AS WE WOULD NOT BE BOUND UNTO PUNISHMENT, LET US NOW SEEK TO BE LOOSED FROM SIN. MATT. xxii. 13, .4. 13 not having a-wedding garment? And he was-speechless epiuwen. Then said the king to-the servants, Bind him hand and foot," and-take-him-away, and cast him into outer 14 darkness; there shall-be weeping and gnashing of teeth. For many are called, but few are chosen εκλεκτοι. a GR. feet and hands. SCRIPTURE ILLUSTRATIONS. Mt. xxii. 12. speechless-Je. ii. 26, As the thief is ashamed when he is found, so is the house of Israel ashamed; they, their kings, their princes, and their priests, and their prophets,' - Both Gentile, Rom. i. 20, and Jew, ii., are inexcusable iii. 19, That every mouth may be stopped, and all the world may become guilty before God.'- In the immediately succeeding paragraphs, Mt. xxii. 15, &c., the several despisers of the grace of the Lord; the worldlyminded Herodian, ver. 15-22; the infidel Sadducee, ver. 23-33; the self-righteous Pharisee, ver. 34-40, come forward in succession as opposing the Saviour, and they are all of them put to silence, ver. 41-.6. 13. Bind him, &c.-He had refused to be made free indeed, as invited by the Son of God, Jno. viii. 31, .2, .6, § 55, pp. 103, ..4. take him away-He had refused to come unto Jesus in truth, as invited, ch. xi. 28-30, § 29, p. 228. outer darkness-He had refused to follow the light, as exhorted, Jno. viii. 12, § 55, p. 100-The casting into outer darkness is referred to, Mt. viii. 12, § 28, p. 220; xxv. 30, § 86, p. 350-And the same seems to be described in other words, 2 Th. i. 9; 2 Pe. ii. 17; Jude 13. 12, .3; Is. viii. 22; xxvi. 11; lxv. 13-.5; Mt. viii. 12 weeping and gnashing of teeth-see Ps. xxxvii. § 28, p. 220. 14. few... chosen-see ch. xix. 30, §75, p. 230; xx. 16, § 76, p. 233-Many were called but few chosen, in the case of Gideon's victory over the Midianites, Ju. vii. NOTES. addressing any person. Comp. ch. xx. 13, § 76, company of the redeemed are in Rev. xix. 11—.4, rep. 233; xxvi. 50, § 88, p. 419. presented as clothed in white robes, typifying, like Mt. xxii. 12. maç elonλess, &c. i. e., 'How is it that dikaiμara Tv ȧyiwv, i. e., the justificatory robes of the white robe of the spouse of the Lamb, ver. 8, the thou didst venture to come in ?' &c. the saints.'-Bloomf.] Dr. Doddridge observes, that this circumstance of the parable is admirably adapted to the method of God's dealing with us. For he requires repentance, indeed, and holiness, in order to our partaking of the happiness of heaven; but at the same time he graciously offers to work it in us by his Holy Spirit; and therefore may justly punish our neglect of so great a favour. On the word FRIEND, see ch. xx. 13, § 76, p. 233. [A wedding garment. vdupa yaμov. An appropriate robe, with which those who attended were expected to come clothed, and which was invariably furnished by the host on all such occasions as a wedding-feast. This custom was common alike to the Hebrews, Greeks, and Romans; and something similar to it yet prevails in the East. In this, therefore, consisted the offence of the delinquent-that he had neglected to provide himself with the appropriate dress. But the most important point in tracing the moral of the parable is, to ascertain what it is that is designated by the wedding garment. We should, with many eminent interpreters, and recently Mr. Greswell, understand this to mean "a lively faith in Christ, a sacred badge of our christian profession, peculiarly characteristic of the gospel, and the grand criterion between the nominal and the real Christian; forming, indeed, the mystical bond of union which attaches the members to the Head of his body, the Church." This proper garment (observes Mr. Greswell) was to be furnished indeed from the vestry of the king, but its assumption depended on the guests themselves; and even faith, though the one thing necessary to salvation, and in its imputed efficacy singly sufficient for that purpose, is not independent of the free will and co-operation of the believer, no more than of the grace of God. It may be the proper spiritual covering of the soul, and neither of mortal texture nor of human acquisition, but immediately derived from the wardrobes of heaven; and yet it must be received and put on by the wearer for himself. Thus it is, as Calvin well remarks, frivolous to debate whether the wedding garment designates faith or a holy life; since the two are inseparable, the former implying the latter. And therefore the former is rightly made the symbolum or tessera of admission to the heavenly banquet. Agreeably to this, St. Paul says, Rom. iv. 16. did Touro in TOTWs [Bori] va xarà xápiv, scil. 7. So also the innumerable [And it is to be borne in mind (as Mr. Greswell well suggests), that "the individual mentioned in the parable as being rejected for non-qualification, forms the representative of a class, and, alas! a very large one, even of those among professing believers, who presumptuously seek to be saved in some other -Ibid.] way, and not through faith in a crucified Redeemer."' 