merely the certainty, but also the nature, of that state of retribution unto which the Gospel dispensation is designed to conduct, will it surprise us that the kingdom of heaven should be uppermost in the thoughts and expressions of the sacred penmen, even where the Gospel dispensation was meant. The sublime and rapturous prospect of the future, discernible by the eye of faith beyond this temporary scene of things, the contemplation of those ineffable joys and glories of which Christian patience and perseverance insure us the reversion in another life, but do not convey to us the possession in this, would naturally so transport and fill their minds, as to make them habitually insensible to the interval between the present and the future; and in the language of St. Paul, forgetful of the things that were passing, or past, look only, press on, only, towards those which were before, and to come.

Besides which, if the Gospel dispensation, as placing all who are subject to it in a state of probation preparatory to a state of retribution, is something which concerns individual Christians, as much as Christians in common, the interval between the commencement of the one and the arrival of the other, in every individual Christian's case, is, strictly speaking, the interval of his lifetime. If the state of probation, as such, actually terminates with death, and the state of retribution virtually begins where the state of probation actually ends, then the interval between the Gospel dispensation, and the kingdom of heaven, as far as concerns the interest of any particular Christian in either, is neither more nor less than the period of his natural existence.

It remains for us now to inquire how far this

association of ideas between the kingdom of heaven, as such, and the Gospel dispensation, illustrates or explains the parables. The words, "The kingdom

66

"of heaven is likened, or the kingdom of heaven is like,” (ώμοιώθη, oι ὁμοία ἐστὶν, ἡ βασιλεία τῶν οὐρανῶν,) stand as the subject of comparison at the head of many of the parables, and might be shewn, from the nature of the parabolic history, to be virtually premised to many more. Is it not, therefore, more reasonable to suppose, that they stand in each instance for something the same, than for something different? Not indeed for something absolutely the same, or purely identical in every instance, because the parables to which they are premised have all a different moral; but for something generally at least the same, though specifically perhaps distinct.

Now, with regard to what this is; until we admit the necessity of considering the phrase itself to stand for the Gospel dispensation, as preparatory, and merely conducive, to the kingdom of heaven, we shall be painfully at a loss to discover the affinity between the obvious meaning of the terms, and the drift of the several parables, to which they are compared. But with this admission, we shall perceive a wonderful result of harmony, congruity, affinity between the objects of comparison on both sides; which is one of the strongest presumptive proofs of the truth of the admission itself, and a clear evidence of the great propriety with which the name of parables may be given to the comparison together of subjects, so related to each other.

The phrase, Gospel dispensation, indeed, is one of an extensive signification: nor is it necessary to suppose that it must always be used in the utmost

of its meaning. It is sufficient, if some one determinate member of its various component parts, be selected from the complex import of the terms, and be strictly kept in view for the particular oc

casion.

The Gospel dispensation, even as the state of probation preparatory to the state of retribution, may be restricted in one point of view, to the first preaching and promulgation of the Gospel in another point of view, to the material or external constitution of the visible church: in another point of view, to the continued subsistence of the Christian religion, from its beginning to its consummation, with the causes to which it is due. In another instance, it may be limited to the rule of proceeding with respect to one main article of the discipline of the Gospel dispensation, the forgiveness of sins, or the offences of Christians against God, as dependent on their forgiveness of injuries, or the offences of others against themselves. In another instance, and as still a part of the same complex notion of the Gospel dispensation, the phrase may stand for the gratuitous extension to the Gentile of the spiritual privileges, which on condition of certain performances, were the covenanted right of the Jew. In another sense, it may be restricted to the mere overture of Christianity and Christian privileges, first to the Jew, and secondly to the Gentile; with its different reception by each. In another instance, the phrase may be used, for the duty of Christian vigilance, incumbent on Christians as such, in order to be always prepared for the coming of Christ. In each of these senses, and in others similar to these, we shall see it illustrated hereafter, in different para

bles; but that which is at the bottom of them all, is the Gospel dispensation, primarily, considered as a state of probation in this life, conducting, secondarily, to the enjoyment of a kingdom of heaven, considered as a state of retribution in another life.

CHAPTER XI.

On the method observed in treating of the Parables. THE method, which I have observed, in treating of each parable, as far as it was practicable, is this: first, I have explained the circumstances of the material history; secondly, I have ascertained its moral; thirdly, I have shewn its application, or its interpretation.

The explanation of the material structure of each parabolic history seemed obviously necessary, before we could proceed to consider its use in any other respect. The analogies which must be applied in the case of a moral example, and the facts which must be interpreted in that of a prophetical allegory, both suppose the circumstances of the narrative to be previously well understood. These circumstances constitute the data of our practical reasonings in the one case, and the symbolical language of our real histories, which is to be translated and explained, in the other.

Besides, as each of these parabolic narratives, whatever may be its ulterior use and purpose, has an essence and composition of its own, it may require explanation, either to shew the connexion of its parts, or to clear up and illustrate its allusions, which being derived from ancient sources are not uniformly intelligible to modern readers. I have made a point therefore, of endeavouring to explain all the material circumstances of each parable, or at least as much of them as was practicable, before I attempted any thing else: and should it