really\nbelieved; for unregenerate human nature at that time looked at the\nthings alone which are seen and believed in nothing else.\n\nThe rest of the town-clerk's speech is equally deserving of study from\nevery point of view. He gives us a glimpse of the Apostle's method of\ncontroversy: it was wise, courteous, conciliatory. It did not hurt the\nfeelings or outrage the sentiments of natural reverence, which ought\never to be treated with the greatest respect, for natural reverence is\na delicate plant, and even when directed towards a wrong object ought\nto be most gently handled. \"Ye have brought hither these men, which\nare neither robbers of temples nor blasphemers of our goddess.[214] If\ntherefore Demetrius, and the craftsmen that are with him, have a\nmatter against any man, the courts are open, and there are proconsuls:\nlet them accuse one another.\" Modern research has thrown additional\nlight upon these words. The Roman system of provincial government\nanticipated the English system of assize courts, moving from place to\nplace, introduced by Henry II. for the purpose of bringing justice\nhome to every man's door.[215] It was quite natural for the proconsul\nof Asia to hold his court at the same time as the annual assembly of\nthe province of Asia and the great festival of Diana. The great\nconcourse of people rendered such a course specially convenient, while\nthe presence of the proconsul helped to keep the peace, as, to take a\nwell-known instance, the presence of Pontius Pilate at the great\nannual Paschal feast at Jerusalem secured the Romans against any\nsudden rebellion, and also enabled him to dispense justice after the\nmanner of an assize judge, to which fact we would find an allusion in\nthe words of St. Mark (xv. 6), \"Now at the feast he used to release\nunto them one prisoner, whom they asked of him.\"\n\n  [214] St. Paul's zeal never outran his discretion. He never\n  blasphemed or spoke lightly of ideas and names held sacred by his\n  hearers. I remember in our local ecclesiastical history an example\n  of the opposite course which has often found imitators. When\n  Charles Wesley first visited Dublin about the year 1747, he left\n  behind a zealous but very unwise preacher to continue his work.\n  His language was so violent that the mob were roused to burn his\n  meeting-house, which stood in Marlborough Street near the spot\n  where the Roman Catholic Cathedral now stands. He then took his\n  stand on Oxmantown Green in the northern suburbs, where he\n  preached in the open air. On Christmas Day he took the Incarnation\n  as his subject, and began, as St. Paul never would have done, by\n  crying aloud, \"I curse and blaspheme all gods and goddesses in\n  heaven and earth, save the Babe that was born in Bethlehem and was\n  wrapped in swaddling clothes,\" whereupon the Dublin mob with their\n  ready wit in the matter of nick-names called the Methodists\n  swaddlers, a title which has ever since stuck to them in Ireland,\n  and is to this day commonly used by the Roman Catholics. This\n  seems an interesting illustration of the typical character of the\n  Acts.\n\n  [215] See Preface by Bishop Stubbs to Benedict of Peterborough,\n  _Gesta Regis Hen. II._, t. ii., pp. lxv.-lxxi. (Rolls Series);\n  Madox, _Hist. of Exchequer_, pp. 84-96, for an account of the rise\n  of the English Assize System; see Le Blant, _Les Actes des\n  Martyrs_, pp. 50-121, and _Marquardt's R\u00f6m. Staatsverwalt_, p. 365\n  about Roman assizes. There were eleven circuits in Asia.\n\nIt has been said, indeed, that St. Luke here puts into the\ntown-clerk's mouth words he could never have used, representing him as\nsaying \"there are proconsuls\" when, in fact, there was never more than\none proconsul in the province of Asia. Such criticism is of the\nweakest character. Surely every man that ever speaks in public knows\nthat one of the commonest usages is to say there are judges or\nmagistrates, using the plural when one judge or magistrate may alone\nbe exercising jurisdiction! But there is another explanation, which\ncompletely solves the difficulty and vindicates St. Luke's minute\naccuracy. Three hundred years ago John Calvin, in his commentary,\nnoted the difficulty, and explained it by the supposition that the\nproconsul had appointed deputies or assessors who held the courts in\nhis name. There is, however, a more satisfactory explanation. It was\nthe reign of Nero, and his brutal example had begun to debauch the\nofficials through the provinces. Silanus, the proconsul of Asia, was\ndisliked by Nero and by his mother as a possible candidate for the\nimperial crown, being of the family of Augustus. Two of his\nsubordinates, Celer and \u00c6lius, the collectors of the imperial revenue\nin Asia, poisoned him, and as a reward were permitted to govern the\nprovince, enjoying perhaps in common the title of proconsul and\nexercising the jurisdiction of the office.[216] Finally, the tone of\nthe town-clerk's words as he ends his address is thoroughly that of a\nRoman official. He feels himself responsible for the riot, and knows\nthat he may be called upon to account for it. Peace was what the Roman\nauthorities sought and desired at all hazards, and every measure which\nthreatened the peace, or every organisation, no matter how desirable,\na fire brigade even, which might conceivably be turned to purposes of\npolitical agitation, was strictly discouraged.\n\n  [216] See Lewin's _St. Paul_, i. 337, 338.\n\nThe correspondence of Pliny with the Emperor Trajan some fifty years\nor so later than this riot is the best commentary upon the\ntown-clerk's speech. We find, for instance, in Pliny's _Letters_, Book\nX., No. 42, a letter telling about a fire which broke out in\nNicomedia, the capital of Bithynia, of which province Pliny was\nproconsul. He wrote to the Emperor describing the damage done, and\nsuggesting that a fire brigade numbering one hundred and fifty men\nmight be instituted. The Emperor would not hear of it, however. Such\nclubs or societies he considered dangerous, and so he wrote back a\nletter which proves how continuous was Roman policy, how abhorrent to\nthe imperial authorities were all voluntary organisations which might\nbe used for the purposes of public agitation: \"You are of opinion that\nit would be proper to establish a company of fire-men in Nicomedia,\nagreeably to what has been practised in several other cities. But it\nis to be remembered that societies of this sort have greatly disturbed\nthe peace of the province in general and of those cities in\nparticular. Whatever name we give them, and for whatever purposes they\nmay be founded, they will not fail to form themselves into factious\nassemblies, however short their meetings will be\"; and so Pliny was\nobliged to devise other measures for the security and welfare of the\ncities committed to his charge.[217] The accidental burning of a city\nwould not be attributed to him as a fault, while the occurrence of a\nstreet riot might be the beginning of a social war which would bring\ndown ruin upon the Empire at large.\n\n  [217] A similar jealousy of voluntary organisations is still\n  perpetuated in France under the code Napoleon, which largely\n  embodies Roman methods and ideas.\n\nWhen the recorder of Ephesus had ended his speech he dismissed the\nassembly, leaving to us a precious record illustrative of the methods\nof Roman government, of the interior life of Ephesus in days long gone\nby, and, above all else, of the thorough honesty of the writer whom\nthe Holy Spirit impelled to trace the earliest triumphs of the Cross\namid the teeming fields of Gentile paganism.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVI.\n\n_ST. PAUL AND THE CHRISTIAN MINISTRY._\n\n     \"And after the uproar was ceased, Paul having sent for the\n     disciples and exhorted them, took leave of them, and departed for\n     to go into Macedonia.... And upon the first day of the week, when\n     we were gathered together (at Troas) to break bread, Paul\n     discoursed with them, intending to depart on the morrow; and\n     prolonged his speech until midnight.... And from Miletus he sent\n     to Ephesus, and called to him the elders of the church. And when\n     they were come to him, he said unto them, Ye yourselves know,\n     from the first day I set foot in Asia, after what manner I was\n     with you all the time, serving the Lord with all lowliness of\n     mind, and with tears.... Take heed unto yourselves, and to all\n     the flock, in the which the Holy Ghost hath made you bishops, to\n     feed the Church of God, which He purchased with His own\n     blood.\"--ACTS xx. 1, 7, 17-19, 28.\n\n\nThe period of St. Paul's career at which we have now arrived was full\nof life, vigour, activity. He was in the very height of his powers,\nwas surrounded with responsibilities, was pressed with cares and\nanxieties; and yet the character of the sacred narrative is very\npeculiar. From the passover of the year 57, soon after which the\nApostle had to leave Ephesus, till the passover of the next year, we\nlearn but very little of St. Paul's work from the narrative of St.\nLuke. The five verses with which the twentieth chapter begins tell us\nall that St. Luke apparently knew about the Apostle's actions during\nthat time. He gives us the story of a mere outsider, who knew next to\nnothing of the work St. Paul was doing. The Apostle left Ephesus and\nwent into Macedonia, whence he departed into Greece. Three months were\noccupied in teaching at Corinth, and then, intending to sail from\nCenchre\u00e6 to Ephesus, he suddenly changed his mind upon the discovery\nof a Jewish plot, altered his route, disappointed his foes, and paid a\nsecond visit to Macedonia. In this narrative, which is all St. Luke\ngives, we have the account, brief and concise, of one who was\nacquainted merely with the bare outlines of the Apostle's work, and\nknew nothing of his inner life and trials. St. Luke, in fact, was so\nmuch taken up with his own duties at Philippi, where he had been\nlabouring for the previous five years, that he had no time to think of\nwhat was going on elsewhere. At any rate his friend and pupil\nTheophilus had simply asked him for a narrative so far as he knew it\nof the progress of the gospel. He had no idea that he was writing\nanything more than a story for the private use of Theophilus, and he\ntherefore put down what he knew and had experienced, without troubling\nhimself concerning other matters. I have read criticisms of the\nActs--proceeding principally, I must confess, from German\nsources--which seem to proceed on the supposition that St. Luke was\nconsciously writing an ecclesiastical history of the whole early\nChurch which he knew and felt was destined to serve for ages.[218] But\nthis was evidently not the case. St. Luke was consciously writing a\nstory merely for a friend's study, and dreamt not of the wider fame\nand use destined for his book. This accounts in a simple and natural\nway, not only for what St. Luke inserts, but also for what he leaves\nout, and he manifestly left out a great deal. We may take this passage\nat which we have now arrived as an illustration of his methods of\nwriting sacred history. This period of ten months, from the time St.\nPaul left Ephesus till he returned to Philippi at the following Easter\nseason, was filled with most important labours which have borne fruit\nunto all ages of the Church, yet St. Luke dismisses them in a few\nwords. Just let us realise what happened in these eventful months. St.\nPaul wrote First Corinthians in April A.D. 57. In May he passed to\nTroas, where, as we learn from Second Corinthians, he laboured for a\nshort time with much success. He then passed into Macedonia, urged on\nby his restless anxiety concerning the Corinthian Church. In Macedonia\nhe laboured during the following five or six months. How intense and\nabsorbing must have been his work during that time! It was then that\nhe preached the gospel with signs and wonders round about even unto\nIllyricum, as he notes in Romans xvi. 19, an epistle written this very\nyear from Corinth. The last time that he had been in Macedonia he was\na hunted fugitive fleeing from place to place. Now he seems to have\nlived in comparative peace, so far at least as the Jewish synagogues\nwere concerned. He penetrated, therefore, into the mountainous\ndistricts west of Ber\u0153a, bearing the gospel tidings into cities and\nvillages which had as yet heard nothing of them. But preaching was not\nhis only work in Macedonia. He had written his first Epistle to\nCorinth from Ephesus a few months before. In Macedonia he received\nfrom Titus, his messenger, an account of the manner in which that\nepistle had been received, and so from Macedonia he despatched his\nsecond Corinthian Epistle, which must be carefully studied if we\ndesire to get an adequate idea of the labours and anxieties amid which\nthe Apostle was then immersed (see 2 Cor. ii. 13, and vii. 5 and 6).\nAnd then he passed into Greece, where he spent three months at\nCorinth, settling the affairs of that very celebrated but very\ndisorderly Christian community. The three months spent there must have\nbeen a period of overwhelming business. Let us recount the subjects\nwhich must have taken up every moment of St. Paul's time. First there\nwere the affairs of the Corinthian Church itself. He had to reprove,\ncomfort, direct, set in order. The whole moral, spiritual, social,\nintellectual conceptions of Corinth had gone wrong. There was not a\nquestion, from the most elementary topic of morals and the social\nconsiderations connected with female dress and activities, to the most\nsolemn points of doctrine and worship, the Resurrection and the Holy\nCommunion, concerning which difficulties, disorders, and dissensions\nhad not been raised. All these had to be investigated and decided by\nthe Apostle. Then, again, the Jewish controversy, and the oppositions\nto himself personally which the Judaising party had excited, demanded\nhis careful attention. This controversy was a troublesome one in\nCorinth just then, but it was a still more troublesome one in Galatia,\nand was fast raising its head in Rome. The affairs of both these great\nand important churches, the one in the East, the other in the West,\nwere pressing upon St. Paul at this very time. While he was immersed\nin all the local troubles of Corinth, he had to find time at Corinth\nto write the Epistle to the Galatians and the Epistle to the Romans.\nHow hard it must have been for the Apostle to concentrate his\nattention on the affairs of Corinth when his heart and brain were torn\nwith anxieties about the schisms, divisions, and false doctrines which\nwere flourishing among his Galatian converts, or threatening to invade\nthe Church at Rome, where as yet he had not been able to set forth his\nown conception of gospel truth, and thus fortify the disciples against\nthe attacks of those subtle foes of Christ who were doing their best\nto turn the Catholic Church into a mere narrow Jewish sect, devoid of\nall spiritual power and life.\n\nBut this was not all, or nearly all. St. Paul was at the same time\nengaged in organising a great collection throughout all the churches\nwhere he had ministered on behalf of the poor Christians at Jerusalem,\nand he was compelled to walk most warily and carefully in this matter.\nEvery step he took was watched by foes ready to interpret it\nunfavourably; every appointment he made, every arrangement, no matter\nhow wise or prudent, was the subject of keenest scrutiny and\ncriticism. With all these various matters accumulating upon him it is\nno wonder that St. Paul should have written of himself at this very\nperiod in words which vividly describe his distractions: \"Beside those\nthings that are without, there is that which presseth upon me daily,\nthe care of all the churches.\" And yet St. Paul gives us a glimpse of\nthe greatness of his soul as we read the epistles which were the\noutcome of this period of intense but fruitful labour. He carried a\nmighty load, but yet he carried it lightly. His present anxieties were\nnumerous, but they did not shut out all thoughts upon other topics.\nThe busiest man then was just the same as the busiest man still. He\nwas the man who had the most time and leisure to bestow thought upon\nthe future. The anxieties and worries of the present were numerous and\nexacting, but St. Paul did not allow his mind to be so swallowed up in\nthem as to shut out all care about other questions equally important.\nWhile he was engaged in the manifold cares which present controversies\nbrought, he was all the while meditating a mission to Rome, and\ncontemplating a journey still farther to Spain and Gaul,[219] and the\nbounds of the Western ocean. And then, finally, there was the care of\nSt. Paul's own soul, the sustenance and development of his spirit by\nprayer and meditation and worship and reading, which he never\nneglected under any circumstances. All these things combined must have\nrendered this period of close upon twelve months one of the Apostle's\nbusiest and intensest times, and yet St. Luke disposes of it in a few\nbrief verses of this twentieth chapter.\n\n  [218] I do not wish to decry the industry and learning of German\n  critics, to whom I owe much, as my various references show; but I\n  am always suspicious of their historical conclusions, simply\n  because they are pure students, and are therefore ignorant of life\n  and men. The more industrious and secluded a life a man may lead,\n  so much the more ignorant of the practical world a man becomes,\n  and so much the more unfitted to be a real historian, who must\n  know men as well as books. History is a picture of real life in\n  the past, and to paint it a man must know real life in the\n  present. As well might we set an academic scientist who regarded\n  all lines as straight and all bars as rigid to build the Forth\n  Bridge, as set a man who knows nothing of human nature and how it\n  acts under the stress of practical affairs to write the story of\n  human life two thousand years ago. We may take and use German\n  investigations, but we should apply English common sense and\n  experience to test German conclusions. This rule is, I fear, too\n  much forgotten in a great deal of the literature that is now being\n  pawned off upon the English world in the name of criticism. Surely\n  the fate of Baur's theories ought to be a warning to all young men\n  against swallowing as the latest results of scholarship everything\n  that comes clothed in the German language! The English nation has\n  a reputation for solid common sense. What fools the Germans would\n  be did they take everything English as full of common sense\n  because printed in our language!\n\n  [219] I say to Gaul, because I take it that he would have sailed\n  to Marseilles, which was then the great port of communication with\n  Asia Minor, as we have noted above, pp. 372-74, when treating of\n  the worship of Diana and its extension from the East to\n  Marseilles.\n\nAfter St. Paul's stay at Corinth, he determined to proceed to\nJerusalem according to his predetermined plan, bringing with him the\nproceeds of the collection which he had made. He wished to go by sea,\nas he had done some three years before, sailing from Cenchre\u00e6 direct\nto Syria. The Jews of Corinth, however, were as hostile as ever, and\nso they hatched a plot to murder him before his embarkation. St. Paul,\nhowever, having learned their designs, suddenly changed his route, and\ntook his journey by land through Macedonia, visiting once more his\nformer converts, and tarrying to keep the passover at Philippi with\nthe little company of Christian Jews who there resided. This\ncircumstance throws light upon verses 4 and 5 of this twentieth\nchapter, which run thus: \"There accompanied him as far as Asia Sopater\nof Ber\u0153a, the son of Pyrrhus; and of the Thessalonians, Aristarchus\nand Secundus; and Gaius of Derbe, and Timothy; and of Asia, Tychicus\nand Trophimus. But these had gone before, and were waiting for us at\nTroas.\" St. Paul came to Philippi, found St. Luke there, celebrated\nthe passover, and then sailed away with St. Luke to join the company\nwho had gone before. And they had gone before for a very good reason.\nThey were all, except Timothy, Gentile Christians, persons therefore\nwho, unlike St. Paul, had nothing to do with the national rites and\ncustoms of born Jews, and who might be much more profitably exercised\nin working among the Gentile converts at Troas, free from any danger\nof either giving or taking offence in connexion with the passover, a\nlively instance of which danger Trophimus, one of their number,\nsubsequently afforded in Jerusalem, when his presence alone in St.\nPaul's company caused the spread of a rumour which raised the riot so\nfatal to St. Paul's liberty: \"For they had seen with him in the city\nTrophimus the Ephesian, whom they supposed that Paul had brought into\nthe temple\" (xxi. 29). This incident, together with St. Paul's conduct\nat Jerusalem as told in the twenty-sixth verse of the twenty-first\nchapter illustrates vividly St. Paul's view of the Jewish law and\nJewish rites and ceremonies. They were for Jews national ceremonies.\nThey had a meaning for them. They commemorated certain national\ndeliverances, and as such might be lawfully used. St. Paul himself\ncould eat the passover and cherish the feelings of a Jew, heartily\nthankful to God for the deliverance from Egypt wrought out through\nMoses centuries ago for his ancestors, and his mind could then go on\nand rejoice over a greater deliverance still wrought out at this same\npaschal season by a greater than Moses. St. Paul openly proclaimed the\nlawfulness of the Jewish rites for Jews, but opposed their imposition\nupon the Gentiles. He regarded them as _tolerabiles inepti\u00e6_, and\ntherefore observed them to please his weaker brethren; but sent his\nGentile converts on before, lest perhaps the sight of his own example\nmight weaken their faith and lead them to a compliance with that\nJudaising party who were ever ready to avail themselves of any\nopportunity to weaken St. Paul's teaching and authority. St. Paul\nalways strove to unite wisdom and prudence with faithfulness to\nprinciple lest by any means his labour should be in vain.\n\nSt. Luke now joined St. Paul at Philippi, and henceforth gives his own\naccount of what happened on this eventful journey. From Philippi they\ncrossed to Troas. It was the spring-time, and the weather was more\nboisterous than later in the year, and so the voyage took five days to\naccomplish, while two days had sufficed on a previous occasion. They\ncame to Troas, and there remained for a week, owing doubtless to the\nexigencies of the ship and its cargo. On the first day of the week St.\nPaul assembled the Church for worship. The meeting was held on what we\nshould call Saturday evening; but we must remember that the Jewish\nfirst day began from sundown on Saturday or the Sabbath.