mercy, yet practically living without him, and thus exposing ourselves to his righteous judgment, "He that is not with me is against me." We have lifted up the heel against him. Oh what love, what long-suffering, what endurance has he manifested towards us, in our wayward wanderings from him; he has never lost sight of us, he has followed us, that he might "seek and save," and bring us back again to the fold. Oh that none might henceforth be found to abuse his mercy, and to do despite unto his grace! Oh, that none might henceforth assume the garb of a friend, and conceal the heart of an enemy,-partake externally of his ordinances, and yet lift up the heel against him,-honour him with the lip, and yet in reality trample under foot the Son of God," and "put him to open shame."

66

After intimating, however, that the language of the Psalmist, as quoted above, was yet to be applied to him, and fulfilled in him, our Lord proceeds plainly to unfold to the astonished company the fact that direct treason existed among them. It was not only that one of their number was hereafter to prove a hypocrite, and return from following his master, and bring dishonour on his cause; but one was actually to betray him into the hands of his enemies. "When Jesus had said this, he was troubled in spirit, and testified, and said, "Verily, verily, I say unto you, that one of you shall betray me." He was "troubled in spirit," and what caused this trouble? was it the cross and the shame which rose up before his view? was it the bitterness of his passion, a foretaste of which was presented to his mind? was it the anticipation of his being left in the midst of his enemies, a mark for the finger of scorn, the object of insult and cruel mockings? No, this was not the cause of that cloud of sorrow which passed over the

countenance of the tender and loving Jesus; these things were ever before him, with all their fierce assaults and fiery trials, and therefore we must look for some more immediate cause of this trouble of soul. It was when he thought of Judas, the traitor, the guilty one, that we are told he was troubled; his spirit was bowed down with grief on his account, just as before he had wept over the guilty inhabitants of Jerusalem. Oh, what a spirit is here manifested by our Divine Master! His treacherous friend is at the table with him, and his treason is well known. He who was to be betrayed, knew every past circumstance of his guilty plans, and saw as clearly every future step in his guilty career; was he not indignant, then, that such a man with such an intention should dare hypocritically to sit down with him as a friend- -was not a throb of anger felt in the mind of Jesus-did not the flush of injured feeling crimson his cheek? No! he was "troubled in spirit," at the iniquity and the consequent misery of his follower, his compassion was moved towards his guilty disciple. He saw the toils of the great enemy of souls around the poor, the willing captive, and to his all-seeing eye there rose up the image of all the horrors and agonies of a lost soul; his spirit then was sore vexed within him, and we might suppose him mourning in his inmost soul over the lost sheep, even as he uttered his grief on another occasion, "If thou (would that thou) hadst known the things which belong unto thy peace, but now they are hidden from thine eyes."

What dismay must this testimony of Jesus have caused among his disciples! "Then the disciples looked one on another, doubting of whom he spoke." The little band, which a moment before had been compact and united, in which unbroken confidence and love had hitherto prevailed,

is now agitated by suspicion, and fear, and distrust. A traitor is one of the party, and they know not which; they look with dread and alarm at one another, each thinking to read in the countenance of his neighbour, proofs of his wicked and treasonable intentions.

"Now there was leaning on Jesus's bosom one of his disciples, whom Jesus loved," that is, the disciple who was reclining at table immediately to the left of Jesus; and the disciple here mentioned was the writer of this gospel, this being the language which he always uses in writing of himself—"The disciple whom Jesus loved:" strongly indicating his humility, and his love to his Master, as if he never desired to think of himself otherwise than as the unworthy object of the Saviour's love, and a monument of his grace; as if this were "all in all" to him, in the recollection of the past, the enjoyment of the present, and the prospect of the future, that his Master loved him.

"Simon Peter therefore beckoned to him that he should ask who it should be of whom he spake. He then lying on Jesus' breast saith unto him, Lord, who is it? Jesus answered, He it is to whom I shall give a sop, when I have dipped it; and when he had dipped the sop, he gave it to Judas Iscariot, the son of Simon. And after the sop, Satan entered into him. Then said Jesus unto him, That thou doest, do quickly. Now no man at the table knew for what intent he spake this unto him. For some of them thought, because Judas had the bag, that Jesus had said unto him, buy those things that we have need of against the feast, or that he should give something to the poor. He then having received the sop, went immediately out."

This passage seems necessarily to call for a brief enquiry into the character of this unhappy man; and the more so, as I cannot but think that it has been very much misap

prehended. Judas, in fact, apart from the actual guilt of treachery, is set down in the imagination as altogether a creature of such fearful criminality, as to supply no special point of comparison with the great bulk of professing Christians. The mind naturally associates with the blackness of the act of treason, a whole character of no ordinary wickedness, and thus the traitor is most frequently set apart to be gazed on with abhorrence, rather than, as I conceive the case ought to be, regarded as a remarkable warning of the fatal effects resulting from the indulgence of sentiments and desires, which, alas, are to be found strongly marked and strongly developed in a very large proportion of mankind. It is to be feared that in the process of our investigation, we shall be compelled to acknowledge, that many within the nominal fold of Christ's church partake of the character of Judas, and leave us no grounds for doubting that if they had been placed in similar circumstances, their conduct would have resembled his.

I think there can be no question that Judas was not in the same state of mind at the time of his first joining the followers of Christ, and at the period of his treason. It is by far the most probable supposition, that he entered on his discipleship, influenced in a certain sense by a sincere desire to follow Jesus; his natural feelings excited by the manifestation of the kindness of the Saviour, and stimulated by the gracious words which proceeded out of his mouth. Doubtless, when first he followed Jesus, he looked on with feelings of astonishment and admiration at the works his master performed, not easily to be distinguished from the other apostles; and hung with wonder and with natural emotions deeply affected, on the discourses of him who spake as never man spake. And when he received the commission from the "Lord of the harvest," with the rest

of his brethren, to go and preach to the "lost sheep of the House of Israel," and with the commission, received also the power of working miracles, I cannot but suppose, unless convinced by a distinct declaration to the contrary, that he went with his fellow-disciples, with an ardour and zeal which he thought sincere, and that he felt for a time a deep interest in the cause of Jesus.

Our Lord's parable of the sower will, I think, enable us to form a correct estimate of his character, and will place it before us in its true light. He did not receive the seed "by the wayside." He did not belong to that class of hearers, for the word was not immediately caught away from him, as soon as he heard it. Neither did he receive it as "on stony ground," for his profession stood some trial. When "persecution arose because of the word," we are no where told that he was offended. If he did not meet with any particular opposition during his journeyings among the lost sheep of the house of Israel, yet even in the immediate attendance on his master, he must have found offence enough. If the master was persecuted, and called Beelzebub, it is not likely that they of his household escaped altogether from the brunt of trial. Yet he was not offended. His case then appears to be exactly that of the third class of hearers in the parable, and this will, I think, supply the key wherewith to unlock the mystery of his character. His heart was like the stony ground; and though when first he heard the word he received it with joy, yet did the cares or the love of this world, and "the deceitfulness of riches, choke the word, and it became unfruitful."

It is not unlikely that Judas himself was not aware of the power of the besetting sin within him, namely, the love of money, when first he followed Jesus. He may not