LIBRARY OF THE
UNIVERSITY OF VIRGINIA

 

PRESENTED BY

Mrs. William Weaver LukensTHE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO
ple ken:THE GOSPEL ACCORDING TO

alle lil ie

With NOTES CRITICAL AND PRACTICAIy

BY IHh REV. Me. SADE ie

RECTOR OF HONITON ; PREBENDARY OF WELLS; AUTHOR OF “‘ CHURCH DOCTRINE
BIBLE TRUTH,” ‘‘ CHURCH TEACHER'S MANUAL,” “‘ NOTES CRITICAL
AND PRACTICAL ON ST. MATTHEW,” ETC.

 

NEW YORK:
JAMES POTT AND CO.
1887.NET OD Cer L@ Ne

F the writer of the third Gospel nothing whatsoever is known,
except that he was the faithful friend and companion of the
Apostle St. Paul. I shall first consider the Scripture notices of
him, then the references to his Gospel in the early Fathers, which
prove that it has been accepted from the very first as on the same
level as regards authority and inspiration as the other three; and,
lastly, I shall inquire whether his Gospel can be said to be that of
St. Paul—whether we have equal reason for believing that his
Gospel is the reproduction of the teaching of St. Paul respecting our
blessed Lord’s Birth, Life, Death, and Resurrection, as St. Mark’s
was from the first believed to be the substance of the teaching of
St. Peter.

We
SCRIPTURE NOTICES.

Luke is mentioned by name three times in the Epistles of St.
Paul, and always with affection: first in Col. iv. 14, ‘‘ Luke, the
beloved physician, and Demas greet you;” then in 2 Fim. tye ie,
“ Only Luke is with me;” and in Philemon, “ There salute thee

Marcus, Aristarchus, Demas, Lucas, my fellow-labourers.”’
From Col. iv. 11, where the companions of Paul, “who are of
the circumcision,” are distinguished from those afterwards named,
we gather that he must have been before his conversion a Gentile.
His name is Gentile—Lucanus, shortened into Lucas. These
are the only places in which he is mentioned, but there can be
not the smallest doubt that frequently in the narrative of the
Acts he includes himself amongst the companions in travel of
St. Paul by changing the pronoun to the first person plural.
Thus in Acts xvi. up to the ninth verse, the historian uses thevi INTRODUCTION.

third person plural, ‘‘they.” After they were come to Mysia,
they assayed to go into Bithynia: but the Spirit suffered them not.
And they passing by Mysia came down to Troas : ” then, in the next
verse but one, the tenth, there is a change to the use of the first person
plural : “‘ After he had seen the vision, immediately we endeavoured
to go into Macedonia . . . Therefore, loosing from Troas, we came
with a straight course to Samothracia.”” There is no way of ac-
counting for such a change except on the supposition that St. Luke,
the undoubted writer of the Acts, joined the party at Troas. St.
Lukeappears to have been left at Philippi,and joined Paul’s company
again at Assos (xx. 14) and accompanied him to Jerusalem (xxi. 15).
We gather from the same use of the first person plural that Luke
was a fellow-voyager with St. Paul to Rome, and was shipwrecked
with him.

There is good reason also to suppose that St. Paul alludes to St.
Luke in 2 Cor. viii. 18: ‘“‘ We have sent with him the brother, whose
praise is in the Gospel throughout all the churches.” If an account of
our blessed Lord’s Birth, Life, Death, and Resurrection was then
called the Gospel—and I do not see why it should not have been so
called—then the allusion is most natural and becoming; otherwise
it is difficult to understand what St. Paul means by “praise in the
Gospel,” for his name is not mentioned in any Gospel, nor is his
preaching of the Gospel with eloquence ever alluded to, as that of
Apollos’ is.

These are all the notices of him, direct or indirect, which are to
be found in the New Testament. They tell us nothing to satisfy
our curiosity ; but we cannot but infer from them that he must have
been a man of very great zeal and holiness and Christian love, to
have been the tried friend and constant companion of the great
Apostle.

An immense number of conjectures, all perfectly groundless, are
made by various writers respecting him: that he was originally a
slave ; that there was a medical school at Tarsus, at which he
studied, and so became acquainted with St. Paul; that he might
have been known to the poet Lucan, and to the philosopher Seneca ;
and a very late tradition speaks of him as having been a portrait-
painter as well as physician.INTRODUCTION.

II.

EARLY FATHERS.

I now come to the notices of him in the early writers.

First, Eusebius, book iii. chap. 4. ‘‘ But Luke, who was born at
Antioch, and by profession a physician, being for the most part
connected with Paul, and familiarly acquainted with the rest of the
Apostles, has left us two inspired books, the institutes of that spiri-
tual healing art which he obtained from them. One of these is his
Gospel, in which he testifies that he has recorded ‘as those who were
from the beginning eye-witnesses and ministers of the Word de-
livered unto him,’ whom also, he says, he has in all things followed

Itis also said, that Paul usually referred to his Gospel, when-
ever in his Epistles he spoke of some particular Gospel of his own,
saying, ‘according to my Gospel.’” With respect to Antioch being
his birthplace, Godet writes: ‘‘ If Luke had really found a home at
Antioch, we can understand the marked predilection with which
the foundation of the Church in that city is related in the Acts.
In the lines devoted to this fact (xi. 20-24) there is a spirit, anima-
tion, and freshness which reveal the charm of delightful re-
collections.”

Again, Eusebius, book iii. ch. xxiv: ‘In his own Gospel he de-
livered the certain account of those things that he himself had fully
received from his intimacy and stay with Paul, and also his inter-
course with the other Apostles.”

Treneus refers to him frequently by name, as book iii. ch. i.:
“Tuke also, the companion of Paul, recorded in a book the Gospel
preached by him.”

Again, Ireneus, speaking of the sacerdotal aspect of Christ, given
by St. Luke, writes, book iii. chap. xi. 8: “‘ But that according to
Luke, taking up his priestly character, commenced with Zacharias
the priest offering sacrifice to God.”

Again, Tertullian, in speaking of St. Luke’s Gospel, writes : “ The
same authority of the Apostolic Churches will afford evidence to the
other Gospels also, which we possess equally through their means,
and according to their usage—I mean the Gospels of John and
Matthew, whilst that which Mark published may be affirmed to be
Peter’s, whose interpreter Mark was. For even Luke’s form (d-Vill INTRODUCTION.

gestum) of the Gospel men usually ascribe to Paul.”! (‘ Tertullian
against Marcion,” book iv. chap. 5.)

And lastly Origen, quoted by Eusebius, writes: ‘‘ And the third,
according to Luke, the Gospel commended by Paul, which was
written for the converts from the Gentiles.” (‘‘Hccles. Hist.”
book vi. ch. xxv.)

III.
AUTHENTICITY OF ST. LUKE’S GOSPEL.

Three writers, living in different parts of the world before the
end of the second century quote St. Luke with the same faith in
his authority as any Christian writer would now do. From an
index I have now before me I find that Ireneus quotes St. Luke
above 150 times, Clement of Alexandria above 100 times, and Ter-
tullian, in his book against Marcion alone, above 300 times.

Hach one of these writers recognizes four Gospels, no more, no
less ; each one names them as the Church has ever done, and one
of them, Ireneus, the first in point of time, gives several reasons—
some of them, it is true, not wise ones—for holding that there can be
no more than four. Now it is to be remembered that Ireneus,
when a young man, could have conversed with aged Christians,
whose memories of the history and events of the Church would ex-
tend nearly to the days of St. Luke and St. Paul. All the three
could have conversed with old men who lived in the first century.
Can it be imagined that such men, taking the greatest interest
in everything connected with the Church, and holding the truth of
the records of Christ as their lives, should be mistaken in the
matter of one of their principal books, whether it was genuine or
not? Let the reader remember, too, that those who held the Gospel
of St. Luke, as we now have it, to be a part of the Divine oracles,
lived within seventy or eighty years after its publication, and could
have conversed with men who could have known the author, and
that the men who are now impugning its authority live 1,700
years later, and have dogmatic reasons for getting rid of it. I have
carried this argument out more fully in my Preface to my Notes on
St. John’s Gospel, to which I refer the reader.

The covert allusion to St. Luke in Justin Martyr, a writer of about
150 4.D., is very interesting. He is speaking of the Lord’s Bloody
Sweat, and in doing so he distinguishes between the Apostles andINTRODUCTION. 1X

their companions: “ For in the memoirs which, I say, were drawn
up by His Apostles, and those who followed them (it is recorded), that
His sweat fell down like drops of blood while He was praying and
saying, ‘ If it be possible let this cup pass from me.’”’

IV.
Men GOSPELS OF ST LUKE AND ST, PAUR.

It is quite clear from the extracts given in Section II. that there
was an universal belief in the earliest Churches that the Gospel of St.
Luke was the embodiment ofthe Gospel preached by St. Paul, and it
will be necessary now to examine whether we can find good grounds
for such an assertion in the Pauline Epistles: but first of all we
must consider the question, what would be the form of the Gospel
of the Apostle of the Gentiles. Would it be, for instance, in the form
of an account of Christ, such as the other Gospels present ? Would
it, that is, be in an historical form—or would it be in the form of an
evangelical treatise or essay setting forth, not facts respecting the
Son of God, but abstract doctrines, such as Justification, Election,
Sanctification, Assurance, and such things ?

Now the Apostle answers this question himself, and tells us very
distinctly that his Gospel was an historical one, and consisted of
certain facts, and these were no other than the Death for sin, Burial
and Resurrection of the Lord. Here are his words: ‘‘ Moreover,
brethren, I declare unto you the gospel which I preached unto
you, which also ye have received, and wherein ye stand ... Forl
delivered unto you first of all that which I also received, how that
Christ died for our sins according to the scriptures ; and that he
was buried, and that he rose again the third day according to the
scriptures: And that he was seen of Cephas, then of the twelve,”
&e., and then there follow the notices of several appearances of our
Lord after His Resurrection, ending with that to St. Paul himself.
(1 Corinth. xv. 1-10.)

But it is clear that there must be something previous to this to
be believed and accepted, and that is the doctrine of the Person of
Him Who could thus die for sins—His Incarnation and coming into
the world—and this is set forth in the opening words of the most
important of his Epistles, where St. Paul tells us that he was
‘ separated unto the gospel of God, concerning His Son Jesus Christ
our Lord, which was made of the seed of David according to thex INTRODUCTION.

flesh; and declared to be the Son of God, with power, according
to the spirit of holiness, by the resurrection from the dead.”
(Rom. 1. 1-4.)

There can be no doubt, then, that St. Paul considered his Gospel
to be a record of the Birth, Death, and Resurrection of the Son of
God—assuming, of course, His previous existence on the one hand
(Phil. ii. 6), and the dominion over all things at the Right Hand of
God on the other.

Again, if St. Matthew thought it right to leave among the
Palestinian Christians an account of the acts and sayings of the
Lord, such as is contained in his Gospel,’ and St. Mark wrote
from the lips of Peter the account of the Life of the Lord which
he preached, is it to be supposed for a moment that St. Paul would
be behind them in his care for his converts, and not leave them in
possession of a full account of the words and works of Christ while
on earth? If he had not done so, how, for instance, could he have
charged his Colossian converts that ‘the word of Christ should
dwell in them richly in all wisdom’ ? Such a charge presupposes a
full account of, at least, the teaching of Christ.

Is, then, the fact that he did leave such an historical Gospel
among them, and that this Gospel was that of St. Luke, which we
have seen to be the widespread opinion of the earliest Churches,
borne out by an examination of the Epistles ?

1. Now, first of all, it is clear that the account of the Institution
of the Eucharist is derived not from the tradition in the first two
Synoptics, but from St. Paul, who tells us that he himself derived
it from a revelation by the Lord Himself: “‘I have received of the
Lord that which also I delivered unto you, that the Lord Jesus the
same night in which he was betrayed, took bread: and when he
had given thanks, he brake it, and said (Take eat): thisis my body,
which is broken for you: this do in remembrance of me. After the
same manner also he took the cup, when he had supped, saying,
This cup is the new testament (or rather covenant) in my blood:
this do ye, as oft as ye drink it, in remembrance of me.”’ (1 Cor. xi.
23-26.)

Now this is virtually reproduced by St. Luke in the words,
“And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave unto
them, saying, This is my body which is given for you: this do in

- ne, ‘
See Husebius, iii. ch. xxiv.INTRODUCTION. x1

remembrance of me. Likewise also the cup after supper, saying,
This cup is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for
you.” (Luke xxii. 19, 20.)

The reader will notice that in the revelation of the Lord to St.
Paul there are two very important differences from the traditional
account. One, that the Lord said, ‘‘Do this for my commemora-
tion”’ (or anamnesis). The other, that He said respecting the cup,
“This cup isthe new covenant in my blood.” Thereby emphasizing
both the sacramental reality of the contents of the cup—for a cove-
nant must be in blood, not in wine—and also the covenant nature
and value of the ordinance.

Here then, so far as the Eucharist is a Gospel ordinance, con-
veying to us the most precious promises of the Lord’s discourse in
John vi., St. Luke’s Gospel is that of St. Paul rather than of the
other two Synoptics.

This is a very important matter indeed, and opens out to us a
very wide field of (I may say) legitimate speculation, for if St. Luke
received this important account from St. Paul, and he from the
Lord Himself, we cannot help asking, is this the only direct revela-
tion from the Lord respecting what He did whilst on earth, which
St. Paul received direct from His Master, and caused to be written
in St. Luke’s Gospel? If the account of the institution of the
Eucharist came thus direct from the Lord through St. Paul to St.
Luke, what other matter in which St. Luke is the sole authority,
may not have similarly come from the Lord ?

2. We now come to a second coincidence, which, even were
it by itself, would go far to identify St. Luke’s Gospel with
St. Paul’s.

St. Paul in 1 Cor. xv. sets forth his Gospel to be mainly the
evidences of the Lord’s Resurrection, and the first of these men-
tioned by him is an appearance to Cephas: ‘““He was seen of
Cephas, then of the twelve.” Now it is remarkable that this ap-
pearance to Cephas is of the Evangelists only mentioned by St.
Luke, and by him, too, as if it was the first. For when the two,
Cleopas and his friend, came to the assembled disciples, they were
greeted with the words, ‘“‘ The Lord is risen indeed, and hath ap-
peared unto Simon.” (Luke xxiv. 34.) Too much stress can
scarcely be laid upon this coincidence, as identifying St. Paul’s
Gospel with St. Luke’s.

8. The third which I shall notice seems to me very suggestiveX11 INTRODUCTION.

indeed of the closest connection. St. Luke’s Gospel has always
been believed to have been written for the especial use of the
Gentile converts of St. Paul. Now the great battle of St. Paul’s
life was to free the Gentiles from the yoke of Jewish ordinances,
and yet from St. Luke’s Gospel alone do we learn that the
Lord’s infancy and youth were characterized by strict observance
of the Mosaic ordinances. St. Matthew, for instance, writing for
Jews, takes it for granted that they would know that the Lord
received His Name at the time of His circumcision, and does not
allude to it; whereas St. Luke not only particularly notices that at
His circumcision on the eighth day He received His Name, but
that this was followed by the presentation in the temple, and that
the accustomed offering was made, and everything was done
strictly in accordance with the Mosaic ritual. His account is,
‘When the days of her purification according to the law of Moses
were accomplished, they brought him to Jerusalem, to present him
to the Lord (as it is written in the law of the Lord, Every male
that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the Lord); and to
offer a sacrifice according to that which is said in the law of the
Lord, A pair of turtledoves, or two young pigeons.” (Luke
its 21.)

Now we have the key to this anxiety on the part of the Hvange-
list to show that Joseph and the Lord’s Mother in all things
conformed to the Levitical Law in the words of the Apostle in
Galatians iv. 4: ‘‘ God sent forth his Son, made of a woman, made
under the law, to redeem them that were under the law, that we
might receive the adoption of sons.”

According then to the Apostle, the submission of Jesus to the
requirements of the law was redemptive. He, by this submission,
redeemed them that were under the law, in order that they might
in due time be delivered from the bondage of that system of things
which, according to the words of St. Peter, “ Neither their fathers
nor they were able to bear” (Acts xv. 10); and if they were thus
to be redeemed from this yoke of bondage, much less could it be
imposed upon the Gentiles, for whom it was never designed.

Now doctrine like this necessitates some teaching respecting our
Lord’s ceremonial subjection during His early years on which it
could be based. We have no such teaching in the oth
We have it very fully in the Pauline Gospel of St. Luke.

4, With this, as part of the same subject, we have the allusion to

er Gospels.

       
  
   
  
   
  
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
  
   

me

SenneINTRODUCTION. xi

the doctrinal significance of the Lord’s circumcision in Coloss. ii.
11: ‘‘In whom also ye are circumcised with the circumcision
made without hands, in putting off the body of the sins of the flesh
by the circumcision of Christ.” This teaching seems to require as
its basis some distinct allusion to the Lord’s circumcision, which
is mentioned only in St. Luke’s Gospel.

The rest of the instances of identity or close agreement are only
coincidences, but are nevertheless of great value to the argument
when taken in connection with the more important ones cited above.

5. St. Paul’s description of a ‘“‘ widow indeed” in 1 Tim. v. 5:
‘¢ She that is a widow indeed, and desolate, trusteth in God, and
continueth in supplications and prayers night and day,” is a re-
production of the account of Anna in Luke ii. 87: ‘She departed
not from the temple, but served God with fastings and prayers
nicht and day.”

6. Luke iv. 19: ‘‘To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.”
This quotation from Isaiah lxi. 1 is only to be found in St. Luke,
and it agrees well with the preaching of the Apostle of the Gentiles,
who alone dwells on the present time being the accepted time
(2 Corinth. vi. 2).

7, St. Luke alone (xii. 42) designates the minister of Christ as a
“ steward ” (oikovduoc), which term in St. Matthew is represented
by émirporoc. St. Paul speaks of the Apostles as ‘“ministers of
Christ and stewards (é.covdpor) of the mysteries of God ” (1 Cor. iv.
1), and says that a ‘“‘ bishop must be blameless, as the steward
{éucovdpoc) of God ” (Tit. i. 7).

8, In St. Luke alone (except in one place in St. Matthew) 1s aliena-
tion from God described as being dead, and the return to obedience
as being made alive again. (Luke xv. 24, 82.) The reader needs
scarcely to be reminded how habitually the Apostle describes a state
of sin as death, and a state of conformity to God as life.

9. St. Luke alone of the Synoptics applies the word ‘revealed ”
to the second coming of the Lord (Luke xvii. 30); and so St. Paul
(1 Cor. i. 7, 2 Thess. i. 7).

10. It is worthy of remark that the order of the commandments
of the second table is the same in Luke xviii. 20, and Rom. xiil. 9,
so far as this, that ‘‘ Thou shalt not commit adultery,” precedes
“Thou shalt not kill, Thou shalt not steal.” In the parallel
passage in St. Matthew, xix. 18, ‘Thou shalt do no murder,”
comes the first. In St. Mark the reading is doubtful.al

      
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
  
 
   

X1V INTRODUCTION.

11. In the account of the Lord’s refutation of the arguments of
the Sadducees, St. Luke tells us that He concluded with the words,
“for all live to him,” which are not in St. Matthew’s, or St. Mark’s
account. Now this is a favourite expression with St. Paul; thus,
‘‘ alive unto God through Jesus Christ our Lord ’’—“ None of us
liveth to himself ”’—‘‘ He died for all, that they who live should live
henceforth not unto themselves,” &e.

12. In their respective accounts of our Lord’s great prophecy of :
the destruction of Jerusalem, St. Matthew and St. Mark seem to .
recognize no lengthened period of time between the coming in
judgment at the destruction of Jerusalem, and the second coming
at the end (Matth. xxiv. 29; Mark xiii. 24). St. Luke, on the con-
trary, speaks of “Jerusalem being trodden down of the Gentiles
until the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled’ (xxi. 84). Now in the
Epistle to the Romans, in speaking of the casting away of the
fleshly Israel for a time, St. Paul alludes to these ‘‘ times of the
Gentiles’ in an expression exactly analogous to that in St. Luke,

‘*until the fulness of the Gentiles be come in.”” (Rom. xi. 25.)

13. Again, St. Paul in a very large number of places associates |
the Ascension of the Lord with His Resurrection. (Thus Rom. |
vill. 834; Ephes. i. 20, 21; Phil. ii. 9; Coloss. iii. 1-4, &.) This d
seems to demand that in his Gospel special mention should be
made of it, and so it is, for in St. Luke’s Gospel we read that the
Lord was taken up into heaven in the act of blessing His dis-
ciples. Of the other Evangelists, Matthew and John give no ac-
count of the Ascension, and Mark, or the Apostle who concludes
his Gospel (I believe St. Peter), very cursorily mentions it. But
if we are allowed to consider the first verses of the Book of the
Acts as a part of the Gospel, then the Ascension occupies the
prominent place in this Gospel which we should suppose that
1 have in any Gospel which St. Paul could designate as
i ce eel ae ‘ae we have the Saviour speaking

sion ins being preached in His name
among all nations, ‘‘ beginning at Jerusalem,” and St. Paul seems 4
2 a up this word when he writes (Rom xv. 19), that (frome |
erusalem and round about unto Illyvi ae oe
WY oof Charset.” lyvicum he had fully preached
The following are a few verbal coincidences which h

; . ave some
value in connection with the more prominent onesINTRODUCTION. XV

St. Paul calls the Christian under instruction 6 karnyotpevoc
(Gal. vi. 6), a reminiscence of Luke i. 4, wepi dy KarnynOnce dNOywr.
No other sacred writer uses the word.

St. Luke only of the Evangelists makes the Lord mention
‘children of light’ (xvi. 8), and so St. Paul (1 Thess. v. 4),

The only plausible meaning that can be given to 1 Tim. ii. 15,
‘¢ she shall be saved through the childbearing,” is that it is a covert
allusion to that particular childbearing by which the Saviour came
into the world, and this ‘ childbearing”’ occupies a far more promi-
nent place in St. Luke than in any other Gospel.

In St. Luke xxii. 48, we read, w¢0n d& auT@ dyyedoc, and in St.
Paul, 1 Tim. ii. 16, ©¢0n ayyédoc.

In Coloss. iii. 16, the Apostle exhorts his converts to let the word
of Christ dwell in them richly in all wisdom, and then exhorts
them to ‘‘speak and admonish one another in psalms, and hymns,
and spiritual songs.” Now that the word of Christ (as distin-
guished from that of God in the Old Testament) should thus dwell
in them, demands that there should be in use among them a
written Gospel in which this word should be embodied, and if this
was that of St. Luke, then it is worthy of notice, that that Gospel
contains the only Christian hymns (as distinguished from Psalms)
to be found in the New Testament, viz., Luke i. 46 and 68, and ii. 29.

Two other matters bearing upon the connection between St.
Luke’s written Gospel and the teaching of St. Paul, as contained in
his Epistles, require to be shortly examined.

The preaching of St. Paul brings forward very prominently that
men are saved by faith, and this in order that they may be saved by
Grace. (Rom. iv. 16.)

Now if this be so we should expect to find in St. Luke much that
would support this, and so we do. Thus, in the very first chapter,
we have Zacharias punished for his want of faith (1. 20), and the
Holy Virgin pronounced blessed because she believed (i. 45). Again,
the woman who is a sinner, no doubt a gross sinner, is dismissed with
the words, ‘Thy faith hath saved thee, go in peace” (vii. 50).
Again, as Godet says, the four parables of the lost sheep, the lost
piece of money, the prodigal son, and the Pharisee and the Publican,
are the doctrine of Paul exhibited in action. Again, salvation
comes to the house of Zaccheus the Publican because he receives
Christ into it. Again, the teaching of the parable of the unprofit-
able servant is against any merit of works. Again, to the oneXV1 INTRODUCTION.

Samaritan out of the ten lepers the Lord says, ‘‘ Thy faith hath
made thee whole” (xvii. 19). And, lastly, the first words on the
Cross, “‘ Father, forgive them,” and the absolution of the penitent
malefactor, are exhibitions of the fullest and freest grace conceivable.

Again, the earlier chapters especially contain many expressions

of a like character, peculiar to this Gospel, as, for instance, the
whole of the Magnificat and the Song of Zacharias and of Simeon,
and the Song ofthe Heavenly Host, and St. Luke alone tells us that
the Lord, in the synagogue at Nazareth took as His text the words
of the Evangelical prophet, “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me,
because he hath anointed me to preach the gospel to the poor,” &c.
(iv. 17-20).

And, lastly, St. Paul, in writing to the Corinthian Christians,
beseeches them “by the meekness and gentleness of Christ” (2 Cor.
x. 1). We should gather from this that in his Gospel, which must have
been in the hands of the Corinthians, and from which they would
derive all their knowledge (for the time) of the Lord’s character and
teaching, the meekness and gentleness of the Lord would be brought
into prominence, and soitis. From the Gospel of St. Luke we derive
the touching narrative of the gentleness and compassion of the
Lord in the raising up of the widow’s son and of His treatment of
the woman which was a sinner ; and we have the record of His own
example of His meekness and forbearance in His prayer for His
murderers, and in His reception of the penitent malefactor. Again,
His teaching, as exhibited in St. Luke’s Gospel, inculeates this dis-
position very strongly, as, for instance, the parable of the good
Samaritan, the instruction respecting taking the lowest room, the
gentle and forbearing treatment of the sulky and surly elder gon by
the father in the parable of the Prodigal Son, also the parable of
the Pharisee and the Publican, and in connection with this it a

worthy of notice that St. Luke does not mention the great indig-
nation manifested by the Saviour against the disciples when the
had rebuked those who had brought the little children (xviii. 16),
fom the temple, (Compare Lake eae eee RATAN end elle
Mie Ge) X. 20 with Matth. xxi. 12 and
more all these considerations it appears to me to be an absolute
certainty that the early fathers were right in identifying the Gospel
of St. Paul (“my Gospel”) with that of St. Luke, not, eS

: of '
that St. Paul himself wrote it, but that it was writt ie

en by hisINTRODUCTION. XVil

direction and the materials, some of them at least, derived from the
highest source, even the revelation of the Lord Himself to the Apostle.

We know that one part of this Gospel came from the Lord
through St. Paul, and we know not what other portions may not
have had asimilar origin. Ithink it is not unreasonable to suppose
that much besides the Institution of the Eucharist was made known
to St. Paul by Christ personally.

With respect to other channels of information, St. Luke, in the
preface, seems to assert that he derived his materials from the
highest human sources. ‘It seemed good to me, who, having had
perfect understanding of all things from the very first ’’ (‘‘ or having
traced the course of all things accurately from the first’), and this he
did apparently from the reports of “ those who, from the beginning,
were eyewitnesses and ministers of the word.”

Now, in carefully examining this Gospel, there seems to be a
large number of incidents, the accounts of which must have been
derived from eyewitnesses. Thus the account of the miraculous
draught of fishes (v. 8-8) must have come from one present, and in
whose memory all was indelibly engraved, so also the disciples
rubbing the ears of corn (vi. 1), and the healing of the man with the
withered hand (vi.6). (This account is quite as minute as St. Mark’s,
but not copied from it.) Thesame may be said of the healing of the
centurion’s servant (vii. 1-9). This account is far more circum-
stantial than St. Matthew’s, and is not found in St. Mark. Also
the account of the woman that was a sinner, peculiar to St. Luke
(vii. 36-50). Again, the miracle of the Gadarene demoniac is as
graphic as that in St. Mark, but not derived fromit. So also the
account of the Transfiguration (ix. 28-37) must have come, we
should say, from one of the three present. Again, the same may
be said of the Lord’s Apprehension in xxii. 47-58. We are there told
that Judas went before—we are told of the Lord’s question, ‘‘ Judas,
betrayest thou the Son of man with a kiss?’’, and the disciples’
question, “ Lord, shall we smite with the sword?” and the healing
ofthe ear, and the solemn concluding words, “* This is your hour, and
the power of darkness.”

Again, I have noticed that the account of St. Peter’s denials,
from verses 56 to 59, bears all the marks of coming direct from one
who was present; and, lastly, the account of the meeting of the
risen Lord with many disciples in xxiv. 36-42, must have been

given by an eyewitness.CST

XVill INTRODUCTION.

All this bears out very fully the statement of Eusebius, that he
had received his information ‘from his intimacy and stay with
Paul, and also his intercourse with the other Apostles.”’

Ve
MEDICAL LANGUAGE OF ST. LUKE.

I trust (if God spare me to write on the Acts of the Apostles), to
give in an excursus some instances of the use of medical language
by St. Luke. This subject seems exhausted in a treatise by the
Rev. W. K. Hobart, of Trinity College, Dublin, on “ The Medical
Language of St. Luke.” He seems to prove very clearly, not only
that St. Luke uses medical terms in describing the miracles of heal-
ing, which the other Evangelists do not use, but that his vocabulary
is that of one who had received a medical education and studied
medical treatises ; and when writing respecting non-medical matters
he yet uses very many words which Hippocrates, Galen, Dios-
corides, and other Greek physicians were in the habit of employing
even when not writing on diseases and their remedies. To give
Dr. Hobart’s own words, ‘‘There is a class of words running
through the third Gospel, and the Acts of the Apostles, and for the
most part peculiar to these books of the New Testament writings,
with which a medical man must have been familar, as they formed
part of the ordinary phraseology of Greek medical language. In
thus using words to which he had become habituated through pro-
fessional training, St. Luke would not be singular, for the Greek
medical writers, also, when dealing with unprofessional subjects,
show a leaning to the use of words to which they were accustomed
in their professional language.” Iwish I could now give instances,
but the extent to which these Notes on St. Luke have already run
quite forbids it, and some of the more remarkable instances are to
be found in the Book of the Acts.

So that a searching examination of St. Luke’s phraseology yields
a striking confirmation to the truth of the words of the Apostle,
which describe him as a physician.

Almighty God, Who calledst Luke the Physician, whose praise is
in the Gospel, to be an Evangelist and Physician of the soul; May
it please Thee that, by the wholesome medicine of the doctrine
delivered by him, all the diseases of our souls may be healed:
through the merits of Thy Son Jesus Christ our Lord. Amen. _me COM,MMEN TARY.

Si LUKE:

INTRODUCTORY REMARKS ON THE PREFACE.

1-4, ‘‘ Forasmuch as many have taken in hand,” &c. This is the
only place in the New Testament which throws any direct light
on the composition of the Gospel narrative. From it we learn
that, in the very earliest times, the Church was instructed in
the accounts of the Life, Death, and Resurrection of the Lord Jesus,
not from books, but from the oral teaching of the Apostles, for
the Apostles only can be alluded to in the words, ‘‘ They de-
livered them unto us who from the beginning were eye-witnesses,
and ministers of the word.” The things which these original
witnesses delivered were historical facts—not abstract doctrines,
no matter how clearly deducible from such facts, but the facts
themselves; for the true rendering of the words “‘ most surely be-
lieved amongst us” is rather ‘‘ which have been accomplished
amongst us’’ (Godet), or ‘have been fulfilled amongst us” (Revisers
of 1881).

These facts, it appears, were at the first not committed to writing,
certainly not by the Apostles or original witnesses, who for some
reason confined themselves to teaching them orally.

As might have been expected, many of the first Christians thus
orally instructed were dissatisfied with having the accounts only in
memory ; and for the benefit of themselves and of their friends,
and perhaps of the Church, committed to writing in an historical
form, more or less imperfectly, the facts which they had heard from
the lips of the Apostles.

In a very modest way St. Luke, on the cround that he had care-
fully informed himself of all the facts from the very commencement,
puts forth a claim to write a consecutive account of them, and this,

B2 THE PREFACE. [Sv. Luxe.

not apparently that the whole Church might possess an orderly
account of Gospel facts, but that a certain Theophilus [from the
way in which he is addressed as most excellent [xpdriore|, evidently a
person of great consideration in the early Church], might know
the certainty of the instructions which he had received.

The lessons, then, which we gather from this short preface are of
very great importance: they are these—that the Church as an orga-
nized body instructed in the teaching, and continuing in the fellow-
ship of the Apostles, was anterior, in point of time, to any book
of the New Testament Scriptures—that the instruction in which the
first converts were built up in the faith was historical instruction
—and that its subject matter was the Life, Death, and Resurrection
of Christ; and whatever doctrines were afterwards superadded or
deduced, had all of them this account of the Lord’s Life and Death
as their foundation; but we learn also that from the necessities
of the case it was deemed right that in the later Apostolic times
the oral accounts of the Lord’s Life should be preserved by being
put into writing.

There is one important matter deserving attention suggested
by this introduction; and that is, its language or style. Godet
says: ‘Not only is it written in most classical Greek, but it re-
minds us, by its contents, of the similar preambles of the most
illustrious Greek historians, especially those of Herodotus and
Thucydides. The more thoroughly we examine it the more we
find of that delicacy of sentiment and refinement of mind which con-
stitute the predominant traits of the Hellenic character; we do not
find a style like it in all the New Testament, except at the end of
the Acts, and in the Epistle to the Hebrews.” If these one or two
Scripture writers use at times most classical Greek, why should not
all the New Testament have been similarly composed? Evidently
because its composition, according to classical models, would have
deprived it of all its usefulness as a book for all, for the poor and
uneducated rather than the refined and educated. The Hebrew
and Aramaic are, as regards the composition of their sentences, ex-
ceedingly simple compared with the Greek and Latin languages.
When God then, at the first, caused the account of His Son’s Life
and Death to be preached in the words and sentences of the Aramaic
He enshrined it in that which was especially the language of the
poor, and also in the idiom of the poor; and when it was translated
into the great classical languages of the period, the phraseology andTHE PREFACE.

CHAP. I.

/ | a .
ORASMUCH as many have taken in hand to set forth
in order a declaration of those thimes which are most
surely believed among us.

1. “‘ Declaration;” rather ‘“‘narration;” ordinare narrationem, Vulg.; ‘‘ to draw up a
narration,” Revisers. ‘‘ Of those things which are most surely believed among us,” or
<« which have been fulfilled among us,” Revisers; “que in nobis complete sunt rerum,”

Vulg.

idiom of the Aramaic were preserved and employed as far as pos-
sible, so that what the common people of Palestine heard gladly,
the common people of all nations might hear gladly as well. So
that we see that it was not from want of ability that one most im-
portant sacred writer narrates the words and deeds of the Lord,
not in well-turned periods and carefully chosen phrases, of which
we see from this preface that he was the master, but in the simple,
artless style of the original tradition, so that not the few, but the
many might receive in its simplicity the faith of the Lord.

1. ‘“‘Forasmuch as many have taken in hand,” &e. Are St.
Matthew and St. Mark to be included amongst these “many ?”
Certainly not St. Mark, for he most probably wrote in Rome, but it
is not at allimprobable that St. Matthew may be included ; for it is
to be carefully borne in mind, that St. Luke, in this preface, pro-
nounces no opinion, favourable or otherwise, about these previous
efforts to compose narratives of the Lord’s life, but only claims for
himself a place amongst them on special grounds, mentioned in the
third verse.

Another question is, Are the authors of the productions known as
the Apocryphal Gospels to be any of them included amongst these
“many?” Certainly not; because the Apocryphal Gospels, all of
them, contain much which is, on the face of it, unworthy of the Lord,
and were all the production of much later times.

‘A declaration of those things which are most surely believed
among us.” The Revisers of 1881 more correctly render this “a
narrative of those matters which have been fulfilled among us,”4 THE PREFACE. (Sr. Luxe.
2 *Even as they delivered them unto us, which >from the

ee «© begimmime were eyewitnesses, and ministers of the
CLS ek. < ©:

feoeeae | OTS:

Q . e ‘

> Mark i. 1. 3 °It seemed good to me also, having had per-
John xy. 27.

° Acts xv. 19, Lect understanding of all things from the very first,
25, 28. 1 Cor.

vii. 40.

 

3. “Having had perfect understanding of all things from the very first.” See below
for translation of Revisers and Godet.

i.e. in our day and generation amongst our contemporaries, though
our elders.

‘“¢ Most surely believed” is a wrong translation.

2. ‘They who from the beginning were eyewitnesses and
ministers of the word.” The eyewitnesses from the beginning
must have been the Apostles. Thus when one was chosen to fill
the place of the traitor, his qualification was that he was one “ of
those men who had companied with the Apostles all the time that
the Lord Jesus went in and out amongst them, beginning from the
Baptism of John,” &c. These were naturally the first depositaries
and deliverers to others of the original account or tradition [para-
dosis]|. From this we learn that the inspiration of the Evan-
gelists did not consist in the Holy Spirit pouring into their mind
the knowledge of otherwise unknown facts respecting the Lord’s
life, but that He so overruled them, that out of a very world of facts,
and incidents, and parables, and miracles, and discourses, they were
directed to select and set forth those which it was most to the advan-
tage of the future Church to know; so that the mind of the Church
might not be distracted or merely amused by a vast multiplicity
of incidents, but be led to dwell upon those which, in the eye of the
Spirit, were most profitable for faith and practice.

‘“‘ Hyewitnesses and ministers of the word.’ This is more cor-
rectly rendered by Godet, ““who were eyewitnesses of them (the
facts or events) from the beginning, and who (afterward, at the
Day of Pentecost) became ministers of the word. This emphasizes
the fact that only on and after the Day of Pentecost did the Apostles
become the ministers of the full and complete word. Before, they
preached simply that men should repent and believe, now they
preached the sanction of repentance and faith in the full account of
the Life, Sayings, Acts, Death and Resurrection of Christ.

Q

3. “ It seemed good to me also, having had perfect under-Cuap. I.] THE PREFACE. 5
to write unto thee *in order, “most excellent ¢ Acts xi. 4.
Theophilus, a
:
4 *That thou mightest know the certainty of £ John xx. 31.
those things, wherein thou hast been instructed.

 

4, «That thou mightest know the certainty of those things wherein,” &c. ‘“‘ That thou
mightest know the certainty concerning the things,” &c.

standing of all things from the very first.” Revisers more correctly
translate this, ‘*‘ Having traced the course of all things accurately
from the first.” Godet, ‘‘ After carefully informing myself of all these
facts from their commencement.’ There seems to be in the words
“fromthe first”’ or ‘*commencement,”’ an allusion to the circumstance
that St. Luke goes further back in his account than the ministry of
John, and gives an account of the very first dawning of the Gospel
day in the vision of the Angel to Zacharias announcing to him the
birth of the Lord’s forerunner. So Godet: ‘‘ The author com-
pares himself to a traveller who tries to discover the source of a
river, in order that he may descend it again, and follow its entire
course.”

“To write unto thee in order, most excellent Theophilus.” ‘In
order ” would seem to be in order of time. Very probably the
narratives which were composed by ‘“‘the many” were the greater
part of them mere memoranda arranged according to the order in
which they were received or remembered, rather than with any
regard to chronology, or their true sequence in the Lord's Life.

‘‘ Most excellent Theophilus.” He writes to Theophilus, a man
probably of some distinction, and a governor; for the form Most
excellent was not used except to rulers and governors. As, for ex-
ample, St. Paul says to Festus, ‘ most excellent Festus,” using pre-
cisely the same word. In this latter case it must have been used
as a form, for there was nothing noble or great about Festus. About
Theophilus personally nothing whatsoever is known. It is just pos-
sible that as the word means “ beloved of God,” it may be taken as
a general appellation of believers, or Christians, who could not have
been called out of darkness into light, except by an act of love on
God’s part.

4. “That thou mightest know the certainty of those things,
wherein thou hast been instructed.” Some translate this ‘‘in-
structed” as if it meant “‘ catechized,” but 1b must not be taken to6 ZACHARIAS. [Sr. Luxe.

Before the 5 HERE was ®in the days of Herod,
common ac- f : ae
count called _ the king of Judea, a certain priest

Anno Domini : : pa.
the sixth year. named Zacharias, "of the course of Abia: and

3 ae il. his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and her
a yhr, XXiv. o

10, a oe name was Elisabeth.

Xll, 4, 1/.

imply that form of instruction by question and answer to which we
apply the word “ catechize.” Theophilus had been instructed in the
history of the Lord, but orally, and perhaps by different teachers;
and this treatise or narrative being written with care and in
due order, and after much investigation, would confirm, i.e. Invest
with more certainty, the oral instruction which Theophilus had
received.

5. ‘There was in the days of Herod, the king of Judea, a certain
priest,” &e. The reign of Herod is here mentioned, not simply to
indicate the time in the world’s secular history, but the time in
which prophecy was fulfilled; for this king Herod was an Idumean
or EHdomite king, imposed upon the Jews by the Romans in virtue
of their conquest of the Holy Land. The sceptre had now departed
from Judah, so Shiloh was to come, or rather according to the strict
meaning of the Hebrew prophecy, “‘he was to come to whom the
gathering of the people should be.”

‘““A certain priest named Zacharias, of the course of Abia,” &e.
David divided the families of Hleazar and Ithamar into twenty-four
divisions, who were in their turn to minister in the Sanctuary—the
turn of each course coming twice a year. It was their duty to
perform the higher offices of the holy place, to offer the blood of the
sacrifices by sprinkling it at the bottom of the altar, to trim the
seven-branched candlestick, to put on the shew-bread, and as here
mentioned, to burn incense on the altar of incense. The course
of Abia was the eighth of these courses, and calculations have been
made to show that the course or Ephemeria of Abia would be on
duty in the week from the seventeenth to the twenty-third of April,
and in that from the third to the ninth of October, but this rests
too much on conjecture.

‘And his wife was of the daughters of Aaron, and hername was
Elizabeth.” In this he had fulfilled the will of God, who desired
that the priestly tribe should keep its lineage pure by the priests
taking wives of the same tribe. Being of the daughters of Aaron,Cua. I] RIGHTEOUS BEFORE GOD. 7

6 And they were both ‘righteous before God} walking in

oO
all the commandments and ordinances of the Lord i Gen. vii. 1.
oy sae & Xvil. 1. 1 Kin,
blameless. ix. 4, 2 Kin,
XX. 3. Job i le

¢ And they had no child, because that Elisa- Acts xxiii. 1,

7 saa Harr ; ae a ake & xxiv.16.
beth was barren, and they both were now well Phil. iii. 6.
stricken 1n years.

Q | = ges * Smadar .

8 And it came to pass, that while he executed
the priest’s office before God *in the order of his * 1 Chr, xxiv,
ees 19. 2 Chr. viii.
course, 14, & xxx. 2.

9 According to the custom of the priest’s office,

a Ae peel ay = Pasir et - f : l Wxyxxx. 7,3:
his lot was !to burn incense when he went into the 1 sam. ii. 28.

: - > : sai 1 Chr. xxiii. 13.
temple of the Lord. 2 Chr. xxix. 11.

9. «* His lot was to burn incense when he went into the temple of the Lord.” Revisers
translate, “‘ His lot was to enter into the temple of the Lord and burn incense.” The
meaning is that after he and his brother priests had entered that morning into the temple
of the Lord they drew lots to determine which part of the service each one should take,
and tbe lot fell to him to burn incense.
she must have been the daughter of a member of one of the twenty-
four courses.

6. ‘And they were both righteous before God, walking in all the
commandments,” &c. Righteous before God, i.e., righteous before
Him Who searcheth the hearts. They were sincere and hearty in
their obedience, and this is perfectly compatible with the un-
doubted theological truth, that being conceived and born in sin
“through the weakness of their nature they could not always stand
upright.”

‘‘ Walking in all the commandments and ordinances.” The
commandments seem to refer to the precepts of the moral law, the

we : A
ordinances to the Levitical precepts respecting the worship of God.
: : ee ”

7. ‘And they had no child, because that Elisabeth was barren,
&e. Inasmuch as fruitfulness was amongst the blessings pro-
nounced by God on the children of Israel if they obeyed Him, the
Jews falsely inferred that individual barrenness implied a curse,
whereas the mothers of some of the greatest persons 1n their history,
Isaac, Jacob, Samson, Samuel, had been barren till God answered
their prayers by special miracles. B

8-9. “And it came to pass. ...- his lot was to burn incense,
&e. It appears that, in order that there might be no jealousy or

rer i EE8 THE TIME OF INCENSE. (Sr. Luxe.

10 ™And the whole multitude of the people were praying

m Ley. xvi.17. without at the time of incense.
Rey. viii. 3, 4. ° I z
11 And there appeared unto him an angel of the
n Ex.xxx.1, [Lord standing on the right side of “the altar of

incense.

 

unseemly rivalry, all the functions of each day were apportioned
by lot amongst the priests who belonged to the particular course in
attendance. According to Dr. Edersheim, a priest could only offer
incense once in his lifetime. His words are: ‘‘ While the (morning)
sacrifice was prepared for the altar, the priests, whose lot it was, had
made ready all within the Holy Place, where the most solemn part
of the day’s service was to take place, that of offering the incense,
which symbolized Israel’s accepted prayers. Again was the lot, the
third, cast to indicate him, who was to be honoured with this
highest Mediatorial Act. Only once in a lifetime might any one
enjoy that privilege. - Henceforth he was called ‘rich,’ and must
leave to his brethren the hope of the distinction which had been
granted him.” (“‘ Life of Christ,” vol. i. p.1384. 2nd edit.)

10. “And the whole multitude of the people were praying.”
This was the one time of special daily prayer in the temple. The
time of acceptable prayer apparently was not so much the time of
offering any bloody sacrifice, however solemn, but the time of
incense—incense typifying by its sweet odour the favour with
which God regarded true prayer. Thus David says: “Let my
prayer be set forth in Thy sight as the incense,” and in the Revela-
tion we read: ‘‘ Another angel came and stood at the altar, having
a golden censer, and there was given unto him much incense, that
he should offer it with the prayers of all the saints upon the golden
altar which was before the throne. And the smoke of the incense
which came with the prayers of the saints ascended up before God
out of the angel’s hand”’ (viii. 3,4). It is to be remarked that the
Incense is not typical of prayer, but ascends up with it as accom-
panying it.

11. “ And there appeared unto him an angel of the Lord stand-
ing on the right side,’ &c. This is the first gleam of the dawn of the
Gospel Day, and where did it shine forth? In the temple of God—in
the centre and heart of that remarkable system of blended
ment and worship which God had established amongst His

v

atone-
peopleCuapr. I.] FEAR FELL UPON HIM. 3)

12 And when Zacharias saw him, °he was. Judg. vi. 29.
y.: : & xiii. 22. Dan.
troubled, and fear fell upon him. x 8.) ver. 90)
ch. ii. 9. Acts
ede Revd
17.

to prepare them for the true Atonement and the spiritual worship
of the Church of Christ. It is exceedingly significant how God
passed over the teaching or expository system of the popular
religion of the day, which had become thoroughly corrupt in the
hands of the Rabbis and Scribes, and gave the first sign which
heralded the coming change, not in the Synagogues or Rabbinical
schools, but in the Holy Place, where was the altar of incense
betokening acceptable prayer, and the table of shew-bread showing
forth the true Bread, and the seven-branched candlestick the type

‘of the seven-fold Spirit. ‘‘It seems indeed most fitting that the
Evangelic story should have taken its beginning within the sanc-
tuary and at the time of sacrifice. Despite its outward veneration
for them, the temple, its services, and specially its sacrifices, were
by an inward logical necessity, fast becoming a superfluity in the
eyes of Rabbinism. But the new development, passing over the
intruded elements [of Rabbinism] which were, after all, of rational-
istic origin, connected its beginning directly with the Old Testament
dispensation—its sacrifices, priesthood, and promises. In the
sanctuary, in connection with sacrifice, and through the priesthood
—such was significantly the beginning of the -era of fulfiment.
And so the great religious reformation of Israel under Samuel had
also begun in the tabernacle.”

12. ‘And when Zacharias saw him, he was troubled, and fear
fellupon him.’ This fear has been ascribed to his sense of sin, but
does it not rather arise from the manifestation of the supernatural
or spiritual world? The inhabitants of this world are in a sphere
above ours. We feel ourselves utterly powerless before them. For
what purpose does God permit them to appear ? Daniel, a man
far greater and holier than Zacharias, felt this fear. On one occa-
sion, in the sight of this very Gabriel, he was afraid, and fell on
his face (Dan. viii. 17), on another there remained no strength in
him (x. 8).

Great pains have been taken by some commentators to show that
before a messenger from the other world can appear, *‘ a condition
of peculiar receptivity is required. This condition,” it is said,
“ existed in Zacharias at this time. It had been created in him by10 THY PRAYER IS HEARD. __§ {Sr. Luxe.

13 But the angel said unto him, Fear not, Zacharias:
for thy prayer is heard; and thy wife Elisabeth shall bear

p ver, 60,63. thee a son, and ? thou shalt call his name John.
14 And thou shalt have joy and gladness; and

OQ

a ver. 58. 4many shall rejoice at his birth.
15 For he shall be great in the sight of the

the solemnity of the place, by the sacredness of the function he
was about to perform, by his lively sympathy with all this people
who were imploring heaven for national deliverance, and, last of
all, by the experience of his own domestic trial.” But why thus
limit the power of God? What right have we, who know nothing
of the conditions under which the denizens of the unseen world
exist, much less appear and disappear—what right have we to say
that God can only send them to those who are in what we are
pleased to call a state of receptivity? One would also think that
the state of receptivity would dispel the fear with which their
coming seems always attended, but it does not. One thing, how-
ever, is most certain, that in every case they appear unexpectedly
and suddenly, and disappear as suddenly, as if their manifestation
depended on nothing except the Divine Will.

13. ‘‘ But the angel said unto him, Fear not, Zacharias: for thy
prayer is heard,”’—1.e., thy prayer for a son. When God moves
the heart to pray for some extraordinary blessing, it is a sign that
He is about to grant it.

“Thou shalt call his name John.” He was commanded to give
the child this name, because of its signifying ‘‘ the Lord is gracious,”
or ‘‘ shows grace.”

14. ‘‘And thou shalt have joy and gladness.” This joy and
gladness has become the heritage of the whole Church of Christ, for
the outward form and utterance of this joy in the Benedictus has
ever been the expression of the Church’s joy that God has visited
and redeemed His people.

‘And many shall rejoice at his birth.” This must not be restricted
to the joy of the family circle (v. 58), or of the neighbouring country,
but to the revival of religious hope through his ministry. According
to the Lord’s words, ‘‘ He was a burning and a shining light, and
ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light”’ (John v. 83),
15, ‘‘ For he shall be great in the sight of the Lord.” The LordCusp: I] HE SHALL GO BEFORE HIM. it

es Pee eey Ly Riese t 0 d ae :
Lord, and shall drink neither wine nor strong drink; and
he shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, ‘even from * Num. vi. 3.

his mother’s womb. See aae
16 ‘And many of the children of Israel shall he Gare
turn to the Lord their God. t Mal. iv. 5, 6.
7 = Andehe shall co before him in the spirit 3 eho
Wiattexa 14:

Mark ix. 12.

 

witnesses to his greatness when He says that he was ‘‘more than a
prophet,” and that ‘‘ of those born of women there hath not risen a
ereater.”

‘¢ And he shall drink neither wine nor strong drink.” That is, he
shall all his life be under the vow of the Nazarite. Not only was
he not to drink wine nor strong drink, but nothing that is made of
the vine-tree, from the kernels even to the husk, no razor was to
come upon his head, and he was not to touch the dead body even
of his father or his mother when they died, because the consecration
of his God was upon his head (Numb. vi. 4, 5, 7).

‘He shall be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from his mother’s
womb.” ‘St. John who, before he was born, when yet in hig
mother’s womb, bore witness to the grace of the Spirit which he
had received, when, leaping in the womb of his parent, he hailed
the glad tidings of the coming of the Lord. There is one spirit of
this life, another of grace. The former has its beginning at birth,
its end at death; the latter is not tied down to times and seasons,
is not quenched by. death, is not shut out of the womb” (Ambrose
in Catena Aurea).

16. “And many of the children of Israel shall he turn to the
Lord their God.” By no prophet who went before him was the
religious heart of the people of Israel so stirred. ‘‘ Then went out
unto him Jerusalem and all Judea, and all the region round about
Jordan.” The Lord speaks of “all the people that heard him, and
the publicans justifying God being baptized with the baptism of
John” (Luke vii. 29). So that his work in preparing the elect
remnant for the reception of Christ was pre-eminently blessed of
God.

17. **Andhe shall go before him in the spirit and power of Elias,”
&e. Go before whom? No doubt before Christ the Son of God,
who is here by very sure implication called “‘ the Lord their God.”
And what wonder, seeing that this same Christ permitted Hisi WHEREBY SHALL I KNOW THIS? [Sr. Lune.

and power of Elias, to turn the hearts of the fathers to

|| Or, by. the children, and the disobedient || to the wisdom
of the just; to make ready a people prepared for the Lord.
« Gen. xvii.17. 18 And Zacharias said unto the angel, * Where-

by shall I know this? for I am an old man, and my wite
well stricken in years.

 

apostles to worship Him, and to call Him “ Lord and God.” Thus
Bede, ‘‘ Now since John (who bearing witness to Christ, baptized

the people in His faith), is said to have turned the children of

Israel to the Lord their God, it is plain that Christ is the God of
Israel.”

‘*'To turn the hearts of the fathers to the children.”” Many early
writers consider that ‘‘the children’’ here mean the apostles and
Christian teachers who inherited the promises made to the fathers,
so that it is the same as turning them to Christianity, which was
in a sense the offspring of the older religion; but this seems very
far fetched. Do not the words seem to point to a revival of family
religion, and home duties and affections, which must have been in a
fearfully low state, if divorce was then socommon among the Jews,
as we know it was? If Christianity was to be a religion of love,
what more likely than that love should be revived im the home
circle? Coleridge, quoted in Ford, has an observation worth re-
producing: ‘‘ The paternal and filial duties discipline the heart,
and prepare it for the love of all mankind. The intensity of private
attachments encourages, not prevents, universal benevolence.” It
is to be remarked that the prophet Malachi, from whom this quota-
tion is cited, mentions both sides—the hearts of the fathers to the
children, and the children to the fathers.

‘A people prepared for the Lord.”’ By repentance, and works
meet for repentance.

18. “ And Zacharias said unto the angel, Whereby shall I know
this ?”’ &e. This unbelief on the part of this good man seems
strange. Was not the appearance of the angel, and in such
sacred place, sufficient to assure him ? though, however , Many
phets and holy men, Abraham, Gideon, and H een) had
for signs. And, howtos, we are to remember, that the meale did not
on all occasions present a supernatural appearance. They seem to
havemanifested themselves on most occasions simplyasmen. Daniel

3
pro-
l askedCuap. I.] I AM GABRIEL. 13

19 And the angel answering said unto him, I am ¥ Gabriel,
that stand in the presence of God; and am sent ȴ Dan. viii. 16,
to speak unto thee, and to show thee these glad Matt, xvit, 10
a Heb. i. 14.

20 And, behold, * thou shalt be dumb, and not * Ezek. iii. 26.
able to speak, until the day that these things shall ge
be performed, because thou belevest not my words, which
shall be fulfilled in their season.

 

66

speaks of the ‘“‘man” Gabriel. There is no ground whatsoever for
supposing that they were as represented in pictures, men furnished
with impossible wings. But we are to remember that the mani-
festation of the supernatural by no means necessitates a true belief
in God, and in what God requires. The Lord very emphatically
says, ‘‘ If they hear not Moses and the prophets, neither will they
be persnaded, though one rose from the dead.” The whole book,
Old Testament and New, is a strange record of mingled belief and un-
belief; and this good man’s case isno exception. The very greatness
of the tidings, so unlooked for, and yet earnestly prayed for, might
instil doubt, as the disciples, when they heard of the Lord’s Resur-
rection, “‘ believed not for joy, and wondered.”

19. ‘And the angel answering, said unto him, I am Gabriel,” &c.
Gabriel, apparently the second in rank of God’s great angelic
ministers. He is the one apparently most constantly employed in
messages respecting redemption, whereas Michael, who alone is
styled Arch-angel, is always at the front of the contest between
good and evil (thus Dan. x. 18; xii. ; Rev. xia? ;) Jaded).

“And am sent to speak unto thee.’ From this we gather that
there is place, and distance, and motion in the unseen world.
However we conceive of it, and speak of it as above this visible state
of things, we are not so to speak of it as to rob it of all its reality,
and make it a mere vision or transcendental state.

90. “And behold thou shalt be dumb, and not able to speak.”
This was at once a sign and a chastisement. A sign that the word
of God through the angel would be fulfilled ; a chastisement, and
yet one which should make his heart overflow with joy, for the in-
stantaneous dumbness inflicted at the mere word of the angel was
to him as supernatural as the birth of a son would be.

Se ee14

21 And the people waited for Zacharias, and marvelled
that he tarried so long in the temple.
22, And when he came out, he could not speak unto them:

He COULD NOE SPEAK TO THEM.  [Sr. LUKE.

and they perceived that he had seen a vision in the temple :
for he beckoned unto them, and remained speechless.

a See 2 a 23 And it came to pass, that, as soon as * the
Rive Ghia: ; 46 : . :
ix. 25. days of his ministration were accomplished, he de-

parted to his own house.
24 And after those days his wife Elisabeth conceived, and
hid herself five months, saying,

 

21. “And the people waited for Zacharias, and marvelled that
he tarried,” &c. They waited to receive the blessing, most pro-
bably that contained in Numbers vi., ‘‘The Lord bless thee and
keep thee,’ &c., which he would pronounce after the incense was
consumed. It is not improbable that the angel spake to the aged
priest much more than the few words which are preserved.

22, “* And when he came out, he could not speak unto them,” i.e.,
he could not pronounce the words audibly, but made signs by which
they might understand that he was invoking the benediction upon
them. I can give no other meaning to the words, ‘‘ He beckoned
unto them, and remained speechless.”’

23-25. “And it came to pass... to take away my reproach
among men.” ‘Hid herself five months, saying, Thus hath the
Lord dealt,” &e. Various reasons have been given for this conduct
on the part of Elizabeth, all unsatisfactory ; as, for instance, the
natural modesty of females to conceal their state, but this reason
would have operated more strongly at the end of the five months.
Again, Godet has given an exactly opposite reason,—that she hid
herself till it could be seen that the Lord had taken away her re-
proach. Again, devotion has been suggested, but such would seem
to require that her retirement should be stricter as the time drew
nigh,

Is it not certain, however, when we take into consideration what
immediately follows, that it must have been something not clearly
revealed, connected with the visit of St. Mary ? For it was at the
close of these very five months that the Incarnation took place, and
Mary came at once to visit her kinswoman, apparently accordingCuar. I.|

   

THUS HATH THE LORD DEALT. je

25 Thus hath the Lord dealt with me in the days wherein

he looked on me, to ’take away my reproach » Gen. xxx. 23.
. . Is. iv. 1. & liv
among men. are ee

 

to the direction of the angel, “‘ Behold thy cousin Elizabeth, this is
the sixth month with her who was called barren.’ It may have been
necessary that the Holy Virgin should be sustained in the prospect of
Joseph’s suspicion, and, perhaps, other cruel slanders, by the salu-
tation and the acknowledgment of her more exalted kinswoman.
Would it not add some assurance to even the Virgin’s faith in the
greatness of Him to Whom she should give birth, to learn that her
kinswoman had miraculously conceived him who was to be the fore-
runner of Mary’s Son, the Elias who was to herald Him? Would
it not add even more assurance that her kinswoman, because she
was filled with the Holy Ghost, prophetically recognized that she
was already the mother of the Lord? Whilst fully recognizing her
firm faith in God’s promise, may we not be permitted to believe
that even she required support and comfort ?

WHEN THOU TOOKEST UPON THEE TO DELIVER Man, THOU DIDST
NOT ABHOR THE VIRGIN’S WOMB.

We now approach the first and greatest Mystery of the Gospel.

The first in order because it is the beginning of Redemption.
Tt is the root from which all else springs. The Death of Christ for
the world’s sin, and the Resurrection of Christ to be the world’s
new Life are both the issues of what the Evangelist is now about to
record. Before the Son of God could die and rise again for us, He
must have a true human nature, “‘ of a reasonable soul and human
flesh,” in which He could die and rise again, and the Evangelist is
now about to set before us the circumstances, so far as they are re-
vealed, under which this took place.

It is also the greatest of all mysteries, being the most full of
mystery, for it is the Infinite personally and permanently uniting
Itself with the finite, it is the High and Lofty One Who inhabiteth
eternity appearing in time. It is God, without ceasing to be God,
becoming man, and man, without ceasing to be man, taken into
God.

To express it in Scripture language, it is One Who was in the
form of God, and thought it not a thing to be tenaciously grasped,16 THE INCARNATION. [Sr. Luxe.

96 And in the sixth month the angel Gabriel was sent

 

to be equal with God, emptying Himself, taking the form of a ser-
vant and being made in the likeness of men. It is “The Word
Who was in the beginning, Who was with God, Who was God it
is this Word being made flesh and beginning to dwell amongst us
so truly that men should “‘see with their eyes, should look up, and
their hands should handle of the Word of life.”

Such is the mystery of God’s Birth, the humiliation of the Eternal
Son, which is the theme of the next few words of the Evangelist.

One or two general remarks are necessary before we consider
them word by word.

First, let the reader notice one very great difference between the
two accounts of the coming of the Son of God amongst us, as they
are given by St. Matthew and by St. Luke respectively.

In St. Matthew the revelation is made to Joseph, and the Virgin
is altogether in the background. In St. Luke, the later Gospel, this
is altogether reversed. The angel appears, not in a dream, as to
Joseph, but to St. Mary personally, so that whilst awake she re-
ceives his salutation and converses with him; and to the end of
the account of the Nativity and Infancy, all is about Mary, who
visits Elisabeth and receives her salutation, and returns thanks to
God in the Magnificat. Then comes the account of her giving birth
to her Divine Son, and the visit of the shepherds, who found Mary,
and Joseph, and the Babe lying in a manger, and then there is her
purification and what she offered, and how Simeon prophesied to
her of the falling and rising again of many, and of the piercing
as by a sword, of her own soul; and then there is the seeking
her Son, when, for a few days, He was lost, and her words to Him,
the whole concluding with, ‘‘ His mother kept all these sayings in
her heart.”’

Then, in the next place, let us consider that if no other than the
Hternal Son came amongst us by the power of the Holy Ghost, and
in a way so above nature, whether it is not reasonable that there
should be very many attendant circumstances, in some degree cor-
responding in their spiritual as well as in their miraculous nature.
to so unparalleled a visitation. Is there nothing but the visit of the
Magiled by the star, to mark such an advent? St. Luke’s account
assures us that there is. The Holy Ghost, Who brought about

the Incarnation, appeared amongst these holy persons, who wereCuap. I.] GABRIEL SENT FROM GOD. VG

from God unto a city of Galilee, named Nazareth,

 

favoured with a knowledge of it in the fulness of the spirit of
prophecy. Elisabeth in recognition of Mary as the Mother of her
Lord, is filled with the Holy Ghost, and the Forerunner in her
womb knew the Lord. Mary under the inspiration of the same
Spirit poured forth her Magnificat. Zacharias was filled with the
Holy Ghost, and prophesied in the words of the Benedictus
Simeon came by the Spirit into the temple, and praised God in
another hymn universally adopted by the Church. Anna, the
prophetess, at that instant came into the temple, and spake of Him
to all them that looked for Redemption in Jerusalem. And besides
this there had been the message of the angel of the Lord to the
shepherds and the anthem of the heavenly host. Now all these
formed no part of the original tradition commonly preached ; they
were scarcely likely to have done so, for they were, most of them, of a
more private nature, seen and known by a very few: by the family
gathering at the circumcision of the Baptist; by, perhaps at the
most, twenty shepherds; by the few that happened to be within
reach of the voice of aged Simeon; and so in the course of a genera-
tion they would be well-nigh forgotten ; but they were nevertheless
worthy to become the heritage of the Church, and by the instru-
mentality of our Evangelist, who was led to ‘“ trace all things accu-
rately from the very first,” and under the guidance of the Holy
Ghost, they have become a part of the Gospel of Christ.

We now come to the examination of this true Gospel of the In-
fancy verse by verse.

96. ‘And in the sixth month,” i.e, the sixth month after the
birth of the Baptist. This, as I noticed, is the starting-point of the
chain of events culminating in Redemption.

“The angel Gabriel.” In the account of his former appearance to
Zacharias, the angel mentions his own name only on the occasion
of the unbelief of Zacharias. Now an event in the highest heavens
is revealed, ‘‘ The angel Gabriel was sent from God.”

“Unto a city of Galilee named Nazareth.’ Unto the most de-
spised of the cities of Israel, a place of which even good men scorn-
fully asked, ‘‘ Can any good thing come out of Nazareth?” And
yet God brought about that the greatest event which has ever
happened in the universe, even the union of the Godhood and Man-
hood in the Person of Jesus, should take place in this despised city.
Cc18 THE VIRGIN’S NAME WAS MARY.  [Sr. Luxe.

27 To a virgin “espoused to a man whose name was Joseph,
c Matt.i.1s. of the house of David; and the virgin’s name
che ite 45 5:
was Mary.

28 And the angel came in unto her, and said,

 

27. ‘**Toa virgin espoused.” Because of the prophecy, ‘‘ Behold
a virgin shall conceive and bear a son, and they shall call His name
Emmanuel.”’

“To a virgin.’ Because it was fitting that the all-holy One
should come amongst us in the way of the most perfect purity
conceivable.

“To a virgin espoused to a man whose name was Joseph.”
“Scripture has rightly mentioned that she was espoused as well as a
virgin ; ‘a virgin,’ that she might appear free from all connection
with man; ‘ espoused,’ that she might not be branded with the
disgrace of sullied virginity ’’ (Ambrose).

‘*Of the house of David.” His lineage is given in Matthew i.
Inasmuch as our Lord was for many years known only among the
Jews as the son of Joseph, it is clear that if He was to be held to be
the descendant of David, His lineage must be traceable to David him-
self. It is as certain, as will soon appear, that Mary was a descen-
dant of the same king.

“And the virgin’s name was Mary.” Mary or Miriam (in the
New Testament always Mariam) being the name of the creat sister
of Moses, was one of the most common, if not the most common, of
Jewish female names. There were two, if not three, Maries at the
cross. There was Mary the sister of Martha, and Mary the mother
of John Mark. Miriam was the most remarkable woman in Jewish
history ; she seems to have been both leader and prophetess. As
prophetess she gave utterance to the sublime ode in which the
women of Israel celebrated their deliverance from Egyptian bon-
dage, and their safe passage through the sea. It was through her
that Moses was spared to be the future deliverer of Israel, and in
the wilderness she seems to have been honoured as a sort of co-
leader with her two brothers.

248. “ And the angel came in unto her.” That is most probably
into her chamber, where she was in prayer. That the angel thus
came in, seems to imply that the visit took place, not in the field,
or by a well, or in the midst of friends,Cuap. 1] HAIL, HIGHLY FAVOURED. 19

d rave ; i Bs ces] ora L. as > 7 Spas

Hail, thou that art || highly favoured, ° the Lord ae
See : & x. 19.

| Or, graciously

accepted, or,

much graced :

See yer. 30.

© Judg. vi. 12.
‘“Thou art highly favoured.” The two oldest translations, the Syriac and the Latin,

both translate xexoapitrwuévn, as “full of grace;” Latin, gratia plena ; Syriac, malith

tatbotho.

 

‘* Hail” (translated in Syriac shalém, the usual Eastern saluta-
tion), ‘‘thou art highly favoured.” ‘The reader can scarcely be
ignorant of the fact, that in all those Churches which use the Latin
Vulgate, these words of what is called the ‘‘ Ave Maria,” are trans-
lated ‘* full of grace.’ ‘*‘ Hail thou who art full of grace,” richly
endowed with grace. Our translation of the Greek word looks
rather to the favour with which God regarded her, and is somewhat
external in its meaning. God might, for instance, see fit to grant
some great favour to a person not of exalted goodness and holiness.
But it may be understood as meaning “‘ endowed with internal sanc-
tifying grace,” and this being the deeper meaning, is undoubtedly
the one to be preferred ; for though it was a favour transcending all
thought that she should be the mother of the Lord, yet there must
have been in her mind and heart moral and spiritual fitness for such
a gift, which fitness she could only receive by the grace of the Holy
Spirit: and we have abundant proof that there was. Elisabeth said
of her, ‘‘ Blessed is she that believed.” She herself praised God in
a psalm of the most exalted devotion. It is said of her, “‘ Mary
kept all these things, and pondered them in her heart.” And again
it is said of her, ‘ Mary kept all these sayings in her heart.” And
surely if ever woman required the help of the Spirit, it was she to
whom was committed the guardianship and earliest training of the
Divine Son. Undoubtedly, then, this word should be translated
“full of grace,” in the sense of endowed by God with the best graces
of His Spirit.

And yet, though holding to this deeper and higher meaning, we
must not forget that for God to make use of any holy soul is to
confer an infinite favour on that soul. We cannot say for a moment
that Mary merited to be the instrument by which God became man,
but we must acknowledge for the honour of God, Who always
chooses the most fitting instruments, that of all human beings she
was the most worthy to be the channel of such grace to man.

“The Lord is with thee.” This also must be taken in the highest20 BLESSED ART THOU AMONG WOMEN. [St. Luxe.

as with thee: blessed art thou among women.
f ver. 12. 29 And when she saw him, ‘she was troubled
at his saying, and cast in her mind what manner of saluta-
tion this should be.

30 And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou
hast found favour with God.

«« Among women.” See below. “ Blessed art thou among women” omitted by &, B., L.,
two or three Cursives, and Copt.; retained by A., C., D., later Uncials, almost all Cur-
sives, Vulg., Syriac, &c.

29. “ And when she saw him.”’ So A., C., almost all later Uncials, almost all Cursiyes,
Itala (but Vulg. cum audisset), Goth., Syriac, 4{thiopic, &c.; but X, B., D., L., X., and
two or three Cursives omit.
possible sense. If the Lord was with the earthly heroes of the Jews,
so that fleshly men like Gideon should deliver Israel, in an infinitely
higher sense must He have been with this meek and humble saint,
that in her the Word should be made flesh.

‘‘ Blessed art thou among women.” This form of speaking is the
Hebrew superlative. There are multitudes of similar forms. ‘‘If
thou know not, O thou fairest among women,”’ literally ‘‘ O thou the
fair among women.”’ And in fact, measured by the greatness of Him
Whom she conceived, and to Whom she gave birth, and to Whom
for years she acted the part of a mother, her blessedness as a mother
is beyond thought. In her the original curse was reversed. Through
the child-bearing of Eve we partake of sin and death ; through the
child-bearing of Mary there came into the world that second Adam
through Whom we receive deliverance from sin and eternal life.

29. ‘“* And when she saw him, she was troubled at his saying,”
&e. Thus the greatness of the blessings which he saw before him is
said to make even Israel fear. ‘‘Then thou shalt see, and flow
together, and thine heart shall fear, and be enlarged; because the
abundance of the sea shall be converted unto thee, the forces of the
Gentiles shall come unto thee”’ (Isaiah lx. 5), and those who heard
that the Lord was risen were possessed by fear as well as great joy.
Notice also that she was troubled at the saying.

‘Cast in her mind what manner of salutation this should be.”
From the three notices of the way in which she regarded the dispen-
sations of God, it is clear that she must have been one of the most
reflective of women. ‘Casting in her mind,” “ pondering in her
heart,” ‘‘ keeping in her heart,” the sayings of her Divine Son.

30. *‘ And the angel said unto her, Fear not, Mary: for thou hastermir: 1 JESUS. 2k

ol ® And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thv womb, and
bring forth a son, and "shalt call his name & Is. vii. 14.

JESUS. Matt. 121

he chy ie al.

2X = ae ve anes i | oc
32 He shall be great, ‘and shall be called the i Mark v. 7.

 

found,” &c. As if he said, ‘‘ Fear not that the blessing seems over-
whelming. Whatever be in store for thee, thou hast no cause of
fear, for thou hast found favour with God, Thou hast pleased God:
God thy Maker hath seen in thee that which makes thee the fit
instrument of His most gracious purpose.”’

dl. * And, behold, thou shalt conceive in thy womb, and bring
forth a son, and shalt call his name JESUS.” The honour of giving
to the Holy Child the most Holy Name, the Name that is above
every hame, is in St. Matthew given to Joseph. It is here given to
Mary.

The name Jesus, which is a shortened form of Joshua, signifies
‘The Lord our Saviour.” And the reason we find in St. Matthew,
‘* He shall save his people from their sins.’

382. ‘‘He shall be great, and shall be called the Son of the
Highest.’ The same angel said of John to Zacharias, ‘‘ He shall
be great in the sight of the Lord.” But were the two greatnesses the
same? So far from this, St. John the Baptist himself confesses
the greatness of the Lord as infinitely above his, in the words, ‘‘ He
it is who, coming after me, is preferred before me, whose shoes
latechet I am not worthy to unloose.”’

* Shall be called the Son of the Highest.’’ We who have the
Gospel of St. John and the Epistles of St. Paul to guide us to the full
doctrine of the Person of the Lord, can give but one meaning to
these words. To us they mean, ‘the only-begotten Son of God.”
But how did St. Mary understand them? We can hardly think
that she understood them in the sense of the creeds of the Catholic
Church: any adequate sense of such nearness of the Divine Nature
would have simply overwhelmed her; and yet it is impossible to
suppose that she understood them as merely meaning that her Son
would be a child of God as all other children of Abraham were,
God said (Ps. Ixxxii. 6, 7), of all the children of Israel, “I have
said ‘‘ Ye are gods; and ye are all the children of the most Highest ;
but ye shall die like men, and fall like one of the princes.” But the
words of an angel would not be needed to announce such a well-known22 THE SON OF THE HIGHEST. (St. Luxe.

k2Sam.vii. Son of the Highest: and * the Lord God shall give
ti 12s es, : : -

exxxii. ll. Is. unto him the throne of his father David :

He On fe OO SNL « : :
5, Jer. xxiii. 5. 33 1 And he shall reign over the house of Jacob
ewe 1 1

1 Dan. 1. 44. &
vii. 14, 27.
Obad. xxi.
Mic. iv. 7.
John xii. 34. Se
ebsites:

for ever; and of his kingdom there shall be no
end.

truth as this. The words must have been understood by her in
some high and unique sense, very probably an indefinite sense of
their greatness and mystery pervaded her mind ; just as it was with
St. Peter, when he said, ‘“‘ Thou art the Christ, the Son of the living
God.” He knew not the full meaning of his own language. It
was the utterance of one who was yet spiritually a child, but he de-
sired to express by them the highest relationship to God which men
could then know or conceive.

32, 88. “‘ And the Lord God shall give unto him the throne of his
father David: And he shall reign,’ &c. All the expectations of the
Jews respecting the Messiah as their deliverer and king spring from
the promises which God had made to David. Such are, ‘‘ The Lord
hath made a faithful oath unto David, and he shall not shrink from
it; of the fruit of thy body will I set upon thy seat’ (Ps. cxxxii.) ;
again, in 2 Sam. vii., ‘‘I will set up thy seed after thee, which shall
proceed out of thy bowels, and I will establish his kingdom. He
shall build an house for my name, and I will stablish the throne
of his kingdom for ever. I will be his father, and he shall be my
son.”’ :

Now this promise had never been fulfilled. There was never an
approach to a fulfilment of it worthy of the greatness of the terms
in which God had promised it in any of the kings of the house of
David. They wrought no permanent deliverance. After a few
years, sometimes a very few, as in the case of Josiah, they passed
away. The one whose youth gave the fairest promise fell under the
dominion of degrading sin, and brought upon his descendants the
division of the kingdom. The greatest heroes of Jewish history, the
Maccabees, were ‘‘ not of the house and lineage of David.”

But the true people of God, those who looked for redemption in
Jerusalem, knew that God’s promise would not fail, and that the
more unlikely the advent of the true deliverance, the greater it
would be. And now at last it had come.Cuap. I.] HOW SHALL THIS BE ? eo

34 Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be,
seeing I know not a man?

30 And the angel answered and said unto her, ™ The Holy
Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the ™ Matt. i. 20,

“The Lord God shall give unto Him the throne of His father
David, and He shall reign,” &&. How would the Virgin understand
this? At first, and till the sword had pierced her own soul, and
the descent of the Spirit had enlightened her as to the true meaning
of the kingdom of God, she would understand it as any maiden of
the royal house would have understood it,—as the restoration of
the kingdom to Israel. But in the light of the Catholic faith, we
interpret it as meaning, ‘“‘ He ascended into heaven, and sitteth on
the right hand of the Father ; and He shall come again with glory
to judge both the quick and the dead, Whose kingdom shall have
no end.”

And yet some of us believe that the greater and wider will not
prevent the smaller and the narrower fulfilment, and that He
who is King of kings, and Lord of lords, will always retain, in a
peculiar sense, the title which He bore upon the Cross, ‘“‘ King of
the Jews;”’ that men will never cease to invoke Him as the Son of
David ; that the promises to the national Israel will not be totally
lost and absorbed in the promises to the Catholic Church, but that
‘* of the increase of his government and peace there shall be no end
upon the throne of David and upon his kingdom.”

84, “Then said Mary unto the angel, How shall this be, seeing,”
&e. This is not the question of unbelief as that of Zacharias, who
asked, ‘‘ Whereby shall I know this?” «e., the truth of your word,
but of faith. Believing that it would come to pass, and knowing that
she was a pure maiden, and understanding that the child to be born
of her was to be hers and hers only, perhaps remembering the an-
cient prophecy, “ Behold, a virgin shall conceive and bear a son,”
she naturally asked how it could come to pass.

35. ‘“ And the angel answered and said unto her, The Holy Ghost
shall come upon thee,” &c. Thisis the most explicit declaration of
the mystery of the Incarnation, on its human side, which we have
in Scripture, whilst the words of St. John, “ The Word was made
flesh and dwelt among us,” are the most explicit declaration of the
same mystery on its Divine side. In St. Luke it is the prepara-
tion on the part of the Holy Ghost of an undefiled human nature24 THAT HOLY THING. (Sr. Luxe.

Highest shall overshadow thee: therefore also that holy thing

n Matt.xiv. which shall be born of thee shall be called * the
BD. Oo xen O85

64. Marki.l. Son of God.

John i. 34. &

Ke ole: Acts

vill, 87. Rom.
tok

 

in the womb of the Virgin, so that it should be assumed by the Son
of God, and the union of the Son of God with that nature, also by
the operation of the Holy Spirit. In St. John it is the Word being
made flesh, no notice being taken of the operation of the Spirit in
the womb of the Virgin.

‘““The Holy Ghost shall come upon thee, and the power of the
Highest shall overshadow thee,” &c. The angel here speaks in a
Hebrew parallelism. The Holy Ghost being the power of the Highest.
The Holy Ghost, the Spirit of the Father, and of the Son, is that
Person of the Godhead by Whom the Father and the Son put
forth or exert their power. Thus the Lord says to the Apostles,
“ Tarry ye in Jerusalem till ye be endued with power from on high.”’
Again, ‘‘ God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost and
with power.” Again, St. Paul’s word was “in demonstration of
the Spirit and of power, that your faith should not stand in the
wisdom of men, but in the power of God.” “ Christ’s humanity
itself is thus formed by the power of the Holy Ghost,” and again,
“His hand [i.e., His Spirit] had carefully selected the choicest
specimen of ournature from the Virgin’s substance, and separating
it from all defilement, His personal indwelling hallowed it and
gave it power.” (J. H. Newman).

‘* Therefore also that holy thing which shall be born of thee shall
be called the Son of God.” We are not for a moment to understand
this as if “the holy thing,” 7.e., the undefiled human nature, was
of itself the Son of God; but we are to understand that when the
Holy Ghost formed this Holy Thing in the womb of the Blessed
Virgin, the Eternal Son began to dwell in it from the first, and thig
by the operation of the Holy Ghost, and so that which was born of her
was the Son of God. Here then are the two natures, but the One
Person. The Human nature being formed in the womb of the
Virgin, the Divine nature, as St. John tells us, assumes it; but the
one Being Who is born is One Person. ‘That holy thing which
shall be born of thee shall be called the Son of God.”

‘That holy thing.” ‘To distinguish His holiness from oursCuap. I.| WITH GOD NOTHING IMPOSSIBLE. Z

fal

Ort

36 And, behold, thy cousin Elisabeth, she hath also con-
ceived a son in her old age: and this is the sixth month with
her, who was called barren.

For ° with God nothing shall be impossible. 5 ,Sen. xvii.

Jev, XXXii,

17. Zech. viii.

6. Matt, xix

= 26. Markx., 27.
ch. xviii. 27.
Omen Jie

 

37. Quia non ertt impossibile apud Deum omne verbum, Vulg. See below.

Jesus is stated in an especial manner to be born Holy, for we,
although indeed made holy, are not born so, for we are constrained
by the very condition of our corruptible nature to ery out with
the Prophet, ‘ Behold, I was conceived in iniquity.’ But He alone
is in truth Holy, Who was not conceived by the cementing of a
fleshly union, nor, as the heretics rave, one person in His Human
Nature, another in His Divine: not conceived and brought forth a
mere man, and afterwards by His merits obtaining that He should
be God. But the angel announcing and the Spirit coming, first the
Word in the womb, afterwards within the womb the Word made
Flesh.” (Gregory. )

And yet, though thus above us in holiness, yet not separate
from us.

‘‘ Bor we confess that which then was taken up from Mary to
be of the nature of man and a most real body, the very same also
according to nature with our own body. For Mary is our sister,
seeing that we have all descended from Adam.” (Athanasius in
Catena Aurea.)

36. ‘And, behold, thy cousin Elizabeth, she hath also conceived
a son in her old age,” &c. This was undoubtedly the first intima-
tion which Mary had received of the miracle wi ‘ought in Elisabeth,
who had hid herself to this time, by which must be meant that she
had kept her state concealed.

This revelation by the mouth of the angel, not by common report,
was for the confirmation of Mary’s faith. Mary believed, but every
degree of human belief is capable of increase ; and joy, and strength,
and consolation, and hope accrues from such increase.

‘Thy cousin Elizabeth.” Not necessarily ‘‘ cousin,” but ‘ kins-
woman.’ There is no word in Hebrew, or Aramaic, or Greek to

signify strictly “ cousin.’
37. * Boy with God nothing shall be impossible.” The wordsee, ee

    
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
   
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
   
 
 
 
  
  
  
   
  

26 THE HANDMAID OF THE LORD.  [Sr. Luxz.
88 And Marv said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord ; be
it unto me according to thy word. And the angel departed

from her.

 

remind us of the word of the angel, or rather of the Lord in angelic
form who asked, when Sarah laughed at the thought that she should
conceive miraculously, ‘“‘Is anything too hard for the Lord ?”

Their teaching goes far beyond the conception by a virgin, or any
other miracle in the world of time and sense. They mean that itis
not impossible for the Creator to become a creature—it is not 1m-
possible for the high and lofty One, Who inhabiteth eternity, to be
born in time—it is not impossible that the Divine and the human
should be so united as that God and man should be one Christ—it
is not impossible that man should ascend above all heavens and sit
on the right hand of God. It is within the power of God to bring
about these things.

The sense is precisely the same if we translate thing [no-thing|
by ‘‘ word,” as in the Hebrew. If God's Word contains a prophecy
or a promise, that prophecy or promise will surely come to pass in
its season.

38. ‘And Mary said, Behold the handmaid of the Lord; be it
unto me,” &. “It only remained for Mary to consent to the conse-
quences of the Divine offer. She gives this consent in a word at
once simple and sublime, which involved the most extraordinary
act of faith that a woman ever consented to accomplish.” Mary
accepts the sacrifice of that which is dearer to a young maiden than
her very life, ‘‘ and thereby becomes pre-eminently the heroine, the
ideal daughter of Zion, the perfect type of human receptivity in
regard to the Divine work.” (Godet, a Swiss Ultra-Protestant
writer.)

Notice how in this, the greatest of all God’s dispensations, He
requires the free consent of the instrument He uses. It was the
part of Mary to submit herself unreservedly to the will of God, no
matter what the consequences to herself or to her reputation. It
must have at once occurred to her that she would lose the respect and
affection of her betrothed, and what a depth of shame and misery
was involved in that. She could not then know that her inno-
cence was to be vindicated to him by an angelic messenger, but she
left all to God, relying on the promise, ‘‘ Commit thy way unto the
Lord, and put thy trust in him, and he shall bring it to pass; heCuap. I.j

MARY

AND ELISABETH.

e

bo

(

39 And Mary arose in those days, and went into the hill
country with haste, ? into a city of Juda:

40 And entered into the house of Zacharias, and

saluted Elisabeth.

P Josh. xxi.
9), 1), ati

41 And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the

 

shall make thy righteousness as clear as the light, and thy just
It is to be remembered that though a
ereat part of Christendom has paid her little short of Divine honours,
yet by her own people, the Jews, every contumely and blasphemy
has been heaped upon her memory.

Immediately upon this, her act of submission, the Incarnation

dealing as the noonday.”’

took place, ‘‘ The Word was made flesh.”

‘“* He who was in the

form of God, and thought it not robbery to be equal with God,

emptied himself, and was made in the likeness of men :”’

“The

only begotten Son of God, begotten of his Father before all worlds
... for us men and for our salvation, came down from heaven, and
was incarnate by the Holy Ghost of the Virgin Mary, and was made

33

Man.

39. ‘* And Mary arose in those days, and went into the hill country

with haste, into a city of Juda.”

Sympathy with one who, like

herself, was the instrument of God’s highest providential dealings,
would lead to this hurried visit; but no doubt it was brought about
that they should sustain. one another by their mutual faith, and
that Mary should receive the acknowledgment of her faith, and of
her exalted place in that greatest dispensation of God of which she
was the sole human instrument.

The hill country of Judea was that about Hebron, or rather to the
south of it, so she would have to go a distance of nearly one hundred
Some suppose that the city was Hebron
itself, but if so it would have been mentioned by name, as not
only a city of great importance, but the first capital of the kingdom

miles to visit Elisabeth.

of David.

41. “And it came to pass, that, when Elisabeth heard the salu-

tation of Mary, the babe leaped,” &c.

Some commentators, even

believing ones, have attempted to account, on natural principles,
for the leaping of the yet unborn child for joy. Thus Godet: ‘It is
not surprising that the imtense feeling produced in Mary by the

sight of Elisabeth should have reacted immediately on the latter.28 THE BABE LEAPED IN HER WOMB. (Sr. Luxe.

salutation of Mary, the babe leaped in her womb; and
Elisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost:

The unexpected arrival of this young maiden at such a solemn mo-
ment for herself, the connection which she instantly divines between
the miraculous blessing of which she had just been the object, and
this extraordinary visit, the affecting tones of the voice and holy
elevation of this person, producing all the impression of some
celestial apparition, naturally predisposed her to receive the illu-
mination of the Spirit. The emotion which possesses her is com-
municated to the child, whose life is as yet one with her own, and
at the sudden leaping of this being, who, she knows, is compassed
about with special blessing, the veil is rent. The Holy Spirit, the
prophetic spirit of the Old Covenant, seizes her, and she salutes Mary
as the Mother of the Messiah.”

But surely all this is little better than impertinent intrusion. If
God be personally and peculiarly present, is not all around holy
ground ? When He, Who was now in the Virgin’s womb, was asked
to reprove His disciples because they shouted, ‘‘ Blessed be the
King that cometh in the name of the Lord,” did He not answer,
‘*T tell you if these should hold their peace, the stones would inme-
diately cry out!” In the Psalms we read, ‘“ The hills melted like
wax at the presence of the Lord.”’ If we believe that the Incarna-
tion had then taken place, that the Son of God was then present,
that the Virgin had then within her the Lord of Elisabeth, and if
the Lord of Elisabeth, then the Lord of all men, that Elisabeth had con-
ceived supernaturally, and that he whom she had conceived was to be
the forerunner of the then present Son of God—if we believe all this,
surely we shall acknowledge that this joy of the unborn forerunner
was but consistent with it all. It was the smallest of the wonders
that were then in close association with the persons of the Virgin
and her kinswoman. To attempt to rationalize about it seems
ridiculous. Deny the presence of the Incarnate God if you will,
but if you acknowledge it do not lay down, as if you were omnis-
cient, what from your merely human point of view you think can
be, or cannot be the accompaniments of such a Thing.

The Evangelist evidently relates it as a thing beyond all natural
explanation.

42. “And Hlisabeth was filled with the Holy Ghost.

Jv

And sheune: i] THE MOTHER OF MY LORD. ae

42 And she spake out with a loud voice, and said, % Blessed
art thou among women, and blessed is the fruit 4 ver. xxviii.
Judg. v. 24.
of thy womb.
3 And whence zs this to me, that the mother of my Lord
should come to me?

 

42. “With a loud voice.” So &, A., C., D., almost all later Uncials, all Cursives,
Italian, Vulg.,&c. But B., L., read “ cry.”

spake with a loud voice,” &. ‘ Fruit of thy womb.” ‘his is told
us in order that we may look upon the words which she said as not
her own merely, but as embodying Divine truth.

‘‘ Blessed art thou among women.” These are the same words
as those of the angel Gabriel. We have commented on them fully
when they first appeared in the Sacred Narrative. Suffice it to say
here that inasmuch as Elisabeth, when she said them, was filled
with the Holy Ghost, they are words from God, and declare God’s
truth ; so that whether the words were actually spoken before by
the angel or not, they are equally true.

‘¢ Blessed is the fruit of thy womb.’ Blessed, of course, in a far
higher sense, because the blessedness of Mary was the blessedness
of the creature, whereas the blessedness of her Son—the fruit of
her womb—was the blessedness of the Creator,

43. **And whence is this to me, that the mother of my Lord
should come to me?” The child in the womb of Mary was the
Lord of Elisabeth? How could this be? LHvidently because He
was ‘the Son of the Highest.” Some, however, suggest that it
was because He was to be the Messiah. But why in the counsels
of God was He to be the Messiah? Because He was God’s Son in
that unique sense which no created being, angelic or human, could
possibly share with Him.

In the counsels of God the Messiah was to be the God-Man.
David addresses Him as ‘‘ God, whose throne endureth for ever and
ever’? and as his Lord, to Whom the Lord said, “ Sit thou on my
right hand ;” Isaiah, as ‘“‘the Emmanuel,” the “mighty God ;”’
Jeremiah as the ‘‘Lord our Righteousness ;”’ Micah as the ‘‘ Go-
vernor coming from Bethlehem, whose goings forth have been from
old of everlasting;’’ Malachi as the ‘‘Lord whom men sought,
suddenly coming to his temple.”

Ii was these Divine prerogatives which constituted the true3 BLESSED IS SHE THAT BELIEVED.  [Srt. Luxe.

44. For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded
in mine ears, the babe leaped in my womb for Joy.

|| Or, which 45 And blessed is she || that beheved: for there
believed that ie. 5
there. shall be a performance of.those things which were

told her from the Lord.

’

‘*That believed: for there shall be.” See note below.

Lordship of the Messiah, and Elisabeth spake by inspiration of
the omniscient Spirit. If these titles of the Christ were not in her
mind, they assuredly were in the mind of the Spirit by Whom she
was filled.

44, ** For, lo, as soon as the voice of thy salutation sounded,”’
&e., ‘the babe leaped,’ &. The babe did not leap merely as sym-
pathizing with his mother in her joy, but with a joy of his own,
which the Spirit of God, with whom he was filled from his mother’s
womb, shed into him.

45. ** Blessed is she that believed: for there shall be a perfor-
mance,” &c. Thus early is the dispensation marked out as peculiarly
a dispensation of faith. Zacharias is punished for unbelief. Mary
receives the promise through faith. The passage may be translated
in one of two ways. Hither ‘‘ Blessed is she that believed, for
[i.e. because] there shall be a performance of those things,” &e¢.; or,
‘* Blessed is she that believed that there should be a performance,”
&e. The latter seems preferable, for the performance of the
greatest things promised had already taken place. In her the
Eternal Son was already incarnate, and if God had begun with
so stupendous a wonder, all other things, such as the birth, the
greatness of Him Who was born, and His eternal reign would
follow in due course. Elisabeth could know of the faith exercised
by Mary in the word of the angel only by inspiration of the Spirit.

46.“ And Mary said, My soul doth magnify the Lord, and my spirit
hath rejoiced,” &c. In commenting upon this hymn of praise of
the Blessed Virgin, it is impossible to put out of view the hymn of
Hannah, the mother of Samuel. At first there seem strong verbal
resemblances, but the contrast between the tone of the one and of that
of the other is very great indeed. In Hannah’s hymn we recognize
the existence of human feelings of exaltation, must we not say of
some degree of bitterness over her personal adversary, Peninnah,

who had “provoked her sore, so as to make her fret”? Thus sheCuap. I.) MY SOUL DOTH MAGNIFY THE LORD.

46 And Mary said, * My soul doth magnify the Lord,
47 And my spirit hath rejoiced in God my “1 Sam. ii.1.

PSs SRL Veo ce

Saviour. eee
a i Ei poe A abi 18
48 For ‘he hath regarded the low estate of his : 1 gam.i. 11

handmaiden: for, behold, from henceforth ‘all eae

generations shall call me blessed. ch. xi, 27.

sings: ‘‘ My mouth is enlarged over mine enemies,” “‘ Talk no
more so exceeding proudly, let not arrogancy come out of your
mouth,” “‘ The barren hath borne seven, and she that hath many
children is waxed feeble.” Whilst the Canticle of the Virgin is a
fay more spiritual hymn, setting forth free grace and the blessed-
ness of the poor in spirit, as we shall see as we proceed.

46. ‘‘My soul doth magnify the Lord” .... ‘‘He hath re-
garded the low estate,’ &&. These are the words of a maiden of
the noblest family in Israel, one of the Royal Line, the line of
David, Solomon, Hezekiah, Zerubbabel, who had often in secret
wept over the fallen fortunes of her house. And now God had
looked on them in mercy, and was doing for them more than they
could ask or think. A Son was to be born to them Who was God
over ali, blessed for ever, His throne the Throne of God, His
Kingdom the whole creation, visible and invisible.

48. ‘For, behold, from henceforth all generations shall call me
blessed.” This title of ‘‘ blessed,” first given to her by the angel,
then confirmed by the Holy Ghost speaking by the mouth of this
Saint of God, should always be given to the Virgin, for it is the
distinction accorded to her not by men, not by the Church even,
but by God Himself. If we withhold it, we do not fall into God’s
mind, weare not conformed to His will. Bishop Pearson has some
good remarks on this (Creed, Article iii.): “In respect of her it was
therefore necessary, that we might perpetually preserve an esteem
of her person proportionate to so high a dignity. It was her own
prediction, ‘ From henceforth all generations shall call me blessed,’
but the obligation is ours, to call her, to esteem her so. If Hlisa-
beth cried out with so loud a voice, ‘Blessed art thou among
women,’ when Christ was but newly conceived in her womb, what
expressions of honour and admiration can we think sufficient now
that Christ is in heaven, and that mother with Him! Far be it
from any Christian to derogate from that special privilege grantedu Ps. Ixxi. 19.
& cxxvi. 2, 3.
=x Ps. exi. 9.

y Gen. xvii. 7.
Ex, xx. 6.

Ps. cili. 17, 18.

mercy rest.

 

holy is his name.”
only begotten Son.
redeeming grace to mankind.”

observer of the life.

and * holy zs his name.

29 HIS MERCY IS ON THEM THAT FEAR. [Sz. Mark.

49 For he that is mighty “hath done to me creat things ;

50 And ‘his mercy 2s on them that fear him

from generation to generation.

 

to her which is incommunicable to any other.
reverent a regard unto the mother of our Lord.” So long as we
give her not that worship which is due unto the Lord Himself, let
us keep the language of the primitive Church, “ Let her be
honoured and esteemed, let Him be worshipped and adored.”

49. “For he that is mighty hath done to me great things; and
“He has caused me to be the mother of His
He hath made me the outward channel of all
Mary may not have thoroughly
yealized all this, but we are bound to give to her words no lower
meaning, for in our worship we adopt her words as the words of
the Church and of our souls; and we must measure their meaning
not by the ignorance which we, in our ignorance, impute to her,
but by what the Spirit of God, Who inspired her, has since revealed
to us; and He has revealed to us that the Incarnation which took
place in her is the first mystery of Godliness.

‘‘ His mercy is on them that fear him from generation to genera-
tion.” Throughout the Old Testament all men’s duty to God is
expressed by this fear of God, not as excluding the love of God and
zeal for His glory, but as meaning a perpetual: sense of His holi-
ness, His truth, His greatness, His demands upon our constant
obedience, His perpetual presence as a reader of the heart, and an
It was because the Holy Virgin excelled in
this fear, that His unspeakable mercy in the Incarnation was upon
her, and after her upon all who cultivate a similar fear, will this

We cannot bear too

How miserably then are they mistaken who, on the strength of a
few texts which speak against slavish fear, deprecate that godly
fear, without which there can be no reverence, no sense of God’s
greatness, which is the only guard against that familiarity in our
intercourse with God, which so often degenerates into impiety, if

SC - ae)
not blasphemy.

66 a 7 7

He hath shewed strength with his arm: he hath scattered the
te ee Ce
proud in the imagination,” &c. He hath put down the mightyCuap. I.] STRENGTH WITH HIS ARM. 33

ol *He hath shewed strength with his arm; *he hath

scattered the proud in the imagination of their 7 Ps. xeviii.1,
ee & CXvili. 15,
hearts. Isa. xl. 10.
a : So ain

02 ° He hath put down the mighty from their 10.

as a Ps, xxxiii,

seats, and exalted them of low degree. lompee ©
b 1 Sam. ii.

—— 6, &e.

 

‘* and hath exalted the humble and meek.’ The Incarnation was the
greatest putting forth of the power of God conceivable, for it was
God humbling Himself, God emptying Himself of His glory. It
was God becoming what He was not before. It was also the putting
forth of the greatest moral power, for it was the Judge abasing Him-
self to be on a level with the criminal in order to reach his heart,
and draw the criminal to Himself, not with the physical strength
of chains and bonds, but with the moral attraction of humiliation
and sympathy as exhibited.in the Cross.

“He hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their
hearts.” All that man can pride himself upon, whether in the
way of brute force, of worldly honour, of glory, of riches, of intel-
lectual superiority, of human philosophy, all is scattered to the
winds by the Incarnation; for it is God subduing men, not by
strength, but by weakness, not by the great and honourable of
the earth, but by the Son of a poor woman, wife of a carpenter,
not by rich men, but by very poor ones, not by philosophy, but by
the preaching of the Cross. Even in religion men must not at-
tempt to merit grace, but unfeignedly renounce all merit, and cast
themselves as guilty and weak sinners upon mere mercy.

52. ‘* He hath put down the mighty from their seats.” It has
been supposed that the mighty is Satan, the ruler of the dark-
ness of this world, and there appears to be grounds for such
interpretation in the words of the Lord, “I saw Satan, like light-
ning fall from heaven,” and ‘“‘ now is the judgment of this world;
now shall the prince of this world be cast out;”’ but isnot its mean-
ing more general, and doesit not rather look to that great principle
of the kingdom of God, so often enunciated by the Lord, ‘ He that
exalteth himself shall be abased, and he that humbleth himself shall
be exalted’? The weapons of the saints are humility, self-denial,
and charity. These are the weapons which are ‘‘ mighty through
God, to the pulling down of strongholds, casting down imaginations,
and every high thing that exalteth itself against the knowledge of
Do4 HE HATH FILLED THE HUNGRY. (St. Luss.

53 °He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the
¢1Sam.ii.5. rich he hath sent empty away.

Psi xxxive |

: Oe ee
Gepost 2 54 He hath holpen his servant Israel, “in re-
a ty 238 12 ) e

30" * ~~ membrance of his mercy ;

© Gen.xvii.19. 55 ®As he spake to our fathers, to Abraham,
ES eiGxexa Te eli,

Rom. xi. 28. and to his seed for ever.
Gal. iii. 16.

 

God, and bringing into subjection every thought to the obedience
of Christ.”

53. ‘‘He hath filled the hungry with good things; and the rich
he hath sent empty away.’ Here we have againaclear enunciation
of the principle of grace. God blesses with the good things of the
Gospel, those who feel their need of them, whilst the self-satisfied
and self-complacent receive no benefit. Here we have an antici-
pation of the Lord’s beatitude, ‘‘ Blessed are they which do hunger
and thirst after righteousness, for they shall be filled.’’ And the
same principle applies to the Eucharistic food. It is the deep sense
of spiritual need, the not presuming to come “ trusting in our own
righteousness, but in God’s manifold and great mercies;’’ it is the
heartfelt confession that we are ‘‘ not worthy so much as to gather
up the crumbs under his table,” which is the true preparation for
discerning the Lord’s Body—for so eating the flesh of the Son of
Man, and drinking His Blood that our sinful bodies are made clean
by His Body, and our souls washed through His most precious
Blood.

54, “ He hath holpen his servant Israel, in remembrance of his
mercy ; as he spake,” &c. The Lord, might seem, in the eyes of
men, to have forgotten the promise to Adam, that the seed of the
woman should bruise the serpent’s head; to Abraham, that in his
seed all the nations of the earth should be blessed ; to David, that
of the fruit of his body He would set upon his seat; but “a
thousand years is with the Lord as one day.” The mystery of sin
must be fully worked out, and clearly seen to be beyond the reach
of any human remedy: natural religion, the law, philosophy, must
all be seen to fail, and then in the fulness of the times, and in the
Person of the Lord, Redemption and Regeneration could be
brought in.

56. ‘‘ And Mary abode with her about three months,” &e. This
is written to show that the Holy Virgin was not with Elisabeth atCuap. 1] HE SHALL BE CALLED JOHN, a0

56 And Mary abode with her about three months, and
returned to her own house.

57 Now Elisabeth’s full time came that she should be
delivered ; and she brought forth a gon.

58 And her neighbours and her cousins heard how the
Lord had shewed great mercy upon her ; and ‘ they rejoiced
with her. f ver. 14,

o9 And it came to pass, that % on the eighth day s Gen. xvii, 12.
they came to circumcise the child; and they called es
him Zacharias, after the name of his father.

60 And his mother answered and said, » Not so; » ver. 13,
but he shall be called John.

61 And they said unto her, There is none of thy kindred
that is called by this name.

62 And they made signs to his father, how he would have
him called.

 

the time of the birth of St. John the Baptist. On her return, no
doubt, Joseph was informed, probably by herself, of her state. At
first, as was natural, he disbelieved her account of what had taken
place, but was reassured by the angel appearing to him in a vision,
as is related in St. Matthew 1.

57, 58. ‘* Now Elizabeth’s full time came . . . they rejoiced with
her.’ Not only because the reproach of barrenness was taken away
from an aged woman, but because God had brought this about in
so wondrous a manner that the greatest hopes were entertained of
the career of one so born into the world.

59-63. “And it came to pass that on the eighth day... his
name is John.” Owing to his dumbness inflicted by the angel in
punishment of his unbelief, Zacharias seems to have been under
a cloud, and so not consulted by the other chief persons amongst
his kinsfolk, who had come to the circumcision. And the name
they chose (perhaps, as has been suggested, out of compliment to
his father) would have been a most appropriate name, for it signi-
fies “The Lord hath remembered :” but the true name had been
sent by God through the angel, and was more clearly connected, not
with God’s remembrance, so much as with God’s mercy and grace,
John or Jehochanan meaning, ‘The Lord hath been gracious.”36 HE SPAKE AND PRAISED GOD. _ [St. Luxe.

63 And he asked for a writing table, and wrote, saying,

i ver. 13. iis name is John. And they marvelled all.

k ver. 20. 64 * And his mouth was opened immediately,
and his tongue loosed, and he spake, and praised
God.

65 And fear came on all that dwelt round about
| Sayings. them : and all these || sayings were noised abroad
1 ver. 39. throughout all ‘the hill country of Judea.

m ch. ii.19,51. 66 And all they that heard them ™ laid them up

in their hearts, saying, What manner of child
n Gen. xxxix. shall this be! And “the hand of the Lord was
Bs RSs xxx. ; :
17. &lxxxix., With him.
21. Acts xi.

21. 67 And his father Zacharias ° was filled with
¢ Joel ii. 28. the Holy Ghost, and prophesied, saying,

By his being spoken to by signs it seems that the dumbness was
accompanied with deafness.

“A writing-table.’ A tablet of smooth wood on which was
a thin coating of wax, on which the answer was written with a
sharp-pointed instrument.

64. *‘And his mouth was opened immediately, and his tongue
loosed.’’ This was according to the word of the angel, ‘‘ Behold
thou shalt be dumb, and not able to speak until the day that these
things shall be performed.”’ It is to be remarked that the punish-
ment was not removed immediately on the birth of the child, but
when Zacharias had done his part by setting aside the wishes of his
kinsfolk, and naming the child according to the word of the
angel.

65, 66. It is probable that from these wondrous circumstances of
his birth, they expected that the child would be himself the Messiah.

‘“The hand of the Lord was with him.’ No doubt meaning that
he exhibited a devotion and intelligence far beyond his age, because
filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother’s womb.

67. ‘And his father Zacharias was filled with the Holy Ghost
. . - redeemed his people.” The Incarnation in the womb of the
Virgin had taken place but some three or four months, but this holy
priest, inspired by the Spirit, speaks of Redemption as already ac-
complished, though it would be thirty years or more before theCuap. 1] AN HORN OF SALVATION. od

68 P Blessed be the Lord God of Israel; for *he hath
visited and redeemed his people, P 1 Kings i.

eof Nate oe : : . 48, Ps. xii, 18,

69 * And hath raised up an horn of salvation & lxxii. 18. &

Cet ee ae Z Oa ee é evi. 48.
for us in the house of his servant David ; conond Ge
7() § Aa on analza hv tha ~ Si pollo Sew: & iv. 31. Ps,
(0 * As he spake by the mouth of his holy pro- cai. 9. th. vii.
16.

phets, which have been since the world began: z
ee Z o r Ps, cxxxii.
71 That we should be saved from our enemies, 17:
a s Jer. xxiil, 5
and from the hand of all that hate us; 6. & xxx. 10.
mo t : er : : 3 Dan, ix. 24.
72 *To perform the mercy promised to our Aets iii. 21.
HOM. Ie) 2.
t Ley. xxvi.
AQ’ ES. Xcvilis
3. & ev. 8, 9.
& evi, 45.
Ezek. xvi. 60.
ver. 54,

fathers, and to remember his holy covenant ;

 

72. “To perform the merey promised to our fathers.” “To have mercy upon our

fathers,” ad faciendam misericordiam cum patribus nostris, See below.

Lord offered His all-atoning Sacrifice. But if God had begun by so
profound an act of humiliation, He would assuredly bring all to its
predetermined conclusion. He would not rest with an unfinished
work, and so in the mind of the inspiring Spirit all was already
accomplished.

69. ‘And hath raised up an horn of salvation for us in the house
of hig servant David.” The horn is the symbol of strength, and the
ideais taken fromthe horns of animals, which are their most powerful
means of defence. The rendering in the Prayer Book, “a mighty
salvation,” is most true and expressive. The prophecy most
directly alluded to is that of Psalm exxxii., “ There shall I make
the horn of David to flourish.”

70, 71. ‘‘As he spake by the mouth of his holy prophets which
have been since the world began.” This is literally true if we take
into account the prophecy of Enoch who lived before the death of
Adam, preserved to us in the Epistle of St. Jude, which speaks of
‘‘the Lord coming with ten thousand of his saints to execute judg-
ment upon all.” This judgment being upon the enemies of Christ
and His Church to deliver the godly out of their power. The pro-
phecy of God Himself that the seed of the woman should bruise the
serpent’s head was now being fulfilled.

72. “To perform the mercy promised to our forefathers.” The
word ‘‘ promised ” is not in the original, and the passage should be38 THE OATH TO ABRAHAM. [Sv.. Luke.

73 °The oath which he sware to our father Abraham,
u Gen. xii. 3. 74. That he would grant unto us, that we being
See a delivered out of the hand of our enemies might
Hebr. vi. 13, : :
Ge x serve him without fear,
x Rom. vi. 18,
22. Hebr. ix.
14.
translated without it. Thus the Revisers, ‘‘ To show mercy towards
our fathers.” Williams gives the truest translation, “To perform
mercy [on us] together with our fathers. [‘‘God having provided
some better thing for us, that they without us should not be made
perfect,” Hebr. xi. 40.] Thus Origen, “I think that at the coming
of our Lord and Saviour Jesus Christ, both Abraham, Isaac, and
Jacob were partakers of His mercy. For it is not to be believed,
that they who had before seen His day, and were glad, should
afterwards derive no advantage from His coming, since itis written,
‘Having made peace through the blood (by him to reconcile all
things to himself) whether in earth or in heaven.’” And Theo-
phylact, “The grace of Christ extends even to those who are dead,
because through Him we shall rise again, not only we, but they
also who have been dead before us. He performed His mercy also
to our forefathers in fulfilling all their hopes and desires. . . . The
fathers also seeing their children enjoy these blessings, rejoice to-
gether with them, just as if they received the mercy in themselves.”

73. “The oath which he sware to our forefather Abraham, that
he would grant,” &¢. This oath was made or rather renewed to
Abraham just after he had in intention offered hisson Isaac. ‘‘ By
myself have I sworn, saith the Lord, for because thou hast done this
thing, and hast not withheld thy son, thine only son: That in blessing
I will bless thee, and in multiplying I will multiply thy seed as the
stars of the heaven, and as the sand which is upon the sea-shore ;
and thy seed shall possess the gate of his enemies. Andin thy seed
shall all the nations of the earth be blessed’ (Gen. xxii. 16, &e.).

How wonderful the fulfilment! Abraham, in obedience to God,
withheld not his son, his only son, and now God in mercy to Abra-
ham and to his seed had not withheld His Son, His only Son;
only with this amazing difference, that whereas in the case of Isaac
a substitute was found, in the case of God’s only Son no substitute
was found, but He was Himself our substitute.

74, “ That we being delivered out of the hand of our enemies.”’
Probably Zacharias in these words looked for liberty from theCuar.Il.] THE PROPHET OF THE HIGHEST. 39

75 ¥In holiness and righteousness before him, » Jer. xxxii
39

all the days of our life. Cates
76 And thou, child, shalt be called the prophet 2 Tim, 19.

Tit. ii, 12.
of the Highest: for 7 thou shalt go before the face 1 Pet. i. 15.
of the Lord to prepare his ways; 5 ae as

J - Xl. oo.
Mal. iii. 1. &
lvoe Vstite
XI OS Vere lene

 

id. “All the days of our life.’ “‘ All our days;4 Sow; A., B., C., D., F., K., U., most
later Uncials, almost all Cursives, and versions.

Roman yoke, that his countrymen might worship God in the holy
and beautiful house without fear that it would be polluted by
heathen statues, or that the blood of the worshippers would be
mingled with their sacrifices; but all such narrower and more
local understandings have long vanished away; and the Catholic
Church understands ‘‘ deliverance from our enemies,” to be de-
liverance from the burden of sin and the temptations of Satan;
and by ‘“‘ without fear,” she understands ‘‘in the spirit of filial
freedom,” as distinguished from that of servile bondage, and that
through the faith of Christ, we have boldness and access with con-
fidence to God.

75. ‘“‘In holiness and righteousness before him, all the days of
our life.’ The end of all God’s dispensations, and especially the
end of His crowning one, is, that we should serve in holiness and
righteousness before Him.

The word “serve” is liturgical, and has to do with religious
worship, especially that by sacrifice, so that the meaning is that our
lives and our religious services should correspond to the character
of the holy and righteous God Whom we worship. It appears to
us rather that purity (dovrne) is a negative quality, the absence of
stain; and righteousness (duavootdyn) a positive quality, the presence
of all those religious and moral virtues which render worship ac-
ceptable to God.

76. “‘ And thou, child, shalt be called the prophet of the Highest:
for thou shalt go before,” &c. The father’s thoughts turn now to the
little child who is to play so distinguished a part in the immediate
future. He is to be a prophet, the prophet of the Highest ; but the
Lord accords to him a higher place when He speaks of John as
‘more than a prophet,” for no prophet before him had heralded
the personal advent of God.THE DAYSPRING FROM ON HIGH.

ae 77 To give knowledge of salvation unto his
| Ox, for. people * || by the remission of their sins,

ace 78 Through the || tender mercy of our God;
| Or, sun- whereby the || dayspring from on high hath visited
en

Numb. xxiv. 17.

Is. xi.1. Zech. =
MT Ose Vie Le.

Mal. iv. 2.

 

77. “To give knowledge of salvation unto his people.’ The Greek
more fully indicates a purpose. “* Thou shalt go before the face of the
Lord to prepare hisway, by giving knowledge of salvation to his people
by the,” &. The way of Christ was to be prepared in two ways:
first, by touching the national conscience, by showing the people
what sin really is, and God’s wrath declared against it. This the
Baptist did when he preached repentance, and fruits meet for
repentance, and turned the hearts of the fathers to the children,
and of the children to their fathers, i.e. by reviving home and do-
mestic religion ; and, secondly, by showing what salvation was—that
it was not deliverance from a hateful foreign yoke, but the blotting
out of sin and the renewal of the heart. This the holy Baptist did
when he pointed to Jesus as the Lamb of God that taketh away the
sin of the world, and preached that plenary remission and also the
gift of the Holy Spirit should attend the baptism of Christ.

78. ‘Through the tender mercy of our God; whereby the day-
spring from on high hath visited us,’ &e. Literally ‘‘ through the
bowels of mercy of our God.” Because God hath forgiven our sins,
not for our works’ sake, but through His mercy, it is therefore
fitly added

‘Through the tender mercy of our God; whereby the daysprin
from on high,” &e. Literally, the rising of the sun, the orient | Vulg.],
the dawn. Thecoming of the Messiah as the true light of the world
is often alluded to in the prophets under this figure of a rising lumi-
nary. Thus Isaiah: ‘‘ Arise, shine, for thy light is come, and the
glory of the Lord has risen upon thee.” And Malachi: “ Unto you
that fear my Name shall the sun of righteousness arise with healing
in his wings.” And the Lord says of Himself in the Revelation: ‘TI
am the bright and morning star.”’ It was His arising in the world
that made the day break and the shadows flee away. The types and
figures of the law were then abolished. It was His light that dis-
pelled the mists of ignorance and idolatry: and He alone delivers

o
SCuap. 1] THE CHILD GREW. Al

(9 °To give hight to them that sit in darkness and in the
shadow of death, to guide our feet into the way » Is. ix.2. &

ie : xine 7. & xix,
OL peace. ae Matt. lv.
: Be ee ee ee : NGOs. ACtS xl
80 And ‘the child grew, and waxed strong in 1s. :
¢ ch. ii, 40.

 

the soul from the night of sin and the misery produced by it. ‘‘ All
the stars, and the moon with them, cannot make it day in the
world: this is the sun’s prerogative; nor can nature’s highest
light, the most refined science and morality, make it day in the
soul, for this is Christ’s [work]. The sun can make dark things
clear, but it cannot make a blind man see them; but herein is
the excellency of this Sun, that He illuminates not only the object,
but the faculty; doth not only reveal the mysteries of His king-
dom, but opens blind eyes to behold them.’”’—Leighton, Sermon on
Isaiah lx. 1.

79. “To give light to them that sit in darkness and in the shadow
of death.” In darkness, of course moral darkness; the darkness of
heathenism, of perverted Judaism; the darkness of a blind heart,
of a crooked and corrupt will; the darkness of hatred, according to
the words of the Apostle, ‘‘ he that hateth his brother is in darkness,
and walketh in darkness.”

“‘ The shadow of death.” The shadow of death is not death itself,
but is a figure to express the close proximity of death. If anyone
had been brought to the very gates of the grave, and had been re-
stored, he would have been said to have passed through the valley
of the shadow of death. Here it must mean the grossest moral and
spiritual darkness possible.

‘To guide our feet into the way of peace.” The way of forgive-
ness, of righteousness, of holiness, above all, the way of love—of
love not only to God but to our brethren ; for if we have the spirit
of wrath and contention we cannot have the Spirit of God, Who is
the Spirit of Peace.

80. “ And the child grew, and waxed strong in spirit,” 2.e., grew or
increased in the Spirit of God. Herein was fulfilled the words of
the angel, that “he should be filled with the Holy Ghost, even from
his mother’s womb.”

“ And was in the deserts.” Not necessarily in uninhabited, but
rather in thinly inhabited regions. I cannot help thinking but that
it implies that he did not exercise the office of a priest before the42 A DECREE FROM CASAR. (Sr. Luxe.
spirit, and “was in the deserts till the day of his shewing

d Matt. iii. unto Israel.
Te ex

 

people, as being the son of a priest he might have done; but wasin
solitude and loneliness, prepared by God for the special work of
preparing the way of the Lord.

 

CHRUAG = lle
pecteithe ND it came to pass in those days, that there
fee went out a decree from Cesar Augustus,
Pommmt —_ that all the world should be || taxed.
year,
|| Or, inrolled,

1, ‘“‘ Taxed,” properly “enrolled.” Vulg., describeretur.
, perly

1. “And it came to pass in those days, that there went out a
decree from Cxsar Augustus, that all the world should be taxed.”
““In those days,” %.e., just after the birth of the Baptist, ‘there
went out a decree from Cesar Augustus.” A difficulty has been
made of the fact that we have no specific mention of this particular
decree ; but the accounts of the latter part of Augustus’s reign are
very meagre, and we know that in the closing years of his life he
was much occupied with compiling a statistical account of the
whole empire.

‘That all the world should be taxed.” Rather should be enrolled
with a view to future taxing.

4. “ And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was governor
of Syria.” ‘There is a still greater difficulty here in reconciling the
account given by the sacred historian with secular history. It
appears that Cyrenius was not governor of Syria till the year 4 of
our era, and he did not execute the enumeration which bears his
name till the year 6 a.p., after the deposition of Archelaus, the son
and successor of Herod, so that St. Luke seems to represent the
journey of Joseph and the Blessed Virgin to Bethlehem as a conse-
quent upon an imperial order for taxing or enrolment, which didCuap. IL] THE ENROLMENT. 43

a zs - a ss :
2 @ And this taxing was first made when Cyrenius was
governor of Syria.) a Acts v. 37.

 

2. “ This taxing was first made.” The article before taxing (droypad)) is found in
A., C., L., later Uncials, almost all Cursives, but omitted by 8%, B., D., which would
mean, ‘‘ This was the first taxing made.”
not take place till six years afterwards. The most likely way of
reconciling all difficulties seems to be something like this.

Augustus just before the Lord’s birth published his decree of
enrolment of the whole empire, but there would be necessarily
some delay in carrying it out, and particularly in Palestine, where
there was a fanatical population which would bitterly resent such an
interference by a hateful andidolatrous Power. In order to smooth
the way for this enrolment, which he saw to be inevitable, Herod
commenced an enumeration which proceeded on Jewish lines; as,
for instance, he registered the people, not according to the locality
in which they lived, but according to their families and tribes; so
that Joseph, being of the house of David, would go up to Bethlehem
to be registered. This preliminary enrolment, which it was sup-
posed would answer the end the emperor had in view, was appa-
rently attended with no opposition, being carried out by the national
sovereign, so as not to arouse the prejudices of the people ; whereas,
when Cyrenius, who appears to have been appointed for this pur-
pose, undertook the matter de novo, after the banishment of Arche-
laus, it was the occasion of the dangerous insurrection alluded to by
Gamaliel (Acts v.17). St. Luke then desires to distinguish this
abortive enumeration of Herod’s from the far more important one
which took place some time after. This latter was the census
generally known as Quirinius’s first census. And so his words
may be paraphrased, ‘‘There came forth a decree from Czesar
Augustus, that a census of all the world should be taken. As to
the census itself, called the first, it took place under the govern-
ment of Quirinius. St. Luke would break off to remark, that prior to
the well-known enumeration which took place under Quirinius,
and which history had taken account of under the name of the
first, there had really been another, generally lost sight of, which
was the very one here in question ; and thus that it was not unad-
visedly that he spoke of a census anterior to the first. [I owe the
substance of this to Godet].’

 

1 There seems, however, reasonable grounds for believing thatAA ALL WENT TO BE TAXED. (St. Luke.

3 And all went to be taxed, every one into his own city.
4 And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of
S

b1Sam. xvi. Nazareth, into Judea, unto >the city of David,
ae onn
j >

vii. 42, which is called Bethlehem; (° because he was of
c Matt.i.16. the house and lineage of David :)

Chen. 37. % si ans. on eos ope
d Matt. i. 18. 5 To be taxed with Mary “his espoused wife,

ene. oi.

beige great with child.

 

4, ** Lineage,” properly ‘‘ family.”

5. ‘* His espoused wife.” ‘‘ Wife” omitted by 8, B., C., D., L., one or two Cursives,
some old Latin, Coptic, Syriac; retained by A., later Uncials, almost all Cursives, some
old Latin (a, b, c), Vulg., &e.

3. “And all went to be taxed [or enrolled], every one into his
own city.” It is very questionable whether Joseph, like Mary, was
a native of Nazareth. He might have been a native of Bethlehem,
who for some reason, ordered by God’s providence, went up to
Nazareth, and perhaps temporarily settled there, and found there a
virgin, like himself of the family of David, and espoused her. If
this be so, it will account for the fact that Matthew, who puts
him more prominently forward, speaks of Joseph as turning
aside into the parts of Galilee, and coming and dwelling in a city
called Nazareth, as if he had had previously little permanent con-
nection with it.

4,5. “And Joseph also went up from Galilee, out of the city of
Nazareth ... to be taxed with Mary his espoused wife, being great
with child.” Why this extreme haste? was the matter of the
decree so pressing that in the case of a woman just on the point of
her delivery there could be no delay of a month or five weeks?
No, I believe that this journey, at this exact time, was not so much a
matter of necessity, as of faith on the part of both St. Joseph and
the Blessed Virgin. Both of them were conscious that they were of
the house and lineage of David. To Joseph the angel had promised
the birth of Hmmanuel, addressing him as “ Joseph, thou Son of
David.” To Mary the angel had said, ‘‘ The Lord God shall give
unto him the throne of his father David.’ Where was he to be

 

 

the government of Cyrenius has been made to commence too late.
Justin Martyr in three places makes our Lord born in the gover

nor-
ship of Cyrenius. Apol. i. 84; Apol. i. 46; Trypho, 78.Cuar.I.] THE DAYS WERE ACCOMPLISHED. Ad

6 And so it was, that, while they were there, the days
were accomplished that she should be delivered.

born? They, of all the people of the Jews, knew the prophecy. No
prophecy of the expected Son of David could be a matter of indiffe-
rence to any lineal descendant of David, much less if they were
just men, or devout and chaste virgins.

And here let us adore the wondrous providence of God, that the
Only-begotten should be brought into the world in the place which
God had decreed in His eternal counsels, and foretold by His
Prophet. The coming of the Son of God in the flesh was infinitely
the most important thing that had taken place in the history of the
world. But He must be born of a particular family, in a particular
city, and in order to bring this about, the Sovereign of a far distant
city of the West, must rule over an ancient province in the East,
and publish a decree for a census of it, just at the time when there
was a tributary king reigning over it who would attempt to take the
census in such a way that each man would be enrolled, not in his
domicile, but in the seat of his family and tribe. Ifit had been but
a little later this would have been neglected, and prophecy falsified
by the birth of the Lord in Nazareth. Thus Chrysostom: “It was
the Lord Who directed Augustus to give the edict, that he might
minister to the coming of the Only-begotten : for it was this edict
that brought Christ’s mother into his country as the prophets had
foretold, namely, to Bethlehem of Judea, according to the word ‘ to
a city of David, which is called Bethlehem.’ ”’

6. “ And so it was, that, while they were there, the days... no
room for them in the inn.” Thus did the Lord of Glory begin His
visible Life amongst men. In these few simple words is related the
appearance amongst His creatures of the Eternal Word. Nine months
before this the Only-begotten Son of God “for us men and for our
salvation came down from heaven and was incarnate.” And now
there was a further act of humiliation in that He was born into the
world He came to redeem under circumstances of extreme poverty.
There was no room for his parents in the apartments of the inn, so
they had to take refuge in the stables, and there the Virgin Mother
gave a human birth to Him through Whose Divine Power she had
herself received her being.

Jesus Christ is the first-born of the Blessed Virgin, and of every

creature. His stooping to the weakness of infancy is so much the46 HER FIRSTBORN SON. [Sr. Luxe.

7 And °she brought forth her firstborn son, and wrapped
e Matt.i.25. him in swaddling clothes, and laid him in a

 

more worthy to be adored, asit appears [outwardly] more unworthy
of His greatness and wisdom. Let human pride blush, since God
became an infant of days, submitted to the confinement of swaddling
clothes, to the meanness of a manger, to the mansion of beasts, to
have recourse to the assistance of His creatures, and to be refused
by them. It is the Christian’s glory, that his God would do and
suffer all this for his salvation. It is his honour to adore Him, to
own Him for his King, and to pay Him homage in all His states
and conditions [in the womb, in the manger, on the Cross, on His
Throne]. (Quesnel.)

It was the opinion of some of the ancient Fathers of the Church,
that there were certain supernatural circumstances attending His
birth, which are not recorded in Scripture, as that the Holy Virgin
gave birth to Him without the usual pains of parturition. Thus Gre-
gory Nyssen: ‘ Though coming in the form of man, yet not in every-
thing is He subject to the laws of man’s nature; for while His being
born of a woman tells of human nature, virginity becoming capable
of childbirth betokens something above man. Of Him, then, His
mother’s burden was light, the birth immaculate, the delivery with-
out pain, the Nativity without defilement, neither beginning from
wanton desire, nor brought to pass with sorrow. For, as she who
by her guilt engrafted death into our nature was condemned to
bring forth in trouble, it was meet that she who brought life into
the world should accomplish her delivery with joy.”

7. “ Her firstborn son.” This by no means implies that she had
other children. Jesus being born of a woman, and made under the
law, it is said with reference to the requirements of the law. Thus,
Exodus xiii. 15, the Israelite is directed to say, “I sacrifice to the
Lord all that openeth the matrix, being males; but all the firstborn
of my children I redeem.” Ihave shown in an excursus at the end
of my notes on St. Mark’s Gospel that the only persons who can
be supposed to be the brethren of the Lord are expressly said to be
the children of another Mary. (Matth. xiii, dd, and Mark vi. 3,
compared with Matth. xxvii. 56, and Mark xy. 40.)

“And wrapped him in swaddling clothes,’’ She evidently did

this herself, as from her poverty she appears to have been wholly
unattended.Cuap. IL] NO ROOM IN THE INN. A7

manger; because there was no room for them in the inn.

8 ed there were in the same country shepherds abiding
in the field, keeping || watch over their flock by li Or, the night
night. ee

9 And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and

 

 

9. “Lo” omitted by &, B., L., but inserted by A., D., all later Uncials, al

1 Cursives,
old Latin, Vulg., Coptic, and ee

‘* And laid him in a manger, because there was noroom for them
in the inn.” There was a tradition as old as the time of Justin
Martyr, that the place where the Lord was born was a cave, used
as a stable or place for cattle. And this might have been SO, as it is
never said that the place where He was born was the actual stable
of the inn.

8. “ And there were in the same country shepherds abiding in the
field,” &e. A passage from the Mishnah leads to the conclusion
that the flocks which pastured there (between Bethlehem and Jeru-
salem) were destined for temple sacrifices, and accordingly that the
shepherds who watched over them were not ordinary shepherds.
The latter were under the ban of Rabbinism, on account of their
necessary isolation from religious observances, and their manner of
life which rendered strict legal observances unlikely, if not abso-
lutely impossible. (Hdersheim.)

It has been inferred, because these shepherds were outin the field
all night, that the Saviour could not have been born at that (winter)
time, but without the smallest reason. The latitude is considerably
south of that of Algiers and Tunis, and from the same passage of
the Mishnah just alluded to, Edersheim infers that these flocks lay
out all the year round, since they are spoken of as in the fields
thirty days before the Passover, that is in the month of February,
when in Palestine the average rainfall is nearly greatest. Mr.
Blunt also notices that any passer-by may see the flocks and their
shepherds upon the bleak Wiltshire downs at Christmas time, as
well as at all other seasons, and even though the snow should be
upon the ground the bleatings of hundreds of lambs during many
an hour of the night early in January.

9. ** And, lo, the angel of the Lord came upon them, and the
glory of the Lord shone round,” &c. This revelation of the birth
of the Lord to these shepherds is in keeping with the circumstances48 GOOD TIDINGS OF GREAT JOY. (Sr. Luxe.

the glory of the Lord shone round about them: ‘and they
f ch. i, 12. were sore afraid.
10 And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold,

& Gen. xii. 3.
Matt. xxviii.
19. Marki. ghall be to all people.
Hide aver. ol:

a ich eae 11 *For unto you is born this day in the city
lee Coll 123: e ° a

Heisate 1x, 6: Pinna Fee Meer eae

I bring you good tidings of great joy, ° which

of His Incarnation and Birth. He is born in a cave, and cradled
in a manger, and the first notice of His birth is sent to shepherds ;
not to the Sanhedyim, not to the chief priests, nor to Herod, nor to
Cesar, but to these simple men; and sent, no doubt, simply for
their poverty’s sake and their obscurity: for God is now “‘scatter-
ing the proud in the imagination of their hearts. He is putting
down the mighty from their seat, and is exalting the humble and
meek.” ‘A set of poor men engaged in a life of hardship, exposed
at that very time to the cold and darkness of the night, watching
their flocks, to scare away beasts of prey or robbers.” To men so
circumstanced the angel appeared : one, perhaps the chief, of those
mighty ones who “‘ excel in strength,” who always behold the face of
God, in comparison with whose power and glory that of the mightiest
king upon earth is as nothing, to these,poor men this messenger,
direct from’ heaven, appeared. He appeared as if to show them
that God had chosen the poor of this world to be heirs of His king-
dom, and so to do honour to their lot.

‘The glory of the Lord shone round about them.’’ Not the glory
of the angel shone, but the glory of the Lord Himself, as if for a
moment a ray from the throne of the Highest had illumined the
plain.

10. “And the angel said unto them, Fear not: for, behold, I
bring you good tidings,” &e. Literally, I evangelize you a great
joy, and all the things whioh make the Gospel of Christ a matter
of joy are to be found in these words of the angel.

“Which shall be to all people.” For Jew and Greek, Barbarian,
Scythian, bond and free.

“ as ie ou: Le oe this day in the ay of David,” &e.
you. ‘ as born, and lived, and died for each person.

For one and all who hear the call to receive and b

Him.

“Is born this day in the city of David.” By naming David the

elieve inCuap. IL] THIS SHALL BE A SIGN. AQ

of David ‘a Saviour, * which is Christ the Lord. i Matt. i. 21.
12 And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall ee a

find the babe wrapped in swaddling clothes, lying a, bx 86.

in a manger, hile le
13 ‘And suddenly there was with the angela, 2 Gen at

12. & Xxxil.

multitude of the heavenly host praising God, and 1,2. Ps. ciii.

; DOO as
Saying, exlviii. 2.
i Dan. vii. 10.
oo Hebr. i. 14,
Rey. v. 11.

angel connects with the Child thus born all the promises made to
David.

‘‘ A Saviour,’’—from all spiritual, and in due time from all tem-
poral evil, even from death.

‘* Which is Christ.’”’ And go anointed with the fulness of the
Spirit to be Prophet, Priest, and King to His people.

‘“The Lord.’’ Here is His Divine nature and power.

The shepherds may not have understood the angel’s message in
this fulness of meaning, but we who have the New Testament, and
the Catholic Church, are bound to understand them as implying all
this; for this message was said to the shepherds and chronicled
in God’s Word for the use of the whole Catholic Church to the end
of time.

12. ‘And this shall be a sign unto you; Ye shall find the babe
wrapped in,” &c. The sign by which they were to know the Christ
was a miracle of humiliation, confounding all their ideas of the
Messiah as invested with all human greatness. As Bedesays: ‘‘ We
may observe that the sign given us of the new-born Saviour was,
that He would be found, not clothed in Tyrian purple, but wrapped
in swaddling clothes; not lying on agilded couch, but ina manger.”

13. “‘ And suddenly there was with the angel a multitude of the
heavenly host.” Literally, of the heavenly army. The veil between
the seen and the unseen was rent, and the sky above Bethlehem
was peopled with hosts of angels, for the King of angels was born
there. If when Elisha was in a certain city, it was surrounded with
chariots and horses of fire, much more would angels circle round
the birthplace of the Only Begotten.

14. “ Glory to God in the highest, and on earth peace, good will
toward men. ‘‘Glory to God in the highest,’ i.e., in the heaven of
heavens. The fruit of the Incarnation and Birth of the Son of God,
E50 ON EARTH PEACE. [Sr. Luks.

 

ae 38. 14 ™ Glory to God in the highest, and on earth
ee | a peace, Sood will toward men.

Rey. v. 18. S

n Is, lvii. 19.

Che tei:

Rom. v. I.

Eph, ii. 17. 14. “On earth peace, good will toward men.” So L. and all later
Col. i. 20.

Uncials, Cursives, Coptic, Syriac, AXthiopic, Armenian, and several
aoeae 11.16. Fathers; but &, A., B., D., Ital., Vulg., Gothic, Cyril of Jerusalem
BONA fe

2 Thess. ii. 16. (sect. xii., 32), and Ireneus and Origen read ‘‘peace to men of good
1 John iv, 9, will.”

10.

including its issues of Redemption by His Cross, and the presence of -
Christ by His Spirit in His Church, and its manifold trials and
victories, was designed to give the angelic world a higher view of
the wisdom of God than was otherwise possible. According to the
words of the Apostle, ‘Unto the principalities and powers in
heavenly places might be known by the church the manifold
wisdom of God.” (Ephes. iii. 10.)

‘On earth peace, good will toward (or amongst) men.” If this
is to be rendered according to the reading of the Received Text, we
must supply a copulative,—on earth peace from God, and from God
good will towards men. The peace on earth may look forward to
some future reign of profound peace amongst mankind, foretold in
Psalm Ixxii. and Isaiah ii. 4, in which case the “ good will toward”
or “‘ amongst men,” would be in apposition to it. The good will
of God to men, and the good will of men toward one another pre-
vailing in the human race.

But the reader is, of course, aware of the variation in the ancient
MSS. and in the Vulgate, “peace to men of good will,” peace to
those on whom God looks with good will, or peace to those who
have a good will—a will to receive Christ and be reconciled to
God. The last rendering, ‘peace to men of good will,” has un-
doubtedly the most ancient MSS. and the Vulgate in its fav
but, after all, if we attentively consider these two meanings,
are both true, for it is the fact that the Gospel proclaims God’s good
will to men generally—in the most unreserved way, so that every
one of the race to whom the message comes has a right to it, and ig
bound to accept it; and yet the peace which is so universally pro-
claimed avails only to “‘men of good will,” to those whom God
regards with good will, and to those who regard God with good

will,’ to those who desire to be reconciled to Him, and to be re-

our ;
they

* The word eudokia signifies the affection of good will residing

4Cuar.Il.] LET US GO NOW TO BETHLEHEM. ol

15 And it came to pass, as the angels were gone away from
them into heaven, +the shepherds said one to + Gr. the men
another, Let us now go even unto Bethlehem, es
and see this thing which is come to pass, which the Lord
hath made known unto us.

16 And they came with haste, and found Mary, and Joseph,
and the babe lying in a manger.

 

15. ‘The shepherds.” ‘‘The men the shepherds,” in margin, after A., D., later
Uncials, almost all Cursives, Gothic, “Ethiopic; but &, B., L., old Latin, Vulg., Sah.,
Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, read “ shepherds ” only,
newed by Him, and these two sets of men are the same. God only
regards those with good will who have in themselves the good will
to come to Him through His Son. There need be no dispute about
this part of the angelic anthem. However taken, it teaches the
same lesson, that the Salvation of Christ belongs to all, but is
available only to those who accept it.

T need hardly remind the reader that these words of the Angelic
Anthem form the first words of the Church’s Eucharistic Hymn,
the ‘‘ Gloria in Excelsis.”’

15. “‘Andit came to pass, as the angels... Lord hath made known
to us.” Though the angel had not commanded them to go, he had
told them what they should see if they went; and this was suffi-
cient for godly and simple-minded men. ‘‘ Even unto Bethlehem”
would seem to imply that the city of David was at some great
distance; but it is not so, for the words need only be rendered, let
us go ‘‘as far as to,” or simply ‘‘to”’ Bethlehem.

16. ‘‘And they came with haste, and found Mary,” &. Unless
they had come with haste they would not have found the Holy
Child in the manger, as doubtless He was soon removed to some
human habitation. The simple accordance of the angels’ word
with the fact was sufficient for these humble believers. They
asked for no more, but immediately began to make known the
vision of angels which they had seen, and the Divine Message and
the Anthem of the heavenly host. Ifit be true that these shepherds
kept the flocks destined for the Temple services, they may have
spoken of the vision to the officers of the Temple itself.

 

in the hearts of men in Rom.x. 1, Phil. i. 15, and (according to
rendering of Revisers), 2 Thess. i. 11.52

17 And when they had seen it, they made known abroad
the saying which was told them concerning this child.

18 And all they that heard it, wondered at those things
which were told them by the shepherds.

MARY KEPT ALL THESE THINGS.

   

P Gen, xxvii 19 > But Mary kept all these things, and pon-
Sch. 1,66. : ‘
ver. 51, dered them in her heart.

20 And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising
God for all the things that they had heard and seen, as it
was told unto them.

q Gen. xvii. 21 2 And when eight days were accomplished

12. Lev. xii. : ae : :
3. ch.i.69. for the circumcising of the child, his name was

 

19. ‘‘ Things,” or “‘ sayings.”

21. “‘ Of the child.” So D., B., G., H., M., V., very many Cursives, Syriac, Atthiopic;
but &, A., B., F. (Wetstein), K., L., R., 8., U., &., nearly 100 Cursives, old Latin,
Vulg. (Cod. Amiat.), Gothic, Coptic, read ‘‘ of him.”

18-19. ‘And all they that heard it, wondered .... pondered
them in her heart.” It seems as if the sacred writer desired to
mark a great contrast here. The multitude of hearers wondered at
the time, and soon forgot all about it, but Mary kept all these
words, ‘‘ pondering” them—casting them over and over in her
heart. The reader will notice how this whole narrative of St.
Luke’s puts St. Mary into the foreground as a humble, contempla-
tive, observant Saint of God.

20. ‘“‘And the shepherds returned, glorifying and praising God
for all the things which they had seen and heard.’”’ They had only
seen a new-born Infant in circumstances of deep poverty ; but that
sight corresponded with what they had heard from the angel. They
had heard probably other things from the Virgin and St. J oseph,
as particularly how the angel of the Lord had appeared to both of
them ; and for these things, as certifying that the long-expected
Redeemer of Israel had come, they returned ‘“ glorifying and
praising God.” :

21. And when eight days were accomplished for the circumcising
of the child,” &&. Why was it that the Lord, conceived and born
without sin, and having pure and holy flesh in which no carnal or
worldly lusts could find a place, submitted to receive a rite which
betokened the cutting off of the sinful lusts of the flesh? Evi-

   

[Sr. LUKE.Cnar. II.] HIS*NAME WAS CALLED JESUS. 53

called * JESUS, which was so named of the angel before he

was conceived in the womb. r Matt. i. 21,
O53. chek ole

 

dently that He might be “‘ made under the law;” so that through
His perfect obedience we might receive “‘ the adoption of sons ”’ (Gal.
iv. 4,5). For it was on His circumcision that the redeeming Blood
was first shed, it was on His circumcision that He was first ‘“‘ num-
bered with the transgressors,” for circumcision was for sinners, as
baptism now is; so that when circumcised He was treated as a
sinner, as if He Himself needed that circumcision of the Spirit
which in His kingdom He imparts to His brethren.

Again, in the case of the Lord, the reception of circumcision was
a further humiliation, for circumcision was the entrance into the
then family of God, and the Lord, the only begotten of the Father,
one with Him in nature, in will, in power, consented to be received
into His earthly family, and to be the Son of God as a son of
Abraham.

Thus His circumcision was the first stage in that outward life of
submission to the will of His Father by which He redeemed us.
It teaches us, as nothing else can, that submission to God—submis-
sion of body, soul, and spirit to God, is at the root of all religion.
If they will but receive it, it reads a severe lesson to those pro-
fessedly spiritual persons who speak and act as if their spirituality
put them into some sphere above the ordinances and sacraments
of the Catholic Church. For under pretence of being more en-
lightened by the Spirit, they? profess to regard as secondary matters
the sacraments ordained by Hit» from Whom proceeds the Spirit,
and Who willingly submitted Himself to observe every ordinance
of God which came in His way.

And at this act of submission He received the Name which is
above every name.

‘Fis name was called JESUS, which was so named of the angel,”
&c. The name Jesus is the same as that borne by the great leader
of the people of God, who put the Israelites in possession of the
land which God had promised to them. It signifies the Lord the
Saviour, or the Lord our Saviour, but it signifies infinitely more in
the case of the Lord than it does in the case of Joshua; for with
Joshua it simply signified that the Lord through him, but apart from
him, saved the people of Israel, and subdued their enemies ; whereas
in Jesus Christ it signifies that the Lord, «.e., the Divine Essence, 1s54. THE PURIFICATION. (Sv. Luxe.

s Ley. xii. 2,

Aree 22 And when ‘the days of her purification

 

22. ‘‘ Her purification;” rather “their” with &, A., B., L., R., later Uncials, most
Cursives, Gothic, Sahidic, Coptic, Syriac, Armenian, Aithiopic. Very little MSS. authority
for ‘‘ her.”

personally in Him to save His own people from sin; for, as we learn
from St. Matthew, the name of Jesus is given to Him in fulfilment
of the prophecy that He is to be “‘ God with us”’ (Matth. i. 21-23),
so that to fulfil the import of His name, He must be personally the
Lord, Who is ‘‘ God with us ” to save us.

‘Tet the Holy Name be ever my refuge and confidence, my
strength and support, my peace and consolation ; and letit be truly
to me a name of salvation. Hxert upon my heart, O Jesus, the
right and sovereign power which this Name gives Thee to save me.”
(Quesnel.)

22. “‘ And when the days of her purification according to the law
of Moses,” &c. The most probable reading is “‘ their” purification :
but the woman only, under the Jewish law, was supposed to be
unclean through child-bearing, and no uncleanness was supposed
to adhere either to the husband or to the child; so Edersheim
with some apparent reason maintains that “their” refers to the
Jews. The whole law on this matter the reader will find in
Leviticus xu.

Now since all this matter of uncleanness in child-bearing, and
consequent ceremonial purificatzors arises from the fact that each
one of the human race is conceivad*an&*born in sin, how is it that
the Virgin Mother, who had conceived the sinless Son of God in a
way separate from all sin, needed purification? The answer is,
“Thus it became her to fulfil all righteousness.”

Christ, her Divine Son, needed not Circumcision, and yet He was
circumcised ; He needed not Baptism, yet to fulfil all righteousness
He was baptized. And so, though there was no sin defiling His
Conception and Birth, yet God willed that His mother should act in
this respect as all other mothers did. Indeed, it arose from the
necessities of the case. His immaculate Conception and stainless
Birth could not be made known till long after, and if His mother
had neglected the separation for forty days, and the offerings for

purification incumbent upon every Jewess, it would have been a
grievous scandal in the eyes of all who knew her.Cuar. IL. ] THE LAW OF PURIFICATION. ay)

according to the law of Moses were accomplished, they brought
him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord;

23 (As it is written in the law of the Lord, ‘Every male
that openeth the womb shall be called holy to the foe

Lord ) & XXxiy. 19.

: : ; Num. iii. 13.
24 And to offer a sacrifice according to “that & vii. 17.

. : : : : g XVI. 1d.
which is said in the law of the Lord, A pair of » ee
; 6, 8.

turtledoves, or two young pigeons.

‘‘They brought him to Jerusalem, to present him to the Lord.”’
This, of course, was no part of His mother’s purification. Livery
first-born child, if a male, had to be redeemed. It was first pre-
sented to the Lord, by being given into the hands of the priest, and
then five shekels were paid for its redemption. The law of this,
and the reason for that law, the reader will find in Exodus xiii. and
Leviticus xii. God took the tribe of Levi to be His special servants
in lieu of the first-born being males. The tribe of Levi was num-
bered and the first-born of the rest of Israel were also counted, and
it was found that the first-born exceeded the number of the Levites
by 278. These were redeemed at five shekels the head, and the
redemption money, 1,865 shekels, was given to Aaron and his
sons.

We learn from Numb. xviii. 15, 16, that this redemption of every
first-born Israelite, if a male, was to be perpetual.

And this was a further and extraordinary condescension on our
Lord’s part. He Who had been from all eternity the only begotten
of the Father, was presented to God in His human nature; and He
Who redeemed all men, was Himself, as a son of Abraham, re-
deemed for five shekels of silver.

According to Dr. Edersheim (and indeed it seems only natural) the
father or mother of the first-born thus redeemed must not be of
Levitical descent, which disposes of the legend that the father of
the Virgin was a priest, which opinion seems also to have been
adopted by Rationalists who desire to show that He had in reality
none of the blood of David in His veins.

94. * And to offer a sacrifice, according to that which is said in
the law,” &c. Weread in Levit. xii. 6, that the mother was to
bring for the offering of the purification, a lamb for a burnt offer-
ing, and one turtle-dove or young pigeon for a sin offering ; ; but if,56 SIMEON. [Sr. Luxe.

250 And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose
name was Simeon: and the same man was just and devout,

x Is, xl. 1. “waiting for the consolation of Israel: and the
Mark xy. 48. :
ver, 38, Holy Ghost was upon him.

26 And it was revealed unto him by the Holy
y Ps. Ixxxix. Ghost, that he should not ¥see death, before he
48. Heb, xi. 5. : R
had seen the Lord’s Christ.

 

26. “It was revealed.” “It had been revealed,” Revisers.

being poor, she was not able to bring a lamb, then she was to
bring two turtle-doves or two young pigeons—one for the burnt-
offering, the other for the sin-offering.

This seems to prove that this presentation could not have taken
place after the Magi had presented their offerings, which must have
been of considerable value, and would have enabled the Virgin to
offer the lamb. Thus the Lord in His mother suffered a further
humiliation, being born in a poor family, and this was for our
sakes, as St. Paul teaches us, ‘“‘ Ye know the grace of our Lord Jesus
Christ, who though he was rich, yet for our sakes he became poor,
that we through his poverty might be rich.” (2 Cor. viii. 9.)

25. ‘‘ And, behold, there was a man in Jerusalem, whose name
was Simeon.” Some have supposed Simeon to have been the son
of the great Hillel, the founder of one of the great Rabbinic schools,
but without the smallest reason. Simeon, at this time, must have
been a very old man, waiting for hig departure hence, whereas the
Simeon, son of Hillel, became President of the Sanhedrim thirteen
years after this. Simeon was one of the most common of Jewish
names.

No description of a Christian character can be higher than this
of his. He was just in all his relations to men. He was devout,
1.€., pious, God-fearing in his service of God, and he waited for the
consolation of Israel. He waited for the First Coming of the Lord,
just as the true believer now waits for His Second Coming, as the
time when he shall receive his crown. And all this not of himself,
but because ‘‘ the Holy Ghost was upon him.”

26. ** And it was revealed unto him by the Holy Ghost,” &e. By
some secret intimation of which he could not mistake the origin.
Bede remarks well: “‘ To see death means to undergo it, and happyCuap. II.] NUNC DIMITTIS. Oo”

O77 Ny > 12 hy A =

27 And he came ’” by the Spirit into the temple: and when
the parents brought in the child Jesus, to do for + Matt. iv.1.
him after the custom of the law,

23 Then took he him up in his arms, and blessed God, and
said,

29 Lord, “now lettest thou thy servant depart e Ser are ou:
: hil, i. 28,
in peace, according to thy word:

will he be to see the death of the flesh, who has first been enabled
to see with the eyes of his heart the Lord Jesus; having his con-
versation in the heavenly Jerusalem, and frequently entering the
door of God’s temple, that is, following the examples of the saints
in whom God dwells, as in Histemple.” (Catena Aurea.)

27. “And he came by the Spirit into the temple.’ Rather,
perhaps, in the Spirit. The Holy Ghost secretly and irresistibly
directing his will, so that, perhaps, at some hour when he was not
usually worshipping in the Temple he was constrained to come.
Thus Jesus was afterwards led by the Spirit into the wilderness.

‘‘ And when the parents:brought in the child Jesus, to do for him
after,’ &c. ‘‘The parents.” Joseph, as well as Mary, is here
said to be the parent of the Lord. Now, though we believe and
confess, as the chief article of the Catholic faith, that Incarnation
which requires that He had no human father, yet by virtue of the
sacramental mystery of marriage, Joseph was one flesh with Mary,
of whose flesh the Lord partook. So that in this sense it is right to
call Joseph and Mary united the parents of the Lord.

28. “Then took he him up in his arms, and blessed God, and
said.” It is nowhere said that he acted here instead of the priest
whose duty it was, when a child was presented, to receive him for
God by taking him up in his arms. But why should not a little
child be taken in the arms of more than one person? Joseph and
Mary are not at all likely, from what we have just read, to have
neglected so simple a part of the ritual law as that the officiating
priest should present the child.

29. “Lord, now lettest thou thy servant depart in peace, accord-
ing to thy word.” The word “Lord” is not the usual one, but is
rather to be rendered Master, in the sense of dominion. It is “ des-
potés,” and from it comes our word “ despot.” From this and from
the word to “‘let depart,” signifying sometimes to loose from58 NUNC DIMITTIS. (Sr. Lux.

30 For mine eyes ” have seen thy salvation,

b Is, li, 10. 31 Which thou hast prepared before the face of
ch. i. 6.

els.ix.2.& all people;

a ioe ae 82 °A light to lighten the Gentiles, and the
Matt. iv. 16.

Acts xiii 47. glory of thy people Israel.

& XXViii. 28.

 

bonds, it has been supposed that the idea is here “‘to dismiss from
servitude ;’ but does it not rather look to the words which had just
been spoken of this holy man, that he should not taste of death till
he had seen the Lord Christ? In Acts iv. 24, and in Rev. vi. 10
the word despot is used in very solemn invocations of the Great
Ruler of all.

Some of the Fathers unite these meanings. Thus Origen :—
‘Knowing that no one could release him from the chains of his
body with the hope of future life but He Whom he held in his
arms.” And again, as if he said, ‘‘ As long as I held not Christ,
I was in prison, and could not escape from my bonds. Observe,
again, that this just man, confined, as it were, in the prison of
his earthly frame, is longing to be loosed, that he may again be
with Christ.”

30. ‘“‘ For mine eyes have seen thy salvation.” This is an utte-
rance of very remarkable faith. He held in his arms a little
child six weeks old, weak and helpless, to all appearance, as any
other child, and yet he discerned in this child the salvation of God.
The Holy Ghost had revealed to him that He was the Christ, and
this was enough. If He was the Christ, then in Him must be ful-
filled all the promises centred in the Christ.

31-32. “Which thou hast prepared before the face of all people, to be
a light to lighten,” &¢. Why hast set forth before, &c.? Only four
persons, then, knew and recognized the Lord. But when God had
thus sent His Son into the world as its Saviour, everything, in the
eye of faith, is already accomplished; already He is preached be-
fore allthe people; already the rays of the Sun of Righteousness dis-
perse the darkness of heathenism; already the name of Israel is the
name of the true people and Church of God.

Bede has a remarkable note: “And well is the enlightening of
the Gentiles put before the glory of Israel, because when the ful-
ness of the Gentiles shall have come in, then shall Israel be
safe.”’Cuar. IL] THE FALL AND RISING AGAIN. Be

33 And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things
which were spoken of him.

34 And Simeon blessed them, and said unto Marv his
mother, Behold, this child is set for the ¢ fall and ee viii,

'

si OS. X1Y. 9.
Matt. xxi. 4
Rom. ix. 32,
1 Cor. 1. 23,
2 Cor. i. 16.
Ie Rete lie ts os

CO

 

4
2
oO
a,

ise

33, “* And Joseph and his mother.” So A., E., G., H., K., M., and other later Uncials
and Cursives, most old Latin, Gothic, Syriac; but 8, B., D., L., some Cursives Geass

’

157), Vulg. and Sah., Coptic, Aithiopic, Armenian, read ‘‘ his father and his mother.”

33, “ And Joseph and his mother marvelled at those things which
were spoken,” &c. There seems to be some probability that the
true reading is ‘‘ His father and his mother.” See note on verse
27, as to the freedom with which St. Joseph was called “ His
father.”’

Is it not wonderful that after each of them had received angelic
messages, and Mary herself had conceived and borne a Son in a way
so far above nature, and after she herself had given utterance to the
Magnificat, that they should marvelat anything which was toldthem?
And yet this wonder was no proof of unbelief. It was simply that
they passed from successive stages of imperfect knowledge to others
more perfect. The full Godhead of the Lord could not be revealed
to them, or they could not have gone about their daily household
work, if they could have even existed at all under any adequate
sense of such Nearness. ‘‘ The rays of Godhead and of glory, that
broke forth, filled them with wonder and adoration ; while knowing,
they knew not what they knew.” ‘‘ Thus we also, though we know the
great things of the Gospel long before, and have embraced them, yet on
every fulfilment before our eyes and with us, in the development of
these promises, we marvel and wonder as at some new thing, gain-
ing new eyes to see that which we had before seen and confessed,
and yet knew not.” (Williams.)

34, “ And Simeon blessed them, and said unto Mary, his mother,
Behold,” &c. Hitherto all the revelations of the Spirit which ac-
companied the coming of the Eternal Son amongst His creatures,
have been of unclouded glory, now there comes the first shadow of
the Cross.

‘This child is set for the fall and rising again of many in Israel.”
Thus the Lord said, “For judgment I am come into this world,60 A SWORD SHALL PIERCE. [Sr. Luxe.

rising again of many in Israel; and for °a sign which shall
e Acts xxviii, be spoken against ;
22

Ebest 0. 35 (Yea, ‘a sword shall pierce through thy own
ae soul also,) that the thoughts of many hearts may

be revealed.

 

35. ** Also” omitted by B., L., and some old Latin, Vulg., and some versions; but
retained by N, A., D., &c.
that they which see not might see, and that they which see might
be made blind.”

Here again is fulfilled the prophecy: ‘‘He [the Lord of Hosts]
shall be for a sanctuary, but for a stone of stumbling, and for a rock
of offence.’’ And that of Malachi, ‘‘ Who shall abide the day of His
coming, and who shall stand when he appeareth? He shall sit as
a refiner and purifier of silver.’’ The word of the Saviour being the
word of God, tried all that heard it as the word of no prophet before
had tried them. They that were of God, heard in His words God’s
word, and so rose; they that were not of God, heard them not, and
fell.

‘* And for a sign which shall be spoken against.” This was ful-
filled when they said of Him, ‘‘ He hath a devil, and is mad. Why
hear ye him?’’ When they said of Him, ‘‘ By the prince of the
devils he casteth out devils; ’’ when they said, ‘‘ He deceiveth the
people.” He was the Salvation of God, the Light to lighten the Gen-
tiles, and the Glory of God’s people Israel ; and yet He was to be de-
spised and rejected of men, a man of sorrow, and acquainted with
grief. Such opposites meet in the Christ of God.

35. (‘* Yea, a sword shall pierce through thy own soul also.”) It
is surprising how most commentators apply this to the grief in the
Virgin’s heart at the rejection of her Son, when we read of the
whole country ringing with the fame of His miracles, and that the
common people heard Him gladly. It seems to me that the only
adequate fulfilment, the only one worth naming, is the intense grief
which must have pierced her soul when she saw her Son upon the
Cross.

‘That the thoughts of many hearts may be revealed.’ Is thig
to be made to depend upon the “‘sign which shall be spoken against,”
or with “‘ a sword shall pierce through thy own soul?” TI believe
with both. The falling and rising again, the sign spoken against, the
sword piercing the Virgin’s soul, all met in their fulness at theCuapr. IL] ANNA A PROPHETESS. 61

36 And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter
of Phanuel, of the tribe of Aser: she was of a ee age
and had lived with an husband seven years from Her
virginity :

 

Cross. It was that which occasioned the true and permanent
fall. It was that which brought about the moral, and will after-
wards bring about the actual Resurrection (I, if I be lifted up
from the earth, will draw all men unto me”). It was then that
the sign was spoken against, it was then that the soul of the Virgin
was pierced, and so, by the Cross, more than by all else in the orate
Life, are ‘“‘ the thoughts of many hearts revealed.” Christ crucified
reveals the thoughts of men. To the Jews it is a stumbling-block,
and to the Greeks foolishness. It reveals the hidden hypocrisy of
the formalist, the hollowness of the multitude, the shallowness of
the pretenders to wisdom. As Godet says :—‘ The hatred of which
Jesus will be the object, and which will pierce the heart of Mary
with poignant grief, will bring out those hostile thoughts towards
God which in the people lie hid under a veil of pharisaical devotion.
Simeon discerned beneath the outward forms of Jewish piety, their
love of human glory, their hypocrisy, avarice, and hatred of God;
and he perceives that this Child will prove the occasion for all this
hidden venom being poured forth from the recesses of all their
hearts. God does not will the evil: but He wills that the evil when
present should show itself; this is an indispensable condition to its
being either healed or condemned.”

36. *‘ And there was one Anna, a prophetess, the daughter of
Phanuel.” The fact that she was a prophetess does not imply that
she was a public teacher, but that she had a special grace of the Holy
Spirit to comfort and edify those who needed it—above all, that she
discerned the signs of the times, and looked for the speedy coming
of the Hope of Israel.

‘‘ Of the tribe of Aser.” It seems probable that though the vast
bulk of the inhabitants of the Holy Land belonged to the tribes of
Judah, or Levi, or Benjamin, yet during the long period when the
ten tribes were given up to idolatry, many of those who bowed not
the knee to Baal, would have taken refuge in Jerusalem to be within
reach of the ordinances of God. To one of these families, belonging
to the tribe of Aser, this Anna belonged.

36-37. “‘ She was of a great age, and had lived . . . fourscore and2 FASTINGS AND PRAYERS. [Sr. Luxe,

oo

37 And she was a widow of about fourscore and four years,
which departed not from the temple, but served God with

g Acts xxvi. 7. fastings and prayers ® night and day.
Timi. os ©

 

37. ‘<A widow of about fourscore and four years.” So later Uncials, most Cursives,
1 j Oy) : -y rare mas “92
Syriac; but NX, A., B., L., some Cursives (33, 120), Vulg., and some versions read “ until
instead ‘of about;” usque ad annos octoginta, Vulg.

four years,” &c. It is possible that the last clause indicates not the
time of her widowhood, but her age. If it means the time during
which she had lived as a widow, she must have been above one
hundred, perhaps nearly one hundred and ten years old.

‘‘Which departed not from the temple.” This has been held to
mean that she spread her pallet or mat in the Temple and lived
there altogether. But would such a thing have been permitted except
to some officials of the holy place? May not the words rather be
explained by those of Acts i. 14, and ii. 46, ‘* They continuing daily
with one accord in the temple,” &c.

“But served God with fastings and prayers night and day.”
Tt has been said that her form of piety was Jewish rather than
Christian ; but must not St. Paul have had her in his eye when he
speaks of the true type of the Christian widow as “‘ She that is a
widow indeed, and desolate, trusteth in God and continueth in
supplications and prayers night and day” ? (1 Tim. v. 5.)

Her piety was certainly not of that stamp which finds most
favour amongst us now—active, bustling, energetic, and so assumed
to be the most useful ; but have we not gone much too far in despis-
ing the contemplative, ascetic, prayerful life? Who knows what
may not have been the use of Anna’s fastings and prayers, in pre-
paring hearts to receive the Lord? God, we doubt not, answered her
many supplications in ways which could not be traced out, but
which will assuredly be known at the last. Her life of fasting and
devotion was evidently her calling of God, known and approved by
Hin.

And may not, in this very day, the life of religion amongst our-
selves be owing not only to sermons, and visitings, and meetings,
but to the prayers of the few scattered handfuls of worshippers
who here and there are constant at daily service? A thoroughly
ultra-Protestant writer (Girdlestone) remarks on this verse:
“The abuses which have attended often on the practice of a mo-Cuap. IL] THE CHILD GREW. 63

38 And she coming in that instant gave thanks likew
unto the Lord, and spake of him to all them that 2
for redemption in || Jerusalem.

ise
looked
h Mark xv. 43,

ver. 25. ch,

39 And when they had performed all things xxiv. 21.
according to the law of the Lord, they returned ! 9” 7.
into Galilee, to their own city Nazareth.

40 *And the child grew, and waxed strong in ‘ ver-52. ch.

i, 80.

38. “Unto the Lord.” So A., later Uncials, almost all Cursives, most old Latin, Vulg.,
Syriac, thiopic, Armenian; but XN, B., D., L., a few old Latin, Coptic, read ‘‘ to God.”

40. “Strong in spirit.” So A., later Uncials, almost all Cursives, Syriac, AXthiopic ;
but 8, B., D., L., most old Latin, Vulg., Sah., Coptic, Armenian, omit “ spirit.”
nastic life, should not render us insensible to the duty of spending
large portions of our time in meditation and prayer and fasting.”

38. ** And she coming in at that instant ’—doubtless led “‘in the

Spirit,” as Simeon had been led, to come and acknowledge before all
the infant Son of David—“ gave thanks likewise unto the Lord.”

The word ‘‘ gave thanks,” rather means ‘‘ confessed to the Lord,”’
1.€., confessed to Him, and before all bystanders, that the child in
Simeon’s arms was the Salvation of the world, and the Hope of Israel.

89. ‘* And when they had performed all things,” &e. How care-
fully St. Luke notices that in the case of this Holy Child, Who was
in due time to break from off the necks of God’s people the burden-
some yoke of the law, all things were done according to the law!
This Gospel was, according to the testimony of the earliest Fathers,
the preaching of that Apostle who taught so prominently that Christ
was born of a woman, and made under the law to redeem them that
were under the law, that we might receive the adoption of sons.
(Gal. iv.).

“They returned into Galilee, to their own city, Nazareth.’
Between the first and second parts of this verse we must place, I
think, the visit of the Magi and the reception of their offerings, and
certainly the flight into Egypt. St. Luke, who has amore vivid ap-
prehension of the prominent part played in all these matters by the
Virgin Mother, rather than by Joseph, speaks of their own city, be-
cause it was her native place, and because of this, Joseph (as related
in Matthew ii. 283), out of all the cities of Galilee chose Nazareth,
and so fulfilled the prophecy, ‘‘ He shall be called a Nazarene.”

40. ‘“* And the child grew, and waxed strong [in spirit] a If the
words “in spirit” are not authentic, and there are considerable

’64. THE GRACE OF GOD UPON HIM.  [St. Luxe.

spirit, filled with wisdom : and the grace of God was upon

him.
Pee on 41 Now his parents went to Jerusalem “every
veer xviil, year at the feast of the passover.

A.D. 8. 42, And when he was twelve years old, they
went up to Jerusalem after the custom of the feast.

43 And when they had fulfilled the days, as they returned,

42, ‘*They went up to Jerusalem.” So A., C., later Uncials, almost all Cursives, old
Latin, Vulg., Gothic, Armenian, AXthiopic; but &, B., D., L., three Cursives (125, 219,
24), Syriac, Coptic, Sah., omit *‘ to Jerusalem.”

grounds for their omission, then the whole of the first part relates
to the bodily growth and development of the Body of the Lord.
His Body appears to have been wholly free from the seeds of dis-
ease, and to have been capable of very great exertion, so that He
waxed strong, not only in firmness and determination of spirit, but
in all the physical powers which became a sinless human nature,
which was so far above death, that He alone of all men could
say, “ No man taketh my life from me, but I lay it down of my-
self.” (John x. 18).

‘Bull of wisdom, and the grace of God was upon him” (or in
Him), as we shall see by what follows.

41. “Now his parents went to Jerusalem every year at the feast
of the passover.” Notwithstanding their poverty, they performed
this annual pilgrimage of above sixty miles in obedience to the law.
At a later period a portion of the family went up to the Feast of
Tabernacles as well (John viil). It appears also that St. Mary as
well as St. Joseph went up, though it was only incumbent upon
males to attend the feasts.

49. ** And when he was twelve years old.”” At thirteen He would
become what the Rabbis called a Son of the Law. He would then
be of a sufficient age to know its obligations, and very probably
came up to Jerusalem, anticipating the usual time by a year, He
make public profession that he was under such obligations, as our
children do at the time of Confirmation.

“And when they had fulfilled the days.” Only on the two first
days of the Feast of the Passover was personal attendance in the
Temple necessary. With the third day commenced the so-called
half-holydays, when it was lawful to return to one’s home—a pro-Cuap. IL] JESUS TARRIED BEHIND. 695

she child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem ; and J oseph and
his mother knew not of it.

44 But they, supposing him to have been in the company,
went a day’s journey; and they sought him among their
kinsfolk and acquaintance.

43. ‘Joseph and his mother.” SoA., C., later Uncials, almost all Cursives, most old
Latin (b, ¢, f, ff, &c.), Gothic, Syriac; but 8, B., D., L., some Cursives (1, 13, 33, 118,
181, 157, 209), Sah., Coptic, Armenian, read ‘‘ his parents.”

vision of which, no doubt, many availed themselves. Indeed, there
was really nothing of special interest to detain the pilgrims. For
the Passover had been eaten—the festive sacrifice or chagigah
offered, and the first ripe barley reaped and brought into the
Temple, and waved as the omer of first flour before the Lord.”
(Edersheim.) So that the words, ““when they had fulfilled the days,”
cannot necessarily imply that the Holy Virgin and St. Joseph had
remained in Jerusalem during the whole Pascal week.

Tt is important to remember this, as the day of return not being
definitely fixed, may have been one of the circumstances which
contributed to the Lord having been left behind.

“The child Jesus tarried behind in Jerusalem: and Joseph and
his mother,” &c. This was probably what we should call acci-
dental, and may have been occasioned somewhat in this way. As
they would travel for the sake of mutual protection in large com-
panies or caravans (those which belonged to some particular neigh-
bourhood joining together), through some oversight due notice
may not have been given to the Lord, Who spent all His time
in the Temple, and so the caravan from Jerusalem to Nazareth set
off without Him. When this had occurred, there was no help for
Him except to stop where He was, spending His days in the
Temple, and receiving food and lodging at night from some friend or
relative of his parents, of whom they on their return to seek for
Him neglected or forgot to inquire.

44, “But they, supposing him to have been in the company...
kinsfolk and acquaintance.” The caravan consisting of a great
number of people and continually moving, they would not miss
Him, nor would they be able to search for Him till they halted for
the night.

F66 THEY FOUND HIM IN THE TEMPLE. (Sr. Luxe.

45 And when they found him not, they turned back again
to Jerusalem, seeking him.

46 And it came to pass, that after three days they found
him in the temple, sittmg in the midst of the doctors, both
hearing them, and asking them questions.

Matt oi. 28. 47 And ‘all that heard him were astonished at
ee te? re his understanding and answers.

46. “Seeking him.” SoX8, A., later Uncials, Cursives, but B., C., D., L., read ““ seeking
him diligently.”

45-46, “ And when they found him not... asking them ques-
tions.” “After three days.’ This cannot well mean that they were
three days searching for Him in the city. It probably dates from
the time they set out. The first day would be the first day’s
journey, the day of their anxious search the second, and the day of
their return the third.

We are not to suppose that there was anything unusual in one
who sought instruction from the teachers of the law, not only thus
hearing them, but questioning them. On the contrary, there seems
to have been the greatest freedom in the Rabbinical schools of
putting questions to the teachers. The Talmudical writings are full
of wise sayings given in answer to questions put at the moment.
But what was unusual is contained in the next verse.

