which, if attentively examined, will be found pertinent enough to the end in view, the apostle states, with great variety and copiousness of language, that the resurrection body will be spiritual, that is, refined and incorruptible (35-55). Hence he breaks forth into a triumphant exclamation over death and the grave, which, for grandeur and animation, has never been surpassed, even if it has been equalled and he concludes with an impressive exhortation to perseverance in that Christian course, the reward of which is at once so certain and so exalted.

I shall now offer short annotations on those verses of the chapter which may seem to require that kind of elucidation for the present, I shall limit myself to the division ending at the twentieth verse.

1, "the gospel which I preached unto you." Compare this clause with vers. 3-9, and three things will be evident. In the first place, that the gospel preached by Paul consisted mainly in facts; secondly, that those facts were, nevertheless, of the highest importance; and, thirdly, that they were the same with what the other apostles taught.

Ib. and 3, "received." The Corinthians received this gospel from the lips of Paul, who himself received it specially from Jesus Christ. See 1 Cor. xi. 23; Gal. i. 9, 12.

3, 4, "according to the Scriptures:" i. e. to the prophetic Scriptures of the Jews. Luke xxiv. 27; John v. 39. It is probable that Paul might have the fifty-third chapter of Isaiah specifically in his view.

of the twelve;"* the body of the apostles known under such a designation, though not then amounting to that number" all the apostles," as in ver. 7.

6, " above five hundred brethren," &c. Neither this appearance nor the interview with James, mentioned in the next verse, is noticed by the evangelists. However, such appeals by Paul to witnesses still living, are among the strongest indications of sincerity and truth.

8, "

he was seen of me also." Hence, and from Acts

Some of the early transcribers, &c., were perplexed by this form of expression, and read "the eleven," very incorrectly. See Griesbach in loc.

i. 21, 22, we may conclude, that it was one essential qualification of a Christian apostle, to have seen the Lord Jesus personally.

10, "I laboured more abundantly than they all." By this language Paul does not mean to disparage the rest of the apostles, but only to state an undoubted truth, which the circumstances of the infant church required him to assert. His special commission to the Gentiles, placed him in a wider sphere of service, and called for more intense exertions; and, since his apostolical office and authority had been slighted by some of his converts, though not by his fellow-labourers, he judged it needful to describe the manner in which they had been sanctioned and honoured. 12, no resurrection of the dead." It is material that we keep in view the subject of this part of the epistle. The question, as between Paul and those on whom he animadverted, was, not whether there will be a future life, but whether there will be a resurrection of the dead. These two points must not be confounded with each other. We shall soon perceive the importance of regarding them distinctly, and with discrimination They are mutually related indeed a resurrection is the means-a future life, the end; to Christians a resurrection is the sure and certain proofto the eye of their faith and hope a future life is the object proved. Now things mutually related, cannot be strictly the same. In these considerations we shall find a key to the subsequent reasoning of our apostle.

17, "your faith is vain," &c. "It has no solid evidence on which to rest; and you are destitute of all just hope of pardon, and must remain in your heathen state of ignorance, alienation, and guilt.'

19, "If in this life only we have hope in Christ, we are of all men most miserable." This statement was perfectly accurate as to the apostles and the Christians of their age: nor must it be extended further. Paul draws no contrast here between the lower animals and man; none between wicked and sensual men, and the consistent disciples of Christ, who live not in times of persecution. The 30th, 31st, and 32d verses, interpret this verse, and shew why and how it should be restricted.

I greatly approve of Bishop Pearce's suggestion as to the rendering of the former of the two clauses: he proposes to translate it thus: "If in this life we have hoped in Christ

only."*-The words are not fairly applicable to our Lord's followers in general. Paul himself speaks elsewhere of godliness as being profitable for the life which now is, "and for that which is to come:" in the ordinary circumstances and seasons of the world, the Christian uniformly finds religious virtue to be the source of his present happiness; and the verse on which I am commenting, is sadly perverted and abused when annotators or preachers would teach us that had we no hopes of a better life after this, "we Christians should be the most abandoned and wretched of creatures."

[To be continued.]

N.

ADDRESS OF THE

CATHOLIC ASSOCIATION TO THE PRO

TESTANT DISSENTERS OF ENGLAND.

[Concluded from p. 80.]

We now come to our SECOND assertion,-"That the Catholic religion is favourable to liberty of conscience." To prove this assertion, we also appeal to history. History tells us, that after the Reformation persecution was a crime committed indiscriminately by all sects. Catholics persecuted because they were strong. Protestants, as they grew into strength, immediately persecuted the Catholics and as they varied in their Protestant sects, they persecuted each other.

Amidst this horrid scene of unchristian, criminal, and abominable persecution, what denomination of Christians was it that gave the first bright example of religious tole

* Commentary, &c., in loc.

