haunts. Ulysses maintained his ground, through the constancy of his loftier and more resolute intellect.* Orpheus more admirably drowned the enchanting voice, and confounded the tempter, by singing Pæns, or hymns of adoration to the gods. And surely, as Bacon† observes, divine meditation excels the pleasure of the sense, both in power and in sweetness. Let us cherish this, that our souls, charmed by the preciousness of a Saviour, and devoted to his love and service, may effectually "mortify the deeds of the body," and thus, through the power of the indwelling Spirit, break the meshes of that net of gigantic texture, in which the poor entangled victims perish so miserably before our eyes.§ But the Lord warns his disciples against proximate occasions of sin, in a general parabolical form, that they might be the better secured against the temptations of the flesh. *But as hard rocks are worn away by soft water, so the pure may fall by repeated solicitations; (see Tertull. de Cult. Fæm. § 2,) our safety then is only in the grace of Jesus. † Works V. x. p. 208. Rom. viii. 13. § It is remarkable that in Philo, (de Decal. § 24, 25, p. 201, and de Spec. Leg. p. 300, ed. Mang.,) Mark, (ix. 19,) Luke, (xviii. 20,) and in Paul's epistle to the Romans, (xiii. 9,) the order of the 6th and 7th commandments is inverted. Tertullian follows Philo in arguing from this, that adultery is the greatest possible wrong that can be done to our neighbour. The Alexandrian Jew anticipates the Fathers in the extent, to which he carries the law of chastity. "And if thy right eye offend thee, pluck it out, and cast it from thee; for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell: (Gehenna.) And if thy right hand offend thee, cut it off, and cast it from thee; for it is profitable for thee that one of thy members should perish, and not that thy whole body should be cast into hell:" (Gehenna.) (v. 29, 30.) A similar passage occurs in a later chapter, and also in the Gospel of St. Mark, where the disciples are warned against doing anything, which would ensnare a brother, or throw a stumbling block in his way. We cannot therefore limit this lesson, with Chrysostom, to the mere duty of shunning the company of friends and associates, however dear to us, or otherwise serviceable, if they prove the means of drawing us into sin;‡ but must apply it to every known source of evil, or occasion of loss and injury to the soul, which is equally to be shunned. The hand, which might be wantonly stretched out to smite a neighbour, and the wandering eye, must be alike restrained at any cost. The temptation, which was unforeseen, but which has unexpectedly ensnared us, must be diligently avoided for the future; whatever *Or "ensnare." Matt. xviii. 8, 9; Mark ix. 43-48. ‡ T. iii. p. 38. (To dishonour or renounce their friendship to render our salvation more secure.) T. iv. p. 119. it might have been; whether the glass of wine, or the elegant dress, or the insinuating voice, or the attractive music, or the admired works of art. No situation, however profitable or agreeable, must be retained, which exposes our morals to corruption, or our souls to danger. No worldly honours or advantages can counterbalance the acquisition of one vice, or the formation of one habit of evil, or the lapse of the soul into lukewarmness or formality. No company must be frequented, no amusement, however innocent in itself, must be indulged in, which will tend to deaden our devotions, and unfit us for communion with our God. Above all no associate must ever be permitted to ingratiate himself into our favor, who is not ashamed to make a mock at sin, or whose frivolity tends to impair the delicate sensibility of the soul to the hatefulness of vice. It was the lesson of universal experience, which Menander expressed, when he said, "evil communications corrupt good manners." The apostle only re-echoes his testimony, and thus shows how the Holy Spirit graciously condescends to apply the lessons of human experience to the guidance of indiscreet and unestablished Christians.* And thus in relation to others, the parable, as given in St. Mark, is explained and applied by St. Paul in a similar manner. "It is good neither to eat flesh, nor to drink wine, nor any thing whereby thy brother * 1 Cor. xv. 33. Otherwise he might have quoted Prov. xiii. 20. For stumbleth, or is offended, or is made weak."* "when ye sin so against the brethren, and wound their weak conscience, ye sin against Christ. Wherefore, if meat make my brother to offend, I will eat no flesh while the world standeth, lest I make my brother to offend." For though lawful, "it is evil for that man who eateth with offence." It is the law of love to God, which stimulates to self denial in one case; it is the law of love to man, which requires it in the other. We must neither rush unbidden into situations of danger ourselves, nor do any thing wittingly, which will draw our neighbours into them. Present gain is dearly purchased by the loss of the soul, or even of spiritual privileges; better live maimed and halt in the heavenly city, than be exposed to the abominations and fire of Gehenna with unmutilated limbs; better far take up a daily cross, and deny ourselves, that we may be enabled to keep under our bodies, and thus overcome all the lusts of the flesh, than by careless self indulgence in lawful pleasures to excite and foster them.§ *Rom. xiv. 21. † 1 Cor. viii. 12, 13. and see x. 31—33. Rom. xiv. 20. § Philo says that temperance (yxpárea de vit Cont. § 4,) is the basis of all virtues, bringing with it health, safety, and immortality; and that desire is a many headed monster, (Quæst in Exod. i. 19,) the fountain of all evil, wrongs, and crimes, which becomes all in all to the unhappy wretch in whose bosom it rages. de Decal § 28; 12: de Mund Opif § 53. § 3. "It hath been said, whosoever shall put away his wife, let him give her a writing of divorcement; but I say unto you, that whosoever shall put away his wife, saving for the cause of fornication, causeth her to commit adultery: and whosoever shall marry her that is divorced,* committeth adultery." (v. 31, 32.) The Pharisees pretended that it was lawful for a man to divorce his wife "for every cause." But when they hypocritically tempted Jesus by this question, He answered them by simple reference to the original institution of marriage, on which He grounded the solemn inference, as a law binding upon every conscience, "what God hath joined together, let not man put asunder." They rejoined, "why did Moses then command to give a writing of divorcement, and to put her away?" He replied, "Moses because of the hardness of your hearts suffered you to put away your wives; but from the beginning it was not so;" and then repeated the statement before us. We may conclude from the silence of His enemies on that occasion, that this really involves no contradiction of the law, as otherwise they would have "taken hold of His words." For the force of the qualifying clause of the original * Justin M. Apol. p. 62, cites this clause only: "whoever marries one divorced by another man commits adultery." † Matt. xix. 3-9. Cf. Mark x. 2-12. See Luke xx. 26. N |