And we are his witneffes of these things, and fo is alfo the Holy Ghoft, whom God has given to them that obey him.' All this he refifted, and was confenting to the murder of Stephen who preached the fame thing, and evidenced it by miracles. So that his mind, far from being difpofed to a credulous faith, or a too eafy recep tion of any miracle worked in proof of the Chrif tian religion, appears to have been barred against it by the most obftinate prejudices, as much as any man's could poffibly be; and from hence we may fairly conclude, that nothing less than the irrefiftible evidence of his own fenfes, clear from all poffibility of doubt, could have overcome his unbelief.

VANITY or felf-conceit is another circumstance that, for the most part, prevails in the character of an enthusiast. It leads men of a warm tempc and religious turn to think themfelves worthy of the fpecial regard, and the extraordinary favors of God; and the breadth of that inspiration to which they pretend, is often no more than the wind of this vanity, which puffs them up to fuch extravagant imaginations. This strongly appears in the writings and lives of fome enthusiastical heretics in the myftics both ancient and modern, in many founders of orders and faints both male and female among the Papifts, in feveral Protef

tant fectaries of the laft age, and even in fome of the Methodists now. All the divine communications, illuminations, and extafies, to which they have pretended, evidently fprung from mnch feifconceit, working together with the vapours of melancholy upon a warm imagination. And this is one reason, besides the contagious nature of melancholy, or fear that makes enthufiam fo very catching among weak minds. Such are moft ftrongly disposed to vanity; and when they fee others pretend to extraordinary gifts, are apt to flatter themselves that they may partake of them as well as those whose merit they think no more than their own. Vanity therefore may justly be deemed a principal fource of enthufiafm. But that St. Paul was as free from it as any man, I think may be gathered from all that we fee in his writings, or know of his life.Throughout his Epiftles there is not one word. that favors of vanity, nor is any action recorded of him in which the leaft mark of it appears.

In his Epistle to the Ephefians he calls himfelf lefs than the leaft of all faints. And to the Corinthians he fays, he is the leaft of the Apostles and not meet to be called an Apostle, because he had perfecuted the church of God. In his Epiftle to Timothy he fays, This is a faithful faying and worthy of all acceptation, that Chrift Jefus

came into the world to fave finners, of whom I am chief. Howbeit for this caufe I obtained mercy, that in me firft Jefus Chrift might fhew forth all long-fuffering, for a pattern to them which fhould hereafter believe in him to life everlasting.'

It is true indeed, that in another Epistle he tells the Corinthians, That he was not a whit behind the very chiefeft of the Apoftles. 2 Cor. xi. 5. But the,occafion which drew from him these words must be confidered. A false teacher

by faction and calumny had brought his Apoftleship to be in queftion among the Corinthians. Against such an attack not to have afferted his apoftolical dignity would have been a betraying of the office and duty committed to him by God. He was therefore conftrained to do himself juftice, and not let down that character, upon the authority of which the whole fuccefs and efficacy of his ministry among them depended. But how did he do it? Not with that wontonnefs which a vain man indulges, when he can get any opportunity of commending himself; not with a pompous detail of all the amazing miracles which he had performed in different parts of the world, though he had fo fair an occafion of doing it, but with a modeft and fimple expofition of his abundant labours and fufferings in preaching the

Gospel, and barely reminding them, that the figns of an Apostle had been wrought among them in all patience, in figns and wonders, and mighty deeds. Could he fay lefs than this? Is not fuch boasting humility itfelf? And yet for this he makes many apologies, expreffing the greatest uneafiness in being obliged to speak thus of himself, even in his own vindication. When in the fame Epistle, and for the same purpose he mentions the vifion he had of Heaven, how modeftly does he do it! Not in his own name, but in the third perfon, I knew a man in Chrift, &c. caught up into the third heaven.' And imimmediately after he adds, but now I forbear, left any man fhould think of me above that which he feeth me to be, or that he heareth of me.' How contrary is this to a spirit of vanity! how different from the practice of enthusiastic pretenders to raptures and vifions, who never think they can dwell long enough upon those fubjects, but fill whole volumes with their accounts of them! Yet St. Paul is not fatisfied with this forbearance, he adds the confeffion of fome infirmity, which he tells the Corinthians was given to him as an ally, that he might not be above measure exalted through the abundance of his revelations. I would also observe, that he fays this rapture, or vifion of paradise, hap

pened to him about fourteen years before. Now had it been the effect of a mere enthusiastical fancy, can it be supposed that in so long a period of time, he would not have had many more raptures of the fame kind? Would not his imagination have been perpetually carrying him to heaven, as we find St. Theresa, St. Bridget, and St. Catharine were carried by theirs? And if vanity had been predominant in him, would he have remained fourteen years in absolute filence upon fo great a mark of the divine favour? No, we should certainly have seen his Epiftles filled with nothing else but long accounts of these vifions conferrences with angels, with Chrift, with God Almighty, myftical unions with God, and all that we read in the works of those fainted enthusiasts, whom I have mentioned before. But he only mentions this vifion in answer to the falfe teacher who had difputed his Apoftolical power, and comprehends it all in the three fentences, with many excuses for being compelled to make any mention of it at all. Nor does he take any merit to himself, even from the fuccefs of those Apoftolical labours which he principally boasts of in this Epiftle. For in a former one to the fame church he writes thus, Who then is Paul, and who is Apollos, but minifters by whom ye believed, even as the Lord gave to every man?