mend them avoid premature convulsions. Let the harvest be ripe before you reap it. Remove not one system before you can substitute another. Tolerate an abuse rather than embroil a nation. But in so doing cease not, in imitation of Jesus, to prepare the way for its removal. Pay tribute, but denounce corruption. There is a virtue found often in the Christian character, which, were it not so timid, one would term amiable, that trembles to lift high the voice of crimination and reproof, and retires into privacy to busy itself with the care of feeding the hungry and clothing the naked. We condemn not its existence, but deprecate its spread; we approve of its good, while we deplore its defects. It is not the virtue of Jesus. He was at once the private and the public benefactor. The kindness of his heart even prompted him not to tolerate, but to denounce public abuses. When did his virtuous indignation kindle, but in beholding the hypocrisy of the Pharisees, and the wickedness of those who were at once the priests and rulers of his country?

This may lead us to notice the time when Jesus began his patriotic exertions. It was a time of unprecedented depravity. Corruptions prevailed alike in the church and in the state. Then Jesus elevated his admonitory and threatening voice; then he went about doing good, teaching, warning, and amending. Eventful periods require extraordinary exertions. The character of every change is largely affected by the character of those concerned in making it; and he who would see a change from bad to good, must in every case throw his influence into the right scale. There are periods when the fortune of a country is at stake, when its destinies undergo a new creation, when events take place of a magnitude sufficient to influence unborn ages. Then, as did Jesus, every man is bound to exercise the more active duties of a Patriot. Then, to the quiet virtues of the parent and the benefactor, must be added the stirring excellence of one who loves his country too well to spare any effort for its rescue and salvation. The period at which we of this day find ourselves is one of this character. The elements around us, with all their mighty agencies, are in active operation. A dreadful collision or a happy renovation is at hand. This is not the time for idle gazing. Every lover of his country, every lover of his species, should now take an active part, and do what in him lies to give the victory to the righteous cause. The collision of which we have spoken is fearful to think of. Willingly would the benevolent heart see the nations reach the peaceful shore without passing over the stormy ocean. Let us brace up our minds to hope for the best and bear the worst. Let us learn to buy good nor grudge the cost. Let us be prepared to pursue, without wearying, the path of duty. Whether or not the sunshine of success illumine our road, still let us press forward, turning neither to the right hand nor the left. Onward, onward, let our watchword be, through defeat and through victory-through joy and through sorrow-God's glory and man's happiness being our end and aim.

ON THE CHRONOLOGY AND ARRANGEMENT OF THE GOSPEL NARRATIVES.

(Continued from p. 314.)

NEAR the close of our last article, it was observed, that, in the circumstances of the case, St. Luke could not have compiled his Gospel in closely chronological order; and that it presents internal indications that his ar rangement is not strictly chronological. The obvious character of St. Luke's mind would lead him to adopt an orderly mode of composition; and it cannot be doubted that he would not, without due notice, intentionally depart from the order of time; but those who have considered the circumstances of that part of our Lord's Ministry which immediately followed the imprisonment of the Baptist-so crowded with occurrences, and these so constantly changing in their locality-will have no difficulty in perceiving, that nothing but personal attendance, and even contemporaneous records, could enable a person to retrace a comprehensive view of that period in the exact order of events. Of short portions, such a view might be given by persons residing where the occurrences took place, or who had attended our Lord in particular parts of his progresses; and by diligent inquiry, some general idea might be formed, by a person not present, of the train of events, which would serve as a guide in framing an orderly narrative. St. Luke obviously possessed records of such portions; and all that could then be learnt as to the succession of events, he would undoubtedly learn, in order to frame his narrative. But for this purpose he had not such advantages as he possessed for his subsequent "treatise." In the latter, the series of events extended over a space of many years, and the events themselves often occurred at far distant places, and at like intervals of time what is still more important, he was himself a personal witness during a large portion of his history. But in retracing the occurrences of a few months-commonly unconnected with each other, except in their effects on the bodies or the souls of those who were the objects of them, and, in various instances, occurring in the same places, after short intervals in which our Lord had been absent from them-he must often, when framing his narrative, have had no other guidance than the connexion of place and of subject. This invaluable historian followed, in every instance, we doubt not, the best system of arrangement which the circumstances of the case presented and though the gospel annalist of the present day has advantages which St. Luke did not possess, for framing a chronological arrangement of the whole of our Lord's Ministry; and, in some respects, superior advantages, in reference to the succession of events, even in that part of it which Luke peculiarly records ;* yet one important result has probably followed from his not having closely bound himself to the (often unattainable) order of time-that he has recorded various discourses and sayings of our Lord, the precise date of which could not have been ascertained, and which, from his wider range of knowledge, he alone had the power to record.