47. “‘ And all that heard him were astonished at his understand-
ing and answers.” And when we consider the sort of Scripture
interpretation and exposition which then began to prevail, well they
might be. The Lord’s questions, on whatever subject they were
upon, would confound these teachers of tradition by their very sim.
plicity—they would come direct from the heart, and so would reach
the heart. Think of some of the questions with which the Lord in
after times exposed their ignorance: ‘‘ Have ye not read what David
did, when he was an hungered? If David call Christ Lord, how is
He his Son? Is it not written in your law, I have said ye are
gods?” &¢c. See how simple these questions are, and yet what a
mine of instruction each one opens up !

We are not for a moment to suppose that our Lord in thus hear-
ing them and asking them questions, undertook to teach them. He
simply availed Himself of the liberty which seemingly all Jewish
scholars had, of questioning their teachers. And in their turn theyCuar. IL] HOW IS IT THAT YE SOUGHT ME? 67

48 And when they saw him, they were amazed: and his
mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt with
us behold, thy father and T have sought thee sorrowing.

49 And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me?

could question Him. A false view of the whole matter is given by
the words. ‘‘ disputing with the doctors,” so often applied to this
incident. The time had not come for controversy and dispute. No
doubt the Lord avoided all appearance of it, and in all simplicity asked
and answered as a child would do. But children ask at times the
profoundest questions, and this was what would astonish them, not
His precocity, so to speak, but the depth of His simplicity—not His
learning as men understand the term, but His insight; not His
subtlety, but His straightforwardness; not His weaving of cob-
webs, but His brushing aside all such things, and laying bare the
very heart of the subject which they were considering.

48. ‘‘And when they saw him they were amazed.”’ Till then,
apparently, He had been reticent of His Divine knowledge, even
to them. But most probably they were amazed, not at His ques-
tions or answers, which they could not have heard, but at the
rapt attention which was accorded ‘to what He was saying by the
doctors of the law who were gathered around Him.

“And his mother said unto him, Son, why hast thou thus dealt
with us,’ &c. There is, of course, a sound of reproof about these
words. The Holy Virgin thought more of the past anxiety than of
the scene before her. This was most likely said as He retired with
them. It was the most natural thing for a mother in such circum-
stances to say, and yet all depended upon the tone and manner of
the saying, for it might merely be the expression of inquiry respect-
ing conduct which was unusual.

49. ‘* And he said unto them, How is it that ye sought me? wist
ye not that I must be,” &c. These words have been translated,
‘‘Wist ye not that I must be in my Father’s house?”’ So the Re-
visers of 1881, and the Syriac. The words literally rendered are,
‘in the things of my Father.’ A very little consideration will serve
to show that the rendering of the authorized ‘‘ about my Father’s
business,’’ does not convey the meaning of the Lord. For it is im-
possible to suppose that the Lord in asking the question, “ How is
it that ye sought me?” meant to shame them for coming to seek68 MY FATHER’S HOUSE. [Sr. Luxe.

m Johnii.16. wist ve not that I must be about ™ my Father’s

business ?

49, «About my Father’s business,” rather ‘in the things of my Father,” or ‘“‘ in my
Father’s house.”
Him when He was not to be found in the caravan. He could not
blame them for looking after Him. What He does blame them for is
for not at once finding Him at the right place—at the Temple—the
place where they might have known that He was most likely to be
found. If, then, we are to take the words in the most literal way,
“in the things of my Father,” those ‘‘ things” must have been the
worship and ‘instruction in His Father’s house. The things of His
Father must indicate some definite place, whereas ‘‘ His Father’s
business’ might be anywhere ; when He had entered on His public
ministry, His ‘‘Father’s business” took Him from the borders of Tyre
and Sidon and the east of Jordan, through Samaria to Jerusalem—
that is, over the whole circuit of the Holy Land. Whereas His
question, ‘‘ How is it that ye sought me?” viewed in the light of the
circumstances which gave rise to it, must indicate that they need
not have sought Him, but should have betaken themselves at once
to the Temple, where they were most certain to find Him. There
were the ‘‘ things of His Father”? in which He must be employed.

These words are remarkable above all others in this respect, that
they are the first words of the Lord. As such, they show: 1, His
perfect consciousness of His Divine origin, that God, and not Joseph,
was His real Father. There is a clear contrast between the Virgin’s
words, ‘“‘ Thy father and I have sought thee,” and the Lord’s words,
‘in the house [or concerns] of my Father.” Very many commen-
tators, even thoroughly believing ones, speculate freely about the
Lord’s human and Divine consciousness, about the development in
the human mind of the Child Jesus of the sense of the Divine in-
dwelling of the Second Person of the Godhead, and of the realizing
that He was the Divine Son of the Eternal Father; but is not all
this most presumptuous ? The mystery of mysteries is, that there
are two whole and perfect natures in one Person, that of Jesus
Christ ; that the Personality—the Ego—is that of the Son of God;
and the deepest thing about this mystery is, that the finite nature
should, because finite, increase in wisdom, and yet the Personality
should be the infinite. And yet there are persons, otherwise believ-
ing and reverent, who say that at this juncture it first began to dawnCuar. I].] HE WENT DOWN WITH THEM. 69

00 And “they understood not the saying which he spake
unto them. n ch, ix, 45,

Me E : & xviii, 34,

51 And he went down with them, and came to

upon the Lord’s mind that God was His true and proper Father.
Surely all this should be left to God, and so left in its original
mystery; and it should be remembered that these words of the
Lord teach us that He was perfectly conscious of His Divine Son-
ship. But, 2, these first recorded words teach us, that from the first
He recognized that it was His mission to be ‘‘in”’ the things of His
Father, and therefore in the one place of accredited intercourse with
God, where God had ‘set His Name,’ the ‘ place where God’s honour
dwelt.’

50. ‘‘ And they understood not the saying.’ Even the Blessed
Virgin did not and could not realize as yet that He was the Hternal
Son—the Word made Flesh; neither could they understand the
nature and scope of His future mission, for which His sojourf in the
Temple was a preparation.

It is clear that the Lord, however conscious He was of His Divine
Sonship, had veiled it, and with it His superhuman knowledge, so
that familiar intercourse with Him in their home, though it deepened
their love and admiration, had not brought home to St. Joseph the
significance of His name, ‘‘ Emmanuel,” which he had heard from
the angel; nor to the Blessed Virgin the sense in which He was to
be called “the Son of the Highest.” But, indeed, that they should
have had any adequate sense of His unutterable greatness was out
of the question, for, as I said, to have possessed it would have simply
paralyzed them, and made them incapable of performing the daily
duties of home in His presence and company.

51. “‘ And he went down with them, and came to Nazareth, and
was subject unto them.’ ‘“ But from His very first years, being
obedient to His parents, He endured all bodily labours humbly and
reverently. For since His parents were honest and just, yet at the
same time poor and ill supplied with the necessaries of life (as the
stable which administered to the holy birth bears witness), it is
plain that they continually underwent bodily fatigue in providing
for their daily wants. But Jesus being obedient to them, as the
Scriptures testify, even in sustaining labours, submitted Himself to
a complete subjection.” (Basil, in Catena Aureas)70 HE WAS SUBJECT UNTO THEM. (Sr. Luxe.

: anette
Nazareth, and was subject unto them: but his mother ° kept

o yeree: all these sayings in her heart.
Dan. vii. 28. J So

How wonderful it seems, that from His twelfth year, when He
was taken to the Temple, to his thirtieth, when He was baptized,
there is nothing recorded of the Lord, except that He was subject to
His parents! With the exception of this obedience, all is wrapped
in the profoundest obscurity : not a record of one word that He said,
or of any one act which He performed, of one soul that He rescued
from evil, or assisted in acquiring goodness. Surely this seems an
amazing humiliation—that He Who had evinced such knowledge of
Seripture, and such insight into its meaning as to astonish the doc-
tors of the law, should have been contented at the will of His Father
so to veil His Light, and to live in such retirement, that, when He
did begin to teach, His fellow-townsmen asked, ‘‘ Whence hath this
man this wisdom?’ But in this was He not learning to sympa-
thize with that vast mass of His fellow creatures who have to pass
through life unknown and unnoticed, obeying in quietness and
patience those over them, though such may be vastly inferior to
themselves? In this, too, as well as in the pains of the Cross, He
‘learned obedience by the things which He suffered.”

And by this, what a high value has He set upon the faithful per-
formance of home duties, the essence of which is loving subjection
to those who are over us in the family! Submission in the smaller
sphere of the family prepares us for submission in the wider sphere
of the Church, and that for obedience in the still wider sphere of the
kingdom of God in the eternal world.

‘* But his mother kept all these sayings in her heart.’ It is re-
markable that this should be twice mentioned, for in verse 19 we
read, ‘‘Mary kept all these things, and pondered them in her
heart.” What is the significance of this repetition? Is it to vindi-
cate the election of God, in that He chose one to be the mother of
the Lord whose mind was thoroughly in accord with the purposes
of grace, and who would watch with adoring interest all the indica-
tions of His higher origin, and of His future greatness ; or is it to
assure us that to her observation and memory we owe the few
precious notices contained in these chapters of the infancy of the
Son of God ? They were not learnt by the Evangelist through tradi-
tion, but in personal conference with her who, as Origen says, pre-Cuar. II] WISDOM AND STATURE. cl

52 And Jesus ? increased in wisdom and || sta- P 1 Sam. ii.
26. ver. 40,
|| Or, age,

served all His words in her heart, not as those of a child of twelve
years of age, but of Him Who was conceived of the Holy Ghost.

52. “* And Jesus increased in wisdom and stature.’’ ‘*In this state
of subjection He advanced in wisdom, not as God the Word, but as
man, for to perfect manhood growth and increase is needful: but
as the separation and distinction between our Lord’s Godhead and
human Soul is a mystery infinitely above us, and to look into which
too curiously, is to look into the ark of God, so this increase in wis-
dom is mysterious; but no less mysterious would it have been, if
He had not grown in wisdom, and unharmonious with the other
parts of Catholic truth. He was Almighty in Godhead, yet His Body
and Soul received increase; thus not only in bodily affections, but in
affections of the soul also, He was as man: He learned obedience ;
He marvelled; He felt surprise, as at the breaking in of new know-
ledge.” (Isaac Williams.)

In this He can sympathize with us in our infirmities and dis-
tresses through partial knowledge. As the apostolic writer says:
‘He can have compassion on the ignorant, and on them that are
out of the way, for that He Himself also was compassed with
infirmity,” and so partaker of that infirmity which all scholars in
the school of experience must have; for, as far as we can judge from
the study of our nature, the wisdom gained by experience can only
be gained by experience: it cannot be poured into us once for all,
but must be acquired by degrees.

‘And in favour with God and man.” It seems a mystery that
One Who had been in the bosom of God from eternity should in-
crease in “favour,” or grace, with God and man; but in this re-
spect the Son of God was the representative of His brethren. Accord-
ing to their use of God’s grace and gifts, the saints of God increase
in the favour of God. God regards them with increasing love and
good will according to their dev otedness, and it was not otherwise
with the Eternal Son. For our sakes He Who was the equal of
God in His higher nature, in His lower created nature served God
as His servant, and grew in His love and favour, so that it was not
only in submission to suffering, but in that which constitutes the
bright side of God’s dealings with men that He is as we are. It was
prophesied of Him, that because “‘ He loved righteousness and hated@ FAVOUR WITH GOD AND MAN. _ [Sr. Luxe.

ture, and in favour with God and man.

 

iniquity, therefore God anointed Him with the oil of gladness above
his fellows.’’ He said of Himself in respect of His intercourse with
His Father, ‘‘ If ye keep my commandments, ye shall abide in my
love, even as I have kept my Father’s commandments, and abide
in His love.” It is no more difficult to believe that on His human
side He increased in the favour of God, than that through keeping
God’s commandments He abode in the love of God.

But with respect to His increasing in favour with men, it has
been well said that ‘‘men suffer for righteousness’ sake when the
light of their example becomes a witness against others, or excites
their envy; but the virtues and holiness of a child consist so
much in meekness and subjection, that they kindle love and ex-
cite interest among elders; the witness of goodness which dis-
pleases and the envy it excites are to be found more among equals

in age.”
CHAR. tile
_(itasne ] OW in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tibe-
OMINI : ae ; ;
26. rius Cesar, Pontius Pilate being governor

of Juda, and Herod being tetrarch of Galilee,

1. “Now in the fifteenth year of the reign of Tiberius Ceesar,”’
&e. Augustus, the predecessor and uncle of Tiberius, died a.p. 14,
and but two years previously he had associated his nephew with
him in the imperial rule, so that the ministry of John would com-
mence A.D. 26.

: fies ae io

“Pontius Pilate being governor of Judea,” &c. He was appointed
In A.D. 26. He was not supreme governor under the Emperor, but
procurator under the pro-consul of Syria. His province, or district,
embraced Samaria as well as Judea proper.
| ‘Herod being tetrarch of Galilee,’ &c. This was Herod Antipas,

| son of Herod the Great, and the man who beheaded the Baptist.
His tetrarchy embraced Galilee and Perea, that is, the countr

y to
the east of Jordan, south of the sea of Galilee.Cuar.III.] THE WORD OF GOD CAME UNTO JOUN. 73

and his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturzea and of the region
of Trachonitis, and Lysanias the tetrarch of Abilene,

2 * Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests, « John xi. 49,
the word of God came unto John the son of Zacha- Acsiv6.
rias in the wilderness.

2. “Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests,” rather ‘in the high priesthood o.

Annas and Caiphas,’ &, A., B., C., D., E.,G., H., K., L., &c., and most Cursives.

** And his brother Philip tetrarch of Iturea and of the region of
Trachonitis,” &c. This was not the Philip whose wife Antipas
married, but the son of Herod by his wife Cleopatra. This is the
only place in the Gospel history where hisname is mentioned. His
territory was to the east of the Upper Jordan, and its capital
Cesarea Philippi. Much of it was beyond the bounds of the Holy
Land. Itureza is supposed to have derived its name from Jetur the
son of Ishmael (Gen. xxv.15). Trachonitis was a rocky territory
forming part of the ancient Bashan, and is supposed to be the
Greek equivalent for the Aramaic Argob. (Smith’s Dictionary.)

“‘ Lysanias the tetrarch of Abilene.” Abilene was a territory out
of the bounds of the Holy Land to the north of Cesarea Philippi
and the east of Damascus. Abilene, near Lebanon, was granted by
Augustus to Herod the Great, on whose death he restored it to the
heir of a former Lysanias put to death by Antony.

2. * Annas and Caiaphas being the high priests,’ &e. The oldest
MSS. (see above) read ‘‘ being the high priest.” There could be,
lawfully, but one high priest, and the one who had the legal claim
was Annas, who had been deprived of his office by Gratus, the pre-
decessor of Pilate. Caiaphas was his son-in-law. It is probable
that he was considered by the people the only true high priest, and
so we read in St. John that the Lord was first taken to him that he
might give a sanction and authority to His condemnation which it
would not otherwise have had.

‘‘The word of the Lord came unto John the son of Zacharias,” &c.
This is the phrase used in the Old Testament to describe that the
Divine inspiration or afflatus came to a prophet to compel him to
deliver some messages from God to the people. Thus Hosea as
“The word of the Lord that came unto Hosea.” Also Jeremiah
i. 2. It is not elsewhere used in the New Testament to describe the
first action of the Spirit on an Apostle or Prophet.14. THE BAPTISM OF REPENTANCE.  [Sr. Lux.

3 °And he came into all the country about Jordan,
Bee ii-1. preaching the baptism of repentance ° for the re-
Mark i. 4, re :
ooh ie. mission of sins:

4 As itis written in the book of the words of

gals. xl. 3. Hsaias the prophet, saying, ? The voice of one cry-
Matt. 1. 3, ee d = 2

Fated os ing in the wilderness, Prepare ye the way of the
ohn i. 23. 2 e :

Lord, make his paths straight.

3. “ And he came into all the country about Jordan, preaching
the baptism,” &e. He was not sent, as we should have expected, to
Jerusalem, or to any of the cities of Judea or Galilee; but he took
up his station in the wilderness, and the inhabitants of the cities
and towns flocked to the wilderness to hear his preaching and re-
ceive his baptism.

“The baptism of repentance for the remission of sins.” This is
the same account of the Baptism of John as that in St. Mark, and
it should be noticed that it is the same as St. Paul’s account in
Acts xiii, 24, and Acts xix. 4. The Baptism of John appears to
have been a new thing, as administered to the then people of God.
Proselytes when brought into the Church of the Old Covenant were
baptized ; but there was no baptism for the children of Israel, to
indicate that they all needed repentance, and that this repentance
was to be followed by a far deeper and more effectual cleansing than
the blood of their sacrifices could convey. So that the Forerunner
was sent to prepare the way of the Lord, by preaching the Baptism of
repentance to the chosen people as, notwithstanding all their
privileges, deeply needing it. And yet we must be careful to re-
member the wholly preparatory nature of John’s Baptism. It was
not with the Holy Ghost. It was no Burial and Resurrection with
Christ. It conveyed no new birth of water and of the Spirit. It
baptized into no mystical body. It had to be repeated, even in the
case of those who were believers in the Lord. (Acts xix. 5, 6.)

4,5. “ As it is written in the book of the words of Esaias .. .
Every valley shall be filled .... rough ways shall be made

smooth.” As it is the speciality of St. Luke to give (as we shall
| soon see) the preaching of the Baptist more in detail, describing the
| way in which he addressed various classes, so in quoting the passage
in Isaiah which predicts that teaching, he alone, of the Evangelists,
gives it in full, and we find that it sets forth the preparation for the

he "
ee ee
poten —

DalitCuar. IIL] EVERY VALLEY SHALL BE FILLED. 19

TA ‘ a he aya ‘ TAY Fs +7 j
5 Hvery valley shall be filled, and every mountain and hill
shall be brought low; and the crooked shall be made straight,
and the rough ways shall be made smooth:

Lord in striking accord with the words of the Blessed Virgin, in the
Magnificat. She had prophesied, ‘‘ He hath shewed strength with
his arm; he hath scattered the proud in the imagination of their
hearts. He hath put down the mighty from their seats, and hath
exalted the humble and meek.’’ And here, in the citation of Isaiah,
we have the same figures, ‘‘ Every valley shall be filled, and every
mountain and hill shall be brought low.”

‘‘Hivery valley shall be filled,” &. The valley being low and
depressed, represents here the abject mind, the lowly and contrite
heart, the spirit broken and depressed on account of sin. The Son
of God comes to raise up the poor miserable fearful spirit, always
looking upon God in the light of a severe Judge, and to give it assu-
rance of forgiveness, to take away the abject spirit of bondage and
to replace it with the spirit of adoption.

‘Every mountain and hill shall be broughtlow.” It is the very
first law of Christ’s kingdom, that all pride whatsoever is to be
brought down. Its first beatitude is, ‘‘ Blessed are the poor in
spirit.” Its second is, ‘‘ Blessed are they that mourn.” Its third
is, ‘Blessed are the meek.” Repentance, if it be worth anything,
humbles every man because it makes him ashamed of himself. A
true sense of sin never allows a man to compare himself with an-
other to his own advantage, and so the mountains and hills—the self-
complacent and conceited souls—imust be levelled by repentance.

‘The crooked shall be made’straight,” &¢. Repentance unto
life rectifies all within. It produces in the soul sincerity of purpose
in all our service both of God and of our fellow-creatures. It takes
away the double mind, striving to look at once to God and self, and
fixes the attention upon fulfilling the will of God.

‘‘ And the rough ways shall be made smooth,” &c. The rough
ways are those which are full of impediments, andthe true penitent
clears his path of life of all impediments to his Christian walk, such
as bad or irreligious company, immoderate desires, self-indulgent
habits, and such things; or, as Gregory explains it, the rough ways
are changed to smooth when “fierce and savage dispositions by the
influence of Divine grace return to gentleness and meekness.” (Cat.

Aurea. )76 BRING FORTH FRUITS. [Sr. Luxe.

6 And “all flesh shall see the salvation of God.

e Ps, xeviii. 2. 7 Then said he to the multitude that came forth
Is. ii. 10. ch. ; ee 5

ii. 10. to be baptized of him, * O generation of vipers, who
resort. til 7)

hath warned you to flee from the wrath to come ?
| Or, meet for. 8 Bring forth therefore fruits || worthy of re-

 

6. “All flesh shall see the salvation of God.” This may be a pre-
diction of the universal spread of the Gospel, which even before St.
Paul’s death was so extensive that he wrote of it as being preached
to “every creature which is under heaven ;” and it may look to the
time of the end when “‘every eye shall see him,’ when each one
**in his fiesh shall see God.”

7. “Then said he to the multitude that came forth to be baptized
of him, O generation of vipers,” &c. In St. Matthew it seems to be
said that he addressed these words not to the multitude, but to
““ many of the Pharisees and Sadducees,” but the Pharisees and Sad-
ducees were the representatives of the whole people, who were, as a
body, leavened with the leaven of Pharisaism, which made void the
law through tradition, or of Sadduceeism, which robbed the pro-
mises of God of all their virtue through unbelief.

‘‘O generation of vipers, who hath warned you to flee,” &c. These
words have been pronounced harsh, but are they one whit more
harsh than the words of the Lord, “‘ Ye are of your father the devil,”’
2.¢., the old serpent, “and the works of your father ye will do”? It
is one of the most common of Scripture figures of speech to call men
the children of those whose character they have inherited : the good
are called the children of God, of Abraham, of wisdom, of hight ;
whilst the bad are called the children of Belial, of the devil, of the
wicked one, of vipers. Instead of carping at such plain, outspoken
words, let us consider their truth. If men can be called the chil-
dren of those whom they imitate, surely they are the children of
vipers, whose words instill the poison of infidelity, of heresy, of un-
cleanness, of envy and malice, and so eternally ruin souls.

8. ‘* Bring forth therefore fruits worthy of repentance,” &c. Tf
repentance be not merely a change of conduct, but a change of heart
from sin to God, then repentance worthy of this must, in the first
place, be internal, the sorrow of the heart. It must begin with the
contrition of the heart, and the cleansing of the conscience. The
heart must loathe its old sins, and if it does not, earnest prayer for aCrar. I1.] WE HAVE ABRAHAM TO OUR FATHER. 77
pentance, and begin not to say within yourselves, We have
Abraham to our father: for I say unto you, That God is
able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.

deeper and more thorough repentance must be offered to God. We
sometimes fini persons speaking boastfully of their former state
of sin as enhancing the erace of God in their present case; but
such can have no genuine abhorrence of sin. Men cannot speak
lightly or complacently of that of which they are thoroughly
ashamed. .

But if repentance be a genuine change of heart, it will not stop
for a moment in internal emotions. If the tree be made good its
fruit will be good, and that good fruit must answer to the corre-
sponding evil fruit; avarice must be changed into generosity, un-
cleanness into purity, malice into goodwill. And, again, there
must be restitution if anyone has been wronged; as Zaccheus said,
“Tf I have done any wrong to any man I restore him fourfold.” If
any one has seduced another from either faith or virtue, there must
be every effort made, and constant prayer offered, to bring the seduced
back to faith and virtue. :

Again, he brings forth fruit worthy of repentance, who, when
converted, serves God with as much zeal and ardour as before he
served Satan and the world; according to the words of the Apostle,
‘““As ye have yielded your members servants, to iniquity unto ini-
quity, so now yield your members servants to righteousness unto
holiness” (Rom. vi. 19).

“Begin not to say within yourselves, We have Abraham,” «c.
Tt was no small matter to be the children of Abraham. God very
solemnly promised that if the children of Israel atter departing from
Him yet returned to Him again, He would remember His covenant
with Abraham, and receive them again (Levit. xxvi. 42). Again,
the Lord calls Israel by Isaiah, ‘‘ The children of Abraham His
friend.” But that which was intended to be, and was, a blessing,
if rightly remembered, would be turned into a curse if used as a
license for sin.

“God is able of these stones to raise up children unto Abraham.”
This may be hyperbolical, but on that account it more deeply im-
presses the truth. Abraham shall not want children though you be
cut off; the stony hearts of the Gentiles shall be softened by the
piercing influences of His grace. He Who could quicken Sarah’s8 THE AXE LAID UNTO THE ROOT. (Sr. Lugs.

9 And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees:
e Matt. vii.19. S every tree therefore which bringeth not forth
vood fruit is hewn down, and cast into the fire,

 

9. “ And now also,” ‘* Even now,” already. Jam enim, Vulg.

womb and Abraham when old, can supply him with truer sons than
you. (Williams.)

9. ‘* And now also the axe is laid unto the root of the trees,” &e.
This, no doubt, primarily refers to the Jewish people. They were
about to have offered to them such mercy and grace as they never
had before, but corresponding to this greatness of their salvation
was their danger. The figure is remarkable. It is as if a wood-
cutter had been to some noble tree of the forest, and had laid the
axe at its root ready to fell it, but had gone away for some reason,
and it had a short respite; and so the Son of Man had come to the
Jewish Church, and His coming must be, in the case of the whole
Church, and of every single soul which composed it, for mercy or for
judgment—for mercy to every tree which suffered itself to be made
good by Him, for judgment if it would not be renewed but would
remain as it was.

** Every tree therefore which bringeth not forth good fruit,” &e.
Vengeance will be executed not only on those whom men account
wicked, but on the idle, and the slothful, and the barren, and the
unprofitable. Thus in the Vision of Judgment in Matth. xxv. those
on the left hand are placed there because they have not done good.
‘“‘T was an hungred, and ye gave me no meat,” &c., and to the man
who had laid up his pound in the napkin, the Lord says, ‘“ Out of
thine own mouth will I judge thee, thou wicked servant” (Luke xix.
22); and to the man who hid his talent in the earth the Lord
says, “‘ Thou wicked and slothful servant’ (Matth. xxv. 26).

‘* Cast into the fire.” In the case of Jerusalem, which refused to
be gathered, it was the condign punishment of its siege and destruc-
tion, the account of which, in Josephus, is more terrible than any
other passage in history ; in the case of the unfruitful soul, it is the
outer darkness, where is the wailing and the gnashing of teeth, and
something described in yet more terrible words as the aionian
punishment, answering to the aionian life.

10. ‘‘ And the people [lit. the multitude, the crowds] asked him

.o» +. let him do likewise.”” The people or crowds mean here,Cuar. IIL.] WHAT SHALL WE DO? 79

10 And the people asked him, saying, " What shall we do
then ? h Acts ii. 37.

11 He answereth and saith unto them, ‘ He that Ae .

James ii. 15,16.
Say ea le vOnMeie 7.

& iv. 20.
probably, the masses, consisting mostly of working men or la-
bourers.

‘* What shall we do?” &c. Do, thatis, to avoid the condemnation
of being ‘‘ hewn down and cast into the fire.” It means, what par-
ticular fruit must we bear ?

The answer is exceedingly remarkable if we consider that St.
John’s mission was to prepare the way for Christ. If this question
were put to many amongst ourselves who profess to lead men to
Christ, they would answer, ‘‘ You can do nothing. All works of
men in your unreconciled state are displeasing to God. You
can in no way, by any works of your own, further your own
salvation. It is the worst of errors to think so.” But the Baptist,
filled with the Holy Ghost from his mother’s womb, gives an answer
implying the very reverse. It is, ‘‘ You must do something.
You must do what is in your power. You can, at least, give food
and raiment to the poor starving creatures around you. Begin with
this. If you begin thus with denying your selfishness, God will
soon show you a more exccllent way—the way of grace in His Son.
But till that Son comes and reveals Himself to you, do what your
hand finds to do. Do some good to your fellow creatures. The
way for you to obtain mercy is to be merciful.” Now in saying
this did St. John, in the least degree, swerve from his mission of
preparing the way for Christ by preaching of repentance? No, not
for amoment. When the people asked him what they were to do
to avoid the wrath to come, it was a plain sign that God had
touched their hearts with some degree of repentance, and this re-
pentance was no repentance at all unless it cut at the root of their
selfishness, and every unselfish, self-denying act would deepen it.

Notice, also, that St. John said this to the masses. Instead of
saying to them, ‘‘ You have little to give, and so God will excuse
you from contributing,” he says to them, “ Whatever you have
that you do not absolutely need, give it.” Looked at in this
light, the words are very strong, very searching. If they make such
a, demand onthe crowds, what do they make on the few who have
abundance of this world’s goods ?| hath two coats, let him impart to him that hath none; and
he that hath meat, let him do likewise.

 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
 
 
 
  
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
    

 

WHAT SHALL WE DO? (Sr. Lune.

k Matt. xxi. 12 Then *came also publicans to be baptized,

SBE echt vile 29:

and said unto him, Master, what shall we do?

 

Of course such words of the Holy Baptist are to be understood in
the light of common sense: men are not to give to enable others to
be idle, and so St. Jerome applies the words of St. Paul as the best
commentary on this passage: ‘‘ [mean not that other men be eased, |
and ye burdened; but by an equality, that now at this time your |
abundance may be a supply for their want, that their abundance
also may be a supply for your want: that there may be equality.”
(2 Cor. viii. 18, 14.)
Calvin has some very suggestive remarks which it would be well
for many preachers who admire him to lay to heart: ‘“ A true feel-
ing of repentance produces in the mind of the poor sinner an eager
desire to know what is the mind and will of God. John’s reply
explains in a few words the fruits worthy of repentance, for the
world is always desirous to acquit itself of its duty to God by per-
forming outward acts of worship (ceremonies), and there is nothing
to which we are more prone than to offer to God pretended worship
whenever He calls us to repentance. But what fruits does the
Baptist here recommend? ‘The duties of charity and of the second
table of the law, not that God disregards the outward profession of
godliness, and of His worship ; but that this (the duty towards our
neighbour) is a surer mark of distinction, and less frequently leads
to mistakes. For hypocrites labour strenuously to prove themselves
worshippers of God by the performance of ceremonies, paylng no
regard, however, to true righteousness, for they are either cruel to
their neighbours, or addicted to falsehood and dishonesty. It was
therefore necessary to subject them to a more homely examination,
if they are just in their dealings with men, if they relieve the poor,
if they are generous to the wretched, if they give liberally what the
Lord has bestowed upon them” (Calvin in loco).
| oc came also publicans to be baptized, and said unto
him,” &e. The former words (‘he that hath two coats,” &.) were
| to the multitude, and the precept would reach all ; now, two specific
classes or professions are named, viz., publicans and soldiers. Why
should these be singled out for mention, except for this, that of allGuar; Tl. DO VIOLENCE TO NO MAN. 81

13 And he said unto them,! Exact no more than that which
is appointed you. 1 ch, xix, 8.

14 And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying,
And what shall we do? And he said unto them, || Do violence

m

to no man, “neither accuse any falsely ; and be | Or. Put no
a Man in Fear.
| wages. m Ex, xxiii. 1,
z Weve xix. lt,
\| Or, allow-
ance,

content with your

 

 

14. “‘ Demanded” is too strong. It should be simply “asked.”

then existing means of livelihood, they were the two in which the
practice of religion was most difficult. We should have supposed
that he would at once have bidden them quit their present calling,
and choose some other free from such urgent temptations; but he
does not. ‘To the publicans he says :—

‘*Hixact no more than that which is appointed you.” ‘The publi-
cans were the farmers of the revenue which was imposed on the
country by the Romans. Being Jews, they were held in detestation
by all classes of their countrymen, as lending themselves to the con-
querors to help them to oppress and plunder their own nation. Being
thus held up to opprobrium, in a sort of despair they took no pains
to prove the falsehood of the accusations against them, but rather
gave themselves to all manner of extortion: so that to call a man
a publican was to call him a rogue and a scoundrel. If St. John
suffered such men to continue in their calling, and simply bade
them resist the temptations incident to it, then there is no profes-
sion which is capable of being honestly pursued which men may
not raise and sanctify by their personal integrity and religion.

14. ‘“*And the soldiers likewise demanded of him, saying, And
what shall we do?” The word ‘soldier’ is not the usual one, but
rather signifies soldiers going on an expedition, or on the march.
These were probably mercenaries in the pay of Herod Antipas, and
were not likely to have been Roman soldiers, as such would have
understood neither the language nor the teaching of the Baptist.
St. Augustine comments on this passage, as showing the lawfulness
of bearing arms: ‘‘ For he knew that soldiers, when they use their
arms, are not homicides, but the ministers of the law; not the
avengers of their own injuries, but the defenders of the public
safety.”” The mention of the military profession in Scripture is

very hon ourable. There is the centurion whose faith is commended ;
G82 I BAPTIZE YOU WITH WATER.  [Sr. Luxe.

15 And as the people were ||in.expectation, and all men

 

|| Or, a sus- || mused in their hearts of John, whether he were
pense. i

|| Or, reasoned, the Christ, or not;

or, debated. eres : bee - 5

n Matt. ii. 6 John answered, saying unto them all, "I in-

deed baptize you with water; but one mightier
than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes [am not

16. ‘One mightier than I,” rather “ he that is mightier than I,” Revisers.

the centurion at the cross; Cornelius; and the centurion who had
charge of St. Paul on occasion of his shipwreck.

15. ‘And as the people were in expectation, and all men mused
in their hearts,’ &c. ‘The reader will remember the words of the
Lord respecting John: ‘‘ He was a burning and a shining light, and
ye were willing for a season to rejoice in his light” (John v. 35);
and how the Jews sent priests and scribes from Jerusalem to ask
him, ‘‘ Who art thou? ”’

16. ‘‘ John answered, saying unto them all, I indeed baptize you
with water,’ &c. It is to be remarked that in each of the E range-
lists it is expressly recorded that the Baptist denies that any
spiritual grace attends his baptism (Matt. iii. 11; Mark i. 8; John
. 26, 383). The holy Baptist had to prepare the way of Christ, not
only by preaching, but by baptizing; but if his baptism was the
same as that of Christ—.e., if he baptized with the Holy Ghost, so
that men should be grafted into Christ (if such a thing be conceiv-
able), then there would be no need for the Lord to come, for the
Lord’s coming was in order that men should receive the Holy Ghost
that they might be united to Him spiritually and sacramentally in
the unity of His Body.

“But one mightier than I cometh, the latchet of whose shoes I
am not worthy to unloose.” St. Matthew tells us that he said,
““ whose shoes I am not worthy to bear.”’ But St. Mark and St.
Luke that he said, ‘‘ whose shoe latchet I am not worthy to stoop

down and unloose.” But is it not probable, as St. Augustine sug-
gests, that he used both these expressions at times ? They involve
an acknowledgment of the infinite difference between Christ and
all other men. St. John was by family great among his country-
men, His birth was foretold by an angel. His calling as the fore-
runner of Christ was foretold by two prophets, Isaiah and Malachi.Cuar. I.] WHOSE FAN IS IN HIS HAND. 83

 

worthy to unloose: he shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost
and with fire:

17 Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly

 

17. ‘And he will throughly purge.” So A.,C., D., L., all later Uncials, all Cursives,
many old Latin, Vulg.; but &, B., old Latin (a, e), Coptic, Armenian, read “to throughly
purge,”

He was ‘‘the friend of the bridegroom,” ‘‘a burning and shining
light.”” Ofthose born of women, none had risen greater thanhe. His
character was one of the noblest in all Scripture. For him, then,
to say such a thing of a fellow man certifies the believer that He of
Whom such a thing could be said was more than man, and if more
than man, Who and What was He ?

‘* He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghostand with fire.” Does
this refer to Christ alone, considered apart from all visible agents or
agency, suchas His Church and ministers; or does it refer to Christ
as present in His Church, and acting through His ministers? Un-
questionably the latter. What are the last words of the Lord?
‘Go ye and disciple all nations, baptizing them,” and ‘‘ Lo, I am
with you alway.”’ Iam with you in all your ministrations, that
they should be Mine, not yours. Whatsoever ye do in My Name
I do it.

Do Christ’s ministers, then, when they baptize in His Name,
baptize with the Holy Ghost, and with fire? Yes, unquestionably.
If Christ, through their hands, imparts any gift of the Spirit, He im-
parts that which is likened to fire in its power of heating and puri-
fying. How, then, is it that the members of the Church are so cold,
so unpurified? Because this fire has to be watched, to be fed, to
be shielded, to be at times almost rekindled. And both ministry
and people are negligent, and take no heed to retain the gift—
perhaps scout the idea that any gift worth speaking of is given.
The reader will see, if he refers to my note on Matthew ui. 11, the
various meanings and interpretations of this ‘‘ baptism of fire,” and
all in a sensetrue. I find that Origen and Bede, quoted in “‘ Catena
Aurea,” both understand it of that fire which shall try every man’s
work, alluded to by the Apostle in 1 Corinthians ui. 1s.

17. “Whose fan is in his hand, and he will throughly purge his
floor, and gather,” &c. The fan here is not a winnowing fan,
putting the air in violent motion, but rather a shovel where-84 THE WHEAT AND THE CHAFF. (Sr. Luxe.

purge his floor, and ° will gather the wheat into his garner ;

© Mic, iv. 12.

i
Mate nis, but the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable.
Matt. xi, 30.

«And will gather.” So A., C., D., L., later Uncials, Cursives, &c.; but *, B., old
Latin (e), Armenian, read “to gather.”

with the grain is tossed up, and, as it falls, the wind drives
away the light chaff. It is ever to be remarked how closely grace
and judgment are associated in the Gospel. We have in the last
verse the crowning promise of grace: ‘“‘He shall baptize you with
the Holy Ghost.” And here we have the certainty of judgment and
separation by the same Divine Baptizer.

‘Whose fan is in his hand.” It is even now in His hand. The
judgment of Christ, separating the radically evil from the good,
goes on from the first, and is always going on, though it may be
secretly, but it will be manifested in its fulness at the last day.

“And he will throughly purge his floor.” The word for
“throughly purge” seems to signify “He will purge it right
through.” It represents the husbandman as beginning, so to speak,
on one side of the floor—the windward side,—and prosecuting
his winnowing or cleansing operation right through, or through
to the other side (Morison).

And, of course, it means, “ will so thoroughly purge or cleanse it
that not one grain of chaff shall remain hidden among the wheat.
There shall in no wise enter into it anything that defileth.”

“And will gather the wheat into his garner.” ‘ By this com-
parison the Lord shows that on the day of judgment He will discern
the solid merits and fruits of virtue from the unfruitful lightness of
empty boasting and vain deeds. . . . For that is, indeed, the more
perfect fruit which was thought worthy to be like to Him who fell
as a grain of wheat, that He might bring forth fruit in abundance ”
(Ambrose in ‘‘ Cat. Aurea’’).

‘* But the chaff he will burn with fire unquenchable.” It is idle
to dispute whether this fire is metaphorical or real. Suppose it is
a metaphor, yet those metaphors which represent things of another
world do not generally exaggerate the reality and intensity of the
things designed to be shadowed out by them.

Again, it has been suggested that this fire, whatever it be, annihi-
lates, as material fire is assumed to do; but fire never annihilates,
If it seizes upon wood, some parts of that wood it converts intoCuar. II] MANY OTHER THINGS PREACHED HE. 85

18 And many other things in his exhortation preached
he unto the people.

19 ? But Herod the tetrarch, being reproved by » Mate. xiv. s.
him for Herodias his brother Philip’s wife, and ee
for all the evils which Herod had done,

20 Added yet this above all, that he shut up
John in prison.

21 Now when all the people were Sci 1it A.D. 27,

q Matt. iii. 13.
John i. 82.

 

18. ‘‘ With many other exhortations preached he glad tidings” (Revisers). Multa
quidem et alia exhortans, evangelizabat populo. (Vulg.)

19. “His brother Philip’s wife.” So A., C., K., some later Uncials and Cursives ; but
&, B., D., I., most later Uncials, and very many Cursives, old Latin, and Vulg., omit
« Philip.”
cinder, and some is dispersed as steam or gas; but not a particle is
annihilated.

18. ‘‘And many other things in his exhortation,” &c. This may
be more properly translated, “‘with many other exhortations
preached he good tidings [or the Gospel] unto the people.”

Among, then, many other things, was the proclamation of the
‘¢Tamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world ;” and if all
the latter verses of John iii. contain the Baptist’s teaching, then at
times he must have set forth very deep truths respecting the Son of
God and His relations to His Father.

19. “But Herod the tetrarch, being reproved by him for Hero-
dias,’ &c. This very slight mention of Herod’s criminal marriage,
and his conduct to John, is the only one in this Gospel; but in St.
Luke only have we the account of the Lord being sent by Pilate to
Herod, and of His being set at nought, and mocked by him. From
St. Luke’s words, ‘“‘for all the evils which Herod had done,” we
learn that Herod’s infamous union with Herodias was by no means
ae ee ervime for which St. John eee him.

. “Added yet this above all,” &e. “ Above all.’”? The im-
a ee of John was his oe crime, for it came nearest to
the sin against the Holy Spirit, Who was emphatically in St. John.
It was not a mere yielding to lust; it was a desire, as far as
possible, to quench the Light itself.

21. ‘Now when all the people were baptized,” &c. The mention
of this circumstance, that the baptism of Jesus took place the last86 THE HEAVEN WAS OPENED. (St. Luxe.

came to pass, that Jesus also being baptized, and praying,
the heaven was opened,

of all, is peculiar to St. Luke, and requires notice. It cannot mean
that it was at the conclusion of St. John’s ministry of Baptism, for
such a circumstance as that recorded in John iii. 23 (which took
place long after the Lord’s baptism), seems to forbid the idea. The
only reason for its notice seems to be to show that the Lord was
not baptized privately or separately, but after a crowd of others
had received the same rite. ‘‘ Thus do we behold Him, as in a
scene brought before our eyes, going down with that promiscuous
crowd as a man amongst men, as a sinner amongst sinners, yet
Himself the Maker and Judge of all” (Williams).

“It came to pass that Jesus also being baptized, and praying.”
The mention of this, that our Lord was in the act of prayer when
the Holy Ghost descended upon Hin, is also peculiar to St. Luke;
and it is very remarkable that St. Luke alone mentions that our
Lord was praying when He began to be transfigured. This teaches
us a lesson. The sacraments of Christ do not depend, as regards
their inward part, on our prayers; but unless we pray earnestly,
both on and after their reception, they are more likely to be to us
a source of death unto death than of life unto life. As the article
of the Church says: ‘‘ Faith is confirmed and grace increased by
virtue of prayer to God.” If the Eternal Son, full of all grace,
prayed so on the occasion of His Baptism, how earnestly ought
parents and sponsors to pray on behalf of the young, and those
baptized in riper years on behalf of themselves—that the seed may
remain in them; that they may hold fast their profession; that
the good work begun in them may be continued till the day of the
Lord Jesus !

21, 22. “The heaven was opened, and the Holy Spirit de-
scended in a bodily shape,” &e. The words of St. Luke seem dis-
tinetly to express that the Holy Spirit was seen, at least by St. John
the Baptist, to come down and alight on the Lord. Thus we read
in John i. 83, that God said to him: “ Upon whom thou shalt see
the Spirit descending, and remaining on him.” Now, if St. John
was to see this great thing, the Spirit must take some form or ap-
pearance, and each of the four Evangelists assures us that He took
the form of a dove; and to put this beyond doubt that the bodily
eyes of John saw this outward and visible sign, St. Luke tells usCuar. IIl.] THE HOLY GHOST DESCENDED. 87
22 And the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape like

 

that the Holy Ghost descended in a bodily shape (or as the Re-
visers of 1881), ‘‘in a bodily form,” as a dove. It is surprising
how some believing commentators have endeavoured to explain this
away. One tells us that we need not believe that the Spirit ap-
peared under any specific form, but that He came upon the Lord
with a hovering motion.

But what amazing absurdity! How could He be seen to hover if
He had no visible form? A hovering motion cannot be seen, It
must be something visible which descends, and hovers, and alights
on anyone.

Of all the forms which the Blessed Spirit could take, that of the
dove seems the most appropriate, seeing that His fruits are love,
peace, and gentleness. The Lord Himself, too, bids us be ‘‘ harm-
less as doves.” -

And now a deeper question arises: Why did the Holy Spirit
thus descend upon the Lord at this time? Had He not the fulness
of the Spirit? Nay, inasmuch as He is the Second Person in the
Godhead, does not the Spirit proceed from Him? Yes; but in the
economy of His humiliation, He had to partake of our sanctifica-
tion, He had to be baptized by that Spirit by which we are bap-
tized. This, of course, was only with respect to His human nature,
but that human nature was the instrument by which the Divine
redeems us and sanctifies us, and unites us to Himself; and so, in
some mysterious way, He to Whom in the Trinity the Holy
Spirit is subordinate, condescended to lay aside His own power,
and to do His mighty works by the Holy Ghost. Thus we read,
“God anointed Jesus of Nazareth with the Holy Ghost, and with
power, Who went about doing good, and-healing all that were op-
pressed with the devil”’ (Acts x. 38); and even in the matter of the
instruction of the Apostles, we read that the Lord ‘‘ through the
Holy Ghost gave commandment to the Apostles whom he had
chosen” (Acts i. 2). Again, in the very next chapter it seems that
He preached by the Spirit, for He claims for Himself the prophecy,
‘The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed me
to preach the Gospel to the poor.” His Baptism was the com-
mencement of His ministry: and as His ministers are fitted for
their work by the consecration of the Spirit, so was He. In fact,
the Spirit of God co-operates in all the Redeeming Work: through88 THOU ART MY BELOVED SON. (Sr. Luxe.

a dove upon him, and a voice came from heaven, which said,
Thou art my beloved Son; in thee I am well pleased.

23 And Jesus himself began to be * about thirty * Seo Num,
years of age, being (as was supposed) ‘the son of eke re
: ee : s Matt. xiii.
Joseph, which was the son of Heli, 55, John vi. 42,

 

23. “And Jesus himself began to be about,” &c.; or, as Revisers, ‘* And Jesus himself,
when he began to teach, was about,” &e.

Him the Lord was Incarnate ; through Him He was baptized;
through Him He did His mighty works. Even in the work of the
Cross the Spirit was present, for we read, ‘“‘ Through the Hternal
Spirit he offered himself without spot to God” (Hebrews ix. 14).
““ By the Spirit he was raised from the dead” (Rom. i. 4), and by
the Spirit he will raise us from the dead (Rom. viii. 11).

“A voice came from heaven, which said, Thou art my beloved
Son; in thee I am well pleased.” St. Matthew says that the voice
of the Father said, ‘‘This is my beloved Son.’ St. Mark and St.
Luke agree in representing the words to have been “Thou art my
beloved Son, in thee I am well pleased.” No doubt we must take
the testimony of the two latter as being the more accurate, and St.
Matthew by no means contradicts it, but gives the same sense. It
is not impossible that the words as addressed to the Lord sounded,
“Thou art my beloved Son,” whereas in order that St. John, and
it may be others, might. be certain as to the Person, the Divine
Voice sounded to them, ‘“‘ This is my beloved Son.”

We now come to St. Luke’s account of the genealogy of the
Lord.

The following remarks will, I trust, be sufficient (in addition to
the excursus on these genealogies at the conclusion of my commen-
tary on St. Matthew) to enable the reader to form some judg-
ment respecting the difficulties of the whole matter, and how little
they affect any truth respecting the Lord Himself, or any view
which reasonable persons may entertain respecting the inspiration
of the Evangelists.

1. The truth that our Blessed Lord was the lineal descendant of
David, and the inheritor of the promises made to him, depends (in
the case of Gentile Christians, such as ourselves), in no respect upon
either of these genealogies, but amongst other Script

ure testimonies
upon the express words of the Lord Himself, whe

n He says, “ICuap. IIL] THE GENEALOGY OF CHRIST. 89

24 Which was the son of Matthat, which was the son of
Levi, which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of J anna,
which was the son of Joseph,

25 Which was the son of Mattathias, which was the son of
Amos, which was the son of Naum, which was the son of
Hsh, which was the son of Nagge,

am the Root and the Offspring of David ”’ (Rev. xxii. 16), and those
of two of His Apostles, one of whom says, ‘‘God had sworn with an
oath to David, that of the fruit of his loins he would set one upon
his throne,’”’ and then declares that this is fulfilled in the Lord’s
Resurrection (Acts ii. 31), and the other with equal clearness writes
that the Lord was made of the seed of David according to the flesh
(Rom. i. 3).

2. But though we who believe in the truth of the New Testament
do not depend upon the testimony of these documents for the truth
that the Lord was the Son of David, they were absolutely necessary
for the Jews at the time when the New Testament was written ;
for the Jews had a right to demand that the lineage of Him Whom
they supposed to have been the Lord’s earthly father, should be
traced up to David. This, it appears to me, must have been, in any
serious investigation, the first preliminary. Whatever the nature
of the Lord’s miracles and discourses, if it could have been shown
that His reputed father was not of the house of David, His claims
would not have been listened to, even by candid and well-disposed
Jews.

3. The two genealogies preserved to us must have been copied
verbatim from well-known documents, and must represent the diffi-
culties, and if there were such, the omissions or inaccuracies of
such documents. If the Evangelists had attempted to correct what
they found in the public rolls, it would immediately have been ob-
jected against them that they had not faithfully reproduced what
they had found written therein. It seems clear that they did not
correct these documents by the Old Testament itself, as they might
have done in one instance at least, that is, in the case of the parent-
age and the family of Salathiel, for in the Chronicles (1 Chron. in.
17), Salathiel is the son of Jeconiah, whereas in St. Luke he is the son
of Neri; and in the Chronicles Zorobabel is the son of Pedaiah,
whereas in both St. Matthew and St. Luke he is the son of Salathiel.90 THE GENEALOGY OF CHRIST. [Sr. Luxe.

26 Which was the son of Maath, which was the son of
Mattathias, which was the son of Semei, which was the son
of Joseph, which was the son of Juda,

27 Which was the son of Joanna, which was the son of
Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel, which was the son of
Salathiel, which was the son of Neri,

27. ‘‘ Rhesa, which was the son of Zorobabel.’’ Some suppose this name Rhesa to have
been a title, that of “‘ head ” or “chief,” mistaken for a proper name, Rhesa is not men-
tioned in the Chronicles as a son of Zorobabel.

4, All the original documents containing the Lord’s lineage, to-
gether with any notes which may have explained their difficulties
and’cleared up their obscurities, having perished utterly, it follows
that all the ways suggested by all subsequent authors, of reconciling
any supposed discrepancies between the two genealogies, are the
merest conjectures; the greater part wholly the creatures of ima-
gination. This remark applies to every scheme of explaining these
difficulties.

d. It applies, for instance, to a popular explanation, which, as far
as I can see, is worthless in removing any difficulty, that St. Mat-
thew gives the royal line of succession, and St. Luke the natural
pedigree. Of course the line in St. Matthew between David and
Jeconiah or Zorobabel is the royal line, but it is equally a natural
line, the son succeeding his father without a break from David to
Jeconiah, and though in one case three generations are omitted,
yet the fourth generation descends lineally from the first of the
three, t.e., Uzziah or Ozias from Joram (Matth. i. 8).

But what ground can there be for designating the line from Zoro-
babel to Joseph as a Royal Line, as distinguished from a natural
line? Is there a shadow of evidence that the Jews recognized the
line of Zorobabel’s son Abiud as inheriting, rather than any other,
the kingly succession ? If so, what authority designated each mem-
ber of the chain as the heir of David’s Royalty? It is absolutely
impossible to say which of the two lines, that of Jacob, the father
of Joseph, from Abiud, the son of Zorobabel, or that of Heli, the

father of Joseph, from Rhesa (or, if Rhesa be a title), from Joanna,
| the son of Zorobabel, be the inheriting line. It is impossible to
say whether any one member of either of these successions suc-
ceeded the one before him by natural generation, by Levirate raisingCuap. IIL] THE GENEALOGY OF CHRIST. oe

28 Which was the son of Melchi, which was the son of Addi,
which was the son of Cosam, which was the son of Hilmodam,
which was the son of Er,

29 Which was the son of Jose, which was the son of Eliezer,
which was the son of Jorim, which was the son of Matthat,
which was the son of Levi,

 

29. <* Which was the son of Jose.” So A., E., G., H., K., M., 8., and some other
later Uncials ; but XN, B., L., a few Cursives (13, 33, 69, 346), read Jesus (’Incots). Qui
Fut Jesu (Vulg.).

of seed, by adoption from some collateral branch, or by inter-
marriage; and so, through a female link which would be quite
admissible in the point ofsuccession to all rights of property, though
the name of the female might not appear on the rolls. We may
also add that the words of the prophet Jeremiah in chapter xxii. 30,
seem to cut off the seed of Jeconiah (and he is assumed to have seed)
from inheriting the throne ; and this curse very probably applies to
his descendants, or to any whom he would desire to make the heir
of his pretensions.

6. I think that respect for the letter of Scripture would make us
regard the succession given in St. Matthew as direct, 2.c., from
father to son, by natural generation, because St. Matthew uses in

he case of each member of the succession the word “ begat.”

‘‘ Abraham begat Isaac,” and in the case of the last link, where the
reputed father did not beget, the mother, who was the real link, is
mentioned. ‘“ Jacob begat Joseph, the husband of Mary, of whom
was born (or begotten) Jesus.”

Whereas the term used by St. Luke ‘‘ son of,” or rather simply
“of,” is more open to succession by adoption or by marriage with
a daughter. In both the first and last links of the chain, Jesus, the
son of Joseph, and Adam, the son of God, there is no descent by
natural generation.

7. It appears that in St. Luke’s line from Nathan, the son of
David, to Joseph, there are forty-one generations. Now I need
hardly remind anyone who has given even the most cursory atten-
tion to the subject, that the probabilities are exceedingly great against
a genealogy extending over above a thousand years being pre-
served except through female links. In fact, taking into account
the law of probabilities, it would require a miracle to keep it up99 THE GENEALOGY OF CHRIST. [Sv. Luxe.

30 Which was the son of Simeon, which was the son of
Juda, which was the son of Joseph, which was the son of
Jonan, which was the son of Hliakim,

31 Which was the son of Melea, which was the son of
Menan, which was the son of Mattatha, which was the son
t Zech. xii. 12. of ‘Nathan, “which was the son of David,

u 2 Sam. v. 14.

(eC hie) Mae

solely in the male line. Several of our own oldest titles of nobility
are preserved through female succession. Now the law of Moses
makes express provision for the succession of property through
female heirs. Though then the names of females may, in accord-
ance with Jewish custom, be omitted from the rolls—the rights of
property, and, if of property, no doubt other rights must descend
through them, in default of male heirs. So that in the genealogies
of St. Matthew from Zorobabel to Joseph, and in that of St. Luke
from Nathan to Joseph, involving very probably sixty acts of
succession, there must have been, according to the law of proba-
bilities, many cases of succession through females, unless, of course,
it was ordered otherwise by some providential interference.

The way is now open to us for considering anew the great crux
in these genealogies as compared together, and that is the relation
of Joseph, the Lord’s reputed father, to Jacob, who in St. Matthew’s
genealogy is said to have begotten him, and to Heli, of whom, in
St. Luke’s genealogy, he is said to have been the son (‘‘ of Heli,”
however, is the expression), but without specifying the nature of
the sonship, which St. Matthew does.

Since St. Matthew specifies that the relation between the two,
Joseph and Jacob, was by natural generation (Jacob begat Joseph),
it would seem to require overwhelming evidence to set this aside,
and consequently we must at first take it for granted, and consider
how St. Luke can with propriety call Joseph the son of Heli other-
wise than by natural generation.

Three ways of so doing—all of them, of course, in our present
state of knowledge, conjectural—have been put forth.

1. By calling in the operation of the Levirate law.

2. By simple adoption.

3. By intermarriage: Joseph marrying a daughter of Heli, who
had no sons, and so becoming of his family, and consequently hisCuar. TI.] THE GENEALOGY OF CHRIST. 95

32 * Which was the son of Jesse; which was the son ot
Obed, which was the son of Booz, which was the * Ruth iv. 1s,

5 eee SC.) Chris
son of Salmon, which was the son of Naasson, 10, &e.

 

i, The first of these is a very old opinion in the Christian Church,
being adopted by most of the Christian Fathers. It can be traced to
Africanus, a writer of the third century, and is to be found at
length in the seventh chapter of the first book of Eusebius. This
Africanus professes to give the genealogy as handed down amongst
the descendants of the Lord’s own relatives ; but whether he him-
self investigated the matter carefully, or even received it at first
hand from these relatives, is very doubtful. The account he gives
is this:—‘‘ Matthan, whose descent is traced to Solomon, begat
Jacob; Matthan dying, Melchi, whose lineage is from Nathan, by
marrying the widow of the former, had Heli. Hence Heli and Jacob
were brothers by the same mother, and Heli dying childless, Jacob
reared up seed to him, having Joseph, according to nature, belonging
to himself, but by the law to Heli. Thus Joseph was the son of
both.”

This is, as far as I can make out, the fons et origo of all the opinions
of the later Fathers, and the reader will see in a moment how
utterly worthless it is, for Julius Africanus in reproducing it cannot
have taken the trouble to refer to the genealogies in the Gospels,
for if he had he would have seen that Melchi was the grandfather of
Matthat (or Matthan, supposing them to have been the same
person), and could not, if any reliance is to be placed in St. Luke’s
account, have married as his second wife Matthat’s widow.

This oldest opinion, then, though supposed to be derived from the
descendants of our Lord’s relatives, is on the face of it worthless in
explaining the discrepancy in our two Hvangelical genealogies.

The Levirate hypothesis is, in the case of the Lord’s genealogy,
a singularly difficult and unlikely one, for from Salathiel to Joseph
there are two separate lines of succession, each member of which
has a different father and grandfather, and these two lines have
to be assumed to coalesce, so that two members of them (contem-
poraries) should be brothers by the same father. In order to this
it has to be assumed, without thesmallest atom of evidence, that a
member of one line marries a widow of the other, who has had already
one child, and he has one child by her; that of these two half-brothersG4 THE GENEALOGY OF CHRIST. (Sr. Luxe.

82 Which was the son of Aminadab, which was the son of
Aram, which was the son of Esrom, which was the son of
Phares, which was the son of Juda,

33. Wehaveno less than five genealogies, or parts of genealogies, witnessing to the sequence
of namesin this verse as being Naasson and Aminadab, Aram or Ram and Esrom, viz., Numb,
ii. 3; Ruthiy. 18,19; 1 Chron. ii. 9,10; Matt. i.3,4; andthe universally received reading
of this place in St. Luke. The Septuagint reproduces these names exactly, so does the
Syriac; and yet, in the face of all this, we have such a critic as Tischendorf reading
[the son] of Naasson, of Aminadab, of Admin, of Arni, thus introducing another generation,
totally unknown before, into this sacred genealogy, simply because N reads [son of ]
Adam, of Admin, of Arni (three generations, where in the sacred text there is but two;
and substituting a word beginning with N, aleph, for a word beginning with Y, ayin).
And we have also Professors Westcott and Hort reading [son of] Naasson, of.Admin [or
Adam], of Arni, thus perpetuating the blunders of the scribes of two MSS., Nand B.,
who, contrary to all other authorities, wrote Adam or Admin and Arni. .Surely these
two learned men cannot believe, on the strength of two unknown scribes, that Naasson’s
father was ever called Admin or his grandfather Arni !

one is childless, and the other being his uterine brother, and so not
bound by the Levirate law to raise up seed to his half-brother, con-
sents to do so, and a woman hitherto childless bears seed to him.
Add to this the opinion of Jewish doctors that the Levirate law
had not been enforced from before the Captivity, and the balance of
probabilities against the citation of it to solve difficulties seems
overwhelming.

2. Adoption, unless it be from a collateral branch, breaks the
line of succession, for the original line is supposed to be practically
extinct, and an offshoot from some parallel line is chosen by some
childless member of the first lime. But there are two great diffi-

ulties attending it. In the first place, the ancestors of the adopted
scion become virtually the direct line. If, then, the adopted person
be of the lineage of David, his ancestors displace the ancestors of
the members of the line which has adopted him. If he is not of the
lineage of David, then that lineage becomes extinct, for no adop-
tion can confer the reality of that blood relationship which ig
implied in the words “‘ He was of the house and lineage of David,”
or “‘I am the offspring of David.”

3. ‘Then remains the hypothesis of intermarriage. In which case
Joseph, by marrying the daughter of Heli, would become his son
by marriage as really and truly as he would have been if Heli had
died childless, and his brother Jacob had begotten him of Heli’s

widow, or if Heli had simply adopted him from the collateral
branch.Cua. IIL] THE GENEALOGY OF CHRIST. 95

34 Which was the son of Jacob, which was the son of
Isaac, which was the son of Abraham, ¥ which y Gen. xi. 24,
was the son of Thara, which was the son of N achor,

There is but one objection to this—a very strong one in appear-
ance at first, but which becomes weaker and weaker the more it is
examined. It is that the Christian Fathers never adopt this way
of reconciling the two genealogies, but preter bringing in the Levi-
rate law. But the more the Fathers are examined, the more igno-
rant they will be found to be of all Jewish matters. The greater
part of them seem to recognize no meaning in the Old Testament
except some typical one. Now it appears from the testimony of
Dr. Mill that both St. John Damascene and St. Ambrose virtually
adopt the testimony of Julius Africanus without any attempt to
correct his manifest blunder respecting Melchi taking as his second
wile the widow of one who, according to St. Luke’s genealogy, is
his grandson. The fact is, that the Fathers took without exami-
nation the testimony of one who offered them a tradition, which
he said was traceable to the descendants of the Lord’s family.

Now against this we have to set a tradition handed down, singu-
larly enough, from the most bitter enemies of the Lord and of His
Mother, viz., that Mary was the daughter of Heli,! and being without
brothers, Joseph, by marrying her, would become the heir, and in
all probability the adopted son of Heli. Mill urges against this
that we receive this tradition from the enemies of the Lord, but on
that very account it is almost certain to be true, for from what
source could the Jews have received such a tradition? Evidently
not from the Evangelists, for neither of them mention Mary’s
name in the genealogy, and it is to the last degree improbable that

' I have given it in my excursus at the end of my notes on St.
Matthew. Lightfoot gives a remarkable citation in point, so blas-
pbhemous, however, that one hardly likes to write it. It is this :—
“One who had been in hell, vidit etiam Mariam filiam Fli sus-
pensam in umbris per glandulas mamillarum.”’ ‘“ Hieros: Sanhe-
drin,” fol. 28, 3, et ‘‘Babyl. Sanhedrin,” fol. 44, 2, quoted also
in Schoetgen’s ‘“‘ Hore Hebraice et Talmudice,” tom. ii. lib. ix.
‘cap. il.96 THE GENEALOGY OF CHRIST. (Sv. Luke.

25 Which was the son of Saruch, which was the son of
Ragau, which was the son of Phalec, which was the son of
Heber, which was the son of Sala,

the Jews would assist the Christians to reconcile a serious discre-
pancy between two of their sacred books. No account whatsoever
can be given of the origin of such an opinion amongst the Lord’s
enemies, except its foundation in the truth. Ifit be asked, how was
it that the Fathers of the Christian Church did not adopt it, we
answer that they were most probably in profound ignorance about
it. They had no communication with the Jews; very few among
them understood the Hebrew of the Old Testament, fewer still
the Talmudic Hebrew. ‘The later Jewish literature seems to have
been utterly unknown to them. I believe, then, that this Levirate
tradition is the solution of the difficulty. Joseph could not have had
two natural fathers. Jacob is expressly said to be his father by
natural generation (Jacob begat Joseph). Joseph, then, could mon
be the true son of Heli. He must be his son either by Levirate
‘raising of seed,” in which case we have to invent most unlikely
hypotheses to make Jacob and Heli brothers, though they have
both different fathers and grandfathers—or by adoption : but Heli
must have had some reasonable ground for adopting Joseph, and
what more reasonable than that which supposes the Blessed Virgin
to be the daughter of Heli?

One more difficulty which arises from the comparison of the two
genealogies, requires examination. The two lines coalesce in Sala-
thiel and Zorobabel, but in Matthew i., Salathiel is the son of Jeco-
niah, whereas in Luke iii. 27, Salathiel is said to be the son of Neri.
This has been explained on the hypothesis that Jeconiah was abso-
lutely childless, and that whilst in Babylon he adopted Salathiel.
whose real father was Neri, as being the head of the collateral
family. Jeconiah is assumed to have died childless, because of the
curse pronounced upon him in Jeremiah xxii. 30, “ Write ye this
man childless.’’ But in the verse but one before this, he is assumed
to have ‘‘ seed.” ‘‘ Is this man Coniah a despised broken idol? ig
he a vessel wherein is no pleasure? wherefore are they cast out, he
and his seed, and are cast into a land which they know not?”
mulso in, Chron. i, 175 she thas apparently eight sons. There

can be no doubt that the word barren (‘‘ ariri’’), in Jeremiah xxiiCHAE. 111. ] THE GENEALOGY OF CHRIST. OF

36 * Which was the son of Cainan, which was the son of
Arphaxad, * which was the son of Sem, which wag + See Gen. xi.
2 12
the son of Noe, which was the son of Lamech,

a Gen. v. 6,

Z : &e. & xi. 10
3¢ Which was the son of Mathusala, which was ¢¢ “ **)

the son of Enoch, which was the son of Jared, which was the

son of Maleleel, which was the son of Cainan,

 

really signifies ‘‘ desolate,’ and its meaning is to be ascertained
from the latter part of verse 30, ‘‘ A man that shall not prosper in
his days, for none of his seed shall prosper, sitting upon the throne
of David, and ruling any more in Judah.” This evidently meang
that his desolation should consist in himself and his family being
deprived of the kingly crown and succession. Neither Assir nor
Salathiel succeeded to the kingly title; and though great honour
was done to his faithful grandson, Zorobabel, in that he took part
in the building of the Temple, yet he did not this as a king, but
simply as the head of a chief Jewish family. All through Ezra
and Nehemiah he shares the authority with others, with Joshua,
with Nehemiah, and their compatriots. There is then a primé
facie case for taking the words of St. Matthew: ‘‘ Jeconiah begat
Salathiel,” literally ; in which case, probably, he had married the
daughter of Neri, and so Salathiel was, as in St. Luke, ‘‘ of Neri,’’
being his grandson. ‘This, of course, is a conjecture, but it is quite
as reasonable as bringing in a Levirate marriage. It is also more
reasonable than the supposition of simple adoption on the part of
Jeconiah, for both in St. Matthew and in the Chronicles, Jeconiah
is said to bethe father of Salathiel, and Salathiel was one of several
brothers.

There is also a minor difficulty in reconciling both the New
Testament genealogies with that in the Book of Chronicles, re-
specting the children of Zorobabel, but at this distance of time, and
with no contemporary information at hand, all such attempts are
mere conjectures ; and the two Hvangelists, by taking no notice of
the genealogy in 1 Chron. iii., seem to have set it aside, and to rely
on their own sources of information as preferable.

St. Luke then in giving the genealogy of Heli, the father of the
Blessed Virgin, follows up the line which he had already taken in
bringing her into the foreground, and showing her exalted position
as the one real parent of the Lord. Both of the genealogies were
H98 THE GENEALOGY OF CHRIST.  [Sz. Lune.

38 Which was the son of Enos, which was the son of Seth,
b Gen, v.1,2. which was the son of Adam, which was the son

of God.

 

necessary to the Jew. In the first stage of Gospel preaching the
rightful claims of Joseph were all important, but afterwards, in the
second stage of that preaching, when the Lord’s miraculous con-
ception was more fully realized, it was well that there should be
the evidence of a double descent. The custom of the Jews would
forbid the name of the inheriting female, but every one of common
sense, when he came into possession of the two Evangelists, would
know that because Joseph could not have two natural fathers, St.
Luke’s expression ‘‘(son) of Heli” must be explained otherwise
than of natural generation. That the parentage of Mary should be
so soon forgotten, or not known accurately, is, I grant, very strange,
but the strangeness almost vanishes when we consider the extra-
ordinary ignorance of the Christian Fathers of all purely Jewish
matters, and the tradition amongst the bitter enemies of the faith,
that she was the daughter of Heli, is perfectly unaccountable ex-
cept on the hypothesis of its truth.

In verse 36 there is also a difficulty of a lesser sort, that a second
Cainan should be inserted into the line. In this St. Luke follows
the Septuagint, which both in Genesis x. 24 and xi. 12, introduces
this name.

St. Luke carries back the genealogy to Adam. “ Adam, who
was the [son] of God.” Thus the Lord, though He be the only-
begotten Son of God, and the Son of God because His pure human
nature was created in the womb of the Virgin by the power of the
Holy Ghost, is yet the Son of God in the same sense as all His
brethren, for we all are, as St. Paul, quoting a Greek poet, says,
“‘the offspring of God.”’Cuar. IV.] JESUS TEMPTED. 99

CHAP. IV.

ND *Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from
Jordan, and » was led by the Spirit into the » Matt. iv. 1.

rilder fa Mark i. 12.
wilderness, Hae ie

2 Being forty days tempted of the devil. And ™ 7"

“in those days he did eat nothing: and when they © Ex. xxxiv.
: : 28. 1 Kin. xix.
were ended, he afterward hungered. 18.

1, *‘Into the wilderness.” So A., E., G., H., K., M., other later Uncials, almost all
Cursives, some old Latin (¢, e, f, 1), Vulg., Coptic, Syriac ; but SN) by, Dy ee some old
Latin (a, b, g', q), Sah., read, “ In the wilderness.”

“‘And was led,” &c. Revisers translate, ‘‘ And was led by the Spirit in the wilderness
forty days, being tempted of the devil.”

I. “ And Jesus being full of the Holy Ghost returned from Jordan,”

é&e. “Hull of the Holy Ghost.” ‘This carries us back to iii. 22,
where we are told that the Holy Ghost ‘descended upon him in a
bodily shape.’’ The genealogy, then, is to be considered as in a

parenthesis, and the temptation by Satan follows immediately upon
the Baptism of the Spirit, and the witness of the Father that He is
His beloved Son.

‘* Returned from Jordan.” Some think that this expresses the
Lord’s human intention to return to Galilee, and commence a
ministry there, but that in this He was overruled by the Will of
His Father, Who foresaw that He must be perfected for His
Messianic Ministry by the endurance of temptations especially
adapted to try His fitness for that ministry. As I have shown in
my notes on St. Matthew, all the recorded temptations are addressed
to Him as the Christ, the Second Adam.

2. ‘Being forty days tempted of the devil.” Comparing this
with Mark i. 18, there can be little doubt but that the Lord was
during the whole forty days exposed to the assaults of the evil one,
and that the three temptations actually recorded are the last and
crowning ones.

‘‘And in those days he did eat nothing.” These words seem
intended to teach us that the Lord’s fast was a total abstinence100 IF THOU BE THE SON OF GOD.  [St. Luxe.

3 And the devil said unto him, If thou be the Son of God,
command this stone that it be made bread.

 

from all nourishment. He must, consequently, have been miracu-
lously sustained to endure so prolonged a deprivation of necessary
food.

Now, for what purpose did He endure this? It was not merely to
teach us that, after His example, we must subdue the flesh to the
Spirit, but to give the tempter every advantage, and so to bring out
more fully the strength of His devout and obedient will. After
such abstention, the demand of the exhausted body for nourishment
would be overpowering. The Lord would feel Himself fainting,
sinking unto death, and so the tempter would seize the opportunity
to urge Him to sustain His life by a miracle, which, if He were the
Son of God, would be a very small, and apparently harmless, exer-
tion of His power.

2. “And the devil said unto him, If thou be the Son of God [as
thou wast proclaimed to be] command this stone that it be made
bread.” What would have been the sin of working a miracle to
sustain an almost ebbing life? Evidently this. By assuming our
nature, and becoming the Son of man for our sakes, He had volun-
tarily submitted to all the conditions under which we, as creatures
of God, have to exist. One of these, in fact, the very first, is that
we are to depend upon God for all the things needful for the sup-
port of our life. And as we have to depend upon God’s providence
for our daily bread, so must the Son of God. For the Lord to have
used His miraculous power to sustain His own life, would have
been to lift up Himself above His own sphere as a Son of man.
He had taken our flesh and blood, in order that He might
experience to the uttermost the privations to which that flesh
and blood is exposed, and set us an example that we are not
to deliver ourselves from such privations in our own way, and
at our own time, but to await God’s providence, to be exercised

in His own time. The Father had’ given to the Son a com -
mandment “‘ what he should do,” and to deliver Himself from His
present straits by a miracle was not in that commandment. The
Lord was now about to commence a ministry which He was to
commend to the people’s notice and acceptance by miracles, and
He must show that the power which He exercised was never to be
exercised independently of God: in fact, that it was not strictlyCuap. IV.] NOT BY BREAD ALONE. 101

4, And Jesus answered him, saying, “It is written, That
man shall not live by bread alone, but by every 4 Deut. viii. 3.
word of God.

5 And the devil, taking him up into an high mountain,

 

4. *‘ But by every word of God.” So A., D., all later Uncials, all Cursives, old Latin,
Vulg., Syriac, Gothic, Armenian ; omitted by &, B., L., Sah., and Coptic.

5. **Into an high mountain.” So A., later Uncials, all Cursives, some old Latin
(c, b), Gothic, Syriac; but omitted by &, B., L., some old Latin (b, g 12), Vulg. (Cod.
Amiat.), Sah., Coptic.

His own power as the Second Person of the Trinity, but the
power of the Spirit Who proceeds from God, and so was never to
be exercised, except at the express will of God.

4. ““And Jesus answered him, saying, It is written, that man
shall not live by,” &. The answer is taken from the Book of
Deuteronomy (vill. 3), where God, through Moses, tells the children
of Israel that He fed them in the wilderness by the miraculously
produced food of manna, to teach them that God could sustain His
creatures by any means which He chose. By food which seemed
to come down from heaven, or, if it seemed to Him good, by no
external food at all, but by His mere Word infusing internal strength
of body. So He sustained Moses and Elijah in their long fasts, and
so He had for the last forty days sustained the human nature of His
Son.

‘““But by every word.” Or, perhaps, by every “thing spoken
by” God, because the words of God are always with power, making
that to be which was not before in existence. Making bread where
there was no bread, or bringing water out of the rock of flint.

This temptation, and our Lord’s answer to it, teaches us a most
needful moral. ‘‘It may be taken as a type of a class of tempta-
tions to which the greater part of men are especially liable. In our
Lord’s hunger we may see a type of the straits and necessities into
which we sometimes fall in our worldly condition; and in the
temptation of Satan an example of the unlawful and indirect ways
in which men are tempted to escape from them.” .. . “Our Lord’s
conduct is an example of trust in the providential care of God, and
of the duty of abstaining from all unsanctioned ways of providing
for ourselves’ (Manning’s Sermons, vol. ii. ch. vi.).

5. “And the devil, taking him up into a high mountain, shewed
unto him,” &e. We shall consider fully in a note at the end of thea

  

102 ALL THIS WILL I GIVE THEE.  [Sr. Luxe.

shewed unto him all the kingdoms of the world in a moment
of time.

6 And the devil said unto him, All this power will I give
¢ John xii. 31. thee, and the glory of them: for ° that is delivered

xiv. 80. Rev.

ut 2, 7. unto me; and to whomsoever I will I give it.

 

account of the temptation whether it is more reasonable to consider
this transportation of the Lord to the top of the mountain to have
been objective or subjective, t.e., whether Satan led the Lord’s Body
to the top of an actual mountain, or whether it was all in vision,
and took place entirely in the brain of the Son of God, and had no
outward reality. Anyhow, we must treat it as if the Lord saw, or
had pictured before Him, all the kingdoms of the world, so that the
sight of them should stir up any feelings of ambition, or desire of
rule over men, or of outward pomp and glory which Satan might
assume to be in One Who, being the Son of God, was of necessity
the heir of unbounded power and greatness.

Assuming the occurrence to have been objective, 7.e., taking place
in the outer world of time and sense, there was a mountain not far
off, which seems adapted to be the scene of such a display.
“ Directly west,” writes Dr. Thompson, ‘is the high and precipi-
tous mountain, called Quarantania, from a tradition that our Lord
here fasted forty days and forty nights, and also that this is the high
mountain from whose top the tempter exhibited ‘all the kingdoms
of the world, and the glory of them.’ The side facing the plain is
as perpendicular and apparently as high as the rock of Gibraltar.”
Of course, the highest mountain in the world would not afford a
prospect of above one or two hundred miles; but any mountain of
great elevation, and with an unimpeded view, would afford a far
more suitable scene for such a display than the plains beneath it.

6. “And the devil said unto him, All this power will I give thee
. . . for that is delivered unto me.” These words of Satan are
peculiar to St. Luke. Were they a mere impudent falsehood, or is
there a truth in them ? Unquestionably the Lord admits a certain
degree of truth in then, when He speaks of Satan being “the prince
of this world.” The Holy Ghost, by the mouth of St. Paul, bears
witness to it when he calls Satan the *“ god of this world.” And St.
John, also, when he speaks of the whole world “ lying in the evil
one” (1 John v. 19, Revisers).Cuar.IV.] GET THEE BEHIND ME, SATAN. 108

7 If thou therefore wilt || worship me, all shall be thine.
8 And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get ee fall down

efore me.

thee behind me, Satan: for ‘it is written, Thou ¢ Deut. vi. 13.

(6 se, PAV)

 

7. All shall be thine ;” or, rather, ‘It shall be all thine.” So, Ave Bes Dee lieclater
Uncials, almost all Cursives.
8. “Get thee behind me, Satan,” omitted by &, B., D., L., several Cursives , 8; 22

33, 118, 131, 251), some old Latin, Vulg., Gothic, Sah., Coptic, Syriac, Armenian ; neraited
by A., later Uncials, most Cursives.

Taking Satan to be the ruler of this world by means of its idolatry
and wickedness, what he means is, that if the Lord will do him but
one single act of homage—for the word need mean no more than
the obeisance which an inferior pays to his lord—he will leave
the world to Christ, so that from that moment the war between
good and evil would end; so that the Lord, without any further
humiliation or suffermg, may at once set up His Church, and
gather all nations into it, without conflict, without martyrdom,
without persecution, without apostasy, without the loss of a single
soul. This was the intended sting of the temptation. It is impos-
sible to suppose that such a being as Satan, intent upon frustrating
the will of God, should have allowed himself to be ignorant of
the contents of those Scriptures which set forth God’s designs.
He must then have known that He Whom he was tempting was—if
He was the Christ—the Heir of the world; but that it could only
be after a long and bitter conflict that He would enter upon His
inheritance. By what, then, did he attempt to seduce the Lord ?
Not merely by dazzling His eyes with the glory of the world, but
by holding out to Him the prospect of a speedy and easy acquire-
ment of it. This was the very essence and spirit of the temptation.
So the Lord would take it; and it is very remarkable that when
the same allurement of an easy and painless conquest was suggested
by his chief follower, it was repelled by the same words, “‘ Get thee
behind me, Satan” (Matt. xvi. 23).

8. “And Jesus answered and said unto him, Get thee behind
me, Satan,” &e. Worship such as Satan demanded would have
been an acknowledgment that Satan was a lawful power in God's
universe. When men bow before God they acknowledge that He
is the rightful Ruler of all, and that He rules all things rightly, and
is the source of all power and blessing. And the very least homage
to Satan from our Lord would mean that Satan’s dominion was104 HE BROUGHT HIM TO JERUSALEM. (Sr. Luxe.

shalt worship the Lord thy God, and him only shalt thou
serve.

& Matt. iv. 5. 9 * And he brought him to Jerusalem, and set

 

not usurped, but of right; that it was not only by God’s sufferance,
but by His will. Godet expresses this well where he writes on this
passage: “The act of prostration in the East is practised to every
lawful superior, not in virtue of his personal character, but out of
regard to the portion of Divine power of which he is the depositary.
Satan had a certain tolerated, and yet usurped and wrongful, power
over the world and its kingdoms; but this was only to last till a
kingdom should be established which was ‘not of this world.’
The Lord, now tempted by Satan, was to establish this kingdom ;

and the smallest inclination of His head to Satan would have been

an acknowledgment of the rightful power of the god of this world,

in that no kingdom could be in it except by

his allowance and
sanction.”

The reader will see at once the moral lesson. He who would
seek to establish the truth by the smallest concession to falsehood

(known to be such), bows to Satan. He who would use superstition

or pious fraud for the upholding of the Church, bows to Satan. He
who would make deliberate use of fanaticism for the advance or
maintenance of religion, bows to Satan. And, in the broadest and
most universal sense, he who would do evil that good may come, —
bows to Satan.

“For it is written, Thou shalt worship the Lord thy God, and
him only shalt thou serve.” Our Lord repels the temptation ; not
by quoting the mere words, but the full meaning and spirit of two
or three passages out of Deuteronomy—one (vi, 18), “‘ Thou shalt

fear the Lord thy God, and serve him, and shalt swear by his

name. Ye shall not go after other gods, of the gods of the people
which are round about you.”

The others, Deut. x. 12, and xiii. 4.
All these imply that God was the sole object of such obeisance or
reverence as Satan asked for.

9. “And he brought him to Jerusalem, and
temptation, which is put last in St. Luke
Matthew’s account, the second in order.
Lord, ‘‘ Get thee behind me, Satan,’
evil one; and so St. Matthew adds,

 

set him,” &e. This
8; according to St.
The last words of the
seem a final dismissal of the
“ Then the devil leaveth him,Cuar. IV,] CAST THYSELF DOWN. 105

him on a pinnacle of the temple, and said unto him, If thou
be the Son of God, cast thyself down from hence:

10 For *it is written, He shall give his angels » Ps. xei. 1.
charge over thee, to keep thee:

9. “If thou be the Son of God.” Article omitted before “ Son” in NAS. B.D Ti

>
later Uncials, and most Cursives.

and behold angels came and ministered unto him.” And yet there
is a deep reason why St. Luke should put this the last, for it is, in
a sense, the culminating one. It directly addresses itself to our
Lord’s sense of His highest spiritual relationship to His Father—in
fact, to His faith in God,—that the Lord should exaggerate that
faith, that sense of the constant nearness of God's gracious help,
and turn it into presumption. The first temptation was that He
should act independently of God, and turn the stones into bread,
apart from His Father’s will; the second, that He should receive
aid to establish His kingdom from another than God; but this third
is that He should rely upon God’s help, where and when that help
was not promised.

‘“A pinnacle of the temple ’”—probably the roof of a porch built
by Herod, called the Royal Porch, from which, as Josephus says,
the eye looked down into an abyss.

The evil one now, in his turn, cites Scripture. He quotes
Ps. xci.: ‘“‘ He shall give his angels charge over thee to keep thee
in all thy ways. They shall bear thee up in their hands, lest thou
dash thy foot against a stone.’’ This Psalm is not specially Mes-
sianic, and is full of promises of comfort to every godly man; but,
of course, it must & fortiori apply to One Who could be, in any true
sense, called God’s Son.

This temptation, as I have said, suggested ‘“‘a presumptuous
dependence upon God in circumstances to which He had not pro-
mised to extend it, and a consequent presumption in running into
dangers.” Such a temptation can only be addressed to religious
persons, but in various shapes and ways it is constantly held before
them, so that it behoves every child of God to be assured before he
takes any unwonted line of action that in doing so he is strictly in
the path of duty—that there can be no doubt respecting what is
the will of God in the matter, or else he cannot claim the Divine
Protection or the Divine Blessing. Suppose, for instance, a reli-a

     
 
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
    
  

106 THOU SHALT NOT TEMPT THE LORD. (Sr. Lugs.

11 And in their hands they shall bear thee up, lest at any
time thou dash thy foot against a stone.
i Deut. vi. 16. 12 And Jesus answering said unto him, ‘It is
said, Thou shalt not tempt the Lord thy God.

 

gious person thinks himself called to preach the Gospel in some
way which experience shows to be sure to end in multiplying or
intensifying the divisions in the Church,—ought he not to pause,
and consider how earnestly Christ prays for the unity of His
Church, and how solemnly and frequently the Apostles commend
that unity to the Churches under them? Can he ask God’s blessing
on undertakings and schemes which tend more and more to break
up the unity of the mystical body, and should this not make him, at
the cost of trouble, and renouncing the indulgence of his self-will,
look for means whereby the truth may be proclaimed, and yet that
which is so dear to Christ’s heart, the unity of His Church, be
preserved ?

Again, both the Scriptures and the experience of Christian life
teach us that no Christian, no matter how advanced in the
Divine life, can afford to forego watchfulness and self-denial—that
at no time can habits of prayer and self-discipline be safely re-
laxed. The calls to watchfulness on the part of Christ and of His
Apostles are simply incessant. Now it is this watchfulness and
constant care which constitutes the Christian’s firm standing, and
to relax is to “cast himself down” in the hope that he may be
preserved when he neglects the means by which God has bidden
him preserve himself. And of course by this temptation, and our
Lord’s conduct under it, we are warned against all needless ex-
posure of ourselves to temptation. The Christian who best knows
himself knows that he is always on narrow ground—that there are
always precipices near his path, if not all around him; and that
the prayer, “hold up my goings in Thy path, that my footsteps
slip not,” is never out of place.

12. “And Jesus answering said unto him, Thou shalt not tempt,”
&c. The Lord again repels the tempter by the use of Scripture, and
his citation is remarkable. It is from Deut. vi. 16, “‘ Ye shall not
| i tempt the Lord your God, as ye tempted him in Masgsah.” Its gist
et may be familiarly expressed by such words as, “‘ Ye shall not try
ls the patience of God.” God was sustaining the people by dailyCuarp.IV.] HE DEPARTED FOR A SEASON, 107

13 And when the devil had ended all the temptation, he

departed from him * for a season. phase.
eDrelivealos

 

miracles, and they tried His patience—they trifled with His for-
bearance by murmuring, and chiding, and unbelief. Our Lord, then,
raises a particular precept into a most general one. Thou shalt in
no way act presumptuously with God; thou shalt keep strictly in
the path which He has set before thee; thou shalt not court danger
which is not in thy Divinely appointed course, but if it be in thy
path thou shall not try God’s patience by doubting His presence
with thee, as did the Israelites when they tempted God in Massah.

13. ‘‘And when the devil had ended all the temptation, he
departed,” &c. ‘‘ All the temptation,” rather ‘‘ every temptation,”
implying, I think, that there were many more than the three
recorded.

‘“*Hor a season.” Till the time of which the Lord said, ‘‘ The
prince of this world cometh, and hath nothing in me;”’ and when
He said, ‘‘ This is your hour and the power of darkness.”

WAS THE TEMPTATION OBJECTIVE OR SUBJECTIVE ?

Two considerations connected with our Lord’s temptation now
demand attention.

1. In what sphere did the temptation take place? Did it take
place in this outward visible state of things? Was it an objective
reality? Did the Lord feel actual hunger? Were there stones
lying about which seemed to suggest the miracle that they should
be made bread? Was there a mountain at hand, which from
its position and extensive view, seemed fitted for the scene of some
panoramic display ? and was such display created before the eyes
of the Lord by a powerful spirit? Did the Lord accompany Satan,
or was He in some outward way conveyed by Satan to the top of
some pinnacle of the actual Temple, where, if His human nature
was the same as ours, He would actually feel a sense of extreme
danger, such as those necessarily experience who look from some
dizzy height into an abyss, and are tempted to throw themselves
over ?

Or did all take place within the Lord’s brain, or mind, or spirit,
i.e., was it all subjective? Was His hunger mere spiritual, or
mental, or imaginary hunger? Were the stones to which the108 NOTE ON THE TEMPTATION. (Sr. Luke.

tempter alluded, when he said, ‘‘ Command that this stone” (or
““these stones,’ Matth.), phantoms of stones injected into the Lord’s
imagination ? It is necessary to draw attention to this, because
commentators of note explain the first temptation on one principle
—the objective, and the second and third on another—the sub-
jective. Was the Lord transported only in very vivid imagi-
nation to the top of the pinnacle, so that whilst He was in per-
fect safety on the sward of the wilderness He was deceived, and
thought Himself in a position of extreme danger; and was the
Lord’s mind or brain so acted upon that He thought that He was
on the top of a mountain, with a scene of earthly grandeur and
power spread before Him, while all the while He never stirred
from His place?

Now it is remarkable that this latter view of the temptation is
taken, not merely by rationalists or semi-rationalists, but by
believing commentators, such as Godet, who writes :—‘ We believe
that had He been observed by any spectator whilst the temptation
was going on, He would have appeared all through it motionless
upon the soil of the desert.”’

But the whole narrative seems to be the account of as outward
and visible a transaction as any other in the life of the Lord. The
tempter ‘‘ came to Him” (Matth. iv. 3), “spoke to Him,” “took Him
up into a high mountain,” “‘ brought him to Jerusalem,” “‘leaveth
him,” “ departed from Him.” Why are all these plain intimations
to be set aside? 1. Because (it is alleged) nowhere else in the New
Testamentis the devil said to take a visible form. 2. Because (it is also
alleged) it is not to be supposed that Satan should have power to trans-
port our Lord through the air. To the first of these we answer, The
good spirits evidently take a form, a human form, or are seen under
a human form, so that they can be discerned by mortal eyes. Why,
then, cannot the evil spirits similarly appear, if permitted by God?
2. But the second is to my mind beyond measure weak and incon-
sistent, for it makes a difliculty of giving to the evil one such power
over our Lord as that he should be able to lead Him or bring
Him to certain heights (the words used by St. Matthew and
St. Luke by no means implying that the devil actually carried
Him), whilst it assumes that he had such power over the Lord’s
brain, which in human beings is the seat of consciousness, as to

make Him suppose that He looked down into a particular

abyss
which had no existence.

For how are mental delusions, such asCuar. IV.] NOTE ON THE TEMPTATION. 109

imagining ourselves on the: brink of a precipice, or seeing a vision
of distant scenes as if close at hand, produced—I mean, naturally
produced? Evidently by an abnormal state of the brain or nerves.
To deny, then, to Satan, temporary power over our Lord’s person
to bring about that He should change His place, and yet to give
him power over that in the Son of Man, whatever it be which con-
nects His mind and body, so as to set aside His proper conscious-
ness, and make Him the subject of delusions, seems to me astraining
at a enat and a swallowing of a camel, to which nothing in the
whole range of Scripture misinterpretation can approach.

It was evidently intended by the Saviour, or by His Father, to
give Satan every possible advantage, so that he should never be
able to assert that if he had had the ordering of the circumstances
he would have been successful. The hunger after so long a tast
must have been overpowering, and necessitated a corresponding
strength of holy will in the Lord to overcome it. And so the
circumstances of the second temptation (in St. Luke) were so
ordered that the visions of worldly grandeur and worldly power
were placed before the Lord in the best setting, so to speak, not in
the bottom of a ravine, but on a commanding eminence. The Lord,
of course, was not shown the actual capitals in which the kings of
the earth were displaying their greatness, but He saw it all re-
flected, as in a faithful mirror, and recognized the truth of the
representation, and if there had been anything of the world in Him
it would have overcome Him. But does not this imply that Satan
must be a being of immense power and knowledge, to conjure up
before the Lord such representations? Certainly, [ answer; and
that is what the Spirit of God, speaking by the Apostles, implies
that he is, when He speaks of him as the “ god of this world,” the
prince of the power of the air, the head ‘‘ of principalities, of powers,
of the rulers of the darkness of this world.”’

T believe, then, that itis most natural, most im accordance with the
fitness of things, and if the word must be spoken, that it makes the
less demand upon our credulity, to consider the whole transaction as
outward, visible, and objective. I have the strongest repugnance
to believe that Satan was allowed such power over the Lord’s inner
person, His brain or mind, as to make Him the victim of delusions
or illusions. I think it far more reverent to give any power to
Satan to conjure up, or form, or paint, or mirror images from
without, than to ascribe to him power over the Son of Man within.110 THERE WENT OUT A FAME OF HIM. (Sv. Luxe.

Anno 14 4' And Jesus returned ™in the power of the

Domini
80, Spirit into "Galilee: and there went out a fame of
1 Matt. iv. 12.

 

Johniy. 43, im through all the region round about.
meyer.
n Acts x. 37. =

If it be replied that, after all, the visions of the kingdoms of
this world and their glory were delusions, I answer most empha-
tically—no, they were not delusions, they were representations. A
faithful picture is neither a delusion or illusion, though it may be
used as such: itis arepresentation. Butif the man before whom
it is displayed is aware that it is a perfectly faithful picture, he
is not deluded by it, but his mind can be excited by it to desire
what is represented, with the certainty that if he ever does possess
it, he will find it exactly as has been represented in the picture.

2. Another and a practical remark. The example of the Lord
in beating back His tempter by the use of Holy Scripture teaches
us how we are similarly to use Scripture in our spiritual warfare.
If we are tempted habitually to any form of sin, we must have
constantly in our minds those precepts or examples of Scripture
which are directed against that sin. Are we tempted to unclean
thoughts, we must be ready with the Lord’s beatitude, *‘ Blessed are
the pure in heart, for they shall see God.”’ Is our temptation to
sudden and causeless anger, we must call up in memory and say
the words, ‘‘Be ye angry and sin not.” “ Let all bitterness, and
wrath, and anger, and clamour, and evil speaking be put away
from you.” Are we tempted to covetousness we must be ready
with, ‘‘ How hardly shall they that have riches enter into the king-
dom of God.” Whatever our besetting sin be, we shall find in Holy
Writ not one, not two, not three, but a multitude of words of
warning oene it, with which we must be ready, as the Saying is,
at a moment’s notice, or the enemy may eff ;

‘“lay our honour in ae dust.” i a Oe

14. “ And Jesus returned in the power of the Spirit into Galilee.”’.
This did not take place immediately after the temptation ;
contrary, the order of events probably was—

1. Jesus returning to where John was baptizing.

2. Attaching to Himself James, John, Andrew, Philip
Bartholomew, or Nathaniel (John i. 29-51).

3. The marriage in Cana; the first cleansing of the Temple; the

on the

andCuar. 1V.] HE CAME TO NAZARETH. ie

15 And he taught in their synago
of all.
16 4 And he came to ° Nazareth, where he had one
F OMINI
been brought up: and, as his custom was, P he 31.
q o Matt. ii. 23.
went into the synagogue on the sabbath day, and & xiii. 54,
Ad neon Lornoadl 2 Mark vi. 1,
stood up for to read. teen a
17 And there was delivered unto him the book &=¥ii- 2:
of the prophet Hsaias. And when he had opened the book,
he found the place where it was written,

gues, being glorified

ing with the woman at the well; and the healing of the nobleman’s
son. In fact, a ministry of some length and importance in Jeru-
salem and Judza, the account of which is contained in John ii. 13
to iv. 43.

‘In the power of the Spirit,” shown in the mighty works which
He had wrought, especially in Judea and Jerusalem, the fame of
which preceded Him to Galilee.

14, 15. “There went a fame of him through all the region round
about. And he taught,” &e. St. John describes this in the words,
** Then when he was come into Galilee, the Galileans received him,
having seen all the things that he did at Jerusalem at the feast ; for
they also went unto the feast’ (John iv. 45).

16. ‘And he came to Nazareth, where he had been brought up
-... toread.’’ There were, in all probability, two visits of the
Lord to Nazareth, of which this was the first, as I have shown in
my note on Mark vi. 1.

‘As his custom was, he went into the Synagogue.” Some think
that “as his custom was” refers to His custom in early years in
this very synagogue; but I think it was much more probable that
in most synagogues He stood up to read and teach, if permitted by
the rulers. The Jews seem to have allowed great liberty, even for
strangers, to teach and exhort in their synagogues. Thus, at
Antioch, in Pisidia, the rulers of the synagogue invited Paul and
Barnabas, who were absolute strangers, to address the congregation

(Acts xiii. 15).

17. “And there was delivered unto him the book of the prophet
Esaias,” &c. It is uncertain whether he asked for the roll contain-
ing Hsaias, or whether the reading or, as we call it, ‘‘ lesson,’ was

interview with Nicodemus: and, on His way to Galilee, the meet-112 HE HATH ANOINTED MBE. (Sr. Luxe.

18 “The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath
aIs.lxi.1.  anoimted me to preach the gospel to the poor;

 

on that Sabbath a portion of that prophet. I should think the
former, for the wording seems to imply that he sought out and
found an appropriate passage.

18. “ The Spirit of the Lord is upon me, because he hath anointed
TNO. a 6 5 acceptable year of the Lord.” This passage from
Isaiah lxi. is taken to be a prophecy of the deliverance of the
people of God from the Babylonish captivity; but, like many
others, the reference to anything occurring in the times of the
Jewish dispensation seems very remote and obscure; so that we,
living in the light shed upon it by the Gospel, cannot rest in—in-
deed, can scarcely tolerate—the low, narrow, temporal sense in
which it may have been once understood, and we take it as very
plainly setting forth the grace and power which accompanies the
present preaching of the Gospel.

There seems to have been a twofold thought in the mind of the
prophet—the proclamation of the return from the captivity in the
terms of the proclamation of the year of Jubilee. As in the year of
Jubilee, the poor had their alienated lands restored to them, the
slaves were manumitted, the captives set free; so at the return
from Babylon, when the decree came from Cyrus, ‘‘ Who is there
among you of all his people? The Lord his God be with him, and
let him go up,” the tidings would be especially the ‘‘ Gospel,” i.e.,
good news, to the poor of the people, who had for years been subject
to the grinding oppression which was the common lot of the poor
in the great heathen cities, and which would be still more bitter in
the case of the poor Jews, whose captors would look upon them as
aliens as well as slaves. And when the prophet speaks of deliver-
ance to the captives, and setting at liberty them that were bruised,
the captive Jews would understand it as the promise of liberty in
their own land, reaching to the prisoners who, through the cruelty
of heathen masters, had been ‘‘ fast bound in misery and iron.”’

There is great difficulty, however, in applying the promise of
restoration of sight to the blind to the times of Cyrus; and it has
been understood as meaning that those in dark dungeons should be
restored to the use of their eyes in the light of day. Such is the
temporal local Jewish application.

But the Lord now transforms and regenerates the passage—eives.Cuar.IV.] HE HATH SENT ME TO HRAL. ils

he hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted, to preach deliver-

ance to the captives, and recovering of sight to the blind, to
set at liberty them that are bruised,

18. ‘To heal the brokenhearted.” So A,, all later Uncials, almost all Cursives, Goth,,
Syriac, and some versions; but omitted by &, B., D., L., a few Cursives (13, 33, 69), old
Latin, Vulg. (Cod. Amiat.), and some versions.

it anew, world-wide, and eternal meaning, which every true Chris-
tian has been made by the Spirit to apprehend.

The anointing of Jesus by the Spirit, and in and through Him of
His ministers, is especially that they should preach the Gospel to
the poor. This means, first, that they should preach a message
from God respecting redemption and sanctification and eternal life,
which the very poor and the uneducated can not only understand,
but are in a better position to receive than the rich and educated,
because they are better able to apprehend it in its simplicity ;
secondly, it means that the poor, who have little of this world’s
comforts, and very much of its privations, should have the offer of
a complete reversal of their state in the eternal world, so that they
who have received here evil things, if they be true to God and to
Christ, should be eternally comforted.

But we are also to remember that the word in the Hebrew for
‘““poor”’ also signifies meek and lowly in heart. And the meek
only, the poor in heart only, can effectually receive a Gospel which
humbles whilst it exalts—humbles on earth, and with respect to all
earthly things, whilst it exalts to heaven.

“He hath sent me to heal the brokenhearted.’’ Not only to
apply to those broken hearted through the sense of sin the consola-
tion of the Gospel, but to comfort every heart broken through loss
of property, loss of reputation, loss of friends and dear relatives,
with the glorious hopes of that future when God shall wipe away
all tears from all eyes.

“To preach deliverance to the captives.’ So that being made free
from sin, which is the worst of bondage, they should be the children
of Him Whose service is “‘ perfect freedom.”

‘And recovering of sight to the blind.”” So that they who were
blind to the light of God’s truth should even see God, should ‘‘ endure
as seeing Him Who is invisible.”

“To set at liberty them that are bruised.”’ This, in its spiritual
I114 ALL BARE HIM WITNESS. [Sr. Luxe.

19 To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.

90 And he closed the book, and he gave i# again to the
minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all them that were
in the synagogue were fastened on him.

91 And he began to say unto them, This day is this
scripture fulfilled in your ears.

: Pees 99, And all bare him witness, and "wondered at

Mark vi. 2.
ch. ii. 47.

 

significance, seems something different to the emancipation of the
captives just mentioned. Bede and, after him, Didacus Stella,
interpret it as deliverance from the galling chain of the Jewish
ceremonial law—a yoke which, according to St. Peter, ‘“‘neither he
nor his fathers were able to bear.”’ All false opinions of God and
His ways, however, at first men may freely accept them, and take
to them, and glory in them, become in time galling, bruising, un-
bearable fetters. What a yoke, for instance, has that view of God’s
dealings, popularly called Calvinism, become to thousands upon
thousands of Christians once nurtured in it!

‘To preach the acceptable year of the Lord.” The acceptable
year, 2.e., the time in which God will accept men. This is, of
course, the whole Christian time or dispensation. Now—now till
Christ comes to judge,—now is the time when every sinner is
invited to receive the Gospel, and be saved.

Some have thought from this that the Lord’s ministry was only
for one year; but such literalness is alien to the whole Gospel
narrative.

Something of the former sort we may reverently assume was the
evangelical meaning of this prophecy which the Lord set forth when

21. “He began to say unto them, This day is this scripture ful-
filled in your ears.”” Mark how He passed over unnoticed every
former fulfilment, and called attention to that only which He
Himself brought about.

22. “And all. bare him witness, and wondered at the gracious
words,” &c. The reader will remember the words of the Psalmist:
‘‘Full of grace are thy lips, because God hath blessed thee for
ever.”

Note the description of the Lord’s speaking “ gracious words,”
not merely words of wisdom or of power, but words of grace. AndCuar. IV.] IS NOT THIS JOSEPH’S son ? ES

the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth. And
they said, ‘Is not this J oseph’s son P

23 And he said unto them, Ye will surely say
unto me this proverb, Physician, heal thyself :
whatsoever we have heard done in
do also here in "thy country.

s John vi, 42.

* Capernaum, t Matt, iv. 18,
& Xi, 23

5 2B

u Matt. xiii.
24 And he said, Verily I say unto JOUeNO mye

* prophet is accepted in his own country. Fae ee i

John iv, 44,

 

23. ‘In Capernaum.” So ALS Rett... Gr es K., M., other later Uncials, al

most all
Cursives. ‘* For” or “to Capernaum” in &, B., D., ie

four Cursives (13, 69, 124, 346).

well may they have been such if they were an application of the
words of the Evangelical prophet which He had just read. And
note, also, that He stops short of the last words, ‘‘the day of ven-
geance of our God,” as if on this first offer of salvation to His
countrymen, He spake words of invitation only—words of mercy,
not of judgment.
~ And they said, Is not this Joseph’s son?” Their admiration
passes away at once, and turns into criticism. “Is not this the
youth brought up amongst us? Why does He take upon Himself
to teach us, and apply to Himself one of the chiefest prophecies of
our greatest prophet ?”’
* 23. “ And hesaid unto them, Ye will surely say unto me this pro-
verb, Physician,” &c. Thereseemsto be noroomfor doubt respecting
the sense in which the Lord cites this proverb: “ You have healed
strangers, heal your own citizens, heal your own flesh and blood.”
And yet some have taken it to mean, “ Deliver yourself from your
poverty,” or, ‘‘ Assert your Messiahship ”’ by some mighty work.
24, “ And he said, Verily I say unto you, No prophet is accepted,”
&e. It is very hard for those amongst whom a man has been
brought up, to consider him as in any way above themselves. And
in this case especially, for during the time of His sojourn in Naza-
reth—which was before His entrance on His public ministry—He
had done no miracles. In all probability His private life had been
very unobtrusive. It is impossible to suppose that He even
preached, or, on the first recorded occasion of His preaching, they
would not have expressed such astonishment at His words of
grace.a

  

Tilo MANY WIDOWS, MANY LEPERS.  [Sz. Luks.

25 But I tell you of a truth, ’many widows were in Israel
ee in the days of Elias, when the heaven was shut
James v.17. up three years and six months, when great famine

was throughout all the land ;

26 But unto none of them was Elias sent, save unto
Sarepta, a city of Sidon, unto a woman that was a widow.

z 2 Kin. v. 14. 27 * And many lepers were in Israel in the time
of Hliseus the prophet; and none of them was cleansed,
saving Naaman the Syrian.

28 And all they in the synagogue, when they heard these
things, were filled with wrath,

29 And rose up, and thrust him out of the city, and led
| Or, edge. him unto the || brow of the hill whereon their city
was built, that they might cast him down headlong.

 

25, 26, 27. ‘But I tell you of a truth, many widows were in
Israel ... Naaman the Syrian.” LEHlijah and Elisha were both
Israelites, and yet Hlijah, in the time of famine, supported by his
miraculous power but one widow, and she not of the chosen
people, but a Gentile: and Elisha healed but one leper, and he a
Syrian. Elijah could have supported all the widows who would
have asked his help, Elisha could have healed every leper; but
because of unbelief none came to claim the exercise of the power
which God had given to them.

And so it was with the Nazarenes: ‘‘ He could do no mighty
works there, because of their unbelief.”

But there can be little or no doubt that the Lord in these
words looks far beyond Nazareth and Capernaum. We cannot
butsee in them the casting away of the Jews through unbelief, and
the call of the Gentiles. The Jews put away from themselves the
message of salvation: in the words of the Apostle, they ‘held
themselves unworthy of eternal life,” and God, through His Church,
‘*‘ turned to the Gentiles.”’

28, .29. “And all they in the synagogue, when they heard these
things, were filled with wrath.” What an inconceivably rapid
change from ‘‘ bearing Him witness,” and “ wondering at His words
of grace,” to anger and persecuting hate, which made them thirst
for His Blood. We must remember that what intensified theirCuar. IV.| HIS WORD WAS WITH POWRR. ee

30 But he *passing through the midst of them went his
way, @ John viii. 59.
& x. 39.

b .
31 And came down to Capernaum, a city of » Matt. iv. 13.

Galilee, and taught them on the sabbath days. poner
32 And they were astonished at his doctrine:
“for his word was with power. c Matt. vii. 28,

29. Titusii. 15.

persecuting rage, was their familiarity with Him in times past.
That one whom they had known familiarly as a child, and as a
workman in a carpenter’s shop, should take to Tec a leading
prophecy of {saiah, should not only call Himself a prophet, but
cite the examples of Elijah and Elisha, to show that if they rejected
Him, it was to their own inconceivable loss and peril, was more
than they could bear, and so they

29. “* Rose up, and thrust him out of the city .. . might cast him
down headlong.” The place of this attempted murder seems
clearly capable of identification. ‘‘ Nazareth spreads itself out
upon the eastern face of a mountain, where there is a perpendicular
wall of rock from forty to fifty feet high.”

30. “ But he passing through the midst of them, went his way.”
Some believing commentators deny that there was anything mira-
culous about this. One of them (Godet) writes: ‘‘ The deliverance
of Jesus was neither a miracle nor an escape; He passed through
the group of these infuriated people, with a majesty which over-
awed them.” But ifit was His majestic appearance or bearing that
overawed them, why did not this same majestic appearance prevent
their thrusting Him out of the city, and ignominiously hustling
Him till they came to the brow of the hill? The power of suddenly
changing a meek and defenceless demeanour into one so overpower-
ingly majestic that it overawed a brutal and bloodthirsty mob,
either belongs to the sphere of the miraculous, or is a piece of stage
acting, which we scarcely dare to name in connection with the
Lord, but must do so if it is imputed to Him.

31. “And came down to Capernaum, a city of Galilee...
with power.” Notice how St. Luke, writing his Gospel for distant
Gentile churches, explains that Capernaum, which from its size and
importance must have been well known to dwellers in the Holy
Land, was ‘‘a city of Galilee.”

‘‘His word was with power.’’ Not merely with power in the118 A SPIRIT OF AN UNCLEAN DEVIL. [Sr. Luks.

. athie h
30 4° And in the synagogue there was a man, which had
4 Marki. 23. a spirit of an unclean devil, and cried out with
a loud yoice,

 

sense of incisiveness and directness of appeal to the conscience, but
commended to their acceptance by such works of power, as those
which follow.

33. “‘ And in the synagogue there was a man which had a spirit
of an unclean devil.” The account of this miracle is to be found in
St. Mark, but not in St. Matthew. It was probably not contained
in the body of tradition usually preached, but was peculiar to the
preaching of St. Peter; the miracle having taken place before St.
Matthew and the greater part of the apostles were called to follow
Jesus. Certain small differences seem to forbid us to believe that
St. Luke copied it from St. Mark. He probably took it down from
the lips of St. Peter himself.

“ Which had a spirit of an unclean devil.” St. Mark speaks of
the man as “having an unclean spirit.” St. Luke as “a man
which had a spirit of an unclean devil,” thereby emphasizing the
fact that the devil was the source of uncleanness, having probably
in the first instance tempted the man through the lust of un-
cleanness.

With respect to demoniacal possession, I have given a short
excursus on it in the end of my commentary on St. Mark, and must
refer the reader to that.

I would here remark that every account of our Lord’s casting evil
spirits out of men, implies that he looked upon possession by them
as areal thing, very different from the usual forms of madness or
insanity. He gives the apostles and disciples power to cast out devils
(Luke ix.1.) In Mark ix. 29, he distinguishes a certain kind as
not yielding to ordinary forms of exorcism, but as going out only
by prayer and fasting. In Luke xi. 21, he refers the subjection of
the devils to His disciples (the seventy), to the fact that He had
seen “ Satan as lightning fall from heaven.”

With respect to the fact that instances of demoniacal possession
were much more common in the time of our Lord, than either be-
fore or after, Godet asks: ‘‘ Are there not times when God permits
a superior evil power to invade humanity ? Just as God sent Jesus

at a period in history when moral and social evil had reached itsCuar. IV.] LET US ALONE. 119

34 Saying, || Let ws alone; what have we to do with thee,
thow Jesus of Nazareth? art thou come to destroy | Or Away.
us? °I know thee who thou art; ‘the Holy One : eee
of God. pan ms 24,

34, “Saying.” So A., C., D., later Uncials, all Cursives, Ital., Vulg., Goth., Syriac,
&c.; but omitted by & B., L., and Coptic.
culminating point, did not He also permit an extraordinary mani-
festation of diabolical power at the same time? By this means
Jesus could be proclaimed externally and visibly as the conqueror
of the enemy of men, as He Who came to destroy the works of the
devil, in the moral sense of the word.” (1 John iii. 8.)

Upon possession by unclean spirits, Quesnel remarks: ‘‘ He who
has his soul possessed by uncleanness is far more miserable than he
whose body only was heretofore possessed by a devil. An unchaste
person appears to the eyes of the mind much more demoniac than
any other sinner. Our having so little abliorrence of such is a sign
that we are not yet in a capacity to judge well of the opposition
there is betwixt the Spirit of God and the unclean spirit, betwixt
grace and sin.”

34. ‘Saying, Let us alone; what have we to do with thee, thou
Jesus of Nazareth?” Notice how the presence of the All-Holy dis-
turbed and distracted the unholy being. Andis not this a parable ?
Those who live in criminal pleasure cannot endure that anyone
should disturb their miserable peace. At times I have noticed the
impure studiously avoid the company of the good, though there was
no chance of their receiving rebuke from them.

‘“T know thee who thou art.” Some commentators (amongst
them Williams) have thought that these words imply on the part
of the evil spirits, some late reception of the knowledge that Jesus
was the Messiah, and they suppose that at the temptation the Lord
was manifested to the unseen spiritual world as its Judge and King ;
but is it not most likely that all purely spiritual existences have a
knowledge of one another by a sort of intuition which those in the
flesh cannot have?

‘The Holy One of God.” He spoke of Him not as a holy one
of God, as if He were like to the other saints, but as being in a re-
markable manner the Holy One (with the addition of the article).
For He is by nature holy, by partaking of Whom all others are
called holy.120 HOLD THY PEACE. (Sr. Luxe.

380 And Jesus rebuked him, saying, Hold thy peace, and
come out of him. And when the devil had thrown him in
the midst, he came out of him, and hurt him not.

36 And they were all amazed, and spake among them-
selves, saying, What a word is this! for with authority and
power he commandeth the unclean spirits, and they come out.

37 And the fame of him went out into every place of the
country round about.

& Matt.viii.14. 38 4 ® And he arose out of the synagogue, and
Mark i. 29. : “py

entered into Simon’s house. And Simon’s wife’s
mother was taken with a great fever; and they besought him
for her.

 

35. “And Jesus rebuked him, saying, Hold thy peace, and come
out of him.” By this He both refused to receive testimony to His
Godhead from these evil spirits, and yet evinced His Divine power
over them by expelling them, not by some laboured process, or
doubtful form of exorcism, but by a single word. ‘‘And when the
devil had thrown him in the midst, he came out of tiara a re
Here was exhibited the power of Christ, that this lagt and fiercest
effort of the despairing spirit to destroy his victim was harmless.
The words “and hurt him not” reproduce in a striking manner
the impression of eye-witnesses: they ran towards the unhappy
man expecting to find him dead, and to their surprise on lifting him
up they found him not the least injured by the violent paroxysm.

06. “And they were all amazed, and spake among themselves,
saying, What a word is this!” They probably compared the short,
decisive, and irresistible command of the Lord with the feeble, and
in most cases, abortive exorcisings of those amongst them who
attempted to cast out evil spirits.

38-39. ** And he arose out of the synagogue... ministered unto
them.” The healing of Peter’s wife’s mother is given to us by the
three Synoptics. The speciality of St. Luke’s’ account is that the
Lord stood over her and rebuked the fever, using the same expression,
“rebuked,” as when he gives the account of the Lord casting out the
evil spirit. It is to be noticed how often this word is used when it
cannot be understood of moral rebuke of intelligent creatures.
Thus He rebukes not only the evil spirits, but “the winds and
waves,’ as if in all evil things he discerned an evil intelligenceCuar. IV.] HE STOOD OVER HER. Pa

39 And he stood over her, and rebuked the fever ; and it
left her: and immediately she arose and ministered unto
them.

40) 4 * Now when the sun was setting, all they » Matt. viii. 16.
that had any sick with divers diseases brought Mk
them unto him; and he laid his hands on every one of them,
and healed them. :

 

behind the physical evil, as if he knew or recognized not dead
laws, but evil spirits who worked in or under them. Thus he
speaks of a woman who had an infirmity, that ‘‘ Satan had bound
her these thirty years.”

St. Luke speaks of the fever as a great fever, and it is thought by
some that this expression is technical, and used by St. Luke the phy-
sician as denoting that the fever belonged to a particular class; but
it is best to understand it as describing a strong or malignant disease.

St. Luke also emphazises the fact that the cure was not only
instantaneous, but so was the restoration to perfect strength.
‘*Immediately she arose and ministered unto them ”’—teaching us
that those whom the Lord raises from the fever and weakness of in-
dulged passions may be instantly able to serve Him. In fact, their
beginning in some way to serve Christ and his Church is the true
sign of their restoration to spiritual health.

St. Cyril gives the spiritual significance of the miracle when he
writes, ‘‘ Let us therefore receive Jesus. For when He has visited
us we carry Him in our heart and mind. He will then extinguish
the flame of our unlicensed pleasures, and will make us whole, so
that we minister unto Him, that is, do things well-pleasing to Him.”’
[Cyril in Catena Aurea.|

40. ‘“Now when the sun was setting,” &¢. That is, when the
Sabbath was over, when it would be lawful for them to carry the
burdens of the sick bodies.

‘‘ He laid his hands on every one of them.” So that virtue might
be clearly seen to go from His most sacred Person [must we not
say his Body ?] into them. St. Luke alone mentions that on this
occasion He healed them by the laying on of hands. This, con-
sidering the great multitudes, must have much enhanced His labour
and consequent bodily fatigue. Godet has an admirable passage on
this: ‘‘ Whenever Jesus avails Himself of any material means toLZ2 TIE PEOPLE SOUGHT HIM. (Sr. Luxe.

4] *And devils also came out of many, crying out, and
i Marki.34. saying, Thou art Christ the Son of God. And
mi 1 oe
k Marki.25, “he rebuking them suffered them not || to speak:
‘ yer. 34, 35. ees
pee for they knew that he was Christ.
| Or, to say J
that they knew
him to be
Christ.
1 Mark i. 38.

42 And when it was day, he departed and went
into a desert place: and the people sought him,
and came unto him, and stayed him, that he should
not depart from them.

43 And he said unto them, I must preach the kingdom of
God to other cities also: for therefore am I sent.

m Mark i. 39. 44" And he preached in the synagogues of
Galilee.

Pe ewuhou art Christ... So) Au. later Uncials, most Cursives, some old Latin, Goth.,
Syriac, Ath. “Christ” omitted by &, B., C., D., F., L., three Cursives (33, 180, 220),
old Latin, Vulg., Copt., Arm., &c.

43. “Other ;” “the other,” Revisers.

44. “‘ Synagogues of Galilee.” So A., D., later Uncials, old Latin, Vulg., Goth., Syriac,
&c.; but 8, B., C., L., a few Cursives, Copt., Syriac, read, ‘‘ Judea.”

work a cure, whether it be the sound of His voice, or clay made of
His spittle, His aim is to establish, in the form best adapted to the
particular case, a personal tie between the sick person and Himself;
for He desires not only to heal, but to effect a restoration to God,
by creating in the consciousness of the sick, a sense of union with
Himself, the organ of Divine grace in the midst of mankind.”

42. “ And when it was day he departed,” &e.... “ preached in
the synagogue of Galilee.” St. Mark is much more circumstantial
in his relation of what took place : according to him the Lord rose
up early and departed into a desert place to pray, and He was fol-
lowed by Peter, and “they that were with him,” who told Him of
the eagerness of the multitude to hear him, and of their desire that
He should not leave them.

“Therefore am I sent.” His first work in order of time was
preaching, not that it was greater than His Atoning work on the
Cross, but because preaching presses upon men the acceptance of
the things of the Kingdom of God, introduces it, explains what it is,

and prepares men to receive it.Cuar. V.] TWO SHIPS. 123

CHEERS Ni.

ND *it came to pass, that, as the people pressed upon
him to hear the word of God, he stood by Matt. iv. 18.
Mark i. 16.
the lake of Gennesaret,
2 And saw two ships standing by the lake: but the fisher-
men were gone out of them, and were washing their nets.

 

2. ‘Two ships.” So, B., D., most later Uncials, most Cursives, old Latin, Vulg
but A., E., L., five or six Cursives (1, 33, 40, 53, 237, 259), read “ little ships.”

°F

1-4. ‘And it came to pass, that, as the people pressed upon him
to hear the word of God... taught the people out of the ship.’ It
is very difficult indeed to come to any decision respecting the
question, Is this the same call of Apostles which is mentioned in
Matthew iv. 18, and Mark i. 16-20?

First we will note the differences. St. Matthew and St. Mark
say nothing about the multitudes who were pressing upon Him to
hear the word of God. On the contrary, we should gather from
this account that the Lord was alone. In St. Luke the fishermen
were gone out of the boat. In St. Matthew they were casting their
net into the sea. According to St. Luke, He entered into one of
the ships and taught the people out of it. Of this nothing is said
in St. Matthew. In St. Luke’s account, having finished teaching,
the Lord ordered them to launch out into the deep ; of this we have
nothing in the other two Synoptics. St. Luke alone gives the
words of St. Peter: ‘‘ We have toiled all night and have taken
nothing,” whereas St. Matthew and St. Mark, as we have seen,
represent that they were then casting their net into the sea. St.
Luke alone mentions what follows, the immense draught of fishes,
the breaking of the net, the calling for help to their partners, the
sinking of the boat, the words of St. Peter, ‘“‘ Depart from me,” &e.
The words of Christ are quite different in each case, and correspond

to the different cireumstances. In St. Matthew the brethren were
simply fishing, nothing being said of their success, and the Lord
calls them to be fishers of men; but in St. Luke’s account they had’
actually caught an overwhelming number, and the Lord says to124 LAUNCH OUT INTO THE DEEP. (Sr. Luxe.

38 And he entered into one of the ships, which was Simon’s,
and prayed him that he would thrust out a little from the
land. And he sat down, and taught the people out of the
ship.

4 Now when he had left speaking, he said unto Simon,
» John xxi.6. ° Launch out into the deep, and let down your
nets for a draught.

 

Peter alone, the caster in of the net, ‘From henceforth thou shalt
catch (or take alive) men.”

The accounts then are almost totally different, and we should all,
I think, pronounce them to refer to two different callings: but the
difficulty of this is that the conclusion of each is the same, which
is the final renunciation of “all” on the part of the four to follow
the Lord. It is asked, How can this have oceurred twice? I grant
the difficulty, but nevertheless, I assert that such a first and then a
second and final forsaking is not at all unlikely.

First, then, they all four knew the Lord previously, having been
directed to Him by the Baptist. He then very probably spoke to
them about following Him, and to some extent they did, for they
were with Him at the Marriage Feast in Cana, and during part of
His ministry in Jerusalem. After this came the call whilst they
were fishing, recorded in St. Matthew and St. Mark; they then
began to follow Him more closely, but, perhaps, with fears about
their livelihood. He set before them no means of employment
whereby they might be sustained ; so taking into account that even
after the Resurrection they went back to their boats and fishing, it
may be that after some slight separation they returned again to
their occupation. But now at last the miracle of the overwhelming
draught beyond measure humbled and overawed them. There
must be no further hesitation, no further looking back: and so they
forsook not their nets only, as is mentioned by St. Matthew and St.
Mark, but all besides, as we have in our Evangelist.

4-6. “ Now when he had left speaking ... net brake.” Many of
the older commentators notice how this shows that the Lord would
be no man’s debtor. Simon had let Him have the use of his ship
as a pulpit, from which to preach the Word of God, and now He
rewards him with the immense haul; but had we not rather concen-
trate our view on the miracle which follows as addressed to theCuapr. V.] WE HAVE TOILED ALL NIGHT. 25

©» And Simon answering said unto him, Master, we have
toiled all the night, and have taken nothing :
thy word I will let down the net.

6 And when they had this done, they inclosed a great
multitude of fishes: and their net brake.

nevertheless at

faculty of faith in Simon and his companions? As the star was to
the Magi, so was this to the Apostles. It met them in the work of
their daily calling, and convinced them that He Who had such
power to fill their net after they had toiled all night in vain, must
be One in Whom they could put entire trust for their future, whether
in this world or in the next.

5. “* Master, we have toiled all the night, and have taken nothing :
nevertheless at thy word I will,” &e. This is not the answer of
despondency, but of faith. It is to be remembered that St. Peter
had been a witness of the turning of the water into wine, and
perhaps of many other miracles in the Lord’s ministry in Judea,
and his own wife’s mother had been healed in his house. In faith,
then, that something great would happen, he said, “At thy word I
will let down the net.”

6. “‘ And when they had this done, they inclosed a great multitude
of fishes,” &c. Was this a miracle of creative power, or of knowledge,
or of the two combined ? If the Lord had created new fish it would
have been the first; but there is no reason to suppose this, as the
lake swarmed with fish. Was it then a miracle of knowledge, He
being aware that there was in that part of the lake into which they
cast their nets at that moment a vast shoal of fish? This, though
not impossible, is unlikely, for they had apparently been fishing in
that part without success, and the usual time for taking fish was
then past. It was most probably a work of power and knowledge
combined. He brought within the reach of their nets a shoal which
was not there before, or quick-sighted fishermen would have seen
the indication of it.

The following is from Tristram’s ‘‘ Natural History of the Bible.”
‘* The thickness of the shoals of fish in the lake of Gennesareth is

almost incredible to anyone who has not witnessed them. They often
cover an area of more than an acre, and when the fish move slowly
forward in a mass, and are rising out of the water, they are packed
so close together that it appears as if a heavy rain was beating126 THEY BEGAN TO SINK. [Sx. Luke,

7 And they beckoned unto their partners, which were in the
other ship, that they should come and help them. And they
came, and filled both the ships, so that they began to sink.

 

down on the surface of the water.” It is plain, then, that the Lord
by His power brought such a shoal from the depths within reach of
St. Peter’s net: for if it had come naturally he or his comrades
would have discerned it afar off, and there would have been no
miracle in their eyes.

“And their net brake,” (7) “And they beckoned .. . began to
sink.”’ The breaking of the nets and the beginning of the ships to
sink are parables. The first betokens the destruction of discipline,
owing to the numbers of men of all sorts, good and bad, that are
taken in the net of the Church. The second symbolizes a worse
evil by far. It is the depressing and destructive effect of the world
which has been received into the Church, which threatens to over-
whelm it, and if Christ were not in the boat, would do so.

The first, the want of discipline, leads to the second. The dis-
cipline of the Church is its way of asserting publicly that those
who belong to a holy company should be holy, and if the Church is
unable to do this, she is wanting in her principal witness against
sin, and so the world within her asserts itself in its lawlessness and
impurity, and self-will, and irreligion, and unless God interfere by
His own sharp discipline she sinks. But, to take our own case, is it
possible to exclude from the Church of England the world which
has for centuries been within its pale, and well nigh ruled it? It
Seems impossible. No disestablishment, no disendowment, no
possible political or ecclesiastical movement would effect it. Must
then the Church sink? No, the remedy is in its true members—all

those who realize it as the mystical body of Christ, exercising dis-
cipline over themselves, exercising self-denial, labouring incessantly,
“ reproving, rebuking, exhorting with all long-suffering.” It is a
token for good that there has been such a revival of effective dis-
cipline among the clergy, so that those who disgrace their holy
calling are so much more easily removed or punished. And we
must remember that the word in the original is not to be sunk, as
if the action was completed, but ‘begin to sink.” The
always in danger, both from without
safety is in those who are aware of its

Church is
and from within, and its
constant state of peril, cryingCuap. V.] DEPART FROM MB. 27

8 When Simon Peter saw ut, he fell down at Jesus’ knees,
saying, ° Depart from me; for] am a sinful man, ¢2sam. vig,
O Lord. cae ee

9 For he was astonished, and all that were with him, at
the draught of the fishes which they had taken:

10 And go was also J ames, and John, the gongs of Zebedee,
which were partners with Simon. And J esus said unto
Simon, Fear not; 4 from henceforth ¢]

thou shalt 4 Matt. iv. 19.
: Mark i. 17.
catch men.

 

incessantly to the Lord that He would raise up His power and come
and help us, and in His creat might succour us.

8. “When Simon Peter saw it,... Iam asinful man, O Lord.”
In these words we have the first feelings of sinful man, when he
realizes the presence of God. It is the sum and confession of his
own uncleanness, and the unutterable holiness of Him Who has
revealed it. We may compare it with the words of Job: “T have
heard of thee with the hearing of the ear, but now mine eye seeth
thee ; therefore, I abhor myself” (Job xlii. 5, 6), or with those of
Isaiah, ‘‘ Woe is me, for I am undone, because I am a man of
unclean lips . . . mine eyes have seen the King, the Lord of Hosts.”
Such is the natural and appropriate feeling for those who know and
realize God’s holiness, and yet know not the way of reconciliation
and the fulness of Divine grace in Him who has opened it for us.
Thus, when Peter knew something of this, his “ Depart from me”
is changed into “'To whom shall we go? thou hast the words of
eternal life.”’

J. “For he was astonished, and all that were with him
taken.” Unless it was clearly a miracle, he would not have been
thus overwhelmed with awe. And being a fisherman, he was the
best judge. It is clear from his unbounded astonishment, and that
of his partners, that nothing like it had occurred in their experiences
on the lake.

10. “And so was also ... from henceforth thou shalt catch
men.” ‘hou shalt not only be a fisher of men, but shalt catch
them, and not only catch them, but catch or take them alive. Tt
means, *‘ Thou shalt catch them not for death, but for life.” Those
whom the Gospel net catches are slain, it is true, to the world, but at
the same time they are raised to a far higher, because a spiritual life.laitemtemmanen —

128 A MAN FULL OF LEPROSY. (St. Lure.

11 And when they had brought their ships to land, ° they

e Matt.iv.20, forsook all, and followed him.

& xix. 27. Mark f 2 :

i. 18, ch. xviii. 12 ‘And it came to pass, when he was in a
28. ae

? Matt. viii,2, certain city, behold a man full of leprosy: who

Mark i. 40.

 

11. “And when they had brought their ships to land, .. .
followed him.” In St. Matthew’s and St. Mark’s account, the ships
are already brought to land, and in the one case the nets only, in
the other “‘ their father Zebedee, with the ship and hired servants,”
were left: now it is ‘“‘all’’—they forsook all. Are not then the
accounts in the two first Synoptics those of a different event to this,
and this in St. Luke the final call, after which they never resumed
their first occupation ?

12. ‘‘ And it came to pass, when he was in a certain city,” &c.
It is worthy of remark that though all the three Synoptics give the
account of the instantaneous cleansing of the leper, yet in not one
is the place where it occurred named. The name of the place had
evidently dropped out of the memory of the Apostles. St. Luke’s
remark that it took place in a certain city, is also worthy of notice.
The leper, whose proper place was without the walls, seems to have
penetrated, perhaps surreptitiously, into the city, to come near the
Lord. It may be, however, that the Lord was passing the quarter
assigned to these miserable men. Dr. Thomson, in his work “ The
Land and the Book,” has a ‘most terribly graphic account of his
straying by accident into the quarter assigned to the lepers in the
city of Jerusalem: “‘ Sauntering down the Jaffa road, I was startled
out of my reverie by the sudden apparition of a crowd of beggars.
They held up towards me their handless arms, unearthly sounds
gurgled through throats without palates.” And in describing the
beginning and progress of the disorder, he writes: ‘“‘New-born
children of leprous parents are often as pretty and as healthy in
appearance as any, but by-and-by its presence and working become
visible in some of the signs described in the 13th chapter of
Leviticus. The ‘scab’ comes on by degrees in different parts of
the body; the hair falls from the head and eyebrows; the nails
loosen, decay and drop off; joint after joint of the fingers and toes
shrink up and slowly fall away. The gums are absorbed and the
teeth disappear. The nose, the eyes, the tongue, and the palate are
slowly consumed, and finally the wretched victim sinks into theCuar. V.] LORD IF THOU WILT. 129

seeing Jesus fell on his face, and besought hin, saying, Lord,
if thou wilt, thou canst make me clean.

 

earth and disappears, while medicine hag no power to stay the
ravages of this fell disease, or even to mitigate sensibly its tortures ”
(p. 634).

To the sentence of exclusion pronounced on the leper in Levit.
xiul. 45, Rabbinism, ever exaggerating every seemingly harsh pre-
cept, ever merciless in binding heavy unendurable burdens, added
still more to make the leper’s lot intolerable. No one was even to
salute him. If he even put his head into a place it became unclean.
No less a distance than four cubits (six feet) must be kept from a
leper: or if the wind came from that direction a hundred were
scarcely sufficient. One would eat nothing purchased in a street
where there was a leper. Another boasted that he threw stones at
them to keep them afar off—Edersheim (chap. xv.)—who also well
remarks, ‘‘ We can judge by the healing of this leper of the impres-
sion which the Saviour had made upon the people. He would
have fled from a rabbi: he came in lowliest attitude of entreaty to
Jesus.”

“Fell on his face, and besought him, saying, Lord, if thou wilt,
thou canst,” &¢. In my St. Mark I noticed how this suppliant could
not have addressed the Lord differently, if he had believed in His
Godhead. Let us add one or two remarks which we have there left
unsaid.

1. The leprosy was held to be, as indeed it was, incurable, except
by Divine power. ‘‘AmTI God,” exclaims a king of Israel, ‘to kill
and to make alive, that this man doth send unto me to recover a
man of his leprosy?” (2 Kings v. 7.) For this man to kneel to
Jesus, and say to Him, “If Thou wilt, Thou art able,” was to
ascribe to Him the power of God. Whether he believed that that
power resided in Him as the Son of God, or as the Messiah, the
especial Messenger sent by God, we need not now inquire. Any-
how, he believed that the Lord’s power of healing extended to a
disease which all his nation believed incurable, except by the finger
of God.

2, ‘This prayer of this unknown outcast of an unknown city, is
the very type of the prayer of faith. It is the outcome of intense
faith, recognizing more fully than any other prayer addressed. to
Jesus, the Lord’s power ; and yet it bows before the Lord’s will, as
K130 I Will: BE THOU CLEAN. [Sx. Luxe.

13 And he put forth ms hand, and touched him, saying,
I will: be thou clean. And immediately the leprosy departed

from hin.
x Matt. viii. 4. 14 ®And he charged him to tell no man: but

go, and shew thyself to the priest, and offer for

13. “Be thou clean.” ‘* Be thou made clean,” Revisers.

being the will of a wise as well as of a good Being, Who in this
present state of things, sets bounds to the benevolent exercise of
His omnipotence, and permits fearful evils to afflict those created in
God’s image. His prayer is humble, plain, and full of confidence
in God, Who can do all things, and of dependence upon His will,
which orders all things well. It is peculiar to God alone, that He
need only will what He intends to perform. His power is His
will. It is because He wills it, that thereby He effects all, both in
nature and grace.

13. “And he put forth his hand, and touched him, saying, I will:
be thou clean.” The Lord, as we have noticed all through this com-
mentary, if possible, brings His Body into contact with the bodies
of those whom He heals, thereby to certify to them and to us that
His very Body overflows with healing life and power, and He makes
no exception even in the case of lepers whom it was pollution to
touch. But His Sacred Body receives no pollution from the un-
cleanness even of the leprous body. On the contrary, the pollution
fices before it. As soon as it touches it finds the flesh pure, for it was
the outward and visible sign of the Divine Will which accompanied
it. (See passage from Chrysostom in my Notes on St. Mark.)

‘ST will: be thou clean.” If thou wilt. I will. The answer
was instantaneous. All Christ’s miracles are revelations also.
Sometimes, when the circumstances of the case required it, He de-
layed His answer to a sufferer’s prayer. But we are never told that
there waS a moment’s pause when a leper cried to Him. Leprosy
was an acknowledged type of sin, and Christ would teach us that
the heartfelt prayer of the sinner to be purged and cleansed is always
met by instantaneous acceptance.

14. “And he charged him to tellnoman.” Hither that He might
not be hindered in His spiritual ministry by men crowding about
Him to be healed of bodily diseases, or rather, perhaps, to prevent
the priests at Jerusalem from refusing to certify that the man wasCuap. V.] HE WITHDREW HIMSELF. 131

thy cleansing, “according as
mony unto them.

15 But so much the mor
abroad of him: ‘ and ere
gether to hear, and to be
infirmities.

Moses commanded, for a testi-

h Ley. xiy, 4,
e went there a fame ~7°»
at multitudes came to- i Matt. iv. 25,
healed by him of their uae

16 ¥ * And he withdrew himself into the wilder- Me xiv. 23.
ark yi, 46,
ness, and prayed.
17 And it came to pass on

ing

a certain day, as he was teach.
g, that there were Ph

arisees and doctors of the law sitting
es

cleansed when they heard that the word of Jesus

was the occasion
of his cleansing. They

are to see him and pronounce him clean
before they hear of the means which brought it about.

* For a testimony unto them.” May mean either for a testimony
of My power even over leprosy, or for a testimony that in all things
I desire that the law of Moses should be ol

16. “ And he withdrew himself into the wilderness, and prayed.”

How was it that when the Lord was doing so much good (for it is
said “‘eveat multitudes came together both to hear and to be
healed”) He withdrew Himself? We may answer in the words of
Quesnel : “It is for the advantage of souls, as well as of ministers,
that these [ministers] should be absent from those for a time. To
speak to God on behalf of souls is not to forsake them. It is the
most effectual way of serving them for a man to purify himself by
retirement, that he may serve them the better, and replenish him-
self with God and His truths ; that so he may dispense them in
greater abundance, and after a more holy manner.”

This place shows us the need, if possible, of retirement for
prayer. The Son of God was always in communion with His
Father: yet it may be that even His perfectly holy human Soul was,
like ours, distracted by the presence and the importunity of the
multitudes, and so not on this occasion only, but continually He
sought retirement.

17. “ And it came to pass on a certain day ... . presentto heal
them.” We gather from this that the growing fame of the Lord’s
miracles and teaching had thoroughly excited the fear of these
teachers of false tradition, who now realized that if the Lord’s

beyed,3 A MAN TAKEN WITH A PALSY. [Sr. Luxe.

by, which were come out of every town of Galilee, and

Judea, and Jerusalem: and the power of the Lord was

present to heal them.

1 Matt. ix. 2. 18 4! And, behold, men brought in a bed a man

ae which was taken with a palsy: and they sought
means to bring him in, and to lay hum before him.

 

spiritual doctrine became known it would supersede and destroy
theirs. So even in these comparatively remote parts they were
present in force amongst His hearers for the purpose of cavilling and
opposing.

“Present to healthem.” Not, of course, the Pharisees and doctors,
for they would be the last to come in faith to be healed, but the
multitude.

18. “And, behold, men broughtin a bed a man which was taken
with a palsy,” &¢. I have commented very fully in my Notes on St.
Mark on this miracle, since that Evangelist gives the circumstances
more fully. In these notes I shall have principally in view its
evangelical and practical import.

First of all let us notice the genuineness of the faith of those who
brought the man in—that it overcame all difficulties. The house,
which was probably a good-sized square building erected round a
court, was so crowded, both in the room where the Lord was teach-
ing, the court-yard, and all about the doors, that there was no possi-
bility of entrance, especially for four persons bearing the sick man
on his pallet. Then there would be a natural fear that the crowds
who were eagerly listening would resent the interruption, and per-
haps some apprehension also that the great Teacher Himself would
not approve of so apparently untimely an approach; but they
knew that the Lord could heal, they knew that He never sent any
away unblessed from His presence, and their faith made them
determined to come at Him. If Jewish houses were then like what
they are now this must have been a matter of much trouble, for
we are told that the houses of the Holy Land have flat roofs.
Dr. Robinson thus describes their construction :-—* First, large
beams, at intervals of several feet, then rude joists, on which again
are arranged small poles close together, or brushwood, or, as in this
case, slabs of tile or dried clay underneath, and over this a thickCuap. V.] WHEN HE SAW THEIR FAITH, 133

19 And when they could not find by what way they might
bring him in because of the multitude, they went upon the

housetop, and let him down through the tiling with his couch
into the midst before J eSus.

20 And when he saw their faith,

he said unto him, Man,
thy sins are forgiven thee.

compost of earth or gravel, on the top of which er
stows, on which goats browse.”
covering would be a work of labour, so as not to interfere with the
structure of the house. Of course this forced entrance through the

roof must have taken place by the permission or connivance of the
owner.

ass sometimes
One sees how to remove such a

So that their faith was one which oy
and not unreasonable apprehension
commended it by rewarding it.

ercame outward difficulties,
, and so the Lord “saw ” it and

This faith, too, was exerted not for
their own benefit, but on behalf of another. And should not we have

something of this faith in bringing not only our own spiritual wants,
but those of others to the feet of the Lord? Is there anything like
the spirit of Intercessory prayer amongst us that there ought to be?
May we not find out at the last that vastly more good might have
been done both in the world and in the Church if we had prayed and
worked more diligently and faithfully ? Quesnel remarks: « True
friendship consists in taking a friend out of the way of sin and
perdition, in carrying him to Christ, in bringing him into His
house, and in laying him, as it were, before Him, by admonitions,
instructions, reading, and prayers.”
20. “And when he saw their faith,
sins are forgiven thee.”
Lord are to be found ]

he said unto him, Man, thy
No doubt, however, the true words of the
*Y comparing St. Matthew and St. Mark’s
accounts. “ Be of good cheer,” or “Take courage.” “Son, thy sins
be forgiven thee.” It ig noticeable that these words were said on
Seeing the faith of the bearers, but not to them, only to the sick
man. The paralytic then, very probably, had some deep feeling
respecting past sin, which made him afraid even in the presence of
the Great Healer. What was the nature of his fear? Very pro-
bably it arose from the doctrine inculeated by the Rabbinical
teachers that all such bodily infirmities were the punishment of sin
in himself or in his parents (John ix. 2), or connected with this134 WHO CAN FORGIVE SINS ? [Sx. Luxe.

21 ™And the scribes and the Pharisees began to reason,
m Matt.ix.3. saying, Who is this which speaketh blasphemies ?
Mark ii. 6, 7. og 5
n Ps, xxxii, 5, ™ Who can forgive sins, but God alone?

Is, xliii. 25.

 

that his bodily affliction could not be removed unless his sins had
been remitted; and who could do this? To this fear the Lord
addressed himself in the absolving words: ‘“‘ Thy sins be forgiven
thee.” A question has been raised whether the Lord by the words
He uses signifies: “‘ Thy sins are forgiven thee,” 7.e., then, at that
time, through the power of the Lord’s absolving words, or “ Thy
sins have been forgiven thee,” 1.c., at some time of his past life
which the Lord knew, because He knew the history of every man’s
soul. In this last case the Lord’s word would be in no way
absolving, being totally unconnected with the man’s forgiveness,
which had taken place long before.

Now it is as clear as possible that the Lord meant His words to
be absolving, because when the Pharisees objected: ‘“ Who can for-
give sins, but God only ?” instead of disabusing them by saying,
“I merely meant that by My knowledge of men’s past spiritual
history, I know that this man’s sins have been forgiven,’ He says,
“That ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to for-
give.” A plainer claim to exercise by His mere Word the power of
Absolution cannot be imagined.

241. “And the seribes and the Pharisees began to reason .
Who can forgive sins, but God alone?” In my Notes on St. Matthew
I dwelt somewhat on the fact that here we have the most un-
Spiritual men, opposers of Christ to the uppermost, professing to
uphold against Him the sole honour of God, in that God and God
only forgives sin. In asserting this they asserted one side of a
truth, another side of which is that God, Who is invisible, is wont to
dispense the benefits of His kingdom of grace through the lips or the
hands of others. This great principle was asserted partially under the
old dispensation under which these Pharisees and Doctors lived, in
that certain degrees of cleansing and reconciliation were dispensed
by the priests through the blood of sacrifices ; but it was to be much
more fully carried out in that kingdom of grace which Christ was
to maugurate. Init His Apostles were in His absence far more
fully to represent Him than Aaron and his brethren represented
God. Its beginning was, “ As my Father sent me so send I you.”Cuar. V.] WHAT REASON YE? 135

22 But when Jesus perceived their thoughts, he answering
said unto them, What reason ye in your hearts ?

23 Whether is easier, to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee;
or to say, Rise up and walk?

24 But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power
upon earth to forgive sins, (he said unto the sick of the
palsy,) I say unto thee, Arise, and take up thy couch, and
go into thine house.

It contained such promises as, ‘“‘ He that heareth you heareth me.”
‘He that despiseth you despiseth me.” ‘I am with you alway.”
By their hands the Lord was to baptize. By their hands He was
to dispense the Spirit in Confirmation and Ordination. By their
hands He was to feed the faithful with His Body and Blood, and
by their lips He was to absolve. And one of the ways in which He
prepared men to receive this was by claiming to absolve, not as the
Son of God, but as the Son of Man, “‘ That ye may know that the
Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins.”

Let no one then be surprised or moved by hearing even religious
persons speak against the Absolutions of the Church. It is nota
sign of piety or spirituality. It is rather a sign that such persons
know not the Scriptures nor the power of God, they have no
notion of what the Kingdom of God or the Church of Christ really
is; for the Lord has set forth in His Word, in the plainest terms, that
He will exercise that Headship through a ministry set apart to His
service, which will exist and exercise its functions till He comes
again.

22, 28, 24. ‘But when Jesus perceived ... go into thine house.”
The Lord shows them that all He did was in the Name and Power
of God by two signs. First He showed them that He read the
thoughts of their hearts by exposing their secret reasonings that
He was claiming a power in the invisible world to which He had no
right. ‘Ido not claim this power unreasonably, with no sign to
show that what I do is ratified at God’s secret tribunal. On the
contrary, I will work a work on this man’s body, which only God
can bring about, and which, if I were a blasphemer, He would not
permit me to do. I will say to this man ‘ Arise and walk ;’” and
the Lord said this, and His word was with power, for=
nearness peo

136 THEY GLORIFIED GOD. [Sr. Luxe.

25 And immediately he rose up before them, and took up
that whereon he lay, and departed to his own house, glorifying
God.

26 And they were all amazed, and they glorified God, and
were filled with fear, saying, We have seen strange things
to day.

25. “Immediately he rose up before them .... glorifying God.”’
If it be rejoined to what I have said above respecting the power of
Absolution that the ministers of Christ have no right to claim it
except they can prove their right by miracles similar to this, I
answer, No, for such miracles of Christ as this, followed by His
Resurrection, the crowning sign of all, prove not only that He had
Himself power on earth to forgive, but that He had also authority
to inaugurate a system, viz., His Church, and a ministry which
should represent Him and dispense His forgiving and strengthening
grace, not only to sinners during one age when miracles were com-
mon, but to the many generations in which there would be few or
hone. ‘l'o assume to give the Holy Ghost in such a rite as Ordina-
tion or Confirmation, or to feed men with What can with any
propriety be called His Body and His Blood, are cach of them
surely as great, if not greater things, than to pronounce a guarded
Absolution in His Name in which all ultimate power of forgiveness
is reserved to God alone.! [For further discussion of this matter
see my Notes on John xx. 21-23.]

45, 26. ““And immediately he rose up before them.... strange
things to-day.” It was indeed worth while that the Lord should be
interrupted in His preaching if the interruption should be the occa-
sion of a miracle such as this, for it would show the hearers that if

His word was thus with power it must be true, and would all be
fulfilled in its season.

 

 

* Nothing can be more guarded against the idea that the Priest
absolves by his own power than the Absolution in our Service for
the Visitation of the Sick. First, Christ has left this power for
the benefit of those only “who truly repent and believe; then He
Himself is invoked to forgive, “of his great mercy forgive thee
thine offences ;”’ and then the Priest absolves not in his own name,

but “‘in the Name of the Father, and of the Son, and of the Holy
Ghost.”’ :Cnap. V.] FOLLOW ME. 137

, 0 , 7
27 4° And after these things he went forth, and saw a
publican, named Levi, sitting at the receipt of ° Matt. ix. 9.
: Mark ii, 1!
custom: and he said unto him, Follow me. Ce
28 And he left all, rose up, and followed him.

29 P And Levi made him a great feast in his eat ee
Mark ii. 15.

27. ‘‘ And after these things he went forth, and saw a publican,
.... follow me... . followed him.” It is impossible to suppose
that this was the first time that St. Matthew saw the Lord, or, in-
deed, that this was his first interview with Him. If we had only
the Synoptics we should have, perhaps, imagined that the Lord first
made acquaintance with Peter and his brother and his partners
James and John when He went into his house, as we are told in the
last chapter. Whereas from St. John’s narrative we know that long
before this He had conversed with them and attached them to
Himself as, in some sort, His disciples. And so, no doubt, Matthew
had seen many of the Lord’s miracles and heard many of His dis-
courses, and was deeply moved by what he saw and heavd, so that
these words, ‘“‘ Follow me,” merely decided what had long been in
the mind of Matthew, that he should give up a calling hateful to
his co-religionists and full of temptations, and from henceforth
attach himself to the Lord.

But there can be no doubt that the narrative seems to set forth a
sort of miracle in the mind of the Evangelist, in that he was in a
moment, as it were, set free from all covetous desires, and at once
enabled to surrender himself to the Lord, to follow Him in poverty
and persecution and contempt of a very different kind from that
which he had hitherto endured from the unpopularity of his occupa-
tion. In my Notes on St. Mark’s Gospel I gave several proofs of the
sreat probability that there was then a religious movement among

the publicans as a class, which had influenced this Matthew, or
Levi. The change in his name, very probably by the will of Jesus
Himself, was what had taken place in the case of the greater part
of the Apostles. It seemed right in His sight that they who were
to live such totally new lives should bear new names. In their case
was fulfilled the words of the prophet, “ Thou shalt be called by a
new name, which the mouth of the Lord shall name.”’
29. ““And Levi made him a great feast .... sat down with
them.” From St. Matthew and St. Mark we should simply gather138 PUBLICANS AND SINNERS. [Sr. Luxe.

own house: and ‘there was a great company of publicans
Q ch. xv. 1. and of others that sat down with them.

30 But their scribes and Pharisees murmured against his
disciples, saying, Why do ye eat and drink with publicans
and sinners ?

31 And Jesus answering said unto them, They that are
whole need not a physician; but they that are sick.

peat oe. 18. 32 *I came not to call the righteous, but sinners
ie to repentance.

 

30. ‘But their scribes and Pharisees.” So A., E., F., K., M., other later Uncials,
almost all Cursives, Goth., Syriac, th.; but (&), B., C., D., L., a few Cursives (1, 33,
131, 157), old Latin, Vulg., Copt., Arm., read, ‘‘ The Pharisees and their scribes.”

that Jesus took refreshment in the house; but St. Luke tells that
Levi, or Matthew, made Him a great feast, and that he did this with
the view not only of taking leave of his former associates, but of
bringing them and others into the company of the Lord, that they
might hear from His own lips the words of salvation which had
separated him from his former evil life.

30. “But their scribes and Pharisees murmured against his
disciples,” &c. In St. Matthew and St. Mark (by implication) the
Pharisees complain to the disciples against the Lord. ‘“ Why eateth
your Master with publicans and sinners?” Here they murmur against
the Apostles themselves: ‘Why do ye eat and drink?” But this
is a sign of the truth of the narrative. They would at one moment
complain against the Lord, at another against the Lord and His
Apostles together.

bl, 32. “ And Jesus answering said... . sinners to repentance.’
This is a truth of the widest application possible. It was because
the race of mankind was not righteous like the angels, but sinful
and corrupt by nature, that the Lord came amongst us. If any
of the race of men were absolutely righteous they would have no
need of the Saviour as a cleanser and healer. If any of the race
think themselves righteous, they, of necessity, must think them-
selves less in need of the Soneharre as a cleanser and healer. Well,
then, has God ceased to love righteousness? Does He desire that
men should commit unrighteousness in order that they may realize
the healing power of Christ? God forbid. If God be truly “‘ righ-
teousness,’’ He must approve of righteousness in everyone, believer» CHar. V.] THINE EAT AND DRINK. 139

33 §] And they said unto him, ‘Why do the disciples of
John fast often, and make prayers, and likewise s Matt. ix. 14.
the disciples of the Pharisees; but thine eatand
drink ?

 

Ope -. Wihy, doze) So Nt Al ©.) DD? Ry, later Uncials, almost all Cursives, old Latin,
Vulg., Syriac, other versions ; but “ why ” omitted by B., L., (33, 157), Copt.

or unbeliever, heathen or Christian, converted or unconverted.
Suppose then, that a man has lived a comparatively righteous
life, has the Saviour come to call him? Yes, and the call of the
Saviour will, no matter how innocently the man has lived, convince
him of sin and of his need of the cleansing and strengthening power
of the Lord. We have a remarkable example of this in Scripture.
God himself witnessed respecting holy Job, “that there was none
like him in the earth, a perfect and an upright man, one that feareth
God and escheweth evil” (Job i. 8), and yet, when God came near
to Job, so that Job could say, ‘‘ I have heard of thee with the hear-
ing of the ear, but now mine eye seeth thee,” then Job “‘abhorred
himself, and repented in dust and ashes” (xlii. 5, 6). Now the call
of Christ will do this to the most righteous man. It will reveal to
him God, and it will reveal to him himself; and the man will soon
see his need of the Physician, and in all probability his after life
will be humbler, and his walk more careful than the man whom
Christ calls out of the slough of wilful sin.

Mark too, that the call of Christ is to repentance—that is, to
shame for past sin and a loathing of it, and a desire to be rid of it,
and to serve God with a perfect heart and cleansed conscience.

33-35. *‘ And they said unto him, Why do the disciples of John fast
often ....fast in those days.” The Lord had instituted no fasts,
whilst the strict Jews kept two days of the week as days of abstinence,
and it may be that John had also instituted some weekly fasts which
the disciples of the Lord kept not. The Lord excuses them on the
ground that the time when He was with them was a time of joy;
times of distress and hardship and bitter persecution were to overtake
them after He had left them, but these days were not as yet. When
He left them He prophesied that they would ‘‘ fast in those days.”
It isto be observed that the Lord in norespect blamed the Pharisees
and the disciples of John for fasting, as He did the former for making
void God’s law by their traditions. He does not ‘class their fasts
among the burdens grievous and heavy to be borne. He had, in140 THE BRIDEGROOM WITH THEM. (Sr. Loxs.

34 And he said unto them, Can ye make the children of
the bridechamber fast, while the bridegroom is with them ?
30 But the days will come, when the bridegroom shall

be taken away from them, and then shall they fast in those
days.

"Matt. ix. 16, 36 4] * And he spake also a parable unto them;
17. Mark i.

21, 22. No man putteth a piece of a new garment upon an
old; if otherwise, then both the new maketh a rent, and

the piece that was taken out of the new agreeth not with the
old.

36. ““No man putteth a piece,” &e. So A., C., later Uncials, almost all Cursives, Ital.,
Vulg., and some versions; but &, B., D., a few Cursives (1, 22, 33, 181, 157, 251), Copt.,

Sets.

Syriac, read, ‘‘ No man putteth a piece that he hath torn from a new garment.”

His Sermon on the Mount, actually joined fasting with prayer and
almsgiving as a means of grace which, if rightly and humbly and
unostentatiously used, would call down the blessing of God.

80. “Then shall they fast in those days.” Christians, in and
from the New Testament times, have always thus fasted, as I have
shown in my Notes on St. Mark. [See Acts xin. 2, xiv. 23.2
Corinth. vi. 5, xi. 27.] I cannot help noticing how English Pro-
testant commentators try to get rid of this prophecy, one saying
that the true fasting is fasting from sin, forgetting that the question
might be put to him, When are we allowed to feast in sin? Surely
the English-speaking races have, as yet, shown no disposition to
err on the side of self-denial, that they should be cautioned against
fasting, as if they were in the smallest danger from such a quarter.
Taking the very lowest ground, fasting is useful as a discipline. How
can we, according to the precept of the Apostle, present our bodies a
living sacrifice truly acceptable to God (Rom. xii. 1)—how can we,
after the example of the same Apostle, keep under our bodies and
bring them into subjection (1 Cov. ix. 27), if we of set purpose neglect
the precept and the example of the Lord Himself (Matth. iv. 2
vi. 18), in this matter ?

86. “And he spake also a parable unto them ; . Shall perish.”
If the new cloth is put in to patch up the old, then the new, when
washed or exposed to the rain, will shrink, and the borders of the
new will soon start from the old, and there will be unsightly rents

or openings: and if new wine is put into old wine-skins, the new

.
?

ceCua. V. | NEW WINE, OLD BOTTLEs. 141

37 And no man putteth new wine into old bottles; elge
the new wine will burst the bottles, and be spilled, and the
bottles shall perish.

38 But new wine must be put into new bottles;

and both
are preserved.

 

38. “And both are preserved.” So Aue Ce Ds
Latin, Vulg., and various versions ; omitted by
157, 209, 301), Copt.

, later Uncials, almost all Cursives, old
N, B., L., five or six Cursives Geen tole

wine will be sure to burst the old skins, because in the new the
fermentation is not altogether finished, and the old sking being
weak and unelastie will give way. The explanation, notwith-
standing the difficulties which have been made of the passage,
seems very easy. The old cloth and the old wine is the old or
Jewish dispensation, the new cloth or new wine is the Christian,
and the Lord here teaches a lesson which even the Apostles were
very slow in learning, viz., that the Christian Church cannot be put
as a patch on to Judaism, but the old garment must be altogether
laid aside and the new one put on. Again, the new dispensation
has a spirit, as it were, which cannot be tied down to the old forms,
but must have forms of its own, adapted to its own catholic diffusive
character. Take, for instance, that which was most of all charac-
teristic of Judaism, its strictly local and national character. It is
clear that a religion which required yearly pilgrimages to J erusalem,
and held all sacrifices unlawful, except those offered at one altar by
one tribe of national priests, could never be transformed into a
Catholic Church. It must “ vanish away,’ and the new state of
things which is so able to subdue all nations to the obedience of
faith, cannot be made to patch up or supplement the old, but must
take its place.

39. “No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth
new .. . old is better.”” Most modern commentators seem agreed
that the Lord uttered this short additional parable in a spirit of
large-heartedness, or charity, as making an excuse for the slowness,
or even inability, of His countrymen to embrace the Gospel. And
this seems more probable if we take one fact into full account, viz.,
that for many years the Lord did not require those Jews who
accepted Him, to give up the profession and rites of Judaism. On
the contrary, we read that many years after the Ascension, and the
outpouring of the Spirit, there were in Jerusalem myriads of Jews142 THE OLD IS BETTER. [Sr. Luxe.

39 No man also having drunk old wine straightway desireth
new: for he saith, The old is better.

 

39, “‘ Straightway ” omittéd by &, B., C., L., and a few Cursives ; retained by A., later
Uncials, most Cursives, Vulg., Syriac.
who were all zealous for the law: and that there was the greatest
difference made (no doubt with God’s approval) between them and
the believing Gentiles; for whereas in the Gentiles it was some-
thing akin to apostasy to put on a national ceremonial yoke never
intended for them, the Jews were allowed to observe the law in its
fulness to the last, z.e. to the time when to observe it became im-
possible, because the temple, which was its only lawful home and
centre, was destroyed.

The Jews then were those who had drunk the old wine, and were
permitted to continue as far as possible so to do: the Gentiles, on
the contrary, having never drunk the old wine, having never been
brought up in these exclusive doctrines and ordinances, were for-
bidden so to do.

CHAE. Vil

ND *it came to pass on the second sabbath after the
first, that he went through the corn fields; and his
® Matt, xii. 1. disciples plucked the ears of corn, and did eat,
avVLark ll. co, . ° °
rubbing them in their hands.

1. ‘On the second sabbath after the first,” or, ‘‘ second first sabbath.” So A.. C.. D
E., H., K., M., other later Uncials, almost all Cursives, a few old Latin (a, fx), ve ’
Goth., Syriac, &c.; but “on a sabbath” in N, B., L, a few Cursives (1, 22, 33, 69, 118,
157, 209), some old Latin (b, ¢, e, f**, 1, q), Copt., Syriac, AEth. eg

1. ‘‘ And it came to pass on the second sabbath after the first

: : ’

that he went through, &c. .. . rubbing them in their hands.” The
second sabbath after the first, literally the second-first sabbath
This is a very difficult phrase, and all explanations of it must be
conjectural, as there is apparently no sabbath designated by this
name in any Rabbinical writing. One of the two following ex-
planations seems most likely: (1) either that it was the sabbathCuar. VI] NOT LAWFUL ON THE SABBATH. 143

2 And certain of the Pharisees said unto them, Why do

ye that ’ which is not lawful to do on the sabbath » Ex. xx. 10,
days?

ep) Bil, 3 And Jesus answering them said, Have ye
pe UA tied Tee
Ze tor do.4 SouN At Oo We later Uncials, Copt., Syriac ; omitted by B., old Latin,
Vulg,

which occurred during the Octave of Pentecost—the greatest sabbath
of the year being the Passover sabbath (that sabbath day was an
high-day), and the one occurring at the next greatest feast, that of
Pentecost, would be the next greatest, or next-first, or second-first, the
Passover sabbath being the first-first, or by far the greatest. The feast
of Tabernacles would be the third. But very many take it to be a
sabbath at the Passover, either the first sabbath after the second
day of that festival, from which the sabbaths to Pentecost are
numbered, or the last day of the feast, which was to be observed as
a sabbath.

Whichever of these is the true meaning, it appears to me that
St. Luke does not designate this day as the second-first, to mark
the date when the transaction occurred, but to mark the peculiar
holiness of the day. The disciples were in their estimation break-
ing no ordinary sabbath, but one of the most sacred of all. The
breaking of the sabbath on the part of the disciples did not consist
in their plucking the ears of corn, but in rubbing them with their
hands.’

3-4, “And Jesus answering them said, . . . priests alone? Doelk
So very sacred a law as the eating of the hallowed bread, or shew-
bread, by the priests alone, was to give way to the necessities of

 

‘ The reader will find an immense number of ridiculous ways of
breaking the sabbath in Edersheim’s “‘ Life of Christ,” Appendix
xvi. The following bear on this sin of “‘ rubbing with their hands: ”
“If a woman were to roll wheat to take away the husks, she would
be guilty of sifting with a sieve. If she were rubbing the ends of
the stalks she would be guilty of threshing. If she were cleaning
what adheres to the side of a stalk she would be guilty of sifting.
If she were bruising the stalk she would be guilty of grinding. If
she were throwing it up in her hands she would be guilty of
winnowing it”’ (vol. ii. p. 783).144 WHAT DAVID DID. [Sr. Luxe.

not read so much as this, °what David did, when himself was
c1 Sam. xxi.6. an hungred, and they which were with him ;

4. How he went into the house of God, and did take and
eat the shewbread, and gave also to them that were with him ;
d Lev. xxiv.9. ‘which it is not lawful to eat but for the priests
alone?

5 And he said unto them, That the Son of man is Lord
also of the sabbath.

 

4, After verse 4 Codex D. alone of MSS. inserts the following: ‘‘On the same day
having beheld a certain man working on the sabbath, He said to him, Man, if thou
knowest what thou doest thou art blessed, but if thou knowest not thou art cursed, and a
transgressor of the law.” It is exceedingly improbable that the Lord said anything of
the sort, for He never gaye man a licence to work on the sabbath, though He reprobated
the Pharisaical enactments which made it a burden.

David and his companions in arms, much more should such a ridicu-
lous straining of the law as forbade the removal of husks from
wheat, give way before the necessities of the disciples of Him Who
was ‘‘ Lord of the sabbath.”

I have enlarged so fully in my Notes on St. Matthew and St.
Mark, on the Son of Man being Lord of the sabbath, that I need
only here mention the two particulars in which He has shown His
lordship: first, by changing the day of the weekly festival, so that
our day of rest is kept, not on the seventh day, on which God rested,
but on the first day of the week, in which Christ rose from the dead ;
and, secondly, by relaxing the strictness of the Jewish law, so that
the sabbath instead of being a burden always fretting the conscience,
may be a day of spiritual refreshment to those who, by the Spirit
working in them, and sanctifying them, can keep it as such. If
we are to keep the Christian sabbath aright, we must be risen in
Spirit with Him Who on it brake the bands of death.

And yet all are bound to abstain from exacting work from others
on Sunday, if it is ‘‘made for man” as the Lord go emphatically
says that itis. It is made especially for those who have on the six
days to labour for their daily bread, that they may have one day
for rest, and for attendance at Christian Instruction, Prayer, and
Eucharist.

6. ‘And it came to pass also on another sabbath,” &e. From
St. Luke’s account alone we learn that this was on another sabbath.Cuar. VI,] HE KNEW THEIR THOUGHTS. 145
6 °And it came to pass also on another sabbath, that he

entered into the synagogue and taught : and there 6 Matt. aii. 9.

was a man whose right hand was withered. seni “ ;
7 And the scribes and Pharisees watched him, ie igen pee

whether he would heal on the sabb

find an accusation against him.

8 But he knew their thoughts, and said to
had the withered hand, Rise up, and st
midst. And he arose and stood forth.

ath day; that they might

the man which
and forth in the

ee

7. **An accusation against him.” So AGS Hye OR PECs Ke Le Mi
Uncials, most Cursives, Goth., Copt., Arm. ;
124, 131), Vulg. (Amiat.), &c., * Find how to

-» and other later
but &, B., three or four Cursives (1, 22, 28,
accuse him.”

This emphasizes the fact that the Lord by preference chose the
Sabbath for the performance of His miracles of healing. His
miracles were as much acts of instruction as His discourses. They
taught that He was Himself the source of all good to the bodies and
souls of men. They directed the attention of the multitudes who
frequented the Synagogues to Himself, as exhibiting the Divine
Mercy and Compassion as well as the Divine Wisdom and Power.
‘Whose right hand was withered.” Not only was the diseased
nerve incapable of conveying sensation and the power of motion,
but its impotence deprived the arm and hand of that necess
function of all living healthy flesh of renewing itself, so that it was
shrivelled and to all intents and purposes a dead thing. This is a
parable teaching us that spiritual life and activity are ever united.
Life is seen in action and sensation, and seems unable to exist if
it is not in constant use of some sort.
7. “And the scribes and Pharisees watched
would heal on the sabbath day,”
lignity,

ary

him, whether he
«ce. What extraordinary ma-
to watch in order that they might accuse a man for benefit-
ing his fellow-man, and the Benefactor d
being always exercised on the side of goodness and virtue, must
be from the Author of all good! How near in all this did they come
to committing the sin against the Holy Ghost!

8. “ But he knew their thoughts, and said to the man which had
the withered hand,” &c. According to St. Matthew the Scribes
first asked the question, ‘“ Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath day ?”’
According to St. Mark and our Evangelist they watched whether

-
du

oing it by a power which,146 STRETCH FORTH THINE HAND. _ [Sr. Luxe.

9 Then said Jesus unto them, I will ask you one thing ;
Is it lawful on the sabbath days to do good, or to do evil?
to save life, or to destroy a ?

10 And looking round about upon them all, he said unto
the man, Stretch forth thy hand. And he did so: and his
hand was restored whole as the other.

11 And they were filled with madness; and communed
one with another what they might do to Jesus.

 

9, «I willask.” So A., D., later Uncials, most Cursives, many old Latin (a, b, c, &c.),
Syriac, Arm., th.; but X, B., L., some old Latin, Vulg., Copt., ‘‘ I ask.”

« Whether it is lawful” in A., E., K., M., 8., &c., very many Cursives; but X, 183, 105,
L., some old Latin (a,c, e, f, n), Vulg., Copt., Syriac, &c., read, ‘‘ If it is lawful,” &c.

10. “Whole as the other.” ‘‘ Whole” omitted by &, A., B., D., K., L., many Cursives,
old Latin, Vulg., and so is doubtful. ‘* As the other” omitted by 8, B., L., some Cursives
(33, 34, 63), some old Latin (a, e), Vulg.

He would heal. Perhaps we must reconcile these statements by
supposing that assoon as they saw the man with the withered hand
they anticipated the Lord’s action, because He had constantly
chosen the sabbath as the fittest day for such exhibitions of Divine
power. They then asked, ‘‘Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath ?”’
thus endeavouring to cast a doubt on the lawfulness of what
they supposed He was about to do. But having made the man
rise up and stand in the midst in order that all in the synagogue
might see his deplorable state, He gave an unexpected turn to the
question by putting it in the form, ‘Is it lawful to do good on the
sabbath day ?”’ ‘‘ Surely it is right to do good to a fellow-creature
on any day!’’ must be the answer. And especially when they
considered that the sabbath day was instituted for the most bene-
volent of purposes, ‘‘ That thy man servant and thy maid servant
may rest as well as thou.”

But, as St. Mark tells us, they gave no answer, ‘‘ They held their
peace.” Having then looked round about upon them all, with
mingled grief and anger, He healed the man by restoring the
withered hand whole as the other. :

11. ‘‘And they were filled with madness; ...do to Jesus.”
St. Luke alone describes the effect upon them in these terms.

Now all this teaches us Christians this lesson—that men who are
in their whole habit of mind utterly apart from God, and alienatedCuap. VIL] ALL NIGHT IN PRAYER. 147

12 “And it came to pass in those days, th
into a mountain to pray, and continued all ni
in prayer to God.

13 § And when it was day, he called wnto him his dis-

at he went out
eht f Matt. xiv. 23.

