{"collection":"scripture-revelation","full_text_available":true,"graph_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/api/page/gutenberg_21328/graph","html_url":"https://unchartedknowledge.5gfusion.net/v2/page/gutenberg_21328","id":"gutenberg_21328","license":"Public Domain (US)","rights_basis":"gutenberg_metadata_copyright_false","source":"gutenberg","source_url":"https://www.gutenberg.org/ebooks/21328","summary":null,"tags":["Category: Religion/Spirituality","Jesus Christ -- Parables"],"text":"Produced by Brian Sogard, Laura Wisewell and the Online\nDistributed Proofreading Team at http://www.pgdp.net\n\n\n\n\n\n\n +--------------------------------------------------------------+\n | |\n | Transcriber's note |\n | |\n | Printer errors: A number of printer errors and some |\n | punctuation errors have been corrected, but inconsistent |\n | hyphenation has been left as in the original. Details of the |\n | printer errors can be found in the HTML version of this |\n | eBook. |\n | |\n | Greek: This book contains a number of Greek words and |\n | phrases. These have been transliterated. To see the correct |\n | rendering, use the UTF-8 text or HTML version of this |\n | eBook. |\n | |\n +--------------------------------------------------------------+\n\n\n\nTHE PARABLES OF OUR LORD.\n\n\n\n\n_WORKS BY THE SAME AUTHOR._\n\n\nI.\n\nNEW EDITION, COMPLETE IN ONE VOLUME,\n\nLAWS FROM HEAVEN FOR LIFE ON EARTH: Illustrations of the Book of\nProverbs. Crown 8vo, cloth. Price 7s. 6d.\n\n\nII.\n\nROOTS AND FRUITS OF THE CHRISTIAN LIFE. Crown 8vo. Price 7s. 6d.\n\n\nIII.\n\nTHE RACE FOR RICHES, AND SOME OF THE PITS INTO WHICH THE RUNNERS FALL.\nFoolscap 8vo. Price 1s. 6d.\n\n\n\nT. NELSON AND SONS. LONDON, EDINBURGH, AND NEW YORK\n\n\n\n\n THE\n\n PARABLES\n\n OF\n\n OUR LORD.\n\n\n _By the_\n\n _REV. WILLIAM ARNOT._\n\n\n LONDON:\n T. NELSON AND SONS, PATERNOSTER ROW;\n EDINBURGH; AND NEW YORK.\n\n 1874.\n\n\n\n\nCONTENTS.\n\n\n Page\n _INTRODUCTION,_ 11\n\n I. _The Sower,_ 43\n\n II. _The Tares,_ 75\n\n III. _The Mustard Seed,_ 101\n\n IV. _The Leaven,_ 111\n\n V. _The Hidden Treasure,_ 128\n\n VI. _The Pearl,_ 144\n\n VII. _The Draw-Net,_ 160\n\n VIII. _The Unmerciful Servant,_ 185\n\n IX. _The Vineyard Labourers,_ 204\n\n X. _The Two Sons,_ 223\n\n XI. _The Wicked Husbandmen,_ 237\n\n XII. _The Royal Marriage Feast,_ 254\n\n XIII. _The Ten Virgins,_ 282\n\n XIV. _The Entrusted Talents,_ 299\n\n XV. _The Seed Growing Secretly,_ 312\n\n XVI. _The Two Debtors,_ 326\n\n XVII. _The Good Samaritan,_ 341\n\n XVIII. _The Friend at Midnight,_ 357\n\n XIX. _The Rich Fool,_ 369\n\n XX. _The Barren Fig-Tree,_ 378\n\n XXI. _The Excuses,_ 387\n\n XXII. _The Lost Sheep,_ 402\n\n XXIII. _The Lost Coin,_ 422\n\n XXIV. _The Prodigal Son,_ 427\n\n XXV. _The Prudent Steward,_ 451\n\n XXVI. _The Rich Man and Lazarus,_ 465\n\n XXVII. _Unprofitable Servants,_ 483\n\n XXVIII. _The Importunate Widow,_ 497\n\n XXIX. _The Pharisee and the Publican,_ 509\n\n XXX. _The Servants and the Pounds,_ 520\n\n\n\n\nINTRODUCTION.\n\n\nWe have been accustomed to regard with affectionate veneration the\nlife-work of the Reformers, and the theology of the Reformation. Of a\nlater date, and in our own vernacular, we have inherited from the\nPuritans an indigenous theology, great in quantity and precious in\nkind,--a legacy that has enriched our age more, perhaps, than the age is\naltogether willing to acknowledge. At various periods from the time of\nthe Puritans to the present, our stock of sacred literature has received\nadditions of incalculable value. So vast and varied have our stores\nbecome at length, that an investigator of the present day can scarcely\nexpect to find a neglected spot where he may enjoy the luxury of\ncultivating virgin soil: so ably, moreover, have our predecessors\nfulfilled their tasks, that a modern inquirer, obliged to deal with\nfamiliar themes, cannot console himself with the expectation of dealing\nwith them to better purpose. It does not follow, however, that a\ncontribution to the literature of theology is useless, because it\nneither touches a new theme, nor treats an old more ably.\n\nThe literature of one century, whether sacred or common, will not, when\nserved up in the lump, satisfy the craving and sustain the life of\nanother. The nineteenth century must produce its own literature, as it\nraises its own corn, and fabricates its own garments. The intellectual\nand spiritual treasures of the past should indeed be reverently\npreserved and used; but they should be used as seed. Instead of\nindolently living on the stores which our fathers left, we should cast\nthem into the ground, and get the product fresh every season--old, and\nyet ever new. The intellectual and spiritual life of an age will wither,\nif it has nothing wherewith to sustain itself, but the food which grew\nin an earlier era; it must live on the fruits that grow in its own time,\nand under its own eye.\n\nNor will a servile imitation of the ancient masters suffice. A mere\nreproduction, for example, of the Puritan theology would not be suitable\nin our day; while the truth, which constitutes its essence, remains the\nsame, it must be cast in the moulds of modern thought, and tinged with\nthe hues of modern experience.\n\nEngineers surveying for a railway lay down the line level, or as nearly\nlevel as the configuration of the surface will permit; but an engineer's\nlevel is not a straight line; it is the segment of a circle,--that\ncircle being the circumference of the globe. The line which practically\nconstitutes a level bends downwards continually as it goes forward,\nfollowing the form of the earth, and at every point being at right\nangles to the radius. If it were produced in an absolutely straight\nline, it would, in the course of a few miles, be high and dry above the\nsurface of the earth, and entirely useless for the practical purposes of\nlife. Such would sacred literature become if in blind admiration of the\nfathers, the children should simply use the old, and not produce the\nnew. As we advance along the course of time, we are, as it were, tracing\na circle; and he who would be of use in his generation, must bend his\nspeculations to the time, and let them touch society on the level at\nevery point in the progress of the race. To throw a new contribution\ninto the goodly store does not, therefore, imply a judgment on the part\nof the writer that the modern theology is better than the ancient. We\nmust make our own: it concerns us and our children that what we make be\nin substance drawn from the word of God; and in form, suited to the\ncircumstances of the age.\n\nStill further, the accumulations of the past should be used by those who\ninherit them, as a basis on which to build. It is the business of each\ngeneration to lay another course on the wall, and so leave the structure\nloftier than they found it. The Bible, like the world, is inexhaustible;\nin either department hosts of successive investigators have plied their\ntasks from the beginning, and yet there is room.\n\nSome observations are here submitted, more or less strictly introductory\nto a treatise on a specific branch of Scriptural exegesis--the Parables\nof Our Lord.\n\n\nI.--ANALOGY.\n\nAs the husbandman's first care is neither the fruit nor the tree which\nbears it, but the soil in which the tree must grow: so an expositor,\nwhose ultimate aim is to explain and enforce the parables of Jesus,\nshould mark well at the outset the fundamental analogies which pervade\nthe works of God, and constitute the basis of all figurative language,\nwhether in human teaching or divine.\n\nThe Maker and Ruler of the universe pursues an object, and works on a\nplan. His purpose is one, and he sees the end from the beginning: the\nvariations, infinite in number, and vast in individual extent, which\nemerge in the details of his administration, are specific accommodations\nof means to ends.\n\nThe material and moral departments of the divine government are, like\nbody and soul of a human being, widely diverse from each other; but one\nMaster administers both with a view to a common end. The two departments\nare different in kind, and therefore the laws which regulate the one\ncannot be the same as the laws which regulate the other; but in both one\ndesigner operates towards one design, and therefore the laws which\nregulate the one must be like the laws which regulate the other. From\nthe duality of creation, there cannot be identity between the physical\nand moral laws; but from the unity of the Creator there must be\nsimilarity.\n\nNor is it only between the two great departments of the divine\ngovernment generically distinguished, that analogies may spring: within\neither department, analogies innumerable may be found between one\nspecies and another, and even between individuals of the same species.\nBetween two parts of the material world, or two portions of human\nhistory, or two processes of mental effort, analogies may be traced, as\nwell as between the evolutions of matter and the laws of mind.\n\nIt is not strictly correct to speak of the similitudes which we have\nbeen accustomed to admire in literature, as \"creations of genius;\" the\nutmost that is competent to genius is to observe and exhibit the\nsimilitudes as they lie in nature. An observing eye, a suggestive mind,\nand a loving heart constitute all the necessary apparatus; with these\nfaculties in exercise, let any one stalk abroad upon the earth among his\nfellows, and analogies will spring spontaneously around him, as\nmanifold and as beautiful as the flowers that by daylight look up from\nthe earth, or the stars that in the evening reciprocate from heaven the\ngentle salutation.\n\nAnalogy occupies the whole interval between absolute identity on the one\nhand, and complete dissimilarity on the other. You would not say there\nis an analogy between two coins of the same metal, struck successively\nfrom the same die; for all practical purposes they are identical.\nAlthough the two objects are thoroughly distinct, as all their sensible\nqualities are the same, we are accustomed to speak of them not as\nsimilar but the same. In order that a comparison may be effective either\nfor ornament or for use, there must be, between the two acts or objects,\na similarity in some points, and a dissimilarity in others. The\ncomparison for moral or aesthetic purposes is like an algebraic equation\nin mathematical science; if the two sides are in all their features the\nsame, or in all their features different, you may manipulate the signs\ntill the sun go down, but you will obtain no useful result: it is only\nwhen they are in some of their terms the same and in some different,\nthat you can bring fruit from their union.\n\nWe stand here on the brink of a great deep. For wise ends the system of\nnature has been constructed upon a line intermediate between the\nextremes of sameness and diversity. If the measure of difference between\nclasses and individuals had been much greater or much smaller than it\nis, the accumulation of knowledge would have been extremely difficult,\nor altogether impossible. It is by the combination of similarity and\ndissimilarity among sensible objects that science from its lowest to its\nhighest measures becomes possible. If all animals, or all plants had\nbeen in their sensible qualities precisely the same, there would have\nbeen of animals or vegetables only one class: we could have had no\nknowledge regarding them, except as individuals: our knowledge would at\nthis day have been less than that of savages. Again, if all animals or\nall plants had been in their sensible qualities wholly dissimilar--all\nfrom each, and each from all, it would have been impossible to frame\nclasses; our knowledge, as on the opposite supposition, would have been\nlimited to our observation of individuals. In either case Zoology or\nBotany would have been impossible. Man, endowed with intelligence, could\nnot, in such a world, have found exercise for his faculties. It would\nhave been like a seeing eye without a shining light. The power would\nhave lain dormant for want of a suitable object. Ask the Botanist, the\nNaturalist, the Chemist--ask the votary of any science, what makes\naccumulated knowledge possible; he will tell you, it is the similarity\nwhich enables him to classify, accompanied by the diversity which\nenables him to distinguish. Wanting these two qualities in balanced\nunion there could be no analogy; and wanting analogy, man could not be\ncapable of occupying the place which has been assigned to him in\ncreation.[1]\n\n [1] But in order to employ analogy with effect more is needful than\n to make sure that the two objects or acts compared are similar\n without being identical: the design for which a comparison is made\n enters as an essential element, and decisively determines its value.\n Between two given objects an analogy may exist, good for one purpose\n but worthless for another. Given two balls, spherical in form and\n equal in size, the one of wood and the other of iron; and let the\n question be, Do these two objects bear any analogy to each other,\n real in itself and capable of being usefully employed? The question\n cannot yet be answered: we must first ascertain for what purpose the\n comparison is instituted. The two balls are like each other in form,\n but unlike in material; whether is it in respect of their form or\n their material that you propose to compare them? If one of them rolls\n along a gently inclined plane, you may safely infer that the other,\n when placed in the same position, will follow the same course; for\n although different in other features they are similar in form. But\n you cannot infer that because one floats when thrown into the water\n the other will float too, for in respect to specific gravity there is\n no similarity between them. Again, let two pieces of wood, cut from\n the same tree, be brought together, the one a cube, the other a\n sphere; you may safely conclude, if one swim in water that the other\n will swim too, because though of diverse forms they are of the same\n specific gravity; but you cannot conclude, if the one roll on an\n inclined plane, that the other will roll also, because though of the\n same specific gravity they are diverse forms. Two objects may be\n compared for the purpose of inferential analogy, although in nine of\n their qualities they are wholly dissimilar, if they resemble each\n other in one, and that the quality with respect to which the\n comparison is instituted. Again, although two objects be similar in\n nine of their properties, and dissimilar only in one, no useful\n analogy can be instituted between them if the object for which the\n comparison is made save with respect to the one point in which they\n are dissimilar. An acquaintance with such simple rudiments would go\n far to correct blunders both in the construction and the exposition\n of analogies.\n\nIn suggesting probabilities and throwing out lines of inquiry, analogy\nis of unspeakable value in every branch of science; in sacred\napologetics its specific use is to destroy the force of objections which\nmay be plausibly urged against facts or doctrines otherwise established;\nbut it is as an instrument for explaining, illustrating, fixing, and\nimpressing moral and spiritual truth that we are mainly concerned with\nit here.\n\nGod's word is as full of analogies as his works. The histories,\nofferings, and prophecies of the Old Testament are figures of better\nthings which have been brought to light by the gospel. The lessons of\nthe Lord and his apostles teem with types. Almost every doctrine is\ngiven in duplicate: the spirit is provided with a body; a body clothes\nthe spirit. Every fruitful vine has a strong elm to which it clings;\nevery strong elm supports a fruitful vine.\n\nOne important use of analogy in moral teaching is to fix the lesson on\nthe imagination and the memory, as you might moor a boat to a tree on\nthe river's brink to prevent it from gliding down during the night with\nthe stream. A just analogy suggested at the moment serves to prevent the\nmore ethereal spiritual conception from sliding out of its place.\n\nIn practical morals analogy is employed to surprise and so overcome an\nadverse will, rather than merely to help a feeble understanding. In this\ndepartment most of the Lord's parables lie. When a man is hardened by\nindulgence in his own sin, so that he cannot perceive the truth which\ncondemns it, the lesson which would have been kept out, if it had\napproached in a straight line before his face, may be brought home\neffectually by a circuitous route in the form of a parable. When the\nconscience stands on its guard against conviction you may sometimes turn\nthe flank of its defences unperceived, and make the culprit a captive\nere he is aware. The Pharisees were frequently outwitted in this manner.\nWith complacent self-righteousness they would stand on the outside of\nthe crowd, and, from motives of curiosity, listen to the prophet of\nNazareth as he told his stories to the people, until at a sudden turn\nthey perceived that the graphic parable which pleased them so well, was\nthe drawing of the bow that plunged the arrow deep in their own hearts.\n\nA man may be so situated that though his life is in imminent danger, he\ncannot perceive the danger, and consequently makes no effort to escape.\nFurther, his mind may be so prejudiced that he still counts the beam on\nwhich he stands secure, although a neighbour has faithfully given\nwarning that it is about to fall; it may be that because he stands on it\nhe cannot see its frailty. Let some friend who knows his danger, but\nwishes him well, approach the spot and hold a mirror in such a position\nthat the infatuated man shall see reflected in it the under and ailing\nside of the beam that lies between him and the abyss. The work is done:\nthe object is gained: the confident fool, made wise at length, leaps for\nlife upon the solid ground.\n\nAlthough the faculty of perceiving and understanding analogies is\ninherent in humanity, and consequently co-extensive with the race, it is\ndeveloped in a higher degree in some persons and in some communities\nthan in others. The common opinion, that the inhabitants of mountainous\ncountries possess this faculty in a higher measure than the inhabitants\nof the plains, seems to be sustained by facts. Within the borders of our\nown island it is quite certain that the Scotch and the Welsh employ\nfigures more readily and relish them more intensely than the English.\nHow far the difference may be directly due to the physical configuration\nof the country cannot perhaps be accurately ascertained; but doubtless\nthe mountains contribute indirectly to the result, by rendering access\nmore difficult, and so producing a greater measure of isolation and\nsimplicity.\n\nIt is an acknowledged and well-known fact, moreover, that the\ninhabitants of eastern countries are more prone to employ figurative\nlanguage than the peoples of western Europe; but it is difficult to\ndetermine how far this characteristic is due to the meteorological and\ngeographical features of the continent, and how far to hereditary\npeculiarities of race.\n\nLooking merely to the physical features of their country, you might\nexpect that the inhabitants of Palestine would possess in a high degree\nthe faculty of suggesting and appreciating analogical conceptions; the\npeculiar history and jurisprudence of the people must have tended\npowerfully in the same direction. Accordingly, as might have been\nexpected from the circumstances of the nation, it appears in point of\nfact on the whole face of the Scriptures, that as the institutes of the\ncommonwealth were symbolical, the language of the people was figurative.\nThey were at home in metaphor. It was their vernacular. The sudden and\nbold adoption of physical forms in order to convey spiritual\nconceptions, did not surprise--did not puzzle them. \"Ye are the salt of\nthe earth,\" \"Wheresoever the carcase is, there will the eagles be\ngathered together,\" fell upon their ears, not as a foreign dialect, but\nas the accents of their native tongue.\n\nIt might easily be shown that no other characteristic connected with the\nform of the Scriptures could have done so much to facilitate their\ndiffusion in all climes, and in all ages, as the analogical mould in\nwhich a large proportion of their conceptions is cast; but this is\nscarcely denied by any, and is easily comprehended by all. In another\npoint of view, less obvious, and not so frequently noticed, the\nprevalence in the Scriptures of analogical forms, attaching spiritual\ndoctrines to natural objects and historic facts, has served a good\npurpose in the evidences and exposition of revealed religion. The more\nabstract terms of a language are not so distinctly apprehended as the\nmore concrete, and in the course of ages are more liable to change. The\nhabit, universal among the writers of the Scriptures from the most\nancient to the latest, of making abstract moral conceptions fast to\npillars of natural objects and current facts, has contributed much to\nfix the doctrines like fossils for all time, and so to diminish the area\nof controversy. All the more steadily and safely has revealed truth come\ndown from the earliest time to the present day, that it has in every\npart of its course run on two distinct but parallel tracks.\n\n\nII.--PARABLES.\n\nThe parable is one of the many forms in which the innate analogy between\nthe material and the moral may be, and has been practically applied.[2]\nThe difficulty of constructing a definition which should include every\nsimilitude that belongs to this class, and exclude all others, has been\nwell appreciated by expositors and frankly confessed. The parables of\nthe New Testament, after critics have done their utmost to generalize\nand classify, must in the end be accounted _sui generis_, and treated\napart from all others. The etymology of the name affords us no help, for\nit is applied without discrimination to widely diverse forms of\ncomparison; it indicates the juxtaposition of two thoughts or things,\nwith the view of exhibiting and employing the analogy which may be found\nto subsist between them; but several other terms convey precisely the\nsame meaning, and therefore it cannot supply us with the distinguishing\ncharacteristic of a class. As far as I have been able to observe, hardly\nanything has been gained at this point by the application of logical\nprocesses. The distinctions which have been successfully made are\nprecisely those which are sufficiently obvious without a critical\napparatus; and in regard to those comparisons which bear the closest\naffinity to the parable, and in which, on account of the rainbow-like\nblending of the boundaries, logical definitions are most needed, logical\ndefinitions have most signally failed. Scholars have, for example,\nsuccessfully distinguished parables from myths and fables; but this is\nlaboriously to erect a fence between two flocks that in their nature\nmanifest no tendency to intermingle; whereas, from some other forms of\nanalogy, such as the allegory, the parable cannot be separated by a\ndefinition expressed in general terms, which shall be at once\nuniversally applicable and universally understood.\n\n [2] Christ made it his business to speak in parables; and, indeed,\n one may say, the whole visible world is only a parable of the\n invisible world. The parable is not only something intermediate\n between history and doctrine; it is both history and doctrine--at\n once historical doctrine and doctrinal history. Hence its\n enchaining, ever fresher, and younger charm. Yes, parable is\n nature's own language in the human heart; hence its universal\n intelligibility, its, so to speak, permanent sweet scent, its\n healing balsam, its mighty power to win one to come again and again\n to hear. In short, the parable is the voice of the people, and hence\n also the voice of God.--_Die Gleichniss-reden Jesu Christi, von\n Fred. Arndt_, vol. i. 2.\n\nInto all parables human motives and actions go as constituents, and in\nmost of them the processes of nature are also interwoven. The element of\nhuman action is generally introduced in a historic form, as \"a certain\nman had two sons;\" but some of the similitudes of Scripture, which by\ngeneral consent are reckoned parables, lack this feature, as for\nexample, the Lost Sheep.[3] \"What man of you, having an hundred sheep?\"\nFor my own part, while there are some that, on the one hand, I can with\nconfidence include, and some that, on the other, I must with equal\nconfidence keep out, I see not a few lying ambiguous on the border. My\njudgment inclines to what seems a medium between two extremes,--between\nthe decision of some German philosophical expositors who are too\ncritical, and the decision of some English practical preachers who are\nnot critical enough. I would fain eschew, on the one hand, the laborious\ntrifling by which it is proved that the parable of the Sower is not a\nparable; and, on the other hand, the unfortunate facility which admits\ninto the number almost all similitudes indiscriminately. I shall adopt\nthe list of Dr. Trench,[4] thirty in number, as being on the whole a\nfair and convenient medium; although I could not undertake to\ndemonstrate that these only, and these all possess the qualities which\nin his judgment go to constitute a parable. Some that are included can\nscarcely be distinguished by logical definitions from some that are\nexcluded; but so far am I from considering this a defect, that I deem it\na necessary result of the impalpable infinitesimal graduation by which\nthe fully-formed parable glides down into the brief detached\nmetaphorical aphorism, in the words of the Lord Jesus during the period\nof his ministry.\n\n [3] It is not, however, by the universal consent of critics that\n even this is admitted as a genuine parable. Schultze boldly excludes\n it; but he excludes also all the group in Matt. xiii. except the\n Tares. By one arbitrary rule after another, he cuts down the whole\n number of our Lord's parables to eleven.--_A. H. A. Schultze, de\n parabolarum J. C. indole poetica com._ Men have good cause to\n suspect the accuracy of their artificial rules, when the application\n of them works such havoc. Better that we should have no critical\n rules, than adopt such as separate on superficial literal grounds,\n things that the judgment of the Church and the common sense of men\n have in all ages joined together as substantially of the same class.\n\n [4] Notes on the Parables.\n\nCertain figurative lessons, differing from the parable on the one hand,\nand the allegory on the other, may be found scattered up and down both\nin the Scriptures and in secular literature, whose distinguishing\ncharacteristic is, that they are not spoken but enacted, and which I am\ndisposed to regard as more nearly allied than any other to the parables\nof our Lord.\n\nThey seem to constitute a species of simple primitive germinal drama.\nSome examples occur in the history of the Hebrew monarchy before the\nperiod of the captivity. At Elisha's request, Joash, King of Israel,\nshot arrows from a bow, in token of the victory which he should obtain\nover the Syrians. Left without instructions as to the frequency with\nwhich the operation should be repeated, the king shot three arrows\nsuccessively into the ground, and paused. Thereupon the prophet,\ninterpreting the symbol, declared that the subjugation of the Syrians\nwould not be complete (2 Kings xiii.) Another specimen may be observed,\nshining through the history in the reign of Jehoshaphat, when a prophet\nnamed Chenaanah made a pair of iron horns, and flattered the King of\nIsrael by the symbol that he would push the Syrians till he should\nconsume them (2 Chron. xvii. 10). About the time of the captivity, and\nin the hands of Ezekiel, this species of parable appears with great\ndistinctness of outline, and considerable fulness of detail. When a\nfrivolous people would not take warning of their danger, the prophet,\ngodly and grave, took a broad flat tile, and sketched on it the outline\nof a besieged city, and lay on his left side, silently contemplating the\nsymbol of his country's fate (chap. iv.) The strange act of the revered\nman attracted many eyes, and stirred new questionings in many hearts.\nEqually graphic is the representation of Israel's captivity, in the\ndramatic parable recorded in chap. xii., where the prophet personally\nenacts the melancholy process of packing his goods, and escaping as an\nexile.\n\nFrom the subsequent history, we learn that this significant act arrested\nattention; the people gazed in wonder on the sign, and anxiously\ninquired into its meaning.\n\nIt is eminently worthy of notice that the lavish and bold imagery of\nEzekiel effectually served the immediate purpose for which it was\nemployed; it attracted the people's regard, explained the prophecy to\ntheir understandings, and fixed the lessons in their memories. It is\ntrue, indeed, that they did not repent; but this only shows that\nparables, even when dictated by the Spirit, have not inherent power to\nconvert; even God's word may, through the hearer's sin, remain a dead\nletter in his hand. It emerges incidentally in the history that the\npreaching of Ezekiel was eminently popular; crowds came out to hear and\nsee.\n\nThe ultimate spiritual success lies in other hands; but in as far as the\ninstrument is concerned, it is proved, from the experience of this\nancient prophet, that the mastery of analogies draws the people round\nthe preacher's feet, and brings his lessons into contact with their\nminds and hearts.\n\nIn modern times, much argument is employed to prove that the drama may\nbe pure in itself, and effectual as a moral educator,--argument which,\nhowever excellent it may be in theory, has hitherto proved impotent in\nfact. But from the beginning it was not so; Ezekiel was a dramatist; he\nacted his prophecies and his preachings on a stage. The warnings were in\nthis form clearly articulated, and forcefully driven home; if they\nfailed to produce the ultimate result of repentance, the obstacle lay\nnot in the feebleness of the instrument, but in the wilful hardness of\nthe subject whereon the instrument was plied. Dramatic representation in\nthe simplicity of its infancy was a golden vessel of the sanctuary,\nemployed in the service of God; long ago it was carried away into\nBabylon, and profanely used as a wine cup in the orgies of idols.\nWhether it shall ever be wrenched from the enemy, purified, and restored\nto the service of the temple, I know not.\n\nIn the general history of the world, the most interesting parable of\nthis class that occurs to my memory is one attributed to a North\nAmerican Indian in conversation with a Christian missionary. The red\nman had previously been well instructed in the Scriptures, understood\nthe way of salvation, and enjoyed peace with God. Desiring to explain to\nhis teacher the turning point of his spiritual experience, he had\nrecourse, in accordance, perhaps, with the instincts and habits of his\ntribe, to the language of dramatic symbols rather than to the language\nof articulate words. Having gathered a quantity of dry withered tree\nleaves, he spread them in a thin layer, and in a circular form on the\nlevel ground. He then gently laid a living worm in the centre, and set\nfire to the circumference on every side. The missionary and the Indian\nthen stood still and silent, watching the motions of the imprisoned\nreptile. It crawled hastily and in alarm towards one side, till it met\nthe advancing girdle of fire, and then crawled back as hastily to the\nother. After making several ineffectual efforts to escape, the creature\nretired to the centre, and coiled itself up to await its fate. At this\ncrisis, and just before the flames reached their helpless victim, the\nIndian stept gravely forward, lifted the worm from its fiery prison, and\ndeposited it in a place of safety. \"Thus,\" this simple preacher of the\ncross indicated to the missionary,--\"Thus helpless and hopeless I lay,\nwhile the wrath due to my sin advanced on every side to devour me; and\nthus sovereignly, mightily, lovingly did Christ deliver my soul from\ndeath.\"\n\n\nIII.--THE PARABLES OF THE LORD.\n\nMetaphorical language, as we have seen, is deeply rooted in the\nfundamental analogy which subsists between the several departments of\nour Creator's work; and the parable is a species of figure which, for\nall practical purposes, is sufficiently distinguished from others,\nalthough it is scarcely possible to isolate it by a complete logical\ndefinition. Nor is it enough to say that those specimens which are found\nin the record of Christ's ministry belong to the species; they may be\nsaid to constitute a species by themselves. The parables which are known\nto literature beyond the pale of the evangelic histories are either very\ndiverse in kind, or very few in number. The practical result is, that\nwhile we treat the parable as a distinct species of analogical\ninstruction, we must treat the parables spoken by the Lord as a unique\nand separate class. As the Lord's people in ancient times dwelt alone,\nand were not reckoned among the nations, the Lord's parabolic teaching\nstands apart by itself, and cannot with propriety be associated with\nother specimens of metaphorical teaching. Logically as well as\nspiritually it is true, that \"never man spake like this man.\"\n\nBut, when setting aside all other forms of comparison, we confine our\nregard to the parable, and, setting aside other specimens, we confine\nour regard to the parables spoken by the Lord, other questions arise\nconcerning the internal and reciprocal relations of these peculiar\ncompositions; should they be read and considered as so many independent\nunits miscellaneously scattered over the evangelic record, or should\nthey be classified according to the place which belongs to them in a\nsystem of dogmatics? or can any method of treatment be suggested\ndifferent from both of these extremes, and better than either?\n\nIt is doubtless competent to any inquirer to frame the doctrines which\nthe parables illustrate into a logical scheme, and in his exposition to\ntranspose the historical order, so that the sequence of the subjects\nshall coincide with his arrangement. This method is lawful in regard to\nthe parables particularly, as it is in regard to the contents of\nScripture generally; but, as a method of prosecuting the inquiry, I\nthink it loses more on the side of topical and historical interest than\nit gains on the side of logical precision. As the Bible generally is in\nits own natural order, both more engaging and more instructive than a\ncatechism compiled from it, although the compiler may have been both\nskilful and true; the parables of the Lord, in particular, taken up as\nthey lie in his ministry, are both more interesting and more profitable\nthan a logical digest of the theology which they contain, however\nfaithfully the digest may have been made.\n\nAny one may observe, as he reads our Lord's parables, that some of them\nare chiefly occupied with the teaching of doctrine, and others with the\nreproof of prevailing sins; but when on the basis of these and other\nsubordinate distinctions, you proceed to arrange them into separate\nclasses, you are met and repelled by insurmountable difficulties. When\nBauer, for example, has arranged them in three divisions, dogmatic,\nmoral, and historic, he is compelled immediately to add another class\ncalled the mixed, as dogmatic-moral and dogmatic-historic, thereby\nproving that his logical classification has failed.[5]\n\n [5] In reference to Bauer's classification, Limbourg Brower (_de\n parabol. Jesu._) observes that the distinction between parables that\n are dogmatic and parables that are moral cannot successfully be\n maintained, because of the intimate union maintained in the\n discourses of Jesus between the revelation of truth and the\n inculcation of duty. This remark, in connection with its ground, is\n decisive not only against the particular division to which it is\n applied, but to all divisions, in as far as they pretend to be\n logically distinct and complete.\n\nBy abandoning, for the purposes of exposition, the order in which the\nparables have been recorded, and adopting a classification on the basis\nof contents or form, some incidental advantages are obtained; especially\nsome otherwise necessary repetitions are avoided, and some subordinate\nrelations are by the juxtaposition more easily observed; but the loss\nis, I apprehend, much greater than the gain. The temptation to bend the\nfreely-growing branches of the parable, that they may take their places\nin the scheme, is by this method greatly increased; while historical\nsequences and logical relations, lying more or less concealed in the\nrecord, are in a great measure thrown away. Accordingly, I prefer the\nmethod of maintaining in the exposition the order which the evangelists\nhave adopted in the narrative. Besides the advantage of preserving in\nall cases the historical circumstances whence the parable sprung, we\ndiscover, as we follow this track, several groups associated together by\nthe Lord in his ministry, for the sake of their reciprocal relations,\nand reverently preserved in their places by the evangelical historians.\nThe seven in Matt. xiii., and the three in Luke xv., constitute the\nchief of those dogmatic groupings formed to our hand in the ministry of\nthe Lord. I refer to them here as examples, but defer the exposition of\ntheir sequences and relations, until it can be presented with greater\nadvantage in connection with the examination of their contents.\n\nA question, on some of its sides difficult, meets us here, regarding the\nreason why the Lord employed parables in the prosecution of his\nministry. On the one hand, it is certainly true, as may be proved from\nall history, that comparisons between material and moral facts or laws,\nspring up naturally in human converse; and further, that the truth\nexpressed in parables, if not in all cases immediately palpable, is\nbetter fitted both to arrest attention at first, and to imprint the\nlesson permanently on the learner's memory. But the use and usefulness\nof the parable in this respect are obvious and undisputed; it makes\nspiritual truth more attractive and more memorable. The difficulty does\nnot lie on this side; it adheres to a second function of the parable, in\nsome respects the opposite of the first,--the function of concealing the\ndoctrine in judgment from closed eyes and hardened hearts. In some\ninstances and to some extent, the parables, while they conveyed the\ndoctrine to one portion of the audience, concealed it from another. In\nthose cases \"they are like the husk which preserves the kernel _from_\nthe indolent, and _for_ the earnest.\"[6] It is the method, not unknown\nin other departments of the divine government, of making the same fact\nor law at once profitable to the humble, and punitive to the proud. Not\nonly the Lord's word, but also the Lord himself, partakes of this\ntwofold character, and produces these diverse effects; the same rock on\nwhich a meek disciple surely builds his hope, is also the stone over\nwhich scoffers stumble in their final fall.\n\n [6] _Gerlach in Lange._\n\nThe judicial or penal function of the parable was indicated by the Lord\nin express terms when he explained the meaning of the sower in private\nto his own disciples (Matt. xiii. 11-17; Mark iv. 10-13). In these\ncases, however, the wilful blindness of men's hearts appears as the sin\nwhich brought down the punishment, and the obstacle which kept out the\nblessing. Every word of God is good; but some persons maintain such an\naverted attitude of mind, that it glides off like sunbeams from polar\nsnows, without ever obtaining an entrance to melt or fructify. To one of\ntwo persons who stand in the same room gazing on the same picture in the\nsunlight, the beauty of the landscape may be fully revealed, while to\nthe other, on account of a certain indirectness of position and view, it\nappears only as an unpleasant dazzling glare. So, of two Jews who both\neagerly listened to Jesus, as he taught from the fishing-boat on the\nLake of Galilee, one found in the story the word of the kingdom,\nrefreshing as cold waters to a thirsty soul, while the other, hearing\nthe same words, perceived nothing in them but incoherent and tantalizing\nenigmas. For the right comprehension of the parables in particular, as\nof revealed truth in general, a receptive heart is a qualification even\nmore peremptorily and essentially necessary than a penetrating\nunderstanding. \"If any man is willing to do his will, he shall know of\nthe doctrine, whether it be of God\" (John vii. 17).\n\nEach of the parables contained some characteristic, or presented some\naspect of Christ's kingdom. His kingdom was not of this world, and\ntherefore it was intensely distasteful to the carnal Jews of that day.\nThe idea did not readily enter their mind; and when it did in some\nmeasure penetrate, it kindled in their corrupt hearts a flame of\npersecuting rage. It was necessary that the Lord should, during the\nperiod of his personal ministry, fully develop and deposit the seed of\nthe kingdom; but it was necessary also that he should remain on earth\nuntil the set time when his ministry as prophet should terminate in his\noffering as priest. Now, if he had at any period displayed all the\ncharacteristics of his kingdom in terms which the mob and their rulers\nwere able to comprehend, the persecution that ultimately crucified him,\nwould have burst prematurely forth, and so deranged the plan of the\nOmniscient. It was necessary, for example, in order to provide\nconsolation for his own disciples in subsequent temptations, that the\nLord should predict his own death and resurrection; but this\nprediction, when uttered in public, was veiled from hostile eyes under\nthe symbol, \"Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up\"\n(John ii. 19). More generally, it was necessary that such features of\nthe kingdom as its spiritual character and its expansive power should be\nmade known to true disciples for their instruction and encouragement,\nbut hidden for a time from persecutors in order to restrain their\nenmity. Parables served the twofold purpose. Tender, teachable spirits\ncaught the meaning at once; or, if they failed, they asked and obtained\nan explanation from the Master in private; while those who had not the\nsingle eye, were for the time left in darkness. It was their own\nhardness that kept out the light; their own hardness was employed as the\ninstrument whereby judgment was inflicted upon themselves.[7]\n\n [7] In Matthew (xiii. 13) he speaks in parables, \"because ([Greek:\n hoti]), they seeing, see not:\" and in Mark (iv. 12), and Luke\n (viii. 10), \"that ([Greek: hina]) seeing they might not see.\" Two\n different objects were effected at the same time, and by the same\n act, corresponding to those two terms; it is true that the Lord\n employed parables, as one employs pictures to teach a child,\n _because_ his auditors were children in understanding; and it is\n also true that he veiled his doctrines under metaphor _in order\n that_ those who were children in understanding but in malice men,\n might not perceive his drift, and so might not violently interfere\n to suppress his ministry. Thus according to the explanation which he\n gave at the moment, \"Whosoever hath, to him shall be given, and he\n shall have more abundance; but whosoever hath not, from him shall be\n taken away even that he hath\" (Matt. xiii. 12).\n\n\nIV.--THE INTERPRETATION OF THE PARABLES.\n\nOf the parables in particular, as of the Scriptures generally, it is\ntrue that faith is necessary to the full appreciation of their meaning.\nThat you must understand the Scriptures in order to have faith, and have\nfaith in order to understand the Scriptures, is indeed, a circle; but\nit is not a vicious circle. As you approach from without, you may\nperceive that the Bible is the word of God, and that the Christ whom it\nreveals is the Saviour of sinners; standing now on your new position,\nand recognising your Instructor as also your Redeemer, you will discover\nin his word a length, and breadth, and height, and depth, which were\nformerly concealed. In our day, as well as when the parables were first\nspoken, it is to his own disciples that their true meaning is made\nknown.\n\nAnother cognate requisite to the true spiritual comprehension of these\ndivine sayings, is sympathy with the view which Jesus took and gave of\nhuman nature in its fallen state. He spoke and acted not only as the\nTeacher of the ignorant, but also as the Saviour of the lost: if we do\nnot occupy the same stand-point, and look upon humanity in the same\nlight, we shall stumble at every step in our effort to comprehend what\nthe Speaker meant.\n\nThese two qualifications are supreme; and they apply alike to divine\nrevelation as a whole, and to each of its parts; there are others which\nare important though subordinate, and which bear more specially on the\nparticular department of Scripture exegesis with which we are here\nengaged, the Parables of the Lord.[8]\n\n [8] The Parables of the Kingdom are, as it were, a picture gallery,\n and we walk up and down it, examining each picture by itself. We\n must not forget, however, that these are heavenly pictures that hang\n around us,--that heavenly things are here exposed to view. A\n heavenly interpreter walks by our side: we must have a heavenly\n sense if we would grasp the meaning of what we hear and see. If our\n study quicken this sense within us, so that it shall grow clearer\n and sharper before every picture, a rich treat awaits us, for the\n heavenly Gallery is great.--_Draeseke, vom Reich Gottes_, i., 270.\n\n1. The faculty of perceiving and appreciating analogies. It is certainly\nnot necessary that an interpreter of Scripture should be a poet; but to\npossess in some measure that eye for parallels which constitutes the\nbasis of the poetic faculty, is a most desirable qualification for one\nwho proposes to help his neighbours in the study of the parables. It is,\nindeed, true that a man who possesses only a very small measure of this\nor of other mental gifts, may read these lessons of the Lord with\nspiritual profit to himself; but the pictorial theology of the New\nTestament is not safe in the hands of a teacher who is signally\ndefective in the faculty to which it specially appeals. Learning, and\nzeal, and faith combined may, in this department, expend much labour to\nlittle purpose, for lack of power to perceive the point of the analogy.\nBut, on the other hand,\n\n2. A stern logic is as necessary as a lively imagination. Deficient in\nthe analogical faculty, you cannot in this department go quickly\nforward; but deficient in the logical faculty, you will go forward too\nfast and too far. We need a well-spread, well-filled sail; but we need\nalso a helm to direct the ship in the path of safety. Restraining,\ndiscriminating judgment, is as necessary as impulsive power. Every one\nwho possesses even a moderate acquaintance with the literature of this\ndepartment will, I am persuaded, acknowledge the justice of this\nobservation. Some expositors of the parables, especially in more ancient\ntimes, remind one of the _Great Eastern_ in the Atlantic when her rudder\nwas disabled. There is plenty of impelling force, but this force, for\nwant of a director, only makes the ship go round and round in a\nweltering sea. From the pages of those commentators, whose imaginations\nhave broken loose, you may cull fancies as manifold, as beautiful, and\nas useless as the gyrations of a helmless ship in a stormy sea.\n\n3. Some competent acquaintance, not only with the Scriptures, but also\nwith the doctrines which the Scriptures contain, arranged in a dogmatic\nsystem, is necessary as a safeguard in the interpretation of the\nparables. A scientific acquaintance with natural history is necessary\nnot only in order to an intelligent appreciation of the contents of a\nmuseum, but also in order that you may turn to good account your\nmiscellaneous observation of nature; in like manner, although a correct\nexegesis of Scripture supplies us with our only true dogmatics, the\nknowledge of dogmatics, scientifically arranged, contributes in turn to\na correct exegesis. This remark has been drawn from me by my own\nexperience in the study of this department of theological literature. If\nwe would avoid the mistakes into which his own contemporaries fell, we\nmust read the Lord's parables in connection with the fuller exposition\nof divine truth which he commissioned and inspired the apostles to give.\nExcept in some cases where an explanation is subjoined, or the\ncircumstances exclude all uncertainty, it is not safe for us to lean on\na parable as an independent evidence of a dogma. The pictorial\nillustrations and the more direct doctrinal statements of Scripture\nshould go together for reciprocal elucidation and support. More\nespecially it is extremely dangerous for a theologian, when he has a\npurpose to be served and an adversary to be refuted, to grasp a parable\nin the sense which suits his view, and wield it as a weapon of offence;\nin such a case he will probably do more execution upon himself than upon\nhis antagonist. The importance of this point will be more fully seen\nwhen we consider the parables in detail.\n\n4. Some knowledge of relative history, topography, and customs should be\nat hand for use; but, at the same time, these things should be\nresolutely kept in their own place. They may be good servants, but they\nare bad masters. Through a signal defect in the knowledge of oriental\nantiquity, an interpreter may permit some beautiful allusions to slip\nthrough his hands unperceived; but, on the other hand, it ought to be\nfrankly conceded, and, if necessary, firmly maintained, that the\nprofitable use of our Lord's parables does not depend on rare and\ndifficult erudition. If a deficiency in this department infers the risk\nof baldness in the exposition, a redundance supplies a temptation to\npedantic display. It is one thing to place some ancient eastern custom\nin such a position that a ray of light from its surface shall pleasantly\nillumine a feature of the parable that was lying in the shade, and all\nanother thing to make the parable a convenience for the exhibition of a\nscholar's lore.\n\nWith more immediate reference to the exposition herewith submitted, it\nis enough to intimate that it is neither a compend of criticism, nor\nmerely a series of sermons. I have endeavoured to combine the substance\nof a critical investigation with the direct exhortation which becomes a\nminister of the gospel, when fellow-sinners constitute his audience, and\nthe Bible supplies his theme. On the one hand, no important difficulty\nhas been consciously slurred over without an effort to satisfy the\njudgment of a studious reader; and, on the other hand, no opportunity\nhas been omitted of pressing the gospel of Christ on the consciences of\nmen.\n\n\n\n\nTHE\n\nPARABLES OF OUR LORD.\n\n\n\n\nTHE GROUP IN MATT. XIII.\n\n\n\"The same day went Jesus out of the house, and sat by the sea side. And\n great multitudes were gathered together unto him, so that he went\n into a ship, and sat; and the whole multitude stood on the shore.\n And he spake many things unto them in parables.\"--MATT. xiii. 1-3.\n\nIn Matthew's narrative, the first specimen of that peculiar pictorial\nmethod which characterized the teaching of our Lord, is not an isolated\nparable occurring in the midst of a miscellaneous discourse, but a group\nof seven presented in one continuous and connected report. Nor is the\ngrouping due to the logical scheme of the Evangelist; we have here, not\nthe historian's digest of many disjointed utterances, but a simple\nchronological record of facts. In this order have these seven parables\nbeen recorded by the servant, because in this order they were spoken by\nthe Lord. It does not in the least detract from the soundness of this\njudgment to concede that some of them were spoken also in other\ncircumstances and other combinations. There is no ground whatever for\nassuming that one of our Lord's signal sayings could not have been\nspoken in one place, because it can be proved that it was spoken at\nanother. From the nature of the subjects, and the form which Christ's\nministry assumed, it might be confidently anticipated that the parables\nand other sharply relieved similitudes would recur, in whole or in part,\nin different discourses and before different assemblies: with this\nsupposition accordingly the facts agree, as they may be gathered from a\nsynopsis of the several narratives.\n\nAmong the later German critics, it is distinctly conceded by Lange that\nthese seven parables were spoken by the Lord in the order of Matthew's\nrecord, although some of them appear to have been spoken also at other\ntimes. If it could have been proved that none of the parables had ever\nbeen spoken a second time, the circumstance would have constituted a\nnon-natural and inexplicable phenomenon.\n\nA measure of logical order and reciprocal relation has always been\nobserved in this cluster of parables. While some of the relations, and\nthese the most important, are so obvious that they have been observed\nalike by all inquirers, in regard to others a considerable diversity of\nopinion has prevailed. Some, in the sequences of the group, look only\nfor various phases of the kingdom, presented in logical divisions and\nsub-divisions: others find here, in addition, a prophetic history of the\nChurch, like that which the Apocalypse contains. For my own part I am\ndisposed to confine my view to that which I consider sure and\nobvious,--the representation of the kingdom of God in different aspects,\naccording to a logical arrangement, not pronouncing judgment regarding\nthe soundness of the prophetic view, but simply passing it by, as being\nfrom its nature difficult and dim.\n\nThe first six readily fall into three successive well-defined pairs,\nand the seventh stands clearly designated by its subject as an\nappropriate conclusion. The _first_ pair exhibit the RELATIONS of the\nkingdom to the several classes of intelligent creatures with which, as\nadversaries or subjects, it comes into contact: the _second_ pair\nexhibit the PROGRESS of the kingdom from small beginnings to a glorious\nissue: the _third_ pair exhibit the PRECIOUSNESS of the kingdom, in\ncomparison with all other objects of desire: and the remaining _one_\nteaches that the good and evil which intermingle on earth will be\ncompletely and finally separated in the great day. Thus--\n\n { 1. _The Sower_; the relation of the\n { kingdom to different _classes of\n I. RELATIONS..........{ men_.\n { 2. _The Tares_; the relation of the\n { kingdom to _the wicked one_.\n\n { 1. _The Mustard-seed_; the progress\n { of the kingdom under the idea\n { of _a living growth_.\n II. PROGRESS...........{ 2. _The Leaven_; the progress of the\n { kingdom under the idea of _a\n { contagious outspread_.\n\n { 1. _The Hid Treasure_; the preciousness\n { of the kingdom under the\n { idea of _discovering what was hid_.\n III. PRECIOUSNESS.......{ 2. _The Goodly Pearl_; the preciousness\n { of the kingdom under the\n { idea of closing _with what is\n { offered_.\n\n { _The Draw-net_; the separation between\n IV. SEPARATION.........{ good and evil in the\n { great day.\n\nIt is not a valid objection to this division that in several cases, if\nnot in all, the subjects reciprocally overlap each other; it is, in the\ncircumstances, natural and necessary that they should. Thus, in regard\nto the first pair, the work of the adversary appears in the sower, and\nthe contact of believers with unbelievers appears in the tares; but I\nthink these are in either case incidental and subordinate, while the\nleading idea of the first is the reception given to the gospel by\ndifferent classes of men, and the leading idea of the second is the wile\nof the devil in his effort to destroy the work of Christ.\n\nWe must, however, beware of giving too much and too minute attention to\nthe sequences and mutual relations of the parables. Most of them, in\npoint of fact, are found in the narrative as isolated lessons, each\ncomplete in itself and independent of others. Even in this group,\nalthough the connections are interesting and obvious, they are not\nessential. The meaning of each specimen may be substantially discerned\nwithout reference to its place in the series. By studying each apart you\nmay learn the lesson well; but by studying all together you may learn\nthe lesson better.\n\nOn the face of the narrative it appears that the first four were\naddressed to a multitude congregated on the margin of the lake, and the\nlast three more privately to a smaller circle of disciples in a\nneighbouring house; but there seems no ground for supposing that the two\nportions were separated from each other by any considerable interval of\ntime or space.\n\nI freely concede that there is some ground for the distinction between\nthe more outward and obvious aspects of the kingdom presented in the\nfirst four, and the more inward and experimental matters which, in the\nlast three, were subsequently communicated to a more private circle; but\nthe distinction, though real and perceptible, does not appear to me so\nfundamental and so deeply marked as to justify those who make it the\nturning-point of their exposition.\n\nThere is a parallel which the thoughtful reader of the Scriptures will\nnot fail to observe, although a prudent expositor will beware of\nattempting to trace it too minutely, between the seven parables of this\nchapter and the epistles to the Seven Churches of Asia, in the beginning\nof the Apocalypse. The two groups agree in this, that both represent by\na series of examples various features of the kingdom, and various\nobstacles with which it must contend: they differ in that, while the\nexamples given in the Gospels are pictures drawn by the imagination, the\nexamples given in the Apocalypse are facts taken from history. But as\nall the characteristics and vicissitudes of his Church were present to\nthe Head from the beginning, it was as easy for him to exhibit an image\nof its condition through the ministry of Matthew, as to record examples\nafter they emerged in fact, through the ministry of John. In both\ncases--alike in the pictures presented to the Galilean crowd and the\nregistered events sent to the Asiatic Churches--the Master's design is\nto exhibit the kingdom on all its sides, that the observer's view,\nwhether of beauties or of blemishes, may be correct and full.\n\nI subjoin for the reader's information the view of those who see in this\nseries of parables the subsequent historical development of the Church,\nas it is briefly and clearly expressed by Lange: \"We ... trace in the\nparable of the sower a picture of the apostolic age; in the parable of\nthe tares, the ancient Catholic Church springing up in the midst of\nheresies; in the parable of the mustard-bush resorted to by birds of\nthe air as if it had been a tree, and loaded with their nests, a\nrepresentation of the outward Church as established under Constantine\nthe Great; in the leaven that is mixed among the three measures of meal,\nthe pervading and transforming influence of Christianity in the mediaeval\nChurch among the barbarous races of Europe; in the parable of the\ntreasure in the field, the period of the Reformation; in the parable of\nthe pearl, the contrast between Christianity and the acquisitions of\nmodern culture and secularism; and in the last parable a picture of the\nclosing judgment.\"\n\nThe parallel which the same critic institutes between the seven parables\nof this group and the seven beatitudes of the Sermon on the Mount, is an\nattractive study, and some of the coincidences are obvious and\nbeautiful; but this line of observation should be jealously kept\nsubordinate to the primary substantial lesson which each parable\ncontains. On the one hand, I desire that these secondary and incidental\nviews should not by their beauty draw to themselves a disproportionate\nshare of our attention; and on the other hand, I am disposed to respect\nevery earnest, sober, and reverential suggestion which any believing\ninquirer may throw out, regarding the lateral references and\nunder-current secondary meanings of the Lord's discourses; for they\npossess a length and breadth, and height and depth, which will exercise\nthe minds of devout disciples as long as the dispensation lasts, and\npass all understanding when it is done.\n\n\n\n\nI.\n\nTHE SOWER.\n\n\n\"The same day went Jesus out of the house, and sat by the sea side. And\n great multitudes were gathered together unto him, so that he went\n into a ship, and sat; and the whole multitude stood on the shore.\n And he spake many things unto them in parables, saying, Behold, a\n sower went forth to sow; and when he sowed, some seeds fell by the\n way side, and the fowls came and devoured them up: some fell upon\n stony places, where they had not much earth: and forthwith they\n sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth: and when the sun\n was up, they were scorched; and because they had no root, they\n withered away. And some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprung up,\n and choked them: but other fell into good ground, and brought forth\n fruit, some an hundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold. Who\n hath ears to hear, let him hear.... Hear ye therefore the parable of\n the sower. When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and\n understandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away\n that which was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by\n the way side. But he that received the seed into stony places, the\n same is he that heareth the word, and anon with joy receiveth it;\n yet hath he not root in himself, but dureth for a while: for when\n tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word, by and by he\n is offended. He also that received seed among the thorns is he that\n heareth the word; and the care of this world, and the deceitfulness\n of riches, choke the word, and he becometh unfruitful. But he that\n received seed into the good ground is he that heareth the word, and\n understandeth it; which also beareth fruit, and bringeth forth, some\n an hundredfold, some sixty, some thirty.\"--MATT. xiii. 1-9, 18-23.\n\nThe parable is, in our language at least, so uniformly associated with\nthis name, that it would not readily be recognised under any other\ndesignation; but \"The four kinds of ground\" (viererlei Acker), the title\nwhich seems to be in ordinary use among the Germans, is logically more\ncorrect, inasmuch as it points directly to the central idea, and\nexpresses the distinctive characteristic.\n\nAt this period a great and eager multitude followed the steps of Jesus\nand hung upon his lips. A certain divine authority, strangely combined\nwith the tenderest human sympathy, marked his discourses sharply off, as\nentirely different in kind from all that they had been accustomed to\nhear in the synagogue. Finding that instincts and capacities hitherto\ndormant in their being were awakened by his word, \"the common people\nheard him gladly.\" At an earlier hour of the same day on which this\nparable was spoken, the circle of listeners that encompassed the Teacher\nhad become so broad and dense, that his mother and brothers, who had\ncome from home to speak with him, were obliged to halt on the outskirts\nof the crowd, and pass their message in from mouth to mouth. In these\ncircumstances, the Preacher's work must have been heavy, and doubtless\nthe worker was weary. Having paused till the press slackened, he\nprivately retired to the margin of the lake, desiring probably to \"rest\na while;\" but no sooner had he taken his seat beside the cool still\nwater, than he was again surrounded by the anxious crowd. At once to\nescape the pressure and to command the audience better when he should\nagain begin to speak, he stepped into one of the fishing-boats that\nfloated at ease close by the beach, on the margin of that tideless\ninland sea. From the water's edge, stretching away upward on the natural\ngallery formed by the sloping bank, the great congregation, with every\nface fixed in an attitude of eager expectancy, presented to the\nPreacher's eye the appearance of a ploughed field ready to receive the\nseed. As he opened his lips, and cast the word of life freely abroad\namong them, he saw, he felt, the parallel between the sowing of Nature\nand the sowing of Grace. Into that mould, accordingly, he threw the\nlesson of saving truth. Grasping the facts and laws of his own material\nworld, and wielding them with steady aim as instruments in the\nestablishment of his spiritual kingdom, in simple yet majestic terms he\nsaid, \"Behold, a sower went forth to sow.\"\n\nWhether a sower was actually in sight at that moment in a neighbouring\nfield or not, every man in that rural assemblage must have been familiar\nwith the act, and would instantly recognise the truth of the picture.\nThe sower, with a bag of seed dependent from his shoulder, stalks slowly\nforth into the prepared field. With measured, equal steps, he marches in\na straight line along the furrow. His hand, accustomed to keep time with\nhis advancing footsteps, and to jerk the seed forward with considerable\nforce, in order to secure uniformity of distribution, cannot suddenly\nstop when he approaches the hard trodden margin of the field. By habit\nthe right hand continues to execute its wonted movement in unison with\nthe sower's steps as he is turning round; and thus a portion of the seed\nis thrown on the unploughed border of the field and the public path that\nskirts it. Birds, scared for a moment by the presence of the man, hover\nin the air till his back is turned on another tack, and then, each eager\nto be first, come swooping down, and swallow up all the grain that found\nno soft place where it fell for hiding in. Even if it should happen in\nany case that no birds were near, the seed that fell on the way side was\nas surely destroyed in another way: the alternative suggested in Luke's\nnarrative is, that \"it is trodden under foot of men.\"\n\nBut while the portion of the seed that fell on the way side was thus\ncertainly destroyed, it does not follow that the rest came to\nperfection: \"Some fell upon stony places, where they had not much earth:\nand forthwith they sprung up, because they had no deepness of earth:\nand when the sun was up they were scorched; and because they had no\nroot, they withered away.\" The stony places are not portions of the\nfield where many separate stones may be seen lying on the surface, but\nportions which consist of continuous rock underneath, with a thin\nsprinkling of soft soil over it. Here the young plants burst through the\nground sooner than in spots where the seed found a deeper bed: but when\nthe rains of spring have ceased, and the sun of summer has waxed hot,\nthe moisture is quickly exhaled from the shallow stratum of soil, and\nforthwith the fair promise dies.\n\nBut yet another slip there may be \"between the cup and the lip:\" even\nfrom the seed that falls on deep, soft ground, you cannot count with\ncertainty on a rich return in harvest. Although the plants should\nwithout obstruction strike their roots deeply into the soft, moist\nearth, and rear their stalks aloft into the balmy air, they may be\nrendered barren at last by the simultaneous growth of rivals more\nimperious and more powerful than themselves. Unless the grain not only\ngrow in deeply broken ground, but grow alone there, it cannot be\nfruitful: \"Some fell among thorns; and the thorns sprung up and choked\nit.\" Besides those plants that are more correctly denominated thorns, we\nmay include under the term here all rank weeds, varying with countries\nand climates, which infest the soil and hurt the harvest. The green\nstalks that grow among thorns are neither withered in spring, nor\nstunted in their summer's growth; they may be found in harvest taller\nthan their fruitful neighbours; but the ear is never filled, never\nripened, and the reaper gets nothing in his arms but long slender straw\nadorned at the top with graceful clusters of empty chaff. The roots of\nthe thorns drank up the sap of the ground, while their branches veiled\noff the sunlight, and thus the good seed, starved beneath and\novershadowed above, although it started fair in spring, produced nothing\nin the autumn.\n\nAs Truth is one and Error manifold, so in regard to the seed sown, the\nstory of failure is long and varied, the story of success is short and\nsimple: \"Other fell into good ground, and brought forth fruit, some an\nhundredfold, some sixtyfold, some thirtyfold.\" The design of the picture\nis to reveal the various causes which at different times and places\nrender the husbandman's labour abortive and leave his garner empty. This\ndone, there is no need of more. The seed, when none of these things\nimpeded it, prospered as a matter of course, under the ordinary care of\nman and the ordinary gifts of God.\n\nThree distinct obstructions to the growth and ripening of the seed are\nenumerated in the parable. The statement is exact, and the order\ntransparent. The natural sequences are strictly and beautifully\nmaintained. The three causes of abortion--the way side, the stony\nground, and the thorns--follow each other as the spring, the summer, and\nthe autumn. In the first case the seed does not spring at all; in the\nsecond it springs, but dies before it grows up; in the third, it grows\nup, but does not ripen. If it escape the way side, the danger of the\nstony ground lies before it; if it escape the stony ground, the thorns\nat a later stage threaten its safety; and it is only when it has\nsuccessively escaped all three that it becomes fruitful at length.\n\nIn this case, the Lord himself gave both the parable and its\nexplanation; he became his own interpreter. The Master takes us, like\nlittle children, by the hand and leads us through all the turnings of\nhis first symbolic lesson, lest in our inexperience we should miss our\nway. The Son of God not only gave himself as a sacrifice for sin; he\nalso laboured as a patient painstaking teacher of the ignorant: he is\nthe Apostle as well as the High Priest of our profession. His\ninstructions have been recorded by the Spirit in the Scriptures for our\nuse; we may still sit at his feet and listen to his voice. He has taken\nhis seat on the deck of a fishing-boat while the waters of the lake are\nstill, and is discoursing to a congregation of Galileans from the\nneighbourhood who stand clustering on the shore. Let us join the\noutskirts of the crowd and hear that heavenly Teacher too.\n\nHe speaks in parables: he fixes saving truth in the forms of familiar\nthings, that it may be carried away and kept. We look with lively\ninterest on the scene which these words conjure up before our eyes; but\nwe should look on it reverently: it has not been given to us as a\nplaything. Gaze gravely, brother, into this parable, for \"thou art the\nman\" of whom it speaks: it reveals the way of life and the way of death\nto thee. If a traveller who possesses an accurate map of his route turn\naside from it and perish in a pit, it will not avail him in his\nextremity to reflect that he carries the correct track in his hand.\nAlas! a literary admiration of the parable-stories which Jesus told in\nGalilee will not avail us, if we do not accept himself as our Saviour\nfrom sin.\n\nFrom the Lord's own exposition here and elsewhere recorded, we learn\nthat the seed is the word of God; that the sower is the man who makes it\nknown to his neighbours; and that the ground on which the seed falls is\nthe hearer's heart. The main drift of the parable concerns the ground,\nand to it accordingly our attention must be chiefly directed. The\nlesson, however, is drawn, not from the inherent, essential properties\nof the soil, but from the accidental obstructions to the growth of grain\nwhich it may in certain circumstances contain: some notice, therefore,\nof the seed and the sower in their spiritual signification is not only\nprofitable at this stage, but peremptorily necessary to the full\napprehension of the instruction which the parable conveys.\n\nSEED has been created by God and given to man. If it were lost, it would\nbe impossible through human power and skill to procure a new supply: the\nrace would, in that case, perish, unless the Omnipotent should interfere\nagain with his creating power. For spiritual life and food the fallen\nare equally helpless, and equally dependent on the gift of God. The seed\nis the word, and the word is contained in the Scriptures. When we drop a\nverse of the Bible into listening ears, we are sowing the seed of the\nkingdom.\n\nThe seed is the word, but the Word is Christ: \"In the beginning was the\nWord, and the Word was with God, and the Word was God ... and the Word\nwas made flesh and dwelt among us,\" (John i.) Christ is the living seed,\nand the Bible is the husk that holds it. The husk that holds the seed is\nthe most precious thing in the world, next after the seed that it holds.\nThe Lord himself precisely defines from this point of view the place\nand value of the Scriptures,--\"They are they which testify of me\"\n(John v. 39). The seed of the kingdom is himself the King. Nor is there\nany inconsistency in representing Christ as the seed while he was in the\nfirst instance also the sower. Most certainly he preached the Saviour,\nand also was the Saviour whom he preached. The incident in the synagogue\nat Nazareth (Luke iv. 16-22) is a remarkably distinct example of Christ\nbeing at once the Sower and the Seed. When he had read the lesson of\nthe day, a glorious prophetic gospel from Isaiah, \"he closed the book,\nand gave it again to the minister, and sat down. And the eyes of all\nthem that were in the synagogue were fastened on him. And he began to\nsay unto them, This day is this scripture fulfilled in your ears.\" As\nsoon as he had taken from the Scriptures the proclamation concerning\nhimself, he laid them aside, and presented himself to the people. The\nSaviour preached the Saviour, himself the Sower and himself the Seed.\n\nIn the beginning of the Gospel, when the chosen band of sowers first\nwent to work upon the ample field of the world, taught of the Spirit,\nthey knew well what seed they ought to carry, and were ever ready to\ncast it in where they saw an opening. One of them, and he the greatest,\nformed and expressed a determination to know nothing among the people\nsave Jesus Christ, and him crucified. Twice in one chapter (Acts viii.),\nwe learn incidentally, but with great precision, what kind of seed\nPhilip the Evangelist carried always in his vessel, and cast into every\nfurrow as he passed along. When a large congregation assembled in the\ncity of Samaria to hear him, \"he preached Christ unto them;\" and when,\non a subsequent occasion, he was called to deal with an anxious inquirer\nalone in the desert, \"he opened his mouth and began at the same\nscripture\"--He was led as a lamb to the slaughter--\"and preached unto\nhim Jesus.\" This is the seed sent down from heaven to be the life of the\nworld.\n\nThe SOWERS, although they have become a great company in these latter\ndays, are still, like the reapers, \"few\" in relation to the vastness of\nthe field. The Lord's message to Ananias of Damascus concerning Saul,\nimmediately after his conversion, graphically defines the office of a\nminister as a sower of the seed: \"He is a chosen vessel unto me, to bear\nmy name before the Gentiles, and kings, and the children of Israel\"\n(Acts ix. 15). A vessel for holding Christ and dropping that precious\nseed into human hearts wherever an opening should appear--this is the\ntrue idea of a minister of the Gospel. Nor is the work confined to those\nwho, being trained to it, and freed from other cares, may thereby be\ncapable of conducting it on a larger scale. As every leaf of the forest\nand every ripple on the lake, which itself receives a sunbeam on its\nbreast, may throw the sunbeam off again, and so spread the light around;\nin like manner, every one, old or young, who receives Christ into his\nheart may and will publish with his life and lips that blessed name. In\nthe spirit of the Lord's own precept regarding the harvest, we may all\nbe encouraged to adopt and press the prayer that our Father, the\nhusbandman, would send forth sowers into his field.\n\nWe turn now to the GROUND, and the various _obstacles_ which there\nsuccessively meet the seed and mar its fruitfulness.\n\n\nI. THE WAY SIDE.--\"When any one heareth the word of the kingdom, and\nunderstandeth it not, then cometh the wicked one, and catcheth away that\nwhich was sown in his heart. This is he which received seed by the way\nside.\" A path beaten smooth by the feet of travellers skirts the edge,\nor, perhaps, runs by way of short cut through the middle of the field.\nThe seed that falls there, left exposed on the surface, is picked up and\ndevoured by birds. Behold in one picture God's gracious offer, man's\nself-destroying neglect, and the tempter's coveted opportunity!\n\nThe analogy being true to nature is instantly recognised and easily\nappreciated. There is a condition of heart which corresponds to the\nsmoothness, hardness, and wholeness of a frequented footpath, that\nskirts or crosses a ploughed field. The spiritual hardness is like the\nnatural in its cause as well as in its character. The place is a\nthoroughfare; a mixed multitude of this world's affairs tread over it\nfrom day to day, and from year to year. It is not fenced like a garden,\nbut exposed like an uncultivated common. That secret of the Lord, \"Enter\ninto thy closet,\" and \"shut the door,\" is unknown; or if known,\nneglected. The soil, trodden by all comers, is never broken up and\nsoftened by a thorough self-searching. A human heart may thus become\nmarvellously callous both to good and evil. The terrors of the Lord and\nthe tender invitations of the Gospel are alike ineffectual. Falling only\nupon the external senses, they are swept off by the next current; as the\nsolid grain thrown from the sower's hand rattles on the smooth hard road\nside, and lies on the surface till the fowls carry it away. The parallel\nbetween the material and the moral here is more close and visible in the\noriginal than it appears in the English version. But our language is\ncapable in this instance, like the Greek, of expressing by one phrase\nequally the moral and the material failure: \"Every one that hears the\nword of the kingdom and does not take it in\" ([Greek: me synientos]).\nThe cause of the failure in both departments is, that the soil, owing to\nits hardness, does not take the seed into its bosom.\n\nThe seed is good: \"The word of God is quick and powerful;\"--that is, it\n\"is living, and puts forth energy.\"[9] Like buried moistened seed it\nswells and bursts, and forces its way through opposing obstacles. A\nheart of clay, smoothed and hardened on the surface, may hold it out for\na lifetime; but a heart of stone could not keep it down, if it were once\nadmitted, for a single day.\n\n [9] [Greek: Zon gar ho logos tou Theou, kai energes.]--HEB. iv. 12.\n\n\"Behold the Lamb of God, which taketh away the sin of the world;\" \"If\nany man thirst, let him come unto me and drink;\" \"Believe on the Lord\nJesus Christ, and thou shalt be saved;\"--these and many such great solid\nseed-grains rain from heaven upon us in this land: shall we close all\nthe avenues to our hearts and so leave that seed lying on the surface\ntill the enemy carry it away? or shall the groanings which cannot be\nuttered, the convictions of sin in the conscience, rend at length the\nseared crust, that the seed may enter and occupy the life for God?\n\nIf privileged and professing hearers of the Gospel come short of the\nkingdom, the fault lies not in the seed--the fault lies not often or to\na great extent even in the sower, although his work may have been feebly\nand unskilfully done. If the seed is good, and the ground well prepared,\na very poor and awkward kind of sowing will suffice. Seed flung in any\nfashion into the soft ground will grow; whereas, if it fall on the way\nside, it will bear no fruit, however artfully it may have been spread.\nMy father was a practical and skilful agriculturist. I was wont, when\nvery young, to follow his footsteps into the field, further and oftener\nthan was convenient for him or comfortable for myself. Knowing well how\nmuch a child is gratified by being permitted to imitate a man's work, he\nsometimes hung the seed-bag, with a few handfuls in it, upon my\nshoulder, and sent me into the field to sow. I contrived in some way to\nthrow the grain away, and it fell among the clods. But the seed that\nfell from an infant's hands, when it fell in the right place, grew as\nwell and ripened as fully as that which had been scattered by a strong\nand skilful man. In like manner, in the spiritual department, the skill\nof the sower, although important in its own place, is, in view of the\nfinal result, a subordinate thing. The cardinal points are the seed and\nthe soil. In point of fact, throughout the history of the Church, while\nthe Lord has abundantly honoured his own ordinance of a standing\nministry, he has never ceased to show, by granting signal success to\nfeeble instruments, that results in his work are not necessarily\nproportionate to the number of talents employed.\n\nNor does the cause of failure, in the last resort, lie in the soil. The\nman who receives the Gospel only on the hard surface of a careless life,\nis of the same flesh and blood, endued with the same understanding mind\nand immortal spirit, with his neighbour who has already become a new\ncreature in Christ. Believers and unbelievers are possessed of the same\nnature and faculties. As the ground which has been trodden into a\nfootpath is in all its essential qualities the same as that which has\nbeen broken small by the plough and harrow, so the human constitution\nand faculties of one who lives without God in the world are\nsubstantially the same as those which belong to the redeemed of the\nLord. It was the breaking of the ground which caused the difference\nbetween the fruitful field and the barren way side. So those minds and\nhearts that now bear the fruits of faith were barren till they were\nbroken; and those on which the good seed has often been thrown, only to\nbe thrown away, may yet yield an increase of a hundredfold to their\nowner, when conviction and repentance shall have rent them open to\nadmit the word of life.\n\nFelix the Roman governor was a specimen of the trodden way side. His\nheart, worn by the cares of business and the pleasures of sin passing in\ngreat volume alternately over it, presented no opening for the entrance\nof the Gospel. Paul accordingly, when called to preach before him, did\nnot, in the first instance, pour out the simple positive message of\nmercy: he reasoned of righteousness, temperance, and judgment to come;\nthus plying the seared conscience with the terrors of the Lord, in the\nhope of breaking thereby the covering crust and preparing a seed bed for\nthe word of life. But the earth, in that case, was as iron, and refused\nto yield even to an apostle's blow. From the heart of Felix the message\nof mercy was effectually shut out. The jailer of Philippi was doubtless\nequally hard in a more vulgar sphere, but his defences were shattered:\nin that night of visitation his heart was rent as well as his prison,\nand over the openings, while they were fresh, the skilful sower promptly\ndropped the vital seed, \"Believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou\nshalt be saved.\" The word entered, and its entrance gave life.\n\nAt this point the parable addresses its lesson specifically to those who\nhave lived without God in the world, and who have lived in the main\ncomparatively at ease. They have not a real heart-possessing,\nlife-controlling religion, and they have never been very sorry for the\nwant of it. They have no part in Christ, and no cheering hope for\neternity. They are not ready to die; and yet they cannot keep death at\nbay. They know that they ought to care for their souls, but in point of\nfact they do not care; they know there is cause to be alarmed, and yet\nthey are not alarmed. They neither grieve for sin nor love the Saviour;\nyet perhaps a dark cloud-like thought sometimes sweeps across their\nbrightest sky--We have not yet gone in by the open door of mercy, and\nwhile we are delaying it may be suddenly shut.\n\nThe case might be understood well enough by those whom it concerns, if\nthe same amount of attention were bestowed upon it that is ordinarily\ndevoted to other branches of business. See the hard dry road that runs\nalong the edge of a corn field: you are not surprised to find it barren\nin a harvest day; you know that grain, although sown there, would not\ngrow, and you know the reason. The reason why the Gospel does you no\ngood may be as clearly, as surely seen. Cares, vanities, passions, tread\nin constant succession over your heart, and harden it, so that the word\nof Christ, though it sound on the surface, never goes in, and never gets\nhold. Think not that the saints are by nature of another kind: they were\nonce what you are, and you may yet become what they are, and more.\n\"Break up your fallow ground.\" Look into your own heart's sin until you\nbegin to grieve over it; look unto Jesus bearing sin until you begin to\nlove him for his love. Tell God frankly in prayer that your heart is\nhard, and plead for the Holy Spirit to make it tender. The saints\nalready in rest, and disciples in the body still, were once a trodden\nway side like yourself, as hard and as barren. Place your heart, as they\ndid, without reserve in the Redeemer's hands; bid him take the hardness\nout and make it new. Invite the Word himself to take up his abode within\nyou; throw the doors widely open that the King of Glory may come in.\nWhen Christ shall dwell in your heart by faith, a godly sorrow\nunderneath will soften every faculty of your nature, and over all the\nsurface fruits of righteousness will grow.\n\n\nII. THE STONY GROUND.--A human heart, the soil on which the sower casts\nhis seed, is in itself and from the first hard both above and below; but\nby a little easy culture, such as most people in this land may enjoy,\nsome measure of softness is produced on the surface. Among the\naffections, when they are warm and newly stirred, the seed speedily\nsprings. Many young hearts, subjected to the religious appliances which\nabound in our time, take hold of Christ and let him go again. This, on\nthe one hand, as we learn by the result, was never a true conversion;\nbut neither was it, on the other hand, a case of conscious, intentional\ndeceit. It was real, but it was not thorough. Something was given to\nChrist, but because all was not given the issue was the same as if all\nhad been withheld. In the rich young man the seed sprang hopefully, but\nit withered soon: he did not lightly part with Christ, but he parted: he\nwas very sorrowful, but he went away.\n\nA Christian parent or pastor, diligent in his main business and fervent\nin prayer for success, observes at length in some young members of his\ncharge a new tenderness of conscience, an earnest attention to the word,\na subdued, reverential spirit, with frequency and fervency in prayer.\nWith mingled hope and fear these symptoms are watched and cherished: the\nsymptoms continue and increase: the converts are added to the Church,\nand perhaps their experience is narrated as an example. This is not a\ndeception on the part of either teacher or scholar: it is a true\noutgrowth from the contact of human hearts with the word of life. Man,\nwho looks only on the outward appearance, cannot with certainty\ndetermine in whom this promise of spring will be blasted by the summer\nheat, and in whom it will yield a manifold return to the reaper. When\nyou cast your eye over the corn field soon after the seed has sprung,\nyou may not be able to detect any difference between one portion and\nanother; all may be alike fresh and green. But, if some parts of the\nfield be deep soft soil, and other parts only a thin sprinkling of earth\nover unbroken rock, there is a decisive difference in secret even now,\nand the difference will ere long become visible to all. Come back and\nlook upon the same field after it has lain a few days without rain under\na scorching sun: you will find that while in some portions the young\nplants have increased in bulk without losing any of their freshness, in\nothers the green covering has disappeared and left the ground as brown\nand bare as it was when the sower went forth to sow upon it. Where the\nearth is soft underneath, and so permits the roots to penetrate its\ndepths, the towering stalks defy the summer's drought; but where the\nroots are shut out from the heart, the leaves wither on the surface.\n\nIf the law of God has never rent the \"stony heart\" and made it\n\"contrite,\" that is, bruised it small, you may, by receiving the Gospel\non some temporary, superficial softness of nature, obtain your religion\nmore easily and quickly than others who have been more deeply exercised;\nbut you may perhaps not be able to hold it so fast or retain it so long.\nTesting trials are the method of the divine government, discipline the\norder of Christ's house. He that endureth to the end shall be saved, but\nhe that falls away in the middle shall not. The fair profession that\ngrows over an unhumbled heart \"dureth for a while,\" but does not endure\nto the end. When tribulation or persecution ariseth because of the word,\nthe religion which reached no further than the surface cannot maintain\nits place there; it withers root and branch. The inward affection, such\nas it was, and the outward profession together disappear. From him that\nhath not shall be taken even that which he seemeth to have.\n\nIn the earlier centuries of the Christian era the profession of faith,\nwhen lightly assumed, was frequently and suddenly scorched off the\nso-called Christian's lips by the pitiless persecution of heathen\ngovernments: in subsequent ages, and down even to our own day, Papal\nfires have burned fiercely in many lands, and before them every faith\nhas faded except that which is of God's own planting, and grows in the\nsecret depths of believing souls. Nationally for several generations we\nhave enjoyed freedom; but let us beware. The divine law, \"All that will\nlive godly in Christ Jesus must suffer persecution\" (2 Tim. iii. 12),\nhas not been repealed. Nor is this merely a caveat thrown in to keep our\ntheology correct; it is a present and pressing truth. In every season\nand in every climate the sun of persecution is hot enough to kill the\nreligion which grows in accidentally softened, natural affections, over\na whole and unhumbled heart. Experience incontestably establishes the\nfact, although it may be difficult for philosophy to explain the reason\nof it, that slight persecutions have often been as effectual as the\nheaviest in blasting the deceptive appearance of religion, which, under\nfavouring circumstances, grew for a time in the life of an unrenewed\nman. In point of fact, a sneer from some leading spirit in a literary\nsociety, or a laugh raised by a gay circle of pleasure-seekers in a\nfashionable drawing-room, or the rude jest of scoffing artisans in a\nwork-shop, may do as much as the fagot and the stake to make a fair but\nfalse disciple deny his Lord.\n\nYoung disciples, whose faith and hope are bursting through the ground,\nshould be, not indeed distrustful of the Lord, but jealous of\nthemselves. \"Let him that thinketh he standeth take heed lest he fall.\"\nDeeper sense of sin, clearer views of the Gospel, warmer love to\nChrist,--these are the safeguards against backsliding. Strive and pray\nfor these. Do not keep Christ on the surface; let him possess the\ncentre, and thence direct all the circumference of your life. \"Whosoever\nwill save his life,\" by keeping its central mass all and whole for\nhimself, \"shall lose it; and whosoever will lose his life for my sake,\"\nopening and abandoning it to Christ from its circumference to its core,\n\"shall find it.\" It is then only his own, when he has without reserve\nabsolutely given it away.\n\nIt seems to have been after the manner of the seed on stony ground that\nking Saul's faith grew and withered. It came away quickly at first, and\npresented a goodly appearance for a while; but the ground, broken and\nsoftened on the surface by Samuel's ministry and the call to the\nkingdom, was rocky underneath, and the rock was never rent. When he was\nseated on the throne, with the thousands of Israel coming and going at\nhis word, he began to feel the restraints of piety irksome, and to count\nthe rebukes of the aged prophet rude. The sun of prosperity scorched the\ngreen growth of religious profession that had suddenly overspread his\noutward life. Michal, his daughter, better acquainted, probably, with\nthe kingly airs of his later than with the pious confession of his\nearlier days, seems to have partaken of his inward hardness while she\nhad no share of his superficial piety. Like him, she was ungodly in the\ndepths of her soul; but unlike him, she disdained to wear the outward\ngarb of godliness. When she exerted all the force of her irony in order\nto make her husband David ashamed of his own zeal in dancing before the\nLord, she truly reflected the inner spirit though not the external\nprofession of her father's court. That taunt from the supercilious,\ncurling lip of the royal princess, who had honoured him by consenting to\nbecome his wife, was a burning ray of persecution streaming on David's\ndefenceless head. If his religion had been confined to the surface,\nwhile the pomp and circumstance of royalty occupied his heart, it would\nhave died out then and there, as the tender sprouting corn, whose roots\nrest on a rock, dies out under the scorching sun of Galilee. But David's\nfaith was deep, and it ripened rather than withered under the scornful\nglance of the worldly-minded princess, as corn, growing in good ground,\nfills better and ripens sooner where the sky is cloudless and the sun is\nfierce.\n\nThat deep-seated stony hardness of heart which defies all the efforts of\nhuman cultivators is often broken small by the hand of God. It appears\nthat Lydia, through natural temperament or association with Christians,\nor both together, had attained some measure of spiritual susceptibility,\nfor she confessed the truth and attended the prayer-meeting by the river\nside; but the seed of the word which had sprung on the surface of her\nlife had not yet struck its root so deep as to withstand persecution if\nit should arise. She is described as a woman who sold purple and\nworshipped God: she had an honest business and a true religion, and were\nnot these enough? No; the next fact of her history was the cardinal\npoint of her life,--\"whose heart the Lord opened that she attended to\nthe things that were spoken of Paul.\" The seed from that skilful sower's\nhand went in and took possession, but it entered at an opening made by\nthe power of God. Whether the rock was rent by the dew of the Spirit\ndropping silently, or by some stroke of Providence falling on her person\nor her material interests, we know not. If ordinary providential\nmethods were employed, we know not, of the many instruments that lie\nclose to the Ruler's hand, which he was pleased to use in that\nparticular case. Perhaps the child of this honest and religious woman\ndied, and her bosom, bereft of its treasure, rent with aching. Perhaps,\non the day that Paul was there, she came to the meeting for the first\ntime in widow's weeds, and the stroke that tore her other self away had\nleft a wide avenue open into her heart. Perhaps,--for small instruments\ndo great execution when they are wielded by an almighty arm,--an adverse\nturn of trade had left the hitherto affluent matron dependent on a\nneighbour's bounty for daily bread. Were other dealers, less\nscrupulously honourable than herself, underselling her in the market?\nWas her foreman unsteady? for, being a woman, she must needs depend much\non hired helpers. Or did a living husband grieve her more than a dead\none could? By some such instrument, or by another diverse from them all,\nor without any visible agent, the Lord opened Lydia's heart, and the\nword of life entered in power. Henceforth she was not her own; Christ\ndwelt in her heart by faith, and her life was devoted to the Lord her\nRedeemer. Deep in that broken heart the seed is rooted, and now no\ntemptation, however intense and long-continued, shall be able to blanch\nits green blade or blast its filling ear. Lord, increase our faith. When\ntrouble comes, whether under the ordinary procedure of God's government\nor more directly from his hand, whether in the form of bodily suffering\nor spiritual convictions, possess your soul in patience and wait for the\nend of the Lord. \"No chastening for the present seemeth to be joyous,\nbut grievous; nevertheless afterward it yieldeth the peaceable fruit of\nrighteousness unto them which are exercised thereby\" (Heb. xii. 11).\n\n\nIII. THE THORNS.--In the application of the lesson this term must be\nunderstood not specifically, but generically. In the natural object it\nindicates any species of useless weed that occupies the ground and\ninjures the growing crop: in the spiritual application it points to the\nworldly cares, whether they spring from poverty or wealth, which usurp\nin a human heart the place due to Christ and his saving truth.\n\nThe earthly affections in the heart which render religion unfruitful in\nthe life are enumerated under two heads,--\"The care of this world,\" and\n\"the deceitfulness of riches;\" the term riches includes also, as we may\ngather from Luke's narrative, the pleasures which riches procure.\n\nBoth from our own experience in the world and the specific terms\nemployed by the Lord in the interpretation of the parable, we learn that\nall classes and all ranks are on this side exposed to danger. This is\nnot a rich man's business, or a poor man's; it is every man's business.\nThe words point to the two extremes of worldly condition, and include\nall that lies between them. \"The care of the world\" becomes the snare of\nthose who have little, and \"the deceitfulness of riches,\" the snare of\nthose who have much. Thus the world wars against the soul, alike when it\nsmiles and when it frowns. Rich and poor have in this matter no room and\nno right to cast stones at each other. Pinching want and luxurious\nprofusion are, indeed, two widely diverse species of thorns; but when\nfavoured by circumstances they are equally rank in their growth and\nequally effective in destroying the precious seed.\n\nIn two distinct aspects thorns, growing in a field of wheat, reflect as\na mirror the kind of spiritual injury which the cares and pleasures of\nthe world inflict when they are admitted into the heart: they exhaust\nthe soil by their roots, and overshadow the corn with their branches.\n\n1. Thorns and thistles occupying the field suck in the sap which should\ngo to nourish the good seed, and leave it a living skeleton. The\ncapability of the ground is limited. The agriculturist scatters as much\nseed in the field as it is capable of sustaining and bringing to\nmaturity. When weeds of rank growth spring up, their roots greedily and\nmasterfully drain the soil of its fatness for their own supply; and as\nthere is not enough both for them and the grain stalks, the weakest goes\nto the wall. The lawful, useful, but feeble grain is deprived of its\nsustenance by the more robust intruder. Under the ground as well as on\nits surface, might crushes right. Robbers fatten on the spoil of loyal\ncitizens, and loyal citizens are left to starve. Moreover, the weeds are\nindigenous in the soil: this is proved by the simple fact of their\npresence, for certainly they were not sown there by the husbandman's\nhand. The grain, on the other hand, is not native; it must be brought to\nthe spot and sown; it must be cherished and protected as a stranger. The\ntwo occupants of the ground, consequently, are not on equal terms; it is\nnot a fair fight. The thorns are at home; the wheat is an exotic. The\nthorns are robust and can hold their own; the wheat is delicate and\nneeds a protector. The weeds accordingly grow with luxuriance, while the\nwheat stalks in the neighbourhood, cheated of their sustenance under\nground, become tall, empty, barren straws.\n\n2. Thorns and thistles, favoured as indigenous plants by the\nsuitableness of soil and climate, outgrow the grain both in breadth and\nheight. The outspread leaves and branches of the weeds constitute a\nthick screen between the ears of corn and the sunshine. Under that\nblighting shadow, although the stalks may grow tall and the husks\ndevelop themselves in their own exquisite natural forms, no solid seed\nis formed or ripened. On the spot which the thorns usurped, the reaper\ngathers only straw and chaff.\n\nHow vivid on both its sides is the picture, and how truthfully it\nrepresents the case! The faculties of the human heart and mind are\nlimited, like the productive powers of the ground. Neither the\nunderstanding nor the affections are endowed with an indefinite capacity\nof reception. The soil, even where it is rich and deep, may be soon\nexhausted, especially where the more gross and greedy weeds have taken\nup their abode. You are convinced of sin and begin to cry for pardon;\nyou plead the Redeemer's sacrifice and righteousness; you grieve over\nyour own backsliding, and come anew to the blood of sprinkling; the twin\nemotions, confession and prayer, struggle together in your breast,\n\"Lord, I believe; help thou mine unbelief.\" Thus far, it is well. The\nfield has been broken; the seed has been covered in the ground; the\ncovered seed has sprung; the sprung seed has grown apace and now seems\nnear maturity. The evil spirit that seeks to spoil this fair promise\nseldom comes in the form of speculative unbelief. When you begin to fall\naway, you do not begin by abjuring your religion, or denying the Lord.\nYou do not pull the grown but unripe corn up by the roots and cast it\nover the hedge: the harvest is marred in a more secret and silent way.\nThe kingdom of the wicked one, cunningly in this matter imitating the\nkingdom of God, \"cometh not with observation.\" Weeds spring up among the\nwheat. At first they are small and scarcely perceptible; the\ninexperienced, apprehending no danger, are put off their guard. The\nfirst leaves which these bitter roots put forth are generally smooth,\ntender, and apparently harmless, giving to the inexperienced eye no\nindication of their rough and ravenous nature. But these thorns, if they\nare not watched, curbed, and killed, may yet cause the loss of the soul.\n\nIf you are poor, anxieties about work and wages, clothes and food, wife\nand children, become the thorn plants, harmless in appearance at first,\nwhich in the end may choke the seed of grace in your heart. If you are\nrich, the pleasure which wealth may purchase, or love of the wealth\nitself, may become the bitter root, which in its maturity may overpower\nall spiritual life within you, and leave only chaff, to be driven away\nin the great day of the Lord. Watch and pray: these cares and pleasures\npresent themselves at first in humble and submissive guise; it is by\ntheir gradual growth that they are enabled to inflict a deadly injury.\nTheir roots, if not checked, silently drain all the sap of your soul,\nand the kingdom of God within you, although never formally abjured, is\npermitted to sink into decay. Your time, your memory, your imagination,\nyour affections, your thoughts, late and early,--all that constitutes\nyour life, instead of being devoted first to the kingdom of God and his\nrighteousness, are usurped and absorbed by the things that perish in the\nusing. When you betake yourself to the word, to prayer, to communion,\nyour heart, already searched, drained, scourged by the greedy roots of\nrank earthly lusts, is a sapless, impoverished, shrivelled thing, where\nfaith in God and loving obedience to his law can no longer grow. Thus\nperish many bright promises; and high above the ruin, living and abiding\nfor ever stands the word of Christ a witness against all who have been\nundone by neglecting it, \"No man can serve two masters.\"\n\nWorldly cares nursed by indulgence into a dangerous strength are further\nlike thorns growing in a corn field, in that they interpose a veil\nbetween the face of Jesus and the opening, trustful look of a longing\nsoul. It is the want of free, habitual exposure to the Sun of\nrighteousness that prevents the ripening of grace in Christians. Unless\nwe turn our eye often upward, and expose the struggling, springing seed\nof faith to the beams of the Redeemer's love, there will be no steady\ngrowth of grace, and no ultimate fruit of righteousness. It is thus that\ninsinuating, overspreading, domineering cares quench both hope and\nholiness: they hinder the simple, tender, confiding look unto Jesus\nwhich is necessary to the increase or maintenance of spiritual life. The\nlove of Christ freely streaming down from heaven through the Scriptures\nand by the ministry of the Spirit, when freely admitted into an open,\nwilling heart, by degrees turns fear into hope, doubt into faith, and\nthe feeble struggle of a child into the strong man's glorious victory;\nas unimpeded sunlight converts the minute mustard seed into a towering\ntree, and the tender sprouts of spring into the golden treasures of\nharvest. A thickly woven web of cares and pleasures interposed between\nthe soul and the Saviour is a chief cause of failure in \"God's\nhusbandry.\"\n\nNor is the harvest safe although the thorny shade that overhangs it be\nnot completely impervious and constant. Fitful glances of sunshine now\nand then will not bring the fruit to maturity. Stand beneath the\nbranches of a forest tree on a day that is at once bright and breezy:\nyou may observe on the ground at your feet a curious network of\nflickering light trembling and dancing about in perpetual motion. The\nsunbeams that penetrate at intervals through openings among the agitated\nbranches are barren though beautiful. The grass that gets no other\nlight grows slim and pithless, bearing no seed-knot on its slender top.\nSunlight admitted now and then through apertures in the leafy awning is\nnot sufficient for the processes of nature; the grain field must get its\nbosom opened without impediment permanently to the sun. It is thus that\nsnatches of spiritual exercise do not avail to promote the growth, or\neven to preserve the life of grace in a heart that in the main is\nhabitually overshadowed by a crowd of overgrown imperious worldly cares.\nEvening and morning you may open the Bible and bend the knee, but the\ntender plant of righteousness in your heart is not effectually revived\nby these brief and fitful glances. Before the drooping leaves have had\ntime to feel the genial warmth, another cloud has closed the orifice and\nleft them again in the chill damp shade. Even the Lord's day, as a gap\nleft open between earth and heaven, is not by any means so wide as it\nseems; for the memory of the past week's business and pleasure stretches\nover on the one side, until it meet, or almost meet, the anticipation of\nthe next week's business and pleasure, so that even on the Sabbath the\nworld still overshadows the soul of its votary. Shut out, except at\nshort and uncertain intervals, from the Light of Life, he passes through\nthe summer of his probation with a well-proportioned but empty form of\ngodliness; and the Lord, when he comes at the close to gather the wheat\ninto his garner, finds on that portion of the field only the rustling\nchaff of a hollow profession, instead of the fruit unto holiness that\ngrows on living souls.\n\nSome lessons suggest themselves in connection with this portion of the\nparable, and claim a brief notice at our hand.\n\n1. As the thorns are indigenous and spring of their own accord, while\nthe good seed must be sown and cherished; so, vain thoughts, lodged in\nour hearts from the dawn of our being, have the advantage of first\npossession, and get the start of their competitors in the race for\nsupremacy. Lurking unobserved between the folds of nature's faculties,\nbefore the understanding is developed, they come away early and grow\nrapidly, and obtain a firm footing before the saving truth, the seed of\nthe kingdom, has burst the kernel and broken through the ground. Crucify\nthe flesh with its affections and lusts; begin that work early, and\npersevere in that work to the end.\n\n2. As long as the weeds live they grow. Every moment, until they are\ncast out of the field, they spread themselves more widely over its\nsurface and drain away more of its nutritive juice. Delay is dangerous.\nIf it be painful to pull out the root of bitterness from your heart\nto-day, it will be more painful to-morrow. Take for example the love of\nmoney: we know well that though money is a useful servant it is a hard\nmaster; be assured if it get and keep the mastery of a soul, its little\nfinger in the end will be thicker than its loins were at the beginning.\nAvarice chastises its slave in middle life with whips; but if he abide\nits slave, it will chastise him when he is old with scorpions.\n\n3. The thorn is a prickly thing; it tears the husbandman's flesh, as\nwell as destroys the fruit of his field. In like manner the care of the\nworld and the deceitfulness of riches lacerate the man who permits them\nto grow rank in his heart. The vain man is continually meeting with\nslights, or suspecting that his neighbours are about to offer them. The\nmiser is always losing money, or trembling lest he should lose it in\nthe next transaction. The world itself knows, and in its proverbs\nconfesses, that around the most coveted pleasures are set sharp thorns,\nwhich wound the hand that tries to pluck the rose.\n\n4. It was where the seed and the thorns grew together that the mischief\nwas done. If the grain is permitted to occupy alone the heart of the\nfield, the thorns that grow outside and around it may constitute a hedge\nof defence, not only harmless but useful. There is a place for cares,\nand for riches too,--a place in which they help and do not hinder the\nkingdom of God. Kept in its own sphere, the lawful business of life\nbecomes a protecting fence round the tender plant of grace in a\nChristian's heart. Permit not the thorns to occupy the position which is\ndue to the good seed. Not as rivals within the field, but as guards\naround it, earthly affairs are innocent and safe. \"Seek first the\nkingdom of God and his righteousness, and all these things shall be\nadded unto you.\"\n\n5. When the husbandman perceives a huge prickly weed in the midst of his\nfield robbing and overshadowing the corn, he sends his servant to cast\nout the intruder. In such a case, a bare spot is left where the thistle\ngrew; but at this stage experiences diverge and travel on different\nlines towards opposite results. In some cases the blank is soon made up\nagain, and the corn waves level like a lake over all the field, so that\nnone could tell where the thistle stood: in others, the blank caused by\nthe removal of a rank weed remains a blank throughout the summer,\npresenting to the reapers in harvest only a spot of bare ground. Why do\nopposite effects proceed from similar operations? Time was the turning\npoint. In the one case the weed was torn out at an early period of the\nsummer; in the other case it was torn out too late.\n\nWe have often seen a soul placed in imminent danger by the overgrowth of\ncares or pleasures that threatened by their rankness to choke the seed\nof the word; and we have afterwards seen that soul delivered from the\ndanger, by a stroke of God's providence that plucked out the weeds in\ntime. Many of the saved both in earth and in heaven now praise the Lord,\nbecause he tore the idols from their hearts and spared not for their\ncrying. The love of Christ that had been planted in their youth, and\nhad, though hard pressed, still kept hold, soon spread again and\noccupied all the empty space, whence the fortune, or fame, or living\ntreasures dearer still, had been plucked. When he came to himself, that\ndisciple, afflicted sore but comforted again, clearly saw and gladly\nsang the mercy and judgment joined together that had cleared the room\nfor Christ in his heart. But examples of an opposite experience, here\nand there one, stand on the edge of life's crowded highway, ghastly as\nthe pillar of salt on the plain of Sodom, burning into the soul of the\npassenger the warning word, \"Be in time.\" An old man has, by the hand of\nthe Lord in providence, been stripped of all his treasures. These\ntreasures, whether they were in themselves the noblest or the\nmeanest,--for when a man made in the likeness of God abandons himself to\nthe worship of an idol, it matters little whether the idol be made of\nfine gold or of dull clay,--these treasures possessed and filled his\nheart. Round them his understanding and affections had closely clasped,\nso that his whole nature had taken the mould of the object which it\ngrasped. In this attitude the man grew old: the faculties of his mind\nbecame hard and rigid like the members of his body. The bosom, no\nlonger pliable to open by gentle pressure, was rudely rent, and its\nportion in one lump wrenched away. A deep, broad, dark chasm, like the\nvalley of the shadow of death, was left: and the chasm remained dark and\nempty to the end; for neither the affections of the old man's soul nor\nthe joints of the old man's frame would fold round another portion now.\nAh! the cares and pleasures that drove Christ from the heart may be cast\nout too late for letting Christ come in again to occupy the empty room.\n\"Now is the accepted time; now is the day of salvation.\" \"To-day, if ye\nwill hear his voice, harden not your hearts.\"\n\n\nIV. THE GOOD GROUND.--Guided by the Great Teacher's own interpretation,\nwe have travelled through the series of successive obstacles which\nhinder the growth and mar the fruitfulness of God's word in the hearts\nof men,--travelled through, weeping as we went. At the close of this sad\nbut instructive journey, a beauteous sight bursts into view: it is a\nfield of ripe grain on a sunny harvest day. The ground was ploughed, and\nthe seed sank beneath it from the sower's hand in spring; the earth was\nsoft and sapful to a sufficient depth, and the roots of the springing\ncorn found ample room to range in; the soil was clean, and its fatness,\nnot shared by usurping weeds, went all to the nourishment of the sown\nseed: therefore in the balmy air and under the beaming sun it is ripe\nto-day, and ready to fill the reaper's bosom. It is a refreshing,\nsatisfying sight; but, fair though it be, we shall not now linger long\nto gaze upon it. By the parable the Master meant mainly to teach us what\nthings are adverse to his kingdom. Having learned this lesson from his\nlips, we go away grateful for his pungent, deeply-traced, and memorable\nwarnings, without pausing to examine minutely the glad prospect to which\nour thorny path has led. The traveller who has come safely through many\ndangers by flood and field, narrates at large, with burning lips and\nthrobbing heart, the varied toils of the journey; but his home,--he does\nnot describe, he enjoys it.[10]\n\n [10] It is not intimated by the parable that our Father the\n Husbandman finds any of the good ground in us: the ground, like the\n tree in another analogical lesson of the Lord, is not good until it\n is _made_ good. It is beyond the scope of this parable to explain\n how the ground is rendered soft and kept free from thorns. The\n Teacher was content in this lesson to tell us what the good ground\n produces; we must discover elsewhere in the Scriptures whence its\n goodness is derived. \"...The similitude from nature is no longer\n applicable to the mystery of the kingdom of heaven; as a parable, it\n has already reached its limits, when the truth goes beyond the\n similitude. There is a _miraculous_ seed superior indeed to all\n natural seed, so powerful that by its growth it can and will choke\n all thorns. Nay more, it can also break through the rock in striking\n its root down into the earth, and can make that to be again a field\n of God which was a way for the feet of the prince of this\n world.\"--_Stier in loc_.\n\n Among the many incidental and collateral applications of which this\n parable is susceptible, one of the most interesting and instructive\n is--That every man has within himself the elements of all the four\n kinds of ground. The conception is thus presented by Fred. Arndt:\n \"At the outset, the word of God finds all in the first unreceptive\n condition; we go away without experiencing its power, and remain in\n a state of nature, unconverted. Next, the word begins to take effect\n upon us, and we are awakened. Oh now the word of the Lord burns with\n a holy glow in our hearts! We give ourselves over with our whole\n souls in those first days of love. We have found heaven; we have\n seen it opened, and the angels of God ascending and descending on\n the Son of man. But this condition does not endure. The fightings\n begin from within and from without, and the flame is quenched. The\n heart becomes cold and empty. The life of faith becomes silent and\n slow in its course. We become languid in watching and prayer; the\n love of the world and its sinful pleasures awakes again; and before\n we are aware, we are trying to serve both God and the world. Then\n the war bursts out: this moment God is above us, the next beneath\n us, and we get no rest until we have renounced the world, and\n surrendered our heart and life to God wholly, and to God alone. Thus\n we pass, in the faith-school of the Holy Spirit, through all the\n four classes, deceiving ourselves and being deceived, until at last,\n after many a bitter experience, we strike upon the narrow way, and\n through the strait gate.\"--_Die Gleichniss-reden. Jes. Chr._\n\nWhile all the ground that was broken, deep, and clean in spring and\nsummer, bears fruit in harvest, some portions produce a larger return\nthan others. The picture in this feature is true to nature; and the fact\nin the spiritual sphere also corresponds. There are diversities in the\nSpirit's operation; diversities in natural gifts bestowed on men at\nfirst; diversities in the amount of energy exerted by believers as\nfellow-workers with God in their own sanctification; and diversities,\naccordingly, in the fruitfulness which results in the life of\nChristians. While all believers are safe in Christ, each should covet\nthe best gifts. No true disciple will be contented with a thirtyfold\nincrease of faith, and patience, and humility, and love, and usefulness\nin his heart and life for the Lord, if through prayer and watching--if\nby denying ungodliness and worldly lusts--if by sternly crucifying the\nflesh and trustfully walking with God, he may rise from thirty to sixty,\nand from sixty to an hundredfold in that holy obedience which grows on\nliving faith.