And he was angry, and would not go in; therefore came his father out, and entreated him. And he, answering, said to his father, Lo, these many years do I serve thee, neither transgressed I at any time thy commandment; and yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I might make merry with my friends: But as soon as this thy son was come, which hath devoured thy living with harlots, thau hast killed for him the fatted calf. And he said unto him, Son, thou art ever with me; and all that I have is thine. It was meet that we should make merry, and be glad: for this thy brother was dead, and is alive again; and was lost, and is found."

THIS is one of the most striking and beautiful parables in the Bible, not only for its simplicity and delicateness in every part, but for its adaptation to the subject which it was designed to illustrate, and for the severity of the reproof which it administered to those who had murmured against Jesus because he associated with publicans and sinners. Some parts of the parable will be better understood, and appear with more force, if we take notice of those customs on which they were founded.

The younger son required of his father the portion of goods that belonged to him, and the father readily bestowed them upon him. Adam Clarke has shown that "it has been an immemorial custom in the East for sons to demand and receive their portion of the inheritance during the father's life time and the parent, however aware of the dissipated inclinations of the child, could not legally refuse to comply with the application." The design of the law was to protect the child from illtreatment on the part of the father; but if it could be shown that the child had separated from the paternal mansion without just cause, he was subject to a heavy fine.1 The young man immediately de1 Com. on the place.

parted unto a far country, and wasted his substance in riotous living. He began to be in want, and went and joined himself to a citizen in that country, who put him to the menial employment of feeding swine. No Jew could see greater degradation than this. Among people of that nation, it was regarded as a great defilement to eat swine's flesh; it must therefore have been deemed more dishonorable and odious to be engaged in the employment of feeding these animals. He would fain have satisfied his hunger with the husks the swine eat. His extreme misery induced him to form the resolution to return to his father's house; and when he came, the joyful parent ordered the best robe to be put upon him, a ring to be put upon his hand, and shoes on his feet. He was received with every demonstration of welcome. The compliment of the ring denoted that the person was received to favor and honor; thus Pharaoh took off his ring from his hand and put it on Joseph's, Gen. xli. 42, and Ahasuerus plucked off his ring and bestowed it on Haman, Esther iii. 10, and afterwards on Mordecai, viii. 2.

The object of this parable was the same with that of the two last, with this addition-Jesus here introduced the character of the Pharisee, and under the figure of the elder son he exhibited it, stripped of all its deception. The circumstance that called forth the three parables in Luke xv. should not be forgotten. When the publicans and sinners drew near to Jesus to listen to his instructions, and he did not forbid them, the Scribes and Pharisees expressed their astonishment in the strongest. terms, and murmured even that he should receive sinners and eat with them. In the parables of the lost sheep, and lost piece of silver, as we have

shown, Jesus illustrated the propriety of his con. duct, and convinced the Pharisees that, if they were as righteous as they judged themselves, there was no reason why he should seek their society, as they stood not in need of any assistance from him. In the parable before us, by painting, in a masterly manner, the misery into which sin plunges mankind, he showed them that sinners were objects of pity, not of scorn; and by contrasting the hatred and anger of the elder son with the joy felt by all the rest of the family at the prodigal's return, he developed in the clearest light, the misanthropic disposition of the Pharisees. The parable is carried along with great judgment, until the repentant son has mingled with the family, and musick, feasting and dancing are put in requisition to denote the common joy. At this moment the elder son, who represented the Pharisees, is introduced. He draws nigh to the house, and hears musick and dancing. He calls one of the servants, and inquires what these things mean. The servant, as full of joy unquestionably as any other member of the household, and expecting to communicate the same joy to the inquirer that he felt himself, tells him that his brother has returned, and that his father hath killed the fatted calf, because he hath received him safe and sound. Now mark the Pharisee. Is he pleased? Does he rush into the house, and seize his brother's hand, and bathe it in the tears of joy that he finds himself unable to repress? No, far from this-he is angry, and will not go in. What is the matter? What excites his anger? Only this-the father hath seen fit to receive the sinner into favor, and he is displeased about it. He thinks sinners ought to be cast off forever, and experience no mercy. Well, his father comes out let us see

how he manages his case. He says to his father, "lo, these many years do I serve thee, neither transgressed I at any time thy commandment, and yet thou never gavest me a kid, that I might make merry with my friends; but as soon as this thy son [not my brother] was come, which hath devoured thy living with harlots, thou hast killed for him the fatted calf." Here the self-righteousness of the Pharisee appears. In his own estimation he has never done any thing wrong. This is his opinion of himself, but what is the fact? The fact is he is now openly violating his father's commands, who requires him to love his neighbor as himself. he hates his brother, and is angry because the father, more merciful than himself, has received him into favor. Why did he never think to complain before? Not a word of fault previously to this had ever fallen from his lips. The fact is, he never saw any reason to complain until others were treated as well as he. So long as he enjoyed his father's bounty alone, and the prodigal was far away suffering in sin, he felt contented and happy; but the moment the father shows the least kindness to any person besides himself, then he is angry, and will not go in. This was the real disposition of the Pharisees. Why did they murmur against Christ? Because "he received sinners, and ate with them," ver. 2. But let us examine this elder son a little more closely. He says his father never gave him a kid that he should make merry with his friends. What! is this true? Did not his father divide his goods with the children? ver. 12; and did not the father say, 'son, thou art ever with me, and all that I have is thine'? ver. 31. It seems then that Pharisees can' utter falsehoods, holy as they think themselves. The father closes the scene by asserting the pro

priety of his conduct. 'It was meet that we should make merry and be glad; for this thy brother was dead and is alive again; and was lost, and is found." If the Pharisees to whom these parables were originally delivered, had any sensibility whatsoever, they must have felt the force of the rebuke which was here so adroitly administered.

The spirit of the Pharisees is the same in every age of the world; and we are sorry to say, that we perceive much of it among mankind now. If we tell some persons that God will at last receive all his prodigal children to his kingdom, they are exceedingly displeased; they cannot endure such doctrine. They do not complain, if we say that they themselves are to enjoy God forever; this they believe; but nothing will excite their anger more quickly, than to tell them that all mankind at last shall fare as well as they. They sometimes inform us, that they do not wish to go to heaven, if all mankind are to enter there. In that case they will be angry, and will not go in. They will complain, if this doctrine is true, that they have not been treated as well as they ought to have been; but if they can have the glorious satisfaction of knowing that those whom they hate are cast off forever, they are then satisfied.

The parable before us furnishes many rich doctrinal reflections-it sets forth the conduct of God towards his erring children. Witness first the misery into which sin plunged the prodigal, and contrast it with the happiness of his father's house; then you will know what sufferings press upon the sinner, when compared with the peace and consolation of the virtuous heart. That doctrine which we sometimes hear, that sinners often are happy in their sins, while the righteous are afflicted and dis