Two circumstances contributed to that wider range: the one, that his inquiries would naturally extend into the eastern part of the dominions of Herod, where our Lord spent several weeks during (we may reasonably suppose) the absence of the Twelve; the other, that, from his profession

* We can scarcely be misunderstood, but deem it best to specify that we refer to the possession of St. John's Gospel, and St. Matthew's.

and education, he would have access to a class in society superior to that of the fishermen and publicans of Galilee. To the latter cause may be attributed St. Luke's knowledge of various occurrences at the houses of the rich, which are not recorded by Matthew or Mark; and also of those connected with the household or the jurisdiction of Herod to the former, his knowledge of discourses, parables, &c., which were delivered in the Peræa, or at least recorded by believers who resided there, and probably but little known in Galilee. It is not likely that St. Luke would have much access to Apostles, most of whom must have left Judæa, and of whom one alone is mentioned in the later part of St. Paul's history (Acts xxi. 18): but many of the Seventy must have been still living; and from their recollections, as well as from those records, which (either from personal knowledge, or from the preachings of the Apostles) would be early drawn up, of our Lord's transactions or discourses in particular portions of his ministry, he must have had sources of information beyond what any single Apostle could have supplied. The Gospel of Luke may be divided into six leading portions:

I. The record of the early history of John and of Jesus: ch. i. ii.

II. The Ministry of the Baptist; with the Baptism and Temptation of Christ: ch. iii. 1—iv. 13.

III. The Ministry of Christ in Galilee: ch. iv. 14-ix. 62.

IV. Miscellaneous Discourses and Transactions principally connected with the Peræa: ch. x. 1-xvii. 10.

V. Discourses and Occurrences during the last Journey to Jerusalem: ch. xvii. 11-xix. 28.*

The words in Luke xvii. 11, are rendered, "And it came to pass, as he went to Jerusalem, that he passed through the midst of Samaria and Galilee :" dia μɛoov Σαμαρείας και Γαλιλαίας, As Luke could not have represented our Lord's course to Jerusalem from any part of Palestine, as passing through the midst, first of Samaria, and then of Galilee,—and as he was too accurate a writer to place the countries in that order, if our Lord had been journeying from any part of Galilee to Jerusalem-it appears most reasonable to suppose, that his words mean, "through the borders of Samaria and Galilee." From ch. ix. 51-56 and Matt. xix. 1, it appears, that, on our Lord's last journey to Jerusalem, having been rejected in Samaria, he passed over the Jordan, into the Peræa-probably over the bridge near Scythopolis. His course would, therefore, lie along the confines of Samaria and Galilee; and Luke would naturally mention Samaria first, because his previous view of our Lord's course was from Samaria. This is the interpretation of Wetstein and others; and it now appears to us fully satisfactory. Lightfoot imagines that Galilee (as loosely it might) included Peræa; and, further, that it here means Peræa, which is not an admissible interpretation. Paulus and Greswell suppose, that, as Christ, after raising Lazarus, resided for a time at Ephraim, and afterwards went into Galilee, before he came to Jerusalem at the last passover, Luke speaks of him, in the passage under consideration, as taking a circuit from Ephraim, through Samaria aud Galilee, in the way to Jerusalem!

Regarding Luke xvii. 11 as referring to our Lord's last journey to Jerusalem, we have little hesitation in considering it as the recommencement of that narrative which the Evangelist had interrupted at the close of the ninth chapter, in order to introduce a Gnomology consisting of miscellaneous records, without specific dates, the whole of which he may have collected in the Peræa, and much of which he may have known to be connected with it in point of locality. There are in it some facts which could not have occurred in our Saviour's last journey to Jerusalem, as the mission of the Seventy, and the visit to Bethany in the tenth chapter; and some discourses (as we shall hereafter specify) which the Gospel of Matthew, and internal evidence, would lead oue to refer to an earlier period: but, on the other hand, there are others, (as ch. xiii. 1-9 and 22-35,) which so obviously suit that journey, that

VI. Transactions from our Lord's entry into Jerusalem to his ascension: ch. xix. 29-xxiv. 53.

The fourth portion contains the greater part of that Gnomology which Bishop Marsh supposes to have, in a great measure, existed before St. Luke began to compile his Gospel; and to have been placed by him in the position in which we find it, on account of the references which occur in it to our Lord's journeying to Jerusalem. The part of the Gospel which Marsh includes in the Gnomology, occupies from ch. ix. 51 to xviii. 14. For the reason we have assigned in the preceding note, we would lessen the extent of that miscellaneous collection of Discourses, &c.; and we much prefer the supposition that the Gnomology was formed by St. Luke himself, from various records which he collected in the Peræa, but which, from different causes, he could not interweave in the continuous narrative that he had given of our Lord's ministry in Galilee, or in that which he afterwards gives of the journey through the Peræa to Jerusalem.*

