have been especially designed for their instruction and benefit; and this was a fresh evidence that Christ came from God, inasmuch as a deceiver would have striven to conciliate the great, and by winning the noble to his side secure to himself a powerful party. You find it intimated on several occasions, that the esteem in which Jesus was held by the lower orders among the Jews, prevented the chief priests and rulers from adopting those violent measures to which their passions would prompt them. Thus we are told that they " sought to destroy him; but could not find what they might do, for all the people were very attentive to him." Here it is plain, the fame which Jesus gained by his preaching was a restraint on the malice of his bitterest foes; his discourses had so enchained the populace that their rulers were compelled to let him go free. And you will all remember, that when they had actually sent officers to take him, these officers were so struck by his preaching that they did not proceed in the execution of their commission, but returned without their prisoner, and gave as their apology," Never man spake like this man.” Now, it seems to be a very interesting and important thing, to inquire into the causes of the greater effect produced by the preaching of Jesus upon the poor than upon the rich. We take, therefore a text, in which the fact is clearly affirmed- "And the common people heard him gladly;" for though nothing is here said of the other class of hearers, it is evidently implied, that the gladness was felt by the common people alone. We shall not confine ourselves to the point on which our introductory remarks have all had a bearing-the proof furnished of the divine mission of Christ by the character of his preaching; for we think that, over and above this, there is much that is very valuable to be derived from the text. We shall rather endeavour to set before you the various truths and allusions, which appear suggested and enforced by the fact which is to come under review; considering, in the first place, the gladness which the common people felt as proceeding from wrong motives, and, in the second place, from right motives.

Now, you may experience some surprise at our making such a division of our discourse, for you may not have

been prepared to hear wrong motives assigned for the gladness produced by the preaching of Jesus. But we cannot forget, that the very parties who listened with great pleasure to the discourses of Christ, were soon after earnest in demanding his crucifixion; and we may, therefore, lawfully doubt whether the pleasure they experienced were altogether such as Christ himself would have approved. And it has always seemed to us, that the way in which the words of our text are introduced, convey the impression that the pleasure of the people was not of the purest kind. Our Saviour had just been advancing his triumphant argument, with regard to the superiority of Messiah to David. If you turn to the parallel passage in St. Matthew, you will find he asks the Pharisees,-" What think ye of Christ? whose son is he?" They answered, according to their false notions of the personal office of the promised Messiah,"The son of David." But Christ replied,-"How then doth David in spirit call him Lord, saying, the Lord said unto my Lord, sit thou on my right hand, till I make thine enemies thy footstool.' If David then call him Lord, how is he his son?" This simple but powerful reasoning was not to be controverted; it was so convincing, and it produced such a feeling of the superiority of the speaker, that we are told, "No man was able to answer him a word, neither durst any man from that day forth ask him any more questions." This is the account which Saint Matthew gives of the effect wrought by the argument; but Saint Mark merely says, "And the common people heard him gladly." You are to combine the two accounts, and you will then, perhaps, see cause for supposing that the pleasure of the people arose partly from the triumph which Christ gained over their rulers. He had completely silenced the Pharisees in argument. These arrogant and domineering men, who looked with disdain on the great body of the people, had entered into controversy with Christ, and been signally defeated. The controversy had taken place in the presence of the multitude; so that over and above the mortification of being beaten in argument, there was the galling circumstance of being lowered in the eyes of the common people, of whom they claimed credit for extraordinary wisdom. But what was painful to the

proud Pharisee was likely to give pleasure to the multitude. There is unhappily a tendency in our nature to the being gratified when we see others humbled; for we repine at the superiority of those who are above us, however haughty we may be to those who are below, and we are disposed to rejoice when any wound is inflicted on the vanity of such as move in exalted stations. This is, perhaps, especially the case with the lower order of society. We doubt, for example, whether a speaker can do a more popular thing when addressing a multitude-one which is likely to ingratiate him in their favour-than decrying the dignities and throwing ridicule on those whom rank and fortune widely separate from his hearers. He enters on the most favourite topic, the one on which he is sure to elicit the heartiest applause, the moment he begins his invective against the noble, whether or no he has cause for the attack that he makes; and if, in the audience of the multitude, he could bring into close debate and discussion one eminent in rank and authority, we believe that all the feelings of the people would be enlisted on his side, just as though they had a personal interest in the controversy; and if he had the best of the argument, and silenced his high-born antagonist, there would be, we are persuaded, a sense of satisfaction diffused throughout the listeners, as though they themselves had won a victory; and they would be gratified, and evince gratification, not so much because their partisans had manifested power and tact, as because their superior had been humbled and exposed to a species of personal disgrace.

