being such as God would sanction, were sug- | healing, because the nature and effects of it gested by the evil One, and based upon en- would be visible, and its reality discernible vious, malignant, and unbelieving feelings. to the senses, in order that it might serve How often do men imagine that they are as a proof of his possessing the power to acting uprightly, and in conformity with the forgive sins, which he had previously asprinciples of true piety, when in reality they serted. And a stronger proof could not have are doing those things which are abomina- been given, as it was a manifest exercise of tion in the sight of God. the physical power of Deity, which could not have been displayed by one who had just before been guilty of a blasphemous assumpThis miracle, therefore, differs from all the tion of the judicial prerogatives of God.

5. For whether is easier, to say, Thy sins be forgiven thee; or to say, Arise, and walk?

6. But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, (then saith he to the sick of the palsy,) Arise, take up thy bed, and go unto thine house.

It must be evident to the attentive reader, that the sentence in this passage enclosed in the parenthesis, was in substance part of the actual address of Jesus to the scribes, which was thus changed and inserted in a parenthetic form by the evangelist to suit the nature of an historical narrative. The words of Jesus were evidently as follows "But that ye may know that the Son of man hath power on earth to forgive sins, I now say unto the sick of the palsy, Arise, take up thy bed and go unto thine house." This is evidently the construction of the passage according to the parallel texts in Mark ii. 11, and Luke v. 24.

These verses are evidently designed by the Saviour to afford both a refutation of the charge of blasphemy, and a proof of his possessing the power of forgiving sins. Had he said to the paralytic man in the first instance" Arise, take up thy bed, and walk," the scribes would not have accused him as guilty of blasphemy;- yet where is the difference, in point of difficulty, between saying this, and saying" Thy sins are forgiven thee"? One is as much a proof of the possession of divine power as the other, for both are equally difficult or equally easy, since no power short of the unlimited ability of God can give utterance to either with effect. There is this difference, however, between the two, that the effect of saying "Thy sins are forgiven thee" is not visible or apparent, as it refers to the communication of a spiritual blessing; and therefore Christ reserved the miracle of

rest which had been already related by St. Matthew, as it was wrought not only for the purpose of proving that he was possessed of that divine power which was necessary for the direct performance of the miracle itself, but also to show that he was invested with the moral and judicial powers of Deity. New light was hereby thrown upon the Saviour's character, and the attributes of that character were more fully developed. It was hereby shown that the exercise of moral and physical power were equally easy to him, and that the benevolent object of his having been manifest in the flesh was to exert both for our complete restoration-to pardon our sins in the first instance, and then to remove all those evils which sin has produced. Nor is he deterred by the obloquy and calumnious invectives of the ungodly from bringing this work to a happy consummation in the experience of all those that believe.

The cure was effected by a single command; and to demonstrate its reality and completeness, he desires the man to take up his bed and walk. Had not the palsy been entirely removed, he could not have done this. He had now a different burden to carry home from the burden of his sins which he had brought with him. But when Christ removes the load of our iniquities, we should be ready to carry any other load which he may command us, if it be for his glory; and he will never command us to do so otherwise. This man was to take home his bed to retain it as a memento of his former illness. And is it not well that those who are pardoned by the love of God should always have something to remind them of what they were in their lost estate? He probably used the same bed afterwards on which he had lain palsied and decrepid before the Saviour; well, therefore, might he say with the Psalmist-" My mouth shall praise thee with joyful lips; when I remem

ber thee upon my bed, and meditate on thee | But "no man can say that Jesus is the Lord, in the night watches; because thou hast been my help," Psalm lxiii. 5-7.

Matthew was sitting at the receipt of ners came and sat down with him

custom when the Saviour saw him. It is and his disciples:

thought that he collected the custom dues which were exacted from those who passed over the sea of Galilee. By the receipt of custom we are to understand a kind of stall or toll-booth, erected, probably, as a moveable and temporary office for receiving the dues. The passing by of Jesus seems to have been accidental; and so does the conversion of a sinner frequently seem to have been the result of chance, yet, in reality, a sinner is never called except in compliance with the electing will and purpose of God. And as it was the case that Jesus "saw Matthew," so is it with the sinner: the mercy of God is brought near to him, for he would never, of his own accord, come to God for mercy. The account here given would lead us to suppose that there was a great abruptness in our Lord's address, and a corresponding suddenness in Matthew's compliance; but we should remember that in many of the narratives in the Gospels we are told only the substance and results of what passed -as much as the Holy Ghost knew would be profitable for doctrine, for reproof, for correction, and for instruction in righteousness. We have in this account an illustration of the freeness of divine grace. Publicans were odious and detestable in the estimation of the Jews, on account of their extortions. But though Jesus did not sanction or approve of extortion, yet he was as free from the prejudices and national enmities of his countrymen, after the flesh, as he was from their sinfulness. The grace of God never proves itself so conspicuously to be grace, as when it blesses the chief of sinners.

The call of Jesus was effectual. Matthew no sooner heard it, than, without waiting to confer with flesh and blood, or pleading his occupations as an excuse, he rose up and followed him. Human reason may enter into conflict with difficulties and opposing claims, but the grace of God sets all these aside at once, and disarming the sinner of every subterfuge and plea, leads him in the

golden chains of love-an humble and believing follower of the Lord who bought

him with his blood.

