which seem to slight good works, and make every thing of faith, or mere belief; and that the severe rebukes and warnings which are contained in the latter portion of it, were the chief occasion of the writer's being stoned to death by the Jewish populace; as that event is supposed to have taken place a short time after the publication of the epistle.

That the encomium of James on good works was intended to explain some of those things in Paul's writings which were hard to be understood, is not improbable; but that it is in direct opposition to them, as some have thought, is not only improbable but impossible. For it is impossible to read Paul's description of charity, in which he declares that it is greater than both faith and hope, and still to believe that he would so directly contradict himself as to reverse this order, and exalt faith above charity; or that he intended by what he calls works, and the works of the law, what we mean by good works and christian morality or virtue. The world have been too long, and much too vehemently disputing about the relative superiority of faith and works, and arraying James against Paul, and Paul against himself. It was, perhaps, a strong bias toward one side of this controversy, or rather a bigoted and dogmatical attachment to it, quite as much as any doubts of the genuineness and antiquity of James' epistle, which induced Luther to call it, in contempt, 'an epistle of straw.' Despite, however, of this coarse epithet of the Reformer, it has maintained its authority in the christian church; an authority, which, if intrinsic excellence and internal evidence have any weight, it amply deserves.

JUDE.

THE apostle who stands the tenth on Matthew's list, and is there called 'Lebbeus whose surname was Thaddeus,' is called in Mark's catalogue, 'Thaddeus,' and in Luke's, Judas the brother of James.' We cannot fail to remark how carefully he is always distinguished from the other Judas. Matthew and Mark avoid naming him by the name which he held in common with the traitor; and Luke takes care to distinguish him, by adding to that ill omened appellation, that he was the brother of James.

All that is said of him in the sacred histories, is, that at the last supper he asked Jesus why he was to manifest himself to his disciples, and not to the world. He was moved to put this question by the views, which, in common with the other disciples, he entertained of the coming of the Messiah; who, as he thought, was to declare himself at last, with great pomp and external power. It was a mystery to him, therefore, how this victorious display was to be made to the

small number of his disciples alone, and not to the whole admiring world. The answer of Jesus was not then, in all probability, understood. The meaning and substance of it was, that he and his Father would manifest themselves to those alone, and dwell in those alone, who loved him with that holy love, the fruits of which were righteousness and peace. This strong and beautiful declaration of the spirituality of the Messiah's kingdom, is to be added to those which I have already noticed. The circumstance is related by John in the fourteenth chapter of his Gospel, who designates the apostle as 'Judas, not Iscariot.' No light is any where thrown upon his character; and all that we know of his condition, is, that he was the brother of James the Less, and consequently a cousin of our Lord.

Other accounts of this apostle are so various and contradictory, that it would be wasting time to quote any of them. It is not known with certainty where he preached, or where he died, or whether he died a natural death, or suffered martyrdom. Most of the Latin writers say, that he travelled into Persia, where his labors were very successful, but where, having irritated the Magi by reproving them for their superstitious practices, he was put to a violent death. Some of the Greeks affirm that he died quietly at Berytus; and the Armenians contend that in their country he was martyred.

One epistle has been so generally ascribed to Judas, or Jude, that it has been admitted into the canon of the New Testament. There is hardly another book, however, in that canon, which has been so much dis

puted. And yet there is no solid reason for rejecting the early tradition, which gives it to this apostle. It was known in the first century, and there is no internal evidence against its apostolic origin.

SIMON ZELOTES.

THE next in order is another Simon, who, in the catalogues of Matthew and Mark, is surnamed 'the Canaanite,' and in that of Luke's Gospel, and the book of Acts, 'Zelotes.' Some have thought that the surname, Canaanite, denoted the birthplace of the apostle; but others, with more probability, suppose that Canaanite is merely a Hebrew word, having the same signification with Zelotes, the Greek word used by Luke, and which means a zealot, or one who is extremely zealous. Simon may have received this appellation on account of his having once belonged to a sect or faction among the Jews, who were called Zealots, or only on account of the warmth of his disposition, or the ardor with which he espoused and maintained the cause of Jesus.

It is highly probable, though not certain, that he is the same Simon who is mentioned as one of the brethren or cousins of our Lord. Of the history of his life nothing whatever is known; although the later writers, and martyrologists of the church, pretend, as usual, to be intimately acquainted with it, and give us our