 

from Him by envy, rancour, malice, and hypocrisy, may seemingly
assert the honour of an outward law like that of the sabbath, and
accuse the holiest men of breaking it; and this because the latter
understand the highest of all laws, the law of liberty—not the law
of licence, whick prompts to the breaking the commandment, but
the very spirit and intent of the law, which often refuses to 1
enclosed in the bare letter.
12. “ And it came to pass in those days, that he went out into a |
mountain to pray,” &e. The Lord, having the same nature as ours,
would desire retirement for closer intercourse with His Father. |
The company which always seem to have flocked around Him, the
importunity of those who desired healing for themselves and for
their friends, the questioning of friends and foes, the consciousness
that some were always watching Him—all these things must have
tended to hinder His human soul in the matter of unburdening
itself to God, especially at such a juncture as this, when He must
now choose those who were to represent Him, to found His Church,
and ultimately in the future world to share His glory.
Now this teaches us that the Lord can feel for those who are dis-
tracted in prayer. He can sympathize with those whose circum.
stances seldom or never allow them to be in retirement ; butitalso
teaches us that, if possible, we must seek retirement for devotion.
Thus Cyril: ‘‘ Let us examine then in the actions which Jesus did
how He teaches us to be instant in prayer to God, going apart by
ourselves, and in secret, no one seeing us; putting aside also our
worldly cares, that the mind may be raised up to the height of
Divine contemplation ; and this we have marked in the fact that
Jesus went up into a mountain apart to pray.”
13. “ And when it was day, he called unto him his disciples:
and of them,” &c. Ihave enlarged in my Notes on St. Matthew and
St. Mark on the significance of the Lord Himself, and not the body of
the disciples, choosing the Apostles, choosing a definite and almost
sacred number, so that not all were Apostles, separating them from
the rest of His followers, always to be with Him, giving them
special instruction which He withheld from the rest, and in every

de148 HE CHOSE TWELVE. . [Sr. Luxe.

ciples: £and of them he chose twelve, whom also he named
g Matt. x. 1. apostles :

way seeming to designate them as as an order of men in His
Church who were especially to lead, to command, to bind, to loose ;
so that, from the very first, the Christian ministry, as contained in
the Apostles, should be the commencement of the organization of
the Church: an organization in His absence connecting Himself in
heaven with His Church on earth; an organization by, and in, and
through which, He would ordinarily work in the @hurch ; though,
of course, reserving to Himself the right of raising up faithful men
to act as Apostles in reforming the Church, in extending it, in
deepening its piety, in bringing before 14 long-forgotten truths.

‘And when it was day, he called unto him his disciples : and of
them,” &c. Quesnel has a remark which I cannot help repro-
ducing :—‘‘ Jesus prays as man, but chooses as God, and as the
Sovereign Pastor in the Name of God, He consults neither those
He chooses, nor those from among whom He chooses them; but
without any human respect whatever executes His Father’s will.
Mission is so essentially necessary to a man’s having authority in
the Church, that Christ would have His first ministers bear the
name of Apostles, or envoys, to the end that their mission might
be as well known as their very name; and that all the world
might be convinced that there is no true mission in the Chureh but
EMIS.”

The word ‘“‘ Apostie”’ means, of course, one sent, and the extent
of the “sending,” or ‘‘ mission,” we gather from the Lord’s own
words, ‘‘As my Father sent me,so send I you.” His Apostles
were sent by Him to represent Himself, and in His place to do all
things which He did which are capable of being done by mere men.
Did He govern as Bishop? So are they to do the same.. Did He
preach and teach? So arethey. Did Heexpiate sin? They cannot
do this, but they can apply His own all-sufficient expiation, and
this they must do. And so, did He absolve? So are they to absolve.
Did He celebrate the Eucharist? So arethey. Did He offer to men
His Body and Blood for their spiritual food and sustenance ? So
must they offer it to their brethren. So that the ministry which
was in its fulness in Him is to be in them, and as He transmitted
it to them so are they to transmit it to others, and this is to last till
He comes again.Cuarp. VL] SIMON AND ANDREW. 149

14 Simon, (" whom he also named Peter,) and Andrew his
brother, James and John, Philip and Bartholomew, » John i. 42.

 

14. “James and John, Philip.”

NS Di Ke le many Cursives, old Latin (a, b, Cc).
some Codices of Vulgate, Syriac

, and Arm.,, read ‘and ” before “James” and also before
“Philip; ” but A., E., M., other later Uncials, most Cursives, some old Latin and Vulg,
(Amiat.) as in Rec. Text.

14. Simon, (whom he also named Peter,) and Andrew his
brother.”’ As I promised in my commentary on St. Mark, I shall here
notice very shortly what is said in Scripture and ecclesiastical
history respecting the remainder of the Apostles after the three
first, Simon, James, and John.

‘Andrew his brother.” Andrew-is not a J ewish, but a Gentile
name, and signifies “manly.” He was, at first, a disciple of the
Baptist, and began to follow the Lord, when the Baptist pointed to
Him as the Lamb of God. Through him his brother Simon was
brought into the presence of the Lord. Once only he is found in
company with the more favoured three, when Peter, J ames, John,
and Andrew asked the Lord privately, ‘“‘ When shall these things
be?” Again we find him associated with Philip in bringing before
the Lord the request of certain Greeks. The only other separate
notice is where he mentions the lad having the five loaves. Accord-
ing to Husebius he preached in Scythia.

For James and John see my Notes on St. Mark, and for John my
Introduction to his Gospel.

“Philip.” The first mention of this Apostle is by St. John, who
tells us that the Lord found him (John i. 48) either on His way
to, or in, Galilee. He then brought Nathanael to Christ. It was
to Philip that the Lord put the question, ‘‘ Whence shall we buy
bread that these may eat?” He joined with Andrew in telling
Jesus of the Greeks who wished to see Him, and in the last dis-

course he putin the word, “ Lord, shew us the Father, and it sufficeth
us,” and received the memorable answer, “He that hath seen
me, hath seen the Father.” After this there is no mention whatso-
ever of him in the New Testament.’ The place where he preached
and ended his days isunknown. One tradition places itin Parthia,
another in Scythia.

 

‘ The article on him in Smith’s “ Dictionary of the Bible” gives
anumber of wild legends from apocryphal books not worth
attention.150 MATTHEW AND THOMAS. [Sr. Luge.

15 Matthew and Thomas, James the son of Alpheus, and
Simon called Zelotes,

 

15. ‘‘ Matthew.” “‘ And” inserted by much the same authorities (&, B., D., L., &c.) as
those mentioned in last critical note as inserting it before *‘ Philip ;” omitted by A. and
some who omitted it there. %

<< James.” “And” here inserted by &, B., D., L., &e. ; omitted by A., H., M., &c., as
in previous verses.

“Bartholomew,” or son of Tolmai. Very probably the same as
Nathanael. Nathanael seems to have been of the number of the
twelve from his being mentioned as an Apostle in John xxi.2. He
is always associated with Philip in the lists of the Apostles.
Nothing more is known of him than that the Lord witnessed
respecting him that he was “an Israelite indeed, in whom there is
no guile.” Nothing further is mentioned of him under either the
name of Bartholomew or Nathanael. He is said by Eusebius to
have preached the Gospel in India.

15. “Matthew.” Respecting Matthew, called also Levi, and said
to be the son of Alpheus, I must refer to my Introduction to St.
Matthew’s Gospel. After his call to the feast that he made for the
Lord, he is never mentioned in the New Testament as speaking any
one word, or doing any particular act apart from the others. He is
said by Eusebius to have preached the substance of his Gospel to his
countrymen in Palestine in an unwritten form and afterwards on
his leaving them to preach in more distant parts, he committed it to
writing that they might the better remember what he had preached.

“Thomas.’’ We have no notice whatsoever taken of St. Thomas
in the three Synoptics except the mention of his name in their lists
of the twelve. St. John, however, records three sayings of his, in
each case calling him Didymus. First, when he heard that the
Lord, Whose life had been threatened by the Jews, intended to go to
Bethany again, Thomas said to his fellow disciples ‘‘ Let us go also,
that we may die with him.” Ona second occasion he asks, ‘‘ Lord,
we know not whither thou goest, and how can we know the way ?”’
and elicited from the Lord the memorable answer, “I am the way,
the truth, and the life ; no man cometh unto the Father but by me.”
The third, the scene which occurred on the eighth day often the
Resurrection, is too well known to require further mention. After
this he appears as one of the five who were with the Lord at His
showing himself on the lake of Galilee: and then he is mentioned
no more in Scripture, except as one of the Apostles who were in theCuar. VI.] JUDAS THE BROTHER OF JAMES. 151

16 And Judas ‘the brother of James, and Judas

Iscariot,
which also was the traitor.

i Jude i.

ee

upper room after the Ascension. He is said to have preached in
Parthia, or Persia, and to have died at Edessa, where his tomb is
mentioned by St. Chrysostom as actually existing in his time.

“James the son of Alpheus.” Respecting this James, if he be
not the Bishop of Jerusalem, and the writer of the Epistle bearing
the name of James (and I do not see how he well can be) nothing
whatsoever is said in Scripture. In an appendix on ‘the brethren
of the Lord,” in my Commentary on St. Mark, I have given many
reasons for believing that the Bishop of Jerusalem, the Lord’s
brother, and James the son of Alpheeus, were three different persons.
Alpheus, the name of his father, or Cleophas, or Clopas, seems to
have been a common name among the Jews, so thatit is impossible
to say whether Alpheus the father of Levi or Matthew, and
Alpheus the father of this James, and Alpheus the husband of the
Mary who stood by the cross, were the same, or two, or even three
different persons.

‘Sumon called Zelotes.”” The same as Simon the Kananite (not
Canaanite as in the Authorized), in the lists in St. Matthew and
St. Mark. No word said or act done by him has come down to us.
He is said, on very doubtful authority, to have preached in Egypt
and Cyrene, and on equally doubtful authority to have been
crucified in Judea in the reign of Domitian.

16. ““And Judas the brother of James.” In St. Matthew he is
designated as Lebbeus, whose surname is Thaddeus; but the true
reading may be simply Thaddeus, as he is described in Mark. It
is not at all improbable that he should have two names, as indeed
almost all the Apostles had. One saying of his is recorded by St.
John: “Lord, how is it that thou wilt manifest thyself to us and
not unto the world?” He is there carefully distinguished from
his namesake the traitor, “Judas (not Iscariot) saith unto him.”
(John xiv. 22.) Respecting his sphere of work nothing certain is told
us in tradition and ecclesiastical history, but he seems to have for
some time preached the Gospel at Edessa, and beyond it in Assyria.

The three names, James, Judas, and Simon, are the same as
those of three out of the four persons who are named as the Lord’s

brethren, in Matth. xiii. 55, and the parallel place, Mark vi. 3.
Whether they were all the sons of Alpheus, and how they wereSac tel

152 HE STOOD IN THE PLAIN. [Sr. Luxe..

17 { And he came down with them, and stood in the
x Matt. iv.25. plain, and the company of his disciples, = al a
Mark iii. 7. ;

creat multitude of people out of all Judea and

Jerusalem, and from the sea coast of Tyre and Sidon, which
came to hear him, and to be healed of their diseases ;

18 And they that were vexed with unclean spirits: and
they were healed.
| Matt. xiv.36. 19 And the whole multitude ‘sought to touch

17. ‘‘ The company.” So A., D., later Uncials, almost all Cursives, old Latin, Vulg. ;
but &, B., L., two Cursives (1, 118), and Syriac, insert, ‘‘ A great ” (aoAbs).

related to the Lord is exceedingly difficult to decide. If the reader
desires he will see the matter very acutely argued in favour of their
being the sons of Alpheus, in Smith’s ‘“ Dictionary of the Bible”’
(Article ‘“ James,” page 920 to 928 of vol. i.).

‘‘ Judas Iscariot.” Several interpretations have been given to
the surname Iscariot—the most probable by far being that which
connects it with Keriot in the tribe of Judah. Respecting the
mystery of the fall of this man, see my notes on John xiii. 18 and 28.
Respecting any special act of his in his character of Apostle, not a
word has come down to us. We cannot suppose that he was an
hypocrite and dishonest man when the Lord chose him, but by
yielding constantly to the temptation to do little acts of fraud, he
got hardened in sin, and at last ended with betraying the Lord.

17. ““And he came down with them, and stood in the plain.”
This seems to tell us that the discourse which immediately follows
is a different one from that called the Sermon on the Mount; the
former was delivered before the call of the Apostles, and this
evidently after. I believe that St. Luke, if he knew anything
whatsoever of the original body of tradition, knew well the
Sermon on the Mount, and that it was according to such tradition
delivered on a mount; and in what follows he intends to give the
draft of another discourse similar in some points, but, as we shall
see, very different in others.

“And a great multitude, &c.... healed them all.” This occurs
so frequently in the Lord’s ministry, that we cannot with any cer-
tainty use it as marking a particular time.

19. “And the whole multitude sought to touch him ... healed
them all.” What gave rise to this peculiar action on the part ofCuar. VI] BLESSED BE YE POOR. 153

him: for ™there went virtue out of him, and healed them
all. m Mark vy. 30.
9 ae : ‘ 2 Has ch, viii. 46,
20 §[ And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples,
and said, * Blessed be ye poor: for your’s is the » Matt. v. 3, &
i : : e x1.5, James ii,
kingdom of God. 5

oO.

 

the multitude? Some one must have set them an example, and

have been the first to receive a cure in this way. It is mentioned in
Matthew xiv. 86, and Mark vi. 06, that the multitude did this, and
in each case some time after the miracle of the healing of the
woman who had the issue of blood. It seems most probable, then,
that she was the first, and that the fame of her faith spread far and
wide, and many openly availed themselves of this way of receiving
healing from the Lord’s person.

20. “‘ And he lifted up his eyes on his disciples, and said, Blessed
be ye poor,” &. The reader will at once perceive by these opening
words that the discourse which follows is especially delivered to the
disciples. Ifit is intended, as no doubt it is, for the whole Church,
it is addressed to the Church through the disciples. We hear it
with their ears, they receive it as our representatives. The Lord
lifts up His eyes on the disciples, and the first beatitude is not
expressed in general terms, ‘‘ Blessed are the poor in spirit,’ but
‘“ Blessed be ye poor.” Now it seems to me scarcely possible that, if
the discourses are the same, St. Luke should have omitted the
qualifying words ‘“‘in spirit,” for a poor man may be anything but
poor in spirit. In numberless instances he is proud, overbearing,
and conceited. It is also difficult to imagine why. St. Luke, if he
were reproducing parts of St. Matthew’s sermon, should have
narrowed the general into the particular — should have changed
‘the poor in spirit ” into “‘ ye poor.” Indeed, the difference between
the Sermon on the Mount and this sermon on the plain are such
that each must be treated independently, as if they were distinct
discourses, if we would endeavour to explain faithfully the words of
the Lord.

‘‘ Blessed be ye poor.’ The Lord, as reported in St. Matthew,
pronounces a blessing on a certain disposition of mind wherever and
in whomsoever it may be found; here, on the contrary, He blesses
certain persons, who, by an act of extreme self-renunciation, had
attained to it. The disciples or apostles around Him had sur-154 BLESSED ARE YE THAT HUNGER. (Sz. Lux.

      
   
   
   
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
    
  
 
 
 
 
 
   

o Is. Iv. 1. & 21 °Blessed are ye that hunger now: for ye
lxv.13. Matt.

ViesQe

 

| rendered their all for His sake. They had surrendered those good

| things of this world which above all others have a tendency to raise

| men above their fellows, and make them look down upon them.
The poverty or humility of spirit which, doubtless, they must have
possessed, through the preaching of the Baptist, and that of the
Lord, was increased or perfected when they left their all to follow
the Lord, and so He addressed them as those in whom their
voluntary poverty had produced the Divinely intended effect.
“Ye poor, both actually and spiritually, Blessed be ye.”’

‘‘ For yours is the kingdom of heaven.” To the Apostles especially
belonged the good things of the kingdom of God in its present
manifestation as the Church, the Body of Christ, for they were its
founders, they laid down its laws, they shaped its first course.
Taking the first marks or features of the Church as we have them

in the account of the first Pentecostal Church, doctrine, fellowship,

Eucharists, prayers (Acts ii. 42)—how intensely must the Apostles

have realized these as theirs—theirs not for themselves, but for all

their fellow members! See how St. Peter writes about the doctrine of

the Resurrection of the Lord, that it had begotten all men who

accepted it ‘to a lively hope of an inheritance incorruptible and un-

defiled’; how must they have realized the ‘‘ fellowship” who so con-

stantly speak of the Church as all one in Christ; how must they

have realized the Eucharist when one of them could say, ‘“‘ We being

many are one bread and one body, for we are all partakers of that

one Bread”! how must they have realized the prayers, when the

twelve as one man put from them into semi-lay hands, the serving

of tables, and the importance which belongs to it, with the words,

‘We will give ourselves continually to prayer, and to the ministry

of the word”! Theirs was the kingdom of heaven, theirs was the

understanding, the realizing, the dispensing of the treasures of

. Divine grace, long before each was called to sit on his throne in
heaven itself.

21. “ Blessed are ye that hunger now: for ye shall be filled.”
This means more than the corresponding blessing in St. Matthew,
‘Blessed are they which do hunger and thirst after righteousness.”
It seems to say, Not only blessed are ye that spiritually hunger after

i every Divine grace, for all shall be poured into you, but ‘blessed
are ye that hunger, having no certain means of livelihood, for yeCuar. VI.] BLESSED ARE YE THAT WEEP. 155

shall be filled. ? Blessed are ye that weep now: for ye shall

laugh. P Is. Ixi. 3.

Matt. v. 4.

 

shall be filled, for ye shall lack nothing, the Divine power shall

give you all pertaining to life and godliness.” Quesnel has a remark
of great depth and value upon this beatitude: “How glorious is it
to God to make Himself beloved by men at the expense of all things,
without the allurement of any sensible good whatsoever, and purely
for His own sake! This is a proof of His existence, a mark of His
greatness, of the truth of His religion, and of the power of His
grace.”

‘* Blessed are ye that weep now, for ye shall laugh.” This looks
to far more than the comfort of the Gospel, which follows after the
sense of the guilt of sin. It rather looks to the whole present state
of things, as revealed in the Gospel, as a serious state, which will
not allow those who realize it to live in pleasures and worldly
amusements. ‘The men of the present world are in danger, just as
the men on the eve of the Deluge, and the sinners of Sodom were
in danger, and those who have their eyes opened to understand the
danger, will, to the extent to which they realize it, be concerned
about it—for the members of their own families, their nearest neigh-
bours, their best friends, may perish by it. Even under the Law
the Psalmist could say, ‘‘ Mine eyes gush out with water because
men keep not thy law.”

Such were the Apostles. They were men who had a purpose in
life, and that the most overwhelmingly serious one that men could
possibly have before them, to save men from that untoward genera-
tion, from “the wrath to come,” from the anger of God revealed
against all ungodliness and unrighteousness of men. Such men
might not have always solemn looks, much less mournful ones, they
might relax at times, but they could not laugh with the world.
Such things as frivolity, light-hearted unthinking carelessness, un-
restricted enjoyment of even sinless things, must have been in their
eyes sin.

“Ye shall laugh.” This is more than the “ they shall be com-
forted”” of the Sermon on the Mount. It points to exultation in
the triumphs of the Gospel, and the extension of the Church. We
can well imagine an Apostle laughing when some stronghold of
Satan was overthrown, laughing for joy when he heard of some new
Church planted in some city steeped heretofore in wickedness.156 MEN SHALL HATE YOU. [St. Luxe.

22 4 Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you, and when

a Matt. v. i. they ‘shall separate you from their company, and
et. i. 1, &

iii, 14, & iv.14. shall reproach you, and cast out your name as
r John xvi. 2. : Ps
evil, for the Son of man’s sake.

 

Would not holy exultation have lighted up every feature of the
Apostle’s face, when he wrote, ‘Thanks be to God, which always
causeth us to triumph in Christ, and maketh manifest the savour
of his knowledge by us in every place”’? (2 Cor. ii. 14.)

22, 23. ‘Blessed are ye, when men shall hate you .... fathers
unto the prophets.” In St. Matthew we have, first a blessing pro-
nounced on those who are persecuted for righteousness’ sake, then
on those who are persecuted for Christ’s sake (v.10, 11). In this case
only does St. Matthew make the Lord address the disciples personally
as St. Luke does, ‘‘ Blessed are ye, when men shall revile you.”
Now it seems plain from this that the Evangelists are reporting two
separate discourses, and that this last beatitude was the only one in
which the personal form of blessing, “‘ blessed are ye,” was the same.
In fact, the only beatitude which is exactly the same in both. For
it is clear that St. Matthew gives the full number of the beatitudes.
The Lord must have pronounced each one which St. Matthew
records, and yet it is equally plain that He could hardly have
pronounced them according to St. Luke’s form. He would not have
said, ‘‘ Blessed are ye meek ones,” ‘“‘ Blessed are ye merciful ones,”
‘‘ Blessed are ye peacemakers.” The four given by St. Luke are
the only ones which could well have been pronounced personally on
the disciples ; so that the beatitudes as given by St. Matthew and
St. Luke respectively, could not have been altered forms of the same
discourse: and those in St. Luke, as we learn from what goes before,
were especially addressed to the disciples, and are especially appli-
cable to them.

‘‘Hate you,” because ye persistently press upon them My Re-
demption, which must, if received, separate them from the sins they
love, and My judgment, which shall separate them for ever from the
children of God, unless they repent. ‘Separate you,’ most pro-
bably, in a religious sense ; cast you out of the synagogues, cast out
your name as evil, 7.e. erase your name from the synagogue rolls.
[So Godet. |

‘For the Son of man’s sake.” St. Matthew has “‘ For my sake.”
‘The latter expression (St. Matthew’s) denotes attachment to theCuap. VIL] REJOICE YE IN THAT DAY. om

23 * Rejoice ye in that day, and leap for joy: for, behold,
your reward is great in heaven: for *in the like ie a
manner did their fathers unto the prophets. i.24. Jamesi. 2,
24 "But woe unto you *that are rich! for ? ye eee
have received your consolation. : een i
25 * Woe unto you that are full! for ye shall y Matt. v1.2,
Ee 2 Ts. bey. 13, a

Person of Jesus; the former, faith in His Messianic Character, as
the perfect representative of humanity.” But isnot this too refined ?
Evil men persecuted Jesus, not surely as the perfect representative
of humanity, but as the perfect embodiment of that holiness and
purity of God which they hated.

‘“ Rejoice ye in that day,” &¢. They would rejoice because their
persecution would be a sign to them that they were one with Christ
in His sufferings, and so would be one with Him in His glory. [So
Coloss. i. 23, 24; 1 Pet. iv. 12, 18, 14.]

24. “ But woe unto you that are rich! for ye have received your
consolation.” These four woes are the exact counterpart of the four
beatitudes. St. Matthew has, in the Sermon on the Mount, nothing
corresponding to them, which, I think, he must have had if he and
St. Luke reproduce with variations the same discourse: for if the
Lord’s words are to be faithfully reported, such severe sayings as
these must receive some notice.

‘The Lord here does not enunciate a doctrine so much as declare a
fact: for just as when He said, “‘ Blessed are ye poor,” He declares a
fact which was true of those around Him who had given up all for
His sake, so now He sets forth a fact that the rich and learned and
covetous Scribes and Pharisees, and Sadducean High Priests, were
accursed because their worldly possessions and worldly position
hindered them from coming to Him that they might receive His
life. The reader cannot but remember the words of the Blessed
Virgin: “ He hath put down the mighty from their seat, The rich

he hath sent empty away.” And those of Abraham to the rich man:
‘Son, remember that thou in thy life-time receivedst thy good
things.” Thisis but one of a hundred places which declare that
riches are acurse unless they are parted with, that the only way of
neutralizing their ill ettect is to give alms very bountifully of them.

25. “Woe unto you that are full.” The reader will remember
how the Lord said, ‘‘ Take heed lest your hearts be overcharged158 LOVE YOUR ENEMIES. [Sr. Luke.

hunger. * Woe unto you that laugh now! for ye shall mourn
a Proy. xiv.13. and weep.

 

b John xy. 19. 26 » Woe unto you, when all men shall speak
I John tv. 5. i :
well of you! for so did their fathers to the false
prophets.
¢ Ex. xxiii. 4. 27 4 °But I say unto you which hear, Love your
Prov. xxv. 21. ee ¥ < .
Matt. v.44. enemies, do good to them which hate you,
Wer. oo. Rom. =m
x1. 20)
25. “ Woe unto you that laugh now!” Some read, “‘ Woe ye that laugh now.”
Zoe Oe Unto yOu Unto yous omitted ibyiN. Av, es eHi, 1 cl Ke ee Viee soldi

Latin, Vulg., and most authorities; but retained only by D., Copt., Syriac, and a few
versions.

with surfeiting, and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that
day come upon you unawares” (Luke xxi. 34).

‘Woe unto you that laugh now!” &. See note on latter part of
verse 21.

26, “Woe unto you, when all men shall speak well of you!”
‘When all men speak well of you, it is a sure sign that you have not
been faithful witnesses to the humbling and purifying truths of the
Gospel. If you are faithful you will raise up against you the hatred
and opposition of the world, though you will have the respect and
love of the people of God.” This is true, in a measure, of all times ;
but more, of course, of those times in which the world and the
Church were in deadly feud, than of times in which the world has
been largely influenced and permeated with the truths of the
Gospel. It would be well if all successors of the Apostles had the
question of the Apostle ever in their minds: “ Do I seek to please
men ? for if I yet pleased men, I should not be the servant of
Christ ” (Gal.i.10). Rather, perhaps, we may say, the words of the
Lord: ‘‘ If ye were of the world, the world would love its own ; but
because ye are not of the world, but I have chosen you out of the
world, therefore the world hateth you” (John xv, 19).

27. “ But I say unto you which hear, Love your enemies,” &e.
“ Unto you which hear.” Does this signify much the same as “ He
that hath ears to hear, let him hear”? Does it not rather mark a
change in the purport or in the subjects of the discourses 2 In the
four beatitudes Christ speaks to the disciples or apostles. In the
four woes to those who are in their character, and in the side whichCuar. VI] BLESS THEM THAT CURSE YoU. 159

28 Bless them that cur

se you, and 4 pray for them which
despitefully use vou. ch. xxiii. 84.
p yi yi Acts vii. 60.

 

they take in the great struggle between the world and Chr
opposite of the Apostles. Now His addy
general; it is spoken to all who hear.

Love your enemies.” We are bound to look always to the con-
text before we give any interpretation of a p
gone before, in verses 2

ist, the
ess becomes perfectly

assage, and what has
2 and 26, obliges us to interpret here, in the
first place, these “enemies”? and “those who hate us,” as our
enemies for the Gospel’s sake. Now, Christian compassion would
lead us to do this ; for which is most to be pitied, the persecutor or
the persecuted, the hater or the hated? Looked at in the light of
the Cross and Judgment of Christ, undoubtedly the persecutor : for
he hates the Christian because of his real Christianity, because he
sees in him the power of the Cross to Separate from sin and an evil
world. Now what can be more terrible, and so more worthy of
Christian compassion, than the case of the man whose love of sin
and the world is such that he hates the Cross of Jesus because of
its sin-destroying power? And such must be that of the enemies of
the religion of the Cross: and what will be their fate when Christ
comes to judge? Surely, then, such a precept, though so hard, so
above human nature, is reasonable. And ten times more so when
we take into account that Christianity is not merely a teaching
system, but a system for the conveyance of the Grace, nay, even the
Nature of Christ, to enable us to do the works of Christ,
amongst them to love our enemies as Christ loved His.

And the same applies in its measure to all enmity of all enemies.
Is a man our enemy because he fancies that we stand in the way
of his interests ? He is fostering within himself a passion which will,
in the end, do infinitely more harm to him than he can possibly do
tous. We must set this before us, and we shall soon see that com-
mon Christian compassion would make us—at whatever cost to
pride and self-love—meet his hatred with good-will.

‘“Love your enemies.” Love is a feeling or affection of the heart,
and we cannot command our affections. How is it to be got within
us ? Let us take some means of attaining to it, and God seeing our
earnestness will bless them. Thus amongst those whom we pray
for daily, if we know of anyone who regards us with dislike, let us
pray for him, and if we find that in our hearts we are continually

and160 OFFER ALSO THE OTHER. (St. Luke.

99 ©And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek
e Matt. v.39. offer also the other; ‘and him that taketh away
£1 Cor. vi. 7 : : ‘
1Cor. vi. 7. thy gloke forbid not to take thy coat also.

gs Deut. xv. 7, 20 Give to every man that asketh of thee;
Oe lOs = ErOve une ; Si le:
xxi, 26. Matt. and of him that taketh away thy goods ask them
vy. 42, :

not again.

 

dwelling upon the thought of his enmity, and are tempted to wish
him evil, let us pray very earnestly to God for a better mind. And
if we have opportunity, let us do him some good, and let us pray for
him that he also may be brought by God’s grace to lay aside all ill-
feeling, and be reconciled both to God and his brethren. Even
against our inclinations we can force ourselves to do this, and God
assuredly will look favourably upon the effort.

99. “And unto him that smiteth thee on the one cheek offer,” &c.
This is a proverbial saying, and, like many such, would, if obeyed
literally, lose the desired effect of conciliating the adversary ; and,
besides, the Lord Himself did not do this literally, for when smitten
He asked, “‘ Why smitest thou me?” Quesnel expresses the spiri-
tual meaning of this precept well, when he writes: “ The proof of
our love to our enemies is being disposed to suffer from them
affronts, contempt, and ill-treatment ; to relinquish our rights rather
than to lose our meekness and charity towards them. Ever since
our Blessed Saviour suffered His enemies to take away His life, it
is by His patience that we must regulate our own.”

““ Give to every man that asketh of thee . . . ask them not again.”
I have treated this precept at very full length in my notes on St.
Matthew v. 42, to which I must refer the reader. Of course such
precepts must be taken with certain exceptions and limitations,
such as, “* We must not give so as to encourage idleness or mendi-
cancy; we must not give where we know that what we give will
be spent in sin.” Our Lord knew perfectly well how necessary these
limitations and exceptions are; but He was desirous of creating the
Christian character, and this must be formed by the reception of
eveat and universal principles, not by the contemplation of the ex-
ceptions and limitations. May I be permitted to reproduce here
what I have written in my Commentary on St. Matthew ? “Our
Lord lays down one thing at a time in all its breadth and fulness ;
so that we may be struck by it, and have our minds occupied by it,Cuar. VI] WHAT THANK HAVE YE ? 161

ol "And as ye would that men should do to you, do ye
also to them likewise. h Matt. vii, 12,

32 ‘For if ye love them which love you, what i Matt. v. 46.
thank have ye? for sinners also love those that love them.

33 And if ye do good to them which do good to you, what
thank have ye? for sinners algo do even the same.

34 * And if ye lend to them of whom ye hope to * Matt. v. 42.
receive, what thank have ye? for sinners also lend to sinners,
to receive as much again.

34. For sinners also.” So A., later Uncials, all Cursiyes, old Latin, Vulg., &c. ; but
&, B., L., Coptic, read, “‘ Even sinners,” so Revisers.

and then, when we have firmly grasped the principle, there will be
time to consider the limitations. It is infinitely more important
that we should have within us the patience, the endurance, the
charity, by which we resist not evil, and give to him that asketh,
than the self-love and prudence, innocent though they are, which will
preserve us from injuring ourselves by too literally following the
leading of such patience and such charity.”

31. “And as ye would that men should do to you,” &c. This
passage serves a very different purpose in this discourse to what it
does in St. Matthew’s Sermon on the Mount. In that sermon it
follows upon some promises that God will hear prayer. And, as I
have shown in my note, it signifies to us that if we would obtain
our petitions fron God, we must be ready to grant the reasonable
petitions of our brethren. Here, however, it must be taken with
what follows.

32, 33, 384. “If ye love them ... if ye do good to them... . if
ye lend... to receive as much again.’’ We must do good to those
who have no claim upon our kindness, just as we should wish to be
benefited by those upon whom we have no claim since we have con-
ferred upon them no kindness.

It is no virtue to love those who love us. It is no virtue to do
good to those who do good to us. It is no virtue to lend to those from
whom after a specified time we look to receive what we have lent
them, perhaps with interest; and who may assist us because we
have assisted them.

If we were penniless and friendless, we should desire that others

MM162 YOUR REWARD SHALL BE GREAT.  [St. Lune.

35 But ‘love ye your enemies, and do good, and ™ lend,
iver.27. hoping for nothing again; and your reward shall
26 ver 30, be great, and “ye shall be the children of the
» Matt.v. 45. Hichest: for he is kind unto the unthankful and

to the evil.

35. ‘Hoping for nothing again.” So A., B., L., later Uncials, most Cursives. Old
Latin reads, Nihil desperantes, Vulg., Nihil inde sperantes. Our Authorized is the only
translation agreeing with the words before.

“<¢ Children ;” rather, sons (viol).

would help us out of pure bounty ; and even if we had been their
enemies, we should still cherish a secret hope that they would for-
get their enmity when they saw our distress: and so the Lord,
building on this secret desire in all of us, that enemies may relent,
and niggards be bountiful, and that we all may be treated un-
selfishly, says :—

35. ‘“ But love ye your enemies, and do good, and lend, hoping for
nothing again.” Upon this Chrysostom well remarks, ‘“‘ Whereby
thou wilt confer more upon thyself than upon him. For he is
beloved by a fellow-servant, but thou art made like unto God.”

“And your reward shall be great.” Though no Christian in
doing good sets before himself any definite reward, but does good
for the sake of God and for the love of the thing, yet God assures us
over and over again, that not one good deed shall be forgotten, but
that even the giver of a cup of cold water shall ‘‘ in no wise lose his
reward.” But though the true Christian seldom, if ever, looks for
a reward for himself, so little does he think of his services and self-
denials, yet he looks for this reward in the case of others. When he
hears of others doing good, spending themselves for the cause of
Christ and the good of His poor, then he is free to rejoice, and he does
rejoice, because he knows that they shall be welcomed to the joy of
their Lord. As regards himself he recognizes no merit in himself,
but casts himself wholly on the mercy of God; but in his brethren
he recognizes merit, he thanks God for their subjection to the Gospel,
and he is sure that as they have sown bountifully they shall reap
also bountifully.

‘Children of the Highest.” Men are children of God by imita-
ting Him. Thus God is the author of all peace, He is the God of
peace, and the Lord blesses the peace-makers by the promise that
‘* they shall be called the children of God.” What mistakes and mis-Cuar. VI] i JUDGE NOT. 163

36 °Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father

also is
merciful,

© Matt. v. 48.

3/7 > Judge not, and ye shall not be Judged: p Matt. vii. 1.

oe ee ee
conceptions there are about this term “ children of God’’! What
numbers of Christian teachers professing to be regenerate, to be
converted, to be saved—if they were asked howare we to become chil-
dren of God, would never think of giving such an answer as the Lord
gives here, ‘‘ Love your enemies, do good, and lend, hoping for no-
thing again”! And yet it will be found at the last that this is the
surest mark of God’s true children, that they should be like to Him
in forgiving and forbearing love.

“Be ye therefore merciful, as your Father also is merciful.”
This is the summing up of all that precedes. It is remarkable that
in St. Matthew, in the corresponding passage, we have “Be ye
perfect ;”” here we have “ Be ye merciful.” So that the perfection of
God is His mercy; and it must be, if it caused Him to give His
Son for us, the just for the unjust, that He might bring us to
God.

a7. “ Judge not and ye shall not be judged, condemn not and ye
shall not be condemned.” ‘* What Jesus desires to banish from the
society of His disciples is the judging spirit, the tendency to place
our faculty of moral appreciation at the service of natural malig-
nity, or more simply still, judging for the pleasure of judging.”
(Godet).

The judging in the first clause is, of course, judging so as to cen-
sure and condemn; the condemning of the second clause signifies,
from the preposition incorporated into the original word, a more
downright condemning, a condemning without mercy, and without
making any allowance for the circumstances adverse to virtue, or
particular temptations in the way of our neighbour. Here the Lord
inculcates that charity which is so well described by His servant (or
rather by Himself through the pen of His servant) as ‘ rejoicing
not in iniquity,” but ‘‘believing all things,” and “hoping all
things.” The censorious spirit rejoices in the iniquity of its neigh-
bour. It is the food upon which it preys. It looks out for it, and is
determined to find it whether it be there or not. The loving spirit,
on the contrary, ‘‘ believeth all things,” 2.e., believes that the heart
is not so bad as the action seems to show; “‘ hopeth all things,” @.e.,
hopes that an acquittal, a palliation, or an excuse will soon be164 GIVE, AND IT SHALL BE GIVEN.  [Sz. Luge.

condemn not, and ye shall not be condemned : forgive, and

ye shall be forgiven :
aq Proy. xix. 17. 38 4Give, and it shall be given unto you; good

 

37. ‘‘ Forgive, and ye shall be forgiven.” The Revisers translate this, ‘‘ Release, and
ye shall be released ;” but as the burden from which we are to be released is sin, it is
better to retain the old rendering.

found. I have noticed, in my comment on the parallel passage in
St. Matthew, that the judgment which the Lord condemns is the
judging of the heart, i.c., of the secret motives, on which we who
cannot read the heart must pronounce no opinion, aS we cannot
do so with certainty. Sin, wherever it appears, is sin, and we
must pronounce it to be such, if we would be sincere in our alle-
giance to Christ; but we must not intrude into the office of the
Searcher of hearts. The sin which we see may be the effect of
some sudden unknown temptation, and not have its roots so deep
as we might suppose.

‘‘ Forgive, and ye shall be forgiven.” ‘‘ Forgive”’ here is ‘‘ release,”’
and though it most probably primarily refers to forgiveness of all
injuries, yet must be extended to releasing from all burdens, as
fromservitude, and from obligations which those who have contracted
them are now no longer able to fulfil. Thus the Lord’s prayer in
St. Matthew’s Gospel is, ‘‘ Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our
debtors.”

But are we to take literally, ‘‘ye shall not be judged,” ‘‘ ye shall
not be condemned,” ‘‘ ye shall be forgiven”? Does not forgiveness
depend upon the Sacrifice of the Lord, not upon our forgiving one
another? Of course it depends primarily on the Lord’s Sacrifice
which has opened the way for forgiveness; but we may depend
upon it that at the last the Lord Who offered Himself for us will
make good His own words, “ Forgive, and ye shall be forgiven.”
We may not be able to reconcile with one another the various
words in which the Lord has set forth the mysteries of grace. The
Lord has not, as many vainly think, laid it upon us to do so; but
He has asked us to look upon Himself as our sacrifice and our
reconciliation to God, and He has also bidden us, on the pain of
forfeiting our part in this sacrifice, to be reconciled with one
another.

88. “ Give, and it shall be given unto you; good measure, pressed
down, and shaken together,” &c. Does this refer to generous treat-Cuar. VIL] MEASURED TO YOU AGAIN. 165

measure, pressed down, and shaken together, and running
over, shall men give into your "bosom. For « Ps, Ixxix. 12,

Ke of -, § Matt. vii. 2,
‘with the same measure that ve mete withal i wares oie
shall be measured to you again. eer St

ee

38. “With the same measure that VE Meter: So AO.
most old Latin, Vulg., Syriac ; but NB. De. las
(e), Copt., A&th. read, <‘ With what measure y

later Uncials, most Cursives,
» Some Cursives (1, 33, 131, 209), old Latin
e mete.”

ment by our neighbours in this world, or by God in the eternal
world? No doubt the latter, for the word “men”?

is not in the
original.

“Tt shall be given,” without specifying the giver ; and yet

no doubt it will be found true in a sense of God’s dealings with
generous, open-hearted men in this world, that God will move the
hearts of others to deal bountifully with them.

‘Good measure, pressed down, shaken together, and running
over.” “ He that soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully.” ‘It
will be ‘measure,’ because the eternal reward will be dispensed by
proportion, and according to deservings ; ‘good,’ because it will
be the true good, embracing in itself everything that is really good;
‘pressed down,’ because it will be to all fulness, having no part
empty, nothing to desire (they shall be satisfied with the fulness of
God); and ‘shaken together,’ because it will be firmly established
and secure; and ‘running over,’ or abundant as surpassing all
their deserts.” (From an old medieval writer quoted in Williams’.)

‘Give unto your bosom.” Here is an allusion to the form of
the Eastern garment, which like a large pocket can contain many
things in the fold above the girdle.

“ For with the same measure that ye mete withal it shall be mea-
sured to you again.” ‘He that soweth sparingly shall reap also
sparingly, and he that soweth bountifully shall reap also bountifully.”’
The last final award will not only be judgment or acquittal, or con-
demnation, or recompense, but it will very much take the form of
that sort of judgment which we associate with the word requital.
This is very clearly brought out in the Parable of the Pounds in
this gospel (xix. 12, &e.).

39. “And hespakeaparableunto them, Can the blind lead the blind?
shall they not both fall?” &e. Commentators have found it difficult
to explain how such a parable as this, respecting spiritual blindness,
can have a place in this part of the discussion, which is wholly166 CAN THE BLIND LEAD THE BLIND? ([Sr. Luxe.

39 And he spake a parable unto them, ‘Can the blind
t Matt. xv. 14. Jead the blind? shall they not both fall into the

ditch ?
panei a 2 40 "The disciple is not above his master: but
ohn xiii. 16. s :
cove 20 every one || that is perfect shall be as his master.
|| Or, shall be a
perfected as

 

his master.

39. <‘And he spake a parable,” &. X&, B., C., D., L., R., X., some Cursives (13, 33,
69, 124, 157), most old Latin, Vulg. read, “And he spake also ;”’ but “also” omitted
by A., most later Uncials, most Cursives, Copt., Goth., Syriac.

40. But every one that is perfect,” &e. ‘‘ But every one when he is perfected shall be
as his master” (Revisers) ; perfectus autem omnis ert, st sit sicut magister cjus. (Vulg.)

occupied with works of forgiveness and charity ; but may not this
be owing to mistaken views upon the nature of Christian light and
its corresponding eyesight ? Is not the key to it to be found in the
words of the beloved disciple, ‘“‘He that loveth his brother abideth
in the light, and there is none occasion of stumbling in him. But he
that hateth his brother is in darkness, and walketh in darkness,
and knoweth not whither he goeth, because that darkness hath
blinded his eyes”? (1 John ii. 11,12). Ever since the time of
Zwingle and Calvin Protestants look upon light as the possession of
clear views upon certain of the doctrines of grace, and being able
to express ourselves well and lucidly upon the truths of redemp-
tion ; but however necessary this may be, the Lord and His Apostle
allow no light to be true unless it is united with charity and the
love of our neighbour. An essential lens, so to speak, of the
spiritual eye is this love or charity ; and if we have not this the
Lord holds us to be blind, no matter what our intellectual grasp of
His truth.

‘Shall they not both fall into the ditch?’ If men have not
love—the light of pure Christian holy love—they cannot lead the
Church or its members aright. At the last day we shall know how
many errors of the Church have had their root in want of love.

40. “The disciple is not above his master: but everyone that is
perfect shall be,” &c. This is a very difficult passage, both as toits
meaning and its connection with the context. Godet connects the
‘blind leader” of verse 39 with the man with ‘“ the beam in thine
own eye” in verse 41,and tries to make this verse (40) a sort of con-
necting link, but I think very unsuccessfully. Oosterzee makes it to
mean, ‘‘It is only when the disciple surpasses his master that heCuap. VI] THE MOTE—THE BEAM. 167

41 *And why beholdest thou the mote that is in thy brother’s
eye, but perceivest not the beam that is in thine x Matt. vii.3
own eye?

42 Hither how canst thou say to thy brother, Brother, let
me pull out the mote that is in thine eye, when thou thyself

beholdest not the beam that is in thine own eye? Thou

a

42. “‘ Kither how canst thou say,” &c. So AS, | Cao):
Uncials, almost all Cursives, old Latin, Syriac, Goth.,
by &, B., Vulg. (Cod. Amiat.).

» H., K., L., M., other later
Copt., &e.; but “either” omitted

can hope to be preserved from falling into the ditch, into which his
blind leader falls. Since, however, the disciple does not usually
surpass his master, he has the same danger to fear.” The best in-
terpretation, however, seems to be that which makes the Master
here to be the Lord Himself, Who came not to judge, but to save.
So Cyril: ‘‘ Since Christ, therefore (thy Master), judged not, why
dost thou judge ? for He came not to judge the world, but to show
mercy.’ And so Stier: “ The Lord intends to say, ‘ Take care that
ye do not, in your rash and unmeasured condemnation of your
brethren, exercise a severer judgment than I, in My love and for-
bearance, have exercised upon you. For does not the censorous
judge place himself, as it were, above His forgiving, graciously
correcting, long-suffering Master? In this case ‘ everyone that is
pertect,’ i.e., perfectly instructed and disciplined, shall be as His
Master, i.e., conformed to His image of long-suffering love.”

41, 42. “ And why beholdest thou the mote that isin thy brother’s
eye?” &e. It seems strange that amongst reasonable creatures
such an illustration as this should be at all needed, yet what is
more common than to see persons who have some grave fault, or
faults, known to all around them, severe upon others for some error
incomparably less offensive or dangerous? But just as the eye can-
not see itself, so the moral vision can with difficulty be turned
inward, so that we should scrutinize ourselves with the severity
with which we scrutinize others. So that one of the most dangerous
things for ministers, whose duty it is to teach, reprove, and exhort,
is to forego self-examination and strict judgment of themselves.
Such become hypocrites; for a man who is constantly censuring
others without dealing strictly and severely with himself is a hypo-
crite, for he is no real hater of evil, for if it was hatred of evil that168 A GOOD TREE. (Sr. Luxe.

hypocrite, ¥ cast out first the beam out of thine own eye, and

ySeeProv. then shalt thou see clearly to pull out the mote

a that is in thy brother’s eye.

2 Matt.vii.16, 43 7 For a good tree bringeth not forth corrupt

- fruit; neither doth a corrupt tree bring forth good
fruit.

inspired his judgment, would he not begin by showing this feeling
in an unsparing judgment of himself?

‘‘ First cast out the beam ... and then shalt thou see clearly.”
This teaches us that the most successful combatants against sin in
others are those who most thoroughly cleanse themselves.

43. ‘For a good tree bringeth not forth corrupt fruit; neither
doth a corrupt tree,” &c. Much difficulty has also been made of
the connection of this with what precedes, but it seems very plain.
The Lord had said, ‘‘ Cast out the beam out of thine own eye, and
then shalt thou see clearly,” &e. What does the illustration ‘* cast
out the beam”? signify but ‘‘ cleanse thyself from sin, from all heart
sin, as well as from all outward sin,” and then thou wilt bear fruit
unto God, then thou wilt make thyself a good tree, bearing thyself
the fruits of righteousness, and helping and influencing thy brethren
to bear the same fruit? The ‘“‘for”’ at the beginning of verse 43
evidently implies a close connection with the last clause of verse 42,
and what I have said seems to make a very close one, and I think
the only one possible.

‘A good tree ...a corrupt tree,” &. The Lord, ‘‘ who came to
destroy the works of the devil, and make us the children of God,”
could not possibly have said this if every tree was fated to remain
always thesame. On the contrary, those to whom He said it could
only be compared to trees in the sense that each tree bears its own
particular fruit. Men are not in all respects like trees: they have
wills, hearts, consciences. And these the Lord came to direct, to
change, to awaken. So that the good tree might bring forth better
fruit, and the bad be converted and bear good.

But does not a good tree, z.¢., a good man, sometimes, through
the weakness of his nature, commit sin; and does not an evil man,
because he yet retains some remnants of his original righteousness,
sometimes do good? Yes; and so the Lord’s words are only
strictly and absolutely true of the man in each; the old man, andOnur, Vi | HIS OWN FRUIT. 169

44 For *every tree is known by his own fruit. For of
thorns men do not gather figs, nor of a bramble » Matt. xi. 33.
bush gather they + grapes. + Gr. a grape.

45 »A good man out of the good treasure of > Matt. xii. 35,
his heart bringeth forth that which is good ; and an evil man

 

the new ; the old man, when not hindered by the new, always doing
evil (“corrupt according to the deceitful lusts,”’ Ephes. iv.), and the
new man, when not hindered by the old, always doing good: So
at least we, as Christians, must understand Him, and make it the
business of our lives to mortify the old and to cherish the new.

But the Lord speaks in a general way; internal characters pro-
duce corresponding external fruits, and so He proceeds to say,—

44, “ For every tree is known by his own fruit,” &e. The proud
man by his pride, the selfish man by his want of care for his
brethren, the dishonest man by his fraud ; as also the humble man
by his humility, the charitable man by his benevolence, the honest
man by his truthfulness and fair dealing.

But would it not be better to put all together, and say the con-
verted man (or saved man) by the fruits of conversion? No, it
would not, for the change which is generally known as conversion
very frequently leaves some bad feature of the original character
little altered. The converted man, as the term “conversion” is
very commonly understood, is frequently by no means an humble
man, and often he is a censorious man who deeply needs the
application to himself of the Lord’s words, “ Judge not, and ye
shall not be judged.”’ The Apostles had, if ever men had, accepted
the Lord—for they had given up all to follow Him; and yet even
they needed a conversion from a spirit of self-aggrandizement ; for
when they disputed “ which should be the greatest?” He answered,
Except ye be converted, and become as little children, ye shall
not enter into the kingdom of heaven.”’

45, “A good man out of the good treasure of his heart bringeth
forth,” &e. The good treasure in the heart of the good man is not
only good knowledge of Scripture and of the doctrines of grace, for
there are numberless instances of a very extensive knowledge of the
best things in the hearts of bad men. No, the good treasure is first
of all a good intention—the bent of the will being turned to God;
the good treasure is the new heart and the right spirit. It is newE70 WHY CALL YE ME, LORD, LORD? [Sr. Luxe.

out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth forth that which
c Matt. xii.34. ig evil: for °of the abundance of the heart his
mouth speaketh.

Baan 46 & 4And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do
Matt. vii. 21. / J ?

&xxv.11. ch. not the things which I say
Kili. 25. -

 

45. “Out of the evil treasure of his heart bringeth,’ &c. So A.,C.,X.,T, a, later
Uncials, almost all Cursives, some old Latin (¢, e, f, g?, q), Copt., Syriac, Goth., Ath. ;
but X, B., D., L., a few Cursives (1, 69, 131), a few old Latin, Vulg. (Cod. Amiat.), Arm.,
omit ‘‘ treasure of his heart.”

affections set on God, new desires longing after righteousness, new
hopes of God’s eternal good things. These, and these alone, give
their value to such things as correct and extensive knowledge, or
powers of illustration, or richness of imagination, or a copious flow
of language.

And the converse is true: the radically evil state of the heart
taints the outpourings of its stores of knowledge and wit in brilliant
conversation, or at least renders them nugatory for good.

‘‘ Of the abundance of the heart his mouth speaketh.’ From the
abundance, because there is ever more within than is poured forth.
The heart is as a deep fountain, these but the streams.

But cannot a wicked man dissemble and speak good words and
refrain from evil ones? Not always. No man can at all times, on
all occasions, and in all companies, do such violence to himself as
never to unburthen his own soul—never to give relief to his very self
—always to stifle what his heart prompts him to utter.

46. “And why call ye me, Lord, Lord, and do not the things
which I say?” The Person of Christ, God and Man, and all that
flows from this union of the Godhead and Manhood, is given to us
that through His grace and love working in us we should obey Him.
What a mockery to confess Him as “‘ God,” if we do not surrender
ourselves to Him as God! What a mockery to call Him “ Lord”
if we do not attempt to obey Him as Lord! What a mockery to
call Him “Saviour” and continue in wilful bondage to that from
which He died to save us!

Notice how here Christ claims to be what they called Him, and
demands that they should obey Him as the Lord. As Cyril says:
‘Lordship, both in name and reality, belongs only to the highest
nature.”Cusp. VI] IT WAS FOUNDED UPON A ROCK. 171

47 °Whosoever cometh to me, and hear
and doeth them, I will shew you to w
like:

eth my sayings,
hom he ig « Matt. vii, 24.

48 He is like a man which built an house, and digged
deep, and laid the foundation on a rock: and when the flood
arose, the stream beat vehemently upon that house, and
could not shake it: for it was founded upon a rock.

48. ‘Upon a rock.” “ Upon the rock.”
“For it was founded upon a rock.”
Cursives, old Latin, Vulg., Goth., Syriac,
Copt. read, ‘‘ Because it was well built.”

SovAyy C.D. x A later Uncials, almost all
and Arm. ; but ¥, B., L., two Cursives (33, 157),

47. “ Whosoever cometh to me, and heareth my sayings, and
doeth them, I will,” &c. This parable differs from that in Matth. vii.
in this particular, that “‘ coming to Christ” is spoken of before
“hearing His sayings” and “ doing” them. It is plain that stress
should be laid upon this coming. It is not picking out some
particular sayings of Christ which an unconverted Hindoo might
learn, and attempting to imbibe their Spirit and obey them. This
is useless unless it leads to something better. But Christ is not
only a teacher, He is a Master. Heis a bestower of grace and
strength to obey His precepts. We must come to Him, by an act
of our spirit, to throw ourselves at His feet and commit the care of
our souls personally into His hands, all the while endeavouring to
follow all His leading. This, and this only, is to dig deep (to dig
and deepen, as the Revisers have it). Itis getting to the rock, but
still be it remembered, when the foundation is reached the house is
not built—the act of building is the hearing Christ’s sayings and
doing them, and is, I need not say, the work of a lifetime ; but the
Lord, it appears to me, speaks here not so much of the process of
building as of the coming to, the reaching Himself, the true Rock,

in the matter of the laying of the foundation.

48. “‘ When the flood arose, the stream beat vehemently,” &c. A
house built only on the earth, on the slopes of the hills with which
our Lord was surrounded, may not always be washed away by a
deluge of rain. It may escape, and doubtless many ill-built houses
do, which are not so much in the way of the stream as others: but
the Christian building, the house of each man’s soul, must alwaysM2. IMMEDIATELY IT FELL. [Sr. Luxe.

49 But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like a man that
without a foundation built an house upon the earth: against
which the stream did beat vehemently, and immediately it
fell; and the ruin of that house was great.

 

be tried by the flood. Itisa spiritual necessity. It is part of our
probation that, at some time or other, or constantly, we should be
tempted. And we must be prepared for the stream ‘‘ beating vehe-
mently.’”’ We must be prepared for temptations which nothing
but holding on very firmly to Christ, and using all the means of
grace, and following in the steps of our Lord in prayer and self-
denial and the use of Scripture, will enable us to overcome.

Such is the positive side of building on the rock; but when we
come to the negative, ‘‘ But he that heareth, and doeth not, is like
a man that without a foundation,” &c., we see a remarkable
difference ; no mention is made of the “coming,” but only of the
hearing and the not doing, ‘‘doeth not.” So that the unsuccessful
builder is the one who, even if he has come to Christ, neglects to
follow Him and obey His word. It is as if the ceasing to obey of
itself removed the man from the foundation.

49. ‘Tt fell; and the ruin of that house was great.” This is a
place of terrible significance. The soul thus ruined and fallen need
not have been that of some king or noble or philosopher, but of
some obscure man whose fall from truth or goodness none but a
few godly neighbours would notice even, much less lament; and
yet to the man himself the ruin was unspeakably great, for it was
the loss of his spiritual and then of his eternal life—of his all; and
yet it is possible that whilst he was in this life he might by
repentance begin to build again.Cuar. VIL] A CENTURION’S SERVANT.

CEA WV

N OW when he had ended all his Sayings in the audience
J of the people, * he entered into Capernaum.

2 And a certain centurion’s servant, who was * Matt. viii. 5.
dear unto him, was sick, and ready to die.

3 And when he heard of Jesus, he sent unto him the

elders of the Jews, beseeching him that he would come and
heal his servant.

4 And when they came to Jesus, they besought him in-

stantly, saying, That he was worthy for whom he should do
this :

© For he loveth our nation, and he hath built us a syna-
gogue. See
4. “Instantly.” Revisers, “‘ Urgently.”
“That he was worthy for whom he should do this.” Rather, ‘‘He is worthy for

whom thou shouldest do this.” So x, A., B., C., D., E., H., L., &c., twenty-one Cur-
sives ; but as Authorized in G., K., M., S., and most Cursives.

1-5. ‘‘ Now when he had ended all his sayings .... built usa
synagogue.” ‘A certain centurion’s servant,” &c. This miracle is
common to St. Matthew and St. Luke, but all notice of it is omitted
by St. Mark. St. Matthew’s narrative is much shorter, and if we
possessed it alone we should have supposed that the centurion came
once in person to the Lord, and that there was but one stage, as it
were, in the narrative; whereas St. Luke’s account very greatly
enhances our opinion, not only of the faith, but of the exceeding
humility of the centurion. For no doubt feeling that he was of an
alien race whom God as yet had kept at a distance from Himself,
instead of coming personally, he sent the elders of the chosen
people of his place to the Lord, with the request that “‘He would
come and heal his servant.’’ They seconded his appeal by recount-
ing his good deeds, that he loved the Jews as the people of God,
and had built them a synagogue.

6. “ Then Jesus went with them .... under my roof.” From
the accounts of His miracles and teaching this man must have been174 SAY IN A WORD. [Sr. Luxe.

6 Then Jesus went’ with them. And when he was now
not far from the house, the centurion sent friends to him,
saying unto him, Lord, trouble not thyself: for I am not
worthy that thou shouldest enter under my roof :

7 Wherefore neither thought I myself worthy to come
unto thee: but say in a word, and my servant shall be healed.

8 For I also am a man set under authority, having under
+ Gr. this man. me soldiers, and I say unto + one, Go, and he
goeth: and to another, Come, and he cometh; and to my
servant, Do this, and he doeth 7.

9 When Jesus heard these things, he marvelled at him,

7. ‘‘My servant shall be healed.” SoX, A., C., D., all other Uncials and Cursives,
&c.; but B, and L. read, ‘‘ Let my servant be healed.” Westcott and Hort, Tischendorf,
and other editors follow these two MSS., and reject the verdict of the rest of Christendom.

very deeply impressed with the Lord’s greatness and goodness and
with His nearness to God. This came upon him with such force,
when he saw that the Lord was approaching his house, that he
sent the remarkable message that the Lord would no further trouble
Himself, but heal his servant by His mere word, “‘ Say in a word,
and my servant shall be healed.”

And the reason which he urged was still more remarkable for its
grasp of recognition of the Lord’s power and greatness. ‘‘ Say in
a word, and my servant shall be healed. For I also am a man,” &c.
He looks upon the Lord as having all power over that vast hierarchy
with which the unseen and spiritual world is peopled, so that as God
is set before us throughout the Old Testament as sending His angels
to destroy or to avert destruction, so Jesus had such power with God
that He could dothesame. For such must be the true meaning of the
comparison which he draws between himself as issuing his commands
to his under officers or soldiers to do his will at a distance, and the
Lord issuing His commands. The Lord was a poor man, having
no servants, and the words of the centurion imply that if He healed
his servant it would be because invisible messengers of health and
strength waited His beck and call.

66 VAT ‘ : :
9. ““ When Jesus heard these things he marvelled ... . faith,
;
no, not in Israel.” The belief of this Gentile centurion stands in
strong contrast with that of the Jewish nobleman whose utmostCuar. VII] NO, NOT IN ISRABL. Iv

and turned him about, and said unto the people that followed
him, I say unto you, I have not found so great faith, no, not
in Israel.

10 And they that were sent, returning to the house, found
the servant whole that had been sick.

11 § And it came to pass the day after, that he went into

 

10. ‘* That had been sick ” omitted by Nc, B., L., Cursives 1, 1
e, &c.), Copt.; retained by A., C., DF We Re Cy the ake
Cursives, Vulg., Syriac, &e.

1]. “On the day after.” Ne, AS, BH, We Ge, He le. offer, later Uncials, seventy
Cursives, some old Latin (a, b), &c, read only “‘afterwards;” but NS Ca Dy ke Vie
very many Cursives and versions read as in Authorized.

57, 209, old Latin (a, b, ec,
, M., other Uncials, almost all

faith was only strong enough to make him say, “ Sir, come down,
ere my child die.” St. Chrysostom also shows how jt rises far
above that of the sisters whom Jesus loved ; for they thought of
nothing more than sending for the Lord, and when He came they
could only say somewhat reproachfully, ‘‘ Lord, if thou hadst been
here, my brother had not died.”

“He marvelled.”” How is it that the Son of God, Who foresees
and knows all things, marvelled, because all wonder arises from
want of foresight, from seeing, or hearing, or learning something
unlooked for ? The answer is, that our Lord fully partook of human
nature; and just as according to His human nature He increased
in wisdom, so in His human nature He was astonished. It is the
greatest of mysteries that God and Man—God with all the powers
and perfections of the Godhead, and man with all the limitations
and sinless weaknesses of the perfect manhood—should be one
Christ ; but this mystery pervades the whole Revelation of the Son
of God contained in the Gospels. He knows all things, and yet He
increases in wisdom. He is the source of all happiness, and yet He
suffers pain. He ceaselessly and unweariedly upholds all things, and
yet Heis weary. He is almighty, and yet He is crucified through
weakness. All the mystery of His compound Being is contained
in the words, ‘‘He was in the form of God” and yet “ He emptied
Himself.” How all this came to pass is a secret of the Trinity.
We have but to fall down and worship.

11. And it came to pass the day after, that he went into a city called
Nain; and many,” &e. This consoling and instructive miracle ig
only to be found in St. Luke, and the question naturally arises,176 A CITY CALLED NAIN. [Sr. Luxe.

a city called Nain; and many of his disciples went with him,

and much people.

 

««Many of” omitted by &, B., D., F., L., some old Latin (a, e, f,1), Vulg., and versions,
Duteread inl Aue Go) Bie, Grey El Ke Mi) &c., most Cursives, Goth.

why so remarkable an act of Christ’s power in raising the dead
should not form part of the body of tradition which we have in the
first two Evangelists. Perhaps we have been much too ready to
ascribe some human or secondary motive to the Evangelists, in
that they inserted one account and rejected another—perhaps we
have not sufficiently ascribed their choice to the cuidance of that
Spirit Who “ divideth to every man severally as He wills,” and Who
thought good to order that whilst the four have much in common,
each should have the honour of recording special incidents, or as is
the case with St. Mark, narrate them with a circumstantiality
which takes note of the manner, look, and gesture of the Lord in
doing them. Godet suggests that the life of the Lord was so
crowded with miracles that little more could be given with any
fulness of detail than one or two of each class. As he rightly re-
marks, “ For edification, which was the sole aim of the popular
preaching, this was sufficient. Ten cures of lepers would say no
more to faith than one. And that as St. Matthew and St. Mark
give fully the restoration to life of Jairus’ daughter, and St. J ohn
that of Lazarus, so to St. Luke is assigned this of the widow’s son.”
Dean Plumptre suggests that St. Luke received this account from
the devout women who followed the Lord, as the miracle was one
which, from its circumstances, had specially fixed itself in their
memories.

Attempts also have been made to get rid of the miracle by assert-
ing that it was a case of suspended animation, the young man not
being really dead, but only in a death-like swoon; but, if so, the
miracle of Resurrection is changed into a miracle of Divine intui-
tion, for the Lord must have in this case foreseen the very moment
at which the young man would come again to life, and God must
have so ordered the two processions—that of the disciples and fol-
lowers of Jesus, and that of the funeral in which was ‘‘much
people of the city,” that they should meet at the exact moment ; for
afew minutes earlier, and the sad concourse would not have left the
house of mourning ; afew minutes later, and the body would have
been quietly deposited in the grave.Cuar. VIL] THE ONLY SON OF HIS MOTHER. MG

12 Now when he came nigh to the gate of. the city, be-
hold, there was a dead man carried out, the only son of his
mother, and she was a widow: and much people of the city
was with her.
13 And when the Lord saw her,

he had compassion on
her, and said unto her, Weep not.

 

“Called Nain.” A pbou yet exists called Neen or Nein in the
locality where the city must have existed. Dean Stanley writes :—
“On the northern slope of the rugged and barren ridge of little
Hermon, immediately west of Endor, which lies in a further recess
of the same range, is the ruined village of Nain. No convent, no
tradition marks the spot. But under the circumstances the name

is suilicient to guarantee its authenticity. One entrance alone it
could have had—that which opens on the rough hill side on its
downward slope to the plain. It must have been in this steep
descent, as according to Eastern custom they ‘ carried out the dead
man,’ that nigh to the gate of the village the bier was stopped,
and the long procession of mourners staid, and the young man
delivered back to his mother.” (P. 357.)

12. “ Now when he came nigh to the gate of the city . . . . was
with her.” What avery simple, yet what a surpassingly touching
picture of the bereavement! ‘‘ He has told us the sum of misery in
afew words. The mother was a widow, and had no further hope
of having children; she had no one upon whom she might look in
the place of him tl ee was dead. ‘To him alone she had given suck,
he alone made her home cheerful. All that is sweet and precious
to a mother was he alone to her.” (Greg. Nyss., Cat. Aurea.)

3. “* And when the Lord saw her, he had compassion on her,’
&e. What an honour had this unknown widow, that the Lord saw
her grief and had pity on her! But has not the Lord, Who is un-
changeable, and Who, from His most eminent place in heaven,
sees all grief, has He not compassion now on those who weep? We
firmly beheve that He has. but what form does His sympathy
take? 'That we know not now, but we shall know hereafter. We
shall know then that the grief of every mourner has been specially
discerned by Him, and that a particular exercise of compassion has
come forth trom Him; but whether His act of compassion has met
with its due recognition and response from the mourner is another
matter altogether.178 HE TOUCHED THE BIER. (Sr. Luge.

14 And he came and touched the || bier: and they that

 

|| Or, cofin. bare him stood still. And he said, Young man,
b ch. viii. 54. b :

John xi. 43. I say unto thee, ” Arise.

Acts ix. 40.

Rom. iv. 17.

“Weep not.” And what He says to the disconsolate one he says
to every mourner, ‘‘ Weep not.” For it is He Who takes away all
cause for bitter tears. Do we weep for the dead? He is the Resur-
rection, and He hath abolished death, so that “they who sleep in
Jesus will God bring with Him.” Do we weep for sorrow of heart
for any worldly loss, as of means, of health, of friends? It is He
Who has said without any reserve, “‘ Blessed are they that mourn,
for they shall be comforted.’ Letus but strive to receive a message
from Him in every visitation whatever it be, and our sorrow will,
sooner than we think, be turned into joy. Do we mourn for sin ?
This is His most precious gift, for He has Himself made us sorry
that we may receive from Him remission, reconciliation, resto-
ration.

14. ‘And he came and touched the bier,’ &c. There was no
coffin fast closed and nailed. The body lay stretched upon a board
or plank with raised edges, covered with the white linen grave-
clothes, and a napkin to hide the face.

“Touched the bier.” On almost every occasion when it is pos-
sible, He brings His blessed Person into contact with the body of
him whom He desired to heal or to raise. Here the act has a pecu-
liar significance which is wonderfully brought out by St. Cyril:
‘““He performs the miracle not only in word, but also touches the
bier, to the end that you might know that the Sacred Body of
Christ is powerful to the saving of man; for it is the Body of
Life, and the Flesh of the Omnipotent Word, Whose power It
(the Body) possesses. For as iron applied to fire does the work of
fire, so the Flesh, when it is united to the Word which quickens
all things, becomes itself also quickening, and the banisher of
death.” (Cat. Aurea.) And so to each one we give the Commu-
nion of the Body of Christ in the words, ‘‘ The Body of our Lord
Jesus Christ, which was given for thee, preserve thy body and soul
unto everlasting life.”’

“And they that bare him stood still.” Why was this? It may
be through awe at meeting one the fame of whose miracles had
filled the Holy Land. Perhaps, also, they vaguely expected some
act of power on His part.Cuar, VIL] HE THAT WAS DEAD SAT Up. 179

15 And he that was dead sat up, and began to speak.
And he delivered him to his mother.

 

‘“And he said, Young man, I say unto thee, Arise.’ Here we
have the majesty as well as the power of God exhibited in the Lord,
Massillon, one of the most eloquent of French orators, thus charac-
terizes it: ‘‘ Elijah, it is true, raises up the dead, but he is obliged
to stretch himself out upon the body of the child whom he recalls
to life; and it is easily seen that he invokes a foreign power, that
he withdraws from the empire of death a soul which is n

ot subju-
gated to him, and that he is

not himself the master of life and death.

Jesus raises up the dead as easily as He performs the most common
actions; He speaks as master of those who repose in an eternal
sleep ; and it is thoroughly felt that He is the God of the dead as
of the living, never more tranquil and calm than when He 1
ating the grandest things.”

15. ‘And he that was dead sat up... And he delivered him
to his mother.” Notice the two deliverances. He delivered him
from death to life, and He delivered him to his mother. This isa
type or forecast of what will take place at the great day of Resur-
rection. Then all who rise in Christ will be ‘delivered ” to those
from whom they have been separated ; delivered to those whom they
have loved, so that they shall be theirs in a far higher
way than they could have thought it possible.

The Fathers consider the deliverance of this young man to hig
mother by the power of Christ’s word as a type of the restoration
of all those who are raised by Christ’s power from the death of sin
to their true and sorrowing mother the Church. The Church weeps
for those who are alienated from her through evil lusts and passions.
They are dead to her. They cannot support her or strengthen her
by prayer and a holy life; but when by Christ’s power they are
awakened from their sleep, then they become hers again. She has
again restored to her their love, their works, their intercessions.
Augustine also compares the three forms of death from which our
Lord restored Jairus’ daughter, the widow’s son and Lazarus, and
deduces from the comparison how the Lord raises from spiritual
death three classes of sinners—one, that of the little maid, is scarcely

death, and it typifies the restoration of the sinner who, by consent-
ing to secret sin, is only just dead; a second, like the widow’s son,
is completely dead, and is no longer of service to religion or the

S oper-

and better180 GOD HATH VISITED HIS PEOPLE. (Sr. Luxe.

16 © And there came a fear on all: and they glorified God,
© ch. i. 65. saying, ‘That a great prophet is risen up among
cae ato‘ us; and, ° That God hath visited his people.
ee “17 And this rumour of him went forth through-

out all Judea, and throughout all the region
round about.
f Matt. xi. 2. 18 ‘And the disciples of John shewed him of

all these things.

 

Church, but is put away, if not formally at least really ; whilst a
third, like Lazarus, is not only dead but loathsome and polluting all
around by the savour of his ill-deeds. He is as one buried four
days, and by an inveterate continuance in sin has become corrupt
and noisome, while evil custom lies as a stone upon the grave, and
its old sinful habits, like grave-clothes, wrap around the body. So
that no form of spiritual death is such that it can resist the quick-
ening power of the word of the Lord.

16. ‘“‘ And there came a fear on all: and they glorified God.”’ This
fear was rather what we now call awe: because though it retained
much of the nature of fear, as there always must be in the near-
ness of the supernatural, yet it rather attracted them to God, for
they said, ‘‘ A great prophet is risen up among us,” and “ God hath
visited His people.” The words ‘‘God visiting” is applied to any
deliverance which God wrought. Thus, when Naomi returned to
the land of Israel, it was because ‘‘she had heard that the Lord had
visited his people in giving them bread.”” The hearty confession of
the hand of God on the part of His ancient people in every dispen-
sation of judgment or deliverance, puts the cold, grudging, half-
believing recognition of God’s interference by some modern Chris-
tian nations to shame.

17-18. “And this ramour of him went forth .... shewed him
of all these things.” By the words ‘‘ throughout all the region
round about,” St. Luke very probably alludes to the part beyond
the Dead Sea where John was imprisoned: so that the rumour
reached those disciples which were near him, and had access to
him. It is probable that they were somewhat prompted by envy.
They could not bear to think that their master should decrease, and
that the new Teacher should increase. Of course, in such disciples
the teaching of the Baptist had as yet failed to produce the one
effect for which John was sent to preach, viz., to prepare men toCuap. VIL] LOOK WE FOR ANOTHER? 181

19 * And John calling unto him two of his disciples sent
them to Jesus, saying, Art thou he that should come? or
look we for another ?

20 When the men were come unto him, they said, John
Baptist hath sent us unto thee, saying, Art thou he that
should come? or look we for another ?

21 And in that same hour he cured many of their in-
firmities and plagues, and of evil spirits: and unto many
that were blind he gave sight. ;

22 ® Then Jesus answering said unto them, Go « Matt. xi. 4.
your way, and tell John what things ye have seen and heard ;

 

19. ‘Sent them to Jesus.” So, A., A, later Uncials, almost all Cursives, old Latin
(b, c, f, 1, q, &c.), Copt., Syriac, &c.; but B., L., R., Cursives 13, 33, 69, 157, some old
Latin (a, g), Valg. (Cod. Amiat.), Arm., 4®th. read, ‘‘ to the Lord,”
receive Christ. Those who had most effectually received the words
of the Baptist,—Peter, James, John, Andrew, Philip, Nathaniel,——
had long ago attached themselves to Christ.

19, 20. “ And John calling unto him two of his disciples... .
look we for another?” “ Art thou he that should come?” &c. The
Messiah was emphatically the Coming One. Of His own coming
into the world He says, ‘‘ Lo I come, to do Thy will.” It was He
that beyond all other messengers of God should ‘‘come in the
name ofthe Lord.” He was “the Desire of all nations” that should
‘“come,” of whom Haggai prophesied, and of whom Habakkuk
spake of as “‘ He that shall come will come, and shall not tarry.”’

21. ‘And in that same hour he cured many of their infirmities

. he gave sight.” He did not answer them in words, but bid
them stand aside and judge of Him by His works of mercy and power.

22. “Then Jesus answering said unto them, Go your way and
tell John,” &e. -The Lord here asserts that in His personal acts of
love and power He fulfils one of the most remarkable prophecies of
the Old Testament respecting the Coming One, and the good time
which He brings with Him; but when we look to the words of the
prophecy, we found that He Who comes is God: ‘‘Say to them
that are of a fearful heart, Be strong, fear not: behold your God
will come with vengeance, even God with a recompense; He will
come and save you. Then the eyes of the blind shall be opened,

and the ears of the deaf shall be unstopped. Then shali the lame182 THE BLIND SEB. (Sr. Luge.

“how that the blind see, the lame walk, the lepers are
h Is. xxxv.5. cGleansed, the deaf hear, the dead are raised, ‘to
ich.iv.18. the poor the gospel is preached.

23 And blessed is he, whosoever shall not be offended in
me.

 

99

man leap as an hart, and the tongue of the dumb sing.” Notice,
the question of the Baptist was, ‘““Art Thou He that should come;”’
and the Lord after doing the mighty works foretold by the pro-
phet, sends to John to tell him that the prophecy which speaks of
no other than God’s coming and saving was fulfilled in Him. To
this the Lords adds: ‘‘To the poor the Gospel is preached.” This
seems to belong to another prophecy, that of Isaiah lxi., but must
it not be included under the promise of the prophecy of chap. xxxv.,
which the Lord is now referring to, for the prophet goes on to pre-
dict, ‘‘In the wilderness shall waters break out, and streams in the
desert”? What is this but the Lord by His Gospel giving to thirsty
souls the living water ?

23. “‘ Blessed is he whosoever shall not be offended in me.” St.
Ambrose supposes that in these words the Lord anticipates the offence
of the cross—the last and most dangerous offence of all. ‘‘ For the
cross,” he writes, “ may cause offence even to the elect. But there
is no greater testimony than this of a Divine Person. For there is
nothing which seems to be more surpassing the nature of man than
that One should offer Himself for the whole world.”

Respecting the motive of St. John in sending the two disciples
to the Lord, whether whilst languishing in prison he felt deserted,
and so was somewhat shaken in faith, or whether it was only for
the sake of his disciples, that, seeing the Lord’s work, they might
attach themselves to Him—these two matters I have discussed in
my note on St. Matthew xi.2. Upon the whole, the evidence seems
in favour of the latter view. Godet supposes that John was moved
with the fact that Jesus had not begun to fulfil the programme, if
one may use the expression, which John, speaking by the Spirit,
had marked out for Him. In particular, He had made no approach
to fulfilling that work of judgment which St. John had assigned to
Him when he spake of Him as One “ whose fan is in His hand, and
He will throughly purge His floor,” &e.; but this seems unsatisfac-

tory, because John had equally prophesied of the Lord as the Lamb
of God.Cuap. VIL] MORE THAN A PROPHET. 183

24 4“ And when the messengers of John were departed,
he began to speak unto the people concerning « Matt. xi. 1.
John, What went ye out into the wilderness for to see? A
reed shaken with the wind ?

25 But what went ye out for to see? A man clothed in
soft raiment ? Behold, they which are gorgeously apparelled,
and live delicately, are in kings’ courts.

26 But what went ye out for to see? A prophet? Yea,
I say unto you, and much more than a prophet.

2/ This is he, of whom it 1s written, 1 Bekold, I | Mal. iii.1.
send my messenger before thy face, which shall prepare thy
way before thee.

 

24. ‘‘And when the messengers of John were departed, he
began,” &c. Particular notice is taken of the fact that the Lord
gave this testimony to John, not in the presence of his disciples,
but when they had gone to their master. In their then state of
unbelief respecting Himself it would probably have been injurious
for them to have heard so high atestimony to John as being “‘ more
than a prophet.” They might have said to themselves, “‘ If he be
more than a prophet why should we leave him to follow another?”

94. “What went ye out... . live delicately, are in kings’
courts.” ‘ What went ye out into the wilderness for to see? A reed,”
&e. They took a long journey into the wilderness: did they go
out to see one like one of the reeds growing there in the marshy
places ?

Again He asks, ‘‘ What went ye out for tosee?”’ (not naming the
wilderness.)

Did they go out to see one clothed according to his exalted rank
among them: being a son of one of the chief priests; or wearing
long robes as one of the scribes? In other words, did they go to
see a fickle, time-serving preacher, who trimmed his doctrine so as
to win the applause of the multitude? or did they go to hear one
like a court preacher, softening down the denunciations of God
against luxury, rapacity, and adultery? No, they left their homes
and went into the wilderness to see a prophet, one far greater than
any prophet.

27. “This is he of whom it is written, Behold, I send my mes-184 THE PUBLICANS JUSTIFIED GOD. (Sr. Luxe.

28 For I say unto you, Among those that are born of
women there is not a greater prophet than John the Baptist :
but he that is least in the kingdom of God is greater than
he.

29 And all the people that heard him, and the publicans,
m Matt. iii.5. justified God, ™bemg baptized with the baptism
a of John.

 

28. ‘‘There is not a greater prophet.” So A., E., G., H., later Uncials, almost all
Cursives, some old Latin, Vulg., Goth., Syriac; but ‘‘ prophet” omitted by &, B., K., L.
M., twenty-five Cursives, most old Latin (a, b, c, e, h, &e.).

“The Baptist” omitted by X, B., L., Cursives 1, 131, 157, and a few others ; retained by
A., H., G., H., K., M., &., other Uncials, most Cursives, old Latin, Vulg., Syriac.

’

senger before thy face.” Greater was John than any prophet before
him, in that he heralded the approach of the Lord—in that he pre-
pared His way—in that he pointed Him out as the Lamb of God—
in that he even baptized Him.

28. “ For I say unto you, Among those that are born of women,”’
&e. It is singular that so many of the Fathers have missed the
meaning of this saying. Bede gives from those who preceded him
two interpretations, one that the kingdom of heaven means the
angelic kingdom, and so the least angel is greater in power at least
than such a saint as John; and the other that the Lord refers to
Himself, Who at the time of His birth came after John but was far
greater in Divine authority.

But the true meaning undoubtedly is that John, having suffered
martyrdom before the Lord’s Crucifixion and Resurrection, was
“under the law,” and could not receive that new nature and those
sacramental means for its conveyance which were the results of
the Resurrection of the Saviour. The least member of Christ’s
Mystical Body has a nearness to Christ and an union with Him
which none of the patriarchs or prophets could have before He
finished His Redeeming Work. “ As a type or prophecy of grace
is less than a pledge and means, as a Jewish Sacrifice is less than
a Christian Sacrament, so are Moses and Elias less by office than
the representatives of Christ.” (J. H. Newman.)

29. “And all the people that heard him, and the publicans, justi-
fied,” &c. This particular mention of the publicans is remarkable.
It seems to me to point to some religious movement amongst themCuar, VII] WHEREUNTO SHALL I LIKEN ? 185
30 But the Pharisees and lawyers || rejected "the counsel
of God || against themselves, being not baptized || Or, frus-

a 1 f trated.
One Janhaale n Acts xx. 27.

31 4] And the Lord said, ° Whereunto then shall |,» he
I liken the men of this generation? and to what ° Matt. xi. 16.
are they lke?

31. “And the Lord said.” This clause omitted by nearly all MSS., x, A., B., D., E.,
F.,G., H.,K., L., M., other later Uncials, 150 Cursives, most old Latin, Vulg. (Cod.
Amiat.), and versions, though without it the following clause comes in with most unusual
abruptness.

as a class. And it may be that God, seeing that they were utterly
condemned by the rest of the Jews because they submitted to farm
the taxes under the Roman Government (which existed by the
decree and providence of God), showed openly, by some strong
spiritual influences which He shed upon them, that He was no
respecter of persons. (See particularly my note on Mark ii. 14.)

* Justified God,” i.e., acknowledged the goodness and righteous-
ness of God in the mission of John, and submitted to it by being
baptized by him.

30. *‘ But the Pharisees and lawyers rejected the counsel of God
against themselves,’ rather rejected against themselves (to their
own infinite loss) the counsel of God, which was designed to prepare
the whole nation for the reception of Christ.

‘Being not baptized of him.” So that the counsel of God can
be rejected by refusing to receive an outward ordinance. And
rightly so, because the outward reception of the ordinance was a
sign of submission to the counsel of God. The Pharisees might
have said, and probably did say, ‘“‘ What good can the reception of
such a thing do to us?” It can do no good of itself, but it is a
sign of obedience and submission to God the Author of all good.
Much more, of course, does such reasoning apply to the devout
reception or profane rejection of a Christian Sacrament, which is

not only the outward sign, but the means of the conveyance to us of
very great ‘“‘good”’ from God. They who devoutly and intelli-
gently accept the Christian Sacraments justify God in offering to
us such high grace under such lowly forms.

81, 82. ‘‘And the Lord said, Whereunto shall I liken the men
of this generation?’ &e. “Ye have not wept.’ A considerable
difficulty has been made of this parabolic illustration, es I have186 LIKE UNTO CHILDREN. [St. Luxe.

32 They are like unto children sitting in the market-
place, and calling one to another, and saying, We have piped
unto you, and ye have not danced; we have mourned to you,
and ye have not wept.

noticed in my commentary on St. Matthew, by pressing the corre-
spondence between all the parts of it too far. It has been urged
(particularly by Archbishop Trench in his ‘‘ Studies in the Gospels”)
that the Lord cannot compare Himself and the Baptist to ‘‘ the
men of this generation,’ who called unto their fellows and found
them untoward and ill-humoured; so that we must explain it as if
‘‘the men of this generation ’’ were the unbelieving Jews, who desired
that St. John should be laxer; ‘‘they would fain have him give up
his strict, ascetic ways, his rigid separation from sinners, his stern
summonses to repentance, and complained that he would not do
so, that he would not ‘dance’ to their ‘ piping.’ Christ Himself was
equally, as they thought, at fault. They mourned to Him, and He
would not lament. The Bridegroom and the Bringer of Joy, He
would not change for any sadder note that note of joy to which the
Gospel that He preached was set.” (Luke y. 30-385.) But surely our
Lord at times was as stern and uncompromising as the Baptist;
and certainly the demands which He made upon some for the for-
saking of all worldly goods, and upon all for the cleansing of the
heart rather than the reformation of the outward life, went far
beyond the demands of the Baptist. The whole difficulty vanishes
if we consider that the Lord includes Himself and the Baptist in
“this generation.” They, equally with their fellow-countrymen,
were “men of this generation.” The exalted Personality of the
Lord, and the greatness of the forerunner, are entirely sunk, or lost
sight of; and the one point is that, as two parties of children play-
ing a common game found their playmates untoward and unwilling
to play with them, no matter how they endeavoured to engage
them, so the men of that generation rejected the messengers of God,
no matter how or under what guise they came.

As our Lord was then probably preaching in some public place,
it is not improbable that the very scene was going on under His
eyes.

The lesson is that worldly and impenitent men will, under all
circumstances, reject a true messenger from God; and so the Lord
proceeds to show the truth of the illustration.Cuar. VIL] A WINEBIBBER. 187

33 For ? John the Baptist came neither eating
drinking wine ; and ye say, He hath a devil. ae
: : : ark 1. 6.
34 The Son of man is come eating and drink- ch. i. 15.
ing; and ye say, Behold a gluttonous man, and a winebibber,
a friend of publicans and sinners !

30 1 But wisdom is justified of all her chil- 4 Matt, x.19.
dren.

bread nor
D Matt. iii, 4.

33, 34. “ For John the Baptist came neither eating bread ...
friend of publicans and sinners.”

The men of the generation cast
about for an excuse for rejecting the messages of both Jesus and
John; and, regardless of all consistency, they professed to find this
in the manner of life of each respectively: the Baptist led the
ascetic life in the desert; the Lord the life of holiness in common
life in cities and towns. But the men of the generation would have
none of either, because, under different guises, the message of each
was the same—“ repent,” “ believe,” and, in believing, change your
false worldly hopes into spiritual ones, renounce all sin, keep all
God’s commandments, give alms. The Baptist preached nothing
sterner than the words of Christ, respecting the cutting off of the
right hand, the plucking out of the right eye, and the fear of Him
Who is able to destroy both body and soul in hell; and the Lord
preached no more joyful tidings respecting Himself than the Baptist
did, when he proclaimed the coming of the Bridegroom.

39. “ But wisdom is justified of all her children.” The children
of wisdom are the true children of God, who are drawn to Him by
what is attractive and amiable in His truth, or are driven to Him
by what is severe in the same truth.

It is the wisdom of God to use opposite means and instruments,
by one or other of which all His children come to Him, and so
justify Him.

The use of the word ‘‘ wisdom,”’ instead of ‘‘ God,” as in the 29th
verse, is remarkable. Archbishop Trench (no doubt with absolute
truth) refers to the impersonation of Wisdom in the book of Pro-
verbs: ‘‘ Wisdom here is no abstract quality, no attribute of God,
any more than at Luke xi. 49; but a Person, even the same of
whom such glorious things are spoken in the book of Proverbs ; who
appears there as crying in the streets (i. 21, viii. 1-3), as building
her mystical house, sending forth her maidens, gathering to herself
all those who are willing to hear her voice (ix. 1-6): being, indeed,188 A WOMAN IN THE CITY. (Sr, Luge.

36 & * And one of the Pharisees desired him that he would
eee. eat with him. And he went into the Pharisee’s
6. NLark X1V. 5
3. John xi.2. house, and sat down to meat.

37 And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner,

 

a

37. «<A woman in the city which wasa sinner.” So A., later Uncials, almost all Cur-
sives, old Latin (a, b, e, q); but &, B., L., Z., some old Latin (¢, f, 1), Vulg., &c., read,
«© A woman which was a sinner in the city.”

no other than the Word as yet (7.e., when the book of Proverbs was
written) not made flesh, or rather the Divine Word in Att His
dealings, both before the Incarnation and after, with the children
of men; Who, being this absolute Wisdom, must have chosen wisest
ways in which to deal with them, and Who, therefore, should not
have been lightly charged with waywardness and folly” (Archbp.
Trench, ‘‘ Studies in the Gospels ’’).

36. ‘*And one of the Pharisees desired him that he would eat
with him ... sat down to meat.” It is important that we should
consider the state of mind of this Pharisee towards our Lord. He
was evidently friendly towards Him, but nothing more. A great
teacher and worker of miracles was in his city. He may have been
much struck with the wisdom of His discourses, and the evident
power from God displayed in His miracles; and he desired & closer
intimacy, in order that he might learn more about Him. But I
cannot think, with Godet and others, that his spiritual state was
that of the debtor who had been forgiven the smaller sum of the
ensuing parable. There seems to be no sign whatsoever that the
Lord’s teaching had so reached his heart that he could in any sense
have been said to have had any forgiveness from any act or word
of Christ. Hiverything in the narrative seems to show the uncer-
tainty of his state. He may not have been, or he may have been,
far from the kingdom of God.

37. “ And, behold, a woman in the city, which was a sinner, when
she knew,” &. Who was this woman? There can be no doubt
whatsoever that the words ‘“‘a woman in the city, which was a
sinner,’’ mean that she was aharlot. Butas to her name, that is for-
gotten, unless she be Mary Magdalene, which is, I think, unlikely.’

 

In my notes on Mark xv. 40, I said, “‘ The Magdalene is most
probably the woman mentioned in Luke vii. 37; but this is not
absolutely certain.” Further consideration makes me think that it
is improbable,Cnar. VIL] AN ALABASTER BOX. 189

when she knew that Jesus sat at meat in the Pharisee’s
house, brought an alabaster box of ointment,

That she was Mary, the sister of Lazarus, the woman who sat at
Jesus’ feet, and had chosen the good part, is impossible. It is
true that many of the fathers consider her to have been such, and
hold that the two anointings—one at Bethany, another here in
Galilee—were the same, but that one or other of the Evangelists
made a mistake about the place. But it seems to us marvellous
that such an opinion should have been entertained for a moment;
for the things which the Lord said of each of these women respec-
tively could not have been said of the same person. Of the one He
said, ‘She hath done what she could; she is come aforehand to
anoint my body to the burying;” of the other, “ Her sins, which
are many, are forgiven, for she loved much.’ The complaint in the
one case was that of the Pharisee, who said within himself, ‘‘ This
man, if he were a prophet, would have known who or what manner
of woman this is.’’ In the other case, it was that of Judas: ‘‘ This
ointment might have been sold for five hundred pence, and given to
the poor.’ The only things in common are the two anointings, and
the two hosts having the same name of Simon; but the practice of
anointing was most frequent, and Simon was the most common of
Jewish names.

It has been asked how it was that a woman of such character was
permitted to enter after the Lord into the guest chamber; and it is
answered that the feasts of the Jews were much more public than
ours; that many entered, and even took part in the conversation,
who had not been invited to the feast. That the entrance of
strangers was not unusual is manifest from the unspoken thought
of the Pharisee. He expressed no wonder or indignation at the
presence of the woman in the hall; but he did express wonder
that the Lord, professing to be a prophet, knew not her manner of
life.

‘‘ Brought an alabaster box of ointment.” Nothing is here said
of the value of the ointment; whereas, in the corresponding anoint-
ing by Mary at Bethany, its very great preciousness (being equal in
value to five hundred pence) was the cause of the envy of Judas,
and ultimately, through his disappointment, of the Lord’s betrayal.
It was a small phial, rather than a box. The alabaster was sup-ee!

190 AND KISSED HIS FEET. [Sr. Luxe.

38 And stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began
to wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs
of her head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the
oimtment.

38. ‘‘ And kissed his feet.” The word in the original (xatedine.) betokens kissing with
much affection or earnestness. The Revisers in the margin read, ‘‘ kissed much,”

posed to preserve the ointment better than any other material, and
being fragile, was easily broken.

38. “ And stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began,” &e.
‘‘ Weeping’ for sorrow at her past life, of the sin of which some
words of the Lord had convinced her, and worked in her godly
sorrow unto repentance.

‘“To wash his feet with tears.’”’ This was, no doubt, the first
opportunity she had of confessing in His presence the shame of her
past life, and that He was the means by which she had been delivered
from it. No doubt the Lord, like other guests, had put off Hig
sandals before reclining, and His feet being on the outer side of the
couch, the woman would be able to come close behind them, and
hang over them, and let her tears fall upon them.

“And did wipe them with the hairs of her head.” Itissaid that,
‘In order to duly appreciate this act we must remember that
among the Jews it was one of the greatest humiliations for a woman
to be seen in public with her hair down.”

This very remarkable action of anointing His feet and wiping
them with her hair is mentioned by St. John in connection with
that subsequent anointing by Mary, the sister of Martha, which
gives it the appearance of being by the same person,—so that she
should be designated by that marked description of “the Mary
that wiped His feet with her hair.” But the other affecting circum-
stance of washing His feet with her tears, and kissing His feet, is
not mentioned in the latter case, whereas it has a peculiar propriety
on this occasion, rather than on the other. It has been well ob-
served that, though many come to Christ under the pressure of
bodily maladies, yet this is the only instance of one comine to be
released from sins, and to express love for deliverance from en evil
life. |

{hope TI am not wronging Mary of Bethany in suggesting that
she may have heard of this wiping of the Lord’s feet with hair, andCuap. VIL] SHE IS A SINNER. Poe

39 Now when the Pharisee which had bidden him s
he spake within himself, saying, * This man, if he sch.x
were a prophet, would have known who and what manner
of woman this is that toucheth him - for

aw tt,

Viera

she is a sinner.

 

she may have desired to express as deep and lowly gratitude for the
deliverance of her brother from death as did this first wom
her own rescue from a life of sin.

39. “* Now when the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he
spake within himself,’ &e. It is impossible that this Pharisee
should have hitherto received any spiritual benefit from Christ if
he could harbour such a thought as this. No doubt, as I said, he
invited Christ as a teacher, perhaps from God, and with a view of
knowing more about His teaching and mission ; and here the Lord’s
silent acquiescence in the homage of this penitent decides him that
He cannot be even a prophet, or He would have shrunk from the
pollution of her touch.

But all the circumstances forbid us to judge very harshly of him,
though, as I said, they altogether prevent us from supposing that
he was represented by the debtor who owed fifty pence, and had
had that debt forgiven him. It is very improbable, indeed almost
impossible, that he could have known that this woman had been
convinced of the sin of her life by the preaching of the Lord. He
looked upon her as yet a sinner, and this was his most erievous
fault, that he did not discern and welcome the manifest signs
of repentance which he saw her exhibit. If he had been a true
penitent himself he would have welcomed the smallest sign of

repentance. If he had known the grace of God he would have also

known that that grace could reach and raise up the most degraded
sinner.

an for

But in common with almost all his countrymen he was not, as yet,
delivered from the bondage of the formal and the external. No doubt
he judged that the touch of such an one was defilement, for her
whole life had been, and perhaps he thought was yet, a life of bodily
as well as ofspiritual pollution. Such an one as she, in his estima-
tion, had lived apart from ordinances, apart from even ceremonial
washing, apart from all temple or even synagogue worship; so she
was as a heathen, and must not so much as be touched by a devout

Israelite; and so he judged not her, but the Lord. Jesus, if a192 MASTER, SAY ON. (St. Luxe.

40 And Jesus answering said unto him, Simon, I have
somewhat to say unto thee. And he saith, Master, say on.

4] There was a certain creditor which had two debtors:
| See Matt. the one owed five hundred || pence, and the other
XVill. 28.

aee

fifty.

 

 

prophet, must be zealous for the law, ‘‘Had He been a Rabbi He
would certainly, and had He been a prophet He would probably,
have repelled such approach. The former, if not from self-righteous-
ness, yet from ignorance of sin and forgiveness; the latter because
such homage was more than man’s due.’ (HEdersheim, vol. 1.
p. 567.)

But the Lord read his thoughts, and this alone should have con-
vinced him that He came in the Name and with the Power of the
Searcher of hearts, for—

40-43. “Jesus answering said unto him, Simon, I have some-
what to say unto thee . . . Thou hast rightly judged.”’ The larger
of the debts would amount to about £16, the smaller to about
325. This parable must be interpreted on principles of common-
sense, There must be, for instance, some likeness or equality of
disposition between the two debtors. They must, of necessity, have
had the same honesty of purpose which would make them equally
desire, if they could do so, to pay their respective debts. Because,
of course, if one was indifferent about his obligations, and the other
very sensitive about them, the parable would not hold good. This,
I need not say, is true quite independently of the spiritual applica-
tion of the parable. It equally requires some common-sense limita-
tion of this sort whether it be understood of debts owed by men to
one another, or of debts owed by all men to God.

Butifthese considerations be taken into account—if, that is, there
be such an equality—then it stands to reason that the greater debt
would bring the greater anxiety of mind and the greater relief in its
forgiveness, and the livelier feeling of gratitude towards him who
had generously removed it.

And now as to the application of all this to spiritual things.
Taking what we have said into account it seems easy, for it is not
the mere money value of any debt, but its pressure upon the mind
which depends upon the state of the heart, whether honest or other-
wise.Cuar. VII.] HE FRANKLY FORGAVE THEM BOTH. 193

42 And when they had nothing to pay, he frankly forgave
them both. Tell me therefore, which of them will love him
most P

43 Simon answered and said, I suppose that he, to whom

he forgave most. And he said unto him, Thou hast rightly
judged.

 

And so the relief felt by any sinner at the forgiveness of his sin
does not depend upon the actual amount of sin, but upon its burden,
the sense of its guilt and loathsomeness ; in fact, upon the state of
his heart.

And this, of course, depends upon the grace of God; for repent-
ance, contrition, the sense of sin as well as the sense of forgiveness,
depend upon the grace of God.

Now, God is a just God, righteous in all His ways, and holy in
all His thoughts. Is it right, then, that He should give such a deep
sense of sin, and such a lively sense of love at its removal, to a gross
sinner as this woman, and withhold the same from a comparatively
virtuous person, as we may presume this Pharisee to have been?

The answer to this is, that in a world constituted as ours, God
would not be just if He did not; for we must take into account the
difference of outward circumstances, over which any particular
sinner has no control, which may have contributed to his sinful or
vicious life. Take the case of this woman. From what we know

of the utter degradation in the matter of purity and chastity of those
times and of that country, it is not at all improbable but that in
early youth she was sold by others, perhaps by her very parents,
to a life of impurity; whilst it is very probable that the Pharisee
had, through no merits of his own, been shielded from all the evil
influences which had ruined the life of the woman. When, then,
this woman was, by the word of Jesus, awakened to a sense of sin,
and, with this, to a sense of goodness and virtue, it was the begin-
ning of a new life, rather, perhaps, the reawakening of her true life.
It was the first springing up of hope and of holy love. She owed
it to the Lord Himself, and so it would seem to her a very small
tribute of gratitude to wash His feet with her tears and wipe them
with her hair; whereas the guilt of the Pharisee was, that having
been brought up under comparatively better influences, and without
all doubt having been carefully instructed in the letter of the Word of
O194 SEEST THOU THIS WOMAN ? [Sr. Luxe.

44, And he turned to the woman, and said unto Simon,
Seest thou this woman? [I entered into thine house, thou
gavest me no water for my feet: but she hath washed my
feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her head.

44, “With the hairs of her head.” So E., F., G., H., M., some later Uncials, most
Cursives, Cureton Syriac; but x, A., B., D., I., K., L., other later Uncials, twenty-five
Cursives, old Latin, Vulg., Copt., Syriac omit “‘ of her head.”

God, he was really indifferent to the goodness of God, for he viewed
with no thankfulness the signs of penitence and a return to virtue
in a fellow-sinner, and he could debate in his mind whether one who
taught and performed the mightiest acts of mercy, as did the Lord—
whether such as He were even so much as a prophet, because He
suffered returning penitents to touch His feet.

Such, it seems, is the relation of the teaching to the penitent

woman and to Simon. The great lesson of the whole transac-
tion, taking together the signs of contrition in the woman and the
Lord’s approval of them, is this, that the publicans and harlots enter
into the kingdom of God before the self-righteous ; that God may
make even gross Sinners monuments of His mercy (as He did St.
Augustine), whilst men who live decent and respectable lives
may be far from God through pride, through selfishness, through
coldness arising from indifference, and that indifference having its
roots in self-satisfaction and a desire to remain as they are rather
than to come nearer to God.

And now we come to the comparison of the conduct of the woman
with that of Simon.

44-46. ** And he turned to the woman, and said unto Simon, Seest
thou this woman? I entered . . . hath anointed my feet with oint-
ment.” I think those are wrong who suppose that Simon had
intentionally slighted our Lord in not offering Him these acts of
courtesy. One who has written a life of our Lord with the special
view of illustrating it from Jewish customs and observances
(Edersheim) says, “To wash the feet of a guest, to give him the
kiss of welcome, and especially to anoint him, were not, indeed,
necessary attentions at a feast. All the more did they indicate

/ special care, attention, and respect.” Simon, if this be true, had
E : not been intentionally rude and discourteous to the Lord. He had
merely contented himself with offering Him the customary common-Cuar. VIL] SHE LOVED MUCH. 195

45 Thou gavest me no kiss: but this woman since the
time I came in hath not ceased to kiss my feet.

46 *My head with oil thou didst not anoint: ¢ Ps. xxiii. 5.
but this woman hath anointed my feet with ointment.

47 “Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which «1 Tim.i. 14.
are many, are forgiven; for she loved much: but to whom
little is forgiven, the same loveth little.

 

7
place civility due to an ordinary guest, not the affectionate welcome
due to an honoured one. It is important to remember this, Simon
received the Lord simply with doubt, as one who might be a
prophet, but it was uncertain: the woman treated the Lord as the
Prophet whose word had delivered her from the nusery of a sinful
life; and so Simon took no account of the signs of contrition in the
conduct of the woman, and all but pronounced the Lord to be no
prophet because He graciously received them. The mighty works
of merey which Simon must have known, or he would not have
invited a poor man like the Lord at all, did not make him welcome
the Lord as any messenger from God ought to have been welcomed ;
whereas the words of Christ, which had rescued the woman from the
bondage of sin, bowed her whole soul before Him in utter humiliation.

Such is the innermost teaching of the incident, the difference
which the true sense of sin makes in the attitude of the whole soul
to Christ.

Christ cannot be treated familiarly and on terms of equality by
one who has a spark of true and genuine penitence. He cannot be
debated about, whether He be this or that. No. The penitent soul
will fall down before Him, will kiss His feet, will lavish upon Him
all that is costly, all that expresses shame, humility, devotion,
self-denial, as well as love.

47. ‘‘ Wherefore Isay unto thee, Her sins, which aremany....
loved much.” She loved much because she felt she had much for-
given. Ifshe had felt no deep sense of sin, no fear of its conse-
quences, no shame at its pollution, she would not have behaved
thus at her sense of deliverance and at the new hope within her;
but her burden was very great, and her love of Him Who had
removed it was great in proportion.

48. ‘And he said unto her, Thy sins are forgiven.” That this
was said in the sense of absolving her, or, at least, asserting before196 THY SINS ARE FORGIVEN. [Sr. Luke.

48 And he said unto her, *Thy sins are forgiven.

eee 49 And they that sat at meat with him began

 

all present that which God only can really know, is certain from
what follows.

49, “ And they that sat at meat with him began to say within
themselves,” &e. They could not have said this unless they had
understood the Lord’s words as pronouncing forgiveness In a way
in which it was unlawful for any mere man to do, unless he had a
special commission from God ‘‘to declare and pronounce to peni-
tents the absolution and remission of their sins.” This the Lord
had, and the proof thereof was His miracles, which, being all on the
side of God and goodness, showed that He was sent by God.

‘Her sins, which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much.”

48-50. ‘“‘And he said unto her, Thy sins are forgiven .

Thy faith hath saved thee; go in peace.” It is surprising to think
that the conclusion of this affecting incident should have been made
the battle-field on which controversialists should have contended,
whether this woman was saved by faith alone, ‘‘ Thy faith hath
saved thee ;”’ or by love, ‘‘ Her sins, which are many, are forgiven ;
for she loved much;” and as love is assumed to be a work, some
on one side would deny that love had anything to do with saving
her, whilst others, on the other side, would assert that her faith,
unless it was mixed with love or issued in love, would be simply
the faith of devils.

Now, let us try and reconstruct, as it were, the spiritual history
of this woman. In its leading features I think we cannot be far
wrong. Our knowledge of human society, would teach us that
she could scarcely have been the only sinner of her class. Very
likely great numbers who sinned either openly or secretly after
the same sort of sin had heard, along with her, the Lord’s call to
repentance.

But there was that within her which attracted her to Him, and
made her listen to Him, whilst other similar sinners did not. What
was that? It was an alteration in her will, a sense of sin as foul
and polluting, which made her not only be willing, but “ will”’ (i.e.,
strongly desire) to be rid of it. This was the root of all. What was
it? Being a change of heart, or mind, a turning from sin and

turning to God, we may call it repentance; but it was not repen-Cuap. VII.] WHO IS THIS THAT FORGIVETH SINS? 197

to say within themselves, Who is this that forgiveth sins

also ? y Matt. ix. 3.
Mark ii. 7.

 

tance alone, ifso it would have turned to despair—it was inextric-
ably mixed with faith, faith in God and goodness, a belief in the
present excellence and future triumph of purity, as distinguished
from the present degradation and future condemnation of impurity.
So it was faith as the evidence of things not seen. This gave her
the ear to listen to the words of Christ, because in them she heard
the words of One Who was Himself divinely pure, and yet showed
Himself able and willing to relieve the hearts of all who came to
Him under the burden of impurity.

This was a further act of faith on her part. She not only believed
in a God of purity, but in Christ as the representative of that God
of purity. She consequently came to Him in spirit as she listened
to His words, because His words first opened before her the door of
hope. So then we have here a confirmation of the truth of the re-
markable words of the Apostle, ‘‘ We are saved by hope.”

If the words of Christ had not been full of hope for a person in
her sad condition she would not have listened to Him so as to be
attracted to Him. But we have used the word “ attract: what is
the attraction of soul to soul? Most people would unquestionably
call it love, and they would be right; for how could there be the
attraction of a penitent soul to a pure, yet loving Saviour, for such
benefits as forgiveness and cleansing, without love? What was it,
then, which ‘‘saved”’ her. It was her will, the opposite of the will
of those to whom the Lord said, ‘‘ Ye will not come unto me that
ye may have life.” Being the change of her will it was repentance
(metanoia), “repentance unto life ;” but repentance which differed
from despair or worldly sorrow, because it was inspired by hope
(‘‘we are saved by hope”’).

It was a change of mind Godward, and so was faith in God; and
Christward, because it recognized in the Lord the Saviour from sin
(‘‘ Ye believe in God, believe also in me ”): and yet from first to last it
was faith, whose very life was holy love. She was attracted to the
former guilty partners of her sin by unholy love ; she was attracted
to Christ by penitent, believing, hopeful, holy love.

It seems to me the height of folly and presumption to try to sepa-
rate the will, the repentance, the faith, the hope, the love, and assign
to each their respective parts in the matter of salvation. God hath198 THY FAITH HATH SAVED THEE. [Sr. Luxe.

See ee 50 And he said to the woman, ” Thy faith hath

x. 52. ch. Vili.
48. & xviii. 42.

 

joined all together; let us not try, even in thought, to put them
asunder.

But what is the significance of the Lord’s words, ‘‘ Her sins,
which are many, are forgiven; for she loved much’? The real drift
of it seems to me to have been extensively misunderstood. The
key to it seems to be in the many sins (ai w6d\ar) and the loving
much (word), the same Greek adjective. A sinful life such as hers,
in which she had laid herself out to seduce others to sin, required a
deep sense of guilt, a deep repentance: a superficial, light-hearted
sorrow in her case would have been, humanly speaking, of no avail,
no repentance at all; but God, in His mercy, gave her true and
godly sorrow. This appeared in her whole action, particularly in
her washing the Lord’s feet with her tears, and wiping them with
the hairs of her head. Now, Mary of Bethany similarly poured pre-
cious ointment on the Lord’s feet, and similarly wiped them with
her hair; but in all the three accounts there is not a word said of
her shedding a single tear: and if she had, her tears would not
have been those of penitence, but of gratitude for the restoration of
her brother.

What, then, was the washing of the Lord’s feet with her tears ?
of what, I mean, was it the sign ?—of repentance ? of faith ? of love ?
Of all three, I answer, all inseparable, all permeating one another,
all sustaining and nourishing one another. The whole action, if a
sincere one, could not have existed without all three.

The Lord’s words, then, cannot have the slightest bearing on
any post Reformation disputes respecting faith and works, faith and
love, love as preceding forgiveness, or love as following it. They
are emphatically natural words, describing the natural effect of the
grace of God in the soul; for though grace be above nature, it yet
works not unnaturally, but naturally, according to its own nature,
and according to the nature of the human being who receives it.
Sins such as this woman had lived by, make terrible havoc of the
best sensibilities of the soul, no roots of bitterness strike so deep,
and to be done away, they require adequate self-abhorrence, ade-
quate prostration before the Author and Giver of grace, or they
may resume dominion. The Lord here announces that the work
of grace in the soul was sufficient, and so He bids her “ go in peace.”Cuar. VIII.] GO IN PEACE. LoS

saved thee; go in peace.

 

Be it remembered that after this woman left the Pharisee’s house,
avery different sign of love to her Saviour would be required of
her: the Lord would no longer look for washing of His feet with
tears, but for the mortification of sin, and the cultivation of purity
and holiness; and unless He had known well that in her case the
vork already begun in tears and faith and love was deep and would
he permanent, He Who knew all things would not have said to her
“ go in peace.”’

CHAP: VAL.

A ND it came to pass afterward, that he went throughout

every city and village, preaching and shewing the glad

tidings of the kingdom of God: and the twelve were with
him.

a Matt. xxvii.
Soa.

2 And *certain women, which had been healed

 

1. “And it came to pass afterward .. . twelve were with him.”
This is the first notice in St. Luke of the Lord commencing, what
we call an itinerating ministry ; not confining Himself to one spot
or its immediate neighbourhood, but taking extensive circuits
through districts. Diocesan Hpiscopacy is in its nature itinerating,
if the Bishop is to be the pastor of the laity of his diocese as well as
of the clergy.

2, 3. “And certain women which had been healed of evil spirits
and infirmities .... which ministered unto him of their substance.”
It appears that all these, as well as Mary Magdalene, the first men-
tioned, had received some healing benefit from Him, and followed
Him, ‘‘and ministered unto Him of their substance.”’ Itis not im-
plied, of course, that they followed Him as closely as the Apostles
did. It would have been inconvenient, to say the least, that a
mixed troop of perhaps more than twenty persons (‘‘ many others”’
in addition to the Apostles and the three women expressly named)200 MARY MAGDALENE. (Sr. Luke.

of evil spirits and infirmities, Mary called Magdalene, ” out of
b Mark xvi.9. whom went seven devils.

3 And Joanna the wife of Chuza Herod’s steward, and
Susanna, and many others, which ministered unto him of
their substance.
¢ Matt. xiii.2. 4 9 °And when much people were gathered
ol together, and were come to him out of every city,
he spake by a parable:

5 A sower went out to sow his seed: and as he sowed,

 

3. “Unto him.” So y, A., L., M., 0, Cursives 1, 33, and many other Cursives, old
Iuatin (a, b, 1), Copt., Syriac, Arm., AXth.; but B., D., E., F., G., H., K., other later
Uncials, ninety Cursives, some old Latin (¢, e, f, g, &c.), Vulg. (Cod. Amiat.), Syriac
(Cureton and Schaaf) read, ‘‘ Unto them.”

should always be in attendance. It is probable that they took it by
turns to attend to the bodily wants of Himself and the Apostles.

We learn from this that the Son of God Who in His heavenly
Being made and sustained all things, in His earthly existence lived
on the willing liberality of others. He acted in all this in the way
in which He commanded His Apostles to act, to have no settled
means of subsistence, but to live on the alms which the faithful,
unsolicited by Him but moved by the Spirit of God, tendered to
Him.

“Mary called Magdalene,” ?.e., of the city of Magdala. From
being associated with Joanna, the wife of Herod’s steward, as minis-
tering to the Lord, she must have been a person of some substance,
and could not have been the nameless penitent mentioned in the
last chapter. Godet suggests that Chuza might have been the Basi-
hikos (court lord) whose son Jesus had healed (John iy. 46), and
who had believed with all his house; but this is the merest con-
jecture.

4, “And when much people were gathered together . . . spake
by a parable.” St. Luke omits to mention that this parable was
delivered by the Lord from a ship, the people thickly lining the
beach. Ifhe had simply constructed his narrative out of the exist-
ing body of tradition, he would not have omitted such a circum-
stance. :

o. “A sower went out to sow his seed .... it was trodden down
.... the fowls of the air devoured it.” St. Luke alone mentionsCuar. VIII.] SOME FELL BY THE WAY SIDE. 201

some fell by the way side; and it was trodden down, and
the fowls of the air devoured it.

6 And some fell upon a rock ; and as soon as it was sprung
up, it withered away, because it lacked moisture.

7 And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprang up
with it, and choked it.

 

that the seed sown by the way side was ‘‘trodden down;” and
it is remarkable that in the explanation given by the Lord in verse
12, no noticeis taken of this “treading down.” But it is one of
those touches which makes the similitude true to nature, for seed
sown on the road or trodden path, would not germinate, not only
because it would be snatched away, but because some of it would be
certainly trodden down by the next passer-by. The treading down
may be the crushing or destruction of the seed by the allowance of
gross sin, as distinguished from the light and trifling thoughts
which, like the fowls coming and going, snatch it away.

6. ‘“ And some fell upon a rock; and as soon as it was sprung
up.... lacked moisture.”’ St. Luke speaks here of theseed having
been sown upon the rock, whereas St. Matthew and St. Mark
speak of its being on rocky ground, 1.e., a rock covered with only a
thin coating of earth. St. Luke, then, takes for granted that there
must be some soil, and only mentions the cause of the mischief, the
nearness of the rock to the surface equivalent to the ‘‘no depth of
earth.” St. Matthew and St. Mark speak of its having no root, 2.e.,
none worth speaking of. St. Luke that it withered because it lacked
moisture. If it had had any length of rootit would have penetrated
into the deeper soil, which was always moist; but because of the
nature of the ground it had no length of root, so it perished because
‘‘it lacked moisture.”

7. “Some fell among thorns; and the thorns,” &c. St. Luke
here has a slight but important difference. St. Matthew and St.
Mark have simply the thorns grew up, or ascended; but St. Luke
has, the thorns grew up together with it, as if the thorns when the
seed were sown were under the earth, and they grew up as the
wheat grew, alongside of it.

8. “And other fell on good ground, and sprang up, and bare
fruit,” &c. St. Luke here has “and sprang up, and bare fruit,”
whereas St. Matthew and St. Mark have “and gave [1.e., yielded]202 OTHER FELL ON GOOD GROUND. [Sr. Lux.

8 And other fell on good ground, and sprang up, and
bare fruit an hundredfold. And when he had said these
things, he cried, He that hath ears to hear, let him hear.

d Matt. xiii. 9 ¢ And his disciples asked him, saying, What
10, Mark iv. ;
10. might this parable be:

10 And he said, Unto you it is given to know the mysteries
of the kingdom of God: but to others in parables; ° that
¢ Is. vi. 9. seeing they might not see, and hearing they might
© not understand.

 

fruit.” St. Matthew and St. Mark notice the difference in the
yield, thirty, sixty, an hundredfold; whereas St. Luke mentions
the largest yield only, an hundredfold.

I have noticed the differences, sometimes comparatively trifling,
between St. Luke’s version of this parable and that of the two
other Synoptics, because it seems to me to bear very directly upon
the relation of St. Luke’s narrative to the original tradition.
St. Matthew and St. Mark give almost word for word the same
account. Theirs is the same version, with comparatively slight
difference, whereas St. Luke is, so far as words are concerned, a
totally different version, though with precisely the same meaning
all through. On comparing all three it is clear that none of them
copied from an original written document, or we should not have
the slight discrepancies between St. Matthew’s and St. Mark’s
version ; and assuming that there was no original written docu-
ment, but an original oral tradition, carefully committed to memory
for some years, then St. Matthew and St. Mark drew upon, and
endeavoured to produce as far as possible, that original body of tradi-
tion almost verbatim, and St. Luke did not do this, but received his
account from one who knew the original tradition well, and entered
fully into its meaning and spirit, but reproduced it more loosely,
and with considerable variations, all the while preserving the
meaning and spirit of it.

9, 10. “ And his disciples asked him, saying, What might .. . they
might not understand.” I have dwelt upon this and the addi-
tional matter which accompanies it so fully in my comments on
St. Matthew and St. Mark, that I must content myself with giving
the following founded upon a very good exposition of these parables
by Thiersch. A time of sifting had commenced among the hearers,Cuar. VIIL] THE SEED IS THE WORD OF Gop. 203

11 * Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God.

12 Those by the way side are they that hear; {Matt xiii, 18.
v CA lark 1V, .

 

and now the Lord spoke after a different manner—that is to say, by
parables. These parables are of the nature of warnings to disciples,
and contain also great promises and mysteries of the kingdom of God.
The Lord declared these warnings and prophecies purposely in ob-
scure language, in order to hide their meaning from blasphemers and
sceptics, whose anger He was unwilling to excite, and yet so as to
confirm the faith of the disciples to whom He explained all things.
The honest-minded were to be led further into the truth, but only
they. All who had treated the earlier discourses of the Lord with
levity and unfaithfulness were to receive no further light.

11. ‘“‘ Now the parable is this: The seed is the word of God.”
That is the message of salvation by Christ, usually called the
Gospel; but we must not absolutely confine it to this. An example,
a warning, a moral precept even, may be the first means of arousing
the attention ; but if the word of God, sown by the sower, is to pro-
duce its perfect fruit, its full effect, it must be the full word. No part
of the Catholic truth respecting the Person, or work, or character, or
requirements of Christ must be withheld. When Philip preached
Christ to the eunuch it at once elicited from him the question, “‘ See,
here is water: what doth hinder me to be baptized?” So that the
true proclamation of Christ cannot be without some sacramental
teaching.

It is to be remarked that there is no explanation of the field, what
it is, as in the parable of the tares in St. Matthew xiii.; but it is
needless. It is usually the congregation, all who are assembled to
hear the word, but it is all into whose ears the word falls, whether
receiving it in a body or singly.

12. “Those by the way side are they that hear,’ &c. These
wayside hearers are the only one of the four classes which absolutely
reject the word, so that it never sinks into their hearts so as to
germinate and appear above ground. By this hard-beaten ground
are described insensible, frivolous, and worldly dispositions, upon
whom the Word of God makes no impression. They reject His
sovereignty ; they are unmoved by His goodness. Like the wicked
before the flood, they desire that God should depart from them, and
know not what the Almighty can do for them. ‘ Many of these
souls, hardened by the continual wear and pressure of the world’s>

  

204 THEY ON THE ROCK. (Sr. Luxe.

then cometh the devil, and taketh away the word out of their
hearts, lest they should believe and be saved.
13 They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, re-

 

footsteps, are frequenters of churches and places where prayer is
made and sermons are preached. They do so from custom, because
others do: but they accustom themselves to hear without attention,
and understand nothing. The Word ministered passes by them,
neither affecting the heart nor enlightening the conscience. So
they remain unprofited, unchanged.’ (Thiersch.)

It is necessary here to call attention to a particular kind of
this wayside hearing, by which many in these days deceive them-
selves and others as to their real state. The only springing up of
the seed recognized by the Lord is that which produces, or is in the
way of producing, fruit. Now, there are many who have an intel-
lectual apprehension of the doctrines of grace. They can discourse
well upon some of the highest truths of Christianity—they can
defend them against heretics or unbelievers—they can take sides in
theological controversy, and yet the seed lies crushed and lifeless on
the surface of their souls because they have never attempted to put
it into practice, The only germinating or springing up of the seed
is its action first in the heart, by repentance and prayer, then in the
life by good works, and this they have never once seriously
attempted.

Let the reader note this also, that the word, being living, its
natural result is to spring up in life; and where it does not, it is
destroyed by being crushed by deadly sin, or is snatched away by
frivolous, worldly, unbelieving thoughts, which are the emissaries of
the evil one, instilled by him into the heart for the purpose of
counteracting the Divine sowing.

13. ‘They on the rock are they, which, when they hear, receive
.... fall away.” Stier has a good exposition, which is virtually
the same as that which I have given in my Commentaries on both
St. Matthew and St. Mark. ‘* He who quickly with joy receives
the earnest word of truth, which judges the principle of the heart
and conscience, perceives not at all its Serious meaning and
difficulty ; he expends his strength before the time in shallow feel-

ing, and in hasty words, instead of recelving it, as he ought, with

the calm earnestness which marks a thorough work slowly effected.Cuar. VIL] THESE HAVE NO ROOT. 205

ceive the word with joy; and these have no root, which for
a while believe, and in time of temptation fall away.
14 And that which fell among thorns are they, which,

 

Then the sun arises (in its midday or summer heat), and this the
weak seed which has shot up in a way not natural cannot bear.
The sunshine and its heat mean no harm to the seed, but come
rather as an ordinance from God to promote the growth, and are
even necessary to it. . . . Nothing ripens without heat, and in the
case of a good root it must promote, and not hinder, the growth.”

I noticed in my Commentary on St. Mark how we have several
instances of men, apparently with joy, receiving the word and fall-
ing away in time of temptation, as Herod, who heard John gladly ;
as the Pharisees, who were willing for a season to rejoice im the
light of the forerunner ; as the Galatians, who received St. Paul’s
message with joy and warmth of affection. (Gal. iv., 14, 15.)

But there is another case of falling away which we have in
John vi. in which the temptation, and consequent offence, arose
from the very nature of the seed which the Eternal Son Himself
sowed. He sowed the seed of a word which required subjection of
the reason and understanding to the deepest revealed mysteries of
God, and those who had received His Word up to a certain point were
startled, and exclaimed, ‘‘ This is a hard saying, who can hearit?”’
and “ walked no more with Him.” And is not this a very powerful
temptation in our own day ? Men stumbling at what is mysterious
and supernatural in the Gospel, asking how can these things be? and
refusing the remedy for the deepest evils of our nature because they
cannot understand all about it. And all the while taking scientific
grounds, whilst they are forced to confess that every single depart-
ment of science rests on a mystery as unthinkable, and as incompre-
hensible as any mystery which underlies the Gospel.

Are those that fall away irrevocably lost? They are, unless,
God, Who raises the dead, has means of reviving that which is
withered. He may have. We trust in many cases, He may see fit to
bring about in this life a spiritual restoration, or even resurrection,
but His Son has said nothing about it here.

14. “And that which fell among thorns are they, ....n0 fruit
to perfection.” Taking the heart to be the earth or ground, the
firstisort have hard hearts, the second shallow hearts, and the206 CHOKED WITH CARES. [Sr. Luxe.

when they have heard, go forth, and are choked with cares
and riches and pleasures of this life, and bring no fruit to
perfection.

 

third divided hearts. God, and the things of God have not the fore-
most place in the heart. The things of this world, worldly anxieties,
worldly satisfactions, worldly lusts and desires, have their principal
thoughts. When alone their thoughts do not naturally revert to God,
and the things of God, as perhaps they once did. Now, God must
have the throne of the heart, and such a share in the service of
the life, that all duties, even secular duties, are done as to Him, and
with a view to His approval. (See particularly Ephes. vi. 5-8.)
Thiersch writes well on this class. ‘Here is a progress made,
though unless the danger that threatens it be removed in time, it
must end disastrously. The seed remains, takes root, but in the
midst of thorns. The thorns are at first weak and small, and,
therefore, made no account of, but little by little they grow up—
they strike their roots more and more firmly—they spread abroad
above the earth, until they exhaust the strength of the soil. ... The
danger to which such souls as are here described are exposed is
this, that they scarcely perceive the quenching of the Spirit of life—
the gradual withdrawal of grace, which is the effect of the growth
of the thorns, 7.e., of the increasing power of the cares of this world,
of the esteem and love of riches, and of other lusts.

They deceive
themselves as to their real state.

They suffer from a spiritual
consumption, and the evil of this disease consists in this: that the
sick person does not know his true condition, and how near he is
to spiritual death. The thorns are at first small; that iss this evil
does not begin with gross sins, but with things that a m
lawful and innocent,—such as anxiety al
love of money, attachment to earthly ;
obtain a*high position, gr

an considers
sout his livelihood, the
0Ssessions, in efforts to
atification in the honour that comes from
men, seeking after refined enjoyments and pleasures, the pride of
science, political excitement.” The occupation of the heart by
these things brings on spiritual decay, and though we cannot say
death, yet the plant is too often as good as dead, being unfruitful.
The Lord, as reported in St. Luke, says not that these are abso-
lutely unfruitful, but ‘bring no fruit to perfection.”
Now, is there no hope for those in this state ?

Certainly, if they
will arouse themselves and do their

best to weed the garden of theirCuap. VIII.] THAT ON THE GOOD GROUND. 207

15 But that on the good ground are they, which in an

 

souls, and determinedly pray to God to help them in thus cleansing
away all noxious growths from within them. How does the Holy
Ghost, by the Apostle, teach us that we are to avoid being barren
and unfruitful? ‘“‘ Giving,” he says, ‘‘ all diligence, add to your
faith, virtue; and to virtue, knowledge; and to knowledge, tempe-
rance; and to temperance, patience; and to patience, godliness ;
and to godliness, brotherly kindness; and to brotherly kindness,
charity ; for if these things be in you and abound, they make you
that ye shall be neither barren nor unfruitful in the knowledge of
our Lord Jesus Christ.’ (2 Pet.i., 5, &c.)

15. “But that on the good ground are they which in an honest
and good heart,” &e.

It is to be remarked what trouble (so called) Evangelical com-
mentators have with these words of the Lord, ‘‘ an honest and good
heart.”’ It cuts at the roots of their favourite dogma, that the grace
of God is given after such a sort, that the previous state of the
heart, and by consequence of the life, is of no avail, i.e., it is never
really taken into account by God. But the teaching of this parable
from beginning to end is, that the state of the heart or conscience
before hearing the word makes all the difference. It does so in the
three cases where the sowing fails or seems to fail, and the Lord
asserts equally clearly that it does so in the one case out of the four
where the sowing is successful. Now, in all this there is the deepest
of all mysteries, i.c., the difference between one heart and another—
what makes the heart in one case good, and in another evil, before
the man himself has had any power over himself to attempt even to
cleanse or rectify himself, or to call upon God to help him so to do.
All that we know is that ‘“‘ every good gift and every perfect gift is
from above,” and that God opens hearts to receive the word (Acts
xvi. 14). Let us, then, at least in deference to the express words of
the Lord, avoid all such teaching as that the disposition of the heart
or works done before a certain definite crisis, such as conversion or
regeneration, are useless. We know not where, when, and how
the Spirit works in the human heart, and if we are not careful, we
may be speaking against that secret working of the Holy Ghost
whereby He prepares men to receive the Word of God. Whilst
acknowledging the deficiency of all natural good dispositions and
their fruits, let us equally acknowledge that all goodness is of God,208 AN HONEST AND GOOD HEART.  [Sr. Luxe.

honest and good heart, having heard the word, keep 7#, and
bring forth fruit with patience.

g Matt. v. 15. 16 § ® No man, when he hath lighted a candle,
Mark iv. 21. : ; di :
ch. xi. 33, covereth it with a vessel, or putteth 7 under a

bed; but setteth it on a candlestick, that they which enter
in may see the light.

 

16. *‘ Candle ’”’—** candlestick.” Rather, ‘‘ lamp ”—‘‘ lampstand.”

and pleasing to Him, though He may desire to raise it, and purify
it, and enlarge it—in fact, regenerate or renew it.

‘Keep it””—that is, hold it fast by the action of their own wills in-
spired by Divine grace.

“And bring forth fruit,” the fruit of works of mercy, corporal
and spiritual, for these are the fruit which the Lord mentions in
His own account of His procedure at the judgment.

“With patience.” ‘There are three kinds of patience which are
necessary in order to bring forth fruit pleasing to God. That of
continuance in prayer to keep and preserve the seed, in expectation
ot the blessing of God upon it to make it fruitful; that of Christian
perseverance, in bringing forth fruit to the end without being tired ;
and that of resistance and suffering in trials and persecutions,
either internal from evil habits, or external from the hands of men.
What, then, must we always pray and never cease fighting, under the
banner of Christ, against His and our Spiritual enemies? Yes.
This is the lot of the children of God in their present state, the
fruit of the Divine word in their hearts, and the continual exercise
of their patience.” (Quesnel.)

16. ‘“No man, when he hath lighted a candle, covereth it with a
vessel,” &e. The man who lights the candle or lamp represents the
Lord, The lamp or candle which he lighted was the Apostolic
company, to whom He had just said, “To you it is given to know
the mysteries of the kingdom of God.” By the lighting of this
lamp, the Lord here alludes to the instruction He had given to
them respecting the sowing of the seed of the word. The lamp-
stand or candelabrum (called here wrongly “‘ candlestick”) was a
piece of furniture which, from its height and the position in which

it was placed, could give light as far as possible to the whole house.
This candelabrum represented the exalted place which the LordCuap. VIII.] TAKE HEED HOW YE HBAR. 209

17 >For nothing is secret, that shall not be made mani-
fest; neither any thing hid, that shall not be » Matt. x. 26.
known and come abroad. ye

18 Take heed therefore how ye hear: ‘for who i Matt. xiii. 19.
soever hath, to him shall be given; and whoso- ok ae
ever hath not, from him shall be taken even that

which he || seemeth to have. || Or, thinketh
that he hath.

 

had assigned in His Church to the Apostles, that all that enter into
the Church may be within the reach of the Light of Life.

17. “For nothing is secret, that shall not be made manifest ;”’
&e. God revealed to them secret things—hidden mysteries, in
order that all the world might, through the teaching of the Church,
derived at first from the Apostles, be enlightened in the knowledge
of the deepest mysteries of God. Consider the secret things of God
which were unknown, or known but very dimly by the patriarchs
and prophets, and which are now the common heritage of the
children of the kingdom, at least so far as finite minds can apprehend
them. The Trinity, the Incarnation, the Atonement, the gift of a
New Life through the human nature, the Flesh and Blood of Christ,
the Church the Body and the Bride of Christ, we, His members,
the call of the Gentiles, the equality of all men in Christ, the
clear meaning of once obscure prophecies, the significance of types,—
all these were revealed, perhaps not at this time, but as men were
able to receive them.

18. “Take heed therefore how ye hear,” &c. Some have said
that we should rather have expected, ‘‘ Take heed how ye preach,
how ye teach,” but if they are to preach and to teach aright, they
must hear aright.

But how does this agree with the latter clauses of this verse ?

“ Whosoever hath, to him shall be given; and whosoever hath
not,” &e. Evidently in this way. Only they who take heed how they
hear, who hear reverently, attentively, believingly, “‘ have.” They
only retain, and realize, and make their own of what falls into
their ears; and such only are in a condition to receive more. “ He
alone who assimilates the Lord’s teaching by an act of living com-
prehension, who really ‘hath’ (the opposite of seeing without

seeing, verse 10), can continually receive more. Acquisitions are
made only by means of, and in proportion to, what is already pos-
Ppy

210 MY MOTHER AND MY BRETHREN.  [Sr. Luxe.

19 4 * Then came to him Ais mother and his brethren, and
K Matt. xii. 46. could not come at him for the press.
= 20 And it was told him by certain which said,
Thy mother and thy brethren stand without, desiring to see
thee.

21 And he answered and said unto them, My mother and
my brethren are these which hear the word of God, and do it.

sessed .... If, therefore, anyone amongst them contents himself
with hearing truth without appropriating it, by and by he will
obtain nothing, and at last even lose everything.” (Godet.)

19. “ Then came to him his mother and his brethren... . for
the press.” St. Luke, apparently by using the word “then,” places
this incident, in point of time, just after the parable of the sower,
omitting the other parables, which in the narratives of St. Matthew
and St. Mark follow this first parable. St. Matthew places it
immediately after the Lord had delivered the parable of the evil
spirit returning to the empty house (xii. 48-45,); St. Mark, after
He had been speaking of the sin against the Holy Ghost, which
itself was called forth by their asserting that He cast out devils
through Beelzebub, and that He had an unclean spirit. Gresley, in
his ‘‘ Harmony,” places it immediately after the parable of the un-
clean spirit re-occupying his old abode, though that parable comes
in this Gospel much after this (xi. 24, &e.). The discrepancies,
both in the Evangelists and in the harmonists respecting the true
sequence of this incident, show how impossible it is to arrange the
incidents of our Lord’s life in any sure chronological order. It
seems to me quite clear that for some wise purpose we are forbidden
to attempt to harmonise them, i.e., to weave them into one conse-
cutive narrative. God has given to us four Gospels, and we are not
to attempt to make them virtually one.

I have commented so fully on this incident as it is related in the
other Synoptics that I can only say now that the Lord’s words do
not imply that He resented the interference, which was no doubt
kindly meant on the part of his kinsfolk, but they teach us that He
desired to lay the greatest stress possible on the fact that of all rela-
tionships spiritual relationship is the closest; and that this spir
relationship is, in its essence, obedience to God. For
He is reported to have said, ‘‘ My mother

itual
in this Gospel
and my brethren are thoseCuar, VIIL] HE FELL ASLEEP. Pag ied |

22 4 * Now it came to pass on a certain day, that he went
into a ship with his disciples: and he said unto 1 Matt. viii, 23.
them, Let us go over unto the other side of the © ee
lake. And they launched forth.

23 But as they sailed he fell asleep: and there came down

 

who hear the word of God and do it,”’ whilst in St. Matthew’s narra-
tive He says, ‘“*‘ Whosoever shall do the will of my Father which is in
heaven, the same is my brother.” In the one case the “‘ doing”’ alone
is mentioned; in the other the hearing, in order to do. Even in
earthly relationships communion in will, 7.e., in spirit, is far closer
than communion in flesh. There may be, and too often is, estrange-
ment in those who have only flesh in common; but in commu-
nion of will there is love, and united purpose, and a mingling of
thought and intercourse, of soul with soul, tending to make all one.
Now this was pre-eminently the case with the Blessed Virgin. She
“who had said, ‘‘ Behold the handmaid of the Lord, be it unto me
according to Thy word,” she also had kept and pondered all the
sayings of her Son in her heart: but now she was accidentally, it
may be said, associated with those who were taking too much upon
themselves, and this drew from the Lord one of His deepest and
most searching sayings.

22. “Now it came to pass on a certain day .... and they
launched forth.” This passage over the sea, of which St. Luke
leaves the date uncertain, according to St. Mark took place on the
evening of the day on which the Lord had been teaching the
multitude by parable out of the ship.

St. Luke, for some reason, does not notice the fact that the Lord
went into a ship and taught the people from the ship as they were
crowding the shore (Luke viii. 4); St. Mark seems to imply that
the ship did not touch the western shore of the lake that even-
ing (iv. 85); whilst St. Matthew places this and the three following
miracles much earlier in the narrative and in the midst of totally
different incidents—another, as I believe, divinely appointed caution
against all our attempts at ‘‘ harmonizing.”

93-25. “ But as they sailed he feel asleep . . . . he commandeth
even the winds and water,” &c. With respect to this miracle, I
have commented so fully upon it in my notes on the other two
Synoptics that I can but very briefly advert to it here. The sea ofmanifest.

 
 

212

MASTER, MASTER, WE PERISH.

  

(Sr. Luxe.

a storm of wind on the lake; and they were filled with water,
and were in jeopardy.

24 And they came to him, and awoke him, saying, Master,
master, we perish. Then he arose, and rebuked the wind
and the raging of the water: and they ceased, and there was

a calm.

24. “Then he arose.”

 

«“And he awoke,” Revisers, after XN, B., L.; but A., later

Uncials, Cursives, &c., as in Authorized.

Galilee was always subject to sudden storms, and the leading
Apostles, in plying their trade on it, must have been long accus-
tomed to expect them. From, however, their fear on this occasion,
it seems that this storm must have been one of unaccustomed
violence, and probably of longer continuance than usual. Cyril
notices this: “It seems to have been especially and wonderfully
ordained that they should not seek His assistance when first the
storm began to affect the boat, but after the danger had increased,
in order that the power of the Divine Majesty might be made more

were in jeopardy.’

Hence it is said, ‘And they were filled with water, and

This, indeed, our Lord allowed for the sake of

trial, that having confessed their danger, they should acknowledge

the greatness of the miracle.”’

The words with which the disciples awoke the Lord are some-
what differently reported in the three Evangelists. St. Mark has
““Carest thou not that we perish?’ St. Luke, ‘‘ Master, master,
we perish ;”’ St. Matthew, “ Lord, save us, we perish.”

But as Augustine says this may have been the case that by the
many that awoke Him all these things were said, one by one, and
another by another. Indeed, it is extremely improbable that in
such an urgent crisis only one should have uttered a word.

All are agreed upon the typical significance of this miracle—that
the ship is the Church; the storm, the persecution and opposition
of the world; and the Lord, asleep on the pillow, the presence of
Christ in the Church, but, though present, at times seemingly re-
gardless of the dangers which threaten to overwhelm it. But those
who are in the ship rouse Him, as it were, by their prayers, and
He delivers them from their distress.

But Quesnel and others consider that the ship also represents the

soul; the passage over the sea, its passage through time into eter-Cuar, VIL] WHERE IS YOUR FAITH ? 21s

25 And he said unto them, Where is your faith? And
they being afraid wondered, saying one to another, What
manner of man is this! for he commandeth even the winds
and water, and they obey him.

26 4]™ And they arrived at the country of the ™ Matt. viii.
ety ; 28. Markv. 1.
Gadarenes, which is over against Galilee.

 

26. ‘‘Gadarenes.” So A., later Uncials, almost all Cursives and Syriacs (Cureton and
Pesh.); but X, L., some Cursives (1, 33, 118, &c.), Copt., Arm., Ath. read, “‘ Gergesenes,”
and B., D., old Latin, and Vulg. read, ‘‘ Gerasenes.”

nity ; the lake, the world over which we must pass; the storm of
wind, the temptations of our spiritual enemy, which may spring up
from any quarter suddenly; and the water with which the ship was
filled, and well-nigh ready to sink, the sins and declensions from
God, which are the effect of temptations yielded to. But can the
Saviour be said to bein the ship of the soul? Assuredly, for He
says, ‘‘He that abideth in me, and I in him.” And, again, His
Apostle says, ‘‘ Know ye not that Jesus Christ is in you, except ye
be reprobates.”’ The Church is made up of souls, and Christ is in
the Church by His dwelling in the souls of its members.

But can the Saviour be said to be in the soul like one asleep ?
Yes; for one of the principal exercises which He lays upon the soul
is that it should stir up the grace already given to it. He makes as
though He were slumbering, in order that we may call upon Him
the more earnestly. And ‘‘ the Lord will wake as one out of sleep,”
and rebuke the tempest of passion and the waves of temptation, and
there shall be a great calm.

25. “And he said unto them, Where is your faith?”’ Where is
your faith in My Divine Mission, if ye are are afraid that any com-
motion of wind and waves could cut it short, and frustrate the
purpose of God in sending Me into the world ?

‘What manner of man is this! for he commandeth even the
winds,” &c. The miracle had done its work in them ; for this is a
question, not of unbelief, but of faith, for the only answer to it is
that He is infinitely more than man. There are questions of un-
belief which are such as “ How can these things be?” But there
are questions to which faith only can reply, and this is one, for the
answer is, ‘‘ He is God’s only Son, our Lord and our God.”

26. “And they arrived at the country of the Gadarenes,” &e. I>

ere
oe

  

214 IN THE TOMBS. (Sr. Lugs.

27 And when he went forth to land, there met him out of
the city a certain man, which had devils long time, and ware
no clothes, neither abode in any house, but in the tombs.

 

27. *‘ Which had devils long time.” So A., later Uncials, almost all Cursives, Vulg. ;
but X, B., L., Cursives 1, 33, 131, 157, and some versions take “ long time” with “ ware
no clothes,”—‘‘ and for a long time he ware no clothes” (Revisers).

have shown in notes on St. Mark that the locality of this miracle
has been pretty surely identified with a place yet retaining the name
of Gersa or Chersa. The name as pronounced by the Bedouin
Arabs is Gersa or Kersa; and the natural features of steep declivity
and narrow shore of the lake in all respects correspond with the
narrative.

27. “And when he went forth to land, there met him out of the
city,’ &e. St. Mark says ‘there met him out of the tombs.” Both
may be perfectly accurate. The man belonged to the city, but refused
to dwell in human habitations, but had his dwelling-place in the
tombs, the remains of which yet exist in the mountain close by.

St. Matthew mentions two possessed persons, St. Mark and St.
Luke one only: the general explanation being that the one men-
tioned by the second and third Synoptics was by far the best known,
and the most violent.

“Which had devils long time, and ware no clothes, neither abode
in any house,” &. Macarius (quoted in Ford) has an eloquent
passage upon this case of possession, in that he was driven to dwell
in the tombs. ‘‘ Whenever you hear mention made of tombs, don’t
let your thoughts run only upon such as are outward: for thine own
heart is the tomb orsepulchre. For when the prince of wickedness
and his angels are lurking there, and make paths and thoroughfares,
where the powers of Satan walk up and down in thy very mind and
thoughts, art not thou a hell, a sepulchre, and tomb, and art thou not
dead to God? Thereit is that Satan hath stamped the reprobate silver
(Jer. vi. 30) ; in thy very soul has he sown the seeds of bitterness, and
leavened it with the old leaven. The Lord, therefore, descends to
those souls that seek after Him, into the very depths of the heart :
and there doth He give forth His commands to death, saying, ‘ Let

out all the souls under your confinement that seek after me, and
which you keep by main force.’ He breaks, therefore, through the
heavy stones that lie upon the soul, opens the sepulchres, raises upCrap. VIII] LEGION. Zio

28 When he saw Jesus, he cried out, and fell down before
him, and with a loud voice said, What have I to do with
thee, Jesus, thow Son of God most high? I beseech thee,
torment me not.

29 (For he had commanded the unclean spirit to come out
of the man. For oftentimes it had caught him: and he was
kept bound with chains and in fetters; and he brake the
bands, and was driven of the devil into the wilderness.)

30 And Jesus asked him, saying, What is thy name? And
he said, Legion :, because many devils were entered into him.

 

the true dead, and bringeth the imprisoned soul out of the custody
of darkness.”

28. ‘* When he saw Jesus, he cried out .. . . torment me not.”
Throughout the narrative, the human subject, the man, is wholly in
the background; he neither addresses the Lord, nor the Lord him.
He had been for long tormenting his victim, and yet not the
oppressed, but the oppressor, cries to the Lord, “‘I beseech thee,
torment me not.” Here he witnesses to the Lord, Whom he calls
the Son of God most high, as being the Judge of the whole universe
of fallen spirits, as well as of sinful men.

29. ‘“‘For he had commanded the unclean spirit to come out of the
man.” How is it that the unclean spirit who held possession of the
man allowed him to come into the presence of the Lord? No doubt
because the Lord compelled him. The same power which cast him
out forced him to present himself before the King and Judge of
Angels that he might receive sentence at His hand.

30. ‘And Jesus asked him, saying, What is thy name? And he
said, Legion,” &c. Both Trench and Godet, and doubtless many
others, suppose that this question was put by the Lord with the view
of facilitating the man’s cure; for we are told that asking the
name of a lunatic or madman throws the man back on his own con-
sciousness, which they assume is a step to the restoration of his
reason; but if so, in this case it was unsuccessful, for the man does
not give his name, but the Spirit, through the man’s lips, gives a
name which must have been dictated by Him, and which itis absurd
to suppose that the man would have given of himself. We do not
know the conditions under which the unseen spiritual world exists ;216 AN HERD OF MANY SWINE. [Sr. Luxe.
31 And they besought him that he would not command

n Rey. xx.3. them to go out into the deep.

32 And there was there an herd of many swine feeding on

 

3l. “‘ The deep.” Rather, ‘‘ the abyss.”

but if this band of evil spirits was always associated with their
leader, and obeyed him as one man, through some necessity un-
known to us, then, if the Lord’s question forced the evil one to say
the truth respecting himself, it is probable that he must give an
answer which betokened that he was never alone, and could not be
regarded as a simple unit, but wherever he was there was his evil
company ; and so his strange answer as given in St. Mark is the
more exact, “‘ My name is Legion, for we are many.”’

31. “And they besought him that he would not command them
to go out into the deep.” “The deep” is a most inadequate—in-
deed, according to the circumstances, an absolutely wrong—trans-
lation. The word is, the “ abyss,’ rendered several times in the
Revelations as the bottomless pit, and always in a bad Sense, as the
place from which issued the smoke and the tormenting locusts (Rev.
ix.1,2,11),and into which Satan was cast bound during the thousand
years (Rev. xx. 2, 3). Seeing, then, that this “ abyss,” whatever it
was, was destined to be their prison, and they knew that the time
of their final doom was not yet come, they most naturally ask the
Lord for a longer respite. In St. Matthew one of them is repre-
sented as saying, “ Art thou come hither to torment us before the
time ?”’

But, then, the question arises, how are we to make their request,
as given in St. Luke, agree with that which is given in St. Mark ?
“ He besought Him much that He would not send them away out of
the country.” Taking the two places as they stand, and assuming
that both requests were made, they can be perfectly reconciled in
this way. The country of the Gadarenes, perhaps this small
neighbourhood, was the only one in which they were allowed to be

at large. It was for them either this city and hill-side, or the abyss.
To deprecate, then, being driven out of the country,
their imprisonment in the abyss.
32. “‘ And there was there an herd of many swine feeding . ‘
he suffered them.” Only one likely reason has been given for this
request, that the evil spirits foresaw that if they could enter

was to deprecate

intoCuap. VII] HE SUFFERED THEM. 2G

the mountain: and they besought him that he would suffer
them to enter into them. And he suffered them.

33 Then went the devils out of the man, and entered into
the swine: and the herd ran violently down a steep place
into the lake, and were choked.

and destroy the swine it would so act upon the fears or the cupidity
of the people of the place that they would reject the Lord’s mission.
Or the real reason for their asking for such a thing may be totally
unknown to us. It may have been inexpressible torment for these
evil spirits to be left to wander about unclothed with some human,
or in default of that, some animal frame which they could torment
or worry, and so they asked to be clothed with the bodies of these
swine. It may be that they did not desire the destruction of the
swine, and that a panic got among these creatures which they were
unable to control, and so the Lord punished them by granting their
request. But the whole matter isin a sphere above and beyond us,
and we can only put forward conjectures which appear less unlikely
than others. It has sometimes seemed to me that the Saviour, 10
performing this miracle, desired not merely to set forth His power
over all worlds, visible and invisible, but to give us a slight glimpse
of the fearful conditions under which the evil side of the world of
spirits exists; how it torments, and is tormented ; how it destroys,
and is destroyed ; how it is a world of unrest, of unsatisfied lusts
aud longings; how it has affinities with all that is unclean and
ignoble, and sensual, and base, in this mixed state of things; how
we are encompassed by a hell of evil spirits as well as by a heaven
of good angels. Of all such things we have just a glimpse, as it
were, 1n this narrative.

33. “Then went the devils out of the man, and entered, &c....
were choked.” I observed, in my notes on St. Mark, that this
does not at all imply that there was an evil spirit to each separate
swine, but that a herd of swine, as of other animals, would follow
if a panic seized the leaders. Ialso showed, by a quotation from Dr.
Thompson’s *‘ The Land and the Book,” that there was close at hand
a part of the beach exactly suited to the destruction of an herd of
creatures such as these, for there is just at this spot a mountain, or
hill, the side of which inclines rapidly to a very narrow strip of
beach, so that the swine would, if they rushed violently down, noter |

 

218 SITTING AT THE FEET OF JESUS. _[St. Luxe.

34 When they that fed them saw what was done, they
fled, and went and told i¢ in the city and in the country.

35 Then they went out to see what was done; and came
to Jesus, and found the man, out of whom the devils were
departed, sitting at the feet of Jesus, clothed, and in his right
mind: and they were afraid.

86 They also which saw it told them by what means he
that was possessed of the devils was healed.
oMatt.viiis4. 37  °Thenthe whole multitude of the country
P Acts xvi.39. of the Gadarenes round about ? besought him to
depart from them ; for they were taken with great fear: and
he went up into the ship, and returned back again.

be able to stop themselves, but would be carried by the impetus
into a deep part of the lake.

34-87. “‘ When they that fed them .... taken with great fear.”
This conduct of the Gadarenes must not be ascribed wholly to
avarice at the loss of their swine, but to ignorance and fear. We
are to remember that the country was more than half heathen, that
this was the Lord’s first visit, that He had never preached among
them or healed any of their sick. In all probability they only half
understood what had been done. The swineherds could have
heard little or nothing of what had passed between the Lord and
the man possessed with the Legion. They only saw three things,
the presence of some very powerful stranger, the marked change in
one who had probably long been their terror, and the sudden, and
to them unaccountable destruction of their swine; unaccountable,
I say, for they could not have seen invisible spirits quit their human
victim and take possession of the animals; so that much of their
seeming sin must be imputed to blind ignorance, and fear at the
presence of the supernatural in the Lord.

And yet their conduct is an apt illustration of what is very
common, the rejection, by worldly or carnal, or ignorant souls, of
the near approach of Jesus, in a true conversion and change of
heart and character, because they have an instinctive feeling that
His presence will destroy carnal lusts and swinish indulgencies.
This is but another form of the very old rejection of God in theCar. VII.] RETURN TO THINE HOUSE. 29

38 Now “the man out of whom the devils w
besought him that he might be with him:
Jesus sent him away, saying,

ere departed
but 4 Mark vy. 18.

39 Return to thine own house, and shew how great things
God hath done unto thee. And he went his way, and pub-

lished throughout the whole city how great things Jesus had
done unto him.

40 And it came to pass, that, when Jesus was returned,

the people gladly received him: for they were all waiting for
him.

words, ‘‘ Depart from us, for we desire not the knowledge of thy
ways.” (Job xxi. 14.)

38,39. “ Now the man out of whom the devils were departed ....
Return to thine own house,” &e. It seems strange that the Lord
should have refused this man’s request to be his follower, as the
Apostles were, but He no doubt saw that one so long the terror of the
neighbourhood, but now in his right mind, would bea more effectual
witness to His love and power amongst his fellow-countrymen, who
knew so well what he had once been, than to strangers who knew
not his history. That He should command one to spread abroad
the fame of a stupendous miracle, and enjoin others with the utmost
strictness to say nothing about a similar one, no doubt depended
upon each man’s particular state of mind. To go about disclosing
what God has done for us is not enjoined in all cases, for in one sort
of soul it may minister to humility, and in another to self-conceit,
which wouid destroy very much of the good effect, even of a miracle
of conversion.

By the living witness of the change wrought in this man the
inhabitants of the district might be more ready to welcome the
tidings of the Gospel, when it was preached to them after the
Resurrection and the Day of Pentecost.

40. “ And it came to pass, that, when Jesus was returned... .
waiting for him.” We should gather from this that the Lord had
foreseen how very short His sojourn on the other side of the lake
would be, and had made it known; otherwise, if His return had
been uncertain they would not “all have been waiting for Him.”

41, 42. ‘‘And, behold, there came a man named Jairus....
thronged him.” ‘‘Jairus,” the same name as Jair, in NumbersPr |

220) A MAN NAMED JAIRUS. [Sr. Luge.

41  * And, behold, there came a man named Jairus, and
r Matt.ix.18. he was a ruler of the synagogue: and he fell
Manz. 22: down at Jesus’ feet, and besought him that he
would come into his house:

42, For he had one only daughter, about twelve years of
age. and she lay a dying. But as he went the people thronged
him.

: Matt. ix.20. 43 “| * And a woman having an issue of blood
twelve years, which had spent all her living upon physicians,
neither could be healed of any.

43. “‘ Had spent all her living upon physicians.” This sentence has various readings.
Omitted by B., retained by x, A., C., D., L., later Uncials, Cursives, &c.

xxxii. 41. It is possible that he was one of those who interested
themselves on behalf of the centurion (Luke vii. 3), as the place where
this occurred was most probably Capernaum. Ifso, his kindly feeling
towards his Gentile neighbour was indeed abundantly rewarded.
His daughter was restored by a miracle, one of the three recorded
cases of the Lord’s raising the dead, and his name is handed down
in the Gospel narrative as one who, on account of his faith,
received this special benefit from the Lord.

43,44. “ Anda woman having an issue of blood twelve years... .
her issue of blood stanched.” I have commented so fully on this
incident and its typical meaning in my notes on both St. Matthew
and St. Mark, that little can be said here. The narrative of
St. Luke is much more full and circumstantial than that in St.
Matthew, but not so much so as that of St. Mark. It seems to me
that St. Mark’s is that of an eyewitness who had even conversed
with the woman (Mark v. 28, 29), and St. Luke that of one who
had received his account from an eyewitness, whilst St. Matthew
produces the account in its traditional form very abbreviated.

The woman may be taken to represent human nature convinced
of its sin and misery in the sight of God. Her deep-seated and
incurable malady may be held to signify the dominion of evil
habits. The physicians upon whom she had spent her all seem to
set forth the impotence of all human means to deliver the sinner
from the guilt and power of sin. The coming behind the Lord on
the part of the woman indicates the mind of the sinner to whom44 Came behind him, and touched the border of his o
ment: and immediately her issue of blood stanched.

Cua. VIII] WHO TOUCHED MB ?

45 And Jesus said, Who touched me?
Peter and they that were with him said, Master, the multi-
tude throng thee and press thee, and sayest thou, Who

touched me?

45. “And they that were with him.” So w, A., C., Dela

Cursives ; but B., a few Cursives, Sah., and Syriac omit.

“* And sayest thou, Who touched me?” So A., Oleg 1D)
Latin, Vulg., Syriacs ; omitted by N, B., L.

    
  
   
        
  
   
     
  

221

Sar-

When all denied,

., later Uncials, almost all

., later Uncials, &c., Cursives, old
, three or four Cursives, Sah., Copt., Arm.

God had granted faith in His Son,—he would come to the Lord as
knowing that in Christ is his only hope of deliverance. The touch-
ing the hem or tassel of the Lord’s garment is the belief (and con-
sequent acting on that belief) that the Lord’s whole Person, Body,
Soul, and Spirit, being the Person of the God-man, is the channel
of all healing from God to man—not merely the doctrine, no
the example, nor even the power, but the very Person, Bader

Blood, Soul, and Divinity of the Redeemer

as the Second

Adam, of whose very nature we must partake if we are to be in
Christ by grace as we are in Adam by nature, for we receive
sin and death, not from following the example, but by receiving
the nature of Adam, and we must receive life and righteousness
not merely by trying to follow the example, but by, if possible,
so coming into contact with Christ, the Second Adam, as to receive

His nature.

The fringe or tassels of the Lord’s garment adumbrate the means
of grace in the Church of Christ by touching, i.e., by partaking, of
which the sinner comes into contact, as it were, with the Lord’s
Person, only with this very great difference, that there was no
promise attached to touching the borders of the Lord’s garment,
whereas to the devout reception of His Body and Blood the Lord
joins the greatest possible promise, even ‘‘ He that eateth my Flesh
and drinketh my Blood dwelleth in me, and I in him.”

The stanching of her issue of blood is the type of the reception
of deliverance from past sin, and power against future sin, which
in Christ. I believe that at the last it
srace against sin has ordinarily come

we receive through faith
will be found that this
through the channels of

has not apparently accompanied the use of these means it is simply

erace in the Church:

and that where it222 VIRTUE IS GONE OUT OF ME. (Sr. Luxe.

46 And Jesus said, Somebody hath touched me: for I
* Mark v.30. perceive that ‘virtue is gone out of me.
a 47 And when the woman saw that she was not
hid, she came trembling, and falling down before him, she de-
clared unto him before all the people for what cause she

had touched him, and how she was healed immediately.

 

because they have been used mechanically or without faith, and
without prayer and self-examination, and above all, without a
sincere desire to receive in their use the grace which Christ has
promised. We must not only have a general faith in Christ, a faith
in His Atonement or Intercession, or His love to us, but a faith
‘‘ whereby we steadfastly believe the promises of God made to us in
that Sacrament.”

The comparison between the thronging and pressing of the multi-
tude and the perhaps slight and almost imperceptible touch by
the woman, sets forth the difference between the practical unbelief
of mere nominal and the real faith of true Christians. The multi-
tude, at least that part of it which was nearest to the Lord’s Person,
touched Him, hustled against Him, pressed Him, and in all proba-
bility came really nearer to Him than the woman, but there was
no purpose in their coming near or touching, whereas the woman
touched with a purpose—a definite purpose—of receiving healing
from His Person through His robe. The multitude, then, may
prefigure those who throng our churches, and even frequent the
Sacraments, but for mere custom’s sake. In coming to church they
come into His peculiar presence: in coming to Holy Communion
they come far closer still, but they have little or no more purpose in
coming than the crowd in surrounding Him, of which crowd, be it
remembered, it is said that “they gladly received Him,” or, as
is in the Revised, “ They welcomed him, for they all waited for
him.”

But the woman adumbrates those who come to His presence in
church, or much more to His presence in the Blessed Sacrament,
with a purpose—with a will—with a strong definite desire to receive
from Him eternal life. It is to such that He manifests His Near-
ness, even the saving efficacy of His Real Presence.

48. “And he said unto her, Daughter, be of good comfort: thy
faith hath made thee whole,” &e. ‘Thy faith hath made thee:Cuap. VIII.] GO IN PEACE. 223

48 And he said unto her, Daughter, be of

good comfort :
thy faith hath made thee whole;

20 In peace.

 

48. “Be of good comfort.” So AG. CO:
Goth., Syriac, Aith.; omitted by X,
Vulg., Sah., Copt., Cureton Syriac.

E., H., other later Uncials, most Cursives,
By De le six or eight Cursives, most old Latin,

whole.” What was her faith? It was a faith not only in the
general power and goodness of the Lord, but that His very Person
overflowed with healing virtue. It was the preparation for that
loftier and more intelligent faith of the Catholic Church that the
Lord’s Person, as the Second Adam, is the fountain of healing Grace,
and that He diffuses this Grace through means—means of grace
utterly inadequate in themselves, but efficacious because of their
Divinely appointed connection with Himself.

Godet has made a remark on the Lord’s asking the question
‘Who touched me? ” that should not be suffered to pass unnoticed.
He writes: ‘There is no reason for not attributing to Jesus the
ignorance implied in the question, ‘Who touched me?’ But could
the Lord have been ignorant of the particular person on whose be-
half the virtue had gone out of Him? Surely the same Divine
knowledge which revealed to Him that a particular person in a
dense crowd had very gently touched His ‘clothes with a purpose,
revealed to Him that purpose, revealed to Him the person in whoge
breast it had been formed, revealed to Him that she was worthy to
receive a cure, and so on. It seems to me the height of superstition
to suppose that virtue had gone out of Him at random as it were,
without an act of His Divine will suffering it and directing it to
the proper object.” Godet further remarks, “Anything like feigning
ignorance ill comports with the candour of His character.” But
the Lord did not, in asking this question, ‘feign ignorance.” He
asked the question for the sole purpose of drawing out from the
woman a full and voluntary confession of what she had done and

her reason for doing it. Considering the crowd which surrounded
them, He could not have accused any one in particular of touching
Him. Her own confession was necessary if the bystanders were
to believe that her action was voluntary. With respect to feigning,
did God feign when He asked Adam ‘“‘ Where art thou?” or when
He asked him ‘‘ Who told thee thou wast naked?” or when He asked
Eve, “‘ What is this that thou hast done ?”’ (Gen. iii. 9, 11, 18).|

22.4 TROUBLE NOT THE MASTER. [St. Luxe.

49 {While he yet spake, there cometh one from the
u Marky. 35. ruler of the synagogue’s house, saying to him,
Thy daughter is dead; trouble not the Master.

50 But when Jesus heard zt, he answered him, saying, Fear
not: believe only, and she shall be made whole.

5] And when he came into the house, he suffered no man
to go in, save Peter, and James, and John, and the father
and the mother of the maiden.

52 And all wept, and bewailed her: but he said, Weep
x John xi.11, not; she is not dead, * but sleepeth.

a 53 And they laughed him to scorn, knowing
that she was dead.

54 And he put them all out, and took her by the hand,

y ch. vil. 14. ry Ala Yaar
es. and called, saying, Maid, * arise.

54, “And he put them all out” omitted by XN, B., D., L., most old Latin, Vulg., Cur.
Syriac, Ath. ; retained by A., most later Uncials, Cursives, &c.

49. “ While he yet spake, there cometh one from the ruler of the
synagogue’s house,” &c. This must have tried exceedingly the
faith of the ruler. He had not had faith to ask the Lord, “ Say
the word only,’ as the centurion had; but like the nobleman
whose son was at the point of death, he could only believe that the
Lord could work miracles where He Himself was present, and
could lay His hands on the sick. But if he was to receive the bless-
ing he sought, he must believe that the Lord’s power could reach to
the very confines of the unseen state into which the souls of the
dead pass, rather even into the unseen realm itself, and so the Lord
upheld him with the words—

50. ‘Fear not: believe only, and she shall be made whole.”
‘“‘ Believe only.” Faith is the one thing needed, for it is that within
us which realizes to us the Son of God in all His attributes of grace
and love as well as in the Divine dignity of His Person: but faith
in the Lord as revealed to us must not stop short at anything
which is within the reach of His Almighty Power. It must not
confer with flesh and blood, and think, as the ruler was tempted
to think, that the Lord’s power is limited to this world, and to
this present life.

51-56. “And when he came into the house....no man whatCuap. [X.] THE TWELVE APOSTLES. 225

59 And her spirit came again, and she arose straightway :
and he commanded to give her meat.

56 And her parents were astonished: but *he = Matt. viii. 4.

x. 30. Mark
charged them that they should tell no man what v.43. a

was done.

 

was done.” I have sufficiently commented on the substance of these
verses in my notes on St. Mark. They have nothing more than
what is in the other Synoptiecs.

CAR EXE

HEN “he called his twelve disciples together, and gave
them power and authority over all devils, % Mieaiitis x

] lark ieee

and to cure diseases. & vi. 7.

1. ‘His twelve disciples.” So E., F., H., U., many Cursives, a few old Latin (b, ff?,
gl, 1,q); but §, C., L., some Cursives (16, 33, 67, 69, 124), old Latin (a, ¢, e, f), Vulg., Kc.
read, “his twelve apostles,” and A., B., D., K., M., R., S., other later Uncials, about
100 Cursives, and Syriacs read, ‘‘ the twelve.”’

1. “Then he called his twelve disciples together,’ &. He
called them ‘‘ together” as a ‘‘ body” or “ college,”’ and gave them
this their first commission in their corporate capacity, as it were,
thus distinguishing them from the rest of His disciples.

“‘ And gave them power and authority over all devils, and to cure
diseases.” He gave them what in the eyes of men was esteemed to
be His own highest prerogative, for the people had exclaimed,
‘What a word is this, for with authority he commandeth even the
unclean spirits, and they obey him.”

‘Over all devils.” The effects of possession by evil spirits were
diverse, according to the power and malignity of each one ; some
were easily expelled, others held to their victims more tenaciously ;
but the Lord gave them power over all, so that, if any resisted
them, it was through their own deficiency in faith. (Matt. xvii.
20.)

Q7
Apne SY

226 HE SENT THEM TO PREACH. [Sr. Luxe.

2 And "he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and
b Matt.x.7,8. to heal the sick.

"ke vi. 12.

ae 1,9. 3 ° And he said unto them, Take nothing for
nee your journey, neither staves, nor scrip, neither
Bee bread, neither money; neither have two coats

apiece.

 

2, ‘The sick” omitted by B. and Cureton Syriac only.

3. “Staves.” So A., H., K., other later Uncials, very many Cursives; but N, B., Cz,
D., E., F., L., M., &., many Cursives (1, 11, 22, 28, 33, 69, 106, &c.), old Latin, Vulg.,
and versions, read, ‘‘a staff,”

2. And he sent them to preach the kingdom of God, and to heal
the sick.” ‘To preach the kingdom of God,” 4.¢., its near ap-
proach, so that those who heard should accept it in the Person of
the Lord.

Did they themselves then understand all that was meant by the
term, “‘ Kingdom of God”? Certainly not. This was not neces-
sary, for in preaching the kingdom, they simply heralded it, and
proclaimed its near approach, but did not expound it. Men expected
that the Messiah when He came, would introduce a new regime, as
it were. This they proclaimed as at hand.

‘And to heal.” The healing those afflicted in mind or body, in
mind by evil spirits, in body by diseases, was their credential. Tt
was the same as the Lord’s. In this first mission of the twelve
there was a partial fulfilment of that which after the Resurrection
was embodied in the words, ‘“ As my Father sent me, so send I
you.” Godet has a valuable remark: “ There is something greater
than preaching—this is to make preachers; there is something
greater than performing miracles—this is to impart the power to
perform them. It is this new stage which the work of Jesus here
reaches. He labours to train His Apostles.up to His own level.

3. And he said unto them, Take nothing for your journey.” Go
just as you are, make no preparation whatsoever. My Father will
see that you need nothing.

“Neither staves.” Probably, neither a staff. This does not
mean that if they had a staff they were to throw it away, but if
they had not a staff already, or if they walked well without one,
they were not to procure or buy one.

‘Nor scrip,” i.e., no wallet or

small basket to hold provisions; for
when they wer

e hungry God would open the hearts of the first
person they called upon to supply their wants.Cuar, IX.] SHAKE OFF THE VERY DUST. Dene

d he = a ee .
4 “And whatsoever house ye enter into, there abide, and
thence depart. d Matt. x. 11.

Mark vi, 10.
9 “And whosoever will not receive you, when ¢ mat ny

ye go out of that city, *shake off the very dust £ Acts xiii. 51,
from your feet for a testimony against them.

“ Neither bread, neither money.” This shows that this mission
was a very special one, because in their usual following of the
Lord, they took with them some provision of bread (‘we have no
more but five loaves”’), and they had also a common purse or bag,
out of which Judas pilfered.

* Neither have two coats apiece.” This of course does not imply
that they are to go insufficiently clad, but that they are to have no
change of garments. They were to travel as poor working men
were wont to do.

4. ‘‘ And whatsoever house ye enter into, there abide, and thence
depart.” We gather from St. Matthew that they were first to in-
quire who in the city was worthy, so that their ministry might not
be injured by any scandal in the house from which they went forth ;
and having found such a house they were to continue in it, and not
go from house to house in search of better quarters.

These short directions as to the conduct of the Apostles, on this
their first missionary journey, imply two things. The most com-
plete unselfishness and indifference to creature comforts on the
part of the Apostles, and their absolute faith that God would watch
over them and supply their needs wherever they were. This, their
faith, was amply rewarded, for when the Lord afterwards appealed
to them, ‘‘ When I sent you without purse or scrip, lacked ye any
thing ?”’ they said ‘‘ Nothing.” (Luke xxii. 35.)

5, 6. ‘*And whosoever will not receive you, when ye go out of
that city, shake off... . healing every where.” The Jews were ac-
customed, on their return from heathen countries to the Holy Land,
to shake off the dust from their feet at the frontier. This act signi-
fied a breaking away from all joint participation in the life of the
idolatrous world. The Apostles were to act in the same way with
reference to any Jewish cities which might reject in their person
the kingdom of God.

The rejection of the Gospel is not the rejection of a mere theory
on which men may innocently entertain different opinions. It isDAS HE WAS PERPLEXED. [Sr. Luxe.

6 And they departed, and went through the towns,
@ Mark vi.12. preaching the gospel and healing every where.
ano 7 ¥ * Now Herod the tetrarch heard of all that
fer, aS done by him: and he was perplexed, because
Mark vi. 14. that it was said of some, that John was risen from
the dead ;
8 And of some, that Elias had appeared; and of others,

that one of the old prophets was risen again.

 

7. ‘‘That was done by him.” ‘‘ By him” omitted by N, B.,C., D., L., Cursives 69, 157,
old Latin (a, b, e, ff?, &c.), Sah., Copt., Cur. Syriac, Arm., but retained in A., E., G., H.,
K., M., 8., &c., most later Uncials, almost all Cursives, some old Latin (c, f), Vulg., Goth.,
Pesh Syriac, ASth.
the rejection of a message which, if faithfully received, reveals
God, and subdues us to Him, and transforms us into His likeness.
It is the refusal of the only remedy for moral evil which God has
given toman. And notice that this remedy, being offered to us by
men sent by God, may be rejected in rejecting their message or
their preaching. The faults or idiosyncrasies of the preacher are
taken no account of by the Lord. It is one with what He says
elsewhere, “ He that heareth you, heareth me, and he that despiseth
you, despiseth me, and he that despiseth me, despiseth him that
sent me.”’

