servant. How could such a one without weapons in his hands compel ten hundred, or ten thousand, or ten millions, by force to come in. It needs but to be looked at in order to see that such an inference is inadmissible. But if it was an invitation to a feast, what use could there be for compulsion by physical force? Besides, if they had driven them in by force, they could not have compelled them to eat when they did come in. It assumes that those who do come, feel hungry and will eat what is set before them. So the expression, "Compel them to come in," means, compel them by argument, by the force of moral suasion, by commending the thing to their consciences, by showing that it is so great a privilege that they shall be compelled by a force stronger than that of swords, mightier than armies the obligation, the sacred obligation of conscience. -to come in, and partake of those benefits that are provided for them in the gospel. Unquestionably, force is forbidden in the pages of the gospel as an ally to its invitation. We must neither unsheath the sword, nor light the fagot, nor in any similar way try to make men Christians by force. You may bribe men to come in, but you will only have a congregation of hypocrites by such a process. You may compel men by physical force, and crowd them within four walls, but you will only have reluctant and rebellious worshippers. But if you can compel them by the far loftier course of securing the conviction of their judgments, the approbation of conscience, the attention of love, then you have exercised a power over them mightier than any physical coercion-a power under which they will move with alacrity and joy to the acceptance of those grand and precious blessings which are set before them in every page of the everlasting gospel.

We read, in a parable almost parallel with this, which I

will consider in our next, that when Christ came in to look at the guests, he saw a man not having on a wedding garment. I can only briefly notice this. In the halls of ancient mansions there were hung up robes in sufficient abundance for the guests, and each guest invited to the feast was required to put on one of these robes. The only custom at all like it with us is found at funerals, where cloaks are provided by the relatives of the deceased, clothed in which the mourners accompany the remains of the departed to their rest. In ancient times the master who invited a guest to dine with him, gave him a cloak or garment in which he was to sit at his table and partake of his hospitality; and to refuse to put on that robe was to insult the master of the house, and to disqualify the guest from joining in the feast. Persons say, this "wedding garment" meant a suitable state of heart: no doubt this is required, because, unless they had that suitable state of heart, they would not have accepted it; but yet it was something that the master of the feast provided for them, it was something not in them, but on them, and it was so accessible that there was no excuse for not wearing it. It is a righteousness not in us, but upon us,-the robe of a Redeemer's righteousness, the wedding garment of a Redeemer's obedience, which he gives us, that in it we may sit down with Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, and be partakers of the everlasting joys of the kingdom of heaven. I have thus explained the gospel feast; I have tried, in the simplest terms, to describe the most precious of truths. Have we approached this festival by faith, and eaten and drank and been satisfied? If not, we are still spending our money for that which is not bread, and our labour for that which satisfieth not.

This festival is only a foreshadow of a future and the heavenly one. He that sits not down with Christ in this

feast below, will never sit down with Christ, and Abraham and Isaac and Jacob, in that rich festival which is above. The first is the pathway to the last. We must accept Christ crucified, or we never can be accepted by Christ glorified. We must eat bread with him upon earth, if ever we hope to eat bread with him in heaven; and blessed are they that eat bread with him here, that they may eat of that bread and drink of that cup afresh in the kingdom of their Father.

46

LECTURE III.

THE ROYAL FEAST.

And Jesus answered and spake unto them again by parables, and said, The kingdom of heaven is like unto a certain king, which made a marriage for his son, and sent forth his servants to call them that were bidden to the wedding: and they would not come. Again, he sent forth other servants, saying, Tell them which are bidden, Behold, I have prepared my dinner: my oxen and my fatlings are killed, and all things are ready: come unto the marriage. But they made light of it, and went their ways, one to his farm, another to his merchandise: and the remnant took his servants, and entreated them spitefully, and slew them. But when the king heard thereof, he was wroth: and he sent forth his armies, and destroyed those murderers, and burned up their city. Then saith he to his servants, The wedding is ready, but they which were bidden were not worthy. Go ye therefore into the highways, and as many as ye shall find, bid to the marriage. So those servants went out into the highways, and gathered together all as many as they found, both bad and good: and the wedding was furnished with guests. And when the king came in to see the guests, he saw there a man which had not on a wedding garment: and he saith unto him, Friend, how camest thou in hither not having a wedding garment? And he was speechless. Then said the king to his servants, Bind him hand and foot, and take him away, and cast him into outer darkness; there shall be weeping and gnashing of teeth. For many are called, but few are chosen. -MATT. xxii. 1–14.

THIS parable is perfectly distinct from Luke xiv. 16–24. That of Luke occurred at a meal, while Matthew's occurred in the temple: the former also took place at an earlier period, the latter at a much later. In the former the hostility of the Pharisees was not yet so intensely expressed; but in the latter case their hostility and hatred to the Son of man had risen to its highest possible pitch. In Luke's narrative, and at the era of the occurrence he records, there was some hope of softening down and winning to a better mind, and therefore all is gentle and persuasive: at

the time of St. Matthew's narrative there seems to have been left no hope, and therefore there is a tone of stern and unsparing severity. Our Lord thus adapted his teaching, not his principles, to the circumstances and the persons among whom he was placed. In the first instance, the excuses wear an air of plausibility and importance; in the second no excuse is pleaded, but there is exhibited instead, violence, insolence and contempt. In the first instance the deceived excuse-makers were excluded; but in the second their city is burned up with fire, and they themselves are utterly destroyed. In Luke's the thought is, that the gospel should be taken away from the Jews, the priests, and the Pharisees, and passed over to Gentiles, or perhaps the very least esteemed of the people. In Matthew's, the Pharisees finally cease, and the Gentiles are represented as taking the place of the Jews, who had lost their privileges, and perished from their possession. Thus we see the perfect consistency and harmony of these parables with the circumstances, the time, the position, and the audience of our Lord. They are not the same story diversely and contradictorily told, as a modern skeptic alleges, but two distinct occurrences, told each with the inimitable simplicity of inspired truth.

Let us notice also how Christ opens up his character in these two. In Luke's narrative, the earlier parable-we read of the householder's son; but in Matthew's, which is the later, we read of the son of the king. The domestic relationship, soft and beautiful, predominates in the one. The royal dignity, august and solemn, starts into view in the other. Progression is still the law of the Christian dispensation. He who now pleads as an elder Brother, will come soon as the royal Bridegroom. This narrative is in fact that of a festival and marriage combined. Here is the espousal; in Revelation xix. 7, there is the marriage