for if there had been any in him, he could not have removed ours.

The text sets forth his innocence in two particulars; "he did no violence, neither was there any deceit in his mouth." Deceit and violence are the fruits of wisdom and power when abused: and alas! wisdom is but' too often employed in devising mischief, as power is in executing it. Our Lord was endued with wisdom; for "in him were hid all the treasures of wisdom and knowledge:" and he was possessed of power; for all nature, animate and inanimate, was under his controul: but he never abused either for the purposes of deceit or violence. On the contrary, he employed his wisdom in confounding his captious adversaries, and in explaining the mysteries of his kingdom to his followers: and his power he exerted in working miracles upon the bodies of men, and in affecting the conversion of their souls. Who can read any of his discourses without acknowledging, as they did of old, that "he spake as never man spake?" who that hears him commanding the unclean spirits with authority, and rebuking the winds and the sea, must not immediately confess, that "no man could do these things except God were with him?" Sometimes indeed he answered differently from what we might have expected; as when he told the young man to "enter into life by keeping the commandments:" but this he did, because he knew, that the young man's heart was proud of his great attainments, at the same time that, it was glued to his earthly possessions. This therefore was the way, not to deceive, but to undeceive him, by discovering to him the sinfulness of his heart: whereas, if he had told him at once, that the way to enter into life was by believing in him, he would indeed. have given a more explicit answer to the question; but he would have left him wholly ignorant of his own corruptions, and would have exposed him thereby to the tenfold danger of making, like Judas, an hypocritical profession. So our Lord may appear to have done violence, when he beat the armed men backward to the ground by his word. But this was done in pity to their , souls: it was the very way to convince them, that they were about to seize the Lord's prophet; and thereby to

make them desist from their purpose. If they were Jewish soldiers, as doubtless they were, because they were sent by the chief priests and elders, and Pilate was not yet acquainted with their intentions, they could not but have heard the history of the prophet Elijah, who struck dead two different companies of men, consisting of fifty each, who came to apprehend him. Now our Lord struck them to the ground to bring that to their remembrance: and when they would not desist, he resigned himself into their hands. He healed also the high priest's servant, whose ear Peter had cut off: and, as he had once before rebuked his disciples, when they would have called fire from heaven to destroy a Samaritan village that had refused him admission, so now he told them, that "all who took the sword, should perish with the sword." Indeed, if there had been any deceit in Jesus, Judas would gladly have discovered it, as a justification of his own treachery; and, if there had been any violence in him, his numerous and watchful enemies would not have failed to lay it to his charge. But, so far was he from using deceit or violence himself, that he has engaged to deliver his people from all, who, in either of these respects, should attempt to injure them: "He shall redeem their souls, says David (Ps. lxxii. 14.) from deceit and violence."

It appears then that his innocence in every respect stands unimpeached; "he was just such an high priest as became us, holy, harmless, undefiled, and separate from sinners." Nor was he more clear in the sight of men, than he was in the sight of God; for "he did always those things which pleased his Father:" and thrice did his Father, by an audible voice from heaven, declare him to be "his beloved Son, in whom he was well pleased."

But, however innocent he was, however free both from violence and deceit, yet he was not dealt with as innocent either by God or man: for, as his own countrymen treated him with the utmost barbarity, so even his heavenly Father acted towards him, as if he had been the greatest of all criminals; as we shall see by considering

VOL. II.

3 B

II. The conduct of his Father towards him.

We must acknowledge that there is something inexpressibly awful, and deeply mysterious, in the declaration before us: nevertheless it will be found literally true, that, notwithstanding the complacency and delight which the Father must of necessity have taken in the immaculate Jesus, "it pleased the Lord to bruise him."