[220] This is\nthe first notice in the Acts of the observance of the Lord's day as\nthe time of special Christian worship. We have, however, earlier\nnotices of the first day in connexion with Christian observances. The\napostles, for instance, met together on the first day, as we are told\nin John xx. 19, and again eight days after, as the twenty-sixth verse\nof the same chapter tells. St. Paul's first Epistle to Corinth was\nwritten twelve months earlier than this visit to Troas, and it\nexpressly mentions (ch. xvi. 2) the first day of the week as the time\nordered by St. Paul for the setting apart of the Galatian contribution\nto the collection for the poor saints at Jerusalem; and so here again\nat Troas we see that the Asiatic Christians observed the same solemn\ntime for worship and the celebration of the Eucharist. Such\nglimpses--chance notices, we might call them, were there not a higher\nProvidence watching over the unconscious writer--show us how little we\ncan conclude from mere silence about the ritual, worship, and\ngovernment of the Apostolic Church,[221] and illustrate the vast\nimportance of studying carefully the extant records of the Christian\nChurch in the second century if we wish to gain fresh light upon the\nhistory and customs of the apostolic age. If three or four brief texts\nwere blotted out of the New Testament, it would be quite possible to\nargue from silence merely that the apostles and their immediate\nfollowers did not observe the Lord's Day in any way whatsoever, and\nthat the custom of stated worship and solemn eucharistic celebrations\non that day were a corruption introduced in post-apostolic times. The\nbest interpreters of the New Testament are, as John Wesley long ago\nwell pointed out in his preface to his celebrated but now almost\nunknown Christian Library, the apostolic fathers and the writers of\nthe age next following the apostles.[222] We may take it for a\ncertain rule of interpretation that, whenever we find a widely\nestablished practice or custom mentioned in the writings of a\nChristian author of the second century, it originated in apostolic\ntimes. It was only natural that this should have been the case. We are\nall inclined to venerate the past, and to cry it up as the golden age.\nNow this tendency must have been intensified tenfold in the case of\nthe Christians of the second century. The first century was the time\nof our Lord and the age of the apostles. Sacred memories clustered\nthick round it, and every ceremony and rite which came from that time\nmust have been profoundly reverenced, while every new ceremony or\ncustom must have been rudely challenged, and its author keenly\nscrutinised as one who presumptuously thought he could improve upon\nthe wisdom of men inspired by the Holy Ghost and miraculously gifted\nby God. It is for this reason we regard the second-century doctors and\napologists as the best commentary upon the sacred writers, because in\nthem we see the Church of the apostolic age living, acting, displaying\nitself amid the circumstances and scenes of actual life.\n\n  [220] There is to this day a trace of this custom in the Book of\n  Common Prayer in the rubric which prescribes that the collect for\n  Sunday shall be said on Saturday evening. In colleges, too,\n  according to Archbishop Laud's rules, surplices are worn on\n  Saturday evenings as well as on Sundays.\n\n  [221] See above, pp. 342 and 361, where I have pointed out the\n  dangerous character of the argument from mere silence. I may\n  perhaps recur to the example of Meyer, the eminent textual critic,\n  to illustrate my view of German critics stated in my first note to\n  this chapter, p. 386 above. Meyer is an exhaustive textual critic,\n  but as soon as he ventures on the region of history he falls into\n  this trap, and concludes from the argument of silence that Apollos\n  was never baptized with Christian baptism because he was so clever\n  and spiritually enlightened that he did not need it. But, then,\n  how does he account for the case of St. Paul? Was Apollos superior\n  to St. Paul? And yet he was baptized. But the illustrations of the\n  fallacies of this method of argumentation would be endless. If the\n  argument of silence is sufficient to prove a negative, what are we\n  to do with female communicants? There is not a single instance of\n  them in the New Testament. It is here, however, that the study of\n  the second-century writers is so valuable as illustrating the\n  silence of the first. See my note on p. 342 above.\n\n  [222] The Christian library was a series of fifty volumes which\n  Wesley published for the use of his followers. They were begun in\n  1749 and completed in 1755. \"The opening volume contains, 1. The\n  Epistles of the apostolical fathers Clement, Ignatius, and\n  Polycarp, whom he believed to be endued with the extraordinary\n  assistance of the Holy Spirit, and whose writings, though not of\n  equal authority with the Holy Scriptures, are worthy of a much\n  greater respect than any composures that have been made since. 2.\n  The martyrdoms of Ignatius and Polycarp. 3. An extract from the\n  Homilies of Macarius, born about the year 301.\" See Tyerman's\n  _Life of Wesley_, ii. 25, 65-67.\n\nJust let us take as an illustration the case of this observance of the\nfirst day of the week. The Acts of the Apostles tells us but very\nlittle about it, simply because there is but little occasion to\nmention what must have seemed to St. Luke one of the commonest and\nbest-known facts. But Justin Martyr some eighty years later was\ndescribing Christianity for the Roman Emperor. He was defending it\nagainst the outrageous and immoral charges brought against it, and\ndepicting the purity, the innocency, and simplicity of its sacred\nrites. Among other subjects dealt with, he touches upon the time when\nChristians offered up formal and stated worship. It was absolutely\nnecessary therefore for him to treat of the subject of the Lord's Day.\nIn the sixty-seventh chapter of Justin's First _Apology_, we find him\ndescribing the Christian weekly festival in words which throw back an\ninteresting light upon the language of St. Luke touching the Lord's\nDay which St. Paul passed at Troas. Justin writes thus on this topic:\n\"Upon the day called Sunday all who live in cities or in the country\ngather together unto one place, and the memoirs of the apostles or the\nwritings of the prophets are read, as long as time permits; then, when\nthe reader has ceased, the president verbally instructs, and exhorts\nto the imitation of these good things. Then we all rise together and\npray, and as we before said, when our prayer is ended, bread and wine\nand water are brought, and the president in like manner offers prayers\nand thanksgivings according to his ability, and the people assent,\nsaying Amen;[223] and there is a distribution to each, and a\nparticipation of that over which thanks have been given, and to those\nwho are absent a portion is sent by the deacons. And those who are\nwell to do and willing, give what each thinks fit; and what is\ncollected is deposited with the president, who succours the orphans\nand widows, and those who through sickness or any other cause are in\nwant, and those who are in bonds, and the strangers sojourning among\nus, and in a word takes care of all who are in need. But Sunday is the\nday on which we all hold our common assembly, because it is the first\nday on which God, having wrought a change in the darkness and matter,\nmade the world; and Jesus Christ our Saviour on the same day rose from\nthe dead.\" This passage gives us a full account of Christian customs\nin the first half of the second century, when thousands must have been\nstill alive who remembered the times of the apostles, enabling us to\nrealise what must have been the character of the assembly and of the\nworship in which St. Paul played a leading part at Troas.[224]\n\n  [223] Here we have an illustration of 1 Cor. xiv. 16: \"Else if\n  thou bless with the Spirit, how shall he that filleth the place of\n  the unlearned say the Amen at the giving of thanks, seeing he\n  understandeth not what thou sayest?\" See also ch. lxv. of Justin's\n  same _Apology_ for another reference to the Amen, and cf. _Apost.\n  Constitutions_, viii. 10; Cyril of Jerusalem, _Cat._, ch. v.;\n  Euseb., _H. E._, vi. 43 and vii. 9; Ambros. _De Sacrament._, iv.\n  4; Jerom., _Epist._, 62; Chrysost., _Hom._, xxxv. on 1st Cor.;\n  Bingham's _Antiqq._, XV. iii. 26; and the article on Amen in the\n  first volume of Smith's _Dict. Christ. Antiqq._ The preceding\n  chapters of Justin's _Apology_, lxv. and lxvi., are full of\n  information. They expressly state that in the Primitive Church no\n  unbaptized person was allowed to communicate, an elementary point\n  of Christian practice about which some persons and some Christian\n  societies seem at present very uncertain. Hooker's words, _Eccles.\n  Pol._, Book V. ch. lxvii., are very clear on this topic.\n\n  [224] The continuous character, the strong conservatism of the\n  early Christian Church receives an interesting illustration from\n  the history of the Sabbath as distinguished from the Lord's Day.\n  The Jewish Church gave the outward form to Christianity; and\n  though Christianity parted company with Judaism by the end of the\n  first century, yet the sacred character of the Sabbath was still\n  perpetuated among the Gentiles notwithstanding St. Paul's strong\n  language in Galatians and Colossians. In the fourth century the\n  Sabbath was observed in many places in the same manner as the\n  Lord's Day. St. Athanasius says: \"We meet on the Sabbath, not\n  indeed being infected with Judaism, but to worship Jesus, the Lord\n  of the Sabbath.\" Timothy, one of his successors at Alexandria,\n  says that the Holy Communion was administered on the Sabbath as on\n  the Lord's Day, and that these two were the only days on which it\n  was celebrated in that city. In the time of St. Chrysostom the two\n  great weekly festivals were the Sabbath and the Lord's Day. It was\n  the same in the fifth century in the Egyptian monasteries, where\n  the services for Saturday and Sunday were exactly the same. See a\n  full account of this matter in Bingham's _Antiquities_, Book XIII.\n  ch. ix. sec. iii.\n\nThere was, however, a difference between the celebration at Troas and\nthe celebrations of which Justin Martyr speaks, though we learn not of\nthis difference from Justin himself, but from Pliny's letter to\nTrajan, concerning which we have often spoken. St. Paul met the\nChristians of Troas in the evening, and celebrated the Holy Communion\nwith them about midnight. It was the first day of the week according\nto Jewish computation, though it was what we should call Saturday\nevening. The ship in which the apostolic company was travelling was\nabout to sail on the morrow, and so St. Paul gladly joined the local\nchurch in its weekly breaking of bread. It was exactly the same here\nat Troas as reported by St. Luke, as it was at Corinth where the\nevening celebrations were turned into occasions of gluttony and\nostentation, as St. Paul tells us in the eleventh of First\nCorinthians. The Christians evidently met at this time in the evening\nto celebrate the Lord's Supper. It has been often thought that St.\nPaul, having referred just twelve months before in the First\nCorinthian Epistle to the gross abuses connected with the evening\ncelebrations at Corinth, and having promised to set the abuses of\nCorinth in order when he visited that church, did actually change the\ntime of the celebration of Holy Communion from the evening to the\nmorning, when he spent the three months there of which this chapter\nspeaks.[225] Perhaps he did make the change, but we have no\ninformation on the point; and if he did make the change for Corinth,\nit is evident that he did not intend to impose it as a rule upon the\nwhole Christian Church when a few weeks after leaving Corinth he\ncelebrated the Lord's Supper at Troas in the evening. By the second\ncentury, however, the change had been made. Justin Martyr indeed does\nnot give a hint as to the time when Holy Communion was administered in\nthe passages to which we have referred. He tells us that none but\nbaptized persons were admitted to partake of it, but gives us no minor\ndetails. Pliny, however, writing of the state of affairs in\nBithynia,--and it bordered upon the province where Troas was\nsituated,--tells us from the confession extracted out of apostate\nChristians that \"the whole of their fault lay in this, that they were\nwont to meet together on a stated day, _before it was light_, and sing\namong themselves alternately a hymn to Christ as God, and to bind\nthemselves by a sacrament (or oath) not to the commission of any\nwickedness, but not to be guilty of theft or robbery or adultery.\"\nAfter this early service they then separated, and assembled again in\nthe evening to partake of a common meal. The Agape or Love-Feast was\nunited with the Holy Communion in St. Paul's day. Experience, however,\nshowed that such a union must lead to grave abuses, and so in that\nfinal consolidation which the Church received during the last quarter\nof the first century, when the Lord's Second Coming was seen to be not\nso immediate as some at first expected, the two institutions were\ndivided; the Holy Communion being appointed as the early morning\nservice of the Lord's Day, while the Agape was left in its original\nposition as an evening meal. And so have matters continued ever since.\nThe Agape indeed has almost died out. A trace of it perhaps remains in\nthe blessed bread distributed in Roman Catholic churches on the\nContinent; while again the love-feasts instituted by John Wesley and\ncontinued among his followers were an avowed imitation of this\nprimitive institution. The Agape continued indeed in vigorous\nexistence for centuries, but it was almost always found associated\nwith grave abuses. It might have been innocent and useful so long as\nChristian love continued to burn with the fervour of apostolic days,\nthough even then, as Corinth showed, there were lurking dangers in it;\nbut when we reach the fourth and fifth centuries we find council after\ncouncil denouncing the evils of the Agape, and restricting its\ncelebration with such effect that during the Middle Ages it ceased to\nexist as a distinctive Christian ordinance.[226] The change of the\nHoly Communion to the earlier portion of the day took almost universal\neffect, and that from the earliest times. Tertullian (_De Corona_,\niii.) testifies that in his time the Eucharist was received before\ndaybreak, though Christ had instituted it at a meal-time. Cyprian\nwitnesses to the same usage in his sixty-third Epistle, where he\nspeaks of Christ as instituting the Sacrament in the evening, that\n\"the very hour of the sacrifice might intimate the evening of the\nworld,\" but then describes himself as \"celebrating the resurrection of\nthe Lord in the morning.\"[227] St. Augustine, as quoted above,\nwriting about 400, speaks of fasting communion as the general rule;\nso general, indeed, that he regards it as having come down from\napostolic appointment. At the same time St. Augustine recognises the\ntime of its original institution, and mentions the custom of the\nAfrican Church which once a year had an evening communion on Thursday\nbefore Easter in remembrance of the Last Supper and of our Lord's\naction in connection with it. My own feeling on the matter is, that\nearly fasting communion when there is health and strength is far the\nmost edifying. There is an element of self-denial about it, and the\nmore real self-denial there is about our worship the more blessed will\nthat worship be. A worship that costs nothing in mind, body, or estate\nis but a very poor thing to offer unto the Lord of the universe. But\nthere is no ground either in Holy Scripture or the history of the\nprimitive Church justifying an attempt to put a yoke on the neck of\nthe disciples which they cannot bear and to teach that fasting\ncommunion is binding upon all Christians. St. Augustine speaks most\nstrongly in a passage we have already referred to (_Epist._ cxviii.,\n_Ad Januar._) about the benefit of fasting communion; but he admits\nthe lawfulness of non-fasting participation, as does also that great\nGreek divine St. Chrysostom, who quotes the examples of St. Paul and\nof our Lord Himself in justification of such a course.[228]\n\n  [225] St. Augustine, in _Epist._, cxviii., _Ad Januar._, cc. vi.\n  vii., was one of the first to suggest this idea. The passage is\n  quoted by Bingham, _Antiqq._, XV. vii. 8.\n\n  [226] See the exhaustive article on Agap\u00e6 in Smith's _Dict.\n  Christ. Antiqq._, vol. i., p. 39.\n\n  [227] The early Christians celebrated the Holy Communion in memory\n  of Christ's resurrection as much as in memory of His death. The\n  resurrection of Christ was, in fact, the central point of their\n  belief and thought. This alone would have conduced to the practice\n  of early morning communion, even before day, inasmuch as it was at\n  that time the resurrection took place. Cf. _Dict. Christ.\n  Antiqq._, vol. i., p. 419, on the hours of celebration of the Holy\n  Communion. On p. 41 of the same volume the writer of the article\n  on the Agap\u00e6 makes an extraordinary statement that it was only at\n  the third Council of Carthage, A.D. 391, that the time of\n  Eucharistic celebration was changed to the morning, and that then\n  the Agape was first separated from the Holy Communion. The change\n  and the separation had taken place in Pliny's time, as I have\n  already shown.\n\n  [228] This whole subject of fasting communion is discussed at\n  length with all the authorities duly given in Bingham's\n  _Antiquities_, Book XV. ch. vii. sec. 8, whence I have taken my\n  references, and where he quotes Bishop Fell's Notes on Cyprian,\n  _Epist._ lxiii. p. 156, who says that \"the custom of communicating\n  after supper lasted for a long time in the Church\": cf. Socrates,\n  _H. E._, v. 22, and the _Dict. Christ. Antiqq._, vol. i., p. 417,\n  on _Fasting Reception of H. C._\n\nThe celebration of the Eucharist was not the only subject which\nengaged St. Paul's attention at Troas. He preached unto the people as\nwell; and following his example we find from Justin Martyr's narrative\nthat preaching was an essential part of the communion office in the\ndays immediately following the apostles' age; and then, descending to\nlower times still, we know that preaching is an equally essential\nportion of the eucharistic service in the Western Church, the only\nformal provision for a sermon according to the English liturgy being\nthe rubric in the service for the Holy Communion, which lays down that\nafter the Nicene Creed, \"Then shall follow the sermon or one of the\nHomilies already set forth, or hereafter to be set forth, by\nauthority.\" St. Paul's discourse was no mere mechanical homily,\nhowever. He was not what man regarded as a powerful, but he was a\nready speaker, and one who carried his hearers away by the rapt\nintense earnestness of his manner. His whole soul was full of his\nsubject. He was convinced that this was his last visit to the churches\nof Asia. He foresaw too a thousand dangers to which they would be\nexposed after his departure, and he therefore prolonged his sermon far\ninto the night, so far indeed that human nature asserted its claims\nupon a young man named Eutychus, who sat in a window of the room where\nthey were assembled. Human nature indeed was never for a moment absent\nfrom these primitive Church assemblies. If it was absent in one shape,\nit was present in another, just as really as in our modern\ncongregations, and so Eutychus fell fast asleep under the\nheart-searching exhortations of an inspired apostle, even as men fall\nasleep under less powerful sermons of smaller men; and as the natural\nresult, sitting in a window left open for the sake of ventilation, he\nfell down into the courtyard, and was taken up apparently lifeless.\nSt. Paul was not put out, however. He took interruptions in his work\nas the Master took them. He was not upset by them, but he seized them,\nutilised them, and then, having extracted the sweetness and\nblessedness which they brought with them, he returned from them back\nto his interrupted work. St. Paul descended to Eutychus, found him in\na lifeless state, and then restored him. Men have disputed whether the\nApostle worked a miracle on this occasion, or merely perceived that\nthe young man was in a temporary faint. I do not see that it makes any\nmatter which opinion we form. St. Paul's supernatural and miraculous\npowers stand on quite an independent ground, no matter what way we\ndecide this particular case. It seems to me indeed from the language\nof St. Paul--\"Make ye no ado; for his life is in him\"--that the young\nman had merely fainted, and that St. Paul recognised this fact as soon\nas he touched him. But if any one has strong opinions on the opposite\nside I should be sorry to spend time disputing a question which has\nabsolutely no evidential bearing. The great point is, that Eutychus\nwas restored, that St. Paul's long sermon was attended by no fatal\nconsequences, and that the Apostle has left us a striking example\nshowing how that, with pastors and people alike, intense enthusiasm,\nhigh-strung interest in the affairs of the spiritual world, can enable\nhuman nature to rise superior to all human wants, and prove itself\nmaster even of the conquering powers of sleep: \"And when he was gone\nup, and had broken the bread, and eaten, and had talked with them a\nlong while, even till break of day, so he departed.\"\n\nWe know nothing of what the particular topics were which engaged St.\nPaul's attention at Troas, but we may guess them from the\nsubject-matter of the address to the elders of Ephesus, which takes up\nthe latter half of this twentieth chapter. Troas and Ephesus, in fact,\nwere so near and so similarly circumstanced that the dangers and\ntrials of both must have been much alike. He next passed from Troas to\nMiletus. This is a considerable journey along the western shore of\nAsia Minor. St. Paul was eagerly striving to get to Jerusalem by\nPentecost, or by Whitsuntide, as we should say. He had left Philippi\nafter Easter, and now there had elapsed more than a fortnight of the\nseven weeks which remained available for the journey to Jerusalem. How\noften St. Paul must have chafed against the manifold delays of the\ntrading vessel in which he sailed; how frequently he must have counted\nthe days to see if sufficient time remained to execute his purpose!\nSt. Paul, however, was a rigid economist of time. He saved every\nfragment of it as carefully as possible. It was thus with him at\nTroas. The ship in which he was travelling left Troas early in the\nmorning. It had to round a promontory in its way to the port of Assos,\nwhich could be reached direct by St. Paul in half the time. The\nApostle therefore took the shorter route, while St. Luke and his\ncompanions embarked on board the vessel. St. Paul evidently chose the\nland route because it gave him a time of solitary communion with God\nand with himself. He felt, in fact, that the perpetual strain upon his\nspiritual nature demanded special spiritual support and refreshment,\nwhich could only be obtained in the case of one who led such a busy\nlife by seizing upon every such occasion as then offered for\nmeditation and prayer. St. Paul left Troas some time on Sunday\nmorning. He joined the ship at Assos, and after three days' coasting\nvoyage landed at Miletus on Wednesday, whence he despatched a\nmessenger summoning the elders of the Church of Ephesus to meet\nhim.[229] The ship was evidently to make a delay of several days at\nMiletus. We conclude this from the following reason. Miletus is a town\nseparated by a distance of thirty miles from Ephesus. A space\ntherefore of at least two days would be required in order to secure\nthe presence of the Ephesian elders. If a messenger--St. Luke, for\ninstance--started immediately on St. Paul's arrival at Miletus, no\nmatter how quickly he travelled, he could not arrive at Miletus sooner\nthan Thursday at midday. The work of collecting the elders and making\nknown to them the apostolic summons would take up the afternoon at\nleast, and then the journey to Ephesus either by land or water must\nhave occupied the whole of Friday. It is very possible that the sermon\nrecorded in this twentieth of Acts was delivered on the Sabbath,\nwhich, as we have noted above, was as yet kept sacred by Christians as\nwell as by Jews, or else upon the Lord's Day, when, as upon that day\nweek at Troas, the elders of Ephesus had assembled with the Christians\nof Miletus in order to commemorate the Lord's resurrection.