7-9. “Now Herod thetetrarch..... And he desired to see him.”’
There is a remarkable difference between the narratives of the
other Synoptics and that of St. Luke, respecting the conduct of
Herod on his hearing of the fame of Jesus. According to St. Mat-
thew, Herod himself suggests that it is St. John the Baptist risen

from the dead. According to St. Mark, Herod suggests that it is
John, and those about him that it is Elias, or some other prophet.
But according to St. Luke, the name of the Baptist and other pro-
phets is first suggested by others, and Herod exclaims, “‘ John have
I beheaded, but who is this?”’ The accounts in the two first Evan-
gelists seem to set forth more decidedly the workings of Herod’s
guilty conscience. It seems not improbable that Herod’s fears first
suggested to him the reappearance of John from the dead ; then
those about him, to calm them, would name other prophets, as
Elias; and lastly, Herod, having somewhat reassured himself that
John could not have risen, exclaimed, ‘“‘ Who is this, of whom I hear
such things ?”Onan. LX] WHO IS THIS? 229

9 And Herod said, John have I beheaded: but who is this,
of whom I hear such things? ‘And he desired i ch. xxiii. 8,
to see him.

10 4 * And the apostles, when they were re- * Mark vi. 30.
turned, told him all that they had done. !'And ! Matt. xiv.13.
he took them, and went aside privately into a desert place
belonging to the city called Bethsaida.

11 And the people, when they knew zt, followed him: and

 

10. ‘‘ Into a desert place belonging to the city called Bethsaida.” SoA.,C., K., G.,
H., K., M., 8., T., A, other Uncials, most Cursives, Arm., Goth., #th. ‘A city called
Bethsaida,” B., L., 2, X., 33, Sah., Copt. mn locum desertum qui est Bethsaida, Vulg.
(Cod. Amiat), old Latin. There are a number of other different readings. ‘Into a
Village (xwuiv) called Bethsaida,” D., and others.

‘‘And he desired to see him.” The reader will remember that
St. Luke, who alone records this desire on Herod’s part, is the only
Evangelist who tells us that the Lord was at the first sent by Pilate
to Herod, so that Herod had his profane and godless curiosity
gratified, but in a way which only added to his condemnation.

Godet has a suggestive note respecting the source of St. Luke’s
knowledge of this desire of Herod. ‘‘ The remarkable detail which
Luke alone has preserved—that Herod sought to have a private
interview with Jesus—indicates an original source of information
closely connected with this king. Perhaps it reached Luke, or the
author of the document of which he availed himself, by means of
some one of those persons whom Luke describes so exactly in Luke
viii. 3, as ‘Joanna the wife of Chuza, Herod’s steward,’ and in Acts
xiii. 1, ‘Manaen which had been brought up with Herod the
Tetrarch,’ and who belonged to Herod’s household.”

10. ‘And the apostles, when they were returned, told him all...
desert place belonging to the city,” &c. According to St. Mark, He
thus took them aside, to afford them some needful rest. They were
distracted with the constant calls on their powers of healing, so that
they had ‘no leisure so much as to eat.”

“Into a desert place belonging to the city called Bethsaida.”
There are considerable differences of reading; but it is clear that
the place into which He led them, being a desert place, could not
have been the city of Bethsaida itself.

11. ‘‘And the people... and he received them... need of
healing.” Instead of blaming them, and sending them away, be-Race tel

230 WE ARE HERE IN A DESERT PLACE. [S1. Luxe.

he received them, and spake unto them of the kingdom of
God, and healed them that had need of healing.

m Matt. xiv. 12 "And when the day began to wear away,
35. ronan then came the twelve, and said unto him, Send
a the multitude away, that they may go into the
towns and country round about, and lodge, and get victuals:
for we are here in a desert place.

 

cause they broke upon His scanty but well-earned and sorely-needed
leisure, He received them. The Son of God is never angry with
eagerness and importunity, always with indifference. He seems
never to resent interruption, if they who intrude upon Him do so
in order to call forth the exercise of His power and goodness.
“And spake unto them of the kingdom of God.” In St. Mark
this is described as “he began to teach them many things.’’ The

_ kingdom of God has many aspects. It is not a very simple matter,

which can be dismissed in a sentence or two. It is full of mystery.
“Unto you it is given to know the mysteries of the kingdom of
God.” It is like many things, very different from one another. It
is like a field, a hidden treasure, a grain of mustard seed, a net, a
man making a supper, and virgins going to meet a bridegroom.

12. “And when the day began to wear away... here in a
desert place.” We now enter upon our fourth exposition of the
miracle which seems, in the view of the Spirit of God, the most im-
portant of all, for a separate account of it is given in each of the
four Gospels; and, if we take into consideration that another
miracle, precisely similar in its leading features, 7.e., the feeding of
the four thousand, is given us in two Evangelists, we have this mira-
culous multiplication of bread repeated six times in the evangelical
narrative. The reader, then, cannot expect more than a ** gather-
ing up of fragments;” and yet fragments which must not be
lost, i.e., incidental lessons, which ought on no account to pass
unnoticed.

In the first place, then, we may notice that there is nothing
special in St. Luke’s account. He gives no incident or feature
which is not to be found in SS. Matthew and Mark ; but yet his
account is so far independent that it is impossible to suppose that
he copied from either of them.

It is also worthy of notice that there were two or three remark-Cuap. IX.] GIVE YE THEM TO EAT. 231

13 But he said unto them, Give ye them to eat. And they
said, We have no more but five loaves and two fishes; except
we should go and buy meat for all this people.

 

able anticipations of this miracle in the Old Testament. There was
the unfailing barrel of meal in the history of Elijah (1 Kings
xvii. 14). There was the multiplication of the oil in the history of
Elisha (2 Kings iv. 1-7); and, in the account of the latter prophet,
there was a miracle still more remarkably similar—where Elisha
bids his servitor set twenty loaves, and some full ears of corn in the
husk, before a hundred men. There is the same objection made by
the servitor as by the Apostles. The one asks: “ Shall I set this
before a hundred men?” The other: ‘‘ What are they among so
many?” And in each case there was some left. Now these antici-
pations of this miracle in the Old Testament—a book which must
have been familiar to the Apostles—seem very important. The
Apostles knew the history of Elisha. In this very Gospel, and in this
chapter, we are told they asked respecting the Samaritan village
which would not receive them, ‘ Wilt thou that we command fire
to come down from heaven, and consume them even as Elias did ?”’
How is it, then, that having seen our Lord perform miracles greater
and more numerous than those of Elijah and Elisha, they did not
anticipate that He could multiply food? Was it owing to their
want of faith, or to their forgetfulness? Our Lord seems to impute
it to their want of understanding; but this want of understanding
was providential, for it shows us plainly that they never looked out
for miracles. They were never fully alive to the significance of the
supernatural in the life and actions of the Lord. In recording these
stupendous miracles of creation they record their own extraordinary
dulness of apprehension and slowness of belief. We may feel
assured that they never imagined a miracle where there was none,
and never exaggerated a natural incident into a miracle. On the
contrary, their want of apprehension seems at times itself miracu-
lous, as if a supernatural veil was over their hearts. Never once
does the Lord reprove them for superstition, or too creat readiness
to believe; constantly does He blame them for unreadiness to take
in the greatness of His claims. |
With respect to the teaching of the miracle, in my notes on St.
Matthew and St. Mark I have shown how it sets forth the Lord asD329 MAKE THEM SIT DOWN. [Sr. Luxe.

14 For they were about five thousand men. And he said
to his disciples, Make them sit down by fifties in a company.

 

14. ‘By fifties in a company.” ‘‘ Make them sit down (or recline) in companies about
fifty each.”

the Feeder of His people—feeding them both by doctrine and by
Eucharist.

With respect to the doctrine, look how the few facts of the Gospel
narrative embodied in the creeds have multiplied under His hands,
and in the hands of those whom He has sent, into a vast body of
truth, practical, consolatory, instructing, correcting, elevating even
to heaven, enlightening the soul’s eye, so that human beings once
blind through sin should see God and His invisible kingdom; and,
in the case of the poor and the uneducated, see how at times the
smallest modicum of truth is multiplied in the individual mind, so
as to furnish it, satisfy it, enable it to overflow and abound. Keble
has a remarkable application of this in a sermon of his on this
miracle. “He helps our souls as He helps our bodies, through the
aid of ordained means; and sometimes He may cause these means
to fall short, and then may supply them as suddenly and abundantly
as He multiplied these loaves and fishes. A person may have but
little learning—he may be quite unable to read, and may seem to
himself as if he did not well understand what he hears—and yet, if
he have the fear of God in his heart, and try to live accordingly, he
shall eat and be filled with spiritual meat and drink. One good
lesson, one verse, one prayer may be a treasure to him which he
shall never lose. He maybe a good way from church, he may have
few helps at home; but if he really try to make the most of what
little he has, God can and will make a good deal of it—to him.
Half a prayer remembered as having been learnt in childhood; an
old loose Bible or Testament on a shelf; the remembrance of some
good Christian formerly known, his sayings, his tone of voice, his
manner of coming in and going out, all these and other such things
are as the scanty fare of that multitude, which become abundant
under His creative hand.”

And with respect to the Eucharistic Food, His Body and Blood
given to us to make us partakers of Himself, how is His most
sacred Body and Blood present at every Eucharist, to be offered to
every Christian! We who believe that in that sacred feast He feedsCuap. IX.]

 

HE BLESSED THEM, AND BRAKE. 2338

15 And they did so, and made them all sit down.

16 Then he took the five loaves and the two fishes, and
looking up to heaven, he blessed them, and brake, and gave
to the disciples to set before the multitude.

 

us, not with representations or figures or emblems, but with reali-
ties, must believe that His Almighty grace has so brought it about
that every communicant has received His Body and His Blood as
surely as each one of these multitudes received what He had taken,
and blessed, and broken, and given. Our Blessed Lord seems to have
ordered His doings in such a way that the disciples would be sure
to remember them when, about a year after, He instituted the Eucha-
rist. The very act of consecration, the taking, blessing, breaking,
was anticipated by the Lord when He fed the multitudes. We
cannot read the miracle without thinking of the Lord’s action on
the night of His betrayal.

And the Lord evidently meant us to connect mentally the one
with the other, and, as far as I can see, for but one reason,—to en-
hance our ideas of the greatness of the Sacrament, as a rite or
ordinance in which He feeds all with one Bread. Whatever the
appearance of the broken element, there is but one nourishing
and sustaining Substance. ‘‘ The bread which we break, is it not
the participation of the Body of Christ?” ‘We being many are
one bread and one body, for we are all partakers of that one
bueade: Cl Corex. 16, 17.)

And again, by this miracle our Lord gives believers a lively as-
surance of the truth of His promise, ‘‘ Seek ye first the kingdom of
God and His righteousness, and all these things (i.c., all things
needful for the body) shall be added unto you.” These multitudes
sought first the kingdom of God. They so hung upon the words
proceeding from the Lord’s lips; they were so taken with His
miracles o1 healing, that they forgot the things needful for this
life; they seem to have even forgotten their hunger, and took no
care for their night’s lodging, and in this desert place the Lord fed
them by this miracle. And I do not think that we can read the
account of the life of any poor humble-minded Christian, without
finding that when he was in great straits the Lord assisted
him unexpectedly by some special providence, which required as
distinct an interference on God’s part with the course of human934 WHOM SAY THE PEOPLE THAT I AM? (Sr. Luxe.

17 And they did eat, and were all filled: and there was
taken up of fragments that remained to them twelve baskets.

n Matt. xvi. 18 42 And it came to pass, as he was alone
13. Mark viii. : : feu s ; ‘
27. praying, his disciples were with him: and he

. s
asked them, saying, Whom say the people that Iam?

events, as did the performance of this miracle demand an exercise
of unique power over the elements of human food.

Two subordinate lessons are (1) the necessity of a particular act
of giving thanks at each meal to Him that giveth food to all flesh ;
and (2) the duty of avoiding all waste. Here was an immense
quantity of human food produced without labour by a mere word ;
but by the Lord’s blessing it had become fit to sustain life, and so
nothing of it was to be lost. There is a sort of sacredness about
all human food, for it is God’s means of keeping alive one who is
created in His image, and so the truly God-fearing man will look
upon it with some degree of reverence, and preserve even its frag-
ments for the use of those who are in want, or who have but scanty
means of living.

18. ‘“‘And it came to pass, as he was alone praying,” &c. St.
Matthew and St. Mark tell us that what follows, 7.e., the question of
Jesus as to whom the people, and then the disciples, said that He
was, took place in the coasts or towns of Cesarea Philippi. And
St. John records that immediately after the feeding of the five
thousand, there took place the miracle of the Lord walking on the
water, and the discourse of the Lord respecting eating His Flesh
and drinking His Blood, which He delivered in the synagogue of
Capernaum. St. Luke here, between verses 17 and 18, omits several
matters of interest, as the dispute with the Pharisees respecting the
eating with unwashen hands—the nature of defilement, the healing
of the daughter of the woman of Canaan, the healing of the deaf
and stammering man (in Mark vii. 32-37 alone): also the second
miracle of the loaves—the Pharisees seeking a sign, the reproof of
the disciples for their want of understanding, and, in St. Mark
ouly, the healing of the blind man at Bethsaida. Some of these,
as bearing so directly upon the acceptance of the Gentiles, we
should have supposed that St. Luke would not have passed over, if
it had been his special purpose, in writing his Gospel, to set forth
the words and acts of the Lord which foreshadowed it.Case,IX| (WHOM: SAY YE THAT 7 AM ? 235

19 They answering said, °John the Baptist; but some
say, Hlias; and others say, that one of the old © Matt. xiv, 2,
prophets is risen again. ver. 7, 8.

20 He said unto them, But whom say ye that I
amr ? Peter answering said, The Christ of God. » Matt. xvi. 16.

John vi, 69.

18. ‘‘ And it came to pass, as he was alone praying .... Whom
say the people that Tam?” This is the only instance in which
the Lord inquires as to the opinion of others respecting Himself.
He does it, no doubt, in the way of catechizing, to draw forth from the
Apostles what the multitude thought of He and then what they
themselves thought ; so that they might be more distinctly conscious
of the wide difference between the popular opinion and that which
they had themselves formed; and this, that they might the better
understand, that if they had a truer view of Him than the multi-
tude, it was because they were taught of God. (‘Flesh and blood
hath not revealed it unto thee, but my Father.’’)

It is said that He did this when He was “alone pr aying,’’ and
that His disciples were with Him, ‘.c., only His disciples, not the
multitude. Quesnel has a womeriabille application of this, ‘‘ Christ
asks His disciples concerning their faith after prayer and in the
privacy of retirement, on purpose to teach bishops not to instruct,
nor to examine into the faith of inferior pastors in the presence of
the people, and to do it with much prudence, after having begged
of God the Spirit of Wisdom.”’

19. “They answering said, John the Baptist; but some say,
Elias, and others,” &c. This answer is remarkable. The miracles
of the Lord had convinced the people that He was come from God,
a messenger from the unseen world, and so they thought that He
must be some former servant of God, who after his departure had
been sent again. It seems strange that they should so far honour
Him as to imagine Him to be John or Elias risen again, and yet
stop short of the truth. Why should He be a resuscitated prophet,
and not the Messiah Himself? The answer is, either that He was
a totally different Messiah to what they expected, or (which is
more likely to be the truth) that when the true Messiah came, none
would recognize Him, except those specially taught of God.

20. “He said unto them, But whom say ye that lam? Peter

99

answering,” &¢e. All the truth of Christ’s revelation is wrapped236 THE SON OF MAN MUST SUFFER. (St. Luxe.

21 *And he straitly charged them, and commanded them
a Matt. xvi.20. to tell no man that thing ;
pee OD Saying, "The Son of man must suffer many
things, and be rejected of the elders and chief priests and

scribes, and be slain, and be raised the third day.

 

s Matt. x. 38. 23  * And he said to them all, If any man will
& xvi. 24.

Mark viii. 34.

Che xis i.

up in these words, ‘‘The Christ of God.” For Christ means the
Anointed One. If He be the Anointed of God, and is faithful to His
anointing, then all that He reveals respecting Himself, respecting
the Father, respecting the Holy Ghost, respecting His own Saeri-
fice, His Intercession, His Mediation, His Judgment, His Flesh
being the bread of His people, His perpetual Presence after His
departure—all is absolutely true, and will be revealed to the
Church, and then to individual souls, as they require it.

Hitherto the Lord had elicited from them the confession of Him-
self as the Christ. Now He set forth the qualifications which
would enable Him to exercise the Messiahship. This was not His
Divine dignity, or His Almighty power, but His humiliation and
His weakness.

21, 22. ** And he straitly charged them that they should tell no
man... . be raised the third day.” But why did He so straitly
charge them that they were to tell no man that He was the Christ
of God? Because in their then state of ignorance they would be
utterly unable to preach the truth respecting His Messiahship.
Both they and the people expected a victorious prince; a captain
of salvation made “perfect through suffering’? would then be
unimaginable by either Apostles or multitude.

23. ‘And he said to them all.” Why is it said, ‘to them all?”
This is a very remarkable case of two wholly independent narra-
tives, explaining one another. St. Matthew had said, ‘‘ Jesus said
unto his disciples,” and when this conversation was begun the
disciples alone could have been present. How is it, then, that St.
Luke says, “He said to them all”? The key is given in St. Mark,
who tells us that ‘‘He called the people unto him with his dis-
ciples,” and then He proceeded to say words which belong not to
Apostles only, but to all who name the Lord’s Name. “If any man
will [or desire to] come after me, let him deny himself,” &c.

There can be no doubt (as I have endeavoured to impress uponCuap.IX.] LET HIM TAKE UP HIS CROSS. 237

come after me, let him deny himself, and take up his cross
daily, and follow me.

23. “Daily” omitted by C., D., E., F., G., H., 8., &., nearly 120 Cursives, old Latin
(a, b, c, e, ff?, 1, q); retained by ¥, A., B., K., L., M., R., &c., Cursives 1, 13, 33, 69, 72,
124, 131, old Latin (f), Vulg., Sah., Copt., and Syriacs (Pesh, and Cureton), Goth., Arm.

the reader), that Christianity has two sides, the attractive, the win-
ning, the merciful, and the severe side. The attractive may be ex-
pressed in the words, ‘‘Come unto me, all ye that labour and are
heavy laden, and I will give you rest.”” The severe is to be found
in, ‘‘ If any man will come after me, let him deny himself, and take
up his cross daily, and follow me.” No servant of Christ who looks
upon himself as called to teach others can be faithful, unless he
does his best to set forth, as occasion requires, these two aspects of
the Lord’s teaching. No teacher has ever joined these two more
effectually than St. Paul, ‘They that are Christ’s have crucified
the flesh with its affections and lusts.” ‘Mortify therefore your
members which are on the earth.” ‘‘Fornication,” &c. ‘We be-
seech you .... that ye present your bodies a living sacrifice,
holy acceptable to God.” “I keep under my body, and bring it
into subjection, lest that by any means,” &c. One of his faithful
sayings is, ‘If we suffer with him, we shall also reign with him.”
These are as much His words, and seem to be said with as much
earnestness as ‘‘ By grace are ye saved through faith.”

“Deny himself’’—that is, at times to abstain from what is
pleasurable, though it be perfectly lawful. Without this there is no
exercise in godliness, no true discipline.

“Take up his cross daily.” The taking-up of the cross is a re-
markable figure. For a man to bear on his shoulder two heavy
pieces of wood, knowing that at the end of the journey they will be
the instrument of a cruel death to him, betokens, if it be done wil-
lingly, the most determined purpose conceivable to endure all for
the cause on which he has set his heart. Now, if the man’s heart
be set to follow in the blessed steps of his Saviour’s holy life, then,
to take up the cross daily, implies bearing, enduring, praying,
watching, of no ordinary kind; for to take up a cross willingly
must have been, even in the times when crucifixion was a punish-
ment, no ordinary thing. It implies willingness to endure no
ordinary death; and the figure, as used by the Saviour, must of
necessity betoken the determination to go very contrary to fleshDe THE SAME SHALL SAVE IT. (Sr. Luk.

94 For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: but who-
soever will lose his life for my sake, the same shall save it.

a Matt. xvi.26. 25 *For what is a man advantaged, if he gain
Mark viii. 36. :
the whole world, and lose himself, or be cast

away ?

24, <‘ Will save ;”’ 7.e., wills or desires to save.
«‘ Will lose.” The secoud ‘‘ will” only the sign of the future tense,

and blood, rather than not follow His example, or not do His
will.

“Hollow me.” Follow Me in the path of purity, holiness, good-
ness, love, submission to God.

94. ‘* For whosoever will save his life shall lose it: but whoso-
ever will lose,” &e. It is to be noticed that the ‘‘ life’’ here is one
thing : it means the self—that for which a man lives, whether in
this world, or in the next.

“Whosoever will save,” 7.e., whosoever desires, whosoever lays
himself out to ‘‘save his life,” 7.e., either to avoid death, which
must overtake him if he adheres to the profession of My faith; or
to avoid what comes short of death, 7.e., personal discomfort, loss of
the world’s favour, or whatsoever it be which makes a man feel that
this world is not his home, and that he must look for his true home
in another world. If a man sets himself to work to avoid these
things, and to make the best of this world, then he loses his true
life, which is a life ‘‘ hid with Christ in God.”

‘But whosoever will lose [not desires to lose, but shall lose]
his life,” 7.e., his temporal life, or all things that in the estimation
of the world make the present life worth living ; whosoever shall
despise these, if put against the possession of My Favour, then such
an one “shall save his life ;”’ he shall preserve within himself the
true life of God, and he shall gain the Resurrection life.

25. “* For what is a man advantaged, if he gain the whole world
and lose himself,” &c. This is one of the plainest of Christ’s holy
words. It is equally true, whatever we take life here to mean.
What would it profit a man if he had all the wealth of the world in
his possession, and yet, as soon as he possessed it, his soul or life
should be required of him? He could take not one penny of it
away with him. He would only find in the other world that which

he had parted with in this, for the sake of Christ, or His Church. orCuar.IX.] WHOSOEVER SHALL BE ASHAMED, 9239

26 “For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my

words, of him shall the Son of man be ashamed, © Matt. x. 33.

: : Mark viii. 38.

when he shall come in his own glory, and in his 2 Tim. ii, 19,

Father’s and of the holy angels,

Eee ee
His poor. The gold and silver which he had spent in mere luxury,
or vain glory, or sinful pleasure, will then be “a Witness against
him,” and “eat his flesh as it were fire ” (James v. 8).
To profit by this saying of the Lord’s, we must have real faith in
Jesus Christ. Faith in Him, as on His cross losing the whole
world, and then, because of His self-renunciation, gainine the
empire of the universe. Faith in Him as coming again, and at Hig
coming reversing all human conditions, scattering the proud,
putting down the mighty, “raising up the poor out of the dust, and
lifting the needy out of the dunghill, that He may set him with

princes, even with the princes of His people.”

26. “ For whosoever shall be ashamed of me and of my words...
holy angels.” It seems impossible, now that the Name of Christ is
so honoured in the world, that men should be ashamed of Christ ;
even infidels, or some infidels, speak of him as the wisest and
greatest of men. Even those who deny His Godhead confess that
no one has made such a mark in the history of the world and in
human society as He has. But the Lord connects the being ashamed
of His words with being ashamed of Himself. And must we not be
delivered from the fear of our fellow-men; must we not hold the
opinion of the world and its great ones very cheap, if we are in all
companies manfully to confess that we believe in the truth, the
absolute truth, of the very words which He has just been uttering,
that His true followers must deny themselves, and take their cross
daily ; that whosoever will save his life, 7.e., shall lay himself out to
enjoy it to the full, shall lose it, and that the gain of the whole
world is worthless when set side by side with the possession of the
true Life of God ?

‘When he shall come in his own glory,” &e. The most abject
shame and the highest glory are here contrasted. The ineffable
glory of the Son of Man, threefold—His own, that of His Father,
that of the holy angels—all enhancing the distress and confusion
of the miserable being who has had the opportunity of winning a
crown by confessing Him, and has deliberately rejected it for the
goodwill of a condemned world.240 SOME STANDING HERE. [Sr. Luxe.

97 *But I tell you of a truth, there be some standing
x Matt. xvi.28. here, which shall not taste of death, till they see
Mark ix. 1. -
the kingdom of God.

 

97. “But I tell you of a truth, there be some standing here, which
shall not taste of death,’ &c. I have spoken twice before of the
difficulty of this verse, and that I have never found an altogether
satisfactory explanation of it. One thing, however, is certain, that
there must be some reference in the Lord’s words to the approach-
ing vision of glory, for each of the three Synoptics prefaces his
account of the Lord’s Transfiguration with it. The difficulty is this.
The words, ‘‘I tell you of a truth, there be some standing here
which shall not taste of death,’’ seem to point to a very prolonged
life indeed. They seem to point to far more than a survival of the
destruction of Jerusalem, which took place some forty years after-
wards, and which is by almost universal consent reckoned as a
coming of the Lord, only to be exceeded in the terrors of its ven-
geance by the consummation at the last day.

It seems at first sight, then, impossible to refer the words with
any degree of propriety to the event on the mountain top, which
should occur in little less than a week. And so it would be if the
Transfiguration had been a public manifestation of the Lord’s glory
in the sight of all Jerusalem or all Galilee. But the key to the
difficulty is, I am persuaded, to be found in the fewness of those
to whom the Lord vouchsafed the sight of His glorified Body, and
the injunction He laid upon those favoured three, to “‘ tell the vision
to no man.’ The Lord had been speaking of Himself as ‘‘the Son
of Man coming in his glory,” and then “‘rewarding every man
according to his works,” and of ‘‘ coming in his own glory, in that
of his Father, and of the holy angels,” and of then being ashamed
of those who had been ashamed of Him. But this event was in the
far distance; ages might intervene, the coming might be long
delayed, and the dangers and persecutions alluded to in verses 23,
24,25 were close at hand. Was there to be any sign, any pledge,
any pre-announcement of the final glory? Yes, therewas. There
were three, and only three, who should be witnesses of a sight of
the Lord, arrayed in as much of the Light and Splendour of the
Second Coming as mortal eyes would be able to bear. On thestead-
fastness of the faith of these three God had made the faith of the
Church to depend; and the vision on the holy mount was necessaryCuar. IX,] AS HE PRAYED. 241

28 §| * And it came to pass about an eight days after these

|| sayings, he took Peter and John and James, and » Matt. xvii. 1.
went up into a mountain to pray. I oe wee

29 And as he prayed, the fashion of his countenance was
altered, and his raiment was white and glistering.

 

to the steadfastness and perseverance of their faith—necessary, that
is, in the counsels of God, for God has made all men’s faith to
depend in a great measure on the testimony of their fellow-men.

These observations convey in somewhat different language what I
have written more fully on Mark ix. 1, to which I earnestly refer
the reader.

28. “ And it came to pass about an eight days after.” St. Matthew
and St. Mark write after six days; but there is no discrepancy.
These were six whole, unbroken days; and the parts of the day
preceding the first of these six, and of the day succeeding the last,
would be reckoned by St. Luke as “days.”

29. ‘*And as he prayed,” &. St. Luke alone mentions that He
retired for prayer, and that the glory began “as he prayed.” May
we reverently inquire as to the subject of His prayer? We should
say the strengthening of the faith of the three, and through them
of the whole company of the Apostles. And so the answer to His
prayer was the Transfiguration itself, which, more than any
miracle that they had seen, upheld them in the overwhelming
waterflood through which they had soon to pass.

“The fashion of his countenance was altered.” It has been re-
marked that St. Luke, writing his Gospel for Gentiles, avoids the
use of the word which St. Matthew and St. Mark employ to signify
the change which came over the appearance of the Lord. They use
the word ‘‘ metamorphosed,’ a word which would suggest to
Gentiles, acquainted with their own mythological system, all
manner of abominable stories; whilst St. Luke, writing for Gen-

tiles especially, simply says that His countenance was “ other,”
that is, different, because of its radiance, from what it was before.

‘His raiment was white and glistering.” ‘This seems to signify
that the light of the indwelling Deity streamed, not only from His
countenance, but from His whole Person through His garments.
What was this radiance—this glory, this all-penetrating bright-
ness? Evidently that of His Divine Nature, which by a miracle of
Roe
tpn oe

242 MOSES AND ELIAS. [Sx. Luxe,

30 And, behold, there talked with him two men, which
were Moses and Elias:

 

restraint He kept from shining forth; but now for a brief space He
withheld the restraining power, and He appeared in something of
His natural brightness. So that, as I have shown in my notes on
St. Matthew, the Transfiguration was not a miracle of superadded
glory, but the removal of a veil which hid His state of natural
glory from the eyes of His fellows—the real miracle was in the
humilation—the emptying of Himself, the shrouding and restrain-
ing of what was ever ready to shme forth.

30. ‘* And behold, there talked with him two men, which were
Moses and Elias.” ‘‘ Luke does not name them at first. He says
‘two men.’ This mode of describing them reflects the impression
which must have been experienced by the eye-witnesses of the
scene. ‘They perceived first of all the presence of two persons un-
known, it was only afterwards that they knew their names. Behold
(dob) seems to express the suddenness of the apparition. The
imperfect, ‘they were talking,’ proves that the conversation had
lasted some time when the Apostles first perceived the presence of
these strangers.”’ (Godet.)

Two or three questions are suggested by this appearance of these
two prophets. The first is, were they mere disembodied spirits ?
If not, ‘‘ with what body did they come?” Now it is often re-
marked, that there was something strange and unique about the
departure of these two saints. Elias was taken up to heaven in a
chariot of fire and horses of fire, and the death and burial of Moses
was still more mysterious, ‘‘ God,” it is said, “ buried him, and no
man knoweth his sepulchre unto this day.” And, besides this, if
the Epistle of St. Jude is written under the guidance of God’s
Spirit, there was a contention between the chief of the good angels
and the chief of the wicked ones respecting his body. This seems
to teach us that his body did not undergo that which is the
common lot of all, but that it was reserved in God’s keeping till
this appearance of it in the company of the Lord.

Another question seems absurd. It is, ‘‘How did the Apostles
know them to be Moses and Elias?”? Many ways were possible.
It might be by intuition from God, or by revelation, it might have
been through the words which the Lord addressed to them. It was
needful that they should know who these heavenly visitors were,Cuar.IX.j WHO SPAKE OF HIS DECEASE. 243

31 Who appeared in glory, and spake of his decease which
he should accomplish at Jerusalem.

32 But Peter and they that were with him 7 were heavy
with sleep: and when they were awake, they saw «Dan. viii, 18,
his glory, and the two men that stood with him. “~~”

33 And it came to pass, as they departed from him, Peter

32. “And when they were awake.” Alford translates this, ‘‘ But having kept awake,”
Revisers (in margin), “‘ Having remained awake.”

because it added to the dignity of the Saviour; and so was intended
for the confirmation of their faith, that the law and the prophets
should appear in the persons of Moses and HKlijah as waiting on the
Lord.

31. “ Who appeared in glory.” That is, radiant with light, as
apparently all heavenly visitants are.

“And spake of his decease which he should accomplish at Jeru-
salem.’ The word for decease is exodus. His departure, or going
out of this evil world, as the children of Israel departed out of the
bondage of Egypt. It was evidently for the sake of the three
Apostles that the Lord and His two servants conversed upon this.
St. Peter had said of that decease or Exodus, ‘ Be it far from Thee,
Lord ; this shall not be unto Thee.” And now they have the two
leading prophets of the Old Covenant speaking to the Lord of this
only, and as taking place in the Holy City, and no doubt to be
accomplished in a very short time.

32, “* But Peter and they that were with him were heavy with
sleep: and when,” &c. This was the effect of the vision, or rather
ofits beginning. There are several other instances of this sleep, or
absence of distinct consciousness in the presence of some super-
natural manifestation. Thus, it is said of Abraham when he
received the remarkable revelation of God immediately after his
justification, that ‘‘a deep sleep fellupon Abraham, and lo, a horror
of great darkness fell upon him.” (Gen. xv.12.) And of Daniel,
‘“ When I heard the voice of his words, then was I in a deep sleep
on my face, and my face toward the ground.” (Dan. x. 9.)

38. ‘ And it came to pass, as they departed from him, Peter said
unto Jesus, Master, it is good,’’ &. St. Luke alone mentions that
they saw the two prophets departing, and that they desired toerr}

244 THIS IS MY BELOVED SON. (Sr. Luxe.

said unto Jesus, Master, it is good for us to be here: and let
us make three tabernacles; one for thee, and one for Moses,
and one for Elias: not knowing what he said.

34 While he thus spake, there came a cloud, and over-
shadowed them: and they feared as they entered into the
cloud.

35 And there came a voice out of the cloud, saying, * This
a Matt. iii.17. is my beloved Son: ” hear him.

b Acts lil. 22.

Oo

3. “ Tabernacles ;” rather, ‘‘ booths.”

5. “This is my beloved Son.” SoA., C., D., all later Uncials and fragments (except
L. and 3), all Cursives seemingly, most old Latin (b, ¢, e, f, q), Vulg., Syriac (Cureton
and Schaaf); but X, B., L., Z, Sah., Copt., and old Latin (a) read, ‘‘ This is my Son, my
chosen.” In 2 Peteri. 17, in which we have the same words, all MSS., including WN, B.,
L., read, “‘ My beloved Son.” If not St. Peter’s, this epistle is of extreme antiquity.

ew

detain them, because of the wonderful things respecting His death
upon which they had been conversing.

“ Master, it is good for us to be here: and let us make three
tabernacles [or booths for dwelling in]; one for thee, one,” &e.

‘*Not knowing what he said.”’ He desired greatly to detain the
two heavenly visitants with the Lord, as the revelations respecting
Redemption through the Lord’s converse with these glorified pro-
phets were far beyond all that he had yet received; but, like men
who have an earnest desire after some great blessing, and know not
how it is to be brought about, he talked wildly, supposing that
Moses and Elias would not remain, unless they had some sort of
habitation provided for them. And should we, who despise his
words, have said anything more to the point, if we were fainting
with fear at the immediate presence of these glorified denizens of
the eternal world ?

34. ‘* While he thus spake, there came a cloud, and overshadowed
them: and they feared,’ &e. No doubt, from what follows, that
this cloud, like the schekinah of old, betokened the immediate
presence of the Father. St. Matthew speaks of it as a bright cloud
which “overshadowed them.” It was first above them, and then
seemed to descend over them and envelop them, otherwise it is
dificult to explain the words, ‘‘ They feared as they entered into
the cloud.”

380. “And there came a voice out of the cloud, saying, This is my
beloved Son.” Moses and Elias were servants—last of all God sentCuar. IX.] JESUS WAS FOUND ALONE. 245

36 And when the voice was past, Jesus was found alone.
° And they kept tz close, and told no man in those © Matt. xvii. 9.
days any of those things which they had seen.

 

His Son. This was He in the company of God’s two greatest ser-
vants, and in their presence the voice of the Father was heard to
say, “Hear him.” They had heard Moses and the prophets, now
they must hear the Son, Who would teach them the true meaning of
both the law and the prophets. Or the significance may be, “* This
is my beloved Son, hear Him in whatsoever He may say to you.
Even though He speak about His departure by a cruel and
ignominious death, hear Him.”’

36. “And when the voice was past, Jesus was found alone.”

Rather when the voice was—at the time of the voice.

“Jesus was found alone.” Godet asks, “ Does this contain any
allusion to the idea which has been made the very soul of the nar-
rative: the law and the prophets pass away—Jesus [Who is their
true fulfilment] and His word alone remain.”

“And they kept it close, and told no man in those days.” Notice
the undesigned coincidence between St. Luke and the other two
Synoptics. St. Matthew and St. Mark mention that Jesus charged
them that they should tell no man what they had seen. St. Luke
says nothing respecting the Lord’s charge, but tells us that they
kept the matter close. They would certainly not have done so
unless Jesus had very strictly bidden them not to make it known.

Such is the Transfiguration. One of the greatest divines of our
Church, Dr. Pusey, has treated it as giving an earnest of the Chris-

tian’s future glory. And certainly it gives a remarkable reality to
many intimations of the heavenly state which God sets before us.
Among them such as, ‘‘ He shall change our vile body, that it may
be like unto his glorious Body.” ‘‘ Then shall the righteous shine
forth as the sun in the kingdom of their Father.” ‘‘ We know that
when he shall appear we shall be like him, for we shall see him as
he is.” ‘‘As we have borne the image of the earthy, we shall who
bear the image of the heavenly.” ‘‘ When Christ, who is our life,
shall appear, then shall we also appear with himin glory.” ‘“‘Itis
sown in dishonour, it is raised in glory.” I believe that in most of
these places we have the effects of the teaching of the Transfigura-
tion, even in those which were written by St. Paul. If it be ob-
jected against this that both St. Paul and St. John saw the Lordae

7
er

    
   
 
  
  
  
 
 
  
   
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
   
  
   
  
  
   
 
   
  

 

246 LOOK UPON MY SON. [Sr. Luge.

87 4 4And it came to pass, that on the next day, when

d Matt.xvii. they were come down from the hill, much people
14, Mark ix.
14, 17. met him.

838 And, behold, a man of the company cried out, saying,
Master, I beseech thee, look upon my son: for he is mine
only child.

 

in the glory of His Godhead (Acts xxvi. 13, Rev. i. 13-17), I answer
that the glory manifested at the Transfiguration seems to have
been milder and more tolerable, and so was more likely to have
been the origin and seed of that view of the state of the glorified
body of the Christian of which the foregoing passages are
intimations.

87. ‘And it came to pass, that on the next day, when they were
come down from the hill.” It has been generally supposed from
this that the Transfiguration occurred at night, and that Jesus and
His three Apostles came down from the Mount early the next day.
The expression, ‘‘much people met him,” corresponds with the
statement in St. Mark, ‘‘running to him, saluted him.”

The miracle which follows is given so much more fully in St.
Mark, where I have examined it at great length, that it seems im-
possible to do more than refer to the account, and the notes upon
it, to be found in my comment on that Gospel.

88. ‘And, behold, a man of the company cried out, saying...
mine only child.” From St. Luke alone we learn that the man
pleaded that the sufferer was his only son. Do we not naturally
revert to what had just taken place? The Lord had just been recog-
nized by the Father as His Beloved Son; and now one calls upon
Him to heal his only son.

“Look upon my son.” St. Luke alone represents the parent as
asking the Lord to look upon his son. To look upon sinners with
a view to extending mercy to them is a divine act. The Psalmist
prays for it when he says, ‘‘ Look thou upon me, and be merciful
unto me, as thou usest to do unto those that love thy name.” “The
Lord turned and looked upon Peter.” The father may not have
understood it in so deep a sense; but he was led by a higher power
to use words which reached far beyond his present thoughts. His
words as recorded in St. Mark, “Lord, I believe; help thou mine
unbelief,” are certainly inspired to express the thought of all sinnersGiri 1 | A SPIRIT TAKETH HIM. 247

2 / Sane .

39 And, lo, a spirit taketh him, and he suddenly erleth
out; and it teareth him that he foameth again, and bruising
him hardly departeth from him.

40 And I besought thy disciples to cast him out; and
they could not.

41 And Jesus answering said, O faithless and perverse
generation, how long shall I be with you, and suffer you?
Bring thy son hither.

 

in the presence of One Who, whilst He gives faith, gives along with
it the deep feeling of its imperfection.

Quesnel well remarks: “ He who begs one look of mercy begs
every thing. God has already looked upon that person who, know-
ing the absolute necessity of this look, desires and implores it.”

39, 40. “And, lo, a spirit taketh him... they could not.” And
yet but a short time before they had been sent on a mission to
‘cast out devils,” and had returned, saying, ‘“‘ Lord, even the devils
are subject to us in thy name.’ There must have been a falling
away of their faith—perhaps, owing to the absence of the Lord and
the three leading ones; perhaps, in some measure owing to their
despondency at the Lord’s intimation of His approaching Sufferings
and Death.

41. ‘““And Jesus answering said, O faithless and perverse genera-
tion, how long?” &e. ‘‘ Generation” here signifies, not only the
Apostles who had declined in faith, but the multitude, the father of
the child, who could only say, ‘“‘ If thou canst do anything,” the
scribes who, from their presumed greater knowledge of the Old
Testament Scriptures, ought to have discerned in Jesus the signs of
the Messiah. In these almost desponding words there seems to be
a tacit reference to the company of the spirits of just men made
perfect, which He had just enjoyed. Their holy converse impresses
upon Him the more deeply the faithlessness and sinfulness of the
generation among whom He must yet labour, and at whose hands
He must soon suffer so much.

‘‘ After enjoying fellowship with celestial beings, Jesus suddenly
finds Himself in the midst of a world where unbelief prevails in all
its various degrees. It is, therefore, the contrast, not between one
man and another, but between this entire community alienated
from God, in the midst of which He finds Himself, and the inhabi-Ser |

248 THE DEVIL THREW HIM DOWN.  [Sz. Lunz.

42 And as he was yet a coming, the devil threw him down
and tare him. And Jesus rebuked the unclean spirit, and
healed the child, and delivered him again to his father.

43 4 And they were all amazed at the mighty power of
God. But while they wondered every one at all things which
Jesus did, he sacl unto his disciples,

e Matt. xvii. 44, ° Let these sayings sink down into your ears:
i for the Son of man shall be delivered into the
hands of men.

f Mark ix. 32. 45 * But they understood not this saying, and
ch. ii. 50. & y
Xvi. 34.

42. “The devil threw him down, and tare him.” ‘‘ The devil dashed him down” (or
‘rent him,” marg.), ‘and tare him grievously ” (or ‘‘convulsed him,” marg.), Revisers.

tants of heaven which He hasjustleft, which wrings from Him this
mournful exclamation.” (Godet.)

42. ** And as he was yet a coming, the devil threw him down, and
tare him,” &c. We learn from this the comforting lesson that the
most violent temptations of the evil one may immediately precede
his expulsion by the power of God. He ‘has great wrath because
he knows that he has but a short time.”’

43, 44. “‘ And they were all amazed . . . into the hands of men.”
Notice the implied contrast here. The people were full of admira-
tion and wonder, and no doubt those warm expressions corresponded
to their state of feeling. But the Lord turns from them to the
Apostles: ‘‘ Trust not to this seeming devotion. The Son of Man
must be delivered into the hands of men.” Men—this very genera-
tion—will crucify and kill Him. St. Luke omits what St. Matthew
inserts: “The third day he shall rise again,’ which, no doubt, the
Lord really said. But the next verse,

45. “ But they understood not this saying, and it was hid from
them, that they perceived it not,” must be Pen as referring to the
Lord’s approaching Death, which alone St. Luke mentions. It is
very marvellous to think how, after the Lord had so distinctly in-
formed them respecting His Death, and that the leaders of the
Apostolic band had heard Moses and Elias speaking to Him of His
“decease which He should accomplish at Jerusalem,” that it should
bs said with such remarkable iteration, “they understood it not,”
“it was hid from them,” “ they perceived it not.” Was this becauseCuap. IX,] THERE AROSE A REASONING. 249

it was hid from them, that they perceived it not: and they
feared to ask him of that saying. ‘
46 4° Then there arose a reasoning amone ¢ Matt. xviii.
Sk : es % O 1. Mark ix, 34,
them, which of them should be greatest.
47 And Jesus, perceiving the thought of their heart, took
a child, and set him by him.

 

all men naturally turn away from, and refuse to contemplate what
is distasteful to them, or was it because there was a supernatural
veil over their understandings? Very probably from both causes.
At first they refused to accept in simple faith those sayings of the
Lord which seemed contrary to His honour, and to the end which,
not He, but they themselves had assigned to Him, forgetting that
it was He, and not they, Who knew best what was most to His
glory, so that when they rejected or mentally turned away from
His own words respecting His decease, it was through want of real
faith; for faith would say, without any reserve, ‘Thou knowest all
things. Thou knowest what is most conducive to the glory of
God.’’ And this lack of faith would bring about its own retribution.
What they turned away from, God would not allow them to realize;
the plainest truth would be hidden from them, so that they should
perceive it not.

“They feared to ask him of that saying.” Does not this mean
that they feared lest it should be too true; that they should lose
their Master, and be left alone, whereas they knew not that by His
departure they would gain a presence and an indwelling above
all thought ?

46. ‘Then there arose a reasoning among them, which of them
should be the greatest.” What can have first given rise to this
reasoning ? Must it not have been the prospect of the removal of
the Lord by death? Hitherto, when as yet they had had no
thought of His Death, such a question seems never to have occurred
to them. Now, if He was to leave them, who was to supply His
place ?

How was it, however, that they did not all instinctively turn to
Simon Peter? Evidently because the Lord’s words respecting his
primacy were not intended to reserve for him such pre-eminence as
would put him above them as the vicar of Christ.

47. “And Jesus, perceiving the thought of their heart, took aeer |

250 WHOSO SHALL RECEIVE ME. [Sr. Luge.

48 And said unto them, ? Whosoever shall receive this
h Matt.x.40. child in my name receiveth me: and whosoever

& xviii. 5. i : :

Mark ix.37. shall receive me receiveth him that sent me:
John xii. 44,

& Xill. 20.

 

child, and set him by him.” St. Matthew represents the disciples
as “coming to the Lord;” St. Mark, that the Lord Himself began
the matter by asking, “ What was it that ye disputed among your-
selves by the way?” St. Luke’s account may be called inter-
mediate. There arose amongst them the dispute; and Jesus, as the
discerner of the thoughts of the heart, “perceived it.’”’ Here we
see the relations between the accounts of the three. St. Mark gives
the incident verbatim, as the eye-witness, St. Peter, delivered it.
St. Luke’s narrative is from one who had more accurate informa-
tion than the account preserved in the common tradition, but more
general than St. Mark’s history; whilst St. Matthew gives the
tradition which, in detail, could hardly be preserved very accu-
rately ; but the sense of each is the same, whilst their witness is
independent.

“And set him by him.” The Lord, of course, would be in the
midst of the disciples; so that when, according to St. Mark, the
Lord set him in the midst of them, He would set the child beside
Himself,

48. “ And said unto them, Whosoever shall receive this child in
my name, receiveth me.” St. Mark has “one of such children.”
It is clear that the meaning is the same. The child which Jesus
took was no different from other children, and so could be taken as
the type of any and every child. The principle underlying the
words of the Lord, about receiving a child in His name, is this—
ambitious disciples or ministers, who are desirous to be great in the
world, would strive to minister to the rich, to the educated, to those
who are in high places and have influence in the world, and would
neglect the poor, the ignorant, the lowly, and the despised. In making
such a preference to further their ambitious ends, they would vir-
tually reject Christ; whilst those who would, out of the love of their
Master (Who, like His Father, had respect unto the lowly) try to
instruct and benefit poor children, or such as are like children, re-
gardless of any consideration except helping forward a poor and
despised member of Christ; such receive Christ, and in receiving
Him receive God His Father. How have we of the Church ofCuap. IX, THE SAME SHALL BE GREAT. Dal

‘for he that is least among you all, the same shall i Matt. xxiii,
a,
be great. i

 

48. «‘Shall be great.” So A., D., later Uncials, almost all Cursives, old Latin (e, q),

Syriac, Arm.; but N, B., C., L., X, 2, 1, 33, ten other Cursives, old Latin (a, b, ¢, f, 1, g),
Vulg., Copt. read, “‘is”—‘‘is great.”
England been in fault in this matter! How have we built churches
in rich streets and squares and fashionable suburbs, and till very
lately neglected to bring the means of grace to the doors of the poor
in their crowded courts and alleys; and we are reaping the fruit of
it now in the alienation of such from the Church of their Fathers.

The spirit of these words of Christ seems exactly expressed in the
precept of His servant: ‘Comfort the feeble-minded, support the
weak, be patient towards all men;”’ and in the same Apositle’s
other words: ‘‘ Mind not high things, but condescend to men of low
estate.” ‘‘ He who receiveth such an one [by affection to sympa-
thize with him, by converse to console him, by effort to serve him,
by patience to suffer with him] he receiveth Me.” (Ludolphus,
quoted in Williams).*

‘For he that is least among you all, the same shall be [or 7s]
great.”

‘‘ He that is least ’’—-he that abases himself, spares not himself,
makes himself, or is ever willing to make himself, the last of all and
the servant of all, he shall be great, for true greatness consists in
service, in self-sacrifice, self-denial, self-abasement.

1 Alford takes a totally different view of the scope of this inci-
dent. ‘The dispute had been—who among the twelve should be
eveatest ? Our Lord reminds them that no such precedence is to
be thought of among those sent (Apostoli) in His Name; for that
even a little child if thus sent is clothed with His dignity; and if
there be any distinction among such, it is this—that he who is like
that child, humblest and least, 2.e., nearest the Spirit of the Lord,
he is greatest.’’ And then, with reference to what John says respect-
ing his having reproved one who cast out devils, he (Alford)
establishes the connection thus: “There arises the thought in the
mind of the ardent son of Zebedee of the exclusive and peculiar
dignity of those who were thus sent, and he relates what they had
done as a proof of his fully appreciating this exclusive dignity.” I
think, however, the exposition I have given (the usual one) is far
better.252 HE FOLLOWETH NOT WITH US.  [Sr. Luxz.

49 4 * And John answered and said, Master, we saw one
« Mark ix.38. casting out devils in thy name; and we forbad
See Num. xi. i e :
28. him, because he followeth not with us.
50 And Jesus said unto him, Forbid him not:

30 ait. xi, for the that is not against us is for us.

30. ch, xi. 23.

50. “Against us is for us.” So E., F., G., H., many later Uncials and Cursives.
‘‘ Against you is for you” read by B., C., D., K., L., M., twenty-five Cursives, old Latin,
Vulg., Goth., Copt., Syriacs, &e. ‘‘ Against you is for us,” read in Rc AnagNe

49, 50. ‘“* And John answered and said ....weforbad him....
against us is for us.” Why is it that John answered and said? He
apparently answered what his conscience struck him as being a re-
proof in the words of the Lord. He and others had come in con-
tact with one who was little more than an incipient disciple. He
could not have been very well instructed in the words of Christ,
because the Apostolic company, and those closely connected with
them, alone had the Lord’s instructions in full; but what he had
heard or seen of the Lord had convinced him that He had come
from God; and, above all, that the invocation of His Name was with
power over evil spirits; and so, in a spirit of faith, he cast out
devils in Christ’s name. John forbad him; and we gather that he
obeyed the rebuke, or John would have mentioned that he refused
to obey them; and the Lord’s words, “ Forbid him not,’ seem to
imply that St. John should remove a prohibition which was yet
obeyed. It was the success of his prohibition in this case which
seems to have struck the conscience of the Apostle, and made him
bring the case before the Lord.

In my notes on St. Mark I entered fully into the present applica-
tion of this incident—how far it bears upon the forbidding, on the
Church’s part, of irregular or schismatical ministrations. I desire
to notice in addition that, in all probability, the man was animated
by no spirit of opposition, much less had he the least idea of setting
up some new organization. He had been deeply struck with the
Lord’s words and works. He tried the invocation of His Name on

those possessed, and he found it successful; and so he went on,
without a thought that he must be joined to the One Body, for
that Body was not yet manifested so that all men should be received
into it.

“He that is not against us is for us.” This clearly shows thatCir. IX] HE STEDFASTLY SET HIS FACE. 28

ol 4{ And it came to pass, when the time was come that
“he should be received up, he stedfastly set hig ™ Mark xvi.
: 19. Acts i, 2.
face to go to Jerusalem. a

 

he evidently acted in no antagonistic spirit. If he had done so, the
Lord would not have described him as “not against us.” Godet
speaks of him as the Dissenting disciple, a description utterly
opposed to the facts.

d1. “And it came to pass when the time was come that he
should be received up, he steadfastly,” &c. In these words we
enter upon a portion of the Lord’s ministry, the account of which
is peculiar to St. Luke. It extends from this place (ix. 51) to
chap. xvill. 15, where St. Luke’s narrative rejoins that of the other
Synoptics in the account of the Lord blessing the little children.
(Matt. xix. 13, and Mark, x. 13.)

Respecting the chronological place of the first incident in this
section, that of the conduct of James and John, and the rebuke
they received from the Lord, there is considerable difference
amongst harmonists. Greswell places it between what is related
in Luke xvii. 10, and xvii. 11 (where the Lord heals the ten lepers).
In the Speaker’s, and most other commentaries, it is put in its order
in the Gospel as beginning the section which relates the events of
a journey to Jerusalem through South Galilee, Samaria, and Perea.
Alford considers this journey to Jerusalem to be that which ended
in his arriving there at the time of the Feast of the Dedication.
Godet seems to hold the same view. ‘‘ Immediately therefore after
the Feast of Tabernacles Jesus returned to Galilee, and it was then
that he definitely bade adieu to that province, and set out as we
read (Luke ix. 51) to approach Jerusalem slowly, and while preach-
ing the Gospel. Not only is such a journey possible, but it is, in a
manner, forced on us by the necessity of providing contents for
that blank interval in the ministry of Jesus.”

‘* That he should be received up.” This, of course, is his Ascen-
sion, the termination of His earthly career.

‘“‘ He steadfastly set his face.” The reader will remember how
differently the same determination is described in St. Mark, ‘ And
they were in the way going up to Jerusalem. And Jesus went
before them; and they were amazed.” (Mark x. 383.)

52. **And sent messengers before his face: ... Samaritans, to254. THEY DID NOT RECEIVE HIM.  [Sr. Lugs.

52 And sent messengers before his face: and they went,
and entered into a village of the Samaritans, to make ready
for him.

n John iv. 4,9. 53 And “they did not receive him, because his
face was as though he would go to Jerusalem.

54 And when his disciples James and John saw this, they
said, Lord, wilt thou that we command fire to come down

make ready for him.” Travelling with, at least, twelve followers,
and those who ministered unto Him, it would be needful to seek
out sufficient, though no doubt homely, lodging places beforehand.
It might be also to prepare the village for a more spiritual recep-
tion of Him.

53. “And they did not receive him, because his face was as
though,” &&. How different to His former reception by the people
of Sychar! Probably to some extent because His face was as
though he would go to Jerusalem, to one of the chief feasts ; where-
as, on the former occasion, He was coming from Jerusalem. Know-
ing that He now claimed to be the Messiah, they would be the
more exasperated that as the Messiah He should reject their schis-
matical worship at Gerizim.

This adds the finishing stroke to His rejection by men, His fel-
low-creatures. He had been rejected by the chief priests, by the
Scribes, by the elders, by the Jewish sects, Pharisees, Sadducees,
and Herodians, by the people both of Jerusalem and Galilee, and
now these aliens, who had before seemed as if they would receive
Him and accept His claim, rejected Him. '

54. “ And when his disciples James and John saw this, they
said,” &e. How is it that James and John were the ones to show
this untempered zeal? Archbishop Trench suggests, ‘They feel
that a greater than Elias is here, for they are fresh fromthe Mount
of Transfiguration, where they had seen how the glory of the fore-
most prophets of the Old paled and waned before the brighter
glory of Him Whom they served, the Lord of the New; an outrage
against Him, and the rejection of Him should not be, therefore,
less terribly avenged.”

This act of zeal shows our Lord’s insight into their characters
when He called them ‘“‘sons of thunder.” “Well did they pre-Cuar. IX.] HE TURNED AND REBUKED THEM. ZO
from heaven, and consume them, ey
did ?

0) But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, Ye
not what manner of spirit ye are of.

en as ° Hlias © 2 Kingsi. 10,
12.

know

54. ‘“ Hven as Elias didP” So A., C., D., all later Uncials and Cursives, old Latin (i, b:

¢, f, q), some Copt., Syriac (Schaaf), &c.; omitted by NB ee Tl lon Vulg.

55. “Ye know not what manner of spirit ye are of ” omitted by Nj AL Bs © , Ee Ge
H.,L.,8., &c., about sixty Cursives, including 28, 33, 71,157, and some versions ; retained
by D., Fw., K., M., U., &., most Cursives, old Latin, Vulg. Notwithstanding that the
authority of the oldest MSS. are against the retention, it seems to hare all

the stamp of
the Lord’s wisdom and goodness.

It is easy to see why it has been omitted ; it is
measure difficult to suppose any one inventing it, and putting it into the Lord’
Its absence seems to me to be so far the condemnation of any MSS.
wanting.

beyond

Ss mouth,
in which it is

sume,” says St. Ambrose, ‘“ on bringing down fire from he
they were the Sons of Thunder.”

“As Hlias did.” Whether the words are genuine or not, the
Apostles must have had before their eyes the example of Elijah in
2 Kings 1., 9, “The king sent unto him a captain of fifty, with his
fifty. And he went up to him: and, behold, he sat on the top of an
hill, And he spake unto him, Thou man of God, the king hath said,
Come down. And Elijah answered, and said to the captain of fifty,
If I be a man of God, then let fire come down from heaven and con-
sume thee and thy fifty. And there came down fire from heaven and
consumed him and his fifty.” There is no other instance of a ser-
vant of God invoking fire from heaven upon the enemies of God.

55. “ But he turned, and rebuked them, and said, “‘ Ye know not
what manner of spirit ye are of.” These words of the Lord’s re-
buke (assuming their genuineness) have been variously understood.
The key to the right understanding of them, is that they must be
words of rebuke. Now this seems to set aside all such meanings
as would make them to be words of blame for their want of mere
knowledge. They are paraphrased as meaning, ‘‘ Ye know not that
ye partake of the Spirit of the Old Testament rather than of the
New.” Thus Hammond (quoted in Trench): ‘ Christ tells them
they know not of what spirit they are, that is, they consider not

under what dispensation they were. But surely the Old Testament
had much of forgiveness and mercy, whilst the New, in its far
clearer denunciations of eternal wrath, much exceeds the Old in
its real severity. Nothing whatsoever is said about the eternal

ven, for296 NOT TO DESTROY BUT TO SAVE. (Sx. Luxe.

56 For ? the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives,
p John iii.17. but to save them. And they went to another
& xii. 47,
village.

q Matt. viii. 19. 57 4 4 And it came to pass, that, as they went

 

56. ‘* For the son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but to save them” omitted
by almost all authorities, XN, A., B., C., D., E., G., H., L., and others, above sixty Cursives
(including 28, 33, 51, 79, 157), and some editions or MSS. of versions. Found only in
Fw., K., M., many Cursives, old Latin (a, b, ec, e, f, q), Vulg., Cur. Syriac.

state of these captains and their fifties that were consumed by fire
from heaven, whilst the Lord of all compassion says of those who
reject Him, “‘ If ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your
sins.” And these very Apostles had been bidden to shake off from
their feet the dust of any city which had not received them, with
the assurance that it should be more tolerable for Sodom and
Gomorrah in the day of judgment than for that city. It is clear,
then, that the Lord, the Searcher of hearts, discerned in them, not
so much zeal for His glory, as a vindictive and persecuting spirit
because they also were rejected in the refusal to entertain their
Master.

Thus Cornelius a Lapide, ‘Ye think ye are influenced by the
Spirit of God, whilst ye are acted on by a human spirit of impatience
and revenge.”

56. ‘‘ For the Son of man is not come to destroy men’s lives, but
to save them.” Whatever meaning we give to the word ‘“life,”’
this saying is equally true. Ifit means the spiritual or eternal life,
the life of the soul in the presence of God, then the whole mission
of the Lord was to implant and cause to increase the life of God in
the soul of man: and if the Lord alludes rather to the temporal
life, then by His constant healing of all manner of sickness, and all
manner of disease, and by His raising of the dead, He set forth that
He came not to cut short, but to prolong the lives of His fellow-
men.

57. “And it came to pass as they went on their way a certain
man said unto him,” &c. ‘There is considerable difference of
opinion respecting the chronological plan in the Gospel narrative
of the incidents which follow. Godet, for instance, considers that
they should most fitly be placed at the commencement of the last
journey when the Lord was taking a final leave of Galilee. Arch-
bishop Trench, on the other hand, who has ashort chapter on themCuap. IX.] I WILL FOLLOW THEE. ZO

in the way, a certain man said unto him, Lord, I will follow
thee whithersoever thou goest.

58 And Jesus said unto him, Foxes have holes, and birds
of the air have nests; but the Son of man hath not where
to lay his head.

 

57. “Lord” omitted by &, B., D., L., Z, Cursives 1, 28, 64, 1381, 157, old Latin (a, ¢, e),
Vulg.; retained by A, C., A, later Uncials, almost all Cursives, &c.

entitled, ‘‘ The Three Aspirants,”’ in his “‘ Studies on the Gospels,”
considers that their place in the narrative in St. Matthew is the
true one, holding that they must have taken place before the final
designation of the Apostles to their office, as he considers each of
the three to have been of the number of the twelve, and not
ordinary disciples, as such would have needed no special call.

“A certain man said unto him, Lord, I will follow thee,” &c.
This was a forward disciple, knowing little of his own real motives,
and very probably offering to follow the Lord ‘‘ whithersoever he
went,” from hopes of worldly advantage in the kingdom of such a
Messiah as the ordinary Jew then expected. The Lord cuts him
short by setting before the man His own life of absolute poverty
and self-denial, having no settled home even, and depending on the
alms and offerings of those whose hearts were opened to assist Him.
‘¢ Boxes have holes, and the birds of the air have shelters [or rather
roosting places] but the Son of man hath not where to lay his
head.” It has been remarked that even on the Cross the Lord
had no restfor His Head. When all was over He “ bowed His head
and gave up the Ghost,” and afterwards the resting-place of His
Body was not His own.

Archbishop Trench thinks that itis by no means an improbable
conjecture that this was Judas Iscariot himself, and that the Lord
who read his heart, and knew his double-mindedness, sought here
to discourage him, notwithstanding the zeal, and love, and devotion
from which so unreserved an offer of service seemed to proceed.
There is this to be said for this view, that Judas could not well have
been at first chosen by the Lord ; he must have offered himself, and
put himself forward before the rest. And there is nothing so likely
as that the Lord should so speak to him as to repel him from
seeking a nearness t0 His person which could only end in his

ereater condemnation.
S258 FOLLOW MB. [Sr. Luxe.

59 * And he said unto another, Follow me. But he said,
"Matt. viii.21. Lord, suffer me first to go and bury my father,

 

 

59. ‘Lord ” omitted by

B., D., V., 57; retained bya a vAL Once
all Cursives, old Latin, Vu

, later Uncials, almost
lg., Goth., Copt., Syriac, &c.

59. “ And he said unto another, Follow me,”’
man the Lord takes the first Step Himself.
was more truth in the backwardness of this
wardness of the other who had just addres
him with that significant ‘ Follow me’
moned Philip, Matthew, Andrew, Peter

Mark i. 17).”—Trench. But the man seems to hold back. pond,

suffer me first to go and bury my father.” It is doubtful whet

ther
in this case the man’s father was lying dead waiting to be buried,

or whether it meant that he was very old, and, to u
expression, “with one foot in the grave,”
Matthew I gave an instance of the use of this phrase in this very
day in the Hast, in the case of one who declined to leave home and
country till he had performed the last rites to his father, who was
then alive and well. But supposing that the father was actually
dead, there was ample precedent in the law of Moses, thatin certain
exempt cases a man must not pollute himself by contact with the
dead body of his nearest relative. “ The high priest and the Naza-
rites were not to pollute themselves for the dead, were it ev
father or mother (Lev. xxi.11; Numb. y
could neither touch the body,

&e. Here with this
“He knew that there
man than in the for-
sed Him, and so He calls
wherewith He had sum-
(John i. 43; Matth. ix. 9 :

se the common
In my notes on St.

en their
i. 6,7); thatis to say, they
to pay it the last duties, nor enter the
house where it lay (Numb. xix, 14), nor take partin the funeral meal
(Hos. ix. 4). It must be remembered that the pollution contracted
by the presence of a dead body lasted seven days (Numb. xix, 11-
22). What would have happened to this man during
days? His impressions might have been chilled.
Saw him plunged anew in the tid

these seven

Already Jesus
e of his ordinary life, lost to the
kingdom of God.” —Godet. It is clear also from the words “ let the
dead bury their dead ” Tove vexpovc) that there were sufficient
numbers of unbelieving relatives to perform the last office. (See
my note on the same words in Matth. viii. 1:93)

If the man showed his obedience by
he showed his fitness for the Apostolic o

at once following the Lord,
the secular life. The Lord might see tha

fice by at once renouncing
t the wrench to natural feel-Cup. IX] LET THE DEAD BURY THEIR DEAD. 2059

60 Jesus said unto him, Let the dead bury their dead :
but go thou and preach the kingdom of God.

61 And another also said, Lord, *I will follow 5s See 1 Kings
thee: but let me first go bid them farewell, which 7
are at home at my house.

62 And Jesus said unto him, No man, having put his hand
to the plough, and looking back, is fit for the kingdom of

God.

60. “Let the dead,” z.¢., “‘ Leave the dead to bury,” &e.

ings, in leaving others as near as himself to perform the funeral
obsequies of his father, might be needful to fit him to hold so unique a
ministry as the Apostolic.

St. Luke now mentions a third case unnoticed by St. Matthew.

61. “‘And another also said, Lord, I will follow thee: but let me
first go bid them farewell, which are at home at my house.” Does
this man offer himself, or has the Lord called him? I think he
offers himself, and yet his words are not irreconcilable with the fact
that the Lord had first called him. * Any how, he makes a condition
which the Lord tacitly rejects, and with it the man himself, as not
a true-hearted disciple. The Lord, Who searches the hearts of all
men, saw in this request a sign of half-heartedness. He compares
him to a ploughman who, having put his hand to the plough,
instead of keeping his eye looking straight forward at the ridge
running right before him, looks back, and so spoils the furrow.
Such a man is only half at work, and half work or a marred work
will be the only result.

What a view we have in these three instances of the difficulties
of the Apostolic life! This is the work which our forefathers in
Christ, the founders of the Christian Church, had to undergo. They
had to follow closely in the steps of One Who had no settled abode.
They had to hold themselves loose to the dearest ties of relation-
ship, and they were required instantly, and without delay, to obey
any call of Christ. Their attitude of mind was, ‘‘ Here am T, send
me.” They were the slaves, the dotdor, as well as the followers
and representatives of Christ. When we look at all this we are
forced to exclaim, Is there now on the earth a real ministry of

Christ ?260 OTHER SEVENTY ALSO. (Sr. Luxe.

CHAP. X.

FTER these things the Lord appointed other seventy
also, and * sent them two and two before his face into

ones 1. every city and place, whither he himself would
Mark vi. 7.
come.

 

 

i. *@ther seventy.” So X, A., C., L., later Uncials, nearly all Cursives, some old
Latin (b, f, q), Goth., Copt., Syriac (Schaaf); but B., D., M., R., old Latin (a, c, e, 1),
Vulg., Cureton Syriac read, “seventy-two.”

1, “After these things the Lord appointed other seventy also,
and sent them,” &c. There is considerable difference amongst
harmonists about the chronological place of this mission of the
seventy. Greswell (or Williams) in his Harmony assigns it a place
after the Lord’s departure to the city Ephraim (John xi. 54), but
this seems much too near the end to allow time for the work of
these thirty-five pairs of disciples in preparing the way for His
preaching and teaching in many “cities and places whither He Him-
self would come.” In the harmony in the “ Speaker’s Commentary ”
itis placed between xviii. 85 and xix. 1 in St. Matthew, and between
John vii. 1-10 and vii.11. If the reader desires to see the whole
subject well discussed, though I cannot but think an uns
conclusion is arrived at, he should turn to Williams
Commentary,” third year, part iii., pp. 270-282,

* The Lord appointed other seventy also.” The words “ other,
also,” seem used to distinguish this mission from that of the twelve
(ix, 1-6), and from that of the mere messengers whom He sent to
make ready for Him [ix. 52].

Many interesting questions arise respecting the number as sev
Some think that this corresponds to the seventy elders chosen by
Moses, who all prophesied,_.and go they conjecture that this was a
revival by the Lord of the [so-called] order of prophets. But
there never was a fixed order of “ prophets,” as there was of priests
and Levites among the Jews, or of Apostles, Bishops, or Presbyters
and Deacons in the Church. The prophets seem to have been raised
up as occasion required, and we read of no regular specific duties, not

atisfactory
’ “ Devotional

enty.Cuap. X.] THE LABOURERS ARE FEW. 261

2 Therefore said he unto them, ® The harvest truly is great,
but the labourers are few: °pray ye therefore the » Matt. ix. 37,
Lord of the harvest, that he would send forth 35. ae
labourers into his harvest. ¢ 2 Thess. iii. 1.

 

even of preaching or instruction, discharged by them. Others sup-
pose that the number seventy corresponds to the number of the
Sanhedrim, and tell us that the Lord here institutes a spiritual
Sanhedrim in opposition to the carnal one. Others fasten upon an
old opinion among the Jews, that the nations of the Gentiles were
seventy in number, and that this mission of the seventy adumbrates
the call of the Gentiles, the Apostles being sent to the lost sheep of
the house of Israel only, but no limitation is named in the mission
of the seventy.

Some also have supposed that in these seventy the Lord instituted
the order of Presbyters, as in the Apostles He did that of Bishops,
but all these are the merest conjectures : what, however, strikes the
thoughtful mind about this appointment of the seventy is that the
Lord’s itinerating work was far more extensive than what we gather
from the two first Synoptics. Here, at the close of His ministry, we
find thirty-five pairs of disciples sent to prepare His way by healing
the sick, casting out devils, and preaching the Gospel. Now,
supposing that each pair of disciples announced his coming in as
fow as three cities or villages, here are above one hundred cities
and villages which He visited and in which He preached, the name
of scarcely one of which has come down to us. How does this
force upon us the truth in J ohn xxi. 25, that the works of the Lord
were practically numberless !

2. “Therefore said he unto them, The harvest truly is great, but
the labourers are few.” ‘This is as true of this, the nineteenth
century, as 1t was of the Lord’s lifetime. There were then twelve
apostles and seventy disciples for the millions of Palestine. Now
I suppose that there are not anything like this proportion for the
present heathen world. For instance, the inhabitants of China
cannot be less than 300,000,000, and the number of missionaries,
exclusive of Roman Catholic clergy,1s not aboveone hundred persons.

“Pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that he would send
forth labourers,” &c. It is often said that this is the foundation of
our Ember prayers, but it leads us far beyond either of those which262 PEACE BE TO THIS HOUSE. (Sr. Luxe.

3 Go your ways: ‘behold, I send you forth as lambs
d Matt. x.16. among wolves.

e Matt. x. 9, © Oarr ith urse, nor scrip, nor shoes:
10. Markvics, © “Carry neither purse, P

ch, ix. 3. and ‘salute no man by the way.

f 2 Kingsiv. 29. :

Bet Go. 5 And into whatsoever house ye enter, first

say, Peace be to this house.
6 And if the son of peace be there, your peace shall rest
upon it: if not, it shall turn to you again.

 

 

6. “The son of peace;” rather, ‘‘a son of peace.” So A., B., C., D., and all other

Uncials except X, and nearly all Cursives.

we use at such seasons, for in them we ask for a blessing only on
those who have aleady obeyed the call, whereas the Lord here bids
us ask that a sufficient number of faithful labourers may be called.

3. “Go your ways: behold, I send you forth as lambs among
wolves.” 4.e., weak and utterly unprovided with means of defence,
so that their only safety is His protection, in which they must
exercise constant faith.

4. “ Carry neither purse,” 4.e., they are not to provide themselves
with money to purchase necessaries. “Nor scrip,” 2.e., they are to
take no supply of food for their next meal, but are to rely upon God
opening the hearts of those to whom they preach to provide them
with it. ‘“ Nor shoes,” i.e., they were to have no change of sandals,
They were to be shod with sandals, but were not to burthen them-
selves with carrying any other.

“Salute no man by the way.” They were to act like men who
feared nothing so much as hindrance in their work. Salutation
might lead to conversation, and this to the loss of time. The
reader cannot but remember what Elisha says to Gehazi; “ Gird
up thy loins ; if thou meet any man salute him not; and if any
salute thee, answer him not again, and lay my staff on the face of
the child.” (2 Kings iv. 29.)

d. “And into whatsoever house ye enter, first say, Peace be to
this house.” The reader will remember that in the service for the
Visitation of the Sick of our branch of the Church Catholic the
minister is directed to say, when he comes into the sick person’s
house, “‘ Peace be to this house and to all that dwell in it.”

6. “And if the son of peace be there, your peace shall rest upon
it: if not, it shall turn to you again.” This seems to mean that ifCuar. X.] GO NOT FROM HOUSE TO HOUSE. 263

h . . +: : . .
7» And in the same house remain, ‘eating and drinking

such things as they give: for *the labourer is » Matt. x.11.
worthy of his hire. Go not from house to house. ae ss a
Q g s Tee al 3 1 Cor. ix.4, &e.
And into whatsoev er city ye enter, and they ; Tin. v. 7s.
receive you, eat such things as are set before you:
9 1} And heal the sick that are there, and say ' ch. ix. 2.

unto them, ™The kingdom of God is come nigh ™ Matt. iii.2.
unto you. ne

 

there be any one in the house favourably disposed to receive the
word of God, they should have some sure, but secret intimation from
God, that their salutation of peace had not been in vain, but that it
had blessed the heart of one inhabitant of the house, and so they
might enter and preach the word of God; and they should have a
like intimation from God if there were none in the house whose
hearts could be moved, and so any labour they bestowed there would
be lost. “To every house which they enter is the declaration of
peace to be made ; for it is not in man to know whether the Son of
peace be therein, which the great day only can make known.”
Williams thus seems to interpret the “ Son of peace” of Christ
Himself, Who must Himself first be present in any house if they are
to labour in it to any profit.

7. “And in the same house remain, eating and drinking such
things . . . . as they give,’ &c. As if the Lord said, ‘‘ Ye have
no call to consider yourselves as under any obligation to those who
set meat before you, for you give them that which is of infinitely
greater value to them than what they give to you 1s to you. 28
St. Paul writes, “If we have sown unto you spiritual things, is it
a great thing if we shall reap your carnal things pia (le Con. ix. tle)

‘© Go not from house to house,” &e. Do not choose those houses
in which you think you will be best entertained. If you have
taken up your abode in one house and the fare is poor, do not leave
it for a better.

g “And into whatsoever city ye enter, and they receive you,”
&e. This seems to look to the fact that they are sent not to house-
holds so much as to cities and communities. ‘If one household
shuts the door upon you, another may receive you and entertain
Then you are to do the two things which 1 have done in

you. ,
sick and to proclaim the near

every place. You are to heal the264 THE VERY DUST OF YOUR CITY. [Sv. Lugs.

10 But into whatsoever city ye enter, and they receive you
not, go your ways out into the streets of the same, and say,

n Matt, x. 14, 1] *Even the very dust of your city, which
ch. ix. 5. Acts

xiii, 51. & cleaveth on us, we do wipe off against you: not-

xviii. 6, ;
withstanding be ye sure of this, that the kmedom
of God is come nigh unto you.

11. Cleaveth on us.” So E. and some later Uncials and very many Cursives; but A.,
C.,G., K., L., M., “to our feet”—cleaveth on us to our feet,” and N, B., D., R., most
old Latin, and Cur. Syriac read, “to the feet.”

**Unto you.” So A., C., later Uncials, most Cursives, &c.; but N, B., D., L., some
Cursives (1, 13, 33), most old Latin, and Vulg. omit.

approach of the Kingdom of God in My Person, as I
follow you and perfect your work.”

10,11. “ But into whatsoever city ye enter, and they receive you
not... . nigh unto you.” The message of God’s servants cannot
be rejected with impunity. It is either the savour of life unto life
or of death unto death. Note here, that in the rejection of Christ’s
message through His servants Christ Himself can be rejected.
Indeed, now that His visible presence is withdrawn, He can only be

accepted or rejected in and through the ministrations of His
ministers.

To “shake off the dust of their feet”
city which had wholly rejected their mes

had no more part or lot with the inhab
retain nothing of theirs, no,
to their sandals.

shall shortly

as a witness against any
sage, signified that they
itants—that they would
not so much as what accidentally cleaved
This was one of the many outward significant
symbolical acts of which the special messengers of God made constant
use. Thus Jeremiah put on a yoke, and hid a girdle by the side of
the Euphrates—thus Agabus bound St. Paul’s girdle round his own
hands and feet, and Paul himself and Barnabas on one occasion
used this very sign of shaking off the dust of their feet against the
Jews of Antioch in Pisidia, who had rejected God’s word spoken by
their mouth. We have given up altogether the use of such Signs,
and I believe have lost much by our rejection of them.

“ Notwithstanding be ye sure of this, that the kingdom of God is
come nigh.” Mercy here appears to be mingled with judgment.
If in time to come ye call to mind oursmessage and repent, the door
is yet open. We can do no more, and we have done with you. GodCuar. X.] WOE UNTO THEE, CHORAZIN ! 265

12 But I say unto you, that °i¢ shall be more tolerable in
that day for Sodom, than for that city. Sie ie
13 ® Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, » Matt. xi. 21.
Bethsaida! ¢for if the mighty works had been 4 Ezek. iii. 6.
done in Tyre and Sidon, which have been done in you, they
had a great while ago repented, sitting in sackcloth and ashes.

may not have altogether cast you off; and if ye remember our
message and repent and turn to Him, He assuredly has not.

12. ‘But I say unto you, that it shall be more tolerable for
Sodom,” &c. Sodom was a place of unnameable wickedness, but
of little or of no light. There was one righteous man in it, but his
witness, from all we can gather of his character, must have been
miserably weak; whereas the cities which rejected the testimony
of the Lord had messengers direct from Him equipped with His
power to enforce the truth of their message, representing Him also
not only in words, but in self-denial, in zeal, and in earnestness.

13. “Woe unto thee, Chorazin! woe unto thee, Bethsaida ! for if
the mighty works,” &¢. God only knows all possible contingencies,
and His co-equal Son here declares that if the people of Tyre and
Sidon had had the light of the Lord’s preaching and mighty works, as
Chorazin and Bethsaida had had, they would have deeply repented.
Why was it, then, that Chorazin and Bethsaida were unmoved by
the personal witness of Christ? Simply because they and their
fathers had gone on for generations resisting light. They had
become hardened by continued indifference and the love of sin to
the light of Moses and the Prophets ; and when the Lord came to
them, showing by His holy teaching and mighty works that it was
He to Whom Moses and the Prophets bear witness, they hardened
their hearts still more and rejected Him. In all probability they
of Chorazin and Bethsaida were by no means so immersed in
deadly sin as they of Tyre and Sidon, but they were harder in
heart. They were self-righteous and self-satisfied, and this made
them determinedly resist the entrance of all further truths, which
would humble them and bring them nearer to God. And so it
may be with multitudes of professing Christians who seem free
from open sin. Their case is more hopeless than that of many
grosser sinners, because they think that having the outward pos-
session of the Bible, the Church and the Sacraments, they have266 THOU, CAPERNAUM. [St. Lune.

14 But it shall be more tolerable for Tyre and Sidon at
the judgment, than for you.

r Matt. xi, 23. 15 * And thou, Capernaum, which art * exalted
s See Gen. xi.
4. Deut, i. 98. to heaven, tshalt be thrust down to hell.

Hise xiv. 13!

Jer. i. 53. 16 * He that heareth you heareth me; and * he
nee Hack. that despiseth you despiseth me; *and he that
Xxxii. 18, despiseth me despiseth him that sent me.

u Matt. x. 40.
Mark ix. 37.
John xiii. 20.

x ] Thess. iv. 8.
y John y. 23.

 

15. ‘* Which art exalted to heaven, shalt be thrust down to hell.” So A., C., all later
Uncials except L. and Z, almost all Cursives, some old Latin, Vulg., &c.; but &, B., D.,
L., &, Cur. Syriac, Copt. read, “Shalt thou indeed be exalted . . . thou shalt be thrust
down,” &c.

need of nothing, and the first step towards really knowing God is a
source of need.

15. ‘ And thou, Capernaum, which art exalted to heaven, shalt be
thrust. down,” &. In what respect could Capernaum be considered
as exalted to heaven? Simply and solely by the dwelling of Christ
so long within it. Thisis one of those many sayings which so meek
aud humble aman as Christ would not have said, unless He had
been conscious of the dwelling of the Godhead within Him. The
reading of B. and the few MSS. which usually agree with it makes
our Lord express Himself in a way very unusual with Him, but does
not affect the sense.

16. “He that heareth you heareth me; and he that despiseth
you,’ &c. We should never have dared to say this of any human
ministry whatsoever: but as the Saviour has Himself said it, and
more than once (Mark ix. 87; John xiii. 20), we must not dare to
keep it back, or unsay it, as it were, by diluting it. Quesnel has a
very good remark on this. ‘It is one and the same truth, which
is in the Father, by His essence, in the Son, by His Eternal
Generation, in the Apostles by His Spirit. So long as the trust is
kept inviolable, in hearing these we hear the Father and the Son.
The pastoral authority, which, as well as the truth, has God for its
fountain, is communicated to the Son by the mission of Hig
Father, i.e. by His Incarnation ; to the Apostles by the mission of
the Son; and to the Church by His Spirit.”

17, 18. “‘ And the seventy returned again with joy, saying, Lord,Cuar. X.] THE SEVENTY RETURNED WITH Joy. 267

17 4 And *the seventy returned again with joy, saying,
Lord, even the devils are subject unto us through « ver.1.
thy name.

18 And he said unto them, *I beheld Satan ag ® Jobn xii. 31.
: ; & xvi. 11. Rev.
lightning fall from heaven. ix. 1. & xii. 8, 9.

19 Behold, >I give unto you power to tread on > Markxvi.1s.

Acts xxvili. 5.

 

17. “‘And the seventy.” ‘The seventy-two” read by B., D., old Latin, &e. See
critical note on verse 1.

19. “I give.” So A., D., later Uncials, almost all Cursives, Cur. and other Syriac;
but x, B., C., L., a very few Cursives, most old Latin, Vulg., &c. read, ‘‘I have given.”
even the devils are subject, &c....as lightning fall from heaven.”
It has been a question amongst expositors whether this exclamation of
the seventy, ‘“‘even the devils are subject unto us through Thy name,”
was said in holy exultation at the power of Christ manifested inthem,
or whether there was a degree of self-satisfaction in it which called
forth the saying of the Lord, ‘“ I beheld Satan as lightning fall from
heaven,” as if He said, Be not lifted up with pride at your success
over the spirits of darkness. Remember that it was pride which
hurled from his exalted place in heaven the chief of these spirits.
I behold this terrible fall of one once so high in the favour of God,
and I bid you take warning from the example.”’ I do not think that
the Lord’s saying has this significance. It rather seems to mean,
‘You naturally exult in these triumphs of My power through your
hands. I was contemplating (eOewpovv) a far greater conquest.
I was contemplating Satan’s power shattered, his strongholds
spoiled. The idolatries and false philosophies of the world
vanquished by My Cross.’’, Itis to be remembered that the Spiritual
Hye of the Lord sees all things, past, present, and to come, and saw
in them all their issues. In the first fall of Satan from heaven, and
in his subsequent expulsion from every place of eminent power which
he has usurped, He clearly discerned the issue of the warfare be-
tween good and evil, in the final triumph of good.

It is worthy of notice that Quesnel, a predestinarian, has this
remark upon the fall of Satan. ‘If grace was not in a state of
security in an angel of high rank in heaven, what man upon earth,
if he have this treasure, ought not to tremble, since he carries it in
an earthen vessel ?”

19. ‘‘Behold, I give unto you power to tread on serpents and
scorpions,” &c. In these words the Lord seems to confer annosed

268 ALL THE POWER OF THE ENEMY. (Sr. Luxe.

Serpents and scorpions, and over all the power of the enemy:
and nothing shall by any means hurt you.

20 Notwithstanding in this rejoice not, that the spirits are
pom Asal 32. subject unto you: but rather rejoice, because “your
“<-iv. 3. Daa. names are written in heaven.

Rte lee inal ity.
3. Heb. xii. 23.
Rev. xiii. 8. &

 

KB OC ERI O's

20. *‘ Rather rejoice.” Almost all authorities, X, A., B., C., D., E., F., later Uncials,
Cursives, old Latin, Vulg. omit “ rather,”

additional power over and above that which He had already granted.
That they are to be taken literally as well as spiritually is evident
from the terms in which the Lord renews the gift just before His
Ascension (Mark xvi. 18), where, having mentioned the casting out
of devils He separately promises to them the power of taking up
serpents, and that if they drink any deadly thing it shall not hurt
them.

But what means He by adding the words, “ all the power of the
enemy ’? The words read as if serpents and scorpions were part of
this power, 2.e., were the creation of Satan and not of God; but
in the original it is clear that “power” or “authority” not
‘tread’ must be read before ‘‘over.” ‘‘ Behold, I give you the
power of treading on serpents and scorpions and (power) over all
the power of the enemy.” Many suppose these malignant and
deadly creatures to be here taken as types of evil men, and many
suppose that they are to be understood of open and secret sins; but
that the Apostles had power given to them over venomous creatures
is certain from the incident recorded of St. Paul at Melita (Acts
xxvil. 5). I should rather take the treading on serpents and
scorpions literally, and ‘‘the power of the enemy” to signify the
idolatries and false and wicked opinions by which Satan enslaved
souls, and which gave way before the preaching of the Gospel.

‘And nothing shall by any means hurt you.” They were to be
“immortal till their work was done,” and till God should call them
to Himself by a martyr’s death. Compare St. Paul’s words, “ All
things work together for good to them that love God.’ And
“thanks be to God, who always causeth us to triumph in Christ.”

20. “ Notwithstanding in this rejoice not, that the spirits are sub-
ject to you: but rather,” &e. All outward acts of power, even the
casting out of evil spirits, might be done in Christ’s name by thoseCuap, X.] JESUS REJOICED IN SPIRIT. 269

21 4 °In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I
thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth, @ Matt. xi, 95,

 

21. ‘‘Rejoiced in spirit.” So A., E., G., H., M., later Uncials, almost all Cursives, &c.
** Rejoiced in the Holy Spirit ” read in X, B., C., D., K., L., 1, 33, old Latin (b, ec

e, i, 1),
Vulg., Copt., Syriac (Cur. and Pesh.), ee

who were really not his; thus the Apostle says, “ Though I have
all faith so that I could remove mountains, and have not charity, it
profiteth me nothing.” Their names were written in heaven, not
by an act of partiality or mere unreasoning will (sic volo, sic jubeo),
but because they had heard the word of Christ, accepted Him, and
were following Him in righteousness and self-denial. ‘There is no
limitation to the truth, that the most magnificent successes, the
finest effects of eloquence, temples filled, conversions by thousands,
are no real cause of joy to the servant of Jesus, except in so far as
he is saved himself.”—Godet.

21. “In that hour Jesus rejoiced in spirit, and said, I thank thee,
O Father, Lord of heaven,” &¢. The words of the Lord in this
verse are verbatim the same as those of the parallel passage in St.
Matthew. In St. Matthew, however, they are prefaced by the
words, “At that time Jesus answered and said.”’ A very important
question arises: Were these precisely similar words, then, said
at one time or at two different times? ‘Trench (in his ‘Studies in
the Gospels”’), Alford and others, consider that they were said at two
different times, but if so, then that which goes before, the woes on
Chorazin and Bethsaida, must also have been repeated twice. I
cannot help thinking, however, that as itis freely allowed that St.
Matthew at times places parts of discourses together as if they were
one discourse, we may take the words, ‘‘ Then began he to upbraid,”’
of Matth. xi. 20, as not necessarily following upon “ Wisdom is
justified of her children,” but simply as introducing words which
St. Luke gives us in their right sequence.

‘*T thank thee, O Father, Lord of heaven and earth,” should be
rather, ‘‘ I confess to thee, O Father,’’ and may be paraphrased, “I
confess to thee, O Father, that thou hast done right in hiding these
things from the wise and prudent.’ These “‘ wise and prudent”’
here, of course, are the Scribes and Elders, the leaders of religion
among the Jews. The Lord means the wise and prudent in
their own eyes, those who had stifled any life they may have had
by their perverse worshipping of “the letter that killeth,” and by" q
er

common people rather than of the learned.

270 IT SEEMED GOOD IN THY SIGHT. (Sr. Luxe.

that thou hast hid these things from the wise and prudent,
and hast revealed them unto babes: even so, Father; for so
it seemed good in thy sight.

 

their neglect of, and opposition to “the Spirit which giveth life.”
The babes signify the twelve, or the seventy, to whom the Lord
shortly turns, and says, “Blessed are the eyes which see the
things that ye see.” In these words we have enumerated the great
principle of the kingdom of God, that faith, unquestioning faith,
faith which bows itself in adoration before the mysteries of God, is
the first requisite in the school of Christ. And rightly so, for if we
voluntarily put ourselves under such a teacher as the Eternal, In-
comprehensible, and all-wise God, we must feel and acknowledge
that what He vouchsafes to teach us respecting Himself and His
dealings must be infinitely above us; and so we must receive it in
submission, acknowledging that He knowsinfinitely better than we do
all things which require a revelation from Him before we can know
them. There are two ways in which men receive knowledge. They
receive it so as to be made proud by it (‘‘ knowledge puffeth up’’), or
they receive it so as to be humbled by it, because the more know-
ledge they receive, the more vast and infinite do they perceive the
domain of knowledge to be. The former our Lord means by the
wise and prudent, the latter He would class amongst the babes ;
for it is to be noticed that He does not contrast the ‘“‘ wise and pru-
dent’ with the ignorant and foolish, but rather with the docile,
the meek, the simple-minded. And the Father reveals these things
to babes, not that they should continue babes in knowledge and
understanding, but that they should become men in Christ; for the
Lord indignantly asks these babes when they did not reflect upon
what they had seen, ‘‘ Are ye yet without understanding?” And
His inspired servant says, ‘‘ In understanding be men.”’

For these reasons it was good in the sight of the Father to reveal
the mysteries unto babes. I have dwelt upon this in my notes on
St. Matthew. I have noticed there two other reasons why the
mysteries of the kingdom should be revealed to those who were as
regards them in the condition of babes: first, that the Revelation
would be thus kept the purer, as being in the hands of those who
had no temptation to mix it up with human philosophy, and also
that it should be commended to the world in the language of theCuar. X.] NO MAN KNOWETH THE son. 2

Bl
e 1 . S 1 5
22° || All things are delivered to me of my © Matt, xxviii,
ee : 18. Sohn at
Father: and ‘no man knoweth who the Son is, 35. @+. 97%
Ravel ase

 

|| Many ancient

copies add

So N, B., D., L., M., 1, 18, 22, these words,

a, b, e, f, g), Vulg.; but A.,C., B., Ad turning to
; , 1 ee /asianscrpless

and Syriac (Schaaf) begin this verse

22, “ All things are delivered,” &c,
33, about fifteen others, old Latin (
G., H., K., 8., &c., most Cursives,

2 acer ae he said,
with the words, “‘ And he turned unto his disciples, and said, All things,” ¢ John i. 18
&e. & Vi, 44, 46.

22. “ All things are delivered to me of my Father ;
knoweth,” &¢. The Lord says this contemplating the
and feeble in themselves as mere babes, to whom His Father had
vouchsafed the highest revelation of His purposes. How were such
persons to bring about the final conquest of sin and Sat
victory of the Kingdom of God? The Lord answ
are delivered unto me of my Father.” , This is exactly parallel to
what He says in giving them their final commission, “ All power
is given unto me in heaven and in earth. Go ye, therefore, and
teach all nations,” &e.

This deliverance of all things unto the Son cannot for a moment
be taken as implying any inferiority on the part of the Son. It
rather implies equality. For if all things are committed by the
Father to the Son, the Son must have the same Divine power and
knowledge as His Father has, to receive all things at His hands,
and henceforth rule over them as His Father had done. These
words do not look to our Saviour’s dominion over all things by
right of creation, but as the Mediator. Athanasius has well ex-

pressed this. ‘ The dominion of the Creation is not then, as they
[the Arians] think, here meant; but the words signify the dispen-
sation made in the flesh. For after that man sinned all things were
confounded ; the Word then was made flesh that He might restore
all things. All things, therefore, were given Him, not because He
was wanting in power, but that as Saviour He should repair all
things; that as by the Word all things at the beginning were
brought into being, so when the Word was made flesh He should
restore all things in Himself,

“No man knoweth who the Son is but the Father.” What a
wondrous thing for one in flesh and blood to say that no one
knows what He is except the omniscient God, and that no one
knows who the eternal and infinite God is except Himself. This
meek and lowly man, Who was born little more than thirty years

and no man
persons meek

an, and the
ers, “ All thingsTie WHO THE FATHER IS. (St. Luxe.

but the Father; and who the Father is, but the Son, and
he to whom the Son will reveal him.

293 4 And he turned him unto his disciples, and said
g Matt. xiii.16. privately, * Blessed are the eyes which see the

things that ye see:

 

before this, and within one short year would surrender His lite—
He alone knows the nature and mode of existence, and mind, and
will, and power of the Father, and the Father alone knows His
nature and mode of existence, and mind, and will, and power, as
the Son. This equality—this sameness of knowledge—implies
equality and sameness of nature. It also necessarily implies
mutual indwelling, that He is in the Father, and the Father in
Him, This saying of the Lord’s requires the full Catholic doctrine
of the Trinity, at least of the relation of the Father to the Son, as
set forth in the creeds of the Catholic Church, to enable us to
realize it.

«And he to whom the Son will reveal him.’ The Son reveals
the Father to the soul that will receive His teaching as a little
child. He reveals that the supreme Being is essentially a Father,
as having from all Eternity One only Son. He reveals the will and
heart of the Father towards mankind as reconciled to them, as
loving them, as desiring that they should know Him, and partake
of His holiness, and be conformed to His image.

Of course the man to whom the Son thus reveals the Father
knows Him only in the degree that a finite creature can know the
Infinite; but he really does know the supreme Father. All the
knowledge that he is capable of receiving is true and right, and to
be relied on. He is by this revelation of the Son wholly delivered
from all and every form of ‘‘ Agnosticism ”’ respecting God.

93. “And he turned to his disciples, and said privately, Blessed
are the eyes,” &c. What are the things which they saw? They saw
the holy life. the Divine actions, the miracles, the privations, the suf-
ferings of the Son of God. And in these things they were beginning
to discern with the eye of faith One Who was far above any prophet
or king, or righteous man. They discerned this no doubt dimly at
present; but their faith was a living faith, and so, a growing faith.
What it eventually grew to we learn from the words of the last
survivor of them all, who looking back on these days of the Son of

’Cap, X.] MANY PROPHETS AND KINGS. 28

24 For I tell you, * that many prophets and kings have
desired to see those things which ye see, and have » 1 Pet. i. 10,

not seen them; and to hear those things which ye he

ar, and
have not heard them.

25 And, behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted

BEEN

25. “Tempted him ;” perhaps, “ tried him,”

man, wrote, ‘* That which was from the beginning, which we have
heard, which we have seen with our eyes, which we have looked
upon, and our hands have handled of the Word of Life ; for the life
was manifested, and we have seen it, and bear witness and show
unto you that eternal life which was with the Father, and was
manifested unto us.” (1 Johni.) How manifested ? By His Life
of consummate holiness, by His words of Divine wisdom, by His
acts of almighty power.

These words were said to them privately : just as the parallel
words reported by St. Matthew were said to the disciples when
they were alone.

24, “ For I tell you, that many prophets and kings have desired
to see those things,” &c. The best explanation of this is in the
words of one then present, ‘‘of which salvation the prophets have
inquired and searched diligently, who prophesied of the erace
which should come unto you. ... Searching what, or what manner
of time the Spirit of Christ which was in them did signify, when it
testified beforehand the sufferings of Christ and the glory that should
follow.” (1 Pet. i.10.) All the prophets have expressions of devout
longing for some great person or some good time coming, which
they hoped might even be in theirday. Thus David: “ Remember
me, O Lord, with the favour that thou bearest unto thy people: O,
visit me with thy salvation. That I may see the good of thy
chosen, and rejoice in the gladness of thy people, and give thanks
with thine inheritance.”

Is this the same saying, and said at the same time as the parallel
one in St. Matthew? I think not. Is it not likely that the Lord
frequently repeated sayings which He desired should sink very
deep into the hearts of those who heard them ?

25. “And behold, a certain lawyer stood up, and tempted him,
saying,” &¢. There is no indication as to the time and place of
this narrative. Some suppose that as the scene of the parable is
D274 HOW READEST THOU ? [Sr. Luke.

him, saying, ‘Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal
i Matt. xix.16. life?

& xxii. 35. : : : : :
96 He said unto him, What is written in the
law? how readest thou?
k Deut. vi. 5. 27 And he answering said, “Thou shalt love

 

laid on the road from Jerusalem to Jericho, that the question was
asked of the Lord somewhere near that city; but the road in
question was then, as it now is, notorious all over the Holy Land
for its insecurity.

“Stood up.” This seems as if the Lord was teaching in some
house: it might be in a synagogue.

“And tempted him.” This may mean with a bad intention to
draw from Him something for which he might accuse Him, so
Cornelius a Lapide; or it might simply mean, as Edersheim sup-
poses, to try Him, as to which side He would take in a matter much
controverted amongst the Rabbis, whether good works or the study
of the law was the surest passport to Paradise. Evidently, how-
ever, he did not come and ask the question with the same sincerity
as the young ruler who came running to the Lord and falling down
before Him. (Luke xviii. 18 compared with Mark x. 17.)

‘What shall I do to inherit eternal life?’’ He has been blamed
for asking such a question as savouring of legalism; but the Lord
does not blame him for so putting the matter, nor does He
attempt to set him right in the matter of salvation by faith or by
works. The Lord’s atoning Death was not at this time understood
by any one of the Apostles, how, then, could one not under the
Lord’s instruction anticipate its significance? The covenant of
works was then in force, and the new and better covenant was not
yet revealed, at least clearly, and as of universal application ; so that
if the man really desired to know how he was to get to heaven, he
could only ask it in some such terms.

26. ‘*He said unto him, What is written in the law? how readest
thou?’’ The Lord does not answer him, but makes him answer
himself, as indeed he afterwards did, when he asked, ‘“‘ who is my
neighbour ?”

27. ‘“ And he answering said, Thou shalt love the Lord thy God,”
&e. This answer the Lord Himself gave to another inquirer on a
very different occasion. The question, then, arises, how came thisCase. Xe] THE LAW OF LOVE. 275
the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and with all thy soul,

 

27. “With all thy soul.” x, Beast lal, 57, 209, and Copt. read, “In all thy soul
—in all thy strength—in all thy mind ;” but A., C., all later Uncials, almost all Cursives,
most old Latin, Vulg., Syriac as in Authorized.

lawyer, evidently a very unspiritual person, to give the same
answer—to single out of all the precepts scattered up and down the
Pentateuch, these two, out of different books, and put them together?
The answer seems to be that these had long before been distinguished
from the rest by the Jewish teachers : and, indeed, to any one who
has any knowledge of human nature, the law of love must be the
strongest of all. All other laws are satisfied with the minimum of
obedience, the law of love is never satisfied with the maximum.
Take the first two laws of the decalogue. If a Jew acknowledged
and worshipped no other God than Jehovah, he had fulfilled the
letter of these laws. Take, again, the law of fear; a Jew might say,
‘“‘T have done, or, I have abstained from doing, quite sufficient to
avert punishment”; but no true lover of God could say, ‘‘I have
done enough to serve and please One Who has done go much for
me.” So that, as I said, any one who knew well human nature,
if he had proposed to himself the question which is the most
powerful command, must have singled out those which command
or involve love, and we have evidence from Rabbinism that these
two commands were thus distinguished.!

 

* “ As yegarded the duty of absolute love to God, indicated by the
quotation of Deut. vi. 5, there could, of course, be no hesitation in
the mind of a Jew. The primary obligation of this is frequently
referred to, and, indeed, taken for granted in Rabbinic teaching.
The repetition of this command, which, in the Talmud, receives the
most elaborate and strange interpretation, formed part of the daily
prayers. When Jesus referred the lawyer to the Scriptures he
could scarcely fail to quote this first paramount obligation. Simi-
larly he spoke as a Rabbinic lawyer, when he referred, in the next
place, to love to our neighbour, as enjoined in Levit. xix. 18.
Rabbinism is never weary of quoting, as one of the characteyristic
sayings of its greatest teacher, Hillel (who, ot course, lived before
this time), that he had summed up the law in briefest compass, in
these words: “‘ What is hateful to thee, that do not to another.
This is the whole law ; the rest is only its explanation. Similarly|

276 THIS DO AND THOU SHALT LIVE. ([Sz. Luge.

and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind: and ‘thy
1 Lev. xix.18. neighbour as thyself.
98 And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this

m Lev. xviii.5. do, and ™thou shalt live.
Neh. ix. 29.

Hizek, xx. 11,
1.21. Kom, ee ee
Kero

“And thy neighbour as thyself.” Godet remarks well on the
connection between these two greatcommands. ‘The second part
of the summary is the corollary of the first, and cannot be realized
except in connection with it. Nothing but the reigning love of God
can so divest the individual of devotion to his own person that the
Ego of his neighbour shall rank in his eyes exactly on the same
level as his own. The pattern must beloved above all, if the image
in others is to appear to us as worthy of esteem and love as our-
selves. Thus to love is, as Jesus says, the path to life, or rather it
is life itself. God has no higher life than that of love. The
answer of Jesus is, therefore, not a simple accommodation to the
legal point of view. The work which saves, or salvation, is really
loving. The Gospel does not really differ from the law in its aim ;
it is distinguished from it only by its indication of means, and the
communication of strength.”

98. “And he said unto him, Thou hast answered right: this do,
and thou shalt live.” It has been said that the Lord said this
somewhat in irony, or in a sort of benevolent contempt for one so
ignorant. On this principle of interpretation it is as if He said,
‘“‘This do, and thou shalt live; but thou canst not do it, so thou
mayest as well let it alone.” But one’s whole soul revolts from
such an interpretation of the Lord’s words, which never could have
erossed the mind of one who lived before the sixteenth-century
controversies respecting justification. Does the Lord, then, mean
that he was to be saved by love alone—that he need seek no faith,
no reliance on the Lord’s merits and strength, and so on? Now the
answer to all this is, that at that time, and before ‘‘ a more excellent
way ’’ was revealed to him and pressed upon his acceptance, the
very best thing that this inquirer could do was to bend his whole

 

Rabbi Akiba taught, that Levit. xix. 18 was the principal rule—we
might almost say—the chief summary of the law.” Edersheim’s
‘“‘ Life and Times of Jesus Christ,” vol. ii., p. 232.Cuap. X.] WHO IS MY NEIGHBOUR? Zed

29 But he, willing to "justify himself, said unto Jesus, And
who is my neighbour ? n ch, xvi. 15,
30 And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down

 

soul and spirit to the attainment of this love of God and of his
neighbour—to ask God constantly, and with all the earnestness
that he could excite within himself, to give him this love of Himself,
to write this law of love in his heart, and, at the same time, to ask
God for forgiveness for all his breaches of this law of love, and to
set before himself all the instances in Scripture and in the history
of the chosen race, which were calculated to warm his cold heart
with the love of the God of Israel. If he did this—that is, if he took
pains to do what the Saviour told him to do—we may be sure, not
only that he would not be without Divine Help, but that, in a very
short time, he would be led by God’s Spirit to see the greatness of
Him Who was then conversing with him—to see in Him the
exuberant love of God to His fallen creatures, and to be joined to
Him, inwardly by faith, outwardly by fellowship in that Church
which would be His abiding representative when He was taken
away. If the law was a schoolmaster to lead men to Christ, surely
the chief precept of the law, the law of Divine love, would lead a
sincere soul most directly to Him,

29. “ But he, willing to justify himself, said unto Jesus, And who
is my neighbour?” This word ‘“‘justify”? cannot be taken in a
theological sense. It seems to mean, willing to justify himself for
having asked a question which, by so simple a process, he had been
himself compelled to answer.

“Who is my neighbour?” Such a question is eminently cha-
racteristic of Judaism. The whole spirit of Rabbinism would ex-
clude heathens from all good offices. For instance, in explaining
Exod, xxiii. 85, they explain it so as to mean that the burden is
only to be unloaded if the ass that lieth under it belongs to an
Israelite, not if it belongs to a Gentile; and so the expression,
‘‘ the ass of him that hateth thee,” must be understood of a Jewish
and not of a Gentile enemy.

30. “And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down
from,” &c. It has been made a question whether what follows was
a parable composed by the Lord on the occasion, or a narrative of
what actually occurred about that time. I should think most pro-
bably the former.Soe,

278 A CERTAIN PRIEST. (St. Luxe.

from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves, which
stripped him of his raiment, and wounded him, and departed,
leaving him half dead.

31 And by chance there came down a certain Priest that

 

“A certain man.” No doubt a Jew by nation and religion, or

the parable would lose very much of its point.

** Went down from Jerusalem to Jericho, and fell among thieves,
which stripped,” &e. The road from Jerusalem to Jericho is
described so graphically as to its desolateness and solitariness, its
dangers and its declivity, in the following passage from Thomson’s
‘** Land and Book,” that I think the reader will thank me for recall-
ing it to his recollection or introducing him to it. ‘‘ With noise
and pomp such as Arabs only can affect we passed out [of
Jerusalem] at St. Stephen’s gate, wound our way into the narrow
valley of Jehosophat, over the south point of Olivet, by the miserable
remains of the city of Mary, Martha, and Lazarus, and then pre-
pared ourselves to descend—for you remember that we must ‘go
down to Jericho.’ And sure enough, down, down we did go, over
slippery rocks, for more than a mile, when the path became less
precipitous. Still, however, the road follows the dry channel of a
brook for several miles further, as if descending into the very
bowels of the earth. How admirably adapted for ‘robbers’! After
leaving the brook, which turns aside far to the south, we ascended
and descended naked hills for several miles, the prospect gradually
becoming more and more gloomy. Not a house, not even a tree is
to be seen; and the only remains are those of a large khan, said
to have been the inn to which the good Samaritan brought the
wounded Jew. Not far from here, in a narrow defile, an English
traveller was attacked, shot, and robbed in 1820. As you approach
the plain, the mountains wear a more doleful appearance, the
ravines become more frightful, and the narrow passes less and less
passable. At length the weary traveller reaches the plain, by a
long, steep declivity,” &c., p. 613.

31. “And by chance there came down a certain priest that way.”
This is the only place where chance is mentioned in the New
Testament. The Apostolic writers look upon every thing as ordered
or controlled by God, and so they seldom use the word. But the
expression scarcely signifies absolute chance as we use it of theCuar. X.] LIKEWISE A LEVITE. 279

way: and when he saw him, °he passed by on the other
side.

© Ps, xxxyviii,

32 And likewise a Levite, when he was at the =

 

chances of dice, or such things. The word really means “ concur-
rence,’ or ‘‘ coincidence ” of circumstances, all which circumstances
are foreseen by God and, in a way unknown to us, ordered by Him;
so that though to the priest himself his coming up at that moment
seemed fortuitous, it was so ordered that it should display his want
of charity, and so bring out into deeper relief the charity of one
whom he esteemed his natural foe. This holds good whether the
narrative be areal accident or a parable. All through our lives
thousands of circumstances which seem like chance to us serve to
bring out what is within us.

‘‘A certain priest.”’ He was going up to Jerusalem, in his turn
to take part in the sacrificial worship of God, or he was returning
from Jerusalem, having assisted in that worship, and that was the
worship of One Who had said in words which must have been well
known to him. ‘‘He... loveth the stranger in giving him food
and raiment. Love ye, therefore, the stranger, for ye were strangers
in the land of Egypt.” (Deut. x. 18, 19.)

‘¢ When he saw him, he passed by on the other side.” He might
have made many excuses for doing this. He might have said to
himself, ‘‘He is well nigh dead already. He cannot recover;
besides I shall be too late for the appointed sacrifice if I delay, or
IT am expected at home, and they will be anxious about me, and
the wretches who have murdered this poor man may rush out upon
me in so dangerous a part of the road as this.” But though we
take example from this man, let us not judge him, for distress may
have lain in our way, and in countless instances we may have
passed by on the other side. All wilful avoiding information
respecting any misery or sin which may be in our midst lest, if we
know it, our consciences may reproach us with having done nothing
to alleviate or remove it, or lest it threaten expense to us, and the
loss of valuable time—is not this our way of passing by on the
other side ?

32. “And likewise a Levite, when he was at the place, came and
looked on him,” &c. The Levite seems to have been somewhat
more humane at the first than the priest; for the priest simply saw
him and got out of the way, whereas the Levite came and saw280 A CERTAIN SAMARITAN. [Sr. Luxe.

place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other
side.

33 But a certain ? Samaritan, as he journeyed, »P John iv. 9.
came where he was: and when he saw him, he had com-
passion on him.

34 And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in

(looked on) him. It seems as if the Levite examined the case more
closely, but declined giving assistance as too difficult, or too
dangerous, or too expensive. The Levite seems in one respect to
have been more blameable than the priest; for being more of a
menial servant of the temple, he was accustomed to rougher
work, such as bearing burdens, killing, washing the animals used
in sacrifices, and preparing their bodies for the sacrificial fire or
feast, so that it would not have been out of the way of his occupation
to remove the wounded man to the neighbouring inn.

33. “ But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he
was.’ Commentators have drawn attention to the fact that the word
“Samaritan ” is put as the first word of the sentence to emphasize
it: ‘“A Samaritan, a certain one.” I think that that which em-
phasizes the mention of the Samaritan most strongly is the fact
that just before this the Lord was churlishly denied hospitality by
a village of these aliens, because His face was “ as though he would
go to Jerusalem.”

‘And when he saw him he had compassion on him.” The priest
and Levite if they retained in their breasts any human feeling
must have felt some degree of compassion ; but this is passed over
by the Saviour as of no account, because it bore no fruit, whereas
the compassion of the Samaritan is mentioned with honour because
it made him actively succour and relieve the miserable man.

d4. “ And went to him, and bound up his wounds, pouring in
oil and wine,” &c. He poured oil unto the wounds as an emollient,
but why wine? As the man was in a fainting state, and no doubt
exhausted with weakness through loss of blood, it would seem that
the wine must have been given to him as a cordial to revive him;
but all expositors seem agreed in the fact that the application of
both was external. The wine, which would be more of the nature
of vinegar than of wine, was supposed to cleanse the wounds, and
the oil to heal.Cuar. X.] TAKE CARE OF HIM. 281

oul and wine, and set him on his own beast, and brought him
to an inn, and took care of him. ;

35 And on the morrow when he departed, he took out
two || pence, and gave them to the host, and said | See Matt.
unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever oe
thou spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee.

 

35. “Two pence.” ‘‘Two denarii”—double what the householder in the parable in
Matth. xx. gave to each of the labourers for their day's work. Supposing that wages
were 20s. a week, it would be above 6s. in real value.

d

34, “ And brought him to aninn.” Nota mere caravanserai with
bare rooms, but a place of rest and refreshment which receives all
comers.

‘‘ And took care of him,”’ i.e., nursed him till he left him the
next day, as we must suppose, out of danger.

35. ‘And on the morrow when he departed, he took out two
pence.”’ He not only stayed till he saw him in the fair way of
recovery, but gave the host a sufficiency for the maintenance for
two days more, and, if this would not be enough, he gave him per-
mission to spend upon the wounded man whatsoever was necessary,
if it was best that he should remain longer at the inn.

Mark the various stages in the goodness of this man, which fully
entitle him to the name of ‘‘Good”’ Samaritan. He had compas-
sion on him; he delayed his journey to bind up his wounds, apply-
ing to them his own provision for his journey; he set him on his
own beast, himself walking by his side; he nursed him himself the
first night; he left sufficient for his keep for sometime, and gave
the innkeeper a promise to repay him all further expenses. We
should particularize all these points, because the Lord does so, in
order to bring out the contrast between the trouble—the labour of
love which he took—and the mere look of the priest and Levite.

Tt should be remarked that the word penny (two pence) is a wrong
translation, because it conveys a very false impression to the majo-
rity of those who hear it, or read it. In the case of nine-tenths
of half-educated Englishmen it would convey the idea of extreme
stinginess, which would seriously detract from the teaching of the

rest of the parable, whereas the sum was amply sufficient for the
occasion. The word had better be left untranslated, as the value of
money fluctuates and differs in every country.2

 

82 WHICH NOW WAS NEIGHBOUR ? (Sv. Luxe.

36 Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neigh-
bour unto him that fell among the thieves ?
3/ And he said, He that shewed mercy on him. Then said

 

36. ‘Which now of these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour
unto him?” &e. Observe how the Saviour here turns the tables, as
ib were, on His questioner. Instead of asking, ‘‘ Must not every
one be our neighbour, no matter what his religion or race?” He
asks, ‘‘Who is he who acts as a neighbour, and so sets us an
example of true disinterested humanity?” This would come home
to the conscience of the lawyer, for he would feel that he ought to
have been above asking such a question. The mere fact that he
made such an inquiry showed a very imperfect practical knowledge
of the law of love. The Lord’s question has been admirably put as,
“Which now of these three understood best what thou desirest to
know?” The Samaritan was the wounded man’s neighbour.
Neighbour is a correlative term; and the meaning is—which acted
as a neighbour, recognized the true love of one’s neighbour, and
So is to be imitated. Surely it is he who allowed no distine-
tion of religion, or country, or friendship, to straiten his com-
passions.

37. “ And he said, He that shewed mercy on him.” CGommen-
tator after commentator blames the lawyer, and imputes it to his
ineradicable national prejudices that he did not directly name the
Samaritan, but “ circuitously ” replies, “ He that shewed mercy on
him ;” but it seems to me that we must draw an exactly contrary
inference, for instead of simply saying ‘‘the Samaritan,” he desig-
nates him by his good deed: ‘‘He that shewed merey on him.”
It seems as if the good example had struck him, and produced the
desired effect. If he wished to disparage him, he would have said,
He who assisted the wounded man, or relieved him; but he gives
him his full due in naming the word “ mercy.”

“Then said Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise.” And
what our Lord says to this man He says to every Christian who
hears or reads this most exquisite Divine story (or history, as it
may be). ‘Do thou shut thine eyes to no misery or want which is
near thee, or in thy way. Rather do thou visit those afflicted by
it. Do thou relieve it, even at the cost of some luxury or even com-
fort in thine own house. Do thou apply thyself to its removal, even
though it give thee trouble, take up thy time, and somewhat hinderCuap, X.] GO AND DO THOU LIKEWISE. 283

Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise.

 

thy business ; for do thou remember well that no business will be
found at the last to have been anything like so urgent as the laying up
of treasures in heaven, or making to thyself friends of the mammon
of unrighteousness.” Thiersch has an application very appropriate
to these times. ‘‘ Many in our day consider it a sufficient evidence
of their Christian chavrity, if they pay others to fulfil the works of
mercy. And, indeed, the good Samaritan paid the host of the inn
for the care of the wounded man. But before all he wrought with
his own hand, and spared not the pains of dressing the wounds of
the sufferer, walking by his side after placing him on the mule.
When, from a pure motive and with prompt resolution, we incur
privation, sacrifice pleasure, and undertake a painful personal
labour for the benefit of a suffering neighbour, a special blessing
rests upon us.”

I cannot help saying that I take it as a special token for good in
the Church that God, from Whom every good impulse comes, has
raised up amongst us such multitudes of nursing Sisterhoods.
When one remembers that forty years ago there was not one or only
one, and now they are, with their offshoots, about one hundred, it
seems as if His Spirit had not forsaken us.

All commentators, Catholic and non-Catholic, seem at one in the
spiritual or mystical application of this parable. The Lord has not
created for us such an example and model without having Himself,
in His own Person, set it before us.

The wounded man is human nature, sick unto death through
sin, ‘‘ from the sole of the foot to the crown of the head, no sound-
ness in it, but wounds and bruises and putrifying sores.’ The
robbers are the powers of evil under their prince: he who was a
murderer from the beginning. The priest and the Levite are the
law and the prophets, utterly powerless to help or to give lie, for
‘‘if there had been a law given which could have given life, verily
righteousness, [which is the life of all intelligent creatures], should
have been by the law” (Gal. iii. 21).

The Lord Himself was the good Samaritan, only infinitely exceed-
ing the type in goodness. He ‘“‘looked” from heaven upon our
miserable condition. He did far more than the Samaritan could
do, for the Samaritan and the Jew had but one common nature,
whereas the Son of God, retaining all His Divine powers of healing,284 IT CAME TO PASS AS THEY WENT. (Sr. Lune.

38 § Now it came to pass, as they went, that he entered

 

took upon Him our nature, in order that He might bind up our
wounds, and pour into us health and consolation and strength. In
His human nature He bore our burden—the burden of our sins and
sorrows. He brought us to a place of comparative safety, even His
Chureh, ruled by His ministers—the dispensers' of His Sacra-
ments. Having first tended us Himself—for the first care-taker of
every soul is the Lord Himself,—then He left us in the hostelry
which He Himself had built and furnished, and put under ministers
—under Apostles, Evangelists, Pastors, and Teachers. In His Com-
mission, in His Word, in His Sacraments, He has given these ministers
and stewards all things needful for the restoration of souls; and if
there is anything which in reason they, under the guidance of
His Spirit, see needful, they are to supply it, and He will allow
it at His return. Such is this parable, wondrous alike in its depth
and its simplicity, convincing us all of sin—of miserable short-
coming in this matter of Divine and heavenly charity.

“O Lord, who hast taught us that all our doings without charity
are nothing worth, send Thy Holy Ghost, and pour into our hearts
that most excellent gift of charity, the very bond of peace and of all
virtues, without which whosoever liveth is counted dead before Thee.
Grant this, for thine only Son Jesus Christ’s sake.”

38. “ Now it came to pass, as they went, that he entered into a
certain village.” This certain village must have been Bethany, so
that if the seventy were sent forth by the Lord when He was
journeying in South Galilee and Persea, this incident must have
occurred at one of His visits to Jerusalem.

Hdersheim supposes that it took place at the feast of tabernacles,
that its proper place is just before John vii. 14. It is there stated
that about the midst of the feast Jesus went up into the Temple.
Where was He before this? Itis suggested that He would not have
journeyed during the feast, but that He sent his disciples on to
Jerusalem, and He Himself abode at Bethany, at the house of
Martha; that they lodged for the most part, not in the house, but,
as all law-observing Jews did, in a booth or booths in the court or
garden; and that this accounts for the distraction of Martha with
the ‘much serving,” as she would have to go to and from the booth
to the house—Lazarus, who is not mentioned, being absent, keeping
the feast at Jerusalem. This is ingenious, but pure conjecture.Ouse: Xe] MARTHA AND MARY. 285

int Fecal ool tan tes
ore ct village: and a certain woman named ¢ Martha
received him into her house. a John xi. 1,

& xii. 2, 3.
39 And she had a sister called Mary, * which * 1 Cor. vii. 32
also ®sat at Jesus’ feet, and heard his word. .

¢

s Luke viii. 35.
Acts xxii.3.

 

39. “* At Jesus’ feet.” So A., later Uncials, almost all Cursives, &c.; but &, B., C., D
L., old Latin (except b), Vulg., Copt., Syriacs (Cur. and Schaaf) read, ‘‘ The Lord’s feet.”

“A certain woman named Martha.’ Commentators, with one
consent, notice the exact similarity of the characters of the two
sisters as given in the two Evangelists. Martha, too attentive to
household duties, ‘“‘cumbered with much serving,” in St. Luke;
and, at the supper mentioned in St. John, ‘“‘ Martha served.”
Mary, in St. Luke’s narrative, sitting at the Lord’s feet; and, in St.
John, anointing the Lord’s feet. Martha forward to speak (Luke x.
40; John xi. 21-27, 89). Mary retiring in silent meditation (Luke
x. 89; John xi. 20).

All sorts of conjectures have been made respecting the condition
of Martha: that she was a widow; that she was the wife of Simon
the leper; that it was even possible that she was the elect lady to
whom St. John wrote his second Epistle; but two things must be
held with certainty respecting her, first, that she was a true be-
liever, for it was she who answered the Lord’s question respecting
belief in Himself as the Resurrection and the Life, with the words:
‘“T believe that thou art the Christ, the Son of God, which should
come into the world.” Secondly, that she must have been a person
of some means, probably large means, and so that the whole
household would not consist of herself and her sister only. This is
most certain from the fact that their family sepulchre was like that
of Joseph of Arimathea, a cave hewn out in a rock, with a stone as
its door.

39. “And she had a sister called Mary,” &c. “A sister called
Mary:” such a mode of naming her shows that she could not
possibly have been the Mary called Magdalene, of chap. viii. 2, or
the woman that was a sinner of vii. 37. This is undoubtedly the
first mention of her.

‘“Which also sat at Jesus’ feet, and heard his word. lds, of
course, means that she was a devout and attentive disciple, hke her
great namesake, keeping the Lord’s sayings, and pondering them in
her heart.

”?286 MUCH SERVING. (St. Luxe.

40 But Martha was cumbered about much serving, and
came to him, and said, Lord, dost thou not care that my
sister hath left me to serve alone? bid her therefore that she
help me.

 

‘And heard his word’’ means that she heard them effectually.
She had ears to hear, she heard the Lord’s words, and believed on
Him that sent Him.

40. “But Martha was cumbered about much serving, and came

to him, and said,” &c., “serve alone.” Very much depends upon
the meaning of this “ serving alone.” Were there no other servants
to whom such household duties could be committed? From all
that we can gather respecting the circumstances of the family, there
must have been such. If there were not, and food had to be pre-
pared for the Lord, and perhaps other guests, then it seems selfish
in Mary not to have assisted her sister, so that both together might
listen to the Lord. But if there were other servants to whom such
duties might have been well left, then the case is altered. Martha
must have known that the best way of honouring the Lord was not
to prepare Him an elaborate entertainment, but to listen to Him,
and to receive His words, and through receiving them be made His.
The Lord evidently blames Martha. He could not blame her for
doing a woman’s duty, but he could blame her for overdoing it, for
thinking for a moment that anything was so acceptable to him as
receiving His Word—and His Word was the Word of God—in the
love of it. So that what He undoubtedly blames her for is the dis-
play of a worldly spirit—a desire to get credit from the entertain-
ment—and so a woman’s vanity.

And now it will be needful to consider an opinion largely held by
Christian antiquity, which is this, that both Martha and Mary
served the Lord with religious service—the one in her household
work, the other in listening to his words; and that the Lord in
what He says does not blame Martha, but pronounces the way of
Mary to be a more perfect way. Thus Gregory, following Augus-
tine: ‘‘ One signifies the active life, the other the contemplative ;
that Martha’s care is not blamed, but Mary is praised, for great are
the rewards of an active life, but those of the contemplative far
better.” But I think such an application of the incident is impos-
sible, i.e., an application which treats both Martha’s and Mary’s
conduct on this occasion as religious; but Mary’s as the better, forCuap.X.] TROUBLED ABOUT MANY THINGS. 287

41 And Jesus answered and said unto her, Martha, Martha,
thou art careful and troubled about many things:

 

41. “And Jesus.” So A., C., D., all later Uncials, almost all Cursives, old Latin (b, ¢
f, q), Copt., Syr. (Schaaf), &¢.; but x, B., L., old Latin (a, i, 1), Vulg., read, “the Lord.”

surely the Lord Himself set an example of the active life, and all
His Apostles, and all who in other days have extended the borders
of His Church, have led active lives—lives never without earnest
prayer, never without the reading of Scripture, never without
seasons of retirement for devout meditations, but still active ones—
lives in which he who led them fed on the words of J esus, and de-
voutly accepted His every utterance, and chose the good part, but
still such men could not be described as sitting still at the Lord’s
feet, and doing nothing but listening to His words. For what is
such listening as Mary’s for? Surely not merely for private and
solitary contemplation, however devout, but for the benefit of others.
For as activity, without meditation and constant retirement for
devotion, is not according to the Lord’s will, and will soon more
and more secularize religion, and make it cold and mechanical; so
contemplation without activity will make religion unreal and
dreamy, and unfruitful, for every doctrine of our religion, without
exception, must both be contemplated inwardly and acted out
visibly in the conduct.

41,42. “ And Jesus answered and said unto her... . not be taken
away from her.” As if He said, ‘‘ Thou art distracted with such
anxieties respecting the entertainment of thy guests, that thou
neglectest the one thing for which I took thy nature. I came
not to be ministered unto, but to minister; and I minister the
word of salvation. Blame not thy sister; she has discerned the
one object of my Mission, the one reception which honours
Me, the one entertainment for which I look. If thou hadst been
like her, and understood my one purpose in coming to my people,
thou wouldst have given less attention to niceties for which I care
nothing, and found time for receiving from my lips that word of
truth by which thy soul will be made mine for ever.”’

Did Martha, then, never sit at the feet of Jesus and choose the
good part? Did Mary never honour thd Lord’s Body with outward
service? The sequel of their history, as given in St. John, tells us;
For Martha in that she confessed, ‘‘ Yea, Lord, I believe that thou
art the Christ, the son of the living God;” and so, “‘ Thou art the288 ONE THING IS NEEDFUL. "Sr. Luke.

42 But ‘one thing is needful: and Mary hath chosen that
* Ps. xxvii. 4. good part, which shall not be taken away from
her.

 

42. «But one thing is needful.” So A., C., all later Uncials except L., all Cursives
(except 1, 33), some old Latin (f, gl, q), Vulg., Syriac (Cur. and Schaaf); but y, B., L.,
1, 33, Copt., Aith., read, ‘‘ few things are needful or one.” In this case the so-called
neutral text substitutes an unintelligible sentence for one of the Lord’s most important
words. And this against the authority of all Christendom.

Resurrection and Life,”—Martha, I say, in thus confessing Him,
manifested with all possible clearness that she had sat at the feet
of the Lord, and received His words of life; and Mary, in that she
anointed His Body with the box of very precious ointment, paid
far more devotion to that adorable Body than Martha did when she
was busied about the food of His entertainment. So that they
seem to change places, the one received His Word as the Word of
God, the other honoured His Body as the Body of God.

CER. XI.

ND it came to pass, that, as he was praying in a certain
place, when he ceased, one of his disciples said unto
him, Lord, teach us to pray, as John also taught his disciples.

ee ee er

1. And it came to pass, as he was praying in acertain place .
John also taught his disciples.” It has been Supposed that the
Lord was praying aloud, that one of the disciples (perhaps one of
the seventy who had not heard the sermon on the mount), struck
with the fervour and Divine rapture of His prayer, selced to be
taught to pray similarly, and added, that His great forerunner had
given to his disciples a form of prayer. :

2. “And he said unto them, when ye pray,
which art in heaven,” &e. It is evident by the answer which the
Lord gave, that the disciples had asked the Lord to teach them
form of prayer. The Lord’s answer is very suggestive. Acs tans
| . us . . . 2
to the opinion of many bodies of Christians Since the time of Calvin,

eee

say, Our FatherCuar. XI.] WHEN YE PRAY SANG

2 And he said unto them, When y

which art in heaven, Hallowed be th
kingdom come.

289

€ pray, say, *Our Father
y name. Thy a Matt. vi. 9,
Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth.

Se

2. “Our Father which art in heaven.” So AS 5 Casale.

all later Uncials, almost all
Cursives, most old Latin (be cat tha |

pale eC) Conte Our, Syriac, &e.; but M5 JBlog 2b}
IL 2, BiG Vulg., have only “ Father,” without « our,” and without “ which art in heaven.”
“‘ Thy will be done, as in heaven, so in earth.”

Bo N, AN: D., all later Uncials,
almost all Cursives, old Latin (Oy Cres te 1s. q), Copt., A&ith,, but omitted by eB. ed.
22, Vulg., Cureton Syriac, Arm.

the Lord should have said, “I cannot teach you any form of prayer.
Any words that even I could give you would only fetter the free-
dom of your intercourse with your Father. My Spirit alone can
teach you how to pray, and His teaching will raise you up into an
atmosphere far above all forms.” On the principle of those who dis-
card the use of all forms, such should have been the Lord’s answer ;
but instead of this He at once gave them, asecond time apparently,
the prayer which He had given in the Sermon on the Mount.
Now, in giving them this well-known form, He gave them words
to which, so far from fettering or cramping their freedom, they would
never be able to rise up. Do what we will we can never com-
prehend the depth and fulness—we can never attain to the height of
“hallowed be thy name, thy kingdom come, thy will be done.”
Consider the first, “Hallowed be thy name.” It blends itself
with the incessant Trisagion of the Seraphim close to the thr
It unites itself in earth with the praise of “
breath.” It prays against every for
tious worship, of will- worship,
hypocritical worship ; and it pr

one,
everything that hath
m of false worship, of supersti-
of careless, indevout, cold, formal,
ays for every thing by which God
may be better known, better remembered, better loved. It prays
for all honour to God, in heaven and in earth, in the heart, in the
family, in the senate, in the world, in the Church; above all, in the

Eucharistic celebration, because that is the highest act of worship
of the Mystical Body.

Consider “‘ Thy kingdom come.” The more we know of God’s

kingdom in the heart, the Church, the world, the more we know of
the misery of all advers

se rule, and of the blessedness of being ruled
by God, and of having every thought brought into subjection to the
obedience of Christ, the more we shall: realize “ 'T

hy kingdom
come.”’

U—

290 DELIVER US FROM EVIL. (Sr. Luxe.

3 Give us || day by day our daily bread.
| Or, for the 4 And forgive us our sins; for we also forgive
a every one that is indebted to us. And lead us not
into temptation ; but deliver us from evil.

4, “ But deliver us from evil.” So A., C., D., later Uncials, almost all Cursives, old
Latin (b, ¢, f,i, 1, q), (a, e wanting here), Copt., Syriac (Cur. and Schaaf), dith.; but
omitted in x, B., L., 1, 22, 57, 180, 181, &c., Vulg.

And the more we know of the righteousness and goodness of the
will of the Supreme Father, with the more fervour and devout sub-
mission we shall say, ‘‘ Thy will be done.”’

So that no prayer should be so studied as this prayer. Under no
other prayer can we gather up and express so many aspirations.
No prayer leads us to think so much of God and of His will and
designs as this prayer. In the use of no other prayer can the
Christian submit himself so unreservedly to God. It follows that
no prayer should be said—at times, at least—so slowly, so col-
lectedly, so recollectedly, so humbly, so reverentially. It follows
that no prayer requires more teaching of God’s Spirit to enter some-
what into its depth and fulness, and so to say it aright.

Like the Eucharist, it can be offered up with a particular inten-
tion. If there be any work to be done for God or for the Church,
what better way of commending it to God—if there be not time or
opportunity for the celebration of the Eucharist—than by this
prayer, that in the work on account of which we pray He would
glorify His Name, He would advance His kingdom, and carry out
His holy will.

I have enlarged upon each petition so very fully in my comment
on St. Matthew vi., that I must refer the reader to that, if he desires
a fuller exposition of the several parts.

An interesting question arises, however, on this—whether the
Lord gave this prayer to His disciples only once or on two occasions:
once in His Sermon on the Mount (Matt. vi.), once as related
here.

Now it will be necessary to remember that the form in St.
Matthew is not only the most perfect form, but that, when we have
once known it, we could not possibly be contented with that given
in St. Luke; for the form in St. Luke, as given in several ancient
MSS., and in the Vulgate, is this—‘ Father: hallowed be Thy
Name. Thy kingdom come. Give us to-day our daily bread. AndCuar. XT] LEND ME THREE LOAVES. 207

© And he said unto them, Which of you shall have a
friend, and shall go unto him at midnight, and say unto him,
Friend, lend me three loaves ;

ee ee

forgive us our sins, for we also forgive every one that is indebted to
us. And lead us not into temptation.” Now it is incredible that
the Lord should have given the Lord’s Prayer in a perfect state,
and not taught His people to say, “Thy will be done,” and
“ Deliver us from evil.” Supposing, then, that these Manuscripts
give the true version of this prayer as it came from the lips of the
Lord on this occasion, then St. Matthew, who seems to have
been, in most cases, the more perfect reporter of the Lord’s dis-
courses, has given us that form from which it is impossible for any
Christian to deviate; for it is absurd to suppose that they are
alternative forms, so that we should Sometimes say the Lord’s
Prayer with the petitions, “ Thy will be done” and “ Deliver us
from evil,” and sometimes, of set purpose, omit them.

It, however, the Lord had previously given to His people the
Prayer as it is contained in the Sermon on the Mount, then, when
He was asked by one who was ignorant of it to teach them to pray,
He might naturally give them what would remind them that He
had already taught them the prayer of prayers. He would give
them the shortened form, which probably, as He then set it forth,
was still shorter, merely to remind them that He had already
taught them what they now asked for, and that they must remem-
ber His former words. Or it may be that St. Luke, in this account,
contented himself with words just sufficient to remind his hearers
of the fuller form. Anyhow, there can be no Lord’s Prayer without

‘Thy will be done.”

5. “And he said unto them, Which of you shall have a friend,
and shall go?” &. The Lord having taught them the most fitting
words of prayer, now adds a short parable respecting frequency and
perseverance in prayer. In order to encourage us always to pray
and never to faint, and in everything by prayer and supplication to
make our requests known unto God, He gives us a short parable,
in which the case is put as strongly as it well can be.

Supposing that any one of those who heard Him had a friend who
came to him in the dead of night, hungry,. and faint with his
journey, and he went to a neighbour of his, also his friend, whom
he had seldom found wanting in time of need, though he had often292 TROUBLE ME NOT. [Sr. Luxe.

6 For a friend of mine || in his journey is come to me, and
| Or, owt of hts IT have nothing to set before him?
a 7 And he from within shall answer and say,
Trouble me not: the door is now shut, and my children are
with me in bed; I cannot rise and give thee.

 

tried his patience, he would not scruple to go to this friend, not-
withstanding that it was midnight, and ask for three loaves, for he
was bound to show his visitor hospitality, and he had nothing
whatsoever in the house. The case was so urgent that he would
run the risk of exciting his friend’s impatience and ill-temper; and
when his friend, perhaps in angry tones, told him to take himself
off, for if he got up to supply his want, he would wake up his
children, and disturb all the house, the man without, urgently feel-
ing the need, would continue knocking till he within, seeing that
there was no help—that, if he would get his night’s rest, he must
comply with his friend’s request, and yield to his shameless impor-
tunity,—would rise up, and with ill-humour and, perhaps, some bad
words, give him what was needed.

Now see the amazing contrast between the conduct of the angry
and churlish friend and that of God. The friend in his house at
midnight, in bed with his children, is put in contrast with God, Who
never slumbers nor sleeps, Whose ears are always open to prayer,
Who is angry and disturbed—to speak after the manner of men—not
when His people pray, but when they do not pray; the door bolted
and barred is put in contrast with the door of heaven, always open;
the trouble that the friend within deprecated is in contrast with the
ease with which Almighty God can grant any and every request,
without stirring from His place. The impatience of the friend at
being disturbed is in contrast with the patience of God, Who, no
matter how we have sinned, will hear our prayer. The eranting of
the request, not for friendship, but for self’s sake, is in contrast with
the exuberant kindness and mercy of God, Who gives to us, not as
a relief to Himself, but because of His love to us, and His desire for
our temporal and eternal good.

The refusal and delay of the man within, in order that the man
without might go away, and cease to disturb him, is in contrast
with the mind and conduct of our heavenly Father, Who, when He
seems to delay His answer, delays not for His ease, but for our sakes,Cuar. XI] ASK, AND IT SHALL BE GIVEN. 293
8 I say unto you, ” Though he will not rise and give him,
because he ig his friend, yet because of his im- b ch, xviii, 1,
portunity he will rise and give him as many as he
needeth.

9 “And I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be © Matt. vii, 7.

: & = eae xd 2
given you; seek, and ye shall find; knock; and it Mark xi. 24,
| 1] - John xy. 7.

Shall be opened unto you. James i. 6,

1 John iii, 22,

 

in order that our faith may be strengthened, our habit of prayer
increased, and our appreciation of the value of His gifts deepened
because of the trouble and perseverance we have to exercise.

Whether this parable was spoken just after Jesus had taught them
the Lord’s Prayer seems doubtful; but what immediately succeeds,
“Ask, and it shall be given you,” was no doubt delivered at the same
time by the Lord as the lesson of the parable. There are many
spiritual meanings given to various parts of it, as that the three
loaves are faith, hope, and charity, or the knowledge of the three
Persons of the Trinity; but it seems best to let nothing interfere
with the lesson, which is, that persevering, importunate prayer will
always be answered.

Again, some commentators have taken pains to vindicate the
comparison of the conduct of God with that of the churlish man
here described; but it seems to be not a comparison, but a contrast,
all the way through. The character and conduct of God, as regards
prayer, is the opposite of that of the man in question: and so the
rather with confidence ask of God, seek His grace, knock at His
door.

9. “And Isay unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and
yeshallfind; knock,” &¢. ‘I say unto you,” as the great lesson from
the parable I have just uttered, ‘‘ Ask, seek, knock.” These grada-
tions of earnestness are suggested by the parable. The man first, no
doubt, simply asked ; then he sought the door, or sought to open it,
till he found it was fast shut and barred; then he knocked, so as to
threaten to awake not only his friend, but the other inmates of the
house. Quesnel has a very good exposition: ‘‘A man, in order to
offer up such a prayer as becometh a sinner, must ask with the
humility of a beggar, seek with the carefulness of a faithful servant,
and knock with the confidence of a friend.”

Or, again, ‘‘asking’’ may be simply putting up words; “ seek-294 HE THAT SEEKETH FINDETH. [Sr. Luxe.

10 For every one that asketh receiveth ; and he that seeketh
findeth; and to him that knocketh it shall be opened.

 

ing’ may be the diligent use of means of grace; ‘knocking’ may
sienify still further and more decided means of attracting the ear
of God, such as, for instance, fasting and almsgiving. Of Cornelius
it was said, ‘‘ Thy prayers and thine alms are come up for a memo-
rial before God ;’ and as to those who set apart Paul and Barnabas to
the Apostolic work, it is said that the command from heaven came
** As they ministered unto the Lord, and fasted.” The great prayer
seasons of the Church, the Ember days, and the Rogation days, are
days of fasting as well as of prayer. Again, as to the use of means
of grace. Do we ask for strength of soul against sin? We must
remember that Christ has left a means of grace for the strengthen-
ing and refreshing of our souls, even the Sacrament of His Body and
Blood; and we shall show the sincerity of our prayers by diligently
using that Sacrament with the earnest desire and definite intention
of receiving strength in it. Anyhow, this place teaches us that if
we have any sincerity, we must not put up some hasty prayer and
have done with it. People who are in earnest about any earthly
matter do not so behave. They call to mind all the ways of ap-
proaching a friend or patron who has something to give, and neg-
lect none. Particularly if the great man has any friend who can
command his ear, they will avail themselves of such an one’s inter-
cession. And so the Christian will ask particularly the intercession
of the Lord, and also of His people. And if by any memorial act
they can remind the patron of some great kindness of his to them
in past time, they will most certainly use such memorial; and so
the Christian’s special times of prayer and intercession will be when
the Sacrifice of Christis represented to Ged in the Sacrament of His
Son’s Body and Blood.

10. “For every one that asketh receiveth.” He may not receive
what He asks for in the exact form in which he expects it; but he
shall receive something better, something that God knows that He
requires more.

‘“‘He that seeketh findeth.” He findeth the hidden treasure—
the pearl of great price; He finds God.

‘To him that knocketh it shall be opened.” The door of erace
here, the door of heaven hereafter. eCuar. XI] HOW MUCH MORE. 295

1] “Tf ason shall ask bread of any of you that is a father,
will he give him a stone? or if he ask a fish, will « Matt. vii. 9,
he for a fish give him a serpent ?

12 Or if he shall ask an egg, will he +offer + Gr. give.
him a scorpion ?

13 If ye then, being evil, know how to give good oifts unto
your children: how much more shall your heavenly Father
give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him ?

 

13. ‘ Your heavenly Father,” rather ‘‘ the Father which is from heaven.”

11. “If ason shall ask bread of any of you that is a father...
scorpion.”” To what does this similitude look? What being, when
he is asked for bread, gives astone? In all probability the Lord
opposes the gifts of the Father to the gifts of the world, or of Satan.
It may be observed that each has a slight resemblance to the object
put in opposition to it: bread to astone, fish to a serpent, the egg to
a scorpion. ‘Thus it is with the things which Satan bestows; they
have always some similarity to the objects which the heart of man
seeks, but are useless as is the stone, or in the end fatal as the ser-
pent or the scorpion.

13. “If ye then, being evil, know how to give good gifts unto
your children: how,” &e. The reader will remember how, in the
exactly parallel place in Matth. vii., the heavenly Father, in answer
to prayer, is said to give all good things ; so that it seems, by com-
paring the places, that the Holy Spirit is the equivalent of “all good
things.” But, indeed, is He not much more? What is all know-
ledge, even of the Scriptures, all eloquence, all skill, not to mention
all riches, all earthly happiness, or earthly glory, without the Holy
Spirit.

The greatest gift of God, then—the gift of the Renewer, Comforter,
Revealer of God, and Giver of Eternal Life—is to be got for the
asking.

Notice how the Lord here recognizes the universal presence of
sin in the race when He says, “ If ye then, being evil.”

Notice also, that though thus sinful by nature, we still retain so
much of the image of God, that we can infer, from the remains of
what is good within us, the perfect goodness of God.

14. “‘And he was casting out a devil, and it was dumb....296 THE PEOPLE WONDERED. [Sr. Luxe.

14 4 °And he was casting out a devil, and it was dumb.
© Matt. ix.32. And it came to pass, when the devil was gone
ae out, the dumb spake; and the people wondered.

f Matt. ix. 34, 15 But some of them said, ‘He casteth out
ee devitinroueh | Beclzobub tae ehietor anevada
dul, and so ver.

18, 19. 16 And others, tempting him, * sought of him a
S Matioai. 38s qr. . a-7;

Ri 1. sign from heay en. |

h Matt. xii.25. 17 * But ‘he, knowing their thoughts, said unto

Mark iii. 24, : 22 : : :
i Johnii, 25, them, Every kingdom divided against itself is

 

people wondered.” It is not possible, with any degree of certainty,
to fix the time of this miracle. It is almost identical, both in its
circumstances and its effects on the people and on the Pharisees
with two in St. Matthew, one related in Matt. ix. 31, the other in
xu. 22. If much that is in the preceding chapter describes the acts
of a ministry in Perea, then this must be related by St. Luke out
ofits place. Alford supposes, and with seeming truth, that it was
‘a portion of the Evangelic history the position of which was not
exactly and satisfactorily fixed.” In St. Mark’s Gospel the blas-
phemy of the Pharisees, and the Lord’s answer to it, come in imme-
diately after the interference of His friends to restrain Him as one
“beside himself.” (Mark iii. 21, 22, &e.) I would only remark in
passing, that the casting out of evil spirits seems to have been
viewed with more wonder by the people than any other of the
Lord’s miracles. They perhaps contrasted His power with the im-
perfect and abortive efforts of their own exorcists,

15. “ But some of them said, He casteth out devils,” &e. With
jneredible folly, as well as wickedness, they ascribed to the power
of the evil one miracles of the highest power on the side of good,
done with the express purpose of enforcing the highest righteous-
ness and goodness which God has ever revealed to His creatures.

16. “And others, tempting him, sought of him a sign from
heaven.” With equal folly demanding, as the highest credential
of His mission, that He should afford them a sign somewhere in
the region of the sky, and not on the surface of the earth.

17. “ But he, knowing their thoughts, said unto them, Every
kingdom divided,” &e. Every kingdom rent by internal divisions,

Issuing in civil war, is destroyed by such divisions; and everyCnr, XI] A HOUSE DIVIDED FALLETH. DOT

brought to desolation; and a house divided against a house
falleth.

18 If Satan also be divided against himself, how shall
his kingdom stand? because ye say that I cast out devils
through Beelzebub.

19 And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do
your sons cast them out? therefore shall they be your judges.
20 But if I ‘with the finger of God cast out * Exod. vii
devils, no doubt the kingdom of God is come upon z

you.

 

17. ‘* A house divided against a house falleth.” Some interpret this as meaning “‘ house

falleth against house,” when there is civil war. The Vulgate translates, domus supra
domum cadet.

house or family similarly divided cannot maintain its high position.
And, if Satan be divided against himself, so that he casts out his
own evil angels who maintain his power over the bodies and souls
of men, how can his kingdom be maintained ?

19. “ And if I by Beelzebub cast out devils, by whom do your
sons ?”’ &c. As if He said, I, by a power on the side of benevolence
and goodness, repeatedly cast out evil spirits, and your sons, in-
voking the Name of this God of all goodness, at times cast out the
same evil spirits, but far less frequently and successfully than I do.
If you allow their feeble efforts in this way to be by the power and
according to the will of God, why do you impute my far more
successful inroads on the kingdom of evil to the author of evil ?

‘* Your sons” cannot well mean the Apostles, as some suppose,
for they wrought solely under Christ and His Name. They can be
only Jewish exorcists, but not necessarily pretenders or cheats, as
the sons of Sceva. ce xix. 14.)

20. “ But if with the finger of God cast out devils,” &c. Notice
how the casting out of evil spirits by the Lord by the power of the
Spirit (Matt. x1. 28), or finger of God, as here, is the surest sign
of the presence of the kingdom of God. The Lord in saying this
must have believed in the reality of the evil world of fallen angels.
He could not have said this if His words and His actions respect-

ing possession by devils was only an accommodation to the igno-
rance of the times. (See my excursus on Demoniacal Possession
at the end of my volume on St. Mark’s Gospel.)oes

298 THE STRONG AND THE STRONGER. [Sr. Luxe.

21 ‘When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his
| Matt. xii. 29. goods are in peace:
a Recs 22 But ™ when a stronger than he shall come
Repo upon him, and overcome him, he taketh from him
all his armour wherein he trusted, and divideth his spoils.
n Matt.xii.30. 23 "He that is not with me is against me: and

he that gathereth not with me scattereth.

 

21. “When a strong man armed keepeth his palace, his goods
are in peace,’ &c. This, taken with the preceding context, seems
to mean that the power of Satan, the strong man, fully equipped
with all appliances of evil, is not destroyed by any internal division
in his kingdom, but by the Son of God, armed with all the power
of God, suddenly coming into his kingdom and taking from him all
by which he kept possession of his domain. This is true both of
the world and of the soul.

Satan’s power was destroyed in the world by the coming of
Christ in the flesh, and the setting up of His visible kingdom, the
Church. Then the Word of Christ went forth, conquering and to
conquer. ‘There was a power given to Christ’s servants which if
faithfully used would have rooted all idolatry and all falsehood
in religion, and philosophy, and morals, out of the world; but
because the servants of Christ did not faithfully use this power,
their success has been but too partial. And so with the soul. The
soul of the impenitent sinner is Satan’s stronghold, and its true
conversion is not owing to any struggle within it between cood and
bad principles—the good getting the better by their own strength,
but by the coming of Christ to it, regenerating it, renewing it,
taking all its faculties and powers, and turning them from the ser-
vice of self to the service of God.

Notice how the Son of God is the “stronger.” He is stronger
than any evil lust, or bad temper, or sinful habit, no matter how
inveterate. He is stronger than any evil opinion, or heresy, or
prejudice, no matter how deeply rooted; He is stronger than the
world. “Greater is he that is in you than he that is in the
world.”

23. “He that is not with me is against me: and he that gathereth
not with me scattereth.”’ There can be no neutrality in the war

between Christ and evil. Neutrality is treason to Christ. Tf a manCuap. XI] THE UNCLEAN SPIRIT RETURNING. 299

24 °When the unclean spirit is gone out of a man, he
walketh through dry places, seeking rest; and © Matt. xii. 43,

finding none, he saith, I will return unto my house whence I
came out.

Se

is not religious, his weight, whether he be conscious of it or not,
goes into the scale opposite to that of Christ. A neutral man—a
man who says, ‘‘I make no profession of religion ’—is of the world.
He is one unit more to swell the world’s power. He is often more
dangerous than an avowed unbeliever, or an opponent of what is
good. Let us remember that, so far from tolerating neutrality,
Christ does not even tolerate lukewarmness: “ Because thou art
neither hot nor cold, I will spue thee out of my mouth.”

“He that gathereth not with me scattereth.” Godet supposes
that this refers to the Jewish exorcists. Though seemingly on the
side of Christ, and against that of Satan, they were not so in reality:
for they enabled the adversaries to say that mighty works might be
done by those not belonging to Christ, and so that the Lord’s power
over evil spirits was no infallible sign of the truth of His mission.
But the saying is of far wider significance. It means that no one
can really uphold the cause of virtue in the world, if he attempts to
do it independently of the Christian faith.

24. ““ When the evil spirit is gone out of a man, he walketh
through dry places,” &¢e. This parable or illustration is almost
verbatim the same as that in Matthew xii. 48, the most noticeable
difference being the conclusion; the words, ‘‘ Even go shall it be
also to this wicked generation,’’ being omitted in St. Luke. I have
shown in my remarks on St. Matthew’s version of it, to which I
refer the reader, that it bears on the face of it a twofold application.
It applies, as the Lord distinctly says, to that evil generation. The
evil spirit of idolatry and neglect of God’s worship had been cast
out; but he had then returned with other evil spirits worse than him-
self. The spirit of idolatry itself had returned; but it returned in

the shape of the worship of the letter of Scripture, to the neglect of
its spirit, so that the very law of God was made void, and with him
came the evil spirits of hypocrisy—the most evil of all evil spirits,
of formality, of adultery, and fornication, which appears to have
prevailed then as grossly as in the semi-heathen times; of exclu-
siveness, so that they would deny to the Gentiles the very word of
life itself; of disobedience to parents; of false swearing; and, above_ ere. |

300 SEVEN OTHER SPIRITS. [Sr. Luxe.

25 And when he cometh, he findeth iz swept and gar-
nished.

26 Then goeth he, and taketh to him seven other spirits
more wicked than himself; and they enter in, and dwell
p Johny. 14. there: and ?the last state of that man is worse
Hebr. vi. 4. &

x. 26. han the first.
2 Pet. ii. 20. than the ‘

 

all, of the deadliest dislike of the holiness of God’s character, as set
forth in the Life and Example of His Son then dwelling amongst
them.

The second application is to the individual soul. The evil spirit
may be driven out in Baptism, or even ‘by a conversion sincere at
the time; but no pains are taken to invite into his place, or to
retain the Holy Spirit of God. Habits of prayer, or reading of
Scripture, or careful preparation for the reception of the Lord’s
Body and Blood are relaxed; and sin by degrees regains its
dominion, perhaps not in its first grosser forms, but in the form of
covetousness, selfishness, secret impurity, envy, evil-speaking, all of
these quite as deadly as gross, open sin. There is the form of god-
liness, but a complete denial of its power. So that this is a place
much to be pondered over by all who have begun well. Quesnel
remarks: ‘‘A converted sinner is a place which the devil has lost,
the weak sides and avenues whereof he perfectly knows, in which
he very often keeps a correspondence.”

Alford, in his “ New Testament for English Readers,” has another
application to the Christian Church, which, though in many respects
fanciful, and tinged by his ultra-Protestantism, nevertheless is
worth notice: ‘‘ Strikingly parallel with this [the application to the
Jewish Church]runs the history of the Christian Church. Not long
after the Apostolic times, the golden calves of idolatry were set up
by the Church of Rome. What the effect of the captivity was to
the Jews, that of the Reformation has been to Christendom [?]. The
first evil spirit has been cast out [perhaps in England, Scotland,
Holland, and parts of Germany]. But by the growth of hypocrisy,
secularity, and rationalism, the house has become empty, swept,
and garnished—swept and garnished by the decencies of civilization
and discoveries of secular knowledge, but empty of living and
earnest faith. And he must read prophecy but ill who does not see
under all these seeming improvements the preparation for the finalCuar. XI] A CERTAIN WOMAN. 301

27 “| And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a
certain woman of the company lifted up her voice, and said
unto him, * Blessed is the womb that bare thee, 4 ch. i. 28, 48,
and the paps which thou hast sucked.

28 But he said, Yea * rather, blessed are they * ate aie aT

ch. viii. 21.

that hear the word of God, and keep it. James i. 25.

 

27. “A certain woman of the company,” rather ‘fa certain woman from among the
crowd lifted,” &c.

development of the man of sin—the great repossession, when
idolatry, and the seven worse spirits, shall bring the outward frame
of so-called Christendom to a fearful end.”

The great lesson, then, of this similitude is that, under a seeming
improvement, there may be a far worse alienation from God.

27. “And it came to pass, as he spake these things, a certain
woman,” &c. This incident is variously placed by harmonists.
Greswell supposes that it took place at the same time that His
mother and His brethren came, interrupting Him (Matt. xii. 46-50);
and it is supposed that when this woman heard His mother named,
she broke out into this exclamation; but in common with a vast
number of incidents in the Lord’s life, it is impossible to fix its
place in a harmony. It is peculiar to St. Luke.

So far from derogating from the blessedness of the Holy Virgin,
the Lord by implication here declares it to be twofold. He did not
deny her blessedness in having brought into the world its Redeemer;
but He sets forth a higher than this, that of hearing the Word of
God, and keeping it. This was, in one sense, the highest blessed-
ness of the Virgin, in that it sets its crown on the first. If the thing
may be so much as imagined, it would not have availed the Virgin
to have brought Christ the Son of God into the world, if she had had
no part in Him spiritually; but not only blessed was she who
gave birth to our Lord and God, but “ blessed is she that believed,”’
“blessed is she that kept all the sayings of her Divine Son, and
pondered them in her heart.” (Luke i. 45; 11.19, 51.) In this, her
second and greatest blessedness, we can share; but it was through
her first blessedness that we can now hear the word of God uttered
by His Incarnate Son: and it is through the grace of that Incarna-
tion, of which she was the instrument, that we can keep it.302 THE SIGN OF JONAS. [St. Luxe.

29 4s And when the people were gathered thick together,
s Matt. xii. 38, he began to say, This is an evil generation: they
39,
seek a sign; and there shall no sign be given
it, but the sign of Jonas the prophet.
t Jonah i. 17. 30 For as ‘Jonas was a sign unto the Ninevites,
& ii. 10.
so shall also the Son of man be to this generation.

 

29. «Jonas the prophet.” So A.,C., later Uncials, almost all Cursives, some old Latin
(e, f, g), Syriac (Schaaf), some Cope. Ath. ; but “‘ the prophet” omitted in XN, B., D., L.,
some old Latin (a, b, ec), Vulg. (Cod. Amiat.), some Copt., &e.

29. “And when the people were gathered thick together, he
began to say,” &c. Why is the crowd of people so expressly men-
tioned ? Seemingly for this reason, that He desired that what He
was saying respecting the wickedness of the generation, and the
Queen of the South, and the Ninevites rising up in judgment against
it, should be diffused far and wide; so that when the time came, as
many as possible, taking warning from his words, should “save
themselves from that untoward generation.”’

“They seek asign.” This has evident reference to what is re-
lated in verse 16. The sign they asked was evidently a sign from
heaven. They made light of the miracles of healing; they said
that He cast out devils through the prince of the devils; nothing
would satisfy them except a ‘‘ sign from heaven,”—as Moses gave,
when he brought down the manna, seemingly from heaven; as
Elijah, when at his prayer God sent down the fire on the sacrifice,
apparently also from heaven.

‘No sign be given them, but the sign of Jonas the prophet. For
as Jonas was a sign,” &c. The Lord here alludes to His Resurrec-
tion, as we learn from St. Matthew’s account. The Resurrection of
Christ was His Spirit coming out of the unseen and eternal world,
and re-animating the Body. It was far more, then, than any bring-
ing down of either manna or fire from the lower region of the sky,
It was the Highest Power of the heaven of heavens bringing a soul
out of Paradise, and so changing the nature of the resuscitated body,
that it became from that time a spiritual body.

30. “‘ For as Jonas was a sign to the Ninevites, so shall also the
Son of man be,” &c. The resembiances between. the two signs are
remarkable. Jonas was a sort of piacular victim, his death accepted
in the place of the destruction of the crew of the ship; Jonas wasCuar. XI.] THE QUEEN OF THE SOUTH. 303

31 "The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment
with the men of this generation, and condemn 1 Kings x. 1,
them: for she came from the utmost par
hear the wisdom of Solomon ;

Solomon 7s here.

ts of the earth to
and, behold, a ereater than

32 The men of Nineve shall rise up in the judement with
this generation, and shall condemn jt: for *they * Jonah iii, 5,
repented at the preaching of Jonas; and, behold, a greater
than Jonas is here.

ee

dl. “ A greater than Solomon,” literally “« more than Solomon.”

cast forth from the jaws of death as the Lord was. Jonas was sent
to the Gentiles, and the Lord, after His Resurrection, became “a
light to lighten the Gentiles.” In both cases, as I noticed in my
comment on St. Matthew, the persons did not perform a wonder or
miracle as a sign, but were themselves the sign. And in both cases
they were a sign only to faith, for none of the Ninevites saw the
prophet’s deliverance from death, they only saw him after his de-
liverance, and none of the Jews saw the Resurrection of the Lord,
only a few chosen ones saw His Body after His Resurrection.

31. “The queen of the south shall rise up in the judgment with
the men of this generation,” &e. Either the Queen of Abyssinia,
or the queen of a district at the south-west corner of Arabia. The
Lord, the meekest of men, calls Himself greater, or more than
Solomon, the wisest of men; and yet, in the view of the Catholic
Church, there is no comparison between the two. The wisdom
of the one was that of a created being, given to him, and not his
by nature; the wisdom of the other was the Wisdom of God, from
Whom that of Solomon himself was derived.

52. “ The men of Nineve shall rise up in the judgment with this
generation,” &e. They repented at the preaching of a servant of
God, who, as far as we read, did no miracles, healed no palsied or
leprous persons, fed no multitudes, raised no dead, whereas the Son
of God did all these things, and rose from the dead, and sent His
Spirit. So that His messengers or representatives did greater

things, and yet the generation repented not.

Mark the graphic way in which the Lord describes the last judg-
ment, men not only raised up from the dead to be judged, but304 THE LIGHT OF THE BODY. (Sr. Luxe.

282 YNo man, when he hath lighted a candle, putteth 7

y Matt. v. 16. in a secret place, neither under a || bushel, but on

Mark iv. 21. i Sue :

ch, viii. 16. a candlestick, that they which come in may see
See Matt. Vv. :

I a the light.

+ Matt. v.22. 34 7The light of the body is the eye: therefore
when thine eye is single, thy whole body also is full of light;
but when thine eye is evil, thy body also is full of darkness.

33, <¢ Under a bushel,” or “ candlestick,” rather “ the bushel »__«¢ the lamp stand.”

34, «The light of the body.” D., most old Latin, Vulg., Copt., Syriac (Schaaf), read,
‘© of thy body.”

«Isthe eye.” So E.,G.,H., K., L., other later Uncials, most Cursives, Cur. Syriac,
Arm, ; but 8*, A., B., C., D., M., a few Cursives, old Latin, Vulg., Copt., Syriac (Schaaf),
read, “is thine eye.”

«« Therefore when thine eye.”
Vulg. Copt.; but retained by A., C., 1

‘¢ Therefore” omitted by N, B., D., L., A, old Latin,
ater Uncials, almost all Cursives, and Cur. Syriac.
rising up in the judgment to witness against those who had rejected
Christ.

33. ‘No man, when he hath lighted a candle, putteth it in a
secret place,” &c. This proverb, as it may properly be called, has
been twice before used by the Lord, once in the Sermon on the
Mount (Matt. v. 15), where it is evidently spoken with reference
to the Apostles; once before in this very Gospel (chap. viii. 16),
where it seems also to refer to the Apostles. Here, however, it
seems to be spoken by our Lord of Himself. He is the Light which
God hath lighted; and as God Himself has lighted Him for the
purpose of diffusing Divine Light, He will see to it that He shall
be put in a position to give light to the world. This was fulfilled
at His Resurrection and Ascension, and the consequent descent
of the Spirit.

34, “The light of the body is the eye: therefore when thine eye
is single, thy whole,” &c. Here the Lord seems to pass from Him-
self the Light to His entrance into the soul to give it light. The
light of the luminary, no matter how brightly it shines, is of no
avail, unless there be an organ through which it can shine into the
body. Ifthe eye, the organ for enlightening man, be clear, and all
its parts do their work, the whole body is full of light; but if the
eye be dimmed by films stealing over it, or if, in any other way, it
does not fulfil its functions, then the body is full of darkness; the
eye misrepresents objects so that they appear not in their proper
colours, or size, or place.Cuap, XI.] TAKE HEED, 305

35 Take heed therefore that the light which is in thee be
not darkness.

36 If thy whole body therefore be full of light, having no
part dark, the whole shall be full of light, as when +the
bright shining of a candle doth give thee light. 7 Gr. a candle

by rts bright
Shining.

 

35, 36. D. and some old Latin (a, b, ¢, ff, i) omit verses 35 and 36.

Now the soul has a spiritual eye, which is the conscience, or moral
sense ; if this eye be in a good and healthy state, then it allows the
light of the Lord to shine into it, and enlighten the whole soul with
the light of God; but if the soul’s eye be evil, if the conscience be
defiled or unhealthy, it vitiates the very light of Christ as it shines
into the soul. Take, for instance, every form of Antinomianism ¢
it apparently gladly weleomes into the soul the light of Christ as an
atoning sacrifice, but not as a sin eradicator; so that the very light
of Gospel truth is turned into darkness, for no darkness is greater
than the belief that Christ saves us in our sins, and not from them.
Again, what numbers nowadays teach that sin is not sin, 7.e., loses
its character of sin,in God’s children! whereas,the Apostle has warned
us very solemnly : ‘‘ Little children, let no man deceive you ; he that
doeth righteousness is righteous, even as he is righteous : he that
committeth sin is of the devil.”

35. “Take heed therefore that the light which is in thee be not
darkness.” Take heed that the light of Christ shining into thee
purify thee, fill thee with the love of God and of thy neighbour,
make thee peaceable, gentle, honest, and full of mercy and of good
fruits.

36. “If thy whole body therefore be full of light .... give
thee light.” This a difficult place. It evidently takes up the argu-
ment of the preceding verse, which makes the nature of the hight
within a man to depend in one sense on himself. It seems to mean
that if a man’s whole body or self be full of light, having no dark
places, the illumination will be like that of a very bright light or
lamp within, in the very centre of the room, as distinguished from
the light entering by a comparatively small aperture in one side.
In times before the invention of glass, the apertures to let in the
light must have been small, as the weather had to be excluded, so
that the most perfect illumination of an apartment would have
Ne306 YE MAKE CLEAN THE OUTSIDE. ([Sr. Luxe.

37 ¥ And as he spake, a certain Pharisee besought him to
dine with him: and he went in, and sat down to meat.

a Mark vii. 3. 88 And *when the Pharisee saw it, he mar-
velled that he had not first washed before dinner.
2 Hes xxiii. 39 >And the Lord said unto him, Now do ye

Pharisees make clean the outside of the cup and

 

been from a bright lamp in the centre. ‘If, then,” the Saviour
seems to say, “you see to it that the light shines well into you, and
is pure light unmixed with darkness, as that which comes from the
eye in its perfect state, then your whole interior shall be as per-
fectly illuminated with the light of truth as when a bright shining
candle leaves no dark corners, but illuminates the whole apartment
equally.” Whether this be the meaning or not, the true interpre-
tation of the passage must depend upon the fact that the illustra-
tion requires that a lamp is supposed to give the most perfect
illumination to the interior of a room.

This interpretation which I have given is perfectly consistent
with the fact that Christ Himself is the lamp within; so that we
have to see that Christ is within us. (2 Cor. xii. 5.)

37. ‘And as he spake, a certain Pharisee besought him to dine
with him,” &c. This incident is peculiar to St. Luke, but not the
discourse which the Lord delivers in the house. Much of this, if
not all, is to be found in Matt. xxii., which contains a much
longer discourse on the same subject, evidently delivered by the
Lord in Jerusalem. I do not see why these denunciations should
not have been repeated, and in the same words. The Pharisees
everywhere seem to have been of the same formal, hypocritical
character, and would require them as much in Galilee or Pera, as
in Jerusalem.

“To dine.” Rather, to take the morning meal—to breakfast.

88. “And when the Pharisee saw it, he marvelled,” &. On
another occasion the Pharisees brought this accusation against the
disciples. (Matt. xv. 1,2; Mark vii. 3.) I think the fact that the
Pharisee marvelled shows that he had not invited the Lord with any
malignant purpose.

39. “And the Lord said unto him, Now do ye Pharisees make
clean the outside,” &e. Ye cleanse yourselves externally by con-
stant washings of your hands, but ye take no pains about the puri-

i SRST Ee eS ee Re OPE SsCuap, XL] RATHER GIVE ALMS. 307

the platter; but your inward

part is full of ravening and
wickedness.

¢ Titus i, 15,
40 Ye fools, did not he that made that which is without
make that which is within also ?

4] “But rather give alms || of such things as ye 4 Is. iwiii, 7.

z Dan. iv. 27.
have; and, behold, all things are clean unto you. ch. xii, 33,
] Or, as you are
sie aoe able,

 

41. **Of such things as ye have,” rather “

of the things within,” 2.€., the food, Vulg.,
Veruntamen quod superest, date eleemosynam

fication of your hearts from envy, guile, malice, adulterous thoughts,
and covetous desires.

40. “Ye fools, did not he that made that which is without make
that which is within also?” If He made that which is without,
and ordained that it should be kept pure from ceremonial pollution,
did not He make that which is within, 7.e., the soul or spirit, and
ordain that it should be kept pure from the contamination of evil,
covetous, defiling thoughts, #.e., “ ravening and wickedness,”

41. “ But rather give alms of such things as ye have; and,
behold, all things,” &¢. Instead of “ such things as ye have,” the
words ought rather to be rendered, rather give alms of that which
is “‘ within the cup and platter,” #.c., of their contents, give food
and refreshment to those who need it, and behold all things are
clean unto you. This is one of those very many places which
assign to almsgiving (of course if practised for the approval of God,
and not for vain glory) an almost expiatory value. Thus this Gos-
pel (xvi. 9), ‘‘ Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of un-
righteousness, that when ye fail they may receive you into everlast-

ing habitations.” ‘‘Thy prayer and thine alms are come up for a
memorial before God” (Acts x. 4). ‘Come, ye blessed of my
Father, inherit the kingdom prepared for yous 2. 3. for I was an
hungred, and ye gave me meat” (Matt. xxv. 34, 35), “Charee
them that are rich, . . . . that they do good, that they be rich in
good works, .... laying up in store for themselves a good foun-
dation against the time to come, that they may lay hold on eternal
lite (1 Tim. vi. 17, 18). (Also Psalm xli. 1, 2; Daniel iv. 27 ; Matt.
v.7; vi. 8,4; Luke xii. 82, 33.) Godet paraphrases it well: “Do
you wish, then, that these meats and these wines should not be de-
filed, and should not defile you? Do not think that it is enough308 WOE UNTO YOU, PHARISEES.  [Sr. Luxe.

42 °But woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye tithe mint and

€ Matt. xxiii. rue and all manner of herbs, and pass over judg-

7 ment and the love of God: these ought ye to
have done, and not to leave the other undone.

fMatt.xxii.6. 43 ‘Woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye love the

oe uppermost seats in the synagogues, and greetings
in the markets.

s Matt. xxiii. 44, ® Woe unto you, scribes and Pharisees, hypo-

pl ay crites! for ye are as graves which appear not,
and the men that walk over them are not aware of
them.

 

43. C., D., Cursives 18, 64, old Latin (b, q), add ‘‘the first places (of reclining) at
feasts.”

44, ‘‘Scribes and pharisees, hypocrites!” So A., D., later Uncials, most Cursives,
some old Latin (b, f, i, q), Syriac (Schaaf); but these words omitted in XN, B., C., L., a
few Uncials, old Latin (a, ¢, e, ff2), Vulg., Copt., Syriac (Cureton), Arm,

for you carefully to wash your hands before eating ; there is a surer
means: let some poor man partake of them.”

42. “But woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye tithe mint and rue
and all manner,” &c. As if the Lord said: Ye are to be scru-
pulous in paying to God in His temple service, to the minister of
God, and to the poor, the utmost of their dues; but, with all this, ye
ought by constant prayer and watchfulness to cultivate within you
the spirit of righteousness and love. In the parallel passage in
Matthew, instead of judgment and the love of God, we have judg-
ment, mercy, and faith; but if men cultivate the love of God, that
love will necessarily be accompanied by mercy and faith.

