Christians with refpect to the evidence given to the New Tef tament; and examines certain affertions of Gibbon and Priestley.

Sermon II. difcuffes the three first of these causes; and maintains that miraculous powers were occafionally exercifed in the church, after the death of the apoftles, to the reign of the emperor Julian. The particular fpecies of miracle, which the fathers defcribe as having been moft frequently wrought, was the expulfion of evil fpirits from the bodies of men.' Mr. Kett allows that by demoniacal poffeffion may be denoted certain corporal difeafes. The author here combats the oppofi tion of Middleton to the account of these miracles: but commits an error in reasoning, which we hope was not inten tional. In concluding his defence of the paft apoftolic miracles, he afferts that, if the principles of that writer be adopted, the existence of Julius Cæfar, and the event of the battle of Actium, will be involved in equal doubt, and exposed to equal objections with the miracles of Chrift, and the propagation of Christianity.' The miracles of Chrift were not the fubject in debate. By inftancing these, it seems as if the author wished to withdraw our attention from the real fubject, and transfer it to a topic which is not queftioned; neither can we agree to the affimilation he has propofed. The Chriftian miracles are of an extraordinary and fupernatural description: the existence of Cæfar, and the battle of Actium, are facts in the ordinary courfe of nature and experience. Cautious of wounding the cause of Christianity, we are of opinion that the most effectual friendship is demonftrated by pointing out weak and inconclufive allegations in its favour. An inju dicious friend is a real foe. Non tali auxilio, non defenfo ribus iftis. Mr. Kett on this fubject preffes into his fervice arguments unworthy of his attention. Is it to be supposed that miracles were wrought in the Chriftian church beyond the middle of the fourth century, because Clement, bishop of Rome, fays, that his converts were all indued with a plentiful effufion of the Holy Spirit?" or because Polycarp, bishop of Smyrna, congratulates the Philippian church on God's having bleffed them with every good gift, and that they were deftitute of no fpiritual grace? This effufion and this grace we do not conjecture with Mr. Kett fignified the fupernatural power of speaking various languages, of pro phecying diftant events, and healing difeafes. Besides, prophecy, in fcripture-language, by no means uniformly means prediction. It is a fufpicious circumstance, with refpect to thefe miracles, that they are ftated only in the earliest part the Christian æra. Even Origen remarks, that in the fecond century their number confiderably decreased, and that in the

་

of

third, only a few traces remained of them.' Eufebius, Jerom, and Chryfoftom too allow, that the genuineness of them was doubted, the fame of them was not fo extenfively spread abroad, and they were not recommended with fuch authority as to be received without hesitation, even by believers themselves.' Yet Mr. Kett maintains that the objections brought from the filence of the apoftolical writers are inconclufive; and that the unanimous teftimony of the second and third century deferves to be received without hesitation.' When Mr. Kett fo judiciously prefers the force of predictions to that of miracles, he needed not to be so strenuous in behalf of the latter. Miracles are at best equivocal and queftionable figns of truth: predictions well attefted and proved are incontrovertible.

The apologies of the Christian fathers are cenfured by Mr. Gibbon, because they expofe with fuperfluous wit and elegance the extravagance of polytheifm; and because they infift much more strongly on the predictions which announced, than on the miracles which accompanied, the appearance of the Meffiah.' In their vindication from these charges Mr. Kett is eafily fuccessful: and concludes that they were well calculated to filence the clamour, and abate the rage of the Pagans. The zeal of the first miffionaries is described with much warmth of colouring, and the progrefs of the gospel delineated with geographical accuracy. The concluding paffage of this defcription is too well written, and too interesting, not to be de fcribed.

