<<nication: from which, if ye keep yourselves, ye ❝ fhall do well."

It is faid by fome, and especially Dr. Lardner, that this was only a temporary provision, designed to prevent giving offence to the Jews; but, in an fwer to this, it may be said, that there is no intimation, or hint, of its being temporary, or any mention made of a time when the prohibition was to cease; and the apostle John wrote after the destruction of Jerufalem, when it cannot be pretended, that there was any neceffity for obferving fo much tenderness with refpect to the Jews,

Moreover, it is not impoffible, but that our Lord himself might refer to this decree of the apoftles, and thereby give his fanction to it, when, in his message to the church at Thyatira, he says, Rev. ii. 24. "I will put upon you none other burden. "But that which ye have already, hold fast till I "come." No moral precept is ever properly called a burden in the fcriptures; and, therefore, they are probably some observances of a ceremonial nature, that are referred to; and the very fame word, Bape, burden, is made use of, both by the apostles, and by our Lord on this occasion*.

It

* It appears to me rather extraordinary, that Dr. Lardner fhould be of opinion, that our Lord refers to this apoftolical de cree in the Revelation, which he supposes to have been written in the year 95 or 96, a long time after the destruction of Jerusalem,

and

It may feem extraordinary, that the prohibition of fornication fhould be joined to that of eating blood, in the fame decree; but it should be confidered, that fornication was not thought to be an immorality by the Gentiles; and even the Jews had not the fame ideas of chastity and purity in this refpect, which are enjoined upon chriftians. Dr. Lardner fuppofes that, by fornication in the apoftolical decree, we are to underftand marriage with heathens, from which the apostle Paul so earnestly diffuades the christians at Corinth.

Dr. Lardner alfo fuppofes, that," the decree " is not to be understood as a precept or com"mandment, but as advice and counfel, concern"ing matters of prudence and expedience, confi"dering the circumftances of things and perfons "in that time." Remarks on Ward's Differtations, page 141. But it cannot be denied, that it becomes all chriftians to yield to such advice and

and yet that it fhould have been intended to continue in force only till his religion had made greater progrefs in the world; as if that was the meaning of his coming: whereas, I do not think, that any thing elfe in the language of the New Teftament would lead us to conclude, that this phrafe was applicable to any other than fome determinate event, and especially the destruction of Jerusalem, or the time of the final judgment, See Remarks on Ward's Differtations, p. 122.

counsel,

counsel, if it extend to them. And if, as he allows, it did extend to chriftians after the deftruction of Jerufalem, I do not fee that there is not equal reafon why it fhould extend to us. And one of the reafons for abftaining from blood, which was hinted at when the prohibition was given to Noah, is of as much weight now as ever it

was.

It has been urged as an argument against the perpetuity of the apoftolical decree in the Acts, that the apostle Paul never quotes, or alludes to it in his writings. But, admitting it to be temporary, no person will maintain that it was not defigned to extend beyond the time of his epiftles; and yet, though the unlawfulness of fornication be allowed to be perpetual, Paul did not avail himself of any argument drawn from that decree when he wrote on that fubject to the Corinthians, who, of all the Greeks, were most remarkably addicted to that vice.

If we interpret this prohibition of the apostles by the practice of the primitive chriftians, who can hardly be fuppofed not to have rightly understood the nature and extent of it, we cannot but conclude, that it was intended to be abfolute and perpetual; for blood was not eaten by any chriftians for many centuries. When the chriftians were charged with meeting in the night, and drinking

blood,

blood, by way of binding one another to fecrecy, in fome immoral practices, Tertullian obferves with refpect to it, that it was well known that no christian would eat blood at all; infomuch, that it was usual with heathens, when they wanted to know whether any person was a chriftian, to fet blood-puddings before him as a very fufficient teft.

Blood is not eaten by chriftians in any part of the Eaft, or by the Greeks, or Ruffians, who are of the Greek church, to this day; nor indeed was the use of blood introduced into this western part of the world till very late. When the Pomeranians were converted to christianity, which was in 1120, they were particularly enjoined to abftain from blood, as a badge of their profeffion. It was not allowed to be eaten in the West in the time of Bede, or a century afterwards; and blood was not eaten in any part of Switzerland till Calvin introduced the practice from fome other place. See Curcellæus on this subject. Dr. Lardner, however, fays, that little regard was paid to these regulations of the apoftolical decree by the Latin chriftians, from the end of the fourth century. Remarks on Ward's Differtations, p. 136.

It is farther faid, that the liberal spirit of chriftians is ftrongly against any such a diftinction of meats as the prohibition of the ufe of blood fup

poses i

pofes; and that even the very letter of the declaration of our Lord and his apoftles excludes any fuch diftinction. Thus we read, Matt. xv. II. "Not "that which goeth into the mouth defileth a man: "but that which cometh out of the mouth, this "defileth a man." And the apostle Paul reprefents him who believeth that he may eat all things, as not weak, but as of a stronger and more enlarged mind than he who thought and acted differently, Rom. xiv. I. He also fays, v. 17. "The king

"dom of God is not meat and drink, but righte

oufnefs, and peace, and joy in the Holy Ghoft;" and v. 20. "All things are pure: but it is evil "for any man who eateth with offence."

But our Saviour made the declaration abovementioned, at a time when he himself strictly conformed even to the Jewish diftinction of meats; and Paul might only allude to the same restrictions, to which, as well as to other Jewish rites, many chriftians then conformed. The fame apostle, in the fame general manner, makes light of all diftinction of days, though, he no doubt, made a diftinction of one day of rest.

Though, in difcuffing this fubject, I have generally mentioned the arguments for the prohibition of blood before those against it, and have replied to the latter more than to the former, I would not have my reader conclude, that I am fully deVOL. II. termined