will soon carry me away, to participate with them in the joys of paradise." From this time the monks constantly attended him, persecuting him with their persuasions and arguments; but he confounded them all by his answers. In the midst of these distractions, he evidently sought to raise his soul continually to God. Sometimes he gave utterance to fervent prayer, or chanted portions of the Psalms. The constancy and devotion displayed in these the last hours of his life, touched the hearts of all his attendants; even the monks could not restrain their tears. In the evening, when they were about to conduct him to the place of punishment, two monks presented themselves to accompany him, and told him they were come to comfort him. "I have no need of you," he replied; "I have a more faithful comforter within me." One of them said, "But do you not wish that we should accompany you?"- "No," replied the martyr; "I have the company of angels, who are about my person, and who have promised that they will be with me to my latest breath." But the monks were not to be prevented from attending him: they walked on either side of him, and were witnesses of the constancy with which he went to martyrdom. His countenance was radiant with joy, and he gave striking proofs of the faith and hope which filled his heart. The streets through which he passed were crowded with people; and among them he perceived many persons of his acquaintance who had abjured the Protestant religion. He saluted them; and, seeing the tears flow from their eyes, he said "Weep not for me, weep for yourselves; I shall very soon be delivered from the sufferings of this world, but I leave you behind. Repent, and God will have mercy on you." He was led out of the town by the gate of Beauregarde. It was from this gate that he discovered the scaffold which was prepared for him. He had no sooner seen it than he exclaimed with holy transport, "Courage, courage! This is the place which I have so long desired, and for which God himself has prepared me. I see the heavens open to receive me, and angels prepare to bear me away." As he approached nearer he began to sing a psalm, but silence was imposed on him. Having reached the foot of the scaffold, he exclaimed, "Oh! how favourable is this ladder to me! It will serve me as a step to mount to heaven!" After this he knelt down, and continued a long time in prayer, making use of many parts of the fifty-first Psalm, which he pronounced aloud, and with much fervour. Having concluded his prayer, he mounted the ladder with firmness and composure. Seeing one of the monks ascending after him, he gently repulsed him, saying, “I have already said, and I tell you again, that I have no need of your assistance; I have received enough from my God to enable me to take the last step in my career." He would have addressed the people, but as soon as he opened his mouth a number of kettle-drums were struck, to prevent his voice being heard. Perceiving that it would be in vain to speak, he resigned himself into the hands of the executioner with the same firmness as he had evinced from the first. Soon the last act of the tragedy was finished, and the lifeless body was all that remained on earth of M. Fulcrand Rei. Even the darkened inhabitants of Beaucaire testified emotion at his death, and many exclaimed aloud that he had died a true martyr. "Ye who your Lord's commission bear His way of mercy to prepare,Angels He calls ye!-be your strife To lead on earth an angel's life. Think not of rest; though dreams be sweet, Start up and ply your heavenward feet. Is not God's oath upon your head Ne'er to shrink back on slothful bed? Till, when the shadows thickest fall, KEBLE. A. H. STRICTURES ON DR WARDLAW'S DEFENCE OF CONGREGATIONAL I NOW proceed to consider the views Presbyterians are of opinion that the meeting above mentioned affords (says Dr Wardlaw), that it was a tian community is divided,-Episco- "I avow it as my firm conviction palian, Presbyterian, or Congregational;-but that, with regard to the chief point, the point of doctrine, the determination ultimately adopted and communicated to the church at Antioch, and to the Gentile churches generally, rested, not on the authority of a church court, by what title soever designated, but on that of apostolical inspiration."-P. 262. Again, he says, "I avow it as my firm conviction, that it was a case of appeal to inspired authority, and that it was by such authority the decision was framed, and the decree issued."