13. Bind him hand and foot,... cast him into outer darkness, &c. It is well known that the Jewish marriages were performed in the night season - see ch. xxv. 6, § 86, p. 346; and that the rooms in which the feast was celebrated were splendidly illuminated.See on ch. viii. 12, § 28, p. 220. This parable supposes an individual hurried from the dazzling brilliancy of an imperial palace, illuthe prisons lying at the foundation of its external minated for a purpose of no common festivity, into walls; not simply expelled the royal residence, and thrust forth to the shades of the night, but plunged into those melancholy abodes which, when the meridian sun gladdens the face of nature, admit no cheerful beam. And, considering how splendid and magnificent the entertainments of the eastern princes were, it cannot be thought an unnatural circumstance that such an affront as this offered to the king, his son, his bride, and the rest of the company, should be so punished. [This parable is parallel to Lu. xiv. 16-21, § 67, p. 183-see Parallelism,' ADDENDA, p. 186. They hold in view one object, and are so similar in their illustrations, that in each we find the same circumstances, but little varied, and alternately expounded. This parable exceeds, in the events of the wedding garment, the destruction of the rebellious, and the punishment of the individual presuming to appear without the robe of ceremony. The parable in St. Luke enumerates the various excuses brought by the parties who renounced the invitation. These are the only differences; it is clear that the same object is kept in sight in both cases, while the allegories mutually furnish something to perfect the true and affecting delineation. Conjointly, they present a most interesting display of Divine mercy and of human folly; and powerfully enforce the leading sentiment of both parables, many are called, but few are chosen.'] AS WE WOULD NOT BE CAST INTO OUTER DARKNESS, LET US NOW BE CLOTHED IN LIGHT. A FOOL'S WRATH IS PRESENTLY KNOWN: BUT A PRUDENT MAN COVERETH SHAME.-Prov. xii. 16. (G. 70.)-Jesus answers the question of the Herodians, concerning the payment of tribute to the Roman emperor.*-Matt. xxii. 15-22. Mark xii. 13-.7. Luke xx. 20-.6. In the temple. INTRODUCTION AND ANALYSIS. Mt. xxii. 15, .6. Mk. xii. 13. Lu. xx. 20. The him credit for candour, and fearlessness in declaring Pharisees take counsel to reduce Jesus to a dilemma; the truth and doubtless, thinking that he cannot, so that he must either, by his answer to their ques- consistently with any claim to his being the King of tion, disappoint the somewhat popular expectation Israel, allow that tribute should be paid to a foreign of his being the long-promised Messiah; or on the despot, they conclude by asking, whether it be lawother hand, so declare himself, as that they may pro-ful to give tribute unto Cæsar, or not?' cure his being apprehended by Pilate, under the Mt. xxii. 18, .9. Mk. xii. 15. Lu. xx. 23,.4. Jesus, charge of disaffection to the Roman government. perceiving their crafty wickedness, charges them This charge it would be inconsistent for themselves to make, but not for the Herodians, the great advo- there with, and asks to be shewn the tribute money. cates of a connection with Rome. Herod had shewn xxii. 19-21. -xii. 16. - xx. 24. himself ready and willing to sacrifice religious duty bring him a penny; he asks, Whose is the image and at the shrine of political expediency, or in order to superscription' thereon? They answer, procure as he thought worldly advantages, by being -xii. 17. - xx. 25. subservient to the Romans in matters forbidden of briefly but expressively reproves both parties, withGod. Some of this party the Pharisees get to go out involving himself with either. forth with their disciples, in order to ensnare Jesus. - xxii. 21. They 'Cæsur's.' Jesus They - xxii. 22. -xii. 17. - xx. 26. marvel at his answer, are put to silence, and depart disappointed of their prey." MARK Xii. 13-.7. And they send unto him * certain of-the Pharisees LUKE XX. 20-.6. And they-watched him 20 and-sent-forth spies eyкabeтOUS, SCRIPTURE ILLUSTRATIONS. Mt. xxii. 15. Pharisees-who would neither go into the kingdom of heaven themselves, nor suffer others to enter, ch. xxiii. 