On examining the records of Matthew and Mark, respecting the last journey from Galilee, through the Peræa, to Jerusalem, (Matt. xix., xx., and Mark x.,) and considering that the Apostles were with our Lord during the whole of it, abundant reason presents itself for the conviction, that the mission and return of the Seventy could not have occurred during that journey. There is, indeed, no reference to these disciples in any part of the first two Gospels; and the continuous nature of the narratives of the last journey, precludes the supposition that their mission took place during it. Upon our leading principle-that the miracle of the Five Thousand occurred a short time before the Last Passover-it was not possible that it should have done so; and without departing from St. Luke's own Gospel, we see reason to conclude that he could not have intended to represent their mission as occurring between our Lord's leaving Galilee and his entering Judæa. He says (ch. ix. 51), that when the time was come that he should be received up, Jesus steadfastly set his face to go to Jerusalem. This expression excludes the supposition of a circuitous progress, or a long sojourn, in the Peraa; his direct course would not exceed forty or fifty miles. Three days would be sufficient for that part of his journey. During it he might work many miracles, and often communicate his heavenly instructions to the multitudes

and

they would naturally suggest the placing of the whole in that portion of the Gospel,in other respects the best suited to it.

Again, considering this passage as describing the course our Lord took after being rejected in Samaria, we must place the miraculous cure of the Ten Lepers on the last journey to Jerusalem. In "a Harmony of the Gospels," (Boston, 1831,) the plan proposed by Lant Carpenter, LL. D.," in his "Introduction to the Geogra phy of the New Testament," this occurrence is placed before the Feast of Dedication, agreeably to the order in Dr. Carpenter's New Testament Geography. We shall have occasion to notice this beautifully printed Harmony hereafter; but we may be allowed to express here our satisfaction, that the leading principles of arrangement which we are advocating, are likely to obtain an extensive reception among our transatlantic brethren. The Boston Harmony came to hand after our anticipation in p. 307 had gone to the press.

Bp. Marsh's view of the contents of this Gnomology, will be found in his "Dissertation on the Origin and Composition of the Three First Canonical Gospels," pp. 236-241. How far he is correct (or, rather, incorrect) in saying, p. 241, that St. Matthew "has a great part of the matter contained in Luke ix. 51-xviii. 14," may be seen by referring to our Table in p. 309, § 33—64.

N. B. The reader will oblige us by altering the word taught (in the last paragraph of p. 314) to wrought; and also ch. x. 57, to ch. ix. 57.

and to his disciples; and from the first three Gospels we have rather copious records of our Lord's transactions during it: but nothing that at all accords with the occurrence during it of the mission of the Seventy, and their return after having executed their commission.

If the mission of the Seventy could not have occurred on our Lord's last journey, we are at liberty to place it where it best suits the history; and no situation appears more probable than during the absence of the Twelve, and soon after our Lord had sent them forth. Purposing, without a doubt, to spend some time in the eastern part of Herod's dominions, (which he did after he had visited Jerusalem at the Feast of Dedication,) it was natural that-in order to prepare for his preaching in a district where he had not yet been in his public character, and at a season of the year when it would not be practicable to collect great numbers of the people together, as in the preceding months in Galilee-he should adopt the preparatory measure of sending persons, many of whom might be natives of the Peræa, to the various towns and villages which he intended to visit. It is not improbable that we are to refer to his preaching in the Perea at that period, several of the discourses and occurrences which are recorded in our fourth division of St. Luke's Gospel, i. e. the Gnomology. If the Evangelist became acquainted with the materials of that portion, principally by his researches in the Perea, it might have contributed to their being arranged in their present situation and together; and if they were chiefly derived from some of the Seventy, it would naturally lead to their being introduced by a brief record of the mission and ministry of those disciples.

μετα ταύτα,

Independently of any other consideration, it might, indeed, be reasonably supposed, from the expression, "after these things," (ch. x. 1,) that St. Luke considered the mission of the Seventy as occurring on the last journey; and though the fact is perceived to be otherwise, from the accounts of the preceding Evangelists, yet it might be admitted that such really was the view of St. Luke, except for his preceding representation (ch. ix. 51) of the despatch and directness with which our Lord performed that journey. This almost obliges us to refer such an occurrence as the mission of the Seventy to a different period.-How then are we to interpret the words "after these things"? Since the record obviously forms an independent section of the Gospel, it might be supposed that Mera Tavra occurred in the original document, and was left by St. Luke as he found it. This, however, does not seem very consistent with that correctness of style which is manifestly a characteristic of this Evangelist; and it is more probable, that since his preceding section (ch. ix.) had begun with the account of the mission of the twelve-with which he connected a brief view of the events following their return till our Lord's last journey-he adverted to their mission in the expression Mera Taura (without notice of the intervening records) ; just as he clearly does when he says that "the Lord appointed Seventy others also," Kal Tips Bounovra. If the reader do not deem this solution fully satisfactory, he may consider it as one of the many cases in which we have only to choose between difficulties; and we prefer that supposition which is attended with a verbal difficulty to that which opposes fact.

The remarks already made in reference to the characteristics of the fourth part of St. Luke's Gospel, consisting of the Gnomology, will probably have prepared the way for what we have to offer on the historical portion forming the third part-respecting our Lord's ministry in Galilee.

There is little room to doubt that St. Luke would arrange his materials in the order of time, in proportion as he could ascertain it; and as he gives