his former authority-to do something by virtue of that power, and not inconsistent with his previous character, which will effectually guard him against the consequences otherwise to be apprehended to himself, from the loss of his master's favour, and the place which he held in his service. What his previous character might be, and what the particular moral quality of the expedient upon which he fixes, so far as the end which he has in view by it was concerned, it would not be necessary to inquire, further than to know, that better or worse in itself his character was consistent from first to last in prompting him to this expedient and right or wrong in itself, the expedient which he adopted was critically adapted to serve his purpose.

Such, we may contend, would be a correct outline of the principal, material facts in the parabolic history, considered as supplying the grounds of analogy to justify the application of the narrative to any thing beyond itself. But with regard to this application or whom it might concern, and in what respects as the parable is ushered in by a remark of the evangelist who records it, that it was addressed by our Lord to his disciples-as the reflections, which he himself founds upon the facts of the narrative, are directed to them-as though the Pharisees, and probably others, might hear what was said by him, as well as the disciples, yet it appears that they heard it only because they were present at the same time, and in the same place, as they—it seems superfluous to observe that in the intention of the speaker of the parable, the parallel or example therein contained, must have been designed to apply

in a special manner, to the case of his own disciples. But if it was designed for his own disciples, we may conclude that it was designed for those, who either were, or should be, Christians: and if it was specially designed for Christians, we may take it for granted it was designed for an use and purpose highly evangelical, and becoming all Christians both to know and to observe accordingly: something, in short, if we may judge from the dislike of the doctrine, exhibited by the Pharisees, and the manner in which they gave vent to their feelings upon hearing it, not only new and unheard of until now, (and consequently either not taught, or not clearly taught in the writings of Moses and the Prophets,) but withal highly offensive to antecedent prejudice, or natural inclinations. What this doctrine was, may be collected from the statement of the four following propositions; in which we may sum up the moral of the parable, as deducible from that outline of its most important circumstances, given above.

First, by virtue of such a representation as is contained in this parable, Christians in general may and ought to know that they stand, or are capable of standing to some master, in the relation of confidential servants in general, and of stewards in particular; and therefore that they are, or they may be, invested with a certain responsible trust.

Secondly, by virtue of the same representation, as applicable to their own case, Christians may and ought to know that the trust in question is one which they hold, or are liable to hold, only for a limited time; which they must render up at last however long they may retain it previously, and may be called upon to resign prematurely.

Thirdly, by virtue of the same representation Christians may and ought to know that on the use and administration of this trust, so long as it remains in their possession, certain consequences, affecting themselves, in the way of retribution, that is, in the shape of reward or in the shape of punishment, when they come to render it up again, necessarily will depend.

Fourthly and lastly, by virtue of the same representation Christians may and ought to know that it is their interest as well as their duty, so to use and administer the trust in question, while it is their own, that when it is taken from them, or when they cease to retain it, they may be no losers in personal advantage by the change of circumstances they may not fail of the good, attached to its right use, nor become liable to the evil, entailed by its abuse, previously.

THE APPLICATION.

If the moral of the parable is rightly comprehended in the four preceding propositions, and if the persons to whose case it was intended to apply, are Christians, then, it may certainly be collected from it that Christians in particular are, or may be, invested with a peculiar trust; that they are, or may be responsible accordingly; that they have, or they may have a direct personal interest in the consequences whether of the use or of the abuse of their trust. But responsibility is simply the consequence of the delegation of a trust from a proper superior to a proper inferior; and the idea of such a trust may apply to every thing which can be committed by one person

upon certain terms, to the care or disposal of another. The question, then, may be asked, what is the specific character of that trust with which Christians, by the light of the parable, may conclude themselves to be invested, or capable of being invested? and in particular, what is its subject matter, or the thing committed to their trust-as well as who is the superior from whom they must be supposed to have received it, and to whom they are responsible for its use?

Now the analogy of the parable leads to the inference, that if the persons, to whose case it is applicable, are placed in circumstances corresponding to those of the parties in the parabolic transaction; they stand in the relation of servants to some master in general, and of stewards who have the care of his property in particular; and if these persons are Christians, then as the only master to whom Christians in general can stand in the relation of servants, is God, so the only description of trust with which they can be invested as a consequence of that relation, and be placed by it in the relation of stewards to their proper master, is the use and enjoyment of temporal wealth. The specific description of the trust, then, with which Christians in general, by the light of the parable, may know themselves to be invested, or capable of being invested, is that of a stewardship under the temporal providence of such a master as God; and the particular instance of the thing committed to their charge, for the use or the abuse of which they are or they may be responsible to this master, is temporal wealth.

This conclusion is shewn to be just both by the

application which our Lord himself makes of the parable in his own comments and reflections upon it, and by the conduct ascribed to the Pharisees, who were present and heard what he said. It appears from the tenor of his observations, that the case which he had supposed as applicable to the situation of his hearers, applied to them in the capacity of owners and holders of mammon-that is, of owners and holders of money or wealth; for mammon in the vernacular language of Palestine, answers to Plutus in Greek and both, as properly denoting wealth or riches in general, are metaphorically capable of being applied to designate the power or divinity supposed to preside over, and to regulate the distribution of this species of temporal good1. The immediate cause of the conduct ascribed to the Pharisees, is no doubt attributable to their dislike or contempt of the doctrine of our Saviour, whatsoever it was; the ultimate cause, or the motive to this dislike or contempt itself, is resolved by the evangelist into their love of money: from which it is necessarily to be inferred that the doctrine so offensive to their prejudices, or so absurd to their apprehensions, concerned in some manner or other the subject of money. It is to be supposed that their dislike or contempt of the doctrine, was arrived at its height, when it broke out in insulting language, or in

1 Mammonas autem est secundum Judaicam loquelam, qua et Samaritæ utuntur, cupidus et plusquam oportet habere volens : Irenæus, 211. lib. iii. cap. 8.—Mammona autem, non Hebræorum, sed Syrorum lingua, divitiæ nuncupantur, quod de iniquitate collectæ sint: Hieronym. iv. pars i. 196. ad calc.: Epistola ad Algasiam.-Mammona sermone Syriaco, divitiæ nuncupantur: Ibid. 22. ad princip.: in Matt. vi.