\n\n  [229] The _Lives of St. Paul_ by Lewin and by Conybeare and Howson\n  enter into minute computations as to the days of the month upon\n  which the Apostle touched at the various towns mentioned in the\n  Acts. I can now merely refer the reader to these works for such\n  details about St. Paul's life, as they scarcely come within the\n  scope of an expositor's duty.\n\nWe have already pointed out that we know not the subject of St. Paul's\nsermon at Troas, but we do know the topics upon which he enlarged at\nMiletus, and we may conclude that, considering the circumstances of\nthe time, they must have been much the same as those upon which he\ndwelt at Troas. Some critics have found fault with St. Paul's sermon\nas being quite too much taken up with himself and his own vindication.\nBut they forget the peculiar position in which St. Paul was placed,\nand the manner in which the truth of the gospel was then associated in\nthe closest manner with St. Paul's own personal character and\nteaching. The Apostle was just then assailed all over the Christian\nworld wherever he had laboured, and even sometimes where he was only\nknown by name, with the most frightful charges; ambition, pride,\ncovetousness, deceit, lying, all these things and much more were\nimputed to him by his opponents who wished to seduce the Gentiles from\nthat simplicity and liberty in Christ into which he had led them.\nCorinth had been desolated by such teachers; Galatia had succumbed to\nthem; Asia was in great peril. St. Paul therefore, foreseeing future\ndangers, warned the shepherds of the flock at Ephesus against the\nmachinations of his enemies, who always began their preliminary\noperations by making attacks upon St. Paul's character. This\nsufficiently explains the apologetic tone of St. Paul's address, of\nwhich we have doubtless merely a brief and condensed abstract\nindicating the subjects of a prolonged conversation with the elders of\nEphesus, Miletus, and such neighbouring churches as could be gathered\ntogether. We conclude that St. Paul's conference on this occasion must\nhave been a long one for this reason. If St. Paul could find matter\nsufficient to engage his attention for a whole night, from sundown\ntill sunrise, in a place like Troas, where he had laboured but a very\nshort time, how much more must he have found to say to the presbyters\nof the numerous congregations which must have been flourishing at\nEphesus where he had laboured for years with such success as to make\nChristianity a prominent feature in the social and religious life of\nthat idolatrous city!\n\nLet us now notice some of the topics of this address. It may be\ndivided into four portions. The first part is retrospective, and\nautobiographical; the second is prospective, and sets forth his\nconception of his future course; the third is hortatory, expounding\nthe dangers threatening the Ephesian Church; and the fourth is\nvaledictory.\n\nI. We have the biographical portion. He begins his discourse by\nrecalling to the minds of his hearers his own manner of life,--\"Ye\nyourselves know, from the first day that I set foot in Asia, after\nwhat manner I was with you all the time, serving the Lord with all\nlowliness of mind, and with tears, and with trials which befell me by\nthe plots of the Jews\"; words which show us that from the earliest\nportion of his ministry at Ephesus, and as soon as they realised the\nmeaning of his message, the Jews had become as hostile to the Apostle\nat Ephesus as they had repeatedly shown themselves at Corinth, again\nand again making attempts upon his life. The foundations indeed of the\nEphesian Church were laid in the synagogue during the first three\nmonths of his work, as we are expressly told in ch. xix. 8; but the\nEphesian Church must have been predominantly Gentile in its\ncomposition, or else the language of Demetrius must have been\nexaggerated and the riot raised by him meaningless. How could\nDemetrius have said, \"Ye see that at Ephesus this Paul hath persuaded\nand turned away much people, saying that they be no gods which are\nmade with hands,\" unless the vast majority of his converts were drawn\nfrom the ranks of those pagans who worshipped Diana? These words also\nshow us that during his extended ministry at Ephesus he was left at\npeace by the heathen. St. Paul here makes no mention of trials\nexperienced from pagan plots. He speaks of the Jews alone as making\nassaults upon his work or his person, incidentally confirming the\nstatement of ch. xix. 23, that it was only when he was purposing to\nretire from Ephesus, and during the celebration of the Artemisian\ngames which marked his last days there, that the opposition of the\npagans developed itself in a violent shape.\n\nSt. Paul begins his address by fixing upon Jewish opposition outside\nthe Church as his great trial at Ephesus, just as the same kind of\nopposition inside the Church had been his great trial at Corinth, and\nwas yet destined to be a source of trial to him in the Ephesian Church\nitself, as we can see from the Pastoral Epistles. He then proceeds to\nspeak of the doctrines he had taught and how he had taught them;\nreminding them \"how that I shrank not from declaring unto you anything\nthat was profitable, and teaching you publicly, and from house to\nhouse, testifying both to Jews and Greeks repentance toward God, and\nfaith toward our Lord Jesus Christ.\" St. Paul sets forth his manner of\nteaching. He taught publicly, and public teaching was most effective\nin his case, because he came armed with a double power, the powers of\nspiritual and of intellectual preparation. St. Paul was not a man who\nthought that prayer and spiritual life could dispense with thought\nand mental culture. Or again, he would be the last to tolerate the\nidea that diligent visitation from house to house would make up for\nthe neglect of that public teaching which he so constantly and so\nprofitably practised. Public preaching and teaching, pastoral\nvisitation and work, are two distinct branches of labour, which at\nvarious periods of the Church's history have been regarded in very\ndifferent lights. St. Paul evidently viewed them as equally important,\nthe tendency in the present age is, however, to decry and neglect\npreaching and to exalt pastoral work--including under that head Church\nservices--out of its due position. This is, indeed, a great and\nlamentable mistake. The \"teaching publicly\" to which St. Paul refers\nis the only opportunity which the majority of men possess of hearing\nthe authorised ministers of religion, and if the latter neglect the\noffice of public preaching, and think the fag end of a week devoted to\nexternal and secular labours and devoid of any mental study and\npreparation stirring the soul and refreshing the spirit, to be quite\nsufficient for pulpit preparation, they cannot be surprised if men\ncome to despise the religion that is presented in such a miserable\nlight and by such inefficient ambassadors.[230]\n\n  [230] I do not think there is any greater want in the Church of\n  England than the revival of preaching. It is simply lamentable to\n  see the numbers who under usual circumstances will walk out of\n  church before the sermon, and still more lamentable to see the\n  number of men who do not go to church at all. This I attribute to\n  the low estate to which the ordinary sermon has fallen. In the\n  days of evangelical supremacy the pulpit may have been unduly\n  exalted; now it is unduly neglected, and with terrible results.\n\nSt. Paul insists in this passage on the publicity and boldness of his\nteaching. There was no secrecy about him, no hypocrisy; he did not\ncome pretending one view or one line of doctrine, and then, having\nstolen in secretly, teaching a distinct system. In this passage, which\nmay seem laudatory of his own methods, St. Paul is, in fact, warning\nagainst the underhand and hypocritical methods adopted by the\nJudaising party, whether at Antioch, Galatia, or Corinth. In this\ndivision of his sermon St. Paul then sets forth the doctrines which\nwere the sum and substance of the teaching which he had given both\npublicly and from house to house. They were repentance towards God,\nand faith towards our Lord Jesus Christ, and that not only in the case\nof the Jews, but also of the Greeks. Now here we shall miss the\nimplied reference of St. Paul, unless we emphasize the words \"I shrank\nnot from declaring unto you anything that was profitable.\" His\nJudaising opponents thought there were many other things profitable\nfor men besides these two points round which St. Paul's teaching\nturned. They regarded circumcision and Jewish festivals, washings and\nsacrifices, as very necessary and very profitable for the Gentiles;\nwhile, as far as the Jews were concerned, they thought that the\ndoctrines on which St. Paul insisted might possibly be profitable, but\nwere not at all necessary. St. Paul impresses by his words the great\ncharacteristic differences between the Ebionite view of Christ and of\nChristianity and that catholic view which has regenerated society and\nbecome a source of life and light to the human race.[231]\n\n  [231] I think I hear in St. Paul's words in this passage an echo\n  of the Epistle to the Romans which he had written a month or two\n  previously. The idea, \"Repentance towards God, and faith towards\n  our Lord Jesus Christ,\" as the essence of Christianity is the\n  central idea of that Epistle.\n\nII. We have, then, the prospective portion of his discourse. St. Paul\nannounces his journey to Jerusalem, and professes his ignorance of his\nfate there. He was warned merely by the testimony of the Holy Spirit\nthat bonds and afflictions were his portion in every city. He was\nprepared for them, however, and for death itself, so that he might\naccomplish the ministry with which the Lord Jesus Christ had put him\nin trust. He concluded this part of his address by expressing his\nbelief that he would never see them again. His work among them was\ndone, and he called them to witness that he was pure from the blood of\nall men, seeing that he had declared unto them the whole counsel of\nGod. This passage has given rise to much debate, because of St. Paul's\nstatement that he knew that he should never see them again, while the\nEpistles to Timothy and that to Titus prove that after St. Paul's\nfirst imprisonment, with the notice of which this book of the Acts\nends, he laboured for several years in the neighbourhood of Asia\nMinor, and paid lengthened visits to Ephesus.\n\nWe cannot now bestow space in proving this point, which will be found\nfully discussed in the various Lives of St. Paul which we have so\noften quoted: as, for instance, in Lewin, vol. ii., p. 94, and in\nConybeare and Howson, vol. ii., p. 547. We shall now merely indicate\nthe line of proof for this. In the Epistle to Philemon, ver. 22,\nwritten during his first Roman imprisonment, and therefore years\nsubsequent to this address, he indicates his expectation of a speedy\ndeliverance from his bonds, and his determination to travel eastward\nto Coloss\u00e6, where Philemon lived (cf. Philippians i. 25, ii. 24). He\nthen visited Ephesus, where he left Timothy, who had been his\ncompanion in the latter portion of his Roman imprisonment (cf.\nPhilem. 1 and 1 Tim. i. 3), expecting soon to return to him in the\nsame city (1 Tim. iii. 14); while again in 2 Tim. i. 18 he speaks of\nOnesiphorus having ministered to himself in Ephesus, and then in the\nsame Epistle (ch. iv. 20), written during his second Roman\nimprisonment, he speaks of having just left Trophimus at Miletus sick.\nThis brief outline, which can be followed up in the volumes to which\nwe have referred, and especially in Appendix II. in Conybeare and\nHowson on the date of the Pastoral Epistles, must suffice to prove\nthat St. Paul was expressing a mere human expectation when he told the\nEphesian elders that he should see their faces no more. St. Luke, in\nfact, thus shows us that St. Paul was not omniscient in his knowledge,\nand that the inspiration which he possessed did not remove him, as\nsome persons think, out of the category of ordinary men or free him\nfrom their infirmities. The Apostle was, in fact, supernaturally\ninspired upon occasions. The Holy Ghost now and again illuminated the\ndarkness of the future when such illumination was necessary for the\nChurch's guidance; but on other occasions St. Paul and his brother\napostles were left to the guidance of their own understandings and to\nthe conclusions and expectations of common sense, else why did not St.\nPeter and St. John read the character of Ananias and Sapphira or of\nSimon Magus before their sins were committed? why did St. Peter know\nnothing of his deliverance from Herod's prison-house before the angel\nappeared, when his undissembled surprise is sufficient evidence that\nhe had no expectation of any such rescue? These instances, which might\nbe multiplied abundantly out of St. Paul's career and writings, show\nus that St. Paul's confident statement in this passage was a mere\nhuman anticipation which was disappointed by the course of events. The\nsupernatural knowledge of the apostles ran on precisely the same lines\nas their supernatural power. God bestowed them both for use according\nas He saw fit and beneficial, but not for common ordinary every-day\npurposes, else why did St. Paul leave Trophimus at Miletus sick, or\nendure the tortures of his own ophthalmia, or exhort Timothy to take a\nlittle wine on account of his bodily weakness, if he could have healed\nthem all by his miraculous power? Before we leave this point we may\nnotice that here we have an incidental proof of the early date of the\ncomposition of the Acts. St. Luke, as we have often maintained, wrote\nthis book about the close of St. Paul's first imprisonment. Assuredly\nif he had written it at a later period, and above all, if he wrote it\ntwenty years later, he would have either modified the words of his\nsynopsis of St. Paul's speech, or else given us a hint that subsequent\nevents had shown that the Apostle was mistaken in his expectations, a\nthing which he could easily have done, because he cherished none of\nthese extreme notions about St. Paul's office and dignity which have\nled some to assume that it was impossible for him ever to make a\nmistake about the smallest matters.[232]\n\n  [232] See on this point Dr. Salmon's _Introduction to New\n  Testament_, 4th ed., p. 445.\n\nIII. This discourse, again, is hortatory, and its exhortations contain\nvery important doctrinal statements. St. Paul begins this third\ndivision with an exhortation like that which our Lord gave to His\napostles under the same circumstances, \"Take heed unto yourselves.\"\nThe Apostle never forgot that an effective ministry of souls must be\nbased on deep personal knowledge of the things of God. He knew, too,\nfrom his own experience that it is very easy to be so completely taken\nup with the care of other men's souls and the external work of the\nChurch, as to forget that inner life which can only be kept alive by\nclose communion with God. Then, having based his exhortations on their\nown spiritual life, he exhorts the elders to diligence in the pastoral\noffice: \"Take heed unto yourselves, and to all the flock, in the which\nthe Holy Ghost hath made you bishops, to feed the Church of God, which\nHe purchased with His own blood.\" St. Paul in these words shows us his\nestimate of the ministerial office. The elders of Ephesus had been all\nordained by St. Paul himself with the imposition of hands, a rite that\nhas ever been esteemed essential to ordination. It was derived from\nthe Jewish Church, and was perpetuated into the Christian Church by\nthat same spirit of conservatism, that law of continuity which in\nevery department of life enacts that everything shall continue as it\nwas unless there be some circumstance to cause an alteration.[233] Now\nthere was no cause for alteration in this case; nay, rather there was\nevery reason to bring about a continuance of this custom, because\nimposition of hands indicates for the people the persons ordained, and\nassures the ordained themselves that they have been individually\nchosen and set apart. But St. Paul by these words teaches us a higher\nand nobler view of the ministry. He teaches us that he was himself but\nthe instrument of a higher power, and that the imposition of hands was\nthe sign and symbol to the ordained that the Holy Ghost had chosen\nthem and appointed them to feed the flock of God. St. Paul here shows\nthat in ordination, as in the sacraments, we should by faith look away\nbeyond and behind the human instrument, and view the actions of the\nChurch of Christ as the very operations and manifestations in the\nworld of time and sense of the Holy Ghost Himself, the Lord and Giver\nof life. He teaches the Ephesian elders, in fact, exactly what he\ntaught the Corinthian Church some few months earlier, \"We have this\ntreasure in earthen vessels, that the exceeding greatness of the power\nmay be of God, and not from ourselves\" (2 Cor. iv. 7); the treasure\nand the power were everything, the only things, in fact, worth naming,\nthe earthen vessels which contained them for a little time were\nnothing at all. How awful, solemn, heart-searching a view of the\nministerial office this was! How sustaining a view when its holders\nare called upon to discharge functions for which they feel themselves\nall inadequate in their natural strength! Is it any wonder that the\nChurch, taking the same view as St. Paul did, has ever held and taught\nthat the ministerial office thus conferred by supernatural power is no\nmere human function to be taken up or laid down at man's pleasure, but\nis a life-long office to be discharged at the holder's peril,--a\nsavour of life unto life for the worthy recipient, a savour of death\nunto death for the unworthy and the careless.\n\n  [233] This rule or law is the principle of Butler's great argument\n  for a future life in the first chapter of his _Analogy_. He\n  expressly states in the following words, \"There is in every case a\n  probability that things will continue as we experience they are,\n  in all respects, except those in which we have some reason to\n  think they will be altered. This is that kind of presumption of\n  probability from analogy expressed in the word continuance which\n  seems our only natural reason for believing the course of the\n  world will continue to-morrow as it has done so far back as our\n  experience or knowledge of history can carry us back.\"\n\nIn connexion with this statement made by St. Paul concerning the\nsource of the ministry we find a title given to the Ephesian\npresbyters round which much controversy has centred. St. Paul says,\n\"Take heed unto the flock, over which the Holy Ghost has made you\n_bishops_.\" I do not, however, propose to spend much time over this\ntopic, as all parties are now agreed that in the New Testament the\nterm presbyter and bishop are interchangeable and applied to the same\npersons.[234] The question to be decided is not about a name, but\nabout an office, whether, in fact, any persons succeeded in apostolic\ntimes to the office of rule and government exercised by St. Paul and\nthe rest of the apostles, as well as by Timothy, Titus, and the other\ndelegates of the Apostle, and whether the term bishop, as used in the\nsecond century, was applied to such successors of the apostles.[235]\nThis, however, is not a question which comes directly within the\npurview of an expositor of the Acts of the Apostles, as the\nappointment of Timothy and Titus to manage the affairs of the Church\nin Ephesus and in Crete lies beyond the period covered by the text of\nthe Acts, and properly belongs to the commentary on the Pastoral\nEpistles. St. Paul's words in this connexion have, however, an\nimportant bearing on fundamental doctrinal questions connected with\nthe person of the Lord Jesus Christ. St. Paul speaks of the presbyters\nas called \"to feed the Church of God, which He hath purchased with His\nown blood.\" These words are very strong, so strong indeed that various\nreadings have been put forward to mitigate their force. Some have read\n\"Lord\" instead of \"God,\" others have substituted Christ for it; but\nthe Revised Version, following the text of Westcott and Hort, have\naccepted the strongest form of the verse on purely critical ground,\nand translates it as \"the Church of God, which He hath purchased with\nHis own blood.\" This passage, then, is decisive as to the\nChristological views of St. Luke and the Pauline circle generally.\nThey believed so strongly in the deity of Jesus Christ and His\nessential unity with the Father that they hesitated not to speak of\nHis sacrifice on Calvary as a shedding of the blood of God, an\nexpression which some fifty years afterwards we find in the Epistle of\nIgnatius to the Ephesians, where St. Ignatius speaks of them as\n\"kindled into living fire by the blood of God,\" and a hundred years\nlater still, in Tertullian, _Ad Uxor._, ii. 3. This passage has been\nused in scientific theology as the basis of a principle or theory\ncalled the \"Communicatio Idiomatum,\" a theory which finds an\nillustration in two other notable passages of Scripture, St. John iii.\n13 and 1 Cor. ii. 8. In the former passage our Lord says of Himself,\n\"No man hath ascended into heaven, but He that descended out of\nheaven, even the Son of man which is in heaven,\" where the Son of man\nis spoken of as in heaven as well as upon earth at the same time,\nthough the Son of man, according to His humanity, could only be in one\nplace at a time. In the second passage St. Paul says, \"Which none of\nthe rulers of this world knew; for had they known it, they would not\nhave crucified the Lord of Glory,\" where crucifixion is attributed to\nthe Lord of Glory, a title derived from His Divine nature. Now the\nterm \"Communicatio Idiomatum,\" or \"transference of peculiar\nproperties,\" is given to this usage because in all these texts the\nproperties of the nature pertaining either to God or to man are spoken\nof as if they belonged to the other; or, to put it far better in the\nstately language of Hooker, v. liii. where he speaks of \"those cross\nand circulatory speeches wherein there are attributed to God such\nthings as belong to manhood, and to man such as properly concern the\ndeity of Jesus Christ, the cause whereof is the association of natures\nin one subject. A kind of mutual commutation there is, whereby those\nconcrete names, God and man, when we speak of Christ, do take\ninterchangeably one another's room, so that for truth of speech it\nskilleth not whether we say that the Son of God hath created the world\nand the Son of man by His death hath saved it, or else that the Son of\nman did create and the Son of God die to save the world.