that he might die away from what he conceived might be the distractions of his weeping family; and his desire was granted. We met at Byculla Church on Tuesday evening to do honour to his remains. And oh, what a sight! what an honourable gathering was there! All the religious community of the island, and a vast number of poor pensioners, warrant officers, Indo-Britons, natives, and all weeping! I have never seen the like; and this, too, in the case of one who shunned observation when living. But his works have followed him. Where shall we find his like? I fear, never. Our friend, Mr. Candy, was absent at Poonah: he hurried down and preached a funeral sermon last Sunday at Trinity Chapel on the text, 'The word of the Lord endureth for ever. A solemn season! There was not a dry eye in the crowded church. I must leave imagination to supply the scene. Only the Sunday before, the departed was there, preaching on the uncertainty of lifethe blessedness of vision in glory; and now we were left to mourn our loss and his unspeakable gain. The pulpit and reading-desk were hung with black; and it was as much as Mr. Candy could do to get through his delineation of the departed saint's character. And what a character was his! Mr. Candy said, that during six years of intimate acquaintance with Mr. Valentine, he never, on any one occasion, recollected a word, a look, a gesture, or an act, unbecoming a holy man of God. What an example this to us all!

Oh may

it be blessed indeed to many! You can hardly conceive the impression that holy man's life and death have made in the whole Presidency. It has been the subject of conversation and of thought wherever people meet. Considering his remarkably retiring habits, his self-denying rejection of most invitations he received to dine out, that it might leave him unshackled and uninterrupted in his more proper work, it is quite remarkable how generally his loss is felt."

The Bishop of the Diocese, in a letter dated Belgaum, Aug. 21, 1844, writes

"You will doubtless have been in

formed of the very severe loss which our Mission in Bombay has sustained, through the death of our highly-valued and devoted friend Mr. Valentine. It will be difficult to supply his place. Though much discouraged at times from the little success which followed his labours, he was yet persevering in his work, against hope believing in hope, always disposed to render his advice and assistance where there was any prospect of usefulness."

The feelings of the Bombay Corresponding Committee were expressed in the following resolutions, drawn up by the Archdeacon, and adopted by them on the 23rd of July, the very day of Mr. Valentine's death

"That the Committee desire to record their deep sense of the irreparable loss the Mission has sustained by the lamented decease of Mr. Valentine. He united ardent missionary zeal, piety, talents, and learning, with meekness, gentleness, and a truly humble Christian spirit. His untiring diligence and labour in his Master's cause, though unseen and unobtrusive, is well known to the Committee and all the members of the Mission. In these mysterious and awful dispensations, the only comfort and encouragement left to the Committee is, that the Lord does not depend upon man, and can send other labourers into His vineyard. That the Committee cannot but feel that such a missionary, of such a spirit, and such qualifications, will not easily be replaced, and cannot but deeply grieve for their loss.

"That a subscription, limited to three rupees each, be opened for the purpose of erecting a head and footstone over the grave of the late Mr. Valentine; and that an engraved brass memorial be placed on the floor of Trinity Chapel, within the communion-rail."

The friends of Mr. Valentine, in the Presidency and the Out-Stations, have testified their love and esteem for his memory by subscribing a sum exceeding £1000 toward the support of his bereaved widow and orphan children.

Such is a brief notice of the life,

PETER THE APOSTLE's original name was Simon, (Matt. iv. 18.) or Simeon; (Acts xv. 14.) he was also addressed as Simon Barjonas. (Matt. xvi. 17.) Christ called him Cephas. (John i. 42.) He was a native of Bethsaida, a city of Galilee, upon the lake or sea of Gennesareth; (John i. 44.) his vocation was that of a fisherman, (Matt. iv. 18.) which occupation he followed at intervals until after the Ascension. (Luke v. 4; John xxi. 3.) John and James were partners with him. (Luke v. 10.)

Peter was married at the time he was ordained by Christ to the apostleship: (Matt. viii. 14.) he is the only one of the twelve whose wife is definitely spoken of in the Gospels; but St. Paul distinctly announces that the wives of the apostles accompanied them 66 about;" and he particularly mentions, "other apostles and the brethren of the Lord," (1 Cor. ix. 5.) who were James, Joses, Simon, and Judas. (Matt. xiii. 55).

