they had not attempted to bind them to the Mosaic law, they proceeded to declare the tenet which had been lately advanced, and their motives for opposing it. They soon found persons of the same legal spirit, who justified and repeated the obligation of the ceremonial law upon all who embraced the Gospel. Upon this, a particular day was named for the whole assembly to meet and discuss the question. In this convention there was the highest room to expect that the Spirit of God would influence their resolves, and guard them from giving their sanction to an error, and he did so; yet not by an audible voice or instantaneous impulse, but by presiding over their debates, and enabling them, in the conclusion, to collect and pronounce the true state of the question with infallible evidence and certainty. Here again it is plain that Peter little thought himself entitled to that supreme prerogative, as the immediate Vicar of Jesus Christ, which his pretended successors falsely ascribed to him; nor did his brethren remind him of the privilege, otherwise there could have been no debate, for his declaration would have been decisive; but, waiving the claim of authority, he argued the insignificance of the Jewish rites as to salvation, from the Lord's conduct towards Cornelius and his friends, by his ministry. These were the first Gentile converts, and in this instance, he said, the Lord had fully declared his mind, making no difference between Jew and Gentile, purifying their hearts by faith in his blood, and imparting to them those substantial blessings, of which the ceremonial law exhibited no more than the shadow; and which, in comparison of the liberty of the Gospel, he termed an unnecessary yoke, too heavy to be borne. The assembly then kept silence, while Paul and Barnabas related more at large the fruits of

their late mission among the heathens. The conference was closed, and the determination given, not by Peter, but by James, who asserted the Gentiles' freedom from the Jewish yoke, and enjoined them only to abstain from fornication, from things offered to idols, and from blood. The two latter points were necessary, to preserve a friendly intercourse between the Gentiles and Jewish converts, so long as these were indulged in observing the Levitical institutions; and the prohibition from fornication, though immediately belonging to the moral law, which was of universal obligation, was added, to give the Gentiles a deeper sense of the guilt and evil of a practice, which the most civilized and virtuous Heathens considered as almost, if not wholly, innocent.

This sentence was generally embraced; and a letter to the same effect was written to the believers at Antioch, confirming them in their Christian liberty. In this they thought it a sufficient condemnation of the opposite opinion to say, they had given no such commandment: a protestation the apostles might have often repeated, had they lived to this day; but since their genuine writings still subsist, we may, by parity of reason, still infer, that we need not be afraid of rejecting any thing that is enjoined as binding upon the conscience, if we can be sure that the apostles, who were divinely in spired to explain the Christian faith and practice, have given us no precept in its favour. They likewise took care to assert their firm persuasion, that their decision was agreeable to the dictates of the Holy Spirit. This convocation has generally been styled the first Chris→ tian council; but, indeed, when we compare it with those which bore the same name afterwards, and were professedly formed upon this precedent, we shall be almost tempted to say, it was not only the first, but

the last. Here were no intrigues practised, no temporal interests consulted, no fierce and bloody anathemas issued to give a sanction to persecution, no uncertainty or animosity in the issue; but the affair was conducted with freedom and moderation, and the conclusion made by general consent, and to the satisfaction of both parties: how different in these respects from the spirit of after-times! But though this answered the end in the present case, the judgment of the apostles was not entirely obeyed, even while they lived. This debate was revived in other places, and proved a frequent impediment to the peace of the church, so long, at least, as the temple and worship of Jerusalem continued, and gave St. Paul an occasion to write his epistle to the Galatians expressly on this subject. Nay, it seems, the mistake still subsisted in Judea, though none publicly ventured to contradict the decree when it was made. For when, some time after, Peter went to Antioch, and conversed* freely with the Gentile converts living after their manner for a season; yet, when some brethren came down from Jerusalem, he was so fearful to offend them in this matter, that he separated himself again; and, by his influence, prevailed on Barnabas likewise to dissemble in favour of those of the circumcision. For this weak compliance, whereby he seemed to overthrow what he had before established, St. Paul withstood him to his face. He did not detract from his character, by insinuations to his prejudice behind his back, nor did he content himself with reproving him in secret; but, as their offence was public, tending to confirm the Jews in the bigotry, and to offend the weak on both sides, he boldly and publicly rebuked

* Gal. ii. 11.

him before them all. Strange weakness, incident to the best of men, that Peter, who had first laid aside his prejudices, who had visited the Gentiles by divine direction, had seen the happy effects of his compliance, and vindicated his own conduct so unanswerably upon a late occasion, should now shrink and trifle, expose himself and grieve his brethren, through fear of those who came from Jerusalem! To be delivered from the fear of man, is a deliverance indeed! It was happy for Peter that he had, in his brother Paul, a faithful friend, who, by a few well-timed words, broke the chain, and set him at liberty. It is surprising that any who have read this passage should dream of fixing on Peter, above any other of the apostles, to be the supreme and infallible head of the Christian church.

Justus and Silas, two of the brethren, were sent with Barnabas and Paul, to accompany the letter, and to declare the purport of it more at large. They were gladly received at Antioch, and not only confirmed the peace of the church, but were further helpful to their faith, by the singular gifts with which the Lord had honoured them. In a little time Justus returned to Jeru salem; but Silas chose to continue longer, and was afterwards the constant companion of St. Paul in his travels.

A. D. 50.] This obstacle being removed, the Gospel flourished greatly at Antioch. But, amidst all their services and success there, Paul and Barnabas could not forget the converts they had left in Cyprus and Asia Minor; they proposed therefore to make them a second visit, to comfort them, and to see how the work had prospered in their absence. But a difficulty was started concerning John, surnamed Mark, who had formerly left them at Perga, and, having probably repented of

bis irresolution, was now desirous to proceed with them again. Paul warmly opposed this, thinking him highly culpable for his inconstancy, and, perhaps, too much influenced against him by a spirit of resentment not wholly excusable. On the other hand, Barnabas undertook his apology; in which, besides his tenderness to his fault, he seems to have been moved by considerations which ought to have no place where the service of God is concerned. John was his sister's son, and this led him to consider his conduct in the most favourable light. Thus they were both a little partial in the cause, but much more wrong in the issue; for the contention became so sharp between them, that it broke their harmony. They determined to part: accordingly Barnabas took Mark, (whose company he had dearly purchased by the loss of Paul's,) and sailed to Cyprus, his native place; and Paul, choosing Silas in his room, went through Syria and Cilicia, being recommended to the Lord by the prayers of the brethren. So that their former work was now divided between them.

I must venture to digress here a little, for the sake of two remarks, of which the course of our history may often remind the reader. 1. How small an occasion will discover human infirmity, even in the brightest characters! Not all the graces of Paul and Barnabas, nor the remembrance of the services and difficulties they had jointly experienced, nor the importance of the common cause in which they were engaged, nor the fear of giving offence to the world and to the church, could restrain these dear friends, fellow-labourers, and fellow-sufferers, from contending and separating about a trifle. 2. How wise is the over-ruling providence of God, permitting such things for the trial of some, the