10. And it came to pass, as Jesus sat at meat in the house, behold, many publicans and sin

It was in the house of Levi that this entertainment was given. Jesus neither affected needless singularity nor austerity of demeanour when he was on earth; but was in all points made like unto his brethren, sin only excepted. He went to this feast for the sake of the opportunity which it afforded him of doing good, for " he pleased not himself,” Rom. xv. 3. How few can say that they accept the invitations of their friends for the same reason!

In the house of a publican it was natural to meet with persons of the same profession. These were Levi's associates and friends; and having tasted of the Saviour's mercy himself, he was anxious that they might enjoy the same privileges and blessings. By "sinners," we are here to understand persons who supported themselves by unlawful modes of life, and who were therefore looked upon as infamous by others. Levi showed that he knew the object of the Saviour's coming, by collecting such persons to meet him. The more vile a sinner is, the more he requires a Saviour.

With how little ceremony did these publicans and sinners come and sit down with Christ and his disciples! Perhaps his great condescension gave them confidence, or perhaps they thought themselves good enough to be the companions of him and his disciples, who were despised and contemptuously treated by the Scribes and Pharisees. Whatever gave them courage to sit down with him, they were not more welcome to Levi than they were to Jesus, nor did Levi give them a richer entertainment than Christ himself, who provided them with the rich provisions of his divine teaching, which constitutes the food and sustenance of all who look to him for instruction and salvation.

11. And when the Pharisees

saw it, they said unto his disciples, Why eateth your master with pub

licans and sinners?

The Scribes and Pharisees seem to have been employed by Satan as spies to watch the Saviour. The former, to watch his words, as we find from verse 3,—the latter,

"For I am not

word "mercy" requires no explanation, as the last clause of this verse— it denotes here, as well as elsewhere, the come to call the righteous, but sinners to rekindness and love of God our Saviour to-pentance." Some think that by the word wards mankind. But what use does the "righteous" we are to understand those who Saviour make of this general principle? It imagined themselves to be righteous, that is thought by some, that his direct and pri- is, the Pharisees; and that the Saviour's mary object was to intimate to the Pharisees meaning is, that he came not to call to rethat they should attend to this principle in pentance those who imagined themselves to their conduct; but this explanation will not be righteous, but those who felt themselves account for his connecting the remainder of to be sinners. This explanation, however, the verse with this sentence by the word is inadmissable, as it gives an interpretation "for," "I will have mercy and not sa- which requires us to add to the words of crifice, for I came, not to call the righteous, the text. Besides, to think oneself righteous but sinners to repentance." The Saviour's is the character of every natural man,-as primary object in quoting this text, must the Apostle says" I was alive without appear, on a careful examination, to have the law once," Rom. vii. 9,—and was therebeen for the purpose of showing the Phari- fore the character of these publicans and sees what was the principle on which he sinners, except so far as any of them were acted in associating with publicans and sin- convinced of sin by the teaching of the ners, and what was the rule by which he Holy Spirit. The Pharisees, also, were was guided therein; as if he had said called to repentance as well as others, Matth. "Instead of bringing forward your tradi- iii. 7-10, and required to repent even more tions as binding upon me, go to the written than the publicans, Luke xviii. 14; for those word of God which ye have made void, but who think themselves to be righteous have which I regard as the rule of my conduct, most need of Christ, Rev. iii. 17, 18. Anand you will there find the principle, by other explanation of this passage which which I have been regulated, clearly stated. has been proposed, is, that by the word It is there said, by my Heavenly Father, " righteous" we are to understand those that he will not accept an observance of who have been already justified by faith in external ceremonies as a substitute for that Christ, and that the Saviour's meaning is mercy which should ever be shown to those consequently this-that he did not come to that require it. By this principle I am call to repentance those who had already guided, and will not therefore suffer myself exercised repentance towards God and faith to be obstructed in the great work which I in him, but those who were still dead in have come into the world to perform, by trespasses and sins, and that therefore it was any ceremonial regulations which you have no wonder that he should be found in comprescribed. Acting, then, upon this prin- pany with the latter. To this explanation ciple, I associate with publicans and sinners, there is not the same decided objection as "for I came not to call the righteous, but there is to the former; but as the Pharisees sinners to repentance." could not have understood the word righteous in this sense, it is probable that the remaining interpretation is the more natural and correct one, namely, that which explains the word righteous in its primary sense as denoting a complete personal compliance with the law of God, as it is to be understood in Rom. iii. 10, and which represents Christ as simply asserting that he came not to call the righteous to repentance, because there are none righteous, as all have sinned and come short of the glory of God, but that he came to call "sinners" to repentance.

But though this is the direct and immediate explanation of this passage, an explanation confirmed by an examination of the parallel text in Matth. xii. 7, yet it was also the Saviour's object to convey reproof to those who found fault with him. They should have been actuated by the same principles. The language of Christ in Matth. xxiii. 23, contains this view of the passage in other words - "Woe unto you Scribes and Pharisees, hypocrites! for ye pay tithe of mint, and anise, and cummin, and have omitted the weightier matters of the law, judgment, mercy, and faith: these ought ye to have done, and not to leave the other undone."

There are three interpretations given of

But let us pause here to reflect upon the glorious view which this declaration gives of the love of God. The rebellion and sinfulness of man is the historical cause of the