+ 1 Tim. iv. 8.

Atterbury, before he was raised to the episcopal bench, preached a Funeral Sermon for Mr. Thomas Bennet, on this text it was printed separately, and, again, in the second volume of the Bishop's Discourses (1723), where it forms the subject of "a large preface" -a preface much longer than itself! Hoadly opposed the doctrine and reasoning of the Discourse, which are what I have described above; and he had the last word, and, which is not always the same thing, the triumph, both of temper and argument, in the controversy. See his Works, Vol. 1. 48-107.

Mr. Bennet was an eminent London bookseller: he married into the family of Whitewrong, and, in consequence, occupied Rothamstead, in the parish of Harpenden, near St. Alban's, in the county of Hertford. Nichols' Lit, Anec, &c., Vol. III. 710, &c., and VIII. 448.

ration? This is an interesting inquiry every man feels it's importance and may well repeat with impatience the important question,-What was the first Christian denomination that disarmed persecution of legal power, and generously conceded to all freedom of conscience?

4

With what generous exultation do we answer that question? It was it was the Catholics! The Catholic state of Maryland, whose Catholic legislature enacted the first law of religious liberty of perfect freedom of conscience. It was passed in the year 1649. By whose hand was that statute drawn up? Listen to the fact, oh! British prejudice, by the hand of a Jesuit.

This noble Catholic example has been widely imitated. To cite a few instances: In the year 1792, the Catholic Parliament the Diet of Hungary, passed a gracious emancipation law in favour of their Protestant brethren. The Protestants were less than one-fifth of the population. The Catholic Diet gave them up one-third of the churches, and totally exempted them from payment of tithes to the Catholic, being the established, clergy.

Protestant Dissenters of England, has it ever entered into your waking thoughts, or do you even dream of obtaining a similar concession from a fellow-Protestant Parliament And as you do not pray pause before you infix the stain of bigotry on Catholics, who have granted to Protestants that valuable immunity which one sect of Protestants deem impossible to be asked for or conceded to other Protestants.

Again, we cite the recent instance of Bavaria. There, a Catholic king, fervent, and even rigid, in the practical exercise of his own religion, has repealed all the ancient persecuting laws, and granted to his Protestant subjects with whom he differs, a perfect equalization of civil rights with his Catholic subjects, with whom he agrees sincerely in religious belief, and has given civil liberty to both.

Again, in France, a Catholic king, strict in all the obser vances, and sincere in the practice, of his own religion, admits to his councils, and employs in the highest official stations of his realm, his Protestant, indiscriminately with his Catholic subjects whilst the Protestant is perfectly equal with the Catholic in the eye of the law; and the Protestant clergyman is paid by the state more liberally, by onefifth, than the Catholic priest, although the Catholic is declared by law to be the established religion of that state.

From foreign Catholic states we turn to our own domestic concerns, and here, Protestant Englishmen, we stand on a proud pre-eminence. Protestant historians have gratefully recorded the precious fact-"THAT THE IRISH CA

THOLICS ARE THE ONLY SECT THAT EVER RESUMED POWER WITHOUT EXERCISING VENGEANCE.

"Shew me a brighter instance, if you can, in the page of history?" We repeat the question of a distinguished Protestant writer.

The Catholics of Ireland-blessed be God for it-have shewn two such examples.

The

The last was in the reign of James the Second. Irish Parliament was, during that reign, composed of more than five-sixths Catholics. They never persecuted one single Protestant; they never passed one persecuting law; they enacted several laws favourable to civil and religious liberty.

But we go back, with great pleasure, to a former period -and here indeed our honest exultation is perfectly justifi able.

4

English Protestants, you have often heard of Queen Mary. Bloody Mary is chimed into your ears from childhood to the grave. Bloody Mary is the theme of Fox's ly ing legends, and of all your grave historians. We do not mean to excuse her conduct, or even to palliate it. We leave it to English Catholics, if they think fit, to recount the savage and treacherous machinations which were ar ranged, and the open attacks which were made upon the throne and her life, before she commenced the career of her odious persecution. We leave it to the English Catholics to shew, if they think fit, how Mary retaliated on the authors of cruelty their own horrible atrocities, and to detail with what unrelenting vengeance Elizabeth and James made sanguinary compensation for the crimes of Mary.

We neither excuse or palliate her crimes, but we turn to her history, in order to place in stronger light, and more direct contrast, the conduct of the Catholics of Ireland du ring her reign.

Protestant Englishmen, are you acquainted with that conduct? Do you know how the Irish Catholics treated the Protestants during the reign of Queen Mary?

It is time you should know it. But before we state that conduct, let us call to your recollection, that the Catholics of Ireland had been persecuted-bitterly persecuted, during