In Matt. xxiii. 8-11, Christ cannot have intended absolutely to prohibit the assumption of these titles; for they are given by the sacred writers to teachers and distinguished men, as may be seen in Poli Synop., Wolfius, Wetstein, Kuinöel, and others on the place, and in Schleusner, Rose's Parkhurst, Suicer, and Buxtorfii Lex. Talm. Rab. in voc. He can, therefore, only have meant to forbid Christians to assume them in the same way as the Scribes and Pharisees, through pride and ostentation, without striving or wishing to deserve them. Be not, like them, "called Rabbi; for one is your Master;" you have only one teacher and instructor invested with that infallible authority which is claimed by the Scribes and Pharisees; "even Christ; and all ye are brethren," and no one ought to pretend to such an authority over the rest. "And call no man your father upon earth;" do not attribute to your human teachers the power which the Pharisees challenge by claiming the title of fathers; "for one is your Father, which is in heaven;" to God only must you yield this absolute subjection. "Neither be ye called masters;" do not be teachers of such characters and pretensions as the Scribes and Pharisees; "for one is your Master;" you have only one teacher entitled to the authority

imperium omne hoc verbo (katakupiɛúovσiv) tolli, sed ejus abusum." Wolfius.

which they claim, "even Christ1."-From this examination it is apparent that neither of the passages militate against a just and legitimate authority, either civil or ecclesiastical.

3. Dissenters lay great stress upon our Saviour's declaration, "My kingdom is not of this world," John xviii. 36., from which they infer, that "it is a community distinct from all earthly ones, and apart by itself; a cause that needs not, asks not, admits not the coarse and rude instruments of secular power, or policy, for its establishment, support, and progress, but is entirely a spiritual community. Not merely not a kingdom for temporal purposes, but which is not set up or supported by worldly governments 1."

If this view of our Lord's declaration be correct, it will apply with the same force against all secular means of spreading the Gospel. If it prohibits the civil magistrate from employing means for the propagation of Christianity, it must also prohibit societies, meetings, committees, &c., from employing them; for both equally use the instrumentality of human means. Should it be said that the latter are of a spiritual nature, engaging spiritual men for spiritual objects, the same may with equal truth be said of the administration of the civil magistrate in his character of patron and governor of the

J Christian Expositor on v. 8.

2 James, Address, p. 11.

Church. In principle there is no difference; both use gold and silver, and other secular means; the one is as much "of this world" as the other; and if the State's appointing and supporting a clergy be condemned by our Saviour's words, so must the election and support of ministers by any society or body of men; and, following the argument to its ultimate results, we must in the same way infer from the text the condemnation of all and every worldly means for the furtherance of the Gospel.

The sectarian view of the passage, then, in as much as it proves too much, cannot be just; and this will further appear from its true interpretation. The Gospel dispensation is represented in the Scriptures as a kingdom which God would set up, of a spiritual nature, of which Christ is the head, and which, commencing in this world, is to be perfected in the next. To this Jesus refers, declaring, that He is a King, and possesses a kingdom; but it is not of this world," or rather, "not from this world1;" that is, not

1'EK TOυ KÓσμOU TOÚTOV, “ is not from this world." Bp. Pearce. "'Ek præcise notat originem, ut mox έvτɛ~0ɛv, hinc." Bengel. Gnomon in loc. “ Εἶναι ἐκ τοῦ κόσμου significare potest vel originem sumere ex his hominibus, vel simile esse regno terreno Utrumque eodem redit, si sententia spectatur." Rosenmüller. The exposition given in the text is confirmed by the foreign commentators, Lampe, Wolfius, Rosenmüller, Tittmann, Kuinöel, Semler, Grotius, and others in Poli Synop., as well as by the most eminent of our own.

derived from it, not of human or mundane original. If it were an earthly kingdom, "then would my servants fight, that I should not be delivered to the Jews;" they would use force and worldly means for my protection; "but now, for as much as they do not, it is evident that "my kingdom is not from hence," not from the world, but from heaven, a spiritual kingdom, and therefore is not opposed to Cæsar, or any civil government. The passage, therefore, is a declaration that Christ's kingdom is a spiritual dispensation, not an earthly sovereignty; but how, or in what way it may be most effectually promoted, whether by legalized institutions or otherwise, is a question to which it cannot justly be applied.

Dr. Wardlaw, evidently hard pressed by the force of this interpretation, endeavours to evade it in the following manner. Supposing the design of our Lord was to allay the jealous surmises of the Roman governor, by asserting that his kingdom was of a very different nature from that of this world's potentates, and so not of a kind to interfere with any political authority; yet, says he, "there is one consideration which appears to be unaccountably overlooked,-so far as this text is concerned, the turning point of the present controversy. It is found in the word Now: 'now is my kingdom not from hence.' The words involve a comparison be

tween the past and the present; and they intimate a change,-a change from what had been to what was now to be. He had all along —in a way which we understand, though we have little ground to suppose that Pilate did— been King of the Jews. But, in former times, his kingdom, in its form and constitution, had been national;-there was in it an incorporation of the civil and the sacred; and it was maintained and defended by similar outward means as other kingdoms;-but Now it was to be otherwise. The 'now' is not a mere unemphatic and inferential particle; for indeed there is nothing of inference in the case. It announces a transition,-a transition from a comparatively secular and worldly state of his kingdom, to a state essentially different. In this view, therefore, we have in the passage a distinct disavowal, from the Redeemer's own lips, of the Old Testament constitution of his kingdom, as in any respect a model for the kingdom he was about to establish;-a declaration that its national and worldly state was now to terminate, and that at this new æra, it was to assume a new character,-embracing as its subjects, those who were of the truth,' i. e. who believed his doctrine, and lived under its practical influence-and maintaining its ground, and punishing its delinquents, and extending its conquests, by no power but the moral power of