\n\n\n\n\nII.\n\nTHE TARES.\n\n\n\"Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven\n is likened unto a man which sowed good seed in his field: but while\n men slept, his enemy came and sowed tares among the wheat, and went\n his way. But when the blade was sprung up, and brought forth fruit,\n then appeared the tares also. So the servants of the householder\n came and said unto him, Sir, didst not thou sow good seed in thy\n field? from whence then hath it tares? He said unto them, An enemy\n hath done this. The servants said unto him, Wilt thou then that we\n go and gather them up? But he said, Nay; lest while ye gather up the\n tares, ye root up also the wheat with them. Let both grow together\n until the harvest: and in the time of harvest I will say to the\n reapers, Gather ye together first the tares, and bind them in\n bundles to burn them: but gather the wheat into my barn.... Then\n Jesus sent the multitude away, and went into the house: and his\n disciples came unto him, saying, Declare unto us the parable of the\n tares of the field. He answered and said unto them, He that soweth\n the good seed is the Son of man; the field is the world; the good\n seed are the children of the kingdom; but the tares are the children\n of the wicked one; the enemy that sowed them is the devil; the\n harvest is the end of the world; and the reapers are the angels. As\n therefore the tares are gathered and burned in the fire; so shall it\n be in the end of this world. The Son of man shall send forth his\n angels, and they shall gather out of his kingdom all things that\n offend, and them which do iniquity; and shall cast them into a\n furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and gnashing of teeth. Then\n shall the righteous shine forth as the sun in the kingdom of their\n Father. Who hath ears to hear, let him hear.\"--MATT. xiii. 24-30,\n 36-43.\n\nAs the main design of the first parable is to exhibit the kingdom in its\nrelation to unbelieving men, who, in various forms and with various\nmeasures of aggravation, ultimately reject it; the main design of the\nsecond is to exhibit the kingdom in its relation to the wicked one, who\nendeavours, by cunning stratagem, to destroy it. In either case there is\na conflict: in the first, the conflict is waged chiefly between the\nword, which is the seed of the kingdom, and the various evil\ndispositions which impede its growth in the hearts of men; in the\nsecond, the conflict is waged chiefly, as in the mysterious temptation\nin the wilderness, between Christ, man's Redeemer, and the devil, the\nadversary of man. In the first parable the obstacles to the progress of\nthe kingdom lay in the heedlessness, the hardness, and the worldliness\nof men; in the second, the old serpent is the opposer, and wicked men\nare wielded as instruments in his hands.\n\nThe picture is sketched from nature; the lines are very few, but each\ncontributes a feature, and all, together, make the likeness complete.\n\nA Galilean countryman, after having fenced and ploughed and cleaned his\nfield, has watched the condition of the soil and the appearance of the\nsky, until he has found a day on which both were suitable for the grand\ndecisive operation of the season, the sowing of the seed. With anxiety,\nbut in hope, this critical and cardinal act is performed; the seed is\ncommitted to the ground.\n\nIt was \"good seed\" that the careful husbandman cast among the clods. If\nthe last season's crop was of inferior quality, he and his children have\ncheerfully lived upon the worst, that the best might be reserved for\nsowing; if the last crop was scanty, the family were content with a less\nplentiful meal; and if none of the previous year's produce was well\nripened, better grain has been bought in a distant market, that at all\nhazards a sufficient quantity of good seed may be secured for the coming\nseason. Those only who have lived among them, and shared their lot, know\nhow much the poor but intelligent and industrious cultivators of the\nsoil will do and bear in order to preserve or obtain plenty of \"good\nseed.\"\n\nThe great crisis of the season is now past; and the husbandman, wiping\nhis brow as he glances backward upon his completed work, goes home at\nsunset with limbs somewhat weary, but a heart full of hope. The next\nportion of the picture is of a dark and dismal hue. When the farmer and\nhis family, innocent and unsuspicious, are fast asleep, a neighbour, too\nfull of envy for enjoying rest, stalks forth into the same field under\ncover of night, and with much labour scatters something broadcast over\nits surface. He is secretly sowing tares, with the malicious design of\ndamaging or destroying the wheat. As soon as the deed of darkness is\ndone, he creeps stealthily back to his own bed, and in the morning, when\nhe meets his fellow-villagers, does his best to put on the air of an\ninnocent man.\n\nWeeks pass; showers fall; the seed springs and covers all the ground\nwith beautiful green. The owner visited his field from time to time in\nspring, and thought it promised well. But at that period of the summer,\nstill a good while before harvest, when the ears of the grain begin to\nappear, some of the farmer's servants, looking narrowly into the quality\nof the crop, discovered that a large proportion of it was darnel.\nForthwith they reported the sad intelligence to their master, and\nrequested permission to pluck out the intruders. It was agreed among\nthem that good seed had been sown, and the darnel or false wheat was by\ncommon consent and without hesitation set down as the work of an enemy.\nAs to the treatment of the disaster now that it had occurred, the\nmaster's judgment was clear, and his order explicit: to pull out the\ndarnel at this stage, as the servants proposed, would hurt the wheat\nmore than help it; both must be permitted to grow together till the\nharvest; they may be safely and effectually separated then.\n\nSome interesting questions connected with the natural objects claim our\nregard in the first instance, before we proceed to investigate the\nspiritual significance of the parable.\n\nWhat are the tares? The original term does not elsewhere occur in\nScripture, and in the total absence of examples for comparison, it is\nsomewhat difficult to ascertain its precise signification. The word and\nthe thing which it signifies have exercised the learning and ingenuity\nof expositors both in ancient and in modern times. On such a subject as\nthis it is on the line of natural history rather than philology that the\ninvestigation should mainly proceed; there, from the nature of the case,\nsurer results may be obtained. Through the increased facility of making\nlocal inquiries which has of late years been enjoyed, it is now known,\nand apparently with one consent acknowledged by intelligent inquirers,\nthat the seed which the malicious neighbour sowed in order to injure the\nproduce of the field was _Lolium temulentum_, or darnel, a kind of false\nwheat to which the Arabs of Palestine at this day apply a name (zowan)\nwhich bears some resemblance to ([Greek: zizania]) the original word in\nthe Greek text.[11] It has long narrow leaves and an upright stalk, and\nis indeed in all respects so like the wheat, that even an experienced\neye cannot distinguish the two plants until they are in ear: the\ndistinction then is manifest, and any one may observe it. The grains of\nthe darnel are not so heavy as the wheat, and not so compactly set upon\nthe stalk. They are poisonous, their specific effect both in man and in\nbeast being nausea and giddiness. The remark of Schubert in his \"Natural\nHistory,\" quoted by Stier, that \"this is the only poisonous grass,\" is\ndeeply significant in relation to the spiritual meaning of the parable;\nit suggests the reason why the Healer selected this plant as the symbol\nof sin.\n\n [11] \"The Land and the Book,\" by Dr. Thomson. T. Nelson & Sons.\n\nBut another question meets us here, more obscure and difficult than\neither the appearance or the characteristic effects of the darnel,--the\nquestion whether it is originally a specifically different plant, or\nonly wheat degenerated. Some maintain that it is wheat which, by some\nmysterious causes in the processes of nature, has fallen, as it were,\ninto a lower type. This view imparts additional fulness to the parable\nin its spiritual application. So interpreted, the picture exhibits not\nonly the low estate of the sinful, but also the fact that they have\nfallen from a higher. In such cases, however, there is some danger lest\nthe beauty and appropriateness of the conception should entice us to\nreceive it on insufficient evidence. The fact that some plants in\ncertain adverse circumstances tend to degenerate, and in certain\nfavourable circumstances to attain a higher type, is well known in\nnatural history; but it seems questionable whether these changes ever\ntake place to such an extent, and in such a uniform method, as must be\nassumed if we take darnel for degenerated wheat. Agriculturists in\nPalestine believe and declare, that, when the season is wet, the wheat\nwhich they sow in certain fields in spring grows as zowan in harvest. It\nis difficult for one who is accustomed to observe the uniformity of\nnature in the reproduction of each species from its own seed, to believe\nthat transformations so great are accomplished at a single step. An\nAmerican writer, one of the latest authorities, and, in respect to his\nabundant opportunities of observation, one of the best, bears witness\nthat he has often seen the wheat and barley fields overrun with darnel,\nand that the native owners stoutly declare that the good wheat which\nthey sowed has been changed into the false in the process of growth\nduring a single season; but he intimates at the same time that he\nbelieves the men are mistaken, and that the presence of the darnel must\nbe attributed to some other cause, and accounted for in some other\nway.[12] The suggestion that the same peculiarities of season which\ndestroy the sown wheat may favour the springing of the darnel, that had\nlain in the ground dormant before, may possibly account for the present\nexperience of the Syrian cultivators; or the effects may be in whole or\nin part due to other causes of which we are not cognizant; but the\nsolution of this question is by no means essential to the right\ninterpretation of the parable, and therefore we shall not prosecute the\ninvestigation further in this direction.\n\n [12] \"The Land and the Book.\" Note by Principal Fairbairn in\n translation of \"Lisco on the Parables.\"\n\nDr. Thomson gives unequivocal testimony, at the same time, that at the\npresent day no instance is known of the growth of darnel among the wheat\nbeing caused by the malicious act of an enemy. This, however, as he\ndistinctly owns, does not prove that the transaction depicted in the\nparable had no foundation in fact. It must have happened substantially\nin history, otherwise it would not have been introduced as a supposition\ninto these lessons of the Lord. Some travellers have stated that this\nspecies of crime is known in India; but I do not set much value on the\ndiscovery of precisely identical facts in modern times. The existence of\nthe representation in this parable is, simply as a matter of rational\nevidence, a tenfold stronger proof that the facts in their essential\nfeatures actually happened, than any quantity of analogous cases drawn\nfrom other countries in later times. It is of greater importance to note\nthat the malice which endured the toil of sowing tares in a neighbour's\nfield grows yet, and grows rankly in human breasts. In different ages\nand regions, that spiritual wickedness may clothe itself in bodies of\ndiverse mould and hue, but it is in all times and places the same foul\nand malignant spirit, acting according to its kind. The same spirit that\nsowed darnel among wheat at night in a corn field of Galilee, two\nthousand years ago, will set fire to a stackyard, or hamstring the\nhorses, or shoot the overseer from behind a hedge in our own day, and,\nalas! in some parts of our own land. As in the highest good, so in the\ndeepest evil, there are diversities of operation by the same spirit.\nWhen we take into account the changes of fashion which occur both in\nclothing and in crime, we have no reason to be sceptical as to the\nancient fact, and no difficulty in obtaining a modern specimen.\n\nFrom the results already gained, it appears obvious that the translation\n\"tares\" in our English version is unfortunate: it not only fails to\nrepresent clearly the state of the fact, but leads the reader's mind\naway in a wrong direction. To an English reader the term suggests a\nspecies of legume, which bears no resemblance to wheat at any stage of\nits progress. By the use of this word the characteristic feature of the\npicture is greatly obscured. Had the plant which sprung from the envious\nneighbour's seed been a legume, its presence would have been detected at\nthe first, and it could have been separated at any stage. The darnel, on\nthe contrary, cannot be distinguished from wheat until both are nearly\nripe, and the process of separation, whether in the field or on the\nthreshing-floor, is much more difficult.\n\n * * * * *\n\nAgain the Lord becomes his own interpreter: at the request of the\ndisciples he explained to them in private the meaning of his allegory.\nThe points are great, few, and clearly defined. In this journey the\nMaster has kindly gone before us; reverently, trustfully, we shall\nfollow his steps. \"He that soweth the good seed is the Son of man; the\nfield is the world.\" It is in connection with the \"field\" that the\ngreatest difficulty has occurred, the greatest mistakes have been made,\nand the deepest injury has been done. Few words of Scripture are more\nplain; and yet few have been more grievously misunderstood and wrested.\nAt the entrance of the inspired explanation, the expositor, bent on the\ndefence of his own foregone conclusion, takes his stand, like a\npointsman on a railway, and by one jerk turns the whole train into the\nwrong line. \"The field is the world,\" said the Lord: \"The field is the\nChurch,\" say the interpreters. It is wearisome to read the reasonings by\nwhich they endeavour to fortify their assumption. Having determined that\nthe field is the Church, they are compelled immediately to address\nthemselves to the great practical question of discipline. If they were\nprepared to admit that there should be absolutely no discipline--that no\nman should be shut out from communion, however heretical his opinions or\nvicious his practice might be, their task under the general principle of\ninterpretation which they have adopted would be very easy. The command\nis clear, cast none out of the \"field,\" however fully developed their\nwickedness may be, until the angels make the separation between good and\nevil at the consummation of all things. If the field means the Church,\nthe exclusion of the unworthy by a human ministry is absolutely\nforbidden. But the expositors are not willing altogether to abandon\ndiscipline. They maintain, on the one hand, that this parable deals with\nand settles the question of the right to eject unworthy members from\nthe communion of the Church; and on the other hand, that while it\ncondemns excessive and puritanical strictness, it permits and justifies\nthe ejection of those who are manifestly unworthy. Most of the\ncommentaries that have come under my notice betray on this point\nweakness and inconsistency. If by this feature of the parable the Lord\ngives a decision on Church discipline, he forbids it out and out, in all\nits forms, and in all its degrees. The separation suggested, he permits\nnot to be attempted at all, until he shall charge his angels to\naccomplish it at the end of the world. In my judgment, to contend for\nthe right of excluding some of the ranker tares, after admitting that\nthis parable bears upon the subject of ecclesiastical discipline, tends\nnot only to perplex the student, but to throw a reflection on the\nauthority of the Word. I see only two doors open: either cease to hold\nthat the field is the Church, or cease to claim the right of excluding\nany from communion.\n\nGood old Benjamin Keach, in a portly volume on the parables, addressed\n\"to the impartial reader,\" and sent \"from my house in Horsley Down,\nSouthwark, August 20. 1701,\" indicates with clearness and simplicity his\nown judgment; but, overawed by authority, seems afraid at the sound of\nhis own words: \"The field is the world; though it may, as some think,\nalso refer to the Church. Marlorate saith by a synecdoche, a part for\nthe whole, it signifies the Church; though this seems doubtful to me,\nand I rather believe it means the world.\" The second of two reasons\nwhich he submits as the grounds of his opinion is,--\"Because tares, when\ndiscovered to be such, must not grow among the wheat in the Church, but\nought to be cast out, though they ought to live together in the world.\"\nHere Keach reasons most naturally, and indeed irrefragably, against the\ninterpretation that the world is the Church, from the monstrous\nconsequence to which it necessarily leads. I am beyond measure amazed to\nfind the general stream of interpretation, as far as I have had an\nopportunity of examining it, ancient and modern, German and Anglican,\nflowing in this channel. When I find the great and venerated name of\nCalvin contributing to swell this tide, I am compelled to pause and\nexamine the subject anew; but my judgment remains the same. We must call\nno man master on earth; one is our master in heaven. It is not\nnecessarily presumption in one of us to oppose the judgment of the great\nand good of a former age, especially on such a subject as this. In\nregard to all the relations between the Church and the civil power, we\nare in a better position for judging than either the early Reformers or\nthe Continental and Anglican theologians of the present day. The general\nprogress made since the time of Calvin in the historical development of\nthe Christian Church, and the particular experience through which\nChristians in Scotland have in later times been led, greatly contribute\nto elevate our stand-point in relation to the discipline of the Church,\nand its right to freedom from civil control. As a child on the house-top\ncan scan a wider landscape than a man on the ground, although the child\nmay have been indebted to that man for his elevation; so we may own the\nReformers as in a right sense our teachers, and yet on some subjects\nform a sounder judgment than they. Although no new revelation has been\nmade since the Lord's apostles were removed from the earth, the Church\ndoes under the government of her Head, advance from age to age; and the\nprinciple embodied in the declaration, \"The least in the kingdom of\nheaven is greater than he\" (Matt. xi. 11), emerges still in manifold\nsubordinate fulfilments. As to the greatest modern scholars of Germany\nand England, the accepted and even lauded Erastianism in which they are\nsteeped is a beam in their eye, which dims and distorts their sight when\nthey look in the direction of the Church with its constitution and\ndiscipline. While on other subjects their insight is such that we may be\ncontent to sit at their feet, the view on this side is from their\nstand-point cut off short, as if by a mountain in the foreground, and\nthey can afford us no help.\n\n\"The field is the world:\" in the prevailing confusion we hold to this,\nas the ship to her anchor in a storm. Men should remember when they\nexplain away the meaning of the term \"world,\" and teach that it\nsignifies the Church, that they are dealing not with a parable, but with\nthe explanation of a parable given by the Lord. The parable is\nprofessedly a metaphor; but when the Lord undertook to tell his\ndisciples what the metaphor meant, he did not give them another metaphor\nmore difficult than the first. I venture to affirm that the expositors\nwould have found it easier to show that the \"field\" is the Church than\nto show that the \"world\" is the Church. According to their view, it\nresults that the Lord proposed to interpret his own allegory, but only\ngave on this point another allegory somewhat more obscure. The\noutrageousness of the conclusion proves the premises false. In\naffectionate tenderness to the twelve, the Lord Jesus undertook to\ntranslate a figurative expression which puzzled them into a literal\nexpression which the feeblest might be able to comprehend. The \"field\"\nis the metaphor, and that metaphor interpreted is the \"world;\" it does\nnot need to be interpreted over again. This Teacher means what he says.\nHe points to this globe, man's habitation, and mankind its inhabitants\nin all places and all times.\n\nInto this world Christ, the Son of man, the Son of God, cast good seed.\nThe children of the kingdom are the good seed: in the beginning men were\nmade in God's likeness, and placed in his world. Thereafter and\nthereupon an enemy stealthily and maliciously sowed tares in the same\nfield. The enemy is the devil; and the tares which he by his sowing\ncaused to spring in the field are the children of the wicked one. In the\nfirst instance, the Day in which the sower spread good seed in his field\nwas the day in which God made man upright: the Night in which the enemy\nsowed tares was the period of the temptation and the fall. Both these\nantagonistic processes are carried on still. The Son of man sows the\ngood seed day by day in the world, and night by night the enemy sows his\ntares. Especially and signally in the fulness of time the good seed,\nmore completely developed, was again committed to the ground in the\nministry and sacrifice of Christ; and again the wicked one renewed and\nincreased his efforts to counteract and destroy it. These two, opposite\nin origin and in nature, are commingled and interwoven in all the\nordinary relations of life. The children of the wicked one and the\nchildren of the kingdom live together in the world, eat of the same\nbread, and breathe the same air, and look upon the same light.\n\nIn the Galilean field, which the Lord employed as a type with which to\nprint his lesson, portions might be seen where, owing perhaps to\npeculiar wetness and sourness in the soil, the wheat had wholly\ndisappeared, and the darnel grew alone; in other parts, probably where\nthe soil was warm and dry, the good seed had gained the mastery, and the\nfalse scarcely showed its head; and in a third quarter the good and bad\nmight appear in equal numbers and equal strength. Such precisely is the\naspect of the world. Large portions of it have been heathen from a\nhigher date than that to which history ascends; large portions, which\nwere Christian long after the apostolic age, have been overrun and laid\nwaste by the blind but strong system of Mahomet; while in other parts a\nvigorous Christian life appears, although even there the good seed must\nmaintain a struggle against bitter roots below and poisonous fruit\nrearing its head on high.\n\nI accept, therefore, in all simplicity, the Master's own definition: I\nsee in the field of the injured husbandman a picture, not of the Church\nin the world, but of the world in which the Church must for the present\nlive and labour. The ingenious effort made by a recent Swiss\nexpositor[13] to find a middle path only serves to show how heavily the\ndifficulties of the common interpretation press on those who maintain\nit. Having confessed, according to the terms of the text, that the field\nor ground is not the Church, but the world, he proceeds, with a very\nstrong animus against what he calls puritanism or separatism,[14] to\nargue in the usual way against every attempt to purify the visible\nChurch except by the exclusion of persons who are notoriously heretical\nor vicious. The grounds on which he pleads against separation from the\nimpure, in as far as this parable is concerned, are--(1.) That there\nwas no need of a revelation to make known the universally acknowledged\nmaxim that bad people should be tolerated in the world; (2.) That,\naccording to the terms of the parable, the farmer sowed wheat in his\nground, but did not sow the whole of his ground--so that the ground may\nbe the world, and the portion sown, or the wheat field, may still\nrepresent the Church; (3.) That the parable of the fishing-net confirms\nthis interpretation; and (4.) That in the world there was no wheat until\nthe preaching of the gospel reached it, and consequently the mixture\nis in the church, and not in the world.\n\n [13] Die Parabeln des Herrn, fuer Kirche, Schule, und Haus, erklaert\n von Dr. De Valenti. Basel, 1841.\n\n [14] It is quite possible that the separatists whom De Valenti\n scolds, with more warmth than elegance, may deserve his censure; for\n severe restrictive measures adopted by governments to suppress\n religious dissent have frequently the effect of deteriorating its\n character, on the principle that oppression makes a wise man mad.\n\nThe first of these grounds seems most unfortunate; for corrupt\necclesiastics, from an early age to the present day, have ever shown\nthemselves ready to cast those whom they call heretics, not out of the\nChurch only, but out of the world:[15] the second is a refinement too\nnarrow for building any conclusion upon: the third applies a mistaken\nview of one parable to support a mistaken view of another: and the\nfourth is the second in another form. After having in effect explained\naway his own admission, that the field is the world, and not the Church,\nhe freely concedes in the close that the openly heretical and vicious\nshould not be tolerated within the Church. But I ask what right has he\nto exclude those whom, according to his exegesis, the Lord commanded\nhis ministers to tolerate in the Church?\n\n [15] Lange (_in loc._), having quoted Gerlach to the effect that\n this prohibition refers to extremes of ecclesiastical discipline,\n for the purpose of excluding all unbelievers and hypocrites, and\n constituting a perfectly pure Church, timidly replies: \"We can\n scarcely agree with him that it contains no allusion to the\n punishment of death for heresy.... It is well known that\n Novatianism, on the one hand, and the Papal hierarchy, on the other,\n have addressed themselves to this work of uprooting despite the\n prohibition of the Lord, and that the Romish Church has at last\n ended by condemning to the flames only the best wheat.... The _auto\n da fes_ of the middle ages were only a humble caricature and\n anticipation of that fiery judgment.\"\n\nIn the intimation that it was while men slept that the mischief was\ndone, I cannot find any covert reproof of an indolent ministry in the\nChurch. It was night: all the community had retired to rest. The species\nof criminal which the parable depicts was not numerous,--the crime was\nnot of daily occurrence. It was neither the practice nor the duty of the\npeople, after they had toiled all day in their fields, to watch their\nwork by night, to protect it from possible injury. The expression,\n\"while men slept,\" is intended merely to indicate that the evil-doer\ntook advantage of the darkness to cover his deed: accordingly, in the\ninterpretation no specific meaning is attached to this feature of the\nparable.\n\nIn regard to the servants, and their proposal instantly to pull up the\ntares, the interpretation is attended with difficulty. With some eminent\nancient expositors I am convinced that, if not exclusively, yet\nprimarily and chiefly, the servants who offered to make the separation\nare the angels. The parable stretches far into both time and space: it\ncomprehends the world, and the successive dispensations of God there.\nMorning stars sang together when they saw beautiful worlds starting into\nbeing at their Maker's word: the same high intelligences must have been\nsurprised and grieved when they saw God's fairest work marred by sin. It\nis like the impulse of beings perfect in holiness, but limited in\nknowledge, to offer themselves on the instant as willing instruments to\ncast the defilers out. Pleased, doubtless, with their instinctive zeal\nfor holiness, but comprehending his own purposes better than they, the\nLord declined the proffered ministry. At the same time he intimated that\nthe separation which the servants suggested was not refused, but only\npostponed. His plan required that good and evil, now that evil had\nbegun, should mingle in the world till the end. At the close of the\ndispensation, when the Son of man shall come in his glory, he will give\nthe commission for a final separation to the angels who shall constitute\nhis train.\n\nIt seems to be generally assumed by modern expositors, that while the\nreapers who shall separate the tares from the wheat in harvest are\nangels, the servants who offered to weed out the tares while they were\nyet green are the human ministers of the visible Church. Archbishop\nTrench, for example, says: \"These servants are not, as Theophylact\nsuggests, the angels (they are the reapers, ver. 30); but men, zealous,\nindeed, for the Lord's honour, but zealous with the same zeal as\nanimated those two disciples who would fain have commanded fire to come\ndown from heaven on the inhospitable Samaritan village\" (Luke ix. 54). I\nthink the learned author is mistaken here, and that the preponderance of\nevidence lies on the other side. The subject is interesting, and will\nrepay the labour of investigation.\n\nHere two questions, distinct, yet closely connected, constitute the\ncase: on the answer which may be given to them the decision will turn.\nOne relates to the persons, and the other to their acts: Are the\n\"servants\" who propose to pull up the tares in summer, and the \"reapers\"\nwho are commanded to make the separation in harvest, the same, or\ndifferent persons? and is the separation proposed by the servants\nsubstantially the same in kind with that which is ultimately effected by\nthe reapers, or is it different?\n\nI think the servants and the reapers are substantially identical. The\ntroop of servants who haunt a rich man's house, and the band of\nlabourers who reap his patrimonial fields, stand far apart in our land\nand our day. Not so, however, in the establishment of a Galilean\nhouseholder eighteen hundred years ago. When you take into view the\nhabits of society at the date and on the scene of the parable, it will\nappear certain and obvious that the servants who proposed to weed the\nfields in summer were, in part at least, the same persons who would be\nsent to reap the fields in autumn. The reapers might be a more numerous\nband than the servants who were employed throughout the year, but to a\nlarge extent the constituents must have been the same. In another\nparable (Luke xvii. 7-10), a servant, who has been ploughing or feeding\ncattle, is obliged, after he returns from the field, to gird himself and\nwait on his master at table. This shows conclusively that the division\nof labour which obtains among us was unknown then in Galilee. The master\ndoes not, indeed, say to the servants who made the proposal, I will\nemploy you in harvest to accomplish the separation: the form of\nexpression is, \"I will say to the reapers;\" but reapers and servants\nwere of the self-same class, and in all probability to some extent the\nsame individuals.\n\nThe second question can be more easily answered. The separation which\nthe reapers ultimately effected is essentially the same with that which\nthe servants at an earlier period proposed. It is an actual, material,\nfinal separation of the tares from the wheat.\n\nIt results that there is no solid ground in the parable for the\nassumption that those who proposed to make the separation at an earlier\ndate represent men, while those who were employed to accomplish it\nafterwards represent angels; and that the separation which the Lord\nprohibited was spiritual, while that which he permitted was physical.\nIn regard to the separation which he sanctioned, the Lord interprets\nwhat the operation is, and who are the operators; whereas, in regard to\nthe separation at an earlier date proposed, he gives no interpretation.\nInstead of beginning by giving my own assumption as to the meaning of\nthe uninterpreted part, I go first to the part that is interpreted to my\nhand, and from the point which is illuminated I get light thrown back on\nthe point which was left in the shade. The reapers, I know, are the\nangels; and the servants were the same, or at least the same class of\nministers, proposing to accomplish the work at an earlier date. The\nseparation which was actually effected in the harvest represents, we\nknow, the personal and local as well as moral and spiritual separation\nof the good and the evil; thence I conclude that the separation which\nthe same ministers, or the same class of ministers, had previously\noffered to make was personal and local as well as moral and spiritual.\nThe proposed and the accepted separations were precisely the same in\nkind and degree; they differed only in their dates: while, therefore,\none of the two is interpreted to my hand, I have no right to attach to\nthe other an interpretation totally different. The assumption that the\nseparation which the Lord prohibited was only a spiritual sentence,\nwhile the separation which he permitted was actual, local, complete, and\nfinal, derives countenance neither from the parable nor its\ninterpretation.\n\nIt appears to me, then, that the Lord's direct and immediate design in\nthis parable is, not to prescribe the conduct of his disciples in regard\nto the conflict between good and evil in the world, but to explain his\nown. Knowing that their Master possessed all power in heaven and in\nearth, it was natural that Christians of the first age should expect an\nimmediate paradise. Nothing was more necessary, for the support of\ntheir faith in subsequent trials, than distinct warnings from the Lord,\nthat even to his own people the world would remain a wilderness.\nAccordingly, both in plain terms and by symbols, he faithfully,\nfrequently intimated that in the world they should have tribulation, but\nthat all should be set right at last. On both sides they needed, and on\nboth sides he gave, the instruction, that in this life they must lay\ntheir account with a mixture, but that after this life they would\nescape. Left to their own imagination, they would readily have expected\nthat their omnipotent Head would so rule over the world, and so instruct\nhis ministers, whether stormy winds or flaming fires, that evil, as soon\nas it showed its head, would be weeded out of his people's way: but with\nthis parable and other cognate lessons in their hands, they would not be\nsurprised at any amount of success which the enemy might be permitted to\nobtain; they would possess their souls in patience, and wait for the end\nof the Lord.\n\nThe parable condemns persecution, but it seems not to bear upon\ndiscipline at all. In its secondary sense, or by implication, it\nprotects the wicked from any attempt on the part of the Church to cast\nthem out of the world by violence; but it does not, in any form or\nmeasure, vindicate a place for the impure within the communion of the\nChurch of Christ. Arguments against the exclusion of unworthy members,\nfounded on this parable, are nothing else than perversions of Scripture.\nElsewhere Christians may clearly read their duty in regard to any\nbrother who walks disorderly; elsewhere they may learn how to counsel,\nexhort, and rebuke the erring, and, if he remain impenitent, how to cast\nhim out of communion by a spiritual sentence; but in this parable\nregarding these matters no judgment is given.\n\nWhile the \"Notes\" of Dr. Trench on the parables are generally judicious\nand valuable, his exposition of this and one or two others that are\ncognate is injured by a secret bias towards the forms in which he has\nbeen educated,--a bias that is natural and human, but not on that\naccount less hurtful. The body of the vast and venerable institution of\nwhich he is at once a chief and an ornament, stands so near, and bulks\nso largely, that where it is concerned his usual acuteness fails him.\nThe general announcement at the commencement of the parable, that it\nconcerns the kingdom of heaven, he seems to think is sufficient proof\nthat the \"field\" must mean the kingdom of heaven or the Church. It does,\nindeed, concern the kingdom of heaven, for it shows that when that\nkingdom has, by the Son of man, been introduced into the world, many\nthings spring up and mingle with it there to mar its fruitfulness; but\nit betrays an unaccountable confusion to argue formally that because the\nparable concerns the kingdom of heaven, therefore, of all the features\nwhich the parable contains, \"the field\" must specifically represent that\nkingdom, in the face of the express testimony of Scripture that the\nfield represents a totally different thing. The parable of the\nmustard-seed concerns the kingdom too, but does the \"field\" in that\nparable therefore mean the Church? No. The mustard-seed that grew in the\nfield means the Church, and the field means the world in which the\nChurch is planted. So in this parable the only thing that represents the\nChurch, or aggregate of individual believers, is the mass of the wheat\nstalks that sprang from the good seed: the good seed are the children of\nthe kingdom, and the field is the world in which these children live and\nlabour. Looking minutely to the phraseology employed, we find that the\nkingdom of heaven is not said to be likened unto a field, but unto a man\nthat sowed seed; pointing to the Lord himself as the head, and the good\nseed as his members, and the wide world as their place of sojourn, till\nhe take them to himself.\n\nDr. Trench remarks further on this point, that the use of the term\n\"world\" need not perplex us in the least; and perhaps he was led to make\nthat assertion because the use of the term did perplex him much. His\nsolution of the difficulty is this: \"It _was_ the world, and therefore\nwas rightly called so, till this seed was sown in it; but thenceforth\nwas the world no longer.\" If it has any meaning at all, this sentence\nmust mean that what was the world yesterday becomes the Church to-day,\nwhen some seed is sown, when some children of the kingdom are in it.\nDoes the whole world become the Church when one country is\nchristianized? or is it only the portion christianized that becomes the\nChurch? If so, how many Christians must be in a given portion of the\nworld, to constitute that portion the Church? If there were three of the\ntrue seed in Sodom, was Sodom the Church? or did not the three\nconstitute the Church in Lot's house, while the world raged around it\nlike the troubled sea?\n\nSome of Stier's remarks are good: \"The parable moves in quite a\ndifferent sphere from that of the question concerning Church\ndiscipline.\" \"The householder forbids and will not allow what the\nservants wish. These would have all the tares removed entirely from\ntheir place among the wheat, from the kingdom of Christ (ver. 41). But\nbecause the field is the world, that were equivalent to removing the bad\nout of the world (slaying the heretics),\" &c.\n\nThe conclusion of the whole matter is, that whatever separation the\nparable forbids, it forbids entirely: if it speaks of discipline, it\nsays there shall be none; so that they are wholly out of their reckoning\nwho lean on it for the condemnation of what they consider excessive\nstrictness while they would retain the power of excluding the worst from\ncommunion. But, in truth, the parable has nothing to say on the subject.\n\nWhen we have made our way through the discussions that have accumulated\nround it, we return to the text in its simplicity, and grasp its plain\npositive truth, \"The field is the world.\" It was all empty; nothing good\ngrew there, until the seed was brought from heaven and sown. The nation,\nthe family, the soul that has not Christ, is poor, and wretched, and\nmiserable, and blind, and naked.\n\n\"The good seed are the children of the kingdom.\" They are bought with a\nprice and born of the Spirit; they are new creatures in Christ and heirs\nof eternal life. Expressly it is written in reference to Christ's\ndisciples, \"All things are for your sakes\" (2 Cor. iv. 15). For their\nsakes the world is preserved now, and for their sakes it will be\ndestroyed when the set time has come. The darnel is permitted to grow in\nsummer, and in harvest is cast into the fire,--both for the sake of the\nwheat. Because Christ loves his own he permits the wicked to run their\ncourse in time; but because Christ loves his own he will separate the\nwicked from the good at last.\n\nThe tares are the children of the wicked, and \"the enemy that sowed them\nis the devil.\" Some people doubt, and some positively deny, the\nexistence of the devil; but one thing is clear, the Lord Jesus Christ,\nthe eternal Son of the Father, has no doubt on that point. He believes\nin that doctrine and teaches it: he teaches it to the multitude on the\nmargin of the lake, and to the select circle of his followers in a\nprivate dwelling.\n\nLively and energetic are the remarks of Fred. Arndt on this subject:\n\"Yes, Jesus says, in dry, clear words, 'The enemy that soweth them is\nthe devil.' But surely there is not any devil? Who says that? The Son of\nGod, the mouth of eternal truth, who knows the realm of spirits even as\nhe knows this visible world,--who is the highest reason and the deepest\nwisdom, yea, even Omniscience itself,--he believes it. He holds it\nreasonable to believe in it. He teaches what he believes. Dost thou know\nit better than he, thou short-sighted being, thou dust of yesterday,\nthou child of error and ignorance? He says it, and therefore it is\neternal truth. 'But is it not intended to be taken figuratively?' Well,\nsuppose it were meant figuratively, we can only comprehend the figures\nof actually existing things, and the figurative representation of the\ndevil would imply his real being: but here in the text the speech is not\nfigurative; the expression stands not among pictures and parables, but\nin the interpretation of a picture and a parable.\"[16] Whence hath it\ntares? inquired the servants. Already in those days they had begun to\nprobe the question around which the conflict of ages has been waged--the\norigin of evil. One thing in the answer of the Lord is fitted to pour a\nflood of comfort into our hearts when they are agitated by the\ndifficulties of this tremendous problem,--\"an enemy hath done this.\"\nEvil does not belong originally to the constitution of man, nor has God,\nhis maker, introduced it. Our case is sad, indeed; for we learn that an\nenemy whom we cannot overcome is ever lying in wait seeking how he may\ndevour us. But what would our case have been, if evil, instead of being\ninjected by an enemy from without, had been of the essence of the\ncreature, or the act of the Creator? Our condition would have been one\nof absolute and irremediable despair. What a strong one, who is our\nenemy, has brought in, a stronger, who is our friend, can cast out--will\ncast out. Be of good cheer; believe on the Lord Jesus Christ, and thou\nshalt be saved.\n\n [16] _Die Gleichniss-reden Jesu Christi_, von Fried. Arndt.\n\nHow grand is the view which this picture discloses, when in the\ninterpretation of it we closely follow the Master's steps! It is,\nindeed, a parable concerning the kingdom of heaven. The whole world\nbelongs to the King; he has placed his children in it, and commanded\nthem to multiply till they people all its borders. The enemy has\nintroduced among them evil persons, and within them evil thoughts. It is\nnot a part of the omniscient Ruler's plan to remove, by the ministry of\neither angels or men, all the wicked at once from his world. For his own\npurposes, which are only in part discernible by us, he permits the good\nand the evil to mingle and contend with each other until the fulness of\ntime, as he left the Canaanites in the land to chastise and exercise his\nchosen people. When the tares prosper, the wheat languishes: when the\nwheat prospers, the tares languish. Evil men have lived in God's world\never since sin began: evil thoughts and deeds will be found in God's\nchildren as long as they remain in the body. The angels are not sent\nto-day to make such a separation as would leave the children of the\nkingdom nothing to do, or to bear.\n\nIf you desire the heavenly to prosper within you and around you, fight\nwith the proper weapons against the devilish: if you desire the devilish\nwithin and around you to languish and decay, cherish the heavenly. As\nDavid's house waxes stronger, Saul's house will wax weaker. When Christ\ngets more of the world and of our hearts, the devil will get less.\n\n\n\n\nTHE MUSTARD-SEED, AND THE LEAVEN.\n\n\nIn the first two parables the kingdom of heaven is represented in\nconflict with its enemies; in the next two it stands alone, putting\nforth its inherent life and power. There we learn the strength of its\nadversaries, and here we learn its own. There we saw the efforts made to\ncheck the progress of the kingdom; and here we see the progress which,\nin spite of these efforts, the kingdom makes. There the combat is\nexhibited, and here the victory. Devils and men, conscious conspirators\nor unconscious tools, did their utmost, as explained in the first pair\nof parables, to strangle the kingdom in its infancy, or to overpower it\nat a later stage; but the kingdom, as we learn from the second pair,\nshakes its assailants off, emerges unhurt from the strife, and goes\nforward from strength to strength, until it has subdued and absorbed all\nthe world. I have seen clouds gathering at dawn on the eastern horizon,\nwith dark visage and a multitudinous threatening array, as if they had\nbound themselves by a great oath either to prevent the sun from rising\nor afterwards to quench his light; but through them, beyond them, above\nthem, slowly, steadily, majestically rose the sun, nor quivered from his\npath, nor halted in his progress, until by the power of his mid-day\nlight he had utterly driven those clouds away, so that not a shred of\ntheir tumultuous assemblage could any more be seen on the clear blue\nsky. Such and so impotent in Christ's hands are the adversaries of\nChrist's kingdom, although they seem formidable to men of little faith:\nsuch and so glorious will be the final victory of the King, although\neven his true subjects may fret and fear over his incomprehensible\ndelay. The coming of the kingdom is like the morning, as slow, but as\nsure. As smoke is driven before the wind, so shall the Redeemer in the\nday of his power drive away all those adversaries, whether within his\npeople or without, that now impiously say, \"We will not have this man to\nreign over us.\" Christ's disciples are on the winning side, whatever may\nbe the present aspect of the world. \"He that believeth shall not make\nhaste.\"\n\nThe two parables which now claim our attention, although closely allied,\nare not in meaning and application precisely identical. Both show the\nprogress of the kingdom from a small beginning to a glorious\nconsummation; and both indicate that this growth, as to cause, is due to\nits own inherent unquenchable life, and as to manner, is silent, secret,\nunobserved. Thus far these two are in the main coincident; but besides\nteaching the same lesson in different forms, they teach also different\nlessons. The parable of the mustard-seed exhibits the kingdom in its own\nindependent existence, inherent life, and irresistible power; the\nparable of the leaven exhibits the kingdom in contact with the world,\ngradually overcoming and assimilating and absorbing that world into\nitself. Both alike show that the kingdom increases from small to great;\nthe first points to the essential, and the second to the instrumental\ncause of that increase: in the mustard-seed we see it growing great\nbecause of its own omnipotent vitality; in the leaven we see it growing\ngreat because it uses up all its adversaries as the material of its own\nenlargement.\n\n\n\n\nIII.\n\nTHE MUSTARD-SEED.\n\n\n\"Another parable put he forth unto them, saying, The kingdom of heaven\n is like to a grain of mustard-seed, which a man took, and sowed in\n his field: which indeed is the least of all seeds: but when it is\n grown, it is the greatest among herbs, and becometh a tree, so that\n the birds of the air come and lodge in the branches thereof.\"--MATT.\n xiii. 31, 32.\n\nWe are familiar with the mustard-plant both in a wild and in a\ncultivated state in our own country. Although not the smallest, it is by\nno means the largest of our herbs. On this point it is necessary to\nrecall and keep in mind the fact that when a given plant is indigenous\nin a southern climate, the corresponding species or variety that may be\nfound in more northerly latitudes is generally of a comparatively\ndiminutive size. I have seen a mahogany-plant cultivated in a\nflower-pot, the best representative that could be obtained here of those\nforest patriarchs in tropical America which constitute the mahogany of\ncommerce. The diminutive proportions of our mustard-plant prove nothing\nregarding the magnitude of the herb which bears the corresponding name\nin Syria. We know, in point of fact, that it grows there to a great size\nat the present day. \"I have seen it,\" says Dr. Thomson, \"on the rich\nplain of Akkar as tall as the horse and his rider.\"[17] Irby and Mangles\nfound a tree growing in great abundance near the Dead Sea possessing\nmany of the properties of mustard, which they suppose must be the\nmustard of the parable; but this suggestion seems incompatible with the\nmain scope of the representation, for its turning-point lies in this,\nthat a culinary herb became great like a tree. That a forest tree should\nbe large enough to afford shelter to the birds, is nothing wonderful;\nthe parable is hinged on the fact that the garden herb ([Greek:\nlachanon]) became a tree ([Greek: dendron]).\n\n [17] _The Land and the Book_, p. 64.\n\nBut in this case an investigation exact and minute into the natural\nhistory of the plant is by no means necessary to the appreciation and\nexplanation of the parable. It is not needful to determine what amount\nof credit is due to the witness who declared that he had seen a man\nclimbing into the branches of a mustard-plant, or how far the fact, if\nreal, was uncommon and exceptional. This plant obviously was chosen by\nthe Lord, not on account of its absolute magnitude, but because it was,\nand was recognised to be, a striking instance of increase from very\nsmall to very great. It seems to have been in Palestine, at that time,\nthe smallest seed from which so large a plant was known to grow. There\nwere, perhaps, smaller seeds, but the plants which sprung from them were\nnot so great; and there were greater plants, but the seeds from which\nthey sprung were not so small.\n\nBut the circumstance that most clearly exhibits and indicates the\nappropriateness of the choice, is the fact that the magnitude of the\nmustard-plant, in connection with the minuteness of its seed, was\nemployed at that day among the Jews as a proverbial similitude, to\nindicate that great results may spring from causes that are apparently\ndiminutive, but secretly powerful. The expression, \"If ye had faith as a\ngrain of mustard-seed,\" employed by the Lord on another occasion, is\nsufficient to show that both the conception and its use were familiar to\nhis audience.\n\nThe spiritual lesson of the parable diverges into two lines, distinct\nbut harmonious. By the kingdom of heaven, as it is represented in the\ngrowth of the mustard-plant, we may understand either saving truth\nliving and growing great in the world, or saving truth living and\ngrowing great in an individual human heart. In both, its progress from\nsmall beginnings to great issues is like the growth of a gigantic herb\nfrom the imperceptible germ that was dropped among the clods in spring.\n\n\nI. The kingdom of heaven _in the world_ is like a mustard-seed sown in\nthe ground, both in the smallness of its beginning and the greatness of\nits increase. The first promise, given at the gate of Eden, contained\nthe Gospel as a seed contains the tree. It fell among Adam's descendants\nas a mustard-seed falls between the furrows, and lay long unnoticed\nthere. With the Lord, in the development of his kingdom, a thousand\nyears are as one day in the growth of vegetation. A man who in his\nchildhood observed the seed cast into the ground, may live long and die\nold before the plants have reached maturity; but the seed of the kingdom\nhas not lost its life, the God of the covenant has not forgotten his\nown. At the appointed time he will visit his husbandry, and fill his\nbosom with its fruits.\n\nNever to human eye did the seed seem smaller than at the coming of\nChrist. The infant in the manger at Bethlehem is like a mustard-seed--an\natom scarcely perceptible in the hand, and lost to view when it falls\ninto the earth. Yet there lay the seed of eternal life--thence sprang\nthe stem on which all the saved of mankind shall grow as branches.\nIsrael was feeble among the nations--a little child writhing in the\ngrasp of imperial Rome; Judea and Galilee, with the heathenish Samaria\nbetween, constituted his beat throughout the brief period of his public\nministry. The range was short in its utmost length, narrow in its utmost\nbreadth. In a map of the world of ordinary size, the spot that indicates\nPalestine can scarcely be seen; yet from that spot radiated a power\nwhich is at this day actually paramount. The Christ who seemed so small\nboth in private life at Nazareth and in the public judgment-hall of\nPilate at Jerusalem, is greatest now both in heaven and in earth.\nChristendom and Christianity are both supreme, each in its own place and\naccording to its own kind. This world already belongs to Christian\nnations, and the next to Christian men. So great has the religion of\nJesus grown, that its body overshadows the earth, and its spirit reaches\nheaven.\n\nAs the leaves and branches of a tree tend to assume the form and\nproportions of the tree itself, so subordinate parts in the development\nof God's kingdom follow more or less closely the law of the whole\nkingdom--a progress secret, slow, and sure, from a diminutive beginning\nto an unexpected and amazing greatness. Take, for example, the history\nof Moses, which is a vigorous branch shooting out from the mustard-tree\nunder the ancient dispensation. The branch, a part of the tree, is, like\nthe tree itself, small at first and great at last. A poor Hebrew\nslave-mother, counting her own \"a goodly child,\" as every true mother\nwill to the end of time, strove, by a strange mixture of ingenuity and\ndesperation, to preserve him from the cruel executioners of Pharaoh.\nWhen she could no longer hide him in the house, she laid him in a wicker\nbasket, and set it afloat in an eddy of the Nile. How small the seed\nseemed that day! A slave's man-child, one of many thousands destined by\ntheir jealous owners to destruction, cast by his own mother into the\nriver, that he might not fall into the more dreaded hands of man--how\nsmall that germ was, and yet how great it grew! From heaven the word had\ngone forth, \"Destroy it not, for a blessing is in it.\" On the mighty\nstream, and the cruel men who frequented it, the Maker of them both had\nlaid the command, Touch not mine anointed, and do my prophet no harm.\nFrom that small seed, accordingly, sprang the greatest tree that grew in\nthose old days upon the earth. Moses, the terror of Pharaoh, the scourge\nof Egypt, the leader of the Exodus, the lawgiver of Israel--Moses in his\nmanhood was to the foundling infant what the towering tree is to the\nimperceptible seed from which it springs.\n\nThe operation of the same law may be observed in later ages. In the\nPopish convent at Erfurt a studious young monk sits alone in his cell,\nearnestly examining an ancient record. The student is Luther, and the\nbook the Bible. He has read many books before, but his reading had never\nmade him wretched till now. In other books he saw other people; but in\nthis book for the first time he saw himself. His own sin, when\nconscience was quickened and enlightened to discern it, became a burden\nheavier than he could bear. For a time he was in a horror of great\ndarkness; but when at last he found \"the righteousness which is of God\nby faith,\" he grew hopeful, happy, and strong. Here is a living seed,\nbut it is very small an awakened, exercised, conscientious, believing\nmonk, is an imperceptible atom which superstitious multitudes, and\ndespotic princes, and a persecuting priesthood will overlay and smother,\nas the heavy furrow covers the microscopic mustard-seed. But the living\nseed burst, and sprang, and pierced through all these coverings. How\ngreat it grew and how far it spread history tells to-day. We have cause\nto thank God for the greatness of the Reformation, and to rebuke\nourselves for its smallness. Through the grace of God it made rapid\nprogress at the first, and by the passions of men it was arrested before\nits work was done;--not arrested, but impeded; it is growing still, and\ngrowing more vigorously in our own day than it has done in any\ngeneration since its youth.\n\nBut the present time supplies examples of the kingdom's growth from\nsmall to great, as distinct and characteristic as any period since the\napostles' days. The revivals of these times are vigorous off-shoots from\nthe great stem of Christ's kingdom in the world, and the part observes\nthe same law of increase that operates in the whole. Trace any one of\nthe local awakenings back to its source, and you will discover that the\ninterest in spiritual, personal religion, which now overtops and\novershadows all other interests in the neighbourhood--which has led many\nwanderers back to Christ's fold--which has caused friends to sing aloud\nfor joy, and enemies to stand mute in astonishment--which has emptied\njails and filled prayer-meetings--which has changed the wilderness into\na garden, and drawn wondering witnesses from distant lands--sprang from\nsome upper or lower room in which two or three unnoticed and unknown\nbelievers were wont to meet at stated times for prayer. Many of those\nsmall but living seeds have burst through the ground and made themselves\nknown by their magnitude; and many similar seeds are lying hid to-day\nunder the capacious folds of our vast and earnest industry. May great\ntrees spring from these small seeds in the Lord's good time!\n\nRobert Haldane in Geneva, with his Bible in his hand and a group of\nstudents around him, is a modern example of the same law in the growth\nof the kingdom.\n\n\nII. The kingdom of heaven _in a human heart_ is like a mustard-seed,\nboth in the smallness of its beginning and the greatness of its\nincrease. In the grand design of God, moral qualities hold the first\nplace; physical magnitude is subordinate and instrumental. We may safely\naccommodate and apply to space the principle which the Scripture\nexpressly applies to time: One man--as a sphere on which his purposes\nmay be accomplished and his glory displayed--one man is with the Lord as\na thousand worlds, and a thousand worlds as one man. There is room,\nbrother, for the whole kingdom of God \"within you.\" In one sense, it is\nmost true, we ought to abase, but in another we ought to exalt\nourselves. We should reverence ourselves as the most wonderful work of\nGod within the sphere of our observation. The King, as well as the\nkingdom, finds room in a regenerated man. Here the Lord of glory best\nloves to dwell.\n\nIn this inner and smaller, as well as in the outer and larger sphere,\nthe kingdom of heaven, following the law of the mustard-plant, grows\nfrom the least to the greatest. All life, indeed, is, in its origin,\ninvisible; and the new life of faith is not an exception to the rule.\nThe Lord himself, in the lesson which he taught to Nicodemus, compared\nit in this respect to the wind. In its origin it is imperceptible; in\nits results it is manifest and great. To wash seven times in Jordan\nseemed a small thing to the Syrian soldier, and such it really was; but\nwhen his leprosy was cleansed, and his flesh restored like that of a\nlittle child, he perceived that a great effect had sprung from simple\nmeans. The little-child look unto Jesus which the Gospel prescribes for\nthe saving of the soul seems to the wisdom of this world as inadequate\nto heal a leprosy as the waters of the Jordan seemed to Naaman; yet from\nthat small seed springs the tree of life, with all its beautiful\nblossoms of hope, and all its precious fruits of righteousness.\n\nThe first true, deep check in the conscience because of sin; the first\nreal question, \"What must I do to be saved?\" the first tender grief for\nhaving crucified Christ and grieved the Spirit; the first request for\npardon and reconciliation made to God, as a child asks bread from his\nparents when he is hungry;--the kingdom, coming in any of these forms is\nsmall and scarcely perceptible; but it lives, and in due time will grow\ngreat. Be of good cheer, ye who have felt the word swelling and bursting\nlike a seed in your hearts. That plant may not yet have attained\nmaturity in your life, but greater is He who shields it than all who\nassail it: the enemy cannot in the end prevail. He who hath begun a good\nwork in you, will perfect it until the day of Christ. You could not make\na living seed; but God has given it. Thus far all is well, but you are\nas helpless at the second stage as you were at the first; you have no\nmore power to make the seed grow than you had to make the seed. The\nAuthor and Finisher of this work keeps it from first to last in his own\nhands. It is He who gives rain from heaven and fruitful seasons. The\nsmall seed of the kingdom has fallen on your hearts, and been hidden in\ntheir folds; it has taken root, and sent up into your lives some tender\nshoots of faith, and hope, and love. It is well; thank God for the past,\nand take courage for the coming time. The plant is small now; it will be\ngreat hereafter. It is small on earth; it will be great in heaven. Weed\nit and water it, sun it and shelter it. Be diligent on your own side of\nthis great business, and God will not withhold his power. Cultivate the\nkingdom in your own hearts, and count on the blessing from on high to\nmake it prosper. From the tender, diminutive life of grace, the life of\nglory will in due time grow.\n\nWhen painters have drawn their figures in light, they throw in dark\nshadows beside them, that the positive forms may thereby be more\nprominently displayed. So, beside the kingdom of heaven, under the\naspect of its growth from small beginnings, let us throw in the outline\nof the kingdom of darkness, that thereby the glory of light may be\nbetter seen.\n\nAlthough one kingdom differs from another in character and aim, all\nkingdoms are like each other in the method of their operation. The\nkingdom of darkness, like the kingdom of light, grows gradually from\nvery small to very great. The kingdom of Satan hangs on and follows\nChrist's kingdom like a dark shadow, and the shadow depends upon the\nlight. The first sin against God was a very small seed, but the tree\nwhich sprang from it was the fall of man. \"Thou shalt not eat,\" is a\nsmall point--its smallness has sometimes supplied unbelievers with wit,\nif not with argument--but on that point a door was hung, which, turned\nthis way, opened heaven and shut hell; turned that way, opened hell and\nshut heaven. In its beginning the kingdom of evil was small; but from\nthat small seed a mighty tree has grown.[18]\n\n [18] \"Good is like the mustard-seed; from small it becomes great:\n evil resembles it not less. Here, too, the great springs from the\n small. An evil thought, when once it has made its way into a poor\n soul, may become mighty enough to cast it into hell.\"--_Draeseke vom\n Reich Gottes_, ii. 238.\n\nAs there is no sin so great that the blood of Christ cannot blot it out,\nso there is no sin so small that it cannot destroy a soul. A little sin\nis like a little fire: stand in awe of the spark, and rest not till it\nis quenched. As Christ our Lord is tenderly careful of spiritual life\nwhen it is feeble, and cherishes it into strength, we should sternly\nstamp out evil while it is yet young in our own hearts, lest it spread\nlike a fire. He will not quench the smoking flax of beginning grace, and\nwe should quench with all our might the smoking flax of sin. He\ncommanded the Church in Sardis to \"be watchful, and strengthen the\nthings which remain, that are ready to die\" (Rev. iii. 2). The\ncounterpart and complement of that command is binding, too, upon his\ndisciples: Be watchful, and weaken--if possible, kill outright--the\ngerms of evil that are springing from unseen seeds within your own heart\nand around you in the world. \"The God of peace will bruise Satan under\nyour feet shortly:\" He will bruise Satan, but Satan must be bruised\nunder your feet.\n\n\n\n\nIV.\n\nTHE LEAVEN.\n\n\n\"Another parable spake he unto them; The kingdom of heaven is like unto\n leaven, which a woman took, and hid in three measures of meal, till\n the whole was leavened.\"--MATT. xiii. 33.\n\nIn the mustard-seed we saw the kingdom growing great by its inherent\nvitality; in the leaven we see it growing great by a contagious\ninfluence. There, the increase was attained by development from within;\nhere, by acquisitions from without. It is not that there are two\ndistinct ways in which the Gospel may gain complete possession of a man,\nor Christianity gain complete possession of the world; but that the one\nway in which the work advances is characterized by both these features,\nand consequently two pictures are required to exhibit both sides of the\nsame thing.\n\nThe thought which is peculiar to this parable, the specific lesson which\nit teaches, is, the power of the Gospel, acting like contagion, to\npenetrate, assimilate, and absorb the world in which it lies. The\nkingdom grows great by permeating in secret through the masses, changing\nthem gradually into its own nature, and appropriating them to itself.\n\nThe material frame-work which contains the spiritual lesson here is, in\nits main features, easily understood. Immediately below the surface,\nindeed, lie some hard questions; but all that is necessary is easy, and\nthe discussion of difficulties, although it may well repay the labour,\nis by no means essential.\n\nThe chief use of leaven in the preparation of bread is, as I understand,\nto produce a mechanical effect. A certain chemical change is caused in\nthe first instance by fermentation in the nature of the fermented\nsubstance, and for the sake of that change the process is in certain\nother manufactures introduced; but along with the chemical change which\ntakes place in the nature of the substance, a mechanical change is also\neffected in its form, and for the sake of this latter and secondary\nresult fermentation is resorted to in the baking of bread. The moist,\nsoft, yet dense mass of dough, is by fermentation thrown into the form\nof a sponge. Owing to the consistence of the material, the openings made\nby the ferment remain open, and consequently the lump, which would\notherwise have been solid, is penetrated in every direction by an\ninnumerable multitude of small cavities. Through these the heat in the\noven obtains equal access to every portion of the dough; and thus,\nthough the loaf is of considerable thickness, it is not left raw in the\nheart. Other methods, essentially different from fermentation, are in\nmodern practice adopted in the preparation of bread; but by whatever\nmeans channels may be opened for the admission of heat to every particle\nof the dough, the result is practically the same as that which is\nobtained by leavening. The operator converts the mass of solid dough\ninto swollen, light, porous, spongy leaven, by introducing into it a\nsmall quantity of matter already in a state of fermentation. It is the\nnature of that substance or principle to infect the portion that lies\nnext it; and thus, if the contiguous matter be a susceptible conductor\nlike moistened flour, it spreads until it has converted the whole mass.\nThe knowledge of this process is not so universal amongst us as it was\nthen in Galilee, or is still in many countries, because baking by\nfermentation, especially in the northern division of the island, is not\nmuch practised in private families. In countries where bread is prepared\nby that method, and every family prepares its own, the process is, of\ncourse, universally familiar.\n\nThe three measures of meal, which together make an ephah, were the\nunderstood quantity of an ordinary batch in the economics of a family,\nand as such are several times incidentally mentioned in the Scriptures\nof the Old Testament. See, for example, the preparation of bread by\nSarah, as it is narrated in Gen. xviii. The various suggestions which\ninquirers have made regarding the specific significance of the _three_\nmeasures of meal, are interesting and instructive. As they do not\ndirectly traverse the lines of the analogy, they are entitled to a\nrespectful hearing; but the subject is subordinate, and the meaning must\never be comparatively obscure. Whether the three measures are understood\nto point to the three continents of the world then known, or to the\nthree sons of Noah by whom the world was peopled, or to spirit, soul,\nand body, the constituent elements of human nature, an interesting and\nuseful conception is obtained. Each of these suggestions contains a\ntruth, and that, too, a truth which is germane to the main lesson of the\nparable.\n\nThe same historic incidents which show that three measures were the\nordinary quantity, show also that the women of the house were the\nordinary operators. Baking the bread of the household was accounted\nwomen's work; as men ploughed and sowed in the field, women kneaded and\nbaked at the oven. An inversion of this order would have been noticed\nas incongruous, and presented a difficulty. Exceptions may be found,\nboth in ancient and modern times, but the representation in the text\nproceeds obviously upon the ordinary habits of society. On this account,\nalthough I willingly listen to interesting and ingenious speculations\nregarding the significance of the woman who hid the leaven among the\nmeal, I cannot accept them as the foundation of any positive doctrine. I\nam jealous, not without cause, of ecclesiastical tendencies and\nprepossessions in the interpretation of the parables. It is quite true\nthat both in the discourses of the Lord and in the epistles of his\nfollowers, reference is made sometimes to the community or communities\nof believers constituted as a Church; but the Church in the Scriptures\nis a much simpler affair than it is in ecclesiastical history. Moreover,\nin these lessons which were taught by the Lord in the beginning of the\nGospel, we find much about the individual man, and about the aggregate\nof mankind, but little about the Church in its visible organization.\nAccordingly, while I endeavour to keep my mind open for everything that\nthe Scriptures bring to the Church, I am disposed to shut the door hard\nagainst anything that I suspect the Church is bringing to the\nScriptures. When the woman who kneaded the dough, and the woman who lost\nand found the silver coin, come forward, backed by much learned\nauthority, saying, We are the Church, I stand on my guard against\ndeception, and carefully examine their credentials. A man took the\nmustard-seed and sowed it in his field; a woman took the leaven and hid\nit in three measures of meal. The two parables are in this respect\nstrictly parallel; in both alike an ordinary act in rural economy is\nperformed, and in either it is performed by a person of the appropriate\nsex. The converse would have been startling and inexplicable. Whatever\nthe operator may represent in the sowing of the seed, the operator in\nthe hiding of the leaven represents the same. To neglect the strict\nparallelism between the two cases, and attribute some meaning to the\nselection of a woman as the operator in the one, which the selection of\na man in the other does not convey, is, as I apprehend the matter, to\nforsake the main track of the analogy, and follow by-paths which lead to\nno useful result. The same divine hand that dropped the word of eternal\nlife as a mustard-seed into the ground, also hid the word of eternal\nlife as leaven in the ephah of flour. Looking to the spiritual\nsignificance of the two parables, we have in both cases the same act,\nand in both cases, therefore, the same actor.[19]\n\n [19] To the question what the woman specially represents in the\n parable, Draeseke answers, \"The grace of God.\"--ii. 263.\n\nA question of deep interest and considerable difficulty arises from the\nfact that here, and here only, the greatest good--the kingdom of God in\nthe world--is unequivocally compared to leaven, whereas this similitude,\nin all other places of Scripture where it occurs, either stands\nindefinitely for progress of any kind, or expressly represents the\nenergy of evil. I assume without argument that in this parable the\ndiffusion of leaven through the mass represents the diffusion of good in\nthe world, although here and there, both in ancient and modern times, an\ninquirer appears who understands the leaven in this place to predict the\nprevalence of false doctrines and practices in the Church. This\ninterpretation no man would voluntarily adopt in the first instance, for\nit is obviously incongruous with the signification of the kingdom in\nevery other parable of the group; but some have permitted themselves to\nbe driven into it by a difficulty that threatens on the opposite side.\nBecause in other portions of Scripture they find leaven employed as an\nemblem of evil, they think themselves obliged to take it as a\nrepresentative of evil here. But the difficulty which is presented by\nthe use of a type to denote good, which is elsewhere employed to denote\nevil, must be fairly met and explained: to escape an imaginary\ndifficulty we must not plunge into a real mistake. I am convinced that\nhere, as in many similar cases, that which at first sight and on the\nsurface wears the appearance of harshness, will be found, on fuller\nconsideration, to contain a new beauty, and impart additional power.\n\nIt is obvious, in the first place, from the references made to it both\nby the Lord and his apostles, and especially from the iteration of the\nsame maxim by Paul in two distinct epistles, that the similitude was\ncurrent and familiar among the people as a proverb. It is conceded, that\napart from this parable, wherever its application is expressly\nindicated, it is employed to designate the progress of evil; but it\nought to be borne in mind that Paul has twice, in the same words,\nenunciated the universal proposition, \"A little leaven leaveneth the\nwhole lump\" (1 Cor. v. 6; Gal. v. 9). By expressly mentioning the leaven\nof malice and wickedness in connection with this proposition, he leaves\nroom for the supposition that there may be also a leaven of truth and\nholiness. In like manner, the Lord in another place warns his followers\nto beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is hypocrisy; but he\nnowhere says that leaven is hypocrisy. Leaven does, indeed, illustrate\nthe method in which falsehood spreads; but it may, for aught that is\nsaid in the Scriptures, illustrate also the manner in which truth\nadvances, when it has gotten a footing in the world or in a man. If\ntruth and error, though opposite in their nature, are like each other in\ntheir tendency to advance, as if by contagion; and if error is in this\nrespect like leaven, then truth must be in this respect like leaven too.\nWhen two things are in a certain aspect like each other, and one of them\nis in the same aspect like a third thing, the other must also be like\nthat third thing, provided the point of view remain unchanged. Leaven\nrepresents evil not in its nature, but only in the manner of its\nprogress; and in this respect the symbol is equally applicable to the\nopposite good.\n\nThis argument, indeed, may be carried one step further. It is not enough\nto show that no loss of meaning is sustained by the application of this\nanalogy to a new and opposite class of facts; a positive gain thereby\naccrues. The circumstance that in all other places of Scripture in which\nthe symbolical meaning of leaven is specifically applied, it is, in\npoint of fact, employed to designate the progress of evil, instead of\nobscuring, rather reflects additional light on the comparison as it is\nused in this parable. The Teacher who speaks here is sovereign. By him\nthe worlds were made, and by him redemption wrought. In both departments\nhe executes his own will: when he speaks, he speaks with authority.\nObserving that the principle which ordinarily enters and pervades human\nhearts is evil, a leaven of hypocrisy, he does not submit to that state\nof things as necessary and permanent: this is, indeed, the condition of\nthe world; but he has come to change it. Such is the direction of the\ncurrent, and the proverb which compares moral evil to a leaven correctly\ndescribes its insinuating and persevering course; but here is one who\nhas power to turn the river of water so that it shall flow backward to\nits source. Corruption has, indeed, spread through the world as leaven\nspreads through the dough, but here is Truth incarnate, another leaven,\nintroduced into the mass, having power to saturate all with good, and\nthereby ultimately to cast forth evil from the world. The kingdom of\ndarkness, for example, comes secretly,--the wiles of the devil\nconstitute his policy and secure his success; the kingdom of God,\nalthough opposite in essence, is similar in the method of its advance,\nfor it \"cometh not with observation.\" The wheat and the darnel were\nopposite in character and consequences as light and darkness, but they\nwere precisely alike in the manner of their growth. The loyal army\nadopts the same tactics which the rebels employ, while it strives to\ndefend the throne which they are leagued to overthrow.\n\nThus, it is not enough to say that although the diffusion of evil in\nGod's intelligent creatures is like the diffusion of leaven in the\ndough, Jesus may notwithstanding employ the same analogy to indicate how\ngrace grows: we may proceed further and affirm, as Stier has ingeniously\nsuggested, that because evil has often been compared to leaven in the\nmanner of its advance, Jesus adopts that similitude to illustrate the\naggressive, pervasive power of the truth.\n\nBoldly, as a sovereign may, this Teacher seizes a proverb which was\ncurrent as an exponent of the adversaries' successful stratagems, and\nstamps the metal with the image and superscription of the rightful King.\nThe evil spreads like leaven; you tremble before its stealthy advance\nand relentless grasp: but be of good cheer, disciples of Jesus, greater\nis He that is for you than all that are against you; the word of life\nwhich has been hidden in the world, hidden in believing hearts, is a\nleaven too. The unction of the Holy One is more subtle and penetrating\nand subduing than sin and Satan. Where sin abounded grace shall much\nmore abound.\n\nThe appropriation by Christ and to his kingdom of a similitude which had\npreviously been applied in an opposite sense may be illustrated by many\nparallel examples in the Scriptures.[20] Of these, as far as I know, the\ndifferent and opposite figurative significations of the serpent are the\nmost striking and appropriate. The conception of secret motion, followed\nin due time by a surely planted effectual stroke, which is associated\nwith the faculties and habits of a serpent, Christ found appropriated as\na type to express the power of evil: but he did not permit it to remain\nso appropriated; he spoiled the Egyptian of this jewel, and in as far as\nit possessed value, enriched with it his own Israel. The serpent, as a\nmetaphor, was in practice as completely thirled to the indication of\nevil as leaven had been, but Jesus counselled his disciples to \"be wise\nas serpents.\" A similar example occurs in the parable of the unjust\nsteward: it teaches that the skill of the wicked in doing evil should be\nimitated by Christians in doing good. Christ acts as king and conqueror.\nHe strips the slain enemy of his sharpest weapons, and therewith girds\nhis own faithful followers. Whatever wisdom and power may have been\nemployed against them, wisdom and power inconceivably greater are\nwielded on their side.\n\n [20] \"Thus in different passages the lion is used as a figure of\n Satan, but also of Christ; the serpent as a figure of the enemy, but\n also of the wisdom needful to the apostles; birds as a figure of\n believing trustfulness, but also of the devil catching away the\n word.\"--_Lange_ in loc.\n\nWe shall be better prepared to appreciate for practical purposes the\npeculiar meaning which the symbol bears in this parable if we advert, in\nthe first place, to its ordinary meaning in other parts of Scripture.\nBoth in the typical worship of the Old Testament and in the doctrinal\nteaching of the New, leaven is ordinarily employed to denote the\ninsinuating, contagious advance of sin. When the Hebrews were instructed\nto cast all leaven out of their houses during the solemnities of the\nPassover, their lawgiver meant to teach them by type that in worshipping\nGod through his ordinances they should cast all malice and wickedness\nout of their hearts. In like manner, when the great Teacher warned his\nfollowers to beware of the leaven of the Pharisees and of the Sadducees,\nhe meant that they should eschew on the one hand the lie of\nself-righteous superstition, and on the other the lie of libertine\nunbelief. The Apostle Paul, too, while he does not forbid another use,\nemploys the conception, in point of fact, to illustrate the presence and\npower of sin.\n\nEvil is a mysterious, self-propagating principle, like leaven. In the\nfact of the fall a piece of this leaven was hidden in the mass, and all\nmankind have consequently become corrupted. The leaven of sin that\ntouched humanity at the first has infected the whole. The fact of a\nuniversal corruption appears in all history, and its origin is explained\nin the beginning of Genesis. The whole lump has been leavened: break off\na bit at any place, at any time, and you will find it tainted. \"The\ninnocence of childhood\" is a fond, false phrase, employed to conceal the\nterrible reality: there is no innocence, no purity, except that which\ncomes through the gift of God, the sacrifice of Christ, and the ministry\nof the Spirit.\n\nIdolatry, for example, is a leaven that must have been small in its\nbeginning, but at a very early date it had grown great. The world was\nidolatrous when Abraham was called out to become the nucleus of a\nreligious nation; and even his descendants, though constituted as a\ncommonwealth expressly for the purpose of maintaining the worship of\nthe true God while all the world beside had sunk into idolatry, were,\nthrough contact with the contaminating leaven, frequently overrun by the\nsame sin. It became necessary that they should be poured from vessel to\nvessel, and tried as by fire, in order to keep them separate.\n\nSmall and apparently harmless Popery began: with the power and\nperseverance of a principle in nature it spread and defiled the Church.\nHow completely that leaven penetrated the lump may be seen everywhere\nthroughout Europe, in the architecture, sculpture, paintings,--in the\nlaws, habits, and language that have come down from the middle ages to\nour own day. The evil spirit of the Papacy has intruded into every\nplace; into the councils of kings, into the laws of nations, into the\nbirths, marriages, and deaths of the people. Between ruler and subject,\nbetween husband and wife, between parent and child, comes the priest,\ngliding in like water through seamy walls, sapping their foundations.\nInto the inmost heart of maid, wife, mother, creeps the confessional,\ntainting, souring, defiling society in its springs,--a leaven of malice\nand wickedness, a leaven at once of Pharisee and Sadducee, a\nsuperstition that believes everything in alliance with a scepticism that\nbelieves nothing, and all combined to conceal the salvation of God and\nenslave the spirits of men. Beware of the leaven of the Papacy.\n\nOther things of grosser and more material mould follow the law of leaven\nin their progress from small to great, until they obtain the mastery of\na community or a man. Such, for example, are the use of ardent spirits\nin Scotland and the use of opium in China. A hundred years ago how small\nwas either bit! but being a bit of leaven, when it is once introduced\nit creeps stealthily forward, the appetite growing by what it feeds on,\nuntil it dominates, and in some cases utterly destroys. These creeping\nleavens stain the beauty and waste the strength of nations. Some tribes\nof Indians in North America have been annihilated mainly by this\nprocess; and at this day the Canadian Parliament, through a benevolent\nlaw, sanctioned by the Sovereign, entirely prohibit the sale of spirits\nto the Indians, and thus save from extinction the remnants of the tribes\nthat live under our protection. Those subtile and powerful material\nagents which create abnormal appetites and influence the moral habits of\na whole people, afford ample room for gravest thought both to Christians\nand patriots.\n\nThe fact acknowledged in Scripture, and manifest in all experience, that\nevil has transfused itself through humanity like leaven, serves to bring\nout in deeper relief the comforting converse truth which Christ has\nembodied in this parable. The universal diffusion of corruption in the\nworld becomes a dark ground whereon the Lord may more vividly portray\nthe progress and final triumph of holiness. Good introduced among the\ngood is not much noticed; but when good assails, overcomes, and\ntransforms evil, its power and beauty are conspicuously displayed.\nEmploying the sad facts already stated as shadows filled in to make the\nlines of light more visible, I shall proceed now to express and enforce\npositively some of the practical lessons which the parable contains.\n\n1. Christ, the Son of God, became man and dwelt among us. Behold the\npiece of leaven that has been plunged into the dead mass of the world!\n\"In him was life, and the life was the light of men\" (John i. 4). The\nwhole is not leavened yet, but the germ has been introduced. The\nmeaning of Immanuel is, \"God with us:\" the incarnation is the link that\nbinds the fallen to the throne of God. One without sin and with\nomnipotence has become our brother,--has taken hold of our nature, and\nwill keep hold of it to the end. He will not fail nor be discouraged. To\nhim every knee shall bow, and every tongue confess: the prophecy has\nbeen written, and the history will follow. In the meantime, while we\nwait for the accomplishment of the promise, we may obtain from this\nparable some glimpses of the method by which the change will be effected\nat last.\n\nLeaven consists in, or at least causes, fermentation. The name suggests\nthe mechanical process of boiling. The most sublime and awful scenes\nwhich nature has ever presented have been produced in this way. When\ngreat masses are affected, a boiling becomes unspeakably grand and\nterrible. This earth, now so solid beneath, and so green on the surface,\nseems to have been once a boiling mass. Those mountains that cleave the\nclouds are the bubbles that rose to the surface and were congealed ere\nthey had time to subside again: there they stand to-day, monuments of\nthe fact. The moral government of God is like the natural. The Maker's\nmethod, when he would bring down the high things and exalt the low, is\nto throw in an ingredient which will produce fermentation. He can make\nthe world of spirit fervid as well as this material globe. The earth is\nshaken by moral causes. The Gospel sends a sword before it brings peace.\nWars and rumours of wars rend the nations, and make men's hearts melt\nwithin their breasts. In some cases it is obviously Christian truth\nplunged into the mass that agitates the nations; and if we were able to\ndiscern the links of cause and effect a few degrees further into the\nfringes of the cloud that encircles God's throne, we would perhaps see\nthe same central fact setting in motion more distant forces. Our life is\nso short, and our range of vision so contracted, that we cannot observe\nthe progress which the kingdom makes. Sometimes, and in some places, it\nseems to recede; but when the end comes it will be seen that every step\nof apparent retreat was the couching in preparation for another spring.\nThe kingdoms of this world shall become the kingdoms of our Lord and of\nhis Christ. The captive's chains shall be broken, whether they bind more\ndirectly the body or the soul, although the ancient political\norganizations of Europe, and the more recent fabrics of America, should\nbe torn asunder and tossed away in the process, as foam is tossed from\nthe crest of a wave upon the shore. \"Thou shalt break them with a rod of\niron; thou shalt dash them in pieces like a potter's vessel. Be wise now\ntherefore, O ye kings; be instructed, ye judges of the earth. Serve the\nLord with fear, and rejoice with trembling. Kiss the Son, lest he be\nangry, and ye perish from the way, when his wrath is kindled but a\nlittle. Blessed are all they that put their trust in him\" (Ps. ii. 9-12).\n\n2. Converted men, women, and children are let into openings of corrupt\nhumanity, and hidden in its heart. There they cannot lie still: they\nstir, and effervesce, and inoculate the portions with which they are in\nclosest contact. In this respect the lesson is the same with that which\nis taught in those other short parables of Jesus,--\"Ye are the light of\nthe world. Ye are the salt of the earth.\"\n\nNor is the conception essentially different from that of Christ or his\nword dropped into the lump of humanity; for Christians have no life and\nno expansive power, except in as far as Christ dwells in their hearts\nby faith. They are vessels which contain the truth, and when these\nvessels are hidden under the folds of families and larger communities,\nthe word of life, which is within them, touches and tells upon their\nneighbours.\n\nThe most recent experience of the Church exhibits the kingdom spreading\nlike leaven, as vividly, perhaps, as any experience since apostolic\ntimes. By contact with one soul, already fervid with new life, other\nsouls, hitherto dead, become fervid too. One sinner saved, his heart\nburning within his breast, as he consciously communes with his Saviour,\ntouches a meeting and sets it all aglow; the prayer-meeting thus moved\ntouches the congregation and throws its settled lees into an unwonted\nand violent commotion; this assembly, all throbbing with the cry, What\nmust we do to be saved? infects a city; and the city so infected\ncommunicates its fervour to the land; and a nation thus on fire kindles\nanother by its far-reaching sympathy beyond intervening seas. Thus some\nportions of the world have been thrown into such a state of\neffervescence, by the leaven of the Gospel hidden in their heart, that\nfor a time the sound of praise for sin forgiven has risen in the\nhighways and market-places, louder than that other old, strong cry, What\nshall we eat, and what shall we drink, and wherewithal shall we be\nclothed?\n\nThe leaven, like gravitation, follows the same law on smaller spheres\nthat it follows on the larger. Brother infects sister, and sister\nbrother; parent child, and child parent; shopman shopmate. We often\nlament the contagious influence of evil, and it is right that we should;\nbut it is an unthankful, unhopeful spirit, that thinks and speaks of the\ndark side only. Oh, thou of little faith, wherefore didst thou doubt?\nThe new life which Christ has brought into the world is a leaven too.\nWorking on the same method, but backed by a mightier power, good will\nyet overcome evil,--life will destroy death. Life from the Lord and in\nthe Lord, though small at first as to the number of persons whom it\nanimates, will increase until it fill the world. It will absorb\nsurrounding death, and in absorbing quicken it. He that sat upon the\nthrone said, \"Behold, I make all things new\" (Rev. xxi. 5).\n\n3. There is yet another branch of the practical lesson which ought not\nto be overlooked: The life of faith, when it is hidden in the heart,\nspreads like leaven through the man, occupying and assimilating all the\nfaculties of his nature and all the course of his life. The whole lump\nof the individual must be leavened, as well as the whole lump of the\nworld. Christ will not be satisfied until he get every man in the world\nfor his own, and every part of each. Whatever amount of ground there may\nbe for the judgment of some expositors that the three measures of meal\nin the parable represent spirit, soul, and body, the constituents of\nhuman nature, certain it is that if the leaven of the kingdom is\ndeposited in the heart, it will not cease until it has interpenetrated\nthe human trinity and conformed all to the likeness of Christ. In the\nnew creature, as in the new world, \"dwelleth righteousness.\" That which\nis now laid on the conscience of Christians as a law will yet emerge\nfrom their life as a fact,--\"Whether therefore ye eat or drink, or\nwhatsoever ye do, do all to the glory of God.\"\n\n * * * * *\n\nFrom a circumstance not expressly mentioned in the parable, but\nobviously contained in the nature of the case, springs a thought of\ntender and solemn import. The piece of leaven was hid in the meal, and\nthe whole quantity, in consequence, was converted into leaven; but the\nleaven will not spread through meal that is dry; the meal is not\nsusceptible, receptive, until it is saturated with water.\n\nWithin some persons, some families, some congregations, some\ncommunities, the leaven of truth has been deposited for a long time, and\nyet they are not moved, they are not changed. The leaven remains as it\ncame, a stranger; all around, notwithstanding its presence, is still, is\ndead. It is when the Spirit is poured out as floods that the leaven of\nthe kingdom spreads with quickening, assimilating power. I will pour out\nmy Spirit upon you, saith the Lord: the promise is sent to generate the\nprayer, as a sound calls forth an echo. Behold, I come quickly, says\nChrist: Even so, come, Lord Jesus, respond Christians. Catch the promise\nas it falls, and send it back like an echo to heaven. I will pour out my\nSpirit upon you: Pour out thy Spirit, Lord, on us, as floods on the dry\nground; so shall the word already lying in our Bibles and our memories\nrun and be glorified in our life and through our land.\n\n\n\n\nV.\n\nTHE HIDDEN TREASURE.\n\n\n\"Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto treasure hid in a field; the\n which when a man hath found, he hideth, and for joy thereof goeth\n and selleth all that he hath, and buyeth that field.\"--MATT. xiii. 44.\n\nThese two parables, the hidden treasure and the costly pearl, are even\nmore closely allied to each other than the two which precede them.\n\nGenerically they teach the same truth; but they teach it with distinct\nspecific differences. It will be most convenient to notice in connection\nwith the first, the lessons that are common to both; and in connection\nwith the second, the points of distinction between them.\n\nThese twin parables, then, exhibit on the one hand the intrinsic\npreciousness of the Gospel, and on the other the high esteem in which\nthat precious thing is held by a spiritually quickened man. They set\nforth first how valuable the kingdom of God is, and next how much it is\nvalued by those who know its worth.\n\nThese two, along with the concluding representation of the general\njudgment, were spoken, not to the multitude on the shore of the lake,\nbut more privately to a smaller audience in a neighbouring dwelling.\nMany expositors believe that they can discern a difference in the nature\nand treatment of the subjects between the first four and the last three,\ncorresponding to the different circumstances in which the two portions\nof the group were severally delivered. It is thought that those which\nwere addressed to the multitude in public represent the kingdom in its\nmore general and external aspects, as was suitable in a miscellaneous\naudience; while those which were addressed privately to the circle of\ndisciples represent the kingdom more especially in its intrinsic nature\nand individual, personal application. I would not presume to affirm that\nthere is no ground for this distinction; but I think it is a mistake to\nmake it the hinge on which our view of the whole group must turn. I\nsuspect there are things in the parable of the sower which require, for\ntheir appreciation, the faith and experience of true disciples, as much\nas anything that the parable of the hidden treasure contains; and, on\nthe other hand, that the lessons suggested by the treasure were as\nnecessary and appropriate to the mixed multitude as those which are\ntaught by the sowing of the seed on different kinds of ground. The\nnecessity of personal appreciation and acceptance of the Gospel, which\nis the main lesson of this parable spoken privately in the house, is\npre-eminently a word in season to those that are without. That lesson,\naccordingly, the Lord and his apostles were wont to teach in promiscuous\nassemblies. While, therefore, I notice the fact that the three later\nsimilitudes of this group were given to a smaller circle after the crowd\nhad dispersed, I am not able to say that the reason of the change is\nevident in the nature of the subjects. Had these three also been spoken\nfrom the fishing-boat to the promiscuous assemblage on shore, I would\nnot have been able to affirm that the themes seemed less appropriate to\nthe audience, or less in accordance with the Teacher's method at other\ntimes. I look with interest into the distinctions which some have drawn\nbetween the four _exoteric_ parables addressed to a miscellaneous\nassembly, and the three _esoteric_ parables spoken to a more select and\nmore sympathizing few; but to me they do not appear to be of substantial\nimportance in the interpretation.\n\nThe treasure may have been gold or silver or precious stones, or a\ncombination of all three: it may have been anything of great value that\nlies in small bulk, and is not liable to decay,--such a treasure as may\nlie buried under the earth for a long period without any diminution of\nits worth. In oriental countries and in ancient times treasures were hid\nin the ground more frequently than in our land and our day; but it is\nprobable that even there and then the subterranean wealth was tenfold\ngreater in the popular belief than it was in reality.\n\nTwo distinct causes, or classes of causes, lead to the concealment of\ntreasure under ground: the feeble bury their wealth when they are\noppressed, and the guilty when they are scared. As a general rule, we\nmay assume that the treasure which is found buried in the earth has been\nplaced there either by honest men when the law was feeble, or by\ndishonest men when the law was strong. The two classes of persons who\nbury gold are the robbed and the robbers.\n\nIn both cases, the treasure which is intentionally and intelligently\nburied is liable to be lost through the removal or death of those who\nwere in the secret. Such secreted and lost wealth is afterwards from\ntime to time found by those who build houses or cultivate the soil. In\nall lands and ages some such hoards have been actually discovered, and\nmany such have been imagined and expected by the credulous. The\nconditions of the treasure that may be buried under ground exist in\nsubstances widely different from gold and silver and precious stones.\nOn the west coast of Scotland, a few years ago, some men, while engaged\nin digging fuel from a moss, found at a great depth large quantities of\ntallow carefully sewed up in raw ox-hides, and in good preservation. In\ntroubled, lawless times, a clan had ravaged their neighbour's territory:\nnot having had time to drive away the cattle, they had buried the only\nportion of the spoil that could be preserved, intending to return when\nthe danger was past and carry it away. The opportunity of realizing the\nbooty had never occurred, and the clansmen had carried the secret with\nthemselves to the grave.\n\nIn modern times, treasures a thousand-fold more valuable than any that\nhave ever been hidden by human hands are frequently discovered under the\nearth, and wealth correspondingly great obtained by purchasing the field\nin which they lie. The much disputed and now celebrated mineral at\nTorbanehill, near Bathgate, in the county of Linlithgow, affords a good\nexample. A person discovered that a coal or other mineral substance of\ngreat value lay in the ground. Without revealing, perhaps not knowing to\nthe full extent the value of his discovery, he forthwith concluded, not\nprecisely a purchase, but a long lease of the ground for mining\npurposes. When his bargain was securely made, he began to bring up the\nprecious substance. As a raw material for the manufacture of gas and\noil, it was found precious beyond all precedent. The original proprietor\nthen raised an action for the dissolution of the lease. The action has\nbeen several times renewed in various forms, and its fame has resounded\nthrough all Europe. Meantime the prudent discoverer of the treasure and\npurchaser of the field is reaping a rich harvest from his transaction.\n\nIn North America, both in the States and in Canada, similar facts have\noften of late years emerged, especially in connection with oil springs\nand copper mines. Some men have obtained enormous wealth by purchasing\nfor a small price a piece of ground in which a seam of copper lay, and\nselling it again when the fact was verified.\n\nA question has been raised and discussed at greater length, I think,\nthan its importance warrants, regarding the conduct of the man who found\nthe treasure and hid it again till he had secured the field--whether the\nact was fair or unfair. The parables of the Lord are allowed to flow\nlike a mountain stream in its natural channel. In those at least that\nare metaphorical, the narrative does not undertake to prescribe what\nshould be, but to represent what is probable in human history. The fact\nas narrated may or may not be an example worthy of imitation.[21] The\nmoral lesson is found, not by looking directly at the story, but by\nlooking at the shadow which the material case projects on the spiritual\nsphere. The conduct of the person in the picture may be good, bad, or\nindifferent; the spiritual lesson is not affected by the moral character\nof the act which is employed as a leaden type to make it visible. As the\nlesson on a printed page is not affected by the baseness or the pureness\nof the metal which constituted the type, provided always that the form\nof the type were appropriate; so the doctrine left for us after the\nparabolic picture has passed is not dependent for its purity on the\nmaterial of which the type was formed. The shifty dishonest factor, and\nthe indolent unrighteous judge of subsequent parables, occur as\nconspicuous examples.\n\n [21] It is otherwise, of course, in those that are directly moral,\n as the Good Samaritan; they are not metaphors to be translated, but\n examples to be imitated.\n\nThe picture is obviously true to nature. When a man became aware that a\ngreat treasure lay under ground at a certain spot, he concealed his\nknowledge of the fact, and took measures to obtain possession of the\nfield. Believing that this hidden wealth was greater far than all that\nhe possessed in the world, or could ever hope to acquire by the ordinary\nproduce of his property, he sold all that he had without a grudge, in\norder to make sure of the prize. The love of his own possessions,\nwhether hereditary or acquired, whether lands or money, was overbalanced\nand so destroyed by the estimate which he had formed of the hidden\ntreasure. The new and stronger affection neutralized and blotted out all\nprevious predilections for what was his own. He sold all that he had,\nand bought the field. The turning-point is here; and here, accordingly,\nthe story is abruptly broken off. There is not a word regarding the\nsubsequent steps of the important and critical transaction. How much he\ngained by his bargain; whether the validity of the purchase was disputed\nin a court of justice by the former proprietor, on the ground of a\nconcealment of facts by the buyer;--these and all similar points are\ndesignedly veiled off. If they had been introduced, they would have\nserved only to lead the investigator into a wrong track, and the meaning\nof the Master would thereby have been lost. The story advances in broad\nand manifest accordance with nature, both in its main line and in its\nsubordinate accessories, until it has reached and passed the point which\nmarked its goal: then the curtain suddenly drops, resolutely concealing\nall the rest, and so compelling the reader to fix his regard on the\ngreat essential lesson, instead of dissipating his energies on a\nmultitude of interesting but unnecessary speculations.\n\nSuch is the material framework which sustains the spiritual truth,--such\nthe trellis which bears up the fruitful vine: having first gone round it\nto survey its construction and its form, we now approach it to gather\nfor our own use the ripe fruit that hangs within reach on every side.\n\n1. There is a treasure, placed within our reach in this, world, rich\nbeyond all comparison or conception,--a treasure incorruptible and\nundefiled and unfading. \"God is love,\"--behold the fountain-head, where\nan exhaustless supply is stored: in the Gospel of Christ a channel has\nbeen opened through which streams from that fountain flow down to this\ndistant world. In the Son of God incarnate divine mercy reaches our\nnature, and supplies our wants. Through the ministry of the Spirit, in\nthe earliest promise and in subsequent prophecy the refreshing water was\nbrought into contact with parched lips. A heavenly treasure lies on this\npoverty-stricken, bankrupt, accursed world, sufficient to enrich every\none of its poor and miserable and wretched and blind and naked\ninhabitants.\n\n2. The treasure is hidden. In early ages it was concealed under certain\nveils, constructed of design in such a manner that through their\nhalf-transparent folds a halo of the unseen glory should excite the\nhopes and attract the steps of every generation. The promise given at\nthe gate of Paradise contained the treasure, but contained it wrapped up\nin allegoric prophecy which nothing but subsequent fulfilment could\ncompletely unfold. Down through the patriarchal and prophetic ages it\ncontinued a hidden treasure, although the new life of the faithful was\nsecretly sustained by it all the while. Even when Christ through these\nparables taught his disciples in Galilee, his kingdom was still hidden.\nA few fishermen, and here and there a ruler, had discovered the precious\ndeposit, and had drawn from it enough to enrich themselves for ever; but\nto the multitude it was still unknown. Under the form of a man--under\nthe privacy and poverty of a Nazarene, was the fulness of the Godhead\nhid that day from the wise and prudent of the world. The light was near\nthem, and yet they did not see; the riches of divine grace were brought\nto their door, and yet they continued poor and miserable.\n\nBut even after the Lord had fully declared his mission, and finished his\nwork,--after he had died for our sin, and risen again for our\njustification,--after his disciples through the ministry of the Spirit\nhad published the glad tidings in many lands,--the treasure still lay\nhidden. It was near, and yet out of sight. Those who find it, find out\nat the same time that they have been almost treading on it for years,\nand yet ignorant of its existence and its worth. Saul of Tarsus had been\noften near it, before he found it for himself. When Gamaliel lectured on\nthe Mosaic sacrifices, the attentive, clear-headed and ardent pupil, was\non the very point of discovering where the treasure lay; but though\noften near it, he never fell on it until that day when he fell to the\nground near Damascus. Felix was near it when, shut in between his own\nsin and God's righteousness, he trembled at the sight of the\njudgment-seat, like an angel with a drawn sword right before him on the\nnarrow path. Agrippa was near it when, caught and carried away ere he\nwas well aware by the close, clear reasoning of a true preacher, he was\nalmost persuaded to be a Christian. Still men may be walking near the\ntreasure of eternal life,--walking over it, and yet miss it: the\ntreasure that they trod upon remains hidden, and they remain poor.\n\n3. The hidden treasure is at last found. It is noticed by all students\nof the parables, that on this point there is a marked distinction\nbetween the experience of the man who found the hidden treasure, and\nthat of the merchant who found the pearl of great price. It is probable\nthat this man was not aware that there was any treasure in that field:\nhe seems to have been neither looking for it nor expecting to find it.\nHe was probably employed in some other work, and prosecuting some other\nobject. He may have been a labourer toiling there for his daily bread;\nor he may have been engaged in making a road or digging for the\nfoundation of a house, when the treasure, concealed in a troubled time,\nwas exposed to view. He found what he was not seeking: he was seeking a\nbit of bread, and stumbled upon a fortune. The merchant, on the\ncontrary, who fell in with the precious pearl was travelling with the\nexpress purpose of discovering goodly pearls and buying them. He\nobtained what he was seeking; but obtained a pearl of greater value than\nhe had previously seen, or expected ever to see.\n\nOutwardly at least, and on the surface, a similar distinction seems to\nobtain between one man's experience and another's, in regard to the\nmanner of finding the treasures of divine grace. Some seem to find the\nSaviour when they are not seeking him; and some, after deliberately and\nconsciously seeking him long, are rewarded at length. It is the former\nof the two classes with whom we are more directly concerned in the\nexposition of this parable. Looking abroad upon the past history or the\npresent experience of the Church, we observe that some suddenly\nstumble, as it were, upon salvation, when they neither expected nor\ndesired to find it. Not a few have come to laugh, and remained to pray.\nMany authentic cases are recorded of persons who entered the house of\nGod bent on making sport of the preacher, and who went away believing in\nthe Saviour whom he preached. A youth has left his home in the country\nand plunged into a great capital to push his fortune, and has found\nthere, what he did not seek, pardon of sin and peace with God through\nthe Saviour. Another has gone to India as a soldier, dreaming of war and\nvictory, and honour and wealth; but has returned a meek disciple of\nJesus, glory to God and peace with men radiating like sunlight from all\nhis spirit and all his life. A young female, chafed and fretting under\nthe enforced dulness of a sober home, has received and accepted an\ninvitation which promises to set her free from restraint for a time, and\npermit her to flutter at will in the midst of a fashionable throng. At\nthe threshold of the prepared festivities a message meets her,--a\nmessage charged with a mighty sorrow, which drives the crowd of joyful\nanticipations forth from her heart, as a swollen stream bears down the\ndry leaves of autumn. She is thrown aside in solitude, in emptiness, in\nagony. In the silent night, and in the aching emptiness of her soul, the\nknocking of Christ from without is for the first time heard. The weary\nheart opens at last, and lets the Stranger in. She has found a treasure\nwhich, though often near her before, had hitherto escaped her notice.\nFrom the peace of God in which she now dwells she looks out from time to\ntime on the pleasures of sin which she formerly chased, and borrows from\nthe experience of ancient Israel a phrase best fitted to express her\nmind,--\"The Portion of Jacob is not like them.\"\n\nThe history of the Church is studded with such examples: the hearts of\nbelievers, when they are ready to faint, are cheered from time to time\nby such good news from countries far and near. It is a reproof to us,\nbut a glory to the Lord, that he is often found of those who sought not\nafter him. Perhaps the man in the parable was digging for stones when he\nfell upon the treasure: they who find the true riches meet often with a\nsimilar surprise.\n\n4. The next feature that claims attention is the instant ardent effort\nof the discoverer to make the treasure his own, now that he knows what\nit is and where it lies.\n\nIn the parable, the man conceals his discovery, because he knows that if\nthe secret leak out, the owner will not part with his field at any\nprice. One can easily imagine the scene and the act that enlivened it. A\nlabouring man, digging for some purpose in a field alone, in the\nprogress of his hard and humble work lays open one side of a glittering\ngolden store. As soon as the first tumult of emotion has subsided, he\ngathers his wits and goes into action. First of all he throws some earth\nover the exposed portion of the treasure; then he looks cautiously round\nto ascertain whether any witness was near enough to observe his motions.\nHe proceeds next, probably, to ply his ordinary task on another spot\nwith an indifferent air, that he may not attract attention. The place\nwhere the treasure lies, the place that he loves best, he carefully\navoids: he comes not once near it again until he has paid the price, and\nsecured the titles of the property.\n\nToo much has been made of the subordinate circumstances here. A person\nin the position of this man could not do otherwise than he did, without\nabandoning all hope of obtaining the prize. To blab it out, would have\nbeen to throw it away. If he had talked about it, the fact would have\nproved that he did not care for it. The concealment is not an essential\nfeature, but a subordinate circumstance of the parable. It was resorted\nto, not for its own sake, but as an obvious means of obtaining a desired\nend. The hiding of the treasure is introduced into the picture simply to\nmark the man's estimate of its worth and his determination at all\nhazards to obtain it.\n\nIn the spiritual department a similar end is pursued, but the adoption\nof similar means there would not tend to insure success. In the nature\nof the case it is not necessary to conceal the spiritual treasure from\nothers in order to secure it for yourself. Although the world should\ndiscover it, by an intimation from you, and enrich themselves out of it,\nyou would not therefore obtain less. It is thus a vain labour to search,\nas many do, for something in the spiritual sphere corresponding to the\nconcealment by the discoverer in the story. The best way of interpreting\nthat feature is to represent by it a soul's high appreciation of divine\nmercy and earnest desire to obtain it, and then allow the feature to\ndrop out of sight, like the husk after the ripened grain has fallen from\nit and been secured. It has been said that one of the rarest kinds of\nknowledge is to know when to hold your peace. Many know well how to\nspeak; few know when to be silent. A similar experience emerges here:\nmany have an excellent faculty for opening up the parables, and tracing\nevery feature up to all its springs, and down to all its consequences.\nThe power of attributing a distinct spiritual import to every light and\nshadow of the picture is common; but the faculty of permitting a\nsubordinate accessory to drop when it has fulfilled its office, and\nfollowing stanchly on the main track, is comparatively rare.\n\nYou may, indeed, find instances in which a man, awakened and persuaded\nof the preciousness of Christ, has kept all silent within his own breast\nuntil he has made his own calling and election sure; but in these cases\nthe secrecy is by no means prompted by a fear that to publish the secret\nwere to lose the treasure; and in many other examples the discoverer,\nduring the continuance of his efforts to obtain possession, publishes\nthe secret to the world, and enters at last into his heritage in\npresence of many witnesses. The discoverer of Christ's preciousness is\nlike the discoverer of hid treasure, in his ultimate aim, but not in his\nmediate methods. Concealment would not help him to possession, and\ntherefore he does not uniformly or necessarily take pains to conceal.\n\n5. He parts with all in order that he may acquire the treasure. This is\nthe turning-point of the parable, and the turning-point too of that\nwhich the parable represents,--the conversion of sinners,--the saving of\nthe lost. The picture, being framed of earthly materials, fails on one\npoint to represent the idea of the Lord. When the man had converted all\nhis property into money, and offered the net proceeds for the field, his\noffer was accepted as adequate, and the property was conveyed to him in\nreturn for value received. The transaction which takes place in\nredemption between a sinful man and God his Saviour is essentially\ndifferent. Although it is true on the one side that in accepting pardon\nwe must and do surrender all to Christ, pardon is, notwithstanding,\nbestowed as a free gift. Our self-surrender does not in any sense or\nmeasure give to God an equivalent for that which in the covenant he\nbestows on his own. The same two things occur, indeed, in the natural\nand in the spiritual spheres, but they occur in the reverse order. The\nprice which the buyer offers induces the possessor to give him the\nproperty; on the contrary, on the spiritual side it is the free gift of\nthe treasure by the Proprietor that induces the receiver to part with\nall that he has to the Giver. In one aspect the acquisition of the\ntreasure which enriches a soul is a purchase which a needy man makes by\nthe surrender of all that he has, and in another aspect it is a free\ngift bestowed by God for Christ's sake upon him who had nothing to give\nin return. In as far forth as it is a purchase which a sinner makes,\nthis parable represents its nature; but in as far forth as it is a gift\ngiven on the one side and accepted on the other, this parable is silent.\nIt contains no feature capable of presenting salvation in that point of\nview.