happiness of existence; perfect holiness, deliverance from all evil, the fruition of God in everlasting blessedness. Now I would ask, Who was competent to confer such a gift as this? Who is able, both to give existence, and to make that existence perfectly and immortally happy? Whom would a serious and rational person, in his last moments, choose to invoke and rely upon for this greatest of all blessings; for the highest enjoyment that divine benevolence can, to all eternity, confer upon a dependent being? And can it be imagined, that this distinguished saint, a man divinely enlightened in the knowledge of Christian truth,* who was so favoured with preternatural discoveries of heavenly realities, that "he saw the glory of God,"-should, in his extremity, turn from the Living and Almighty God and repose his last act of faith and confidence upon a mere fellow-creature? Upon the principles of those who hold the third sentiment, it will be readily granted that the object which the martyr desired was the eternal salvation of his soul, his immediate reception to the state of purity and happiness, "to be with Christ, where he is, and to behold his glory." He asked, therefore, of the Lord Jesus, the GREATEST GOOD that immortal existence can receive, or that even OMNIPOTENT LOVE can *He is described as "a man full of faith and the Holy Spirit, full of faith and power." Chap. vi. 5, 8. bestow ! And did he ask this of one who was only a fellow-man, however dignified? For these reasons, I cannot but regard the notion, that it was allowable in Stephen to pray to Jesus, because "he actually saw him,"* as a childish and imbecile subterfuge, incapable of freeing the martyr, upon the Unitarian hypothesis itself, from the charge of absurdity, profaneness, and idolatry. For, let it be observed, that the point of the case is not a mere "address to Jesus," as it is artfully represented: but it lies in this, that the incontrovertible meaning and purport of the words used by Stephen, was a prayer for the GREATEST of possible blessings; a petition which would have been equally preposterous and irreligious, whether offered to a visible or an invisible being, unless that being were over all, God blessed for ever." 66 But the Calm Inquirer will not be moved by these reasonings. He does not hesitate at the broad insinuation that this dying act of faith and devotion was an act of disobedience to Christ.+ Was it, then, in scorn and irony that, in the *"This address of Stephen to Jesus when he actually saw him, does not authorize us to offer prayers to him, now he is invisible." Impr. Vers. Annot. + "The solitary unauthorized example of this good man would of itself be no sufficient warrant for a practice contrary to the precepts of Christ, and the doctrine of his apostles, which are the only proper directory of Christian worship." Page 373. same breath, he denominates Stephen "this good man, this holy proto-martyr ?" Or are his notions of duty and of sin so lax, that, in his account, worship"unauthorized" and "contrary to the precepts of Christ," was a trifling error, an inconsiderable weakness, such as we may very calmly attribute to one of the most eminent of the Saviour's disciples; and may even expect to find it recorded in the apostolic history, not only without censure but with every appearance of approbation? He says that this is a 'solitary example." But it should be observed that it is the only circumstantial account of the death of a disciple of Christ, which it has pleased the wisdom of inspiration to preserve in the New Testament. It is, indeed, one; but it is all: and therefore we have a right to regard it as instar omnium; as equivalent, for all the purposes of instruction and example, to the possession of a larger number of instances. It is, however, the fact that the New Testament furnishes us with references to the death of Christians, which are 'very remarkably impressed with the same character as this of Stephen, a peculiar and distinguished respect to the Lord Jesus Christ. Believers, at their mortal dissolution, are described as "fallen asleep in Christ, dead in Christ, fallen asleep through Jesus, blessed henceforth [as] dying in the Lord :"* and when the apostles Peter * 1 Cor. xv. 18. 1 Thess, iv. 14, 16, τοὺς κοιμηθέντας διὰ τοῦ Ἰησοῦ. and Paul write in anticipation of their own death, it is very observable that the thought in their minds was most intimately associated with the authority, power, and glory of our Lord Jesus Christ.* The Inquirer also pronounces this example to be "unauthorized." Surely logical equity, leaving modesty out of the question, might have taught him to spare this assumption. If, by being authorized, he refers to the general warrant of Christianity, I appeal to the judgment of the serious and impartial reader, upon the evidence which has been and may be laid before him. If the expression be taken as respecting Stephen's personal knowledge of the principles of his religion, and his own obligations and duty; I humbly submit that it is, in a very high degree presumptuous and unreasonable for a writer of the nineteenth century, who professes himself to be an obedient believer in the religion of the New Testament, thus to question the authority, and to condemn the practice of an apostolic Is it not a plain and rational interpretation of this phrase, that these Christians had enjoyed a peaceful and happy death, through the grace and power of their Redeemer ?-Rev. xiv. 13. * See 2 Pet. i. 14, 15, 16. 2 Tim. iv. 6, 7, 8. If, in 2 Tim. i. 12, πаρaðýиŋ were understood to express the deposit of the apostle's personal and eternal interest, the sentiment would be remarkably conformable to that of Stephen's prayer. But I apprehend that the occurrence of the word in v. 14, and in 1 Tim. vi. 20, determines it to the sense of the great charge of the Christian religion, its preservation and prosperity in the world. Christian, a man evidently held in the first rank of approbation by the inspired servants of Christ, and of whom we have no right to doubt that he was himself inspired; "a man full of faith and of the HOLY SPIRIT." Certainly this writer has little considered, whether he was not assuming the character of certain disputants against Stephen, who could not resist the wisdom and the Spirit by which he spake :" and therefore they accused him of "speaking blasphemous words. What man of scriptural wisdom and humble piety, will not say; Let me die as Stephen died! Let his faith and devotion be mine! But let me not be numbered with those who think themselves qualified to judge and censure him. Before quitting this example, our attention is due to the second prayer of this Christian martyr: "Lord, lay not this sin to their charge!" We have not the least reason to suppose that there was any change in the object of this address, from that of the first. The contiguity of the two, and the compellation, (which is the style of address usually applied to Christ in the Acts and Epistles), give the superior probability to this inference. Let us then, observe the purport of the prayer; an intercession for the pardon of sin, of great and enormous sin. This blessing is implored from the Lord Jesus: thus proceeding on the belief of his right and power to FORGIVE SINS. In this passage, therefore, we have |