-P. 263. Such is the theory which Dr W. states, and by means of which he endeavours to show that Presbyterians can derive no support from the fifteenth chapter of the Acts, in favour of that form of church government which they have adopted. Let us examine how far his theory is in accordance with the facts recorded in the chapter. The narrative informs us, that certain men came down from Judea to Antioch, and taught the brethren the following doctrine, "Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved." It further informs us, that those who taught this doctrine met with decided opposition on the part of Paul and Barnabas: they "had no small dissension and disputation with them." In consequence of the controversy, the brethren at Antioch "determined that Paul and Barnabas, and certain other of them, should go up to Jerusalem unto the apostles and elders about this question.' reader will observe, that the appeal or reference was made to "the apostles and elders;" and the subject of the appeal was "this question," namely, whether it was necessary that men, in order to their being saved, should "be circumcised after the manner of Moses." No other question, except this, is mentioned in the narrative. This, and this alone, constituted the subject of the appeal. The was there, then, for making an appeal to an inspired authority at Jerusalem, when they had an authority of this kind already amongst them? Was not Paul as competent to decide the question, by virtue of his inspired authority, as any of the other apostles were? If inspired authority was to determine the question, this could be done as well by Paul at Antioch, as by the other apostles at Jerusalem. This objection to Dr Wardlaw's theory meets us at the very outset. 6 In order to obviate the force of this objection, Dr Wardlaw makes the following statements:-" "The manifest object of the appeal was to ascertain whether the dictates of inspiration in him (Paul) corresponded with the dictates of inspiration in the other apostles, which had been brought into question by the false pretensions of these unauthorised Judaizers."P. 269. "These men taught the brethren' that the apostles at Jerusalem preached a different doctrine from that which Paul was teaching in Antioch; and, consequently, that the church at Jerusalem held a different doctrine from that which they were receiving at Antioch. The men were vehement and pertinacious in their assertions. It may seem strange to us that Paul's divinely accredited inspiration, did not suffice, if not to silence them, at least to satisfy and secure against hesitancy and doubt the minds of the brethren. And yet there is little room for wonder. It was the accredited inspiration of the whole college of apostles, which, on the point in question, was by these men affirmed to be in opposition to the accredited inspiration of one; and that one not one of the original number. It became necessary, for the full satisfaction of the brethren's minds, and the establishment of their faith, that this question—a question of inspiration against inspiration, and miracle against miracle, should be promptly, authoritatively, finally settled. And it could be settled in no other way than by an appeal to the inspired apostles whether they taught the doctrine imputed to them, and to the elders, in their own behalf and in behalf of all the brethren, whether they held it. Where is the 'riddle?'—where the mystery here?" -P. 304, 305. In making these statements, my respected brother goes beyond the record, and draws largely upon his imagination. All that is affirmed in the record, concerning the teaching of the men that came down from Judea, is, that they taught the brethren,- -"Except ye be circumcised after the manner of Moses, ye cannot be saved." Dr Wardlaw gives us some additional information concerning their teaching, though he has not been pleased to inform us from what source his information is derived. He tells us, that these men taught the brethren, "that the apostles at Jerusalem preached a different doctrine from that which Paul was teaching in Antioch ;" and they taught further "that the church at Jerusalem held a different doctrine from that which they were receiving at Antioch." Not only (according to my friend) did they teach the brethren these things; but he adds, they were vehement and pertinacious in their assertions." He goes on to describe (still, however, drawing upon his imagination) the effect produced by their teaching. He says they produced "hesitancy and doubt" in the minds of the brethren concerning "Paul's divinely accredited inspiration." And he adds, "There is little room for wonder" that they did so. Now, I wish my readers to observe, 66 that all these things are mere supposition on the part of Dr Wardlaw. They are not stated in the sacred narrative. The object of his making these supposititious statements is sufficiently obvious. It is to show that the brethren at Antioch had not sufficient confidence in Paul's inspired authority as an apostle, so as to believe, on his affirmation, that they would be saved even though they should not be circumcised after the manner of Moses, and that there was, therefore, a necessity for appealing the case to the apostles at Jerusalem, that the point might be determined by their inspired authority. It is upon such slender grounds as these, grounds that are altogether supposititious-that