and St. Ignatius, disciple of St. Mark, both relate that St. Peter and St. Paul were married (Euseb. Hist. Eccl. lib. iii. chap. 30.— Ignat. Epist. ad Philadelph.). St. Ignatius is not the sole authority for the marriage of St. Paul: Clement of Alexandria (Strom. lib. vii. sect. 21.) infers it from two passages of that apostle; 1 Corinthians, ch. ix. v. 5. and Philippians, ch. iv. v. 2 and 3. In the first he says "May we not take "with us a married sister, as did our Lord "and Cephas?" Now this married sister could not be a stranger, since there would have been too much scandal in that; and we have seen that St. Peter took his wife with him to Rome; and the Martyrologies, and other works, state, that she suffered martyrdom at Rome, whilst Peter was there. It does not follow from what St. Paul said, that he actually took his wife with him; for it appears that he did not: it goes merely to establish, that it was lawful for him to have done so. St. Clement gives as a reason for his leaving her behind, that she would have been of no use to him in his ministry. But all the writers of the first ages

apply the second passage of St. Paul to his wife; and the σukuyɛ youɛ is, by the best interpreters, translated by conjux germana, or sincera conjux. And, on this same subject, St. Ignatius to the Philadelphians says, that not only St. Peter and St. Paul, but the greater part of the apostles, were married. Theophylactes, who does not agree to the sense given to these words, rests his opinion that that apostrophe is in the masculine gender; but he was mistaken; it is neutral: and as to ymore, it is known that the Attic dialect admits sometimes of the masculine, as in Homer, Antòs for ann; in Euripides, yematos for yerala; and Theophylactes himself, in the Epistle of St. Paul to Titus, renders wrńgios by salutifera. This apostrophe, besides, did not apply to those who co-operated with St. Paul in the ministry of the Gospel: he always calls these συνεργές, not σύζυγος.

The bishops and priests of the primitive churches were also married. St. Paul, 1 Tim. ch. iii. v. 2 and 12., says, that it is becoming that they be ΕΙΝΑΙ ΕΣΤΩΣΑΝ -husbands of one wife; not that they

should have been husbands of one wife only: and thus Theodoret interprets it. "I approve," he says, "the sentiment of "those who maintain that, as the Jews and "Greeks had many wives at once, and as "at present, the laws of the Emperors no "longer permitting that they keep concu"bines, the apostle forbids the ordaining "for bishops any but those who have only « one wife. ΕΙΝΑΙ μίας γυναικὸς ἄνδρα; in "the present tense, that he be; not in the "past, that he had been."

148. TEMPTATIONS OF PAUL.

Εδόθη μοι σκόλοψ τη σαρκί, II. Cor. Ch. 12, v. 7. Some commentators have interpreted this thorn in the flesh, of which St. Paul complains, to be the desires of lust: but' what probability is there that so holy a man, already in years, should have occasion thus to bewail himself? It is more reasonable to suppose, with St. Ambrose, that St. Paul speaks here of the intrigues, persecutions, and calumnies of his enemies, who gave " him no repose, but tended, as he expresses it, to hinder him from taking to himself

all the glory of the graces he had received from the Lord, had it been proper for him to do so. These are the enemies he calls 'Satan; that is to say, the agents of Satan.

149. To COVET A WOMAN IS ADULTERY. "Whosoever looketh on a woman, to "covet her, hath already committed adul

tery," saith Jesus Christ. A Greek author, quoted by Chrysostome (Collectanea Antonii), has also said, 'Piga porxetas ʼn neβίεργος θέα τῶν ὄψεων.-The source of adultery is in the too eager inspection of the eyes.

150. State of the Soul and Body afTER DEATH.

Many ancient philosophers, and Plato among others, imagined that, after death, the soul was clothed with an ærial and subtle body, susceptible of all sensations of pain or pleasure, and by which man was to be punished or recompensed in a future life. In this opinion, there was nothing absurd; but it wanted proofs and evidence. Revelation has relieved us from this doubt and difficulty, Jesus Christ (Matth. ch. 22)

has told us, that after the resurrection

men shall be like to angels, irayléno

ἰσαγΓέλοι

that is to say, that they will have immortal bodies, incorruptible, light, and luminous, without, however, losing corporeal qualities; such as was the body of Jesus Christ after his resurrection: it was tangible and had flesh and bones; the gospel also teaches us, that men shall neither eat nor drink, nor marry. To enquire farther is to enter into vain and useless speculations. As to the state of the soul immediately after death, and be̟fore it shall re-assume its body at the general resurrectton of the dead, we must not sup pose it will be deprived of all sentiment and feeling. The other world is not so far removed from this as we may imagine. It is our union with the body which intercepts the prospect. As soon as the soul quits the body, it passes into another world, or rather into another state of life; for the world is no longer the same. To live with this body, is to live in this world; to live without this body, is to change the scene and commence to see what the veil of flesh now conceals from us. A new spectacle