This man blasphemeth.

or perhaps his exceeded even theirs. He who knew the heart, knew that he was not only afflicted, but of "a broken and contrite spirit," a state of mind which might have been produced by sanctified affliction; for he grants the greater mercy first; and then, since the affliction had answered its intended design, he removes that also. Those greatly err who consider that to pronounce the forgiveness of sin, and to heal the palsy, were substantially the same acts, according to the notions of the Jews. Whatever their views might be, the acts are here kept plainly distinct. First the man's sins are forgiven; but, before his disease is healed, a conversation passes between Christ and the scribes; and the miracle of healing takes place in proof of the power of Christ to forgive sins. It is clear, also, from the objection of the scribes, that they considered the forgiving of the man's sins, and the healing of his diseases, as works of a wholly different kind.

Verse 3. This man blasphemeth.-Because our Lord assumed a power to forgive sins, which they justly agreed belonged only to God. See Mark ii. 6, 7. The offended only can forgive the sin of the offender; and had not Christ been God, that is, the Being offended by the sin of man, he would have been guilty of the charge, as taking into his own hands the office of God. Blasphemy, in the sense in which it is here used, and as in other instances applied by the Jews to Christ, signifies, not any reproachful, profane words, malignantly directed against God, but the arrogating of what is proper only to God by a creature; which species of blasphemy the Jews held rendered a man liable to condign punish

ment.

Verse 4. Why think ye evil in your

hearts?-Why do ye unjustly account me an impious person and a blasphemer? Their thinking evil signified, not that they were wrong in assuming that God only could forgive sin, but that they had formed a rash and injurious opinion of Christ; which also had this further "evil," that they ought to have admitted him to be the Messiah because of his miracles, and ought to have so understood their scriptures as to conclude that the Messiah was a divine person.

Verse 5. Whether is easier?-To a mere mortal man both are impossible: as no man can authoritatively forgive sin, so no man can work a true miracle of healing by his own power. To the Christ, as God, on the contrary, both were equally "easy." He could forgive the sins committed against himself, and he could heal diseases by virtue of his omnipotence. It may be said, that the disciples of Christ had the gifts of healing, but not the authority to forgive sin; and one to them was therefore "easier" than the other. Certainly not. The disciples could no more heal than they could forgive sin. The works of this kind which they performed were done in "the name" of their Master, and professedly by his communicated power alone. Of" themselves they could do nothing," and they constantly disclaimed it. The argument of our Lord here is, in fact, (although the time was not come for a full manifestation of the truth of his Godhead, and therefore he uses a sort of parable in action to indicate it,) that "none can forgive sins but God only;" but that the working of a miracle of healing by his own original and essential power, was the proof of his divinity, and of his consequent authority to forgive sins. Then in their presence he commands the man to arise, take up his

b

bed, the light portable mattress on which he had been brought, and walk; thus demonstrating his divine authority to forgive sins, by his omnipotence to heal diseases. To this demonstration was added, in the present case, Christ's knowledge of their thoughts and secret reasonings;-and Jesus knew their THOUGHTS. But wherever pride and prejudice possess the heart, the clearest proofs either pass unnoticed, or they are quickly forgotten. Yet this knowledge of the thoughts of the heart ought to have commended Christ to the scribes, since one of their rules for trying the Messiah when he should appear, was his power to discover the hearts of men. Hence in subsequent times they objected the want of this quality to the false messiah Barchochebas. "Bar Cozeba," says the Talmud," reigned two years and a half. He said to the Rabbins, 'I am the Messiah.' They replied, 'It is written of Messiah, that he is of quick understanding, and judges: (Isaiah xi. 3:) let us see whether this man can tell whether one is wicked, or not, without any external proof.' And when they saw that he could not judge in this manner, they slew him." That our Lord knew the thoughts of the objectors on this occasion, and that they gave no outward indication of them by words or signs, is clear from the narrative,―Then certain of the scribes said within themselves, This man blasphemeth.

Verse 8. Glorified God, which had given such power unto men.-They acknowledged the power of healing, but they still thought it a derived and not an original

one.

The mystery of "Emmanuel, God with us," was not yet, doctrinally, fully declared, but was left to be inferred from the actions of our Lord, and the occasional allusions to his superior nature, which occurred in his discourses. See the note on Mark ii. 3.

Verse 9. Matthew sitting at the receipt of custom.-The other evangelists call him Levi, so that he had two names, and was called by either, indifferently; as Simon Peter is sometimes simply called Simon, and sometimes Peter.

At the receipt of custom.-The TEλWVIOV, or custom house, or collector's booth; for such buildings were erected at the foot of bridges, the mouths of rivers, in towns, and at the landing-places along the seashore, where the publicans, that class of them called portitores, received the imposts on passengers and goods. Matthew was thus employed when he received his call to follow Christ; that is, to give himself wholly up to follow him, renouncing all secular concerns, in order to be employed in a spiritual work. He had probably been a disciple previously, but he now received his ministerial call. The promptitude of his obedience is to be remarked; and especially, knowing as he did, that the call implied the entire sacrifice of worldly gain. He was a publican, and probably, like others of that race, had been sufficiently ardent in the pursuit of wealth; now grace triumphs over the habits of the man, and he leaves all to follow Christ, and to embrace a life of poverty and persecution.