Now, we do not give this as a parallel case to that brought before us by the context of our text, because it was no part of Christ's design to ingratiate himself with men, by bringing the noble into contempt. But, nevertheless, the result of Christ's discussion with the Pharisees had been exactly what we have supposed. The Pharisees were defeated in argument, and that too in the presence of the multitude, from whom they demanded profound homage and reverence; and we think it in the highest degree probable, from comparing the accounts of the different Evangelists, that the common people were pleased just as the mob in our own day would be pleased, because the nobles

On

of the land had been worsted and put to silence. another occasion we are told that "the people were astonished at Christ's doctrine; for he taught them as one having authority, and not as the Scribes." Here, again, their admiration of Jesus arose, at least in part, from their being able to draw a comparison between him and their ordinary teachers, which was greatly to the disadvantage of the latter; and probably the principle of which we spoke would come here also into play. The people were gratified, not merely with the teaching of Jesus itself, but because the teaching cast a tacit reproach on the Scribes ; men whom they had every wish to see humbled the most. So that we cannot feel sure that the assertion of our text proves, that any such delight was produced in the multitude by the preaching of Christ, as evidenced their persuasion of his doctrines. The assertion, following immediately, as it does, on the account how Christ confuted the Pharisees, gives some room for suspicion,--more especially when we remember, that the persons who were pleased were the persons who cried "Crucify him,"-that it was only a sinful gladness with which the multitude hearkened to the Saviour. Aye, it is but too possible that none but turbulent and malevolent passions were in exercise, when a thronging crowd hung delightedly on the lips of the Divine Speaker. These may have been little more than the excitement which is felt and exhibited, when a popular orator dissects the vices or defames the characters of those who are placed in authority, and though the Saviour had advanced a clear and commanding argument, whereby he had vindicated the Messiah of nobler origin than that of David's son; oh, it may not have been the fine application of Scripture, nor the lofty character which was proved to belong to the promised Christ, that caused a feeling of pleasure to spread itself through the eager assembly; it may only have been-alas, for that depravity of heart which could turn even the preaching of Jesus into an incitement to evil-it may only have been because they saw the Pharisees baffled and crest-fallen, and not because they heard the Bible explained, and their Messiah exalted, that "the common people heard Christ gladly."

But we are not disposed to dwell at greater length on

the supposition, that the gladness of which our text speaks may be referred to wrong motives. There are indeed but too good grounds on which to rest the supposition; and we have advanced it because we wish to commend to you the fact, that there may be a great admiration of the power with which a theological controversy is carried on, and great applause at the issue, and nevertheless no care for the doctrine which has been discussed, and no love for the truth which has been established. You may have a strong desire to see one of the debaters defeated, and it may be simply his mortification at which you may rejoice, whilst you are, probably, flattering yourselves that it is the triumph of truth by which you are gratified. Controversy is a dangerous thing, as well to the bystanders as to the intellectual combatants. Those who listen to it, and those who engage in it, are almost sure to have feelings enlisted which have no alliance whatsoever with love of truth; and when one party has conquered, there is scarcely the least remembrance as to what the point is which has been debated and demonstrated; the defeated think only of their defeat, and the victorious only of their victory.

Now we will waive, as we have said, further reference to our text when the gladness of which it speaks is supposed to spring from wrong motives. We know that weighty reasons may be given, why the common people heard Christ gladly, without supposing them pleased because the Pharisees were silenced; and this brings us to that subject matter of our discourse which we are most anxious to place fully before you.

We now take the supposition that the gladness of the common people was, in part at least, such as they ought to have felt, produced by the general tenor of Christ's preaching, and not merely by a triumphant argument which confounded their rulers; and we are to examine into the causes from which it came to pass, that discourses which were distasteful to the great amongst the Jews found acceptance with the common people. Of course it would be easy to assign reasons derived from the peculiar circumstances of the Jewish nation; for it may well be supposed, that the expectation of a temporal prince, which operated so largely