\" This is a\nsubject of profound speculative and doctrinal interest, not only in\nconnexion with the apostolic view of our Lord's Person, but also in\nreference to the whole round of methodised and scientific theology. We\ncannot, however, afford further space for this subject. We must be\ncontent to have pointed it out as an interesting topic of inquiry,\nand, merely referring the reader to Hooker and to Liddon's Bampton\nLectures (Lect. V.) for more information, must hurry on to a\nconclusion. St. Paul terminates this part of his discourse with\nexpressing his belief in the rapid development of false doctrines and\nfalse guides as soon as his repressive influence shall have been\nremoved; a belief which the devout student of the New Testament will\nfind to have been realised when in 1 Tim. i. 20, in 2 Tim. i. 15, and\nii. 17, 18 he finds the Apostle warning the youthful Bishop of Ephesus\nagainst Phygelus and Hermogenes, who had turned all Asia away from St.\nPaul, and against Hymen\u00e6us, Philetus, and Alexander, who had imbibed\nthe Gnostic error concerning matter, which had already led the\nCorinthians to deny the future character of the Resurrection. St. Paul\nthen terminates his discourse with a solemn commendation of the\nEphesian elders to that Divine grace which is as necessary for an\napostle as for the humblest Christian. He exhorts them to\nself-sacrifice and self-denial, reminding them of his own example,\nhaving supported himself and his companions by his labour as a\ntentmaker at Ephesus, and above all of the words of the Lord Jesus,\nwhich they apparently knew from some source which has not come down to\nus, \"It is more blessed to give than to receive.\"\n\n  [234] Iren\u00e6us, however, writing in the second century, states that\n  the bishops and presbyters of Ephesus and the neighbouring cities\n  were assembled at Miletus, so that he distinguishes between\n  bishops and presbyters even on this occasion: see his work\n  _Against Heresies_, iii. 14. Dr. Hatch had an extraordinary\n  theory, which he elaborates in his article \"Priest\" in the\n  _Dictionary of Christian Antiquities_, vol. ii., p. 1700. He thus\n  states it: \"Whether the institution of Presbyters existed in the\n  first instance outside the limits of the Jud\u00e6o-Christian\n  communities is doubtful. There is no evidence that it did so; the\n  presumption is that it did not, for when St. Paul, writing to the\n  churches which were presumably non-Jewish in their character,\n  recognises the existence of church officers, he designates them by\n  other names: \u03c0\u03c1\u03bf\u03ca\u03c3\u03c4\u03ac\u03bc\u03b5\u03bd\u03bf\u03b9 (1 Thess. v. 12), \u1f10\u03c0\u03af\u03c3\u03ba\u03bf\u03c0\u03bf\u03b9 (Philip. i.\n  1).\" To put it briefly, his idea is that bishop as a title was\n  confined to predominantly Greek communities, and presbyter as a\n  title was confined to predominantly Gentile communities. Will this\n  theory and the instances he gives stand the test of facts?\n  Philippi was, he thinks, a predominantly Gentile Church, so\n  thoroughly Gentile that its members would necessarily prefer\n  titles drawn from impure pagan sources rather than from\n  Judaism. But was Philippi so thoroughly Gentile? If so, why did\n  St. Paul stay there and celebrate the days of unleavened bread and\n  the passover, as we have above noted? A large element in the\n  church must have been Jewish when this happened. Again, take\n  Thessalonica. We have already noted that the majority of that\n  church must have been Gentile in origin; but there must have been\n  a large and influential minority Jewish by race in a town where\n  the Jews were so large an element in the population. Again, we\n  find the title presbyter applied to the church officials of\n  Ephesus. Dr. Hatch on the same page enumerates Ephesus among the\n  Jud\u00e6o-Christian communities, one, therefore, which would\n  presumably prefer Jewish titles for its clergy. But was it\n  predominantly Jewish? St. Paul laboured three months in the\n  synagogue at Ephesus, and was then expelled. He laboured there for\n  two years among the Gentiles with such success, that Demetrius\n  describes him as having turned away all Asia from Diana's worship.\n  Surely if ever there was a Gentile Christian Church it was\n  Ephesus! (Cf. Ephes. ii. and iii., where the Gentile character of\n  the Ephesian Church is expressly asserted.) Yet here we have the\n  title presbyter in use. Dr. Hatch's is not scientific historical\n  reasoning, but the exercise of what Bishop Butler well designates,\n  that delusive faculty called man's imagination and fancy. Upon\n  this whole question of the origin of Christian presbyters, I may\n  notice an exhaustive Biblical inquiry, called \"The Ruling Elder,\"\n  by the Rev. Robert King of Ballymena, the learned author of a\n  well-known Irish Church History. It appeared after this chapter\n  was written.\n\n  [235] In the second century bishops were often called presbyters,\n  though presbyters were not called bishops, or, to quote Bishop\n  Lightfoot, \"Essay on the Ministry,\" _Philippians_, p. 226: \"In the\n  language of Iren\u00e6us, a presbyter is never designated a bishop,\n  while on the other hand he very frequently speaks of a bishop as a\n  presbyter.\" This usage long continued in the Church. Cyprian often\n  expresses himself thus: cf. article on word \"Senior\" in _Dict.\n  Christ. Antiqq._ Many instances of it occur in the literature of\n  the early Celtic Church in Ireland, which was an offshoot of the\n  Gallican Church and, through Gaul, of the Church of Western Asia\n  Minor. In fact, this custom of calling bishops seniors or\n  presbyters was used in Ireland till the twelfth century: see\n  Ussher's Works, Ed. Elrington, vi. 517, 528. St. Bernard, for\n  instance, in his Life of St. Malachy, calls the Bishop of Lismore\n  \"Senior Lesmorensis.\" I do not, as I have said, propose to enter\n  any further into the debateable subject of Church government; but\n  as I have come across this passage, and as I have already\n  announced that I am writing this commentary as a decided\n  Churchman, I may be permitted to state my own views, as history\n  seems to me to set them forth, without entering into any\n  discussion on the point. During the apostolic age the terms bishop\n  and presbyter were interchangeable. As the apostles passed away,\n  they seem to me to have established Episcopacy as the normal rule\n  of the Church, though, doubtless, it was only by degrees that the\n  title of bishop was appropriated to the office so created. By the\n  time of Ignatius, that is, about 110 A.D., this appropriation was\n  complete. As regards my authority for saying the apostles\n  established Episcopacy, I simply appeal to Iren\u00e6us, who, in his\n  great work against Heresies, Book III., ch. iii., states in\n  section i. that \"the apostles instituted bishops in the churches,\"\n  and then in sec. 3 proceeds to trace the line of these bishops in\n  the Roman Church, beginning with Linus, \"into whose hands the\n  blessed apostles committed the office of the Episcopate.\" Now it\n  is upon Iren\u00e6us we largely depend for the proof of the canon of\n  the New Testament and the Johannine origin of the Fourth Gospel.\n  Surely if Iren\u00e6us is a witness sufficient to establish the\n  apostolic origin of the Gospels, he should be quite sufficient to\n  establish the apostolic origin of Episcopacy! If Iren\u00e6us is a\n  competent witness to the true authorship of an anonymous document\n  like the Fourth Gospel, he is surely competent to tell us of the\n  true origin of a worldwide institution like Episcopacy. It is\n  assuredly much easier to learn the origin of institutions than of\n  documents.\n\nWhen the Apostle had thus terminated his address, which doubtless was\na very lengthened one, he knelt down, probably on the shore, as we\nshall find him kneeling in the next chapter (xxi. 5, 6) on the shore\nat Tyre. He then commended them in solemn prayer to God, and they all\nparted in deep sorrow on account of the final separation which St.\nPaul's words indicated as imminent; for though the primitive\nChristians believed in the reality of the next life with an intensity\nof faith of which we have no conception, and longed for its peace and\nrest, yet they gave free scope to those natural affections which bind\nmen one to another according to the flesh and were sanctified by the\nMaster Himself when He wept by the grave of Lazarus. Christianity is\nnot a religion of stoical apathy, but of sanctified human affections.\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVII.\n\n_A PRISONER IN BONDS._\n\n     \"Having found a ship crossing over unto Ph\u0153nicia, we went\n     aboard, and set sail.... We sailed unto Syria, and landed at\n     Tyre: for there the ship was to unload her burden.... When we\n     were come to Jerusalem, the brethren received us gladly.... Then\n     the chief captain came near, and laid hold on him, and commanded\n     him to be bound with two chains; and inquired who he was, and\n     what he had done.... But Paul said, I am a Jew, of Tarsus in\n     Cilicia, a citizen of no mean city: and I beseech thee, give me\n     leave to speak unto the people.\"--ACTS xxi. 2, 3, 17, 33, 39, 40.\n\n     \"And they gave him audience unto this word; and they lifted up\n     their voice, and said, Away with such a fellow from the earth:\n     for it is not fit that he should live.... But on the morrow,\n     desiring to know the certainty, wherefore he was accused of the\n     Jews, he loosed him, and commanded the chief priests and all the\n     council to come together, and brought Paul down, and set him\n     before them.\"--ACTS xxii. 22, 30.\n\n     \"And after five days the high priest Ananias came down with\n     certain elders, and with an orator, one Tertullus; and they\n     informed the governor against Paul.\"--ACTS xxiv. 1.\n\n     \"And Agrippa said unto Paul, Thou art permitted to speak for\n     thyself. Then Paul stretched forth his hand, and made his\n     defence.\"--ACTS xxvi. 1.\n\n\nThe title we have given to this chapter, \"A Prisoner in Bonds,\"\nexpresses the central idea of the last eight chapters of the Acts.\nTwenty years and more had now elapsed since St. Paul's conversion on\nthe road to Damascus. These twenty years had been times of unceasing\nand intense activity. Now we come to some five years when the external\nlabours, the turmoil and the cares of active life, have to be put\naside, and St. Paul was called upon to stand apart and learn the\nlesson which every-day experience teaches to all,--how easily the\nworld can get along without us, how smoothly God's designs fulfil\nthemselves without our puny assistance. The various passages we have\nplaced at the head of this chapter cover six chapters of the Acts,\nfrom the twenty-first to the twenty-sixth. It may seem a large extent\nof the text to be comprised within the limits of one of our chapters,\nbut it must be remembered that a great deal of the space thus included\nis taken up with the narrative of St. Paul's conversion, which is\ntwice set forth at great length, first to the multitude from the\nstairs of the tower of Antonia, and then in his defence which he\ndelivered before Agrippa and Bernice and Festus, or else with the\nspeeches delivered by him before the assembled Sanhedrin and before\nFelix the governor, wherein he dwells on points previously and\nsufficiently discussed.[236] We have already considered the narrative\nof the Apostle's conversion at great length, and noted the particular\ndirections in which St. Paul's own later versions at Jerusalem and\nC\u00e6sarea throw light upon St. Luke's independent account. To the\nearlier chapters of this book we therefore would refer the reader who\nwishes to discuss St. Paul's conversion, and several of the other\nsubjects which he introduces. Let us now, however, endeavour, first of\nall, to gather up into one connected story the tale of St. Paul's\njourneys, sufferings, and imprisonments from the time he left Miletus\nafter his famous address till he set sail for Rome from the port of\nC\u00e6sarea, a prisoner destined for the judgment-seat of Nero. This\nnarrative will embrace from at least the summer of A.D. 58, when he\nwas arrested at Jerusalem, to the autumn of 60, when he set sail for\nRome. This connected story will enable us to see the close union of\nthe various parts of the narrative which is now hidden from us because\nof the division into chapters, and will enable us to fix more easily\nupon the leading points which lend themselves to the purposes of an\nexpositor.\n\n  [236] Thus in ch. xxiv. 10-16 he enlarges upon the subject of \"the\n  Way which they call a sect,\" a topic and a name fully discussed\n  above on pp. 32, 33.\n\nI. St. Paul, after parting from the Ephesian Church, embarked on board\nhis ship, and then coasted along the western shore of Asia Minor for\nthree days, sailing amid scenery of the most enchanting description,\nspecially in that late spring or early summer season at which the year\nhad then arrived. It was about the first of May, and all nature was\nbursting into new life, when even hearts, the hardest and least\nreceptive of external influences, feel as if they were living a\nportion of their youth over again. And even St. Paul, rapt away in the\ncontemplation of things unseen, must have felt himself touched by the\nbeauty of the scenes through which he was passing, though St. Luke\ntells us nothing but the bare succession of events. Three days after\nleaving Miletus the sacred company reached Patara, a town at the\nsouth-western corner of Asia Minor, where the coast begins to turn\nround towards the east. Here St. Paul found a trading ship sailing\ndirect to Tyre and Palestine, and therefore with all haste transferred\nhimself and his party into it. The ship seems to have been on the\npoint of sailing, which suited St. Paul so much the better, anxious as\nhe was to reach Jerusalem in time for Pentecost. The journey direct\nfrom Patara to Tyre is about three hundred and fifty miles, a three\ndays' sail under favourable circumstances for the trading vessels of\nthe ancients, and the circumstances were favourable. The north-west\nwind is to this day the prevailing wind in the eastern Mediterranean\nduring the late spring and early summer season, and the north-west\nwind would be the most favourable wind for an ancient trader almost\nentirely depending on an immense main sail for its motive power. With\nsuch a wind the merchantmen of that age could travel at the rate of a\nhundred to a hundred and fifty miles a day, and would therefore\ntraverse the distance between Patara and Tyre in three days, the time\nwe have specified. When the vessel arrived at Tyre St. Paul sought out\nthe local Christian congregation. The ship was chartered to bring a\ncargo probably of wheat or wine to Tyre, inasmuch as Tyre was a purely\ncommercial city, and the territory naturally belonging to it was\nutterly unable to furnish it with necessary provisions, as we have\nalready noted on the occasion of Herod Agrippa's death. A week,\ntherefore, was spent in unloading the cargo, during which St. Paul\ndevoted himself to the instruction of the local Christian Church.\nAfter a week's close communion with this eminent servant of God, the\nTyrian Christians, like the elders of Ephesus and Miletus, with their\nwives and children accompanied him till they reached the shore, where\nthey commended one another in prayer to God's care and blessing. From\nTyre he sailed to Ptolemais, thirty miles distant. There again he\nfound another Christian congregation, with whom he tarried one day,\nand then leaving the ship proceeded by the great coast road to\nC\u00e6sarea, a town which he already knew right well, and to which he was\nso soon to return as a prisoner in bonds. At C\u00e6sarea there must now\nhave been a very considerable Christian congregation. In C\u00e6sarea\nPhilip the Evangelist lived and ministered permanently. There too\nresided his daughters, eminent as teachers, and exercising in their\npreaching or prophetical functions a great influence among the very\nmixed female population of the political capital of Palestine. St.\nPaul and St. Luke abode in C\u00e6sarea several days in the house of Philip\nthe Evangelist. He did not wish to arrive in Jerusalem till close on\nthe Feast of Pentecost, and owing to the fair winds with which he had\nbeen favoured he must have had a week or more to stay in C\u00e6sarea. Here\nAgabus again appears upon the scene. Fourteen years before he had\npredicted the famine which led St. Paul to pay a visit to Jerusalem\nwhen bringing up the alms of the Antiochene Church to assist the poor\nbrethren at Jerusalem, and now he predicts the Apostle's approaching\ncaptivity. The prospect moved the Church so much that the brethren\nbesought St. Paul to change his mind and not enter the Holy City. But\nhis mind was made up, and nothing would dissuade him from celebrating\nthe Feast as he had all along proposed. He went up therefore to\nJerusalem, lodging with Mnason, \"an early disciple,\" as the Revised\nVersion puts it, one therefore who traced his Christian convictions\nback probably to the celebrated Pentecost a quarter of a century\nearlier, when the Holy Ghost first displayed His supernatural power in\nconverting multitudes of human souls. Next day he went to visit James,\nthe Bishop of Jerusalem, who received him warmly, grasped his\nposition, warned him of the rumours which had been industriously and\nfalsely circulated as to his opposition to the Law of Moses, even in\nthe case of born Jews, and gave him some prudent advice as to his\ncourse of action. St. James recommended that St. Paul should unite\nhimself with certain Christian Nazarites, and perform the Jewish rites\nusual in such cases. A Nazarite, as we have already mentioned, when he\ntook the Nazarite vow for a limited time after some special\ndeliverance vouchsafed to him, allowed his hair to grow till he could\ncut it off in the Temple, and have it burned in the fire of the\nsacrifices offered up on his behalf. These sacrifices were very\nexpensive, as will be seen at once by a reference to Numbers vi.\n13-18, where they are prescribed at full length, and it was always\nregarded as a mark of patriotic piety when any stranger coming to\nJerusalem offered to defray the necessary charges for the poorer Jews,\nand thus completed the ceremonies connected with the Nazarite vow. St.\nJames advised St. Paul to adopt this course, to unite himself with the\nmembers of the local Christian Church who were unable to defray the\ncustomary expenses, to pay their charges, join with them in the\nsacrifices, and thus publicly proclaim to those who opposed him that,\nthough he differed from them as regards the Gentiles, holding in that\nmatter with St. James himself and with the apostles, yet as regards\nthe Jews, whether at Jerusalem or throughout the world at large, he\nwas totally misrepresented when men asserted that he taught the Jews\nto reject the Law of Moses. St. Paul was guided by the advice of\nJames, and proceeded to complete the ceremonial prescribed for the\nNazarites. This was the turning-point of his fate. Jerusalem was then\nthronged with strangers from every part of the world. Ephesus and the\nprovince of Asia, as a great commercial centre, and therefore a great\nJewish resort, furnished a very large contingent.[237] To these,\nthen, Paul was well known as an enthusiastic Christian teacher,\ntoward whom the synagogues of Ephesus felt the bitterest hostility.\nThey had often plotted against him at Ephesus, as St. Paul himself\ntold the elders in his address at Miletus, but had hitherto failed to\neffect their purpose. Now, however, they seemed to see their chance.\nThey thought they had a popular cry and a legal accusation under which\nhe might be done to death under the forms of law. These Ephesian Jews\nhad seen him in the city in company with Trophimus, an uncircumcised\nChristian, belonging to their own city, one therefore whose presence\nwithin the temple was a capital offence, even according to Roman\nlaw.[238] They raised a cry therefore that he had defiled the Holy\nPlace by bringing into it an uncircumcised Greek; and thus roused the\npopulace to seize the Apostle, drag him from the sacred precincts, and\nmurder him. During the celebration of the Feasts the Roman sentinels,\nstationed upon the neighbouring tower of Antonia which overlooked the\nTemple courts, watched the assembled crowds most narrowly,\napprehensive of a riot. As soon therefore as the first symptoms of an\noutbreak occurred, the alarm was given, the chief captain Lysias\nhurried to the spot, and St. Paul was rescued for the moment. At the\nrequest of the Apostle, who was being carried up into the castle, he\nwas allowed to address the multitude from the stairs. They listened to\nthe narrative of his conversion very quietly till he came to tell of\nthe vision God vouchsafed to him in the Temple some twenty years\nbefore, warning him to leave Jerusalem, when at the words \"Depart, for\nI will send thee forth far hence unto the Gentiles,\" all their pent-up\nrage and pride and national jealousy burst forth anew. St. Paul had\nbeen addressing them in the Hebrew language which the chief captain\nunderstood not, and the mob probably expressed their rage and passion\nin the same language. The chief captain ordered St. Paul to be\nexamined by flogging to know why they were so outrageous against him.\nMore fortunate, however, on this occasion than at Philippi, he claimed\nhis privilege as a Roman citizen, and escaped the torture. The chief\ncaptain was still in ignorance of the prisoner's crime, and therefore\nhe brought him the very next day before the Sanhedrin, when St. Paul\nby a happy stroke caused such a division between the Sadducees and\nPharisees that the chief captain was again obliged to intervene and\nrescue the prisoner from the contending factions. Next day, however,\nthe Jews formed a conspiracy to murder the Apostle, which his nephew\ndiscovered and revealed to St. Paul and to Claudius Lysias, who that\nsame night despatched him to C\u00e6sarea.[239]\n\n  [237] See Lightfoot's _Ignatius_, vol. i., p. 452, upon the\n  presence of Jews in the towns and cities of Proconsular Asia.\n  Antiochus the Great transported two thousand Jewish families to\n  these parts from Babylonia and Mesopotamia.\n\n  [238] Inscriptions, according to Josephus, were graven in Greek\n  and Latin on stones fixed in a wall or balustrade which ran round\n  the Temple, warning the Gentiles not to enter on pain of death:\n  see Josephus, _Wars_, V. v. 2; _Antiqq._, XV. xi. 5. One of these\n  stones was discovered some twenty years ago by M. Clermont\n  Ganneau, with the inscription intact. It had been buried in the\n  ground on the Via Dolorosa in Jerusalem, where this learned\n  Frenchman discovered it. A transcript of it can now be seen in\n  Lewin's _St. Paul_, ii. 133. The inscription literally translated\n  runs thus: \"No alien to pass within the balustrade round the\n  Temple and the inclosure. Whosoever shall be caught (so doing)\n  must blame himself for the death that will ensue.\" This stone must\n  often have been read by our Lord and His apostles, as they\n  frequented the temple.\n\n  [239] It is very curious how perpetually St. Paul escaped the\n  plots of the Jews at Corinth, Ephesus, and elsewhere. At Corinth\n  the plot formed was revealed as it would seem just as he was about\n  to go on board his vessel (ch. xx. 3). Doubtless there were\n  concealed Christians to whose ears the plots came and by whom they\n  were revealed.\n\nAll these events, from his conference with James to his arrival under\nguard at C\u00e6sarea, cannot have covered more than eight days at the\nutmost, and yet the story of them extends from the middle of the\ntwenty-first chapter to the close of the twenty-third, while the\nrecord of twelve months' hard work preaching, writing, organising is\nembraced within the first six verses of the twentieth chapter, showing\nhow very different was St. Luke's narrative of affairs, according as\nhe was present or absent when they were transacted.