\n\n6. Mark, now in the close yet another specific feature of the material\nfact which has its counterpart in full on the spiritual side. It is\nintimated that when the man had discovered the treasure, \"for joy\nthereof\" he went and sold all, in order to buy the field that contained\nit. This \"joy\" is an essential element in the case. If it is wanting the\nbusiness will at some stage certainly miscarry, the transaction will\nnever be completed. One love in a human heart cannot be overcome and\ndestroyed except by another. Love, among the affections of our nature,\nis one of those high born nobles who refuse to be tried or superseded\nexcept by their peers. Love of the world will not yield to fear, even\nthough the fear be a fear of God's anger. You cannot overcome and cast\nit out until you bring against it another and greater love.\n\nA man has joy in his possession, and lives without God in the world: he\nis a god unto himself. He cannot and will not surrender his joy, such as\nit is, to any summons except to that which a greater joy sends in. When\nthe preciousness of peace with God through the blood of Christ is\nrevealed to him, the \"joy thereof\" becomes so great that all his gold\nbecomes dross, and all his fine gold dim in his own esteem. This new joy\nis so weighty that it tosses up the scale in which all his former\ndelights lay, as if they were only the small dust of the balance.\n\nA young rich man came running once to Jesus, as the owner of the field\nthat contained the treasure of eternal life, and entered gravely into\nterms for the purchase. He would give so much for it, but the owner held\nit high: \"All that thou hast,\" this is the price, and there is no\nabatement. The young man did not close with that offer, and did not\ncomplete the transaction. He went away; but what was the state of his\nmind as he departed? \"He went away sorrowful.\" Ah! the secret is out.\nAlthough he desired, in some sense, to obtain what he called eternal\nlife, the \"joy thereof\" had not been kindled in his cold, calculating\nheart. His love of earthly riches was too strong to yield to the\nsuggestions of prudence, or the fear of a future judgment. The love of\nthe old portion will yield to nothing but love of the new; and love of\nthe new he had never felt.\n\nThe case of Paul supplies an exact contrast. A learned Pharisee,\nconscious of a power that would one day place the highest dignities at\nhis disposal, he was a man of great and manifold possessions. A curious\nand interesting inventory of his goods has been preserved like a fossil\nin the Scriptures (Phil. iii. 5, 6). These things he highly valued and\nfondly loved; but another and opposing love came against them, and the\nstrong man succumbed to the stronger. \"What things were gain to me,\nthese I counted loss for Christ:\" he parted with all and purchased the\nnewly discovered treasure; but it was \"for joy thereof.\" He went into\nthe transaction not driven by dread, but drawn by the expectation of a\ngreater joy.\n\nIt is thus that men buy an incorruptible treasure; it is thus that men\nwin Christ. They deceive themselves who try how cheaply they may get to\nheaven,--how much of their idol they may retain and yet be safe in the\njudgment. The man who was \"sorrowful\" when the two portions were set\nbefore him for his choice, \"went away.\" As long as peace with God in his\nSon, labelled with its price, \"All that you have,\" makes us sorry that\nthe boon is held so dear, we will never obtain the boon: when the sight\nof it, price and all, sends a flash of more than earthly joy into the\nsoul, then we shall bound forward, leaving all behind, and win Christ.\n\n\n\n\nVI.\n\nTHE PEARL.\n\n\n\"Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a merchant man, seeking\n goodly pearls: who, when he had found one pearl of great price, went\n and sold all that he had, and bought it.\"--MATT. xiii. 45, 46.\n\nSo closely allied are these two parables, that if we had regarded\nrepetition as a formidable blemish in our lessons, we would not have\nproposed to expound them separately and successively. The two lines are\ncoincident throughout their whole length, except at one point; but there\nthe diversity is broadly marked, amounting in one aspect to a specific\ncontrast. In view of this difference on the one hand, and of the example\nof the Lord on the other, I think it right to open and apply the parable\nof the pearl as fully as if the parable of the hidden treasure had not\ngone before it. We need and get not only different pictures of the same\nobjects, but also the same pictures repeated in different colours and on\ndifferent grounds. One eye may be more touched and taken by this colour,\nand another by that, although the outline of the objects be in both\ncases essentially the same. Thus, the conception of a treasure found may\nconvey the meaning more impressively to one mind, and the conception of\na pearl purchased may convey it more impressively to another; and so,\nalthough the lesson of the second parable had been more nearly identical\nwith that of the first than it is, it would not have been expedient to\ndismiss it with a cursory notice. By a full examination of the principle\nunder the picture of a precious pearl, we shall obtain the advantage\nwhich in moral questions, as in material operations, is often\nunspeakably great, of a second stroke on the same spot. The usefulness,\nand even the necessity of this method is acknowledged by all teachers,\nin whatever department they may be called to exercise their office. The\nsame reasons, moreover, which induced the Master to reduplicate his\nlesson demands that we should also reduplicate ours: it is our part both\nin matter and in method to follow his steps.\n\nPearls seem to have borne a higher value in ancient times than they bear\nnow, both absolutely and in comparison with other kinds of jewels.\nRomantic ideas prevailed regarding their origin and their nature; but it\nis well worthy of remark that the parable passes in silence all that was\nfalse or fanciful in the ideas of the ancients regarding the production\nand the medicinal virtue of pearls. There is not a word about their\norigin in a drop of dew, or the colour imparted to them by the\nbrightness or darkness of the heavens at the moment of their conception:\nthe only circumstance regarding the pearl which the Lord employs in his\ninstructions is its high price. He seizes the obvious and universally\nknown fact, taking no notice of the fanciful theories with which it was\nconnected.\n\nThis fact possesses a value in relation to Apologetics which intelligent\nstudents will readily appreciate. It is instructive and suggestive to\ncompare the Scriptures on such subjects with other books both ancient\nand modern. Take, for example, a passage from the comment of Benjamin\nKeach, which gives both the conceit of the ancients and the endorsement\nof it at a comparatively recent era. \"Pearls,\" naturalists tell us,\n\"have a strange birth and original. Pliny saith, Shell fish is the\nwonderful geniture of a pearl congealed into a diaphanous stone, and the\nshell is called the mother of pearl. Now at a certain time of the year\nthis shell fish opens itself, and takes in a certain moist dew, after\nwhich they grow big until they bring forth the pearl. By which it seems\nthey have their birth from heaven in a marvellous manner.\" Planting his\nfoot upon this story, the worthy expositor gravely and devoutly\nprosecutes the parallel; but already, although it is only a century and\na half old, his speculation serves only to provoke a smile. The comment,\nwritten in England a hundred and sixty years ago, is antiquated and set\naside by the light of the present day; but the parable, spoken in\nGalilee eighteen hundred years ago, stands in the middle of the\nnineteenth century, enduring in safety the scrutiny of adversaries, and\nministering to the delight of friends, as fair and fresh as on the day\nof its birth. \"Whence hath this man this wisdom?\"[22]\n\n [22] For the sake of its bearing on the divine authority of the\n Scriptures, and the questions that are agitated at the present time,\n I subjoin a similar example, extracted from a lecture which I\n contributed to the Exeter Hall series of 1860-61:--\n\n \"A very remarkable expression occurs in the Apocalypse (xvi. 18)\n bearing on the work of preparing the earth for man, before man was\n made: 'And there was a great earthquake, such as was not since men\n were upon the earth, so mighty an earthquake and so great.' There\n the advent of man, as an inhabitant of the earth, is formally given\n as an epoch after which great earthquakes did not occur. It is well\n known now that earthquakes must have rent this globe before the\n birth of man, which make all that have occurred since sink into\n insignificance; but how was John, the fisherman of Galilee, led to\n employ, eighteen hundred years ago, a phraseology which the\n researches of our own day have now for the first time shown to be\n philosophically exact? Speaking of this verse, and quoting it\n freely, John Bunyan (\"Reign of Antichrist,\") says, 'For the\n earthquake, it is said to be _such as never was_, so mighty an\n earthquake and so great.' He thought the phrase, 'since men were\n upon the earth,' was equivalent to 'never:' so he wrote and fell\n into the blunder. Who led John the Apostle safely past the mistake\n into which John Bunyan fell?\"\n\nPearls are the product of certain species of shell-fish, both marine and\nfluvial. The cause and manner of their formation have not even yet been\ncompletely ascertained. They do not constitute any part or organ of the\ncreature that contains them. They are not found in every shell, nor of\nthe same size and shape in any two. They are eccentric and accidental,\nprobably also morbid excrescences, thrown out by some individuals of the\nspecies in irregular forms and at uncertain times. They probably owe\ntheir origin to the presence of some minute foreign substance within the\nshell, which is distasteful to its occupant. Not being able to cast out\nthe intruder, the feeble but diligent inhabitant covers it with a sort\nof saliva, which hardens over it into a substance similar in consistency\nand sheen to the interior surface of its own shell. The act of covering\na base substance of any shape with gold or silver by the process of\nelectrotype is in human art an analogous operation. When the material,\ndistilled in imperceptibly minute portions from the living mollusc, has\nchemically agglomerated round the original kernel, the pearl is made.\nThe creature having covered the irritant atom with a coating at once\nhard and smooth, can now endure with equanimity its presence within the\nshell. Thus unconsciously it manufactures those indestructible and much\ncoveted jewels, for the sake of which its own life is sought and taken\nby man.\n\nIn modern times pearl fishing has become a business, and is prosecuted\non a great scale in several far separated regions. Perhaps the increase\nof production, through superior methods and instruments, may, here as\nelsewhere, have contributed to depreciate the value of the article.[23]\n\n [23] I have been informed by a British merchant who, under license\n from the government of India, conducts the pearl fishing in the Bay\n of Kuratchee, that the method pursued is to bring the shells to\n shore as they are brought up from the bottom of the sea until a\n considerable quantity has been accumulated, disposed in a series of\n small contiguous heaps, and that then the men stand round the heaps,\n open the shells, and search for the pearls. So much loss accrues\n from the dishonesty of the men and the facility of secreting a\n treasure that lies in such a small bulk, that the proprietor of the\n fishing has had under consideration a suggestion to sell the heaps\n of shells by auction to the natives, and permit them then to make\n the best of their bargain. Whether this method of preventing\n peculation has been actually adopted, I have not learned.\n\n Our own Scottish rivers are frequented by a large bivalve mollusc,\n which produces true pearls, although their size and number have\n never been sufficient to attract capitalists or sustain a steady\n trade. I do not know how others operate in other localities, but\n here is a method which I either invented for myself or borrowed from\n a neighbour, and practised with considerable success on the river\n Earn in Perthshire when I was a boy:--Provide a long straight rod,\n thin and broad and rounded at the point after the manner of a\n paper-cutter. Jump into a light fishing-boat, and bring it right\n over the oyster bed when the sun shines brightly and no ripple\n disturbs the surface of the water. Bring the boat into such a\n position with respect to the sun that your own body, bending over\n the gunwale, will throw a shadow on the immediately subjacent\n surface. Through that shaded spot you see the bottom with great\n distinctness, and can distinguish there the objects of your search\n lying invitingly still, and open, and unconscious. The depth may be\n from six to twelve feet. The molluscs lie bedded in the mud, with\n one edge above the ground, and that edge slightly open. Push your\n rod now gently down in a perpendicular direction,--for if you permit\n an angle the different degrees of refraction in the air and water\n will make your straight rod crooked, and you will egregiously miss\n your object at every stroke,--until its point is within an inch or\n two of the opening between the shells of the mollusc, and then\n quickly plunge it in. Hold it still there for a few seconds until\n the creature has time to close and bite the rod, you may then pull\n it up at your leisure. Throw your capture into the bottom of the\n boat, and proceed in the same manner with the next. When you have\n collected a sufficient store, sit down and open them one by one with\n a knife, feeling carefully with your thumbs for the little hard\n round knots among the velvet folds. These knots, when extricated\n from the fleshy lobes that cover them, turn out to be pearls, in\n form more or less globular, and in sheen more or less bright. You\n rejoice more or less, accordingly, in your capture. The day on which\n a good pearl was found became a day to be remembered in the family\n group. The price of the finest never rose above a shilling or two;\n but as riches are relative, and must be estimated by comparison,\n these were treasures to us, and the sight of a large bright pearl\n suddenly shining out of the shell was enough to set a boy's heart\n a-beating in those early days.\n\n During a drought in the summer of 1863 the small river Doon, in Ayr\n shire, fell so low that some pearl-beds in pools, that had not been\n noticed in other seasons, were exposed to view, and placed within\n reach: the consequence was that the people in the neighbourhood, old\n and young, betook themselves to pearl fishing, and that with\n considerable success. Among other facts circumstantially related in\n the local papers at the time, it was stated that one poor woman,\n during the sickness of her husband, gained as much by the sale of\n her pearls as made good the loss of her husband's wages for a whole\n month. In the course of this summer (1864), and since the preceding\n notes were written, a considerable amount of pearl fishing has been\n carried on in certain rivers in the northern districts of Scotland,\n and efforts have been made to organize a regular trade.\n\nI suppose diamonds occupy now the place that was held by pearls in\nancient times. While a vast number of goodly diamonds are in\ncirculation, affording occupation to many dealers, here and there one is\nfound which alone constitutes a fortune of almost fabulous amount for\nits owner. One that was brought from India a few years ago, and is now\nin the possession of the Queen, has a history extending upward several\ngenerations. It passed, like provinces, from potentate to potentate by\nnatural inheritance or the fortunes of war. If it had fallen into the\nhands of any private person, it would have made him an object of wonder\non account of his wealth, even in presence of modern accumulations. The\nhistory and fame of the Kooh-i-noor supply the best illustration of this\nparable that I know.\n\nConceive a merchant with a moderate capital setting out on a journey\nwith the view of collecting diamonds for sale in the home market. In the\ncourse of his travels, in the interior of India it may be, he discovers\na diamond such as the Kooh-i-noor in the hands of a countryman. The\npossessor may know generally the value of diamonds, and know that this\none in particular is of greater value than any that had ever come into\nhis hands; yet, because it is unique, and he has nothing in his\nexperience wherewith to compare it, he may dispose of it for a tenth of\nits value. If the best diamond that the seller had ever seen were worth\ntwenty thousand pounds, he might value this one at forty thousand; and\nthat price the buyer might cheerfully pay down, although it constituted\nall his property, knowing that at home the prize will command four\nhundred thousand. Thus, without supposing ignorance on the one side or\ndishonesty on the other, you have a transaction which will enrich the\nmerchant at once and enable him to retire in affluence. This is the sort\nof transaction that is supposed in the parable. It was a natural and\nprobable supposition at a time when information did not spread so\nquickly as in our time, and when pearls held as to value the place which\ndiamonds occupy in modern merchandise.\n\nIt is true that the merchant went abroad expressly for the purpose of\nseeking goodly pearls; yet this pearl was to him an unexpected and\nsurprising discovery. He had provided funds sufficient to purchase many\npearls; but when he met with this one, its value was such that he could\nnot make an offer for it until he had returned to his home and converted\nall his property, including the pearls that he had previously purchased,\ninto money. In this parable as well as in that of the hidden treasure,\nan object is discovered of a value hitherto unknown and unsuspected. But\nthe lesson here is in one important respect different from that of the\npreceding parable, and the point of distinction is, that there a man\nstumbled upon a treasure when he was in search of meaner things, while\nhere the merchant finds in kind the very object which he sought, but\nfinds it in measure far surpassing all his expectation or desire.\n\nWell might the merchant return and convert all his estate into money\nthat he might purchase this jewel; for if it were once in his\npossession, as there could be no rival, he might command his own price.\nNone but monarchs could aspire to the possession of such a treasure, and\nthese would compete with each other at his desk for a gem that could not\nelsewhere be obtained.[24]\n\n [24] Although their place is not the highest now, yet pearls even in\n our own day are sometimes found of a value so great that the history\n of an individual is recorded and its praises published through the\n world. The following, for example, are the terms of a paragraph\n taken from a British journal of last year:--\"One of the finest\n pearls in the world has been found in the bay of Panama. It is of a\n perfect pear shape, and of the finest water.\"\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe application of the parable is, intellectually at least, a short and\neasy process. It is not precisely the case of a man who finds the\nkingdom of God when he is seeking something else: neither is it the case\nof a man who first thoroughly knows the worth of that kingdom and then\nsets out in search of it. There is no such example: no man knows its\nworth before he obtains it. The merchant knew the value of pearls and\nset out in search of them, but such a pearl as that which he found he\nhad never seen before, and never expected to see. So, although a man has\nsome spiritual perceptions and spiritual desires; although by a\ndeliberate judgment he determines to seek the life-eternal in preference\nto all the business and pleasures of the world, he does not at the\noutset understand how exceeding rich the forgiving grace of God is. Nay,\nhe thinks, when he first begins his search for salvation, that it may\nbe accomplished by the union of many attainments, such as men may\npossess. Precious pearls and a number of them indeed; but still such\npearls as he has often seen in the possession of other merchants, and\nsuch as he has in former times had in his own store. He goes out with\ncash in hand to buy pearls, but he leaves his house and land still his\nown. He expects to acquire many excellent pearls and retain all his\nproperty besides. He did not conceive of one that should be worth all he\nhad, until he saw it. It is thus that people under convictions set out\nin search of something that will make them right before God. They want\nto get righteousness and temperance, and a good case for the judgment to\ncome. In their search they come to the Gospel; they get a glimpse\nbeneath the surface; they see protruding from beneath the folds\nsomething that surprises them. Can that be a pearl? No; that is larger\nthan any pearl ever was or can be, and brighter; surely that cannot be a\ntrue pearl. What? Pardon of sin to sinners without stipulating for a\nprice in their own repentance and righteousness,--peace with God and\nsonship given free to the chief of sinners before he has done anything\nto deserve it,--all sin forgiven, and that now and that free, and no\ncondemnation thenceforth, but the place and the favour of God's sons!\nand these not only to some who stand out from their fellows as great and\ngood, but these to me,--from God to me to-day as surely as if there\nnever had been a human being on the earth but myself, and the errand of\nChrist had been only and all for me! These glimpses stagger the man at\nfirst; he thinks they are too good to be true. It is as if some one\nshould tell a skilful pearl merchant that under yon covering lay a pearl\na thousand times more precious than any he had ever seen before: of\ncourse the merchant is incredulous, and demands a sight of it. Then a\nportion of the covering is removed, and a glittering disc is partially\nrevealed, so vast and so lustrous, that instantly and instinctively the\nmerchant feels, If that be a pearl it is more precious a thousand-fold\nthan any that I have ever seen: but at the same time he secretly fears\nit is not a pearl, and that, not for want of the true pearly lustre,\nwhich his eye has been well educated to detect, but because of its very\ngreatness and goodness. The process in his mind is not that it does not\nseem a genuine pearl, but that if it were a pearl it would be so\ninconceivably great and precious that he must conclude there is some\ndeception. But when it is more fully revealed and more thoroughly\ninspected, he finds that it is indeed a true pearl. Instantly he\ndetermines to part with all he has that he may obtain it: he parts with\nall that he has, and makes it his own. He has not only made a successful\nbargain, as other merchants may do, or as himself may have done at other\ntimes: he has in one moment enriched himself beyond all conception that\nhe formerly entertained. His merchandise has been brought to an end.\nThere is no need now for more buying and selling in order to acquire\nwealth; his fortune is made.\n\nThis is really very like the process that goes on in a human spirit when\nan anxious inquiry about salvation terminates in finding and closing\nwith Christ the Saviour. The expectations with which the inquirer set\nout were very low. If he could get his sense of guilt somewhat lightened\nthat he might begin anew and endeavour to please God; if he could get\nthe fear of wrath diminished, and some assurance that the Judge would\nnot visit him to the full extent for all his sins;--he does not venture\nto expect more. Expressly he had no conception of all in one: he\nthought of a multitude of good religious attainments, which, when added\ntogether, would make him, if not rich enough, yet as good as any of his\nneighbours. Some low and little thing he went out to seek, and, lo! he\ncame upon all the fulness of the Godhead bodily treasured up in Christ,\nand all that fulness offered in return for simple surrender of himself.\n\nSurprised by the greatness of the treasure, he suspects at first that\nthere must be some mistake; but when he becomes convinced of its\nreality, his resolution is instantly taken, and the transaction\nirrevocably closed. Like the merchant rejoicing in his fortune is a\nbeliever who has found peace with God: henceforth he is rich. He does\nnot need now to huckster in small bargains between his conscience and\nthe divine law every day, and struggle to diminish the ever-increasing\namount of guilt by getting small entries of merit marked on the other\nside of the page. All this is past. He is in Christ Jesus, and to him,\ntherefore, there is now no condemnation.\n\nThe treasurer of the Ethiopian Queen was precisely such a merchant.\nBefore he left home he evidently counted himself poor, and longed to\npossess the true riches: before he left home he was aware that a man is\nnot profited although he gain the whole world, if he lose his own soul.\nIt was an oppressive sense of poverty that compelled him to travel. He\noccupied the highest office in a kingdom; he stood on the steps of the\nthrone, and had charge of the royal treasury; but he counted himself\npoor notwithstanding. He must go in search of more precious pearls than\nthese. Peace of conscience, righteousness, hope for eternity,--these are\ngoodlier pearls than any that can be found in Ethiopia; and the man\nundertakes a journey to Jerusalem to try if he can find them there.\nDisappointed there, he was on his way home, seeking still for the\npearls, and seeking near the very spot in the Scriptures where the one\npriceless pearl lay, when Philip met him. By the Evangelist's skilful\nhelp he found it then and there; but when he found it at last, it was\nmuch more precious than he had ventured to expect. \"He was led as a lamb\nto the slaughter.\" \"Of whom speaketh the prophet this?\" inquired the\nEthiopian, \"of himself, or of some other man?\" Some subordinate benefit\nhe was contemplating,--the suffering of some good man, perhaps, as an\nexample to his brethren. Even that, as being something that might\ncontribute to the peace of his soul, he was glad to hear of, and would\ngladly buy, that he might add it to his stock of goodly pearls. But when\nPhilip, beginning from that scripture, \"preached to him Jesus,\" he found\nthat the lamb led to the slaughter is the \"Lamb of God, who taketh away\nthe sin of the world.\" The worth of the pearl turned out to be\nimmeasurably greater than the merchant had previously been able to\nconceive. He exchanged all for it on the spot, and went on his way\nrejoicing. He did not require to go from country to country any more in\nsearch of goodly pearls. He was rich,--rich toward God.[25]\n\n [25] Das ist Philippus element,\n Er uebt sein Predigtamt,\n Lebendig wird das Pergament,\n Des Mohrenfuersten Herze brennt,\n Sein dunkles Auge flammt.\n\n Denn was er im Juwelenschrein\n Kandaces nimmer sah,\n Die eine Perle, himmlischrein\n Die koestlicher als Edelstein,\n Er fand am Weg sie da.\n\n _Kari Gerok._\n\nI think all speculations about the whiteness and purity and lustre of\nthe pearl as an ornament should be set aside, as being an attempt to\nbring a meaning out of the parable which its Author did not put into it.\nObviously the merchant did not buy it in order to wear it. If after\ngiving all that he had for the pearl, he had hung it on his neck, where\ncould the poor man have found food and clothing? No; the pearl is\npresented here in one aspect only,--as being \"of great price.\" It was\nworth much--it was a fortune to a merchant; but when you speak of it as\nan ornament on the wearer's brow, you turn aside from the line of the\nparable, and miss its meaning.\n\nThe true lessons of the parable, as I understand them, are briefly\nthese:--\n\n1. It represents the experience, not of a careless or a profane man, who\nstumbles suddenly upon the Gospel when he was in search of other things,\nbut of one who is awakened, and has begun to seek the true religion,\nendeavouring to add attainment to attainment sincerely, according to his\nlight. His conscience is uneasy. He has tried the old specific, \"All\nthese have I kept from my youth up;\" but it no longer avails to soothe\nhis spirit. \"What lack I yet?\" burst from his breast in broken sighs.\nThere is truth in the man, though not wisdom. He is honestly seeking the\nway, and the Lord leads him. He is seeking; he shall find.\n\n2. It represents the unparalleled, inconceivable richness of God's mercy\nin Christ, taking away all a sinner's sin, and bestowing on him freely\nthe place and privileges of a dear child.\n\n3. It represents that these riches lie, not in an accumulation of goodly\nattainments, such as men are wont to traffic in, but in one undivided,\nindivisible, hitherto unknown and unimagined treasure.\n\n4. It represents that the inquirer, the instant he discovers that this\none incomparable, all-comprehending treasure exists and is offered to\nhim, cheerfully, eagerly, unhesitatingly gives away all that he\npossesses, in order to acquire it. That is, he gives all for Christ, and\nthen enjoys all in Christ.\n\nLet me suppose myself a merchant, travelling in a foreign country in\nquest of pearls. I have found and secured several lots that I count\ngood. I have still capital remaining sufficient to purchase many more; I\ntherefore continue my search. One day I meet a man who shows me a pearl\nmore precious than any that I had ever seen before. At a glance I\nperceive that it is worth all I possess twenty times told. I say to the\nowner, and say it with a beating heart, fearing that he will despise my\noffer, \"I shall give you all I possess for this pearl.\" He accepts my\noffer; he gives me the pearl into my own hands, and I consign over to\nhim all that I have in the world: first, all the pearls that I have\nbought in my journey; next, all my remaining capital; then houses,\nlands, books,--all. I sign the deed with a throbbing heart, not from\nfear, but from abounding joy. My act does not intimate that I value\nlightly my possessions and rights: it intimates that my new portion is,\nin my esteem, so greatly good, that it will repay all my outlay, and\ngive me a fortune beside.\n\nSo when I abandon my repentance, and my prayers, and my services and\ngifts--when I sign away all my expectations on account of all religious\nattainments, and accept Christ alone as my soul's portion--my act does\nnot intimate that I count little on the various graces of the Spirit in\na disciple's life: it means that in Christ and with him I have all good\nthings in measure infinite, in duration eternal.\n\nIf our suggestion regarding the cause and manner of the pearl's growth\nis correct, the kingdom of God in the Gospel of his Son was generated in\nthe same way: the pearl and the pearl of great price have the same\nnatural history.\n\nSome foreign, hurtful thing falls on the creature's life. Forthwith the\nirritation which that invader produces causes the creature to throw out\nand over the disturber that which forms a covering round it--hiding,\nsmothering, annihilating the originating evil, and constituting over it\nand in place of it a gem of the tenderest, gentlest beauty--impenetrable,\nimperishable, glorious.\n\nSo sin, a corroding drop, a dark, deadly, vexing, torturing thing, fell\nupon God's fair creation, threatening to inoculate it with a poison that\nshould leaven the whole lump, and change its beauty into corruption. But\naround the dark sin-spot, and because the sin-spot was there, divine\nlove showered down, like the impalpable silver gathering on its object\nin the electrotype, embracing, surrounding, covering, killing the evil\nand bitter thing that threatened to destroy the works of God. Death was\nswallowed up in victory. The Son of God came into the world because sin\nwas on it. He, the Holy One, took sin into his bosom, that he might\nquench it in his own embrace. It was sin that summoned the Saviour to\nthe world, and gave shape to the Gospel of God. To the devil's wile in\nEden, as the occasion, though not the cause, unfallen angels and\nransomed men will for ever be indebted for that specific work of their\nCreator which will most attract their eyes and inspire their songs. On\none side they behold mercy, in spotless, unmingled white; and on the\nother side they behold judgment, darker, indeed, yet equally\nresplendent. But here in the midst, in the person of God incarnate, they\nsee mercy and judgment meeting--the pearl of great price--where two\ndifferent and apparently opposite glories mysteriously and beauteously\nmingle and play. Death swallowed up in victory; sin embraced and so\ndestroyed in the person of Immanuel; sin lost in the holiness and love\nthat agglomerated round it;--this pearl will shine in heaven with a\nglory that excelleth, when the sun and stars shall have fallen like\nunripe figs from the sky.\n\n\n\n\nVII.\n\nTHE DRAW-NET.\n\n\n\"Again, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net, that was cast into the\n sea, and gathered of every kind: which, when it was full, they drew\n to shore, and sat down, and gathered the good into vessels, but cast\n the bad away. So shall it be at the end of the world: the angels\n shall come forth, and sever the wicked from among the just, and\n shall cast them into the furnace of fire: there shall be wailing and\n gnashing of teeth.\"--MATT. xiii. 47-50.\n\nGreat variety obtains in the size and structure of fishing-nets; and\ngreat variety, too, in the manner of using them. Some are stationary,\nfixed to poles in the sea or the estuaries of rivers; some are dropped\nin a straight line into the water, and allowed to remain there suspended\nuntil a shoal of fish, endeavouring to pass, become entangled one by one\nin the meshes; others are shot in a semicircular form into the sea, and\nimmediately drawn back by both extremities simultaneously to the shore.\n\nIt is this last mentioned species of net that is employed in the\nparable. Its depth is comparatively small, but its length is great. One\nside is kept close to the bottom by weights, and the other side drawn\ntowards the surface by corks or bladders. Thus when spread it stands\nerect like a wall in the water, enclosing a large space. As soon as it\nhas been spread, the fishermen begin to draw it at both ends slowly and\nsteadily towards the land. As the enclosed semicircle gradually\ndiminishes, the captured fishes, having still room for motion, retire\nbefore the advancing prison wall, until they are at length confined\nwithin a very narrow space, and drawn into shallow water. There is then\na violent flutter for a few moments, and the whole are laid helpless on\nthe sand.\n\nThen begins that operation on which the Master has here mainly fixed his\neye, and to which exclusively he directs attention in his own\nexposition. When the fishermen have at last drawn the net wholly out of\nthe water and secured its contents on dry land, they sit down to examine\nleisurely the worth of their capture, and to separate the precious from\nthe vile. The good they gather into vessels for preservation; the bad\nthey simply throw away. The net surrounded and brought to land every\nliving creature that fell within its sweep, and was not small enough to\nescape through its meshes. Some of these are in their own nature and at\nall times unfit for food; others are useless at particular seasons.\nEvery one who has watched the operations of fishermen on the shore is\nfamiliar with the appearance of star-fish and other low forms of marine\nlife, which are drawn out by the nets, and cast away upon the sand.\nLarge predatory fishes of a low type are also sometimes caught, when\nthey venture too near in search of prey. In some instances, moreover,\nfishes that are dead and partially decayed are brought up in company\nwith the living, and these are of course cast out as vile.\n\nThe central figure of the parable, round which the other features\ncongregate only as fore or back ground accessories--the central figure\nis, A group of fishermen, panting from recent exertion, sitting on a\nknoll close by the sea-side, with the newly-drawn net lying in a soaking\nheap at their feet, picking up one by one the fishes that are fit for\nfood, and putting them on one side into baskets, and casting the rest\naway. The men are skilful, experienced, and cool; they have no interest\nin forming an erroneous judgment, and they are not liable to fall into\nmistakes. The separation between good and bad is made without partiality\nand without hypocrisy; it is deliberate, accurate, inevitable. At the\nclose, not one good fish has been cast away, and not a bad one has been\nadmitted into the vessels.\n\nIt is of great importance to note that when the Lord undertakes to\nexplain this parable, he determines for us the spiritual meaning of the\nlast act only of the fishermen's labours, and passes in silence all the\nrest. I do not conclude from this fact that the earlier features of the\nscene possessed no spiritual significance, or that their meaning cannot\nbe ascertained. But it is undeniable that when Christ himself gives the\nmeaning of his own parable, the part that he leaves unexplained cannot\nbe as surely and clearly understood as the part which he has explained:\nand further, the portion of a parable on which he maintained silence\nwhile he explained another part, is not for us in the same position as\nanother parable of which he has not given an exposition at all. Some of\nthem are so transparent that he did not count it needful to give the\ninterpretation; in other cases, such as the sower, he gave the\nsignification of the whole; in a third class of cases, to which this\nparable belongs, he explains one feature of the picture, and maintains\nsilence regarding the rest. Now it is precisely the portions left\nwithout explanation in parables partially explained, that must in the\nnature of the case be to us most uncertain. It may be assumed regarding\nthem that their spiritual meaning is either self-evident, and therefore\nrequired not a comment, or of subordinate importance, and therefore did\nnot obtain one. In this case it is certain, from the diversity of\nopinion that prevails regarding them, that these portions are not easily\nunderstood: there remains only the other alternative, that they are not\nessential.\n\nOur view of the grand lesson which the Master taught from the closing\nact of the fishermen, is very little affected by the opinion which we\nmay form regarding the preparatory portions. Those who differ widely\nregarding the significance of trees and animals that occupy the\nbackground of a picture, may notwithstanding agree entirely regarding\nthe meaning of the picture itself. Although we entertain various views\nin respect to the spreading and drawing of the net, we come all, under\nthe Master's guidance, to substantially the same view of the separation\nbetween good and evil which was accomplished when the net was brought to\nshore. Upon this point the Lord fixed his eye and expressed his mind. He\nhas made it so plain that there is not room among Christians for serious\ndiversity concerning it.\n\nA river in Africa is known and navigated in its lower reaches near the\nsea. Ships from many nations frequent the estuary, and obtain cargoes of\noil, and wax, and fruit from the inhabitants on its shores. But a\nquestion, meantime, arises among geographers regarding the source of\nthis river in the interior of the continent, and the direction of its\ncurrent before it reaches the navigable portion near the ocean. One\nbelieves the river rises in the north, and flows mainly southward;\nanother contends that it springs in a mountainous ridge far to the\neastward, and flows in a westerly course to the Atlantic. In defect of\nan actual exploration, there is room for differences of opinion; and\ndifferences have accordingly sprung up. The right is better than the\nwrong even here; but the importance of the point is, in a commercial\npoint of view, secondary. Waiting till time shall afford the materials\nfor decision, the disputants meanwhile frequent the deep estuary in\ncompany, and grow rich by the merchandise which it supplies. Thus we all\nunderstand, from the Lord's own transparent, decisive exposition, the\nlast, the deepest, the most profitable portion of the parable. While we\nendeavour reverently to investigate the portions that are still\nuncertain, we should rejoice with thankfulness that where agreement was\nmost necessary, the Great Teacher has made it impossible to differ.\n\nAfter this explanation, I need not hesitate to admit that the view of\nthe parable, in its earlier and unexplained portions, which on the whole\nmost commends itself to my judgment, differs essentially from the\nexpositions that are generally given. With modest, grave, watchful\nspirit should one student of the Scripture suggest and another receive,\nan interpretation of any portion different from that which has been\ngiven by the earnest, accomplished, and devout scholars, who in various\ncountries and times have sought to discover the mind of the Spirit. On\nthe other hand, to suppress a judgment, in deference to human authority,\nwould be disloyal to the Lord and contrary to the principles of\nProtestants.\n\nThe view commonly entertained is, that the net is the Church, or, as\nsome express it, the Bible and the ordinances of religion; while the\nfishermen who spread and draw it are the apostles in the first instance,\nand afterwards the ordinary ministers of the word. If the net is the\nChurch, and its drawers the Church's ministers, the whole question of\ndiscipline is immediately raised. This parable, accordingly, like that\nof the tares, has been impressed into their own service by the\nopponents of discipline both in ancient and modern times. We\nemphatically repeat here, what we formerly stated in connection with the\ncognate parable, that no consistent argument can be maintained in regard\nto discipline from this scripture, except an absolute and entire\nrepudiation of all effort, by a human ministry and in this present\nworld, to keep any person or class of persons without the pale of the\nvisible Church on account of their opinions or their conduct. Very few,\nhowever, venture to take this ground. The ordinary method is to contend\nfor some measure of Church order--for the right and duty of excluding\nsome of the worst--and then to lean on this parable for an argument in\nfavour of a lax and against a stringent administration. We submit that\nto take your stand on this parable, and thence contend for the exclusion\nto some extent of the evil from the pale of the Church, is to trample\nall logical and critical laws under foot. This scripture manifestly\neither forbids all effort to discriminate in this world, or says nothing\nat all on the subject.\n\nI shall now state, as distinctly and fairly as I can, some of the\ndifficulties and inconsistencies which adhere to the common\ninterpretation of the net and its drawers, and convince me that it is\nnot the true interpretation.\n\n1. It makes those who draw the net through the water, and those who\nseparate between good and evil on the shore, not the same, but different\npersons, and persons of different classes,--the one representing men\nministering to the Church in time, the other angels executing judgment\nin eternity; whereas, both from the terms of the narrative and the\nordinary practice of fishermen, we know that the same persons who draw\nthe net to shore afterwards divide between the worthless and vile of\nits contents. The net \"was cast into the sea, and gathered of every\nkind: which, when it was full, they drew to shore, and sat down, and\ngathered the good into vessels, but cast the bad away.\" There is no\nambiguity here; the drawers are also the dividers. I suppose none will\ntake advantage of the impersonal form in which the casting of the net is\nexpressed, and assume that while one class, representing a human\nministry, cast the net into the water, another class, representing\nministering angels, drew it to land and divided its contents; for it\nwould be, contrary to all analogy and propriety, to assume that the Lord\nintroduced into his picture a feature that is never found in fact. There\nis no such thing in reality as one set of men throwing the net into the\nwater, and then retiring from the scene, while another set of men draw\nit out.\n\nThe ordinary interpretation assumes, contrary both to the letter of\nScripture and the custom of men, that when ministers of flesh and blood\nhave spread the net, and drawn it toward the shore, enclosing a\nmultitude good and bad of their brethren, they disappear and take no\npart further in the transaction. Another party, representing the angels,\nnow fasten on the net, and pick out the good from the bad. A late German\nexpositor, learned, suggestive, and devout, Olshausen, yielding to the\ninexorable logic of the case, concedes that the drawers of the net and\nthe dividers of the fish are not diverse, but the same. He turns,\nhowever, to the other side for a solution of the difficulty. Instead of\nsimply proceeding to determine the unknown by the known;--instead of\nowning that as angels separate the good from the evil on the shore, they\nmust have also thrown and drawn the net, he explains away the specific\nsignification of angels, and supposes that those who minister the Gospel\nin time are employed, under the general designation of angels, to\nseparate between good and evil in the world to come. This solution will\nnot readily commend itself to British students of the Scripture. The\nfact therefore remains, that the ordinary exposition of the parable, in\nthis part of its progress, is palpably at variance with the structure of\nthe parable itself, and the facts on which it is founded.\n\n2. In the visible Church, the profession, at the very least, is to\nenclose the good within the communion of saints, or to rescue the evil\nby making them new in the act of entrance; whereas the net is let down\nat a certain spot to sweep indiscriminately all within its circle to the\nshore. It makes absolutely no distinction between good and bad; it can\ndiscriminate only between great and small. The net is laid down in the\nsea along a certain line: twelve inches beyond that line fishes good and\nbad are swimming, which it does not touch; while an inch within that\nline are fishes good and bad which it draws indiscriminately to the\nshore. I can perceive no likeness between this and the kingdom of\nheaven, if you understand thereby the visible Church and the efforts of\nthe ministry.\n\n3. One of the chief practical lessons which expositors ancient and\nmodern have drawn from the parable, under this view of its meaning, is\nextremely incongruous, and even grotesque. Churchmen cling to it as a\nsheet anchor in controversy with Nonconformists. If this notion were\nadopted only by mediaeval monks and modern Romanists, I would reckon it\nunworthy of notice; but it is received and uttered again as genuine at\nthis day by grave and learned Protestant theologians of Germany, and\nnotwithstanding the solidity and good sense which characterize his\n\"Notes\" generally, is formally reproduced in its boldest form by Dr.\nTrench.[26]\n\n [26] \"They [this and the parable of the tares] convey, too, the same\n further lesson, that this fact [the actual intermixture of evil in\n the visible Church] does not justify self-willed departure from the\n fellowship of the Church, and impatient leaping over or breaking\n through the nets, as here it has often been called; but the Lord's\n separation is patiently to be waited for, which shall surely arrive\n at the end of the present age.\"--_Dr. Trench, Notes on the\n Parables_, p. 133. This is a style far too loose for a critical\n exposition of Scripture. If the actual presence of tolerated\n impurity within the Church does not justify a \"self-willed\"\n departure from her communion, does it justify a departure that is\n not self-willed, but a solemn separation in order to carry out the\n will of the Lord? The assumption that the separation of the English\n Nonconformists was \"self-willed,\" of course begs the whole question.\n\nThe practical lesson, then, which these expositors draw from the parable\nis, that disciples of Christ are not justified in leaving an organized\nChurch with which they were connected, and forming a Christian community\nbeyond its pale, on the ground that unworthy members are tolerated\nwithin its communion. This is, indeed, not the true state of the\nquestion as between the Established Episcopal Church in England and the\nearly Nonconformists; the Puritans did not spontaneously retire, they\nwere ejected by the hand of power because they refused to comply with\nnew ordinances imposed upon the Church of Christ by human authority. But\nalthough the state of the question were conceded, the argument\ncompletely fails. If this lesson against separation is justly deduced\nfrom the parable, there must be in the natural object some parallel more\nor less distinct which suggests and supports it. What is that parallel,\nand where does it lie? Translate the spiritual lesson, which men profess\nto find, back into the material facts, and observe the straits into\nwhich your mistake has brought you. The parallel obviously must be,--The\ngood fishes that are enclosed within the net, or those that count\nthemselves good, should not leap out because star-fish and molluscs are\nenclosed along with them. Either this is the parallel on which the\nlesson leans, or it has no foundation at all; but there is no such thing\nin nature, and no such representation in the parable. The fishes when\nthey are once enclosed within the net cannot break out; and even if they\ncould, they would break out not because they were confined in low\ncompany, but because they were confined. The good would fain be free;\nand the bad too. From first to last the net is to all its inmates and to\nall alike a dreaded prison. I do not descry a solitary feature of\nresemblance between the parable at this stage and the doctrine regarding\nChurch discipline which the expositors deduce from it.[27]\n\n [27] While Stier and Trench seem to start with the same principle of\n interpretation on this subject, they are led ultimately to opposite\n practical results. Trench, as we have seen, gathers from the parable\n that the pure, or those who consider themselves pure, are not\n justified in leaping out of the net at their own pleasure; that is,\n the Nonconformists should not go and constitute conventicles beyond\n the pale of the Establishment. Stier, on the contrary, represents\n the evil as endeavouring to break out of the net, but unable to\n accomplish their purpose: \"Many a leviathan is caught, and although\n he would fain get out, yet cannot break the net.\"--_Stier_ in loc.\n\n4. The sea, according to the interpreters, being the world, and the net\nbeing the Church, I want to know what is meant by drawing the net to\nland. To be drawn from the sea to the land must mean to be led, willing\nor unwilling, from this life into eternity; for both good and bad are\nbrought to the shore; then and there the separation takes place which\nall acknowledge to be final. But are the members of the visible Church\nalone drawn out of this life into the other world? Do the ministers of\nthe Gospel occupy themselves in dragging their brethren away from the\nworld? Here, too, the interpretation is inconsistent with the facts of\nthe case and the representations of the parable.\n\nThese difficulties in which the common interpretation is involved, go\nfar to prove that it must be erroneous; a true principle of exposition\nwould surely not lead its adherents into such straits. The real key, if\nit were found, might be expected to open the lock without wrenching its\nparts asunder.\n\nAlthough for my own part I would be content to take the plain and\nundoubted doctrine which the closing scene of the parable contains, and\nleave the earlier stages of it as the Lord left them, without attaching\nto them any definite and distinct significance, I am prepared at the\nsame time to suggest a totally different interpretation of the net\ndrawing the fishes to land, for the consideration of those who love to\nsearch the Scriptures. I shall state the principle of interpretation\nwhich commends itself to my judgment, and leave everyone to judge for\nhimself whether it will consistently and profitably explain all the\nfacts.\n\nThe net is not the visible Church in the world, and the fishes good and\nbad within it do not represent the true and false members of the Church.\nThe sea is the world. The net, almost or altogether invisible at first\nto those whom it surrounds, is that unseen bond which, by an invisible\nministry, is stretched over the living, drawing them gradually,\nsecretly, surely, towards the boundary of this life, and over it into\nanother. As each portion, or generation of the human race, are drawn\nfrom their element in this world, ministering spirits, on the lip of\neternity that lies nearest time, receive them and separate the good from\nthe evil.\n\nI shall enumerate here some of the reasons which commend this\ninterpretation, and notice some of the objections which may be urged\nagainst it.\n\nAmong the reasons which commend it,--\n\n1. It assumes, according to the facts of the case and the express terms\nof the scripture, that the same persons who draw the net also separate\nthe worthy from the worthless of its contents on shore.\n\n2. In owning this along with Olshausen, it owns also that the angels who\nseparate the good from the evil at the end of the world are angels, and\ndoes not with him explain them away into the human ministry of the\nGospel.\n\n3. It is perfectly congruous with the habits of fishermen and the\ncharacter of the instruments which they employ. As fishers drop the net\nover a certain space, and, without making any pretence of discriminating\nbetween good and bad, drag all within that space to shore; so the\ninvisible agents whom God employs in his universal administration,\nwhether laws or angelic spirits or both combined, make no distinction\nbetween good and bad, when by successive castings of the net, as it\nwere, they enclose section after section, generation after generation of\nhuman kind, and draw them slowly, silently, but inevitably to the edge\nof this life, and over it into the unseen world. I scarcely know in the\nwhole range of nature an analogy more true and touching than this. When\nyou allow that the angels cast and draw the net as well as divide its\ncontents, the incongruities disappear, and the picture starts into life,\ntrue to the original. The fishes, enclosed within the net when it is\nfirst thrown out, but still swimming in the sea, not aware that the net\nis round them, are intensely like a human generation, with the sentence\nof death hanging over them, yet living and moving freely, and looking\nfor many days. As the circle of the net grows narrower the fishes\ngently give way before it, and so enjoy for a little longer the\nsensation of floating at liberty in the water; and it is not until they\ntouch the ground that they become thoroughly alarmed. The struggle then\nis sudden, earnest, short, unavailing. Thus are mankind, without respect\nto their vice or their virtue, indiscriminately drawn to the margin of\nthis world's life, and, willing or unwilling, thrown into an unknown\nstate beyond.\n\n4. If any struggles are made against the encircling net during the slow,\nsolemn process of drawing--any efforts on the part of the captives to\nleap out into freedom, they are made, not by one kind in displeasure at\nbeing shut up with another, but by every kind indifferently in\ndispleasure at being shut up at all. Like the indefinite terror of mute\nfishes when they feel the net coming closer in, is the instinctive alarm\nof human beings when the hand of death is felt gradually contracting the\nspace in which the pulses of life are permitted to play.\n\nI shall now notice and endeavour to estimate the principal objections,\nas far as I am able to anticipate them, which may be urged against the\ninterpretation that I have suggested.\n\n1. The Lord at another time, in calling some of his apostles, said,\n\"Follow me, and I will make you fishers of men\" (Matt. iv. 19). He did;\nand I think it is by a mistake in instituting an analogy between that\nfact and this parable that interpreters have been led into a wrong\ntrack.\n\nSome expositors have made a similar mistake in regard to the parable of\nthe leaven, and the one error will throw light upon the origin and\nnature of the other. Observing that the Lord in another place represents\nthe doctrines of the Pharisees and the Sadducees as a leaven, some have\nconcluded that the leaven in the parable also must point to the spread\nof error, and have expounded it accordingly. All judicious critics,\nhowever, clearly see and distinctly explain in that case, that the\nleaven which was in other instances employed to represent the diffusion\nof evil, was in the parable employed to represent the prevalence of\ngood. Although leaven in one of the Lord's discourses pointed to\nhypocrisy and unbelief, they teach, and teach correctly, that leaven in\nanother of his discourses points to the progress of saving truth.\n\nThe same discrimination should be exercised here. It is quite true that\nthe Lord at one time, and in one discourse, compared the ministry of\napostles in winning souls to the labour of fishers in the ordinary\nexercise of their craft; but that does not prevent him from employing at\nanother time the universal sweep of the draw-net to represent the\nsilent, slow, and sure encompassing of human kind, which draws them,\ngood and bad alike, by instruments and agencies which they do not see\nand cannot resist, from this troubled sea of time toward the shore of\nthe unknown eternity. Because the conception of capturing fishes in the\nSea is at one time in the Lord's discourses employed to indicate the\nbenevolent labour of the Gospel ministry, it does not follow that you\nare compelled to construe that conception in the same way wherever it\noccurs, although the circumstances manifestly render the application\nincongruous and contradictory.\n\nLet it be observed, moreover, that when the apostles in respect of their\nwork are called fishers of men, not one feature in the process of\nfishing is specified in detail. Nothing is introduced but the general\nconception of a fisherman catching fishes in the sea. This conception in\nthe abstract contains nothing incongruous with the labour of the\napostles. As long as you abide by the bare general term \"fisher,\" the\nanalogy, as applied to \"apostle,\" is obvious and the meaning easily\nrecognised; but the moment you descend into the details of a net, and\nthe mixture of good and evil, you plunge into inextricable confusion, if\nyou persist in maintaining an analogy between the detailed process of\nfishing and the labour of apostles for the kingdom of Christ.\n\nThe general conception of fishing, as it appeared to the mind of speaker\nand hearers on the margin of the Lake of Galilee, diverged into two\ndissimilar branches as soon as it descended into practical detail. The\nfishermen prosecuted their avocation sometimes with line and baited\nhooks, sometimes with boat and nets. Fishing with line and hook, a\nprocess of watching, selecting, discriminating, whereby the fishes are\none by one enticed and taken, readily spontaneously leaps up before the\nimagination as a line parallel with the work of an evangelist, bent on\nwinning souls; but fishing by the draw-net absolutely refuses to be\nfashioned into an analogue of the evangelistic work. The Lord in his\nteaching said that fishers were like apostles; but he never said that\nthe process of fishing by the draw-net resembles the efforts of his\nministers for the conversion of the world. Of the two methods of fishing\nwhich were familiar to the parties, one is in some of its main features\nanalogous to the new employment into which Jesus called the twelve, and\nthe other is totally dissimilar. When I read, therefore, that an apostle\nis a fisher of men, I shall think of the selecting, discriminating\nmethod of casting a hook into the water; and when I learn from this\nparable that the separation between the good and bad of the net's\ncontents upon the shore represents the separation between good and bad\nmen by the ministry of angels in the unseen world, I am not compelled--I\nam not permitted to believe, contrary to all analogy, that the Church\nencloses all, like the net, without an effort, a hope, a desire to\ndiscriminate, and that the ministers of the Church, like the fishermen,\ndrag their brothers unwilling out of the world to the judgment-seat.\n\n2. But has not the Lord said in this parable, as in all the rest of the\ngroup, the kingdom of heaven is like unto a net that was cast into the\nsea? He has; yet the fact does not prove that he meant to represent the\nChurch by the net, and the labour of apostles by the spreading and\ndrawing of the net. The formula, \"The kingdom of heaven is like,\"\nrelates to the parable as a whole, and not specifically to that feature\nof the parable which lies next to it in the record. For the evidence of\nthis proposition it is not necessary to go further than the two\nimmediately preceding parables. In one, \"the kingdom of heaven is like\nunto treasure;\" in the other, it \"is like unto a merchant-man.\" If,\ninstead of looking to the picture as a whole, you insist on finding the\nanalogue of the kingdom or the Church specifically in the net, you must,\nin like manner, in the parable of the pearl, find that the Church is\nspecifically compared to a man, whereas in the preceding example it was\ncompared to a treasure. In these examples it is demonstrated that the\nanalogy instituted refers to the picture as a whole, and not to the\nsingle feature that first occurs in the narrative.[28]\n\n [28] The argument on this point is well stated by Limburg Brouwer.\n His conclusion is: \"Accedit quod [Greek: promythion] illud, ([Greek:\n homoiothe he Basileia, k.t.l.]) saepe ita comparatum est, ut proprie\n non conferendum sit cum solo illo subjecto, quocum ab auctore\n connectatur, sed potius cum universa re narrata.\"--_De Parabolis\n Jesu Christi_, 153.\n\nThe Lord intimates in the introductory formula that he intends by this\nparable to give yet another lesson regarding the kingdom of heaven; and\nit must be determined otherwise than by the mere juxtaposition of the\nclauses, on what aspect or period of the kingdom he will by this\nsimilitude throw light. Six consecutive lessons on the subject have\nalready been given. He has taught already what hinders the kingdom in\nthe deceitfulness of human hearts, and the machinations of the wicked\none; what its inherent power is, and what its contagious all-pervading\ninfluence; what is its value in the estimate of those who know it, and\nhow much they willingly part with in order to obtain the treasure. What\nnew and additional characteristic of the kingdom does the Master teach\nhis disciples in the seventh and last parable of the group--the parable\nof the draw-net? The closing lesson about the kingdom relates to the\nclosing scene of the kingdom--the separation of the wicked from the good\non the great day. From the order of the subjects in the series you might\nexpect this; from the picture actually presented you are logically led\nto infer this; but, especially, you know this from the spontaneous\nexplanation then and there given by the Lord. Although, according to his\nusual method, he completed the parabolic picture, filling up the fore\nand back grounds with the objects that naturally lay there, yet when he\ncomes to the interpretation, he passes in silence all these preparatory\nfeatures, and tells the meaning of the last only--the separation of the\nwicked from the just through the ministry of angels at the end of the\nworld. Yes, as the Lord said, this parable sheds light on the kingdom,\nbut the portion of the kingdom on which the light falls is the close. It\nbrings out in strong relief the final separation between those who\nremain distant and those who are brought nigh.\n\nIn view of the decisive fact that the Lord gives an interpretation, and\ndoes not interpret the casting and drawing of the net to mean the\nvisible Church and its operations--does not interpret the casting and\ndrawing of the net at all, I cannot assent to the demand that the\ngeneral formula of introduction common to all the seven parables should\nbe held to determine what specific portion of the extended picture, or\nwhether any, represents the Church in relation to the character of its\nmembers and the duty of its ministers.\n\nWhen God in his work of creation determined to give this globe a \"lesser\nlight,\" to mitigate the necessary darkness of its night in the absence\nof the sun, he provided an orb which serves that purpose, and more.\nAlthough only one of its sides is turned towards the earth, the moon has\nanother side formed in full. For light to the earth the Creator needed\nonly a disc; but in order to provide it he made a sphere. In a similar\nmanner the Lord has acted in the parable, when he desired to give his\ndisciples a lesson upon the separation which takes place at the close of\nthe dispensation; He made the orb full, although he illumined only one\nside of it by his own interpretation.\n\nIf any one is disposed to hold me to the letter of this similitude, and\nsay that the uninterpreted portion of the parable is left, like the\nfurther hemisphere of the moon, deep in the shade, and beyond our view,\nI frankly consent to be so held. I agree that those portions of the\nparable should be considered to us of uncertain significance. We may\nlawfully and profitably examine them, and test every proposed\nexplanation, and profit by every good lesson that may be obtained; but\nwe ought absolutely to abandon all attempts to find there an authority\nfor any doctrine or any duty. I think when the Lord has explained a\npart of one of his own parables, the portion of it which he has left\nunexplained is in a different position from a parable which he has not\nexplained at all. When he gives any interpretation, his silence has a\nmeaning as well as his words. If he had meant to determine by a\nparticular feature of this parable any important doctrine or duty, we\nmay rest assured, when he did undertake to give an explanation, he would\nnot have left that part altogether unexplained. On the whole, I think\nthe earlier portion of the parable is debatable ground; it is left in\nthe shade; there is room for difference of opinion in regard to it. In\nsome aspects it may suggest useful reflections as a picture of the good\nand evil mingled in the Church; in other aspects it may suggest solemn\nthoughts as a picture of successive generations being gradually drawn\nfrom life's moving sea to eternity's stable unknown shore. I believe\nthat profitable lessons may be obtained from it in both of these, and\nperhaps in other aspects; I believe that the disciples do not sin, and\nthe Master is not displeased, when to one inquirer it suggests this\nlesson, and to another it suggests that, as long as all is done in\ncharity, and according to the analogy of the faith. I have suggested a\nline of thought, which I believe to be relevant and profitable; but I\nwould not dare to plant my foot on this exposition as the ground of any\ndoctrine or any duty. It is because others, both in ancient and modern\ntimes, have pretended to find on the unillumined side of this parable a\nlight to guide Christians authoritatively in points that vitally affect\nthe kingdom of Christ, that I have entered at so great length into the\ninquiry.\n\nI confess frankly that I count it a good and necessary work to wrench\nthis scripture from the hands of those who, whether in ignorance or\nconscious partiality, use it as an instrument practically to blot out\nthe line which the Lord has elsewhere drawn between the Church and the\nworld.\n\nIt is not necessary now to refute formally the fond, feeble notion, that\nthis parable proves the sinfulness of dissenting from the Church of\nEngland, established by the State and prelatic in its government. Even\nalthough we should concede that the visible Church and the character of\nits constituents are the subjects with which the parable deals, it would\nbe childish trifling on the part of a Churchman to quote it as of\nauthority against Nonconformists. In the same Bible stands the precept,\n\"Come out from among them and be ye separate;\" and the Nonconformist has\nas good a right, that is, no right at all, to quote it as of authority\nby itself against a Churchman. The matter cannot be settled, on either\nside, by general announcements like these, although they are selected\nfrom the Scriptures. Every case must be judged upon its own merits. The\nquestion whether a dissenter has separated from a corrupt community in\norder to obey his Lord, or has rent the Church to gratify his own pride,\nmust be determined in each case by an appeal to the facts: no solution\nsatisfactory to intelligent Christians, or to grown men, can be reached\nby superciliously throwing a text in your neighbour's face. This remark\nis made upon the supposition that the parable bears upon the point,\nwhich I think is more than doubtful. Those who gravely counsel the\nfishes to abide peacefully within the net, and not to leap out\npharisaically and schismatically because foul fish abound within the\nsame enclosure, certainly show themselves incapable of appreciating the\nanalogies of nature, whatever may be their familiarity with\necclesiastical affairs.\n\nWe subjoin two practical lessons; the first, though in itself\nself-evidently true, depending for its suggestion here on the special\nview of the net which we have submitted; the second founded directly on\nthe word and enforced by the authority of the Lord.\n\n1. We of this generation, a miscellaneous multitude of old and young,\ngood and evil, move about at liberty in the wide expanse of life, as\nfishes move about in the deep broad sea; but certain mysterious,\ninvisible lines, have been let down into the water, and are silently,\nslowly creeping near, and winding round us. The net at first has a vast\ncompass: a fish within its circle has as much room as it needs, and\ncares not for distant danger. Even when the cords begin to come near, he\nmoves out of their way, and for his own comfort embraces warmly the\nopinion that these cords do not constitute a net. They are some loose\nthings,--certain species of sea-weed, such as he has often seen before.\nHe has gone round them or through them often and easily: he will do so\nagain. But these approach persistently, and still from the same side:\nthey lie between him and the open sea: to avoid them he must move\nin-shore. Getting now a nearer view, he descries some new features of\nthe danger. These lines are crossed and knitted in a manner all unlike\nthe sea-weed threads that streamed so long and straight and loose in the\ntide-way. A secret foreboding of some unknown doom arises: the alarmed\ncaptive, having now no further room to retire, darts wildly sea-ward,\nand is caught in the inevitable meshes of the encircling net. After a\nmoment of violent but feeble struggle, he is laid still and dumb on the\nshore.\n\nIt is a picture touchingly, terribly exact of our own state. The net has\nbeen spread around us: the sharp knitted lines gradually approach and\ntouch us. Shrinking from the clammy contact as we would from living\nsnakes, we retire before them, and still find room. But the lines appear\nagain, always on the same side. Our space grows narrower as we recede,\nfrom year to year, from week to week, from day to day, until at length\nwe graze the ground and strike upon the eternal world.\n\nThat net cannot be removed or evaded; but it may be changed, so that you\nwould not fear its approach. When we become new creatures in Christ,\ndeath approaching us becomes a new creature too, as the image in a\nmirror changes with the object that stands before it. This dreaded net\nbecomes like a warm, soft, encircling arm, pressing a frightened infant\ncloser to a mother's breast.\n\n2. Good and bad alike are drawn in company toward the shore, but the\ngood and bad are separated when they reach it.\n\nNo lesson can be addressed to men more touching, more piercing than\nthis. Nor is its penetrating power diminished by any deficiency of\nauthority in the word that presses it home. It is the word of the Lord;\nnot spoken in parables, but expressly given as the meaning of the\nparable that had been spoken. Its force is not weakened by any quiver of\ndoubt in the Christian brotherhood as to the Master's mind. All\nChristians hear this word and understand it alike: the whole assembly,\nwhen they hear it, bow the head and worship. On the authority of our\nRedeemer, and in terms so transparent that they afford no room for\ndoubt, we learn that on the shore to which we are silently, surely\nmoving, a separation infallibly exact and irrevocably final will be made\nbetween the evil and the good. As to the positive punishment into which\nthe impenitent will be cast, while I simply receive all the words of the\nLord, I shall take care not to obtrude many of my own. He spoke of\nmatters beyond the cognizance of sense, and beyond even the range of\nimagination, and therefore in the nature of the case we cannot fully\nunderstand his words. But He who utters this solemn warning knows what\nwe understand by \"a furnace of fire,\" and by \"wailing and gnashing of\nteeth:\" he intends to convey to us, regarding sufferings that are not\nonly unknown, but in our present condition to us unknowable, as clear\nand deep and awe-inspiring an impression as our minds are capable of\nreceiving. He leads our minds in that direction as far as they can\nfollow; and, for the rest, darkness will cover it until \"that day.\" In\nthe direction downward unto death, as well as upward unto life, the word\nholds good, \"What thou knowest not now, thou shalt know hereafter.\"\nEither line, when it crosses the border of this life, \"passeth all\nunderstanding.\" I suppose it is as completely impossible for a human\nheart to conceive what God hath prepared for them that hate him, as to\nconceive what he hath prepared for them that love him.\n\nIt is eminently noteworthy here, that the clearest, most articulate, and\nmost emphatic announcements regarding the positive punishment of the\nwicked in a future world which the Scriptures contain, were spoken, and\nspoken repeatedly, by the lips of the Lord Jesus. Wherefore? Did the\nlove of the Redeemer sometimes wax cold? Did even he, through the\nprovocations that he met in his ministry, sometimes forget to be\ngracious? No; never at any time did his heart melt more with tenderness\nfor men than when he proclaimed that the wicked shall be cast into outer\ndarkness. He not only intimated, as in this parable, that such sentence\nwould be pronounced, but declared that himself would pronounce it: \"When\nthe Son of man shall come in his glory ... then shall he say unto them\non the left hand, Depart from me, ye cursed, into everlasting fire,\nprepared for the devil and his angels\" (Matt. xxv. 31-41). He who\nuttered these words pitied and loved sinners; he loved them while he\nspoke these words; he loved them although he spoke these\nwords;--_because_ he loved them, he spoke these words. The thing which\nthese words declare is true: Christ did not change the eternal law of\nGod that evil shall not dwell in his presence: since this law remains\nbeyond the line of the present world to meet every man as he enters\neternity, it was kind to give us warning. It would have been unkind, and\ntherefore unlike the Lord, to conceal the dreadful fact, and leave\nunwarned sinners to learn it first by feeling it. It was love,\noverflowing love in the heart of our Brother, that drew these warnings\nrepeatedly from his lips. The reason why he tells us that the wicked\nshall be cast away, is that we may never be cast away. The good Shepherd\nwould compel the sheep to flee to the fold by sending out his terrors,\nwhen they refused to be more gently led.\n\nThere is a machine in the Bank of England which receives sovereigns, as\na mill receives grain, for the purpose of determining wholesale whether\nall are of full weight. As they pass through, the machinery, by unerring\nlaws, throws all that are light to one side, and all that are of full\nweight to another. That process is a silent but solemn parable for me.\nFounded as it is upon the laws of nature, it affords the most vivid\nsimilitude of the certainty which characterizes the judgment of the\ngreat day. There are no mistakes or partialities to which the light may\ntrust: the only hope lies in being of standard weight before they go in.\n\nI gratefully recognise tender, overflowing love, in the faithful\ntestimony of Christ regarding the punishment of the wicked: it is meant\nto compel sinners now to take refuge in his righteousness.[29]\n\n [29] Arndt closes his exposition of this parable with a hymn, which\n I subjoin, not only for the sake of the doctrinal statement\n regarding the ground of a sinner's hope contained in the first\n verse, but also, and still more, for the union of simplicity and\n solemnity in the conception of future punishment contained in the\n second:--\n\n Christi Blut und Gerechtigkeit,\n Das ist mein Schmuck und Ehrenkleid;\n Damit will ich vor Gott besteh'n\n Und zu der Himmelsfreud' eingeh'n.\n\n Hilf, Gott, dass yeder kommen mag,\n Wo tausend Yahr' ist wie ein Tag:\n Vor dem Ort uns, O Gott, bewahr',\n Wo ein Tag ist wie tausend Yahr'!\n\n Christ's blood and righteousness\n Shall be the marriage-dress,\n In which I'll stand\n At God's right hand\n Forgiven,\n And enter rest\n Among the blest\n In heaven.\n\n Help, Lord, that we may come\n To thy saints' happy home,\n Where a thousand years\n As one day appears,\n Nor go,\n Where one day appears\n As a thousand years\n For woe.\n\n\n\n\nVIII.\n\nTHE UNMERCIFUL SERVANT.\n\n\n\"Therefore is the kingdom of heaven likened unto a certain king, which\n would take account of his servants. And when he had begun to reckon,\n one was brought unto him, which owed him ten thousand talents. But\n forasmuch as he had not to pay, his lord commanded him to be sold,\n and his wife, and children, and all that he had, and payment to be\n made. The servant therefore fell down, and worshipped him, saying,\n Lord, have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. Then the lord\n of that servant was moved with compassion, and loosed him, and\n forgave him the debt. But the same servant went out, and found one\n of his fellow-servants, which owed him an hundred pence: and he laid\n hands on him, and took him by the throat, saying, Pay me that thou\n owest. And his fellow-servant fell down at his feet, and besought\n him, saying, Have patience with me, and I will pay thee all. And he\n would not: but went and cast him into prison, till he should pay the\n debt. So when his fellow-servants saw what was done, they were very\n sorry, and came and told unto their lord all that was done. Then his\n lord, after that he had called him, said unto him, O thou wicked\n servant, I forgave thee all that debt, because thou desiredst me:\n shouldest not thou also have had compassion on thy fellow-servant,\n even as I had pity on thee? And his lord was wroth, and delivered\n him to the tormentors, till he should pay all that was due unto him.\n So likewise shall my heavenly Father do also unto you, if ye from\n your hearts forgive not every one his brother their\n trespasses.\"--MATT. xviii. 23-35.\n\nThis parable, and that of the Good Samaritan, as has been justly\nsuggested by Fred. Arndt, although historically separate, are logically\nrelated, like two branches that spring from one stem: together they\nexpress a Christian's duty to his brother in respect of injuries. When a\nbrother inflicts an injury on you, forgive him; when a brother suffers\nan injury from another, help him. Forgiving love is taught in this\nparable; helpful love in the parable of the Good Samaritan.\n\nThe immediate occasion of this parable is obviously Peter's question,\n\"How oft shall my brother sin against me and I forgive him?\" but how\nPeter's question springs from the preceding context does not so readily\nappear. The Natural History of the process in that apostle's mind was\nprobably something of this sort: The Master had instructed his disciples\nhow they should act in the event of a brother doing them an injury:\nthree distinct steps are indicated, rising one above another like courts\nof appeal; first, a private remonstrance; if that prove unavailing, then\na remonstrance in the presence of one or two witnesses; and lastly, an\nappeal to the Church. These rules are very specific, and together\nconstitute a complete code on the branch of the subject to which they\nrefer. In the matter of dealing with an offending brother with the view\nof bringing him to a better mind, you can no further go: if all these\nefforts fail, you must separate yourself from the offender, lest by\ncontinued intimacy you should seem indifferent to his sin. After this\nthe Lord proceeds to give instruction on other subjects, and especially\non united prayer. Peter, I suppose, had allowed his mind to be so\ncompletely occupied with the question of forgiving injuries, that he\nfailed to follow his Teacher when the lesson glided into another theme.\nI could suppose him to have been so busy with the thought of injuries\nreceived, and the difficulty of forgiving them, all the time that the\nLord was discoursing on united prayer, that he scarcely observed his\nMaster's words. All the more readily might this happen, if the impetuous\nfisherman had a quarrel with some of his neighbours on hand at the very\ntime, and was exercised in conscience about the duty of bringing it to a\nclose. At the first pause, the current which had been for a time flowing\nunder ground, burst out on the surface. Taking up and again abruptly\nintroducing the subject which had been for some time dismissed, he\nasked, as if unconscious that the theme had been changed during his\nreverie, \"Lord, how often shall my brother sin against me, and I forgive\nhim? Till seven times?\" He wanted to have a number specified, beyond\nwhich he should not be bound to forgive repeated offences. In suggesting\nseven he seems to have had in his mind some Pharisaical formula:\nprobably he thought the allowance was liberal, and expected to be\napproved for his magnanimity.\n\nThe formula, seventy times seven, while it serves to intimate that there\nis in the law no limit to the exercise of a forgiving spirit, seizes\nupon Peter's narrow proposal and makes a show of it openly. It is\npossible that he may have fallen into a mistake here through the\nmisapprehension of a lesson on the same subject given by the Lord. He\nmay have heard the Master teach, as at Luke xvii. 4,--\"If he trespass\nagainst thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn again\nto thee, saying, I repent, thou shalt forgive him.\" But evidently the\nnumber seven in that discourse has substantially the same meaning with\nseventy times seven here: seven times a day, even when literally\nunderstood, includes as much as the absolute seventy times seven. The\ndoctrine in both cases is that it is not lawful to set any limit to the\nprinciple and the practice of forgiving injuries.\n\nTo repeat, expand, and enforce this lesson, the parable is introduced.\nThe kingdom of heaven is like a man king--[Greek: anthropo basilei].\nExpressly the divine is in this respect analogous to the human. This\nruler proposed to take account of his servants. It was not the final\nreckoning, but a periodical balance. A king is in this respect like a\nmerchant: he takes account from time to time of his own affairs, and the\nintromissions of his servants. \"Short counts make long friends.\"\n\nThese servants were not slaves, the property of their master; for\nafterwards it is assumed that he may sell them, not as an ordinary\nright, but as the special penalty incurred by an insolvent debtor. A\nking, in ancient times and oriental regions, entered into pecuniary\ntransactions with his servants on a great scale. One man, who owes all\nto the personal favour of the sovereign, is the governor of a wealthy\nprovince. Bound by no written law, and living at a distance from the\nseat of government, that servant possesses always the power, and too\nfrequently seizes the opportunity of oppressing the people on the one\nhand, and defrauding the royal treasury on the other. In many cases\nfortunate or powerful dependants farmed the taxes of a district, paying,\nor at least promising to pay, a certain sum yearly to the supreme\ngovernment, and obtaining authority in return to levy contributions on\nthe inhabitants for their own behoof, sometimes almost according to\ntheir own pleasure. Vast sums passed through the hands of these great\nofficers, and vast sums also remained in their hands that should have\npassed through them.\n\nThe amount specified in the parable--ten thousand talents--is very\ngreat, of whatever species you may suppose the talent to be. The inquiry\nwhich has been prosecuted with a view to determine precisely the value\nof the talent in this case is difficult, and does not lead to any\ncertain or important result. The question is interesting to Biblical\nscholars and antiquarians, but the solution of it is by no means\nnecessary to the perception or the application of our Lord's meaning in\nthe parable. The sense is completely obtained by taking the ten\nthousand talents as a vast but indefinite sum. A hundred talents of\nsilver constituted the hire of a great army, 2 Chron. xxv. 6; and\nnotwithstanding the lavish use of gold in the construction of the\nTent-Temple in the wilderness, only twenty-nine talents were employed in\nall (Ex. xxxviii. 24). Besides the distinction between gold and silver,\nother variations occur in the value of a talent, depending upon time,\nplace, and other circumstances. In any view of its worth, however, the\ndisparity between the sum which this servant owed to the master, and the\ntrifling amount which a fellow-servant owed to him, is as great as the\nimagination can effectually grasp; larger numbers would not sensibly\nintensify the impression.\n\n\"One was brought to him:\" this servant would not have come to the king\nof his own accord; but he could not escape the interview and the\nreckoning. Aware of his enormous debt, he would fain have kept out of\nhis master's way, but could not. God looks on the heart, and grasps the\nconscience, whether the man will or be unwilling.\n\nThe punishment is very severe, but in accordance with law and custom. No\ncomplaint is made against the sentence as if it were unjust in\nprinciple, or excessive in degree: the culprit appeals only to the mercy\nof the judge, and thus the righteousness of the verdict is tacitly\nacknowledged.\n\nHis promise to pay means nothing more than his desire to escape. He made\nthe promise, not in the expectation of being able to perform it, but as\nthe most likely means of escaping from punishment. His worship was\nprompted by selfish fear, not by filial love. He did not know his\nmaster's heart: he thought he would gain his object most readily by\nleading the king to expect payment in full.\n\nThe king did not grant his servant's request: he did more; he forgave\nthat servant all. The absolved debtor, as soon as he obtained his\nliberty, went out, and met a fellow-servant, who owed him an hundred\npence. I suppose, if that fellow-servant had come to him while yet he\nwas in his master's presence, he would not have dared to act the tyrant;\nbut \"out of sight, out of mind.\" He forgot his own prayer, and his\nlord's compassion. He grasped the fellow-servant by the throat and threw\nhim into prison, until he should pay.[30] The amount is comparatively\nsmall, as is fit between servant and servant: the smallness of the debt\nbrings the cruelty of the creditor out in high relief. His neighbour's\npleading is expressed in the same terms as his own: the sound should\nhave reminded him of his duty.\n\n [30] Die am meisten geschont sind erweisen sich als die\n Schonungslosesten. Unter den Fluegeln der Zaertlichkeit wird die\n Grausamkeit ausgebruetet. (Those who get most mercy give least; and\n cruelty is hatched under the wings of tenderness).--_Draeseke vom\n Reich Gottes_, ii. 141.\n\nFellow-servants observing the outrage were at once indignant and\ncompassionate. They informed their master. The master displeased,\npronounced his condemnation in full. He who showed no mercy to his\nbrother, received judgment without mercy for himself.\n\nBefore proceeding to the exposition of the parable in its spiritual\nmeaning and application, I shall submit a remark of a general character,\nbearing on the parables at large, as well as on this in particular,\nwhich can be made more conveniently now than at the close.\n\nThe more I examine the structure and use of the parable in the teaching\nof the Lord, the more I am convinced that men make a great mistake when\nthey betake themselves to a single feature of the natural scene as a\ndefence of some specific and controverted dogma. The rule may be made\nabsolute, or if there are exceptions they are few, that the parables are\nintended to expand, illustrate, and enforce what is elsewhere clearly\ntaught in the Scriptures, and not themselves to constitute the grounds\nor evidences of the doctrines. But to whatever extent such a general\nrule may be applicable, it is most certain that those who run to a\ncorner of a parable and take their stand on it, as impregnable evidence\nof some doctrine which they hold, are in all cases egregiously mistaken.\nThe controversies, for example, on the question of Church discipline,\nwhich were made to turn on the tares among the wheat, and the net that\ncaught all kinds of fishes, are a mere waste of words. Those parables do\nnot afford material for the decision of the question; they do not speak\nto the point.\n\nIn like manner, when theologians gravely refer to this parable in order\nto prove that after a man's sins have been all freely forgiven by God,\nhe may yet fall from grace, and the guilt of all his sins be laid upon\nhim at the last, they waste their own time, and trifle with the\nscripture. True, in this picture you see one whose great debt was all\nfreely forgiven by the master brought back into judgment, and made\nanswerable for the whole amount; but this incidental feature of a human\nprocedure will not bear the weight which men would fain lay on it. This\nking, whose conduct is represented in the parable, is expressly called a\n_man_ king. No doubt his procedure in that case is employed to\nillustrate some laws of the kingdom of heaven; but this is done by\nanalogy. Analogy is not identity; the very essence of it lies in\ncoincidence in some points, with diversity in others; if the two were\nidentical, there were no longer an analogy. Take two pictures of a\nperson printed from the same negative photograph; you do not say they\nare like each other, they are the same. It is most dangerous to fasten\non any point of the depicted human procedure, and found on it the\naffirmation that the divine must be precisely the same.\n\nBut besides this general consideration demanding caution, there is\nenough in the parable itself absolutely to refute the notion, that God\nmay forgive a man all his sins, and thereafter lay these very sins all\nto his charge. It is indeed said in the earlier portion of the parable\nthat the lord of that servant forgave him the debt; but it is as clearly\nindicated in the close that the debt was not forgiven. The man was cast\ninto prison until he should pay it all; he was held bound for all the\noriginal debt, and was punished accordingly. If he was forgiven all that\ndebt, not one penny of it can afterwards be placed to his account; and\nif it is afterwards placed to his account, the fact proves that it had\nnot been forgiven.\n\nThe meaning of the phraseology must be determined by the necessary\nconditions of the fact. That word of the king, \"I forgive thee,\" was not\na discharge; if it had been, mere justice demanded that the debt\ndischarged should not be charged again. The fact that it was all charged\nagain, proves irrefragably that it was not discharged. The meaning in\nthe light of the facts must be that these terms were offered by the\nking. His terms are free forgiveness, bestowed in sovereign love by the\ngiver, and accepted in grateful love by the receiver. The servant, as is\nshown by his conduct, did not accept these terms, and so there was no\ntransaction.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe key-notes of the parable are found at the beginning and the end. It\nwas spoken in order to show that a man should set no limit to the\nforgiveness of injuries; and in order to show this, the parable goes\ninto the deep things of God. It shows that the motive power which can\nproduce in man an unlimited forgiveness of his brother, is God's mercy\nforgiving himself. At the close it lays down the law, that the act or\nhabit of extending forgiveness to a brother, is a necessary effect of\nreceiving forgiveness from God. If you get pardon from God, you will\ngive it to your brother; if you withhold it from your brother, you\nthereby make it manifest that you have not gotten it from God.\n\nAs the king determined to take account of his servants during the\ncurrency of their work, and before the final winding up of their\nengagement, so the King Eternal in various ways and at various periods\ntakes account of men, especially of those who know his word, and belong\nexternally to his Church. One by one the servants are brought into their\nLord's presence. The messenger that brings them may be a commercial\ncrisis, a personal affliction, or a revival in the neighbourhood. The\nKing has many messengers at his command, and he employs now one and now\nanother to bring a professing Christian forward to his presence. When\none who has contrived to keep out of the way, both of his own conscience\nand of God, is at length compelled to open his heart to the Omniscient,\nand fairly look into it himself, he discovers that his debt is\nunspeakably, inconceivably great. The sum of ten thousand talents in the\npicture is not an exaggeration; it does not indicate all the guilt which\nGod detects in the conscience, and which the awakened conscience detects\nin itself. It is a dreadful moment when a sinner is brought face to face\nwith God, and charged with his guilt; it is then that the law performs\nits terrible yet merciful work of conviction.\n\nThe first purpose that springs in the heart of the alarmed transgressor\nis to satisfy the demand: Give me time, and I will pay all. Whether he\ndeliberately expects to be able to pay it may be doubted; but one thing\nis clear, he thinks that nothing else will appease the Master, and he\nmakes the promise accordingly. This is, in point of fact, the first\nproposal of an alarmed conscience, \"I will pay thee all.\" The natural\nhistory of the process is here.\n\nGod does not hold the convicted transgressor to his own rash promise.\nTreating the criminal, not according to his desert, but according to his\nneed, the Judge announces the terms of his own covenant--a pardon\nimmediate, complete, and free.\n\n * * * * *\n\n\"The same servant went out:\" the moment of close dealing between God and\nthe soul has passed: the man who has trembled at the sight of his sin,\nand the prospect of judgment, has heard the Gospel, and gotten a\nrespite. He goes out from that solemn and searching communion: he is\nreleased for the moment from the presence of the Judge, and from the\nsense of his sin. He glides again into the world. He has not been\nconverted; he has only been frightened. He has not been forgiven; he has\nonly been respited. He has not accepted God's grace, and therefore is\nnot under law to God. The fright is past, and faith has not taken its\nplace. The heart, after terror had driven the evil spirits out, does not\nopen to the Lord, and therefore the evil spirits come back, and possess\nthe empty room in sevenfold power. As soon as he comes in the way of\ntemptation, the unsubdued carnality of his soul asserts its life and\npower. A fellow-servant who has in small matters offended him, begs for\npardon, as he had done from God, and begs in vain. He shows no mercy;\nthe fact proves that he has not himself accepted the mercy that was\noffered by God. If the channel of his heart had really been inserted\ninto the fountain-head of mercy for receiving, mercy would infallibly\nhave flowed in the way of giving, wherever the need of a brother made an\nopening; if the vessel had been charged, it would certainly have\ndischarged. No compassion flowed from that heart to refresh a\nfellow-creature in distress, because that heart had never truly opened\nto accept mercy from God; the reservoir was empty, and therefore the\noutbranching channels remained dry.[31]\n\n [31] Draeseke expresses the same conception in his own peculiarly\n terse and antithetic way:--So gewiss kein Gottesreich ohne die\n Schulderlassung die wir empfangen; so gewiss kein Gottesreich ohne\n die Schulderlassung die wir leisten. (As certainly as there is no\n kingdom of God without the forgiveness which we receive, so\n certainly there is no kingdom of God without the forgiveness which\n we bestow.)--ii. 147.\n\nBeyond all question, the design of the Lord in this parable is to\nenforce the duty of forgiving one another. In teaching this lesson, he\ntouches matters greater than itself; but these occupy here only a\nsecondary place. The drift of the parable is to take off the artificial\nlimit laid by Peter, and by the Pharisees before him, on the disposition\nto forgive an offending brother, and to leave it limitless,--infinite,\nas far as the faculties and the time of men can reach.\n\nI think the substance of the lesson may be expressed in these two words,\nthe _practice_ and the _principle_ of forgiving injuries. These two are\nin effect the _ultimate act_ and the _secret power_ that produced it.\nThey are at once distinguished and united in that new commandment which\nJesus gave to his disciples,--\"That ye love one another, as I have loved\nyou\" (John xiii. 34). The first part of that commandment tells what\nthey ought to do, and the second part tells what will make them do it.\nIt is when they place themselves under the power of Christ's forgiving\nlove to themselves, that they are impelled in turn to forgive each his\nbrother. The duty corresponds to the moving machinery, and the motive to\nthe stream of living water which makes the machinery go.\n\n1. The PRACTICE of forgiving injuries. The terms employed indicate\nclearly enough that the injuries which man suffers from his fellow are\ntrifling in amount, especially in comparison of each man's guilt in the\nsight of God. There is a meaning in the vast and startling difference\nbetween ten thousand talents and a hundred pence. Even when the injury\nis the greatest that human beings are capable of inflicting on the one\nside, and enduring on the other; even when an enemy has killed the body\nand ceased then, because he has no more that he can do, it is still a\nmeasurable thing. Love in a finite being's heart may swell high over it,\nand exult in bestowing forgiveness on the murderer with the victim's\ndying breath. In the beginning of the Gospel a vivid example of that\nvery thing stands recorded: \"Lord,\" said Stephen with fainting heart and\nfailing breath, \"Lord, lay not this sin to their charge.\" Great as the\ninjury was, according to earthly measurements, the imperfect love that\nlived in a man's heart was more than a match for it, and the martyr with\nhis dying breath forgave his murderers. But how rare are those injuries\nthat rise to this extreme height! Most of the injuries with which we are\ncalled to deal are small, even in relation to human capacity: they are\nvery often precisely of the size that our own temper makes them. Some\npeople possess the art of esteeming great injuries small, and some the\nart of esteeming small injuries great. The first is like a traveller\nwho throws a great many stones out of the burden which he carries, and\nso walks with ease along the road; the other is like a traveller who\ngathers a great many stones on the way-side, and adds them to his\nburden, and is therefore soon crushed by the load.\n\nBut more than this: the foolish man who made his burden heavier, retains\nthe redoubled weight upon his back; while the wise man who made his\nburden lighter, contrives to throw off even the smaller weight that\nremained. The same spirit that induced the suffering Christian to\ndiminish his estimate of the injury, induces him to forgive even that\nwhich remains, and thus he gets quit of it altogether; for to forgive\nit, is equivalent to throwing it away, in as far as it had power to\nburden or irritate you. On the other hand, the same spirit which in an\nirritable man magnified and multiplied the actual injury which he\nreceived, prevents him from forgiving the great and exaggerated mass;\nthus in effect he is crushed under the accumulated weight of all the\nreal injury he has sustained, and all the imaginary injury he has added.\nThe compassionate, loving man, who counted the great injury small, was\nrelieved even of that small remnant by forgiving it: the selfish,\nunloving man, who counted a small injury great, could not forgive his\nneighbour, and so was compelled to bear the heavy burden on his heart.\nIn this case that sublime rule of the Scripture takes effect: \"To him\nthat hath shall be given, and he shall have abundance; but from him that\nhath not shall be taken even that which he hath.\" [32]\n\n [32] Fred. Arndt puts the lesson warmly and well; his appeal is in\n substance this:--\"A man without compassion has all against him, God\n and the world; and meets as many adversaries in judgment as he had\n associates in life. Woe to him who is arraigned in secret by the\n tears of the feeble and oppressed! The sighs which he has pressed\n out, the plaints which he has generated, cry up to heaven against\n him, and their echo clangs horrid from heaven down again upon the\n life of the loveless and revengeful.... And can we sleep in peace\n another hour, as long as there are men upon the earth with whom we\n live in unpeace and enmity? Cannot be written the happiness, the\n inward bliss of the peaceful and peace-making. Revenge, indeed,\n seems often sweet to men; but, oh, it is only sugared poison, only\n sweetened gall, and its after taste is bitter as hell. Forgiving,\n enduring love alone is sweet and blissful; it enjoys peace and the\n consciousness of God's favour. By forgiving, it gives away and\n annihilates the injury. It treats the injurer as if he had not\n injured, and therefore feels no more the smart and sting that he had\n inflicted. Forgiveness is a shield from which all the fiery darts of\n the wicked one harmless rebound. Forgiveness brings heaven to earth,\n and heaven's peace into the sinful heart. Forgiveness is the image\n of God, the forgiving Father, and an advancement of Christ's kingdom\n in the world. Your unalterable duty is clear: as surely as we are\n Christians, men who have experienced great compassion, who see in\n every man a brother in Christ, and are going forward to God's\n righteous judgment, so surely we must forgive. Of no commandment\n will the fulfilment be demanded of us with such stringency, no\n divine rule so strictly enforced as this, without the slightest\n exception to leave a loop-hole of hope to the transgressor. If we\n forgive not those who injure us, neither will our heavenly Father\n forgive us; and this would be the greatest calamity that could\n befall us in time and in eternity.\"--_Die vergebende Liebe; oder\n Gleichniss vom Schalksknecht_.\n\nBut we must carefully discriminate here, and ascertain what the Lord\nmeans by forgiving a brother. There should not be a little, narrow,\ngrudging forgiveness; it should be large, loving, and free. But parallel\nwith forgiveness there must be faithfulness. Faithfulness to the\nevil-doer himself, and to the community, comes in here to modify, not\nthe nature, but the outward form of forgiving.\n\nFor example, there is no virtue in simply permitting a man to wrong you\nas often as he chooses,--forgiving him and doing nothing more. In the\nimmediately preceding context the Lord has taught that the injured\nshould tell the injurer his fault. Tell him faithfully in secret his\nsin: if he repent, thou hast gained thy brother: if he do not listen,\ntell it in the presence of two or three witnesses: if he is still\nobdurate, tell it to the Church: and if he refuse to hear the Church\nwithdraw from his company; let him and all the world know that you do\nnot make light of his sin.\n\nAgain, in some kinds of injury, it becomes your duty for the sake of the\ncommunity to aid in bringing the criminal to justice. To bring the\ndiscipline of the righteous law upon the criminal, is not revenge: to\nshield him from its stroke is not love. So far from being necessarily\ninconsistent with forgiveness, such faithfulness in action may be\nassociated with a Christ-like love to the sinner, and a thorough\nforgiveness of his sin, as an injury inflicted upon you.\n\nHere is a side on which there is much room for advancement: let us\nforget the things that lie behind us on this path, and reach forward to\nhigher attainments. In as far as Christians unite faithfulness and\ntenderness in their treatment of evil-doers, they become \"imitators of\nGod, as dear children.\"\n\n2. The PRINCIPLE of forgiving injuries. Suppose that the methods for\npractice are accurately laid down, where shall we find a sufficient\nmotive? Suppose that an unexceptionable machinery has been constructed,\nwhence shall we obtain an adequate force to set it in motion? From an\nupper spring in heaven the motive power must flow; it can be supplied\nonly by God's forgiving love, on us bestowed and by us accepted. When,\nlike little closed vessels, we are charged by union with the\nfountain-head, forgiving love to erring brothers will burst\nspontaneously from our hearts at every opportunity that opens in the\nintercourse of life.\n\nThe express command of Him who redeemed us is, \"Love one another, as I\nhave loved you.\" In teaching his disciples how to pray, he linked their\npromise to forgive with their plea for forgiveness, so that no prayer\nof theirs should rise to heaven for receiving pardon unless it were\naccompanied by an engagement expressed or implied to bestow pardon:\n\"Forgive us our debts, as we forgive our debtors.\"\n\nBut there is much more in the connection between receiving and bestowing\nforgiveness than can be expressed by the conception of yielding to the\npressure of a motive. It is not only obedience to a command enjoined; it\nis the exercise of an instinct that has been generated in the new\nnature. The method in which this and other graces operate is expressed\nby an apostle thus: \"It is no more I that live, but Christ that liveth\nin me.\" When Christ is in you, he is in you not only the hope of glory,\nbut also the forgiving of an erring brother.\n\nA traveller in Burmah, after fording a certain river, found his body\ncovered all over by a swarm of small leeches, busily sucking his blood.\nHis first impulse was to tear the tormentors from his flesh: but his\nservant warned him that to pull them off by mechanical violence would\nexpose his life to danger. They must not be torn off, lest portions\nremain in the wounds and become a poison; they must drop off\nspontaneously, and so they will be harmless. The native forthwith\nprepared a bath for his master, by the decoction of some herbs, and\ndirected him to lie down in it. As soon as he had bathed in the balsam\nthe leeches dropped off.\n\nEach unforgiven injury rankling in the heart is like a leech sucking the\nlife-blood. Mere human determination to have done with it, will not cast\nthe evil thing away. You must bathe your whole being in God's pardoning\nmercy; and these venomous creatures will instantly let go their hold.\nYou will stand up free.\n\nTwo wheels protrude from a factory, and are seen in motion on the outer\nwall by every passenger. They move into each other. The upper wheel is\nlarge, the under small. From without and at a distance, you cannot tell\nwhether the upper is impelling the under, or the under moving the upper.\nThis question, however, might be settled by an inspection of the\ninterior. By such an inspection it would be found that the larger and\nhigher wheel communicates motion to the lower and smaller. If the upper\nwheel, which communicates the motion, should stand still, so also would\nthe lower: but more than this,--if the lower wheel, which receives the\nmotion, should by some impediment be stopped, the upper wheel also would\nstand still.\n\nIt is in some such way that God's goodness in forgiving freely for\nChrist's sake our sins, impels us to forgive from the heart those that\nhave trespassed against us. The power is all from above; yet, though we\nby our goodness do not set the beneficent machinery in motion, we may by\nour badness cause it all to stand still. It is not our forgiveness\naccorded to an evil-doer that procures forgiveness to ourselves from\nGod; the opposite is the truth: yet our refusal of forgiveness to a\nbrother prevents the flow of pardon down from God to our guilty hearts.\nSuch is the structure of the covenant. It is only a small part of that\ncovenant that we can comprehend; but, as far as we are able to perceive\nits provisions, behold, they are very good!\n\nWhile a few acres of cold barren moorland constitute all your heritage,\nif a neighbour encroaches on it by a hair's-breadth, you assert your\nright and repel the aggression: possibly you may, in your zeal, accuse\nhim of an intention to trespass, if you see him digging his own ground\nnear your border. While your property is very small, you are afraid of\nlosing any of it; and perhaps you cry out before you are hurt. But if\nyou become heir to a broad estate in a fertile valley, you will no\nlonger be disposed to watch the motions of your neighbour, and go to law\nwith him for a spadeful of moss that he may have taken from a disputed\nspot.\n\nThus, while a human soul has no other portion than an uncertain shred of\nthis uncertain world, he is kept in terror lest an atom of his property\nshould be lost; he will do battle with all his might against any one who\nis, or seems to be, encroaching on his honour, or business, or property:\nbut when he becomes a child of God, and an heir of an incorruptible\ninheritance--when he is a prince on the steps of a throne, he can afford\nto overlook small deductions from a possession that is insignificant in\nitself, and liable to be taken away at any time without an hour's\nwarning.\n\nIn this aspect it is eminently worthy of notice that the disciples, when\ntheir Master on another occasion (Luke xvii. 3-5), taught them a similar\ndoctrine on the forgiveness of injuries, immediately exclaimed,\n\"Increase our faith.\" They seem to have been surprised by the extent of\nthe demand, and conscious of their inability to meet it. As soon as the\nduty of forgiving injuries was laid before them in its true magnitude,\nthey were brought to a stand; but they had sense to know wherein their\nweakness lay, and simplicity to seek in the proper quarter for renewed\nstrength. It was a true instinct that led them, then and there, to plead\nfor an increase of faith. A wider, freer channel for the inflow of God's\ncompassion into their own hearts,--this is what they need in the\nemergency, and this is what they get from the Lord.\n\nThe miller, finding that some of the lumps are large and hard, and that\nthe mill-stones are consequently almost standing still, goes quietly out\nand lets more water on. Go you, and do likewise. When injuries that seem\nlarge and hard are accumulated on your head, and the process of\nforgiving them begins to choke and go slow under the pressure, as if it\nwould soon stop altogether; when the demand for forgiveness grows great,\nand the forgiving power in the heart is unable to meet it;--then, enter\ninto your closet and shut your door, and pray to your Father\nspecifically for more experience of his forgiving love; so shall your\nforgiving love grow stronger, and overcome every obstacle that stands in\nits way. Your heart, under the fresh impulse of pardon to you through\nthe blood of the covenant, will toss off with ease the load of\nimpediments that obstructed for a time its movements, and you will\nforgive even as you have been forgiven.\n\n\n\n\nIX.\n\nTHE VINEYARD LABOURERS.\n\n\n\"For the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is an householder,\n which went out early in the morning to hire labourers into his\n vineyard. And when he had agreed with the labourers for a penny a\n day, he sent them into his vineyard. And he went out about the third\n hour, and saw others standing idle in the market-place, and said\n unto them; Go ye also into the vineyard, and whatsoever is right I\n will give you. And they went their way. Again he went out about the\n sixth and ninth hour, and did likewise. And about the eleventh hour\n he went out, and found others standing idle, and saith unto them,\n Why stand ye here all the day idle? They say unto him, Because no\n man hath hired us. He saith unto them, Go ye also into the vineyard;\n and whatsoever is right, that shall ye receive. So when even was\n come, the lord of the vineyard saith unto his steward, Call the\n labourers, and give them their hire, beginning from the last unto\n the first. And when they came that were hired about the eleventh\n hour, they received every man a penny. But when the first came, they\n supposed that they should have received more; and they likewise\n received every man a penny. And when they had received it, they\n murmured against the goodman of the house, saying, These last have\n wrought but one hour, and thou hast made them equal unto us, which\n have borne the burden and heat of the day. But he answered one of\n them, and said, Friend, I do thee no wrong: didst not thou agree\n with me for a penny? Take that thine is, and go thy way: I will give\n unto this last, even as unto thee. Is it not lawful for me to do\n what I will with mine own? Is thine eye evil, because I am good? So\n the last shall be first, and the first last; for many be called, but\n few chosen.\"--MATT. xx. 1-16.\n\nAgain the heavenly kingdom is compared to the proceedings of a human\nhouseholder. While in fertile plains, like Esdraelon, the grain-field\nwas the Hebrew husbandman's chief care, on the mountain sides, the\nvineyards were the most valuable property, and required the greatest\namount of labour. The steepness of the slopes on which the vine grows\nbest, greatly increases the owner's toil. In many cases the terraces\nmust be supported by strong stone walls; and not only must the manure\nbe carried on men's shoulders up the steep, but in some cases even the\nsoil itself is carried up in the same way, and laid upon the bare rocks.\n\nDifferent kinds of work are required in vineyards at different seasons.\nIn spring they prepare the soil; in summer they prune and tie up the\nvine branches; and in autumn all the joyous labour of the vintage comes\nsuddenly on. Looking to the circumstance in the parable, that the\nlabourers who began early counted much on having borne the heat of the\nday, we might be inclined to suppose that the scene is laid in the\nmiddle of summer; but the fact that the householder required so many\nlabourers and hired all that he could find, points rather to the vintage\nin the end of autumn.\n\nThe master went out early in the morning to hire labourers. There was\nsome spot, doubtless, recognised both by masters and men, as the common\nmeeting-place for those who needed work, and those who needed\nworkmen,--the Cross or the Buchts[33] of that place and day. This\nhusbandman at once engaged all the men that he found, and sent them into\nhis vineyard to begin work at six in the morning,--the first hour of the\nJewish day. The terms were arranged beforehand,--a penny a day. The\nRoman denarius is reckoned equal to sevenpence half-penny of our money;\nbut obviously it was considered the ordinary rate of a labourer's wages\nat the time.\n\n [33] The name of a great trysting place for selling cattle and\n hiring men and women on the eastern outskirts of the city of\n Glasgow, where the two operations resemble each other too closely\n for the credit of our institutions or the safety of society.\n\nAgain at nine o'clock the husbandman went to the market-place, and\nfinding some unemployed men, sent them also to work in his vineyard.\nAgain at mid-day, and yet once more at five o'clock in the afternoon he\nwent out, and finding men on each occasion loitering about the\nmarket-place, he sent them also into the vineyard. In these cases,\nhowever, as was meet when the day was broken, the master did not promise\nany specific rate of wages; and the men, thankful for an opportunity of\nturning to some profitable account a day which would otherwise have been\nwholly lost, were content to accept whatever he might be pleased to\ngive.\n\nAbout six o'clock in the evening,--earlier or later according to the\nseason of the year and the consequent duration of daylight at the\ntime,--work in the vineyard ceased for the day, and each labourer,\ncalled forward in turn by the steward, received his wages in the\nmaster's presence.[34] The steward, acting doubtless under special\ninstructions, called first the men who had entered the vineyard at five,\nand quitted it at six, and gave each a penny for his hour's work.\nSurprised by the munificence of their employer, these men retire towards\ntheir homes with silent gratitude. Afterwards those who had laboured\none-half, and those who had laboured three-fourths of the day, were\ncalled in succession, and each received also a penny. Last of all came\nthe men who had laboured from morning till night. They had been standing\nnear, and had observed that all their fellow-labourers, not excepting\neven those who had been employed only an hour, received the same uniform\nreward, each man a penny. As this process was going on, they cherished\nin silence the expectation that when their turn should come, they would\nreceive more of the master's money, because they had done more of his\nwork. But the steward, evidently acting on precise orders, gave each of\nthese men also a penny, and no more. No longer able to conceal their\ndisappointment, although they were well aware that they had no legal\nclaim for more than they had received, they broke out into murmurs\nagainst their employer. Of course, he closed their mouths in a moment:\nhe had completely fulfilled his agreement with them, and they had no\nright to interfere with his spontaneous generosity, whenever and towards\nwhomsoever he might choose to exercise it.