and cast it from thee;" meaning thereby, that whatever offends us as Christians, that is, stands in our way, and obstructs our progress in following our Master's steps, though it may be as dear to us as an eye, or a right hand, must be renounced thoroughly, and heartily, and cheerfully, for his sake, if we expect that He should own us as his disciples.

Now this precept of plucking out an eye, or cutting off a right hand, is by no means hard to be understood, as to the spirit and intention of it, and the disposition meant to be recommended; and when it is understood, its effect will be, on those who sincerely study to comply with it, exactly what our Lord designed; they cannot in this case satisfy their conscience by a literal compliance with it in the performance of any specific act; and, consequently, will the more naturally be led to cultivate that frame of mind, and study to adopt that principle of thorough devotedness to Christ, which He meant to recommend.

Again, in inculcating the duty of gentleness and patience under provocation, He says, " if any man smite thee on the right cheek, turn to him the left also; if any man will take away thy

cloak, let him have thy coat also; if any man compel thee to go a mile, go with him twain:" in which it is evident, that his meaning was, not the mere literal performance of those specific actions mentioned, but the cultivation of a mild and long-suffering temper. The strong way in which He delivered those precepts-the striking and often paradoxical illustrations which He gave of them--had the effect of making a more lively impression on the hearers' minds, and at the same time guarded them (as I have just before observed) against supposing that it was enough to perform, literally, the particular actions mentioned, without adopting the principle of action which He was illustrating. This last instance again combines two of the circumstances above mentioned: the mere literal observance of the precept would not only be in many cases irrational, but also manifestly insufficient, and would fall far short of what is meant to be inculcated; and hence a candid hearer is the more immediately led to understand, that obedience to it implies not the bare performance of this or that particular action, but the careful cultivation of a certain habit of action.

The same observations will apply to our Lord's precept against chusing "the most honourable seats at feasts;" and his exhortation to men to occupy a lower place than they have a just title to. He did indeed intend that his rule respecting good manners should be literally observed, since good manners is a part of good morals; but it is evident that this literal compliance was the least part of what He designed, and that He took this method of inculcating, generally, a caution against arrogance and self-exaltation.

Universally indeed, He was accustomed to illustrate whatever principle He had in view, by some particular instance; knowing that this would take better hold on men's attention, and be more surely fixed in their memory, than if He had confined himself to the mere general maxim ; and that it would be very easy for any one, after being, by this exemplification, put in possession of the general maxim, to extend and apply it, for himself, to every case that might occur; supposing him to have the sincere disposition to do so, without which no instruction can avail.

Thus, when He was called upon to explain what kind of neighbourly love we ought to shew,

and towards whom, He illustrates his meaning by relating the parable of a man who "fell among thieves," and He concludes his instruction by saying, "Go and do thou likewise;" which exhortation no one can be so stupid, if he be not also perverse, as to interpret by the letter, as meaning merely that when he might chance to meet with a traveller thus circumstanced, he should relieve him, and that precisely such a case as that in the parable was all that was contemplated. The interpretation of "Go and do thou likewise" was clear enough to any one who wished to understand it; as signifying that we are to regard every one as a neighbour to whom we have an opportunity of doing service, and are ready to perform the kind offices of a neighbour towards him.

・But, as I have said, our Lord chose not only to illustrate his general maxim by some particular exemplification; but, also, in order to make it the more clear to his hearers that this was his object,--that the instances adduced were for the purpose of illustrating the general rule,--it happened very frequently, as in the case of some of the illustrations just mentioned, that He

selected by choice such as were in themselves the smallest and most insignificant instances of the rule. Thus, when He wished to impress on his disciples in the most forcible manner the duty of being ready to serve, and perform kind offices for one another, He taught them by an action,--by himself condescending to wash their feet; and afterwards telling them, "ye ought also to wash one another's feet." This, it is well known, was, from the peculiar circumstances of the age and country, one of the chief refreshments to travellers: this particular instance, consequently, was chosen, as affording an easy and familiar illustration of the general disposition He designed to inculcate; a readiness to perform all manner of kind offices for one another. Now if the particular office of kindness, selected by Him, had been one of the more important services of life, there might have been the more danger of their supposing that his precept was meant to extend only to that particular service mentioned: whereas this was guarded against by his particularizing one of the smallest: when He said to them, "ye ought to wash one another's feet," they could not have a doubt that the precept was