present prudence as in conflict with other duties. Duties cannot conflict. Diverse considerations may be in our minds, recommending one course instead of another; but the course which has on its behalf the higher and the weightier claims, that it is our duty to pursue, and, as a consequence, it is equally our duty to quit and abandon the other. As conflicting duties are impossible, so rival claimants must not be allowed. The lower must always yield to the higher-pleasure to duty, sense to intellect, our animal to our spiritual nature; for 'no one can serve two masters; ye cannot serve God and Mammon' (Luke xvi. 13).

The occurrence of the word Mammon (the god of gain) leads to the thought that Jesus had been discoursing against covetousness. Of this discourse only the concluding sentence is preserved by Luke (comp. Matt. vi. 24, seq.). An indication of what is omitted is curiously found in the ensuing verse (Luke xvi. 14), where we read that 'the Pharisees, who were covetous, heard all these things, and they derided him.' Their being covetous prompted them to deride Jesus when he spoke in reproof of covetousness. Here we have a striking token of reality. Nothing in the connection is said of covetousness; yet the words lead us to believe that such had been the topic of discourse. The discourse itself is not given; but the reported accessaries imply it. It is the play of Hamlet, with Hamlet himself omitted, but omitted in the only possible manner that is to say, with such results as to show that he formed and forms an essential character in the drama. Such things are not invented: they arise in the intercourse of life, and are reported in books, passing from age to age as extracts from the great book of reality-human existence.

The Pharisees, it is said, derided Christ's doctrine. There is a moral propriety in the word. Derision is the answer made by all narrow minds to plans and measures of lofty benevolence. In their worldly wisdom, the grudging hug and flatter themselves, and laugh, as at folly, when Jesus, or those who have the same mind as was in him, discourse against covetousness and on behalf of a disinterested and self-denying course. As no one can serve two masters, so men, by paying homage to Mammon, make themselves insensible to the call of God.

With what terrible effect did the Messiah describe the unutterable folly of those who received his doctrine with derision, in the parable, apparently delivered on this occasion, of what is termed the Rich Man and Lazarus! By the former, the Jews, and especially the Jewish rulers, are intended; by the latter, the Gentiles. With a more general application, the lesson points to those adjustments of a retributory Providence which make those who laugh weep, and those who mourn rejoice, according to the eternal laws of equal justice constantly in operation, but to be exemplified and displayed on that great day when in so many cases the last will be first, and the first last (Luke xvi. 19-31).

CHAPTER X.

JESUS, AT BETHANY, RAISES LAZARUS — THE PRIESTS, ALARMED, RESOLVE ON SLAYING CHRIST, WHO ACCORDINGLY RETURNS TO EPHRAIM, AND THENCE PASSES OVER INTO PEREA, WHERE HE CONTINUES SOME TIME, TEACHING THE NATURE AND ADVENT OF THE KINGDOM OF HEAVEN-THE PARABLE OF THE UNJUST JUDGE -THE PHARISEE AND THE PUBLICAN-BLESSES LITTLE CHILDREN -THE YOUNG RULER.

Spring, A. D. 30.

While engaged in his labours of love, Jesus received intelligence that his friend Lazarus was dangerously ill. Intending to make his death an occasion for displaying the Divine power, in order that belief in himself as God's messenger might be strengthened, deepened, and diffused, he abode in Pere'a, where he was for a period of three days. Then, at the risk of his life, he went into Judea. As he drew near Be'thany, Martha, as the representative of the family, went to meet him, and announced the death of her beloved brother, and, half in grief, half in gentle reproach, declared her conviction that if Jesus had been with them, Lazarus would not have died. Mary, with her sensitive nature, sat at home indulging her melancholy. Informed, however, that Jesus had inquired for her, she hastened to him, and, falling at his feet, expressed the same conviction as that uttered by Martha. Doubtless on their loss they had discoursed, as the bereaved are apt to do, of the possibilities of the case, and had in common been led to the assurance that the presence of Jesus would have preserved their brother. They seem also to have formed another conviction, namely, that if Jesus asked God to restore Lazarus to life, he would be restored. Hence it is clear to see that Jesus was regarded in the privacy of domestic friendship not merely as a wise, good, and kind man, nor as a great moral reformer, but as the Messiah, the Son of God, who had the keys of death and the grave. Deeply afflicted at the bitter grief of the amiable and affectionate sisters, and recalling with poignant regret the happy hours he had in their society spent with Lazarus, Jesus, troubled in spirit, proceeded to the sepulchre; and when he saw it, his heart burst with a flood of tears. He offered a prayer to the Almighty, and called the sleeper from the tomb. Lazarus came forth, and, being set free from his grave-clothes, retired to his home, a living, healthful, happy