13, § 85, p. 316-and see on ch. xvi. 4, § 47, p. 29. entangle Their desire was not to elicit the truth, but to darken 'counsel by words without knowledge,' Job xxxviii. 2, that they might, if possible, get the True Witness to condemn himself-Ps. lix. 3, For, παρατηρησαντες, d which-should-feign ὑποκρινομένους themselves just-men, that lo, they lie in wait for my soul:' &c.—and see on Lu. vi. 7, § 25, p. 195. Lu. xx. 20. feign-Ps. Iv. 21, The words of his mouth were smoother than butter, but war was in his heart:-They wished to exercise craft, in order to gratify their malice, as Jesus had forewarned, when he spoke to them of their father, who from the beginning was a murderer and a liar, Jno. viii. 44, § 55, p. 106. NOTES. [Mt. xxii. 15. Entangle him. mayidebowoir, "might ensnare him. The term is properly used of snaring birds; but, like dypeter, employed by Mark, xii. 13, and the Latin irretire and illaqueare, is used of ensnaring any person by difficult and artful questions.] [Lu. xx. 20. Watched him, spies. yxatérovs. 'Eуká@sтos properly denotes one who is stationed in a lurking place' to watch another's motions, either for attacking him or otherwise; and, in a metaphorical sense, one sent as a spy, whether of words or actions.] [Mt. xxii. 16. With the Herodians. Josephus nowhere mentions them as a distinct religious sect. They were distinguished from the other parties, first, by their concurring in Herod's plan of subjecting himself and his people to the dominion of the Romans; and secondly, in complying with the latter in many of their heathen practices, such as erecting temples with images for idolatrous worship; raising statues, and instituting games in honour of Augustus; which symbolizing with idolatry upon views of interest and worldly policy, is supposed to have been a part at least of the leaven of Herod,' against which our Lord PRACTICAL REFLECTION. with those to whom they are the most directly opposed, in order that they may the more successfully oppose the truth.] [Mt. xxii. 15, 6. There are no such insidious and persevering enemies to our Lord and his gospel, as the self-righteous Pharisees. They will conspire even 'This incident respecting the payment of tribute to the Roman emperor, who at this time was Tiberius Cæsar, touched upon the principles first openly avowed, U.C. 760, by Judas, the Gaulanite, commonly called the Galilæan. This question was put by the Herodians, but it was suggested and abetted by the Pharisees; and the account of its circumstances, though substantially the same in all, is yet much closer together in St. Matthew and St. Mark, than in either and St. Luke, whose conciseness in particular is easily explained by the minuteness of the other two. Yet with his usual attention to precision, he has specified most distinctly, both the design proposed by the question, and the effect produced by the answer. Writing also for Gentile readers, and not with the associations of a Jew himself, he suppresses the name, while he describes the character, of the instruments now employed, viz., as parties suborned, or put forward, by others; feigning themselves righteous, that is, actuated by a zeal for God, whose exclusive right to the civil obedience of the Jews was the question concerned in the solution of the practical difficulty, respecting the payment of tribute to Cæsar. This assumption of pretended righteousness appears in the language of their hypocritical compliment to our Saviour, at the outset of the address, as recorded by St. Mark. Διδάσκαλε, rabbi or master, we know that thou art nens, a plain spoken, sincere, or honest, man; who, when the truth is concerned, carest for no one; for thou payest no respect to the person of men, but teachest of a truth the way of God. The name of Herodians does not occur in the gospel of St. Luke.'-Greswell, Vol. III. Diss. xl. p. 114. VOL. II.] MALICE IS EVER ACTIVE. [295 HE THAT SPEAKETH TRUTH SHEWETH FORTH RIGHTEOUSNESS: BUT A FALSE WITNESS DECEIT.