Syria and Mesopotamia. Nicephorus adds, that he came at last to Edessa, where Abagarus governed, and where Thaddeus, one of the seventy, had already sown the seeds of the Gospel. Here he perfected what the other had begun; and having by his sermons and miracles established the religion of Jesus, he died in peace; but others say that he was slain at Berytus, and honorably buried there. The writers of the Latin Church are unanimous in declaring that he travelled into Persia, where, after great success in his apostolical ministry for many years, he was at last, for his freely and openly reproving the superstitious rites and customs of the Magi, cruelly put to death.

St. Jude left only one epistle, which is placed the last of those seven styled catholic, in the sacred canon. It hath no particular inscription as the other six have, but it is thought to have been primarily intended for the Christian Jews, in their several dispersions, as St. Peter's epistles were. In it he tells them "that he at first intended to write to them in general of the common salvation, and establish and confirm them in it; but seeing the doctrine of Christ attacked on every side by heretics, he conceived it more necessary to spend his time in exhorting them to fight manfully in defence of the faith once delivered to the saints, and oppose the false teachers who labored so indefatigably to corrupt it."

It was some time before this epistle was generally received in the church. The author, indeed, like St. James, St. John, and sometimes St. Paul himself, does not call himself an apostle, styling himself only "the servant of Christ." But he has added what is equivalent, "Jude the brother of James," a character that can belong to no one but our apostle. And surely the humility of a follower of Jesus should be no objection against his writings.

ST. MATTHIAS.

As Matthias was not an apostle of the first election, immedi.. ately called and chosen of the Son of God himself, it cannot be expected that any account of him can be found in the evangelical history. He was one of our Lord's disciples, probably one of the seventy; he had attended on him the whole time of his public ministry, and after his death was elected into the apostleship, to

supply the place of Judas, who, after betraying his great Lord and Master, laid violent hands on himself.

The defection of Judas having made a vacancy in the apostolic college, the first thing they did, after the return from mount Olivet, when their great Master ascended to the throne of his glory, was to fill up this vacancy with a proper person.

Accordingly, two persons were proposed, Joseph called Barsabas, and Matthias, both duly qualified for the important office. The method of election was by lots, a way common both among the Jews and Gentiles for determining doubtful and difficult cases, especially in choosing judges or magistrates. And this course seems to have been taken by the apostle, because the Holy Ghost was not yet given, by whose immediate dictates and inspirations they were afterwards chiefly guided. The prayer being ended, the lots were drawn, by which it appeared that Matthias was the person, and he was accordingly numbered among the twelve apostles.

Not long after this election the promised powers of the Holy Ghost were conferred on the apostles, to qualify them for that great and difficult employment upon which they were sent, namely, the establishing the holy religion of the Son of God among the children of men.

St. Matthias spent the first year of his ministry in Judea, where he reaped a very considerable harvest of souls, and then travelled into different parts of the world, to publish the glad tidings of salvation to a people who had never before heard of a Saviour; but the particular parts he visited are not certainly known.

It is uncertain by what kind of death he left the regions of mortality, and sealed the truth of the Gospel he had so assiduously preached, with his blood. Dorotheus says, he finished his course at Sebastople, and was buried there, near the temple of the sun. An ancient Martyrology reports him to have been seized by the Jews, and as a blasphemer to have been stoned and then beheaded. But the Greek offices, supported herein by several ancient brevaries, tell us that he was crucified.

ST. MARK.

ST. MARK was descended from Jewish parents, and of the Nor was it uncommon among the Jews to

tribe of Levi.

change their names on some remarkable revolution or accident of life, or when they intended to travel into any of the European provinces of the Roman empire.

The ancients generally considered him as one of the seventy disciples; and Epiphanus expressly tells us, that he was one of those who, taking exception at our Lord's discourse of "eating his flesh and drinking his blood, went back and walked no more with him." But there appears no manner of foundation for these opinions, nor likewise for that of Nicephorus, who will have him to be the son of St. Peter's sister.

Eusebius tells us, that St. Mark was sent into Egypt by St. Peter to preach the Gospel, and accordingly planted a church in Alexandria, the metropolis of it; and his success was so very remarkable, that he converted multitudes both of men and women; pursuading them not only to embrace the Christian religion, but also a life of more than ordinary strictness.

St. Mark did not confine himself to Alexandria, and the oriental parts of Egypt, but removed westward to Lybia, passing through the countries of Marmacia, Pentapolis, and others adjacent, where, though the people were both barbarous in their manners, and idolatrous in their worship, yet by his preaching and miracles he prevailed on them to embrace the tenets of the Gospel; nor did he leave them till he had confirmed them in the faith.

