not the publication), the faults of its neighbours.

Like faith, it "believeth in the veracity of his protestations." Like hope, it "hopeth" in the sincerity of his amendment, and

Like patience, it "endureth" all things, as well the injuries and provocations of man, as the wholesome chastisements of God. In a word, it is the crown, and sum, and principle of every other virtue, entering into and adorning, and sanctifying every other. It is like that "wisdom from above," of which au Apostle speaks" first pure," as its source; "then peaceable, gentle, easy to be entreated, full of mercy, and good fruits, without partiality and without hypocrisy."

And as its nature is thus excellent, and its operation comprehensive, so is its continuance lasting beyond every other gift. "Charity never faileth,”—but" whether there be prophecies, they shall fail," when the Church shall no longer require miraculous instruction; "whether there be tongues, these shall cease" when study shall have supplied their place; "whether there be knowledge" of the ultimate and spiritual intention of former dispensations, "it shall vanish away" before that blaze of evidence which shall shortly unfold to every eye the full mystery of the Gospel. For what is the knowledge, of which you boast, but as a single ray to enlighten the faithful? And what is this prophesying but a channel after all of partial instruction? "We know" but "in part, and prophesy in part?" but when that, which is perfect, is come, and the Gospel shall have been fully established by the aid of these miraculous helps, "then that which is in part shall be done away." "When I was a child, I spake as a child, I understood as a child, I thought as a child; but when I became a man, I put away childish things. " And the same process shall be ob servable in the ages of the Church. In its present infancy, when its doc

5

trines are unknown, and their effects untried, and the obstacles to be encountered great and appalling, these miraculous gifts are suited to its exigencies; but in its maturer years, they shall be put away.

And if this shall be their fate in this world, how much more in that higher and more perfect state which awaits the Christian in the heavens? Where will then be the need of your gift of healing, when God shall have wiped away the tear from every eye, and death and sorrow,and crying and pain shall be no more? Where your opportunity of working miracles, when this world with all its objects shall have passed away? Where your knowledge of tongues, when saints and angels, with one heart and one voice, shall sing the song of the Lamb? Where your privilege of unfolding mysteries and interpreting prophecies, when every prophecy shall have been accomplished, and every mystery unfolded? "Now, indeed, we see as through a glass darkly," enveloped, as we are, with the veil of this weak and corrupted flesh; "but then face to face"fully and clearly-" now" at the best, "we know but in part," however rich or extensive our endowments may be, "but then shall we know, even as we are known."

Amid this evanescence, however, of every other gift, shall Love be equally transient? Is this but the ornament of the Church in her infancy, and to be laid aside in her maturer years? "Now"-through every period of her existence" abideth Charity," grounded on "faith," and encouraged by "hope." These three the Church can never lay aside, without ceasing to be the body of Christ; these three must be the constant attendants on her earthly pilgrimage. And yet among these "the greatest is Charity;" for in its effects it is more beneficial; in its nature more allied to the di vine image-(for God,' saith the Apostle, is Love")-and in its du ration eternal.

Faith and hope benefit indeed the individual possessors of these graces, but Charity benefits others; faith and hope rest on God; Charity would imitate him. The time shall come, when faith shall be lost in sight; for we shall behold our Lord as He is; and hope swallowed up in enjoyment, for we shall be in heaven; but love shall then become more lovely, for we shall be in the presence of the Beloved-of Him), who is the God of Love, and who has loved us with an everlasting love, and we shall be ourselves knit together, with angels and archangels, in one indissoluble and everlasting bond.

I have thus endeavoured, by a careful induction of particular passages out of the discourses of our blessed Lord, and the writings of his Apostles, to establish and enforce the peculiar importance at tached, in the Holy Scriptures to the gift of Charity, "the very bond of peace" (to adopt the language of

our excellent Liturgy)" and of all virtue, without which, whosoever liveth, is counted dead before God." Neglect not then, I beseech you, as you value your everlasting salvation, to cherish this sacred principle within your breasts; banish, by God's grace, every rancorous, and revengeful, and selfish feeling-and "put on, as the elect of God, holy and beloved, bowels of mercies" towards the poor-“ kindness" towards all men,—" humbleness of mind,"-" meekness" under every provocation," long-suffering" however offended; "forbearing one another, and forgiving one another" "if any man have a quarrel against any; even as Christ forgave you, so also do ye."

"And above all things put on Charity, which is the bond of perfectness; and let the peace of God rule in your hearts, to the which also ye are called in one body in Christ Jesus our Lord."

C.

