« AnteriorContinuar »
followed the manners of the Jews or not. St. Paul at that very time sacrificed in the temple of Jerusalem ; and we know that the fifteen first bilhops of Jerusalem were circumcised Jews; and that they observed the Sabbath, and abstained from the meats forbidden by the Jewish law. Should a bishop of Spain or Portugal at this time be circumcised, or observe the Sabbath, he would infallibly burn at an auto-da- fé: and yet this fundamental point did not occasion the least animosity between the Apostles, or between the primitive Christians.
If the Evangelists had resembled our modern writers, what an immense field was there for disputation between them. St. Matthew reckons only eight and twenty generations from David to Jesus. St. Luke reckons forty-one ; and these generations are absolutely different. Yet no diffention appears to have arisen between the disciples on account of these apparent contradictions, which have been so admirably well reconciled by the fathers of the church ; but they still continued in brotherly love, peace, and charity with each other. What more noble lefion can we have of indulgence in our dirputes, and of bumility in regard to those things which we do not understand?
St. Paul, in his Epistle to certain Jews of Rome who had been converted to Christianity, employs all the latter part of his third chapter, in telling them, that by faith alone they will be glorified, and that no man is justified by good works only. St. James, on the contrary, in the second chapter of his Epistle to the twelve tribes dispersed over the earth, is continually preaching up to them, that without good works no man can be saved. This has occasioned the sea paration of two great communions among us; but it caused no division among the Apostles.
If the perfecuting of those who differ from us in opinion, is an holy action, it must be conferfed, that he who had murdered the greatest number of hereticks would be the most glorious faint in heaven. If so, what a pitiful figure would a man who had only stripped his brethren of all they had, and thrown them to rot in a dungeon, make, in comparison of the zealot who had butchered his hundreds on the famous day of St. Bartholomew? This may be proved as follows:
The successor of St. Peter and his consistory cannot err; they approved, they celebrated, they consecrated the action of St. Bartholomew;
consequently that action was holy and meritorious ; and, by a like deduction, he who of two murderers, equal in piety, had ripped up
the bellies of eighty Hugonot women big with child, would be entitled to double the portion of glory of another who had butchered but twelve: in this manner, by the same argument alfo, the enthusiasts of the Cevennes have reason to believe that they will be exalted in glory, in proportion to the number of catholic women, priests and monks,whom they may have knocked on the head: but surely these are strange claims to eternal bappiness,
If Non-TOLERATION was part of the Divine
Law among the Jews, and whether it was always put in practice.
Blindhe rules and precepts which have been
Y the divine law, I take to be understood those rules and
precepts which have been given to us by God himself. For example, he ordained, that the Jews should eat a lamb dreffed with bitter herbs, and standing with a staff in their hand, in remembrance of the passover; that the consecration of the highpriest should be performed by touching the tip of his right ear, his right hand, and his right foot with blood ; that the scape-goat should be charged with the sins of the people: he also for bid the eating of all shell-fish, fwine, hares, hedge-hogs, owls, the heron, and the lapwing I.
He also instituted their several feasts and ce. remonies; and all those things which appeared
| Deut. chap. xiv.
arbitrary to other nations, and subjected to positive law and custom, when commanded by God himself, became a divine law to the Jews, in like manner, as whatever Jesus Christ the son of Mary and the fon of God has commanded us, is to us a divine law.
But here let us not presume to enquire wherefore it hath pleased God to substitute a new law in the room of that he had given to Moses, and wherefore he commanded Mofes more things than he did the patriarch Abraham, and Abraham.more than Noah 7. In this he appears
+ Agreeable to my intention of making fome useful notes upon this treatife, I shall here observe, that although God is said to have made a covenant with Noah, and with all the beasts of the field; yet he permits him to eat of every thing that hath the breath of life, excepting only the eating of blood, which he positively prohibits; and moreover adds, that “ the Lord will take vengeance of or every beast by whom man's blood shall be * fhed.".
From these passages and several others of the like tenor, we may infer, with all the sages of antient