-Prov. xii. 17. BE THOU EXALTED, LORD, IN THINE OWN STRENGTH:-Psa. xxi. 13. cautioned his disciples, Mk. viii. 15, § 48, p. 32; con- It is probable that the Herodians, in their doctrinal tenets, were chiefly of the sect of the Sadducees; since that which is by one evangelist called the leaven of Herod,' Mk. viii. 15, is by another termed-see Mt. xvi. 6, § 48, p. 32-the leaven' of the Sadducees.' Lu. xx. 20. Just men. dialous. That is, men of probity and integrity, who were only actuated by motives of conscience, and the desire of being taught in the questions they had to propound. Mt. xxii. 16. Art true. àλnens Upright,' neither practising simulation nor dissimulation. Regardest not. ob péλei oo . o. Meaning, art impartial,' without partiality.' Regardest not the person, &c. Art not influenced in thy teaching by the outward condition of any human being. Thou favourest no man for his riches or greatness. [17. Is it lawful to give tribute, &c. In order to understand the insidious nature of the question here proposed to Jesus, it must be observed, that the Jews at this time being under the dominion of the Romans, paid them an annual tribute in money as an acknowtion tax, vóμιoμa hoov, or tribute money, imposed ledgment of their subjection. The annual capitaby the Romans on the Jews was a denarius, which tax they bore with great impatience. Judas of Galilee, about ten years after the birth of Christ, first stirred up the people to resist this tax, saying it was contrary to their religion to acknowledge any other sovereign than God.-See Ac. v. 37.-He is supposed to have been of the Pharisees.] Cæsar. The Roman emperor. The name Cæsar, after the time of Julius Cæsar, became common to all the emperors, as Pharaoh was the common name of all the kings of Egypt. This was Tiberius Cæsar. PRACTICAL REFLECTIONS. [Mt. xxii. 16. That was a true confession which the messengers of the Pharisees made respecting Christ; but it was made in the spirit of falsehood, and with the most evil intent. Unlike such men, let us speak the truth in love; and, like our Leader, let us be 'wise as serpents, and harmless as doves."] [17 ver. Had the Jews been true to their heavenly King, they would not have been subjected to a foreign yoke. They had low thoughts of the Messiah, if they thought that he was to be only a de 296] liverer from temporal bondage. The Jews thought that Jesus could not, consistently with his being the Messiah, allow of their paying tribute to Cæsar; but it was most fit that they should remain in temporal bondage, until they were willing to be made spiritually free.] 18 ver. Jesus gives evidence of his Messiahship in a way not expected, by shewing that they were naked and open to his omniscient eye. Let us not think of imposing upon the Lord with flattering words, but let our hearts be right before him. NO INIQUITY WITH THE LORD OUR GOD,-2 Chron. xix. 7. [VOL. II. THE CHRISTIAN TAKES UP CONTENTMENT IN GOD'S APPOINTMENT. HE WHO TRAFFICS IN GOD'S SERVICE TO FREIGHT HIMSELF WITH MAN'S PRAISES, SHALL SUFFER SHIPWRECK IN THE HAVEN. SCRIPTURE ILLUSTRATIONS. Mt. xxii. 21. Cæsar's-The image and name of the Roman emperor being on their coin, was a public acknowledgment of their having submitted themselves to the Roman government; which, for the purpose of defending the lives and property of its subjects, required that tribute should be paid, as is noticed, Rom. xiii. 6, For for this cause pay ye tribute also: for they are God's ministers, attending continually upon this very thing.'-1 Pe. ii. 13, .4, Submit yourselves to every ordinance of man for the Lord's sake: whether it be to the king, as supreme; or unto governors, as unto them that are sent by him for the punishment of evildoers, and for the praise of them that do well.' Render-Rom. xiii. 7, Render therefore to all their dues tribute to whom tribute is due; custom to whom custoin; fear to whom fear; honour to whom honour.'-1 Pe. ii. 13, .4, .7, Fear God. Honour the king.' and unto God-see the sacrifices which God requires and which the Pharisees neglected to present to God, whilst they professed to be most zealous in NOTES. [Mt. xxii. 18. Their wickedness. rovnplay. The word here signifies, like the Latin malitia, craft. So Luke has πανουργίαν; Mark, ὑπόκρισιν, with reference to the υποκρινομένους of Lu. xx. 20.] Why tempt ye me? Or, why would you ensnare me? They conceived it impossible that he could extricate himself from the dilemma into which they had brought him. 20. Superscription. The denarius paid by the Jews as tribute money, is said to have had round the head of Caesar this inscription: Kaloap Avyovor. 