him. Even in the midst of bodily anguish, he constantly exerted himself in sustaining the spirits of his much-loved relatives, and never was he heard to utter a single murmur or complaint on his own account. If, with a mind so habitually prepared for death, any earthly thought could have occasioned him distress, it must have been the prospect of leaving his wife and children in a world so full of sin and sorrow. But such was the strength by which he was mercifully supported in this prospect, that even this could not rob him of the Christian's peace and consolation in the approach of dissolution. With the writer of this memoir he conversed frequently and unreservedly upon this subject, and always with a calmness which none but the sincere believer can experience at such a crisis. "With respect to myself," said he, "blessed be God, I have not a single doubt remaining. I trust-I feel that I am ready to depart. Nor do I experience any apprehension concerning those so dear to me on earth; for He, without whose permission not even a sparrow falleth to the ground, has graciously assured us that his reasonable creatures are of more value than many sparrows: and to His care and guidance I leave them without fear or distrust."

Thus prepared for death, he received its final summons with composure, and even with joy. After various alternations of pain and comparative relief, the abscess at length burst on the 7th of December, producing for some days constant and exquisite suffering, as well as increasing emaciation and debility. The rest will best be told in the words of an affecting funeral sermon preached on the occasion of his death, by an eminently pious clergyman, who had long known and appreciated his excellence, and was constantly near him throughout his last illness.

"During his last hours, he was calm and full of hope: he had joy in his expected rest. The way was

rough and painful to his mortal frame; but he knew that he had in heaven a better and an enduring substance. Such blessed knowledge comforts, refreshes, and fills the soul; it raises a man above himself. Every trial of the Christian is assuredly appointed by God in love and mercy. If he chastens, he sustains, and refines when he tries. When faith is in lively exercise, it will bear a man above great distresses; for it enables him to dis-. cern a merciful providence, sure promises, and a faithful God. It was this which sustained our departed brother. No complaint was ever heard to escape from his lips. He was fully aware of the near approach of his dissolution: he said,

I am dying, I am going to leave you; but I am prepared for the event-I am happy!' He desired his friends around him to pray that he might be dismissed to his rest. He said himself, Lord Jesus, come near unto me; and, if it be thy will, release me! He exhorted those around him, as his last hour approached, to be reconciled to God, and expressed his earnest wish that his children should be brought up in his fear. He repeatedly said, with great energy, No pain, and no fears.' He clasped his hands together, and exclaimed, Come, come.' His whole manner was marked by an anxious desire to relieve the minds of those about him. Nothing could be more peaceful than his final dissolution., For the last three or four hours he seemed to be dying, but life again appeared. At length, however, his happy spirit was released, and returned to God who gave it. Thus, at the early age of thirtythree years, this faithful servant of God 'fell asleep in Jesus."" He died without a struggle or a sigh, on the morning of the 21st of December 1825. He is now delivered from the bondage of corruption into the glorious liberty of the children of God. Now, freed from all darkness, and doubts, and fears, he is

drinking, from the pure Fountain of life and happiness, draughts of unmixed and uninterrupted felicity. His warfare is ended; and he is wearing a crown of glory, "the prize of the high calling of God in Christ Jesus." He is now fully acquainted with the wisdom and mercy of the dispensations of God towards him; and, with the assembled saints in glory, is singing Hallelujahs of praise to that God "who has led him by a way that he knew not," and brought him to the holy company of angels in heaven, with apostles and martyrs, who "came out of great tribulation, and have washed their robes, and made them white in the blood of the Lamb." He is now, with adoring gratitude, confessing that "the Lord is righteous in all his ways, and holy in all his works; for he has exchanged a life of pain and sorrow of difficulty and trials, for rest and peace with God-earth for heaven, and time for a glorious eternity.

I subjoin to this imperfect memoir the following extract from a letter written, on the occasion of Mr. Martyr's death, by another eminently pious clergyman, who was intimately acquainted with his character, and who thus bears testimony to his worth and excellence.

"His departure," says he, "is to me a dark and mysterious providence. He promised fair to be one of the most valuable and useful men I ever knew. There are very many to whom the prolonged existence on earth of this man might have been of unspeakable value; but God knows best how to manage his own family and to dispose of them. I hardly expected, at my advanced time of life, ever to become so intimately attached to any man as 1 was to him; but as such characters are taken away, the affections of those who love and fear God are gradually transferred to the world of spirits. If they have one fewer friend on earth, they have one more in heaven."

man

The memory of such a cannot but be long cherished in the hearts of all who knew him, with feelings of lively and tender emotion; and, even to those who were personally unacquainted with him, the memorial of his Christian life and death must furnish much valuable instruction. They will here see exemplified the all-important truth, that vital religion alone can minister consolation in the time of life, support the mind in sickness, and cheer the departing spirit at the hour of death. The effects produced in this instance were not singular; for such will invariably proceed from the same operating An inseparable connexion exists between a life of holiness and a death, if not of triumph or even of perfect repose, (for many eminent Christians have suffered much depression in their last hours,) yet, what is far better, of safety; and they who would secure the latter should, like him who is gone to his rest, be diligent in cultivating the former.

cause.

And who that contemplates the cheerful resignation, and peaceful end of this faithful servant of God, can forbear exclaiming from his heart, "Let me die the death of the righteous, and let my last end be like his!"

W. E. PARRY.

Tothe Editorofthe Christian Observer. SINCE a theorem is never duly appreciated till it is put to the test of experiment, 1 will endeavour to shew, in a specific instance, the truth of Mr. Faber's general proposition, concerning the use of the Fathers in controversy. I would premise that I take them only as evidence*, not as authority; as wit

The term arbiter is generally used of an authoritative judge, to whom a cause is referred in the last resort. This term must therefore be understood in a very qualified sense, when applied to the ancient Fathers, since it is now admitted that they rather resemble a witness giving evidence than a judge passing a definitive

sentence.

nesses to the sentiments of the church in their own day, not as interpreters from whose decision lies no appeal.

The instance I am going to allege, may be of use to a numerous class of your readers, and may induce some other correspondent to furnish and apply extracts more interesting, and from ecclesiastical writers less known, than the one I am about to cite; namely, Eusebius. The following passage occurs in his Ecclesiastical History, book V. chapter xxviii. Valerius's edition.

"In a work written against the heresy of Artemon (which heresy Paul of Samosata, endeavoured to revive in our own times), there is a passage which will throw some light on the subjects we are investigating in this history. The author is confuting those who endeavoured to assign high antiquity to this heresy, which makes Christ a mere man; and, amongst other arguments against this impious fiction, he makes these observations following, which I transcribe word for word*. "They say that all the ancients, and even the Apostles themselves, received and taught the very same things which they now maintain; and that the truth was preserved in its original purity to the time of Victor, the thirteenth bishop of Rome from Peter, but was adulterated under his successor Zephyrinus: which assertion of their's might perhaps have been credible, had not, in the first place, the sacred writings been against them; and then the books of several brethren who lived before Victor, and wrote in defence of the truth against the Pagans and Heretics of their time; I mean Justin, Miltiades, Tatian, and Clement, and many more, who all maintain

Lardner, in his "Credibility," had occasion to quote this passage, and he has omitted from "The author is," &c. to "They say." The omitted passage contains Eusebius's own testimony against the doctrine of Artemon and Paul of Samosata, which were probably Lardner's also.

† Inclusively: Victor died about 196

A.D.

the Divinity of Christ: for who is ignorant of those works of Irenæus, Melito, and others, in which Christ is declared to be both God and man? Besides, there are many psalms and hymns composed long since by faithful men, in which Christ is celebrated as the Logos, or Word of God, and has divine attributes ascribed to him. Such being for so many years the judgment of the churches, how can it possibly be true, that the doctrine preached from the beginning, down to the end of Victor's episcopate, was that which they hold? I wonder they are not ashamed to include Victor in this false accusation, when they very well know that Theodotus the tanner, the founder of this Goddenying apostasy was excommunicated by Victor, as being the first who said Christ was a mere man; for, if Victor himself held that opinion which they impiously teach, how could he excommunicate Theodotus the inventor of it?' [Here Eusebius finishes his quotation, and resumes his own narrative.] This is all I have to say concerning Victor and the period in which he flourished: after he had held his office ten years he was succeeded in it by Zephyrinus, in the ninth year of the reign of Severus. The author of the above-mentioned work against the heresy of Artemon relates another affair, which happened under Zephyrinus: this is his account of it, word for word I will remind many of my brethren of something which occurred in our own times,""&c.

Eusebius then relates the case of Natalius, a confessor, as stated by this anonymous author.-It seems he had adopted the sentiments of Artemon and Theodotus, and was made a bishop of their party with an annual pecuniary provision, but was afterwards wrought upon by some signal affliction to return to that church which he had forsaken, and into which he was re-admitted by Zephyrinus. This was done in his own times, as the author himself as

sures us: he lived therefore under Zephyrinus, the immediate successor of Victor; and must therefore be an unexceptionable witness to a fact so recent, and of such notoriety, as the excommunication of Theodotus by Victor. If we should admit that some credulity and superstition appear in his account of Natalius, this will by no means impair his credibility as a witness to a public transaction; for the truth of which he appeals to his opponents, who, he says, knew it for certain.

Should any Unitarian accidentally peruse this brief extract from Eusebius, he is requested to weigh it impartially, and calculate what is the amount of its testimony, as evidence of the sentiments of the church at this early period; namely, 160 years after the death of Christ, and about 100 after the death of the