\n\n [34] By law, wages for the work of the day must be paid the same\n evening (Deut. xxiv. 15).\n\nHere, again, the key-notes of the parable are found at the beginning and\nat the end. The direct and immediate occasion of the discourse lies in\nPeter's question at the 27th verse of the nineteenth chapter, \"We have\nforsaken all and followed thee: what shall we have therefore?\" But as\nthe parable sprang from Peter's question, so Peter's question sprang\nfrom an antecedent fact. To that fact, accordingly, we must look as the\ntrue ultimate root on which the parable grows.\n\nAs Jesus was going about in the Father's business, attended by the\ntwelve, a young man came running forward to him, bending the knee in\ntoken of reverence (Mark x. 17), and asking, \"Good master, what good\nthing shall I do that I may inherit eternal life?\" Accommodating his\nlesson to the condition of the learner's heart, the Lord saw meet, at\nthe close of his discourse, to lay a specific cross on this promising\ndisciple, in order at once to reach and eradicate the specific disease\nthat threatened the life of his soul,--\"Sell all that thou hast, and\ncome, follow me.\" The young man loved the world more than Christ:\ncompelled to make his choice, he cleaved to the portion that he loved\nbest. When by the sovereign act of the Lord he was placed in such a\nposition that he could not enjoy both portions, he parted with the\nSaviour and clung to his wealth. Peter and the rest of the apostles\nlistened and looked on, during this decisive interview: they gazed after\nthe youth, perhaps with tears, as he slowly and sorrowfully withdrew.\nBut their Lord did not leave the impressive fact to sink into their\nminds in silence: He interposed at the moment, to print the lesson\npermanently on their hearts, \"How hardly shall they that have riches\nenter into the kingdom of heaven!\" \"Then answered Peter;\"--as usual this\nimpetuous man burst suddenly into a speech upon the point in hand,\nbefore he had well considered what he was about to say. For one thing,\nthere is no deceit in Peter's question; he thinks aloud, and his thought\nis one of intense and undisguised self-conceit. The spirit of the\nPharisee was there, \"Lord, I thank thee that I am not as other men.\" His\nheart at this moment was undisguisedly mercenary; his eye was on the\nmain chance. We have done and suffered so much for God; what return may\nwe expect for our services? That young rich man would not part with his\nportion in this world, in order to follow Christ: Peter, thereupon, made\na most comfortable comparison between himself and the undecided youth,\nand expressed a hope that his own great devotion would not be overlooked\nin the day of reward.\n\nI sometimes think the Papists acted wisely in making Peter the first\nPope. He serves better as a type for them than any one of the twelve,\nunless they had gone all the way and chosen Judas. None of the true men\nwere so forward as Peter in giving their judgment, or so frequently\nwrong.\n\nThe reply of our Lord to Peter's self-righteous demand is twofold.\nFirst, he owns and reiterates the truth that all labourers in his\nkingdom will be rewarded; and next corrects the abuse of that principle\ninto which a self-pleasing human heart is apt to fall. In the discourse\nrecorded at the close of the nineteenth chapter, he teaches the cheering\ntruth that the Lord will richly reward the services of his people, and\nin the subsequent parable gives to them and us a solemn admonition\nagainst the error into which Peter had been for the moment betrayed.\n\nThe positive doctrine regarding compensation for all sacrifices and\nwages for all work needs only to be read in the memorable words of\nJesus, as the evangelist has recorded them here. Notwithstanding the\nincrustations of ignorant self-righteousness that now and then covered\nand disfigured their faith, these Galileans have in very deed left all\nfor Christ, and shall all in very deed receive from Christ a\nhundred-fold. Even Peter's own decisive life-act,--his consecration to\nJesus, was a higher and purer thing than his own foolish words at this\ntime would represent it to have been. It was not with a mercenary eye to\na subsequent equivalent that he left his nets and followed Jesus. That\nself-devotion in the simplicity of faith will be gloriously recompensed,\nnotwithstanding the subsequent slips that dishonour the disciple and\ngrieve the Master; but Peter, and through him all men, must be clearly\ntaught that work done for the sake of the reward is not owned in the\nkingdom of heaven.[35]\n\n [35] These two are thus united and distinguished by\n Draeseke,--\"Although the kingdom of God is God's gift in the souls of\n men, yet without a worthiness in men it can neither begin nor\n continue, neither reveal nor develop itself. And again, although our\n worthiness is necessary, we nevertheless obtain the kingdom, not\n through the merit of works, but from the fulness of grace, yea, from\n that alone. In short, the kingdom demands workers; hirelings it\n disdains (das Reich verlangt Arbeiter; Soeldlinge verschmaeht es)....\n Thus it stands shut against the hireling, open to the worker. Not as\n though the kingdom needed thy labour. He who makes the winds his\n messengers and the flames his servants, can do without thy\n hand-work, O little man. Thy labour avails not; but that thou\n shouldest be a labourer, that thou shouldest have a mind for God,\n and through that mind shouldest elevate thy life into a free and\n joyful service of him--that avails.\"--_Vom Reich Gottes_, ii. 40,\n 42.\n\n Remarkable is the construction of the chain by which this writer\n connects the poor unemployed men who were standing idle in the\n market-place with the ever-during, ever-increasing satisfaction of\n their souls in eternity. So verlangt das Reich Arbeiter, nicht\n Soeldlinge. Es beruft die Arbeitlosen. Es stellt die Bernfenen an. Es\n beschaeftigt die Angestelleten. Es uebt die Beschaeftigten. Es belohnt\n die Geuebten. Es genuegt den Belohnten. Und Gnuege waehrt ewig; waechst\n ewig.--ii. 51.\n\nEvery one that hath forsaken earthly possessions for Christ's sake shall\nreceive an hundred-fold, and shall inherit everlasting life,--\"_But_\nmany that are first shall be last, and the last first.\"\n\nThis short antithetic sentence is the very gate by which we enter into\nthe meaning of the parable; if we rightly comprehend it, we rightly\ncomprehend all. It is necessary to determine here the connection between\nthis sentence and the doctrine, which is taught in the immediately\npreceding verses. While the Lord undertakes that service and sacrifice\nin his cause will be rewarded, he warns his disciples in the next breath\nthat those who labour longest, or produce the greatest quantity of work,\ndo not in every case, and necessarily, receive the highest reward. In\nhis kingdom the reward is not measured only and always by the length of\nthe service or the quantity of work; many who are first as to the amount\nof work done will be last as to the amount of recompense received.\n\nA lesson drawn from this scriptural principle may be legitimately\naddressed to those who are not within the kingdom, but I think the\nMaster in this parable primarily intends to draw distinctions, not\nbetween those who are within and those who are without, but between two\nclasses of genuine disciples,--between those who simply trust in the\nLord and serve him in love, and those who, although also in the main\nbelievers, allow the leaven of self-righteousness to creep in and mar\nthe simplicity of their faith.[36]\n\n [36] On the other hand the text, Luke xiii. 30, although precisely\n similar to this in form, distinguishes, as may be seen from the\n context, between those who are within and those who are without.\n\nIt is not said that those who are first in the quantity of work shall\nall or uniformly be last in the measure of reward, but \"many\" that are\nfirst shall be last. Some who are foremost in the amount of service may\nalso be most free from the self-righteous spirit, and some who have\nlaboured least may also receive least if they do their little under the\ninfluence of a hireling's selfishness. The meaning is, that although you\nbe first as to length of time and quantity of labour, if the leaven of\nself-righteousness mingle in your offering, you will be lowest in the\nMaster's esteem, and least in the day of reward; whereas, although you\nbe last in point of time, and least in point of service, if you receive\nall from Christ's mercy, and render all in love to Christ, you will be\nhigher in the end than some who seemed more energetic and successful\nworkers.\n\n\"For the kingdom of heaven is like unto a man that is a householder,\"\n&c. This picture will illustrate the truth which has been declared; the\nhouseholder represents Christ, the vineyard his kingdom, and the\nlabourers his servants. The main lesson of the parable concerns, not the\nway of redemption, but the service which the redeemed render to their\nLord. The wages of the labourer represent the rewards which Christ\nconfers upon his servants, but this must be taken with certain\nexplanations and limitations, especially these two,--(1.) That the\nreward is partly a thing now begun, and partly something that is\ncompleted in heaven; (2.) That the value of the reward depends\nessentially on the disposition of heart with which the workman receives\nit.\n\nIt is not necessary to determine whether the labourers who were first\nhired, and who laboured all the day, represent the Jews under the first\ndispensation, or those in the Christian Church who individually are\nconverted in early youth, and continue in Christ's service throughout a\nlong life, or those who, from special talent, or zeal, or opportunity,\ndo and suffer most for the Lord and his cause. The all-day labourers may\nrepresent all these classes, each in turn, and especially the last. We\nmust not understand exclusively by \"the first\" those who began first in\npoint of time. The term indicates rather those who are first in the\nsense of being chief or greatest; it points especially to those who were\nfirst in rank as having endured the greatest amount of loss, and done\nthe greatest amount of work in Christ's cause. In the parable it is true\nthose who were first sent into the vineyard, in point of time, were\nchief among the labourers as to the quantity of labour contributed, but\nthe time is only an accident. The matter truly brought into view is not\nthe time, but the quantity of work. Time is here employed simply as a\nmeasure of quantity, for it is obviously assumed throughout that all the\nmen performed equal amounts of labour in equal times. It conduces\ngreatly to a clear conception of the whole lesson when you think of the\nfirst and last as indicating those who did and suffered most in Christ's\ncause and those who did and suffered least.\n\nThose who toiled only one hour or other larger fraction of a working\nday had no contract as to amount of wages; they entered the vineyard and\nlaboured without a bargain. They did not know what wages they would be\npaid with, but they knew what master they were working for; they were\nprepared to accept whatever he might be pleased to bestow. In this\nrespect they correctly represent the truest of Christ's disciples--those\nlittle-child Christians whom he sets up as a pattern for others. Those,\non the other hand, who were first in point of time, and therefore first\nin point of quantity, made their bargain before they began. This is like\ndisciples who slide back in some measure from the simplicity of faith\nand allow a mercenary motive to mingle in their devotions. Especially is\nit like Peter when, contrasting his own large sacrifices with the\nrefusal of the young man to sacrifice anything, and counting himself\nfirst, while he looked down on others as last, he cunningly\ninquired,--Lord, what shall we get for leaving all and following thee?\nIn answer to his egotistical inquiry, he is informed in plain terms that\nhe is one of those first who shall be last. This, however, according to\nall the analogy of Scripture, is not, in regard to Peter or any\nindividual disciple, an absolute prediction of what shall be, but a\nwarning of what may be if the same spirit remain.\n\nOur Scottish forefathers at the period of the Reformation suffered much\nfor Christ; some pined long in prison, some died at the stake. These\nwere first, and we who contribute a few pounds to a missionary society,\nor teach a Sabbath school, or visit some poor families, are last in\nrespect to the quantity of our doing and suffering in the Saviour's\ncause. But if any of those first were proud of their sufferings, they\nwill be last in the reward; and whosoever of these last give their mite\nin simple love to the Lord that bought them, will be first when he\ncomes to bring home his own.\n\nSuch is the structure of the parable that it must express the difference\nby giving one labourer not an absolutely but a comparatively greater\namount of wages than another. The last are recompensed at a higher rate\nthan the first, yet all go home with the same sum of money. But although\nthe labourers are all equal in the absolute amount of wages received,\nthe last are made higher than the first by a distinct addition to the\npecuniary recompence--that is, a contented, loving, thankful mind.\n\nSee the two groups of labourers as they severally wend their way home\nthat evening. As to amount of money in their pockets, they are all\nequal: but as to amount of content in their spirits there is a great\ndifference. The last go home each with a penny in his pocket, and\nastonished glad gratitude in his heart: their reward accordingly is a\npenny, and _more_. The first, on the contrary, go home, each with a\npenny in his pocket, and corroding discontent in his soul: their reward\naccordingly is _less_ than a penny. Those who know how great a gain is\ngodliness with contentment, and how small a gain is even godliness, when\ndiscontent is eating into it like rust, will allow that, while the\nlabourers first and last alike had each his penny, yet the last were\nfirst and the first last in the real value of their reward.\n\nConsidering that Peter is evidently designated as one of the first who\nshall be last, I cannot understand the parable otherwise than as showing\ndifferences among the disciples of Christ,--differences in simplicity of\nspirit while the labour lasts, and consequently in the value of the\nreward when the labour is done. As all the labourers get the wages of a\nday, so all who are represented by them, inherit the kingdom: but as\none star differeth from another star in glory, so shall it be when\nChrist comes to gather all his own. They will wear the brightest crowns\nwho thought most of their Redeemer's goodness, and least of their own\nsacrifice and work.\n\nThe latter clause of the 16th verse, \"for many be called, but few\nchosen,\" being evidently attached to the parable as its application by\nthe Lord, demands our earnest attention.[37] If we should understand by\nit, that many hear the call of the Gospel, but few are chosen by God and\nadmitted through regeneration into his family, it would not be possible,\nas far as I can perceive, to assign to it any proper connection with the\nlesson of the parable. But by the terms in which this sentence is\nintroduced, it is clearly intimated that it is the very conclusion and\nkernel, so to speak, of the doctrine which the parable was intended to\nconvey. Whether we shall be able to understand it or not, it certainly\nmust be something precisely in the line of the preceding instructions.\nIn that direction we must seek for its meaning; for it is manifestly\nintroduced as a gathering up in short and condensed form of all that the\nparable contained.\n\n [37] While in some cases the application of the parable which the\n Lord himself makes at the moment is full and perspicuous, it is in\n other cases like the parables themselves, and doubtless for good\n reasons, short, sententious, and partially veiled. In some cases the\n subjoined doctrine must be read in the light of the parable itself\n ere it can be understood. \"Majus vero et certius auxilium interpreti\n paratur in illis locis, in quibus ipse Jesus sensum parabolarum\n explicat, quod quidem modo luculentius, ut in orationibus Mat. XIII.\n modo paucis tantum verbis fit. Saepe enim praemittitur vel\n subjungitur ab eo doctrina per parabolam prolata, quae tamen ipsa\n interdum paulo obscurius exprimitur, ita ut nisi per parabolam ipsam\n intelligi non possit.\"--_Schultze de par._ 86.\n\nThe exposition suggested by Bengel is simple, consistent, and clear; and\nit is, I think, correct. Taking the term \"called\" as signifying not all\nto whom the call of the Gospel is addressed, but those only who are\neffectually called,--not those who only hear, but those who also obey\nthe call,--taking the term in this sense, which is a sober and\nscriptural view, he finds that this is not a distinction between saved\nand lost, but between two classes of the saved. The called and the\nchosen are both true disciples of Christ, and heirs of eternal life, and\nyet there is some distinction between them. Chosen must here therefore\nmean, what it did sometimes mean in ancient times, and does often mean\nstill, the best of their kind. We constantly speak of choice or select\narticles, meaning the most excellent. The phrase, whether used\nproverbially before Christ's time or not, is in nature and structure\nproverbial. He either found it a proverb and used it, or he made it a\nproverb there and then, for such it essentially is. It seems to have\nbeen employed by the Lord on more than one occasion, and differently\napplied at different times. As we might say among a great number of\nmanufactured articles, all true and genuine, \"few are first-rate;\" so,\namong a great number of real disciples, few stand out unselfish,\nunworldly, and Christ-like, honouring their Lord, and making the world\nwonder. Most, even of those who are disciples indeed, and shall inherit\neternal life, are so marred by self-righteous admixtures, and\nunsanctified temper, and conformity to the world, that their light is\ndim and their witness inarticulate. Peter, for example, was one of the\ncalled, in that he heard and obeyed Christ, and was saved; but he was\nnot a chosen or choice disciple, when he demanded of his Saviour what he\nshould get for what he had done; or when in the hour and power of\ndarkness, he denied all connection with Jesus of Nazareth. Alas! though\nthere are many Christians, how few there are who forget the things\nbehind, and press forward till they reach the high calling of God in\nChrist Jesus.[38]\n\n [38] In the transaction with the young man from which this parable\n remotely springs, an analogous expression is employed to indicate a\n chosen or choice disciple; \"Jesus said unto him, If thou wilt be\n perfect, go and sell that thou hast,\" &c. (xix. 21.) The term\n \"perfect\" in that text seems to be entirely parallel with \"chosen.\"\n The meaning of both is determined by the main drift of the parable;\n and the meaning thus given accords with the analogy of faith.\n\n Another remarkable confirmation of this exposition is found in the\n use of the same term, [Greek: eklektoi], in Rev. xvii. 14. The word\n in that passage must have the same meaning that we have attributed\n to it in the parable. Two reasons, a supreme and subordinate, are\n given to account for the victory of the Lamb,--his own omnipotence,\n and the trustworthy character of the instruments whom he employs.\n \"The Lamb shall overcome them: for he is Lord of lords and King of\n kings: and they that are with him are called, and chosen, and\n faithful;\" [Greek: kletoi kai eklektoi kai pistoi]. If you\n understand here by [Greek: eklektoi], chosen by God in the eternal\n covenant, the logical arrangement becomes obscure. It would be\n strange if, in enumerating the qualifications of soldiers, one\n should represent first that they were summoned to the warfare, next\n that they were chosen for that purpose before, and last that they\n were stanch in the battlefield. If this had been the meaning of\n [Greek: eklektoi] it must have stood first in order. The fact that\n it stands second suggests another explanation. Take it, in the sense\n which it readily assumes and frequently bears, and the order of the\n series becomes at once transparent. The soldiers were \"called, and\n choice, and faithful.\" They were enlisted in the cause, excellent in\n character, and found unflinching when the fight began.\n\nSome obvious practical lessons may be appended to the exposition.\n\n1. Judge not. Let a man examine himself rather than his neighbour. When\nPeter saw the young man refusing to make a sacrifice for Christ, he\ncomplacently remembered his own sacrifices, and thought he had done\nremarkably well. Ah, Peter, Satan desires to have thee that he may sift\nthee as wheat; but what by the Master's rebukes addressed to him, and\nwhat by prayers poured out for him, he will be saved; yet so as by fire.\nYou left all, you say, to follow Jesus; and how much was that? a share\nin a boat and some nets, both probably the worse for wear. Ah, Peter, if\nyou had been as rich as this young man, I am not sure whether you would\nnot have done as he did,--gone away, sorrowful indeed, but away from\nJesus!\n\nDisciples of Christ that are poor, should beware of judging the\ndisciples who are rich. You were enabled to break the tie that bound you\nto the earth; and you see a neighbour struggling with the yoke still on\nhis neck. Be not high-minded but fear. The line that bound you was a\nslender cord; the line that binds that brother is a cart rope. He, if he\nis set free at a later day, may be first in the day of reward, and you\nlast.\n\n2. All whom the Lord meets and calls are sent to work, and all go. From\nthe moment they meet the Master till the evening of life's labour-day,\nthey work for him. They not only labour for the Lord, they labour \"in\nthe Lord.\" Thus it is not a pain but a pleasure; it is their meat and\ntheir drink.\n\nGod needs not our work, but we, for our own sakes, need work in his\nkingdom. He can find other servants; but if we refuse his call we shall\nnever find a \"good Master.\"\n\n3. The true spirit of a worker is love to the Master, and to the work\nfor the Master's sake. The moment that a thought of merit glides into\nthe servant's heart, it brings him down, not indeed from the number of\ntrue disciples, but from the highest to the lowest class there.\n\nAmong the motives that, in these matters, sway a human heart, there are\ntwo forces equal and opposite: one is a humble, broken-hearted\nconsciousness that you deserve nothing, and receive all free; the other\nis a self-righteous conceit that your valuable services deserve a great\nreward. If this latter spirit is the main spring of your activity, it\ndetermines your position to be altogether outside of the circle of true\nbelievers; if it intrudes more or less as a temptation, and tinges with\nself-righteous blemishes a substantial faith in Christ, it reduces you\nfrom the highest to the lowest rank of disciples, and from the first to\nthe last in the final award of those who serve the Lord.\n\nIn one of its aspects the lesson of this parable is parallel with that\nwhich is taught by the experience of the penitent thief. Both greatly\nmagnify the patience and long-suffering of God: they record and\nproclaim, each in its own way, that there is hope at the eleventh hour.\nBut in such a case, a perverse carnal mind frequently turns the grace of\nGod into lasciviousness. Because the mercy of our Redeemer is stretched\nto the furthest verge of safety to leave room for the outcast to enter,\nwhen on the darkening evening of the day of grace he flees at last from\nthe wrath to come; souls cleaving to the dust, take the liberty of\nstretching their expectations a little further than Christ stretched his\noffer, and find the door shut, when they come too late. Ah, when the\ntender Saviour of sinners, by his parable, and the experience of the\nthief, gives you encouragement to come, although you are late; beware\nlest you take from his words wrested an encouragement to be late in\ncoming.\n\n\n\n\nGROUP--THE TWO SONS, THE WICKED HUSBANDMEN, AND THE MARRIAGE OF THE\nKING'S SON.\n\nMATT. xxi. 28; xxii. 14\n\n\nThe natural history of a parable is like the (probable) natural history\nof a pearl. Something alien and irritating has alighted upon life, and\nforthwith a covering of pure and precious matter is thrown over it.\nAfter this manner, indeed, as we have already noted, a greater than the\nparable came. In this way redemption began, and grew. Sin entered Eden\nand fastened upon that image of God which had appeared on earth in the\nperson of primeval man; forthwith holy promises from heaven began to\ncluster round the sin-spot. As age succeeded age these promises\ndistilled like dew and crystallized around the original nucleus, until\nredemption was completed in the sacrifice of Christ and the ministry of\nthe Spirit: that glorious gospel on which we now fondly look, gathered\nround the fall. The sin of man, though not the cause of God's salvation,\nbecame its occasion and determined its form.\n\nThe particular lessons which Jesus taught in the course of his ministry,\nfollowed in this respect the analogy of his redeeming work as a whole;\nin most cases his instructions were called forth and fashioned by hard,\nbold outstanding sins. Some of the brightest jewels which shine in the\nlife of Christ are the pure pearly coverings which he threw around\nPharisaic pride, or Sadducean unbelief, or the self-righteous stumbles\nof his own disciples. Thus he made the wrath, and the malice, and the\ndeceit of men to show forth his own praise; thus rust-spots were\nconverted into shining pearls; thus human errors, as they sprung up,\nwere seized and choked and buried under a mantle of glorious grace.\n\nHere in Matthew's Gospel, we encounter a group of three parables, the\ntwo sons, the wicked husbandmen, and the marriage of the king's son,\nconnected with each other historically in a consecutive report, and\nlogically as successive steps in the development of one argument. The\nportion, chapters xxi. xxii. xxiii., is the compact record of a single\nscene. Approaching by the Mount of Olives, Jesus entered Jerusalem in a\nsimple but significant triumphal procession, heralded by the hosannahs\nof the multitude, which, if for the most part neither intelligent nor\npermanent, were sincere and spontaneous. Arrived in the city he at once\nmade his way to the Temple, and there assumed an unwonted and severe\nauthority. The mercenary profaners of the temple he cast out; the blind\nand lame he healed. On the way to and from Bethany, where he lodged for\nthe night, the fruitless fig tree withered under his word. Next morning\nas he was teaching in the temple, the heads of the Jewish external\ntheocracy, stung to rage by his words and deeds on the preceding day,\nformally demanded the exhibition of his authority, as a preliminary step\nto the violent suppression of his work. Jesus knew the hearts of these\nmen; he knew that while, in virtue of their office, they affected to\nexpound and apply the divine law, and to rule the people in accordance\nwith it, they were at once ignorant of God's word and tamely subservient\nto the passions of the people. To tear off, or rather to compel them\nwith their own hands to tear off their cloak of hypocrisy, he addressed\nto them that question of wonderful simplicity but wonderful power, The\nbaptism of John, whence was it? from heaven or of men? Knowing that if\nthey should confess the divine origin of John's mission they would\nthereby establish the Messiahship of Jesus to whom John had borne\nwitness, and that if they should deny it they would forfeit the favour\nof the people, they answered, We cannot tell, meaning, It is\ninconvenient to express an opinion. As they could not venture to\npronounce whether a ministry which had left its impress deep on the\nwhole land, was a human usurpation or a divine mission, they had\nobviously no right to sit in judgment on the credentials of Jesus. When\non this point they were condemned out of their own lips the Lord, rising\nnow more into the stern dignity of judge when his ministry was drawing\nto a close, advances against the discomfited and stunned hierarchs, with\nanother, another, and yet another stroke, unveiling the hypocrisy of\ntheir religious profession, predicting the consummation of the crime,\nthe murder of the Father's well beloved, which they were already\ncherishing in their hearts, and denouncing finally the doom which in the\nrighteous government of God should fall upon themselves and their\ncity.[39] Such are the occasion, the places, the object, and the nature\nof the three parables which Jesus spoke that day in the Temple, and the\nEvangelist Matthew has recorded in this portion of the word. The first\nis the parable of--\n\n [39] \"He now constrains them, in the first parable, to declare their\n own guilt; and, in the second, to declare their own punishment; and\n as they had now decided to put Him to death, He describes to them,\n in the third parable, the consequences of their great violation of\n the covenant and ingratitude,--the destruction of their ancient\n priesthood, and the triumphant establishment of his new kingdom of\n heaven among the Gentiles.\"--_Lange in loc._\n\n\n\n\nX.\n\nTHE TWO SONS.\n\n\n\"But what think ye? A certain man had two sons; and he came to the\n first, and said, Son, go work to-day in my vineyard. He answered and\n said, I will not: but afterward he repented, and went. And he came\n to the second, and said likewise. And he answered and said, I go,\n sir: and went not. Whether of them twain did the will of his father?\n They say unto him, The first. Jesus saith unto them, Verily I say\n unto you, That the publicans and the harlots go into the kingdom of\n God before you. For John came unto you in the way of righteousness,\n and ye believed him not: but the publicans and the harlots believed\n him: and ye, when ye had seen it, repented not afterward, that ye\n might believe him.\"--MATT. xxi. 28-32.\n\nFrom this parable, in connection with that of the labourers in the\nvineyard, we incidentally learn that among the cultivators of Palestine\nin those days there was the same admixture of large and small farms\nwhich prevails in our own land. In order to provide for the structure of\nthe preceding parable, an agriculturist is introduced who cultivates on\na large scale. Group after group of labourers are hired wholesale, and\nsent successively into the vineyard; in the evening a steward pays each\nlabourer under the general instructions of his chief. There in a few\nstrokes you have the picture of an ancient Israelitish magnate, owning a\nbroad estate and affording employment to a multitude of dependants. In\nthe parable which is now under review, we have a picture equally\ndistinct, but representing another class of countrymen. This is neither\non the one hand a great proprietor, nor on the other a landless\nlabourer. Here is a man who has a stake in the country, a portion of\nground of size sufficient to provide for the wants of his family; but\nhis farm cannot afford employment and remuneration to a gang of\nlabourers; the work must be all done by the owner himself and his\nchildren. This is a desirable condition of life, and the class who\noccupy it are valuable to society. There, in the middle, they are\nsheltered from many dangers to which their countrymen on either extreme\nof social condition are exposed. Woe to the country in which there are\nonly two classes,--the greatest and the smallest,--the large proprietors\nand the floating sea of labourers. The strong fixed few and the feeble\nsurging many are to each other reciprocally dangerous. Give me a country\ndotted all over with homesteads, where father and mother, sons and\ndaughters, till their own ground and eat the fruit of their own labour.\n\n\"To the first he said, Son, go work to-day in my vineyard.\" The first\nwas none other than the one whom the father first met that morning. To\nhave intimated whether he was the elder or the younger, would have\nintroduced a disturbing element, and obscured the meaning of the lesson.\nThere is no question here between elder and younger, or between Jews and\nGentiles. At all events, if those who maintained a place within the\ntheocracy are distinguished from those who stood without its pale, we\nmust conceive of the Father approaching on this occasion from without\ntowards the centre, coming in contact first with those who were excluded\nas aliens, and afterwards reaching the inner circle, who counted\nthemselves the seed of Abraham.\n\nThis son, rebellious in heart, and not trained to cover his disobedience\nunder a smooth profession, meets his father's command with a rude, blunt\nrefusal. I think the humble husbandman had received a similar answer\nfrom the same quarter more than once before. This is not the first\nunseemly word which the young man had spoken to his father: neither\nhimself nor his wickedness has grown to maturity in a day. The habit of\ndishonouring his parents had sprung from a seed of evil in his infancy,\nand grown with his growth until he and it had reached full stature\ntogether. The father seems not to have spoken a word in reply. Probably\nhe knew by experience that an altercation on the spot would only have\nmade matters worse: perhaps he sighed, perhaps he wept as he turned\ngently round and went away. I do not know how often and how long he had\nmeditated on the grand practical question for a father, when he should\nbe severe, and when he should show indulgence. May God guide and help\nparents who have disobedient sons; they need much patience for bearing,\nand much wisdom for acting aright.\n\n\"But afterward he repented and went.\" There is much in these few simple\nwords. He repented; perhaps his father's silent grief went to his heart\nat length and melted it. He saw himself in his true colours, and loathed\nhimself for his sin. The son, who probably obtained a glimpse of his\nfather's tears, wept himself in turn, and, as the best amends he could\nmake, went silently into the vineyard, and did a good day's work there.\nThus, when Jesus, suffering, bearing reproach before Pilate's\njudgment-seat, looked on Peter sinning, Peter went out and wept. When he\nwas called to suffer for Christ, he had rudely answered, \"I will not;\"\nbut afterwards he repented and went--to work, to witness, to suffer, to\ndie for the Lord whom he loved.\n\nPerhaps the father, from beneath the cottage eaves, saw the son on the\nbrow of the hill toiling in the noon-day heat,--saw and was glad. The\nvalue of a day's labour was something; but it was as the small dust of\nthe balance in comparison with the price he set on the repentance and\nobedience of his child. I suppose there was a happy meeting at night\nwhen the son came home. I suppose the father was a happy man as he saw\nthe robust youth wiping the sweat from his brow, and sitting down to his\nevening meal.\n\n\"He came to the second, and said likewise.\" The second son had an answer\nready, sound in substance and smooth in form. It was a model answer from\na son to his parent: \"I go, sir,\" said the youth, without hesitation or\ncomplaint. I am not sure that the father was overjoyed at the promptness\nand politeness of this reply: probably he had received as fair promises\nfrom the same quarter before, and seen them broken. At all events, this\nyoung man's fair word was a whited sepulchre; he did not obey his\nfather. Whether he fell in with trivial companions on his way to the\nvineyard, and was induced to go with them in another direction, or\nthought the day too hot and postponed the labour till the morrow, I know\nnot; but he said, and did not. It was profession without practice. The\ntender vine-shoots might trail on the ground for him till their\nfruit-buds were blackened; he would not put himself to the trouble of\ntying them up to the stakes, although the food of the family should be\nimperilled by his neglect.\n\nNow comes the sharp question, \"Whether of them twain did the will of his\nfather?\" The answer is all too easy. The light is stronger than is\ncomfortable for those owl-eyed Pharisees, who were prowling about like\nnight-birds on the scent of their prey. The sudden glance of this\nsunbeam dazzles and confounds them. In utter helplessness, they confess\nthe truth that condemns themselves; they say unto him \"The first.\"[40]\n\n [40] At an earlier stage of the same interview, when a question\n regarding the ministry of the Baptist was addressed to them, fearing\n the consequences which an answer might involve, they had sought\n shelter under the plea of ignorance. As they gained nothing by their\n duplicity on that occasion, they may have been unwilling to try the\n same policy again; and, accordingly, they give frankly the obvious\n answers to the questions that resulted both from this and the\n succeeding parable.\n\nIn the first example the Lord represents chief sinners repenting; and in\nthe second, the form of godliness without its power. The publicans and\nharlots, who had forsaken their sins and followed the Saviour, sat for\nthe first picture; the chief priests and elders, who concealed their\nthirst for innocent blood under a mantle of long prayers and broad\nphylacteries, sat for the second.\n\nLet us look first to the two distinct and opposite answers, and next to\nthe two distinct and opposite acts.\n\n_The answers._--That of the first son, \"I will not,\" was evil, and only\nevil. It is of first-rate practical importance to make this plain and\nprominent. Looking to the son in the story, we see clearly that the\nanswer was outrageously wicked: it was an evil word flowing from its\nnative spring in an evil heart. Looking next to the class of persons\nwhom that son represents, we find they are the openly and daringly\nungodly of every rank in every age. This son, when he rudely refused to\nobey his father, meant what he said; he was not willing to obey, and he\nplainly said so. This represents those who have neither the profession\nnor the practice of true religion; they neither fear God nor pretend to\nfear him.\n\nAt this point, among certain classes, a subtle temptation insinuates\nitself. In certain circumstances, ungodly men take credit for the\ndistinct avowal of their ungodliness, and count on it as a merit. They\nare not, indeed, submissive in heart and life to the will of God; but\nthey do not tell a lie about the matter; they make no pretension. The\nfrank confession, that they are not good, seems to serve some men as a\nsubstitute for goodness. By comparing themselves complacently with\nfellow-sinners of a different class, they contrive to rivet the fatal\nerror more firmly on their own hearts. Observing among their neighbours\nhere and there a rank hypocrite, they compare his sanctimonious\nprofession with his indifferent sense of honesty, and congratulate\nthemselves that they are not hypocrites.\n\nWell, brother, suppose it were conceded that you are not a hypocrite;\nwhat then? If you have lived unrepenting, unforgiven, unchanged; if with\nyour whole heart and habits you have departed from the living God, and\nnot returned to him through the Mediator,--will all be atoned for and\nmade up by the single fact that to all your other sins you did not add\nthe cant of a hypocrite? It is true, a hypocrite is a loathsome\ncreature; but his badness will not make a profane man good. When he is\ncast away for his hypocrisy, it will be no comfort to you as you keep\nhim company that it is for open ungodliness, and not for lying\npretensions to piety, that you are condemned. Hypocrites are, indeed,\nexcluded from the kingdom of God; but it is a fatal mistake to assume\nthat, provided you are not a hypocrite, you will be welcomed into heaven\nwith all your vices on your back.\n\nI scarcely know a more subtle or more successful wile of the devil than\nthis. Many strong men are cast down by it. You don't pretend to be good;\nwell, and will that save you? What comfort will it afford to the lost to\nreflect that they went openly to perdition, in broad daylight, before\nall men, and did not skulk through by-ways under pretence that they were\ngoing to heaven?\n\nThe answer of the other son was evil too, if you look not to its body,\nbut to its spirit. There is no reason to suppose that it was, even at\nthe moment, an act of true obedience to his father. \"He said, I go, sir;\nand went not:\" he said one thing, and did another, an opposite; but\nthere is no ground for believing that he meant to go when he promised,\nand afterwards changed his mind. His smooth language was a lie; and his\nsubsequent conduct showed, not that he had changed his mind when his\nfather was out of sight, but that he concealed it while his father was\npresent. It is worthy of notice, that although the first son changed his\nmind after he had given his answer, there is no intimation of any change\nhaving passed on the second son, between his answer and his act. By its\nsilence on this point, the narrative leads us to infer that the purpose\nof the disobedient son was the same while he was promising well as when\nhe acted ill. The course of the life flowing full in the direction of\ndisobedience, proves that the expression of the lips which ran in the\nopposite direction, was a lie; it was like a glittering ripple caused by\na fitful breeze, running upward on the surface of the river, while the\nwhole volume of its water rolls, notwithstanding, the other way.\n\nThus is even the worship of hypocrites worthless: Not every one that\n_saith_ unto me, Lord, Lord; but he that _doeth_ the will of my Father\nwhich is in heaven. The want of the subsequent obedience shows that the\npromise was not true.\n\nThus at first both these sons were in a false and unsafe position. Their\ncharacters were not the same,--were not similar: they differed in\nthought and word; but the difference, in as far as their answers were\nconcerned, indicated only varieties of sin. Legion is the name of the\nspirits that possess and pollute the fallen; but all the legion do not\ndwell in every man. Different temptations tinge different persons with\ndifferent hues of guilt. At the time when the father uttered his\ncommand, the character of the first son was bold, unblushing rebellion;\nthe character of the second was cowardly, false pretence. The one son\nneither promised nor meant to obey; the other son promised obedience,\nbut intended not to keep his word.\n\nIn the first instance, therefore, there is no ground for preferring the\none to the other. While they stood severally in their father's presence,\nand before either had repented of his sin, they were both, and both\nalike evil. The blasphemer has no right to boast over the hypocrite, and\nthe hypocrite has no right to boast over the blasphemer. In either case\nit is a body of sin, but there is a shade of difference in the colour of\nthe garments. The one pretends to a goodness which he does not possess;\nand the other confesses, or rather boasts, that he is destitute of\ngoodness. They measure themselves by themselves; and therein they are\nnot wise. The one thinks his smooth tongue will save him; and the other\ncounts himself safe because he has not a smooth tongue.\n\nWe come now to the ultimate _act_ of either son. The first, after\nflinging a blunt refusal in his father's face, repented of his sin. The\nturning-point is here. A change came over the spirit of the man, and a\nconsequent change emerged in his conduct: his heart was first turned,\nand then his history. The honesty of his declaration--the absence of\nduplicity in giving his answer, would not have justified him before\neither God or man. He repented; he turned round. He grieved over his\nsin; he was sorry that he had disobeyed his father. Repentance\nimmediately brought forth fruit after its kind. He went into the\nvineyard, and laboured there with a will all day at the kind of work\nwhich he knew would please his father. These two things go always in\ncompany, and together make up the new man--they are the new heart and\nthe new life.\n\nThe grieved father would weep for joy, as he looked up the precipitous\nhill-side on which the terraced vineyard hung, and saw there the head\nand hands of his son glancing quickly from place to place among the vine\nplants. Thus there is joy in heaven--deep in the heart of heaven's\nLord--over one sinner that repenteth. Among the vines that day work was\nworship: the resulting act of obedience--fruit of repentance in the\nsoul, was an offering of a sweet-smelling savour unto God.\n\nThe other son promptly promised, but failed to perform. The first was\nchanged from bad to good, but the second was not changed from good to\nbad. No change took place in this case, and none is recorded. It is not\nwritten, that having promised, he afterwards repented and did not go.\nHis promise was not true; at the moment when it was made, the youth did\nnot intend to work, and therefore it required no change of mind to\ninduce him afterwards to spend the day in idleness.\n\nThis son represents, in the first instance, those Pharisees who were\nthen and there compassing the death of Jesus. They ostentatiously\nprofessed that they were doing God service; yet they were spreading a\nnet for the feet of the innocent, and preparing to shed his blood.\nWearing broad phylacteries, making long prayers, and offering many\nsacrifices, they were, notwithstanding, living in malice and envy,\nhateful, and hating one another. With their lips they honoured God; but\nin works they denied him. These, in as far as they are here represented,\nwere evil first and last. In the second son we have an example, not of a\nman who meant to do good changing his mind and ultimately doing evil,\nbut of a man who, notwithstanding his fair profession, meant evil at the\nbeginning and perpetrated it in the end.\n\nNor are these lessons of the Lord limited to one private interpretation:\nthe lesson of this parable was not exhausted when the Pharisees died\nout. As surely as the thorns, and the tares, and the lilies to which\nJesus on various occasions alluded in his lectures, grow on the ground\nat this day, and have grown there through all the intervening\ngenerations--so surely the various classes of human character which he\nrebuked, warned, or encouraged in his ministry, have their\nrepresentatives going out and in amongst us in the present day. It is\nmeant that in this glass all the self-righteous to the end of the world\nshould see themselves; their profession is fair, but their life is for\nself, and not for God.\n\nIn the stratified rocks many species and genera of plants and animals\nare found in a fossil state which are not found in the flora or fauna of\nour present earth; but the human characters that were fixed and stamped\nas by photograph in the Scriptures are not so far removed from the men\nand women who now live on the earth. No species has become extinct; and\neven the minuter characteristics of distinct varieties remain legible\nstill.\n\n * * * * *\n\nHere spring two distinct warnings to two distinct classes, with\ncorresponding encouragements attached, as shadows follow solid bodies\nin the sunlight;--to the Publicans and Harlots first, and next to the\nPharisees of the day.\n\n1. There is a class amongst us answering to those publicans and sinners\nto whom Jesus was wont to address the message of his mercy. Alas, they\nmay be counted by thousands and tens of thousands in the land! They are\nthe drunkards, the licentious, the profane, the false, the cruel,--those\nwho abandon themselves to a vicious life, and do not take the trouble of\nattempting to hide their sin under a cloak of sanctity. They gratify\nevery lust, and crucify none. They live without God in the world. The\nkey-note of their being is, Let us eat and drink, for to-morrow we die.\n\nTo all this class the parable proclaims a warning. A rank, soporific\nsuperstition has crept over these free and easy spirits,--a superstition\nas dark and deceitful as any of the inventions of Rome. Men seem\nactually to persuade themselves that their very wickedness will supply\nthem with a passport into heaven. They seem to expect that they will be\nmade pets in the great day, because they made no pretension to\nsaintship; and that they will be fondled by the Judge as they have been\nby their boon companions, because hypocrisy cannot be reckoned among\ntheir sins. It is a false hope. Free thinking, free living brother, if I\nsaw you about to put to sea in a ship which I knew to be affected with\ndry-rot in the timbers of the bottom, I would warn you with all my\nenergy, that I might save your life: when I see you preparing to launch\ninto eternity leaning on a lie, I cry vehemently, Beware, lest you be\nlost for ever! Without holiness no man shall see God. The absence of a\nhypocritical pretension to holiness will not be accepted instead of\nholiness. All who go away to the judgment-seat without holiness will be\nshut out of heaven--alike those who thought they had it, and those who\nconfessed that they had it not. It was all right at last with the\nprofane son in the parable; but mark, he repented and obeyed. God's\ninvitation to the wicked is, Turn and live; but the promise contains in\nits bosom the counterpart threatening, If you turn not you shall die. It\nwas not the bold, frank declaration of disobedience that made the first\nson all right: it made him all wrong. It was his change,--his passing\nout of that state, as if he had passed from death unto life, that saved\nhim.\n\nBut to this class the parable speaks encouragement as well as warning.\nSo great is God's mercy in Christ that even you are welcome when you\ncome; the gate stands open; the Redeemer from within is calling chief\nsinners in, He has pledged himself to cast no comer out because of his\nworthlessness. Nor does the freeness of his grace prove that the\nprodigal's sins are small; it proves only that the forgiving love of\nChrist is great.\n\n2. There is still a class corresponding to the Pharisees, and to these\nthe Lord in this parable conveys both warning and encouragement.\n\nThe essence of the Pharisaic character, under every variety of form,\nconsists of these two things,--an exact and laborious observance of\nexternal religious duties, and a heart satisfied with itself while it is\ndevoted to the world. The species is described for all times and places\nin the Apocalyptic Epistle to the Church in Sardis: \"Thou hast a name\nthat thou livest, and art dead\" (Rev. iii. 1). There is a profession of\ngodliness wanting its power; Christ's name comes readily to the lip, but\nthe god of this world possesses the heart and controls the life.\n\nThere is encouragement to the Pharisee as well as to the publican to\nturn and live. There is no respect of persons with God; the Pharisee was\nas welcome to Christ as the publican, if he would come. A Pharisee and a\npublican went up to the temple at the same hour to pray; the publican\nreturned to his own house pardoned and at peace with God, while the\nPharisee went home still unreconciled and under condemnation: but\nwherefore? Not that God was more willing to forgive the publican than to\nforgive the Pharisee; but because the Pharisee did not ask forgiveness.\nHe would have obtained it if he had asked it: his self-righteousness was\nhis ruin.\n\nThus in the end of this parable, the Lord intimates to the Pharisees\nthat the outcasts whom they despised are entering the kingdom of heaven\nbefore them. This does not mean that the way is made more easy, the gate\nmore wide, to the licentious and profane than to the hypocrite,--it\nintimates merely that in point of fact the profane were then and there\nhastening in through the gate which stood open alike for all, while the\nself-righteous were standing aloof. The intimation, moreover, is made,\nnot in order to keep these Pharisees back, but to urge them forward. The\nLord desires to provoke them to jealousy by them that were no people.\nThese despised outcasts are going in before you; arise and press in now,\nlest the door be shut. It was not because they were publicans and\nharlots that they were saved, but because they believed and repented\nunder the preaching of John; and it was not because the others were\nPharisees that they were still unsaved, but because even with the\nexample of fellow-sinners repenting and believing before their eyes,\nthey, thinking themselves righteous, would not repent and believe.\n\nGod delights as much to receive a Pharisee as to receive a publican.\nWhen a self-righteous man discovers himself at last to be a whited\nsepulchre, and counting his own righteousness filthy rags, flees to\nChrist as his righteousness, he is instantly accepted in the beloved.\n\nIf I could be admitted, in the body or out of the body, to a vision of\nthe saints in rest, I would like to creep near the spot where two saved\nsinners chance to meet,--the man who wrote this narrative of Christ's\nministry, and the man who preached Christ to the Gentiles. I would fain\nlisten for an hour to the conversation of Matthew the publican and Saul\nthe Pharisee when they meet in the mansions of the Father's house. Their\nloving argument, I could imagine, would sometimes run high. Matthew will\ncontend that the grace of their common Lord has been most conspicuously\nglorified in his own redemption, \"for,\" he pleads, \"I was all evil and\nhad nothing good, I had neither inside purity nor outside whitening. I\nhad neither the seemly profession without nor the holy heart within. I\nwas altogether vile; and in me therefore is the grace of God glorified\nmost.\" Paul, on the other side, will contend, with his keen intellect\nperfect at last, that he was the chief sinner, and that consequently in\nhis redemption a more decisive testimony is given to the abundance of\nthe Saviour's grace. After describing his own hardness and blindness and\nunbelief, he will add, as the crowning sin of man, the crowning glory of\nGod,--While I was thus the chief of sinners, I gave myself out as one of\nthe greatest of saints.\n\nIt may be hard to tell whether of the two mountains is the more\nelevated; but one thing is clear,--both are covered by the flood. The\nblood of Jesus Christ, God's Son, cleanseth us,--the profane and the\nself-righteous alike,--cleanseth us from all sin.\n\n\n\n\nXI.\n\nTHE WICKED HUSBANDMEN.\n\n\n\"Hear another parable: There was a certain householder, which planted a\n vineyard, and hedged it round about, and digged a winepress in it,\n and built a tower, and let it out to husbandmen, and went into a far\n country: and when the time of the fruit drew near, he sent his\n servants to the husbandmen, that they might receive the fruits of\n it. And the husbandmen took his servants, and beat one, and killed\n another, and stoned another. Again, he sent other servants more than\n the first: and they did unto them likewise. But last of all he sent\n unto them his son, saying, They will reverence my son. But when the\n husbandmen saw the son, they said among themselves, This is the\n heir: come, let us kill him, and let us seize on his inheritance.\n And they caught him, and cast him out of the vineyard, and slew him.\n When the lord therefore of the vineyard cometh, what will he do unto\n those husbandmen? They say unto him, He will miserably destroy those\n wicked men, and will let out his vineyard unto other husbandmen,\n which shall render him the fruits in their seasons. Jesus saith unto\n them, Did ye never read in the scriptures, The stone which the\n builders rejected, the same is become the head of the corner: this\n is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous in our eyes? Therefore say\n I unto you, The kingdom of God shall be taken from you, and given to\n a nation bringing forth the fruits thereof. And whosoever shall fall\n on this stone shall be broken: but on whomsoever it shall fall, it\n will grind him to powder. And when the chief priests and Pharisees\n had heard his parables, they perceived that he spake of them. But\n when they sought to lay hands on him, they feared the multitude,\n because they took him for a prophet.\"--MATT. xxi. 33-46.\n\nWhen a proprietor has determined to appropriate as a vineyard a portion\nof ground which had previously lain waste, or been employed for some\nother purpose, his first care is to plant the vines. As some time must\nnecessarily elapse before the young plants begin to bear fruit, he may\nprosecute the other departments of his undertaking at leisure. In due\ntime, accordingly, he constructs a fence around the field to keep out\ndepredators, whether men or beasts; digs a vat for receiving the juice,\nand prepares an apparatus above it for squeezing the clusters quickly\nin the hurry of the vintage; builds a tower as at once a shelter for the\nkeeper and an elevated stand-point for the watcher by night or day.\n\nIn the case which this parable represents, the owner did not continue to\nreside on the spot and cultivate his own vineyard; \"he let it out to\nhusbandmen, and went into a far country.\" This lease, granted by a\nnon-resident proprietor, throws an interesting light on the habits of\nthe place and the time. In regard both to the tenants and the terms, the\ninformation, though very brief, is very definite. The vineyard was let\nnot to one capitalist, who might employ labourers to do the necessary\nwork, but to a kind of joint-stock company of labourers who proposed to\ncultivate the property with their own hands for the common benefit. It\nwas stipulated, moreover, that the rent should be paid not in money but\nin kind. It is the system known in India at this day as ryot-rent; the\ncultivator undertakes to give the owner a certain fixed quantity yearly\nfrom the produce of the farm, and all that is over belongs to himself.\n\nThe structure of the parable in its later stages presupposes a country\nin which the central government is paralyzed, and the will of the\nstrongest has usurped the place of law. With us it requires an exercise\nof imagination to conjure up a scene in which these events could\npossibly occur; but in those regions such anarchy was not uncommon\nthen,--is not uncommon now. It is probable that the annals of our own\nempire in India could supply some parallel conflicts between the\nprivileged superiors and the actual cultivators of the soil.\n\nThe proprietor, being personally absent from the country, employed\nagents to demand his stipulated share of the produce at the proper\nseason from the tenants in possession. The tenants, presuming on the\ndistance of the superior, and the difficulty which he must necessarily\nencounter in any attempt to enforce his rights, not only refused to\nfulfil the conditions of their lease, but also assaulted the messengers\nwho made the demand; they beat one, and killed another, and stoned a\nthird. Obviously, they determined from the first to retain the whole\nproduce of the vineyard for themselves. They do not seem to have laid\ntheir plans with much care: there is more of passion than of policy in\ntheir conduct. It is the ordinary practice of those who break the laws\nof God or of man, to grasp madly a present pleasure, and refuse to think\nof coming vengeance. Having heard of the treatment which his agents had\nreceived, the proprietor despatched another party more numerous, with\nthe view probably of overawing the refractory peasants by a display of\nstrength; but the second mission was as cruelly and contemptuously\nrejected as the first. The proprietor, still unwilling to bring matters\nto an extremity, adopted next an expedient which he hoped would subdue\nthe rebellion, without imposing on him the necessity of punishing the\nrebels. Keeping out of sight for the moment his rights and his power, he\nappealed confidingly to their hereditary reverence for the family of\ntheir chief; he sent his son, and sent him unarmed, unattended.\n\nThe conduct of the husbandmen at this point is unintelligible, if you\nsuppose that the country enjoyed a regular government, and that the men\nhad deliberately adopted a plan. In order to account for the\ncircumstances, you must suppose that the central government was\nparalyzed, and that these men were as stupid as they were wicked. Great\ncriminals are often blind to their own interests: their blunders\ngenerally lead to their conviction.\n\nThe murder of the heir by these greedy tenants, in the vague hope of\nobtaining the property, is a probable event. To show that the scheme was\nnot skilfully devised, does not by any means prove that the crime was\nnot actually perpetrated. The owner was absent; no display of\nirresistible power was made to their senses; they were not in the habit\nof nicely considering the remote consequences of an act, and an\novermastering passion completely paralyzed at that moment a judgment\nwhich was feeble at the best.\n\nFrom this point the close of the tragedy is self-evident; the Lord\naccordingly does not further prosecute the narrative. Here the Pharisees\nare invited to pronounce judgment upon themselves; nor do they hesitate\nto accept the challenge. Whether in simplicity, as unconscious of the\nTeacher's drift, or in exasperation as knowing that by this time his\ndrift appeared to the whole company all too plain, may not be certain;\nbut in point of fact they gave the answer without abatement and without\nambiguity: \"He will miserably destroy those wicked men, and will let out\nhis vineyard to other husbandmen which will render him the fruits in\ntheir season.\"\n\nNo serious difficulty occurs in the interpretation of this parable, and,\nconsequently, no considerable differences of opinion have arisen among\ninterpreters regarding it. The main lines of the lesson cannot be\nmistaken; but there is need of careful discrimination in some of the\ndetails.\n\nFrequently in the Scriptures the seed of Abraham, called by God and\nendowed with many peculiar privileges, are compared to a vine, or to the\naggregate of vines in a vineyard. I shall here point to three examples\nof this usage, in order to show that, notwithstanding an obvious general\nresemblance, they differ from each other and from this parable in the\nspecific purposes to which they severally adapt and apply the analogy:--\n\n1. Isa. v. 1-7: \"Now will I sing to my well-beloved a song of my beloved\ntouching his vineyard. My well-beloved hath a vineyard in a very\nfruitful hill. And he fenced it, and gathered out the stones thereof,\nand planted it with the choicest vine, and built a tower in the midst of\nit, and also made a winepress therein: and he looked that it should\nbring forth grapes, and it brought forth wild grapes. And now, O\ninhabitants of Jerusalem, and men of Judah, judge, I pray you, betwixt\nme and my vineyard. What could have been done more to my vineyard, that\nI have not done in it? wherefore, when I looked that it should bring\nforth grapes, brought it forth wild grapes? And now go to; I will tell\nyou what I will do to my vineyard: I will take away the hedge thereof\nand it shall be eaten up; and break down the wall thereof, and it shall\nbe trodden down. And I will lay it waste: it shall not be pruned nor\ndigged; but there shall come up briers and thorns: I will also command\nthe clouds that they rain no rain upon it. For the vineyard of the Lord\nof hosts is the house of Israel, and the men of Judah his pleasant\nplant: and he looked for judgment, but behold oppression; for\nrighteousness, but behold a cry.\"\n\nThe vineyard, with its slope to the southward, and rich soil, and\ncareful cultivation, and secure defences, and convenient apparatus,\nrepresents the people whom God chose and cherished. The drift of\nIsaiah's parable is to show the exaggerated wickedness of that favoured\nnation. The vineyard brought forth wild grapes,--those sour grapes which\nset on edge the teeth of him who tastes them (Ezek. xviii. 2). Israel\nlived like the heathen, and thus the care bestowed upon them was thrown\naway. As a punishment for its ungrateful return, the vineyard was laid\nwaste; the kingdom and polity of Israel were destroyed by the decree of\nGod, and through the instrumentality of the king of Babylon.\n\n2. Ezek. xv. 2-5: \"Son of man, What is the vine tree more than any tree,\nor than a branch which is among the trees of the forest? Shall wood be\ntaken thereof to do any work? or will men take a pin of it to hang any\nvessel thereon? Behold, it is cast into the fire for fuel; the fire\ndevoureth both the ends of it, and the midst of it is burnt. Is it meet\nfor any work? Behold, when it was whole, it was meet for no work: how\nmuch less shall it be meet yet for any work, when the fire hath devoured\nit, and it is burned?\"\n\nHere Israel is compared, not to a vineyard, but to a single vine; and\nthe special characteristic selected for purposes of instruction is the\nuselessness of the vine tree as timber. Cultivated only for the sake of\nits fruit, if it prove barren, it is not only no better than the trees\nof the forest, but much worse. Forest trees are useful in their own\nplace, and for certain purposes; but a vine, if it do not bear fruit, is\nof no use at all. No man can make a piece of furniture from its small,\nsupple, gnarled stem and branches. The wood of the vine is fit for\nnothing but to be cast into the fire, and, therefore, a fruitless vine\ntakes rank far beneath a forest-tree; thus an apostate and corrupt\nChurch is a viler thing than the ordinary secular governments of the\nworld. Such obviously and notoriously is ecclesiastical Rome to-day.\n\n3. Ps. lxxx. 8-15: \"Thou hast brought a vine out of Egypt; thou hast\ncast out the heathen, and planted it. Thou preparedst room before it,\nand didst cause it to take deep root, and it filled the land. The hills\nwere covered with the shadow of it, and the boughs thereof were like the\ngoodly cedars. She sent out her boughs unto the sea, and her branches\nunto the river. Why hast thou then broken down her hedges, so that all\nthey which pass by the way do pluck her? The boar out of the wood doth\nwaste it, and the wild beast of the field doth devour it. Return, we\nbeseech thee, O God of hosts: look down from heaven, and behold, and\nvisit this vine; and the vineyard which thy right hand hath planted, and\nthe branch that thou madest strong for thyself.\"\n\nAgain Israel is represented as a vine; but in this case the features\nbrought into prominence are its former flourishing condition and great\nextent compared with its present desolation. By the removal of the\nprotecting fence, the wild beasts of the forest were permitted to\ntrample at will on its feeble and lowly boughs. The picture sets forth\nthe ruin of Jerusalem through the withdrawal of God's protecting hand,\nand the consequent irruption of hostile nations.\n\nIn all these cases the vine, or aggregate of vines, represents the\nprivileged persons who constituted the kingdom of Israel or Church of\nGod, as it then existed in the world. In the first example, the\n_wickedness_ of Israel is represented by the bitterness of the fruit\nwhich the vineyard produced; in the second, the _unprofitableness_ of\nIsrael is represented by the want of fruit on the vine; and in the\nthird, the _sufferings_ of Israel are represented by the inroads of the\nwild beasts upon the wide spread, tender, unprotected vine.\n\nOur parable differs from all three as to the point where its lesson\nlies. It is not a case in which a favoured vineyard produces bad fruit;\nit is not a case in which a vine bears no fruit; it is not a case in\nwhich a vine that might otherwise have been fruitful is trampled down by\nwild beasts for want of a fence. It is a case in which, after the\nvineyard has brought forth its fruit, the cultivators who have charge\nrefuse to render to the owner the portion of the produce which is his\ndue. The difference is important: it determines clearly the main line in\nwhich the interpretation of the parable should proceed.\n\nBy the vineyard with all its privileges, I understand the ordinances of\nIsrael as appointed by God, and the people of Israel in as far as they\nwere necessarily passive in the hands of their priests and rulers. The\nhusbandmen manifestly represent the leaders, who at various periods had\nusurped a lordship over God's heritage. Extraordinary ambassadors were\nsent from time to time in the owner's name, to demand the stipulated\ntribute,--prophets such as Elijah, Elisha, Isaiah, Jeremiah, and\nEzekiel, men not of the number, or in the confidence of the ordinary\nrulers, but specially commissioned by the Supreme, to approach them with\nreproof and instruction. The established authorities of the nation,\nexercising their office for their own pleasure or profit, rejected the\ncounsel and assaulted the persons of the messengers. Some were\nimprisoned, some driven into exile, and some put to death. Successive\nembassies, sent in successive ages, met with similar treatment, until,\nin the fulness of time, Christ the Son became the messenger of the\ncovenant. He came unto his own, and his own received him not. Already\nthose Jewish rulers who listened to this parable, were laying their\nplans to cast this greatest prophet out of the city, and to crucify\nhim.\n\nThe owner of the vineyard said, \"They will reverence my son.\" The\nexpression is natural and appropriate in the lips of a human proprietor;\nbut obviously when it represents the purpose of God, it means only that\nsuch reverence was claimed, and such reverence was due. The omniscient\nknew beforehand that the Jewish rulers would not yield even to this last\nand tenderest appeal. The expectation of the husbandmen that when they\nshould have murdered the heir, the property should become their own,\ndoes not point to any definite, well considered plan by which the wicked\nexpect to gain a permanent portion by rejecting the Gospel; it indicates\nmerely the blunt determination of the carnal mind to grasp and enjoy\nGod's bounties while it despises and rejects his grace. To crucify\nChrist by the hands of the Romans, or to crucify him afresh through\nunbelief, was and is a short-sighted policy.\n\nWhen the Lord of the vineyard cometh he will destroy those wicked men,\nand will let out the vineyard unto others. The interpretation of this\nturning-point is given to the Jewish rulers in full, and without\nconcealment. \"The kingdom of God shall be taken from you and given to a\nnation bringing forth the fruits thereof\" (ver. 43). The polity of the\nJews was crushed by the Romans, and the charge of the Church fell into\nother hands. The \"nation\" that has succeeded to the kingdom is\nconstituted on a different principle, and held together by different\nbonds. It is not after the flesh, but after the spirit that citizenship\nis obtained in the Christian commonwealth; henceforth, the partakers of\nAbraham's faith are the seed of Abraham to whom the covenant of promise\npertains. The worship and ordinances of God's house were transferred to\nthe apostles and their followers, neither as Jews nor as Gentiles, but\nas the disciples of Christ. A new nation ([Greek: ethnos]) is\nconstituted of those who are born again; of those the kingdom consists,\nand under their charge its affairs will be carried on until the Lord\ncome again.\n\nThe personal and permanent application of the lesson is obvious.\n\nA rich vineyard, planted and fenced to our hand, has been let out to us\nby the Maker and Owner of the world. Civil and religious liberty, the\nBible and the Sabbath, the Church and its ministry, have been provided\nand preserved for us by our Father's care. We are permitted to enjoy all\nfor our own benefit, under deduction of a tribute to the Giver. Our\nofferings cannot directly reach him, but he has made them payable to the\npoor.\n\nWhen Christ the messenger of the covenant stands at the door and knocks,\na worldly heart within refuses to admit him. The carnal mind is enmity\nagainst God, and therefore resists the claim which the Mediator bears:\nits language is, \"We will not have this man to reign over us.\"\n\nThe lesson bears also upon the gradual corruption of the Christian\nChurch in the first centuries, and the absolute apostasy of the lordly\nhierarchy at Rome. At the Reformation the kingdom was in part taken from\nthat faithless priesthood; but they retain vast multitudes in bondage\nstill. The Lord reigneth; and the time will come when every yoke shall\nbe broken, and the Church set free to serve the Lord alone. The vineyard\nwill one day be delivered from the tyranny of usurping tenants, and its\nfruit fully rendered to its rightful Lord.\n\nAh, my country, I dread the punishment of thy unfaithfulness! The same\nrighteous God, who cast out the Jews and admitted the Gentiles, reigneth\nstill. On the same principle he has taken the kingdom from Asia Minor\nand Greece, and given it to this island of the sea. Alas, if we render\nnot to him the fruits of his vineyard, he may take our privileges in\njudgment away, and give them to another nation, perhaps to\nItaly--emancipated, regenerated Italy (Rom. xi. 19).\n\n * * * * *\n\nThis parable is remarkable for the codicil taken from the Old Testament\nand attached to it by the Lord on the spot and at the moment. The\npicture of the tenant vine-dressers usurping possession--driving off the\nowner's servants and slaying his son, although transparent in its\nmeaning and pungent in its reproof, does not contain all that the Lord\nthen desired to address to the Pharisees. It pleased him to employ that\nsimilitude as far as it reached; but when its line had all run out, he\nseized another line that lay ready in the Scriptures to his hand, and\nattached it to the first, that by the union of the two he might make the\nreproof complete. The first type taken from human affairs is not broad\nenough to represent the kingdom of God at a crisis of its conflict. The\nson whom the proprietor sends on an embassy to the vine-dressers, points\nto Christ sent by the Father to his own Israel. The terrestrial fact\nserves to show that the son was put to death by the rebels in\npossession, but there its power is exhausted; it has no means of\nexhibiting the other side of the scene,--that this son rose from the\ndead, and now reigns over all. The parable, when it came to its natural\nconclusion, left the lesson which it had begun to teach abruptly broken\noff in the midst,--left a glory of the Lord unrevealed, and a terror to\nwicked men unspoken. That he might proclaim the whole truth, and leave\nhis unrepenting hearers without excuse, the Lord proceeded then and\nthere to demand of them, \"Did ye never read in the Scriptures, The\nstone which the builders rejected, the same is become the head of the\ncorner?\"\n\nThe parable of the husbandmen has already shown that the Son was\nrejected by the favoured people to whom he was sent; and this grand text\nfrom the Old Testament Scriptures, which the Scribes well knew, shows\nfurther that he whom the official but false builders rejected and cast\ndown, was accepted and raised up by God. Whom they refused, dishonoured,\nand slew, him God raised up and made King upon his holy hill of\nZion.[41] It is a dreadful discovery for those husbandmen to make, that\nthe Son whom they murdered lives, and has become their Lord. Nothing is\nmore appalling to criminals than to be confronted with their\nvictim,--living and reigning. Hence the agony of Joseph's faithless\nbrothers when they discovered that Joseph was their judge. Herod\nbeheaded the Baptist in the intemperate excitement of a licentious\nfeast, that he might keep before his nobles the word which he had rashly\npledged to a fair, false woman: but Herod was not done with John when\nJohn's body, tenderly buried by his disciples, lay silent in the grave.\nMany times by night and day the king saw that gory head again lying on\nthe charger--it would not go out of his sight. The creaking of a door,\nor the sighing of the wind among the trees, seemed the footfall of the\nBaptist stalking forth to reprove him. When an attendant reported to\nHerod the miracles of Christ, reporting at the same time that some took\nJesus of Nazareth for Elias, and some for another prophet, he had his\nown opinion on the point; he knew better, and in a whisper, with pale\nface, and starting eye-balls, and trembling limbs, he said to his\ninformant,--\"It is John the Baptist whom I beheaded\" (Mark vi. 14).\n\n [41] What wise one of this world,--what human reason would have\n conceived, under the cross, that this man suspended between two\n malefactors, and despised by all, would one day receive the worship\n of the whole world? This is the Lord's doing, and it is marvellous\n in our eyes.--_Heubner in Lange_.\n\nIt is a fearful thing for his murderers to fall into the hands of this\n_living God_. It is a fearful thing to see him whom you have crucified\nafresh coming in the clouds to judge the world in righteousness.\n\nFurther expanding this conception regarding the chief corner stone, the\nLord transfers from another scripture (Isa. viii. 14, 15), the prophecy\nspoken of old on this very point,--\"And whosoever shall fall on this\nstone shall be broken; but on whomsoever it shall fall, it will grind\nhim to powder.\" We seem to mark here a change in the character of Jesus.\nSterner and more stern he becomes, as in his prophetic office he\napproaches the subject of his own kingly judgment. His eyes pierce these\nhypocrites, and they quail before him. As his witnessing approaches its\nclose, he draws the two-edged sword from its sheath and holds it before\nthe time over the naked heads of his enemies, if so be they may even yet\nfear and sin not. For his own holy purposes he lays aside for a moment\nhis gentleness, and appears as the Lion of the tribe of Judah. The last\ndays of the Mediator's ministry on earth are now running: it must now be\ndecided whether his own will receive or reject him. The leaders of\nIsrael stood before him, with all their crooked purposes revealed to his\neye; the plot was ripening to take his life away. Laying aside the style\nof a meek Beseecher, he assumes the aspect of a just Avenger; already we\nseem to see the wrath of the Lamb gathering on his brow. Kiss the Son,\nlest he be angry; as yet, his wrath is kindled but a little; in that\nday, it will burn like fire. Why has it been kindled a little before the\ntime? Mercy has lighted this premonitory fire. This terror of the Lord,\nlike all the others that he sends in the day of salvation, is employed\nas the means of persuading men. He not only receives all who come at his\ninvitation, but sends out foreshadowings of judgment to drive from their\nunbelief those who refuse to yield to gentler means. Many of the\nforgiven, on earth and in heaven, are ready to tell that after they had\nlong resisted his tender invitations, they were overcome at last by\ngracious terrors launched against them by a loving Saviour.\n\nThe Jews were familiar with these ideas connected with the corner stone.\nThe prophecy in the aspect of a promise they readily understood, but\nhere the other and opposite side of it also is displayed.\n\nThe picture--for it is by itself a short parable--represents a great\nstone at rest. In Alpine valleys, close by the root of rent, rugged,\nprecipitous mountains, you may often see a rock of vast dimensions lying\non the plain. In magnitude, it is itself a little hill; and yet it is\nonly a stone that has fallen from the neighbouring mountain. Suppose a\nband of living men should rush with all their might against that stone,\nthey would be broken and it would not be moved. If they retire and\nrepeat the onset, the rock lies still in majestic repose, while their\nfeeble limbs are mangled on its sides, and their life-blood sinks into\nthe soil at its base.\n\nThe next part of the conception, which the imagination can easily form\nat will, is precisely the reverse of the first. The rock rises now into\nmid-heaven, hovers over the assailants for a while, and then falls upon\ntheir heads. Here, as in the other case, the human adversaries of this\nrock are destroyed, but their destruction is wholly different in degree\nand kind. In the first case, they were broken; in the second, they are\ngrinded to powder.[42] The words in the original are very specific, and\nthe translation is remarkably accurate. The term employed to indicate\nthe injury which men inflict upon themselves when they resist the\nRedeemer in the day of grace, conveys the idea of the crushing which\ntakes place when a man strikes swiftly with all his force against a\ngreat immoveable rock; the term which indicates the overwhelming of\nChrist's enemies by his own power put forth in the day of judgment,\nconveys the idea of the crushing which takes place when a great rock\nfalls from a height upon a living man. The one calamity is great in\nproportion to the weight and impetus of a man; the other calamity is\ngreat in proportion to the weight and impetus of a falling rock. Both\nthe rejection of Christ by the unbelieving in the time of grace, and the\nrejection of the unbelieving by Christ when he comes for judgment, are\nbruisings; but the second is to the first, as the power of a great rock\nis to the power of a man. The first bruising, caused by a man's\nunbelieving opposition to Christ under the Gospel, may be cured; but the\ngrinding accomplished by the wrath of the Judge when the day of grace is\ndone can never be healed. There remaineth no more sacrifice for sin.\n\n [42] The expression is chosen with reference to the mysterious stone\n in Daniel ii. 34, 35, which grinds to powder the image of the\n monarchies; that is, to Christ who unfolds his life in the kingdom\n of God and grinds the kingdom of this world to powder.--_Lange_.\n\nThere are only two ways. This stone lies across our path from edge to\nedge. It is not possible to be neutral, so as to be neither for Christ\nnor against him: we must either accept or reject the Son of God. In the\nprophecy to which the text refers (Isa. viii. 14, 15,) it is intimated\nthat \"He shall be for a sanctuary, but for a stone of stumbling.\" The\nmighty one stands on our life path, and we cannot pass without coming\ninto contact with him. If we flee to him for refuge, he is the sanctuary\nin which we shall be safe; if we fall on him, in a vain effort to\nescape, we shall stumble, and fall, and perish.\n\nAs a general rule, it is in the present life that he bears the weight of\nsinners striking against him; and in the life to come that those who\nrejected him here, must bear the weight of his judgment.\n\nBut some do not relish this doctrine; those who heard it directly from\nthe lips of the Lord resented it keenly, and many resent it still when\nit is taught from the Scriptures. In our day men do not often expressly\nfind fault with the teaching of Jesus as it is recorded by the\nEvangelists: they prefer to blame the ministers who take up and echo\ntheir Master's words. People fondly grasp one side of God's revealed\ncharacter and use it as a veil to hide the other from themselves. The\ntenderness of God our Father is employed to blot out from view the wrath\nof God our righteous Judge. Since the fathers fell asleep, all things\ncontinue as they were; where, therefore, is the promise of his coming?\n\nA great rock is lying on the plain: the cultivators have ploughed and\nthe cattle have grazed round it since the flood. Standing beside it, and\nreverting to its possible history, you give scope to your imagination\nand ask, What if it had fallen, or should yet fall on me? The bare\nconception makes you shudder: you are fain to shake off the reverie and\ncompose yourself by the reflection that the rock, fixed to the spot by\nthe laws of nature, cannot move to harm you.\n\nBut the Judge of the quick and the dead, though likened to a stone as to\ncrushing power, is not like a stone in its silent still inertia. He\nliveth and abideth for ever. He bears now,--has borne long. The Almighty\nGod does not move himself to hurt those who are his enemies, any more\nthan the rock which has slept half buried in the valley many thousand\nyears. But he will not thus bear for ever: he will come to judge the\nworld. He will come as the lightning comes: then blessed will all be who\nshall have put their trust in him, while he waited, through the Gospel,\nto be gracious. \"When the Son of man cometh\" the second time, \"shall he\nfind faith on the earth?\" He will then _find_ only the faith which his\nfirst coming generated; for his second coming _creates_ no new faith.\nThen, it is not \"believe in the Lord Jesus Christ and thou shalt be\nsaved;\" but \"a fearful looking for of judgment.\"\n\n\n\n\nXII.\n\nTHE ROYAL MARRIAGE FEAST.\n\n\nPART I.--THE WEDDING GUESTS.\n\n\"And Jesus answered, and spake unto them again by parables, and said,\n The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a\n marriage for his son, and sent forth his servants to call them that\n were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come. Again, he sent\n forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I\n have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all\n things are ready: come unto the marriage. But they made light of it,\n and went their ways, out to his farm, another to his merchandise:\n and the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully,\n and slew them. But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he\n sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up\n their city. Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but\n they which were bidden were not worthy. Go ye therefore into the\n highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage. So\n those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together\n all, as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was\n furnished with guests. And when the king came in to see the guests,\n he saw there a man which had not on a wedding-garment: And he saith\n unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a\n wedding-garment? And he was speechless. Then said the king to the\n servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him\n into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.\n For many are called, but few are chosen.\"--MATT. xxii. 1-14.\n\nThis parable stands connected both historically and logically with the\ntwo which immediately precede it: especially between the guests here\ninvited to the feast and the husbandmen to whom the vineyard was\nentrusted, there is a close resemblance in privileges enjoyed, in\nperversity manifested, and in judgment incurred. Yet the lessons, though\nin some respects parallel, are to a great extent distinct; and though\nboth traverse partially the same ground, the latter carries the\nargument some steps further forward than the former parable.\n\nA question has arisen and been largely canvassed, on the relation\nbetween the parable and one[43] recorded in Luke xiv. 16-24 regarding a\ncertain man who made a great supper and bade many. Around this subject\nmuch useless and some mischievous debate has accumulated. The criticism\nwhich assumes that only one discourse on the subject was spoken by\nJesus, and that consequently two reports of it differing from each\nother, cannot be both correct, is impertinent and trifling. It is a\npedantic literalism contrary to experience and to common sense. It rests\nupon the assumption that a public Teacher who taught the common people\ndaily, on the margin of the lake and in private dwellings, in the Temple\nat Jerusalem and in the sequestered villages around, never repeated with\nvariations in one place the substance of a lesson which he had given in\nanother. Even in the immense profusion of nature every plant is not in\nall its features different from all others; two individuals or species\nare found in some respects the same and in some respects different. The\ntwo walk together as far as they are going the same way, and separate\nwhen each approaches his own peculiar and specific terminus. This\ncombination of identity and difference pervades creation; and you may\nobserve the same characteristics in the scheme of Providence. Two men\nduring a portion of their life-course suffer the same troubles and taste\nthe same joys; but at a certain point in their progress their paths\ndiverge, and they never meet again in a common experience. Look even to\nthe history of any citizen whose life is public, and you will find that\nby speech, or writing, or act, he prosecutes his objects by a mixture\nof sameness and diversity. His address in the high court of the nation,\nand his address to his rustic constituents in a distant province, will\nbe found in some features similar and in some different: yet the address\nin either case will be found an independent and consistent whole,\ncorresponding to the character of the speaker and the circumstances of\nhis audience.\n\n [43] No. XXI. of this series.\n\nThis \"Teacher sent from God\" was wont in later lessons to walk sometimes\nover his own former footsteps, as far as that track best suited his\npurpose, and to diverge into a new path at the point where a diversity\nin the circumstances demanded a variety in the treatment. This is the\nmethod followed both in nature and revelation,--the method both of God\nand of men.\n\n\"A certain king made a marriage for his son,\" the two important features\nhere are the royal state of the father, and the specific designation of\nthe supper as the nuptial feast of his son. It may be quite true, as\nsome critics say, that because the greatest feasts were usually\nconnected with marriages, the epithet \"marriage\" was sometimes applied\nto any sumptuous banquet; if in the Scriptures or elsewhere we should\nfind a banquet denominated a marriage feast, while from the\ncircumstances it appeared that no marriage had taken place, we should\nexperience no difficulty in explaining the apparent incongruity. But in\nthis case there is no reason for adopting the exceptional, and the\nstrongest reason for retaining what is confessedly the ordinary and\nnatural signification of the term. The conception of the Redeemer as the\nbridegroom, and his redeemed people as the bride, lies too deep in\nScripture and protrudes too frequently from its surface to leave any\ndoubt concerning the allusion in the parable. The feast, introduced into\nthe story for the sake of its spiritual significance, is the marriage\nsupper of the king's son.\n\nThe king sent forth his servants, not on this occasion to give the first\ninvitation, but to warn those who had been previously invited that the\ntime had come, and the preparations been completed. It is obviously\nassumed, and analogies are not wanting to justify the assumption, that\nthose whom the king desired to honour were informed of that desire\nbefore the day of the feast, and that another message was sent to each,\nafter everything was ready, requesting his immediate attendance in the\npalace of the king. This feature of the transaction is not explained or\ndefended in the narrative; it is silently taken for granted as at least\nsufficiently common to be well understood.[44]\n\n [44] I have witnessed a process closely analogous, in a small\n detached island of the Shetland group in which the message sent was\n an invitation, not figurative but literal, to come and hear the word\n of the kingdom. It had been previously intimated to the islanders\n that a minister of the Gospel from the south would preach to them on\n the occasion of his visit to the neighbouring mainland, as the\n largest island of the group is styled. When the minister and his\n friends succeeded at length in crossing the Channel, several\n children were dispatched as messengers in different directions to\n inform the people that public worship would immediately begin. In a\n very short time a congregation was assembled consisting of the whole\n population of the island.\n\nThis peculiarity of the invitation is important in connection with the\nseverity of the punishment which was subsequently inflicted on the\nrecusants. They did not repudiate the invitation when it was first\naddressed to them. By retaining it, and enjoying the advantage of being\naccounted the king's guests during the interval, they pledged themselves\nto attend the marriage festival, and honour their sovereign by their\npresence. Their abrupt refusal at the eleventh hour, after all was ready\nto receive them, partook of the nature both of breach of engagement and\ndisloyalty. \"They would not come.\"\n\nA second message was sent, more specific and more urgent: but the men\nmet the importunate kindness of the king with contemptuous mockery:\n\"they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his farm, another to\nhis merchandise.\" A portion of them carried their opposition beyond\nsupercilious neglect into blood-thirsty enmity; \"the remnant took his\nservants and entreated them spitefully and slew them.\"\n\n\"But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his\narmies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city.\" As far\nas appears from the narrative, those who affronted the king by neglect,\nand those who put his messengers to death, received the same punishment.\nAlthough the cruelty perpetrated by some of the conspirators was an\naggravation of their guilt, the crime for which they suffered was one of\nwhich all alike were guilty,--the crime of despising the king's\ninvitation, and pouring contempt upon his authority.\n\nThe transaction may have had great political significance. It was a\ncombination among the aristocracy to thwart the king and dictate to him\na line of policy. They meant by their absence in mass to leave him\nwithout support, that he might be compelled to court them on their own\nterms. In such a case only two alternatives are open to the supreme\nmagistrate: he must either submit to the aristocracy and buy them back\nat their own price, or supersede them by a bold appeal to the common\npeople. Suppose that in this country the Lords should by compact refuse\nto attend Parliament, for the express purpose of extorting concessions\nin favour of themselves by bringing the process of legislation to a\nstand: the sovereign, in that case, must either submit to the terms of\nthe refractory nobles, or by prerogative create a new peerage from the\nplebean ranks. Such, on a minute scale and in a simple form, was the\ncourse adopted by the king in this ancient oriental drama.\n\nHe destroyed their city: it was the king's own city, but he loathed it\nbecause of the rebellion of its inhabitants. He took no pleasure in its\nstreets and palaces when their moral glory had departed. The loss of so\nmuch property was a small loss; the gain for the discipline of unborn\ngenerations was unspeakably great. The overthrow of the city in which\nthe rebels dwelt would make children's children shudder at the thought\nof apostasy. The sacrifice of a material interest in order to afford\nsanction to moral laws is the highest wisdom of government, both human\nand divine. This principle was adopted on the largest scale after the\nfirst rebellion, when the earth was cursed for man's sake.\n\nThe king took his servants into his counsel. They had suffered in his\ncause, and he will not conceal from them what he is about to do. \"Go ye\ntherefore into the highways,\"--the public places of resort, as well the\ncity's streets as the roads that traverse the country,--\"and as many as\nye shall find, bid to the marriage.\" In the first instance the\ninvitation was limited to the class who had a prescriptive right to\nappear at court; when these by their perversity had excluded themselves,\nthe king in his sovereignty extended the invitation generally to the\ncommon people,--to persons who previously possessed no right of\nadmission, but who obtained the right then and there by the free act of\nthe sovereign.\n\nThe servants did as they were instructed. They understood and executed\ntheir commission according to its letter: they brought in \"bad and\ngood.\" As they were not instructed to institute an inquiry into the\ncharacter or social position of the persons whom they should invite,\nthey made no distinction; they swept the streets to fill the royal\nhalls.\n\nAt this point the parable becomes logically complete, and its lesson may\nbe exhibited apart from the addition regarding the wedding garment which\nimmediately follows. It will be more convenient, accordingly, to\nprosecute the exposition of the earlier portion by itself, and leave the\nlatter portion to be treated afterwards as substantially a separate\nlesson.\n\nThe parable, as far as we have hitherto read it, repeats and extends the\nwarnings previously given regarding the spiritual privileges which the\nJews enjoyed and abused, the judgments which had been and still would be\npoured out upon the nation, and the successful proclamation of the\nGospel to the Gentiles, when the natural seed of Abraham should have in\nrebellious unbelief rejected the offers of their Lord.\n\nThe marriage festival made by the king in honour of his son, points\nmanifestly to redemption completed in the incarnation, ministry, death,\nand resurrection of Christ. Banquets had before this period been\nprovided by the king, and enjoyed by the favoured circle of his guests;\nmuch advantage was possessed by the Jews over the Gentiles in every way,\nbut especially in that to them were committed the oracles of God. But\nthe feast depicted in this parable was the last and best; it was the way\nof salvation in its completed state. As the king made known his\nintention before it was carried into effect, and intimated to the guests\nthat they would be summoned as soon as the preparations were complete;\nso a period of preparation, and promise, and expectation intervened\nbetween the incarnation and the sacrifice of Christ. To the Jewish\ncommonwealth the promise was made in the birth of the babe at Bethlehem,\nand they were invited to be upon the watch for the moment when the\nkingdom should come in its power.\n\nWhen the fulness of time had come, the Lord himself undertaking the work\nas well as assuming the form of a servant, carried to the chosen people\nthe message, \"Come, for all things are now ready.\" His immediate\nfollowers and their successors repeated and pressed the invitation. It\nis worthy of notice that the servants, when they went out with the\ncommission of the king, did not announce the feast as a new thing, then\nfor the first time made known; they spoke of it as that which was\npromised before, and actually offered them; they summoned those who had\npreviously been fully informed that the feast was provided for their\nuse. These favoured but unthankful people were not taken at their word;\nafter the first refusal, another and more urgent invitation is sent. The\nsuccessive reiterated mission of the servants to the class who were\noriginally invited, may be understood to point to the ministry of the\nLord and the seventy until the time of the crucifixion, and the second\nmission of the apostles after the Pentecost, and under the ministration\nof the spirit. Both invitations were neglected and rejected by the\npeople to whom they were sent; Christ came unto his own, and his own\nreceived him not.\n\nSignificant are the differences in the treatment which the message and\nthe messengers received from different classes within the privileged\ncircle of the first invited. We learn here the solemn lesson that though\nthere is much diversity in the degrees of aggravation with which men\naccompany their rejection of the Saviour, all who do not receive him\nperish in the same condemnation. At first no distinction is made\nbetween class and class of unbelievers; of all, and of all alike it is\nrecorded, \"they would not come.\" But when the offer became more pressing\nand more searching, a difference began to appear, not as yet the\ndifference between the believing and the unbelieving, but a difference\nin the manner of refusing, and in the degrees of courage or of cowardice\nthat accompanied the act. The greater number treated the message\nlightly, and preferred their own business to the life eternal which was\noffered to them in Christ; while a portion, not content with spurning\naway the offer, persecuted to the death the ambassadors who bore it. The\nfault of those who are first mentioned takes the form of indolent,\nfrivolous neglect, rather than of active opposition. They were occupied\nwith many other things, and therefore could not attend to this one; they\nwere bent on prosecuting their own gains, and therefore set no value on\nGod's favour.[45]\n\n [45] A melancholy interest adheres to the contrast between man's\n heedlessness of God as expressed in this parable, [Greek:\n amelesantes], made light of it, did not care for it; and God's\n regard for men as expressed in 1 Peter v. 7, [Greek: auto melei peri\n humon], he careth for you.\n\nThese two, ungodliness and worldliness, are always found in company; but\nit is sometimes difficult to determine which of the two goes first, and\ndraws the other after it. You seldom meet a man who neglects this great\nsalvation, and neglects also the gains and the pleasures of life. Those\nwho forget God follow hard after another lord, although they may be\nunable to detect or unwilling to confess their own idolatry. No man can\nserve two masters; but every man practically serves one. It may not,\nhowever, be easy in any given case to discover whether a man pursues\nsome particular pleasure because he is determined to abide far from\nChrist, or is kept far from Christ because his heart is pre-engaged to\nsome worldly lust. In the case which the parable exhibits, this point\nhas not been expressly determined. When the second and more urgent\nmessage arrived, demanding their immediate attendance on the king at the\nmarriage of his son, those men departed in an opposite direction, each\nto his own business; but it remains an open question whether their\nhearts were first so glued to the farm and the merchandise, that they\ncould not be persuaded to take from these engrossing pursuits as much\ntime as would suffice to attend upon their sovereign; or whether there\nwas first a determination to resist the sovereign's call, and that they\nthen introduced the business as an excuse, and fled to it as a welcome\noccupation.\n\nIt may have been either or both; but in the circumstances I think it was\nprimarily the latter of the two. In the hearts of those men lay a deep\ndesign against the authority of the king; but it would have involved\nserious risk to have flatly refused his reiterated invitation. They had\nactually incurred a grave responsibility, and they were disposed to\nlighten it somewhat by interposing a plausible excuse. Troubled,\nmoreover, by the gravity of their step they were fain to seek refuge\nfrom reflection by plunging into the ordinary avocations of life. I\nthink it was not an excessive zeal for agriculture and trade that really\nprevented them from attending on the king that day; but a consciousness\nof having conclusively offended the king that drove them for relief into\nagriculture and trade. On the spiritual side of the parable, in like\nmanner, the excessive devotion to business which occupies some men, and\nleaves not a shred either of their hearts or lives for Christ, may be in\nmany cases not a primary affection, but the secondary result of another\nand deeper passion. When Christ has often knocked at the door, and the\ninhabitant soul within has as often refused to open, there is no longer\npeace in the dwelling that has been barred against its Lord. He who has\nrejected the merciful offers of a merciful God, does not afterwards sit\nat ease; every sound that in moments of solitude falls upon his ear,\nseems the footstep of an angry God, returning to inflict deserved\npunishment. When one has distinctly heard the Saviour's call, and\ndeliberately refused to comply with it, he thenceforth experiences a\ncraving for company and employment. He cannot endure silence or\nsolitude. When he stands still, he seems to hear the throbbings of his\nown conscience terrible as the ticking of the clock in the chamber of\ndeath. To be alone is unendurable, because it is to be with God. To\nescape from this fiery furnace, he hastens to plough in his field or\nsell in his shop. In such a case, the worldliness, even when it runs to\nthe greatest excess, is not the primary passion, but a secondary\nrefuge,--the trees of the garden among which the fallen would fain hide\nfrom the Lord God.\n\nBut in some cases the disease may first approach by the other side: love\nof the world may be the earlier matured and more imperious passion. The\nfarm and the merchandise may become the soul's first and fondest love;\nand that love possessing all the soul's faculties, may cast or keep out\nChrist and his redemption. If you suppose those invited guests to have\nbeen previously wedded to the idolatry of covetousness, worshipping gain\nin secret as their god, you can easily comprehend how they should grudge\na day taken from traffic in order to honour their king; so in the\ninterpretation of the parable, when riches or pleasures increase, and\nthe possessor sets his heart upon them, he has already obtained his\nportion, and will not cast it away for Christ; he will mock the\nmessengers who bring the distasteful proposal.\n\nAmong the invited guests, however, there is another class who treat the\nking's servants in another way. The first class made light of the\nmessage; the second murdered the messengers. It is intimated that while\nthe bulk of those to whom the Gospel was preached, neglected the offer\nand busied themselves with earthly gains, some rose against the\npreachers and persecuted them unto the death. These last, however, seem\nto have been in point of numbers an inconsiderable minority,--\"the\nremnant entreated them spitefully and slew them.\"\n\nThere were persecutors in the earliest days of the Gospel, and there\nhave been persecutors in every generation since. The Pharisees plotted\nthat they might put Jesus to death: Saul of Tarsus at a later date was\ntheir willing tool in a desperate effort to quench the life of the\ninfant Church in the blood of its members. After he was turned, and the\nmighty stream of his life compelled to flow like a river of water in the\nopposite direction, a constant succession of cruel men has been kept up\nin this restless, sin-stained world, whose life-work is to crucify\nChrist in his members. The unchanged, unrepenting hierarchy of Rome,\nsuccessor not of Peter the apostle, but of Saul the persecutor, does yet\nall that it can and dare to treat spitefully and slay those servants of\nthe king who invite them and the world to the marriage-supper of the\nKing's Son.\n\nBut the crucifiers of Christ are not all shedders of human blood. Deadly\nenmity to the truth and its publishers may be manifested where stakes\nand fagots are out of fashion and inconvenient. The soul of the\npersecution which the parable represents lies in entreating spitefully\nthe king's messengers, because they loathed the invitation, and were\nirritated by the urgency wherewith the servants, remembering their\nsovereign's command, felt themselves constrained to press it on every\nman they met. In our own day, it does not require extraordinary sagacity\nto perceive the same spirit in the relish and readiness with which\ncertain classes catch up a cry against any one who, not ashamed of the\nGospel of Christ, has discharged his commission in full.\n\nBut when you add together both classes of open antagonists--those who\nshed the blood of Christians, and those who merely calumniate them, you\nhave only a very small company before you. On the one side I see a\nlittle flock,--those who meekly receive Christ; on the other and\nopposite side I see also a little flock,--those who loudly proclaim by\nword and deed, \"We will not have this man to reign over us:\" but there\nis a multitude, whom no man can number, in the midst, who neither accept\nthe king's message nor persecute the servants of the king. The character\nof the company on either extreme is distinctly marked, and easily seen.\nThose have manifestly closed with Christ's offer, and are accepted\nthrough faith; these, on the other hand, have considered the offer, and\nproved their rejection of it by killing its bearers. But the multitude\nin the middle have not taken a decisive part; they have remained\napparently in a state of equilibrium. As yet they have not indeed\nactually and personally closed with the Redeemer as their own; but\nneither on the other hand have they determined and proclaimed that they\nwill not accept him. They have not moved to either side to take a\ndecisive part for or against the Lord.[46] This feature of their\ncondition and their history helps to deceive and so to destroy them. If\nthe condition of the world and the law of God were such that all would\nbe safe in the great day who did not blaspheme Christ's name, and mock\nhis Gospel, and put to death his ministers, this multitude in the middle\nmight remain where they are at ease. But this is not the state of the\ncase; life and death for us depend on our knowing and not mistaking the\nstate of the case here.\n\n [46] These three different methods of treating the message were all\n exhibited simultaneously at Athens when Paul preached there: \"Some\n mocked, others said, We will hear thee again of this matter....\n Howbeit, certain men clave unto him and believed\" (Acts\n xvii. 32-34).\n\nTo all the multitude in the middle the word of a merciful and faithful\nGod proclaims, In order to be saved, it is necessary that you should\narise, and turn to the right hand, and join the company there who have\ngladly welcomed the Son of God as their Saviour; but, correspondingly,\nin order to be lost, it is not necessary that you should arise from your\nstate of indifference, and join the scoffer's ranks. To be saved you\nmust flee to the refuge; but to be lost, it is enough that you remain\nwhere you are.\n\nIn the Theocracy, the Hebrew nation were the hereditary nobles. It is\nsaid of them in the Scriptures that they are a people near unto God\n(Ps. cxlviii. 14). They enjoyed a right of entry into the king's presence.\nHaving, in virtue of their birth-right, a perennial invitation to the\nroyal festivals, they needed only a message as a matter of course,\ndemanding their presence when the feast was prepared. The Gospel of\ngrace complete in Christ is obviously the feast to which the house of\nIsrael were in the fulness of time specially summoned. When they refused\nto come to the banquet, the Provider was displeased, but not put about:\nthe Omniscient knows his way. He never permits his purposes to be\nthwarted: He makes the wrath of man to praise himself, and the remainder\nof that wrath he restrains.\n\nIn the beginning of human life and of God's moral government on earth,\nthe enemy seemed to triumph. Creation was thrown out of joint; the being\nmade in God's image was defiled by sin. But although the garden of Eden\nwas emptied, God was not left without a witness in the world: sin\nabounded, but grace did much more abound. In like manner, at a later\nstage of the divine administration when the favoured vine became barren,\nanother was brought out of Egypt and planted in its stead. When Israel\nrejected Christ, God rejected Israel, and called another people to be\nhis own. \"We have Abraham to our father,\" said the Jewish leaders to the\nBaptist when his lessons began to gall them, \"We have Abraham to our\nfather,\" meaning thereby to intimate that they alone were the chosen\npeople, and that failing them God would have no children on the earth.\nHow did John answer this boast? \"Think not to say within yourselves, We\nhave Abraham to our father; for I say unto you that God is able of these\nstones to raise up children unto Abraham\" (Matt. iii. 9, 10).\n\nAlthough those privileged Hebrews rejected him, Christ did not remain a\nking without subjects, a shepherd without a flock. In the exercise of\nthe same sovereignty through which he chose Abraham at first, he passed\nover Abraham's degenerate posterity and called another family. This\nfamily was Abraham's seed, not by natural generation, but in the\nregeneration through faith. Of these stones he raised up children to\nAbraham, when the natural children of the family had through unbelief\nshut themselves out. \"Go to the highways:\" Christ commanded his\napostles to begin at Jerusalem indeed, but he did not enjoin,--did not\npermit them to continue holding out their hands to a disobedient and\ngainsaying people; the alternative was embodied in their commission, If\nthe Jews do not receive you, go to the Gentiles.\n\nIt becomes us to stand in awe before these deep things of God: their\nfall became our rising. In the channel through which a running stream is\ndirected upon a mill wheel the same turning of a valve that shuts the\nwater out of one course throws it into another, that had previously been\ndry; thus the Jews by rejecting the counsel of God shut themselves out,\nand at the same moment opened a way whereby mercy might flow to us who\nwere afar off.\n\nThe servants went out and did as they were bidden. Peter went to the\nhouse of Cornelius, and in that lane of the world's great city found a\nwhole household willing to follow him to the feast his royal master had\nprepared. Soon thereafter Paul and Barnabas, Silas, Titus, Timothy, and\nothers traversed the continents of Europe and Asia, bringing multitudes\nof neglected outcasts into the presence and the favour of the king.\n\n\"They brought in good and bad.\" This is a cardinal point in the method\nof divine mercy, and therefore it is articulately inserted in the\npicture. The scene is taken from life in the world; the conceptions\naccordingly, and the phraseology correspond with the circumstances. In\nsociety at large, and in every section of society such as the rich or\nthe poor, two classes are found distinguished by their moral character,\nand in ordinary language designated the good and the bad. The thought\nand the style of ordinary life are adopted in the parable, and every\nreader understands easily what is meant. Every great community has its\nvirtuous poor and its vicious poor. The invitations of the Gospel come\nto fallen human kind, and to all without respect either of persons or of\ncharacters. Apart from Christ and prior to regeneration the distinction\nbetween bad and good is only an earthly thing: in God's sight and in\nprospect of the judgment, there is none good, no not one. There are not\ntwo roads from earth to heaven: there is only one gate open, and by it\nall the saved enter. It is not the man's goodness that recommends him to\nGod's favour: the worst is welcome through the blood of Christ, and the\nbest is rejected if he approach by any other way. Nor does it follow\nthence that the Judge is indifferent to righteousness; that which the\nunreconciled offer to him as righteousness is in his sight sin; and the\nfact of offering it as a ground of justification aggravates the\nofferer's guilt.\n\n\nPART II.--THE WEDDING GARMENT.\n\nWe have here two parables in one. In their union and relations they\nresemble the two seed-stones which are sometimes found within one fruit,\nattached to each other, and wrapped in the same envelope, but possessing\neach its own separate organization, and its own independent germ of\nlife. The parable of the prepared, offered, and rejected feast, and the\nparable of the wedding garment, although actually united in the Lord's\nministry and the evangelic record, are in their own nature distinct,\nwhether you consider the secular scenes delineated or the spiritual\nlessons which they convey.\n\nWhen the wedding was furnished with guests the king came in to see them.\nThe representation is in strict accordance with the relations of the\nparties and the customs of society both in ancient and modern times.\nWhen a citizen entertains his equals he must himself be first in the\nfestal hall to welcome the guests as they successively arrive; but when\na sovereign invites subjects to his palace he appears among them only\nwhen the company have all assembled.\n\nThe instant that he entered the festive hall the king saw there a man\nwho had not on a wedding-garment. Although this is the turning point of\nthe parable, it is represented with extreme brevity. The great central\nfacts are recorded with the utmost distinctness, but all the surrounding\ncircumstances are in silence assumed: no explanation is given, and the\nreason doubtless is that no explanation is needed. Some customs and\nallusions connected with the scene remain obscure to us, after all that\nmodern research has done to illustrate them, but the lesson which our\nLord intended to teach stands relieved in clearest light and sharpest\noutline, like distant mountain tops when the sun has newly set behind\nthem. Some points regarding which we might desire information are left\nin the shade, but in as far as the story is necessary to unfold and\nperpetuate the spiritual lesson, it is accompanied with no doubt and\nwith very little difficulty.\n\n1. The wedding garment was something conspicuous and distinctive. As\nsoon as the king entered the room he detected the single man who wanted\nit in a great company of guests.\n\n2. It was not a necessary part of a man's clothing, but rather a\nsignificant badge of his loyalty. The primary use of the symbol was\nneither to keep the wearer warm nor to make him elegant, but to manifest\nhis faithfulness.\n\n3. The want of it was, and was understood to be, a decisive mark of\ndisloyalty. The man who came to the feast without a wedding-garment\nendorsed substantially the act of those who had proudly refused to\ncomply with the king's invitation. It was the same heart-disobedience\naccompanied by a hypocrisy that would fain commit the sin and yet escape\nthe consequences.\n\n4. The question whether a wedding-garment was proffered to every guest\nas he entered, out of the royal store, is attended with some difficulty.\nThe preponderance of probability seems to lie with those who think that\nthese decorations were freely distributed in the vestibule to every\nentrant, in some such way as certain badges are sometimes given to every\none of a wedding party amongst ourselves in the present day. But the\npoint is not of primary importance. From what is tacitly assumed in the\nnarrative it may be held as demonstrated alternatively that either the\nking gave every guest the necessary garment, or it was such that every\nguest, even the poorest, could on the shortest warning easily obtain it\nfor himself. Two silences become the two witnesses out of whose mouths\nthis conclusion is established,--the silence of the king as to the\ngrounds of his sentence, and the silence of the culprit when judgment\nwas pronounced. The judge does not give any reason why sentence should\nbe executed, and the criminal does not give any reason why it should\nnot. On both sides it is confessed and silently assumed that the guest\nhad not, but might have had, the wedding-garment on. If there had been\nany hardship in the case the king would have vindicated his own\nprocedure, and the condemned guest would not have remained speechless\nwhen he heard his doom.