[240]\n\n  [240] See Lewin's _Fasti Sacri_, pp. 314-16, for an elaborate\n  account of each day's proceedings, and a discussion of the various\n  problems, chronological and otherwise, which they raise.\n\nFrom the beginning of the twenty-fourth chapter to the close of the\ntwenty-sixth is taken up with the account of St. Paul's trials, at\nfirst before Felix, and then before Festus, his successor in the\nprocuratorship of Palestine. Just let us summarise the course of\nevents and distinguish between them. St. Paul was despatched by\nClaudius Lysias to Felix accompanied by a letter in which he contrives\nto put the best construction on his own actions, representing himself\nas specially anxious about St. Paul because he was a Roman citizen, on\nwhich account indeed he describes himself as rescuing him from the\nclutches of the mob. After the lapse of five days St. Paul was brought\nup before Felix and accused by the Jews of three serious crimes in the\neyes of Roman law as administered in Palestine. First, he was a mover\nof seditions among the Jews;[241] second, a ringleader of a new sect,\nthe Nazarenes, unknown to Jewish law; and third, a profaner of the\nTemple, contrary to the law which the Romans themselves had\nsanctioned. On all these points Paul challenged investigation and\ndemanded proof, asking where were the Jews from Asia who had accused\nhim of profaning the Temple. The Jews doubtless thought that Paul was\na common Jew, who would be yielded up to their clamour by the\nprocurator, and knew nothing of his Roman citizenship. Their want of\nwitnesses brought about their failure, but did not lead to St. Paul's\nrelease. He was committed to the custody of a centurion, and freedom\nof access was granted to his friends. In this state St. Paul continued\ntwo full years, from midsummer 58 to the same period of A.D. 60, when\nFelix was superseded by Festus. During these two years Felix often\nconversed with St. Paul. Felix was a thoroughly bad man. He exercised,\nas a historian of that time said of him, \"the power of a king with the\nmind of a slave.\" He was tyrannical, licentious, and corrupt, and\nhoped to be bribed by St. Paul when he would have set him at liberty.\nAt this period of his life St. Paul twice came in contact with the\nHerodian house which thenceforth disappears from sacred history. Felix\nabout the period of St. Paul's arrest enticed Drusilla, the\ngreat-granddaughter of Herod the Great, from her husband through the\nmedium as many think, of Simon Magus. Drusilla was very young and very\nbeautiful, and, like all the Herodian women, very wicked.[242] Felix\nwas an open adulterer, therefore, and it is no wonder that when Paul\nreasoned before the guilty pair concerning righteousness, temperance,\nand the judgment to come, conscience should have smitten them and\nFelix should have trembled. St. Paul had another opportunity of\nbearing witness before this wicked and bloodstained family. Festus\nsucceeded Felix as procurator of Palestine about June A.D. 60. Within\nthe following month Agrippa II., the son of the Herod Agrippa who had\ndied the terrible death at C\u00e6sarea of which the twelfth chapter tells,\ncame to C\u00e6sarea to pay his respects unto the new governor. Agrippa was\nruler of the kingdom of Chalcis, a district north of Palestine and\nabout the Lebanon Range. He was accompanied by his sister Bernice, who\nafterwards became the mistress of Titus, the conqueror of Jerusalem in\nthe last great siege. Festus had already heard St. Paul's case, and\nhad allowed his appeal unto C\u00e6sar. He wished, however, to have his\ncase investigated before two Jewish experts, Agrippa and Bernice, who\ncould instruct his own ignorance on the charges laid against him by\nthe Jews, enabling him to write a more satisfactory report for the\nEmperor's guidance. He brought St. Paul therefore before them, and\ngave the great Christian champion another opportunity of bearing\nwitness for his Master before a family which now for more than sixty\nyears had been more or less mixed up, but never for their own\nblessing, with Christian history. After a period of two years and\nthree months' detention, varied by different public appearances, St.\nPaul was despatched to Rome to stand his trial and make his defence\nbefore the Emperor Nero, whose name has become a synonym for vice,\nbrutality, and self-will.\n\n  [241] The Romans were always afraid of Jewish seditions. Seven\n  years before St. Paul's imprisonment there had been a terrible\n  outburst, in which Ananias the high priest had been himself\n  involved, and which led to the despatch of Felix himself as\n  procurator. He had effectually put down all disturbances, which\n  led to the prolongation of his rule in Palestine for the very\n  unusual period of eight years, from 52 to 60 A.D. This accounts\n  for the words of Tertullus (ch. xxiv. 2): \"Seeing that by thee we\n  enjoy much peace, and that by thy providence evils are corrected\n  for this nation.\" See Lewin's _Fasti_, pp. 296-98, 315, 320;\n  Conybeare and Howson, ch. xxii.; and for the latest authority,\n  Sch\u00fcrer's _Geschichte des J\u00fcdischen Volkes_, i. 477-83, ii. 170\n  (Leipzig, 1886).\n\n  [242] Drusilla perished with her child by this union with Felix in\n  the famous eruption of Vesuvius A.D. 79.\n\nII. We have now given a connected outline of St. Paul's history\nextending over a period of more than two years. Let us omit his formal\ndefences, which have already come under our notice, and take for our\nmeditation a number of points which are peculiar to the narrative.\n\nWe have in the story of the voyage, arrest, and imprisonment of St.\nPaul, many circumstances which illustrate God's methods of action in\nthe world, or else His dealings with the spiritual life. Let us take a\nfew instances. First, then, we direct attention to the steady though\nquiet progress of the Christian faith as revealed in these chapters.\nSt. Paul landed at Tyre, and from Tyre he proceeded some thirty miles\nsouth to Ptolemais. These are both of them towns which have never\nhitherto occurred in our narrative as places of Christian activity.\nSt. Paul and St. Peter and Barnabas and the other active leaders of\nthe Church must often have passed through these towns, and wherever\nthey went they strove to make known the tidings of the gospel. But we\nhear nothing in the Acts, and tradition tells us nothing of when or by\nwhom the Christian Church was founded in these localities.[243]\n\n  [243] See my remarks in the next chapter on the case of the church\n  at Puteoli, which St. Paul found flourishing there on his voyage\n  to Rome.\n\nWe get glimpses, too, of the ancient organisation of the Church, but\nonly glimpses; we have no complete statement, because St. Luke was\nwriting for a man who lived amidst it, and could supply the gaps which\nhis informant left. The presbyters are mentioned at Miletus, and\nAgabus the prophet appeared at Antioch years before, and now again he\nappears at C\u00e6sarea, where Philip the Evangelist and his daughters the\nprophetesses appear. Prophets and prophesying are not confined to\nPalestine and Antioch, though the Acts tells us nothing of them as\nexisting elsewhere. The Epistle to Corinth shows us that the prophets\noccupied a very important place in that Christian community.\nProphesying indeed was principally preaching at Corinth; but it did\nnot exclude prediction, and that after the ancient Jewish method, by\naction as well as by word, for Agabus took St. Paul's girdle, and\nbinding his own hands and feet declared that the Holy Ghost told him,\n\"So shall the Jews at Jerusalem bind the man that owneth this girdle,\nand deliver him into the hands of the Gentiles.\"[244] But how little\nwe know of the details of the upgrowth of the Church in all save the\nmore prominent places! How entirely ignorant we are, for instance, of\nthe methods by which the gospel spread to Tyre and Ptolemais and\nPuteoli! Here we find in the Acts the fulfilment of our Lord's words\nas reported in St. Mark iv. 26: \"So is the kingdom of God, as if a man\nshould cast seed upon the earth; ... and the seed should spring up and\ngrow, he knoweth not how.\" It was with the last and grander temple of\nGod as it was with the first. Its foundations were laid, and its walls\nwere built, not with sound of axe and hammer, but in the penitence of\nhumbled souls, in the godly testimony of sanctified spirits, in the\nearnest lives of holy men hidden from the scoffing world, known only\nto the Almighty.\n\n  [244] This prophecy was not literally fulfilled. The Jews did not\n  bind St. Paul, nor deliver him into Gentile hands. The Romans took\n  him out of Jewish hands, and bound him for their own purposes. The\n  Jews, however, brought this binding about, and were the cause of\n  his captivity in Roman hands. On the question of prophets and\n  prophesying in the primitive Church, see Dr. Salmon's article on\n  Hermas, in the _Dictionary of Christian Biography_, vol. ii., pp.\n  916-19.\n\nAgain, we notice the advice given by James and the course actually\nadopted by St. Paul when he arrived at Jerusalem. It has the\nappearance of compromise of truth, and yet it has the appearance\nmerely, not the reality of compromise. It was in effect wise and sound\nadvice, and such as teaches lessons useful for our own guidance in\nlife. We have already set forth St. Paul's conception of Jewish rites\nand ceremonies. They were nothing in the world one way or another, as\nviewed from the Divine standpoint. Their presence did not help on the\nwork of man's salvation; their absence did not detract from it. The\nApostle therefore took part in them freely enough, as when he\ncelebrated the passover and the days of unleavened bread at Philippi,\nviewing them as mere national rites.[245] He had been successful in\nthe very highest degree in converting to this view even the highest\nand strictest members of the Jerusalem Church. St. James, in advising\nSt. Paul how to act on this occasion, when such prejudices had been\nexcited against him, clearly shows that he had come round to St.\nPaul's view. He tells St. Paul that the multitude or body of the\nJud\u00e6o-Christian Church at Jerusalem had been excited against him,\nbecause they had been informed that he taught the Jews of the\nDispersion to forsake Moses, the very thing St. Paul did not do. St.\nJames grasped, however, St. Paul's view that Moses and the Levitical\nLaw might be good things for the Jews, but had no relation to the\nGentiles, and must not be imposed on them. St. James had taught this\nview ten years earlier at the Apostolic Council. His opinions and\nteaching had percolated downwards, and the majority of the Jerusalem\nChurch now held the same view as regards the Gentiles, but were as\nstrong as ever and as patriotic as ever so far as the Jews were\nconcerned, and the obligation of the Jewish Law upon them and their\nchildren. St. Paul had carried his point as regards Gentile freedom.\nAnd now there came a time when he had in turn to show consideration\nand care for Jewish prejudices, and act out his own principle that\ncircumcision was nothing and uncircumcision was nothing. Concessions,\nin fact, were not to be all on one side, and St. Paul had now to make\na concession. The Jud\u00e6o-Christian congregations of Jerusalem were much\nexcited, and St. Paul by a certain course of conduct, perfectly\ninnocent and harmless, could pacify their excited patriotic feelings,\nand demonstrate to them that he was still a true, a genuine, and not a\nrenegade Jew. It was but a little thing that St. James advised and\npublic feeling demanded. He had but to join himself to a party of\nNazarites and pay their expenses, and thus Paul would place himself\n_en rapport_ with the Mother Church of Christendom. St. Paul acted\nwisely, charitably, and in a Christlike spirit when he consented to do\nas St. James advised. St. Paul was always eminently prudent. There are\nsome religious men who seem to think that to advise a wise or prudent\ncourse is all the same as to advise a wicked or unprincipled course.\nThey seem to consider success in any course as a clear evidence of\nsin, and failure as a proof of honesty and true principle. Concession,\nhowever, is not the same as unworthy compromise. It is our duty in\nlife to see and make our course of conduct as fruitful and as\nsuccessful as possible. Concession on little points has a wondrous\npower in smoothing the path of action and gaining true success. Many\nan honest man ruins a good cause simply because he cannot distinguish,\nas St. Paul did, things necessary and essential from things accidental\nand trivial. Pig-headed obstinacy, to use a very homely but a very\nexpressive phrase, which indeed is often only disguised pride, is a\ngreat enemy to the peace and harmony of societies and churches. St.\nPaul displayed great boldness here. He was not afraid of being\nmisrepresented, that ghost which frightens so many a popularity hunter\nfrom the course which is true and right. How easily his fierce\nopponents, the men who had gone to Corinth and Galatia to oppose him,\nmight misrepresent his action in joining himself to the Nazarites!\nThey were the extreme men of the Jerusalem Church. They were the men\nfor whom the decisions of the Apostolic Council had no weight, and who\nheld still as of old that unless a man be circumcised he could not be\nsaved. How easily, I say, these men could despatch their emissaries,\nwho should proclaim that their opponent Paul had conceded all their\ndemands and was himself observing the law at Jerusalem. St. Paul was\nnot afraid of this misrepresentation, but boldly took the course which\nseemed to him right and true, and charitable, despite the malicious\ntongues of his adversaries. The Apostle of the Gentiles left us an\nexample which many still require. How many a man is kept from\nadopting a course that is charitable and tends to peace and\nedification, solely because he is afraid of what opponents may say, or\nhow they may twist and misrepresent his action. St. Paul was possessed\nwith none of this moral cowardice which specially flourishes among\nso-called party-leaders, men who, instead of leading, are always led\nand governed by the opinions of their followers.[246] St. Paul simply\ndetermined in his conscience what was right, and then fearlessly acted\nout his determination.\n\n  [245] St. Paul, writing twelve months earlier than his arrest,\n  expressly lays down this principle in 1 Corinthians vii. 18-20:\n  \"Was any man called being circumcised? let him not become\n  uncircumcised. Hath any been called in uncircumcision? let him not\n  be circumcised. Circumcision is nothing, and uncircumcision is\n  nothing; but the keeping of the commandments of God. Let each man\n  abide in that calling wherein he was called.\"\n\n  [246] We see enough of this in politics. We see it in the Church\n  as well. Writing as one with nearly a quarter of a century's\n  experience of a disestablished, and therefore of a popularly\n  governed Church, I have seen a great deal of this tendency in\n  ecclesiastical matters. Prominent and ambitious men are ever apt\n  to fall into the snare here noted. The tendency of popular\n  assemblies is ever to develop a class of men who will have but\n  little backbone, and will be always ready to rectify their\n  convictions to suit their constituencies. \"Show thou me the way I\n  should walk in,\" but in a very different sense from the\n  Psalmist's, is the unuttered prayer of their lives, addressed to\n  the popular audiences of whose opinions they are the mere\n  expressions, not the guides. For such men this typical history has\n  many a reproof in St. Paul's brave conduct upon this and every\n  other occasion. He was never afraid of a little temporary\n  misrepresentation, and therefore he proved a real guide to the\n  Church of his own and of every age.\n\nSome persons perhaps would argue that the result of his action showed\nthat he was wrong and had unworthily compromised the cause of\nChristian freedom. They think that had he not consented to appear as a\nNazarite in the Temple no riot would have occurred, his arrest would\nhave been avoided, and the course of history might have been very\ndifferent. But here we would join issue on the spot. The results of\nhis action vindicated his Christian wisdom. The great body of the\nJerusalem Church were convinced of his sincerity and realised his\nposition. He maintained his influence over them, which had been\nseriously imperilled previously, and thus helped on the course of\ndevelopment which had been going on. Ten years before the advocates of\nGentile freedom were but a small body. Now the vast majority of the\nlocal church at Jerusalem held fast to this idea, while still clinging\nfast to the obligation laid upon the Jews to observe the law. St. Paul\ndid his best to maintain his friendship and alliance with the\nJerusalem Church. To put himself right with them he travelled up to\nJerusalem, when fresh fields and splendid prospects were opening up\nfor him in the West. For this purpose he submitted to several days\nrestraint and attendance in the Temple, and the results vindicated his\ndetermination. The Jerusalem Church continued the same course of\norderly development, and when, ten years later, Jerusalem was\nthreatened with destruction, the Christian congregations alone rose\nabove the narrow bigoted patriotism which bound the Jews to the Holy\nCity. The Christians alone realised that the day of the Mosaic Law was\nat length passed, and, retiring to the neighbouring city of Pella,\nescaped the destruction which awaited the fanatical adherents of the\nLaw and the Temple.[247]\n\n  [247] See Eusebius, _H. E._, iii. 5, and the notes of Valesius on\n  that passage.\n\nAnother answer, too, may be made to this objection. It was not his\naction in the matter of the Nazarites that brought about the riot and\nthe arrest and his consequent imprisonment. It was the hostility of\nthe Jews of Asia; and they would have assailed him whenever and\nwherever they met him. Studying the matter too even in view of\nresults, we should draw the opposite conclusion. God Himself approved\nhis course. A Divine vision was vouchsafed to him in the guard-room\nof Antonia, after he had twice experienced Jewish violence, and\nbestowed upon him the approbation of Heaven: \"The night following the\nLord stood by him, and said, Be of good cheer; for as thou hast\ntestified concerning Me at Jerusalem, so must thou bear witness also\nat Rome.\" His courageous and at the same time charitable action was\nvindicated by its results on the Jerusalem Church, by the sanction of\nChrist Himself, and lastly, by its blessed results upon the\ndevelopment of the Church at large in leading St. Paul to Rome, in\ngiving him a wider and more influential sphere for his efforts, and in\naffording him leisure to write epistles like those to Ephesus,\nPhilippi, and Coloss\u00e6, which have been so instructive and useful for\nthe Church of all ages.\n\nAnother point which has exercised men's minds is found in St. Paul's\nattitude and words when brought before the Sanhedrin on the day after\nhis arrest. The story is told in the opening verses of the\ntwenty-third chapter. Let us quote them, as they vividly present the\ndifficulty: \"And Paul, looking stedfastly on the council, said,\nBrethren, I have lived before God in all good conscience until this\nday. And the high priest Ananias commanded them that stood by him to\nsmite him on the mouth. Then said Paul unto him, God shall smite thee,\nthou whited wall: and sittest thou to judge me according to the law,\nand commandest me to be smitten contrary to the law? And they that\nstood by said, Revilest thou God's high priest? And Paul said, I wist\nnot, brethren, that he was high priest: for it is written, Thou shalt\nnot speak evil of a ruler of thy people.\"\n\nTwo difficulties here present themselves. (_a_) There is St. Paul's\nlanguage, which certainly seems wanting in Christian meekness, and\nnot exactly modelled after the example of Christ, who, when He was\nreviled, reviled not again, and laid down in His Sermon on the Mount a\nlaw of suffering to which St. Paul does not here conform. But this is\nonly a difficulty for those who have formed a superhuman estimate of\nSt. Paul against which we have several times protested, and against\nwhich this very book of the Acts seems to take special care to warn\nits readers. If people will make the Apostle as sinless and as perfect\nas our Lord, they will of course be surprised at his language on this\noccasion. But if they regard him in the light in which St. Luke\nportrays him, as a man of like passions and infirmities with\nthemselves, then they will feel no difficulty in the fact that St.\nPaul's natural temper was roused at the brutal and illegal command to\nsmite a helpless prisoner on the mouth because he had made a statement\nwhich a member of the court did not relish. This passage seems to me\nnot a difficulty, but a divinely guided passage witnessing to the\ninspiring influence of the Holy Ghost, and inserted to chasten our\nwandering fancy which would exalt the Apostle to a position equal to\nthat which rightly belongs to his Divine Master alone.\n\n(_b_) Then there is a second difficulty. Some have thought that St.\nPaul told a lie in this passage, and that, when defending himself from\nthe charge of unscriptural insolence to the high priest, he merely\npretended ignorance of his person, saying, \"I wist not, brethren, that\nhe was high priest.\" The older commentators devised various\nexplanations of this passage. Dr. John Lightfoot, in his _Hor\u00e6\nHebraic\u00e6_, treating of this verse, sums them all up as follows. Either\nSt. Paul means that he did not recognise Ananias as high priest\nbecause he did not lawfully occupy the office, or else because that\nChrist was now the only high priest; or else because there had been so\nmany and so frequent changes that as a matter of fact he did not know\nwho was the actual high priest. None of these is a satisfactory\nexplanation. Mr. Lewin offers what strikes me as the most natural\nexplanation, considering all the circumstances. Ananias was appointed\nhigh priest about 47, continued in office till 59, and was killed in\nthe beginning of the great Jewish war. He was a thoroughly historical\ncharacter, and his high priesthood is guaranteed for us by the\ntestimony of Josephus, who tells us of his varied fortunes and of his\ntragic death. But St. Paul never probably once saw him, as he was\nabsent from Jerusalem, except for one brief visit all the time while\nhe enjoyed supreme office.\n\nNow the Sanhedrin consisted of seventy-one judges, they sat in a large\nhall with a crowd of scribes and pupils in front of them, and the high\npriest, as we have already pointed out (vol. i., p. 181), was not\nnecessarily president or chairman. St. Paul was very short-sighted,\nand the ophthalmia under which he continually suffered was probably\nmuch intensified by the violent treatment he had experienced the day\nbefore. Could anything be more natural than that a shortsighted man\nshould not recognise in such a crowd the particular person who had\nuttered this very brief, but very tyrannical command, \"Smite him on\nthe mouth\"? Surely an impartial review of St. Paul's life shows him\never to have been at least a man of striking courage, and therefore\none who would never have descended to cloke his own hasty words with\neven the shadow of an untruth![248]\n\n  [248] There is no necessity to adopt forced and unnatural\n  explanations when an easy one lies ready to our hand, and we all\n  have daily experience how hard it is for even a keen-sighted man\n  to distinguish among a crowd the person who utters a brief\n  exclamation; a fact which the debates in the House of Commons\n  often illustrate. I can myself quite appreciate St. Paul's\n  difficulty. I am extremely short-sighted, and am never able to\n  discern--say in a meeting of one of our synods--who it is that\n  interrupts or contradicts me.