That his heavenly Father did inflict punishment upon him, even these words indisputably prove; as also do the words which immediately follow; "he hath put him to grief." There is also in other parts of scripture abundant evidence to confirm it: for, all that either men or devils did, was not only by his permission, but by his express commission. The Father" spared not his Son, but delivered him up;" and though the Jews took him, and by wicked hands crucified and slew him, yet St. Peter says, he was delivered up "by the determinate counsel and foreknowledge of God." And indeed, how otherwise shall we account for his agony in the garden? If it was produced by devils, still they "could have no power against him, except it had been given them from above." And what shall we say to that bitter lamentation which he uttered upon the cross? The complaint arose, not from any pains of body, but from the desertion and wrath which his soul experienced from his heavenly Father: then the Father" bruised him." This expression alludes to the holy incense mentioned in Exod. xxx. 34, 36. "The Lord said unto Moses, Take unto thee sweet spices with pure frankincense, and thou shalt beat some of it very small, and put of it before the testimony in the tabernacle of the congregation, where I will meet with thee; and it shall be unto you most holy." Before these spices could ascend up to God as incense, or be worthy to be laid up in the tabernacle, they were to be "beaten very small:" and in the same manner was Jesus to be bruised, before the incense of his merits could be accepted, or his own person be received into the tabernacle of the Most High. This was by far the most distressing part of our Saviour's sufferings; for could we account for his behaviour under them, unless we believed, that they were inflicted by his heavenly Father: for many martyrs have endured

all that men could inflict, not only with resignation, but with joy and triumph: but here we see no less a person than the Son of God exceeding sorrowful even unto death at the very apprehension of his sufferings: we hear him crying for the removal of the bitter cup, and bewailing in the most pathetic manner the intenseness of his agony.

Nor did the Father bruise him only, but as the text intimates, took pleasure in bruising him; "It pleased the Lord to bruise him." The word which is here translated, "It pleased," includes in it an idea of complacency, and is strongly expressive of pleasure: the import of it is much the same with that which the apostle uses, when he says, "With such sacrifices God is wellpleased:" in conformity with which idea, Jehovah is said to smell a sweet savour from those sacrifices which prefigured the crucified Jesus. Indeed, the same idea, though not so expressly asserted, is supported and confirmed by many other passages of scripture. In the very verse following the text, we are informed, that the Father gave him promises on the express condition that he should endure his wrath for man; that "when he should make his soul an offering for sin, he should see a seed, and should prolong his days;" that is, that, on condition of his bearing the wrath due to sinners, many should be everlastingly saved through him, and with him. In another place we are told that "God sent his Son into the world for this very end, that he might be the propitiation for our sins; that is, that he might bear the punishment due to them: St. Paul also says, that "Christ was made sin, that is, a sin-offering, for us:" and again, that "he was made a curse for us:" all of which passages shew that God sent him into the world on purpose to bruise him. We may further observe, that the Father had from the beginning delighted in the sacrifices which were offered, because they were types of that sacrifice, which Christ in due time should offer upon the cross. When Noah came out of the ark, he built an altar, and offered a burnt-offering upon it; and then we are told, "The Lord smelled a sweet savour." So, at the very time that our Lord was bruised, the Father was pleased with it; for the apostle says of Christ,

that he " gave himself an offering and a sacrifice to God for a sweet smelling savour;" plainly implying, that as God was pleased with the offering of beasts by Noah, and with the savour of the incense which was composed of bruised spices, so he was pleased with the offering of his own Son, while he was yet consuming with the fire of divine wrath. The Father has moreover exalted Jesus in consideration of his having endured the sufferings which he had appointed him. The apostle having set forth Christ as obedient unto death, even the death of the cross, adds, "Wherefore God hath highly exalted him, and given him a name above every name." In the same manner, every blessing which the Father bestows upon mankind is given as the purchase of Christ's blood, and as the reward of his obedience unto death. Redemption includes every blessing of the covenant; every evil we are delivered from, and every good which we are ever to possess: and this the apostle ascribes wholly to the efficacy of Christ's blood; "We have redemption, says he, through his blood;" and another apostle says, "Ye were redeemed with the precious blood of Christ."

Now did the Father give promises to his Son on the express condition of his suffering? did he send him into the world on purpose that he might suffer? did he delight in other sacrifices merely as typical of those sufferings? did he declare, that the offering up of his dear Son was an offering of a sweet smelling savour? did he exalt Christ for his sufferings? and does he continually bestow the richest blessings on his very enemies as a reward of those sufferings? did he do all these things, and shall we not acknowledge that the sufferings of Christ were pleasing to him; or, to use the words of the text, that it pleased the Lord to bruise him?

However, we must not imagine that the mere act of inflicting punishment on his only dear Son could be pleasing to him: No: "He delighteth in mercy;" and Judgment is his strange work:" he is averse to punish even his enemies; and much more his own Son. But there were very sufficient reasons why he should be pleased with bruising his own Son; to illustrate which we shall consider