In thus tracing the progrefs of the gofpel, ard eftimating the zeal of its first preachers, a melancholy reflection naturally arifes in the mind. The countries in which the faith was first promulgated, retain at prefent very imperfect marks of its ancient diffufion. The rich provinces of Afia Minor and Syria, which have been long expofed to the defpotism of the Ottoman princes, exhibits only in venerable ruins the ancient edifices of magnificence and devotion. Most of the feven cities immortalized by the writer of the Apocalypfe, difcover no remaining veitiges to gratify the eye of the pious traveller. In Damafcus, renowned in facred history for the converfion of the great apostle of the Gentiles, a Turkish mofque is erected amid the ruins of a Christian church. Jerufalem itself, the theatre of the ftupendous and mighty works of the Son of God, exifts only as a monument of the rapacity and extortion of its infidel tyrants. Even in that holy place where rending rocks. and opening graves attefted the dignity of an expiring redeemer, the proud crefcent of Mahomet is difplayed over the proftrate banner of the cross.'

We with we could agree with our author that 'the acquifitions which Chriftianity has made in fome places are abunCRIT. REV. N. ARR. (IV.) Feb. 1792. N dantly

dantly more than a counterbalance for her depreffed state in others.' The reception which the experiences in America and on the coafts of Malabar,' appears no adequate compenfation for her expulfion from Palestine: efpecially as, in a future age, fhe may be forced by other revolutions from terri tories that he now poffeffes, and by alternate gains and loffes may, like the fea, which is in a ftate of perpetual fluctuation, in the end have gained nothing, and poffefs no more actual dominion than at firft*. It remains, therefore, only seriously to anticipate with Mr. Kett:

-the immenfe addition which will be made to human happinefs, both temporal and eternal, when the follower of Mahomet, the difciple of Brama, and the votary of Confucius, with every worthipper of every idol, fhall bow with equal veneration at the name of Jefus; and when the Chriftian religion, like the bright luminary of day, fhall diffufe its aufpicious influence over the whole race of mankind.'

be

The third fermon defcribes the fortitude of the early martyrs, with the different caufes to which that fortitude may attributed, and its immediate influence on the Pagan world. Mr. Kett enumerates the various caufes which produced the perfecution of the Chriftians under the Roman government; one of which is fo juftly and elegantly delineated, that we beg leave to transcribe it.

To avoid interruption they met together during the filence of the night, or at the dawn of the day. Their choice of fuch unfeasonable hours for their devotions gave great alarm to the Romans, fince the laws from the foundation of the republic had ftrictly forbidden nocturnal meetings. In the celebration of the Bacchanalian rites, with which the Chriftian affembles on account of their external appearance might poffibly be confounded, the fenate was alarmed with apprehenfions of danger, on being informed that a multitude was often convened in the feafon of darkness and repofe. The baptifmal vow likewife gave no fmall caufe for fufpicion, as it was liable to be interpreted into an oath of criminal fecrecy, and a ratification of treasonable defigns.

That the meek and benevolent followers of Jefus fhould be miftaken for the abetters of fedition, is an evident proof with what a fuperficial glance the jealous Roman furveyed their affemblies. His fears of their defigns were vain, and his ignorance of their conduct was inexcufable. Had he carefully examined their fimple rites and harmless tranfactions, he would doubtless have passed a

If extent of country and number of votaries be admitted as an argument of truth, and a fymptom of fuccefs, it must not be forgotten that the Mahometan has a vast advantage over the Christian faith.

more

more equitable judgment, and rather have imputed their conduct to the delufions of pitiable fanaticism, than to the machinations of a malignant and deftructive fuperftition. He knew not what fpirit they were of. They met not to drain the bowl of intemperance, or to indulge the exceffes of licentioufnefs; but to break the facred bread of the eucharift, and renew their refolutions of purity and holinefs. They were convened not to fan the flames of infurrection, or meditate dark and subtle stratagems against the state; but to invoke the Moft High for the profperity of the emperor, and pay the tribute of adoration and prayer to the Prince of Peace.'

It has been objected to the merit of the martyrs, that mo tives merely temporal might have actuated them in their fufferings, and that many nations and individuals have shown and continue to difplay an equal defiance of death in the cause of their religion.