\n\nAgain, the readiness and quickness of St. Paul in seizing upon every\nopportunity of escape have important teaching for us. Upon four\ndifferent occasions at this crisis he displayed this characteristic.\nLet us note them for our guidance. When he was rescued by the chief\ncaptain and was carried into the castle, the captain ordered him to be\nexamined by scourging to elicit the true cause of the riot, St. Paul\nthen availed himself of his privilege as a Roman citizen to escape\nthat torture. When he stood before the council he perceived the old\ndivision between the Pharisees and the Sadducees to be still in\nexistence, which he had known long ago when he was himself connected\nwith it. He skilfully availed himself of that circumstance to raise\ndissension among his opponents. He grasped the essential principle\nwhich lay at the basis of his teaching, and that was the doctrine of\nthe Resurrection and the assertion of the reality of the spiritual\nworld. Without that doctrine Christianity and Christian teaching was\nutterly meaningless, and in that doctrine Pharisees and Christians\nwere united. Dropping the line of defence he was about to offer, which\nprobably would have proceeded to show how true to conscience and to\nDivine light had been his course of life, he cried out, \"I am a\nPharisee, a son of Pharisees: touching the hope and resurrection of\nthe dead I am called in question.\" Grotius, an old and learned\ncommentator, dealing with ch. xxiii. 6, has well summed up the\nprinciples on which St. Paul acted on this occasion in the following\nwords: \"St. Paul was not lacking in human prudence, making use of\nwhich for the service of the gospel, he intermingled the wisdom of the\nserpent with the gentleness of the dove, and thus utilised the\ndissensions of his enemies.\" Yet once more we see the same tact in\noperation. After the meeting of the Sanhedrin and his rescue from out\nof its very midst, a plot was formed to assassinate him, of which he\nwas informed by his nephew. Then again St. Paul did not let things\nslide, trusting in the Divine care alone. He knew right well that God\ndemanded of men of faith that they should be fellow-workers with God\nand lend Him their co-operation. He knew too the horror which the\nRoman authorities had of riot and of all illegal measures; he\ndespatched his nephew therefore to the chief captain, and by his\nreadiness of resource saved himself from imminent danger. Lastly, we\nfind the same characteristic trait coming out at C\u00e6sarea. His\nexperience of Roman rule taught him the anxiety of new governors to\nplease the people among whom they came. He knew that Festus would be\nanxious to gratify the Jewish authorities in any way he possibly\ncould. They were very desirous to have the Apostle transferred from\nC\u00e6sarea to Jerusalem, sure that in some way or another they could\nthere dispose of him. Knowing therefore the dangerous position in\nwhich he stood, St. Paul's readiness and tact again came to his help.\nHe knew Roman law thoroughly well. He knew that as a Roman citizen he\nhad one resource left by which in one brief sentence he could transfer\nhimself out of the jurisdiction of Sanhedrin and Procurator alike, and\nof this he availed himself at the critical moment, pronouncing the\nmagic words _C\u00e6sarem Appello_ (\"I appeal unto C\u00e6sar\"). St. Paul left\nin all these cases a healthy example which the Church urgently\nrequired in subsequent years. He had no morbid craving after suffering\nor death. No man ever lived in a closer communion with his God, or in\na more steadfast readiness to depart and be with Christ. But he knew\nthat it was his duty to remain at his post till the Captain of his\nsalvation gave a clear note of withdrawal, and that clear note was\nonly given when every avenue of escape was cut off. St. Paul therefore\nused his knowledge and his tact in order to ascertain the Master's\nwill and discover whether it was His wish that His faithful servant\nshould depart or tarry yet awhile for the discharge of his earthly\nduties. I have said that this was an example necessary for the Church\nin subsequent ages. The question of flight in persecution became a\nvery practical one as soon as the Roman Empire assumed an attitude\ndefinitely hostile to the Church. The more extreme and fanatical party\nnot only refused to take any measures to secure their safety or escape\ndeath, but rather rushed headlong upon it, and upbraided those as\ntraitors and renegades who tried in any way to avoid suffering.[249]\nFrom the earliest times, from the days of Ignatius of Antioch himself,\nwe see this morbid tendency displaying itself; while the Church in the\nperson of several of its greatest leaders--men like Polycarp and\nCyprian, who themselves retired from impending danger till the Roman\nauthorities discovered them--showed that St. Paul's wiser teaching and\nexample were not thrown away.[250] Quietism was a view which two\ncenturies ago made a great stir both in England and France, and seems\nembodied to some extent in certain modern forms of thought. It taught\nthat believers should lie quite passive in God's hands and make no\neffort for themselves. Quietism would never have found a follower in\nthe vigorous mind of St. Paul, who proved himself through all those\ntrials and vicissitudes of more than two years ever ready with some\nnew device wherewith to meet the hatred of his foes.[251]\n\n  [249] Any reader who wishes to see how this question was discussed\n  about the year 200 A. D. should turn to Tertullian's treatise _De\n  Fuga in Persecutione_, c. 6., in his works translated in Clark's\n  Ante-Nicene Library, vol. i., p. 364, where Tertullian admits that\n  the apostles fled in time of persecution, but argues that the\n  permission to do so was merely temporary and personal to the\n  apostles. The study of Church history is specially useful in\n  showing us how exactly the same tendencies emerge in ancient and\n  modern schisms and sects. Tertullian would have been a Quietist\n  had he lived in the seventeenth century; see note 2, p. 446.\n\n  [250] St. Ignatius of Antioch was very desirous of martyrdom. St.\n  Polycarp fifty years avoided it till he was arrested. St. Clement\n  of Alexandria, in his _Stromata_, iv. 16, 17, condemns the\n  suicidal passion for martyrdom. St. Cyprian, enthusiastic as he\n  was, retired like Polycarp till escape was impossible. These holy\n  men all acted like St. Paul. They waited till God had intimated\n  His will by shutting up all way of escape. The story of Polycarp\n  has an interesting warning against presumptuous rushing upon\n  trials. Quintus, one of St. Polycarp's flock, gave himself up to\n  death. His courage failed him at the last, and he became an\n  apostate: see on this subject Lightfoot's _Ignatius and Polycarp_,\n  vol. i., pp. 38, 393, 603.\n\n  [251] Quietism, Jansenism, and Quakerism were all manifestations\n  of the same spirit, and arose about the same time. Molinos was the\n  founder of Quietism in Spain. A concise account of the movement\n  will be found in Schaffs _Theological Encyclop\u00e6dia_ in connexion\n  with the names of Molinos and Guyon.\n\nIII. We notice lastly in the narrative of St. Paul's imprisonment his\ninterviews with and his testimony before the members of the house of\nHerod. St. Peter had experience of the father of Herod Agrippa, and\nnow St. Paul comes into contact with the children, Agrippa, Drusilla\nand Bernice. And thus it came about. Felix the procurator, as we have\nalready explained, was a very bad man, and had enticed Drusilla from\nher husband. He doubtless told her of the Jewish prisoner who lay a\ncaptive in the city where she was living. The Herods were a clever\nrace, and they knew all about Jewish hopes and Messianic expectations,\nand they ever seem to have been haunted by a certain curiosity\nconcerning the new sect of the Nazarenes. One Herod desired for a long\ntime to see Jesus Christ, and was delighted when Pilate gratified his\nlonging. Drusilla, doubtless, was equally curious, and easily\npersuaded her husband to gratify her desire. We therefore read in ch.\nxxiv. 24, \"But after certain days, Felix came with Drusilla, his wife,\nwhich was a Jewess, and sent for Paul, and heard him concerning the\nfaith in Christ Jesus.\"\n\nNeither of them calculated on the kind of man they had to do with. St.\nPaul knew all the circumstances of the case. He adapted his speech\nthereto. He made a powerful appeal to the conscience of the guilty\npair. He reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and the judgment to\ncome, and beneath his weighty words Felix trembled. His convictions\nwere roused. He experienced a transient season of penitence, such as\ntouched another guilty member of the Herodian house who feared John\nand did many things gladly to win his approval. But habits of sin had\ngrasped Felix too firmly. He temporised with his conscience. He put\noff the day of salvation when it was dawning on him, and his words,\n\"Go thy way for this time, and when I have a convenient season I will\ncall thee unto me,\" became the typical language of all those souls for\nwhom procrastination, want of decision, trifling with spiritual\nfeelings, have been the omens and the causes of eternal ruin.\n\nBut Felix and Drusilla were not the only members of the Herodian\nhouse with whom Paul came in contact. Felix and Drusilla left\nPalestine when two years of St. Paul's imprisonment had elapsed.\nFestus, another procurator, followed, and began his course, as all the\nRoman rulers of Palestine began theirs. The Jews, when Felix visited\nJerusalem, besought him to deliver the prisoner lying bound at C\u00e6sarea\nto the judgment of their Sanhedrin. Festus, all powerful as a Roman\ngovernor usually was, dared not treat a Roman citizen thus without his\nown consent, and when that consent was asked Paul at once refused,\nknowing right well the intentions of the Jews, and appealed unto\nC\u00e6sar. A Roman governor, however, would not send a prisoner to the\njudgment of the Emperor without stating the crime imputed to him. Just\nat that moment Herod Agrippa, king of Chalcis and of the district of\nItur\u00e6a, together with his sister Bernice, appeared on the scene. He\nwas a Jew, and was well acquainted therefore with the accusations\nbrought against the Apostle, and could inform the procurator what\nreport he should send to the Emperor. Festus therefore brought Paul\nbefore them, and gave him another opportunity of expounding the faith\nof Jesus Christ and the law of love and purity which that faith\ninvolved to a family who ever treated that law with profound contempt.\nSt. Paul availed himself of that opportunity. He addressed his whole\ndiscourse to the king, and that discourse was typical of those he\naddressed to Jewish audiences. It was like the sermon delivered to the\nJews in the synagogue of Antioch in Pisidia in one important aspect.\nBoth discourses gathered round the resurrection of Jesus Christ as\ntheir central idea. St. Paul began his address before Agrippa with\nthat doctrine, and he ended with the same. The hope of Israel,\ntowards which their continuous worship tended, was the resurrection\nof the dead. That was St. Paul's opening idea. The same note lay\nbeneath the narrative of his own conversion, and then he returned back\nto his original statement that the Risen Christ was the hope of Israel\nand of the world taught by Moses and proclaimed by prophets. But it\nwas all in vain as regards Agrippa and Bernice. The Herods were\nmagnificent, clever, beautiful. But they were of the earth, earthy.\nAgrippa said indeed to Paul, \"With but little persuasion thou wouldest\nfain make me a Christian.\" But it was not souls like his for whom the\ngospel message was intended. The Herods knew nothing of the burden of\nsin or the keen longing of souls desirous of holiness and of God. They\nwere satisfied with the present transient scene, and enjoyed it\nthoroughly. Agrippa's father when he lay a-dying at C\u00e6sarea consoled\nhimself with the reflection that though his career was prematurely cut\nshort, yet at any rate he had lived a splendid life. And such as the\nparent had been, such were the children. King Agrippa and his sister\nBernice were true types of the stony-ground hearers, with whom \"the\ncare of the world and the deceitfulness of riches choke the word.\" And\nthey choked the word so effectually in his case, even when taught by\nSt. Paul, that the only result upon Agrippa, as St. Luke reports it,\nwas this: \"Agrippa said unto Festus, This man might have been set at\nliberty, if he had not appealed unto C\u00e6sar.\"\n\n\n\n\nCHAPTER XVIII.\n\n_IN PERILS ON THE SEA._\n\n     \"And when it was determined that we should sail for Italy, they\n     delivered Paul and certain other prisoners to a centurion named\n     Julius, of the Augustan band. And embarking in a ship of\n     Adramyttium, which was about to sail unto the places on the coast\n     of Asia, we put to sea, Aristarchus, a Macedonian of\n     Thessalonica, being with us. And the next day we touched at\n     Sidon: and Julius treated Paul kindly, and gave him leave to go\n     unto his friends and refresh himself.\"--ACTS xxvii. 1-3.\n\n     \"And when we entered into Rome, Paul was suffered to abide by\n     himself with the soldier that guarded him.\"--ACTS xxviii. 16.\n\n\nThis chapter terminates our survey of the Acts of the Apostles, and\nleads us at the same time to contemplate the Apostle of the Gentiles\nin a new light as a traveller and as a prisoner, in both which aspects\nhe has much to teach us. When St. Paul was despatched to the\njudgment-seat of C\u00e6sar from the port of C\u00e6sarea, he had arrived at the\nmiddle of his long captivity. Broadly speaking he was five years a\nprisoner from the day of his arrest at Jerusalem till his release by\nthe decision of Nero. He was a prisoner for more than two years when\nFestus sent him to Rome, and then at Rome he spent two more years in\ncaptivity, while his voyage occupied fully six months. Let us now\nfirst of all look at that captivity, and strive to discover those\npurposes of good therein which God hides amidst all his dispensations\nand chastisements.\n\nWe do not always realise what a length of time was consumed in the\nimprisonments of St. Paul. He must have spent from the middle of 58 to\nthe beginning of 63 as a prisoner cut off from many of those various\nactivities in which he had previously laboured so profitably for God's\ncause. That must have seemed to himself and to many others a terrible\nloss to the gospel; and yet now, as we look back from our\nvantage-point, we can see many reasons why the guidance of his\nheavenly Father may have led directly to this imprisonment, which\nproved exceedingly useful for himself and his own soul's health, for\nthe past guidance and for the perpetual edification of the Church of\nChrist. There is a text in Ephesians iv. 1 which throws some light on\nthis incident. In that Epistle, written when St. Paul was a captive at\nRome, he describes himself thus, \"I therefore the prisoner _in_ the\nLord,\" or \"the prisoner _of_ the Lord,\" as the Authorised Version puts\nit. These words occur as the beginning of the Epistle for the\nSeventeenth Sunday after Trinity. Now there is often a marvellous\namount of spiritual wisdom and instruction to be gained from a\ncomparison between the epistles and gospels and the collects for each\nSunday. All my readers may not agree in the whole theological system\nwhich underlies the Prayer Book, but every one will acknowledge that\nits services and their construction are the result of rich and varied\nspiritual experiences extending over a period of more than a thousand\nyears. The mere contrast of an epistle and of a collect will often\nsuggest thoughts deep and searching. So it is with this text, \"I\ntherefore the prisoner in the Lord.\" It is preceded by the brief pithy\nprayer, \"Lord, we pray Thee that Thy grace may always prevent and\nfollow us, and make us continually to be given to all good works,\nthrough Jesus Christ our Lord.\" The words of St. Paul to the Ephesians\nspeaking of himself as the prisoner of God and in God suggested\nimmediately the idea of God's grace surrounding, shaping, constraining\nto His service every external circumstance; and thus led to the\nformation of the collect which in fact prays that we may realise\nourselves as so completely God's as, like the Apostle, continually to\nbe given to all good works. St. Paul realised himself as so prevented,\nusing that word in its ancient sense, preceded and followed by God's\ngrace, guarded before and behind by it, that he looked beyond the\nthings seen, and discarding all secondary agents and all lower\ninstruments, he viewed his imprisonment as God's own immediate work.\n\nI. Let us then see in what way we may regard St. Paul's imprisonment\nas an arrangement and outcome of Divine love. Take, for instance, St.\nPaul in his own personal life. This period of imprisonment, of\nenforced rest and retirement, may have been absolutely necessary for\nhim. St. Paul had spent many a long and busy year building up the\nspiritual life of others, founding churches, teaching converts,\npreaching, debating, struggling, suffering. His life had been one of\nintense spiritual, intellectual, bodily activity on behalf of others.\nBut no one can be engaged in intense activity without wasting some of\nthe spiritual life and force necessary for himself. Religious work,\nthe most direct spiritual activity, visiting the sick, or preaching\nthe gospel, or celebrating the sacraments, make a tremendous call upon\nour devotional powers and directly tend to lower our spiritual\nvitality, unless we seek abundant and frequent renewal thereof at the\nsource of all spiritual vitality and life. Now God by this long\nimprisonment took St. Paul aside once again, as He had taken him\naside twenty years before, amid the rocks of Sinai. God laid hold of\nhim in his career of external business, as He laid hold of Moses in\nthe court of Pharaoh, leading him into the wilderness of Midian for\nforty long years. God made St. Paul His prisoner that, having laboured\nfor others, and having tended diligently their spiritual vineyard, he\nmight now watch over and tend his own for a time. And the wondrous\nmanner in which he profited by his imprisonment is manifest from this\nvery Epistle to the Ephesians, in which he describes himself as God's\nprisoner--not, be it observed, the prisoner of the Jews, or of the\nRomans, or of C\u00e6sar, but as the prisoner of God--dealing in the\nprofoundest manner, as that Epistle does, with the greatest mysteries\nof the Christian faith. St. Paul had an opportunity during those four\nor five years, such as he never had before, of realising; digesting,\nand assimilating in all their fulness the doctrines he had so long\nproclaimed to others, and was thus enabled out of the depth of his own\npersonal experience to preach what he felt and knew to be true, the\nonly kind of teaching which will ever be worth anything.\n\nAgain, St. Paul designates himself the prisoner of the Lord because of\nthe benefits his imprisonment conferred upon the Church of Christ in\nvarious ways. Take his imprisonment at C\u00e6sarea alone. We are not\nexpressly told anything about his labours during that time. But\nknowing St. Paul's intense energy we may be sure that the whole local\nChristian community established in that important centre whence the\ngospel could diffuse itself as far as the extremest west on the one\nside and the extremest east on the other, was permeated by his\nteaching and vitalised by his example. He was allowed great freedom,\nas the Acts declares. Felix \"gave orders to the centurion that he\nshould be kept in charge, and should have indulgence; and not to\nforbid any of his friends to minister unto him.\" If we take the\nvarious centurions to whom he was intrusted, we may be sure that St.\nPaul must have omitted no opportunity of leading them to Christ. St.\nPaul seems to have known how to make his way to the hearts of Roman\nsoldiers, as his subsequent treatment by Julius the centurion shows,\nand that permission of the governor would be liberally interpreted\nwhen deputies from distant churches sought his presence. Messengers\nfrom the various missions he had founded must have had recourse to\nC\u00e6sarea during those two years spent there, and thence too was\ndoubtless despatched many a missive of advice and exhortation. At\nC\u00e6sarea, too, may then have been written the Gospel of St. Luke. Lewin\n(vol. i., p. 221), indeed, places its composition at Philippi, where\nSt. Luke laboured for several years prior to St. Paul's visit in 57\nA.D. after leaving Ephesus; and he gives as his reason for this\nconclusion that St. Paul called St. Luke in 2 Cor. viii. 18, written\nabout that time, \"the brother whose praise is in the Gospel,\"\nreferring to his Gospel then lately published.[252] I think the\nsuggestion much more likely that St. Luke took advantage of this\npause in St. Paul's activity to write his Gospel at C\u00e6sarea when he\nhad not merely the assistance of the Apostle himself, but of Philip\nthe deacon, and was within easy reach of St. James and the Jerusalem\nChurch. St. Luke's Gospel bears evident traces of St. Paul's ideas and\ndoctrine, was declared by Iren\u00e6us (_H\u00e6r._, iii. 1) to have been\ncomposed under his direction,[253] and may with much probability be\nregarded as one of the blessed results flowing forth from St. Paul's\ndetention as Christ's prisoner given by Him in charge to the Roman\ngovernor.\n\n  [252] This involves, however, the supposition that St. Luke's\n  narrative had then obtained its more modern name of \"the Gospel,\"\n  which is in my opinion an anachronism. In the earliest writings\n  which refer to apostolic narratives they are simply called the\n  writings or memoirs or commentaries of the apostles, as in\n  Aristides, c. xvi., and Justin Martyr, _Apol._, i. 67. In\n  Aristides there is one passage in ch. ii. where the word gospel is\n  used, but not in the sense of a special title for a book: \"This is\n  taught from that Gospel which a little while ago was spoken among\n  them as being preached; wherein if ye also will read, ye will\n  comprehend the power that is upon it.\" Iren\u00e6us, III. xi. 7, 8, is\n  the earliest I can now recall who uses the word gospel in this\n  technical sense. He speaks there of the Gospel of St. Matthew,\n  etc. But this was in the last quarter of the second century. In\n  the year 57, when Second Corinthians was written, the word gospel\n  was applied to the whole body of revealed truth held by the\n  Church, and not to a book.\n\n  [253] Iren., iii. 1: \"Luke, also the companion of Paul, recorded\n  in a book the gospel preached by him.\" With respect to the\n  relation between St. Paul and St. Luke, see also Iren., iii.,\n  xiv., xv.