Dr Wardlaw makes the affirmation; "the manifest object of the appeal was to ascertain whether the dictates of inspiration in Paul corresponded with the dictates of inspiration in the other apostles." So far from this being the manifest object of the appeal, it does not appear to have been the object of the appeal at all. What that object was, is stated with sufficient clearness in the first and second verses of the fifteenth chapter of the Acts; it was to obtain a deliverance from the apostles and elders on the question at issue between Paul and the judaizing teachers, namely, whether sinners could be saved without being circumcised after the manner of Moses. But my friend is desirous to have it believed, that the deliverance was given by inspiration; and, in order to remove an objection that presses upon this theory, it was necessary for him to assign a reason why the deliverance could not be given by the inspiration of Paul at Antioch, as well as by the inspiration of the other apostles at Jerusalem. Where and how does he find this reason? He finds it—not in the narrative-but by making the supposition, that the Judaizing teachers had succeeded in raising doubts in the minds of the brethren at Antioch, to the "free use of probabilities and concerning Paul's inspiration, so that suppositions." The following is the they would not believe the doctrine substance of the answer which he which he taught to be true, until the gives :-"I now further observe, point was first ascertained, whether what seems, after all, to constitute the dictates of inspiration in him cor- the true key to the whole case, that responded with the dictates of inspi- there were evidently, in the appeal, ration in the other apostles. I would two points to be ascertained-a point here remind Dr Wardlaw of the re- of doctrine, and a point of fact :-The mark which he makes, when finding point of doctrine, as before observed, fault with others, for doing the very was one of the very first magnitude, thing with which he himself is involving the freedom of the Gentiles chargeable in the present instance: from the yoke of the Mosaic law, and "If we are allowed (he says) the the justification of both Jews and free use of probabilities and supposi- Gentiles by faith, without deeds of tions for getting over difficulties, they the law;' the latter being the very can seldom be long in the way."- first principle of the gospel. The P. 292. I ask, did it not occur to point of fact was, whether those men my ingenious brother, when he was who had come down from Jerusapenning the statements on which I lem,' pretending that they had a comhave been making comments, that mission thence to teach the doctrine he was making "free use of proba- of the necessity of subjection to the bilities and suppositions" for getting law for justification, really had such a over "a difficulty." That he has commission. When this twofold obmade "free use of probabilities and ject of the message to Jerusalem is suppositions" in the passages re- kept in view, it throws a clear light ferred to, is certain: but, even with on the whole transaction, rendering such aid, he has not been able to get all easily consistent."-P. 302. over the difficulties connected with his theory. Another objection that may be urged against the theory which Dr Wardlaw endeavours to support, is, that if it was a case of appeal to inspired authority, why was the appeal made to the elders, as well as to the apostles? They were not inspired men; and yet they were called upon to give judgment in reference to the question that agitated the church at Antioch. If the object of the appeal had been to obtain a deliverance from inspired authority, the appeal would have been made to the apostles alone, as the elders could not, on such a supposition, have given any deliverance on the subject. This objection appears to be fatal to Dr Wardlaw's theory. In what way does my friend answer the objection? He answers it much in the same way that he answered the former one, namely, by having recourse 6 In the extract now given, it is affirmed that "there were evidently, in the appeal, two points to be ascertained-a point of doctrine, and a point of fact.” I ask, where is the evidence? It is not to be found in the record. The record mentions only one point, and that is the point of doctrine. This point is specially mentioned in the first verse of the chapter; and it is expressly stated in the second verse, that the appeal or reference was made to the apostles and elders "about this question." The point of doctrine is again stated in the fifth verse, and it is mentioned in the verse following, that "the apostles and elders came together for to consider of this matter." Not a single word is said about what Dr Wardlaw calls "the point of fact," and which, he says, is evidently in the appeal. We find no reference made to it in any of the speeches that were delivered on the occasion. The |