• The ancient inhabitants of northern Europe fought death with ardent eagerness in the field of battle, or welcomed its approach in the decline of age with expreffions of favage joy. The follower of Brama to fhun the wearifome decay of lingering fickness anticipates the hour of death, and devotes himself to the flames. The Indian remains unmoved amid the dreadful preparations for his lingering execution, and defies in the agonies of torture the ingenious cruelty of his foes. The Gentoo with fteady pace and unaltered look afcends the funeral pile, and becomes a willing facrifice to her departed husband.'

Between thefe inftances, and thofe of the early martyrs, Mr. Kett labours to establish an effential difference.

On contemplating the fituation and circumstances of the early martyr, his cafe will appear to be widely different: he was gene rally taken from the eminent ranks of Chriftians; he was born in an enlightened country; his difpofition and education inclined him. more neceffarily to the allurements of ease and peace; unlike the favage he was a stranger to fcenes of turbulence and blood, and unaccustomed to fituations that called for vigorous exertion, or unremitting and hardy activity; his mind was actuated by keen fenfibility, which is a quality that never exists in a barbarous ftate of fociety; he was alive to all the exquifite endearments of focial life; and attached to the world by all thofe tender ties of friendship and of affection which hold the heart in the moft permanent captivity. Hence arofe a contest between the love of God and love of life; between the fuggeftions of confcience and the calls of affection; between the claims of rigid duty and the expoftulations of violated nature. Nothing lefs therefore than a divine interference feems capable of terminating the dubious conteft, and of making religion triumphant over the reluctance of humanity, and the powerful attractions of the world.

Moreover, the tenderness of youth, and the delicacy of the fe male fex were frequently expofed to the fame punishments. They turned from the fafcinating pleafures of the world, and met their fate with the fame unruffled compofure which diftinguished the wictims of more mature experience. The conduct of Blandina among the martyrs of Lyons and Vienne, was as confpicuous and exemplary as that of the venerable Pothinus. As the fame temper of mind actuated all the fufferers without diftinction of fex or age, it becomes more neceffary to advert to a principle which, from the energy of its effect, and the extent and the uniformity of its operation, will obviously account for fuch heroic behaviour.'

On the fame principles Mr. Kett, of course, accounts for the modern martyrdoms in our own country. But this reafoning is by no means conclufive. If falfe religions and erroneous prejudices will excite their devotees, even of the tender fex, and enjoying all the comforts of life, to court deftruction, it can be no characteristic of the true religion, nor an argument of divine interference, that its profeflors meet death with fimilar heroifm. To call in the arm of God to affift the Chriftian in thus encountering death, when mere prejudice is fufficient to invigorate the Pagan, is to confess a weaknefs in the Chriftian caufe, and to elevate the powers of unaffifted nature-Nec Deus interfit nifi dignus vindice nodus. The Christian sufferers were not more tender, nor lefs fond of life than the Pagan martyrs. The utmoft that can be inferred from the heroism of both parties is, that each firmly believed, even unto death, that his religion was true. The influence of thefe Christian fufferings on the Pagan world is ftated to be, that the latter were induced to inquire into principles which could produce fuch heroism of conduct. The compaflion of the multitude rendered them curious, and their curiofity became the happy means of their conversion.'

In his fourth fermon Mr. Kett presents a concife and juft account of the difcipline of the primitive church, with refpect to its internal regulations, and its oppofition to herefy; the virtues of the firft Chriftians; and the combined effects of the foregoing caufes upon private manners, and public inftitutions among the nations converted to the faith.' In defcribing the ancient heretics, he obferves that,

Between the Ebionite and the Mahometan there is a clofe and ftriking resemblance. According to the creed of both, Jefus Chrift is a mere man. They practice with fcrupulous attention the rites of circumcifion and of purification: they both appeal to the authority of fpurious books; and as the Ebionites value the fabulous travels of Clement, fo the Mahometans confult the falle gofpel of Barnabas. They have a high regard for particular places: