22. David, "by the instigation of the Lord, numbered the people of Israel and Judah ; but afterwards, being probably ignorant by whose instigation he had acted, he repented of the deed. This repentance did not excuse him in the sight of the Lord, who offered him to chuse either "seven years" famine, three months defeat before his enemies, or three days pestilence. David chose the latter, and seventy thousand men died. This memorable event has not escaped the inspired penman of the Book of Chronicles,† who affirms," that Satan stood up against Israel, and provoked David to number them;" but God was dis pleased with this thing, and therefore smote Israel. David repenting, was offered from God his choice, either "three years famine, three months destruction before his enemies, or three days pestilence;" the lat ter of which he chose, and there died of Israel seventy thousand men.

Our too curious and inquisitive opposers, who are unwilling to believe" cunningly devised fables,"‡ enquire how it could be a crime in David to number the people, especially as it was by the instigation of the Lord. They beg to be informed, whether the Lord, and Satan, be one and the same person; and if not, which of the two was the instigator of this unhappy business, and likewise which of the two "infallible" and "inspired" writers teils the lie? Lastly, they cannot conceive how the seven years famine in the Book of Samuel is dwindled into three in the Chronicles. To all these questions we answer, that it was

*2 Sam. xxiv.

† 1 Chron. xxi.

+ 2 Pet. i. 16.

sufficient to make this action of David's criminal, that the Lord disliked it after it was done; and as to its being done by his instigation, we must observe, that it is no uncommon thing for the Lord to be angry with his servants for obeying his commands.

23. The instance of Balaam is a case in point. Hence we infer, that, in the commands of the Lord, there is always a clause implied or understood, which leaves it to the discretion of the faithful to act as they think proper. It is true, that this position leads immediately to the doctrines of the Jesuits, which have been so universally abhorred: but why need we regard the abhorrence of the world, while we are convinced that our tenets are scriptural? With regard to the affairs of Satan and the Lord, we leave it to your Lordships' management; but cannot help observing with derision, the futility of the objections respecting the three and seven years' famine. They have little skill in divine arithmetic, if this affords them any embarrassment. They know nothing of the sublime logic by which divines prove three to be one, and one to be three. For example, if it were affirmed that Eldon is a Lord, Castlereagh is a Lord, and Sidmouth is a Lord, and yet they are not three Lords, but one Lord, this would be termed absolute and ridiculous nonsense, notwithstanding their close Ministerial union. But in holy matters it is quite otherwise,† as might easily be elucidated by instances too sacred to be commented upon by any unconsecrated individual.

24. Another instance of the imperfection of the

Qu. 16.

+ See an excellent specimen of this in the Creed commonly ascribed to St. Athanasius.

art of arithmetic, as it is erroneously taught in our schools, appears in its affording no rule by which the two genealogies of Jesus Christ may be reconciled to each other. Matthew reckons twenty-seven generations from David to Christ. Luke reckons fortytwo; and the names totally disagree. Matthew traces the descent from Solomon, and Luke from Nathan, both sons of David. According to our feeble notions, twenty-seven cannot be equal to forty-two, neither can Nathan, &c. be imagined to be Solomon, &c. The infidels suppose, that the two evangelists, rather than the church should be without the genealogy of its founder, chose to invent them; but we good Christians, who know that both writers were infallible and inspired, are ready to reject the clearest axioms of mere human science, and allow that, in sacred matters, the greater number may be equal to the less. These cavillers and infidels also demand how these genealogies of Joseph prove, that Jesus was the son of David, when it is avowed that Joseph was not his father? But they do not consider, that a married man is obliged to father all the children his wife may produce; and if this answer does not satisfy them, they must at all events confess, that Joseph was father-in-law to Jesus, by being married to his mother; consequently Jesus was son (in-law) to Joseph, Q. E. D. As there is no answering for the perverseness of men, there may perhaps be some, whom even this demonstration will not, satisfy. To these we offer an argument discovered by the truly profound Mr. Pascal. He justly observes,

* Les "faiblesses" les plus apparentes sont des "forces" à ceux qui prennent bien les choses. Par example les deux généa

that when two witnesses disagree in the circumstances of a fact, we ought to believe them so much the more readily on that account, as it shews that they did not contrive the story in concert. This remark, it is to be hoped, will likewise put an end to the absurd custom which prevails in our courts of justice, of discrediting evidences, which contradict each other, such contradictions being in reality a mark of truth, "à ceux qui prennent bien les choses."

25. It is much to be wished, that some of our spiritual directors, who have leisure time and large incomes, would be at the pains to rectify and adjust to the standard of holy writ, the many errors and omissions of profane historians.

When Christ was baptized by John, the heavens were opened, and a voice was heard, declaring his divine origin. Such a prodigy must have awakened the attention of all Judea; yet we find the historians totally silent on the matter. It is strange, that the horrid massacre of the children by the command of Herod should be totally unnoticed by Josephus, and even by the evangelists, Mark, Luke, and John.* Matthew alone mentions it; but his authority is fully sufficient to justify an interpolation (like many others)

logies de St. Matthieu, et de St. Luc, il est visible, que cela n'a paseté fait de concert. Voyez remarques sur les Pensées de Pascal Ed. Geneve, 1773.

* If such an act of cruelty had been committed, it could not by any contrivance have been concealed, and Josephus, the inveterate enemy of Herod, and many of the most impartial historians of the Romans, living at that period, would have taken care to record such a public act of barbarity on the part of Herod.

EDITOR.

into the text of the other three evangelists, who are defective in that particular. It is well known with what success the primitive Christians began the holy work of interpolating, suppressing, forging, and altering profane histories; but as we believe their piety always prevented their meddling with the sacred text, notwithstanding the arguments of infidels, who attempt to prove the contrary, these holy frauds have been found of infinite service in establishing the cause of Christianity. Why do we forbear to pursue their great and laudable example? The modesty or the mistaken candour of these antients* have allowed them to interpolate no more than one paragraph concerning Jesus into the text of Josephus. Would it not shew our superior zeal, and be of infinite service to posterity, if some divine of the present age would incorporate the whole narrative of Matthew into the same text? But, alas, the sneers of our adversaries, the unbelievers, have prevailed too much, and good works, like these, are now no more!

26. About eighteen centuries ago, (according to the prophecy of Christ and his apostle Paul,)† the sun was darkened, the moon ceased to give light, and the stars fell from heaven; the sign of the Son of Man was seen, the Lord himself descended from heaven with a shout, the trumpets of the archangels were heard, the dead in Christ arose, St. Paul and others of the elect, who were then living, were caught up in the clouds, went to meet the Lord in the air, and have been with

Josephus, de Autiq. Jud. lib. xviii. cap. 4.

+ Matt. xvi. 27, 28.-Matt. xxiv. 29, 34.-Mark xiii. 24, 31.Luke xxi. 25, 33.-1 Thess. iv. 16, 17.