man.

O who that has been accustomed to visit the sick, the dying, and the bereaved, has not for a moment yielded to the wish that he, too, possessed a power like that employed by the Lord Jesus for the relief and joy of the household at Bethany? Vain such

a wish! yet not vain, but very precious, are the efforts of all true Christians who extract from this pathetic narrative consolation for the bruised, the wounded, or the broken heart. One Lazarus raised from the tomb has been the source of light and spiritual power to thousands of darkened and weeping homes.

Let the reader turn back to what we have said of the burial customs of the Jews (p. 161), and he will understand the circumstances under which the restoration of Lazarus took place. That he was dead, is made certain by the intentional delay of three days on the part of Christ, as well as by his head having, according to custom, been enveloped in a cloth which, used in life during prayer, was wound round the head after death. Of the manner of his rising, a false idea has been made prevalent by painters unacquainted with Eastern customs. It was not from a hole dug in the earth, and filled with soil after the interment of the corpse, that Lazarus came forth; but from the interior of a cave, where, when once erect, he had no obstacle to overcome.

This wonderful display of Divine power and love produced opposite effects, as do all God's dealings with man. Those whose hearts were ready for the reception of truth, were by faith in Jesus led into the possession of it. The wicked were hardened in their opposition, and in zealous hate reported to the Pharisees what things Jesus had done.

The Pharisees were alarmed. The great council was summoned. 'What are we about?' asked they, 'for this man doeth many miracles. If we let him alone, all will believe in him, and the Romans will come and destroy our place and nation.' And therefore he must die, not because he was an evil-doer, but for reasons of state. Oh! these considerations of policy have caused rivers of blood to flow, and inflicted innumerable ills on man. The high-priest, Caiaphas, too, has his reason, a very high reasonone which puts this policy in a very humble position. A victim, he declares, is necessary; only by human blood can the people be rescued from the ruin which so many tokens portend. A victim must be had. A final resolution was taken-Jesus must die. It now only remained to accomplish this fell design. The magistrate and the priests, with policy and superstition for their impulse, combined against 'the holy one of God,' whose remaining days were therefore few.

Before this wicked conspiracy Jesus retired. Leaving the vicinity of the capital, he went into a country near to the wilderness (of Judea), into a city called E'phraim, and there continued with his disciples' (John xi. 1-54).

This Ephraim (Ephron, Ophrah, 'a fawn,' Joshua xviii. 23; 1 Sam. xiii. 17) has with much probability been identified with the modern et-Taiyibeh, a lofty site two hours north-east of Bethel, and six hours twenty minutes north-north-east of Jerusalem.

From this place of refuge Jesus, after a time, seems to have passed over into Perea, and, going down the eastern bank of the Jordan, entered Jericho, whence he proceeded, through Bethany, on his last visit up to Jerusalem. During the interval he continued his instructions, labouring to sow broad-cast over the land the seeds of divine truth, that when at length he had perished in the capital, they might spring up and bear increase a hundred-fold. What were the lessons which he gave, or what incidents took place in this interval, it is not easy to determine with exactitude. But the materials supplied by the evangelists bear the stamp of the Saviour's character, though some of them may not now be easily assigned to the place which they originally occupied. Their position is a very small matter in comparison with their intrinsic worth. Leaving, not without gratitude for what they have effected, the critics to discuss, and, if they can, to settle these lesser points, we ask the reader to pass on with us to study the divine greatness of the Saviour of mankind in a few more displays of his moral perfection.

