avowal that crucifixion was to be his fate; and the composure which he assumed immediately after, sustained during his trial before the priests and Pilate, and displayed even on the cross itself, to the pardoning of the penitent thief, providing for the protection of his mother, and praying for his enemies. All those imply, even in the human sense of the phrase, a mind of the highest order of manliness, self-possession, and fortitude. But, the true explanation is to be found, in his being the appointed and exact representative of Adam; who, in his first consciousness of having brought down the Divine wrath, hid himself in terror among the trees of the garden. Christ, after the Paschal Supper, goes to the garden, and prepares himself for the agony, as a distinct portion of the task which must be undergone. The agony of our first parent must have been wrought to an indescribable pitch of horror, misery, and despair, if mental suffering is to be at all proportioned to the value of what has been lost, or the keenness of what is to be suffered. What must have been the torture of his mind, who felt that by a single act he had forfeited all the glories and enjoyments of existence; that he had thrown away existence itself; and had now only to meet the heaviest wrath of Heaven 1!

The commentators have singularly enfeebled the purport of the Agony, by conceiving it to express simply, our Lord's humility, and his personal sorrow for human sins. Bishop Hors

The distinction of the characters, however, remains; and where Adam was all horror and remorse, Christ mingles with his agony obedience. "Let this cup pass from me; nevertheless, not my will, but thine be done."

But the sentence is to be passed on Adam; and not on him alone, but on Eve, and on the serpent. Again, the connexion of the type and the antitype explains a difficulty which has long perplexed all interpretation. Why Christ should have been crucified between two malefactors; why one of them should have suddenly adopted the language of pious hope, while the other only broke out into scoffing and despair; why the instant opening of

ley considers it as chiefly a call to man to bear misfortune patiently; "See this good and perfect man patiently bearing our sorrows: humble thyself, arrogant philosophy, say not that affliction is not an evil; say that it is to be borne with humility, as the punishment of sin," &c. (Sermons.) Paley looks upon it as an instance of the due vehemence of prayer, an intense solicitation for strength at the approach of death; an agony of entreaty, which he strongly recommends to every one. "We find our Lord in his last extremity resorting to prayer, and with an earnestness, a vehemence of devotion, suited to the occasion. One great extremity at least, the hour of approaching death, is to be passed through by all; what then ought to occupy us-prayer. Prayer with our blessed Lord was the refuge from the storm." (Sermons.) Such are the extravagances into which even this clear-headed writer could heat his imagination. The value of constant prayer is indisputable; but are we to be urged to an agony of prayer, to the palpable mental torture, which even in Christ required the comfort of an angel?

Paradise should have been declared in that hour of suffering; and why the dying words of the Saviour should yet have been expressive of his being under the deepest sense of Divine rejection'. All those are questions of high interest, which have exercised the mind from the earliest age, and which press upon the feelings of the Christian to this hour.

But the whole scene of suffering becomes explicable by a reference to the type. The last act of the Divine government in Paradise was the sentence of Adam. Three criminals there stood before the Judge: Adam, Eve, and the serpent. The three were sentenced, but the man and the woman, by the new covenant of mercy, were subjected only to temporary death; they were virtually forgiven, and prepared for entrance into the place of

1 The natural reluctance of divines to admit that our Lord could have been reduced to this extremity, proposes some readings of the text which are altogether inadmissible. Lightfoot thinks that "Why hast thou forsaken me?" should be understood "Why hast thou given me into such hands?" Dr. Smith (Script. Test.) thinks that it is little more than a general reference to the Psalm; Rosenmuller, a mere expression or interjection of mental suffering; Dr. Clarke, an exclamation of surprise at the wickedness of the people-to what hast thou abandoned me! Others, that warı may mean ɛiç TL, &c. But Scripture cannot require those dexterities. The text is unequivocal dejection, felt through unequivocal suffering; the same suffering which the first man felt in the misery of his guilt. How to reconcile this with Deity is not the question for human powers.

the redeemed. The third criminal, the serpent, was beyond forgiveness, and was abandoned to his full sentence of despair.-At the crucifixion, Christ retains his representative character of Adam. Though sinless, he is under the curse; "Cursed is every one that hangeth on a tree." The heart of the penitent criminal is already of his Church, a representative of the Bride, the forgiven Eve of the lost Paradise. The heart of the scoffer and impenitent is the representative of that evil Spirit of which it has been the slave. Still the original distinction between Christ and Adam is preserved. Christ is God and man as man he suffers, and exclaims, in the language of a being on whom the hand of eternal justice has fallen; as God, even in that moment, he pardons the repentant sinner, and receives the soul into his kingdom'.

'The commentators have mistaken the principle of this great transaction. Bishop Sherlock thinks that the different fate of the malefactors was for the purpose of showing, by the proximity of justice and mercy, "how to fear without despair, and to trust without presumption." (Sermons.) Lightfoot considers the faith of the penitent thief to have been the whole origin of the distinction. "His was a great faith, which could discover Christ under such a scorned, crucified Jesus." Others look upon the distinction as an evidence of the exhaustless mercy of Heaven. But if this were the object, the conversion of both the malefactors would have naturally been the result. Those interpretations, too, omit all the characteristics.

N n

CHAPTER XLV.

THE APOSTOLIC CHURCH.

THE parallelism continues through the history of Adam and his descendants.

Adam, departing from Paradise, is thenceforth to spend his existence in culturing the wilderness of the world; yet not without a promise that Paradise shall again be opened when the serpent is slain. Eve conceives, and bears a son, to whom she gives a name of triumph, "Cain," in the faith of the promise, that from her shall descend the Victor. She subsequently bears another son, to whom she gives a name of feebleness, Abel.-Cain is a husbandman, Abel a shepherd. They both come to man's estate, and then severally offer sacrifice; Cain a wilful sacrifice, of the fruits of his own labours; Abel a commanded sacrifice, of the firstlings of his flock; the former a sacrifice of works, the latter a sacrifice of faith.-Cain is indignant at the Divine preference of his brother's offering; rejects the Divine remonstrance; and at length kills his brother. He thenceforth loses the inheritance, is exiled from the presence of the