'Iovdaias eaλanvias; Cæsar Augustus, Judæa being conquered. The origin of stamps and impressions on coins is attributed to the Persians. Our Lord here baffles the malignant proposers of the question, by taking advantage of their own con cession, that the denarius bore the emperor's image and superscription, and also of the determination of their own schools, that wherever any king's coin was current, it was a proof of that country's subjection to that government. He significantly warns these turbulent and seditious demagogues, the Pharisees, to render unto Cæsar the dues of Caesar, which they resisted; and these licentious and irreligious courtiers, which they neglected; thus publicly reproving both, the Herodians, to render unto God the dues of God, but obliquely, in a way that they could not take any hold of.'-Dr. Hales. 22. Marvelled. atuacar. That is, 'wondered at the wisdom of his answer;' for by this decision of so nice and difficult a question, Cæsar was satisfied, God glorified, and the people edified. PRACTICAL REFLECTIONS. [Mt. xxii. 19, 20. Let us consider our opponents, so as to meet each of them upon his own ground, as our Lord does here the worldly-minded Herodians, in company with the covetous Pharisees, who in receiv. ing the money of Cæsar, acknowledged him to be their sovereign.] to the civil governor the submission commanded by the Supreme; but unlike the Herodians, let us refrain from yielding to human authority, that which belongs to God. If men would be freed from evil in the former respect, let them give unto God the glory due unto his name: and soon he will break their bands asunder. Cæsar must exact his tribute, until Christ is submitted to by the nations.] [21 ver. Unlike the Pharisees, let us gladly render VOL. 11.] IN THEE, O LORD, DO I PUT MY TRUST:-Psa. lxxi. 1. [297 THE HYPOCRITE HIDES HIS SINS WHICH HE SHOULD HAVE CONFESSED, AND PUBLISHES HIS GOOD DEEDS WHICH HE SHOULD HAVE HID. IT IS THE GLORY OF GOD TO CONCEAL A THING: BUT THE HONOUR OF KINGS IS TO SEARCH OUT A MATTER.-Prov. xxv. 2. ADDEND A. The transactions of this day, which answers to the morning of the Jewish twelfth of Nisan, and to the Julian third of April, are not only the most diversified in their circumstances, and the most minutely related, but the most interesting in themselves of any which have yet been considered. The day, too, is memorable as the close of our Lord's public ministry; after this time, until the morning of the crucifixion, he never appeared openly again. It was consequently a remarkable coincidence, resolvable perhaps solely into the agency of a controlling Providence, that the last and concluding scene of his ministry furnished the clearest indications which had yet been exhibited, both of the malice, the hypocrisy, and the subtlety of his enemies on the one hand, and of his own wisdom, power, and Divine authority on the other..... ON THE PROCEEDINGS OF WEDNESDAY IN PASSION WEEK.-Greswell, Vol. III. The first circumstance is manifestly the renewal of the conversation in reference to the fig tree, Mk. xi. 20-6 [p. 281]; the time and the place of which must consequently have been either the same as those of the original incident the day before, or not much different from them..... The remaining events of the day are to be divided into those which occurred in the temple before our Lord quitted it for the night, and those which occurred out of it after he had quitted it for the night. The particulars of the first division consist chiefly of a series of questions put to our Saviour one after another, until he had successively foiled the interrogators, or replied to all their inquiries, so that from that time forward no man durst ask him any more. The first two of these questions turned upon a civil, or political, much more than upon a religious, or doctrinal point; the last two were purely of the latter description. The final end proposed by them all, except perhaps the last, was sinister; that of the first two to render our Lord amenable to the spiritual jurisdiction of the sanhedrim, or to the civil jurisdiction of the Roman governor; that of the third, if not of the fourth, by a perplexing, and an apparently insuperable difficulty to lower his credit as a teacher. The parties from whom they proceeded were in every instance one or more of the three existing and principal sects, the Pharisees, the Sadducees, and the Herodians; the two former a philosophical, or a religious denomination; the latter probably a civil; retaining, though covertly, the principles of Judas of Galilee; which accounts for the question put by them. In all of them, however, the Pharisees in general, and the leading members of the sanhedrim in particular, appear to have taken, either openly or in secret, the most active and the most inuential part. 