43. “ Woe unto you, Pharisees! for ye love the uppermost seats
in the synagogues.” Some must have the uppermost seats, but
what the Lord here denounces is the love of such distinctions. The
office of teaching the Word of God ought to humble a man, seeing
that he has to set forth such holy truth, seeing that he is bound to
live to his teaching, seeing that he has to give account for every
word which he teaches. ;

‘‘ Greetings in the markets.” As St. Matthew explains it, greet-
ings such as Rabbi, Rabbi, denoting their high place in the the ocracy.

44, “ Woe unto you, seribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye
are as graves which,” &e. As the graves which had nothing to dis-Cuap, XI] YE LADE MEN WITH BURDENS. 309

45 Then answered one of the lawyers, and said unto
him, Master, thus saying thou reproachest us also.

46 And he said, Woe unto you also, ye lawyers! ‘for ye
lade men with burdens grievous to be borne, and i Matt. xxiii. 4.
ye yourselves touch not the burdens with one of
your fingers.

47 “Woe unto you! for ye build the sepulchreg * Matt. xxiii
of the prophets, and your fathers killed them.

48 Truly ye bear witness that ye allow the deeds of your
fathers: for they indeed killed them, and ye build their
sepulchres.

 

tinguish them polluted those who walked over them, so those who
came in contact with these pretenders to righteousness were morally
the worse for intercourse with them.

45. “Then answered one of the lawyers, and said unto him,
Master, thus saying,’ &. The Pharisees were a sect, but the
lawyers a profession. They were the authorized teachers and ex-
pounders of the law. They, by their teaching, kept up the autho-
rity of the traditional interpretations of the law which practically
made it void.

46. “And he said, Woe unto you also, ye lawyers, for ye lade
men with burdens,” &c. The Mosaic law itself was a hard burden,
at least so St. Peter said when remonstrating with the Pharisaic
party among the Christians ; he asks, “‘ Now, therefore, why tempt
ye God to put a yoke upon the neck of the disciples which neither
we nor our fathers were able to bear?” If, then, the law, pure and
simple, could be thus described, with what weight must it have
pressed down upon God’s people when the load of traditions was
added-to it!

From this place we gather the hypocrisy of the teachers. They
taught what they took no care to observe in their own lives.
Theophylact (quoted in Williams) says: ‘“ As often as the teacher
does what he teaches, he lightens the load, by offering himself for
an example.”

47, 48. “Woe unto you! for ye build the sepulchres of the pro-
phets, and your fathers killed them. Truly ye bear,” &c. This is
spoken in deep irony. It would have been an act of virtue to build
and adorn the sepulchres of prophets whom their fathers persecuted310 I WILL SEND THEM PROPHETS.  [St. Luxe.

49 Therefore also said the wisdom of God, ‘I will send
1 Matt. xxii. them prophets and apostles, and some of them
34
they shall slay and persecute:

 

and killed, if they were ready to welcome and listen to the prophets
whom God was then sending: but if, in like manner as their fathers
had done, they persecuted and killed the true prophets of their own
time, then they acted with most shameless hypocrisy. Their build-
ing of the prophets’ sepulchres could not be allowed by God or man
to be a repudiation of their fathers’ deeds; it must rather be taken
as approving such deeds. As Godet well puts it: ‘‘ By a bold turn,
which translates the external act into a thought opposed to its osten-
sible object, but in accordance with its real spirit, Jesus says to
them: ‘ Your fathers killed, ye bury; therefore ye continue, and
finish their work.’ ”’ ?

49. ‘‘ Therefore also said the wisdom of God, I will send them
prophets,” &c. This is understood as if it were a quotation
from the Old Testament, or from some lost prophetical book. Most
probably the latter. If the former, it must be a reminiscence of
2 Chron. xxiv. 18-22. So Alford; but if the reader refers to this
place, I think he will not consider it likely. There is a similar
passage, but not exactly the same, in Matt. xxii. 34; but there
the Lord assumes to Himself the sending of the “ prophets, wise

 

* There are enormous rock-hewn tombs yet remaining in the
neighbourhood of Jerusalem. My. Williams thus describes what
are now called “the tombs of the Prophets.” ‘Through a long
gallery, first serpentine and then direct, but widening as you ad-
vance, one passes into a circular hall, rising into a conical dome,
about twenty-four feet in diameter. From this hall run three
passages, communicating with two semicircular galleries in connec-
tion with the hall, the outer one of which contains in its back wall
numerous recesses for the corpses, radiating towards the centre hall.
No inscriptions or remains of any kind have been discovered to
elucidate the mysteries of these mansions of the dead.”” Dr, Thomp-
son, to whom I owe this extract, says: ‘“ The prodigious extent of
these quarries and tombs is one of the most striking indications of
a great city, and of a long succession of prosperity which the environs
of Jerusalem furnish.”Grav, Xi) IT SHALL BE REQUIRED. dll

00 That the blood of all the prophets, which was shed
from the foundation of the world, may be required of this
generation ;

ol “From the blood of Abel unto "the blood ™ Gen.iv.s.
of Zacharias, which perished between the altar Seay ed
and the temple: verily I say unto you, It shall
be required of this generation.

02 ° Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken pee ae

 

men, and scribes.” If they are the words of no inferior prophet,
but of the Lord Himself, then He here speaks of Himself ag the
“Wisdom of God.” Godet supposes that the Lord has in His mind,
and gives the sense of Prov. i. 20-81, “ Wisdom uttereth her voice,”
&¢.; but there is this difficulty, that throughout that passage Wis-
dom does not speak of sending any prophets or messengers, but of
speaking herself in her own person. So, on the whole, we must
consider them either the words of the Lord Jesus Himself, the
wisdom of God, or of some one of the numerous prophets whose
writings have not come down to us.

00. “That the blood of all the prophets, which was shed from
the foundation of the world,” &c. Because the truth and love
which was very partially set forth in the messages of former pro-
phets, was concentrated, as it were, in the words of Christ and of
His Apostles—because the credentials in the shape of miracles
wrought by former prophets were far exceeded by the Resurrection
of the Lord, and the great Pentecostal sign ; so that as that genera-
tion sinned against infinitely greater light, so they were visited by
a far more tremendous punishment. (See my note on Matt.
xxl. 35.)

‘* Zacharias.” No doubt the son of Jehoiada. Abel and Zacharias
seem singled out from the rest because their blood was especially said
to cry for vengeance. Thus Gen. iv.: “ The voice of thy brother’s
blood crieth unto me from the ground.” And in 2 Chron. xxiv. 29,
itis said of Jehoiada that when he was martyred by Joash, under
circumstances of the blackest ingratitude, he said, “‘The Lord look
upon it and require it.”

52. “* Woe unto you, lawyers! for ye have taken away the key of
knowledge .... ye hindered.” The lawyers, who claimed to be
the authorized interpreters of the law, by their traditions and falseale THE KEY OF KNOWLEDGE. [St. Luxe.

away the key of knowledge: ye entered not in yourselves,
|| Or, forbad. and them that were entering in ye || hindered.

53 And as he said these things unto them, the scribes and
the Pharisees began to urge him vehemently, and to provoke
him to speak of many things:

P Mark xii13. 54 Laying wait for him, and ” seeking to catch
something out of his mouth, that they might accuse him.

 

53. ‘As he said these things unto them.” So. A., D., later Uncials, almost all Cur-
sives, old Latin, Vulg., Syriac (Cur. and Schaaf), Arm., Aith.; but N, B., C., L., 33,
Copt., read, ‘‘ when he had gone out thence.”

54, “Seeking.” So A., C., D., later Uncials, almost all Cursives, old Latin, Vulg,,
&c.; but omitted by X, B., L., and a few Cursives, &e.

“That they might accuse him.” SoA., C., D., later Uncials, Cursives, &c.; omitted
by N, B., L., Copt., Ath.

expositions obscured its true meaning. ‘The true meaning of the
law was either (1) its literal, plain, common-sense meaning,
which would have convinced men of sin, and so make them ready
to welcome such an one as the Lord, Who engaged to deliver them
from the power of sin ; or (2) it meant the spiritual meaning which
still more directly set forth Christ as the hope of Israel. By
neither of these meanings did the Scribes themselves give the true
interpretation of Scripture, and they hindered others from perceiving
it, and so being prepared for the coming of the Christ.

53, 54. “ And as he said these things .... that they might accuse
him.” On no occasion apparently were they so exasperated at the
way in which he exposed their hypocrisy. This scene seems to
have taken place after He had left the house of the Pharisee. Their
frantic looks and angry gestures and vociferation seem to have col-
lected together the ‘‘innumerable multitude’? mentioned in the
next verse.Cuar. XI] AN INNUMERABLE MULTITUDE. 313

CHEAP Xa,

N *the mean time, when there were gathered together an
innumerable multitude of people, insomuch « Matt. xvi. 6.
Mark viii. 15.

that they trode one upon another, he began to

 

1. In the mean time, when there were gathered together ....
hypocrisy.” The following warnings—for warnings they all are (at
least to the 10th or 12th verses)—were all delivered by the Lord on
various occasions, and in most cases, with a different object in view,
which we shall draw attention to as we proceed. Indeed, this
applies to the whole chapter. Dean Burgon has an observation on
this well worthy of serious thought: ‘A strange circumstance it
certainly is that of the 59 verses which compose the present
chapter, no less than thirty-five should prove to have been delivered
on quite different occasions, and not in single verses either, but by
seven, eight, or even ten verses at a time. He must have a very
unworthy notion of the dignity of the Gospel, who can make light
of a fact lke this.... let us be well persuaded that over and
above the advantage to be derived from every passage so repeated,
considered in and by itself, there is a further use provided by its
repetition ; discoverable, however, only by him who will diligently
seek for it by minute comparison, exceeding watchfulness, and
patient thought.”

‘“He began to say unto his disciples first of all.”’ He spoke
directly to the disciples, but so that the multitude (called “‘ an in-
numerable multitude’) should hear and profit.

‘First of all.” By this He emphasized the warning against
hypocrisy as the most important of all, because, no doubt, the
leaven of hypocrisy was the most subtle and destructive.

‘‘ Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, whichis hypocrisy.” All
sects who, as a body, make a profession, avowed or tacit, of greater
or deeper religion than the majority, are in the greatest danger of
falling into this soul-destroying vice. The Pharisees, whose very
name implied separation, separated themselves and held themselves
aloof from the mass of the Jews as being stricter observers of theone BEWARE OF HYPOCRISY. [Sr. Luxe.

say unto his disciples first of all, » Beware ye of the leaven
b Matt.xvi.l2. of the Pharisees, which 1s hypocrisy.

 

law, and of that which was held in almost the same estimation as
the law, the body of tradition by which it was explained. Hvery
man amongst them who professed to be a sincere member of the
sect was bound to join with his fellows in making a stricter profes-
sion of obedience than the rest of the people, for such was the one only
reason for his existence as a Pharisee. But the strain of making
the inward life consistent with such an outward profession could be
kept up by a very few. The great majority made no effort to
cleanse that which was within, that it might accord with the cere-
monial cleanness of that which was without, and so there was an
ever-widening difference between the inner state of the heart and
the outward apparent sanctity: and this was the hypocrisy which
leavened the whole Pharisaic sect, and spread its noxious influence
far and wide over the whole nation.

This evil spirit is ever reappearing in the Christian Church, and
in all parts of it; particularly where a higher profession of what is
called Christian experience or spirituality is required for those who
would be members, or admitted to Communion. There is particular
danger of fostering this spirit in what are called class meetings,
if such meetings are held for the relation of Christian experi-
ence—each person being called upon to relate the dealings of God
with his or her individual soul. Persons thus called upon would be
more than human if they were not under the constant temptation
of concealing what is in the least degree discreditable, and of dress-
ing up what is ordinary and common-place ; and all this breeds
unrealty.

The clergy, I need hardly say, have constant daily need to realize
this warning of the Lord, for their very calling as ministers of
Christ requires a higher standard—a standard which may be
observed punctually in the outer life and neglected in the inner one
of secret prayer and devout meditation and self-examination.

At the same time, it must be remembered that though we must
constantly put Christians on their guard against this vice, this
must be done in general terms. To qualify (as Quesnel says) aman
to tax others with hypocrisy, he must be able to know the bottom of
the heart as Jesus did. We must remember that there may be, and
often is, very flagrant inconsistency, with little or no real hypocrisy.Cuap. XIL.] UPON THE HOUSETOP. dls

2 °For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed :
neither hid, that shall not be known. c Matt. x. 26.

3 Therefore whatsoever ye have spoken in dark- oh vii I
ness shall be heard in the light; and that which ye have
spoken in the ear in closets shall be proclaimed upon the
housetops.

 

2. “For there is nothing covered, that shall not be revealed;
neither hid, that shall not be known.” This saying is often repeated
by the Lord, and with different meanings. In Matt. x. 26 it is
said in deprecation of the fear of men. In another part of this
Gospel (viii. 17) it seems to refer to the spread or divulgence of all
and every part of the truth of God; but here it seems to form the
natural sequel to the solemn warning against hypocrisy. Secret
sins, secret selfishness, secret insincerity, shall all be exposed in the
full light of the coming of the Son of Man. So that if men would
only believe that the day is fast approaching when the secrets of all
hearts shall be disclosed, they would earnestly set to work to put
away all guile, all malice, hypocrisy, to be as pure in heart and
honest in intention as they desire to seem blameless in outward
life.

But though this application, as against hypocrisy, is manifesily
both true and necessary, yet the next verse seems to demand that
we consider these two verses as parallel to, and so having something
of the same significance as those in Luke viii. 16, 17. For we
read there :—

3. “ Therefore whatsoever ye have spoken in darkness shall be
heard in the light,” &e. Think not that anything ye say or do can
be permanently hidden. On the contrary, it shall spread and be
known far and wide. You will be put into such a position in My
Church (Luke viii. 16) that your least and most secret words and
actions shall be like the rays of a lamp diffusing light through the
whole Church. Or the Saviour may mean by the ‘“‘darkness”’ and
the secresy of the ‘‘closets’’ the comparative obscurity of their
present teaching in Galilee; and by “‘ the light” and “the house-
tops’ their proclamation of the truth in the great centres of haman
concourse and power, Alexandria, Athens, Rome.

The reader will, of course, remember that the houses in Syria
were flat-roofed, and the streets very narrow, so that, at a given316 YEA, I SAY UNTO YOU, FEAR HIM. [Sr. Luxe.

4 “And I say unto you °my friends, Be not afraid of
a: them that kill the body, and after that have no
Matt. x. 28. _ more that they can do.
ae ee? 5 But I will forewarn you whom ye shall fear:
Fear him, which after he hath killed hath power to cast into

hell; yea, I say unto you, Fear him.

 

5. ** Hell,” not “hades,” as in Luke xvi. 23, but ‘‘ Gehenna.”

signal, the roofs would be covered with eager listeners in numbers
far greater than could possibly be assembled in the streets below.

4,5. ‘“‘ And I say unto you, my friends, Be notafraid of them . . .
yea, I say unto you, Fear him.” The connection seems to be,
‘* What ye have spoken in secret shall be heard far and wide, and
it shall draw down upon you the bitter wrath of those in power.
They shall persecute you and put you to cruel deaths. But fear
them not. ‘They have done their worst when they have slain you.
All the indignities which they can inflict on your mangled bodies
will not delay for one moment the resurrection of those bodies in
the likeness of Mine. Fear them not, but fear Him Who has given
you to suffer on My behalf. Fear lest, through fear of men, you
fall away and deny Me; for whereas the wrath of your persecutors
extends only to your death, His wrath can extend through eternity.

“Fear him who hath power to cast into Gehenna: yea, I say
unto you, Fear him.” We have ventured to paraphrase this awful
place, simply for the purpose of showing how it carries on the
sense of verse 3; but, taken assetting fortha general truth, that all,
even those whom Christ calls His friends, must have the fear as
well as the love of God ruling in their hearts, it is above all eXposi-
tion, for no words even of the Lord are plainer. We can only
direct attention to the plain lessons it teaches, and to the extraordi-
hary seriousness and earnestness of the Lord in Saying it.

It teaches us that the highest favour of God does not absolve us
from the fear of God; for here Christ warns, not His enemies the
Pharisees and Scribes, not the fickle multitude, but his disciples—
those whose salvation was so far assured that He could say to them,
“Ye have not chosen Me, but I have chosen you and ordained you,
that ye should bring forth fruit, and that your fruit should remain.”
To these He says, ‘‘ I will forewarn you when ye shall fear.”

It teaches us also that in sinful beings, or in beings bearing aboutCuar, XII] NOT ONE FORGOTTEN. 317

6 Are not five sparrows sold for two || farthings, and not
one of them is forgotten before God ? || See Matt. x.

€
awd,

 

a remainder of sin as we do, the fear of God cannot altogether be
dissociated from the justice of God. We have to do with an exceed-
ingly just Judge, Who though He may not and will not condemn
us to condign punishment, has it in His power so to do, and the
Lord here tells us very plainly that our fear is to distinctly take
into account this tremendous power. Some may dislike this, but I
cannot see how else the Lord’s words are to be received. The slavish
fear which love casts out cannot be the true godly fear which the
Lord presses here upon St. John as well as on all else. No faith,
as far as I can see, can absolve from this fear, for the Apostle says:
“Thou standest by faith ; be not high, but fear” (Rom. xi. 20). In
fact, it is this fear which makes love to be holy reverential love, and
which saves faith from becoming forward and presuming.

And, then, as to the seriousness and earnestness with which the
Lord here inculcates this fear. It is scarcely paralleled in any other
of His sayings, ‘‘I say unto you, my friends, fear not them.” “TI
will forewarn you whom ye shall fear.” ‘‘Fear him.” ‘Yea, I
say unto you, Fear him.”

And yet the popular fanaticism of the day, out of the pretence of
honouring the finished work of Christ, pushes aside this fear,
preaches a Christianity in which it has no place, condemns those
who teach it, and brands as unsaved those who feel it. I need
hardly say that it is one of the characteristics of the Catholic
Church to put it in the foreground of her teaching.

And now the Lord, having taught His friends to fear, as emphati-
cally teaches them to “ fear not.”

‘*Are not five sparrows sold for two farthings, and not one of
them .... more value than many sparrows.” The providence of
God takes into full account the smallest matters as much as the
sreatest, for insomuch as the whole course of nature and of human
life is made up of an infinite number of small things, and all inter-
dependent, the providence of God would not be all-observing and
all-ruling, if it omitted anything, for the smallest omission might
put all things else out of gear, as it were.

But is there not a course of nature? Do not all things take
place in a natural order, according to (so-called) laws of nature ?
They may do, but this does not for a moment exclude God’s omni-318 FEAR NOT THEREFORE. (Sr. Luxe.

7 But even the very hairs of your head are all numbered.
Fear not therefore: ye are of more value than many sparrows.
f Matt. x. 32. 8 ‘Also I say unto you, Whosoever shall con-
Mark viii. 38. 2 :
2Tim.ii.12. fess me before men, him shall the Son of man also
1 John ii. 23.

confess before the angels of God:

 

presence, and superintendence, and control, and power of altering
such course, though He does not allow us to see how and when He
does so. This is the mystery of God’s providence. There is a
seemingly unbroken chain of cause and effect, and yet not one of
the men who deny God’s overruling providence would now be in
existence if it were not for that providence warding off death and
preserving life. Ifnot a single sparrow is now alive except by the
express will of God, no more is any human being; and if God
takes account of the hairs of our heads, much more does He of our
life, both temporal and eternal, and all things that affect either the
one or the other. Now, in view of all this, Christ says to the
Apostles, and through them to every one of God’s children, ‘‘ Fear
not.” Nothing can happen to you, no matter how trivial, except
as foreseen by Me and controlled by Me; and if you but commit
your way to Me and love Me, everything shall work together for
your good.

There seems a slight touch of irony in the words, ‘‘ Ye are of
more value than many sparrows.” Though all things are equally
controlled and ordered by God, all things are not of equal value in
His sight. That which He prizes most of all created things in this
world is the soul of the Christian, which has surrendered its will to
His, and desires to be the instrument of His purposes. Itis the
price of His Son’s Blood. It is the habitation of Hig Spirit, and
nothing can exceed its preciousness in His eyes.

8, 9. “ Also I say unto you, Whosoever shall confess . - - denied
before the angels of God.” The confession of Christ by the
Apostles was before the heads of their religion, the chief priests who
had crucified Him. It was before rulers and kings, before the
philosophers of Athens, the libertines of Corinth. Tt was the bold
unflinching avowal that the world was save
disgraceful death of a Jew, one of a nation regarded with pretty
much the Same contempt as they are now. They who made this

confession always made it at the risk of their lives. This confession

d by the cruel andCuar. XII] HE THAT DENIETH ME. d19

9 But he that denieth me before men shall be denied
before the angels of God.

 

of Christ is yet dangerous to life even in this nineteenth century.
No manin a Mahometan country, brought up in the national faith,
can embrace the Christian religion except at the risk of his life—at
least it was so a very few years ago.

In Christian England the confession of Christ has assumed a
different form, but it equally requires sincerity and courage to make
it: a Christian has now to profess the creating power of God

amongst Evolutionists, and the all-ruling providence of God in the

company of unbelieving Scientists. In some companies he has to
brave the ridicule attaching to the belief in miracles. In the society
of filthy-minded men he has to uphold the purity of Christ, and in
the society of worldlings he may be called upon to uphold the
rooted antagonism between the world and Christ. These may
seem very poor and mild ways of confessing Christ compared to
what our forefathers in the faith had to endure ; but they all try
the metal of the Christian. If he is faithful in confessing Christ in
these comparatively little matters, he may have a good hope that
God would, if called upon, give him grace to make a bolder and
more public and dangerous confession if it was laid upon him so
to do.

Such is the confession of Christ; and the reward answers to it :
“Whosoever shall confess me before men, him shall the Son of
man also confess before the angels of God.”

Before the angels of God,” @.e., before the court of God—before
His special ministers. Notice the extraordinary reality with which
the Lord here invests the unseen world of angels. To be honoured
before them and receive their applause infinitely outweighs the
contempt and persecution of a condemned world. It is to be
noticed that in the parallel place of St. Matthew (x. 32) the con-
fession on the part of the Saviour and His corresponding denial is
“before the Father.” This seems to show that the two sayings of
the Lord, though parallel, are different, and come from different
traditional sources. Neither of them could possibly have been sub-
stituted for the other.

10. “‘ And whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of man,
it shall be forgiven him: .. . not be forgiven.” Saul of Tarsus
spake very many blasphemous words against the Son of man, ‘.e.,320 TAKE YE NO THOUGHT. (Sr. Luxe.

10 And & whosoever shall speak a word against the Son of

« Matt. xii. 31, man, it shall be forgiven him: but unto him that
S25 Manet : ‘
98. 1 John . blasphemeth against the Holy Ghost it shall not
16.

be forgiven.

h Matt, x, 19. 11 "And when they bring you unto the syna-
Mark xiii. 11. :
ch, xxi. 14. cogues, and unto magistrates, and powers, take ye

no thought how or what thing ye shall answer, or what ye
shall say :

12 For the Holy Ghost shall teach you in the same hour
what ye ought to say.

 

against His claims to be the Christ, and even compelled others to
do the same, and yet it was forgiven him; but he had never seen
the Lord, he had never conversed with Him. He had never spent
so much as one day in His company. If he had had full opportu-
nity of knowing the goodness and holiness of the Lord and the
truth and genuineness of His miracles, and yet had pronounced
His goodness to be hypocrisy, and His miracles to be due to the
power of the evil one, then humanly speaking, there would have
been no hope for him. He would have come as perilously near to
the blasphemy against the Holy Ghost as we can predicate of any
human being. ‘‘ The sin which is for ever unpardonable, is not the
rejection of the truth, in consequence of a misunderstanding, such
as that of so many unbelievers who confound the Gospel with this
or that false form which is nothing better than a caricature of it.
It is hatred of holiness as such,—a hatred which leads men to
make the Gospel a work of pride or fraud, and to ascribe it to the
spirit of evil. This is not to sin against Jesus personally: itis to
insult the Divine principle which actuated Him. It is hatred of
goodness itself in its supreme manifestation ”’ (Godet).

11, 12, “And when they bring you unto the synagogues, and
unto magistrates, .... what ye ought to say.” Thus it is said of
St. Peter, when brought before the high priests and their council,
that he was “filled with the Holy Ghost” (Acts iv. 8), and of St.
Stephen that he was “full of the Holy Ghost” (vii. 55). The Holy
Ghost was needed, not so much for their own defence, as that their
judges and accusers should have the truth of Christ set before them
in a way which would either convince or convict them,Cuar. XI] SPEAK TO MY BROTHER. 321

13 4 And one of the company said unto him, Master,
speak to my brother, that he divide the inheritance with me.

14 And he said unto him, ‘Man, who made me ‘ Johnxviii. 36.
a judge or a divider over you?

 

13, “‘ And one of the company said unto him.” Wither “one out of the crowd (3% rou)
said unto him.” SoRN8, B., F., L., 33; or “one said unto him out of the crowd,” so
A., D., later Uncials, most Cursives, Vulg. (Cod Amiat), Sah., Copt., Syriac, &e,

This was a more absolute promise of the guidance of the Holy
Spirit than that which was given to them in the matter of their
preaching ; and naturally so, for in preaching they could choose
their time, and place, and audience; whereas, when taken before
magistrates, they had to answer for their lives before men of far
greater worldly wisdom than themselves. Again, in many cases,
such as that of Paul before Felix, they had skilful advocates learned
in the law hired against them, to whom they could oppose nothing
but what would excite prejudice and ridicule, and it seems meet that
both for the sake of themselves and of the truth they should in such
cases have a special and very unreserved promise of Divine help.

18, 14. ‘“And one of the company said unto him.... ora
divider over you?” ‘This was a very natural interruption; one of
the crowd, impressed with the wisdom of the Lord’s words, and the
authority with which he spoke, and having a grievance against his
brother, probably the head of the family, that he had kept him out
of his share in the inheritance, asks the Lord to arbitrate. His
request, and the answer to it, changes the whole subject of the
discourse; at least till verse 34. Hitherto it had been on the
confession of Christ; now it is upon the danger to the soul of all
love of this world’s goods—nay, even of all anxiety about them.
Commentators notice that the Lord’s answer exactly corresponds to
that given to Moses by one of the two Israelites he was desirous to
reconcile (Hixod. ii. 14): ‘Who made thee a prince and a judge
over us?” ‘* Then Moses was by anticipation assuming his office as
the ruler of a temporal kingdom, but this Christ refuses, because
His kingdom was not of this world.” I cannot but think that in

this case the Lord disclaims, on behalf of His ministers, all temporal
rule, such as that of the Bishop of Rome over the States of the
Church, the prince Bishops of Germany, and such offices of temporal
sovereignty as occupy the time and energies of His ministers with
XY322 BEWARE OF COVETOUSNESS. (Sr. Luge.

15 And he said unto them, *Take heed, and beware of
k1Tim.vi.7, Govetousness: for a man’s life consisteth not in

Ce

the abundance of the things which he possesseth.

16 And he spake a parable unto them, saying, The ground
of a certain rich man brought forth plentifully :

 

15. “‘ Covetousness.” So H., F., G., H.,S., &c., and most Cursives; but X, A., B., D.,
K., L., M., Q., R., and more than forty Cursives, old Latin, Vulg., Sah., Copt., Syriac,

&e., read, ‘‘ all covetousness.”

secular business. Still it may often be the duty of the office-
bearers of His Church to arbitrate in cases where they clearly see
their way to the establishment of peace in families or societies.

15. ‘And he said unto them, Take heed, and beware of
covetousness: . . . which he possesseth.’’ The meaning is some-
what difficult. Read in the light of the succeeding parable it
seems to signify that amongst the many things which a rich man
may possess he cannot reckon his life, because it may be required
by God at any time, and thus he loses every earthly possession
along with it. Or it may convey a general truth independent of
the parable, which is that a man’s life, either his present enjoyment
of life, or his true life, his eternal and spiritual life, does not consist
in the abundance of the things which he possesses. Let him amass
riches ever so much, even whilst he possesses them he may neither
enjoy them nor really profit by them; he is not certain of the
enjoyment of them for a single day ; whereas, if he does not set his
heart upon them, so as to tenaciously grasp and hold them, he may
make them his own for ever by being rich towards God. If he
parts with them now he shall find them hereafter.

16. “ And he spake a parable unto them, saying, The ground of a

certain rich man,”’ &e.

The groundwork of the parable with which

our Lord now enforces His warning against covetousness seems to
be found in the apocryphal Book of Ecclesiasticus. Indeed, the
resemblances, both verbal and material, are so striking that we can
hardly resist the conclusion that He either honoured that book by
taking His illustration from it; or that the Spirit which was with-
out measure in Him was also given to the Son of Sirach, that he
should give us what, if not to be appealed to for doctrine, is yet very
profitable indeed for “reproof, for correction, for instruétion in

a : ae :
righteousness.” The passage runs: ‘There is that waxeth rich byCuap. XII] I WILL PULL DOWN MY BARNS. 3238

17 And he thought within himself, saying, What shall I
do, because I have no room where to bestow my fruits ?
18 And he said, This will I do: I will pull down my barns,

18. ‘‘ My fruits.” SoX&, A., D., most later Uncials, several Cursives; but B., L., Xe;
some ten Cursives, Sah., Copt., Arm., Ath., read, ‘ my corn.”

his wariness and pinching, and this is the portion of his reward:
whereas he saith, I have found rest, and now will eat continually of
my goods: and yet he knoweth not what time shall come upon
him, and that he must leave these things to others and die”
(Heelus. x1. 18, 19):

“The ground of a certain rich man brought forth plentifully.” It
is not said that he amassed his wealth by hard or unfair means.
On the contrary, his profits arose from that over which he had
apparently no control—the extraordinary fertility of his ground.
If, however, that fertility was owing, under God, to himself, by the
skill with which he cultivated it, this was to his credit, and would
not be blamed by Him Who had laid it upon mankind to replenish
the earth and subdue it ; and had also said, “‘ Whatsoever thy hand
findeth to do, do it with thy might.”

17. “And he thought within himself, saying, What shall I do,

. where to bestow my fruits?” This was the beginning
of his sin—at least the first indication of his rooted covetous-
ness. He takes counsel with himself, how he is to preserve the
profits of his lands for himself and, as the sequel shows, only for
himself.

18. ‘‘And he said, This will I do: I will pull down my barns,
and build greater; ....my goods.’’ It seems never to have
crossed his mind—indeed, we may be certain that the idea never for
a moment suggested itself to him, “‘ If God has given so much to me,
what can I give to others? Ihave many more goods (aya6d) than
what I can enjoy myself, what more good can I do to my poorer
neighbours ?”” His conduct stands in remarkable contrast with
an eminent servant of God of the last century, who had an in-
come of some thirty pounds a year, of which he gave away three
to the poor; and when his income was doubled, instead of say-
ing to himself, ‘‘ What greater comfort can I procure for myself
by this increase of income?” he said, on the contrary, ‘‘I have
lived in great comfort, and in reality wanted nothing on my thirty324 EAT, DRINK, AND BE MERRY. (Sr. Luxe.

and build greater; and there will I bestow all my fruits and
my goods.

1 Eccles. xi. 9. 19 And I will say to my soul, !Soul, thou hast
I Core xv. 32. : S s :
James v. 5. much goods laid up for many years; take thine

ease, eat, drink, and be merry.

 

pounds, now I shall be able to give thirty pounds more to those in
distress.”

“And there will I bestow all my fruits,” &c. This man was a
landowner or agriculturist; for the Jews, at least those living in
Palestine, were not then a commercial nation. If the Lord had laid
the scene in England, He would probably have made a slight altera-
tion in the parable. He would probably have said: ‘‘ The business
of a certain rich merchant, or tradesman, was exceedingly profit-
able; ”’ or, ‘‘ The practice of a certain professional man, a physician,
or lawyer, was very extensive.”’ He would not have made such an one
talk of pulling down and rebuilding barns, but he would have
made the man speak to himself about investments, securities, per-
centages of interest, and such like, for these are the things which,
though the mention of them may sound vulgar, most assuredly
answer to the pulling down and building of barns in the Lord’s
time ; and if any man ever did, the Lord spake to the men of the
time and adapted Himself to their mode of life; and if there is to
be any yeality in what we build upon His words, we must do the
same.

19. “And I will say to my soul, Soul, thou hast much goods laid
up for many years,” &c. The guilt or the innocence of much of
this speech depends entirely upon the spirit in which it was said.
And the Lord tells us at the conclusion that it was said in a godless,
selfish spirit. It would have been perfectly right if he had said,
‘‘T have got not only a competency, but an increasing income. I
will devote no more of the time which God may give me to money-
making; I will rest and take my ease from this, and see what good
I can do with what I have already accumulated ;” but when he says
to his soul, “‘ Hat, drink, and be merry,” he says what any libertine
would say.

Though few Christians would say this even to themselves, is it
not what they secretly think and hope? “TI will now rest on my
oars. I will enjoy life. I can now afford this, that, or the otherCuar. XIL] THOU FOOL. \ 325

20 But God said unto him, Thow fool, this night || ™ thy
soul shall be required of thee: "then whose shall | Or, do they

require thy

those things be, which thou hast provided ? soul.
: m Job xx. 22.
& XxXvil. 8.
ese lie vie

James iy. 14,
n Ps, xxxix. 6,
Jer. xvii. 11.

 

indulgence.”” Now this rest or indulgence may be perfectly inno-
cent, but tosave the thought from guilt, it requires a distinct calling
to mind of the will of God with reference to ourselves, a committal
of our way to God, a thorough belief and acknowledgment that our
times are in His hand, that what He has given us is not for our-
selves only, but for our fellow members in Christ’s body, that the
secular life, even if lived in a godly Christian way is not the
highest life, and such things.

20. “ But God said unto him, Thou fool, this night thy soul shall
be required,” &c. ‘‘God said unto him.” It is asked how God
said this. Did Hespeak directly to this man, did He afford him a
presentiment, or a dream? But God may not have spoken to the
man at all so that he should hear Him. It may simply represent
God’s judgment upon the man, 2.e., upon his folly, and God’s will
that he should surrender up his soul to its account at once. Thus
God is represented as saying to the King of Assyria what He had
determined about him, though it never was intended to reach his
ears. (Isaiah xxxvii. 28, 29.)

‘Thou fool.” He was probably a man of much worldly prudence
and foresight, but inasmuch as he was alive only to his temporal
interests, and blind to his eternal ones, God Who inhabits Eternity
knew his extreme folly.

“This night thy soul shall be required of thee,” or rather, ‘‘ They
shall require thy soul of thee.” Theophylact (quoted in Trench)
has a remarkable passage upon this. ‘“‘ For like pitiless exactors of
tribute, terrible angels shall require thy soul from thee unwilling,
and through love of life resisting. For from the righteous his soul
is not required, but he commits it to God and the Father of Spirits,
pleased and rejoicing, nor finds it hard to lay it down, for the body
lies upon it as a light burden. But the sinner who has enfleshed
his soul, and made it earthy, has prepared to render its divulsion
from the body more hard: wherefore it is said to be required of
him, as a disobedient debtor that is delivered to pitiless exactors.”326 TAKE NO THOUGHT FOR YOUR LIFE. [Sr. Luxe,

21 So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, °and is

© Matt. vi. 20. not rich toward God.

ver. 33. 1 Tim. 4 ; Cake

vi. 18, 19. 22 4 And he said unto his disciples, Therefore
James ii. 5. :

P Matt. vi. 25. L say unto you, ? Take no thought for your life,

what ye shall eat; neither for the body, what ye shall put on.

“Then whose shall these things be which thou hast provided ?”’
By this question God seems to imply that he might have retained
them, or rather more than retained them—have received them again
in the other world with God’s abundant interest added to them;
whereas now he has lost them with respect of both worlds. He
can now take nothing away with him to the other world; and what
St. James calls the canker of his gold and silver unused for God,
*‘and their rust, shall be a witness against him and shall eat his flesh
as it were fire” (v. 8).

21. “‘So is he that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich
towards God.” That is, he is both to be stripped of every thing by
death at any moment, and to wake up in the eternal world poor
beyond expression, having no deeds of faith or love set against his
name in God’s books; whereas his poor neighbour, because rich in
faith, is “heir of the kingdom which God hath prepared for them
that love him” (James ii. 5).

Such is this parable. It is very awful in its reticence. It is not
said that he is taken to a place of punishment; nor is it mentioned
that his riches pass into the hands of a stranger. He simply lays
up treasure for himself, and loses all: whereas if he had been
unselfish—if he had, in the words of the Apostle, “done good, and
been rich in good works, ready to distribute, willing to communi-
cate’’—he might have laid up for himself “a good foundation
against the time to come”’ (1 Tim. vi. 17).

22. “And he said unto his disciples, Therefore I Say unto you,
Take no thought,” &. These precepts following seem not to be
said to the multitude, but to the disciples, t.e., to the twelve, or
those who followed Him as did the twelve. ‘“ They are conceived
in a higher tone of unworldliness than the parable which had just
been delivered to the people. They are not merely to beware of
covetousness, they are to ‘‘ take no thought [t.e.,
thought] for their life.” And so the words have a
cation.

no anxious
general appli-Cuap. XII] CONSIDER THE RAVENS. S25

23 The life is more than meat, and the body is more than
raiment.

24 Consider the ravens: for they neither sow nor reap;
which neither have storehouse nor barn; and ‘ God feedeth

them: how much more are ye better than the 4 Job xxxviii.
; 5 : 41, Ps. exlvii. 9.
fowls:

 

“Take no thought,’ rather be not anxious, or as we say,
“worried.” Archbishop Trench remarks that “ take no thought”
is a mischievous translation. “It sounds like an exaggeration of
the precept of faith, and by the help of assuming that it is so,
and the consequent impossibility of carrying out the precept, men
justify to themselves the whole extent of their unfaithful anxieties
and cares.”

Calvin makes a good remark upon the general application to all
Christians. ‘‘ Hach of us ought to labour as far as his calling
requires and the Lord commands, and each of us ought to be
led by his own wants to calling upon God. Christ does not forbid
every kind of care, but only what arises from distrust. ‘Be not
anxious, says He; that belongs to those who tremble for fear of
poverty or hunger, as if they were to be in want of food every
moment.”

23. ‘‘The life is more than meat, and the body than raiment.”
‘* He had forbidden them to be excessively anxious about the way
in which life might be supported, and now he assigns the reason.
The Lord Who has given life itself will not suffer us to want what
is necessary for its support; and certainly we do no small dishonour
to God, when we fail to trust that He will give us necessary food
or clothing; as if He had thrown us on the earth at random.”

24. ‘Consider the ravens: for they neither sow nor reap... .
better than the fowls?’’ In the parallel passage in St. Matthew,
the fowls of the air are mentioned. Here the ravens are particu-
larized, probably because of the words of the Psalmist, ‘‘ He feedeth
the young ravens which call upon Him.” It is said also that the
Lord speaks of the young ravens, as they are soon deserted by their
parents, and have more difficulty in procuring subsistence, because
they feed on flesh or carrion.

‘God feedeth them.” ‘There is no such thing recognized in
Scripture as “laws of nature,” by which the various creatures are328 CONSIDER THE LILIES. [Sr. Luxe.

25 And which of you with taking thought can add to his
stature one cubit ?

26 If ye then be not able to do that thing which is least,
why take ye thought for the rest P

27 Consider the lilies how they grow: they toil not, they

sustained. God is here and elsewhere represented to us as feeding
them Himself, ‘‘ He giveth food to all flesh.” He may employ
secondary means but He must Himself be present with these
secondary means, or they would not continue in action for a single
day. And in this respect the Bible is infinitely more philosophical
than modern books of science: for these books represent the present
state of things as carried on by laws themselves, whereas a law,
being an unconscious rule or limitation, can do nothing of itself. It
must be kept in action by a will, 7.c., an Intelligence, which con-
sidering the boundless field it has to occupy, we can hold to be
nothing less than the Supreme Will.

25. “And which of you with taking thought can add one cubit ? ”
There is some difficulty in settling whether our Lord here alludes
to the increase of the height of the body, or the increase of the
term of life. By no carefulness or thought, however intense, can
we add the smallest increase to our height; by no thought or care
can we add to our term of life when the time decreed by God for
our departure hence has arrived. Eusebius (quoted in ‘Catena
Aurea’’) seems to recognize both. ‘“Ifno one has by his own skill
contrived a bodily stature for himself, but cannot even add the
shortest delay to the prefixed limit of his time of life, why should
we be vainly anxious about the necessaries of life ?”’

26. ‘If ye then be not able to do that thing which is least, why
take ye thought for the rest ?”’ Our stature, or the term of our life,
trifling things though they seem, are predetermined by God—so
fixed that we cannot alter them in the least. If, then, all that we
are is so ordered by God, why cannot we resign ourselves to God
altogether, with the thought that He who has thus ordered our
stature and our allotted time here has ordered all things belonging
to us, so that if we but look to Him and do our duty, all will be
well both here and hereafter ?

27. “ Consider the lilies how they grow: they toil not, they spin
not.” The Lord’s argument requires that these should be the wildCuap. XII.] IF GOD SO CLOTHE THE GRASS. 329

spin not; and yet I say unto you, that Solomon in all his
glory was not arrayed like one of these.

28 If then God so clothe the grass, which is to day in the
field, and to morrow is cast into the oven; how much more
will he clothe you, O ye of little faith ?

29 And seek not ye what ye shall eat, or what ye shall
drink, || neither be ye of doubtful mind. l| Or, dive not

un careful
suspense.

28. “God so clothe the grass, which is to day in the field.” So A., most later Uncials

and Cursives, but &, B., L., A, &c., read, “If God clothe the grass in the field.”

lilies, the lilies of the field, as we read in the parallel place in St.
Matthew. As they spring up spontaneously, man, by his culti-
vation, has added nothing to their perfection. They are creations of
God on which He has lavished such splendour of form and colour
that Solomon’s jewelled robes were not to be compared to them,
and yet God has thus gorgeously clothed them for no apparent
purpose except to exhibit profuseness of beauty; they last but a
day, and the next day their withered stalks are gathered for fuel for
the oven. Not one in one million delights the eye even of a child;
and yet each particular one serves its purpose in creation. Hach
one is observed and its beauty noted by God—by Him Who num-
bers the grains of sand and the drops of dew—each particular one,
though never to be seen by man, is as perfect of its kind as if it had
been destined to adorn the temple of God.

28. “If then God so clothe the grass, which is to-day in the
field,” &c. Such are the lilies, and their lesson to. us is, that we
need take no thought for raiment. If God sees to it that the grass
which withereth and perisheth is clad so exquisitely, will He not
see to it that the bodies of those who commit their way to Him be
protected and preserved from shame ?

‘““O ye of little faith ’—little faith, not only in the Scriptures,
but in the lessons taught by the birds and the flowers.

29. “And seek not ye what ye shall eat, or what ye shall
drink,” &c. This does not seem to refer, as many take it, to the
quality of the food as if it meant seek not to live sumptuously ; but
rather, “be not anxious how ye shall procure your food.” The ye
is very emphatic.

‘‘ Neither be ye of doubtful mind.’’ The meaning of this word,330 FEAR NOT, LITTLE FLOCK. [Sr. Luxe.

30 For all these things do the nations of the world seek
after: and your Father knoweth that ye have need of these
things.

r Matt.vi.33. 31 47" But rather seek ye the kingdom of God;
and all these things shall be added unto you.
s Matt. xi. 25, 32 Fear not, little flock ; for Sit is your Father’s

good pleasure to give you the kingdom.

 

30. “All these things.” So A., D., K., M., &c., most Cursives, many old Latin (b, ¢,
f, i, 1, q), Vulg., Copt., Syriac (Schaaf); but XN, B., E., H., L., &c., thirty Cursives, old
Latin (a, e), Sah., Cur. Syriac omit “all.”

rendered here to “‘be of doubtful mind,” is uncertain. In the
Apocrypha (2 Macc. vy. 17, &c.), it seems to mean indulging lofty
imaginations. In a place in Josephus, however, where the adjective
is used (De Bell. Jud. i. 27, 8) it means “agitated with anxious
thoughts ;’’ and such signification seems best to suit the context
here: “‘ Be not agitated with uneasy, restless thoughts as to how
you shall live.”

30. ‘‘ For all these things do the nations . . . . and your Father
knoweth,” &e. As if He said, ‘‘ The Gentiles are anxious about
these things because God has not clearly revealed to them His
personal providence and care of them as a Father, whereas He has
revealed to you that He is your Father, and as a Father He
knoweth all your needs, and will see that they are supplied.”

d1. ““ But rather seek ye the kingdom of God; and all these
things shall be added unto you.” The kingdom of God in the
Person of the Lord had been found by them, and they had
preached it as at hand. And yet the kingdom of God has always
to be sought—always to be prayed for, as all Christians do when
they say, ‘‘ Thy kingdom come.”’ No one here on earth has fully
realized its extent and powers. Hach successive revelation of it
discloses wonders of grace and love which exceed all former ones.

32. ‘* Fear not, little flock ; it is your Father's good pleasure,” &c.
What means He by this “ Fear not’’? Evidently that they should
put away all fear respecting their daily wants. If it is God’s good
pleasure to give them the great gift of the kingdom, will He not give
them all things pertaining to the life which they must pass through
before they can come to the full enjoyment of the kingdom ?

‘Little flock.” The flock of Christ is always, compared to theCuar. XII] SELL—GIVE ALMS. 331

33 ‘Sell that ye have, and give alms; “provide yourselves
bags which wax not old, a treasure in he heavens ‘ Matt. xix. 21.

Acts li, 45. &
that faileth not, where no thief approacheth, iv. 34.
: u Matt. vi. 20.
neither moth corrupteth. ch. xvi. 9.
Je tim- vie 19s

 

world around it, a little flock. “ Many are called but few chosen ;
but when uhiey are all gathered together it will be “ an innumerable
multitude ’’ (Rev. vii. 9).

“It is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom.” He
had given it to them now; for He had given them to Christ and
Christ to them, and if alee continued faithful (some did not) He
would give it to them hereafter.

88. “Sell that ye have, and give‘'alms: provide yourselves bags,”
&e. ‘This, as compared with some modern teaching and exposi-
tions, is an astonishing inference. There is a tract upon this
text written by an Evangelical bishop in which this place is
is made to teach absolute confidence that if we have been once
in grace we shall be always in grace. Our ultimate salvation
is secured to us the moment we believe, but assuredly the Lord
draws no such lesson from the good pleasure of God to the little
flock around him. His inference is “‘ Sell that ye have and give
alms. It is your Father’s good pleasure to give you the kingdom.
Sell, give alms, provide yourselves bags in which your money will
always be secure, for they cannot have holes in them—a treasure
out of all reach of robbery and decay.”

This is one of those many places which teach us that there is a
real virtue in almsgiving, if it be done in sincerity and with a view
solely to God’s approval and the benefit of those to whom we give.
It follows up the teaching of the Sermon on the Mount, “ Blessed
are the merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.” “Let not thy left
hand know what thy right hand doeth; that thine alms may be
in secret, and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee
openly.” (See also Matth. xix. 21; Luke xvi. 9; Acts ii. 44, 45;
mAs ob Aimy. 793)

It is clear from these places that no one can be a faithful minister
of Christ who does not set forth in its integrity the truth contained
in these words of God. Too often are they deprived of all their
force by solemn cautions against self-righteousness and trusting in
almsdeeds, and so forth; whereas we may humbly hope that Godape

 

Doz TREASURE AND HEART. (St. Luxe.

84 For where your treasure is, there will your heart be
also.

Who gave us the good-will to part with our possessions, will also
see to it that the gift of this liberal mind be not a snare to us.

There can be no doubt but that this and similar precepts moved
the Pentecostal Christians to sell all that they had and hold all
things in common; but the question arises how far such counsels
of perfection are binding in their fulness upon Christians in all
ages. Godet has some very sensible remarks on this. ‘It must
not be forgotten that the kingdom of God at this period was identified
with the Person of Jesus and the society of disciples who accom-
panied Him. To follow Jesus (literally) in His itinerant ministry
was the only way of possessing this treasure, and of becoming fit
to spread itin consequence. Then, as we have seen, it was an army,
not merely of believers, but of evangelists, that Jesus was now
labouring to form. If they had remained attached to the soil of
their earthly property they would have been incapable of following
and serving him without looking backwards (ix. 62). The essentia
character of such a precept alone is permanent. The form in
which Jesus presented it arose from the present condition of the
kingdom of God. The mode of fulfilling it varies. There are
times when to disentangle himself, and practise Christian love, the
believer must give up everything ; there are other times when, to
secure real freedom, and be the better able to give, he must keep
and administer. When Paul thus expressed the Christian duty
‘“‘yossesing as though they possessed not’’ (1 Cor. vii. 80), it is
evident that all he had in view was the disengaged and charitable
spirit commended by Jesus, and that he modified the transient
form which this precept had assumed.”’

34. ‘“ For where your treasure is, there will your heart be also.”
Let a man for but a short time carefully watch the current of his
thoughts, and he will see how true this is. If, even in our prayers,
we constantly find our heart wandering to our farm, our estate, our
office or place of business, our condition, our favourite amusements,
it is a sign that we require to be converted from what is earthly to
what is heavenly. We have, to use the vulgar expression, no real
interest, no stake in the eternal kingdom of God. Bede writes
truly, ‘‘ Now this must not only be felt concerning love of money,
but all the passions. Luxurious feasts are treasures, also the sports
of the gay, and the desires of the lover.”Cuar. XII] . LET YOUR LOINS BE GIRDED. 308
30 “Let your loins be girded about, and 3 your lights
burning ; x Eph. vi. 14,
Sy IN : a bets eos
36 And ye yourselves like unto men that wait + Matt: eee.
for their lord, when he will return from then tos
wedding; that when he cometh and knocketh, they may
open unto him immediately.
3/7 * Blessed are those servants, whom the lord « Matt. xxiv.
when he cometh shall find watching: verily I say ’

 

At this point there is a complete change in the Scope of the dis-
course: hitherto it has been on covetousness, and the danger of
riches, now it is on preparation for the Lord’s second Advent, and
the necessity of our looking for the Lord from heaven.

35, 36. “ Let your loins be girded about, and your lights burning
- +. . open unto him immediately.’’ Here is an allusion to the
long flowing robes then worn, which required to be tucked up, and
the ends fastened under the girdle, if there was to be any freedom
for either labour or quick walking.

‘And your lights burning.” There seems an allusion to the
burning lamps in the parable of the ten virgins, but with this dif-
ference, that there the virgins wait outside to join in the procession ;
here the watchful servants wait inside, to answer the door the mo-
ment the Master knocks. In St. Matthew xxv., the Lord Himself
is the Bridegroom ; here, on the contrary, He seems to come home
from some wedding of one of His friends. Stier ingeniously ex-
plains the returning from the wedding as the returning from heaven,
where He is already holding the wedding feast ; but not in the ful-
ness and perfection of bliss and glory with which it will be held at
the time of the end. But this is inconsistent with the general tenor
of Scripture, which seems always to place the marriage feast as the
consummation itself. Better to take the marriage as symbolizing
any entertainment, and the main thought is that He is away at a
feast and will return.

37.- “ Blessed are those servants .... watching - - come
forth and serve them.” The figure used to express the high blessed-
ness of those found watching, that the Lord will gird Himself and
wait upon them, is a very surprising one, and must betoken an
honour and blessedness beyond all thought. There is a remarkable
foreshadowing of it in John xiil., where the same Lord is said to‘ Pe,
er

334 HE SHALL GIRD HIMSELF. [Sr. Luxe.

unto you, that he shall gird himself, and make them to sit
down to meat, and will come forth and serve them.

88 And if he shall come in the second watch, or come in
the third watch, and find them so, blessed are those servants.

 

have laid aside His garments and taken a towel and girded Himself,
and to have begun to wash the Apostles’ feet. But there is this
difference that in the first, the foreshadowing, the Lord is in a state
of humiliation, but then He will be in a state of glory. What the
reality will be we cannot somuch as attempt to conceive. As Stier
says, ‘“‘ Let no one contemplate it but when clothed in the pro-
foundest humility.”” But be it remembered that all the Lord’s acts
of humiliation for our sakes are comprehended in the first—the
taking upon Him our nature—in doing this He took upon Him the
form of a servant, and He would not take upon Him the form with-
out becoming the reality. All His life was a life of service to us.
He served us in the pain, the sorrow, the anguish He endured. In
submitting to the penalty of our sin He served us as our Sacri-
fice. In giving His Body to be eaten by us, and His Blood to be
drunk by us, He abases Himself to serve the deepest needs of our
souls.”

Cyril has a good remark on this girding. ‘‘‘He shall gird him-
self,’ from which we perceive that He will recompense us in like
manner, seeing that He will gird Himself with those that are
girded.”

38. ‘“‘ And if he shall come in the second watch, or come in the
third watch, and find,’’ &e. This seems as if the most meritorious
watching was that in the first watch. They who watched in the first
watch, as the early Church did, understood with most faith His own
words respecting the uncertainty of the hour of His return, that it
might be at any moment after His first departure; and so, imme-
diately after the disappearance at His Ascension, two angels pro-
phesied His apparently speedy return. But as the ages pass along
and the Lord’s coming is delayed, men’s faith in His speedy and
unexpected return grows dim and feeble; but this does not absolve
them from the duty of being ready to meet the Lord at any mo-
ment, and so He hints the possibility of a long delay; but this
delay will in no way affect the blessedness of those who die in a
state of preparedness.Cuar, XII] BE YE READY ALSO. 335

39 * And this know,

that if the goodman of the house had
known w

hat hour the thief would come, he would

Matt. xxiv.
have watched, and not have suffered his

43. 1 Thess,
house to v.2. 2 Pet.

iii. 10. Rey.
be broken through. iii. 3. & xvi. 15,
4() > Be ye therefore ready also: for the Son of » Matt. xxiv,

_ At oo KXy. 13)

man cometh at an hour when ye think not. Mark xiii. 33.
s : ch. xxi. 34, 36,

41 ¥ Then Peter said unto him, Lord, Speakest 1 Thess. + a

- 2 Pet. iii, 12,

thou this parable unto us, or even to all ? eee

SS ee

39. “ And this know, thatif the good

man of the house had known
what hour,’’ &e.

If the time of the attack by the robber had been
known men would have prepared for him, and been safe from his
depredation; but as he is known to be meditating a sudden and
unexpected attack on the house, there is nothing left but that they
should be always on the look-out. Now the Lord compares the
secrecy and suddenness of His coming to an attack of this sort
so He presses upon His disci
times.

40. ‘‘ Be ye therefore ready also:
an hour,’ &c.

Paani
ples the need of being ready at all

for the Son of man cometh at
From this and many other sayings and discourses
of the Lord, we gather that the duty of looking
the Lord’s coming at any time is an attitude of mind towards Him
distinct from, and over and above every other. We are not only
to believe, but to watch—not only to obey, but to watch—not only
to love, but to watch. We are to watch for Him, “ coming [accord-
ing to His constantly reiterated promise] in the clouds of heaven.”
We are not merely to watch, and be prepared for the day of our
death—for then we should be draughted out of this world, and go to
Him—but we are to be in a constant attitude of expectancy for an
unknown day, in which He will come out of the unseen state to this
world and to us. We are, therefore, to watch for, and be ready,
not for some dispensation of providence, however great, but for a
Person Who at His coming will put a stop to the present state of
things, and bring in the eternal kingdom of God. [For a full exa-
mination of what our watching for Christ’s comin g is, and what it
implies, see my notes on St. Matthew xxiv. 23-27 ; and on St. Mark
Xili. 24. ]
41. ‘“‘ Then Peter g
unto us,” &e.

for and expecting

aid unto him, Lord, speakest thou this parable
St. Peter naturally asked this because the discourseales or rh |

336 BLESSED IS THAT SERVANT. [Sr, Lux.

AQ, And the Lord said, ° Who then is that faithful and
cee ae wise steward, whom fis lord shall make ruler
1 Uor.iv.2. over his household, to give them their portion of
meat in due season ?

A3 Blessed is that servant, whom his lord when he cometh
shall find so doing.

a Matt xxiv, 44 ¢Of a truth I say unto you, that he will

make him ruler over all that he hath.

 

about covetousness was addressed to the disciples (verse 22). He
1ad spoken to them as “a little flock,” and then He bids them be
like unto men that wait for their Lord.

42. “And the Lord said, Who then is that faithful and wise
steward . ... meat in due season?’’ Why does the Lord give the
answer in theshape of a question ? Apparently because He is struck
with the difficulty of finding, amongst fallen sinners, one who com-
bines perfectly faithfulness and wisdom.

‘¢ Whom his Lord shall make ruler over his household.” This,
of course, does not mean the whole household, but each local por-
tion of it. All pastors, as St. Peter, the asker of this question,
tells us, have, ‘‘ To feed the flock of God which is among them.”
(iets. le 2,)

Notice how all Church rule proceeds from Christ, not from the
people.

‘‘To give them their portion of meat in due season.” Here the
wisdom of the pastor comes in as distinguished from his faithfulness.
He has to give to all their portion of meat in due season. He has
to see to it that he does not give the strong meat to babes; but he
has also to see that through ignorance, or negligence, or prejudice
he keeps nothing back, that in its proper place he declares the whole
counsel of God. (Acts xx. 27.)

43, 44. ‘“‘ Blessed is that servant ....rulerover all that he hath.”
He will make him ruler over all that he hath. Is this to be con-
sidered an hyperbole, because, if taken literally, there would be
many rulers over all that the Lord hath? We are to remember
that in various shapes this promise is repeated. ‘* How shall he
not with him also freely give us all things ?”” (Rom. viil.82.) ‘* All
are yours” (1 Cor. ii. 22). ‘To him that overcometh will I give
to sit with me on my throne” (Rev. iii. 21). The reward is toCuar. XID] MY LORD DELAYETH. 337

45 °But and if that servant say in his heart, My lord
delayeth his coming; and shall begin to beat the « Matt. xxiv.
menservants and maidens, and to eat and drink, o
and to be drunken ;

46 The lord of that servant will come in a day when he
looketh not for him, and at an hour when he is not aware,

 

us, in our present state, inconceivable, and that is just what the
Apostle says that it is, when he saith, ‘‘ Eye hath not seen, nor ear
heard, neither have entered into the heart of man the things which
God hath prepared for them that love him” (1 Cor. ii. 9).

Bede finds what he considers a suitable meaning i comparing
the merits and rewards of watchful servants (verse 3 ) and watchful
pastors. “For what difference there is in the merits of good hearers
and good teachers, such also there is in their rewards; for the one

whom when He cometh He finds watching He will make to sit
down ; but the others whom He finds faithful and wise stewards
He will place over all that He hath, that is, over all the joys of the
kingdom of heaven, not certainly that they alone shall have power
over them, but that they shall more abundantly than the other
saints enjoy eternal possession of them.”

45. “ But and if that servant say in his heart, My Lord delayeth
his coming,” &c. Notice that the beginning of unfaithfulness is the
putting away the thought of the nearness of the Lord’s Advent.
He who is faithful to this idea will keep in mind that he is only a
servant, and must be always employed about his Lord’s business,
for, not at some definite time, but at any moment, he may be called
upon to give account; the unfaithful servant, on the contrary, be-
gins to play the master. He begins to oppress the underservants,
and to live in self-indulgence.

46. ‘* The lord of that servant will come in a day when he looketh
not,” &c. Hither at the great day, or at death, or it may be by
cutting him off from the true vine, so that long before he leaves
this world his doom is finally sealed, and he is, as it were, both
dead and judged.

** Will cut him in sunder ’”’ seems to mean his irreparable destruc-
tion. Some commentators, as Alford, see a symbolical reference
to that dreadful sundering of the conscience and practice which
shall be the reflective torment of the condemned: but this can
Zthe injuries which they themselves have inflicted upon their fellows.

 

398 BEATEN WITH MANY STRIPES.  [Sr. Luxe,

and will || cut him in sunder, and will appoint him his portion

|| Or, cut kim with the unbelievers.

off. Matt. : i : :
xxiv. 51. 47 And ‘that servant, which knew his lord’s
f Numb. xv.
30. Deut. xxv.
9 > . . . . .

2 Jonn ix it; ing to his will, shall be beaten with many stripes.

xvii. 80. James g - eee TA :

sae ame AS £But he that knew not, and did commit

pees thines worthy of stripes, shall be beaten with few
im, 1. 15. o 2

will, and prepared not himself, neither did accord-

 

hardly be the meaning, because this cutting asunder is the man’s own
doing in this world.

‘Will appoint him his portion with the unbelievers.” Not with
the heathen, but with those who, having the Gospel of light pre-
sented to them, refused it, as loving darkness rather than light.
This place shows that the man was a believer, or the words would
have no point. It is one of those many places which teach us that
the term ‘“‘believer”’ is not by any means synonymous with true
Christian. Itis not the unbeliever, but the believer, who has to
make his calling and election sure.

47. ** And that servant, which knew his lord’s will.” Knew his
Lord’s will, ¢.e., by the ministry of the Church and the possession of
the Scriptures.

“And prepared not himself.” It isa mistakein the authorized Ver-
sion to insert “himself.” He has not to prepare himself only, but
to do an appointed work, upon which he must be employed when the
Master returns. (See Mark xiii. 34: ‘“‘ to every man his work.’’)

48. “ But he that knew not, and did commit things worthy of
stripes,’ &c. This appears primarily to refer to the heathen, who,
at the second coming of the Lord, will stand before Him for judg-
ment. How is it, however, that those who ‘‘ know not” are to be
punished at all? Evidently because their natural conscience, their
moral sense, if they had followed its leading, would have preserved
them from doing much evil, and led them to do much good.
(Rom. ii. 14, 15, 16 and 26.)

This place is exceedingly important as teaching two truths.

1. That no wrong-doers whatsoever will escape punishment.
Tenorance will not shield them, because it will be found that, no
matter how ignorant they have been, they have yet judged all
around them, and condemned, in others who have injured them,Cuap. XII] FEW STRIPES. d39

stripes. For unto whomsoever much 1s
be much required: and to whom me
of him they will ask the more.

given, of him shall
n have committed much,

 

2. But, in the second place, this passage teaches us that ¢]
is utterly false that God intends to inflict |
the next world, and that an eterna
that we can scarcely da

1e idea
out one punishment in
I one, and of a kind go terrible
re to contemplate it. That God can and
will inflict aionian punishment on the devil, and those men who
have persisted in rebellion against Him, and determinedly continued
in impenitence and unbelief, is certain ; but this place (Luke xii, 47)
most undoubtedly does not contemplate any such punishment.

The “few stripes” is, to my mind, totally incompatible with a
never-ending eternity of stripes, for such cannot be called few.

The Lord seems to have in His mind a punishment typified and
set forth in Deut. xxv., and not at the present time a punishment
typified and set forth by the valley of the Son of Hinnom (which
latter He unquestionably has set forth in Matt. v. 29, 30; xxv. 41),

Let no sinner, however, res ding this, imagine that the “few
stripes” will be light, and go itis of comparatively little consequence
whether, through grace, we avoid them or not. Look at the years
of suffering through disease or imprisonment which God in this
world allows His friends—those reconciled to Him—to undergo,
and then think what He certainly can and will inflict on wilful
sinners ; but, notwithstanding this, if we, in the very teeth of many
express Scripture assersions, insist upon it that God has, in the
world to come, precluded Himself from inflicting any punishment
except an eternal one, it seems to me that we go far to destroy
the Revelation of future punishment and reward which God has
given.

‘For unto whomsoever much is given ...askthe more.” All
human responsibility is grounded on this principle. We may, then,
be quite sure that God, in His apportionment of rewards and
punishments, will act according to that principle of justice which
He has Himself implanted within us. Only be it remembered that
He, and He only, knows the full consequences of sin, either in the
outward universe or in the heart. He, and He only, knows the
exact history of every man, what each one had at the first, how he
has retained it, improved it, or lost it; how each soul has dealt
with God and with itself.ee |

 

340 FIRE ON THE EARTH. [Sv. Luxe.

49 €*T am come to send fire on the earth; and what
h ver. 51, will I, if it be already kindled ?

 

49. “Tam come to send fire on the earth; and what will I, if it
be already kindled?’ The connection between the foregoing words
respecting wilful and ignorant sinners and their respective punish-
ments, and this verse is very difficult indeed to establish. I con-
fess I have nothing to offer upon it. It seems asif the Saviour was
wrapt in intense thought upon the changes which His coming
would bring upon mankind, and gave utterance to a soliloquy, of
which it seems absurd, as well as most presumptuous, to endeavour
to guess the mental cause.

‘‘T am come to send fire on the earth.’’ The ancients mostly
explain this of the fire of the Holy Spirit which would enkindle
human nature with the fire of Divine love. Thus Cyril: ‘‘ Now it
is the way of Holy Scripture to use sometimes the term ‘ fire’ of
holy and divine words. For as they who know how to purify gold
and silver destroy the dross by fire, so the Saviour, by the teaching
of the Gospel in the power of the Spirit, cleanses the minds of those
who believe in Him. ‘This, then, is that wholesome and useful fire
by which the inhabitants of earth, in a manner cold and dead
through sin, revive to a life of piety.” (‘‘ Catena Aurea.’’)

It has been explained by Moderns—Godet, for example, and after
him, the authors of the Commentary on St. Luke in the ‘‘ Speaker’s
Commentary,’’—of the divisions and heartburnings which the pro-
mulgation of the Truth occasioned: but surely the two opinions,
when carried out, coalesce. What occasioned the divisions but the
searching purifying power of the Spirit, making one of a family on
fire with the love of God, and leaving the other in the icy coldness
of his unrenewed nature, because he refused to be renewed ?

‘And what will I, if 1t be already kindled?” Thetranslation of
this place has occasioned much difference among critics. It is diffi-
cult to understand the meaning of the English translation. Alford
renders it, ‘‘ What will I, would that it was already kindled.” This
is substantially the same as that given by Cyril, ‘“‘ Our Lord was
hastening the kindling of the fire, and hence it follows, ‘And
what will I, save that it be kindled ?’”’ If thus translated this verse
forms a Hebrew parallelism with the text, at least with its latter
clause.Cuar. XII] NAY, BUT RATHER DIVISION, d41

S

00 But ‘I have a baptism to be baptized with; and how
am I || straitened till it be accomplished ! i Matt. xx, 22,

Ky] no : : s Mark x, 38.

Oo Suppose ye that I am come to give peace | Or, pained.
on earth? TI tell you, Nay; ' but rather division - See!

02 ™ For from henceforth there shall be five in Ee Miealy via 6)

ne : ohn vii, 43,
one house divided, three against two, and two &ix.16,&
e x. 19.

against three. m Matt. x. 35.

53 The father shall be divided against the son, and the
son against the father; the mother against the daughter,

00. “ But I have a baptism to be baptized with ; and how am I
straitened till,” &e. This baptism was His Passion and Crucifixion.
Till He had offered that Offering for the sins of the world, He could
do comparatively nothing. But when once it was offered the barrier
between heaven and earth, occasioned by the sin of man, was broken
down, the veil of exclusion was rent, and the Lord was free to
operate upon all mankind. Before the Crucifixion and Resurrection
the fire was pent up; after the Resurrection and Ascension it could
spread on all sides, and enkindle all within its reach. The old
translation, then, ‘‘ What will I, save that the fire be kindled,” ig
parallel to ‘‘ How am I straitened till it be accomplished ! ”’

d1. “ Suppose ye that I am come to give peace on earth?” &e,
It was natural to expect that the Lord would come to give peace,
seeing that He was described in prophecy as the “ Prince of Peace,”’
seeing that at His Birth the angels sung “‘ peace on earth,” seeing that
in His atoning work “righteousness and peace kissed each other: ”
for He has made peace through the Blood of His Cross. And yet
the primary effect of His coming and work must needs be division,
for the wisdom which is from above is first pure and then peaceable,
Its purity naturally rouses the opposition of the impure, which
opposition lasts as long as they continue in their impurity. So that
the first effect of the coming of the Gospel to the kingdom, the
society, the family, must be division, and the division will be first
and most bitterly felt in the household.

52, 53. “For from henceforth there shall be five in one house
divided . ... daughter in law against her mother in law.” This
was of frequent occurrence during the centuries of persecution, for
then Christians were not unfrequently betrayed to death by their
nearest relatives. And now many professedly Christiat .omes are342 WHEN YE SEE A CLOUD RISE.  [Sv. Luxr.

and the daughter against the mother; the mother in law
against her daughter in law, and the daughter in law against
her mother in law.

n Matt. xvi.2. 54 § And hesaid also to the people," When ye
see a cloud rise out of the west, straightway ye say, There
cometh a shower; and so it is.

 

rendered unhappy because the fire of divine love has seized upon
one in the household, and his or her godliness and zeal puts to
shame the lukewarmness or ungodliness of the rest. Where this is
so there must be every effort made to avoid needless offence, and to
present true religion under such an aspect that it may win rather
than repel. This saying of Christ is a prophecy, and is cited by
Chrysostom as witnessing to the Godhead and supernatural know-
ledge of Christ. ‘‘ Now hereby He declared a future event, for it so
happened in the same house that there have been believers whose
fathers wished to bring them to unbelief; but the power of Christ’s
doctrine has so prevailed that fathers were left by sons, mothers by
daughters, and children by parents .... But if He were mere
man, how could it have occurred to Him to conceive it possible that
He should be more loved by fathers than their children were, by
children than their fathers, by husbands than their wives, and they
too not in one house, or a hundred, but throughout the world. And
not only did He predict this but accomplish it in deed.”

04, ‘‘ And he said also to the people, When ye see a cloud rise out
of the west,” &c. In these verses the Lord uses a similar illustra-
tion to that which He had employed in Matthew xvi. 1-4, but
though similar as taken from the signs of the weather, it is not the
same or addressed to the same persons. On the occasion mentioned
in St. Matthew the Pharisees had asked from Him a sign from
heaven, and His answer implied that such sign if given, would do
them no good. They were accustomed to predict fine or rainy
weather from the signs in the sky. The signs of the political sky
were quite as distinct in predicting the near approach of the Mes-
sianic kingdom, and yet they could not see it. Why this? Because
of their insincerity, 2.e., their hypocrisy. If we are determined
upon any course of action, it is quite in our power to resist the evi-
dence of any sign which makes against it.

The Pharisees, and with them the majority of the Jewish people,Cuar. XIL] THERE WILL BE HEAT. 343

55 And when ye see the south wind blow, ye say, There
will be heat; and it cometh to pass.

56 Ye hypocrites, ye can discern the face of the sky and of
the earth; but how is it that ye do not discern this time ?

o¢ Yea, and why even of yourselves judge ye not what is
right ?

 

56. “Ye do not diseern.” So A., D., T, A, A, I, later Uncials, almost all Cursives,
most old Latin, Vulg., both Syriacs; but X, B., L., 33, Sah., Copt., /Ath., read. “‘ Ye do
not know how to discern.”’

were determined not to see the tokens of the Messiah in Jesus of
Nazareth. Their evil instincts led them clearly to see that if they
accepted Him they must give up their worldliness, their covetous-
ness, their exclusiveness, their formality, and become new crea

tures; and so they shut their eyes to the clearest proofs of His
Messiahship, and refused to see in such things as the departure of
the sceptre from Judah, the fulfilling of the weeks of Daniel, the
coming of the Baptist in the spirit and power of Elias, that this was
the very hour when the Messiah was to be expected. From the
rising of clouds, or the quarter from which the wind blew, they pre-

dicted the weather promptly and surely. It was only their double-

mindedness, 7.e., their hypocrisy, which prevented them from seeing

that what was happening to their church and nation, showed the

coming of the Christ to be at hand.

And so it may be with us, the time of the second coming may be
imminent, and the appointed signs very plain, but only to those
who have eyes to discern them. So it is written in the book of
Daniel, ‘‘ None of the wicked shall understand, but the wise shall
understand ” (xii. 10).

57, 58. “ Yea, and why even of yourselves judge ye not what is
right ? [For] When thou goest with,” &c. The Lord had been show-
ing them how they did not read the signs of the times, because of
their double-mindedness and hypocrisy. Now He urges upon them
the pressing need of repentance towards God, with a view to recon-
ciation with Him, from their own conduct in their proceedings
one with another.

This is a very important saying of the Lord. It may be con-
sidered to be the text or motto, or seed of such a book as “ Butler’s
Analogy.” Origen remarks upon it, ‘“‘Had it not been implantedSerre.

 

344 THE VERY LAST MITE. [Sr. Luxe.

58 4° When thou goest with thine adversary to the magis-
preaeeie. trae, “28 thou art in the way, give diligence that
p See Ps.xxxii, thou mayest be delivered from him; lest he hale
fees) | thee to the judge. and the judge deliver thee to
the officer, and the officer cast thee into prison.

59 I tell thee, thou shalt not depart thence, till thou hast

| See Mark = paid the very last || mite.

 

in our nature to judge what is right, our Lord would never have
said this.

58. ‘ When thou goest with thine adversary to the magistrate, as
thou art in the way,” &c. Who is the adversary here? It has been
variously explained as the Devil, as the Law of Moses, or the law of
God, as conscience, or as God Himself. Thus Godet, ‘‘ God is at once
adversary, judge, and officer, the first by His holiness, the second
by His justice, the third by His power.” A very beautiful applica-
tion of itis given by Augustus, “If thou sin the Word of God is
thine adversary. (John xii. 48.) It is the adversary of thy will,
till it become the author of thy salvation. But if thou maintain a
good will to thine adversary and agree with him (Matt. v. 25), in-
stead of a judge shalt thou find a Father; instead of a cruel officer
an angel taking thee unto Abraham’s bosom ; instead of a prison, a
Paradise. How rapidly hast thou changed all things in the way,
because thou hast agreed with thine adversary!”

59. “TI tell thee, thou shalt not depart thence, till thou hast paid
the very last mite.” It is assumed that this is impossible, and that
the man must continue in prison for ever; but I think that if the
Lord had meant this, He would have distinctly said it: for at times
He speaks of aionian punishment with fearful plainness. (Matt. xxv.
46; Mark ix. 48-49.) Ifthese were the words of a human judge they
would certainly imply, that not all who were imprisoned continued
there for ever, but that the length of the imprisonment would be
according to the amount of the debt.Cuar. XIII] THEY TOLD HIM OF THE GALILEANS. 345

CEL Abs Xehlel.

HERE were present at that season some that told him
of the Galileans, whose blood Pilate had mingled with
their sacrifices.
2 And Jesus answering said unto them, Suppose ye that
these Galilesans were sinners above all the Galileans, because
they suffered such things?

 

1, ‘‘ There were present at that season some that told him of the
Galileans.” There is no account in Josephus, the only Jewish
contemporary historian, of this massacre of the Galileans. The
oldest account of it is in Cyril of Alexandria (about 400 years after
it occurred) and runs thus: “‘ For these [Galileans] were followers of
the opinions of Judas of Galilee, of whom Luke makes mention in
the Acts of the Apostles, who said that we ought to call no man
master. Great numbers of them refusing to acknowledge Cesar as
their master were therefore punished by Pilate. They said also
that men ought not to offer to God any sacrifices that were not
ordained by the law of Moses, and so forbade to offer the sacrifices
appointed by the people for the safety of the Emperor and the
Roman people. Pilate, thus being enraged against the Galileans,
ordered them to be slain in the midst of the very victims which
they thought they might offer according to the custom of their law,
so that the blood of the offerers was mingled with that of the
victims offered.’ It is also conjectured that this interference of
Pilate in slaying these Galileans was the cause of his quarrel
with Herod, who resented his interference until a reconciliation
took place by his sending Christ to him as one under his own
jurisdiction.

2. “ And Jesus answering said unto them, Suppose ye that these
Galileans,’ &c. For the Lord to have answered in such words
implies that those who brought the matter under His notice held that
such a carnage in so holy a place, and whilst engaged in a religious
act, was a direct sign of the anger of God against men who had
committed no ordinary sin, and inquired of Him respecting its346 THOSE EIGHTEEN. (Sr. Luxe.

3 I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all
likewise perish,

4 Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell,
Oe, debtors, and slew them, think ye that they were || sinners
ch. xi. 4. above all men that dwelt in Jerusalem ?

© I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all
likewise perish:

 

3. “Likewise” [wcat’rws]. So A., later Uncials, almost all Cursives; but X, B., D
Cursives 1, 13, 33, 69, 181, 157, 209, read, “in like manner” [Sows].

5. “Likewise” [acatrws]. So X, B., L., M., Cursives 1, 29, 33, 71, 131, 244, 248, 251;
but A., D., later Uncials, almost all Cursives, &c., read, ‘‘in like manner” [éolws].

bliss

nature and guilt. Heat once, as was His wont, brushes aside all
mere speculation as to how God looked upon the matter and draws
the lesson, ‘‘ Except ye repent, ye shall all likewise perish.”

Did He mean by this word “perish” destruction in this or in
the eternal world? It is impossible to shut out an allusion to the
future punishment of impenitent sinners at the day of judgment.
But it is not at all improbable that the Lord’s words here are
prophetic of the fearful slaughter of the Jews at the taking of
Jerusalem—the city, be it remembered, being crowded with those
who had come up to one of the feasts and were not allowed to
depart, so adding to the horrors of the siege. And so in like
manner the impenitent Jews perished.

3. “T tell you, Nay.” Mark the authority of these words. He
speaks as if He knew the future lot of each one of those men who
miserably perished, and their character and deserts at the bar of
God, as well as the character and deserts of all those who perished
not. And He pronounces, as One who knew the secrets of God’s
judgment that they were not more guilty, and so their slaughter
was a surer indication of the doom which would overtake, not
grievous sinners only, but all the impenitent.

4. “ Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell,” &e.
They had brought before the Lord the case of men perishing whilst
performing religious services in the temple. He now reminds
them of another loss of life which apparently had very lately taken
place through a mere accident—the fall of a building—and He
evidently desires that they should look upon the two as of the same
character. Whether the cause of death is the cruelty and profanityCuar. XII.] HE SOUGHT FRUIT THEREON. O47

6 [He spake also this parable; *A certain man had a
fig tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and °Is.v.2.
og eee : Matt. xxi. 19.
sought fruit thereon, and found none.

of Pilate, or the fall of a building, it is all the same. We can gather
nothing from it respecting the greater or less guilt of those who
perished ; both died alike by the providence of God, but we can
and must gather from each the same lesson of the necessity of
repentance to every sinner.

6,7. “He spake also this parable; A certain man had a fig tree
planted in his vineyard,” &c. This parable very appropriately
follows upon the double warning which the Lord had grounded on
what had just then occurred, ‘.ec., the slaughter of the Galileans,
and the falling of the tower. “Except ye repent,” He had said,
“ye shall all likewise perish ;” but ye need not perish; ye are as a
fig tree planted in the vineyard of God. Hitherto He has looked in
vain for fruit. He is minded to cut it down as taking up room
which might be more profitably employed. But the judgment,
though threatened, is not yet executed. There is an Intercessor
Who is pleading for a longer respite in which He will bring to bear
upon it more labour and more means of grace. But this respite is
not a long one. Let it alone this year also. And if this day of
grace be neglected, then even the Intercessor will ask for the
removal of thetree. ‘‘ If not, then after that thou shalt cut it down.”

With respect to the interpretation of this short parable I cannot
help remarking that commentators who, in explaining other
parables, warn us not to insist upon giving a specific meaning to
every minute detail, in their exposition of this parable entirely
neglect their own advice, and insist upon taking notice of every
feature. Some, for instance, say that we cannot explain the fig-
tree as the Jewish nation, because according to the analogy of other
parables, the vineyard is the nation. But need the planting of the
fig-tree in the vineyard betoken anything more than the care taken
of the fig-tree that it should be planted in a place eminently calcu-
lated to make it produce fruit ? It is planted in a cultivated enclosure,
not on the road-side. The idea of the parable seems to combine
national and individualrepentance. The Lord had called all to re-
pentance, not only through fear of the judgment of the last day,
but because a terrific destruction threatened the nation. But

national repentance cannot be separated from individual. The848 WHY CUMBERETH IT THE GROUND? (Sr. Lugs.

7 Then said he unto the dresser of his vineyard, Behold,
these three years I come seeking fruit on this fig tree, and
find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground ?

 

nation is composed of units, and each unit must repent and be
reconciled to God. Each unit stands apart from the rest and must
be dealt with by God and man as separately as a fig-tree planted
among vines must be treated by itself. Much of the force of the
parable would have been lost if the Lord had made the owner look
for fruit from one vine amongst many vines, or from one fig-tree in
an orchard of figs. When God deals individually with any soul it
stands out from among its fellow souls such as a fig-tree in a vine-
yard stands out amongst the vines.

The fig-tree, then, is any member of the Jewish nation or Church,
who, being barren and useless, is taken to represent the whole.
The planter of the fig-tree is God. The vineyard in which it is
planted is the Jewish Church. The dresser of the vineyard is the
Lord Jesus Christ. The three years denote a sufficient time of
probation. Various explanations have been given of these three
years. Some think they mean the three years of our Lord’s
ministry, and the Lord in other places represents Himself as the
Son sent by the Father to receive of the fruit of the vineyard: but
in this case how are we to explain the one additional year, because
at least forty intervened between the Lord’s Ascension, followed by
the descent of the Spirit and the final execution of vengeance in the
destruction of Jerusalem. Ambrose makes the three years cover
the whole time of the dispensation. ‘‘ Behold these three years I
came seeking fruit. He came to Abraham, He came to Moses, He
came to Mary, that is, He came in the seal of the Covenant, He
came in the Law, He came in the Body.” Augustine understands
by them the times—of the natural law—of the written law—and
now of the time of grace. By those who explain it of the individual,
the three years are taken to be childhood, manhood, and old age.
But the unsatisfactoriness of all these explanations lead us to
understand the three years as signifying amply sufficient time, and
nothing more.

‘““Cutitdown; why cumbereth it the ground?” Itis remarkable
how frequently the grace of God is set forth as working on a com-
paratively small field or area, so that if a church or an individual
is unfaithful it takes up room which might be more profitablyCuar. XII.] LET IT ALONE THIS YEAR. o49

8 And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this
year also, till I shall dig about it, and dung it:

9 And if it bear fruit, well: and if not, then after that
thou shalt cut it down.

 

9. “And if not, then after that.” ‘After that” in the last clause in A., D., later
Uncials, almost all Cursives, old Latin, Vulg., and Syriacs ; but in the former clause, “If
it bear fruit after that,” in x, B., L., 33, 69, Sah., Copt., &c. Revisers translate “and if
it bear fruit thenceforth.”
occupied by some other Church or person. (See Matt. xxi. 41,
Romisad, 19, Reve i. 5.)

8. “And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year
also, till,” &e. “This year” seems to have nothing to do with
some remaining year of our Lord’s ministry, because as far as we
can see He applied by his preaching to the Jews no further declara-
tion of grace than he had done in the previous years. If it applies
to the period between Pentecost and the destruction of their city,
then “‘this year” cannot denote a year of twelve months, but must
signify a time in the counsels of God amply sufficient for all pur-
poses of His grace.

The “ digging about it” and “‘dunging it,” signifies the setting
up of the Christian Church, and its ample means of grace, and the
miracles, such as the gift of divers languages, and the extraordinary
multitude of conversions greater than those performed by the Son
of Man when living amongst men in the flesh.

Theophylact writes, ‘‘ The dresser is Christ who will not leave
the fig-tree cut down as barren, as if saying to the Father, Although
through the law and the prophets they gave no fruit of repentance, I
will water them with my sufferings and teaching, and perhaps
they will yield us fruits of obedience.” (Theophylact, in “‘ Catena
Aurea.’’)

The application to the individual soul is very easy and common
place, but withal, of overwhelming importance. Each and every
impenitent soul living without God, and bearing no fruits of righ-
teousness, is in danger of being cut down and cast into the fire.

There is One Who intercedes for each sinful soul. “ If any man
sin, we have an advocate with the Father,’ &. His intercession is

that it may be some time longer under His care. His care for it
will be shown in calls to repentance, in the discipline of afflictions
and distresses, and in the application of the means of grace.350 A SPIRIT OF INFIRMITY. [Sr. Luxe.

10 And he was teaching in one of the synagogues on the
sabbath.

11 {] And, behold, there was a woman which had a spirit
of infirmity eighteen years, and was bowed together, and
could in no wise lift up herself.

 

But this renewed season of grace is not for ever. It will speedily
come to anend. If then there be no return for all this loving care,
if there be continued barrenness, then even the Intercessor says,
“Thou shalt cut 1t down.”

One more remark. Let the reader notice that the fig-tree is not
condemned because it produced evil figs (Jer. xxiv. 3), but for its
barrenness: and so God looks for fruit, i.e., good works: He is
not for a moment satisfied with a mere respectable abstention from
sin. His Son was sent to “purify unto Himself a peculiar people,
zealous of good works.” (Titus ii. 14.)

10, 11. “And he was teaching in one of the synagogues on the
sabbath. And behold there,” &. ‘A spirit of infirmity.” Com-
paring this with the words of the Lord in verse sixteen, “a daughter
of Abraham, whom Satan hath bound,” it seems not unlikely that
the infliction under which she laboured arose from some sort of
possession. Ve read of deaf and dumb spirits, in which case the
influence of the evil spirit must have been on the nerves, by which
the soul or spirit acts on the ear in the conveyance of sound to
itself, and on the tongue by enabling it to make its thoughts known
to the outer world in articulate speech ; and this affliction, described
as ““ being bowed down” so that she could not lift up herself, was
through the nerves, by which the spirit acts on the muscles of the
body ; so that this may have been a case of possession, the evil spirit
acting on the secret links of connection between spirit or soul, and
body.

This evil spirit was in no way permitted to affect her religion,
for she came to the synagogue as a devout worshipper, notwith-
standing her infirmity.

The Lord, however, in speaking of Satan having bound her, may
merely refer to the fall brought on by Satan, through the effects of
which she suffered; and so He traces, as it were, all the evils of
humanity to their one root.

I may mention, in passing, that the use of the particular terms
translated, ‘‘lift up herself,” “thou art loosed,” and “madeCuar. XII] SHE WAS MADE STRAIGHT. Soil

12 And when Jesus saw her, he called her to hi
said unto her, Woman, thou art loosed from thine infirmity.

13 ° And he laid his hands on her: and imme- » Mark xvi 18.
diately she was made straight, and glorified God, “1”

14 And the ruler of the Synagogue answered with indion

a-
tion, because that Jesus had healed on the sabbath day, and

m, and

 

straight,” shews, amongst many similar instances, the medical

training of St. Luke. (See Hobart on “The Medical Language of
St. Luke.’’)

12. ““And when Jesus saw her, he called her to him, and gs

aid
unto her,”’ &e

- The Lord, it is to be noticed, does not wait to be
entreated, but seeing her miserable case, at once, without asking
respecting her faith, commences the work of healing. It has been
suggested that her attendance at the Synagogue might be taken as
& sign of faith, but when our Lord did demand faith, it was always
in His own power to work a miracle. Probably the woman being
bowed down, so that she could not lift up herself, did not see Him
till He called her.

13. “And he laid his hands on her, and immediately she was
made straight,” &¢. Another instance to be added to the many
others, in which He not only says the word, but brings His most
Sacred Person into contact with those whom He desired to heal.
Thus Cyril: ‘We should here answer, that the Divine power had
put on the sacred flesh. For it was the flesh of God Himself, and
no other, as if the Son of Man existed apart from the Son of God,
as some have falsely thought.” (“Catena Aurea.’’)

‘And glorified God.” Though many more than those distinctly
recorded as having done so, may have glorified God for some great
and miraculous benefit which they had received of the Lord, yet
mention is made of comparatively few who showed any gratitude
to God or to Christ. Thus of ten lepers cleansed only one gave
thanks, so that it seems that we must sorrowfully conclude that in
very few cases the spiritual accompanied the bodily healing.

14. ‘‘ And the ruler of the synagogue answered with indignation,
because that,” &c. The malignity and folly of this man seems
almost incredible. Instead of falling down and glorifying God that
So astonishing an act of Divine power and mercy had taken place
in his synagogue, and that he had been privileged to be present andTHOU HYPOCRITE.

said unto the people, ° There are six days in which men ought

cEx.xx.9. to work: in them therefore come and be healed,
d Matt. xii. 10.

Wario. and “not on the sabbath day.

h. vi. 7. & ¥ 7
eee 15 The Lord then answered him, and said,
ech. xiv.5. [how hypocrite, *doth not each one of you on the

sabbath loose his ox or his ass from the stall, and lead him
away to watering?

f ch, xix. 9. 16 And ought not this woman, ‘ being a daugh-
ter of Abraham, whom Satan hath bound, lo, these eighteen
years, be loosed from this bond on the sabbath day ?

 

15. ‘“‘ Thou hypocrite.” NX, A., B., L., later Uncials, about eighty Cursives, Sah., Copt.,
read, “Ye hypocrites ;” but D., many Cursives, and Syriacs, read as in Received Text.
2 -f > 3 ~ - 3

witness it, he, in his envy and wrath, speaks words which imply
that this afflicted woman ought to have absented herself from the
synagogue when the Lord was there, lest he should have compassion
on her and heal her.

15. “The Lord then answered him, and said, Thou hypocrite,
_...on the sabbath day.” Well might the Lord call him a
hypocrite, for his making zeal for the sanctity of the Sabbath a
pretext for his malignant opposition to Jesus. The Lord had simply
called to the woman, laid his hand upon her, and spoken a very few
words. This did not involve anything like the Sabbath breaking
of unloosing an ox, or an ass, and leading him to some place where
there was water, perhaps to some considerable distance. In fact, it
did not necessitate anything like the labour of opening the syna-
gogue chest, taking out the roll of the Scriptures, unrolling it, find-
ing the place appointed to be read, reading it, and returning it to
the officer.

‘¢ Be loosed from this bond on the sabbath day?” So far from
being forced to continue even a day longer in her wretched state of
premature decrepitude lest these hypocrites should be offended, the
Lord pronounced that the moment she appeared in His presence
her restoration should not be delayed. (See particularly my note
on Mark iii. 4.)

Why does the Lord mention her as a daughter of Abraham?
The reader will remember that in the case of Zaccheus, He said,
‘‘ Salvation is come to this house, forasmuch as he also is a son ofCuap, XIII] THE PEOPLE REJOICED. 3355

17 And when he had said these things, all his adversaries
were ashamed: and all the people rejoiced for all the glorious
things that were done by him.

18 4 Then said he, Unto whatis the kingdom § Matt. xiii.

: 81, Mark iv,
of God like? and whereunto shall I resemble it? 30. re

 

18. ‘‘ Then said he.” So A., D., later Uncials, almost all Cursives, Syriac (Schaaf),
&v.; but N, B., L., 1, 13, 69, 157, 246, most old Latin, Vulg., Sah., Copt., read, ‘‘ He said
therefore.”

Abraham.” This may mean that He was sent to the lost sheep of
the house of Israel, that the children must first be fed, and so that
this woman had a right on the ground of God’s covenant with
Abraham to receive blessing from Him: or it may mean that, as
was seen in her acknowledgment of the mercy, she was a true
child of Abraham by faith, and so had a double right to what she
had received.

18. ‘Then said he, Unto what is the kingdom of God like? and
whereunto shall I resemble,” &c. Whichever reading we adopt,
‘¢ Then said He,” or, ‘‘ He said therefore,” the Evangelist establishes
a connection between the enunciation of this parable in this place,
and what precedes. Now that which immediately precedes is not
the healing of the woman with a spirit of infirmity, but the effect
of it, which was the confounding of the Lord’s adversaries, and the
belief and consequent rejoicing manifested by all the people. This
brings before the Lord’s prophetic vision the spread of His kingdom
from the smallest beginnings. The Lord uses the grain of mustard
seed to illustrate this because there was a common proverb among
the Jews “as small as a grain of mustard seed.” The grain of
mustard seed was the seed, not properly of a tree, but of a garden
herb, but it grew with the rapidity of the growth of a garden herb
into a production of sufficient size to be called a tree, so that not
only did birds commonly rest in its branches, but these branches
could sustain the weight of a man: and it attained to this size by
vapid growth. It would not have served the Lord’s purpose to
have taken as an example an acorn, or any seed of a forest tree,
because such trees are of very slow growth ; the mustard seed seems,
in fact, the only one which would serve the double purpose of very
quick growth, like a garden herb, and the production of such
branches that it could rightly be called a tree.

AA354 A GRAIN OF MUSTARD SEED. [Sr. Luke.

19 It is like a grain of mustard seed, which a man took,
and cast into his garden; and it grew, and waxed a great
tree; and the fowls of the air lodged in the branches of it.

 

19. “A great tree.” So A., later Uncials, almost all Cursives, some old Latin (ce, f, q),
Syriac, Aith.; but x, B., D., L., old Latin (a, b, e, ff, i, 1), Cur. Syriac, Arm., omit
“* great.”

T have shown, in my notes on Matthew xiii. 31, and Mark iv. 31,
that the fact that the fowls of the air could take refuge in its branches,
is not one of the accessories, so to speak, of this parable, but of its
essence. The parable means that the Church shall grow from the
smallest of beginnings to be a place of refuge or shelter.

Williams notices in how many ways the Church was, at the first,
exceedingly small. It was small in numbers, being all contained
in one man, then in twelve, and though it spread rapidly, yet only
after more than three centuries, did its children become the majority
in the Roman Empire. It was small in point of wealth, very few
of the rich or respectable belonged to it, so much so that it was often
thrown in the teeth of Christians that they were principally
recruited from the slave, or working class: it was small in the
scandal of the Cross, Christians gloried in One Who had done no
mighty deeds as of a warrior, but endured the most shameful of
deaths, and their symbol was the form of the Cross on which He
was crucified; it was small in reputation, “ye see your calling,
brethren,” says one of its greatest teachers, “‘ how that not many
wise men after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble, are
called.” (1 Cor. i. 26.)

With respect to that which I believe is its leading teaching, that
it grows from the smallest beginnings to be a sheltering or proteot-
ing institution, this was fulfilled when the nations of the world
established it, and adopted its laws and principles as their own, but
it has ever been the only true refuge, not only for nations, but for
souls.

This was the view, mostly taken by the Fathers, of the birds
finding refuge in its branches. Thus Gregory: “In these boughs
iF the birds find rest, because holy souls raise themselves from earthly
. thoughts in the sayings and consolations of holy preachers, which

are the branches, and so find a respite from the weariness of this
life.” And Jerome: ‘‘ The branches of the Gospel tree, which have
grown of the grain of mustard seed, I suppose to signify the various-Cuap. XIII] If IS LIKE LEAVEN. S00

20 And again he said, Whereunto shall I liken the kingdom
of God ?

21 It is like leaven, which a woman took and hid in three
|| measures of meal, till the whole was leavened. Lp ge ett

doctrines in which each of the birds (or believing souls) takes his
rest.”’

20, 21. “‘ And again he said, Whereunto shall Iliken . . . whole
‘was leavened.”’ This parable is the necessary counterpart of the
preceding one, for whereas under the figure of the grain of mustard
seed the Church is set forth as a visible and widely ramified institu-
tion affording shelter to all who need it, so here it is described as
an invisible influence permeating all human society with which it
comes in contact.

The leading principle of this parable is, of course, the transform-
ing power of the leaven, but another most essential feature is its
working invisibly from within, for the woman hid the leaven in the
meal, The grain of mustard seed, as soon as it appears above
ground, grows visibly—the leaven works secretly, and has trans-
formed nearly the whole mass before its effects are visible.

With respect to the woman, she is taken to represent the Church,
but does not the Lord bring in the woman because making the
household bread is a woman’s work? Again, I do not think that
the three measures of meal have any particular mystical mean-
ing, but must be taken, as Chrysostom says, for an ample quantity
—a sufficiency. Archbishop Trench illustrates the influence of
the leaven by its secret, one might almost say, stealthy working, in
the Roman Empire before the time of Constantine. He cites “the
entire ignorance which heathen writers betray of all that was going
forward a little below the surface of society, the manner in which
they overlooked the mighty change which was preparing, and this
not merely at the first, but, with slight exceptions, even up to the
very moment when the triumph of Christianity was at hand.”

Thiersch, whose valuable work on the parables I have before
alluded to, relying on the fact that leaven generally signifies an
evil influence, explains it of the rapid corruption of the Church from
the first, in doctrine and discipline ; but in these parables the Lord
is setting forth the necessary principles of the Church, and He
would scarcely say that the Kingdom of God was like a corrupting256 ARE THERE FEW THAT BE SAVED? (Sr. Luxe.

22,» And he went through the cities and villages, teaching,
Ree 35. and journeying toward Jerusalem.
: 23 Then said one unto him, Lord, are there few
that be saved? And he said unto them.
eee 94 {Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for
34. & vii. 21. “many, I say unto you, will seek to enter in, and
Beene I. shall not be able.

 

24. Gate.” So A., later Uncials, Cursives; but X, B., D., L., 1 181, Arm., read,
“« door.”

influence, though He might, as in the parable of the tares, show
how an enemy had corrupted it. Here the reader will notice that
the Kingdom itself is likened to the leaven.

22. “And he went through the cities and villages, teaching, and
journeying toward Jerusalem.” This seems to indicate a very slow
and leisurely progress, taking on His way every place where men
were gathered together, and so where a congregation could be made
for His teaching. There is not a word said respecting the place
from which the journey commenced, nor the route which He took,
except its direction ; nor have we the name ofa single city or village
into which He entered. We should think, however, that these
cities and villages must have been those in which His way had been
prepared by the mission of the seventy (x. 1).

23, 24. **Then said one unto him, Lord, are there few . . . not
be able.”” What gave rise to this question it is impossible to say
—indeed after the notice of the extent of the Lord’s work in the
previous verse it seems absurd to ask. It is to be noticed, however,
that two similar questions had but a little before been put to the
Lord. One by St. Peter (xii. 41), “ Lord, speakest thou this parable
unto us, or even unto all?” another, when He was told of the
Galileans “ whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices.”
Our Lord treats each case in a precisely similar way. He does not
answer the question but throws it back upon the questioner, that
he himself should see to it that he is a faithful and wise steward—

\ | that he should repent if he would not perish at last—and here that
he should set about the salvation of his own soul in good earnest.

“‘ Strive to enter in at the strait gate: for many, I say unto you,
will seek to enter in,” &c. The man asks Are there few that be
saved ? This seems to refer to salvation at the last day; and the

er}Cuar. XIII.] LORD, LORD, OPEN TO US. 307

25 "When once the master of the house is risen up, and
™hath shut to the door, and ye begin to stand oe secre
without, and to knock at the door, saying, ™ Lord, mal Mette ace)
Lord, open unto us; and he shall answer and SAY n ch. vi. 46,
unto you, °I know you not whence ye are: Fete ae

& xxv. 12.

 

Lord seems to confine His answer to the final salvation ; so that it
seems to me to take from the terrible significance of the Lord’s
words, as Godet seems to do, to interpret them as meaning
entrance into the Messianic kingdom. The illustration seems to be
formed on the idea of some great house, or castle, into which men
enter, not by some grand and lofty portal, but by some narrow
postern gate (betokening humility and penitential sorrow) into
which if men desire to enter they must throw away all impedi-
ments, and the period of entrance is uncertain and may be closed
at any moment without warning given. Williams notices that in
the Second Book of Esdras there are very similar and striking
expressions, as a “ city full ofall good things, the entrances thereof
narrow, and set in a dangerous place to fall, like as if there were a
fire on the right hand, and on the left a deep water, and only one
path between them both.”

25. ‘* When once the master of the house is risen up, and hath
shut to the door,’ &&. There seems to be a difference between the
gate, or door, which has to be passed through with difficulty,
because of its straitness in this life, and the door of eternal blessed-
ness at last; but if we take the striving to enter in at the strait
gate to be self-surrender—the surrender of our corrupt wills to God—
then this is only available now on this side of eternity, God will
only accept it now. He will not receive our self-surrender at last
when it will be in a manner forced upon us, when the time of pro-
bation is over, and we begin to realize what we have lost.

‘Ye begin to stand without, and to knock at the door, saying,
Lord, Lord, open to us.” The reader will remember that all this
happened to the foolish virgins. They went to buy the oil, but it
was too late; they came to the door, and said these very words,
‘‘TLord, Lord, open to us;’’ and they received the same answer.

“‘T know you not whence ye are.” In the parable of the virgins the
answer is simply, “I know you not.” In the Sermon on the Mount
it runs ‘‘ I never knew you;”’ but, very probably, the difference is358 DEPART FROM ME. |Sr. Luxe.

96 Then shall ye begin to say, We have eaten and drunk
in thy presence, and thou hast taught 1m our streets.

P Matt. vii. 23. 27 But he shall say, I tell you, I know you

ver, 25. not whence ye are; 1depart from me, all ye
q Rss Vii. 8. k f euke it

Mati. xxv.41, workers of iniquity.

Ae §—= «28 * Where shall be weeping and gnashing of
Saal teeth, Swhen ye shall see Abraham, and Isaac,

S Matt. viii. 11.

 

to be found in a covert allusion to what comes after. “I know
you not of what parentage ye are. Ye are not of God—ye are not
the children of Abraham by faith.”

96. ‘Then shall ye begin to say, We have eaten and drunk in
thy presence, and thou hast taught,” &c. We can well imagine
many who knew our Lord after the flesh—many who sat down
with Him at such a meal as that of the Pharisee in Luke xi. 37,
saying these very words.

But it is impossible to read them without our minds reverting to
another eating and drinking, and that in the still more immediate
presence of Christ, even in the Eucharistic Communion. To plead
even this will be of no avail, because for what purpose is Christ
present in the Eucharist there and then to feed us with His Flesh
and Blood, but to separate and purify us from all sin, and to bring
about that He should dwell in us and we in Him. His presence
amongst us is for a purpose, and if we have not answered or
accomplished that purpose, even His Sacramental Presence will be
our condemnation.

Again, with respect to His teaching it is vain to plead that we
have heard His teaching either from Himself personally or from
His ministers, if it has not brought us to Him by a living faith, and
so He reiterates with terrible emphasis His former words.

27. ‘* But he shall say, I tell you, I know you not whence yeare,
depart from me, all ye workers of inquity.”” The last sentence of the
Judge has always respect to “doing.” They that have done good
to the resurrection of life and they that have done evil to the resur-
rection of condemnation. So to those, who, “‘ by patient continuance
in well-doing, seek for glory, honour, and immortality, God will
render eternal life,’ &c. (Rom. ii. 7.)

28. ‘There shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth . . . . your-
selves thrust out.’ The Lord here speaks to Jews, whose greatestCuap. XIII.] LAST WHICH SHALL BE FIRST. 359

and Jacob, and all the prophets, in the kingdom of God, and
you yourselves thrust out.

29 And they shall come from the east, and from the west,
and from the north, and from the south, and shall sit down
in the kingdom of God.

30 ‘And, behold, there are last which shall be * Matt. xix. 30.

2 xx.16,. Mark
first, and there are first which shall be last. x. 31.

 

names were those of Abraham, Isaac, Jacob, and the prophets. If
He had spoken to nominal Christians would He not have said:
‘* When ye shall see the apostles, the martyrs, the true servants of
God, the intrepid soldiers of the cross, the lights of the Church in
all ages, the true benefactors of mankind—when ye shall see them
welcomed to the joy of their Lord, and His face turned away from
you.”

29. ‘“* And they shall come from the east and from the west,” &c.
This prophecy was very rapidly fulfilled. The Ethiopian eunuch
came from the south; men living in the first century were con-
verted to Christ in Spain, in Gaul, in Britain.

About thirty years, or less, after this, a great servant of Christ
wrote, “From Jerusalem and round about, unto Illyricum, I
have fully preached the Gospel of Christ.” And it is so now;
you cannot take up a missionary journal, but you find men but a
year or two ago heathen, and given up to all wickedness, now re-
ceiving the Gospel with a simplicity, and carrying out its precepts
with a faith and fervour which puts to shame the coldness and
apathy of hereditary believers.

30. ‘“*And behold, there are last which shall be first,” &e. These
words are said by the Lord on at least three different occasions (here
and in Matth. xix. 30, and xx. 16). The “last” seems to represent
those who have only just received the word of God, and from them
little might be expected. The “first” means those who have been
educated in its principles, and from them God looks for much.
Thus Theophylact, ‘‘ We, as it seems, are ‘‘ the first”” who have re-
ceived from our very cradles the rudiments of Christian teaching, and
perhaps shall be last in respect of the heathen who have believed
at the end of life.’ And Bede, ‘‘ Many also, at first burning with
zeal, afterwards grow cold; many, at first cold, on a sudden become
warm ; many despised in this world will be glorified in the world360 HEROD WILL KILL THEE. (St. Luxe.

31 4 The same day there came certain of the Pharisees,
saying unto him, Get thee out, and depart hence: for Herod
will kill thee.

32 And he said unto them, Go ye, and tell that fox, Behold,
I cast out devils, and I do cures to day and to morrow, and
u Heb. ii.10. the third day “ I shall be perfected.

 

31. “The same day.” So later Uncials, most Cursives, old Latin, Vulg., Sah., Cop.,
Syriac (Schaaf), Arm., Ath.; but X, A., B., D., L., and about fifteen Cursives, read,
*« the same hour.”

32. ‘‘I shall be perfected.” ‘<I am perfected ” (Revisers).
to come: others renowned among men will, in the end, be con-
demned.’”’ (Catena Aurea.)

81. ‘The same day there came certain of the Pharisees... .
kill thee.” Was this enmity of Herod a fabrication on the part of
the Pharisees, desiring, for their own ends to scare the Lord from
Galilee, or was there any real ground for their caution? We must
take as our key to the significance of the advice, the fact that
Herod, so far from seeking the life of our Lord, earnestly desired
to see Him, in order that he might see some miracle done by Him
(Luke xxiii. 8). The rumour, then, was a mere invention on the
part of those who desired our Lord’s removal from a part of Judxa
where He was, humanly speaking, safe, and where He was daily
increasing in the affections of the people, to another district where
He would be more in the power of his enemies, the chief priests
and the rulers, or Sanhedrim.

82. ‘And he said unto them, Go ye, and tell that fox,” &c.
This enigmatical answer of our Lord has presented considerable
difficulty. At first it seems as if the particular Pharisees who had
bidden Him beware of the malice of Herod, were his emissaries ;
but if Herod sought to kill the Lord why should he give Him
warning to remove out of his territories? This has occasioned
some to interpret ‘‘ that fox” or rather ‘ this fox,” of the craftiness
of those present, as if He said, ‘‘ I know perfectly well your deceit,
but I am totally unmoved by it: whether your pretended sender
or you yourselves, desire my absence, I shall go on as I have done.
I cast out devils, and Ido cures to-day and to-morrow (meaning by
to-day and to-morrow a short but indefinite time), and the third
day (after I have finished the work allotted to Me by My Father),
I shall be, or I am perfected, that is, by My sacrificial Death.”Cuap. XIII.] © JERUSALEM, JERUSALEM. ob1

33 Nevertheless I must walk to day, and to morrow, and
the day following : for it cannot be that a prophet perish out
of Jerusalem.

34 *O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the x Matt. xxiii.
prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto a

 

33. ‘* Nevertheless I must walk to-day, and to-morrow, and the
day following ... Jerusalem.” This ‘‘ nevertheless’’ may allude
to His death. He should walk as He had done, 7.e., He should
exercise an active ministry of teaching and healing to the very
week, or almost to the day of His death. Williams paraphrases
the two verses, ‘“‘In executing this My last Mission, there is no
power of preventing me during this period, for this is not the place
of my departure. ‘For it cannot be that a prophet perish out of
Jerusalem. I have a journey to perform to Jerusalem, and there
will be an end ; out of Jerusalem there is no fear; that is the place
of all wickedness, and the consummation of crime, the law with all
its types requires that the great sacrifice should be in Jerusalem.”

34. **O Jerusalem, Jerusalem, which killest the prophets, and
stonest them,” &c. This apostrophe to Jerusalem is almost word
for word the same as that in St. Matth. xxiii. 37, and yet the latter
was delivered in Jerusalem, this in Galilee. It is exceedingly
difficult to believe thatit was uttered twice, and yet if only poured
forth once, the occasion in St. Matthew seems by far the most ap-
propriate. But still, the words which the Lord had just been say-
ing, respecting no prophet perishing out of Jerusalem, seem a most
fitting and natural introduction to the words as contained in St.
Luke. Godet even prefers the idea that it was said in Galilee.
“Were not the Pharisees whom Jesus had before Him, the repre-
sentatives of that capital. Compare v.17. There were Pharisees
and doctors of the law sitting by, which were come out of every
town of Galilee and Judea and Jerusalem. ... Such an apostrophe
to Jerusalem regarded from a distance has something about it
more touching than if He had been already within its walls.”

‘‘ Which killest the prophets, and stonest them that are sent unto
thee.” What a mystery of sin and evil. Jerusalem—the vision of
peace—the city of the great King, in whose midst was the palace
not for man, but for the Lord God; the place where God had set
His Name, where He dwelt between the cherubims, this JerusalemHOW OFTEN ! [Sr. Luxe.

thee; how often would I have gathered thy children together,
as a hen doth gather her brood under her wings, and ye would
not!

 

killed the prophets and stoned them which were sent unto her
from the very God Who dwelt in her, and this has she done for so
many centuries that the Lord said, ‘‘ It cannot be that a prophet
perish out of Jerusalem.” But such a city must have been long ago
given up by God. Not so, for here we have the Son of God
saying :—

** How often would I have gathered thy children together, as a
hen doth gather,” &c. As I said in my notes on St. Matthew, this
must not be taken as referring merely to former visits to Jerusalem,
such as those recorded in St. John, but to all the dealings of the Pre-
existent Word with them from the time of Moses to the time of the
Lord’s personal coming.

Keble has a wonderful sermon on this text, the mere name of
which is full of instructive warning of the deepest character, for it
is entitled, ‘‘ The Disappointments of our Lord.” ‘‘ Christ is God ;
He has the mind, the will, the power, the love, the omniscience of
God> ‘He that hath seen Him, hath seen the Father.’ Now as
Christ exhibits to us all other features of God’s character, so this
among them, that He respects our freedom. He sets bounds to the
power of His loving mercy in that He allows Himself to be rejected
by those whom He takes pains to save. When He says ‘How
often would I have gathered thy children together as a hen gathers
her brood under her wings,’ it is as if he should have said, ‘Do
you know how anxious I am, how much I care for your souls.
Look at those whom I have created to be mothers, how wholly
their minds are wrapped up, as it were, in their offspring. Look at
so common a thing as a hen with her young brood: she minds no-
thing but how to feed and how to defend them; though naturally
timid, she is bold as a lion when she sees a hawk coming; she
longs to gather them under her wings, and to feel that they are
safe.’ Such is Christ’s care for Jerusalem, but Jerusalem cares
neither for herself nor for Christ. ‘I would have gathered you,
but ye would not. Icame down from heaven and was made one of
you, that ye might be partakers of Me: but as far as doing good to
you is concerned, My coming has been in vain.’ ”’

35. ‘‘ Behold, your house is left unto you desolate.” If the wordCuap. XIII. ] DESOLATE. 363

35 Behold, your house is left unto you desolate: and
verily I say unto you, Ye shall not see me, until » Lev. xxvi.31,

: 2 : PS. six.
the time come when ye shall say, * Blessed 1s he 25. Is. i.7.
S Dan. ix. 27.
that cometh in the name of the Lord. Mic. iii. 12.
2 Ps, exviill. 26.
Matt. xxi. 9.
tees Mark xi. 10.
ch, xix. 38.
John xii, 13.

 

 

85. S* Desolate. omitted by, N, Au, Be, Ke, Dis Ro S.5)V-, Ws A. I, 80) Cursivess
some old Latin (e, ff2, g2, i), Vulg. (Cod. Amiat), Sah., Copt., Arm. ; but retained by D.,
B., G., H., M., U., X., A, 38, and many other Cursives, old Latin (a, b, e, f, g!, 1, q),
Syriac (Cureton and Peshito), some Copt., Atth.

‘‘ desolate? is to be retained, then the utter desolation shortly to
overtake the city and temple, and indeed the whole Jewish state of
things was principally in the Lord’s eye. If the word is to be re-
jected, the sense is yet very good and significant. “ Your home,
your state of things is left unto you. Deserted by God you are as
a church and nation left to yourselves, to the desolation of your
own pride, and wilful ignorance and selfishness.” We have a
wonderful comment on the whole passage in the eighty-first psalm:
‘‘T am the Lord thy God who brought thee out of the land of
Egypt: open thy mouth wide and I will fill it. But my people
would not hearken to my voice ; and Israel would have none of me.
So I gave them up unto their own hearts’ lusts, and they walked
in their'own counsels. O, that my people had hearkened unto me,
and Israel had walked in my ways! .. . I should soon have sub-
dued thine enemies . . . with honey out of the stony rock should
I have satisfied thee.”

“Verily, I say unto you, Ye shall not see me, until the time come
when ye shall say,” &c. Most probably the meaning is, “ Ye shall
not see me effectually, so as to be benefited by the sight”: in the
sense of the word “‘ seeing’ in John xiv. 19, “‘ The world seeth me
no more, but ye see me.”’ All Jerusalem saw Him, and shouted,
«Blessed is He that cometh in the name of the Lord.” But this
was to no purpose; it did not hinder them from crying, “ Crucify
Him.” Hereafter when the heart of the nation is turned to the
Lord, and they look for Him, and bless the signs of His appearing,
then He shall be seen again, and be seen for ever.WATCHED HIM.

CHAPTER XIV.

ND it came to pass, as he went into the house of one
of the chief Pharisees to eat bread on the sabbath day,

that they watched him.
2 And, behold, there was a certain man before him which

had the dropsy.
3 And Jesus answering spake unto the lawyers and Phari-
a Matt. xii.10. sees, saying, °Is it lawful to heal on the sabbath
day

 

3. “Is it lawful to heal on the Sabbath day?” So A., alllater Uncials, almost all Cursives,
some old Latin (a, c, ff, i, 1), Vulg., some Sah., Syriac (Schaaf), Arm.; but N, B., D.,
L., 1, 13, 69, 124, and some old Latin (b, e, f, q), some Sah., Copt., Cur. Syriac, add, “ or
not,” ‘‘ Is it lawful to heal or not P”

1. “And it came to pass, as he went into the house of one of the
chief Pharisees... watched him.’ This miracle is so very similar
in its circumstances to several others, especially that in the pre-
vious chapter (xili. 11, 17), that few remarks need be made upon
it. It appears that the Jews constantly gave feasts on the sabbath,
though one cannot suppose that such entertainments were allowed
to contravene the law of Exod. xxxv. 3, ‘‘ Ye shall kindle no fire
throughout your habitations on the sabbath day.”

2. “And, behold, there was a certain man before him which had
the dropsy.” Was this man invited, or placed by them before the
Lord with an evil purpose? Very probably ; though very likely
unknown to the sufferer. ‘‘ They watched him,” whether He
would observe the sufferer and heal him, for apparently the man
did not put himself forward, or ask to be healed. It is noticeable

that this is the only case in which the Lord heals the disease of
dropsy.

3. “ And Jesus answering spake unto the lawyers and Pharisees,
saying, Is it lawful,” &e. What did the Lord answer, because
apparently, no one had spoken? No doubt He answered their
secret thoughts. They were asking in themselves, will He heal
this man on this day, as He has healed many others. ‘Is it law-Car. XIV.] WHEN THOU ART BIDDEN. 069

4 And they held their peace. And he took him, and
healed him, and let him go ; 7

© And answered them, saying, » Which of you » Ex. xxiii, 5

eos
eut. XXii. ¢

shall have an ass or an ox fallen into a pit, and ch. xiii. 15,
will not straightway pull him out on the sabbath day ?
6 And they could not answer him again to these things.
7 4 And he put forth a parable to those which were bidden,
when he marked how they chose out the chief rooms ; saying
unto them,

=

8 When thou art bidden of any man to a wedding, sit not

down in the highest room; lest a more honourable man than
thou be bidden of him ;

 

ry

5. “An ass.” So N, K., L., X., I, 1,33, old Latin (a, b,c, i, 1), Vulg., Copt., Arm.,

, 43
ZEth.; but A., B., E., G., H., M., S., U., V., 1, A, A, about one hundred and thirty
Cursives, some old Latin, Sah., Cur, Syriac, read, ‘‘a son.” D. reads a “‘ sheep.”

ful to heal?” because, no doubt, it would entail upon the Lord
no labour: indeed, nothing like the labour and trouble of laying
the feast.

4, “ And they held their peace. And he took him, and healed
him, and let him go.” He did this no doubt by His word, and by
His touch when He took or laid hold of the man.

5, 6. ‘And answered them, saying,...could not answer him
again to these things.” It would be gross inhumanity to let an ox
or an ass continue in a state of suffering when you are at hand,
and able to help him; and it ismuch more contrary to all brotherly
feeling to allow a fellow creature to remain in a state of distress,
when, by a simple word, he can be restored to the enjoyment of
life.

7. ‘ And he put forth a parable to those which were bidden,...
saying unto them,” &c. This parable seems to have been spoken
at a different feast to that at which He had just performed the
miracle. The miracle requires a state of comparative quiet in
which they could watch the Lord. But here all would be bustle and
anxiety on the part of those present to secure the best places.

8. ** When thou art bidden of any man to a wedding, sit not
down in the highest room.” The “room”’ signifies, and should
rather be rendered “first couch,” or reclining place. All took|

366 FRIEND, GO UP HIGHER. [Sr. Luxe.

9 And he that bade thee and him come and say to thee,
Give this man place; and thou begin with shame to take the
lowest room.
¢ Prov. xxv. 10 °But when thou art bidden, go and sit down
oe in the lowest room; that when he that bade thee
cometh, he may say unto thee, Friend, go up higher: then
shalt thou have worship in the presence of them that sit at
meat with thee.

 

10. **Of them that sit at meat with thee.” So D., 1, A, A,I, later Uncials, most
Cursives, old Latin, Vulg., Goth., Arm.; but x, A., B., L., X., about twelve Cursives,
Sah., Copt., Syriac, AAth., read, ‘all them.”

place in one room, or apartment, in which the shame of him who
was made to give place, and the honour conferred on him who had
a better place assigned to him, could be observed by the whole body
of the guests.

9. “‘ And he that bade thee and him come and say to thee, .. .
lowest room.” Here it is implied that the host, coming in last,
brings with him the more honourable guests who had probably
been lodging with him, and for whom places near to himself had
been reserved, into one of which the person supposed to be addressed
may have intruded.

‘*To take the lowest room.’’ Because all the others were filled
up, and he was not sufficiently honourable or respectable to have
room made for him, which would have required some one’s degra-
dation to a lower place.

10. “ But when thou art bidden, go and sit down . . . worship in
the presence of them that sit at meat with thee.’ Does the Lord
here inculcate a feigned humility? By no means; He simply
enjoins that a man should mortify his individual pride and self-
seeking, an act of self-discipline which is in itself always whole-
some and beneficial. If the man deserved the lowest or a lower
place, then all was right; he took that to which alone he was
fairly entitled. If he took a place below what he was entitled to,
then he left it to the master of the feast, the only fountain of honour,
to redress matters. Anyhow he set an example of ‘“‘ minding not
high things,” but “‘in lowliness of mind esteeming others better than
himself.” It is to be remembered that in one of any real worth
the outward act would react on the inward spirit. The pride ofCuar. XIV.] THE HUMBLE EXALTED. 367

11 “For whosoever exalteth himself shall be 4 Job xxii. 29.

i PSE xville 27
abased ; and he that humbleth himself shall be Prov. xxix. 23.
Matt. xxiii. 12.
exalted. ch. xviii. 14,
James iy. 6,
1 Petey. 5.

 

spirit is fostered by outward self-assertion, and mortified by out-
ward self-abasement.

11. “For whosoever exalteth himself shall be abased; and he
that humbleth,” &c. With respect to the spiritual meaning of the
parable we have a remarkable key to it in the passage referred to
in the marginal references (Prov. xxv. 6, 7), “ Put not forth thyself
in the presence of the king, and stand not in the place of great
men. Far better is it that it be said unto thee, Come up hither;
than thou shouldst be put lower in the presence of the prince
whom thine eyes have seen.” The Lord must have had this place
in His eye; He must have meant Himself by the prince, for it was
He Who, as the wisdom of God, inspired this passage. All pride,
all self-assertion, all seeking of great things takes place in the pre-
sence of a King, the supreme Fountain of honour, the Lord of both
worlds, the present and the future. It is very necessary for us to
remember this, for the shame and confusion of face which in this
parable is represented as the lot of mortified pride does not always
follow it in this world. Self-assertion, self-assumption, forward-
ness, and boasting do not always entail a disgraceful fall upon the
man who displays them. The meek do not as yet ‘inherit the
earth ;’ though, if we can trust the words of Christ, they assuredly
will. David asks, how is it that ungodly men “ speak so disdain-
fully, and make such proud boastings.” Men who are ambitious
and self-seeking at times attain to the height of their ambition,
provided, of course, that they have other qualities, such as prudence,
cleverness, and perseverance. But a day is coming when the words
of Christ, with which the parable concludes, will be verified in the
case of every man. He Himself is the King before Whom all pride
displays itself, and before Whom it will be abased. And there is
the greater reason that He should do so, for when He had the
highest place in the universe next to the Eternal Father, He abased
Himself, and took the lowest place, even the place of the Cross and
of death, in order that He might exalt those who have “ followed
the example of His humility.”

The Judge at that day will remember and humble every act of368 HE SAID TO HIM THAT BADE HIM. [Sr. Luxz.

12 § Then said he also to him that bade him, When thou
makest a dinner or a supper, call not thy friends, nor thy
brethren, neither thy kinsmen, nor thy rich neighbours; lest
they also bid thee again, and a recompense be made thee.

pride, just as He will remember and reward every act of humility.
Does this seem too much? Not for One Who numbers the hairs
of our heads, and without Whose permission no sparrow falls, and
Who has engaged to bring every idle word into judgment, and
make manifest the secrets of all hearts. Should it not, then, be a
matter of prayer that God may humble us here rather than here-
after? It may be very bitter to have our pride mortified now, but
it will be a thousand fold more bitter to have it mortified before
men and angels, above all in the presence of the Prince Whom our
eyes have seen.

12. ‘Then said he also to him that bade him, When thou makest
a dinner or a supper,” &c. It may be that there had been some-
thing very pretentious about the banquet; so that a number of
euests of consideration were there, and these would naturally stand
upon ceremony and precedence.

When the Lord says, ‘‘ When thou makest a dinner or a supper,
call not thy friends,” &. His words are to be understood some-
what on the principle that His other words, ‘If any man will
come after me and hate not his father and mother,” &c., are to be
received. He really means that hospitality is first to be exercised
towards those who need it, because of their narrow means, and to
whom kindness of this sort is more pleasant, because they receive
such little notice from the world. These are to be first recipients
of our hospitality, and after them our friends, relatives, and neigh-
bours, who may be supposed to be able to ask us again. This, of
course, is directly contrary to the practice ofthe world. Now Ido
not think that we obey this injunction of the Lord by following its
spirit (as the saying is) rather than its letter. It has been said
that ‘“‘ The essence of the beatitude, as distinct from its form, remains
for all who give freely, to those who can give them no recompense
in return, who have nothing to offer but their thanks and prayers,”
and that ‘“‘relief, given privately, thoughfully, discriminately, may
be better both for the giver, as less ostentatious, and for the re-
ceiver, as tending to the formation of a higher character than theCuar. XIV.] WHEN THOU MAKEST A FBEAST. 369

13 But when thou makest a feast, call © the poor, the
maimed, the lame, the blind: e Neh. viii. 10,
14 And thou shalt be blessed ; for they cannot i

recompense thee: for thou shalt be recompensed at the
resurrection of the just.

open feast of the Eastern form of benevolence.” But it is to be
noticed that the Lord is not speaking of relief, é.c., of almsgiving,
but of hospitality. Itis one thing to send relief in a basket to some
poor person from your house, and quite another yourself to proffer
to the same person food upon your own table of which you and he
jointly partake. By relief or alms you almost, of necessity, consti-
tute yourself his superior; by hospitality you assume that he is far
more on the same level with yourself. Partaking of food in common
has, by the absolutely universal consent of mankind, been esteemed
a very different thing to the mere gift of food. Ifit be said that
such hospitality, as the Lord here recommends, is contrary to the
usages of even Christian society amongst us, we answer, “of
course it is;” but, notwithstanding this, it is quite possible that
the Christianity of our Christian society, of which we have so high
an opinion, may be very imperfect indeed, and require reformation,
if not regeneration, and that ‘‘ the open feast of the Eastern form
of benevolence” may be worthy of more imitation amongst our-
selves. Look at the extravagant cost of some entertainments:
viands set before the guests simply because they are costly and out
of season; and consider that the difference between a fair and
creditable entertainment and this extravagance would enable the
giver to act ten times more frequently on the principle which the
Lord inculeates, and for which he would be rewarded; consider
this, and the folly of such waste, not to say its wickedness, is
manifest.

As in the case of the parable of the good Samaritan and many
others, as, for instance, in that of the very last one He had given
utterance to, respecting taking the lowest room, so here the Lord
Himself has first set the example before He inculcates the precept.
‘*T appoint unto you,” He says, “a kingdom, as My Father hath
appointed unto Me, that ye may eat and drink at My table in
My kingdom.” He goes even further than this, where He says
respecting those servants whom He shall find watching, that at
His own table He will wait on them. (Luke xii. 37.)

BB370 ALL THINGS ARE NOW READY.  [Sr. Luge.

15 § And when one of them that sat at meat with him

f Rev.xix.9. heard these things, he said unto him, * Blessed

is he that shall eat bread in the kingdom of God.

g Matt. xxii. 2. 16 Then said he unto him, A certain man
made a great supper, and bade many:

h Prov.ix.2,5. 17 And sent his servant at supper time to say

to them that were bidden, Come; for all things are now ready.

 

15, 16, 17. “And when one of them that sat at meat with him
heard these things,” &c. The man who made this exclamation
seems to have been moved by the words of the promise, that those
who extend their hospitality to such as cannot recompense them in
this world shall be abundantly rewarded on the Day of the Resur-
rection. He seems to have uttered the words in a self-satisfied
spirit—he recalled, perhaps, some works of charity or almsgiving
which he had done, and he felt sure that such as he could not miss
receiving the final recompense.

Our Lord’s parable was uttered to convince him, and such self-
satisfied Jews as were like him, that before he could eat bread in the
kingdom of God he must accept an invitation which numbers like
himself, indeed, the vast bulk of his countrymen, might and would
reject. The kingdom of God in which he must eat bread, was not
wholly in the future, though its final consummation might be long
delayed. It wasa present reality, at least it was a closely impending
reality. Inaveryshort time, perhaps in two orthree months, certainly
within that year, he and his fellow-countrymen would be invited to
enter, and take their places at the feast, i.¢., they would be invited
to enter into the Church of Christ. They would be invited to accept
Him as the Christ, to be washed in the Blood of His all-atoning
Sacrifice, and through this to receive a gift of the Holy Ghost, such
as men had never received before. They would be invited to be bap-
tized unto His mystical Body, and to eat His Flesh and drink His
Blood, so that He should dwellin them and they in Him. Through
the reception of the Catholic faith they would be invited to enter-
tain the highest conceivable views of the Godhead, and through
instruction in the Life of Christ to have before them as their ex-
ample the highest pattern of holiness, and through Christian wor-
ship, especially the Eucharistic oblation, they would join in that of
which all their previous worship had been but the shadow.Cuap. XIV.] I PRAY THEE HAVE ME EXCUSED. 371

18 And they all with one consent began to make excuse.
The first said unto him, I have bought a piece of ground,
and I must needs go and see it: I pray thee have me excused.

19 And another said, I have bought five yoke of oxen, and
I go to prove them: I pray thee have me excused.

 

If not then, yet very shortly they would hear the words, ‘‘ Come,
for all things are now ready :”’ the Gospel is preached, the Church
is set up, the Sacraments are administered. Surely one and all
‘would crowd to eat such bread in the kingdom of God. No, the
Saviour warns His hearers that it would not be so—all with one
consent would begin to make excuse.

18,19, 20. ‘‘ And they all with one consent,” &c. The first said,
“T have bought a piece of ground, and I must needs go and see
it... . therefore I cannot come.” Now a very little thought
will show to us that all these are mere empty excuses, one and all
meaning that they declined to come to such a feast. If one had
said, ‘‘ my father is on the point of death and I must run to soothe
his last moments,” or another had said, ‘‘ my dearest friend is haled
up before the judge, and I must lose no time in witnessing to his
innocence,” there might have been some show of reason in the
refusal: but the land which the one had bought would not disap-
pear, he could just as well fulfil his engagement and see it the next
day. And so the second would have lost nothing by postponing
the “proving”’ of his oxen, for a day or two, and the third, if he
could not have brought his wife with him might have left her at
home for a few hours, as he certainly would have done if the feast
had been to his mind. It seems to me a mistake, though we have
such high authority as Augustine for it, to say that these three
excuses represent the “all that is in the world” of St. John. The
lust of the flesh, ‘“‘ I have married a wife.” The lust of the eyes, “‘ I
have bought five pairs of oxen.” The ambition of life, “I have
bought a farm.” This seems beside the mark, for the one was not
called upon to part with his farm, or the other with his oxen, and
assuredly the third was not required to put away his wife. No.
The point of the parable is that they were all on the face of them
empty excuses, and when we consider that according to Jewish
custom this was the second invitation following upon one which
they had accepted (or the announcement that all was ready wouldplace for us.”

372 I CANNOT COME. [Sr. Luxe.

20 And another said, I have married a wife, and therefore
I cannot come.

21 So that servant came, and shewed his lord these things.
Then the master of the house being angry said to his servant,
Go out quickly into the streets and lanes of the ‘city, and

 

not have been sent), it is clear that they were mere shifts to break a
disagreeable engagement.

Now this exactly answers to the case of the Jews. By their reli-
gion, by their Scriptures, by their national hopes, by their own in-
dividual confession of expectancy, they were bound to accept the
Messiah Whom God would send. It was not as if they were invited
for the first time, and so had no choice. The man who exclaimed,
‘“‘ Blessed is he that shall eat bread in the kingdom of God,” by this
very exclamation showed that he entertained strong hopes of the
coming, perhaps the speedy coming, of the Messiah, to usher in a
state of blessedness, which would commence with a feast. The
excuses then, as I said, were empty subterfuges to escape that which
they were bound to accept. They may have even been falsehoods.
Any how if these had not been forthcoming they would have found
or invented others.

And is it not so with nominal Christians? Do they not for the
present cast about for any excuse whereby they may postpone the
acceptance of the claims of Christ? There is only this difference:
the Jews were invited to enter as for the first time into the place of
the feast: nominal Christians are presumed to have already entered
into but are in no sense enjoying, the unspeakable blessings with
which they are surrounded ; they have to wake up even as from the
dead (1 Cor. xv. 34, Ephes. v. 13, 14), and claim their part in the
feast, or they may be ignominiously cast eut, as we learn from the
sister parable in St. Matthew. (The wedding garment, Matth. xxii.
1-14.)

21. ‘So that servant came, and shewed his lord these things.
Then the master of the house,” &. Quesnel interprets this servant
as being the Son of God, ‘‘God sent His own Son clothed in the

form of a servant, to invite and conduct us to the heavenly supper ;
all things are ready because He has done all things necessary to
our salvation—is Himself the banquet, and is gone to prepare the
But even His patience may be exhausted. AfterCuar. XIV.] YET THERE IS ROOM. 3713
bring in hither the poor, and the maimed, and the halt, and
the blind.

22 And the servant said, Lord, it is done as thou hast
commanded, and yet there is room.

23 And the lord said unto the servant, Go out into the

 

years of intercession He may turn and “show the Father” the way
in which all offers of grace have been perseveringly rejected. This
is what He did in the case of His own countrymen. At last he be-
came the minister of Divine Vengeance, for we know that the
destruction of Jerusalem was His coming in vengeance.

But here, inasmuch as the day of salvation is not closed when the
first bidden guests refuse, He is sent into the streets and lanes of
the city to bring in the poor, the maimed, the halt, and the blind.
Now inasmuch as these streets and lanes are the streets and lanes
of the city within its walls or enclosure, we must understand these
poor and maimed of the more ignorant and despised of the Jews,
those whom the rulers and Pharisees and Scribes looked down upon
as the people, the common herd, who, knowing not the law, were
cursed (John vii. 49); and to whom our Lord alludes when He
speaks of the publicans and the harlots entering into the kingdom of
heaven before the Scribes and Pharisees. (Matth. xxi. 31.)

The Epistle of St. James, which seems to embody or represent
the teaching and preaching to the Circumcision, is especially ad-
dressed to such poor and despised Jews, as for instance: ii. 5.
“‘Hearken my beloved children, hath not God chosen the poor of
this world ?”’ ‘‘Donot rich men oppress you, and draw you before
the judgment seats?” and again especially, v. 1, “Go to now, ye
rich men, weep and howl for your miseries which shall come upon
you,” &e.

To such the invitation of the Gospel was addressed, and they
accepted it, but not so as to fill up the places of the great

banquet.
92-23. ** And the servant said, Lord, it is done as thou hast com-
manded, and yet, &..... may be filled.” This, no doubt, repre-

gents the call of the Gentiles, who were accounted by the Jews to
be homeless vagabonds, and in truth their religion compared with
that of the chosen people was as the miserable shelter of a hedge
compared to that of a house in a walled city.374 COMPEL THEM TO COME IN. [Sr. Luxz.

highways and hedges, and compel them to come in, that my
house may be filled.

i Matt. xxi. 43. 24 For I say unto you, 1That none of those men
& xxii. 8. Acts 5 :
xiii, 46, which were bidden shall taste of my supper.

 

“‘Compel them to come in,” i.e., by holding out to them the
threatenings of the law, and the promises of the Gospel. ‘‘ Compel
them,’’ not of course by persecution, but by earnest pleading, by
importunity, by taking no denial.

24. ‘“ For I say unto you, That none of those men which were
bidden,” &c. Itis to be noticed that the Saviour here interposes,
and Himself claims to be the giver of the Feast, or at least so One
with Him that the feast is His Feast.

He here teaches us that God will not for ever callmen. There
will be an end of His offers, and those who have persistently neg-
lected them shall be finally shut out.

Let us now gather up some of the permanent lessons of the
parable, and before doing so translate it into the language of modern
life. We shall find it very startling. A man, evidently a very rich
and great man, makes a great entertainment, invites his very
respectable neighbours, such as those who dwell in the suburbs and
squares, and on their refusal calls the indigent poor, those who dwell
in the streets and lanes, and when these are not enough, then fills it
with the refuse of the common lodging houses. This is no exaggera-
tion. Itis literally what is described in the parable. When put thus,
it is, as I said, very startling, and was evidently intended to be so
in order the more deeply to impress upon us some hard lessons.

The first may be this, that mere respectability without godliness
is no passport to eternal happiness. A man may be thoroughly
respectable, well to do, unexceptionable in outward conduct and
demeanour, a good and useful member of this world’s society, a
business man, a family man, and yet be all his life refusing the calls
of God. Thorough respectability as regards this world, and deep-
rooted ungodliness, may be united in the same man.

A second lesson is this, that those who from their place in Chris-
tian society, and their knowledge and their education, one would
suppose to be marked out by God to be the pillars and ornaments
of His Church, are perpetually falling short of God’s high calling.
God looks to find fruit on them and finds none, whilst abundant
fruit is unexpectedly found on those from whom we hope nothing,Cuar. X1V.] HE TURNED AND SAID UNTO THEM. 375

25 4 And there went great multitudes with him: and he
turned and said unto them,

 

A third and very consoling lesson is this, that heaven will at last
be full. It is said in prophecy of Jesus its King, that ‘‘ He shall
see of the travail of His soul and shall be satisfied,” and we say it
with all reverence, it will take much to satisfy His soul.

The Apostle saw ‘‘an innumerable multitude which no man could
number, standing round about the throne.” God’s home will be
filled, but by whom? Let the prophet answer. ‘“‘I was found of
them that sought me not, I was made manifest to them that asked
not after me;’’—by such the places in His house will be filled: but
the prophet proceeds, ‘‘ All the day long have I stretched forth my
hands unto a disobedient and gainsaying people.”

Wonderful mystery that of God’s election, that God has a
multitude of souls innumerable to us, but which He knows! And it
ought to be a consoling thing to think that God’s purposes of mercy
will not be thwarted. His house will be filled, but by whom? By
those who accept and receive, and realize, and enjoy the promises,
the truths, the Eucharists of the Gospel.

It remains to say that this parable is not the same as that of
Matth. xxii. 1-14. The first part resembles that in St. Matthew,
but with important differences. The principal figure in that of St.
Matthew is a king, who acts like a king, inasmuch as he sends forth
his armies and destroys the murderers of his servants and burns up
their city. The “certain man” of St. Luke’s parable acts through-
out like a private person whose only punishment to those who
despise the invitation is exclusion from his feast. The occasions
also which gave rise to each respectively are as different as possible.
In the one case the parable is suggested by the exclamation of one
of the guests at a feast; the other follows close upon another
parable, that of the wicked husbandman, setting forth God’s deal-
ings with the chosen people under the similitude of one who required
fruit of them and they refused it.

25. “And there went great multitudes with him: and he turned
and said,” &c. We now come to a passage of no ordinary difficulty :
at least we must judge so from the great difference amongst com-
mentators in the interpretation of it. Archbishop Trench has a
chapter upon it in his ‘‘ Studies of the Gospels;” and, though if
cannot say that in all respects I agree with him in his exposition,376 IF ANY MAN COME TO ME. (Sr. Luxe.

26 * If any man come to me, ‘and hate not his father, and

« Deut. xiii. 6. mother, and wife, and children, and brethren, and

& xxxiii. 9.

Matt.x.37. sisters, ™ yea, and his own life also, he cannot be
1 Rom. ix. 18. ee

m Rey, xii11, my disciple.

n Matt. xvi. 27 And "whosoever doth not bear his cross,

24. Mark viii. ee
34. ch, ix.23, and come after me, cannot be my disciple.
2 Dim. iin, 12.

 

yet if any one would at all properly face the difficulties of these en-
suing verses (25-32) and see their intimate connection, and form
anything like a clear and sensible idea of the lessons which the Lord
teaches us in them, he must procure a sight of this book and read
very carefully the chapter entitled the “‘ Unfinished Tower and the
deprecated War.”

The key to the whole is to be found in the very first words setting
forth how there went great multitudes with the Lord, and He turned
and instead of welcoming them discouraged them. He bid them
count the cost of following Him as His disciples.

Now it is most needful, first of all, to make up our minds as to

what this following of our Lord on the part of the multitude really
meant. It was evidently not a following in the sense of accepting
His teaching and obeying His precepts of holy living. It is impos-
sible to suppose that our Lord would bid them calculate what
would be involved in believing what He said, or obeying what He
commanded, so that if, on consideration, they found that it would
demand more than they had strength for, they must forthwith cease
from listening to Him, and from attempting to practise what He
taught them. On the contrary, the Lord had distinctly likened the
believing on Him with the view of obeying Him, to a man building
—building, not a tower, but a house—and the process of building,
the laying of stone upon stone, was the hearing of His sayings and
the doing of them. Again, though He does not in any of His
parables liken the following of Him in faith and obedience to a war-
fare, yet He intimates precisely the same thing when He speaks of
“the kingdom of heaven suffering violence, and the violent taking it
by force.” It is impossible then that He could have meant to tell
them that before they set out on the path of faith and obedience
they must calculate the chances of failure, so that if they discovered
that they were too poor to build and too weak to fight, they must
fall back into the ranks of the world.Cuar. XIV.] COUNTETH THE COST. ol7

23 For ° which of you, intending to build a tower, sitteth
not down first, and counteth the cost, whether eo xxiy.
he have sufficient to finish it ?

For what then were they following our Lord? Evidently with
the view of attaching themselves, so far, that is, as such a consider-
able multitude could, to His person, much as aie Apostles had done,
but without a particle of their religion or their devotion. They no
doubt believed that the Lord was the Messiah, and that He would
shortly manifest Himself as such. This they learnt from the
parable of the great Supper which the Lord had just given utter-
ance to. They wished to be present at this manifestation, and to
reap any temporal benefits, and a few of them, perhaps, hoped for
Some higher blessings, which might accrue to those who had
ranged themselves on His side. The more I think of it, the more
it seems to me impossible that these great multitudes went with
Him with any distinct spiritual purpose, such as the blotting out
or subjugation of their sins, or their acceptance in Him, or their
attainment of such a heaven—such a state of holiness and spiritual
happiness after death, as He set forth.

The conduct of these great multitudes, and their reception on the
part of our Lord, seems to me the exact counterpart of the offer of
the scribe and the Lord’s reception of it in Matth. viii. 19. “A
certain scribe came and said unto him, Master, I will follow thee
whithersoever thou goest,” and the Lord’s answer was, ‘“‘ Foxes
have holes, and the birds of the air have nests, but the Son of man
hath not where to lay his head.” ‘This means, ‘‘If you follow me
as my apostles or disciples are doing, you must surrender every-
thing, you must even consent to give up that which the poorest of
them—which even animals and birds have—a home.

This, then, is what the Lord said to this ignorant mixed multi-
tude. ‘‘ You desire to go with Me, not merely in the sense of
hearing and keeping My sayings, but as these My apostles and
evangelists are doing. If after such sort you desire to cast in your
lot with Me, you must be as they are. They have given up home,
parents, brothers, sisters, relatives, friends—they, like Me, have no
certain dwelling-place, they are prepared to surrender their lives if
I call upon them sotodo. They areall prepared, in following Me,

to take up the cross, and you must cast in your lot with them, for I378 THIS MAN BEGAN TO BUILD. (Sr. Luks.

29 Lest haply, after he hath laid the foundation, and is
not able to finish 7, all that behold it begin to mock him.

30 Sayme, This man began to build, and was not able to
finish.

cannot now, at this fast approaching crisis, be encumbered with a
mixed following, ‘attached partly to Me and partly to the world.
You see that you must count the cost, or you may ignominiously
fail and fall away. These My Apostles have counted the cost. I
have set before them what is meant by ‘drinking of my cup,’ and
‘being baptized with my baptism.’ And they have deliberately
said ‘ We are able.’ And you must count the cost too. They have
proposed to themselves to do what may be likened to building no
mean tower and engaging in no petty warfare, and you must look
well to your resources, if you propose to do the same.”

Such, I cannot but think, must be the meaning of the Lord’s
appeal, or rather caution, to the multitude. It is absurd to sup-
pose that the Lord would counsel men to deliberate, to balance
chances of failure, to count the probable cost of self-denial that
they might have to undergo if they began a life of ordinary Chris-
tian faith and obedience. Can He mean that when the providence
of God brings them in front of the strait gate and the narrow
way, they may deliberate about entering and turn aside with im-
punity ? Impossible. But what He undoubtedly means is that
they must deliberate, if they would follow Him in the Apostolic
Life. One man, and he one of the twelve, did not so deliberate
or count the cost, and his failure was terrific. Another man,
Demas, did not count the cost of following the Lord’s life, as set
forth in the life of the Apostle Paul, and his failure was disgraceful.
His name has been a byword in the Church for those who love the
world before Christ.

A few questions more must be answered before we have done
with this difficult but most interesting passage.

1. Is anything in the common Christian life or warfare meant
by the tower, and the more powerful king? Taking into conside-
ration the analogy of many other places of Scripture, in which the
Christian life is compared to the building of a house upon the rock,
or the building upon a foundation laid by the Christian preacher
(1 Corinth. i. 10); there seems to be at first sight no difficulty
about what this tower is, but the crux is that the Lord evidentlyCuap. XIV,] WHETHER HE BE ABLE. avg

31 Or what king, going to make war against another king,
sitteth not down first, and consulteth whether he be able with

 

31. “ Going to make war against ;” or rather, ‘‘as he goeth to encounter” (Revisers).

sets forth the building of the tower as something not necessary in
the case of every one who desires to follow Him, because the Lord’s
words seem to have no meaning except on the assumption that the
man who meditates the building ofthe tower, may, after considera-
tion, decline the work. Whereas it is not in the power of anyone
who has so much as once heard the Gospel to decline the building
up of himself upon his most holy faith, except at the peril of his
soul. The first hearing of the Gospel puts a man under the respon-
sibility of receiving it or not. If he receives it he is bound to build
his spiritual home upon it, 7.e., upon the rock, and the only alter-
native is rejecting it and so refusing to save his soul.

So that if the tower means anything, it means the erection of
something far more costly, and difficult, and dangerous than the
building up of the house of each man’s Christian life, and the only
things which seems to me to correspond to this, is the self-denial,
the poverty, the ceaseless labour, and the dangers of the Apostolic
life. (1 Corinth. iv. 9-14; 2 Corinth. vi. 4-10; xi. 23-30.)

But what can the more powerful king, who can put into the field
20,000 men against the other’s 10,000 signify ? Strange to say, it
has been held to signify both God and Satan. The latter seems
absurd, for is it to be supposed that the Lord would ever put it
within the range of possibility that a man should make terms with
Satan, much less send an embassage to the Evil One and desire
conditions of peace ?

And it seems exceedingly difficult to explain the more powerful
king as being God, for though itis quite true that a man at enmity
with God ought seriously to consider the boundless resources of
vengeance of Him Whom he so madly opposes, yet the gist of the
whole passage is against such an interpretation ; for the Lord is
considering not what a man must do, but what he can apparently
innocently decline doing. Now the weaker king meditates war,
whereas the impenitent sinner merely desires to be let alone by
God. Add to this, that it is extremely improbable that our Lord
should compare the Almighty to a king who has only just double
the strength of his opponent, seeing that a commander of genius880 TEN THOUSAND AGAINST TWENTY.  [Sr. Luks.

ten thousand to meet him that cometh against him with
twenty thousand ?

 

and skill in handling his troops, and who can choose his ground,
may easily defeat another who can bring twice the number of men
into the field.

Ido not think that we can give with any certainty a definite
meaning to either the tower or the more powerful king. The one
thing which, it seems to me, the Lord desired to bring before those
who were desirous of following Him in the Apostolic Life, was
the possibility of leading such a life, and yet the absolute need of
deliberation, and men looking well into themselves, as to whether
they were at all even in the way of being fitted for it. For, with
all deference to the opinion of many good and pious men, I do not
think that the Lord here intends to teach that either the tower-
builder or the weaker king must look to his own resources, and
that if he finds that he has not sufficient (which of course he assu-
redly will find out, ifhe isin the least degree honest in dealing with
himself), he must invoke the resources of Divine Grace, for the
man is not bound either to begin the tower or undertake the
wav.

The true state of the case may be put thus. A man thinks he is
called upon to follow the Lord, literally sharing with Him the life
He was then leading. Before he does this, he must set before
himself the sort of life which he proposes to himself, a life of ex-
treme self-denial and very patient endurance indeed. Now it will
not be sufficient for such an one to say, “ God’s grace is all-sufficient.
I will cast myself upon it.” No; God works by means, and, of
course, by fitting means. The man in question must, so far as he
is able, see to himself as to whether he is at all likely to be one of
such fitting means; he must count the cost, by seeing narrowly to
his past life, whether it has been a life of self-indulgence, or self-
restraint—whether he has had his entire self under control. If he
has noi, he has no right to count upon the grace of God to enable
him to lead a life of extraordinary endurance in close companion-
ship with Christ. God may choose to call such a man, but the
Lord is here speaking, not of what God sets forth before the man,
but of what the man sets forth before himself. If God clearly and
distinctly sets a particular form of life before a man, such an one

has no alternative. He is not to hesitate a moment. Thus, inCuar. XIV.] HE SENDETH AN AMBASSAGRE. asl

¢ AY alia aia a es 7) 6 eae ric 3
32 Or else, while the other is yet a great way off, he
sendeth an ambassage, and desireth conditions of peace.
33 So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not
all that he hath, he cannot be my disciple.

 

this very Gospel, we are told that the Lord said to one, ‘“ Follow
me ;”’ and when the man rejoined, “‘ Lord, suffer me first to 20 and
bury my father,” he was cut short with the words, “Let the dead
bury their dead, but go thou and preach the kingdom of God”
(ix. 60).

If it be rejoined to all this, that we are giving a somewhat narrow
and temporary explanation, by referring these two illustrations to
the Apostolic life and ministry, we reply, ‘‘ By no means.” For the
Apostolic ministry is, throughout the New Testament, the type and
example of all other. We have throughout the Acts and Epistles
no account of the life and work of the ordinary Christian minister
of modern times. The bishops, or presbyters, and deacons, over
whom Timothy and Titus had the oversight, may have been such,
but, as I said, we have no account of either their life or work,
whereas the pages of the New Testament contain very fully the
account of the Apostolic ministry. Now if this be the rock whence
we are hewn, it may be well for us to look to it far more than we
do. In the providence of God, we may at any time be forced to
adopt this as our standard: so that those who are entering upon
the Christian ministry, or are purposing to adopt some higher form
of it, such as the missionary life, must ‘‘ count the cost ;”’ must see
as to their own resources of self-command and strong will, and re-
sistance to temptation, as well as to the promises of Divine assist-
ance. Romanist commentators, such as Cornelius a Lapide, in-
terpret these two illustrations as referring to entering upon a life
of Christian perfection, such as the monastic; but the Lord’s
words, in verse 26, go far beyond this. Itis true that such an one
gives up his property, and engages to live under strict rule, but he
has a home and a settled maintenance, both of which the Apostles
and first followers of the Lord surrendered at the outset.

33. ‘*So likewise, whosoever he be of you that forsaketh not all
that,” &c. These words are evidently the sequel of the preceding
ones. They set forth in the plainest way the extent to which the
‘““counting of the cost” must go. It must go to the extent ofApostolic ministry without counting the cost, without very deep

382 SALT IS GOOD. (Sx, Luxe.

34 FP? Salt is good: but if the salt have lost his savour,

p Matt. v.13. wherewith shall it be seasoned ?
Mark ix. 50.

 

giving up all that a man hath, and living a life of daily dependence
on God’s particular providence. Because, however, the injunction
seems so universal, and the taking of our Lord at His word so ex-
ceedingly rare, expositors have cast about for some interpretation
which they think will include a larger number in the net of dis-
cipleship, and they think they have found this in the discarding of
a man’s own righteousness, and the desire to be found before God
clothed only in the righteousness of Christ. Thus one of great and
deserved eminence writes: ‘‘ But this self which needs to be re-
nounced is oftentimes a very subtle one; the self of him who pur-
poses to serve God, but to serve Him in his own strength, and not
in God’s, and thus to have wherein to glory; who may have re-
nounced much, but has not renounced a vain confidence in his own
powers, and that these will enable him to carry to a successful end
a service thus undertaken.’ Now the answer to this is, that the
Apostolic life was not a surrender of one’s own righteousness, but
a surrender of friends, home, reputation, property and life. The
same Apostle who said, ‘‘I desire to be found in Him not having
mine own righteousness, which is of the law, but that which is
through the faith of Christ’ (Phil. iii. 9), said also of himself and
his fellows, ‘‘Kven unto this present hour we both hunger and
thirst, and are naked, and are buffeted, and have no certain dwell-
ing-place”’ (1 Cor. iv. 11). It is to this aspect of the life of His first
followers to which the Lord evidently alludes, and, I believe, to no
other.

34. “Salt is good: but if the salt shall have lost his savour, where-
with shall it be seasoned ?’’ &c. The connection between this
and the preceding verses seems sufficiently clear. The Apostles,
and those who followed them as they followed Christ, were to act
in the moral world as salt does in the natural. They were to pre-
serve from corruption those with whom they came in contact who
would receive their teaching. But this could only be if they re-
tained the savour of Divine Grace. They might lose this savour—
indeed of the very foremost of them one would lose it. And who
were more likely to lose it than those who had intruded into theCuar. XIV,] MEN CAST IT OUT. 383

35 It is neither fit for the land, nor yet for the dunghill ;
but men cast it out. He that hath ears to ear, let him hear.

and earnest self-examination as to their motives, and their sincerity,
and the self-control and self-denial which, by God’s grace, they had
hitherto been able to exercise? Such would become like that salt
so familiar to those who have traversed salt deserts. <“ Maundrel,
near Gebal, found some salt perfect to the eye, but completely in-
sipid from long exposure to air, rain, and sun.” Schoettgen speaks
of a fragrant bituminous salt from Lake Asphaltites strewn largely
over the sacrifices, to overpower the smell, and facilitate combus-
tion, which, when it lost its aromatic virtue, was sprinkled over
part of the temple pavement to prevent the priests slipping. (Notes
on the Four Gospels, by F. M.)

No doubt this illustration of the salt losing its savour, and be-
coming worthless, is first of all intended for the Apostles, and those
who followed the Lord as they did; for in the parallel place
(Matth. v. 13), it is to the Apostles that Christ speaks when He
says: “Ye are the salt of the earth;” but these last verses are of
more general application than the preceding—all Christians are, by
their example, even more than by the teaching of some among
them, to be the salt of the earth; but if they lose their religion,
their case seems more hopeless than those who have never repented
or been converted.

‘““Wherewith will ye season it? What new motives to repen-
tance or holiness can ye bring to bear on them, seeing they have
already received them, and now are unmoved by them? Their
terrible case is described by the Apostle. ‘It had been better for
them not to have known the way of righteousness than, after they
have known it, to turn from the holy commandment delivered unto
them.” (2 Peter ii. 21).384 THIS MAN RECEIVETH SINNERS. (Sr. Luge.

CHAP. XV.

HEN * drew near unto him all the Publicans and sinners
for to hear him.

a Matt. ix. 10, 2 And the Pharisees and Scribes murmured,
b Acts xi. 3. ; : ‘ i §
Gal. ii. 12. saying, This man receiveth sinners, ? and eateth

with them.

1. ‘Then drew near unto him all the Publicans and sinners for
to hear him.” They were not repelled by His holiness, as at first
thoughts we might have imagined, but rather attracted by it, for
God had begun a work of grace within them, and they came to Him
as being both Divinely compassionate and Divinely holy. He was
compassionate, and so they felt that He would receive them; and yet
He was holy so that though He loved their souls He yet hated their
sin, and so would put forth His almighty power to rid them of it.

“All the Publicans.” I have noticed elsewhere that there can be
little doubt but that God was having mercy upon the Publicans as
a class, and so it is said that “‘ all the Publicans drew near.’ Their
calling was full of temptation, and yet not absolutely unlawful. It
might be followed honestly and respectably, whereas the Jews, no
doubt from national feeling, treated it as absolutely unlawful, so God,
by raising up amongst them such men as Matthew and Zaccheus,
showed that He did not brand it as an essentially sinful calling.

‘And sinners.” No doubt the open, wilful sinners, such as the
woman of chap. vii. 37.

4. “ And the Pharisees and Scribes murmured, saying, This man
receiveth sinners,’ &c. Not only received them, that is absolved
them, encouraged them, instructed them, and in all respects acted
toward them as a loving pastor; but even eat with them as a token
that on their repentance He had communion with them. Ag
Thirsch well says, “‘ He gave the impression which one of us would
do, who allowed himself to be seen in company with convicts
recently released from prison.”

They “murmured,” as supposing that such a reception would
confirm sinners in their sins. They did this because their wholeCuar. XV] IF HE LOSE ONE OF THEM. 385

3 4 And he spake this parable unto them, saying,

4° What man of you, having an hundred sheep, ¢ Matt. xviii.
12
if he lose one of them, doth not leave the ninety

cast of mind was unsympathizing. They only understood the severe,
harsh, unloving mode of treatment; whereas even their own law,
their own national history, such accounts as the reception and
restoration of their great hero David, on his repentance, ought to
have taught them better.

And now the all merciful Lord, not merely with the view of cor-
recting false notions of God’s mercy, but with the view of enshyrining
God’s loving and joyful reception of penitents for ever in the mind
of His Church, uttered three parables, which have been fitly called
parables of grace, each one advancing beyond the other in its enun-
ciation of the loving joy of Himself and His Father in the contem-
plation of the return of sinners.

In the first He likens this loving joy to that of a man who having
lost one out of a hundred sheep finds it again and brings it home.
In the second, to a poor woman who had missed one out of ten pieces
of silver, and after very much trouble and turning the house upside
down, recovers it: and in the third, to a father who had but two
sons, and, to all appearance, one of them became a reprobate, and
yet through God’s mercy he returns to gladden the heart of his
father.

4, ‘* What man of you, having an hundred sheep, if he lose one
of them, doth not,” &c. The first thing to be noticed is that the
Lord appeals to their own feelings, ‘‘ What man of you,” so that
the Lord teaches us that our better human feelings are the reflection
of what is in the Divine mind. God has not so deserted us that
we cannot, upon the whole, ‘of ourselves judge what is right.”
Then it is to be noticed that the man owns a comparatively small
flock, not so small in number as the pieces of silver in the purse of
the woman, not so small as the family of two sons only, but still
a flock so small that if but one sheep were lost it would be an
object to him to recover it.

And it was an object, for it is said that on discovering the loss
he forthwith left the ninety and nine, and went after the lost
one.

He left the ninety and nine. Does this sound as if he was
CC386 WHEN HE HATH FOUND IT. [Sr. Luxe.

and nine in the wilderness, and go after that which is lost,
until he find it?

5 And when he hath found 7t, he layeth it on his shoulders,
rejoicing.
careless about them, and left them in comparative insecurity, or in
an unprotected state? Common sense teaches us that this is im-
possible; for if the loss of a single sheep was the cause of such
anxiety and gave him so much trouble, he would surely take care
not to run the risk of losing fifty more. He left them, no doubt,
under the care of his servants, and probably in a fold: but still,
why is it said particularly that, he left the ninety and nine and
went after the straying one? I answer, simply to emphasize
the fact that he himself went after it: he did not stay with the
ninety and nine and send another man after the lost one—he
took upon himself the more difficult and troublesome task, and
went in person after the lost sheep, and by this we are taught the
value which he put upon every single sheep of the flock.

“And go after that which is lost until he find it.””’ From this
we should gather that he eventually finds and brings home every
sheep after which he goes: and in Divine things, in the spiritual
application of the parable, it seems difficult to suppose that it can
be otherwise. It seems impossible that the toil and labour of the
good Shepherd after any lost sheep should be thrown away, and yet
in an expression in the corresponding parable in St. Matthew we
seem to have the freedom of the will asserted when it is written,
“if so be that he find it,’ instead of the absolute ‘“‘ when he hath
found it.”’

It may be wrong to insist much upon this, but it would be equally
wrong to leave it unnoticed.

5. “And when he hath found it, he layeth it on his shoulders,
rejoicing.” Gregory of Nyssa remarks on this: ‘‘ When the shep-
herd hath found the sheep he did not punish it, he did not get it
back to the flock by driving it, but by placing it upon his shoulder
and carrying it gently, he united it to his flock.”

6. ““And when he cometh home, he ealleth together his friends
and neighbours, saying,” &c. Both sorrow and joy ask for sym-
pathy. As it adds bitterness to our sorrow to grieve alone, so it
adds sensibly to our joy when others share it with us.

7. “I say unto you that likewise joy shall be in heaven over oneCuap. XV,] WHEN HE COMETH HOME. O80

6 And when he cometh home, he calleth together his

 

sinner,” &c. This is the point of the parable. This is its one great
lesson. The Pharisees and Scribes had murmured because He
received sinners. The Lord shows them that their murmuring
betrays a character the very opposite to that of the angels in heaven
—the very opposite to that of God Himself.

Such is the parable of the lost sheep. It was at first addressed
to Jews, and was intended to reprove those who had a zeal of God,
and yet utterly mistook His character and purposes. He is the
only fountain of holiness, and His hatred of sin is shown, not in
His repelling sinners, and bidding them remain as they are, and
await His punishment; but in His desire that they should come to
Him to be freed from sin and become again His true children.

But the application to Christians is so much closer, and so much
more in accordance with the whole parable and every circumstance
of it, that we must address ourselves to bringing out its present
bearing on the members of the mystical Body.

Now, in the first place, the foundation of the whole parable, that,
in fact, which is its first necessity as a parable, is, that the sheep
which was lost belonged to the owner of the flock—was, no doubt,
marked with his mark and strayed out of his fold. The straying
sheep could not have belonged to another person, it could not have
belonged to his enemy, much less could it have been a wild sheep
which required altogether reclaiming from its natural state. This
is the starting point, as it were. The sheep is first of all in a flock
belonging to an owner who had a flock of one hundred. And go
whenever the Christian goes astray he leaves a home—a home of
grace—a fold in which he is safe if he continues in it. What ig
this home? Practically it is the grace of our Baptism. If by
Baptism we are brought into a state of grace, one of the least
things that can be said of this state is, that whilst we continue in
it we are in the fold of Christ, owned by Him as one of His sheep,
and marked with His mark. The Spirit in the Scriptures says

very much more of the grace of Baptism than this, for He says that
in it we are buried and raised again with Christ, that in it in some
sense we are ‘‘saved,” that in it we are all baptized by one Spirit
into one Body; but what I have said will suftiice so far as this, that
we must account ourselves as having been brought into the flock
of Christ and numbered amongst His sheep.388 I HAVE FOUND MY SHEEP. [Sr. Luxe.

friends and neighbours, saying unto them, Rejoice with me ;
a 1 Pet. ii.10, for T have found my sheep * which was lost.

40.

 

What is the straying of the sheep? It is not leaving the outward
fold of the Church, but it is running counter to the grace which
we received when we were first born into that flock or family. We
may be outwardly in the flock, and yet the searching eye of the
Good Shepherd may discern that in spirit and in life we are very
far indeed from it. He who reads the heart can discern little or
nothing of the stamp of grace upon the soul. The straying of the
sheep of the flock of Christ is the continuance in sin, wilful or open,
and the neglect or contempt of the means of grace. The eye of Christ
alone can measure spiritual distances, so that in the sight of our
brethren we may be in the fold, or very near it, and in His eye we
may be very far off indeed. Of course those who are living in
drunkenness, and sensuality, and uncleanness, and fornication, are
lost sheep, but men are lost also through sins of the spirit. The
proud, unhumbled, implacable, unforgiving, are in very deed lost,
wandering sheep, if Christ be the humble, forgiving Saviour that
the Scriptures represent Him to be. A man may be a lost sheep
through idleness and sloth in the matter of his Salvation.

And now what is the going after the lost sheep on the part of the
Good Shepherd, seeing that He never locally moves out of His place,
nor they out of theirs? What can it be but the workings of con-
science, its misgivings, its stings, its wounds? What can it be
but visions of future wrath? What can it be but the memories of
the innocence of the past, contrasted with the cheerlessness of the
present and the loomings of the future? Orit may be the Lord finds
them by loss of friends, loss of health, loss of means, loss of pros-
pects, loss of children or of wife, ingratitude where they looked
for some return of lovingkindness, disappointments where they
were so sure—all these may be the pursuing footsteps of the Good
Shepherd to find His lost sheep.

But is this, or something like this, the conduct of the Shepherd
with every lost sheep, seeing there are such multitudes? As-
suredly we are bound to believe that it is, for the secret action of
Christ with regard to each soul is hidden from us, sometimes hidden
from the soul itself, and will never be known till the last day. At
that day, when the secrets of all hearts shall be disclosed, it willCuar. XV.] JOY SHALL BE IN HEAVEN. 389

7 I say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over

be found that Christ has in some way or other pursued with His
love every soul.

But what is there now in the Christian dispensation which
answers to the calling together of the man’s friends and neighbours
that they should rejoice with him, because of the recovery of the
lost one?

The Lord Himself seems to explain it. He makes known to the
angels, and no doubt to the spirits of just men made perfect, His
success in the recovery of every lost member of His Body, and
they rejoice with Him. The Lord uses the expression, ‘“ Joy shall
be in heaven.”’ But where in heaven? First of all, evidently in
the breast of the Great Shepherd. His heart can contain the whole
multitude, and His mind can discriminate each one, and His
Intercession is not for all in a mass but for each one, and He
rejoices separately, as it were, over the return of each one, and He
makes this joy known to all the redeemed and glorified family,
that they may rejoice with Him. The reader will remember the
words, ‘‘ Enter thou into the joy of thy Lord.” The greatest joy
which created beings can feel, is that which they share with God.
If God be the Greatest and Highest of beings, His joy must be the
ereatest and highest joy, and His Son tells us here that His joy is
in the triumph of Goodness and the discomfiture of evil, when He
tells us that it is over the repentance of the sinner.

‘““ More than over ninety and nine just persons which need no
repentance.” It is surprising how many commentators give a
sinister meaning to the ninety and nine—that they are self-righteous
and suppose that they have no need of repentance, that they repre-
sent the Scribes and Pharisees who were murmuring against the
Lord because He received sinners. Even Archbishop Trench writes :
“The one view of the parables which seems to afford a solution
of the difficulties appears to be this, that we understand these
‘righteous ’ as really such, but also that their righteousness is a legal
one, is of the old dispensation, so that the least in the kingdom of
heaven is greater than they.”

But I cannot think that such is the meaning —indeed, it seems to
me to make the whole parable unreal. For what is the joy of the
parable? It is the joy after labour, after sorrow, after anxiety. It
is the joy of recovery, of restoration; but to understand aright its390 ONE SINNER THAT REPENTETH. (Sr. Luxe.

one sinner that repenteth, “more than over ninety and nine
ch. v.32, just persons, which need no repentance.

relation to other joy, we have only to consider what the owner of
the one hundred sheep would have said if this had been put to him:
‘You have felt intense joy at the recovery of this lost sheep, much
more than you feel at the contemplation of the safety of your
ninety and nine; had you not better throw down the fences of
your fold, and dismiss your servants, so that the remainder may
go astray in order that you may have the same joy over again at
finding them and bringing them back ?”’ We may imagine what the
man would have said if such folly had been seriously proposed to
him ; and what will God say to those teachers who virtually assert
that there is no such thing as growing up in the grace of His cove-
nant, that there was no such thing under the Old Covenant as grow-
ing up from the root of circumcision, imperfect though it was,
and that there is now no such thing as growing up in the fold of
grace from the Baptismal root—that no one can be properly
accounted a true Christian who has not broken his baptismal vows,

made naught of baptismal grace, and plunged into wilful sin ?
It isto be remembered that the true type of the Jew was not the
Scribe or Pharisee. It was rather men of the stamp of John the
Baptist, Zacharias and Elizabeth, Simeon, Anna, and St. Joseph,
and if it be lawful to name her with others, the Blessed Virgin. Itwas
rather the first called Apostles, and Barnabas, and Timothy, and
Saul, who even in his unconverted state lived in all good conscience
before God; and if we go back to the Old Dispensation, Daniel, and
the three holy children, David in his youth, Joseph and Joshua, and
others. Now these men would all confess sin; their very holiness
being the infusion of God’s Spirit, would make them bewail short-
comings, but they needed not repentance such as David did after
his fall, as Solomon after his declension, as Manasseh did after
provoking God with the provocations which required the national

retribution of the seventy years’ captivity.

