Mat. iv. 18.] or the call spoken of by Luke, v. 1, because it is certain that neither the one nor the other was given till after the Baptist was silenced.

On the third day after Jesus and his disciples arrived in Galilee they went to & marriage that was at Cana. Here Jesus furnished wine for the feast by miracle, by the desire of his mother, who was also bidden. Dr. Clarke thinks our Lord, in the course of private life, had sometimes exerted his divine power for the relief of his friends; and that his mother, having seen or heard of these miracles, knew the greatness of his power, and so applied to him on this occasion. Or we may suppose she had heard him speak of the miracles he was to perform for the confirmation of his mission, and the benefit of mankind, and begged him to favour his friends with one in the present necessity. Probably, Mary interested herself in this matter because she was a relation, or an intimate acquaintance of the new married couple, and had the management of the entertainment committed to her care, so was anxious to have every thing gone about with decency. Or she might make the case known to her son, being desirous to see him perform a miracle before such a numerous company of friends. [John ii. 1..4. And the third day there was a marriage in Cana of Galilee, and the mother of Jesus was there. And both Jesus was called, and his disciples, to the marriage. And when they wanted wine, the mother of Jesus saith unto him, They have no wine. Jesus saith unto her, Woman, what have I to do with thee? mine hour is not yet come. We have no reason, as Dr. Doddridge observes, to conclude that there was any rudeness in his addressing his mother thus. For though, indeed, it is. a manner of expression that is very unusual among us, to call a person woman when we are speaking to her, if she be one to whom we think that any respect is due, yet some of the politest writers of antiquity make the most well-bred accomplished princes use it in their addressing ladies of the highest quality; and even servants too are sometimes represented as speaking of their mistresses in the same language. Mary was, without doubt, biameable, for presuming to direct her son in the duties of his ministry, her parental authority not extending to these matters. Therefore, he very justly gave her this gentle rebuke, in which he insinuated that his miracles were not to be performed at the desire of his relations, for civil and private reasons of conveniency, so that she acted improperly in making the request; yet Jesus, knowing that it would tend to the confirmation of his disciples' faith, and to the advancement of his mission, thought proper to comply, being not the less willing to exert his power, that his friends would reap some benefit from the matter of the miracle Ordering the servants, therefore, to fill six water-pots, that were at hand, to the brim, with water, the instant the pots were filled he converted the whole mass of the fluid into excellent wine; then desired that some of it might be drawn out, and carried to the governor of the feast, or entertainer of the company. [John ii. 5.] Among the Greeks, Romans, and Jews, it was usual at great entertainments, especially marriage feasts, to appoint a master of ceremonies, who gave directions, not only concerning the form and method of the entertainment, but likewise prescribed the laws of drinking. Jesus, therefore, ordered the wine, which he had formed, to be carried to the governor of the feast, that, by his judgment passed upon it in the hearing of all the guests, it might be known to be genuine wine of the best kind. The governor of the feast, on tasting the wine, was highly pleased with its flavour and richness, but did not know how it had been procured. Wherefore, addressing himself to the bridegroom in the hearing of all the guests, he commended it as far preferable to what they had been drinking, and praised him for the elegance of his taste, and for his civility in giving the company better wine during the progress of the entertainment, than at the beginning of it, which shewed that he did not grudge the quantity they might use. This information,

no doubt, surprised the bridegroom, who knew nothing of the matter, and occasioned an inquiry to be made about it. It is reasonable, therefore, to suppose, that the servants were publicly examined, and that the company received an account of the miracle from them. For it is expressly said that by it, Jesus manifested his glory, i. c. demonstrated his power and character, to the conviction of the disciples and of all the guests. This beginning of miracles did Jesus in Cana of Galilce, and manifested forth his glory; and his disciples believed on him. Being the first miracle they had ever seen Jesus perform, it tended not a little to the confirmation of their faith, and made his fame spread over all the neighbouring country.

From Cana Jesus went, with his disciples, to Capernaum, and from Capernaum to Jerusalem, to the passover, which, it seems, was approaching. After this, he went down from Capernaum to Jerusalem, he, and his mother, and his brethren, and his disciples, and they continued there not many days. And the Jews' passover was at hand, and Jesus went up to Jerusalem. None of the evangelists mention any further particulars of our Lord's history, between his baptism and this, which was the first passover in his ministry. But his transactions at the feast itself are mentioned by John. It is, therefore, probable, that though Christ's ministry really commenced immedi ately after his baptism, it began to be more publicly excrcised at this passover.