\n\nThe Apostle's Roman imprisonment again was most profitable to the\nChurch of the imperial capital. The Church of Rome had been founded by\nthe efforts of individuals. Private Christians did the work, not\napostles or eminent evangelists. St. Paul came to it first of all as a\nprisoner, and found it a flourishing church. And yet he benefited and\nblessed it greatly. He could not, indeed, preach to crowded audiences\nin synagogues or porticoes as he had done elsewhere. But he blessed\nthe Church of Rome most chiefly by his individual efforts. This man\ncame to him into his own hired house, and that man followed him\nattracted by the magnetic influence he seemed to bear about. The\nsoldiers appointed as his keepers were told the story of the Cross and\nthe glad tidings of the resurrection life, and these individual\nefforts were fruitful in vast results, so that even into the household\nand palace of the C\u00e6sars did this patient, quiet, evangelistic work\nextend its influence.[254] Nowhere else, in fact, not even in Corinth,\nwhere St. Paul spent two whole years openly teaching without any\nserious interruption; not even in Ephesus, where he laboured so long\nthat all who dwelt in Asia heard the word; nowhere else, was the\nApostle's ministry so effective as here in Rome, where the prisoner of\nthe Lord was confined to individual effort and completely laid aside\nfrom more public and enlarged activity. It was with St. Paul as it is\nwith God's messengers still. It is not eloquent or excited public\nefforts, or platform addresses, or public debates, or clever books\nthat are most fruitful in spiritual results. Nay, it is often the\nquiet individual efforts of private Christians, the testimony of a\npatient sufferer perhaps, the witness all-powerful with men, of a life\ntransformed through and through by Christian principle, and lived in\nthe perpetual sunshine of God's reconciled countenance. These are the\ntestimonies that speak most effectually for God, most directly to\nsouls.\n\n  [254] The subject of Christianity and the household of C\u00e6sarea\n  would form an interesting subject of inquiry did only space\n  permit. I have, however, the less hesitation in passing it over\n  because it has been exhaustively discussed by Bishop Lightfoot in\n  the following places, to which I must refer my readers:\n  _Philippians_, Introduction pp. 1-28, and in dissertations on, pp.\n  97-102 and 169-76. This is also the subject of an elaborate\n  monograph by Professor Harnack in the _Princeton Review_ for July\n  1878, entitled \"Christians and Rome,\" with which should be\n  compared Sch\u00fcrer's _Geschichte des J\u00fcdischen Volkes_, ii. 506-512,\n  and a treatise published by him _Die Gemeindeverfassung der Juden\n  in Rom._, Leipzig 1879.\n\nLastly, St. Paul's imprisonment blessed the Church of every age, and\nthrough it blessed mankind at large far more than his liberty and his\nexternal activity could have done in one other direction. Is it not a\ncontradiction in terms to say that the imprisonment of this courageous\nleader, this eloquent preacher, this keen, subtle debater should have\nbeen more profitable to the Church than the exercise of his external\nfreedom and liberty, when all these dormant powers would have found\nample scope for their complete manifestation? And yet if Christ had\nnot laid His arresting hand upon the active, external labour in which\nSt. Paul had been absorbed, if Christ had not cast the busy Apostle\ninto the Roman prison-house, the Church of all future time would have\nbeen deprived of those masterly expositions of Christian truth which\nshe now enjoys in the various Epistles of the Captivity, and specially\nin those addressed to the churches of Ephesus, Philippi, and Coloss\u00e6.\nWe have now noted some of the blessings resulting from St. Paul's five\nyears' captivity, and indicated a line of thought which may be applied\nto the whole narrative contained in the two chapters with which we are\ndealing. St. Paul was a captive, and that captivity gave him access at\nC\u00e6sarea to various classes of society, to the soldiers, and to all\nthat immense crowd of officials connected with the seat of government,\nqu\u00e6stors, tribunes, assessors, apparitors, scribes, advocates. His\ncaptivity then led him on board ship, and brought him into contact\nwith the sailors and with a number of passengers drawn from diverse\nlands. A storm came on, and then the Apostle's self-possession, his\ncalm Christian courage, when every one else was panic-stricken, gave\nhim influence over the motley crowd. The waves flung the ship of\nAlexandria in which he was travelling upon Malta, and his stay there\nduring the tempestuous winter months became the basis of the\nconversion of its inhabitants. Everywhere in St. Paul's life and\ncourse at this season we can trace the outcome of Divine love, the\npower of Divine providence shaping God's servant for His own purposes,\nrestraining man's wrath when it waxed too fierce, and causing the\nremainder of that wrath to praise Him by its blessed results.\n\nII. Let us now gather up into a brief narrative the story contained in\nthese two chapters, so that we may gain a bird's eye view over the\nwhole. Festus entered upon his provincial rule about June A.D. 60.\nAccording to Roman law the outgoing governor, of whatever kind he was,\nhad to await his successor's arrival and hand over the reins of\ngovernment--a very natural and proper rule which all civilised\ngovernments observe. We have no idea how vast the apparatus of\nprovincial, or, as we should say, colonial government among the Romans\nwas, and how minute their regulations were, till we take up one of\nthose helps which German scholars have furnished towards the knowledge\nof antiquity, as, for instance, Mommsen's _Roman Provinces_, which can\nbe read in English, or Marquardt's _R\u00f6mische Staatsverwaltung_, vol.\ni., which can be studied either in German or French.[255] The very\ncity where first the new governor was to appear and the method of\nfulfilling his duties as the Judge of Assize were minutely laid down\nand duly followed a well-established routine. We find these things\nindicated in the case of Festus. He arrived at C\u00e6sarea. He waited\nthree days till his predecessor had left for Rome, and then he\nascended to Jerusalem to make the acquaintance of that very\ntroublesome and very influential city. Felix then returned to C\u00e6sarea\nafter ten days spent in gaining an intimate knowledge of the various\npoints of a city which often before had been the centre of rebellion,\nand where he might at any moment be called upon to act with sternness\nand decision. He at once heard St. Paul's cause as the Jews had\ndemanded, brought him a second time before Agrippa, and then in virtue\nof his appeal to C\u00e6sar despatched him to Rome in care of a centurion\nand a small band of soldiers, a large guard not being necessary, as\nthe prisoners were not ordinary criminals, but for the most part men\nof some position, Roman citizens, doubtless, who had, like the\nApostle, appealed unto the judgment of C\u00e6sar.[256] St. Paul embarked,\naccompanied by Luke and Aristarchus, as the ship, being an ordinary\ntrading vessel, contained not only prisoners, but also passengers as\nwell. We do not intend to enter upon the details of St. Paul's voyage,\nbecause that lies beyond our range, and also because it has been\nthoroughly done in the various _Lives_ of the Apostle, and above all\nin the exhaustive work of Mr. James Smith of Jordanhills. He has\ndevoted a volume to this one topic, has explored every source of\nknowledge, has entered into discussions touching the build and rigging\nof ancient ships and the direction of Mediterranean winds, has\nminutely investigated the scenery and history of such places as Malta\nwhere the Apostle was wrecked, and has illustrated the whole with\nbeautiful plates and carefully drawn maps. That work has gone through\nfour editions at least, and deserves a place in every man's library\nwho wishes to understand the life and labours of St. Paul or study the\nActs of the Apostles. We may, however, without trenching on Mr.\nSmith's field, indicate the outline of the route followed by the holy\ntravellers. They embarked at C\u00e6sarea under the care of a centurion of\nthe Augustan cohort, or regiment, as we should say, whose name was\nJulius.[257] They took their passage at first in a ship of\nAdramyttium, which was probably sailing from C\u00e6sarea to lie up for the\nwinter. Adramyttium was a seaport situated up in the north-west of\nAsia Minor near Troas, and the Sea of Marmora, or, to put it in modern\nlanguage, near Constantinople. The ship was, in fact, about to travel\nover exactly the same ground as St. Paul himself had traversed more\nthan two years before when he proceeded from Troas to Jerusalem.\nSurely, some one may say, this was not the direct route to Rome! But\nthen we must throw ourselves back into the circumstances of the\nperiod. There was then no regular transport service. People, even the\nmost exalted, had to avail themselves of whatever means of\ncommunication chance offered. Cicero, when chief governor of Asia,\nhad, as we have already noted, to travel part of the way from Rome in\nundecked vessels, while ten years later than St. Paul's voyage the\nEmperor Vespasian himself, the greatest potentate in the world, had\nno trireme or warship waiting upon him, but when he wished to proceed\nfrom Palestine to Rome at the time of the great siege of Jerusalem was\nobliged to take a passage in an ordinary merchant vessel or corn\nship.[258] It is no wonder, then, that the prisoners were put on board\na coasting vessel of Asia, the centurion knowing right well that in\nsailing along by the various ports which studded the shore of that\nprovince they would find some other vessel into which they could be\ntransferred. And this expectation was realised. The centurion and his\nprisoners sailed first of all to Sidon, where St. Paul found a\nChristian Church. This circumstance illustrates again the quiet and\nsteady growth of the gospel kingdom, and also gave Julius an\nopportunity of exhibiting his kindly feelings towards the Apostle by\npermitting him to go and visit the brethren. In fact, we would\nconclude from this circumstance that St. Paul had already begun to\nestablish an influence over the mind of Julius which must have\nculminated in his conversion. Here, at Sidon, he permits him to visit\nhis Christian friends; a short time after his regard for Paul leads\nhim to restrain his troops from executing the merciless purposes their\nRoman discipline had taught them and slaying all the prisoners lest\nthey should escape; and yet once again when the prisoners land on\nItalian soil and stand beside the charming scenery of the Bay of\nNaples he permits the Apostle to spend a week with the Christians of\nPuteoli. After this brief visit to the Sidonian Church, the vessel\nbearing the Apostle pursues its way by Cyprus to the port of Myra at\nthe south-western corner of Asia Minor, a neighbourhood which St.\nPaul knew right well and had often visited. It was there at Patara\nclose at hand that he had embarked on board the vessel which carried\nhim two years before to Palestine, and it was there too at Perga of\nPamphylia that he had first landed on the shores of the Asiatic\nprovince seeking to gather its teeming millions into the fold of Jesus\nChrist. Here at Myra the centurion realised his expectations, and\nfinding an Alexandrian transport sailing to Italy he put the prisoners\non board. From Myra they seem to have sailed at once, and from the day\nthey left it their misfortunes began. The wind was contrary, blowing\nfrom the west, and to make any way they had to sail to the island\nCnidus, which lay north-west of Myra. After a time, when the wind\nbecame favourable, they sailed south-west till they reached the island\nof Crete, which lay half-way between Greece and Asia Minor. They then\nproceeded along the southern coast of this island till they were\nstruck by a sudden wind coming from the north-east, which drove them\nfirst to the neighbouring island of Clauda, and then, after a\nfortnight's drifting through a tempestuous sea, hurled the ship upon\nthe shores of Malta. The wreck took place towards the close of October\nor early in November, and the whole party were obliged to remain in\nMalta till the spring season permitted the opening of navigation.\nDuring his stay in Malta St. Paul performed several miracles. With his\nintensely practical and helpful nature the Apostle flung himself into\nthe work of common life, as soon as the shipwrecked party had got safe\nto land. He always did so. He never despised, like some religious\nfanatics, the duties of this world. On board the ship he had been the\nmost useful adviser to the whole party. He had exhorted the captain of\nthe ship not to leave a good haven; he had stirred up the soldiers to\nprevent the sailors' escape; he had urged them all alike, crew and\npassengers and soldiers, to take food, foreseeing the terrible\nstruggle they would have to make when the ship broke up. He was the\nmost practical adviser his companions could possibly have had, and he\nwas their wisest and most religious adviser too. His words on board\nship teem with lessons for ourselves, as well as for his\nfellow-passengers. He trusted in God, and received special revelations\nfrom heaven, but he did not therefore neglect every necessary human\nprecaution. The will of God was revealed to him that he had been given\nall the souls that sailed with him, and the angel of God cheered and\ncomforted him in that storm-driven vessel in Adria, as often before\nwhen howling mobs thirsted like evening wolves for his blood. But the\nknowledge of God's purposes did not cause his exertions to relax. He\nknew that God's promises are conditional upon man's exertions, and\ntherefore he urged his companions to be fellow-workers with God in the\nmatter of their own salvation from impending death. And as it was on\nboard the ship, so was it on the shore. The rain was descending in\ntorrents, and the drenched passengers were shivering in the cold. St.\nPaul shows the example, so contagious in a crowd, of a man who had his\nwits about him, knew what to do, and would do it. He gathered\ntherefore a bundle of sticks, and helped to raise a larger fire in the\nhouse which had received him. A man is marvellously helpful among a\ncowering and panic-stricken crowd which has just escaped death who\nwill rouse them to some practical efforts for themselves, and will\nlead the way as the Apostle did on this occasion. And his action\nbrought its own reward. He had gained influence over the passengers,\nsoldiers, and crew by his practical helpfulness. He was now to gain\ninfluence over the barbarian islanders in exactly the same way. A\nviper issued from the fire and fastened on his hand. The natives\nexpected to see him fall down dead; but after looking awhile and\nperceiving no change, they concluded him to be a god who had come to\nvisit them. This report soon spread. The chief man therefore of the\nisland sought out St. Paul and entertained him. His father was sick of\ndysentery and the Apostle healed him, using prayer and the imposition\nof hands as the outward symbols and means of the cure, which spread\nhis fame still farther and led to other miraculous cures. Three months\nthus passed away. No distinct missionary work is indeed recorded by\nSt. Luke, but this is his usual custom in writing his narrative. He\nsupposes that Theophilus, his friend and correspondent, will\nunderstand that the Apostle ever kept the great end of his life in\nview, never omitting to teach Christ and Him crucified to the\nperishing multitudes where his lot was cast. But St. Luke was not one\nof those who are always attempting to chronicle spiritual successes or\nto tabulate the number of souls led to Christ. He left that to another\nday and to a better and more infallible judge. In three months' time,\nwhen February's days grew longer and milder winds began to blow, the\nrescued travellers joined a corn ship of Alexandria which had wintered\nin the island, and all set forward towards Rome. They touched at\nSyracuse in Sicily, sailed thence to Rhegium, passing through the\nStraits of Messina, whence, a favourable south wind springing up, and\nthe vessel running before it at the rate of seven knots an hour, the\nusual speed for ancient vessels under such circumstances, they arrived\nat Puteoli, one hundred and eighty-two miles distant from Rhegium, in\nthe course of some thirty hours. At Puteoli the sea voyage ended. It\nmay at first seem strange to us with our modern notions that St. Paul\nwas allowed to tarry at Puteoli with the local Christian Church for\nseven days. But then we must remember that St. Paul and the centurion\ndid not live in the days of telegraphs and railway trains. There was\ndoubtless a guard-room, barrack or prison in which the prisoners could\nbe accommodated. The centurion and guard were weary after a long and\ndangerous journey, and they would be glad of a brief period of repose\nbefore they set out again towards the capital. This hypothesis alone\nwould be quite sufficient to account for the indulgence granted to St.\nPaul, even supposing that his Christian teaching had made no\nimpression on the centurion. The Church existing then at Puteoli is\nanother instance of that quiet diffusion of the gospel which was going\non all over the world without any noise or boasting. We have\nfrequently called attention to this, as at Tyre, Ptolemais, Sidon, and\nhere again we find a little company of saintly men and women gathered\nout of the world and living the ideal life of purity and faith beside\nthe waters of the Bay of Naples. And yet it is quite natural that we\nshould find them at Puteoli, because it was one of the great ports\nwhich received the corn ships of Alexandria and the merchantmen of\nC\u00e6sarea and Antioch into her harbour, and in these ships many a\nChristian came bringing the seed of eternal life which he diligently\nsowed as he travelled along the journey of life. In fact, seeing that\nthe Church of Rome had sprung up and flourished so abundantly, taking\nits origin not from any apostle's teaching, but simply from such\nsporadic effects, we cannot wonder that Puteoli, which lay right on\nthe road from the East to Rome, should also have gained a\nblessing.[259] A circumstance, however, has come to light within the\nlast thirty years which does surprise us concerning this same\nneighbourhood, showing how extensively the gospel had permeated and\nhoneycombed the country parts of Italy within the lifetime of the\nfirst apostles and disciples of Jesus Christ. Puteoli was a trading\ntown, and Jews congregated in such places, and trade lends an element\nof seriousness to life which prepares a ground fitted for the good\nseed of the kingdom. But pleasure pure and unmitigated and a life\ndevoted to its pursuit does not prepare such a soil. Puteoli was a\ntrading city, but Pompeii was a pleasure-loving city thinking of\nnothing else, and where sin and iniquity consequently abounded. Yet\nChristianity had made its way into Pompeii in the lifetime of the\napostles. How then do we know this? This is one of the results of\nmodern arch\u00e6ological investigations and of epigraphical research, two\ngreat sources of new light upon early Christian history which have\nbeen only of late years duly appreciated. Pompeii, as every person of\nmoderate education knows, was totally overthrown by the first great\neruption of Mount Vesuvius in the year 79 A.D. It is a curious\ncircumstance that contemporaneous authors make but the very slightest\nand most dubious references to that destruction, though one would\nhave thought that the literature of the time would have rung with it;\nproving conclusively, if proof be needed, how little the argument from\nsilence is worth, when the great writers who tell minutely about the\nintrigues and vices of emperors and statesmen of Rome do not bestow a\nsingle chapter upon the catastrophe which overtook two whole cities of\nItaly.[260] These cities remained for seventeen hundred years\nconcealed from human sight or knowledge till revealed in the year 1755\nby excavations systematically pursued. All the inscriptions found\ntherein were undoubtedly and necessarily the work of persons who lived\nbefore A.D. 79 and then perished. Now at the time that Pompeii was\ndestroyed there was a municipal election going on, and there were\nfound on the walls numerous inscriptions formed with charcoal which\nwere the substitutes then used for the literature and placards with\nwhich every election decorates our walls. Among these inscriptions of\nmere passing and transitory interest, there was one found which\nillustrates the point at which we have been labouring, for there, amid\nthe election notices of 79 A.D., there appeared scribbled by some idle\nhand the brief words, \"Igni gaude, Christiane\" (\"O Christian, rejoice\nin the fire\"), proving clearly that Christians existed in Pompeii at\nthat time, that they were known as Christians and not under any other\nappellation, that persecution and death had reached them, and that\nthey possessed and displayed the same undaunted spirit as their great\nleader and teacher St. Paul, being enabled like him to rejoice even\namid the sevenfold-heated fires, and in view of the resurrection life\nto lift the victorious p\u00e6an, \"Thanks be to God, which giveth us the\nvictory through our Lord Jesus Christ.\"[261]\n\n  [255] The governors brought with them regular bodies of assessors,\n  who assisted them like a privy council. There is a reference to\n  this council in Acts xxv. 12 and xxvi. 30. These councils served\n  as training schools in law and statesmanship for the young Roman\n  nobility. See Marquardt, _l.c._, p. 391.\n\n  [256] Roman citizens had the right of appeal no matter where they\n  were born or of what race they came or how humble their lot in\n  life. Mere provincials devoid of citizenship, no matter how\n  distinguished their position, had not that right.\n\n  [257] Julius is one of those unknown characters of Scripture about\n  whom we would desire more information. He is described as a\n  centurion of the Augustan band, which was the imperial guard, and\n  was always stationed at Rome. Julius may possibly have been an\n  officer of this guard sent out with Festus and now returning back\n  to his duties.\n\n  [258] See Josephus, _Wars_, VII. ii. 1. It was exactly the same\n  with Titus, Vespasian's son, after the war ended. He travelled\n  from Alexandria to Italy in a trading vessel. Suet., _Tit._, c. 5.\n\n  [259] The accuracy of the Acts in representing Puteoli as the seat\n  of an early church has been amply illustrated by modern\n  investigations. Judaism was flourishing there from the earliest\n  times. In the year 4 B.C. a colony of wealthy Jews was established\n  at Puteoli (Josephus, _Wars_, II. vii. 1). An inscription has been\n  found there commemorating a Jewish merchant of Ascalon named Herod\n  (Sch\u00fcrer's _J\u00fcdisch. Volk._, I. 234).\n\n  [260] This point is elaborated by Mr. Cazenove in an article on\n  the Theban Legion contained in the _Dictionary of Christian\n  Biography_, iii. 642.\n\n  [261] This interesting inscription will be found in Mommsen,\n  _Corpus of Latin Inscriptions_, vol. iv., No. 679. I described it\n  in the _Contemporary Review_ for January 1881, p. 97, in an\n  article on Latin Christian Inscriptions. This inscription fully\n  bears out Lord Lytton in the picture he gives of the introduction\n  of Christianity into the neighbourhood of Vesuvius and Naples in\n  his _Last Days of Pompeii_.\n\nAfter the week's rest at Puteoli the centurion marched towards Rome.