'When, therefore, we consider the common antipathy and want of union prevailing in other respects between these sects, and yet the concurrence of all, not merely simultaneously, but in a regular order of succession, to injure or to criminate our Saviour, we may justly conclude that they did not act at random, nor independently of each other, but upon some preconcerted plan, and with a mutual understanding. They had agreed to forget for the time their preexisting jealousies and differences of opinion, while they aided and supported each other in a common attack upon our Lord. It is true, the method of disputation among the Jews was purely dialectic; that is, by asking questions and receiving answers. But on no occasion except this may each of the sects in its turn be seen united in a single endeavour to puzzle or to ensnare the same person, with their most difficult or most dangerous problems; and like so many epsopo, successively entering the lists against him. We may argue, therefore, that they acted on a scheme concerted overnight; and that our Lord's oldest, most inveterate, and most powerful enemies, the Pharisees, were probably the contrivers or abettors of the whole plan. Nor is this supposition without its use in accounting for the immediate origin of that highlywrought invective, which will be found recorded as the last event of the proceedings in the temple for the day, and which our Lord in his turn levelled against that sect in particular. . . . . 298] Upon the close of this account, St. Matthew, ch. xxi. 28-32 [p. 285], subjoins the moral illustration of the father and the two sons; the application of which by our Lord shews that it had reference to the preceding question, and therefore might have been suggested by it. The point of the comparison must be sought for in the historical fact of the different success of the same preaching of John, like the alleged different success of the same request of the father; of the former with two very different orders of persons, the scribes and the Pharisees on the one hand, and the publicans and sinners on the other; of the latter with his two sons, as the first or as the last addressed respectively. The antecedent self-righteousness of the scribes and Pharisees answered to the apparent readiness of the last addressed, the antecedent wickedness and impenitence of publicans and sinners to the apparent refusal of the first. Yet the preaching of John had failed with the former, and succeeded with the latter, as the second son had broken his original promise, and the first had retracted his original refusal. That St. Mark should have omitted this discourse is nothing extraordinary; and that St. Luke did so is explained by a comparison with Lu. vii. 29, 30 [§ 29, p. 225], which is substantially to the same effect. The parable of the vineyard let out to hustion, recorded by each of these evangelists, and by bandmen [p. 286] is a parable of a different descripeach in a consecutive order. Nor could it have been long over before another of the same class, recorded by St. Matthew only, the parable of the wedding garment [p. 291], was also subjoined; the omission of which in St. Mark is to be explained as before; and its omission in St. Luke by its partial resemblance to a parable which was previously recorded by him, and by him alone, the parable of the great supper [ch. xiv. 15-24, § 67, p. 183]. tion concerning the payment of tribute to the Roman The next incident appears to have been the quesEmperor, who at this time was Tiberius Cæsar; touching consequently upon the principles first openly avowed in U.C. 760, by Judas the Gaulanite, commonly called the Galilæan. This question was abetted by the Pharisees; and the account of its cirput by the Herodians, but it was suggested and yet much closer together in St. Matthew and St. Mark, cumstances, though substantially the same in all, is than in either and St. Luke, whose conciseness in particular is easily explained by the minuteness of the other two.-See NOTE, p. 295. The next circumstance on record is the question proposed by the Sadducees, in which, though the Pharisees might have rejoiced to see Jesus perplexed by it, unless they had their own mode of solving the problem, they could not perhaps openly have con DEBATE THY CAUSE WITH THY NEIGHBOUR;-Prov. xxv. 9. [VOL. II. THE HEAVEN FOR HEIGHT, AND THE EARTH FOR DEPTH, AND THE HEART OF KINGS IS UNSEARCHABLE.-Prov. xxv. 3. |