[47]\n\n [47] \"It should be assumed that the guests were not instantly\n hurried into the festal hall, but that an opportunity was afforded\n to them of changing their dress. This, however, is not expressly\n asserted in the narrative, but may be gathered from the term [Greek:\n ephimothe] (he was speechless) in ver. 12; and must be understood on\n this account also, that, otherwise the sentence in ver. 13 would\n stand exposed to the charge of injustice.\"--_Storr, de parabolis\n Christi_, p. 113.\n\nFrom the circumstances in which that motley company was collected and\nintroduced into the palace, we may safely conclude that no kind of\nclothing, however torn and mean, would have been counted a\ndisqualification. Over the whole surface of the scene is spread the\nproof that nothing in the character or condition of the attire which a\nstreet porter or a field labourer might happen to wear, when he was\nintercepted on the highway by the king's messengers, and hurried away to\nthe palace without an opportunity of visiting his own home, could\npossibly have been a ground of exclusion. When such persons in such\ncircumstances were invited to the banquet, assuredly the king was\nprepared to welcome them, as far as dress was concerned, precisely as\nhis servants had found them. No man forfeited his place at that table on\naccount of any defect in the quality or condition of the clothing which\nhe wore when he unexpectedly met the messengers and was suddenly hurried\naway to the feast. Thus far, treading on firm ground, we tread surely.\n\nAlike from the facts of the case, from the analogy of others, and from\nthe corresponding spiritual lesson as elsewhere declared in Scripture,\nwe conclude with confidence that the wedding garment was a well\nunderstood distinctive badge, expressive generally of loyalty, and\nspecifically constituting and declaring the wearer's fitness for sitting\nas a guest at the marriage supper of the king's son. In appearance it\nmust have been conspicuous; but its value may not have been great. It\nwas not the inherent worth of the material but the meaning of the symbol\nthat bulked in the estimation of both the entertainer and his guests. It\nmay from analogous cases be shown to be probable that a loyal heart\ncould have easily extemporized the appropriate symbol out of any\nmaterial that lay next at hand. Where there is a will there is a way.\nItalian patriots at the crisis of their conflict with multiform\noppression, and while the strong yoke of the despot was still upon their\nnecks, contrived to display their darling tricolor by a seemingly\naccidental arrangement of red, white, and green among the vegetables\nwhich they exhibited in the market or carried to their homes. Nay more,\nthe loyalty of a loyal man may in certain circumstances be more\nemphatically expressed by a rude, extemporaneous symbol, hastily\nconstructed of intractable materials, than by the most elaborate\nand leisurely products of the needle or the loom. In such cases, the\nwill of the man is everything; the wealth of the man nothing. The\nmeanest rag suddenly thrown across the shoulders, arranged so as\nunequivocally to express the wearer's faith may be a better evidence of\nloyalty than the richest silks of the East.[48]\n\n [48] A custom connected with funerals, which prevails in some\n districts of England, if not in all, approaches closely in some of\n its essential features to that which occupies the most conspicuous\n place in this parable. A scarf of black silk, large, conspicuous,\n and expensive, yet constituting no part of the proper garments of\n the wearer, is given by the person who invites, and worn by every\n one who accepts the invitation. A single person without the badge in\n the procession would be instantly detected, and the omission would,\n in the circumstances, be taken as proof of disrespect.\n\n * * * * *\n\nLet us now endeavour to appreciate and express the spiritual lesson.\nTrue to nature on the earthly sphere the parable represents the\ninvitation, the assembling of the guests, and the entrance of the king,\nas three several and successive acts; but in the processes of the\nspiritual kingdom these three operations advance simultaneously. Some\nare in the act of hearing the invitation,--some are accepting it and\ngoing to the feast,--some are sitting at the table under the inspection\nof the king,--all at the same moment. The process is like the habit of\nsome species of fruit trees, on which flowers, green berries, and ripe\nfruit may be seen at the same time; the flowers of this season become\nthe green berries of the next, and the green berries of this season\nbecome the ripened fruit of the next; and thus a constant succession is\nmaintained. In like manner, as the generations pass, all the processes\nof Christ's kingdom are simultaneously carried forward.\n\nThe guests who have come at the call of the servants, and taken their\nplaces at the table of the king, are those who hear the Gospel and fall\nin with its terms,--who adopt Christ's name and enrol themselves among\nhis people,--who hope in his mercy and commemorate his death. Herein\nthey are broadly distinguished from those who made light of the message,\nand those who persecuted the messengers; but it is not yet certain\nwhether they are forgiven and renewed. The profession which they have\nmade distinguishes them from those Jews who refused the invitation, and\nthose Gentiles who have not yet heard it; but among those who thus far\ncomply with the call, another distinction must still be made. That\ngoodly heap must be tossed up and winnowed yet again, that the chaff may\nbe driven before the wind, and only the wheat gathered into the\nhusbandman's garner.\n\nAs in the parable, we are not informed what were the shape, size,\ncolour, or material of the wedding garment, but only that it was\nnecessary that every guest should wear it; so we do not find here any\nspecific doctrinal instruction as to the method of redemption and the\ndecisive characteristics of believers. We learn from the parable that\nevery sinner must simply comply with God's terms in order that he may be\nsaved; and elsewhere in Scripture we are fully taught what these terms\nare. An abundant answer to the question, \"What must I do to be saved?\"\nis recorded by the Spirit: the only point regarding it which this\nparable teaches, is that a sinner must abandon his own method, and fall\nin with Christ's. The meaning of the man who sat at the feast without a\nwedding garment seems to have been, \"I am my own master, and I shall\nwork my own way to heaven:\" the meaning of the men who meekly wore it\nwas, \"We are not our own; we are bought with a price; our\nrighteousnesses are as filthy rags, but the Lord is our righteousness.\"\n\nThus the lesson of the parable concentrates itself at last upon a point;\nbut that point is the turning-point of life or death to men. Is any one\ndisposed to complain that it stakes all upon an opinion? It does, and\nwhy not? One man's opinion is that his own righteousness, especially\nwhen he has gotten time to improve it, may be safely presented in the\njudgment, and ought to satisfy the judge. Another man counts all his\nefforts vile, as lacking the vital element of love, and at God's command\nplaces his trust wholly in Christ his substitute: the first does deepest\ndishonour, the second gives highest glory to God. A man's opinion on a\ntrifling subject, may be of trifling import; but a man's opinion--his\nmind on how he may be just with God, is the greatest and most pregnant\nfact in creation. Opinion here is nothing less and nothing else than the\nattitude of a fallen creature towards his Maker and Judge: one opinion\nis the alienated heart of a rebel, another is the glad trustfulness of a\ndear child.\n\nIf the head of a Hebrew family, on the dread night of the Exodus, had\nsaid within himself, What shall I gain by sprinkling a lamb's blood upon\nmy door-posts? Or, if a conspicuous mark be necessary, may not the blood\nof this animal suffice, that was killed for the use of my family in the\nordinary way? If moved by some self-confident speculations regarding the\nconstancy of nature, he had entered through the portals of the twilight\ninto that awful night, he would have perished while his neighbours were\npreserved: not that a lamb's blood had power to save, but because this\nman refused to take God's way of being saved, and trusted in his\nown.[49]\n\n [49] I do not attach much value to the question which has been much\n canvassed here, whether the wedding garment specifically signifies\n Faith or Charity,--whether it points to what the saved get from God,\n or what they do in his service. To wear the garment at the feast\n means that the wearer takes God's way of salvation and not his own;\n to want it, means that the wanter takes his own way of salvation and\n not God's. This is the conclusion of the whole matter. If you\n suppose that the garment means evangelical obedience, you must\n assume that faith in Christ is the root on which obedience grows;\n if, on the other hand, you suppose that the garment means faith in\n Christ, you must assume that it is a living not a dead faith,--a\n faith that will work by love and overcome the world.\n\nThe rest may be expressed in few words. He saw there a man which had not\non a wedding garment. Here, first of all, it is not intimated that\nordinarily there is only one hypocrite in a large company of professors:\nit is no part of the Lord's design in this parable to tell us whether\nthe false members of the visible Church are many or few. The single\npoint on which the Master has fixed his eye is the certainty that the\nfalse will be detected: the parable does not reveal their numbers, but\nit assures us that none of them shall escape in the crowd. If the\nrepresentation had been that a large proportion, say a half or\nthree-fourths of the guests, had been detected at the table without the\nappropriate symbol of loving loyalty to the king, the omniscience of the\nvisitor, and the certainty of the criminal's doom would not have been so\nclearly and strongly expressed. That the king's eye instantly detects\nthe undecorated guest, although he is only one in a multitude, is the\nmost emphatic warning that could possibly be conveyed to the\nunbelieving. None who live without Christ in the world shall be\npermitted to glide into heaven with the crowd in the great day. The\nconstancy of nature is sometimes wielded as a weapon of assault against\nrevealed religion: it will one day strike a heavy blow on the other\nside. When a mixture of wheat and chaff is thrown up in the wind, the\nsolid grains drop down on the spot, and the light chaff is driven away.\nYou never expect, in such a case, that to please some fancy of yours,\nthe solid grain will fly away on the wings of the blast, and the chaff\ndrop down at your feet. The constancy of nature prevents. Well; by a law\nas constant and changeless--a law of the same God, reigning over the\nworld of spirit, \"the wicked is driven away in his wickedness, but the\nrighteous hath hope in his death\" (Prov. xiv. 32).\n\nHe was speechless. The judgment will be so conducted that the condemned\nwill be compelled to own the justice of their sentence. Conscience,\nbrought again into contact with God, will be awakened and restored to\nthe exercise of its functions; like a mirror it will receive and repeat\nthe decree of the Judge. Persecutors were wont to gag their victims\nwhile they burnt them; it was found necessary to put iron on the tongues\nof the witnesses, to make them silent while they suffered. No such\nclumsy device is needed in the assize which the righteous God will hold\nupon the world. Conscience swelling within will stifle the complaint of\nthe guilty. The courage of the despiser will fail: the last poor comfort\nof the blasphemer, to hurl against the judgment seat the last\ndespairing, defiant word, will be taken away. The history of the fact\nwritten by divine prescience before the time, makes no mention of what\nthe condemned will say. The record simply runs, \"These shall go away\ninto everlasting punishment.\"\n\n\"Outer darkness:\" tell us in detail what the condition the outcast will\nbe, and what will be the constituents of their suffering? We cannot.\nRome has impiously traded upon this weakness of humanity. She has\nparcelled out her purgatory, as we delineate this upper world on a map.\nThis is the machinery whereby she is enabled to traffic in the souls of\nmen. No; that condition lies in outer darkness; I cannot see through the\nveil, and tell the specific sufferings that lie beneath it. My Lord has\ntold me that it is in outer darkness; but he has covered it from my\nsight. He hath done all things well. He often warns us that the wicked\nshall be cast away; but he never tells us the particulars of their\ntorments. For teaching about this terror let me listen to his word; for\nsafety from it, let me hide in his bosom.\n\n\n\n\nTHE TEN VIRGINS AND THE ENTRUSTED TALENTS.\n\nMATT. xxv. 1-30\n\n\nBoth historically and logically the two parables, of the ten virgins and\nof the talents, are connected and constitute a group: in place they are\ncontiguous, and in nature they are reciprocally complements of each\nother, making together a complete whole. De Valenti has by a happy\ngeneralization placed their relations in an interesting and instructive\nlight. He points out that there are two kinds of almost-Christians, the\nbustling labourers, and the mystic-dreamers. One class tries to live on\nworks without faith, and the other on faith without works. From opposite\ncauses both efforts fail. The parable of the ten virgins addresses its\nwarning to the Almost-Christianity which is all body with no spirit; and\nthe parable of the talents addresses its warning to the\nAlmost-Christianity which is all spirit with no body.\n\nThese constitute a pair; or rather they are the right and left sides of\none living lesson. Both represent the character and condition of the\nChurch and its members, while they wait for the coming of the Lord; both\napply decisive tests to a seemly profession, and thereby separate\nbetween the true and the false: but they differ in that the first\nsearches the heart, and the second examines the life. The first test\ndetects the want of secret faith; the second the want of active\nobedience. The parable of the ten virgins prepares and throws into the\nmass of Christian profession a solvent which serves to determine whether\nand where there is life _in_ the Lord; the parable of the entrusted\ntalents prepares and throws into the mass of Christian profession a\nsolvent which serves to determine whether and where there is life _for_\nthe Lord.\n\nThese two,--the inward grace of faith and the outward life of obedience,\nconstitute the two sides,--the right and left of the new man. To that\nnew man as a whole both parables alike refer; but the one touches him\nfor testing on the right side, and the other on the left. The first\ntests his works by his faith, and the second tests his faith by his\nworks. The first goes directly to the root and inquires whether the tree\nis good or bad; thus determining what the character of the fruit must\nbe; the second goes first to the fruit, and by its sweetness or\nbitterness ascertains the character of the tree. The parable of the ten\nvirgins speaketh on this wise,--If there be true faith in the heart,\nthere will be active obedience in the life: the parable of the talents\nspeaketh on this wise,--If there be active obedience in the life, there\nmust be a root of faith unseen whereon that good fruit grows.\n\n\n\n\nXIII.\n\nTHE TEN VIRGINS.\n\n\n\"Then shall the kingdom of heaven be likened unto ten virgins, which\n took their lamps, and went forth to meet the bridegroom. And five of\n them were wise, and five were foolish. They that were foolish took\n their lamps, and took no oil with them: but the wise took oil in\n their vessels with their lamps. While the bridegroom tarried, they\n all slumbered and slept. And at midnight there was a cry made,\n Behold, the bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him. Then all those\n virgins arose, and trimmed their lamps. And the foolish said unto\n the wise, Give us of your oil; for our lamps are gone out. But the\n wise answered, saying, Not so; lest there be not enough for us and\n you: but go ye rather to them that sell, and buy for yourselves. And\n while they went to buy, the bridegroom came; and they that were\n ready went in with him to the marriage: and the door was shut.\n Afterward came also the other virgins, saying, Lord, Lord, open to\n us. But he answered and said, Verily I say unto you, I know you\n not.\"--MATT. xxv. 1-12.\n\nHere is one of the larger and grander pictures in this gallery of\nvarious glory. It is sublime in its ample outline, and exquisitely\ntender in its details. It is charged with many precious lessons, which\nflow freely at the gentlest touch; and it is cruel to put it to the\ntorture to compel it to give meanings which it never received from its\nauthor.\n\nThe painful search for precisely identical customs in eastern countries\nand ancient times is here, for the most part, unnecessary and\nunprofitable. The usages incidentally photographed in such a parable as\nthis are indeed true sections of the place and the time, but others,\nagreeing in general character though differing in detail, might have\nbeen substituted in perfect consistency with the circumstances. There is\nsome elasticity even in Oriental manners. It is not probable that all\nmarriages were conducted on precisely the same plan. There might, for\naught I know, be a difference between a wedding among the rich and a\nwedding among the poor, and another difference between the method of\ncelebrating a marriage in the city and the country,--in Galilee and\nJudea. In examining analogous cases, I would look for similarity of\nstyle rather than identity of individual features. Looking on the\nparable of the ten virgins as a grand original, I don't trouble myself\nwith the work of hunting for corroboration of its truth or explanations\nof its meaning in the form of identical observances recorded in other\nbooks.\n\nThe more important portion of the nuptial ceremonies were performed at\nnight. They consisted in a great measure of processions along the road\nand festivals within the dwelling. The out-door part of the pageant is\nof course conducted by torch-light. A small cup, filled with rags and\nresin, is affixed to a rod, that it may be held aloft. At the proper\ntime the rags are lighted, and the flame is fed from time to time by\npouring oil into the cup. Each processionist carries such a lamp, and\nthe many separate lights dancing and crossing each other, and changing\nplaces as the bearers advance on the undulating and tortuous path,\nimpart great liveliness to the joyful nocturnal scene.\n\nFrom the nature of the case there must be two successive processions,\none in which the bridegroom with his friends goes for the bride to her\nfather's house, and another in which bride and bridegroom, together with\nthe friends of both families, march to the future home of the married\npair. There was more or less of ceremonial and feasting in either\nmansion. It is not certainly known, and the knowledge would not be\nimportant although it were obtained, whether the principal feast was\nheld in the home of the bride's father or in that of the bridegroom. It\nis probable that the practice in this matter varied according to the\nwealth of the parties and the capacities of the several mansions. In one\ncase the father of the bride, and in another the bridegroom, might\npossess the more commodious dwelling, and be more able, in virtue of\nampler resources, to entertain the company. I am not aware that there is\nany ascertained law or habit of the places and times demanding that the\nprincipal feast should be always given by the father or by the\nbridegroom.\n\nIn this case there is nothing in the narrative that determines with\ncertainty whether the bridegroom, when the ten virgins waited for him,\nwas on his way for the bride to her father's house or with her to his\nown. On the whole, the balance of probability inclines to the side of\nthose who think that this is the procession coming for the bride rather\nthan the procession returning with her. The particular expression, \"The\nbridegroom cometh,\" among other circumstances, points in this direction.\nLange's conception commends itself as probable that the virgins are in\nsome sense representatives of the bride, that they go forth to meet the\nbridegroom, that he has come from afar, and that some unexpected delays\nhave occurred on the journey.\n\nThe house whose door was shut ere the foolish five came up was obviously\nthe house in which the grand marriage festival was held: to be shut out\nof that house was to be shut out from the marriage.\n\nWhen the curtain rises and the scene is first displayed, we behold ten\nyoung women, adorned according to the fashion of the time, lingering in\na group by the wayside at night in the warm climate of Palestine.\n\nThey may have been the young companions of the bride, a selected ten,\nspecially invited to meet the bridegroom on the way, and enter with him\ninto the festal hall,--a group in character and constituents closely\ncorresponding to the bridesmaids at our marriage feasts,--or they may\nhave been the daughters of neighbouring families, sent by their parents,\nor going of their own accord, in compliance with the custom of the\nplace, to offer a tribute of respect and affection to the bride and\nbridegroom on their marriage-day.\n\nThis feature of the scene, although in itself subordinate and\nincidental, derives great importance from the subsequent development of\nthe parable: it becomes the hinge on which the lesson turns. From the\ncircumstance that a portion of the company neither came with the\nbridegroom nor waited in the house for his arrival, but went out to meet\nhim, all the tender and solemn teaching of this parable has sprung.[50]\n\n [50] The closest analogue that I know of the fact which plays so\n great a part in the structure of this scriptural lesson may be found\n in a custom which prevails at funerals in the rural districts of\n Scotland. When the distance between the house of the deceased and\n the cemetery is considerable, a common, perhaps I should say a\n uniform, practice is, that those friends of the mourning family who\n reside in the neighbourhood of the burying place assemble in a group\n at a convenient turning of the road, and wait till the funeral\n procession reaches the spot; they then silently fall into their\n places and follow the corpse to the grave. I like the analogy none\n the less that it is taken, not from a time of mirth, but from a time\n of weeping. The two cases coincide in all their features except one.\n In either example we have an occasion of absorbing interest to one\n family, and the sympathy of neighbours expressed by means of large\n assemblies and public processions. In a minor but characteristic\n feature there is an exact coincidence,--a portion of the\n sympathizing neighbours wait for the main body at a point on the\n path and fall into the line of march from that spot to the terminus.\n That the one is a joyful and the other a mournful group enhances\n rather than diminishes the value of the comparison.\n\nWaiting long without employment, the group of maidens would stand, and\nsit, and recline by turns. Each holds a tiny torch in her hand, or has\nlaid it on the ground by her side. As the night wears on, the\nconversation that had at first been animated, gradually dies away, and\none by one the wearied damsels drop over into snatches of slumber.\nBefore midnight they have all sunk into a continuous sleep. At midnight\na cry arose, apparently from some more wakeful watcher in the\nneighbourhood, \"Behold the Bridegroom cometh; go ye out to meet him.\" At\nthis alarm the whole band awake simultaneously and spring to their feet.\nEach maiden hastily snatches up her torch; not one of them burns\nbrightly now; some are flickering low, and some are altogether\nextinguished. In a moment, all those nimble young hands begin to ply the\nwork of trimming the expired or expiring lamps. All alike are able to\ntouch them skilfully, but the main want with every lamp is a new supply\nof oil. Some can supply that want at the moment on the spot, while\nothers cannot. Those who had brought from home a supply of oil in\nseparate vessels, found it easy to make the flame of their torches burn\nup as brightly as ever; but those who had neglected to provide such a\nsupply could not with all their efforts revive the dead or dying light.\n\"Give us,\" said the five improvident maidens, \"give us of your oil, for\nour lamps are gone out.\" The more thoughtful, and therefore more\nfortunate watchers, while they pitied their sisters, were afraid to part\nwith any portion of their own stores, lest they should be left in the\nsame hapless condition ere the procession should close: \"Go to them that\nsell, and buy for yourselves.\" Alas, this was now the only alternative!\nAway went those foolish virgins at the dead of night on the hopeless\nerrand of buying oil for immediate use in the shops of the neighbouring\ntown. The folly, however, lay not in this latest act; this was now their\nonly resource. The foolish deed was done in the day time, and before the\ncry arose, Behold the bridegroom cometh.\n\nAs soon as the foolish five had gone, the procession came up, and they\nthat were ready fell into their places. The new accession, each bearing\na flaming torch aloft, increased the grandeur of the scene. When the\ncompany reached the house, they all entered with the bridegroom, and the\ndoor was shut. Some time afterwards the five who had gone away in search\nof oil, returned and pleaded for admission; but they pleaded in vain.\nWithin the house the glad festival went forward; but those who came too\nlate were not admitted.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe story at its close is indebted for its deep pathos, not to anything\ninherent in itself, but to the sublime lesson which it conveys. The\nLord's great parable, like the Lord's great apostle, is \"weak and\ncontemptible\" in its bodily presence; but the letters in which it writes\nits meaning are like his, \"weighty and powerful.\" A few country girls\narriving too late for a marriage, and being therefore excluded from the\nfestival, is not in itself a great event: but I know not any words in\nhuman language that teach a more piercing lesson than the conclusion of\nthis similitude. The frame is constructed of common materials; the\nsublimity lies in the spiritual truth which that frame sustains. This\nconception, like that of the hen gathering her chickens under her wing,\nseems so common and so common-place, that we would not have ventured in\ndignified discourse to employ it; in the hands of Jesus the similitude\nbecomes at once tender and terrible in the highest degree. At his word\nthe world sprang from nothing; we need not be surprised to find that\nunder his touch small things become great.\n\nI think no symbolic character should be attributed to the virgins, as\nsuch, in the interpretation of the parable; it is when they take their\nlamps and go forth to meet the bridegroom that they first acquire a\nspiritual significance. The whole group represent that portion of any\ncommunity who hear the Gospel, accept its terms, and profess to be the\ndisciples of Christ. The sincerity and depth of their profession will be\ntested afterwards; but in the meantime, both in their own opinion and\nthat of their neighbours, they are all alike Christians. The structure\nof the parable required virgins in this place, in order that the picture\nmight be true to nature; in the customs apparently of all times and all\ncountries, this position at a marriage feast is assigned to young\nunmarried women. The ancient practice of the East is, in its essential\nfeatures, reproduced among ourselves from day to day in the troop of\nvirgins, dressed in white, who attend the bride on her bridal day. I\ncannot acquiesce in the view of those who see in the special condition\nof these watchers a symbol of the purity which becomes the followers of\nChrist, for I find, as I read onward in the parable, that while the ten\nwere in respect to condition all equal, in as far as they represent\nspiritual relations, five are symbols of sincerity, and five are symbols\nof deceit. The condition of virgins which was common to all, cannot,\nwithout complete confusion of ideas, be made, within the compass of the\nsame allegory, to signify both the true and the false. From the\nprocession of virgins, therefore, I obtain no more than I would have\nobtained from a procession of men or matrons, if the habits of society\nhad permitted such a representation to have been made.[51]\n\n [51] Lange's view on this point seems sound and consistent; while\n both Olshausen and Stier endeavour with much pain but little fruit,\n to prove that the foolish represent true but defective disciples.\n \"One part of the Church is living, while the other lives only _in_\n appearance, because it lives only _to_ appearance.\"--_Lange_.\n\nThey took their lamps and went forth to meet the bridegroom; this\nrepresents an open, intelligent, and seemly profession of faith in\nChrist. As all the lamps burned at first with equal brightness, and no\nsuspicion of a defect occurred either to the wise or the unwise, we\nlearn that the profession which never had life may appear so well\nfavoured for a time, that neither the false professor nor his converted\nneighbour may be aware of its shallowness.\n\n\"To meet the bridegroom;\" the parable and the discourse which precedes\nit, bear upon Christ's second coming, and the attitude, which becomes\nhis disciples in prospect of that decisive event. They who have been\nwashed in his blood love his appearing.\n\nNo difference between class and class was as yet manifest; but already\nthe causes which subsequently wrought the separation had begun to\noperate in secret, and here accordingly they are recorded by the Lord;\n\"five of them were wise, and five of them were foolish.\" I stand in awe\nof this dividing word. While the whole band take part in the loyal\nexodus, and all seem equal in zeal and love, the Searcher of hearts\nalready perceives and pronounces that some of them are wise unto\nsalvation, and some are so foolish that they are throwing away their\nsouls. That same Lord looks on the ten thousand times ten thousand who\nin our times go out to meet the bridegroom. There is not a more grand or\na more beautiful spectacle on earth than a great assembly reverently\nworshipping God together. No line visible to human eye divides into two\nparts the goodly company; yet the goodly company is divided into two\nparts. The Lord reads our character, and marks our place. The Lord\nknoweth them that are his, and them also that are not his, in every\nassembly of worshippers.\n\nThe distinguishing feature is now specifically set down,--the wise\ncarried each a separate vessel containing a supply of oil, that they\nmight keep the flame of their lamps alive, however long the bridegroom\nmight tarry: the foolish, satisfied that their lamps were burning at the\nmoment, laid in no supply for future need. This is the turning-point of\nthe parable, and in the light of subsequent events its spiritual import\nmay be determined with precision and certainty. The oil in the lamp, and\nthe flame which it sustained, indicate a seemly Christian profession;\nthis the virgins all possessed, and all alike. The quality that tested\nand divided them, lay not in the burning lamps but in the supply\nvessels. The oil, whether employed to anoint a person or to feed a\nflame, represents, in Old Testament typology, the Holy Spirit. That\nwhich the wise virgins carried in their vessels, as distinguished from\nthat which burned in their lamps, points to the Spirit as a spirit of\ngrace and supplication dwelling in a believer's heart. All experienced\nconvictions, and made profession, as is indicated by the lamps lighted\nand borne aloft; but some had nothing more than convictions and\nprofessions, while others had passed from death unto life and had gotten\ntheir life, through the Spirit's ministry, \"hid with Christ in God.\"\nThis will more fully appear as we proceed stage by stage with the\ninterpretation.\n\n\"The bridegroom tarried.\" For a special purpose, the Lord represents\nthat the bridegroom lingered till a much later hour than that at which\nthe virgins expected him. The disciples, during their Master's ministry\nand long afterwards, cherished a belief that the coming of the Lord and\nthe end of the world would take place in their own generation. This\nexpectation was, in its literal sense, incorrect; but it could not be\ncorrected by an explicit announcement that for more than a thousand\nyears all things should continue as they were; for such an intimation\nwould have destroyed the expectant watchfulness which in the\ncircumstances was salutary and even necessary. By that watchfulness the\nChristians of the immediately succeeding generation escaped the\ndisasters which befell the Jews at the destruction of Jerusalem, and by\nit believers in subsequent times were kept more loose to the world and\nmore close to Christ. In this parable, however, and elsewhere in the\nScriptures, prophecies are recorded, which events subsequently\nexplained,--prophecies which showed the Christians of a later age that\nwhile their Lord desires to keep them in an expectant attitude through\nall generations, his intention from the beginning was to permit a long\nperiod to intervene between his ascension and his return. The\npreparation which Christ desires and true Christians attain, pertains\nmore to the inner spirit than to the anticipation of the external\nadvent.\n\nWhile the bridegroom tarried, they all slumbered and slept. At this\npoint many interpreters endeavour to grasp a lesson regarding the\ntendency of even true disciples to slumber sinfully at their post, like\ntheir worldly neighbours. The lesson is in itself good, and comes\nreadily to hand, but it is not taught in this text. Calvin has correctly\nconceived and clearly expressed the meaning of the sleep that oppressed\nthe waiting virgins; it intimates the necessity that lies on all of\ngoing down into the ordinary affairs of this life. Disciples in the\nbody cannot be occupied always and only with the expectation of their\nLord's appearing. Sleep and food, family and business, make demands on\nthem as well as on others,--demands which they cannot and should not\nresist. If the coming of the bridegroom be delayed till midnight, the\nvirgins must slumber; this is not a special weakness of individuals, it\nis the common necessity of nature. So, when life is lengthened in the\nbody, we must attend to the affairs of this world.\n\nThe coming of the Son of man may surprise one at his farm and another at\nhis merchandise, but it does not follow, on that account, that it will\nsurprise them unprepared. Now and then in the history of the Church a\nChristian has been found dead in his closet and on his knees. A few\nyears ago, in a rural district of Scotland, an elder who was leading the\ndevotions of a district prayer-meeting suddenly ceased to speak,--ceased\nin the middle of a sentence, in the middle of a prayer. The worshippers\nopened their eyes, and observed that his head and breast leant heavily\non the desk; they approached and found him dead. At the moment when the\nbridegroom came this watcher was wide awake, standing on tiptoe, and\nstraining forward to catch the first glimpse of the glory that should\nherald his approach. When the bridegroom came this watcher went out to\nmeet him, and went in with him to the feast: safe and happy he, but not\nhe only.\n\nOn the other side we hear sometimes of a merchant who died in his\ncounting-house, his ledger, not the Bible, the last book he had read; of\na miner killed in an instant by an explosion while he was picking coals\nin the bowels of the earth; of a soldier falling on a battle-field,\nwhile his right hand raised the sword to strike a foe; these were all\nslumbering and off guard when the bridegroom came. What of them? were\nthey all shut out? Nay, verily. Some of them were shut out, and some\nwere let in, according as they were carnal or spiritual when the\ndecisive moment came. The new creature in Christ, who is surprised amid\nthe toils of his daily calling, goes as safely into rest as his brother\nof the same family who is summoned over in the very act of prayer. The\nfive wise virgins were stretched on the ground asleep, with their lamp\nfires dead or dying, when the cry arose, Behold the bridegroom cometh,\nand yet there was no surprise, and no damage. Although they were only\nawakened by his coming, they were ready to meet him when he came, and to\nenter with him into his rest.\n\nWhen the cry was heard all those virgins arose and trimmed their lamps.\nWhen life is closing behind, and eternity opening before us, we are all\naroused. Every one who has a lamp hastens then to examine its condition\nand stimulate its flame: all who have borne Christ's name search\nthemselves to see whether they are ready for his presence. There is no\nvisible distinction at this stage between those who have only a name\nthat they live, and those who have attained also the new nature: all\nbestir themselves to examine the ground of their hope, and the state of\ntheir preparation.\n\nAt this point the decisive difference which existed in secret long\nbefore emerges into view. The foolish virgins, having no oil in separate\nvessels, could not keep the flame of their lamps any longer alive. Both\nclasses had a profession; the formalists had a profession and nothing\nmore. Finding in the hour of their extremity that they had neglected\ntheir souls while the day of grace was running, they make a piteous\nappeal to believing neighbours for help, \"Give us of your oil, for our\nlamps are gone out.\" How true to nature is this picture! He who draws it\nknows \"what is in man.\" How fondly the empty, in such a crisis, lean on\nthe full. Alas, even the full is but a little vessel filled by Christ.\nThat vessel is not a spring; this saved sinner is not a saviour of\nsinners. He has gotten from his Lord all that himself needs; but he\ncannot supply a neighbour's want. Brother, if the call come to you while\nyou are not in Christ reconciled and renewed, though all the saints in\nheaven and earth stood weeping at your bedside they could not save you.\nIf you neglect the Son of God while he stands at the door and knocks, in\nvain will you apply to a godly neighbour, after the day of grace is\ndone.\n\nTaking into view generally the intimate relations which subsisted among\nthat group of maidens, and in particular the unselfish tenderness which\nmust have characterized the wiser five, we should expect to learn that\nthey had generously resolved, at all hazards, to share their oil to the\nlast drop with their unfortunate companions. But this, though consonant\nwith nature in the external body of the parable, would have been\nincongruous with the spiritual truth which the parable has been framed\nto convey. In the structure of the parable provision is made for\ndefining sharply the spiritual lesson, even at the expense of some\nmeasure of harshness left on one feature of the story. True Christians\ncannot impart a share of the grace that dwells in their own hearts to\ndeluded formalists in their departing hour. On the spiritual side such a\ndistinction cannot be made, and therefore the Master represents the wise\nvirgins as distinctly and peremptorily refusing to share their store of\noil with their improvident companions.[52]\n\n [52] They turn themselves to the wise, whom, perhaps, they had\n lately laughed at, with the prayer: \"Give us of your oil, for our\n lamps are gone out.\" They betake themselves, if they are Catholics,\n to the dead saints, if they are Protestants, to the living, whom\n they have been accustomed to revere as their guides on account of\n their wisdom and grace, and plead, Help us, comfort us, pray for us,\n that we may be brought into a state of grace. In vain. They answer:\n Not so, lest there be not enough for us and you. What you desire is\n impossible. None of us has any surplus merit out of which he could\n give a portion to another.--_Arndt_, ii. 177.\n\n\"Go to them that sell, and buy for yourselves.\" The advice was the best\nthat in the circumstances could be given. The mention of \"them that\nsell\" calls up all the scene of the preceding day. Oil was plentiful in\nthe town; the five wise virgins having gone by daylight to the stores\nwith their vessels, had experienced no difficulty in obtaining a supply.\nThe same method was open to the rest: they failed to secure a store in\nthe daytime, and then they tried in vain to make good the deficiency at\nmidnight, after the merchants had retired to rest. This feature of the\nparable intimates that those who are found destitute at the coming of\nthe Lord, enjoyed their day and their opportunity, but neglected them:\nthey allowed the day of mercy to run out, and cried frantically for\nmercy after the merciful Saviour had wearied waiting and gone away.\n\nWhile the foolish virgins are absent on this errand, the bridegroom\ncomes up. They that are ready go in with him to the wedding, and the\ndoor is shut. Christ calls away his own at some midnight hour when they\nare off their guard; but though surprised, they are not hurt. The five\nwise virgins were asleep when the approach of the bridegroom was\nannounced, and yet they were ready to meet him. Their safety resulted\nnot from their fluttering activity at that moment in the trimming of the\nlamps, but from their wise foresight on the preceding day. The\nsalvation of a soul depends not on frightened earnestness in the moment\nof departure, but on faith's calm closing with Christ, before the moment\nof departure comes. In the vessels of the wise there was store of oil,\nand it was easy for them at any time or place to refresh the fading fire\nof the torches which they bore. Deep in the hearts of those disciples\ndwelt the spirit of Christ, and the light of their profession which had\nshone brightly in a time of ease, burst into greater brightness in the\nhour of their extremity. An abundant entrance was administered to\nthem,--an entrance into the joy of their Lord. The door was shut!\nSuffering, sorrowing believers, do you hear the clang of that closing\ngate! Be of good cheer, disciples; when your Lord and you go in, the\ndoor is shut behind you, and nothing shall enter that defileth. Heaven\nis for the holy, and for them alone; if it were open for all it would\nnot be heaven.\n\nThe foolish virgins went away after midnight to seek a supply of oil;\nbut we are not informed whether or not they obtained it. The omission is\nsignificant; this word of Jesus gives no encouragement to delay in the\nmatter of the soul's salvation; not a ray of hope is permitted to burst\nthrough the gloom that shrouds these hapless wanderers. The sole lesson\nof the parable is a simple, sublime warning that sinners should close\nwith Christ now, lest they should be left to invoke his name in vain at\nthe hour of their departure. This parable is a voice from an open heaven\npromising all grace now, but refusing to promise any then.\n\nThey came afterwards to the door and cried bitterly for admission, but\nthe Lord answered from within, I know you not. As the omniscient he knew\nthem; he was acquainted with all their ways. He knew them, for they had\ncrucified him afresh by their neglect. But he did not know them, as he\nknew the poor bashful woman who crept near in the crowd and by her touch\ndrew saving grace from his overflowing heart; he did not know them by\nfeeling their weight, like John's, leaning on his breast.[53]\n\n [53] The concluding application is well expressed by\n Arndt:--\"Perhaps the breaking heart grasps at the Bible; it has only\n spikes and nails, but no balm of consolation. Perhaps the dying man\n calls in those who have the care of souls; the words of comfort\n slide over the ears, while the Holy Spirit seals none of them upon\n the heart. Perhaps he partakes of the Holy Supper: ah, the feast is\n to him not a feast of blessings, but an eating of judgment. Perhaps\n he prays to the Lord himself: the Lord answers, I know you not.\n\n \"Oh, it is sad to be so near heaven, and yet to be lost--to be\n almost saved, and yet altogether lost. Were it not the Lord who\n speaks here, Jesus Christ, the Life Eternal, the Judge of the living\n and the dead, our feeling would be mightily to resist the terrible\n conclusion of this parable, which cuts all and every hope clean\n away, and leaves not an If or a But behind, nor any other possible\n interpretation. But he speaks; and before his words every mouth is\n silent in fear and adoration. He writes into our breast, with a\n glowing iron pen, the warning word--therefore watch, &c.\n\n \"Short is life; fleeting is time; quick is death; long is eternity.\n Therefore what thou desirest to do, do it quickly.\"--_Gleichnisse_.\n\nAfter the parable is finished the marrow of its meaning is given in one\nshort sentence by the Lord: \"Watch therefore, for ye know neither the\nday nor the hour wherein the Son of man cometh.\" Let us take heed here,\nlest after all the pains we have bestowed on this scripture, we should\nmiss the portion for ourselves with which it is charged. This parable\nwas not spoken for the purpose of kindling an agony of repentance in the\nhour of death. It describes a sudden call, and an eager upstarting, and\na fruitless effort, and a right prayer uttered too late, and final\nrejection, and a fearful doom,--but it reveals this dreadful close of a\nlife, in order to show us what we should be and do before the close of\nlife comes on. The end of the foolish five is unveiled in order that we\nmay be wise unto salvation in the beginning of our days. The lighthouse\nreared on a sunken reef flings its lurid glare far through a stormy air\nand over a stormy sea, not to teach the mariner how to act with vigour\nwhen he is among the breakers, but to warn him back, so that he may\nnever fall among the breakers at all. Even so, the end of the lost is\nrevealed in the word of God, not to urge us to utter a very loud cry\nwhen the door is shut, but to compel us to enter now while the door is\nopen.\n\n\"Behold I stand at the door and knock.\" His word to-day runs, Soul,\nsoul, open for me: if that tender plea is echoed back from your closed\nheart in a beseeching Saviour's face to-day, your cry, \"Lord, Lord, open\nto me\" will come back to you in empty echoes from a closed heaven.\n\nThe foolish five came to the door only a little too late, but it was not\na little damage that they suffered thereby. In the matter of fleeing to\ntake refuge in Christ, to be late by a little is the loss of all.\n\n\n\n\nXIV.\n\nTHE ENTRUSTED TALENTS.\n\n\n\"For the kingdom of heaven is as a man travelling into a far country,\n who called his own servants, and delivered unto them his goods. And\n unto one he gave five talents, to another two, and to another one;\n to every man according to his several ability; and straightway took\n his journey. Then he that had received the five talents went and\n traded with the same, and made them other five talents. And likewise\n he that had received two, he also gained other two. But he that had\n received one went and digged in the earth, and hid his lord's money.\n After a long time the lord of those servants cometh, and reckoneth\n with them. And so he that had received five talents came and brought\n other five talents, saying, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me five\n talents: behold, I have gained beside them five talents more. His\n lord said unto him, Well done, thou good and faithful servant; thou\n hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over\n many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord. He also that had\n received two talents came and said, Lord, thou deliveredst unto me\n two talents: behold, I have gained two other talents beside them.\n His lord said unto him, Well done, good and faithful servant; thou\n hast been faithful over a few things, I will make thee ruler over\n many things: enter thou into the joy of thy lord. Then he which had\n received the one talent came and said, Lord, I knew thee that thou\n art an hard man, reaping where thou hast not sown, and gathering\n where thou hast not strawed: and I was afraid, and went and hid thy\n talent in the earth: lo, there thou hast that is thine. His lord\n answered and said unto him, Thou wicked and slothful servant, thou\n knewest that I reap where I sowed not, and gather where I have not\n strawed: thou oughtest therefore to have put my money to the\n exchangers, and then at my coming I should have received mine own\n with usury. Take therefore the talent from him, and give it unto him\n which hath ten talents. For unto every one that hath shall be given,\n and he shall have abundance: but from him that hath not shall be\n taken away even that which he hath. And cast ye the unprofitable\n servant into outer darkness: there shall be weeping and gnashing of\n teeth.\"--MATT. xxv. 14-30.\n\nThe owner of a large property has occasion to leave the country for a\ntime and reside in a foreign land. His possessions, consisting of \"his\nown servants\" and \"his goods,\" must necessarily be left in the country,\nand naturally he considers how he may so dispose of them during the\ninterval that they may yield to him the largest profit at his return.\nTwo distinct principles were open to his choice corresponding to the\nmethods of day's-wages and piece-work in modern social economics; he\nmight either confide to his servants generally the management of his\nestate, and give them wages according to time, or give each a certain\namount of capital, to be exclusively at his own disposal, promising to\nreward him according to his diligence and success. The latter method is\nobviously the one which contains a spring within itself constantly\nurging to diligence. With a set of slaves who are ignorant, degraded,\nand suspicious, this plan would not be practicable, but if the men\npossess a certain amount of moral principle, self-reliance, and\nintelligence, it is safest and best.\n\nThe master accordingly, counting on the good-will and honesty of his\ndependants, frankly entrusts each with a certain amount of capital,\ngraduated according to their capacity for business. Nothing is said in\nthe record regarding the terms of the compact, but it is implied that\nthese were clearly understood between the parties. The money was given\nin order that it might be laid out to the best advantage, primarily for\nthe owner's interest, and secondarily for the due remuneration of the\nfaithful servant. This practice was carried to a great extent among the\nRomans; the owner of a skilful slave could make a greater profit by\ngiving scope to the man's energies than by confining him forcibly to\nmenial occupation.\n\nIt is by no means necessary to determine the precise character of the\nbond which united the servant to his master in this case. The\ncircumstances of the parable will suit equally the supposition of\nabsolute right on the part of the master and a voluntary contract\nbetween him and his servant for a limited time. Whatever may have been\nthe amount of service due to the master at the time of his\ndeparture,--whether the whole life and energy of a slave, or a limited\nquantity of work from a servant,--that service was his property, and he\ndesired to turn it to the best account.\n\nTwo of the servants traded with the capital entrusted to their charge\nand doubled it ere the master returned; one from a morbid dread of his\nmaster's severity, coupled with indolence in his personal habits, hid\nthe money in the ground, thereby deliberately sacrificing his master's\nprofit in order that himself might incur no risk. The two who had\nsuccessfully traded were commended and rewarded; the one who allowed his\ntalent to lie idle was condemned and punished for his unfruitfulness,\nalthough no positive dishonesty was laid to his charge.[54]\n\n [54] For the relation between the talents and the pounds, see the\n exposition of the latter parable,--the last of the series.\n\n * * * * *\n\nWe are now ready to proceed with the exposition. The proprietor who went\nabroad represents Christ at the close of his ministry on earth leaving\nhis disciples and ascending to heaven. His continued presence\nspiritually with his people is not inconsistent with this\nrepresentation, for our parable deals with the bodily and the visible.\nHis own servants, whom he called, like the ten virgins who went out to\nmeet the bridegroom, represent the whole number of those who are called\nby his name and seem to be his disciples. The delivery of the master's\ngoods to these servants intimates that the Lord gives to every member of\nthe visible Church all his faculties and opportunities.\n\nIn this distribution different amounts are consigned to different\npersons. Here the representation obviously accords with the fact: of\ntime, of intellect, of health, of learning, of wealth, scarcely any two\npersons possess a precisely equal portion. There is a clause here\ngenerally overlooked by expositors, but which must be intended to\nexpress some feature of importance,--\"to every one according to his\nseveral ability.\" We can easily understand it as it occurs in the story:\nthe master, at the moment of his departure, graduated his gifts\naccording to the abilities and acquirements of the servants that he\nmight not throw a great responsibility on a weak man, or leave a man of\nvigour only half employed. What doctrine does this feature represent?\nProbably that, while all the gifts that a man possesses are bestowed by\nGod, some, such as bodily constitution and mental capacity are conferred\nby God as governor of the world; while others are subsequently conferred\nby the Lord Jesus as the king and head of the Church. I am inclined to\nunderstand these latter gifts by the goods which the master bestowed on\nthe eve of his departure; these gifts are in some way proportioned to\nthe faculties of the receiver, so that one may not be oppressed and\nanother left with inadequate occupation.\n\nThe one who received most and the one who received a medium amount of\ngifts and opportunities proved both faithful, and both faithful alike.\nAlthough the first did absolutely more for Christ and the world than the\nsecond, both were equally diligent and faithful according to their\nmeans. Examples both of the likeness and the difference occur by\nhundreds day by day before our eyes. A disciple with greater and a\ndisciple with smaller endowments labour in the Lord's work with equal\nlove, but the amount of fruit is greater where greater gifts and graces\nhave been received and employed. We shall learn soon how the two cases\nare treated at the master's return, but in the meantime we have observed\nwhat the two cases are.\n\nThe servant who had received one talent went and digged in the earth,\nand hid his lord's money. The meaning of his conduct and its result we\nshall discover more fully when we reach the record of the reckoning; at\npresent, and in general, we may understand that this man made no effort\nto serve his lord, but devoted himself exclusively to one aim,--that he\nmight be able to stand at last on the plea that he had at least done his\nlord no harm.\n\nThese three examples are obviously given in order to cover all cases:\nthey represent an indefinite and all but infinite variety in the measure\nof the gifts.\n\nTwo are represented to have been diligent and only one indolent, but no\ninformation is thereby given regarding the proportions of mankind in\ngeneral or within the Church who shall be found faithful in the great\nday. Two cases were required in order to show that, where the diligence\nof the workers is equal, the result may, in quantity, be unequal; and a\nthird case was required to show that, besides some who lack the power to\ndo much, there are some who lack the will to do anything at all; the\nnumbers have no other meaning.\n\nAnother very important question is suggested here,--What is meant by the\nrepresentation that the person who possessed only one talent became\nunfaithful, rather than the person who possessed two, or the person who\npossessed five? It is precisely analogous to the representation\ncontained in another parable that one man, and not ten or twenty, came\nto the marriage-feast without a marriage garment. Most certainly it does\nnot mean that those who have few talents are more liable to be\nunfaithful than those who have many; and yet something is gained by\nmaking the servant who had received one talent rather than the servant\nwho had received five, the example of unfaithfulness. It does not mean,\nIf you have only one talent you will be unfaithful; but it does mean,\nAlthough you have only one talent, you will be condemned for\nunfaithfulness if you do not employ it. The lesson is much more\nemphatically given than if the servant who received five talents had\nproved unfaithful. Much of the master's property was entrusted to him:\nif he had permitted it to lie waste, and been punished accordingly, it\nmight have been supposed that the essence of the guilt lay in the\nlargeness of the loss. As it is faithfulness, without regard to the\namount of capital at stake, that determines the sentence of approval; so\nit is unfaithfulness, without regard to the amount involved, that\ndetermines the sentence of condemnation. He who has least is bound to\nserve the Lord with what he has; and if he serve the Lord faithfully\nwith little, he will be honoured and rewarded, while those who had\ngreater gifts, but less diligence, will be cast out.\n\nEvery one possesses some talents. He who has bestowed them expects that\nwe shall diligently improve them. He has departed, but he desires that\nwe should act as in his presence. In this respect he is never\nabsent--\"Lo, I am with you alway.\" Now is the time for laying out our\ngifts in the Lord's service; for it will be too late to begin, in\nterror, when he comes to judgment.\n\n\"After a long time the Lord of those servants cometh and reckoneth with\nthem\" (ver. 19). The time is not long in the account of the Lord\nhimself: his latest warning to the Church is, \"Behold I come quickly;\"\nand with him a thousand years are as one day. Nor is the time long to\nungodly men; for in such an hour as they think not, the Son of man\ncometh. At whatever time he comes, he comes too soon for them who would\ngive all the world, if it were theirs, that he should not come at all.\nBut to the true disciples of Christ, especially in times of persecution,\nthe period of his absence has often appeared long: they have often\nborrowed the unbeliever's cry, \"Where is the promise of his coming?\" and\nused it with a new significance. But to saints and sinners, whether they\nlong for his presence or loathe it, he certainly will come at length.\n\nThe two who had received from their Lord unequal gifts, and had laid\nthem out with equal faithfulness, give in their account with joy. They\nare equally approved; and either is rewarded with the fruit of his own\ndiligence.\n\nThe case of the unfaithful one, in accordance with the obvious design of\nthe parable, is given with much greater fulness of detail than those of\nthe faithful two. Permitting our comment on this point to mould itself\nafter the proportions of the text, we shall look more narrowly into this\nman's character and conduct. All the more willingly shall we devote the\nmost of our attention to the darker side of the picture, that the\nevangelical obedience of the faithful servants may be most distinctly\nseen in the dark mirror of the opposite unfruitfulness.\n\nIn the case of the unprofitable servant, as it emerges in the latter\nportion of the parable, three points demand our attention separately and\nsuccessively,--the Reason, the Nature, and the Reward of his\nunfaithfulness.\n\n1. The reason of his unfaithfulness, as explained by himself, is, \"I\nknew thee that thou art an hard man,\" &c. The naive confession of this\nman is a very interesting feature of the story, and a very precious\nlesson to us regarding the deep things of God. Through this opening\nlight is thrown at once upon the spring of continued disobedience in\nhuman hearts, and upon the nature of the remedy which the ailment needs.\n\nSome persons take much pains to extol a good life at the expense of the\nmysteries of grace. They know not that they are endeavouring to break\nthe upper links of a chain, while themselves are suspended on the lower.\nAll the value of service rendered by intellectual and moral beings\ndepends on the thoughts of God which they entertain; and the thoughts\nwhich they entertain of God depend on the attitude in which he presents\nhimself to them--that is, upon the revelation of the Father in the\nperson and work of the Son.\n\nObviously the conception which this man had formed of his master's\ncharacter, was the direct efficient cause of his unprofitable idleness.\nThe picture, at this point, represents a human heart secretly conscious\nof guilt, not reconciled through the Gospel, and dreading the wrath of\nthe righteous Judge. When one is at peace with God in the Redeemer,\nperfect love casteth out fear; but here, in the absence of this\nreconciliation, perfect fear casteth out love. Love is the fulfilling of\nthe law; and without love there can, in God's sight, be no obedience.\nThus, by a few links which can neither be obscured nor broken, active\nobedience is bound to faith in Christ. Where faith in the Mediator is\nwanting, God, as shown in a guilty conscience, is dreaded as an enemy;\nand such fear produces no obedience. You might as well sow stones in\nyour field, and expect them to produce bread.\n\nIt is not necessary to examine in detail the continuation of the\nunfaithful servant's answer. When he had taken his ground on a sullen\nplea of not guilty which threw the blame upon his Lord, it was natural\nthat he should endeavour to justify himself and fortify his position by\nspecific averments of hard treatment; but the essence of his answer lies\nall in his first words, \"I knew thee hard.\" The meaning cannot be\nmistaken here. These words do not make known to us what the master's\ncharacter really was: the only thing which they determine is the\nservant's conception of the master's character. The servant's conduct\nis, in point of fact, regulated not by what the master absolutely is,\nbut by what he is in the belief and regard of the servant.\n\nThe parable represents at once, with rich pictorial effect and strict\nlogical exactness, the legal relation of sinful men to a righteous God,\napart from the peace that comes through the Gospel. While you think of\nthe Judge, recording now your thoughts, words, and actions, in order to\nrender unto you what you deserve in the great day, you cannot love him,\nand you do not like to retain the knowledge of him in your mind. The\nBible calls him good, and perhaps your lips have pronounced him good in\nyour prayers and hymns; but what you really know of him in your heart is\nhis hardness. This hard measure expected, haunts you like a spectre, and\ncasts a dark shadow over your path. Whatever your ears may hear or your\nlips may speak, you know God only as the disturber of your joy in life,\nand the inexorable exactor of impossible penalties at last.\n\nThe natural and necessary, as well as actual result of this knowledge or\nconception of the master, is the utter idleness of the servant. Tell a\ncriminal in chains that by his own hands he must remove yonder mountain\ninto the sea in the space of one year, on pain of death when the year\nis done, and the certain result will be that the wretched man will\npermit the appointed time to expire without removing a single atom of\nits mass; but on the other hand, let it be gently intimated to some\nemancipated slaves that their service in removing earth from that\nmountain to the sea will please their deliverer, and forthwith they will\ncarry with all their might, their burden meanwhile being their delight,\nbecause they have thereby an opportunity of serving the Lord that bought\nthem. Thus the idleness of one servant is explained, and the activity of\nothers.\n\n2. As to its nature, the disobedience was not active but passive; he did\nnot positively injure his master's property; he simply failed to turn it\nto profitable account. The terror of this servant was too lively to\nadmit of his enjoying a debauch purchased by the treasure which had been\nplaced under his charge. Fear is a powerful motive in certain directions\nand for certain effects; it makes itself felt in the heart, and leaves\nits mark on the life of a man. Like frost it has power to arrest the\nstream of energy, and fix it cold, stiff, motionless; only love can,\nlike the sun of summer, break the chains and set the prisoner free to\nrun his race rejoicing.\n\nThe passive character of the servant's fault greatly extends the sphere\nof the lesson, and increases the weight of its rebuke. If only positive\nactivity in evil had been condemned, a multitude of the unfaithful would\nhave escaped, or at least would have thought themselves exempted from\nthe indictment. The bearers of poisonous fruit constitute a\ncomparatively small class in the vegetable creation; the plants that\nbear no good fruit are much more numerous. Unfruitfulness includes both\nthose that bear bad fruit and those that bear no fruit. The idleness of\nthe servant who knew his master only as a hard man, reproves all except\nthose who obey the Lord whom they love, and love the Lord whom they\nobey.\n\n3. The reward of unfaithfulness is, \"Take the talent from him and cast\nhim out.\" In both parts the sentence of condemnation corresponds to\nits opposite in the reception of those who had been faithful to their\ntrust. These retain their employed gifts; from him the unused talent is\ntaken away. These are received into their master's favour; he is cast\nout of his master's sight.\n\nIt is worthy of remark that the execution of the sentence begins in\ntime, and in its first stages lies within the reach of our observation.\nThe portion of the sentence, moreover, which is inflicted in our sight,\ncomes through the regular operation of law. The disuse of any personal\nfaculty, surely, though gradually, takes the faculty away. Those who\nexplain away the positive doctrines and facts of the Gospel, delight in\nrepresenting that God does everything by the instrumentality of law. It\nis superstition, they say, to suppose that he will put forth his hand to\narrest the mighty machinery of nature, with a view either to punish your\nguilt or reward your obedience. Here at least we can meet them on their\nown ground, and accept their rule. Let any member of the body, or any\nfaculty of the mind lie dormant for a time, and by the very fact, its\npower is diminished or destroyed. It is a law of life that a talent\nbecomes feeble in proportion as it has been left in idleness. It is not\nonly true in point of fact that when we do not diligently lay out our\ngifts, the Giver recalls them; it is further true, that he recalls them\nin our sight by the silent operation of an inexorable law.\n\nTo waste life in the hope of getting all made right by an energetic\nrepentance at the close, is a very foolish and mischievous species of\nsuperstition; it is the exercise of a very strong faith, without any\npromise from God on which it may lean. You seem to expect that God will\narrest the operation of his own laws in order to afford you every\nfacility for living in sin. In the Scriptures we read of an interference\nwith the natural laws--the sun standing still--in order that the enemies\nof the Lord and his people might be destroyed; but you expect a greater\nmiracle;--you expect the Omnipotent to arrest the operation of his own\nlaws, in order that his enemies may prosper now and escape at last. You\nexpect that Jesus will work a miracle not to cast out the unclean\nspirit, but to maintain him in possession of a human heart. The disuse\nof the talent takes the talent away; this is the law of the kingdom; and\nit will not be changed in order to encourage the sinner in his sin.\n\n\"For unto every one that hath shall be given,\" &c. Obviously from the\nwhole circumstances of the case, \"to have\" in this connection, means to\npossess and use aright. He who received only one talent was\ndistinguished from him who received five, not by not having, but by not\nusing. The law announced here is that they who employ well what they\nhave, shall retain it all and receive more in addition; whereas they who\ndo not rightly employ what they have, will be deprived of that which\nthey possess but do not use.\n\nFearing lest I should darken counsel by words without knowledge, I leave\nthe positive penal infliction, which takes effect beyond the precincts\nof this life, without one word of comment, in the short and solemn words\nof the Scripture, \"Cast ye the unprofitable servant into outer darkness:\nthere shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth.\"\n\nThe sentence \"Take it from him,\" goes before the sentence, \"Cast him\nout.\" A sinner is given over to himself, before he is given up to\njudgment. The first prepares the way for the second death; the process\nis now going on by which the destiny is decided. Now is the accepted\ntime; now either salvation or condemnation is wrought out.\n\nSee the process and the path of death; the steps are few and well\nmarked. I knew thee hard, and I hid thy talent; take it from him, and\ncast him out. The corresponding steps on the other side are, I tasted\nthy tender mercy, and lovingly laid thy talent out; give the faithful\nservant more, and lead him into the joy of his Lord.\n\nThe stumbling-block at the outset that turned the unfaithful servant\naside was his conception of the Lord as a hard master: it is the\nexperience of the master's love that impels the servant forward in the\npath of duty. When we know God in Christ, we know him reconciled to\nourselves. Christ, therefore, is the way; by him we go _in_ to the\nFather for acceptance, and by him we go _out_ for needful work upon the\nworld. Without me ye can get nothing from God; \"Without me ye can do\nnothing\" for God.\n\n\n\n\nXV.\n\nTHE SEED GROWING SECRETLY.\n\n\n\"And he said, So is the kingdom of God, as if a man should cast seed\n into the ground; and should sleep, and rise night and day, and the\n seed should spring and grow up, he knoweth not how. For the earth\n bringeth forth fruit of herself; first the blade, then the ear,\n after that the full corn in the ear. But when the fruit is brought\n forth, immediately he putteth in the sickle, because the harvest is\n come.\"--MARK iv. 26-29.\n\nThis is the only parable that is peculiar to Mark. The subjects\ncontained in the fourth chapter of Mark are obviously the same, in the\nmain, as those which occupy the thirteenth chapter of Matthew. The\nparable of the sower occurs in both at the beginning; and at several\nother parts they coincide. The parable of the seed growing secretly\nholds in Mark the place that the parable of the leaven holds in Matthew.\nWe might, therefore, expect a close analogy between these two parables:\nand accordingly we find in point of fact that they exhibit the same\ncharacteristics of the kingdom, and convey the same lessons to its\nsubjects.\n\nWhen a man has cast the seed into prepared ground at the proper season,\nhe thenceforth leaves it to itself. He sleeps by night, and attends to\nother affairs by day, often looking to it indeed, and oftener thinking\nof it, but never touching it till harvest. By its own vitality it grows\nsecretly, gradually until it arrives at maturity. Man interferes only at\nthe beginning and at the end; in spring he sows, and in autumn he reaps,\nbut throughout the interval between these extremes he lets it alone.\nThe point on which the parable concentrates our regard is, that the\ngrowth of the plant, from the time of sowing to the time of reaping,\nproceeds according to its own laws, and in virtue of its own inherent\npower, neither visible to the owner's eye nor dependent on his hand.\n\nIn the interpretation of the parable certain great leading points must\nfirst be determined, and then all the rest will be safe and easy.\n\nThere are two such points, one at the beginning and one at the end,\nwhich are in themselves uncertain; and one in the middle which, being\nitself determined by circumstances, serves to determine the other two.\nThe question at the beginning is, Who is the sower? And the question at\nthe end, What is the reaping? The point in the centre already fixed, on\nwhich the two extremities depend, is the growth of the seed without the\naid, and even beyond the cognisance, of the sower.\n\nLook first to the question which meets an inquirer at the outset, Who is\nthe sower? Obviously it has two sides and two only; the sower represents\neither the Lord himself, or the human ministry that he employs from age\nto age. Both representations are in themselves true and scriptural; it\nis by means of other features less ambiguous that we shall be able to\ndetermine whether of the two is adopted in this parable. Try first the\nsupposition that the sower is the Lord himself; of him, in that case, it\nis immediately said that he sleeps, and rises night and day, and that\nthe seed meanwhile springs up, he knows not how. This representation is\npalpably incongruous with the attributes and character of the Lord. The\nthings that are hidden from us, both in the natural and spiritual\ngrowth, are open in his sight. Expressly it is said of Jesus, \"he knew\nwhat was in man;\" and we learn, from many circumstances in the evangelic\nhistory, that he knew the thoughts alike of plotting enemies and of\nfainting friends. The suggestion made by some that this part of the\nparable may be understood to represent the Lord's ascension into heaven,\nafter having sown the word in his own ministry, does not satisfy the\ndemands of the case. We cannot, without doing extreme violence to the\nanalogy, find a sense in which the divine Redeemer does not help and\ndoes not know the growth of his own grace in believing hearts. The\ngermination and increase of vegetation without the intervention of the\nsower and beyond his ken, represent a helplessness and an ignorance so\ndefinite and complete, that we cannot, on any rule of sober\ninterpretation, apply it to the omniscient and omnipotent Redeemer.\n\nThe impossibility of accepting the first suggestion throws us\nnecessarily back on the only other supposition that remains;--the sower\nin the parable must represent the earthen vessel to which the ministry\nof the Gospel has been entrusted,--the human agent employed in the work\nof the Lord. This will, of course, accord perfectly with the\nrepresentation in the heart of the parable that he who sows the seed\nneither helps the growth nor understands its secrets; but does it accord\nalso with the representation, in the end of the parable, that he who in\nspring sowed the seed, thrusts in his sickle and reaps the ripened\nharvest? Some, assuming that the reaping means the closing of all\naccounts in the great day,[55] conclude that to represent the sowing as\nthe ministry of men is incongruous with the reaping, which must, as\nthey suppose, be the work of the Lord at his second coming. In this way\nthey become involved between two impossibilities. If the Lord himself is\nrepresented as the sower the representation is inconsistent with the\nmiddle of the parable, in which it is declared that he neither aids nor\nunderstands the growth of the grain; if, on the other hand, men are\nrepresented as the sowers, the representation is inconsistent with the\nend of the parable, in which it is declared that they thrust in the\nsickle at the close of the dispensation and reap the harvest of the\nworld.\n\n [55] Dr. Trench takes for granted, without a word of proof, or any\n evidence that he has even considered the question, that the reaping\n is the consummation of all things, the exclusive prerogative of the\n Lord.\n\nNow in order to escape from this double difficulty it is not necessary\nto put to the rack either the words or the thoughts of the parable. The\npath out of the difficulty is broad and straight; it is the path into it\nthat is crooked and narrow.\n\nThe question which demands solution here, and which, when solved, will\nsolve all the rest, is, What is meant by thrusting in the sickle and\nreaping the ripened grain when the harvest has come? Apart from this\nparable two distinct significations may be attributed to the analogy,\nboth alike true in fact, and both alike adopted in the Scriptures. In\nsome cases the harvest and the reaping point to the end of the world and\nthe awards of the judgment; expressly in the Lord's own interpretation\nof the parable of the tares, it is said, \"The harvest is the end of the\nworld, and the reapers are the angels\" (Matt. xiii. 39). But in other\ncases the reaping of the ripened grain is employed to represent that\nsuccess in the winning of souls which human ministers of the word may\nobtain and enjoy. Such is its meaning in Ps. cxxvi. 6, \"He that goeth\nforth and reapeth, bearing precious seed, shall doubtless come again\nwith rejoicing, bringing his sheaves with him.\" In the same sense it is\nemployed by the Lord (John iv. 35, 36), \"Say not ye, There are yet four\nmonths, and then cometh harvest? behold I say unto you, Lift up your\neyes, and look on the fields; for they are white already unto harvest.\nAnd he that reapeth receiveth wages, and gathereth fruit unto life\neternal: that both he that soweth and he that reapeth may rejoice\ntogether.\" The same idea is expressed in terms, if possible, still more\narticulate, in Matt. ix. 37, 38. \"The harvest truly is plenteous, but\nthe labourers are few; pray ye therefore the Lord of the harvest, that\nhe will send forth labourers unto his harvest.\"[56]\n\n [56] Bengel's suggestion is ingenious and interesting, but\n contributes nothing towards the solution. \"Sermo concisus. Mittet\n falce preditos, nam [Greek: apostellesthai] est viventis cujuspiam.\"\n He would understand the phrase \"he putteth in the sickle\" as a curt\n form of expression, intended to intimate that he sends out reapers\n with sickles to reap the grain; fortifying his opinion by the remark\n that the term \"putteth in,\" ([Greek: apostellei], \"sends out,\")\n refers to a living person, and not an inanimate instrument.\n Countenance for this view might be found in Matt. ix. 37 where\n [Greek: ekbalein] equivalent to [Greek: apostellesthai] is employed\n to indicate the sending forth of reapers. On the other hand,\n however, the passage, Rev. xiv. 15, 16, goes decidedly against it;\n for there both [Greek: pemmtein] and [Greek: ballein], \"thrust in\"\n (the sickle) are certainly applied to the instrument itself, and not\n to the men who wield it.\n\nBut while the symbol taken from the reaping of ripened grain represents\nalternately in Scripture, these two distinct though analogous\nconceptions, it is the latter and not the former which this parable\nadopts and employs. The reapers are the human ministers of the word, and\nthe reaping is their successful ingathering in conversion here, not the\nadmission of the redeemed into glory at the end of the world.\n\nNo other conclusion is compatible, either with the scope of the lesson\nor the facts of the case. The sower in this story neither helps the seed\nto grow nor understands how the growth proceeds. The parable is spoken\nin order to show that, while men are employed at first to preach the\nword and at last to gather the fruits in the conversion of their\nbrethren, they can neither perform the converting work nor trace the\nfootsteps of the quickening Spirit in the secrets of a human heart. By\nthis similitude the Lord represents the extent and the limits of human\nagency in the progress of his kingdom.\n\nHaving made our way through the difficulties of the parable, and found\nthe key-note of its interpretation, we turn again to its terms for the\nsake of observing and applying the practical lessons which it contains.\n\nThe sower sows the seed; the seed is the word; the hearts of those who\nhear it are the field. Parents make known the Gospel in their families,\nministers in the congregations, teachers in the schools. These sowers\nlose sight of the seed from the moment that it drops into the ground. It\nsinks and disappears; they must go away and leave it. They sleep by\nnight,[57] and attend to other matters by day; they cannot see how it\nfares with the Gospel in a neighbour's soul. They cannot put their hand\nto the work at this stage to help it: the seed must be left to itself in\nthe soil.\n\n [57] Here, as in the case of the tares, the sleep of the husbandman\n implies no culpable negligence either in the natural or spiritual\n sphere. \"Sind wir am Tage recht wach; dann, moegen wir Nachts ruhig\n schlafen.\"--_Draeseke, vom Reich G._\n\nAt this point the likeness between the natural and the spiritual is\nexact and obvious. When you have made the Gospel of Christ known to some\nin whom you are interested, you are precisely in the position of the\nagriculturist who has committed his seed to the ground. If you think of\nthe matter when you lie down, or when you awake, you discover, perhaps\nwith pain, that you do not know whether the seed is swelling and\nspringing or not: and that though you knew its condition you could not\nreach it, to stimulate the process. It is out of your hands, and out of\nyour sight. It is not, however, out of mind, when it is out of sight;\nand your own helplessness may draw forth a more eager prayer to the\nAlmighty Helper. In this way it is when we are weak that we become\nstrong; it is when we are made most keenly sensible of our own weakness\nthat we cast our care most fully on the Lord. The law that shuts the\nsown seed out from us, shuts it in with God. One door closes; but the\nclosing that hides the seed in its seed-bed from our eyes and separates\nit from our hands, leaves it open to His sight, and pliant to his power.\nThe moment that the seed is sown, he takes it out of our sight, but then\nand thereby he brings it into his own. It is away from us, and with\nGod.[58]\n\n [58] Like the seed, is the Word himself. He became flesh and dwelt\n among us; but he has ascended out of our sight. At the beginning he\n came into the world; and at the close he will return;--a spring and\n a harvest, but all the space between, he is out of sight.\n\nThe parable shows, with great perspicuity and certainty, both the extent\nand the limits of this withdrawal from human cognizance and help. In the\nmain concern the exclusion is complete; but in some subordinate and\nincidental matters, it is only partial. As to the power of germination,\nand the knowledge of it, the sower is entirely shut out from the seed,\nboth in the natural and spiritual departments. But as he may continue\nhis care in nature, with much profit to the seed; so he may, in a\nsubordinate capacity and in an indirect manner, do much to promote the\ngrowth of grace in the heart, after the Word has been addressed to the\nunderstanding. The exclusion of a minister, a teacher, a parent, from\nknowing and helping the growth of grace after the Gospel has been\npublished, is like the exclusion of the farmer from his seed after it\nhas been committed to the ground. He can help it, and does help it much\nby his care. He keeps the fences up, that the field may not be trampled\nby stray cattle: he keeps the drains open and the furrows clear, that\nwater may not stand on the field, but run off as soon as it falls: he\ngathers off the stones, that they may not crush the seed, and pulls out\nthe weeds that they may not choke it.\n\nIn a similar way and with similar profit, ministers and teachers of the\nword may remove obstructions which would prevent its growth. Not only\nhave we permission to do this: we are bound positively to do it. The\nparable excludes us indeed from further knowledge or power, after the\nword is made known, but it excludes as the farmer is excluded from his\nsown seed. We know the nature and extent of that exclusion. While the\nlesson relieves us from the responsibility of that which is beyond our\npower, it lays upon us the responsibility of that which is within our\npower.\n\nYou may have seen a sown field in spring immediately after a great\nrain-fall; and you may have observed that a large portion of it, on its\nlower side, was smooth, and run together and caked, bearing all the\nmarks of having been for some days under water. On the higher portions\nthe wheat was springing, but on this portion, sown at the same time, the\nground was bare. You examine the matter more minutely and discover that\nthe drains that had been made for carrying off the surplus moisture, had\nbeen choked in the operations of the seed-time, and not cleared out\nagain; and that consequently when rain fell heavily, it accumulated on\nthe lower ground; and having soaked and soured it for several days, had\nkilled the germinating seed beneath the ground. You go to the farmer and\nask why he had allowed a large portion of his crop to be lost. Suppose\nhe should say, My work was done, as soon as the seed fell from my hand\ninto the soil; I can neither make it grow, nor understand how it grows;\nit was not in my province that the failure took place, and therefore the\nfailure could not be my fault. No such specimen of hypocrisy is found in\nthe kingdom of nature: no man could hold up his face before his fellow\nand cover his indolence by such an impudent plea.\n\nWe must see to it, that we be not guilty of the same inconsistency in\nmatters of greater moment. A parent or minister or teacher has committed\nthe good seed of the word to the hearts of his young people, with all\ndue solemnity and care; and thereafter permits them to be steeped in a\nflood of folly, which he could easily have drained away. The good seed\nis drowned in that deluge; but it is the sower's fault. It is true he\ncannot make it grow by his care; but he can make it not grow by his\ncarelessness. We cannot do the saving; but we can do the destroying.\nMany pains and many prayers are competent to the sower, although he\ncannot directly control the growth of the seed. When it grows, it grows\nindependently of him; but when it fails, the failure may in part be due\nto his unfaithfulness.\n\nFurther, when it is said that the earth bringeth forth fruit of herself,\nthe influences of heaven are not excluded, any more than the collateral\ncare of the husbandman. We know how and in what sense the earth brings\nforth spontaneously, after it has received the seed into its bosom: if\nthe sun were kept from shining, or the rain from falling on it, the\nearth would produce nothing. It is thus also with grace in the heart:\nthe Spirit ministering the things of Christ is as necessary in the\nkingdom of grace, as rain and sunshine are in the kingdom of nature.\n\nSurrounding circumstances, moreover, tend powerfully to help\nor to hinder the growth of the new life. The seed grows indeed by its\nown vitality: the most favourable circumstances that are possible on\nearth could not produce a harvest of grace without the seed of the Word;\nbut these circumstances go far instrumentally to help or to hinder the\ngrowth and ripening of the seed. The family of which you are a member,\neither as child or servant,--the Church with which you worship,--the\ncompanions with whom you associate,--the tone of the society in which\nyour social life moves on,--the business that occupies your day,--and\nthe amusements that refresh you when you are wearied;--these and many\nothers affect for good or evil the growth of grace in Christians, as wet\nor dry, cold or warm seasons, affect the growth of the seed after it has\nbeen committed to the ground. Watch and pray; one of these small points\nmay be the turning-point of your destiny.\n\nThe seed grows gradually from stage to stage. Three stages are\nspecified; first the blade, then the ear, then the full corn in the ear.\nThis does not determine the time occupied in the spiritual process. In\nthis respect there is not uniformity: the spiritual growth from spring\nto maturity sometimes requires more than one natural season, and\nsometimes is accomplished in less.\n\nIn the first stage of growth, it is not easy to distinguish with\ncertainty between the wheat and common grass; it is when the ear is\nformed and filled, that you know at a glance, which is the fruitful and\nwhich the fruitless plant There is a similar ambiguity, in as far as\nappearance is concerned, in the earliest outgrowth of convictions from\nthe hearing of the word. Not that there is any uncertainty in the nature\nof the things: the wheat is wheat, and the grass is grass from the\nfirst: but an observer cannot so surely at first determine which is\nwheat, and which is merely grass.\n\nThus, many hopeful impressions that appear for a while in the young, die\naway, and bring forth no fruit; but at later stages, a judgment may be\nformed with greater confidence. The plant assumes by degrees a more\ndefinite form, and a more substantial fulness: the fruits of the Spirit,\ngreen at first, but growing gradually more and more mellow, crown the\nprofession of a Christian.\n\nLet us not deceive ourselves, in connection with the acknowledged\nsecrecy of the Spirit's work. The growing is an unseen thing; but\nthe grown ripened grain is visible. It is the inner power that is hid;\nthe fruit may be seen by all. There is indeed an invisible Christ, who\nis already within his people the resurrection and the life; but there is\nno invisible Christianity. How grace in the heart grows is an\ninscrutable mystery; when it is grown, it is known and read of all men.\nYour life, as to its source and supply, is hid with Christ in God: but\nyour life, as to its practical effects, is a city set on a hill. There\nis a great difference between the light that you get and the light that\nyou give. The Lord in heaven is the light of Christians; but Christians\nare the light of the world.\n\nThe source of the mighty Ganges is secret; and that secret the\nsuperstition of the Hindus has converted into a religious mystery. But\nthe Ganges is not a secret unseen thing, as it flows through the plains\nof India, fertilizing a continent.\n\n\"The harvest is come.\" It is not the end of the world; it is not even\nthe close of a Christian life in the world. There is a ripening and a\nfruit-bearing while life in the body lasts: there is also a reaping and\nan enjoying of the harvest by those who sow the seed, or their\nsuccessors. The announcement, \"one soweth and another reapeth,\" clearly\nimplies that the same one who sows may also to some extent reap. There\nis part of both: a sower gathers some of the fruit of his labour in his\nown lifetime; and some of it is gathered by others after he has\ndeparted.\n\nHere is a lesson for ministers and teachers. The Lord, who sends them\nout to sow, expects that they will look and long for fruit, and be\ndisappointed if it does not appear. When the case occurs, as occur it\nmay, in which the sower is not permitted to reap, the delay, although\nnot a ground of despair, should be a source of disappointment: the\nstroke will be felt painful, if there is life where the stroke falls.\nThe giver of the seed expects that the sower, if he lives to see it\nripening, will reap it joyfully. It is like the joy of harvest to see\nthe Lord's work prospering under our own hand. The Master seems to chide\nthe inertness of his servants when he says, \"the fields are white\nalready to harvest.\" If it were their meat, as it was his, to do the\nFather's will, they would bound more quickly into the field, whenever\nthey saw it whitening.\n\nSome lessons, partly encouraging, partly reproving, which lie in the\nparable, but have hitherto been either omitted or only incidentally\ntouched in the course of exposition, may be now conveniently enumerated\nin the close.\n\n1. The work of sowing and the joy of reaping advance simultaneously on\nthe spiritual field. The labour of the husbandman in the natural sphere\nis all and only sowing at one season, all and only reaping at another:\nthe seed of the word affords a different experience; in the kingdom of\nGod there is no period of the year when you must not sow, or may not\nreap. These two processes are in experience very closely linked\ntogether. They become alternately and reciprocally cause and effect: if\nwe were not permitted at an early period to reap a little, the work of\nsowing would proceed languidly or altogether cease; on the other hand if\nwe cease to sow, we shall not long continue to reap. When the workmen\nare introduced into this circle, it carries them continuously round.\n\n2. In any given spot of the field there may be sowing in spring, and yet\nno reaping in harvest. If there is no sowing, there will be no reaping;\nbut the converse does not hold good; you cannot say, wherever there has\nbeen sowing, it will be followed by a reaping. The seed may be carried\naway by wild birds, or wither on stony ground, or be choked by thorns.\n\"Watch and pray that ye enter not into temptation.\"\n\n3. The growth of the sown seed is secret; secret also is its failure. It\nis quite true, there may be grace in the heart of a neighbour unseen,\nunsuspected by me; but the heart of my neighbour may be graceless while\nI am in its earlier stages ignorant of the fact. The gnawing of a worm\nat the root of one plant is for a time as secret as the healthful growth\nof another. \"Lord, is it I?\" I must not too lightly assume either in the\nnatural or the spiritual husbandry, that everything is prospering that\nis out of sight.\n\n4. Though the sower is helpless after he has cast the seed into the\nground, he should not be hopeless; we know that the seed is a living\nthing, and will grow except where it is impeded by extraneous\nobstacles. \"The word of God is quick (living) and powerful.\"\n\n5. In every case the harvest, in one sense, will come; on every spot of\nall the field there will be a reaping. If one set of ministers do not\nreap there, another will. Where there is not conversion, there will be\ncondemnation. The regeneration is one harvest; the judgment is another.\nThe angels are not sowers, but they are reapers. Where the men who sowed\nthe seed find nothing to reap during the day of grace, those ministering\nspirits to whom no seed has been intrusted will be sent with a sickle to\ncut down and cast away. The first harvest is like the first\nresurrection; blessed are they who have part in it. In the ministry of\nthe Baptist, the appointed preparer of his way, Christ comes from heaven\nto earth on the blessed errand of gathering his wheat into the garner:\nrejoice therefore, Christians; he has prepared for you a place, and he\nwill bring you safely to it; but take heed and beware of hypocrisy; for\nsee, while he comes to bring home the wheat, he carries a \"fan in his\nhand\" (Matt. iii. 12).\n\n\n\n\nXVI.\n\nTHE TWO DEBTORS.\n\n\n\"And one of the Pharisees desired him that he would eat with him. And he\n went into the Pharisee's house, and sat down to meat. And, behold, a\n woman in the city, which was a sinner, when she knew that Jesus sat\n at meat in the Pharisee's house, brought an alabaster box of\n ointment, and stood at his feet behind him weeping, and began to\n wash his feet with tears, and did wipe them with the hairs of her\n head, and kissed his feet, and anointed them with the ointment. Now\n when the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he spake within\n himself, saying, This man, if he were a prophet, would have known\n who and what manner of woman this is that toucheth him; for she is a\n sinner. And Jesus answering said unto him, Simon, I have somewhat to\n say unto thee. And he saith, Master, say on. There was a certain\n creditor which had two debtors: the one owed five hundred pence, and\n the other fifty. And when they had nothing to pay, he frankly\n forgave them both. Tell me therefore, which of them will love him\n most? Simon answered and said, I suppose that he, to whom he forgave\n most. And he said unto him, Thou hast rightly judged. And he turned\n to the woman, and said unto Simon, Seest thou this woman? I entered\n into thine house, thou gavest me no water for my feet: but she hath\n washed my feet with tears, and wiped them with the hairs of her\n head. Thou gavest me no kiss: but this woman since the time I came\n in hath not ceased to kiss my feet. My head with oil thou didst not\n anoint: but this woman hath anointed my feet with ointment.\n Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins, which are many, are forgiven;\n for she loved much: but to whom little is forgiven, the same loveth\n little. And he said unto her, Thy sins are forgiven. And they that\n sat at meat with him began to say within themselves, Who is this\n that forgiveth sins also? And he said to the woman, Thy faith hath\n saved thee; go in peace.\"--LUKE vii. 36-50.\n\nAn interesting and difficult question regarding the harmony of the\nGospels generally attaches itself to the exposition of this parable.\nEach of the four Evangelists narrates that a woman anointed Jesus while\nhe sat at table; and it becomes difficult to determine with certainty\nwhether they refer all to the same event, or some to one event, and some\nto another. In the narratives features of similarity occur; leading to\nthe one conclusion, and features of dissimilarity leading to the other.\nThe prevailing opinion now is that Matthew, Mark, and John, speak all of\nthe same fact, and that Luke speaks of another. I have thought it right\nto mention, that this question has been often discussed in connection\nwith our parable; but I shall do no more. The decision of it here and\nnow is by no means necessary: the interpretation of the parable does not\nin any measure depend upon it. It is an inquiry belonging to a different\nbranch of Scripture exposition, and to discuss it here would tend to\ndistract attention from the subject in hand.\n\nAssuming then without argument that Luke here records an event which is\nnot mentioned by any of the other Evangelists, I shall proceed at once\nto examine its substance as the ground from which the parable directly\nsprings. The husbandman at one time operates directly on the tree, and\nat another time directly on the ground in the neighbourhood; in both\ncases however, and in both alike, his aim is to increase the\nfruitfulness of the tree; it is thus that an expositor must in some\ninstances turn his attention in the first place to the surrounding\ncontext which suggests and sustains the parable, as the best means of\nascertaining the import of the parable itself.\n\nA Pharisee invited Jesus to a feast: he accepted the invitation and\njoined the company at the appointed place and time. A woman who had been\nof bad character in the town, as soon as she learned that he was there,\nentered the apartment where the guests reclined at meat, and stood at\nhis feet behind him weeping. Her tears rained down on his feet; she\nwiped them off with her hair, and then anointed them with precious\nointment.\n\nLet us endeavour to determine precisely the character of the several\nactors and the meaning of their acts.\n\nThe Pharisee, having formed, on the whole, a favourable opinion of Jesus\nas a prophet in Israel, and being, as he supposed, in a position to act\nthe patron, with benevolent intent, but with a high estimate of his own\ncharacter and position, invited to his house and table the remarkable\nNazarene, whose miracles and doctrines were in every one's mouth.\nDoubtless he expected, also, that by closer contact, and by means of his\nown shrewd observation, he should be able definitely to make up his mind\non the character of the new prophet, and so to favour or frown on him\naccording to the result.\n\nWhile her actions only are recorded in the narrative, we may, by the\nlight of the Lord's subsequent declarations, also read without danger of\nmistake the emotions that were working in this woman's heart. She had\nfallen into a course of vice, and consequently lost caste in the\ncommunity. Knowing that she had lost the respect of her neighbours, she\nhad lost respect for herself. From a sinful act she had glided into\nsinful habits. Perhaps remorse from time to time made her inwardly\nsorrowful; but she put on a bold countenance, and tried to laugh down\nrebuke.\n\nThis woman, while in this state, crept one day to the outer edge of a\ncrowd in the neighbourhood of the city, to satisfy her curiosity as to\nthe cause of the concourse. In the centre stood Jesus of Nazareth\npreaching; and all the people in solemn silence hung upon his lips. She\nlistened too, and heard some wonderful words; God loved the world; God\npardons sin--pardons freely, pardons it all; pardons chief sinners;\nloves to pardon; has given his Son to seek and save; this is the Son,\nrevealing the Father, and inviting the prodigal to return to the\nFather's bosom. Hark; he says, \"Come unto me all that labour and are\nheavy laden, and I will give you rest.\" Peeping through openings in the\ncrowd, she might see the love that beamed in the preacher's countenance,\nas well as hear the gracious words that came from his mouth.\n\nThe woman's heart is touched and taken; the woman is won. By that still\nsmall voice the devil's chains are broken, the rocky heart is rent. When\nthe congregation dissolves, she steals away to her house alone. There\nher eye falls on some gaudy ornaments, the instruments of her sin, and\nthe badges of her shame. Whence this sudden strong loathing? Perhaps she\ngrasps them convulsively and flings them on the fire, shutting her eyes\nthat she may not see her tormentors. She sits down, and searches her own\nheart,--her own life. She discovers that it is altogether vile. Her own\nheart is the darkest, deepest pit out of hell; she is the chief of\nsinners. She never knew this before. She had often experienced twitches\nof conscience for particular acts of evil; but now her whole life and\nher whole being seem one dark, deep, crimson sin. What has done this? It\nwas that word of Jesus; it was the pardon that he offered; it was the\ndivine compassion that beamed on his countenance and glowed on his lips.\nShe was melted. The old stony heart flowed down like water, and went\naway; and a new, tender, trustful, loving heart came up in its place.\nShe is not the same woman that she was yesterday. She is a new creature\nin Christ Jesus; but she could not yet tell the name and describe the\nnature of the change that had taken place in her being, as a new-born\nchild could not announce the fact and explain the nature of its birth.\nThe infant will manifest its birth and life, by seeking sustenance from\nits mother's breast; and when the child has grown, the grown man will\nreflect on his birth, and perhaps understand in some measure its nature\nand importance. Such was the passing from death into life in the\nexperience of that woman. Conversion in our own day often takes place as\nsecretly, and as soon. The word of the Lord that proved itself quick and\npowerful then, liveth and abideth the same for ever; and this is the\nword which by the Gospel is preached unto us still.\n\nThe natural history of conversion does not change with the lapse of\ncenturies, any more than natural history in other departments; there\nwere doubtless examples of secret regeneration in the time of our Lord\nand his apostles, as well as in our own time. He knew this woman's case\nas well as he knew the case of the woman who pressed through the crowd\nto touch the hem of his garment. That woman, when she was healed, would\nhave kept her case secret at the time if she could; she was put about\nand ashamed when she was called in public, and her experience proclaimed\nin the crowd. It suited the purpose of the Lord to make known her\nexperience on the spot; that method he saw would do most for his\nkingdom. But in the case of this woman who was a sinner, he did not act\nin the same way. There are diversities in his operation. He foresaw an\noccasion when her repentance and faith could be turned to greater\naccount; accordingly he postponed the public announcement of her\nforgiveness till then. True to the new instinct that had been planted in\nher heart, this saved sinner, as soon as she heard that Jesus sat at\nmeat in the Pharisee's house, grasped the richest offering she possessed\nand hastened to the spot. Her plans, I think, were not fully laid. The\nimpulses of a bursting heart drew her to the place where her Redeemer\nwas; but she had not foreseen all the difficulties, and consequently had\nnot prepared the means of overcoming them.\n\nArrived at the house, she entered the open door; and passing through the\nattendants, penetrated into the apartment where the company reclined at\nmeat. The table stood in the middle of the hall, and sofas in a\ncontinuous line were placed near it on either side. On these sofas were\nthe guests, not sitting as we do with their feet on the floor beneath\nthe table, but reclining with their feet projecting a little behind, the\nsandals having previously been drawn off by servants, for coolness and\ncomfort. Thus it was easy for one who entered the room, to walk up to\nany individual of the company and converse with him during the meal;\nand, so far from being out of the way and unnatural, it was the easiest\nand most natural of all things, that the woman, when she came to Jesus,\nshould touch his feet. This was precisely the part of his body which she\ncould most easily reach, and which she might bathe and anoint, while the\nmeal proceeded, without difficulty to herself or inconvenience to him.\n\nWe shall fall into a mistake if we think either that the act as here\nnarrated was altogether accordant with the habits of the time and place,\nor altogether contrary to them; it was partly the one and partly the\nother.\n\nIn the first place it was an act radically diverse from the intrusion of\na stranger to anoint the feet of a guest sitting at dinner with his\nfriend in our country and our day. Such an act among us would be so\nunprecedented, so difficult, so awkward, that it would shock every\nobserver, if it were attempted, and bring the whole business to a stand.\nThere and then, in as far as the entrance of a person unbidden is\nconcerned, there was nothing to attract attention. There is abundant\nevidence that even at this day, it is common in the East for persons not\nof the party to enter the feast chamber during the progress of the meal,\nand sitting on seats by the wall, converse on business or politics with\nthe guests that recline beside the table; and, further, from the\nposition of the guests, it was not difficult, but easy to reach his\nfeet. Thus far, all was accordant with use and wont. But as to the\nperson who entered on that occasion, and the act which she performed,\nthere was something strange and out of the way. It was fitted to attract\nattention, and to excite suspicion; and so indeed it did. A woman,\ncoming in while the company sat at meat, and such a woman, habit and\nrepute disreputable; and besides all this, the ardency of her emotions,\nand the familiarity of her acts, surprised the onlookers.\n\nI think it important to notice these two sides of the case; so much of\nit was according to use and wont, that the entrance of the woman by\nitself did not surprise and shock the company; and yet so much of it was\nstrange, that the curiosity of the company was aroused, and their\nattention arrested. The circumstances of the incident on both sides,\nwere thus calculated to promote the design of Jesus, to instruct and\nreprove. There was as much of the ordinary in the act as prevented it\nfrom shocking the feelings; and as much of the extraordinary as awakened\nthe interest of the spectators.\n\nWhen she reached the feet of the Redeemer with the intention of\nanointing them in token of her adoring gratitude, her plan seems to have\nbeen deranged for the moment, by a sudden and uncontrollable flood of\ntears, as if the fountains of the great deep within her being had been\nopened, and grief and gladness, both at their height, had met and\ncaused an overflow. From the position she had assumed those tears wet\nthe feet of Jesus; and having no other towel, she, with a woman's sudden\ninstinct, dried them again with her long flowing hair.[59]\n\n [59] \"She was forgiven much; therefore she loved much. As soon as\n she had learned that Jesus was at table in Simon the Pharisee's\n house, her heart drew her thither to him, that she might offer him\n the expression of her gratitude and love,--of her adoration and her\n joy. She took with her a phial of ointment, the costliest that she\n possessed, found an entrance into the Pharisee's house, and walked\n behind backs to the feet of Jesus, as he reclined at table on an\n elevated cushion. Arrived there, she is incapable of accomplishing\n her purpose. The thought of the greatness of her sin, and the\n greatness of the compassion of Jesus, broke her heart. She wept, and\n so unwittingly wet the feet of Jesus with her tears. Oh, salt,\n salutary tears! They are tears at once of repentance and gratitude.\n Now, she must first dry the Lord's feet again. But for this she had\n not prepared herself; for this she had nothing but her hair. So she\n wiped them with her hair; and kissed the feet of Jesus, and then\n anointed them with ointment. All this was the manifestation of her\n inward burning love to the Lord.\"--_Arndt_, ii, 85, 86.\n\n\"Now, when the Pharisee which had bidden him saw it, he spake within\nhimself, This man, if he were a prophet, would have known who and what\nmanner of woman this is that toucheth him.\" It was an acknowledged sign\nof a true prophet to be a discerner of hearts. Simon had this test\nbefore his mind, and was secretly applying it to determine the claims of\nJesus. But another principle lay deep in the heart of the Pharisee,\nwhich he considered applicable to the case in hand: he counted, as a\nmatter of course, that a prophet, while he might sit at table on terms\nof equality with himself, a good man, would not accept any mark of\nhomage from a bad one. He believed that, by his knowledge of the town,\nhe had gained advantage over the prophet of Nazareth, who was a\nstranger, and had found a ground on which he might reject his claims.\nSimon knew the character of this woman. Believing that Jesus, as a\nrighteous man, would have spurned her away if he had known what she\nwas, he thought he saw in the fact of his bearing with her an evidence\nthat he was ignorant of her character.\n\nThe reasoning was this. Either he knows what sort of a woman this is, or\nhe does not. If he does not know, he is not a prophet, because he cannot\ndiscern spirits; if he knows, he is not a prophet, for he does not cast\nthe disreputable person away. On either alternative, therefore, he is\nnot a prophet.[60]\n\n [60] The dilemma is well put by Dr. Trench.\n\n * * * * *\n\nI proceed now, under the direction of the Lord's own words, to consider\nthe spiritual meaning and the practical use of the narrative. The\ncreditor is God, in whom we live, and move, and have our being--from\nwhom we derive all, and to whom we must account for all; the debtors\nsinful men; and the debts the sins which they have severally done.\n\nOf the two, while both are in debt, one owes ten times as much as the\nother. A comparison of this proportion, with that which appears in the\nparable of the unmerciful servant, is interesting. Between the debt\nwhich the servant owed to his master, and the debt which a\nfellow-servant owed to him, there is no assignable proportion: so vast\nis the difference that we cannot form a definite conception of the\nrelation. This is precisely what we should expect in order to show the\ndisproportion, or want of all proportion, between sins against God and\nsins against a neighbour. In this parable, on the other hand, the debt\nin both cases is due to the master, and not in either due by one servant\nto another. We accordingly do not expect, and do not find a\ndisproportion so vast; and yet, there is a great difference between the\ntwo sums. In the one case the debt is five hundred pence, and in the\nother fifty: the less is only one-tenth of the larger sum. Although\nthere are aggravations in one case, and alleviations in another, I think\nthe disproportion would not have been so great as in the parable it\nactually is, if it had been the design of the Lord here to teach us how\nmuch the guilt of one man may exceed that of another in the sight of\nGod. From the circumstances of this case we may safely gather that these\nsums represent not the absolute quantity of sin-debt that stood against\nthese men severally in the book of divine justice, but the estimate\nwhich they severally made of their own shortcomings. The fifty and the\nfive hundred pence indicate the amounts which the debtors severally\nacknowledged, rather than those which the creditor might have claimed.\n\nThe plan of providence in the present life permits every man to keep his\nown accounts of debt to God: no neighbour is empowered to record the\nitems, and sum them up, and keep a record of their amount against you.\nThe Romish priesthood attempt to usurp this prerogative, but in its\npurpose it is boldly unjust, and in its results miserably ineffectual.\nThey ought not, in point of principle, to make the attempt; and they are\nnot able, in point of fact, to accomplish their object. Every man keeps\nhis own account book; and no other man dare or can look into it, except\nin as far as the owner opens it of his own accord for the inspection of\nhis neighbour.\n\nSome teachers adopt this principle, with good effect, in the discipline\nof children at school. Each child has a book in which he marks, from day\nto day and from hour to hour, his own successes and his own failures;\nand according to this record the prizes are awarded or withheld. When\nthe child is put upon his honour, it is expected that he will be\nhonourable. Probably a large balance of advantage results from this\ncontrivance where it is judiciously managed; but it is capable of\ntelling two ways, and does tell in opposite ways with different persons.\nIf the child deal fairly, the principle of truth within him will be\nstrengthened by habit; but if he cheat, all of the sense of honesty that\nremained within him will soon be worn away. \"To him that hath shall be\ngiven, and he shall have abundance; but from him that hath not shall be\ntaken, even that which he hath.\"\n\nBut while each man is permitted to keep the account of his own sins\nagainst God, and no human being can rightfully possess a duplicate,\nthere is a duplicate: another record is kept in the Book of God. That\nrecord is true; and woe to the self-deceiver who made false entries in\nhis own favour all his life, when it is found that the two accounts will\nnot tally in the great day.\n\nSimon the entertainer kept account of his own debt to God--his sins of\nomission and commission--and balanced them from time to time against a\ncolumn of merits which he possessed. The balance, he confesses, was\nagainst himself, and the difference he set down as the amount due: it is\nexpressed by fifty. The woman, on the other hand, had during a course of\nwickedness lost all reckoning, both of her own sins and of God's\nmercies. Lately she had obtained a copy of the missing documents. A\nreflection of the charge had been suddenly thrown down from the archives\nof the Judge, upon the tablet of her own conscience. Without attempting\nto tax the account in her own favour, she accepted it in full, and\nexpressed it by five hundred--ten times as much as the Pharisee had laid\nto his own charge. He, taking his own reckoning for authority, counted\nhis liability light: she, taking her data from God's law, counted her\nliability heavy.\n\nIn the story, as it is constructed by the Lord for the instruction and\nreproof of Simon, the love of both servants to their master is caused,\nand consequently measured by, the forgiveness which they had received:\none having obtained the remission of a small debt, loved the forgiver a\nlittle; the other, having obtained the remission of a great debt, loved\nthe forgiver much. In any such case, however, love springs up strong in\nproportion, not to the absolute amount of the debt remitted, but to the\nestimate of its amount which the debtor himself has formed. This\nprinciple must be kept in view when we apply the lesson of the parable\nto Simon. The Scripture does not concede that the amount of forgiveness\nthat he needed and obtained was in respect to that of the poor woman as\nfifty to five hundred: the Scripture does not even determine that Simon\nwas, in point of fact, forgiven at all. In its application to the case\nin hand, the Lord's instruction is equivalent to the conditional\nformula, If you have been forgiven fifty pence, and she five hundred,\nwhether will she or you experience the more fervent gratitude to your\ncommon benefactor? This, I think, is the only true and consistent method\nof applying the parable to the experience of the woman and the Pharisee.\nThe point on which all the weight should lean is not the absolute amount\nof guilt incurred by the sinner and forgiven by God, but the estimate\nmade by the sinner of his own sin, and his consequent appreciation of\nthe boon he receives when it is unconditionally blotted out. This view,\nbesides being in itself right, possesses this practical advantage, that\nit steers entirely clear of the entangling question, If the greatest\nsinner, when forgiven, loves his Forgiver most, will not he be happiest\nat last who is the guiltiest now? There is no place here or elsewhere in\nthe Scriptures for such a speculation: it is not admissible in any\nform. The conception which the parable produces when legitimately\napplied is at once beautiful and beneficent: love to the Saviour rises\nin the heart of a saved man in proportion to the sense which he\nentertains of his own sinfulness on the one hand, and the mercy of God\non the other. Thus the height of a saint's love to the Lord is as the\ndepth of his own humility: as this root strikes down unseen in the\nground, that blossoming branch rises higher in the sky.\n\nThe woman did not speak of her own acts, either within herself or to her\nneighbours; but her acts are, notwithstanding, proclaimed and recorded.\nThey are minutely catalogued (ver. 44-46), by the Lord himself. Nothing\nis lost on him; his ear is open, and his eye. As in providence not a\nsparrow falls to the ground without our Father's permission and regard,\nso in the new covenant not a tear falls for sin indulged, not a sigh\nrises for deliverance from its pollution, without attracting the notice\nand obtaining the approval of the Sinner's Friend. Love, burning as a\nnight lamp silently in a penitent's breast, or bursting forth in\nimpetuous praise, or calmly supplying the motive power of a useful\nlife--love in the heart of the forgiven sinner, serves and pleases the\nforgiving Redeemer.