Apostle John. As to those expressions which he may deem offensive, I can only say, I have translated them exactly; at least I have not designedly aggravated them: they are the expressions not only of the anonymous author, but also of the learned Eusebius himself, who, in his introduction to this quotation ranks its author with orthodox and ecclesiastical men. I would first request him to notice this fact, that the Unitarians of this early period asserted, that the Roman Church had believed Christ to be a mere man from the beginning of the Gospel to the death of their Bishop Victor, but had adulterated the truth under his successor Zephyrinus: they admit therefore, that the Church of Rome was not of their sentiments, A.D. 196 (or very soon after); that it was so before A.D. 196—namely, at the decease of Victor, and all through the period occupied by his twelve predecessors the Artemonians asserted, and this anonymous author denies, in which denial Eusebius himself clearly concurs. Let the Unitarian preacher observe by what authority the anonymous writer supports his denial of their assertion, and the order

in which he arranges his arguments: first, the sacred Scriptures, then the writings of Justin, Miltiades, Tatian, Clement, Irenæus, Melito, and many others; then certain psalms and hymns which were of considerable antiquity, and ascribed divine honour to Christ; and lastly, the excommunication of Theodotus, within the writer's recollection, for being >the first propagator of this opinion at Rome. I am not now arguing from the sacred Scriptures, but from the testimony of the Fathers; and we find in this extract from their writings, positive evidence that the doctrine of the mere humanity of Christ was a novel heresy publicly condemned at Rome about A.D. 190; that at this early period it was considered as being at variance not only with the sacred Scriptures, but also with a succession of Christian authors then extant, and generally esteemed in the churches, and also with several hymns which were even then called ancient. may be justly called abundant evidence, if we take into account the shortness of the interval which it occupies, for there is little more than 100 years between the beginning of Zephyrinus's precedency and the latest of the canonical books of the New Testament. Let the Unitarian. conscientiously and carefully compute the amount of the counter-testimony which he has to produce, and see whether it is or is not over-balanced by the authority of this succession of wit

nesses.

This

Let him collect and produce the few fragments of history which can with any semblance of probability, prove that the primitive apostolic church believed Christ to be a mere man. If he will still maintain that the Church of Rome became what he considers idolatrous as early as A. D. 196, and that the memorials of her short period of what he considers orthodoxy are perished, let him search for some remnants of the true original Christianity in that part of the world where this religion first appeared ;*

:

let him turn his eyes towards that country where Jesus was born and died, and where the doctrine of his sole humanity is most likely to have been deeply infixed in men's minds by his actual presence, and to have been the longest preserved by the recollections of many coevals; there, on the very spot where Jesus died, he will find, in the 18th year of Ad rian, A. D. 136, a Christian church composed of Gentile believers and Jews who had entirely renounced Judaism were these of his sentiments? Eusebius, who wa sborn in this very country only 134 years after the founding of this church of Ælia*, and constantly resided in that country, has made frequent mention of this church in his Ecclesiastical History: he has given the names of its bishops from Marcus, who was the first, to his own times. He has mentioned several particulars, especially concerning Narcissus and his successor Alexander. His approbation of this church is sometimes expressed, and always implied; and his disapprobation of the Ebionites is as clearly expressed, though they also were his countrymen, and he could not be ill informed respecting them: he says positively, that they held Christ to be a mere man, and condemns them for it.-The church of Ælia therefore, which is identified with that of Cæsarea, did not hold this doctrine of the Ebionites: the later bishops of Ælia (Jerusalem), near Eusebius's time, were the friends and disciples of Origen, who certainly did not believe that Christ was a mere man. If it be alleged that this church of Ælia, though collected only sixty-five years after the dissolution of the mother church of Jerusalem, and on the very same spot, was not its legitimate successor, the true aboriginal church having fled to . Pella just before the siege began: then let evidence be produced that the church of Pella, or that the Jewish Christians who returned from that place to the ruins of Jerusa* Built by Adrian, on the site of Jerusalem.

CHRIST. OBSERV. No. 293.

lem, were of Unitarian sentiments: and this will tend to prove that the parent stock from which they were transplanted, namely, the church founded at Jerusalem by Peter, James, and John, was of the same sentiments. But what evidence can be produced to establish this point?Eusebius does not appear to have had any materials respecting the church at Pella; but he says (book iii. c. xi.) that, after the destruction of Jerusalem by Titus, the surviving apostles and disciples assembled from different quarters and chose Symeon to succeed James the last bishop of Jerusalem: he gives the names of thirteen bishops after Symeon, who filled up the interval of sixty-five years between the destruction of Jerusalem, and Adrian's edict, which banished all Jews and Jewish Christians from the neighbourhood: were these thirteen bishops of Judæa predecessors of Artemon and Theodotus, and the only faithful depositaries of the genuine tradition respecting the human nature of Jesus? Let Eusebius answer the question. He says, book iii. c. xxxv., that very many Jews became Christians under Justus, the successor of Symeon, and that the whole Jewish church observed still the Mosaic Law; and he says of this recruited church (book iv. c. xxii.) that there were some disorders in it, of which Thebuthis, in Symeon's time, was the first mover: but this departure from sound doctrine was not prevalent, for he says that the bishops of this Jewish church of Palestine were "all Hebrews, and retained the genuine knowledge of Christ" (book iv. c. v.) This expression ynowe from the pen of Eusebius proves, that all the successors of James and Symeon, bishops of Jerusalem, were, as Eusebius was, believers in the Divinity of Christ; and Sulpitius Severus (about 100 years after Eusebius), speaking of this very period and of this same church of Palestine in Adrian's reign, has these remarkable words; "Tum pæne omnes Christum Deum sub legis observatione credebant," 2 M