If then the ninety and nine be sincere followers of God, whether
‘| Jews before Pentecost or Christians after, how does God regard
them? Surely it seems absurd to ask the question, but seeing that
. commentator after commentator seems to think that because the
joy over the finding of the lost sheep is emphasized, therefore there
is no joy worth speaking of over the ninety and nine, let us outCran ov | IF SHE LOSE ONE PIECE. j9E

8 § Hither what woman having ten || pieces of silver, if
she lose one piece, doth not light a candle, | Drachma,
vee : here translated
and sweep the house, and seek diligently till she «a piece of
see te a silver, is the
find it eighth part
a of an ounce,
9 And when she hath found 7, she calleth her which cometh
sy. . ; . to seven pence
friends and her neighbours together, saying, Re-  halfpenny, and
joice with me; for I have found the piece which

is equal to the
Roman penny,
Matt. xviii. 28.
I had lost.

of a thousand places just name one, ‘* The Lord’s delight is in them
that fear him, and put their trust in his mercy ;”’ and another, ‘‘ He
will fulfil the desire of them that fear him ;” and again, ‘‘ The eyes
of the Lord are over the righteous, and his ears are open unto their
prayers;” and if we ask how this joy is reflected in the breasts of
the true servants of God, let us think how one servant says, ‘“‘ Now
we live if ye stand fast in the Lord” (1 Thess. iii. 8) ; (could he have
expressed himselfmore strongly ?) And another says as heartily, ‘‘ I
have no greater joy than to hear that my children walk in truth”’
(3 John 4).

8, 9. “ Hither what woman having ten pieces of silver, if she
lose,’ &c. ... “I have found the piece which I had lost.” This
parable seems intended to teach precisely the same lesson as the
one we have just expounded. Several differences have been noticed
in their respective lessons, which, on closer examination, seem to
me to be made out with difficulty. One, for instance, is this. The
owner of the lost sheep goes in search of it from a feeling of pity
and humanity, the idea of self-interest being ignored. Whereas the
woman searches for her lost coin solely from a feeling of self-inte-
rest, and because the piece of money is a dead thing, humanity or
pity cannot be thought of in connection with it; the lost money is
simply valuable or necessary, and so she searches diligently, and
calls her friends and neighbours to rejoice with her on its recovery.
But surely to give the man credit for such feelings of humanity is an
anachronism. It is to transfer back to well-nigh two thousand
years ago, the feelings (exceedingly good and right, but exceedingly
modern) of the present century, the century of humane and animal
protection societies. The man set out to recover his lost property
with just the same intention as the woman began to sweep the
house to recover hers. The one great point to which all else is392 A CERTAIN MAN HAD TWO SONS.  [Sr. Luxe.

10 Likewise, I say unto you, there is joy in the presence of
the angels of God over one sinner that repenteth.
11 § And he said, A certain man had two sons:

 

subordinate is, that in the one case the sheep was his, and s0 in his
flock before it strayed, and in the other case the drachma was hers,
and in her purse or girdle before it rolled away.

If there be a difference in the teaching of the parables, it appears
to me to be somewhat of this sort. When the owner sets out to find
his sheep, it may, for anything he knows, be irrecoverable; it may
have perished by falling down some precipice (St. Matthew says,
‘he goeth into the mountains ”’), or it may have been devoured by
wild beasts. He has a large tract of country to traverse, and if he
finds it, a long way to bring it home on his shoulders: whereas, in
the other case, the drachma, though lost, is evidently somewhere in
the house, and if due diligence is used it is almost certain to be
found. This last parable then seems to indicate a far less wide de-
parture, and so amore hopeful search, but lam not at all sure about
such an application.

Again the woman has been supposed to be the Church, the light-
ing of the candle the ministry of the word, which is a light unto
our feet, and a lantern unto our paths. The drachma, stamped
with the image of a king, the soul or spirit of man stamped with
the image of God. The trouble taken by the woman in sweeping
the house and peering into the corners, the diligence of the Church
in preaching the word and exercising discipline, so that not one
who bears the image of God may be useless and unavailable for
purposes of good. All these may be true interpretations, but they
must not be allowed for a moment to interfere with the lesson, which
is that the man in the one case and the woman in the other, lost
their own—their property, and missed it at once, and were annoyed
at the loss, and at once took steps to recover it, and at the recovery
expressed more joy than at the quiet possession of that which had
not been in danger of being lost.

11, 12. ‘‘ And he said, A certain man had two sons .. . divided
unto them his living.” This most wonderful parable follows upon
and emphasizes the teaching of the two preceding ones. In all
three the Lord tells us in different ways that God cares for the souls
of those who have left Him, and gone astray, and rejoices at theirCuar. XV.] GIVE ME THE PORTION OF GOODS. 398

12 And the younger of them said to his father, Father,
give me the portion of goods that falleth to me. And he
divided unto them ‘his living. f Mark xii. 44,

 

12. “‘ The portion of goods which falleth to me.’”’ ‘‘The portion of thy [or the] sub-
stance which falleth to me.”

- recovery more than at the safety of those whom He has not lost.
The exhibition of grace in the parable of the prodigal son is far
beyond that of the other two, for whereas in the first an unreason-
ing creature strays, not knowing or reflecting upon what it does,
and in the second a senseless thing is lost, in the third a human
being in the full use of his faculties, determinedly chooses evil and
refuses good, and yet, notwithstanding his wilfulness, his selfishness,
his extravagance and debauchery, is, on his repentance, received
back, not only freely and joyfully, but without a word of reproach.

This individual application must be firmly held to as the teaching
of the parable. It springs out of the same root as the teaching of
the other two, viz., that the Lord received certain gross sinners on
their coming to Him to be delivered from the burden of sin, and
that certain others, Scribes and Pharisees, were scandalized at such
freeness of grace and welcome. If we take the chief lesson of the
parable to be its reference to certain large classes into which man-
kind is divided, such as Jews and Gentiles, it seems to weaken the
impression of the deep personal feeling and exuberance of love of the
old father, both to him who had wrung his heart by unkindness and
to him who was irreconcilable. The teaching of the parable is that
there is joy in the heart of the Eternal Father over a penitent re-
turning sinner, no matter how he has sinned, and that the same
Eternal Father bears with, and by condescending kindness would
overcome evil-mindedness of another sort altogether—that which
exhibits itself in uncharitableness, moroseness, churlishness, envy,
and ill-temper.

12. “And the younger of them said to his father, Father, give me
the portion of goods . . . divided unto them his living.”

‘The portion of goods that falleth to me,” 1.€., we Suppose, ‘the
share which would be mine if you were to die now.”

‘‘ He divided unto them his living.” This seems to imply that
he assigned to each of them their interest in the property or estate.
In the original it is “‘the living.” Alford writes upon this, “ Theao 4 THE YOUNGER SON. [Sr. Luxe.

13 And not many days after the younger son gathered

 

first-born had two-thirds of the property. (See Deut. xxi. is) the
father, as implied in the parable, reserves to himself during his
life power over the portion of the first-born. (See verse 31.) The
parable sets before us, very strikingly, the permission of free will
to man.” Certainly not, we answer, unless the elder had the
same power of disposing of his share as the younger had. It ig
not at all impossible that the father divided between them the
estate : certainly the words taken literally seem to imply it. If it
be objected that this would be contrary to common prudence, we
are to remember that the wisdom of the old man in the matter
does not come into consideration at all, but only hig overflowing
goodness.

13. “ And not many days after the younger son gathered all to-
gether . . . riotous living.” No doubt this was his intention when
he asked to have his share given to him. He hated the restraints
of his father’s house, and he desired to get as far from it as he could,
so he took his journey into a far country, where there would be
nothing to remind him of the home which he had left, and from
whence, as we trust, he hoped that no tidings of his profligacy
would reach his father’s ears. His case, as described by the Lord,
is @ very bad one, and was intended to be taken as such, in order to
subserve the purpose of the parable. It is difficult to say which is
the worst, his selfishness, his love of sinful pleasure or his undutiful-
ness and want of allfilial feeling. There is apicture of Vernet’s which
brings out with extraordinary power his character of selfish uncon-
cern for the feelings of his father. It represents the courtyard of
an Eastern house in which he is taking leave. The mother is lean-
ing, in the depths of distress, against the side of the door, the father
is bending towards him with a countenance full of yearning affec-
tion and grief, as if his heart would break; a leading domestic,
perhaps “‘ the steward of the house,” clenches his hands as unable
to restrain his feelings of indignation, astonishment, and shame at
his cool indifference as he turns away from his father’s embrace to
a groom who is holding a high-mettled and richly-caparisoned
steed, so that he may mount it at once and take his departure.
Altogether it is a dreadful picture; but it may have been, and no
doubt was, far below the reality of a multitude of such scenes, vividly
present to the all-comprehending mind of the Divine Speaker.Cuar.XV.] HE BEGAN TO BE IN WANT. 395

all together, and took his journey into a far country, and
there wasted his substance with riotous living.

14 And when he had spent all, there arose a mighty
famine in that land; and he began to be in want.

15 And he went and joined himself to a citizen of that
country ; and he sent him into his fields to feed swine.

‘* Wasted his substance with riotous living.”

‘‘ Riotous living,” living riotously; but the word signifies far
more than noise and clamour at feasts, and rather describes excess
of profligacy. Some commentators have, in excuse, expressed their
doubts as to whether it need comprehend fornication and such vices ;
but is it at all in accordance with common sense to suppose that a
rich young libertine, one who had abandoned himself to all sorts of
debauchery, should have kept ‘‘ his body in chastity ”’?

14. “‘And when he had spent all, there arose a mighty famine in
that land,’ &e. This famine is broughtin to explain the extremity
of his want, for the scarcity and dearness of the common necessaries
of life would press most hardly upon such as he, who had squandered
all his money, who had pampered desires such as only money could
minister to, and who knew not how to obtain any decent means of
employment.

I do not think it is well to give any intellectual meaning to this
famine and consequent want, so as to make it less vulgar, as Godet,
who explains it as ‘“ the absolute void of a heart which has sacrificed
everything for pleasure, and which has nothing left but suffering.”
Why not suppose that if it had not been for the pressure occasioned
by this famine he might have lived on his friends, and his return
not taken place? The famine would be felt by all, and a stranger
like himself would be the last to be cared for or relieved. Much
better what Alford suggests, that the famine is providential. It is
the Shepherd seeking His sheep which was lost.

15. “ And he went and joined himself to a citizen of that country :
and he sent him,” &c. This is the extremity of indignity. The last
and bitterest drop of his bitter cup, that he, a Jew, of course, should
be reduced to herd the swine of the heathen man of the far country.

16. “And he would fain have filled his belly with the husks,”
&e.,.. . ‘gave unto him.” These husks are supposed to be, not
the pods of our ordinary leguminous plants, such as peas, or beans,396 NO MAN GAVE UNTO HIM. [Sr. Luxe.

16 And he would fain have filled his belly with the husks
that the swine did eat: and no man gave unto him.

 

or lentils, but the pods of the carob tree. ‘‘ Inshape they resemble
a bean-pod, though larger, and curved more into the form of a
sickle, thence called keration, or little horn.” (Trench.) They are
sometimes eaten by the very poor, but oftener used for the fodder-
ing of cattle. When it is said, he would fain have filled his belly
with these husks, it seems to imply that he was not allowed by the
owner even to do this; or it may be understood with what follows,
that he desired to eat these because no man gave him anything, 7.e.,
anything fitter for human food.

‘““No man gave unto him.” Not one of the false friends, or the
harlots on whom he had squandered his money would give him the
smallest trifle to save him from starving.

This is the end of the first stage of his history. At its beginning,
when he left his father’s house with the purpose of being far away
from its restraints, so that he should live a life of undisturbed sen-
sual gratification, he had fallen morally as low as he could; for the
gratification of sensual lusts is not lower than determined selfish-
ness and filial ingratitude, and through God’s mercy he has been
steeped in misery and degradation, a poor, ragged, starved swine-
herd ; so that his final outward or worldly condition was the exact
counterpart of his first spiritual state: as at first he was without the
commonest feelings of virtue, so he is now without the commonest
necessaries of life: as at first he fed his filthy lusts, so now he has
to feed swine.

Now in reviewing this part of the parable, it seems to me that a
great mistake is made by giving an intellectual colouring to it.
There is a great temptation to do this, if we take the real design of
the parable to represent the departure of the Gentiles from their
first knowledge of God. In this case the famine is supposed to re-
present the wants of the soul or spirit, to which the philosophies
and mythologies, and traditions of heathenism were as unsatisfy-
ing husks. The citizen of the country has been explained as the
representative of the wisdom and knowledge—the maxims of
worldly prudence, or principles of ethics, without religion—which

for a time sustain the soul, and ‘still the hungry edge of appetite,”
and keep it from sinking utterly, while yet they leave it in its
wretchedness.Cuar.XV.] WHEN HE CAME TO HIMSELF. Oy

17 And when he came to himself, he said, How many hired

 

Now all such intellectual colouring detracts very seriously from
the application of the parable to common life, and, still worse,
seems to weaken its principal point, which is, the readiness of God
to receive individual returning sinners—for, I need not say, every
sinner must come back personally to God. Of course amongst the
Gentiles in their best state there was a woeful famine of the know-
ledge of God; but the famine, if one would do justice to the
parable, must be taken as literally as possible, as representing the
sharp worldly disappointments and distresses which in so many
cases are the means by which sinners are brought to their senses.
The incidents of the parable are vulgar in the sense of common or
familiar, because they represent what is constantly occurring in
daily life. It is true that few men have in their youth a fortune
given them to squander in vice or extravagance, but most men leave
the home of religion or grace through some gross sin or other—
drunkenness, fornication, evilcompany, gambling, betting, or some
sort of dishonesty. In vast numbers of cases, where they are re-
claimed, it is through the sharp discipline of want, disappointment,
sickness, pain, or distress, according to the words of the Psalm,
‘Before I was afflicted I went astray, but now have I kept thy
word.” Or at least these things contribute, through the good pyro-
vidence of God, to their restoration. Some may wander through
Agnosticism, Rationalism, or various forms of Scepticism, but these
must be comparatively few, and the teaching of the Lord is not for
the few but for the many.

17. “And when he came to himself, he said, How many hired
servants,’ &c. He came to himself, or, in other words, when he
came to his senses. In spiritual matters, the coming to one’s self
is the coming to God ; for it is coming to understand our true in-
terests as immortal beings, our true place in God’s creation, or
rather family, as His sons, and our true nobility ; and yet how allthis
has added to our sin, in that we have forsaken God! In the case
of the prodigal himself, we must be careful, if we would not make
the parable unreal, not to credit him with all the thoughts and
feelings of Evangelical Christianity, as if he lived in Gospel, not in
Jewish times. The thing that awoke him, as it were, was the re-
membrance of the overflowing plenty of his forsaken home com-
pared with his present want.398 I WILL ARISE. (St. Luxe.
servants of my father’s have bread enough and to spare, and
I perish with hunger!

18 I will arise and go to my father, and will say

 

“I perish with hunger.” So A., P., Q., X., T., A, A, I, later Uncials, most Cursives,
&c.; but &, B., D., L., some Cursives, old Latin, Vulg., Copt., Syriac, &c., read, “ perish
here.”

“How many hired servants of my father’s have,” &c. Again, we
must be careful how we project the spiritual, or Christian, interpre-
tation into the story itself, and so confuse the parable, and rob it of
some of its most salient points. One commentator, for instance
makes these ‘“‘hired servants” to “represent those heathen pro-
selytes who had a place, although a very inferior one (the outer
court) in the temple, and who might thus from afar take part in the
worship.” Another sees in them “those who, with no very lofty
views about living to the glory of God, with no very lively affec-
tions towards Him, do yet find their satisfaction in the discharge
of their daily duties; who, though they do His work more in the
spirit of servants than of sons, rather looking to their hire than out
of the free impulses of love, are not without their reward.”’

But, we must ask, what did the prodigal himself mean by these
hired servants ? Evidently the lowest, meanest, and least cared for
people.in his father’s employment. In ancient times the hired
servant was far worse off than the slave, for the slave was always
sure of his food, his clothing, his lodging, his attendance when sick :
whereas the hired servant had simply his day’s wages, and when
these were paid, he went off to his hovel, and there was an end of
all care for him. He had his liberty, it is true, but that was too
often liberty to starve; so that when the prodigal envied the lot of
the hired servants, he envied the lot of the lowest of those who had
anything to do with his father.

1385S willie abe and go to my father, and will say unto him,
Father, I have,” &ce. There must have Been some struggle within
to enable fe to determine upon this. There was the shame on
the one side, the shame of meeting his father and the household,
and the elder brother, but it was overborne by the remembrance of
his father’s kindness in time past. He could not believe that he
had changed.

“My father.” He feels that he is his father, and that there is
no hope for him on earth except in the name of “ father.”Cuar. XV] FATHER, I HAVE SINNED. 399

unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before
thee,

19 And am no more worthy to be called thy son: make
me as one of thy hired servants.

20 And he arose, and came to his father. But £ when he

‘ Ree = z ie = § Acts ii. 39
' TO oO , 7 aE . Ue
was yet a great way off, his father saw him, Taearia te

 

“Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee.”
“‘ Against heaven,” i.e., against the God of heaven. ‘“‘ Before thee.”
Notice that we are yet in the parable, and so we must not at present
identify the father of the parable with God, the Eternal Father of the
Eternal Son. The father is the natural father of the prodigal, and
he resolves to return to him confessing the twofold guilt of his
sin against heaven and before him. Godet considers this ‘‘ before
thee’ to mean when in the presence, and under the roof of his
father he gathered all together, and when his father beheld him
with grief, ‘he defied his last look, and obstinately turned his back
upon him.” It may be, however, that he knew that his reckless
career had become known to his father.

19. ““ And am no more worthy to be called thy son.” Here we
have the truth so constantly recurring in Scripture, that it is one
thing to be in relationship to a person, God or man, and another to
live according to that relationship—one thing to be a son, another
to live as a son should live. Thus St. Paul, ‘‘ Now are ye light in
the Lord, walk as children of light’ (Ephes. v. 8).

‘“* Make me as one of thy hired servants.” Again he thinks of
the lowest and poorest in his father’s employment and desires to
take his place amongst them.

20. ‘“‘And he arose, and came to his father.” Apparently he
made no delay. The sharp discipline of want and shame had had
its desired effect.

‘*But when he was yet a great way off, his father saw him.”
His father was on the look-out for him. He knew, no doubt, that
there was but one way by which he could return. It seems impos-
sible to suppose that he had been totally without any information
respecting his son, and so hearing of his extremity, he might expect
him back. If, however, the Lord would have us suppose that he
had no knowledge of it, what a picture have we of a father’s yearn-
ing for the lost, that he should go out daily, perhaps many times a400 FELL ON HIS NECK. [Sr. Luxe.

and had compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed
him,

21 And the son said unto him, Father, I have sinned
h Ps, li, 4, against heaven, and in thy sight, and am no
more worthy to be called thy son.

 

21. ** And am no more worthy.” ‘‘ And” omitted by N; A., B., D., K., L., 1, 1, 6, 181,
and a few others, old Latin, Vulg., Sah., Copt.; but K., G., H., M., P., Q., R., other
Uncials, most Cursives, Syriac, &c., retain ‘‘ and.”

21. &, B., D., U., X., add to end, ‘“*make me as one of thy hired servants.” A., L., P.,
Q., R., other Uncials, almost all Cursives, old Latin, Vulg., &c., omit it.

day, and strain his eyes in the direction of the “‘ far country,” hoping
against hope that his son might have some sense of his sin—some
memory of the goodness of his home vouchsafed to him by God!
He knew that he had long earnestly prayed for this, and it may be
that he had faith in the promises of God that He would answer his
prayers.

‘* His father saw him.” His heart at once told him that the in-
distinct figure in the dim distance was his son. He forgot in a
moment all the unkind, unfilial treatment which he had received.
His bowels yearned over him, and

‘He ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed him.” This appa-
rently before the son had time to say a word. His return was the
best proof of his repentance, but there was also the deep sorrow and
anguish of his face, his soiled and tattered garments, his erect form
bowed down with shame. By all this the father saw at a glance
that his son was “‘ alive again.”

21. ‘‘And the son said unto him, Father, I have sinned against
heaven,” &c, The unlooked for kindness of his reception does not
stay for a moment the penitent’s confession. The acknowledgment
of sin seems perfect.

‘‘T have sinned against heaven,” i.e., against God and His law
and holy will, and before thee. His absence from a good and righ-
teous home, and the company of a loving father was, he knew, ever
before his father. His abject poverty and wan looks were the proof,
before the eyes of all, of his vicious extravagance.

‘And am no more worthy to be called thy son.” Here was the
acknowledgment of his father’s goodness and righteousness. How
could such a profligate be the son of such a father? and yet he isCuar. XV.] BRING FORTH THE BEST ROBE. AO]

22 But the father said to his servants, Brine forth the

best robe and put it on him; and put a ring on his hand,
and shoes on his feet :

 

 

22. ‘Bring forth quickly ” (tax).
Goth., Copt., Arm., 42th.; but Aj
read as in Rec. Text.

SON Br bX. taXews), old Latin, Vulg.,
later Uncials, all Cursives, Sah., Syriac, omit and

his father. This is admirably put by Quesnel, ‘The particular
marks of God’s favour and goodness towards a true penitent never
cause him to lay aside the resolution of humbling himself ever after
at His footstool. He is faithful to his purpose, and it is even an
effect of the goodness of God that he isso. How unworthy soever
he may acknowledge himself to be called a child of God, yet he
cannot forbear calling Him Father: it is a contest between con-
fidence and humility; the former restores what the latter takes
away.”

42. “ But the father said to his servants, Bring forth the best
robe... . shoes on his feet.” If we are to bear in mind the
intention of the parable which is to teach us how God rejoices over
the penitent, we must postpone all consideration of the spiritual or
mystical meaning of the robe, or ring, or shoes, and consider for
the present only what they would signify if the parable was the
relation of an occurrence which actually took place about that time.
In such a case the robe would not be the robe which the prodigal
used to wear before he left home (if it was a costly or gorgeous one,
why when he gathered all together should he have left it behind 2),
but the best festive robe in the house. The father, being a man of
wealth and consideration, would have festive robes with which he
would clothe any guest whom he wished to honour (see parti-
cularly notes on Matth. xxii. 11); so that the young man was wel-
comed back, not merely with the tenderest affection, but in the
highest festive way as the most honoured guest; the giving of a ring
was a sign of the highest honour which princes could bestow.
(Genesis xl. 42, Esther iii. 10, viii. 2.) The putting on of shoes or
sandals on his feet, was not because he was weary and footsore, but
because the being shoeless was a mark of mourning (2 Sam. xv. 30,
Hzekiel xxiv. 17); and so all signs of mourning must be removed ;
besides, we are told that slaves could not wear shoes or sandals, so
that this investiture was a token that he was not for a moment to be
considered as a slave, notwithstanding his poverty.

DD402 LET US EAT AND BE MERRY. [Sr. Luxe.

23 And bring hither the fatted calf, and kill i; and let us
eat, and be merry :

 

23. ‘‘And bring hither the fatted calf, and kill it,” &e. In those
old times, when each great man killed the meat for his feasts, and
at any time might be called to entertain persons of distinction,
some beasts were always ready fattened (Gen. xviii. 7); so that the
penitent is, in all respects, treated as a distinguished guest who had
suddenly arrived, and towards whom suitable and generous hospi-
tality was to be exercised.

24. ‘For this my son was dead, and is alive again,” &....
‘‘began to be merry.”” We are not at first to give these words
their high spiritual meaning, though I confess that it is hard not
to do so. Still any good and virtuous man who had similarly lost
one of his family, would almost naturally say the same. ‘My son
was dead to all better feelings, all self-respect, all sense of what is
looked for from a member of my family, and all these good and
right feelings are revived in him, so that he is to me as one alive
from the dead. He was lost to myself, to his family, to society,
and religion, and is found.

Such is the parable. I have studiously kept quite in the back-
ground all spiritual, all evangelical, all mystical meanings, because
all such seem to me, if brought forward at the first, to detract from
the power of the teaching, which is to set forth the heavenly joy
in the bosom of God, and of the angels of God, at the restoration of
the penitent, by means of a most graphic picture of high and pure
earthly joy at the return of a reprobate to his earthly father’s house.
The circumstances of the parable are intensely human, or, to use
the word most fashionable with expositors, intensely anthropo-
morphic, and were intended by the Lord to be so, so that of our-
selves—ourselves, of course, in our best state—we might judge what
is right.

And the lesson is beyond measure astonishing. The Eternal Son,
Who is in the bosom of the Father, and Who knows every beat of
that Father’s heart, sets forth here what He alone knows, the mind
of God towards the penitent. In the two former parables this mind
is set forth in somewhat general language, ‘‘ Rejoice with me, for I
have found my sheep,” ‘‘ Rejoice with me, for I have found the
piece which I had lost ;”’ but here is the liveliest picture of the joy
itself, the seeing afar off, the compassion, the embrace, the kiss, asCuar. XV\] DEAD AND ALIVE AGAIN. 403

;
24 1For this my son was dead, and is alive again; he

was lost, and is found. And they began to be auras a‘

“ Ss oD Meee le OG

merry. v.14. Rev,
: iii. 1.

 

prelude to the festive robe, the ring, the sandals, the best provision,
the feast itself, the mirth of the feast.

Such is the human or earthly picture by which the Lord would
have us judge of the mind and heart of His Father towards
penitent sinners. And now, having kept the picture on its human
side clear, so that it may bring out in stronger relief the one creat
purpose of the parable, we can the better consider its evangelical
application, because it was evidently intended, not for a mere
handful of Jews, but for us, for the Church of Christ, the Church
Catholic in all ages and in all countries.

In the spiritual application, the loving and forbearing Father is
God. By some German commentators it has, to serve their
rationalistic purposes, been made a difficulty that the Son of God,
and His Mediation are not alluded to in a parable which seems to
require some reference to them; but the whole Godhead—Father,
Son, and Spirit—is the Head of the house ; the prodigal sins equally
against the love of the Father, the covenant of the Son, and the
sealing of the Spirit.

It will be now at the outset necessary to settle distinctly in our
minds as to what the home is from which the prodigal, or the erring
Christian, departs ; for this lies at the root of the parable itself, and
of any spiritual application of it. It has been taken by Catholic
commentators to be the state of baptismal grace or membership
in the mystical body of Christ, in which, assuming that infant
baptism is according to the will of God, and that He will accom-
pany it with grace suitable to the needs of the child, the son has
been brought up from his earliest years. Only two hypotheses
seem possible. This to which we have alluded, that the pro-
digal was brought up in a state of grace answering to that men-
tioned in the catechism, ‘‘I heartily thank our heavenly Father,
that he hath called me to this state of salvation through Jesus
Christ our Saviour; and I pray unto God to give me his grace,
that I may continue in the same.” Or that the youth entered into
a state of grace by an act of conscious conversion later in life, which
would necessitate that he should be the son of another father,
brought up in an altogether different home, and that much later in404 THE HOME. [St. Luxe.

life, perhaps two or three years before his departure, he deliberately
chose for himself another father, and then, for the first time,
became an inmate of the good and holy home which he left when
he became the prodigal. It is absolutely necessary, I say, that we
should settle this matter, for the fact that the prodigal left the house
of a father, in which he was living in peace and plenty at the time
of his departure, is not one of the accessories of the parable, but
its dominant feature. It is the root, the foundation of the whole
matter. I do not see how in either this dispensation, or indeed in
the Jewish, the parable could be applied to individual souls without
it. The doctrine of baptismal grace, as set forth in Scripture and
the formularies of the Church,‘ supplies the idea of the home; and,
as far as I can see, nothing else can. And a home of love and
grace in which a child can be brought up must be assumed, or the
whole parable seems meaningless.

Such is the home; and now for the circumstances of the depar-
ture. The younger son first asked that his portion of goods might
be given to him, so that he might do what he liked with it, and the
father at once gave it to him. This is interpreted on the part of
the Eternal Father as the gift of free-will, and on the part of the
prodigal as representing that inherent selfishness which is at the
root of all wilful sin, or that love of independence which even
caused the fall of our first parents; but I ask, is it not essential to
the construction of the sort of parable or story which the Lord in-
tended to produce? He desired to represent a man well brought
up wasting his patrimony in vice and extravagance, and also his
kind reception by his father after he had incurred severe discipline,
And this necessitates that he must have means wherewith to be
sinful and profligate; and so his father must give him his share at
the outset. The conduct of the father, if it represents the conduct
of God, seems to me to set forth the terrible truth, that when men
depart from God, He does not take away His gifts from them, but
permits them to misuse them, so that they may see that all tem-
poral gifts are curses when enjoyed apart from Him.

The taking a journey into the far country, and there wasting his
substance must be what it is described as being, plunging into a

 

‘ Or what, of course, exactly answers to it under the old covenant,
the reception of the Jewish child by circumcision into the elder
family of God.Cuar. XV.] THE DEPARTURE. A405

course of open and deliberate sin, accompanied by drunkenness and
fornication, as well as waste and extravagance. The latter part of
the parable forbids us to interpret it as any form of ill-temper, or
moroseness, or even self-righteousness which, if persisted in, will
destroy religion. It must be open and deliberate sin, and be it re-
membered that open profligacy has the additional aggravation that
it involves others in sin. The evil companions, male and female,
of the prodigal must have been, some of them, at least, hardened,
not only by his example, but by the means of sinful indulgence
which the squandering of his great wealth afforded them. Some
of them may have owed their first experience in evil to him.

Add to this that the greater part of those to whom we preach
repentance seem mostly to fall away from God by gross sin of some
sort, especially the poor.’

The ‘‘ far country’ has been interpreted as alienation from God.
To Christians it may also mean deliberate withdrawing from the
reception of those means of grace which remind the soul of God and
eternal things.

The “mighty famine ’’ must not be taken to be a ‘‘ famine of the
word of God,” or of spiritual satisfaction, because this sort of want
was most pressing when he was in the height of his carnal plea-
sures. Then his soul was dying of spiritual starvation when he
least realized such needs. The famine is rather, as I have said,
the afflictions and distresses both of body and soul by which God
so often brings wilful sinners to their senses.

The “‘ feeding swine’ seems to depict the lowest state of abase-
ment that could well enter into the Jewish mind. The consistency
of the outward framework of the parable seems to require that it
should not be understood as the gratification of very debasing lusts,
because he had not the means of so doing, and had not wherewithal
to assuage his hunger.

The ‘‘ coming to himself” and his soliloquy about the hired ser-
vants seems to betoken the awaking of the soul to its true needs,
perhaps the remembrance of bygone pleasures of religion, perhaps
the consciousness that those only who are in the home of God’s
grace enjoy true happiness.

 

‘ The late Archbishop Sumner in his “ Apostolical Preaching
considered,” notices this as showing the wisdom of the Apostles in
preaching against gross rather than refined forms of sin.not an outward, but an inward thing.

406 MY FATHER. [Sr. Luxe.

‘“‘T will arise, and go to my Father.’ Here is the first thing,
to arise out of the mire and degradation of sin, and go even to
God.

“To my Father.’ Here is the sense of the Fatherhood of God,
which gives its life to Evangelical repentance: without it all is
cold formalism, or forsaking of sins on mere prudential motives, or
despair.

‘“‘ Father, I have sinned against heaven, and before thee.” ‘* He
shows his repentance to have been divinely wrought, a work of the
Holy Spirit, in that he acknowledges his sin at its root as trans-
eression of the Divine Law—as wrought against God. Thus did
David say, ‘against Thee, Thee only have I sinned,’ while yet his
offences had been against the second table. For we may injure our-
selves by our evil, we may wrong our neighbour, but strictly speak-
ing we can sin only against God; and the recognition of our evil
as first and chiefly an offence against Him, is of the essence of all
true repentance, and distinguishes it broadly from remorse, and
all other kinds of sorrow which may follow upon evil deeds.”
(Trench).

‘* And am no more worthy to be called thy son.” See observa-
tions on pp. 399 and 400.

“When he was yet a great way off, his father saw him,” &e.
This is far truer of the spiritual reality than of the parabolic
picture ; for it is the heavenly Father, Who when he is almost
totally alienated, brings the sinner to his senses by corrective
discipline, brings him to himself, shows him how his sin is against
heaven, gives him the mind to resolve, and secretly upholds him in
putting his resolution into effect; and when he is come back, and
is nearing home, gives him such a foretaste of heavenly joys as
dispels his fears and encourages him, and fills him with hope and
makes him resolve that come what will, he will never again wring
the heart of so forbearing a Father. Quesnel aptly remarks, ‘“‘ A
pastor to whom a penitent comes as a father, ought to have the
heart and deportment of one, and imitate Him Whose place he
holds.”

As to the robe, the ring, the shoes, the fatted calf, we have seen
how they denote high festival: and I think it is well to keep them
as such, and not endeavour to minutely particularize everything.
Thus the robe has been explained as the “‘ Righteousness of Christ
thrown over the sinner,” but the great gift of the New Covenant is
Jewish righteousness igCuap. XV.] MUSICK AND DANCING. AQT

25 Now his elder son was in the field: and as he came
and drew nigh to the house, he heard musick and dancing.

comparatively external, whilst Christian righteousness, that of the
new and better covenant is ‘“‘I will put my law in their hearts”
(Hebrews x. 11). Again, the ring has been explained as the sign of
betrothal, ‘‘I will betroth thee unto me in faithfulness,” and the
shoes somewhat lamely have been associated with Ephes. vi. 15.

The killing of the fatted calf has been said to be the Death of
Christ; but as Trench well remarks, ‘‘ That sacrifice is not a con-
sequence of the sinner’s return, as the killing of the fatted calf ig
the consequence of the prodigal’s, but the ground which renders
such a return possible.”

With respect to the Eucharistic feeding, which the feast on the
fatted calf is, by so many spiritual divines, said to symbolize, I
cannot help saying that I hesitate so to apply it. The figures
which compose this delightful parable are exceedingly engaging,
loving, instructive, necessary, but they are elementary. They
appear to me to be in a sphere below those set forth in John
vi. The Eucharistic feeding, that in it we may partake of the full
nature of the God-Man, has to do with the conveyance of Life,
spiritual and eternal Life, and the Resurrection of the Body, whilst
the fatted calf has to do with the festivity of a welcome home.
The ideas associated with the welcome home are very beautiful, but
still ordinary religious ideas, God meeting the penitent, encouraging
him, diffusing joy into his heart; whereas the ideas associated with
the Eucharistic Oblation, and the feeding on the Body and Blood
of the Adorable Victim, are transcendental.

The second part of the parable teaches us the same lesson as the
first part, viz: the exceeding goodness and forbearance of the
father, in dealing with and endeavouring to win over to a better
mind, one whose conduct seems morose and churlish to the last
degree. It begins with

25. ‘*Now his elder son was in the field: . . . music and danc-
ing.” + Now his elder son was in the field, 2.e., he was about his

 

1 «* Musick and dancing.” As I desire to keep my remarks on this parable free from
all considerations which may distract the reader’s attention from its great lesson, I think
it better to throw the following into a footnote.

On the ‘‘dancing” Dean Alford remarks :—‘ This is one of those by-glances into the
lesser occupations and recreations of human life, by which the Lord so often stamps hi408 WHAT THESE THINGS MEANT. _ [Sr. Luxe.

26 And he called one of the servants, and asked what these
things meant.

 

father’s business, and considering that the framework of the parable
has to do solely with home duty, or the neglect of it, nothing better
could be said of him. It is quite evident that the Lord means by
this notice to contrast his conduct with that of his brother’s, and
also to shew us, perhaps by way of some exculpation, that having
been absent about the farm work when the younger son returned,
he had not seen the deep marks of contrition exhibited in his
whole demeanour nor heard his penitent confession. In fact we
shall see he had not heard one word of his brother’s change of
heart till he heard it from his father in the very last words of the
parable.

Let the reader remember that I do not say this to vindicate him,

 

tacit approval on the joys and unbendings of men. Would these festal employments have
been here mentioned by Him on so solemn and blessed an occasion, if they really were
amongst those works of the devil which He came into the world to destroy?” Upon this
another commentator, Bishop Ryle, remarks :—‘‘I can see no force in arguments of this
kind. There is not the slightest proof that the dancing referred to in this place was at
all like the dancing of modern times. There is no proof that it was at night, or that it
was a dance of men and women mingled together.” But is not this commentator aware
that the most abominable of all dancing is that where the sexes—especially the females—
dance apart? The thing which purifies dancing in these Western countries is the in-
termingling of the sexes, just as the same mixture goes very far (humanly speaking)
to purify society. The vilest state of society is that where men and women are kept
apart.

With respect to dancing itself, it is a natural way of expressing joy, and so is common,
in some shape or other, to the whole human family. It is abundantly recognized in
scripture as a natural and innocent mode of recreation. Thus Jeremiah xxxi. 13, “ Then,”
2. €. in Messianic times, ‘‘ the virgins shall rejoice in the dance, both young men and old
together: for I will turn their mourning into joy, and will comfort them, and make them
rejoice from their sorrow.” Also Jer. xxxi. 4. “Thou shalt be built . ... and shalt
again go forth in the dances of them that make merry.” It was also, like music, capable
of a religious use. Psalm cxlix. 8, cl. 4; Exod. xv. 20; II. Samuel, vi. 14; which it
could not be if it was essentially ungodly. Of course like every other amusement, or,
indeed, occupation, it requires strict Christian watchfulness, lest it occupy the mind ;
and wherever it takes place in houses of public resort it requires to be put under the
strictest regulation as to hours, company, &c. I cannot help concluding this note without
expressing my conviction—that in past years untold harm has been done to tender con-
sciences by religious guides of a certain school making that to be a sin which is no sin.
The young have been taught that an amusement is essentially unclean, which God has
not pronounced to be unclean. Not being ‘fully persuaded in their own minds,” they
have engaged in it, as the Apostle says, “‘ with offence,” and from this they have received
permanent injury to their souls rather than from any evil connected with the amusement
itself; but we trust that this, being the fault of others, will not be imputed to them.Cuar. XV.] HE WAS ANGRY. 409

27 And he said unto him, Thy brother is come; and thy
father hath killed the fatted calf, because he hath received
him safe and sound.

28 And he was angry, and would not go in: therefore
came his father out, and intreated him.

 

28. ‘* Therefore came his father out.” So almost all later Uncials, almost all Cursives,
Vulg., Syriac; but X, A., B., D., L., R., X., 1, 33, 181, 157, old Latin, Goth., Copt., Arm.,
read, ‘and his father.”
but rather to vindicate the father, whose words of affection and
regard to him are utterly out of keeping with the character of mere
superficial show of heartless obedience, with which the majority of

commentators credit him. |
26. “And he called one of the servants and asked what these

things meant. .. . safe and sound.” This enquiry without going

in himself is also alleged against him by Archbishop Trench as |

indicating the ungenial character of the man, and still more
offensively by Godet. ‘ Every free and joyous impulse is abhorrent
to the spirit of Pharisaism. Rather than go straight into the
house, the elder son begins by gathering information from a
servant: he does not feel himself at home in the house.” But it
seems to me that the Lord introduces this minor incident with a
double purpose. First, as part of the necessary machinery, so to
speak, of the parable. It was necessary in order to bring out into
the strongest relief the exceeding kindness and forbearance of the
old man, that he should himself come out and himself personally
entreat his son to come in; all which would have been lost if the
son had gone in at once. And, besides this, it is probably intended
by the Lord to be in some measure exculpatory, for the servant, as
IT before remarked, said nothing whatsoever of the younger brother's
repentance, merely that the father had received him safe and
sound, and the sinful irreconcilability of the elder brother scarcely
began, till he, having heard the imperfect statement of the servant,
refused to come in, which, with the father’s conduct consequent
upon it, is thus described.

98. “And he was angry, and would not come: theretore came
his father,” &c. It is to be remembered that he had not heard the
circumstances which were in his brother’s favour. This, 7.e., his deep
sorrow and humiliation, he heard for the first time when his father
came out and described his brother as one risen from the dead.410 THOU NEVER GAVEST ME A KID. (Sr. Luxe.

29 And he answering said to his father, Lo, these many
years do I serve thee, neither transgressed I at any time thy
commandment: and yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I
might make merry with my friends:

 

He ought of course to have anticipated his father’s kindness,
or, as Godet says, to have considered himself more at home, but, if
he had, we should have missed the latter part of the parable.

29. “‘ And he answering said to his father, Lo, these many years
do I serve thee, neither at any time,” &c. Let the reader remember
that these words in the actual parable itself, as distinguished from
its spiritual import, may not have been said in the vain-glorious
spirit which they seem to us to proceed from. Looking at them
simply and merely as what passed between a human father and his
son, many a son may have been able to say this to his father, just
as I have heard more than one father say of his son, ‘“‘ That dear
lad has never given me one moment’s uneasiness.” If St. Paul in
the view of the approval of his Divine Father could say, “‘ Men and
brethren, I have lived in all good conscience before God until this
day ” (Acts, xxiii. 1), and could deseribe his former Judaical state in
the words ‘‘touching the righteousness which is of the law blame-
less,” surely this young man, looking back at his past years of
industrious farm work, office work, home work, might say what he
did.

Of course, considered theologically in the light of the new views
of things brought us by the fulness of New Testament teaching,
respecting works and grace, he could not for a moment say any-
thing like this to his heavenly Father. Taking the fulness of
gospel truth into account, and considering the father of the parable

not as a human, but as the Eternal Father, he must be held to
have sinned and come short of the glory of God, and must be
justified freely by God’s grace, just as his own father, rather just as
Abraham, Isaac, and Jacob, and the prophets must have been
justified. But looking at the parable on its human side, it was
quite possible that he could, without falsehood, have said this to
the father whose estate he had managed, and whose household had
been probably very much under his coutrol.!

* I cannot gather less than this from verse 31.Cuar. XV.] SON, THOU ART EVER WITH ME. All

30 But as soon as this thy son was come, which hath
devoured thy living with harlots, thou hast killed for him
the fatted calf.

31.And he said unto him, Son, thou art ever with me,
and all that I have is thine.

 

‘* And yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I might,” Xe.

Though in all probability there was not a sumptuous entertain-
ment given by his father for years past in which he had not played
the part next to the head of the household.

30. ‘‘ But as soon as this thy son was come, which hath devoured
thy living,” &c. Nothing can be worse than the spirit of this
remonstrance. He repudiates the name and relationship of brother.
This thy son—not my brother, but thy son: thereby tacitly re-
proaching his father for having such a son. I cannot help remark-
ing that he would not have expressed himself in such language if
his brother and he had been on loving terms before the departure
of the former. Up to that time it is not probable that they had
had much in common. The elder one a business man devoted
to husbandry and the management of the estate: the younger
not so.

But this exceeding moroseness and ill-temper did not for one
moment alienate the heart of his father from him. Quite the con-
trary—the father not only bears with it, but tries to bring him
round in words of such extraordinary approval and affection that
one cannot but be astonished at the father’s wonderful forbearance
in that he should at that time, in the face of the insulting speech
which he has just received, have given utterance to them.

31,32. ‘And he said unto him, Son, thou art ever with me, and all
that I have is thine. It was meet that we should make merry, and
be glad,” &c. Here the father pronounces upon the state of the two
sons—of the first, notwithstanding the sinful outbreak of unchari-
tableness and ill-temper, he says, ‘‘Son, thou art ever with me,
and all that I have is thine.” Of the other he says, “This thy
brother was dead, and is alive again ; and was lost, and is found.”

Now both these expressions must be understood according to the
same principle of interpretation. They must both be understood,
first of all, in a worldly or lower sense, that is, within the limits of412 THIS THY BROTHER. [Sr. Luxe.

32 It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad:
k yer, 24, “for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again ;
and was lost, and is found.

 

the parable, taking it to be a story of what might have occurred at
any time in the history of a wealthy family; and then they must
be understood according to the spiritual interpretation of the para-
ble as an earthly story setting forth some heavenly and spiritual
reality.

In the first case “‘thou art ever with me’”’ means thou art ever
in my house—about my person—consulted by me on all points
connected with my estate and my household; and “all that I have
is thine” means thou hast the present enjoyment and the future
disposal of all that belongs to me.

In the second case “ this thy brother was dead’ means that “to
me he was as one dead, his affections were seemingly alienated
from me, and his conduct was a disgrace to my name, but now “he
is alive again,” his affection tome is revived; his conduct promises
to be virtuous, and his life will be a source of happiness to me: he
was lost to all sense of decency, lost to all better feeling, to all use-
fulness, and now all this is reversed, it is as if it had not been, he
is found.”’

But. the parable sets forth spiritual realities. We must be-
lieve, as I said, that the Lord spake it for the edification of his
Church to the end of time. If ever there was a Gospel parable
framed with reference to Gospel times, it is this. No other parable
more naturally lends itself to the exhibition of Gospel realities.

Now, as evangelically understood, what must be the significance
of “this my son (or thy brother) was dead and is alive again ?”’ It
can have but one, which is set forth in the words of the apostle :
*“‘ Awake, thou that sleepest, and arise from the dead, and Christ
shall give thee light.” The being dead must be “‘ dead in trespasses
and sins,” the being alive again must be “ yielding ourselves unto
God as those that are alive from the dead,” or in the words of
another apostle, ‘‘ we being dead to sin live unto righteousness.”
For this resurrection to newness of life we pray every time we stand
by the grave of a departed brother. ‘We meekly beseech thee, O
Father, to raise us from the death of sin unto the life of righteous-
ness.” And the same with the expressions “lost” and “ found.”
The being lost can have but one spiritual meaning, the loss of theCuar. XV.] THE DIFFICULTY. A413

soul through sin. Similarly the being ‘‘ found” can only have but
one meaning, the salvation of the soul through Christ: the soul
being brought to itself, converted, forgiven, and established by Him
Who came “‘ to seek and to save that which is lost.” But ifthe
words respecting the second son have this spiritual application, and
this only, what must we say of the words said to the first son ?
Are we to understand the words said to the younger spiritually, and
those to the elder carnally? Impossible. This is not dealing
honestly with the word of God. If the words to the younger are
intended by the Lord to apply spiritually to the members of His
Church, so must the words to the elder; and they too can have but
one meaning. ‘‘ Thou art ever with me” can only mean “ Thou
abidest in Me, in My love, in My grace—notwithstanding thine in-
firmities, thy sinful infirmities, thy outbursts of passion, or even
uncharitableness, thou art ever with Me. Thou hast not fallen away,
thou hast not sinned unto death. And ‘all that I have is thine’
cannot but mean “‘thou art yet an inheritor of the kingdomof heaven,
all things are thine if thou yet belongest unto Me.”

If the words said of the younger son respecting his restoration to
life are to be understood spiritually, so must the words to the elder
son respecting his abiding in life, or at least in the favour of God.
And there is a heartiness about both sets of expressions, an affec-
tionateness, a plainness, which seems to assure us that the Father
meant what He said in each case.

But there is undoubtedly a difficulty, which to some minds, I
believe, is insuperable, in acknowledging the reality of the father’s
words to the elder son, and it is this, that it is taken for granted
that he is intended to represent the Scribes and Pharisees, who at
the beginning of the chapter are set forth as murmuring against
the Lord, because He received sinners and eat with them; but I
believe that this identification of the elder son with the Pharisees
is a great mistake, and cannot be held consistently with our Lord’s
conduct to the Pharisees, or his words respecting them. His words
to them are always words of very strong and withering denuncia-
tions. ‘* Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites, for ye
pay tithe of mint and anise and cummin, and have omitted the
weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith.” Think
of some of the things of which He accuses them in Matth. xxiii.
‘Ye shut up the kingdom of heaven against men;” “ Ye devour
widow’s houses;” “ Ye make the proselyte twofold more the child414 JUDAISM NOT PHARISAISM. [Sr. Luxe.

of hell than before;”” “ Ye make clean the outside of the cup and
platter, but within they are full of extortion and excess;”’ “Ye are
like whited sepulchres, full of all uncleanness.”. I appeal to the
reader, is it possible that the Lord should denounce the Pharisees
as a body in this way, and then, as in this parable, address a typical
or representative Pharisee with such words as ‘‘ Son, thou are ever
with me, and all that I have is thine?’ Common sense seems to
forbid it. No. We must take the elder son to be the representa-
tive not of the Pharisee, but of the Jew—the religious Jew. And
if it be asked, Is it possible to suppose that any religious Jew would
grumble, and manifest ill-feeling at the ready reception of a penitent,
we answer, wé have a case exactly to the point in one of the most
remarkable characters in the Old Testament—in no other than the
prophet Jonah. His outburst of extreme ill-temper at God’s ready
reception of the Ninevites, and God’s patient forbearance with him,
seem the exact counterpart of the conduct exhibited by the elder
son and God’s patient forbearance towards him. [Jonah iy. ]

Be it remembered that the ill humour of the elder brother was
not directed against any reception of the returning penitent, but
against the joy and festivity which accompanied the particular
reception. Ifit had been put to him he would probably have said,
“by all means let him be received, but let him be made to feel the
disgrace that he has brought upon’us, let him be put under discip-
line, let him be treated as one of the hired servants,” forgetting, or
it may be, being willingly ignorant that his brother had been made
to undergo very severe discipline indeed, in the starvation of his
body through the famine, and in the distress and anguish of his
mind through his repentance. He required not discipline, but re-
assurance, and this he could hardly have without some very mani-
fest tokens of the restored love of his father. In the most peniten-
tial of Psalms we are taught to pray, “Make me hear of joy and
gladness, that the bones which thou hast broken may rejoice,” and
“restore unto me the joy of thy salvation.”

With respect to the saying of the elder son, ‘“ Lo, these many years
do I serve thee, neither transgressed I at any time thy command-
ment,” I say that those who impute this to him as sinful Pharisaical
self-righteousness must be extraordinarily ignorant of the language
of the Old Testament, especially of the book of Psalms. I have
counted about twenty similar and parallel expressions in the 119th
Psalm alone (verses 31, 51, 55, 06, 59, 60, 70, 101, 111, DeCuap, XV] LOVE AND SIN. Ald

129, 161-178." See also Psalm xviii. 19-26, and Neh. xiii. 14 2%
31).

The words and conduct of the elder brother thus represent, not
Pharisaism, but religious Judaism, which, one might almost say,
of necessity lacked that deep view of sin, or of the sinfulness of all
human nature which can only, as far as we can see, be brought
about by the full exhibition of the Life and Death of the Son of
God. Under such a system—an imperfect and (compared to the
Christian) a superficial system—individual goodness as contrasted
with the shortcomings of others was naturally a matter of glory,
and because of the same imperfection in the system, returning sinners
would be more harshly dealt with. The deeper the view of sin the
more will love be applied in dealing with it, because the depth of
love can only reach the depth of sin in the soul.

One word more. I have said that this parable is in its very
nature adapted to the times of the Gospel, but can the conduct and
spirit of the elder son be reproduced now? One would imagine that
the influence of this parable itself, apart from any other teaching
of Christ, would have made such a thing impossible, but it has not.
In the early ages sects flourished for centuries whose separation
from the Catholic Church was on the sole ground of its supposed
too easy reception of penitents. The whole spirit of the elder
brother seems reproduced in the later life and many of the sayings

of Tertullian. And if we could read hearts, we should perhaps find
that many devout Christians need the teaching of the parable,”
though undoubtedly much of the popular preaching of the day
ignores the prodigal’s deep and hearty repentance, and would
account him to be received back with no signs of contrition at all.

 

' 81. “I have stuck unto thy testimonies.”’

51. “The proud have had me greatly in derision, yet have I not
declined from thy law.”

55. “IT have remembered thy name, O Lord, in the night, and
have kept thy law.”

56. ‘This I had, because I kept thy precepts,” &c. &e.

2 Thomas Scott, the Evangelical Commentator, has a remarkable
note opposing the views of Dr. Adam Clarke, another Evangelical
Commentator, which is much to the point. Adam Clarke had
written: ‘‘ They would never say that He (Jesus) was a friend to416 REVIEW OF THE PARABLE. [Sr. Luge.

Such is the parable. I have, with much regret, taken a view of
it different to that of many Christian commentators, but my reasons
are these:

I believe that of all parables it is the most Evangelical, and this,
I think, mainly arises from its lending itself so readily, indeed from
its requiring an individualizing application ; but to this two things
are necessary.

1. That the groundwork of the parable—the human story of what
might have occurred in any wealthy family of the time, must be
first of all set forth naturally, because the taking of it naturally
and literally sets forth, more than anything else can do, the exube-
rance of forgiving love in the old father—the head of the family.
The love of the eternal Father in receiving sinners, is imaged by
the love of an earthly father, and the Lord has drawn the picture
of an earthly father’s love which brings home to us with exceeding
emphasis the heavenly Father’s love.

2. That all introduction of the reception of classes of men, such
as Jews and Gentiles, before Christ, or in the time of Christ, or
after it, seriously interferes with the individual application of the
parable.

 

 

 

prostitutes, because it does not appear that such persons ever came
to Christ, or that He in the way of His ministry ever came to
them” (Dr. A. Clarke, note on Luke viii.). ‘‘ Dr. Clarke, how-
ever,” Scott rejoins, ‘allows that the prodigal son was among
harlots. I trust that he did not, in his zealous defence of Mary
Magdalene from the unjust charge brought against her, recollect at
the moment the conclusion which might readily be deduced from
this statement. Are the harlots (zopyva:) so immensely more
criminal and hopeless than their male associates and often seducers
(zopyor), that while one of the latter was selected by our Lord
Himself, for the encouraging pattern of our gracious God’s ready
mercy to the penitent, however vile their previous character; the
former are to be considered merely as the objects of His frown and
studied disregard?” Iremember well that some years ago a leading
Evangelical newspaper denounced very strongly the zeal with
which the members of the Catholic School threw themselves into
the good work of reclaiming fallen women. Surely the teaching
and spirit of this parable was needed here.CHar. XV.) REVIEW OF THE PARABLE. A417

3. Thatthe parable being the most Evangelical of all, was mainly
intended for the use of the Catholic Church, i.e., for gospel times ;
and so such expressions as ‘“‘ This my son was dead, and is alive
again,’ and “Son, thou art ever with me,” must be interpreted
according to Christian, rather than to Jewish ideas, or else we
detract from our power of applying the parable to the case of any
fallen Christian. :

Add to this that the Jews did not reject Christ because of His
reception of the Gentiles, but because He was a totally different
Messiah to what they expected: ‘‘ We preach Christ crucified, to the
Jews a stumblingblock.” The Pharisees who were afterwards con-
verted to the faith gave much trouble, not because they opposed the
conversion of the Gentiles, but because they desired that they might
be circumcised that they might ‘ glory in their flesh.’ (Gal. vi.)

My view of the scope of the parable is mainly that taken in a
note at the end of Archbishop Trench’s exposition, which repro-
duces the view of Cajetan. It is this: ‘“‘Cajetan’s view of the
displeasure of the elder brother is interesting, and in its main fea-
tures, original. He speaks first of the sweetness which the peni-

ent often finds at his first return unto God, ‘the music and dan-
cing;’ for him all the glories of the Gospel have the freshness of
novelty, an overpowering gladness, which they cannot possess for
one to whom they have been familiar from the beginning. The
joy of the latter has been infinitely greater than this one burst of
gladness, but spread over larger spaces of time: so that, seeing
the exultation of the newly converted, he may be tempted to ask,
with a transient feeling of discontent, why to him also is not given
this burst of exulting joy? why for him the fatted calf has been
never slain? The answer is, because he has been ever with his
father, because his father’s possessions are, and always have been,
his. His joy, therefore, is soberer and more solid—not the sud-
denly swelling mountain torrent, but the deep but smooth, silent
river; and what is given to the other is given to him just because
he was a beginner.”

I see also that my view of the elder brother’s state is in the main
that of Wesley, who ends his remarks on the parable with, “ Let no
elder brother murmur at this indulgence, but rather welcome the
prodigal back into the family. And let those who have been thus
received, wander no more, but emulate the strictest piety of those
who for many years have served their heavenly Father, and not
transgressed His commandments.”

EEbane

418 A RICH MAN WHICH HAD A STEWARD. [Sr. Luxe.

CHAP. XVI.

ND he said also unto his disciples, There was a certain
rich man, which had a steward; and the same was
accused unto him that he had wasted his goods.

 

1. “And he said also unto his disciples, There was a certain rich
man... . wasted his goods.” I cannot altogether agree with
the great majority of expositors in considering this parable as one
of very great difficulty. The difficulty appears to me to vanish
if we hold very fast and firm to the fact that it teaches but one
lesson, and that, apart from this one lesson, it has no typical or
mystical meaning. The lesson which is the key to the whole of
it, is contained in verses 8 and 9. “ The children of this world
are, in their generation, wiser than the children of light, and I
say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of un-
righteousness,” &c. The Lord simply inculeates spiritual prudence
or foresight, and in this respect I think only teaches the children of
light to take example from the children of this world in their exercise
of worldly prudence or foresight. Many things in the parable, T fully
grant, seem to suggest a spiritual sense, but thissense cannot possibly
be applied to all the cireumstances of the parable without obscuring
its one great lesson. Take, for instance, that which at first sight
seems so obvious, that the rich man signifies God, that the steward
is the soul to whom God has committed goods which do not
belong to the soul, but to Him; that the soul, being sinful, has
wasted its Master’s goods instead of making the best of them to
His glory, that God will call each and every soul to account for
what He has committed to its keeping, that the time of this calling
to account is either death or the judgment; that the soul called
thus to account exclaims ‘“‘ What shall I do?” thus the lesson
of the parable is the need of preparation for the inevitable issue of
this calling to account, but here the spiritual interpretation begins to
fail; for when God calls us to account for the deeds donein the body,
it is too late to make preparation for afuture world. ‘The harvest is
past, the summer is ended.’ ‘The master has risen up and shut to
the door.’ And, as we proceed, the interpretation I have alludedCuar. XVI] GIVE AN ACCOUNT. 419

2 And he called him, and said unto him, How is it that I
hear this of thee? give an account of thy stewardship ; for
thou mayest be no longer steward.

 

to fails still more signally, for even supposing that God says to the
soul while there is yet time to make preparation, “‘ How is it that I
hear this of thee?” yet His demand can only be to wake the soul
to repentance, but the steward in the parable, instead of repenting,
adds sin to sin, and by further acts of dishonesty prepares a future
home for himself by evil deeds, which in the spiritual and eternal
reality he can only make provision for by good deeds.

The more seemingly obvious spiritual meaning thus failing, a
variety of others have been suggested, some of them to be com-
mended for their extraordinary ingenuity, but for nothing else.
Archbishop Trench gives an interpretation from Vitringa, which
may be taken as a sample, in which the rich man is God, the
steward the ecclesiastical rulers of the people, the accusers of these
rulers, the prophets, as Ezekiel xxxiv. 2 (“‘ Woe be to the shepherds
of Israel that do feed themselves,’’) Malachi ii. 8 (‘‘ Ye are departed
out of the way ; ye have caused many to stumble at the law,” &c.),
the accusation is “that they wasted the Lord’s goods, they used the
teaching and other powers committed to them for purposes of self-
exaltation. They feel the justice of this, and see that there is no-
thing but condemnation from God before them.” Therefore they
now seek to make themselves friends among the Lord’s debtors,
and to retain their hold upon them though forsaken by God. And
the device by which they seek to retain the people is by lowering
the standard of righteousness, by substituting an outside instead of
a heart righteousness. They invent convenient glosses for evad-
ing the strictness of God’slaw. They suffer men to put away their
wives for any trifling cause. This gives a distinct meaning to the
lowering of the bills, ‘‘ write fifty,” “write fourscore.” I have
abridged the above from Trench. The answeris that it is much too
clever, much too ingenious, and above all, much too original. The
lesson of the parable is obscured by it. 'Thelesson is a very impor-
tant one for every Christian soul, and must be very plainly set forth
in the parable itself, instead of very circuitously, and very obscurely
as in the explanation of this Vitringa.

We now proceed to examine the parable.

‘There was a certain rich man which had a steward,” as we420 I AM RESOLVED WHAT TO DO. [Sr. Lune.

3 Then the steward said within himself, What shall I do ?
for my lord taketh away from me the stewardship: I cannot
dig; to beg I am ashamed.

4 Iam resolved what to do, that, when Iam put out of
the stewardship, they may receive me into their houses.

 

should call him, an agent. It is probable that he did more than
receive rents, for the most feasible explanation of what follows ig
that he received the produce of the estate in kind, and sold it to
merchants and dealers.

‘“‘ And the same was accused unto him that he had wasted (or
was wasting) his goods.” We must adhere to the meaning of the
word “‘ wasting;”’ it is the same as that applied to describe the
extravagance of the prodigal son. He wasted his lord’s money
over himself in extravagant living. This accounts for the fact that
when put out of his office he had nothing to fall back upon, but was
penniless. He had not robbed his master and put his ill-gotten
gains in a place of safety, but had lived in extravagance beyond the
income or share of the profits which he was allowed.

2. ‘And he called him and said unto him, How isit that I hear? ”
&e. The lord had not only heard the accusation, but was con-
vinced that it was true, so he calls upon him to give account—not
with a view to his acquittal, about that the lord had made up his
mind—but that his accounts might be handed over to his successor:
besides, it is in the preparation of the account that the fraud took
place.

3. ‘*Then the steward said within himself, What shall I do?”
&c. It is clear that he had nothing to urge in excuse, or even in
mitigation. He had no hope of any further consideration from his
lord.

‘I cannot dig;” perhaps, ‘I am not strong enough to dig.”

“To beg Iam ashamed.” And yet he was not ashamed to com-
mit a fraud.

4. ““T am resolved what to do, that, when I am put out,” &e.
As if he had turned the matter over in his mind and a sudden, and,
as he deemed, a happy thought struck him: and he lost not a
moment in carrying it out, for indeed no time was to be lost.

5. “So he called every one of his lord’s debtors unto him, and
said unto the first,” &e. Notice how the abruptness of the narra-Cuar. XVI.] HOW MUCH OWEST THOU ? A421

5 So he called every one of his lord’s debtors unto him,
and said unto the first, How much owest thou unto my lord?

6 And he said, An hundred || measures of oil. | The word

A ‘ : Batus in the

And he said unto him, Take thy bill, and sit down original con-
: : taineth nine
quickly, and write fifty. gallons three
: quarts: See
7 Then said he to another, And how much UWzex. xiv. 16

: 11, 14.

owest thou? And he said, An hundred || measures 4 ‘The word

2 : : = : here inter-
of wheat. And he said unto him, Take thy bill, sreteda mea-

and write fourscore. sure in the
original. con-
taineth about
fourteen bush-
els and a pot-
tle.

>

 

tive indicates the rapidity with which the nefarious business is
carried out. No account is given of the thought and resolution
immediately following upon it. We learn what it was from the
way in which it was carried into execution.

‘“‘ And he said, An hundred measures of oil . . . write fifty .. .
write fourscore.” From the steward asking the question and using
the expression thy bill, it has been supposed that, contrary to our
custom, the debtors made out each his own account, which, when
he brought in, was examined and certified by the steward as correct.
Very probably it was so: but one thing is quite certain, that the
steward’s voucher for the correctness of the bill was, in law, binding
on the lord, who could not alter it, but must accept it as a true
account of the debt.

But why is it said that he remitted one man fifty per cent. and
the other twenty only ? Very ingenious spiritual reasons have been
given for this: but was it not a part of the steward’s shrewdness or
cunning? It seems to me (but of course no two persons will regard
this in the same light), that if he had made an uniform deduction
from each bill the fraud would have been more easily detected.
Again, as to the difference in the amount of what was remitted, it
might be alleged, that the circumstances of each debtor or farmer
required to be taken into account: and so the lord, who seems to
have been 2 man who left his concerns pretty much in the hands of
others, would take the longer time in finding out the exact nature
and extent of the fraud.

Such was the fraud, a very clever one, perhaps one which, except
for some accident, would not have been discovered for a long time.422 THE LORD COMMENDED. (Sr. Lure.

8 And the lord commended the unjust steward, because he

 

He had been able, at the last moment, to make each of these debtors
a present of a considerable sum of money, and he counted on their
gratitude and perhaps on their fears that he might make his home
at one or other of their houses for some time to come.

8. “ And the lord commended the unjust steward, because he had:
done wisely.” Done wisely, or rather prudently, in that at the
very last moment he had provided himself a home with money
which he had for a very short time, perhaps only for a day or
two, under his control. He had to give up his account, part of
that account must be the amount of money owing to the lord or
rich man. It was not in his power to apply to his own use any
deduction he might make in each case, because when found out
he could have been compelled to repay it, and the debtor, being
in no way under an obligation to him, would have been first to
accuse him, but his voucher or signature was good against his
master, so that the lord could not sue the debtor for more than was
on the bill.

Altogether it was a very clever fraud, and so the lord praised
him for his prudence and forethought. And the Lord Jesus Him-
self now comes in, and adds the moral. ‘For the children of this
world are in their generation wiser than the children of light.”
What is the significance of this ‘for’ [37:] 2? Some, and amongst
them Alford, seem to think that it refers to the lord, or rich man,
as a child of this world, in a measure sympathizing with and so
praising the unjust steward for his clever fraud; but we have no
right to assume this of the rich man, for the little we are told of
him seems to show that he was by no means watchful in the
management of his concerns.

Is not the explanation of it rather in the wisely (¢povipwe), and
wiser (ppoviwrepor), as if He said, ‘though the wisdom of this
world, in all its branches, is foolishness with God, yet there is a
certain wisdom in which the children of this world excel, and this
is the wisdom of self-interest ; and so his lord praised the steward
in this sense, and he could well do so because the children of this
world present so very many examples of this lower ear thly wisdom.’

‘‘ Are in their generation wiser than the children of lwedanie’? IGF
has been thought that the word “wisely” is not a good rendering,
because in the most part of Scripture the word “wise ” ig appliedCuar, XVL] IN THEIR GENERATION. A423

had done wisely: for the children of this world are in their

generation wiser than * the children of light. # John xii. 36.
E

ph. v. 8
ROR Ran Pe cree 1 Thess. v. d.

to the wisdom from above—the highest wisdom, and it has been
suggested that it would be better to render it by “* prudent’’—
‘‘ prudently,” but this latter word by no means sufficiently recog-
nizes the extraordinary cleverness of the transaction, in which in-
genuity was united with rapidity of execution. The word “ shrewd,”
however, would be better rendering of the Greek, Perhaps the
word which exactly expresses the idea is our word, ‘‘ sharp,” which
would combine the forethought of the man, the ingenuity of his
conception, and the quickness with which he carried it out.

“Tn their generation.” The very literal rendering is “ towards their
generation,’ which would seem to mean towards the men of their
generation, and the idea is supposed to be that the steward, and
the debtors benefited by him were all of one race, children of the
ungodly world; and the Lord’s declaration is that the men of this
world make their intercourse with one another more profitable,
obtain more by it, manage it better for their interests, such as those
are, than do the children of light their intercourse with one another.
“For what opportunities,” He would imply, ‘‘are missed by these
last by those among them to whom a share of the earthly mammon
is entrusted; what opportunities of laying up treasure in heaven,
of making to themselves friends for the time to come by showing
love to the poor saints, or generally of doing offices of kindness to
the household of faith, to those of the same generation as them-
selves,_—whom notwithstanding this affinity they yet make not to
the extent they might receivers of benefits to be returned hereafter
a hundredfold into their own bosoms.” (Trench.) This is ex-
ceedingly good, but is not the application much too narrow ? for
surely a man makes himself friends of the mammon of unrighteous-
ness, when he supports missions to the heathen abroad, or to those
who are utterly alienated from the Church and virtually heathen
at home. I acknowledge, of course, that there is a peculiar blessing
upon those who do good to Christians, as Christians, or the Apostle
would not have said, ‘“‘ While we have time let us do good unto all
men, and specially to them who are of the household of faith.” I
cannot, however, help thinking that if possible the paraphrase of
Alford, which gives a wider application, is to be preferred. “The
sons of this world are far more shrewd for (towards the pur-424 WHEN YE FAIL. (Sv. Luxe.

9 And I say unto you, "Make to yourselves friends of the

b Dan.iv.27. || mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye
Matt. vi.19.& |! : 5 : ;
xix. 21. ch.xi. fail, they may receive you into everlasting habi-
41, 1 Tim. vi. ; : Y

17, 18, 19. tations.

| Or, riches.

 

9. <‘ When ye fail.” So later Uncials, nearly all Cursives, some old Latin (b, e, f, ff,
g)Viulo- but N; A.B: D., Ll. R., mW, old Latin (a, cy 1); Cop., syz-, Arm:, ith., read,
“‘they fail.”

poses of) their own generation, for the purposes of their self-
interest, than the sons of light.’’ If we take the term ‘‘ generation ”’
to signify the time in which each generation lives, and along with
it the interests, opportunities, &c., of that time, then, the word
may mean, ‘“‘in matters pertaining to this world,” which is, I
think, the true idea. Be it remembered, however, that the Lord
speaks generally, for many a child of this world throws away his
earthly prospects, just as some children of light have in their
pursuit of the true and eternal riches, far exceeded the wise of this
world in their pursuit of this world’s good things.

9. “And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the
mammon,” &e. We must first consider the broad, general meaning
of this saying of the Lord, and then the particular terms in which
it is expressed.

The Lord introduces His lesson with, “I say unto you.” In
this He seems to contrast Himself with the lord of the unjust
steward. ‘‘ He, the lord, commended the unjust steward because he
made such good use, for his own purposes, of money over which
he had control for so very short a time. And I, your Lord and
Judge, commend the same prudence and forthought to you, My
disciples and hearers. As he made himself friends by the money
over which he had control, so I say unto you make to yourselves
friends by means of that which it is now in your power to use to
your eternal advantage.”

The Lord’s saying is virtually the same as His saying in
Matthew vi. 19.20. “Lay not up for yourselves treasures upon
earth,” “lay up for yourselves treasures in heaven;”’ the same as,
“Sell that thou hast and give to the poor, and thou shalt have
treasure in heaven.” The same as that in Luke, “Sell that ye
have and give alms, provide yourselves .. . a treasure in the heaven
that faileth not.” The same as that in 1 Tim. vi. 19, ‘* Chargeen 5 EE IG TC A

 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
  
  
 
  
  
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
  
 
  
   
  
 
 
  
     

Cuar. XVI] FAITHFUL, UNJUST. 425

10 °He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful

also in much: and he that is unjust in the least © Matt. xxv.
: - Di che xix, le
is unjust also in much.

them that are rich in this world that they do good, laying up in
store for themselves a good foundation ... that they may attain
eternal life.’ In fine it is one of those many places which give a
place to almsgiving of the first importance, which make it a means
of calling down from God especial grace, and which seem to make
it almost, if it may be lawful to say so, ‘‘propitiatory ”’—not of
course expiatory, but propitiatory in the sense of making God
propitious to us according to the Lord’s words, ‘‘ Blessed are the
merciful, for they shall obtain mercy.”

But why does the Lord express himself in such terms as “ Make
to yourselves friends of the mammon of unrighteousness?” We
answer, to carry on the analogy of the parable. The Lord had
given utterance to a very graphic parable, in all probability founded
upon an actual occurrence in which a man by unjust use of what
was not his own made himself friends, who would receive him into
their temporal habitations; and the Lord would have us in a way
very acceptable to God, make by means of the same money which,
though we have the disposal of it, is not strictly our own, friends
who will receive us into eternal habitations. The expressions are
clearly highly figurative or poetical. The friends who will receive
us to the everlasting habitations, are either the good deeds per-
gonified, of which we have abundant instances in Scripture, as
when, for instance, the hire of labourers is said to cry against
oppressors of the poor (James v. 4), or when Abel’s blood is said to
ery to God against Cain, or it may be the friends whom we have
won by our almsgiving, who will pray for us in this world, or if
they die before us will welcome us into Paradise. I very much
prefer the former meaning.

The Lord calls this world’s riches unrighteous mammon, either
because it is so often amassed, or at least increased by crooked
means, or hard dealing, or because it so often produces covetous-
ness, or worldliness, in those who possess it.

10. “He that is faithful in that which is least is faithful also in
much: and he,” &. The Lord here seems to pass from the un-
faithfulness of the steward in dealing with that which was his426 UNRIGHTEOUS MAMMON. TRUE RICHES. [Sr. Luxe,

11 If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrigh-
|| Or, riches. teous || mammon, who will commit to your trust
the true riches ?

 

master’s to the detriment of his master, to the general subject of
faithfulness to our trusts and its opposite. He lays down that
faithfulness is a principle, and, as such, will be seen in the per-
formance of the smallest duties as much as in the greatest. “There
is nothing small which God has either commanded, or expressed
His pleasure respecting it, that we should do it. His greatness
makes all about Him to be great. Nothing is little by which God
may be pleased or may be offended. A thought is a little thing,
and yet it may be a great provocation of the Divine Majesty ; for
every sin has the whole principle and virus of sin. So every duty,
even the least duty, involves the whole principle of obedience, and
little duties make the will dutiful, that is, supple and prompt to
obey. The daily round of duty is full of probation and of discipline :
it trains the will, heart, and conscience. To be holy we need not
be prophets or apostles. The commonest life may be full of per-
fection. The duties of home are a discipline for the ministries of
heaven. It is specially the common unnoticed duties of life which
are the safest and most searching tests. They have no ostentation
or excitement, but are done from inward force and a fruitful
principle of duty.” (Manning, ‘ Sermons,” vol. iv. Sermon Li)
11. “If therefore ye have not been faithful in the unrighteous
mammon, who will,” &. The unrighteous mammon means the
goods of this world, the use or disposal of which God has made a
part of our probation. If we are faithful in the use of these,
we show our fitness to have what the Lord here calls the “ true ”’
entrusted to us. Our translators have supplied the word “riches ”’
to complete the sense: but the word which the parallelism strictly
demands is “mammon’’—‘ the true mammon”: but as such a
rendering is absolutely inadmissable, perhaps the best word would
be “ goods,” or ‘ good things,”’ which is more comprehensive than
riches. There is a very deep and important truth in this place, for
how is it that the faithful use of this world’s mammon or goods is
the condition without which we cannot be entrusted with the true
good? Hvidently because the true good, whatever it be, has to be
employed throughout eternity in the service of God. There will
be no selfishness amongst the blessed in the eternal world. AllCuar. XVI.] ANOTHER MAN’S. YOUR OWN. 427

12 And if ye have not been faithful in that which is
another man’s, who shall give you that which is your own ?

12. “That which is your own.” So X, A., D., all other Uncials, Cursives, SC aCe s
but B., L., read, ‘“‘our own,” thereby destroying the sense. This surprising blunder of
the officious scribe of B., who had not the least idea of the true meaning of the passage,
is virtually adopted by Westcott and Hort, without even a note to vindicate their
adhesion to a manifest blunder of two MSS. against the testimony of all the rest of
Christendom,

their powers, faculties, possessions, will be ever laid at the feet of
God. They will be ever used, not for themselves, but for Him.
If, then, men have here in this life considered that which God has
committed to them as absolutely their own to be used selfishly, and
with little or no thought of God’s ownership in it, how can the mere
passage through death or the grave so change them that in eternity
they will employ all that may be given them unselfishly, and to the
sole glory of God? The rewards of the future world are never repre-
sented in Scripture as an eternity of mere rest, or of mere singing of
‘praise, or even ofmere rapture. Taking into full account such places
as Luke xix. 17, 19, and the obedience of those hosts of angels to
whom we shall be made like, and the analogy of all God’s dealings
with intelligent creatures, it will be an eternity of employment, in
the faithful execution of higher and still higher trusts committed to
us. And to fit us for this it is evident that we must not only receive
erace, but also education, and the Lord here assures us that a great
part of our education for these higher trusts will be our fulfilment
of the lower trust—the unrighteous mammon.

12. “And if ye have not been faithful im that which is another
man’s, who shall,” &c. At first sight the reason for this is not
apparent. If anything can be called our own why should we not
have it? and supposing that any person commits some thing of
value to us, is it not possible that we might be very careless about
looking to his interests and very careful about our own in any
matter which we really think belongs to us? So it would be if
what is here called ‘‘ our own” were our own absolutely now in
this life, and we were not accountable to anyone for its due use; but
what our Lord means is this: “ Our own” is only that which is
eternally our own, which is inalienable. Now the things of this life
are not our own, because we must part with them at death: but
they are God-ordained means in the due use of which we may be428 GOD AND MAMMON. (Sr. Luxe.

13 & "No servant can serve two masters: for either he
d Matt. vi. 24. will hate the one, and love the other; or else he
will hold to the one, and despise the other. Ye cannot serve
God and mammon.

prepared to serve God in another world with that which in a far
higher,sense can be called ‘‘ our own ” because inalienable. The true
good, anor, cannot be given to any one; only to those who are
prepared to use it for ever to the glory of God. The enlarged gifts,
faculties, and powers of the undying nature if given to those
alienated from God would simply make them devils.!

13. “No servant can serve two masters: for either he will hate
the one, and love the other,” &¢. The connection between this
and what goes before is extremely difficult to ascertain. One com-
mentator supposes that the connecting link is the fact that the
unjust steward attempted to serve both his lord and the mammon
by which he at last made himself friends, but it appears to me that
he never even attempted to serve his lord—only himself; at first
by extravagance, then by fraud. The better connection is that we
are put in trust of the unrighteous mammon, and must not allow it
to become our master. If we employ it in the service of God, we
are its master. If we employ it to feed our selfishness, or our
covetousness, we become its slave. And the Lord seems to desire
to impress upon us that there is no alternative. We must every
one of us rule on God’s part the unrighteous mammon, or be ruled
by it. (See notes on Matth. vi. 24.) Mammon, of course, means

 

' There is a wonderful illustration of the truth of this at the con-
clusion of one of the most remarkable poems in our language,
Southey’s “‘ Curse of Kehama.”’ A wicked king by the performance
of sacrifices, acts of worship, and austerities obtains possession of
the whole universe; heaven, earth and hell are at his feet. He has
subdued to himself all living existences except the Triad. (Brakma,
Vishnu, Siva.) Immortality alone is wanting. In the last scene
he stands side by side with a chaste virgin, and the cup of Eternal
Life is handed to both. The maiden drinks it, and it infuses into
her immortality capable of unbounded happiness. He drinks it
and he becomes a molten statue, the fire within him ever burning
and never exhausted.Cuar. XVI.] GOD KNOWETH YOUR HEARTS. A429

14 And the Pharisees also, °who were covetous, heard all
these things: and they derided him. e Matt, xii

15 And he said unto them, Ye are they which
‘justify yourselves before men; but *°God £ch.x.29.
knoweth your hearts: for >that which is highly cee a
esteemed among men is abomination in the sight
of God.

16 ‘The law and the prophets were until John: i Mat ral
since that time the kingdom of God is preached, ch. vii. 29.
and every man presseth into it.

 

every good thing of this world. Not only money, but money's
worth, as the saying is. A man must serve either God or the
world. He cannot serve neither and he cannot serve both.

14. “And the Pharisees also, who were covetous, heard all these
things: and they derided him.” ‘There seems to be here the point
of a new departure. The Lord’s words which follow, ‘.e., from the
fifteenth to the eighteenth verses inclusive, seem to be the fragments of
a much longer discourse which appears to have been upon the errors
or sins of the Pharisees. The fifteenth verse denounces their show
of mere outside formal righteousness. The sixteenth opposes their
worst error—the idea that the Old Testament dispensation was
final, and that their exposition of it had put the top stone to its
fabric. So far from this being the case the old state of things really
came to an end in John and his preaching. Then the kingdom of
God was proclaimed, and the publicans and harlots were pressing into
it before them ; but lest they should think that the passing away of
the law in its ancient form implied its destruction, He assured
them that it would pass away by being fulfilled in every tittle—
nothing of it should fail. It would be like the passing of the bud
into the flower, or that of the flower into the fruit. The ancient law
would be regenerated, or transfigured, as it were, and become the
everlasting Gospel—the narrow polity of the earthly Israel would
pass into the Catholic or Universal Church—the partial atonement
by sacrifices would be absorbed into the one universal Atonement of
the One Oblation—the ten commandments written on tables of
stone would become spiritual as well as literal, so that they should
be written on the tables of the heart—the outward circumcision of430 WHOSO PUTTETH AWAY HIS WIFE. (Sr. Luxe.

17 * And it is easier for heaven and earth to pass, than
k Ps. cii. 26, one tittle of the law to fail.

iene Sa Xie Se : :

& li. 6, Matt. 18 ' Whosoever putteth away his wife, and
WelSe 1 Pet: S :

i. 25. marrieth another, committeth adultery: and who-

1 Matt. v. 32.
& xix.9. Mark
Xoo ICor:
Wills NO). Ik.

 

the flesh would give way to a Baptism conveying the grace of
Christ’s Resurrection to enable men to “‘ walk in newness of life *—
the feeding on the Paschal Lamb would give place to a Sacrament
in which men eat the Flesh of the Son of Man and drink His Blood,
so that they may have His very Life in them—the various Sacri-
fices setting forth the Death of Him Who was to come would all
merge in the one Eucharistic Oblation which set forth, which
pleaded, which re-presented, the all-reconciling Death.

18. “Whosoever putteth away his wife, and marrieth another,
committeth adultery,’ &e. The extraordinary abruptness with
which the saying is introduced, standing, as it seems to do, wholly
out of connection with what precedes respecting the impossibility
of any part of the law failing, and with the parable of the rich man
and Lazarus which succeeds, can only be explained on the assumption
I have alluded to, that verses 13-19 are only fragments of a longer
discourse respecting the sins and errors of the Pharisees. The
Pharisees were, as a body, covetous, and proud, or self-justifying.
They held that the law in its outward form was for ever binding,
and that it was not to be superseded by any future “ kingdom of
God,” and they justified divorce for very trivial grounds. Re-
specting this last the Lord now reproves them. If we had all
the discourse we should most probably find that He repeated the
arguments used by Him in Matth. xix. 4, 9, respecting the older
law being that of the indissolubleness of marriage, and the per-
mission. of Divorce introduced because of the “ hardness of men’s
hearts.”

T have treated this subject so fully in my notes on Matth. xix.’
that I must refer the reader to what I said there, merely drawing
attention to the fact that in this place (Luke xvi. 18) there is no
mention of the relaxation of the principle, even in the case of
adultery. I cannot but draw from this the conclusion that adhe-
rence to the original principle founded on the creation of one male
and one female is the safest for the sake of society. It seems clearCuar. XVI.] MARRIAGE OF THE DIVORCED. 431

soever marrieth her that is put away from her husband
committeth adultery.

 

that to allow the guilty parties to marry is contrary to the words of
the Lord and an encouragement to sin.’

We now come to the Parable (or, it may be, narrative,) of the
Rich Man and Lazarus. There is much difference of opinion as to
whether it be a parable, or an account of what actually took place,
first in this world, then in the world of spirits—for all that takes
place in either world is ‘‘ naked and open”? before the eyes of Him
Who uttered what follows. But whether it be an account of what
actually took place or not, is immaterial. It is a parable to us,
just as the Good Samaritan, the Unjust Steward, and the account
of the Prodigal Son are parables, in the lesson taught by each,
and yet every particular in each one of them may have been
historical.

 

1 Since writing the above I have had my attention directed by
a friend (the Rev. J. B. Sweet) to a review by a Presbyterian
minister of America, the Rev. 8.) Dike, of the fearful state of
things respecting Divorce in the United States, particularly in some
of the New England States. In Connecticut, in the year 1878,
there was one divorce to between ten and eleven marriages. In
1880 one to a little under fourteen marriages. In Massachusetts, in
1860, there was one divorce to fifty-one marriages, but so rapidly
has the practice increased that in 1878 there was one to twenty-one
marriages. But this is by no means all. We have to deduct
Roman Catholic marriages, because that Church does not allow
divorce, and it appears to keep such.a hold upon those belonging to
it that they abstain from it; but if the number of Romanist
marriages be taken into account and deducted, then in 1878 the
proportion of divorces to marriages was, in Connecticut, one in
between eight and nine, and in Rhode Island about the same. The
author, the Rev. S. Dike, Presbyterian, makes the following state-
ment. ‘The current (in favour of divorce) was set wrong in part by
the early Puritan dread of everything like Heclesiasticism. Marriage
at the first was made a civil contract only, and a religious cere-
mony forbidden or discouraged.” (‘‘ Marriage Laws in the United
States, and their Results.” Published by Vacher & Sons.)432 DIVES AND LAZARUS. [Sr. Luxe.

What gave rise to this parable? Has it any connection with any
word which the Lord had been uttering? Some think that it was
addressed as a warning to the Pharisees, ‘‘ who were covetous,”
and had “‘ derided’’ the Lord. Others that it follows up the teach-
ing of the Unjust Steward, inasmuch as we have the lot of one in
the unseen world who, through his selfishness, had failed to ‘‘ make
to himself friends of the mammon of unrighteousness,” and so had
no one to welcome him into “‘ the everlasting habitations.” Others
think that by the fate of the rich man the Lord foreshadows that
of Herod, but the difficulty of supposing that it applies to the
Pharisees is that as a rule they seem to have been austere rather
than luxurious in their mode of living. Our Lord describes them
in another parable as “fasting twice in the week,” and Josephus
speaks of them as self-denying and plain in their living. One
expositor describes the rich man as a Pharisee who lived as a
Sadducee—another (Trench) as an unbeliever, and if so, he could
hardly have been a Pharisee; a third as a self-justifier, because the
Lord had just said, ‘“‘ ye are they which justify yourselves before
men,” and endeavours to show that his words to Abraham are, when
narrowly examined, so much self-exculpation.

Now it seems that the principal means for ascertaining the scope
of the parable, and most certainly realizing the width of its practical
application, is the fact that nothing whatsoever is said of the vice, or
sin, of the rich man which brought him to such fearful punishment,
just as nothing whatsoever is said of the virtue, or faith, or even
patience of Lazarus which caused him to beso rewarded. Before the
death of each nothing is said respecting the one, except what de-
scribes his prosperity, just as nothing is said of the other except what
brings out the depth of his misery. And this reticence is wonder-
fully emphasized by the utter want of reference, in the words of
Abraham, to the moral character of either the one or the other.
Abraham says not, ‘‘ Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime wast
selfish, and hard hearted,” but simply ‘“‘ thou receivedst thy good
things,’ just as he says not, ‘‘ Lazarus was poor in spirit, and
patient, and believing,” but ‘‘ Lazarus received evil things.” That
the rich man by his want of true faith or charity, by his “ doing ”
or his “‘leaving undone,” deserved his punishment, we naturally
infer with the utmost certainty, from what we believe of the perfect
justice of God ; but nothing is said of the guilt of the rich man, or
of the faith of Lazarus. And this reticence is so marked, indeed,Oar, XVI | A CERTAIN RICH MAN. 433

19 § There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in
purple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day :

 

compared with the general tenor of our Lord’s teaching, so extra-
ordinary, that it seems to me to be the key of the parable. The
teaching of the parable may be summed up in one word—Contrast.
The contrast which may be, and in cases of which God only knows
the number, actually 1s, between the state of any man before and
after his death. The depth of misery—of what the world esteems
misery—and the height of happiness. The height of happiness—
of what the world esteems happiness—and the depth of misery.
So that the parable is the most graphic illustration conceivable of
what is implied in the Lord’s question, ‘‘ What shall it profit aman
if he gain the whole world and lose his own soul?”

And this interpretation, far more than any other, makes all parts
of the parable cohere. The extremity of the misery of the unseen
world is that it must be suffered without alleviation and without
sympathy—of course, availing sympathy. One who has such a
place in Paradise as Abraham cannot alleviate or send any one to
alleviate, the misery of one whom he acknowledges as his son (child) ;
and even the latter part of the parable, where the rich man prays that
one should be sent from the world of spirits who, by his witness to its
realities, may bring his brethren to repentance, is a most fitting
conclusion to the whole, for its intention is to teach how this abso-
lute reversal of our state from happiness to misery may be avoided by
listening to the word, and by believing and accepting the Revelation
of God; to the Jew this was Moses and the Prophets, to the Chris-
tian it is Christ and the Apostles. Let the soul that desires that its
present happiness be not quenched in misery, let the soul which
desires that its present wretchedness and poverty be so sanctified
by grace that it may make it fit for a place in the Paradise of God,
listen to this: for this Revelation of God in His Word is sufficient,
and no other message from the eternal world apart from it can be
of any avail.

19. ‘‘ There was a certain rich man who was clothed in purple
and fine linen.”? Such was his wealth and love of display that he
clothed himself as if he were a king. The fine linen (byssus)
was from the looms of Egypt. In Revelations xviii. 12, it has a
foremost place amongst the most costly merchandize. “ Gold,
FFA3A4 A CERTAIN BEGGAR. [Sr. Luke.

20 And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus, which
was laid at his gate, full of sores,

21 And desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from
the rich man’s table: moreover the dogs came and licked his
sores.

21. “With the crumbs which fell.’ So A. (D.), P., X., T, A, A, I, later Uncials,
almost all Cursives, old Latin, a, f, gl, Vulg., Goth., Syriac; but X, B., L., old Latin (b,
c, e, i, 1, m, q), Sah., read, “ with what fell.”

silver, precious stones, pearls, fine linen (byssus), purple and silk.”
Edersheim tells us that ‘‘ The white garments of the high priest on
the day of atonement were made of it. To pass over exaggerated
accounts of its costliness, the high priest’s dress of Pelusian linen
for the morning service of the day of atonement was said to have
cost about £36, that of Indian linen for the evening of the same
day, about £24. As regards purple, which was obtained from the
coasts of Tyre, wool of violet purple was sold at that time by the
pound, at the rate of about £3 the Roman pound.”

“Faring sumptuously,” translated literally, “ enjoying himself
splendidly.”

20. ‘And there was a certain beggar named Lazarus.” The
name Lazarus is the same as that of Eleazer, signifying ‘‘ God is
my help,” the Lord apparently signifying by this that he had no
help but in God.

‘‘ Which was laid at his gate, full of sores.’”’ ‘‘ Laid at his gate,”
so that the rich man saw the wretched object every time he went
in or out of his mansion; and the poor man heard the sound of
joyous revelry, and perhaps saw the abundance under which the
tables groaned, so that his utmost desire was to partake of the
broken fragments.

‘‘ Hull of sores.” St. Luke here uses a medical term, ‘‘ ulcerated
all over.” These ulcers, however, could not well have been the
effect of leprosy, as some suppose, or he would have been confined to
a particular quarter of the city.

‘¢ Moreover the dogs came and licked his sores.”’ Commentators
are divided as to whether this is noticed as an alleviation of, or an
addition to his pains. I think the former, but the fact that these
unclean creatures, the scavengers of the streets of an Eastern city,
should be able to pollute him with their tongues, sensibly increases
the degradation of his state.Cuar. XVI. ] THE BEGGAR DIED. 435

22 And it came to pass, that the beggar died, and was
carried by the angels into Abraham’s bosom: the rich man
also died, and was buried ;

23 And in hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and

 

22. ‘* And it came to pass that the beggar died, and was carried
by the angels, &. . . . was buried.’”’ No mention is made of his
funeral. It seems as if he died as he lived, utterly forgotten, his
body cast out of sight into some hole, whereas since the Lord ex-
pressly mentions the burial of the rich man, we must infer that his
funeral was costly and magnificent as was his life. And now begins
the contrast, the absolute reversal of the two conditions of each
respectively.

Though perhaps there was no one friend or relative to soothe the
last moments of Lazarus, and see to his decent interment, angels
were watching the moment of his departure, that they might bear
him through the gates of Paradise to the bosom of Abraham.

Whereas respecting the passage of the soul of the rich man into
the unseen, the Lord says nothing; his soul, weighed down by
luxury, by selfishness, by unforgiven sin, sunk down to the place of
punishment which God had assigned to it, and the Lord says :

23. ‘In hell he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth,” &c.
As this is one of the very, very few places in which God is pleased
to lift up a little corner, as it were, of the veil which hides from us
the unseen spiritual world, almost every syllable of the fearful
account should be reverently and carefully examined.

The place, then, in which the rich man lifts up his eyes is not
Gehenna but Hades, not the place of everlasting torment, but the
place in which the souls of those who die before the Lord’s coming
exist in blissful or in doleful expectation of the end at that coming.
This is noticed by all commentators who desire to set forth honestly
what is in Scripture. Thus Alford, “‘ Hades (Shel) is the abode of all
disembodied spirits, till the Resurrection, not the place of torment,
much less fell as commonly understood in the English Version.
Lazarus was also in Hades, but separate from Dives, one on the
blissful, the other on the baleful side . . . the Lord Himself went
into the same Hades, of which Paradise is a part.” So also Words-
worth, Plumptre, Godet, Stier, &e. Cornelius a Lapide writes, ‘in
inferno, id est in Purgatorio,” quoting Faber Stapulensis, but goes
on to say that in this case it is equivalent to hell, 2.e. Gehenna.436 ABRAHAM AFAR OFF. [Sr. Luxz.

seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.

‘Being in torments.” The whole of the account would lead us
to believe that these torments were not merely spiritual torments,
such as anguish of mind, or despair, but bodily.

Tf it be asked how can a disembodied spirit feel bodily pain, or
what is equivalent to it, and must be described in the same lan-
guage, we answer by asking the question, ‘‘ What is it within us
which feels pain? ’—evidently not the mere wounded fleshly muscle,
but the animal life, the soul in fact (vxy7), to which the nerves
which permeate all parts of the body, carry to and fro the sensations
which the soul feels, for if the nerve which forms its link of com-
munication with the stricken or burnt limb be severed or withered,
the self or soul feels no pain. Just then as the soul can think in-
dependently ofthe brain, though the brain isin some way, unknown
to us, its instrument in the act of thinking, so the soul may feel
that which can only be described in the terms which indicate bodily
pleasure or pain, though it is apart from the body.

‘ And seeth Abraham afar off, and Lazarus in his bosom.’”’ Was
this a special revelation, or are the inhabitants of the regions on
each side of the impassable gulf able to see one another, and not
only to see but to converse. We have reason to believe that in the
unseen world there is not the same sense of distance as there is in
this. I have heard of one of very great piety and intellect, having
a, vision of things after death, and the most prominent fact of that
vision to him was that, in that state of existence, space seemed
annihilated, and he and others were at once able to hold com-
munication with those who, judged by our ideas of space, would be
at an almost infinite distance. In the last chapter of Isaiah, it
seems that the righteous, or at least the worshippers of God, were
able:to go forth and look upon the carcasses of impenitent sinners,
‘“whose worm shall not die, neither shall their fire be quenched, and
they shall be an abhorring to all flesh” (Ixvi. 22-24).

Another question presents itself. Was the holiness of Lazarus
such that he should have a permanent place in the bosom of the
greatest saint of the Old Covenant? This seems as if it required
that the place should not be taken strictly literally, and it is to be
remarked that the bosom of Abraham was a Jewish phrase for the
highest, or a very high state of bliss, and it was the intention of the
Lord, in order to emphasize the teaching of the parables, to bringCuar, XVI.] SEND LAZARUS. 437

24 And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy
on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip ™ Zech. xiv.

12

ae

of his finger in water, and ™cool my tongue; for n Is, xvi. 24.
T "am tormented in this flame. on aa

 

on the scene the highest human inhabitant of the unseen world as
unable to alleviate the sinner’s punishment.

24. “And he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on
me,” &c. Most extraordinary misapprehensions, as atleast they seem
to me, have been entertained by commentators upon this passage.
The rich man is supposed to have carried into the other world his
unbelief in things unseen, and his realization only of things seen,
and so he is supposed to pray to Abraham rather than to God, but
how do we know thatin his misery he had not invoked God? The
rich man’s words to Abraham are not a prayer at all, taking prayer
to be calling upon a Divine Being, or one whom we suppose to be
one. They are words which we should address to any one whatso-
ever whom we supposed could hear and help us, as for instance, if
we were in danger from fire or drowning. Abraham was within
the reach of his voice, and he begged him, not to deliver him out of
his misery—that he knew only God could do; but to afford him a
very slight alleviation; and one which, taking into account their
respective conditions, did not seem to demand any very great exer-
cise of power.

“Father Abraham.” It has been said that his invocation of
Abraham as his father was an outcome of the Jewish superstition
that none of the circumcised seed of Abraham could perish, but if
he knew that the being on whom his eyes rested was Abraham, the
most likely and natural thing for him to do was to call upon him as
his father, which, of course, Abraham was.

‘Send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his finger in water,
and cool my tongue,” &c. He is supposed, by some, from these
words to have had the same feelings of fancied superiority towards
Lazarus in Paradise as he had upon earth, and so he desired.
Abraham to send Lazarus, as if he were a servant, but it stands to
reason that if he saw one in Abraham’s bosom whom he recognized,
he should ask the great Patriarch to send him, rather than come
himself.

But why did he put his request for a little alleviation in such a438 SON, REMEMBER. [Sr. Luxe.

25 But Abraham said, Son, °remember that thou in thy
cee es - lietimee receivedst thy good things, and likewise
form? Evidently as a contrast to what had taken place upon earth.
Lazarus had desired to be fed with the crumbs. He desired that
he should bring him but a drop of water, just as Lazarus had desired
to be fed with the crumbs from his table. As I said, the main
teaching of the parable is contrast: and here is the most salient
point of such contrast.

With respect to the question whether, in his earthly prosperity,
he had denied Lazarus the crumbs, I think this petition seems to
indicate that he had not. Whyis it said that Lazarus desired to be
fed with the crumbs? Evidently because the fragments of such
abundance as covered the rich man’s table would have been an ample
meal for him. If the crumbs did not find their way to Lazarus, it
was probably owing to the selfishness or dishonesty of the menials,
and the rich man’s sin most probably was that he was utterly care-
less as to whether any of his exceeding abundance relieved the
hunger of Lazarus or not. It seems to me that the two, the crumbs
and the drop of water, form part of the fearful contrast, and the rich
man would scarcely have asked that Lazarus should have been sent
to him with the one, if he had wholly denied him the other. With
respect to the apparent slightness of the alleviation, it has been
supposed that he thought that one drop of the water of Paradise
would very sensibly and permanently relieve his torment.

25. “But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime
receivedst,’ &c. This answer of Abraham, rightly understood,
seems to furnish the key to the leading teaching of the parable,
which is, contrast—the comparison between the state of the reprobate
man, no matter what the sin or sins may have been for which he is
rejected by God, and the accepted man, no matter what the parti-
cular good disposition which Divine gracé has wrought in him for
which God rewards him.

For Abraham says nothing about the vice or sin of the rich man,
He makes not the slightest mention of unbelief or infidelity, or
luxury, or selfishness, or pride, or extravagance, or other grosser
sins which usually accompany ‘‘ fulness of bread” (see particularly
Ezek. xvi. 48, 49); justas he makes no mention of the faith or love,
or patience, or devoutness of Lazarus. Between the state of any
sinner that is lost, and any sinner that is saved, there is the sameCuar. XVL] A GREAT GULF FIXED. 4359

Lazarus evil things: but now he is comforted, and thou art
tormented.

26 And beside all this, between us and you there is a
creat gulf fixed: so that they which would pass from hence

25. «He is comforted.” N, A., B., D., all Uncials, one hundred Cursives, Syriac, Copt.,
Sah., Arm., th., read, ‘He is here comforted.” Old Latin and Vulg. doubtful; a few
Cursives as in Text. Recept.

fearful difference. And so, in order that the lesson from this con-
trast may be as wide as possible, no particular sin on the one side,
and no particular grace on the other ig mentioned. But, of course,
common sense teaches us that the rich man must have made the
worst use of his riches; he failed to lay up treasure in heaven—he
failed to make himself friends of “‘the Mammon of unrighteous-
ness,” and so had no one to receive him “into everlasting habita-
tions.” The Lord, no doubt, means to teach us that his wealth was
the principal cause of his soul’s ruin. It, and the world’s flattery
which accompanied it, had no doubt blinded his eyes to the realities
of the future world. [“ How can ye believe,”’ &c., John v. 44,| He was
an example of the truth of the Lord’s words, “ Woe unto you rich,
for ye have received your consolation.” (Luke vi. 24.)

Commentators notice, and with reason, that Abraham says,
“Thou receivedst thy good things,” as if all that the rich man
really regarded as good was his wealth, and the luxury and magnifi-
cence which accrued to him from it. Of course this is true. If he
had realized the higher good he would not have been where he was,
but I doubt whether Abraham intended this, or the Lord intended
that such an emphasis should be laid on Abraham’s words.

Some Rationalists, in order to disparage the authority of St. Luke
as a teacher of the truth of God, endeavour to make us believe, that
in this Parable we have the Ebionite tendencies of this evangelist—
the rich man being condemned for the mere possession of riches; but
the fact that the request is answered and refused by one who, in all
probability, whilst on earth was far richer than Dives, but made a
good use of his wealth, is sufficient disproof of the idea.

96. “And beside all this, between us and you there is a great gulf
fixed,” &c. But cannot those who are in the unseen world, and
have put off their gross heavy bodies, pass over any gulf? To this
we answer that we have not the least knowledge of the conditions440 SEND HIM TO MY FATHER’S HOUSE. (Sr. Luxe.

to you cannot; neither can they pass to us, that would come
from thence.

27 Then he said, I pray thee therefore, father, that thou
wouldest send him to my father’s house :

under which the spirits in Hades exist; what are their powers, how
they exercise them, and their limitations. One thing, however, is
certain, that the whole structure of the parable requires that the
gulf or chasm should have a real objective existence. It cannot be
explained as solely the difference between their two moral states—
between established holiness and entire unmitigated wickedness.
What we must gather from its description is the absolute separation
between the two conditions, or rather places; so that the wicked
cannot escape into Paradise, or the righteous descend to bring them
alleviation. (One did descend there, but when this was spoken He
had not done so.) Beyond this we can say absolutely nothing.
We are not to gather from this the absolute fixedness of the rich
man’s state. Stier well says, ‘‘ Not as if the power of God were
unable to fill up even this chasm, but it is not in the power of the
6dovrec [they which would] to pass from the one side to the other.”
We shall have to advert to this again at the conclusion of our
remarks, and must pass on to the second part of the dialogue.
27-31. “Then he said, I pray thee, therefore, father, that thou
wouldest send him, &e. . . . though one rose from the dead.”’ The
parable so far as its great lesson is concerned finishes with the
twenty-sixth verse, in which Abraham asserts the impossibility of
granting the rich man’s request. The second request, its denial,
or rather Abraham’s assertion of its needlessness, and counter
assertion of the all-sutficiency of the Revelation already given to
save the rich man’s brethren from falling into his condition, is, as
it were, by the way; but the merciful Lord Who would have no
man lost, appends it, in order to show His hearers how the punish-
ment of the rich man is to be avoided. It would seem that if
sinners had more light, more direct warning, more certain know-
ledge of the fearful mysteries of the unseen state, they would repent.
A messenger from Paradise, Whom they had known when He was
living here on earth, and who had also been witness of the punish-
ment of their impenitent brother, would certainly arouse their
slumbering consciences, and bring them to repentance, but it wouldCuar. XVI] I HAVE FIVE BRETHREN. AA]

28 For I have five brethren; that he may testify unto
them, lest they also come into this place of torment.

 

not beso. The appearance of a messenger from Paradise or Hades,
the Lord, Who knows all things, knew would startle and terrify
for a time, but would do no more; whereas the witness of God’s
revelation in the Scriptures, even of the Old Testament only,
would, if received and obeyed, prepare them for much more than
avoiding future misery. It has been noticed that Abraham’s answer
goes far beyond the rich man’s prayer in this respect; that the rich
man says, “If one went unto them from the dead,” whereas Abra-
ham rejoins, “neither will they be persuaded though one rose from
the dead.” Not one only, but two rose from the dead; first
Lazarus, one bearing the same name as that given by the Lord to
the poor beggar, and they were not persuaded, for they took
counsel how they might put Lazarus to death ; then the Lord Him-
self rose, and they bribed the soldiers, and spread abroad the report
that He was stolen away whilst the guard slept.

One question yet remains. Is the parable intended to teach us
that the rich man’s state was unalterably fixed for all eternity 2
will now set before the reader what has been said by good and
learned men on this matter; and I earnestly pray that I may be
withheld from either overstating or understating anything what-
goever bearing on the inference, whatever it be, which the Lord in-
tends us to gather from His account.

Those who contend that we are to infer the eternal condemnation
of the sinner, appeal, of course, to the words of Abraham, ‘‘ Between
us and you there is a great gulf fixed, so that they which would
pass from hence to you, cannot, neither can they pass to us who
would come from thence.” Cornelius & Lapide, who believes that
the rich man was undergoing eternal condemnation, uses this
argument to show that though at the outset he is said to be in
Hades, yet this mention of the ‘“‘oreat gulf fixed,” shows that we
are to understand that the Lord asserts the sufferings of Gehenna.’

 

1 «Tn inferno. Id estin purgatorio, ait Jacobus Faber Stapulensis
(censet ergo ipse Epulonem salvatum esse, post purgationem gule in
igne Purgatorii): verum hoc est paradoxum, unde alii passim infernum
damnatorum hic accipiunt, asseruntque divitem hunc esse damna-449 MOSES AND THE PROPHETS. [Sr. Luxx.

P Is, vill, 20. 29 Abraham saith unto him, ?’ They have
& XXxXi1v. 16.

John v.39, 45. Moses and the prophets; let them hear them.

Acts xv. 21. &

Xyvu. 1],

 

Butit is not improbable that he is swayed by his Romish views of
Purgatory, according to which substantial relief can be granted to
those suffering in it, through the prayers and Eucharistic oblations
of their friends, and so, of course, by the intervention of such a saint
as Abraham. Alford also holds the same view of the eternity ofthe
punishment, and actually uses it to disparage the seeming affection
displayed by Dives. ‘This expression [is fixed for ever] precludes
all idea that the following verse indicates the beginning of a better
mind in the rich man.’’ And on verse 27 he writes, ‘This is the
believing and trembling of James ii. 19. His eyes are now opened
to the truth, and no wonder that his natural sympathies are
awakened for his brethren. That a lost spirit should feel and ex-
press such sympathies is not to be wondered at; the misery of such
will be very much heightened by the awakened and active state of
those higher faculties and feelings, which selfishness and the body
kept down here.” So Dean Alford; but this is amazing! The
higher faculties and feelings more fully developed in hell in a soul
absolutely lost, because of the absence of selfishness!! Could he
have seriously thought of what he was putting on paper when he
wrote this ?

Such is the argument, and apparently the only one, which can be
drawn from the contents of this parable respecting the eternal
fixedness of the torments of the rich man.

The arguments of those who, with fear and trembling desire, in
submission to God, to take a more merciful view of his case are as
follows.

First of all he is represented as being in Hades, which is not
a final state, though the condition of many souls in it must be
final.

Secondly, the moral state of the rich man as indicated by his
words. The general description of the state of the lost is that they

 

tum, idque satis colligitur ex,versu vigesimo tertio etvigesimo quarto,
et Maxime versu 26 ubi dicitur chaos magnum inter Abraham. et
Hpulonem firmatum esse,” &c.Cuar. XVL.] NAY, FATHER ABRAHAM. 443

30 And he said, Nay, father Abraham: but if one went
unto them from the dead, they will repent.

 

never open their lips except for blasphemy—this blasphemy being
the outcome of the eternal hate which reigns within them which
they share with Satan and his angels. But, on the contrary, the
words of the rich man are exceedingly submissive. Making no
excuse, urging no self-vindication, he asks for a very small allevia-
tion. He asks for no deliverance, and therefore cannot be said to
pray to Abraham as if he were in the place of God.

And when his request is refused, instead of replying in anger and.
cursing, he prays for others—for his brethren. Whatever be his
motive in this, it is very contrary to the disposition of many
amongst us, who when they have ruined their own souls feel a
diabolical pleasure in compassing the ruin of others.

It is quite true that he uses a bad argument. He overrates the
influence of a supernatural appearance and underrates the power of
the Seriptures, but one of the most distinguished preachers of
righteousness of modern times was known to say that if he could
only prove the reality of the fact of the appearance of a ghost
or spirit he would be able to silence all infidelity.

From his words, then, naturally interpreted, we must gather
that his soul was not lost in the sense of being utterly bad and
deprived of all remains of goodness, as the soul of a devil is sup-
posed to be.

The words of Abraham also to the rich man are not such as we
can well suppose to be addressed to an utterly “cursed” spirit in
everlasting fire prepared for the devil and his angels.

First of all he addresses him as “ son ” (child, réevoy), using &
somewhat more endearing word than Son.

Then he bids him ‘‘ remember.” Stier remarks upon this,
‘¢ Remember my son, saith Abraham, think upon it, and thou wilt
discern that thy present torment is just, and therefore the best
thing that God can and will send thee: thus may thy pondering
find the right way out of this present unto another future. For the
‘but now’ (viv dé) does not constitute an irrevocable and final end,
if there is yet left to him a ‘remember’ (uw2joOn7t). If a father
graciously says to his son under chastisement, ‘reflect, my son t?
there glimmers through all the punishment the distant design of444 IF THEY HEAR NOT. (Sr. Luxe.
31 And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and

 

love, and in the very words there is an exhortation to a right return
to self, and to an earnest repenting.”’ !

Godet, whose remarks on this parable are far too short, writes on
verse 25, ‘The words ‘comforted’ and ‘tormented ’’are not the
equivalents of saved and damned, absolutely taken. Nothing could
be final among the members of the ancient covenant till they had
been brought into contact with Jesus Christ. ‘The Gospel,’ says
St. Peter (1 Epistle iv. 6) ‘ was preached to them that are dead,’
that they might be capable of being judged. The knowledge of
Jesus Christ is the condition on which the pronouncing of the final
sentence is based. The hour of this judgment has not yet struck
for the rich man.”

With respect to the second request of the rich man Godet writes :
‘“*Some commentators, unable to allow any good feeling in one
damned, have attributed this prayer of the rich man to a selfish
aim. According to them he dreaded the time when his own suffer-
ings would be aggravated by seeing those of his brethren. But
would not even this fear still suppose in him a remnant of love?
And why represent him as destitute of all human feeling? He
is not yet, we have seen, damned in the absolute sense of the
word.”

In writing, or selecting from the writings of others, the foregoing
remarks, I desire it to be very distinctly understood that I refer to
nothing except the single case of the man mentioned in the narra-
tive, ifit be a true history. How far he may represent a class it is
impossible to speculate upon. There may have been others stand-

 

* It is right, however, to state that Stier at the conclusion con-
siders his ultimate repentance and restoration to be very doubtful,
because he thinks he discerns in the rich man’s request to have
Lazarus sent to his brethren a flavour of self-justification. And so
literally and truly this good man Stier is in doubt of him, because
his words may be understood as somewhat contrary to the Lutheran
formula of Justification. I could give instance upon instance
of this extraordinary enslavement of mind in these commentators
in that they expect clear views of justification by faith long before
it was revealed as a distinct and defined doctrine.Cuar. XVII] OFFENCES WILL COME. 445

the prophets, ‘neither will they be persuaded, though one

rose from the dead. 4 John xii. 10,
ele

ing by his side in the same place of torment to whose case they do
not apply, inasmuch as their rebellious and blasphemous words
would show that they were in very deed utterly lost: but the
Saviour has given the account of a man whose words are not words
of rebellion and blasphemy, but humble words of deprecation and
submission, and regard for others.

With respect to the opinions of commentators I cannot help
thinking that their doctrinal views respecting the state after death
prevent many from taking all that is said of this rich man into full
account. Romanists are afraid that if this man’s state be Purga-
torial, it militates against their view of the alleviation of the
pains of Purgatory by the intercession, or intervention, of saints or
other means: Protestants take the darkest view because if the
man’s state be capable of change they suppose that it proves the
existence of Purgatory.

CHAP, XViT

HEN said he unto the disciples, *It is impossible but

that offences will come: but woe unto hum, p ae as
ls ark ix,

through whom they come! as

1. “Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that
offences will come,” &c. Scarcely any two commentators are agreed.
as to the connection between these verses 1-10 with what goes
before, or with one another. But do we not go too far in endeavour-
ing to make out the origin, in the course of events, or in the Lord’s
Mind, of everything which He says. Many of His most precious
words are perfectly independent of time and circumstances because
they are general truths, capable of the widest application. To make
them spring out of certain local or temporary incidents does not add
to the universality of their application, but rather weakens it.

“Tt is impossible, but that offences will come.” Wherever there44.6 IF HE REPENT, FORGIVE. (Sr. Luxe.

2 It were better for him that a millstone were hanged
about his neck, and he cast into the sea, than that he should
offend one of these little ones.

a 3 4 Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother
BR, PN 2 : : : :

¢ Lev. xix.17, trespass against thee, °rebuke him; and if he
Proy. xvii. 10. : :

James v.19. repent, forgive him.

3. ‘Thy brother trespass against thee.” So D., X.,r, A, A,I, all later Uncials, almost
all Cursives, some old Latin (¢, e, q), and some editions of Versions; but N, A., B., L., 1,
42, 131, 209, 254, 346, some old Latin (a, b, f, ff?, gl, i, 1, m), Vulg. (Cod. Amiat.), Goth.,
Copt., Syriac, omit “against thee.”

is sin in a Christian, or indeed in any human being, there will be
offences. Numbers of those who see sin in a fellow Christian will
either be encouraged to do the like, or speak against the holy
religion possessed by him as too weak to preserve him from evil,
and so it may be safely neglected. What numbers among the poor
profess to see no good in Holy Communion, because of the incon-
sistent lives of some communicants. Let men take good heed lest
by their impure conversation they infuse impurity, or by their
sceptical remarks they shake the faith of their brethren, for
assuredly the Judge of all will some day or other make good His
threat. “ It were better for him that a millstone were hanged about
his neck and he cast,’ &e. The millstone cast round the neck will
cause the body to sink to the lowest depth, and will render its
burial impossible ; ‘‘ but far more terrible to be cast into hell with the
weight of another’s ruin on one’s conscience.” If any have thus
brought religion into contempt, or seduced innocence, there must be
reparation of the wrong done. Public, if the scandal has been
known by all—personal if it has been a private wrong, as the seduc-
tion of innocence, or the undermining of faith, or partnership in
fraud, or the teaching of any evil habit.

3. “Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass [against
thee], rebuke him,” &c. The reader will see from the critical note
above that the words ‘“‘against thee” are very doubtful. More
doubtful than the same words in Matth. xviii. 15. It seems, how-
ever, Imperative upon us to understand them, because the words in
the next clause, “‘if he repent forgive him,” can only apply to tres-
passes of one man against another, not to trespasses against God.

Godet well remarks, “‘ Holiness and love meet together in this pre-Cuar. XVIL] LORD, INCREASE OUR FAITH. 447

4 And if he trespass against thee seven times in a day,
and seven times in a day turn again to thee, saying, I repent;
thou shalt forgive him.

5 And the apostles said unto the Lord, Increase our faith.

6 4And the Lord said, If ye had faith as a ple Sk

: : i SCX eal
grain of mustard seed, ye might say unto this Mark ix. 23.
: E Xiao.
sycamine tree, Be thou plucked up by the root,
and be thou planted in the sea ; and it should obey you.

4. «Seven times in a day.” “In a day” omitted by N, B., D., L., a few Cursives,
most old Latin, Copt., Arm. ; but retained by A, I, A, A, M1, later Uncials, most Cur-
sives, Vulg., Syr., #th., &c.

6. “Ifye had faith.” So D., F.,G., H., many Cursives, and Vulg.; but &, A., B., F.,
Kea 6.10. otherlater Uncials, above forty Cursives, read, “ If ye have faith.”
cept; holiness begins with rebuking; then when the rebuke has
once been taken, love pardons. The pardon to be eranted to our
brethren has no other limit than their repenting, and the confession
by which it is expressed.”

5. “And the apostles said unto the Lord, Increase our faith.”
The need of more faith seems to have been impressed upon them by
this command of unlimited forgiveness of one another. A man
who would thus forgive another, must have a very vivid realization
indeed of unseen and eternal things. And faith is the ‘‘ evidence of
things not seen.” He must be very full of the sense of his constantly
recurring need of forgiveness—of what God has done through the
Incarnation and Redemption of Christ to bring forgiveness near to
himself and to his brethren, of the necessity of constant conformity
to the mind and will of his forgiving Father, if He would fulfil this
precept of forgiveness.

6. “And the Lord said, If ye had [or have] faith as a grain of
mustard seed,” &c. I have enlarged so fully on the teaching of
these words in my comments on the parallel passages, Matth. xvii.
20, and xxi. 21, and Mark ix. 23, and xi. 23, that I must refer the
reader to my notes on those places.

I would, however, remark on a matter I before omitted to
notice. The Lord does not, in any of these words, deny that the
Apostles had any faith, especially if we consider that His words
really were not “if ye had faith,” but ‘if ye have faith.” They had
certainly faith in Himself as having come out from God, and for
this He specially thanks the Father (John xvi. 27, xvii. 8,25). But448 GIRD THYSELF AND SERVE ME. (Sr. Luxs.

7 But which of you, having a servant plowing or feeding
cattle, will say unto him by and by, when he is come from
the field, Go and sit down to meat?

8 And will not rather say unto him, Make ready where-
ech. xii.37. with I may sup, and gird thyself, °and serve me,
till I have eaten and drunken; and afterward thou shalt eat
and drink ?

 

their faith looked at from His point of view as that of One Who from
moment to moment lived consciously in the Father, referred all to
Him, did all in and through Him, was exceedingly small—smaller
than that which was proverbially the smallest of seeds; but yet the
smallest conceivable seed has a living principle within it, and so
may grow to be the greatest of trees, and thus it was with the
Apostles’ faith. The Lord answered this their prayer. He added
to their faith. And this smallest seed of faith which they had,
though then scarcely perceptible, grew shortly to be the greatest
power of life in a dead world.

7, 8. “But which of you, having a servant plowing or feeding
cattle . ... drink.’ Thisshort parable teaches us one lesson, how
we are ourselves to look upon all services which we render to God.
It does not contemplate for a moment the way in which God is
pleased to look upon our services or to reward them. It simply
regards us as creatures of God’s hands; to Him we belong, body
and soul, for He has made both; and having made us, He has kept
us in being from moment to moment. He cannot need anything of
us, for ‘ He giveth to all life, and breath, and all things:”’ so that
it is impossible to suppose that we can be profitable to Him in the
sense in which we can be profitable to our fellows, who, more or
less, depend upon us. Nor is this relation between our services
and God’s all-sufficiency in the least degree altered by Divine grace.
St. Paul asks Christians, his converts, who were inclined to boast
against one another, ‘“‘ Who maketh thee to differ from another,
and what hast thou that thou didst not receive? now if thou didst
receive it, why dost thou glory, as if thou hadst not received it?”
(1 Corinth. iv. 7.)

So that the case against any idea of merit on our partis as strong
as can possibly be stated. The master who possesses the servant
possesses him as a slave, to whom he owes nothing, neither thanksCar. XVII] DOTH HE THANK THAT SERVANT ? 449

e
9 Doth he thank that servant because he did the things
that were commanded him? I trow not.

9. “I trow not.” Omitted by N, B., L., X., 1, 2, 8, 118, 131, 157,,.209, old Latin (a, e),
Copt., Arm., Ath. ; but retained by A., D.. all other Uncials, most Cursives, most old
Latin, Vulg., Goth., Syriac.

nor wages. For his own profit he keeps him in food and clothing
under his roof, but because he belongs to him, he never thinks of
thanking him; but after all, as members of the same human family,
the slave is on a sort of equality with his master. He did not
receive his being from his master, nor his strength of body, or intelli-
gence of soul, whereby he can serve him, whereas everything that we
can name as belonging to us we oweto God only. Inno sense then
can God owe us anything, and this we must both feel and acknow-
ledge. Even though through the ignorance and blindness of our
Old Adam, we may not realize our utter unprofitableness, we are
yet to confess it, for the Lord says, ‘‘ When ye have done all these
things which are commanded you, say, We are unprofitable ser-
vants: We have done that which is our duty to do.” If we do not
feel this unprofitableness, if we have not this estimate of our best
services, it is a sign that we do not realize the greatness and all-
sufficiency of Almighty God, and we have need to put up the prayer
of the Apostles, ‘‘ Lord, increase our faith.” Stier, quoting Gerlach,
says, ‘‘ The lack of faith has its ground pre-eminently in self-righ-
teousness, in the reliance upon our own merit.”

Let us now see as to the way in which the Lord brings out this
truth. He brings forward a very strong case. A man has a ser-
vant, apparently his only servant, who has been at work all day in
the fields, or in the sheep walk. When he comes home, instead of
allowing him to rest and refresh himself, he sets him upon house-
work. ‘Make ready wherewith I may sup, and gird thyself and
serve me.” This seems hard, and that is what the Lord intended
it to seem. He draws the picture of a man who, without being a
cruel master, evidently intends to get the fullest amount of work
possible out of his slave. He does this, and does not think that he
is in the least degree obliged to him, and this because he belongs to
him. If he had thanked the slave he would have confessed his
obligation to him. He does not thank him, because he conceives
that he is in no way indebted to him, even for what we may deem
extra work. Now the Lord in effect says, ‘‘ When you think of
GG450) UNPROFITABLE SERVANTS. [Sr. Luxe.

10 So lkewise ye, when ye shall have done all those things
f Job xxii.3. which are commanded you, say, We are ‘ unprofit-

& xxv. i. PS: :

xvi.2. Matt. able servants: we have done that which was our
xxv. 30. Rom.

iii. 12. & xi. 35. Guty to do.

1 Cor. ix. 16, i

17. Philem. 11.

 

your work which God distinctly demands of you, no matter how
long and toilsome it seems, no matter how it accumulates upon you,
even when you think you need rest; look upon it all as simply
your duty. God, in strictness, owes you not even thanks for it:
much less can He, Who is all-sufficient, be profited by it. So, just
as the man in My parable treats his servant as if he were unprofit-
able to him, giving him no thanks even, so do you treat yourselves ;
so do you estimate your services to One to Whom you owe all
things, even the body and soul in which you serve Him.

Such is the parable, but itis to be remembered that it is the one
sole place in our Lord’s discourses in which He would have us mea-
sure our services by God’s all-sufficiency only. In innumerable
other places He would have us regard God as delighting in, as
praising, as rewarding, our feeblest endeavours. He very empha-
tically promises that the gift of a mere cup of cold water shall not
lose its reward. He promises to reward openly secret prayer, alms-
giving, and fasting. He actually identifies Himself with His needy
fellow-creatures: ‘‘ Come ye blessed, receive the kingdom, for I was
an hungered, and ye gave memeat.” This is a great mystery, rather
a sacred paradox, that the God Who is in one way so all-sufficient
that He is infinitely above the reach of our services, in another way,
and that the way of the Incarnation, has abased Himself so that He
can be our debtor, and so account Himself as relieved by us when
we relieve the poor members of His Body.

Must not our Lord also in the expressions He made use of in
giving us this parable, have had regard to other words of His recorded
in this very Gospel, in extreme contrast with those now before us.
Here He represents God under the figure of an exacting master,
bidding the servant, after his day’s work, gird himself and serve
him, whereas in Luke xi. 37, He says, ‘‘ Blessed are those servants
whom the Lord when he cometh shall find watching: verily I say
unto you, that he shall gird himself and make them to sit down to
meat, and-will come forth and serve them.” Just as in the former
we have the Lord for a purpose regarded simply and solely as all-Cuar. XVIL] TEN MEN THAT WERE LEPERS. 451

11 And it came to pass, *as he went to Jerusalem,
that he passed through the midst of Samaria and § Luke ix. 51,
: : 52. John iv. 4.
Galilee.
12 And as he entered into a certain village, there met him
ten men that were lepers, " which stood afar off: —» Lev. xiii. 46.

 

sufficient, and nothing else—so in the latter, we have the same
Divine Being regarded simply and solely as all-condescending, all-
loving, all-rewarding.

These two views of God, as at once all-sufficient and all-loving,
must be held together, or we may fall into grievous error. The
heathen feigned that the gods dwelt at ease, regardless of the sins
and the sufferings of mortals; and Eliphaz, the friend of Job,
seems to have been on the brink of the same error, when he says:
‘¢ Can a man be profitable to God as he that is wise may be profit-
able unto himself? Is it any pleasure to the Almighty that thou
art righteous, or is it gain to him that thou makest thy way
perfect ?”’ Our perfection is no gain to God; but that it is pleasing
in His sight every word of Scripture assures us.

11. “And it came to pass, as he went to Jerusalem, that he
passed through,” &c. It is, of couse, impossible to suppose that if
our Lord was going southward to Jerusalem, He would pass first
through Samaria, and then turn back again into Galilee. So most
commentators explain this verse as teaching that He went eastward
along the confines of the two provinces, skirting both till He came
to Jordan, and crossed over it into Persea, near Scythopolis, where.
there was a bridge, and so entered Perea, and then left Perea by
Jericho on His last journey towards Jerusalem (Luke xviii. 31, 35;
xix. 1). The Galilean Jews who went up to the feasts usually
went round by Perea to avoid the dangers of passing through
Samaria, the Samaritans, as related in Josephus, having massacred
about this time a number of Jews on their way to the Temple.
The fact of one Samaritan, a member of the less numerous people,
consorting with nine Jews, seems to indicate that the miracle pro-
bably took place in a border district.

12. “And as he entered into a certain village... stood afar off
_. . have mercy upon us.” “Stood afar off.” This was in order
to obey the law that they were to keep at the distance of one hun-
dred paces from all whom they met: so being obliged to keep at452 JESUS, MASTER. [Sr. Luxe.

13 And they lifted up thew voices, and said, Jesus, Master,
have mercy on us.
14 And when he saw them, he said unto them, 'Go shew

panne. S 2 priests. And it came to pass,
eet x2. yourselves unto the pries pass,

re 4. ch.v. that, as they went, they were cleansed.

such a distance they had to ery very loudly to make themselves
heard.

This cry was undoubtedly the cry of faith. They would not have
so cried unless they had heard that the Lord had healed many who
were similarly afflicted, and they believed that He was both able
and willing to heal them.

14. “And when he saw them, he said unto them, Go shew your-
selves unto the priests,” &c. In this the Lord acted as He had done
when He healed the man mentioned in Matth. viii. 4, and Luke
v.14. He sent the lepers to the priests because, no matter how
perfect their healing seemed to be, they could not be restored to
religious worship in the synagogues or temple except by the verdict
of the priests. The priests’ function was not to cleanse or heal, but
to pronounce them clean.

The question has been gravely asked and discussed, whether,
seeing one of them was a Samaritan, the Lord sent him to the
Samaritan priest; but is it likely that the Lord would thus formally
recognize a religion of whose votaries He had said, ‘‘ Ye worship ye
know not what” (John iv.)? The healing which the man. expe-
rienced at the hands of a Jew was better than ten thousand argu-
ments to convince him that the religion which Jesus by His constant
attendance at the feasts so devoutly observed was the true one: so
that the Lord no doubt took for granted that he would give up his
idle superstition.

“And it came to pass, that, as they went, they were cleansed.”
It is to be remarked that there is implied in this a further and a far
sreater act of faith on the part of all the ten. The Lord had not
bid them come to Him, and touched each, one by one, and dispelled
the leprosy by His touch ; on the contrary, when they obeyed His
command, and set out, they were unhealed. It was only after they
had commenced their journey that the signs of leprosy began
rapidly to disappear. They might have said, with Naaman, “ Let
Him come and lay His hands upon us. Why should we go to theCuar. XVII}. HE WAS A SAMARITAN. 453

15 And one of them, when he saw that he was healed,
turned back, and with a loud voice glorified God.

16 And fell down on his face at his feet, giving him thanks:
and he was a Samaritan.

Temple till we are actually cleansed ?”’ They did not thus object,
but at once set out, in the belief that before they reached the priests
they would be such as the ministers of the Temple might receive
and dismiss as clean.

So far, then, as the healing of their bodies was concerned, nothing
was wanting in their faith.

But though the ten were healed, but one felt gratitude to the
Healer.

15-16. “ And one of them, when he saw that he was healed... he
was a Samaritan.” It is necessary to notice the saving element in
this man’s gratitude. We can imagine them saying to the Samari-
tan, as he turned back, ‘‘ We are as grateful to God as you are, but
we will return our thanks in the temple of God. There are certain
acts of worship, certain sacrifices ordained in the law by God Him-
self. In the due performance of these we will thank God in His
own appointed way. He Who healed us is a great Prophet, but it
is the power of God alone which has cleansed us.” Now the
Samaritan was not content with this. His faith worked by love,
taking the form of thankfulness. He at once left the nine to their
journey, and, without delay, threw himself at the feet of the Lord.
He felt that his was not a common healing—not a healing in the
way of nature, by the disease exhausting itself in time. It was a
supernatural healing, through the intervention of a particular
Servant of God; and this Servant [or, perhaps, he had heard that
Jesus claimed to be more than a servant, even the Son of God],
must be thanked and glorified. If God had healed him in the
ordinary course, the sacrifices prescribed for such healing would
have sufficed. But God had healed him in an extraordinary way
by His Son, by One Who was far greater than any prophet; and
80, if God was to be glorified, it must be in connection with this
extraordinary channel of blessing, this Mediator. With this agrees
what follows.

17,18. ‘‘ And Jesus answering said, Were there not ten cleansed ?
but where are the nine? .. . There are not found that returned,” &c.454 WHERE ARE THE NINE? [ Sr. LuKe.

17 And Jesus answering said, Were there not ten cleansed ?
but where are the nine

18 There are not found that returned to give glory to God,
save this stranger.
k Matt. ix. 22. 19 * And he said unto him, Arise, go thy way:
Mark y. 34. & an z 2
x. 52. ch. vii. thy faith hath made thee whole.

50. & viii. 48.

& xviii. 42. 20 § And when he was demanded of the Phari-

 

Here the Lord distinctly claims that His action in the matter as the
special representative of God, even His Son, must be recognized, In
falling down ‘‘at His (Jesus’) feet, giving Him thanks,” this Samavri-
tan, and he alone, gave glory to God. Here we have not obscurely
set forth the truth so often insisted on by the Lord in His discourses
as given by St. John, that the Father that dwelt in Him did the
works, and that men must honour Him as they honour the Father;
and that these nine ungrateful Jews, in neglecting to honour the
Son, ‘‘ honoured not the Father which had sent him.”

‘* Save this stranger ’’—rather, save this alien. The Samaritans
were not Jews, but Gentiles. By the fact that he who set the
example of gratitude was an alien and a misbeliever, we are taught
that God constantly raises up men from systems outside the pale of
His Church, to set examples of faith and devotion to those who,
though “ of Israel,’ are not, by their unbelief, the true Israel.

19. ‘‘ And he said unto him, Arise, go thy way: thy faith hath,”
&e. But were not the nine made whole by faith? They had faith
to ask the Lord to heal them. They had faith to act as if He
intended: to heal them. And yet their faith was not “saving,” for
it saved them not from the sin of ingratitude. The Lord, by the
words ‘“‘thy faith hath saved thee,’ must allude to a far higher
salvation, of which the salvation from leprosy was but the type.
For the faith of this Samaritan, so far as was possible before the
Resurrection and Ascension, joined him to the Son of God. The
same grace which had made him grateful to Christ would make
him believe in the Lord, and accept His salvation from sin and an
evil world. Perhaps he was one of those who by their testimony to
the power of Christ prepared their countrymen to receive the
message of the Gospel at the lips of the Evangelist (Acts viii.).

20, 21. “ And when he was demanded of the Pharisees, when the
kingdom of God . . . within you.” The key to the explanation ofCuar. XVIL] LO HERE! OR, LO THERE ! 455

sees, when the kingdom of God should come, he answered
them and said, The kingdom of God cometh not || with
observation : | Or, with out-
a : ward shew,
21 'Neither shall they say, Lo here! or, lo 1 vey, 93.
there ! for, behold, Bike limedom of God is || “som ssG

eee || Or, among
within you. you, John i, 26.

 

21. ‘‘Lo there.”’ This “lo” omitted, ¥, B., L., and some old Latin; but A., D., all
later Uncials and Cursives, old Latin (a, b, ¢, f, g), Vulg., &c., retain it.

this passage is the character and expectations of the questioners.
They expected a carnal kingdom, a great prince at the head of the
nation, leading it to victory in the sight of the world; but it was
not to be so. The kingdom of God was not to come with observa-
tion, 7.¢.,in such a way that men would say ‘‘lo here! or, lo there!”
On the contrary, it would come about, one might say, stealthily.
Men, before they were aware of it, would be caught in the net, and
overcome; or, on the contrary, the signs of its being at work in
their midst would be so contrary to all carnal expectation that they
would reject it. We may take what happened to the Lord Himself
as an illustration. If the kingdom of God had come when He
entered into Jerusalem in a sort of triumph, as was prophesied of
Him, and had then visibly displayed Divine power in the subjuga-
tion of His opposers—then it would have come ‘‘ with observa-
tion.’ But it came with its greatest, its most triumphant power,
when He was crucified: for then it came in its atoning and recon-
ciling power. It came with still greater power at His Resurrection ;
but no one saw Him rise. It came with renewed power at His
Ascension; but only a favoured few saw Him ascend.

But they make a great mistake who suppose that the kingdom of
God was always to be unobserved or unobservable. The Lord, so
far as its outward aspect was concerned, had compared it to the
grain of mustard seed which was, at first, the least of all seeds, but
in a short time grew to be the greatest among herbs. It was
destined to become the most powerful of human institutions; but
when the Pharisees asked this question, it was in its beginning.
And when it became in a degree an outward organization, as at
Pentecost, it was not one that flaunted itself before the eyes of the
world. Men could oppose it, and scorn it, and deny it to be ‘‘ of
God.” Years after, when it was spreading in the seats of Greek456 DAYS OF THE SON OF MAN. [Sx. Luxe.

22 And he said unto the disciples, "The days will come,
n See Matt.ix. when ye shall desire to see one of the days of the
15. John xvii. 5 5 S
12. Son of man, and yet shall not see 7.

culture and learning, it could be said of it, ‘‘not many wise men
after the flesh, not many mighty, not many noble are called ”’
(1 Cor. i. 26).

All this bears upon the vexed question, What is the meaning of
“within you”? ‘ Within you” usually means ‘‘in your hearts,”
but it sometimes has the meaning of ‘“‘among you.” It is difficult
to believe that the Lord, in addressing the Pharisees, would say
that “the kingdom of God was within them ;”’ for it assuredly was
not in them in the sense of their spiritually apprehending it; and
it was amongst them in the persons of the Lord and his first fol-
lowers, but not so that they should discern it.

The reader will remember that St. Paul writes, “the kingdom of
God is not meat and drink, but righteousness and peace and joy in
the Holy Ghost ;” but surely such a description of an internal state
of holiness applies least of all to these Pharisees. If by évrdc the
Lord alludes to any merely internal spiritual aspect of His king-
dom, He can only mean the power of discerning it is ‘‘ within
you.” ‘You can only discern it by the soul’s eye, the eye of faith;”
but such an interpretation seems very unlikely.

22. “And he said unto the disciples, The days will come, when
ye shall desire to see,” &c. These words are said expressly to the
disciples, so that they cannot allude, as some have supposed, to an
earnest longing for one of the days of the Messiah’s power in the
fearful time when the Jewish polity was fast coming to a close.
They no doubt express what would be in the minds of the Apostles
or early disciples who had seen the Lord, and the acts of His power
and goodness, and who would be then assailed by persecution and
opposition from without, and dismayed by the decline of love, and
multiplying of heresies within. Would that we could see again but
one of the days in which He fed the multitudes, and stilled the tem-

pest, and enlightened us with His teaching, and made all His
adversaries ashamed !

They should not see it: not even one of such days. And this would
make them more fervently long for the day of His coming: as the
last of them did who prayed, ‘“‘ Even so come Lord Jesus.”Cuar. XVIL.] AS THE LIGHTNING. Ao

23 ° And they shall say to you, See here; or, see there:
go not after them, nor follow them. o Matt. xxiv.
24 ? For as the lightning, that lighteneth out ee
of the one part under heaven, shineth unto the ae ea:
other part under heaven; so shall also the Son of
man be in his day.

25 1 But first must he suffer many things, and a ae et
be rejected of this generation. 33, ch. ix. 22.
26 * And as it was in the days of Noe, so shall © Gen. vii.
it be also in the days of the Son of man. eae

 

24. ‘‘In his day.” So WN, A., L., later Uncials, nearly all Cursives and Versions ; but
B., D., 220, old Latin (a, b, e, i), omit “in his day.”

23, 24. ““And when they shall say to you, See here; or, see
there: . . . Son of man be in his day.’’ This is one of those many
places which assure us that the Second Coming of the Son of Man
will not be a mere providential coming, as at the destruction of
Jerusalem, when not He Himself in person, but the armies of the
Romans executed His purposes of vengeance. Nor will it be a
spiritual coming, as in the more rapid and successful propagation
of the Gospel; but it will be a sudden and personal appearance to
all men at once, so that no one need point out to his neighbour
where the Lord is. As one says, ‘‘ Men do not run here or there to
see a flash of lightning: it shines simultaneously on all points of
the horizon.’”’ So the Lord will appear at the same moment to the
view of all living. The judgment will not be as now in the secret
place of each man’s conscience, but in the sight of all mankind.

25. “ But first must he suffer many things, and be rejected of this
generation.” “This generation” means, in the first place, the
generation in which the Lord then lived, but, by implication, the
men of the world from the day of Pentecost to the Second Advent.

The world, as the world, as a whole has rejected Christ. Whilst
in His Mediatorial kingdom He has controlled and ordered all
things, He has yet reigned in the hearts of buta few. Very few have
rendered to him the obedience of faith. Even where His Name has
been professed, and His true doctrine vindicated, the strictness and
holiness of His teaching has been set at naught.

26, 27. “And as it was in the days of Noe . . . destroyed them458
27 They did eat, they drank, they married wives, they

were given in marriage, until the day that Noe entered into

the ark, and the flood came, and destroyed them all.

» Gen. xix, 98 * Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot ;

they did eat, they drank, they bought, they sold, they planted,

they builded ;

) Gen. xix.16, 29 But ‘the same day that Lot went out ot

THEY DID EAT, THEY DRANK. [Sv. Luke.

all.” The flood came upon men suddenly, unexpectedly, univer-
sally [thatis, to the then inhabited parts of the earth: there was no
need that it should overwhelm tracts, perhaps whole continents, on
which no foot of living man had then trod], so that there was no
escape. And yet they had had above a hundred years of warning.
They had a preacher of righteousness, an upholder of the truth of
God, and a prophet of the coming destruction in Noah; but his
testimony was utterly disregarded, and no doubt the sign patent to
all that he believed his own testimony in the long continued build-
ing of the ark before their eyes, was scoffed at. And so at last
destruction came upon them as in a moment, and there was no
escape.

It is worthy of notice how the fact that ‘‘they married wives,”’
‘“‘they were given in marriage,’ seems to signify something con-
trary to the will of God in the marriages then contracted; and so
we read that ‘‘the sons of God saw the daughters of men that they
were fair ; and they took them wives of all which they chose.’ (Gen.
vi. 2.) That these marriages were impious or ungodly there seems
to be no doubt, and the Lord alludes to them as exhibiting the carnal
security of the time.

28, 29. “Likewise also as it was in the days of Lot; they did eat,
they drank . . . destroyed them all.” The account of the destruc-
tion of Sodom is so very fragmentary that nothing is said in the
narrative in Genesis of any warning which they had been vouch-
safed; but the notice of this catastrophe in the Second Hpistle of
St. Peter, where it is said that “that righteous man, dwelling among
them, in seeing and hearing, vexed his righteous soul from day to
day with their unlawful deeds,” seems to imply that Lot witnessed
to them of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come.

Both these cases are cited because of the suddenness, complete-
ness, and inevitableness of the judgment in each case.Cuar, XVIL] IT RAINED FIRE AND BRIMSTONE. 459

Sodom it rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed
them all.

30 Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man

“is revealed. u 2 Thess. i. 7.
31 In that day, he * which shall be upon the ~« Matt. xxiv.
a 17. Mark xiii.

housetop, and his stuff m the house, let him not 15.
come down to take it away: and he that is im the field, let
him likewise not return back.

 

‘“‘Tt rained fire and brimstone from heaven, and destroyed them
all.” Here the Lord vouches for the truth of the manner of the
destruction of the Sodomites—a matter called in question by
sceptical writers, and by those semi-believers who think that, though
we in our sphere can bring to bear various natural forces for the de-
struction of our enemies, God in His sphere cannot—in a word,
that He is less powerful in His sphere than we are in ours.

In each of these cases—that of the Flood and of. the destruction
of Sodom—the course of the world, its businesses, its pleasures,
was going on just as usual, when the all-reaching destruction came
on without a moment’s warning of its being close at hand. And so
it will be at the last day.

80. ‘Even thus shall it be in the day when the Son of man is
revealed.’’ It is much to be noticed that the Lord does not allude
to the extreme wickedness of the Antediluvians or the Sodomites,
but to the things which showed their carnal security, their sporting
upon the brink of destruction.

31, 82. “In that day, he which shall be upon the housetop
Remember Lot’s wife.’’ All these verses seem to refer to the Second
Coming of the Lord in glory, and not to the destruction of Jerusa-
lem. And yet these two verses appear to refer to a catastrophe from
which it may not be impossible to escape, if when it bursts upon us
we are perfectly unencumbered. Godet writes: “ Jesus describes
that disposition of mind which, in this last crisis, shall be the con-
dition of salvation. The Lord passes with His heavenly retinue ;
He attracts all the inhabitants of the earth who are willing and
ready to join Him; but it transpires in the twinkling of an eye.
Whosoever is not already loosed from earthly things, so as to haste
away without hesitation, taking flight towards Him, freely and
joyously, remains behind. Thus precisely had Lot’s wife perished460 REMEMBER LOT’S WIFE. [Sr. Luxe.

y Gen. xix, 26. 32 Y Remember Lot’s wife.
z Matt. x. 39. 33 Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall

& xvi. 25. Rina

Mark viii.35. lose it; and whosoever shall lose his life shall pre-
ch. ix, 24, ;

John xii. 25. Serve 1t.

38. “*Seek to save.” Sow, A., R., later Uncials, almost all Cursives, old Latin (a, e,
f, 2,1), Vulg.; but B., L., old Latin (b, c,i, q), read, “Seek to gain”’ or “ possess”
his life.

with the goods from which she could not part. Agreeably to His
usual method Jesus characterizes the dispositions of mind by a
series of external acts, in which it is concretely realized.’’ But the
objection to this is that the great day is not represented as a proces-
sion of a bridegroom (asin Matth. xxv. 1-13), but as a Judge coming
in the clouds of heaven, and calling all before Him to receive their
award. I think it is most probable that it refers to some absolute
surrender of earthly things which will be required of the true elect
before the Lord’s actual appearance, which will be clear to those and !
those only whose hearts are right with God (Daniel xii. 10, ‘‘ None |
of the wicked shall understand, but the wise shall understand ’’).

32. ‘‘Remember Lot’s wife.” ‘Lot’s wife was destroyed because,
at the very last moment, when the wicked city was just about to be
consumed—even, perhaps, whent he work of destruction had begun,
she looked back with longing eyes at a place in which she had lived
in comfort and peace, regardless of the extreme wickedness of its
inhabitants. And the Lord teaches us here that the world, notwith-
standing its ungodliness, is yet so fascinating that it will retain
some hold upon the spirits of Christ’s people, even when the signs of
His coming to condemn it are all around. Lot’s wife was destroyed
when all belonging to her were fleeing for their lives from the
coming wrath. And so this example of Lot’s wife is cited by the
Lord as a warning at all times against looking back—looking back
on the world—looking back with pleasure at the commission of past
sins. Thus Quesnel: “A man is sometimes so great an enemy to
his own good that he regrets the loss of wicked company, and of
those opportunities of ruining himself from which he has been
delivered through the Divine mercy. This is a piece of ingratitude
which the Lord cannot bear, and which He punishes very severely.
We must readily give up our friends and relations, our wealth and
temporal advantage, and count them but loss for Christ, when theyCuap. XVII] IN THAT NIGHT. A461

34 *T tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one
bed ; the one shall be taken, and the other shall + Matt. xxiv.

4041. 1 Thess:
be left. iv. 17. ae

35 Two women shall be grinding together; the one shall
be taken, and the other left.

36 || Two men shall be in the field; the one | This 36th
fe *s verse is
shall be taken, and the other left.

wanting in
most of the
So a Pn ess ORT ig Greek copies.

36. ‘* Two men shall be in the field,” This verse omitted by X, A., B., L., Q., R., all
other later Uncials, many Cursives; but retained by D., U., most old Latin, Vulg.

become obstacles to our salvation. We love them with a criminal
fondness, when at His command we leave them with grief and
anxiety.”

33. ‘“* Whosoever shall seek to save his life shall lose it ; and who-
soever....preserveit.” This saying of our Lord was uttered by Him
not once or twice, but apparently many times. It contains a truth
which should ever abide with us: We require it every day of our
lives, for almost every day we are called upon in some shape or
other to choose between that self-indulgence which pleases our
earthly perishing life, and thatself-denial which nourishes oureternal
life. I have commented on it somewhat fully in my notes on
Matth. x. 39, on Mark viii. 35, on ix. 24 of this Gospel, and on
John xii. 25; and can only now remark that as it is here introduced
amongst sayings which refer entirely to the Second Advent, there
will be particular need of it when that Advent is close at hand. All
Scripture teaches that the last trial of the Church will be the
greatest. May God prepare us for it.

34-36. ‘‘ I tell you, in that night there shall be two men in one
bed... . the other left.” The Lord would very strongly empha-
size what He is now about to say, for He begins it with “TI tell
you.”

‘Tn that night.”’ This has been used to support the view that
our Lord will come in the night, literally, as a thief in the night;
but as one remarks, it will be night to one half the world and day
to the other; another says that ‘that night,” is descriptive of
the world’s condition, when the lightening of the day of Christ
shall burst upon it; in other words, shrouded in the darkness of sin
and unbelief. In the three illustrations which follow, one, the two462 WHERE, LORD ? [Sr. Luke.

87 And they answered and said unto him, » Where, Lord ?
» Job xxxix. And he said unto them, Wheresoever the body 1s,

30. Matt. xxiv. : ‘
28. thither will the eagles be gathered together.

in one bed, is appropriate to the night, but the grinding, and the
working, or walking in the field, is more consonant with the day
time. But the fact is, it will be neither day nor night. If the
presence of the sun makes the day, he will not be seen. So far as
the good are concerned, it will be the dawn of eternal day, to the
wicked it will be the closing in of eternal night.

‘¢Tsy9 men in one bed; the one shall be taken, and the other
left.’ No doubt the word “taken” is to be understood in a good
sense. “The one shall be taken up to the Lord” (1 Thess. iv. 17).
The other left to perish. The one shall be received to Himself
(John xiv. 8). The other disowned by Him.

It has been noticed that there are three gradations of close inti-
macy: occupying the same couch, working at the same domestic
work, walking together in the field.

Many have a secret feeling that because they are the friends or
relatives of true Christians, and consort with them, and listen to
them with something of approval, they will be right at last: but
this is a miserable deception, God will then bring to judgment the
secrets of man. ‘The state of the heart will make the difference.

37. ‘‘ And they answered and said unto him, Where, Lord? And
he said unto them,” &c. To those who did not thoroughly realize
the universality of the separation at the judgment, this was a very
natural question. Our Lord’s answer seems to assure them that
wherever there are human beings of different characters to be sepa-
rated, there willbe the ministers of separation. The saying, ‘‘ Where-
soever the body is,” &c., was probably a proverbial one, grounded
upon the almost immediate appearance of the vultures wherever
there is a dead body. Some accounts of the power of vultures in
discerning a carcase immediately after it has been slain seem mira-
culous. No one will be able to escape the all-observing, all-sifting,
all-separating judgment.Cuap. XVIII] ALWAYS TO Prov, NOM TO WAINT,

CHAR. XavEn.

N ND he spake a parable unto them to this end, that men

ought * always to pray, and not to faint ; eee

‘S : iv xxl. 36. Rom.
xli. 12. Eph,
vi. 18. Col. iv.
2. lebhess: vs,
17.

 

1. *‘ That (men) ought.” So D., E., G., H., A, many Cursives; but NU UALS BL Ke
&c., nearly sixty Cursives, Copt., Arm., read, “that they ought ” (adding airovs).

1. “ And he spake a parable unto them to this end, that men
ought always,” &e. These words of the Saviour seem to fix the
application of the parable as perfectly general. They teach us
that men ought always to pray, that is, we ought to pray at all
times—not merely at stated times, as at morning, and noonday, and
evening—but at all times; particularly when God puts within us
the thought of our adversary, who has, through the fall, got access
to our soul, or of our besetting sin by which we constantly fall, and
by which our whole spiritual progress is hindered. The applica-
tion, I say, the Saviour seems to desire to make perfectly general,
so that every soul should account itself the widow, and look upon
every sin or spiritual evil as its adversary, and regard God as being
the very opposite of this unjust judge; as ever more ready to hear
than we to pray, as being, in very deed, on our side against the world
and sin, Who when He is weary, is weary not with our constancy
and perseverance in prayer, but with our forgetfulness of His pre-
sence and cessation from prayer.

T think we should keep this before us as the design of the parable,
and that we should be somewhat cautious in considering the widow
to be the Church, and the avenging speedily as the sudden cessation
of the tribulation of the last days by the coming of the Lord. This
is its secondary application, and can only be effectually realized
through its primary one, because the Church is a Body made up alto-
cether of individual souls or persons, so that when the Church as a
person, 7.e., a widow, cries to God it can only mean, as far as I can
see, a spirit of prayer diffused through the hearts of the particular
members of the Church, and exercised by them individually.A64 AVENGE ME OF MY ADVERSARY.  [St. Luxe.

2 Saying, There was tin a city a judge, which feared not
+ Gr. ina God, neither regarded man:
ee 3 And there was a widow in that city; and she
came unto him, saying, Avenge me of mine adversary.

4, And he would not for a while: but afterward he said
within himself, Though I fear not God, nor regard man ;

2 <« And she came;” rather, ‘‘and she kept coming,” ‘‘came oft,” Revisers.

oO.

We now come to the parable.

9. “Saying, There was in a city a judge, which feared not God,
neither regarded man.” Isaac Williams illustrates it ‘‘ As fearing
not God, having no mercy: as regarding not man, having no wish
to appear better:”’ as we should say, dead to all better motives,
divine or human.

9 « And there was a widow in that city,” &c. In those Hastern
countries, for above 1,500 years, widows seem to have had no
protector but God. Amongst us especial favour is granted to them
by society. Every effortis usually made to alleviate their sorrows.
Unbounded indignation pursues those who wrong them, whereas
through long ages, reaching to our Lord’s time, they seem to have
been a special object of prey to their unscrupulous relations or
neighbours. Thus God calls Himself ‘‘a father of the fatherless,
and the defender of the cause of the widow.” When Isaiah calls
the people to do “works meet for repentance,” they are ‘‘ to judge
the fatherless and plead for the widow ” (Isaiah i. 17).

‘‘ And she came unto him, saying, Avenge me of mine adver-
sary.”’ The idea is not so much ‘avenge me”’ as ‘‘ do me justice ”’
against mine adversary. Some powerful and wicked neighbour had
taken away her land, her house, her cattle, and she called aloud to
the judge to “right” her. ‘“‘Avenge’’ conveys a wrong impression.
Tt was not so much vengeance or the punishment of her oppressor
that she wanted, as the restoration of her rights; though I grant
that if the widow is taken to be the Church, her martyrs are repre-
sented, in Rev. vi. 10, as calling for vengeance.

4, * And he would not for a while: but afterward he said within
himself, Though I fear not God,” &c. ‘Though I fear not God.”
He is represented by the Lord as not only wicked, but conscious of
his wickedness, and glorying in it, and boasting to himself that no
consideration can move him except that of his own ease.Cuap. XVIIL] I WILL AVENGE HER. 465

5 > Yet because this widow troubleth me, I will avenge her,
lest by her continual coming she weary me. b ch, xi. 8,

6 And the Lord said, Hear what the unjust j udge saith.

7 And “shall not God avenge his own elect, © Rev. vi. 10.

 

5. ‘‘She weary me,” ‘‘she wear me out,” Revisers; and in margin, ‘‘ bruise me,” but
see below.

o. “Yet because this widow troubleth me, . . . she weary me.”
The word translated “weary” seems to have properly a far more
startling meaning. It is “lest by her continual coming she smite
me on the face.” As if he was afraid that the widow would assault
him; the same word in 1 Cor. ix. 27 (where alone it occurs
except in this passage) signifying “‘ buffeting and, as it were, morti-
fying the body by various self-denials.” Perhaps ‘plague me”’
would preserve the strong meaning, and yet be without the seeming
vulgarity. But it is to be remembered that the Lord is drawing
the picture of a man regardless of self-respect and decency.

6. “And the Lord said, Hear what the unjust judge saith.”
Notice how the Lord directs attention not so much to theimportunity
of the widow, as to her success in causing this bad, selfish man to
listen to her.

7. “ And shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and
night,” &¢. No doubt but that by the elect is meant the Church,
but the Lord, by using a plural noun, and not the collective
word Church in the singular, would desire us to take to ourselves,
each one for himself, this most gracious promise. We have a right
to the promise only as members of the Church, but we exercise that
continual prayer which entitles each one of us to his share in the
promise individually.

‘His own elect.” Who are the elect? What is the mark by
which we may know ourselves to be of the number? LHvidently
earnest and continual prayer (His own elect which cry day and night
unto him).

‘‘ Avenge His own elect.” This avenging, ofcourse, will have its
consummation at the Second Coming, when the Church, as such,
will be avenged of the world, and the prince of the world: but it
would be a poor promise for those who have fought, or are fighting
their fight now, to be told that their avenging will be that of
another generation at the last day. They feel the power and tyranny

eet4.66 THOUGH HE BEAR LONG. [Sr. Luxe.

which cry day and night unto him, though he bear long with

them ?
2 a d : ; s]x~ & Heb. x. 37.
8 I tell you ‘that he will avenge them speedily. § pe air 8’.

7. “Though he bears long with them” “ and he is long-suffering over them,” Revisers.
(uaxpobynisy in T., A, A, R., later Uncials, almost all Cursives, Syriac (Schaaf), paxpobdmes
in x, A, B., D., L., ©, X., 1, 157, 209), but see below.

of their adversary ow : now at this present he oppresses them—now
sin finds an entrance into their mortal bodies—-now they cry, “‘O
wretched man that I am, who shall deliver me from the body of this
death?” Their earnest desire, their cry is that God should bruise
Satan under their feet shortly. The warfare is within, the oppression
is within, and the avenging, the deliverance, must be within if they
are to have part in the final deliverance. So now they cry for cleans-
ing—for the casting out of the evil spirit—the spirit of anger, envy,
concupiscence, foul thoughts, wordly ambition.

Some have made it a difficulty that the Lord is here compared
to a judge of iniquity, but He is not compared to such a judge, He
is contrasted with him. If the unjust judge is made by the perse-
verance of the widow to yield and do justice, much more will the
just and holy God Who has commanded us always to pray and
not to faint, and Who is on our side in the warfare we are maintain-
ing with the evil within and without us—much more will such a
God take the part of His Own.

“Though he bear long with them.” This may mean, ‘‘ Though,
like the judge, He bear long with their cry, deferring his answer,”’
or, it has sometimes been interpreted, ‘‘though He bear long with
their remaining sinfulness:”’ or, ‘‘ though He bear long with those
which oppress them.”

8. ‘TI tell you that he willavenge them speedily.”’ Williams well
remarks : “ [tis the same contradiction which always pervades this
subject, for the Lord is always described as appearing to be long in
coming to avenge His elect; and yet, in fact, coming ‘ speedily.’
This very word occurs in another place in the same way: ‘The
Lord is not slack concerning his promise as some men count slack-
ness; but is longsuffering to us-ward’ (uaxpoOupov), (2 Peter iii. 9).
For that which seems long with men is very short with God,
oo ce them that are with God, and who come to the mind of

od.Cuap. XVIIL] A PHARISEE. A PUBLICAN. A467

Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find
faith on the earth ?

9 And he spake this parable unto certain® which ° ch. x. 29. &

: Xvi. 15.

trusted in themselves || that they were righteous, | or as being
and despised others : sh ties

10 Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a
Pharisee, and the other a Publican.

 

‘Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh, shall he find [the]
faith on the earth?” This has been understood as if, before the
Second Coming prayer will have become less fervent through lack
of faith: but such a meaning seems scarcely to do justice to the
passage. In it the Lord asks a question, and seems to express
a doubt as to the answer He should receive. ‘‘ When the Son of
man cometh shall he find, think you, the faith (not faith, but
the faith) on the earth? ”’ I cannot but think that this faith is the
faith once delivered to the saints, the faith of the Gospel, and
the creeds—the faith in Christ, the Eternal Son of God Incarnate,
Crucified, Risen, Ascended, and Returning. This faith will be
in the pages of Scripture, and in the creeds of the Church. It
may not, perhaps, be denied, but it will not be held. And yet
without the realization of these great eternal verities there can be
no faith, in the New Testament sense of the word.

Already this faith grows weaker and weaker. It has been said
that faith is ‘‘turned inward,” and a miserable ‘turning’? it is:
for what is there within the sinner to raise him up to God and
unite him to the Supreme? It is the exhibition of the love of God
in His Son which breeds faith inthe soul. It is the same exhibition
which sustains it, and the same which perfects it.

9, ‘And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in
themselves,” &¢. This declaration on the Lord’s part fixes the
meaning and purpose of the parable. Its application is perfectly
general, and any application to classes, such as Jews and Gentiles,
however seemingly appropriate, must be put quite in the back-
ground.

10. “Two men went up into the temple to pray; the one a
Pharisee, and the other a Publican. Why are two men out of these
two classes chosen? Evidently because the Pharisees were the
most popular religionists of the day, and the Publicans the most468 GOD, I THANK THEE. [Sr. Luxe.

f Ps, exxxv.2.. 11 The Pharisee ‘stood and prayed thus with
oy te himself, God, I thank thee, that I am not as
iii. 17.

 

despised of all Jews. According to the popular view, a Pharisee
could not be unjustified, and nothing that he could do would justify

Publican so long as he continued in his hated calling.

“Went up,” naturally because the temple was on an elevation.
Went up to pray. They went up, that is, for private prayer. The
temple being the one place of sacrificial worship, was naturally the
place of prayer. Whilst the sacrifices of the law and the burnings
of incense were going on, men would desire that their particular
prayers and thanksgivings should unite with the smoke of the
offerings, and be thus borne up to heaven. It is a great scandal
that our churches are not open for prayer at all times. It is to be
hoped that the time is not far distant when this will be first possible
and then universal. Any poor Jew could escape from the noise
and worry of his crowded home, and use this most splendid of all
places, raised to the honour of God, as his oratory. Why should
not every poor English Christian have the same privilege ?

11. ‘The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I
thank thee, that I am not as,’ &. Why does the Lord draw
attention to the standing of the Pharisee, seeing that standing
was the common posture of the Jews in prayer? Hvidently
because he stood erect, without even an inclination of the head or
the body, as if he had no sin to be ashamed of, no wrath to depre-
cate, no spiritual want to be supplied.

‘“‘ Prayed thus with himself.” ‘‘ With himself” does not depend
upon ‘‘ standing,” as if it were standing aside by himself, but upon
“prayed.” He prayed thus with himself, as we say, to himself, in
his mind, though his words may have been heard by those near.

‘God, I thank thee that Iam not as other men are, extortioners,
unjust, adulterers,” &c. It seems to me a great mistake to endea-
vour to bring in this man guilty of the sins which he here thanks
God that he does not commit, as Stier, for instance, seems to do.
‘*Tf we could suppose God to answer him by setting before him the
true catalogue, with the question appended in each case, Art thou
not such thyself, at least in My sight? then might a revealing
light have penetrated to his soul, and he might have recognized in
in himself the extortioner, and even the adulterer (according to
John vill. 9), and especially in the spiritual meaning.” This seemsCuap. XVIII] I FAST TWICE IN THE WEEK. 469
other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even as this
Publican.

12 I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I
possess.

 

to me to undo the lesson of the parable, which is the evil of the
man’s self-righteousness and self-complacency, per se. Giving him
the fullest credit for keeping the letter of the law, that he was
neither extortionate, unjust, or adulterous; the wrong thing was
that he prided himself upon his outward observance of these pre-
cepts, that he was proud, self-righteous, and self-complacent. To
such an extent was he this, that he did not utter even a prayer.
His prayer was, in fact, no prayer at all. Itwas a soliloquy rather,
in which, whilst formally addressing God, he really ran over to
himself his virtues, his abstainings, his superiority to all others, or,
at least, to the general run of men, his self-denials, his offerings.

‘“‘Fiven as this publican.” As he looked round upon this man, he
must have observed the signs of contrition and humility in his whole
demeanour. And yet he took no account of them. He knew he
was a Publican, and so, though knowing nothing of his real state
before God, he credited him with the Publican’s vices, no doubt par
ticularly extortion and injustice. All this showed his guilty state
of heart, because it proved his shameful ignorance of the spirit of
his own scriptures, embodied in such striking passages as ‘* Thus
saith the high and lofty One that inhabiteth eternity ....I dwell
in the high and holy place, with him also that is of a contrite and
humble spirit, to revive the spirit of the humble, and to revive the
heart of the contrite ones.”

‘‘T fast twice in the week.” Does the Lord here speak in dis-
paragement of fasting, seeing that He Himself had fasted forty
days and forty nights; seeing that He had said to His followers,
‘¢ When ye fast, be not as the hypocrites.” ‘‘ Thou when thou fastest,
appear not unto men to fast, but unto thy Father which is in secret,
and thy Father, which seeth in secret, shall reward thee openly.’
What, then, does the Lord blame? Not the fasting, but the compla-
cent dwelling uponit; the displaying it before God ; the mentioning
of it ag ifit was an end in itself, and not the means to an end; for it
is to be remarked that he does not even plead his fasting that God
may give him something; he has no sense of any want, for there is
no prayer whatsoever, as I noticed before, throughout his soliloquy.470 STANDING AFAR OFF. (Sr. Luxe.

13 And the Publican, standing afar off, would not lft up
so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast,
saying, God be merciful to me a sinner.

“T give tithes of all that I possess.” Does the Lord here dis-
courage carefulness and exactness in our transactions with God, so
that we should give to Him His full tenth? No; because the
Lord Himself, in speaking of the tithing of such small matters as
pot-herbs, mint, rue, and anise, says, ‘‘ These (the tithes of such
things) ought ye to have done, and not to leave the others (justice,
mercy, and faith) undone.”

What, then, does He blame? The complacent dwelling upon if,
the secret regarding of God as his debtor, because he gave Him
what others neglected to give.

Such was the Pharisee’s prayer. To us it seems incredible that
one taught in the scriptures of God should so address Him; and
yet prayers conceived in this spirit seem to have been common.
Edersheim gives two or three. One is, “‘I thank Thee, O Lord, my
God, that Thou hast put my part with those who sit in the academy,
and not with those who sit at the corners (money changers and
traders). For I rise early, and they rise early: I rise early to the
words of the law, and they to vain things. I labour, and they
labour: I labour and receive a reward, they labour and receive no
reward. I run, and they run: I run to the life of the world to
come, and they to the pit of destruction.”

13. “And the Publican, standing afar off, would not lift up so
much as his eyes,” &c. “Standing afar off” seems to signify that,
whilst the Pharisee pressed as near to the most sacred part of the
temple as he was allowed to do, the Publican stood far behind him,
scarcely venturing to pass through the entrance, feeling that one so
unholy must not tread on holy ground.

‘Would not lift up so much as his eyes unto heaven.” Showing,
in the curved posture of his body, and his downcast look, the
deepest feeling of personal guilt.

“But smote upon his breast,’ thereby not taking credit for re-
pentance, but taking shame for sin.

‘““God be merciful to me a sinner.” We are to remember that
this cry for mercy was the utterance of the agony of his inmost
spirit. There was no prescribed ritual which put into his mouthCuap, XVIIL] LHL eoU. A71

14 I tell you, this man went down to his house justified

14, ‘‘ Justified rather than the other.” “ Above”’ or ‘‘beside the other” read by 8, B., L.,
11, 94, 209, Sah., Copt., old Latin (b, ¢c, e, f, ff2, i, 1, q); but A., all later Uncials, &c., as
in Rec. Text.

such words as, ‘‘ Thou, O Lord, have mercy upon us, miserable
offenders.” It was, as we said, private prayer, though in a public
place; as the Pharisee’s prayer was extempore, the overflowing of
his own heart, so was the Publican’s, though the words he chose
are to be found in many Psalms.

14. ‘I tell you, this man went down to his house justified,” &c.
That is, he went down to his house, having had his prayer for
mercy heard and accepted by God; whilst the other, having
prayed for nothing, received nothing, because he had simply dis-
played himself before God, and so came under a curse rather than a
blessing, as it is written, ‘‘ Everyone proud in heart is abomination
to the Lord.”

A question now presents itself upon the words, “justified rather
than the other” (or as the neutral text MSS. read, ‘‘ above the
other’) which is forced upon us by the treatment which this
passage receives at the hands of some good and able divines. Thus
one writes that the Pharisee was unjustified, not so much because
of his pride, but because it is said that the Publican was “justified
rather than he was,” and as there can be “no degrees in justifica-
tion,” the Pharisee must be altogether unjustified ; and so it is
assumed that the one went to his house with “a sweet sense of
assurance,” which he may have had, but of which nothing is said,
and the other was secretly “‘ without peace,” being in reality ill at
ease, which we should have seen if we could have only read his
heart.

But is it possible thus to apply to the Publican’s case the Pauline,
or rather Christian sense of justification? Ithink it is absurd todo
so, and that it seriously interferes with the reality and naturalness,
so to speak, of the parable. For what is the Pauline doctrine of
justification ? It is justification of life (Rom. v. 18); that life being
not the natural, but the supernatural life, resulting from the com-
munication tous of the Lord’s Risen Life. It is, consequently, the
vesult of the Lord’s Resurrection, and of nothing else, and is made
over or supposed, by St. Paul at least, to be made over to each man
on his believing the resurrection of the Lord (Rom. iv. 23-25, x. 9),JUSTIFIED.

h Job xxii. 29. rather than the other: "for every one that exalteth
Matt. xxiii. 12. i

choad. 1:

JamMeiveG, 1 ae ea

Pet. v..5, 6.

and is sealed to him on his submitting to receive a rite in which he
is mystically raised again with Christ (Rom. vi. 3, 4). This is the
only view of Christian justification given after Pentecost, by the
only Christian writer who systematically entertains the subject.

To connect the Publican’s justification and the Pharisee’s want of
justification with this is not only a misleading anachronism, but an
introduction of an element of unreality. The Publican was justi-
fied, 7.e., accepted and blessed because of his self-abasement, and
the Pharisee, the popular religious professor of the day, was unjus-
tified and unblessed, because of his self-conceit and self-assertion,
according to the Divine words, ‘‘ Though the Lord be high, yet hath
he respect unto the lowly; as for the proud, he beholdeth them
afar off.”

One word more. When the Publican thus confessed himself a
sinner, and asked mercy, we are not to suppose that he confessed
mere sinfulness, common to all men alike, but that in all proba-
bility he had committed the sins to which the Publicans as a class
were liable, fraud, extortion, injustice, false accusation. The
whole virtue of the parable is in this, that he had led an actually
evil life, and from this he was delivered, and not only from certain
spiritual sins to which there is no particular shame attached.

So that the words with which the Lord concludes are absolutely
true. ‘‘ Every one that exalteth himself,” no matter how free from
blame his outward conduct, no matter how high his profession is,
no matter to what pretentious sect he belongs,—‘‘ Every one that
exalteth himself shall be abased, and he that humbleth himself ’’
—no matter how evil his former life—‘“ shall be exalted.”” He shall
be high in the favour of Him whose loving-kindness is better than
the Life itself.

And now for the application of this to Christian times.

We must remember that such things as self-esteem and self-
complacency depend very much on the system in which men are
brought up, and to which they continue to belong. Under a legal
system, aman will pride himself upon legal, ¢.e., outward righteous-
ness; under a spiritual system, a man will esteem himself on
account of his spiritual discernment—his clear views of the doctrines
of grace and their relations one to another, particularly of theCuar. XVI] ABASED—EXALTED. AT3

himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself
shall be exalted.