To the Editor of the Remembrancer. Sir,

You will probably think, that it is a refined and fastidious scruple, which I have often felt in reading the allusion to the case of Judas in the first exhortation in the Communion Office. I am free to own that it is an objection, with which I am not aware that others have been perplexed, and which I should therefore have concealed within my own bosom, if I was not persuaded after mature consideration, that it is capable of a satisfactory solution. It is on the following words that my objection is grounded: "Repent you of your sins or else come not to that holy table, lest after the tak-, ing of that holy Sacrament the Devil enter you as he entered into Judas,

and fill you full of all iniquities and bring you to destruction both of body and soul."

words, that if a person comes to It is the plain import of these the Lord's table without the necessary preparation of repentance, his unworthy celebration will open a passage by which the Devil may enter into him, and fill him full of all iniquities, and bring him to destruction both of body and soul. It is a sentence of strong and earnest admonition on the great peril of the unworthy receiving of the Lord's the case of Judas imply that he is Supper; but does the allusion to of such unworthy celebration, or an example of the sin and danger because he partook of the bread and that the Devil entered into him, the wine at the last Supper, of which he was unworthy to partake?

The words in question before the last Revision, formed part of the third exhortation at the time of the celebration, but although their position is changed, their meaning was always the same, and they were always liable to the same objection.

Comber after many just observations on the discipline of the Church, and the necessity of exact and ri. gorous caution in warning and deterring impenitent offenders, adverts to the history of Judas and to the awful example which his history exhibits.

"We appeal to every man's conscience, and set before them the danger of coming with wicked purpurposes for so they imitate Judas, who notwithstanding that plain caution, Matt. xxvi. 24. set down with a heart full of treachery and covetousness; John xiii. 26, 27. but instead of being a partaker of Christ, Satan did enter into him and confirmed his wicked purposes, so that he came to destruction both of body and soul. Repent therefore O you profane wretches being warned by so terrible an example or else your judgment is inevitable; for if you continue in these damnable sins you die, and if you think to find favour by laying hold of Christ's body you are mistaken, for you profane the mystery, violate God's covenant, trample on the blood of Christ, to which you have no right, so long as you live in open defiance to his laws; and if you come thus, you give Satan more power over you, both to corrupt you and to ruin you; yet if you stay away you cannot escape unless you do repent; and if you would do that, after awhile you might be received: However we have delivered our souls by giving you this warning, do not cast away yours by despising

it."

In this paraphrase the learned Commentator affirms, that Judas "sat down," as he unquestionably did to the feast of the Passover, and he insinuates that instead of

being a partaker of Christ, Satan did enter into him; but Satan entered into him before the institution of the Lord's Supper; and it is yet to be proved that Judas was present at that Supper, and that he could in any sense be a partaker of Christ, with reference to that Supper. Dr. Bennet, as he is quoted by Bishop Mant in his useful Annotations on the Common Prayer, proceeds with more caution, and leaving it uncertain whether Judas did partake of the Supper of the Lord, maintains that our Church does not compare Judas and the unworthy Communicant as Communicants, but in the effect produced upon the aggravated sinfulness of each. His words

are:

"The Church does not here affirm, that the Devil entered into Judas after he had received the holy Eucharist, but only that he entered into Judas, whether he received the holy Eucharist or not: and she exhorts her members to take care, that their unworthy participation do not cause the Devil to enter into them. The circumstance of receiving therefore is no part of the comparison, for the comparison goes no further, than the entering in of the Devil."

This appears to be the true meaning of the Church, the order of whose words would otherwise have been," lest the Devil enter into you as he entered into Judas, after receiving that holy Sacrament.” As the exhortation is at present ended, the taking of the Sacrament is the peculiar offence of the unworthy Communicant; the entrance and energy of the Devil are alone common to him and to Judas.

This may be shewn to be the true order of the Evangelical History. Bishop Sandford in his "Lectures upon the history of the Week of the Passion of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, which at this season will engage and reward the attention of the Christian Scholar, thus arranges in correspondence with Dr.

Hales, the events which accom. panied the treachery of Judas, and his conduct before the last Supper. "Jesus checked the impetuosity of Peter by predicting that before the cock should crow twice he would deny him thrice.' But He who knew what was in man' had a heavier and more mournful lesson still to teach them how false may sometimes be the semblance of Enthusiasm. Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me,' were words to moderate the ardour of profession and to mortify the confidence of courage yet untried! They heard with deep dejection. "Lord, is it I?' was the only question their anxious hearts suggested or their trembling lips could frame. And he answered and said unto them; he that dippeth his hand with me in the dish, the same shall betray me.' Judas in his turn now asked, Master, is it I? Thou hast said,' was the affirmative reply. But this was probably uttered in a low tone by Jesus, and not heard by the other disciples. Thus far I follow the account given by St. Matthew. St. John adds some further eircumstances, in which his was the principal share. The disciples' he says, (probably not having heard the answer to Judas) 'looked on one another, doubting of whom he spoke.' Then Peter gave a sign to John, whose situation at the table, next to Jesus, gave him the opportunity of making the inquiry, to ask who was intended. Jesus answered in an under voice, He it is to whom I shall give a sop when I have dipped it.' It was the custom, at the second course, which they were now eating, for the master of the house to dip a piece of unleavened bread into the sallad of bitter herbs, and distribute to the guests. To Judas Iscariot was the sop delivered. And after the morsel Satan entered into him again, and took full possession of his heart. For finding that he was now detected by his master, and con