\nThe Roman congregation had received notice of St. Paul's arrival by\nthis time, and so the brethren despatched a deputation to meet an\napostle with whom they were already well acquainted through the\nepistle he had sent them, as well as through the reports of various\nprivate Christians like Ph\u0153be, the deaconness of Cenchre\u00e6.[262] Two\ndeputations from the Roman Church met him, one at Appii Forum, about\nthirty miles, another at the Three Taverns, about twenty miles, from\nthe city. How wonderfully the heart of the Apostle must have been\ncheered by these kindly Christian attentions! We have before noticed\nin the cases of his Athenian sojourn and elsewhere how keenly alive he\nwas to the offices of Christian friendship, how cheered and\nstrengthened he was by Christian companionship. It was now the same\nonce again as it was then. Support and sympathy were now more needed\nthan ever before, for St. Paul was going up to Rome not knowing what\nshould happen to him there or what should be his sentence at the hands\nof that emperor whose cruel character was now famous. And as it was\nat Athens and at Corinth and elsewhere, so was it here on the Appian\nWay and amid the depressing surroundings and unhealthy atmosphere of\nthose Pomptine Marshes through which he was passing; \"when Paul saw\nthe brethren, he thanked God, and took courage.\" And now the whole\ncompany of primitive Christians proceeded together to Rome, allowed\ndoubtless by the courtesy and thoughtfulness of Julius ample\nopportunities of private conversation. Having arrived at the imperial\ncity, the centurion hastened to present himself and his charge to the\ncaptain of the pr\u00e6torian guard, whose duty it was to receive prisoners\nconsigned to the judgment of the Emperor. Upon the favourable report\nof Julius, St. Paul was not detained in custody, but suffered to dwell\nin his own hired lodgings, where he established a mission station\nwhence he laboured most effectively both amongst Jews and Gentiles\nduring two whole years. St. Paul began his work at Rome exactly as he\ndid everywhere else. He called together the chief of the Jews, and\nthrough them strove to gain a lodgment in the synagogue. He began work\nat once. After three days, as soon as he had recovered from the\nfatigue of the rapid march along the Appian Way, he sent for the\nchiefs of the Roman Synagogues which were very numerous.[263] How, it\nmay be thought, could an unknown Jew entering Rome venture to summon\nthe heads of the Jewish community, many of them men of wealth and\nposition? But, then, we must remember that St. Paul was no ordinary\nJew from the point of view taken by Roman society. He had arrived in\nRome a state prisoner, and he was a Roman citizen of Jewish birth, and\nthis at once gave him position entitling him to a certain amount of\nconsideration. St. Paul told his story to these chief men of the Jews,\nthe local Sanhedrin perhaps, recounted the bad treatment he had\nreceived at the hands of the Jews of Jerusalem, and indicated the\ncharacter of his teaching which he wished to expound to them. \"For\nthis cause therefore did I entreat you to see and speak with me: for\nbecause of the hope of Israel I am bound with this chain,\" emphasizing\nthe Hope of Israel, or their Messianic expectation, as the cause of\nhis imprisonment, exactly as he had done some months before when\npleading before King Agrippa (ch. xxvi. 6, 7, 22, 23). Having thus\nbriefly indicated his desires, the Jewish council intimated that no\ncommunication had been made to them from Jerusalem about St. Paul. It\nmay have been that his lengthened imprisonment at C\u00e6sarea had caused\nthe Sanhedrin to relax their vigilance, though we see that their\nhostility still continued as bitter as ever when Festus arrived in\nJerusalem and afterwards led to St. Paul's appeal; or perhaps they had\nnot had time to forward a communication from the Jerusalem Sanhedrin\nto the Jewish authorities at Rome; or perhaps, which is the most\nlikely of all, they thought it useless to prosecute their suit before\nNero, who would scoff at the real charges which dealt merely with\nquestions of Jewish customs, and which imperial lawyers therefore\nwould regard as utterly unworthy the imprisonment or death of a Roman\ncitizen. At any rate the Jewish council gave him a hearing, when St.\nPaul followed exactly the same lines as in the synagogue at Antioch of\nPisidia and in his speech before Agrippa. He pointed out the gradual\ndevelopment of God's purposes in the law and the prophets, showing how\nthey had been all fulfilled in Jesus Christ. It was with the Jews at\nRome as with the Jews elsewhere. Some believed and some believed not\nas Paul preached unto them. The meeting was much more one for\ndiscussion than for addresses. From morning till evening the\ndisputation continued, till at last the Apostle dismissed them with\nthe stern words of the Prophet Isaiah, taken from the sixth chapter of\nhis prophecy, where he depicts the hopeless state of those who\nobstinately close their ears to the voice of conviction. But the Jews\nof Rome do not seem to have been like those of Thessalonica, Ephesus,\nCorinth, and Jerusalem in one respect. They did not actively oppose\nSt. Paul or attempt to silence him by violent means, for the last\nglimpse we get of the Apostle in St. Luke's narrative is this: \"He\nabode two whole years in his own hired dwelling, and received all that\nwent in unto him, preaching the kingdom of God, and teaching the\nthings concerning the Lord Jesus Christ with all boldness, none\nforbidding him.\"[264]\n\n  [262] Romans xvi. is a sufficient witness of the intimate\n  knowledge of the Roman Church and its membership possessed by St.\n  Paul. We may be sure that many mentioned in that catalogue written\n  three or four years before found a place in the two deputations\n  who went to meet St. Paul.\n\n  [263] See for proof of this Harnack's article in the _Princeton\n  Review_, quoted above.\n\n  [264] The various biographies of the Apostle, and specially that\n  of Conybeare & Howson, follow the Apostle's history in great\n  detail during these two years; but the story of that period more\n  properly falls under the consideration of the writers upon the\n  Epistles of the Captivity than of one dealing with the Acts of the\n  Apostles. If I were to discuss St. Paul's life at Rome I should\n  have simply to borrow all my details from these Epistles. The\n  abruptness of St. Luke's termination of his narrative is very\n  noteworthy, and the best proof of the early date of the Acts. I do\n  not think I need add anything to Dr. Salmon's argument on this\n  point contained in the following words, which I take from chap.\n  xviii. of his _Introduction_: \"To my mind the simplest explanation\n  why St. Luke has told us no more is, that he knew no more; and\n  that he knew no more, because at the time nothing more had\n  happened--in other words, that the book of the Acts was written a\n  little more than two years after Paul's arrival in Rome.\"\n\n\n\n\nINDEX.\n\n\n  Abbott, Dr., _Biblical Essays_, 12, 43.\n\n  Abgar, King, 53.\n\n  Achaia, Province of, 326.\n\n  Achilles Tatius, 367.\n\n  Acoimet\u00e6, or Watching Monks, 176.\n\n  _Acta Sanctorum_, 56, 141, 200, 213, 247.\n\n  \u00c6neas, 97.\n\n  Agabus, the prophet, 162, 426, 434.\n\n  Agape, 399, 400.\n\n  Agrippa II., 432, 448.\n\n  Alabarch, 81, 153.\n\n  Alexander, the Coppersmith, 378.\n\n  Amen, Eucharistic, 396.\n\n  Ammianus Marcellinus, 152.\n\n  Ananias, of Damascus, 53, 54, 55, 57, 58, 59, 68.\n\n  Ananias, the high priest, 431, 440-443.\n\n  Ancyra, 339, 367.\n\n  Annas, 30.\n\n  Antinomianism, 62.\n\n  Antioch, (Syrian) church of, 146, 154.\n\n  ---- city of, 150-13.\n\n  ---- synagogue of, 155.\n\n  ---- people of, and nicknames, 159.\n\n  ---- of Pisidia, 198.\n\n  Apollos, 341-43, 347.\n\n  Apostle, meaning of, 83, 84, 193.\n\n  Apostolic Constitt., 344.\n\n  Aquila and Priscilla, 322, 323, 332, 333, 337, 341, 347.\n\n  Aquileia, church of, 247.\n\n  Aratus, 11, 315.\n\n  Areopagus, court of, 309-17.\n\n  Aretas, 30, 81.\n\n  Aristides, 35, 214, 318-20.\n\n  Artemas, bishop of Lystra, 213.\n\n  Artemis (see Diana), 360, 362, 376.\n\n  Artemisius, month of, 362.\n\n  Asiarchs, 375-78.\n\n  Assize Courts, 382.\n\n  Athanasius, St., 301.\n\n  Athenagoras, _Apol._, 282.\n\n  ---- church of, 321.\n\n  Athens, topography of, 312.\n\n  Attalia, 201, 276.\n\n  Augustine, St., _Confessions_ of, 29, 286.\n\n  ---- _Epp._, 398, 401.\n\n  Aurelius, Victor, 163.\n\n\n  Baptismal formula, 345.\n\n  Barclay, Robert, 122.\n\n  Barnabas, St., 7, 8, 81, 155, 258.\n\n  Baronius, _Annals_ of, 259.\n\n  Bartolocci, _Bibl. Rabbin._, 13.\n\n  Basnage, _History of the Jews_, 13, 19.\n\n  Baur, 1.\n\n  Bayet, _De Titulis Attic\u00e6 Christ._, 308, 321.\n\n  Bent, J. T., 374.\n\n  Bernard, St., _Life of St. Malachy_, 417.\n\n  Bernice, 432, 448.\n\n  Ber\u0153a, 296, 302.\n\n  Bingham's _Antiqq._, 176, 396.\n\n  Bishops, origin of, 416-18.\n\n  Blomfield, Bishop, 229.\n\n  Boeckh, _Gr. Ins., Corp._ 205, 278, 300, 363, 366.\n\n  Butler, Bishop, _Analogy_ of, 133, 413.\n\n  Butler's _Coptic Churches_, 256.\n\n  Buxtorf's _Lexicon_, 16.\n\n\n  C\u00e6sar, Augustus, 273.\n\n  ---- Claudius, 323.\n\n  ---- Julius, 31.\n\n  ---- Tiberius, 36, 166, 185.\n\n  C\u00e6sarea-on-the-Sea, 101, 147.\n\n  Caiaphas, 30.\n\n  Caligula, 82, 94, 166, 167.\n\n  Calvin's _Commentary N.T._, 128, 383.\n\n  Capes, W. W., _The Early Empire_, 109.\n\n  Cave's _Lives of the Apostles_, 256, 259, 263.\n\n  Celebrations, evening, 398-401.\n\n  Celtic language, 264.\n\n  Cenchre\u00e6, 332.\n\n  Cesnola, General, 205.\n\n  Charlemagne, 11.\n\n  Chosroes, King, 159.\n\n  Christian Library, 394.\n\n  Christian, title of, 159-62, 211.\n\n  Chrysostom, Dion, 276, 377.\n\n  Chrysostom, St., 46, 84, 251, 352.\n\n  ---- _Homilies_, 55.\n\n  Cicero, 275, 304, 327.\n\n  Circumcision, controversy about, 222, 228.\n\n  Cistercians, 227.\n\n  Cleanthes, 315.\n\n  Clement of Alexandria, _P\u00e6dagogue_, 180.\n\n  ---- _Stromata_, 356, 446.\n\n  Clement, _Recognitions_ of, 259, 344.\n\n  ---- _Homilies_, 344.\n\n  Clermont Ganneau, 428.\n\n  Communion Office, rubrics of, 335, 336.\n\n  ---- evening, 398-401.\n\n  \"Communicatio Idiomatum,\" 419.\n\n  Constantine, Emperor, 238, 273.\n\n  _Contemporary Review_, 468.\n\n  Conybeare and Howson, _St. Paul_, 46, 57.\n\n  Corinth, First Epistle to, date of, 359, 387.\n\n  Cornelius \u00e0 Lapide, 46.\n\n  Cornelius, the Centurion, chaps. v., vi.\n\n  ---- baptism of, 140.\n\n  Council of Jerusalem, chap. x.\n\n  Councils, histories of, 219.\n\n  Cramer's _Catena_, 46.\n\n  Crispus, 325, 326.\n\n  Cudworth's _Intellect. Syst._, 315.\n\n  Cyprus, gospel in, 196, 201-206, 258.\n\n  Cyril of Jerusalem, 396.\n\n\n  Damascus, 30, 36.\n\n  Daphne, 157, 158.\n\n  De Broglie, _L'\u00c9glise et l'Empire_, 273.\n\n  Demetrius, 350, 369, 372-75.\n\n  Derbe, 200, 216, 260.\n\n  Derenbourg and Saglio, _Dict. des Antiqq._, 361.\n\n  Diana (see Artemis), 331, 360.\n\n  Didache, 34, 345.\n\n  Dion Cassius, 163, 204.\n\n  Dion Chrysostom, 276, 377.\n\n  Dionysius, Areop., 317, 318, 320.\n\n  Discipline, 107.\n\n  Dods, Dr. M., _Introd. N.T._, 360.\n\n  D\u00f6llinger, Dr., 145.\n\n  Dorcas, 97.\n\n  Drusilla, 431, 447.\n\n  Duhr's _Journeys of Hadrian_, 306.\n\n  Duumviri, 275.\n\n\n  Ebionites, 6.\n\n  Eckhel, _on Coins_, 163.\n\n  Edersheim, Dr., 14.\n\n  Egnatian Road, 271.\n\n  Elymas, 203.\n\n  Ember seasons, 194.\n\n  Enthusiasm, power of, 269.\n\n  Epaphras, 350.\n\n  Ephesian letters, 355.\n\n  Ephesus, council of, 258.\n\n  Epimenides, 11.\n\n  Epiphanes, Antiochus, 6.\n\n  Epiphanius, in _Corpus H\u00e6reseolog._, 6.\n\n  Ethnarch, 153.\n\n  Eucharist, celebration of, 393-401.\n\n  Eusebius, _H. E._, 171, 181, 199, 241, 320.\n\n  Eutychus, 403.\n\n  _Expositor_, viii.\n\n\n  Fabricius, _Biblioth. Gr\u00e6c._, 315, 367.\n\n  Farrar's _St. Paul_, 15, 16, 19, 20, 50, 51, 152.\n\n  Fay\u00fbm MSS., 356.\n\n  Fechin, St., 89, 278.\n\n  Felix, 430-432.\n\n  Fell, Bishop, on Cyprian, 401.\n\n  Ferrar, Nicholas, 176.\n\n  Festus, 448.\n\n  Findlay, _Epp. of St. Paul_, 60, 295.\n\n  ---- on Galatians, 234.\n\n  Fitz Ralph, Archbishop of Armagh, 227.\n\n  Fleury's _Eccles. Hist._, 246.\n\n  Forms, use of, 121.\n\n  Fox, George, 122.\n\n  Francis de Sales, St., 279.\n\n  Friends, Society of, 122, 142.\n\n\n  Gaius, 326.\n\n  Galerius, Emperor, 273.\n\n  Gallio, 327-29.\n\n  Gamaliel, 13, 14, 15.\n\n  Geikie, _Holy Land_, 38, 101, 119.\n\n  German criticism, 386.\n\n  Gibbon, _Decline and Fall_, 150, 158, 273.\n\n  Gischala, 4, 6.\n\n  Gnosticism, 420.\n\n  Godefroy's _Comment. on Theodos. Code_, 273.\n\n  Gospel, slow progress of, 269.\n\n  Goulburn's _Personal Religion_, 121.\n\n  Guhl's _Ephesiaca_, 356, 362, 367.\n\n  Guyon, Madame, 446.\n\n\n  Habakkuk, 20.\n\n  Hadrian, Emperor, 306.\n\n  Harris, Rendal, on Aristides, 321.\n\n  Hatch, Dr., on Episcopacy, 416.\n\n  Hefele's _Councils_, 379.\n\n  Hegesippus, 241.\n\n  Helena, Queen, 186.\n\n  Heliogabalus, 36.\n\n  Hemerobaptists, 344.\n\n  Hermas, 434.\n\n  Herod the Great, 102, 151, 166.\n\n  ---- Antipas, 30, 166.\n\n  ---- Agrippa, 95, 164, 168, 183-187.\n\n  Heuzey, Leon, _Mission Arch\u00e9ol._, 274, 281.\n\n  Hilary, 84.\n\n  Hiram of Tyre, 183.\n\n  Hogarth, D. G., 261.\n\n  Holy Ghost and Ordination, 414.\n\n  Hooker, _Eccles. Pol._, 29, 74, 238, 396, 419.\n\n  Horace's _Satires_, 276.\n\n  Hours, canonical, 122.\n\n  Hyp\u00e6pa, 198.\n\n  Hyrcanus, 31.\n\n\n  Iconium, 199, 260.\n\n  Imposition of hands, 414.\n\n  Incarnation, delay of, 99.\n\n  Inscriptions on Temple wall, 428.\n\n  Iren\u00e6us, 416-418.\n\n  Irenarch, 216.\n\n  Irish Academy, Royal, 89.\n\n  Island monasteries, 89.\n\n  Italian band, 103.\n\n\n  Jailor, Phillippian, 286-90.\n\n  James, apostle and martyr, 168-74.\n\n  James, Bishop of Jerusalem, 241, 426, 427.\n\n  Jebb, Bishop, 99.\n\n  Jerome, St., 84, 141, 251.\n\n  ---- _Cat. of Illust. Writers_, 4, 6.\n\n  Jews, hostility of, to early Church, 212.\n\n  ---- at Athens, 308.\n\n  ---- at Ephesus, 427.\n\n  Johannes Scotus, 318.\n\n  John's Eve, St., 335.\n\n  John Baptist, disciples of, 342-44.\n\n  Jonah, 119.\n\n  Jonathan, 30.\n\n  Joppa, 118.\n\n  Josephus, _Antiqq._, 11, 31, 32, 33.\n\n  _Journal of Hellenic Studies_, 261, 265, 364, 372, 374,\n      53, 95, 102, 185, 428.\n\n  ---- _Wars_, 95, 102, 428.\n\n  Joyce's _Acts of the Church_, 237.\n\n  ---- _Irish Names_, 88.\n\n  Judas, 56.\n\n  Julius, the centurion 460.\n\n  Justin Martyr, _Apologies_, 27, 267, 282, 395, 396.\n\n  Justus, 325.\n\n  Juvenal's _Satires_, 152.\n\n\n  Keble, John, 70.\n\n  King, Rev. Robert, _The Ruling Elder_, 417.\n\n  Kitto's _Bib. Encycl._, 16.\n\n  Knox, Alexander, 100.\n\n  K\u00fchn's _Journal Comp. Philol._, 265.\n\n\n  Lacroix, _Manners of Middle Ages_, 16.\n\n  Laymen in synods, 236.\n\n  Le Bas and Waddington, _Voy. Arch\u00e9ol._, 216.\n\n  Legions in Palestine, 103.\n\n  Lewin, _Fasti_, 31, 60, 163, 167, 360.\n\n  ---- _St. Paul_, 31, 32, 39, 45, 80, 102, 119, 186, 198.\n\n  Libanius, 151, 152.\n\n  Liddon's, _Bampt. Lect._, 420.\n\n  Lightfoot, Bishop, on the Essenes, 344.\n\n  ---- _Colossians_, 252, 350.\n\n  ---- _Essays_, 96, 300.\n\n  ---- _Galatians_, 19, 20, 50, 79, 84, 247, 251, 264, 266.\n\n  ---- _Ignatius_, 363, 378, 427.\n\n  ---- _Philippians_, 173, 291-93, 417.\n\n  Lightfoot, Dr. J., _Hor. Heb._, 32, 57, 441.\n\n  Lipsius, R. A., 5.\n\n  ---- _Apoc. Acts_, 53.\n\n  Lord's Day, observance of, 393-397.\n\n  Lucian's _Philopatris._, 312.\n\n  Luke, St., at Philippi, 391.\n\n  Lycaonia, language of, 212, 265.\n\n  Lydia, 278.\n\n  Lysias, Claudius, 429.\n\n  Lystra, 200, 212-17, 260.\n\n  Lyttelton, Lord, on _Conver. St. Paul_, 40.\n\n  Lytton, Lord, _Last Days of Pompeii_.\n\n\n  _Macmillan's Mag._, 377.\n\n  Magic at Ephesus, 352.\n\n  Malalas, John, 157.\n\n  Malta, 462.\n\n  Mandeans, 344.\n\n  Mansi's _Councils_, 220, 259, 379.\n\n  Maps, use of, 100.\n\n  Marcellinus, Pope, 144.\n\n  Mark, St., 252-54, 256.\n\n  Marquardt, 104, 458.\n\n  Marseilles, 374, 390.\n\n  Mason's _Diocletian Persecution_, 367.\n\n  Massutius, _Vita S. Pauli_, 11, 55, 60.\n\n  Melville, Henry, _Voices of the Year_, 114.\n\n  Menander, 11.\n\n  Mendicant orders, 227.\n\n  Meyer's Theory of Baptism, 342.\n\n  Miletus, 405.\n\n  Milligan, Dr., on _Resurrection_, 134.\n\n  Misopogon, 159.\n\n  Mithras, 35.\n\n  Mnason, 426.\n\n  Molinos, 446.\n\n  Mommsen's _Provinces_, 96, 103, 150, 378.\n\n  ---- _Corp. Ins. Lat._, 281, 468.\n\n  ---- in _Ephem. Epig._, 140.\n\n  Monasticism, Celtic, 88.\n\n  Morinus, _Exerc. Bibl._, 13.\n\n  M\u00fcller's _Antiqq. of Antioch._, 150.\n\n  _Museum Evang. Sch. of Smyrna_, 264.\n\n\n  Nazarite vow, 333, 436.\n\n  Neapolis, 272.\n\n  Nelson's _Fasts and Festivals_, 256.\n\n  Neocoros, 379, 380.\n\n  Nero, Emperor, 433, 470.\n\n  Nestorianism, 258.\n\n\n  \u0152cumenius, 84.\n\n  Oehler, 6.\n\n  Ordination and imposition of hands, 194, 414.\n\n  Ornaments rubric, 239.\n\n  Orontes, 151, 196.\n\n\n  Paley's _Hor\u00e6 Paulin\u00e6_, 291, 360.\n\n  Pang\u00e6us, Mount, 276.\n\n  Papal Infallibility, 230.\n\n  ---- Supremacy, rise of, 144.\n\n  Paphos, 197, 201.\n\n  Paul, St., in Antioch (Pisidian), 206-10.\n\n  ---- in Antioch (Syrian), 157.\n\n  ---- in Arabia, 77-91.\n\n  ---- in Athens, 305-21.\n\n  ---- baptism of, 72-77.\n\n  ---- birthplace of, 4.\n\n  ---- at C\u00e6sarea, chap. xvii.\n\n  ---- and Church organisation, 216.\n\n  ---- and circumcision, 225-28, 392, 435.\n\n  ---- conversion of, chap. ii.\n\n  ---- at Corinth, chap. xiii.\n\n  ---- dispute at Antioch, 247.\n\n  ---- at Ephesus, chaps. xiv., xv.\n\n  ---- exegesis of, 18, 19, 207.\n\n  ---- family of, 7.\n\n  ---- in Galatia, 263.\n\n  ---- language of, 9.\n\n  ---- in Macedonia, chap. xii.\n\n  ---- at Malta, chap. xviii.\n\n  ---- martyrdom of, 246.\n\n  ---- at Miletus, 405-21.\n\n  ---- on ordination, 414, 415.\n\n  ---- ordination of, chap. ix.\n\n  ---- at Patara, 424.\n\n  ---- portrait of, 51.\n\n  ---- at Puteoli, 465.\n\n  ---- quarrel with Barnabas, 248-251.\n\n  ---- and Roman. See, 246.\n\n  ---- and Sanhedrin, 23, 429, 442.\n\n  ---- second tour of, chap. xi.\n\n  ---- at Sidon, 461.\n\n  ---- speech at Apostolic Council, 241.\n\n  ---- thorn in flesh, 49, 296.\n\n  ---- trade of, 10, 348.\n\n  ---- at Troas, 268, 392-406.\n\n  ---- at Tyre, 425.\n\n  ---- voyage to Rome, chap. xviii.\n\n  Paulinus of Nola, St., 369.\n\n  Pausanius, _Descr. of Greece_, 305, 308, 312, 363, 365.\n\n  Perga, 197, 201, 364.\n\n  Persecution, religious, 192.\n\n  Peter, St., on baptism, 140.\n\n  ---- on the resurrection, 133.\n\n  ---- sermon at C\u00e6sarea, 131-41.\n\n  ---- vision at Joppa, chap. vi.\n\n  ---- in prison, 174-82.\n\n  Petrie's _Tara_, 37.\n\n  Petronius, 95.\n\n  Pfitzner, 104.\n\n  Phalerum, 303.\n\n  Pharisees, 33.\n\n  Philemon and Baucis, story of, 213.\n\n  Philip, St., evangelist, 143, 426.\n\n  Philippi, gospel at, 273-89.\n\n  Philo, 14, 19, 23, 96, 307.\n\n  Philostratus, _Life of Apollonius_, 312.\n\n  Ph\u0153be, 332.\n\n  Photius, 263.\n\n  Pliny, _Epistles of_, 28, 35, 266, 383.\n\n  ---- _Nat. Hist._, 199.\n\n  Police, Roman, 216.\n\n  Politarchs, 300.\n\n  Polycarp, 367, 446.\n\n  Pompeii, 466.\n\n  Pontius Pilate, 30.\n\n  Pork, use of, 128.\n\n  Porter's _Damascus_, 38, 53.\n\n  Postal service under the Romans, 272.\n\n  Prayer, 66.\n\n  Preaching, decline of, 409.\n\n  Prion, Mount, 263.\n\n  Procter on _B. C. P._, 336.\n\n  Prophets, 434.\n\n  Prosbol, 16.\n\n  Proselytes, 110, 210.\n\n  Provinces, Roman, division of, 203-206.\n\n  Ptolemais, 96, 425.\n\n  Puteoli, 465.\n\n\n  Quadratus, 318.\n\n  Quaresmius, _Eluc. Ter. Sanct._, 57.\n\n  Quietism, 446.\n\n\n  Radzivilus, _Peregrinatio_, 57.\n\n  Ramsay, Prof., _Hist. Geog._, 100, 198, 200, 213, 260,\n        261, 363, 364.\n\n  ---- on Artemis worship, 374.\n\n  R\u00e9nan, 215, 369.\n\n  Renaudot, 256.\n\n  Resurrection, evidence of, 133.\n\n  _Revue Arch\u00e9ol._, 198, 361, 364, 374.\n\n  Roads, ancient, 37, 260, 271.\n\n  Robbers and the Apostles, 199.\n\n  Ruinart's _Acta Sincera_, 267.\n\n\n  Sabbath, 16, 397.\n\n  Sabians, 344.\n\n  Sadducees, 33.\n\n  Sadler _on the Acts_, 289.\n\n  Saint, meaning of, 60, 62, 63, 64.\n\n  Salamis, 197.\n\n  Salmon, Dr., _Introduction to N. T._, vi. 1, 413.\n\n  ---- on Clementine literature, 259.\n\n  Sceva's sons, 355.\n\n  Schaff's _Encyclop._, 13, 110, 247.\n\n  Sch\u0153ttgen's _Hor. Hebr._, 9.\n\n  Sch\u00fcrer, 25, 431.\n\n  Seleucia, 157, 196.\n\n  Senior, title of, 417.\n\n  Serarius, _De Rabbinis_, 13.\n\n  Sergius Paulus, 201-206.\n\n  Shrine-makers, Ephesian, 369.\n\n  Sidon, church at, 461.\n\n  Silas, 257, 325.\n\n  Silence, argument from, 342, 361, 393.\n\n  Simon the Tanner, 119.\n\n  Singon Street, 157.\n\n  Sinuessa, Council of, 144.\n\n  Skelligs, 88.\n\n  Slavery, 314.\n\n  Smith, Mr. James, of Jordanhills, on _Voyage of St. Paul_, 459.\n\n  Smith, _Dict. Christ. Biog._, 6, 14, 259, 273, 344, 353, 367, 434.\n\n  ---- _Dict. Rom. Antiqq._, 104.\n\n  ---- _Dict. Christ. Antiqq._, 176.\n\n  ---- _Dict. of Class. Biog._, 213.\n\n  Sosipatros, 199.\n\n  Spon and Wheeler, 312.\n\n  Stanley, Dean, 57.\n\n  ---- _Hist. East. Ch._, 301.\n\n  Stephanas, 326.\n\n  Stephens' _St. Chrysost._, 352.\n\n  Sterrett's _Epig. Journ._, 200, 213.\n\n  Stokes, G. T., _Anglo-Norman Church_, 16, 227.\n\n  ---- _Celtic Church_, 37, 89.\n\n  Strabo, 199, 204.\n\n  Straight Street, 52.\n\n  Suetonius, 163, 273, 323, 327.\n\n  Survey of Palestine, _Memoirs_ of, 101.\n\n  Synagogue, 277.\n\n\n  Tacitus, _Annals_, 352, 363.\n\n  Talmud, 13, 16.\n\n  Tanning, 120.\n\n  Taylor, Jeremy, _Holy Living_, 29, 334.\n\n  ---- _Via Intellig._, 267.\n\n  Tertullian, _Apol._, 36.\n\n  ---- _De Corona_, 400.\n\n  ---- _De Fuga_, 445.\n\n  ---- _De Pudic._, 50.\n\n  ---- _on Prayer_, 122-24, 195.\n\n  Texier on Galatia, 266.\n\n  Thayer's edition of Grimm's _Lex. N. T._, 252.\n\n  Theodore of Mopsuestia, 84.\n\n  Theodoret, 84.\n\n  Theodosian Code, 370.\n\n  Theophilus, 30, 32.\n\n  Thessalonica, 294-300.\n\n  Timothy, 325, 347.\n\n  ---- and circumcision, 227.\n\n  ---- family of, 8, 9.\n\n  ---- martyrdom of, 263.\n\n  ---- ordination of, 261.\n\n  Tozer's _Highlands of Turkey_, 294, 300, 303.\n\n  Trajan, 28.\n\n  Trench, Archbishop, _on Words_, 159.\n\n  Tridentine Council, 238.\n\n  Tyrannus, 347.\n\n\n  Ussher's Works, 318, 362.\n\n\n  Valens, Emperor, 352.\n\n  Valesius, 439.\n\n  \"Vas Electionis,\" 64, 65.\n\n  Vatican Council, 238.\n\n  Vespasian, Emperor, 460.\n\n  Vibius Salutarius, Gaius, 370, 371.\n\n  Vincentian rule, 100.\n\n  Virgil, 70.\n\n  Vitellius, 30, 33.\n\n\n  Waldstein, C., 372.\n\n  Way, meaning of, 32, 33, 34, 347, 362, 423.\n\n  Wesley, Charles, 381.\n\n  ---- John, 394.\n\n  Whately, Archbishop, 73.\n\n  Wickliffe, 227.\n\n  Wieseler's _Die Christenverfolg. der C\u00e4saren_, 336.\n\n  Williams, Dr., 64.\n\n  Wood's _Ephesus_, 281, 362.\n\n\n  Xenoi Tekmoreioi, Societies of, 364.\n\n\n  Zeller, _On the Acts_, vi.\n\n\nTHE END.\n\n       *       *       *       *       *\n\nTranscriber'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\nMissing page numbers are page numbers that were not shown in the\noriginal text.\n\nPage 165: Footnote 93 \"... he jokingly said, 'It were better to be\nHerod's pigs ...'\" The transcriber has added the word \"It\".\n\nPage 378: Footnote anchor number 213 was missing and was supplied by\nthe transcriber. \"The Ephesian mob ...\".\n\nThe cover for the eBook version of this book was created by the\ntranscriber and is placed in the public domain.","title":"The Expositor's Bible: The Acts of the Apostles, Vol. 2","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":157337}