\n\nOne point still remains unnoticed, needing indeed some notes of\nexplanation, but capable of being easily and fully explained; it lies in\nthese words of Jesus: \"Wherefore I say unto thee, Her sins which are\nmany are forgiven; for she loved much.\" A question has been raised here,\nDid the woman's love to the Lord cause him to forgive her, or did his\npardon freely bestowed cause the forgiven woman to love him? To state\nthe question is in effect to answer it. This announcement which Jesus\nmakes in the close of his exposition is obviously meant to run in the\nline of the parable; but if you understand it to represent the woman's\nlove as the procuring cause of pardon from the Lord, it runs right in\nthe face of the parable from first to last. The love of the servants,\nthe lesser as well as the larger love, is not the cause but the effect\nof the Master's kindness; and it would not only be out of harmony with\nthe parable, but in sheer opposition to it in letter and in spirit, to\nunderstand it as countenancing the doctrine that the sinner's\nspontaneous love to God merits and obtains forgiveness.\n\nAlthough, in sentences of this form, it is more common to express the\neffect in the first clause, and the cause, introduced by a For in the\nlatter; yet the converse method is frequently employed and perfectly\ncorrect. You may say, Tan-waste is strewn on the street opposite this\nmansion, for a member of the family lies within it sick; or, A member of\nthe family lies sick within this mansion, for tan-waste is strewn on the\ncontiguous street. In the first instance you place the cause last, and\nin the second instance the effect, using precisely the same formula in\nboth. Nor is it difficult to perceive why Jesus places the effect of\nforgiveness in the prominent position here, for it is the only thing\nthat is visible to the Pharisee whom he desires to instruct. The pardon\nwhich this woman had obtained Simon did not and could not see; but her\nlove being embodied in action was palpable to his senses. The energetic\nact of adoration was evidence of the heart-love from which it sprang. To\nthis love accordingly Jesus points, and thence infers the existence of\nthe great forgiveness which prompted it. In the end, He confirms and\nseals, by his own lips, the pardon which the repenting sinner had\nalready secretly received. The Redeemer's forgiving love to sinners is\nthe only cause of all their love to him. \"We love him because he first\nloved us.\" Have you seen a broad, straight path of silver brightness\nlying by night upon a smooth sea, and stretching from your feet away\nuntil it was lost in the distance--a path that seemed to have been\ntrodden by the feet of all the saints who have ever passed through a\nshifting world to their eternal home. Oh that silver path by night\nacross the sea,--it glittered much: but it was not its brightness that\nlighted up the moon in the sky. Neither was it the love to Jesus\ntrembling in a believer's heart, that kindled forgiving love in him. We\nlove him because he first loved us; the love that makes bright a\nforgiven sinner's path across the world was kindled by the light of life\nin the face of Jesus; from him and to him are all things.\n\nThere is a peculiarly wise and tender adaptation to our need in that\nfeature of our Lord's character, which consists in his desiring and\nappreciating our love. He is not a distant, cold, omnipotence. He\nlavishes love on the world, but he is disappointed when the world does\nnot throw back a reflection of his own love, as the rippling sea throws\nup to heaven again, the light it got from heaven. When the ten lepers\nwere cleansed, and one returned to lavish love on his healer, that\nhealer, while he enjoyed the single penitent's devotion, permitted a\nsigh to escape his lips, articulated in the sad pensive question, \"Where\nare the nine?\" I love the Lord for uttering that complaint. It proves to\nme that he counts it no intrusion when we burst in upon him with our\nglad thanksgiving. In the bold in-bursting of this woman; in her\npremeditated anointing, and unpremeditated tears, the Lord Jesus\nsees--tastes of the travail of his soul and is satisfied.\n\n\n\n\nXVII.\n\nTHE GOOD SAMARITAN.\n\n\n\"And Jesus answering said, A certain man went down from Jerusalem to\n Jericho, and fell among thieves, which stripped him of his raiment,\n and wounded him, and departed, leaving him half dead. And by chance\n there came down a certain priest that way: and when he saw him, he\n passed by on the other side. And likewise a Levite, when he was at\n the place, came and looked on him, and passed by on the other side.\n But a certain Samaritan, as he journeyed, came where he was: and\n when he saw him, he had compassion on him, and went to him, and\n bound up his wounds, pouring in oil and wine, and set him on his own\n beast, and brought him to an inn, and took care of him. And on the\n morrow when he departed, he took out two pence, and gave them to the\n host, and said unto him, Take care of him; and whatsoever thou\n spendest more, when I come again, I will repay thee. Which now of\n these three, thinkest thou, was neighbour unto him that fell among\n the thieves? And he said, He that showed mercy on him. Then said\n Jesus unto him, Go, and do thou likewise.\"--LUKE x. 30-37.\n\nLogically this parable may be conveniently associated with that of the\nunmerciful servant. They constitute a pair; that teaches us to forgive\nthe injurer; and this to help the injured.\n\nOn the almost pictured page of the evangelic history you may often\nobserve two persons, sometimes in presence of a multitude, and sometimes\nfar apart, engaged in close and earnest conversation. In most cases you\ndiscover, when you approach, that one of them is the Lord Jesus, and the\nother one of the lost whom he came to save. At one time it is a rich\nJewish ruler, and at another a poor woman of Samaria; now, it is\nNicodemus in a private house, and then Pilate in the judgment hall; here\nthe Saviour, suffering, converses with the thief on the cross, and there\nthe Saviour, reigning, calls to Saul as he is entering Damascus. Many\nof the precious words of Jesus which now constitute the heritage of the\nChurch, were at first spoken in answer to friends or foes, during the\nperiod of his ministry on earth, or after he ascended into heaven.\n\nThus the Lord's word frequently took its form from the the character and\nconduct of those with whom he conversed. On their ignorance, or\nsimplicity, or malice, his wisdom and goodness were cast for keeping\ntill the end of time. The temper, and conceptions, and tricks of those\nJews, like sand in a foundry, constituted the mould in which the pure\ngold of our Redeemer's instructions was poured; and like the sand, when\nthey had served that purpose, they were allowed to fall asunder, as\nbeing of no further use.\n\nHere is a case in which the question of a self-righteous Jew elicits and\ngives shape to the subsequent discourse of the Lord; here, accordingly,\nthe meaning of the discourse depends, in a great measure, on the history\nin which it grows. At some pause in the Lord's discourse, while the\nmultitude still remained on the spot expecting further instruction, a\ncertain lawyer who was watching his opportunity, interposed with the\ndemand, \"Master, what shall I do to inherit eternal life?\"[61] The\nquestion was not put in simplicity, with a view to obtain information,\nit was employed knowingly as an experiment and a test.\n\n [61] \"How eagerly would the critics seize on this passage, and\n pronounce the question of a certain lawyer to be identical with the\n narrative contained in Matt. xix. 16, only differently reported--if\n St. Luke had not himself subsequently narrated that second incident\n (xviii. 18)! This once more shows that many things could naturally,\n and would necessarily, occur more than once in the life of\n Jesus.\"--_Stier_.\n\nVery many such questions were addressed to the Lord Jesus during the\nperiod of his public ministry by different persons, and with different\nmotives. We may safely gather from the whole spirit of the narrative\nthat this example, as to the character and motive of the questioner, was\nneither one of the best nor one of the worst. This scribe was not, on\nthe one hand, like Nicodemus, a meek receptive disciple, prepared to\ndrink the sincere milk of the word that he might grow thereby, nor was\nhe like some, both of the Pharisaic and Sadducean parties, who came with\ncunning questions to ensnare and destroy. This man seems to have been\nfrom his own view point sincere and fair: his tempting aimed not to\ncatch and betray, but simply to put the skill of the new Nazarene\nprophet to the test. The man was full, not of conscious malice against\nJesus, but of ignorant confidence in himself.\n\nThe scribe's question is cast in the mould of the most unmitigated\nself-righteousness: \"What shall _I do_ that _I may inherit_?\" &c. No\nglimpse had he ever gotten of his own sinfulness, no conception did he\never entertain of the publican's prayer, \"God be merciful to me a\nsinner.\"\n\nTaking the man on his own terms, and meeting him on his own path, the\nLord replies by the question, \"What is written? and refers him to the\nlaw.\" The lawyer, a professed theologian, answers well. He gave a\ncorrect epitome of all moral duty, showing that love is the fulfilling\nof the law,--\"Thou shalt love the Lord thy God with all thy heart, and\nwith all thy soul, and with all thy strength, and with all thy mind, and\nthy neighbour as thyself.\"\n\nThe Lord approved the answer, seemed to require as to profession, not\nanother word, and closed for the time the colloquy with the simple\nannouncement, \"This do and thou shalt live.\" A very great question\ncrosses our path here, but we must not discuss it fully lest we should\nbe diverted too far from our immediate object. This answer of the Lord\nwe accept in all simplicity as the great universal cardinal truth in the\ncase. Life was offered at first, and life is offered still as the reward\nof obedience. It is not safe, it is not needful to apologize for this\nstatement or to explain it away; it is not in any sense contrary to\nevangelical doctrine. It is really true that the fulfilling of God's law\nwill secure his favour. Nor is this a thing merely to be admitted in its\nown place when it comes up; it is the truth that lies at the foundation,\nand on which all other truth leans. The basis of all is,--Obedience\ndeserves life, and disobedience deserves death. Mankind have disobeyed;\nwe have all sinned, and are therefore all under condemnation. Nothing\nbut a perfect obedience can gain God's favour. Hence the covenant, and\nhence the incarnation and sacrifice of Christ; hence the substitution of\nthe just for the unjust. The Gospel is not an exception to the Law,\n\"This do and thou shalt live;\" the Gospel is founded on that Law. This\nLaw Christ came not to destroy but to fulfil.\n\n\"This _do_ and thou shalt live:\" whether by an emphasis on the word, or\nby an expressive glance at the moment in the speaker's eye, or by the\nsimple majesty of the truth declared, the scribe's conscience was\naroused and arrested. The questioner was not altogether comforted by the\nresult of the conversation; he could not allow the matter to drop there.\nThe reason why he continued the dialogue is expressly given; he was\n\"willing to justify himself.\" Justify himself! But who accused him? Not\nthe Lord: he had only said, \"This do and thou shalt live.\" The man's own\nconscience was awakened and at work: well he knew at that moment that he\nhad not done what his lips confessed he should do; he had not loved God\nwith all his heart, and his neighbour as himself.\n\nIt is interesting to notice the principle on which he proceeds to defend\nhimself: conscious that love to neighbours is in his heart a very narrow\nthing, he conducts his argument so as to justify its narrowness. If he\ncan show that his neighbours are limited to a small circle of relatives,\nwith the addition perhaps of some chosen individuals beyond the line of\nblood, he may yet be able to live on good terms with himself as a keeper\nof the law; accordingly, in order to form a basis for his own defence,\nhe inquires, \"Who is my neighbour?\"\n\nThe parable constitutes the answer. But before we proceed to examine its\ncontents, it is of great importance to observe that it is not a direct\nanswer to the scribe's question. It is the answer which the Lord saw\nmeet to give, but it is not a decision on the case which had been\nsubmitted for adjudication. In his question the scribe contemplated\nother people, and speculated upon who had the right to receive kindness:\nthe answer of Jesus, on the contrary, contemplates the scribe himself,\nand inquires whether he is prepared to bestow kindness. As to those who\nshould receive our love there is no limit: the real subject of inquiry\nconcerns the man who bestows it. The question is not, Who is my\nneighbour? but, Am I neighbourly? This is the line in which the parable\nproceeds. It does not supply the scribe with an answer to the question\nwhich he had put; but it supplies him with another question which he\ndesired to evade. He is not permitted to ride off upon a speculative\ninquiry about the abstract rights of other men; he is pinned down to a\npersonal practical duty. \"A certain man went down from Jerusalem,\" &c.\nIt is a narrow, dreary mountain pass. By nature it is fitted to be a\nhaunt of robbers; if there are any robbers in the country, they will\ncertainly gravitate to this spot. In point of fact it was notoriously\nunsafe for travellers in that day, and it is equally dangerous still. A\nparticular portion of the road acquired the name of the _path of blood_,\nand under the feeble government of the Turks, as well as in more ancient\ntimes, it has well deserved its appellation. The scene of the event\ntherefore is laid in a place which is eminently suitable to its\ncharacter: the audience who heard the story first would at once and\nfully recognise its appropriateness.\n\nRobbers assailed the solitary traveller, and after plundering him of his\nmoney, left him so severely wounded that he could do nothing to help\nhimself, and must soon have died if he had not obtained help. Although\nit is not expressly stated, it appears from the whole complexion of the\nnarrative that this man was a Jew. Indeed this is so obvious and so\nnecessary that the point of the parable would be lost if it were\notherwise: I think the nationality of the unfortunate sufferer is not\nstated, precisely because it could not be mistaken.\n\n\"And by chance there came down a certain priest that way,\" &c. By chance\nis an unfortunate translation here. It was not by chance that the priest\ncame down by that road at that time, but by a specific arrangement, and\nin exact fulfilment of a plan; not the plan of the priest, not the plan\nof the wounded traveller, but the plan of God. By \"coincidence\" ([Greek:\nkata synkyrian]) the priest came down: that is, by the conjunction of\ntwo things, in fact, which were previously constituted a pair in the\nprovidence of God. In the result they fell together according to the\nomniscient designer's plan. This is the true theory of the divine\ngovernment, and this is the account of the matter which the parable\ncontains.[62]\n\n [62] The analogy between the meetings exhibited in this parable and\n the meeting of Philip with the Ethiopian (Acts viii.) is interesting\n and instructive. In both cases the place is a desert, in both a man\n in great need and a man who has the means of supplying that need\n meet each other there. Here the want and its supply are material and\n temporal, there they are moral and spiritual. The man who fell among\n thieves on the way to Jericho suffered from bodily wounds, and the\n Samaritan who came to his relief appropriately applied material\n remedies: the Ethiopian treasurer, in that way towards Gaza which is\n desert, suffered in his soul, and the name of Christ was the\n ointment which Philip the evangelist poured into his wound. These\n two cases are indeed diverse, but as we learn from the Scriptures\n throughout, they proceed, both as to disease and cure, upon\n analogous principles, so that the knowledge of the one throws light\n upon the meaning of the other. The meeting in the desert near Gaza\n did not happen by chance, it was a tryst duly made and exactly kept,\n for \"the angel of the Lord spake unto Philip, saying, Arise and go\n toward the south,\" &c. (Acts viii. 26). The appointment for the\n meetings in the valley between Jerusalem and Jericho was as\n certainly made, although it has not been as expressly recorded.\n\nBy previous appointment and actual exact coincidence that meeting took\nplace between the hale comfortable priest and the wounded half-dead\ntraveller in the bloody path between Jerusalem and Jericho. It is thus\nthat all meetings take place between man and man. \"The poor ye have\nalways with you,\" said Jesus to his disciples. It is not only that once\nfor all the poor and the rich are placed in the same world: but day by\nday, as life's current flows, by divine unerring purpose those who need\nare placed in the way of those who have plenty, and the strong are led\nto the spot where the feeble lie. We are accustomed to admire the wisdom\nand foresight that spread layers of iron ore and layers of coal near\neach other in the crust of the earth that the one might give the melting\nheat which the other needed; but the divine government is a much more\nminute and pervading thing. The same omniscient provider has appointed\neach meeting between those who are in want and those who have\nabundance; and for the same reason, that the one may give what the other\nneeds, and that both may be blessed in the deed. But he who lays the\nplan watches its progress, and is displeased when men do not take the\nopportunity that has been given. When he has brought the strong to the\nspot where the weak are lying he is displeased to see them pass by on\nthe other side. \"Lo, I am with you alway even unto the end of the\nworld.\" Is that a pleasant promise? No; if after the Lord has led you to\nthe spot where the needy are perishing, you pass by on the other side;\nit is a dreadful thing to have him beside us, looking on in such a case\nas this.\n\nWe are led to suppose that the wounded man was not only unable to walk,\nbut that he could not even move his head, so as to observe at a distance\nthe approach of a traveller. Possibly the sound of footsteps was the\nfirst warning he received that a human being was near. Perhaps he\nstarted in terror lest it should be the robbers returning to take what\nremained of his life away. But as the priest came and looked upon him,\nhe might well begin to hope. This is a man who is consecrated to the\nservice of God; he is even now on his way from his turn of office in the\ntemple. He who gets so near to God will surely show mercy to man. No:\nthe priest passed by on the other side. We are not informed what his\nexcuses were; but we may be quite sure he had plenty, and that they were\nvery good. Those who seek a good excuse for neglecting the labour of\nlove always find one. He was alone; he could neither cure the\nunfortunate man there nor carry him away. To make the attempt might\nbring the robbers down from their fastnesses upon himself, and thus he\nshould only throw away a good life after a damaged one. Right well\nwould he justify himself that evening as he told his adventure in the\npass to his friends or his family in Jericho. Love saw no excuses for\nleaving the man lying in his blood, for it was not looking for them; but\nselfishness saw them at a glance, and would have created them in plenty\nif there had been none at hand.\n\nIn like manner also a Levite came to the spot, looked for a moment on\nthe sufferer, and passed on.\n\nAt last a Samaritan came up; and when he saw the wounded man \"he had\ncompassion on him.\" The root of the matter lies here: \"Out of the\nabundance of the heart the mouth speaks,\" and the hand labours; the\nfountain is opened, and you may expect to see a flowing stream. Love in\npresence of human suffering takes the form of compassion; and love in\nall its forms tends to express itself in action: compassion issues in\nhelp.\n\nIn this case evidently compassion was the secret force that produced all\nthe subsequent beneficence: yet we must not too readily count that all\nis safe for practical efficiency, when in presence of a brother's\nsuffering this tender emotion begins to flutter about the heart. As the\nheart itself is deceitful, so also in turn are each of its affections;\neven those that in name and nature are good may swerve aside after they\nhave sprung, and degenerate into selfishness. Probably both the priest\nand the Levite experienced some compassion as they looked on the pale\nand bleeding victim of lawless violence; perhaps they went away pleased\nwith themselves on account of their tenderness, and somewhat angry with\nthe wounded man for being wounded, and so hurting their sensibilities.\nThe best things corrupted become the worst; and sometimes the sight of\ndistress among poorer neighbours stirs into fermentation some of the\nworst elements of character in the comfortable classes. A little water\nmay spring in the bottom of the well; but if it do not increase so as to\nfill the cavity, and freely overflow, it will become fetid where it\nlies, and more noisome than utter dryness. It is quite possible, as to\nemotion, to be very languishing over the misfortunes of others, and yet\ndo the unfortunate as little good as the misanthrope who laughs at human\nsorrows.\n\nBut while the spurious compassion is thus vile and worthless, the true\nis beyond expression beautiful and good. It breaks forth in power, and\nsweeps down whatever obstacles may be thrown in its way. In this parable\nthe Lord expressly points to the fountain of compassion opened before he\ninvites us to follow the stream of beneficence in its course.\n\nThe nationality of the compassionate traveller is an important feature\nof the parable; he was a Samaritan. The Jews and Samaritans were locally\nnearest neighbours, but morally most unneighbourly. An enmity of\npeculiar strength and persistency kept the communities asunder from age\nto age. The alienation, originating in a difference of race, was kept\nalive by rivalry in religion. The Samaritans endeavoured to cover the\ndefects of their pedigree by a zealous profession of orthodox forms in\ndivine worship. The temple which they presumed to erect on Gerizzim as a\nrival to that of Jerusalem was naturally more odious to the Jews than\nothers that were more distant in space, and more widely diverse in\nprofession. Distinct traces of the keen reciprocal enmity that raged\nbetween the Jews and the Samaritans crop out here and there incidentally\nin the evangelical history, as in chapter ix. 54.\n\nMost certainly the Lord does not here intend to intimate that all the\npriests and Levites were cruel, and all Samaritans tender-hearted: to\napply them so would be to wrest his words. This teacher grasps his\ninstrument by the extremity, first one extremity and then the other,\nthat his lesson may reach further than if he had grasped it by the\nmiddle. The honourable office, and even the generally high character, of\npriest and Levite will not cover the sin of selfishly neglecting the\nsufferings of a fellow-creature: self-sacrificing love is approved by\nGod and useful to men as well in a Samaritan as in a Jew. There is no\nrespect of persons with God. It is quite certain that there were\nbenevolent priests and unkind Samaritans; and it is also certain that\nthe Lord would not overlook kindness in the one, nor sanction cruelty in\nthe other. The lesson was addressed to a Jew; and therefore the lesson\nis so constructed as to smite at one blow the two poles on which a vain\nJewish life in that day turned--\"they trusted in themselves that they\nwere righteous, and despised others.\" That high thing, the scribe's\nself-righteous trust in his birth-right, the Lord will by the parable\nbring low; and this low thing, the mean position of a Samaritan in the\nestimate of the scribe, he will at the same moment exalt. He hath done\nall things well.[63]\n\n [63] In the case of the ten lepers (Luke xvii. 16), which is not a\n parable, but a history, we learn that the one who experienced and\n expressed gratitude to God for his recovery was a Samaritan. Whether\n their low and despised condition had been to some extent blessed in\n making them more humble and receptive than their Jewish neighbours,\n we do not know; but, in point of fact, in the historical incident a\n Samaritan was more ready than the Jew to give praise to God; and in\n the construction of the parable a Samaritan is represented as also\n more beneficent to men.\n\n In connection with this case a striking example may be seen of the\n divine impartiality of the Scriptures. Some persons, with a view to\n objects of their own, take pleasure in representing ministers of\n religion as more self-seeking and less generous than those who make\n no religious profession. The contrast between the Levite and the\n Samaritan, if this case stood alone, might seem to support their\n theory. But there is no respect of persons or classes with God; you\n may learn from the Scriptures--and that, too, from the writings of\n the same apostle--that the Samaritans were not all kind, and the\n Levites not all hard-hearted. They were Samaritans (Luke ix. 53) who\n would not permit Jesus and his disciples, when they were weary, to\n pass the night in their village; and he was a Levite (Acts iv. 36)\n who was named Son of Consolation, and sold his property that he\n might distribute the proceeds among the poor.\n\nThe Samaritan had compassion on the wounded man; and the emotion is\nknown to be genuine by the fruits which it immediately bears: he bound\nup his wounds, pouring in oil and wine. These methods doubtless\nrepresent the opinions and practice of the time and place as to the\ntreatment of wounds. They constituted the expression of the Samaritan's\npainstaking compassion; and for our present purpose no further notice of\nthem is needful.[64]\n\n [64] The Samaritan was riding; for he set the wounded man \"on his\n own beast.\" What of the priest and the Levite?--were they riding, or\n performing the journey on foot? If they were both pedestrians, while\n the Samaritan had a mule or an ass, it is obvious that the two\n parties were not on equal terms, and that consequently no fair test\n of their benevolence could in that transaction be obtained. On that\n very ground I think it is certain that they were riding as well as\n he. The parable is not a history, containing the simple facts of any\n given case, without respect to the lessons which the facts may\n contain; it is a picture, constructed according to its Author's\n mind, and constructed for the purpose of expressing a particular\n lesson which the Author already had in his mind, and desired to\n teach. The doctrine which the Teacher intended to declare obviously\n requires that the two parties whose compassion is compared and\n contrasted should be on equal terms. The lesson which he meant to\n convey would slip through and be lost, like water through a leaky\n vessel, if the priest and Levite were walking when they found the\n wounded man: we must, therefore, if we would not do violence to the\n parable, assume that both were mounted. With this conclusion,\n resulting from the nature of the case, the expressions in their\n minutest details correspond. The journey of the priest is narrated\n in the same terms as that of the Samaritan: \"A certain priest came\n down that way,\" and \"A certain Samaritan as he journeyed came where\n he was:\" we never learn that the Samaritan had a beast of burden\n until he sets the half-dead traveller upon its back. There was no\n occasion for mentioning the priest's mule, for he made no special or\n remarkable use of it.\n\nThe inn to which the patient was conducted must have been more than a\nkhan built on the way-side, and left empty, a free shelter to each party\nof travellers who chose to occupy it for a night. It must have been\nsomething more nearly allied to our modern system; for there was a\nresident manager, who kept in store such provisions as travellers\nneeded, and supplied them to customers for money.\n\nThe Samaritan remained all night with his patient, and then intrusted\nthe case to the care of the inn-keeper, paying a sum to account, and\npledging his credit for the balance, if the expense should ultimately\nexceed the amount of his deposit. Two denaria (pence) were at the time\nand in the circumstances of value sufficient to meet the probable\noutlay.\n\nNow comes the searching question, \"Which of these three thinkest thou\nwas neighbour unto him that fell among the thieves?\" The scribe, shut up\nto one answer, gives it rightly, beginning perhaps to be dimly conscious\nof its bearing upon himself,--\"He that showed mercy on him.\" Here, as\nhas been already noted, the tables are turned upon the questioner. The\npoint on which attention is fixed is not, Who of all mankind have a\nright to receive kindness? but, Are you willing to show kindness, as far\nas you have opportunity, to every human being who is in need? The scribe\ndesired to select a few who might rank as his neighbours, hoping that by\nlimiting their number he might show kindness to each, without any\nsubstantial sacrifice of his own ease. The Lord shows him that love is\nlike light: wherever it truly burns it shines forth in all directions,\nand falls on every object that lies in its way. Love that desires to\nlimit its own exercise is not love. Love that is happier if it meet\nonly one who needs help than if it met ten, and happiest if it meet\nnone at all, is not love. One of love's essential laws is expressed in\nthose words of the Lord, that the apostles fondly remembered after he\nhad ascended, \"It is more blessed to give than to receive.\"\n\n\"Then said Jesus, Go and do thou likewise.\" Through the self-sufficient\nJewish theologian the command is addressed to us. The direct form of the\ninjunction intimates, what might be gathered from the nature of the\ncase, that this parable is more strictly an example than a symbol. It\ndoes not convey spiritual lessons under the veil of material imagery: it\nrather describes a case of practical beneficence, and then plainly\ndemands that we should imitate it. However various the required\nreduplications may be in their form, they are the same in kind with the\nsample which is here exhibited.\n\nBesides this more obvious and literal application, almost all the\nexpositors find in the parable an allegorical representation of the\nworld's lost state and Christ's redeeming work. In this scheme the\nwounded man represents our race ruined by sin; the robbers, the various\nclasses of our spiritual enemies; the priest and Levite, the various\nlegal and ineffectual methods by which human wisdom endeavours to cure\nsin; and the Samaritan shadows forth the Redeemer in his advent and his\noffice. I mention this scheme in order to intimate that I cannot adopt\nit. From the nature of the things, there must be some likeness to our\nRedeemer's mission, wherever a loving heart pities a fallen brother, and\na strong hand is stretched out to help him; but beyond this general\nanalogy I see nothing. I can derive no benefit from even the most\ncautious and sober prosecution of the details. I find in it a reproving\nand guiding example of a true and effective compassion; but I find\nnothing more. Nor should we think the lesson unworthy of its place,\nalthough it does not directly reveal the redemption of Christ; He who\nloved us, and whose love to us is the fountain and pattern of all our\nbenevolent love to each other, counted it a suitable exercise of his\nprophetic office to teach his disciples their relative duties in life.\nThe lesson of this parable is parallel with that other lesson, \"Love one\nanother, as I have loved you.\"[65]\n\n [65] Draeseke has happily expressed the conception that to love is\n truly to live: \"Wir finden hier demnach die Lehre: Willst du leben,\n liebe.\"--_Vom Reich G._, ii. 130.\n\nSome who experience a genuine love are so poor that when they meet a\nsufferer they cannot supply his wants. In such a case the Lord\nacknowledges the will, and knows why the deed does not follow. In the\nexample of the widow's mite he has left it on record that he does not\ndespise the gift because of its smallness. Nay, further, he approves and\nrewards the emotion when it is true, although the means of material help\nbe altogether wanting: \"I was sick and in prison, and ye came unto\nme.\"[66]\n\n [66] \"If the robbers had seized the Samaritan before he was able to\n accomplish his design, his work would have been accomplished in the\n sight of God;--and if the priest and Levite had given help on\n account of approaching spectators, it would have been of no\n value.\"--_Stier_.\n\nIn the vast mass and complicated relations of modern society, it is\nextremely difficult to apply right principles in the department of\nmaterial benevolence. On two opposite sides we are liable to err; and we\nought on either side to watch and pray that we enter not into\ntemptation. (1.) It would be a mischievous mistake to give money, food,\nand clothes to every importunate beggar who contrives to cross our path\nand present an appearance of distress. There are men, women, and\nchildren in our day, who trade upon their sores, and even make sores to\ntrade upon. To give alms indiscriminately, in these circumstances, is\nboth to waste means and propagate improvidence. But (2.) it is not\nenough to resist importunities which may proceed from feigned distress.\nShut your hand resolutely against the whine of trained, unreal\npauperism; but, at the same time, diligently search out the true\nsufferers, and liberally supply their wants. If from defective knowledge\nerrors must sometimes be committed, better far that now and then a\nshilling should be lost, by falling into unworthy hands, than that our\nhearts should be drained of their compassion and dried hard by the habit\nof seeing human suffering and leaving it unrelieved. \"A man's life\nconsisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth;\" it\nis better that his abundance should be diminished, by an occasional\nexcess of disbursement, than that love, in which his life really lies,\nshould wither in his breast for want of exercise. \"The milk of human\nkindness\" this compassion has been called; but let us remember that if\nno needy child is permitted to draw it, this milk will soon cease to\nflow.\n\n\n\n\nXVIII.\n\nTHE FRIEND AT MIDNIGHT.\n\n\n\"And he said unto them, Which of you shall have a friend, and shall go\n unto him at midnight, and say unto him, Friend, lend me three\n loaves; for a friend of mine in his journey is come to me, and I\n have nothing to set before him? And he from within shall answer and\n say, Trouble me not: the door is now shut, and my children are with\n me in bed; I cannot rise and give thee. I say unto you, Though he\n will not rise and give him, because he is his friend, yet because of\n his importunity he will rise and give him as many as he needeth. And\n I say unto you, Ask, and it shall be given you; seek, and you shall\n find; knock, and it shall be opened unto you. For every one that\n asketh receiveth; and he that seeketh findeth; and to him that\n knocketh it shall be opened.\"--LUKE xi. 5-10.\n\nIn prayer, as in every other department of his ministry, the Lord Jesus\ngave his disciples both example and precept: he prayed in their\npresence, and taught them to pray. The order of events at the beginning\nof this chapter is worthy of notice: it was the Lord's praying that led\nto the Lord's Prayer. The disciples heard their Master praying, and\nrequested him to teach them also to pray: in reply he imparted to them\nthe brief germinal directory which the Church has been living on ever\nsince, and which the Church will live on till her Redeemer come again.\n\n\"As he was praying in a certain place;\"--the scene here presented is\nsublime and mysterious. The Son of man--the Son of God in our nature, is\npraying to the Father, and his followers are standing near. Silently,\nreverently they look and listen. They bate their breath till the prayer\nis done, and then eagerly press the request, \"Lord, teach us to pray.\"\nThey observed in their Master while he prayed a strange separation from\nthe world, a conscious nearness to God, a delight in the Father's\npresence, and a familiarity in communion with the Father, which seemed\nto them like heaven upon earth. Fondly desiring to partake of these\nblessed privileges, they besought their Master to show them the way. He\ncomplied with their request. He taught them as one teaches children--he\nput words in their mouths. Behold, the natural history of the Lord's\nPrayer! Thus sprang that wonderful specimen-prayer, which serves at once\nas the first lesson for babes beginning, and the fullest exercise of\nstrong men's powers.[67]\n\n [67] This seems, however, not to have been the first occasion on\n which he gave \"The Lord's Prayer\" to the disciples; it is embodied\n in the Sermon on the Mount, which belongs to an earlier date. The\n learners were defective both in understanding and memory; and the\n Master gave them \"line upon line.\"\n\nHaving taught his followers first by praying in their presence, and then\nby dictating an example of prayer, he next gives them a specific lesson\non importunity and perseverance in praying. This lesson he has been\npleased to impart in the form of a parable--\"And he said unto them,\nWhich of you shall have a friend,\" &c.\n\nThe picture refers to a simple, primitive condition of society, and\nreveals corresponding social habits. We must abandon our own modern,\nartificial view-point, ere we can comprehend and appreciate the facts on\nwhich the parable is based. Some cottages, built near each other for\ncommon safety, are owned and possessed by the cultivators of the\nsurrounding soil. Daylight has disappeared, and the inhabitants of the\nhamlet, wearied with their toil, have all retired to rest. Meantime a\nbenighted traveller is threading his way to the spot expecting food and\nshelter in the house of his friend. It is midnight ere he arrives; for,\nfootsore and weary, he has consumed many hours in accomplishing the\ndistance between his resting-place at noon and his destination for the\nnight. The inmates, hearing his knocking and recognising his voice,\nforthwith open the door and hospitably receive the traveller.\n\nBut here a new difficulty occurs: the bread prepared for the household\nhad satisfied their wants for the day, but none remained over. The last\nremnant had been consumed at the evening meal, and the family had\nretired to rest with the intention of providing early in the morning for\nthe wants of the following day. They had not a morsel to set before the\nweary stranger. The head of the house, willing to undergo any amount of\ntrouble rather than seem lacking in hospitality, determined to borrow\neven at that late hour the necessary supply of bread. To the door of his\nnearest neighbour, accordingly, he went, and knocked as the traveller\nhad already knocked at his own. Between the two villagers a conversation\nnow takes place, the one lying in bed within, and the other standing on\nthe street without. The request is met at first by a polite but\nperemptory refusal. The hour is untimely; the children are asleep;\nunwonted movements in the house will awaken and alarm them: better that\none stranger should fast till morning than that a whole family should be\ndisturbed in the night.\n\nBut the suppliant at the door has taken the matter much to heart. The\ncustoms of society elevate the exercise of hospitality into the highest\nrank of virtues: he was ashamed to be caught off his guard, and unable\nto comply with the cardinal social duty of the East. He knew not how to\nmeet his friend and confess that he had no bread in his house; bread he\nmust have, and will not want; he plies his request accordingly. He will\nlisten to no refusal; he continues to knock and plead. To every answer\nfrom within, \"I will not give,\" he sends a reply from without, \"I shall\nhave.\" It was for the sake of shielding his own sleeping family from\ndisturbance at midnight that this neighbour had, in the first instance,\nrefused; but now he discovers that the method which he had adopted to\npreserve the seemly stillness of night is the surest way of disturbing\nit. At first, that he might protect his sleeping family from\ndisturbance, he refused; but at last, for the same reason, he complied.\nAlthough he would not give from friendship, he gave to importunity.\n\nThis parable is remarkable in that the temporal and spiritual, instead\nof lying parallel throughout their length, touch each other only at one\npoint. They are like two straight rigid rods laid one upon another at\nright angles; all the weight of the upper rod lies on the under at one\nspot, and therefore presses there with tenfold intensity. The comparison\nhas been chosen, I think, precisely because of this quality. Because the\nanalogy does not hold good in every feature, it better serves the\npurpose in hand: the point of comparison delivers its lesson all the\nmore emphatically when it stands alone.\n\nWhen you have been convinced that God cares for his creatures, and have\ntherefore begun, in the Mediator's name, to pray;--when you have not\nonly said a prayer in fulfilment of a commanded duty, but felt a want,\nand like a little child requested your Father in heaven to supply it,\nanother lesson concerning prayer remains still to be learned--to\npersevere. When you have asked once--asked many times, and failed to\nobtain relief, you are tempted gradually to lose hope and abandon\nprayer. Here the lesson of the parable comes in: it teaches you to\ncontinue asking until you receive. Ask as a hungry child asks his mother\nfor bread. It is not a certain duty prescribed, so that when you have\nperformed it you are at liberty to go away. Nor is it, Ask so many\ntimes--whether seven or seventy times seven: it is, Ask until you obtain\nyour desire. When the Lord desired specially to recommend importunity in\nprayer, he selected a case which teaches importunity and nothing more.\nHe gives us an example in which unceasing pertinacity alone triumphed\nover all obstacles, and counsels us to go and do likewise when we ask\ngood things from our Father in heaven.\n\nIn this parable, as in that of the unjust judge, a human motive that is\nmean is employed to illustrate a divine motive that is high and holy. In\nboth cases the reason of the choice is the same; and in both the reason\nof the choice becomes the explanation of the difficulty. An example of\npersevering importunity in asking was needed in order to become the\nvehicle of the spiritual lesson; but in human affairs such an example\ncannot be found among the loving and generous: you must descend into\nsome of the lower and harder strata of human character ere you reach a\nspecimen of the pertinacious refusal which generates the pertinacious\ndemand. That feature of the Father's government which the Son here\nundertakes to explain cannot otherwise be represented by analogies drawn\nfrom human experience. If the villager had been more generously\nbenevolent, he would have complied at once with the request of his\nneighbour; but in that case no suitable example for the Lord's present\npurpose could have emerged from his act. In order to find an example of\npersevering importunity, it was necessary to select a case in which\nnothing but persevering importunity could prevail.\n\nThe terms are distinct and emphatic: \"Though he will not rise and give\nhim because he is his friend, yet because of his importunity, he will\nrise and give him as many as he needeth.\" The term [Greek: anaideian],\ntranslated \"importunity,\" signifies freedom from the bashfulness which\ncannot ask a second time. The shamefacedness which prevents a modest man\nfrom importuning a fellow-creature for a gift, after the first request\nhas been refused, is out of place in the intercourse between an empty\nbut believing suppliant and the God of all grace. If this Jewish\ncountryman in his perplexity had been ashamed to ask a second time, he\nwould have failed to accomplish his object; but because he was not so\nashamed, or at least did not permit the shame to drive him from his\npurpose, he obtained at length all his desire. Now, his conduct in this\nrespect is specially commended to us for imitation in our prayer: \"And I\nsay unto you, Ask and it shall be given you.\" As that man asked a gift\nfrom a brother, we should ask from God. This is the kind of prayer that\nChrist teaches us to address to God; and the Son who is in the bosom of\nthe Father will rightly declare the Father's mind.\n\nThe lesson is in some of its aspects difficult. We have not\nexperience--we have not faculties sufficient to make us capable of\nunderstanding it fully. Our Teacher might have maintained silence\nregarding it; or he might have said, as we often in substance say to\nlittle children, \"What thou knowest not now, thou shalt know hereafter;\"\nand this not from our unwillingness to teach, but from their incapacity\nto comprehend. But the Lord does not leave us wholly ignorant, because\nwe are incapable of understanding all. He makes one point abundantly\nclear--that persevering importunity in prayer is pleasing to God and\nprofitable to men.\n\nBut the lesson is not easy: analogies drawn from sensible objects or\nhuman experience cannot express it fully. The two parables which bear\nupon it--the one now under consideration, and that of the unjust\njudge--touch only the edges of the theme. The human motive is in the one\npicture mean, and in the other wicked; yet these are the best analogies\nthat can be found on earth for expressing this feature of our Father's\nlove.\n\nKnowing the defect of the analogy employed in the parable, the Lord has\nsupported and supplemented it by a fact in his own history. The case of\nthe Syro-phoenician woman (Matt. xv. 21-28), although a historic\nevent, serves also as an allegory. The two parables, one enacted and the\nother spoken, together make the lesson plain, as far as we are capable\nof comprehending it. In the mouth of these two witnesses the Lord has\nestablished his doctrine regarding importunate pressure in prayer.\n\nWhen I was a little child I often stood near a forge, and watched a\nblacksmith at work, admiring the strength and skill of the\nwonder-working man. He was wont to treat me kindly and bear with me\npatiently, although I sometimes stood in his way. At one time he would\nbenevolently answer my childish questions; and at another, instead of\nanswering, would continue to handle his tools with his strong, bare\narms, throwing glances of tenderness towards me from time to time out of\nhis deep intelligent eyes, but all in silence. When two pieces of iron,\nplaced in the fire in order to be welded together, became red, I thought\nand said he should take them out and join them; but he left them lying\nstill in the fire without speaking a word. They grew redder, hotter;\nthey threw out angry sparks: now, thought I, he should certainly lay\nthem together and strike; but the skilful man left them still lying in\nthe fire, and meantime fanned it into a fiercer glow. Not till they were\nwhite, and bending with their own weight when lifted, like lilies on\ntheir stalks--not till they were at the point of becoming liquid, did he\nlay the two pieces alongside of each other, and by a few gentle strokes\nweld them into one. Had he laid them together sooner, however vigorously\nhe had beaten, they would have fallen asunder in his hands.\n\nThe Lord knows, as we know not, what preparation we need in order that\nwe may be brought into union with himself. He refuses, delays,\ndisappoints,--all in wise love, that he may bring the seeker's heart up\nto such a glow of desire as will suffice to unite it permanently with\nhis own.\n\nA father, when his son asks bread, does not give him a stone: when he\nasks a fish, does not give him a serpent. Thus, our Father in heaven\ngives good things to them that ask him. \"The giving God\" ([Greek: tou\ndidontos Theou] James i. 5), is one of his attributes. Why, then, do not\nall his children get whatever they ask, and when they ask it? One\nreason, doubtless, is, that the child, ignorant and short-sighted, often\nasks a stone or a serpent because they seem beautiful,--not knowing that\nthe one is destitute of nourishment, and that the other will sting--and\nthen frets when things are given to him wholly different from those\nwhich he desired and expected. Hannah asked a son; in that case God saw\nthat the request was wise: the child asked bread, and the Father, after\nthe needful trial of faith, bestowed it freely. Some have asked a son,\nnot knowing that in their case the gift would have been a serpent. All\ntheir days they have wondered why the boon was denied, and have learned,\nperhaps, in the light of the great white throne when their days on\nearth were done, that He who cared for them shielded their bosoms more\ntenderly and effectually than themselves could have done, from one of\nthe sharpest stings that pierce the flesh of living men. Abraham\nbelieved God, and every step of his life-journey was thereby made plain:\nsome great mountains that stood in the path of the patriarch were\nobliged to get quickly out of the way as he approached. To him that\nbelieveth, all things are possible.\n\nAt midnight, in the parable, the cry for help came, and prevailed. It is\nnever out of season to pray, until you be out of life. He that keeps\nIsrael slumbers not nor sleeps. Come we early, he is awake; come we\nlate, he has not retired to rest. In prayer, the shamefacedness ([Greek:\nanaideia]) that shrinks from giving trouble should have absolutely no\nplace. We trouble God by our sins, but not by our prayers. Is the sun\nburdened by the weight of the planets that hang on him as they run their\ncourse? Is he exhausted by the necessity of supplying them with the\nlight in which they shine? Would you relieve him by covering some of\nthem up, or blotting them out of being? The infinite God is not wearied\nby the weight of all the worlds he has made: the God and Father of our\nLord Jesus Christ is not exhausted by giving a portion to each of his\nregenerated children of human kind. Ten lepers were healed by the word\nof Jesus, and of them one came back to give him praise. That man in his\neagerness pushed aside every obstruction, and pressed through the crowd\nthat encircled the great Teacher, demanding and engaging his attention.\nDid the interruption trouble the Lord? No. Who troubled him? Not the one\nwho came, but the nine who remained at a distance. With a sigh the Lord\nsaid, \"Where are the nine?\" He grieved because they did not come back\nwith praise: therefore he would have rejoiced if they had come. But if\nthey who come to Christ to give thanks please him much, they who come to\nhim asking gifts please him more; for in his own experience, and\naccording to his own testimony, it is more blessed to give than to\nreceive.\n\nSome additional light is thrown backward on the parable by the discourse\nthat immediately follows. It was with the view of bringing out and\npressing home the lesson from his own picture, that the Lord, in\ncontinuation of his teaching, said, \"And I say unto you, Ask, and it\nshall be given you,\" &c. Two things here are most wonderful;--one is,\nthat needy men should require so many reasonings to induce them to ask\ngood things from God; and the other is, that God should condescend to\nemploy so many reasonings for that end.\n\nOne who knew only the pertinacity with which the prodigal held to his\nhunger, and cold, and nakedness in a foreign land, would be apt to\nsuppose that this son had been harshly treated in his father's house,\nand that nothing but punishment awaited him on his return. But if such\nan observer had been able to witness the actual meeting of father and\nson when the exile returned at last, he would have learned from the fond\nreception which the yearning father gave to his erring child, that the\nson had all along grievously misjudged and misrepresented his father.\n\nSuppose, now, the angels, who desire to look into the provisions of the\ncovenant of grace, should have discovered only these two things, the\nneed of men, and the mercy of God, they would expect that all the fallen\nwould flock back to his presence, like doves to their windows when the\ntempest comes on: but herein they would find themselves mistaken. That\ncomplaint which our Redeemer uttered describes in one stroke the\nessential characteristic of the lost,--\"Ye will not come unto me, that\nye might have life\" (John v. 40).\n\nThe Lord, who loves to bestow the blessing, reasons with us from our own\nexperience. Children trust a father, and are not disappointed; why will\nyou not confide in the Father of your spirits, and live?\n\nIn the close of his lesson, he indicates that the best gift of God is\nthe Holy Spirit, and that this gift he is most willing to bestow. More\nready than a father is to give bread to a hungry child when it cries, is\nour Father to give the Holy Spirit to them that ask him.\n\nLet us put him to the proof. Let us come at Christ's bidding, and in\nChrist's name: let us come boldly to the throne of grace. He who\nreigneth over all has sent for us, and bidden us come--bidden us ask. He\nwill not dishonour his own promise: treat him as a father, and see\nwhether he will not make you his dear child.\n\nIn some respects these two,--this and the unjust judge,--are the most\nwonderful and most precious of all the parables. The rest present such\nviews of divine grace as may be shadowed forth by the ordinary\nmanifestations of human character and action,--such as a shepherd\nbringing back his sheep, or a sower casting his seed into the ground:\nbut these two go sheer down through all that lies on the surface of\nhuman history--down through all the upper and more ordinary grades of\nhuman experience, and penetrate into the lower, darker, meaner things at\nthe bottom, in order to find a longer line wherewith to measure out\ngreater lengths and breadths of God's compassion; as the shadow in the\nlake must needs be deepest where the heavens which it represents are\nhighest.\n\nI know nothing more amazing, in all these lessons which Christ gave\nabout the kingdom of grace, than the lesson which these two pictures\nteach about prayer. It is the same lesson that is embodied in one of the\nmost memorable and mysterious of all the Old Testament facts--Jacob's\nwrestling with the Angel. Sweet to the Angel of the Covenant was the\npersistent struggle of the believing man; and sweet to that same Lord\nto-day is the pressure which an eager suppliant applies to his heart and\nhis hand. In all the Bible you will not find a word that expresses\ngreater loathing than that which tells us how God regards the Laodiceans\nwho asked as if they cared not whether they obtained or not: \"Because\nthou art lukewarm, and art neither cold nor hot, I will spue thee\nout of my mouth.\" The Lord loves to be pressed; let us therefore press,\nassured by his own word that the Hearer of prayer never takes urgency\nill.\n\n\n\n\nXIX.\n\nTHE RICH FOOL.\n\n\n\"And he spake a parable unto them, saying, The ground of a certain rich\n man brought forth plentifully: and he thought within himself,\n saying, What shall I do, because I have no room where to bestow my\n fruits? And he said, This will I do: I will pull down my barns, and\n build greater; and there will I bestow all my fruits and my goods.\n And I will say to my soul, Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for\n many years; take thine ease, eat, drink, and be merry. But God said\n unto him, Thou fool, this night thy soul shall be required of thee:\n then whose shall those things be, which thou hast provided? So is he\n that layeth up treasure for himself, and is not rich toward\n God.\"--LUKE xii. 16-21.\n\nWhile Jesus was, in his wonted way, preaching the kingdom to a great\nmultitude, one of the audience, taking advantage probably of some\nmomentary pause in the discourse, broke in upon the solemn exercises\nwith the inappropriate and incongruous demand, \"Master, speak to my\nbrother that he divide the inheritance with me.\"\n\nIn regard to the matter in dispute between himself and his brother, this\nman probably had both an honest purpose and a righteous cause. For aught\nthat we know to the contrary, he may have been violently or fraudulently\ndeprived of his share in the inheritance of the family. In the answer of\nthe Lord there is not a word that calls in question the justice of his\nclaim. The question of right and wrong as between the brothers does not\nconstitute an element of the case as it is presented to us; it is\nintentionally and completely omitted. Dishonesty is a simpler affair,\nand can be settled in very few words. Elsewhere it is disposed of in a\nvery brief sentence,--\"Thou shalt not steal.\" But here a far more subtle\nsin is analyzed and exposed. The lesson is not, Take heed and beware of\nInjustice; but, \"Take heed and beware of Covetousness.\" The warning is\ndirected not against the sin of obtaining wealth by unjust means, but\nagainst the sin of setting the heart upon wealth, by what means soever\nit may have been obtained: this reproof was doubtless a word more in\nseason for the assembly of well-conducted Jews who listened that day to\nthe preaching of Jesus, as it is a word more in season for the members\nof Christian Churches in this land, than an exhortation to beware of\ntheft.\n\nThe appeal so inopportunely made, shows incidentally that the people had\nbegun to look on Jesus as a prophet, and to pay great deference to his\nword. Had he not been already in some sense recognised as an authority,\nthis man would not have applied to him for relief. He was well aware\nthat Jesus of Nazareth could bring no civil constraint to bear upon his\nbrother; it was the moral influence of the prophet's word that he\ncounted on as the means of accomplishing his purpose: \"Master, _speak_\nto my brother, that he divide the inheritance with me.\" He had, perhaps,\nobserved an amazing effect produced by a word from those meek lips; he\nhad, perhaps, himself seen wicked men subdued by it, and heard from\nothers that it had silenced a stormy sea. He may have marked its power\nin healing the sick and raising the dead. Forthwith he conceived the\nplan of enlisting this mysterious and mighty word on his own side of a\nfamily quarrel. If that word, he thought within himself, were exerted in\nmy behalf, it would induce my brother to give to me the half or the\nthird of the paternal estate, which I claim as my right.\n\nWe cannot cast the first stone at this poor simpleton, who had no other\nuse for the Redeemer's word than to gain by means of it a few more acres\nof the earth for himself: in every age, some men may be found who hang\non the skirts of the Church for the sake of some immediate temporal\nbenefit. Nor is it difficult to understand the phenomenon: \"No man can\nserve two masters;\" practically each chooses one, and in the main serves\nhim faithfully. If Christ is chosen as Lord and Master, Mammon and all\nother things are compelled to serve: if Mammon is chosen and seated on\nthe throne, he will not scruple to lay heaven and earth under\ncontribution for the advancement of his designs;--Mammon, when master,\nwill take even the word of Christ and employ it as an instrument\nwherewith he may rake his rags together.\n\nHow simple and helpless is the man who has allowed wealth to become his\nchief good! Here is an example of ungodly simplicity. Without any\napprehension of a reproof from the Lord or his disciples, the poor man\nbetrays all: in the public assembly he unwittingly turns his own heart\ninside out. Instead of addressing to the preacher the question, What\nmust I do to be saved? showing that the truth had taken effect on his\nconscience, he preferred a request regarding a disputed property,\nshowing that while the words of Jesus fell on his ears, his heart was\ngoing after its covetousness. He attended to the sermon for the purpose\nof watching when it should be done, that he might then do a stroke of\nbusiness.\n\nWe must not too complacently congratulate ourselves on our superior\nprivileges and more reverent habits. If those who wait upon the ministry\nof the word in our day were as simple as this man was, some requests\nsavouring as much of the earth as his would be preferred at the close\nof the solemnity. If human breasts were transparent, and the thoughts\nthat throng them patent to the public gaze, many heads would hang down.\n\nFrom this untimely and intensely earthly interruption the parable\nsprings: thus the Lord makes the covetousness as well as the wrath of\nman to praise him, and restrains the remainder thereof. A fissure has\nbeen made in the mountain by some pent-up internal fire that forced its\nway out, and rent the rock in its outgoing; in that rent a tree may now\nbe seen blooming and bearing fruit, while all the rest of the\nmountain-side is bare. \"Out of the eater came forth meat; out of the\nstrong came forth sweetness.\" This word of Jesus that liveth and abideth\nfor ever is a green and fruitful tree to-day; but it was the outbursting\nof a scathing, scorching covetousness that formed the cavity, and\nsupplied the soil in which the tree might grow.\n\n\"The ground of a certain rich man brought forth plentifully,\" &c.\n\nThe ground was his own: no law, human or divine, challenged his right.\nThe ground was eminently fruitful; the unconscious earth gave forth its\nriches, making no distinction between one who used it well and one who\nabused it. On the fields of the covetous man the rain fell and the sun\nshone: God makes his sun to shine on the evil and on the good. It is not\nhere--it is not now that he judges the world in righteousness. He giveth\nto all men liberally, and upbraideth not.\n\nMark now what effect the profusion of nature and the beneficence of God\nproduced on the mind of this prosperous man. It set him a thinking: so\nfar, so good. The expression in the original indicates a dialogue, and a\ndialogue is a discourse maintained between two. Dialogue is, indeed,\nthe original word transferred bodily into the English language: [Greek:\ndielogizeto en heauto]--he dialogued in himself: his soul and he held\na conversation on the subject. This was a proper course. When riches\nincrease it is right and necessary to hold a consultation with one's own\nsoul regarding them: in like manner, also, when riches take themselves\nwings and fly away, a conversation between the same parties should take\nplace regarding their escape.\n\nHe said, \"What shall I do, I have no room where to bestow my fruits?\"\nThe process advances most hopefully: hitherto, no fault can be found\nwith this man's conduct. So great had been his prosperity that he was at\na loss for storage. His cup was not only full, but running over, and so\nrunning waste; his solicitude now turned upon the question how he might\nprofitably dispose of the surplus. Taking it for granted, as any\nsensible man in the circumstances would, that something should be done,\nhe puts the question, \"What shall I do?\" A right question, addressed to\nthe proper person, himself. No other person was so well qualified to\nanswer it,--no other person understood the case, or possessed authority\nto determine it.\n\nListen now to the answer: \"He said, This will I do: I will pull down my\nbarns, and build greater,\" &c. This is the turning-point, and on it the\npoor man turns aside into error. When God's goodness was showered upon\nhim in such abundance, he should have opened his treasures and permitted\nthem to flow: for this end his riches had been bestowed upon him. When\nrain from heaven has filled a basin on the mountain-top, the reservoir\noverflows, and so sends down a stream to refresh the valley below: it is\nfor similar purposes that God in his providential government fills the\ncup of those who stand on the high places of the earth--that they may\ndistribute the blessing among those who occupy a lower place in the\nscale of prosperity.\n\nBut self was this man's pole star: he cared for himself, and for none\nbesides. Self was his god; for to please himself was practically the\nchief end of his existence. He proposed to pull down his barns, and\nbuild a larger storehouse on the site, in order that he might be able to\nhoard his increasing treasures. The method that this ancient Jewish\nself-seeker adopted is rude and unskilful. We understand better the\nprinciples of finance, and enjoy more facilities for profitably\ninvesting our savings: but the two antagonist principles retain their\nrespective characters under all changes of external circumstances--the\nprinciple of selfishness and the principle of benevolence; the one\ngathers in, the other spreads out.\n\nThe method of reserving all for self, is as unsuccessful as it is\nunamiable: it cannot succeed. The man who should hoard in his own\ngranary all the corn of Egypt, could not eat more of it than a poor\nlabourer--probably not so much. It is only a very small portion of their\nwealth that the rich can spend directly on their own personal comfort\nand pleasure: the remainder becomes, according to the character of the\npossessor, either a burden which he is compelled to bear, or a store\nwhence he daily draws the luxury of doing good.\n\nThe dialogue proceeds: the man has something more to say to his soul:\n\"Soul, thou hast much goods laid up for many years,\" &c. He counts on\nriches and time as if both were his own, and at his disposal. The big\nbarn is not yet built; the golden grain that shall fill it has not yet\nbeen sown: and even although no accident should mar the material portion\nof the plan, how shall he secure the \"many years\" that constitute its\nessence on the other side? Does he keep Time under lock and key in his\nstorehouse, that he may at pleasure draw as much as he requires? Many\nyears! These years lie in the future,--that is, in the unseen eternity.\nThey are at God's right hand--they are not within your reach. Why do you\npermit an uncertain element to go into the foundation of your hope?\n\nThere is, indeed, nothing strange here. It is according to law: those\nwho are taught of the Spirit understand it well. The god of this world\nhath blinded the minds of them that believe not. \"Thou hast goods laid\nup for many years! take thine ease, soul; eat, drink, and be merry!\"\nWhat simplicity is here! The case is in degree extreme; the letters are\nwritten large that even indifferent scholars may be able to read the\nlesson; but the same spiritual malady, in some of its forms and degrees,\nis still epidemic in the world: those are least exposed to infection who\nhave their treasures laid up at God's right hand.\n\nIt is a useful though a trite remark, that there is great stupidity in\nthe proposal to lay up in a barn the portion of a soul. The soul, when\nit is hungry, cannot feed on musty grain. Material treasures cannot save\na soul from death. The representation in the parable, however, is true\nto nature and fact: it would be a mistake to attribute to a miser a high\nappreciation of the dignity of man. Covetousness, in its more advanced\nstages, eats the pith out of the understanding, and leaves its victim\nalmost fatuous.\n\nThis man, in a dialogue with his own soul, had settled matters according\nto his own mind. The two had agreed together that they would have a\nroyal time on earth, and a long one. The whole business was comfortably\narranged. But at this stage another interlocutor, whom they had not\ninvited, breaks in upon the colloquy: \"God said unto him, Thou fool,\nthis night thy soul shall be required of thee; then, whose shall those\nthings be which thou hast provided?\" This is the writing on the wall\nthat puts an end to Belshazzar's feast, and turns his mirth into terror.\n\nThe terms run literally, \"Unwise, this night they demand from thee thy\nsoul.\" Those ministering angels and providential laws, represented by\nthe drawers of the net in another parable, to whom the Supreme Governor\nhas committed the task of gathering gradually the generations of men\nfrom this sea of time, and casting them for judgment on the borders of\neternity--those ministering spirits, and principles pervading nature,\narrive in their course this night at your door, and send the message\ninto the midst of the merry festival, The master of this house is wanted\nimmediately; he must arise and go, in obedience to the summons; he can\nneither resist nor delay. He may weep, tremble, rage; but he must go,\nand go on the instant. It is not the whole man, but only his soul that\nis wanted: his body will be left behind. But the body, though left\nbehind, cannot claim, cannot use the goods. When the soul is summoned\nover into eternity, it cannot carry the hoarded treasures with itself,\nand the body left behind has no further use for them. A grave to rest in\nwhile it returns to dust is all that the body needs or gets; and the\ndeserted wealth must advertise for an owner--whose shall it be?\n\nOur Lord Jesus has spoken these piercing words, not for the sake of the\npain which they are fitted to inflict. He is the Healer[68] of diseased\nhumanity, and when he makes an incision he means to cure. This sharp\ninstrument, at whose glance we wince and shrink precisely in proportion\nto the measure of our malady, he wields for the purpose of piercing\nthe deadly tumour, and so saving the threatened life. \"A man's life\nconsisteth not in the abundance of the things which he possesseth\"\n(ver. 15); and the man who places his life therein, loses his life. That\nis not his life; and if he take that for his life, he is cheated: when a\nmerchant has given all for what seemed a goodly pearl, he has not\nanother fortune in reserve wherewith to begin anew, if that for which he\npaid all his possessions turns out to be a worthless toy of glass. Our\ntime, our life--this is our fortune, on which we trade for the better\nworld: if these be spent,--be thrown away for what is not life, then\nlife is lost.\n\n [68] Der Heiland--the Healer--is the ordinary epithet applied to the\n Lord Jesus in the religious phraseology of the Germans. The term is\n suggestive and comforting.\n\nRiches are truly enjoyed when they are wisely employed in doing good;\nbut hoarded as the portion of their possessor, they burden him while\nthey remain his, and rend him at the parting.\n\nBy way of contrast, the Lord mentions another kind of treasure, which\nsatisfies now, and lasts for ever. Those who are \"rich toward God,\" are\nrich indeed, and all besides are poor: and this wealth is, in Christ,\noffered free,--offered to all.\n\nSeeing that an evil spirit possessed this man, the Lord in mercy applied\nhis word to cast the evil spirit out, and make room for his own\nindwelling. When the spirit of the world refuses to go out at his word,\nhe sometimes interferes as Ruler in providence, and tears out the\nintruder by his mighty hand: the kingdom of heaven that is \"within you\"\nalso suffereth violence; and He who is most mighty comes sometimes with\nmerciful strokes to take it by force. \"Even so: come, Lord Jesus.\"\n\n\n\n\nXX.\n\nTHE BARREN FIG-TREE.\n\n\n\"There were present at that season some that told him of the Galileans,\n whose blood Pilate had mingled with their sacrifices. And Jesus\n answering said unto them, Suppose ye that these Galileans were\n sinners above all the Galileans, because they suffered such things?\n I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all likewise\n perish. Or those eighteen, upon whom the tower in Siloam fell, and\n slew them, think ye that they were sinners above all men that dwelt\n in Jerusalem? I tell you, Nay: but, except ye repent, ye shall all\n likewise perish. He spake also this parable; A certain man had a\n fig-tree planted in his vineyard; and he came and sought fruit\n thereon, and found none. Then said he unto the dresser of his\n vineyard, Behold, these three years I come seeking fruit on this\n fig-tree, and find none: cut it down; why cumbereth it the ground?\n And he answering said unto him, Lord, let it alone this year also,\n till I shall dig about it, and dung it: and if it bear fruit, well:\n and if not, then after that thou shalt cut it down.\"--LUKE xiii. 1-9.\n\nIt is obvious that the massacre of the Galileans by Pilate was mentioned\non this occasion, not for its own sake, but for the purpose of\nsupporting a doctrine which the narrators held and desired to establish.\nTheir meaning is echoed distinctly in the answer of the Lord. These\nPharisees seem to have found grist for their own mill in all events and\nall persons; everything was turned to the account of their own\nself-righteousness. Peculiar sufferings seemed to prove peculiar guilt.\nThe logical consequence they did not express, and perhaps did not\ndistinctly frame even in thought; but they solaced themselves with it,\nnotwithstanding: they were not visited by such calamities, and therefore\nit might be presumed they were not chargeable with such sins.\n\nThe Lord expressly denied the truth of their silent, hidden inference,\nand fortified his teaching by reference to another analogous case,--the\nsudden death of some men through the fall of a tower. Leaving untouched\nthe general doctrine that mankind suffer for sin, he clearly and\nemphatically teaches, that particular calamities do not measure or prove\nthe particular guilt of those who suffer in them. Otherwise, it is\nobvious that God's government begins and ends in this life; there is\nneither the necessity nor the evidence of a judgment to come. He\nindicated to the Jews that the sudden and unexpected destruction of\nthose sacrificing Galileans, was but an emblem of the sudden and\nunexpected destruction that would overtake themselves if they were not\nconverted in time, and shielded in mercy from the judgment that sin\nentailed. To repeat, expand, and enforce this lesson the parable is\nspoken: \"He spake _also_ this parable,\"--the similitude is given in\naddition to the more direct instruction which had gone before, and for\nthe same purpose.\n\n\"A certain man had a fig-tree planted in his vineyard.\" This was not a\nseedling that had sprung accidentally within the fences of the vineyard,\nand through carelessness been permitted to grow: the language is\nprecise, and indicates that the fig tree had been planted within the\nvineyard by a deliberate act of the owner. The husbandman planted the\nfig-tree that he might enjoy its fruit; and in order more effectually to\nsecure his object, he selected for the tree the most favourable\nposition. It is obvious both from the structure and design of the\nparable that the position of the fig-tree was the best that it could\npossibly have obtained.\n\nIn countries where the vine is cultivated, not by a few wealthy\nproprietors with a view to an export trade, but by each family on a\nsmall scale with a view to the food of the household, to plant some\nfruit trees of other kinds within the same enclosure is the rule rather\nthan the exception. The vineyard is not the luxury of the few, but a\ncommon necessity of life with the many. It becomes the most cherished\npossession of the permanent rural population. Its aspect is sunward, its\nsoil is good, its fences are in order. Within this favoured spot the\nowner is willing to make room for one or more fig-trees, for the sake of\nthe fruit which in such favourable circumstances he expects them to\nbear.[69]\n\n [69] In the valley of the Rhine where the vine is cultivated as the\n material of a great manufacture, and the staple of a foreign trade,\n fruit trees of other species are not admitted within the vineyard;\n but at Botzen in the Tyrol, where the habits of society are more\n simple and primitive, I have repeatedly seen fig-trees growing\n within the lofty wall of the carefully cultured vineyard, rewarding\n the possessor for his care with abundant fruit.\n\nWhen the tree had reached maturity the owner expected that it should\nbear fruit; but that year, the next, and a third it continued barren.\nHaving waited a reasonable time, he gave orders that it should be\ndestroyed; since it produced nothing, he desired to utilize in another\nway the portion of ground which it occupied.\n\nThe dresser of the vineyard is a person who has the entire charge,\nsubject to the general instructions of the proprietor. He has long\noccupied this position, and is acquainted with the fig-tree from its\ninfancy; he knows it, as a shepherd in a similarly primitive state of\nsociety knows his sheep. He has formed for it a species of attachment;\nand a sentiment akin to compassion springs up in his heart, when he\nhears its sentence pronounced. \"Woodman, spare that tree,\" is a species\nof intercession thoroughly natural and human.\n\nThe intercession of the dresser, however, is not sentiment merely; it\nis sentiment completely directed and controlled by just reason. He does\nnot plead for the indefinite prolongation of a useless existence. He\nasks only another year of trial: he intends and promises to take in the\ninterval the most energetic measures for stimulating the barren tree\ninto fruitfulness. If under these appliances it bear fruit, he knows the\nowner will gladly permit it to retain its place; if not, he will abandon\nit to the fate which it deserves and invites.\n\nNo peculiar difficulty attends the exposition of this parable: the main\nfeatures of its meaning are so distinctly marked, that it is hardly\npossible to miss them. The lesson is easily read; and when read, it is\nunspeakably solemn and tender.\n\nGod is the owner of the vineyard and the fig-tree within its walls.\nAbraham's seed, natural and mystical, are the fig-tree; and the Mediator\nbetween God and man is the Dresser of the vineyard, the intercessor for\nthe barren tree. These points are all so obvious that there can hardly\nbe any difference of opinion regarding them. One point remains,\ndemanding some explanation indeed, but presenting very little\ndifficulty,--the vineyard. The fig-tree was planted within the vineyard,\nand what is the doctrine indicated by this circumstance in the material\nframe of the parable? The suggestion that the vineyard means the world,\nin the midst of which Israel were planted, although supported by some\nhonoured names, does not merit much consideration. In no sense is there\nany likeness between the vineyard and the world. The essential\ncircumstances involved in the fact that the fig-tree grew within the\nvineyard are, that in soil, south exposure, care and defence, it was\nplaced in the best possible position for bearing fruit. The one fact\nthat it was planted in the vineyard indicates, and was obviously\nintended to indicate, that the owner had done the best for his fig-tree.\nThe meaning is precisely the same as that which is more fully expressed\nin the analogous parable: \"Now will I sing to my well-beloved a song of\nmy beloved touching his vineyard,\" &c. (Isa. v. 1-7). In the prophet's\nallegory, while in general the vineyard represents the house of Israel,\nthe vine trees more specifically represent the people, and south\nexposure, soil, care, and defence, represent the peculiar providence and\ngrace of God displayed in their history and institutions. \"The\nvineyard of the Lord of hosts is the house of Israel, and the men of\nJudah his pleasant plant\" (ver. 7); the plants represent the men, and\nall that the proprietor did in their behalf represents the goodness of\nGod to Israel in redeeming them from bondage and giving them his\ncovenant. On the same principle in our parable the fig-tree represents\nthe people who were favoured, and the advantages of the vineyard\nrepresent the privileges which the people enjoyed. The intimation that\nthis barren fig-tree grew within a vineyard, is a short method of\ninforming us that it enjoyed a position on a very fruitful hill, and was\nthere fenced, watched, and watered with the most patient care. Now,\nobviously, none of these things, in their spiritual signification, were\nenjoyed by Israel simply in virtue of their existence in this world. The\nEgyptians, the Babylonians, and the Persians were placed in the world\ntoo, and yet they enjoyed no peculiar privileges,--could not be compared\nto a vineyard on a very fruitful hill. This feature of the parable, so\nfar from merely intimating that Israel were placed in the world, teaches\nus that they were separated from it; they were protected by special\nprovidences in their history, and cherished by the ordinances of grace.\nThe place of the fig-tree within the vineyard indicates that the people\nto whom God looked in vain for the fruits of righteousness, were\ndistinguished from the nations by the peculiar religious privileges\nwhich they enjoyed: the favourable circumstances of the tree aggravated\nthe guilt of its barrenness.\n\nThree successive years the owner came seeking fruit on this fig-tree,\nand found none. In regard to the specified period of three years, I do\nnot think we gain much by a particular reference to the well-known\nnatural process by which the fig develops simultaneously the fruit of\nthis season and the germs of the next; for we do not know in this case\nwhether the germs were never formed, or fell off before they reached\nmaturity. I am not able to perceive that the number three has any\nnecessary reference to the peculiarities of the fig; I think the same\nnumber would have been employed for the purposes of the spiritual\nlesson, although a fruit tree of another species had been taken as an\nexample. Three years was a reasonable period for the owner to wait, that\nhe might neither on the one hand rashly cut down a tree that might soon\nhave become profitable, nor on the other permit a hopelessly barren tree\nindefinitely to occupy a position which might otherwise be turned to\ngood account.\n\nWhile the lesson of the parable bears upon the Church at large, both in\nancient and modern times, it is to individuals that it can be most\nsafely and most profitably applied. Most certainly we enjoy at this day\nthe advantages set forth under the figure of the favoured fig-tree.\nBesides the life and faculties which we possess in common with others,\nwe have spiritual privileges which are peculiar to ourselves. Civil and\nreligious liberty, the Scriptures, the Sabbath, the Church, place us in\nthe position of the fig-tree within the vineyard, while other nations\nare more or less like a tree rooted in the sand, or exposed on the\nwayside. The God in whom we live has conferred these advantages upon us,\nthat we might bear fruit unto holiness; and if we remain barren,\nnotwithstanding all his kindness, he will give forth the decree to cut\nus down. In some he finds bad fruit, and in some no fruit, and even in\nthe best, little fruit. He has not cast out the unfruitful, but has\ntenderly spared them.\n\nAs the fig-tree greedily drank in the riches of earth and air, and\nwasted all in leaves, so the unconverted in a land of Christian light\nenjoy God's goodness and employ it in ministering only to their own\npleasures. The line of justice, stretched to the utmost,--to the utmost\nand more, snaps asunder at last: the sentence goes forth, Cut the barren\ntree down, and cast it out. This is the doom which guilt deserves and\njustice proclaims: if the sinful were under a government of mere\nrighteousness, it would be inexorably executed upon all.\n\nHere is the turning point: here an intercessor appears,--an Intercessor\nwho cares for man and prevails with God. The first part of his plea is,\nSpare: he appeals for a respite of definite and limited duration,--one\nyear: less would not afford an opportunity for amendment, and more would\nin the circumstances confer a bounty on idleness. All who have under the\nGospel reached the age of understanding, and are still living without\nGod in the world, enjoy the present respite in virtue of Christ's\ncompassionate intercession. If that Mediator had never taken up the\ncase, or should now abandon it, the sentence already pronounced would\ndescend like the laws of nature and inexorably execute itself. It is\nChrist's intercession alone, that stands between the unpardoned on\nearth, and the punishment which is their due.[70]\n\n [70] I cannot see any force in the argument by which Stier\n endeavours to show that the interceding vine-dresser represents\n primarily the human ministry in the Church.\n\nBut the Intercessor does more than secure for the sinful a space for\nrepentance: He who obtains the respite takes means to render it\neffectual. The two chief applications employed in husbandry to stimulate\ngrowth and fruitfulness are digging and manuring: these accordingly the\ndresser of the vineyard undertakes to apply in the interval to the\nbarren fig-tree. I think something may be gained here by descending into\nthe particulars. One of these agricultural operations imparts to the\ntree the elements of fruitfulness, and the other enables the tree to\nmake these elements its own. Digging gives nothing to the tree; but it\nmakes openings whereby gifts from another quarter may become practically\navailable. The manure contains the food which the plant must receive,\nand assimilate, and convert into fruit; but if the hardened earth were\nnot made loose by digging, the needed aliment would never reach its\ndestination.\n\nSimilar processes are applied in the spiritual culture: certain diggings\ntake place around and among the roots of barren souls, as well as of\nbarren fig-trees. Bereavements and trials of various kinds strike and\nrend; but these cannot by themselves renew and sanctify. They may give\npain, but cannot impart fertility: the spirit much distressed may be as\nunfruitful as the spirits that are at ease in Zion. These rendings,\nhowever, are most precious as the means of opening a way whereby the\nelements of spiritual life conveyed by the word and the Spirit may reach\ntheir destination. The Lord who pours in the food for the sustenance of\na soul, stirs that soul by his providence, so that grace may reach the\nroot and be taken in. As the constituents of fruit, held in solution by\nair and water, cannot freely reach the plant whose roots lie under a\nlong unbroken and indurated soil, so the grace of God contained in the\npreached Gospel is kept at bay by a carnal mind and a seared conscience.\nIt is when afflictions rend the heart, as a ploughshare tears up the\nground, that the elements of life long offered are at length received.\nIt is thus that providence and grace conspire to achieve the purpose of\nGod in the salvation of men. In this work mercy and judgment meet; and\nsaved sinners, on earth and in heaven, put both together in their song\nof praise (Ps. ci. 1.)\n\nBut a feature appears in the close, well fitted to arouse those who have\nhitherto presumed upon impunity and neglected Christ. Even this kind\nIntercessor does not propose that the unfruitful tree should be allowed\nindefinitely to maintain its place without changing its character: He\nspontaneously concedes that if this trial prove ineffectual, justice\nmust take its course; \"After that thou shalt cut it down.\" When Jesus\nlets a sinner go, who shall take him up? But there is love even in this\nlast stern word. Love intercedes for a time of trial,--an opportunity of\nturning; and love, too, after securing sufficient opportunity, lets go\nits hold and leaves all hopeless beyond. It is the terrible concession,\n\"thou shalt cut it down,\" issuing from the Intercessor's lips, that\ngives power to the invitation, \"Now is the accepted time.\" To warn me\nnow that if I let the day of grace run waste, even Jesus on the morrow\nof the judgment will not plead for me any more, is surely the most\neffectual means of urging me to close with his offer to-day.\n\n\n\n\nXXI.\n\nTHE EXCUSES.\n\n\n\"Then said he unto him, A certain man made a great supper, and bade\n many: and sent his servant at supper time to say to them that were\n bidden, Come; for all things are now ready. And they all with one\n consent began to make excuse. The first said unto him, I have bought\n a piece of ground, and I must needs go and see it: I pray thee have\n me excused. And another said, I have bought five yoke of oxen, and I\n go to prove them: I pray thee have me excused. And another said, I\n have married a wife, and therefore I cannot come. So that servant\n came, and showed his lord these things. Then the master of the house\n being angry said to his servant, Go out quickly into the streets and\n lanes of the city, and bring in hither the poor, and the maimed, and\n the halt, and the blind. And the servant said, Lord, it is done as\n thou hast commanded, and yet there is room. And the lord said unto\n the servant, Go out into the highways and hedges, and compel them to\n come in, that my house may be filled. For I say unto you, That none\n of those men which were bidden shall taste of my supper.\"--LUKE xiv.\n 16-24.\n\nA chain of connected lessons, consisting of several links, immediately\nprecedes the parable in the evangelic history; but we may appreciate all\nthe meaning of the parable without reference to the circumstances in\nwhich it sprung. In some cases the connection with the context is such\nthat light from the history preceding is necessary to elucidate the\nmeaning of the lesson that follows; but it is not so here. Although one\nthing suggests another in the conversation which the Evangelist records,\nthe lesson ultimately given is independent of the things that suggested\nit.\n\nTouched by the solemn teaching of the Lord Jesus, one of the company,\nwell-meaning, but dim and confused in his conceptions, made the remark,\n\"Blessed is he that shall eat bread in the kingdom of God.\" Observing\nthat this man and the Pharisees around him were clinging to the notion\nthat to be invited to enter the kingdom is the same thing as to be in\nit, he spoke the parable to point out the difference, and to show that\nthe invitation will only aggravate the doom of those who refuse to\ncomply with it. He intends to teach the Jews, and through them to teach\nus, that those who are near the kingdom may in the end come short of\nit--that those who stand high in spiritual privileges may be\nexcluded--may exclude themselves from the kingdom of God.\n\nBoth in the natural objects employed, and the spiritual lessons which\nthey convey, there is, at some points, a marked resemblance between this\nparable and that of the royal marriage; but the two, though similar, are\nmanifestly distinct.\n\n\"A certain man made a great supper and bade many.\" In this case it is\nnot a king but a person in a private station who provides the feast; and\nthe occasion of the rejoicing is not the marriage of the entertainer's\nson. It is an ordinary example of hospitality exercised by an affluent\ncitizen.\n\nBoth here and in the analogous parable of the royal marriage it is\nassumed, as at least not altogether incongruous with custom, that\ninvitations should be issued some days before, and that the invited\nguests should a second time be warned by a messenger to repair to the\nbanqueting house when the time drew near. This summons to attend\nimmediately was sent out at supper time. We know that the term [Greek:\ndeipnon] was in ancient times employed generally to signify the\nprincipal meal, without reference to a particular period of the day;\nand, from the circumstances of this case, it plainly appears that the\nfeast was a dinner at an early hour, and not a supper in our sense of\nthe word. At the moment when the warning reached him, the man who had\nbought a field intended to go and see it, and the man who had bought\nfive yoke of oxen intended on that same afternoon to try whether they\nwould go well in harness; these excuses, although not sincere, must in\nthe nature of the case have appeared plausible, and consequently the\nfeast must have been ready at an early hour of the day.\n\nIt is implied that these men had tacitly, or in some other\nwell-understood way, accepted the first invitation. They gave no\nintimation that they intended to decline--they gave the provider of the\nfeast reason to expect their presence. Probably they were well pleased\nto be invited; if they met any of their poorer neighbours in the\ninterval, it is probable they would take occasion to show their own\nimportance. These common people in the town, and these labourers in the\ncountry, are not admitted as we are into good society. When the moment\narrived they were unwilling; or rather they were so intently occupied\nwith their own affairs, that the attractions of the feast were not\npowerful enough to tear them away.\n\n\"With one consent\" they all made excuses. The servant saw them\nseparately and received their answers. There is no reason to believe\nthat they met together and framed a plan to insult their entertainer.\nThey acted all on the same method, although they did not act in concert.\nThe creatures were of one kind, and though they answered separately they\nanswered similarly. Off one carnal instinct--[Greek: apo mias\n(gnomes)]--the excuses were taken, and accordingly, although spoken by\ndifferent persons, and moulded by different circumstances, they were\nall of the same type.\n\nThe first had bought a field and must go to examine his bargain; the\nsecond had bought live stock for his farm and must see them tried\nimmediately; the third had married a wife, and held himself absolved for\nthe time from the ordinary rules of society. They are fair samples of\nthe things that occupy and engross men's hearts and lives.\n\nThe servant, having no authority to act, simply reported the facts to\nhis master. The master was angry, and immediately invited all the poor\nof the neighbourhood to the feast. When many of the most destitute had\nassembled, the householder, not satisfied as long as there was room at\nthe table, and a poor man within reach to occupy it, sent out another\nmessage still more pressing, to sweep into the feast all the homeless\nwanderers that could be found, the very dregs and outcasts of society.\nSatisfied when his house at length was filled, the owner announced that\nnone of those who had made light of his invitation should now be\npermitted to partake of the feast.\n\nWe are now ready to examine more directly the spiritual meaning of the\nparable, and as the lesson is in the main coincident with that of the\nroyal marriage in its earlier portion, a brief exposition will suffice.\n\nIn the Gospel, God has provided a great feast. Israel, or his Church at\nany period, are a privileged class, and enjoy, through his sovereign\ngoodness, a perpetual invitation,--a standing right. The charge which\nthe parable brings against this privileged people is, that they were\nsatisfied with the honour of being invited, and refused actually to\ncomply with the invitation. They were content with their name and their\noutward privileges, and would not in their own hearts and lives obey the\nGospel; clinging to the form of godliness, they peremptorily denied its\npower. Not they who are invited, but they who partake of the feast, are\nblessed. To get the first invitation will be not a blessing but an\naggravation of guilt, if you despise the Giver and refuse his gifts. The\nlast invited shall be first in ultimate position if they accept the\ninvitation, and the first invited will be last and lowest if they refuse\nto comply: the condition of men, ultimately, turns not on pardon to them\noffered, but on pardon by them received.\n\nThe servant obviously represents the ministry of the Gospel in every\nform and in all times. The message is addressed in the first instance to\nthem \"that were bidden.\" The Gospel was not first proclaimed to the\nheathen: begin at Jerusalem was the Master's command, and that command\nwas fulfilled in spirit and letter by his servants. To the lost sheep of\nthe House of Israel the Lord came in person, and to them the apostles\naddressed their Lord's words at the beginning of their ministry. The\nhistory of the event in the Acts of the Apostles corresponds exactly\nwith the prophetic delineation in this parable: it was when the Jews\nrejected the Gospel, that the messengers turned to the Gentiles.\n\nThe invitation addressed to the favoured circle first is, \"Come, for all\nthings are now ready;\" all preceding dispensations were a preparation\nfor Christ. When the fulness of time had come, those who had been all\nalong brought up within the lines of the privileged people, were invited\nto behold the Lamb of God that taketh away the sin of the world. This is\nrepeated in the experience of every generation, and every individual,\nthat grows up within the circle of Christian ordinances, as soon as the\nmind comprehends the message of mercy. As each attains maturity, he is\ninformed that all things are now ready; he is invited and pressed to\nbelieve in the Lord Jesus Christ that he may be saved.\n\nTo \"make excuse,\" does not here mean to invent an excuse, and falsely\nstate, as a reason, that which is, in point of fact, not the motive\nof the act. To make excuse, both in the original Greek ([Greek:\nparaiteisthai]) and in the English translation, signifies simply to\nplead to be excused. The grounds on which the plea is urged, may in any\ncase be true or false; but in this case, it is highly probable that the\ngrounds stated were in themselves facts, and that they were, in part at\nleast, the true grounds of refusal. Whether the first would have gone\nto the feast, if he had not at that time bought a property, we do not\ncertainly know. A man who is intensely unwilling to go, when one reason\nfails, will find or make another; but in this case, the probability is,\nthat anxiety to see his purchase was the real, or at least, a real\nobstacle. The same observation is applicable to the other two examples.\n\nBut although we concede that the obstacles are real, we do not thereby\nhelp the case of those who neglect the Gospel; we must go one step\ndeeper into the strata of deceit that are piled over each other in a\nhuman heart. A secret unwillingness to partake of the feast may induce\nthe invited to time his purchases, so that he may have a good excuse at\nhand, or at least to abstain from effort to regulate the incidence of\nother cares, so as to leave a time of leisure for the great concern.\nHere in the highest matters, as elsewhere in lower, \"Where there's a\nwill there's a way.\" If the desire were pure and true,--the desire to\nattend the Giver, and receive his unspeakable gift, the field may be\ninspected and the oxen proved early in the morning, or postponed till\nthe following day. Without supposing a conscious falsehood representing\nthat transactions which had no existence stood in the way, you have the\nevil in all its bulk and all its virulence, when the deceitful heart\ntries to persuade neighbours, and to persuade itself, that the emerging\nnecessities of earthly business interfered with the waiting on Christ\nfor the salvation of the soul.\n\nWe might be put on our guard against this species of deceit in the\nhighest matters, by observing how readily we glide into it, in things of\nsmaller moment. Deceits of every shade, from the lie direct to the most\nattenuated equivocation, spring in the complicated intercourse of modern\nsociety, like weeds in a moist summer on a fallow field. Assuredly,\nunless our hand be diligent in digging out these bitter roots, we shall\nnot grow rich in the graces of the Spirit. You are invited to a\nneighbour's house: you don't like to go, and you determine that you will\nnot go. Forthwith your wits go to work to discover an excuse, and you\nsoon find that which you seek for: you must travel on business that day;\nor some other excuse equally convenient and plausible occurs. You are\ninvited to the house of another neighbour; difficulties unforeseen\nspring up; but being bent on accepting this invitation, you brush them\nall aside, and contrive to reserve the evening for the company that you\nlove. There is much danger of staining the conscience in affairs like\nthese. The Lord requires truth in the inward parts: watch and pray. But\nthe difficulty of the path should not make any disciple sad: the effort\nto walk circumspectly, when honestly, prayerfully, lovingly made, is\npleasant and healthful exercise to the spirit.\n\nNeither on the natural nor on the spiritual side does the expression,\n\"with one consent,\" intimate that the parties met and consulted together\nregarding the terms of their answers. As birds of the same species build\ntheir nests of the same material and the same form, without deliberation\nor concert; so the carnal mind, being in its own nature enmity against\nGod, produces, wherever it operates, substantially the same fruits. In\nan alienated heart there is an intense unwillingness to be or to abide\nnear to God; and there is, consequently, great fecundity in the\nconception and production of partition walls to shield the conscience\nfrom the glances of his holiness.\n\nThe three species[71] of thorns that grew up and choked the word in this\ninstance, are fair specimens of their class--fair samples from the heap.\nThese and such as these slay their thousands still in the Christian\nChurch. At this point, however, it is of very great importance to\nobserve that all the transactions which are represented in the parable\nas having come between a sinner and the Saviour, are in themselves\nlawful; to overlook this would be to miss half the value of the lesson.\nIn point of fact acts and habits of positive vice keep many back from\nthe Gospel; but it is not with these cases that the parable deals--it is\nnot to these persons that the Lord is here addressing his reproof.\nEverything in its own place and time; the lesson here is not, \"A\ndrunkard shall not inherit the kingdom,\" but \"How shall we escape if we\nneglect so great salvation?\" When the material of the temptation is\nlawful and honourable the temptation is less suspected, and the tempted\nis more easily thrown off his guard. The field and the oxen must be\nbought and used; the affections of the family must be cherished; but woe\nto us if we permit these seemly plants to grow so rank that the soul's\nlife shall be overlaid beneath their weight!\n\n [71] I do not set much value on the elaborate and minute discussions\n which some expositors have raised regarding the distinct and\n specific significance of the several excuses. It is enough for me\n that they point to the possessions and the pleasures of life,--the\n possessions being distinguished into two kinds, the field and oxen,\n corresponding to the farm and the merchandise of the cognate\n parable.\n\nThe mission of the servants successively to the streets and lanes of the\ncity, and to the highways and hedges, with the urgent invitation to poor\nlabourers and homeless beggars, the maimed, the halt, and the blind, is\na vivid picture, given in prophecy, of what the Gospel of Christ does\nand will do in the world till the end of time. When many, and these the\nmost wretched, are brought in redeemed and sanctified, the Lord is not\nsatisfied; yet there is room, and the servants must go forth again to\nnew, and if possible, more needy objects, with new, and if possible,\nmore urgent appeals. \"Whosoever will, let him come.\" It is thus that the\nnumbers are filled up in the kingdom of God; but let it be well observed\nthat to be in a spiritually wretched state does not confer a favour or\nimply safety. These men were saved, not because they were spiritually\nvery low, but although they were spiritually very low: they were saved,\nalthough the chief of sinners, because Christ invited them, and they\ncame at his call. The more moral, and more privileged, who were first\ninvited, would have been as welcome and as safe if they had come.\n\n\n\n\nTHE LOST SHEEP, THE LOST COIN, AND THE PRODIGAL SON.\n\nLUKE xv.\n\n\nThe three parables of this chapter, like the seven in Matt. xiii.,\nconstitute a connected series. As soon as we begin to look into their\ncontents and relations, it becomes obvious that they have been arranged\naccording to a logical scheme, and that the group so framed is not\nfragmentary but complete. We cannot indeed fully comprehend the\nreciprocal relations of all until we shall have examined in detail the\nactual contents of each; and yet, on the other hand, a preliminary\nsurvey of the scheme as a whole may facilitate the subsequent\nexamination of its parts. A glance towards the group from a point\nsufficiently distant to command the whole in one view may aid us\nafterwards in making a minuter inspection of details; and, reciprocally,\nthe nearer inspection of individual features may throw back light on\nwhat shall have been left obscure in the general outline.\n\nThe three parables, then, the lost sheep, the lost coin, and the\nprodigal son, refer all to the same subject and describe the same fact;\nthey contemplate that fact, however, from opposite sides, and produce,\naccordingly, different pictures. It is important to notice at this stage\nthat the three parables of this group do not constitute a consecutive\nseries of three members. In the logical scheme the stem parts into two\nbranches, and the first of these is afterwards subdivided also into two:\nthe lost sheep and the lost coin contemplate the subject from the same\nside, and in the main present the same representation.[72]\n\n [72] While the evidence that the main division is twofold, not\n threefold, lies chiefly in the nature of the several\n representations, the minute formulae by which the transitions of the\n narrative are effected, point in the same direction. The parable of\n the lost sheep is introduced by the phrase, \"And he spake this\n parable,\" ([Greek: eipe de ten parabolen]), and that of the prodigal\n by the corresponding, \"And he said,\" ([Greek: eipe de]). These two\n are thus balanced over against each other; but the only link between\n the lost sheep and the lost silver is, Either ([Greek: e]),\n indicating that the second does not introduce a new subject, but\n gives another illustration of that which was already expressed in\n the first.\n\nThe repetition is profitable, for besides the intensity which\nreiteration imparts, the two parables, although generically the same,\nare specifically different. Together they represent one side of the fall\nand the redemption of man, while the other and opposite side is\nrepresented by the parable of the prodigal. But while the first two\nrepresent the same aspect of the great event, they represent it with\nspecific varieties of feature. This will be more distinctly understood\nwhen we shall have examined the parables in detail.\n\nIn further indicating the relations which subsist between the two\nportions of the group, I shall, for the sake of shortness, speak only of\nthe lost sheep and the prodigal, including under the first term also its\ntwin parable of the lost money.\n\nThe sin and the salvation of man,--the fall and the rising again,\nconsidered as one whole, is here contemplated successively from two\ndifferent, and in some respects opposite points of view. As the result,\nwe obtain two very dissimilar pictures; yet the pictures are both true,\nand both represent the same object.\n\nIn as far as the departure is concerned, the two representations are\ncoincident: it is only in regard to the return that they are essentially\ndiverse. The sheep and the prodigal alike depart of their own accord,\nthe one in ignorance and the other in wilful wickedness. Man destroys\nhimself; but the hand of God must intervene for his salvation.[73]\n\n [73] Bengel, in his usual pointed way, expresses the specific\n varieties which characterize the three successive views of men's\n sin, as stupidity, want of self-consciousness, and the positive\n choice of evil by an intelligent but depraved being. \"Ovis, drachma,\n filius perditus: peccator stupidus, sui plane nescius, sciens et\n voluntarius.\"\n\nThe conversion of a sinner is, on the contrary, represented by two\ndifferent pictures. You cannot convey a correct conception of a solid\nbody by one picture on a flat surface. The globe itself, for example,\ncannot be exhibited on a map except as two distinct hemispheres. To the\nright you have a representation of one side, and to the left a\nrepresentation of the other; the two pictures are different, and yet\neach, as far as it goes, is a true picture of the same globe. In like\nmanner, the way of a sinner's return to God is too great and deep for\nbeing fully set forth in one similitude. In particular its aspect\ntowards God and its aspect towards men are so diverse that both cannot\nbe represented by one figure. On one side the Redeemer goes\nspontaneously forth to seek and bear back again the lost; on the other\nside the wanderer repents, arises, and returns. Here, accordingly, you\nsee the shepherd following the strayed sheep, and bringing it back on\nhis shoulders to the fold; and there you see the weary prodigal first\ncoming to himself, and then coming to his Father. The first picture\nshows the sovereign self-moving love of God our Saviour; and the second\nshows the beginning, the progress, and the result of repentance in a\nsinner's heart.\n\nThese two similitudes represent one transaction: first, you are\npermitted to look upon it from above, and you behold the working of\ndivine compassion; next, you are permitted to look upon it from below,\nand you behold the struggle of conviction in a sinner's conscience,--the\nspontaneous return of a repenting man. Here is revealed the sovereign\noutgoing of divine power; and there in consequence appears a willing\npeople (Ps. cx. 3). It is not that one sinner is brought back by Christ,\nand another returns of his own accord: both features are present in\nevery example. Of every one who, from this fallen world, shall have\nentered the eternal rest, it may be said, and will be said in the songs\nof heaven, both that the Lord his Redeemer, of His own mere mercy, saved\nhim, and that he spontaneously came back to his Father's bosom and his\nFather's house.[74]\n\n [74] It is interesting to notice that the same twin doctrines which\n the Master here exhibited in parables were afterwards taught in the\n same relation by his servants. Take two examples, one a brief bold\n allegory, and the other an autobiographic fragment, both from the\n fervent heart and through the fruitful pen of the apostle Paul. (1.)\n \"Nevertheless the foundation of God standeth sure, having this seal,\n The Lord knoweth them that are his; and, Let every one that nameth\n the name of Christ depart from iniquity\" (2 Tim. ii. 19). The\n engraving on the upper side of this seal represents God's part in a\n sinner's salvation, and corresponds to the shepherd's generous act;\n the engraving on its under side represents man's part, and\n corresponds to the repenting and returning of the prodigal. (2.)\n \"Not as though I had already attained, either were already perfect;\n but I follow after, if that I may apprehend that for which also I am\n apprehended of Christ Jesus\" (Phil. iii. 12). The obscurity which\n adheres to the sentence as it stands in the English Bible is removed\n when, instead of \"that for which,\" you substitute the more direct\n and literal rendering, \"for that,\" meaning \"because\" or \"inasmuch\n as.\" The sentence should be read, \"I follow after, if that I may (if\n so be that I may) apprehend, inasmuch as I also have been\n apprehended by, Christ Jesus,\" ([Greek: dioko de ei kai katalabo,\n eph ho kai katelephthen hypo tou Christoi Iesou]). The apostle\n intends to state two connected facts; and to intimate that the one\n is the cause of the other. He is striving to grasp the Saviour; and\n what impels or encourages him to make the effort? His own experience\n that his Saviour has already in sovereign love laid hold of him.\n Christ has already come to this sinful man, in loving saving power,\n as the good shepherd came to the lost sheep; therefore the sinful\n man will arise and go to the Father like the repenting prodigal. The\n consciousness that like the lost sheep he has been grasped in the\n Redeemer's arms does not induce him to abstain from effort as\n unnecessary; on the contrary, by inspiring hope, it nerves his arm\n and spurs him on. Because he feels that the Shepherd is bearing him,\n therefore he will arise and go.\n\nIt is proper to notice here also the immediate occasion in our Lord's\nhistory whence these instructions sprung, as it belongs not particularly\nto the first parable, but generally to the whole group. This spark of\nheavenly light, like many others of similar beauty, has been struck off\nfor us by a rude blow which the Jewish leaders aimed against the\ncharacter and authority of Jesus. The publicans and sinners of the\nplace,--the home-heathen of the day,--the people whether rich or poor,\nwho had neither the power of religion in their hearts nor the profession\nof it on their lips,--came out in great numbers to hear this new\nprophet, Jesus of Nazareth. The word was new: \"never man spake like this\nman\" to these poor outcasts before. If at any time they sauntered into\nthe synagogue, and hovered for a few moments on the outskirts of the\ncongregation, the stray words that reached their ears from the desk of\nthe presiding scribe, were harsh supercilious denunciations of\nthemselves and their class. Hitherto their hearts had been like clay,\nand the Pharisaic teaching, as far as it had reached them, had been like\nfire: the clay in this furnace grew aye the harder. But now a new sound\nfrom the lips of a public teacher saluted their ears. They could not\nthrow these words back in the speaker's face, if they would; and they\nwould not if they could. They permitted themselves to be taken, and\nled. To them Jesus speaks \"with authority, and not as the scribes.\" This\nword had power; and its power lay in its tenderness: it went sheer\nthrough their stony hearts, and made them flow down like water.\n\nNor did he gain favour among unholy men by making their sins seem\nlighter than the scribes represented them to be: he made them heavier.\nHe did not convey to the profane and worldly the conception that their\nsins were easily forgiven; but he fixed in their hearts the impression\nthat God is a great forgiver. Touched and won by this unwonted\ntenderness, they came in clouds to sit at Jesus' feet.\n\nThe Pharisees counted their presence a blemish in the reputation of the\nteacher. As for them, they had always so spoken as to keep people of\nthat sort effectually at a distance: the doctrine, they think, that\nbrings them round the preacher cannot be sound. \"This man,\" they said,\n\"receiveth sinners and eateth with them;\" and they said no more, for\nthey imagined that Jesus was convicted and condemned by the fact.\n\nThe occasion of the parables becomes in a great measure the key to their\nmeaning. These men, the publicans and sinners, are Abraham's seed, and\nconsequently, even according to the showing of the Pharisees themselves,\nlost sheep,--prodigal sons; and the Redeemer's errand from heaven to\nearth is to seek and find and bring back such as these to the Father's\nfold. If they had not strayed, it would not have been necessary that the\nshepherd should follow them in their wandering, and bear them home: if\nthey had not in a far country spent their substance in riotous living,\nit would not have been necessary that they should return repenting to\ntheir Father.\n\n\n\n\nXXII.\n\nTHE LOST SHEEP.\n\n\n\"Then drew near unto him all the publicans and sinners for to hear him.\n And the Pharisees and scribes murmured, saying, This man receiveth\n sinners, and eateth with them. And he spake this parable unto them,\n saying, What man of you, having an hundred sheep, if he lose one of\n them, doth not leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness, and go\n after that which is lost, until he find it? And when he hath found\n it, he layeth it on his shoulders, rejoicing. And when he cometh\n home, he calleth together his friends and neighbours, saying unto\n them, Rejoice with me; for I have found my sheep which was lost. I\n say unto you, that likewise joy shall be in heaven over one sinner\n that repenteth, more than over ninety and nine just persons, which\n need no repentance.\"--LUKE xv. 1-7.\n\nAlthough by another saying of the Lord, it is rendered certain that\nhired, and even in a sinister sense \"hireling,\" shepherds were known at\nthe time in the country, the presumption that the flock which this\nshepherd tended was his own property is favoured both by the specific\nphraseology employed in the narrative, and the special circumstances of\nthis particular case. The size of this flock, consisting of only a\nhundred sheep, points rather to the entire wealth of a comparatively\npoor man, than to the stock of a territorial magnate. The conduct of the\nshepherd, moreover, is precisely the reverse of that which is elsewhere\nascribed to the \"hireling whose own the sheep are not.\" The salient\nfeature of the man's character, as it is represented in the parable,\nconstitutes a specific proof of his ownership,--\"he careth for the\nsheep,\" and that too with a peculiar and self-sacrificing\ntenderness.[75]\n\n [75] In the nature of the case a great and incurable defect adheres\n to the method of employing a hired servant to keep a flock of sheep,\n without giving him a material interest in the prosperity of his\n charge. Such is the nature of the occupation, and such its sphere,\n that the servant is necessarily far and long removed from the\n master's inspection, and if suspicion should arise, proof of\n unfaithfulness could hardly be brought home to the accused. It is\n the interest of the owner to contrive some method of linking the\n profit of the shepherd to the prosperity of the flock. It was by\n attempting to accomplish this object by a defective plan, that Laban\n afforded to Jacob the opportunity of prosecuting his subtle policy.\n While conversing lately with some shepherds on the Scottish\n Cheviots, I learned that masters and servants in that district\n arrange the matter easily to their mutual profit and satisfaction.\n The wages of the shepherd are not paid in money; a certain number of\n the sheep, between forty and fifty according to circumstances, are\n his own property, and their produce constitutes his hire. Thus his\n own interest is an ever present motive pressing the man to do his\n best for the flock, and so to do his best for the master.\n\nWe assume, therefore, according to the terms of the narrative in their\nliteral acceptation, that this is a man \"having an hundred sheep,\"--that\nthe sheep are his own. He is feeding them on pasture land far from\ncultivated fields and human dwellings. Hills impervious to the plough,\nand patches of vegetation interspersed through rugged stony tracts, have\nin all countries and ages constituted the appropriate pasture for flocks\nof sheep. These are indicated here by one word, \"the wilderness.