As the evangelists have not expressly determined the number of passovers which happened between the baptism and death of Christ, or during the course of his public ministry; so it is well known that learned men have been much divided in their opinious about them. By far the greater part have supposed there were four, reckoning this the first; the feast. mentioned John v. 1, the second; the passover spoken of, John vi. 4, as the third; and that at which Christ suffered, the fourth; but there are others of a different opinion. The celebrated Sir Isaac Newton reckons five; the first, that which is now before us; the second, according to him, happened four months after Christ's discourse with the woman of Samaria [John iv. 35.]; the third, a few days before the story of the disciples rubbing the ears of corn [Luke vi. .]; the fourth, a little after the feeding of the five thousand; and the last, at the time of our Lord's crucifixion. Mr. Manne, and, after him, Dr. Priestly, have, with grest learning and ingenuity, attempted to revive a long exploded notion, that Christ's minustry continued but sixteen months; so that there were but two passovers during the whole course of it. Mr. Whiston's reasoning against this hypothesis, in the sixtn of his late dissertations, appears to be unanswerable. For he there shews, that if this was true, Christ must have travelled, on an average, near ten miles a day, during the course of his ministry. Besides, the transpositions in scripture, which this would introduce, seem very unwarrantable and dangerous; and, among other difficulties, it is none of the least that Mr. Manne is obliged to suppose that Christ only purged the temple at his last passover, and, consequently, that St. John has misplaced this story, though verse the twenty-fourth of this chapter, and verses 22, 23, 24, of the next, afford such strong arguments to the contrary.

While Jesus was at the passover he signalized himself in the metropolis, by driving the buyers and sellers out of the temple, and by pouring out the changers' money, and overturning their tables. It seems, the officers, whose province it was to take fare of the temple, permitted a market of oxen, sheep, doves, and other things necessary for sacrifice, to be kept in the court of the Gentiles; by which means, there was often such a bustle and confusion there, that the proselytes, who came up to worship, could not but be much disturbed in their devotions. The changers of money were people who gave the Jews from foreign countries current money of Judea, in lieu of the moncy of the countries from whence they had come, and, for that service, took a

small premium, in which the profits of their business consisted. These being gross. profanations of a place set apart for the worship of God, Jesus thought fit to correct them, and he had a right to do it because the temple was his own house. [Mal. iii 1.] And when he had made a scourge of small cords, (with which they were used to tie the beasts to some rings fixed in the pavement for that purpose,) he drove them all out of the temple, and the sheep, and the oxen, and poured out the changers' money, and overthrew the tables. And said unto them that sold doves, Take these things hence, the cages wherein the pigeons were exposed to sale, pointing to them, make not my Father's house an house of merchandise; make not the temple, which is dedicated to the wor ship of God, a place for carrying on low traffic. It is remarkable, that the persons in the fault did not offer to make the least resistance, probably, consciousness of guilt restrained them, or the wonderful things which Jesus had performed at this festival made them afraid to resist him. Or they may have been intimidated by the energy. of our Lord's miraculous power on their minds. Nevertheless, in the apprehension of the disciples, he exposed himself to great danger, by turning out a body of factious men whom the priests and rulers supported. On this occasion, therefore, they called to mind that text in the Psalms, where it is said, "The zeal of thine house hath eaten me up," imputing their Master's action to such a concern for the purity of God's worship, as the Psalmist of old was animated by. The truth is, this affair had the marks of an extraordinary zeal, a zeal nothing inferior to what the prophets were famed for, which was the reason the rulers came to him, and desired to know by what authority he had undertaken singly to make such a reformation in the house and wor ship of God, especially in reference to matters which had been declared lawful by the council, and the doctors of the greatest reputation. And if he had any real authority for doing such things, they required him to shew it them, by working a greater miracle than he had hitherto done. Jesus replied by referring them to the miracle of his own resurrection. Only in appealing to it as a proof of his mission from God, he prudently expressed himself in terms somewhat obscure, that the Jews might not be hindered from accomplishing the divine purpose. Destroy this temple, and in three days I will raise it up, pointing, perhaps, to his body, which, with the greatest propriety, he called a temple, on account of the divinity residing in it. But they supposing that he spoke of Herod's temple in which they were standing, replied, Forty and six years was this temple in building, and wilt thou rear it up in three days? but he spake of the temple of his body. When, therefore, he was risen from the dead, his disciples remembered that he said this unto them; and they believed the scripture, and the word which Jesus had said. They believed the scriptures, which predicted Messiah's death; and they believed the more firmly in their Master, on account of this prophecy, which, by foretelling his resurrection so long before-hand, rendered that event, when it happened, a more illustrious proof of his mission from God.

The time which the Jews said the temple was in building deserves some remark. Josephus, in the first book of his wars with the Jews, tells us, "that in the fifteenth year of his reign, he (Herod) repaired the temple itself, and inclosed a space of ground about it, of double the compass with that which surrounded it before." But in the Antiquities, xv. 14, he corrects this note of time. In the eighteenth year of his reign, Herod projected the rebuilding of the temple." Some attempt to reconcile the passages by supposing, that, in the one, Herod's reign is dated from the decree of the senate; and in the other, from the death of Antigonus; for the eighteenth year, from the decree of the senate, is coincident with the fifteenth from the death of Antigonus. But though this solution of the difficulty should be admitted, it carnot be refused that we have Josephus, in one passage, telling us, Herod did that which