After this long tour he returned to Alexandria, where he preached with the greatest freedom, ordering and disposing of the affairs of the church, and wisely provided for a succession, by constituting governors and pastors of it. But the restless enemy of the souls of men would not suffer our apostle to continue in peace and quietness, for while he was assiduonsly laboring in the vineyard of his Master, the idolatrous inhabitants, about the time of Easter, when they were celebrating the solemnities of Serapis, tumultuously entered the church, forced St. Mark, then performing divine service, from thence; and binding his feet with cords, dragged him through the streets, and over the most craggy places, to the Bucelus, a precipice near the sea, leaving him there in a lonesome prison, for that night; but his great and beloved Master appeared to him in a vision, comforting and encouraging his soul, under the ruins of his shattered body. The next morning early the tragedy began afresh, for they dragged him about in the same cruel and barbarous manner till he expired. But their malice did not end with his death; they burnt his mangled body, after they had so inhumanly deprived it of life; but the Christians, after the horrid tragedy was over, gathered up his bones and ashes, and decently interred them near the place where he used to preach. His remains were afterwards, with great pomp, removed from

Alexandria to Venice, where they were religiously honored, and he was adopted the tutelar saint and patron of that state.

He suffered Martyrdom on the 25th of April, but the year is not absolutely known: the most probable opinion however is that it happened about the end of Nero's reign.

His Gospel, the only writing he left behind him, was written at the entreaty and earnest desire of the converts at Rome, who, not content with having heard St. Peter preach, pressed St. Mark, his fellow-disciples, to commit to writing an historical account of what he had delivered to them, which he performed with equal faithfulness and brevity, and being perused and approved of by St. Peter, it was commanded to be publicly read in their assemblies. It was frequently styled St. Peter's Gospel, not because he dictated it to St. Mark, but because the latter composed it in the same manner as St. Peter usually delivered his discourses to the people. And this is probably the reason of what St. Chrysostom observes, that in his style of expression he delights to imitate St. Peter, representing a great deal in a few words. The remarkable impartiality he observes in all his relations is plain from hence, that so far from concealing the shameful lapse and denial of Peter, he describes it with more aggravating circumstances than any of the other evangelists.

ST. LUKE.

THIS disciple of the blessed Jesus was born at Antioch, the metropolis of Syria, a city celebrated by the greatest writers of these times for the pleasantness of its situation, the fertility of its soil, the riches of its commerce, the wisdom of its senate, and the civility and politeness of its inhabitants. It was eminent for schools of learning, which produced the most renowned masters in the arts and sciences. So that, being born, as it were, in the lap of the muses, he could not well fail of acquiring an ingenious and liberal education. But he was not contented with the learning of his own country; he travelled for improvement into several parts of Greece and Egypt, and became particularly skilled in physic, which he made his profession.

But those who would, from this particular, infer the quality of his birth and fortune, forget that the healing art was in those

early times generally practised by servants; and hence Grotius is of opinion, that St. Luke was carried to Rome, and lived there a servant to some noble family, in quality of physician; but after obtaining his freedom he returned into his own country, and probably continued his profession till his death, it being so highly consistent with, and in many cases subservient to, the care of souls.

He was also famous for his skill in another art, namely, painting, as appears from an ancient inscription found in a vault near the church of St. Maria de Via Lata, at Rome, supposed to have been the place where St. Paul dwelt, which mentions a picture of the blessed Virgin, Una ex vii. ab Luca depictis, "being one of the seven painted by St. Luke."

St. Luke was a Jewish proselyte; but at what time he became a Christian is uncertain. It is the opinion of some, from the introduction to his Gospel, that he had the facts from the reports of others, who were eye-witnesses, and suppose him to have been converted by St. Paul: and that he learned the history of his Gospel from the conversation of that apostle, and wrote it under his direction; and that when St. Paul, in one of his epistles, says, "according to my gospel," he means this of St. Luke, which he styled "his," from the great share he had in the composition of it.

On the other hand, those who hold that he wrote his Gospel from his own personal knowledge, observe, that he could not receive it from St. Paul, as an eye-witness of the matters contained in it, because all those matters were transacted before his conversion; and that he never saw our Lord before he appeared to him in his journey to Damascus, which was some time after he ascended into heaven. Consequently when St. Paul says, "according to my Gospel," he means no more than that Gospel in general which he preached; the whole preaching of the apostles being styled the Gospel.

But however this be, St. Luke became the inseparable companion of St. Paul, in all his travels, and his constant fellowlaborer in the work of the ministry. This endeared him to that apostle, who seems delighted with owning him for his fellow-laborer, and in calling him "the beloved physician," and the "brother whose praise is in the Gospel."

St. Luke wrote two books for the use of the church, his Gospel and the Acts of the Apostles; both which he dedicated to Theophilus, which many of the ancients suppose to be a feigned name, denoting a lover of God, a title common to all sincere Christians. But others think it was a real person, because the title of "most excellent" is attributed to him; the usual title and form of address in those times to princes and great men.