\" The\nterm is obviously used not in a strict but in a free popular sense; it\nmeans simply the region of pasturage, consisting generally of hills and\nmoors, not suitable for being ploughed and sown.\n\nA flock of a hundred sheep, although small, is yet sufficiently\nconsiderable to render it impossible for the shepherd to detect the\nabsence of one by merely looking to them in the lump and from a\ndistance; he must have minutely inspected them ere he discovered that\none was amissing. Knowing them all individually, he knows the one that\nhas strayed; he loves them all as his children, and grieves when one\ngoes out of sight.\n\nIt was no mark of carelessness in the shepherd, as some have erroneously\nimagined, to leave the ninety and nine in the wilderness while he went\nto seek the one that was lost. The main body of the flock was left in\nits own proper place, where it is often left from morning till night by\nthe most careful shepherd, even when he is not employed on the urgent\nduty of recovering wanderers.\n\nThe shepherd knows the nature of the country in which the sheep is\nstraying; and also the nature of the sheep that is straying there. He\nknows the roughness of the mountain passes, and the silliness of the\nsolitary truant sheep; he divines accordingly what track it will take.\nHe conjectures beforehand, with a considerable measure of accuracy, the\npit in which it will be found lying, or the thicket in which it will be\nseen struggling. He follows and finds the fugitive. Wearied by its\njourney, and perhaps wounded by its falls, the sheep, when discovered,\ncannot return to the fold even under the shepherd's guidance; he takes\nit on his shoulders and bears the burden home. He does not upbraid it\nfor its straying; he does not complain of its weight. He is glad that he\nhas gotten his own again, after it was \"ready to perish.\" Happy while he\nbears it homeward, and happy when he has gotten it home, he invites all\nhis neighbours to share in his joy.\n\nSuch is the simple and transparent outline of this ancient eastern\npastoral scene; let us now endeavour to see in the symbol those lessons\nwhich it at once veils and reveals.\n\nThe parable is spoken expressly for the purpose of determining and\nmanifesting the character and work of the Son in the salvation of sinful\nmen; it declares the design, the method, and the terms of the incarnate\nRedeemer in his intercourse with the creatures whom he came to save. But\nin the fact of accomplishing this its immediate object, it strikes also\na chord which runs through the centre--constitutes, as it were, the\nmedulla of the divine government in all places and all times. The\nparable spoken in order to afford a glance into the heart of Jesus,\nincidentally at the same time sketches the outline of God's universal\nrule; as in drawing the figure of a branch you necessarily exhibit, in\nits main features and proportions, an image of the tree. This wider\nsubject, certainly and accurately outlined, although incidentally\nintroduced, demands some notice at our hand.\n\n * * * * *\n\nEver since scientific observation discovered the true system of the\nmaterial universe, and so, as it were, changed those twinkling sparks of\nlight into central suns, the rulers of tributary worlds, philosophy\napart from faith has been, more or less articulately, scattering the\nquestion, at once a fruit and a seed of unbelief, How could the Creator\nof so vast a universe bestow so much of his care on one small spot? Some\nhave been disposed to say, and perhaps more have been disposed to think,\nwith fear or joy according to their predilection, that modern discovery\nis gradually putting the Bible out of date. A feeling, if not a\njudgment, has in some quarters arisen, that in view of the vastness of\ncreation, the Scriptures ascribe to this globe and its concerns a share\nof its Maker's interest disproportionately great.\n\nThis phase of unbelief is refuted both by the necessary attributes of\nGod and by the written revelation of his will. What relation, capable\nof being appreciated or calculated, subsists between material bulk and\nmoral character? The question between great and small is totally\ndistinct from the question between good and evil. Number and extension\ncannot exercise or illustrate the moral character either of God or of\nman. We should ourselves despise the mischievous caprice which should\ngive to the biggest man in the city the honours that are due to the\nbest. Right and wrong are matters that move on other lines and at higher\nlevels than great and small, before both human tribunals and divine.\n\nThere is, perhaps, as much reason for saying that this earth is too\nlarge, as for saying that it is too small, for being the scene of God's\ngreatest work. The telescope has opened a long receding vista of\nwonders, where the observer is lost in the abyss of distance and\nmagnitude; the microscope has opened another long receding vista of\nwonders, where the observer is lost in the abyss of nearness and\nminuteness equally beyond his reach. Between the great and the small,\nwho shall determine and prescribe the centre-point equidistant from both\nextremes, which the Infinite ought to have chosen as a theatre for the\ndisplay of His greatest glory?\n\nIn the divine government generally, as well as in revealed religion\nparticularly, the aim is not to choose the widest stage, but on any\nstage that may be chosen to execute the Creator's purpose, and achieve\nthe creature's good. A battle is fought, an enemy crushed, and a kingdom\nwon on some remote and barren moor: no man suggests, by way of\nchallenging the authenticity of the record, that a conflict waged\nbetween hosts so powerful, and involving interests so momentous, could\nnot have taken place on an insignificant spot, while the continent\ncontained many larger and more fertile plains: neither can the loss\nincurred by the sin of men, and the gain gotten through the redemption\nof Christ, be measured by the size of the world in which the events\nemerged. It is enough that here the first Adam fell and the second Adam\ntriumphed;--that here evil overcame good, and good in turn overcame\nevil. There was room on this earth for Eden and for Calvary; this globe\nsupplies the fulcrum whereon all God's government leans. The Redeemer\ncame not to the largest world, but to the lost world: \"even so, Father.\"\n\n\"He took not on him the nature of angels.\" In aggregate numbers they\nmay, for aught we know, be the ninety and nine, while we represent the\none that strayed; but though all these shining stars were peopled\nworlds, and all their inhabitants angels who kept their first estate, he\nwill leave them in their places in the blue heaven afar, like sheep in\nthe wide moorland, and go forth in search of this one shooting star, to\narrest and bring it back. It is his joy to restore it to law and light\nagain. Rejoice with great joy, O inhabitants of the earth! the Saviour\nAlmighty has passed other worlds and other beings, some of whom do not\nneed, and some of whom do not get, salvation,--has passed them and come\nto us. He has taken hold of the seed of Abraham, that we who partake of\nAbraham's sinful flesh may partake also of Abraham's saving faith. There\nis much in this mystery which we do not know, and in our present state\ncould not comprehend; but we know the one thing needful regarding\nit,--that \"Jesus Christ came into the world to save sinners.\"[76]\n\n [76] \"Should not that great and glorious Shepherd, whose millions of\n bright sheep fill the universe, leave these millions in order to\n seek the slightest, poorest, most infirm of those who need his care,\n and without that care would utterly perish; does not his boundless\n love require him to go after it?\" Stier, after quoting this sentence\n in reference to the parable from Kurz, _Bibel und Astronomie_,\n remarks, \"This is a thought quite permissible in itself, but as an\n exposition of what Eternal Wisdom has spoken, it is not valid.\"\n Here, however, the learned critic has incorrectly apprehended the\n state of the question. A secondary relation is as real in its own\n place as a primary. It is quite true that the parable, under the\n picture of the one sheep that strayed and the ninety-nine that\n remained on the pasture, points directly and immediately to two\n distinct classes of human kind; but it brings up as legitimately,\n although more remotely, the distinction, governed by the same\n principle, which has in God's universal sovereignty been made\n between the human race on the one hand, and angelic spirits on the\n other. One expositor may legitimately confine his view to the more\n immediate and narrower sphere; but another may as legitimately take\n a wider range, provided he make and mark the necessary distinctions\n as he proceeds; as one inquirer in physics may limit his speculation\n to the solid body of this globe, while another, under the same\n general designation, may, with perfect logical exactness, include\n also the atmosphere that surrounds it.\n\nHaving noticed cursorily that grand characteristic feature of God's\nuniversal government to which the principle of the parable is\napplicable, we proceed now to examine more particularly the recovery of\nlost men by the Lord our Redeemer, to which the lesson of the parable\nis, in point of fact, specifically applied.\n\n1. The shepherd misses one when it has strayed from the flock. The\nRedeemer's knowledge is infinite; He looks not only over the multitude\ngenerally, but into each individual. When I stand on a hillock at the\nedge of a broad meadow, and look across the sward, it may be said in a\ngeneral way that I look on all the grass of that field; but the sun in\nthe sky looks on it after another fashion,--shines on every down-spike\nthat protrudes from every blade. It is thus that the Good Shepherd knows\nthe flock. Knowing all, he misses any one that wanders. He missed a\nworld when it fell, although his worlds lie scattered like grains of\ngolden dust on the blue field of heaven,--the open infinite. When the\nlight of moral life went out in one of his worlds, he missed its wonted\nshining in the aggregate of glory that surrounds his throne. With equal\nperfectness of knowledge he misses one human being who has been formed\nby his hand, but fails to hang by faith upon his love. The Bible speaks\nof falling \"_into_ the hands of the living God,\" and calls it \"a fearful\nthing\" (Heb. x. 31); but an equally fearful thing happened before\nit,--we fell _out of_ the bosom of the living God. He felt, so to speak,\nthe want of our weight when we fell, and said, \"Save from going down to\nthe pit.\" But the omniscience of the Saviour does not stop when it\npasses through the multitude, and reaches the individual man; it\npenetrates the veils that effectually screen us from each other, and so\nknows the thoughts which congregate like clouds within a human heart,\nthat he misses every one that is not subject to his will. When the\nmighty volume is coursing along its channel towards the ocean, he marks\nevery drop that leaps aside in spray. It is a solemn thought, and to the\nreconciled a gladsome one, that, as the shepherd observed when one sheep\nleft the fold, the Shepherd of Israel, who slumbers not nor sleeps,\ndetects every wandering soul, and in that soul every wandering thought.\nThe Physician's thorough knowledge of the ailment lies at the very\nfoundation of the patient's hope.\n\n2. The shepherd cared for the lost sheep; although he possessed ninety\nand nine, he was not content to let a unit go. A species of personal\naffection and the ordinary interest of property, combine to cause grief\nwhen the sheep is lost, and to contribute the motive for setting off in\nsearch of the wanderer.\n\nIn attempting to apply the lesson at this point, we very soon go beyond\nour depth. Our own weakness warns us not to attempt too much; but the\ncondescending kindness of the Lord, in speaking these parables,\nencourages us to enter into the mystery of redeeming love on this side\nas far as our line can reach. In that inscrutable love which induced the\nOwner of man to become his saviour when he fell, there must be something\ncorresponding to both of the ingredients which constituted the\nshepherd's grief. There was something corresponding--with such\ncorrespondence as may exist between the divine and the human--to the\npersonal affection, and something to the loss of property. When we think\nof the Redeemer's plan and work as wholly apart from self-interest, and\nundertaken simply for the benefit of the fallen race, we form a\nconception of redemption true as far as it goes, but the conception is\nnot complete. The object which we, from our view-point, strive to\nmeasure, has another and opposite side. For his own sake as well as for\nours, the Redeemer undertook and accomplished his work.[77] \"For the joy\nthat was set before him he endured the cross, despising the shame.\" When\nhe wept over Jerusalem, mere pity for the lost was not the sole fountain\nof his tears. Those tears, like some great rivers of the globe, were\nsupplied from two sources lying in opposite directions. As the\npossession of the ransomed when they are brought back affords the\nRedeemer joy, the want of the lost, while they are distant, must cause\nin his heart a corresponding and equivalent grief. It is true, that if\nwe too strictly apply to the divine procedure the analogy of human\naffairs at this point we shall fatally dilute our conception of the\ngenerosity displayed in the Gospel; but on the other hand, if do not\napply this analogy at all, we shall inevitably permit some of our\nsweetest consolation to slip from our grasp. To be merely pitied does\nnot go so kindly or so powerfully about our hearts as to be loved;\nChrist's regard for fallen men is not merely the compassion of one who\nis loftily independent. When an infant is lost in a forest, and all the\nneighbours have, at the mother's call, gone out in search of the\nwanderer, it would be a miserably inadequate conception of that mother's\nemotion to think of it as pity for the sufferings of the child: her own\nsuffering for want of her child is greater than the child's for want of\nhis mother; and by the express testimony of Scripture, we learn that the\nSaviour's remembrance of his people is analogous to the mother's\nremembrance of her child. If you press the likeness too far, you destroy\nthe essential character of redemption, by representing it as a\nself-pleasing on the part of the Redeemer; but if you take away the\nlikeness altogether, you leave me sheltered, indeed, under an Almighty\narm, but not permitted to lie on a loving breast. My joy in Christ's\nsalvation is tenfold increased, when, after being permitted to think\nthat he is mine, I am also permitted to think that I am his. If it did\nnot please him to get me back, my pleasure would be small in being\ncoldly allowed to return. No: the longing of Christ to get the wanderer\ninto his bosom again, for the satisfaction of his own soul, is the\nsweetest ingredient in the cup of a returning penitent's joy.[78]\n\n [77] You may measure a square surface and find it to contain so many\n feet of superficial area: suppose you discover afterwards that it\n has depth as well as length and breadth; to take in also this new\n measurement does not diminish the old. If we discover that, for his\n own sake, the Redeemer accomplished his saving work, it was not on\n that account less for our sakes.\n\n [78] \"In the centre of all lies the profound thought, that in God\n and Christ love is one with self-interest, and self-interest one\n with love; no such contrariety existing between them as is found in\n the case of man.\"--_Stier, Words of the Lord_.\n\n3. The shepherd left the ninety and nine for the sake of the one that\nhad wandered. I find no difficulty in the interpretation of the parable\nhere. The doctrinal difficulty which some have met at this point, has\nbeen imported into the field by a mistake in regard to the material\nscene. The leaving of the ninety and nine in the wilderness, while the\nshepherd went out to seek the strayed sheep, implied no dereliction of\nthe shepherd's duty,--no injury to the body of the flock. In this\ntransaction neither kindness nor unkindness was manifested towards those\nthat remained on the pasture;--it had no bearing upon them at all. Nor\nis it necessary, at this stage, to determine who are represented by the\nninety and nine. Be they the unfallen spirits, or the righteous in the\nabstract, or those who, in ignorance of God's law, count themselves\nrighteous, the parable is constructed for the purpose of teaching us\nthat the mission of Christ has for its special object, not the good, but\nthe evil. As the specific effort of the shepherd, which is recorded in\nthis story, had respect not to the flock that remained on the pasture,\nbut to the one sheep that had gone away, the specific effort of the Son\nof God, in his incarnation, ministry, death, and resurrection, has\nrespect, not to the worthy, but the unworthy.\n\nThus the Pharisees were entirely at fault in regard to the first\nprinciple of the Gospel. They assumed that, because the publicans and\nsinners had gone astray, Jesus, if he were the true Messiah, would not\nhave any dealings with them; without either conceding or expressly\ndenying their assumption of superior righteousness--that being precisely\nthe point on which he determined that then and there he would give no\njudgment--he intimates that the strayed sheep is the peculiar object of\nhis care, and that because it is the strayed sheep, and he is the Good\nShepherd;--he intimates, taking the Pharisees at their own word, that\nthe sinners are the objects whom a Saviour should follow, and seek, and\nfind, precisely because they are sinners. It concerns us more to know\nwho are represented by the strayed sheep, than to know who are\nrepresented by the sheep that did not stray, for to the former class,\nand not to the latter, we most certainly belong.\n\n4. How does the shepherd act when he overtakes the wanderer? He does not\npunish it--he does not even upbraid it for straying; his anxiety and\neffort are concentrated on one point--to get it home again. Would that\nguilty suspicious hearts could see through this glass the loving heart\nof Jesus, as he has himself presented it to their view! He takes no\npleasure in the death of them that die. His ministry in general, and\nthis lesson in particular, proclaim that Christ's errand into the world\nis to win the rebellious back by love. You may suppose the truant sheep\nto have dreaded punishment when it was overtaken by the injured\nshepherd; but his look and his act when he came must have immediately\ndispelled the helpless creature's fears. The Lord has held up this\npicture before us that in it we may behold his love, and that the sight\nof his love may at length discharge from our hearts their inborn\nobdurate suspiciousness.\n\n5. The shepherd lays the sheep upon his shoulders. This feature of the\npicture affords no ground for the doctrine which has sometimes been\nfounded on it, that the Saviour is burdened with the sinners whom he\nsaves. His suffering lies in another direction, and is not in any form\nrepresented here. He weeps when the sinful remain distant and refuse to\nthrow their weight on him; he never complains of having too much of\nthis work in hand. The parable here points to his power and victory, not\nto his pain and weariness.\n\nThe representation that the shepherd bore the strayed sheep home upon\nhis shoulder, instead of going before and calling on it to follow, is\nsignificant in respect both to this parable and its counterpart and\ncomplement, the Prodigal Son. In as far as the saving of the lost is\nportrayed in this similitude, the work is done by the Saviour alone.\nFirst and last the sinner does nothing but destroy himself: all the\nsaving work is done for him, none of it by him. This is one side of\nsalvation, and it is the only side that is represented here. It seems\nhard to conceive how any converted man can be troubled by doubt or\ndifficulty concerning this doctrine. Every one whom Christ has sought\nand found, and borne to the fold, feels and confesses that, if the\nShepherd had not come to the sheep, the sheep would not have come to the\nShepherd. If any wanderer still hesitates on the question, Who brought\nhim home? it is time that he should begin to entertain another question,\nWhether he has yet been brought home at all? The acknowledgment of this\nfundamental truth, that salvation is begun, carried on, and completed by\nthe Saviour alone, does not, of course, come into collision with another\nfundamental truth, which expatiates on another sphere, and is\nrepresented in another parable, that except the sinful do themselves\nrepent, and come to the Father, they shall perish in their sins.\n\n6. Far from being oppressed by the burden of his strayed sheep, the\nshepherd rejoices when he feels its weight upon his shoulder. His joy\nbegins not when the work is over, but when the work begins. While the\nlost one is on his shoulder, and because it is on his shoulder, the\nshepherd is glad. The doctrinal equivalent of this feature is one of the\nclearest of revealed truths, and yet it is one of the last that a human\nheart is willing to receive. The work of saving, far from being done\nwith a grudge in order to keep a covenant, is a present delight to the\nSaviour. This lesson falls on human minds like a legend written by the\nfinger on dewy glass, which disappears when the sun grows hot; but when\nit is graven on the heart as by the Spirit of the living God, it is\nunspeakably precious. When I habitually realize not only that Christ\nwill keep his word in receiving sinners, but that he has greater delight\nin bearing my weight than I can ever have in casting it on him, I shall\ntrust fully and trust always. There is great power in this truth, and\ngreat weakness in the want of it. Let even an experienced Christian\nanalyze carefully the working of his own heart, not in the act of\nbacksliding towards the world, but in its best efforts to follow the\nLord, and he will discover among the lower folds of his experience a\npersistent suspicion that the great draft which a sinner makes on the\nSaviour's mercy will, though honoured, be honoured with a grudge because\nof its greatness. Look on the simple picture of his love which Jesus has\nin this parable presented--look on the words, \"He layeth it on his\nshoulders rejoicing,\"--look till you grieve for your own distrust, and\nthe distrust melt in that grief away.\n\n7. The shepherd on reaching home not only himself rejoiced, but invited\nhis neighbours to rejoice with him over his success. To this last\nintimation of the parable the Lord immediately adds an express\nexposition of its meaning,--Ver. 7, \"I say unto you that likewise joy\nshall be in heaven over one sinner that repenteth, more than over\nninety and nine just persons which need no repentance.\" In the parallel\nexplanation appended to the next parable (ver. 10), an additional\nfeature is expressed, \"There is joy in the presence of the angels of God\nover one sinner that repenteth;\" both obviously refer to the same fact,\nand should be taken together as one announcement.\n\nThe kingdom of God recognises two successive homecomings in the history\nof every citizen. The exile discovered and borne back by the\ndiscriminating mercy of the Redeemer, comes home when through the\nregeneration he enters a state of grace; and he comes home under the\nleading of the same chief, when in the resurrection he enters a state of\nperfect glory. It is instructive and comforting to observe that, while\nboth homecomings are joyful, it is of the first that the Lord expressly\nspeaks when he intimates that over it himself and the hosts of heaven\nwill rejoice. It is over the repentance of a sinner that a jubilee is\nheld in heaven; they do not wait till the ransomed one shall appear in\nbodily presence near the great white throne. There is no need: the\nentrance into grace ensures the entrance into glory. The children will\nall get home. No slip can come between the cup of the Redeemer's glad\nanticipation when a sinner is renewed, and the lip of his complete\nsatisfaction when he welcomes the ransomed at length into the mansions\nof the Father's house.\n\nIn this brief but lucid exposition of his own similitude which the Lord\ngave at the moment, and the evangelist has preserved for us, something\nis taught first regarding the companions, and second regarding the\nmeasure of his joy. Both present points of interest which require and\nwill repay more particular attention.\n\n(1.) In regard to the participation of the angels, in the Redeemer's joy\nover the salvation of the lost, the intimations bear that there is joy\n\"in heaven,\" and \"in the presence of the angels of God.\" It seems\nunaccountably to those who look carefully into the terms of the record,\nto be universally assumed from these expressions that the angels, in the\nexercise of their inherent faculties, are in some way cognisant of\nconversion as it proceeds in human souls upon the earth, and that they\nrejoice accordingly when another heart melts, and another rebel submits\nto God. Capital has even been made out of this passage by Romanists in\nsupport of prayers addressed to unseen created spirits. All this\nproceeds upon an exegesis, which is, I believe, demonstrably erroneous.\nIn order to settle all questions that can arise here, nothing more is\nnecessary than a simple straight-forward examination of the terms. The\nrejoicing takes place \"in heaven,\" and \"in presence of the angels\"\n([Greek: enopion ton angelon]). This is not the form of expression\nthat would naturally be employed to intimate that the angels rejoiced.\nExpressly it is written, not that they rejoice, but that there is joy in\ntheir presence,--before their faces. The question then comes up, Who\nrejoices there? In as far as the terms of the exposition go, the\nquestion is not expressly decided; but its decision can be easily and\ncertainly gathered from the context. Both in the case of the lost sheep\nand in that of the lost money the comparison is introduced by the term\n\"likewise\" ([Greek: houto].) In this manner there is joy before the\nangels; in what manner? Obviously in the manner of the rejoicing which\ntook place after the strayed sheep was brought home, and the piece of\nmoney found. He who sought and found the lost, rejoiced over his gain;\nbut, not contented therewith, he told his neighbours about his\nhappiness and its cause; he manifested his joy in their presence, and\ninvited them to rejoice in sympathy with himself. It is after this\nmanner that joy in heaven over a repenting sinner begins and spreads. We\nare not obliged,--we are not permitted to guess who the rejoicers are,\nor how they came by the news that gladdens them. The shepherd himself,\nand himself alone, knows that the strayed sheep is safe in the fold\nagain, for he has borne it back on his shoulder: his neighbours did not\nknow the fact until he told them, and invited them to participate in his\njoy. It is expressly in this manner, and none other, that there shall be\njoy in heaven over one sinner that repenteth. The angels do not become\naware of the fact by a species of subordinate omniscience. He who saved\nthe sinner knows that the sinner is saved; rejoicing in the fact, he\nmakes it known to his attendants, and invites them to share in his joy.\n\nThe gladness that thrills in the angels is a secondary thing, caught by\nsympathy from that which glows in the heart and beams in the countenance\nof Jesus. The Son of God the Saviour having won a sinner by the power of\nhis love, and brought the wanderer back forgiven and renewed, rejoices\non his throne over this fruit of his soul's travail. Ere the ransomed\nsinner has risen from his knees or wiped his tears away;--ere he has had\ntime to sing a hymn or sit down at the communion table on earth, the\nLord in heaven, feeling life flowing from himself into that living soul,\nrejoices already in the fact, and calls upon his friends, whether the\nspirits of just men or angels unfallen, or both in concert, to\nparticipate in his joy. The Apocalyptic witness saw no sun in the new\nheaven; \"the Lamb is the light thereof:\" from that sun the light streams\ndown on the sea of upturned faces that surround the throne, and the\nsympathetic gladness that sparkles in the members is a reflection from\nthe gladness that first glows in the Head, as a separate sun glances on\nthe crest of every wavelet, when the breeze is gentle and the sky is\nbright.\n\n(2.) The intimation that there is greater joy in heaven over the return\nof a single wanderer than over ninety and nine who never strayed,\npresents indeed a difficulty; but here, as in many other similar cases,\nthe difficulty lies more in the way of the scientific expositor, whose\ntask is to express the meaning in the form of logical definitions than\nin the way of the simple reader of the Bible, who desires to sit at the\nfeet of Jesus, and learn the one thing needful from his lips. In this,\nas in many other portions of Scripture, a hungry labourer may live upon\nthe bread, while it may baffle a philosopher to analyze its\nconstituents, and expound its nutritive qualities. A devout reader may\nget the meaning of the parable in power upon his heart, while the\nlogical interpreter expends much profitless labour in the dissection of\na dead letter.\n\nWho are the just persons who need no repentance? The suggestion[79] that\nthey are the members of the Old Testament Church, who really possessed\nthe righteousness of the Law, although they had not attained the\nrighteousness of the Gospel, creates a greater difficulty than that\nwhich it proposes to remove. There is not any such essential difference\nbetween the righteousness of Abraham, who looked unto Jesus coming, and\nthe righteousness of Paul, who looked unto Jesus come.\n\n [79] Made or adopted by Dr. Trench.\n\nThe true solution I apprehend to be that in the mind of the Lord this\ndeclaration had a double reference. It expressed an absolute and\nuniversal truth, known to himself and to his enlightened disciples; and\nalso, at the same time, took the Pharisees on their own terms,\ncondemning them out of their own mouth. The parable was spoken expressly\nto the Pharisees, and spoken specifically in answer to their objection,\n\"This man receiveth sinners.\" They meant to intimate that it became the\nMessiah to shun the evil and associate only with the good. From their\nown view-point he exposes their mistake; even granting their assumption\nthat themselves were the righteous, their sentence was erroneous.\nAccording to the principles of human nature, and the ordinary practice\nof men, they might have perceived that the chief care of the shepherd\nmust be bestowed on the sheep that has gone astray, and his greatest joy\nbe experienced when it has been discovered and restored. The Saviour's\ndelight over a publican's return to piety should be more vivid than his\njoy over a Pharisee, who, by the supposition, has been pious all his\ndays.\n\nHad the Lord then and there intimated to the Pharisees that they were\ndeceiving themselves in regard to justifying righteousness,--that they\nneeded repentance as much as the publicans, his word would have been\ntrue, but that truth, he perceived, was not suitable in the\ncircumstances. It pleased him at this time not to fling a sharp reproof\nin their faces, but rather to drop a living seed gently into their ears,\nthat it might find its way in secret to some broken place in their\nhearts. A certain portion of the truth he communicated to them; more\nthey would not have received. The whole truth on this subject, if it had\nbeen bluntly declared, would have driven them away in disgust.\n\nElsewhere the Master expresses his mind very clearly, \"Except your\nrighteousness exceed the righteousness of the Scribes and Pharisees, ye\nshall in no case enter into the kingdom of heaven;\" but it pleased him\non this occasion to teach another lesson, namely, that even although\nthey were as righteous as they deemed themselves to be, the recovery of\na lost one would afford the Redeemer a greater joy than the retention of\nthe virtuous. Beyond expression precious is the doctrine unequivocally\ntaught here that so far from receiving prodigals with a grudge, the\nSaviour experiences a peculiar delight when a sinner listens to his\nvoice and accepts pardon at his hand. This doctrine we learn is divine;\nwe know it is also human: almost every family can supply an example of\nthe familiar principle that the mother loves most fondly the child who\nhas cost her most in suffering and care.\n\n\n\n\nXXIII.\n\nTHE LOST COIN.\n\n\n\"Either what woman having ten pieces of silver, if she lose one piece,\n doth not light a candle, and sweep the house, and seek diligently\n till she find it? And when she hath found it, she calleth her\n friends and her neighbours together, saying, Rejoice with me; for I\n have found the piece which I had lost. Likewise, I say unto you,\n there is joy in the presence of the angels of God over one sinner\n that repenteth.\"--LUKE xv. 8-10.\n\nThe three parables of this group, as has been already intimated, do not\nconstitute a simple consecutive series of first, second, and third: the\ngroup consists of two parts, and the first part contains two parables.\nThe saving of the lost is represented in the first division as it is\nseen from God's side, and in the second as it is seen from man's. In the\nfirst, the Saviour appears seeking, finding, and bearing back the lost;\nin the second, the lost appears reflecting, repenting, resolving, and\nreturning to the Father.\n\nThe two parables which constitute the first division are generically\ncoincident, but specifically distinct. Both represent the side on which\nthe sinner is passive in the matter of his own salvation, and the\nparable of the prodigal alone represents the aspect in which he is\nspontaneously active; but while the first two agree in their main\nfeature, they differ in subordinate details. The second goes partly over\nthe same ground that has already been traversed by the first, and\npartly takes a new and independent track of its own.[80]\n\n [80] Recognising in the lost coin mainly a repetition of the same\n lesson which the lost sheep contained, but justly anticipating from\n the mere fact of a repetition, that the second will present some\n features which were not contained in the first, Dr. Trench finds the\n expected difference in this,--that \"if the shepherd in the last\n parable was Christ, the woman in this may, perhaps, be the Church.\"\n After suggesting as an alternative that the woman may represent the\n Holy Spirit, he remarks that these two are in effect substantially\n identical, and finally rests in the conclusion that it is \"the\n Church because and in so far as it is dwelt in by the Spirit, which\n appears as the woman seeking her lost.\" This able expositor speaks\n with evident hesitation when he represents the Church as the seeker\n here; and accordingly we find him with a happy inconsistency\n affirming in a subsequent paragraph that \"as the woman, having lost\n her drachm, will light a candle and sweep the house, and seek\n diligently till she find it, even so the Lord, through the\n ministrations of his Church, gives diligence to recover the lost\n sinner,\" &c. I am willing to accept the phraseology of this\n sentence, but it is obviously at variance with the view which he had\n previously presented, and to which he recurs in the close, that in\n this parable it is the Church which seeks the lost, while in the\n preceding parable it is the Saviour. Further, if he maintain that\n the woman seeking the lost coin represents the Lord seeking sinners\n through the ministrations of the Church, he must also maintain that\n the shepherd seeking the lost sheep represents the Lord seeking\n sinners through the ministrations of the Church. If the Lord himself\n is in both cases equally the seeker, there is no reason in the text\n of Scripture, and Dr. Trench suggests none from any other quarter,\n why he should be represented as seeking through the ministrations of\n the Church in one case and not in the other. The letter of the word\n and the nature of the case peremptorily demand that the\n qualification regarding the instrumentality of the Church should be\n attached to both or to neither. In either case it remains that, in\n respect to the person who seeks the lost, these two parables teach\n precisely the same lesson.\n\n The house in which the coin is lost means, according to Dr. Trench,\n the visible Church: the result is that the Church (invisible)\n searches in the Church (visible) for sinners that have been lost\n there, and restores them when found to the Church, but whether the\n visible or invisible I cannot discover. The Church then calls upon\n the angels to rejoice with her over the recovery of the lost. This\n exposition seems confused and inconsistent; and it is a dim\n mysterious conception of \"the Church\" that constitutes the\n disturbing element.\n\nFrom the similarity of structure and the studied identity of expression\nin the two cases, I gather surely that the persons who seek and find\nthe lost in those two parables both represent the same Seeker of lost\nmen, the Lord Jesus Christ. On any other supposition, I cannot find a\nspot on which the foundation of a satisfactory exegesis can be laid. The\nintroduction of the second parable by the particle either ([Greek: e])\nin the eighth verse, prepares us to expect, not another subject, but\nanother illustration of the same subject; whereas, when the Prodigal Son\nis introduced in the eleventh verse, the connecting link distinctly\nindicates a change of theme.[81]\n\n [81] Nor do I see any force in the minute criticism by which Dr.\n Trench endeavours to make out that while the sheep were the\n shepherd's property, the money did not belong to the woman. He says,\n \"I have found my sheep which was lost;\" while she says, \"I have\n found the piece which I had lost;\" but these are nothing more than\n varieties of expression. The absolute identity of the terms in which\n the two cases are introduced, proves that these seemly and slight\n variations of phraseology at the close, do not indicate a\n substantial difference. \"What man of you having an hundred sheep, if\n he lose one of them?\" and \"What woman, having ten pieces of silver,\n if she lose one piece?\"--these questions, so carefully and\n completely parallel, conclusively show that, after making allowance\n for the necessary difference in the nature of the subjects, the two\n cases, in relation to possession, loss, and finding, are precisely\n the same.\n\nAssuming from the fact of its repetition that some feature or features\nof the lesson must be contained in the second picture which the first\nwas not fitted to display; and finding in the possessors, with their\nmisfortune, their success and their joy, no difference, but on the\ncontrary, a studied balanced parallelism, I look for the distinction in\nthe nature of the property which, in the two cases respectively, was\nlost and found. The sheep is an animated being, with desires, and\nappetites, and habits, and locomotive powers; when it is lost, it is\nlost in virtue of its own will and activity. The silver coin, on the\nother hand, is a piece of inanimate matter; and when it is lost, it is\nlost through its own gravity and inertia. When support fails, it falls\nto the ground. Here lies an inherent and essential difference between\nthe two cases. It is through this opening mainly that light comes to me\nregarding the specific difference between the lessons which these two\ncognate parables respectively convey. The inquiry at present concerns\nthis difference only, for the doctrine which is taught in common by both\nis abundantly obvious. While in both examples alike the property is lost\nand found again, the manner of the loss and the finding corresponds in\neach case to the nature of the subject. In the case of the living\ncreature, the loss is sustained through its spontaneous wandering; in\nthe case of the inanimate silver, the loss is sustained through its\ninherent inertia. The one strays in the exercise of its own will, and\nthe other sinks in obedience to the laws of matter; the method of search\nvaries accordingly.\n\nBoth parables alike represent the sinner lost and the Saviour finding\nhim; but in the one case the loss appears due to the positive activity\nof an evil will, and in the other to the passive law of gravitation. Not\nthat, in the spiritual sphere, one sinner departs from God by an\nexercise of his corrupt will, and another is drawn away by the operation\nof an irresistible law; it is one transaction represented successively\non two sides. The representations are different, but both are true. In\nthe fallen, sin is both active and passive. The sinful select their own\ncourse and go astray in the exercise of a self-determining power; they\nalso gravitate to evil in virtue of an inborn corruption, which acts\nlike a law in their members. In connection with these two sides or\nfeatures of sin, the two doctrines opposite and yet not contrary, the\nsovereignty of God and the responsibility of man, meet and embrace each\nother in the work of redemption. To the disease of sin in both its\nphases,--as an active choice and an innate tendency,--the divine\nphysician has prepared an antidote; He brings the wanderer home, and\nlifts the fallen up.\n\nCompare once more the lost sheep and the lost coin: in both the sinful\nare lost, and in both the Saviour saves; but there we see a spontaneous\nerror, and here the effect of inherited corruption. These, when kept\ntogether like the right and left sides of a living man, constitute, in\nthis matter, the whole truth: to tear them asunder is to kill both.\n\nThe number of the coins is appropriately fixed at ten, while the number\nof sheep was a hundred. Ten sheep would not have required or repaid the\ncare of a shepherd; and a hundred pieces of silver would not, in\nordinary circumstances, have been at one time in the hands of a working\nwoman. The difference of numbers is fully accounted for by the natural\ncircumstances, and no benefit is obtained by squeezing from it a\ndistinct spiritual signification. The numbers, I think, belong to the\nadjuncts of the material pictures, and they constitute only elements of\ndisturbance when they are brought into the interpretation.\n\nThe lessons which some draw from the preciousness of the metal on the\none hand, and the image of the king which it bears on the other,\nalthough attractive and useful in themselves, are not relevant here. It\nis better to forego for the time even precious morsels of instruction,\nthan to obtain them by doing violence to those exquisite\nanalogies which the parables present.\n\n\n\n\nXXIV.\n\nTHE PRODIGAL SON.\n\n\n\"And he said, A certain man had two sons; and the younger of them said\n to his father, Father, give me the portion of goods that falleth to\n me. And he divided unto them his living. And not many days after the\n younger son gathered all together, and took his journey into a far\n country, and there wasted his substance with riotous living. And\n when he had spent all, there arose a mighty famine in that land; and\n he began to be in want. And he went and joined himself to a citizen\n of that country; and he sent him into his fields to feed swine. And\n he would fain have filled his belly with the husks that the swine\n did eat: and no man gave unto him. And when he came to himself, he\n said, How many hired servants of my father's have bread enough and\n to spare, and I perish with hunger! I will arise and go to my\n father, and will say unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven\n and before thee, and am no more worthy to be called thy son: make me\n as one of thy hired servants. And he arose, and came to his father.\n But when he was yet a great way off, his father saw him, and had\n compassion, and ran, and fell on his neck, and kissed him. And the\n son said unto him, Father, I have sinned against heaven, and in thy\n sight, and am no more worthy to be called thy son. But the father\n said to his servants, Bring forth the best robe, and put it on him;\n and put a ring on his hand, and shoes on his feet; and bring hither\n the fatted calf, and kill it: and let us eat, and be merry: for this\n my son was dead, and is alive again; he was lost, and is found. And\n they began to be merry. Now his elder son was in the field: and as\n he came and drew nigh to the house, he heard musick and dancing. And\n he called one of the servants, and asked what these things meant.\n And he said unto him, Thy brother is come; and thy father hath\n killed the fatted calf, because he hath received him safe and sound.\n And he was angry, and would not go in: therefore came his father out\n and intreated him. And he answering said to his father, Lo, these\n many years do I serve thee, neither transgressed I at any time thy\n commandment: and yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I might make\n merry with my friends: but as soon as this thy son was come, which\n hath devoured thy living with harlots, thou hast killed for him the\n fatted calf. And he said unto him, Son, thou art ever with me, and\n all that I have is thine. It was meet that we should make merry, and\n be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was\n lost, and is found.\"--LUKE xv. 11-32.\n\nRecall the relation that subsists between this parable on the one hand,\nand the two that immediately precede it on the other. These two\ndivisions of the group contain two different and in some respects\nopposite representations. Both exhibit the salvation of lost men; but in\nthe first, that deliverance appears as the effect of the Redeemer's\nsovereign love and care; in the second, it appears to spring in the\ndepths of the sinner's own soul. There the wanderer is sought and found\nand borne back; here he spontaneously repents and returns. There the\nSaviour's part is revealed; and here the sinner's.\n\nThese examples represent not two distinct experiences, but two sides of\nthe same fact. It is not that some of fallen human kind are saved after\nthe manner of the strayed sheep, and others after the manner of the\nprodigal son; not that the Saviour bears one wanderer home by his power,\nand another of his own accord arises and returns to the Father. Both\nthese processes are accomplished in every conversion. The man comes, yet\nChrist brings him; Christ brings him, yet he comes. In the two pictures\nwhich we have last examined, the sovereign love and power of the\nRedeemer occupied the front, while the subjective experience of a\nrepenting man was thrown scarcely visible into the back-ground; in the\npicture which is now under inspection the view is reversed--the\nsubjective experience of the sinning man is brought full size into the\ncentre of the field, while the compassion of a forgiving God, although\ndistinctly visible, lies in smaller bulk behind.\n\nAmong the parables that of the prodigal is remarkable for the grandeur\nof the whole, and the exquisite beauty of the parts. The sower is the\nonly one that can be compared with it in comprehensive completeness of\noutline and articulate distinctness of detail. These two greatest\nparables, however, are thoroughly diverse in kind. The two chief\nelements which generally go into the composition of a parable are the\nprocesses of nature and the actions of living men--parables, in short,\nas to their constituents, are composed of history and natural history.\nIn the tares, for example, both these elements are combined in nearly\nequal proportions. In the malicious sowing of the darnel, the zealous\nproposal of the servants, and the cautious decision of the master, you\nhave threads of human motive and action running through the whole; but\nin the growth of the darnel, its likeness to the wheat in spring, and\nthe decisive difference between them in the harvest, you have the\nprocesses of nature profusely intertwined. A parable is ordinarily woven\nof human action and the unconscious development of nature, as warp and\nwoof. In the two greatest parables those twin ingredients are in a great\nmeasure separated: the sower is almost wholly composed of processes in\nnature, the prodigal almost wholly of human motive and act.\n\nThis parable reveals one of the brightest glimpses of God's character\nand way that men in the body can obtain. There are greater and less\namong the parts of God's word as well as among the parts of his\ncreation. Taking the discourses of the Lord Jesus, as the little child\ntook the stars, for \"gimlet-holes in heaven to let the glory shine\nthrough,\" we find in the prodigal the largest of them all. It differs\nfrom other stars in the same firmament by its bulk and its brightness.\nNever man spake like this man; and nowhere else has even this man spoken\nmore fully or more winsomely of man's need and God's mercy. Both the\ndeparture and the return--both the fall and the rising again, are\ndepicted here. The lesson sweeps the whole horizon of time from the\nunfallen state at first to the glory that shall at last be revealed. The\nway is laid open with marvellous precision from the lowest state of sin\nand misery to a heavenly Father's heart and home. Here a gate is opened\nby the Mediator's hand, and no man can shut it, until the angel shall\nproclaim that time shall be no more. Here resounds a voice clear, human,\nmemorable--a voice that all the hum of the world cannot drown,\nproclaiming to the lowest, furthest outcasts, and to the latest\ngenerations, \"Whosoever will, let him come.\"[82]\n\n [82] A curious illustration of the bondage to which an indurated\n Erastianism has reduced many of the Protestant Churches of the\n Continent, is incidentally afforded in a remark made by Stier\n regarding the peculiar fulness and preciousness of this\n parable:--\"That this parable, which Lange beautifully terms a gospel\n within a gospel, this universal text for preaching about the lost\n and recovered sons of our heavenly Father (and the hopelessly lost\n first-born to the rich possessions of the house), should be wanting\n in the pericopae of the Sunday Kalendar, is an omission which is\n utterly unjustifiable on any ground whatever, which is not\n compensated by the insertion of the previous similitudes, and which\n of itself is ample reason for that reformation of the Kalendar which\n Palmer desires.\"--_Words of the Lord Jesus, in loc_. The successors\n of Luther must, it seems, tread the mill from year to year on the\n same limited curriculum of texts which their Kalendar contains; and\n those of them who are weary of the restraint long in vain for an\n opportunity to preach on such a subject as the prodigal, for it is\n not set down in the bond. That Church surely is greatly defective\n both in godliness and manliness, that cannot or will not throw open\n all the Word of God alike, at all times, to its ministers and\n congregations in their Sabbath solemnities.\n\nIt is not necessary in this case to submit a sketch of the material\nframe-work: there it lies, and the simplest may see it for himself. The\nleast learned may go round without a guide, and not miss any essential\nfeature of the scene. In this case the bare reading of the story from\nthe Bible leaves the image sharply outlined, and permanently impressed\nupon the reader's mind. Assuming that the body of the lesson may be\neasily seen, let us proceed at once to seek for its soul in the\nspiritual meaning, which the picture covers and yet reveals.\n\n\"A certain man had two sons:\" one of the greatest difficulties meets us\nin the first line. It is evident that God, as specially manifested in\nthe Gospel, is represented by the father; but who are represented by the\ntwo sons,--the elder, who remained at home, and the younger, who went\naway? On this point three distinct interpretations have been suggested:\nthe two brothers of the parable may represent angels and men, Jews and\nGentiles, or Pharisees and publicans. I do not think it is a profitable\nmethod to send these three into the field to fight until two are\ndestroyed, and one is left in undisputed possession. I am convinced that\nwe shall more fully and more correctly ascertain the mind of the Lord by\nemploying them all than by selecting one.\n\nIn representing the human figure, an artist may proceed upon either of\ntwo distinct principles, according to the object which, for the time, he\nmay have in view. He may, on the one hand, delineate the likeness of an\nindividual, producing a copy of his particular features, with all their\nbeauties and all their blemishes alike: or he may, on the other hand,\nconceive and execute an ideal picture of man, the portrait of no person\nin particular, with features selected from many specimens of the race,\nand combined in one complete figure. The parable of the prodigal is a\npicture of the latter kind. It is not out and out the picture of any\nman; but it is, to a certain extent, the picture of every man. This\nprophecy of Scripture is not of private construction; and therefore it\nis not of private interpretation. As the ideal portrait is in one\nfeature the likeness of this man, and in another the likeness of that\nman, while it is not throughout the likeness of any; so the elder and\nyounger sons of this parable find at one point their closest counterpart\nin angels and men, at another in Jews and Gentiles, at a third in\nPharisees and publicans, and indefinitely in as many pairs of\ncorresponding characters as have been, or may yet be, found in the\nworld.\n\nIn the first act of the drama,--the departure of the younger son, the\ncase of angels and men, presents by far the most exact counterpart to\nthe case of the two brothers. Man is the youngest child of God's\nintelligent family. Elder and younger remained together in the house\nawhile. You may observe sometimes in human families that the children\nwho have reached the years of understanding at the birth of the youngest\nrejoice over the infant with a fondness second only to that of the\nmother. Thus the elder brother angels of our Father's house,--the\nmorning stars of creation, sang together over the advent of man. But the\nyounger son did not remain in the house: having become alienated in\nheart from the Father, he was uneasy in his presence, and sought relief\nby going out of sight.\n\nIn the description of the younger son's conduct, we find a picture both\nof the first fall and of the actual apostasy of each separate sinner.\n\"The younger said to his father, Father give me the portion,\" &c. Only\nhis words are preserved in the record; but we know that thoughts unseen\nin his soul were the seeds whence these words sprang. He desired to\nplease himself, and therefore grew unhappy under the restraints of home.\nBent on enjoying the pleasures of sin, he determined to avoid the\npresence of his father: alienated in heart, he becomes vicious in life.\n\nThe same two elements go to constitute the character and condition of\nthe sinful before he is reconciled to God. There is a lower and a higher\nlink in the chain that binds the slave. There is a body of this death,\nand a soul: there is a spiritual wickedness in high places, and a bodily\nwickedness in low places. The one is guilt, the other sin: the heart is\nat enmity, and the life is disobedient.\n\nThe younger son did not humbly sue for a gift from his father's bounty:\nhe claimed a share of the property as of right. The terms are\nsignificant; \"Give me the portion of goods that _falleth_ ([Greek: to\nepiballon meros]) to me.\" The phrase faithfully depicts the atheism of\nan unbelieving human heart; the fool hath said in his heart, \"No God.\"\nHe has become brutish: as swine gather the acorns from the ground,\nheedless of the oak from which they fell; alienated men snatch God's\ngifts for the gratification of their appetites, and forget the giving\nGod. This seeing eye, and this hearing ear, and these cunning hands, the\nirreverent son counts his own, and determines to employ them in\nministering to his own pleasure.\n\nThe father might justly have refused to comply with his son's demand:\nalthough a certain part of the property might by law \"fall\" to the\nyounger son at the death of the father, there was no law or custom that\ngave the youth a right to any of it during his father's life. In this\ncase, however, the father saw meet to let the young man have his own\nway; he threw the reins loose upon the neck of the prodigal. Although\nthe father of his flesh could not see the end from the beginning, the\nFather of his spirit, in permitting his departure, already planned the\nglad return.\n\n\"Not many days after:\" weary of paternal restraint, he made off as soon\nas possible. He gathered all; for he needed all as a price in his hand\nto pay for his pleasure. He went into a far country, and there wasted\nhis substance with riotous living. Even a large substance may in this\nmanner soon be consumed; money and health waste away quickly when they\nare employed as fuel to feed the flame of lust. An interesting parallel\nto this portion of the parable occurs in Luke xii. 45. A servant to\nwhom much had been intrusted thought his master was at a great distance,\nand would remain a long time away; then and therefore he began \"to beat\nthe men-servants and maidens, and to eat and drink, and to be drunken.\"\nIt is when a man is, or imagines himself to be, far from God that he\ndares to indulge freely his vicious propensities: and conversely, those\nwho are secretly bent upon a life of sin, put God far from their\nthoughts, in order that they may not be interrupted in their pleasures.\n\nThe crisis came. The \"season\" of pleasure did not last long; and the man\nwho had \"sowed to the flesh\" was compelled to fill his bosom with an\nearly harvest of misery. The hunger, nakedness, and shame that\naccumulated on the head of this wayward youth aptly represent the bitter\nfruits which sin, even in this life, bears as an earnest of the full\nwages in the second death, which it promises to pay its servants.\n\nHis sufferings did not in the first instance turn him from his sin:\nhuman sorrow is not all or always godly sorrow. Although the prodigal\nwas in want, he did not return to his father. Convictions and terrors in\nthe conscience seldom bring the wanderer at once to the door of mercy:\nhe generally tries in succession several other methods in order to\nobtain relief. As the prodigal attempted to keep body and soul together\nby the most desperate and loathsome expedients, rather than throw\nhimself on his father's compassion; so an alienated human soul,\nconscious of having wantonly offended a good God, and therefore hating\ndeeply the Holy One, will bear and do the will of the wicked one\nto the utmost extremity of misery rather than come home a beggar,\nand be indebted for all to a father's love. The picture, although drawn\nby the Master's own hand, is necessarily drawn in the colours of\nexternal nature, and therefore it comes far short of the original, which\nis a spiritual wickedness. The cherished son of an affluent and\nhonourable house in Israel has become the swineherd of a stranger in a\nfamine-stricken land: the transition is as great as could be displayed\non the limited stage of the present world; but when he who was made in\nGod's image and treated as God's child is bound by the chain of his own\npassions, and indentured as a slave in the devil's service, the fall is\ngreater, as heaven is higher than the earth, and the world of spirit\ndeeper than the world of flesh. \"No man gave unto him:\" when a son\ndeserts the Father of lights, from whom every good gift comes down, his\nsoul cannot be satisfied from other sources: the world's breasts are\ndry, or yield only poison to the eager drawing of the famished child.\n\nThere is a blank in the history here. The later stages of the prodigal's\nmisery are not exhibited in the light: fully exposed, they might have\nbeen shocking rather than impressive. Every height has its opposite and\ncorresponding depth: as eye has not seen nor ear heard in all its\nfulness the blessedness that God hath prepared for them that love him;\nso neither can our faculties measure the miseries of sin, in their\nforetastes here and their fulness hereafter. How the prodigal fared\nunder that veil, as his misery day by day increased to its climax, we\nknow not; but at length he suddenly emerges another man. \"He came to\nhimself:\" the wild foul stream that had sunk into the earth and flowed\nfor a space under ground, bursts to the surface again, agitated still\nindeed, but now comparatively pure. We learn for the first time that the\nman has been mad, by learning that his reason is restored. It is a\ncharacteristic of the insane that they never know or confess their\ninsanity until it has passed away: it is when he has come to himself\nthat he first discovers he has been beside himself. The two beings to\nwhom a man living in sin is most a stranger are himself and God; when\nthe right mind returns, he becomes acquainted with both again. The first\nact of the prodigal, when light dawned on his darkness, was to converse\nwith himself, and the second to return to his father.\n\nA man can scarcely find a more profitable companion than himself. These\ntwo should be well acquainted, and deal frankly with each other; in the\ncase of the prodigal how disastrous was the estrangement, how blessed\nthe reconciliation between them! The young man, during the period of his\nexile, was as much a stranger to himself as to his father. His return to\nhimself became the crisis of his fate; from the interview sprang the\nburning thought, \"I will arise and go to my father,\" and the resolute\ndeed, \"he arose and went.\"\n\nWhen he had determined to return, he returned at once, and returned as\nhe was. Emaciated by prolonged want,--naked, filthy, hungry, he came as\nhe was. He did not remain at a distance until by efforts of his own he\nshould make himself in some measure worthy to resume his original place\nin the family; he came in want of all things, that out of his father's\nfulness all his wants might be supplied. The signification of this\nfeature on the spiritual side is obvious; it exhibits a cardinal point\nin the way of a sinner's return to God.\n\nBut while the repenting youth did not pretend to bring anything good to\nhis father's house, neither did he presume to bring thither anything\nevil: his poverty and hunger were brought with him, but the companions\nand instruments of his lusts were left behind. This is a distinctive\ndiscriminating feature of true repentance. In the act of fleeing to his\nfather the prodigal leaves his associates, and his habits, and his\ntastes behind: and conversely, as long as he clings to these he will\nnot--he cannot return to his father.\n\nIn the narrative it is made evident that a return to his father was the\nson's last resort; he did not adopt it--he did not even entertain it,\nuntil all others had failed. The grief which he must have known his\nunnatural exile caused in the bosom of the family at home did not move\nhim: even want, when it came upon him like an armed man, failed to\novercome his stubborn spirit. He will be the servant of a stranger\nrather than his father's son; he would live on swine's food, if it had\npower to sustain a human life, rather than sit at his father's table. It\nwas not till death stared him in the face that he consented to return.\nHe encountered all extremities of privation rather than come home; no\nthanks to him, then, for coming at last. Yet he was received with an\nardent welcome, and without upbraiding. The son's sullen, obdurate,\ndesperate resistance becomes a measure and a monument of the father's\nforbearing, forgiving love. It is thus that sinful men return to God in\nChrist to-day; and thus that God in Christ to-day receives sinful men.\nProdigals returning deserve nothing, and yet obtain all. Of even the\nlast rag of merit that the imagination can conjure up--the merit of\nbeing willing to receive favour--they are utterly destitute. Though we\ndo not come back to our father until all other resources have\nfailed--although we come, as it were, only when we cannot help coming,\nhe receives us with open arms; he takes the sin away, and does not cast\nit up.\n\n\"When he was yet a great way off his father saw him.\" He must have been\nlooking out. Often, doubtless every day, his eye turned and strained\nwistfully in the direction of his son's retiring footsteps. While that\nson was starving in a foreign land, his father was weeping at the\nwindow, longing for his return; when at last the prodigal appeared, the\nwatchful father caught sight of his form in the distance, and ran to\nmeet him. Behold again in this glass another feature of redeeming love!\nJesus, looking down on Jerusalem, wept for sorrow, because its giddy\nmultitude would not turn and live; if they had with one accord come\nforth to accept the pardon which he offered, he would have wept again\nfor joy. In his tears, as well as in his teaching he showed us the\nFather.\n\nThe reconciliation is immediate and complete. The parable reveals an\nextraordinary outburst of paternal tenderness. The son, melted, and in\nsome measure confused by the undeserved, unexpected warmth of his\nreception, bethought of the speech which, at the turning point of his\nrepentance, he had resolved to address to his father, and began to\nrecite it as he had conned the words in exile:--\"Father, I have sinned\nagainst heaven, and in thy sight, and am no more worthy to be called thy\nson;\" but there stopped short, omitting the portion about being content\nwith the position of a hired servant. Bengel suggests that the father\nmay have cut the prodigal's speech short by giving aloud an order to the\nservants for the kind and honourable reception of his child; but another\nthought, also suggested by the same acute and experimental expositor,\nbrings out, I think, more truly the deep significance of the\nomission:--The son lying on the father's bosom, with the father's tears\nfalling warm on his upturned face, is some degrees further advanced in\nthe spirit of adoption than when he first planned repentance beside the\nswine in his master's field. There and then the legal spirit of fear\nbecause of guilt still lingered in his heart; he ventured to hope for\nexemption from deserved punishment, but not for restoration to the place\nof a beloved sen. Now the spirit of bondage has been conclusively cast\nout by the experience of his father's love; the fragments of stone that\nhad hitherto remained even in a broken heart are utterly melted at last,\nas if by fire from heaven. He could not now complete the speech which he\nhad prepared; its later words faltered and fell inarticulate. He could\nnot now ask for the place of a servant, for he was already in the place\nof a son.[83]\n\n [83] The paraphrase of this Scripture, in a selection employed in\n most of the Presbyterian Churches of Scotland, stumbles at this\n point, and misses the meaning of the text. Overlooking the mighty\n step of progress which the prodigal had made between the time when\n his accumulating convictions turned the balance first in favour of\n repentance, and the time when the last fragment of distrust melted\n away in the flood of a full reconciliation, the hymn represents the\n son as still pleading specifically to be sent away into the place of\n a servant, after the embrace, and the kiss, and the tears of his\n father had bestowed and triply sealed his sonship.\n\n \"He ran and fell upon his neck,\n Embraced and kissed his son:\n The grieving prodigal bewailed\n The follies he had done.\"\n\n \"No more, my father, can I hope\n To find paternal grace;\n My utmost wish is to obtain\n A servant's humble place.\"\n\n No; after the meeting the youth did indeed say that he was not\n worthy to be called a son, but he did not say he had abandoned the\n hope or the desire of being reinstated. Yet, notwithstanding this\n and other errors that have crept into the collection, and the\n superior character of many that are excluded from it, no vigorous\n effort has been made to obtain a revision in order to exclude the\n faulty and introduce better in their stead. Conservative inertia--an\n instinct to keep unchanged what has descended to us from our\n fathers--is a great and curious power in human nature, operating\n both on Church and State. Although not creditable to the wisdom and\n courage of men, it is doubtless overruled for good by the providence\n of God.\n\nThe father's command regarding the son's reception represents the\ncomplete reconciliation of the Gospel--the total oblivion of the\nprodigal's past sins, and his admission into the favour and the family\nof God, as a dear child. Even the details at this point have been framed\nafter the pattern of spiritual privileges as they are elsewhere\nrepresented in the Scriptures; and they admit, consequently, of being\nminutely examined and applied. The best Robe points to the Redeemer's\nrighteousness which the believer puts on, and wherein he is justified;\nthe Ring is the signet of a king, the seal of the Spirit in the\nregeneration; the Shoes suggest that the sinner, forgiven and renewed,\nshall walk with God in newness of life; the Feast indicates the joy of a\nforgiving God over a forgiven man, and the joy of a forgiven man in a\nforgiving God.\n\nThese two lessons Christ has tenderly and plainly taught in this\nparable,--first, that God receives and forgives a sinner who comes back\nrepenting; and second, that he delights in the act of so forgiving\nrepentant sinners: on these points no ambiguity is left, and no room for\ncontroversy. These features of our Father's character, if they were\nfully perceived and frankly accepted, would soon change the face of the\nworld. Guilt makes the guilty suspicious and distrustful. For the chief\nailment of humanity the parable supplies a specific antidote: let the\naspect of God's character, which is here displayed, take possession of a\nsinful heart, and it is forthwith won.\n\nA young person is in want of employment; and a great man lives in the\nneighbourhood who could give him both work and wages. To this man the\nyouth is advised in his distress to apply; but this is the man whom the\nyouth has injured and offended,--the man whose just resentment he\ndreads. But it is known and reported that this possessor of great\nwealth is kind, generous, forgiving; that he does not retain resentment\nfor injuries received; that he delights to bestow favour on those who\nhave offended him. Convinced by these representations, the youth\ndetermines to venture, and accordingly sets out on his journey toward\nthe great man's house. As he approaches it, however, his limbs grow\nfeeble, his heart beats high, and he lacks courage to go near and knock.\nHe halts, and is about to turn back in despair. What would suffice to\nencourage the trembler at that moment, and bear him through? If then and\nthere he could in any way be thoroughly convinced that the man whom he\nformerly injured, and therefore now dreads, is not only in general\ntender-hearted and open-handed, but is at that moment specifically\nthinking of this individual transgressor, grieving over his impenitence,\nwatching from his window for his coming, yearning to receive his\nconfession, and enjoy the blessedness in his own heart of forgiving and\nsatisfying the penitent; this will be effectual; the youth will go\nforward to the door now with a firm step.\n\nIt is such a conviction regarding the mind of God towards erring men\nthat is needed, in order to bring them in clouds to his mercy-seat, like\ndoves to their windows; and it is in order to work this conviction in\nour hearts that Jesus, who has authority to declare the Father, has\ngiven us the parable of the Prodigal Son. May the Spirit take this word,\nand make it in us quick and powerful.\n\nHere we are not left to deal with curious or doubtful speculation.\nNothing in heaven or earth can be truer, surer, plainer than this. The\nview that Jesus gives is the true view of the Father, as he turns his\nface to-day toward the children of men.\n\nHere is a youth who has discovered suddenly that a disease has fatally\nstricken him, deep in the springs of life. After struggling some days\nagainst conviction, and clinging to false hopes, he has at length\nacknowledged that sentence of death has been passed. When the first\ntumult subsides, a species of calm succeeds,--the calm of earnest\noccupation with one over-riding and absorbing theme. The world, with its\nhopes and fears, is conclusively cut off: his business with time is\nclosed. He has bidden farewell to the crowd that he has left behind, and\nhas entered the solemn vestibule which at the other end opens on\neternity. With all the energy of his being, he applies himself now to\nthe question, Am I lost or saved?\n\nHe looks alternately backward on his own life, and upward to God's\nthrone; both prospects trouble him. Backward he sees only sin; forward,\nonly judgment. Himself seems the stubble, and the Judge a consuming\nfire. As these two approach, and their meeting seems near, he fears with\nan exceeding great fear, and cries with an exceeding bitter cry. He\ngreatly wonders, meanwhile, that he never saw things in this light\nbefore. Now, in man's extremity, is God's opportunity to show him the\nFather. While the eyes of the body are closed in weariness, the mental\nvision remains active; and a picture appears, as if it were hung in\nlight upon the wall. To the soul's eye Christ appears, and appears in\nthe act of revealing the Father. The Father whom Christ reveals runs\nforth to meet his prodigal son, falls on his neck, weeps, and kisses\nhim. There is no upbraiding, no bargaining for terms. The returning son\nis forgiven, accepted, clothed, honoured, loved. He has all, and\nabounds. This is doubtless a true picture, the dying youth reflects, for\nit is Christ that displays it; but, alas, it brings no hope to me. I\nhave stifled convictions, and lived for my own pleasure; and though I\noften heard of mercy, I never sought it, until I found that death was on\nmy track. How can I expect that God should receive me, when I make him a\ndo-no-better, for I never thought of seeking him until all my chosen\nidols had forsaken me, and I was left destitute?\n\nBrother, look; what good thing was in the lost son, that served to\nrecommend him to his father? He would not remain at home; he could not\nenjoy his abundance as long as the father, whose face he loathed, abode\nunder the same roof. He went away, that he might enjoy the pleasures of\nsin. He did not return while he had enough; he did not return when he\nbegan to be in want; he endured the extreme of misery and shame rather\nthan return; he came back to his father only when all other resources\nfailed;--and yet his father received him with great gladness. Sinner,\nlook on this love,--look on it till you live in its light. It is not him\nthat never departed, or came back while he yet had plenty, or came back\nsoon, or came back with an improved heart,--it is, \"_Him that cometh_ I\nwill in no wise cast out.\"\n\nThose who from this parable conclude that God receives sinners into\nfavour without a propitiation, and those who endeavour to escape from\nthat conclusion by affirming that the father in the parable represents\nChrist, err equally, although on opposite sides.[84]\n\n [84] Stier's observations on this point are excellent:--\"The\n well-meaning efforts which are made to explain the absence of\n reference to the mediating _propitiation_ of the Son of God in this\n instant exhibition of the _Father's mercy_, are altogether needless;\n they rest fundamentally on false dogmatic views of this\n propitiation, as if there were not existing in the Father's being\n the same love which is expressed in the Son,--as if the Father\n needed abstractly to be propitiated in order to entertain this love!\n We are not to seek _Christ himself_ as mediator in the person of\n this father; nor (though Melancthon has strangely ventured to affirm\n it), afterwards in the fatted calf, as sacrificially slain. _His_\n place here is rather to be sought in his thus authoritatively\n testifying of the Father's mercy. As Nitzsch excellently says:--'If\n he seems to conceal himself here, he is all the more manifest there,\n where the Shepherd seeks the lost sheep. For _the_ Son--who is\n neither an elder nor a _younger_, the _eternal_ Son of the Father,\n one with him, his eye and his heart towards the lost--is come into\n this world, although invisible and unnamed in the parable, to reveal\n the Father where he had been ever invisible, and where no man knew\n him: and he is to the children of the law and the curse, not only a\n living herald of the propitiable--we shall rather say of the already\n propitiated--Father, but the (that is _our_) propitiation itself,\n and the way whereby every one of us may come back to God.' The\n mediation of Christ is no more denied by this silence than the\n seduction of Satan was denied in the sinner's apostasy at the\n beginning of the parable. We may also say with Von Gerlach that the\n 'coming out of the father to meet his son, here figuratively\n exhibits the sending of the Son.'\"--_Stier in loc_.\n\nThe notion that a mediator is not needed, because a mediator is not here\nspecifically represented, proceeds upon the assumption, obviously and\ninexcusably erroneous, that all truth must be taught in every parable.\nWhile occasionally visiting the printing works of the publishers as\nthese sheets are passing through the press, I have observed the process\nof printing coloured landscapes by lithograph. One stone by one\nimpression deposits the outline of the land; another stone, by another\nimpression, fills in the sea; and a third stone, on a different machine,\nsubsequently adds the sky to the picture. No observer is so foolish as\nto complain, while he sees the process in its earlier stages, that there\nis no sea or no sky in the landscape. It is thus with the parables in\ngeneral, and with this group in particular. By the two first, certain\nportions and aspects of the scene are represented; and by the last one,\nwhen it is impressed on the same field, the remaining features are\ncompleted.\n\n * * * * *\n\nHitherto we have been occupied exclusively with the younger of the two\nsons; but the notice given in the first sentence of the parable\nprepares us for meeting with the elder in some significant capacity ere\nit close; and here, accordingly, he comes up to sustain his part.\n\nAt the moment of the prodigal's return, his elder brother was in the\nfield, whether for his father's profit or his own pleasure we are not\ninformed. When he came home in the evening, and before he had entered\nthe house, he heard the sound of the festival within. Surprised and\ndispleased that a feast on so large a scale should have been instituted\nwithout his privity and participation, he assumed and maintained an\nattitude of haughty reserve. Instead of going in at once and seeing all\nwith his own eyes as a son, he went to a servant, and in the spirit of\nan alien, inquired the reason of the mirth. Having learned the leading\nfacts, instead of imitating his father's generosity, he abandoned\nhimself to selfish jealousy, and went away in a pet. The father, on\nevery side true to his character, came out and pleaded with him to enter\nand share the common joy. Hereupon the true character of the\n_soi-disant_ model son is revealed; he peevishly casts it in his\nfather's face, as a reproach, that he had never provided such a feast\nfor his immaculate and superlatively dutiful child.\n\nThe elder son, in his statement of the case, introduces an elaborately\nconstructed double contrast between his brother's experience and his\nown, which is peculiarly interesting in relation to the mercy of God and\nthe methods of the Gospel. To the jaundiced eye of this sour-tempered\npharisaic youth, it seemed that his father gave much to him that\ndeserved least, and little to him that deserved most: to the profligate\nson, the fatted calf; to the eminently dutiful child, not even a kid.\nHere the hard, self-satisfied formalist, like Pilate and Caiaphas,\npreaches the Christ whom he did not know. The envious contrast portrayed\nby the elder son is a dark shadow which takes its shape from the Light\nof life. It is a law of the Gospel that nothing is given to the man in\nreward for the righteousness which he brings forward as his boast; but\nall is given to the man who has flung away his own righteousness with\nloathing as filthy rags, and come, \"wretched, and miserable, and poor,\nand blind, and naked,\" to cast himself on the mercy of God. The greatest\ngift is bestowed on the most worthless; for \"God commendeth his love\ntoward us, in that while we were yet sinners, Christ died for us\"\n(Rom. v. 8).\n\nAt this point the line of our parable touches that of the lost sheep,\nand thenceforth runs coincident with it to the close: it points to the\nsame features of human character, and teaches the same principles of\ndivine truth. In the first place, it repeats the answer already given in\nthe two preceding parables to the question embodied in the complaint of\nthe Pharisees,--\"This man receiveth sinners and eateth with them.\" The\nfather announces with great clearness and fulness, the grounds on which\nhe rejoiced more that day over the prodigal restored than over the elder\nson, who had never left home. It is a rule in human experience,\nuniversally understood and appreciated, that though a son never lost is\nas precious as one who has been lost and found, parents experience a\nmore vivid joy in the act of receiving the exile back than in the\ncontinuous possession of a son who has been always in their sight.[85]\n\n [85] This law may be illustrated by an analogous fact in the\n material department of creation. Lay a ball, such as a boy's marble,\n on an extended sheet of thin paper, and the paper, though fixed at\n the edges and unsupported in the midst, will bear easily the weight:\n take now another ball of the same shape and weight, and let it drop\n upon the sheet of paper from a height, it will go sheer through. The\n two balls are of the same weight and figure; but the motion gave to\n one a momentum tenfold greater than that of the other at rest. It is\n in a similar way that the return of a lost son goes through a loving\n father's heart, and makes all its affections thrill; while the\n continued possession of another son, equally valuable and equally\n valued, produces no such commotion either in the heart of the father\n or his home.\n\nIn the meantime, it is very sweet to learn from the lips of Jesus that\nthis law, which may be clearly traced on earth, penetrates to heaven,\nand there prepares for repenting sinners, not a bare escape from wrath,\nbut an abundant entrance into the joy of their Lord.\n\nBut while the parable thus demonstrates that even though the claim of\nthe Pharisees were granted their objection falls to the ground, it most\ncertainly does not grant that claim. So far from conceding that they\nneeded no repentance, the Lord makes it evident that they kept company\nwith the publicans in sin, and only differed in this, that they did not\nrepent and forsake it. The elder brother, towards the close of the\nparable, presents a life-likeness of the Pharisees; in him they might\nhave seen their own shadow on the wall.\n\nThe self-righteousness, the pride, the peevishness, the jealousy of the\nelder brother in the close of the parable represent, in its most\ndistinctive features, the character of the Jewish people and their\nleaders, in the beginning of the Gospel. One of their leading reasons\nfor refusing to own Jesus as the Messiah was his manifested willingness\nto extend the blessings of redemption to the needy of every condition\nand every name. When the Lord reminded them that Elijah was sent past\nmany suffering widows in Israel to relieve a stranger at Sarepta, and\nthat Elisha left many lepers uncured among his own countrymen when he\nhealed the Syrian soldier, they were so exasperated by the suggestion\nthat God's favour had already flowed out to the Gentiles, and might flow\nin the same direction again, that they \"rose up and thrust him out of\nthe city, and led him unto the brow of the hill whereon their city was\nbuilt, that they might cast him down headlong\" (Luke iv. 29). The same\nspirit burst forth when they were touched on the same tender point in\nthe ministry of the apostles. Paul was permitted from the stairs of the\nfortress attached to the temple at Jerusalem to address an excited\nmultitude on the faith as it is in Jesus. Loving the Hebrew tongue in\nwhich he spoke better than the Greek, which they had expected him to\nemploy, they listened with interest and in silence to the story of his\nconversion through the appearing of the risen Jesus; but when in the\nprogress of the narrative he found it necessary to inform them that the\nLord his Saviour gave him a commission to preach the Gospel beyond the\nboundaries of Israel, saying, \"Depart, for I will send thee far hence\nunto the Gentiles, they gave him audience unto this word, and then\nlifted up their voices and said, Away with such a fellow from the earth,\nfor it is not fit that he should live\" (Acts xxii. 21, 22). In this\ninveterate prejudice of the Pharisaic Jews against the admission of\npersons or communities other than themselves into the privileges of\nMessiah's kingdom, we see the reason why the Lord gave his parable the\nturn which it takes in the extraordinary conduct of the elder brother.\nCounting that the kingdom belonged exclusively to themselves, the Jewish\nhierarchs violently resented every suggestion that pointed to the\nreception of strangers. It was to them that this series of parables was\naddressed; and to them, in immediate relation to their stupid and\nimpudent cry, \"He receiveth sinners!\"\n\nBut we have not exhausted this portion of the lesson when we have\npointed out that those whom the elder brother represents fret proudly\nand peevishly against the admission of their neighbours into the\nkingdom: by that very fact they unconsciously but surely demonstrate\nthat themselves have not entered yet. The spirit that in regard to self\nis satisfied, before God unhumbled, and towards men unloving, has no\npart with Christ: this is the proud whom God knoweth afar off, not the\nmeek whom he delights to honour.\n\nAh, woe to the man who serves God as that son served his father, with a\nmercenary mind and an unbroken heart,--who thinks his obedience\npraiseworthy, and would be surprised if it should go without reward. The\nelder son was lost as well as the younger; but as far as the parable\nreveals his history, he was not like him found again: he, like his\nbrother, went astray; but unlike him, refused to come back. The father\nwas grieved as much by the sullen, dry, hard, cold, dead formality of\nhis elder son, as by the prodigal wastefulness of the younger, without\ngetting the sorrow balanced by a subsequent joy. Whited sepulchre! what\nwill thy residence in the house, and thy constant and punctilious\nprofession avail thee while thou art planting daggers in thy father's\nheart, and nursing vile hypocrisy in thy own? It is the empty open\nvessel that gets itself filled when it is plunged into a well of living\nwater; the vessel that is full and shut, although it is overflowed by\nrivers of privileges, does not receive and retain a drop. Before God and\nunder the Gospel, the turning-point of each man's destiny is not the\nnumber or the aggravation of his sins, but the discovery of his own\nguilt, and the consequent cry out of the depths for mercy. That which\nreally in the last resort hinders a man's salvation and secures his\ndoom is not his sin, but his refusal to know and own that he is a\nsinner. All the excesses of the prodigal will not shut him out of\nheaven, for he came repenting to the father; but all the virtues of the\nelder brother will not let him into heaven, for he cherished pride in\nhis heart, and taunted his father for overlooking his worth. The ground\non which the Laodiceans were condemned was not the sinfulness of their\nstate, but their stolid satisfaction with the state they were in.\n\"Because thou sayest, I am rich and increased with goods, and have need\nof nothing; and knowest not that thou art wretched and miserable, and\npoor, and blind, and naked\" (Rev. iii. 17). What although they were not\nrich;--if they had known their poverty, all the treasures of the Godhead\nwere at their disposal: what although they were wretched;--all the\nblessings that are at God's right hand were theirs for the asking. What\nalthough this son was prodigal;--there is a place for him in God's\nfavour,--a place for him in the mansions of the Father's house for ever\nwhen he comes back repenting, confiding; but what although he never\nstrayed--never missed a diet of worship or a deed of alms, the elder\nbrother by holding to his own righteousness, rejects the righteousness\nwhich is of God by faith, and shuts himself out of the kingdom. Him who\nthought he was poor and miserable, and wretched, and blind, and naked,\nthe father runs to meet with kisses of love and tears of joy: but him\nwho thought himself rich and increased with goods, and in need of\nnothing, the father puts away, with the most piercing expressions of\nloathing which the whole Scriptures contain, \"I will spue thee out of my\nmouth.\"\n\n\n\n\nXXV.\n\nTHE PRUDENT STEWARD.\n\n\n\"And he said also unto his disciples, There was a certain rich man,\n which had a steward; and the same was accused unto him that he had\n wasted his goods. And he called him, and said unto him, How is it\n that I hear this of thee? give an account of thy stewardship; for\n thou mayest be no longer steward. Then the steward said within\n himself, What shall I do? for my lord taketh away from me the\n stewardship: I cannot dig; to beg I am ashamed. I am resolved what\n to do, that, when I am put out of the stewardship, they may receive\n me into their houses. So he called every one of his lord's debtors\n unto him, and said unto the first, How much owest thou unto my lord?\n And he said, An hundred measures of oil. And he said unto him, Take\n thy bill, and sit down quickly, and write fifty. Then said he to\n another, And how much owest thou? And he said, An hundred measures\n of wheat. And he said unto him, Take thy bill, and write fourscore.\n And the lord commended the unjust steward, because he had done\n wisely: for the children of this world are in their generation wiser\n than the children of light. And I say unto you, Make to yourselves\n friends of the mammon of unrighteousness; that, when ye fail, they\n may receive you into everlasting habitations.\"--LUKE xvi. 1-9.\n\nOn the face of this parable a difficulty presents itself, all the more\nformidable in that it lies not in the critical, but in the moral\ndepartment. In almost all the other examples, the acts attributed to\nhuman agents are either morally blameless in themselves, or are\nmanifestly exhibited in order to be condemned: but here, an element of\ninjustice is inseparably mixed up with the prudence which is commended\nin the conduct of the steward. The difficulty lies in this, that the\nspecimen of worldly prudence presented in order to suggest and stimulate\nspiritual prudence in securing the interests of the soul, is dyed\nthrough and through with the loathsome vice of dishonesty. It is not\neasy, at least for us, to gather the lesson which this man's prudence\ncontained, out of the dishonesty in which in was steeped.\n\nWhen we read the parable we may detect a feeling of surprise creeping\nover our minds, that the Lord, who had the whole world and its history\nbefore him whence to select his examples, should have chosen a specimen\nof worldly wisdom, damaged by an admixture of downright falsehood, in\norder to stimulate thereby the spiritual zeal of his own disciples. The\nthree following observations will, in my judgment, explain and\ncompletely remove the difficulty:--(1.) The Holy One, precisely because\nhe is perfectly holy, can come closer to the unholy than we who are\ninfected with sin and susceptible of injury from contact with impurity.\nJesus talked with the Samaritan at the well, and permitted the sinner to\nwash his feet with tears in Simon's house. His own disciples and the\nPharisees wondered by turns why he came so close to the unclean; but if\nthey had been free from sin as he was, they could have handled it freely\nwhen in their ordinary ministry it crossed their path. Inflammable\nmatter must be kept far from fire; whereas matter that is incombustible\nmay, when a necessary cause occurs, safely pass through the midst of the\nflame. (2.) A shorter parable in another place presents and explains the\nsame difficulty: \"Be ye wise as serpents, and harmless as doves.\"\nSerpents are proposed to the disciples as examples to be imitated; but\nit is the wisdom only and not the hurtfulness of the serpent that their\nMaster enjoins them to imitate. Foresight and dishonesty are not more\nclosely or inseparably united in the character of the cunning steward\nthan wisdom and hurtfulness in the nature of the serpent. In both alike\nthe Master meant that one quality which is commendable should be\nselected for imitation, and the other quality which is vile should be\ncast away with loathing. (3.) The key-note of the parable is expressed\nin verse 8: \"The children of this world are wiser in their generation\nthan the children of light.\" The line of interpretation must be drawn\nthrough this point, and all the scattered features of the picture\nbrought up or brought down to meet it. Thus the tinge of dishonesty that\nruns through the prudence of the steward, so far from rendering his case\nunsuitable for the purpose of the Lord, imparted to it additional\nappropriateness and point. The methods, as well as the ends of the\nworldly, were different from those of the spiritual. This example shows\nthat, from the ungodly man's own view-point, and according to his own\nmaxims, he prosecutes his object with energy and skill. Let the\nChristian, with his clearer, purer light, prosecute his high aim by holy\nmeans with an energy and zeal similar to those which the ungodly exhibit\nin the pursuit of their gains or pleasures. It was the design of the\nLord not simply to give his disciples generally an example of wisdom,\nbut to give them specifically an example of the wisdom of the world--the\nwisdom that neither fears God nor regards man. An example of prudence\ntaken from a good man's history, and exercised under submission to the\nlaw of God, would not have suited the Master's purpose so well as the\none that has been chosen.\n\nIt is important to notice at the outset, that in this instance the Lord\naddresses his instructions specifically to his own disciples. The three\nparables which are recorded in the preceding chapter were spoken to the\nPharisees; immediately after these, and in continuation of the history,\nthe evangelist intimates that \"he said also unto his disciples, There\nwas a certain rich man,\" &c. Besides those lessons which he gave to the\nmultitude, teaching how the distant may come near, he gave this lesson\nto those who had already come near, in order to incite them to diligence\nin the course which they had chosen: this Teacher rightly divides the\nword of truth, giving to each his portion in due season. In this lesson\nthe diligence of worldly men is employed to rebuke the slothfulness of\nChristians. Those who make perishing things their portion are\nthoughtful, inventive, energetic, decisive in prosecuting their object;\nhow thoughtless and slow are the heirs of the kingdom in the work of\ntheir high calling!\n\n\"A certain rich man had a steward.\" We learn here, incidentally, how\nevenly balanced are the various conditions of life in a community, and\nhow little of substantial advantage wealth can confer on its possessor.\nAs your property increases, your personal control over it diminishes;\nthe more you possess, the more you must entrust to others. Those who do\ntheir own work are not troubled with disobedient servants; those who\nlook after their own affairs, are not troubled with unfaithful\noverseers.[86]\n\n [86] A case came up lately in an English court of justice, in which\n a certain duke prosecuted his butler for malversation in his charge.\n It appeared in evidence that the defalcation on the account for wine\n alone amounted to L. 1500. This fact incidentally reveals two\n things:--How great is the wealth of these British princes; and how\n little that wealth is under their own control.\n\nThis overseer cheated his master, and concealed the fraud for a time\nunder the folds of complicated accounts; but, as in all similar cases,\nthis career of wickedness came suddenly to an end. Some person\ndiscovered the facts and informed the proprietor. When suspicion was\nraised inquiry could not be resisted; and, when an inquiry was\ninstituted, the crime could not be hid. The steward seems to have given\nup his case as soon as he was accused; he uttered not a word in his own\ndefence. There was no proof on one side, and no denial on the other. The\ncase was clear, and the process summary; sentence of dismissal was\npronounced on the spot. But the proprietor was still in a great measure\nat the mercy of this unfaithful servant; the accounts were all in his\nhand, and the owner could not instantly resume the power which he had\ndelegated. The agent accordingly was ordered to prepare and submit a\nbalance-sheet, on which his successor might proceed to administer the\nestate.\n\nThere was not much time for deliberation: the decree of dismissal had\nalready passed, and as soon as the state of accounts could be made up,\nthis once comfortable and important personage must be cast penniless\nupon the world. Now or never, he must do something for himself. With\nhabits, both mental and physical, cast in another mould, he cannot win\nhis bread as a labourer; and his pride revolted against the prospect of\nbecoming a beggar on the spot where he had long been owned as master by\nthe multitude. His resolution is quickly formed, and as quickly carried\ninto effect. He will employ his present opportunity, so as to provide a\nrefuge for himself in his future need: he will so deal with the money\nwhile it is still in his hand, as that he shall not be left destitute\nwhen he is driven from his place.\n\nIn prosecution of his purpose, the steward summoned his master's debtors\none by one into his presence. He held their acknowledgments for goods\nreceived, or their signatures for the amount of rent which they had\nagreed to pay for their lands. Having in his hands the documents which\nbound the debtors, he might have read off from these the amount due by\neach; but it suited his purpose better to ask the obligants what sums\nthey owed, and to proceed wholly upon their voluntary acknowledgments.\nThe first owed a hundred measures of oil, the second a hundred measures\nof wheat. What these quantities may have been in relation to our\nstandards is a question which possesses only a critical and antiquarian\ninterest: it has no bearing on the interpretation of the parable, and\ntherefore we pass it without further notice. The absolute amount of the\ndebt has no influence on the meaning of the parable; the point which is\nreally important is the proportion between the amount owned by the\ndebtors and the amount exacted by the steward. Olive oil and wheat were\ntwo of the staple products of the country, and the obligations in regard\nto them may have been incurred either in transactions of a mercantile\ncharacter, or in those which intervene between landlord and tenant.[87]\n\n [87] Probably the rents were paid in kind, and these were the\n arrears which the tenants acknowledged.\n\nThe method of the overseer is short and simple: apart from\nconsiderations of morality, conscience, and divine retribution, it\nseemed a short road to the accomplishment of his purpose. He surrendered\nto the debtors their obligations, and received in return obligations for\nsmaller amounts, in one case for fifty, and in another for eighty,\ninstead of a hundred. These two cases are submitted as specimens: others\nwere treated in a similar way. Of course the steward could not obtain\nfrom these debtors any obligation in his own favour for the portion\nremitted, which could be enforced in a court of justice; for the proof\nof the claim on the one side would have revealed his guilt on the\nother: but it was assumed between the parties that the benefit conferred\nshould in due time be substantially acknowledged and repaid. The steward\ncounted that in the day of his distress those men on whom he had\nconferred favours would receive him into their houses.[88]\n\n [88] Of the same nature were the long leases of ecclesiastical\n property in England at low rents, granted by the living incumbents,\n in consideration of a sum of money in name of fine paid to\n themselves.\n\nIt was expected, moreover, that the proprietor, or the steward whom he\nmight afterwards employ, could not exact more than the smaller sums, for\nwhich they possessed the acknowledgments of the parties. We could indeed\nconceive a case in which the injured owner could lead a proof of fraud\nin the transaction, and enforce from the obligants the original amounts;\nbut it is not probable that, in an age when records were defective, and\nthe two parties immediately connected with the fraudulent transaction\ndeeply interested in concealing it, such a suit could be successfully\ncarried through.[89]\n\n [89] A case emerged lately in the courts of this country, in which a\n proprietor, who had lost very large sums by the unfaithfulness of\n his agent, prosecuted the parties for restitution, on the ground of\n the agent's bad faith in the transactions. The case was protracted,\n and I lost sight of it before the solution was reached; but it is\n enough for my present purpose that a plea was actually raised to\n obtain from one debtor the price of a hundred measures of oil\n instead of fifty, which he acknowledged, on the alleged ground that\n the absconded steward had corruptly and for his own interest\n sacrificed the rights of his employer.\n\nThe lord, that is the injured proprietor, commended the unjust steward,\nbecause, or in that, he had done wisely. The difficulty here lies on the\nsurface,--lies, as it were, in the sound; upon a close examination it\nvanishes. First of all, the lord who praised the steward is, as the\ntranslators have indicated by printing the word without a capital, not\nthe Lord Jesus, the speaker of the parable, but the master, whom the\ncunning agent had robbed. Further, this praise obviously did not\nindicate moral approval. The master praised the servant when all was\nover, not for the faithfulness with which he had been served, but for\nthe cleverness with which he had been cheated. The commendation which\nthe master bestowed upon the servant was that of sharply looking after\nhimself. It is the commendation which one whose house has been robbed\nduring the night might bestow in the morning upon the robber, after\nnoticing how adroitly he had opened the locks, and carried off the\nbooty.\n\nThis nefarious transaction was, from the perpetrator's view-point,\ncleverly planned and promptly executed. It was no sooner said than done;\ndelay might have ruined the steward's prospects. He must have everything\ndone before he is summoned actually to transfer his books to his\nsuccessor's hands. He provided in his own way for his own future need;\nthe plan was well-contrived, and successfully carried into effect. This\npraise, but expressly and only this, the injured master bestowed upon\nthe man.\n\n\"And I say unto you, Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of\nunrighteousness; that when ye fail, they may receive you into\neverlasting habitations.\" Such is the lesson which the Lord draws from\nthe picture. Difficulties, indeed, adhere to the phraseology in its\ndetails; but the interpretation, in its main line, is determined and\nmade evident by landmarks which can neither be overlooked nor removed.\nThe mammon of unrighteousness means the world with all its business and\nits possessions; mammon is denominated unrighteous, generally on account\nof the manner in which it is employed by worldly men, and specially on\naccount of the case in hand, where a gross injustice was perpetrated\nwithout scruple, and as an ordinary matter of business. Alas, how\nprevalent is this form of unrighteousness still! Although justice in a\nlarge measure pervades and so sustains the vast commerce of the country,\nmany mean tricks insinuate themselves between its mighty strata,\ncorroding its fabric, and undermining its strength.\n\nIn counselling the disciples to acquire for themselves friends from the\nmammon of unrighteousness ([Greek: poiesate heantois philous ek tou\nmamona tes adikias]), the Lord obviously adopts the terms of his\nspiritual lesson from the structure of the parable which conveys it. By\nremitting part of their debts the steward made the debtors his friends;\nhe won them to his side, and made sure of their sympathy when his day of\nneed should come. His prudence and skill were commendable, but the fraud\nwhich was mingled with them is neither approved by the Lord, nor\nprescribed as a pattern for the disciples.[90] Nor is it difficult to\nlift the pure lesson from the impure ground on which it lies. The\nsteward could not reach his unrighteous object except by a crooked path;\nbut the ends which a Christian strives to attain neither require nor\nadmit the employment of falsehood. Use the world in such a way that it\nshall help and not hinder the interests of your soul and of the world to\ncome.\n\n [90] The Emperor Julian adduced this parable in order to prove that\n the doctrines of Christ were adverse to good morals. This is\n precisely the place where the apostate, seeking reasons to justify\n his apostasy, will most readily find what he seeks.\n\nThe position of the phrase, [Greek: eis ten genean ten heauton], in or\nfor their own generation, near the end of the sentence, determines that\nit is applied equally to both parties. It is implied that both\nclasses, the children of the world and the children of light, look\nafter their own affairs; and it is intimated that the one class attends\nto its business more earnestly and more skilfully than the other. This\nman cleaves to the world as his portion, and that man has chosen the\nSaviour as his: but, in point of fact, he who has chosen the inferior\nobject prosecutes it with the greater zeal. The superior energy of the\nworldling in the acquisition of gains is employed to rebuke the\nChristian for his slackness in winning the true riches. This is the\nmain lesson of the parable.\n\nThe specific form which the lesson assumes is,--Provide now for future\nneed, and make the opportunities of time subservient to the interests of\neternity.\n\nThe characteristic features of the steward's skill were, that when his\ndismissal was near, he occupied the short time that remained, and the\nresources still at his disposal, in skilfully providing for the future.\nWe are stewards in possession still, but under warning; do we employ the\ntime and the opportunities that remain in making our calling and\nelection sure?\n\nMany precious possessions have been placed in our hands by the owner of\nall; health of body and soundness of mind; home and friends; good name\nor great riches, or both conjoined;--these and many others have been by\ntheir owner placed under our charge, that we should lay them out for\nhim. Soon the stewardship will be taken from us. \"When ye fail,\"--that\nis, when we can no longer retain our hold of time and life; when flesh\nand heart are failing; when a mist comes over the eye, so that it can no\nlonger see the circle of weeping friends that stand round the bed of\ndeath,--have we an everlasting habitation ready to receive the departing\nspirit?\n\nMore particularly the practical question is, Have we disposed of earthly\npossessions and opportunities, so that they helped and did not hinder\nthe acquisition of an incorruptible inheritance?\n\nThere is a place and a use for temporal things in making sure of the\nlife eternal. How constant has been the tendency of fallen humanity to\nrun wildly into opposite extremes of error; because the Popish system\ngives worldly possessions too high a place in the concerns of the soul,\nwe may readily fall into the error of giving them no place at all. We\nlean hard over against the superstition that expects by alms, and money\npaid for masses, to smooth the spirit's path to peace beyond the grave;\nbut when we have refused to make money directly the price of our\nadmission into heaven, we have not exhausted our duty in regard to its\nbearing on our eternal weal. The property, and money, and occupations of\ntime may instrumentally affect for good or evil our efforts to lay up\nthe true riches. According as they are employed, they may become a\nstumbling-stone over which their possessor shall fall, or a shield to\ncover his head from some fiery darts of the wicked one.[91]\n\n [91] For example, their competence and the comforts which it brings\n shield women of the higher and middle classes in this country, in a\n great measure, from certain snares of the devil in which multitudes\n of their poorer sisters miserably fall. If those who enjoy this\n protection throw away their advantage by turning that which is a\n protection on one side into a temptation on the other, and so bring\n themselves to an equality over all with the less favoured classes,\n the fault is their own. It is proved by obvious facts that worldly\n possessions may be placed between you and temptation, as cotton\n bales and sand bags may be employed to ward off cannon shot from\n stone walls. They are capable of being turned to some account in\n advancing our eternal interests; for our inheritance in heaven, the\n world is useful, if it is rightly used.\n\nCould it be truly said of any who are lost that the mammon of\nunrighteousness brought them to the place of woe? or, conversely could\nit be truly said of any who now stand round the throne in white, that\nthe mammon of unrighteousness became the friend who introduced them to\nthat everlasting habitation? I reply, this mammon is not and cannot be a\ncause either of being saved or being lost; but it, as well as all other\nthings in time, may become instruments in the saving or destroying of a\nsoul, according as it is wisely used or foolishly abused. For example,\nin the next parable, it was sin and not wealth that ruined the rich man;\nmany richer men than he have walked with God on earth, and entered rest\nwhen they departed. Wealth was not his destroyer, yet he so used his\nwealth as to permit the wicked one to bind his soul with it as with\nchains over to the second death. On the other hand, it was neither the\npoverty nor the sores of Lazarus, nor both together, that saved him;\nmany as destitute of money and as full of sores as he are never saved.\nChrist was this man's Saviour,--Christ alone; yet, his poverty became in\nGod's hands, and through his servant's faith, the instrument of\nshielding him from temptation and purging his dross away. In the same\nsubordinate and instrumental sense in which the rich man's wealth was\nhis ruin, the poverty of the poor man saved him. But these results are\nnot uniform--are not necessary; they may be--they often are reversed.\nThe wealth of a rich man may help him heavenward, and the poverty of a\npoor man may press him down toward the pit. The cardinal point of the\nparable is, employ the mammon of unrighteousness--this world's affairs\nall, with forethought, skill, decision, and energy, to further your own\nsalvation; turn all to account for the gain of godliness.\n\nA ship leaves our shores bound westward to an Atlantic port: the wind,\nbeing from the north, beats on her right side all the way. She makes a\nquick voyage and reaches her destination in safety. Another ship at\nanother time leaves these shores for the same destination: the wind,\nblowing from the south, beats on her left side. She wanders from her\ncourse and is shipwrecked. Whence these opposite results? Was the first\nship saved because she met a north wind, and the second lost because she\nfell in with a wind from the south? Nay, verily: but because the one so\nreceived the wind, from whatever point of the compass it might blow, as\nto be impelled by it onward in her course: and the other, instead of\nwisely employing every wind to help her forward, allowed herself to\ndrift before the wind that happened to blow.\n\nMammon, the world--ah, is it not adverse to the interests of our souls?\nWhat then? Believer, adversary though it be, you may make it your\nfriend. A skilful seaman, when once fairly out to sea, can make a wind\nfrom the west carry him westward! he can make the wind that blows right\nin his face bear him onward to the very point from which it blows. When\nhe arrives at home, he is able to say the wind from the west impelled me\nwestward, and led me into my desired haven.\n\nThus if we were skilful, and watchful, and earnest, we might make the\nunrighteous mammon our friend; we might so turn our side to each of its\ntortuous impulses, that willing or unwilling, conscious or unconscious,\nit should from day to day drive us nearer home.\n\nThe parable is in this peculiar, that in the moral lesson which the\nMaster enforces at the close, he retains and employs the phraseology of\nthe story. \"Make to yourselves friends of the mammon of\nunrighteousness,\" &c. The meaning is by the context made plain, and the\nreader may translate the metaphor as he proceeds. The steward, while he\nremained in his place, so handled the property in his power as to secure\nfor himself a home when he should be removed from his place: in like\nmanner let men so use material possessions while they live on earth,\nthat these very possessions shall be found to have helped them toward\ntheir eternal rest. When a man's ways please God, he maketh even his\nenemies to be at peace with him. These things that are enemies, and that\novercome many, you may make your friends; you may turn to them such a\nside, that every time they strike they shall press you nearer rest, and\nat their last stroke impel you through the narrow entrance into the joy\nof your Lord.\n\n\n\n\nXXVI.\n\nTHE RICH MAN AND LAZARUS.\n\n\n\"There was a certain rich man, which was clothed in purple and fine\n linen, and fared sumptuously every day: and there was a certain\n beggar named Lazarus, which was laid at his gate, full of sores, and\n desiring to be fed with the crumbs which fell from the rich man's\n table: moreover the dogs came and licked his sores. And it came to\n pass, that the beggar died, and was carried by the angels into\n Abraham's bosom: the rich man also died and was buried; and in hell\n he lift up his eyes, being in torments, and seeth Abraham afar off,\n and Lazarus in his bosom. And he cried and said, Father Abraham,\n have mercy on me, and send Lazarus, that he may dip the tip of his\n finger in water, and cool my tongue; for I am tormented in this\n flame. But Abraham said, Son, remember that thou in thy lifetime\n receivedst thy good things, and likewise Lazarus evil things: but\n now he is comforted, and thou art tormented. And beside all this,\n between us and you there is a great gulf fixed: so that they which\n would pass from hence to you cannot; neither can they pass to us,\n that would come from thence. Then he said, I pray thee therefore,\n father, that thou wouldest send him to my father's house: for I have\n five brethren; that he may testify unto them, lest they also come\n into this place of torment. Abraham saith unto him, They have Moses\n and the prophets; let them hear them. And he said, Nay, father\n Abraham; but if one went unto them from the dead, they will repent.\n And he said unto him, If they hear not Moses and the prophets,\n neither will they be persuaded, though one rose from the\n dead.\"--LUKE xvi. 19-31.\n\nThe intervening portion of history, contained in verses 14-18, should\nnot be permitted to conceal from us the intimate relation that subsists\nbetween this and the preceding parable. The application of the first for\nthe reproof of covetousness, touched a besetting sin of the Pharisees,\nand stung them to the quick. Unable to bear in silence a rebuke which\ntheir own consciences recognised as just, they interrupted the preacher\nwith rude derision. They attempted to shield their own open sores from\npainful probing by raising a laugh at the expense of the reprover. I\nsuspect they reckoned without their host in this matter. This man spake\nwith authority, and not as the scribes; the common people heard him\ngladly. His speech was too divinely grave, and too palpably true, to be\nturned aside by the clumsy wit of the men whom it condemned.\nIntermitting for a moment the thread of his parabolic preaching, he\nturned aside and addressed a few withering words directly to these\nuneasy interrupters.[92]\n\n [92] From the introduction of a new subject abruptly in the 18th\n verse--the much agitated question regarding a man's right to put\n away his wife--I think it probable that the interruption had been\n repeated and continued; that it took the form of a dialogue, the\n Pharisees throwing in what they considered a damaging question, and\n Jesus giving an answer by turns--a scene which is frequently\n repeated in modern missions among the heathen.\n\nWhen this episode was over, the Lord resumed his theme where it had been\nbroken off. I think it probable, both from the terms of the narrative,\nand the nature of the case, that if these Pharisees had not been\npresent, or if they had held their peace when the preaching galled them,\nthe matter of verse 19th would have touched that of verse 13th--the\nparable of the rich man and Lazarus would have been connected in place\nas well as in purport with that of the prudent steward.\n\nWhen he had followed up the first parable with a pungent application\nregarding the abuse of riches, \"the Pharisees, also, who were covetous,\nheard all these things, and they derided him.\" To them, in reply to\ntheir jesting, he spoke the words verses 14-18, and then resumed, in\nverse 19th, \"There was a certain rich man,\" &c.[93]\n\n [93] Dr. Trench's disquisition regarding the latent union between\n covetousness and prodigality, involving a proof that the discourse\n about the rich man was applicable to the Pharisees who were not of\n prodigal habits, although very good in itself, is scarcely relevant;\n inasmuch as it is not the parable of the rich man, but the reproofs\n intervening between it and the unjust steward that are expressly\n addressed to the Pharisees.\n\nAt the beginning of the chapter, addressing his own disciples\nparticularly, although some of the Pharisees were present, he had taught\nthem from the case of the prudent steward to use the possessions of this\nworld with a view to their bearing on the next; and now, to complete the\nlesson, he will teach them, by a terrible example, the consequences of\nneglecting that rule.