remind us of Elijah (2 Kings i. 8); -and our blessed Lord said expressly, concerning John, "This is Elias which was to come." Mat. xi. 14.

Reader. You must not be surprised at reading that John ate locusts; for we are told by several authors, ancient and modern, that there is a kind of locust in the East which is used as an article of food, especially by poor people. Indeed, the permission anciently given to the Jews to adopt this kind of food proves that the use of it existed from very early times. Read Lev. xi. 22.

Mary. "Even these of them ye may eat; the locust after his kind, and the bald locust after his kind, and the beetle after his kind, and the grasshopper after his kind."

tration of a proselyte by another person, had not previously existed, and that nothing more than ceremonial ablutions-the act of the individuals themselves-had been in use. -Perhaps there are no sufficient means of determining this question. -At all events, the baptism performed by John was not any arbitrary act, or one of his own invention; for he was "sent to baptize with water." John i. 33.

As the mention of Pharisees and Sadducees occurs for the first time in this passage, I will request Theophilus to read a page to which I point, containing an account of these two leading Jewish parties.

Theophilus. "THE PHARISEES derived their name from the Hebrew word Pharash, which signifies 'to set apart, or to separate,' because they separated themselves from the rest of their countrymen, to peculiar strictness in religion. Their leading tenets were the following:-that the

Theophilus. I believe the ceremony of baptism was not entirely new and unknown at this time.

Reader. Some suppose that it had been already in use among the Jews on occasion of receiving proselytes, especially such proselytes as did not submit to circumcision. And therefore, say they, by baptizing Jews, and thus treating them as proselytes, John marked his ministry as the introduction of a new economy. Others, however, think that baptism, properly so called,—that is, the lus

fixed decree of God; that the souls of men were immortal, and were either eternally happy or miserable beyond the grave; that the dead would be raised; that there were angels, good and bad; that God was under obligation to bestow peculiar favour on the Jews; and that they were justified by the merits of Abra

dress; praying at the corners of the streets, and seeking publicity in the bestowment of alms. They sought principally external cleanness; and dealt much in ceremonial ablutions and washing.

"In addition to the written law, they adhered to the traditions of the elders, which they vainly supposed to have been handed down from Moses. They were, in general, a corrupt, hypocritical, office-seeking, haughty class of men. There were, however, some among them of a better character. See Acts v. 14.

"THE SADDUCEES are supposed to have taken their name from Sadoc, who flourished about 260 years before the Christian era. He was a pupil of Antigonus Sochæus, president of the Sanhedrim, or great council of the nation. He had taught the duty of serving God disinterestedly, without the hope of reward, or the fear of punishment. Hence Sadoc, incorrectly, drew the inference that there was no future state of rewards or punishments; and on this belief he founded the sect..... They held that there is no resurrection, neither angel nor spirit (Matt. xxii. 23; Acts xxiii. 8); and that the soul of man perishes with the body;..... and they rejected all traditions."

Reader. The Pharisees, as they appear before us in the New Testament, are to be regarded as representatives of superstition, hypocrisy, and self-righteous pride; the Sadducees, of worldliness, sensual indulgence, and unbelief." The Pharisees," says a judicious commentator,

66

were zealots for the ceremonies, for the power of the church, and the traditions of the elders; the Sadducees ran into the other extreme, and were little better than deists, denying the existence of spirits, and of a future state."

When St. John saw these men come to his baptism-(the Æthiopic version adds, privately)—he addressed them in language strongly expressive of his abhorrence of their character as the very personification of inveterate and malicious wickedness. And he inquired, with astonishment, who had warned them to flee from the impending wrath. Hence, then, it appears that neither of these parties came in a right disposition of mind, or with proper views. The Pharisees were proud of their supposed superiority in piety and virtue, and of their relation to Abraham; the Sadducees were vain of their fancied wisdom and philosophical attainments; and all were alike unprepared to become disciples of the uncompromising Baptist, or of the meek and lowly Jesus.

Theophilus. Did the Baptist allude to any particular stones or rocks, when he said what we read in the ninth verse?

Reader. Perhaps he then pointed to the stones which lay scattered about in the rough and rocky desert. Or, as he was baptizing at the ford of Jordan, where Israel passed over, some have thought that he alluded to the twelve stones which were set up as a memorial of that event. Josh. iv. 20. But before we could adopt the latter opinion, we should

require proof that the ancient monument had continued in its place until the Baptist's time. At all events, the meaning is clear and certain. St. John assured his hearers that, rather than that the promises of God should fail, and rather than that proud, impenitent, unbelieving sinners should partake of the blessings promised to the real, spiritual posterity of Abraham, God would raise up others who should tread in his footsteps, and thus become his children, even, if necessary, by the most unlikely means;-that He would raise up children to Abraham even from among the Gentiles, whom the Jews may have thought as unlikely to receive that privilege as the senseless rocks which they saw around them, or the stones beneath their feet.

The Jews falsely gloried in their descent from Abraham; regarding it as securing to them an immunity from punishment. That descent, however, rightly considered, ought not to have been regarded as a privilege, in and of itself; but rather as an obligation and excitement to a godly life and conversation.

Theophilus. By "the axe laid unto the root of the trees" we are to understand, I suppose, the Romans, whose power was ready to crush the guilty city and nation of the Jews.

Reader. Such seems to be the primary meaning of the expression; which may also be understood as referring to future and eternal judgments ready to fall upon the wicked. Mary. How long did St. John continue to preach?

Reader. The period of his ministry, probably, did not exceed six months,-which was the distance of time between the commencement of his preaching, and of that of our blessed Lord.-Can you explain that phrase, in the eleventh verse," whose shoes I am not worthy to bear?"

Mary. It is an allusion to the custom of slaves carrying their master's sandals. The sandal was a piece of wood or leather, fitted to the soles of the feet, and fastened by thongs of leather. And it was the business of certain slaves, of the lowest class, to remove these sandals from their masters' feet, and to take charge of them, while the wearers were reclining at table, or otherwise stationary in the house.

Theophilus. I am not sure that I rightly understand the meaning of that saying, "He shall baptize you with the Holy Ghost, and with fire."

Reader. Some suppose that this expression alludes to the gifts of the Holy Spirit which were poured out upon the Apostles on the day of Pentecost, and were afterwards imparted, through the instrumentality of the Apostles, to other believers. You remember the appearance of "tongues like as of fire" on the day of Pentecost, Acts ii. 3.-Others regard the words "with the Holy Ghost and fire" (for in the original the preposition is not repeated) as referring to the spiritual influences of the divine agent, set forth under the similitude of fire. "The Holy Spirit," say they, "is represented here under the image of fire, because he was to illuminate and invigorate