 

relative positions of justification and santification—of imputed and
imparted righteousness, and such things. In my own youth I was
thrown much amongst such persons, and though I remember many
among them of the deepest, because the humblest piety, walking to
all appearance as closely with God as any can do on this side of
eternity, yet I have in my recollection not a few whose whole souls
seemed to be permeated with the self-complacent, self-asserting,
self-conscious spirit of this Pharisee. Their self-gratulation was
that they were enlightened, that they had clear views, and the
worst sign in their eyes of the condition of a fellow-creature was,
that he had not such. The view of illuminating grace which they
entertained was, I need not say, very different from that of the
Apostle, where he writes, ‘‘ He that hateth his brother is in dark-
ness, and walketh in darkness, and knoweth not whither he goeth,
because that darkness hath blinded his eyes” (1 Johnii. 11). How
many pride themselves upon their conversion, not remembering
that our Lord in speaking of conversion says not merely, ‘‘ except
ye be converted,” but, ‘‘ except ye be converted and become as little
children, ye shall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven.” ?
We Christians then have to take heed lest we resemble the
Pharisee. In such a spiritual dispensation as that in which we are,
our outward confession may have not one word like his, and yet
our whole heart and mind may be pervaded by his spirit of self-
esteem. The worst part of his address were the words, ‘‘ Even as
this publican.” The moment we find ourselves comparing our-

 

Such persons are very much decreasing in the Church of England.
They have taken refuge principally among the so-called ‘‘ Brethren.”
Their uncharitableness in the matter of “judging” would now
seem incredible. I remember, as if it were yesterday, being in a
company of religious persons of this school, very shortly after the
death of the late Dr. Arnold. An article in a religious newspaper
of the day was discussed, in which it was asserted that Arnold had
only just light enough to save him. Upon which one of the leaders
in the company (I assure the reader far above the average) ex-
pressed, by no means flippantly, but in all seriousness, the opinion
that he had nothing like light enough to save him.A474 THEY BROUGHT TO HIM INFANTS. (Sr. Luxz.

15 ' And they brought unto him also infants, that he would

pats: touch them: but when his disciples saw i, they
ANLark X, Lo.

rebuked them.

 

selves with others to our own advantage, then we have reason to
fear the spirit of Pharisaism." .

Lastly we see, from the example of the Publican, what God re-
quires of sinners.. He requires of them that they should seek Him,
and throw themselves simply and entirely upon His mercy. In
coming to God, then, let us extenuate nothing. Let us not say
that such or such a temptation, under which we fell, was too
strong for us, because He, no doubt, remembers what we forget,
that there was a way of escape provided, if we would have seen
it, and not turned away our eyes from it. Do not let us plead
our circumstances, because God, perhaps, may be able to show
that others under more adverse circumstances have endured where
we have failed. It is the safest to come to God cloaking nothing,
extenuating nothing, mentioning nothing but His promises of mercy
in Jesus Christ.

15. “ And they brought unto him also infants that he would
touch them,’’ &e. What blessing did the parents of these children
expect from the Lord? It could not have been healing, for they
were not sick, and it could not have been any high spiritual grace.
Origen says that they thought that ‘no ill-chance, or evil spirit
could harm those infants on whom Jesus laid His hand, and by His
touch infused virtue into them. Augustine, however, goes deeper.
“To whom are they brought to be touched, but to the Saviour ?

 

 

‘ An almost ludicrous yet very instructive illustration of the
form in whieh this spirit not unfrequently displays itself, I heard
but aday or two ago. A well-known and much esteemed minister
of the Church entered a place where a prayer meeting was being
held. He was asked to stay, as in a minute or two he would be
privileged to listen to the experiences of some convert well known
in the locality. He did stop, and did hear a long confession, but
not of the man’s own sins, but of those of lis father. Scarcely a word
was said of his own wrong doings; it was full from beginning to
end of the drunkenness, the neglect of prayer, and other signs of
his own father’s irreligion.Cuar, XVIII. FORBID THEM NOT. 47d

16 But Jesus called them wnto him, and said, Suffer little
children to come unto me, and forbid them not: for * of such
is the kingdom of God. K 1 Cor. xiv.

17 ' Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not as pee
receive the kingdom of God as a little child shall in no wise

enter therein.

 

And as being the Saviour they are presented to Him to be saved,
Who came to save that which was lost. But with regard to these
innocents, when were they lost? The Apostle says, ‘By one man
sin entered into the world.’ Let then the little children come as
the sick to a Physician, the lost to their Redeemer.” I have very
fully examined the import of this beautiful incident in my notes on
St. Mark’s Gospel (x. 17). I need hardly remind the reader that
the Church, in her Baptismal Office for Infants, uses it to stir up
our faith in the gracious presence and working of our Saviour at
every baptism. We are not to “doubt, but earnestly believe that he
will likewise favourably receive this present infant; that he will
embrace him with the arms of his mercy,” &c. The strict logical
deduction from the transaction (taking our Saviour’s Divine power
and Godhead into account) is that He will confer spiritual blessings
upon those who, at the time, cannot pray to Him, or consciously
apprehend the gift He bestows.

‘‘ Suffer little children to come unto me.’ Here we see that
the Lord accounts that children who are brought to Him come
unto Him. He takes their tender age into account, and dispenses
for the time with their conscious coming.

‘¢ Of such is the kingdom of God.” ‘The kingdom of God is com-
posed of children, and of such as are, in respect of their humble and
teachable disposition, like unto children.

17. ‘‘ Verily I say unto you, Whosoever shall not receive the
kingdom of God,” &c. We cannot but infer from this, that after
Baptism our continuance in the kingdom of God depends upon our
preserving the humble, teachable, child-like spirit. If we are re-
ceived into the Church of Christ as infants, and afterwards become
worldly, proud, questioning, sceptical, we fall away from the grace
of our adoption, and have to re-enter the kingdom not only by
being converted, but by being converted so as to become as little
children.476 A CERTAIN RULER. [Sr. Luke.

18 ™And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master,
et «© woat shall L doto inherit eternal life ?
Os NLAarK XX.
17. one Es ae

18. “And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what
shall I do,” &. We now come to our third exposition of this
remarkable incident, for we have it fully reported in each of the
three synoptics. I have examined it very fully in my notes on St.
Mark—particularly with reference to two things: first, to our Lord
demanding of the young ruler why he called Him good; secondly,
with respect to our Lord directing the young ruler to follow Him
in the way of perfection, not as an ordinary Christian, but as an
Apostle, or quasi-Apostle, (such as Matthias and Joseph, surnamed
Barsabas) parting with all that he had at the outset. Respecting
these matters I must refer the reader to the notes on St. Mark.
There are, however, one or two points in this most instructive in-
cident which will require further handling.

IT would make one observation at the outset, that the internal, or
spiritual, character of the man, 7.e., his state before God, must be
judged from the fact that our Lord, not before, but after he had
given the answer, ‘‘All these have I kept from my youth up,”
“looked upon him and loved him.” Now it is the prerogative of
our Lord, as partaking fully of the Divine Nature, to read the
heart. He could not have said this if the man had been a hypo-
crite, or proud, or insincere in his first question, or a boaster, or
self-righteous after the example of the self-righteousness of the
Pharisee of the last parable.

“And a certain ruler asked him, saying, Good Master, what shall
I do,” &. St. Luke alone tells us that he was a ruler—most pro-
bably a ruler in asynagogue. We should gather from this that he
had, at least, a reputation for being learned in the Scriptures, as
well as that he was highly esteemed for his moral life.

‘* What shall I do to inherit eternal life?’ There was nothing
blameable in this question, i.c., in asking what he should ‘‘ do.”
The way of faith in a crucified and risen Saviour was not revealed,
at least it was not apprehended even by the Apostles (Luke xviii. 34),
and if they, as yet, could not apprehend it, much less this ruler. It
is to be observed that the Lord does not blame him for putting this
question, but rather for using unreal words.

19, “And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good?”
&c. See my note on St. Mark. He had, according to St. Matthew,Cuar. XVUI.] ALL THESE HAVE I KEPT. AUT

19 And Jesus said unto him, Why callest thou me good ?
none is good, save one, that is, God.

20 Thou knowest the commandments, ® Do not n HX. xx. 12.
commit adultery, Do not kill, Do not steal. Do 16:20, "Rom,
not bear false witness, °Honour thy father and saat ek
thy mother. Col. iii. 20.

21 And he said, All these have I kept from my youth up.

 

19. ‘‘Save one, that is God” (§ @e). So A., D., and apparently all other authorities
except N and B. (first hand), which, omitting article, read, ‘‘ save one God,”
asked ‘‘ what good thing shall I do?” and the Lord would rectify
his ideas respecting goodness, by not allowing him to call even
Himself good unless he realized something of the meaning of the
words he used.

20. ‘“*Thou knowest the commandments, Do not commit adul-
tery, do not kill,” &c. All these commandments are good, accord-
ing to the words of the Spirit by St. Paul, ‘“‘ The commandment is
holy, and just, and good.” (Rom. vii. 12). And as these command-
ments are good, so the doing of them, even in the letter, is good.
It is good, for instance, to keep the first of these things which the
Lord here mentions, for otherwise human society becomes a filthy
sty, as it is becoming in places where a lawless Gospel is preached.

21. “And he said, All these have I kept from my youth up.”
We are to judge of these words by two things. First by the way
in which the Lord receives them. He utters not one word of
reproach to the man because of the seeming self-righteousness he
evinced. On the contrary, it is said by St. Mark that then “‘ Jesus
beholding him, loved him.” Now it was impossible for the Lord
to have thus spoken if the man had been animated by anything of
the spirit of the Phayrisee in the last parable, for the look of Jesus
penetrates into the innermost depths of the soul. Could the all-
knowing Saviour, after searching him through and through, and
then loving him, have thought of him as a modern Evangelical
expositor does who writes, ‘‘ An answer more full of darkness and
self-ignorance it is impossible to coneeive! He who made it could
have known nothing rightly either about himself, or God, or God’s
law.” Surely if the Lord entertained the same view of his state of
heart as Bishop Ryle here does, He would have plainly told him
that he had never kept one of God’s commandments. Then, in the478 WHEN JESUS HEARD. (Sr. Luxe.

22. Now when Jesus heard these things, he said unto him,

next place, we must estimate them by the standard of the dis-
pensation in which they were uttered. They are not one whit
more self-righteous than the words of Hezekiah, ‘“‘ Remember now,
O Lord, I beseech thee, how I have walked before thee in truth,
and with a perfect heart, and have done that which is good in thy
sight” (Isaiah xxxviii. 3), or than those of David in a hundred places
in the Book of Psalms; take, for example, Psalm xxvi., beginning,
‘Be thou my judge, O Lord, for I have walked innocently : my
trust hath been also in the Lord, therefore shall I not fall.’ Or
Psalm xviii. 20-26, ‘‘ The Lord shall reward me after my righteous
dealing, according to the cleanness of my hands shall he recompense
me.” We are to remember that the essential difference between the
dispensations is that the one was of the letter, the other of the Spirit.
(2 Corinth. iii. 6, 7). Men now take a far deeper view of sin, and
a far wider view of God’s law, because of the Incarnation and its
consequences. ‘‘ The Spirit was not then given because that Jesus
was not then glorified.” The Spirit is now given to conform men
to the example, and to infuse into them the mind of the Eternal
Son: so that now they know no standard but His Life, no righteous-
ness by the side of His Righteousness ; but before the Resurrection
and Pentecost it was not so, and could not have been so. Men
then, such as David, Hezekiah, and this ruler, expressed themselves
not vain-gloriously, but naturally, according to their standard. Their
standard was a legal one, and, in a great measure, an external one.
The young ruler could have kept perfectly the letter of the com-
mandments which Christ mentioned. That he should have kept
them in the spirit, or taken a spiritual view of their full require-
ments depends upon this, whether God in his case chose to antici-
pate the principal feature of the New Dispensation as distinguished
from the Old, which is this, “I will put my law in their minds and
write it in their hearts.’ (Heb. viii. 8-10, x. 16.)

22. ““ Now when Jesus heard these things he said unto him, Yet
lackest thou,” &c. St. Matthew alone makes the ruler ask, ‘‘ What
lack I yet?” St. Mark and St. Luke both make the Lord first allude
to the one thing lacking.

It is commonly supposed that this man was exceedingly covetous.
One writes, “‘It was a case of desperate and idolatrous love of
money, and so there was but one remedy, ‘ Sell all and distribute.’ ”’Cuar. XVIIL.] YET LACKEST THOU ONE THING. 479

Yet lackest thou one thing: sell all that thou hast, and

distribute unto the poor, and and thou shalt have pinlatt, wig)

KER ite
treasure in heaven: and come, follow me. 1 Tim, vi. 19.

23 And when he heard this, he was very sorrowful: for he
was very rich.

Well I can only say that in this our England there are numberless
cases of such covetousness, and yet no preachers and no commen-
tators that I ever heard of have preached so severe a remedy. The
Lord not only bid him sell all, but ‘‘follow ” Him, 7.e., in the way
of the Apostolic life, as the twelve were doing, and to this he was
not equal. The Lord, be it remembered, did not bid him sell all
in order that he might have eternal life hereafter—respecting that
He had said, “‘ If thou wilt enter into life, keep the commandments ”’
—hbut in order that He might live the Apostolic life and obtain the
Apostolic crown.

Tam thankful to see that this view which I have advocated in
my notes on the two first synoptics is in the main that taken by so
Evangelical a commentator as Godet. ‘‘ This look of love was also
a scrutinizing look by which Jesus discerned the good and bad
qualities of the heart, and which dictated to Him the following say-
ing. He determined to call this man into the number of His per-
manent disciples. The real substance of his answer, indeed, is not
the order to distribute his goods, but the call to follow Him. The
giving away of his money is only the condition of entering upon
that new career which is open to him (see at ix. 61, and xu. 38).
In the proposal which He makes to him Jesus observes the character
which best corresponds to the desire expressed by the young man.
He asked of Him some work to do; and Jesus points out one, and
that decisive, which perfectly corresponds to his object, inasmuch
as it assures him of salvation.”’

23, 24. ‘“* And when he heard this, he was very sorrowful... . And
when Jesus saw that he was very sorrowful, .... How hardly,” &e
This shows that this young man was not exceptionally covetous or
fond of riches, but that he was one of a class, and that he did not rise
above his class. He was an example of a danger shared in by very
many. For instance, the Lord, in describing the persons which re-
fused the Gospel invitation, makes the first to be one who had
bought a piece of land, and the second one who had bought five
yoke of oxen. The Lord seems to lay down that all worldly480 WHO THEN CAN BE SAVED ? [Sr. Luxe.

94 And when Jesus saw that he was very sorrowful, he
a Prov. xi. 28. said, ?How hardly shall they that have riches
Matt. xix. 23. me 7
Mark x.93. enter into the kingdom of God!

25 For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle’s eye,
than for a rich man to enter into the kingdom of God.

26 And they that heard i# said, Who then can be saved.

re Boer 27 And he said,* The things which are impossi-
i. uecn, Vill. =

poe ble with men are possible with God.

AS, ClN 15 ail

24. “© When Jesus saw that he was very sorrowful.” So Ae Te Re, Rie, OS, Is ANG ls
all later Uncials, almost all Cursives, most old Latin, Vulg., Syriacs; but &, Be; Ulett
157, 209, Copt., read, ‘‘ And Jesus seeing him, said.”

24, “ Shall they that have riches enter.” So N, A., D., all other later Uncials, most
Cursives, old Latin (f, 1), Syriac, &c.; but B., L., read, ‘‘do enter.”

possessions have a tendency to make men worldly. One man may
cling to a small estate more detrimentally to his soul than another
may cling to a larger. Riches, too, are a matter of degree. Every
shilling of the incomes of many rich men is anticipated, and must
be expended upon others as soon as received. Whilst many work-
ing men, who would class themselves as poor, are able to expend in
some districts of this country as much as two pounds a week in low
sensual pleasures, and do so.

95, 27. ‘ For it is easier for a camel to go through a needle’s eye,
than for a rich man... . possible with God.” Here the Lord
lays down the impossibility, humanly speaking, of a rich man
entering into the kingdom of God ; and He somewhat qualifies what
He was saying from His own divine standpoint, ‘‘ The things which
are impossible with men are possible with God.”

Now what is our duty as ministers of God, living in the midst
of an exceedingly wealthy community, as regards these sayings ?
Evidently not to make the one neutralize the other, but to assert
manfully and courageously the danger of wealth, and all other
worldly advantages, and that men can only deprive them of
their poison by giving liberally ; far, far more liberally than the
standard even of the Church recognizes as liberality, and that all
mental powers, accomplishments, &c., are to be laid at the feet of
the Lord and consecrated to His service. The preaching and
inculeation of almsgiving bears no proportion in modern books
on religion, or sermons, to what it does in the New Testament.Cuar. XVII] LO, WE HAVE LEFT ALL. 481

28 *Then Peter said, Lo, we have left all, and followed
thee, s Matt. xix. 27.

28. “‘ Lo, we have left all.” So x, A., P., R., X., 1, A, A, I, all later Uncials, most

Cursives, Vulg., Goth.; but B., D., L., some Cursives, 1, 13, 49, 118, 181, 209, 346, Copt.,
Syr. (Schaaf), most old Latin, read, ‘‘left our own.”
And yet it was not so in the first ages. Almost every sermon or
lecture of Chrysostom on St. Matthew or the Epistles ends with
some inculcation of almsgiving or generosity, sometimes couched in
the most trenchant language possible.

The Apostles, though they themselves had given up all, were
astonished at this saying. Perhaps some part of their astonish-
ment arose from the marked difference between the two dispensa-
tions in this very matter. Of the man under the Old Covenant
that feareth the Lord, it is said, ‘“‘ Riches and plenteousness shall
be in his house,” but for the New Dispensation, the Lord said,
‘‘ Blessed are ye poor,” “woe unto you rich.” Outward blessings
are now not the sign of the Divine favour as they were under the
old state of things—yrather the contrary ; so that it seems beside
the mark to cite the cases of Abraham, David, Hezekiah, Jehosha-
phat, Josiah, Job, and Daniel, as rich men who were saved; for in
and after Christ’s time matters were utterly reversed. The Lord,
the first Apostles, St. Paul, and his companions, were very poor ;
all the first teachers of the Christian religion were very poor.

Let nothing that we say upon this very serious matter undo the
force of the Lord’s words, ‘“‘ How hardly,” for if the truth was un-
flinchingly declared, many a rich man now at ease in his possessions
might be aroused, and led to lay hold of that grace, the first effect
of which will be to make him part with his wealth, and succour his
needy fellow creatures, and lay up treasures in heaven, escape the
terrible lot of Dives, do good, be rich in good works, ready to dis-
tribute, and so lay up in store for himself a good foundation against
the time to come, that he may lay hold on eternal life (1 Tim. vi.
18, 19).

98—30. “Then Peter said, Lo, we have left all... . world to
come life everlasting.” For the explanation of the great truth con-
tained in this passage, I must refer the reader to my notes on
Mark x. 29, 30. Suffice it now to notice one or two things.

1gt. The Lord does not reply to Peter’s question so far as regards
himself and those on whose behalf he spake, but gives an answer of
the widest application. ‘‘ Verily, I say unto you, there is no man
a482 MANIFOLD MORE. [Sr. Luke.

29 And he said unto them, Verily I say unto you, ‘There
poet xxxiii. is no man that hath left house, or parents, or
: brethren, or wife, or children, for the kingdom of

God’s sake,
u Job xiii. 10. 80 "Who shall not receive manifold more in
this present time, and in the world to come life

everlasting.

that hath left house,” &c.; so that there is no man, no matter in
what age of the Church he lives, who has followed the example
of the apostles, but will receive as far as possible the rewards of
the apostles; I say as far as possible, for the promise accorded in
Matth. xix. 88, respecting the twelve thrones, is of course limited
to the twelve.

With respect to the words “in the present time,’ which are
evidently opposed to the words ‘‘in the world to come”’ of the next
clause, they teach us that we must be careful to explain the ‘“mani-
fold more,” as given in this world. Homes, parents, brethren,
wives, children, are things to be desired, because they call forth
the highest and purest affections, the exercise of which sheds abroad
in the heart the highest and sweetest human joy and satisfaction.
Now a man's conversion to the faith of Christ, though it at times,
perhaps almost always, estranged him from a heathen home and
family, gave him another home, and a far wider family, attached to
him in far firmer and closer and, withal, more holy bonds, and
these were brethren and sisters, fathers and mothers in Christ. The
exercise of purified love and affection, and, we may add, reverence
towards these, would diffuse through his heart a far holier and deeper
joy than he had ever experienced in his former unholy heathen state.
Take, for instance, the last chapter of the Epistle to the Romans ;
look at the number of Christians to whom the apostle sent salutation.
In no one case were these salutations a mere heartless form. In
every case they were accompanied by the overflow of Christian love,
by memories of how they had laboured and suffered together in the
same holy cause ; in most cases, perhaps, they were the greetings
of a father to his children in the faith. What a sea of satisfaction
and holy joy does all this disclose! And so it was, though, of
course, in different degrees, and under various forms, with every
Christian who had given up any worldly advantage for Christ’s sake.

’Cuar, XVIII.] THIS SAYING WAS HID FROM THEM. 483

31 9*Then he took unto him the twelve

, and said unto
them,

Behold, we go up to J erusalem, and all « Matt. xvi.
e .. 21. & xvii, 22.
things ¥that are written by the prophets con- & xx. 17.
5 e : Mark x. 32.
cerning the Son of man shall be accomplished. vPs, ee ie,
32 For ” he shall be delivered unto the Gentiles, 2 ee cet
and shall be mocked, and spitefully entreated, and ae
spitted on: Acts iii. 13.
33 And they shall scourge him, and put him
to death: and the third day he shall rise again.
34 * And they understood none of these things : as Mark ix 32.
: ; ; ; : ch. ii. 50. & ix.
and this saying was hid from them, neither knew i 3.en%. 6.
s & xii. 16.
they the things which were spoken.

31. “Then he took unto him the twelve, and said unto them,
Behold, we goup.... Neither knew they the things which were
spoken.” ‘“ Then took he unto him;” i.e., according to St. Matthew,
“he took them apart by the way.” ‘*He shall be delivered unto
the Gentiles.” Mark the words. He must first be delivered to the
Gentiles by His own people before they could touch Him. (See my
note on John xix. 11.)

34, “ And they understood none of these things,” &e. And yet
nothing could be plainer or more circumstantial than the Lord’s
prophecy. It was not deep doctrine respecting His union with the
Father, but the plainest possible intimation of His sufferings. He
shall be mocked, spitefully entreated, spitted on, Scourged, put to
death.

Why was it that they understood not such things, that they were
hidden from them, that they knew them not? Some think that
it was because their whole soul rejected the thought of what was
impending. They would not entertain it, but when we read the
words “‘it was hid from them,” we cannot but think that there was
something supernatural in this ‘“ hiding ” or “ concealing.” It was
as if God for His own all-wise purposes had cast a veil over these

plain things, and if the thirty-fourth verse principally refers to
the prophecy respecting His Resurrection on the third day, their
inability to understand this may have been, in a sense, judicial.
They were bound to receive all the Lord’s words as the utterances of
the Incarnate Truth, and as they had not received the intimations of484 THOU SON OF DAVID. [Sr. Luxe.

35 {> And it came to pass, that as he was come nigh unto
» Matt. xx. Jericho, a certain blind man sat by the way side
rg Mark x. begging ;

36 And hearing the multitude pass by, he asked what it
meant.

37 And they told him, that Jesus of Nazareth passeth by.

38 And he cried, saying, Jesus, thou Son of David, have
mercy on me.

39 And they which went before rebuked him, that he
should hold his peace: but he cried so much the more, Thou
Son of David, have mercy on me.

40 And Jesus stood, and commanded him to be brought
unto him: and when he was come near, he asked him,

 

His sufferings because they gave way to their natural dislike to the
thought of such things, so when He announced the termination of
these sufferings in His rising again, they were, by a judicial act of
God, unable to apprehend it. Through God’s all-ruling providence
this slowness on their part to believe in the Resurrection is, for these
latter days, one of the greatest proofs of its reality. They did not
expect it, and so they did not figure it to themselves, or imagine it,
and so could not have imposed upon themselves an appearance
which never had any external or objective reality.

35. ** And it came to pass, that as he was come nigh unto Jericho,
a certain blind man,” &c. I have commented so fully upon this
incident in my notes on St. Mark’s Gospel, that I can do little
more than refer the reader to that volume. St. Mark gives by far
the most circumstantial account; St. Luke’s narrative differs from
his mainly in this, that he considers the miracle to have taken place
as the Lord came nigh to Jericho; whereas St. Mark says, ‘*‘ As he
went out of Jericho.” It has been supposed that the principal
blind man, that is Bartimeus, first accosted the Lord as He entered
Jericho, and not having, for some reason or other, attracted His
notice he sat by the wayside, and called to Him along with another,
who had joined his company, as He departed. I see that Godet
quotes an author or reviewer who mentions that Josephus and
Eusebius distinguish between the Old and the New Jericho, andCuar. XVIII. ] RECEIVE THY SIGHT. A85

41 Saying, What wilt thou that I shall do unto thee? And
he said, Lord, that I may receive my sight.
42 And Jesus said unto him, Receive thy sight: °thy faith

hath saved thee. ¢ ch. xvii. 19,

43 And immediately he received his sight, and
followed him, * glorifying God: and all the people, 4 ch. v. 26.

cts ty. 2P.

when they saw it, gave praise unto God. & xi. 18.

that the two blind men might have been found, the one as they
went out of one city, the other at the entrance of the other.”

Be this as it may, the lessons to be derived from the parable are
the same.

First, that the Lord is ever passing by. He is ever coming near
to us, and though we see Him not, giving proofs of His nearness
to encourage us to call upon Him for spiritual sight.

Secondly, that the more we are forbidden, whether by false
friends or by seemingly discouraging circumstances, to call upon
Him, the more we should call. True faith is that which overcomes
all discouragements.

Thirdly, that if we do thus perseveringly call, He will stand; He
will cause us to be brought to Him; He will give us what we cry
for: especially will He give us spiritual sight, ‘‘the eyes of our
understandings being enlightened, we shall know the hope of His
ealling.”’

Fourthly, that it will be Christ, Who gives us the light of truth
and salvation, and yet it will be our faith—our faith in Him as a
living person, as the Son of David, and, therefore the Inheritor of
all the promises, and the Wielder of all the power ascribed to that
Son of David. Itis remarkable that amidst all the glorious titles
of Christ such as God, as Word, as Only Begotten, as Saviour and
Redeemer, the Church has not forgotten this one of *‘ Son of David.”
““O Son of David,” we call in our Litany, ‘‘O Son of David, have
mercy upon us.”

And lastly, when we have received this spiritual sight, if it be
true spiritual sight, we shall follow Him, glorifying God. We shall
follow Him in the path of faith and love and obedience, and those
around us, when they see our holy and consistent walk, will “ give
praise unto God.”A MAN NAMED ZACCH AUS.

(jeUle, QD

ND Jesus entered and passed through Jericho.
2 And, behold, there was a man named Zaccheus,
which was the chief among the publicans, and he was rich.
3 And he sought to see Jesus who he was; and could not
for the press, because he was little of stature.

 

1, 2. ‘“‘ And Jesus entered and passed through Jericho. And be-
hold, there was a man named Zaccheus,” &c. The account of
Zaccheus we owe to St. Luke alone. The name is a Jewish or
Hebrew name, and is the Grecized form of Zaccai (Ezra ii. 9).

‘Which was the chief among the publicans.”’ It was only natural
that Jericho, from its position close to the fords of Jordan (Josh. 11.
7), and as the frontier city on entering the Holy Land from Perea
situated, too, as it was, in the richest plain of Palestine, from which
the costly balsams passed from Gilead on their way westward,
should be the seat of a revenue collector of superior rank.

3,4. ‘‘And he sought to see Jesus who he was. . . he was to pass
that way.” Why did he seek to see the Lord? It must have been
from some strong interest he took in Him, and this could not well
be other than a spiritual one. He is another instance of that which
we have several times noticed in the course of this commentary,
that from many hints in the Gospels, it seems that a work of grace
was going on amongst the publicans as a class. (See Luke iii. 12;
vy. 29; vii. 29; xv. 1; xviii. 10. These should be taken together.)
He was very probably one of those who had strong feelings towards
religion, and deep yearnings after what is good and right, but, as yet,
had not been able to separate himself from the peculiar sins of his
dangerous calling. The good Shepherd discerned him, and secretly
but irresistibly led him to seek Him, though at first in the way of
curiosity, perhaps, as much as from any deeper longings. The
means he took to see the Lord were very remarkable, very un-
wonted for a man in his position, a rich man, chief of a wealthy
class. Regardless of ridicule, and ofany compromise of his dignity,
he ran and climbed into a roadside tree, as if he were a boy, in

 

°Cuap. XIX.]  ZACCHAHUS, MAKE HASTE. A487

4 And he ran before, and climbed up into a sycomore tree
to see him: for he was to pass that way.

5) And when Jesus came to the place, he looked up, and
saw him, and said unto him, Zaccheus, make haste, and come
down ; for to day I must abide at thy house.

6 And he made haste, and came down, and received him
joyfully.

order to get a sight of the Lord as He passed. As Trench remarks,
‘He has not, or if he has he overcomes, that false pride, through
which so many precious opportunities, and oftentimes in the
highest things of all, are lost.” It is noticed by commentators that
the tree into which he climbed has wide-spreading lateral branches
which made it easy for a man to climb and stand in it.

5. ‘And when Jesus came to the place, he looked up,” &c. He
brought Zaccai out of his concealment, perhaps to his momentary
discomfiture, as He did the woman with the issue of blood. He
had far more grace in store for him than the mere sight of His
Person.

‘“* Zaccheus, make haste and come down, for to-day I must abide
at thy house.” Words of extraordinary grace, for while the Lord
accepted many invitations (Luke vii. 36, xi. 37, xiv. 1), yet we do
not read that He honoured any but this publican by thus offering
Himself to his hospitality. As Augustine says, ‘‘ He who thought
it a great blessing to behold Jesus passing by, hath, of a sudden,
merited to receive Him into his house.’”’ The reader will remember
the words of the Lord to the Church of Laodicea. “If any man
hear my voice, and open the door, I will come in to him and sup
with him, and he with Me.” (Rey. ii. 24.)

6. ‘* And he made haste, and came down, and and received him
joyfully.” This seems to imply that Zaccheus sought to see the
Lord out of far more than a feeling of mere curiosity. He must
have heard much about the Lord’s miracles, His teaching, above
all, His receiving publicans, thus to welcome Him. He must, I
think, have been looking for Him, as One in some way sent from
God, to separate men from their past evil lives.

7. ‘“ And when they saw it, they all murmured, saying, That he
was gone to be,” &e. So they murmured when, at the house of
Matthew, He eat with Publicans and sinners; so they murmured

   
  
 
 
 
 
   
 
    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
   
   
   
  
 
 
    
 

CCPL ERS

att > an ee ee
I ae tal ae eta

See
PC Atte niet ns488 THEY ALL MURMURED. (Sr. Lu«e.

7 And when they saw it, they all murmured, saying, * That

a Matt. ix.11. he was gone to be guest with a man that is a
ch. y. 30. : =
sinner.

8 And Zacchzeus stood, and said unto the Lord; Behold,
Lord, the half of my goods I give to the poor; and if I have
bch. iti, 14. taken any thing from any man by ° false accusa-
eG tion, °I restore him fourfold.

1 Sam. xii. 3.
2 Sam. xii. 6.

when He allowed the penitent woman to anoint His feet. They
all murmured—the crowd murmured—because He shared the
hospitality of a hated tax-gatherer and extortioner. The Phari-
sees, probably—the leaders of the then religious world—that He
was gone to be the guest of one excommunicated.

8. “And Yaccheeus stood, and said unto the Lord ; Behold, Lord,
the half of my goods,” &c. This is as if he rose from his seat where
he was sitting surrounded by many other guests as well as the Lord
and His disciples, and made a solemn profession or confession.
Some have supposed that he stood up to profess the benevolence of
his private life and conduct in opposition to those who had said that
the Lord had gone in to eat with asinner. And they explain his
last words, “if I have taken any thing from any man by false
accusation, I restore him fourfold,’ by such a supposition as, “* In
a profession like his, it was easy to commit involuntary injustice.
Besides Zaccheus had under his authority many employés, for
whom he could not answer.’”—Godet. But it seems rather to be a
profession of repentance, and the consequent determination to lead
a new life—a life exactly contrary to his old one. For inasmuch as
his former life was devoted to the accumulation of money, now, at
one stroke, he gives up half his property ; whereas before he had
given way to the practices frequent in his profession, of extortion
and underhand dealing, now he openly repudiates all such un-
lawful ways of gain.

It is very probable that the single Greek word (icvxcodayrnoa),
rendered in English by the whole sentence, ‘‘if I have taken (any
thing) by false accusation,” had a wider meaning than is implied in
its derivation, and includes many species of fraud besides that
directly connected with false witness.

“T restore him fourfold.” The thief had to restore fourfold
(Exod. xxii. 1), So that, by such a restoration, Zaccheeus publiclyCuap. XIX.] SALVATION COME TO THIS HOUSE. 489

9 And Jesus said unto him, This day is salvation come

confessed that his frauds were breakings of the eighth command-
ment.

“The half of my goods I give to the poor... . I restore four-
fold.” These are indeed worthy fruits of repentance. There seems
to be nothing like them in this our day. When a man in the
worldly position of Zacchzus is converted, or becomes religious, it
is reckoned an adequate sign of it if, out of perhaps an income far
above one thousand a year, he gives a few guineas to a few socie-
ties, helps a little more liberally the parish schools and the parish
benefit clubs, and so on. On the other hand, Cornelius 4 Lapide,
and others anxious to show that from that time he embraced a life
of voluntary poverty, tell us that he only retained the other half in
order that out of it he might pay the ‘‘ fourfold ” to those whom he
had defrauded; but this is absurd on the face of it: for we have no
reason to believe, from the narrative, that he threw up his position
as chief of the publicans. The Lord did not bid him follow Him,
as He did the young ruler, in the way of apostolic poverty ; and it
is not to be imagined that he continued fraudulent practices in
order that he might make amends to the sufferers with the other
half of his income. In all probability, with the Lord’s express
sanction, he continued in his occupation, in order that he might
set an example to others of his class, showing them that a calling
which does not involve the commission of sin is a lawful one, and
may be pursued innocently and honestly; and in order that he
might restrain those, over whom he acted as chief, from extortion
and other crimes.

9. “ And Jesus said unto him, This day is salvation come to this
house,” &c. To many houses had the Lord come, and even He had
not brought salvation to the inmates, because they received Him as
a mere guest, and not as the Messiah or special representative of God
to save them from sin; but to this man the coming of the Lord, and
His holy converse, had been the turning point in his soul’s life. He
had probably made many resolutions before, and had had much con-
flict with the evil within him; but now, encouraged by the pre-
sence, and assisted by the secret power of Christ, he vigorously
snapped asunder the chains of the world, and became a new man,
denying his covetousness, confessing and making amends for his
fraud and extortion, entering upon a life of benevolence and regard490 A SON OF ABRAHAM. [Sv. Luxe.

d Rom.iv.11, to this house, forsomuch as “he also is “a son of
12,16. Gal. :
iii, 7. Abraham.

© ch, xiii, 16. Laer
tee esis 10 ‘For the Son of man is come to seek and to
11. See Matt. save that which was lost.

11 And as they heard these things, he added

and spake a parable, because he was nigh to

s Actsi.6. Jerusalem, and because *they thought that the
kingdom of God should immediately appear.

for others, and acknowledging the claims of Him whose presence
had wrought so marvellous a change.

Thus had salvation come to his house, because the Lord had
come in saving power to him.

“Forsomuch as he also is a son of Abraham.” The import of
this seems to be that, notwithstanding the detestation under which
his class was held by his fellow-countrymen, the covenant of God
with him as a son of Abraham held good that, on his repentance, he
should be restored to all the privileges of the Israel of God. Those
who hold that he was a Gentile by birth, suppose that by these
words the Lord claimed him as a son of Abraham by faith, as
one of the spiritual seed of Abraham, but I do not think this is
possible.

‘“‘ For the Son of man is come to seek and to save that which was
lost.” We learn from this, that though Zaccheus seemed to seek
the Lord to see Him, yet the Lord was secretly seeking Zaccheus,
both assisting and fostering the better thoughts which were taking
possession of his soul, and also exciting his innocent curiosity so as
to bring about His sojourn in his house, which was, of course, the
occasion of much closer intercourse than Zaccheus would otherwise
have enjoyed.

11. “And as they heard these things, he added and spake a
parable .... immediately appear.” They knew that He was
soing up to Jerusalem for no ordinary purpose,—not merely to teach
or work miracles, but to bring about a crisis. What He had ex-
pressly told them respecting this crisis, as involving His own suffer-
ings and shameful death before He entered into His glory, they
put from them, and would not entertain the idea; but they knew
that He was going up to establish the Messianic kingdom. This
kingdom they, in their carnal views, understood to be one of “ ob-Cuar. XIX.] OCCUPY WILE © COM: AQT]

: =
12 ° He said therefore, A certain nobleman went into a

a

far country to receive for himself a kingdom, and » Matt. xxv.

14. Mark xiii,
to return. 34.
= :
13 And he called his ten servants, and delivered | aMina, here
: : translated a
them ten || pounds, and said unto them, Occupy pound, is
a “ twelve ounces
till T come. and a half:
: ; ats : which accord-
14 *But his citizens hated him, and sent a ing to five shil-
a es Mee es a : - _ lings the ounce
message after him, saying, We will not have this is three pounds
pe peel eo a two shillings
man to relgn over us. and sixpence.
i John i. 11.

 

13. ‘Occupy till I come.” So T, A, A, most later Uncials, almost all Cursives; but
XN, A., B., D., K., L., R., 1., and about twenty Cursives, read, “ during the time that I

come,” 2.é., “‘ whilst I am away.”
servation,” of outward show and pomp; and He now puts forth a
parable which teaches them that there must be a long period of
probation, during which His servants would be on their trial,
during His prolonged absence, and must win their places of rule
in His kingdom by the use they made of the gifts which He com-
mitted to them.

This parable bears in some of its features a resemblance to that
of the Talents in Matth. xxv.; but in its great lesson is essentially
different. I have dwelt at some length upon the difference in my
notes on St. Matthew’s Gospel, but it may be well now shortly to
re-state it.

The two parables, taken together, represent the sum of human
accountability. All human beings whatsoever are accountable to
God for the use which they make of His gifts; but these gifts may
be divided into two classes, those which God gives to all alike, and
those which He gives to each diversely in different proportions. To
the heathen, even, He gives to all alike the gifts of life and breath,
and the use of speech and sight and hearing, and such things ;
but he gives such gifts as health and riches, and strength of body
and intelligence to each one in different proportions, so that no two
men are exactly alike in their possession of these gifts. Now the
Parable of the Talents has to do with each man’s use or neglect of
this latter set of gifts, or Talents as we have come to call them. In
it the man travelling into the far country commits to each one of
his servants his property in very different shares or proportions: to492 WHEN HE WAS RETURNED. [St. Luxe.

15 And it came to pass, that when he was returned,
havine received the kingdom, then he commanded these

 

one five talents, to another two, according to their several ability ;
and as each man has different abilities, each has a different share.
When the time of recompense comes, no difference seems to be
made between him who has made his five talents into ten, and
him who has made his two into four. They have each done their
best, according to their ability, and are both welcomed into the joy
of their Lord; but in this parable of the Pounds or Minas it is alto-
gether different. The nobleman, on his leaving to receive for him-
self a kingdom, gives one and the same sum to each one of ten
servants. One trades so well with his mina, that he increases it, or
rather it increases under his hands into ten, another into five: and
these are made rulers over ten and five cities respectively. The
treatment of the man who makes no profit by his pound, but hides
it in a napkin, is similar to that of the man who buried his
talent in the earth. It is taken from him, and given to him that
hath ten.

Now, first of all, this parable of the Minas, or Pounds, is much
more closely connected with the manifestation of the kingdom, or
Church, of Christ than that of the Talents. It was uttered because
some thought that the kingdom of God should “immediately
appear,’ —i.e., be manifested in power and glory. The great man of
the parable is not a householder, but a nobleman, one well born
(ciyevjc), who goes into a far country to be invested by the emperor,
or greater sovereign, with the kingly rule of a province. At his
departure he calls to him his ten servants (ten, of course, standing
for any large number), and commits to them one mina each, which
he left in their hands to trade with. Then there comes a sort of
episode. His fellow-citizens hate him, and send after him an
embassage to the emperor, or greater sovereign, with the words,
‘We do not desire this man to rule over us.”’ The length of the

 

1 This part of the parable seems to have been founded on an his-
torical fact. Archilaus, on the death of his father, Herod the Great,
went to Rome to receive from Augustus the same royal dignity, and
the Jews sent at the same time a deputation to the Emperor, beg-
ging him to deliver them from this evil house, and to convert thisCrap. XEX,] GAINED BY TRADING. 493

servants to be called unto him, to whom he had given the
y money, that he might know how much every i &. silver,

: : = and so ver. 23.
man had gained by trading.

time during which he is absent is the real answer to those who
thought that the Messianic reign would at once be manifested.
There must, first be a probation of his servants, during which time
his enemies remain unpunished, and this may be a considerable time,
but he does return, and rewards his servants in exact proportion to
what they have gained. The reward is in accordance with what
we should expect that an Hastern king would give to faithful ser-
vants. They reign with and under him. One is made ruler over
ten, the other over five cities ; and after the idle servant is deprived of
his power, the parable concludes with condign punishment executed
before the king himself on the rebels.

Now taking into account the close connection of the parable with
the kingdom, or church, of Christ, its points of contrast with the
Parable of the Talents, particularly in regard of the equality of the
sum committed to each of the ten, and their reward strictly accord-
ing to the faithfulness and industry of each, there*can be no doubt
whatsoever what these minas, or pounds, denote. ‘They must
denote something which is the same to all, so that no one at the
first can have more than another, and yet this something is of such
a sort that it can be very differently employed, or increased by each
one, not so much according to his ability, as according to his faith-
fulness or industry. Now there is one thing common to all Chris-
tians, which all receive alike, which is exactly the same to one as
to another, and that is the Church taken in connection with its
means of grace. Baptism is the same to all, for it is a grafting
into One Body, so that the person baptized is made a member of
Christ, no more and no less. The Scripture, or the Word of God,
whether written or preached, is the same to all; its great leading
truths, the being and attributes of God—the Incarnation, Life, Death,

 

country into a Roman province. At this very Jericho, where the
Lord was speaking, Archelaus had built for himself a magnificent
palace. He received from the Emperor only a part of his father’s
dominions, with the inferior title of Ethnarch, and on his return
put to death those who had opposed his pretensions.494

16 Then came the first, saying, Lord, thy pound hath
gained ten pounds.

17 And he said unto him, Well, thou good servant: be-
att axY. cause thou hast been * faithful in a very little,
10. have thou authority over ten cities.

18 And the second came, saying, Lord, thy pound hath

   

WELL, THOU GOOD SERVANT. [St. Luxe.

gained five pounds.
19 And he said likewise to him, Be thou also over five
cities.

and Resurrection of the Son of God, are the same to each and all.
The gift of the Spirit, at least the initial gift, is common to all, for
the Apostle very emphatically says, ‘‘ The manifestation of the
Spirit is given to every man to profit withal” (1 Corinth. xi. 7)
The Eucharist is the same to all. It is the Body and Blood of
Christ, but one may so receive it that he “dwells in Christ and
Christ in him,’ and another so profanes it that he ‘“‘eats and drinks
his own condemnation, not discerning the Lord’s Body.” And so
with the promises of God that He will hear all our prayers, so with
the example of Christ and His saints—all these things are the same
to each. The early Christians had no means of grace which we have
not. The Eucharist was the same Body and Blood of Christ to
St. Paul as to the weakest believer. The profiting by it was
according to the faith and prayer exercised in each case.

Such are these minas, or pounds. I do not see that any other
meaning can be given to them. So that the difference between
Christian and Christian—between nominal Christian and real be-
liever, and between one real believer and another—is simply the use,
the cultivation, the employment of, the perseverance in—the means
of grace—the common means of grace which all Christians have,
or are able to have, alike.

One objection, however, may be made. It may be said that the
means of grace are withheld or mutilated, or given in very different
proportions to different Christians. Amongst a vast body of Chris-
tians half the Sacrament of the Eucharist is withheld from the great
body of the faithful, inasmuch as they are communicated only in
one kind. Amongst us of the Church of England, about seventy or
eighty years ago, there were multitudes of churches in which theCuap. XIX,] HERE IS THY POUND. A495

20 And another came, saying, Lord, behold, here is thy
pound, which I have kept laid up in a napkin :

21 ‘For I feared thee, because thou art an , Matt. xy,
austere man: thou takest up that thou layedst —
not down, and reapest that thou didst not sow.

22 And he saith unto him, ™ Out of thine own 2 : eeu i. 16.
mouth will I judge thee, thow wicked servant. Matt. xii. 37.
"Thou knewest that I was an austere man, taking n Matt. xxv.
up that I laid not down, and reaping that I did =
not sow :

 

Eucharist was only celebrated twice or three times a year. Again,
with respect to other means of grace, many through defect of
education could not read the Scriptures. Again, the preached word
was very differently dispensed in different parishes. Now taking
all this into the fullest account, there are yet abundant indications
that God can, and does, make up for such seemingly serious losses
in a marvellous way. Many devout Romanists seem to profit by
their mutilated Sacrament more than many of us do by our full
rite. God’s good Spirit sometimes savingly impresses a few
scattered and disjointed truths on the minds of poor Christians, so
that they are far nearer to the mind of God than those whose know-
ledge is infinitely more varied and systematic and, we must say, in-
telligent. ‘The guilt of withholding or depraving God’s Word, and
mutilating His Sacraments is with the teachers or administrators of
Christian systems; and God by His marvellous grace not seldom
makes up to private Christians what, through no fault of theirs,
they have been deprived of.

A second matter for consideration is the method of rewarding the
faithful servants. They are rewarded exactly in proportion to the
way in which they have increased the sum of one mina committed
to each. One is made to rule over ten cities, another over five.

Now, without at all pressing this literally, as that the reward of the
future state will always be government or rule over others, perhaps
in other worlds than this, such a theory of reward is perfectly incom-
patible with the popular idea of “‘heaven.” Iam not, I am sure,
caricaturing the usual view of heaven, when I say that most Chris-
tians look upon it as a vast hall, into which those saved are admitted
on their death; and we are constantly told that if we arrive at the496 TAKE FROM HIM THE POUND. (Sr. Luks.

93 Wherefore then gavest not thou my money into the
bank, that at my coming I might have required mine own

with usury?

94 And he said unto them that stood by, Take from him
the pound, and give i to him that hath ten pounds.

25 (And they said unto him, Lord, he hath ten pounds.)
o Matt. xiii. 26. For I say unto you, °That unto every one
Mark iv 25. which hath shall be given ; and from him that
ch. vil, 18. sath not, even that he hath shall be taken away

from him.

BS a

entrance, and can show our order of admission, we shall not be asked
a word respecting the road by which we have come to the gate.
Once admitted within the four walls, there will be no room for any-
thing approaching to the gradations of rewardset forth in this para-
ble, for the only possible difference which the popular idea admits of
is that one may have a seat nearer the place of honour—another
nearer the door. The employment of the place is but one, no other
which ean properly be called employment has ever been suggested,
one endless hallelujah, one never-ending song of praise. Now let the
reader remember that I am writing nothing in the smallest degree
contrary to what God’s saints have ever held, respecting the won-
drous rapture and glory of the peatific vision. But the same adorable
Lord Jesus, the Ruler of all worlds seen and unseen, the Bestower
of all grace here and all glory hereafter—this same Lord and Judge
has not only said, ‘“ Blessed are the pure in heart, for they shall see
God,” but He has also said that He will say to those whom He
accepts, “‘ Come, ye blessed, inherit the kingdom—not merely enter
into the hall, or even the palace, but inherit the kingdom,” and He
says, 1m strict accordance with this, to one, ‘‘ Be thou ruler over
ten,” to another, ‘‘ Be thou ruler over five cities.” The idea of the
reward which the Lord sets before us here is strictly just; His
servant sets forth the same idea in more general terms when He
says, ‘‘ Hivery man shall receive his own reward according to his
own labour” (1 Coy. iii.), and itis also natural, and points to the
highest development of our natural faculties ; for the guidance, the
direction, the protection, the administration of justice which is
implied in * rule,” and “kingship,” taxes the best and highest
faculties of the creature to the uttermost.Cuar, XIX] SLAY THEM BEFORE ME. 497

27 But those mine enemies, which would not that I should
reign over them, bring hither, and slay them before me.

28 § And when he had thus spoken, he went p Mark x. 32,
before, ascending up to Jerusalem.

29 “And it came to pass, when he was come eee a E
nigh to Bethphage and Bethany, at the mount — me
called the mount of Olives, he sent two of his disciples,

27. “But those mine enemies, which would not that I ShoOulde a.
slay them before me.” One word more respecting that which seems
at first sight apart from the great lesson of the parable, the embassy
and subsequent treatment of the rebels,

“We will not have this man to reign over us.” ‘Those mine
enemies ... bring hither and slay them before me.” It seems im-
possible to avoid the conclusion that the Lord here of set purpose
makes a difference between the slothful, and therefore evil servant,
and the open enemies. The one has his minataken from him, and,
we suppose, like the man who had buried his talent, is cast into
the darkness without, though this is not said ; the others are treated
as enemies, and slain. Those who send the embassy to the greater
sovereign represent, in the first instance, the Jews, but the Jews
themselves in this case must be taken to represent those who,
when the reign of Christ is established, wilfully refuse obedi-
ence. It seems to stand to reason that if men knowingly and
wilfully refuse the rule of Christ, they should be punished with
greater severity than one who makes no use or increase of his gifts.
This place is valuable as giving the lie to the notion that the
Lord can inflict but one punishment, and that of the extremest
severity.

The excuse of the slothful servant, the Lord’s reproof of him, and
his punishment are so similar in the account of the unfaithful
servant in the Parable of the Talents, that I must refer my reader
to my remarks on Matth. xxv. 24-30.

29. ‘‘ And it came to pass, when he was come nigh to Bethphage
and Bethany.” We learn from St. John’s Gospel that Jesus did
not go up to Jerusalem without halting by the way. He stayed
the night at Bethany, at the house of the sisters. At Bethany he
was entertained by Simon the leper, and was by Mary anointed
for His burial. On the next day (Palm Sunday) He made His
KK498- THE LORD HATH NEED OF HIM. [St. Luxe.

30 Sayimg, Go ye into the village over against you ; in the
which at your entering ye shall find a colt tied, whereon yet
never man sat: loose him, and bring him ither. |

31 And if any man ask you, Why do you loose him? thus
shall ye say unto him, Because the Lord hath need of him.

32 And they that were gent went their way, and found
even as he had said unto them.

33 And as they were loosing the colt, the owners thereof
said unto them, Why loose ye the colt?

34 And they said, The Lord hath need of him.
nea 85 And they brought him to Jesus: * and they
8. Mark x7, cast their garments upon the colt, and they set

Jobn xu. 14.
Jesus thereon.

public entry into Jerusalem. All the three Synoptics give accounts
of this, but if we had not the fourth Gospel, it would be impossible
to understand how it was that He was met and followed by such a
multitude. St. John tells us that the people met Him because they
heard that He had ‘‘done this miracle,” i.e., that He had called
Lazarus out of his grave.
30. “Saying, Go ye into the village over against you. . . bring
him hither.” We have remarked upon the extraordinary contrast
between this incident and all others in the life of the Lord. On all
other occasions the Lord refused all demonstrations of popularity—
He forbade men even to mention His miracles. He conveyed Him-
self away when a multitude gathered together (John v. 13). When
they would have taken Him by force, to make Him a king, He de-
parted into a mountain Himself alone (John vi. 15). Now, on the
contrary, He deliberately prepared to receive the all but worship
which He alone knew would be rendered to Him; He laid Himself
out for it, He encouraged it, and what is more, in very extraordinary
words, as we shall see, He vindicated His right to it. First of all,
He sent two disciples, most probably Peter and John, with the
direction that they should find in a certain place two creatures, an
ass and its colt, on which He intended to ride into Jerusalem, these
creatures being those mentioned in the prophet Zachariah as those
on which the Messiah-King should ride in triumph into the Holy
City. St. Luke and St. Mark and St. John, however, only men-Cuar. XIX.] BLESSED BE THE KING. 499

36 * And as he went, they spread their clothes in the
way. 8 Matt, xxi. 8.

3¢ And when he was come nigh, even now at the descent
of the mount of Olives, the whole multitude of the disciples
began to rejoice and praise God with a loud voice for all the
mighty works that they had seen:

38 Saying, ‘Blessed be the King that cometh te. Cxvilie 26.
in the name of the Lord: "peace in heaven, and uch iis
glory in the highest. eee

39 And some of the Pharisees from among the multitude
said unto him, Master, rebuke thy disciples.

38. ‘Blessed be the King that cometh.” So A., L., R., T, A, most later Uncials,
most Cursives, Vulg., Goth., Copt., Syriac (Cureton and Schaaf); D. reads, “he that
cometh ;” N*, “‘the King in the name of the Lord;” but the Text. Recept. has no
doubt the true reading.

tion the young ass or colt. Anticipating some difficulty on the
part of the owners, He foretold that this would immediately vanish
when they heard the royal demand, “‘ The Lord hath need of him.”
‘Then when they had brought him to the Lord, He permitted them
to do to Him what from the Old Testament we learn was done to
those who claimed kingly power. They put their garments on the
colt, and then they spread their garments in the way, that He
might ride over them ; they strewed the road with palm branches,
and shouted before Him words which welcomed Him as King,
““ Blessed be the king that cometh in the name of the Lord,” and
no ordinary king, but one whose reign would be felt in heaven it-
self, ‘‘ Peace in heaven and glory in the highest.” Surely He was
bound to restrain all this, for it was not merely enthusiasm, it was
worship. ‘The hosannas, the blessings, seemed to be given to Him-
self as well as to God. So thought the Pharisees, and accordingly
they remonstrated, as well they might, if He were not a Divine
King. ‘‘ Master,” they say, “‘rebuke thy disciples. These shouts
of hosanna, these invocations of blessing trench on the honour due
to God only.”

The answer of the Lord is very wonderful, and, understood in the
light of the rest of Scripture, is one of the strongest possible claims
to divine worship on. the part of the Lord.500 THE STONES WOULD CRY OUT.  [S1, Loxm

40 And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that,
: Hab.ii.. if these should hold their peace, xthe stones would

immediately cry out.

Al | And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and.

y John xi. 35. ¥ wept over it.
es ee

40. “And he answered and said unto them, I tell you that, if
these should hold their peace, the stones would immediately cry
» This has been designated as an hyperbole, but it is one
that is very common in Scripture—the Prophets and the Psalms
are full of such expressions ; for do they not abound in words
of praise and adoration which make all inanimate nature feel the
eof God? His presence is assumed to give life and tongue
to mountains, to hills, to trees, to fields, to woods, to seas and
their waves. ‘‘The mountains skipped like rams.” “ The hills
melted like wax at the presence of the Lord.” ‘‘ Let the heavens
rejoice, and let the earth be glad, let the sea roar and the fulness
thereof.” ‘‘ Let the field be joyful, and all that is in it, then shall
the trees of the wood rejoice.” Now, of course, all this is poetry,
put then it is poetry which is only given to God, only composed
and poured forth to the honour of the Supreme. And when the
Lord here says that if the disciples withheld their hosannas, the
very stones would ery out, He claimed, not with indifference or
hesitation, but with a very strong “T tell you”? the same worship
on the part of inanimate nature which, in a wondrous figure, if
indeed it be a figure, is accorded to God only.

Such was the adoration which the lowly Son of Man received and
claimed as His due on the way to the Holy City. And yet this way
of kingly triumph was the way of the Cross. As I have shown in
my notes on St. Mark, it was this triumphant entry, and this alone,
which gave the chief priests their only possible opportunity of
accusing Him to Pilate as claiming kingship in any sense.

“ Ride on! ride on in majesty,

In lowly pomp ride on to die;

Bow Thy meek head to mortal pain,
Then take, O God, Thy power and reign.”

41. “And when he was come near, he beheld the city, and wept
The exact spot where this most affecting scene must have
can be pointed out. It is thus described by Dean Stanley:

out

presenc

over it.”
occurred,Cuap, XIX] IF THOU HADST KNOWN. 501

42 Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in
this thy day, the things which belong unto thy peace! but
now they are hid from thine eyes.

 

42. ““ At least” omitted by some MSS. and authorities, as also is “ thy” in *‘ This thy

day.” A. reads, ‘‘ If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this day.” Vulgate agrees
with authorized, and so does Tischendorf.

‘The road descends a slight declivity, and the glimpse of the city
is again withdrawn behind the intervening ridge of Olivet. A few
moments, and the path mounts again, it climbs a rugged ascent,
it reaches a ledge of smooth rock, and in an instant the whole city
bursts into view. As now the dome of the mosque El-Aksa rises
like a ghost from the earth before the traveller stands on the ledge,
so then must have risen the Temple tower; as now the vast en-
closure of the Mussulman Sanctuary, so then must have spread the
Temple courts; as now the grey town withits broken hills, so then
the magnificent city with its background—long since vanished
away—of garden and suburbs on the western plateau behind. Im-
mediately below was the valley of the Kedron, here seen in its
greatest depth, as it joins the valley of Hinnom, and thus giving
full effect to the great peculiarity of Jerusalem, seen only on the
eastern side, its situation as of a city rising out of a deep abyss.
It is hardly possible to doubt that this rise and turn of the road,
this rocky ledge, was the exact point where the multitude paused
again, and He, when He beheld the city, wept over it. Nowhere
else on the Mount of Olives is there a view like this—still less is
there any point where, as here, the city and temple would suddenly
burst into view, producing the sudden and affecting impression de-
scribed in the Gospel narrative.”’

42. “* Saying, If thou hadst known, even thou, at least in this
thy day, the things which belong,” &e. ‘If thou hadst known.”
This is a phrase common in both Testaments for, “O, that thou
hadst known.”

‘‘ Even thou.” “Thou daughter of Zion, which art so deeply
fallen.”

“‘ At least in this thy day.” Thy day of grace, the day in which
God has come to thee as He had never come before. In past days
He came to thee by prophets, by judges, by righteous kings; now, at
last, He has come to thee in this thy day personally, in the power
of His Godhead ; for He has sent, last of all, His Son.502 A TRENCH ABOUT THEE. [Sr. Luge.
thee, that thine enemies

43 For the day shall come upon
ass thee round, and

shall cast a trench about thee, and comp
keep thee in on every side,

“The things which belong unto thy peace.” The things taught by
Me which would have reconciled thee to God, so that thou shouldest
be as thy name denotes—The Vision of Peace—so that from this
time thou shouldest be a joy and praise in the earth.

“But now they are hid from thine eyes.” Now as a city, a
church, a people, thy doom is sealed. Thou canst not now believe
and be turned; but a vemmnant in the midst of thee shall go forth,
and be the root of a more glorious Zion, a more heavenly city, a
more faithful spouse of God.

43. ‘*For the days shall come upon thee that thine enemies shall
cast a trench,” &. Thy day of doom shall be delayed for a little
space till these are gathered out of thee, and then the end shall
come.

“Thine enemies shall cast a trench.” ‘*Trench,” literally,
“ stockade with mound.” Josephus, who has a most graphic des-
eription of its erection, describes it as a wall—meaning, of course,
not a stone wall, but a safe enclosure. ‘‘ Titus gave his opinion, which
was that, if they aimed at quickness, joined with security, they
must build a wall round about the whole city, which was, he
thought, the only way to prevent the Jews from coming out any
way, and then they would entirely despair of saving the city, and
so would surrender it up to him . Titus gave orders that the
army should be distributed to their several shares of this work, and
indeed there now came upon the soldiers a certain Divine fury, so
that they did not only part the whole wall that was to be built
among them, nor did only one legion strive with another, but the
lesser divisions of the army did the same. Now the length of this
wall was forty furlongs, only one abated . . . and the whole was
completed in three days: so that what would naturally have re-
quired some months was done in so short an interval as is in-
credible.” So rapidly and completely was the Lord’s prophecy
fulfilled.

“And shall lay thee even with the ground, and thy children
within thee . . . time of thy visitation.” Josephus’ account is the
best comment upon this. ‘‘ Now as soon as the army had no moreCuap. XIX.] NOT ONE STONE UPON ANOTHER,

44 And *shall lay. thee even with the ground, and thy
children within thee; and ° they shall not leave Fee
in thee one stone upon another; °because thou aimee ae
knewest not the time of thy visitation. Lene
¢ Dan. ix, 24.
SS ies Ie a TE SSS che 1. 685,49:

1 Pet. ii. 12,
people to slay, or to plunder, because there remained none to be the
objects of their fury, Cesar gave orders that they should now
demolish the whole city and temple. . . . This wall (z.e., part of
the west wall) was spared, in order to afford a camp for such as
were to lie in garrison : as were the towers also spared, in order to
demonstrate to posterity what kind of city it was, and how well
fortified, which the Roman valour had subdued : but for all the rest
of the wall, it was so thoroughly laid even with the eround by
those that dug it up to the foundation, that there was nothing
left to make those who came thither believe it had ever been
inhabited.”

Such was the fate of the city of God, and the Lord wept over it as
loving it; but was He not the Lord of the spirits of all flesh ? Could
He not have in one moment turned every heart in Jerusalem to Him-
self? He could, if we regard Him as simply power ; but He was more
than mere power, He was the just Judge—the righteous Ruler of
intelligent spirits who have freedom of will, and He must respect
this freedom of will with which He has endowed His creatures. So
He must not act upon them by mere irresistible force, but must
sway them, if possible, by motives, and draw them to Him by
exhibitions of love and truth and goodness, so that they should
willingly yield their hearts to Him. This He had assayed to do
often and often. ‘‘ How often would I have gathered thy children
together, as a hen gathereth her chickens under her wing,” but they
would not be gathered. And now there was an end; the decree
had gone forth, and though a remnant was to be gathered the
nation must be cast away—the city destroyed. And if God bea
just Ruler and Judge, so it must be now with us, with nations, with
churches, with souls.

With nations, for these are the ‘‘ times of the Gentiles ”—as long
as Jerusalem is trodden down, and trodden down it is now under
the Turk ; the times of the Gentiles—the day of visitation for each
Gentile nation is going on. If we have national life, that life should
surely be national Christian life. National recognition of God,504 HE WENT INTO THE TEMPLE. [Sr LUKE.

d Matt. xxi. AS 4And he went into the temple, and began
12. Mian:

11,15. John

ii. 14, 15. See

national worship, national teaching of God's truth, or at least no
hindrance to its teaching, putting away of national sins, such as
traffic in slaves, which has been repudiated, and traffic in opium,
which is not repudiated.

With churches. The Lord Himself tells us how He visited
the seven churches of Asia, and the Lord is now of a certainty
visiting us of the Church of England. May our prayer now Ot
“Tet Thy continual pity cleanse and defend Thy Church, and
because it cannot continue in safety without Thy succour, preserve
it evermore by Thy help and goodness.”

And souls. ‘Our Redeemer does not cease to weep through
His elect whenever He perceives any to have departed from a good
life to follow evil ways. Who, if they had known their own damna-
tion hanging over them would, together with the elect, shed tears
over themselves. But the corrupt soul here has its day, rejoicing
in the passing time ; to whom things present are its peace, seeing
that it takes delight in that which is temporal. Tt shuns the fore-
sight of the future, which may disturb its present mirth : and hence
+t follows: “But now are they hid from Thine eyes.” (Gregory in
“ Cat. Aurea.”’)

Asit was with Jerusalem so itis with thesoul. There is the time
of each soul’s visitation. There is the time when Jesus comes, stands
at the door, and knocks. This time may be very early, when the
thought first occurs to the child that it must livefor ever. Orit may
be at confirmation, or first communion. It may be when the full-
grown man has to choose between the world and Christ. It may be
at the hearing of a sermon, or when a word has been dropped by a
religious friend, or when there has been some sudden and startling
danger imminent, or when some bitter erief has well-nigh over-
whelmed the soul.

But can these things be the visitation of the Son of God? Cer-
tainly. Nothing can happen to us except by His will, and if that
which has happened has been in the way of awakening or illumi-
nating the soul, it has not only happened according to His will, but
by His special direction, and is a token that He is searching for the
lost sheep that He may bring it home.

45. “ And he went into thetemple . . . ye have made it a den ofCuar. XIX.] HE CAST OUT THEM THAT SOLD. 505

to cast out them that sold therein, and them that bought.

 

45. “Them that sold therein, and them that bought.” ‘Therein ” omitted by N, B.,
C., L., 1, 69, 209, and ten other Cursives, old Latin (e, 1, s), Cop., Arm.; retained by A.,
D., R., later Uncials, most Cursives, most old Latin, Vulg., Syriac.

‘“Them that bought,” omitted by x, B., L., 1, 209, Copt. ; retained by A., Cy, Div.
all other Uncials, most Cursives, old Latin, Vulg., Goth., Syriac, &c.

thieves.” Here we have Christ, who had in fulfilment of prophecy
entered Jerusalem as its king, now asserting His Divine and Kingly
authority in the temple of God. The chief priests had let out the area
of the court of the Gentiles to cattle-dealers, money-changers, and
others, and, no doubt, received much revenue from this profanation,
and now the Lord thrusts aside their authority in what they thought
to be their own house, to be used for their vile, covetous gain, and
asserts His Kingship and Headship over His Father’s house ; and by
an act of supernatural power, drove out these wretches apparently by
a mere act of will, not even with the “ whip of small cords” which
at His first cleansing (John ii.) He had used for this purpose.
Origen, and Jerome after him, consider this one of the most wonder-
ful acts of Divine power exercised by our Lord. TI have considered
in my notes on St. Mark how this action teaches us reverence for
all holy places and things,—not only for our churches, but for our
bodies as along with our souls and spirits dedicated to God; and
in my notes on St. Matthew how this action shows the attitude of
our Lord towards the whole Sacrificial system, of which the temple
was the centre, how till in His providence He actually abolished and
superseded it, He treated it as in very deed the service of the Most
High, and so everything connected with it as most holy. Suffice it
now to say that in this action the Fathers seem to see the dislike of
the Lord for all that approaches to traffic in religion; thus Origen:
** Now I consider that the Church is the temple built of living stones,
and that there are therein certain persons who live not as in the
Church, but as they that war after the flesh, who through their
wickedness make the house of prayer, built of living stones, a den
of thieves. For who that hath perceived the sins that prevail in
some Churches by those who consider the godliness of others to be
their own gain: and when they ought to live entirely according to
the Gospel alone, instead of doing so, collect wealth and great
possessions—who seeing this will not say that the mystical holiness
of Churches has become a den of thieves.” (So also Ambrose and
Augustine, quoted in J. Williams.)506 A DEN OF THIEVES. [St. Luke.

46 Saying unto them, ° It is written, My house is the house
eIs.wiit. of prayer: but ‘ye have made it a den of thieves.
aes 47 And he taught daily in the temple. But
« Mark xi.18. © the Chief Priests and the Scribes and the chief

John yii. 19. :
& vill. 37. of the people sought to destroy him.

48 And could not find what they might do:
1 Or, tanged for all the people || were very attentive to hear

on him, Acts, 3
xvi. 14, him.

46, “Is the house of prayer.” So A., C., D., other Uncials, most Cursives, and old

Latin ; but ne, B., L., R., a few Cursives, &e., read, ‘‘ shall be.”

Quesnel has a valuable application. ‘“‘ Every one of the faithful
is the temple of God ; and, therefore, ought to have the same zeal
for the purity of his own heart, which Christ had for the sanctity
of His visible temple. Avarice, self-interest, fondness for temporal
things, and other lusts of this life, which fill the heart, are the
buyers and sellers which must be cast out of this house of God,
consecrated by Baptism for the offering up of prayer and adoration.”

47, 48. ‘And he taught daily in the temple... . attentive to hear
him.” We are taught by these verses two things ; first, how the
Lord, to the very last, taught not only in the streets but in the
temple itself—and none dare touch Him, because of the attention
of the. people; and, secondly, how the treachery of Judas was a
necessary step before He could be taken and crucified; for He
could only be betrayed “‘in the absence of the multitude” by one
who knew where He resorted for secret prayer.Cuap. XX] BY WHAT AUTHORITY ? 507

CELAE, 2O¢

yee “it came to pass, that on one of those days, as he
taught the people in the temple, and preached the
gospel, the chief priests and the scribes came »* Matt. xxi.23.
upon him with the elders,

2 And spake unto him, saying, Tell us, ? by pee
what authority doest thou these things? or who
is he that gave thee this authority P

 

i <The chiefipriests.4 So NN! b., ©. Di, Ge i QO. Re many Cursives, &e:; but AG.
F,,G., H., K., 8., other later Uncials, and about one hundred Cursives, read ‘‘ the
priests.”

i. ‘And it came to pass, that on one of those days... . with
the elders.”” That is, on the Tuesday, or the Wednesday in Holy
Week. Edersheim gives reasons for supposing it to have been on
the Tuesday. It must have been as soon as possible after the cleans-
ing of the Temple.

The chief priests, whose authority in their own domain had been
interfered with by the casting of the buyers and sellers out of the
sacred precincts, were no doubt the principal instigators of this
inquiry, and they brought with them scribes, men learned in the
law, that if He appealed to Scripture for His authority they might
oppose Him—the elders, no doubt, belonged to the Sanhedrim.

2. “And spake unto him, saying, Tell us, by what authority
doest thou these,’ &¢. No doubt this means, By what authority
dost thou claim to interfere in the regulation of the Temple—but
we are also to remember, that, for a man amongst the Jews to
teach with authority required a commission. ‘‘ There was no
principle more firmly established by universal consent than that
authoritative teaching required previous authorization. Indeed
this logically followed from the principle of Rabbinism. All
teaching must be authoritative, since it was traditional—approved
by authority, and handed down from teacher to disciple. The
highest honour of a scholar was that he was like a well-plastered
cistern, from which not a drop had leaked of what had been poured508 THE BAPTISM OF JOHN. (Sr. Luxx.

2 And he answered and said unto them, T will also ask

you one thing ; and answer me:
A The baptism of John, was it from heaven, or of men?
ie ea Ae

into it. The ultimate appeal in cases of discussion was always to
some great authority, whether an individual teacher, or a decree
by the Sanhedrim.” So Edersheim, who proceeds to describe how
the disciples sat before the Ganhedrim in three rows, how the San-
d from the first row—how there was a form of
n of hands, and so on. All this
ted in the Jewish mind was the

hedrim was recruite
ordination, probably by laying 0
seems to show how deeply inroo

question of authorization.
This was not wrong in itself, for the heads of this system had a

right to demand, indeed it was their duty to demand, that all
teachers should be well instructed in that which they had to teach ;
but they ought to have seen well to two things; first, that the
authorized teaching was according to the Scriptures, and did not
make void the plain commandments of God; and secondly, that
God reserved to Himself the right of raising up special messengers,
not to found rival systems, or organizations, but to recall the minds
of men to the essential holiness of their own system. In what had
ed Jesus had actually vindicated the holiness of the
f which it was the centre against
and consequently

just occurr
temple and the sacrificial worship 0
its own administrators—who were Sadducees,
had no real belief in the Divine authority of anything.
3.8. “ And he answered and said unto them... by what authority
T do these things.” “ The Baptism of John, was it from heaven,”
&e. Our Lord here designates John’s whole dispensation, his
doctrine, profession, preaching, and the like by this one word, his
Baptism. As Maldonatus well observes, ‘‘as the circumcision of
Moses implied a keeping of the whole law, so the Baptism of John
implied all his teaching.” This Baptismal dispensation of John had
no meaning except as pointing to Christ. It is described by the
Apostle Paul as simply and merely a preparation. “John verily bap-
tized with the baptism of repentance, saying unto the people, that
they should believe on him which should come after him, that is, on
Christ Jesus.” [Acts xix. 4.]
When, then, the Lord asked this question, He really asked,
‘Was John’s witness to Me and preparation for Me from God or

from men?”’Cuar. XX.] WHY THEN BELIEVED YE HIM NOT? 509

o And they reasoned with themselves, saying, If we shall

say, From heaven; he will say, Why then believed ye him
not ?

6 But and if we say, Of men; all the people will stone
us: °for they be persuaded that John was a © Matt. xiv. 5

& xxi. 26. ch.
prophet. Vii. 29.
7 And they answered, that they could not tell whence if
Was.

 

And so, if they said from heaven, as was the universal opinion,
then the absolutely necessary inference was that his testimony to
Jesus was from heaven, and if they had believed this they would
have accepted the Lord Jesus as the Christ. But they—these chief
priests, scribes, and elders—had treated it as if it were “of men,”’
because they had not accepted St. John’s one doctrine—his one
testimony—the one purport of his mission. And yet they dare not
confess it to be “‘of men.” The people were convinced, not by
John’s miracles, for he did no miracles, but by the holiness of his
teaching, by his self-denying life, by his faithful reproof of sin in
all men, in kings and courtiers, in Pharisees, publicans, soldiers,
common people, all alike, that he was from above; he could not have
been sent from man, he must have been sent from God.

This dilemma presented itself, as Jesus foresaw, to their minds.
They must either condemn themselves, as professing to believe that
a certain prophet came from God, and yet treating him as mistaken
in his own message, or they must reject his mission, and seriously
endanger their whole religious influence with the people and indeed
their lives, and so they say, ‘“‘ We cannot tell.” ‘““ We do not know,”
1.€., ‘‘ We refuse to entertain the question, being assured that if we
did, it would go against us.”” This was not an absolute lie, as some
have treated it, but a form of self-deception common to all human

beings. Certain good reasons are presented to men’s minds for ac-
cepting a clearly revealed truth of God, or altering a hurtful plan of
life, and as soon as they perceive the goal to which these reasons
tend they at once draw back, they refuse to go on the direct road,
because of its disagreeable termination, and stand still, or turn aside.

Now it is not to be supposed that they—i.e., those of them who
had any remains of a conscience, entirely rejected the claim of John.
They would have said, no doubt, that he was a prophet, that he was510 NEITHER TELL I YOU. [Sr. Luxx.

8 And Jesus said unto them, Neither tell I you by what

authority I do these things.
9 Then began he to speak
SA ea 33. certain man planted a viney
- to husbandmen, and went into

to the people this parable ; oes
ard, and let it forth
a far country for

a long time.

ae eee

God to do much good, to be “useful” to publicans and
le, and that it would have been better for
Herod if he had attended to him, and so on. But Jd ohn was not sent
to reprove Herod, or to reform publicans, but to point to a certain
man and say, “ Behold the Lamb of God,” and’ to say, “ He that
cometh after me is greater than I—He shall gather His wheat—He
shall burn the chaff—He shall baptize with the Holy Ghost.” In
fact, they rejected that in John’s mission which was especially
Divine, Messianic, and Supernatural.

And are not numbers of men, semi-agnostics, and Rationalists,
acting in the same way towards Christ. They allow that he was”
the teacher of a higher morality, a purer worship, a deeper sense
of truth, justice, and mercy, put they reject that for which He
came, to reconcile men to God, to endue them with supernatural
erace, to raise their bodies from the grave, and their souls from
the death of sin by His Spirit. To these things their answer
is, ‘* We cannot tell.” And so these chief priests and scribes,
with every means of forming a correct judgment both of John’s
mission and that of the Lord, refused to do so. And the Lord
retorted on them, “ Neither tell I you by what authority I do
these things.” It would have been waste of words answering such
double-minded men. There was enough to assure them of the
authority of Christ—the prophets could have told them—John the
Baptist told them—the signs of the times assured them—the teach-
ing of Christ, all on the side of goodness and holiness—the miracles
of Christ which, according to one of themselves, no man could do
except God were with Him—all were witnesses to His authority.

9. “Then began he to speak to the people this parable ; A certain
This parable of the “ Wicked Husbandmen ”’

raised up by
soldiers and common peop

man planted,” &e.
serves a double purpose.

The Jews had asked, “ By what authority doest Thou these
things, or who is he that gave Thee this authority ?”’ He didCuar. XX.] THE HUSBANDMEN BEAT HIM. 511

10 And at the season he sent a servant to the husband-
men, that they should give him of the fruit of the vineyard :
but the husbandmen beat him, and sent him away empty.

11 And again he sent another servant: and they beat him
also, and entreated him shamefully, and sent him away empty.

12 And again he sent a third: and they wounded him
also, and cast him out.

then these things as the “beloved Son of God,” and the Father had
expressly sent Him as the last special Messenger to the Jewish
Church and people to demand of them those fruits for the sake of
which God had planted them.

Then in the next place it exhibits to us the extreme long-suffer-
ing of God. For 1500 years He had not only borne with the sin
of the Jewish priests and prophets, but He had for the time con-
doned their persecution of His first prophets so far as to send
others, and when they were rejected, to send His only and well-
beloved Son.

In my notes on the two first synoptics I have very fully con-
sidered the circumstances of the parabolic history, so far as it re-
lates to the Jewish people: but the long-suffering of God as detailed
in the parable, and His perseverance in sending messenger after
messenger to receive the fruit due to Him, naturally suggest two
other applications—His dealing with Churches and His dealing with
particular souls.

The dealings of our Lord with the Seven Churches of Asia by the
mouth of His last surviving Apostle, are examples of His conduct
to churches. He begins with acknowledging, so far as He can do
so, what is good in them, their works, their faith, their patience,
and then He has a “few things ” to say, as to their shortcomings,
and He ends with promising a reward to those among them who
endure and are faithful, but threatens the Church itself with the
loss of His Grace if, as a Church, it is unfaithful. In all this He
addresses, not the Church itself, but the chief minister or angel,
and of course through him, the other ministers. And it will be
found at the last that He has done so with all churches. He has
certainly done so with the Church of England. During the last

century, the time of her deepest declension, He sent such an one ag
Wesley, who did his best to minister faithfully to the Church asAyD I WILL SEND MY BELOVED SON. [Sr Luxe.

 

13 Then said the lord of the vineyard, What shall I do?
IT will send my beloved son: it may be they will reverence
him when they see him.

14 But when the husbandmen saw him, they reasoned
among themselves, saying, This is the heir: come, let us kill
him, that the inheritance may be our’s.

15 So they cagt him out of the vineyard, and killed hum.
What therefore shall the lord of the vineyard do unto them

 

13. <« When they see him.” Omitted by XN, B., C., Dr ie, @., lL: 30, 131, 157, 209, some
old Latin (a, ¢, ff2, i, 1, q), Copt., Syriac (Cur.), Arm.; but retained by AS Reals Aseas
TI, later Uncials, most Cursives, Vulg., Goth., Syriac (Schaaf ).

14. “Come.” Omitted by A., B., K., M., Q., 1, 209, most old Latin, Vulg., Goth., Arm. ;
retained by X, C., D., L., R.,T, A, A, later Uncials, most Cursives, &e.

such, never allowing the ministrations of his own body to take place
when her doors were open, requiring all his preachers and people to
attend the celebrations of the Eucharist in Church, and I believe that,
notwithstanding all provocations, he was in no way answerable for
what took place after his decease. Then after his time a body of
earnest and faithful men in the Church were sent to proclaim the
necessity of preaching the power of the atonement and the cleansing
and sanctifying work of the Spirit, and the need of personal coming
to Christ,and lastly God raised up a band of men, the leaders of them
of very great saintliness of life, to proclaim the reality of the visible
Church and the peculiar grace of its Sacraments, that Christ has one
mystical Body, and that He cares for the unity of this body, as well
as calls for its energy in proclaiming the Gospel. In these ways has
He demanded fruit from our branch of the Church. May God grant
that we may render to Him something of what He looks for.
Then, in the second place, the vineyard is each soul. He is its
Maker and so its Proprietor, and we have to cultivate it, each one
of us for himself. By the gift of the Spirit and the Scriptures, and
the ministry and the Sacraments He has done all that can be done
to enable it to bear fruit: and this fruit which we have to give back
to Him is His service, and His worship. These things may be
compared to the hedge, the tower, the winepress, which in the other
synoptics complete the idea of the vineyard. And in order to receive
from us that fruit, the rendering of which is infinitely more profit-
able to us than to Him, He constantly sends messengers to theCuar, XX.] GOD FORBID. 513

16 He shall come and destroy these husbandmen, and shall

give the vineyard to others. And when they heard it, they
said, God forbid.

17 And he beheld them, and said, What is this then that js
written, °The stone which the builders rejected, « Ps. exviii. 22.
the same is become the head of the corner ? “eae law

18 Whosoever shall fall upon that stone shall be broken ;
but ‘on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind f Dan. ii, 34,

: 35, Matt. xxi.
him to powder. 44,

soul. The watchfulness of parents, the instruction of Christian
teachers, the exhortations of ministers, the reproofs and rebukes of
godly friends; above all, at times He comes Himself ; certainly it
will be found that once, at least, He has come close to each soul.
He has stood and knocked. at its door. If it has opened the door,
it has received Him to its salvation. If it has closed the door, it
has, so far as it can, cast Him out, and crucified Him afresh. It has
said within itself, ‘‘ The inheritance shallbe ours. We will be our
own. In our thoughts, in our wills, in our bodies, in our society,
in our possessions, we will be our own masters.’”’ And the end of
Jerusalem is a true forecast of the end of that soul.

16. “‘ He shall come and destroy those husbandmen ... . grind
him to powder.” They perceived that the parable was aimed at
themselves, and in them at the body of the Jewish people who,
under their influence, were rejecting the Lord.

Bede notices two interpretations, ‘‘He who is a sinner, yet be-
lieves on Christ, falls indeed upon the stone and is shaken, for he is
preserved by penitence unto salvation. But upon whomsoever it shall
fall, that is, upon whom the Stone itself has come down because he
denied it, it shall grind him to powder, so that not even a broken
piece of a vessel shall be left, in which may be drunk a little water.
Or he means by those who fall upon Him, such as only despise
Him, and therefore do not yet utterly perish, but are shaken vio-
lently so that they cannot walk upright. But upon whom it falls,
upon them shall He come in judgment with everlasting punishment,
therefore shall it grind them to powder, that they may be as the
dust which the wind scatters from the face of the earth.” (Bede in
‘*Catena Aurea.’’)

20. “And they watched him .. . authority of the governor.”
LL514 THEY SENT FORTH SPIES. [Sr. Luke.

19 4 And the Chief Priests and the Scribes the same hour
sought to lay hands on him; and they feared the people: for
they perceived that he had spoken this parable against them.
g piate xxii. 90 And they watched him, and sent forth

spies, which should feion themselves just men,
that they might take hold of his words, that so they might
deliver him unto the power and authority of the governor.

ee ee 921 And they asked him, saying, hMaster, we
. Mark Xu. - Y c
14. know that thou sayest and teachest rightly,

neither acceptest thou the person of any, but
\ Ur, ofatruth. teachest the way of God || truly :

 

921. “ But teacheth the way of God truly.” ‘‘ But ofa truth teacheth the way of God.”

Revisers.

From this place we should gather that these spies were emissaries
of the chief priests and scribes only. From SS. Matthew and
Mark we learn that they were sent forth by the Pharisees, and
were their disciples, so that the chief Pharisees kept in the back-
ground for fear of being committed to the views of the Herodians
who joined with them. Taking all three Evangelists together, it
seems that all the enemies of J esus—the Sadducean High Priests,
the Scribes, the Pharisees, and the adherents of Herod—were
united in putting this question following. St. Luke alone expressly
mentions that the intent was that they might “deliver him unto
the power and authority of the governor.’ From this we gather
that they expected from Him an answer adverse to the claims of
Cesar, and in their ignorance they supposed that if He claimed to
be the Messiah He must desire to get rid of foreign ascendancy in
his own kingdom.

“Should feign themselves just men,” 7.e., men who asked the
question honestly and not captiously, with a view to ensnaring
Him.

91, “ And they asked him, saying... teachest the way of God
truly.”” Of course the reader will mark how they condemned them-
selves by this impudent flattery. If He said and judged rightly
and taught the way of God truly, why did they not believe His
teaching ?Cuap. XX] WHY TEMPT YE ME ? 515

22 Is it lawful for us to give tribute unto Ceesar, or no?

23 But he perceived their craftiness, and said unto them,
Why tempt ye me?

24 Shew me a || penny. Whose image and | See Matt.
superscription hath it? They answered and said, ~~
Cesar’s.

 

23. ““ Why tempt ye me?” So A., C.,, D., F., P., r, A, 1, later Uncials, most Cur-
sives, most old Latin, Vulg., Goth., Syriacs ; but omitted by n, B., L., ALG US lol.
157, 209, old Latin (e), Copt., Arm.

24. 8, C., L., some Cursives (1, 13, 33, 69, &c.), old Latin (c), Copt., &e., add, “and
they shewed it to him, and he said ;” but A., B., D., all other Uncials, most Cursives,
most old Latin, Vulg., Goth., Syriac (Cureton and Schaaf), &¢., omit these words.

22. “Ts it lawful to give tribute to Cesar or not?’ It seemed to
them a dilemma from which, to Him at least, there was no escape.
If He said “It is lawful,” His popularity with the multitude, who
hated the Roman yoke, would be gone: for here was a Messiah,
they would say, who belied the very first idea they entertained of
the expected One, that He should make them free, and deliver

‘them from all foreign ascendancy.

If, on the contrary, He said, “It is not lawful,” they would
accuse Him to the governor with some apparent ground of truth for
their accusation.

23-25. ‘But he perceived their craftiness . . . and unto God the
things that are God’s.” The image and superscription on the coin
would show them to whom all obedience in civil matters was due.
‘And observe that He says not give, but return [dzddore, reddite].
For it is a debt. Thy prince protects thee from enemies, renders
thy life tranquil. Surely, then, thou art bound to pay him tribute.
Nay, this very piece of money which thou bringest thou hast from
him. Return, then, to the king the king’s money. God also has
given thee understanding and reason; make, then, a return of these
to Him.” (Theophylact.)

Many expositors have commented on this place in such a way as
to imply that if men would only observe these two precepts of
rendering their dues to God, and to the civil powers, they would
avoid all difficulty, for there would be no collision between the two.
But this betrays great ignorance. For what was it that occasioned
the greater part of the martyrdoms and persecutions of the first

three centuries, but this, that the civil power required Christians to516 CMSAR—GOD. (Sr. Luke.

25 And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Ceesar
the things which be Cesar’s, and unto God the things which

be God’s.
96 And they could not take hold of his words before the

people: and they marvelled at his answer, and held their

peace.

ae xxii. 27 {iThen came to him certain of the Sad-
3. Mark xii. : 3

is: ducees, * which deny that there is any resurrec-

kK Acts xxiii.
Reg a ton and they asked him,

burn incense to false gods, and especially to the genius of the
Emperor. It may be that under the influence of a false and.
spurious liberalism the civil power in this country may endeavour
so to ‘widen the basis”’ (as the cant expression is) of the Church of
England that it should include those who deny the Divinity of Jesus
Christ, or even His special mission as the Son of God. Such a
change would deprive the Church of the first and foremost reason
for her existence, and would have, under God, to be resisted to the
death. May God avert such a danger, and may we each in our
spheres strive to render it impossible by indoctrinating all those
under our influence with the full truth of God.

25. * And he said unto them, Render therefore unto Cesar the
things which are Cesar’s.” Tribute, custom, honour, obedience in
things temporal, loyalty, generous support.

«© And unto God the things which are God’s.” The belief, fear,
and love of the whole heart, the worship of the body and of the
spirit, the submission of the intellect, the careful observance of all
matters, great and small, respecting which God has made His will
known.

96. “And they could not take hold of his words before the
people.” This question had been asked in the temple, no doubt,
before a crowd of bystanders. It was put out of the deepest malice,
but God so overruled it that we owe to it one of the great household
words of our religion, ‘‘ Render the things of Cesar to Cesar, and
the things of God to God.”

97. “'Then came to him certain of the Sadducees, which deny that
there is any resurrection.” The Sadducees hitherto seem to have
taken no notice of the Lord, but to have treated His teaching withCHAP, XOX] MOSES WROTE UNTO US. 517

28 Saying, Master, 'Moses wrote unto us, If any man’s
brother die, having a wife, and he die without 1 Deut. xxv.5.
children, that his brother should take his wife, and raise up
seed unto his brother.

29 There were therefore seven brethren: and the first took
a wife, and died without children.

30 And the second took her to wife, and he died childless.

dl And the third took her; and in like manner the seven
also: and they left no children, and died.

 

28. «‘ And he die without children.” So A.,1T, A, A, I, later Uncials, most Cursives,
old Latin (e, f, i), Goth.; but &, B., L., P., some Cursives, 1, 16, 33, 118, 131, 157,
209, 254, old Latin (a, ff2, gl, 1, q), Vulg., Copt., Arm., Auth., Syr. (Cur. and Schaaf),
read, ‘* he be without children.”

30. &, B., D., L., 157, omit all this verse except the first words, ‘‘and the second ; ”
but A., all later Uncials, almost all Cursives, old Latin, Vulg., as in Rec. Text,

31. ‘* The seven died also, and they left no children.” Perhaps, ‘‘ the seven also left
no children, and died.”

contempt. On one occasion only before this do they seem to have
opposed him, when they united with the Pharisees in seeking from
Him a sign from heaven (Matth. xvi. 1).

He had put to silence both the High Priest’s emissaries and the
Pharisees’ disciples who had united with the Herodians; and now
they would prove Him by themselves, and hoped, of course, by His
discomfiture to show the hollowness of the popular belief in the
existence of the unseen universe, particularly in the existence of
souls after death; and, of course, if they could throw doubt upon
the separate existence of the soul, much more upon the union of
that soul to its own glorified and spiritualized body. They imagine
an absurd and, humanly speaking, impossible case, of awoman who
by the Levirate law had seven husbands, who all died before her, and
they demanded, ‘‘in the resurrection, whose wife should she be?”
Having, as might be expected, only the lowest and grossest view of
the condition of man after death, the Lord first answers them by
exposing their shortsighted and miserable materialism. They had
no elevating hopes of the future dignity and glory of their own race.
They could only imagine a future in which men should be under
the same low conditions, and subject to the same gross and carnal
desires as now.

The Lord answers them by setting before them a far more glorious518 WHOSE WIFE OF THEM IS SHE?  [St. Luxe.

39 Last of all the woman died also.
23 Therefore in the resurrection whose wife of them 1s

she? for seven had her to wife.

34 And Jesus answering said unto them, The children of
this world marry, and are given im marriage :

35 But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain
that world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry,

nor are given in marriage:

 

34, «The children of this world.” Properly ‘‘ sons.”

future, more consonant with the power of God, and with the true
dignity of a race whose nature He Himself had assumed.

The children of this world or aién, or of the present state of
things, marry and are given in marriage. They marry, and are given
in marriage, because otherwise the race would become extinct by
reason of death, but it shall not be so in the better—the eternal
and more spiritual state of things to which the righteous look

 

forward.
35, “But they which shall be accounted worthy to obtain that

world, and the resurrection from the dead, neither marry nor are
given in marriage.” Mark the words: “They which shall be
accounted worthy to obtain that world, or future state, or adn of
glory.” Not all who die will pass into the better state (Luke xii.
47), though God will continue all in a state of existence. Some will
pass into a state of punishment proportioned to their wrong doings.
Some may have so thrown away all their better hopes, and so cut
themselves off from God and goodness that they must share the lot
of evil spirits. But some will be accounted worthy. Who are
these? Are they all who will escape punishment ? Probably the
Lord here alludes to the first Resurrection, what St. Paul calls the
Exanastasis, when he writes, “If by any means I might attain to
the Resurrection from among the dead” (Phil. 111. 11); and St. John
alludes apparently to the same when he writes in the Apocalypse:
‘But the rest of the dead lived not again till the thousand years
were finished.” ‘Blessed and holy is he that hath part in the first
Resurrection: on such the second death shall have no power”’
(Rev. xx. 6). And the words of the Lord in this Gospel (rij¢ avac-
racewe rhe tk vexpwov, Vulg. resurrectione ee mortuis) seem to point@nAp, XeXc] EQUAL UNTO THE ANGELS. oD

36 Neither can they die any more: for ™ they are equal
unto the angels; and are the children of God, ™ 1 Cor. xv.
; 42, 49, 52.
" being the children of the resurrection. 1 John iii, 2.

3¢ Now that the dead are raised, °even Moses ” 2o™-Yii- 23.

O Eisele: O.

 

36. “‘ The children of God, being the children of the resurrection.” Rather, “ sons of
God, sons of the resurrection.”

this way. And the Lord in the next chapter seems to indicate a
select few when He says, ‘“‘ Watch ye therefore, and pray always,
that ye may be accounted worthy . . . to stand before the Son of
man.”

36. “ Neither can they die any more: for they are equal unto the
angels ’’—1.e., equal in the condition of their frames as being above
the reach of death. The angels seem not to be pure thought, or
will, or intellect, but to have frames of so ethereal a nature that
they are above the reach of decay ; and the glorified bodies of the
saints, being raised in the likeness of Christ’s Body, will be equally
above corruption and death. Thus, of the future body, St. Paul
says, ‘‘ It is sown in corruption, it is raised in incorruption ; it is
sown in dishonouwr, it is raised in glory ; it is sown in weakness, it
is raised in power; it is sown a natural body, it is raised a spiritual
body.”’

‘“¢ And are the children of God, being the children of the resurrec-
tion.’ There are four senses, one rising above another, in which
men are the children of God. They are children of God by nature
(Mal. ii. 10); they are children of God by adoption in Baptism by
being grafted into the body of His Son (1 Corinth. xii. 18); they are
children of God by being conformed by His Spirit to His likeness
(Matth. v. 9, 44, 45; Rom. viii. 14); and they are the children of
God in the highest sense, when they have overcome (Rev. xxi. 7),
and are “ worthy to obtain that world and the Resurrection from
the dead.”’

37. “ Now that the dead are raised, even Moses shewed at the
bush,” &e. ‘‘Even Moses”; why does the Lord say “‘ even Moses” ?
Evidently because the declarations of a future state and a resurrec-
tion are much clearer in the later books of the Old Testament than
in the earlier. Thus the most absolute declaration of a Resurrec-
tion is in Daniel xii., a book written towards the conclusion of the
captivity, the dates of the book of Job, and some of the Psalms520 AG LIVE UNTO HiMe (Sr. Luge.

shewed at the bush, when he ealleth the Lord the God of
Abraham, and the God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.
88 For he is not a God of the dead, but of the living: for

Ee vi.10, Pall live unto him.

which contain intimation of the Resurrection being posterior to the
writing of the Pentateuch.

“ Shewed,” rather “indicated.” ‘‘The choice of the word pyri, ‘to
give to understand,’ shows that Jesus distinguishes perfectly be-
tween an express declaration which does not exist, and an indica-
tion such as that which He proceeds to cite.” (Godet).

“ At the bush,” 4.e., in the section of Exodus which describes the
appearance of the Burning Bush. It was God Himself who spake
out of the bush the words, ‘‘I am the God of Abraham, and the
God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob.” No doubt the exact words
which the Lord used are those in St. Matthew and St. Mark.

88. “When he calleth the Lord the God of Abraham, and the
God of Isaac, and the God of Jacob. For he is not a God of the
dead, but of the living,” &c. On the views of the Sadducees who
held no future state of existence, this place means that God is the
God of three dead corpses—rather, inasmuch as those corpses had
long been wholly decayed, the God of a little dust. I have shown,
in my comment on St. Matthew, that God is not a proper name,
but a title of the Supreme Being which implies an abiding relation
to any one of whom He calls Himself the God; and the root of
the word *“‘God”’ in the Semitic languages more particularly im-
plies a being exercising power over, or on behalf of, those of whom
He is the God—power to protect them, guide them, sustain them,
reward them, and so on. So that it would be as incongruous
for God to call Himself the God of Abraham, if Abraham had no
distinct existence after death, as it would be for Him to call Him-
self the ruler or guide of Abraham, if Abraham existed nowhere
in the unseen world.

‘For all live unto him.’ The best comment on these words is
that of St. Paul: ‘‘ Whether we live, we live unto the Lord; or
whether we die, we die unto the Lord: whether we live therefore,
or die, we are the Lord’s. For to this end Christ died and lived
again, that He might be Lord of both the dead and the living.”
When the soul passes from the body it merely passes from one de-Cuar. XX.] THOU HAST WELL SAID. 521

39 Y Then certain of the scribes answering said, Master,
thou hast well said.

40 And after that they durst not ask him any question
at all.

41 And he said unto them, 4 How say they that 4 Matt. xxii.
i a a a " 42. Mark xii.
Christ is David’s gon ?

30.

partment of God’s realm to another, it is as much in His love and
under His care as before death, and is probably employed by Him
according to its capacities, and trained by Him for a still higher
and more perfect state when it shall be raised up in the body.

The question, however, presents itself, Do these words of God
imply the Resurrection of Abraham’s body ? They do, because the
Scriptures do not teach men to look forward to a state in which
they will be disembodied ghosts, such as is described in Homer, but
to a state in which they will be what they are now, body and soul:
the soul a purified and holy soul, the body a spiritual body corres-
ponding to the purity of the soul. Man in his present state is not
a bodiless being, and when God calls Himself the God of Abraham
He means that He is the God of a holy soul awaiting its complete
state in a natural and perfected body to which God in due time will
reunite it.

39, 40. “Then certain of the scribes answering said . . . . durst
not ask him any question at all.” The Scribes, holding the Resur-
rection, were delighted with the answer by which He had silenced
the Sadducees. They now perceived that it was dangerous to ques-
tion Him because He could invariably turn their questions on them-
selves.

It was now, however, His turn to question them, and His ques-
tion was exceedingly remarkable, as its aim was simply to bring
out and assert His Divine Dignity and Power, if He was the Messiah,
or Christ, which He claimed to be. Itis thus very shortly stated by
our Evangelist. |

41, 44. “And he said unto them, How say they that Christ is
David’s son? .... how is he then his son?’”? The Lord con-
stantly spoke and acted as claiming to be the Christ, Who should
come into the world. On three remarkable occasions He allowed
His followers to confess Him to be the Christ. Twice when He
received from Peter the confession, ‘‘ Thou art the Christ, the son of522 How IS HE THEN HIS SON ? [St. Luke.

49 And David himself saith in the book of Psalms, 7 The

ro Bseex i Lorp said unto my Lord, Sit thou on my right
Acts ii. 34.
hand,

43 Till I make thine enemies thy footstool.

44. David therefore calleth him Lord, how is he then his
son?
sMattxxii.1. 45 9° Then ‘n the audience of all the people
Mark =. °°. “he said unto his disciples,

 

the living God” (Matth. xvi. 16, John vi. 69). Again when He
received from Martha the same confession (John xi. 27). He asserted.
it to the woman of Samaria (John iv. 26) ; to the messengers of John
the Baptist (Matth. xi. 4-7). He made it a condition of salvation
when He said, ‘‘ If ye believe not that I am he, ye shall die in your
sins” (John viii. 24). And now He puts to them a question re-
specting who this Christ was which admitted of but one answer-—
that He was such an One that He could be at once the Lord, and
the Son of David: David, speaking of one of his descendants who
should be born a thousand years after his own decease, calls Him
‘my Lord.” How could He be the Lord of the greatest King of
Israel? Only on the same principle that after the decease of Abra-
ham, God could be his God. If when David wrote the one hun-
dred and tenth Psalm, He could call One his Lord, that One must
then have been in existence, and we know that He was in existence
for He was the Word Who was with God, and was God, Who when
He came upon earth said, “‘ Before Abraham was I am,’ #.e., above
one thousand years before David lived “I am.” Well, then, has
Godet written: ‘‘' The three Synoptics have preserved, with slight
differences, this remarkable saying which, with Luke x. 21,22, and
some other passages, forms the bond of union between the teaching
of Jesus in these Gospels, and all that is affirmed of His Person in
that of St. John. If it is true that Jesus applied to Himself the
title of David's Lord, with which this king addressed the Messiah
in Ps. ex., the consciousness of Divinity is implied in this title as
certainly as in any declaration whatever of the fourth Gospel.”

45, 47. ‘Then in the audience of all the people .. . . the same
shall receive greater damnation.” These three verses represent the
denunciation uttered by Him against the Scribes and Pharisees in
Matth. xxiii. The substance of that withering exposure is given usCur. XX1.] BEWARE OF THE SCRIBES. 923

46 ‘Beware of the scribes, which desire to walk in long
robes, and “love greetings in the markets, and ¢ Matt. xxiii.5.
the highest seats in the synagogues, and the chief “°" ***:
rooms at feasts ;

47 *Which devour widows’ houses, and for a « Matt. xxiii,

shew make long prayers: the same shall receive
creater damnation.

by St. Luke xi. 87-53, and our Evangelist here contents himself
with gathering up in very few words the character and doings of the
Seribes and Pharisees of which He bids the disciples beware, such
as their pride and vanity, ‘‘ they desire to walk in long robes, and
love greetings in the markets, and the highest seats in the syna-
gogues, and the chief rooms at feasts;”’ then their greed and extor-
tion—“‘ They devour widows’ houses,” which probably means, they
lay themselves out for getting hold of the property of unprotected
persons, such as widows, and under the pretence of managing it for
them, rob them; and their hypocrisy—“ for a shew they make
long prayers.”

‘“‘' The same shall receive greater damnation,” or greater condem-
nation, which, of course, implies heavier punishment. It is one of
those places which show that there are degrees in punishment as
well as in reward, and the heaviest punishment will be awarded to
those who under the pretence of greater religion rob the credulous
and unsuspecting.

CHAE. XOX,

ND he looked up, *and saw the rich men casting their
gifts into the treasury. a Mark xii. 41.

 

1-4. “And helooked up, and sawtherichmen .. . all the living
that she had.” This beautiful incident of the widow and her two
mites, and the Lord’s commendation of her is one of the very few
places common to St. Mark and St. Luke, only St. Mark, as we
should have expected, gives it more circumstantially : St. Luke as524 A CERTAIN POOR WIDOW. (Sr. Luxe.

2. And he saw also a certain poor widow casting in thither
eo, two || mites.
b 2 Cor, viii. 3 And he said, Of a truth I say unto you, ” that
a this poor widow hath cast in more than they all:
A For all these have of their abundance cast in unto the
offerings of God: but she of her penury hath cast in all the

living that she had.

 

4, «Offerings of God.” So A., D., G., Fr, A, A, 1, later Uncials, nearly all Cursives,
old Latin, Vulg., Syriac (Sch.); but &, B., L., X., 1, 118, 131, 209, Copt., and Cur. Syriac,

omit ‘‘ of God.”

if he received it from the same source as St. Mark received his
accounts, but in a slightly abridged form.

It may be instructive to draw attention to the differences.

St. Mark speaks of the Lord “sitting over against the treasury, ”
4.e., the row of trumpet-shaped vessels at the entrance between the
court of the women and the inner court, so that it was accessible
to the women; and that He watched the people offering their
gifts, and the rich, many of them casting in much; and that the
poor widow cast in two mites, which he explains to his Roman
readers as making a farthing. St. Luke only mentions that the
Lord saw the rich giving, and then the widow casting in her two
mites.

St. Mark then mentions that the Lord called His disciples, and
told them of the widow’s gift; for she must have given it and gone
her way before they could come up. St. Luke more shortly says
that the Lord remarked it, as if speaking to the bystanders, and
they both conclude with the same lesson, not however in exactly
the same words.

The one great lesson from this account is that God estimates the
value of what men give for His poor, or His Church, by one standard
only—by the self-denial they exercise in parting with their money
or their goods.

When it is said that this mite was all this woman’s living, it
must, of course, mean all her living for that day. She threw her-
self upon the providence of God to supply her with her evening
meal or night’s lodging.

From what she gave, which the Lord brought to light and
commended, the expression “‘I give my mite’’ has passed into aCuar. XXI.] GOODLY GIFTS AND STONES. 525

59 ¥* And as some spake of the temple, how it was adorned
with goodly stones and gifts, he said, ¢ Mattar
6 As for these things which ye behold, the
days will come, in the which ‘there ghall not be 4 ch. xix. 44.

left one stone upon another, that shall not be thrown down.

proverb, which in the mouths of many who use it is ridiculous, if
not profane. What ought to be the mite of one in a good business
which yields him several hundreds a, year clear profit? What
ought to be the mite of a professional man in good practice, after
all reasonable family claims are provided for? A man with an
income of at least two or three hundred a year once said to me, when
I called upon him for assistance in keeping up a national school,
“JT will think about it, sir, and I will give you my mite.” He did
think, and his mite was two shillings. Contrast this with the
following. ‘Two aged paupers, having only the usual parish pay,
became communicants. They determined that they would not
neglect the offertory ; but how was this to be done, as they were on
starvation allowance ? Well, during the week before the celebration
they did without light, sat up for two or three hours in the dark,
and then went to bed, and gave the few pence which they saved in
oil or rushlights to be laid on the altar of God.

5-7. ** And as some spake of the temple, how it was adorned ...
thrown down.” We now enter for the third time on the exposition
of the prophecy of the Lord respecting the destruction of the city
and temple, and His Own Second Coming. It will be well particu-
larly to notice the differences between the Lord’s words, as reported
in St. Luke and in the two first Synoptics. We shall see that some
of the things peculiar to St. Luke clear up some of the principal
difficulties in the other two reports. The discourse, as given in our
Evangelist, is as full, or nearly as full as those in the other Synop-
tics, up to the point of the taking of Jerusalem; after that it
hurries on to the consummation, and concludes with the parable of
the fig-tree, and two or three verses only of warning to those who
shall be alive when the Lord actually appears.

“¢ As some spake of the temple, how it was adorned with goodly
stones and gifts.” St. Mark tells us that it was one of His disciples
which drew attention to the stones, evidently to their vast size ; and
that such was the character of the remark, appears from this, that526 WHEN SHALL THESE THINGS BE? (Sr. Luxe.

7 And they asked him, saying, Master, but when shall

these things be? and what sign will there be when these

things shall come to pass ?

et ee 8 And he said, ° Take heed that ye be not
. Mark Xill. :

* Eph. v.6. deceived: for many shall come in my name, say-

o

2 Thess. ie os :
| Or, and, The ING, T am Christ; ||and the time draweth near:
time, Matt. iii.

time, Matt oo ye not therefore after them.

nm

8. “Go ye not therefore.” So A.,T, A, A, IT, later Uncials, almost all Cursives, £05
Vulg.; but N, Bees Lae, es VOU, 346, old Latin (a, ¢, e, ff2, 1, 1, s), Copt., Cur. Syriac,

Arm., and Acth. omit “ therefore.”

according to St. Luke the Lord does not allude to the goodliness
of the stones and gifts, but to the displacement of the stones. This
looks rather to their size than their preciousness, and is almost ver-
batim the same in all three Evangelists.

7. “ And they asked him, saying, Master, but when .. - . come
to pass?” St. Luke omits all mention of this question being asked
as the Lord sat on the Mount of Olives, and by Peter, James, John,
and Andrew. He also omits the very important part of it given
by St. Matthew, * What shall be the sign of thy coming, and of the
end of the world?” The question, as reported by both Luke and
Mark has principally, if not wholly, to do with the destruction of
the temple.

In the answer of the Lord there are four divisions.

First, the apparent signs which may be deceptive as to the
nearness of the catastrophe. (8-20.)

Second, the real and unmistakable sign that the catastrophe is
close at hand, which will assure the believing Jews that if they
desire to escape not a moment is to be lost. (20-22.)

Third, the catastrophe itself and the clear declaration that its
effects shall be prolonged, which prolongation covers the period of
“the times of the Gentiles.” (24.)

Fourth, the signs of the Second Coming to Judgment, and the
appearance of the Son of Man. (25-28.)

After this comes the parable of the fig-tree, which, from the way in
which it is introduced by St. Luke, seems to be uttered after a
pause, or some break in the discourse.

8. ** And he said, Take heed that ye be not deceived: for many
shall come in my name,” &c. We do not read of any false ChristsCuar. XXI.] THE END IS NOT BY AND BY. a2G

9 But when ye shall hear of wars and commotions, be not
terrified: for these things must first come to pass; but the
end is not by and by.

10 *Then said he unto them, Nation shall rise ¢ Matt, xxiv.7.
against nation, and kingdom against kingdom :

 

9. ‘“* By and by.” Rather, “immediately.” Revisers.

who claimed to set the Lord aside and substitute themselves in His
place, and yet such aman as Simon Magus could deceive those who
were on the very threshold of Christianity, so that they accepted him
as “the great power of God” (Acts viii. 10). And we know that at a
very early period indeed, 2.e., before the writing of the second of the
Epistles (2 Thess.) St. Paul found it needful to warn his converts
that “they be not shaken in mind, or be troubled, neither by spirit,
nor by word, nor by letter as from us [as if men forged letters in
his name] as that the day of Christ is at hand. And that no man
should deceive them by any means, as that the day was absolutely
close at the doors”’ (2 Thess. ii. 2, 8).

“Go ye not after them.” It seems impossible to suppose that the
Apostles themselves needed such warnings; they must rather have
been intended for the early converts as represented by, or contained
in, the Apostles.

9. “But when ye shall hear of wars and commotions.’’ The
whole extent of the Roman Empire was agitated, and in the brief
space of eighteen months four Kmperors—Nero, Galba, Otho, and
Vitellius—died by violence. With respect to the regions nearer to
Judzxa, Josephus in his “ Antiquities,” (book xx., ch. iii. sec. 4, and
chap. iv. sec. 2) relates wars between the Parthian king, Artabanus,
and Izates, of Adiabene, and, probably, if one had the history of
those regions more in full, we should learn of many more.

10. ‘‘ Then said He unto them.”’ How isit that these words are, as
it were, interjected, as there is nothing answering to them in the
two first Synoptics? Godet throws out the hint that this passage
(verses 10-19) might have been inscribed here by Luke as a frag-
ment borrowed from a separate document differing from the source
whence he took the rest of the discourse. They should be accounted
for, and yet most expositors take no notice of them.

10. “‘Nation shall rise against nation, and kingdom against
kingdom.” I have noticed that these international conflicts seem528 GREAT SIGNS FROM HEAVEN. [Sr. Luxe.

11. And great earthquakes shall be in divers places, and
famines, and pestilences ; and fearful sights and great signs

shall there be from heaven.

 

to look rather to these latter times, when Europe and the adjacent
parts of Asia and Africa are divided into so many independent
sovereignties, than to a time when there was but one great empire,
which, as it were, kept the peace amongst the smaller nationalities.
Nevertheless there seems to have been at this time fearful conflicts
between the Jews and those nations amongst which they were dis-
persed. ‘“‘In Cesarea twenty thousand Jews were slain in an old
contention with the Syrians, fifty thousand in Alexandria, and two
fierce factions raging in every city.” (See Josephus, “* Wars of the
Jews,” bk. ii., ch. Xvill., sec. 1.) “Every city was divided into two
armies, encamped one against another, and the preservation of the
one party was in the destruction of the other; so that the day time
was spent in shedding of blood, and the night in fear;” and (bk. iv.
ch. iii., sec. 2), ‘There were besides disorders and civil wars in every
city, and all those that were at quiet from the Romans turned their
hands one against another.”

11. “And great earthquakes shall be in divers places.” An
earthquake destroyed Laodicea, Hierapolis, &c., in 67 or 68 A.D.

‘‘ Famines.” There was the famine prophesied of by Agabus in
Acts xi. 28, which came to pass in the days of Claudius Cesar.
Josephus also mentions a famine in Jerusalem, in which the people
were relieved by the bounty of Helena, the mother of Izates of
Adiabene (Ant. xx., ch. ii., sec. 5).

Pestilences, the usual consequences of famines, “ and fearful sights
and great signs shall there be from heaven.”

By the signs from heaven, Godet says, we are to understand.
meteors, auroras, eclipses, &c., phenomena to which the vulgar
readily attach a prophetic significance. Josephus gives a remark-
able illustration. Speaking of the band of Idumeans, who had been
excluded from the city, he writes: “ They lay all night before the
wall, though in a very bad encampment: for there broke out a
prodigious storm in the night, with the utmost violence, with very
strong winds, with the largest showers of rain, with continued.
lightnings, terrible thundering, and amazing concussions and bel-
lowings of the earth, which was in an earthquake.” And he adds:Cap, XXI.] FOR MY NAME’S SAKE. 529

 

12 * But before all these, they shall lay their hands on you,
and persecute you, delivering you up to the syna- < Mark xiii, 9,
: h: : i : a Rey. ii. 10.
gogues, and "into prisons, ‘being brought before
kings and rulers * for my name’s sake, eee ane
13 And ‘it shall turn to you for a testimony, —_* Acts xxv. 23.
a : ‘ oe Pet. 1 13:
14 ™ Settle i therefore in your hearts, not to 1 phil. i. 98.
2 Thess, i. 5.
meditate before what ye shall answer: ‘ Mee
) Matt. x. 19:

Mark xiii. 11.
an Goi. Sahl, WL.

 

‘“ These things were a manifest indication that some destruction was
coming upon men, when the system of the world was put into this
disorder ; and anyone would guess that these wonders foreshowed
some great calamities which were coming.” The Lord here, it will
be noticed, strives to correct such very inferences as Josephus drew
from the war of the elements.

12. ‘But before all these, they shall lay their hands on you,
and persecute you.” Almost immediately after Pentecost perse-
cutions commenced; the Apostles were brought before the rulers
as early as the time of Acts iv. Paul was brought before a
king (Agrippa), and, perhaps, before Nero. Persecutions are nar-
rated as having occurred at Jerusalem (Acts viil. 1, xii. 4), at
Antioch (xiii. 50), at Lystra (xiv.19), at Ephesus (Acts xix.), and in
every city where the Gospel was preached (Acts xx. 23).

13. “And it shall turn to you for a testimony.” The words
parallel to this in St. Mark are “for a testimony against them ”’—
that is, against those kings and rulers who would condemn them.
Their behaviour when on their trial, and the words which Christ
put into their mouths, would not be without effect. It would be a
testimony to their truthfulness, and to the falsehood of their accusers
and unjust judges.

14. ‘* Settle it therefore in your hearts, not to meditate before,”
&e. The parallel words in St. Mark are, ‘‘ Whatsoever shall be
given you in that hour, that speak ye: for it is not ye that speak,
but the Holy Ghost.”

The reader will remember how that, when St. Paul spake of
righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come, Felix, the unjust
governor, trembled. This promise, however, of course, is limited
to cases of emergency, as when they are brought before magistrates,
and have orators and advocates such as Tertullus hired against
M M530 YE SHALL BE BETRAYED. [Sr. Luke.

15 For I will give you a mouth and wisdom, * which all

n Acts vi.10. your adversaries shall not be able to gaimsay nor
resist.

o Mie. vii. 6. 16 ° And ye shall be betrayed both by parents,

eee and brethren, and kinsfolks, and friends ; and

p Acts vii. P some of you shall they cause to be put to death.

& xii. 2.
a Matt. x. 22. 17 And “ye shall be hated of all men for my

or
co

2

name’s sake.

16. ‘Both by parents.” Rather, “even by parents.” Rev.

them. It is not for a moment to be taken as implying that they
may safely neglect such things as preparation for public teaching or
preaching. For the application to those who are called upon on a
sudden to answer the arguments of infidels, I must refer to my notes
on St. Mark xiii. 11.

With respect to the words, “a mouth and wisdom,” Theophylact
remarks : “‘ Many men have often wisdom in their mind, but being
easily provoked to their great disturbance, mar the whole when
their time of speaking comes.”’

This was fulfilled particularly in the case of St. Stephen: ney
were not able to resist the wisdom and the spirit by which he
spake” (Acts vi. 10).

16. “Ye shall be betrayed both by parents, and brethren, and
kinsfolks, and friends,” &e. I gave some instances of this in my
notes on St. Mark. Williams well writes: ‘‘ When deep principles
are actively set afloat, especially if on great matters, an agreement
on those principles is the strongest bond of union among those who
hold them in earnest as true and important; the same therefore is
the strongest cause of division among such as differ on these
points. . . . For this reason nothing is so exciting as the stirring of
religious principles ; the whole mass of society is moved and shaken
in the centre when these are stirred ; besides which there is an in-
trinsic hatred of goodness in the human heart which ever heightens
religious discord ’—i.e., the discord between those who hold a
religion essentially impure and false as heathenism, and those who
hold a purifying and elevating faith.

If any of my readers desire to see the intense antagonism which
the introduction of Christian principles must have occasioned in aCua. XX] NOT AN HAIR PERISH. dol

18 * But there shall not an hair of your head perish.
19 In your patience possess ye your souls. r Matt. x. 30.

 

heathen family, let them read some remarks of Tertullian in his
** Second Book to his Wife,” secs. 3, 4, 5.

18. “ But there shall not a hair of your head perish.” How is
this to be reconciled with the previous words: ‘Some of you shall
they cause to be put to death”? It has been supposed that the
words are to be taken spiritually. Thus one expositor writes:
“They form a proverbial saying. They teach us that whatever
sufferings a disciple of Christ may go through, his best things can
never be injured.” But surely the Lord would never express a
man’s “best spiritual things” or interests by such a term as the
*‘hairs of his head.” And, besides, all the rest of these predictions are
to be taken literally, why should this one among them be taken
spiritually? Godet’s view seems still more unsatisfactory : ‘‘ There
shall, indeed, be some individual believers who shall perish in the
persecution; but the Christian community of Palestine, as a
whole, shall escape the extermination which will overtake the
Jewish people.” It seems that there can be but one reconciliation,
which is to me, at least, most obvious. Some, as the Lord expressly
says, will endure martyrdom for His sake; but they will, as the
saying is, be immortal till their work is done. Not a hair of their
1ead shall perish, except by the Divine permission. We cannot but
refer back to the Lord’s own saying to these same men, “ The hairs
of your head are all numbered.” This does not imply that death
cannot overtake them, but that every event which can occur to
them is absolutely ordered by God, so that they suffer nothing,
except by the express permission of God.

19. “In your patience possess ye your souls.” The parallel ex-
pression to this in St. Matthew and St. Mark is, ‘“‘He that shall
endure to the end, the same shall besaved.” The word ‘ possess’’
should rather be translated ‘“‘win”’ or ‘acquire,’ so the Revised
Version, ‘‘In your patience ye shall win your souls.” “ Their
condition is to be one of patience, that is to say, peaceful waiting
for the Divine Signal, without being drawn aside either by the
appeals of a false patriotism, or by persecution, or false signs, and
Anti-Christian seductions.’”’ The words seem to teach the same
as the words of the Lord by the prophet Isaiah, “In quietness
and confidence shall be your strength.”532 THE DESOLATION IS NIGH. [Sr. Luxe.

90 And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with
s Matt. xxiv. armies, then know that the desolation thereof 1s
15. Mark xiii. :
14. nigh,

Sa

 

90, “* And when ye shall see Jerusalem compassed with armies,
then know,” &c. Hitherto the Lord had been warning them against
being disturbed and “ shaken in mind,” by things which are always
occurring—wars, commotions, insurrections, earthquakes, signs in
heaven, &c.; these things may take place at all times in the history
of the world, and people magnify their intensity by their nearness
to themselves, or by their supposed political or religious influence.’
Now the Lord gives the true and unmistakable sign, J erusalem
compassed about with armies. In my notes on the Gospel of
St. Mark (xiii. 14), I directed the readev’s attention to the fact that
St Luke makes no mention of that sign which the Lord evidently
would have them regard as the sure and unmistakable one, the
“ abomination of desolation” spoken of by Daniel the prophet as
“standing in the Holy Place ” (Matthew), ‘‘ standing where it ought
not” (Mark). It is also to be noticed that the compassing of the city
by the Roman armies is immediately followed, in St. Luke, by the
game express direction verbatim, “Let them which are in Judea
flee to the mountains,” as 1s the sight of ‘‘ the abomination of deso-
lation” in the Holy Place, in St. Matthew’s and St. Mark’s report.
There can be little doubt, therefore, but that the “ abomination of
desolation ’’ is either the presence of the Roman armies, whose very
standards were the objects of idolatrous worship, round the city

on ground which, being the suburbs of the Holy City, was itself
considered holy, or that it refers to something in the siege, or rather
immediately before it, which has not come down to us.

a ae

1 A clever and intellectual man, sober-minded in everything but the interpretation of
prophecy, gravely assured me that he considered the invasion of France by the Prussians
in 1870 to be the fulfilment of the prediction of the ‘‘ great hail” of Rev. xvi. 21. Perhaps
the reader will remember the excitement caused by the republication of Fleming’s book
about the time that Louis Philippe was dethroned, and within a year succeeded by Louis
Napoleon. The Crimea at the time of the Crimean War, and Constantinople at the time
of the Russian invasion of Turkey, were both oracularly pronounced by two excellent
clergymen of our Church to be the scenes of the battle of Armageddon. Such interpre-
tations, in which oneself, and one’s own country, and one’s own religious views are the
centre, are not merely ridiculous, but extremely mischievous. They tend to disparage
the study of prophecy, and probably will be one of the means by which many Christians
will not be able to read the true signs of the time of the Advent.Cusr. XXI] FLEE TO THE MOUNTAINS. 533

21 Then let them which are in Judea flee to the moun-

 

I speak with some hesitation where I differ from such able
expositors as Wordsworth and Alford, but I doubt much whether
the ‘‘abomination of desolation’’ means the possession of the Temple
by the Sicarii, or Assassins ; such would not be a sign to those in
Juda, for the possession of the temple by the Sicarii took place
some time before the siege, whereas the sign in question, whatever
it was, was to be the signal of flight so hasty that they were not
even to go back to the house to take anything out of their house. Be-
sides, as I have shown, the Hebrew word which is translated
‘‘abomination”’ always alludes to an idol, or idolatrous worship,
whereas the Assassins, though guilty of every species of violence and
bloodshed, could not be accused of this.

It is needful, however, to consider how the beleaguering of the
city by the Roman armies could be a sign to the Christians to
‘“‘depart out,” seeing that the besieging army hemmed them in so
that there was no escape? It is to be remembered that the city of
Jerusalem was twice threatened—once, some time before the arrival
of Titus, by Cestius Gallus, who having drawn up his army before
the city, when by a single stroke he might have taken it, and pre-
vented the subsequent carnage and desolation, suddenly, and for
no apparent reason, withdrew his army, so that all who had fears
respecting the issue of the impending struggle fled to Pella. This
retreat is thus described: ‘‘ The people, upon this, took courage,
and when the wicked part of the city gave ground, thither did they
come in order to set open the gates, and to admit Cestius as their
benefactor, who, had he but continued the siege a little longer, had
certainly taken the city; but it was, I suppose, owing to the aver-
sion God had already at the city, and the sanctuary, that he was
hindered from putting an end to the war that very day. It thus
happened that Cestius was not conscious either how the besieged
despaired of success, nor how courageous the people |7.e. the better
minded Jews] were for him; and so he recalled his soldiers from
the place, and by despairing of any expectation of taking it, without
having received any disgrace, he retired from the city, without any
reason in the world.” (‘* Wars of the Jews,” II. ch. xix. 6, ls)

It may have been at this time that that which is related by
Eusebius took place, that‘ the whole body of the Chureh of Jeru-
salem having been commanded by a Divine Revelation given to534 THESE THE DAYS OF VENGEANCE. [Srt. Luxe.

tains: and let them which are in the midst of it depart out ;
and let not them that are in the countries enter thereinto.

99 For these be the days of vengeance, that ‘all things
t Dan. ix.26, which are written may be fulfilled.

27. Zech, x1. 1. : : :
, Matt. xxiv. 93° But woe unto them that are with child,

U
wR and to them that give suck, in those days! for

23. «But woe unto them.” “ Woe” omitted by B., D., L., and old Latin (a, ¢, e,
2 eg) bue retained by €, A., C., all later Uncials, all Cursives, f, Vulg., Copt.,

eee! &e.

men of approved piety there before the war, removed from the
city, and dwelt at a certain town beyond the Jordan, called
Pella.”

21. “Then let them which are in Judea flee to the mountains,”
i.e., to the very rugged and mountainous country beyond Jordan,
perhaps the ancient Gilead.

“ Let not them that are in the countries [i.e., the country dis-
tricts| enter thereinto.”

99. “ For these be the days of vengeance, that all things which
are written may be fulfilled.’ All things that are written in
Deut. xxviii. 49-58, especially the most terrible and horrible of
all, ‘‘ The tender and delicate woman among you which would
not adventure to set the sole of her foot upon the ground for
delicateness and tenderness, her eye shall be evil towards the hus-
band of her bosom, and toward her son, and toward her daughter

and towards her children which she shall bear: for she shall
eat them for want of all things in the siege and straitness where-
with thine enemies shall distress thee in thy gates.” An instance
of this—one amongst many—is given by Josephus. (“ Wars of the
Jews,” VI. ch. iii. 4.) It is too horrible and sickening to give
here.

Let the reader also remember the words of the Lord, ‘‘ Upon you
shall come all the righteous blood shed upon the earth . . . verily
I say unto you, all these things shall come upon this generation ”’
(Matth. xxiii. 35, 36).

23. ‘Woe unto them that are with child, and to them that give
suck . .. wrath upon this people.” That is, God’s blessing of
fruitfulness is turned into a curse. There wasno safety for any in-
habitant of the doomed land but in immediate flight, but how couldCuar., XXI.] THE TIMES OF THE GENTILES. 535

there shall be great distress in the land, and wrath upon
this people.

24 And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall
be led away captive into all nations: and Jerusalem shall
be trodden down of the Gentiles, * until the times ey ix. 27.

lee ttOme

of the Gentiles be fulfilled. xi. 25.

 

such flee so quickly as to save themselves? The reader will re-
member the Lord’s words in the Gospel, ‘‘ Daughters of Jeru-
salem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves and for your chil-
dren,” &c.

24, ‘‘ And they shall fall by the edge of the sword, and shall be
led away captive into all nations.” Eleven hundred thousand
perished by famine or the sword; above ninety thousand were sold
as slaves. Great numbers were sent among the provinces to be the
prey of wild beasts in the amphitheatres.

‘* And Jerusalem shall be trodden down of the Gentiles until the
times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.” The latter part of this 24th
verse is peculiar to St. Luke, and goes very far in clearing up the
principal difficulty of the discourse as contained in the three first
Gospels. For in the reports of the discourse in St. Matthew and
St. Mark there is mention of a tribulation which from its position
in the prophecy must be the destruction of Jerusalem (Matth. xxiv.
15-26; Mark xiii. 14-23). This is called in St. Matthew, ‘‘ The
tribulation of those days,’ and immediately after the tribulation
shall the sun be darkened, and the other signs of the immediate
return of the Lord to judgment shall be manifest. We should
gather, then, from the first two Synoptics, that the tribulation was
the siege and fall of the devoted city, and the subsequent horrors,
and that the Second Coming of the Lord would be immediately after ;
but by St. Luke’s version it is clear that the tribulation may be an in-
definite period, probably long—it may be very long, for “ Jerusalem
shall be trodden down of the Gentiles until the times of the Gen-
tiles be fulfilled.” Jerusalem is now trodden down, and has been
since the time of its final overthrow. The Christian Jerusalem of
the Fathers—the Jerusalem of the succeeding ages—the Jerusalem
of the present time is not Jerusalem. As regards its inhabitants at
all these periods they were none of them, or at least a mere frag-
ment of them, Jews. The Jerusalem of old continues trodden536 SIGNS. [Sr. Luke.

ee 95 €¥ And there shall be signs in the sun, and
9, stark XIll.
a ie Pet. iti. jn the moon, and in the stars; and upon the

down; indeed, is non-existent ; the present city in no respect repre-
sentsit. City after city has grown up on the ruins of its foundations,
but none of them have taken its place.

And all this will be “till the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled.”
The present desolation, moral and religious, of the ancient people
of God is set forth in the words of the prophet. ‘ The children of
Israel shall abide many days without a king,” «.e., of the line of
David; ‘‘and without a prince,” i.e., a leader or judge to unite
them; ‘‘ and without a sacrifice,” that is, without the God-ordained
Levitical Ritual; “and without an image,” i.e., without the worship
of any false god or idol; ‘‘and without an ephod,” i.e., without
oracular guidance from the true God (1 Sam. xxii. 9, 10): “and
without teraphim,” 7.e., idolatrous and unlawful means of divina-
tion. ‘‘ Afterwards,” i.c., after the time of the Gentiles, 6 shall
the children of Israel return, and seek the Lord their God, and
David their king, and shall fear the Lord and his goodness in the
latter days” (Hosea iii. 4, 5). The above is the substance of Dr.
Pusey’s note on this prophecy in his ‘“* Minor Prophets.” It con-
cludes with the words, “‘There will be a more full fulfilment, of
which St. Paul speaks, when the eyes of all Israel shall be opened
to the deceivableness of the last Antichrist, and Enoch and Elias,
the two witnesses, shall have come to prepare our Lord’s Second
Coming, and shall have been slain (Rev. xi. 3), and by God’s ¢on-
verting grace all Israel shall be saved.”

“The Jews are dispersed into all nations, to proclaim and show
to all the world what a people or a soul is without Christ, what it is
to have let slip the time and opportunity of repentance, and what
itis to have heard, without bringing forth any fruit, the Saviour
and His Gospel. That which has happened to this people, happens
to everyone who is finally impenitent; but after a manner which
is much more dreadful.’’ (Quesnel.)

25. * And there shall be signs in the sun, and in the moon....
upon the earth distress of nations .... the sea and the waves
roaring.” That these signs in the sun and in the moon, &c., will
not be the waning of spiritual or religious light, or the dethronement
of great sovereigns, or desolating revolutions, is evident from this,
that such things will occur in addition to the heavenly signs, for,Cuap, XXI.] DISTRESS OF NATIONS. 537

earth distress of nations, with perplexity; the sea and the
waves roaring ;

 

25. “‘ With perplexity, the sea and the waves roaring.” So D.,1., A, A, I, most later
Uncials, most Cursives, old Latin, Vulg. ; but X, A., B.,C.,L., M., R., X., a few Cursives,
Copt., Syriac, Arm., read, “with perplexity at the roaring of the sea,” &c.

according to St. Luke the Lord adds the words, ‘“‘upon the earth
distress of nations, with perplexity.” With respect to the signs in
the sun, we know so very little of what is the cause of its ight that
to assert that there can be no changes in the photosphere, as it is
called, which may seriously affect our share of that light is the ex-
treme of infidel dogmatism.

On two great occasions in the religious history of the chosen
people, God made the phenomena of the natural world to witness
to the awful nature of what was taking place in the moral world:
when He revealed His law on Mount Sinai, and when He revealed
the reconciliation of justice and mercy on Calvary: and the second
coming of the Incarnate Word will be the greatest open manifesta-
tion of God, both in His Person and in His moral attributes, which
the universe has ever seen. The shaking of the whole frame of
nature and the suspension of its highest laws are very small matters
compared to the Revelation of the Unseen and Eternal God which
will then take place.

To one who believes that the Divine, the moral, and the spiritual
is infinitely greater than the natural, Godet’s remark on the pro-
cess by which God may bring about this seems reasonable and
according to common sense when he writes: ‘‘ In the midst of this
carnal security, alarming symptoms will all at once proclaim one
of those universal revolutions through which our earth has more than
once passed. Like a ship, creaking in every timber at the moment
of its going to pieces, the globe which we inhabit (7 oicovpévy) and
our whole solar system shall undergo unusual commotions. The
moving forces (duvdpecc), reguiar in their action till then, shall be,
as it were, set free from their laws by an unknown power; and at
the end of this violent but short distress, the world shall see Him
appear Whose coming shall be like the lightning which shines from
one end of heaven to the other.”

“The sea and the waves roaring.” Some MSS. connect this with
the preceding word “perplexity.” Perplexity (of nations) at the
roaring of the sea and the waves. But inasmuch as but a small part538 THE SON OF MAN COMING. [Sr. Luxs.

26 Men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking
after those things which are coming on the earth: ” for the
2 Matt. xxiv. powers of heaven shall be shaken.

a 97 And then shall they see the Son of man
« Matt. xxiv. @ coming in a cloud with power and great glory.

SON Nevado 1.
& xiv. 14.

of the inhabitants of the earth dwell on the sea coast, this seems
unlikely. If we take the sea and the waves to be the political agita-
tion of the people, then we have a figurative expression used
amongst literal ones, apparently for no purpose; still many take it
to mean universal fear at the frequency of revolts and tumults.
We are to remember, however, that any disarrangement of the in-
fluences of the heavenly bodies would be felt throughout all nature,
especially the sea and the air.

26. “*Men’s hearts failing them for fear, and for looking after
those things,” &c. Is it not, however, said that the wicked will be
in a state of carnal security ? Yes, but the two statements are per-
fectly reconcilable : for in the first place their security will be sud-
denly and rudely broken up, and they will be filled with forebodings
which will maké their hearts fail for fear: and yet they will not
know which way to turn. As the fears and distresses of the Jews
in the siege of Jerusalem did not make them turn to their true
Refuge, so men will then be unable to turn to Him Who is so close
at hand; for, when the sight of Him bursts upon them, they will
call upon the mountains and rocks to cover them and hide them
from His Wrath.

927. “ And then shall they see the Son of man coming in a cloud
with power and great glory.” The Son of Man coming openly,
visibly, gloriously—not spiritually, as when He comes to each soul
at its conversion to Himself—not providentially, as He came in ven-
geance at the destruction of Jerusalem: but as the lightning which
lighteth from the east and shineth even to the west, so that every
eye shall see Him, so that they who have pierced Him shall look
on Him Whom they have pierced, and they who look for Him shall
say, ‘‘ Lo, this is our God! we have waited for Him and He will
save us.”

‘Tn a cloud” ; thus the Lord claims to be that Son of Man, Whom
the Prophet Daniel saw in vision: ‘‘ One like unto the Son of man
came with the clouds of heaven” (vii. 18).war, XXI.] LIFT UP YOUR HEADS. 539

28 And when these things begin to come to pass, then
look up, and lift up your heads; for »your re- » Rom, viii. 19,
demption draweth nigh. 3

29 © And he spake to them a parable; Behold ¢ Matt. xxiv.
the fig tree, and all the trees ; ca

30 When they now shoot forth, ye see and know of your
own selves that summer is now nigh at hand.

31 So likewise ye, when ye see these things come to pass,
know ye that the kingdom of God is nigh at hand.

 

“With power and great glory.” As He Himself expresses it, “in
His own glory, and in His Father’s, and of the Holy Angels.”
(Luke ix. 26.)

‘““In power and majesty will men see Him Whom in lowly stations
they refused to hear, that so much the more acutely they may feel
His power as they are now the less willing to bow the necks of
their hearts to His sufferings.” (Gregory.)

28. ‘“‘ And when these things begin to come to pass, then look up
.... your redemption draweth nigh.” What doesthe Lord mean
by ‘“‘these things ?”’ Does He mean that which occupies the prin-
cipal part of His discourse, z.e., the signs of the impending ven-
gseance on the Jewish nation, or does He mean that which He had
last warned them about, that is, His Second Coming? He may
mean either, butindeed He probably means both. In the first case,
when they heard of the armies of the Romans entering the bounds
of the Holy Land, then their redemption, in the sense of their
deliverance from the fast approaching calamities, was at hand: and
in the second case, when men see the unusual signs in the heavens,
and the widespread distress and perplexity, and the elemental war,
and the shaking of the powers of heaven, then their last and final
redemption, ‘‘to wit, the redemption of their bodies ’’ from corrup-
tion and sin, draws nigh. Here redemption is put for the final, the
crowning effect of the redeeming Death. As the Apostle writes,
“not only they, but ourselves also, who have the first-fruits of

the Spirit, even we ourselves groan within ourselves, waiting for
the adoption, to wit, the redemption of our body” (Rom. viii. 23).

99-31. ‘And he spake to them a parable; Behold the fig tree,
and all the trees ... . the kingdom of God is nigh at hand.” To
the mass of mankind who cannot read or compute time, the near540 THIS GENERATION. (Sr. Lurx.

32 Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass
away, till all be fulfilled.

ee er ee a

approach of summer +s known, not by the almanack, but by the
shooting forth of the fig tree (as being the most conspicuous), and
all the trees; and so to believing souls the swift coming of the
kingdom of God is known by the signs of the times. God will make
the near approach of His Son, in providence to judge Jerusalem, or
in person to judge the world, as certain to those who have eyes to
see, and ears to hear, as He makes the approach of the summer
certain to the labouring man by the bursting forth of all nature into
life.

32, “ Verily I say unto you, This generation shall not pass away,
till all be fulfilled.” The key to this place is, as | have shown in my
notes on Matth. xxiv. 32-34, the words which were really the occasion
of the whole discourse, which are to be found at the conclusion of
the denunciation of the Scribes and Pharisees in Matthew, chap.
xxiii., “ Verily, I say unto you, all these things,” that is, the blood of
all the prophets from Abel to Zacharias, shall come upon this gene-
ration.” This is followed by ‘“‘ Your house is left unto you desolate,
and ye shall not see me till ye shall say, Blessed is he that cometh
in the name of the Lord.” These remarks of the Lord suggested
the question of the Apostles, ‘When shall these things be?” and
upon this follows the whole discourse. Now the discourse which
the Lord utters is occupied with two things: the first, the signs of the
impending vengeance, which was of special interest to that genera-
tion; the second, the signs of the approaching advent, which was of
the utmost concern to a More remote one, which would be in exis-
tence after the “times of the Gentiles were fulfilled.” The Lord,
then, in the words, ‘This generation shall not pass away, &Xc.,
must refer to the first of these, which mainly occupies the first part
of the discourse, and which, be it remembered, is an exposition of
the all-important words—all-important, that is, to the men then
living, ‘All these things shall come upon this generation.” To
make any difficulty about this in deference to an absurd literalism,
and to understand the Lord to mean by “generation,” the whole
future existence of the Jewish people or of the Christian Church, is to
‘nsist that the words of the Lord ‘“ Jerusalem shall be trodden under
foot of the Gentiles, till the times of the Gentiles be fulfilled,”Cuar. XXL] MY WORDS SHALL NOT PASS AWAY. D41

33 “Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words
shall not pass away. d Matt. xxiv,
35,
34 4 And °take heed to yourselves, lest at any « Rom. xiii, 13,

: : 4° 1 Thess. v. 6.
time your hearts be overcharged with surfeiting, jpetiv.7.

signify perhaps half-a-dozen years, whilst on the very face of it they
signify a considerable period of time.

38. ‘‘ Heaven and earth shall pass away: but my words shall not
pass away.’ God in the Scriptures constantly foretells the passing
away of the present earth and heaven to give place to a world far
more worthy of being the habitation of the children of the Resur-
rection. Thus Isaiah lxv. 17, ‘‘ Behold, I create new heaven and a
new earth: andthe former shall not be remembered, nor come into
mind.” And, again, 2 Peter iii. 13, “‘ We, according to his pro-
mise, look for new heavens and a new earth, wherein dwelleth
righteousness.” So that the present outward frame of nature, stable
as it seems, has no real promise of continuance, whereas whaiso-
ever is in the mind of God, and is made known to us by His Son,
cannot fail of being fulfilled in its time. We have reasons for be-
lieving in the immutability of Christ’s words which the first disciples
had not. Nothing could, humanly speaking, be more unlikely, than
that such a temple as that before them would be levelled with the
eround, its huge stones of glittering marble broken to atoms, and
its very site ploughed over, and rendered indistinguishable, and yet
within forty short years all this took place just as the Lord foretold ;
and when this happened, a vengeance was executed on the former
people of God, which could only be likened to the blood of all former
martyrs and prophets of God being required of that particular
generation. And since then “their house has been left desolate ”’ ;
all the powers of earth could not reverse the Lord’s words; a heathen
emperor tried to build up its ruins, and ignominiously failed. All
medizval Christendom united to effect a sort of Christian restora-
tion, but to no purpose. We may settle it in our minds, then, that
if the words of Christ respecting the destruction of such a temple,
and the scattering of such a nation pass not away, no words of His
will pass away—all will be fulfilled in their season.

34, 35. ‘* And take heed to yourselves, lest at any time your
hearts be overcharged ... . the whole earth.” It is sad to reflect
that the disciples of Christ need to be warned not only against spiri-542 AS A SNARE SHALL IT COME. _ [Sr. Luxe.

and drunkenness, and cares of this life, and so that day

come upon you unawares.

f 1 Thess. v. 2. 25 Forfas a snare shall it come on all them
2 Pet. iii. 10.

Rev. iii. 3. that dwell on the face of the whole earth.

xvi. 15.

34, 35. ‘(That day come upon you.unawares. For as a snare.” So A., C., later
Uncials, almost all Cursives; but &, B., D., L., old Latin (a, b, ¢, e, ff, i), Copt., read,
<< Come upon you unawares as a snare : for it shall come,” &c.

tual sins, but against fleshly ones ; not only against cares of this life,
which may be innocent, but against surfeiting and drunkenness.
But must not all poor Christians be exposed to cares respecting
their living, and must not this interfere with their watching and
taking heed? Yes, unless they obey the Apostolic precept, “ Casting
all your care upon him, for He careth for you.”’

“So that day come upon you unawares. For as a snare shall it
come,” &e. Here we have our Evangelist giving us words of the
Lord which answer to those recorded by his brother Evangelists
respecting the duty of watching and waiting for the coming of the
Son of Man; not watching to be draughted out of this world by
death, but watching for the Lord Himself coming again to this
world to reward His faithful ones, and take vengeance on His
enemies.

“To them that look for Him shall He appear the second time
without sin unto salvation.” We are not only to believe, but to
watch; not only to love, but to watch; not only to obey, but to watch.
Besides all other Christian dispositions there is to be this of watch-
ing, for it alone recognizes the very distinct enunciations of the Lord
respecting the secrecy and suddenness of his Second Coming. The
crown which the Lord will give at the last will not be to Apostles
only, but ‘to all them that love his appearing.” See particularly
my notes on St. Matthew xxiv. pp. 364-366, and on St. Mark xiii.
pp. 824-326. And what is this watching? It is not going out and
gazing up into heaven. It is not imagining that every national
distress or natural catastrophe is the immediate forerunner of the
end. It is not dogmatically asserting that such an occurrence is the
fulfilment of such an Apocalyptic vision; but it is the living in the
constant belief that the present state of things may, at any moment,
disappear and give way to another, and this by the coming of the
Lord Himself. It is best described by the Apostle in the words,Cuar. XXI.] WATCH YE THEREFORE. 543

36 ® Watch ye therefore, and * pray always, that ye may

be accounted worthy to escape all these things 6 Matt. xxiv.

that shall come to pass, and ‘to stand before Mark cit as

the Son of man. ; a aoe 1.
eMeatiot Eph. vi. 13.

 

36. ‘“Ye may be accounted worthys So Aj C.D. Re T, A, A, 1, all later Uncials,
most Cursives, old Latin, Vulg., Syriacs, Arm.; but X. Be, Ue Xe, 1, 83486, Diol lone
209, Copt., read, ‘‘ that ye may have strength,”

“This I say, brethren, the time is short; it remaineth, that both
they that have wives be as though they had none; and they that
weep, as though they wept not ; and they that rejoice, as though they
rejoiced not; and they that buy, as though they possessed not; and
they that use this world as not abusing it: for the fashion of this
world passeth away” (1 Cor. vii. 29, 30).

36. “Watch ye therefore, and pray always .... stand before
the Son of man.” This is a very fearful verse. I know none that
brings out with such alarming power and distinctness the difficulty
of final acceptance, and the danger of coming short. ‘ Watch ye,
therefore (be wakeful) at all seasons, praying that ye may be
accounted worthy to escape all those things that shall come to pass,
and to stand before the Son of man. For what end such unremittine
watchfulness and such constant prayer? Is it that we may have the
highest posts of honour, and sit on His right hand and on His left
in His kingdom? No! but that we may be safe. He Who died
for us, Love Infinite! bids us watch, praying at all seasons, that so
we may... . stand before the Son of Man.” (Pusey.) The Holy
Spirit, by the mouth of the Apostle Paul, gives us a similar earnest,
piercing call. ‘Take unto you the whole armour of God, that ye
may be able to withstand in the evil day, and having done all to
stand.” With such words uttered by the Lord Himself, and His
servants, how can men have the face to teach others that salvation
is the matter of a moment—that the moment a man is converted
and believes, he is safe for ever—that a man is to be rewarded with
the fruits of victory before he has struck a blow? It seems an as-
tonishing delusion, preached and believed in in spite of the plainest
words of Christ, and yet it is the most popular delusion of the
day.

I am not speaking against sudden conversions. Conversions with
the most of men ought to be sudden, not a moment is to be lost in544 AT NIGHT HE WENT OUT. [Sr. Luxe,

97 k And in the day time he was teaching in the temple:

John vas and Jat night he went out, and abode in the
ich. sai 30, mount that is called the mount of Olives.

38 And all the people came early in the morning to him
in the temple, for to hear him.

rise ee ae

turning from the wrong way to the right, from sin to holiness, from
the world to God, from self to Christ. But in the face of Scripture
and of all human experience, to say of those who have scarcely
pegun to fight the fight, and to run the race, what an Apostle such
as St. Paul disclaimed respecting himself, does seem a folly which,
we should think, no sane Christian, who cares for the words of
Christ, would be guilty of. “ O God, whose blessed Son was mani-
fested that He might destroy the works of the devil, and make us
the sons of God and heirs of eternal life, grant us, we beseech thee,
that, having this Hope, we may purify ourselves, even as He is
pure, that when He shall appear again with power and great
glory, we may be made like unto Him in His eternal and glorious
kingdom.”

37, 38. ‘And in the day time he was teaching in the temple... .
to hear him.” Why does the Evangelist tell us this? Not only to
teach us of our Lord’s assiduity to the very last, and that to the very
last He kept up the deep interest of the people in what He taught ;
but also to assure us that till the very hour decreed in the councils
of the Trinity He was safe, and could not be taken. Before He
could be taken He must be betrayed by one of the twelve, the
Passover must be eaten, the Eucharist instituted, the Agony en-

dured.Cuap. XXII] THE PASSOVER. O45

CHAP, XOCH,

l TOW *the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which
is called the Passover. a Matt. xxvi,
. se 5 : 2. Mark xiv. 1.
2 And the Chief Priests and Scribes sought » Ps, ii. 2,
js s rene s ao zs J h el 4 .
how they might kill him; for they teared the aac eo:
people.

 

1. “ Now the feast of unleavened bread drew nigh, which is called
the Passover.” I have noticed in my remarks on the other Gospels
how very closely the Lord’s death is connected with the Passover.
This is still more conspicuous in the Gospel of St. Luke, inasmuch
as he omits all mention of the supper in Bethany, and of the
anointing which took place at it, which is inserted in the narratives
of St. Matthew and St. Mark out of its proper chronological order.

‘* The feast of unleavened bread,” not merely the single feast on
the Paschal Lamb, but the whole eight days in which it was un-
lawful to eat anything leavened.

‘Which is called the Passover.” This explanation is given for
the sake of the Gentile readers of the Gospel.

2. ** And the Chief Priests and Scribes sought how they might
kill him, for they feared the people.”’ Emphasis is here to be laid
on the word sought. It was a matter of difficulty, because the last
notice of Him in the last chapter is, ‘‘ All the people came early in
the morning to him in the temple to hear him.” The temple was,
as it were, their own domain, but because of the crowds which
flocked to hear Him He could not be taken there. So that if they
were to apprehend Him at all, it must be ‘‘in the absence of the
multitude:’”? in some place to which He retired for rest and
devotion.

3. ‘Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot, being of
the number of the: twelve.” The account of Judas in St. Luke
occupies a midway position between the accounts of the two first
Synoptics and that of St. John. In SS. Matthew and Mark nothing
whatsoever is said of him, 7.e., to his disparagement, till he perpe-
trates his crime. In St. John, on the contrary, we have the steps
NN546 JUDAS SURNAMED ISCARIOT. (Sr. Lune.

3 | °Then entered Satan into Judas surnamed Iscariot,

e Matt.xxvi. being of the number of the twelve.
14, Mark xiv. =
10. John xiii.

2, 27.

which led to it, by which he hardened his own heart through
repeated small acts of theft from the bag which contained the small
sums which were given to Jesus and the Apostolic band for their
maintenance. He committed these acts of dishonesty all the time
that he was in close companionship with the Lord, seeing all His
miracles, hearing all His discourses, especially those upon the
danger of covetousness ; and being, no doubt, perfectly conscious
that Christ knew well all about his secret peculations—so that at
last he ripened himself to commit the greatest crime that any human
being has ever been guilty of. Itis a fearful thing to think that an
Apostle should fall by the commission of sins for which we should
send a little servant-maid to a reformatory, but it was so. And it
should teach us that any one of us may fall, not by high spiritual,
but also by low carnal sins. It is surprising to see how many godly
commentators of this day try to excuse this man, and to divest his
sin, if possible, of its vulgarity and commonplace character. One
would make his “ deflection” from the Lord to be wholly on political
grounds. In order that he might be a patriot he became a traitor.
Another supposes that he betrayed his Lord in order to foree Him
to proclaim Himself to be the Messiah. A third, whilst allowing
and deprecating his crime, “ wraps it up” in as soft words as he
well can. ‘This disciple, on joining the service of Jesus, had not
taken care to deny his own life, as Jesus so often urged His own to
do. Jesus, instead of becoming the end to his heart, had remained
the means. And now, when he saw things terminating in a result
entirely opposed to that with which he had ambitiously flattered
himself, he wished at least to try to benefit by the false position into
which he had put himself with his nation, and to use his advantages
as a disciple in order to regain the favour of the rulers with whom
he had broken.” But isit at all likely that the rulers knew anything
whatsoever about him till he offered to betray Jesus? Must we not
assume that he originally belonged to the same order of society as
the rest? If anything can be urged in mitigation of his crime on
solid Scripture grounds, let it be so; but the lesson of Scripture is
that one fell from the companionship of the Son of God, and from
an apostolic throne, by miserable, vulgar, contemptible acts of sin.Cuar. XXIL] HOW HE MIGHT BETRAY HIM. 547

4 And he went his way, and communed with the Chief
Priests and captains, how he might betray him unto them.

© And they were glad, and *covenanted to Give 4 Zech. xi. 12.
him money.

6 And he promised, and sought opportunity to
betray him unto them ||/in the absence of the Ons uneliout
multitude. oe

-

¢ 4 °Then came the day of unleavened bread, q Math ay).
; (. Lark X1V.
when the Passover must be killed. 12,

 

7. “Must be killed; ” rather, ‘“‘ must be sacrificed.”

The lesson for each and every Christian is that, if he had the gifts
and graces of an Apostle, this must not exempt him from taking
heed to the precept, ‘‘ Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed
lest he fall.”

4, 5. “And he went his way, and communed with the Chief
Priests and captains .... money.” St. Matthew only mentions
the sum—thirty pieces of silver. St. Mark and St. Luke agree in
noticing the alacrity with which the chief priests accepted the
offer.

6. “And he promised, and sought opportunity,” &e. For this
diabolical purpose he again rejoined the holy company, being on
the watch the whole time for some word to fall from His Master
respecting His movements. He was present at the Passover, re-
ceived the first Eucharist, and allowed the Lord to wash his feet.
[‘* Ye are clean, but not all.’’]

7. “ Then came the day of unleavened bread, when the Passover
must be killed.” As the Jews began their reckoning with the even-
ing, at six o’clock, this, in our way of reckoning, would mean,
‘then came the Thursday evening, the commencement of the day
which with us would begin at twelve o’clock that night, which day
is our Good Friday.” I must refer the reader to my notes on St.
Matthew xxvi. 1, p. 400, and St. Mark xiv. 12, p. 335, for the dis-
cussion of the question, On what day did our Lord eat His
Passover ? I have shown that in all human probability (for there
must always be some uncertainty on a question which has been
debated ever since the second century of our era) He eat it twenty-
four hours before the usual time. I may mention in passing that I548 GO AND PREPARE THE PASSOVER. [St. Luxe.

8 And he sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare us

the Passover, that we may eat.
9 And they said unto him, Where wilt thou that we

prepare ?

10 And he said unto them, Behold, when ye are entered.
into the city, there shall a man meet you, bearing a pitcher
of water ; follow him into the house where he entereth in.
am glad to see that such an unprejudiced and thoughtful commen-~
tator as Godet is of this opinion.

8. “And he sent Peter and John, saying, Go and prepare us
the Passover,’ &c. According to SS. Matthew and Mark the
disciples had asked Him “ Where wilt thou that we go and prepare
the Passover ?”’ According to our evangelist, the Lord takes the
snitiative. I believe that St. Luke’s account is the strictly accurate
one. The Lord, desiring to eat it beforehand, first mentioned the
matter. It may be, however, that the disciples, knowing the difi-
culty of procuring a suitable apartment when such multitudes had
flocked to the city for the same purpose, had mentioned it as desir-
ing to be sure of some apartment.

9, “ And they said unto him, Where wilt thou that we prepare?”
This is precisely the same question as in the two first Synoptics,
and may either have been an answer to the Lord’s direction, or
spontaneous on their part, feeling that if they were to have a room
no time must be lost.

10. “* And he said unto them, Behold, when ye are entered into
the city .. . - he entereth in.” Why does He indicate in so com-
paratively indirect a way how they are to find the house and not
name the house? Evidently because He desired that Judas might
not know the spot, because, if so, the emissaries of the chief priests
might come upon Him whilst He was celebrating the Passover.

‘© Where he entereth in.” He was a servant, and not the master
of the house who is now mentioned as the ‘‘ good man.” *

1 “The sign indicated—a man drawing water from a fountain—is not so accidental as it
appears. On the evening of the 13th, before the stars appeared in the heavens, every
father, according to Jewish custom, had to repair to the fountain to draw pure water with
which to knead the unleavened bread.” So Godet, but he does not give any authority for
this from any Jewish or other writer, and it is not mentioned by any other commentator
that I am aware of. Indeed, it might have confused those who were sent, seeing that
many bearing pitchers might on that day be going on the same errand. :Cuap. XXII] WHERE IS THE GUESTCHAMBER. 549

11 And ye shall say unto the goodman of the house, The
Master saith unto thee, Where is the guestchamber, where I
Shall eat the Passover with my disciples ?

12 And he shall shew youa large upper room furnished :
there make ready.

13 And they went, and found as he had said unto them:
and they made ready the Passover.

 

11. “And ye shall say unto the goodman ... . he shall shew
you a large upper room furnished,” &c. According to Edersheim,
we miss much of the significance of this incident by not sufficiently
distinguishing between the two rooms. It is generally supposed
that the Lord directed them to ask for the same room—the best, or
festal apartment—which was given to Him, but it appears that in
asking for the katalyma, rendered “ Guest chamber,” He asked for
a lower rank of apartment on the ground floor opening into the
court, whereas the goodman, as He foretold, shewed the disciples a
large upper room (andgeon]. ‘‘ The disciples were not bidden to ask
for the chief or upper chamber, but for what we have rendered, for
want of better, by ‘hostelry,’ or ‘hall’—karddvpa—the place in
the house where, as in an open khdn, the beasts of burden were
unloaded, shoes and staff, or daily garment and burdens put down
—if an apartment, at least a common one, certainly not the best.
Except in this place, the word only occurs as the designation of the
‘inn,’ or hostelry (card\vya), in Bethlehem, where the Virgin
Mother brought forth her first-born Son, and laid Him in a
manger. He Who was born in a ‘hostelry’ (katalyma) was
content to ask for his last meal in a katalyma.”’ (Edersheim, vol.
li. p. 483).

13. ‘“‘ And they went, and found as he had said unto them: and
they made ready the Passover.” “‘ They made ready the Passover.”’
That is, all things that were then held to be needful for fulfilling
the institution. No doubt they went with a lamb which they had
purchased to the temple, and had its blood thrown at the bottom
of the altar by the officiating priests ; they procured the unleavened
cakes, the wine, the bitter herbs, and perhaps the sweet sauce
{Haroseth); but it is to be remembered that most of the details
which are given in the Talmud and other Jewish authorities cannot550 WHEN THE HOUR WAS COME.  [Sr. Luxe.

14 ‘And when the hour was come, he sat down, and the

f Matt. xxvi. twelve apostles with him.

20. Mark xiy. : : ‘

17. 15 And he said unto them, || With desire L
| Or, J have
heartily de-
sired.

 

14, “Twelve” omitted by x, Be Da loie old Latin (a, b, ¢, e, ff2, i, 1), Sah., Syr. Cur.,
put retained by A., C., P., R., Vr, A, A, IL all later Uncials, almost all Cursives, old Latin
(f, q), Vulg., Copt., Syriacs (Schaaf, &c.), Arm., Ath.

be traced to our Lord’s time, but first appear in written documents
composed many centuries afterwards.

14. “*And when the hour was come, he sat down, and the twelve
apostles with him.” “* He sat down.” This does not mean that
He and the twelve observed a sitting posture during the whole
succeeding ‘solemnity. On the contrary, there came prayers, and
thanksgivings interspersed with prayers, in which they would natu-
rally assume an attitude of devotion.

«And the twelve apostles with him.” St. Matthew has ‘‘ with
the twelve,” St. Mark, “ he cometh with the twelve.” This is one
of those places to which I have before directed attention, in which
the Lord, for His own most wise purposes, draws a line of distinc-
tion between the twelve and all His other followers. Some of us
may, in our secret hearts, object to this, as implying a small and
narrow basis for the Church, instead of a broad and wide one, and.
some have even hazarded the assertion (which is not only without
a shadow of proof, but is directly contrary to every word of the
Spirit), that there were others present to receive the commission to
celebrate the Eucharist. That there were only twelve is evident
from the after declaration, that those present, except the traitor,
were to sit on thrones, judging the twelve tribes of Israel. (See my
note in St. Matthew on The Resurrection, p. 470.)

15. “And he said unto them, With desire T have desired to eat
this Passover,” &c. To estimate the force of these words, which,
properly rendered, would read, ‘““I have most earnestly, most
heartily, desired to eat this Passover with you,” we must remember
that everything which the Lord did and said was laid down for Him
by His Father. He could not die at any time; it must be when
His hour was fully come. He could not die at any feast ; 1t must
be at the Passover. He could not die at any Passover ; it must be

at that Passover, because not till then had He“ finished the work
which God gave Him to do.” And the particular Passover whichCuar, XXIL] THIS PASSOVER. 551

have desired to eat this Passover with you before I suffer:

He was then about to celebrate was a necessary precedent of His
own immolation, because in it He, as I have shown, parted with all
power over His own life. No one could take Hislife from Him till
He surrendered it; and inasmuch as He died, not asa mere martyr,
but as the One All-atoning Sacrifice, He must surrender up His
life, not in a common, but in a priestly way. As I wrote in my
note on St. Matthew, ‘In this taking and breaking of bread He
formally surrendered that life which He had so emphatically de-
clared that ‘no one could take from Him.’ It was the moment
in time when He formally, federally, and sacerdotally ratified that
purpose which He had conceived and resolved on through eternity,
of giving Himself for His people. As a priest He must offer the
Victim, that is, Himself. He could not slay Himself, but in the
breaking of bread He offered Himself to be slain.”

And besides this, He had it in His mind “ to institute and ordain
Holy Mysteries,” ‘‘ a perpetual memory of that His precious Death.”
Now this Mystery could not have been ordained by Him at any
time. It must be most closely and intimately connected with two
things—the Passover and His own Death. In its origin it was a
part of the Paschal solemnity, to which part He gave a new life and
meaning, that “‘ Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us ;”’ and in its
origin it must be also just before His Death, on its very eve, as close
to that Death as the other circumstances of His Passion would per-
mit, or it would lose all its significance.

So, taking all this into account, we can see why He said, ‘* With
desire I have desired to eat this Passover with you before I
suffer.”

But the words sound to us as if, humanly speaking, there might
have been an hindrance: and so there might. For instance, if,
instead of indicating the place where He desired to eat the feast
somewhat obscurely, by telling them to follow the man with the
pitcher of water, He had distinctly named the name of the host,
Judas would have gone at once about his evil work, and the Lord’s
last Passover might have been interrupted. And very likely He,
Who knew all contingencies, might have foreseen others ; but now
all was, as it were, safe. And there is a sound of satisfaction about
the words, ‘‘ With desire I have desired to eat this Passover,” as if
nothing now could hinder it.DoD DIVIDE IT AMONG YOURSELVES. = [8t. Luxe.

16 For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof,
g ch.xiv.15. until it be fulfilled in the kingdom of God.
Acts x. 41.

Rev. xix. 9. 17. And he took the cup, and gave'thanks, and
said, Take this, and divide it among yourselves :

 

16. ‘‘ Any more” omitted by &, A., B., (Ol, J8le, Aon ube Cursives, old Latin (a), Sah.,
Copt.; retained by D., Pp. B., Xr, 4, A, Uy, later Uncials, almost all Cursives, most

old Latin, Vulg., Syriacs, Arm., ZEth.
17. *‘Thecup.” SoA., De Ke Mes Tl, about twenty-five Cursives. “‘ A cup” with

X, B., C., E., G., H., L., 8., V., most Cursives.

16. “For I say unto you, I will not any more eat thereof, until
it be fulfilled,” &c. The best exposition I have seen of this is that
of Bede : “Iwill no more celebrate the Mosaic Passover until, being
spiritually understood, it is fulfilled in the Church. For the Church
is the kingdom of God.”

But does the Lord mean by this “‘ until” that when the kingdom
of God shall have come and the Passover fulfilled in it, He will eat
a Passover, or that into which the Passover shall have been trans-
formed ? One divine writes: ‘‘ Our Saviour’s words obviously imply
that He will never partake of the Paschal supper any more.”

But when we know that our Lord did actually eat and drink with
His disciples (Luke xxiv. 42, 48; Acts x. 41) after His Resurrection,
it would be well if we did not express ourselves so dogmatically.
The Lord says (verse 80), ‘‘ That ye may eat and drink at my table
in my kingdom.” Could it be called His table if He never partook
with His guests of what was on it? Godet writes: ‘‘ Jesus means
to speak of a new banquet which shall take place after the consum-
mation of all things. The Holy Supper is the bond of union be-
tween the Israelitish and typical Passover, which was reaching its
goal, and the heavenly and Divine feast, which was yet in the dis-
tant future. Does not the spiritual salvation, of which the supper
is the memorial, form in reality the transition from the external
deliverance of Israel to that salvation at once spiritual and external
which awaits the glorified Church ?”’

17. “And he took the cup, and gave thanks, and said, Take this,
and divide it,” &c. Was this the same cup as that of verse 20?
Impossible ; though some difficulties might be avoided by identify-
ing them. There were four cups, at least, solemnly blessed and
used at the Passover solemnity, and this was most likely the
second. This has been called ‘“‘ the cup of the Old Testament”’ orCuar. XXII] THE FRUIT OF THE VINE. 553

Oe :
18. For "I say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of
the vine, until the kingdom of God shall come. h Matt. xxvi.
29. Mark xiv.
25.

 

Los eer will not drink.” So A., C., X., I’, a, A, three later Uncials, most Cursives,
most old Latin, Vulg., Syriac (Schaaf) ; but x, B., K., L., M., 1, fifteen Cursives, e, Sah.,
Copt., &c., read, ‘‘I will not drink henceforth.” So also D., G., in somewhat different
order.

“ Covenant,” being strictly a part of the ancient Passover, which was
then for ever passing away. The next cup (that of verse 20) being
part of the new rite—the Eucharistic sacrament—into which a
somewhat later part of the solemnity, of breaking bread and bless-
ing and handing round a cup, was turned by the Lord.

Did the Lord then partake of this cup? If verses 17 and 18 are
strictly parallel to verses 15 and 16, He did. Just as He partook
of the passover, which ‘‘ with desire he had desired to eat; so of
this cup, which He would have His own to consider as the last
part of the waning solemnity. On this Alford writes:—‘‘ Some
suppose that it is here implied that our Lord did not drink the cup
Himself. But, surely, this cannot be so. The two members of the
speech are strictly parallel: and if He desired to cat the Passover

vith them, He would also drink of the cup, which formed a usual
part of the ceremony. This seems to me to be implied in deZaperoc 5
AaBwy is the word used by all evangelists afterwards, when He did
not partake of the bread and wine. This most important addition
in our narrative amounts, I believe, to a solemn declaration of the
fulfilment of the Passover rite in both its usual divisions—the eating
of the flesh of the Lamb, and drinking the cup of thanksgiving.
Henceforward, He Who fulfilled the law for man will no more eat
and drink of it. I remark this, in order further to observe that
this division of the cup is not only not identical with, but has no
reference to, the subsequent one in verse 20. That was the institu-
tion of a new rite; this the abrogation of an old one now fulfilled,
or about to be so, in the Person of the true Lamb of God.”

With respect to the fact that the words after “ this cup” are the
same, or nearly the same, as those after the cup of the New Testa-
ment in Matth. xxvi. 29, and Mark xiv. 25, it is quite possible that
the Lord said these words, or words very much resembling one
another, twice. So Alford. Williams, however, lays stress on the
difference. ‘‘It may be further observed that although our Lord
uses a similar expression afterwards in appointing the Eucharist,5o4 HE TOOK BREAD. [Sx. Luxe.

a Nieiee 19 {And he took bread, and gave thanks,
26. Mark xiv. c
29.

 

yet He does not speak here (i.e. in St. Luke) as He does there, of
their drinking the new wine, or of His drinking the new wine with
them.”’*

These words respecting the drinking of the fruit of the vine, or
drinking it new with them, are so exceedingly mysterious that I
marvel exceedingly that their seeming repetition (and yet with a
marked difference) has induced some Christian critics to make
them a handle for throwing doubt on the genuineness of the read-
ing of these verses as they are in our Received Text, which, as the
reader will observe, if he turns to the critical notes, have an im-
mense preponderance of authority in their favour.

19-20. ‘And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and
gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given for you:
this do in remembrance of me.” ‘Likewise also the cup after
supper,” &c. .

We now come to the words of Institution as they are to be found
in St. Luke’s Gospel. And first of all we are bound to investigate
the source from which St. Luke, unless the words were made known
tohim by aspecial revelation, must of necessity have derived them.

For they contain certain additions to the traditional account
(assuming that traditional account to be that which we find in St.
Matthew and St. Mark), which St. Luke must have received from
some source of the highest authority.

Now this source was undoubtedly the Apostle St. Paul, with
whom not only was St. Luke associated as a companion, but his
Gospel in very early Fathers was identified with that of St. Paul.
(See Preface to this vol.)

For in the first place the words of Institution in St. Luke are
the same as those in 1 Corinth, xi. 24-25, particularly in the words
in which St. Paul’s account differs from the received tradition in

1 The words in St. Luke after the giving the previous cup are:
“T say unto you, I will not drink of the fruit of the vine until the
kingdom of God shall come.”’ Those in St. Matthew are, “I say
unto you, I will not drink henceforth of this fruit of the vine until
that day when I drink it new with you in my Father’s kingdom,”
or, as in St. Mark, ‘in the kingdom of God.”Cuap. XXII] THIS IS MY BODY. 509d

and brake it, and gave unto them, saying, This is my body

“this is the new covenant in my blood,” and ‘do this in re-
membrance of me.”

And, in the second place, there is another somewhat latent, but
most remarkable coincidence between the two narratives.

St. Luke distinguishes the Institution of the Eucharist from the
preceding Paschal solemnity more sharply than either St. Matthew
or St. Mark; for the Passover Festival in St. Luke clearly ends with
the distribution of the first cup, and then the Institution of the
Eucharist comes in somewhat abruptly. Now this exactly corre-
sponds with the fact that in St. Paul’s account there are no Pass-
over associations whatsoever. The Institution with him takes
place not so much on the night of the Passover, as on the night of
the betrayal. And yet St. Paul is the one Apostle who identifies
the Lord as the true Paschal Sacrifice when he writes in the same
Epistle, ‘‘ Christ our Passover is sacrificed for us, therefore let us
keep the feast”? (1 Cor. v.7). So that in St. Luke we have the
clearest connection between the Jewish and Christian Passover,
and yet the clearest distinction.