C

c Hosea vi. 6; Matt. xii. 7.

Verses 10, 11. As Jesus sat at meat in the house, &c.—That is, the house of Matthew, who, as St. Luke informs us, had made " a great feast" for the entertainment of Christ and his disciples, to which he invited many of his fellow-publicans, that they might have the opportunity of hearing his "onversation. This appears to have been done very publicly; for when the Pharisees saw it, they said unto the disciples, Why eateth your Master with publicans and sinners? for as the publicans were regarded as unclean and unholy persons, no Jew professing sanctity would eat with them, or indeed with the common people. With them it was a mark of holiness to maintain a haughty distance and separation from sinners; saying tacitly, "Stand by thyself, I am holier than thou." Christ often exposes this hypocrisy; and teaches us by his example that if we have superior knowledge and superior holiness, we are compassionately to employ both for the benefit of mankind. The "sinners" usually mentioned with the publicans were not Gentiles, but those Jews who pursued what were thought unlawful callings, as publicans, usurers, feeders of swine, &c., or were notorious for vicious conduct: these were put upon the same level in public estimation as the ɑopuλous, or Gentiles, whom they called sinners, by way of eminence.

Verse 12. They that be whole need not a physician. These words conveyed a sharp reproof to the Pharisees: A teacher of the law was, according to their sayings,

d 1 Tim. i. 15.

a physician of the soul." "If then,” as though Christ had said, "this is your profession, if you even boast of your superior skill in the law and the way of salvation, where ought the physician to be but among the sick? since the whole have no need of him." On this ground our Lord justifies himself. He was indeed the great, the true, the infallible Physician, aтpos kaкwν, a healer of wounds; Twv της ψυχης παθων αριςος ιατρος, the best Physician of the diseases of the soul, as Philo says of the divine Logos; and where should he be busied but among those whose cases most called for his compassion, and most needed his skill? Such were the publicans and reputed sinners; not indeed that they were in a worse moral condition than the Pharisees, but they were more sensible of their case, more ready to acknowledge their spiritual maladies, and more willing to observe the prescribed rules of cure. He had gained one soul from among the publicans of Capernaum, in whose house he was then eating bread; and he might win many others.

Verse 13. But go ye and learn what that meaneth.-Go and learn Ti eσTw, what that is, a phrase used by the Jews when they were about to explain a text of scripture, and draw an argument from it, study it, and get out its sense. The passage referred to is Hosea vi. 6: "For I desired mercy, and not sacrifice; and the knowledge of God more than burnt offerings." Christ quotes only the former

e

part, as being sufficient for his purpose; but the latter clause shows that the former was to be taken comparatively. God had appointed sacrifice; but when mercy and sacrifice could not both be performed, then sacrifice must give place to mercy, -positive institutions to moral duties. The sense of the passage is well given in the Chaldee paraphrase: "For in those that exercise mercy is my delight, more than in sacrifice." The argument of our Lord is, therefore,-If even the appointed sacrifices of the law may give place to the superior claims of mercy, much less can your vain traditions, as to the holiness and unholiness of persons, be pleaded against the exercise of the greatest mercy; mercy to the souls of men perishing in their sins; and in thus caring for their immortal interests I do that which is more acceptable to God than all the minute ritual observances on which you pride yourselves and despise others.

I came not to call the righteous but sinners to repentance.-Some suppose our Lord to speak of the few truly righteous persons who were living in Judea; persons who, like Simeon, Anna, and others, were "waiting for the redemption by the Messiah;" but this is scarcely apposite to his design. He had to justify himself for rather seeking the society of the common people, "the publicans and the sinners," than that of the great professors of sanctity. That the latter needed repentance is certain, as well as that our Lord, by his general preaching, called all to repentance, the Pharisees as well as others; but knowing their character, and the hopelessness of their case, he did not give his principal labours to them; they were encased in pride, hypocrisy, and

self-esteem; they had cultivated religious delusions until they had become infatuated by them; and he turns, therefore, from them to the more simple-minded, to sinners, it is true, but men who had not been taught by a guilty sophistry to give to vice the character of virtue, and to feed a false confidence with forms of external sanctity and exactness of ritual observance. Euthymius has well conceived the sense of the passage: "I came not to call you Pharisees, who fancy yourselves righteous, but those who acknowledge themselves sinners, and seek a method of expiation."

Verses 14, 15. But thy disciples fast not.-Those who were reputed the most holy men among the Jews carried fasting to excess. These fasts were not, however, the public fasts, enjoined by the law, but those which the head of any school might enjoin upon his disciples, or any individual appoint for himself as a branch of moral discipline. The Pharisees fasted twice a week; but beside these fasts innumerable occasions were thought to call for the practice of this duty. The disciples of John practised this kind of austerity, and, as it would seem from the question proposed, as frequently as the Pharisees; and they ap. pear to have been offended that the same mortification did not distinguish the followers of Christ. John himself was now in prison; and as from him they could obtain no information on this point, they came to Jesus, probably supposing that he would bind this duty more strictly upon his followers. Our Lord's answer probably indicates, that John's disciples had multiplied their fasts since their master had been imprisoned; and his