The end was now drawing near. When would the predicted kingdom of God come? The question was put to Jesus in no friendly spirit by Pharisees. Little did they understand either its nature, its advent, or its effects. As little could they learn from those words, so full of meaning, with which Jesus prefaced his reply-The kingdom of God cometh not with observation;' not, that is, with that outward pomp and circumstance which make men stand and gaze, saying to each other, 'See here, or See there' (Luke xvii. 23), but, The kingdom of God is within you,' in the midst of your nation, because in human hearts; and as such, it will be sudden in its coming, unseen in its operation, but powerful, like the thunder and the lightning. It was, Jesus intended to intimate, a great spiritual and not a political revolution which he was aiming to bring to pass. And this truth he enforced by declaring that the head of the new kingdom must first suffer many things, and be rejected of this generation (Luke xvii. 20-37).

The terms which Jesus employed in describing the approaching crisis were full of alarm. His disciples may have felt dejected under their influence; and in order to support them, Jesus may have delivered the parable of the Unjust Judge, the aim of which was to show that though injustice might triumph for a while, God would in his own time avenge his elect, who were instant in prayer as well as patient in suffering (Luke xviii. 1—8).

For the purpose also of communicating solace to his fainthearted disciples, he appears to have pronounced his brief but admirable story of the Pharisee and the Publican, intending to show that the most despised of men, with truth and nature in their hearts, and words of contrition on their lips, were accepted before God, rather than those who, as did his and their enemies, trusted

in themselves and despised others. God's friends have always been a contemned and persecuted people; 'but every one that exalteth himself shall be abased, and he that humbleth himself shall be exalted' (Luke xviii. 9-14).

In this connection the evangelist Luke has placed that exquisitely touching incident in which our Saviour, with all the tenderness of his heart, appears as welcoming into his embrace the little children whom their fond mothers, in faith and love, had brought to receive his blessing (March, 783). The fact needed only the effect of contrast to make it a perfect picture. And that contrast was there; for his disciples in their churlishness rebuked and tried to repulse those mothers. 'No, no,' said these men, 'the Messiah has higher work. Take your infants home, and leave him to establish that kingdom in which we are to sit at his right hand and his left, ruling the twelve tribes of Israel.' Then from the lips of Jesus were heard those lovely accents-'Suffer little children to come unto me, and forbid them not, for of such is the kingdom of God. Verily I say unto you, whosoever shall not receive the kingdom of God as a little child, shall in no wise enter therein.' With what astonishment must the disciples, and with what delight must the mothers, have heard those words, which are as replete with wisdom as they are with affection! (Luke xviii. 15—17, comp. Matt. xix. 13; Mark x. 13).

Connected in thought with the preceding, is the incident of the young ruler who, probably having heard how kind a reception Jesus had given to children, was induced to apply to Christ for information on the momentous question, 'What shall I do to inherit eternal life?' Having addressed our Lord by the appellation Good Master,' Jesus took occasion first to remark that there is none good, that is absolutely good, but God. Then, in reply to his question, he referred the young man to the Ten Commandments, the kernel of the Mosaic system. These, the ruler affirmed, he had kept. One thing was still wanting. Eagerly did the ruler inquire what that one thing was. 'Sell all that thou hast, distribute the proceeds to the poor, and follow me.' He went away in sorrow from the presence of Jesus, for he was unable to make the required sacrifice. The one thing which the young ruler wanted was principle-a principle of benevolence, a benevolent sense of duty, which would make him pluck out a right eye, much more part with silver and gold, rather than fail in the claims of duty. This one thing was of a fundamental nature. It lay, and always lies, at the centre of all real religion. It is the motive which gives their true colour to our deeds. Salvation is not by mere outward acts, but by faith, which, working in the heart and showing itself by love, makes the life conformable with the will of God. Of this great truth the young ruler, brought up in a system of legality, seems to have had not the most distant idea. His morality, therefore, as