But from whom was the account in St. Paul’s Epistle derived ?
He himself tells us. He prefaces his account of the Institution
with the words, ‘‘I have received of the Lord that which I also
delivered unto you” (1 Cor. xi. 23). So that here is one of the very
chiefest facts of historical Christianity respecting which the Apostle
of the Gentiles received the account from the Lord Himself.

The reader will perceive that this account is the most direct of
all. There is but one link between the Evangelist and the Divine
Institutor, and that is the Apostle Paul. To this account, then, let
us in all reverence and humility address ourselves.

19. ‘‘ And he took bread, and gave thanks, and brake it, and gave
to them, saying, This is my body,” &c. These are the words
which enshrine the mystery, a mystery which can in no way be
explained so as to be understood or comprehended by the mere
intellect. They are addressed to faith, and can only be received by
faith, just as the corresponding mystery of the Nature and Person
of the great Institutor Himself can only be received by faith. For
the two mysteries are parallel, just as the Lord is in one Person
God and Man, the Godhead not quenching the manhood, and the
manhood not lowering or detracting from the Godhead, so this556 THIS DO IN REMEMBRANCE OF ME. [Sr. Luge.

k 1 Cor. xi. 24. which is given for you: k this do in remembrance
of me.

19. Properly, ‘‘is being given.” He was then sacerdotally and formally surrendering it.
The words from “this do in remembrance,” &e., to end of next verse, are in all Greek
MSS., except D., 7.e. they are contained in N,’A., B., Gi, E., BS Gia, i
Wes ave eles AG AG alu alll (Cursives and Versions except old Latin and Cur. Syriac.
They are distinctly alluded to by Justin Martyr. If doubt is thrown upon them because of
their omission in one or two most untrustworthy MSS., what passage of Seripture is safe P

Mystery or Sacrament has, as the Church says, two parts. An
outward part, which is bread and wine, which the Lord hath com-
manded to be received, and an inward Part or Thing signified,
which is “The Body and Blood of Christ, which are verily and
indeed taken and received by the faithful in the Lord’s Supper.”
The link of connection between these two parts, so that they should
be both in their integrity in the One Sacrament, the secret of their
identification, so that the Lord, with the full view of the future of
His Church before Him, should say of the bread which He held and
brake, “this is my body,” and of the contents of the Cup which
He commanded them to drink, “this is my blood,” or the New
Covenant in My blood—this link of connection between the Bread
and the Body, this manner of identification by which He gives us
the bread as His Body, is one of the secret things of God, and is
absolutely unknown to us, and as long as we continue human
beings, imperfect both in faith, love, knowledge, and intellect, must
be unknown to us; but though the secret of the mystery is un-
known, the purpose for which the Lord has ordained the Sacra-
ment which enshrines it is clearly revealed. It is that in the due
and faithful use of this Sacrament, we should realize the promise
which He gave to us in the most wonderful and mysterious dis-
course which He ever uttered; in which discourse He assures us
that if we eat His Flesh and drink His Blood, we shall have
eternal life, and He will raise us up at the last day; and that he
that eateth His Flesh and drinketh His Blood dwelleth in Christ,
and Christ in Him.

That the Eucharist is the means by which we can appropriate
to ourselves this promise, is clear from this, that unless we receive
His Flesh and Blood in it, there is no other means ordained by
which we can know that we receive such things at all. The promise
that in the reception of His Flesh and Blood, we shall receive theCuar. XXII.] THE CUP AFTER SUPPER. out

20 Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, ! This cup
Conse NG:

 

extraordinary benefits set forth in the discourse in John vi. is not
an ordinary promise—there is no other at all like it—no other even
remotely like it—for it is that we shall receive the highest benefits
which His Incarnation has brought within our reach, not through
partaking of His Spirit alone, but through partaking of His Flesh
—His Flesh and Blood; and this really means that we shall receive
these highest things through partaking of the lower part of His
human nature rather than of the higher part of the same; for the
lower part is flesh and blood, and the higher is spirit and intellect.

Again, unless the Eucharist be the means of the fulfilment of the
promise in John vi. we have the extraordinary and unaccountable
fact that Christ instituted His Sacrament in such terms as “‘ This is
my body,” “‘ This is my blood,” and had previously given the dis-
ciples no preparation by which they might receive such things
worthily, and with faith, and holy desire. Surely they, just as
much as we, required some previous knowledge, some definite
instruction, or a very Holy Thing seems: offered to those who
through want of due teaching cannot appreciate it.

‘‘ And he took bread.” This taking, being expressly mentioned
in each one of the four accounts, there must have been something
peculiarly solemn in His manner of doing it; so that it at once
arrested their attention.

“And gave thanks.’ In St. Matthew and St. Mark He is said
to have blessed it. And no doubt the ‘“‘ giving thanks” and the
“blessing ’’ were united. What the words which He used were
has not been recorded ; but if the Church has been guided by the
Holy Spirit in any one particular of her mode of celebrating this
most holy rite, it has been in the fact that she has adopted in all her
branches a form very much the same as that of our Consecration
Prayer, in which we recount, in a prayer before God, the words of
the Lord in instituting the Eucharist, and pray that we may par-
take of the benefits attached to the devout reception of so inexpres-
sibly Great and Holy a Thing as the Sacrament of His Body and
Blood.

‘And brake it.” In every one of the accounts this “‘ breaking
is expressly mentioned. By it, of course, He betokened that His
Body should, within a very short time, be bruised, and broken, and

»)558 THE NEW TESTAMENT IN MY BLOOD. [Sr. Luxe.

is the new testament in my blood, which is shed for you.

tortured, and slain upon the cross. But it far more than merely
betokened this; for in its fracture He solemnly and sacerdotally
surrendered His Body to be bruised and slain the next day. He
must thus surrender Himself, for no one could take His Life
from Him. He must lay it down of Himself; and now by this His
act and deed He gave His Body to be immolated on the cross.
This was His most priestly act. He acted as a Priest after the
Order of Melchizedec, who brought forth bread and wine; only
with this difference, that the act of Melchizedec was the type, and
the Act of the Lord was the Antitype—the act of Melchizedee, as
far as we know, ended with Abraham, the act of our Lord ended
with His own Death, and our eternal Life through that Death.

Tt has been remarked by Archdeacon Freeman that this fraction,
or breaking, has a higher position in our Liturgy than in any
other; for in our Liturgy alone does it occur in the consecration, as
it evidently did when our Lord first blessed or gave thanks,
whereas in most others it occurs more towards the conclusion, long
after consecration.

“And gave unto them, saying, This is my body which is given
for you.” It is to be remarked that St. Luke omits the words,
“Take eat,” but the use of bread is to be eaten, and so we must
understand when we read his account that the Lord said this ; just
as when we read St. Matthew’s account we must understand that
the Lord said, ‘‘ Do this in remembrance of me,” though we owe
the record of these latter words to St. Paul and St. Luke.

“Thisis my Body.” Does the Lord here institutea merely figura-
tive rite? Impossible, for the kingdom of God is not a kingdom of
figures, but of realities. The Mosaic institutions were shadows. If
God hath provided some better thing for us, this better thing must
be a system of realities. And this is the difference between the
signs of the Law and those of the Gospel. The ceremony and offer-
ings of the Law are bare signs, having no inward and spiritual grace.
The Sacraments of the Gospel are outward and visible signs of in-
ward and spiritual grace.

But is not the bread which the Lord brake a sign or figure?
Assuredly, but a sign or figure of what? Of something present, or
something absent? We believe that it is the sign, not of what 1sCuap, XXII] ABSENT OR PRESENT. 559

absent, but of what is present. We believe that the outward part
is the sign of the presence of the inward Part. There is no need of any
outward sign to assure us of the existence of the Body of Christ in
heaven, but there is need of an outward sign to assure us that we
can receive that Body now, whilst we live on earth.

Again, the bread and wine cannot be a sign of what is already
within us, or what is usually within us, through some other means.
How can the outward reception of anything assure us of what is
already within us. If there be any use in eating it is to bring that
which is without us, and which God designs for our nourishment,
within us, so that we should be strengthened and refreshed by it.

Again, the partaking of the consecrated Elements cannot be a
sign to assure us of some spiritual truths, such as that we must
each individually believe in Christ, and ‘“‘ assimilate” our part in
Him. The act of eating is not asermon about the need of taking
nourishment, but an act of taking as nourishment into ourselves
what such a sermon as John vi. says we must receive into ourselves,
if we would be truly united to Christ.

In this way we might go through all the subterfuges by which
men endeavour to get rid of the fact that the Sacrament is ordained
to make us partakers of the Body and Blood of Christ. One and
all they come to this, that it would have been better if Christ had
avoided the use of the terms. But we who believe Him to be the
Word and the Wisdom of God, believe Him to know all the needs
of our nature. We believe that He knows that one of these needs
is that we must partake of the elements of His lower nature, so that
through this we should receive the opposite of that which we re-
ceive through the nature—the flesh and blood of Adam. We wish
to receive His words without so spiritualizing them as to weaken
their meaning. We are afraid of any explanation, such as Tran-
substantiation, which turns the mystery into a miracle. We believe
that we have in the service which God’s providence has provided
for us in the Prayer Book the most ample recognition of the fact that
in the Eucharist we must expect to receive, and that we do receive,
nothing less than the Body and Blood of Christ, and for the pur-
poses which in His discourses in the synagogue He declared to be of
the utmost necessity, and we rest here, and are content.

‘‘ This do in remembrance of me.”’ These words are peculiar to
St. Luke and St. Paul. I mean the record of them: because the

Lord certainly said them when He instituted the Eucharist, though560 ANAMNESIS. [Sr. Luxe.

for some reason or other they were not in the original tradition
which is contained in the two first Gospels.

On their right understanding the whole theory of Eucharistic
worship depends. Let us first consider what those who first re-
ceived would, in all human probability, understand by the word
remembrance, or anamnesis; and then what they would under-

2?

stand by the word ‘‘do.’

The words, literally rendered, are, ‘Do this for my commemora-
tion,” or “for my memorial.” They mean something very much
more than, ‘“‘ When you do this remember me ;’ they mean some-
thing very much more than, “‘ Do this to remind yourselves of me,”
or “in order that you may not forget me.” They mean, do this in
order to make before God and the Church a solemn commemora-
tion or memorial of My Death. They mean, do this to show before
God the Sacrifice of My Death, and in your Church assemblies, as
the united body of Christ, to plead it on earth, and join yourselves
with My pleading of it in heaven. The word Anamnesis, except in
connection with the Eucharist in this place, and in 1 Cor. xXi., is
used but once in the New Testament, and that is in Hebrews x. 3:
“In these sacrifices there is a remembrance (anamnesis) again
made of sins once every year.” Now the Apostolic writer here
alludes to a sacrificial act of the Jewish high priest on the great
day of Atonement, which was the great sacrificial function of the
Jewish year, and was to be so exclusively before God that no man
was to be in the tabernacle when he performed it (Levit. xvi. 17).
In two other places in the Septuagint is the word anamnesis used
with respect to sacrifices, and in each of these it is expressly men-
tioned that the anamnesis is before God (Levit. xxiv. 7), ‘‘the incense
may be on the bread for a memorial, even an offering made by fire
unto the Lord,” and Numb. x. 10. So that when the Lord bid
them ‘‘ Do this for His Anamnesis,”’ He used a word which indicated
a very solemn sacrificial memorial, and not a private act of remind -
ing themselves, or one another.

Now this is very much intensified by the word which the Lord,
whether in Hebrew or in Greek, used for “‘do.” The word zovew
in the Septuagint, as well as the word mwy in the Hebrew Bible,
when used with reference to religious worship, signifies ‘‘ sacrifice
this,” or “offer this.” Thus Ps. Ixvi. 15, “I will offer (avoicw)
to thee burnt sacrifices of fatlings, with the incense of rams; I
will offer (xoujow) bullocks and goats.” Then, with respect to dailyCnn ed. | DO THIS. 561

Sacrifice, wow is a regular liturgical word. Thus, Levit. ix. Cs
** And Moses said to Aaron, Draw nigh to the altar, and offer (do,
moujoov) thy sin-offering ... and offer (do, zocor) the gifts of the
people.” Again (Exod. x. 25), “Thou shalt give us whole burnt-
offerings and sacrifices, which we will sacrifice (do, Toujoopnev) unto
the Lord our God.” I give some other instances in a note.?

But it may be asked, why should He say, ‘“‘ Offer this for my
anamnesis,” seeing that in outward form it differed altogether from
the sacrifices of the Jews? To which we answer, that He ordained
a Passover—a new Passover, in which the Paschal Lamb was Him-
self, and, through the consecrated elements of this Sacrament, Him-
self, as the Passover Lamb, was to be partaken of by all His Church
at all times and in every place. The same word was used with re-
spect to the celebration of the Passover as for other sacrifices, viz.,
the word zouiy, which the Lord here used. Thus (Numbers ix. 2),
‘* Let the children of Israel also keep (do, zovsirwoav) the Passover,”
&e. ‘On the fourteenth day of the first month at even, thou shalt
keep it (do, zoujoere) in its season,” &c. Thus the oldest Greek
father of whom we have any considerable remains, Justin Martyr,
who must have been born within seventy years after the death of
Christ, writes: “‘ The offering of the flour commanded to be
offered (zpocpepécOar) for persons cleansed from leprosy, was a type
of the offering of the bread of the Eucharist which our Lord Jesus
Christ gave command to offer (do, zovety) for amemorial (avduynow)
of the sufferings which He underwent for those whose souls are
cleansed from all iniquity ” (‘‘ Dialogue with Trypho,” chap. 41).

Thus Irenzus, who wrote a.p. 180: ‘‘ He took that created thing,
bread, and gave thanks, and said, ‘This is my body ;’ and the cup
likewise, which is part of that creation to which we belong, He
confessed to be His Blood, and taught the oblation of the New
Covenant, which the Church, receiving from the Apostles, offers to
God throughout all the world.”

In an appendix to my work, ‘‘ The One Offering,” I have given

1 «© Now this is that which thou shalt do (qoimoes) upon the altar, two lambs of the first
year day by day continually, One lamb thou shalt do (7. ¢., offer) in the morning, and
the second lamb thou shalt do (offer) in the evening.” (Lev. ix. 7.) Again, “‘ And the
priest of his sons that is anointed in his stead shall offer it ” (do it). (Ley. vi. 22.) ‘* And
ye shall do (é.¢., offer) that day when ye wave the sheaf, an he lamb without blemish.”
«« And they shali sacrifice (do) one kid of the goats for a sin offering. Again, in Ezekiel
xlvl. 12, 13-15, almost at the end of the prophetical dispensation, there is the same use of
poiein, or ‘ do,” for ‘‘ offering a sacrifice.”

0 O562 RIDLEY, MEDE, WESLEY. [Sz. Luxx.

extracts of similar significance from Clement of Rome, Tertullian,
Hippolytus, Origen, Cyprian, Oyril of Jerusalem, Ambrose, Jerome,
Augustine, and Chrysostom ; and amongst English divines from
Bishop Ridley, Bishop Andrews, Bishop Hall, Mede, and Bishop
Jeremy Taylor.

Bishop Ridley, for example, says, “As though our Unbloody
Sacrifice of the Church were any other than the sacrifice of praise
and thanksgiving, than a commemoration, a showing forth, and a
sacramental representation of that One only Bloody Sacrifice, offered.
up once for all.”

I will give one extract from Mede, the anti-papal expositor of
the Apocalypse, which, better than any other that I know,
sets forth the theory of the sacrificial Eucharistic Oblation. ‘‘ In-
stead, therefore, of the slaying of beasts and burning of incense,
whereby they called upon the name of God in the Old Testament,
the Fathers, I say, believed our Saviour ordained this Sacrament
of bread and wine as a rite whereby to give thanks, and make
supplication to His Father in His Name. The mystery of which
rite they took to be this: that as Christ, by presenting His Death
and Satisfaction to His Father, continually intercedes for us in
heaven (Rev. v. 6), so the Church on earth semblably approaches
the Throne of Grace by representing Christ to His Father in these
Holy Mysteries of His Death and Passion.”’

But no English divine has set forth this truth of Eucharistic
sacrificial worship better than Wesley in some of his sacramental
hymns. I will give two verses.

Hymn Cxvit.

‘Thou Lamb that sufferest on the tree,
And in this dreadful mystery

Still offerest up Thyself to God,
We cast us on Thy Sacrifice,
Wrapt in the sacred smoke arise,

And covered with the atoning Blood.”

And again—
OXXIUIT.

‘‘ By faith we see thy sufferings past

In this mysterious rite brought back,
And on Thy grand Oblation cast,

Its saving benefit partake.” 5

But what do we of the Church actually do? We do all that the
Lord did. We take the bread, we use all the words that we knowCaar. XXII.] THE CUP AFTER SUPPER. 563

were said by Him, we break, and we receive and give. We, in
fact, as the oldest Liturgy expresses it, “fulfil His Institution.”
And we do all this not in a sermon to the people, but in an act
of worship offered to God the Father.

20. “ Likewise also the cup after supper, saying, This cup is the
new testament in my blood.” ‘This is virtually the same as the
words recorded in the two first synoptics, “ This is my blood of
the new testament.” Only we gather from it the exceeding im-
portance of the chalice. It contains the Lord’s Blood, but this
Blood for the highest of purposes, our continuance in the New
Covenant. The contents of the cup as mere wine, or as mere
mixed wine, are ignored by the Lord. It is the Blood of the New
Covenant answering to the blood of the paschal lamb. The Pass-
over was a covenant ordinance. It was intended to assure each
Israelite who partook thereof that he continued in the covenant
that God made with Israel. The Lord also may allude to the
ratification of the covenant in Exod. xxiv. 8: “Behold the blood
of the covenant which the Lord hath made with you.”

But should this Blood be drunk, seeing that it was unlawful
under the old covenant to drink blood? Yes. ‘In the figure
(Exod. xxiv. 8), the blood of the victim was sprinkled externally
on the people, or at the Passover on the door posts of the door,
where they were assembled. But in the fulfilment, the Blood of
the Redeemer was to penetrate the inmost recesses of our being,
and hence was given to the Apostles to drink.”

The change from the words, ‘‘ My blood of the new covenant,”
into ‘The new covenant in my blood” in no way detracts from
the mystery of the sacramental presence of the Blood. For the
covenant either of the Old or New Testament was not in wine, but
in’ Blood. What is particularly emphasized by the Blood is for-
giveness. So that the Holy Sacrament is not only to the believer
a channel of strength and union in the Body of Christ, but to the
penitent an assurance of forgiveness. If he is in a contrite state of
heart, and receives in any effectual way the Blood of Christ, he
receives it for the forgiveness of his sins.

21. “ But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is with me
on the table.’’ This is the only sorrowful allusion which St. Luke
records that the Lord Himself made to the treachery of Judas. It
seems certain that it is intended to teach us that Judas had been
present at the Institution and received what the rest did, but
received it to his damnation; as Stier writes: ‘“‘ This hand, which564 A STRIFE AMONG THEM. [Sr. LuKE.

21 § “But, behold, the hand of him that betrayeth me is
m Ps.xi.9. with me on the table.

Matt. xxvi. 21,

Maran 22 =And truly the Son of man goeth, °as it

18. John xiii. :
a Nets WS determined : but woe unto that man by whom

24. 7
© Acts ii, 28. he is betrayed ! |
eae 93 » And they began to enquire among them-

p Matt. xxvi. : ; 3
52, John xii. selves, which of them 1t was that should do this

22, 25. :
thing.

q Mark ix. 34. 94. 4 4 And there was also a strife among them,
ch. ix. 46. A
which of them should be accounted the oreatest.

 

yesterday received the reward of treachery, and to-day dippeth
with me in the dish, receiveth the Bread and the Cup of Mystery.”

92. * And truly the Son of man goeth, as it was determined : but
woe unto that man,” &e. God, Who knows the end of everything
from the beginning, foresaw how the crimes of the Jews, and of
Judas, and of the chief priests and Pilate, would meet at this dread
time, and culminate in the crucifixion of the Lord, and He not only
allowed these things to take their course, but solemnly determined
and decreed that this exceeding wickedness should end in atone-
ment and salvation; but not the less did He determine to punish
the authors of all this wickedness, for the good which He brought
out of the evil in no way diminished its turpitude.

93. “ And they began to enquire among themselves, which of them
it was thatshould,” &c. This enquiry is evidently that which is de-
scribed in Matth. xxvi. 21, 25, where they said one after another, ‘* Is
+412” The matter is narrated in St. Luke somewhat out of its place.

94. “And there was also a strife among them, which of them
should be accounted the greatest.” It is scarcely possible to
suppose that this strife took place after they had received such a
lesson upon humility as the washing of their feet had taught them,
though Greswell places it after this abasement of the Lord. A
similar exhibition of desire of self-advancement is recorded in Mark
ix. 84, which the Lord had reproved by taking the little child and
setting him in the midst as a pattern to which they were to con-
form themselves. The words with which St. Luke introduces this
account are just those of one who was desirous of including in his
narrative whatever occurred about the time: “There was also a

strife,” &e.Cuar. XXII.] THE KINGS OF THE GENTILES. 565

25 "And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles
exercise lordship over them; and they that exer- a a
cise authority upon them are called benefactors. a

26 *But ye shall not be so: ‘but he that is ee 26.
greatest among you, let him be as the younger; «+ ch. ix, 4s,
and he that is chief, as he that doth serve.

27 “For whether is greater, he that sitteth at + ch. xii. 37.
meat, or he that serveth? is not he that sitteth at
meat’? but *I am among you as he that serveth, * Matt. xx. 28.

John xiii. 13,
AS nlite

 

25. *‘ And he said unto them, The kings of the Gentiles exercise
lordship,” &¢. I have commented so fully upon this in my notes
on Mark x. 42-44 that I must refer the reader to that place: suffice
it to say that here, as well as there, the spirit of all church rule is
described as to what it is not, and as to what it is. It is not to be
the rule of the earthly king, much less of such Gentile sovereigns
as were then lording it over the world; even though such persons
may call themselves, or insist upon being called, ‘‘ benefactors.”
Their rule, at the best, was a rule of mere power—mere will—mere
command—whereas the Christian rule was to be that of a servant
who, if he be called upon by the- providence of God, or by the voice
of the Church, to exercise authority or discipline, must do it in the
spirit, not of a master, but of a servant—knowing that all over whom
he exercises rule are his equals in Christ, perhaps many among
them his superiors in piety, in good works, in grace, and humility.

26. ‘‘ He that is greatest [or greater] among you let him,” &c.
The Lord here recognizes that some must be greater—some must
be chief. And in every well ordered community it must be so.
There must be either the lead of those who are appointed, or there
must be the lead of heads of parties, who rise into their positions
by powers of debate, and the arts by which men obtain and keep
together majorities. The former has been the practice of the
Catholic Church—the latter of bodies extraneous to her.

Each of these systems—indeed, any system worked by human
beings—must present temptations to ambition and self-seeking ; and
there is but one remedy, the mind of Christ worked in us by His
Spirit, and that mind we have in what follows.

27. ** For whether is greater, he that sitteth at meat, or he that
serveth .... 1 am among you as he that serveth.” The life of566 IN MY TEMPTATIONS. (Sr. Luxe.

 

28 Ye are they which have continued with me in Ymy
y Heb. iv. 15. temptations.

28. «Ye are they.” ‘‘ But ye are they ” (Revisers) ; (Geis de) 5 Vos autem estis (Vulg.).

the Son of God was one of uninterrupted service: serving God so
that He could say, “My meat and drink is to do the will of him
that sent me;” serving man, always teaching, always healing,
journeying, having no settled home, no servant—always, as one may
say, at the beck and call of everyone who needed His help—living
on the bounty of others—carefully abstaining from all mere human
precedence, power, or judgeship, [“‘ man, who made me aruler and a
judge over you ?”? |—serving His Own, His chosen—always on the
watch for opportunities of instructing them, always bearing with
them, always acting towards them as a shepherd, always watching
them as a nurse would watch a wayward child—and now at this
time actually about to demean Himself to do a menial office for
them, for I cannot but think that the feet washing takes place at
this time.

One writes: “These expressions, ‘ He that sitteth at meat,’ i Ete
that serveth,’ leave no doubt that the fact of the feet washing was
the occasion of this saying.” But may not this saying have equally
been the occasion of the feet washing? He said the words, “ Tam
among you as he that serveth,” and to enforce this He began
literally to act as a servant.

98, 29. “Ye are they which have continued with mein my temp-
tations. And I appoint,” &c. The connecting thought seems to be
something of this kind. ‘‘I have spoken to you as if your highest
glory is to be servants, as I myself came not to be served, but to
serve ; but you are not to understand this, as if you will be ulti-
mately without any reward of glory and honour. On the contrary
in My kingdom ye shall have glory next to Mine.”

‘‘Ye are they which have continued with mein my temptations.”
‘Ye have continued steadfast to Me, notwithstanding my rejection
by the rulers of your nation and the heads of your religion.” It
required no small grace to accept the Messiah under the lowly
guise in which He first appeared, and to adhere to Him though He
constantly and systematically destroyed every Messianic hope which
the worldlings of his people so dearly cherished. He had refused
all worldly praise and honour. He had even gone so far as to sayCuap. XXI.] I APPOINT UNTO YOU A KINGDOM. 567

29 And ’I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father
hath appointed unto me; “ Matt. xxiv,
30 That *ye may eat and drink at my table in 2 Cor. eo .
my kingdom, °and sit on thrones judging the eee
twelve tribes of Israel. Speer
b Ps. xlix, 14:
Matt. xix. 28.
I Comiw 2e
Rev. iii, 21.
that no true believer in Himself could desire it when He asked,
‘“ How can ye believe, who receive honour one from another, and
seek not the honour which cometh from God only ? ”

‘And I appoint unto you a kingdom, as my Father,” &c. As He
would be invested with visible glory and majesty, such as the
universe had never seen, so they should share His glory.

30. “ That ye may eat and drink at my table in my kingdom,

- - twelve tribes of Israel.” What is the meaning of this
promise, which is the same as that in Matth. xix. 28? Do the
thrones mean actual thrones ? What is implied in the “judging ?”
Are the twelve tribes the literal, or the spiritual Israel? Now in
the first place we must remember that if the Lord meant to reassure
His Apostles that they should not be without a visible and tangible
reward, the words that He used betoken the highest glory which in
their then state of mind they could conceive. If He had given
them simply spiritual promises, they would not have understood
them in the least. They would have been no promises to them.
But that they should eat and drink at the table of the Messiah
Himself, and that they should each one rule as a judge over a tribe,
and be the Patriarchs of the glorified Israel—this was beyond their
fondest imagination. JI have no doubt whatever that now in the
unseen world, as well as in the kingdom of glory to be revealed at
the Second Advent, the Apostles, as such, have a place, and power,
and authority, which none (except St. Paul) will share with them.
How far this is connected with the spirits of the justified Israel, the
sealed out of the twelve literal tribes, is hidden from us. Under
what form or circumstances the restoration of God’s ancient people,
the ten tribes now lost, will take place, so that they should be
visibly ruled by these twelve first followers of the Lord, is not
revealed ; but the promise seems so definite as to the Apostles on the
one side, and the tribes on the other, that our safest and humblest
course is take it literally. We must remember that He Who made568 I HAVE PRAYED FOR THEE. (Sr. Luke.

31 F And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, ° Satan

c1Pet.v.8. hath desired to have you, that he may “sift you as

d Amos ix. 9.
wheat:

e John xvii. 9, 32 But °I have prayed for thee, that thy faith
nis 16

31. “And the Lord said.” So &, A., D., Ge See AG AG lls all later Uncials, almost
all Cursives, old Latin, Vulg.; but B., L., T., Sah., Copt., omit the words.

this promise has all time at His disposal and all power at His
command—that the first notice of His first Advent is that ‘‘ God
shall give to him the throne of his father David,” and that on His
Cross was the title, “‘ The King of the Jews.” We believe that the
promise will be fulfilled, and also more than fulfilled; but how,
when, where, we know not.

31. “And the Lord said, Simon, Simon, behold, Satan hath
desired to have you, that,” &e. It is supposed that on this evening
our Lord warned St. Peter no less than three times. The first in-
stance being that recorded in John xiii. 36-38. When Peter said,
“Why cannot I follow thee now? I will lay down my life for thy
sake.” The second that mentioned here by St. Luke, which, accord-
ing to our Evangelist, took place in the same chamber as that in
which He had instituted the Eucharist. The third in Matth. xxvi.
34, when they were on their way to the Mount of Olives. No
warnings could have been more direct: “‘ Verily I say unto thee,”
“Verily, verily, Isay unto thee,” “‘ I tell thee, Peter.” No warnings
could have been more circumstantial: ‘‘ The cock shall not crow,”’
‘The cock shall not crow this day,” “‘ This night before the cock
crow.” And yet he heeded it not, he remembered it not, he
believed it not. Marvellous that men can believe in Christ, and
yet not believe very express words of His, and yet it is so!

‘“‘ Satan hath desired to have you,” %.e., the twelve, ‘‘ that he may
sift you as wheat.” ‘‘Satan asks the right of putting the twelve to
the proof; and he takes upon himself over against God, as formerly
in relation to Job, to prove that, at bottom, the best of the disciples
is but a Judas.”

‘But I have prayed for thee.” Why is it that St. Peter is
prayed for in particular? ‘(I have prayed for thee, that thy faith
fail not.’ It seems as if Satan was not allowed to sift the rest, at
least as he sifted Simon. They all fled, but they kept out of the
way of temptation, which Peter did not. Peter then, as their repre-Cuar. XXII.]

STRENGTHEN

 

     

THY BRETHREN. 569

fail not: ‘and when thou art converted, strengthen thy

brethren.

DPS elie:
John xxi. 15,

33 And he said unto him, Lord, I am ready to 16, 17.
go with thee, both into prison, and to death.

32. “‘And when thou art converted.”
again, stablish thy brethren ” (Revisers).

*“And do thou, when once thou hast turned

sentative, was sifted as wheat, and it was because the prayer of the
Lord prevailed so that, in the depth of His own distress, He might
turn and give Peter the saving look, that Peter’s faith failed not. It
was like the hand of the Lord stretched out once before on the sea

just in time.

It looked him into repentance, and that repentance

was both the revival, and the sign of the faith which yet survived

in him.

‘When thou art converted ’—7.e., when thy miserable cowardice,
and thy disregard of My clearest warnings, and thy want of sym-
pathy with Me in the hour of My distress, are turned into deep and
bitter repentance, with tears and shame, then “strengthen thy

brethren.”

This ‘‘ strengthen thy brethren” seems to refer to his brother
Apostles, between the time of the Lord’s Death and His Resurrec-
tion. It was he that had confessed the good confession, that Jesus

was the Christ, the Son of the living God.

If that faith failed not,

he might with some words of consolation unknown to us be able to
revive or keep alive the failing faith of the Hleven—that all was not
lost, and that God might yet work out His purposes through the
power of Christ in heaven ; for though he did not realize the Resur-
rection he certainly believed that the Lord’s glorified Spirit might
wield the power of God, and establish His kingdom.

33, 34. ‘‘ And hesaid unto him, Lord, I am ready to go with thee,

both into prison, and to death .

99

. . thrice deny that thou knowest

me.’ The stronger man believes himself to be, the weaker he is,
for his promising himself a great deal from his own strength

is a sign that God has already left him to himself.

This Apostle

thought that the love he had for his Master would be proof against
every temptation, and it was the love of his own life which prevailed

and caused him to fall.

‘¢ The cock shall not crow this day ’’—the day, of course, begin-570 I TELL THEE, PETER. [Sr. Luxe.

84 And he said, I tell thee, Peter, the cock shall not

: ee ss crow this day, before that thou shalt thrice deny
30. John xiii. that thou knowest me.

38.

h Matt. x. 9. 85 h And he said unto them, When I sent you
ch. ix. 3. & : : : i

x. 4, without purse, and scrip, and shoes, lacked ye any

thing? And they said, Nothing.

26 Then said he unto them, But now, he that hath a
purse, let him take zt, and likewise his scrip: and he that
hath no sword, let him sell his garment, and buy one.

ning at six o’clock that evening. Thus St. Mark adds the words,
“this day, even in this night.”

35, 36. “And he said unto them, When I sent you without purse
... Nothing ... sell his garment, and buy one.” These words
are peculiar to St. Luke, and they are very difficult, for they seem
to intimate that the Apostles are not to rely upon the power of
Christ for the supply of their temporal wants as they had done in
time past; and that besides this they must rely on ordinary human
means, as the sword, for their defence. They are even to sell their
garments to buy one; and yet they are not to use the sword when
bought. “Put up thy sword into his sheath, for all they that take
the sword shall perish by the sword.”

Some, as Theophylact, or those referred to by him, seem to think
that at least what the Lord says about swords is ironical. “ But
some say that our Lord said, ‘It 1s enough,’ ironically, as if He
said, ‘Since there are two swords, they will amply suffice against
so large a multitude as is about to attack us.’ ”

Mr. Blunt explains the words about the purse and scrip, as if
they had only a temporary application to the time between the
Lord’s Death and His Ascension. He was about to be taken from
them, and they were for a time to be left to themselves. It was
this necessity of providing for themselves which led Simon Peter to
the resolution, “I go a fishing,” and to others of the Apostles say-
ing, ‘‘ We also go with thee.” He takes, however, no notice of our
Lord’s words about the sword. I cannot help taking it to be a
prophecy that, on His departure, they would enter upon a different
outward life. Hitherto, for instance, in their journeyings they had
taken no provision whatsoever, either in money or food; now theyCuar. XXII] HERE ARE TWO SWORDS. ot

37 For I Say unto you, that this that is written must yet
be accomplished in me, ‘And he was reckoned its. tii. 1.
among the transgressors: for the things con- en ee
cerning me have an end.

38 And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords.
And he said unto them, It is enough.

were to equip themselves for their journeys. They were to be sup-
ported, not by the bounty of those with whom they lodged, but with
what was supplied them by the Church: for it would be best that
at first, at least, they should take nothing from the Gentiles
amongst whom they preached. If need be, they were even to work
with their hands (Acts xviii. 3). Still, at the same time, as before,
they were to amass no property, and to live lives cf faith.

With respect to the mention of the sword, it has been taken as if
His words meant that they were to resort to all means of self
defence short of the sword, which the Lord certainly forbad ; but
this is exceedingly unsatisfactory. It seems not intended to be
taken literally at all, but to be an intimation of coming persecutions,
which would destroy some of them, if not all—from which persecu-
tions they had hitherto been shielded by the Lord’s power.

37. “For I say unto you, that this that is written . .. have an
end.” This betokened the fearful rapidity with which the final
stroke would come upon Himself and them. He was now to be
reckoned among the transgressors. He was to be treated by the
chief priests as if He were a blasphemer; by Pilate, whilst the
same Pilate asserted His faultlessness, as if He were a rebel; and
He was to be literally crucified between two transgressors who
deserved punishment.

It is to be remarked that the Lord here claims the great Messianic
prophesy of Isaiah liii., as referring to Himself. If He was the One
Who was to be reckoned with the transgressors, then He was
equally the One Who was to ‘‘bear the sins of many,” and in
Whose hand ‘‘the pleasure of the Lord should prosper.”

38. ‘‘And they said, Lord, behold, here are two swords.” It ig
an interesting question, had they at once acted literally on the
Lord’s advice, and gone out and purchased these swords, or were
they already in their possession? It seems strange that the latter
should have been the case; but very probably, being much struck with52 THE MOUNT OF OLIVES. (Sr. Luxe.

39 | * And he came out, and |! went, as he was wont, to

pues the mount of Olives; and his disciples also fol-
7 ar.

xiy. 82. John |owed him.
Vitek.

l ch, xxi. 37. 40 ™And when he was at the place, he said
m Matt. vi. 13.

& xxvi. 41.

Mark xiy. 38. aa ee
ver. 46.

the prophesies of the Lord, respecting His speedy apprehension and
betrayal, they had secretly purchased these two weapons. It must
have been brought about by the providence of God, for it was with
one of these that St. Peter nearly killed the servant of the high
priest, and so enabled the Lord to demonstrate to His enemies that
His kingdom was not of this world, and also to show those who were
come to capture Him His supernatural and Divine power and
goodness, so that they might have no excuse.

“Tt is enough.” These words have been taken to mean, “I have
said enough. Let us now go hence”’ (John xiv. 31, “‘ Arise, let us
go hence”); or they may be said somewhat ironically, “Two
swords are, indeed, sufficient for any use which you can make of
such weapons.”

39. “And he came out, and went, as he was wont, to the mount
of Olives,” &c. ‘‘As he was wont.” There is here evidently a re-
ference to what is written in xxi. 87, “‘In the day time he was
teaching in the temple, and at night he went out and abode in the
Mount that is called the Mount of Olives.”

40. “And when he was at the place, he said unto them, Pray
that ye enter not into temptation.” The place, evidently Geth-
semane, is alluded to by our Evangelist as a place well known.

We now come to the account of the Agony. St. Luke is here
very compendious. He says nothing about the three disciples,
whom the Lord “took with Him” (Matth. xxvi. 37). Whereas
St. Matthew states that the Lord prayed three times, he only men-
tions one prayer. Whereas St. Matthew mentions three awaken-
ings of the disciples, St. Luke only has one. And yet St. Luke
gives some most precious additions to what we get from the other
Synoptics. It is to him that we owe the name by which this
awful passage in the Lord’s life is known, for St. Luke alone
names it as “agony,” ‘Being in an agony.” He alone mentions
the strengthening by the angel, and the sweat of blood.

I have commented so fully upon the cause, so far as we mayCuar. XXIL] ENTER NOT INTO TEMPTATION. DKS

unto them, Pray that ye enter not into temptation.

 

reverently surmise it, of this mysterious and fearful feature in the
Lord’s Passion in my notes on St. Matthew and St. Mark, that I
can only now briefly summarise what I have there written.

First then, our Lord had perfectly in His foreknowledge, not
only the physical and mental sorrows which were shortly to come
upon Him, but the extraordinary wickedness of the human agents
of the evil one in bringing this about. He had perfectly in His
mind the treachery of Judas, all that led to it, and all its fearful
consequences in the loss of his soul, and what is implied in the
words, ‘‘Good were it for that man if he had never been born!”
He had perfectly in His foreknowledge the extraordinary wicked-
ness and disregard of justice of the chief priests, who were in His
eyes the chief ministers of a religion which, in His pre-existent
state, He Himself had ordained, and which was then the only reli-
gion on the face of the earth in which God could be purely and
holily worshipped. He had perfectly before him the prostitution
of justice and kingly power in the person of Pilate. He had per-
fectly before Him the cruelty and blasphemy of all the subordinate
agents. His holy soul realized, as our polluted souls cannot, the
iniquity of it all—and above all, how it was called out and inten-
sified by His own power and holiness, according to His own words,
‘If I had not come and spoken to them, they had not had sin. If
I had not done among them the works which none other man did,
they had not had sin; but now have they both seen and hated
both me and my Father” (John xy. 22, 24).

And may there not have been present vividly before Him the
ruin and scattering of His own nation and people, which would
be the punishment of their sin in rejecting and crucifying Him ?
These I have considered in my notes on St. Matthew.

Then, in my commentary on St. Mark, I have noticed how our
Lord alone of all men knew the real nature of death, as the oppo-
site to that Life which was inherent in Himself as One to Whom the
Father had granted to have Life in Himself. There is something
exceedingly mysterious about death, putting out of the question any
pains and agonies. Itis in human beings the penalty of sin. It is
reckoned in the Law of God, which must give us a true account of
matters, not only as a painful, but as an unclean thing.

All these, which must have been fully in the Lord’s conscious-574 REMOVE THIS CUP FROM ME. (Sr. Luxe.

4] "And he was withdrawn from them about a stone’s

n Matt. xxvi. cast, and kneeled down, and prayed,

39. Mark xiy. : an : Aol

35. 42 Saying, Father, if thou be + willing, remove
+ Gr. willing this cup from me: nevertheless * not my will, but

5

o John v.30. thine, be done.
& vi. 38.

ness, were, we are sure, NO small part of the extreme bitterness
of His cup, in addition to what is implied in such assertions of the
Spirit as “God made him, who knew no sin, to be sin for us.”
‘The Lord hath laid on him the iniquity of us all.” “ He him-
self bare our sins in his own body on the tree.”

‘Pray that ye enter not into temptation.” This has been under-
stood by some to mean “ pray that ye enter into temptation so as
not to yield to it.” But may it not, looking to the extreme frailty
of human nature, rather mean ‘‘ Pray that ye be not tempted?” It
is, I think, our duty to desire not to be tempted, to shun all near-
ness of evil, such as is implied in temptation.

41. And he was withdrawn from them about a stone’s cast, and
kneeled down, and prayed.” ‘‘He was withdrawn.” The word
withdrawn is much stronger in the Greek (aveordoOm) and also in

the Latin version (avulsus est), and perhaps implies some involun-

tary impulse of extreme grief, as in our Lord’s temptations after
His Baptism, of which St. Mark says, “ The Spirit driveth Him into
the wilderness.” It is as if He was dragged away by anguish.

“And kneeled down and prayed.’ He kneeled down at first,
but afterwards, according to St. Matthew, ‘‘ He fell on His face and
prayed, and Mark, ‘“‘ He fell on the ground and prayed.” “ Thus
He Who bore our sicknesses and interceded for us, bent His knee
in prayer, by reason of the man which He had assumed, giving as
an example, that we ought not to exalt ourselves at the time of
prayer, but in all things be conformed to humility.” (Greg. Nyss. in
Cat. Aurea.)

42. “‘ Saying, Father, if thou be willing .. . . not my will, but
thine, be done.” If the Lord has a perfect human nature, He must
have a perfect will, which, of necessity, shrinks from those things,

such as pain, suffering, and death, which tend to the dissolution of
that nature; for, for this purpose as well as others, God has
endowed human nature with an intelligent, reasonable will. Here
then that will shows itself, but then it no sooner shows itself, but itCuav. XXIL] AN ANGEL STRENGTHENING HIM. 575

43 And there appeared ?an angel unto him from heaven,

strengthening him. P Matt. iv. 11.

43. “This and the next verse are contained in the vest majority of MSS, and versions,
iN, CUS HG. bie ke he Vien Oe Ue X., A, and most Cursives. They are also con-
tained, but marked with asterisks, in H., S., V., A, and five Cursives (24, 36, 161, 166,
274). InT and four or five Cursives they are obelized. They are contained in all Syriac
versions, and in old Latin (a, b, ¢, e, Liou ee eg) sandethe Vulgate. They are dis-
tinctly alluded to by Justin Martyr and Ireneus, They are omitted in A., B., R., T, 124,
in the Memphitic, and in some Thebaic and Armenian Codices, and in f of the old Latin,
Epiphanius says that they were in his time omitted by the Orthodox as derogatory to our
Lord’s Divine dignity. The preponderance of authorities in their favour is immense,

submits to the higher Will of the Father, which the Eternal Son
came into the world to fulfil. Ifthe Lord had been without a human
will which shrinks from suffering and death, there would have
been no virtue in His sufferings. If the Lord had had a will which
asserted itself against the will of God, then He would have been like
the rest of our fallen race, and could not have redeemed us; but
He had a Will which shrunk from death, and yet in the very act of
shrinking submitted to the Highest—the Divine Will. And this it
was which gave His sufferings and Death their redeeming virtue.
This, I need not say, is written also for our sakes, to show us that
there is no sin in having a natural human will which may shrink
from what God sees to be in store for it, if we, at the same time,
say with all our hearts, ‘‘ Thy will be done.”

43. And there appeared an angel unto him from heaven,
strengthening him.” This wonderful place has a twofold signifi-
cance. It teaches us our Lord’s true humanity, and it teaches us
the numberless ways in which God may make use of the angels to
execute His purposes.

1. Our Lord’s true humanity. The angels are ministering spirits
sent forth to minister to those who shall be heirs of salvation. Our
Lord then, by becoming man, was made a little lower than the
angels, and so humbled Himself to receive good offices at their
hands. Thus, after His long fast at the time of His temptation,
angels came and ministered unto him. And now, in the extremity
of His agony, God strengthens Him for the coming conflict, not
directly from Himself, but mediately through the intervention of
an angel.

2. We are taught, secondly, that there can be no limits to the
employment of these ministering spirits in executing the purposes576 THE AGONY. [Sr. Luke.

 

44% And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly :
a John xii. 27, and his sweat was as it were great drops of
Draven ;
blood falling down to the ground.

of God. Nothing can be conceived more intimate than the union
betwixt God and His Son. If then God strengthened His Son by
an angel, what does He not do at the hands of angels? What
natural law may be exempt from their working and control? What
special providence which may not be altogether brought about by
them? What movement of men’s minds may they not shape and
direct? Indeed, the Book of the Revelations teaches that the whole
course of the world is, under God and Christ, administered by them.
For nothing can come up to this, that God strengthened the human
nature of His own Son by an angel.

But how did the angel strengthen the Lord? In what way, or
under what form, did he infuse strength into Him? I cannot
think that the angel infused spiritual strength into the Lord by
presenting to His mind arguments and reasons for trust in God. I
know that this is held by many Catholic commentators, as Corne-
lius 2 Lapide and I. Williams, but it seems to me incredible. For
did not the bloody sweat which took place at the time of the ap-
pearance of the angel, or immediately after it, betoken an action of
the soul or spirit on the body, which must have been followed by
such a prostration as would seem to be the precursor of its dissolu-
tion? The Lord’s redeeming work upon which He was now
entering, required physical strength as well as spiritual; and this
physical strength the angel was sent by God to infuse, in some
way unknown tous. This seems to me the more reverent way of
regarding this awfully mysterious matter.

44. “And being in an agony he prayed more earnestly : and his
sweat was asit were,” &c. Extreme agony, through fear or mental
conflict, has brought about this sweat of blood in others, besides our
Saviour. Thus Maldonatus speaks of having heard from those
who had seen or known him, of a man at Paris in robust health,
who, when he heard that he was condemned to death, sweat blood.
And Thuanus (quoted in Notes by F. M.), narrates of the governor
of Monte Maro, treacherously decoyed by Maggi and the bastard of
Saluces, and menaced with death for refusing to betray his trust,
that it was noticed that he was so shaken in mind with vehementCuar, XXII] WHY SLEEP YE ? 577

45 And when he rose up from prayer, and was come to his
disciples, he found them sleeping for sorrow,

46 And said unto them, Why sleep ye? rise and * pray,
lest ye enter into temptation. r ver. 40.

 

fear of so unworthy a death, that he poured forth a bloody sweat
from his whole body. (Thuanus, ix. 1.)

This bloody sweat was the outward visible sign of a conflict in
the Saviour’s soul, intense beyond conception, and so the Church
mentions it before the Lord in the deprecations in her Litany:
** By thine Agony and bloody Sweat—Good Lord, deliver us.”

This account of the appearance of the angel and the Bloody
Sweat was, strange to say, distasteful to some calling themselves
orthodox, and so they had the audacity to remove it from certain
MSS. of the fourth century, though it is quoted by two of the very
earliest Fathers, Justin Martyr and Ireneus, in the second century.

St. Ambrose commences a passage of wonderful power and
sweetness with a reference to this unworthy fear of the orthodox:
‘*Many are shocked at this place, who turn the sorrows of the
Saviour to an argument of inherent weakness from the beginning,
rather than taken upon Him for the time. But I am so far from
considering it a thing to be excused, that I never more admire His
mercy and majesty : for He would have conferred less upon me had
He not taken upon Him my feelings. For He took upon Him my
sorrow, that upon me He might bestow His joy. With confidence,
therefore, I name His sadness, because I preach His cross. He
must needs then have undergone affliction that He might conquer.
For they have no praise of fortitude whose wounds have produced
stupor rather than pain. He instructs us, therefore, how we should
conquer death, and what is far greater, the anguish of coming
death.” (Ambrose in Cat. Aurea.)

45, 46. ‘And when he rose up from prayer.... enter into
temptation.” Sleeping forsorrow. St. Luke is the only one of the
Evangelists who gives this reason, indeed excuse, for the sleep of

the apostles ; 7.e., of course, of the three. It was not in the tradition,

 

1 The passage from Aristotle quoted by Alford is not at all to the
point, as it describes the effect of disease. And the same also may
be said of the fatal illness of Charles IX. of France.

PP578 JUDAS, ONE OF THE TWELVE. (Sr. Luxe.

47 © And while he yet spake, sbehold a multitude, and he
s Matt. xxvi. that was called Judas, one of the twelve, went

47, Mark : us
“i: 43, John before them, and drew near uuto Jesus to kiss
xviii. 3. :

him.

48 But Jesus said unto him, Judas, betrayest thou the
Son of man with a kiss?

49 When they which were about him saw what would
follow, they said unto him, Lord, shall we smite with the
sword ?

t Matt. xxvi. 50 4 And tone of them smote the servant of
ire gona vie the high priest, and cut off his right ear.
s 5] And Jesus answered and said, Suffer ye

thus far. And he touched his ear, and healed him.

 

and St. Mark, who wrote what St. Peter preached, could hardly
have given it. It may have come to St. Luke from the Highest
Source.

47, 48. ‘And while he yet spake.... betrayest thou the Son of
man with a kiss?’? No doubt Judas came forward far in the front,
and being one of the twelve, would be supposed to be a friend, and
would not strike those about the Lord with fear, and so there would
be neither resistance nor flight till the multitude had had the person
of the Lord clearly indicated to them.

“ Judas, betrayest thou”? And the Lord gives him his proper
name, which was rather like one lamenting and recalling him, than
one provoked to anger. (Chrysostom.)

He says, Betrayest thou with a kiss ? that is, dost thou inflict a
wound with the pledge of love? with the instruments of peace dost
thou impose death? (Ambrose. )

49-51. ‘“‘ When they which were about him.... touched his ear,
and healed him.” St. Luke alone records that they asked the
question, shall we smite? From this we cannot but gather that he
got the account from one present. It is true he gives neither the
name of Peter, or of the servant, or any of the sayings of the Lord
(Matth. xxvi. 52, 54, John xviii. 11), to which the incident gave rise,
and yet St. Luke alone gives the miracle which followed.

“Suffer ye thus far.” More than one meaning has been given
to these words. They have been supposed to have been spoken asCuar. XXII.] THE POWER OF DARKNESS. oe

02 “Then Jesus said unto the chief priests, and captains of
the temple, and the elders, which were come to u Matt. xvi,
him, Be ye come out, as against a thief, with ae
swords and staves?

53 When I was daily with you in the temple, ye stretched
forth no hands against me: *but this is your * John xii.27.

hour, and the power of darkness.

 

a preliminary to the healing. Our Lord had just been seized and
was being held fast, and so could not touch the wounded man, as
He was wont to do when He performed miracles on the bodies of
men—and so He asked that His hand might be allowed to be set
free for a moment, in order that He might touch the ear, and so
show that the healing proceeded from Him Whom they were
treating with such indignity. Or they may have been spoken to
the disciples with a view to restrain them from further violence.
Thus Godet: ‘‘ Stop there; strike no such second blow; this one is
quite enough.’ This act of violence compromised the Lord’s cause.
If it had gone further He could hardly have said to Pilate, “ If my
kingdom were of this world, then would my servants fight.” So it
was needful not only that He should compel his ardent follower to
sheathe the sword, but also that He should restore the servant’s
ear ; thereby showing that the act of violence was done in direct
opposition to His will. It is also suggested that they were ad-
dressed to the servants and officers, that they should not visit His
followers with punishment for this one act, as its ill effects would
be instantly remedied.

52, 538. ‘Then said Jesus unto the chief priests, .... your hour,
and the power of darkness.” St. Luke alone mentions the presence
of ‘chief priests’’—of course not Annas, or Caiaphas, but some of
the heads of the courses. Their presence shows how thoroughly
they were alarmed at the growing influence of the Lord, so much
so that more than one of them accompanied the band of men and
officers to see that there was no slackness in doing their work.

‘‘ Against a thief.” The Lord felt deeply the degradation of the
proceedings taken against Him. His miracles, His teaching, His
innocence of life, His influence, were all ignored, He was treated as
a common criminal, ‘‘ He was numbered with the transgressors.”
‘‘ This is your hour, and the power of darkness.” What a fearful580 PETER SAT DOWN AMONG THEM. [Sv. Luxe.

544 Then took they him, and led him, and brought
y Matt.xxvi. him into the high priest’s house. And Peter
A followed afar off.

z Matt. xxvi.

58. John xvili. 55) © And when they had kindled a fire m the

ar nae midst of the hall, and were set down. together,
eee 1V.

66. John xviii, Peter sat down among them.

7, 18.
7 %@ But a certain maid beheld him as he sat
by the fire, and earnestly looked upon him, and said, This

man was also with him.

 

55. “Hall.” “Court” (Revisers).
«« Among them,” or, ‘‘ in the midst.
other Uncials as in Rec. Text.

» QoB., L., T., but all other authorities, 8, A., all

thing that it could be said of any human beings that they were so
in league with Satan as that their hour was his. This is peculiar
to St. Luke, who says nothing of the flight of the Apostles.

54-60. “Then took they him, and led him... Peter followed
afar off . . . the cock crew.” Rather, “they seized him, and led
him away.” It may be well to remind the reader of the events of
this fearful night in their order. First of all (John xviii. 13), they led
Him to the house of Annas, and this was done, as T have said in my
notes on St. John, to give a show of legality to the proceedings: for
Annas must have been the real high priest. At the house of Annas
nothing took place except to send Him bound to Caiaphas. At
the palace of Caiaphas was the first examination, evidence was
taken, and the Lord was condemned; but His actual legal con-
demnation took place in the morning, as soon as it was day, at a
fuller and more formal meeting. At the house of Caiaphas the
denials by Peter occurred.

St. Luke gives us nothing whatsoever of the trial in the night
before Caiaphas, but mentions the insults which the Lord received.
His account is wholly taken up with the denials of Peter.

The first denial was to a maid of the high priest (Matth. xxvi.
69, 70, Mark xiv. 67, 68, Luke xxii. 56,57). From St. John we
learn that she was the porteress (John xviii. 17).

In the account of the second denial there is apparently a discre-
pancy between St. Luke and the two first Synoptics, for whereas in
St. Matthew and St. Mark it is a female servant, in St. Luke it is a
man (érepoc).Cuar. XXII] I KNOW HIM NOT. ost

57 And he denied him, saying, Woman, I know him not.
58 >And after a little while another saw him, » Matt. xxvi,
; : lee k xiv.
and said, Thou art also of them. And Peter said, a John svi

Man, I am not. oe

59 °And about the space of one hour after ce
another confidently affirmed, saying, Of a truth a John xviii.
this fellow also was with him: for he is a
Galilean.

60 And Peter said, Man, I know not what thou sayest.

And immediately, while he yet spake, the cock crew.

 

57. ‘‘And he denied him.” So A., D., E., G@., H., U, V, a, A, most Cursives, old Latin
Cd), Vulg., Syriac. ‘‘ Him” omitted by &, B., K., L., M., 8., T., XII., above forty
Cursives, old Latin (a, b, c, f, 1), Sah., Copt., Syriac (Cureton and Schaaf), Arm., th.

In the account of the third there is no real discrepancy. St.
Matthew and St. Mark make the denial to be made to them that
stood by; St. Luke to another, a male (d\\oc). And with St. Luke
St. John agrees, and describes the servant as a kinsman of him
whose ear Peter cut off. If several were standing by, it is most
probable that one would take the lead in accusing Peter.

Respecting the discrepancies between the accounts, and the im-
possibility of completely reconciling them, I have commented in
my notes on St. Matthew’s history, and shown that we cannot have
four independent accounts of a transaction of such a sort as this was
without discrepancies. If there were no discrepancies, the Evan-
gelists must have compared notes, and the account would conse-
quently be deprived of very much of its value, for it would be then
one carefully prepared narrative, instead of four natural ones.

“The difficulties of reconciling the various narratives of the

denials have been indefinitely increased by adhering to the absurd
and unnatural supposition, that in a crowd of menials only one
spoke at a time; that they spoke only to Peter, or must all be
assumed to speak only to him; that each denial on the part of Peter
consisted of but one sentence. Whereas we have only to imagine a
scene in which a single person is beset and worried by perhaps a
dozen others, to be convinced how true the account is to nature,
and how impossible it would be for any two bystanders, if after-
wards examined, to give an exactly coherent account of all that was
said and done.” (From notes on St. Mark.)j582 PETER REMEMBERED. [Sr. Luxe.

61 And the Lord turned, and looked upon Peter. 4 And
ean ave Peter remembered the word of the Lord, how he
7, ee had said unto him, € Before the cock crow, thou

e Matt. xxvi. shalt, deny me thrice.

34,75. John

ee 62 And Peter went out, and wept bitterly.

f Matt arn 638 4 fAnd the men that held Jesus mocked
7,68. Mar : :

xiv. 65. him, and smote him.

 

 

So A., D., Fr, A, A, six later Uncials, almost all Cursives,

aaf, Arm.; but N, B., K., Tas. les
“before the cock crow to-

61. ‘‘ Before the cock crow.”
old Latin (a, ¢, e, f,i, q), Vulg., Cur. Syriac, and Sch
T., XII., twenty-five Cursives, Copt., &c., read, ‘‘ to-day ’—
day.”

There are three points in St. Luke’s narrative which seem to
make it almost certain that he received the account from an eye-
witness. First, that the maid or porteress earnestly looked (arevi-
casa) upon him, as if she scanned his features by an imperfect
light, as that of a fire would be. Secondly, that another “ con-
fidently affirmed.” Why confidently ? except there was something
in the tone of his voice which penetrated very deep. Thirdly, that
the Lord turned and looked upon the fallen Apostle, and by His
look recalled him to repentance, to faith, to love.

I have commented so largely on the fall of St. Peter elsewhere
that I cannot here say more than that it was the fruit of self-
confidence and remissness in prayer. If he had been less over-
weening, he would have taken more seriously the warnings of the
Lord, and like Him prayed more earnestly that such a disgraceful
fall might have been averted.

61, 62. “And the Lord turned, and looked upon Peter,” &e.
“Blessed are the tears which wash away guilt! They at length
mourn upon whom Jesus looks. Peter denied the first time, and
wept not, because the Lord looked not on him. He denied a second
time, and wept not, for as yet the Lord had not looked onhim. He
denied also a third time, Jesus looked on him, and he wept most
bitterly. Lord Jesus, look on us, that we may know how to weep
for our sin, and wash out the guilt!” (St. Ambrose. )

63-66. ‘And the men that held Jesus mocked him . . . . spake
they against him.” One would have thought that the fact that he
had done many miracles, and all these miracles of mercy—alleviating
suffering, restoring sight, even raising the dead—all which theseCuar. XXII] WHO IS IT THAT SMOTE THEE ? 583

64 And when they had blindfolded him, they struck him
on the face, and asked him, saying, Prophesy, who is it that
smote thee P

65 And many other things blasphemously spake they
against him.

66 4 ® And as soon as it was day, “the elders aa ae
of the people and the chief priests and the » Actsiv. 26,
scribes came together, and led him into their eee
council, saying,

67 ‘Art thou the Christ? tellus. And he said * Matt. xxvi.

63. Mark xiv.

unto them, If I tell you, ye will not believe: 61.

 

64. ‘*Struck him on the face,and.” So A., X., 1, A, A, six later Uncials, most Cur-
sives, Vulg., but omitted by B., K., L., M., T., 1, Copt., Sah., Cur. Syriac.
67. ‘‘ Art thou the Christ? tell us.” ‘‘ If thou art the Christ tell us” (Revisers).

minions of the chief priests must have known, would have saved the
Lord from such insults as these.

Upon the blindfolding, Quesnel remarks: ‘‘ These soldiers abuse
the Son of God without knowing Him; and Christians affront the
God Whom they know as audaciously as if He were blindfolded,
and could only guess at those who insult Him.” And, again:
‘Thou sanctifiest these things by enduring them in Thy Divine
Person; Thou makest of them a sacrifice to Thy Father, a pattern
of patience and humility to me, and a fountain of grace to Thy
whole Church.” ;

66. “ And as soon as it was day, the elders of the people and the
chief priests,” &c. This was a more formal meeting of the Sanhe-
drin: that which had taken place in the house of Caiaphas being a
preliminary one to collect evidence, and confront the prisoner with
the witnesses. It appears that it was a rule among the Jews that
no sentence could be passed in the night. The Evangelists Matthew
and Mark mention this meeting in the early morning, but give no
account of its proceedings whatsoever. St. John makes no mention
of it, but seems to imply that they led Jesus from the palace of
Caiaphas to the hall of judgment, 7.e., the Preetorium. It is quite
possible, however, that on this occasion the more formal morning
council assembled also in the house of Caiaphas. St. Luke, who
has given no account of the judicial proceedings in the night before584 YE SAY THAT I AM. [Sr. Luge.

68 And if I also ask you, ye will not answer me, nor let

me £0.

k Matt, xxvi. 69 «Hereafter shall the Son of man sit on the

64. Markxiv.
62. Heb.i.3. right hand of the power of God.

a. 70 Then said they all, Art thou then the Son
Matt. xxvi. of God? And he said unto them, 'Ye say that

64. Mark xiv.
62. T am.

68. “Me, nor let me go.” SoA., D., all later Uncials, almost all Cursives, old Latin,
Vulg., Syriaes, but omitted by X&, B., L., T., 22, 131, 157, 209, Copt.
69. “Hereafter.” ‘But from henceforth ” (Revisers).

Caiaphas, seems to transfer these proceedings to the second assembly,
for the narrative in our Evangelist of their questioning Him as to
whether He was the Christ, and the Lord’s answer, * Hereafter
shall the Son of man sit on the right hand of God,” and His avow-
ing Himself to be the Son of God, seems to be a shortened account
of the substance of what is recorded in St. Matthew and St. Mark.
No doubt the notes of what was of most importance in the
midnight proceedings would be read before the more important
assembly, or verbally given to them, and St. Luke might speak of
these as if they were the actual proceedings ; or again, after they
had read the notes they might ask whether He allowed the sub-
stantial allegation against Him in such words as “If thou be the
Christ tell us,” and He would repeat His claim in the words
‘‘ Hereafter shallthe Son of man sit on the right hand of the power
of God.” This would either awaken them to the infinite greatness
of Him Whom they were judging, or harden and condemn them.
70. “Then said they all, Art thou then the Son of God?” &e.
But, in the words He had just said, He had claimed to be the Son
of Man—in fact, the Son of Man of Daniel vu. How then could
they ask Him whether He was the Son of God? Because they
knew full well that His claim to be, in an unique sense, the Son of
Man, carried with it a far higher claim. He claimed to be the Son
of Man, not having his origin from the race, but as having come
into the race from above. They knew well how He had habitually
called Himself “the Son,” and with Himself, as the Son, He had
habitually associated “‘ the Father,” even God. Besides, the night
before, the solemn adjuration of the High Priest was in the words,
‘‘T adjure thee by the living God that thou tell us whether thouCua. XXIL] WE HAVE HEARD OF HIS OWN MOUTH. 585

71 ™ And they said, What need we any further witness ?

for we ourselves have heard of his own mouth. m Matt. xxvi.
65. Mark xiv.
63.

 

be the Christ, the Son of God.” And He had answered “ Thou hast
said. Nevertheless, I say unto you, Hereafter shall ye see the Son
of man sitting on the right hand of power.” So that on His lips
when speaking of Himself, ‘‘ Son of Man,’ and “ Son of God ” were
convertible terms. He was Son of Man in a sense, and with claims
and pretensions which would not be possible unless He were the
very Son of God.

“Ye say that I am.’ This is a Jewish form of affirmation.
““T am what ye say.”” Your question expects from Me the answer,
“T am,” and you are right. St. Mark, it is to be remembered,
writing for Gentiles at Rome, makes the answer to be, “I am.”

71. “ And they said, What need we .... own mouth.” This
proves beyond the shadow of a doubt that they took the word
“Son of God” in a sense which, in their view of Christ, implied
blasphemy worthy of the severest punishment. They proceeded,
through the hands of Pilate, to inflict upon Him a most cruel
death. This He suffered them to do, though by one word, such as
**T am a mere man, as thou art,” He might have rescued Himself and
saved them from the guilt of crucifying Him; but He withheld this
word, and was crucified because He made Himself the Son of God.
He left it to God to vindicate the truth of His Sonship, which that
God did by raising Him from the dead, and, further than this, God
visited the people which, through their rulers and representatives,
thus condemned Him, with the most terrific punishment, because
they continued in the denial of His Sonship. And even more than
this, God superseded a religion whose ministers maintained the strict
solitary unity of the Divine Being, by a religion which maintained
an Unity in Trinity. Such was the verdict of these men, and such
the verdict of God upon them.

“Thou sittest at the right hand of God, in the glory of the
Father. We believe that thou shalt come to be our Judge. We
therefore pray thee help thy servants whom thou hast redeemed

with thy precious blood.”CHRIST A KING.

@iANE 2xexeiilie

ND *the whole multitude of them arose, and led him

unto Pilate.

a Matt. xxvii. 2 And they began to accuse him, saying, We

2. Mark xv. : : ‘
2. hae. found this fellow” perverting the nation, and ° for-

28. a ‘ é
ieee lading bo give tribute to Cesar, saying “that he
c See Matt. himself is Christ a King.

KVii. 27. & xxii. ae ; :

ar Mark xi. 3 ¢ And Pilate asked him, saying, Art thou the
a John xix.12. King of the Jews? And he answered him and

e Matt. xxvii. :
meri said, Thou sayest 7.
vi. 13.

 

2. “The nation.” So A., E., Gorse Us Venn oe A, most Cursives; but &, ie
D., H., K., L., M., R., T., sixty Cursives, old Latin, Vulg., Sah., Copt., Syriacs, Ath., read,
‘our nation.”

1. “And the whole multitude of them arose, and led him unto
Pilate.” ‘‘'The whole multitude.” This seems to imply that there
were many spectators and attendants in the morning sitting of the
Sanhedrin. Their extraordinary earnestness in bringing about
His condemnation is shown in their not sending afew of their body,
but rising en masse and accompanying Him to the Preetorium.

2. “They began to accuse him, saying, We found this fellow
perverting the nation,” &e. The reckless wickedness and injustice
of their proceedings is shown from the very first. At their two
assemblies not a word had been said respecting His forbidding to
give tribute : it was all connected with His making Himself the Son
of God. Pilate, of course, would not have listened to them for a
moment if they had come with such a charge, which would have
been to him simply unintelligible; so they impudently and un-
scrupulously shifted their ground and accused of sedition the man
who a day or two before had said, “ Render unto Cesar the things
which are Cxsar’s.”

“Saying that he himself is Christ a King.” In their own
assemblies they accused him of pretending to be Christ the Son of
God: to Pilate, of pretending to be Christ a King.

8, 4. “And Pilate asked him, saying, Art thou the King of theCuap. XXIII.] I FIND NO FAULT IN THIS MAN. 587

4 Then said Pilate to the chief priests and to the people,
*T find no fault in this man. f 1 Pet. ii, 22.

0 And they were the more fierce, saying, He stirreth up
the people, teaching throughout all Jewry, beginning from
Galilee to this place.

6 When Pilate heard of Galilee, he asked whether the
man were a Galilean.

7 And as soon as he knew that he belonged unto * Herod’s
jurisdiction, he sent him to Herod, who himself ¢ ch. iii. 1.
also was at Jerusalem at that time.

 

6. ‘‘ When Pilate heard of Galilee.’ So A., D., R., X.,1r, A, A, 1, later Uncials, all
Cursives, old Latin, Vulg., Sah., Syriacs; but ‘‘ of Galilee” omitted by N, B., L., T.,
Copt.

Jews? ... no fault in this man.” If we only possessed this
Gospel, or if we were without that of St. John, we should have
here a great difficulty; for if any man had claimed to be king of so
rebellious and excitable a people as the Jews, Pilate was bound to
make some sort of inquiry; for this Man against whom such
pretensions were alleged had lately made a sort of triumphal entry
into Jerusalem, the excited crowds shouting before him, ‘‘ Blessed
be the king that cometh in the name of the Lord;”’ but instead of
investigating the matter, Pilate dismisses it with the words, ‘‘ I find
no faultin this man.”’ He had investigated, and he had been assured

that Christ’s Kingdom was not of this world, and that the mark of-

His subjects was witnessing to the truth. And so he answered the
Lord’s accusers with ‘‘I find no fault in him’’—in this man.
(John xviil. 33-38.)

5, 6, 7. “And they were the more fierce, saying, He stirreth up
the people. ..atthat time.” Pilate, who heartily desired to have
nothing to do with the matter, eagerly caught at the word Galilee,
and finding that the Lord’s usual abode was there, he sent Him to
Herod, the tetrarch of Galilee, who was up at Jerusalem for the
feast. He had had also a quarrel with Herod, and it is not at all
improbable but that he wished to make this up, and endeavoured
to do so by this acknowledgment of Herod’s jurisdiction over these
Galileans who were sojourning in Jerusalem to attend the feast.

8. “And when Herod saw Jesus, he was exceeding glad ....
done by Him.” This was Herod Antipas, the adulterer, and the588 HE ANSWERED HIM NOTHING.  [Sz. Luxe.
8 | And when Herod saw Jesus, he was exceeding glad :
nch.ix.9, for he was desirous to see him of a long season,

Ae because ‘he had heard many things of him ; and
Mark vi. 14. eine ‘

he hoped to have seen some miracle done by him.

9 Then he questioned with him in many words; but he

answered him nothing.

8. “He had heard many things.”’ So A., eke Aven Later Uncials, most Cursives,
old Latin, Vuly., Syriacs ; but &, Be De Kee ravi, Den 131, 157, 209, and ten other
Cursives, Sah., Copt., Syr. (Cureton), omit ‘* many things.”

murderer of St. John the Baptist. Our Lord’s judgment on his
character is to be found in His words, “ Go ye and tell that fox.”
Being the tetrarch of Galilee he must have constantly heard of the
miracles of our Lord. The wife of a member of his household,
Joanna the wife of Chuza, Herod’s steward, was one of our Lord’s
followers, who ministered to Him of their substance. It is from
St. Luke ix. 8, that we hear that a long time before this he desired
to see our Lord out of curiosity. He desired to see some miracles
in the same spirit as he would desire to see any other curious and
unaccountable matter, but with not the smallest intention of
acknowledging the claims which the Lord founded on His miracles.
“ One would apprehend he was in that most fearful state into which
persons sometimes fall, when they have had their feelings once
excited on the subject of religion, but still kept their vices; and
-also still continue to entertain an interest and curiosity in matters
of religion, having lost godly fear.” However, at last he had his
wretched desire gratified; he was face to face with the Lord, but
only to his greater condemnation. Instead of seeing a Divine
miracle, he sees One apparently powerless and deserted, Whom it
is in his power to insult and mock; and being angry and disap-
pointed that, though a king, no notice is taken of him, he turns round
upon the Lord and becomes His persecutor.

9, “Then he questioned with him in many words; but he
answered him nothing.’ This may have been out of just indigna-
tion, inasmuch as Herod was the murderer of the Lord’s forerunner,
or it may have been out of mercy ; for men have to give account of
all messages from God, which any word from our Lord would have
been, and assuredly Herod in his then state of mind could profit

by nothing which the Lord said.Cuarp. XXIIL] A GORGEOUS ROBE. 589

10 And the chief priests and scribes stood and vehemently
accused him.

1] * And Herod with his men of war set him at * Isai. liii. 3.
nought, and mocked him, and arrayed him in a gorgeous
robe, and sent him again to Pilate.

12 4 And the same day’ Pilate and Herod were ! Acts iv. 27.
made friends together: for before they were at enmity be-
tween themselves.

13 4 ™ And Pilate, when he had called together oe
the chief priests and the rulers and the people,

14. John xviii.
388. & xix. 4.

 

1l. ‘‘Gorgeous.” Rather, ‘‘ white.”

10-11. And the chief priests and scribes stood and vehemently
accused him...sent him again to Pilate.” Notice the eagerness
of the chief priests, in following him about. They seemed to have
felt that their whole future influence in the so-called Theocracy
depended on the Lord’s condemnation.

‘‘ Arrayed him in a gorgeous robe:”’ not a purple, but a white
robe. St. Ambrose draws a mystical meaning from it. “It is not
without reason that He is arrayed by Herod in a white robe, as
being a sign of His immaculate Passion.”

12. ‘‘And the same day Pilate and Herod were made friends
together ... enmity between themselves.” What the occasion of
this enmity was we are not told. Some have supposed that it
arose from Pilate’s cruelty in the slaughter of the Galileans,
mentioned in xiii. 1, and was on a matter of jurisdiction, and that
Pilate by acknowledging Herod’s jurisdiction over the Lord in some
sort made amends.

I cannot but think that many good men make a serious mistake
in citing this case of the reconciliation of Pilate and Herod as an
ilustration of the way in which wicked men of different parties
will unite against Christ. Pilate had send Christ to Herod for the
very purpose of avoiding passing sentence upon Him; and, no
doubt, was, in his heart, sore displeased at His being sent back
again. Herod had mocked Him because he was disappointed at
not seeing a miracle, but he appears to have paid no attention to
the vehement accusations of the chief priests against the Lord.
13-16. ‘And Pilate, when he had called together. ... worthy of

?

 

 
  
 
 
  
 
  
 
   
   
 
 
    
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 

|590 RELEASE UNTO US BARABBAS. [Sr. Luxe.

14 Said unto them, "Ye have brought this man unto me,
nver.1,2. as one that perverteth the people: and, behold, ° I,
ee having examined him before you, have found no
fault in this man touching those things whereof ye accuse him:

15 No, nor yet Herod: for I sent you to him; and, lo,
nothing worthy of death is done unto him.

p Matt. xxvii. 16 2 I will therefore chastise him, and release
26. John xix. 1. .

him.
a Matt. xxvii 17 4 (For of necessity he must release one unto
oO. WWLark XY.
6. John xviii. them at the feast.)
acne 18 And ‘they cried out all at once, saying,

Away with this man, and release unto us Barabbas :

 

 

15. «For I sent you to him.” So (NG a.) CELe) Seem las NG eee cers Uncials, most Cur-
sives, most old Latin, Vulg., and Syriacs; but W, B., K., L., M., T., m7, 157, and twenty
other Cursives, f, Sah., Copt., read, “‘ For he sent him back to us.”

17. (‘‘For of necessity ... feast.”) This whole verse omitted by Ay, Bi Kes, ices I,
old Latin (a), Sah., Copt.; retained by N, (D.), X., 1, A, A, later Uncials, all Cursives,
old Latin (b, ¢, e, f, ff?, g 12,1, q), Vulg., some Copt., Syriacs.

death is done unto him.” The account of the proceedings narrated
‘n these four verses is peculiar to St. Luke. Pilate very solemnly
avouches for the Lord’s innocence and appeals to the conduct of
Herod as having virtually acquitted Him, but he now ventures on
another step. He remembers that the time is come when according
to the custom of the feast he must release to them one prisoner.
He suggests that it should be the Lord, but in order to gratify their
malice he offers to chastise Him first and then release Him.
If He had committed no crime, but was entirely innocent, why
should He suffer the cruel punishment of a Roman scourging, under
the pain of which many sunk ?

16 and 17. “I will therefore chastise him, and release him.
(For of necessity he must release one unto them at the feast.)”
The words of Pilate were probably those of St. John and St. Luke
combined, ‘‘ But ye have a custom that I should release unto you
one at the passover (John xviii. 39), I will therefore chastise him
and release him.”

18. “And they cried out all at once, saying, Away with this
man, and release,” &c. But the people, instigated by the chief
priests (Mark xy. 11), had already made up their minds upon theCuar. XXUI.] CRUCIFY HIM, CRUCIFY HIM. d91

19 (Who for a certain sedition made in the city, and for
murder, was cast into prison.)

20 Pilate therefore, willing to release Jesus, spake again
to them.

21 But they cried, saying, Crucify him, crucify him.

22 And he said unto them the third time, Why, what evil
hath he done? I have found no cause of death in him: I
will therefore chastise him, and let him go.

23 And they were instant with loud voices, requiring that

 

prisoner whom they would have released. They apparently took
no notice of Pilate’s hint about the Lord, but crying aloud began
to desire him ‘‘to do as he had ever done unto them.’ Then
Pilate, in bitter mockery at both priests and people of a despised
race, asked whether the prisoner to be released should not be “‘ the
King of the Jews,” and then burst forth the cry from every lip,
‘‘ Away with this man and release unto us Barabbas.”’

19. ‘‘ Who for a certain sedition made in the city,” &e. There
can be little doubt, as I said in my notes on St. Matthew, that this
sedition was not a political outbreak, but a raid for plunder, or
St. Peter would not have reproached the Jews with “desiring a
murderer to be granted unto them.”

It is most probable that just before this he had received the
message from his wife, which made him doubly anxious for the
Lord’s release, and so we read,

20-23. ‘‘ Pilate therefore, willing to release Jesus. .... Crucify
him, crucify him. And he said unto them the third time .....
requiring that he might be crucified.” St. Luke alone mentions
distinctly the three successive appeals of Pilate. ‘The reader
will remember the words of St. Peter in the Acts, “‘ how the people
denied him in the presence of Pilate, when he was determined to
let him go.”

The events immediately following this we find in John xix. 1-15,
and Mark xv. 19. How the Lord was scourged, crowned with
thorns, saluted with “‘ Hail, King of the Jews,” smitten with the
reed and with the soldiers’ hands, spit upon, worshipped in
mockery, brought forth again wearing the crown of thorns and
the purple robe, with the words “ Behold the man.” Again rejected
with ‘Crucify him, crucify him.” Then another awakening of

ea592 PILATE GAVE SENTENCE. [Sr. Luke.

he might be crucified. And the voices of them and of the

chief priests prevailed.

s Matt. xxvii. 24 And § Pilate || gave sentence that it should
26. Mark xv. B
15, John xix, be as they required.

an coor (ebyeAnd she released unto them him that for

Exod. xxiii. 2. sedition and murder was cast into prison, whom
they had desired ; but he delivered Jesus to their will.

 

23. “And of the chief priests.” So A., D., Py ok AN, later Uncials, all Cursives,
old Latin (c, f), Syriaecs, but omitted by XN, Bela, bee, ths, ea, 1, Sah., Copt.

Pilate’s fear when he heard that Jesus claimed to be the Son of
God. Then a return to the judgment hall, another questioning by
Pilate, “‘ Whence art thou?” Then fresh efforts of Pilate to release
Him. Then still further cries of “* Crucify him.” Then the abju-
ration of the theocracy by the chief priests, ‘‘ We have no king but
Cesar,” and then Pilate’s hand-washing, and then the final sen-
tence in the words of St. Luke.

93.96. “And the voices of them and of the chief priests pre-
WLC Os ee he delivered Jesus to their will.” What a sublime
condemnation of human nature there is in these touching verses!
The voices of them—of the rabble, the scum of Jerusalem—and of
the chief priests, the successors of Aaron, Eleazer, Zadok, Joshua,
the chief ministers of the only God-ordained religion then existings
prevailed—prevailed against innocence, and in favour of brutal
guilt. And Pilate—who as a judge was by his office the minister of
God for good—gave sentence that it should be as they required—
gave sentence, not according to his conscience, not according to
his perfect knowledge of the Lord's innocence, but according to his
fears, his cowardice, his self-love,—as they required. They required
not only blood, but blood shed in the most eruel way in which it
could well be shed.

‘‘ And he released unto them him that for sedition and murder
was cast into prison.” A hardened villain guilty of the worst
crimes against human society, and one who for plunder, no doubt,
had destroyed life. But he delivered Jesus—One Who had in num-
berless instances prolonged life, alleviated the sufferings of life,
restored the dead to life, above all, planted in innumerable breasts
the hope of eternal life—‘‘ he delivered Jesus to their will.”

“ He delivered Jesus to their will.” Mark this word “ deli-Cuap, XXII.] ONE SIMON, A CYRENIAN. 993

26 * And as they led him away, they laid hold upon one

Simon, a Cyrenian, coming out of the country, * Matt. xxvii.
: z : 32, Mark xv.
and on him they laid the cross, that he might 21: See John

bear 7 after Jesus. ee

27 9 And there followed him a great company of people,
and of women, which also bewailed and lamented him.

28 But Jesus turning unto them said, Daughters of Jeru-

livered,”’ for in it the cruelty. and wickedness of man, and the
goodness and mercy of God meet.

As He had prophesied, He was delivered to the Gentiles, but it
was by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God. (Acts
il. 23.) He was delivered to His enemies, but He was delivered
‘for our offences.” Pilate seemed to deliver Him, but in a far
higher sense God “delivered Him up for us all.” He was deli-
vered to the power of darkness, but it was that He might deliver
us from the same power of darkness, and translate us into His
kingdom. (Coloss. i. 13.)

26. ‘‘ And as they led him away, they laid hold ..... bear it
after Jesus.”” Simon is the type of all true followers of the Lord,
for what he bears actually they bear spiritually. According to the
words of the Lord, ‘‘ He that will come after me, let him deny himself,
and take up his cross and follow me;”’ and of His servant, ‘‘ Let
us go forth therefore unto him without the camp, bearing his re-
proach” (Heb. xiii. 13).

27. ‘* And there followed him a great company of people and of
women,” &c. Apparently the multitude were mainly those who
were indifferent or hostile: it was the women who are noticed as
bewailing and lamenting. It is very remarkable that women seem
always to have more readily than men received the teaching of the
Lord and taken part with Him. A woman, a virgin, bore Him—
a woman anointed His feet, a woman anointed Him for the burial,
women followed Him, and “ministered to him of their sub-
stances :’’ women were attending beside the cross, women were first
at the sepulchre. He seems to have removed the curse from the sex,
so that they now are more ready to receive His truth than men.

28. “ But Jesus turning unto them said, Daughters of Jerusalem,
weep not for me,” &. St. Luke alone gives the account of His
weeping oyer Jerusalem. And now instead of thinking of the sea

QQ594 WEEP FOR YOURSELVES. [Sr. Luxe.

salem, weep not for me, but weep for yourselves, and for

your children.

u Matt. xxiv. 99 “For, behold, the days are coming, in the

ee wich they shall say, Blessed are the barren, and
the wombs that never bare, and the paps which
never gave suck.

ea 80 *Then shall they begin to say to the moun-
S. X. 0. Ss ~
pee tains, Fall on us; and to the hills, Cover us.

Y 1X. O.

 

of anguish which was about to engulph Him, He thinks rather of
His countrymen and countrywomen, and their helpless little ones,
and the doomed city.

‘“Weep not for me.” Does He reject their sympathy? No.
But He tells them that they and theirs have much more need of
tears than He has, for though His sufferings will be unspeakably
bitter, they will be short. On that very evening they will be all
over, and on the day after the morrow He will come forth from the
tomb incorruptible and impassible, but not so with the people and
the city which reject Him.

99. “For behold the days are coming in the which,” &c. To
those among them who will survive and to their children the bless-
ings of motherhood and of offspring will be turned into a curse.
They shall see them perishing of hunger, slain barbarously, mur-
dered, carried captive to be the bondmen and bondwomen of de-
praved and cruel Gentile masters. They shall even hear of those,
perhaps their neighbours, in whom would be fulfilled the words of
their great prophet, that their eyes should be evil towards their
children that they should bare, and that they should eat them in
the siege and straitness wherewith their enemies should distress
them (Deut. xxviii. 56, 57.)

30. “Then shall they begin to say to the mountains, Fall on us;
and to the hills, Cover us.’’ We are told by Josephus that those
who escaped the destruction of Jerusalem hid themselves in the
dens and in the rocks of the mountains, but the words used by the
Saviour forcibly remind us of the prophecy in the Book of Revela.-
tions, when, not the Jews, but all the impenitent, ‘“‘ Kings, great
men, rich men, chief captains, every bondman, every freeman, will
hide themselves in the dens and caves of the mountains, and call
upon the mountains and rocks to fall upon them and hide themCuap. XXIII.] WHAT SHALL BE DONE IN THE DRY? 595

31 ¥ For if they do these things in a green tree, what shall

be done in the dry? y Proy. xi. 31.
ie Jer, xxv. 29,
32 ” And there were also two other, malefactors, ce ze
e a XxX1, 3, 4,
led with him to be put to death. 1 Pet: iv. U7

; z Is, lili, 12,
33 And “when they were come to the place, Matt. xxvii.38.
a Matt. xxvii.
33. Mark xy.
22. John xix,
17, 18.

from the wrath of the Lamb.” So that in this short prophecy we
have the same feature as in the longer prophecy of the Lord—the
Lord passing from the destruction of Jerusalem and its people to
the day of final vengeance on all the impenitent, of which the
overthrow of the devoted city was but a type and forecast.

“Weep not for me, but weep for yourselves.’ ‘The admoni-
tion we cannot but consider as intended for us all; that when we
feel our human sympathies and compassions moved towards Him
at the recital of His sufferings, we are to think that He turns to
us, and tells us to think of ourselves, and of our own sins, that
occasioned those sufferings ; that when we venture to approach and
gaze on Him, by these contemplations we forget not ourselves
also.”

dl. ‘‘ Forif they do these things in a green tree, what shall be
done in the dry?” This seems to have been a proverbial expres-
sion among the Jews. Ifthe fire seizes and consumes green wood
which has life and sap in it, and is yet capable of bearing fruit,
how much more speedily and effectually will it consume dry, sap-
less, dead wood. And so, if God allowed for our sakes One Who
had done no wrong, but had always served Him, to suffer such
things, what will He bring upon those who have no life of God in
them, and are dead in trespasses and sins, because they finally
reject the offer of Life in the Crucified ?

32. ‘And there were also two other, malefactors, led with him,”
&e. St. Luke alone mentions that these malefactors were led with
Him—that is, for the whole, or part of the way. From the other
evangelists we should suppose that they were brought singly to the
place of execution. If it be as is reported by St. Luke, it adds
emphasis to the prophecy, “He was numbered with the trans-
gyressors.”’

33. ‘‘And when they were come to the place which is called
Calvary... crucified him.’”’ It is impossible in this age to realize596 THEY CRUCIFIED HIM. [Sr. Luke,

which is called || Calvary, there they crucified him, and the
oe ee malefactors, one on the right hand, and the other
OF & SKULL.

on the left.

Mie ee a
these words, since crucifixion is a thing of the past, for Constantine
abolished it. It was no longer meet that vile criminals should
suffer the form of the Redeeming Death.

We cannot even in imagination realize its pain, and we are still
less able to realize the shame of a Death by which the Son of God
got the victory over moral evil, by which He abolished Death, by
which He reconciled God and sinners, by which He won the highest
place in the universe, and a throne in the hearts of all the people of
God.

We cannot add to what we have written in our notes on St.
Matthew and St. Mark, respecting the pain and ignominy of this
form of death ; but we must say something more upon the purpose
for which God suffered His Son to undergo such a death at the
hands of His creatures.

Tt fulfilled the purpose for which the Word became Flesh. The
flesh which He took was capable of exquisite pain and death; and
the Eternal Word took this flesh in order that, suffering and dying
in it, He might atone for our sins, and through the Resurrection of
this crucified Body endue us with His Life. Thus the Psalmist, as
interpreted by the Apostolic writer : ‘‘ Sacrifice and burnt offering
thou wouldest not, but a body hast thou prepared me. In burnt
offerings and sacrifices for sin thou hast had no pleasure. Then
said I, Lo, I come (in the volume of the book it is written of me) to
do thy will, O God. By the which will [of the Eternal Father] we

are sanctified through the offering of the Body of Christ once for
all’? (Heb. x. 5, 8, 10).

Again, similar words: ‘“Forasmuch, then, as the children are
partakers of flesh and blood, he also himself likewise took part of
the same; that, through death, he might destroy him that had the
power of death, that is, the devil ; and deliver them who, through fear
of death, were all their lifetime subject to bondage ”? (Heb. ii. 14).

Such is the purpose of the Death on the Cross.

It exhibits the character of God as nothing else can, for it exhibits
God sacrificing Himself. The Deity, as long as He dwelt in His
own unapproachable Light, could not sacrifice Himself. He took

upon Him a nature capable of the uttermost self-sacrifice, in orderCuar. XXII] FATHER, FORGIVE THEM. 597

34 ¥ Then said Jesus, Father, >forgive them ; fatt.v. 44,

b VV
Acts yii. 60.
ESSN A eae nen a eel ee ue eae 1e@ore ive las

34, The uncritical reader will be surprised and shocked to know that the first word
upon the Cross—the Divinest, the most Evangelical word in the New Testament—is
marked with doubt by some modern critics because it is not in two Uncial MSS. (B. and
D.). It is to be found in ¥, A., C., F., G., H., K., L. (which so often sides with B.), M.,
Q.,8., U., V., I’, A, A, M1, all Cursives except two (38, 435), most old Latin (ce, e, f, ff2, Lb);
Vulg., all Syriac, all Memphitic except two, Arm., Auth. Judged by the Divine character
of the utterance, and the weight of the evidence of all parts of Christendom in its fayour,
its omission from any manuscript must be that manuscript’s utter condemnation,

that He might exercise the uttermost self-sacrifice. ‘‘ Herein is
love, not that we loved God, but that he loved us, and gave his
Son to be the propitiation for our sins.”

It exhibits the value of the soul. ‘“‘ Come (says this crucified God
by the voice of His Blood), come and see by the expense of what I
suffer, how great the value of thy soulis. Thou esteemest thyself,
but not sufficiently. Contemplate attentively thyself in Me: thou
wilt see what thou art, and what is thy value. Thou must prize
thyself by My merits, for I am thy price; and that salvation which
thou givest up on so many occasions is nothing but what I am
Myself, since I deliver myself up for the securing of it. In this
manner He speaks to sinners ..... The mystery of the Cross is,
therefore, a mystery of the Divine Wisdom. For, as St. Chrysostom
argues, a mystery that gives me such high ideas of God, that in-
spires me with an infinite horror of sin, that makes me value my
salvation preferable to all past, present, future, and even possible
things, in whatever point of view I behold it, should appear in my
eyes a mystery of wisdom. .... For this reason the Apostle of the
Gentiles, possessed with a belief of this mystery, made open profes-
sion of knowing nothing except Jesus Christ, and Him crucified.
For in this crucified Jesus he found whatever he wanted to know
—that is, the eminent knowledge of God, and the salutary knowledge
of himself. ‘I judged not to know anything among you, save Jesus
Christ, and him crucified.’” (Bourdaloue, ‘‘ Sermon on the Passion
of our Saviour.’’)

84. “Then said Jesus, Father forgive them; for they know not
what they do.’ These are the first of the seven words upon the
Cross. The Lord was in Himself the Priest and the Victim in one
Person. At the moment that He surrendered Himself to die as the
Victim, He acted as the all-prevailing Priest: for as it was foretold
of Him, “ He made intercession for the transgressors.’’ (Isaiah iii.)598 THEY KNOW NOT WHAT THEY Do.  [Sr. Luxus.
¢ Actsiii17. for ‘they know not what they do. And “they

d Matt. xxvii. . :
35, Markxv, parted his raiment, and cast lots.

OAS Onn xax
23.

 

And now also He set us an example that we should love and pray
for our enemies. He had before said to us, ‘‘ Love your enemies ;
pray for them which despitefully use you and persecute you;” and
now in His own person He carries this out.

But who are they for whom He prays? Not, surely, the soldiers
only. They were only obeying orders; though they might have
shown by their rough and pitiless demeanour that the horrible
work was not distasteful to them.

But did the intercession embrace Pilate—the Jews and their
rulers? Oertainly; for St. Peter said expressly, ‘““And now,
brethren, I wot that through ignorance ye did it, as did also your
rulers” (Acts iii. 17). And St. Paul: “ The hidden wisdom, which
none of the princes of this world knew, for, had they known it, they
would not have crucified the Lord of Glory” (1 Cor. i)

But do these words embrace all sinners? Especially do they
include baptized sinners? Are we not told that by wilful sin we
crucify the Son of God afresh ? Does the Lord here pray for those
who do this? I cannot tell. I will endeavour to answer the
question ; but I will answer it, as far as one dare answer it, in the
words of one who has had far, far more experience than most pastors
in dealing with individual souls. Keble writes: ‘‘ We have put
forth our hands, and have helped to crucify Him ; and that although
we knew, or ought to know what we are doing, what reason have
we to hope that we, too, may be of the number of those for whom
He prayed, ‘ Father, forgive them ; for they know not what they
dou,

“Truly; we could have no hope, were it not for that infinite over-
flowing mercy of His which, if we do but now truly and per-
severingly repent, will, we know, make allowance for all our weak-
nesses and errors and ignorances. We dare not make allowance for
them ourselves—we know not how far they were our own fault;
put if we truly and unfeignedly give ourselves up, soul and body,
to do and suffer His Will, He will allow for them. He will forgive
us the grievous and shameful things for which we cannot forgive
ourselves. Even of the best instructed among Christians it may be
truly said that he knows not what he does, when he breaks his.
baptismal vow. Who can measure the pain, the shame, the dis-Cuar. XXII.] LET HIM SAVE HIMSELF, IS).

35 And °the people stood beholding. And the ‘rulers also
with them derided him, saying, He saved others; © Ps. xxii, 17.
let him save himself, if he be Christ, the chosen ieee
of God. oe Mark xy.

36 And the soldiers also mocked him, coming to him, and
offering him vinegar,

3/7 And saying, If thou be the king of the Jews, save
thyself.

 

30. “‘ And the rulers also.” “ Also” omitted by N, D., and five Cursives, but retained
by A., B., C., L., all other Uncials and Cursives, &c,

“With them” omitted by x, B., C., D., L., Q., X., 38, 47, 69, 157, 346, old Latin (b, ec,
e, ff?, 1), Copt., Syriac (Schaaf), but retained by A., TI, A, A, MI, all later Uncials, most
Cursives, f, Vulg., and Cur. Syriac,

‘Christ, the chosen of God,” or, “ If this is the Christ of God, His chosen” (Revisers).

order which a single bad action in a Christian person may cause in
the world and kingdom of the Almighty, each part of which is so
wonderfully linked and entwined with every other part?” (From
sermons on ‘* Words on the Cross ”’ in Holy Week.)

‘And they parted his raiment, and cast lots.” In all cases of
crucifixion the raiment seems to have been the perquisite of the
soldiers who kept guard. It is probable that they cast lots twice,
once for their choice of the garments which were parted into four
divisions, and a second time for the seamless vesture.

35. ‘And the people stood beholding. And the rulers also with
them,” &. Some expositors, holding the words, ‘‘ with them,” to
be no part of the text, consider that the people were apathetic, and
gazed as they would have done at any other execution, and that
the rulers only derided Him; but this is contrary to the testimony
of St. Matthew and Mark, “ And they that passed by reviled him,”’
&e. These bad men must have known His miracles of Salvation.
How He had in numberless instances saved men from disease, from
blindness, from lameness, from the power of evil spirits. Above
all, they knew perfectly how He had but a short time before saved
a man from the dominion of death. But He heeded not these
mockeries. In all probability He interceded in Spirit for those
who cast them in His teeth.

36, 87. ‘And the soldiers also mocked him, .. . king of the Jews,
save thyself.’ The soldiers, as I have said, could have had no
malevolent feelings against Him on account of His teaching, or600 THIS IS THE KING OF THE JEWS. [St. Luxe.

388 = And a superscription also was written over him in

g Matt, xxvii. letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew, THIS
31. Mark xv

oY Goes If THE KONG OF THE JEWS:

19.
hoMetth vil 389 {And one of the malefactors which were
44, Mark xy.

32. SS

38. “In letters of Greek, and Latin, and Hebrew.” SoN,A., C3., D., all later Uncials,
all Cursives, most old Latin, Vulg., Syriac (Schaaf), Arm., Ath. ; omitted by B., Ca L.,
a, Sah., Copt., Syriac (Cureton).

Messianic claims. They simply regarded Him asa Jew, a fanatical
or perhaps disaffected Jew: and these reproaches were aimed at
the despised Jewish race, of which they assumed Him to be the
pretended king. With respect to their offering Him vinegar it has
been said, “ The soldiers pretend to treat Jesus as a king, to whom
the festive cup is presented.”

38. “And a superscription also was written over him in letters of
Greek,.... This is the king of the Jews.” This inscription was
written by Pilate himself. Of course it was written in mockery
and scorn, but not so much of Jesus Himself as of His crucifiers.
They, feeling the insult, desired that the title should be altered into
a mere assertion of His pretensions. They would have it worded,
‘‘ He said—This Man said—I am the King of the Jews.” But
Pilate refused to alter it: being in this, as I firmly believe, upheld
by a higher power: for Jesus was, both by descent and through
God’s election, the King of the Jews: for the angel had said unto
Mary before His conception, “The Lord God shall give unto him
the throne of his father David.”

But was He not far more than the King of the Jews? was He
not to be the King of all men, the King of Kings? Yes, but this
King of a world-wide dominion, foretold in so many prophecies,
was first to be the King of Zion, “ Yet have I set my king upon
my holy hill of Zion.”

Respecting the trilingual form of the inscription, Theophylact
aptly remarks: “It is said in Greek, Latin, and Hebrew, by which
it was signified that the most powerful of the nations (as the
Romans), the wisest (as the Greeks), those who most worshipped
God (as the Jewish nation), must be made subject to the dominion
of Christ.

39. “ And one of the malefactors which were hanged railed on
him, saying, If thou be,” &c. This most remarkable and instructiveCuar. XXIII] SAVE THYSELF AND US. 601

hanged railed on him, saying, If thou be Christ, save thyself
and us.

 

SO enee Lie thou be Christ.” So A., all later Uncials, and all Cursives, old Latin (esta).
Vulg., Syriacs; but XN, B., C., L., some old Latin (a, b, ff2), Sah., Copt., Cureton Syriac,
Arm., Aith., read, ‘‘ Art thou not the Christ?”

incident is found only in St. Luke. St. Luke alone, who here
relates the conversion of one of them, calls them ‘‘ malefactors ”’
(workers of evil, caxotpyor). St. Matthew and St. Mark call them
robbers. St. John in no way indicates their crimes, or even that
they were criminals, but simply speaks of them as “two other.”
Archbishop Trench, whose chapter upon them in his “ Studies of
the Gospels” is as exhaustive as any study of such a Scripture
incident can well be, supposes that they were not even common
robbers in the sense of men who got their living by plunder and
violence, but belonged to a band of those Jews who resisted by
violence the Roman yoke, and, being outlawed, betook themselves
to plunder as a means of subsistence. These were the zealots who
at the time of the siege of Jerusalem had developed into the
Sicarli, whose possession of the temple brought such unutterable
misery upon Jerusalem. He even supposes that they may have
been of the same company, or band, as Barabbas, and that as
Pilate was forced to release Barabbas, he revenged himself by
sending his two principal adherents to be crucified with the King
of the Jews: so that Pilate made these men partakers of our Lord’s
crucifixion, rather in scorn of the Jews than in hatred or contempt
of Jesus. In this way the vulgarity of their lives of crime is
diminished, and some explanation attempted to be given of the
fact that one who was punished for crimes of violence should
exhibit such nobleness of character. But the Scriptures are totally
silent about this. In St. Luke’s eyes they are simply “evil
workers ;”’ and Barabbas is supposed to be a mere murderer. He
was cast into prison for sedition and murder, and St. Luke re-
presents St. Peter as saying, ‘‘ Ye desired a murderer to be granted
unto you.” Since, then, nothing extenuating is said of them, it is
safer to suppose that they were criminals of a bad type, though one
might have possessed much better dispositions than the other, and
so the Lord’s Almighty Grace is the more magnified in the pluck-
ing of one of them as a brand from the burning.

polvailed... .- If thou be Christ, save thyself and us.” The rail-602 WE INDEED JUSTLY. [St. Luge.

40 But the other answering rebuked him, saying, Dost not
thou fear God, seeing thou art in the same condemnation

41 And we indeed justly; for we receive the due reward
of our deeds: but this man hath done nothing amiss.

ing here is in the scornful expression of unbelief. Canst thou be
the Christ if thou sufferest thy subjects to treat thee so?

“And us.” He believed that the Lord could save neither them
nor Himself.

40. ‘* But the other answering rebuked him, saying, .... same
condemnation.” $8. Matthew and Mark seem to tell us that both
the robbers joined in the insults offered to the Lord. They may
have both done so at the first, and the one who repented may have
been brought to a better mind by seeing the patience and forbear-
ance, and submission of the Lord. Or it may be that the im-
penitent one was from the first more bitter and violent, and seemed
to answer for the other, who may have for some time held his
peace, and so was accounted by the bystanders to be of the same
mind towards the Lord. I much incline to this latter, for if he
had joined in the other’s insults, he could hardly so soon have
reproached his fellow with the want of the fear of God.

“ Dost not thou fear God?” This is a question which implies that
his fellow had no fear of God, and this notwithstanding the agony
of pain he was then suffering. ‘“‘ It is nothing so strange, he would
say, that secure sinners, whom justice has not yet overtaken, for
whom God’s judgments are, as yet, far out of sight, should dare
thus to open their mouths against the Holy One of God; but thou,
upon thy cross, with such teaching as that might give thee, with
such evidence as that affords that God is not mocked, that men eat
at last of the fruit of their doing, dost thou venture upon the
same?” (Trench.)

‘‘The same condemnation,” sharing the same awful suffering
might have softened his heart, and inspired him with some pity for
a patient fellow sufferer.

41. ‘And we indeed justly ; for we receive the due reward of our
deeds.” No expression of conviction of sin can be more practical
than this: he was suffering the most horribly cruel punishment;
and remembering his past life of violence and bloodshed he accepts
it in the words, ‘‘ We, indeed, justly, for we receive the due reward
of our deeds.”Cuar. XXIII] LORD, REMEMBER ME. 603

42 And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou
comest into thy kingdom.

43 And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To
day shalt thou be with me in paradise.

 

42, ‘And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me.” So A., x¢, C2., all later Uncials,
all Cursives, old Latin, Vulg., Syriacs (Cureton and Schaaf), Aith.; but X, B., C., L.,
Sah., Copt., read, ‘‘ He said, Jesus remember me.”

“But this man hath done nothing amiss.” These words have
been interpreted as if he here asserts the theological truth of the
absolute sinlessness of the Lord, but such cannot be. He could not
have known the Lord personally, much less intimately; and he
could not have had a special revelation about so deep a thing: but
no doubt he had heard of the Lord’s life—how He went about
doing good, healing the bodies of men, and teaching their souls the
best truths of God, and so he rightly judged that such an one had
done nothing worthy of the slightest punishment, much less of one
of such extreme cruelty.

42. “And he said unto Jesus, Lord, remember me when thou
comest,” &c. All seem agreed that no prayer of faith of which we
have any record equals this.

‘“To believe that He whose only token of royalty was the crown
of thorns that still clung to His bleeding brows, was a King, and
had a kingdom; that He on whose eyes the mists of death were
already hanging, was indeed the Prince of life, wielding in those
pierced hands, nailed so helplessly to the cross, the keys of death
amewell. .2. 4 that it would profit something, in that mysterious
world whither they were both hastening, to be remembered by this
crucified Man—that was afaith indeed..... Everything seemed
to give the lie to Christ’s pretensions. Disciples and Apostles
themselves had fallen away andfled..... and then in the midst
of this universal unbelief, one, all whose anterior life might seem to
have unfitted him for this heroic act of faith, does homage, not
indeed in outward act, for his limbs are nailed to the tree, but in
heart and word, to Jesus as the King of Israel, as the Lord of the
spirits of all flesh.” (Trench.)

43. “And Jesus said unto him, Verily I say unto thee, To day
shalt thou be,” &c. This is the second word on the Cross, and it
also is the word of the Great High Priest. As the first word was
one of Intercession, so this of Absolution—full, free, immediate. I604 DARKNESS. (Sr. Luge.

A4 i And it was about the sixth hour, and there was a

i Matt. xxvii. darkness over all the ||earth until the ninth hour.
45. Mark xv.

33.

{ Or, Zand.

44. “ And it was about.” So x, A., C., D., Q., R., X., 1, A, A; I, all later Uncials, all
Cursives, old Latin, Vulg., Syriacs, Sah., Arm.; but B.. O*., L., Copt., read, «* And it was
now about.”

dare not comment upon it. I rather reproduce the words of a
sermon preached within a stone’s throw of the place where this
Divine and most gracious utterance proceeded from the Lord.
“What power, O robber, enlightened thee? Who taught thee to
worship that despised Man, thy companion on the Cross? O
Eternal Light, which givest light to them that are in darkness.
Seals Thy deeds are not such as should make thee be of good
cheer; but that the King is here, dispensing benefits. The request
reached unto a distant time; but the grace is very speedy.
‘Verily, I say unto thee, this day shalt thou be with Me in Para-
dise;’ because to day thou hast heard My voice, and hast not
hardened thine heart. Verily, speedily I passed sentence upon
Adam, very speedily I pardon thee. To him it was said, ‘In the
day wherein thou eatest thou shalt surely die ;’ but thou to-day
hast obeyed the faith, to-day is thy salvation. Adam by the tree
fell; thou by the tree are brought into Paradise. I say not unto
thee this day shalt thou depart, but, this day shalt thou be
with Me.

“OQ mighty and ineffable grace! ‘Where sin abounded, there grace
did much more abound.’ They who had borne the burden and heat
of the day had not yet entered; and he of the eleventh hour
entered. Let none murmur against the good man of the house,
for he says, ‘Friend, I do thee no wrong; is it not lawful for me
to do what I will with mine own?’ The robber has a wish to
work righteousness, but death prevents him. I wait not exclusively
for work, I have accepted faith. I am come who feed My sheep
among the lilies. I am come to feed My sheep in the gardens. I
have found a sheep, a lost one, but I lay it on My shoulders, for he
believes, since he himself has said, ‘I have gone astray like a lost
sheep. We receive the due reward of our deeds. Lord remember
me when Thou comest in Thy kingdom.’”’ (Cyril of Jerusalem.)

44-45. ‘* And it was about the sixth hour, and there was a dark-

Acids rent in the midst.” This could not have been anCuar. XXIIL] THE RENDING OF THE VEIL. 605

45 And the sun was darkened, and * the veil of the temple

was rent in the midst. k Matt. xxvii.
51. Mark xv.

 

45. «And the sun was darkened.” So A., D., Q., R., X., TP, A, A, 1, all later Uncials,
most Cursives, old Latin (a, b, ¢, e, f, ff2, 1, q), Vulg., Syriac (Cur. and Schaaf); but X,
B., O*., L., some evangelisteria, and Sah., read, ‘‘ The sun being eclipsed” (or, the sun’s
light failing) (sot 4Nou éxAtrovtos).

eclipse, for such a phenomenon can only happen when there is a
new moon, and it was then full moon. Besides, the obscuration of
a total eclipse can only last a few seconds. Very many so-called
natural causes, some within the range of our atmosphere, others
beyond it,' as in the sun’s photosphere, might have occasioned it, that
is, if we are forced on such an occasion to seek for a natural cause.
If it was owing to a natural cause, as the intervening of a very dense
cloud, still the occurrence at that particular juncture was brought
about by an act of God’s special power, and was designed to reveal
to all in Jerusalem—very probably to all in Palestine—that the
Death of the Crucified was no common death; the very frame of
nature itself seemed to mourn for it.

These phenomena in the outer world—the darkness, the rending
of the veil, the opened graves, could not have been without their
effect. They must have been remembered long after Pentecost, and
no doubt contributed somewhat to the readiness with which so vast
a number of the dwellers in Jerusalem then received the Gospel.

‘¢And the veil of the temple was rent in the midst.” This is
narrated by our Evangelist a little before its proper place. I have
commented very fully upon it in my notes on the two first synop-
tics. The Epistle to the Hebrews teaches us its significance—that
the way into the holiest of all, into the very presence chamber of
God, is made manifest by the Death of Christ. There is now no
obstacle between us and God. The existence of the veil in the

 

1 Godet in a note mentions a remarkable instance of the obscuration of the sun at
midday, the cause of which seems to. have been beyond the limits of our atmosphere,
“<M. Liais, a well-known naturalist, relates that on the 11th of April, 1860, in the province
of Pernambuco, while the sky was perfectly clear, the sun became dark about midday to
such a degree that for some seconds it was possible to lock at it. The solar disc appeared
surrounded with a ring having the colours of the rainbow, and quite near it there was
seen a bright star which must have been Venus. The phenomenon lasted for some
minutes. M. Liais attributes it to cosmical nebulw floating in space beyond our atmo-
sphere. A similar phenomenon must have occurred in the years 1106, 1208, 1547, and
1706.” (‘‘ Revue Germanique,” 1860.)606 HE GAVE UP THE GHOST. [Sr. Luxe.

46 § And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said,
1 Ps. xxxi.5. |! Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit:
1 Pet. ii. 23. : : 1
= Matn xxi. ™and having said thus, he gave up the ghost.
50. Mark xv.
37. John xix. . : pital aaa
30.

temple betokened that there was not as yet perfect reconciliation.
Now there is, but solely through the Death of Christ. If God
had opened the eyes of any godly Jew to understand its significance,
it would have been to him the most perfect outward sign or parable
of completed reconciliation conceivable.

46. “And when Jesus had cried with a loud voice, he said,
Father, into thy hands,” &c. All three Synoptics record that the
moment before His Death He cried with a loud voice, thereby show-
ing that ‘‘ His natural force was not abated.” He died not through
weakness, but by an act of His own will. At the moment of His
saying the seventh and last word, He breathed out His Spirit to
God.

“Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.” These words
show that the cloud, the horror of darkness, which for a brief
season had made him feel as if forsaken by God, had rolled away.
He died in the full consciousness of His Father’s presence and
love.

“Father, into thy hands I commend my spirit.” These were
human words, issuing from the depths of His lower and assumed
nature. They are for us—for all the dying. Because He said
them we are emboldened to say them. But not only in the hour of
death, but in the hour of temptation—in the conflict of our natural
with our spiritual man, we must say them too. They only can
hope to say these words with acceptance at the hour of death who
have all their lives lived in the spirit of them. In lives full of
changes and chances like ours, we who know not what a day or an
hour may bring forth, have reason to say them constantly. Im-
mense numbers of Christians never retire to rest without com-
mending themselves to God’s keeping in these words.’

The fact that the Lord thought good to say such a prayer teaches
us the awfulness of death—even the death of the most righteous.
Death, though its sting is removed, is not to be thought lightly of.

 

. Because the office of Compline—the last of the seven “ hours ”—contains the first
verses of Psalm xxxi., in which verses they occur.Cuap. XXIII.] HE GLORIFIED GOD. 607

47 "Now when the centurion saw what was done, he elori-

fied God, saying, Certainly this was a righteous » Matt. xxvii,

54. Mark xv.
man. 39.

48 And all the people that came together to that sight,
beholding the things which were done, smote their breasts,
and returned.

49 °And all his acquaintance, and the women nue ew
that followed him from Galilee, stood afar off, 55. Mark xv.

; : See John
beholding these things. xix. 25,

It is a fearful mystery. The Church does well in teaching us to say,
‘In the hour of death, Good Lord, deliver us,’’ and in putting into
our lips such words as, ‘‘O holy and merciful Saviour, suffer us not
at our last hour, for any pains of death, to fall from thee.”

47. “ Now when the centurion saw what was done, he glorified
God, saying,” &e. According to SS. Matthew and Mark he con-
fessed Him to be the Son of God. Nodoubt he said both the things
attributed to him: ‘‘ This was arighteous man,” ‘“‘ This was the Son
of God.” Weare to remember that the term ‘“ righteous One” was
especially applied to Christ by the men of His day and country.
He was treated as the worst of sinners, and yet was the righteous,
the just One (Acts iii. 14; vii. 52; and perhaps James v. 6).

48. ‘‘And all the people that came together to that sight ....
smote,” &c. It is probable that the blaspheming part of the multi-
tude had been scared away by the signs and portents, and that those
who remained were, most of them, somewhat better disposed, and
now smote their breasts, asif they felt that some terrible wickedness
had been committed, and that it would be visited upon their city
and nation; and so thy did what the publican in the parable did.
They smote on their breasts in token of contrition, and in depreca-
tion of the wrath they had too good reason to fear.

49. ** And all his acquaintance, and the women that followed
him,” &c. At some time during the latter part of the crucifixion
certain of the women (according to St. John, the Lord’s mother,
her sister Mary of Cleophas, and Mary Magdalene) stood by the
cross. His mother was led away by St. John, and the others, per-
haps, accompanied her, and afterwards were not permitted to come
near to the cross.608 A GOOD MAN AND A JUST. (Sr, Luke.

50 4» And, behold, there was a man named Joseph, a
> Matt. xxvii. counseller; and he was a good man, and a just:
57. Mark xv.

42. John xix. 51 (The same had not consented to the counsel
38.

and deed of them;) he was of Arimatheea, a city of
q Mark xv.43. the Jews: ‘who also himself waited for the king-
ch, ii. 25, 38

dom of God.

¥9 This man went unto Pilate, and begged the body of

Jesus.

ete, 53 ™And he took it down, and wrapped it in
59. Mark xv. : ae :
46. linen, and laid it in a sepulchre that was hewn in

stone, wherein never man before was laid.

 

51. “« Who also himself.” So A., E., F., G., Se saVieg Agi, LA0St Cursives (1, 33, 131,
209); but XN, B,, C., D., L., 69, old Latin (a, b, e, 1), Sah., Copt., omit “ also himself.”

53. ‘Wrapped it.” So A., L., P., Xe AAs lial latex Uncials, most Cursives; but
XN, B., C., D., most old Latin, Vulg., &c., read “‘ Him.”

50-56. ‘“And, behold, there was a man named Joseph .-. =
according to the commandment.” The account of the Lord’s burial
by Joseph of Arimathea is virtually the same in the first three
Gospels. St. Luke says somewhat more respecting his moral
character—that he was a good man and a just, and that he had not
consented to the counsel and deed of them; from which it would
seem that he had attended the meetings of the Sanhedrim, and had
opposed the wicked ruling of the majority.

“ And he took it down, and wrapped it in linen . . . before was
laid.” The Burial of the Lord is a part of the Gospel. Thus St. Paul:
“T declare unto you the Gospel which I preached unto you....
that Christ died for our sins, according to the Scriptures; and that
he was buried, and that he rose again the third day” (1 Cor. xv.).
His Burial was an assurance that His Resurrection was a reality:
for His Body was taken down by friends in the presence of foes,
who knew that He was dead, and deposited by them, not in a
common tomb, but in a cave, hollowed out of a hill side, with a
great stone rolled to block up the entrance, which was guarded by
the soldiers of Pilate.

His burial, also, was the last humiliation offered to Him, for
though Joseph and Nicodemus and the women who assisted per-
formed it as a work of piety and love, yet in it He was not the lessCuar. XXIII] THE SABBATH DREW ON. 609

o4 And that day was ‘the preparation, and the sabbath
drew on. s Matt. xxvii.
55 And the women also, ‘which came with him me vio!
from Galilee, followed after, and "beheld the » Mark xv. 47,

sepulchre, and how his body was laid.

56 And they returned, and * prepared spices and * Mark xvi. 1.
ointments ; and rested the sabbath day Y according ¥ Ex. xx. 10,
to the commandment.

 

associated with us, whose bodies must be committed to the ground,
earth to earth, ashes to ashes, dust to dust; He was the incorrup-
tible, and yet was buried, and they prepared to embalm Him as if
He had been corruptible. In birth from a womb, and in burial in
a tomb, He was one with His sinful brethren.

And the burial of the Lord is in a remarkably mysterious way
connected with our Baptism. The font represents the grave of the
Lord, in which, as having died with Him, we are mystically and
sacramentally buried, and from which we rise again, endued with
new life from Him, as He rose from His grave endued with new
life. Thus St. Paul: “ Buried with him in Baptism, wherein also ye
were raised with him through faith in the working of God which
raised him from the dead” (Coloss. ii. 12, Revised Version). And,
again, ‘“‘ We were buried with him, therefore, through Baptism into
death, that like as Christ was raised from the dead through the
glory of the Father, so we also might walk in newness of life ”’
(Rom. vi. 1-4, Revised Version).

54. “And that day was the preparation.” 1t was the Friday
evening, before six o’clock, when the Sabbath commenced. And in
that year that Sabbath, being at once the Passover festival and the
Sabbath, was a very great day indeed.

“‘Beheld the sepulchre, and how his body was laid.” It is re-
markable that each of the Synoptics mentions how the women
observed the place of the body. St. Matthew mentions particularly
that “‘ they were sitting over against the sepulchre; ” St. Mark, that
“they beheld where he was laid ; ” St. Luke, ‘‘how his body was
laid.”

56. **(They) rested the sabbath day according to the command-
ment.” So strictly did they observe this Sabbath, for it was the
last. Henceforth the Lord’s day was to take its place.

RR

9?610 THE FIRST DAY OF THE WEEK.  [dr. Luxe.

CHAP. XXIV.

OW * upon the first day of the week, very early in
the morning, they came unto the sepulchre, ° bringing
a Matt. xxviii.
1. Mark xvi. 1.
John xx, l.
b ch, xxiii. 55.

1. ‘“‘Now upon the first day, ... very early in the morning,” &e.
The discrepancies between St. Luke and the other Evangelists in
their accounts of the occurrences of the morning of Easter Sunday
seem insuperable. I shall endeavour to show that there is a plain
principle by which the narratives can be reconciled, and this is,
steadily to keep in view the purpose which each Evangelist had in
giving us his particular history of the events of the Resurrection
morning.

St. Matthew, beyond all doubt, writes for his countrymen, or
rather selects that part of the body of tradition which they, as Jews,
most required. On this account he brings forward the angel of the
Lord, the special messenger of the God of their fathers, as descend-
ing, rolling away the stone, striking the keepers with deathly fear,
and encouraging the devoted women. After this, having given one
appearance of the Lord to the women, with a message to the dis-
ciples, he passes on to refute the falsehood spread far and wide
among the Jews that the Lord had been stolen away whilst the
guard slept; and he concludes with the appearance of the Lord
in Galilee, which was not only the most important because of
the Apostolic commission, but was the one which the Lord had
specially promised.

St Mark, writing most probably for Roman Christians, relates
the account of the appearance of the angel to the women, but breaks
off in his narrative before the appearance of the Lord to the women
which we have in St. Matthew; so that his account cannot be
critically compared with that of St. Luke, though he evidently re-
cords in a very abbreviated form the appearance on the way to
Emmaus.

St, John mentions the visits to the sepulchre of no women except
Mary Magdalene, to whom the Lord first appeared, and through
whom He sent a message to His disciples respecting the Ascension,Cuar. XXIV.] BRINGING THE SPICES. 611

the spices which they had prepared, and certain others with
them.

 

1. “And certain others with them.” So AG De se Ie Aer AG Th alll later Uncials,
almost all Cursives, f, q, Sah., Syriacs, Arm. ; but omitted by wy, B., C., L., 33, 124, a, b
e, e, ff, g1, 1, Vulg., Copt.

and not respecting the meeting in Galilee. St. John’s narrative re-
specting the Magdalene seems intended as a preparation for his
account of the meeting with the two. The mysterious words, “Touch
me not, for I am not yet ascended to my Father ; but go to my breth-
ren, and say unto them, I ascend unto my Father and your Father,”
&e., seems to prepare us better for the unutterable mystery of the
words, “As my Father sent me, so send I you,” ‘ Receive ye the
Holy Ghost.”

And now let us come to St. Luke. What is his purpose ?
Evidently to arrive, as soon as possible, at what he conceived to be
his special communication—the appearance of the Lord to the two
disciples on the way to Emmaus. But this account must have
some introduction, because it reports a conversation with two per-
sons, who had set off for a journey into the country before any
account of any appearance of the Lord had reached the body of
disciples whom they left in Jerusalem. These two were evidently
present with those disciples to whom the women brought the
account of the vision of angels, but, like the rest, they seemed to
them as telling ‘‘idle tales, and they believed them not”; and having
heard that Peter had gone to the sepulchre without having had any
further revelation, they set out on their way. This, of course, must
have occurred before the return of Mary Magdalene from the
sepulchre with the account of the appearance of the Lord to her,
and His message respecting His Ascension. (I shall explain the
occurrence of Mary Magdalene’s name in the 10th verse when I
come to it.)

We will now examine the first ten verses.

‘*‘ Now upon the first day of the week, very early in the morning,
they came,” &. Who came? If we look back two verses—to
Xxvii. 55—they were the women who followed Him from Galilee, and
among these were Joanna, the wife of Chuza, and Susannah, and
many others.

But as I noticed in my comment on St. Mark, there were, most
probably, two companies of women, one that of Mary Magdalene,612 THEY FOUND NOT THE BODY. _ [Sr. Luks.

 

2 °And they found the stone rolled away from the
c Matt. xxviii. sepulchre.
2. Mark xvi. 4. a 3
d ver. xxiii. 3 4 And they entered in, and found not the body
Se or whe Mord Jesus,
4 And it came to pass, as they were much per-

A John =x. 12. plexed thereabout, ° behold, two men stood by
cts 1. 10. ; So ae
them in shining garments :

3, << The body of the Lord Jesus.” So ¥, A.,B., C., L., all other Uncials, except D., all
Cursives, old Latin, c, q, Vulg., Copt., Syriacs, Arm., AXth.; but D. and some old Latin,
a, b, e, £2, 1, omit “of the Lord Jesus.”

and Mary the mother of James and Salome (Mark xvi.), and the other
that of Joanna and the women from Galilee. The former were parted
from Mary Magdalene, who preceded them a little, first saw the
sepulchre open, the stone having been rolled away, and taking for
granted that the Lord’s body had been stolen away by His enemies,
left her companions, and ran to tell Peter and John. Those who
remained saw the angel, received the message to the disciples that
the Lord would see them in Galilee, and later on were favoured
with the sight ofthe Lord Himself. The second company (assuming
there to have been a second) came somewhat later, saw two angels,
and were addressed by them in words totally different from those
which the one angel had addressed to the first company, and then
went to the disciples and told them of the angelic vision. This was
before Cleopas and his friend departed for Emmaus, so that they
set out having only heard the account from the Galilean women of
the appearance of the angels. If they had had any word of the
Lord Himself having been seen, they probably would not have left
Jerusalem. But it is next to certain that the company or college
of the Apostles were not assembled together till towards the even-
ing: so that the accounts of the Lord’s appearance to the Mag-
dalen, or to the other women, may have been made known to some
groups of disciples and not to others.

2, 8. “ And they found the stone rolled away ... . body of the
Lord Jesus.” St. Matthew alone gives the action of the angel in
this ; but each of the four accounts notices the rolling away of the
stone. St. Luke alone distinctly mentions that they found not the
Lord’s body.

4, ‘And it came to pass, as they were much perplexed there-Cuar. XXIV.] HE IS NOT HERE, BUT IS RISEN. 613

5 And as they were afraid, and bowed down their faces
to the earth, they said unto them, Why seek ye || the living

among the dead ? | Or, him that
: se : liveth.
6 He is not here, but is risen: ‘remember how + Matt. xvi.
; 21. & xvii. 23.
he spake unto you when he was yet in Galilee, ane Te

; ; & ix. 22.

7 Saying, The Son of man must be delivered **
into the hands of sinful men, and be crucified, and the third
day rise again.

6. “ He is not here, but is risen.” These words found in all other MSS. versions, &c.,
except D., a, b, e, ff2, 1.

about,” &e. This seems to show that they were a different party to
that of Mary Magdalene, for the women, as recorded in both SS.
Matthew and Mark, saw the angel as soon as:they entered the
sepulchre, and had not time to be perplexed, as these were.

o. “ And as they were afraid, .... Why seek ye the living among
the dead?” There is somewhat of reproach in this question. In
bringing the spices to preserve His Body from corruption, they
were manifesting their love and grateful remembrance, and not
their faith ; for they came to preserve a Body from corruption,
which, if they had known the Scriptures (Ps. xvi), or believed His
own words, they would have known to be incapable of corruption.
The Lord demands our love to Himself; but He first of all demands
our faith. The very love which He asks for is to have its root in
faith. Unless we believe in Him as He is revealed, our love is not
worthy of Him, for it does not love Him as being God Incarnate
and Man incorruptible,

6, 7. ‘‘ He is not here, but is risen : remember how he spake... .
third day rise again.” The words said in Galilee, as reported in St.
Luke, were, ‘‘ The Son of man must suffer many things, and be re-
jected of the elders and chief priests and scribes, and be slain, and
be raised the third day;”’ but these seem, from the context, to
have been said only in the hearing of the Apostles; so that it is
most probable that the saying of the Lord quoted by the angel was
said, perhaps more than once, to the outer body of believers, or in-
deed to the people. Its value is this, that it shows that the people
enjoyed just the same intimation of the Resurrection that the
Apostles did, and were as unbelieving.614 THEY REMEMBERED HIS WORDS. _ [St. Luxe.

8 And * they remembered his words,
g John ii, 22. 9 » And returned from the sepulchre, and told

h Matt. xxviii.

8. Markxvi, all these things unto the eleven, and to all the
oe rest.

i ch, viii. 3. 10 It was Mary Magdalene, and ‘Joanna, and
Mary the mother of James, and other women that were with

them, which told these things unto the apostles.

 

9, «From the sepulchre.” These words found in all other MSS. and versions, &c.,
Cop., a, b, ¢, e, ff2, 1, Arm.

8. “And they remembered his words.” The reader will call to
mind the words in St. John’s Gospel respecting the temple of
Christ’s Body, ‘ When therefore he was risen from the dead his
disciples remembered that he had said this” (J ohn ii. 22).

9. “And returned from the sepulchre, and told all these things
unto the eleven,” &c. We are not to suppose from this that the
eleven were all in one room when these tidings were brought;
most probably the communication was not made at once, but it
took some time to inform all; and so, later in the day, Mary
Magdalene, who had remained at the sepulchre after Peter and.
John had left, saw the Lord, and bore His message to the disciples.

«© And to all the rest,” ¢.e., to such disciples as Cleopas and his
companion, and Barnabas and Matthias.

10. “It was Mary Magdalene, and Joanna, and Mary the mother
of James . . . unto the apostles.” How are we to reconcile the
fact that Mary Magdalene, who had seen the Lord and carried from
Him a message to the eleven, is here numbered amongst those who
had only seen the angel or angels? Very clearly in this way. This
verse 10, with the names of the women, is thrown in, as it were, by
the way, to show how all the women who visited the sepulchre bore
their testimony to the angelic vision, and were disbelieved. We
are to remember that, according to St. Mark, Mary Magdalene’s
account of the Lord having appeared to her was at first disbelieved. -
We shall see further that this also is introductory to the account
which follows. I. Williams says: “ St. Luke is speaking (v. 10) of
all the women, who severally brought the accounts to the apostles,
and none of which they believed: and he here introduces the men-
tion of these women, evidently in no immediate connection with
what went before, but as a summary of all the intelligence conveyedCuap, XXIV.) LDEH wrAGES, 615

11 * And their words seemed to them as idle tales, and
they believed them not. k Mark xvi.

12'Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepul- ; Le 6.
chre; and stooping down, he beheld the linen clothes laid
by themselves, and departed, wondering in himself at that
which was come to pass.

13 § ™ And, behold, two of them went that ™ Mark xvi.
same day to a village called Emmaus, which was “
from Jerusalem about threescore furlongs.

 

12. This whole verse omitted by D., a, b,e,1; but retained by all other MSS, and
versions, &c.

13. ‘Three score furlongs.” N,I., K., N., I, 158, 223, 237, 420, old Latin, g, read,
«one hundred and sixty;” but A., B., D., L., and all others, read, “‘ sixty.”

by the. various women at various times during this eventful
morning.”

11. ‘‘ And their words seemed to them as idle tales, and they
believed them not.” Very likely the fact that these appearances
were related at the first only by women had something to do with
their rejection of them, for in immediate sequence comes the visit
of the foremost man of the Apostles to the sepulchre.

12. ‘* Then arose Peter, and ran unto the sepulchre . . . . come
to pass.”” This is evidently the visit recorded in John xx., where,
however, Peter is accompanied by John. Peter’s name is no doubt
mentioned because he first went into the sepulchre, and observed
the order of all within, but the absence of the Body; though it is
to be noticed that the same words are applied to the action of him
who went in, as to that of John before he went in—“‘stooping
down and saw the linen clothes lying.” In verse 24 the presence
of another besides Peter is recognized, ‘‘ certain of them (rwe¢ ray
ody jpiv) which were with us.”

13. “And, behold, two of them went that same day to a village
called Emmaus,” &c. A place apparently mentioned by Josephus,
which Titus assigned, after the siege of Jerusalem, to 800 veterans
of his army, and thence was called Kolonieh, situated exactly
sixty furlongs (a little more than seven miles) from Jerusalem.
Who the two were it isimpossible to conjecture. Thename of one,
Cleopas, is given, and the other, because his name is not given, has616 THEIR EYES WERE HOLDEN. (Sr. Luxe.

14 And they talked together of all these things which had

happened.
15 And it came to pass, that, while they communed toge-
n Matt. xviii. ther and reasoned, ” Jesus himself drew near, and.

20. ver. XXXVi. :

went with them.
o John xx. 14. 16 But ° their eyes were holden that they should
& xxi. 4. :
not know him.

 

been supposed by many to have been St. Luke himself, just as the
unnamed young man who fled naked from the scene of the Lord’s
apprehension is said to have been St. Mark. No other reason can
be given, and from no other hintin his writings can we gather that
St. Luke was in the company of the disciples during the Lord’s
lifetime.

14,15. ‘And they talked .... Jesus himself drew near, and
went with them.’ Theophylact remarks, “The disciples above
mentioned talked to one another of the things which had hap-
pened, not as believing them, but as bewildered at events so extra-
ordinary.”

‘¢ Jesus himself drew near, and went with them.”

It seemed as if a stranger, of whose nearness they were unaware }
because of the earnestness of their conversation, suddenly overtook
them, and began to walk by their side.

16. “But their eyes were holden that they should not know
him.” St. Mark describes this as the appearing in another form;
and, indeed, if they saw him so closely as to discern his features it
must have been so. He must have presented a different appearance
to what they had been accustomed to, or they would have instantly
recognized Him.

‘Having now obtained a spiritual body, distance of place is no
obstacle to His being present to whom He wished, nor did He any
further govern His Body by natural laws, but spiritually and su-
pernaturally. Hence, as Mark says, He appeared to them in a
different form, in which they were not permitted to know Him; for
it follows, ‘ And their eyes were holden that they should not know
him;’ in order, truly, that they might reveal their doubtful con-
ceptions, and uncovering their wounds may receive a cure, and that
they might know that although the same Body which suffered rose
again, yet it was no longer such as to be visible to all, but only toCuar. XXIV.] CLEOPAS. 617

17 And he said unto them, What manner of communica-
tions are these that ye have one to another, as ye walk, and
are sad ?

18 And the one of them, ? whose name was »P John xix. 25.
Cleopas, answering said unto him, Art thou only a stranger
in Jerusalem, and hast not known the things which are come
to pass there in these days?

 

17. “As ye walk, and are sad.” There is some authority, x, A. (?), B. (L.), for the
alteration, ‘‘and they stood, looking sad;” but most MSS. and versions are in favour
of the reading in the Rec. Text.

18. ‘* Art thou only a stranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known.” Revisers translate
this in their text, “‘ Dost thou alone sojourn in Jerusalem?” and in margin, “ Dost thou
sojourn alone in Jerusalem, and knowest thou not,” &e. ?

those by whom He willed it to be seen.” (Theophylact, in Cat.
Aurea.)

17. “ And he said unto them, What manner of communications
are these that ye have one to another,” &¢. The words which the
Lord uses imply rather debate and discussion—what are these
words which ye throw one against another? It would seem from
what follows that they were arguing whether the cruel and shame-
ful death of the Lord was a complete and final disproof of all His
Messianic claims or not.

‘‘And are sad?’’ Rather ‘‘downcast,’ not merely a passing
sadness, but as if their hopes were blighted, and they could not lift
up their heads again.

18. ‘And the one of them, whose name was Cleopas, answering
said unto him,” &c. Cleopas: not the same as Clopas, which was
Aramaic (Cholphai), but a Greek word, short for Cleopatros. Dean
Plumptre suggests that his name indicates Hellenistic and probably
Alexandrian antecedents. This may in part, perhaps, account for
his imparting to St. Luke what had not found its way into the
current oral teaching of the Hebrew Church at Jerusalem as em-
bodied in the narratives of St. Matthew and St. Mark.

‘‘ Art thou only astranger in Jerusalem, and hast not known,” &ce.
This has been more prol ably rendered, ‘‘ Dost thou sojourn alone
in Jerusalem, and knowest thou not?” &. A mere stranger in
Jerusalem, especially if he were one from Galilee or Perea, would
know all about what had occurred within the last eventful week,
The man who had heard nothing of the events which had touched618 WHAT THINGS ? (Sr. Luxe.

19 And he said unto them, What things? And they said

a Matt, xi. unto him, Concerning J esus of Nazareth, 4 which
John iit 2.& WAS & prophet * mighty in deed and word before
14, Actsii, God and all the people:

Sa 9. 20 * And how the chief priests and our rulers

sch. xxiii.l. delivered him to be condemned to death, and

Acts xiil. 27,

28. have crucified him.
t ch. i. 68, & 21 But we trusted ‘that it had been he which
6. ghould have redeemed Israel: and beside all this,

to day is the third day since these things were done.

 

every heart with either pity or fear, must have dwelt alone, by him-
self, having no communication with any one.

19-22. “And he said unto them, What things? .... these
things were done.” The Lord asks ‘‘ What things ?” in order to
draw out from-them what their mind was respecting Himself after
His rejection and crucifixion. Their answer is exceedingly valuable:
for it teaches what their belief had been concerning Him. They
believed that He had been a prophet—perhaps the greatest of the
prophets, “‘mighty in deed and word before God and all the
people.” But could He have really been this if the chief priests—
the chief ministers, not of an ordinary natural state of things, but
of a Theocracy—had condemned Him and crucified Him—that is,
put Him to no ordinary death, but to a death inflicted only on
those who were held to be accursed of God. (Gal. iii. 13.)

21. But we trusted that it had been he which should have re-
deemed Israel.”’ We believed Him to have been the long expected
Messiah: but now our hopes are shattered, for God would not have
suffered His Holy One to die such a death.

“Redeemed Israel.’’ Did they mean by this a spiritual redemp-
tion or a carnal one, such, as is indicated in Acts 1.6: ‘‘ Lord, wilt
thou at this time restore again the Kingdom to Israel?” They
cannot have had any idea of a spiritual redemption through the
Blood of the Crucified One ; much less a redemption from the power
of the grave.

Such was their belief, or rather such had been their belief—that He
was a very great prophet—perhaps a Redeemer. This shows what
must have been at its best the state of mind respecting the Lord inww

 

 

Cuar. XXIV.] HIM THEY SAW NOT. 619

22 Yea, and “certain women also of our company made
us astonished, which were early at the sepulchre; » Matt. xxviii,

23 And when they found not his body, they 10 on LO.
came, saying, that they had also seen a vision of aoe
angels, which said that he was alive.

24 And *certain of them which were with us * ver. 2.
went to the sepulchre, and found it even so as the women
had said: but him they saw not.

 

the outer and very numerous circle of the ordinary disciples—those
not of the twelve. There is nothing in their confession of faith
answering to the words of St. Peter, ‘‘Thou art the Christ, the Son
of the living God.”” And yet these two must have been devoted
followers of the Lord.

‘* And besides all this, to day is the third day,” &e. What is the
ground of this allusion to the third day? It may be a lingering
reminiscence of the promise of.the Resurrection. This is the third
day, it is already on the wane, and nothing is yet manifested to
drive away our despair: and yet they had not given up all hope,
there was yet an uncertain glimmer.

22,23. ‘* Yea, and certain women also of our company made us
astonished .... he was alive.” The reader will notice how the
first verses of this chapter are, as we said, written as an introduction
to this. The women had astonished the disciples by their report
that the sepulchre was empty. “His Body was gone, how they knew
not, only it was notthere. They said that angels had told them that
he was alive, but weak women led away by affection and imagina-
tion, might be deceived in all this. Why should angels give the
first intimation to Galilean women ?

24. ‘ And certain of them which were with us went... him they
saw not.” Notice how two apostles are simply described as “ certain
of them which were with us.” The two, Cleopas and his friend,
were speaking to an apparent stranger, and they never thought of
indicating the position among themselves of the two who went to
ascertain the truth of the women’s story, only the fact that they
went, and found that the women had brought a correct report
respecting the Body not being there ; but nothing further. ‘‘ Him

they saw not.” Perhaps in this there may be an allusion to some620 SLOW OF HEART TO BELIEVE. [Sr. Luxe.

25 Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart to
believe all that the prophets have spoken :

¥ yer. xlvi, 26 Y Ought not Christ to have suffered these
Acts xvii. 3. : : ; 5
1 Pet. i. 11. things, and to enter into his glory ?

 

rumour which reached their ears just before their departure, that
He had appeared to Mary Magdalene. Anyhow, the absence of
any appearance to those who went to the sepulchre to ascertain the
truth of matters was in their minds a proof against the reality of the
angelic appearance to the women.

25, 26, 27. ** Then he said unto them, O fools, and slow of heart
. .. the things concerning himself.” Notice, in the eyes of the
Lord a fool’is one who is “‘slow of heart to believe.” And is it
not according to common sense? If men profess to accept a certain
book or series of books as containing a revelation from God, what
greater folly than only partially to believe it, or accept its state-
ments respecting what suits our earthly hopes and wishes, and re-
ject all init which would raise up our aspirations to the higher
things above this world! Considering what sort of creatures
we are, is not a revelation from God more likely to correct and
rebuke our worldly, carnal, low ideas than to fall in with
them ?

26, 27. “Ought not Christ to have suffered such things...? And
beginning at Moses,” &c. The Jews always believed that the books of
Moses were the greatest of all, and written with the highest degree
of inspiration. The Lord, then, would naturally begin with them,
for they contain the seed of all. It was a rooted principle in the
Jewish mind, that the various facts related in the books of Moses
had a far wider and deeper significance than what was on the sur-
face,—that they hinted at, betokened, shadowed forth, or as we
should now say, typified, great moral and spiritual realities. To
tell these Jews, as most probably the Lord did, that the bruising
of the heel of the seed of the woman, implied some deeply myste-
rious truth, and that Abraham receiving his son back again on the
third day, as from the dead, betokened something equally myste-
rious respecting the same truth, and that Moses lifting up a serpent
of brass upon a pole, that those who looked to it should live, per-
tained also to the same mystery, and that this truth or mystery
was to be connected with, or embodied in, the prophet that theCuar, XXIV] BEGINNING AT MOSES. 621

27 *And beginning at * Moses and Yall the prophets, he
expounded unto them in all the scriptures the < ver. xlv.
thigiosc Rano If a Gen. iii, 15.

ings concerning himself, & xxii. 18, &
Xxvi. 4, & xlix,
10. Num.
xx1. 9. Deu.

Lord God would raise up from among His brethren oe ae 9,
like to Moses,—all this was in accordance with the 10. & xxii. &
religious mind which had been formed in the godly Is. vii, id &
Jews by the study of the Old Testament.! Ti all Tac ena
sprung from the great principle that the word of such ae Jers
a Being as God would contain much more than at 35: Ezek.
first sight it seemed to contain. aoe

As it is said that He “began at Moses,” we may pane a
reasonably, indeed, with almost certainty, surmise Mal. iii. 1.”
that He began with such considerations as would natu- re Ae
rally lead to those revelations of suffering, very closely
followed by glory, which we have in the two greatest Messianic
prophecies, Ps. xxii. and Isaiah liii.

In the first of these, Ps. xxii., we have extreme suffering (having
certain marks and outward features which meet only in crucifixion )
closely followed, apparently in the same person, by a state of glory,
in which the sufferer bows the hearts of all men to God and to
Himself. In the second, the sufferings of a certain human
being have atoning and expiatory terms applied to them which
are nowhere else applied to any man, and are supposed to ter-
minate in an universal priestship and kingly rule, for we read, “ The
pleasure of the Lord shall prosper in his hand:” “ He bears the
sin of many, and makes intercession for the transgressors.” So
that, instead of the sufferings of Jesus being a stumbling-block, they
ought to enforce all His claims. Ought not the Redeemer of Israel
to be a Son of man, to have His hands and feet pierced, to be brought
into the dust of death, to have His garments parted, to have lots
cast for His vesture? If these things had not happened unto Him,
how could all the ends of the world remember themselves and be
turned to the Lord through Him, how could the pleasure of the
Lord prosper in His hand, how could He divide the great for his

portion, and the strong for his spoil? Ought they not, if they be-

 

?

 

1 See Galatians iv. 21. St. Paul would not have argued in this way with Judaizers
unless they acknowledged its soundness.622 ABIDE WITH US. (Sr. Luxe.

98 And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they
oe went: and “he made as though he would have
xii, 7. Mark gone further.
mo a 29 But ‘they constrained him, saying, Abide
Acts xvi- 15. with us: for it 1s toward evening, and the day is
far spent. And he went in to tarry with them.

30 And it came to pass, as he sat at meat with them, ° he took

te xiv. bread, and blessed i#, and brake, and gave to them.

lieved Moses and the Prophets, to have expected that Christ would
suffer such things before He entered into His glory ?

98. “ And they drew nigh unto the village, whither they went - .
went in to tarry with them.” By this He tried them whether they
were so sufficiently absorbed in what He had said, as to desire to
hear more. He actually would have gone further unless they had .
detained Him, but by their constraining Him to abide with them,
they showed theirdesire to hear from Him more of the precious
truth which He had been communicating to them. I. Williams
notices many instances of similar conduct on His part, as for in-
stance, to the blind man by the roadside, to the Canaanite woman ;
so when they were in the storm at sea, He seemed as if He would
have passed by them. ‘“‘Sonow He manifests not Himselfto them,
but is passing by, till constrained to come in and abide; showing
them that although Christ was risen indeed, yet He would not be as
Christ risen unto them, unless they put forth their hands unto Him,
and earnestly sought for Him.”

‘Thus also now is He to us each day of our lives : He passes by, in
opportunities of good that occur, and if neglected, pass, never to
return; but if we constrain them, they become means of manifest-
ing Christ to us, i.e., of fulfillimg His commandments, which en-
lighten the eyes to discern His presence.”

30, 31. ‘‘ And it came to pass as he sat at meat with them...
vanished out of their sight.” We should naturally suppose that this
act of taking bread and blessing it, and breaking it and giving it, was
Eucharistic. For these are the very words in which St. Matthew
and St. Mark describe the Institution. Jesus took (AaBwr) bread,
and blessed it (éAdynoe, in Matthew the participle eAoyjoac), and
brake it (kAdoac, in Matthew écdace), and gave (iedidov, in Matthew
{oidov). Again, in describing to the assembled disciples what tookCuar. XXIV\] THEY KNEW HIM. 623

31 And their eyes were opened, and they knew him; and
he || vanished out of their sight. | Or, ceased to
02 And they said one to another, Did not our see che 0”

See chap. iv.
30. John viii.
59.

 

place here, Cleopas and his friend do it in the words, ‘‘ How he was
known unto them in the breaking of bread ”’ (v. 35), the very words
which St. Luke uses to describe the Eucharist in Acts ii. 42, ‘* They
continued steadfastly . .. . inthe breaking of bread” (rj wAdoe rod
Gprov).. The Lord was manifested to them not whilst He brake,
but whilst they received. ‘He gave to them, and their eyes were
opened.” Receiving Him into themselves, they naturally, one is
almost tempted to say, discerned Him. All that had previously
occurred led up to this, that they should discern Him personally
in this Eucharistic act. Their previous instruction in the witness
of all Scripture to the sufferings and glory of the Messiah was not
sufficient, even though the words made their hearts burn within
them ; their actual recognition of Him was reserved to the moment
of their reception of His Body. Quesnel remarks : “The Eucharist
by faith becomes to us the bread of life, and of saving knowledge.
One communion sometimes opens the eyes more, with respect to
matters of faith, than all the discourses and instructions of men.”
32. “And they said one to another, Did not our heart burn
within us,” &¢.? They had read these Scriptures respecting the
Messiah from their youth, and their hearts had never thus burned

1 The only reason which can be brought against an Eucharistic Significance is that
wine or the cup is not mentioned; but surely there was not likely to be bread on the
table and not wine, meat and not drink, Wine in that country and time was not a
luxury, but an ordinary drink, as in all the South of Europe now. When it is said that it
makes for the giving of the Sacrament in one kind only, we answer that the description
of the Eucharist in Acts ii, 42, equally omits all mention of the cup. And in fact what
need was there to wait for the cup, since He vanished as soon as they had received Him
in the bread? The word “ break” (xAdéw), in connection with bread (dpros), is never used
in the New Testament of ordinary breaking of bread at an ordinary meal. It is used
sixteen or seventeen times in the New Testament; nine times in direct connection with
the Eucharist, Matt. xxvi. 26, Mark xiv. 22, Luke xxii. 19, Acts ii.42 and 46, xx. 7 and 11,
1 Cor. x, 16, xi. 24; five times in connection with that miraculous feeding of the multi-
tudes which foreshadows the Eucharistic feast, and directly led to the Eucharistic discourse
in John vi.; once in the account of St. Paul’s}shipwreck, where, with very peculiar
solemnity, as if he was performing a religious act, ‘‘ he took bread, and gave thanks to God
in presence of them all, and when he had broken it he began to eat.” The meat of the
remainder of the persons on the ship being described by a different word (spop}-). The
remaining’ place is this one, Luke xxiy. 30.624 DID NOT OUR HEART BURN? [Sr. Luxe.

heart burn within us, while he talked with us by the way,
and while he opened to us the scriptures ?

within them. It was not the mere letter of Scripture, though that
is the foundation of all, but it was the letter of Scripture ex-
pounded and brought home by One of surpassing holiness and love.
It was the voice of God and the power of the Spirit which kindled
the fire. And is it not. the same now? Does not one man preach
and read, and there is coldness and listlessness, and men say, ,
‘ How stale is all this! we know it all as well as he’? And does
not another man preach, or teach, or read perhaps the same words,
and the soul catches fire, and truths well known become engraven,
and truths forgotten rise to mind, and prayer ascends, and life is
quickened ?

And now let us shortly review this beautiful episode.

It seems, next to that in St. John xx., the most important of all
our Lord’s appearances. The revelation of the Risen Lord in
John xx. seems given for the ministry in the Apostles, this one
seems for ordinary disciples, for devout Christian wayfarers, one
might say for lay-people. And though not perhaps anterior to the
appearance to St. Peter, it is anterior to that to the college or body
of Apostles.

This account of the walk to Emmaus shows us the state of belief
among the body of the disciples. They accounted the Lord a very
ereat prophet, perhaps the greatest of the prophets. They revered
His memory to the uttermost. Their love seemed unwavering,
but their faith in Him as the Christ the Redeemer seems to have
sunk to nothing, or next to nothing. We may take this state of
mind as representing that of those who were not Apostles. So that
after the Lord’s Death none, absolutely none, in the Church looked
for His Resurrection. Then, in the next place, the account in St.
Luke is intermediate between the traditional account as represented
in St. Matthew, and that in St. John, on the matter of the myste-
rious nature of the Lord’s Body. In this account He appears and
disappears at His Will, but the spiritual nature of His Body is not
emphasized as it is by the mention of the closed doors in the fourth
Gospel, through which He must have passed as a spirit would.
Then, in the next place, this account shows us that our Lord’s ap-
pearances or disappearances are not regulated by any so-called law.
The supposed law is that they who are in accord with Him spiri-Cuar. XXIV.] THE LORD IS RISEN INDEED. 625

33 And they rose up the same hour, and returned to
Jerusalem, and found the eleven gathered together, and
them that were with them.

34 Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and ‘ hath £1 Cor. xv. 5.
appeared to Simon.

 

tually will apparently, quite independently of His Will, see Him in
His spiritual body, if He be near them: but if there be any such
law He ought to have been seen by them when their hearts burned
within them. But their recognition of Him was deferred till the
very moment when He communicated them in His Body. In fact,
it entirely and wholly depended upon His Will.
And, in the last place, the whole narrative leads up to their dis- |
cernment of Him in their reception of the Eucharist—not in their
apprehension of Him in the written Word, even though expounded
and applied by Himself. His Blessed Will, then, is that over and
above the liveliest apprehension of Himself, as set forth in the pages
of Scripture, there is to be a Sacramental Apprehension of His
Presence.
There are very many other lessons drawn out by holy and
spiritual men—as, for instance, that He may be very near to us and
we not know it—that He comes near to us in our way, as we walk
through life, and, though invisible, teaches us, consoles us, reproves
us, particularly when we speak with one another about Him—that
we must constrain Him and He will not leave us—that we must
look for special tokens of His love in His Sacrament. All these are
very good, but they must not be allowed to interfere for a moment
with the revelation in the narrative, which is, the manifestation to
ordinary believers of the Risen Body of the Lord.
33. ‘‘ And they rose up the same hour, and returned to Jerusalem,”’
&e. No time must be lost to declare what they had seen. The
unbelief which they had left in those from whom they parted that
morning must be at once dispelled.
‘‘ And found the eleven gathered together, and them that were
with them.” These that were with them must have been, as we
shall see, those who were in the same state of mind with reference
to the Lord’s Resurrection as Cleopas and his friend.
34, “Saying, The Lord is risen indeed, and hath appeared to
Simon.” Their unbelief was now turned to faith, but there was no
triwmph of faith in this, as some say. They believed when they had
Ss626 HOW HE WAS KNOWN OF THEM. (Sr. Luge.

35 And they told what things were done in the way, and
how he was known of them in breaking of bread.

 

seen. It is remarkable that this appearance to Simon is not
mentioned except by St. Paul in 1 Cor. xv.

Respecting this appearance to Simon Peter nothing whatsoever
has come down to us. It is probable that the Lord enjoined
secrecy upon him for some time respecting any revelation He made
to him. If it be lawful to hazard a conjecture, the Lord may have
made known to him something of what occurred between His
dying and His rising again. St. Peter alone relates the activity of
the Lord in the unseen state. [1 Pet. iii. 19.]

35. ‘And they told what things were done in the way, and how
he was known of them,” &c. Their account was, by some at least,
apparently received with incredulity ; for St. Mark evidently alludes
to the appearance to Cleopas and his friend in the words, ** After
that he appeared in another form unto two of them as they walked
and went into the country,” but he proceeds to say, ‘‘ And they went
and told it to the residue; neither believed they them.” How is it
that apparently, according to St. Mark’s account, they received with
suspicion, to say the least, the account of the two disciples, whilst in
St. Luke they met these very men with the words, ‘‘ The Lord is risen
indeed, and hath appeared unto Simon”? Itmay be that amongst
the body of the disciples there were different degrees of assent. It may
be that, even in one large room, there were groups, and one of them
threw doubts on the appearance on the way to Emmaus. Or may
there not have been a readiness to accept the testimony of Simon Peter
because he was the undoubted leader, and a tendency to reject the
account of appearances to persons not so prominent in the little
society? ‘‘ Why should He appear to these and not tous? Why
should He appear to women—to Mary Magdalen—to those two
‘who would not wait to see the end, but were actually leaving
Jerusalem ? ”’

But, in fact, need we go further for an explanation than the
inconsistency of human nature? I have consulted a large number
of commentators and expositors in the writing of this commentary
on the four Gospels, and have come across an abundance of what
is good, of what springs from the sincerest Christian faith, the
brightest Christian hope, and the warmest Christian love: but (and
I write this, feeling that someone may say the same of myself) ICuar. XXIV,] HANDLE ME AND SEE. 627

36 ‘| * And as they thus spake, Jesus himself stood in the
midst of them, and saith unto them, Peace be unto & Mark xvi.

14. John xx,
you. 19. = Cor.

3¢ But they were terrified and affrichted, and ke vo
supposed that they had seen “a spirit.

38 And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled? and
why do thoughts arise in your hearts ?
_ 89 Behold my hands and my feet, that it is I myself :
‘handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh i John xx. 20,
and bones, as ye see me have. -

a

 

36. “Jesus himself.” So A., E.,G., K.,M., S., and other later Uncials, and almost
all Cursives, &c. ; but ‘‘ Jesus” omitted Dye Bes De a ole 255) ann bees OuhetOure
Syriac.

The latter part in all MSS., &ec., except D. and some old Latin, a, b, ec, ff2, 1.

have come across the most surprising inconsistencies in accepting
some accounts in the Gospels, and ignoring, ifnot rejecting, others.
One man will accept a miracle as undoubtedly historical and reject
another close to it in the narrative as unhistorical. One man will
accept in its fulness a plain saying of the Lord, and the same man
will with all his might endeavour to get rid of another equally
plain. One man cries up pure morality, high motives, constant
regard to truth, &c., and yet writes as if he believed that the four
Evangelists had no regard for the historical truth of their narra-
tives, and were base enough to manipulate that most sacred deposit
with which they had to do, not only for advancing their “ party,”
but out of sheer hatred to persons, as, for instance, to Simon Peter,
or to Judas Iscariot.

So that, if some of the followers of Christ believed heartily and
some with hesitation—if one man believed in the appearance to an
Apostle, and hesitated as to the appearance to a woman, it was only
human nature.

36-43. ‘ And as they thus spake .... as yeseemehave....
did eat before them.” This is apparently the same meeting of the
Lord with His disciples as that described in John xx. 19-23; but
the reports of the two Evangelists are so exceedingly dissimilar, that
they read like the account of two wholly different meetings with
different persons.

Let us reverently draw attention to these differences, for we do628 HAVE YE HERE ANY MEAT ?  [Sa. Lune.

40 And when he had thus spoken, he shewed them Ms
hands and his feet.
x Gen.xlv.26. 41 And while they yet believed not *for joy,
| John xxi.5. 444 wondered, he said unto them, 'Have ye here
any meat ?

42 And they gave him a piece of a broiled fish, and of an

honeycomb.’
m Acts x. 41. 43 ™ And he took it, and did eat before them.

 

40. This verse omitted by D.; but retained by ¥, A., B., L., all later Uncials, Curs
Ce ea of an honeycomb.” So E., H., K., M., N., S:, U.-V.; S., bs Asn ff2,
1, q, Vulg., Copt.; but omitted by &, A., B., D., L., Il, e.
not deal honestly with the Word of God unless we do, and there may
be a meaning in the fact that two such different reports are given.

First, then, St. John alone mentions that the doors were shut.
This shows that he was perfectly alive to subordinate circumstances,
and alluded to them if he thought they were necessary.

The salutation of the Lord is the same in both, ‘‘ Peace be unto
you.” But the effect upon those assembled in each case was exceed-
ingly different. St. Luke tells us that they were ‘terrified and
affrighted, and supposed that they had seen a Spirit.” St. John
says, “‘ Then were the disciples glad when they saw the Lord.” Of
course it be may said,that before they were assured that it was the
Lord by the sight of the marks of the spear and nails they were
affrighted, and that not till then was their fear dispelled ; but this is
very unsatisfactory, for St. John is by no means backward in setting
forth what was in the minds of the Apostles, even when it is to their
discredit ; as, for instance, that St. Peter, in contrast with St. John,
believed not even when he saw the sepulchre empty—that they
knew not the Scripture that He must rise from the dead—and the
unbelief of Thomas.

The impression from St. John’s account is, that they saw Him at
the first with joy. But there is absolutely nothing answering in St.
John’s account to what we find in the next three verses of St.
Luke: ‘“ And he said unto them, Why are ye troubled ? and why do
thoughts arise in your hearts? Behold my hands and my feet,
handle me, and see; for a spirit hath not flesh and bones, as ye see me
have. Andwhen he had thus spoken, he shewed them his hands and
his feet.”” Nowitis impossible to suppose that all this occurred toCuar. XXIV.] ALL MUST BE FULFILLED. 629

44, And he said unto them, " These are the words which I
spake unto you, while I was yet with you, that all ‘> Matt. xvi.

: : 2ie & xvii 225

things must be fulfilled, which were written in oae ie ee

: : Vill, . cl <lke

the law of Moses, and i the prophets, and in the 22. & xviii. 31.
ver. 6.

psalms, concerning me.

 

dispel the unbelief of the ten between the Lord’s salutation and their
seeing Him with gladness, as told us by St. John. So difficultisit that
many commentators (and among them apparently Godet) suppose
that St. Mark and St. Luke mix up the two accounts of the appear-
ance to the ten on Haster day and to the eleven on the next
Sunday, and so they apply to the rest, 7.e., the ten, words which
were addressed only to Thomas, viz., ‘‘ Behold my hands and my
feet, handle me and see,” &ce.

Then, from the forty-first verse, we gather that their unbelief was
even then not wholly dispelled ; and, in order to destroy it entirely,
he asked, ‘‘ Have ye here any meat?” and they gave Him the
broiled fish and the honey-comb, and then He ate before them.
Now in St. John even in the account of the meeting on the eighth
day after, when Thomas was present, we have not a word of such
circumstances, nor are they possible, for the only one remaining
who required his unbelief to be dispelled, was Thomas, and his con-
fession, “My Lord and my God,” followed instantly on his feeling
the wounds in the hands and side.

But we now come to the final and most important difference of all.

44-47. ‘And he said unto them, These are the words which I
spake unto you. . . . rise from the dead the third day: And that
repentance and remission of sins .. . . Jerusalem.” The reader
will notice that St. John gives not one word of this. According to
the fourth Evangelist, the Lord gives to the ten, and to the ten
only, a very remarkable commission, couched in the most startling
language in Scripture (except, perhaps, that in John vi.); words
which must, by their very nature, have been remembered by any-
one who heard them, and these words were accompanied by an
outward and visible act of a kind such as He had never performed
before. He breathed on them, and saith unto them, ‘“ Receive ye
the Holy Ghost. Whosesoever sins ye remit, they are remitted unto
them; and whosesoever sins ye retain, they are retained.”

Not one word of this, the most important commission ever given
to human beings, appears in St. Luke. On the contrary, from his630 THUS IT IS WRITTEN. (Sr. Luxe.

45 Then ° opened he their understanding, that they might
o Acts xvi. 14. understand the scriptures,

Pp ver. 26. : fs : 4

Ps. xxii. Is. 46 And said unto them, ? Thus it is written,
1. 6. & litt. 2, : - ;
bee wets and thus it behoved Christ to suffer, and to rise
XVli. 3.

from the dead the third day:

 

46. “ And thus it behoved.” So A., C2., N., X., 1, A, A, 17, later’ Uncials, almost all
Cursives, f, q, Vulg., Syriacs; but omitted by , B., C, D., L., a, b, ¢, e, ff2, 1, Copt.,
Ath,

narrative we should gather that no commission of any sort was
then given. According to St. Luke the only words spoken were a
reference to other words which are not given, and which seem
to refer to what was spoken to the two disciples on the way to
Emmaus: ‘‘ These are the words which I spake unto you, while I
was yet with you, that all things must be fulfilled, which were
written in the law of Moses, and in the prophets, and in the Psalms
concerning me.”

Such are the two inspired accounts of the same meeting, but with
scarcely a feature in common. The account in St. John is that of
an eye-witness, one of the innermost circle of believers—one on
whose mind such tremendous words, accompanied with so ex-
traordinary an act, must have been for ever impressed. St. Luke
certainly was not present, and yet his account is so circumstantial,
So graphic, that if he be a truthful Evangelist, it must have come
from one present. How are we to account for all this ?

I believe in one way, and in only one. It was a large room.
There was a large assembly of the followers of the Lord, and there
were amongst them two or three distinct groups. One of these
groups stood somewhat by itself, and was formed of the Apostles
alone. The Lord appeared amongst these. They recognized Him
with joy, and words passed between them, very brief, which were
unheard by the others. The “ others,’ or many of them, were
terrified and affrighted, as at an apparition. But He went amongst
them, and reassured them, bid them feel His flesh and bones, and
finally ate something in their presence. These, the greater part,
would not know, or very indistinctly hear what He said to the ten:
the full account of this was reserved to the writing of the last
Gospel.

If any one objects to this explanation, let him do so. But let himpepeneeinatt

     
  
 
 
  
  
  
 
   
  
 
  
  
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
  
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 
 

Cuar. XXIV] YE ARE WITNESSES. 631

47 And that repentance and remission of sins 4 Dan, ix. 24.
: ; : Acts xiii. 38,
should be preached in his name ‘among all 46. 1 John
ii. 12.

nations, beginning at Jerusalem. r Gen. xii, 3
Seon fe ae a7 ae Ps, xxii. 27.
48 And ‘ye are witnesses of these things. Is. xlix. 6, 22.
49 §* And, behold, I send the promise of my yr 73°"

F : fe 6 Mie. iv. 2.
ather upon you: but tarry ye in the city of yuri.

Jerusalem, until ye be endued with power from on eee xv. 27.
ets i. 8, 22.
high. & ii. 32. & iii.

Age eee 15.

G Tse sive ce
Joel ii. 28.
49, “Of Jerusalem.” So A., C2, X., ©, A, A, I, all later Uncials, John xiv. 16,
ull Cursives, f, q, Syriac, Arm., and AXth.; but omitted by &, B., Cl, a & xv. a
D., L., a, b, c, e, ff2, g?, 1, q, Vulg., Copt. j ie a ql ro

“emember what he is bound to account for. He is bound to account
‘or the fact that two inspired writers give a history of what
yecurred at the same time and place without one feature in com-
mon. Theimpression made by the Lord’s appearance, His conduct,
and His words to dispel their fear, and, above all, His final words
are totally different in each narrative.

That the eleven (or ten) were somewhat apart from the rest, so as
to receive a commission by themselves, was no new thing. On the
sontrary, it is in accordance with all Christ’s dealings with them.
They were chosen apart from the rest; they received separate in-
struction as the twelve; they received promises as a body of twelve,
and no more; they only were present at the institution of the
Eucharist. Their segregation continues in the history of the
founding of the Church. One is very solemnly added to fill up the
mystic number. “ Peter stood up with the eleven,” and ‘“‘ of the
rest durst no man join himself unto them.” (Acts i. 26, ii. 14,
v. 13.)

From 8+. Luke we gather that there were more persons besides
the ten, but not one word of any commission addressed to them :
only that, in accordance with prophecy, repentance and remission
of sins should be preached in His name among all nations. This,
if it implies a commission merely to preach, is very indirect, whereas
the commission in St. John to remit or retain sins is the most direct
conceivable.

Much has been made of the presence of others besides the Apostles
as noted by St. Luke. These ‘‘ others,” of whom we know nothing632 WHILE HE BLESSED THEM. (Sr. Luxe.

50 Y And he led them out "as far as to Bethany, and he

am ae 1.12. lifted up his hands, and blessed them.

x 2 Kings il. : : ‘

11. Mark xvi. 51 * And it came to pass, while he blessed them,
19. John xx. : x

17. Actsi.9. he was parted from them, and carried up into
Eph. iv. 8.
F heaven.

 

51. «And carried up into heaven.” So A., B., C., L., X., 1, A, A, II, later Uncials,
all Cursives, c, f, q, Vulg., Syriacs ; but omitted by N, D., a, b, e, ff?.
except that they were so terrified that the feeling of the Lord’s
flesh and bones, and the sight of His hands and feet were not
sufficient to dispel their doubts, are (the reader will scarcely credit
it) supposed to represent the whole Church as apart from the
Apostles, and so to receive a commission to remit and retain co-
ordinately with the Apostles: so that the Lord here desires to
nullify that peculiar position in which He had endeavoured to place
the twelve between Himself and the rest of His followers, and which
they appear to have reassumed after Pentecost.

But this is contrary to all which we can gather from the narra-
tive. Forif ‘the others ’’ had heard any such commission, which, if
addressed to them, the Lord would have taken care that they should
have heard, they would have remembered it, and St. Luke, who is
very circumstantial in his account, would have recorded it from the
report of some one of them: and so his silence is the plainest proof
that no such commission was addressed to those outside the twelve.

44-49. “ And he said unto them .. . on high.”’ We have now to
notice another remarkable matter in St. Luke’s narrative, which
is, that if we understand the words of the Lord recorded in the
forty-fourth verse as said now, then seeing that from the forty-
fourth to the fiftieth verses there is one continuous narrative, he
seems to place the Ascension immediately after this meeting: but
this is impossible. We must then suppose that between the account
of His eating before them, and the words narrated in verses 44 or
46 and 47 there is to be inserted the narratives of all the meetings
related by St. Matthew, St. Mark, and St. John, during the great
forty days.

“Then opened he their understanding,” &¢. This is in all pro-
bability as stupendous a miracle as any in the Lord’s history.
That men should in a moment receive a power of mental compre-
hension which they had not before, and that this power should
enable them to see the true import and meaning of a book whichCuar. XXIV.] THEY WORSHIPPED HIM. 635
52 ¥ And they worshipped him, and returned to Jerusalem

with great joy: y Matt. xxviii,
b 9, 17.

03 And were continually ” in the temple, prais- ae ii, 46.

ing and blessing God. Amen. oe

02, ‘*And they worshipped him.” Omitted by D. and old Latin, a, b, e; 1251 > but
retained by all other MSS., Uncials and Cursives, ¢, f, q, Vulg.

53. “Praising and blessing God.” D, and some old Latin omit “blessing.” Some, x,

B., C., L., omit «< praising.” <‘ Praising and blessing” in A., later Uncials, and all
Cursives, some old Latin, Vulg., &e.

had hitherto been closed to them, seems greater than any acts of
healing, or feeding of multitudes, or stilling of tempests. It implies
Divine power over our spiritual and intellectual nature such as God
only can exercise. And yet it is the commonest of all miracles,
and the one which survives amongst us. The opening of the mind
and heart to the things of God is constantly now going on. To
many—we may say to all—who submit their wills and under-
standings to God, the Scriptures are unlocked, a new light is shed
upon every part of them, especially upon the works and words of
the Lord. This power of a risen Christ we claim every time we
put up to God one of the most familiar of all our prayers, that ‘‘ by
patience and comfort of His holy Word we may embrace and ever
hold fast the blessed hope of everlasting life” in Jesus Christ.

49. ‘“ And, behold, I send the promise of my Father upon you: but
tarry ye in... Jerusalem,” &. This certainly was said but a little
before the Ascension. It must have been said after they had seen
Him in Galilee. It is the substance of what is recorded in Acts i.
4-8,

“The promise of my Father.” The only distinct promises of the
sending of the Holy Spirit are in St. John’s Gospel, so that this
place both requires and recognizes the teaching of the last dis-
courses of that Gospel, John xiii. to xvii.

50, 51. We must reserve all remarks on the Ascension to our
notes on the Acts of the Apostles, which contain the fullest report.
The speciality of the Gospel account is that the Lord was parted
from them in the act of blessing them.

02, ‘‘ And they worshipped him, and returned to Jerusalem with
great joy.” This worship of One Who was by the act of His Ascen-
sion exalted into the sphere of Deity was an act of Divine Worship.

53. “ And were continually in the temple, praising and blessing
ne634 PRAISING AND BLESSING GOD.  [Sr. Luxe.

 
  
   
  
  

God.” So we read, Acts ii. 46, iii. 1, &:. There was no sharp line
drawn between the worship of the Old and the New Covenant.
Till the temple was destroyed the Christian Jews were its constant
attendants. The twilight of Judaism gradually gave place to the
bright and clear morn of the Gospel.

THE END. {

 

CHISWICK PRESS?--C WHITTINGHAM AND CO, TOOKS COURT, CHANCERY LANE.N LIBRARY

e on the date

ALDERMA
The return of this pook is du
indicated pelow

DUE

 

 

 

 

   
  
   

 

ks are lent out for two

eptions an
e date stamped

T—=GUue pooks 2

Usually boo
there are eXC
note carefully th
dad for ove

d the borrowe
above. Fines

t the rate of

weeks, put

r shouldCX 000 454