Peter was the second person chosen to the office of an apostle. "Two of John's disciples followed Jesus.” One of the two which had heard John speak was Andrew, Simon Peter's brother. He first findeth his own brother Simon, and saith unto him, ". we have found the Messias. And he brought him to Jesus." (John i. 37-42). It is very clear that Andrew was the first called, although he is generally placed second on the list; but as all the other apostles are specified as called at other times, and as Andrew went for Peter, after he himself had acknowledged the Messias, there is no doubt he was the first chosen, and then Peter, who until informed by Andrew that "He was come of whom all the prophets bare witness," knew not the Christ, and therefore could not have been previously selected to an office by one who was unknown to him, and for whom such a sacrifice was required as that of leaving all. (Mark xii. 28.) After the appointment of the twelve, they were usually all with Christ; but Peter, James, and John seem to have been in more particular attend

ance upon him than the others, for they only were permitted to see the raising of the daughter of Jairus from the dead, and to witness the Transfiguration. (Matt. xvii.1.) After the Lord's Supper all went with him to Gethsemane (save Judas), (John xviii. 1,) and were there to wait whilst Jesus went farther with Peter, James, and John. (Matt. xxvi. 36, 37.) And he withdrew from them about a stone's cast, and when he returned to them he found them sleeping, and as Peter had ". more vehemently" than the rest said he would " go both to prison and to death" for him, (Luke xxii. 39.) the Lord saith unto him, "Sleepest thou?" (Mark xiv. 37.) Peter was never alone with Christ in his retirement at any time, and had no peculiar advantages in which James and John or the whole number did not share.

When immediately after Peter's presumption, and the weakness of human nature in first boasting of his superior fidelity above his colleagues, we find him then failing in such a season of distress as that in the garden, to watch" one hour," it must be allowed he had a large measure of sin and frailty in his soul.

There is not, on the page of history, so humiliating an example of cowardly desertion as that of Peter denying Christ (for he then virtually abjured the divinity which he had formerly acknowledged), nor a more touching proof of the loving kindness of God to fallen creatures than when "the Lord turned and looked upon Peter:" "then Peter went out and wept bitterly." (Luke xxiii.)

"On the first day of the week, very early in the morning," Peter ran to the sepulchre where the body of Christ had been laid; but he was not permitted to be the first witness of the resurrection of Him whom he had disowned, and "he departed wondering at what had come to pass." (Luke xxiv.) Some divines suppose Peter was one of the two disciples whom the Lord joined on the way to Emmaus; but this is uncertain, and if he were, "his eyes were holden,”

66

for he knew not the Lord until he gave thanks at meat. (Luke xxiv.) Peter must have been with those who were gathered together in Jerusalem, and to whom the Lord appeared on the evening of the day on which he arose from the dead. The perceptions of Peter were not more acute than those of the other disciples, either on this or any other occasion, and this is a decisive proof of his entire want of infallibility, which, if possessed by him, would at once have assured him, "that Christ was risen indeed;" and his own intuitive knowledge would at once have assured him it was Jesus himself who stood in the midst." "But they" (the whole number)“were terrified and affrighted, and supposed they had seen a spirit;' and even when the Lord had showed them his hands and his feet, "they believed not for joy." But an infallible person could not have been mistaken, for such an one is incapable of doubt or error, and must have known by his innate apprehension of right and wrong, without any additional evidence, that the appearance was not an apparition, but would at once have gladly said, "thou art the Christ." When Jesus showed himself to his disciples at the Sea of Tiberias, Peter did not recognize him; it was John who discovered his Lord. (John xxi. 7.)

When the twelve were called, "they had power against unclean spirits. (Matt. x. 1.) They were all commanded to go forth, but "not into the way of the Gentiles," but go rather to the "lost sheep of the house of Israel." (Matt. x. 5, 6.)

After the miracle of the loaves and fishes, Jesus left his disciples, who went on the lake of Gennesareth; during the stormy night they saw him walking on the water, when Peter asked permission to descend in to the sea; but when on the waves his "little faith" failed, and he would have sunk if Christ had not stretched forth his hand and caught him. Upon this occasion they "all worshipped him." (Matt. xiv.)

Soon after that event Peter was the first to acknowledge the divinity of Christ, and for this confession he was "blessed;" and it was further

said, "That thou art Peter, and upon this rock I will build my Church; and the gates of hell shall not prevail against it. And I will give unto thee the keys of the kingdom of heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt bind on earth shall be bound in heaven: and whatsoever thou shalt loose on earth shall be loosed in heaven." (Matt.xvi. 18, 19.) Christ had said to the disciples, "Whom say ye that I am?” and then he immediately changed his mode of speaking from the plural to the singular, and said to Peter, "Thou art Peter." Whatever the promise might contain as to Peter's own prerogatives, there is not a word spoken or implied that any other person present or future should ever share in his peculiar gift or appointment; the authority to bind and to loose, remit or retain, were given on two other occasions to all the apostles collectively; (Matt. xviii. 18; John xx. 23.) but the opening and shutting the kingdom of heaven belonged exclusively to Peter.

