prepared to receive the rest of the edifice, cal probability, then, from the Emperor's and upon which the Mahometans after-own words, is, that unfortunately holding wards built their mosque? What man the Jewish books, as well as our own, in was ever foolish and stupid enough thus abhorrence, he at length resolved to make to deprive himself, at great cost and ex- the Jewish prophets lie. cessive labour, of the greatest advantage that could present itself to his hands and eyes! Nothing is more incredible.

The Abbé de la Blétrie, the historian of the Emperor Julian, does not understand how the temple of Jerusalem was destroyed three times. He says that ap

2. How could eruptions of flame burst forth from the interior of these stones?parently Julian reckoned as a third deThere might be an earthquake in the neighbourhood, for they are frequent in Syria: but that great blocks of stone should have vomited clouds of fire! Is not this story entitled to just as much credit as all those of antiquity?

struction the catastrophe which happened during his reign. A curious destruction this!-the non-removal of the stones of an old foundation. What could prevent this writer from seeing that the temple having been built by Solomon, recon3. If this prodigy, or if an earthquake, structed by Zorobabel, entirely destroyed which is not a prodigy, had really hap-by Herod, rebuilt by Herod himself with pened, would not the Emperor Julian have spoken of it in the letter in which be says, that he had intended to rebuild this temple? Would not his testimony have been triumphantly adduced? Is it Dot infinitely more probable that he changed his mind? Does not this letter contain these words?—

so much magnificence, and at last laid in ruins by Titus, manifestly made three destructions of the temple? The reckoning is correct. Julian should surely have escaped calumny on this point.

The Abbé de la Bletrie calumniates him sufficiently by saying, that all his virtues were only seeming, while all his "Quid de templo suo dicent, quod, vices were real. But Julian was not hyquum tertiò sit eversum, nondùm hodier-pocritical, nor avaricious, nor fraudulent, nam usque diem instauratur? Hæc ego, non ut illis exprobarem, in medium adduxi, utpotè qui templum illud tanto intervallo à ruinis excitare voluerim; sed ideò commemoravi, ut ostenderem delirasse prophetas istos, quibus cum stolidis aniculis negotium erat."

nor lying, nor ungrateful, nor cowardly, nor drunken, nor debauched, nor idle, nor vindictive. What then were his vices?

4. Let us now examine the redoubtable argument made use of to persuade us that globes of fire issued from stones. Ammianus Marcellinus, a pagan writer, "What can the Jews say of their tem free from all suspicion, has said it. ple, which has been destroyed for the Be it so: but this Ammianus has also third time, and is not yet restored? I said, that when the Emperor was about speak of this, not for the purpose of re- to sacrifice ten oxen to his gods for proaching them, for I myself intended to his first victory over the Persians, nine of have raised it once more from its ruins, them fell to the earth before they were but to show the extravagance of their pro-presented to the altar. He relates a hunphets, who had none but old women to dred predictions-a hundred prodigies. deal with." Are we to believe in them? Are we to Is it not evident that the Emperor } believe in all the ridiculous miracles re having paid attention to the Jewish pro-lated by Livy?

phecies, that the temple should be rebuilt Besides, who can say that the text of more beautiful than ever, and that all the Ammianus Marcellinus has not been nations of the earth should come and wor-falsified? Would it be the only instance ship in it, thought fit to revoke the per- in which this artifice has been employed? mission to raise the edifice. The histori- I wonder that no mention is made of

the little fiery crosses which all the workmen found on their bodies when they went to bed. They would have made an admirable figure along with the globes. The fact is, that the temple of the Jews was not rebuilt, and it may be presumed never will be so. Here let us hold, and not seek useless prodigies. Globi flammarum-globes of fire, issue neither from stones nor from earth. Ammianus, and those who have quoted him, were not natural philosophers. Let the Abbé de la Blétrie only look at the fire on St. John's day, and he will see that flame always ascends with a point, or in a cloud, { and never in a globe. This alone is sufficient to overturn the nonsense which he comes forward to defend with injudicious criticism and revolting pride.

to be found worthy of God in following their footsteps in his kingdom, after the example of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, Joseph, Isaiah, and the other prophets-of Peter and Paul, and the apostles who were married."