\n\nBut before we proceed to examine the parable in detail, it is important\nto determine generally regarding its nature whether it is an allegory in\nwhich spiritual things are represented by sensible objects, or simply an\ninstructive example, historic or poetic, charged like other examples\nwith moral warning and reproof. The parable of the sower is an allegory:\nthe sower represents not a sower, but a preacher; the seed represents\nnot seed, but the Gospel: whereas in the inner substance, as well as the\noutward form of the lesson, the good Samaritan is simply a good\nSamaritan, and the wounded traveller is simply a wounded traveller. The\nparable of the rich man and Lazarus is not allegory; it belongs to the\nclass of the Samaritan, and not to that of the sower. It is not like a\ntype, which a man cannot read until it is turned; but like a manuscript,\nwhich delivers its sense directly and at first hand.[94]\n\n [94] It is true a figurative meaning has been applied to it, as to\n all the rest, both in ancient and modern times. In this case the\n lesson, when metaphorically rendered, possesses a remarkable measure\n of beauty, truth, and appropriateness. The rich man is the Jewish\n nation, by God's gift rich in position and privilege, but selfishly\n keeping all to itself, despising and neglecting others. Lazarus\n represents the Gentiles, spiritually poor, naked, hungry, homeless,\n within reach of the privileged people, yet by them left destitute.\n Both die: the old dispensation runs out, and Jews and Gentiles are\n together launched into \"the last times.\" By apostolic messengers,\n the poor outcasts are now led unto the blessed privileges of the\n Gospel; these stones become children of Abraham; while the Jews, who\n enjoyed so good a portion in the former dispensation, are cast out.\n In this case, as in that of the Samaritan, it is easy so to turn the\n polished instrument in the light, that it shall throw off bright\n glimpses of great evangelic facts and doctrines. Perhaps the Lord,\n in constructing it, kept this capability in view; but we must take\n the parable as in the first instance and mainly a direct moral\n lesson, accounting its allegorical capabilities secondary, and to us\n uncertain.\n\nThe description of the rich man is short, but full. He \"was clothed in\npurple and fine linen, and fared sumptuously every day.\" He maintained a\nroyal state and a prodigal expenditure. This excess of luxury was not\nconfined to great occasions; it was the habit of every day.\n\nHere, as in other cognate parables, great wisdom is displayed in\nbringing the whole force of the rebuke to bear on one point. It is not\nintimated that this man made free with other people's money, or that he\nhad gained his fortune in a dishonest way. All other charges are\nremoved, that the weight lying all on one point may more effectually\nimprint the intended lesson. To have represented him as dishonest or\ndrunken, would have blunted the weapon's edge. Here is an affluent\ncitizen, on whose fair fame the breath of scandal can affix no blot. He\nhad a large portion in this world, and did not seek--did not desire any\nother. He spent his wealth in pleasing himself, and did not lay it out\nin serving God or helping man. It is not of essential importance whether\nsuch a man miserably hoard his money, or voluptuously spend it in feasts\nand fine clothing. Some men take more pleasure in wealth accumulated,\nand others more in wealth as the means of obtaining luxuries. These are\ntwo branches from one root; the difference is superficial and\naccidental: the essence of the evil is the same in both--a life of\nself-pleasing--\"without God in the world.\"\n\nBy a transition, purposely made very abrupt, we learn next that a\nbeggar named Lazarus[95] was laid at this rich man's gate, full of\nsores. Whether the position was chosen by the man himself, or by his\nfriends for him, the motive is obvious--it was expected that where so\nmuch was expended, perhaps also wasted, some crumbs might come the\nbeggar's way.\n\n [95] The name of the poor man is given, while the rich man is left\n nameless. Generally, Christ's kingdom is not of this world, and, in\n particular, it does not imitate this world's kingdoms in throwing\n the common people into anonymous heaps, and recording the names of\n only the great. I saw in an extension of the parish churchyard the\n graves of the two hundred men who perished in the pit accident at\n Hartley a few years ago. They were grouped in families of two,\n three, four, or five, and these family groups were arranged in\n extended rows; but all were nameless. Near them slept the dust of\n the hereditary owners of the soil under monumental marble, loaded\n with statuary and inscriptions. Subjects of Christ's kingdom, \"it\n shall not be so among you.\" Nor is the law which obtains in the\n heavenly the direct reverse of that which obtains in the earthly\n kingdom; it is not the poor, but the \"poor in spirit,\" to whom the\n kingdom of heaven belongs. The names that are recorded in the Lamb's\n book of life are neither those who have nor those who lack this\n world's wealth, but those who are poor in spirit and rich in grace.\n\n\"The dogs came and licked his sores;\" perhaps the dogs, always plentiful\nin eastern cities, that had no master; perhaps the dogs that belonged to\nthe rich man, and had turned aside to lick the beggar's sores when their\nmaster rode past on the other side, and hid from the sight of misery\nwithin the drapery of his stately mansion. The act attributed to the\ndogs accords, as is well known, with their instincts and habits. It is\nsoothing to the sufferer in the sensations of the moment, and healthful\nin its effects. When the beggar's fortunate brother took no notice of\nhis distress, the dumb brutes did what they could to show their\nsympathy. The stroke, though it wears all the simplicity of nature, is\nin the parable due to consummate art; the kindness of the brute brings\nout in deep relief the inhumanity of man.\n\n\"And it came to pass that the beggar died.\" Towards this point the\nnarrative hastens. Here on the border is the hinge on which the lesson\nturns. The whole parable is constructed and spoken in order to show how\nthis life bears on eternity; and to make eternity, thus unveiled, bear\nreciprocally on the present life. The death of Lazarus happened in the\nordinary course of things: his sufferings came to an end. Not a word of\nhis dust, whether it was buried, or how. Of design, and with deep\nmeaning, the body is left unnoticed, and the history of his soul is\ncontinued beyond the boundary of life, as the real and uninterrupted\nhistory of the man: in the same breath and in the same sentence that\nintimates his death, we are informed that he was carried by angels into\nAbraham's bosom. The dying and the entrance into the rest that remaineth\nare expressed in one sentence, the two clauses connected by a copulative\nconjunction: the Lord means manifestly to teach us, as he afterwards\ntaught the repenting malefactor on the cross, that there is no interval\nto his people between departing from the body and being with Christ.\n\nNor did Jesus then reveal the immortality of the soul: the doctrine was\nalready accepted, and he assumed it in his discourse as a truth known\nand acknowledged. Even the resurrection of the body was a commonplace\namong the immediate disciples of Jesus during the period of his\nministry: \"Thy brother shall rise again,\" said the Lord to Martha. \"I\nknow that he shall rise again,\" she replied, \"in the resurrection at the\nlast day:\" this was a belief that she previously possessed.\n\nAbraham's bosom, we may assume, was already an expression employed by\nthe Jews to designate the place of the blessed beyond the grave. It\naccords much better with the Lord's purpose and method to suppose that\nthis phrase and the term paradise, which he afterwards employed to\nexpress the same idea, were adopted by him from the current custom, than\nthat they were then first introduced.\n\n\"The rich man also died and was buried.\" Here, for once, the rich and\nthe poor meet together: the beggar died, and the rich man died too. The\nsame event happened to both, and in both cases the same terms are\nemployed to record the events; but very remarkable is the difference\nintroduced immediately after the article of death. What came after death\nin the case of Lazarus? He was carried by angels into Abraham's bosom.\nWhat came after death in the case of this rich man? He was buried.\nPerhaps as much could not have been said of Lazarus. The rich man was\ncarried from a sumptuous table to a sumptuous tomb; and the poor man\nperhaps had not where to lay his head, when its aching had ceased at\nlength. It may be that his body did not find a grave. His spirit found\nhappy rest and holy company; and we can afford therefore to lose sight\nof the dissolving dust. First and last the one had excellent earthly\naccommodation, and the other had none; but conversely, he who had\nneither a house when living nor a tomb when dead, walked with God while\nthe tabernacle stood, and went to God when it fell; whereas he who made\nthe earth his portion got nothing for his portion but earth.\n\nIt would be a mischievous perversion of the parable to suppose that\nbecause the one was rich he was cast out, and because the other was poor\nhe was admitted into heaven: the true lesson is in one aspect the\nreverse proposition: an ungodly man is in the highest sense poor in\nspite of his wealth; and a godly man is in the highest sense rich, in\nspite of his poverty.\n\nWe enter now, or rather have already entered, the region where the\nparable must needs glide, not indeed from the literal into the\nmetaphorical, but from a foreground where every object is distinctly\nseen to a background where the real objects cannot be seen at all, and\nwhere, accordingly, only signals are thrown up to tell what is their\nbulk and their bearing. When the line of the instruction goes through\nthe separating veil and expatiates in the unseen eternity, it must\nbecome dim and indistinct to our vision. The moment that the parable in\nits progress goes beyond the sphere of the present life, our effort to\nfollow it is like the struggle of a living creature out of its element.\nEven when the Lord of that unseen world is our instructor, our\nconceptions regarding it are necessarily indirect, second hand, and\nobscure. In this region the capacity of the scholar is infantile, and,\nconsequently, the ability of the teacher cannot find scope. While,\ntherefore, those parts of the parable which lay within our sphere were\ndirect and literal, the latter portion, lying beyond our sphere, is\nnecessarily indirect and expressed by signs: consequently, though\nsufficiently precise in its larger leading features, it is, in its minor\ndetails, indistinct, inarticulate.\n\n\"The beggar died;\" this is sufficiently direct and literal: \"and was\ncarried by angels into Abraham's bosom,\"--there we are already beyond\nour depth. The horizon is dim now, by reason of distance and intervening\nclouds. Equally obscure is the other line of information when it has\ncrossed the boundary of time. The rich man died and was buried; this we\nclearly comprehend: but \"in hell he lifted up his eyes, being in\ntorment,\"--these are events of the eternal world, shadowed forth in the\nlanguage and according to the conceptions of the present. We perceive\nthe direction in which they lie, and can understand the moral lesson\nwhich they contain, but the things themselves are shrouded from our\nintellectual vision in impenetrable darkness. Not perhaps intentionally\nin the structure of the parable, but necessarily, on account of the\nplace where its scene is latterly laid, a veil thicker than that of\nallegory is wrapped around it.\n\nIn accordance with the use of the word in classic Greek, and of the\ncorresponding term in the Hebrew Scriptures, we might assume that \"hell\"\n(Hades) only indicates generally the world of spirits, as distinguished\nfrom this life in the body; while the expression \"being in torment,\"\nserves to determine the specific region or condition in that world to\nwhich the rich man was consigned: the term, however, wherever it occurs\nin the New Testament, seems to be applied, in point of fact, to the\nplace of punishment, except in passages that are directly quoted from\nthe Old Testament. Both were now in the world of spirits; but the beggar\nin that world was in Abraham's bosom, and the rich man in torment. Both\nspirits near the same time passed from this world by the same narrow\npassage; beyond the boundary their paths diverged in opposite\ndirections. Each went to his own place as certainly and as necessarily\nas vapour rises up, and water flows down. The ransomed man entered the\nFather's house and joined the company of the holy; the ungodly\ngravitated, according to his kind, into the place of woe.\n\nHaving lifted up his eyes, \"he seeth Abraham afar off and Lazarus in his\nbosom, and he cried and said, Father Abraham, have mercy on me.\" Deeper\nand deeper into the mystery we are led at every step. While the outline\nof the landscape is defined sufficiently for the purpose or affording a\nlandmark to direct our course, all the lesser objects are entirely\nconcealed by the distance. We must beware lest, in straining to get a\nglimpse of the invisible, we should mistake the flitting shadows that\nthe unnatural effort sets afloat in the humours of our own eyes for the\nveritable objects of the spiritual world.\n\nHere I would fain arrest attention on one guiding and dominating\nconsideration, which may become a thread to lead us safely through the\nlabyrinth, saving us the trouble of working out difficult speculations,\nand averting from us the danger of injuring ourselves by falls in the\ndark. The Lord delivered and the evangelist recorded this parable for\nthe purpose of teaching, warning, directing, not spirits disembodied in\nthe other world, but men in the body here. \"All things are for your\nsakes;\" the great Teacher determined all his words and acts by a regard\nto the benefit of his people. Even when Lazarus died at Bethany, he said\nto his followers, \"I am glad for your sakes that I was not there, to the\nintent that ye might believe;\" his absence led to the resurrection of\nLazarus, and that event, he foresaw, would confirm their faith. So here,\nhis aim is not to show how much he knows of the separate state, or to\nastonish the world by the display of its secrets; it is to give men\nwhile they are in the body those views of the separate state which will\ntell most effectually in leading the wicked to repentance, and in\nestablishing believers in the faith.\n\nTaking the Teacher's aim as the determinating principle in the\ninterpretation of his discourse, I gather that the dialogue between the\nrich man and Abraham does not describe absolutely what is possible and\nactually takes place in the world of spirits, as if it were addressed\nto an inhabitant of that world, but gives such pictures of it, or signs\nregarding it, as are intelligible to an inhabitant of this world, and as\nwill best bring the realities of the future to bear with beneficial\neffect upon the present character of men. By a system of coloured lights\nwe contrive to warn the conductors of engines on our railways of danger\nto be avoided on the one hand, and to intimate the line of safety on the\nother. The things regarding which the engineers get instruction are not\nwithin their view. A red or a white light are not like the things in the\ndistance that are to be dreaded or desired; but a red or a white light\ndisplayed serves the purpose when the things themselves cannot be made\nknown. There everything is determined with a view to immediate practical\nbenefit. I think this helps me to grasp the difficult portions of the\nparable. The purpose of the Lord was not to display his own knowledge or\ngratify our curiosity. He ever acted as the Saviour of the lost; he\nnever swerved from that aim. It was his meat to do the Father's will,\nand to finish his work. In this particular case, accordingly, the object\nwhich he kept in view was not to convey to men in the body the absolute\nknowledge of a state, for knowing which their faculties are unfit, but\nto convey to them in time such shadows or signals of danger and safety\nas the actual state of matters in the unseen world truly suggested, and\nin such forms as that living men, from their view-point, and with their\nmixed constitution, could comprehend and appreciate.\n\nWhen this principle is permitted to dominate, the exposition of the\ndialogue becomes comparatively both short and easy.\n\nI do not know whether the saved are within view of the lost in a future\nstate, or whether any communication can pass between them; I only know\nthat this parabolic picture, constructed as from a view-point within the\npresent world, is the exhibition best fitted to make the diverse\nconditions of the good and the evil beyond the grave effectual to warn\nand instruct living men in the body. If any one should curiously inquire\nabout flame, what is its nature, and how it can hurt a spirit, I can\ngive no information on the subject, and I can gather none from the\nparable. One thing I know, that this representation is a red light hung\nout before me, as I am rushing forward on the line of life--hung out to\nwarn me of danger, and hung out by the hand of him who came to save the\nlost. I understand perfectly what the beacon means to me: it is my part\nto take the warning which it gives; and, as to the exact state of events\nand capabilities in the world to come, I shall learn all when I enter\nit. It may be quite true that there is not a flame like that which we\nare accustomed to see, and not a body, previous to the resurrection,\nthat may be burned in it. But he who gave the word is my Friend; and he\nis true; I shall trust him. He knows what I understand by a flame; he\nknows how I am affected by the thought of the pain which it inflicts.\nKnowing all these, he has employed that word in order to apply the\nterrors of the Lord for my warning; he has done all things well. The\nminute features of the dialogue all serve to give point to the main\nconception. The request for a drop of water contributes to bring out the\nintensity of the suffering; the answer of Abraham shows that, beyond the\nboundary of this life, there is no hope of relief. Jesus Christ came\ninto the world to save sinners--it was to this world he came; but no\nSaviour goes to that other world to win back the lost who have\npermitted the day of grace to run out. Christ is the way unto the\nFather; but there is no way of passing from death unto life, if the\npassage has not been made in this present world.\n\nInterpreting the rich man's intercession for his brothers on the same\nprinciple, I do not know and cannot learn here, whether those who have\npassed through death into the next world unsaved, remember the character\nof the relatives whom they left behind on earth, or whether, remembering\ntheir condition, they will or can make intercession in their behalf. All\nthat I gather certainly on the subject from this parable is, that\nalthough a brother may permit his brother to abide in sin without\ninstruction or reproof, while all are living here and walking by sight;\nyet, if the fate that awaits the impenitent were adequately believed and\nrealized, he who believed and realized it, could not refrain from effort\nto arouse the slumberers, and lead them to repentance. Again, as in\nprevious parts, I am taught here not what I shall wish when I shall be\nin the world of spirits, but what I should do now while I am in the body\nand under grace. I should get the message sent to every heedless brother\nwho is wasting his day of grace, while a messenger of flesh and blood\nmay be found, and there is a way by which I may reach the objects of my\nsolicitude.\n\nBy aid of the same machinery--the dialogue between the rich man and\nAbraham--another lesson is brought from the world of spirits to the land\nof living men--the lesson that those who refuse to believe and obey\nunder the means of grace which God has appointed in the Church, would\nnot be more pliable if prodigies were shown to them by way of overcoming\ntheir unbelief. The conception, although conveyed by the lips of the\nrich man after he had gone to his own place, that a miracle of power\nwould, if it were exhibited, bring alienated hearts submissively back to\nGod, springs native here in time. It is the deceit with which many sing\nthemselves to sleep--they would believe if one rose from the dead. There\nare two answers to it:--one is, it would not be effectual although it\nwere granted; and the other is, even though it were fitted to accomplish\nthe object, it will not be given.\n\nThe conclusion of the whole matter is, delays are dangerous; \"Now is the\naccepted time, now is the day of salvation.\"\n\nSome lessons still remain, that invite our attention, and will repay it.\n\n1. For mankind, after this life is done, another world remains,\nconsisting of two opposite spheres or conditions, one of holiness and\nhappiness, the other of sin and misery. The Jewish people and their\nrulers persistently demanded of Jesus that he would show them a sign\nfrom heaven; and this demand he as steadily refused to gratify. Unlike\nall false prophets, the Lord Jesus maintained silence in regard to the\nparticular characteristics of the unseen world; but one thing in\ncompassionate love he made known with abundant clearness, that there is\nan absolute and permanent separation between good and evil in the world\nto come, and that there are distinct places of rewards and punishments.\n\nSome people labour hard to shake from their own minds the belief in a\nplace and state of retribution. To these I would affectionately suggest\nthat to disbelieve it will not destroy it. Even in Scotland--the narrow\nend of an island nowhere very broad--I have met with persons well\nadvanced in life, of good common education, and good common sense, who\nhad never seen the sea. Suppose that these persons should have cause\ngreatly to dread the sea, and should therefore ardently desire that\nthere were no such thing in existence. Suppose further, that, in the\ncommon way of the world, the wish should become father to the thought,\nand that they at last should firmly believe that there is not a sea.\nWould their sentiment change the state of the fact? Sinners, to whom the\nname and nature of a place of punishment are disagreeable, have no more\npower to annihilate the object of their aversion than the shepherds of\nthe Cheviots to wipe out the sea by a wish. The sea is near those men\nthough they have never seen it; and, if they were cast into it, they\nwould perish, notwithstanding their opinion. Ah! the thing which by\nGod's appointment is, cannot by our arguments be blotted out of being.\n\n2. There is a way from this present life to the place of future misery,\nand also a way to the place of future blessedness. The way from this\nworld to the place of woe was made by man's sin; the way from this world\nto the place of rest was made by the incarnation, death, and\nresurrection of Christ. By the one way you can glide easily down; by the\nother you may climb toilsomely, but surely up. The one goes with the\ncorrupt affections; the other against them. But let it be remembered\nthat the way of life, though hard, is not unhappy; the struggle, when\nonce fairly begun, is a grand, gladsome thing. Forth from this world\nthere are only two paths; by one or other of these two all men take\ntheir departure; on one or other of these two paths we all are treading\nnow. We owe it to Christ that a way into safety has been opened for our\nsinful world: \"I am the way, ... no man cometh unto the Father but by\nme.\"\n\n3. There is no way over from one of these future states to the other.\nThe great gulf between them is fixed. This is the main fact of the\nparable, and hereon its greatest lesson grows. The great gulf is fixed,\nand after death none can change his place. This fact we now know without\nfurther revelation, and if we believe it not on the testimony of Jesus,\nneither would we believe it although one should rise from the dead to\ndeclare it. This parable, in some of its minute features, is to our\nvision necessarily obscure, because the scene is laid in the life to\ncome, but its main outline is as clearly visible as any temporal object\ncould be. It teaches with great perspicuity that when immortal spirits,\nat the dissolution of the body, are thrown into the eternal world, it is\nno longer possible that their place or their condition should be\nchanged: those who will not learn from this word of Christ that the\ncondition of the departed is for ever fixed at death will not learn it\nin time to profit by the lesson.\n\n4. Our Lord has thus emphatically taught us that there is no possibility\nof passing from one state to another beyond the boundary of this life in\norder that he may thereby constrain us to make the needful transition\nnow. The impassable gulf between the saved and the outcast in eternity\nis a dreadful sight; it was the compassionate Jesus who drew aside the\ncurtain and exposed it to view, and it was his great love that moved him\nto make this revelation. There is a line that crosses our path a little\nway forward from the spot where we stand to-day--a line that divides our\ntime from our eternity--invisible to our eyes, but known unto God. We\nnever know as we advance what step of the journey will carry us over\nthis line. Christ has told us that if we pass it unsaved we cannot\nobtain a change of condition beyond it; and he has revealed to us this\ntruth in order that we might be induced now to make our calling and\nelection sure. These terrors of the Lord are displayed in order to\npersuade men. There is no impassable gulf now between a sinner and the\nSaviour; the way is open, and the perennial invitation resounds from the\nGospel, \"Come unto me;\" but to those who pass from this life without\nhaving obeyed that call, there remaineth no more sacrifice for sin, no\nmore a refuge from judgment.\n\nThis word of Christ is not of any private interpretation; it may have\npointed to Herod or to the Pharisees in the first instance, but it was\nof the nature of a seed, and its applications multiply a hundred times a\nhundred fold down through the history of the world. We may find the rich\nman in this land to-day as certainly as in the circle that listened that\nday to the preaching of Jesus. We find the counterpart of this picture,\nnot only in individuals, but in associated churches; and if Christians,\nboth in their private and corporate capacities, are rich both in\ntemporal means and spiritual privileges, they need not go far to seek\nfor the Lazarus who is laid at their gate. Lazarus lies in the streets\nand lanes of our opulent cities; and, oh, he is full of sores! For his\nsake, for Christ's sake, for our own sake, we must go out and show him\nkindness. Dives lost his opportunity,--lost it for ever: we must \"haste\nto the rescue\" lest we lose ours too. If we love the Lord, our love will\nstir and burst out and overflow in life. The life that will exercise\nitself in Christ-like charity must begin now; and if a new life in the\nLord begin, it will reveal itself in love's labour. If we are bought\nwith a price and quickened by the Spirit, the beggar at our gate will\nsoon discover the change. He will not be left longer to the mere\npromptings of natural instinct among his neighbours for the soothing of\nhis sorrows; the warm skilful hand of intelligent and affectionate\nbrotherhood will raise him up and minister to his wants. Lazarus,\ninstead of having only a dog to lick his sores, will be compassed about\nwith human affections, and all his wants supplied. As a diseased,\nmiserable, neglected lazar world felt the coming of Christ, the poor and\ndestitute of the world's inhabitants will know when a loving, hopeful\nChristian comes within reach. Who touched me? might the huge world have\nsaid, if it had possessed intelligence, when God became man and dwelt\namong us. Who touched me? will the outcasts on the earth begin to cry as\nthey awaken to consciousness, when a revived Church has visited them in\ntheir prison, and brought to them the bread of life.\n\n\n\n\nXXVII.\n\nUNPROFITABLE SERVANTS.\n\n\n\"Then said he unto the disciples, It is impossible but that offences\n will come: but woe unto him, through whom they come! It were better\n for him that a millstone were hanged about his neck, and he cast\n into the sea, than that he should offend one of these little ones.\n Take heed to yourselves: If thy brother trespass against thee,\n rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive him. And if he trespass\n against thee seven times in a day, and seven times in a day turn\n again to thee, saying, I repent; thou shalt forgive him. And the\n apostles said unto the Lord, Increase our faith. And the Lord said,\n If ye had faith as a grain of mustard seed, ye might say unto this\n sycamine tree, Be thou plucked up by the root, and be thou planted\n in the sea; and it should obey you. But which of you, having a\n servant plowing or feeding cattle, will say unto him by and by, when\n he is come from the field, Go and sit down to meat? And will not\n rather say unto him, Make ready wherewith I may sup, and gird\n thyself, and serve me, till I have eaten and drunken; and afterward\n thou shalt eat and drink? Doth he thank that servant because he did\n the things that were commanded him? I trow not. So likewise ye, when\n ye shall have done all those things which are commanded you, say, We\n are unprofitable servants: we have done that which was our duty to\n do.\"--LUKE xvii. 1-10.\n\nWe are accustomed to observe a connection, more or less intimate,\nbetween the parable and the history that precedes it. Generally, some\nrecent event, or some question by friend or foe, suggests the\nsimilitude. In almost every case we are able to trace the natural\nhistory, as it were, of the parable,--to determine what feature of the\nevents or discourses preceding called up the image and gave it shape.\nHere the relation between the parable and the antecedent instruction is\ncloser still: in this case there is not merely a connection, but an\nabsolute union. The direct and the metaphorical are here successively\nemployed to enforce one continuous lesson. The lesson is one: the first\nportion of it is delivered in simple didactic language, and the second\nin parabolic figure. Some instruments are made of two different kinds of\nmetal, not mixed in the crucible, but each occupying its own separate\nplace: one part consists of steel, and another of brass, soldered\ntogether, so as to constitute one rod. The nature of the work is such\nthat steel suits best for one extremity of the tool, and brass for the\nother. It is in a similar way that two different forms of speech are\nemployed here to impart one lesson: the discourse begins with literal\nexpressions, and ends with a similitude.\n\nThe passage 1-10 as a whole, teaches the double truth, That God requires\nof men a complete obedience, and that even though a complete obedience\nwere rendered, the master would not be laid under any obligation--the\nservants would have no claim to praise or reward. While the rule towards\nthe close is made universal, in the beginning the demand is particular\nand specific--to bear meekly and forgive generously the injuries which\nneighbours may inflict in the multifarious intercourse of life. Besides\nthe point which constitutes the main scope of the discourse, several\nmatters of the very highest importance are incidentally involved, and\nmust be noticed, each in its proper place.\n\nFirst of all, in order to prepare his disciples for meeting the trials\nthat lay before them, he warned them that offences will come, and\npronounced a solemn woe on those who should cast them in their\nneighbour's way. Looking to his own--alike those who were then in his\nsight, and those who should believe on him down to the end of the\nworld--he calls them, tenderly, little ones, and intimates that it would\ngo ill with all who should dare to hurt them. This, however, appears to\nbe laid down as a basis for the lesson which he intended at that time to\nteach, rather than the lesson itself. Speaking expressly for the benefit\nof his own followers, he was more concerned to teach them how to bear\ninjuries than to command them to beware of inflicting injuries on\nothers. The chief part of a Christian's duty consists in bearing well;\nand when that part of his duty is successfully performed, it is more\neffectual in serving God and convincing men than any kind or degree of\nactive effort. The disciple is like his Lord in this, that he conquers\nby suffering.\n\nAccordingly, the Teacher soon glides from the precept which forbids his\npeople to inflict injuries, into the precept which teaches how they\nshould bear injuries inflicted by others. \"Take heed to yourselves:\"\nthis is his main design: towards this he was hastening; as a basis for\nthis word, the previous injunction had been given. But, mark well, it is\nnot after the manner of men that Jesus warns his disciples to take heed\nto themselves. He does not mean that they should be solicitous to\nprotect themselves from receiving injury: he leaves that to the natural\ninstincts of self-preservation, and warns them against danger on another\nside, where nature supplies no defence. He does not mean, Take heed lest\nyou suffer by the stroke which an enemy may deal against you; he means,\nTake heed lest you sin in spirit and conduct when you suffer unjustly.\nYou suffer one injury when a neighbour treats you unfairly: and another\nwhen you proudly, impatiently retaliate. The loss that you thus inflict\non yourself is far heavier than the loss which has been inflicted by a\nneighbour: the little finger of the one damage is thicker than the loins\nof the other.\n\nAfter the outpouring of the Spirit at the Pentecost, we find these\nscholars far advanced in this lesson, which their Master taught them\nwhile he remained at their head. The believers of those days had,\nespecially in the persons of Peter and John, been cruelly persecuted by\nthe Jewish authorities, and when they met after their suffering to pray,\ntheir petition ran: \"And now, Lord, behold their threatenings: and grant\nunto thy servants, that with all boldness they may speak thy word\" (Acts\niv. 29). An injury had been inflicted: they innocently suffered; and\nobserve what in these circumstances they feared: not more suffering, but\nlest by the suffering they should be tempted to be silent or wavering\nwhen called to be witnesses of Christ. Not the pain they endured, but\nthe right state of their own spirits under the endurance, exercised\ntheir minds, and stimulated their prayers.\n\nWe must not suppose, however, that the Lord has commanded his disciples\nto bear injuries as a clod bears blows. Mere softness in yielding to the\nwicked is not a Christian grace; it is, on the contrary, a mischievous\nindolence: it suffers sin upon a brother: it deprives him of the benefit\nof reproof, and so encourages him to continue in his sin. \"If thy\nbrother trespass against thee, rebuke him; and if he repent, forgive\nhim.\" This Teacher does not obliterate the lines which separate\nrighteousness from unrighteousness. He enjoins tenderness: but much as\nhe loves to see that feature in his disciples, he places it second to\nfaithfulness. The order of precedence as regards these two has been\ndetermined by royal ordinance--\"first pure, then peaceable.\" \"Have salt\nin yourselves, and have peace one with another,\" said the Lord at\nanother time (Mark ix.), plainly giving faithfulness the first place,\nand requiring that gentleness should press hard up behind. Rebuke the\nbrother who does a wrong to you; if under your reproof and the working\nof the truth on his conscience, he be led to repentance and confession,\nforgive him in your heart, and express your forgiveness, that he may be\nencouraged and relieved. The precept \"forgive\" must, from the nature of\nthe case, refer to the articulate expression of forgiveness; for in his\nheart and before God, a Christian forgives his enemy, although that\nenemy continue obdurate.\n\nNext comes the precept, given in similar terms already in another place\n(Matt. xviii. 15-22), regarding the repetition of injuries. The duty of\nforgiving a repenting injurer is not modified by the frequency of his\nsin; the form of the expression \"seven times in a day,\" is manifestly\nintended to intimate that there is on that side absolutely no limit. It\nis not the part of a Christian to count the number of the injuries he\nhas received, and to refuse forgiveness after a certain point; it is his\npart to be of a forgiving spirit, and to give forth forgiveness to all\nlike the sunlight. The example of the Lord is the pattern for his\nservants; \"Love one another as I have loved you.\"\n\nThe conception of unlimited forgiving, which in Matthew's narrative is\nexpressed by \"seventy times seven,\" is here with equal emphasis\nexpressed by \"seven times in a day.\" When we understand the terms as a\nformula for an indefinite number, we exclude the minute question, How\ncould we believe a man sincere, who should seven times in a day do us an\ninjury, and as often come and express sorrow for his fault? The words\nshould not be literally taken; and besides if any one should trifle with\nhis neighbour by frequent and manifestly false professions of\nrepentance, his meaning would and should be read, not by his words, but\nby his conduct; the rule would and should be understood in its spirit,\nand not in its letter merely.\n\nVer. 5. \"And the apostles said unto the Lord, Increase our faith.\" An\ninteresting and instructive view emerges here, of the relation between\nfaith and practice. When they heard the measure of the demand which\ntheir Master made upon them in the matter of bearing and forgiving\ninjuries, the apostles felt instantly that the weight was heavier than\nthey could bear. They had not in their hearts such an amount of patience\nand love, as would enable them to fulfil this commandment of the Lord.\nHaving already learned that faith is the secret fountain whence the\nstream of obedience flows, they asked with equal simplicity and\ncorrectness that their faith might be increased. In this short prayer\nthey assumed, first, that they already believed, asking for an addition\nto the faith which they already possessed; and second, that it is more\nfaith that will produce more obedience; and third, that the faith which\nworketh by love is not of themselves, but is the gift of God through his\nSon. In all this, having been secretly taught of the Spirit, these\napostles are deeply intelligent, and completely correct. The appetites\nare generally sure guides to living creatures for the sustenance of\ntheir life; and here the appetite of the new creature, points surely to\nthe source of supply: \"Blessed are they that hunger and thirst after\nrighteousness, for they shall be filled.\"\n\nBoth in the request of the scholars (ver. 5), and in the answer of the\nMaster (ver. 6), it is distinctly assumed as a fundamental truth in\nreligion, that faith lies at the root of obedience. When a requisition\nis made upon them for an amount of meek endurance and forgiving love\nwhich their own stores cannot supply, they cry not directly for more\npower of enduring and forgiving, but for more faith which will\nstrengthen them on this side, and on all other sides at the same time.\nIt is as if you had a cistern meant to supply twelve streams, running in\nvarious directions, from whose lip twelve conduits were accordingly led:\nand when water from one of these was suddenly wanted, you opened it but\nfound that little or none could be obtained. You cry out for a new\nsupply to the cistern; that supply given will fill this channel which is\nfor the the moment in requisition, and all the other channels at the\nsame time. Endurance and forgiving--more than we are able to bear and\nbestow--are at this moment required of us; but if we had more faith, we\nshould exhibit more of these graces, and more of all graces.\n\nThe Lord in his answer acknowledges that their inference is correct. By\nanother form of expression, similar in character to the \"seven times in\na day,\" he intimates that faith possesses an unlimited power of\nproduction in the department of doing. To intensify the result he\nemploys a double hyperbole, as engineers employ two pairs of wheels to\ngenerate extreme rapidity of motion; the smallest spark of faith will\novercome the greatest obstacles that may lie across a Christian's path.\nAgain, the same idea which appeared before in Matt. xvii. 20, is\nexpressed here by a different figure: in both cases the Lord intends to\nintimate that what without faith is impossible, may with faith be done.\nIn Matthew the impossible is represented by the removal of a mountain;\nin Luke by the planting of a sycamore in the sea. By these forms our\nTeacher conveys his meaning with amazing distinctness. The letters of\nhis lessons thus sharply, deeply cut, remain indeed dead letters to\nthose who have not experienced the grace of God; as letters of a book,\nthe largest and loveliest lie meaningless before the eyes of a savage or\na little child; but in either case, as soon as the scholar becomes\ncapable of understanding, the meaning shines forth like light. It would\nbe a great transition from our present position of impotence, if we\nshould become able to remove a mountain, or plant a sycamore in the sea;\nsuch and so great is the transition when a man passes from death in sin\nto life in Christ; such and so great the difference between what he\ncould bear, and hope, and do while he was at enmity with God, and what\nhe can bear, and hope, and do when he is reconciled to God through the\ndeath of his Son.\n\nThe particular requirement which on this occasion put the faith of the\ndisciples under a strain greater than it was able to meet, was the\nendurance and the forgiving of injuries; but this Scripture must not be\nlimited to a private interpretation; this is a specimen shown in\nillustration of a general rule. There are diversities of operation,\nunder the providence of God our Father; now the faith of Christians is\ntested in one way, and then in another. At one time they are called\nactively to do a great work; and at another time passively to bear a\ngreat burden. The work required of one disciple is a mission to the dark\nplaces of the earth; and the work required of another is to bear\npatiently many years of pain and weariness, in his own home, it may be\non his own bed. By both alike the kingdom of Christ may be advanced:\nfrom both equally when they are bruised,--the one by great effort, and\nthe other by a heavy weight,--the odour of a holy temper may be diffused\nall around.\n\nWe are not masters; we are servants. The Lord appoints to each his\nplace, and his work.\n\n * * * * *\n\nThe lesson now passes into the parable. When he had pointed out how\ngreat is God's claim, and how large faith's performance might become in\nthe life of a disciple, Jesus warns them, on the other side, that the\ngreatest possible, the greatest conceivable attainment in the direction\nof a believing obedience, implies absolutely no independent merit in\nman; obedience, although it reached the utmost point of perfection,\nwould still leave God indebted to man for nothing, and man indebted to\nGod for all.\n\n\"But which of you having a servant ploughing or feeding cattle.\" The\nstate of society which supplies the ground-work of this parable is in\nmany respects different from that which prevails in modern Europe. It is\nespecially important here to notice the difference in these two\nfeatures:--\n\n1. It is a simple pastoral life that constitutes the basis of this\npicture. The principle of division of labour exists there in its lowest\nstages of development. It is assumed as a common and proper thing to\nemploy a shepherd or a ploughman in serving his master at table--a\npractice entirely unknown among us. 2. The servitude in the instance\nsupposed was not a voluntary limited engagement, but a species of\nslavery: the master's control was much more absolute and complete than\nit is among us. The servant's toil might be, and probably in many cases\nactually was, on the whole, not heavier than that to which our hired\nservants are subjected; but the measure of the labour, both as to its\nendurance and its severity, depended there on the master's will rather\nthan on the servant's freedom. The master, under the species of relation\nwhich then largely prevailed, could demand of his servant on occasion an\namount and continuity of service which now is not demanded on the one\nside, and would not be rendered on the other.\n\nIt should be noticed, however, that the service which is in the parable\nrequired and rendered, is both in character and quantity extreme. An\nordinary example of a servant's work would not have suited the purpose\nof the Lord; he needed a line stretched to its utmost limits. His\npurpose is to teach that the utmost conceivable amount of obedience on\nman's part is not independently meritorious before God; and, in\nsearching among temporal things for a suitable analogy, he selected a\ncase in which the line stretched from one extremity to the other.\n\nWhen the servant has finished his day's work on the pasture or in the\nfield, at his return, and before he obtain either rest or food, he is\ncompelled to wait upon his master at table. Even this extreme measure of\nwork is required by the master and rendered by the servant as within the\nlimits of their respective rights: the servant even in that case has\ndone no more than was due.\n\n\"So likewise ye, when ye shall have done all these things which are\ncommanded you, say, We are unprofitable servants.\"\n\nGod has given all, owns all, has a right to all. We are his by right of\ncreation, and his by redemption, when we are in Christ. Christians are\nnot their own; they are bought with a price. Themselves, and their\nfaculties, and their capabilities belong to God, their Creator and\nRedeemer. When they have rendered all their powers, and all the product\nof these powers, absolutely up to God's will, they have done no more\nthan rendered to him his own. \"Will a man rob God? yet ye have robbed\nme\" (Mal. iii. 8). It is an aggravated sin to rob God of what is his;\nbut it is no merit or ground of praise simply to refrain from robbing\nhim; and this is all that the creature's obedience would amount to,\nalthough it were complete.\n\nOur Master ordinarily makes our work easy; he is gentle, and easy to be\nentreated. \"As a father pitieth his children, so the Lord pitieth them\nthat fear him:\" but at his pleasure, and doubtless in deep ways for\ntheir good, he sometimes lays extraordinary burdens on his own. He may\npermit offences to come, trying your temper; he may permit sickness to\novertake you, trying your patience; he may permit temptations to assail\nyou, trying your faith even at its foundations; he may require of you\ngreat and varied activity, trying your willingness to run at his call.\nThese burdens seem heavy, as the master's demand of service in the house\nseemed heavy to the servant when he returned weary and hungry from field\nlabour; but although we should bear them all with complete uncomplaining\nalacrity, we should acquire thereby no right to reward.\n\nThere is absolutely no such thing as a surplus of merit in man. The\nimagination of it has ever been rife in man-made religions, as weeds\nspring thick and spontaneous from the ground; but never and nowhere is\nthere any substantial foundation for this human conceit. It springs in\nthe deepest ignorance, and it withers when the light of knowledge begins\nto shine. It rests on an entire misapprehension of the relations between\nGod and man. If a man on ship-board, thinking that the ship was about to\nsink, on account of being too heavily loaded, should grasp the shrouds,\nand hang on them with all his weight, by way of lightening the ship, the\nbystanders would count him fatuous; and yet such is the folly of him\nwho, getting all from God, imagines that he has conferred on God a\nfavour by a surplus of goodness. I have seen grown people, in possession\nof all their faculties, able to read, if not further educated, when, in\ncrossing a river by a ferry, they apprehended danger, applying both\ntheir hands to the side of the boat in which they stood, and, pushing\nwith all their might, in order to push it towards a place of safety.\nThis implies the grossest ignorance, or at least the total forgetfulness\nfor the time of the most obvious and ordinary of the natural laws; and\nyet I have found that these persons had quite enough of wit to manage\nall their ordinary affairs, and to get along respectably in society. I\nthink there is some analogy between this case and the case of those who,\nintelligent on other points, yet blindly imagine that they merit praise\nfor not squandering God's gifts that have been placed under their care.\n\n\"When ye have done all, say, We are unprofitable servants\"--servants\nwhom the master did not need, and who contribute nothing to him. The\nquestion whether the Lord conceded that in point of fact any man ever\ndoes perfectly perform all his duty is out of place here; The Lord's\nmeaning is, even although a man should do all, he would still be\ndestitute of merit before God; much more are those destitute of merit\nwho come far short of perfection, and to this class belong all, even the\nbest of the children of men.\n\nMeans and opportunities of bearing evil and doing good are in providence\nconceded to every one of us; and the law announced in another parable\nholds good here; If we improve aright the talents which we possess, more\nwill forthwith be entrusted to us.\n\nThere is room for advancement; and, when grace is begun, it is sweet to\ngrow in grace. If we had power to add cubit by cubit to our stature, we\nshould have far to grow ere our head should strike the heavens; and in\nbearing meekly, and acting righteously, and living purely, we have room\nenough to expand: it will be long ere we have done all, and so our\nprogress be stopped by striking the boundary. Forgetting the things that\nare behind, and reaching forth to those that are before, we may press on\nand ever on; yet there is room.\n\nNor let any one think that bearing and doing God's will must be less\nblessed when we learn that God did not need this at our hand, and that\nwe do not thereby lay him under obligation to us. When one is truly\ntaught of the Spirit, it will increase and not diminish the pleasure\nwhich he enjoys in obedience, to learn that all he is, and has, and\ndoes, comes from God. A dependent is happier than an independent\nposition for human beings, if he on whom they hang is great and good.\nThe life of a child is happiest during the period when he has no\npossession of his own, and desires none,--when he gets all as he needs\nfrom his father; on this side, as well as on others, we must receive the\nkingdom as a little child.\n\nHere is a little stream trickling down the mountain side. As it\nproceeds, other streams join it in succession from the right and left\nuntil it becomes a river. Ever flowing, and ever increasing as it flows,\nit thinks it will make a great contribution to the ocean when it shall\nreach the shore at length. No, river, you are an unprofitable servant;\nthe ocean does not need you; could do as well and be as full without\nyou; is not in any measure made up by you. True, rejoins the river, the\nocean is so great that all my volume poured into it makes no sensible\ndifference; but still I contribute so much, and this, as far as it goes,\nincreases the amount of the ocean's supply. No: this indeed is the\nseeming to the ignorant observer on the spot; but whoever obtains deeper\nknowledge and a wider range, will discover and confess that the river\nis an unprofitable servant to the sea--that it contributes absolutely\nnothing to the sea's store. From the ocean came every drop of water that\nrolls down in that river's bed, alike those that fell into it in rain\nfrom the sky, and those that flowed into it from tributary rivers, and\nthose that sprang from hidden veins in the earth. Even although it\nshould restore all, it gives only what it received. It could not flow,\nit could not be, without the free gift of all from the sea. To the sea\nit owes its existence and power. The sea owes it nothing; would be as\nbroad and deep although this river had never been. But all this natural\nprocess goes on, sweetly and beneficently, notwithstanding: the river\ngets and gives; the ocean gives and gets. Thus the circle goes round,\nbeneficent to creation, glorious to God.\n\nThus, in the spiritual sphere,--in the world that God has created by the\nSpirit of his Son, circulations beautiful and beneficent continually\nplay. From him, and by him, and to him are all things. To the saved man\nthrough whom God's mercy flows, the activity is unspeakably precious: to\nhim the profit, but to God the praise.\n\n\n\n\nXXVIII.\n\nTHE IMPORTUNATE WIDOW.\n\n\n\"And he spake a parable unto them to this end, that men ought always to\n pray, and not to faint: saying, There was in a city a judge, which\n feared not God, neither regarded man: and there was a widow in that\n city; and she came unto him, saying, Avenge me of mine adversary.\n And he would not for a while: but afterwards he said within himself,\n Though I fear not God, nor regard man; yet because this widow\n troubleth me, I will avenge her, lest by her continual coming she\n weary me. And the Lord said, Hear what the unjust judge saith. And\n shall not God avenge his own elect, which cry day and night unto\n him, though he bear long with them? I tell you that he will avenge\n them speedily. Nevertheless when the Son of man cometh; shall he\n find faith on the earth?\"--LUKE xviii. 1-8.\n\nAmong the parables this one is signalized by the distinctness with which\nits object is announced at the commencement, and the principle of its\ninterpretation at the close. No room is left here for diversity of\nopinion regarding the lesson which the Lord intended to teach, or the\nmanner in which the parable should be expounded. The design is expressed\nin verse first; the rule of interpretation in verses sixth and seventh.\nWhy did the Master tell this story to his disciples? To teach them \"that\nmen ought to pray always, and not to faint.\" How may this lesson be\nderived from it? As the widow by her unremitting cry obtained her desire\nfrom the judge, God's own redeemed children will obtain from their\nFather in heaven all that they need, if they ask it eagerly,\npersistently, unwearyingly.\n\nWhen we rightly comprehend the design of the parable, the difficulty\nconnected with the bad character of the judge at once disappears. It was\nnecessary to go to a corrupt tribunal in order to find a suitable case;\na pure judgment seat supplies no such example. In certain circumstances\nyou might gather from a dunghill a medicinal herb which cleaner ground\nwould never bear. The grain which becomes our bread grows best when its\nroots are spread in unseen corruption; and so perfect is the chemistry\nof nature, that the yellow ears of harvest retain absolutely no taint of\nthe putrescence whence they sprung. Thus easily and perfectly the Lord\nbrings lessons of holiness from examples of sin. He pauses not to\napologize or explain: majestically the instruction advances, like the\nprocesses of nature, until the unrighteousness of man defines and\nillustrates the mercy of God.\n\nIt is not by accident,--it is by choice that this seed of the word is\nsown on filthy ground: it is sown there, because it will grow best\nthere. The experience of a righteous human tribunal does not supply the\nmaterial of this lesson. Where the presiding judge is just, a poor\ninjured widow will obtain redress at once, and her perseverance will\nnever be put to the test. The characteristic feature of the case which\nthe Lord needed, was a persistent, unyielding perseverance in the cry\nfor redress; for such a case he must go to a court where law does not\nregulate the judge, but where the judge for his own ease or interest\nmakes his own law. The feature of Christ's teaching which most arrested\nintelligent listeners in his own day, was its inherent, self-evidencing\nmajesty. Instead of seeking props, it stood forth alone, obviously\ndivine. He taught with authority, and not as the scribes. Here is an\nexample of that simple supremeness that is at once a witness to itself.\nHe compares explicitly and broadly the method of God's dealing, as the\nhearer of prayer, with the practice of a judge who is manifestly vile\nand venal. Nor is a word of explanation or apology interposed. He who\nthus simply brings sweet food from noisome carrion, has all power in\nheaven and in earth; His ways are not as our ways, nor his thoughts as\nour thoughts.\n\nAs he needed for his purpose an example of judicial corruption, examples\nlay ready to his hand in human history; especially in the practice of\noriental empires, ancient and modern, it is easy to find cases in which\nthe supreme authority, civil and criminal, is vested in a deputy who\nhabitually sacrifices justice to his own ease or interest.\n\nThe thorough badness of this judge, although stated distinctly, is\nstated briefly; it is not made prominent in the parable, and should not\nbe made prominent in the interpretation of the parable. That badness on\nboth sides, towards God and man, is I apprehend not introduced here for\nits own sake, but for the sake of a particular effect that resulted from\nit;--the frequent, persevering appeals of the widow for redress. This is\nthe thing that is needed and used in the Lord's lesson; and although the\ninjustice of the judge stands distinctly out on the face of the parable,\nit is like the forest tree in the vineyards of Italy, used only to hold\nup the vine. Earnest, repeated, unyielding appeal by a needy, feeble\nsuppliant before the throne of power;--this is the fruit which is\nprecious for the Teacher's purpose, and the hollow heart of the\nepicurean judge is employed only as the trunk to bear it. When it has\nheld up that fruit to be ripened, itself may be thrown away.\n\nAt certain points in frequented routes through romantic scenery it is\ncustomary to fire a gun in order to afford the tourists an opportunity\nof hearing the echoes answering each other in the neighbouring\nmountains. The explosion is in place nearest, in time first, and as to\nsound loudest, but this the most articulate and arrestive fact is\nemployed exclusively for the purpose of producing the subsequent and\nmore distant echo. The explosion is instantly dismissed from the mind\nand attention concentrated on the reverberation which it called forth.\nThe conduct of the judge in this parable stands precisely in the place\nof that explosion. When it has produced the widow's importunity it is of\nno further use; it must be thrown aside.\n\nLet us hear now the interpretation,--\"And the Lord said, Hear what the\nunjust judge saith,\" &c. God's own chosen and redeemed people correspond\nto the suppliant widow in the parable. They are like her in her\nsuffering and her weakness; they should be like her too in her\nunintermittent, persevering cry.\n\nLike other similar lessons, this one bears equally on the Church as a\nbody, and on an individual Christian. The Church collective, in times of\npersecution, and a soul surrounded by temptations, stand equally in the\nplace of the poor widow; they are in need and in danger. They have no\nresources in themselves; help must come from one that is mighty. It is\ntheir interest to plead with him who has all power in heaven and in\nearth,--to plead as men plead for life.\n\nThe lesson here is very specific; it bears on one point, and in order\nthat all its force may be concentrated on one point, others are for the\ntime omitted. This parable is not spoken with the view of teaching that\nChristians ought to pray; that duty is assumed here, not enjoined.\nNeither does it prescribe what the suppliant should ask, or on whose\nmerits he should lean. Taking for granted all these things which the\nScriptures elsewhere explicitly teach, the Master in this lesson\nconfines his attention to one thing,--perseverance in prayer when the\nanswer does not come at first, perseverance and pertinacity aye and\nuntil the object is attained.\n\nIt is expressly intimated in the narrative that there is sometimes a\nlong, and from our view-point inexplicable delay. This is the meaning of\nthe expression \"though he bear long with them.\" This phrase is not taken\nhere in its ordinary signification,--an endurance of injuries; it means\nthat he holds back long, and resists their pressure for relief.\n\nHere are the two sides over against each other: they cry day and night,\nand he, hearing their continuous cry, refrains from bestowing the relief\nfor which they passionately plead. As God keeps back the answer, they\nredouble the cry; as they redouble the cry, God still withholds the\nanswer. Expressly we are informed he will give answer; he will avenge\nhis own elect. The eternal Father treasures up all the supplications of\nhis children, and he will yet give them deliverance. When his time comes\nthe deliverance will be complete; but in the meantime the interesting\ninquiry presents itself, Why does he delay at all? In the light of\nScripture we are able to give a satisfactory answer to this inquiry.\n\nThe reason why the widow's claims were left long unsettled in the court\nwas the self-pleasing indolence of the judge. The love of his own ease\nwas the motive that induced him both to refuse redress at first and to\ngrant it afterwards. He refused to avenge her until he perceived that to\ndo her justice would afford him less trouble than to withhold it. In the\ntreatment which the petitions of the elect receive at the throne of God\nthere is nothing in common with the conduct of the unjust judge, except\nthe delay. The fact that the petitions lie for some time unanswered is\ncommon to both tribunals, but on all other points they are wholly\ndiverse, and even the single feature of coincidence springs in the two\ncases from opposite grounds.\n\nWhen God withholds the deliverance for which his children plead he acts\nwith wisdom and love combined. It would be, so to speak, easier for a\nfather who is at once rich and benevolent to comply immediately and\nfully with all the child's demands; it requires and exercises a deeper,\nstronger love to leave the child crying and knocking for a time in vain\nthat the bounty given at the proper time may in the end be a greater\nboon. I once knew two men who lived near each other in similar worldly\ncircumstances, but adopted opposite methods in the treatment of their\nchildren. The boys of this family obtained money from their father when\nthey asked it, and spent it according to their own pleasure, without his\nknowledge or control: the boys of that family often asked, but seldom\nreceived a similar supply. The father who frequently thwarted his\nchildren's desires loved his children more deeply, and as the result\nshowed, more wisely than the father who could not summon courage\nsufficient to say No. The wise parent bore with his own when they\npleaded for some dangerous indulgence, and the bearing wounded his\ntender heart; but by reason of his greater love, he bore the pain of\nhearing their cry without granting their request. The other parent was\ntoo indolent and self-pleasing to endure such a strain, and he lived to\ntaste bitter fruit from the evil seed which his own hand had sown.\n\nFor the same reason, and in the same manner, our Father in heaven bears\nwith his own when they cry night and day to him for something on which\ntheir hearts are set. Because he loves us he endures to hear our cry and\nsee our tears. We do not certainly know what thorn it was that\npenetrated Paul's flesh, but we know that it pained him much, that he\neagerly desired to be quit of it, and that he besought the Lord thrice\nto take it away. From the fact that the child pleaded three times for\nthe same boon, we learn that the Father bore with him awhile,--bore, so\nto speak, the pain of refusing, because he knew that the refusal was\nneedful for Paul. The thorn was left in the flesh until its discipline\nwas done, and then it was plucked out by a strong and gentle hand. \"My\ngrace is sufficient for thee:\" there are no thorns in Paul's flesh now.\n\nThe case of the Syro-Phoenician woman (Matt. xv. 21-28) runs parallel\nwith this as well as with the \"Friend at midnight.\" Mark how the Lord\nbore with the woman. He delighted in her faith; it was his happiness to\ngive, and yet he refused; in denying her he denied himself. But by\nwithholding a while, he kindled her love into a brighter, stronger\nflame. By refusing what she asked, he reduplicated her asking; this is\nsweet to him and profitable to her. By the long delay on his part and\nthe consequent eager repetition of the request on her part, a richer\nboon was prepared and bestowed. Her appetite was greatly quickened, and\nher satisfying was more full. Who shall be filled most abundantly from\nthe treasures of divine mercy at last? Those who hungered and thirsted\nmost for these treasures in the house of their pilgrimage.\n\nThink of the plainness of this lesson, and the authority which it\npossesses. Its meaning cannot be mistaken; we know what is spoken here,\nand we know who speaks. Hath he spoken, and shall he not make it good?\nThe only begotten Son who is in the bosom of the Father, he hath\ndeclared him. Show us the Father, said Philip, and it sufficeth us; here\nChrist, in answer to his disciples' prayer, is showing the Father.\n\nTo reveal the Father's heart he spoke this parable. The helpless, needy\nwoman came and came again, and cried, and would take no refusal, until\nthe judge was compelled by her importunity to grant her request: and\nthis is the picture chosen by the Lord Jesus when he desires to show how\nGod regards suppliant disciples as they plead at his footstool. It is an\namazing revelation, and the best of it is its truth. He who gave it has\nauthority to speak. The Son will not misrepresent the Father; the\nFather's honour is safe in this Teacher's hands. We learn here, then,\nthat the Hearer of prayer puts himself in the power of a suppliant. He\npermitted Jacob to wrestle, and the firmer he felt the grasp the more he\nloved the wrestler. The words, \"I will not let thee go except thou bless\nme,\" dropping in broken fragments from his lips at intervals as he\npaused and panted, were sweeter than angels' songs in the ears of the\nLord of Hosts. He is the same still, as he is in the New Testament\nrevealed by Jesus. The spirit in man that will take no denial is his\nspecial delight; the spirit that asks once and ceases he cannot away\nwith. As the Lord loveth a cheerful giver, he loveth too an eager\npersevering asker. The door seems narrow, but its narrowness was not\nmeant to keep us out; they please him best who press most heavily on its\nyielding sides. \"The kingdom of heaven suffereth violence, and the\nviolent take it by force.\" The King of Glory feels well pleased the\nwarriors' onset,--gladly welcomes the conqueror in.\n\nIt is indeed blessed to give: but the giver's blessedness is greatly\nmarred by the listlessness of the needy creatures on whom he has\nbestowed his bounty. If they who need and get the goodness are\ninsensible, and cold, and ungrateful, the joy of the benefactor is\nproportionally diminished. It is thus with \"the giving God.\" When the\nreceiver values the bounty, the delight of the bestower is increased.\nThus the Lord Jesus was specially pleased as he healed the daughter of\nthe Syro-Phoenician mother because she gave evidence by her\nimportunity how much she valued the boon; and, on the other hand, his\nplaintive question, \"Where are the nine?\" when the lepers took their\ncure so lightly, shows that he did not much enjoy the act of healing\nbecause the diseased made light both of their ailment and their cure.\n\nCome near, press hard, open your mouth wide, pray without ceasing; for\nthis is the kind of asking that the great Giver loves. Unforgiven sin on\nthe conscience keeps the sinful distant, and Satan calls the silence\nmodesty. It is not; they most honour God who show by their importunity\nin asking that they value his gifts.\n\nWhile it is true that prayer should be a continuous fulness in the\nheart, ever pressing outward and upward, flowing wherever it can find an\nopening, it is not specifically that characteristic to which this\nparable points. This is not the lesson, \"In everything by prayer and\nsupplication, with thanksgiving, let your requests be made known unto\nGod:\" the lesson here points not to the breadth of a whole spiritual\nlife, but to the length of one line that runs through it. Whatever it be\nthat a disciple desires, and is bent upon obtaining, he should ask not\nonce, or twice, or twenty times, but ask until he obtain it; or until he\ndie with the request upon his lips: and in that case he will get his\ndesire, and more. Trust in God: trust in his love. He who has not spared\nhis own Son, how shall he not with him freely give us all things? Do not\ndeem that delay is proof of his indifference. Delaying to bestow is not\nproof of indifference in God; but ceasing to ask is proof of\nindifference in man. Christ assures us he will give: that should induce\nus to continue asking.\n\nGive me these links--1. Sense of need; 2. Desire to get; 3. Belief that\nGod has it in store; 4. Belief that though he withholds awhile, he loves\nto be asked; and 5. Belief that asking will obtain;--give me these\nlinks, and the chain will reach from earth to heaven, bringing heaven\nall down to me, or bearing me up into heaven.\n\nWhile it is right to generalize the lesson, as we have already done, it\nis our duty also to notice the special form of the widow's prayer and\nthe Lord's promise: in both cases it is vengeance against an adversary.\nThe pleading is that the enemy who wronged the widow should be punished\nby the hand of power: the promise is that God will avenge his chosen\nones, who cry to him.\n\nThe case is clearly one in which the weak are overpowered by an\nadversary too strong for them: unable to defend themselves, or strike\ndown their foe, they betake themselves to God in prayer. The ailment is\nspecific; such also is the request. Do justice upon this enemy--rid me\nof his oppression and his presence.\n\nAh, when a soul feels sin's power a bondage, and sin's presence a\nloathsome defilement;--when a soul so oppressed flees to the Saviour for\ndeliverance, the Lord will entertain the case, and grant redress. He\nwill avenge. \"The God of peace will bruise Satan under your feet\nshortly.\"\n\nNo cry that rises from earth to heaven sounds so sweetly in the ear of\nGod as the cry for vengeance upon the enemy of souls. When there is\npeace between man and his destroyer, the closet is silent, and no groan\nof distress from the deep beats against the gate of heaven. This is not\nwhat Jesus loves. He came not to send this peace on earth, or in heaven;\nhe came to send a sword. His errand was to produce a deadly quarrel\nbetween the captive soul and the wicked one, its captivator. When the\ncry rises, broken and stifled, but eager, as uttered by one engaged in\ndeadly strife--when the cry, \"Avenge me,\" rises from earth, God in\nheaven hears it well pleased. He delights when his people, hating the\nadversary of their souls, ask him for vengeance; and he will grant it.\nLong to the struggling combatant the battle seems to last, but speedily,\naccording to God's just reckoning, the avenging stroke will fall. If\nthere is delay it is but for a moment, and because this added moment of\nconflict will make the everlasting victory more sweet.\n\nIt is worthy of notice, incidentally, that where an indolent judge, in\norder to avoid trouble, gives a just sentence to-day, he may, from the\nsame motive, give an unjust sentence to-morrow. He who taught this\nlesson, knowing all that should befall himself, and hastening forward to\nhis final suffering, knew well that deepest sorrow may spring from the\nselfishness of an unjust judge which happened for that time to bring\ndeliverance to the widow. Pilate was precisely such a magistrate.\nNeither fear of God nor regard for man was the ultimate reason that\ndetermined his decision: the love of his own ease and safety was the\nhinge on which his judgment turned. He was disposed to do justly rather\nthan unjustly in the case, when the Jewish rulers dragged Jesus to his\nbar. He would have pronounced a righteous judgment if that course had\nseemed to promise greater or equal advantage to himself. But the priests\nand people were, like this widow, very importunate and persevering.\n\"Crucify him, crucify him,\" they cried. \"Why, what evil hath he done?\"\n\"Crucify him, crucify him,\" rose again in a sound like the voice of many\nwaters from the heaving throng. \"Shall I release Jesus?\" interposed the\nirresolute Pilate; \"Away with this man, and give us Barabbas,\" was the\ninstant reply. \"Shall I crucify your king?\" said Pilate, making yet\nanother effort to escape the toils that were closing round him; but this\nfence laid him open to the heaviest blow of all: \"If thou let this man\ngo, thou art not Caesar's friend.\" He gave way at last: by their\ncontinual coming they wearied him, and he abandoned the innocent to\ntheir will.\n\nThus the unjust as well as the just judgment seat has two sides. Jesus\ngave the safe side to the poor widow, and accepted the other for\nhimself. He became poor that we might be rich: he was condemned that we\nmight be set free.\n\n\n\n\nXXIX.\n\nTHE PHARISEE AND THE PUBLICAN.\n\n\n\"And he spake this parable unto certain which trusted in themselves that\n they were righteous, and despised others: Two men went up into the\n temple to pray; the one a Pharisee, and the other a publican. The\n Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee, that\n I am not as other men are, extortioners, unjust, adulterers, or even\n as this publican. I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all\n that I possess. And the publican, standing afar off, would not lift\n up so much as his eyes unto heaven, but smote upon his breast,\n saying, God be merciful to me a sinner. I tell you, this man went\n down to his house justified rather than the other: for every one\n that exalteth himself shall be abased; and he that humbleth himself\n shall be exalted.\"--LUKE xviii. 9-14.\n\nIn this parable two great classes are represented, not by symbols, but\nby specimens. Self-righteous men are here represented by a\nself-righteous man, and repenting sinners by a repenting sinner. The\ninstruction is communicated, not obliquely by a figure, but directly by\na fact. The quality of the harvest is shown by samples taken from the\nheap.\n\nIf allegory were deemed an essential ingredient of a parable, this\nlesson of the Lord would necessarily be excluded from the list; but I am\nnot disposed to adopt such a narrow and artificial definition. Taking a\ngeneral view of its substance, rather than making a minute inspection of\nits form, I accept the Pharisee and the publican as a parable according\nto the common consent of the Church.\n\nIt is almost entirely free from critical and exegetical difficulties: he\nmay run who reads its lesson.\n\nIn announcing the class of persons for whose reproof it was spoken, the\nevangelist at the outset supplies us with a key that opens all its\nmeaning:--\"Certain which trusted in themselves that they were righteous\nand despised others,\" were clustering round the Teacher, and mingling\nwith his disciples. He spoke this parable for the purpose of crushing\ntheir pride: he will not suffer sin upon them. For their instruction and\nreproof, these examples are selected and described.\n\nIt is not necessary to suppose that the parable pointed exclusively to\nthose who were Pharisees, or exclusively to those who were not: it\nconcerned all who were self-righteous, to whatever sect they externally\nbelonged. We know that within the circle of Christ's devoted followers\nmuch of this spirit still lingered. Peter enumerated the sacrifices\nwhich he and his comrades had made for their Master, and bluntly\ndemanded what reward they might expect for their fidelity. It is\nexpressly to his own disciples that the Lord, on another occasion,\naddresses the warning, \"Beware of the leaven of the Pharisees, which is\nhypocrisy.\" For our benefit, then, even though we be true\nChristians--for our benefit, and not only for some particular sect, is\nthis instruction given.\n\n\"Two men went up into the temple to pray.\" The temple was the\nacknowledged place of prayer; to it the devout Jews went at the hour of\nprayer, if they were near; toward it they looked if they were distant.\nThe appointment was a help to prayer in the preparatory dispensation: it\nwould be a hindrance if it were maintained still. Not in that one place,\nbut in all places, the true worshippers pray to the Father.\n\n\"The one a Pharisee, and the other a publican.\" The two characters are\nrepresented in deep relief: there is no confusion, and no ambiguity.\nEach is exhibited in his own colour, and the two are sharply\ndistinguished from each other.\n\nNor are these two men in all their features diverse: there are points of\nlikeness as well as of difference. It is as profitable to observe\nwherein they are like as wherein they are unlike. The distinction does\nnot lie in that the one was good while the other was bad: both were\nevil, and perhaps it would be safe to say, both alike evil. In the end,\nthe one was a sinner forgiven, and the other a sinner unforgiven; but at\nthe beginning both and both equally were sinners. Their sins as to\noutward form were diverse; but in essential character the sinfulness was\nin both the same. The Pharisee said and did not; the publican neither\nsaid nor did. The Pharisee pretended to a righteousness which he did not\npossess; the publican neither professed righteousness nor possessed it.\nWhile one maintained the form of godliness, but denied its power, the\nother denied both the form and the power of godliness. At first there is\nnothing to determine our choice between the two men as to their state\nbefore God: the one was a hypocrite, and the other a worldling. Both\nalike need pardon, and to both alike pardon is offered in the Gospel.\n\"The blood of Christ cleanseth us from all sin;\" but no effort of our\nown will cleanse us from any. With the forgiveness that comes through\nChrist, the Pharisee would have been accepted; but wanting it, the\npublican would have been cast out. The hinge on which the essential\ndistinction between these two men turned was not the different\nquantities of sin which they had severally committed, but the opposite\ngrounds on which they severally placed their trust.[96]\n\n [96] There is a strong resemblance between this pair and the two\n sons who were severally asked by their father to work in his\n vineyard.--Parable X.\n\nBoth go at the same time to the same place to pray, and both adopt in\nthe main the same attitude in this exercise; they stood while they\nprayed. This was the ordinary attitude; but kneeling and prostration\nwere also practised. Each of these postures has its own peculiar\nappropriateness; either is a seemly and a Scriptural method of bringing\nthe position of the body into significant harmony with the desire of the\nsoul. Among those attitudes which are true and right, we are at liberty\nto adopt that which is in our circumstances most convenient and seemly.\nAlas! there has always been a tendency in man to lay a yoke upon himself\nand his fellow. Why should we judge one another where our Master has\nleft us free? We may safely lay it down as an absolute rule, without\nstipulating for even a single exception, that the best position for\npraying in is the position in which we can best pray.[97]\n\n [97] This question has begun of late to attract a considerable\n measure of attention in the Presbyterian Churches of this country.\n It needs a wise treatment, and, alas! we lack wisdom. For\n convenience and order, all the members of a worshipping assembly\n ought evidently to adopt the same method; but this is not a matter\n for arbitrary ecclesiastical enactment. The Pharisee and the\n publican both stood while they prayed; but their prayers seem to\n have been short. To enact that the congregation must stand during\n prayer, and then to keep them praying for twenty minutes or\n half-an-hour, which is sometimes done, seems to be in effect turning\n prayer into penance.\n\n\"The Pharisee stood and prayed thus with himself, God, I thank thee,\"\n&c. Those expositors are probably right who think that \"with himself\" is\nconnected with \"stood,\" rather than \"prayed.\" It is in perfect accord\nwith the narrative to intimate that he stood by himself--he was not the\nman to mingle with the common herd of worshippers; but it does not seem\ncongruous to intimate that he prayed with himself. His prayer is\naddressed to God; he has no doubt much to do with himself while he\nutters it, but so has his neighbour the publican. As much as the proud\nman deals with himself to contemplate his own goodness during prayer, so\nmuch does the humble man deal with himself to contemplate his own\nbadness. It is not then intimated that he prayed by himself, but that he\nstood by himself while he was praying. He counted that he belonged to\nthe aristocracy in the kingdom of God, and must get a position apart\nfrom the multitude.[98]\n\n [98] [Greek: Statheis pros eauton], standing by himself, as if it\n were [Greek: kath' eauton]. Thus the relation is preserved with the\n position of the publican, [Greek: makrothen estos]. Either stood\n alone, but for opposite reasons: the Pharisee stood forward alone,\n because he thought other worshippers were not fit to be in his\n company; the publican stood back alone, because he considered\n himself unworthy to mingle with other worshippers. It may be worth\n while to mention, for the sake of the English reader, the order of\n the words in the original is, \"The Pharisee standing with himself,\n thus prayed.\" You must be guided entirely by the sense in\n determining whether to read it, Standing with himself, thus prayed;\n or standing, with himself thus prayed.\n\nIn yet one other point the two suppliants are like each other; both\nalike look into their own hearts and lives; and both permit the judgment\nthus formed to determine the form and matter of their prayer. Both\naddressed themselves to the work of self-examination, and the prayers\nthat follow are the fruits of their research.\n\nAt this point the two men part company, and move in opposite\ndirections--the one found in himself only good, the other found in\nhimself only evil. In both, and in both alike, there was only evil; but\nthe publican discovered and confessed the truth regarding himself, while\nthe Pharisee either blindly failed to see his own sin, or falsely\nrefused to confess it.\n\nThe error of the Pharisee does not lie in the form or matter of his\nprayer. It is substantially a song of thanksgiving. This is never out of\nplace; praise is comely. There is not a living man on the earth who has\nnot ground for giving praise to God every day, and all day. Nor does his\nprayer necessarily transgress the strict limits of truth when he says,\n\"God, I thank thee that I am not as other men.\" If he had been employed\nin numbering the mercies of God--if he had meditated on his privileges,\ntill he was lost in wonder, that so many benefits had been conferred on\none so worthless, he might with truth have burst into the exclamation,\n\"I am not as other men.\" As a true penitent, when employed in\nconsidering his own sin, truly describes himself as the chief of\nsinners; so a thankful man, lost in the multitude of God's mercies,\nthinks in all simplicity that none in all the world have been so highly\nfavoured as himself. From his own view-point a true worshipper truly\ncounts both his sins and his mercies greater than those of other men.\nWhen he confesses his sins he counts and calls them deeper than those of\nothers; when he recounts the benefits he has received from God, he says\nthat they are greater than others have enjoyed. Glad praise and weeping\nconfession correspond to each other in a true heart, as correspond the\nheight of the sky and the depth of its shadow in still waters. When the\nclouds above you become high, the shadow of them beneath you becomes\ncorrespondingly deep. The same man who said, \"I am chief of sinners,\"\nsaid also, \"Thanks be to God for his unspeakable gift.\"\n\nIt is not, then, for what he has said that the Pharisee is condemned,\neven when he announces that he is not as other men. If conscious of\nunworthiness, and amazed at God's long-suffering, he had exclaimed, I am\nnot like other men--I have been spared and instructed, and invited and\ntaught and led with a paternal tenderness that others do not enjoy, his\nthanksgiving would have been sweet incense as it rose to the throne of\nthe Most High. He presumes to give thanks not for what he has received,\nbut for what he is and does. Here lies his condemnation. It is not in\nthe thanks but in the reason for the thanks that the old serpent lurks;\nhe is delighted not with what God has graciously bestowed on him, but\nwith what he has meritoriously given to God.\n\nThe sense in the original is more comprehensive than that which the\nEnglish conveys; other men here mean all others. On one side he places\nhimself, and on the other side the rest of human kind: the result of the\ncomparison in his judgment is that he is better than all.\n\nThree of the more articulate and manifest forms of wickedness he\nenumerates, in order by the contrast to set forth his own purity.\n\"Extortioners\" are officials having a right to something, who unjustly\nforce from an oppressed people more than is due; the \"unjust\" are those\nwho deal unfairly in the ordinary intercourse of life; and adulterers\nare, in fact, and were then accounted the deepest and most daring\ntransgressors of the laws both human and divine. Probably the Pharisee\nwas in point of fact free in his conduct from all these vices; there is\nnothing in the parable that forbids us in these matters to take him at\nhis word.\n\nInstead of extending the list of vices of which he felt himself free, he\ncuts the matter short by a general comparison between himself and the\npublican. The contempt in which the tax-farmers were held by the\nstricter Jews shines out in every page of the Gospel, and is well\nunderstood by the readers of the Scriptures. By way of purging himself\nfrom sin in the lump, he says shortly, \"I am not as this publican.\" In\norder to condemn the Pharisee on this point, it is not necessary to\nsuppose that he made a wrong estimate of his neighbour. Granted that\nthis publican had up to this hour been stained with all these three\nvices, and that the Pharisee, knowing his character, formed a correct\njudgment regarding it; still his condemnation remains the same; it is\nnot the part of one sinner to judge and condemn another.\n\n\"I fast twice in the week, I give tithes of all that I possess,\"--all\nthat I acquire; it is not capital but income. It is a picture of mere\nself-righteousness. His judgment was wrong from the root; he knew\nneither his own heart nor God's law. Pharisee as he was, he might have\nlearned from the prophet Isaiah the true state of the case, \"We are all\nas an unclean thing; and all our righteousnesses are as filthy\nrags.\"[99]\n\n [99] He obtained this self-confidence by comparing himself not with\n the law of God, but with others who seemed worse than himself. When\n a man compares himself with robbers and adulterers, for whom the\n sword and the prison are prepared, he may easily seem to himself\n like an angel.--_Arndt_.\n\n\"The publican standing afar off,\" &c. The difference does not lie in\nthat this was a good man while the other was bad. This is a sinner too;\nbut he has come to know it, and therein lies the distinction between him\nand the Pharisee. His judgment of himself accords with his actual state\nand character; he knows and owns the truth regarding his own sinfulness.\nThere is no merit in this discovery, and in itself it cannot save. If\ntwo men should both take poison, and one of them should become aware of\nthe fact ere the poison had time to operate; the one who knows the truth\nis more miserable than the one who is ignorant, but not more safe. If\nthere be a physician within reach who can cure, the knowledge of his\ndanger will send one man to the source of help, while the ignorance of\nthe other will keep him lingering where he is, till it is too late to\nflee. But even in that case it was not the man's knowledge of his danger\nthat saved him. Another saved him; his knowledge of his own need only\nled him to a deliverer.\n\nIt is so here. There is no merit and no salvation in the publican's\nconviction and confession; although he confesses his sin, he is still a\nsinner. His own tears are not the fountain in which his guilt can be\nwashed away. If there were no Saviour, his penitence would do him no\ngood; if Christ had not come to save the lost, the lost, though alarmed,\nwould not have been saved.\n\nIf we take care to notice that there was neither merit nor safety in the\nman's confession, we may profitably listen to the confession, and learn\nwhat it was.\n\n\"He stood afar off.\" Here we begin to observe external marks of an\ninward penitence; he judged and condemned himself. He had the same right\nwith other worshippers to come near; but a consciousness of his\nuncleanness before God compelled him to take the lowest place even among\nmen. Such was the tenderness of his spirit, that he thought everybody\nbetter than himself. Humility is the exact opposite of pride; as the one\nman counted himself better than all, the other counted himself worse\nthan all. When he obtained a sight of his own vileness before God, his\nfeeling was that even his brother would be polluted by his presence. As\nlove of God, when we have tasted his grace, carries love to men after\nit, like a shadow; so shame before God, because of sin in his sight,\ndiffuses humility and modesty through the spirit and conduct in the\nordinary intercourse of life.\n\nHe was unwilling to lift up his eyes to heaven. He looked down to the\nearth; but his heart was rising up to heaven the while. His eyes could\nnot bear at that moment to look, as it were, on the light of the great\nwhite throne; but his soul ascended, and pressed with violence on the\ngate of the kingdom. Against that strait gate his spirit is now\nstriving; the King of glory from within feels the pressure well pleased,\nand opens to let the agonizer in. \"Smote upon his breast;\" it is like\nother signs of grace, precious if it is true, worthless when it is\nfalse. A worshipper will not be heard for his much beating, any more\nthan for his much speaking: but when it is the true external symptom of\na broken heart within, the knocking on his own breast is reckoned a\nknocking at the gate of heaven. To him that knocketh at this lower gate,\nthe highest will be opened.\n\nHis prayer was short and suitable; \"God be merciful to me, the sinner\"\n([Greek: to hamartolo]). The contrast continues to the last; as the\nPharisee had compared himself with all mankind, and concluded that he\nalone was good; so the Publican in the depth of his shame seems to\ncount himself the only sinner.\n\nThe steps are few and simple by which a sinner finds or misses the way\ninto eternal life. Not perceiving his own sin, a Pharisee comes to God,\nas one who deserves favour; he seeks to enter heaven where the wall of\nrighteousness frowns in his face, and is cast away. The publican,\nconscious of his unworthiness, counting himself altogether evil, flees\nfrom his own sin to God's provided mercy; he tries where the door is\nopen, and passes in a moment through. I tell you, \"This man went down to\nhis house justified,\" &c.; he, but not the other.[100] The Pharisee\nforgave himself; who is this that forgiveth sin? and who is this whose\nsins he forgives? He asked no forgiveness from God, and got none. He\ndeparted from the temple as full and satisfied, or rather as empty and\npoor, as he entered it. For aught that we learn to the contrary, he went\non, tithing his mint, anise, and cummin,--went on blindfold till he\nstumbled on the judgment-seat.\n\n [100] He brought with him, what the Pharisee left at home, the book\n of his own guilt, and exhibited all that stood against him\n there.--_Arndt_.\n\nThe penitent Publican went down to his house a justified man; he sat in\nthe circle of his family, retired to rest at night, rose in the morning\nto his labour, at peace with God. On the morrow he looked on the\nsun-light without being in terror of the mighty One whose word had made\nit shine; he walked abroad on the fields, in conscious, loving\ncompanionship with Him who spread them out and covered them with green;\nhe looked from the mountain-side on the great sea when \"it wrought and\nwas tempestuous,\" the confiding child of Him who holds its waters in the\nhollow of his hand; and when again he laid his head upon the pillow for\nrest to his wearied body, he laid his soul on the love of his Saviour,\nas an infant leans on a mother's breast. When the hand that led him\nthrough the wilderness leads him at length down the dark sides of the\nswelling Jordan, he looks up with languid eye, but bright, burning\nspirit, and whispers to his guide, \"I will not fear, for Thou art with\nme;\" when the judgment is set and the books are opened, he stands before\nthe Judge in white clothing, accepted in the Beloved; the voice of the\nEternal, tenderly human, yet clothed with divine authority, utters the\nwelcome,--\"Come, thou blessed of my Father, inherit the kingdom.\"\n\n\n\n\nXXX.\n\nTHE SERVANTS AND THE POUNDS.\n\n\n\"And as they heard these things, he added and spake a parable, because\n he was nigh to Jerusalem, and because they thought that the kingdom\n of God should immediately appear. He said therefore, A certain\n nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a kingdom,\n and to return. And he called his ten servants, and delivered them\n ten pounds, and said unto them, Occupy till I come. But his citizens\n hated him, and sent a message after him, saying, We will not have\n this man to reign over us. And it came to pass, that when he was\n returned, having received the kingdom, then he commanded these\n servants to be called unto him, to whom he had given the money, that\n he might know how much every man had gained by trading. Then came\n the first, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained ten pounds. And he\n said unto him, Well, thou good servant: because thou hast been\n faithful in a very little, have thou authority over ten cities. And\n the second came, saying, Lord, thy pound hath gained five pounds.\n And he said likewise to him, Be thou also over five cities. And\n another came, saying, Lord, behold, here is thy pound, which I have\n kept laid up in a napkin: for I feared thee, because thou art an\n austere man: thou takest up that thou layedst not down, and reapest\n that thou didst not sow. And he saith unto him, Out of thine own\n mouth will I judge thee, thou wicked servant. Thou knewest that I\n was an austere man, taking up that I laid not down, and reaping that\n I did not sow: wherefore then gavest not thou my money into the\n bank, that at my coming I might have required mine own with usury?\n And he said unto them that stood by, Take from him the pound, and\n give it to him that hath ten pounds. (And they said unto him, Lord,\n he hath ten pounds.) For I say unto you, That unto every one which\n hath shall be given: and from him that hath not, even that he hath\n shall be taken away from him. But those mine enemies, which would\n not that I should reign over them, bring hither, and slay them\n before me.\"--LUKE xix. 11-27.\n\nIt is necessary at the outset to indicate the relation which subsists\nbetween this parable and that of the talents, (Matt. xxv). Although in\nmany of their features they are the same, in others there is a decisive\ndifference. Both show that the Lord bestows privileges on his servants,\nand demands faithfulness in return; and both show that the diligent are\nrewarded and the unprofitable condemned. But the one supposes a case, in\nwhich all the servants receive equal privileges, and shows that even\nthose of them who are faithful, may be unequal as to the amount of their\nsuccess; the other supposes a case in which unequal privileges are\nbestowed upon the servants, and shows that when unequal gifts are\nemployed with equal diligence, the approval is equal in the day of\naccount. Both alike exhibit the grand cardinal distinction between the\nfaithful and the faithless; but in pointing out also the diversities\nthat obtain among true disciples, they view the subject from opposite\nsides, each presenting that aspect of it which the other omits. The\nparable of the talents teaches that Christians differ from each other in\nthe amount of gifts which they receive; and the parable of the pounds\nteaches that they differ from each other in the diligence which they\ndisplay.[101]\n\n [101] The man who cannot perceive, or will not own that these are\n two distinct cases, charged with different, though cognate lessons,\n is not fit to be an expositor of any writing, either sacred or\n profane. Enough for the critics who persist in the theory, that\n these two parables are different, and consequently incorrect,\n reports of one discourse spoken only once by the Lord; the conceit\n is not worthy of more minute refutation.\n\nThe incident connected with Zaccheus, although it occurred on the spot\nand at the moment, did not, I think, supply the occasion of this\nparable, and does not contain the key of its meaning. The Lord's\ninterview with that interesting and earnest tax-farmer in the\nneighbourhood of Jericho rather constituted an episodical interruption\nto the continuity of his thought and the narrative of his journey. He\nhad passed through Jericho on his way to Jerusalem for the last time. An\nexpectation, intense in character though vague in outline, was spreading\nthrough the neighbourhood, that great events would emerge on his\narrival at the capital. It was the crowd already on this account\nassembled that gave prominence to the case of Zaccheus. It is not from\nthat episode that the parable springs; rather, when the interruption\nwhich it caused was over, the current of thought, displaced for a\nmoment, returns to its former channel, and flows as it had flowed\nbefore. The crowd had assembled before the conversation with Zaccheus\ntook place, and the cause of the excitement was the expectation that\n\"the kingdom of God should immediately appear.\" It was on account of\nthis expectation that the parable was spoken. The purpose of the Lord\nwas to correct the popular impression in as far as it was erroneous, and\nto turn it to account in as far as it contained a basis of truth. They\nexpected that Jesus was about to proclaim himself king, and occupy\nDavid's throne at Jerusalem: he teaches them by the parable that his\nkingdom is not of this world--that he, the king, will depart from their\nsight for a while, and that it behoves his subjects to occupy their\ntalents and opportunities till he return.\n\n\"A certain nobleman went into a far country to receive for himself a\nkingdom, and to return.\" His errand when he went abroad was not to seek\na kingdom in another quarter of the world, but to obtain from a foreign\npower nomination to the sovereignty of his native land. In the first\nplace, it is not probable that, after having become king of another\ncountry, he would return to reside where he was only a subject; but a\nmuch more decisive indication is given by the message which his\nfellow-citizens sent after him, \"We will not have this man to reign over\nus.\" They do not interfere with his prospects in a foreign country; it\nis his sovereignty over themselves that they dread and deprecate. This\noutspoken repudiation of his government by his fellow-citizens makes it\nboth certain and manifest that, though he sought investiture abroad, the\nkingdom which he expected to receive was in his own native land, and\nover his former fellow-citizens.\n\nIn those days both the Jews and other nations subject to the supremacy\nof Rome were familiar with the transaction which forms the basis of this\nparable. After the nobleman's departure, his countrymen, aware of his\ndesign, endeavoured to thwart it. With this view they sent a message, or\nrather an embassy ([Greek: presbeian]) after him; they commissioned some\nof their own number to appear along with him before the power paramount,\nand oppose his claim. It is a mistake to suppose that the protest of\nthese citizens was addressed to the nobleman who sought to become their\nking; the deputies are instructed to address themselves not to him, but\nto the foreign power from whom he intends to seek investiture. They will\nappear at court along with him when his petition is presented, and plead\nthat it may be rejected. Such debates were in point of fact held before\nthe republican and imperial tribunals of Rome.[102]\n\n [102] Herod and his son Archelaus had both in succession repaired\n personally to Rome to obtain their authority. Precisely similar\n scenes are enacted between the British government and the protected\n potentates of India; the agents for rival princes contend for regal\n rights in London, where the government of India is in the last\n resort controlled.\n\nBefore setting out on his journey \"he called his ten servants,\" &c.\nThese men were his servants or slaves. In different countries, and at\ndifferent times, the bond of servitude has been indefinitely varied both\nin stringency and duration. In all probability these servants were the\nbondsmen of the nobleman, although law and practice might not accord to\nthe owner a power so absolute as that with which we are too familiar in\nmodern slavery. But the more nearly that the master's rights approached\nthe point of absolute ownership of property, the more suitable becomes\nthe picture to represent the relation that subsists between the\nredeeming Lord and his ransomed people.[103]\n\n [103] It is altogether a mistake to conclude from the allusions made\n here and elsewhere in the Scriptures to the actually existing\n servitude of the times and places, that any modern system of slavery\n may claim the sanction of divine approval. It was the custom of\n Jesus to seize existing facts on the right and on the left as they\n lay around, and employ them as vehicles for conveying his meaning.\n Sometimes he so employed a good thing, and sometimes a bad thing,\n but by the mere fact of using a human act or habit as a metaphor, he\n pronounced no judgment regarding its moral character. It was enough\n for him that the thing was well known, and that it served as a\n letter with which he might indicate his mind. Printers make their\n types of any material that may be most suitable for the purpose, and\n most readily obtained; and with these types they multiply the\n Scriptures. They use a cheap mixture of lead and tin; and this base\n alloy serves their purpose better than more precious metals. Their\n only question in determining the choice of material is, Will it\n print our meaning clearly? Thus the Lord Jesus dealt with the habits\n which he found in society, and the events that were passing at the\n time. He selected and employed them with a regard not to their own\n intrinsic moral worth but to their fitness for expressing the idea\n which he meant to convey. No matter whether it be lead or gold; what\n he wanted was material suitable for types. A steward has no\n Scriptural warrant for cheating his master, because the trick of an\n astute agent is employed to print one of the parables; neither have\n men-stealers, men-sellers, and men-buyers any authority from the\n Bible to treat their fellow-men like cattle, because the relation of\n master and slave was employed by the Lord to express a conception in\n the course of his teaching.\n\nThis nobleman, desiring that no part of his property or capital should\nlie unproductive during his absence, made the best arrangement, of which\nthe circumstances admitted, before he left the country. His method was\nthe same as that which appears in the cognate parable, the entrusted\ntalents, with the exception that in this case the master made all his\nservants equal. A mina, in value equal to about L2, 3s. 6d., was\nentrusted to each man, with the intimation that, according to his\ndiligence and faithfulness in the management of this capital, would be\nhis reward when the owner should return.[104]\n\n [104] For fuller notice of the methods adopted, see the exposition\n of the corresponding parable No. XIV.\n\nSuch is the arrangement which this nobleman made with those who are\ndescribed as \"his own servants,\" on the eve of his departure; but with\nhis neighbours, who were free and independent, he had either neglected\nto seek, or failed to obtain, an understanding. Aware of his object,\nthey sent after him a deputation of their own number, instructed to\nappear along with him at the imperial court, and oppose his request.\nThey were not willing to become his subjects, and therefore endeavoured\nto prevent him from obtaining a regal title and despotic power.\n\nTheir opposition, however, had no other effect than to betray their\nenmity, and so expose them to the King's displeasure. His first act\nafter he returned with supreme authority was to call his servants into\nhis presence, and reward them according to their merits; and his second,\nto issue an order for the punishment of those who had opposed his\nelevation. The remaining portion of the scene is so similar to the\ncorresponding parts of the cognate parable already expounded, that it is\nunnecessary to trace the narrative further; rather let us hasten now to\nascertain and enforce the spiritual lesson from the whole.\n\nWhile the Master was setting his face towards Jerusalem for the last\ntime, a dim presentiment of coming change occupied his disciples. In\ntheir minds, the expectation of his kingdom had taken a wrong direction,\nand tended to put them off their guard. To correct their error, and bind\nthem to patient watchfulness, he spoke this parable. Because they\nimagined he was about to assume kingly power, and give them places of\ntemporal dignity on his right hand and on his left, he taught them by\nthis similitude, that he must go away, and that they must remain behind,\nworking and watching.\n\nThe nobleman represents the Lord himself. While he prosecuted his\nministry on earth, he had not fully attained possession of the kingdom.\nThe departure of the nobleman represents the exodus which the Lord soon\nafterwards accomplished at Jerusalem, comprising his death,\nresurrection, and ascension. In the parable, the power paramount who\ncould withhold or bestow a kingdom is not named: it is intimated only\nthat this transaction took place out of sight in a far country. When the\nSon of God ascended after his mediatorial work on earth was complete,\nall power was given to him in heaven and on earth. Beyond his disciples'\nsight he received the kingdom from the Father. Now he has right to rule\nsupreme over that world, on which before he had not where to lay his\nhead. He will come to this world again as its King, with power and great\nglory.\n\nTwo classes of persons are mentioned as having remained in the country\nwhile the prince was absent:--these are his servants and his\nadversaries. In the material scene, there might be many who neither\nserved nor opposed him; but these are not mentioned in the parable,\nbecause there are none to correspond with them on the spiritual side.\nThere only two classes exist,--those who serve Christ as the Lord that\nbought them, and those who, being at enmity with God, refuse to obey the\nGospel of his Son.\n\nThe parable has not much to do with them that are without. At the\nbeginning, it shortly indicates their rebellion, and at the close as\nshortly predicts their doom; but the circumstances, the character, the\nlife, and the reward of the Lord's disciples are more expressly and\nmore fully declared.\n\nThe master who owns them places some of his treasures at their disposal,\nand with the general injunction, \"Occupy,\" goes out of their sight. The\nservants are those who, at least in profession, are the disciples of\nChrist, and the pounds are the faculties which they possess, and the\nopportunities which they enjoy. The place and age in which our lot has\nbeen cast, our early education, our bodily members and mental powers,\nour station in society and the circle of our homes, our money and our\nhealth, and, in addition, the graces of the Spirit, in whatever measure\nthey may have been conferred,--all that we are and have belongs to God.\nHe is the owner, and we are tenants at will.\n\nWhile a general law has been laid down to determine, in the main, the\ndirection of our course, the details are left to our own discretion. One\nman may invest his master's capital in land, and another in merchandise,\nand both may be equally faithful, equally successful: so in various\nlines of effort, different disciples may, in diverse manners, but with\nequal faithfulness, serve the Lord. There is freedom in the choice of\ndepartments, provided always there be loyalty to the King.\n\nIn the relation between Christ and Christians, opposites meet without\nhostile collision. His ownership is absolute, and yet there is freedom\nin full. His lordship does not limit their liberty; their liberty does\nnot infringe his rights. What a glorious liberty this earth-ball enjoys!\nHow it careers along through space, threading its way through thronging\nworlds, and giving each a safe wide berth in the ocean of the infinite!\nYet the sun holds the earth all the while in absolute and entire\ncontrol. Like that glory in the visible heavens is the glory of the\nEverlasting Covenant. The largest liberty conceded to the sons of God\nconsists with sovereignty complete and constant exercised over them by\nthe Redeemer, who bought them with his blood. He is their owner, and yet\nthey are free. The union of opposites is possible with God: \"He is\nwonderful in counsel, and excellent in working.\"\n\nThe sons serve; and yet they are sons. Ransomed men are instruments of a\nhigher order, than other agencies through which the reign of Providence\nis administered. Although the Lord requires of his regenerated people as\ncomplete submission to his law, as he demands and obtains from the\nelements of nature and the brutes that perish, he does not require from\nthem an equally uniform and mechanical routine. The streams that course\nover continents, and the tides that swell upon their shores, must render\nthe same service every day; but these sons of God are not held to labour\nby a bridle so short and rigid. They are endowed with reason and will;\nthey are set at liberty, and permitted to expatiate over a wider field.\nTheir master goes out of sight, and trusts to a renewed, loving heart\nfor the diligent outlay and faithful return of all the talents. The\nGospel requires and generates not a legal, but an evangelical obedience.\n\nWhen the king returns, or the servants are summoned one by one through\ndeath to meet their master, they are tried as to faithfulness and\ndiligence in laying out their talents. Although ten were mentioned at\nthe beginning, it is not necessary to report on more than three at the\nclose. These are sufficient to show that some were diligent, and some\nslothful; and that among the diligent there were different measures of\neffort, success, and reward.\n\nWhat hast thou that thou didst not receive? Occupy; occupy all, and\noccupy it all the time till the Giver come to claim his own. All that\nGod gives us is given for use. There is much evil, moral and material,\nin the world. He who made it and saw it fall by sin, has its restoration\nand renewal much at heart. When he has gotten some of the fallen\nrestored to favour and renewed in spirit, he endows them with various\nriches from his own treasury, that the capital wisely invested may yield\na large return at his coming. Let each according to his means and\nopportunity lay himself and his talents out to leave the world better\nthan he found it;--to diminish the amount of sin and suffering, to feed\nhungry mouths, and cover naked backs, to enlighten dark minds and save\nperishing souls. It is a high calling to be fellow-workers with God, to\nbe instruments of righteousness in his hands.\n\nOne, by trading with his pound gained ten, before the king returned, and\nanother five. Both are equally approved, but unequally rewarded; each\nreceives as his recompense all that he had won. Two principles which\noperate in the spiritual kingdom are symbolized here; one, that various\ndegrees of efficiency and success obtain among the faithful disciples of\nChrist; another that reward in his kingdom springs from work and is\nproportioned to it.\n\nThe parable of the talents recorded by Matthew represented one fact in\nthe history of the kingdom, that different persons receive differing\ngifts from the sovereign God: this parable, recorded by Luke, represents\nanother fact in the history of the kingdom, that among those who possess\nequal gifts varieties occur in the skill and success with which the\ngifts are employed. The practical lesson from the former parable is, If\nwith all your efforts you fall far behind your neighbour in the result\nof your labour, you need not on that account be cast down, for equal\ndiligence will meet equal approval, whether it be applied to a large\ncapital or a small; the lesson of the latter parable is, If others are\nobtaining greater results than you, strive to imitate and equal them,\nlest your opportunity not have having been fully occupied, you should\nobtain at last only a small reward. The first puts in a spring to keep\nthe truly faithful from sinking into despondency because their talents\nare few; and the second puts in a spring to keep the indolent from\nlagging behind. The two together, one on this side and one on that, shut\nall up to diligence in the work of the Lord.\n\nA glimpse is given here of the method in which rewards are bestowed upon\nfaithful servants; each receives what he has won. The work of the saved\nin their Master's service measures in some way their recompense at their\nMaster's side. In all cases the wages given, seeing they depend on the\nmerits of the Mediator, must be immeasureably greater than the work\ndone; but it would appear that the differences which shall obtain in\nheaven will bear some proportion to the productiveness of the service\nhere: the whole continent will be elevated as by the immediate power of\nGod: but certain points will stand out above others in the celestial\nlandscape on account of great talents greatly used. How much a city is\ngreater in value than a pound we cannot calculate exactly, but the\ndifference represents the gain that all the true servants will make at\nthe coming of the king. All the faithful are made great; but the\ngreatest worker is the greatest winner when the accounts are closed.\nHold on, disciples; every grace that grows into strength, through\nbearing and doing your Redeemer's will here, is a seed that will\nmultiply your enjoyment manifold when you come to the inheritance.\nNor is this a mercenary motive. A true Christian can never separate his\ninterests from Christ: he serves his Lord in love to-day, and will\ndiscover at last that in serving his Lord, he has been enriching\nhimself.\n\nThe case of the servant who allowed his pound to lie unused is not\ndifferent from the corresponding case in the parable of the talents\nexcept in one thing; in this parable the pound which the indolent\nservant had permitted to lie idle is simply taken out of his hands,\nwhile, in the other parable, the unprofitable servant is cast into outer\ndarkness.\n\nThe lesson, in as far as it is the same in both, is, that not only those\nwho do positive wickedness, but those also who fail to do good, are\ncounted guilty in God's sight. Inasmuch as in this parable no other\npunishment is inflicted on the indolent servant than the deprivation of\nhis capital, it may possibly be intended to intimate that culpable\nunfaithfulness in a true believer may sometimes descend so far as to be\nundistinguishable by human eyes from the entire neglect of the\nunbelieving. There is, however, in all cases, a dividing line, although\nwe may not be able to trace it--\"the Lord knoweth them that are his.\"\nNor does this conception really weaken the motive to diligence; for if\nany one should slacken in his efforts to serve the Lord on the ground\nthat a great degree of negligence, although it may diminish his reward,\ndoes not imperil his safety, this very thing would conclusively prove\nthat he has no part in Christ. It is the nature of the new creature to\nbe forgetting the things behind, and reaching forth to those that are\nbefore; when the leaning of a man's heart goes in the opposite\ndirection--that is, when he deliberately endeavours to make matters as\npleasant as possible for himself, by escaping from all service to\nChrist, except as much as is necessary to carry him safe to heaven, he\ncertainly has not yet been born again, and in this state shall not see\nthe kingdom. He who sails along the sea of Christian profession, loving\nthe neighbouring land of worldly indulgence, and therefore hugging the\nshore as closely as he thinks consistent with safety, will certainly\nmake shipwreck. Ah! the ship that thus seeks the shore is drawn by the\nunseen power of a magnet-mountain--drawn directly to her doom; he who is\ntruly bound for the better land gives these treacherous headlands a wide\nberth.\n\nThe last lesson is the judgment pronounced and the punishment inflicted\non the adversaries. They who will not submit to Christ the crucified\nwill be crushed by Christ the king. Every eye shall see him; they also\nwho pierced him. Meekly now he stands at the door and knocks; then he\ncomes as the lightning comes.\n\nOne hope remains,--one door stands wide open yet. His enemies must be\nslain, either now or then. The enemies of the Lord's reign in the\npresent world are the evil desires that occupy a man's heart, and close\nit against its rightful sovereign; drag them forth and slay them before\nhim, that he may enter and possess his own. Surrender his enemies into\nhis hands to-day, and you will henceforth be among his friends; if sins\nbe sheltered in the day of grace, the sinners will find no shelter in\nthe day of judgment.","title":"The Parables of Our Lord","tradition":"scripture-revelation","translated_text":null,"word_count":166638}