struck him? If I have spoken ill, convince me of the ill; but if well, why do you strike me? We do not detract from the apostle, but we declare the glory of our Lord; who suffering in the flesh, overcame the difficulties and weaknesses of the flesh. Not to mention what he says in another place. Alexander the copper-smith did me much evil; the Lord, the righteous Judge, will reward him in that day." It is true, St. Jerom elsewhere disapproves a part of that which here he makes his orthodox doctor speak; but it is plain, at least, that one might speak it without being guilty of heresy.

Lastly; When we examine the discourses which we have of Christ's disciples before divers judges, we may easily perceive that they speak with much piety and courage; but it seems not that they say any thing which one might not as well say without inspiration. If we read the histories of those that have been put to death for religion in the last ages, we shall find many that were not prophets, making excellent discourses at their trials, without being prepared before hand. St. Stephen was full of the gospel spirit,

of

when he made the harangue we read Acts vii. It seems nevertheless, that he therein mixed divers circumstances history, which were nothing to the purpose of the matter he spoke about; and which neither can tolerably be reconciled with the history of the Old Testament. And indeed very learned men have been of opinion, that St. Stephen's memory failed him. Mr. Capel in his Spicilegium on vers. 16. says: "It is certain that in this place we should read ὁ του Αβρααμ, and understand exyovos, that it might not be said, Abraham, but his grandchild Jacob, bought this monument. Or we may say, that Stephen, by the fault of his memory, confounded two facts that were somewhat alike, to wit, the purchase made by Abraham, whereof Gen. xxiii. with that made by Jacob, Gen. xxxiii. 19."

However, it is no ways incongruous, that by the Holy Spirit, or the spirit of God, we should understand the spirit of holiness and constancy, which the gospel gives; or such a disposition of mind, as is an effect of our faith. We know it is a manner of speaking common in the Old and New Testament; and that the He

brews call the spirit of jealousy, the spirit of stupidity, the spirit of fear, the spirit of courage, the spirit of meekness, &c. the different dispositions of mind, that render a man jealous, stupid, fearful, courageous, meek, &c. observed this long ago.

The critics have

But I must needs desire you once again to take notice, that when I say the disciples of Christ had not prophetic inspirations, for answering before the tribunal of judges, to the accusations brought against them; I do not mean thereby that it never so fell out; but only that ordinarily they spoke without particular inspiration. I conceive indeed, that if one of them had appeared before a judge, whose language he naturally understood not, it would have been necessary that God should have dictated to him the proper words he was to make use of. And I doubt not but God has often done even that, in favour of such of the apostles as have preached the gospel to barbarous nations beyond the limits of the Roman empire, and perhaps too sometimes amongst the Romans and Greeks.

However it be, it seems to me that if what I have been saying be considered, it must be granted that the passages of St. Luke and St. Matthew, where Christ mises his spirit to his disciples, are not strong enough to render the common opinion indisputable.

pro

Let us now examine that passage of St. John, When the spirit of truth shall come, he will lead you into all truth. Interpreters observe that we must not understand by all truths, any others than those which the apostles were ignorant of, and which it was needful for them to know, that they might be able to acquit themselves as they ought to do of their charge. They received not the holy spirit to learn, for example, that there was a God; nor to be instructed in the mathematics. They knew already this first truth, and of the other they had no need.

The generality of interpreters believe that these words denote a perpetual assistance of the holy spirit, that made the apostles absolutely infallible. To know whether they are in the right or no, we must examine the accomplishment of the

promise; and if it appear that it agrees not with this explanation of our Saviour's words, we must seek another sense, and try to discover wherein the infallibility of the apostles consists.

We find a story Acts xv. whereby it appears manifestly that the apostles did not pass in their own time for persons, whose every word was an oracle, as they are now reputed to have done. Some Jews converted to the Christian religion, not being able to shake off their ancient opinion concerning ceremonies, would have had the Gentiles circumcised. St. Paul, and St. Barnabas were against this: but their authority was not sufficient to put to silence the Judaizing Christians. Although St. Paul was as much an apostle, as those whom our Lord had chosen while he was on earth, yet they would not believe him. The church at Jerusalem must be consulted.

Further also, the apostles and elders of the church, being assembled to examine and determine this affair, dispute a great while before they agree upon it; and it was not till after they had heard