The metaphorical language used, that Peter should be the rock on which the Church should be founded, must be received with great limitations, for Christ could not possibly supersede his own office and nature, "For who is a rock, but our God?"

66

He only is my rock." (Ps. xviii. 31; lxii. 2.) Jesus said, "the stone which the builders refused is become the head stone of the corner." (Matt. xxi. 42.) "This" (Jesus of Nazerath) "is the stone which was set at nought of you builders which is become the head stone of the corner." (Acts iv. 10, 11.) "As it is written, Behold I lay in Sion a stumbling stone and rock of offence, and whosoever believeth in him" (not Peter, but Christ) "shall not be ashamed." (Rom. ix. 33.) Peter applies the same passage to Christ, and not unto himself, calling his Lord "the chief corner stone elect, precious." (1 Pet. ii. 6.-9.) St. Paul says the Church "is built upon the foundation of prophets and apostles, Jesus Christ himself being the chief corner stone.", (Eph. ii. 20.) "The wall of the city had twelve foundations, and in them the names of the twelve apostles of the Lamb." (Rev. xxi. 14.) From these and

similar passages in the Old and New Testaments, it is evident that Christ alone is the rock against which the gates of hell shall not prevail; but Peter's faith continually failed, and he was frequently in sin and error, so that had he been the sole foundation, the superstructure could never have been raised upon what proved too often only sand. When Christ died and rose again, the head stone was laid the prophets had "prepared the way of the Lord, for every valley was exalted, and every hill made low," (Is. xl. 3; Matt. iii. 3.); and the apostles succeeded them, and completed the whole foundation on which the spiritual temple has ever since been rising.

Peter was certainly chosen from amongst the twelve to open the kingdom of heaven to the heathen world, which important epoch was on the day of Pentecost, when the Gentiles entered into more than the ancient privileges of the Jews, and when

three thousand men, Parthians, Medes, Elamites, Jews, and proselytes," received and believed the Gospel of Christ; (Acts ii.) the keys of the kingdom had been applied, and "the great and effectual door was opened." (1 Cor. xvi. 9.) The power of the keys could be only once used by a human being; "he who hath the key of David and openeth, and no man shutteth, hath set an open door which no man can shut." (Rev. iii. 7.) Peter was allowed the high distinction of being the instrument by which the only way of access" to God was shown to the Gentiles; but there and then this peculiar office ceased, for when Christ said, "I am the door," (John x. 9.) how might Peter or any other individual presume to close the "new and living way,' (Heb. x. 20.) which Jesus "bought with his own blood;" or how might he shut "the door of faith," thrown open by God, (Acts xiv. 27); for "through him we both have access with confidence by one Spirit unto the Father." (Eph. ii. 18.)

دو

On two distinct occasions the power of binding and loosing was given; first to Peter (Matt. xvi. 19.) and then to the assembled disciples, (xviii. 18.) To bind and to loose

was a common phrase in general use, and Christ spake according to the idiom of the country, and must have intended his words should be understood in their popular acceptation, and in the sense in which they were always received amongst the Jews, and this mode of expression is still familiar to them. This form of words was never applied to the souls or bodies of persons, but only to things. Binding and loosing in this instance meant that power or permission was granted to the apostles to forbid or allow the continuance of Mosaic commands or heathenish ceremonies and customs, and such was the invariable meaning of the figure amongst the Hebrews, who certainly must be the best judges of the proper manner of understanding their own figurative language.

After the resurrection the Lord added a further gift, that of retaining or remitting sin. (John xx. 23.) This was entirely applicable to persons. To what extent this authority was stretched is not stated in the Scriptures; for neither Peter nor any of the apostles are ever said to have used Christ's words, "thy sins are forgiven thee;" and without a perfect discernment of the thoughts and intents of the hearts of all men, the result of this power could only have been attended with the grossest error and injustice. Peter had no superior power on this point.

The apostles considered themselves on an equality, and none of them ever seemed to be aware that Cephas was above them in any respect; and certainly during the life-time of Christ there was no precedence amongst them; for until the crucifixion there was always a contention and ambition for place amongst them. When the mother of Zebedee's children asked "for them to sit on his right hand and on his left in the kingdom," "the ten were moved with indignation." (Matt. xx.) Peter did not take the opportunity this request .so well afforded, to assert his superiority, but was equally displeased with the others at her presumption. She, the mother of James and John, had heard nothing of Peter's supremacy; and so completely did Christ dis