ceiving himself marked out to the whole company by this significant act, rage and fear impelled him to put his premeditated treachery into immediate execution. So he rose from the table, as we may conjecture from our Lord's words to him, What thou doest, do quickly.” Thereupon he immediately went out, and it was night.' But none of the disciples knew why Jesus thus spake to him, and even John does not appear to have collected, that the act of which our Lord. had given notice was to be immediate. Thus had the traitor full opportunity from the time at which he left the table, and the absence of all suspicion in his brethren, to concert his plan with the chief priests."

"Judas being departed our Lord proceeded to the third course of the Paschal feast; but here he laid aside the Jewish ritual and uncovering the bread, which as master of the family he had set apart be neath the napkin, he was pleased to institute the Sacrament, which was henceforth to supersede the typical and prefiguring observance, and by a commemorative representation to preserve the memory of his precious death till he come again." Lecture III.

This arrangement plainly agrees with the narratives of St. Matthew, and more especially of St. John, and sufficiently shews that Judas was not present at the institution and first celebration of the Lord's Supper, and that the Devil entered into him immediately after he had received the sop, and before our Lord proceeded to establish the me morial of his death. But can the absence of Iscariot be reconciled with the record of St. Luke, in whose Gospel our Lord is reported to have said, as in a continuous speech: " This cup is the New Testament in my blood, which is shed for you, but behold the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on the table." It is obvious to ask, how could the land be present,

if the person were absent? For the resolution of this difficulty, it will be of importance to consider, in what sense St. John uses the word immediately, when he says that Judas having received the sop went out immediately," and whether there is a necessary depen dence and connexion in the words of St. Luke.

; There can be no doubt, that the word immediately, may be used in a larger and a stricter sense; but in the present case if it is not used in the strict sense, it is altogether redundant. The short interval between the celebration of the Passover and the apprehension of our Lord, rendered, it necessary, that Judas should quickly leave the table; St. John is very distinct in describing the time, saying, that he went out immediately, that when he went out it was night, and that when he was gone, Jesus used the remarkable words: "Now is the Son of Man glorified, and God is glorified in him." The words of St. John therefore I conceive must be strictly interpreted.

*

But is it lawful to separate the words of St. Luke, so as to make them harmonize with those, of St. John, thus strictly interpreted. St. Luke is not remarkable for observing a precise and distinct order in his report either of discourses or of facts, of which his arrangement will be found to vary materially from those of the other Evangelists. In the present text, he does not him. self connect the two sentences, which he delivers in succession, by the conjunction and or but (xas, Ce, ", or aλ) but by the adversation particle, nevertheless (λ) which Schleusner translates præterea, Clarke in his paraphrase, separates the twentieth and twenty-first verses, introducing the latter as a new paragraph. Neither does St. Luke in the latter verse, use any verb, indicative of time past, present, or future: for the verb is in the authorized translation, is an interpolation REMEMBRANCER, No. 42.

properly printed in the Italic cha. racter. St. Luke uses the interjec tion Behold; to attract attention to something, wonderful, and extraordinary; and his words literally translated are: Nevertheless, (or furthermore) behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me on: the table. Now if it shall be con. ceded, that these words are not necessarily connected with those which precede them, it may also be admitted, that Iscariot was not: present when the former words were delivered, i. e. at the first celebration of the Sacrament. If this connexion and dependence shall be insisted upon, then the ellipsis of the verb in the twenty-first verse may be supplied by a verb in the past tense.

Behold that at such a time, when I am shedding my blood for you, the hand of the traitor should have been at the table with me. And truly the Son of Man goeth, as was determined, but woe unto that man by whom the Son of Man is betrayed. In either' case, it is not necessary to infer, that Judas was present at the institution of the Sacrament, or that he was a partaker of the mystical body and blood of Christ. In the more exact method of St. Matthew, the words of the twenty-first verse were delivered before the institution of the Supper: and the inquiry con-cerning the traitor, which in St. Luke immediately follows the delivery of these words, is in St. Matthew the occasion of introducing them. St. Luke's narrative will not therefore sustain the presence' of Judas at the first Eucharist: nor can his presence be inferred from the words in which our Lord says in reference to the number of his Apostles, "Ye shall sit upon twelvethrones judging the twelve tribes of Israel," for it is far more plain, that Judas, fell from that office, than that he was ever designed to fulfil it.

It is obvious to observe the ori tical exactness of our Church, in

U u