Some of the learned assert, that the name of St. Paul has been interpolated in this famous letter: however, Turrian and all who have seen the letters of Ignatius in the library of the Vatican, acknowledge that St. Paul's name appears there. And Baronius does not deny that this passage is to be found in some Greek manuscripts: Non negamus in quibusdam græcis codicibus. But he asserts that these words have been added by modern Greeks.

In the old Oxford library, there was a manuscript of St. Ignatius's letters in After all, the thing is of very little im- Greek, which contained these words; but portance. There is nothing in it that it was, I believe, burned with many other affects either faith or morals; and histori-books at the taking of Oxford by Cromcal truth is all that is here sought for.

APOSTLES.

well. There is still one in Latin in the same library, in which the words Pauli et apostolorum have been effaced, but in such a manner that the old characters may be easily distinguished.

Their Lives, their Wives, their Children. AFTER the article Apostle in the Encyclopedia, which is as learned as it is or- It is however certain, that this passage thodox, very little remains to be said. exists in several editions of these letters. But we often hear it asked-Were the This dispute about St. Paul's marriage is, apostles married? Had they any chil-after all, a very frivolous one. What dren? if they had, what became of those matters it whether he was married or not, children? Where did the apostles live? if the other apostles were married? His Where did they write? Where did they first Epistle to the Corinthians is quite die? Had they any appropriated dis-sufficient to prove that he might be martricts? Did they exercise any civil min-ried, as well as the rest:istry? Had they any jurisdiction over the faithful? Were they bishops? Had they an hierarchy, rites, or ceremonies?

I.

Were the apostles married?
There is extant a letter attributed to St.
Ignatius the Martyr, in which are these
decisive words :-

"I call to mind your sanctity as I do that of Elias, Jeremiah, John the Baptist, and the chosen disciples Timothy, Titus, Evadius, and Clement; yet I do not blame such other of the blessed as were bound in the bonds of marriage, but hope

"Have we not power to eat and to drink? Have we not power to lead about a sister, a wife, as well as other apostles, and as the brethren of the Lord, and Cephas? Or I only and Barnabas, have not we power to forbear working? Who goeth a warfare any time at his own charges?"

It is clear from this passage, that all the apostles were married, as well as St. Peter. And St. Clement of Alexandria positively declares that St. Paul had a wife.

The Roman discipline has changed, which is no proof that the usage of the primitive ages was not different.

Eusebius relates that Nicholas, chosen by the apostles to co-operate in the sacred ministry with St. Stephen, had a very handsome wife, of whom he was jealons. The apostles having reproached him with his jealousy, he corrected himself of it, brought his wife to them, and said, "I am ready to yield her up; let him marry her who will." The apostles, however, did not accept his proposal. He had by his wife a son and several daughters.

HI.

Where did the Apostles live? Where did they die?

According to Eusebius, James, surnamed the Just, brother to Jesus Christ, was in the beginning placed the first on the episcopal throne of the city of Jerusalem; these are his own words. So that, according to him, the first bishoprick was that of Jerusalem-supposing that the Jews knew even the name of bishop. It does, indeed, appear very likely that the brother of Jesus Christ should have been the first after him, and that the very city in which the miracle of our salvation was worked, should have become the metropolis of the Christian world. As for the episcopal throne, that is a term which Eusebius uses by anticipation. We all know that there was then neither throne nor see.

Eusebius adds, after St. Clement, that Cleophas, according to Eusebius and the other apostles did not contend with St. Epiphanius, was brother to St. Jo- St. James for this dignity. They elected seph, and father of St. James the Less, him immediately after the Ascension.and of St. Jude, whom he had by Mary,{"Our Lord," says he, "after his resursister to the Blessed Virgin. So that St.rection, had given to James surnamed the Jude the Apostle was first cousin to Jesus Just, to John, and to Peter, the gift of Christ. knowledge:" very remarkable words. Hegesippus, quoted by Eusebius, tells Eusebius mentions James first, then John, us, that two grandsons of St. Jude were and Peter comes last. It seems but just informed against to the Emperor Domi- that the brother and the beloved disciple tian, as being descendants of David, and of Jesus should come before the man who having an incontestable right to the throne had denied him. Nearly the whole Greek of Jerusalem. Domitian, fearing that church and all the reformers ask, Where they might avail themselves of this right, is Peter's primacy? The Catholics anput questions to them himself, and iheyswer-If he is not placed first by the Faacquainted him with their genealogy. The thers of the Church, he is in the Acts of emperor asked them what fortune they the Apostles. The Greeks and the rest had. They answered, that they had thirty-reply, that he was not the first bishop; nine acres of land, which paid tribute, and the dispute will endure as long as the and that they worked for their livelihood. { churches. He then asked them when Jesus Christ's kingdom was to come, and they told him, "At the end of the world." After which, Domitian allowed them to depart in peace; which goes far to prove that he was not a persecutor.

St. James, this first bishop of Jerusalem, always continued to observe the Mosaic law. He was a Recabite; he walked barefoot, and never shaved; went and prostrated himself in the Jewish temple twice a day, and was surnamed by the This, if I mistake not, is all that is Jews Oblia, signifying the just. They at known about the children of the apostles.length applied to him to know who Jesus

Christ was; and, having answered that Jesus was the son of man, who sat on the right hand of God, and that he should como in the clouds, he was beaten to death. This was St. James the Less.

St. James the Greater was his uncle, brother to St. John the Evangelist, and son of Zebedee and Salome. It is asserted that Agrippa, king of the Jews, had him beheaded at Jerusalem.

chair, so splendidly inlaid, in the church at Rome, can hardly have belonged to St. Peter: wood does not last so long; nor is it likely that St. Peter delivered his lessons from this chair as in a school thoroughly formed, since it is averred that the Jews of Rome were violent enemies to the disciples of Jesus Christ.

The greatest difficulty perhaps is, that St. Paul, in his epistle written to the CoSt. John remained in Asia, and go-lossians from Rome, positively says that verned the church of Ephesus, where, it he was assisted only by Aristarchus, Maris said, he was buried. cus, and another bearing the name of Jesus. This objection has, to men of the greatest learning, appeared to be insurmountable.

In his letter to the Galatians, he says that he obliged James, Cephas, and John, who seemed to be pillars, to acknowledge himself and Barnabas as pillars also. If he placed James before Cephas, then Cephas was not the chief. Happily, these

St. Andrew, brother to St. Peter, quitted the school of St. John for that of Jesus Christ. It is not agreed whether he preached among the Tartars or in Argos; but, to get rid of the difficulty, we are told that it was in Epirus. No one knows where he suffered martyrdom, nor even whether he suffered it at all. The Acts of his martyrdom are more than suspected by the learned. Painters have always re-disputes affect not the foundation of our presented him on a saltier-cross, to which his name has been given. This custom has prevailed without its origin being known.

St. Peter preached to the Jews dispersed in Pontus, Bithynia, Cappadocia, at Antioch, and at Babylon. The Acts of the Apostles do not speak of his journey to Rome, nor does St. Paul himself make any mention of it in the letters which he wrote from that capital. St. Justin is the first accredited author who speaks of this journey, about which the learned are not agreed. St. Irenæus, atfer St. Justin, expressly says, that St. Peter and St. Paul came to Rome, and that they entrusted its government to St. Linus. But here is another difficulty: if they made St. Linus inspector of the rising Christian society at Rome, it must be inferred that they themselves did not superintend it, nor remain in that city.

holy religion. Whether St. Peter ever was at Rome or not, Jesus Christ is no less the son of God and the Virgin Mary; he did not the less rise again; nor did he the less recommend humility and poverty: which are neglected, it is true, but about } which there is no dispute.

Callistus Nicephorus, a writer of the fourteenth century, says, that "Peter was tall, straight, and slender, his face long and pale, his beard and hair short, curly, and neglected his eyes black, his nose long, and rather flat than pointed." So Calmet translates the passage.

St. Bartholomew, a word corrupted from Bar. Ptolomaios, son of Ptolemy.The Acts of the Apostles inform us that he was a Galilean. Eusebius asserts that he went to preach in India, Arabia Felix, Persia, and Abyssinia. He is believed to have been the same with Nathanaël. There is a gospel attributed to him: but Criticism has cast upon this matter aall that has been said of his life and of his thousand uncertainties. The opinion that St. Peter came to Rome in Nero's reign, and filled the pontifical chair there for twenty-five years, is untenable, for Nero reigned only thirteen years. The wooden

death is very uncertain. It has been asserted that Astyages, brother to Polemon, King of Armenia, had him flayed alive; but all good writers regard this story as fabulous.

St. Philip.-According to the apocry-in Lybia, and thence into England. phal legends, he lived eighty-seven years, Others make him suffer martyrdom in and died in peace, in the reign of Trajan. Persia. St. Thomas Didymus.-Origen, quoted by Eusebius, says that he went and preached to the Medes, the Persians, the Caramanians, the Baskerians, and the Magi-as if the Magi had been a people. It is added, that he baptized one of the Magi, who had come to Bethlehem. The Manichees assert, that a man who had stricken Thomas was devoured by a lion. Some Portuguese writers assure us that he suffered martyrdom at Meliapour, in the peninsula of India. The Greek church believes that he preached in India, and that from thence his body was carried to Edessa. Some monks are further induced zo believe that he went to India, by the circumstance, that, about the end of the fifteenth century, there were found, near the coast of Ormuz, some families of Nestorians, who had been established there by a merchant of Moussoul, named Thomas. The legend sets forth that he built a magnificent palace for an Indian

St. Thaddau or Lybeus-the same with St. Jude, whom the Jews, in St. Matthew, call brother to Jesus Christ, and who, according to Eusebius, was his first cousin. All these relations, for the most part vague and uncertain, throw no light on the lives of the apostles. But if there is little to gratify our curiosity, there is much from which we may derive instruction.

St. Paul was not one of the Twelve

Two of the four gospels, chosen from among the fifty-four composed by the first Christians, were not written by apostles. Apostles; yet he contributed more than any other to the establishment of Christianity. He was the only man of letters among them. He had studied under Gamaliel. Festus himself, the governor of Judea, reproaches him with being too learned; and, unable to comprehend the sublimities of his doctrine, he says to him, "Insanis, Paule, multe te litteræ ad insaniam convertunt."-Paul, thou art beking, named Gondaser: but all these side thyself; much learning doth make

stories are rejected by the learned.
St. Matthias. No particulars are
known of him. His life was not found
until the twelfth century, by a monk of{

thee mad.

he calls himself sent :

In his first epistle to the Corinthians,

"Am I not an apostle? Am I not

the abbey of St. Matthias of Treves. He free? Have I not seen Jesus Christ our said, he had it from a Jew, who translated Lord? Are ye not my work in the Lord? If I am not an apostle unto others, yet,

it for him from Hebrew into Latin.

Socrates, and Abdias, he preached and {

St. Matthew.-According to Rufinus, { doubtless, I am unto you," &c.

died in Ethiopia. Heracleon makes him while he was studying at Jerusalem under He might, indeed, have seen Jesus, live a long time, and die a natural death. Gamaliel. Yet it may be said, that this Bet, Abdias says, that Hyrtacus, King of was not a reason which could authorise his Ethiopia, brother to Eglypus, wishing to apostleship. He had not been one of the marry his niece Iphigenia, and finding that disciples of Jesus; on the contrary, he be could not obtain St. Matthew's per- had persecuted them, and had been an mission, had his head struck off, and set accomplice in the death of St. Stephen. fire to Iphigenia's house. He, to whom It is astonishing that he does not rather that we possess, deserved a better histo-miracle which Jesus Christ afterwards we owe the most circumstantial gospel justify his voluntary apostleship by the

rian than Abdias.

St. Simon the Canaanite, whose feast is heaven which appeared to him at midcommonly joined with that of St. Jude,- day and threw him from his horse, and Of his life nothing is known. The mo- by his being carried up to the third dern Greeks say, that he went to preach heaven.

worked in his favour-by the light from

15